- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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 9/15/10 at 10:29 am to PokerLawyer
Posted on 9/15/10 at 10:29 am to PokerLawyer
quote:
But true. Fed's game is as much designed for grass as Rafa's is for clay. Period. That translates into Fed being odds on favorite. Oh, and the fact that when he wins his next one, I'll have to start using the other hand to count them all.
Barring injury or some drastic event, if any tennis expert proclaims Federer the Federer for any Wimbledon from this point onward I will stop posting about tennis for a year. Will you do the same if one proclaims Nadal the favorite. To all other tennis fans in this thread, can you say with a straight face that Federer is the favorite in the upcoming Wimbledon Chamionships?
quote:
Yeah, what if, what if, what if. Apples and oranges. I'm talking about GS completed, as the format requires today. No doubt that Borg, Laver, Sampras and a few others on a very short list have a strong case. But, again, and pay attention this time, those hypthetical GS that they could have had or the bunch that Sampras had are all behind Fed in reality.
Come on man there's more to a discussion than simply the number of titles. Did you think David Green was the best college QB ever for the past years simply because he had the most wins ever? Do you now think Colt McCoy is the best college QB ever? Many things like longevity and level of competition need to be factored into an argument.
quote:
My point is that unless and until Rafa shows prolonged dominance on courts other than clay (and, although impressive, a run since 2008 'til now just ain't even close), he is simply a footnote to Fed.
That footnote ushered in the end of Federer's career; that's my point.
quote:
Another questin: when did all this Nadal "GOAT" notion pick up steam? I gotta say that it's fairly disgusting, given that nobody dared to say such a thing for Fed when he had only 9 GS. The sentiment always was that until you can dethrone Sampras, you don't get the golden ring (at least not outright).
It picked up when he became the youngest person to win the career grand slam and when he jumped ahead of Federer's grand slam pace. People never saw the kind of longevity and sustained dominance from a player before Fed.
Now that someone is ahead of his pace, is it too crazy for people to infer that maybe modern training and conditioning (as well as obviously tremendous physical abilities) is what allowed Fed to dominate for so long and that someone (who's arguably the most athletic player to ever play the sport) with those same benefits might be able to dominate for a sustained period as well?
quote:
You don't get to detract from the day in day out dominance that 16 GS titles required when you hit number 9. Absurd. Fed fans didn't do it to Sampras, but Nadal fans do it to Fed.?
The hell they didn't. Fed started getting GOAT talk way before he was topped 16.
Look, in no way shape or form can anyone right now say that Rafa has had a better career than Federer. To argue such would be absurd. However, you can make the (subjective) argument that he's playing the best tennis ever and you can make a predictive argument (which is what I'm suggesting) that barring injury (which is a very real possibility) that he will end up with a better career than Federer.
3
Posted on 9/15/10 at 10:39 am to FootballNostradamus
quote:
However, you can make the (subjective) argument that he's playing the best tennis ever and you can make a predictive argument (which is what I'm suggesting) that barring injury (which is a very real possibility) that he will end up with a better career than Federer.
I'll agree with that.
Nadal has to overcome his injury bug and now history.
Overcoming "history" is easily the most pressure ever an athlete will face.
Will he embrace the GOAT label or not, time will tell The Fed did, which makes this stupid OP the WORST ever...the WOPE!
Posted on 9/15/10 at 10:51 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Head-to-head tallies
The following is a breakdown of their head-to-head results:[9]
Nadal serves to Federer during the 2006 Wimbledon final
* All matches: Nadal 14–7
* All finals: Nadal 12–5
* Grand Slams: Nadal 6–2
* Grand Slam finals: Nadal 5–2
* Best of five sets: Nadal 8–3
* Masters Cup: Federer 2–0
* Masters Series: Nadal 7–3
* Masters Series finals: Nadal 6–3
[edit] Results on each court surface
* Clay courts: Nadal 10–2 (best of five: Nadal 6–0)
* Hard courts: 3–3
* Grass courts: Federer 2–1
I'm not going to argue it anymore, Nadall has had the better of the heads up matches with Federor when you take all surfaces into account. His record against Federor when you add the clay is ridiculous.
Posted on 9/15/10 at 10:55 am to Palm Beach Tiger
If you think Nadal would have been consistently beating Fed in the semis/final of the USO or AO in 05 and 06 you aren't even worth debating. He was getting dominated by guys like James Blake and David Ferrer on hards back then. The head to head would undoutedbly look different, even if Nadal would still have the lead.
Posted on 9/15/10 at 10:57 am to DP40
He's on a faster pace then Federer so far, but his playing still is much more difficult on his body. He's had knee problems off and on, and his incredible amount of spin seems like it will take a toll on his shoulder/arm at some point. I don't think he'll have quite the longevity of Fed, but he is still only 24. His peak will probably be over by 27 though, 28 tops. He definitely could catch or surpass the slam total by then though.
This post was edited on 9/15/10 at 10:59 am
Posted on 9/15/10 at 10:58 am to TulaneTigerFan
Federer would have dominated Nadal had they played more from 04-07, but Nadal wasn't good enough yet. This is kind of like Evert and then Navritilova and then Graf and then Seles. Each player was different in age by a couple of years and each older player was better for a couple of years and then when the younger player started winning, the older player was already past their prime.
Posted on 9/15/10 at 11:15 am to RedHawk
To the tennis posters in this thread, is there one of you who can say with a straight face that Federer is the favorite for the upcoming Wimbledon?
Posted on 9/15/10 at 11:28 am to Rex
quote:
Nadal is no doubt the best ever.
please
Posted on 9/15/10 at 11:31 am to TulaneTigerFan
quote:
He's on a faster pace then Federer so far, but his playing still is much more difficult on his body. He's had knee problems off and on
Yea hopefully the new treatments he's been getting start to work and he continues to take more breaks and not play in every damn tournament under the sun like he used to.
quote:
his incredible amount of spin seems like it will take a toll on his shoulder/arm at some point.
Yea I mentioned this in another thread but I was playing around this past weekend with a friend on the courts and we tried messing around hitting our forehands like Rafa.
Not only did we send balls into orbit but after about 4 swings I stopped cause I was scared I'd have ireperable damage done to my shoulder if I continued. I don't have the slightest clue how he hits like that.
Posted on 9/15/10 at 11:32 am to FootballNostradamus
quote:
To all other tennis fans in this thread, can you say with a straight face that Federer is the favorite in the upcoming Wimbledon Chamionships?
he is not, but he is no longer in his prime
quote:
Did you think David Green was the best college QB ever for the past years simply because he had the most wins ever? Do you now think Colt McCoy is the best college QB ever?
that is a terrible comparison. Football is a team sport whereas tennis is an individual sport
Posted on 9/15/10 at 11:35 am to FootballNostradamus
quote:
Yea hopefully the new treatments he's been getting start to work and he continues to take more breaks and not play in every damn tournament under the sun like he used to.
It seems like he and Uncle Toni recognized that he was playing in too many tournaments after what happened to him in 2009. He really didn't play in many this year and when he did he seemed to not have the same level of intensity, which is a good thing. No reason to give everything he's got to beat Berdych in a warm up event prior to the USO. That is one thing that's impressive about Nadal to me, he's continually refining his game and training methods in order to improve.
And there's absolutely no way that I'd consider Fed the favorite at Wimbledon. Depending on what happens between now and then I might even rank Murray over him.
This post was edited on 9/15/10 at 11:36 am
Posted on 9/15/10 at 11:45 am to TigerBait1127
quote:
To all other tennis fans in this thread, can you say with a straight face that Federer is the favorite in the upcoming Wimbledon Chamionships?
he is not, but he is no longer in his prime
That wasn't part of the question. I wasn't arguing who at their peaks would be the favorite just trying to point out how outlandish it was for someone to claim that Federer was still the favorite.
Posted on 9/15/10 at 11:52 am to TulaneTigerFan
quote:
It seems like he and Uncle Toni recognized that he was playing in too many tournaments after what happened to him in 2009. He really didn't play in many this year and when he did he seemed to not have the same level of intensity, which is a good thing.
Yea doesn't he have the most Master's titles ever at only 24? For some reason I feel I read/heard that somewhere and it's just ridiculous.
Tennis is like golf, all that matters is the slams. It's a good thing he has Tony or I think his competitive spirit would have him in every tournament. Your point about Federer is spot on. I'd always laugh at announcers talking about him slipping because Roddick won the Wimbledon tuneup for the 183472 thousanth year in a row or because Murray beat him in straight sets.
quote:
And there's absolutely no way that I'd consider Fed the favorite at Wimbledon. Depending on what happens between now and then I might even rank Murray over him.
That's definitely possible considering how he played this summer, but I'd still have Federer at 2. Murray just doesn't have it mentally to play consistent tennis in a big 5 set match and I don't know if he ever will.
I also think this is Federer's last good shot at Wimbledon especially considering the addition of his new serve-and-volley game. Sure would be nice to see someone up at the net again on grass. I think it was very smart of him to finally get a real coach.
Posted on 9/15/10 at 12:08 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
Look, in no way shape or form can anyone right now say that Rafa has had a better career than Federer. To argue such would be absurd. However, you can make the (subjective) argument that he's playing the best tennis ever and you can make a predictive argument (which is what I'm suggesting) that barring injury (which is a very real possibility) that he will end up with a better career than Federer.
Fair enough. I'll meet you in the middle and say, yes, if Nadal keeps up what he's been doing, and we have the GOAT discussion in an additional 5 years, you're probably exactly right. My only point has been that, while Nadal is as good as it gets today, he's got a long row to hoe before he gets the moniker of GOAT.
On a side note, the notion of pure numbers doesn't make you GOAT, like you suggested with Green and McCoy. That's why we aren't counting total tourney/ATP wins. I'm counting GS. Had McCoy won 4 national championships, then, yes, he's the GOAT in college football. He didn't.
Fed's record is a record of the most elite tournaments, with the deepest fields, with the most prestige/money available in the sport. That's where he has excelled, for many years, like no other. Rafa may get there, but he isn't there yet. I just hate to see the throne that Fed is on, which he hasn't even gotten warm yet, being turned overy way too soon to somebody else. What Fed has done/may continue to do is astounding. So, while Nadal deserves his own thunder, he can't steal Fed's in the process. That's all.
Posted on 9/15/10 at 10:17 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
I'd love to see the kind of topspin Borg could get with Rafa's racquet and custom strings, would be something!
I'm not a big Borg fan, but it should be noted that he won 9 majors and retired at 26 (really 25 because he only played 1 tourney when he was 26).
Also, instead of having Borg hit with Rafa's racket, how about Rafa hitting with Borg's racket.
I'd pay money to see a computer simulation of Nadal playing Borg at the French -- with both of them using the wooden rackets of the early 80's.
Posted on 9/16/10 at 12:23 am to Rex
quote:
he has DOMINATED the man with the most career Grand Slams in that man's prime
He was only playing Fed on clay in Fed's prime really.
Posted on 9/16/10 at 8:17 am to Bullethead88
quote:
but it should be noted that he won 9 majors and retired at 26
it should also be noted that during his prime they really didn't consider the Austrailian an major, he usually skipped it.
Posted on 9/16/10 at 1:53 pm to H-Town Tiger
The debate is over. Fed is the man and Rafa knows it.
"During Roland Garros 2010, Nadal answered strikingly when a journalist mentioned the statistic in a question to Nadal. Nadal said "I think this person don't know nothing about tennis." The journalist asked why, and Nadal told the journalist, "so you don't know nothing about tennis." After this Nadal explained his answer further. "You see the titles of him and you see the titles of me? It's no comparison. So that's the answer. Is difficult to compare Roger with me now, because he has 16 Grand Slams; I have 6 (he has since increased that number to 9 after winning at Roland Garros Wimbledon and the US Open in 2010). Masters 1000, yeah, I have more than him (Nadal is Masters Series titles leader by 18, Federer is placed second all-time with 17 titles). But for the rest of the things the records of Roger is very, very almost impossible to improve."
Taken from: LINK
Looking through this, I hadn't taken notice of the fact that Fed was #1 in the world for almost 5 straight years. Got that? 5 straight years. In sum total, today (and I stress that), Rafa is in the rear view mirror and he knows that the GS count is what drives the bus.
"During Roland Garros 2010, Nadal answered strikingly when a journalist mentioned the statistic in a question to Nadal. Nadal said "I think this person don't know nothing about tennis." The journalist asked why, and Nadal told the journalist, "so you don't know nothing about tennis." After this Nadal explained his answer further. "You see the titles of him and you see the titles of me? It's no comparison. So that's the answer. Is difficult to compare Roger with me now, because he has 16 Grand Slams; I have 6 (he has since increased that number to 9 after winning at Roland Garros Wimbledon and the US Open in 2010). Masters 1000, yeah, I have more than him (Nadal is Masters Series titles leader by 18, Federer is placed second all-time with 17 titles). But for the rest of the things the records of Roger is very, very almost impossible to improve."
Taken from: LINK
Looking through this, I hadn't taken notice of the fact that Fed was #1 in the world for almost 5 straight years. Got that? 5 straight years. In sum total, today (and I stress that), Rafa is in the rear view mirror and he knows that the GS count is what drives the bus.
This post was edited on 9/16/10 at 1:54 pm
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News