Tennisanity
Legend
He's very passive aggressive.
He's very passive aggressive.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Been having some fun with bad and obnoxious predictions. But this one is among the best. Patronizing response based on the "styles of play" argument, which should have died years ago. For a long time posters claimed that Nadal's (and to some extent Nole's) playing style was so physical they couldn't play well after 30. Can we end this now? Please? In the seasons he turned 31 and 32 (2012 and 2013) fed won one slam. In the equivalent years (2017/18) Nadal won 3 slams and reached the final of a fourth. And he still has one more slam to go. Nadal also won more Masters during the equivalent years, 4 vs 3. And he could still win more this year.
I'd say that at this stage continuing arguing that the "physical' style will stop you from winning after 30 is probably a sign that one lacks understanding of the game. But that's just me.
augustobt
Legend
LOOOOOL! This comparison is not only biased and unfair, but it's shallow too.
When fed was 31 and 32 he had to deal with those younger players on their prime - Djokovic on his peak. Who did Nadal and Djokovic faced in the past couple of years? Outside clay, Nadal won a major without facing no top 20 (!). Outside clay, he had a decent amount of losses. Actually, how many and what tithes did he won outside clay?
I won't even start talking about Djokovic because he was being routined by Berdych and lost in Roland Garros to Cecchinato a month ago. What does that "prove"?
And most importantly: Are you being intentionally obtuse to the fact that both Nadal and Djokovic had to change their styles? Nadal is clearly trying to be more aggressive outside clay to shorten the points because he can't stand the baseline exchange the way he used to.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Ah, the weak era argument. Color me unsurprised.
augustobt
Legend
er... did Nadal and Djokovic faced someone peaking like they did?
FreeBird
Legend
Same old statement we used to hear in 2012.
"Federer's game survives the test of time specially because his play style and the infinite repertoire of shots he can produce. So, as of now at the age of 31, he can rely on it and not depend as much as he did of his legs back in his peak. Both Nadal and Djokovic relies A LOT on their speed and physique (as they're mainly defensive players). It wears down with the age, simple as that."
Guess what Nadal is World No. 1 at an age of 32. Most Federer fans were expecting Nadal to retire by the age of 30-31 because of his 'physical game'.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Did Nadal and Djokovic face tremendous young players? Because that's the main reason why they are still winning. It's not about weak era here.
augustobt
Legend
Are Nadal playing the same tennis he played when he was younger? Djokovic too?
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Sorry , we will not answer this question
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Please, stop. In 2012, the year he turned 31, Fed was stopped at the USO by...Berdych. When he turned 31 Nadal won the USO. In 2013 when he turned 32 Fed lost in the second round of Wimbledon, his best slam, to Stakhosky. At the same age Nadal destroyed the competition at his own best slam and won the FO, a much more physical slam than Wimbledon.
You claimed, like many others here, that Nadal’s and Nole’s physical play meant they wouldn’t be able to win after 30. You condescendingly “explained” to me I didn’t understand the sport.
Turns out it’s you that doesn’t have a clue.
augustobt
Legend
Are you honestly comparing Berdych to Diego Schwartzman and motherfucking Kevin Anderson on a hard court?
So you're using 2013 - a year where Federer WAS INJURED, clearly his worse year since he won his first major (even worse than 2016 that he went under a surgery) and saying like it was a "regular 32 year old season".
YOU clearly don't know a thing, or what seems to be even worse, are trying to manipulate facts to state something that don't make absolutely any sense.
And please, find me saying that I said that Nadal and Djokovic wouldn't be wining anything after they're 30
FreeBird
Legend
Obviously, Nadal is not playing the peak level tennis but still a top level tennis. Not retired like people anticipated. At W, he has produced the best level in last 7 years.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Wow, so now we move from weka era to injuries? What’s next, the weather?Are you honestly comparing Berdych to Diego Schwartzman and motherfucking Kevin Anderson on a hard court?
So you're using 2013 - a year where Federer WAS INJURED, clearly his worse year since he won his first major (even worse than 2016 that he went under a surgery) and saying like it was a "regular 32 year old season".
YOU clearly don't know a thing, or what seems to be even worse, are trying to manipulate facts to state something that don't make absolutely any sense.
And please, find me saying that I said that Nadal and Djokovic wouldn't be wining anything after they're 30
You claimed something and the facts proved it wrong. Just accept it and move on.
augustobt
Legend
Are you 14?
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Dude, you fell to the same misconception that many others here did. You thought that Nadal’s more physical style of play meant he wouldn’t age well in the courts. Turns out he has aged much better than Fed did at 31 and 32. So you were wrong. We shall see how Nadal does in the future. But at this rate nadal will likely win more slams post 30 than Fed did. He only needs to win two more. Not a tall order.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Yes, Fed was stopped by Berdych, a younger player, not another geezer.
Fed simply had his horrible season at 32, while Nadal had it at 29, not the best comparison.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Augustbot claimed, as many others here have, that Nadal’s and Nole’s physical style meant he wouldn’t “age” as well as Federer. But the numbers show that since reaching 30 Fed won 4 slams and Nadal, after 30, won 3. Given that Nadal is 5 years younger there is a good chance Nadal will win more. Nole won 1 slam since 30 so he has a ways to go, but he’s 6 years younger.
The point is not to determine exactly who will win more after 30. We have time for that. The point is that both Nole and, to a much greater extent so far, Nadal, have shown that their physical style does not stop them from winning after 30.
The error here is that modern tennis players are rewriting the rules of what it means to be over 30. What happened in decades past doesn’t tell us too much.
I don’t blame augustbot for being wrong. But it is a bit bothersome when someone is both wrong and condescending about it.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
That has no bearing on my argument.
Again, augustbot’s Argument was that Nadal and Nole’s play style meant they would age much worse than Fed. So far Nadal at least has aged better, meaning he has won more at age 31 and 32 than Fed did at the same age.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Exactly. The argument was that Fed would age better because of his style of play.i even recall some posters calculating how much time each player had spent in the courts. I don’t blame them, the argument made theoretical sense. Nadal’s play is more physical than Fed’s and you could expect that would take its toll.
But it didn’t play out that way. We’ve seen them age. And Nadal at 32 has won almost as much post 30 as Fed at 37. Why is that so difficult to accept?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Tennis_Hands
Banned
When he was turning 31 Federer beat 5-6 years younger ATGs for his titles on the way to the #1 position (including the reigning Wimbledon champion for his Wimbledon title).
2012 is seen as one of the most competitive years in the last decade as far as the tour goes.
Do you have any objections as far as any of those statements go?
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Not really, no. But I wasn’t arguing that.When he was turning 31 Federer beat 5-6 years younger ATGs for his titles on the way to the #1 position (including the reigning Wimbledon champion for his Wimbledon title).
2012 is seen as one of the most competitive years in the last decade as far as the tour goes.
Do you have any objections as far as any of those statements go?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Well, they contradict your argumentation above.
If Nadal (for example) is/was not in the same situation as Federer was at the time, what parallels are you drawing?
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
I don’t think you understand my pointWell, they contradict your argumentation above.
If Nadal (for example) is/was not in the same situation as Federer was at the time, what parallels are you drawing?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
I’ve always found the argument that Nadal and Djokovic wouldn’t last as long as Federer weird. They should last longer, because they are less reliant on quick reflexes. Agassi lasted longer than Sampras. Lendl and Connors lasted longer than McEnroe.
Of course Djokovic and Nadal were not going to fade early for physical reasons. I don’t think anyone really believed that. They said it to themselves more in hope than expectation.
Of course Djokovic and Nadal were not going to fade early for physical reasons. I don’t think anyone really believed that. They said it to themselves more in hope than expectation.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Good point.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Very apt comparison. Improving on something that has been done before, but overhyped by a marketing machine and endlessly defended by fanboys as something completely original and unique. Has since been surpassed by other contenders, but the same fanboys and the media still hype it as the greatest thing ever.
augustobt
Legend
Jeez, is this the best you could've come to assist your friend? Really pathetic.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Except Fed hasn't yet been surpassed by better products.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
If you are going to insult other posters, at least do it writing in proper English. Otherwise you'll look bitter and stupid.
augustobt
Legend
I'm sorry to disappoint you but you sound stupid even writing your bullcraps with shakespearean english.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
I am not the one who writes things like "this shows lack of understanding of the game" and "are you 14?"
Tennis_Hands
Banned
There are two problems with this point.
1) Federer is an aggressive baseliner, so the reliance on reflexes in that comparison is, shall we say, "unsuitable"
2) Especially in Nadal's case, he has been out of the game for roughly 2.5 years, so that was a time when he could rest mentally, and, obviously, physically.
People underestimate the importance of those pauses for a player with such a style, mainly focusing on his "injuries", none of which left any serious trail, but what they do not account for is that the mental burnout, and physical grind needed to be countered.
Mostly people who are not old enough to remember Borg think that taking breaks from the game is bad.
Recently Federer has (yet again) shown the way for the oldies, but Nadal doesn't have that much time left. I have him at maximum another two years of constantly high level of tennis. After that it is a part time affair or retirement.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Yeah, what good is knowing a language when you talk only useless stuff, or, worse, have nothing to say?
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
There are two problems with this point.
1) Federer is an aggressive baseliner, so the reliance on reflexes in that comparison is, shall we say, "unsuitable"
2) Especially in Nadal's case, he has been out of the game for roughly 2.5 years, so that was a time when he could rest mentally, and, obviously, physically.
People underestimate the importance of those pauses for a player with such a style, mainly focusing on his "injuries", none of which left any serious trail, but what they do not account for is that the mental burnout, and physical grind needed to be countered.
Mostly people who are not old enough to remember Borg think that taking breaks from the game is bad.
Recently Federer has (yet again) shown the way for the oldies, but Nadal doesn't have that much time left. I have him at maximum another two years of constantly high level of tennis. After that it is a part time affair or retirement.
My reference to "good point" was mostly to the part of the text I bolded
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Fed fans have been claiming Nadal wouldn't be able to sustain his style of play much longer, and that he would be retired at 30Recently Federer has (yet again) shown the way for the oldies, but Nadal doesn't have that much time left. I have him at maximum another two years of constantly high level of tennis. After that it is a part time affair or retirement.
Some things never change
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
What is the greatest lesson that the GOAT has imparted to Djokovic and Nadal?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
That is the least suitable part to agree with, as it is just a flaming speculation, unlike the part with the comparison with the other ATGs of the game.
And if you think that what you are agreeing with is not a flaming speculation, then what about Toni Nadal?
Was he also saying the same thing "more in a hope"?
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
flaming speculation in TTW?? The horror!That is the least suitable part to agree with, as it is just a flaming speculation, unlike the part with the comparison with the other ATGs of the game.
And if you think that what you are agreeing with is not a flaming speculation, then what about Toni Nadal?
Was he also saying the same thing "more in a hope"?
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
Assuming that's for Djoker? If Nadal had taken that lesson to heart, he'd have closed up shop ages ago.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
You know the reference, right? Glengarry Glenross
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
That phrase's origin is well beyond your purview, friend.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
flaming speculation in TTW?? The horror!
Yeah, but you didn't address my point about Toni Nadal.
Similar threads
- Poll
