Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nadal is better than Federer all time.

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by deliveryman View Post
    Yes, which is why he has had the injuries he does. He has the knees of a 30 year old.

    Do you realize how stupid you sound?

    You're trying to compare someone who has won 6 Grand Slam Titles to someone has has won 16.
    Considering Federer is 5 years older than Nadal I don't think I sound stupid at all. I'm not saying Federer is ****, he is the second best player of all time, Nadal just happens to be the best in my view.

    It sounds stupid of you not to recognize that at 23 Nadal has won 5 more grand slams than Federer did at that age.

    Comment


    • #22
      Andy Murray is better than both of 'em.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by Ben_London View Post
        Considering Federer is 5 years older than Nadal I don't think I sound stupid at all. I'm not saying Federer is ****, he is the second best player of all time, Nadal just happens to be the best in my view.

        It sounds stupid of you not to recognize that at 23 Nadal has won 5 more grand slams than Federer did at that age.
        So what?

        Federer's prime wasn't when he was 18-22 like it looks like for Rafa. Federer's prime was when he was 23-27. He was a late bloomer.

        If Rafa doesn't surpass Federer in Grand Slams, what does it matter who had more when they were 23?

        Like I said, as it stands right now, Federer is winning 16-6.
        Last edited by deliveryman; 05-16-2010, 03:59 PM.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by MUG View Post
          Andy Murray is better than both of 'em.
          Andy Murray beat a doubles partnership of Federer and Nadal while he was paired with a ******ed goat...true story.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by deliveryman View Post
            So what?

            Federer's prime wasn't when he was 18-22 like it looks like for Rafa. Federer's prime was when he was 23-27. He was a late bloomer.

            If Rafa doesn't surpass Federer in Grand Slams, what does it matter who had more when they were 23?
            Only the next few years will tell that.

            Nadal just broke 2 more records today. The most Masters of all time 18 and the first ever player to win 3 Masters in a row.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by Ben_London View Post
              Only the next few years will tell that.

              Nadal just broke 2 more records today. The most Masters of all time 18 and the first ever player to win 3 Masters in a row.
              16 - 6

              Please keep that in mind. That is all.

              Comment


              • #27
                Ken Norton must be greater than Muhammad Ali.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by deliveryman View Post
                  16 - 6

                  Please keep that in mind. That is all.
                  Well of course, he's been playing for considerably longer.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by deliveryman View Post
                    Ken Norton must be greater than Muhammad Ali.
                    What relevence does that have?

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Ben_London View Post
                      Well of course, he's been playing for considerably longer.
                      So until Rafael Nadal EXCEEDS him, you cannot make that claim.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP