- 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: Kornheiser: Nadal has removed Federer from the discussion of G.O.A.T
Posted on 6/12/13 at 3:03 pm to bobbyray21
Posted on 6/12/13 at 3:03 pm to bobbyray21
quote:
Kuerten played Fed in one meaningful match on clay.
Your ferrer example blows and I think you know it.
No, I don't know it. Nadal is 0-2 against Ferrer in hard court slams (he also lost to him in the 4th round of the 2007 US OPen). Federer is 1-1 against Kuerten on clay. Using either as a meaningful measure of how good one player is against the other is completely retarded. I only raised the Nadal-Ferrer example to show the absolutely absurdity of you citing the 2004 FO as proof of anything meaningful.
The 2004 FO was your sole response to austingator's claim that Fed was a better clay court player than Kuerten. I could similarly use Fed's 2001 win over 4 time consecutive defending champ Sampras as absolute proof that Fed is a better grass player than Sampras (I mean they only played one meaningful match). But that would be dumb. Just as your bringing up the 2004 FO as definitive proof of something was dumb.
1
Posted on 6/12/13 at 3:03 pm to bobbyray21
Indoor hard courts are realy fast, and they therefore tend to favor guys with better serves.
End of analysis.
End of analysis.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 3:04 pm to ChiSaint
quote:
No, I don't know it. Nadal is 0-2 against Ferrer in hard court slams (he also lost to him in the 4th round of the 2007 US OPen). Federer is 1-1 against Kuerten on clay. Using either as a meaningful measure of how good one player is against the other is completely retarded. I only raised the Nadal-Ferrer example to show the absolutely absurdity of you citing the 2004 FO as proof of anything meaningful.
The 2004 FO was your sole response to austingator's claim that Fed was a better clay court player than Kuerten. I could similarly use Fed's 2001 win over 4 time consecutive defending champ Sampras as absolute proof that Fed is a better grass player than Sampras (I mean they only played one meaningful match). But that would be dumb. Just as your bringing up the 2004 FO as definitive proof of something was dumb.
I'll ask you again to present an actual reasoned argument as to why you believe Federer is a better clay court player than Kuerten.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 3:18 pm to bobbyray21
quote:
I'll ask you again to present an actual reasoned argument as to why you believe Federer is a better clay court player than Kuerten.
Fed's record at the FO: (58-14, 80.6% with 5 losses coming against the undisputed best clay court player of all time. So 86.5% winning percentage against everyone else). 1 win, 4 finals, 2 semis, 1 QF
Kuerten's record at the FO: 36-8 (81.8%, so slightly better but he did not play a player comparable to Nadal). 3 wins, 2 QFs.
Fed has won 3 master's title on clay while Kuerten has won four. So overall, the stats are close but slightly favor Kuerten. The reason I say that Fed is a better clay court player is that he has played in the era of the greatest clay court player ever. The one time Nadal lost early in the FO, Fed won it. I strongly believe that if Nadal didn't exist, Fed would have won 3-4 more FOs. Whereas, there is no singular player that prevented Kurten from actually displaying more clay court dominance.
In short, if Kurten was playing from 2005-today, not only do I not think he wouldn't have won any FOs, I also don't think he would have made more Finals than Fed. And hence why I think it is reasonable to argue that Fed is the better clay player.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 4:09 pm to bobbyray21
quote:
Kornheiser: Nadal has removed Federer from the discussion of G.O.A.T Indoor hard courts are realy fast, and they therefore tend to favor guys with better serves. End of analysis.
True, specially when there is no wind to affect the toss. Other than his advantage of being lefty, Nada's serve is probably his weakest shot (leaving out his dreadful one handed backhand slice).
Posted on 6/12/13 at 6:16 pm to bobbyray21
quote:
The entire 2009 season was a gift from Rafa to Federer. He felt so bad about the drubbing he gave him in the 2008 French Final, and then how he knocked him off his Wimby perch in the 2008 Wimby Final, and then how he made him cry after the 2009 Aussie Final, that he just decided to give the rest of 2009 to him.
Roger, from what I understand, was nice enough to send a thank you card. Which was thoughtful.
That 2009 season still depresses me. It sucks that injuries are the only thing keeping Rafa from owning this argument.
Had he not been injured he would've won the French again and he probably would've won Wimbledon again (the Fed that beat Roddick would've been torched by a healthy Rafa).
So now Roger has 2 less slams, Rafa has 2 more, and Roger doesn't have his career slam. Ugh, fvcking knees
!Posted on 6/12/13 at 6:52 pm to FootballNostradamus
Don't blame just his knees, blame his parents messy divorce.
Posted on 6/12/13 at 6:58 pm to austingator
quote:
Don't blame just his knees, blame his parents messy divorce.
Prob a little of both.
Posted on 6/13/13 at 3:19 am to ChiSaint
quote:
Fed's record at the FO: (58-14, 80.6% with 5 losses coming against the undisputed best clay court player of all time. So 86.5% winning percentage against everyone else). 1 win, 4 finals, 2 semis, 1 QF
Kuerten's record at the FO: 36-8 (81.8%, so slightly better but he did not play a player comparable to Nadal). 3 wins, 2 QFs.
Fed has won 3 master's title on clay while Kuerten has won four. So overall, the stats are close but slightly favor Kuerten. The reason I say that Fed is a better clay court player is that he has played in the era of the greatest clay court player ever. The one time Nadal lost early in the FO, Fed won it. I strongly believe that if Nadal didn't exist, Fed would have won 3-4 more FOs. Whereas, there is no singular player that prevented Kurten from actually displaying more clay court dominance.
In short, if Kurten was playing from 2005-today, not only do I not think he wouldn't have won any FOs, I also don't think he would have made more Finals than Fed. And hence why I think it is reasonable to argue that Fed is the better clay player.
Kuerten certainly never had to face anybody of Nadal's caliber at the FO. But he did have to go against a field that was much deeper on the dirtballer front. Agassi, Chang, Courier, Carlos Moya, Albert Costa, Juan Carlos Ferrero, Thomas Muster, Sergei Bruguera, Kafelnikov, Medvedev, Magnus Normann, and a few others....*
From the fourth round on, Kuerten was matched up with a certifiable fricking dirtballer ready to grind for 5 hours. And Kuerten proved himself to be the best of the bunch.
Sampras never made it through that grindfest. Agassi finally did. No no, I'm more certain of my conclusion than ever: Kuerten was a better clay court player than Federer.
_________________________________________
*Hell, the "clay court grinder" has become just as rare as the serve and volleyer.
Posted on 6/13/13 at 3:22 am to austingator
quote:
Don't blame just his knees, blame his parents messy divorce.
He's the most fragile indestructible force in the world.
Posted on 6/13/13 at 3:26 am to FootballNostradamus
quote:
That 2009 season still depresses me. It sucks that injuries are the only thing keeping Rafa from owning this argument.
Had he not been injured he would've won the French again and he probably would've won Wimbledon again (the Fed that beat Roddick would've been torched by a healthy Rafa).
So now Roger has 2 less slams, Rafa has 2 more, and Roger doesn't have his career slam. Ugh, fvcking knees
I agree. If there is one aspect of the Fed/Nadal rivalry/GOAT debate that pisses me off a little bit it's 2009.
2008: Rafa is clearly the best player in the world
2010: Rafa is clearly the best player in the world
2009: sorry everybody Rafa can't play tennis, he's busy chatting with Dr. Phil.
It was a prime interrupted.
Posted on 6/13/13 at 6:14 am to bobbyray21
tiger woods!...oh wait
Posted on 6/13/13 at 6:45 am to bobbyray21
Sampras beats Fed on grass (barely)
Fed is best hard surface player ever
Nadal is best clay player ever
Conclusion: Fed is best all around player to ever live
Fed is best hard surface player ever
Nadal is best clay player ever
Conclusion: Fed is best all around player to ever live
Posted on 6/13/13 at 6:46 am to iliveinabox
So if Kornhole says Nadal has removed Fed as the GOAT, but that Nadal has to win some more majors on other surfaces, who does Kornhole say is now the GOAT? If its not Nadal, then Fed has better claim to the GOAT title than anyone else.
And why is Kornhole saying this now. Because Nadal won the French again, which he will probably do for the next 3-4 years? Because federer in his way out of prime age didn't win a major that no one expected him to? Is Fred's legacy now going to be tarnished because he's continuing to play at a high level so late in age, but its just not the great level he formerly played at or the level that djoker and Nadal currently play at?
Is Nadal better than fed? Absolutely. But if.Nadal isn't the GOAT, then it has to be Fed.
And why is Kornhole saying this now. Because Nadal won the French again, which he will probably do for the next 3-4 years? Because federer in his way out of prime age didn't win a major that no one expected him to? Is Fred's legacy now going to be tarnished because he's continuing to play at a high level so late in age, but its just not the great level he formerly played at or the level that djoker and Nadal currently play at?
Is Nadal better than fed? Absolutely. But if.Nadal isn't the GOAT, then it has to be Fed.
Posted on 6/13/13 at 7:01 am to Roscoe
Again, Nadal has won 4 slams outside the French Open. Nadal is better than Fed right now. I don't think he's better than Fed over all, and he won't reach his record, either.
Posted on 6/13/13 at 7:47 am to Interception
quote:
Sampras beats Fed on grass (barely)
Negative Ghost Rider
Posted on 6/13/13 at 9:27 am to ohiovol
quote:
don't think he's better than Fed over all, and he won't reach his record, either.
I wouldn't be suprised to see Nadal reach the record. I can't see anyone stopping him anytime soon at the FO, probably another 2-4 of those. And he has just as good shot as anyone else to get 1-2 more Wimbledon's and 1-2 of the US or Aussie Open's. Fed isn't going to add to his 17, and Nadal truly isn't that far behind considering he has a lock down on the FO's.
Posted on 6/13/13 at 9:28 am to Interception
quote:
Fed is best hard surface player ever
Djokovic is a better hard court player than Fed.
Posted on 6/13/13 at 9:30 am to ohiovol
quote:
Again, Nadal has won 4 slams outside the French Open
And?
quote:
Nadal is better than Fed right now.
Well, duh.
quote:
I don't think he's better than Fed over all, and he won't reach his record, either.
The "five year old nephew uses wikipedia" approach to this argument is not encouraged.
Posted on 6/13/13 at 9:31 am to Interception
quote:
Sampras beats Fed on grass (barely)
Fed is best hard surface player ever
Nadal is best clay player ever
Sampras is a little bit better than Fed on grass.
Nadal is way better than everybody on clay.
Djokovic is the best hard court player I've ever seen, but it isn't a huge disparity. Lots of guys are good on hard courts.
Page 11 of 12
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News