mtenis.com.pl

lake pisze:Wybacz ale pomimo najszczerszych moich chęci nie umiem inaczej zinterpretować Twojej przytoczonej powyżej wypowiedzi niż że Rafa popłakał się z powodu Rogera.

For me, it's important that my fans get on well with the fans of other players, and don't insult or argue with each other just because one person thinks I'm the best, another person thinks it's (Novak) Djokovic, and someone else prefers (Rafael) Nadal.

Just as I respect my opponents, I expect my fans to do the same,' Federer told Credit Suisse.

Anula pisze:Może tylko na wodzie miałby problemy, ale kto wie, może go nie doceniam.

Marat Safin believes that Rafael Nadal can be as great as Roger Federer when he ends his career. Asked by AS to choose between Nadal and Federer, the former Russian player said: 'Nadal, because he is five years younger.

I think he can reach Federer's results, especially with today's level. Before it was impossible to play at 37 years, you weren't winning a match. I had to stop due to a knee, I could not run and compete with younger players.' He also spoke about the new players that he likes the most: 'Alexander Zverev is very strong, (Dominic) Thiem too, but it's the German to stand out.

(Nick) Kyrgios as well. If he fixes his head, he can be an unbelievable player.' The former world No. 1 instead criticized his compatriots Andrey Rublev and Karen Khachanov? 'They are 21 or 22 and didn't win anything.

In our generation, if at 18 you had not won an ATP title you were nobody. Now you win it at 23 and you are a star.'

Federasta20 pisze:Widzę, że wziąłeś przykład z Rogera i postanowiłeś sobie odpuścić sezon ziemny

First of all, I know what you're thinking. Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer are both legends of the game, and even Nadal himself said on Sunday he is not jealous of his rival's greater number of grand slam titles. So must we reduce ourselves to this tiresome debate about who is the greatest of all time (GOAT)?

Well, yes and no. Debating who is greater out of Federer and Nadal is admittedly about as commonplace as a John Isner ace, and almost as tedious.

But my contention is not that one or other is the greatest, but rather that the GOAT debate - and we are talking here about just male players - is fundamentally flawed.

Throughout most of tennis history, the judgment over who is the greatest has been made based principally on the results of the four grand slams - the Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and the US Open. As the four most prestigious and physically gruelling of tennis's events, it makes sense that this is how the judgment is made.

But judging the Federer-Nadal rivalry in this way puts the Spaniard at a major disadvantage because three of the four events favour Federer's game-style.


Federer, with his aggressive game built around the most effective serve in the history of the sport, prospers on quicker courts - which takes in Wimbledon, the US Open and Australian Open. Nadal's baseline game is more suited to clay, which means there is just one grand slam which favours him over Federer (the French Open).

If you were reverse engineering the rivalry between Federer and Nadal to see who was the greatest, you would surely split the four main events into two that favour Nadal, and two that favour Federer?

Let's imagine a tennis landscape where that was the case.

For argument's sake, the Australian Open would become the Argentinian Open and instead of being played on the slick hard courts of Melbourne would be played on the red clay of Buenos Aires. (For the record there is an Argentina Open but it is three rungs down from the grand slams and distinct from what we are imagining here).

Given Nadal's record at the French Open is 11 titles to Federer's one, we can speculate he would have a similar advantage in the fictional Argentinian Open - especially as his Roland Garros tally is no anomaly. Nadal has also won 11 titles at both the Barcelona Open and Monte Carlo Masters.


It would then be a question of whether Federer could match Nadal's supremacy on clay by dominating to a similar extent on the remaining two grass and hard slams.

History suggests he would not. Where Nadal holds an 11-1 title record over Federer at the French Open, Federer's lead over Nadal at the other three slams is 19-6. If we interpolate this to two grand slams as my imagined system does, then those numbers become 13 for Federer and four for Nadal.

That's not even close to the 22-2 extrapolated lead for Nadal at the French Open and imagined Argentinian Open. In fact the overall totals would be 24 for Nadal and 15 for Federer (coincidentally this is almost identical to the head to head record of the two players, which Nadal leads 23-15).

Naturally, there are innumerable variables that make this a far from scientific process, and the fact that Federer prospers on both hard and grass courts could be said to illustrate his greater all-round prowess. Though on this point it's worth remembering that in the pair's grand slam matches on hard and grass courts, Nadal leads Federer 4-3.

A recurring criticism of Nadal in relation to the GOAT debate is that so many of his grand slam wins come at just one event. This can be looked at a different way: given the way the grand-slam system is set up against him, it's remarkable Nadal is even close to his great rival.

Federer is the undisputed GOAT by the current metric. But like a dodgy line call, that metric should be challenged.

jarosword20 pisze: 3. Jaka jest konkurencja na cegle a jaka na trawie czy betonie (przynajmniej obecnie)? Już pomijam fakt, że na trawie lub betonie ktoś z dniem konia może zdecydownie łatwiej odpalić Fedexa niż Nadala na cegle.

simon pisze:

jarosword20 pisze: 3. Jaka jest konkurencja na cegle a jaka na trawie czy betonie (przynajmniej obecnie)? Już pomijam fakt, że na trawie lub betonie ktoś z dniem konia może zdecydownie łatwiej odpalić Fedexa niż Nadala na cegle.

Niech mi ktoś wreszcie wytłumaczy gdzie jest ta konkurencja na trawie. Parę razy w ostatnim czasie widziałem teksty, że na trawie to dopiero ludzie grajo. Zaglądam ja później na oficjalkę ATP i w top20, poza Federerem, może Cilic i Berdych (LOL) należą do tych co to najlepiej na trawie się czują. To już na tej ziemi większe zagrożenia czyhają.

Rroggerr pisze:Jeszcze 20 lat i ta, pozornie bezsensownie obecnie narracja o poszkodowanym układem nawierzchni Rafie, stanie się uznawana za słuszną, skoro już teraz pojawiają się takie kuriozalne argumenty.