[17-6-302]

I find it a little odd that there are people who seem to think losing in the later stages of a slam is better than winning some slams and losing badly at a few. Surely a win is infinitely better than any streak that doesn't get you the title?

 

[NID_BTFO]

Come on now. Going into all 4 GS semis means you're more consistent throughout the year.

 

[Mark Lenders]

So which is better - winning or not winning? Tough one...

 

[Fargif]

If its RG for the win then 4 SF will probably win.

 

[GasquetGulbis]

4 GS semi's = 2880pts
Strange combo = 2405pts

Do the math

 

[ClutchOn&Win]

Another Nadal tard trying to justify Nadal's crap seasons and inconsistencies outside the French Open.

I must be one of the few Indian people that isn't absolutely OBSESSED with Rafael Nadal.

 

[JW Parker]

Another Nadal tard trying to justify Nadal's crap seasons and inconsistencies outside the French Open.

I must be one of the few Indian people that isn't absolutely OBSESSED with Rafael Nadal.

That makes two of us

 

[ClutchOn&Win]

That makes two of us

 

[BankaiKenpachi]

Some deluded tards take 4 GS semis over a GS trophy? Semis mean shit if you don't win it; history will remember winners, not semi finalists. Legends like Kobe Bryant, Magic Johnson or Jordan don't really celebrate when they made it into NBA finals, they do only when they win the championships. Lakers got 16 titles while Celtics got 17 titles, even though Lakers made into finals more than Celtics. Celtics > Lakers, simple as that. Now tards will bring out consistency BS, yeah right, would you take Cilic's year or Federer's year? Hands down Cilic, no question.

 

[mistercrabs]

4 GS semi's = 2880pts
Strange combo = 2405pts

Do the math

I think Andy Murray would give up his 7 semis and 5 finals for one more grand slam.

 

[Snowwy]

Winning.

 

[SheepleBuster]

Well, the elephant in the room is Rafa. If you are talking about him, 4 semis is better. But if it was my favorite player, I'd prefer a win over anything else

 

[SheepleBuster]

I think Andy Murray would give up his 7 semis and 5 finals for one more grand slam.

Why? 2 slams or 3 slams? Who gives a hoot?

 

[GasquetGulbis]

Who does the tennis world think has had a better career? Marin Cilic with his one Grand Slam title and inconsistencies across the board, or Davydenko/Nalbandian/Ljubicic who never one a Grand Slam but were always around?

Marin Cilic doesn't even blip on my list of modern day tennis greats, the others do.

 

[BankaiKenpachi]

Who does the tennis world think has had a better career? Marin Cilic with his one Grand Slam title and inconsistencies across the board, or Davydenko/Nalbandian/Ljubicic who never one a Grand Slam but were always around?

Marin Cilic doesn't even blip on my list of modern day tennis greats, the others do.

Lol, it's the same question as would you rather take Karl Malone's career or Robert Horry's career? Tough one to call but any sane people would know Malone >>>>> Horry. Cilic might not be the better player than Davydenko and Co, but I take Cilic's career over any slamless player.

 

[GasquetGulbis]

Lol, it's the same question as would you rather take Karl Malone's career or Robert Horry's career? Tough one to call but any sane people would know Malone >>>>> Horry. Cilic might not be the better player than Davydenko and Co, but I take Cilic's career over any slamless player.

I guess it depends what type of person you are. I'd rather be in the running for Greatest Player Never to Win a Grandslam, than Worst Player to Ever Win a Grandslam.

 

[booson]

Depends on the player. If one player have few or no slams, the 'QF W R2 A' combo is obviously the best choice. But a player with a lot of slams and certain reputation, that 'QF W R2 A' is almost embarrasing and even a little suspicious (cycling).

 

[Phenomenadal]

If I have the W at RG it means another RG not won by Nadal.

I'll take the W.

 

[Johnny Groove]

The win, obviously

You don't play to make SF, you play to win

 

[Andrej]

I'd take a A W A A over a F F F F.