Re: Djoker is NOT a nemesis
RzR
> Scott wrote:
>> it is pretty ironic for Rafa that he has his own nemesis to haunt his
>> dreams like he did Roger's.
>
> there is no way Djoker is a nemesis of Nadal, it's nothing like what
> Nadal is/was to Fed, Nadal beat Fed since he was a teenage and Fed
> number 1 in the world - this is not the case with Djoker who's only
> become super-human in the past few months thanks to his 'gluten-free'
> diet, before that their record was fairly even.
he chicken-choked him 5 times in a row...its even worse than nadal-fed
Iceberg
Court_1
It is worse than Nadal/Fed in some ways. Fed at least has a vast tool
chest of shots to at least try with Nadal. What weapons does Nadal
have against Djokovic?
The similarity is that both Federer and Nadal's brains turn to mush
when playing Nadal/Djokovic respectively.
Ocean
Nole had to wait until Fedal declined to finally reach #1, pffft. Not
that special. Had Nole become #1 in 2008 then it would have been
cooler....
Javier González
Nadal is peak or nearly peak. He started this season as undisputed #1
and holding 3 slams... Djokovic just matured later.
Nadal is lucky he started winning slams young, before Nole hit his
prime. Otherwise he'd have to be content with a few FOs.
Problem? ;)
Ocean
Hmmm. Nadal almost lost to Isner at RG!!!! ISNER, ffs. Proof he is
declining..... Peak Nadal would never lose sets to Isner at RG. Nope.
Never.
Joe Ramirez
A/k/a "came into his own." :)
Sakari Lund
No point to talk about Djokovic before December 2010. This is the new
Djokovic, and he is definitely a nemesis of Nadal. At least with
Fed/Nadal outside clay Fed always either won or made it very close.
Nadal at the moment has absolutely no answers to Djokovic on any
surface, and it seems to be getting worse all the time.
Iceberg
yes, Djoker hasn't won an FO yet and lost against aging well over 30
Fed.
uly...@mscomm.com
bob
<josephm...@netzero.com> wrote:
>On Jul 6, 3:38锟絧m, Javier Gonz锟絣ez <jagon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 6, 2:37锟絧m, Ocean <ocean.nau...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 6 jul, 16:08, Court_1 <Olympia0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > On Jul 6, 9:51锟絘m, RzR <2r4z...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > On 6.7.2011. 15:33, Iceberg wrote:
>>
>> > > > > Scott wrote:
>> > > > >> it is pretty ironic for Rafa that he has his own nemesis to haunt his
>> > > > >> dreams like he did Roger's.
>>
>> > > > > there is no way Djoker is a nemesis of Nadal, it's nothing like what
>> > > > > Nadal is/was to Fed, Nadal beat Fed since he was a teenage and Fed
>> > > > > number 1 in the world - this is not the case with Djoker who's only
>> > > > > become super-human in the past few months thanks to his 'gluten-free'
>> > > > > diet, before that their record was fairly even.
>>
>> > > > he chicken-choked him 5 times in a row...its even worse than nadal-fed
>>
>> > > It is worse than Nadal/Fed in some ways. Fed at least has a vast tool
>> > > chest of shots to at least try with Nadal. What weapons does Nadal
>> > > have against Djokovic?
>> > > The similarity is that both Federer and Nadal's brains turn to mush
>> > > when playing Nadal/Djokovic respectively.
>>
>> > Nole had to wait until Fedal declined to finally reach #1, pffft. Not
>> > that special. Had Nole become #1 in 2008 then it would have been
>> > cooler....
>>
>> Nadal is peak or nearly peak. He started this season as undisputed #1
>> and holding 3 slams... Djokovic just matured later.
>
>A/k/a "came into his own." :)
you mean fed is actually 3rd in the BOOE??
bob
CloudsRest
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:57:56 -0700 (PDT), Joe Ramirez
>
>
>
> >On Jul 6, 3:38 pm, Javier González <jagon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Jul 6, 2:37 pm, Ocean <ocean.nau...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > On 6 jul, 16:08, Court_1 <Olympia0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> >> > > > On 6.7.2011. 15:33, Iceberg wrote:
>
> >> > > > > Scott wrote:
> >> > > > >> it is pretty ironic for Rafa that he has his own nemesis to haunt his
> >> > > > >> dreams like he did Roger's.
>
> >> > > > > there is no way Djoker is a nemesis of Nadal, it's nothing like what
> >> > > > > Nadal is/was to Fed, Nadal beat Fed since he was a teenage and Fed
> >> > > > > number 1 in the world - this is not the case with Djoker who's only
> >> > > > > become super-human in the past few months thanks to his 'gluten-free'
> >> > > > > diet, before that their record was fairly even.
>
> >> > > > he chicken-choked him 5 times in a row...its even worse than nadal-fed
>
> >> > > It is worse than Nadal/Fed in some ways. Fed at least has a vast tool
> >> > > chest of shots to at least try with Nadal. What weapons does Nadal
> >> > > have against Djokovic?
> >> > > The similarity is that both Federer and Nadal's brains turn to mush
> >> > > when playing Nadal/Djokovic respectively.
>
> >> > Nole had to wait until Fedal declined to finally reach #1, pffft. Not
> >> > that special. Had Nole become #1 in 2008 then it would have been
> >> > cooler....
>
> >> Nadal is peak or nearly peak. He started this season as undisputed #1
> >> and holding 3 slams... Djokovic just matured later.
>
> >A/k/a "came into his own." :)
>
> you mean fed is actually 3rd in the BOOE??
>
> bob
Jeez you are so sore that you weren't right about Federer. This
wouldn't be a problem had *you* been the one to pick Federer from the
start. Nor would this be a problem if Roddick or some other guy you
touted had 16 majors. This is all about *you* and your ego. And you
will do whatever it takes, stoop to any level, to prove you weren't
wrong.
Manco
>
> Nadal is lucky he started winning slams young, before Nole hit his
> prime. Otherwise he'd have to be content with a few FOs.
>
> Problem? ;)
Sounds familiar, sort of like Federer' story! Does this mean Nadal ruled over a clown era(pre-2011)?
Gracchus
> you mean fed is actually 3rd in the BOOE??
>
> bob
Wow, your caps key DOES work!
Javier González
But but but but the clown era was declared over after 2007!
Maybe we can call 2007-2011 the Harlequin era? Or the Mime era?
Wile E. Coyote
> On Jul 7, 4:09 am, Manco <musefan2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, July 6, 2011 12:38:43 PM UTC-7, Javier González wrote:
>
> > > Nadal is lucky he started winning slams young, before Nole hit his
> > > prime. Otherwise he'd have to be content with a few FOs.
>
> > > Problem? ;)
>
> > Sounds familiar, sort of like Federer' story! Does this mean Nadal ruled over a clown era(pre-2011)?
>
> But but but but the clown era was
>declared over after 2007!
The person that Nadal "ruled/s over" is Federer (17>8 and 7> 2 in
slams, favor Nadal)
does that make Federer the "clown" ?
Iceberg
good and sensible post.
Iceberg
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 06:33:38 -0700 (PDT), Iceberg
>
how? he beat him in the USO final and then lost in 4 sets at Wimbledon
when he was injured. A nemesis is someone who turns up and always
wins, regardless of the conditions or times, the record between them
is and has been pretty even.
Iceberg
hey bob, we're supposed to believe that:
a) Djoker only matured as a player later than everyone else, even
later than Fed did
b) he's the BOOE
lol
Iceberg
> Gee, Fed is "way over 30?" He has even turned 30 yet. He's still 29.
you Fedfans are always trying to make out he turned 30 about 10 yrs
ago.
MBDunc
Djoko is now 24y 2months. Has 3 slams and is #1.
At same age:
Agassi had only one slam.
Lend had only one slam
Nastase had no slams.
Newcombe had two slams (amateur).
There have been 25 players who officially have reached #1. There are
more than half dozen players in that list who have gotten their #1
first time at older age than Djoko.
> b) he's the BOOE
On hardcourts maybe he has some case. Surely not on clay nor grass.
Too small sample data to make any final judgment....
.mikko
felangey
>conditions or times<
Watched any tennis this year, have you? :)
Patrick Kehoe
P
Court_1
>
> - Show quoted text -
Nadal lost a set to Paolo Lorenzi in Rome. Lorenzi is ranked 148 in
the world. When would a peak Nadal ever lose a set to anybody on clay
let alone a scrub in an early round?
Thomas R. Kettler
<90b152b2-4660-4bc6...@em7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Gracchus <cernu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
He prefers not to use it since he is no shifty!
--
Remove blown from email address to reply.
bob
yes, way too small a sample so far. funny how the guys touting djok as
BOOE over nadal with such a small sample had a problem with nadal BOOE
over fed with huge sample.
bob
MBDunc
Nadal is BOOE on clay and of course has shattered Fed there (and
everyone else too save Djoko 2011).
Do you really think that Nadal has stronger case than Fed for being
BOOE on grass/hc?
.mikko
Iceberg
Sampras
bob
the eras are slightly skewed in time, hence fed's ability to win so
many nonclay slams from 03-07. but this all comes down to if you
believe fed was playing his best tennis in 08, and i have every reason
to believe he was. if he was, then nadal is BOOE overall, and possibly
on every individual surface. after all, he beat fed in 3 straight slam
finals, 2 of them off clay.
i was always a proponent of talking about individual surface
GOATs/BOATs/BOOEs, but nobody else ever wants to because of the
"sampras factor." glad you had the guts (over oversight) to bring it
up. :-)
bob
bob
don't laugh, sampras is the sole factor why nobody in RST will ever
get into long discussions about surface BOOEs, BOATs, GOATs. God
forbid he comes out as grass GOAT.
i've been keeping tabs on this all along.
bob
CloudsRest
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 16:04:09 -0700 (PDT), Iceberg
>
>
>
Are you serious? This has been discussed many times in the past.
Nadal/Borg for clay, Federer for hard, Sampras for grass. The only
thing you've been doing is creating new acronyms to assign to Sampras.
bob
<spartan-...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 7, 5:44�pm, bob <stein...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 16:04:09 -0700 (PDT), Iceberg
>>
>>
>>
>> <iceberg.ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Jul 7, 10:53�pm, MBDunc <micha...@mail.suomi.net> wrote:
>> >> On 8 hein�, 00:45, bob <stein...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 07:35:46 -0700 (PDT), MBDunc
>>
>> >> > <micha...@mail.suomi.net> wrote:
>> >> > >On 7 hein�, 17:01, Iceberg <iceberg.ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> On Jul 7, 4:02�am, CloudsRest <spartan-warrio...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > >> > On Jul 6, 7:52�pm, bob <stein...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> > >> > > On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:57:56 -0700 (PDT), Joe Ramirez
>>
>> >> > >> > > <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
the acronyms are for everybody. so long as they fit.
bob
jdeluise
On 7-Jul-2011, bob <stei...@comcast.net> wrote:
> the acronyms are for everybody. so long as they fit.
Sounds like Cinderella's slipper.
bob
wrote:
>
>On 7-Jul-2011, bob <stei...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> the acronyms are for everybody. so long as they fit.
>
>Sounds like Cinderella's slipper.
fed looks a little like cinderella now that you mention it.
bob
MBDunc
At times during 2008 Fed was awful compared to his 2004-2007. Granted
he played very good Wimb/USO.
But still based on one "narrow" grass win over Fed you declared Nadal
possible BOOE on grass? (at least you are eager to put him ahead of
Fed there).
- Same thing with HC. Somehow one narrow 5-set loss at AO suddenly
makes 5 USO in-a-row lesser value?
Might as well say that Connors was better than Mac on grass - well
Connors has 4 grass slams vs Mac's 3 and beat him in the middle of
peak Mac's reign three times in a row on their grass matches (82
Queens, 82 Wimb, 83 Queens - when being 7y older than Mac). But then
again Connors cannot be grass GOAT because of Borg, right? (atleast
according to this newest criteria that h2h is everything and actual
trophies are just tin garbage).
> i was always a proponent of talking about individual surface
> GOATs/BOATs/BOOEs, but nobody else ever wants to because of the
> "sampras factor." glad you had the guts (over oversight) to bring it
> up. :-)
>
> bob
"sampras factor" is clearly less painful for Fed fans (save Hazel who
is nuts anyway) than vice verca though.
.mikko
John Liang
I have every reason to believe he wasn't playing his best in 08.
>if he was, then nadal is BOOE overall, and possibly
> on every individual surface. after all, he beat fed in 3 straight slam
> finals, 2 of them off clay.
Their h2h is skewed toward Nadal because Federer was good enough to
get to most of the clay court finals. Nadal just simply wasn't good
enough
to get event close to a HC slam final until he won AO even then he had
a tough
five setters against Federer. For Nadal to be declared BOOE overall
he
needs to at very least proove his HC titles were not fluke wins. He
certainly
failed on that front got nearly straight setted by Murray. He won
Wimbledon
last year I would give him more legacy points and respect if he was
able to defend
his Wimbledon titles this year. Nadal has proove he can win on any
surface but
he has yet to proove on non clay surface he can deal with the pressure
o defending
a grand slam title and BOOE candidates should have done better than
that.
>
> i was always a proponent of talking about individual surface
> GOATs/BOATs/BOOEs, but nobody else ever wants to because of the
> "sampras factor." glad you had the guts (over oversight) to bring it
> up. :-)
Rubbish, BOATs/BOOEs rubbish only come out of you when Federer
surpassed
Sampras in slam count. First it was 7543 when Federer destroy at
system by
having more points it was h2h and now BOOE/BOAT. What is next when
the BOAT sinks ?
>
> bob- Hide quoted text -
bob
it doesn't. i claim that this was nadal's 1st time reaching his peak,
and fed was still there. 1st time their 2 "bests" met and nadal took
3/3 H2H in slams finals VS fed - 2 nonclay. although the clay counts
just as much.
>Might as well say that Connors was better than Mac on grass - well
>Connors has 4 grass slams vs Mac's 3 and beat him in the middle of
>peak Mac's reign three times in a row on their grass matches (82
>Queens, 82 Wimb, 83 Queens - when being 7y older than Mac). But then
>again Connors cannot be grass GOAT because of Borg, right? (atleast
>according to this newest criteria that h2h is everything and actual
>trophies are just tin garbage).
you yourself said that AO back then was of far less importance. he
beat mac at a wimbledon, and mac beat him very very badly at the
previous wimbledon. mcenroe beat connors 6 of last 7 slam H2H, and
20-14 overall, 20-10 after mac was about 19yr old. not a good analogy.
>> i was always a proponent of talking about individual surface
>> GOATs/BOATs/BOOEs, but nobody else ever wants to because of the
>> "sampras factor." glad you had the guts (over oversight) to bring it
>> up. :-)
>>
>> bob
>
>"sampras factor" is clearly less painful for Fed fans (save Hazel who
>is nuts anyway) than vice verca though.
nobody likes hearing sampras is champ of grass, champ of wimbledon.
i'm sure fed himself wants that 7th so bad he can taste it.
bob
bob
<jlia...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 8, 10:43�am, bob <stein...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 14:53:57 -0700 (PDT), MBDunc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <micha...@mail.suomi.net> wrote:
>> >On 8 hein�, 00:45, bob <stein...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 07:35:46 -0700 (PDT), MBDunc
>>
>> >> <micha...@mail.suomi.net> wrote:
>> >> >On 7 hein�, 17:01, Iceberg <iceberg.ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> On Jul 7, 4:02�am, CloudsRest <spartan-warrio...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> > On Jul 6, 7:52�pm, bob <stein...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> > > On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:57:56 -0700 (PDT), Joe Ramirez
>>
>> >> >> > > <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
that confirms w/out doubt he was playing his best.
bob