Can Nadal be beaten on clay at the French Open? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Can Nadal be beaten on clay at the French Open?

TennisAgenda
09-16-2006, 02:59 AM
It seems like it is almost impossible to beat Nadal on clay he's won 60 matches over two years on the surface. This year only Jarrko Neimenen and Federer had a real shot at stopping the streak. Jarrko had a set and a 4-1 in the second set in Barcelona but he choked. And shockingly Federer collapsed in Rome he had a few match points but couldn't close it out. Next year will be very interesting because the South Americans and the Spaniards have dominated the French Open this decade. Agassi was the last non Spaniard or South American to capture the French open title almost eight years ago.
The dominance of the Spanish and Portuguese players at the French Open is incredible. I wonder if next year finally someone else will breakthrough. Besides Federer does anyone have a real chance against Nadal on clay? It seems like Nadal is supreme on clay he cannot be stopped?

Sjengster
09-16-2006, 03:34 AM
If he can win the four big events for a third consecutive year then hats off to him, I remember thinking this year that he would defend the vast majority of his clay points but perhaps lose once somewhere, it should have happened in Rome but didn't. It'll take a combination of a quality player with sustained aggression and rock-solid belief against a slightly off-par Nadal to get a defeat, and even then it will be far from easy. And of course doubly unlikely at the event where it matters the most, considering the best-of-five format at the Slams.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-16-2006, 03:51 AM
If he is healthy then no.

None of the current players can beat Nadal unless they play their best and Nadal is off.

One more perfect season should be enough prove to the haters that Nadal is the best clay player ever. :D

oschemi
09-16-2006, 03:59 AM
If Rafa is healthy and playing well, then it will be very difficult to beat him in a best of 5 match. In a best of 3, he can be beaten by players like Fed. However at the french, a healthy Rafa will be a formidable task.

LCeh
09-16-2006, 04:02 AM
If he is healthy then no.

None of the current players can beat Nadal unless they play their best and Nadal is off.

One more perfect season should be enough prove to the haters that Nadal is the best clay player ever. :D

I thought according to a lot of people, this era is full of clowns. If that's the case, then this doesn't speak much for Rafa does it? Most players already lost the match before they stepped on the court, and they are scared of Rafa's never say die fighting attitude, no? ;)

Sjengster
09-16-2006, 04:05 AM
It strikes me that an awful lot of good claycourt players are going to end up wishing they had taken their chance at RG before Nadal's rise to dominance. I can think of one choker/tanker/claycourt specialist who won't, though. :D

Merton
09-16-2006, 04:34 AM
It is too early to even think about the claycourt season of 2007. We will get a much better sense of where players stand after Montecarlo.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-16-2006, 04:35 AM
Cute LCeh :D

But players try their hardest against Rafa and there are many good clay court players.

GlennMirnyi
09-16-2006, 04:36 AM
If he is healthy then no.

None of the current players can beat Nadal unless they play their best and Nadal is off.

One more perfect season should be enough prove to the haters that Nadal is the best clay player ever. :D

Preposterous.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-16-2006, 04:38 AM
Well even if Nadal wins 10 straight RGs it wont be enough to convice GlennMirnyi. Federer fandom has just rotted the poorguys brain :D

GlennMirnyi
09-16-2006, 04:40 AM
Well even if Nadal wins 10 straight RGs it wont be enough to convice GlennMirnyi. Federer fandom has just rotted the poorguys brain :D

He will never do that. Come back later and mock me if I guessed wrong.

Macbrother
09-16-2006, 04:58 AM
If he is healthy then no.

None of the current players can beat Nadal unless they play their best and Nadal is off.

One more perfect season should be enough prove to the haters that Nadal is the best clay player ever. :D

Nadal has a long way to go before he even approaches the best clay player ever.

hitchhiker
09-16-2006, 05:19 AM
But players try their hardest against Rafa and there are many good clay court players.

good clay court players?

in 2006 the clay field was probably more pathetic then the grass one

the french open favourites were nadal, federer and outside chance almagro who lost to Blake (BLAKE!!!! at the french open)

it says it all when all the major finals were between federer and nadal yet when both withdrew you get robredo and stepanek

Adler
09-16-2006, 06:08 AM
almagro who lost to Blake (BLAKE!!!! at the french open)
maybe it's because Blake was... yyy... good? ;)

but I agree, there aren't many good clay court players like in the 90s (Spaniards, Yevgeny, Muster)

sharpeirob
09-16-2006, 06:29 AM
Like i have said numerous times

Chucho will beat him 6-0 6-3 6-5

sanpo
09-16-2006, 06:33 AM
Cute LCeh :D

But players try their hardest against Rafa and there are many good clay court players.

Nadal's impressive wins is commendable, but please don't hide the fact that there were no solid competition.

Unlike in 2003 - 2004, where there were a whole lot of players peaking and playing their best ( Gaudio, Coria, Puerta, Ferrero, etc.), this year not even one of those mentioned there was in top form, and the only competition was Fed and a one man competition wouldn't be as competitive isn't it?

Apemant
09-16-2006, 10:08 AM
If he is healthy then no.

None of the current players can beat Nadal unless they play their best and Nadal is off.

One more perfect season should be enough prove to the haters that Nadal is the best clay player ever. :D


You are aware of how Rafatardish this sounds?

Federer isn't the best of all time because the field is 'too weak' at the moment; but that doesn't apply to Rafa's clay streak as well, right? Classic 'tardness, really sorry to have to say that.

Action Jackson
09-16-2006, 10:10 AM
If he is healthy then no.

None of the current players can beat Nadal unless they play their best and Nadal is off.

One more perfect season should be enough prove to the haters that Nadal is the best clay player ever. :D

Thanks for that insightful post, it was hilarious to the extreme and it would be funny if you actually believed it.

DrJules
09-16-2006, 10:16 AM
If he is healthy then no.

None of the current players can beat Nadal unless they play their best and Nadal is off.

One more perfect season should be enough prove to the haters that Nadal is the best clay player ever. :D

Rather too early to say. Borg won FO 6 times. Nadal is on 2 wins.

Potentially given his age it is very possible that he could end his career with 5 or more FO titles. Then you would have a strong case especially if he continues his domination in other events.

gusman890
09-16-2006, 11:16 AM
He cant win forever, its just logic.

his body will be taxed from his phyiscal game in like 5 years, then he wont be playing as much. (im saying this as a non fed tard).

but its true, the kind of game he plays requires great fitness, and right now he is on the top of his game. This could or could not be his peak right now, not everyone peaks at 24. some peoeple earlier or older.

On any surface, Anyone is beatable. But Nadal on clay and Federer on grass, its the masters on their best surfaces, you play the best match of your life and you have a 50 50 chance. but once they get older, they will lose that 1/2 a step and more people will realize it.

stebs
09-16-2006, 11:51 AM
Yes. :rolleyes:

Action Jackson
09-16-2006, 11:52 AM
Yes. :rolleyes:

There is a reason he is in the contest. :)

PamV
09-16-2006, 12:17 PM
It seems like it is almost impossible to beat Nadal on clay he's won 60 matches over two years on the surface. This year only Jarrko Neimenen and Federer had a real shot at stopping the streak. Jarrko had a set and a 4-1 in the second set in Barcelona but he choked. And shockingly Federer collapsed in Rome he had a few match points but couldn't close it out. Next year will be very interesting because the South Americans and the Spaniards have dominated the French Open this decade. Agassi was the last non Spaniard or South American to capture the French open title almost eight years ago.
The dominance of the Spanish and Portuguese players at the French Open is incredible. I wonder if next year finally someone else will breakthrough. Besides Federer does anyone have a real chance against Nadal on clay? It seems like Nadal is supreme on clay he cannot be stopped?

I keep trying to think of a strong clay court player other than Nadal or Federer and no one comes to mind.

I wonder if Federer would approach it differently this time, by not trying to get to the final of MC and Rome in order to save strength for the FO. When Agassi won the FO in 1999 he didn't play MC or Hamburg and was beaten in the 3rd round of Rome by Rafter. So it's not a prerequiste to win a clay MS before FO.

joeb_uk
09-16-2006, 12:21 PM
It strikes me that an awful lot of good claycourt players are going to end up wishing they had taken their chance at RG before Nadal's rise to dominance. I can think of one choker/tanker/claycourt specialist who won't, though. :D

Sjeng, "Coria" would never win RG even if Nadal wasn't on tour the way he has played since. Look at him right now, he is a broken man.


I don't think anyone will beat nadal on clay in the next few years if he is healthy.

sharpeirob
09-16-2006, 12:23 PM
Next year, he will face a meteoric fall in the rankings.

Then, he will get caught doping which is the only answer to how he seems to look like and his defense will be that it was Tony that did it because Rafael liked wearing dresses and not kicking a football.

That's why there was too much testosterone, you see.


:scared:

Then Chucho, the rightfull owner wll claim the title :D

Castafiore
09-16-2006, 12:45 PM
This thread is stupid. Of course he can be beaten. Every player can be beaten.

adee-gee
09-16-2006, 12:56 PM
Yes, but not by Federer :)

jenanun
09-16-2006, 12:58 PM
This thread is stupid. Of course he can be beaten. Every player can be beaten.

true...

the question should be when nadal will be beaten at RG...

Saumon
09-16-2006, 01:06 PM
Nadal has more "chances" to be beaten on clay at the French Open, than on say... grass or hardcourts. :)

yomike
09-16-2006, 01:14 PM
The dominance of the Spanish and Portuguese players at the French Open is incredible.

You mean Kuerten; Portuguese speaking winner.

cmurray
09-16-2006, 01:32 PM
Next year, he will face a meteoric fall in the rankings.

Then, he will get caught doping which is the only answer to how he seems to look like and his defense will be that it was Tony that did it because Rafael liked wearing dresses and not kicking a football.

That's why there was too much testosterone, you see.


:scared:

Then Chucho, the rightfull owner wll claim the title :D

ummhmmm....that's what people said about Rafa LAST year. "There is NO WAY he can have another season like he did in 2005. His ranking will drop like a stone." And we all saw what happened this year, didn't we? 60 straight wins on clay is pretty impressive.

That being said, of COURSE he can be beaten. Anyone can be beaten - otherwise, why bother to have a tournament?

sanpo
09-16-2006, 02:34 PM
Nadal has more "chances" to be beaten on clay at the French Open, than on say... grass or hardcourts. :)

What!? :confused:

sanpo
09-16-2006, 02:37 PM
One more perfect season should be enough prove to the haters that Nadal is the best clay player ever. :D

No. He could be, but one season isn't enough. His game might be virtually considered the best game on clay ever, but he still has to stack up FO wins to overpass some clay legends.

This is very similar to Fed's case -- he can be considered the player with the best game ever, but he still needs to surpass Sampras' record of 14 GS wins for him to be actually considered the Greatest Tennis player.

Naranoc
09-16-2006, 03:13 PM
^ Agreed.

Neumann
09-16-2006, 04:06 PM
Nadal has more "chances" to be beaten on clay at the French Open, than on say... grass or hardcourts. :)

:worship: Truth has been spoken :worship:


For the slow ones, redundant title :angel:

t0x
09-16-2006, 06:06 PM
I personally doubted Nadal would defend his points this year. I think he may drop one of the TMSs because it's best of 3 sets before the final. But in RG, I can't really see him being defeated in best of 5 sets...

Having said that, recently more and more players seem to be beating Nadal. But on clay it's gunna be totally different.

Saumon
09-16-2006, 06:52 PM
:worship: Truth has been spoken :worship:


For the slow ones, redundant title :angel:
;)

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-16-2006, 07:22 PM
I agree with Hitler and the Fedtards, Nadal is a horrible player on clay and will never be the best at anything.

He only wins because the era is weak :rolleyes:

Now you guys see why I say the same things about Federer because I like insulting people with their own insane ideas.

2 perfect clay seasons only because everyone else sucks :rolleyes:

When Federer wins its against tough competition, when Nadal wins it because of cake walk draws and easy competition.

Pathetic Fedtards.

stebs
09-16-2006, 07:39 PM
I agree with Hitler and the Fedtards, Nadal is a horrible player on clay and will never be the best at anything.

He only wins because the era is weak :rolleyes:

Now you guys see why I say the same things about Federer because I like insulting people with their own insane ideas.

2 perfect clay seasons only because everyone else sucks :rolleyes:

When Federer wins its against tough competition, when Nadal wins it because of cake walk draws and easy competition.

Pathetic Fedtards.
For the love of God would you stop posting in every thread about Fedtards.

You don't have to go insane and start getting upset and angry and acting like a child every time anyone posts about any of the following:

A - That the 90's were a more competative era in clay court tennis which is almost undoubtedly true.

B - That Nadal is not the greatest clay courter ever which, if you are going by belief of the masses is also true.

C - That Nadal may not be the greatest player in the history of space-time and may infact lose a match on clay again at some point in the future.

No-one is saying Nadal sucks just that maybe someday he might lose and you fly off the handle. Give it a rest, some people have different opinions than you and it is, in fact, yours that are ridiculous rather than other peoples.

I assume you can read, if so then why not read the posts in this thread before trying to start a war.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-16-2006, 07:41 PM
A - That the 90's were a more competative era in tennis which is almost undoubtedly true.

B - That Federer is not the greatest player ever which, if you are going by belief of the masses is also true.

C - That Federer may not be the greatest player in the history of space-time and may infact lose a match again at some point in the future.

Tell this to the Fedtards.

When they agree then I will agree :D

stebs
09-16-2006, 07:47 PM
A - That the 90's were a more competative era in tennis which is almost undoubtedly true.

B - That Federer is not the greatest player ever which, if you are going by belief of the masses is also true.

C - That Federer may not be the greatest player in the history of space-time and may infact lose a match again at some point in the future.

Tell this to the Fedtards.

When they agree then I will agree :D
Once more I am going to have to tell you to open your eyes and stop with this blind faith that everyone is against Rafa and against you.

So now there is a slight change of context you want to change your argument to say that the modern era is less strong? You cannot have it both ways but as it happens I think a very high percentage of what you call 'Fedtards' (though for you that seems to be anyone who doesn't think the sun shines out of Rafa's ass) would agree that overall the 90's were probably a more competative era.

I've still never seen any post stating that Federer is, by accomplishment, the greatest player of all time. I have seen posts saying that he may become that but it is certainly possible that he might so that is an invalid argument. If you can find any post by a regular poster calling Roger the greatest of all time, going on accomplishment, then okay, maybe your point is valid. Until then don't try this argument.

All fans of Federer that I have seen on these forums fully accepted the defeats to rafa this year and to Murray. They also fully accept that Federer is going to lose in the future and that most probably it will start to happen with more fequency over the next year or two.

Action Jackson
09-16-2006, 08:52 PM
A - That the 90's were a more competative era in tennis which is almost undoubtedly true.

B - That Federer is not the greatest player ever which, if you are going by belief of the masses is also true.

C - That Federer may not be the greatest player in the history of space-time and may infact lose a match again at some point in the future.

Tell this to the Fedtards.

When they agree then I will agree :D

Ok, A is true

B: True

C: That is also True

I am impressed that was your best over post.

Sjengster
09-16-2006, 09:16 PM
Sjeng, "Coria" would never win RG even if Nadal wasn't on tour the way he has played since. Look at him right now, he is a broken man.


I don't think anyone will beat nadal on clay in the next few years if he is healthy.

No no, you misunderstand me - I meant one man who won't have to wish that he had taken his chance a couple of years ago. You know who that is. ;)

joeb_uk
09-16-2006, 09:39 PM
No no, you misunderstand me - I meant one man who won't have to wish that he had taken his chance a couple of years ago. You know who that is. ;)

:bolt: Damn! Are you sure you didn't edit your post after? :lol: :retard: Don't know how I missed that.

GlennMirnyi
09-16-2006, 09:53 PM
Next year, he will face a meteoric fall in the rankings.



Signs of intelligent life... :worship:

Pfloyd
09-16-2006, 10:40 PM
Yes he can. It'll be a hell of a task. But by logic, the longer his streak goes on, the bigger the chance that he'll lose.

stebs
09-16-2006, 11:24 PM
Ok, A is true

B: True

C: That is also True

I am impressed that was your best over post.
The only problem with the post is that he attempted to use it as a get out clause in the debate I was attempting to start with him. Instead of replying to me he attempted to veer the conversation a different way, a sure fire way to tell somebody is running out of ideas if they try and change the direction of the debate.

Action Jackson
09-16-2006, 11:26 PM
The only problem with the post is that he attempted to use it as a get out clause in the debate I was attempting to start with him. Instead of replying to me he attempted to veer the conversation a different way, a sure fire way to tell somebody is running out of ideas if they try and change the direction of the debate.

Maybe he wants to be taken seriously.

stebs
09-16-2006, 11:27 PM
Maybe he wants to be taken seriously.
No, I don't think there is ever going to be a time when that is true.

Even so, if he did want to be taken seriously I replied to his post so there is no problem there.

TennisAgenda
09-17-2006, 01:03 AM
Only in the USA is Sampras considered GOAT but the rest of globe get it. Sampras horrible clay court record simply cannot be ignored. John Newcombe and Patrick Rafter stated the obvious. Pete Sampras was so bad on clay he's worst then Federer, McEnroe, Lendl, Borg, and Agassi. Sampras weakness on clay is the reason he's not GOAT. Borg is clearly superior to Sampras since he was so much more consistent then Sampras could dream of being.

GlennMirnyi
09-17-2006, 01:22 AM
Only in the USA is Sampras considered GOAT but the rest of globe get it. Sampras horrible clay court record simply cannot be ignored. John Newcombe and Patrick Rafter stated the obvious. Pete Sampras was so bad on clay he's worst then Federer, McEnroe, Lendl, Borg, and Agassi. Sampras weakness on clay is the reason he's not GOAT. Borg is clearly superior to Sampras since he was so much more consistent then Sampras could dream of being.

:haha:
Another quarter-finalist of the championship showing up.
So 3 QF and one SF of RG is being awful on clay? Winning Rome?
14 GS. That speaks for itself. Sampras is the greatest 'till now.



People are just going over the top with this tournament.

jenanun
09-17-2006, 08:37 AM
So 3 QF and one SF of RG is being awful on clay? Winning Rome?
14 GS. That speaks for itself. Sampras is the greatest 'till now.


as a no.1 player with 14GS title, yes his result on clay was awful, unless you are comparing sampras with an average player ranking 20 in the world...

he played RG 13 times,
there were 8 times he lost in 1st or 2nd round....
how good was he on clay? you tell me.....

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-17-2006, 07:10 PM
Stebs if you admit Nadal's competition is weak on clay then you will have to admit Federer's competition is weak as well.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks. :D

My perfect logic as always is superior.