tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28
From: El Dude
Subject: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their

Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
all surfaces.




 
Date: 30 Jan 2009 14:40:33
From: Joe Ramirez
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
On Jan 30, 5:15=A0am, "john" <jli...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> "Dave Hazelwood" <the_big_kah...@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>
> news:u1k5o4h26e46na529c22q3sel1habq2lne@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:54:11 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> > wrote:
>
> >>john wrote:
> >>> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> >>>news:4982b9a0$0$14845$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> >>>> Dave Hazelwood wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
> >>>>> <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he wi=
ll
> >>>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. =A0The most complete player in histo=
ry.
> >>>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it =
in
> >>>>>> all surfaces.
>
> >>>>> He will always be known as a CHEATER.
>
> >>>> If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the =
guy
> >>>> who was clearly better than him. =A0No coulda/woulda about it as we =
have
> >>>> all
> >>>> the matches on tape to review.
>
> >>> Sorry, if Federer won more slam than Rafa at the end of their respect=
ive
> >>> career then
> >>> Federer will be regard as the better player regardless of your opinio=
n
> >>> of
> >>> him. =A0 Krajicek
> >>> was never regard as Sampras equal or better because their slam
> >>> differential
> >>> is 14:1,
> >>> no could/woulda argument is sufficient to argue against slam numbers
> >>> that is
> >>> the only
> >>> important criteria in judging who is the superior player.
>
> >>Krajicek was 1-1 with Sampras at slams. =A0There was never any suggesti=
on
> >>K was a better player.
>
> > Federer is 1-0 and there is.
>
> Krajicek beat Sampras in straight set at Wimbledon, bluest of blue chips =
so
> that is better
> than Sampras' USO win. =A0Obvously Krajicek just was not assed about USO =
so he
> turn up
> quarter assed and still took a set....

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.tennis/msg/d8896426fc1722e9

Joe Ramirez


  
Date: 31 Jan 2009 10:22:52
From: john
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their entire careers

"Joe Ramirez" <josephmramirez@netzero.com > wrote in message
news:f5356cf5-b750-4b22-af07-bd5693a3994c@f33g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 30, 5:15 am, "john" <jli...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> "Dave Hazelwood" <the_big_kah...@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>
> news:u1k5o4h26e46na529c22q3sel1habq2lne@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:54:11 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> > wrote:
>
> >>john wrote:
> >>> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> >>>news:4982b9a0$0$14845$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> >>>> Dave Hazelwood wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
> >>>>> <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he
> >>>>>> will
> >>>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
> >>>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>> all surfaces.
>
> >>>>> He will always be known as a CHEATER.
>
> >>>> If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the
> >>>> guy
> >>>> who was clearly better than him. No coulda/woulda about it as we have
> >>>> all
> >>>> the matches on tape to review.
>
> >>> Sorry, if Federer won more slam than Rafa at the end of their
> >>> respective
> >>> career then
> >>> Federer will be regard as the better player regardless of your opinion
> >>> of
> >>> him. Krajicek
> >>> was never regard as Sampras equal or better because their slam
> >>> differential
> >>> is 14:1,
> >>> no could/woulda argument is sufficient to argue against slam numbers
> >>> that is
> >>> the only
> >>> important criteria in judging who is the superior player.
>
> >>Krajicek was 1-1 with Sampras at slams. There was never any suggestion
> >>K was a better player.
>
> > Federer is 1-0 and there is.
>
> Krajicek beat Sampras in straight set at Wimbledon, bluest of blue chips
> so
> that is better
> than Sampras' USO win. Obvously Krajicek just was not assed about USO so
> he
> turn up
> quarter assed and still took a set....

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.tennis/msg/d8896426fc1722e9

Joe Ramirez



Joe, there is some serious Tier 1 reasoning for losing a match....




 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 19:42:39
From: Joe Ramirez
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
On Jan 29, 10:25=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> TT wrote:
> > El Dude wrote:
> >> On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com> wrote:
> >>> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
> >>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. =A0The most complete player in history=
.
> >>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
> >>>> all surfaces.
> >>> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over
> >>> Federer or
> >>> Sampras.
>
> >>> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of
> >>> the
> >>> early 90's)
>
> >> But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?
>
> > Exactly. That's why people don't give credit to Agassi as much as he
> > would deserve since he completed his career slam at a point when all
> > already thought/knew he was inferior to his fellow rival Sampras.
>
> Wilander did it twice on all surfaces & gets even less credit than Agassi=
.

Wilander won slams on all surfaces, but he did not win all four slams.
That's a huge difference. And he never even made a semifinal, let
alone a final, at the slam he was missing. Also, two of Wilander's AO
titles came before that tournament had been fully rehabilitated.

Joe Ramirez



  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 05:14:55
From: *skriptis
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their ?entire careers

"Joe Ramirez" <josephmramirez@netzero.com > wrote in message
news:2592653e-f36b-4428-9cfa-249acfc3eb88@e3g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 29, 10:25 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> TT wrote:
> > El Dude wrote:
> >> On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com> wrote:
> >>> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
> >>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
> >>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
> >>>> all surfaces.
> >>> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over
> >>> Federer or
> >>> Sampras.
>
> >>> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of
> >>> the
> >>> early 90's)
>
> >> But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?
>
> > Exactly. That's why people don't give credit to Agassi as much as he
> > would deserve since he completed his career slam at a point when all
> > already thought/knew he was inferior to his fellow rival Sampras.
>
> Wilander did it twice on all surfaces & gets even less credit than Agassi.

Wilander won slams on all surfaces, but he did not win all four slams.
That's a huge difference. And he never even made a semifinal, let
alone a final, at the slam he was missing. Also, two of Wilander's AO
titles came before that tournament had been fully rehabilitated.

***

Surface wise-it doesn't matter.
A grass is a grass..if you want to look "who won biggest titles ie slams on
different surfaces" then that guy doesn't have to win all 4 slams. Does he?
It's a about showing the ability. And Wilander certainly showed.


It's kinda confusing for some because Agassi belongs to these two groups.


1. Guys who won CGS, Perry, Budge, Laver, Emerson, Agassi. The fact they
all but Agassi won on just 2 surfaces doesn't matter. It's a matter of
"completing the set". Not very huge thing unless it's a CYGS of course.


2. Other thing is to give him credit for being triple-suface slam champion,
alongside Connors and Wilander. The fact those two guys won only 3 slams out
of 4 hardly matter in terms of "showing ability you could win biggest events
on all surfaces".
Techically you could object and say that "Connors benefited from having clay
slam in his home country which is different than winning FO", but then you
put question marks alongside every player who wins his home slam. After all,
even Agassi just won on 3 different surfaces, not 4.


So if you're particulary fond of Agassi you could combine these two list,
make an intersection of the two lists and his name would pop out as the only
name.


But, like Whisper said, it's a novelty record and you could make a tons of
these.
Eg. if Nadal wins this AO, we could say " he is the first guy to hold three
slam titles on three diferent surfaces".


In the end, the best and only right to do is to sit in a chair, enjoy some
good tennis, and apply 7543 after the final is over.




 
Date: 30 Jan 2009 00:07:42
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their entire careers
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
<surfbandido@aol.com > wrote:

>
>Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>all surfaces.


He will always be known as a CHEATER.


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 19:26:01
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
Dave Hazelwood wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
> <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>> all surfaces.
>
>
> He will always be known as a CHEATER.


If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the guy
who was clearly better than him. No coulda/woulda about it as we have
all the matches on tape to review.



   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 20:47:51
From: john
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their entire careers

"Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:4982b9a0$0$14845$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Dave Hazelwood wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
>> <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>> all surfaces.
>>
>>
>> He will always be known as a CHEATER.
>
>
> If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the guy
> who was clearly better than him. No coulda/woulda about it as we have all
> the matches on tape to review.
>

Sorry, if Federer won more slam than Rafa at the end of their respective
career then
Federer will be regard as the better player regardless of your opinion of
him. Krajicek
was never regard as Sampras equal or better because their slam differential
is 14:1,
no could/woulda argument is sufficient to argue against slam numbers that is
the only
important criteria in judging who is the superior player.




    
Date: 30 Jan 2009 20:54:11
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
john wrote:
> "Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:4982b9a0$0$14845$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>> Dave Hazelwood wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
>>> <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>>> all surfaces.
>>>
>>> He will always be known as a CHEATER.
>>
>> If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the guy
>> who was clearly better than him. No coulda/woulda about it as we have all
>> the matches on tape to review.
>>
>
> Sorry, if Federer won more slam than Rafa at the end of their respective
> career then
> Federer will be regard as the better player regardless of your opinion of
> him. Krajicek
> was never regard as Sampras equal or better because their slam differential
> is 14:1,
> no could/woulda argument is sufficient to argue against slam numbers that is
> the only
> important criteria in judging who is the superior player.
>
>


Krajicek was 1-1 with Sampras at slams. There was never any suggestion
K was a better player.



     
Date: 30 Jan 2009 21:12:50
From: john
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their entire careers

"Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:4982ce4a$0$14891$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> john wrote:
>> "Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:4982b9a0$0$14845$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>> Dave Hazelwood wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
>>>> <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>>>> all surfaces.
>>>>
>>>> He will always be known as a CHEATER.
>>>
>>> If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the guy
>>> who was clearly better than him. No coulda/woulda about it as we have
>>> all the matches on tape to review.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, if Federer won more slam than Rafa at the end of their respective
>> career then
>> Federer will be regard as the better player regardless of your opinion of
>> him. Krajicek
>> was never regard as Sampras equal or better because their slam
>> differential is 14:1,
>> no could/woulda argument is sufficient to argue against slam numbers that
>> is the only
>> important criteria in judging who is the superior player.
>
>
> Krajicek was 1-1 with Sampras at slams. There was never any suggestion K
> was a better player.

Head to head 6:4 and head to head pre-injury 6:2, even at 1:1 it does not
make Krajicek
equal or better than Sampras low IQ midget. Sampras was better because of
his total number
of slam wins. And if Federer has more slam than Nadal then he is the better
player regardless
of their head to head count.
>




      
Date: 30 Jan 2009 21:15:23
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
john wrote:
> "Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:4982ce4a$0$14891$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>> john wrote:
>>> "Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:4982b9a0$0$14845$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>> Dave Hazelwood wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
>>>>> <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>>>>> all surfaces.
>>>>> He will always be known as a CHEATER.
>>>> If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the guy
>>>> who was clearly better than him. No coulda/woulda about it as we have
>>>> all the matches on tape to review.
>>>>
>>> Sorry, if Federer won more slam than Rafa at the end of their respective
>>> career then
>>> Federer will be regard as the better player regardless of your opinion of
>>> him. Krajicek
>>> was never regard as Sampras equal or better because their slam
>>> differential is 14:1,
>>> no could/woulda argument is sufficient to argue against slam numbers that
>>> is the only
>>> important criteria in judging who is the superior player.
>>
>> Krajicek was 1-1 with Sampras at slams. There was never any suggestion K
>> was a better player.
>
> Head to head 6:4 and head to head pre-injury 6:2, even at 1:1 it does not
> make Krajicek
> equal or better than Sampras low IQ midget. Sampras was better because of
> his total number
> of slam wins. And if Federer has more slam than Nadal then he is the better
> player regardless
> of their head to head count.
>
>


You can't seriously suggest the Fed v Rafa situation is the same as
Sampras v Krajicek?

Or can you?



       
Date: 30 Jan 2009 21:51:17
From: john
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their entire careers

"Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:4982d342$0$14891$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> john wrote:
>> "Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:4982ce4a$0$14891$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>> john wrote:
>>>> "Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:4982b9a0$0$14845$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>>> Dave Hazelwood wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
>>>>>> <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>>>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>>>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>>>>>> all surfaces.
>>>>>> He will always be known as a CHEATER.
>>>>> If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the
>>>>> guy who was clearly better than him. No coulda/woulda about it as we
>>>>> have all the matches on tape to review.
>>>>>
>>>> Sorry, if Federer won more slam than Rafa at the end of their
>>>> respective career then
>>>> Federer will be regard as the better player regardless of your opinion
>>>> of him. Krajicek
>>>> was never regard as Sampras equal or better because their slam
>>>> differential is 14:1,
>>>> no could/woulda argument is sufficient to argue against slam numbers
>>>> that is the only
>>>> important criteria in judging who is the superior player.
>>>
>>> Krajicek was 1-1 with Sampras at slams. There was never any suggestion
>>> K was a better player.
>>
>> Head to head 6:4 and head to head pre-injury 6:2, even at 1:1 it does
>> not make Krajicek
>> equal or better than Sampras low IQ midget. Sampras was better because
>> of his total number
>> of slam wins. And if Federer has more slam than Nadal then he is the
>> better player regardless
>> of their head to head count.
>>
>>
>
>
> You can't seriously suggest the Fed v Rafa situation is the same as
> Sampras v Krajicek?
>
> Or can you?

The situation between fed vs rafa is different but like in case of Samrpas
vs Krajicek
the better player has better overall slam record but inferior h2h record.
You can't
be serious suggesting that with Rafa's 5 slam, 4 of them FO and 1 Wimbledon
is better
than Federer's 13 slam.
>




     
Date: 30 Jan 2009 10:03:07
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their entire careers
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:54:11 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>john wrote:
>> "Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:4982b9a0$0$14845$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>> Dave Hazelwood wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
>>>> <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>>>> all surfaces.
>>>>
>>>> He will always be known as a CHEATER.
>>>
>>> If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the guy
>>> who was clearly better than him. No coulda/woulda about it as we have all
>>> the matches on tape to review.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, if Federer won more slam than Rafa at the end of their respective
>> career then
>> Federer will be regard as the better player regardless of your opinion of
>> him. Krajicek
>> was never regard as Sampras equal or better because their slam differential
>> is 14:1,
>> no could/woulda argument is sufficient to argue against slam numbers that is
>> the only
>> important criteria in judging who is the superior player.
>>
>>
>
>
>Krajicek was 1-1 with Sampras at slams. There was never any suggestion
>K was a better player.


Federer is 1-0 and there is.


      
Date: 30 Jan 2009 21:15:06
From: john
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their entire careers

"Dave Hazelwood" <the_big_kahuna@mailcity.com > wrote in message
news:u1k5o4h26e46na529c22q3sel1habq2lne@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:54:11 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>>john wrote:
>>> "Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:4982b9a0$0$14845$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>> Dave Hazelwood wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
>>>>> <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>>>>> all surfaces.
>>>>>
>>>>> He will always be known as a CHEATER.
>>>>
>>>> If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the guy
>>>> who was clearly better than him. No coulda/woulda about it as we have
>>>> all
>>>> the matches on tape to review.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry, if Federer won more slam than Rafa at the end of their respective
>>> career then
>>> Federer will be regard as the better player regardless of your opinion
>>> of
>>> him. Krajicek
>>> was never regard as Sampras equal or better because their slam
>>> differential
>>> is 14:1,
>>> no could/woulda argument is sufficient to argue against slam numbers
>>> that is
>>> the only
>>> important criteria in judging who is the superior player.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>Krajicek was 1-1 with Sampras at slams. There was never any suggestion
>>K was a better player.
>
>
> Federer is 1-0 and there is.

Krajicek beat Sampras in straight set at Wimbledon, bluest of blue chips so
that is better
than Sampras' USO win. Obvously Krajicek just was not assed about USO so he
turn up
quarter assed and still took a set....




   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 08:54:03
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their entire careers
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 19:26:01 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>Dave Hazelwood wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:14:28 -0800 (PST), El Dude
>> <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>> all surfaces.
>>
>>
>> He will always be known as a CHEATER.
>
>
>If Fed goes on to become achievement goat Rafa will be known as the guy
>who was clearly better than him. No coulda/woulda about it as we have
>all the matches on tape to review.


ditto for Agassi over Sampras.


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 14:22:25
From: El Dude
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
On Jan 29, 12:53=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> El Dude wrote:
> > On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com> wrote:
> >> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
> >>> be the the undisputable GOAT. =A0The most complete player in history.
> >>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
> >>> all surfaces.
> >> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over Federe=
r or
> >> Sampras.
>
> >> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of =
the
> >> early 90's)
>
> > But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?
>
> Exactly. That's why people don't give credit to Agassi as much as he
> would deserve since he completed his career slam at a point when all
> already thought/knew he was inferior to his fellow rival Sampras.


I think Agassi was more talented than Federer and Sampras. If it
weren't for the mental breakdown he had in the middle of his career he
would have won the same amount of GS as Sampras or Federer. His tennis
was well suited for any surface just like Nadal. If Nadal keeps his
shit together and all those money hungry super models away from his
bed he'll achieve what Agassi couldn't.



>
> --
> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"



  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 18:44:36
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
El Dude wrote:
> On Jan 29, 12:53 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> El Dude wrote:
>>> On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com> wrote:
>>>> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>>>> all surfaces.
>>>> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over Federer or
>>>> Sampras.
>>>> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of the
>>>> early 90's)
>>> But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?
>> Exactly. That's why people don't give credit to Agassi as much as he
>> would deserve since he completed his career slam at a point when all
>> already thought/knew he was inferior to his fellow rival Sampras.
>
>
> I think Agassi was more talented than Federer and Sampras.



Pity there isn't a single tennis expert anywhere who agrees.


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 22:25:19
From: jdeluise
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their ?entire careers

On 29-Jan-2009, El Dude <surfbandido@aol.com > wrote:

> I think Agassi was more talented than Federer and Sampras. If it
> weren't for the mental breakdown he had in the middle of his career he
> would have won the same amount of GS as Sampras or Federer. His tennis
> was well suited for any surface just like Nadal. If Nadal keeps his
> shit together and all those money hungry super models away from his
> bed he'll achieve what Agassi couldn't.

It doesn't really work that way. You can't change someone's timeline and
then expect the same things to happen later on in their career.


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 00:29:13
From: TT
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
jdeluise wrote:
> On 29-Jan-2009, El Dude <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> I think Agassi was more talented than Federer and Sampras. If it
>> weren't for the mental breakdown he had in the middle of his career he
>> would have won the same amount of GS as Sampras or Federer. His tennis
>> was well suited for any surface just like Nadal. If Nadal keeps his
>> shit together and all those money hungry super models away from his
>> bed he'll achieve what Agassi couldn't.
>
> It doesn't really work that way. You can't change someone's timeline and
> then expect the same things to happen later on in their career.

How you know?

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


    
Date: 29 Jan 2009 22:38:51
From: jdeluise
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their ?entire careers

On 29-Jan-2009, TT <gold@Olympics.org > wrote:

> jdeluise wrote:
> > On 29-Jan-2009, El Dude <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I think Agassi was more talented than Federer and Sampras. If it
> >> weren't for the mental breakdown he had in the middle of his career he
> >> would have won the same amount of GS as Sampras or Federer. His tennis
> >> was well suited for any surface just like Nadal. If Nadal keeps his
> >> shit together and all those money hungry super models away from his
> >> bed he'll achieve what Agassi couldn't.
> >
> > It doesn't really work that way. You can't change someone's timeline
> > and
> > then expect the same things to happen later on in their career.
>
> How you know?

Well obviously because I've done it before, duh!


     
Date: 30 Jan 2009 00:49:22
From: TT
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
jdeluise wrote:
> On 29-Jan-2009, TT <gold@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
>> jdeluise wrote:
>>> On 29-Jan-2009, El Dude <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think Agassi was more talented than Federer and Sampras. If it
>>>> weren't for the mental breakdown he had in the middle of his career he
>>>> would have won the same amount of GS as Sampras or Federer. His tennis
>>>> was well suited for any surface just like Nadal. If Nadal keeps his
>>>> shit together and all those money hungry super models away from his
>>>> bed he'll achieve what Agassi couldn't.
>>> It doesn't really work that way. You can't change someone's timeline
>>> and
>>> then expect the same things to happen later on in their career.
>> How you know?
>
> Well obviously because I've done it before, duh!

Hope you didn't date your mother though...

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


      
Date: 29 Jan 2009 23:00:44
From: jdeluise
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their ?entire careers

On 29-Jan-2009, TT <gold@Olympics.org > wrote:

> jdeluise wrote:
> > On 29-Jan-2009, TT <gold@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >
> >> jdeluise wrote:
> >>> On 29-Jan-2009, El Dude <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I think Agassi was more talented than Federer and Sampras. If it
> >>>> weren't for the mental breakdown he had in the middle of his career
> >>>> he
> >>>> would have won the same amount of GS as Sampras or Federer. His
> >>>> tennis
> >>>> was well suited for any surface just like Nadal. If Nadal keeps his
> >>>> shit together and all those money hungry super models away from his
> >>>> bed he'll achieve what Agassi couldn't.
> >>> It doesn't really work that way. You can't change someone's timeline
> >>> and
> >>> then expect the same things to happen later on in their career.
> >> How you know?
> >
> > Well obviously because I've done it before, duh!
>
> Hope you didn't date your mother though...

Nope, yours. I was expecting you would turn out better this time too:(


       
Date: 31 Jan 2009 00:30:40
From: TT
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
jdeluise wrote:
> On 29-Jan-2009, TT <gold@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
>> jdeluise wrote:
>>> On 29-Jan-2009, TT <gold@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> jdeluise wrote:
>>>>> On 29-Jan-2009, El Dude <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think Agassi was more talented than Federer and Sampras. If it
>>>>>> weren't for the mental breakdown he had in the middle of his career
>>>>>> he
>>>>>> would have won the same amount of GS as Sampras or Federer. His
>>>>>> tennis
>>>>>> was well suited for any surface just like Nadal. If Nadal keeps his
>>>>>> shit together and all those money hungry super models away from his
>>>>>> bed he'll achieve what Agassi couldn't.
>>>>> It doesn't really work that way. You can't change someone's timeline
>>>>> and
>>>>> then expect the same things to happen later on in their career.
>>>> How you know?
>>> Well obviously because I've done it before, duh!
>> Hope you didn't date your mother though...
>
> Nope, yours. I was expecting you would turn out better this time too:(

That's VERY rude. I would disable you if you said that to my face.
Unmoderated Usenet must be your heaven.

And no, my intention was not to call you motherfucker - which you
obviously are - I just made a good willed comment relating on one of the
Back to the Future -series.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


        
Date: 30 Jan 2009 23:17:35
From: jdeluise
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their ?entire careers

On 30-Jan-2009, TT <gold@Olympics.org > wrote:

> jdeluise wrote:
> > On 29-Jan-2009, TT <gold@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >
> >> jdeluise wrote:
> >>> On 29-Jan-2009, TT <gold@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> jdeluise wrote:
> >>>>> On 29-Jan-2009, El Dude <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I think Agassi was more talented than Federer and Sampras. If it
> >>>>>> weren't for the mental breakdown he had in the middle of his career
> >>>>>> he
> >>>>>> would have won the same amount of GS as Sampras or Federer. His
> >>>>>> tennis
> >>>>>> was well suited for any surface just like Nadal. If Nadal keeps his
> >>>>>> shit together and all those money hungry super models away from his
> >>>>>> bed he'll achieve what Agassi couldn't.
> >>>>> It doesn't really work that way. You can't change someone's
> >>>>> timeline
> >>>>> and
> >>>>> then expect the same things to happen later on in their career.
> >>>> How you know?
> >>> Well obviously because I've done it before, duh!
> >> Hope you didn't date your mother though...
> >
> > Nope, yours. I was expecting you would turn out better this time too:(
>
> That's VERY rude. I would disable you if you said that to my face.
> Unmoderated Usenet must be your heaven.

Sorry to see you so angry, but I think this is really between you and your
glass jaw.

>
> And no, my intention was not to call you motherfucker - which you
> obviously are - I just made a good willed comment relating on one of the
> Back to the Future -series.

I think you need to get a grip. Or perhaps a job....


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 09:07:08
From: El Dude
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
On Jan 29, 9:50=A0am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com > wrote:
> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
> > be the the undisputable GOAT. =A0The most complete player in history.
> > Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
> > all surfaces.
>
> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over Federer o=
r
> Sampras.
>
> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of the
> early 90's)

But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?. Everybody forgets how
YOUNG Nadal is and how much he can achieve.. Nadal is not a big time
veteran whose time is running out. Nadal's entire career is ahead of
him just like Murray's. If Federer manages to get to the top of the
totem pole in tennis it will be a very brief kingdom. By the time
Nadal's career is over people will think of players like Federer or
Sampras like we think today about Agassi or Mcenroe. Great players in
their time that were clearly overtaken by their successors.

Everybody is so obssesed with Federer right now that they fail to see
the rocket that is coming behind him. After all at 22 Federer was
still eating his own bugers to put it plainly. Compare that to Nadal.


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 07:13:01
From: john
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their ?entire careers

"El Dude" <surfbandido@aol.com > wrote in message
news:812499e3-ed8d-4ec6-853f-746af7181654@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com > wrote:
> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
> > be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
> > Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
> > all surfaces.
>
> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over Federer or
> Sampras.
>
> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of the
> early 90's)

But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?. Everybody forgets how
YOUNG Nadal is and how much he can achieve.. Nadal is not a big time
veteran whose time is running out. Nadal's entire career is ahead of
him just like Murray's. If Federer manages to get to the top of the
totem pole in tennis it will be a very brief kingdom. By the time
Nadal's career is over people will think of players like Federer or
Sampras like we think today about Agassi or Mcenroe. Great players in
their time that were clearly overtaken by their successors.

Everybody is so obssesed with Federer right now that they fail to see
the rocket that is coming behind him. After all at 22 Federer was
still eating his own bugers to put it plainly. Compare that to Nadal.



It will be how many slam Nadal win at the end of his career that matters.
At the end
of his career nobody care how young Nadal was back in 2009 and how much he
can
achieved back in 2009. To say Federer's stay at top for five years is a
very brief
kingdom showed how little you know about tennis and of all the No.1s in
history of
rankings only few had longer reign at top than Federer. Until Nadal
can achieve more success than Sampras and Federer he will always remembered
as
a lesser great compare to the other 2. Yes sure at 22 Federer was still
eating his own
burger but he won more 13 slam in less than 4.5 years while Nadal can only
win 5 in
the same time period. How many slam did Nadal has when he was 18, after
all at 18
Becker already had 2 Wimbledons and Nadal was still eating his Nandos,
compare that
to Becker. ( Very silly to compare slam win base on age).




   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 14:51:41
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
john wrote:
> "El Dude" <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:812499e3-ed8d-4ec6-853f-746af7181654@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com> wrote:
>> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>> all surfaces.
>> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over Federer or
>> Sampras.
>>
>> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of the
>> early 90's)
>
> But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?. Everybody forgets how
> YOUNG Nadal is and how much he can achieve.. Nadal is not a big time
> veteran whose time is running out. Nadal's entire career is ahead of
> him just like Murray's. If Federer manages to get to the top of the
> totem pole in tennis it will be a very brief kingdom. By the time
> Nadal's career is over people will think of players like Federer or
> Sampras like we think today about Agassi or Mcenroe. Great players in
> their time that were clearly overtaken by their successors.
>
> Everybody is so obssesed with Federer right now that they fail to see
> the rocket that is coming behind him. After all at 22 Federer was
> still eating his own bugers to put it plainly. Compare that to Nadal.
>
>
>
> It will be how many slam Nadal win at the end of his career that matters.
> At the end
> of his career nobody care how young Nadal was back in 2009 and how much he
> can
> achieved back in 2009. To say Federer's stay at top for five years is a
> very brief
> kingdom showed how little you know about tennis and of all the No.1s in
> history of
> rankings only few had longer reign at top than Federer. Until Nadal
> can achieve more success than Sampras and Federer he will always remembered
> as
> a lesser great compare to the other 2. Yes sure at 22 Federer was still
> eating his own
> burger but he won more 13 slam in less than 4.5 years while Nadal can only
> win 5 in
> the same time period. How many slam did Nadal has when he was 18, after
> all at 18
> Becker already had 2 Wimbledons and Nadal was still eating his Nandos,
> compare that
> to Becker. ( Very silly to compare slam win base on age).
>
>


Fedfuckers do it all the time - they say things like 'It's correct to
compare Sampras/Fed at same age...' - yet fail to apply this same logic
to Rafa?

Guess that's why we call them Fedfuckers.



    
Date: 30 Jan 2009 20:43:27
From: john
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their ?entire careers

"Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:49827954$0$14894$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> john wrote:
>> "El Dude" <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:812499e3-ed8d-4ec6-853f-746af7181654@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com> wrote:
>>> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>>> all surfaces.
>>> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over Federer
>>> or
>>> Sampras.
>>>
>>> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of
>>> the
>>> early 90's)
>>
>> But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?. Everybody forgets how
>> YOUNG Nadal is and how much he can achieve.. Nadal is not a big time
>> veteran whose time is running out. Nadal's entire career is ahead of
>> him just like Murray's. If Federer manages to get to the top of the
>> totem pole in tennis it will be a very brief kingdom. By the time
>> Nadal's career is over people will think of players like Federer or
>> Sampras like we think today about Agassi or Mcenroe. Great players in
>> their time that were clearly overtaken by their successors.
>>
>> Everybody is so obssesed with Federer right now that they fail to see
>> the rocket that is coming behind him. After all at 22 Federer was
>> still eating his own bugers to put it plainly. Compare that to Nadal.
>>
>>
>>
>> It will be how many slam Nadal win at the end of his career that matters.
>> At the end
>> of his career nobody care how young Nadal was back in 2009 and how much
>> he can
>> achieved back in 2009. To say Federer's stay at top for five years is
>> a very brief
>> kingdom showed how little you know about tennis and of all the No.1s in
>> history of
>> rankings only few had longer reign at top than Federer. Until Nadal
>> can achieve more success than Sampras and Federer he will always
>> remembered as
>> a lesser great compare to the other 2. Yes sure at 22 Federer was still
>> eating his own
>> burger but he won more 13 slam in less than 4.5 years while Nadal can
>> only win 5 in
>> the same time period. How many slam did Nadal has when he was 18, after
>> all at 18
>> Becker already had 2 Wimbledons and Nadal was still eating his Nandos,
>> compare that
>> to Becker. ( Very silly to compare slam win base on age).
>
>
> Fedfuckers do it all the time - they say things like 'It's correct to
> compare Sampras/Fed at same age...' - yet fail to apply this same logic to
> Rafa?
>
> Guess that's why we call them Fedfuckers.

If at the end of Federer's career he has less number of slam than Sampras
then it is pretty
obvious that Sampras has better achievement than Federer and he still has
until Fed can
win 14 or more slams. Stop the fedfucker nonsense if you can't produce a
meaningful post
stop posting, your latest post highlighted that your single digit IQ...
>




    
Date: 30 Jan 2009 04:04:51
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their ?entire careers
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 14:51:41 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>john wrote:
>> "El Dude" <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:812499e3-ed8d-4ec6-853f-746af7181654@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com> wrote:
>>> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>>> all surfaces.
>>> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over Federer or
>>> Sampras.
>>>
>>> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of the
>>> early 90's)
>>
>> But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?. Everybody forgets how
>> YOUNG Nadal is and how much he can achieve.. Nadal is not a big time
>> veteran whose time is running out. Nadal's entire career is ahead of
>> him just like Murray's. If Federer manages to get to the top of the
>> totem pole in tennis it will be a very brief kingdom. By the time
>> Nadal's career is over people will think of players like Federer or
>> Sampras like we think today about Agassi or Mcenroe. Great players in
>> their time that were clearly overtaken by their successors.
>>
>> Everybody is so obssesed with Federer right now that they fail to see
>> the rocket that is coming behind him. After all at 22 Federer was
>> still eating his own bugers to put it plainly. Compare that to Nadal.
>>
>>
>>
>> It will be how many slam Nadal win at the end of his career that matters.
>> At the end
>> of his career nobody care how young Nadal was back in 2009 and how much he
>> can
>> achieved back in 2009. To say Federer's stay at top for five years is a
>> very brief
>> kingdom showed how little you know about tennis and of all the No.1s in
>> history of
>> rankings only few had longer reign at top than Federer. Until Nadal
>> can achieve more success than Sampras and Federer he will always remembered
>> as
>> a lesser great compare to the other 2. Yes sure at 22 Federer was still
>> eating his own
>> burger but he won more 13 slam in less than 4.5 years while Nadal can only
>> win 5 in
>> the same time period. How many slam did Nadal has when he was 18, after
>> all at 18
>> Becker already had 2 Wimbledons and Nadal was still eating his Nandos,
>> compare that
>> to Becker. ( Very silly to compare slam win base on age).
>>
>>
>
>
>Fedfuckers do it all the time - they say things like 'It's correct to
>compare Sampras/Fed at same age...' - yet fail to apply this same logic
>to Rafa?
>
>Guess that's why we call them Fedfuckers.


Fine let's start by comparing Sampras to Rafa at the same age.


   
Date: 29 Jan 2009 22:29:49
From: TT
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
john wrote:
> "El Dude" <surfbandido@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:812499e3-ed8d-4ec6-853f-746af7181654@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com> wrote:
>> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>> all surfaces.
>> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over Federer or
>> Sampras.
>>
>> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of the
>> early 90's)
>
> But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?. Everybody forgets how
> YOUNG Nadal is and how much he can achieve.. Nadal is not a big time
> veteran whose time is running out. Nadal's entire career is ahead of
> him just like Murray's. If Federer manages to get to the top of the
> totem pole in tennis it will be a very brief kingdom. By the time
> Nadal's career is over people will think of players like Federer or
> Sampras like we think today about Agassi or Mcenroe. Great players in
> their time that were clearly overtaken by their successors.
>
> Everybody is so obssesed with Federer right now that they fail to see
> the rocket that is coming behind him. After all at 22 Federer was
> still eating his own bugers to put it plainly. Compare that to Nadal.
>
>
>
> It will be how many slam Nadal win at the end of his career that matters.
> At the end
> of his career nobody care how young Nadal was back in 2009 and how much he
> can
> achieved back in 2009. To say Federer's stay at top for five years is a
> very brief
> kingdom showed how little you know about tennis and of all the No.1s in
> history of
> rankings only few had longer reign at top than Federer. Until Nadal
> can achieve more success than Sampras and Federer he will always remembered
> as
> a lesser great compare to the other 2. Yes sure at 22 Federer was still
> eating his own
> burger but he won more 13 slam in less than 4.5 years while Nadal can only
> win 5 in
> the same time period. How many slam did Nadal has when he was 18, after
> all at 18
> Becker already had 2 Wimbledons and Nadal was still eating his Nandos,
> compare that
> to Becker. ( Very silly to compare slam win base on age).
>
>

I see El Dude's post upset "John" gravely.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 19:53:48
From: TT
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
El Dude wrote:
> On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com> wrote:
>> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>> all surfaces.
>> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over Federer or
>> Sampras.
>>
>> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of the
>> early 90's)
>
> But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?

Exactly. That's why people don't give credit to Agassi as much as he
would deserve since he completed his career slam at a point when all
already thought/knew he was inferior to his fellow rival Sampras.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 14:25:19
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in
TT wrote:
> El Dude wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 9:50 am, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com> wrote:
>>> El Dude <surfband...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
>>>> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
>>>> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
>>>> all surfaces.
>>> Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over
>>> Federer or
>>> Sampras.
>>>
>>> (and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of
>>> the
>>> early 90's)
>>
>> But he didn't do it when he was 22, did he?
>
> Exactly. That's why people don't give credit to Agassi as much as he
> would deserve since he completed his career slam at a point when all
> already thought/knew he was inferior to his fellow rival Sampras.
>


Wilander did it twice on all surfaces & gets even less credit than Agassi.

What you guys have to realize is these are novelty type records - the
real game is slam wins with the quality factoring - ie 7543.



 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 11:50:37
From: Javier Gonzalez
Subject: Re: Nadal can achieve at 22 what Federer and Sampras couldn't in their ?entire careers
El Dude <surfbandido@aol.com > wrote:
>
> Win a Grand Slam in all 3 different surfaces. And that's why he will
> be the the undisputable GOAT. The most complete player in history.
> Not only he will win more than Federe and Sampras but he'll do it in
> all surfaces.

Agassi won on all surfaces - look how many people rate him over Federer or
Sampras.

(and he also got to win on fast and slow HC, and in the fast grass of the
early 90's)