Djokovic now indisputedly a better grasscourtplayer than Nadal.....

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
calitennis127 said:
Broken_Shoelace said:
calitennis127 said:
I grew up in a country that does not give a damn about tennis, as is clear from the sorry state of American tennis. Our fourth and fifth rate athletes are the ones who generally play it, and they are almost all white geeks. Yet, I still developed a liking for it because I found it interesting and enjoyable to watch as a European/South American game. At the same time, I find soccer to be a completely stupid game and I do not understand the infatuation with it. It is completely boring compared to American sports, but I suppose if I grew up with in it a Third World country and had no other options, I would somehow find it interesting.

Yeah, only third world countries with "no other options" (like Basketball or tennis, both of which are pretty big over there) love soccer. Which is why the sport originated from England and the best clubs are from Western Europe (or is every non US region of the world a third world country to you?). Jesus Christ you're so ignorant. Way to confirm the stereotype.


I already knew about soccer being popular in Europe, genius. How many times have I heard about Nadal being a "Real Madrid" fan? I am simply making the point that given choices between soccer and other (superior) sports, most would choose the other sports simply based on how boring soccer is. Since most people outside of the U.S. do not have the same access to basketball, football, baseball, hockey, etc. they settle for soccer.

LMAO! Poor culturally superior European countries, they only have soccer, and that's why it's that popular. If only they had access to other superior sports, like Baseball. But luckily, newer generations have access to cable and will be able to follow American sports, so we should expect Soccer to decline in popularity any time now... Oh wait.

Is this real life? Are human beings allowed to be that stupid?
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,840
Reactions
14,997
Points
113
Broken_Shoelace said:
calitennis127 said:
Broken_Shoelace said:
Yeah, only third world countries with "no other options" (like Basketball or tennis, both of which are pretty big over there) love soccer. Which is why the sport originated from England and the best clubs are from Western Europe (or is every non US region of the world a third world country to you?). Jesus Christ you're so ignorant. Way to confirm the stereotype.


I already knew about soccer being popular in Europe, genius. How many times have I heard about Nadal being a "Real Madrid" fan? I am simply making the point that given choices between soccer and other (superior) sports, most would choose the other sports simply based on how boring soccer is. Since most people outside of the U.S. do not have the same access to basketball, football, baseball, hockey, etc. they settle for soccer.

LMAO! Poor culturally superior European countries, they only have soccer, and that's why it's that popular. If only they had access to other superior sports, like Baseball. But luckily, newer generations have access to cable and will be able to follow American sports, so we should expect Soccer to decline in popularity any time now... Oh wait.

Is this real life? Are human beings allowed to be that stupid?

I was trying to stay away from this one, but it's not just jingoistic, it's myopic and wrong. I'm looking at your list of "US" sports. Hockey? Speak to the Canadians and Russians about that one. Didn't occur to you that you need ice for that? Half of the US didn't even play hockey until about the '90s. (And you sneer at rugby.) A lot of the world plays and appreciates baseball and basketball, FYI. It might just be that they prefer soccer, not just settle for it. Just because you don't like soccer, Cali, or what the rest of the world does call football, doesn't make it boring, or a sport to be taken as second best...to what? The enormity of your ego is amazing. The whole world loves "the beautiful game," and yet, because you don't care for it or understand it, you've decided the rest of the world is just wrong. That's in keeping, I guess. :laydownlaughing
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,164
Reactions
7,447
Points
113
Now Cali-bro, you're not really going to go there with an Olde Worlde versus New World cultural debate, are you? Because that would be over fairly fast.

calitennis127 said:
Of course Djokovic was better in 2011, but it wasn't going to take anything special or out of the ordinary to beat Nadal on grass.

I beg to differ. It would have taken him to beat Berdych in the semi-final first, and he couldn't even manage that.

Your Big Idea is that Rafa doesn't win things because he's good enough to win them. No, according to you he wins them because the other bloke lets him win. This isn't knowledge, it's opinion, and it's prejudice, and it's very old, and it's always wrong. You even hold JJ up occasionally as an example of how lousy rafa is, and how he should lose every time he sets foot on court. :lolz:

Had they met in the final in 2010, it would have gone similarly for Novak as the US Open final did that year, where he was well beaten. This is all very simple and observable. I'm surprised you haven't noticed yet, but it's in your blind spot, so...
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,641
Reactions
5,729
Points
113
calitennis127 said:
Broken_Shoelace said:
calitennis127 said:
No, it's not. I was reinforcing the point that to say "This is literally based on nothing" when talking about Federer's refusal to make significant adjustments against Nadal, you need to a) have no memory or b) have been living in a hole. Hence the smart aleck question. Everyone at that time - especially the ESPN commentators - was talking about the adjustments Federer was refusing to make. For you to say "this is literally based on nothing" is just dumb.

I would also like to inform you that I am trying to become more informed on the menacing toughness of French male athletes. Players like Monfils are aggressive, hardcore, tough as nails, and of course Monfils himself also has outstanding stamina, with how he constantly puts his elbows on his knees to catch his breath in between points.

Gasquet too - that's another tough guy. As well as Christian Fournier of the Nuggets.

What's next? A French Kenyon Martin or Marshawn Lynch?

No, you should be informed about Zidane, Platini, and other French greats of whom you'd never heard of, and then for once, admitted to being wrong and ignorant. You don't want to bring that up. Your point about French athletes wasn't limited to tennis, and that's where I and others jumped in. If I recall correctly, and I do, your timeless post also suggested that France being good at Rugby means nothing because Rugby is a sport for wussies, before again, "asking a friend" and admitting, again, to being ignorant. So yeah, I wouldn't bring this up if I were you. You should also be informed about Vieira and Makelele and just how "soft" they were.


I grew up in a country that does not give a damn about tennis, as is clear from the sorry state of American tennis. Our fourth and fifth rate athletes are the ones who generally play it, and they are almost all white geeks. Yet, I still developed a liking for it because I found it interesting and enjoyable to watch as a European/South American game. At the same time, I find soccer to be a completely stupid game and I do not understand the infatuation with it. It is completely boring compared to American sports, but I suppose if I grew up with in it a Third World country and had no other options, I would somehow find it interesting. But the regular American sports are just better, and that is why soccer - despite constant attempts by ESPN and other networks to promote it - has failed to gain any kind of significant appeal in the U.S. It is just a lame sport by comparison to football, basketball, baseball, and hockey.

My point in saying that is I really don't care if France has produced good soccer players. I have watched enough soccer to know that what we can loosely call "mental toughness" really isn't called upon the same way in soccer as it is in other sports. Soccer is a menial game based on endurance capacity. If you throw 40 people out on a congested field, I don't see how that provides the same kind of test of mental toughness as going out on a court by yourself like a tennis player has to in order to win big matches. I also do not see the individualistic dimension of basketball or even football in soccer, except for goalies. Goalies, I will admit, are under immense pressure, but for everyone else, the risk of being embarrassed as an individual is infinitely smaller than in basketball or football. If you are a cornerback in football and a receiver burns you for a touchdown, everyone looks at you like the person who screwed up. If you are a basketball player who turns the ball over or gets scored on, people blame you. And these things can all happen at any moment if you are not on top of your game.

In soccer, where is the comparable individual mental pressure to being a cornerback against DeSean Jackson or AJ Green, who can score a touchdown on you on any play? Where is the comparable individual pressure to being an All Star player in the NBA that needs to score 35 points for his team to win a critical playoff game?

In soccer, I don't see where the comparable pressure is unless you are a goalie, when the game is 90 minutes long and there are a total of maybe 10 shots on goal throughout the match. You have to be a royal screw-up to actually be humiliated as an individual. And, again, I am saying this as someone who has had to explain to numerous American acquaintances how and why I find tennis interesting. The game of soccer is one of the lamer sports out there.

As all of this pertains to the general mental toughness of French athletes in tennis and basketball - the two sports I know best - I stand by my comments. The only French athlete who I recall being very noticeably tough was Michael Pietrus, although that was largely because of his immense athleticism. In general, the French athletest are all kind of wispy and flighty - and I am saying this as someone who also acknowledges that most Spaniards have superior athleticism and stamina on the ATP tour, and that most American male tennis players are unathletic nerds as a type and that they are generally the most aesthetically deficient players on tour.

I read a lot of your stuff with amusement, but this really takes the biscuit :cover Your ignorance and parochialism don't really surprise me, but the fact that you can be as trenchant as you are with these views is just laughable. Those of us from other parts of the world might say the same about American sports (I actually like NFL, the others I can take or leave). But with all due respect don't even imagine for one second that any of your sports remotely.. and I mean remotely compares to the popularity of soccer around the world. You would be deluding yourself on a scale even surpassed by your love affair with Nalbandian. Un-freaking-believable!
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,726
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
Obsi said:
FrailHeartyAustraliansilkyterrier.gif

This is quietly the best post of the entire thread :snicker
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,049
Reactions
7,181
Points
113
Riotbeard said:
I just want to note and appreciate that this thread was not started nor pushed forward by Novak fans...

Nah, it was started by an antiRafa fan whom has his own narcissistic self fulfilling prophecy.
 

Carol

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
9,225
Reactions
1,833
Points
113
Bah, with the bad form that Nadal has played this year everyone is better than him and not only on grass but also on clay, incredible but true. The good news is that he can't play worse :rolleyes::s :nono
But after these last two Wimbledon finals result I'd better say that Novak is better than Federer on grass, both players have played pretty well, fitted and with a lot of confidence but the same player has won both finals
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,726
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
Big shock that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed. What's your excuse for 26-29 year old Rafa losing to nobodies 4 years in a row? All injuries? Or how about that extra week to the rescue?
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,049
Reactions
7,181
Points
113
DarthFed said:
Big shock that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed. What's your excuse for 26-29 year old Rafa losing to nobodies 4 years in a row? All injuries? Or how about that extra week to the rescue?

that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed.
Darth.. that is what "we" all have been saying.. You keep implying that Djoker is the 2nd greatest grass court player you have seen after Roger. I have been saying that defeating 33-34 Roger isn't the same as when Rafa defeated Roger in his prime years but you have been adamant that Rafa accomplishments against Roger is overrated. So Darth, which is it
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,641
Reactions
5,729
Points
113
the AntiPusher said:
DarthFed said:
Big shock that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed. What's your excuse for 26-29 year old Rafa losing to nobodies 4 years in a row? All injuries? Or how about that extra week to the rescue?

that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed.
Darth.. that is what "we" all have been saying.. You keep implying that Djoker is the 2nd greatest grass court player you have seen after Roger. I have been saying that defeating 33-34 Roger isn't the same as when Rafa defeated Roger in his prime years but you have been adamant that Rafa accomplishments against Roger is overrated. So Darth, which is it

I may not like it, but Rafa taking on Roger in 07 and 08 seems more impressive to me than Novak beating Roger now. Even if I do think that Roger wasn't at it for a good long while in 2008, the tennis he brought to bear in the last few sets would have overwhelmed anyone else. That's not to say that Novak couldn't reach those levels, but he clearly hasn't had to.
 

Carol

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
9,225
Reactions
1,833
Points
113
calitennis127 said:
Broken_Shoelace said:
Front242 said:
You realize Rafa scraped that title by the skin of his teeth resorting to some seriously dodgy MTOs against Petzschner who was handing him his behind till Rafa took the said timeouts and he was also fighting a serious losing battle to Haase the round before. That tournament win was not one bit convincing so there's every chance Djokovic could've beaten him if Haase and Petzschner gave him so much grief and in the case of the latter he had to cheat his way to beat him.

Don't you think scrapping by Petschner and Haase is better than being straight setted by Berdych and going to 5 sets with Lu? Both of which happened to Djokovic during that tournament.

Absurd.

No, it is absurd to think that Nadal was in untouchable form in Wimbledon 2010.

This "it was the first week" excuse is really getting tiresome. Why have Federer and Djokovic in their best Wimbledon runs never had similar struggles in Week 1? Oh yeah, maybe it is because their games are more suited for the surface.

Djokovic did not need to be in excellent form to beat Nadal in a Wimbledon final.

Non one needs to be in excellent form to beat Nadal in any Wimbledon round, he is beating himself :rolleyes:
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,726
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
the AntiPusher said:
DarthFed said:
Big shock that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed. What's your excuse for 26-29 year old Rafa losing to nobodies 4 years in a row? All injuries? Or how about that extra week to the rescue?

that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed.
Darth.. that is what "we" all have been saying.. You keep implying that Djoker is the 2nd greatest grass court player you have seen after Roger. I have been saying that defeating 33-34 Roger isn't the same as when Rafa defeated Roger in his prime years but you have been adamant that Rafa accomplishments against Roger is overrated. So Darth, which is it

Actually I rate Roger as the 2nd best grass court player ever. Nole obviously isn't top 3 yet on grass. And 2008 wasn't Roger's prime, he had clearly gone down a notch. I'd say it was similar to Nad's 2012, pretty good year but not close to what we had seen before. Interestingly enough both rebounded well (Roger in 2009 and Rafa in 2013)
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,641
Reactions
5,729
Points
113
DarthFed said:
the AntiPusher said:
DarthFed said:
Big shock that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed. What's your excuse for 26-29 year old Rafa losing to nobodies 4 years in a row? All injuries? Or how about that extra week to the rescue?

that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed.
Darth.. that is what "we" all have been saying.. You keep implying that Djoker is the 2nd greatest grass court player you have seen after Roger. I have been saying that defeating 33-34 Roger isn't the same as when Rafa defeated Roger in his prime years but you have been adamant that Rafa accomplishments against Roger is overrated. So Darth, which is it

Actually I rate Roger as the 2nd best grass court player ever. Nole obviously isn't top 3 yet on grass. And 2008 wasn't Roger's prime, he had clearly gone down a notch. I'd say it was similar to Nad's 2012, pretty good year but not close to what we had seen before. Interestingly enough both rebounded well (Roger in 2009 and Rafa in 2013)

Interesting. You have Sampras above Roger? I would disagree. At Roger's peak, there was an inevitability about his runs, that surpassed even the Pistol. But it's a close run thing
 

Fiero425

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
11,571
Reactions
2,611
Points
113
Location
Chicago, IL
Website
fiero4251.blogspot.com
DarthFed said:
the AntiPusher said:
DarthFed said:
Big shock that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed. What's your excuse for 26-29 year old Rafa losing to nobodies 4 years in a row? All injuries? Or how about that extra week to the rescue?

that Nole is better on grass than a washed up Fed.
Darth.. that is what "we" all have been saying.. You keep implying that Djoker is the 2nd greatest grass court player you have seen after Roger. I have been saying that defeating 33-34 Roger isn't the same as when Rafa defeated Roger in his prime years but you have been adamant that Rafa accomplishments against Roger is overrated. So Darth, which is it

Actually I rate Roger as the 2nd best grass court player ever. Nole obviously isn't top 3 yet on grass. And 2008 wasn't Roger's prime, he had clearly gone down a notch. I'd say it was similar to Nad's 2012, pretty good year but not close to what we had seen before. Interestingly enough both rebounded well (Roger in 2009 and Rafa in 2013)

I wouldn't put Roger even in the top 5 of true grass court players! This is hardly what we can say is historic, grass court play! You need to go back to a bygone era; top of the list would be legends like Laver, Tilden, to a more current era with Edberg, Becker, and Sampras! This grass is nothing like what is considered true grass courts with their homogenized surface, few bad bounces, and players winning who would never win against this other legends! Rafa is right where he should be; going out very early! Federer has his 7 Wimbledons, but he arrived moments before Sampras was exiting so it's hard to put him that high! I've seen a lot of tennis and these guys today would never survive the aggressive S & V of these legends; NEVER! I'm not sure they could get past the 2nd tier like Mayotte, Tanner, or Curren! :p :nono :angel:
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,641
Reactions
5,729
Points
113
^Absolutely hilarious. Edberg is my favourite player of all time, and in my opinion the best all round volleyer the game has ever seen. But I'm sorry... he ain't better than peak Federer on grass. Roger could do everything, baseline and front court. Of all the those guys the only guy that in my opinion stands a chance against Federer at his best was Sampras, and that's because of that serve. Particularly the second serve. But in my view even that doesn't help him over 5 sets. He simply wouldn't be able to get to Roger's relative weaknesses. Federer was too fast, too versatile, just too much in my view. And Roger ate pace at his peak. Sorry..

PS, the best set on grass I've ever seen was the 3rd Edberg - Becker. 1st set Edberg's volleying was so perfect, Boris was helpless. But the sad truth is that the baseline passing of this generation would have done for Stefan, even if folks didn't just go to town on that forehand side :nono
 

Fiero425

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
11,571
Reactions
2,611
Points
113
Location
Chicago, IL
Website
fiero4251.blogspot.com
federberg said:
^Absolutely hilarious. Edberg is my favourite player of all time, and in my opinion the best all round volleyer the game has ever seen. But I'm sorry... he ain't better than peak Federer on grass. Roger could do everything, baseline and front court. Of all the those guys the only guy that in my opinion stands a chance against Federer at his best was Sampras, and that's because of that serve. Particularly the second serve. But in my view even that doesn't help him over 5 sets. He simply wouldn't be able to get to Roger's relative weaknesses. Federer was too fast, too versatile, just too much in my view. And Roger ate pace at his peak. Sorry..

PS, the best set on grass I've ever seen was the 3rd Edberg - Becker. 1st set Edberg's volleying was so perfect, Boris was helpless. But the sad truth is that the baseline passing of this generation would have done for Stefan, even if folks didn't just go to town on that forehand side :nono

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it! :p :angel: :dodgy: