Novak Domination: is he so good or is it the fedal decline?

[jg153040]

In the other thread you actually used "Wimbledons and USOs" as a metric for Federer in a Fed vs Novak argument. 1 USO is very weak for someone of Novak's caliber on HC. You're just arguing to argue.

You see things too black and white.

Everything is HC, you can't divide it to USO or AO or WTF, it's all HC, so it's irrelevant.

You can have 10 AO 0 USO or 10 USO or 0 AO. Same thing, if we use the logic that it's all HC.

Djokovic has only 1 HC slam less than Sampras. You are doing a fallacy using HC as a surface, then at the same time contradicting yourself and counting it as two surfaces and use it against Djokovic.

If HC is the same surface, who cares if you have 5 AO + 1 USO or 6 USOs or 6 AO? Same thing.

You could argue that AO and USO are different surfaces, then you can argue that as an all time great, it's pretty bad for Djokovic to have just 1 USO, 2 W and 0 RG off his best slam.

 

[NatF]

You see things too black and white.

Everything is HC, you can't divide it to USO or AO or WTF, it's all HC, so it's irrelevant.

You can have 10 AO 0 USO or 10 USO or 0 AO. Same thing, if we use the logic that it's all HC.

Djokovic has only 1 HC slam less than Sampras. You are doing a fallacy using HC as a surface, then at the same time contradicting yourself and counting it as two surfaces and use it against Djokovic.

If HC is the same surface, who cares if you have 5 AO + 1 USO or 6 USOs or 6 AO? Same thing.

You could argue that AO and USO are different surfaces, then you can argue that as an all time great, it's pretty bad for Djokovic to have just 1 USO, 2 W and 0 RG off his best slam.

There's a clear difference between the AO and USO in terms of how they play.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

You see things too black and white.

Everything is HC, you can't divide it to USO or AO or WTF, it's all HC, so it's irrelevant.

You can have 10 AO 0 USO or 10 USO or 0 AO. Same thing, if we use the logic that it's all HC.

Djokovic has only 1 HC slam less than Sampras. You are doing a fallacy using HC as a surface, then at the same time contradicting yourself and counting it as two surfaces and use it against Djokovic.

If HC is the same surface, who cares if you have 5 AO + 1 USO or 6 USOs or 6 AO? Same thing.

You could argue that AO and USO are different surfaces, then you can argue that as an all time great, it's pretty bad for Djokovic to have just 1 USO, 2 W and 0 RG off his best slam.

So a slam is a slam? Then why do you value Fed's Wimbledons and US Opens?

 

[jg153040]

There's a clear difference between the AO and USO in terms of how they play.

Yeah, and I addressed using this logic too in the end of the thread.

 

[jg153040]

So a slam is a slam? Then why do you value Fed's Wimbledons and US Opens?

What? I value all slams. What I value with Federer is his versatility, but that is another topic.

But, yeah, using your logic that all is HC, then using lack of USO on HC is irrelevant.

Most people would argue that W and USO are the most prestigious slams. But, are they tougher to win and should be valued more? That is open for discussions.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

What? I value all slams. What I value with Federer is his versatility, but that is another topic.[/QUOTE]

No it's the exact same topic which was my point. 5 AO and 1 US is poor HC versatility.

 

[MichaelNadal]

In the other thread you actually used "Wimbledons and USOs" as a metric for Federer in a Fed vs Novak argument. 1 USO is very weak for someone of Novak's caliber on HC. You're just arguing to argue.

That's what he does here. I really don't get it but it seems to give him a boner. He's a cool guy outside of seemingly NEEDING to just be all over the place with a hand on the ladle that stirs a pot in a kitchen no one cares about.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

That's what he does here. I really don't get it but it seems to give him a boner. He's a cool guy outside of seemingly NEEDING to just be all over the place with a hand on the ladle that stirs a pot in a kitchen no one cares about.

Lol'd IRL.

And I add fuel to the fire by responding and engaging. Working the overnight shift as a doorman doesn't leave me much choice to entertain myself though :evil:

 

[jg153040]

What? I value all slams. What I value with Federer is his versatility, but that is another topic.[/QUOTE]

No it's the exact same topic which was my point. 5 AO and 1 US is poor HC versatility.

Ok, so now you admit HC is not one surface. I've said it, this is different arguemnt.

Yeah, so you meant Djokovic is not versatile on HC, that is different than saying he is not as great as other players who have 6 HC titles.

But using this logic, that makes Federer ultra goat and Rafa even with 17 majors can't equal him .

 

[MichaelNadal]

Lol'd IRL.

And I add fuel to the fire by responding and engaging. Working the overnight shift as a doorman doesn't leave me much choice to entertain myself though :evil:

^I feel you there I'm at work now 11p to 7am lol. Lately I'm just here for the lulz. Nadal damn sure isn't giving me anything to talk about.

 

[jg153040]

That's what he does here. I really don't get it but it seems to give him a boner. He's a cool guy outside of seemingly NEEDING to just be all over the place with a hand on the ladle that stirs a pot in a kitchen no one cares about.

Lol. I have TW fetish. I can't get an erection with a woman before wining an argument.

It's foreplay. Hey, still a lot better and cheaper than viagra.

The biggest irony is that I was the leader of TW clan. Triglav Warriors . Triglav is the highest mountain in Slovenia.

So, I have problems with acronyms. Also, YEC haha another problem. It means also Young Earth Creationist.

Or WTF, doesn't mean World Tour Finals outside of tennis .

 

[xan]

No it's the exact same topic which was my point. 5 AO and 1 US is poor HC versatility.

you do know he made 5 finals there. not 1, 5 uso finals. he may have poor conversion rate. but playing 5 finals there and using phrases like "poor HC versatility" is nothing short of stupid.

 

[Russeljones]

Lol. I have TW fetish. I can't get an erection with a woman before wining an argument.

It's foreplay. Hey, still a lot better and cheaper than viagra.

The obvious problem with this metaphor is that you have yet to win an argument on TW. Must be a hit with the girls then.

 

[jg153040]

The obvious problem with this metaphor is that you have yet to win an argument on TW. Must be a hit with the girls then.

Haha, good point. But, I have a solution even for this. The trick is as long as I believe I have won the argument, that's enough.

 

[5555]

But you did not come up with a counter point to my question...you simply resorted to your fact or opinion default.

I did come up with a counterpoint.

Again, is it not possible that some so called tennis experts might be attempting to sell the sport?

Yes or no.

Can you prove they say what they do not believe?

Even if true, who cares when Fed's peak was 4 years, but Nole's was only for 8 months.

I would rather have 9.8 point peak for 4 years than 10 point peak for 8 months.

Also, Nole at his peak can only win 2 W and 1 USO, while Fed won 12 of those?

That doesn't sound right .

What about level of competition?

 

[TMF]

What about level of competition?

Can you prove that Nole's era wasn't as strong as Federer's era ?

 

[5555]

Can you prove that Nole's era wasn't as strong as Federer's era ?

Can you prove otherwise?

 

[NatF]

I did come up with a counterpoint.

Can you prove you came up with a counterpoint?

 

[Tiger8]

Can you prove otherwise?

He can't, and you can't prove your point either. You were the one who brought up level of competition, so it'd seem logical for you to be the one who backs it up with facts, not opinions.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[TMF]

Can you prove otherwise?

If you can't prove it then why bring up level of competition?

What about level of competition?

You prove it !

 

[5555]

Can you prove you came up with a counterpoint?

My question "Can you prove they say what they do not believe?" is a counterpoint because I meant to say: it can not be proven how many tennis experts say what they do not believe.

You were the one who brought up level of competition, so it'd seem logical for you to be the one who backs it up with facts, not opinions.

Read below what said to TMF.

If you can't prove it then why bring up level of competition?

You prove it !

I have not made an allegation of fact so I do not have to prove.

 

[NatF]

My question "Can you prove they say what they do not believe?" is a counterpoint because I meant to say: it can not be proven how many tennis experts say what they do not believe.

But you can't deny it might be a factor. I am not setting out to prove anything, my error was to attempt to start a legitimate discussion. All those commentators may well believe everything they say - but I think it would right to take it with a grain of salt.

That was my point.

 

[tennisaddict]

My question "Can you prove they say what they do not believe?" is a counterpoint because I meant to say: it can not be proven how many tennis experts say what they do not believe.



Read below what said to TMF.



I have not made an allegation of fact so I do not have to prove.

If you think Fed won in a weak era onus is on you to prove it. not on TMF

 

[TMF]

I have not made an allegation of fact so I do not have to prove.

You were the one who questioned about COMPETITION.

What about level of competition?

If anyone who has to prove it, it's you !
Capiche ?

 

[5555]

But you can't deny it might be a factor. I am not setting out to prove anything, my error was to attempt to start a legitimate discussion. All those commentators may well believe everything they say - but I think it would right to take it with a grain of salt.

That was my point.

There is no proof they say what they do not believe.

You were the one who questioned about COMPETITION.

If anyone who has to prove it, it's you !
Capiche ?

My question was "What about level of competition?" As you can see, I did not ask for proof.

No he was not out of rhythm.

Is it a fact or an opinion?

 

[SLD76]

Can we end this thread now that 555 has underscored it to death? ???

 

[G A S]

Novak's lack of US titles is pretty alarming for such a great HCer, I hope he gets 2 more before he hangs it up.

no one is really owning straight us opens, the last one was federer, I wonder what makes it so? so much of a difference between the australian open and us open in the results.

 

[TennisCJC]

Djoko is a great player but I don't think anyone can dispute that it helps him as Federer gets old and Nadal wears out. Federer is well past his prime level and Nadal is dropping fast in last 6-12 months.