Roland Garros 2014 - Rafa and Maria are the champs!

[Raghav_12]

You can keep harping about this and that. The players you have named are not even half of what Rafa is. Not even in terms of Tennis or mentally. I mean you are giving my Tipsarevic's example? I have seen him play live, he was good but Rafa's in a different league brother. If nothing else, this does prove Rafa's greatness doesn't it? You would anyways agree coz kanspiracy theories seems to be your middle name.

Don't think his that post deserve a reply. Next he is going to come up with is, when I can't hit a simple forehand to get the ball across the court, how Nadal can hit so many? Of course there is something fishy :haha:

[bones]

Don't think his that post deserve a reply. Next he is going to come up with is' date=' when I can't hit a simple forehand to get the ball across the court, how Nadal can hit so many? Of course there is something fishy :haha:[/quote'] Nadal is a drug cheat and you know it. He hasn't been caught yet, but he will. I haven't just been saying this after this win, I was saying it all last year and the year before too. The guy cheats, it's clear as daylight and only the blind would ignore. You guys love this man and will defend him to the end, but when he is exposed, probably when he retires, you will be shocked. The rest of us will say, we saw it coming a long time ago.

[vamos_rafa]

Nadal is a drug cheat and you know it. He hasn't been caught yet, but he will. I haven't just been saying this after this win, I was saying it all last year and the year before too. The guy cheats, it's clear as daylight and only the blind would ignore. You guys love this man and will defend him to the end, but when he is exposed, probably when he retires, you will be shocked. The rest of us will say, we saw it coming a long time ago.

Ok Mr. Oracle.

[vamos_rafa]

Don't think his that post deserve a reply. Next he is going to come up with is' date=' when I can't hit a simple forehand to get the ball across the court, how Nadal can hit so many? Of course there is something fishy :haha:[/quote'] He should work for India TV. He can give them so many sansanikhez khulasas.

[Gambit]

Nadal is a drug cheat and you know it. He hasn't been caught yet, but he will. I haven't just been saying this after this win, I was saying it all last year and the year before too. The guy cheats, it's clear as daylight and only the blind would ignore. You guys love this man and will defend him to the end, but when he is exposed, probably when he retires, you will be shocked. The rest of us will say, we saw it coming a long time ago.

Graceless loser. Just like Federer.

[bones]

Graceless loser. Just like Federer.

I'm not a Fed fan. Just seen a comment on the Guardian's review: "Is Nadal the fittest athlete of all time?" ----Possibly, it's between him, Lance Armstrong and Asafa Powell.

[yoda]

Nadal's won a grand total of 5 grand slams outside of Roland Garros. Wonder what his Bhakth brigade have to say about that. :winky: Fed has 10 outside of Wimbledon his favorite surface, Nadal has 5 outside of Clay. One would expect an ATG to be more well rounded?

[zep1706]

Nadal is a drug cheat and you know it. He hasn't been caught yet, but he will. I haven't just been saying this after this win, I was saying it all last year and the year before too. The guy cheats, it's clear as daylight and only the blind would ignore. You guys love this man and will defend him to the end, but when he is exposed, probably when he retires, you will be shocked. The rest of us will say, we saw it coming a long time ago.

Go cry somewhere else crybaby. :hysterical:

[Raghav_12]

Nadal's won a grand total of 5 grand slams outside of Roland Garros. Wonder what his Bhakth brigade have to say about that. :winky: Fed has 10 outside of Wimbledon his favorite surface, Nadal has 5 outside of Clay. One would expect an ATG to be more well rounded?

Federer has just one on clay, that too when he didn't have to face Nadal. So much for the roundedness of Federer. Nadal at least have 2 on each kind of surface - 9 clay, 3 hard court and 2Grass.

[zep1706]

Nadal's won a grand total of 5 grand slams outside of Roland Garros. Wonder what his Bhakth brigade have to say about that. :winky:

5 grand slams outside anyone's favorite surface is an incredible effort. If he remains fit he would win a couple of more non clay slams. There is no new generation coming up yet and Djokovic looks mentally washed up in GS finals. Besides Nadal has 11 finals on non clay slams and has only lost to Federer and Djokovic (exclusdng the AO this year). If he was playing Baghdatis, Hewitt, Roddick or Philippoussis etc. in the final he would have won a lot more. Since entering his prime in 2008 at the age of 22 he has won 6 clay slams and 5 non clay slams. Only idiots would try to belittle that.

[Raghav_12]

I'm not a Fed fan. Just seen a comment on the Guardian's review: "Is Nadal the fittest athlete of all time?" ----Possibly, it's between him, Lance Armstrong and Asafa Powell.

lol.. somebody posted a comment on Guardian, which could very well be you and you take that as the credible proof of Nadal's drug cheating :giggle: Take rest and get some peace.

[Gambit]

Supposed GOAT Federer has won just 1 grand slam (that too at Wimbledon) since the Australian Open in 2010! :giggle:

[yoda]

5/14 vs 10/17 on non-preferred surfaces. That is the difference IMO, no matter how you guys spin it. Nadal is more like a home track bully who has won a few slams outside of his comfort zone. Fed like most other ATGs like Sampras, et al has had little success on Clay which in itself is a bogus surface IMO, rewarding endurance more than skill. All said and done, a Wimbledon win is worth more than a French open win. That's the hard truth which Nadal fans have to live with. The only thing going for Nadal fans is the head-to-head with Fed. Even there it is skewed in favor of the master clay surface. On non-clay, he is 2-2 vs Nadal in slam finals. So even there, not much to boast of except again the mastery on the wonderful surface of clay.

[zep1706]

Supposed GOAT Federer has won just 1 grand slam (that too at Wimbledon) since the Australian Open in 2010! :giggle:

It is very hard to win slams once you get closer to 30. Besides at that time younger players like Djokovic and Nadal stepped it up. If Federer was playing his 2004-07 non clay competitors he would still be winning majority of them from 2010-2012. Federer is without doubt one of the best players to play the game but he did enjoy a free run outside clay for nearly 4 years. Interestingly Nadal or Djokovic might enjoy similar benefit now in their late 20s.

[zep1706]

Clay which in itself is a bogus surface IMO

There you go! Typical insecure Fed fan. :hysterical:

[yoda]

There you go! Typical insecure Fed fan. :hysterical:

Dude, can you explain why ATGs like Sampras, Becker, Edberg couldn't buy a win there while a no name like Chang could win there? For a while, french open wouldn't even interest me. Ironically, Nadal is the first clay court champion whose game is even worth watching on clay cause he doesn't keep hitting the ball back hoping for an opponent mistake, which is how clay was played.

[zep1706]

Dude' date=' can you explain why an ATGs like Sampras, Becker, Edberg couldn't buy a win there while a no name like Chang could win there?[/quote'] Since when Becker and Edberg became ATGs and Chang became a no name? There are many one time winners on grass too, in the last 20 years Krajicek, Ivanisevic, Hewitt etc. Clay court tennis is an integral part of tennis and has always been for 100s of years. You can't call it inferior just because your favorite isn't good at it. The point construction on clay is second to none. On grass you can win based on a solid serve and not much ground game like Ivanesevic but clay rewards all round game, you can not win it just based on one component.

[yoda]

Since when Becker and Edberg became ATGs and Chang became a no name? There are many one time winners on grass too, in the last 20 years Krajicek, Ivanisevic, Hewitt etc. Clay court tennis is an integral part of tennis and has always been for 100s of years. You can't call it inferior just because your favorite isn't good at it. The point construction on clay is second to none. On grass you can win based on a solid serve and not much ground game like Ivanesevic but clay rewards all round game, you can not win it just based on one component.

The fact that guys like Sampras, McEnroe, Federer have had little success on clay is what makes it a bogus surface, not necessarily my personal like and dislike. Look at the great champions of clay 10 years prior to Nadal's reign: 1995 AUT Thomas Muster USA Michael Chang 7–5, 6–2, 6–4 1996 RUS Yevgeny Kafelnikov GER Michael Stich 7–6(7–4), 7–5, 7–6(7–4) 1997 BRA Gustavo Kuerten ESP Sergi Bruguera 6–3, 6–4, 6–2 1998 ESP Carlos Moyà ESP Àlex Corretja 6–3, 7–5, 6–3 1999 USA Andre Agassi UKR Andrei Medvedev 1–6, 2–6, 6–4, 6–3, 6–4 2000 BRA Gustavo Kuerten SWE Magnus Norman 6–2, 6–3, 2–6, 7–6(8–6) 2001 BRA Gustavo Kuerten ESP Àlex Corretja 6–7(3–7), 7–5, 6–2, 6–0 2002 ESP Albert Costa ESP Juan Carlos Ferrero 6–1, 6–0, 4–6, 6–3 2003 ESP Juan Carlos Ferrero NED Martin Verkerk 6–1, 6–3, 6–2 2004 ARG Gastón Gaudio ARG Guillermo Coria 0–6, 3–6, 6–4, 6–1, 8–6 Anyone sound like a great player? I can see one sandwiched between several useless ones. :giggle:

[yoda]

Also, I keep hearing about Nadal would have won more slams had he been fit and not injured. How come the guy could win 9 french, but suddenly fell unfit when it came to non-clay slams?

[zep1706]

The fact that guys like Sampras, McEnroe, Federer have had little success on clay is what makes it a bogus surface, not necessarily my personal like and dislike. Look at the great champions of clay 10 years prior to Nadal's reign: 1995 AUT Thomas Muster USA Michael Chang 7–5, 6–2, 6–4 1996 RUS Yevgeny Kafelnikov GER Michael Stich 7–6(7–4), 7–5, 7–6(7–4) 1997 BRA Gustavo Kuerten ESP Sergi Bruguera 6–3, 6–4, 6–2 1998 ESP Carlos Moyà ESP Àlex Corretja 6–3, 7–5, 6–3 1999 USA Andre Agassi UKR Andrei Medvedev 1–6, 2–6, 6–4, 6–3, 6–4 2000 BRA Gustavo Kuerten SWE Magnus Norman 6–2, 6–3, 2–6, 7–6(8–6) 2001 BRA Gustavo Kuerten ESP Àlex Corretja 6–7(3–7), 7–5, 6–2, 6–0 2002 ESP Albert Costa ESP Juan Carlos Ferrero 6–1, 6–0, 4–6, 6–3 2003 ESP Juan Carlos Ferrero NED Martin Verkerk 6–1, 6–3, 6–2 2004 ARG Gastón Gaudio ARG Guillermo Coria 0–6, 3–6, 6–4, 6–1, 8–6 Anyone sound like a great player? I can see one sandwiched between several useless ones. :giggle:

Yes Agassi is a great player, as good as McEnroe. Sampras and Federer are all together in different league. I agree that the clay field was quite open in the 1990s but that doesn't make it a bogus surface. You are trying to shift the goalpost like a typical insecure Fed fan. For me in the open era, TierI : Laver, Borg, Sampras, Federer, Nadal Tier II: Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Agassi Tier III: Becker, Edberg, Wilaner, Djokovic (will go to Tier II eventually)