Should Rafa retire after winning 2014 AO?

S

sureshs

Bionic Poster
He would have achieved these landmarks compared to Federer:

At least 2 wins in each Slam

Olympics singles gold

At least 22-10 H2H


He will equal Sampras in Slams and moreover Sampras could not win FO. He long ago passed Agassi who won all 4 Slams and Olympics singles gold. Laver's double Calendar Slam is an impossible target. 17 Slams is not important - diversity of the Slams is more important, and he also has the H2H which makes the Slam count irrelevant.

So what is the point in continuing to play after that? He should take care of his knees and retire in Majorca, maybe run an academy with Toni.
 
Retire at 27? There's gonna be a lot of what ifs if he does retire after AO 2014.
So, no. Play for as long as he can be competitive at the highest level. Pro tennis will never be an option for him again once he's in his mid 30s.

He will have his chance at other things in life even after 35. Not tennis.

This is the same reason why I want Fed to keep playing for as long as he can at the highest level. Once it's goodbye, there's no looking back.
 
Backspin1183 said:
Retire at 27? There's gonna be a lot of what ifs if he does retire after AO 2014.
Click to expand...

What ifs? Djokovic winning 14 Slams and singles gold? That could be a threat yes. But Federer winning more Slams? Does not matter to Nadal, he has proven repeatedly that he is the better player.

Should he continue straining his knees because Djokovic might surpass him one day? I would not advise him to do that.
 
Rafa not winning the AO 2014. Novak is winning that. I have big time money riding on that fact. besides Novak is HOT right now and he will ride that hotness all the way to aussie open 2014.
 
Obviously this is a bit of a troll thread, but why?

If I'm Nadal I go after Federer's slam count. Contrary to sureshs logic, there won't be many people that put Nadal's career above Federer's if he retires after winning in Australia next year.
 
sureshs said:
What ifs? Djokovic winning 14 Slams and singles gold? That could be a threat yes. But Federer winning more Slams? Does not matter to Nadal, he has proven repeatedly that he is the better player.

Should he continue straining his knees because Djokovic might surpass him one day? I would not advise him to do that.
Click to expand...

LOL no, Djokovic isn't winning 14 slams :D he'd be lucky to get to 10.

Nadal's career isn't about Fed or Djokovic. Tennis is what he's done all his life. Why give up something you love when you still have the time to do it? Like I said, he will have all the time in the world in his mid 30s for non tennis stuff.

Playing pro tennis can never be an option again later in his life. You don't give up something so easily whilst still very good at it. Like it or not, there will come a time when he will have to wave goodbye to pro tennis. It will happen.
 
Nostradamus said:
Rafa not winning the AO 2014. Novak is winning that. I have big time money riding on that fact. besides Novak is HOT right now and he will ride that hotness all the way to aussie open 2014.
Click to expand...

You'll lose your money. Djokovic's peaked way too early for the AO. He's gonna be hunted down in Melbourne.
 
No he should not retire. He should focus to win more slams outside the FO, the numbers on the other slams is too bad to be considered the greatest of all time.1 AO, 2 USO and 2 Wimb.

Look at federer, 5 USO, 7 Wimbledon, and 4 wimb. Then we have multiple slam finals in the FO. Thats called being versital.

If nadal wants to be considered as the greatest, its not enough only winning the FO. The numbers must be more distributed.

Federer GOAT.
 
Last edited:
Maybe sureshs should retire...his posts are getting lamer by the minute. Really? With over 28,000 posts, it appears you're going dry.

I propose a ban on anyone with over 5,000 posts. This is simply taking up too much of your life...get out there and enjoy the sun! :)
 
RF-18 said:
No he should not retire. He should focus to win more slams outside the FO, the numbers on the other slams is too bad to be considered the greatest of all time.1 AO, 2 USO and 2 Wimb.

Look at federer, 5 USO, 7 Wimbledon, and 4 wimb. Then we have multiple slam finals in the FO. Thats called being versital.

If nadal wants to be considered as the greatest, its not enough only winning the FO. The numbers must be more distributed.

Federer GOAT.
Click to expand...

One the other hand, something like 10 titles at RG would be, imo, one of the most amazing achievements in the sport. I couldn't see that ever being broken.
 
I wonder what happened to that bi-monthly tradition of suresh starting a fresh "Federer should retire" thread.
The title got me for a split second, but then i realized what his argument was going to be.

suresh, pls try to differentiate yourself from the tdk's of this forum.:D
 
I agree with the OP.

The H2H is 22-17 and for all we know, it may be on the losing side by Wimbledon.

If Novak has the leading H2H, then by transitive rule of math, Novak becomes the GOAT.
 
No I dont see him retiring anytime soon.

I actually see him sticking around long enough to turn his h2h upside down against Novak.

Then what will all the H2H proponents say?
 
The amount of stupid threads rise exponentially after Rafa suffers a loss!
Haters have got their chance only the 7th time this year :lol:
 
Don't think he will retire before 3 years at least.
Read an interview with him and he loves the sport at he gets sad when he thinks of retire.
 
I'm pretty sure Nadal will retire soon, maybe after 2016 olympics, his game is too different to Federer's, he can't stay as long as Fed. But still if he wins AO 2014 (unlikely), FO 2014 and 2015 (likely), he would have had a terrific career.

To retire at 30 years old with 15 grand slams would be just fantastic. Don't want to see him declining like old Fed is now, and pretty sure Rafa himself thinks the same way :)
 
sureshs said:
He would have achieved these landmarks compared to Federer:

At least 2 wins in each Slam

Olympics singles gold

At least 22-10 H2H


He will equal Sampras in Slams and moreover Sampras could not win FO. He long ago passed Agassi who won all 4 Slams and Olympics singles gold. Laver's double Calendar Slam is an impossible target. 17 Slams is not important - diversity of the Slams is more important, and he also has the H2H which makes the Slam count irrelevant.

So what is the point in continuing to play after that? He should take care of his knees and retire in Majorca, maybe run an academy with Toni.
Click to expand...

Interesting peoposal, but I am afraid he will continue until his knees say no...
 
Clarky21 said:
I hope you're right but I doubt it. I think he will be supercharged at the AO, if you catch my drift.
Click to expand...

I tell you, that illegal substance pendulum... one moment it's in eastern europe, then moves to western europe. Now you're saying it's back to the east? I can't keep up with this.
 
He could retire now and become Federer's coach for a huge salaryHe could show him how he should have been playing against him and winning. . Quick Rafa...before Roger retires!


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
 
sureshs said:
He would have achieved these landmarks compared to Federer:

At least 2 wins in each Slam

Olympics singles gold

At least 22-10 H2H


He will equal Sampras in Slams and moreover Sampras could not win FO. He long ago passed Agassi who won all 4 Slams and Olympics singles gold. Laver's double Calendar Slam is an impossible target. 17 Slams is not important - diversity of the Slams is more important, and he also has the H2H which makes the Slam count irrelevant.

So what is the point in continuing to play after that? He should take care of his knees and retire in Majorca, maybe run an academy with Toni.
Click to expand...

sureshs said:
What ifs? Djokovic winning 14 Slams and singles gold? That could be a threat yes. But Federer winning more Slams? Does not matter to Nadal, he has proven repeatedly that he is the better player.

Should he continue straining his knees because Djokovic might surpass him one day? I would not advise him to do that.
Click to expand...

sureshs said:
No it would be the best only for Federer
Click to expand...

So so obsessed with Roger :).
 
No of course not! He has a chance to be GOAT. He can surpass 17. He should not retire and plus he loves the sport. Why should he?
 
sureshs said:
He would have achieved these landmarks compared to Federer:

At least 2 wins in each Slam

Olympics singles gold

At least 22-10 H2H


He will equal Sampras in Slams and moreover Sampras could not win FO. He long ago passed Agassi who won all 4 Slams and Olympics singles gold. Laver's double Calendar Slam is an impossible target. 17 Slams is not important - diversity of the Slams is more important, and he also has the H2H which makes the Slam count irrelevant.

So what is the point in continuing to play after that? He should take care of his knees and retire in Majorca, maybe run an academy with Toni.
Click to expand...

Can't wait till he wins it . Only 76 days left until this endless debate ends once and for all.
 
The AO is not a priority for Nadal. The beginning season always works the same (ramp up nicely in the clay season, win RG, etc. When he deviated from this (2009) bad things happened.

The same regarding the WTF. It was very low on Nadal's priorities. He has his sights set on the slam record, and he is going to go about it in a disciplined and methodical way. If he wins 2 more FOs he is half way there, and there are many slams left for him to play.
 
If I were Nadal, I'd just focus on accumulating as many French Opens as possible to set a record that isn't likely to be broken for at least another 20 years while trying to add one more AO and a couple more Wimbledon titles to his tally.

He's got a stranglehold on the FO already and a record there, so why waste the opportunity to write himself a near-permanent place in the record books with Nos. 9, 10, 11 and 12 at least? One more AO would give him a pair of everything. And focusing more on Wimbledon than either the USO or AO (after he's got No. 2) would be less strain on his knees and possibly prolong his career. Not to mention the fact that after he's dealt with the first 3 Slam titles of the year, he can take it easy for at least 6 months, too. Let Roger, Djoko, Delpo and Andy fight it out for the hardcourt championships (obviously after Nadal's taken AO No.2) and ruin their knees if they want to.

PS
I wish Roger would take the same line of thought. He should forget about being No. 1 again. He's been there already and just focus on adding at least 1 Slam title a year to his grand total. In 10 years time, nobody's going to remembe who was Number One in 2013 but if everyone will still be talking about who's got the most number of Slams.
 
Two legendary TT trolls in duell. Federer watches, smoking cigar
BackDeliciousIsabellinewheatear-size_restricted.gif


Chico said:
He should retire now. It would be the best for everyone.
Click to expand...
sureshs said:
No it would be the best only for Federer
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
What more does Rafa have to do?
3 4 5
Replies
207
Views
11K
Fiero425
Fiero425
PeterHo
  • Poll Poll
Roger Federer: I have no plans to retire after Olympics
Replies
10
Views
940
MasterZeb
MasterZeb
B
If Federer wins the AO17, should he retire?
Replies
17
Views
2K
MLRoy
MLRoy
B
If Federer wins the AO17, should he retire?
Replies
0
Views
422
Blocker
B
Krish872007
"I have no plans to retire after Olympics."
Replies
41
Views
2K
Zain786
Z
Back
Top