Your comments and remarks seem to suggest so. I agree that you can't like everyone, but you need not berate or belittle their achievements.
Buy on AliExpress.com
The Official Tennis Thread (22 Viewers)
- Thread starter HelterSkelter
- Start date
Buy on AliExpress.com
Haha 
Perhaps I am. Maybe I just read too much into your comments; was attempting to be overly analytical A La Cronios.
JCK, however, is completely biased, hence befitting his newly acquired status
Who is better? Fed or Laver? What do u think?
Perhaps I am. Maybe I just read too much into your comments; was attempting to be overly analytical A La Cronios. JCK, however, is completely biased, hence befitting his newly acquired status
Who is better? Fed or Laver? What do u think?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/8133532.stm
PETE SAMPRAS, seven-time Wimbledon champion
Fourteen was a lot of titles in the 1990s and now he's got 15. He could go on to get 18 or 19 titles, and he's only 27. He'll win here for many years and at all the majors if he stays healthy.
Federer is the greatest ever - Sampras
He's humble and he's effortless and it doesn't seem like he's working that hard. His serve is big, has a great forehand, great spin and he's so smooth. He's a great athlete - he's got everything. He was a legend and now he's an icon. He's a credit to the game.
He is the greatest - I have to give it to him - some people say Rod Laver and Rafael Nadal but Roger has won all the majors and he's going to win a few more.
JOHN MCENROE, seven-time Grand Slam winner
He's the most gifted player that I've ever seen in my life - I've seen a lot of people play.
I've seen Laver, I played against some of the great players - Sampras, Boris Becker, Jimmy Connors, Borg.
This guy could be the greatest of all time. That, to me, says it all.
Fourteen was a lot of titles in the 1990s and now he's got 15. He could go on to get 18 or 19 titles, and he's only 27. He'll win here for many years and at all the majors if he stays healthy.
Federer is the greatest ever - Sampras
He's humble and he's effortless and it doesn't seem like he's working that hard. His serve is big, has a great forehand, great spin and he's so smooth. He's a great athlete - he's got everything. He was a legend and now he's an icon. He's a credit to the game.
He is the greatest - I have to give it to him - some people say Rod Laver and Rafael Nadal but Roger has won all the majors and he's going to win a few more.
JOHN MCENROE, seven-time Grand Slam winner
He's the most gifted player that I've ever seen in my life - I've seen a lot of people play.
I've seen Laver, I played against some of the great players - Sampras, Boris Becker, Jimmy Connors, Borg.
This guy could be the greatest of all time. That, to me, says it all.
Your bias is the problem. You don't give Federer credit. You may dislike or hate the player, but you can't argue with the quality of his play and stats. If you look through your posts again, that's if you even bother reading the BS you write, you will notice that you are always refuting his achievements and accomplishments, saying he didn't have to play any quality players in this final the current generation isn't up to scratch, etc.... That is complete and utter bias. It's your opinion, and there is nothing factual about it. Granted, you are entitled to your opinion and I strongly disagree with u, but at least give Federer the credit he deserves.
Now run along and go annoy Cronios
Now run along and go annoy Cronios
Dude, lets face it. Federer's only real competition is Nadal. Roddick isn't an exceptional player by any stretch of the imagination.
Why do Federer fans get so upset that some people just don't like him or think he's not an interesting player? It's our opinion if we prefer Agassi or Sampras, or think they had better competition (which they probably did), so what's wrong with that?
Why do Federer fans get so upset that some people just don't like him or think he's not an interesting player? It's our opinion if we prefer Agassi or Sampras, or think they had better competition (which they probably did), so what's wrong with that?
Absolutely nothing. Read my post again. I said you are free to dislike anyone you desire, but give credit where credit is due, which JCK clearly fails to do by attempting to find excuses for Federer's wins, or claiming that they were easy, because in his mind, he didn't have proper competition.
Nadal is a rival, but recently Murray and Djokovic have elevated their games. 2-3 years ago Hewitt and Roddick were not the pushovers they are today (although Roddick is getting his game back, and adding elements to it) and Safin was a force to be reckoned with. Federer has had to grind out results, and he hasn't always been at his best; the man is a true genius and legend of the game whether you or JCK like him or not. Your opinions are just opinions, but give the man credit where credit is due; you manage to do that Andy, others have a harder time doing so.
Let me ask you this. Jordan, Woods, and Rossi are all legends in their respective sports, regardless of whether you like them or not, right?
Nadal is a rival, but recently Murray and Djokovic have elevated their games. 2-3 years ago Hewitt and Roddick were not the pushovers they are today (although Roddick is getting his game back, and adding elements to it) and Safin was a force to be reckoned with. Federer has had to grind out results, and he hasn't always been at his best; the man is a true genius and legend of the game whether you or JCK like him or not. Your opinions are just opinions, but give the man credit where credit is due; you manage to do that Andy, others have a harder time doing so.
Let me ask you this. Jordan, Woods, and Rossi are all legends in their respective sports, regardless of whether you like them or not, right?
Oh, and btw, I like Agassi a lot. I think the man possesses a lot of charisma and appeal; he is naturally charming, and a true legend of the game. The same applies to Sampras, although I don't find him as interesting as Agassi.
I don't particularly like Nadal, but I admire his tenacity and competitive nature. The guy is a very tough and fierce competitor and I respect that.
I don't particularly like Nadal, but I admire his tenacity and competitive nature. The guy is a very tough and fierce competitor and I respect that.
Would you care to elaborate that, Jack?
I mean I hate Nadal. I hate his face, I hate his whine while serving, I hate this minute-long preparation for every serve, I hate his sleeveless shirts showing off his arms, celebrating every point like it's a game winning one, etc. The guy is completely obnoxius and dislikeable.
For all those reasons, I don't mind Federer. However, Federer is simple, humble and quite honestly seems as a nice guy. I really don't get what's to hate about him.
I mean I hate Nadal. I hate his face, I hate his whine while serving, I hate this minute-long preparation for every serve, I hate his sleeveless shirts showing off his arms, celebrating every point like it's a game winning one, etc. The guy is completely obnoxius and dislikeable.
For all those reasons, I don't mind Federer. However, Federer is simple, humble and quite honestly seems as a nice guy. I really don't get what's to hate about him.
What is it that you want to elaborate?
I can honestly say that I don't share the same feeling towards Federer to that you have towards Nadal. I simply don't like the guy. And as for the humble issue, I don't see him humble at all, on the contrary, I see him as a show off. But who cares about that, I am talking tennis and that's I sport I follow and practice and Federer is a player I don't like.
Notice, you hate Nadal. I don't like Federer.
I can honestly say that I don't share the same feeling towards Federer to that you have towards Nadal. I simply don't like the guy. And as for the humble issue, I don't see him humble at all, on the contrary, I see him as a show off. But who cares about that, I am talking tennis and that's I sport I follow and practice and Federer is a player I don't like.
Notice, you hate Nadal. I don't like Federer.
Haha. You are an interesting character indeed. You possess one hell of an attitude JCK.
I strongly dislike Serena. She is a classless cunt, lacks elegance and grace, typifies the meaning of the word sore loser, arrogant, unwiling to accept defeat, never praises her opponents, and the list goes on. However, I don't know her in person to hate her; however, I have a strong dislike for her personality and attitude insofar as what the media presents. She might actually be nice in person, although I highly doubt it. I can't deny the fact that she is arguably the best player in women's tennis today, and perhaps by the time she retires she will be considered one of the greatest of all time.
The point is, don't you think you are being too harsh on the Fed Express?
I strongly dislike Serena. She is a classless cunt, lacks elegance and grace, typifies the meaning of the word sore loser, arrogant, unwiling to accept defeat, never praises her opponents, and the list goes on. However, I don't know her in person to hate her; however, I have a strong dislike for her personality and attitude insofar as what the media presents. She might actually be nice in person, although I highly doubt it. I can't deny the fact that she is arguably the best player in women's tennis today, and perhaps by the time she retires she will be considered one of the greatest of all time.
The point is, don't you think you are being too harsh on the Fed Express?