MensTennisForums.com - Reply to Topic
Thread: Endless Federer-Nadal debates Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

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.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
04-21-2015 09:28 PM
TennisPhan1
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Andy R & logic picks Roger

http://au.ibtimes.com/andy-roddick-s...second-1386122
12-04-2014 09:51 PM
sdon
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crvena Zvezda View Post
Well I guess it is impossible to have an objective post as Dulltards are always trying to change the rules.

I dont really care about GOATing and I am more eager about next match to be played than piling stats.

I dont like Rafa to be honest, his mimics are bothering me.

When he won his first RG at something like 17, and then the following ones, I nevertheless thought his fans were right when saying "He is younger than Roger but at the end of their career he will have more titles".

Then years go by, massive training and too many competing week as well as a self destructive gamestyle have put him behind "at the same age" :

Federer 15 GS + 5 WTF at 28 when Nadal 14 GS + 0 WTF.

TBH Rafa has still a chance to reverse that trend but obviously with most of GS on clay which is a little bit less shining.

So Dulltards are now claiming about HtoH.
But sorry Santoro is not better than Safin or Kolya than Rafa even if leading HtoH.
It just means Rafa game is really suited to defeat Federer.

So what we have :

On one side a guy that manage to conquest title on all the surfaces from Clay (a few) to Fast Indoor Court.

On the other side a guy whose game is particularly excelling on Clay and wins randomly on other surfaces and hardly never indoor and whose game is suited to defeat Federer.

Excuse me but in my mind GOAT means flexible and adaptable and not specialist.

Another point is consistency with 303 weeks at World n°1 vs something like 150. Means around 3 years more. Sorry to translate.
Not sure this trend would be reversed, moreover with Nole around.


Please ask Dulltard not to keep on starting threads where they clame the 509 consecutive weeks Rafa spent into top 25 because it is paaaaaathetic

We all know that for Roger Nole and Rafa only N°1 matters.
Rather objective post
appreciated
12-04-2014 03:59 PM
ManofSteel
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce7 View Post
You're right about the passing shots, can't believe I forgot about them.

And I was largely joking about Federer being GOAT for that reason, but it's hard to get behind Nadal when he so rarely excites, and so often frustrates me (low-risk game, time between points etc).

OT: Why do you think Nalbandian is the most talented player of that decade?
Nalbandian has a bit less natural strokes than Safin, But when it comes to hability of improvisation he blowns him out of the water.

The most naturally talented players I've seen in the 2000's are 1) Nalbandian 2) Safin.


Nalbandian has the most natural raw talent of any tennis player since the 2000's

Now his hability to underperform was product of lack of focus, reduced mental strenght and lower athleticism (compared to other player of the same generation).
12-04-2014 03:10 PM
17-6-302
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Saying 'Baby' Nadal beat that generation of players is being disingenuous. He was a full grown GS Champion(multiple time) by the time he was done with those blokes. Also love the caveat next to Hewitt's 4 wins with no mention of when Nadal's last few wins against Hewitt came! Also surprised not to see Davydenko there, whatever suits I suppose.

Anyway, that Nadal is better than Hewitt, Roddick, Safin is not in doubt. Peak for peak would he have won 11/16 non clay slams in 4 years? Not a chance in hell. I give him 4 at absolute best.
12-04-2014 03:08 PM
Bruce7
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by ManofSteel View Post
Rafa has insane passing shots too. Anyways you are mistaking what "greatest" mean.

Nalbandian is most talented player I've seen in the 2000's however he is far from being the greatest.
You're right about the passing shots, can't believe I forgot about them.

And I was largely joking about Federer being GOAT for that reason, but it's hard to get behind Nadal when he so rarely excites, and so often frustrates me (low-risk game, time between points etc).

OT: Why do you think Nalbandian is the most talented player of that decade?
12-04-2014 03:01 PM
17-6-302
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by ManofSteel View Post
yes but at BO3, Nadal never lost to the likes of Nalbandian, Safin, Hewitt, Roddick at slams.
Look I don't hate Nadal(have to add the disclaimer or risk facing the wrath of certain other posters) but this is simply not true. He lost to an injured Darcis, Kygrios and Rosol - players far inferior to the ones you have mentioned at the time of making this post. He has also lost to Ferrer*2 at HC slams and baby Murray at USO 08. If you want to split hairs that far, he was losing to 2 time slam winner Djokovic in 2011...as at that point you'd be hard pressed arguing Djokovic at the start of 2011 or even after the AO was definitely better than Safin or Hewitt or even Roddick.

The thing is players become great by beating other players. For example, what if Nadal had never lost those 3 matches from W2011-AO 2012? He'd definitely not be part of some big four but a footnote like Murray(and as it is he is much closer to Murray in terms of slams than to Fedal). Players are as great as you make them out to be. Nadal's clay competition looks weak when you consider he's won all of 2 matches at RG vs RG champions (one of them being Carlos Moya in 2007). The question is, would it have been better if he had let someone else win more? In essence we're penalizing him for dominance like we are Federer.

This condescending tone towards Safin, Roddick, Hewitt has to stop really. Hewitt, Safin, Roddick are definitely in the same ballpark as current Murray(easily ahead till W2013). Nadal in his peak has lost to worse players than Federer did at his peak..that is not up for debate surely?

Absolute peak Federer lost to Nadal on clay and Safin once in a 4 year period at slams. Take any 4 year period you want that you think is Nadal at his zenith and you'll find Rosol, Soderling, Murray(0 slam winner Murray), Del Potro, Ferrer. Not that there's any shame losing to them but claiming he never lost to players of that ilk when he has lost to worse is definitely wrong.
12-04-2014 02:54 PM
ManofSteel
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce7 View Post
The only shot Nadal hits that makes me mess my pants is his FH DTL.

Whereas with Federer, there's the half-volleys, touch shots, return winners, creativity (fake drop-shots, carved IO forehands etc).

So by my spermometer, Federer is the GOAT.
Rafa has insane passing shots too. Anyways you are mistaking what "greatest" mean.

Nalbandian is most talented player I've seen in the 2000's however he is far from being the greatest.
12-04-2014 02:43 PM
ManofSteel
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnbert View Post
a joke is you saying "peak Nadal would never let someone of Nalbandian's caliber beat him at slams" while in fact he lost against those mentioned players during his prime

and yes, "fraud 2013" was a shadow of his former self. it was his worst year since 2002 and murphy barely beat him.

and please don't tell me about logic. according to dulltards, healthy dull never lost a match.
yes but at BO3, Nadal never lost to Nalbandian at slams..


Lets see the H2h

Nadal vs Safin 2-0

Nadal vs Nalbandian 5-2

Nadal vs Roddick 7-3

Nadal vs Hewitt 7-4 (3 out 4 wins of hewitt came at 2004/early 2005... rafa aged 17 in the first loss and 18 in the second and third...)

Nadal vs Ferrero 7-2

Baby nadal is 28- 11 vs strong peak generation of federer


18 years old Nadal in AO 2005 brought hewitt to 5 sets
12-04-2014 02:40 PM
17-6-302
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Apart from the slowing of courts and the balls themselves, Rafa has also been very, very lucky with the time rule. This is a slightly outdated list(Novakal have played 8 matches after that) but have a look at it:

http://www.letsecondserve.com/2013/0...-djokovic.html

I'd like to see Nadal run around like a rabbit and fetch everything if he wasn't allowed a million minutes between points. It's high time the ATP did something about it. He was easily the biggest offender last year (30 time violations - more than 2*next highest) and the officials were actually being liberal. Shot clock seems to be a good idea. You won't hear Djokodal whinging about time penalties then like this year.
12-04-2014 02:07 PM
Bruce7 The only shot Nadal hits that makes me mess my pants is his FH DTL.

Whereas with Federer, there's the half-volleys, touch shots, return winners, creativity (fake drop-shots, carved IO forehands etc).

So by my spermometer, Federer is the GOAT.
12-04-2014 01:28 PM
BankaiKenpachi
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnbert View Post
a joke is you saying "peak Nadal would never let someone of Nalbandian's caliber beat him at slams" while in fact he lost against those mentioned players during his prime

and yes, "fraud 2013" was a shadow of his former self. it was his worst year since 2002 and murphy barely beat him.
Then Olympic doesn't count huh? The one Fraud so direly wanted? Murray beat Fraud in a best of 5 setters. Wait, Fraud was at his worst right after Wimby 2012, that's right.

Quote:
and please don't tell me about logic. according to dulltards, healthy dull never lost a match.

Actually that's a partially correct statement. Peak Djokovic is the one who can beat healthy Nadal at 100%, at slams.
12-04-2014 01:01 PM
Johnbert
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by BankaiKenpachi View Post
Fedtards always cling to Rosol and Darcis as their saviors. What a joke. It needed worst Fed for Murray to get a win at a slam? Yeah, sure, every time Fraud loses, it's worst of him, typical Fedtard logic.
a joke is you saying "peak Nadal would never let someone of Nalbandian's caliber beat him at slams" while in fact he lost against those mentioned players during his prime

and yes, "fraud 2013" was a shadow of his former self. it was his worst year since 2002 and murphy barely beat him.

and please don't tell me about logic. according to dulltards, healthy dull never lost a match.
12-04-2014 12:34 PM
BankaiKenpachi
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnbert View Post
just like dull won't let win mugs like rosol, darcis, söderling, ferrer, kyrgios, wawrinka and, funny, "baby" murray at slams

it needed the worst fed for murphy to finally get his w at a slam. and even then he needed 5 sets...
Fedtards always cling to Rosol and Darcis as their saviors. What a joke. It needed worst Fed for Murray to get a win at a slam? Yeah, sure, every time Fraud loses, it's worst of him, typical Fedtard logic.
12-04-2014 06:44 AM
17-6-302
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by hipolymer View Post


The same Roddick that got his ass kicked by a 21 year old Djoker in his home slam?
The same Roddick who whilst being past his prime smashed defending Champion Djokovic at his pet slam mere months later when Nole as usual chickened out when it got tough.

You are the biggest and worst troll on this forum and that is saying something. A fan of a player who has feasted on leftovers by Fedal has every right to be bitter and obtuse so I'll humour you.
12-04-2014 06:26 AM
Johnbert
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by BankaiKenpachi View Post
Baby Murray was not yet ready to beat Fed at slams, but peak Murray would have surely challenged peak Fed. Peak Nadal would not let those mugs win at slams, but less meaningful events? sure.
just like dull won't let win mugs like rosol, darcis, söderling, ferrer, kyrgios, wawrinka and, funny, "baby" murray at slams

it needed the worst fed for murphy to finally get his w at a slam. and even then he needed 5 sets...
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

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

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