suppersready
New User
Actually, the olympics kinda seem like a holiday exhibition..
Yeah, slam perf. and wtf. I didn't think of that.
Roger Federer Still Greater Than Rafael Nadal; Andre Agassi’s Claim Premature
- Thread starter cronus
- Start date
monfed
Banned
LOL noone watches tennis in olympics. 100 m? Sure.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
It's your mind, dude !
When we say Fed has never beaten Nadal, of course it is implied that we mean clay, and only slam finals (RG). How ridiculous and biased of you to take Mickey Mouse events like Masters into account or cheesy exos like WTF. And you must remember that we are only counting "healthy Rafa" who never loses.
You clearly are new to this forum so we will excuse you.
SoBad
G.O.A.T.
That's why I am surprised that you're not on the 100m forum debating the greatness of a Basel title right now@!:lol:
monfed
Banned
That's funny because I've always found debating WTF> Olympics more interesting. :lol:
SoBad
G.O.A.T.
What is there to debate? Basel >> WTF>>> Olympic
Clearly, a local grassroots tournament in the countryside trumps the circuit holiday exhibition and the exho trumps the greatest achievement in sports@!!:lol:
monfed
Banned
Rather generous of you to make Basel greater than that local dirt ball in some outpost in Barcelona. :lol:
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
I'll give the haters one thing, it's a 24/7 job and they happily trot on non-stop without pay :shock: no way I could spend that much time bashing someone, kudos.
cronus
Professional
The moment you call Olympics as the greatest achievement in sports(not athletics) you should be given a special place in this forum.
Winning Olympics gold is greater than winning Wimbledon 10 times,Tiger woods agrees.
So the new math is olympic gold > Madird > french open > us open > Australian open > Wimbledon.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
17>13.
4 AO vs 1 AO
7 W vs 2 W
5 USO vs 2 USO
302>134
6 WTF> 0 WTF.
Yep. How irational you must be to believe Fed is still above Nadal with these stats....
abmk
Bionic Poster
unless you are a bitter sampras fan or nadal fanatic it should be very clear for anyone with a normal brain that federer is a clearly better player than nadal and sampras.
Anyways now your true colours are coming out more and more often ...
fednad
Hall of Fame
ha ha ... look who is talking about "normal brain". ....
SoBad
G.O.A.T.
Please refrain from personal attacks on ultradr. Thank you.
SoBad
G.O.A.T.
The moment you call Olympics as the greatest achievement in sports(not athletics) you should be given a special place in this forum.
Winning Olympics gold is greater than winning Wimbledon 10 times,Tiger woods agrees.
So the new math is olympic gold > Madird > french open > us open > Australian open > Wimbledon.
Maybe you're right, so forget the Olympics, when Basel = WTF = PharmaMama > everything else. Happy?:lol:
cronus
Professional
I have quoted the part of your post which actually made sense.
may be you are right I > I > I = cow + bull+pony = bakery happy?
That's how you've been posting this thread.
Last edited:
SoBad
G.O.A.T.
That's how you been posting this thread.
I been posting this thread just fine. How you been posting this thread?:neutral:
cronus
Professional
fednad
Hall of Fame
I wish I was as reasonable and thoughtful a poster as you have always been. But then not all wishes can come true.
if you're good enough to make the final and you're "unfamiliar" with grass then the rest of the field must be complete and total rubbish
monfed
Banned
This. Good stuff.
Start da Game
Hall of Fame
almost all the tennis pundits believe that nadal is ultimately greater than federer......style, elegance, blind fanbase aside......when it comes to sheer greatness, it's just nadal over federer in many peopl'e opinion......
agassi is the first one to come out and speak openly......expect more people to say the same thing when nadal wins his 14th slam......
agassi is the first one to come out and speak openly......expect more people to say the same thing when nadal wins his 14th slam......
Bukmeikara
Legend
Which are those manny people, show them, quoted them .... just do something with them not just say that they exist.
Bukmeikara
Legend
Nadal have all the potential to surpass Roger but right now can someone explain to me how a player spending more time as number 2 than number 1 can be considered the best all time? In 5 years he ended the season as number two and in three he ended it as number 1 and truth to be told it would be very hard for him to correct this stat in his favour.
First of all, it absolutely does matter that Nadal owns Federer H2H. However, we all know how Agassi operates. At the root of everything, is Agassi's insecurity, related to his jealousy of Sampras.
Sampras owned Agassi H2H in big matches, had more Majors, more weeks and years at #1 and was much more dominant at Wimbledon and the US Open.
Agassi played longer, won all 4 Majors and competed against a generation of players that Sampras didn't. It's very convenient for Agassi, after being beaten convincingly by Sampras in his last match in the final of the US Open, to claim that Federer and Nadal are at a different level than Sampras. Agassi is basically claiming that since he played against both generations of players, that the Federer/Nadal/Djokovic era is better. I suppose that is how he justifies the idea that Federer and Nadal are better than Sampras and Agassi is an expert because he played them all(except Djokovic). Sampras isn't an expert because he didn't compete with Federer and Nadal on a regular basis. I'm sure Agassi brought up the fact that Sampras lost to Fed at Wimbledon. Agassi is a jackass.
Sampras owned Agassi H2H in big matches, had more Majors, more weeks and years at #1 and was much more dominant at Wimbledon and the US Open.
Agassi played longer, won all 4 Majors and competed against a generation of players that Sampras didn't. It's very convenient for Agassi, after being beaten convincingly by Sampras in his last match in the final of the US Open, to claim that Federer and Nadal are at a different level than Sampras. Agassi is basically claiming that since he played against both generations of players, that the Federer/Nadal/Djokovic era is better. I suppose that is how he justifies the idea that Federer and Nadal are better than Sampras and Agassi is an expert because he played them all(except Djokovic). Sampras isn't an expert because he didn't compete with Federer and Nadal on a regular basis. I'm sure Agassi brought up the fact that Sampras lost to Fed at Wimbledon. Agassi is a jackass.
Dedans Penthouse
Legend
Still?? ....... I hope you're taking something for that.
; )
Hey cronus, think you maybe went a little "Times Square" with the Federer headline font size??
cknobman
Legend
LMAO.
If no one beside Agassi is speaking of it openly how in the h3ll do you know what they think!!!!!!!!
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Even in decline, Nadal still provides some very entertaining matches like the match against Simon in Rome tonight.
Last edited:
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
From what I saw of the match, I'd say it was mostly Simon doing the entertaining.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Nadal had 20 official matches on grass, going into the 2006 Wimbledon final.
It is a myth, that he was "unfamiliar" with the surface, which is perpetuated by the VB (and some other fanatics of other players) and used to elevate Nadal's status in the eyes of the illiterate audience.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
15 actually, unless you're seriously counting Nadal reaching the semi finals of 2002 Junior Wimbledon. Nadal's win-loss record on grass on the main ATP Tour prior to the start of 2006 Wimbledon, was just 5 wins and 4 losses. So at 2006 Wimbledon, Nadal won more matches on grass than he had in his whole career on the main tour prior to the event.
Last edited:
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Í am counting every official match on the surface, that he has played.
There is no reason to exclude anything, especially when someone is talking about "unfamiliar".
Candide
Hall of Fame
Ouch. That sound I'm hearing is the smack of the cold, hard hand of objective reality reverberating off the tender buttocks of delusional fantasy and counter-knowledge.
Dedans Penthouse
Legend
I don't know if it's desparation, but whatever, the OP does reek : )
cronus
Professional
whats wrong with that? only andre agassi can be biased?
Omega_7000
Legend
So if you're going to weigh opinions based on number of majors, then why don't you take off head out of Ralph's rear and listen to Rod Laver?
"When I look at Federer, with what he's accomplished, against the competition that he's accomplished it with, I'd have to say I would think that Roger is the greatest player,'' said the Aussie."
He also added you can only be the best of your era and different era's cannot be compared. Totally agree with this...
"I've always said if you're the best in your era, that's as good as you really can do. You could take it back to 'Is it Fred Perry, is it Don Budge, is it myself that came along?'" added Laver.
http://www.livetennis.com/category/...e-best-player-of-his-generation-201310110001/
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Rod Laver hasn't played against either Federer or Nadal in a competitive level like Agassi has.
Fed and Rod are little buddies which is why Fed sooked so much when he saw Rod being forced to hand Rafa the AO title.
Agassi, Djokovic, Murray all say Nadal is greater and all 3 have played against both.
You only have idiots like Soderling and Mirnyi saying Fed is greater...
Last edited:
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
And why do you think Djokovic and Murray(?) say that? Surely not because they have had their own time of success in Nadal's prime which boosts their own importance if he truly is the GOAT as they say, right? :roll:
Agassi is the same. He is using arguments that can be used for himself against Pete. It's just about himself.
But you know, what others say is irrelevant. Try using logic and reasoning and forget your senseless bias. The numbers speak truly.
cronus
Professional
so funny all this imaginary assumption will go to dust in a couple of years.
only soderling? lol!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5p_nu-OyM0
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
It's too early to say Nadal is greater than Federer. The two biggest stats against Nadal are weeks at no.1 and Slam wins. Nadal needs to at least equal number of slams to overtake Federer. Also, the fact that Federer is 5 years senior to Nadal is always easily overlooked. Nadal is getting beaten more this year and I expect over the next few years, it will be harder for him to stay at the current level. That will make the younger generation of players look better and maybe someone like Thiem will be hailed as the potential greatest of all time if he starts to dominate. The point is, we have to wait until the dust is settled. It's too early to get carried away by Nadal's success, especially from 2013 which seem to have swayed a lot of people's opinions. If he starts losing more frequently due to his age, this perception can suddenly change again. Federer was 28 in 2009, which is the age of Nadal in 2014. Nadal showing signs of decline should tell us that Federer from 2009 was not the best version, yet he was perceived as good as the other big 4 which should indicate how good Federer actually has been past his prime years. That can become more and more obvious in the next 2-3 years as both Nadal and Djokovic decline with age and that may change people's opinion yet again. We'll see how things pan out in the future. Any conclusive opinion now is too premature.
Last edited:
Omega_7000
Legend
Yeah ok. So now that I have crushed your argument (only listen to people with more majors) into dust you come up with "but Rod Laver is friends with Federer". LMAO.
Actually Rod Laver has most impartial stance on this. He's got nothing to gain by saying Federer is the greatest.
cknobman
Legend
Wow, you are seriously dumber than I imagined.
Stooping low enough to try and discredit Rod Laver is about the most pathetic thing I have seen.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Just because Agassi said it it does not mean heis argument does not have flaws.
Start da Game
Hall of Fame
quite true...
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Djokovic and Murray have had their success during Nadal's prime. Obviously they will say Nadal is greater.
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
When Djokovic and Murray turns 28, they will appreciate what Fed has been doing as 28+ yo. It's like we don't appreciate our parents' hard work until we become parents ourselves. Or, it's like as we grow old, we realize how age can be a bi*ch.
AngieB
Banned
more apt caption would be.
Andre Agassi: "where the F is my cocaine?"
It was Meth, not cocaine.
Praise the Lord!
AngieB
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
I agree, Nadal can only realistically be placed in 6th place all time at present.
1. Roger Federer
2. Rod Laver
3. Pete Sampras
4. Pancho Gonzales
5. Ken Rosewall
6. Rafael Nadal
Similar threads
