Indisputable facts that make Rafa Nadal the Greatest Tennis Player of All Time

[quote=“Rudi, post: 818742, member: 1052”]And the guy some of the clowns on here are proclaiming as the greatest only ever won 1 Roland Garros in 15 attempts.

[/quote]

Tennis on clay is not proper tennis. Grass and hardcourts is where its at. As I said over on the French Open thread back in June, McEnroe, Sampras, Connors, Edberg and Becker never won at Roland Garros. All would make any short list for the greatest player of all time. Actually all bar a clown like you maybe as you’re on record as saying that none of McEnore, Sampras, Connors, Edberg or Becker can be ranked as a great player.

McEnroe never won because of Bjorg.

Connors didn’t play at Roland Garros - as was pointed out to me - he did win on clay at the US Open.

Becker, Edberg and Sampras were vastly overrated, as is Federer.

There’s a reason the field court season is less than a month - it is shit.

The likes of Agassi, Bjorg and Connors deserve to be up there and compared with Nadal - the others don’t.

dungeon this crap to fuck will you @The Dunph

[quote=“Rudi, post: 818745, member: 1052”]McEnroe never won because of Bjorg.

Connors didn’t play at Roland Garros - as was pointed out to me - he did win on clay at the US Open.

Becker, Edberg and Sampras were vastly overrated, as is Federer.

There’s a reason the field court season is less than a month - it is shit.

The likes of Agassi, Bjorg and Connors deserve to be up there and compared with Nadal - the others don’t.[/quote]

I know you’ve only discovered tennis in the last few years since you developed your creepy man crush on Nadal so you should really stay away from weighty debates such as the greatest player of all time as you just show yourself up to have little or no knowledge or feel for the game, its history or traditions. Thought you would have learned your lesson after you were shown up as not knowing who Jimmy Connors was but evidently not.

Your assertion that ‘McEnore never won because of Borg’ is nonsensical. McEnore and Borg never met at Roland Garros. They had their two famous meetings at the All England Club in the 1980 & 81 finals which they shared one apiece. They only met on two other occasions in a Grand Slam at the US Open finals in 1980 & 81, both of which were won by McEnroe. In fact they effectively operated in different eras bar a short overlap from about 1979-81. Borg started out in 1973, retiring in 1981. McEnroe started out in the late 70’s, retiring in 1992.

Your assertion that Becker, Edberg, Sampras and Federer are overrated and as you’ve said before not great players, shows you up as nothing but an utter clown.

Sampras was a vastly superior player to Agassi. You seem to put great store on head to head match ups, never the most accurate of indicators. In the case of Sampras and Agassi who had only a year between them in age and who’s careers ran more or less parallel, they may be more instructive than usual. Sampras won 14 Grand Slams to Agassi’s 8. In Grand Slam meetings it was 6-3 to Sampras in head to heads, Sampras winning 4 of their 5 finals they met in and winning all 6 of their meetings at the Championship and the US Open.

[quote=“Manuel Zelaya, post: 818757, member: 377”]I know you’ve only discovered tennis in the last few years since you developed your creepy man crush on Nadal so you should really stay away from weighty debates such as the greatest player of all time as you just show yourself up to have little or no knowledge or feel for the game, its history or traditions. Thought you would have learned your lesson after you were shown up as not knowing who Jimmy Connors was but evidently not.

Your assertion that ‘McEnore never won because of Borg’ is nonsensical. McEnore and Borg never met at Roland Garros. They had their two famous meetings at the All England Club in the 1980 & 81 finals which they shared one apiece. They only met on two other occasions in a Grand Slam at the US Open finals in 1980 & 81, both of which were won by McEnroe. In fact they effectively operated in different eras bar a short overlap from about 1979-81. Borg started out in 1973, retiring in 1981. McEnroe started out in the late 70’s, retiring in 1992.

Your assertion that Becker, Edberg, Sampras and Federer are overrated and as you’ve said before not great players, shows you up as nothing but an utter clown.

Sampras was a vastly superior player to Agassi. You seem to put great store on head to head match ups, never the most accurate of indicators. In the case of Sampras and Agassi who had only a year between them in age and who’s careers ran more or less parallel, they may be more instructive than usual. Sampras won 14 Grand Slams to Agassi’s 8. In Grand Slam meetings it was 6-3 to Sampras in head to heads, Sampras winning 4 of their 5 finals they met in and winning all 6 of their meetings at the Championship and the US Open.[/quote]

Agassi has a gold slam and a grand slam. Sampras does not.

Oh for fuck sake. Despite the fact that Sampras has 14 grand slam titles to Agassi’s 8 slams, also add in the Sampras was world number 1 for 286 weeks compared to Agassi’s 101 and you say that Agassi is a better player because he won a gold medal? Would ya fuck off ya bleedin retard and stop sniffing the drugs coming out of Nadal’s arse.

Did Sampras ever win Roland Garros? No.

Your logic is twisted and nonsensical.

[quote=“Rudi, post: 818774, member: 1052”]Did Sampras ever win Roland Garros? No.

Your logic is twisted and nonsensical.[/quote]

Ah here will ya stop your embarrassing yourself.

No embarrassment here. You have already made a cunt out of yourself for having the ignorance to ever write off Rafael Nadal.

You’re dealing with ignorance and stupidity beyond belief with this Rudi character. He stated earlier that McEnroe never won because of Borg. The sentence in itself doesn’t make any sense, but in the context it was said in, it appears he was droning on about the French Open again. McEnroe never played Borg in the French Open and as I pointed out to him McEnroe won 3 of their 4 Grand Slam meetings, which were all finals.

Borg, Connors and Agassi are the only three players who are seemingly fit to even lace Nadal’s boots. Federer, Sampras, Becker and Edberg are all overrated. Connors only got upgraded once Wrigley Field pointed out to him that Connors won the US Open on clay. He was blissfully unaware of that rather basic fact, also unaware that Connors boycotted Roland Garros for years as he was at loggerheads with the French authorities and had no clue that Connors has won more matches and tournaments than any other player in history.

Curious that Borg & Agassi can make his list of three challengers but Federer can’t. He seems to place great store on winning Grand Slams on all surfaces something Federer has managed to do. Borg never won a US Open or any grand slam on hard courts. Borg would be on my shortlist of the greatest players of all time any day of the week, but its a fairly curious criteria that places Borg so definitively ahead of Sampras and Federer.

No mention of Rod Laver. He’s probably never heard of him.

I’m not the ignorant one here. You came into a thread titled “Undisputable facts that make Rafa Nadal the Greatest Tennis Player of All Time” and started disputing them.

It would be better if you just rolled over and gave in - much like Federer has done to his superior.

[quote=“Rudi, post: 818774, member: 1052”]Did Sampras ever win Roland Garros? No.

Your logic is twisted and nonsensical.[/quote]
I have said it before and I will continue to say it. The French open is for fags.

post reported

whatever

post reported due to your snidey tone

accepted mate.

We’re coming to get you, Federer.

Rafa is without any doubt the best player to ever set foot on a court…what a guy."

:D:D:D

best ever, of that there is no doubt

Congratulations to @Rudi on being proven right yet again