The Official Tennis Thread

Started by Doogie Browser, January 26, 2010, 11:25:28 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

nrico2006

Nadal has dominated on one surface. Take that away and his slams total at the other 3 is nothing special. There is a stronger argument for Djokovic as the best ever than there is for Nadal. Hewitt was brilliant for a few years and essentially prototyped Nadals style of plabut his body simply couldn't hack that style of play which has also happened with Nadal, but not to the same extent.
'To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal, light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle.'

gallsman

Nadal has won 6 grand slams outside Roland Garros. 6.

"Nothing special" he says, clearly not having a f**king clue.

Angelo

Quote from: nrico2006 on June 29, 2019, 05:06:48 PM
Nadal has dominated on one surface. Take that away and his slams total at the other 3 is nothing special. There is a stronger argument for Djokovic as the best ever than there is for Nadal. Hewitt was brilliant for a few years and essentially prototyped Nadals style of plabut his body simply couldn't hack that style of play which has also happened with Nadal, but not to the same extent.

Hewitt was "brilliant" when the opposition was shit, he was effectively a busted flush at 25 when Djokovic, Nadal, Murray et all entered the fray. This was the era where Federer was stockpiling his slams up on.

There are two hard slams a year and one grass slam a year. Both courts play similar, they favour monster servers and not those with a complete game. I'm glad you agree that the tennis season discriminates against complete players with an all round game and vastly favours the big serving machines. Imagine if 75% of the tennis season was tilted toward Nadal's favourite surface? Take away Djokovic's 10 hard slams and his record is nothing special, take away Federer's 11 hard slams and his record is nothing special.

Nadal has played his entire career with brittle knees, he's still going, still winning slams, the injuries have ensured he's left a few behind as well. Nadal is the only player in the modern era (along with Wilander) with multiple slams on every surface, surely that makes his record more special than anyone else?

The debate of the greatest is between Djokovic and Nadal. Federer couldn't live with them when they came along.
GAA FUNDING CHEATS CHEAT US ALL

Angelo

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on June 29, 2019, 12:47:35 PM
So the best players technically, fitter and tactically win the big tournaments. Which has been Federer (the most) followed by the other two. Your point is Nadal is best on clay, one surface and crap on the other two surfaces (in comparison to Fed and Novak)

If you have a preference for clay court players then fine, It's not as prestigious and wanted as Wimbledon, forget about the stuffiness and whatever annoys you.

My point is distinctly that clay court requires the most rounded game, the most ability and strategy to win a point. It's not just putting in monster first serves. Nadal being the greatest clay court ever goes without saying, imagine if the tennis season was titled in his favour and it made up 75% of the season?

You may have an affection for cardigans and strawberries and cream but that's an anglocentric viewpoint, it doesn't necessarily extend to people outside of anglocentric countries. If you watch tennis of both surfaces, you will see grass and hard court tennis are all based on the founding block of monster serving, clay court is about creating the chance to win points.

Federer is 5 years older than Nadal, 6 than Djokovic. He was lucky enough that he picked up 12 slams in a time where the main competition were the likes of Hewitt and Roddick who had completely fallen off the radar in their mid 20s when a golden generation emerged on the scene.


GAA FUNDING CHEATS CHEAT US ALL

mrdeeds

Has Nadal not won the most ATP titles ever and f all of them have been on clay. He's won all four slams. People are arseholes.

Angelo

Quote from: mrdeeds on June 30, 2019, 12:03:04 AM
Has Nadal not won the most ATP titles ever and f all of them have been on clay. He's won all four slams. People are arseholes.

Nadal has 34 Master 1000s, Djokovic 33, Federer 28.

He's also won 4 Davis Cups and along with Agassi is the only player to ever complete the Olympic slam.
GAA FUNDING CHEATS CHEAT US ALL

Milltown Row2

Quote from: mrdeeds on June 30, 2019, 12:03:04 AM
Has Nadal not won the most ATP titles ever and f all of them have been on clay. He's won all four slams. People are arseholes.

ATP titles now? Ffs lads we are talking about the main titles, Federer at the minute is the best player currently due to winning the most Slams. When Nadal gets past his count he'll be unquestionably the best. When that happens he'll be viewed (if the rumours go away that is) he's the best tennis player to grace the courts (clay courts). But being a one trick slam/surface winner won't mean he's the best.

For me and it's all personal choice I think Novak is the best
None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Ea

mrdeeds

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on June 30, 2019, 12:39:35 AM
Quote from: mrdeeds on June 30, 2019, 12:03:04 AM
Has Nadal not won the most ATP titles ever and f all of them have been on clay. He's won all four slams. People are arseholes.

ATP titles now? Ffs lads we are talking about the main titles, Federer at the minute is the best player currently due to winning the most Slams. When Nadal gets past his count he'll be unquestionably the best. When that happens he'll be viewed (if the rumours go away that is) he's the best tennis player to grace the courts (clay courts). But being a one trick slam/surface winner won't mean he's the best.

For me and it's all personal choice I think Novak is the best

But Nadal has the 2nd most slams. Like F me. You're dismissing that. People are arseholes. And as for rumours we could say same about Federer and Novak.

Angelo

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on June 30, 2019, 12:39:35 AM
Quote from: mrdeeds on June 30, 2019, 12:03:04 AM
Has Nadal not won the most ATP titles ever and f all of them have been on clay. He's won all four slams. People are arseholes.

ATP titles now? Ffs lads we are talking about the main titles, Federer at the minute is the best player currently due to winning the most Slams. When Nadal gets past his count he'll be unquestionably the best. When that happens he'll be viewed (if the rumours go away that is) he's the best tennis player to grace the courts (clay courts). But being a one trick slam/surface winner won't mean he's the best.

For me and it's all personal choice I think Novak is the best

So you're judging it on a quantitative basis rather than a qualitative one? The facts say that Federer won 12 slams when guys like Hewitt, Roddick and Safin were the main competition.

What rumours? The ramblings of rattled Fedheads on the internet?

One trick slam/surface winner? Nadal is the only one currently active that has won multiple slams on ALL surfaces. It's the most bizarre of accusations you can throw at him.
GAA FUNDING CHEATS CHEAT US ALL

Milltown Row2

He's won one Australian open. Fed has won one French, they are multiple winners of the rest, Nadal has won 12 french titles on clay, his inability to win on other surfaces is noted, as is Feds problems on clay, though credit to the amount of finals he's played there.

None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Ea

gallsman

Fed does not have a "noted problem" on clay. Nor does Djokovic for that matter. They're both French Open and multiple Masters Series winners in clay. It's simply that Nadal is the best player on it in history by a country mile.

Nadal has won 6 slams away from RG. Six slams is all time great, hall of fame territory ffs.

Angelo

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on June 30, 2019, 01:16:17 AM
He's won one Australian open. Fed has won one French, they are multiple winners of the rest, Nadal has won 12 french titles on clay, his inability to win on other surfaces is noted, as is Feds problems on clay, though credit to the amount of finals he's played there.

Nadal has 4 hard court slams.

Federer's slams dried up significantly since Nadal and Djokovic came on the scene.

Credit to the amount of finals he's played on clay? He's played 6 finals at RG, Nadal has played 5 at Wimbledon, 5 at Australia, 4 in the US.

You keep ignoring the facts that the majority of the body of work that Federer amassed was prior to Nadal and Djokovic's emergence.

Federer did 5 in a row at both Wimbledon and the US Open, he hasn't won the US Open since 2008, he's won 3 of the last 11 Wimbledon titles. And the reason for the colossal fall off has been Nadal and Djokovic, in their peaks Federer had no answer. He has an inferior head to head record at slam events against both of these players.

As well as ignoring the fact that Federer won the vast majority of his slams in a very weak era (see Hewitt, Roddick, Safin etc being the pick of the rest), you also ignore that 75% of the tennis slams are grass/hard courts, they play very similar - it's all based behind a big serve. This is really where Nadal falls down on grass courts and hard courts. He doesn't have the monster serve that will buy you free points on grass.

Despite the fact that clay only makes up 25% of the tennis slams, Nadal is getting very close to equaling the all time record for slams. That's just amazing.
GAA FUNDING CHEATS CHEAT US ALL

Milltown Row2

Quote from: gallsman on June 30, 2019, 08:11:00 AM
Fed does not have a "noted problem" on clay. Nor does Djokovic for that matter. They're both French Open and multiple Masters Series winners in clay. It's simply that Nadal is the best player on it in history by a country mile.

Nadal has won 6 slams away from RG. Six slams is all time great, hall of fame territory ffs.

I'm not knocking him, I love his grit and determination and never give up attitude when he plays. All I'm saying is he's a clay court specialist. I don't think Federer or Novak are any less a tennis player cause of the majority of their slams have been on hard and grass courts, whereas Angelo believes RG is the be and end all of tennis!

His inability to win more on the other surfaces has nothing to do with people who are 6 foot 5! He's no midget himself, possibly the same size as Fed and Novak and they have no problems. As for beating supposed weaker players, that's just rubbish! You beat who's putt in front of you, none of them are easy.

While Fed has 20 he'll be recognised as being better all round. Having a favourite player is fine to, mine is Novak, I think he's better than the other two
None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Ea

gallsman

The point is he doesn't have an inability to win on other surfaces ffs! He has won 6 grand slams off the clay!

Milltown Row2

Quote from: gallsman on June 30, 2019, 11:21:08 AM
The point is he doesn't have an inability to win on other surfaces ffs! He has won 6 grand slams off the clay!

Look, keep your knickers on. The point was that someone thinks he's the best player, I pointed out he's not,  as he hasn't the most titles, then the point on clay making you a better player, as it's a more difficult surface to win on for the big servers, so if he's a better player (technically) he should have won more than his current 6 slams away from clay. I'm not knocking him, in fact I prefer him over Fed. It's just simple maths though, 20 beats 18.

None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Ea