what a game... Rafa vs Dominic...US Open...almost 5 hrs adaru..

[tennisluvr]

On 9/5/2018 at 3:24 PM, uttermost said:

haha.. Federer won against Nadal 15 times??? wow. never would've guessed. its impressive. I thought it'd be half that. haha..

The hard court wins are boosted by year end bullshit tournament, Nadal never shows up to. Its not an excuse. He's just too tired to take it seriously. In Grand Slam finals, Nadal leads Federer 6-3. Two of those Fed wins came early in Nadal's career in 2006/7 at wimbledon, and one recently in Australian Open, I think. 

Also Nadal beat Feddy boi in the Aussie open 3 times, and only lost his recent meeting in the final with him. 

As for grass courts.. lets just say Federer was lucky enough to avoid Nadal in grass courts after losing to him in 2008. 

Nadal has a positive record against fed in french and aussie, and only marginally bested by Fed in wimbledon. US open they never met.

Federer doesn't even make it too deep into the US open anymore, it's obvious that the surface suits Nadal's style more and he would whip Federer on US Open as well if they were to meet. Fed got slightly lucky and perhaps improvised better in the finals of 2017 AO which is why he was able to beat Nadal when Nadal was still leading in the fifth set and took the foot off the gas pedal when he should have been more aggressive. 

That record was 23-9 in favor of Nadal btw till last year's AO, Roger did make up for it by defeating Nadal 6 times last year, mostly on hard courts at that. If Roger built up enough courage to try his hand on clay which he's been dodging since the last 2 years, that record would have been 30-15 by now. LOL at @chittimallu2s logic

[Satakarni_bali]

1 minute ago, tennisluvr said:

No one gives a  about Halle, and Wimbledon is severely overrated anyway. 

I was giving explanation to uttermost as he said Federer isn't great at grass... 

Wimbledon is still a grand slam as Rolland garros... 

Its overrated because it's oldest... 

[tennisluvr]

On 9/5/2018 at 3:28 PM, chittimallu2 said:

lol what are you trying to prove? I see nothing in your explanation. 

My point is this. You said he lacks technique and thrives only on power, I havent met a tennis fan that said Nadal's game is beautiful to watch and he has won fewer titles than Federer. He is probably a one trick pony (power) and one arena emperor (clay). 

So to sum it up

1) lacks technique

2) doesnt play the sport beautifully

3) not the one with highest number of titles

4) one court bully

Like I said I dont watch enough tennis and not a big fan of sport overall. My Q is how are you calling him the greatest? Just because he beat federer a handful times? 

@chittimallu2

Nadal won 6 GS titles away from clay, and has the highest number of Master's 1000 titles which are predominantly played on hard courts and not on clay so how exactly is he a one dimensional player who relies on "power"(btw you need power to play in tennis, Federer himself was considered to have great power on the forehand before Nadal arrived and clobbered it back to him) and how exactly is he an "emperor"(which he is anyway of tennis) of just one surface. How's it that the so called one surface bully was able to tame and beat the so called "master of grass" on his best surface at the peak of his youth and achievements in Wimbledon 2008. 

The same Federer when he met Nadal on Nadals' best surface clay in French Open 2008 got his ass raped so bad he had a score line of 1-6, 0-6 in 2 sets. He didn't even put up a fight, LOL. And the one time Federer won a GS on clay was when Nadal was injured and taken out by Robin Soderling. Roger wouldn't win on clay even if Nadal were limping, such is the fear he has facing Nadal on the other side of the net on clay. LMAO at being the best of all time. 

[tennisluvr]

3 minutes ago, Satakarni_bali said:

I was giving explanation to uttermost as he said Federer isn't great at grass... 

Wimbledon is still a grand slam as Rolland garros... 

Its overrated because it's oldest... 

No it's overrated because it's British and they like to claim that tennis started in Britain, although the scoring system was actually French by origin. Lou'ef translated to "love" now indicates the score at 0, which is a french word for an egg. Also the score after 30-30 jumps to 40 and not 45 due to the French clock being designed as such. 

Grass is such an overrated surface, it's not a surprise I have never seen neither played on a grass surface ever in my life even when I toured multiple cities across the US. 

[Satakarni_bali]

2 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

No it's overrated because it's British and they like to claim that tennis started in Britain, although the scoring system was actually French by origin. Lou'ef translated to "love" now indicates the score at 0, which is a french word for an egg. Also the score after 30-30 jumps to 40 and not 45 due to the French clock being designed as such. 

Grass is such an overrated surface, it's not a surprise I have never seen neither played on a grass surface ever in my life even when I toured multiple cities across the US. 

Tennis was started in French but I meant wimbledon is considered as the first grand slam even though French and US Open were started around same time I guess

[Spartan]

Ninna Naomi pilla played very good...all set for Finals against Serena.... in Womens Singles..

 

Finals lo Talli Serena pace ni tattukogalada leda anedi chudali...it will be like Cat and Mouse fight...

[chittimallu2]

19 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

@chittimallu2

You do realize that "clay" is one of the most common surfaces that tennis is played on? Or weren't you aware of that fact? If Nadal's victories should be counted by taking away his "clay" titles as you suggest, Federer's prowess should also be decided based on how many non "grass" titles he has won. 

 Grass being a surface which doesn't have a single Master's 1000 on that surface and it's best played for a month and half, compared to hard and clay surfaces which make up all those 1000 Master's series and 3/4 grand slams. LOL at your logic. 

 

17 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

LOL at those statistics, their hard court records were actually in favor of Nadal till 2017 when Federer had a resurgence and defeated Nadal 5(or was it 6) times on hard courts. If not for that, till the beginning of Australian Open in 2017 their record stood at 23-9 in favor of Nadal and even on hard courts, Nadal was ahead of Federer. 

As for their meetings on grass, 2 were in Wimbledon finals and were supposedly at a time when Nadal was just considered a clay court specialist. One of them went 5 sets and the other one was when Nadal actually beat Federer on his own purported best surface in 2008. 

 

8 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

@chittimallu2

Nadal won 6 GS titles away from clay, and has the highest number of Master's 1000 titles which are predominantly played on hard courts and not on clay so how exactly is he a one dimensional player who relies on "power"(btw you need power to play in tennis, Federer himself was considered to have great power on the forehand before Nadal arrived and clobbered it back to him) and how exactly is he an "emperor"(which he is anyway of tennis) of just one surface. How's it that the so called one surface bully was able to tame and beat the so called "master of grass" on his best surface at the peak of his youth and achievements in Wimbledon 2008. 

The same Federer when he met Nadal on Nadals' best surface clay in French Open 2008 got his ass raped so bad he had a score line of 1-6, 0-6 in 2 sets. He didn't even put up a fight, LOL. And the one time Federer won a GS on clay was when Nadal was injured and taken out by Robin Soderling. Roger wouldn't win on clay even if Nadal were limping, such is the fear he has facing Nadal on the other side of the net on clay. LMAO at being the best of all time. 

ekkuva aavesa padaku.. I dont even watch or follow this sport... I was asking him a question based on a claim he made... dont bark at the wrong tree  

[tennisluvr]

On 9/5/2018 at 3:28 PM, chittimallu2 said:

lol what are you trying to prove? I see nothing in your explanation. 

My point is this. You said he lacks technique and thrives only on power, I havent met a tennis fan that said Nadal's game is beautiful to watch and he has won fewer titles than Federer. He is probably a one trick pony (power) and one arena emperor (clay). 

So to sum it up

1) lacks technique

2) doesnt play the sport beautifully

3) not the one with highest number of titles

4) one court bully

Like I said I dont watch enough tennis and not a big fan of sport overall. My Q is how are you calling him the greatest? Just because he beat federer a handful times? 

As for tennis being beautiful, I know someone that thinks Dustin Brown's tennis is beautiful with all those drop shots that he hits and the dives he does at the net. I personally think one of the cleanest hitters of the ball is Kei Nishikori and a lot of people have the same opinion that however doesn't mean Kei can sustain himself to win multiple GS titles one after the other. So your explanation of beauty is so subjective it's even funny you are trying to ascribe some logic to it. 

Also as for your questions: 

1) Define Technique, plus also define if the technique that Stan Smith used while swinging his wooden racquet is the same that you want modern players esp Nadal to use while playing the game? Technique is constantly evolving, due to change in racquets, grips, strings, court surfaces, the weight of the ball etc. 

2) Refer to my explanation above. Federer relies a lot on his serve, if you were to take that away from him or even reduce the dependency he has on the serve to do his approach to the net, he wouldn't even make it past the 4th round at any major GS. LOL. 

3) Yes that's the only argument Fed fanboys have in favor of calling him the GOAT. That will be achieved soon as well, and once Nadal goes past his GS tally I guess Fed fanboys have to find new ways to explain why they still harp on to the point of Fed being the GOAT. LMAO. 

4) He in fact bullied(if that's even the right word to use) the so called GOAT you adore on his best surface at the peak of his success, plus he bullied him again in AO 2009 which is when Fed had to resort to that amazing crybaby performance on the dias to garner some sympathy for the fact that he can never beat Nadal on any surface. Which was pretty much the case till 2017, which is also when he started avoiding the clay season altogether. Some GOAT that. 

LMAO at your logic and come back with a better explanation the next time @chittimallu2

[Satakarni_bali]

12 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

@chittimallu2

Nadal won 6 GS titles away from clay, and has the highest number of Master's 1000 titles which are predominantly played on hard courts and not on clay so how exactly is he a one dimensional player who relies on "power"(btw you need power to play in tennis, Federer himself was considered to have great power on the forehand before Nadal arrived and clobbered it back to him) and how exactly is he an "emperor"(which he is anyway of tennis) of just one surface. How's it that the so called one surface bully was able to tame and beat the so called "master of grass" on his best surface at the peak of his youth and achievements in Wimbledon 2008. 

The same Federer when he met Nadal on Nadals' best surface clay in French Open 2008 got his ass raped so bad he had a score line of 1-6, 0-6 in 2 sets. He didn't even put up a fight, LOL. And the one time Federer won a GS on clay was when Nadal was injured and taken out by Robin Soderling. Roger wouldn't win on clay even if Nadal were limping, such is the fear he has facing Nadal on the other side of the net on clay. LMAO at being the best of all time. 

I guess 24 of his 33 masters are on clay

[chittimallu2]

2 minutes ago, Spartan said:

Ninna Naomi pilla played very good...all set for Finals against Serena.... in Womens Singles..

  

Finals lo Talli Serena pace ni tattukogalada leda anedi chudali...it will be like Cat and Mouse fight...

xvideos lo monna oka video choosa.. 2 min video untundi pori with black top... looks like a vintage old movie scene (90s I guess)... title exactly idi "big gorl b**b mallu"

dhani peru ento kanukko... mathi poindi dhanni choosthe 

[tennisluvr]

1 minute ago, chittimallu2 said:

 

 

ekkuva aavesa padaku.. I dont even watch or follow this sport... I was asking him a question based on a claim he made... dont bark at the wrong tree  

Yet you made a claim that FED was the GOAT. 

Actually a so called GOAT doesn't exist, its' a statistical impossibility considering the way conditions change across decades including the racquet technology, strings, court surfaces, weight of the ball, improvement in fitness and nutrition, medical science available for common injuries that affect the recovery time etc. 

This is what even Rod Laver referred to earlier, till the time they kept hounding him to come up with a name for the GOAT in which case he said it's the one with the highest GS titles. It's only Fed fanboys that keep hankering about naming an objective GOAT, which Fed fails to satisfy even by their own logic. 

[chittimallu2]

3 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

As for tennis being beautiful, I know someone that thinks Dustin Brown's tennis is beautiful with all those drop shots that he hits and the dives he does at the net. I personally think one of the cleanest hitters of the ball is Kei Nishikori and a lot of people have the same opinion that however doesn't mean Kei can sustain himself to win multiple GS titles one after the other. So your explanation of beauty is so subjective it's even funny you are trying to ascribe some logic to it. 

 Also as for your questions: 

1) Define Technique, plus also define if the technique that Stan Smith used while swinging his wooden racquet is the same that you want modern players esp Nadal to use while playing the game? Technique is constantly evolving, due to change in racquets, grips, strings, court surfaces, the weight of the ball etc. 

2) Refer to my explanation above. Federer relies a lot on his serve, if you were to take that away from him or even reduce the dependency he has on the serve to do his approach to the net, he wouldn't even make it past the 4th round at any major GS. LOL. 

3) Yes that's the only argument Fed fanboys have in favor of calling him the GOAT. That will be achieved soon as well, and once Nadal goes past his GS tally I guess Fed fanboys have to find new ways to explain why they still harp on to the point of Fed being the GOAT. LMAO. 

4) He in fact bullied(if that's even the right word to use) the so called GOAT you adore on his best surface at the peak of his success, plus he bullied him again in AO 2009 which is when Fed had to resort to that amazing crybaby performance on the dias to garner some sympathy for the fact that he can never beat Nadal on any surface. Which was pretty much the case till 2017, which is also when he started avoiding the clay season altogether. Some GOAT that. 

LMAO at your logic and come back with a better explanation the next time @chittimallu2

again you wasted so much of your time and energy explaining all this to me...  

[tennisluvr]

1 minute ago, chittimallu2 said:

again you wasted so much of your time and energy explaining all this to me...  

Well you will know the next time you claim Roger as the GOAT 😃

[chittimallu2]

Just now, tennisluvr said:

Yet you made a claim that FED was the GOAT. 

Actually a so called GOAT doesn't exist, its' a statistical impossibility considering the way conditions change across decades including the racquet technology, strings, court surfaces, weight of the ball, improvement in fitness and nutrition, medical science available for common injuries that affect the recovery time etc. 

This is what even Rod Laver referred to earlier, till the time they kept hounding him to come up with a name for the GOAT in which case he said it's the one with the highest GS titles. It's only Fed fanboys that keep hankering about naming an objective GOAT, which Fed fails to satisfy even by their own logic. 

haha nenekkada evarni GOAT anale... all I said were based on what I generally hear or read on the internet, I dont even follow this sport, take a jog mate. 

monna edo khaali undi uttermost tho sodhi disco pettina anthe, i couldnt care less about this sport

[chittimallu2]

12 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

No it's overrated because it's British 

They overrate everything and everyone thats from their island... stupid cunts