Were you happy with the Slam finals this year ?

[brokenshoelace]

The fact remains, on the topic of Nadal winning 18+ slam titles, Broken Shoelace is a detractor. That is all I said, and that will remain all the way to #18.

Again, just because I disagree about him getting 18 doesn't mean I'm a detractor on that topic. Because I actually think it's legitimately possible, however, I'm skeptical given his history of injuries. That doesn't make me a detractor, not even about this topic. It just means that while I do think it's possible, I have my reservations.

And you accused me of being a fake fan, and said "I'm not convinced" when someone assured you that I'm a Nadal fan. So no, that is not "all you said."

Stop being so sensitive just because people disagree with you. I think it says something that you've only been here for less than a week, and already, you've gotten on everyone's nerves. This is not a personal attack mind you, but an observation. A piece of advice if you will. Lighten up and learn to accept differing opinions. You can debate them (that's why we're here), just try to be less annoying.

You are the sensitive one, taking offense when I said you were a detractor on the topic of Nadal surpassing Federer's record. Uncle Toni thinks Nadal can reach or surpass Federer's record. So do I. You said 14-16 slam titles. You are a detractor, and that's just the reality of the situation. No criticism, just reality. Detractor is not an offensive word. I couldn't care less if you agree or disagree regarding 18 slams. I said you were a detractor, and you got very upset and made a big deal out of it.

detractor
noun [C] /dɪˈtræk.tər/ US /-tɚ/

Definition
› someone who criticizes something or someone, often unfairly:


Please, learn the meaning of the words you throw around. By saying Nadal will probably win 16 majors, I am in NO WAY criticizing him, or being unfair. No, I am not being a detractor. If anything, it's a testament to him, because I'm saying he'll reach that number IN SPITE OF his knees, which is the real factor here.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

detractor - "a person who disparages someone or something"

just in case: disparage - "regard or represent as being of little worth"


Broken (*edit: who, as i see, beat me to the reply) definitely is no detractor in regards to Rafa. he's a fan, and perhaps a slightly pessimistic one. take a look at DarthFed's posts, and you'll see a quite similar phenomenon at times.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

The fact remains, on the topic of Nadal winning 18+ slam titles, Broken Shoelace is a detractor. That is all I said, and that will remain all the way to #18.

Again, just because I disagree about him getting 18 doesn't mean I'm a detractor on that topic. Because I actually think it's legitimately possible, however, I'm skeptical given his history of injuries. That doesn't make me a detractor, not even about this topic. It just means that while I do think it's possible, I have my reservations.

And you accused me of being a fake fan, and said "I'm not convinced" when someone assured you that I'm a Nadal fan. So no, that is not "all you said."

Stop being so sensitive just because people disagree with you. I think it says something that you've only been here for less than a week, and already, you've gotten on everyone's nerves. This is not a personal attack mind you, but an observation. A piece of advice if you will. Lighten up and learn to accept differing opinions. You can debate them (that's why we're here), just try to be less annoying.

You are the sensitive one, taking offense when I said you were a detractor on the topic of Nadal surpassing Federer's record. Uncle Toni thinks Nadal can reach or surpass Federer's record. So do I. You said 14-16 slam titles. You are a detractor, and that's just the reality of the situation. No criticism, just reality. Detractor is not an offensive word. I couldn't care less if you agree or disagree regarding 18 slams. I said you were a detractor, and you got very upset and made a big deal out of it.

detractor
noun [C] /dɪˈtræk.tər/ US /-tɚ/

Definition
› someone who criticizes something or someone, often unfairly:


Please, learn the meaning of the words you throw around. By saying Nadal will probably win 16 majors, I am in NO WAY criticizing him, or being unfair. No, I am not being a detractor. If anything, it's a testament to him, because I'm saying he'll reach that number IN SPITE OF his knees, which is the real factor here.

You keep saying his knees are the big factor, even though he just proved all he needed to do was take half a year off. He didn't need surgery. His future now looks brighter than ever, as he's shown he knows how to deal with tendinitis and return with 100% healthy tendons (according his doctor).

So you've just seen a player win 2 slam titles (and 22 straight hardcourt matches), just after returning from a 7 month absence. And you don't think its unfair to say the maximum he will win his 3 more slam titles? That's what you said- 14-16. I call that unfair, to place such a limit on a player who just proved that you had no clue what he could do. That's my opinion. Deal with it, bicker over it with others....up to you....

 

[brokenshoelace]

The fact remains, on the topic of Nadal winning 18+ slam titles, Broken Shoelace is a detractor. That is all I said, and that will remain all the way to #18.

Again, just because I disagree about him getting 18 doesn't mean I'm a detractor on that topic. Because I actually think it's legitimately possible, however, I'm skeptical given his history of injuries. That doesn't make me a detractor, not even about this topic. It just means that while I do think it's possible, I have my reservations.

And you accused me of being a fake fan, and said "I'm not convinced" when someone assured you that I'm a Nadal fan. So no, that is not "all you said."

Stop being so sensitive just because people disagree with you. I think it says something that you've only been here for less than a week, and already, you've gotten on everyone's nerves. This is not a personal attack mind you, but an observation. A piece of advice if you will. Lighten up and learn to accept differing opinions. You can debate them (that's why we're here), just try to be less annoying.

You are the sensitive one, taking offense when I said you were a detractor on the topic of Nadal surpassing Federer's record. Uncle Toni thinks Nadal can reach or surpass Federer's record. So do I. You said 14-16 slam titles. You are a detractor, and that's just the reality of the situation. No criticism, just reality. Detractor is not an offensive word. I couldn't care less if you agree or disagree regarding 18 slams. I said you were a detractor, and you got very upset and made a big deal out of it.

detractor
noun [C] /dɪˈtræk.tər/ US /-tɚ/

Definition
› someone who criticizes something or someone, often unfairly:


Please, learn the meaning of the words you throw around. By saying Nadal will probably win 16 majors, I am in NO WAY criticizing him, or being unfair. No, I am not being a detractor. If anything, it's a testament to him, because I'm saying he'll reach that number IN SPITE OF his knees, which is the real factor here.

You keep saying his knees are the big factor, even though he just proved all he needed to do was take half a year off. He didn't need surgery. His future now looks brighter than ever, as he's shown he knows how to deal with tendinitis and return with 100% healthy tendons (according his doctor).

"All he has to do was take half a year off."

LOL, you say that as if it's no big deal. Taking half a year off is a serious issue. He missed two majors during that time. It's a testament to him that he's been able to get back so strong.

 

[Riotbeard]

The fact remains, on the topic of Nadal winning 18+ slam titles, Broken Shoelace is a detractor. That is all I said, and that will remain all the way to #18.

Again, just because I disagree about him getting 18 doesn't mean I'm a detractor on that topic. Because I actually think it's legitimately possible, however, I'm skeptical given his history of injuries. That doesn't make me a detractor, not even about this topic. It just means that while I do think it's possible, I have my reservations.

And you accused me of being a fake fan, and said "I'm not convinced" when someone assured you that I'm a Nadal fan. So no, that is not "all you said."

Stop being so sensitive just because people disagree with you. I think it says something that you've only been here for less than a week, and already, you've gotten on everyone's nerves. This is not a personal attack mind you, but an observation. A piece of advice if you will. Lighten up and learn to accept differing opinions. You can debate them (that's why we're here), just try to be less annoying.

You are the sensitive one, taking offense when I said you were a detractor on the topic of Nadal surpassing Federer's record. Uncle Toni thinks Nadal can reach or surpass Federer's record. So do I. You said 14-16 slam titles. You are a detractor, and that's just the reality of the situation. No criticism, just reality. Detractor is not an offensive word. I couldn't care less if you agree or disagree regarding 18 slams. I said you were a detractor, and you got very upset and made a big deal out of it.

detractor
noun [C] /dɪˈtræk.tər/ US /-tɚ/

Definition
› someone who criticizes something or someone, often unfairly:


Please, learn the meaning of the words you throw around. By saying Nadal will probably win 16 majors, I am in NO WAY criticizing him, or being unfair. No, I am not being a detractor. If anything, it's a testament to him, because I'm saying he'll reach that number IN SPITE OF his knees, which is the real factor here.

You keep saying his knees are the big factor, even though he just proved all he needed to do was take half a year off. He didn't need surgery. His future now looks brighter than ever, as he's shown he knows how to deal with tendinitis and return with 100% healthy tendons (according his doctor).

So you've just seen a player win 2 slam titles (and 22 straight hardcourt matches), just after returning from a 7 month absence. And you don't think its unfair to say the maximum he will win his 3 more slam titles? That's what you said- 14-16. I call that unfair, to place such a limit on a player who just proved that you had no clue what he could do. That's my opinion. Deal with it, bicker over it with others....up to you....

Broken isn't placing a limit, he is making a prediction. Broken has no control over how many slams nadal wins... I don't know how it is unfair, unless Broken personally interferes with Nadal's chances (something I wouldn't suggest, as the millionaire sports stars tend to have good security ).

 

[brokenshoelace]

Again, just because I disagree about him getting 18 doesn't mean I'm a detractor on that topic. Because I actually think it's legitimately possible, however, I'm skeptical given his history of injuries. That doesn't make me a detractor, not even about this topic. It just means that while I do think it's possible, I have my reservations.

And you accused me of being a fake fan, and said "I'm not convinced" when someone assured you that I'm a Nadal fan. So no, that is not "all you said."

Stop being so sensitive just because people disagree with you. I think it says something that you've only been here for less than a week, and already, you've gotten on everyone's nerves. This is not a personal attack mind you, but an observation. A piece of advice if you will. Lighten up and learn to accept differing opinions. You can debate them (that's why we're here), just try to be less annoying.

You are the sensitive one, taking offense when I said you were a detractor on the topic of Nadal surpassing Federer's record. Uncle Toni thinks Nadal can reach or surpass Federer's record. So do I. You said 14-16 slam titles. You are a detractor, and that's just the reality of the situation. No criticism, just reality. Detractor is not an offensive word. I couldn't care less if you agree or disagree regarding 18 slams. I said you were a detractor, and you got very upset and made a big deal out of it.

detractor
noun [C] /dɪˈtræk.tər/ US /-tɚ/

Definition
› someone who criticizes something or someone, often unfairly:


Please, learn the meaning of the words you throw around. By saying Nadal will probably win 16 majors, I am in NO WAY criticizing him, or being unfair. No, I am not being a detractor. If anything, it's a testament to him, because I'm saying he'll reach that number IN SPITE OF his knees, which is the real factor here.

You keep saying his knees are the big factor, even though he just proved all he needed to do was take half a year off. He didn't need surgery. His future now looks brighter than ever, as he's shown he knows how to deal with tendinitis and return with 100% healthy tendons (according his doctor).

So you've just seen a player win 2 slam titles (and 22 straight hardcourt matches), just after returning from a 7 month absence. And you don't think its unfair to say the maximum he will win his 3 more slam titles? That's what you said- 14-16. I call that unfair, to place such a limit on a player who just proved that you had no clue what he could do. That's my opinion. Deal with it, bicker over it with others....up to you....

Broken isn't placing a limit, he is making a prediction. Broken has no control over how many slams nadal wins... I don't know how it is unfair, unless Broken personally interferes with Nadal's chances (something I wouldn't suggest, as the millionaire sports stars tend to have good security ).

You underestimate me. I have my ways. Who do you think caused Nadal's 7 months absence?

 

[Riotbeard]

You are the sensitive one, taking offense when I said you were a detractor on the topic of Nadal surpassing Federer's record. Uncle Toni thinks Nadal can reach or surpass Federer's record. So do I. You said 14-16 slam titles. You are a detractor, and that's just the reality of the situation. No criticism, just reality. Detractor is not an offensive word. I couldn't care less if you agree or disagree regarding 18 slams. I said you were a detractor, and you got very upset and made a big deal out of it.

detractor
noun [C] /dɪˈtræk.tər/ US /-tɚ/

Definition
› someone who criticizes something or someone, often unfairly:


Please, learn the meaning of the words you throw around. By saying Nadal will probably win 16 majors, I am in NO WAY criticizing him, or being unfair. No, I am not being a detractor. If anything, it's a testament to him, because I'm saying he'll reach that number IN SPITE OF his knees, which is the real factor here.

You keep saying his knees are the big factor, even though he just proved all he needed to do was take half a year off. He didn't need surgery. His future now looks brighter than ever, as he's shown he knows how to deal with tendinitis and return with 100% healthy tendons (according his doctor).

So you've just seen a player win 2 slam titles (and 22 straight hardcourt matches), just after returning from a 7 month absence. And you don't think its unfair to say the maximum he will win his 3 more slam titles? That's what you said- 14-16. I call that unfair, to place such a limit on a player who just proved that you had no clue what he could do. That's my opinion. Deal with it, bicker over it with others....up to you....

Broken isn't placing a limit, he is making a prediction. Broken has no control over how many slams nadal wins... I don't know how it is unfair, unless Broken personally interferes with Nadal's chances (something I wouldn't suggest, as the millionaire sports stars tend to have good security ).

You underestimate me. I have my ways. Who do you think caused Nadal's 7 months absence?

Haha :laydownlaughing

 

[Front242]

Seriously this detractor nonsense is hilarious. NADAL2005RG: Broken is a huge Nadal fan and is merely expressing an opinion. You think a huge Nadal fan wouldn't be happy to see Nadal surpass Federer's slam count? Duh. Of course he would. Think of it this way, Serena Williams did indeed have an amazing 2 years (especially given her age and mileage from years of play) but the way the hype is blown all out of proportion people expect her to win everything. 2 slams this year was a fantastic year but still, she was more a favourite at Wimbledon than the French Open and guess which of those she actually won? She also lost rather poorly to Sloane Stephens at the AO when she was highly favoured to win the whole thing. Nadal has had 2 poor years at Wimbledon. Fed had a terrible year there too and indeed the US Open too. The bad losses happen more often the older the players get. That's why it obviously becomes more of an uphill battle to keep winning slam after slam. No pessimism is needed, common sense is though. If he wins 17 or 18 great, if not well he's still an all time great.

Momentum is a great and powerful thing for sure in tennis and sports in general but players just don't win everything they enter. So Broken_Shoelace is just being a lot more realistic than you. Nothing about that makes him a detractor in any way whatsoever, merely realistic. I'm sure he'd love to be proven wrong if Nadal does go on to surpass 17. All this silly gloating like "he may even reach 20+ or 22 though is just madness to most people, especially when you factor in that slam wins decrease as the years go by. Nadal is still extremely fast and that's a large part of his success. It's pretty risky drop shotting him 'cos he usually runs them down and hits a mad stop volley or lovely angled put away but as he slows down and loses a step that physical edge decreases. Hence the newer, younger guys may be able to win more points against him and the wins become harder. It happens to them all.

 

[Moxie]

Nice post, Front.

I just wanted to add that it's unnecessary for ND2005RG to get so upset when the issues of the knee(s) come up. Nowhere do I find, (in English or Spanish,) that Rafa's doctor has said that his knee is 100%. He was quoted to say, as recently as June, that it's in "good condition," and gets "a little better every day." However, Toni himself said, in the last week, that Rafael plays with pain, but that it's manageable.

While I'm unhappy when non-fans insist that Nadal won't be able to do "x-thing" going forward because of his tendency to tendinitis/knee injury and now this Hoffa's syndrome, I don't think it's unreasonable of fans and *actual* detractors, alike, to wonder if he stays healthy enough to play very long into his 30s, and to make predictions with that in mind.

Nadal winning #13 makes the dream of passing Roger a little more tangible, and it's hard to resist envisioning #18 right now. However, there are a lot of factors that go into that, and it's not just down to Rafa and/or his knees. There is the competition, and the notion of 'any-given-day,' as well. (For example, Rosol. However much someone wants to re-imagine that match, Rosol played out of his mind tennis, and Nadal lost. That's the "true," as Rafa would say. :snigger)