- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Does Nadal get to 17 majors?
Posted on 4/8/12 at 2:44 am to bobbyray21
Posted on 4/8/12 at 2:44 am to bobbyray21
quote:
How about you tell us why it's beyond stupid. This way you can add something to the discussion.
It's pretty basic logic, which you obviously don't seem to grasp. Just because he's still one of the best players on tour doesn't mean that he hasn't declined. If that's something you can't comprehend then I can't help you.
1
Posted on 4/8/12 at 2:44 am to bobbyray21
quote:
Hell, Rafa is my favorite player.
That would explain the painful lack of objectivity...
Posted on 4/8/12 at 4:58 am to TulaneTigerFan
quote:
It's pretty basic logic, which you obviously don't seem to grasp. Just because he's still one of the best players on tour doesn't mean that he hasn't declined. If that's something you can't comprehend then I can't help you.
You obviously don't know what the word logic means.
Posted on 4/8/12 at 5:04 am to TulaneTigerFan
quote:
That would explain the painful lack of objectivity...
Except that Novak Djokovic is the premise of my argument. Good try, though.
Posted on 4/8/12 at 9:09 am to BayouBengals03
quote:
Not arguing one side or the other, but he might be in the process of this right now.
I take it, you didn't read my very next line?
Posted on 4/8/12 at 9:20 am to bobbyray21
quote:
Meh, Federer has clearly declined and still gives Djokovic fits. I don't think you can really draw much from this other than Djokovic being a terrible matchup for Nadal just like Nadal was for Fed. I think if all three were in their peaks at the same time you'd see Fed beat Djokovic more often than not, Nadal beat Fed, and Djokovic beat Nadal.
Been saying this for a while. It's crazy how much matchups play into sports.
quote:
Don't get me wrong, I think it is really impressive how Federer was able to prevail in the slams against Mark Philippoussis and Marat Safin and Andy Roddick and Lleyton Hewitt and then Andy Roddick again and then a 35 year old Agassi and Marcos Baghdatis and then of course Andy Roddick again and then the super-elite Fernando Gonzales. That was a really nice run he had.
But then when Nadal ceased being a teenager and came into his own, that run stopped. Nadal became the best player in the world.
And then Djokovic raised his game up above and beyond both guys.
Federer's early competition, or lackthereof, is definitely worthy of criticism.
quote:
Federer hasn't declined. His competition just got better. But don't take my word for it. Here is what Mats Wilander had to say.
This, however, is moronically batshit crazy. It's verbal diarrhea personified.
Posted on 4/16/12 at 11:05 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
FootballNostradamus
You don't know what personified means.
Posted on 4/17/12 at 7:22 am to bobbyray21
Hey, Nadal hasn't even played a match at Monte Carlo yet and he's already laying the foundation for his knee pain and not being able to run.
Posted on 4/17/12 at 7:37 am to bobbyray21
quote:
You don't know what personified means.
You don't know dick about tennis.
Would you feel better if I said your statements about tennis reek with the same pungent odor and wreched attrocity of a human's diarrhea?
Posted on 4/17/12 at 7:56 am to bobbyray21
If you can't see how Federer has declined then I don't know what to say to you. Starting with the mono, which put him off his game starting somewhere during or just after the Australian and lasting until somewhere between the French and Wimbledon that year his game has not been the same. He lost something like 15 pounds IIRC and just hasn't had the same zip that he used to.
Posted on 4/17/12 at 5:55 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
Would you feel better if I said your statements about tennis reek with the same pungent odor and wreched attrocity of a human's diarrhea?
That would at least make sense. Except what does wreched mean?
Posted on 4/17/12 at 6:14 pm to bobbyray21
BTW, of course Federer has declined.* Did y'all think I was serious?
*Somebody has to make this board interesting.
*Somebody has to make this board interesting.
Posted on 4/17/12 at 6:20 pm to bobbyray21
quote:
of course Federer has declined
Though I still contend that Djoker right now (and since early 2011) is playing tennis at a higher level than it has ever been played.
In other words, give me a time machine, put Djoker on it, and then stage a match between him and 2005 Fed. I'm not sure how Vegas would handicap this one.* But either way, I would take Djoker.
*Might be a -110/-110 (a pickem).
Posted on 5/10/12 at 4:41 pm to Roscoe
Nadal loses on the blue clay today and threatens to never play Madrid if they keep the clay blue. Always an excuse for every loss. For one of the GOAT, he sure is a sore loser.
Posted on 5/10/12 at 9:48 pm to Roscoe
quote:
Nadal loses on the blue clay today and threatens to never play Madrid if they keep the clay blue. Always an excuse for every loss. For one of the GOAT, he sure is a sore loser
None of the players like it. Rafa speaks up. I have no problem with this.
P.S. -- I have no problem with your bumping of this thread.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 7:21 am to Roscoe
quote:
Nadal loses on the blue clay today and threatens to never play Madrid if they keep the clay blue. Always an excuse for every loss. For one of the GOAT, he sure is a sore loser.
FYI: Djoker also said he wouldn't play.
Nadal threatens boycott after loss; Djokovic agrees
Posted on 5/11/12 at 8:06 am to bobbyray21
quote:
Though I still contend that Djoker right now (and since early 2011) is playing tennis at a higher level than it has ever been played.
I wouldn't be against this argument.
quote:
In other words, give me a time machine, put Djoker on it, and then stage a match between him and 2005 Fed. I'm not sure how Vegas would handicap this one.* But either way, I would take Djoker.
I still think given the matchups it'd be Federer. Would be epic to watch though.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 10:10 am to FootballNostradamus
quote:
''This surface destabilizes the game. It is a completely different game and I don't want to take risk
Nadal wouldn't have liked playing on the Wimbledon grass when it played like a true grass court, or even the hard courts of old. Instead, all of the surfaces today are pretty much the same so Nadal and Djoker can play the same style and be successful of each of the supposed "different surfaces." If Wimbledon went back to its old surface, I'm sure Nadal would probably boycott that one too.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 3:28 pm to Roscoe
Djokovic lost today too, which means that Fed is the last high seed left. And if he wins this tournament he'll take the #2 ranking from Nadal.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News