[quote=“Horsebox, post: 791792, member: 1537”]Apart from it’s cuisine, it’s culture, museums, history, language, amazing cities, beaches, mountains and women.
And it’s wine.[/quote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_French_inventions_and_discoveries
Tweedle dum and tweedle dee. France is a failed colonial society about to collapse in upon itself. If it wasn’t for the Allied Troops this collapse would have rightly happened a century ago. There is little to admire about the place at this point.
Careful harry-you have a dumb rating on the way from mbb. I suppose when you are from somewhere as sophisticated as Laois, then nowhere else will ever really match up.
Fuck off-it has huge societal problems but to say there is nothing to admire about the country is dumb. Have you ever even been to France?
Nadal wins the Montreal Open. According to tazdedub[/USER] he has been found out on fast courts. I think the only one who has been found out is [USER=312]tazdedub .
Improved his record against Federer to 21-10 last night.
Truly the greatest.
Apparently Nadal has been found out on faster courts but is now 13-0 for hard courts in 2013. Cat got your tongue, @tazdedub?
I would strongly suspect you weren’t watching this match as I wouldn’t be advancing any claims about Nadal’s all time greatness based on this performance. He was outplayed for long stretches by Federer who now could drop to a scarcely credible 7 in Monday#s rankings. At 32 and in freefall Federer really should retire.
It was more or less Federer in his pomp for the first hour or so. An hour is about as long as a lesser player can sustain it for and in the twilight of his career that’s very much what Federer is now, the lesser player. Federer’s footwork was immaculate on the forehand in the first set and a half. He was serving okay, still looked a bit stiff but a lot better than for some time. The first serve has swerve and bite. Nadal looked weak on the backhand for large stretches of the match much more than usual. Nadal’s forehand was humming but Federer did not give him much to hit. Federer was returning well off his backhand side, not just chipping it back.
There was a noticeable shift in all of this about the 7/8 of the second set as Federer visibly tired and it really wasn’t a contest from the end of the 2nd set onwards.
Elsewhere, Andy Murray’s lacklustre form since Wimbledon continued, well beaten in straight sets by Murray. Novak beaten by Isner as well.
With a face like that, I’d say he has to beat himself most nights
[quote=“Jeffrey, post: 818572, member: 740”]I would strongly suspect you weren’t watching this match as I wouldn’t be advancing any claims about Nadal’s all time greatness based on this performance. He was outplayed for long stretches by Federer who now could drop to a scarcely credible 7 in Monday#s rankings. At 32 and in freefall Federer really should retire.
It was more or less Federer in his pomp for the first hour or so. An hour is about as long as a lesser player can sustain it for and in the twilight of his career that’s very much what Federer is now, the lesser player. Federer’s footwork was immaculate on the forehand in the first set and a half. He was serving okay, still looked a bit stiff but a lot better than for some time. The first serve has swerve and bite. Nadal looked weak on the backhand for large stretches of the match much more than usual. Nadal’s forehand was humming but Federer did not give him much to hit. Federer was returning well off his backhand side, not just chipping it back.
There was a noticeable shift in all of this about the 7/8 of the second set as Federer visibly tired and it really wasn’t a contest from the end of the 2nd set onwards.
Elsewhere, Andy Murray’s lacklustre form since Wimbledon continued, well beaten in straight sets by Murray. Novak beaten by Isner as well.[/quote]
You idiot, he just got beat for the 21st time by Nadal.
In fairness Rudi, Rafa invariably wins every time he plays Federer now. You couldn’t even call it a competitive rivalry at this point in time. At this stage in their respective careers, the 5 year age gap is all too obvious. Federer is finished. He’s 32, his backed is f*cked, falling rapidly down the rankings. Age has caught up with him like it invariably does with every player, no matter how great who carry on into their 30’s.
Rafa is looking well placed for the US Open. He’s fresh after his lay off and Djokovic and Murray look a bit jaded at the moment. Novak has had a disappointing year really. Since Australia he’s only won in Abu Dhabi and Monaco back in April.
Did you watch it last night?
Just finished watching it there, having recorded it last night. First couple of sets were excellent, but as alluded to above, Fed can’t really sustain it beyond that anymore. Wonder if he’ll jack it in at the end of the year.
Rudi making a show of himself again. Clearly didn’t even watch the match last night and is calling those who did and are providing insightful analysis on it, idiots.
The quarter finals of the Cincinnati Masters in his weird world is now seemingly a stage that undisputably determines the greatest player of all time. Funny how Rudi wasn’t on providing any of his undisputable facts after his questionable pal was humiliated in the first round of the Championship by the unknown Steve Darcis. A year on from losing to the unknown Lusak Rosol in the 2nd round of the Championship.
Surely performances in the Championship, the most important and prestigious tennis tournament of them all would be key factors in such a weighty claim, rather than a win over Milos Raonic in Montreal or a fading Roger Federer in Cincinnati.
Unfortunately Federer can’t last a 3 set match anymore against the top players in the world. The ranking if 7 is about right for Federer now. I hope at the end of the season Federer will take stock and retire.
I think Nadal is going all out in these ATP competitions at the moment because he needs to get as much match practice as he can due to the injury lay offs he has had.
Federer showed last night how weak Nadal’s backhand when he attacked it last night and can expect Murray and Djokovic to attack that backhand if they meet in the US open.
On current form Nadal would be favourite for this one but I think Murray and Djokovic are holding back these last few weeks saving their energy for this last slam of the season. There is noway that Djokovic or Murray would loose Byrdech or Isner in a slam.
As for Nadal being the greatest that can’t be said until he wins 18 slams.
[quote=“tazdedub, post: 818634, member: 312”]Unfortunately Federer can’t last a 3 set match anymore against the top players in the world. The ranking if 7 is about right for Federer now. I hope at the end of the season Federer will take stock and retire.
I think Nadal is going all out in these ATP competitions at the moment because he needs to get as much match practice as he can due to the injury lay offs he has had.
Federer showed last night how weak Nadal’s backhand when he attacked it last night and can expect Murray and Djokovic to attack that backhand if they meet in the US open.
On current form Nadal would be favourite for this one but I think Murray and Djokovic are holding back these last few weeks saving their energy for this last slam of the season. There is noway that Djokovic or Murray would loose Byrdech or Isner in a slam.
As for Nadal being the greatest that can’t be said until he wins 18 slams.[/quote]
But you said Nadal has been found out on fast courts and now you’re saying he has a great chance of winning the US Open? That’s a contradiction. Nadal doesn’t need to win 18 slams to be the greatest:
[LIST]
[]He has a gold slam
[]He has won four Davis Cups
[]He has won more ATP 1000 titles than any other competitor
[]His has a superior head-to-head record against all of the other big 3 players (21-10 against Federer)
[/LIST]
Nadal is already the greatest, when he does get 18 then that’s just another piece of evidence on an already hugely amassed pile. Saying that there is no way Berdych would beat either Murray or Djokovic in a slam is also retarded. Berdych has the game to bet the top four when he is firing well.
Losing to Lusak Rosol & Steve Darcis in the 2nd and 1st round of the Championship at 26/27 an age that should ordinarily be a players peak years constitutes been well and truly found out on fast courts.
[quote=“Rudi, post: 818671, member: 1052”]But you said Nadal has been found out on fast courts and now you’re saying he has a great chance of winning the US Open? That’s a contradiction. Nadal doesn’t need to win 18 slams to be the greatest:
[LIST]
[]He has a gold slam
[]He has won four Davis Cups
[]He has won more ATP 1000 titles than any other competitor
[]His has a superior head-to-head record against all of the other big 3 players (21-10 against Federer)
[/LIST]
Nadal is already the greatest, when he does get 18 then that’s just another piece of evidence on an already hugely amassed pile. Saying that there is no way Berdych would beat either Murray or Djokovic in a slam is also retarded. Berdych has the game to bet the top four when he is firing well.[/quote]
But he only has 12 slams not 17. So not until he actually wins 18 will he be considered the greatest.
And do you really think that Isner and berdych would beat Murray and Djokovic in a 5 setter in a slam rather than a 3 setter in a warm up tournament where it is plain to see they are saving themselves for the bigger tournament?
You are making a show of yourself as usual.
[quote=“tazdedub, post: 818729, member: 312”]But he only has 12 slams not 17. So not until he actually wins 18 will he be considered the greatest.
And do you really think that Isner and berdych would beat Murray and Djokovic in a 5 setter in a slam rather than a 3 setter in a warm up tournament where it is plain to see they are saving themselves for the bigger tournament?
You are making a show of yourself as usual.[/quote]
I’m not the one making a fool of myself, you are the one saying Nadal was found out on fast courts and I’m making the point that it is being proven to be clueless tripe. I’ve been vindicated yet again.
Of course Berdych has the game to be able to beat one of the big four, you don’t make a grand slam final without having that ability. Nadal doesn’t have to win 18 titles to be the best, he has four Davis Cups, he has a gold slam, he has more Masters 1000 titles than anyone else, he has a superior head-to-head record with the other big four.
Federer had the head start of playing in a weak era and picking up a few handy slams, ever since the likes of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray have arrived they have dried up for. Nadal had and continues to have his number. He will definitely win more slams than Federer but slams aren’t everything. The Davis Cup is the most prestigious tournament in tennis - except maybe for Roland Garros - Nadal has four of these, Federer has zero. Nadal has won the singles gold at the Olympics, Federer hasn’t. Nadal has destroyed Federer again and again and again. There is no doubt about it.
21-10 and counting.
I repeat losing to Lusak Rosol & Steve Darcis in the 2nd and 1st round of the Championship is been found out on fast courts.
For a fellow you claim to be one of the greatest players of all time, a return of just one US Open and two Championships for Nadal in a decade as a professional is decidedly average.
[quote=“Manuel Zelaya, post: 818737, member: 377”]I repeat losing to Lusak Rosol & Steve Darcis in the 2nd and 1st round of the Championship is been found out on fast courts.
For a fellow you claim to be one of the greatest players of all time, a return of just one US Open and two Championships for Nadal in a decade as a professional is decidedly average.[/quote]
And the guy some of the clowns on here are proclaiming as the greatest only ever won 1 Roland Garros in 15 attempts.
The Federer fanboys are very tetchy when his head-to-head record with Nadal is pointed out, they are petulant and almost childlike when the facts are given to them. They are behaving like guys on borrowed time who have failed to accept the inevitable fate.