2014 Aussie Open Final: Nadal vs. Wawrinka

[brokenshoelace]

Here is Peter Bodo's article on the final match.

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/01/was-shark/50440/#.UumjcmCPKM8

As he correctly points out, there is no guarantee that Nadal would have
won this match if he was fine. This is something that Nadal fans need to admit
despite the obviously horrible history of their H2H.

Ah, here we are fabricating narratives again.

Please, point out to me where any Nadal fan suggested Nadal WOULD have won if not for the injury. You have about 150 pages worth of material on these boards so you're bound to find something. I'll wait.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Aphter his AO title, Wawrinka is now ophicially phat! Onto the Phrench Open phor fase two of the Calendar Year Grand Stan!

What's up with the lack of F's? :laydownlaughing

 

[Tennis Miller]

Aphter his AO title, Wawrinka is now ophicially phat! Onto the Phrench Open phor fase two of the Calendar Year Grand Stan!

What's up with the lack of F's? :laydownlaughing

Seriously, it's ph-ing strange!

Cheers
TM

 

[Kieran]

Here is Peter Bodo's article on the final match.

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/01/was-shark/50440/#.UumjcmCPKM8

As he correctly points out, there is no guarantee that Nadal would have
won this match if he was fine. This is something that Nadal fans need to admit
despite the obviously horrible history of their H2H.

Ah, here we are fabricating narratives again.

Please, point out to me where any Nadal fan suggested Nadal WOULD have won if not for the injury. You have about 150 pages worth of material on these boards so you're bound to find something. I'll wait.

Exactly. Nobody can say what might have happened, and I haven't seen anyone speculate, either way. Because we don't know how Stan would have held up as the match progressed. We only know what we know, which is enough to be getting on with...

EDIT: but you're correct, this will become one of those false narratives that'll be repeated ad nauseum...

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

the unknown remains unknown,

we only know what we know,

we don't know how much we don't know.

but we know we don't know everything.

at least that much we know.

 

[Kieran]

the unknown remains unknown,

we only know what we know,

we don't know how much we don't know.

but we know we don't know everything.

at least that much we know.

Dick Cheney?

"We know there are known knowns: there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns: that is to say we know there are things we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don't know we don't know."

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

the unknown remains unknown,

we only know what we know,

we don't know how much we don't know.

but we know we don't know everything.

at least that much we know.

Dick Cheney?

"We know there are known knowns: there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns: that is to say we know there are things we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don't know we don't know."

yes..i did steal from that I thought it was Donald Rumsfeld that gave the infamous 'known unknowns' speech, but I could be wrong.

 

[Kieran]

^^ Oh you're right, it was Rumsfeld, sorry! I thought I knew it, but it was an unknown known!

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

All I know is I know nothing...Was it Socrates?