Why is Laver being such a hater?

[Manus Domini]

There wasn't anything original about it. I think some people were just trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

Many people had something to say because they believe Laver is the GOAT or a GOAT candidate, not because they are mindless followers. According to you, America should never have been created because all the soldiers should have thought for themselves and not fought en masse :roll:

 

[CyBorg]

I'm not a victim. I'm simply a person with her own opinion and own mind. Followers seem to resent original thinkers on this board.

The fact that you can't handle a difference of opinion, or a person's right to one doesn't speak well of you, imo.

You think I have a victim complex. I think you're a follower getting on a bandwagon for no reason and spouting lies you've heard from other people. You're not even original in your approach. But you know what they say, cowards always band together.

Unfortunately, that only works on the playground. I speak my mind. You don't like it? Tough.

Your opinion isn't worth squat to me either, but you don't see me questioning your right to it. See how that works? You say someone's opinion isn't valid, while offering your own invalid opinion. It's a circular argument and nothing you or weak minded followers say will change my opinion, or my stance.



I am so tired of mindless followers.

Too funny.

My opinion doesn't have to be worth anything to you. I already know that it isn't.

What's more troubling is the fact that you let your biases prevent you from analyzing the facts rationally. But that's completely your problem and you're entitled to your ignorance.

As well as your overlong and insecure retorts.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

My opinion doesn't have to be worth anything to you. I already know that it isn't.

What's more troubling is the fact that you let your biases prevent you from analyzing the facts rationally. But that's completely your problem and you're entitled to your ignorance.

As well as your overlong and insecure retorts.

this is a great post.

ps: this is me being original too

 

[CyBorg]

Just out of curiosity-What is so original about your view point? You've voiced what many of your fellow Nadal fans have already said.Unless you want to say that all Nadal fans are 'original thinkers' which is a highly subjective and one-sided view to begin with I don't see what's so original about taking issue with what Laver had to say.
The fact that you happen to disagree with some posters on this board-I can understand.But the originality part is what I really don't get.

I can be original.

"My foot itches, please saw off my legs".

That's a completely original sentence. No one has said that ever before now.

I am original.

 

[CyBorg]

I didn't make this one up, but it was also original when first uttered:

"If it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college."

 

[TheTruth]

considering the article is flawed. Those who say Laver is the GOAT also take into account his dominance on the pro-tour (which Pancho Gonzales was playing), his ability to defeat younger players, his only weakness being his mentality, and more.

Laver was the Rafa where Rosewall was the Federer. Even their recorded ATP H2H shows that: http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=R075&oId=L058

Laver won slams against the best of the best, the cream of the crop. He has as full a right to the GOAT candidacy race as Rosewell (19+ slams, one of the best backhands ever, perfect footwork/anticipation, records set as a pro), Federer, Sampras, Pancho Gonzales, Budge, Tillden, Rafa, Vines, Hoad, you name it.

Someone like you, who can't enjoy the tennis of the greats of the past, cannot possibly think of him as a GOAT candidate, because, subconsciously, you think of him as too boring. He had three grand slams: an amateur grand slam (which you consider to be irrelevant), a pro-grand-slam (he won all three pro slams in 1967, which is more significant than the amateur grand slam by far considering whom he had to beat to get it), and the open grand slam in 1969. That's definately a great resume

No, you don't know what I think, you're only making assumptions.

I don't think Rod is the greatest, because no such thing exists. I never said he didn't have a great resume, he does, but I've also read many others who don't believe he's the GOAT.

You're right I don't think the amateur slam should be counted.

You think Laver is the greatest. I don't.

 

[TheTruth]

Many people had something to say because they believe Laver is the GOAT or a GOAT candidate, not because they are mindless followers. According to you, America should never have been created because all the soldiers should have thought for themselves and not fought en masse :roll:

Some of these people arguing Laver is/was the GOAT aren't even out of their twenties. They haven't even experienced Rod in his heyday. Yeah, I call that mindless follwing.

That analogy makes no sense.

Here's the thing. I wasn't around in the Laver era so I can't tout him as the greatest when I have no experience with what was going on at the time. If I accept that view I would simply be following, because I don't know.

I don't know how history will record this era either, but it may not be the same way I see it.

I wasn't around for Lendl, McEnroe, and many others, so I don't speak to that either. I'm not about to take the word of commentators (many of whom's opinions I don't respect anyway) as gospel. That's just silly to me.

 

[Manus Domini]

I assume you are literate as I write this, because you didn't read my sig. I don't know if it is that you can't or just didn't feel the need to, but just in case I decided to write this.

No, you don't know what I think, you're only making assumptions.

I don't think Rod is the greatest, because no such thing exists. I never said he didn't have a great resume, he does, but I've also read many others who don't believe he's the GOAT.

You're right I don't think the amateur slam should be counted.

You think Laver is the greatest. I don't.

1] well that's a good reason. Why didn't you just say that instead of how boring he was to watch?

2] well he still has two grand slams not counting the amateur grand slam (pro grand slam and open era grand slam)

3] Nope, I think the GOAT is Rosewall. Thus my sig.

Some of these people arguing Laver is/was the GOAT aren't even out of their twenties. They haven't even experienced Rod in his heyday. Yeah, I call that mindless follwing.

Actually, I am the only one I know spouting that Rosewall had 19+ slams, a pro-grand slam, numerous other achievements that make him GOAT, and I don't consider Laver GOAT, but the guy with records.

And by your logic, my opinion on best President is limited to Clinton (who I never heard speeches of), Bush, and Obama. Wow, a pool of three. I guess I can't choose FDR because I never lived through the time. Guess I'm just a mindless follower then :roll:

That analogy makes no sense.

yes it does. They obviously were mindless followers because they all acted the same way, according to you.

Here's the thing. I wasn't around in the Laver era so I can't tout him as the greatest when I have no experience with what was going on at the time. If I accept that view I would simply be following, because I don't know.

As I said about Presidents. But lemme say something else. I guess I can't be Catholic, because I never met Jesus so I don't know if His teachings were good. I guess I can't be Socialist because I never met Karl Marx. I guess I can't prefer Evita Perón over First Lady Obama as the most influential woman in a nation because I didn't live during the 30s. See how stupid that argument is?

I don't know how history will record this era either, but it may not be the same way I see it.

History consists of a series of accumulated imaginative inventions.

History is interpretation of facts. That is the truth.

I wasn't around for Lendl, McEnroe, and many others, so I don't speak to that either. I'm not about to take the word of commentators (many of whom's opinions I don't respect anyway) as gospel. That's just silly to me.

A} reruns of old matches
B} I don't take the word of commentators. If I did, I'd be following RITG's example.

 

[TheTruth]

I assume you are literate as I write this, because you didn't read my sig. I don't know if it is that you can't or just didn't feel the need to, but just in case I decided to write this.

I hadn't read your signature. There's another poster with a name similar to yours, and I get you two mixed up. I am pleasantly surprised that you seem to have your own opinion instead of just reiterating what's been told to you. I hate that.

1] well that's a good reason. Why didn't you just say that instead of how boring he was to watch?

Sorry, but all of the oldtimers look boring now when compared to the current game. IMO, that's why you have to actually be in an era to make such distinctions, you can't simply go by word of mouth.

2] well he still has two grand slams not counting the amateur grand slam (pro grand slam and open era grand slam)

Now that I have never heard of, so thanks for bringing that up. I will read up on it.

3] Nope, I think the GOAT is Rosewall. Thus my sig.

Intriguing, why? If you don't mind me asking.
This is interesting, M.D. I will do a search on Rosewall as well. Information on him seems to be sketchy when compared to the others, but I've never done a search on him alone. Thank you.

Oops. Didn't see the whole of your post, so I'll read it now.

Scratch this.

 

[Manus Domini]

Intriguing, why? If you don't mind me asking.

This is interesting, M.D. I will do a search on Rosewall as well. Information on him seems to be sketchy when compared to the others, but I've never done a search on him alone. Thank you.

Ok now we got that cleared up, here's a thread on the pro-grand-slam:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=364161

also, read here for Laver's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_professional_tennis_tournaments_before_the_Open_Era

 

[Manus Domini]

Intriguing, why? If you don't mind me asking.
This is interesting, M.D. I will do a search on Rosewall as well. Information on him seems to be sketchy when compared to the others, but I've never done a search on him alone. Thank you.

Oops. Didn't see the whole of your post, so I'll read it now.

Scratch this.

lol ok

10 char

 

[TheTruth]

I assume you are literate as I write this, because you didn't read my sig. I don't know if it is that you can't or just didn't feel the need to, but just in case I decided to write this.



1] well that's a good reason. Why didn't you just say that instead of how boring he was to watch?

2] well he still has two grand slams not counting the amateur grand slam (pro grand slam and open era grand slam)

3] Nope, I think the GOAT is Rosewall. Thus my sig.

History is rarely interpreted correctly. All issues have many sides. In order to know anything with a certainty it would require extensive research. No matter how well informed an opinion is, it is still an opinion, and is written from the perspective of a biased writer. It would take a lot of time and energy to research any one idea, because the more research you do, the wider the perimeters become.

 

[PCXL-Fan]

Why is Laver being such a hater?

Well Nadal is a playa. Laver can't hate the game, it made him famous.
Look and how Rafa famboozles Shakira, Megan Fox and half the women on ttforum. He probably roped in Lavers granddaughter as well, which is why Laver's so grouchy.

My guess is Rafa can do the topspin with his tongue which is why he is so popular.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

Well Nadal is a playa. Laver can't hate the game, it made him famous.
Look and how Rafa famboozles Shakira, Megan Fox and half the women on ttforum. He probably roped in Lavers granddaughter as well, which is why Laver's so grouchy.

My guess is Rafa can do the topspin with his tongue which is why he is so popular.

this post made me laugh out seriously loud

 

[niff]

OMG Laver said something mildly disparaging about sweet Rafito?!?!

I guess that's his GOAT status revoked.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

It's just tennis.

It's weird, before this tournament I had a feeling Nadal and Fed wouldn't be in the final, and I was okay with that. I didn't think it would be an injury to take Nadal out, but stuff happens. I'm just glad it's not a serious one. But, it's nice to see someone else on the big stage. Even with some people's disappointments, I think this is going to be a great final. I'm pumped, and happy for both of these fine competitors.

Yep, it is just tennis. But for these players, it is just a bit more than hitting a ball over the net, especially when playing in a slam with so much on the line.

The blood bath, as you predicted, happened. Fedal were shut out of the final, Joker showed his hunger, Ferrer showed his iron will, and even Murray repeated last years result. Overall, I am happy that Fedal did NOT win this one, they have won enough, great for the game to see the rise of the Joker again.

Lets hope the players take this mentality forward and continue to battle for the titles, competition is always healthy for the sport.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

rod LAVER win against easy opponent ! easy for him to say , roger is the best , better than him. he will win next 2 slams , i think nadal can`t beat him.

also laver win 3 of that slam on grass! is bull**** for him say his is proper one .....

posts like this remind me of that great wise Blinkism.

Bacon & eggs tastes great!

 

[5263]

Laver has 2 true Grand Slams. He can say what he wants

Yes and one of the all-time greats he was. I had the pleasure to meet and speak with him and he is the perfect gentleman.

Even though I am a big fan of his, His slams should have several **s by them as well.
for example, 62 was as an amateur and he was probably not a top 5 in the world player yet, as in 63 he was dominated by a couple of players like Rosewall. Pancho, well past his prime was still a handful for him.
in 69, 3 of the 4 slams were on grass i understand. Players like Sampras and Fed, who have dominated on grass would have had great chances at slams then, as they could have leveraged that dominance on grass into several wins on the clay as well. Clearly Fed would have won the FO several times if not having to face the GOAT of Clay.

Laver was amazing, but it should be remembered that his 62 slam should not even be counted and the second one was weighted much more for grass play; So neither are the standards of purity they are held up to be.

 

[TheTruth]

Yep, it is just tennis. But for these players, it is just a bit more than hitting a ball over the net, especially when playing in a slam with so much on the line.

The blood bath, as you predicted, happened. Fedal were shut out of the final, Joker showed his hunger, Ferrer showed his iron will, and even Murray repeated last years result. Overall, I am happy that Fedal did NOT win this one, they have won enough, great for the game to see the rise of the Joker again.

Lets hope the players take this mentality forward and continue to battle for the titles, competition is always healthy for the sport.

I agree, Hitman. I try to always remember that it is just tennis, but for them, it's their lives and career. I wish two things, though, 1.) that I trusted my gut, and 2.) that I was a gambler, because sometimes I just get these feelings. Darn!

This was a very enjoyable tournament for me, because healthy competition is more important than me slobbering over my favorites. Every pro who dedicates his life to the pursuit of excellence is worthy in my eyes. And I am happy for the breakthroughs, the second chances, and the opportunity for someone, anyone to lift a trophy, especially in the midst of the Fedal years, and the necessary mental strength it takes to still believe.

Great tournament!

 

[darth_federer]

Djoker's next slam, AO2014.

 

[kishnabe]

Djoker's next slam, AO2014.

He gonna win something in the middle for sure...it would seem stupid for him to have another 3 years without a major title....I would get pissed off that he didn't step up with a Federer who might get even more slow then! Still Laver must be happy that he doesn't need to defend himself from stupid Media that try to outweight Nadal achievements against Laver! Laver 2 CYGS are allways better....no one can deny that!