- 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: Nadal is no doubt the best ever.
Posted on 9/14/10 at 9:52 am to Rex
Posted on 9/14/10 at 9:52 am to Rex
Truth is the jury is still out for me...
Our generation is all too quick to label GOAT...Jordan, Tiger, Sampras, then Fed, now Nadal...
Case for Fed:
-Most majors, most finals, winning %'s.
Knock against Fed:
-Tennis field is weak compared to '80's-'90's outside of Nadal
-Losing record to Nadal(GOAT on clay)
Case for Nadal:
-Career slam
-Winning record versus Fed in Slam finals
Knock against Nadal:
-not consistent enough and not even within shouting distance of Fed...yet
-single season winning %'s not among the best...yet
Note: One reason why Nicklaus is considered to be the GOAT is his high number of runner-up finishes in majors. Yeah, it's about winning, but when you listen to his competitors they almost always mention his consistency.
I think long-term, the Fed's consistency will be appreciated more than now...
For me:
Laver
Federer
Sampras
Lendl
Nadal will probably pass all except Laver before it's over...
Our generation is all too quick to label GOAT...Jordan, Tiger, Sampras, then Fed, now Nadal...
Case for Fed:
-Most majors, most finals, winning %'s.
Knock against Fed:
-Tennis field is weak compared to '80's-'90's outside of Nadal
-Losing record to Nadal(GOAT on clay)
Case for Nadal:
-Career slam
-Winning record versus Fed in Slam finals
Knock against Nadal:
-not consistent enough and not even within shouting distance of Fed...yet
-single season winning %'s not among the best...yet
Note: One reason why Nicklaus is considered to be the GOAT is his high number of runner-up finishes in majors. Yeah, it's about winning, but when you listen to his competitors they almost always mention his consistency.
I think long-term, the Fed's consistency will be appreciated more than now...
For me:
Laver
Federer
Sampras
Lendl
Nadal will probably pass all except Laver before it's over...
This post was edited on 9/14/10 at 9:54 am
1
Posted on 9/14/10 at 9:58 am to barry
quote:
This is all pointless cause its just Nadal fans arguing with Fed fans.
Posted on 9/14/10 at 10:41 am to FootballNostradamus
quote:
The only thing I don't know how he gets away with is the hack/chop return. I know he might be the greatest passer of all-time, but I think a good serve and volleyer could get a lot of easy points off of Rafa's weak returns.
His athleticism allows him to get away with it though.
He catches up to shots that NO other player can. You can tell when he plays great players. There was a point yesterday where McEnroe made the comment, Djokovic wins that point 3 or 4 times against ANY other player." But Rafa won it, and made it look easy with a nasty backhand down the line.
His ability to hit winning shots from non premium positions is unlike anyone else. The fact that he's now becoming capable of putting himself into better positions with a stronger serve and better returns is scary.
You can see the amusement on his opponents faces at times. Just a look of "WTF else am I supposed to do there?"
Posted on 9/14/10 at 10:43 am to FootballNostradamus
quote:
The Greatest Match Ever. It's about Federer and Nadal's 5 set epic at Wimbledon. It delves into so much with their backgrounds, what they did during rain delays, the history of Wimbledon, etc; I read it in a day, phenomenol book!
Thanks for the suggestion. I still maintain that's the best match I've ever seen, so I'm excited to check it out.
Posted on 9/14/10 at 10:47 am to TulaneTigerFan
[quote]I'm interested to see how he'll play at the Australian.
[/quote
You do know he's already won it once, right?
You act like this is the first hard court tourney he's ever won... and only got their by luck.
Historically, clay court guys NEVER transition to the hard court because they don't serve big enough and rely too much on ball movement. The fact that Rafa was able to morph his game to winning both hard court Majors in 3 years time is pretty phenomenal.
[/quote
You do know he's already won it once, right?
You act like this is the first hard court tourney he's ever won... and only got their by luck.
Historically, clay court guys NEVER transition to the hard court because they don't serve big enough and rely too much on ball movement. The fact that Rafa was able to morph his game to winning both hard court Majors in 3 years time is pretty phenomenal.
Posted on 9/14/10 at 10:58 am to OBUDan
quote:
You do know he's already won it once, right?
Yes, I am well aware that he's won it before. I meant that I'll be interested to see if he can maintain this same level of play on hards, because this is by far his best hard court tennis. He's never consistently beaten guys like Murray, Djoko, Delpo (who will be back and ready to go by then). And the year he won the AO he dodged all of them. I'd like to see how he'd handle a Delpo/Murray/Fed or Djoko quarters/semis/final draw.
This post was edited on 9/14/10 at 11:15 am
Posted on 9/14/10 at 11:00 am to DP40
quote:
For me:
Laver
Federer
Sampras
Lendl
Lendl????? I would put Agassi or Johnny Mac before Lendl
Posted on 9/14/10 at 11:13 am to dukke v
quote:
Lendl????? I would put Agassi or Johnny Mac before Lendl
Lendl consistency and longevity are under appreciated.
His accomplishments exceed both Agassi and Mac...and I hated Lendl when he played...
Posted on 9/14/10 at 11:14 am to DP40
quote:
His accomplishments exceed both Agassi and Mac
LINK????
Posted on 9/14/10 at 11:18 am to OBUDan
quote:
The Greatest Match Ever. It's about Federer and Nadal's 5 set epic at Wimbledon. It delves into so much with their backgrounds, what they did during rain delays, the history of Wimbledon, etc; I read it in a day, phenomenol book!
Thanks for the suggestion. I still maintain that's the best match I've ever seen, so I'm excited to check it out.
Apparently it's called Strokes of Genius, not sure why I thought it was the other title. But yea it's an unreal book and really paints both players in a great light, and didn't favor either over the other IMO.
Posted on 9/14/10 at 11:19 am to dukke v
quote:
LINK????
Good gawd, dude.
Look it up. Better winning percentage, more Slam finals and semis, more yrs at #1, more tour titles, etc...
Posted on 9/14/10 at 11:23 am to PokerLawyer
quote:
unless he starts knocking on the door of the all time grand slam numbers (IMHO he has to get to at least 13 or 14 before this argument has serious merit), his career has just been really good. Not GOAT.
Barring injury is there a chance in hell he doesn't? Does anyone come close to beating him at the French of the Wimbledon? Winning those two the next two years already puts him at 13 and that's assuming he never wins anything after those or anything on hard courts.
quote:
I do think he is currently the best player on earth
Glad you think that someone with one of the top 5 years in the history of tennis is the best player on earth.
quote:
Fed could retire tomorrow and he IS the GOAT, without more. Fed has done enough, right now, to be the GOAT if he decided to make choclate in Switzerland and give up tennis.
Like someone mentioned, I still disagree. Today's media is so quick to proclaim people the GOAT. Currently there's no clear-cut winner. Laver, Federer, Sampras and Borg can all make claims.
Posted on 9/14/10 at 11:27 am to FootballNostradamus
quote:
Barring injury is there a chance in hell he doesn't? Does anyone come close to beating him at the French of the Wimbledon? Winning those two the next two years already puts him at 13 and that's assuming he never wins anything after those or anything on hard courts.
Yeah, I think you can go ahead and pencil him in as winning the French and Wimbledon for the next few years. I don't see anyone challenging him at either now that Fed has started his decline. I'd also assume that he'd win another hard court slam or two even if he regresses a little on that surface. Federer needs to win at least one more to protect his record IMO.
And BTW I ordered Strokes of Genius and am looking forward to reading it.
This post was edited on 9/14/10 at 11:29 am
Posted on 9/14/10 at 11:58 am to TulaneTigerFan
quote:
And BTW I ordered Strokes of Genius and am looking forward to reading it.
Nice! Lemme know what ya think. I thought it was incredibly well done. I knew how Rafa was brought up but had no idea about Federer and never woulda pegged him for the childhood he had.
Also the stuff about the pagentry and tradition of Wimbledon compared to the US Open was awesome. For me, breakfast at Wimbledon is right there with the Super Bowl, such an incredible event. Ya gotta make sure you go at some point (if you haven't)! I just got the Australian and the US to cross off and then I've been to all of em
!Posted on 9/14/10 at 11:58 am to FootballNostradamus
quote:
Barring injury is there a chance in hell he doesn't? Does anyone come close to beating him at the French of the Wimbledon? Winning those two the next two years already puts him at 13 and that's assuming he never wins anything after those or anything on hard courts.
Question: when did Fed. lose his stranglehold? Answer: When Nadal came along. Point being, who knows where the next shot in the dark comes from. You're assuming that Nadal has all these many GS left in him based upon a static field. It ain't static and new players will rise up, maybe the way he did with Fed. As for Wimbledon, until Fed dies or goes partially blind, I'll put him as odds on favorite every time (I obviously do that with Rafa at the French, too).
quote:
Glad you think that someone with one of the top 5 years in the history of tennis is the best player on earth.
Doesn't require much response - I was simply clarifying that the argument for Nadal is not lost on me.
quote:
Like someone mentioned, I still disagree. Today's media is so quick to proclaim people the GOAT. Currently there's no clear-cut winner. Laver, Federer, Sampras and Borg can all make claims.
What are you talking about? The all time holder of GS titles (including ones contested by Rafa) is not, almost by definition, the GOAT? Ok....
For me, the bottom line is that I don't know that I've ever seen a single player dominate all the rest of the field the way Fed has done. Whether that's due to a thin field or something else, I'm not sure. When Fed was in the process of racking up all those Wimbledons and US's it got to be almost a paperwork issue. I don't see that with Rafa anywhere but in France. Rafa doesn't generate the "gimme" GS title feel the same way that Fed did, IMO.
Posted on 9/14/10 at 12:39 pm to PokerLawyer
quote:
Question: when did Fed. lose his stranglehold? Answer: When Nadal came along. Point being, who knows where the next shot in the dark comes from.
Nadal wasn't a shot in the dark. He was arguably the best teenage tennis player ever and a prodigy that everyone knew about. There's no one like that right now.
quote:
As for Wimbledon, until Fed dies or goes partially blind, I'll put him as odds on favorite every time
One of the most obnoxious homer statements I've read in a while.
quote:
What are you talking about? The all time holder of GS titles (including ones contested by Rafa) is not, almost by definition, the GOAT? Ok....
No bc Laver would have more if he'd been allowed to play during his prime, Borg would have more had he played longer, and Sampras has almost as many and against better competitino. Not saying you can't make an argument for Fed but you can make just as good of one for either of them.
quote:
For me, the bottom line is that I don't know that I've ever seen a single player dominate all the rest of the field the way Fed has done. Whether that's due to a thin field or something else, I'm not sure.
It was
quote:
Rafa doesn't generate the "gimme" GS title feel the same way that Fed did, IMO.
Right because he didn't just have one of the dominant US Open tournaments on his worse surface.
Posted on 9/14/10 at 1:01 pm to Rex
quote:
Some of Nadal's forehands yesterday even put Agassi's to shame.
Give Agassi and Sampras, at their peak, modern day equipment (yes it has improved alot of the last 10-15 years) then you would see some amazing power.
Posted on 9/14/10 at 1:11 pm to theunknownknight
quote:
Give Agassi and Sampras, at their peak, modern day equipment (yes it has improved alot of the last 10-15 years) then you would see some amazing power.
I'd love to see the kind of topspin Borg could get with Rafa's racquet and custom strings, would be something!
Posted on 9/14/10 at 1:12 pm to PokerLawyer
quote:
For me, the bottom line is that I don't know that I've ever seen a single player dominate all the rest of the field the way Fed has done.
Sorry, but that's factually incorrect. Nadal has always dominated HIM.
Posted on 9/14/10 at 1:20 pm to Rex
i hate it when people use the fact that rafa is the best on clay against him. they are all well he is only winning the series against federer because of clay or some bullshite.
uhhh, if you can be dominant on a surface that the game is played on, isnt that more reason that you are better, not less?
uhhh, if you can be dominant on a surface that the game is played on, isnt that more reason that you are better, not less?
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News