Will Rafael Nadal ever win the US Open? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Will Rafael Nadal ever win the US Open?

Pages : [1] 2 3 4

Jimnik
12-11-2005, 01:53 PM
I think most people agree that, one day, he'll be able to win the Aus Open but are the North American courts too fast? Will he be able to cause his opponents the same sorts of problems on those courts as he can on slower courts? Will his serve improve and give him more cheap points?

Thoughts please!

Devotee
12-11-2005, 02:21 PM
yes, he's still young and has plenty of time yet to do so

Galaxystorm
12-11-2005, 02:23 PM
Yes, sure

Jimnik
12-11-2005, 02:26 PM
He's young but will his style ever change? I'm not sure if his heavy top-spin balls will ever cause his opponents difficulties on the faster courts. And, I doubt he'll ever develop flat groundstrokes.

Federerthebest
12-11-2005, 02:27 PM
Absolutely not.

stebs
12-11-2005, 02:30 PM
I wish there was a maybe option. Im still totally unsure. I think if Rafa devotes enough time to training for playing on that surface he can and will but he might well not.

LaTenista
12-11-2005, 04:31 PM
He won Montreal on the same surface, defeating Agassi in the final, one of the best players on Decoturf so I think he probably will, maybe even two or three times. He's only 19 so he's got plenty of time to develop.

Fergie
12-11-2005, 04:50 PM
Maybe no

adee-gee
12-11-2005, 05:04 PM
Without a doubt. More than once as well.

DrJules
12-11-2005, 05:09 PM
Yes. He is only 19 and will improve a lot. Already he is as likely as anyone to win if you eclude Roger Federer.

prima donna
12-11-2005, 05:21 PM
Some people have no idea how tough it is to win a GS, especially when your play doesn't suit the surface at all.

*jeopardy music*

For 1200, who was the last dirtballer to win in NYC ?

You take your pick out of this list and tell me which one is these guys strikes you as the type that enjoys getting their socks dirty and rolling around in mud after they nibble on their Roland Garros trophies.

1988 Mats Wilander Ivan Lendl 6-4 4-6 6-3 5-7 6-4
1989 Boris Becker Ivan Lendl 7-6 1-6 6-3 7-6
1990 Pete Sampras Andre Agassi 6-4 6-3 6-2
1991 Stefan Edberg Jim Courier 6-2 6-4 6-0
1992 Stefan Edberg Pete Sampras 3-6 6-4 7-6 6-2
1993 Pete Sampras Cedric Pioline 6-4 6-4 6-3
1994 Andre Agassi Michael Stich 6-1 7-6 7-5
1995 Pete Sampras Andre Agassi 6-4 6-3 4-6 7-5
1996 Pete Sampras Michael Chang 6-1 6-4 7-6
1997 Patrick Rafter Greg Rusedski 6-3 6-2 4-6 7-5
1998 Patrick Rafter Mark Philippoussis 6-3 3-6 6-2 6-0
1999 Andre Agassi Todd Martin 6-4 6-7(5) 6-7(2) 6-3 6-2
2000 Marat Safin Pete Sampras 6-4 6-3 6-3
2001 Lleyton Hewitt Pete Sampras 7-6(4) 6-1 6-1
2002 Pete Sampras Andre Agassi 6-3 6-4 5-7 6-4
2003 Andy Roddick Juan Carlos Ferrero 6-3 7-6(2) 6-3
2004 Roger Federer Lleyton Hewitt 6-0 7-6(3) 6-0
2005 Roger Federer Andre Agassi 6-3 2-6 7-6(1) 6-1

adee-gee
12-11-2005, 05:27 PM
prima donna get your penis out of Roger's ass and think sensibly for a change.

casillas_girl
12-11-2005, 05:32 PM
I hope Rafa will, but I doubt it. I think he has even more chance for the Aussie Open.

prima donna
12-11-2005, 05:36 PM
prima donna get your penis out of Roger's ass and think sensibly for a change.
Why can't you answer the question ?

The personal remarks aren't really necessary and they are actually repetitive, you should preserve these type of classic displays of brilliance for other threads or for MSN Messenger, you know, that thing where you send people messages complaining about individuals and they like blow you off ? Yes, that thing.

No dirtballer has won U.S Open in years, you expect the boy to join a fraternity that includes McEnroe, Sampras, Agassi and Federer - joke of the day, week and year. Possibly evaaaaaaaaa. :lol:

DrJules
12-11-2005, 05:43 PM
For 1200, who was the last dirtballer to win in NYC ?

You take your pick out of this list and tell me which one is these guys strikes you as the type that enjoys getting their socks dirty and rolling around in mud after they nibble on their Roland Garros trophies.

1988 Mats Wilander Ivan Lendl 6-4 4-6 6-3 5-7 6-4


If Mats Wilander could win the US Open beating Lendl I see no reason why Nadal cannot. He is not your normal "dirtballer" (In English I think "dirtballer" means clay court player). Nadal did win in Montreal (beating Andre) and Madrid (beating Ivan).

landoud
12-11-2005, 05:46 PM
Yes, definately
he is young and strong... if he couldn't win it this year , he will the next

prima donna
12-11-2005, 05:47 PM
If Mats Wilander could win the US Open beating Lendl I see no reason why Nadal cannot. He is not your normal "dirtballer" (In English I think "dirtballer" means clay court player). Nadal did win in Montreal (beating Andre) and Madrid (beating Ivan).
Well, Andre is 35 years old and has 1 more USO left in him.

Ivan doesn't perform at GS's, he only collects a 2nd and possibly 3rd round if he's lucky, paycheck.

I don't believe either are significant.

Andre wasn't playing anywhere near the level he peaked in NYC, where he took out James Blake (the man that toyed with Nadal).

Matter of personal opinion. :)

- Also, thats Wilander and Lendl remark is interesting. Just because they were raised on clay and had a game structured towards clay, you're forgetting that we are talking 2 very versatile players here.

Mats is the closest thing to a "dirtballer" to win, Lendl made Wimbledon Final how many times ? A dirtballer? That myth needs to do a disappearing act.

I don't know, I refuse to call legends dirtballers or pretend for even a minute that it'd be fair to compare anything they've accomplished to Nadals "potential"

adee-gee
12-11-2005, 05:48 PM
Why can't you answer the question ?

The personal remarks aren't really necessary and they are actually repetitive, you should preserve these type of classic displays of brilliance for other threads or for MSN Messenger, you know, that thing where you send people messages complaining about individuals and they like blow you off ? Yes, that thing.

No dirtballer has won U.S Open in years, you expect the boy to join a fraternity that includes McEnroe, Sampras, Agassi and Federer - joke of the day, week and year. Possibly evaaaaaaaaa. :lol:
:lol: you really do crack me up.

As for answering the question, Wilander was essentially a clay courter. And anyway, since when has history prevented something like this happening. Agassi was the first out and out baseliner to win Wimbledon, and since then Hewitt has also won it. Just because it may not have happened recently, does not mean to suggest it can't happen. And if Nadal is so awful on hard courts, how has he beaten the magical Federer in straight sets, and then came within a tie break of a 3 sets to 0 whitewash another time :confused:

prima donna
12-11-2005, 05:56 PM
:lol: you really do crack me up.
And if Nadal is so awful on hard courts, how has he beaten the magical Federer in straight sets, and then came within a tie break of a 3 sets to 0 whitewash another time :confused:

Awful wasn't and isn't the word we're looking for here, nor was it at any point used to describe anything concerning Nadal.

After suffering from Heat Stroke, Federer made an unwise decision by choosing to play against the Spaniard in 2004, Miami. Closed case.

It is a testament to Hard Court superiority, to win the U.S Open, not only against the crowd, but against the tough conditions and superior level of talent. The word impossibility is so rarely appropriate, but with the likes of Roger, Berdych and Gasquet lurking that would be the only way to describe Nadal's chances.

Fluke U.S Open titles don't happen and the fans don't just allow you to show up, fist pump and behave however you want. If you are going to win the U.S Open, you'd better have some serious mental strength and be the best hard court player out there at the present time.

The U.S Open, behind Wimbledon, has proven to be the most consistent Slam in terms of winners and playing styles. There hasn't been a fluke at the U.S in ages, most have repeated.

Even Andy Roddick, the 2nd best Hard Court player, will probably win his home tournament again.

How do you ever expect the boy to stop a 140 MPH serve or pass up any of the other names I've mentioned ?

DrJules
12-11-2005, 05:58 PM
Andre wasn't playing anywhere near the level he peaked in NYC, where he took out James Blake (the man that toyed with Nadal).


For the first 2 sets Nadal was fully competitive with Blake and after winning the 2nd set Nadal looked more likely to win the match, but for some reason in the 3rd and 4th sets he just fell away. Agassi should have lost in straight sets to Blake. Maybe the crowd was the difference between the 2 matches; in the first match they were very supportive of Blake and in the second very supportive of Agassi.

prima donna
12-11-2005, 06:03 PM
For the first 2 sets Nadal was fully competitive with Blake and after winning the 2nd set Nadal looked more likely to win the match, but for some reason in the 3rd and 4th sets he just fell away. Agassi should have lost in straight sets to Blake. Maybe the crowd was the difference between the 2 matches; in the first match they were very supportive of Blake and in the second very supportive of Agassi.

6 4 4 6 6 3 6 1 - James Blake D. Rafael Nadal

I'd say "fell away" wouldn't quite do that match justice, unless it involves Nadal falling into a coma and completely looking clueless as to how to properly plan a strategy for hard court success.

On that day, Blake simply outclassed and exposed the young Spaniard.

Concerning your take on Agassi, it was somewhat of a chokejob that aided his cause, but no doubt his level was 50 notches above that given in Montreal.

adee-gee
12-11-2005, 06:04 PM
After suffering from Heat Stroke, Federer made an unwise decision by choosing to play against the Spaniard in 2004, Miami. Closed case.
Stop talking nonsense. If it was that bad he wouldn't have played. Why can't you just accept a defeat without making an excuse.

It is a testament to Hard Court superiority, to win the U.S Open, not only against the crowd, but against the tough conditions and superior level of talent. The word impossibility is so rarely appropriate, but with the likes of Roger, Berdych and Gasquet lurking that would be the only way to describe Nadal's chances.
:lol: what a steaming pile of bullshit. I don't think even Berdych or Gasquet would presently claim to be of a higher standard to Nadal on a hardcourt.

Fluke U.S Open titles don't happen and the fans don't just allow you to show up, fist pump and behave however you want. If you are going to win the U.S Open, you'd better have some serious mental strength and be the best hard court player out there at the present time.
I think the fact that he is number 2 in the world (soon to be number 1) would suggest that it wouldn't be a fluke. As for having mental strength, how about you try winning a Grand Slam on your debut appearance :retard:

How do you ever expect the boy to stop a 140 MPH serve or pass up any of the other names I've mentioned ?
The same way Federer, Hewitt et al have done in the past.

prima donna
12-11-2005, 06:09 PM
Stop talking nonsense.
Hey, it's a good thing to involve your emotions in message board discussion that has no reflection or affect on reality. :yeah:

P.S - I cried during the titantic too.


I don't think even Berdych or Gasquet would presently claim to be of a higher standard to Nadal on a hardcourt.
Neat, I do!


I think the fact that he is number 2 in the world (soon to be number 1) would suggest that it wouldn't be a fluke. As for having mental strength, how about you try winning a Grand Slam on your debut appearance :retard:
What's his record against Top 5 players again ? Hewitt, Roddick, Roger and Safin ?


The same way Federer, Hewitt et al have done in the past.
Surely, the Spaniard possesses keen reflexes and an ability to handle speedy serves that even the likes of Hewitt would marvel at and of course Roger. Let's not forget the great Andre Agassi here.

adee-gee
12-11-2005, 06:14 PM
What's his record against Top 5 players again ? Hewitt, Roddick, Roger and Safin ?
Hewitt 0-3, Roddick 1-1, Federer 2-1, Safin 0-0....Problem?

Surely, the Spaniard possesses keen reflexes and an ability to handle speedy serves that even the likes of Hewitt would marvel at and of course Roger. Let's not forget the great Andre Agassi here.
I provided you with stats once, I won't bother doing it again. I think you'll find his returning stats were the best on tour this season.

Galaxystorm
12-11-2005, 06:15 PM
He won Montreal on the same surface, defeating Agassi in the final, one of the best players on Decoturf so I think he probably will, maybe even two or three times. He's only 19 so he's got plenty of time to develop.

But the balls are different.

Masters series are played with Penn balls and US open with Wilson balls, so their effects on hard court are different , plus they don't exist two courts exactly the same because of geophysics conditions either .


*WILSON EXTRA DUTY are smaller, harder , faster , bounces lower on decoturf courts than Penn, fly less than Penn in the air , and it's more difficult to impress it spins .
*PENN MASTER SERIES are bigger , softer , slower , bounces higher on decoturf courts than Wilson , fly more than Wilson in the air , and it's more easy to put spins on this ball .

Nadal had problems to adjust to the combination balls/surface this year in Flushing meadows, in fact his lack of adjustment to the conditions was one of the reasons that made him to play so horrible there ( Next year after he will travel from Cincy to New York instead of returning to Spain as he did this year ).

Nadal doesn't like US open Wilson ball.

prima donna
12-11-2005, 06:16 PM
[QUOTE=prima donna]What's his record against Top 5 players again ? Hewitt, Roddick, Roger and Safin ?
Hewitt 0-3, Roddick 1-1, Federer 2-1, Safin 0-0....Problem?


I provided you with stats once, I won't bother doing it again. I think you'll find his returning stats were the best on tour this season.

How'd he return serve in Halle, Wimbledon, Cincy and NYC ?

:worship: :worship: :worship:

A display that even the legendary Agassi would find impressive.

prima donna
12-11-2005, 06:18 PM
Hewitt 0-3, Roddick 1-1, Federer 2-1, Safin 0-0....Problem?


I provided you with stats once, I won't bother doing it again. I think you'll find his returning stats were the best on tour this season.

Nice to see that you contradicted yourself.

Anyway, his 2005 results (during which he attained his #2 ranking)

The Spaniard in 2005:
0-1 Hewitt
0-0 Safin
1-1 - Federer
0-0 Roddick

adee-gee
12-11-2005, 06:23 PM
Nice to see that you contradicted yourself.

Anyway, his 2005 results (during which he attained his #2 ranking)

The Spaniard in 2005:
0-1 Hewitt
0-0 Safin
1-1 - Federer
0-0 Roddick
Your point being......?

Safin and Hewitt have been injured, hence the lack of matches. Roddick has had a poor season. And 1-1 against Federer. I can't understand the point you are trying to make?

casillas_girl
12-11-2005, 06:25 PM
These are too many numbers and calculations for me! Please stop! :o

adee-gee
12-11-2005, 06:26 PM
Ok prima donna just answer this.....

Every time Nadal does well on a quick court you have an excuse. Either the court was actually slow, opponents were injured, he didn't beat anyone good, his opponent played badly etc.

Every time he does badly it shows what a bad player he is on quick surfaces.

So when he wins the Australian Open, beating Roger in the final whats the excuse going to be?

prima donna
12-11-2005, 06:26 PM
Your point being......?

Safin and Hewitt have been injured, hence the lack of matches. Roddick has had a poor season. And 1-1 against Federer. I can't understand the point you are trying to make?

Of course you can't, after all, we are dealing with rather complex issues here.

Psychics, gravity and rocket science.

Let me translate it into laymen's terms for you.
His #2 ranking has yet to be validated, due to lack of match play against Top injured players, thus implying he will most likely fall backwards in 2006, given a healthy field.

adee-gee
12-11-2005, 06:31 PM
Let me translate it into laymen's terms for you.
His #2 ranking has yet to be validated, due to lack of match play against Top injured players, thus implying he will most likely fall backwards in 2006, given a healthy field.
The only way his ranking will be going is up my friend, and I'm concerned about your health when Roger gets pushed to #2. I don't want you to do anything silly, I know how embarrassing it'll be for you.

DrJules
12-11-2005, 06:36 PM
But the balls are different.

Masters series are played with Penn balls and US open with Wilson balls, so their effects on hard court are different , plus they don't exist two courts exactly the same because of geophysics conditions either .


*WILSON EXTRA DUTY are smaller, harder , faster , bounces lower on decoturf courts than Penn, fly less than Penn in the air , and it's more difficult to impress it spins .
*PENN MASTER SERIES are bigger , softer , slower , bounces higher on decoturf courts than Wilson , fly more than Wilson in the air , and it's more easy to put spins on this ball .

Nadal had problems to adjust to the combination balls/surface this year in Flushing meadows, in fact his lack of adjustment to the conditions was one of the reasons that made him to play so horrible there ( Next year after he will travel from Cincy to New York instead of returning to Spain as he did this year ).

Nadal doesn't like US open Wilson ball.

Seems rather stupid for the tour to use one type of ball leading up to the US Open and another at the US Open.

DrJules
12-11-2005, 06:40 PM
i
I think the fact that he is number 2 in the world (soon to be number 1) would suggest that it wouldn't be a fluke.

Barring an injury/illness to Roger Federer I do not see Rafael Nadal going to number 1 in the near future (<6months). He has ended 2005 rather a long way behind in the points.

Galaxystorm
12-11-2005, 06:48 PM
Seems rather stupid for the tour to use one type of ball leading up to the US Open and another at the US Open.

Don't forget that Grand slams aren't ATP tournaments and don't obey orders from ATP but ITF . Grand slams are just independent tounaments included on ATP tour , which is different.

ATP has an agreement with Penn so that this brand supplies the balls at Masters series ( Masters cup included )

You know , everything is a matter of commercial agreements .

NyGeL
12-11-2005, 06:49 PM
he will

RonE
12-11-2005, 06:55 PM
Yes, I think Rafael definitely could win the U.S. Open at some stage. He needs to flatten out his groundstrokes a bit, put more bite on the serve and be more aggressive but he has plenty of years ahead of him to make those adjustments. Even today he is one of the best hardcourt players and he will continue to improve on the surface. I think he let himself get maybe a little intimidated by the partisan New York crowd during the Blake match which is what contributed slightly to his defeat.

The whole process may take a couple of years but I believe he will add more venom to his artillery- just as players like Muster and Corretja who traditionally hit with excessive topspin when they first appeared gradually became more aggressive and could employ attacking play too.

World Beater
12-11-2005, 08:27 PM
possibly...

if history is used as an indicator, then no.

but roger is not pete, and nadal is not muster.

so roger can win rg and nadal can win usopen. emphasis on can, will he? i think nadal will, and it all it might take is for safin, hewitt et al to take a walkabout like this year.

he is so young that saying he wont ever win is really quite foolish for all that he has accomplished in his life so far. he wont win with his present game but he can make adjustments and he has great focus and determination.

Federer cant win everything. gasquet has a mental block against nadal. berdych is still volatile like safin.
agassi wont be around forever. hewitt may have another kid. roddick may lose to another muller. anything can happen.

superpinkone37
12-11-2005, 08:40 PM
Rafa is still young..he can definitely win it in the future. He has proved he can play and even win tournaments on the hardcourts. Yeah, his game is much more suited to clay..but he has improved immensely this past year and will keep doing so...unless he wears himself out at too young of an age, I think he can win a few USOs in the future.

RogiFan88
12-11-2005, 08:42 PM
maybe we s rename this thread the "adeegee - prima donna slanging match" ;)

Chloe le Bopper
12-11-2005, 09:11 PM
Wilander was essentially a clay courter.

*smack*

mangoes
12-11-2005, 10:37 PM
Yes

Jimnik
12-12-2005, 01:48 AM
I think he has even more chance for the Aussie Open.
I think no-one is doubting his chances at the Aus Open - he'll surely win it some day.
Nadal did win in Montreal (beating Andre) and Madrid (beating Ivan).
But I think those courts are slower than the New York courts. Maybe the difference seems very small but it's significant.

I'm sure Rafa will one day reach the quarter-final and possibly semi-final. But some people here are underestimating what it takes to actually win a grand slam on a surface that doesn't suit your game.

Aurora
12-12-2005, 06:13 AM
I think he let himself get maybe a little intimidated by the partisan New York crowd during the Blake match which is what contributed slightly to his defeat.:scratch: good you're using the words 'maybe', 'little' and 'slightly' because I don't think that was the case. The kid had already endured worse public reactions. Roland Garros against Grosjean anyone?
He got beaten fair and square, Blake was sublime and Rafa was not shining as brilliantly as he can.

admiralpye
12-12-2005, 06:54 AM
His #2 ranking has yet to be validated, due to lack of match play against Top injured players, thus implying he will most likely fall backwards in 2006, given a healthy field.

I get the point you're trying to make: you're not impressed with Rafa. You don't like him as a player; maybe his style or his gamesmanship. That's okay because we all have our preferences.

However, I think it's unfair to say that his ranking has yet to be "validated." By whom? His ranking came as a result of singles titles he won fair and square. It wasn't a random ranking assigned by the ATP. He, like any tennis player who trained hard for the season, earned it in his own right.

<b>Even if ALL his victories were flukes, he still won them in a tournament, conforming to ATP standards. So I would say that this is enough of a validation for his number 2 rank, don't you think?

What other standard is there for ranking aside from points garnered from matches/tournaments won?</b>

And to answer the question: sure, Rafa has a LOT of things to improve re: his game. But he has as good a chance as any of the yound, upcoming players to win the USO or any other Grand Slam. Stranger things have happened.

Action Jackson
12-12-2005, 07:03 AM
If Mats Wilander could win the US Open beating Lendl I see no reason why Nadal cannot. He is not your normal "dirtballer" (In English I think "dirtballer" means clay court player). Nadal did win in Montreal (beating Andre) and Madrid (beating Ivan).

So a guy who wins Slams on all surfaces is a dirtballer now?

DrJules
12-12-2005, 10:25 AM
So a guy who wins Slams on all surfaces is a dirtballer now?

He is not your normal "dirtballer"

I used the word NOT i.e. "dirtballer" would be an inappropriate classification.

In post #15 I was comparing Wilander with Nadal because he was the only player on the list provided by Prima Donna (post #11) had who won their first grand slam at Roland Garros. I was drawing the comparison that both had started with a preference for clay courts (in 1982/3 Wilander's first 8 tournament wins were on clay; in 2004/5 Nadal's first 9 tournament wins were on clay) and started to achieve wins on other surfaces afterwards.

RonE
12-12-2005, 03:21 PM
:scratch: good you're using the words 'maybe', 'little' and 'slightly' because I don't think that was the case. The kid had already endured worse public reactions. Roland Garros against Grosjean anyone?
He got beaten fair and square, Blake was sublime and Rafa was not shining as brilliantly as he can.

I said 'maybe' 'little' and 'slightly' precisely to emphasize that point. Notice I also said 'contributed to his defeat' meaning it was not the main reason attributed to the loss but something in addition to Blake playing out of this world. In fairness even without the crowd getting behind Blake as much as they did he would have won with the way he was playing but the crowd support was just the icing on the cake.

casillas_girl
12-12-2005, 03:42 PM
What the hell is a dirtballer? :o

DrJules
12-12-2005, 05:57 PM
What the hell is a dirtballer? :o

A nasty term used by people who seem to dislike tennis played on a claycourt. It is used to refer to players who achieve nearly all their wins and titles on claycourts.

AgassiDomination
12-12-2005, 06:23 PM
I dont see it happening...

musefanatic
12-12-2005, 07:42 PM
Totally think so

AgassiDomination
12-12-2005, 07:50 PM
Not happening in the near future thats for sure. I mean not happening in the next 3-4 years. If he can adapt by then, maybe.... MAYBE we will see him in a final at the USO and may even win it.

Jimnik
12-13-2005, 01:20 AM
I don't think he'll ever "adapt". He'll improve his serve, he'll improve his overall game but he won't ever change his style. I think he'll always have the heavy topspin shots in his game so, the question is, whether he can win with that style.

To win the US Open, he'll need a similar situation to AMS Montreal this year when a few key players (Federer, Hewitt and Roddick) were out of the running.

Action Jackson
12-13-2005, 03:21 AM
He is not your normal "dirtballer"

I used the word NOT i.e. "dirtballer" would be an inappropriate classification.

In post #15 I was comparing Wilander with Nadal because he was the only player on the list provided by Prima Donna (post #11) had who won their first grand slam at Roland Garros. I was drawing the comparison that both had started with a preference for clay courts (in 1982/3 Wilander's first 8 tournament wins were on clay; in 2004/5 Nadal's first 9 tournament wins were on clay) and started to achieve wins on other surfaces afterwards.

He isn't a dirtballer period and Wilander's record is good enough to suggest that he wasn't. Just cause they both play from the baseline and they won RG, they have very different games. Lendl won his 1st Slam on clay as well, but was awesome on other surfaces and very good on grass. The players games need to be looked at and not just records.

DDrago2
12-13-2005, 12:03 PM
Slim chances for Nadal on US Open... He is young and will improve, but the problem remains - there will always be other players better adopted to that surface. Nadal will need a lot of luck to win US Open one day! Me thinks

guy in sf
12-14-2005, 12:02 AM
Gasquet might win the US open before Nadal.

mongo
12-14-2005, 12:19 AM
"No chance."

Many point to his NASDAQ result and two MS wins as evidence that Nadal can win on faster surfaces. IMO, however, it's not the speed of the hardcourt surface that matters so much as the ball. MS events use the ATP Tour ball, and it seems to allow him to slow down a "fast hard court." Because of the unusual amount of touque he can get, the ATP Tour ball bites the court and kicks higher, thus slowing play.

By contrast, Nadal remains an easy out at the USO, where the faster Wilson ball gets on him much quicker and stays lower. If healthy, he'd be well served to play the USO Series rather than remain in Europe and accumulate claycourt titles.

Jimnik
12-14-2005, 11:52 AM
In 2003, JC Ferrero did really badly at both Canada and Cincinatti but he then went on to reach the US Open final. Off course, JC is also a Roland Garros champion, who prefers his slow courts, so the ball can't be that much faster at Flushing Meadows.

maryam619
12-14-2005, 01:59 PM
yes he will why not?

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 02:01 PM
yes he will why not?
because prima donna says he won't, and he's always right ;)

cris1085
12-14-2005, 02:10 PM
Maybe one day when Rogi will not be in the US draw ;)

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 02:28 PM
Maybe one day when Rogi will not be in the US draw ;)
Indeed, Nadal cannot trouble Federer on a hard court, as we have seen.

bokehlicious
12-14-2005, 02:41 PM
Indeed, Nadal cannot trouble Federer on a hard court, as we have seen.

This year Roger has been troubled by many other players than Nadal, but almost everytime won at the end, the same way as in Miami against Rafa :)

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 02:59 PM
This year Roger has been troubled by many other players than Nadal, but almost everytime won at the end, the same way as in Miami against Rafa :)
That was because of a shocking line call. And we failed to mention the other 2 meetings with Nadal, which he didn't win.

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:00 PM
Indeed, Nadal cannot trouble Federer on a hard court, as we have seen.

robin soderling gave roger trouble on grass in halle...whats your point?

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:00 PM
robin soderling gave roger trouble on grass in halle...whats your point?
That Roger isn't unbeatable believe it or not

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:02 PM
That was because of a shocking line call. And we failed to mention the other 2 meetings with Nadal, which he didn't win.

boo hoo. he lost becaue of the line call...what nonsense. you dont know what would have happened even if nadal did eventually break...nadal was up in the tiebreak anyway...he had his chances.

nadal beat roger on clay...clay is not hardcourt.

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:03 PM
That Roger isn't unbeatable believe it or not

81-4 is pretty close to unbeatable....if you ask me

bokehlicious
12-14-2005, 03:12 PM
That Roger isn't unbeatable believe it or not

That's not the point !! The point is: Federer is better than Nadal on hardcourt, no doubt at all !!

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:14 PM
boo hoo. he lost becaue of the line call...what nonsense. you dont know what would have happened even if nadal did eventually break...nadal was up in the tiebreak anyway...he had his chances.

nadal beat roger on clay...clay is not hardcourt.
How about Miami the year before then? Oh yes, that was because Roger had heatstroke. Silly me.

And I think the fact that Nadal was a game away from a 3 sets to 0 victory in Miami this year shows he can play a bit on hard courts.

bokehlicious
12-14-2005, 03:14 PM
That was because of a shocking line call. And we failed to mention the other 2 meetings with Nadal, which he didn't win.

Roger had a lot of bad calls in TMC last year or in 2003, and took the titles anyway :wavey:

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:15 PM
81-4 is pretty close to unbeatable....if you ask me
I think you'll find 81-0 would be close to unbeatable, not 81-4.

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:16 PM
That's not the point !! The point is: Federer is better than Nadal on hardcourt, no doubt at all !!
That wasn't my argument. My point was that it's not impossible for Nadal to win a hard court event when Federer is playing in it.

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:19 PM
I think you'll find 81-0 would be close to unbeatable, not 81-4.

:o

81-0 is unbeatable...

:o

what was nadal's record on hardcourts..? what was rogers? i cant seem to remember..why dont you help me... :D

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:22 PM
How about Miami the year before then? Oh yes, that was because Roger had heatstroke. Silly me.

And I think the fact that Nadal was a game away from a 3 sets to 0 victory in Miami this year shows he can play a bit on hard courts.

nobody says he cant play on hardcourts...only that he isnt as good as federer on hc.

miami, the year before roger lost fair and square like this year at rg. roger is however a much better player on hc this year...look at his record.

bokehlicious
12-14-2005, 03:22 PM
That wasn't my argument. My point was that it's not impossible for Nadal to win a hard court event when Federer is playing in it.

He'll always have a small chance, for sure, even on grass........ :)

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:27 PM
:o

81-0 is unbeatable...

:o

what was nadal's record on hardcourts..? what was rogers? i cant seem to remember..why dont you help me... :D
No it's not. Unbeatable would suggest he's never lost a match. That record would only be for 2005.

What was Andy Roddicks record on hardcourts? What was Gilles Mullers? Does that mean Muller can't beat Roddick on hard?

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:27 PM
That wasn't my argument. My point was that it's not impossible for Nadal to win a hard court event when Federer is playing in it.

ok fine :wavey:

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:28 PM
No it's not. Unbeatable would suggest he's never lost a match. That record would only be for 2005.

What was Andy Roddicks record on hardcourts? What was Gilles Mullers? Does that mean Muller can't beat Roddick on hard?

i think you will find that andy played more hc matches...the stats dont lie in this case either

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:29 PM
He'll always have a small chance, for sure, even on grass........ :)
So if they meet in the Aussie Open Final, what chance would you give Nadal?

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:29 PM
i think you will find that andy played more hc matches...the stats dont lie in this case either
I think if you look a %ages then Roddick's was considerably better.

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:32 PM
I think if you look a %ages then Roddick's was considerably better.

right, but saying that muller is better than roddick is absolute trash just because he lost to him once.

thats like saying that nadal is better cos he beat federer once on hc.

bokehlicious
12-14-2005, 03:34 PM
So if they meet in the Aussie Open Final, what chance would you give Nadal?

Never play Roger on Sunday :devil: :wavey:

Seriously I don't know, but saying 50-50 is not realistic for every non Nadal fan or bias !!

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:34 PM
right, but saying that muller is better than roddick is absolute trash just because he lost to him once.

thats like saying that nadal is better cos he beat federer once on hc.
That's not what I'm saying. I was taking an extreme circumstance to show that things don't always go the way you expect.

I genuinely think if they met in the Australian Open final, Nadal would win. Federer simply doesn't like playing him.

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:35 PM
Never play Roger on Sunday :devil: :wavey:

Seriously I don't know, but saying 50-50 is not realistic for every non Nadal fan or bias !!
That's what they said to Nalbandian ;)

I'd say it's more like 99-1 in favour of Roger :rolleyes:

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:36 PM
That's not what I'm saying. I was taking an extreme circumstance to show that things don't always go the way you expect.

I genuinely think if they met in the Australian Open final, Nadal would win. Federer simply doesn't like playing him.

we have already verified...that you are up his ass.

i give nadal a good shot, but he is not the favorite.

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:38 PM
That's not what I'm saying. I was taking an extreme circumstance to show that things don't always go the way you expect.

.

whats new? Is the earth round?

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:39 PM
we have already verified...that you are up his ass.

i give nadal a good shot, but he is not the favorite.
I never said he was the favourite either :shrug:

If you give him a good shot, why are you disputing my point that its possible for Nadal to win hard court events even when Roger is in them?

World Beater
12-14-2005, 03:39 PM
That's not what I'm saying. I was taking an extreme circumstance to show that things don't always go the way you expect.

I genuinely think if they met in the Australian Open final, Nadal would win. Federer simply doesn't like playing him.

ok put it this way

i would give nadal a better shot than roddick, hewitt or safin.

but that doesnt mean that nadal would win or is the favorite.

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:39 PM
whats new? Is the earth round?
I believe so, yes :yeah:

bokehlicious
12-14-2005, 03:40 PM
That's what they said to Nalbandian ;)

I'd say it's more like 99-1 in favour of Roger :rolleyes:

Well Roger should be healthy the last Sunday in Melbourne :rolleyes: not the same way it was in Shangai :)

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:40 PM
ok put it this way

i would give nadal a better shot than roddick, hewitt or safin.

but that doesnt mean that nadal would win or is the favorite.
My sentiments entirely. We agree :D

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:41 PM
Well Roger should be healthy the last Sunday in Melbourne :rolleyes: not the same way it was in Shangai :)
He always seems to be unhealthy when he loses :rolleyes:

bokehlicious
12-14-2005, 03:43 PM
He always seems to be unhealthy when he loses :rolleyes:

I missed something ? Federer was 100% healthy in Shangai ? :rolleyes: He faked an injury on court ? :p

Please come on :o

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:46 PM
I missed something ? Federer was 100% healthy in Shangai ? :rolleyes: He faked an injury on court ? :p

Please come on :o
Apparently he had heatstroke when he lost to Nadal in Miami etc. The only "injury" he had was lack of matches, and I don't classify that as an injury.

bokehlicious
12-14-2005, 03:48 PM
The only "injury" he had was lack of matches, and I don't classify that as an injury.

He just went out of an injury !! 6 weeks off at this top level should have no effect on his fitness ?

Don't worry, he won't be lack of matches in Melbourne...

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:51 PM
He just went out of an injury !! 6 weeks off at this top level should have no effect on his fitness ?

Don't worry, he won't be lack of matches in Melbourne...
Yes, it's still not an injury though. If he didn't feel he could win it he wouldn't have played. Hence, you should accept the defeat fair and square.

Good, that means you won't have any excuses when Nadal destroys him in the final :)

RogiFan88
12-14-2005, 03:54 PM
OK, how about calling this thread "the adeegee-world beater-jmpower three-way"? ;)

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:55 PM
OK, how about calling this thread "the adeegee-world beater-jmpower three-way"? ;)
:D are you wanting in?

bokehlicious
12-14-2005, 03:56 PM
Yes, it's still not an injury though. If he didn't feel he could win it he wouldn't have played. Hence, you should accept the defeat fair and square.


Sure it would have been an easier way for him to withdraw...

That said I totally accept this defeat (I know he wasn't 100% fit anyway), no problem, but that's not what we are talking about here.

If Nadal beats Federer in Melbourne I will accept it and not find excuses (if there are not), but I really doubt Rafa is able to do it anyway, sorry :)

adee-gee
12-14-2005, 03:58 PM
If Nadal beats Federer in Melbourne I will accept it and not find excuses (if there are not), but I really doubt Rafa is able to do it anyway, sorry :)
Splendid :)

RonE
12-14-2005, 04:01 PM
In 2003, JC Ferrero did really badly at both Canada and Cincinatti but he then went on to reach the US Open final. Off course, JC is also a Roland Garros champion, who prefers his slow courts, so the ball can't be that much faster at Flushing Meadows.

The thing is, comparing Ferrero to Nadal is comparing apples to oranges. Their styles are completely different despite the fact that they both had huge success on clay.

Ferrero can rally from the back court and get to balls but he can also flatten out his shots more and play aggressively. If you saw his matches at that U.S. Open against Hewitt, and particularly against Agassi he was standing well inside the baseline trading strokes pound for pound- not many players can do that against Andre yet he soaked up whatever Andre threw at him and paid it back with interest.

Nadal on the other hand, while he can retrieve balls mighty well is not the sort of player to stand inside the baseline trading half-volley strokes with the Agassis and Safins of this world. As much as he can improve and I believe he will, adding more venom to his strokes, that is a basic facet of his game that I do not see changing.

DrJules
12-14-2005, 05:11 PM
That's not what I'm saying. I was taking an extreme circumstance to show that things don't always go the way you expect.

I genuinely think if they met in the Australian Open final, Nadal would win. Federer simply doesn't like playing him.

Who do you believe would beat Rafael Nadal? If you think Rafael will beat Roger then you probably see Rafael as the favourite for the tournament. Roger is possibly more likely to beat Rafael than anyone else in the draw.

Who does like playing Rafael?

tennisinparis
12-14-2005, 05:23 PM
I hope he does win the US Open or Aussie Open because I think he 'could' win them. That is better than his chance at winning Wimbledon, right? Anyway, I hope he does win it, and I hope he wins it/them with a full field, the hardest draw possible, etc so that maybe it won't have an asterisk beside it. For him to do it, his biggest competition will be Hewitt and Federer, in my opinion.

Jimnik
12-15-2005, 12:19 AM
Surely the A-Rod would be his biggest problem at Flushing Meadows. Did you see the way he ripped through him in 2004? Yes, I know it was before Rafa's breakthrough but it was still a good indication of why he'll always struggle in the faster conditions.

In a way, I think Rafa would rather play Federer or Hewitt than Andy because they try to rally more with him. Whereas Andy always tries to keep the points as short as possible giving Rafa no chance of finding his rhythm.

Dirk
12-15-2005, 03:07 AM
I hope he does win the US Open or Aussie Open because I think he 'could' win them. That is better than his chance at winning Wimbledon, right? Anyway, I hope he does win it, and I hope he wins it/them with a full field, the hardest draw possible, etc so that maybe it won't have an asterisk beside it. For him to do it, his biggest competition will be Hewitt and Federer, in my opinion.

If he wins it without beating the big boys he still would deserve it. I don't buy into this Salm with an asterisk stuff because you can pick apart almost everyone's slam win.

adee-gee
12-15-2005, 12:46 PM
Who do you believe would beat Rafael Nadal? If you think Rafael will beat Roger then you probably see Rafael as the favourite for the tournament. Roger is possibly more likely to beat Rafael than anyone else in the draw.

Who does like playing Rafael?
If Roddick is playing well I'd still expect him to beat Nadal on hard. Possibly Safin if he was fully fit as well. If I was Nadal I'd prefer to play Federer than Roddick, it's a better match up. I don't see Nadal as the favourite by any stretch of the imagination, I just don't think its as improbable as everyone else seems to.

DrJules
12-15-2005, 03:27 PM
If Roddick is playing well I'd still expect him to beat Nadal on hard. Possibly Safin if he was fully fit as well. If I was Nadal I'd prefer to play Federer than Roddick, it's a better match up. I don't see Nadal as the favourite by any stretch of the imagination, I just don't think its as improbable as everyone else seems to.

What does Roddick do against Nadal on a hard court so much better than Federer against Nadal. I actually agree about their respective chances, but not really sure why. Is the AO court too slow for Roddick to overpower Nadal, US Open court possibly is too fast for Nadal.

prima donna
12-15-2005, 04:39 PM
Not to sound assinine, pompous, arrogant or rude.

However, some people in this particular thread have no idea how much hard work it takes to win a GS. It is difficult enough for Nadal to ever defend Roland Garros, yet people have convinced themselves he will parade through the field of competitors and meet Mr. Federer, where he will overwhelm him and triumph over the evil demon that is Roger.

--- Okay, now let's step back into reality.

The boy has potential to succeed in Australia, just not for another couple of years. I would like to see him advance into the 2nd week of Australia, before even discussing those possibilities.

With regard to U.S Open, it's just not happening. Too much power, too much talent. It is almost laughable. I can't believe this is a question taken seriously.

I don't know why people have chosen to ride the Nadal bandwagon, maybe it's the only source of transportation that isn't derailed by the Federer Express (yet), requiring them to pay their dues of respect.

We have.
1). Marat Safin
2). Richard Gasquet
3). Tomas Berdych

Some people are legitimate Nadal supporters, but a lot of them are looking for a remedy to the evil dominator that is Roger Federer! :lol:

Very funny. Threads like these are almost as comical as left wing politics.

Dirk
12-15-2005, 04:46 PM
Yes there are bandwagoners but they need to ask themselves if Roger was displaced who would displace Nadal once he is at the top too long for these posters' patience.

Oh I forgot it is ok for Nadal to dominate because he shows emotion and has personality on the court. Roger is just another boring Sampras clone. :rolleyes:

prima donna
12-15-2005, 04:52 PM
Oh I forgot it is ok for Nadal to dominate because he shows emotion and has personality on the court. Roger is just another boring Sampras clone. :rolleyes:
:eek:

If Nadal were #1, that'd breed an entire generation of children that hit 20 foot high groundstrokes and all shouted "Vamos!" or the equivalent in their native language.

No thanks.

Dirk
12-15-2005, 04:54 PM
BUT DONNA THEY WOULD ALL HAVE PERSONALITY!!!!!!!!!!!

Bubba08
12-15-2005, 04:54 PM
He has the game and the mental to achieve this, there are few players like Federer who could prevent him from doing it. If he can stay healthy and free of injury, he is a great contender for the title. :cool:

This post is so original. :angel:

prima donna
12-15-2005, 04:55 PM
BUT DONNA THEY WOULD ALL HAVE PERSONALITY!!!!!!!!!!!
YES.
VAMOS! :yeah:
VAMOS! :yeah:
VAMOS! :yeah:
VAMOS! :yeah:


YOU HAVE JUST MADE UFE #65.

I AM PUTTING THE ONUS ON YOU.

Dirk
12-15-2005, 04:57 PM
Donna I think he needs to yell that so people can wake up from their comas. :lol:

prima donna
12-15-2005, 05:02 PM
Donna I think he needs to yell that so people can wake up from their comas. :lol:
and the dead.

Which would explain all the Elvis sightings at Flushing Meadows.

He wanted to inform Rafael that there are people actually trying to rest in peace, keep down the noise.

I think there should be a meter to see who is louder.

Maria Sharapova

or

Rafael Nadal

Atleast Maria is fun to look at. Okay, enough of my antics, before I get labeled a troll again, by the highly esteemed MTF jury.

Dirk
12-15-2005, 05:04 PM
Donna I have great respect for Nadal's year. He made me look foolish several times this year and I am happy for his success. He seems like a really nice guy off the court but I just can't stand his style on the court.

prima donna
12-15-2005, 05:07 PM
Donna I have great respect for Nadal's year. He made me look foolish several times this year and I am happy for his success. He seems like a really nice guy off the court but I just can't stand his style on the court.
Sure.

He achieved a lot this year and that deserves to be recognized.

He's good for tennis, keeps people interested and I have no problem with that.


... even if Roddick, Safin and Hewitt were M.I.A for the most part.

When the cat's away, the mice will play.

DrJules
12-15-2005, 05:16 PM
Donna I have great respect for Nadal's year. He made me look foolish several times this year and I am happy for his success. He seems like a really nice guy off the court but I just can't stand his style on the court.

Is tennis about winning or beauty? Nadal I feel will win a lot more than people think. Yes his play may be awful to watch, but it is very effective.

If Nadal wins in Australia a lot of people could look rather stupid.

Dirk
12-15-2005, 05:34 PM
Not me because I am not writing him off of Oz, Wimbledon and USO yes but not Oz.

heya
12-15-2005, 06:15 PM
Beauty's not the ability to chase down every shot (just because your long, skinny limbs are similar to those of a monkey). Beauty's not repeatedly striking "low pace shots".

Beauty's respect for opponents. Beauty's not boasting that no one can beat you & that you lose because you lose control only.
I'd rather watch a player who doesn't go on TV to call his opponent an IDIOT.

adee-gee
12-15-2005, 06:54 PM
What does Roddick do against Nadal on a hard court so much better than Federer against Nadal. I actually agree about their respective chances, but not really sure why. Is the AO court too slow for Roddick to overpower Nadal, US Open court possibly is too fast for Nadal.
Roddicks serve means he'd hold over 90% of the time against Nadal, whereas Rafa's serve isn't strong enough yet. Roddick would have a lot more chances on Nadal's serve than Nadal would have on Roddick's. If they get into a rally then obviously Nadal is the favourite, but it would depend on how many returns Rafa could make. Whereas against Federer on hard, although Federer has a very good serve, there are likely to be a lot more rallies, which is when Nadal comes into his own.

mallorn
12-15-2005, 06:56 PM
Not to sound assinine, pompous, arrogant or rude.
Right.
The boy has potential to succeed in Australia, just not for another couple of years. I would like to see him advance into the 2nd week of Australia, before even discussing those possibilities.
Assinine. Before even discussing those possibilities? We're talking about a GS winner at first attempt, #2 player in the world, and a very fast learner. This year he already took Hewitt (who wasnít playing so badly, seeing that he got to the final) to five sets in Melbourne, and that was before he found his best form and confidence. What makes you think (or is it wishful thinking?) that he'll need so much time to improve his results there? He's already shown this year that he can play well and improve fast even on hardcourts. He also seems more motivated and focused than many other players, including some of his most dangerous rivals.
It is difficult enough for Nadal to ever defend Roland Garros, yet people have convinced themselves he will parade through the field of competitors and meet Mr. Federer, where he will overwhelm him and triumph over the evil demon that is Roger.
Pompous.
With regard to U.S Open, it's just not happening. Too much power, too much talent. It is almost laughable. I can't believe this is a question taken seriously.
Some people are legitimate Nadal supporters, but a lot of them are looking for a remedy to the evil dominator that is Roger Federer! :lol:

Very funny. Threads like these are almost as comical as left wing politics.
Arrogant, rude AND patronising.
He's good for tennis, keeps people interested and I have no problem with that.

... even if Roddick, Safin and Hewitt were M.I.A for the most part.
Obviously you have some problem with that. ;)

Iím not saying that he will definitely win either AO or USO. Iím not even saying that heíll definitely defend RG, because unlike you, prima donna, I don't like to make such categorical statements about the future. There are too many unknowns in these equations. All I can say is that, based on what Iíve seen of him so far, I think he has it in him to win both one day and that I hope he will. :) :wavey:

adee-gee
12-15-2005, 06:57 PM
Okay, enough of my antics, before I get labeled a troll again, by the highly esteemed MTF jury.
You will be labelled a troll forever more, because that's exactly what you are.

prima donna
12-15-2005, 07:07 PM
You will be labelled a troll forever more, because that's exactly what you are.
I'm more like a cheap tabloid than a troll, you do a poor job of spelling and labeling.

Are you taking yourself seriously ? I have to ask the question, because you have an avatar of someone you have never seen play in your life and your signature reads " Cool Name " --- wow, nice one slick.

I don't believe in bashing other players. I state the facts. That is that. The manner which I choose to do it in really should be none of your concern.

Do you have a crush on me ? I have MSN Messenger, bellonumerouno@hotmail.com --- feel free to express your sentiments to me anytime through the privacy of it.

DrJules
12-15-2005, 07:11 PM
I'd rather watch a player who doesn't go on TV to call his opponent an IDIOT.

Which player called his opponent an IDIOT.

prima donna
12-15-2005, 07:12 PM
Which player called his opponent an IDIOT.
Roger occasionally yells out "e-dee-et" (idiot) of course to himself of course, this person has it confused with him calling the opposition an idiot. :rolleyes:

DrJules
12-15-2005, 07:13 PM
Dirk and Prima Donna you both seem to have lot of contept for Nadal. What has he done to irritate you so much?

prima donna
12-15-2005, 07:16 PM
Dirk and Prima Donna you both seem to have lot of contept for Nadal. What has he done to irritate you so much?
See, a lot of people confuse my sarcasm and underhanded remarks with dislike.

I have no personal vendetta against anyone or anything, my emotions have no place in the critique or assessment of any player.

Obviously, I'm not his fan and nor will I ever be. That does not mean I hold the boy in any lower regard than Roger or Richard, unless we are talking talent, technical ability and style points here.

adee-gee
12-15-2005, 07:22 PM
Dirk and Prima Donna you both seem to have lot of contept for Nadal. What has he done to irritate you so much?
He's a threat to their beloved Federer. End of story.

prima donna
12-15-2005, 07:24 PM
He's a threat to their beloved Federer. End of story.
Yes. Roger is my lover.

He's meeting me in Milano 10 days from now for Christmas, where we will hold hands and dance into the night.

Okay, back to reality here ---
If this were the case, are you jealous of Roger ? I mean, do you want to take his place ? I'm sure he'd step aside. Your crush on me is flattering.

adee-gee
12-15-2005, 07:25 PM
Yes. Roger is my lover.

He's meeting me in Milano 10 days from now for Christmas, where we will hold hands and dance into the night.

Okay, back to reality here ---
If this were the case, are you jealous of Roger ? I mean, do you want to take his place ? I'm sure he'd step aside. Your crush on me is flattering.
Er, no. That's just what you're hoping.

As for my crush on you. If it raises your self-esteem, then yes, I love you.

prima donna
12-15-2005, 07:26 PM
Er, no. That's just what you're hoping.

As for my crush on you. If it raises your self-esteem, then yes, I love you.

I don't have self-esteem issues, if anything my ego is too big, even bigger than certain person(s) forehead on this board. :angel:

<whistles innocently>

World Beater
12-15-2005, 07:27 PM
Dirk and Prima Donna you both seem to have lot of contept for Nadal. What has he done to irritate you so much?

play the game of tennis

adee-gee
12-15-2005, 07:31 PM
I don't have self-esteem issues, if anything my ego is too big, even bigger than certain person(s) forehead on this board. :angel:

<whistles innocently>
:confused: whatever

prima donna
12-15-2005, 07:37 PM
:confused: whatever
Aww.

DrJules
12-15-2005, 07:52 PM
if anything my ego is too big


Is this your expert analysis.

prima donna
12-15-2005, 07:54 PM
Is this your expert analysis.
How clever.

Jaffas85
04-22-2006, 01:14 PM
Do you think that World #2 Raphael Nadal will soon be able to consolidate his recent good form on Hardcourt surfaces (he has won 2 of his masters series titles on hardcourt and recently won dubai) and be able to convert that into Grand Slam success at the Australian and U.S. Opens?

Over time will he be able to adapt his game better to grass and perform better at Wimbledon in a similar way to which Federer has been able to increasingly adapt his game to his least favourite surface of Clay?

A realistic rivalry will only be produced if Nadal can produce his best tennis and do well at the Grand Slams.....other than the French.

Will this happen soon?

almouchie
04-22-2006, 01:20 PM
he has enough talent, physical abiltiy & most mental toughness
to win on hard courts
it whether he can manage his body &rest injury free that will tell
time is the only true indicator of his longevity at the top

hitchhiker
04-22-2006, 01:21 PM
no

Rogiman
04-22-2006, 01:22 PM
I'll be surprised if he doesn't win the Aussie Open in the next couple of years.

I hope he doesn't though :devil:

stebs
04-22-2006, 01:27 PM
I think Nadal can certainly win the Australian Open. The US Open I'm not so sure but still a good chance. Wimbledon, he could get to the quarter finals given a good draw. We have to wait and see how good his serve becomes.

Jaffas85
04-22-2006, 01:31 PM
Just how different is the surface of the Australian Open to that of the U.S. Open?

Thanks.

hitchhiker
04-22-2006, 01:59 PM
Just how different is the surface of the Australian Open to that of the U.S. Open?


relatively speaking its earth compared to mars

almouchie
04-22-2006, 02:09 PM
both are hardcourts
but different grounds
US i believe is decudorf (spelling)
much faster than AO
add to that the temp &wind conditions
u have a different surface all together

OddJob
04-22-2006, 02:09 PM
Out of the other 3 slams the Aus is Rafa's best chance. I really don't see him winning Wimb and the USO open courts are pretty fast. Tho as his game matures I'm sure his chances of winning the USO will increase.

NYCtennisfan
04-22-2006, 02:14 PM
If he stays healthy, Nadal will probably will AO a few times, probably hold up the USO trophy at least once, and maybe a good draw gives a crack at Wimbledon. With so tennis styles being homogenized the way they are these days a good run at Wimbledon from Nadal wouldn't surprise me at all.

ClaycourtaZzZz.
04-22-2006, 02:17 PM
It's Rafael, not Raphael. He has won in Montreal, which is hard. Madrid is Indoors.

Nacho
04-22-2006, 02:36 PM
he should become the first spaniard to claim the aussie open in a few years time

the US open is more difficult, but if JCF can reach the final, Nadal can too

wimbledon is impossible, let alone nowadays with roger around

Jaffas85
04-22-2006, 02:47 PM
Maybe after Federer claims the "Grand Slam" this year Nadal will be able to win the 2007 Australian Open as Federer will not feel the need to put in such a concerted effort after winning an elusive "Grand Slam".

A_Skywalker
04-22-2006, 05:31 PM
I think he can win Australian Open and may be US open , Wimbledon for now it looks too distant , we'll see how he does this year

ChloeLove
04-22-2006, 05:39 PM
He can win AO, and USO. Maybe not this year, but he will eventually. It's too early to tell with Wimbledon.

David Kenzie
04-22-2006, 05:44 PM
It's Rafael, not Raphael. He has won in Montreal, which is hard. Madrid is Indoors.
I think Madrid is indoor Hardcourt, Bercy is indoor carpet.

DrJules
04-22-2006, 05:45 PM
Does Nadal play too far behind the baseline. He returned serve against Gaudio a long way behind the baseline; Gaudio is not a big server. I think short cross court angles and wide serves will give him problems; particularly on carpet and grass.

Black Adam
04-22-2006, 06:50 PM
Next AO is his, I mean look what damage Mauresmo did with the topspin on that surface.

Rogiman
04-22-2006, 06:57 PM
Next AO is his, I mean look what damage Mauresmo did with the topspin on that surface.
So much damage that the entire draw got injured :haha:
(no offense, she deserved her title and good for her)

KoOlMaNsEaN
04-22-2006, 11:05 PM
I dont think he'll ever do good on grass except for 1 year where he gets lucky.

stebs
04-22-2006, 11:10 PM
Next AO is his, I mean look what damage Mauresmo did with the topspin on that surface.

The games are totally different. Mauresmo is an offensive player and can't be compared as a women's equivalent.

Wannabeknowitall
04-22-2006, 11:28 PM
It depends.
He can't fall into the same pitfall of Ivan Lendl who would start to be aggressive and volley for just a month out of the year when Wimbledon came around.
It just doesn't work that way. If Nadal really wants to get better on grass, then he needs to put an all out effort on it and that starts with being aggressive.
He's the best counter-puncher out there but that's not enough to even beat Blake on hard courts.

fenomeno2111
04-22-2006, 11:57 PM
I think Madrid is indoor Hardcourt, Bercy is indoor carpet.

Yep, Madrid is a Hardcourt...Iwas about to correct that but you anticipated :)

fenomeno2111
04-22-2006, 11:59 PM
Nadal has a shot at the AO, he had a good run in 05 losing to hewitt in a tough match, he can do well on USO he has beaten two of the best HC players recently (Federer and Ljubicic) I don't know about WImbledon but only time will tell

NyGeL
04-23-2006, 01:53 AM
not on grass.

ezekiel
04-23-2006, 03:09 AM
Nadal is a particularly powerful clay- court player, but says the grass of SW19 appeals to him most of all. ďMy tennis dream is to win Wimbledon. The Spanish do not do well at that tournament and it is a special event. I think every tennis player dreams of winning it one day, donít they? It would be a beautiful moment to have success there. Itís so special.Ē

:devil:

deliveryman
04-23-2006, 11:23 AM
I doubt he'll win Wimbledon within the next 4-5 years. Serve just isn't there, and his topspin on grass isn't nearly as effective.

joeb_uk
04-23-2006, 11:25 AM
Definately! He will definately win either the usopen or ao, in his career! That I am sure of :yeah:

Jaffas85
04-25-2006, 08:33 AM
Specifically regarding 2006 where do you all think Nadal will reach in the French, Wimbledon and U.S. Open?

Heres what I think:

French: Finalist *Federer will win in 5 sets*.

Wimbledon: Quarter Finalist.

U.S. Open: Semi Finalist *Possibly a finalist*.


He'll win the 2007 Australian Open.

connectolove
04-25-2006, 08:41 AM
I am hoping that he will make the transition soon. I don't know if he will be able but he will have to learn a completely different game. Anyhow, he is talented and young, and anything is possible.

fadou
04-25-2006, 10:39 AM
Specifically regarding 2006 where do you all think Nadal will reach in the French, Wimbledon and U.S. Open?

Heres what I think:

French: Finalist *Federer will win in 5 sets*.

Wimbledon: Quarter Finalist.

U.S. Open: Semi Finalist *Possibly a finalist*.


He'll win the 2007 Australian Open.

it's impossible for nadal to realize that you wrote because he will be injured before wimbledon or usopen. indeed, the next weeks, he will play barcelone, rome maybe hambourg and french open, he will be tired,sure
How will nadal reach the quarter final of wimbly? it's just impossible

he is young, let him play at his rythm,
i'm sure that he could win AO or Maybe USOPeN but wimbly impossible!!

oz_boz
04-25-2006, 11:10 AM
He has already had hardcourt success, maybe not up to his clay level though (that would be hard to equal...). Weren't Madrid and Dubai reasonably fast surfaces? He still has to prove himself on grass and carpet. It is WAY too early to tell if he will. If he makes the Wimby QF this year, I think he has a shot. But I haven't seen him play on grass.

Neely
04-25-2006, 11:23 AM
While I would rate a fit, well-prepared and rested Nadal as (very) competetive for a hardcourt Grand Slam, especially Australian Open (because of the spin-friendly Rebound Ace surface and because in Melbourne, due to the heat, usually other factors come more likely into play that Nadal likes, such as endurance, stamina), I don't think Nadal will have a chance on grass to achieve something big, at least I don't smell it coming the next few years. He could maybe win a smaller grass court tournament in near future, but not Wimbledon, Queen's or Halle any soon. I would rate it as a success if he reached the Wimbledon QF. But it's hard to say, things can change so quickly.

Neely
04-25-2006, 11:30 AM
How will nadal reach the quarter final of wimbly? it's just impossible
Not very impossible though. If Coria can reach the 4th round of Wimbledon before losing to the 2nd best player on grass, Roddick, you would think that Nadal even more has to potential to do the same or to top that. Granted, while he doesn't have to worry much about the draws in the claycourt tournaments because he can beat anybody there anyway, the draw for him at Wimbledon would need to suit him as there are many more players going around who can beat him.

oz_boz
04-25-2006, 11:35 AM
Isn't his groundstroke backswing one of the main things he has to change to win Wimbledon? Adding more to his serve wouldn't be wrong either.

yomike
04-25-2006, 12:03 PM
AO and US Open - very possible
Wimbledon - in his dreams

ASP0315
04-25-2006, 12:33 PM
He is very talented and he has lot of weapons to tackle federer and his only weakness is his serve. He won TMS Montreal and TMS Madrid beating top players and he could even win US open one day and as for Grass is concerned he should limit his matches on grass (Like Guga did) and avoid further injuries that can ruin his career. Grass is very slippery and it will be difficult for him to play long rallies.
But anyway good luck to him in future hope he can win more grand slams in future

DhammaTiger
04-25-2006, 12:42 PM
He is very talented and he has lot of weapons to tackle federer and his only weakness is his serve. He won TMS Montreal and TMS Madrid beating top players and he could even win US open one day and as for Grass is concerned he should limit his matches on grass (Like Guga did) and avoid further injuries that can ruin his career. Grass is very slippery and it will be difficult for him to play long rallies.
But anyway good luck to him in future hope he can win more grand slams in future
Excellent post cannot say it much better myself :bigclap: :hatoff: I don't know why this fetish with grass for some, I don't think playing or winning on grass is such an important criterion for being a great player. Lendl and Wilander never won wimbledon but does anyone deny them their greatness? By the same token, Sampras never won RG but no one questions his ability and greatness.IMO Rafa is only 19 and he can improve and progress over the coming years and who knows he may won day win on grass, or he may not. As for me a diehard tennis addict since 1968 I will just enjoy watching him play, win or lose, on any surface. Vamos Rafa!!

DhammaTiger
04-25-2006, 12:48 PM
AO and US Open - very possible
Wimbledon - in his dreams
I wonder how you can categorically make such a statement? Are you clairvoyant, if you are than I think you are extremely rich in betting correctly in casinos and winning oodles of money in the stock market. No one can predict the future of any tennis player and Rafa is only 19 and is constantly improving. I am sorry but your prejudice gets the better of your tennis judgement. Vamos Rafa!!

heya
04-25-2006, 12:53 PM
The draw at Wimbledon aren't filled with more than a few good grass players. It's easy to beat Roddick, Hewitt, Karlovic and Ancic. At least Nadal can beat Karlovic and Ancic in the 1st round.

yomike
04-26-2006, 08:43 AM
I wonder how you can categorically make such a statement? Are you clairvoyant, if you are than I think you are extremely rich in betting correctly in casinos and winning oodles of money in the stock market. No one can predict the future of any tennis player and Rafa is only 19 and is constantly improving. I am sorry but your prejudice gets the better of your tennis judgement. Vamos Rafa!!

Be a realist, he won't win it not with that type of game. Have you ever seen him play in grass, its atrocious. Very much like Federer's serve and volley game on clay.

Neely
04-26-2006, 10:34 AM
I don't know why this fetish with grass for some, I don't think playing or winning on grass is such an important criterion for being a great player. Lendl and Wilander never won wimbledon but does anyone deny them their greatness? By the same token, Sampras never won RG but no one questions his ability and greatness.
If Nadal wins near as many Grand Slams as the above-mentioned players, then I'm sure nobody sane who accepts Sampras, Lendl and Wilander as great players will question Nadal's greatness in 15 years either.

As for the grass fetish... well, there are certain people who like this extraordinarly exciting, natural and traditional surface more than everything else because of certain factors, such as the changed style of play, tactics, different play characteristics, faster (even if that is not true anymore for all grass courts), usually more net play... it's maybe hard to understand for those who don't like it, but easy to realize because there are people who love other surfaces most, too.

victor_gospo
01-06-2008, 12:22 PM
As time goes by it has become increasingly harder for Nadal to win on hard courts.

Back in 2005 he won 3 tournaments on hard (plus the incredible final against Federer in Miami), in 2006 won 2 and in 2007 just 1

I don't know what others might think but these numbers seem to be quite clear

RogiRafaFan86
01-06-2008, 12:26 PM
Really? I had no idea. I never would have known that if you hadn't come by and shared your findings.

You should really consider a career in espionage.

ReturnWinner
01-06-2008, 12:31 PM
well you have to analyze the number properly, last year he won an ams destroying Ferrero,Roddick so easily and Djokovic in straight sets,and made Paris final which is pretty good ,in 2005 and 2006 he was not a better hard court player.in 2005 he won madrid but got a draw pretty easily and got some lucky in the final against Ljubicic and in 2006 he won just a title not two
he never is going to be the dominanat player he is on clay,and most of times is going to really struggle with some players like Federer,Nalbandian,Youzhny,Berych,Davydenko,Blake and some others.

Byrd
01-06-2008, 12:31 PM
Really? I had no idea. I never would have known that if you hadn't come by and shared your findings.

You should really consider a career in espionage.

You really shoulder consider getting the tissues out, stop crying mate, and stop taking the bait.

Adler
01-06-2008, 12:32 PM
This thread wouldn't have appeared if Nadal won today's match

ReturnWinner
01-06-2008, 12:35 PM
This thread wouldn't have appeared if Nadal won today's match

not doubt, yesterday Rafita fight spirit "was back again" ,today he is finished on hard.

RogiRafaFan86
01-06-2008, 12:36 PM
You really shoulder consider getting the tissues out, stop crying mate, and stop taking the bait.

Again, who is crying? Rafa lost a hard court match yet again. Plain and simple. I would have preferred that he won, but he didn't. I never cry over matches. I'm not the one playing.

It's not like Rafa losing on HC's is a new thing. He's always struggled and always will.

You're right about the bait thing, though.

Monteque
01-06-2008, 12:37 PM
This thread wouldn't have appeared if Nadal won today's match

Of course, but he didn't win!!!!:rolleyes:

What's your point??>

victor_gospo
01-06-2008, 12:40 PM
My mistake in reference to 2006

I should have checked the ATP page.

However that just just makes my point even stronger.

Against real good hard court players he is finding it increasingly more difficult to win.

Specialy if they can flatten out the ball and just put more and more pressure on his really long forehand stroke and draw the errors from him.

sheeter
01-06-2008, 04:43 PM
Yet he has remained number two and gone deep in every slam for the last three years.

Ivanatis
01-06-2008, 06:01 PM
don't blame him for playing so few Mickey Mouse events

and apart from the fact that probably nobody would have beaten Youzhny today after having played such a match against Moya the previous day, I'm pretty sure almost everybody would like to have this "difficulty" ;)

Greenday
01-06-2008, 06:12 PM
Yet he has remained number two and gone deep in every slam for the last three years.

Wat do u mean by deep....2005 uso 3rd round, 2006 uso QF, 2007 uso 4th round, he went to a QF in australia for the first time in 2007........I dont know how u can say he is going deep in slam for the last3 years........he remains no.2 because of almost 3000 points he get during clay season

sheeter
01-06-2008, 06:30 PM
Wat do u mean by deep....2005 uso 3rd round, 2006 uso QF, 2007 uso 4th round, he went to a QF in australia for the first time in 2007........I dont know how u can say he is going deep in slam for the last3 years........he remains no.2 because of almost 3000 points he get during clay season

I was referring to last year, qf in Australia, final in Wimbledon, Final in French, 4th round in us open. He has also made it to the wimby final twice. His 4th round match against Ferrer in the US open was crazy, and if he had won it, it is possible he would have gone deeper. You make Nadal sound like he is a one court wonder, and he cannot perform on other surfaces, which he has.

FedFan_2007
01-06-2008, 08:33 PM
Until he makes an AO or USO semifinal you can't say he's gone deep there.

Adler
01-06-2008, 08:45 PM
Courier had his biggest achievements on clay and he played in all GS finals
Muster reached SF in Australia and three QFs in US Open

So there's still something to do

acionescu
01-06-2008, 08:48 PM
As long as he goes deep(at least QF in GS and SF in TMS) I don't really care if does not win them. He's not a HC specialist and that's it! I really prefer that he stays healthy, win another 5-6 RG and maybe a Wimby or two! ;)

propi
01-07-2008, 02:29 AM
Not to bad for a so called dirt baller ;)

Ackms421
03-21-2008, 08:37 PM
This is for everyone who makes excuses every time Nadal wins on hard courts. This is for those of you who cite Blake, Berdych, Youzny, and Djokovic in way too many of your posts. This is for those of you who too soon forget what Nadal has done on hard courts in his career and in the past 12 months...

If I opened with references to Nadal's hard court titles, I would be asked "what has he done for me lately," so I will begin, instead, with the last 12 months...

Points Breakdown

Nadal's hard court points: 2325

This means that if Nadal had played *ONLY* hard court tournaments over the past 12 months, and holding all else equal, he would currently be the #8 ranked player in the world. :wavey:

The only players who have more hard court points than him are predictably Djokovic-3685 and Federer-3460 (interesting that Djok has more than Fed, I thought).

Record against hard court nemeses and notable players in past 12 months:

In the last 12 months, Nadal has played 6 matches against Djokovic, 4 on hard courts. He went 4-2 against him in that stretch and 2-2 on hard courts. Is Djokovic such a heavy favorite, then? I do not believe so.

In the past 12 months (and admittedly, I'm making this thread at the most opportune time) on hard courts Nadal has defeated Tsonga (2), Djokovic (2), Blake,
Youzhny, Baghdatis (2), Murray, and Gasquet. I will note that he has not beaten Federer on a hard court in a while. Though, I wish he'd get to the match more than once a year...

Hard court titles

Nadal has won several titles on hard courts. These include:

2005

ATP Masters Series Canada

ATP Masters Series Madrid

Beijing

2006

Dubai

2007

ATP Masters Series Indian Wells

Overall form

You can watch him play a discouraging match here and there, but for those of you who say "his form has been/is dropping, I do not see it. He is a very good hard court player most of the time, and a great hard court player some of the time. We do not often see him play the kind of tennis he played at Indian Wells last year, but it is in there, and I have to believe one day he'll bring it out more consistently.

In the past 12 months Nadal has had some lopsided losses on hard courts, but I believe this is because he is getting deeper into more hard court tournaments than he did before. Thus, his competition has been better. His final in Chennai this year was one round better than last year. The same goes for his semis in Australia. Last year, his second consecutive loss to Nalbandian came in the FINAL of Paris, another hard court masters.

It is beyond me why sometimes the kid looks like a deer in the headlights on the cement and why other times he looks very at home. Maybe he is a bi-polar tennis player, or maybe injuries have something to do with it. I am not sure, but to say that he cannot play on hard courts is a statement not easily supported.

For the record, I'm calling Nadal over Djokovic tomorrow. And, if he wins this tournament having beaten Tsonga, Blake, Djokovic, and Federer/Nalbandian, I want to see some respect being given!

zadle69
03-21-2008, 08:43 PM
he is struggling more this year for some reason. My question is If he starts to lose clay court events will it be his decline? Playing defensively is taking it toll. IMO What is everyone opinion.

scarecrows
03-21-2008, 08:51 PM
you should also add that he's lost from Seppi, Monaco and Ferrer in the past 12 months

l_mac
03-21-2008, 08:51 PM
he is struggling more this year for some reason. My question is If he starts to lose clay court events will it be his decline? Playing defensively is taking it toll. IMO What is everyone opinion.

:wavey:

Best ever showing at AO. Final in Chennai (better than last year) Dubai - same result as 07. At least semis at IW. With two exceptions (where injuries played a part, USO and Cinci) he's made QF or better at the last 8 big hardcourt tournaments (MS and slams)

And he's doing this while not in the best form :worship:

What a player :yippee:

Mansave_75
03-21-2008, 08:55 PM
Great thread! Excelent job mate!

peterparker
03-21-2008, 08:59 PM
He is gettting better all the time without changing any bit of his style.

Parker

Hank777
03-21-2008, 09:02 PM
This is for everyone who makes excuses every time Nadal wins on hard courts. This is for those of you who cite Blake, Berdych, Youzny, and Djokovic in way too many of your posts. This is for those of you who too soon forget what Nadal has done on hard courts in his career and in the past 12 months...

If I opened with references to Nadal's hard court titles, I would be asked "what has he done for me lately," so I will begin, instead, with the last 12 months...

Points Breakdown

Nadal's hard court points: 2325

This means that if Nadal had played *ONLY* hard court tournaments over the past 12 months, and holding all else equal, he would currently be the #8 ranked player in the world.

The only players who have more hard court points than him are predictably Djokovic-3685 and Federer-3460 (interesting that Djok has more than Fed, I thought).

Record against hard court nemeses and notable players in past 12 months:

In the last 12 months, Nadal has played 6 matches against Djokovic, 4 on hard courts. He went 4-2 against him in that stretch and 2-2 on hard courts. Is Djokovic such a heavy favorite, then? I do not believe so.

In the past 12 months (and admittedly, I'm making this thread at the most opportune time) on hard courts Nadal has defeated Tsonga (2), Djokovic (2), Blake,
Youzhny, Baghdatis (2), Murray, and Gasquet. I will note that he has not beaten Federer on a hard court in a while. Though, I wish he'd get to the match more than once a year...

Hard court titles

Nadal has won several titles on hard courts. These include:

2005

ATP Masters Series Canada

ATP Masters Series Madrid

Beijing

2006

Dubai

2007

ATP Masters Series Indian Wells

Overall form

You can watch him play a discouraging match here and there, but for those of you who say "his form has been/is dropping, I do not see it. He is a very good hard court player most of the time, and a great hard court player some of the time. We do not often see him play the kind of tennis he played at Indian Wells last year, but it is in there, and I have to believe one day he'll bring it out more consistently.

In the past 12 months Nadal has had some lopsided losses on hard courts, but I believe this is because he is getting deeper into more hard court tournaments than he did before. Thus, his competition has been better. His final in Chennai this year was one round better than last year. The same goes for his semis in Australia. Last year, his second consecutive loss to Nalbandian came in the FINAL of Paris, another hard court masters.

It is beyond me why sometimes the kid looks like a deer in the headlights on the cement and why other times he looks very at home. Maybe he is a bi-polar tennis player, or maybe injuries have something to do with it. I am not sure, but to say that he cannot play on hard courts is a statement not easily supported.

For the record, I'm calling Nadal over Djokovic tomorrow. And, if he wins this tournament having beaten Tsonga, Blake, Djokovic, and Federer/Nalbandian, I want to see some respect being given!
Excellent writing :worship: I fully second this. I think I do have a partial answer as to why people are being so harsh on NADAL...

At both the Aussie Open and US Open, his performances have not been particularly spectacular for a player of his calibur and I think that's what people look at the most. He's improving though, evidence of his first SEMI at the AO. So at 21 years, he's adapting fast!

I recall Nadal even beating Nadal on hardcourt fairly recently and that was when FEDEX was ON !! also in one of their first meetings they went 5 sets and FEDEX was a little helped by what seemed NADAL being a little bit overwhelmed, he's come along way ever since.

I think he'll be fine as long as his team and RAFA himself keep their analyses sharp on how to go about his tennis.

Lastly ... your comments ACKMS421 have made me even more confident of NADAL's chances tomorrow! :p

DhammaTiger
03-21-2008, 09:07 PM
This is for everyone who makes excuses every time Nadal wins on hard courts. This is for those of you who cite Blake, Berdych, Youzny, and Djokovic in way too many of your posts. This is for those of you who too soon forget what Nadal has done on hard courts in his career and in the past 12 months...

If I opened with references to Nadal's hard court titles, I would be asked "what has he done for me lately," so I will begin, instead, with the last 12 months...

Points Breakdown

Nadal's hard court points: 2325

This means that if Nadal had played *ONLY* hard court tournaments over the past 12 months, and holding all else equal, he would currently be the #8 ranked player in the world. :wavey:

The only players who have more hard court points than him are predictably Djokovic-3685 and Federer-3460 (interesting that Djok has more than Fed, I thought).

Record against hard court nemeses and notable players in past 12 months:

In the last 12 months, Nadal has played 6 matches against Djokovic, 4 on hard courts. He went 4-2 against him in that stretch and 2-2 on hard courts. Is Djokovic such a heavy favorite, then? I do not believe so.

In the past 12 months (and admittedly, I'm making this thread at the most opportune time) on hard courts Nadal has defeated Tsonga (2), Djokovic (2), Blake,
Youzhny, Baghdatis (2), Murray, and Gasquet. I will note that he has not beaten Federer on a hard court in a while. Though, I wish he'd get to the match more than once a year...

Hard court titles

Nadal has won several titles on hard courts. These include:

2005

ATP Masters Series Canada

ATP Masters Series Madrid

Beijing

2006

Dubai

2007

ATP Masters Series Indian Wells

Overall form

You can watch him play a discouraging match here and there, but for those of you who say "his form has been/is dropping, I do not see it. He is a very good hard court player most of the time, and a great hard court player some of the time. We do not often see him play the kind of tennis he played at Indian Wells last year, but it is in there, and I have to believe one day he'll bring it out more consistently.

In the past 12 months Nadal has had some lopsided losses on hard courts, but I believe this is because he is getting deeper into more hard court tournaments than he did before. Thus, his competition has been better. His final in Chennai this year was one round better than last year. The same goes for his semis in Australia. Last year, his second consecutive loss to Nalbandian came in the FINAL of Paris, another hard court masters.

It is beyond me why sometimes the kid looks like a deer in the headlights on the cement and why other times he looks very at home. Maybe he is a bi-polar tennis player, or maybe injuries have something to do with it. I am not sure, but to say that he cannot play on hard courts is a statement not easily supported.

For the record, I'm calling Nadal over Djokovic tomorrow. And, if he wins this tournament having beaten Tsonga, Blake, Djokovic, and Federer/Nalbandian, I want to see some respect being given!

:hatoff:

hra87
03-21-2008, 09:10 PM
Nadal is a hardcourt mug, you're not going to be able to argue your way out of it.

Ackms421
03-21-2008, 09:13 PM
Nadal is a hardcourt mug, you're not going to be able to argue your way out of it.

He's beaten Djok in straight sets on hard courts twice in the past year. He also knocked him out of Wimbledon and the French Open...

I mean, FYI...:angel:

hra87
03-21-2008, 09:30 PM
He's beaten Djok in straight sets on hard courts twice in the past year. He also knocked him out of Wimbledon and the French Open...

I mean, FYI...:angel:

As if Djerkobitch ISN'T a mug. A mug can easily beat another mug.

Ackms421
03-21-2008, 10:50 PM
:hatoff:

Thanks. I just feel like too many people fall into the hype that Nadal cannot play on hard courts. It's just not the case.

~*BGT*~
03-21-2008, 11:02 PM
:wavey:

Best ever showing at AO. Final in Chennai (better than last year) Dubai - same result as 07. At least semis at IW. With two exceptions (where injuries played a part, USO and Cinci) he's made QF or better at the last 8 big hardcourt tournaments (MS and slams)

And he's doing this while not in the best form :worship:

What a player :yippee:

Rafa. :bounce:

Roland9
03-21-2008, 11:11 PM
Nadal fights. That's something very important on any surface, and in any sport obviously.

IMO, if Nadal improves his serve, he will get much better results.

Tnn74
03-22-2008, 12:38 AM
Vamos Rafa! :bigclap:

RonE
03-22-2008, 12:41 AM
Oink.

l_mac
03-22-2008, 01:05 AM
:spit:

Ackms421
04-02-2008, 10:42 PM
...another hard court masters semi and another win over a hard court nemesis. Those of you who think he's "going downhill" need to reevaluate some things...

...he's a beast, even on hard courts.

Sunset of Age
04-02-2008, 10:44 PM
...another hard court masters semi and another win over a hard court nemesis. Those of you who think he's "going downhill" need to reevaluate some things...

...he's a beast, even on hard courts.

;) ;) ;)

kobulingam
04-02-2008, 10:46 PM
Fact: Nadal is so supremely good at his claycourt game that he can still beat almost everyone on HC with it.

Sunset of Age
04-02-2008, 10:48 PM
Fact: Nadal is so supremely good at his claycourt game that he can still beat almost everyone on HC with it.

True. Even more - as could be seen during the whole of 2007, his attempts to improve his HC game even brought a lot of improvements to his clay court game as well. :eek: :o :worship:

Ackms421
04-02-2008, 10:56 PM
True. Even more - as could be seen during the whole of 2007, his attempts to improve his HC game even brought a lot of improvements to his clay court game as well. :eek: :o :worship:

Yep. The proof? Compare his 2007 French Open matches (the year he lost to Federer on clay) to his 2006 French Open matches (the year he went undefeated on clay) and tell me which matches look stronger? If you are relatively familiar with tennis, you will answer "2007."

He *clearly* is becoming a better tennis player. His win in Indian Wells last year showed us what he is capable of. He hasn't yet been able to produce that tennis on a day-to-day basis (on hard courts at least), but it is there.

A year or two from now he will be running less and winning more. Mark my words.

Sunset of Age
04-02-2008, 11:02 PM
Yep. The proof? Compare his 2007 French Open matches (the year he lost to Federer on clay) to his 2006 French Open matches (the year he went undefeated on clay) and tell me which matches look stronger? If you are relatively familiar with tennis, you will answer "2007."

Exactly.

He *clearly* is becoming a better tennis player. His win in Indian Wells last year showed us what he is capable of. He hasn't yet been able to produce that tennis on a day-to-day basis (on hard courts at least), but it is there.

Well, I wouldn't exactly choose his IW victory of a year ago to proof this fact, but rather the fact that he's been able to get consistent results on (nearly - apart from that freak loss in Rotterdam) all the HC tournaments lately. Semi in Shanghai, final in Chennai, semi at the AO, semi in IW, and he's not doing all too bad in Miami now either I daresay.
Strangely enough some people seem to only notice his results when he's winning or reaching a final at a tournament - or so I get the impression... - but his HC results as of late are very consistent, and in the end THAT's what counts. Ask Djokovic, for instance. :p

A year or two from now he will be running less and winning more. Mark my words.

I really hope that's indeed the case. I've been expecting it to happen since 2006. Check my posts. ;)

missvarsha
04-02-2008, 11:05 PM
A year or two from now he will be running less and winning more. Mark my words.

This would be true, except you are working under the fallacy of him having an infinite amount of time. People often delude themselves with the "ZOMG he is only 19 how much better can he get ??!" hysteria. The answer is, no one can keep betting better forever. Nadal himself pointed it out in a recent interview - he started a lot younger than his contemporaries, and in all likeliness will have to STOP a lot younger than his contemporaries.

For the matter under discussion, I said this during the Australian in January and I repeat it now. Nadal is one of the top 5 hard court players on tour. Just because he is such a good claycourter, people assume he can't play on any other surface.

FedFan_2007
04-02-2008, 11:06 PM
Yep. The proof? Compare his 2007 French Open matches (the year he lost to Federer on clay) to his 2006 French Open matches (the year he went undefeated on clay) and tell me which matches look stronger? If you are relatively familiar with tennis, you will answer "2007."

He *clearly* is becoming a better tennis player. His win in Indian Wells last year showed us what he is capable of. He hasn't yet been able to produce that tennis on a day-to-day basis (on hard courts at least), but it is there.

A year or two from now he will be running less and winning more. Mark my words.

Impossible. He'll have to change his shot making dramatically to run less and win more. No one at 21 going on 22 has made such a dramatic change in their game.

Sunset of Age
04-02-2008, 11:09 PM
This would be true, except you are working under the fallacy of him having an infinite amount of time. People often delude themselves with the "ZOMG he is only 19 how much better can he get ??!" hysteria. The answer is, no one can keep betting better forever. Nadal himself pointed it out in a recent interview - he started a lot younger than his contemporaries, and in all likeliness will have to STOP a lot younger than his contemporaries.

Very true indeed, and wise words from Rafa on this matter. Yeah, the whole 'oh he's soooo young, etc.'-garbage is indeed - garbage. In any a profession you have people peaking at a young age, and people peaking much later (Fed is a perfect example of the latter IMHO ;)).
But still, I think he's working hard on improving his game all the same, and IMHO it's paying off well now. :worship:

For the matter under discussion, I said this during the Australian in January and I repeat it now. Nadal is one of the top 5 hard court players on tour. Just because he is such a good claycourter, people assume he can't play on any other surface.

:yeah: - it's indeed a silly assumption. It's just as :retard: as not acknowledging that Fed, for instance, is a very good clay courter as well, only because he's even better on grass and HC (at least, was :rolleyes:).

Thank all the Tennis Gods we still have players left doing well on ALL surfaces. Bless them!

Ackms421
04-02-2008, 11:20 PM
If he makes a marginal improvement each year, in two years he will be better, winning more and running less.

I have observed him improving overall since 2006.I believe he has made (only) marginal improvements each year. They have been slow, but sure, IMO. Watch him at Wimbledon; its more apparent there than anywhere else-there, he can show you the full brunt of what he can do, without his body being hammered at each point. Therein, he produces a very high quality of tennis for 5 sets and 7 matches...

...shame what happened in the fifth set last year though...

Sunset of Age
04-02-2008, 11:23 PM
Impossible. He'll have to change his shot making dramatically to run less and win more. No one at 21 going on 22 has made such a dramatic change in their game.

That's nonsense, FedFan, and you should know, because FED HIMSELF managed to change his attitude a lot when he passed his 21th birthday. Not so much his game, that's true, but that's only one aspect of the overall game - and even more, one's ability to WIN matches.

Fed had the game, but not the attitude when he was Rafa's age. He was known as a total headcase, no less. Rafa might not yet have all of the game, but he has a fantastic mental fortitude ever since he appeared at the tour, when a very young guy. I expect him to be able to improve his game as much as Fed was able to work out his mental problems. ;)

zadle69
04-02-2008, 11:45 PM
IMO. fedfan is right. the body cant take that much pounding. What happens when you are stretched to 3 sets matches especially on hard surface. Also miami courts are slower also. they call it medium slow. if it was med fast, it would be another story. medium fast would be like cincinnati, montrael, us open, washington, indianapolis and los angeles. imo the clay court season will be the tell all. i think the knees and feet wont be able to defend all those points and prediction i think a loss at this year FO champion.

zadle69
04-02-2008, 11:46 PM
also when the body goes down so goes the mental.

Sunset of Age
04-02-2008, 11:51 PM
i think the knees and feet wont be able to defend all those points and prediction i think a loss at this year FO champion.

And I think this has been said for about already two years right now. I don't see any weakness in Rafa's physical condition right now - do you?
It's true, I don't expect him to play until past his thirties, but that doesn't mean he doesn't still have quite a few good years in front of him - and yes, I do think he's perfectly capable of improving game during the coming years. :cool:

stebs
04-02-2008, 11:55 PM
I expect him to be able to improve his game as much as Fed was able to work out his mental problems. ;)

Nadal may improve or maybe the right oppurtunities will come for him to do well but you will be disappointed if you think Nadal can change his game the way Federer changted his mentality. Chages of game are always slight for top pro's and unless Nadal s about to become one of a kind then that won't change.

Sunset of Age
04-02-2008, 11:58 PM
Nadal may improve or maybe the right oppurtunities will come for him to do well but you will be disappointed if you think Nadal can change his game the way Federer changted his mentality. Chages of game are always slight for top pro's and unless Nadal s about to become one of a kind then that won't change.

Well, I remember from the Old Days, that a lot of people also said that Fed wouldn't be able to amend his temper fits... so let's just see what will happen.

Even IF Rafa doesn't manage to further improve his game (which in fact I think he's already been doing to an admirable extent, if only his WILL to indeed perform well at HC and grass tournaments... :worship:), it's just like Fed said in a recent interview: "He doesn't need to improve. He's already there..."
You may agree with Fed's words or not, but I do happen to think that he has a point here. ;) :angel:

Bad Religion
04-03-2008, 12:38 AM
It doesn´t change the fact that Rafa is not as good as JW Tsonga on hardcourt :shrug: . No matter what you say

zadle69
04-03-2008, 01:06 AM
i think the way the game is being played. with much power now coming back in the game and also that it is hard to change one style with already some injuries well. i think you need to take all of that into consideration. Again this is all my opinion.

l_mac
04-03-2008, 01:09 AM
i think the way the game is being played. with much power now coming back in the game and also that it is hard to change one style with already some injuries well. i think you need to take all of that into consideration. Again this is all my opinion.

You make the most objective posts about Rafa on the whole forum. This is my opinion.

Ackms421
04-03-2008, 01:29 AM
It doesnīt change the fact that Rafa is not as good as JW Tsonga on hardcourt :shrug: . No matter what you say

By the standards you use to come to that conclusion, Nadal is not as good as Safin on hard courts.

You can't pick a handful of matches (or one) out of a decade (or long period) to gauge a player's level. On any given day, Nadal vs. Tsonga can go either way. If one plays their best and the other does not, the one will always win. The fact that Tsonga's best on hard courts may be slightly (or significantly) better than Nadal's does not change this.

KaxMisha
04-03-2008, 01:32 AM
By the standards you use to come to that conclusion, Nadal is not as good as Safin on hard courts.

You can't pick a handful of matches (or one) out of a decade (or long period) to gauge a player's level. On any given day, Nadal vs. Tsonga can go either way. If one plays their best and the other does not, the one will always win. The fact that Tsonga's best on hard courts may be slightly (or significantly) better than Nadal's does not change this.

Great post. Wow, a thinking Nadal fan. Admirable. :worship:

Sunset of Age
04-03-2008, 01:43 AM
Great post. Wow, a thinking Nadal fan. Admirable. :worship:

Come on, Kax. Not ALL Rafa fans are idiots. :angel:

KaxMisha
04-03-2008, 01:47 AM
Come on, Kax. Not ALL Rafa fans are idiots. :angel:

I know, I know. :angel: I just had to make that comment based on my recent experience of discussing (and I use that term loosely) topics related to Nadal. ;)

TheSwissMaster
04-03-2008, 10:50 AM
trophies won on HC during last 12 months, "0", if u still dont understand its zero, yes zero and only zero.
thats says it all. Now get over it.

adee-gee
04-03-2008, 10:52 AM
Great post. Wow, a thinking Nadal fan. Admirable. :worship:
Good luck to JWT in his big TMS Semi Final again tomorrow :hatoff:

TheSwissMaster
04-03-2008, 10:56 AM
here is another stat.
since winning the master series event in march that was more than a year ago he has played 11 tournaments on HC (if im wrong plz correct) AND he has reached only 3 finals (miami, paris and chennai)

thats not even 50%

tennizen
04-03-2008, 01:17 PM
here is another stat.
since winning the master series event in march that was more than a year ago he has played 11 tournaments on HC (if im wrong plz correct) AND he has reached only 3 finals (miami, paris and chennai)

thats not even 50%

You sound as if reaching finals is the same as eating cakes or something:lol:

elessar
04-03-2008, 01:40 PM
Yep. The proof? Compare his 2007 French Open matches (the year he lost to Federer on clay) to his 2006 French Open matches (the year he went undefeated on clay) and tell me which matches look stronger? If you are relatively familiar with tennis, you will answer "2007."

He *clearly* is becoming a better tennis player. His win in Indian Wells last year showed us what he is capable of. He hasn't yet been able to produce that tennis on a day-to-day basis (on hard courts at least), but it is there.

A year or two from now he will be running less and winning more. Mark my words.
That was so close to being a good post, but I still have trouble taking anyone seriously when they end their post with "mark my words". :sad: I blame jcempire
You sound as if reaching finals is the same as eating cakes or something:lol:
GO NADAL !
FINAL IN MIAMI MAYBE WIN !
OTHER WIN AT USO : EASY
MARK MY WORDS
GO NADAL GO NADAL

Ackms421
04-03-2008, 02:57 PM
That was so close to being a good post, but I still have trouble taking anyone seriously when they end their post with "mark my words". :sad: I blame jcempire

GO NADAL !
FINAL IN MIAMI MAYBE WIN !
OTHER WIN AT USO : EASY
MARK MY WORDS
GO NADAL GO NADAL

Next time I won't close with mark my words. Mark my words.

aurora2006
04-03-2008, 02:59 PM
:wavey:

Best ever showing at AO. Final in Chennai (better than last year) Dubai - same result as 07. At least semis at IW. With two exceptions (where injuries played a part, USO and Cinci) he's made QF or better at the last 8 big hardcourt tournaments (MS and slams)

And he's doing this while not in the best form :worship:

What a player :yippee:

:yeah:

FluffyYellowBall
04-03-2008, 03:46 PM
2 words to explaion nadals hard court career in the next few years- BABY STEPS...Everytime he has a good result SOMETHING changes for the better. His return is still not that good but stands more inside the basline on 2nd serves and on his own serve have brought him success besides other things i think. And serve placement

KaxMisha
04-03-2008, 05:11 PM
Good luck to JWT in his big TMS Semi Final again tomorrow :hatoff:

I've always thought that you're not as stupid as your posts imply and that you just post shit like this because you enjoy trolling, but I'm strarting to doubt this now. In the thread you are referring to, I said that Nadal is far more consistent than Tsonga but is not as good on hardcourts when both are playing well. Thus, early Tsonga losses do not disprove what I said in any way. It only would do so if what I had said was that they have the same standard deviation, with Tsonga having the higher expected value (and you'd still need quite a bit of them to obtain statistical significance). This is clearly NOT what I said, so what the fuck is your problem? Spewing bullshit is just to hard to resist, or what?

Ackms421
04-03-2008, 06:46 PM
I've always thought that you're not as stupid as your posts imply and that you just post shit like this because you enjoy trolling, but I'm strarting to doubt this now. In the thread you are referring to, I said that Nadal is far more consistent than Tsonga but is not as good on hardcourts when both are playing well. Thus, early Tsonga losses do not disprove what I said in any way. It only would do so if what I had said was that they have the same standard deviation, with Tsonga having the higher expected value (and you'd still need quite a bit of them to obtain statistical significance). This is clearly NOT what I said, so what the fuck is your problem? Spewing bullshit is just to hard to resist, or what?

Point taken, however it remains to be seen whether Tsonga was "playing well" at the Aussie, or whether he was producing an outlying performance. Nadal has also played spurts of brilliant hard court tennis, just not for two consecutive weeks in a slam. And, they did play a few months before the Aussie, in a hard court slam, and Nadal won that one in straight sets. I'm not sure if Tsonga "playing well" against Nadal "playing well" on hard courts is as simple as you say. I'd give you Tsonga playing great on hard courts is better than Nadal playing average on hard courts though.

...but I don't think this will always be the case.

Mansave_75
04-03-2008, 07:59 PM
So Nadal is the third player in the world with more HC points, he deserves some credit, c'mon guys, he's a great champion.
Everybody knows that.

Adler
04-03-2008, 08:01 PM
c'mon guys, he's a great champion.Everybody knows that.
And nobody serious denies that