nadal has won 6 grand slams and roger has won 13 grand slam titles.. so its a lot of catching to do for nadal. if anyone possible of beating pete's 14 slam titles then its roger.
Re: roger the best
by anupam dhar on Mar 23, 2009 11:48 AM
Yes that's right. Its a lot of catching to do for Nadal. However, he is one of the quickest to have achieved at the age of just 22, so looks likely that he may come close to that too..Great players in my opinion win on all surfaces. Sampras was my favorite, but he never won a French. Nor did Federer. I like Nadal a lot, but even I never expected him to win Wimbledon beating Federer like he did twice. I think even die-hard Nadal fans would agree with me on this too. But NAdal did it. This to me is greatness.
Re: Re: roger the best
by amar bhansali on Mar 23, 2009 11:19 AM
Dude the pundits say that to get the "Best Player Eva" tag not only u must have swept everyone but have a better head to head record over all other current players over an elongated period....and whats federer record against nadal 6-13....and grand slam finals 2-5.....so u get the point...also fed now has a pretty bad record against murray 2-6....maybe u could argue in murrays case that fedex is thru his peak but yet...is fedex the gr8est eva...nope...maybe rod laver who swept aside ppl to win golden slams twice....he might play like a violin in a harmony but now when the game requires physicality he has his frailties....it took ppl time to undersatnd in womens tennis too that to defeat williams u have to get better physically and not just have a perfect game(viz. Hingis,Sanchez)
Re: Nadal and Federer
by Varun ccs on Mar 23, 2009 10:43 AM
Don't take someone's opinion so seriously. A person's opinion here about a sportsman's "greatness" won't affect that sportsman's chances of winning or losing. Nadal has achieved at age 22 what Federer had not started till age 23. Again, just an observation by me.
