95%

[brokenshoelace]

i think it is still a year for the ages if he snags the u.s. open crown.

that is like 10 tournaments: 5 masters and 2 slams.


that is sick.

Almost as good as 5 master and 3 slams. :shy:

Yeah, I have to say, while Nadal's year is already phenomenal (given the circumstances), the standard was raised so high by Fed, Djokovic and Rafa himself, that winning 2 slams per year seems "only" great, as opposed to a year for the ages.

 

[Fiero425]

i think it is still a year for the ages if he snags the u.s. open crown.

that is like 10 tournaments: 5 masters and 2 slams.


that is sick.

Almost as good as 5 master and 3 slams. :shy:

Yeah, I have to say, while Nadal's year is already phenomenal (given the circumstances), the standard was raised so high by Fed, Djokovic and Rafa himself, that winning 2 slams per year seems "only" great, as opposed to a year for the ages.

This is such an abhorrent era for the men; so few majors up for grabs! Eras either have one great player or no one great and things meandering around with no names like Kriek, Gomez, Edmondson, Johansson, Gaudio, Teacher, and Korda with what we call majors! Luckily that sort of thing didn't happen too often at Wimbledon and the USO!