Crisstti
Legend
Interesting how Federer can have injury/health problems, but Nadal can't. And The h2h can be skewed due to how good the other player was in that moment, but title count somehow cannot be skewed that way.
Seems Jim Courier is on the "Nadal may be GOAT" train as well
- Thread starter octogon
- Start date
Interesting how Federer can have injury/health problems, but Nadal can't. And The h2h can be skewed due to how good the other player was in that moment, but title count somehow cannot be skewed that way.
Crisstti
Legend
A much, much bigger hole though. Especially when compared with Wimbledon for Nadal.
abmk
Bionic Poster
of course nadal has had his share of health problems , I'll start from 04 :
mid -2004 : had injury problems that forced him to skip RG and wimbledon.
end of 2005 : had foot injury problems that forced him to skip the YEC .
AO 06 - skipped because of the above
2008 rome vs ferrero - had blisters
2008 year end - had injury problems . retired vs davydenko in paris and skipped YEC
2009 rotterdam - was injured and couldn't move well at all. was a surprise that he even managed to take murray to 3 sets
2009 american HC swing - abdomen problem that hampered his serve mainly, otherwise was good.
2010 AO - injured himself towards end of 2nd set vs murray at AO 10. muray would've won anyways
2011 doha - was sick
2011 AO - injured himself vs ferrer
.....
I only call BS on phantom 'injuries' after losses to soderling and rosol.
Major part of rafa's injury problems are because of his style of play. And he hasn't been as seriously affected by injuries as his fanbase likes to believe or as much as the media makes it out to be . As he himself candidly said once in an interview. If you had followed the careers, of the likes of krajicek, haas, ancic, safin etc, you would know .....
about the skew, are you like kidding me ? are you just going to accept nadal's 1-6 h2h vs davy on HC at face value ?
or djokovic-s 4-5 record vs roddick at face value, including 8 sets in a row for roddick ?
Last edited:
Crisstti
Legend
You just call them "phantom" injuries because...?.
Does a player need to have won his last match before being out injured for months for it to be true?. That makes no sense at all.
Not kidding at all. You say the h2h is skewed because the opponent wasn't playing his best, but title count can be skewed the same way because of the opponent not being all that great. I think it's a double standard.
Last edited:
abmk
Bionic Poster
no, if it is a legit significant injury, signs will show before or during the match. That was not the case in RG 2009 or wimbledon 12. soderling and rosol plain outplayed him. you could see nadal's movement was hampered vs ferrer in AO 11 QF, vs murray at rotterdam 09, his serve was hampered because of abdomen injury in summer US swing .
there was no signs or talk of injury before or during the soderling/rosol matches. All excuses came up after he lost.
again, would you take nadal's 1-6 h2h vs davy on HC at face value ? ( with nadal's only win being a close 3-setter )
or roddick going 5-4 vs djokovic, while winning 8 straight sets vs him ( mind you, most of this was with djokovic being ranked #3 and roddick was ranked lower ) ?
I'm not saying title count cannot be skewed because of opposition not being great. I'm saying many of the federer haters/nadal fans/sampras fans vastly under-rate federer's competition at his peak and vastly over-rate nadal's and sampras' competition.
Last edited:
Clarky21
Banned
No, because the actual h2h is 5-6.
abmk
Bionic Poster
I meant to type 1-6 h2h on HC ... just missed the HC part ...
Clarky21
Banned
Clay counts too so why are you dissecting the h2h?
abmk
Bionic Poster
it does of course.
what I was saying was that the hardcourt h2h b/w davy and nadal on HC is affected quite a bit by circumstances of those meetings.
just like federer's vs nadal on outdoor HC or vs djokovic on slow HC.
same for djokovic vs roddick h2h.
Last edited:
Crisstti
Legend
There were. Both before the 2009 and the 2012 breaks, Rafa had been having issues with his knees constantly, for months before.
Rafa missed both the WTF and the DC final in 2008 due to his knees. He played the AO 2009 with a lot of tape on them and his doctor of the PRP treatment has said that Rafa's team first contacted him after the AO that year, because of how much trouble he was having with his knees. He went with other treatment options then though. It was also the knees the problem in that Amsterdam match against Murray I believe.
Rafa said during the DC final in 2011 that he was having problems with his knees. After saying he was going to play the DC tie sometime after the AO in 2012, he withdrew because of his knee. He withdrew from the Miami semi as we know after finishing the match against Tsonga limping. He was icing his left knee after the quarters of RG that year too.
You would hardly have seen him limping or anything during Wimbledon in 2012, he was playing with his knee numbed, so he wouldn't have been in any pain. Doesn't mean he was fine.
Not sure what your point is. I've never said Rafa's h2h against Fed = Rafa is better. I simply don't think it's fair (or reasonable) to just discard it as meaningless either.
Plus, it's really not the same a h2h statistic between players when there's such a vast difference of results as between Rafa and Davydenko, and between players of similar caliber like Rafa and Fed. If Rafa had a clearly winning h2h against Fed but he had just 1 or 2 slams then it wouldn't mean much.
Well, good.
The level of Federer's and Sampras' competition was actually rather similar. And I actually rate Fed higher, sue to him winning more with similar competition, and to Sampras' record on clay. I admit I might be somewhat biased due to never liking Sampras' style.
Rafa's competition has definitely been tougher though. And Djokovic's for that matter.
Because otherwise it's kinda hard to come up with a h2h clearly against Rafa
abmk
Bionic Poster
yes , he did miss YEC and DC in 2008 because of knee problems, I already mentioned that, but he was perfectly fine after that.
played two brilliant gruelling, long matches vs verdasco and federer at the AO.
problem was that after just a week's break, he chose to play at rotterdam, played 3 to 4 consecutive 3-setters and then had problems.
but he took a month off and was perfectly fine in IW winning it, and lost to an inspired delpo in miami
then most importantly, he dominated the CC season easily winning in MC, rome, barca .... it was only in madrid that his form tailed off. ( considering madrid is the CC that suits him the least, not surprising )
but he was slowly regaining it by the time of RG, first round match was a bit shaky, but he played better in the 2nd round match and was at his best destroying hewitt in the 3rd round.
you don't do all this when you significant injury problems.
well yeah, he recovered pretty well after miami ...
he completely dominated on red clay, losing only one set on red clay - to djokovic at RG. how the hell do you manage that when you have a significant enough injury ?
he destroyed ferrer in the RG semi and apart from that stretch of 8 games, was convincingly better vs djokovic.
no, h2h is not meaningless, but it should be analysed with context, including surface, circumstances etc. And in the end, achievements count for far more, since it is performance against the field that counts.
Isn't a losing h2h vs a zero or 1 or 2 slam player worse than vs an opponent of greater calibre ? jeez !
would federer have been better off losing to berdych in 4R at the AO in 09 than vs nadal in the final ? bah !
Also rafa beating federer - since most of them were in the finals , the h2h is already reflected in federer's title count getting reduced because of that and rafa's title count increasing, so h2h is essentially double counting .
no, this is where I'd have to disagree and there is plenty of evidence to support .
fed had to face djoker 10 times in majors after montreal 07 , nadal only 7 times ...
federer has also faced tsonga-soderling-delpo far more times than nadal or djokovic
the likes of roddick ,safin, hewitt, older agassi, nalbandian, davydenko, coria etc were definitely playing great tennis in 04,05,06 in many tournaments.
nadal was at his best in wimby 07 final, djokovic was better in 07 than in 09, 10
rafa's draws in RG 10, wimby 10 were pretty easy ( none of the players he faced were playing close to their best ), his draw in USO 10 till the final was a joke, only final was decent, yet, that was IMO djokovic's worst USO form since 2007 (was better in 07-09 and 11-12 )
nadal did beat murray 3 times at wimby, but he never faced murray who was close to his 2012 or even 2013 level, but federer did and beat him at wimbledon 12.
I could go on and on, but that's just some of the evidence ....of course you could counter it with wimby 08, AO 09 etc, but overall, I don't see rafa's competition being tougher ......
djokovic's probably had it the toughest in terms of competition at the top , but lesser in the tier below that.
Because otherwise it's kinda hard to come up with a h2h clearly against Rafa
had nothing to do with that. I was simply trying to explain how h2h can be skewed by circumstances ...it wasn't the only example I gave btw. I also mentioned roddick-djokovic but you and Clarky chose to focus on rafa vs davy.
Last edited:
Jeffrey573639
Semi-Pro
Why is it we have to factor Nadal's injury problems as an external force? He doesn't use it as an excuse so neither should we. As many people on this thread have surely said, his injuries are due to his very violent and physical playing style without which he won't have won 12 slams. Look at Fed who doesn't get injured very often, but it's very convenient to just say he has a smooth manner of play. I've heard that he does lots of activities e.g. stretches to remain flexible and minimise possibility of injuries. Why doesn't Rafa do something of the like so he doesn't get injured as often? This isn't a Soderling or Seles esque situation where injuries or time off are due to events totally beyond their control.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Arguing with abmk is like talking to a brick wall. The clown thinks that there was nothing wrong with Rafa's knee in WIM12 despite there clearly being 3 injection marks on his left knee lol.
All this whinging about Fed's h2h against Rafa on HC when clearly there is always an excuse. There was nothing wrong with Federer in MIami05 and he only won that because Nadal choked. Down 2 sets to love and a break in the third lol. Dubai was a fast HC and Nadal playing only his second tourney back from foot injury while Fed had just won the AO and the excuse is Fed choked LMFAO. From what exactly? What pressure could he have possibly felt at the time to win a 500 tournament lol. LAME.
Fed's AO competition when he won his title was nowhere near as tough as what Novak had to go through to win his. In fact, even Nadal's 1 AO title was more impressive than any that Fed ever won.
All this whinging about Fed's h2h against Rafa on HC when clearly there is always an excuse. There was nothing wrong with Federer in MIami05 and he only won that because Nadal choked. Down 2 sets to love and a break in the third lol. Dubai was a fast HC and Nadal playing only his second tourney back from foot injury while Fed had just won the AO and the excuse is Fed choked LMFAO. From what exactly? What pressure could he have possibly felt at the time to win a 500 tournament lol. LAME.
Fed's AO competition when he won his title was nowhere near as tough as what Novak had to go through to win his. In fact, even Nadal's 1 AO title was more impressive than any that Fed ever won.
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
So true. But you can't really blame Federer for playing in the era of ducklings and lapdogs...........:twisted:
Federer's level back in the days were leagues (yes, leagues) beyond what Nadal, Nole or Murray are capable of. Nobody can come close to the level of brilliance displayed by Roger back in the day, and that was despite him being weak mentally. Imagine Fed with Nadal's state of mind and he never loses to anyone on anything.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Is that why teenage Nadal was beating him on HC? :lol:
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Good that achievements of one player on a particular surface are not measured against the performance of another player or against the achievements of that other player on another surface but against the entire field.
Otherwise we wouldn't be considering the amount of Majors won, but will be looking for far more subjective measuring sticks.
Or in other words, where are Nadal's HC Majors, if he was as good or better than Federer on HC?
abmk
Bionic Poster
fact is fed's competition at the AO was just as good as what Novak faced. He has one more final and 5 more semis than Novak. He's done better than novak on slow HC. Deal with it.
the fact that you keep on mentioning murray of AO 11 final as tough competition just highlights what a joke you are. The circumstances bit I applied for fed-nadal on outdoor HC was the same I have for nadal-davy on HC and for roddick-djokovic on HC, because I don't have double standards like you do.
those injections in wimby 12 were for minor problems, you don't comprehensively thrash ferrer and then clearly outplay novak like nadal did at RG 12 , if you have serious injury problems.
when nadal actually had injury problem like vs ferrer at AO 11, ferrer crushed him, when he had blisters in rome 2008, ferrero beat him in straights .
as far as AO 09 is concerned, impressive yes, but a better , in-form HC player like federer, djokovic, safin etc would've closed down verdasco in 4 sets probably and federer , if he had his serve intact, like he did in almost all of his matches at his peak , would've probably won.
federer's AO 04 was just as impressive , if not more - he went through 3 slam winners ( hewitt, ferrero, safin ) and an in-form nalbandian ( with hewitt and nalbandian having had his number until then )
Last edited:
Federer20042006
Banned
Utterly ridiculous. Nadal's draw winning his 2009 AO was weaker than every Federer draw except 2006.
What's so impressive about the guy barely beating his pigeon in a fluke-run, Verdasco, in the semi-finals, and then beating his other pigeon, Federer, in a 5 set final? Simon in the QF? LOL!
In 2004, Federer went through Hewitt, Nalbandian, Ferrero, and Safin.
In 2007, he went through Djokovic, Robredo, Roddick, and Gonzo, who was playing better tennis than anyone Nadal faced in his 2009 AO run.
Then in 2010, he beat a revitalized Davydenko, coming off his WTF win, Tsonga, and Murray.
This is a new level of Nadal+@rd-ism for you.
Last edited:
abmk
Bionic Poster
actually you can't blame rafa for playing in the weakest CC field in the open era.
the competition outside of clay is much stiffer, therefore rafa has only 4 majors off clay :twisted:
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Hahahaha you should be a comedian.
Hewitt coming off his worst season dropped from #1 to #17 tough? LOL. Baby Rafa gave him a tough 3 set battle the round before.
Nalbandian, as I've said in the past, good win for Fed here.
Ferrero? LMFAO he only got there thanks to possibly the weakest draw ever to a SF.
Safin was exhausted.
NOT IMPRESSIVE AT ALL.
2006 Fed was in bad form to begin with and he beat who? Haas only got him to 5 because Fed lost his focus. Davydenko played well but nothing special, Kiefer in the SF and Baggy in the final LMFAO.
2007 pigeon Roddick who was playing **** to go with it and another slam final virgin that clearly didn't keep up the same form he had going in to the final.
2010, Davydenko with a disappearing act, exhausted Tsonga and ball less Murray hahahaha
ALL Clown draws.
in 2009 Rafa had to beat Verdasco who was playing better than Safin in AO05 and then he had to contend with Fed himself with less time to recover after a 5 hour SF LMFAO.
Djokovic in 08 had to beat Federer and Tsonga who wasn't exhausted at all after having destroyed Rafa in the SF.
in 11 he had to beat both Fed and Murray, that's 2 big 4 members back to back in best of 5.
in 12 same, 2 of the big 4 back to back in gruelling 5 setters, FAR more impressive than anything Fed's ever done at the AO.
in 13, he had it a bit easier, Wawrinka played the match of his life and almost took him out, but he fought through it and then backed up against Berdych, smashed Ferrer and got through Murray as well. Not the toughest draw but certainly tougher than Fed's 06 draw LOL.
It's not just Murray in the final you fool, did you forget who he had to beat in the SF? That's right straight setted your boy who was ranked higher than him.
Ever heard of it getting worse? What a ridiculous comment, you think you know everything about Rafa's injuries but the fact is you are in denial. You think a competitor like Rafa is going to take 7 months off just for the sake of it yeah? Why isn't he taking 7 months off again this year, he had an even worse loss than last year?
Federer20042006
Banned
If Hewitt hadn't been coming off a down 2003 (and it was mostly down because of his shocking 1st round loss at Wimbledon as the defending champion), Federer never would have been able to draw him in the 4th round in the first place.
Hewitt in 2004 in the 4th round was as tough a 4th round opponent as any top player could get. He would go on to have a great season with only Federer in the way of something truly special, and made the AO final the next year.
Hewitt in 2004 in the 4th round was as tough a 4th round opponent as any top player could get. He would go on to have a great season with only Federer in the way of something truly special, and made the AO final the next year.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
The Hewitt match at Wimbledon 2004 was a QF, but I agree with your point. Hewitt was actually up a break in the 4th set of that match at 4-3 and serving, so contrary to the scoreline of the match, it was pretty tough. Federer won 6-1 6-7 6-0 6-4.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Not too mention he had recently handed Federer his most heartbreaking loss in DC only a couple of months earlier. Ferrero was also coming off an excellent 2003 where he made the final of the US Open. His level of play in sets 1 and set 3 were very high. Safin was patchy but not that bad.
abmk
Bionic Poster
ferrero had reached the USO final beating hewitt and agassi back to back. Was playing very well. just because he had an easy draw till the SF means he wasn't playing well ? now that is comedy.
Go and actually watch the match. the first and the 3rd sets were played at a very high level by both. Only the 2nd set there was a letdown in level from ferrero, but nowhere as bad as the score of 6-1 indicates. on any other day, that set might have been 6-3 or 6-4 to federer.
hewitt had beaten federer in davis cup in late 2003 and was on his way back up already . 'exhausted' safin in AO 04 >>> murray in AO 11 final. safin's game only went down in the 3rd set in that final. murray's was mostly done after 4 all in the first .
murray of AO 2010 final >>> murray of AO 11 final
LMAO @ verdasco of AO 09 SF being better than safin of AO 05. safin or federer of AO 05 would've taken him out in 4 sets at max .
gonzo of AO 07 would've taken out verdasco of AO 09, he was ridiculous in the QF and SF , had 40+ winners and 3-5 UEs vs haas. ~45 winners to ~15 UEs vs rafa. gonzo was playing very well in the final of AO 07 as well, just that federer was too good for him and took him out of his comfort zone.
davydenko of AO 06 was playing just as well as stan in AO 13, just that federer was very focussed and took him out in 4. federer was so not in bad form in AO 06, he had his lapses of concentration, but otherwise was handing out bagels, breadsticks. federer did have letdowns in level vs haas, kiefer, baggy, but not vs davy .
He raised his level when it was the most necessary - the whole match vs davy, in the 5th set vs haas and towards the closing stages of 2nd set vs baggy.
baggy of AO 06 final ~ murray of AO 13 final, so if that is LMAO, then so is murray of AO 13 final. LOL ...
davy in AO 10 did have a big lapse of concentration, but he did actually came back and the 4th set was as fiercely contested as it could be >> something you don't have a clue about.
tsonga would've lost anyways. It was more a result of federer coming out in absolute top form and not giving tsonga any breathing space at all. federer who was clearly worse in AO 13 took out tsonga who was clearly better in AO 13.
as far as novak of AO 12 is concerned, he should have finished the final in 4 , missed an easy FH at the net at 5-3 in the breaker, but just because it went to 5, you make it out to be more impressive than it was.
similar to some ways to rafa's RG 13 SF vs djoker ..
you kept on mentioning murray of AO 11, drop it. roddick of AO 07 SF was better than that .
2 of the big 4 members ? LMAO ... if you had just mentioned federer, I'd have said :
fed in AO 11 was nowhere near peak form , though still a very good win for novak.
but you keep on insisting on things like murray of AO 11 final or wimbledon 08 QF being tough competition, now that's comedy.
ever heard of burnout ? yeah, an equally fierce competitor in borg suffered from it.
I don't know about the full details of rafa's 'injuries' , but you don't either. We can only make out from what we see .
Last edited:
abmk
Bionic Poster
reference in that post was to the fed-hewitt match in 4R in AO 2004.
hewitt also had breakpoint at 4 all in the 4th set in the wimbledon 2004 QF.
Last edited:
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Hewitt-Nalbandian-Ferrero-Safin, in 2004, was a very tough last four matches of the tournament. Possibly the toughest draw possible at that time at the AO (other than Roddick being in there).
NatF
Bionic Poster
Yep, the other side had Roddick and Agassi as well. All the top guys went deep or as far as they could. Very good win for Federer, beat two guys who owned him in the h2h and too guys who were also very good hardcourt players. 4 tough opponents in a row, you wouldn't get that today.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Oh ok. My bad then. Good to know about the BP though. Match was much closer than the scoreline seemed to indicate. Especially with a bagel and a breadstick in there.
Crisstti
Legend
He was perfectly fine because you say so?. Get real. You yourself admit he kept having problems during the year. He was NOT perfectly fine. His team contacted the doctor who uses the PRP treatment after the AO 2009 precisely because he was not fine.
All of those things add up. The long, gruelling matches against Verdasco and Federer in the AO, the Rotterdam matches, all the matches he played during the clay season. Tendinitis is an overuse injury.
Again, because you say so?. Rafa won a 5 set final against Ljubicic in 2005, with a serious foot problem that would keep him out for months and almost end his career. So reality doesn't support your theory.
Plus, you ignore the fact that he could have gotten worse in the grass season, with the changes required, or could have felt worse because of the requirements of grass being tougher when having knee issues.
Sure, but achievements the should be analyzed with context just as much.
No, it isn't, because then it makes a lot more sense to explain it away due to circumstances, match ups and what not (like Fed fans explain his h2h against Rafa) than it makes sense to explain it away like that when you're talking about players of similar caliber.
Federer didn't much face Djokovic during his peak, if we're to agree with what his fans claim was his peak, during the years he won most of his slams anyway. And he only faced Rafa on clay then. Rafa has had to face both during his prime.
You really just have to see who they faced in slam finals. Rafa basically had easy draws in RG 2010 and Wimbledon the same year, and that would be it. See the coincidence of that being the year he won three slams and the easy draws Fed also had when he won three slams a year.
Crisstti
Legend
Who says he doesn't?.
Rafa's style shouldn't be much more taxing on the knees than Djokovic's or Ferrer's, yet they haven't had any tendinitis problems. I'd say it's pretty much beyond his control.
Plus, abmk is saying that Rafa just took months off in 2009 and 2012 just for the sake of it, which is ridiculous.
Don't be mean, you know he can't handle it, lol.
The Dark Knight
Legend
Is courier getting paid to say these things?
Tennis Fanatic 070
Banned
Yes the order is a real comedian, I laughed very hard when I read his post. He's a blinded fanboy. Especially the part where he said that AO 2009 verdasco played better than AO 2005 Safin was very amusing.
Truth is that this year made painfully clear that Nadal will never be able to compete on the highest level again (at least outside clay). This has made people like TDK and the order even more bittered than they already were. Very amsusing to see this, can't wait till the US Open begins and the level of bitterness will increase even more. There are 2 scenario's possible: Nadal won't even compete in this tournament or he will get Rosol'd. Either way, the usual suspects will be more bittered than ever before, so they feel the need to decimate the GOAT even more with weak arguments feeded by their frustration to feel better.
Last edited:
abmk
Bionic Poster
you do realize there is no way he'd have won those back to back five setters without being at 100% ?
His problems came about because he overplayed by playing Rotterdam a week after the AO
But he took time off, recovered and came back. won IW and dominated the CC season till madrid. there is no way he could do that if he wasn't a 100%.
Did you even watch the match vs hewitt in the round before ? rafa was at his very best ( not that he needed to be ) and completely destroyed him.
reality is soderling played amazingly well and plain outplayed him.
no, if we're splitting it that way. rafa's h2h vs fed on clay is because of rafa being superior on clay as well as the matchup.
but outside of clay ,rafa's achievements don't even come close to fed's . 16 majors to 4. circumstances and matchup are the only way to explain it.
losing to an inferior player is worse than losing to an all-time great.
again, answer this . would federer have been better off losing to berdych in AO 09 than losing to rafa ?
If you agree that peak federer was 2004-07, then rafa didn't have to face peak federer at a HC slam.
from 2007 montreal onwards until AO 10, end of federer's prime ( not peak ) , fed-djokovic squared off 4 times in majors, rafa-djoker only once.
djokovic denied federer 3 slams at which he had realistic shot : AO 08, AO 11, USO 11
he denied nadal 3 slams at which he had a realistic shot : wim 11, USO 11, AO 12
so really, quit pretending that djokovic was only rafa's competition, in reality, he was just as much federer's (atleast till now)
Note that I'm not even considering USO 10 SF where federer played a bad match ( though he was playing very well before the semi and might have played very well in the final had he got through )
again, what a myopic view , just considering the finals.
you mean like how we should ignore that rafa beat djokovic at this year's RG SF and just conclude he had an easy RG because he faced ferrer in the final ?
there have been plenty of instances where the QFist or SFist have given the toughest matches to the winner .....see rafa vs soderling at wimby 10, vs almagro in RG 10, vs djokovic at RG 13 etc ..
federer vs delpo in RG 2009 , vs djokovic in USO 2008 , vs davydenko in AO 06, 10 etc .
federer won 3 slams in a year thrice, not once like rafa. :lol:. The only relatively weak year comparable to rafa's 2010 was 2006.
in 2004, he went through hewitt, nalbandian, ferrero and safin in a row at the AO, beat peak roddick in the wimbledon final in a tough match ( beat hewitt in the QF as well ) , beat agassi playing very well in the USO QF, destroyed hewitt in the final.
in 2007 , he beat a red-hot gonzalez in straights in the AO final ; he beat rafa playing his very best in wim 07 final and beat roddick playing his very best and djokovic in USO 2007
Last edited:
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
Federer, Federer who?
The Dark Knight
Legend
I agree with Jim Courier.
The man knows his tennis .
The man knows his tennis .
Jeffrey573639
Semi-Pro
falstaff78
Hall of Fame
I'm te farthest thing from a Nadal hater. I have tremendous respect for his achievements and fighting spirit. Plus I think people who exclude clay are being ******** full stop.
But I do have to say that Nadal's amazing overall win pct numbers and head to head records are ONLY on clay. Off clay he has losing records to all his major rivals.
Does this mean we should ignore his clay achievements? Hell no!
But does this mean we should be careful about interpreting his head-to-head and win pct numbers? Probably.
The Dark Knight
Legend
Courier was just questioned by the ITV Tennis anchorman in the UK, whether Nadal could be considered the greatest ever, and Courier pretty much said that he might just be, if you look at his achievements so far and the fact that he's dominated the H2H with his strongest rivals (Federer, Djokovic, Murray).
Courier said Nadal can't play any of the other guys in the GOAT conversation (aside from Fedrerer) like Sampras and Laver because tey are in different eras, but his superior H2H against all his main rivals in his era works in favour of him being considered the greatest ever.
I do hope the Federer fans won't rip poor Jimbo to shreds (like McEnroe) for daring to have an opinion that suggests Nadal may well be greater than Fed, and the possible GOAT.
Can I see the actual quote ?
E
Ecoplex
Guest
Nadal fan Berdych declares Federer the GOAT. 2/2014
Sorry, Jimbo, but this guy actually plays against these guys.
Sell out
Sorry, Jimbo, but this guy actually plays against these guys.
Sell out
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
- Poll
