El Dude
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 10,160
- Reactions
- 5,842
- Points
- 113
I said you're crabby because you're going after several people and you're wanting to forge a disagreement with me, when there really isn't much to go. You're trying to tie me to a strong opinion that you find wrong, so you can argue. I don't feel strongly about any of this, so there isn't anything to defend, but you're going at me like I'm in court trying to win a case. But whatevs.I'm not looking for a fight. I'm holding your feet to the fire, is all. When you feel the heat, you just say i'm "crabby?"
But you've forgotten that we were trying to compare Nadal and Alcaraz, at the same age on grass, and you said that Alcaraz would have beaten him "handily." I made a good argument for "not handily," which you deflected, with "match-up v. Fed" and Alcaraz v Novak. I'm saying, that's apples and oranges. I think you lost track of that one.
I'm also impressed by Alcaraz, and yes, the rest is just conjecture.
I got it here:
View attachment 9622
___________________
Maybe you didn't read me correctly.
Again, it isn't a strong opinion, just the sense I have of it. There are no hard numbers to prove one was better than the other on grass at the same age, and ultimately I have no idea. But, in the end, Alcaraz has the two Wimbledon trophies at 21, so he's certainly more accomplished. I'd love to have been able to see 21 year old Alcaraz and Nadal duke it out, but we'll never see that, unfortunately. Except in fantasy tennis land!