Which is in essence what I had summarized in my analysis of his service game, so what part of my post did you find yourself at odds with ?
Maybe I'm splitting hairs here
but that's not the same as saying "it's all about the movement" although movement is important as it's for every bloody tennis player.
It's just that I think it's human nature to think in clichés.
Nadal: great athlete, good mover.
But, to add to that: the guy has a fantastic eye-hand coordination, anticipation skills and he can construct a point in a clever way (although it's easier for him on clay because that game is more natural for him) and that will help him when he loses a bit of speed. You can be a good mover but if you can't construct a point in a clever way, your movement will only do so much.
1. I don't think that hardcourts (and esp. indoors) are every going to be his playground.
2. I don't think that he will dominate the game for a long time either. Certainly not like Roger has done.
I wanted him to reach the number one spot and win Roland Garros and Wimbledon back-to-back and he's done both. So, I'm a happy fan.