Will Nadal pass Federer?

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,208
Reactions
7,502
Points
113
federberg said:
Broken_Shoelace said:
federberg said:
I took a mature approach. I was going to wait until after the French. Clearly we all have to go with the decline theory now. Does that mean it's over for him no. Frankly my caution was based on respect of Nadal as an all time great champion. For you to try to use that against me, or as a sign of bias doesn't make much sense to me.

But as to the question of whether he's been unlucky... I take the same view as I would a wealthy man who doesn't win the lottery. I don't see him as unlucky. We are what we are and do, he has been extremely successful doing what he does. If the flipside is that he gets injured more than his rivals, it's just the cost of doing business to me. Luck has very little to do with it. Certainly not with the dearth of specific facts we have to hand.

Actually, it's flat out disrespectful to one of the greatest tennis players of all time to deny his decline when his results had been so piss poor, and he's physically depreciated so much. You flat out said there is NO EVIDENCE. Sugar coat it all you want, that was a flat out asinine claim. It's one thing if you'd said his declining results were not enough evidence, but to say "no evidence" is nothing short of intelligence-insulting. The guy was getting injured more, moving like crap, and having super crappy results in which he couldn't buy a win in the second half of last year. You think it's respectful to say THAT was no evidence of a decline?

But please, keep trying to justify the indefensible. It's quite hilarious.

I'm sure you didn't think he was unlucky to freakishly hurt his back early in a slam final. Honestly, your posts about Nadal are an insult to any person with brain cells.

It shocks me that genuinely intelligent people agree with your take, too. It's becoming contagious.

Well then.. at least I'm not insulting you :lolz:

Rafa never comes back from layoffs and hits the ground running. He has clearly had enough time to get back to speed, something we've seen before. I'm not going to claim I watch Rafa closely enough and divine at what angle he picks his behind to figure out if he's still the same Rafa. Instead of wasting my time watching him (something I don't particularly enjoy doing), I let the results speak. They've spoken, I have conceded he is not playing at the same level as before, as I believe I mentioned somewhere after he lost for a 2nd time to Fog or Almagro I forget who, I said the evidence was building up, but I would still wait. It would only take one good match to spark him. Clearly it didn't happen, although I would add that it wasn't so much the loss to Novak, but the manner of the loss which decided it for me. Why would I waste my time sugar coating to you anyway? :nono

Gimme a break. You're still the same dishonest halfwit who, when Rafa had only been back a single week in 2013, said that he looked fine and couldn't use the layoff as an excuse. I usually try steer clear of personal insults here, but you lie so routinely, I'd be surprised if you ever stand up...
 

Front242

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
23,011
Reactions
3,959
Points
113
Kieran said:
Look, regardless of peoples allegiances, and we all have them, only a troll or an idiot would deny that Nadal missing 3 out of the last 11 majors has affected his chances of actually winning those majors, and getting closer to Roger's total.

And if you think the cycle of withdrawal/recovery/return hasn't been at least debilitating and detrimental to his game, then I wonder what planet you live on...

Besides this year that's actually not the case at all and his PRP treatments have clearly been a massive success. Look no further than 2010 and late 2012 when he had them done and his results in 2010 and 2013 following the last one. 2 of his best years would indicate those treatments were a massive success to most people actually!
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
DarthFed said:
Broken_Shoelace said:
DarthFed said:
Lol, either you are poor at math (17-1=16 which is > 14) or you just completely backtracked following the incorrect statement "Pete's slam mark might still be a pipedream if it wasn't for Rafa's injuries" The argument was about how many slams Roger has won where Rafa was out with injury. And the answer is 2, including AO '06 before Rafa was relevant on hard courts. Again if you want to go all wild and say Rafa missing AO 06 is what won it for Roger then we still have 15 for Roger (since you seem inclined to hand him 09 Wimbledon, grass court monster that he is ;) )

No one on here has said Rafa missing tournaments has hurt his chances at winning majors. I think that's basic common sense.

Congrats, you've reached Cali level of stupid posts.

My statement about Pete's pipe dream record meant that had Nadal won RG 2009, history could have been very different. That point was so obvious. Fed fans including yourself were predicting doom and gloom after the AO final and that literal sob fest. Fed's RG win completely revitalized his year. Nadal winning that would have created an insane wave of momentum that Nadal was already carrying anyway (having won 3 masters and a slam, being world number 1, and having a huge edge over Roger). So Roger's RG win clearly carried over to Wimbledon, the US Open and the AO. Where he won 2 out of 3, and reached a final in between.

Nah, you've reached Cali level of retardation.

"Not nearly as much as Roger benefitted from Rafa being "less active" for so many stretches of his career. Let's not forget that the Sampras record could have remained a pipe dream had it not been for that.

Please, let's not play that game."

There's your response to Front. So now you're saying it all comes down to RG 09 (which frickin Nadal actually played) that would've signaled the end of Roger's career if he hadn't won. Let's remember that Roger had gotten to 5 straight GS finals by the time he reached that RG final. He wasn't going anywhere. And he wasn't staying stuck on 13 or even 14. That's a Kieran narrative that Roger was basically going to go away after RG 09 if he hadn't won that tournament.

Again, from the above it seems clear from the plural word "stretches" you are referring to all the majors Rafa has missed. You probably thought that there was a lot more than Wimbledon 09 that Roger won in Rafa's absence and are simply backtracking and getting all PO'ed for looking foolish.

A) I said, "could" not "would." Big difference.
B) You guys are hilariously hypocritical. Yes, say that in hindsight. Back then, you were all $hitting your pants and predicting Roger's demise, like you proceeded to do after every major loss in his career.
C) Stop being such an idiot. For the last god damn time, ROGER DOES NOT HAVE TO WIN A SLAM TO BENEFIT FROM RAFA'S ABSENCE! This thread talks about Nadal catching Roger. So, as any man with an IQ higher than a jellyfish can tell, if Nadal doesn't win a slam and Roger doesn't win it, Nadal still missed out on a chance to catch up to him.

How on earth is any of this supposed to be so difficult to understand? Jesus Christ.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,208
Reactions
7,502
Points
113
Front242 said:
Kieran said:
Look, regardless of peoples allegiances, and we all have them, only a troll or an idiot would deny that Nadal missing 3 out of the last 11 majors has affected his chances of actually winning those majors, and getting closer to Roger's total.

And if you think the cycle of withdrawal/recovery/return hasn't been at least debilitating and detrimental to his game, then I wonder what planet you live on...

Besides this year that's actually not the case at all and his PRP treatments have clearly been a massive success. Look no further than 2010 and 2013 when he had them done and his results those years.

Well he skipped the U.S. Open in 2012, and Oz in 2013, so there's two slams down the flusher in that period, brother. Are you disagreeing that skipping 3 of the last 11 hasn't affected him?

Are you saying that the periods of withdrawal/recovery/return have no effect on him? None of this has harmed his chances of winning more slams, including the ones he actually missed?
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
federberg said:
Rafa never comes back from layoffs and hits the ground running. He has clearly had enough time to get back to speed, something we've seen before. I'm not going to claim I watch Rafa closely enough and divine at what angle he picks his behind to figure out if he's still the same Rafa. Instead of wasting my time watching him (something I don't particularly enjoy doing), I let the results speak. They've spoken, I have conceded he is not playing at the same level as before, as I believe I mentioned somewhere after he lost for a 2nd time to Fog or Almagro I forget who, I said the evidence was building up, but I would still wait. It would only take one good match to spark him. Clearly it didn't happen, although I would add that it wasn't so much the loss to Novak, but the manner of the loss which decided it for me. Why would I waste my time sugar coating to you anyway? :nono

Is this for real?

OK, let's dissect this crap:

"Rafa never comes back from layoffs and hits the ground running."

Yeah, I mean, 2013 was so long ago that you forgot about it. I know you're older than me, but your memory can't possibly be that bad. Remember 2013? Nadal returns, has one hiccup in the final against Zebalos, then wins everything in sight. He won Indian Wells literally a month after his return, and had won two tournaments prior to that.

But keep making up facts.

". I'm not going to claim I watch Rafa closely enough and divine at what angle he picks his behind to figure out if he's still the same Rafa."

In that case, when people who clearly know about him talk, shut up and listen.

"Instead of wasting my time watching him (something I don't particularly enjoy doing), I let the results speak."

Holy $hit. This guy is clearly admitting he's talking about whether Nadal declined or not WITHOUT WATCHING HIM PLAY!

Double holy $hit. This guy says "he lets results speak" despite the fact that he claimed there was no evidence of a decline when Nadal's results were absolutely disastrous.

Not only am I legitimately debating this with someone who has no idea what he's talking about, but he has the balls to actually personally insult me in numerous posts despite the fact that he's making himself look like a legitimate tool. Pro tip, when you someone has no brain cells, and call them a "joke," make sure you remove the taste of you know what out of your mouth first. It's cluttering the forums.
 

Front242

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
23,011
Reactions
3,959
Points
113
Kieran said:
DarthFed said:
Kieran said:
The article said he received no medical treatment before going to Oz, and you said he received none at the AO. I wonder when the hospitalisation occurred. Could you be mixing this up with a much later visit to the hospital?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/federer-brushes-aside-food-poisoning/story-e6frf9if-1111115327468

I already know you'll be fixated on Roger talking about how he feels fine and is practicing well, (as though he'd talk about feeling bad if he was).
Oh, he lets us know when he's feeling bad. He's been very generous with his disclosures over the years, which isn't something I have a problem with.

Thanks for this article. It says he visited the hospital, which is different to being hospitalised. Lucky enough he was able to recover enough to play and muster up a terrible run to the semis :laydownlaughing

You do realize mono comes and goes right? Soderling was sweating like Michael Jackson in the kid's playground against Tomic when he lost at Wimbledon 2011 as his mono was affecting him very badly at that time. Later this same year in November Soderling was fine and annihilated Berdych in the semis of Bastad and Ferrer in the final and shortly after that it recurred and got so bad he had to quit and hasn't played in nearly five years as you know. Roger was visibly sweating like crazy too when he had mono at Oz '08 and he is NEVER drenched in sweat like Rafa is (after just hitting one ball usually, nose like a tap) so maybe, just maybe that was an indication he was actually pretty sick. :rolleyes:
 

Front242

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
23,011
Reactions
3,959
Points
113
Kieran said:
Front242 said:
Kieran said:
Look, regardless of peoples allegiances, and we all have them, only a troll or an idiot would deny that Nadal missing 3 out of the last 11 majors has affected his chances of actually winning those majors, and getting closer to Roger's total.

And if you think the cycle of withdrawal/recovery/return hasn't been at least debilitating and detrimental to his game, then I wonder what planet you live on...

Besides this year that's actually not the case at all and his PRP treatments have clearly been a massive success. Look no further than 2010 and 2013 when he had them done and his results those years.

Well he skipped the U.S. Open in 2012, and Oz in 2013, so there's two slams down the flusher in that period, brother. Are you disagreeing that skipping 3 of the last 11 hasn't affected him?

Are you saying that the periods of withdrawal/recovery/return have no effect on him? None of this has harmed his chances of winning more slams, including the ones he actually missed?

Frankly this has been covered already but skipping Oz '13 for a stomach virus was really 100% him and his team's choice as there's no way in the wide world he couldn't have played when the tournament stated 18 days later. I understand he said he wasn't ready for best of 5 but that was totally up to him and there was no reason why he shouldn't have played his way into form against nobodies in the early rounds. I'm not gonna feel sorry for a guy who needs 18 frickin days to get over a sore tummy.
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,664
Reactions
5,742
Points
113
Broken_Shoelace said:
federberg said:
Rafa never comes back from layoffs and hits the ground running. He has clearly had enough time to get back to speed, something we've seen before. I'm not going to claim I watch Rafa closely enough and divine at what angle he picks his behind to figure out if he's still the same Rafa. Instead of wasting my time watching him (something I don't particularly enjoy doing), I let the results speak. They've spoken, I have conceded he is not playing at the same level as before, as I believe I mentioned somewhere after he lost for a 2nd time to Fog or Almagro I forget who, I said the evidence was building up, but I would still wait. It would only take one good match to spark him. Clearly it didn't happen, although I would add that it wasn't so much the loss to Novak, but the manner of the loss which decided it for me. Why would I waste my time sugar coating to you anyway? :nono

Is this for real?

OK, let's dissect this crap:

"Rafa never comes back from layoffs and hits the ground running."

Yeah, I mean, 2013 was so long ago that you forgot about it. I know you're older than me, but your memory can't possibly be that bad. Remember 2013? Nadal returns, has one hiccup in the final against Zebalos, then wins everything in sight. He won Indian Wells literally a month after his return, and had won two tournaments prior to that.

But keep making up facts.

". I'm not going to claim I watch Rafa closely enough and divine at what angle he picks his behind to figure out if he's still the same Rafa."

In that case, when people who clearly know about him talk, shut up and listen.

"Instead of wasting my time watching him (something I don't particularly enjoy doing), I let the results speak."

Holy $hit. This guy is clearly admitting he's talking about whether Nadal declined or not WITHOUT WATCHING HIM PLAY!

Double holy $hit. This guy says "he lets results speak" despite the fact that he claimed there was no evidence of a decline when Nadal's results were absolutely disastrous.

Not only am I legitimately debating this with someone who has no idea what he's talking about, but he has the balls to actually personally insult me in numerous posts despite the fact that he's making himself look like a legitimate tool. Pro tip, when you someone has no brain cells, and call them a "joke," make sure you remove the taste of you know what out of your mouth first. It's cluttering the forums.

You do like to get hysterical don't you? :D
The guy is a rhythm player, the more games he plays the better his game. To form any conclusions about how he's going to perform in slams particularly RG his seat of power because of stumbles before said tournament is hasty in my view. And as for the rest, feel free to take what I said literally, I guess I opened myself up to that one! :snicker I watch enough of his matches to be able to make a determination of where his game is at. But... I repeat.. to form any conclusions about him before giving him a chance to do his thing at RG would have been premature. By the way if I was going to listen to anyone on these boards I wouldn't be listening to the likes of you and the maggot. No balance, all bias, there would be no value in it :nono
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,733
Reactions
3,487
Points
113
Broken_Shoelace said:
DarthFed said:
Broken_Shoelace said:
Congrats, you've reached Cali level of stupid posts.

My statement about Pete's pipe dream record meant that had Nadal won RG 2009, history could have been very different. That point was so obvious. Fed fans including yourself were predicting doom and gloom after the AO final and that literal sob fest. Fed's RG win completely revitalized his year. Nadal winning that would have created an insane wave of momentum that Nadal was already carrying anyway (having won 3 masters and a slam, being world number 1, and having a huge edge over Roger). So Roger's RG win clearly carried over to Wimbledon, the US Open and the AO. Where he won 2 out of 3, and reached a final in between.

Nah, you've reached Cali level of retardation.

"Not nearly as much as Roger benefitted from Rafa being "less active" for so many stretches of his career. Let's not forget that the Sampras record could have remained a pipe dream had it not been for that.

Please, let's not play that game."

There's your response to Front. So now you're saying it all comes down to RG 09 (which frickin Nadal actually played) that would've signaled the end of Roger's career if he hadn't won. Let's remember that Roger had gotten to 5 straight GS finals by the time he reached that RG final. He wasn't going anywhere. And he wasn't staying stuck on 13 or even 14. That's a Kieran narrative that Roger was basically going to go away after RG 09 if he hadn't won that tournament.

Again, from the above it seems clear from the plural word "stretches" you are referring to all the majors Rafa has missed. You probably thought that there was a lot more than Wimbledon 09 that Roger won in Rafa's absence and are simply backtracking and getting all PO'ed for looking foolish.

A) I said, "could" not "would." Big difference.
B) You guys are hilariously hypocritical. Yes, say that in hindsight. Back then, you were all $hitting your pants and predicting Roger's demise, like you proceeded to do after every major loss in his career.
C) Stop being such an idiot. For the last god damn time, ROGER DOES NOT HAVE TO WIN A SLAM TO BENEFIT FROM RAFA'S ABSENCE! This thread talks about Nadal catching Roger. So, as any man with an IQ higher than a jellyfish can tell, if Nadal doesn't win a slam and Roger doesn't win it, Nadal still missed out on a chance to catch up to him.

How on earth is any of this supposed to be so difficult to understand? Jesus Christ.

A. Yeah, so Roger "could" have fallen off the face of the Earth if Rafa had played RG...whoops he did play. But ok, if we award Rafa a bunch of matches he didn't win then it is apparently a realistic possibility Roger would've gone haywire and started losing in the 1st round of every major. And just what % chance is your "could" in this context? Is this different from me saying Roger "could" have won the calendar year slam in 2008 if he didn't get mono? Or if Roger was sitting on 13 slams at 2009 USO I might argue Roger "could" have dug in and pulled one out that he pretty much gave away.

B. In hindsight pretty much everyone was wrong, Roger's play went down exponentially in 2008 and continued the first part of 2009. I doubt most said he was done, but it was clear to everyone he was past his best. And I was critical because that's what I do, I get pissed when he loses and sometimes speak nonsense for a few hours. I repeat that the only time I've thought his career might be coming to an end was after USO 2011. I didn't think he'd retire but most were wondering if his head/heart was still in the game and if it wasn't then 2012 would seem to be the "ride into the sunset" year. If you recall I was one of the few who thought 2013 was just a blip and he would return to decent form in 2014. That's the period everyone was truly writing him off.

C. You can insult all you want but you're the one being a tard here. Yes the topic of the thread is about NADAL's potential slam count and whether or not he could catch Roger. But, like 99% of the other threads on this board, we got sidetracked and your comment in question is clearly about ROGER's slam count where he supposedly "could have" become a total nobody if we award Rafa 4 more wins. Now if that is hard for you to follow then I don't know what to say. "Jesus Christ"
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,208
Reactions
7,502
Points
113
Front242 said:
Kieran said:
Front242 said:
Besides this year that's actually not the case at all and his PRP treatments have clearly been a massive success. Look no further than 2010 and 2013 when he had them done and his results those years.

Well he skipped the U.S. Open in 2012, and Oz in 2013, so there's two slams down the flusher in that period, brother. Are you disagreeing that skipping 3 of the last 11 hasn't affected him?

Are you saying that the periods of withdrawal/recovery/return have no effect on him? None of this has harmed his chances of winning more slams, including the ones he actually missed?

Frankly this has been covered already but skipping Oz '13 for a stomach virus was really 100% him and his team's choice as there's no way in the wide world he couldn't have played when the tournament stated 18 days later. I understand he said he wasn't ready for best of 5 but that was totally up to him and there was no reason why he shouldn't have played his way into form against nobodies in the early rounds. I'm not gonna feel sorry for a guy who needs 18 frickin days to get over a sore tummy.

:laydownlaughing You feel sorry for a bloke who had a runny nose. :snicker

But I think even you're coming back around to discussing the the OP again, which is great: Since Wimbledon 2012, Rafa has been affected by a cycle of various injuries, missed slams, and is currently struggling with his return, which has made what once seem like now look highly improbable.

Agreed?
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,664
Reactions
5,742
Points
113
DarthFed said:
Broken_Shoelace said:
DarthFed said:
Nah, you've reached Cali level of retardation.

"Not nearly as much as Roger benefitted from Rafa being "less active" for so many stretches of his career. Let's not forget that the Sampras record could have remained a pipe dream had it not been for that.

Please, let's not play that game."

There's your response to Front. So now you're saying it all comes down to RG 09 (which frickin Nadal actually played) that would've signaled the end of Roger's career if he hadn't won. Let's remember that Roger had gotten to 5 straight GS finals by the time he reached that RG final. He wasn't going anywhere. And he wasn't staying stuck on 13 or even 14. That's a Kieran narrative that Roger was basically going to go away after RG 09 if he hadn't won that tournament.

Again, from the above it seems clear from the plural word "stretches" you are referring to all the majors Rafa has missed. You probably thought that there was a lot more than Wimbledon 09 that Roger won in Rafa's absence and are simply backtracking and getting all PO'ed for looking foolish.

A) I said, "could" not "would." Big difference.
B) You guys are hilariously hypocritical. Yes, say that in hindsight. Back then, you were all $hitting your pants and predicting Roger's demise, like you proceeded to do after every major loss in his career.
C) Stop being such an idiot. For the last god damn time, ROGER DOES NOT HAVE TO WIN A SLAM TO BENEFIT FROM RAFA'S ABSENCE! This thread talks about Nadal catching Roger. So, as any man with an IQ higher than a jellyfish can tell, if Nadal doesn't win a slam and Roger doesn't win it, Nadal still missed out on a chance to catch up to him.

How on earth is any of this supposed to be so difficult to understand? Jesus Christ.

A. Yeah, so Roger "could" have fallen off the face of the Earth if Rafa had played RG...whoops he did play. But ok, if we award Rafa a bunch of matches he didn't win then it is apparently a realistic possibility Roger would've gone haywire and started losing in the 1st round of every major. And just what % chance is your "could" in this context? Is this different from me saying Roger "could" have won the calendar year slam in 2008 if he didn't get mono? Or if Roger was sitting on 13 slams at 2009 USO I might argue Roger "could" have dug in and pulled one out that he pretty much gave away.

B. In hindsight pretty much everyone was wrong, Roger's play went down exponentially in 2008 and continued the first part of 2009. I doubt most said he was done, but it was clear to everyone he was past his best. And I was critical because that's what I do, I get pissed when he loses and sometimes speak nonsense for a few hours. I repeat that the only time I've thought his career might be coming to an end was after USO 2011. I didn't think he'd retire but most were wondering if his head/heart was still in the game and if it wasn't then 2012 would seem to be the "ride into the sunset" year. If you recall I was one of the few who thought 2013 was just a blip and he would return to decent form in 2014. That's the period everyone was truly writing him off.

C. You can insult all you want but you're the one being a tard here. Yes the topic of the thread is about NADAL's potential slam count and whether or not he could catch Roger. But, like 99% of the other threads on this board, we got sidetracked and your comment in question is clearly about ROGER's slam count where he supposedly "could have" become a total nobody if we award Rafa 4 more wins. Now if that is hard for you to follow then I don't know what to say. "Jesus Christ"

DF I think we'll have to accept we'll always hear excuses from this lot. That's just the way they are. We should be charitable, but it's tough being that way when people are obnoxious all the time. We have reality after all. All they have is woulda coulda
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,208
Reactions
7,502
Points
113
federberg said:
But... I repeat.. to form any conclusions about him before giving him a chance to do his thing at RG would have been premature.

There you go again, slithering about the place, lying through your teeth. :cover It seems to come naturally to you. In 2013, he was back a single week and you were being "premature". :cover

When it comes to Rafa, you're like a bloke talking about the fella who's been rogering his missus... :laydownlaughing
 

britbox

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
27,512
Reactions
6,344
Points
113
Location
Gold Coast, Australia
I don't think Roger goes AWOL in 2009 under any circumstances...

2008 RG... He suffers the most humiliating defeat of his career.

BUT

He makes the finals at Wimbledon. Where he suffers the most heartbreaking defeat of his career.

BUT

He makes the finals at the USO and takes the title.

THEN

He suffers a tough defeat in the finals at the AO in 5 against his arch-nemesis

BUT

he makes another RG final, this time winning it.

THEN

he makes another Wimbledon final and wins that.

BUT

He loses the USO in a disappointing final against Del Potro.


The pattern is... Roger was was making finals whether Nadal was around or not around. One thing you can say about Roger until recently was that he was consistent in reaching the business end of proceedings regardless of what was going on with Rafael Nadal.

That semi-final streak wasn't a mirage and had little to do with Nadal either.

I don't think Nadal's timeout in 2009 re-energized Roger. He was always there or thereabouts. Nadal was missing for one major... and based on their Wimbledon histories I don't think it can be assumed that Nadal would have taken that title.
 

Front242

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
23,011
Reactions
3,959
Points
113
Kieran said:
Front242 said:
Kieran said:
Well he skipped the U.S. Open in 2012, and Oz in 2013, so there's two slams down the flusher in that period, brother. Are you disagreeing that skipping 3 of the last 11 hasn't affected him?

Are you saying that the periods of withdrawal/recovery/return have no effect on him? None of this has harmed his chances of winning more slams, including the ones he actually missed?

Frankly this has been covered already but skipping Oz '13 for a stomach virus was really 100% him and his team's choice as there's no way in the wide world he couldn't have played when the tournament stated 18 days later. I understand he said he wasn't ready for best of 5 but that was totally up to him and there was no reason why he shouldn't have played his way into form against nobodies in the early rounds. I'm not gonna feel sorry for a guy who needs 18 frickin days to get over a sore tummy.

:laydownlaughing You feel sorry for a bloke who had a runny nose. :snicker

But I think even you're coming back around to discussing the the OP again, which is great: Since Wimbledon 2012, Rafa has been affected by a cycle of various injuries, missed slams, and is currently struggling with his return, which has made what once seem like now look highly improbable.

Agreed?

Well count Oz '13 as just his own choice to stay home and play with Xisca and her barbie dolls 'cos no one needs 18 days to get over a sore tummy. He's not really struggling with his return from being off, he's just declining. He looks great some days, others not so great. Federer's the same, the day to day consistency is long gone. Happens to them all. You can see he's not as explosive as he was in his prime and he's getting to shots a step slower than before and his timing is off a bit. Hence why we're seeing more shanks, especially on the forehand wing. Federer became a shank machine too when this happened to him. Rafa's had tendinitis from running down too many balls that he probably could've let go by him more than once and would've preserved his joints a bit better if he didn't attempt to run after every single ball, but as I mentioned already many, many players have tendinitis and use strapping, sprays and anti inflammatories all year long so I really don't feel anymore sorry for him than other players with the same little nags.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,208
Reactions
7,502
Points
113
Front242 said:
Kieran said:
Front242 said:
Frankly this has been covered already but skipping Oz '13 for a stomach virus was really 100% him and his team's choice as there's no way in the wide world he couldn't have played when the tournament stated 18 days later. I understand he said he wasn't ready for best of 5 but that was totally up to him and there was no reason why he shouldn't have played his way into form against nobodies in the early rounds. I'm not gonna feel sorry for a guy who needs 18 frickin days to get over a sore tummy.

:laydownlaughing You feel sorry for a bloke who had a runny nose. :snicker

But I think even you're coming back around to discussing the the OP again, which is great: Since Wimbledon 2012, Rafa has been affected by a cycle of various injuries, missed slams, and is currently struggling with his return, which has made what once seem like now look highly improbable.

Agreed?

Well count Oz '13 as just his own choice to stay home and play with Xisca and her barbie dolls 'cos no one needs 18 days to get over a sore tummy. He's not really struggling with his return from being off, he's just declining. He looks great some days, others not so great. Federer's the same, the day to day consistency is long gone. Happens to them all. You can see he's not as explosive as he was in his prime and he's getting to shots a step slower than before and his timing is off a bit. Hence why we're seeing more shanks, especially on the forehand wing. Federer became a shank machine too when this happened to him. Rafa's had tendinitis from running down too many balls that he probably could've let go by him more than once and would've preserved his joints a bit better if he didn't attempt to run after every single ball, but as I mentioned already many, many players have tendinitis and use strapping, sprays and anti inflammatories all year long so I really don't feel anymore sorry for him than other players with the same little nags.

Try be objective, fella. We'll leave aside your rogerfederer.com suppositions about Oz in 2013, and go back to the question I asked: since 2012, 3 of 11 slams have been skipped, a litany of injuries including back spasms in the Oz final, wrist, appendix, and now he's been a shell of himself for the first six months of this year.

Do you think that any of this could have had an adverse effect on his attempts to add to his total of majors in that period?
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,664
Reactions
5,742
Points
113
Front242 said:
Kieran said:
Front242 said:
Frankly this has been covered already but skipping Oz '13 for a stomach virus was really 100% him and his team's choice as there's no way in the wide world he couldn't have played when the tournament stated 18 days later. I understand he said he wasn't ready for best of 5 but that was totally up to him and there was no reason why he shouldn't have played his way into form against nobodies in the early rounds. I'm not gonna feel sorry for a guy who needs 18 frickin days to get over a sore tummy.

:laydownlaughing You feel sorry for a bloke who had a runny nose. :snicker

But I think even you're coming back around to discussing the the OP again, which is great: Since Wimbledon 2012, Rafa has been affected by a cycle of various injuries, missed slams, and is currently struggling with his return, which has made what once seem like now look highly improbable.

Agreed?

Well count Oz '13 as just his own choice to stay home and play with Xisca and her barbie dolls 'cos no one needs 18 days to get over a sore tummy. He's not really struggling with his return from being off, he's just declining. He looks great some days, others not so great. Federer's the same, the day to day consistency is long gone. Happens to them all. You can see he's not as explosive as he was in his prime and he's getting to shots a step slower than before and his timing is off a bit. Hence why we're seeing more shanks, especially on the forehand wing. Federer became a shank machine too when this happened to him. Rafa's had tendinitis from running down too many balls that he probably could've let go by him more than once and would've preserved his joints a bit better if he didn't attempt to run after every single ball, but as I mentioned already many, many players have tendinitis and use strapping, sprays and anti inflammatories all year long so I really don't feel anymore sorry for him than other players with the same little nags.

Isn't it funny how this thread is supposed to be about "Will Nadal pass Federer?" and we have a litany of excuses, and protests that he 'woulda coulda' if not for this that and the other. Pathetic from grown men... deal with the reality. He ain't.. just appreciate what he's done for goodness sakes :nono
 

Front242

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
23,011
Reactions
3,959
Points
113
Kieran said:
Front242 said:
Kieran said:
:laydownlaughing You feel sorry for a bloke who had a runny nose. :snicker

But I think even you're coming back around to discussing the the OP again, which is great: Since Wimbledon 2012, Rafa has been affected by a cycle of various injuries, missed slams, and is currently struggling with his return, which has made what once seem like now look highly improbable.

Agreed?

Well count Oz '13 as just his own choice to stay home and play with Xisca and her barbie dolls 'cos no one needs 18 days to get over a sore tummy. He's not really struggling with his return from being off, he's just declining. He looks great some days, others not so great. Federer's the same, the day to day consistency is long gone. Happens to them all. You can see he's not as explosive as he was in his prime and he's getting to shots a step slower than before and his timing is off a bit. Hence why we're seeing more shanks, especially on the forehand wing. Federer became a shank machine too when this happened to him. Rafa's had tendinitis from running down too many balls that he probably could've let go by him more than once and would've preserved his joints a bit better if he didn't attempt to run after every single ball, but as I mentioned already many, many players have tendinitis and use strapping, sprays and anti inflammatories all year long so I really don't feel anymore sorry for him than other players with the same little nags.

Try be objective, fella. We'll leave aside your rogerfederer.com suppositions about Oz in 2013, and go back to the question I asked: since 2012, 3 of 11 slams have been skipped, a litany of injuries including back spasms in the Oz final, wrist, appendix, and now he's been a shell of himself for the first six months of this year.

Do you think that any of this could have had an adverse effect on his attempts to add to his total of majors in that period?

Even if it did, whose fault is it? Roger's? No. His own from running around like a Duracell bunny too much which resulted in downtime because of him overexerting himself? Gee, I wonder, could it be the latter? He's missed 2 unless you want to treat him like a little girl as I said regarding Oz '13 'cos no one is gonna feel sorry for a grown man who needs 18 days to get over a sore tummy. That was 100% choice there missing that one. I don't feel too sorry for him missing the 2012 US Open as he really reaped massive rewards from the PRP treatment again there for the whole 2013 season. USO '14 was again his own doing with the wrist. The amount of spin he puts on the ball it was a wonder it didn't happen sooner. He got away lightly missing just one slam for a wrist injury when it's pretty much (for now anyway) ended Del Potro's career. The adverse effect has been all his own doing, especially choosing to skip a major for a sore tummy needing 18 days to recover from :rolleyes:

The resentment from Nadal fans that Federer has never missed a slam is pointless. Roger hasn't missed any 'cos he's careful and doesn't overexert himself and not 'cos of "luck" or good genetics. Nadal is not careful with his play. End of. You reap what you sow.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,208
Reactions
7,502
Points
113
Good stuff! :clap

Again, leaving aside the fanbase stuff about Oz in 2013, or the underestimated value of Rogers impeccable ability to remain largely aloof from normal wear and tear, I think we have some measure of agreement here. As much as is possible, right? ;)
 

Front242

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
23,011
Reactions
3,959
Points
113
Kieran said:
Good stuff! :clap

Again, leaving aside the fanbase stuff about Oz in 2013, or the underestimated value of Rogers impeccable ability to remain largely aloof from normal wear and tear, I think we have some measure of agreement here. As much as is possible, right? ;)

Fanbase stuff? Who needs 18 days to get over a sore tummy ffs?! The Nadal fans and Nadal himself expect us to feel sorry for him missing that one which he could easily have played? Sorry, no pass on that one. The opponents in the early rounds would've played him into form in no time. That was 100% his own choice missing that.
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,664
Reactions
5,742
Points
113
Front242 said:
Kieran said:
Good stuff! :clap

Again, leaving aside the fanbase stuff about Oz in 2013, or the underestimated value of Rogers impeccable ability to remain largely aloof from normal wear and tear, I think we have some measure of agreement here. As much as is possible, right? ;)

Fanbase stuff? Who needs 18 days to get over a sore tummy ffs?! The Nadal fans and Nadal himself expect us to feel sorry for him missing that one which he could easily have played? Sorry, no pass on that one. The opponents in the early rounds would've played him into form in no time. That was 100% his own choice missing that.

if it was a sore tummy :angel: