More Self-Serving Narcissistic Droning

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/tennis/nadal-blames-tour-organisers-for-injury-that-cost-him-australian-open-chance-20180123-h0n9ag.html

Is anyone else counting down the days until this loathsome CUNT is off the tour?

I got to say, I thought that was down amongst the worst he’s done.

So now the courts are too hard. How about you’re a clumping, clumsy artisan whose career is build on running the legs off people and you can’t cope unless the sport is set up for you.

Fuck off to clay for whatever remains of your career.

For all those buying into the idea of how he admires Federer though, here’s the clincher:

“But on other hand, I was winning more than almost anyone. That's the real thing. But who knows, if I didn't have all these injuries."

He can piss off, If the tour hadn’t been set up for him in the last 12 years he’d be nowhere.

It must be killing him, the mask has slipped.

I don't recall Djokovic or Murray blaming the tour for their injuries...

Needs to get over it and focus on the other Slams.

bogbrush wrote:But who knows, if I didn't have all these injuries."

... I ask my self same thing every weekend, how many girls would I have fertilized if only there we no other men to take my potential ladies...


What fucking imagination is this? If's and but's, immature spiteful prick he is.

We need to stop sitting on the fence and say it like it is.

bogbrush wrote:For all those buying into the idea of how he admires Federer though, here’s the clincher:

“But on other hand, I was winning more than almost anyone. That's the real thing. But who knows, if I didn't have all these injuries."

He can piss off, If the tour hadn’t been set up for him in the last 12 years he’d be nowhere.

It must be killing him, the mask has slipped.

I saw through it years ago.  Anyone who behaves like he does on court can only be an arsehole.  The fact is it really is killing him.  And his fans too.  The "love" he has for Roger is a nonsense. It's all about his own ego. Every single time he loses it's "injury" "woe is me" "the tournament people cost me" "it was because of X, but now is not thew time to talk about that." I didn't hear a peep from him regarding his cake walk draws last year.  The man is a maggot.  He was a well known self-serving jackass when he was on the players' council as well.

 But who knows, if I didn't have all these injuries."

Said by all of his rabid fanboy clan as well.  Nothing sums this ass up more than that statement.

Next year AO courts will be sticky as hell, marks my words

Nadal seems to forget that only 9 men in the Open Era have played more tour level matches than him - the idea that he could have achieved much more than he has but has faced a cruelly truncated career is pretty fanciful.  Federer is quite right that most of the key guys getting injuries are at an age and stage in their careers where it is a pretty normal consequence of what they are asking of their bodies.  Furthermore, this looks like a crisis for the Tour largely because of the wholly abnormal fact that the five best players who hog the main prizes are all in their 30's. 

I understand that he's very disappointed, but in a calmer moment and with a bit more perspective Nadal should realise that his expectations of himself and what might have been are unreasonable and unrealistic - going forward it is up to him to manage his schedule.

Yep, that’s a bit rich from Nadal.

I knew there was a reason I felt those extreme negative vibes the first time I saw him.

We are all self serving by nature...some maybe less than the others... but he takes it to the unbridled, ugly level...in public!

A truly odious character.

barrystar wrote:Nadal seems to forget that only 9 men in the Open Era have played more tour level matches than him - the idea that he could have achieved much more than he has but has faced a cruelly truncated career is pretty fanciful.  Federer is quite right that most of the key guys getting injuries are at an age and stage in their careers where it is a pretty normal consequence of what they are asking of their bodies.  Furthermore, this looks like a crisis for the Tour largely because of the wholly abnormal fact that the five best players who hog the main prizes are all in their 30's. 

I understand that he's very disappointed, but in a calmer moment and with a bit more perspective Nadal should realise that his expectations of himself and what might have been are unreasonable and unrealistic - going forward it is up to him to manage his schedule.

I don;t think the problem is age as much as the way some (those road runners) players banked on their success. It is clear, Nadal, Djoko and Murray put all their effort in building that body and fitness to maximise consistency at the expense longevity.

They real problem is their style of play and unfortunately that has forced all the other players, including the most talented ones, to work so hard physically that they are all prone to injuries.

By having less tournaments, they would push even harder on the weeks they play. It is no different than a F1 driver taking the curve as quick as they can with the possibility of going too quick and skid off track. The problem is not the curve, it is the driver.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lau5aRvvpeY

3:41... WHAT A TOSS POT.

You laugh but he won 16 slams......without being bothered by friendly steroid testers.

Under the surface I see Nadal doing anything at all to chase Federer records. It’s one reason why I hope Roger doesn’t decide to go out at the very top, with Slams still possible, because I see Nadal wheeling himself out at RG every year for another 5 years to tot it up.

The irony of him hitting 21, say, comprised of 15 RG plus others as the Slam record would be lost on him.

That’s why I think if one one the younger players demonstrates superiority over him on clay he’ll be out of the game overnight.

Tenez wrote:

barrystar wrote:Nadal seems to forget that only 9 men in the Open Era have played more tour level matches than him - the idea that he could have achieved much more than he has but has faced a cruelly truncated career is pretty fanciful.  Federer is quite right that most of the key guys getting injuries are at an age and stage in their careers where it is a pretty normal consequence of what they are asking of their bodies.  Furthermore, this looks like a crisis for the Tour largely because of the wholly abnormal fact that the five best players who hog the main prizes are all in their 30's. 

I understand that he's very disappointed, but in a calmer moment and with a bit more perspective Nadal should realise that his expectations of himself and what might have been are unreasonable and unrealistic - going forward it is up to him to manage his schedule.

I don;t think the problem is age as much as the way some (those road runners) players banked on their success. It is clear, Nadal, Djoko and Murray put all their effort in building that body and fitness to maximise consistency at the expense longevity.

They real problem is their style of play and unfortunately that has forced all the other players, including the most talented ones, to work so hard physically that they are all prone to injuries.

By having less tournaments, they would push even harder on the weeks they play. It is no different than a F1 driver taking the curve as quick as they can with the possibility of going too quick and skid off track. The problem is not the curve, it is the driver.

I agree - Nadal in particular is like a supernova.  When he burns(ed) brightly, frankly, he has(d) the beating of everyone.  The trouble is that to achieve those superhuman levels he has burned fuel (in terms of putting stress on his body) at a rate that is not sustainable consistently over what has been a long career at the top.  It's no good speculating on what might have happened but for injury because he would not have gotten to where he has without courting injuries by his playing style.  I still suspect that absolutely peak Nadal or Djoko have it over absolutely peak Federer (at least away from grass) - but when objectively measuring the respective merits of entire careers it's how many times you can bring something near your peak to the table that counts.

I say 'objectively', because subjectively I believe that the virtuosity of Fed's game puts all the others into the shade in a way that cannot be counted by slams, w/l &c &c &c

I still suspect that absolutely peak Nadal or Djoko have it over absolutely peak Federer (at least away from grass)
=============
Do you really think so? I don't. I'd agree with the old racquet but not since 2015.

I don;t even think Nadal would have ever beaten Fed (including clay!) had he played and trained early with that larger frame. Though that is speculation we cannot prove, we know for fact that Nadal has not hurt Fed since he moved to the larger frame. Nadal's main and only weapon which was his FH on Fed's BH is no longer hurting him, so Nadal is now toothless.

For Djoko it is different. The best of Djoko (2015-16) has had Fed's number. But and there is a big but. Fed still manages to beat Djoko 3 times in 2015..including in London's masters (in Round robin). I think Fed;s ,main problem is that he was facing Djoko at the end of tournaments so yes I can agree that Djoko's best might be better than Fed's best at the end of tournaments and that fitness and age play a lot. But I am almost certain than a fresh Fed is better than Djoko's best.

But we can be sure of one thing, is that had Fed adopted his latest tool in 2002...he'd be playing even better today.

What's really remarkable from Federer is that he comes from the old school and trained by the old school (fast conds, nat string and SVing)...yet adapted to different conds and still got the better of the new gen.

One might say that it helped fed to be training v SVers and play on fast conds...sure but had teh conds stayed the same (esp nat strings)...the likes of Nadal, Djoko and Murray....would not have been near the top.

I understand your logic Tenez - but to make your points you have to adopt something similar to Nadal's 'what if' approach.

In one sense I wish Fed had taken on his current racquet earlier, but no doubt he had his reasons at the time, and of course he didn't; he was 10-23 vs. Nadal four years ago, including being behind on HC.  The last 12 months is the first time I can remember that Fed started vs. Nadal as favourite other than grass/fast indoor in the early days.  You are right that he could still win vs. Djoko in 2015, but only in the less important matches.

So whilst I take your point, I stick to my view.

What are nadal's IFs? Even the way he keeps his bottles lined up is calculated.

I disagree with less important matches. he beat him in 2 finals, including Shanghai I remember.

And Logic is never mine. It's universal. So either you master logos or your don;t.

Tenez wrote:What are nadal's IFs? Even the way he keeps his bottles lined up is calculated.

I disagree with less important matches. he beat him in 2 finals, including Shanghai I remember.

And Logic is never mine. It's universal. So either you master logos or your don;t.

Federer beat Djok in Dubai final (500) but lost in Indian Wells final (1000).
Feds lost in Rome final (1000), Wimbledon final but won Cincy (1000)
Feds lost US Open final and WTF final but won the round robin.

Overall, Feds deffo lost the bigger matches in 2015 to Djok.

luvsports! wrote:

Tenez wrote:What are nadal's IFs? Even the way he keeps his bottles lined up is calculated.

I disagree with less important matches. he beat him in 2 finals, including Shanghai I remember.

And Logic is never mine. It's universal. So either you master logos or your don;t.

Federer beat Djok in Dubai final (500) but lost in Indian Wells final (1000).
Feds lost in Rome final (1000), Wimbledon final but won Cincy (1000)
Feds lost US Open final and WTF final but won the round robin.

Overall, Feds deffo lost the bigger matches in 2015 to Djok.

I know he lost the bigger matches but he won big ones as well. When they play a final, they play to win and no different than a slam final. The difference as I mentioned is that Fed at 36 or 35 will not play as fresh at the end of a tournament
than at the beginning. This is in my view Djoko's real advantage. And you will see than Nadal, Djoko and Murray will start to feel now those longer matches much more than when they were 28/29. I said Djoko was better over the distance (long tournaments)..but on the day NO!....perfect example is that WTF16!

It was obvious for instance how well he was playing in semis V Murray for instance but then in the final could not reproduce. Like in that USO where he had so many BPs but coudl not convert....It;s a huge additional pressure to play knowing you cannot afford to lose sets.

Nadal the beating of everyone off clay?  On what planet, exactly?  There's a reason why he is miles behind Fed off clay. He isn't good enough.  And he always failed to reach Federer on HC in Fed's peak years too.