Poll: Did Nadal still have a great season in 2009? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Poll: Did Nadal still have a great season in 2009?

2003
11-20-2009, 07:54 AM
He did resonably well at the Australian Open warm up tournaments, he lost to Mon Fills but did enough to make it count and he won the 2009 Australian Open, a tournament he proably was never expected to win. He didn't even drop a single set until the semis. Probably worth trading for a FO title really. He did it with 10 hours on the court in 2 days, sure he relied on pot luck to get past Nando Vercrasco but he made it count in the final against Shankerer. And he made Federer cry.

Next he won in the Wind against A Murray, demolishing him. Then he was simply awesome, demolishing Soderling and winning several mickey mouse clay titles despite a strong challenge from king Mole. Federer got lucky in Madrid but Nadal had nothing to prove.

He looked very strong in the French open, and still fought all the way losing to Soderling. The pink shirt was a mistake and I doubt we will see it again. Besides Federer had a bear gut and only really had to motivate himself for the final, even down 2 sets to TH he knew this was his to lose. Destiny.

He did so well to reach the Semis of the US open, I think he shocked everyone really. He was no match for Del Potro but hes just flukey anyway. Nadal didn't lose his way after winning his first GS like Del boy has.

Then he did very well to reach the semis of the recent tournament, defending 71 match points on the way.

He also showed massive resolve to beat David Burgerbandian earlier in the year defending 5 match points then bageling the Argentine.

Now he should win everything in sight.

He also would have won Wimbledon for sure the way Federer played in the final. NADAL JUST WOULDNT LOSE A TIEBREAK UP 6-2 TO FEDERER.

So I think Nadal had a great 2009, maybe better than his 2008 season. I just think dropping the wife beater was a mistake, the new shirts make him look less monsterish.

:)

I actually think when you look at it, Federer had a better 2008 than Nadal and Nadal had a better 2009. It's just that the rankings don't reflect this.

Langers
11-20-2009, 08:00 AM
He did resonably well at the Australian Open warm up tournaments, he lost to Mon Fills but did enough to make it count and he won the 2009 Australian Open, a tournament he proably was never expected to win. He didn't even drop a single set until the semis. Probably worth trading for a FO title really. He did it with 10 hours on the court in 2 days, sure he relied on pot luck to get past Nando Vercrasco but he made it count in the final against Shankerer. And he made Federer cry.

Next he won in the Wind against A Murray, demolishing him. Then he was simply awesome, demolishing Soderling and winning several mickey mouse clay titles despite a strong challenge from king Mole. Federer got lucky in Madrid but Nadal had nothing to prove.

He looked very strong in the French open, and still fought all the way losing to Soderling. The pink shirt was a mistake and I doubt we will see it again. Besides Federer had a bear gut and only really had to motivate himself for the final, even down 2 sets to TH he knew this was his to lose. Destiny.

He did so well to reach the Semis of the US open, I think he shocked everyone really. He was no match for Del Potro but hes just flukey anyway. Nadal didn't lose his way after winning his first GS like Del boy has.

Then he did very well to reach the semis of the recent tournament, defending 71 match points on the way.

He also showed massive resolve to beat David Burgerbandian earlier in the year defending 5 match points then bageling the Argentine.

Now he should win everything in sight.

He also would have won Wimbledon for sure the way Federer played in the final. NADAL JUST WOULDNT LOSE A TIEBREAK UP 6-2 TO FEDERER.

So I think Nadal had a great 2009, maybe better than his 2008 season. I just think dropping the wife beater was a mistake, the new shirts make him look less monsterish.

:)

I actually think when you look at it, Federer had a better 2008 than Nadal and Nadal had a better 2009. It's just that the rankings don't reflect this.
:lol: :spit:

Sri
11-20-2009, 08:03 AM
Ha ha .. hilarious, your reasoning is!

--

I believe in the initial part of 2009, Rafa was just carrying forward momentum of 2008. From what I have seen of him, he's just not the same player anymore. He has considerably lost weight and power and is making way too many unforced errors. This is actually par for Rafa's skills. 2008 he was well above par and he could not have realistically carried that forward for too long.

I wouldn't diagnose 2009 for him as one single season. There was a Rafa before RG and one after RG. We have a new Rafa with a lot to prove in 2010. Can he go back to 2008 levels? I would not bet on it.

n8
11-20-2009, 08:18 AM
You are risking your green lights opening a thread like that. There is no way that Nadal's 2009 was better than his 2008, it's not even worth explaining.

Nadal had a good, definitely not great, 2009 season. It was the first time since 2005 that he didn't make two Grand Slam finals in a season. At Nadal's level, his success is very largely dependant on his performance in Slams and that is what is lacking this year even with his Australian Open triumph. Outside of Slams he had an excellent season but I'm sure he would gladly trade his three Masters Series won this year for another Slam.

It was a good season because he won a Slam and won three Masters. It was not a great season because last year was better and, at 23, he would still be looking to improve/ maintain his level (I am aware that Nadal's injuries restricted his progress more than usual this year).

2003
11-20-2009, 08:40 AM
But without his injuries and family tragedy he would have won 2, and probably 3 slams, no?

He had an awesome year!

n8
11-20-2009, 08:53 AM
But without his injuries and family tragedy he would have won 2, and probably 3 slams, no?

He had an awesome year!

I would say that players would weigh in their injuries when evaluating a season. Take the extreme, injured the whole season (and therefore didn't loose a match) is no doubt a bad season. If Nadal had gotten injured after the Australian Open then had to miss the whole season he would not have called the season great because he would have been favoured for RG and Wimby, it would have been a disaster. Nadal wasn't injured that much but he still achieved less than he could have otherwise and hence it was not a great season.

But I guess it really depends on how you define it. If you say, considering his injuries and family worries, Nadal had an excellent season. Then I would be more inclined to agree with you.

Goldenoldie
11-20-2009, 09:38 AM
Ask any player apart from Federer if they would swap their results for Nadal's, and I think you have your answer.

ShotmaKer
11-20-2009, 10:01 AM
Ask any player apart from Federer if they would swap their results for Nadal's, and I think you have your answer.

DelPo wouldn't, I guess ;)

kyleskywalker007
11-20-2009, 10:35 AM
He did resonably well at the Australian Open warm up tournaments, he lost to Mon Fills but did enough to make it count and he won the 2009 Australian Open, a tournament he proably was never expected to win. He didn't even drop a single set until the semis. Probably worth trading for a FO title really. He did it with 10 hours on the court in 2 days, sure he relied on pot luck to get past Nando Vercrasco but he made it count in the final against Shankerer. And he made Federer cry.

Next he won in the Wind against A Murray, demolishing him. Then he was simply awesome, demolishing Soderling and winning several mickey mouse clay titles despite a strong challenge from king Mole. Federer got lucky in Madrid but Nadal had nothing to prove.

He looked very strong in the French open, and still fought all the way losing to Soderling. The pink shirt was a mistake and I doubt we will see it again. Besides Federer had a bear gut and only really had to motivate himself for the final, even down 2 sets to TH he knew this was his to lose. Destiny.

He did so well to reach the Semis of the US open, I think he shocked everyone really. He was no match for Del Potro but hes just flukey anyway. Nadal didn't lose his way after winning his first GS like Del boy has.

Then he did very well to reach the semis of the recent tournament, defending 71 match points on the way.

He also showed massive resolve to beat David Burgerbandian earlier in the year defending 5 match points then bageling the Argentine.

Now he should win everything in sight.

He also would have won Wimbledon for sure the way Federer played in the final. NADAL JUST WOULDNT LOSE A TIEBREAK UP 6-2 TO FEDERER.

So I think Nadal had a great 2009, maybe better than his 2008 season. I just think dropping the wife beater was a mistake, the new shirts make him look less monsterish.

:)

I actually think when you look at it, Federer had a better 2008 than Nadal and Nadal had a better 2009. It's just that the rankings don't reflect this.

I suppose you are saying that Nadal was the fluke at the US open and not Delpo.How many players shit their pants insteado of finishing nadal off? I lost the count!

paseo
11-20-2009, 11:10 AM
DelPo wouldn't, I guess ;)

Why not? I think Del Potro would love to win 3 MS to accompany his GS title.

ShotmaKer
11-20-2009, 11:33 AM
Why not? I think Del Potro would love to win 3 MS to accompany his GS title.

Fair enough. Tough call anyhoo, Del Po did not have to withdraw from Wimby (where, granted, he did not perform his best anyway) plus he made the semis in Paris :shrug:

MariaV
11-20-2009, 11:37 AM
:spit: 2003 never disappoints. :worship: :bowdown: :rolls:

leng jai
11-20-2009, 12:18 PM
Any season you win a slam is a "great" season.

MurrayFan1
11-20-2009, 12:19 PM
Mediocore by his standards. Right from after he pulled out of Queens it went downhill.

gorgo1986
11-20-2009, 12:26 PM
He won a grand-slam on hard courts beating Fed in the Final, also won 3 masters and that's not too shabby in my book.

born_on_clay
11-20-2009, 01:02 PM
despite the injury and family problems he's still in the hunt for year-end no.1 , and has won 5 titles (including Grand Slam)
Very good year

tennisace
11-20-2009, 01:34 PM
agree with you, Federer with the same problems wouldn't have had better results for sure...

stebs
11-20-2009, 01:44 PM
It was a very good season, not sure about great. Thing is, from an overall point of view it was very impressive, he won a slam on HC which is really a very important acheivement for him. Also, he is still in with a shot at #1 despite not playing one of the slams, that is a big show of how good he has been. First half of this year was just incredible.

It's funny that we can pinpoint the place where the season went a little bit for the worse with one of his best wins, vs Djokovic in Madrid.

FiBeR
11-20-2009, 02:35 PM
Winning a Slam he has never won before is much better than winning what he had already won.

This was a great season. 2008 was his best (Olympics, Roland Garros-Wimbledon, #1)
but winning the Australian Open pretty much certified a good year :yeah:.

sawan66278
11-20-2009, 03:26 PM
Last year was the ONLY year he won two slams in a season...and if you look at his results from previous years, he has had almost a good year across the board as any season prior to 2008. You could even argue that he had the best season of any hard court player (winning the AO, A Masters shield...many semis of other hard court titles, etc.)

He won the LONGEST match (match of the year?) in the history of the AO against Fernando too...

As Lendl said: any season you win a slam in is a great season. Case closed.

habibko
11-20-2009, 03:37 PM
NADAL JUST WOULDNT LOSE A TIEBREAK UP 6-2 TO FEDERER.

funny that you say this, seeing how he lost a TB being up 5-2 in their final last year....

as for the rest of the OP, nice campaigning for ACC :yeah:

Andi-M
11-20-2009, 03:39 PM
Any season with a slam can never be considered bad, it was a fantastic achievement for Rafa to win a slam on a HC.

Compared to 2008 its not great, but the 1st half of 09 year was phenomenal, 2nd half mediocre at best. If the 2nd half of 09 form continues I can see him going slamless in 2010.

Noleta
11-20-2009, 03:47 PM
2008 was very exceptional.But still 09 was a great year for Rafa,winning AO:yeah:

brent-o
11-20-2009, 05:12 PM
It's so hard to believe Nadal won the Aussie this year. It feels like so long ago! Even though he didn't repeat his 2008 success, you have to mark this season down as a slight win because of the Aussie title.

manadrainer
11-20-2009, 05:14 PM
NADAL JUST WOULDNT LOSE A TIEBREAK UP 6-2 TO FEDERER.



Maybe he wouldn't but he came close. Nadal lost a tiebreak to Federer being up 5-2 in 2008 Wimbledon final. :)

SetSampras
11-20-2009, 05:17 PM
Being sidelined with injuries, missing a slam and other tournaments, and dropping back to Number 2 in the world is not a great season in my eyes. No..Nadal was on the verge of a having a great season though around AO time but it came crumbling down.

Winning 1 slam isnt a great season for Nadal standard. Not after he won RG, Wimby last year and followed it up with the AO this year.

SetSampras
11-20-2009, 05:19 PM
And whoever said Nadal had a "great" season isnt all there. He couldnt maintain his health all season, was barely ever top level. Showed up to RG less than top form, missed Wimbeldon. Thats not a great season for Nadal standards

Commander Data
11-20-2009, 06:12 PM
It was great in that after owning allready Clay and Grass Slams he could add a HC Slam to his collection, proving his ability to win Slams on all surfaces. That is certainly a great achievement.
However, missing Wimbledon and especially losing RG was certainly not great. having serious health issues is also not great.


So I would say very good but not quite great Season. For me, Nadal needs to win 2 Slams to have a great Season.

Joao
11-20-2009, 06:53 PM
shoulda coulda woulda ... you can't measure someone's year by what could have been. God I'm so tired of reading "if scenarios" ...

Nadal's standard is winning 1 slam a year so it was a normal year for Nadal I'd say. However, given that the slam he won was on HC, 2009 has something special about it.

momo_momo
11-20-2009, 08:07 PM
He's number 2. Got a handful of slams already before 09. Pretty good despite his injury.
Obviously.

Sunset of Age
11-20-2009, 08:20 PM
As so many said before me, any player winning 'just' (:rolleyes:) ONE GS title in a year has had a very good year.
People tend to go overboard with their expectations on players, winning more than one slam within a year is already exceptional, even more when that player manages to achieve that two years in a row... well perhaps next year? :D

Five titles, a slam on HC, and despite not even being able to defend 2000 points at Wimbly due to private & injury nastiness, still being in the run for YE #1...

Sounds to me like a very good perfomance indeed. :worship:

DrJules
11-20-2009, 08:26 PM
He did resonably well at the Australian Open warm up tournaments, he lost to Mon Fills but did enough to make it count and he won the 2009 Australian Open, a tournament he proably was never expected to win. He didn't even drop a single set until the semis. Probably worth trading for a FO title really. He did it with 10 hours on the court in 2 days, sure he relied on pot luck to get past Nando Vercrasco but he made it count in the final against Shankerer. And he made Federer cry.

Next he won in the Wind against A Murray, demolishing him. Then he was simply awesome, demolishing Soderling and winning several mickey mouse clay titles despite a strong challenge from king Mole. Federer got lucky in Madrid but Nadal had nothing to prove.

He looked very strong in the French open, and still fought all the way losing to Soderling. The pink shirt was a mistake and I doubt we will see it again. Besides Federer had a bear gut and only really had to motivate himself for the final, even down 2 sets to TH he knew this was his to lose. Destiny.

He did so well to reach the Semis of the US open, I think he shocked everyone really. He was no match for Del Potro but hes just flukey anyway. Nadal didn't lose his way after winning his first GS like Del boy has.

Then he did very well to reach the semis of the recent tournament, defending 71 match points on the way.

He also showed massive resolve to beat David Burgerbandian earlier in the year defending 5 match points then bageling the Argentine.

Now he should win everything in sight.

He also would have won Wimbledon for sure the way Federer played in the final. NADAL JUST WOULDNT LOSE A TIEBREAK UP 6-2 TO FEDERER.

So I think Nadal had a great 2009, maybe better than his 2008 season. I just think dropping the wife beater was a mistake, the new shirts make him look less monsterish.

:)

I actually think when you look at it, Federer had a better 2008 than Nadal and Nadal had a better 2009. It's just that the rankings don't reflect this.

And pigs have wings and fly.

Johnny Groove
11-20-2009, 08:29 PM
Yep.

But his 2010 will be better.

djb84xi
11-21-2009, 12:18 AM
IMHO, he's had a great season, but nothing like last year. Who knows how many more titles he could've had, if the injuries, and family issues weren't a distraction. He won his 1st hard court grand slam title, played in 2 of the year's most outstanding matches (vs. Verdasco - Australia, vs. Djokovic - Madrid), won his 5th consecutive titles in Monte Carlo, and Barcelona, plus he made the SF in NY for the 2nd straight year. Not to mention, he's still No. 2. So all in all, he's had a great year, it just got a little rough for him in between.

A lot of players would gladly trade for Rafa's season and accomplishments. I think if he can stay healthy and regain his confidence/composure, 2010 could be the biggest year of his career. I will never underestimate his potential.

jcempire
11-21-2009, 06:30 AM
Absolutely

He miss almost three months...... and just few points behind Fed to finish No 2 by ends

Clydey
11-21-2009, 07:05 AM
He won a major, which was par for the course up until last season. Considering his injury problems and the fact that they fucked up his chances at his two best majors, his season has been remarkable.

That doesn't mean that his recent form isn't cause for concern, though. I would be hugely concerned if I was a Nadal fan. The knee injury ceased to be an excuse months ago, yet he is still being routinely spanked at the business end of tournaments. And he has lost a lot of weight, despite what he would have us believe. I'll reserve judgement until next season, but I would not be at all surprised if Nadal slips to number 5 next year.

Matt01
11-21-2009, 05:26 PM
If he wins the WTF (?) and finishes the season as #1, then it was a great season for him. If not, then it was a good season.

swisht4u
11-21-2009, 05:34 PM
Considering the injuries and missing Wimby Nadal has done great.
He isn't near his best lately and still holds the #2 spot by a decent margin.
Even with all these negatives he still has a chance for #1, though slim.

I'm looking/hoping for a strong/healthy 2010.