DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**verybigf** · 10-02-2009, 06:12 PM

ROFL is all I can say about Jelena's response. I don't see NOTHING wrong with Roger talking about being #1 without a slam and I don't think he or anyone would have had issue had the #1 already had a slam under his or her belt.

JJ goes back and forth, one minute she prefers the #1 ranking over a slam and then when she loses it "it's not how you start the year but how you finish it" hmmmmm, yep as long as I can win 3 tournaments at the end of the year, that's all that matters.

And also I see nothing wrong with Roger saying he's is the best and using his slam counts of 13. To me it means he's the overall best when you consider the number of tournaments including slams won thus far. Nadal is the best player presently but it's still not overall the best based on # of tournaments won.

Anyway like they say you can't please all of the people all of the time so...

Foxy

10-02-2009, 06:12 PM	#29
verybigf Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 572 Senior Member	ROFL is all I can say about Jelena's response. I don't see NOTHING wrong with Roger talking about being #1 without a slam and I don't think he or anyone would have had issue had the #1 already had a slam under his or her belt. JJ goes back and forth, one minute she prefers the #1 ranking over a slam and then when she loses it "it's not how you start the year but how you finish it" hmmmmm, yep as long as I can win 3 tournaments at the end of the year, that's all that matters. And also I see nothing wrong with Roger saying he's is the best and using his slam counts of 13. To me it means he's the overall best when you consider the number of tournaments including slams won thus far. Nadal is the best player presently but it's still not overall the best based on # of tournaments won. Anyway like they say you can't please all of the people all of the time so... Foxy
	Quote