Jim Courier: Rafael Nadal no longer favourite in Paris

[Sysyphus]

This all started when I took exception to the idea that Nishikori must be considered 2nd favourite behind Djokovic! When former champions like Jim Courier buy into this sort of hype, then that is why Murray fans like batz and me get frustrated. I couldn't care less about Nadal being considered 2nd favourite because there is plenty of justification for that unlike with Nishikori!



Fair comment and I never meant to suggest that they did despite what I might have said! !



Nadal once got taken to 5 sets by Isner and Djokovic almost lost to Monfils a few years back. So what? The important fact is that they all won those matches.



As I already said, point taken!



We never mind fair questioning of him at all. It's when we see him constantly getting judged by harsher standards than are applied to other players that it brings out the lion in us!

Fair enough, Mainad.

I very much agree that Murray should be more favored than Nishikori as of now, and that Murray generally gets more flak than most on here. It's mostly the schadenfreude that erupts when he loses and the "Murray will never win another big title/beat Djokovic again" stuff that gets to me most though ;-)

 

[Gary Duane]

I would say Novak most likely wins, but it's close between Murray and Nishi if he doesn't.

People have not noticed how well Andy has been serving this year on clay. If he keeps that up at RG, he is dangerous. VERY dangerous.

 

[Pagoo]

Players and fans care in that the Masters 1000s are launching pads for the slams where players can get their momentum going and help give them confidence. They are great titles to have but they mean little to a player's overall legacy. The only time the Masters 1000 events are scrutinized happens when two players have the same number of slam titles. In that case other stats will be used to further compare the careers of two players.

Other than that you simply cannot compare the historical significance of slams to Masters 1000s and fans who do have an agenda. Masters 1000s will never be on the same level as the slams no matter how many fans on a tennis forum blabber on to the contrary.

Nice try though.

I agree. For example, during the WTF, when Federer is being introduced, I always hear " the holder of seventeen majors." I haven't heard any one mention the number of Masters title. It's the same for Nadal.

Some fans are just reaching when they confer the same prestige on Masters titles.

 

[Sysyphus]

I agree. For example, during the WTF, when Federer is being introduced, I always hear " the holder of seventeen majors." I haven't heard any one mention the number of Masters title. It's the same for Nadal.

Some fans are just reaching when they confer the same prestige on Masters titles.

Oh, once they get the memo, you'll hear them say "the holder of 46 tier 1 events!", just wait ;-)

j/k

 

[Pagoo]

Oh, once they get the memo, you'll hear them say "the holder of 46 tier 1 events!", just wait ;-)

j/k

That would be hilarious. I can totally see that happening. I can almost hear Petchey saying that during the trophy presentation.:lol:

 

[tennisaddict]

The usual suspects (Thundervolley) ensure that the 'Silent Ban' thread was deleted.

 

[Pagoo]

The usual suspects (Thundervolley) ensure that the 'Silent Ban' thread was deleted.

You need to take it easy on Serena though. But yeah, that poster scares me with his/her comments.

 

[G A S]

You need to take it easy on Serena though. But yeah, that poster scares me with his/her comments.

deleted, well that explains my drop of posts, not that I was paying attention..
serena is a champion regardless of the vitriol of some people.

 

[cc0509]

I agree. For example, during the WTF, when Federer is being introduced, I always hear " the holder of seventeen majors." I haven't heard any one mention the number of Masters title. It's the same for Nadal.

Some fans are just reaching when they confer the same prestige on Masters titles.

Oh, once they get the memo, you'll hear them say "the holder of 46 tier 1 events!", just wait ;-)

j/k

:lol:

The tier 1 label referencing slams and Masters 1000s in the same breath is a Veronique special! Only on TTW can you hear such agenda-filled nonsense.

 

[G A S]

Who's favourite? Djokovic

Who I think will win? Nishikori

Who's got the best outside chance? Nadal or federer

nishikori winning would be great, a step forward since the Us Open final defeat.

 

[chjtennis]

Jim Courier stated something obvious, I guess. Djokovic should be the favorite. Nadal can do it, but it will be tough.

 

[spinovic]

Nishikori? Second best clay court player? Based on what exactly?

I laughed.

 

[chjtennis]

Nishikori? Second best clay court player? Based on what exactly?

I laughed.

Yeah, that's reaching. Although I group him as the player other than Djokovic who can potentially win RG this year along with Nadal, Murray, etc.

 

[Sentinel]

I just opened Murray's account.



./

 

[RF-18]

Players and fans care in that the Masters 1000s are launching pads for the slams where players can get their momentum going and help give them confidence. They are great titles to have but they mean little to a player's overall legacy. The only time the Masters 1000 events are scrutinized happens when two players have the same number of slam titles. In that case other stats will be used to further compare the careers of two players.

Other than that you simply cannot compare the historical significance of slams to Masters 1000s and fans who do have an agenda. Masters 1000s will never be on the same level as the slams no matter how many fans on a tennis forum blabber on to the contrary.

Nice try though.

I don't know if you are blind or something but the sentence you quoted states loud and clear that I think masters never will match up to the height of slams or history. But what I want to say is that masters are getting greater, and it will create its own history. It already has 25 years under its belt. So obviously it is of alot of importance.

Fact that still remains is that it is mandatory and played with full fields meaning you have to beat the best players in the world to win it. And djokovic has done it 24 times, that I think its incredible and he deserves praise. It shows what an ATG he is.

Masters is the biggest tournament out there after slams ans WTFs. It gives you many points to your ranking.

 

[G A S]

Nishikori? Second best clay court player? Based on what exactly?

I laughed.

he has not established himself as such, as of now.

 

[xan]

I don't know if you are blind or something but the sentence you quoted states loud and clear that I think masters never will match up to the height of slams or history. But what I want to say is that masters are getting greater, and it will create its own history. It already has 25 years under its belt. So obviously it is of alot of importance.

Fact that still remains is that it is mandatory and played with full fields meaning you have to beat the best players in the world to win it. And djokovic has done it 24 times, that I think its incredible and he deserves praise. It shows what an ATG he is.

Masters is the biggest tournament out there after slams ans WTFs. It gives you many points to your ranking.

You are arguing with armchair experts.
And alot is not a word just like alittle isnt.

 

[LoboR1]

Pulling for Rafa...but would bet the house on Djovak Nokovic

 

[Tshooter]

"Kei Nishikori is my second favourite behind Djokovic and I firmly believe he is the second best claycourt player today.l[/url]

:roll: Good one.

 

[G A S]

:roll: Good one.

a bummer nishikori could not do it in the us open, so close.