Federer is closing in on 300 weeks at Number UNO!

noleisthebest wrote:

Amritia3ee wrote:
Do you even know what you are talking about?
Find me one link which shows Nadal talks about low bounce?
Tenez himself talked about the low bounce on indoor hard on 606v2 last year.

You the one who bleats about it non-stop, not I.
What you do is pick up stuff people talk about on forums and then doctor it out here in complete ignorance.
I love Novak to bits but would never go to lengths you do in order to idolise your favourite player fighting tooth and nail against anyone who says anything that tarnishes Nadal's halo.
He is not worth it.
Forget about him and enjoy tennis. Just about everyone on the tour plays it more pleasing on the eye than Nadal.

I decide who I like watching, its my personal choice
I talk about the fact he doesn't play well on indoor hard, that's a fact.

Amritia3ee wrote:Funny, if Nadal was cycling down in 2009 during the WTF, how on earth did he crush Berdych a week later on clay
My theory is that on indoor hard he struggles more, and hence his results aren't as good. A week later on clay, it is another story, he loves clay.
I wonder what the conspiracy theorists will say? Was he cycling up for the last match of the season??
Isn't it a coincidence that he 'cycles down' for indoor hard, and 'cycles up' for clay a week later. He grew up on clay, it suits his play best.
Isn't it a coincidence that Nadal, a player who everyone thought would have to retire at 23 due to knee troubles, gets a knee injury? Silent ban is it? Why- because he can't put a definitive date?? Surely if it was a ban he would know how long he was banned for. Knee injuries are another issue. Every injury is potentially unique. Look at Wilshere, Monfils, Jimmy Bullard, Flintoff, all of them had knee injuries and they could never put a definitive date on when they would return. Wilshere was meant to be back last month, still out.

So your defence is that if Nadal is cycling down he automatically cant play tennis or win a match and that his win over Berdych on clay proves those loses is nothing more then the conditions
So what happened to his 2010 U.S Open serve at the WTF? Did he change his grip again,and why did he change his racket at the beginning of this season when he could have just changed his grip?
Id also like you explain to me why Nadal lost so much weight,he lost a significant amount of muscle mass towards the end of 09,this is consistent with what happens when you use steroids which contains growth hormones.Your muscles inflate with water and when you cycle down you " deflate"
I would also like you to explain to me how Nadal developed such a muscular build during the summer or 2010 when there were reports of him being bigger then ever
Explain to me how someone who does zero weight/gym training can develop an upper body that defined and muscular while running virtual marathons in grand slams by simply swinging a racket around...body builders must be idiots to be pumping iron away like that when you can just develop biceps by swinging a racket

chinese whispers :P

maybe it started from 'baddiel impaled a thugs nest last nonmember'

1. Conversely I could argue you can't prove doping by just the results.
2. He served well at USO 2010, and I think his serve was as good in 2011. Djokovic improved from 2010 to 2011, and Nadal kept on losing to him which made his serve look worse. It's not pace which troubles Djokovic, you have to serve into his body.
3. Muscle tone can vary with time- it's not necessary that it's doping.
4. There are photos of Nadal working in a gym in his autobiography.

luvsports! wrote:chinese whispers :P

maybe it started from 'baddiel impaled a thugs nest last nonmember'

Amritia3ee wrote:

Veejay wrote:
You may use the indoor hard court season as an excuse but even you have to be real and admit that he isnt half the player he is during the clay as grass season.

His win over Berdych on clay a week later WTF 2009 is still his most one sided match against Berdych.

Veejay wrote:
Amritia,your attempt to defend Nadal is enduring,even I have to to admit that youve improved a bit since the last time we discussed this

lol thanks

Veejay wrote:
What happens if he is injured?

All his career people have been saying he will retire soon due to knee injury. 'Inevitable' in-fact as many have put it.
Why hasn't he been able to put a definitive time-scale? It's an injury. Look at Wilshere. He was meant to be back last month. Injuries aren't always the same. If it's a silent ban it's much easier to give a specific date, surely?

Veejay wrote:
Im not speculating that Nadal dopes,I know for a fact that he does,I base it on my personal experience of using and training people who use PED's.

How can I believe you? That could be a convenient lie, or it could potentially be the truth. Like a lot of things in this debate, there is simply no hard proof or evidence. Just speculation.

Veejay wrote:
Then theres the rumour Ive been told by a friend who is close to someone who works for IMG,who claimed Nadal failed a drugs test last November

A rumour. Told by a friend. Who was told by another (his) friend. Who may/may not work for IMG. Who made a huge claim about Nadal.
Hardly bulletproof stuff is it?

Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps there is no career threatening injury? 7 years and 11 majors later...doesnt looks like his career was ever in threat,at 2011 AO he was playing on a hamstring injury running and jumping for 3+ hours almost making a come back in the 3 set on an injury that would normally see you limping off court in agony rather then running around.Ask any rhythmic gymnast,ballet dancer or profession that requires extreme flexibility,they will all tell you that you never fully recover from a hamstring injury,you have to be so careful.For his build Im amazed he doesnt have hamstring injuries more frequently.Hamstring injuries happen mainly for 2 reasons,1 because you dont warm up properly and 2 because you dont stretch enough.Nadal is probably the least flexible player as his muscles are really short
Not only that,we are expected to believe he risked millions in prize money and endorsements,risking his career by possibly aggravating the injury even more ( as if he doesnt have enough career threatening injuries) all for a match he knew he was going to lose anyway
LOL Ameritia,youre grasping at straws here...you dont have to believe me but to accuse me of lying is desperate
OK let me ask you this if Im lying then,why would the French Canal t.v accuse Nadal of doping if they have no evidence or proof
Why target him? Can you give me one logical,legitimate reason why they decided to air such slanderous skits that would ruin a pro athletes reputation
See the funny thing here is I see you mentioning other players who some are suspicious of,but yet I dont see you going on your crusade to defend any of them,you only defend Nadal.I dont see you try to dispute Federer or Murray or Djokovic....why not?
If you believe Nadal is innocent then you must surely believe everyone else is too,or is it just a case of...everyone else could be doping just not Nadal

1. Nadal's knee injury looks like it may be career threatening, no??
2. I am not saying you are necessarily lying, but I don't know for sure whether you are telling the truth. It seems very convenient.
3. The French Canal thing was a comedy sketch if I remember, not a real news report. They also did one on Margaret Thatcher, joking she was actually a man. A comedy sketch- hardly a bulletproof source is it.
4. Personally I don't think any of the top 4 are doping. But they all could be.

Amritia3ee wrote:1. Conversely I could argue you can't prove doping by just the results.
2. He served well at USO 2010, and I think his serve was as good in 2011. Djokovic improved from 2010 to 2011, and Nadal kept on losing to him which made his serve look worse. It's not pace which troubles Djokovic, you have to serve into his body.
3. Muscle tone can vary with time- it's not necessary that it's doping.
4. There are photos of Nadal working in a gym in his autobiography.

So if Djokovic was the reason why Nadal's serve looked worse then why did Nadal change his racket,the weight of the frame etc..in fact he spent much of 2011 trying to improve his serve to what it was during the 2010 summer,why did all of that if as you claim his serve was basically the same
If all it took was a change of grip,why could he just change his grip again?
Why did his serve only improve on his return after being off tour for injury...how did he rehabilitate his knees and manage to improve his serve in under 3 weeks and if it only took 3 weeks to improve,why couldnt he improve it sooner?
Muscle tone can vary with time? What are you smoking...lol how can someone who does that much cadrio develop muscles like that?
When youre running as much as tennis players do you run a lot of your muscle tone away,thats why marathon runners are so lean,its also why youll never see a body builder on a treadmill,because they are afraid of running their muscle tone away.But yet Nadal develops a muscular physique without any weight training and all the running he does,its virtually impossible so how does he do that Amiritia?

Djokovic was improving Veejay, Nadal had to improve too (to keep up). I believe the racket change actually benefited his back-hand, much more than his serve.
How does Nadal develop muscular physique and run a lot? With science now I believe it is possible, legally. Of course he works out, in the gaps between tournaments I guarantee Nadal works out in the gym. Djokovic also is quite muscular, is he not? So is Murray.

As I said science is advancing, I am sure there are new ways to do this, legally.

Amritia3ee wrote:Djokovic was improving Veejay, Nadal had to improve too (to keep up). I believe the racket change actually benefited his back-hand, much more than his serve.
How does Nadal develop muscular physique and run a lot? With science now I believe it is possible, legally. Of course he works out, in the gaps between tournaments I guarantee Nadal works out in the gym. Djokovic also is quite muscular, is he not? So is Murray.

As I said science is advancing, I am sure there are new ways to do this, legally.

Im glad we agree on at least one point,I am also glad that you're clearly convinced that its impossible to achieve what Nadal does naturally and that youd have to "rely on modern science" to achieve that
Im also glad to see you at least admitting that Nadal is taking something,cause to achieve a ripped look like that will take no less then 4 visits to the gym per week,intense weight training,high protein diet and a cocktail of PED's
The only way Nadal will gain muscle tone without any weight training is purely down to growth hormones,especially on drug like Nandrolone,the only way Nadal can do that much cadrio and not lose that bulk until he cycles down is because of the drugs


If there were drugs out there that could help you achieve what anabolic steroids do,and they were legal and safe then:
1 there wouldnt be a market for steroids,
2 no one would be using steroids,there would be a virtual drug revolution among pro athletes
3 the drugs would rife in the gyms,
4 the companies who manufacture the drugs would be marketing them like other sports products,the drugs will be available over the counter
5 I would have heard of it by now

http://www.health24.com/fitness/Diet_Supplements/16-481-514,31198.asp
http://www.legalmuscle.com.au/
http://www.articlesbase.com/supplements-and-vitamins-articles/legal-athletic-supplements-991495.html

Anyway I am going to sleep now, we can continue this later.

Amritia3ee wrote:http://www.health24.com/fitness/Diet_Supplements/16-481-514,31198.asp
http://www.legalmuscle.com.au/
http://www.articlesbase.com/supplements-and-vitamins-articles/legal-athletic-supplements-991495.html

Anyway I am going to sleep now, we can continue this later.

LMAO

Is that supposed to replace steroids?
If I use these products will I achieve the same anabolic effect as I would with steroids?
Amiritia,your links are pathetic,you just googled it quickly without even reading and understanding what is being said
Creatine,Protein power Vitimins etc is nothing new and is used in combination with steroids for maximum achievement

If the drugs advertised on the links you posted could do even half of what steroids could,it will be illegal and banned cause you'll be gaining an unfair advantage by using them.After all thats the main reasons why drugs are banned,doesnt matter if its safe,if youre able to achieve things you wouldnt normally be able to by using them then thats doping

The other thing that doesnt make sense if that youre trying to prove that Nadal could have gained muscle tone by drinking protein shakes,ok fair enough thats fine but why would Nadal want to bulk up? The bigger he becomes the more awkward it becomes to play and move,plus its pretty risky for an athlete too cause you wouldnt want to put that much strain on your ligaments and skeleton by gaining weight,that could result in osteoporosis.With his already so called career threatening injuries,this could actually seriously cause some real career threatening injuries,real as in real,not real as his phantom injuries that he recovers from in record time
Nadal bulking up is merely a side effect of the hormones,he doesnt take the steroids to get bigger,the reason why your muscles inflates is mostly just to develop muscle growth and definition

http://flacko.info/rafael-nadal-muscles/

Anyone who looks at the above picture and knows anything about steroids will tell you he is 100% on the juice,see how ripped he is,every muscle is showing but yet his muscles arent solid,the definition is too perfect plus it looks unnatural,you cant achieve that look normally even if you're very athletic
And then look at the picture on the right,thats what happens when you completely cycle down,notice that theres hardly any definition,reason being that he never did weight training so his body hasnt actually transformed because of the hormones

Back on topic (this forum needs a permanent Nadal-bashing thread, otherwise every thread becomes monotonous with the usual descent into the favourite pastime. It reflects poorly on the creativity of article writers if there are so few topics, while all topics spiral into just one ...)

Federer can guarantee his place atop the South African Airways ATP Rankings by minimally reaching the Shanghai quarter-finals. Anything less, and Djokovic would overtake the Swiss by winning the Shanghai crown.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2012/10/41/Shanghai-No-1-Ranking-On-The-Line.aspx

Amritia3ee wrote:1. Nadal's knee injury looks like it may be career threatening, no??
2. I am not saying you are necessarily lying, but I don't know for sure whether you are telling the truth. It seems very convenient.
3. The French Canal thing was a comedy sketch if I remember, not a real news report. They also did one on Margaret Thatcher, joking she was actually a man. A comedy sketch- hardly a bulletproof source is it.
4. Personally I don't think any of the top 4 are doping. But they all could be.

Can you give me one good reason why I would lie to you?
Here I am trying to explain something to you,telling a lie would be shooting like myself in the foot,cause if you caught me out in a lie,then my credibility is shot and you wouldnt believe a word I said from here on out.
Why would I want to make up lies and smear Nadal, if my intention was just to taint him because he beat Federer well its not like theres a shortage of Nadal bashing around,look how much talk this subject has generated in recent months,a few months ago I was just me and a few others voicing our suspicions,since then theres been Yannick Noah,the French skits, and the internet is is swamped rumours about a silent ban
These are pretty serious allegations,I wouldnt make them if I wasnt sure thats why I only accuse the players I am absolutely certain of
The skits are a bit like south park but dont mistake the fact that they hide behind comedy,as harmless banter,they purposefully set out to accuse Spain of doping and the damage those skits did to Nadals reputation as a pro athlete is irreparable
I dont think a tv channel would air such slanderous and libellous skits about one of the worlds most prolific athletes without having something that will protect them in a court of law.Nadal is also one of IMG's top cash cows,you wouldnt want to mess with them even if you had a death wish

Veejay wrote:I dont think a tv channel would air such slanderous and libellous skits about one of the worlds most prolific athletes without having something that will protect them in a court of law.

Jay Leno, David Letterman, and many others make fun of the President of the United States. Do you think the US Govt will sue broadcasters?

The French skits are just that.

Journal du Dimanche retracted it's allegations regarding Nadal. Why? Why not offer it's 'proof' to the ITF and WADA?

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=2508656

During Wimbledon, the French newspaper Le Journal du Dimanche reported that Nadal was a target of a Spanish government investigation into doping that centered on cycling. The article had no byline. The International Tennis Federation and the Spanish government have since released statements denying that Nadal was a target.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/26/sports/tennis/26tennis.html?pagewanted=all

I get your point but thats a rather poor example Laverfan
The president is a figure who has to deal with criticism and satire and everything else the media throws at him on a daily basis
There is also a big difference between satire and libel,defamatory comments and slander,we see celebrities sue tabloids all the time for wriitng rubbish false information about them
I cant believe that people cant see how damaging those skits are,being accused of cheating or doping is the worst accusation an athlete could ever be accused of, to even just be linked to a controversy like that leaves your reputation as a pro athlete in taters,cause even if you're proven to be innocent and or a victim,people tend to forget the exact details or the scandal but what they dont ever forget is that you were linked to some kind of doping scandal
What the Cannal T.V did was bang out of order,to target Nadal like that and place him alongside a bunch of other dopers was pretty malicious
Either Nadal did something to deserve that or the t.v channel knows something we dont which somehow protects them

The whole thing is so suspicious,could it be that Nadal was told to take time off tour and lie low until this investigation blew over or perhaps it was a decision his camp made?
That kind of investigation would be pretty big news in Spain and would attract a lot of media coverage plus the French will carry on as if xmas came early
It wont be the first time the Spanish authorities have lied or were involved in covering a doping scandal up.Their prime minister even exonerated Contador
The Nadal family have friends in powerful places,their social circle includes the Spanish royal family,its highly unlikely that he would be investigated like that in his native country or be exposed by the Spanish media
I bet the investigation was shut down faster Nadals 2010 U.S Open 1st serve speed

laverfan wrote:
Jay Leno, David Letterman, and many others make fun of the President of the United States. Do you think the US Govt will sue broadcasters?

Making fun and alleging remarks wrapped in a skit are not the same. And even for making fun, the channel always issues a "disclaimer" keeping its hands completely clean. Now its up to the US president or the US gov to decide weather to take any legal action or not.

laverfan wrote: The French skits are just that.

Nope. Not same. It wasn't about making fun. It was about allegations of doping on Spanish Athlete Nadal. It it was fun, Nadal and whole Spanish media won't have reacted the way it did.

laverfan wrote: Journal du Dimanche retracted it's allegations regarding Nadal. Why? Why not offer it's 'proof' to the ITF and WADA?

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=2508656

Is this the right link which says they retracted it's allegations? Also the allegations were loosely based, not directly. And I didn't see any news about Nadal actually suing them either. So Why did he have to retract when he is absolutely clean as he says?

Also a case of retracting appeared when Greg LeMond apologized for his remarks on LA. But we later learnt the real reason behind it.

Nope the Nadal camp didnt even threaten to sue.The Spanish federation said they would but thats only cause their logo was apparently used
Is not like they would be successful anyway,cause all the other athletes in those skits have been exposed as dopers
Journal du Dimanch were most likely pressured into retracting its allegations by IMG

Comedy sketches are comedy sketches. There was also a sketch on Margaret Thatcher once, saying she was a man who had balls. She never sued them.

Veejay... the whole point is we can't prove or disprove what you say. You could be telling the truth, or you could just be lying to gain a convenient advantage in the debate.

Unless I actually meet you personally I can't say whether you're lying or telling the truth, so you can't really lose credibility as such.

Amritia3ee wrote:Comedy sketches are comedy sketches. There was also a sketch on Margaret Thatcher once, saying she was a man who had balls. She never sued them.

.

That Maggie sketch was a compliment, not an insult, her nick Iron Lady was not for nothing.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Is this the right link which says they retracted it's allegations? Also the allegations were loosely based, not directly. And I didn't see any news about Nadal actually suing them either. So Why did he have to retract when he is absolutely clean as he says?

My question was the ability of Dimanche to offer it's proof to ITF and WADA? Was it? I will have to find the retraction link. This was just a reference.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Also a case of retracting appeared when Greg LeMond apologized for his remarks on LA. But we later learnt the real reason behind it.

Do you understand the concept of 'on a case-by-case' basis? You understand Le Mond and Nadal are not the same person, correct?

This is all guilt by innuendo.

Should I treat every German as a war criminal, which personally to me is an abhorrent idea. I have very honest German friends, BTW.

Contador is guilty, Nadal defended Contador, hence Nadal is guilty.

There are Spanish cyclists who are guilty, Nadal is Spanish, Dimanche had loosely accused Nadal, hence Nadal is guilty.

He has not shown up because of an injury, it must be a silent ban. All speculation and conjecture, not an iota of legal proof. Was Monfils also on a silent ban? Was Djokovic on a silent ban for not playing in February? Why is a silent ban six months and not one month or 29 days or a lunar cycle or low-tide to high-tide in Timbuktu?

If there is proof, let the French authorities, who have the cojones to pursue, do it at RG and find evidence to Nadal's doping and publish it to the world. Why cannot they?

He was not at OG 2012, he must be scared of the 'stringent' testing. Yet WADA covers both OG and ITF.

The obsessive nature of this forum to fixate on Nadal is rather a clear mark of lack of creativity to discussions.

@Veejay.. There are numerous allegations against THASP of Photshopping images. Caveat Emptor! Conspiracy theories abound regarding 9/11. Let the authorities who have the power, be the ones to provide proof. Everything else is just imagination. Or wait till Nadal retires and then the biography will have some insight a la Agassi.

Amritia3ee wrote:Comedy sketches are comedy sketches. There was also a sketch on Margaret Thatcher once, saying she was a man who had balls. She never sued them.

Veejay... the whole point is we can't prove or disprove what you say. You could be telling the truth, or you could just be lying to gain a convenient advantage in the debate.

Unless I actually meet you personally I can't say whether you're lying or telling the truth, so you can't really lose credibility as such.

Then whats the point of debating or commenting on this forum if you think you're conversing with a fraud or liar?
All of us here give each other the benefit of the doubt,thats enables us to discuss things
No one is making outlandish and unbelievable claims about who they are,Im not going around claiming Im Nadals grandmother reincarnated,Im just giving you my opinion which is based on my personal experience
If youre so suspicious why not google the stuff I say and find out for yourself,I would have thought you'd grab the opportunity to try and prove me wrong ages ago,so whats stopping you?

laverfan wrote:

Or wait till Nadal retires and then the biography will have some insight a la Agassi.

That's the last source i would be looking for the truth

laverfan wrote:
This is all guilt by innuendo.

Should I treat every German as a war criminal, which personally to me is an abhorrent idea. I have very honest German friends, BTW.

Contador is guilty, Nadal defended Contador, hence Nadal is guilty.

Speaking of Germans, Hitler is guilty, so if you start defending him, what are we to think about you?

Veejay wrote:Then whats the point of debating or commenting on this forum if you think you're conversing with a fraud or liar?

Is this really a debate? It is just repetitive and brings nothing new to the table. The 2006 material has been hashed ad infinitum ad nauseam. If that is your favourite subject, please continue. Notice what is the title of this topic.

noleisthebest wrote:

laverfan wrote:
This is all guilt by innuendo.

Should I treat every German as a war criminal, which personally to me is an abhorrent idea. I have very honest German friends, BTW.

Contador is guilty, Nadal defended Contador, hence Nadal is guilty.

Speaking of Germans, Hitler is guilty, so if you start defending him, what are we to think?

I have the ability to distinguish between the guilt of Hitler and others who are not. BTW, I did not defend either Hitler or Bush? This is what I call extrapolation, very similar to how Nadal gets discussed.

BTW, I assume you know the second world war history about Hiroshima, Nagasaki or Dresden.

Ouch!!! Where is this discussion going?

Remember....Federer nearing on 300 weeks at number 1!!!!

Just one week to go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can we expect a jacket with a big 300 on the back in gold sequins?

Follwed by a smug grin and "I didnt even realise they'd put 300 on the back"

mikeyM1000 wrote:Can we expect a jacket with a big 300 on the back in gold sequins?

Follwed by a smug grin and "I didnt even realise they'd put 300 on the back"

Yes, I'd love that! Isn't competitive sport after all about "I am better than you"?

mikeyM1000 wrote:Can we expect a jacket with a big 300 on the back in gold sequins?

Follwed by a smug grin and "I didnt even realise they'd put 300 on the back"

Why not 17, 21, 76, 300 or perhaps a neon sign with running numbers so anyone who looks at his jacket will know what are the exact counters?

PS: I need to find the 'Serena' T-shirt which has this emblazoned across 'Are you looking at my Titles'?

That is 5 years and 40 weeks at number UNO!!!! Another 12 weeks and it's 6 years!!!!!!!!!!!

laverfan wrote:

mikeyM1000 wrote:Can we expect a jacket with a big 300 on the back in gold sequins?

Follwed by a smug grin and "I didnt even realise they'd put 300 on the back"

Why not 17, 21, 76, 300 or perhaps a neon sign with running numbers so anyone who looks at his jacket will know what are the exact counters?

I think Roger needs an Ipad stitched on his jacquet as his records improve at too fast a rate!

laverfan wrote:

Veejay wrote:Then whats the point of debating or commenting on this forum if you think you're conversing with a fraud or liar?

Is this really a debate? It is just repetitive and brings nothing new to the table. The 2006 material has been hashed ad infinitum ad nauseam. If that is your favourite subject, please continue. Notice what is the title of this topic.

Thats the nature of the forums Laverfan most topics have been done to death

Veejay wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Veejay wrote:Then whats the point of debating or commenting on this forum if you think you're conversing with a fraud or liar?

Is this really a debate? It is just repetitive and brings nothing new to the table. The 2006 material has been hashed ad infinitum ad nauseam. If that is your favourite subject, please continue. Notice what is the title of this topic.

Thats the nature of the forums Laverfan most topics have been done to death

I think the 300-weeks discussion was new.

I would like to see Federer get to QFs and get his 300 weeks. It would be a very nice achievement in a stellar career.

Tenez wrote:

laverfan wrote:

mikeyM1000 wrote:Can we expect a jacket with a big 300 on the back in gold sequins?

Follwed by a smug grin and "I didnt even realise they'd put 300 on the back"

Why not 17, 21, 76, 300 or perhaps a neon sign with running numbers so anyone who looks at his jacket will know what are the exact counters?

I think Roger needs an Ipad stitched on his jacquet as his records improve at too fast a rate!

Agreed, T.

laverfan wrote:

Veejay wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Veejay wrote:Then whats the point of debating or commenting on this forum if you think you're conversing with a fraud or liar?

Is this really a debate? It is just repetitive and brings nothing new to the table. The 2006 material has been hashed ad infinitum ad nauseam. If that is your favourite subject, please continue. Notice what is the title of this topic.

Thats the nature of the forums Laverfan most topics have been done to death

I think the 300-weeks discussion was new.

I would like to see Federer get to QFs and get his 300 weeks. It would be a very nice achievement in a stellar career.

If you get really bored Laverfan, JA606 is a really good place for entertainment value

Veejay wrote:If you get really bored Laverfan, JA606 is a really good place for entertainment value

I prefer Tennis to entertainment.

laverfan wrote:

Veejay wrote:If you get really bored Laverfan, JA606 is a really good place for entertainment value

I prefer Tennis to entertainment.

Whats the difference?

Veejay wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Veejay wrote:If you get really bored Laverfan, JA606 is a really good place for entertainment value

I prefer Tennis to entertainment.

Whats the difference?

You are correct, the delineation between the two may not be much these days, but my perspective is very archaic. I consider theater or movies in the entertainment category, but very rarely do I think of Tennis as entertaining. Some ingredients are perhaps present in both though, like artistry and passion.

And he's done it

Congratulations to Roger Federer on his masterful and glorious 300 weeks at number one achieved with such poise and elegance

May he learn about my magic hula-hoop back treatment and last us another 300 weeks in good spirit and health

To all his fans and those who don't consider themselves fans

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df-eLzao63I

Congrats to Federer on the 300 weeks. Wonderful achievement.

gallery play wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Or wait till Nadal retires and then the biography will have some insight a la Agassi.

That's the last source i would be looking for the truth

Should I look for more French skits when Nadal retires?

Good for him. I personally am not so hung up on the 300 number - 299 or 300 makes little difference - but happy for him.

What about going forward? Most likely Nole will finish the year at #1 but I would not be shocked to see Roger recapture #1 yet again sometime in 2013 for at least some period. What do you all think?

Going forward?
He'll be doing it as long as his back allows him in my opinion. There will come one morning when he just won't have the will to endure the pain.

As things stand and with current competition, another 3 years look reasonably realistic in the top 10, maybe even top 5.

Recapturing number one is an extremely difficult task and he does not need to do it (if/when he loses it this year), for him the difficulty would be enduring the entire season with the same consistency and winning at least a slam per year.

Some keep going on about his age, but I say, he's only 31!
so long as media leave him alone, which I hope they will, he'll be happy to slide down the ranking. Nobody wants to hear that stupid question Roddick was asked: When are you going to retire?, esp if you have a lingering doubt yourself now and then.
It's a fine thing, but until his cup overflows, he won't even think about it.

I know one or two people here who wouldn't mind this in their stocking for Christmas.
Quick! Write a letter to (I can't believe I have finally used this smiley)

http://tennis.si.com/2012/10/11/roger-federer-shoes-wimbledon-auction/

It also shows in my view how much he cared of the number 1 spot.

A few people said he was at an age where he only cared about slams but I knew that number is a very special drug! You simply want it as much and as long as possible. Its like sitting on top of the world and you know it won't last unlike winning slams so it makes it even more special.

Tenez wrote:It also shows in my view how much he cared of the number 1 spot.

A few people said he was at an age where he only cared about slams but I knew that number is a very special drug! You simply want it as much and as long as possible. Its like sitting on top of the world and you know it won't last unlike winning slams so it makes it even more special.

You sound like an experienced hiker

noleisthebest wrote:Going forward?
He'll be doing it as long as his back allows him in my opinion. There will come one morning when he just won't have the will to endure the pain.

That is my opinion too, and that is what I am hoping too.

noleisthebest wrote:
Recapturing number one is an extremely difficult task and he does not need to do it (if/when he loses it this year), for him the difficulty would be enduring the entire season with the same consistency and winning at least a slam per year.

True. But I think he may have a window of opportunity in the spring after the AO to get back to #1 at least briefly, depending on whether Nole defends his AO.

And even though a season full of consistency may be hard, I am not sure it is totally beyond him, I would not entirely write off his chances for 2013 YE #1. I think he himself may have been surprised how relatively easily he reached #1 this year - I think most people expected he would need a good stretch of results through summer to hopefully get there around the USO, but he got there much sooner. So that may further encourage him for next year.

noleisthebest wrote:he'll be happy to slide down the ranking.

Again, I agree here. He said this in his interview after the Wimbledon win (emphasis mine):

It hasn't always been like this, the pressers. I think they've been somewhat easier for me since I was able to win here three years ago and since I was able to win in Paris. Things are much more easy now in the press room. They're at peace, even though I understand everyone wants to be the first to have mentioned it or said it first that, Okay, this is the decline.
I also said that I think this is just a temporary thing. That maybe down the stretch, like with Agassi I guess in some ways, you'll be happy that I'm still playing a few years from now.

http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/news/interviews/2012-07-08/201207091341829245807.html

The way I was reading it he was saying that he would be happy to enjoy tennis even after he declined some, and was hoping others would come to appreciate him then too.

Then again, I could be wrong and maybe he will decide tomorrow that he has won all he wanted to win and retire