Nadal, Federer, Serena Kick Off 2014 Tennis Season: Previews

LOL Rafa playing Rosol in his 1st match,i look forward to this one with relish,and also a touch of the jitters too,no messing about Rafa lets show him whos boss in that match.

December 28th, 2013 at 2:14 pm

How can I improving H2H with Rafa if they draw him Rosol?

December 28th, 2013 at 2:36 pm

Who is Rosol? Why is everyone talking about him?

December 28th, 2013 at 3:01 pm

Hahaha! 1 0 is like 22 10, yeah its the same!

December 28th, 2013 at 4:07 pm

Cant argue with you there Steve27, but if you think that almost 70% of Nadal’s wins against Fed have come on clay, it kind of takes away the impact of the h2h a little, don’t you think?

Not only that, Fed’s successes against Nadal have come more recently than you think.

a) Indian wells, 2012 Game on Fed
b) World Tour Finals 2011 Game on Fed
c) World Tour Finals 2010 Game on Fed.

All Hard of course.

But this head to head in favour of rafa, really is in favour of clay. Without Clay, *his bread and butter*, what would you be talking about then?

December 28th, 2013 at 5:26 pm

Clay is surface too, with much more history than hardcourts but is almost 2014 so I will respond you in another time.
“The important thing is not to win but to lose another.”

December 28th, 2013 at 6:24 pm

Even outside clay Rafa beats Federer 9-8.

December 28th, 2013 at 6:43 pm

Really, who cares?
Only vamosheads.
What really matters is 17.
If there ia a defining number in Tennis, that is it.
#keepdreamin

December 28th, 2013 at 6:56 pm

Fed fans don’t base themselves on facts but on assumptions. So madmax assumes that clay doesn’t count. Some other fan claims that all h2hs are equally meaningful so Davydenko is better than Rafa. LOl.
A h2h to be meaningful must include sufficient number of matches. The h2h with Fed has more than 30 matches and even the subset of it comprising h2h in slam finals has dear Fed on the losing side.
Now skeezer claims what really matters is 17. Yes to him. Not to history.
Fed fans will have to write a separate history anointing Fed as GOAT.
Rest of the world will have Rafa as the GOAT.Poor deluded Fed fans. My heart bleeds for them.

December 28th, 2013 at 7:39 pm

holdserve,
The only facts you provide is twisted nonsense.

December 28th, 2013 at 7:59 pm

^ said the king of #s and nonsense himself :/

December 28th, 2013 at 9:34 pm

vamosheads.
—
I take that as compliment, arrotard.

December 28th, 2013 at 9:42 pm

“I take that as compliment”

Excellant! So glad u do! It is what it is…

December 28th, 2013 at 10:06 pm

The h2h is not even 22 – 10. It’s 32-0! Remember? A healthy rafa never loses! Never!

December 28th, 2013 at 11:12 pm

Only if fed were not that good on clay, he’d have had an 8-6 h2h against rafa until 2013. Leading 2-1 on grass, 4-0 indoors. So basically the h2h is clay heavy 13-2.

Even without the wins outside of clay rafa leads 13-10 to date. See, rafa doesn’t need other surface victories to improve his h2h!

I would never say clay is not a surface. In fact RG is my 2nd fav slam. But grass is also a surface and so is indoors. And if there were more matches between rafa and roger (during 2004-2011) on grass and indoors, roger would have had the upper hand always.

December 28th, 2013 at 11:32 pm

I don’t see how any tennis fan could say clay doesn’t count. Wasn’t tennis always played on grass or clay in the early years?? We’re always talking about ifs ands or buts on this forum….what if hard court had never been invented?? A whole different scenario, me thinks!!

Vamos Rafa!

December 29th, 2013 at 12:04 am

Sirius, your post borders on the ridiculous. Rafa was just 17 or 18 in 2004. It is truly ridiculous to compare a teenaged Rafa with a Fed in his prime.Of course Fed would win. Fed should have won on all surfaces but Rafa was so good that despite not being at full strength and with a still developing game, he was still beating Fed on clay and even on hardcourt (Miami 2004).
Fed at 18 was nowhere on any surface.
To have a fair comparison, you have to consider the years 2008 to 2010 when both were in their prime. After 2010, Fed went out of his prime.
Between 2008 and 2010 Rafa excelled Fed on all surfaces, had more slams, more Masters, more weeks at no. 1, more year end no. 1 etc.

December 29th, 2013 at 12:31 am

And Sirius you are right about 32-0. Had Fed and Rafa been the same age it would have been probably 32-0. When Rafa was below 22, Fed was able to beat him a couple of times especially on grass. But once Rafa reached 22, he beat Fed on grass and hard courts. So much for Fed’s supposed superiority on those surfaces. However Fed is better on indoor hard courts. Be happy the fake GOAT could beat Rafa on one surface. Of course, now Rafa can beat him there also.

December 29th, 2013 at 12:36 am

yay! tennis is back….

December 29th, 2013 at 12:43 am

“your post borders on the ridiculous”
No, uh…he’s tellng you something deeper. Your posts are the mirror image of this. Look in the mirror and you’ll see. Its called an epiphany. Eureka!

@Okiegal
You have to look @holdserve posts, the ultimate proof of ifs and buts and probablies.
Truly. Clay is a surface, and should be considered 1 of the 4 most important types of surfaces. But it is not THE most important surface. To truly judge a players capabilities on the tour, you have to consider what a players success is on all surfaces compared to others. This is called the complete player. One who rises above all.

December 29th, 2013 at 12:45 am

“rafa was a teengaer”, “Once rafa reached 22″…

the age excuse

rafa turned pro in 2001. Won the RG at 2005 with 4 years of experience at the pro level. So, experience wise he was not a baby. And physically he had the endurance that no one could match at that time (look at his 5 set records). Now nole proved that he’s a rival to rafa on the endurance department

December 29th, 2013 at 12:57 am

As a neutral, I think the head-to-head gets more in favor of Rafa because of the 8-2 advantage on outdoor hard-courts. It’s hard to believe Fed has only beaten Rafa once in Miami and once in Indian Wells on outdoor hard-courts. I think they didn’t play a single match between Dubai 2006 and AO 2009 on outdoor hard-courts.

Personally, I think Fed should’ve done much better than that for someone who has nine majors on that surface. Flip it to 2-8 and it’s 16-16 , even steven. But then it’s also true that they didn’t play against each other outdoors in 2007 and 2008.

December 29th, 2013 at 1:10 am

Well, Skeez, Rafa hasn’t risen to surpass the GS record of Fed…..He may never, but I still think head to head has to account for something…..lots of tennis moguls think so too. Hey, I don’t think clay is the most important surface, I agree with you that all surfaces are important, but by the same token all the arguments on the goat issue (for Fed) the clay court wins of Rafa always comes into play. Fed fans remind everyone that IF it weren’t for clay courts the head to head would be totally different. Well, we don’t know that for sure. It is what it is.

Personally, I still think it is too soon to make that assumption. Rafa is definitely the best clay courter ever and Fed the best hard court player. I do think if Novak had gotten is endurance problem fixed way before he did, I think he would have posed a big problem on the best hard court player issue. He is a great HC player, one of the best I have ever seen. Roger and Rafa have a lot of titles, don’t know if Novak can catch up or not. I am not familiar with all his titles to compare…maybe I will check that out. You probably already know…but you comment above, I will agree with.

December 29th, 2013 at 1:24 am

^thats not a neutral. Again, adjusting the facts with variables is a thing you can argue all day long. What matters is playing who is in front of you every match and winning the most titles and Slams. In the end nothing else matters.

December 29th, 2013 at 1:25 am

I have never cared about the H2H argument,for me the only thing a tennis player can hope to do is beat whomever is stood in front of them at the time,however i do find it unfair when people bring up the whole Rafas wins are mostly on clay,one could flip that argument around and say that Rogers surface bias is on HCs against Rafa,but why would i take out one surface in favour of another as IMO that does not seem fair to the players?surely all surfaces count right?and it just means different players happen to be better players on different surfaces,my two cents.

December 29th, 2013 at 2:04 am

@Skeez^^^

That’s a fair statement.

December 29th, 2013 at 2:05 am

@Chic

I’ll double your two cents and agree with everything you said……my thoughts exactly!!

December 29th, 2013 at 2:13 am

skeezer Says:
“Really, who cares?
Only vamosheads.”

Past greats like Agassi, Sampras, etc do care about the H2H.
Nobody cares what the fed fans think.
I have not heard from any past great that H2H is irrelevant except the kids who worship federer.
#RafaIsTheBest

December 29th, 2013 at 2:44 am

@skeezer:

Not necessarily true. Variables need to be accounted for. If Head-to-heads were irrelevant, Emerson would be rated ahead of Laver but he isn’t despite the fact he has won one more major than him. I personally think, one cannot abstract away such a rich debate to the number of titles won and the number of grandslams.

We have to ask one question to ourselves: a player beats 8 hall-of-famers to win say 10 slams, another play beats say 2 hall-of-famers to win say 12 slams. If you subscribe to the ‘quantity matters club’, you’ll say the latter is superior to the former. If you subscribe to the ‘quality matters club’, you’ll say the former is superior to the latter. It’s relative.

I’m very much in the quality club. My fellow Nole fans may or may not agree with me on this. Just my personal opinion.

December 29th, 2013 at 3:17 am

Patson,
Great post. You nailed it.

December 29th, 2013 at 3:45 am

Monte Carlo and Davis Cup not on Fed’s schedule. Deserting poor Stan AGAIN!! Why doesn’t he want to play for his country??
#IMeAndMyself

December 29th, 2013 at 4:27 am

Steve 27 Says:
Hahaha! 1 0 is like 22 10, yeah its the same!

December 28th, 2013 at 4:07 pm

madmax Says:
Cant argue with you there Steve27, but if you think that almost 70% of Nadal’s wins against Fed have come on clay, it kind of takes away the impact of the h2h a little, don’t you think?

Not only that, Fed’s successes against Nadal have come more recently than you think.

a) Indian wells, 2012 Game on Fed
b) World Tour Finals 2011 Game on Fed
c) World Tour Finals 2010 Game on Fed.

All Hard of course.

I think it is important to read the threads carefully. I did not, nor did any other, say that Clay was *not* important.

You see Steve, you bring something up, in order to titilate teh fans and you start the whole ball rolling again. On a thread meant for discussion about *Fedberg*. Seriously, give it a clean rest.

Rafa this, rafa that. Fact. Rafa’s wins come 70% on clay. Count the tournaments on the men’s ATP, IF there were more tournaments on Grass OR Hard, who do you think would win? Why do you think that Rafa has advocated there should be more tournaments on clay? Why do you think he has complained so much about this in 2013? Why do you think he hates hard court in door so much? Why do you think he would want the end of year finals to be on clay? It’s not rocket science, and until there is someone (perhaps Novak?) who has the belief that they can win against him on clay, clay tournaments will become more boring than ever to watch.

It’s not that clay tournaments are not important, BUT why is it that there are more clay than other surfaces? Grass for example?

That has to be thrown into the argument.

Okiegal Says:
I don’t see how any tennis fan could say clay doesn’t count. Wasn’t tennis always played on grass or clay in the early years?? We’re always talking about ifs ands or buts on this forum….what if hard court had never been invented?? A whole different scenario, me thinks!!

Vamos Rafa!

December 29th, 2013 at 12:04 am

Oki,

No one has said that. Read more carefully please before you make wrong assumptions. Not invented. Do the stats. Almost 70% of tournaments that Rafa has won, have come on clay. You only have to get a calculator to work that one out.

“Wasn’t tennis always played on grass or clay in the early years??”

You need to be more specific here, before people can answer your question Oki.

Over what period?

Amateur or Professional era, etc?

It’s important to remember (and often it isn’t), that Fed has beaten rafa recently, IN RAFA’S PRIME YEARS, as early as 2012, 2011, and 2010, it is just so often, (or conveniently) forgotten, and then come the lame excuses, he was tired, he has bad knees, his parents had a divorce, I mean, seriously.

December 29th, 2013 at 4:39 am

If Fed was younger to Rafa/Nole/Murray group, sampras would be still leading…Fed was lucky to get many slams in his early stages.

December 29th, 2013 at 4:40 am

Roger keeps on saying that Davis Cup is important to him, but clearly it’s not.
#Deceive

December 29th, 2013 at 4:44 am

“On a thread meant for discussion about *Fedberg*. Seriously, give it a clean rest.”

LOL. Check it again. Are you ok ?

December 29th, 2013 at 4:49 am

Slice tennis,

I am so glad you are back! Have you had some food this morning? Seems like you are in a chirpier mood :)

Check out the comment from Steve27, your buddy. We are talking how this started. Why should it be that Fed fans are not allowed to respond to a random comment on a thread that had nothing to do with the GOAT/h2h discussion.

Rather than continue with it, say something different slicetennis..ssshhhhhh now..hush.

December 29th, 2013 at 4:55 am

In all seriousness Slicetennis. I have a bit of the flu right now, over christmas, but I am thankful for your concern :) You okay too?

Regarding my questions about the questions Oki presented: Do you think you could answer those instead? I would be honestly interested in your response, *as you and I seem to be the only ones up this morning*.

Thanks.

December 29th, 2013 at 4:58 am

Yeah, you got me Slicetennis, about kicking off the season!, so what that got to do with GOAT and H2H is my question?

December 29th, 2013 at 4:59 am

Sirius Fed turned pro in 1998 but where was he till 2003?
Age does matter no matter how much you try to discount it. History ( again something Fed fans do not care for ) shows that players reach their peak around 22 and get out of it around 28-29. Virtually all players including Fed, Sampras followed this trend. So far we have seen Rafa also peaked around 22 when he dethroned Fed from grass and also no.
Science has an explanation for this but Science and facts do not exist in Fed world.
They claim Fed is losing now because he is too old but they refuse to accept that between 2004 and 2007 Rafa was too young. If according to these irationals Rafa was already in full form in 2004 then why is his peak as represented by no. of slams, getting year end no. 1 coming on or after 2008?
If you draw a graph ( sorry I won’t educate you about what graphs are ) for the set of all greats you can easily see that the peak is between 22 and 29.
Hippy chic, I am sorry you don’t give importance to h2h. You are probably brain washed by Fed fans.
A h2h between 2 greats with more than 30 matches is highly significant because of the number of matches ( sample size) as well as the fact that they being greats, most of the matches would be important ones like finals or semi finals of slams and Masters.
Fed fans dismiss rigged draws ( in favor of Fed) despite statistical evidence, they dismiss significant h2h by talking about Rosol.
In probability, you can draw concusions with a high degree of certainty when the number of observations is significantly high.

December 29th, 2013 at 5:02 am

Anyway, Fellow Rafa fans, we can never convince Fed fans because they lack logic.
We need not worry about their deluded statements as they are not going to write history. They may succeed in brainwashing some Rafa fans but then history is not going to be written by those Rafa fans either.
The h2h does prove Rafa is better than Fed.
Swallow that bitterness Fed fans!

December 29th, 2013 at 5:11 am

Slice tennis, the Fed fans make false assumptions even about the thread they are in ( i.e. even the verification of the thread is beyond them)

December 29th, 2013 at 5:16 am

holdserve,

why is it that it is you, and mostly you, who continually talk abou this age thing. You think Fed is the only one growing old? What youth serum are you taking?

holdserve Says:
Sirius Fed turned pro in 1998 but where was he till 2003?
Firstly, why is it that age has everthing to do with fed but nothing to do with rafa? Sirius is right. Age does matter no matter how much you try to discount it. History ( again something Fed fans do not care for ) shows that players reach their peak around 22 and get out of it around 28-29. Virtually all players including Fed, Sampras followed this trend. So far we have seen Rafa also peaked around 22 when he dethroned Fed from grass and also no.
Science has an explanation for this but Science and facts do not exist in Fed world.

“So far we have seen Rafa also peaked around 22 when he dethroned Fed from grass”.

Yes. Happened one time.

But please, Sirius came up with a really good argument. About age.
When someone turns pro, they turn pro. Doesn’t matter if rafa was 7 years old, and was playing professionally, he won his first slam when he was 19 was it? or 20? Fed was 21. Some people take more time to mature, a bit like your good self.

Holdserve, smell the coffee.

Skeezer says its the grand slams that count, which signify the GOAT. Who am I to argue?

You want to talk about H2H. It’s not everything.

It is you who mentions this bitterness time and again. Therapy.

December 29th, 2013 at 5:31 am

http://www.foxsports.com.au/tennis/why-isnt-rafael-nadal-considered-the-greatest-tennis-player-of-all-time/story-e6frf4mu-1226647065831
Interesting article albeit dated May 2013.
“So as you can see Nadal has every right to be rated the superior player. But good luck in trying to find someone who agrees”.

December 29th, 2013 at 6:39 am

madmax
If skeezer is your authority that is your choice. People follow cult leaders blindly even though the cult leader talks rubbish. Your choice.
Good luck! Hope you have a better fate than most cult followers.

December 29th, 2013 at 7:32 am

Giles,

Happy New year to you…(almost!). Thanks for the link…have seen it and read it…absolutely should be in the discussion..no argument there…

Holdserve,

Skeezer is NOT my leader..I have my opinion and I share it – that is all.

Skeezer said the GOAT issue (raised earlier in this thread, completely off task and random, this is how the tournaments are assessed. That is it. Fact.

We started talking about the GOAT issue as steve27 talked about h2h, and then I mentioned clay tournys being his majority competition wins. Fact.

Holdserve why are you so defensive all the time? You can’t have a proper discussion here with you getting all grumpy so often.

December 29th, 2013 at 7:43 am

Holdserve,

both you and slice tennis (are you the same poster?) are both grumpy this morning.

December 29th, 2013 at 7:45 am

I see there is still the usual clay doesn’t count excuse when it’s about h2h with Roger. Then we would need to take out Roger’s favourite surface as well. What would be left then? Every surface counts the same way. All those if’s and but’s are irrelevant. Only the matches that actually took place count. So what if Rafa’s favourite surface is clay? There is no rule that hardcourts are more valuable or count for twice as much. I can agree that there could me more tournaments on grass, but hard courts are there for about 75% of the season. Isn’t that enough? Rafa didn’t even play that many clay tournaments through the years. Only in 2005 and this past season he played on clay in February. He could have done that every year. It’s just the fact that he wins most of them that makes people believe he does nothing else. The h2h shows that Rafa beat Roger a lot more than the other way round, while Rafa and Novak are pretty much even. That is just a fact. Now if people like to point out why the h2h doesn’t count, nothing can be done about it. People won’t change their views on that, no matter whose side they are on.

December 29th, 2013 at 9:44 am

Nadal/Djokovic h2h 22-17.

December 29th, 2013 at 10:35 am

Hey madmax. Happy New Year to you too.

December 29th, 2013 at 11:17 am

Alexandra:

“I can agree that there could me more tournaments on grass, but hard courts are there for about 75% of the season. Isn’t that enough?

Rafa didn’t even play that many clay tournaments through the years.

“Huh?” Alexandra? “Huh?”

Only in 2005 and this past season he played on clay in February. He could have done that every year. It’s just the fact that he wins most of them that makes people believe he does nothing else”.

Rafa has been playing clay tournaments for over 12 years now. Only in 2005 and this past season he played on Clay?

What are you talking about?

Nadal has played clay court tournaments (more of them) since 2005.

December 29th, 2013 at 11:18 am

Giles, you posted a link earlier about the GOAT discussion again, here is another one, an extract first of all, you can read the whole one from the link at the bottom of this.

You are welcome.

“Cut the crap with the Rafael Nadal/greatest of all time discussion. Clay-court tennis is so different from the other surfaces that it could legitimately be considered a different sport. Clay slows everything down so much that seniors can play on it and be reasonably competitive. All clay does is allow marginally talented players to have pro careers by playing mostly clay events. Now, obviously Nadal is not a marginal talent. But, if he ends up with 16 majors and, say, nine or 10 are French Opens, in my opinion you can’t really count all those titles as equivalent to other major titles. He is far more than a specialist, but one or two titles in the other events makes him a great player, not the GOAT by a long shot”.
— Willie B., Bethesda, Md.

• First, I don’t get the passion that this discussion — fun, hypothetical, and, above all, ongoing — triggers. That the Internet breeds incivility and discourteous remarks is something other than a news flash. But this subject seems to engender a spectacular level of nastiness. To wit: A reader — from progressive Bethesda, no less! — beginning an email to a complete stranger with the directive, “Cut the crap.” But, yes, Willie B. of Bethesda, let’s indeed cut the crap …

One of the consequences of the French Open is that it has fanned the flames of the GOAT debate. We call the Nadal Truthers to the stand:

Hey, he just turned 27 and won his 13th major. That is, he’s closing in on Pete Sampras, within sniffing distance of Roger Federer (17) and still has years to go. He has won a major nine straight years now — something Federer never did. He was won more Masters Series titles than anyone in history. He’s doing it all in this — forgive the cliché, Your Honor — golden era.

And, yes, there’s that most damning bit of evidence: (jury box gasps) the head-to-head record against Federer. 20-10. (now 22)Tony Kornheiser has, allegedly, been called as a witness and has vigorously testified in Nadal’s favor. I’m not sure this was on the record, but a well-regarded former champion recently put it like this: “How can Federer be the greatest of all time when he’s not even the greatest of HIS era?” Anything further counsel? No? Then let’s hear from the defense.

Federer Truthers, please approach.

Federer still has 30 percent more majors. His titles are less concentrated, his majors far more diverse. He has played more consistently, been healthier and that quarterfinal streak (36 straight at majors) is the real mark. Also, note how many times Nadal has won the year-end shebang? (Hint: zero, because his body can’t last the entire season, and durability is part of “greatness.”)

Nadal is the best on clay. We’ll give you that. But that’s only one surface. Take away clay, and Nadal has won “only” four Slams.

He doesn’t even have a winning head-to-head record against Federer off clay. Artistry and style has to count for something, and Federer is Flaubert; Nadal is James Patterson. Federer moves on little cat feet like the fog; Nadal grinds. Federer’s racket is a paintbrush in his hand; in Nadal’s it is a truncheon.

Me? I think there’s a fun and vigorous debate to be had. Right now, I think Federer still holds the slight edge. Here’s an exercise a reader suggested. Go to their respective Wikipedia pages, scroll to the Slam results grid and then look at the color coding. Hard to see that and not conclude — today, anyway — that Federer is superior.

But the operative phrase is “right now.” This is fluid. And in the end, why not — after a nod of gratitude, or at least awareness, to our good fortune, of living through a time two GOAT candidates playing simultaneously — we wait until their careers are over before making a grand and final determination? Here’s a nice write-up (pre-Paris) by Richard Hinds.

I’m sure we’ll have this discussion now after each Slam. And that’s fine. Part of the run of fandom, even if the GOAT title is mythical and inherently subjective. But — at the risk of triple mixing metaphors — why not hold fire and wait until all the results are in before reaching a verdict?

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/tennis/news/20130612/rafael-nadal-roger-federer-french-open-mailbag/#ixzz2osjhQvKn

December 29th, 2013 at 11:28 am

Holdserve nothing to do with been brainwashed by the Federer fans,its just the whole H2H/GOAT topic is something ive never particulaly cared that much about,its black and white you can only be expected to beat whomever is stood in front of you,and Roger has 17 GS and Rafa has 13 GS end of story.

December 29th, 2013 at 12:06 pm

Alexandra says:

“Only in 2005 and this past season he played on clay in February”

Madmax says:

“Rafa has been playing clay tournaments for over 12 years now. Only in 2005 and this past season he played on Clay?

What are you talking about?”

Hey madmax,
You have serious issues with your reading and comprehension skills.

Please start treating it and get well soon.

December 29th, 2013 at 12:09 pm

madmax. There will always be arguments from fans of both sides. As Rafa says “let’s wait till our careers are over”. In the meantime this will be a never- ending debate.
May the best man win!!
Vamos Rafa!

December 29th, 2013 at 12:15 pm

Giles agree.

Slicetennis, or should I say holdserve? If you feel I need clarification, so be it. May be there is something wrong with my eye sight. Happy you are able to point things out to me, so I am waiting. I don’t see anything wrong in my reply to Alex, she said “Rafa didn’t even play that many clay tournaments through the years, and if that isn’t wrong slice, or clear, then really,Alex needs to explain further.

December 29th, 2013 at 7:32 pm

@Madmax

I haven’t forsaken you, went to Church this morning and can’t find my stylus to type my response on my Kindle….trying to do it wit my little fat fingers. LOL……but here goes……I know I didn’t just dream it up that I have read on this forum from Fed fans about head to head would be different if not for clay court tourneys…….meaning Fed would lead that statistic, but we will never know that for sure, will we? The first person I ever heard say It would be hard to claim Fed as GOAT because of h 2 h against Rafa was John McEnroe. I happen to agree
….Roger has trouble with the southpaw, pure, plain and simple.

Regarding hard courts….I watched Chis Evert win 3 US Opens on clay. In 1978 the US open was changed to hard court….before that all slams were on grass and clay…..but I’m sure you know that…if not, I’m obviously a lot older than you. Aussie Open went from grass to hard in 1988. So, I have watched a lot of tennis under that format. 35 yrs ago for the US Open change and 25 yrs for the Aussie Open change.

I reread your post that you directed to me and you are wrong about one thing for sure. At my age I DO NEED A CALCULATOR!! ….LOL

I have answered your questions as best I can. I don’t claim to be an authority on tennis, but I love watching this sport very much. In all my years of watching, I have a fav and Rafa is mine now. I will not comment on your last comment about lame excuses. If you can’t see that he’s an amazing athlete, well…that makes me speechless. Can I see that Fed is??? …….absolutely! Joker…for sure. To watch all these guys compete against each other is what I live for.

Sorry my comments were late, but have had an extra busy day. Enjoyed our chat! Hope I cleared up some of your thoughts about my thoughts!

December 29th, 2013 at 11:25 pm

“Slicetennis, or should I say holdserve”

You can say whatever you want. slicetennis, holdserve, breakserve, hawkeye, giles, steve 27, Alexandra, thangs, humble rafa and many more. All these are different names for the only single Rafa fan in the world. LMAO.

December 30th, 2013 at 5:25 am

“May be there is something wrong with my eye sight.”

mad max,

That is pretty much 100% true. Go back and read alexandras post regarding that and look for the keyword “February”.

Even a 6 yr old could read that and understand. How old are you. Hope you understand your mistake atleast now. Don’t make a fool out of yourself repeatedly. Its getting too boring.

December 30th, 2013 at 5:32 am

Okiegal Says:
@Madmax

Oki! I have found it! Thanks for the comprehensive reply.

Yes, I do find Nadal an amazing athlete. I have no quibble with that. My point at the time was that he complains a lot about tournaments NOT being on clay, and then it escalated from there.

The GOATdom argument and Mcenroe, well, you see there are many things that Mac has said and they are well documented too. He swings from Roger to others and back again. I won’t print them here. So he is a bit fly by night with his comments.

Slicetennis, enough with the snidey remarks. I will ignore you from now on. It is easy to miss words out when you are reading quickly. We can’t all be as perfect as you. I think I have made my point, now skip along.

December 30th, 2013 at 11:23 am

@madmax

Sorry , I was on a different wave link…..I guess. Thought the h 2 h regarding all of Rafa’s clay wins was the issue. Sorry I got off course. I don’t know why there would even be discussion on Rafa wanting more clay, that’s a no brainer. So the first of the year…….boom baby…..that’s just what he did, more clay in his schedule.

Max, I think after you found out how “ancient” I was, knowing about the old slams being clay and grass, you chose not to fuss with me…….a big thanks for RESPECTING YOUR ELDERS! LOL

Have a Merry New Year and a Happy Hangover!! Oki

December 30th, 2013 at 5:10 pm

I wonder how Fed feels about his losing record against Rafa…..bet it tears him up and his ego is probably rock bottom. Face it, he has trouble beating the southpaw. Rafa is in Rogers head like Novak is in Rafa’s head……which makes Novak clear headed and that’s why he was number one for awhile. Then the number one ranking got in Novak’s head and so on and so forth. Being number one adds another variable in the grand scheme of things…..which is called pressure.

Now, before my fellow Rafa fans get in my face about me saying Novak was in Rafa’s head, Rafa himself said that. Of course, Rafa has beaten Novak, as of late. Those two are so equally matched up that when they meet, it’s a toss up who will win. They have brought some awesome tennis to us fans. Keep it up, guys! 2014 is just about here.

December 30th, 2013 at 6:14 pm

Very fast exciting courts in Doha.

No. 78 34 yr old Karlovic takes out No. 7 Berdych 7-6, 7-6 with three break points and zero service breaks. Dr. Ivo had 25 aces and 49 winners (most of them service winners).

How exciting.

Be careful what you wish for. Zzzzzzzzzzzz.

December 30th, 2013 at 7:19 pm