Yeah, Rafa is great on clay, but the way Roger plays/thinks and just 'does what he does', how long will it be before Roger defeats the walking bicep?
I actually think that there is more to Rafa's game than just a bicep. Unlike a lot of posters on this board- I do think he had some good tennis smarts. He shows it more on clay, and I wish he would show it more on hardcourts, but he does have a good tennis mind imo.
He's actually played them both, which none of us can say. He has a right to his opinion just like anyone else, no?
Yes- he had played them both. Yes, I think that about everyone can say that Federer is the most talented. But- I think it should be acknowledged that Rafa has one of the biggest hearts out there in the sport.
This is one thing that annoys me about tennis. Everyone always seems to say that so and so should have won because they have the most talent. Well- sometimes the fight and grit should be considered and applauded. And that, Rafa has. (I am not saying Rgoer does not have heart, he does...but Nadal's mentaility is such a strength of his game.) If everyone thinks that that the player with the most inate talent should always win- why should there even be matches? To use an analogy from another sport- one of the greatest stories in sport imo of 2006+ was when George Mason beat the far more talented Connecticut during the Elite Eight of the NCAA basketball tournament. GMU simply played to their upmost and deserved the win, regardless of the fact that Uconn had much more talent on their team.
I think the fact that sometimes players find a way to win against players that have more inate ability on the tennis court than they do should be cheered, not derieded as it seems to often be here.