Originally Posted by prima donna
Your way of thinking is interesting, a completely different school of thought alltogether that deserves to be separate from any logical or rational ideas. Roger Federer can compete with Rafael Nadal on clay, even at his best. Nadal can't play his best against Roger, for the simple fact that his best tennis is negated by Roger's best tennis, the 2 cancel eachother out. If Roger is playing his best, there's no player in the history of tennis that would be capable of mustering up the strength to play their best tennis.
Secondly, Sampras was quite cocky and still is, why don't you go read his articles and see what he has to see about your boy wonder ? A man in his 30's thinks that he'd hand Rafael Nadal his ass on Grass. Still subscribing to the same irrational logic of thinking or have you come to your senses yet ?
Roger Federer is simply the best tennis player to ever pick up a racquet, of course there's a distinction that needs to be drawn between being labeled "the best tennis player" and "the greatest tennis player" which is why his search for the Roland Garros crown continues and there's no doubt that if he shows up with anything close to his best tennis and exhibits mental strength that he'd be capable of taking anyone off a clay court in less than 5 sets. Including Nadal.
Hey, Primma, you are a funny guy, you know that right?
I mean, I have this guy here talking to me about logic. How about Roger beat Nadal on clay at least once, before he starts talking about winning the french, huh?
I mean, Roger played his ass off In Rome, and still lost. And regardless of what you say, Nadal did not play his best clay game on that final. Half of it was due to the fact that Federer playing awsome, the other was that Nadal was missing the passing shots he usually makes.
Who gives a Rats ass about what Sampras says about Nadal. And no, I dont think Sampras now would beat Nadal on grass, the way Nadal played in the Wimbledon. But we were not talking about Grass now were we? I though we were talking bout clay. Why dosent, Sampras say he wasnt to play Nadal on clay. Hmmm, to quote Led Zeppelin in "Stairway to Heaven": "and it makes me wonder..."
What's that crap that Nadal cant play his best tennis against Federer because if Federer plays well, they negate each other? Hey, by that Logic I (and I thought mine was irrational) then Nadal is as good as Roger anywhere.
But hey, not even I, stated that, YOU DID.
I'm not saying Roger can't beat Nadal on clay, he can, and Roger could probably be the one to end Rafa's streak, likewise, Rafa ended Roger Federer's hard court streak. All im saying that if Nadal plays his "A" game on clay, Federer cannot beat him, regardless of what you say. And yes, to rephrase it, if Nadal loses to Federer on clay (im STATING CLAY, NOT HARD, OR GRASS), then Nadal did not play his best game.
Do you have Questions Donna?