How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented?? - Page 2 - MensTennisForums.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #16 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:26 PM
Registered User
 
MaxPower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Age: 32
Posts: 7,805
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe32 View Post
So you are arguing for aesthetics/technique? I would not consider Nadal aesthetically pleasing or as having the best technique (at least in the traditional sense). But if someone asked me who is more talented, Nadal or Safin, I would say Nadal in a heartbeat.
Yes partly. But more maximum potential. How many weapons could the player have? Just to take Nalbandian his BH was way more lethal than Federers. His FH and movement possibly in the same ballpark. His body however didn't hold up really.

There are so many other things that affect your results than talent.

Examples:

Your lifestyle
Injuries
Coaching choices
MaxPower is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:27 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Age: 43
Posts: 2,443
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Please consult the dictionary:

MTF Dictionary

Talent:
~noun
1. A quality that allows a player to being better than the rest, despite the number of matches which that player doesn’t win. [i.e: “Pete Sampras won 14 slams but Jean Luc Rodriguez-Hillbilly (sorry, who?) had insane loads of talent”]
2. Ability of making smooth-motioned and good-looking shots, no matter if a high percentage of those shots happens to send the ball to the parking lot.

Talented player:
~noun
1. Favourite player (of a specific MTF poster) who doesn’t win as much as that specific MTF poster would like to, but he’s still better than the rest.
2. Favourite player (of a specific MTF poster) who once did beat a big name, so he proved his superiority for ever and never and that won’t change no matter how many bagels he eats from big names in the future.

Headcase:
~noun
1. Talented player who smashes rackets.
2. Talented player who gets pissed, depressed or just quits when he´s losing a match, and who could have *clearly* won if he wouldn’t get pissed, depressed or if he wouldn’t quit.
3. Player that never loses a match. He just generously grants the match away.
r2473 is offline  
post #18 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:30 PM
Registered User
 
rofe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,789
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Talent is very subjective but if enough people agree that someone has talent then it becomes a generalization.

Think about why you find someone's face beautiful. It is highly subjective but enough people agree, it gets generalized to that person having a beautiful face.

Need ideas for a new signature...
rofe is offline  
post #19 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:30 PM
Registered User
 
Young 8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,201
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe32 View Post
So, the question is: On what grounds do people measure talent other than by results? .
Young 8 is offline  
post #20 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:34 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Gabe32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 502
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by FiBeR View Post
Results are a meassure for greatness but not for talent.
I also do not know how much I agree with this...

There is obviously some correlation between talent and results.

I also do not really buy the aesthetic argument. Get rid of all of Nalbandian's injuries, make him drop 20 pounds, get him a good coach, whatever excuse you want, etc. etc.

I'll take the proven winner, Federer. He simply out-talents Nalbandian, I think.

I think results are the most quantifiable way to measure talent, though not the only way.
Gabe32 is offline  
post #21 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:35 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Gabe32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 502
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by rofe View Post
Talent is very subjective but if enough people agree that someone has talent then it becomes a generalization.

Think about why you find someone's face beautiful. It is highly subjective but enough people agree, it gets generalized to that person having a beautiful face.
This I agree with wholeheartedly, but is not a definition of talent, but simply an explanation for the mass-mentality of calling players like Gulbis, Safin, Gasquet and Nalbandian super talented.

It gets repeated so much that people subconsciously accept it without thinking about it.
Gabe32 is offline  
post #22 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:35 PM
Registered User
 
FiBeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: CapFed, Bs. As.
Posts: 29,033
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe32 View Post
I think I understand what you are saying, but at times it seems like a cop-out. It is too subjective and too easy of a way to end an argument.

If Nalbandian is that much more talented than Federer, or even is equal... what the HELL has he been doing. He can't be that much of a headcase.
Talent is not the only thing you need to become the best. You need plenty of other things.. you are being simplist

It's not like "Talent = world n1"

he's been injury prone, bad body, not 100% devoted, distracted and reaching #1 was never his goal ....(said it plenty of times since like..forever)

It is you who is meassuring Nalbandian by your standarts when he has different ones.

An example: The guy had hip injury and returned to the circuit scoring wins and competitively after a long break.. you require a lot of talent to play that good that quick. Also look at his DC record.. he wants to win it and he hardly losses no matter who's in front. It's up to motivation and he doesn't care for being the best in history...

don't pay too much attention to what people here will tell you, you should analize the player directly, what he says, how he says it, how he plays and what he can do.

Entrá a http://batennis.com/

Sorewa ore no Nindou da

6-4 3-6 6-7 7-6 70-68

FiBeR is offline  
post #23 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:36 PM
Registered User
 
oranges's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,564
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe32 View Post
I think I understand what you are saying, but at times it seems like a cop-out. It is too subjective and too easy of a way to end an argument.

If Nalbandian is that much more talented than Federer, or even is equal... what the HELL has he been doing. He can't be that much of a headcase.
You sound like an absolute dolt. Do you honestly believe talent is the only thing required for success? What planet do you live on? Similarly, regarding your equally simplified-to-the-point-of-absurdity claim that talent=results, it so obviously untrue looking through tennis history, one has to wonder about your thought processes.

Finally, you don't want a discussion. You want a platform to continue raging against imagined 'insult' to more successful players. You got a serious answer, dismissed it in a heart beat and continued on your merry path.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMarble View Post
Imo Safin was always relatively powerless
Samanosuke showing his tennis expertise, promising to self-ban himslef from MTF permanently should Čilić:
Quote:
Originally Posted by samanosuke View Post
About a 500 depends which players he beat on the road to the title . About masters 1000 or GS 1/2 you have my word
oranges is offline  
post #24 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:37 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Age: 40
Posts: 171
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe32 View Post
I have heard this hundreds of times on MTF. "Richard Gasquet/David Nalbandian/Whoever has as much/more talent than Federer"

Even if you do not believe this, does anybody understand how people know this?

The only quantifiable way of measuring talent to me is results. Federer has 16 slams. Gasquet + Nalbandian (x1323023) = 0 slams.

It is very possible that Nalbandian and Gasquet have more talent than Federer in tennis ... but for all we know, so do I, right? I have never taken a formal tennis lesson, who is to say I do not have more natural/undeveloped talent than Federer. For that matter, Lebron James would probably be very talented at tennis if he started playing at the same age as Federer.

So, the question is: On what grounds do people measure talent other than by results? It is not as though Nalbandian and Gasquet are skipping the slams or anything. They are there too, and probably trying very hard during them.
You are 100% right. All that bull... about"big talents" (which never won anything) is just nonsense.
Nalbandian is "bigest talent ever", Dimitrov " a new Fed" , blah,blah,blah...
Ultravox is offline  
post #25 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:38 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Gabe32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 502
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by oranges View Post
You sound like an absolute dolt. Do you honestly believe talent is the only thing required for success? What planet do you live on? Similarly, regarding your equally simplified-to-the-point-of-absurdity claim that talent=results, it so obviously untrue looking through tennis history, one has to wonder about your thought processes.

Finally, you don't want a discussion. You want a platform to continue raging against imagined 'insult' to more successful players. You got a serious answer, dismissed it in a heart beat and continued on your merry path.
Alright, first of all take it easy "oranges." I know you have 5430250 internet posts, but no use trying to be an internet tough guy. No need in being so confrontational.

I am entirely open for discussion. Nothing I have said/done suggest otherwise. Sorry if I am coming off as preachy, but no one has convinced that these guys are some amazing, undeveloped talent.

Last edited by Gabe32; 05-25-2011 at 06:52 PM.
Gabe32 is offline  
post #26 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:39 PM
Banned!
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,577
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

If results measured talent Wozniacki wouldbe the most talented in the women's game.
SerialKillerToBe is offline  
post #27 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:40 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Gabe32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 502
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by hipolymer View Post
If results measured talent Wozniacki wouldbe the most talented in the women's game.
How? She has never won a slam.

Serena has 0 movement, and little or no technique ... do you think she is more talented?
Gabe32 is offline  
post #28 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:42 PM
Registered User
 
FiBeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: CapFed, Bs. As.
Posts: 29,033
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe32 View Post
I also do not know how much I agree with this...

There is obviously some correlation between talent and results.

I also do not really buy the aesthetic argument. Get rid of all of Nalbandian's injuries, make him drop 20 pounds, get him a good coach, whatever excuse you want, etc. etc.

I'll take the proven winner, Federer. He simply out-talents Nalbandian, I think.

I think results are the most quantifiable way to measure talent, though not the only way.
yet again, as i said before you are judging nalbandian by your aims and your standarts.

If the guy doesnt want to become n1 (he claimed he had no interest a lot of years ago, look up articles, interviews, etc..) why do you insist on comparing him with someone with a different ambition???

he loves rally, girls, golf, futbol and food. Am I missing something? i think i am..

what you are saying is that Nalbandian should be judged under Federer's standarts and ambitions or your standarts and ambitions..

Entrá a http://batennis.com/

Sorewa ore no Nindou da

6-4 3-6 6-7 7-6 70-68

FiBeR is offline  
post #29 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:45 PM
Registered User
 
oranges's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,564
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe32 View Post
Alright, first of take it easy "oranges." I know you have 5430250 internet posts, but no use trying to be an internet tough guy. No need in being so confrontational.

I am entirely open for discussion. Nothing I have said/done suggest otherwise. Sorry if I am coming off as preachy, but no one has convinced that these guys are some amazing, undeveloped talent.
Your OP and every subsequent post is written with 'looking-for-a-fight' tone, yet you lecture on not being confrontational. Take the responses you get on the chin. It's what people think about what you had to say and the way in which you say it. BTW, no one has to convince you of anything. No one gives a shit whether you believe it or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMarble View Post
Imo Safin was always relatively powerless
Samanosuke showing his tennis expertise, promising to self-ban himslef from MTF permanently should Čilić:
Quote:
Originally Posted by samanosuke View Post
About a 500 depends which players he beat on the road to the title . About masters 1000 or GS 1/2 you have my word
oranges is offline  
post #30 of 95 (permalink) Old 05-25-2011, 06:45 PM
Banned!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,513
                     
Re: How Do We Know that Nalbandian is So Talented??

Talent is something you're born with. So it's things like technique, hand eye coordination, ability to pull off difficult/trick shots, movement, peak level, etc. Anyone who saw Nalby at his best can tell he has a lot of raw talent which is inhibited by his fitness, his mentality, injuries, and the slowing down of the courts. Nadull, on the other hand, has very little talent but a very good mentality. As you can see, talent doesn't always translate into results and in the above cases is the opposite of career results.

Federer is so great because he's one of the few players in history with massive talent that everyone could see when he was a teenager who actually got it together mentally and translated that talent into the greatest career of all time (arguable but you get the idea).
The Magician is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome