Can You Say 2011??

[Kieran]

doesn't surprise me that you are very uninformed and clueless.....

You're an idiot.

 

[DarthFed]

^ I know it's worth more points. The debate is that it's the outlier in terms of format, and personally, I never had it much on my radar until sometime in the last decade, when it got more hyped, (and I got more interested in tennis, tbh.) But they used to play it in NYC where I live and I didn't know about it.

Yes but the format of the Olympics makes it practically a weaker MS event and we all know which one the players would prefer to win (and that despite less points and money at the Olympics). Same logic for YEC, I highly doubt there is a player on tour that would rather win 1 of the 9 MS events vs. the YEC. You may not have had it on your radar but pretty sure it's been a big deal to the players for quite some time now, a lot longer than MS events have even been in existence (they only started in 1990).

Not everything is meant to be debated. If we can debate which is the more important tournament between YEC and an MS event then we have a little too much debating to do in this world.

 

[Ricardo]

Winning five MS titles in a season was some sort of record, no? And then taking down Rafa, who had a career year in 2010.

By the way, 2006 was a great year, so were many others, but in terms of difficulty and outright greatness, I'd give it to Nole in a straightener between 2006 and 2011. Facing down Rafa and also having Roger there as a tormentor was so much more difficult a year than whatever Roger faced in 2006, leaving aside the fact that Nole had so many failings of his past to overcome...

Fiero claimed Novak11 was more successful than Fed06 (and regarding 'results') so that argument can only be settled by numbers...... which part do you not understand? it does not matter what your 'opinion' is, whoever you think had it tougher is not the point of argument and is simply your opinion.... more often than not, opinions are agenda driven - and i think everyone here knows your agenda and where you stand when it comes to a certain player (who broke your idol's record) :laydownlaughing

 

[Kieran]

Winning five MS titles in a season was some sort of record, no? And then taking down Rafa, who had a career year in 2010.

By the way, 2006 was a great year, so were many others, but in terms of difficulty and outright greatness, I'd give it to Nole in a straightener between 2006 and 2011. Facing down Rafa and also having Roger there as a tormentor was so much more difficult a year than whatever Roger faced in 2006, leaving aside the fact that Nole had so many failings of his past to overcome...

Fiero claimed Novak11 was more successful than Fed06 (and regarding 'results') so that argument can only be settled by numbers...... which part do you not understand? it does not matter what your 'opinion' is, whoever you think had it tougher is not the point of argument and is simply your opinion.... more often than not, opinions are agenda driven - and i think everyone here knows your agenda and where you stand when it comes to a certain player (who broke your idol's record) :laydownlaughing

We all know where you're coming from too, sunshine, and it doesn't smell right.

Nole's 2011 was the greatest year I've seen since Mac in 1984. Scan that news whichever way you want...

 

[Ricardo]

doesn't surprise me that you are very uninformed and clueless.....

You're an idiot.

i know you eat sh!t for a living, which is why you are incapable of even trying to be intelligent and can only wet yourself with jealousy driven agendas...

 

[Kieran]

doesn't surprise me that you are very uninformed and clueless.....

You're an idiot.

i know you eat sh!t for a living, which is why you are incapable of even trying to be intelligent and can only wet yourself with jealousy driven agendas...

Witty and grand...

 

[Ricardo]

Winning five MS titles in a season was some sort of record, no? And then taking down Rafa, who had a career year in 2010.

By the way, 2006 was a great year, so were many others, but in terms of difficulty and outright greatness, I'd give it to Nole in a straightener between 2006 and 2011. Facing down Rafa and also having Roger there as a tormentor was so much more difficult a year than whatever Roger faced in 2006, leaving aside the fact that Nole had so many failings of his past to overcome...

Fiero claimed Novak11 was more successful than Fed06 (and regarding 'results') so that argument can only be settled by numbers...... which part do you not understand? it does not matter what your 'opinion' is, whoever you think had it tougher is not the point of argument and is simply your opinion.... more often than not, opinions are agenda driven - and i think everyone here knows your agenda and where you stand when it comes to a certain player (who broke your idol's record) :laydownlaughing

We all know where you're coming from too, sunshine, and it doesn't smell right.

Nole's 2011 was the greatest year I've seen since Mac in 1984. Scan that news whichever way you want...

doesn't smell right? u gotta stop eating ur own **** and start using some head..... just repeating your opinion 1000 times doesn't make it a fact.

FACTS ARE:

3 majors and a final >>> 3 majors and a semi
4 MS1000 and WTF >>> 5 MS1000

if u just don't get it, go home and chew on some bones.

 

[Ricardo]

Actually, while I agree with your observation regarding Novak having the best year since Laver, it was Nadal who had the most "complete" year on all surfaces since unlike Federer and Djokovic, he won 3 majors on all 3 surfaces in 2010.

Well it was made more complete in my mind by defeating his #1 rival 6 times and twice on clay in straight sets! I can't imagine anyone surpassing that year of '11 results! :clap :nono :angel:

Let's simplify this whole thing for you:

3majors+1final > 3 majors+1semi
4MS1000+WTF > 5MS1000

There is just no way around it, clearly Fed06 surpassed Novak11 "RESULTS".

Supporting a player should not interfere with logical thinking.

By your own accounting, they are very close years. No reason to bludgeon Fiero over the difference, and claim victory. Surely there are fine points within them that make them debatable. Even the notion of 4 MS + the WTF is only debatably better than 5 MS wins. And amongst the fine-points is the quality of players that Djokovic beat that year.

I wonder why that same post isn't directed at Fiero who said that "without a doubt, Nole's 2011 was better than Fed's 2006."

Since they're such close years, surely there must be "doubt."

well she lives on agendas too, and is blind to being fair .... which is why there exists those feminists :laydownlaughing

and that explains why she thinks Flavia Penneta's 'loving feelings' are relevant to ATP discussions.

 

[Ricardo]

doesn't surprise me that you are very uninformed and clueless.....

You're an idiot.

i know you eat sh!t for a living, which is why you are incapable of even trying to be intelligent and can only wet yourself with jealousy driven agendas...

Witty and grand...

yep, always a pleasure to show a wannabe how it's done.

 

[Kieran]

Well it was made more complete in my mind by defeating his #1 rival 6 times and twice on clay in straight sets! I can't imagine anyone surpassing that year of '11 results! :clap :nono :angel:

Let's simplify this whole thing for you:

3majors+1final > 3 majors+1semi
4MS1000+WTF > 5MS1000

There is just no way around it, clearly Fed06 surpassed Novak11 "RESULTS".

Supporting a player should not interfere with logical thinking.

By your own accounting, they are very close years. No reason to bludgeon Fiero over the difference, and claim victory. Surely there are fine points within them that make them debatable. Even the notion of 4 MS + the WTF is only debatably better than 5 MS wins. And amongst the fine-points is the quality of players that Djokovic beat that year.

I wonder why that same post isn't directed at Fiero who said that "without a doubt, Nole's 2011 was better than Fed's 2006."

Since they're such close years, surely there must be "doubt."

well she lives on agendas too, and is blind to being fair .... which is why there exists those feminists :laydownlaughing

and that explains why she thinks Flavia Penneta's 'loving feelings' are relevant to ATP discussions.

Ricky, there are feminists because there are cavemen like you. It's a basic equation. Feminism wouldn't need to exist if fellas like you would take up a book now and then, and learn something. Wipe that dribble off your chin when I'm talking to you.

And see the way you scanned the Flavia thread? That's why you're wrong about tennis in general.

Correction: you got one post right. Long ago.

And nobody else noticed...

 

[brokenshoelace]

Well it was made more complete in my mind by defeating his #1 rival 6 times and twice on clay in straight sets! I can't imagine anyone surpassing that year of '11 results! :clap :nono :angel:

Let's simplify this whole thing for you:

3majors+1final > 3 majors+1semi
4MS1000+WTF > 5MS1000

There is just no way around it, clearly Fed06 surpassed Novak11 "RESULTS".

Supporting a player should not interfere with logical thinking.

By your own accounting, they are very close years. No reason to bludgeon Fiero over the difference, and claim victory. Surely there are fine points within them that make them debatable. Even the notion of 4 MS + the WTF is only debatably better than 5 MS wins. And amongst the fine-points is the quality of players that Djokovic beat that year.

Actually it isn't debatable that 5 MS is better than 4 MS and a YEC. YEC is a bigger deal than MS events without question. Roger had the better results and a much better winning % but part of what made Nole's year so special is what Fiero and Kieran alluded to...10-1 against Rafa and Roger.

But it should also be said that younger Nadal was arguably better on clay than the older one even though he is much better on the other surfaces now. Losing to Rafa on clay in 06 was certainly more quality than losing to 30 year old Roger on clay.

Why isn't it debatable? I think we've debated it a few times over the years. And why is everyone so set in their ways all of a sudden, where nothing is 'debatable', and everything is 'without a doubt.' How are we supposed to have a discussion?

Well, technically, everything is debatable. Except it's pointless/silly to have debates over things that most people recognize as near facts. WTF > A Masters 1000 event. How is that debatable?

I mean fine, let's have a debate about it. Let's hear the arguments for a Masters 1000 event being more important than the WTF.

Spoiler: There will be arguments, and people will say that "you can make a case." Well yeah, but that case would be so easily refuted.

I don't mind debating who had the better season, Fed in 2006 or Novak in 2011 because it was pretty damn close (hell, in my first post, I rated Novak's season as better before changing my mind). But as far as which is more important, a WTF or a Masters 1000 title, what's the point of the argument if everyone deep down inside knows the answer?

Hey, while we're at it, let's debate what weighs more, winning 3 Masters events or 1 slam. You get my point? Everything is debatable. But the extent and the usefulness of the debates vary.

 

[brokenshoelace]

^ I know it's worth more points. The debate is that it's the outlier in terms of format, and personally, I never had it much on my radar until sometime in the last decade, when it got more hyped, (and I got more interested in tennis, tbh.) But they used to play it in NYC where I live and I didn't know about it.

That's more of a personal ignorance kind of thing (I don't mean that negatively, just to be clear). It doesn't change history/prestige/etc...

 

[brokenshoelace]

Here, let me settle the WTF vs. Masters 1000 debate.

If any player is given the choice between winning the WTF or one masters title in a given year, which would they choose? You're fooling yourself if you think this is actually a contest.

 

[Kieran]

You're labouring it, brother, we get that. But would any player take a year where they set a record of MS titles in one season? I think that's also quite unique (until Rafa equalled it, of course).

I agree with them both being a hairs breath season in terms of prestigious events won, but Nole owned 2011, and against great players too, including Nadal coming off a career season, in a way I haven't personally seen done since Mac in 1984...

 

[brokenshoelace]

^ I know it's worth more points. The debate is that it's the outlier in terms of format, and personally, I never had it much on my radar until sometime in the last decade, when it got more hyped, (and I got more interested in tennis, tbh.) But they used to play it in NYC where I live and I didn't know about it.

Yes but the format of the Olympics makes it practically a weaker MS event and we all know which one the players would prefer to win (and that despite less points and money at the Olympics). Same logic for YEC, I highly doubt there is a player on tour that would rather win 1 of the 9 MS events vs. the YEC. You may not have had it on your radar but pretty sure it's been a big deal to the players for quite some time now, a lot longer than MS events have even been in existence (they only started in 1990).

Not everything is meant to be debated. If we can debate which is the more important tournament between YEC and an MS event then we have a little too much debating to do in this world.

Just read this. Sorry for stealing your point in my post above.

 

[Ricardo]

Without a doubt, Nole's '11 was the most successful season for a male pro since Laver's Grand Slam in '69! You've had Federer, Nadal, Wilander, and Connors with 3 majors, but it wasn't as complete as Novak's domination on all surfaces taking 5 or 6 Masters with those Slams! :clap

Actually, while I agree with your observation regarding Novak having the best year since Laver, it was Nadal who had the most "complete" year on all surfaces since unlike Federer and Djokovic, he won 3 majors on all 3 surfaces in 2010.

Well it was made more complete in my mind by defeating his #1 rival 6 times and twice on clay in straight sets! I can't imagine anyone surpassing that year of '11 results! :clap :nono :angel:

Let's simplify this whole thing for you:

3majors+1final > 3 majors+1semi
4MS1000+WTF > 5MS1000

There is just no way around it, clearly Fed06 surpassed Novak11 "RESULTS".

Supporting a player should not interfere with logical thinking.

By your own accounting, they are very close years. No reason to bludgeon Fiero over the difference, and claim victory. Surely there are fine points within them that make them debatable. Even the notion of 4 MS + the WTF is only debatably better than 5 MS wins. And amongst the fine-points is the quality of players that Djokovic beat that year.

ok i'll be patient with you here, normally wouldn't bother with self-claimed tennis 'fans' who are uninformed about WTF. Laver's 69 was often proclaimed as being more successful than others, better than Mac84, Fed06 and Novak11. Yet you ever see anyone debate what you call the 'finer points'? has anyone examined or even tried to with regards to who he beat in all those majors? in that year he beat Tony Roche (correct me if im wrong) at RG final while Fed lost to Nadal. Federer came up one match short, it doesn't matter if he had to face a better player (Rafa) than Roche - i am sure many would say it's easier to beat Roche than Rafa on clay, but it's all IRRELEVANT - Laver got 4 majors and Fed came up one match short and that's the way it is. It's all about the results, and therefore Laver69 > Fed06 > Novak11.

There is no 'finer points' in this case like you claimed (maybe you think it looks smart) .... it doesn't matter who beat (or didn't) someone who was tougher (or softer), harder or easier etc etc, if you win the calender GS you are automatically above someone who came up one match short, who in turn is above someone being two matches short (Novak). It's simple really, we never really examined who Budge, Laver, Mac, Lendl, Wilander, Edberg, Sampras etc etc beat in the majors and compare the 'difficults' when it comes to ranking greatness as it's always done according to their numbers, why should we apply differently only to Federer?

its not about who beat who and draw conclusions, if one really likes arguing he could say a past his prime Fed could beat peak Novak then a peak (2006) Fed was surely better than peak (2011) Novak and whatnot. can you see its all irrelevant in this case?

 

[Ricardo]

You're labouring it, brother, we get that. But would any player take a year where they set a record of MS titles in one season? I think that's also quite unique (until Rafa equalled it, of course).

I agree with them both being a hairs breath season in terms of prestigious events won, but Nole owned 2011, and against great players too, including Nadal coming off a career season, in a way I haven't personally seen done since Mac in 1984...

Fed didn't own 2006? too bad you always go hay-wire when it comes to you know who....

 

[Kieran]

You're labouring it, brother, we get that. But would any player take a year where they set a record of MS titles in one season? I think that's also quite unique (until Rafa equalled it, of course).

I agree with them both being a hairs breath season in terms of prestigious events won, but Nole owned 2011, and against great players too, including Nadal coming off a career season, in a way I haven't personally seen done since Mac in 1984...

Fed didn't own 2006? too bad you always go hay-wire when it comes to you know who....

Too bad you can't read.

Your posts are getting mixed reviews lately, you've toned down the women-hatred to a dull roar. What's happened to you? Did mammy read some of your posts again?

 

[Ricardo]

Let's simplify this whole thing for you:

3majors+1final > 3 majors+1semi
4MS1000+WTF > 5MS1000

There is just no way around it, clearly Fed06 surpassed Novak11 "RESULTS".

Supporting a player should not interfere with logical thinking.

By your own accounting, they are very close years. No reason to bludgeon Fiero over the difference, and claim victory. Surely there are fine points within them that make them debatable. Even the notion of 4 MS + the WTF is only debatably better than 5 MS wins. And amongst the fine-points is the quality of players that Djokovic beat that year.

I wonder why that same post isn't directed at Fiero who said that "without a doubt, Nole's 2011 was better than Fed's 2006."

Since they're such close years, surely there must be "doubt."

well she lives on agendas too, and is blind to being fair .... which is why there exists those feminists :laydownlaughing

and that explains why she thinks Flavia Penneta's 'loving feelings' are relevant to ATP discussions.

Ricky, there are feminists because there are cavemen like you. It's a basic equation. Feminism wouldn't need to exist if fellas like you would take up a book now and then, and learn something. Wipe that dribble off your chin when I'm talking to you.

And see the way you scanned the Flavia thread? That's why you're wrong about tennis in general.

Correction: you got one post right. Long ago.

And nobody else noticed...

you are trying too hard, i know what you think regarding Federer and feminists. If all you ever got when it comes to debating is keep stating your opinion and present it like a FACT, just don't bother.... that's what cavemen do, no ability to 'think', cannot recognize facts the way they really are, you just 'hope' your opinion is right.

who is wrong about tennis in general? i am sure when you said Fed has no match up issue with Rafa, you demonstrated yourself totally. Take a rest dumbas*....

 

[Kieran]

In fact, Ricardo, I don't think I said that. Seriously, this is your problem. One of them, anyway. The need to be loud.

Why not read, then scan properly, then reply intelligently?

And leave out the dirty bits?