Ralph
Hall of Fame
Why do you continually make out that you're neither yet the undertones of your posts (I've been reading a while before I joined) are continually supporting Ralph?
Rafa will still win French
- Thread starter McEnborg
- Start date
Why do you continually make out that you're neither yet the undertones of your posts (I've been reading a while before I joined) are continually supporting Ralph?
QueenSeles
Banned
Oh that idiot is one of the most extreme *********s here. No doubt about that.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
On the plus side, clay is much more forgiving to the body than hardcourt.
QueenSeles
Banned
Not if the matches last that much longer
Ralph
Hall of Fame
I see, name calling is your thing. Very mature
And by not posting in the news threads, that places you on a pedestal? Surely anyone can post in those threads, ****s or not. Am sure they have done.
So you're impartial? Okay. Well, if that's the case, when pmerk34 made the comment above re. Ralph and injuries, why do you feel you need to counter it by dragging Federer into the conversation? No one mentioned Roger in this discussion, just you.
Now if I can find an example of your hypocrisy in this very thread, chances are I will elsewhere in *3,000 plus posts you've made.
What's confusing is that I've read some good points from you over the last several months. I remember it was you because of your name and avatar, quite memorable and catchy! Yet, you seem to take one step forward and two steps back when you start attacking Federer fans.
EDIT*: Sorry, 6000 posts, not 3,000.
Last edited:
Marius_Hancu
Talk Tennis Guru
very possible, but Fed, Djoko and Soderling are dangerous
Whitelight
New User
Rafa: Hello, is this Roger? Roger:Yeah its me Rafa, what`s up? Rafa:Roger, I think we got a problem! Roger:I know buddy..trust me I know
Ralph
Hall of Fame
Rafa: Hello, is this Roger? Roger:Yeah its me Rafa, what`s up? Rafa:Roger, I think we got a problem! Roger:I know buddy..trust me I know
LOL!!! May I use this as a signature? I've only just joined, and have been wondering what to have as one.
Semi-Pro
Hall of Fame
Rafa: Hello, is this Roger? Roger:Yeah its me Rafa, what`s up? Rafa:Roger, I think we got a problem! Roger:I know buddy..trust me I know
This is a great post!
*High 5* LOL
But he didn't.
If Djokovic didn't have problems with his serve and didn't have more double faults than aces, then he would have been #2 by now... maybe even #1
So do you see how silly is the IF card you just played?
Omega_7000
Legend
Last edited:
Rafa: Hello, is this Roger? Roger:Yeah its me Rafa, what`s up? Rafa:Roger, I think we got a problem! Roger:I know buddy..trust me I know
If Murray gets back to form, it will be another worry for the two of them. At the moment, it is all Djokovic.
Joseph L. Barrow
Professional
Actually, I think Nadal will (most likely) take the French Open because he is the best clay court tennis player in the world by a wide margin.
It is a lot closer than that, trust me. Nadal has no clue about the new Djokovic. I am not sure some people on here do as well. This clay season will clear things out.
Rafa's 6th French Open - comparison with Borg
If he wins it this year then he will only be a few weeks older than Borg was when he won his 6th.
Not sure why people eg Djokovic are saying that Rafa will be the greatest of all time because of his age and therefore has time to overtake Federer. It may be that he does this. He certainly is a great player. However, I believe that Borg at the same age had achieved more. Yes, Rafa has the career Slam, but in Borg's era that Australian Open wasn't really regarded as an Important event (evidence - Borg only played this once when he was 17), and Borg won the WCT finals and the Masters which were regarded as key events then (defacto majors). So Borg had achieved much more than Rafa at the same age - more titles - more Grand Slam titles at the same age - dominant at 2 Slams (Wimbledon and the French), whereas Nadal has only been dominant at the French Open.
Okay, sounds like I am giving Rafa a hard time. Not really, I think he is a wonderful, special player - this is just a plea to remember what Borg achieved.
Borg's only blemish really was the US Open open - and really in the context of his career it wasn't a had one. He won the other Defacto Major on indoor carpet - WCT finals.
If he wins it this year then he will only be a few weeks older than Borg was when he won his 6th.
Not sure why people eg Djokovic are saying that Rafa will be the greatest of all time because of his age and therefore has time to overtake Federer. It may be that he does this. He certainly is a great player. However, I believe that Borg at the same age had achieved more. Yes, Rafa has the career Slam, but in Borg's era that Australian Open wasn't really regarded as an Important event (evidence - Borg only played this once when he was 17), and Borg won the WCT finals and the Masters which were regarded as key events then (defacto majors). So Borg had achieved much more than Rafa at the same age - more titles - more Grand Slam titles at the same age - dominant at 2 Slams (Wimbledon and the French), whereas Nadal has only been dominant at the French Open.
Okay, sounds like I am giving Rafa a hard time. Not really, I think he is a wonderful, special player - this is just a plea to remember what Borg achieved.
Borg's only blemish really was the US Open open - and really in the context of his career it wasn't a had one. He won the other Defacto Major on indoor carpet - WCT finals.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Really? Is that why he was running Novak from pillar to post and made him scream MULTIPLE times in frustration just yesterday? Get real.
Not really. How the hell is Murray going to challenge guys like Nadal and Federer on clay when he gets his ass whipped on grass and hard by lesser players?
Joseph L. Barrow
Professional
Let us remember the lesson of history, which cautions against bandwagon-jumping; when a given player is on the crest of an extremely hot run, the overwhelming tendency amongst the fandom is to drastically overshoot in projections of that player's results in the months and years to come. For example, right after Nadal and Federer's respective wins at the 2009 and 2010 Australian Opens, large contingents emerged asserting that each man was on his way to winning the calendar Slam; how did that work out?
Djokovic is primarily a hard-court player. He can also compete at an elite level on clay, but he has not demonstrated even close to the ability there that he has on hard surfaces, and even on hard court, he is only about as good as Nadal; both hold two hard-court Grand Slam titles and four hard-court Masters Series titles, while Nadal has won an Olympic Gold medal and Djokovic has taken the year-end-championships therein.
Nadal has beaten Djokovic nine times out of nine on clay, including three at the French Open, where Djokovic has never taken a set off him. In 2008, when Djokovic was also on fire and also won both the Australian Open and Indian Wells, Nadal still soundly routined him at the French. This "Djokovic-as-new-top-clay-court-player-and-2011-French-Open-champion" speculation appears to me to be another big overreach in response to the temporary tide of a given player's momentum- if I am wrong and Djokovic wins the French Open, feel free to bump this thread and rub my nose in it, but I will state here that unless Nadal suffers some serious injury, he is the overwhelming, preemptive favorite for the French Open title, and that Djokovic is not even necessarily the second favorite (note, say, Federer and Soderling, both of whom have better French Open records than Djokovic does).
kishnabe
Talk Tennis Guru
How about Djoker getting a lighting bottle at RG....he can surely then snuff our Rafa! Could happen like Soderling, Gonzo, and Tsonga!
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Well, Djokovic had a win-loss record of 17-3 at this stage in 2008, having won the Australian Open and beaten Nadal by the score of 6-3, 6-2, in the semi finals of Indian Wells, on his way to winning that Indian Wells title. Djokovic went on to win a clay-court masters in Rome, and when he got to the semi finals at Hamburg to face Nadal, Nadal's number 2 ranking was at stake.
Last edited:
single_handed_champion
Professional
+1. Thanks for saving me the effort.
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
Djokovic was not as mature and was a bit naive to what it took to really be the very best back in 2008. I think he is alot more composed, grounded, and aware of what is to come now. That doesnt mean he will overtake Nadal on clay of course, but I think he will be more of a threat moving forward and a much bigger threat to be #1 than what he was in 2008 where his year gradually fizzled out.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Djokovic still won the Masters Cup in 2008.
In 2008, Djokovic won:
Australian Open
Indian Wells
Rome
Masters Cup
He also lost to Nadal at Hamburg, French Open, Queen's Club and the Beijing Olympics, and lost to Federer at Monte Carlo and the US Open. Lost the Cincinnati final to Murray as well.
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
He was pretty lucky to win the Masters Cup TBH. Davydenko should have beat him in the RR but choked at the end, which would have probably eliminated him even being in the weak pool. He would have lost to either Federer or Murray had he played them most likely. He barely snaked past Simon in the semis. Then he played his best match of the tournament in the final vs Davydenko.
His year gradually fell off after the fast start. I dont think he will win everything but I also dont think he will fall off in the same way.
Joseph L. Barrow
Professional
Not what I said, though it is extremely similar to 2008. You are engaged in what is known as hair-splitting; in 2008, Djokovic also won the Australian Open in dominant fashion, beating Federer along the way, and also won Indian Wells, also beating Nadal along the way (and much more decisively at 6-3, 6-2). Now, he did lose in between the 2008 Australian Open and Indian Wells- his early 2008 run thus wasn't quite as good as his opening to 2011 has been- but the comparison is extremely obvious and entirely valid.
Again, let us look at precedent:
In 2008, Djokovic started the year on fire and claimed the Australian Open and Indian Wells titles, and speculation ran wild that he was about to leap-frog Nadal, take over world's #1 and bring an end to the Federer-Nadal era of dominance. None of this happened; rather, he tapered off and did not win another Grand Slam title that year, or even make another final.
In 2009, Nadal started the year on fire and claimed the Australian Open and Indian Wells titles, and speculation ran wild that he was on his way to claiming a calendar Grand Slam and achieving one of the most dominant seasons in history. None of this happened; rather, he tapered off and did not win another Grand Slam title that year, or even make another final.
In 2010, Federer caught fire and claimed the Australian Open title, and speculation ran wild that he was on his way to claiming a calendar Grand Slam and achieving one of the most dominant seasons in history. None of this happened; rather, he tapered off and did not win another Grand Slam title that year, or even make another final.
In none of the last three seasons has the Australian Open champion finished as year-end number one, won another Grand Slam that year, or even made another Grand Slam final. In fact, even when the Australian Open winner also won Indian Wells, as happened in both 2008 and 2009, all of the preceding held true. Now, this does not demonstrate that all subsequent seasons must go the same way, or that winning the Australian Open is somehow detrimental to finishing year-end number one, winning more Grand Slams or reaching more Grand Slam finals, but I think it does provide ample evidence that these results are not necessarily portents of the giddy heights being envisioned here, and that the tendency in recent years has been toward immense overestimation of the early frontrunner's prospects for the remainder of the season.
Last edited:
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
^Good points man. It's just hard to maintain for that long. People are acting like this has never been done before.
Fiji
Legend
FO likely to win:
Nadal
Soderling
Djokovic
Federer
This is important to take into consideration. Looks like Nadal is closer on HC to Nole now than in 2008... In 2008 Nole spanked him at IW in straights... So, on clay, I doubt Nole will be beating Nadal regularly. Nole might win a masters on clay where Nadal is tired... Rome which is the last Masters on clay this year and is back to back with Madrid...
Nadal
Soderling
Djokovic
Federer
This is important to take into consideration. Looks like Nadal is closer on HC to Nole now than in 2008... In 2008 Nole spanked him at IW in straights... So, on clay, I doubt Nole will be beating Nadal regularly. Nole might win a masters on clay where Nadal is tired... Rome which is the last Masters on clay this year and is back to back with Madrid...
Last edited:
Similar threads
