Who will be more motivated at the FO , Roger or Nadal ?
missy
week of FO if he can remain injury free that far.
It would be interesting to see if he was wasnt fulyl fit - how Roger
mentally coped with him in the final , esp with Wimbledon right round
the bend.
Any one else agree that this period between final of FO and Wimbledon
might make or break the crediability of Rogers GOAT status ?
Superdave
wrote:
ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
dream on cunt.
felangey
> week of FO if he can remain injury free that far.
As opposed to trying to lose in the first week?
> It would be interesting to see if he was wasnt fulyl fit - how Roger
> mentally coped with him in the final , esp with Wimbledon right round
> the bend.
"if he was wasnt fulyl fit" I'm not sure what you are saying? Nadal is going
to be injured...but make the final of RG...to play Federer, who is going to
be too focused on Wimbldeon to bother trying? I don't get it.
> Any one else agree that this period between final of FO and Wimbledon
> might make or break the crediability of Rogers GOAT status ?
If Fed got beaten by a qualifier in the first round of every tournament he
ever plays for the rest of his career, it wouldn't alter his status as GOAT.
felangey
> might make or break the crediability of Rogers GOAT status ?
Come to think of it....Pat? Is this you??
;)
Sao Paulo Swallow
Quite the user icon you got there.
Patrick Kehoe
++ No!
If there were a real GOAT, I would have to believe it would be
Federer... I've only seen tennis since 1970ish... but in my time of
watching tennis, the Open Era, Feds the best over all player,
certainly the most talented and has the best record in slams,
sooooooooo... that's a lot going for him right there... BUT GOAT-ness
is only a talking point, a guess, an opinion as to who 'would' rule
over all others, if time and circumstances didn't separate the best
from the best... AND GOAT-hood is also always subject to change, as
players leave the game and others come along... you cannot be even
hypothetical GOAT forever, at least it's not likely...
P
ca1houn
WTF? Break the crediability of Rogers GOAT status ?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
16 it official
second is Nadal winning the FO and Wimbledon, if so then no because
that will only be 8 slams
TT
>
> Any one else agree that this period between final of FO and Wimbledon
> might make or break the crediability of Rogers GOAT status ?
>
Definitely.
felangey
>> might make or break the crediability of Rogers GOAT status ?
>>
>
> Definitely.
So you also admit he is teetering on the brink of GOATdom? They keep coming
from you! :)
TT
You're slightly smarter than I thought...I was expecting you not to
notice that.
However my logic is that it would break the credibility in eyes of even
those who for some weird reason think he already has GOAT credibility...
Seriously.
;)
bob
<helen...@googlemail.com> wrote:
with his achievements, the only way federer will not be considered
GOAT longterm is if the deficit to nadal H2H grows AND nadal comes
around to start winning slams at roger's expense.
if both of those don't happen, roger will sit at GOAT.
bob
CloudsRest
Federer's an improvement over Sampras. I think there's a bit of room
for a future guy to improve further. As for whether this guy could
defeat Federer or Sampras, that doesn't matter.
missy
> On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:48:52 -0700 (PDT), missy
>
Yes, this is what it comes down too, the only other person who might
make that worse where he to start his head 2 head winning streak
again ( esp in slams ) would be Andy M, or perhaps Del Porto ( the
more likely , at least in slams )
By estimation then , you have at least a couple more years ( this year
and next ) before age becomes a factor
Superdave
wrote:
>On 18 Mar, 22:49, bob <stein...@comcast.net> wrote:
Roger IS the goat. Sooner or later somebody will replace him not as goat but as
the current best.
That will NOT be Nadal. It may be any of the other top five or a new rapidly
rising up and comer but it will NOT be Nadal.
john
"bob" <stei...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6bb5q5l2j745o0456...@4ax.com...
But he is still a greater player than Sampras and as for GOAT Sampras is not
in the picture
and it is between Federer and Laver. Federer is consider as a GOAT
candidates because
of his overall achievement in short or long term until someone who overtake
his slam total
he is the best or the second best of all time. Nadal can not be considered
as the best as there
is another player in his era that won more than 10 slams than him and in
Whisper's world of
blue chip slams the difference is 11 to 1.
>
> bob
Whisper
FO is blue-chip moronus erectus.
Superdave
so Sampras never ever even made a single final yet along won a blue chip slam ?
that's pretty fucking bad man. a goat disaster i'd say.
why have you been backing a guy who couldn't even win all the blue chips ?
certainly Federer who has won all the blue chips is the goat even if he only had
12 slams then.
oh wait ! he has 16 including ALL the blue chips. that sorta puts him light
years beyond Pete.
thanks for the clarification !
john
"Whisper" <beav...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:yv-dnZJj8a-WOznW...@westnet.com.au...
Even if we count FO as blue chip he is still 7 behind. On your 7543 scale
he is 18 FO
wins behind Federer.
>
>
>
>
john
If FO is a blue chip events why didn't Sampras win it ? Why you repeatedly
post in RST that
FO was a mere warm up for Wimbledon wich is just around the corner ?
Clearly an events
us by a player of Sampras' calibre used as a warm up for Wimbledon can't be
consider as blue chip.
Patrick Kehoe
>
> - Show quoted text -
++ Exactly... All this Fed could beat Pete or Pete's 'big game' would
beat Fed is just BULLSHIT SUPREME... they DID PLAY and Fed held his
own at 19 and even managed to win... so... we have a small look into
what might have been... and at the same time it doesn't matter!!!...
if you are indulging in GOAT talk... GOATness is not reality, not
based in what was or in time... it transcends time and match ups...
the best of each generation are unto themselves, with respect to
others before or after them... thus, only the statistics matter in the
end... the numbers bridge the lack of happenstance... Fed has some
legitimate claim to greatness AND SINGULARITY within the best of the
best, certainly, given his majors won record, which he can still add
to... Fed is not historical JUST YET... we don't know his final
totals... that he is still amassing or able to do so is a large plus
in his favour...
P
bob
wrote:
if nadal widens the H2H and wins more slams in 10, 11 then fed, then
there is no GOAT. because nobody would want to recognize a GOAT who
wasn't best of his era. and it would also cast much more doubt on if
fed is best of all time compared to other era bests.
bob
john
The best of an era is judge by how many slam wins not just by h2h. Fed is
now 10 slam
ahead of Nadal nobody would recognized Nadal as the best even if he manage
to win
3 or 4 slam in the next two years. Nadal can't be recognized as the best in
this era when
his record on hard court slam now stand at 1 win out of 14 attempts and 1 or
2 Wimbledon
(even if he win some now) to Federer 6. Of course there is possbility of
Federer even widening
that slam count gap to greater than 10 even in the face of Nadal extending
his h2h. There is very
little doubt players are judge on performance in major championships in
their era not how they
played compare to player of future eras in some imaginery matches which you
and Whisper like
to do. Nadal plays in the same era as Federer so there is no way to ignore
that he is now 10 slam
wins behind Federer. I think we have drilled this question a lot of times
against the current competition
Nadal just is not as good as Federer and in tennis is about how a player
deal with his competition rather
than just a single player.
Superdave
CUDA WUDA FUCKING SHUDA from SAMPRAS ASS LICKER ALIAS WHISPER COCK SUCKER bob
bob
lol. let that anger out dave. agreed, cuda wuda means nothing. it
hasn't happened, yet.
bob
missy
> On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 17:56:12 -0400, bob <stein...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 21:26:31 +1100, "john" <jli...@ozemail.com.au>
> >wrote:
>
Thing is my thoery is that Federer does not handle rivals ( esp
beatings by them on his own turf very well )
If Nadal caused him to cry at AO and lose heart after Wimbledon , just
imagine what having a Sampras there ( esp on his fav surface ) or
other threats would have done ?
This is why I think Fed is " paper goat " and not the real thing.
Nice try though , and Dave please keep it in your pants for once .
Superdave
wrote:
>On Mar 21, 1:35 am, Superdave <the.big.rst.kah...@gmail.com> wrote:
Federer 1 Sampras 0 at the World Championships.
Federer AO Champion
Federer FO Champion
Federer W Champion
Federer USO Champion
Paper goat my ass.
Whisper
He means achievement goat, not the best player in absolute terms.
I agree with him/it.
bob
"paper GOAT". catchy. like it.
have to give credit for the phrase.
bob
CloudsRest
> beatings by them on his own turf very well )
He has handled his rivals quite well. Just because he has beaten most
of them, it doesn't mean they aren't rivals.
>
> If Nadal caused him to cry at AO and lose heart after Wimbledon , just
> imagine what having a Sampras there ( esp on his fav surface ) or
> other threats would have done ?
>
-He also cried after beating Bags at OZ.
-Lost heart? He won the UTC (Ultimate Tennis Championship: US Open)
two months after that tough loss at Wimbledon.
-All players are different. Not all have heavy lefty topspin to
attack Federer's backhand.
missy
Yes and then he lost at Ao to ( u-know-who ) and then started with the
crying again .
Credit to the Paper goat , he did win what he needed too ( JUST ) but
you dont seriously think ( after the last 3 drubbings ) he was going
to beat Nadal om clay do u ?
Nadal ( who is very honest as u know ) even said , more or-less , Fed
got lucky with his ( nadals knees going awol ) and Novak losing .
CloudsRest
> he did win what he needed too ( JUST ) but
> you dont seriously think ( after the last 3 drubbings ) he was going
> to beat Nadal om clay do u ?
Not many people think so, but does it matter? The championship goes
to the individual that defeats seven opponents. Andy Roddick's US
trophy isn't worth any less because he didn't defeat Roger Federer
along the way.
>
> Nadal ( who is very honest as u know ) even said , more or-less , Fed
> got lucky with his ( nadals knees going awol ) and Novak losing .
Oh well. Not Federer's fault they couldn't take care of their own
business. As a result, they don't deserve the trophy.
Joe Ramirez
Actually, "paper GOAT" is rather dumb. *Every* purported GOAT has been
a "paper GOAT," because the title was bestowed on all of them by self-
appointed armchair analysts who merely examined their records. No
supposed GOAT ever earned his or her GOAT status in an official GOAT
championship on the court.
Moreover, using the phrase to denigrate players one doesn't like
reflects a tiresome, scatterbrained view: "I realize that this player
has the credentials to be considered the GOAT, but I hate him/her, so
I'll ignore the credentials and just talk about whatever weak spots in
his/her record I can identify." Once upon a time, there was a lovely
couple here -- call them Wh_sper and b_b -- who spared no rhetorical
ammunition in their defense of the mighty Sampras when he was
subjected to such frivolous attacks during his GOAT reign. But I
believe they must have lost interest in tennis since then.
missy
I believe what we need to settle this once and for all is tennis /
sports version of deadliest warriors .
Manco
already the greatest CC of all time through his 2005-2008 achievements.