Sooda Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Was Einstein lucky to have discovered relativity? I mean do you think he would have made such an everlasting impact on science, had Newton,Pascal, Khayyam and Aryabhatta been his contemporaries? Ha. Indeed. :adore: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dark Horse Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raghav_12 Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 That is the humility of Nadal. And how Federer respondes? :haha: . Nadal is looking almost apologetic for winning this Australian open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Yes probably because Nadal would probably have retired due to injuries by now if he had emerged earlier meaning Federer would have won few French opens too. I heard this Nadal retirement argument for years! Have you ever though that he "may not" retire early as the common perception is ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 That's Nadal's humilty - Lets accept one thing Federer is not one of the most gracious person in defeats on the tennis circuit. He's an ATG as I have said earlier but not every gracious. He doesn't have to be; but that's the fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raghav_12 Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 That's Nadal's humilty - Lets accept one thing Federer is not one of the most gracious person in defeats on the tennis circuit. He's an ATG as I have said earlier but not every gracious. He doesn't have to be; but that's the fact. Yes. Please have a look at the this excerpts from Wiki: Despite their cordial relationship, both men have a somewhat different attitude towards their rivalry. When Federer was securely atop the tennis world he was ambivalent towards the notion of a rivalry with an opponent five years younger than himself.[55][56] But after their memorable 2008 Wimbledon final he had no choice but to acknowledge its significance, even admitting "it definitely becomes more and more special the more times we play against each other."[56] A few weeks later, after Nadal had officially surpassed him in the rankings, Federer offered this compliment: "Look at what he had to achieve to get it. That's what I like to see."[57] Nadal has always cherished the rivalry because he looks up to Federer as both a role model and a measuring stick for success.[58][59] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 LOL.So predictable. With all their assumptions ripped apart and with nothing left to attack ,the naysayers have now resorted to character assasinations. Now waiting for this thread to descend into personal attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 :dontknow: why Federer fanatics get the kicks if an iota of question is raised about something on Federer. I mean at the same time we are praising the fact that he's an ATG, one of the GOAT and the most COMPLETE player. IDK what else Federer fanatics want to say about Federer? Probably this should please them Federer is the most gracious sports man we have ever seen. Tendulkar will now take tips from Federer on graciousness and handling defeats. In fact, there is a Nobel prize announced for Federer in the category of "World Peace". Federer is considered more gracious than Mother Teresa. Enjoy the orgasms! :good: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vvvslaxman Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 :dontknow: why Federer fanatics get the kicks if an iota of question is raised about something on Federer. I mean at the same time we are praising the fact that he's an ATG, one of the GOAT and the most COMPLETE player. IDK what else Federer fanatics want to say about Federer? Probably this should please them Federer is the most gracious sports man we have ever seen. Tendulkar will now take tips from Federer on graciousness and handling defeats. In fact, there is a Nobel prize announced for Federer in the category of "World Peace". Federer is considered more gracious than Mother Teresa. Enjoy the orgasms! :good: Not sure about others. I am not fan of any particular current tennis player. But this thread is nonsensical. I would have defended Nadal if there was a similar topic for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raghav_12 Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Somehow his peak has been very closely related with Nadal's presence and absence.He was at his peak but when Nadal hit his strides after 2007, he immediately lost his peak, at the age of 26 only. Nadal got injured in 2009, Federer hit his peak and won 3 out of 4 grandslams. But as soon as Nadal came back in French Open 2010, Federer again lost his peak. Even now, Nadal got a shock defeat in second round, Federer again hits peak and won Wimbledon. So all of these things are just coincidences? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vvvslaxman Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 In 2009 Federer did not win 3 out of 4. He won only 2. Federer was never good in French open. Even before Nadal he never won any French open. You are saying Federer won wimbledon only because Nadal lost.. But according to you Djoko is another all time great :cantstop:. He could hav eliminated him right? As far as peak goes.. it is very very rare to win multiple majors in the same year for consecutive years. Show me someone who has done that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Not sure about others. I am not fan of any particular current tennis player. But this thread is nonsensical. I would have defended Nadal if there was a similar topic for him. As I said earlier, saying Federer is lucky is right wing extremism and saying Federer is the one and only GOAT is left wing extremism. The answer is somewhere in between. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sooda Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 ^ That is correct... also the OP whilst right as I pointed out is silly as the same hypothetical argument can be used to lessen Rafas achievements..why cant we all agree that Fed=Rafa= THE ATG... And youre right that Fed can be a bit bitter and ungracious in defeat at times, (That pic of him losing at the Aus Open to Rafa is NOT an example of that btw, he was just very upset at losing, shows how much he cares that is all.) He said about Murray last year that he only won tournos beating lesser ranked players (something along those lines) when it was factually untrue... lol...and last year after Nole beat him in that epic Us Open Semi including a forehand return to save a match pointnthat was just incredible- Fed called that shot lucky, and to be fair it may well have carried an element of luck but for Novak to have the balls to go for it was just immense. Fed and Rafa do seem to get on well with each other, however Fed does not like Novak much I dont think :cantstop: yWci2eSsYcQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Sooda - Yes, there are many instances or sometimes excuses. I'm glad you see it the way I see it too. I mean Federer is not a punk. Nadal in my books has still some baby steps to take before he gets to that ATG mark and he's still very young - time ahead of him. I will wait till he passed 30 for a judgment call but he's not that far behind. However, he is undoubtedly THE BEST player on clay. The only thing I get irritated about is sometimes in Federer mania people choose to ignore that there are dark sides to Federer too and rather than trying to prove he's the best at everything (which NO other tennis player is) one should just accept it as a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akshayxyz Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Was Einstein lucky to have discovered relativity? I mean do you think he would have made such an everlasting impact on science, had Newton,Pascal, Khayyam and Aryabhatta been his contemporaries? :two_thumbs_up: case closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sooda Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 94xyOpETYYs On a nice note, this is old but v nice to watch. Whilst the so called fans beat each other over which of these two are the greatest, they have a good time off court in each others company. May be staged mmaaybbbee... but I like to think not...the laughing seems pretty spontaneous and natural Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maniac Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 This thread seems to have gone into all kinds of tangents..Let me just remind everyone the tile was he lucky to win 16 grandslams to which 10 geniuses on this forum have voted as yes.... There hasn't been a single valid argument to prove if he was lucky to win.....and now we are down to talking Federer's behavioral issues,etc...Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maniac Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 There I have highlighted some key words for you...Hope this ansewrs your question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maniac Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 As I said earlier' date=' saying Federer is lucky is right wing extremism and saying Federer is the one and only GOAT is left wing extremism. The answer is somewhere in between.[/quote'] Ok...Fair enough..every argument has it's strengths and weaknesses....the first champion player I saw was Ivan Lendl when he was just about coming off of his peak.....Completely follwed the game during the Agassi-Sampras era ,have vague memories of Lendl-Becker-Edberg era.....saw brief dominance from the likes of Rafter,Courier etc.... but I have never seen a player be in his prime for as long as Federer has....I understand if there were days when Nadal looked like the best ever but every player has such peaks but based on the consistency alone I rank Fed as the greatest ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 However' date=' he is undoubtedly THE [b']BEST player on clay. Thought you didn't believe in Goat arguments? Aap kare to chamtkar... The only thing I get irritated about is sometimes in Federer mania people choose to ignore that there are dark sides to Federer too and rather than trying to prove he's the best at everything (which NO other tennis player is) one should just accept it as a fan Lol. Nobody said or denied that Federer was all roses. It is you who has been using every unrelated opportunity to call him mentally weak,a cry baby and a sore loser and yet blaming the rest? Argument progression:- - OP : Federer is lucky he dominated a weak field - Before Wimbledon : Federer would have been owned by Djokovic and Nadal - After Wimbledon win : Federer would have been owned by Nadal - After a few facts : Federer would have been owned by post 2007-Nadal - When every thing else failed : Federer is mentally weak, a cry baby and a sore loser - When a few people present facts : Federer fanatics! Now the ad hominem attacks will start...:giggle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now