WOW! Nadal beat Roddick! Well,that settles it for me. Nadal must be the greatest ever,right? I mean, not everyone can beat Andy Roddick! Right? That reminds me of what I hate about these 'what if' posts. They are filled with punks who think tennis history started yesterday or whenever the last time their favorite player won a match. What has Nadal ever done to merit comparison to the all time leader in Grand Slam victories? The very notion is absurd. All these revisionist morons who try and denigrate Pete's game remind me of Holocaust deniers. Why not Muster or Kuerten or Barasutegi or Courier vs. Sampras? They have done just as much as Nadal.Or more! On any surface but clay,obviously,Sampras would dispatch this one hit wonder with regularity. His driving groundstrokes would neutralize Nadal's biggest weapon,his top spin strokes that land with regularity short in the court,and Nadal has NEVER,EVER seen the kind of well placed heat Pete could bring on both first and second serve. He has never faced anyone that could back it up with Pete's net game. Nadal's clay court mind set forces him to play beyond the baseline frequently and just invites someone,like Sampras, to come in behind his lethal strokes and own the net. Nadal vs. Sampras? First Nadal has to win a slam that doesn't involve dirt. This whole thread is a sham. There should be a special section for teenagers so this kind of wishful thinking doesn't take up too much space.
