DM72 Posted June 5, 2011 Author Share Posted June 5, 2011 16 grand slams vs 9.. I love you keep changing the argument. He was never owned on his own surface. Nadal is 5-2 in grandslam finals against Federer. I like Federer, but it is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Nadal is 5-2 in grandslam finals against Federer. I like Federer, but it is what it is. again those numbers are skewed because of clay. We all know Nadal is the best ever on clay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted June 5, 2011 Author Share Posted June 5, 2011 again those numbers are skewed because of clay. We all know Nadal is the best ever on clay Nadal DID beat him at Wimbledon (Federer's surface) and at the Australian Open. So what, he beat him 3 times (soon to be 4) in the finals at the French. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Nadal DID beat him at Wimbledon (Federer's surface) and at the Australian Open. just once. Roger dominates otherwise there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted June 5, 2011 Author Share Posted June 5, 2011 just once. Roger dominates otherwise there You're delusional. Nadal has owned Federer and has caught up to him on grass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 You're delusional. Nadal has owned Federer and has caught up to him on grass. i forget what roger did from 2003-2007 i guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted June 5, 2011 Author Share Posted June 5, 2011 i forget what roger did from 2003-2007 i guess Look, Roger right now might be the greatest ever because he's won the most grandslams, but Nadal has owned him in head to head matches and Nadal IS the best NOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Look, Roger right now might be the greatest ever because he's won the most grandslams, but Nadal has owned him in head to head matches and Nadal IS the best NOW. i am not arguing that silly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted June 5, 2011 Author Share Posted June 5, 2011 i am not arguing that silly! The first page of this thread, you said, "Federer is STILL the best there is. He's getting older, but he STILL is the heavyweight champ of the sport." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwack Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Just because a player has the most grand slams doesn't mean he's the best ever. Most people who really know tennis would say that Rod Laver is the best tennis player ever, over Sampras and Federer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 The first page of this thread, you said, "Federer is STILL the best there is." I guess i should clarify, you know like Tim Duncan is the best PF there is, but he isn't winning as much anymore like he used too ---------- Post added June-5th-2011 at 01:08 PM ---------- Just because a player has the most grand slams doesn't mean he's the best ever. Most people who really know tennis would say that Rod Laver is the best tennis player ever, over Sampras and Federer. Tell Tiger woods and the entire golf community then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted June 5, 2011 Author Share Posted June 5, 2011 Just because a player has the most grand slams doesn't mean he's the best ever. Most people who really know tennis would say that Rod Laver is the best tennis player ever, over Sampras and Federer. Don't you have to go by grandslams won? Sampress was great, but the only thing that takes him out of the equation is his record at the French Open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backpack3r Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Congrats to Nadal! He is the king of clay. Cant wait for Wimbledon, gonna be in Vegas so im definitely putting money down on some matches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwack Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Don't you have to go by grandslams won? Sampress was great, but the only thing that takes him out of the equation is his record at the French Open. Well Rod won 11 Grand Slams and 8 Pro Slam Tournaments before there were Grand Slams in the Open Era. If you want to count those that would give him 19 major tournament victories, which would make him the greatest ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCranon21 Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 I like Roger a lot, but Nadal has been owning him since that '08 Wimbedon final. Since then Rafael has been on fire. Roger's last Grand Slam was last year's Aussie Open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted June 5, 2011 Author Share Posted June 5, 2011 Well Rod won 11 Grand Slams and 8 Pro Slam Tournaments before there were Grand Slams in the Open Era. If you want to count those that would give him 19 major tournament victories, which would make him the greatest ever. Oh, Laver is definitely in the discussion. Right now, it's between him and Federer. In a few years, Nadal will enter the discussion. Again, Sampress' French Open record disqualifies him IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Lol **** Federer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilandil Tasardur Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 I love them both and I think Laver and Fed are a push. Hard to discuss the different eras and technology and depth of the draw and everything. That said, there is no reason to believe that Nadal can't win two a year for the next three years and quickly tie Fed at 16. And Nadal is the only one in the goat conversation who spent a majority of his career playing against another player in the goat conversation. IMagine if he finishes with 17 or 18 majors and a third of them were against someone considered as the goat. That means something right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.