General Pro Player Discussion | Forum profile

Quote: Originally Posted by jamesblakefan#1 Epic F-F-Fail! I havent seen Cesc around today, have you? I wonder why __________________ 6 Wimbledon---5 Us Open---3 Australian Open---1 French Open---4 YEC

Quote: Originally Posted by nikdom No keep me out of it. You two take your fight elsewhere. Davey has already been laid to rest (so to speak). too bad, was looking forward to making you look like a clown too. good day kind Sir. __________________ "Agassi was unable to win the french until he did drugs, ill bet pete would be the same"~ Chadwixx

Not to mention, Federer leads their non-clay H2H by just 1 match. Even if they just met 2 times on clay, the most likely scenario would be that Nadal would win both those matches and lead the H2H Also, before anyone gets into anything about how Nadal's success on other surfaces against Federer is because of his mental edge on clay translating into other surfaces, don't forget that in their first 2 matches that a 17 year old Nadal,...

Quote: Originally Posted by Lsmkenpo Nadal = the biggest phoney in pro sports, don't care what BS he spouts to the media, actions show his true colors, on court he is the poorest sportsman in the game. He scrutinizes every close shot from his opponent by staring at the mark for 10 seconds, celebrates unforced errors and tries dumb attempts to intimidate his opponents pre match, bouncing up and down, making the other player wait at the...

i thought connors did it? don't mind it at all. melanie oudin needs to chill with it though __________________ Love the top 3 right now. Couldn't ask for better.

Quote: Originally Posted by flying24 I think Federer really only had a little over 3 year prime. His prime was from the 2003 Tennis Masters Cup until Dubai 2007 basically. Even as a Federer fan I think that is a bit of a mark against him, as most other all time greats hard longer primes. However as long as he manages to keep winning slams and spend time at #1 outside his prime it wont matter much in the big picture. Also no player in history...

Quote: Originally Posted by lawrence I think you missed the whole important part where you multiply the hard and grass values to match up with the clay to get the proper result. My brain is a bit too dead to think atm so I'll let you do this and post back after What do you mean? You just take the frequency of the surface and multiply it by the number of wins on that surface.

Quote: Originally Posted by drakulie so then, how many slams did sampras win when Andre wasn't at his peak ?? 2?? Hard to say as Agassi had no real peak, but a number around 7-12 can't be too far away.

Quote: Originally Posted by cuddles26 Even if you had this rule about only slam winners being considered if Del Potro wins the Masters Cup he would be clearly above Nadal as the top hard court player of the year. Del Potro is still alive in the event you do realize, while Nadal was eliminated today. Yes,you have a point although I don't see Delpo winning.If he wins WTF though I'll give it to him no doubt. __________________ Nothing...

Quote: Originally Posted by Blinkism How could Murray advance if Verdasco and Del Potro win? Fed and Delpo would advance, no? Your right...Murray loses hes' out.