Endless Federer-Nadal debates - Page 62 - MensTennisForums.com

View Poll Results: How will it look?
Nadal more than 15 matches ahead. 108 40.15%
Nadal 13-14 matches ahead. 25 9.29%
Nadal 11-12 matches ahead. 20 7.43%
Nadal 9-10 matches ahead. 20 7.43%
Nadal 7-8 matches ahead. 20 7.43%
Nadal 5-6 matches ahead. 19 7.06%
Nadal 3-4 matches ahead. 5 1.86%
Nadal 1-2 matches ahead. 1 0.37%
Equal 4 1.49%
Federer ahead 47 17.47%
Voters: 269. You may not vote on this poll

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #916 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 12:28 AM
Registered User
 
Matt01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,149
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corey Feldman View Post
Exactly

when all is said and done, Nadal, Agassi and Serena may have a golden slam but their careers are still dwarfed by Fed's career, simple as.

Dwarfed? No, they aren't. A bit less arrogance would be nice.

Monaco - Del Potro - Nadal - Wawrinka - Robredo - Simon - Berdych - Dimitrov - Chardy


Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Kuerten View Post
Djokovic is the people's champion, Federer and Nadal are greedy thugs.
Matt01 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #917 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 01:10 AM
Banned!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 10,825
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt01 View Post
Dwarfed? No, they aren't. A bit less arrogance would be nice.
When it comes to slams wins, continued outstanding at performances at slams and weeks #1, they are... This is not arrogance, these are indisputable facts.
BigJohn is offline  
post #918 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 01:16 AM
country flag n8
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Canberra, Australia
Age: 31
Posts: 7,377
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

I don't get why there is a special name for a Golden Career Slam but nothing for a WTF Career Slam. I guess the latter doesn't have a nice ring to it.
n8 is offline  
post #919 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 02:10 AM
Registered User
 
bouncer7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,306
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by StatRacket View Post
I don't get why there is a special name for a Golden Career Slam but nothing for a WTF Career Slam. I guess the latter doesn't have a nice ring to it.
why are you just wasting energy on useless mtf tards cause this only could be dilemma on mtf lol
bouncer7 is offline  
post #920 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 02:36 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 13,139
                     
Re: Olympics Final: Murray destroys Federer 6-2 6-1 6-4

Quote:
Originally Posted by luie View Post
Simply put , roddicks presence in this thread is as relevant as nadull , who u brought up .
This thread is about fed n Murray and the OG .

Is it? I see we are in the endless Federer-Nadal debates(WTF vs Olympics) thread. I win.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leng jai View Post
Anyone who says any player has no chance against Dolgopolov is clearly trolling.
That's the gospel.
Fumus is offline  
post #921 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 02:57 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,955
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt01 View Post
What? Davis Cup is not RR system.
He`s talking about the 2010 football World Cup...


Last edited by Julián Santiago; 08-07-2012 at 04:01 AM.
Julián Santiago is offline  
post #922 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 03:26 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 13,139
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJohn View Post
It is impossible to fault Federer because Nadal could not keep up with him in reaching those finals, an argument not only retarded, it shows extremely bad faith from the one putting it forward. No wonder you support Nadal.

Who's faulting Federer!? I am not faulting him.

I am saying that his wins mean less without facing his rival. It's like taking a multiple choice English test without the written essay part that you suck at. Sure you got an "A" but someone omitted the biggest part of the test for you.

For certain there is a distinction between 250 and 1000 events. Yes you could argue that winning a 250 event is still winning a tournament and thus equal to winning any other non slam event. The difference between a 250, 500 and 1000 tournie is the competition, OH SNAP! That's why some posters here like to call top players vultures for winning such 250 mickey mouse events...

Roger can't beat Nadal in a slam...he won't. The wins he has since 2008 are tainted, he's a benefit of luck and circumstance. Nothing more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StatRacket View Post
I don't get why there is a special name for a Golden Career Slam but nothing for a WTF Career Slam. I guess the latter doesn't have a nice ring to it.
I agree they are both BS for a tennis player. The idea of a career grand slam is stupid as Australia has changed it's surface several times now (as has the US open) and when Laver won them it was purely grass and clay. Deco didn't exist yet...let alone plexicushion.

Thus the idea of the career grand slam has changed; it's a fallacy. We can makeup whatever we want and the media can create hype around whatever they like...but really it remains...

1)Wimbledon
2)US Open and French Open
3)Aussie


If and when you win any of these you become tennis royalty. If you win more than one, you become a great...if you win more than anyone else you become a legend....you will never become the GOAT because someone else will pass you. Time will allow new champions always. All you can be is the greatest of all current time The GOACT.

(I'm counting on the fact that the world will not end in 2012 when I say all of this, if it does then Federer is by far the GOAT)

There is no grand slam, there are no bests ever...we love the best right now and who's number 1. The greats can be debated but as long as tennis continues to change with it's new surfaces, balls, racquets and string...not to mention the athletes becoming better, faster, taller and stronger...you really can't compare apples to oranges...it's like comparing foosball to fussball.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leng jai View Post
Anyone who says any player has no chance against Dolgopolov is clearly trolling.
That's the gospel.
Fumus is offline  
post #923 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 03:41 AM
Registered User
 
tripwires's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Singapore
Age: 30
Posts: 13,526
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fumus View Post
Who's faulting Federer!? I am not faulting him.

I am saying that his wins mean less without facing his rival. It's like taking a multiple choice English test without the written essay part that you suck at. Sure you got an "A" but someone omitted the biggest part of the test for you.
That's the worst analogy of all-time. If I get an A on a pure MCQ without the essay part that I suck at, I still get an A. The only thing that the asterisk next to my grade would symbolise is that I totally kicked ass at the test (hence getting an A* - A Star).

Quote:
For certain there is a distinction between 250 and 1000 events. Yes you could argue that winning a 250 event is still winning a tournament and thus equal to winning any other non slam event. The difference between a 250, 500 and 1000 tournie is the competition, OH SNAP! That's why some posters here like to call top players vultures for winning such 250 mickey mouse events...
Again, your analogy is flawed. Nadal entered the 2012 Wimbledon Championships. He lost in the second round. That's not the same as a player winning a 250 tournament that the top players did not enter.

Quote:
Roger can't beat Nadal in a slam...he won't. The wins he has since 2008 are tainted, he's a benefit of luck and circumstance. Nothing more.
He did beat Nadal in a couple of slam finals, so stop trying to rewrite history. It's not his problem that Nadal couldn't get past the second round of Wimbledon this year, or that he lost to Ferrer in Melbourne 2010. Nadal losing before the final to meet Roger in no way taints his achievements. Only a Nadaltard/Fedhater would think that. Did he get lucky when Nadal lost early? Of course he did. But Nadal losing was not the only reason for Roger's victories. He had to show up, take the court, and, gasp, play tennis to win matches - and that was exactly what he did.

Anyway, you can discount his victories all you want; sadly for you, a win is a win, and there's nothing that anyone can say that'd diminish his success and achievements.

Roger Federer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt01 View Post
Fed's groundstrokes never were that good to begin with.
tripwires is offline  
post #924 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 03:54 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,041
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fumus View Post
I am saying that his wins mean less without facing his rival. It's like taking a multiple choice English test without the written essay part that you suck at. Sure you got an "A" but someone omitted the biggest part of the test for you.
The point is to win tournaments, not to "beat that specific guy". Pete Sampras would only have five majors if we only count the ones with Agassi and the rest meaningless by your logic. Nadal would also only have six (vs rival Federer)
stewietennis is offline  
post #925 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 03:59 AM
Banned!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 10,825
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fumus View Post
Who's faulting Federer!? I am not faulting him.

I am saying that his wins mean less without facing his rival.
And that is a retarded statement because his rival was not good enough to reach the finals. I'm sure lots of connaisseurs are saying "this wimbledon title means less because thew winner did not beat the guy who lost in round 2 to an unknown ranked 100 in the world."

Actually connaisseurs is not the proper expression to describe people who would say that. I believe pathetic nadal fangirl fits better.
BigJohn is offline  
post #926 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 04:23 AM
Registered User
 
evilmindbulgaria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,686
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJohn View Post
And that is a retarded statement because his rival was not good enough to reach the finals. I'm sure lots of connaisseurs are saying "this wimbledon title means less because thew winner did not beat the guy who lost in round 2 to an unknown ranked 100 in the world."

Actually connaisseurs is not the proper expression to describe people who would say that. I believe pathetic nadal fangirl fits better.
Oh, really? RG'06,07,08,11 AO'09 WI'08 were not all Nadal - Federer finals? How many more chances does the supposed "Goat" need?

RAFAEL NADAL and GRIGOR DIMITROV

Rafa winning at least one slam in 10 consecutive years is the best achievement in Open Era tennis since Laver won all 4 Grand slam tournaments in the same year!


Don't ever underestimate the heart of a champion!
evilmindbulgaria is offline  
post #927 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 04:39 AM
Registered User
 
ssj100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 640
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by evilmindbulgaria View Post
Oh, really? RG'06,07,08,11 AO'09 WI'08 were not all Nadal - Federer finals? How many more chances does the supposed "Goat" need?
I think the point is that not many finals that Federer lost were played out in Federer's prime of 2003-2007. In fact, I count only 4 total finals between these two, with 2 Wimbledons to Federer and 2 French Opens to Nadal.

What would have been interesting is if Nadal was the same age as Federer.

warm regards...

6-2, 6-3, 6-2 and 6-2, 6-2, 6-2 and 6-3, 6-0 (and not even finals).
ssj100 is offline  
post #928 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 04:55 AM
Registered User
 
evilmindbulgaria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,686
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssj100 View Post
I think the point is that not many finals that Federer lost were played out in Federer's prime of 2003-2007. In fact, I count only 4 total finals between these two, with 2 Wimbledons to Federer and 2 French Opens to Nadal.

What would have been interesting is if Nadal was the same age as Federer.
That is one of the main reasons we cannot compare different eras. However, I disagree about Fed's prime. How about 2009? Did he not win 2 GS and reach the final at the other 2 GS? Looking only at one's "prime" years is silly IMO.

RAFAEL NADAL and GRIGOR DIMITROV

Rafa winning at least one slam in 10 consecutive years is the best achievement in Open Era tennis since Laver won all 4 Grand slam tournaments in the same year!


Don't ever underestimate the heart of a champion!
evilmindbulgaria is offline  
post #929 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 05:23 AM
Registered User
 
rickcastle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 934
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Well, maybe Olympics is more "prestigious" because of once every four years thing. But what does it say about Nadal that he is unable to win a less "prestigious" tournament (worth more points than everything else other than the slams btw) that is held EVERY year. And was actually able to make the finals only ONCE. There were a lot more chances for Nadal to win the WTF and yet he was unable to. I think that speaks more to everything above this "which is more prestigious" bullcrap.
rickcastle is offline  
post #930 of 4037 (permalink) Old 08-07-2012, 05:31 AM
ALT-0
 
Litotes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Norway
Age: 43
Posts: 56,880
                     
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

For those who feel the Olympics are more prestigious because they are only held each four years - what is your take on Madrid on blue clay? That was - as it appears - once in a lifetime. So how big is that win, then?
Litotes is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome