if nadal was american, would he be the ultimate fan favorite [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

if nadal was american, would he be the ultimate fan favorite

ugotlobbed
08-25-2006, 05:26 AM
wat do u think

Jagermeister
08-25-2006, 05:49 AM
wat do u think

well...yea. notice how much ink Roddick has gotten from one Slam in 2003. In fact Nadal has gotten a lot of attention in the United States considering he's not American. I can only imagine if he was.

Deboogle!.
08-25-2006, 06:28 AM
he still wouldn't be MY favorite :shrug:

partygirl
08-25-2006, 06:42 AM
he still wouldn't be MY favorite :shrug:
Nor mine.

Macbrother
08-25-2006, 06:42 AM
Doubtful. We don't really care for dirtballers. Now... if he was able to win the U.S.Open or Wimbledon.. maybe.

Neely
08-25-2006, 09:54 AM
Difficult to say, maybe in the USA, but not everywhere else. There, probably rather the opposite. Being from Spain shouldn't hurt Nadal too much either way.

Doubtful. We don't really care for dirtballers. Now... if he was able to win the U.S.Open or Wimbledon.. maybe.
But he would have played for long time with better results than Roddick, even involving non-clay surfaces ;)

Kalliopeia
08-25-2006, 11:36 AM
Of course, he'd be huge if he were American. He's got all the qualities that Americans love to get behind...he's attractive, he's good, he's got the underdog status (against Federer) despite being number 2 in the world. Off court he's boyishly charming and humble. And the dynamics of his rivalry with Federer work for him too...his power and never-say-die determination and intensity against Federer's cool elegance and regal image. Honestly, it's a promoter's dream come true. They haven't had anyone in the game this marketable since Andre Agassi. The only obstacle is that he's not American. And I don't even think that would matter much if the promoters would wake up and see what they have on their hands. And maybe they have...apparently he's been interviewed by People Magazine, Time, and the New York Times since arriving in New York.

bokehlicious
08-25-2006, 11:43 AM
Just wait for his 1st round loss :o Nobody in the US will recall his name by the Sunday's finals times :p

nobama
08-25-2006, 12:13 PM
Of course, he'd be huge if he were American. He's got all the qualities that Americans love to get behind...he's attractive, he's good, he's got the underdog status (against Federer) despite being number 2 in the world. Off court he's boyishly charming and humble. And the dynamics of his rivalry with Federer work for him too...his power and never-say-die determination and intensity against Federer's cool elegance and regal image. Honestly, it's a promoter's dream come true. They haven't had anyone in the game this marketable since Andre Agassi. The only obstacle is that he's not American. And I don't even think that would matter much if the promoters would wake up and see what they have on their hands. And maybe they have...apparently he's been interviewed by People Magazine, Time, and the New York Times since arriving in New York. :spit:

amierin
08-25-2006, 01:30 PM
Of course, he'd be huge if he were American. He's got all the qualities that Americans love to get behind...he's attractive, he's good, he's got the underdog status (against Federer) despite being number 2 in the world. Off court he's boyishly charming and humble. And the dynamics of his rivalry with Federer work for him too...his power and never-say-die determination and intensity against Federer's cool elegance and regal image. Honestly, it's a promoter's dream come true. They haven't had anyone in the game this marketable since Andre Agassi. The only obstacle is that he's not American. And I don't even think that would matter much if the promoters would wake up and see what they have on their hands. And maybe they have...apparently he's been interviewed by People Magazine, Time, and the New York Times since arriving in New York.

I'd like to think this would be the case but I don't think it would be. The tennis PTB in the States show their true colors by promoting two one slam wonders. I thik they were scared shyttless Blake was going to actually show something.
IMG is doing a good job getting Rafa known, a lot of people yesterday who were not going to stop did stop when they saw Rafa and they asked the tennisheads if he was indeed Nadal and they stayed.

They wouldn't be able to ignore him but as far as the all court press? No.

partygirl
08-25-2006, 01:34 PM
They haven't had anyone in the game this marketable since Andre Agassi.
huh.... :confused:
It's not why i like him but as far as American marketability, Andy Roddick is a very wet dream.

nobama
08-25-2006, 01:51 PM
huh.... :confused:
It's not why i like him but as far as American marketability, Andy Roddick is a very wet dream.Yep. Nadal is marketable now because he happens to have Federer's number and therefore they can hype up this big "rivalry".

Castafiore
08-25-2006, 02:01 PM
Quite a few people are getting a bit defensive about this. :confused:


Mirkaland,
You have a point but not entirely....IMHO, he's marketable for more reasons than merely Federer.

However, you can't deny that a guy like Roddick gets more attention because he's born in the US.
Nothing against the US and people don't choose where they are born but if players like Moya, Ferrero, Gaston Gaudio or Thomas Johansson (these guys are attractive + slam winners) were born in the US, they would receive more attention in the media. It's as simple as that.
Suppose Roddick was born in Spain and Moya in the US...what effect would that have on their impact in the media?

star
08-25-2006, 02:18 PM
Of course Americans will get more press in america. I'm sure Nadal gets a lot more press in Spain than any American player.

I think Nadal is a big favorite pretty much everywhere he goes except maybe France because.... :cukoo:

Most everyone likes him as far as I can see. (Not talking about people who post on tennis boards here, but people who go to tennis matches) I haven't heard anyone say anything bad about him.

federated
08-25-2006, 02:21 PM
He'd be huge.

Sunset of Age
08-25-2006, 04:55 PM
I'm glad he's Spanish... :rolleyes:

I don't see much good in overdosed one-dimensional hyping, stirring up 'rivalries' and such. And I doubt Nadal himself would like it. He's said on more than one occasion that he wants to lead a 'normal' life.
Good thing his English is still so :hatoff: crappy!

mamasue
08-25-2006, 04:56 PM
He'd be huge.
Exactly!

Rafa would be "TENNIS" if he was American.

He brought so many people, including tons of Americans of all ages, back to tennis during his amazing RG 2005 run. Many hadn't followed tennis for twenty years or more.

Roddick caused a blip, but he's proven to be Grade A Prick in addition to playing like crap. And Fed is so boring only the diehard tennis fans who never veered away knew or cared who he was.

Rafa's the charismatic star tennis needed, worldwide. And there's no doubt he'd be an even bigger star if he was American, like Agassi.

But, bottom line, he's doing just fine. :)

lunahielo
08-25-2006, 05:17 PM
No

Clara Bow
08-25-2006, 05:18 PM
I think if Rafa were American he would be pretty big here. He does have a good persona for marketing too, intense on court, and nice and polite outside of the tennis facilities. PLus, he can be cheeky and have a nice sense of humor as witnessed in some of his Spanish interviews and even some English ones. :)

But- I don't see any need to bash Roddick or Federer to prop Nadal up. If Roddick had won more GS titles, he would be bigger here. And he is still pretty well known (he is in the likes of Us Weekly and hosted Saturday Night Live, etc.) And while I can see why some may not like his on court behavior sometimes, he seems to be a very good egg off the court- with some of the best interviews in sports. (Plus- I am not ready to write him of as just having one GS by the time he retires.

Likewise - I think that Federer would be very big here if he were American. I think he would be bigger then Pete was. It used to drive me bonkers when media folks would describe Federer as "boring" a couple of years ago. I would read his interviews and see some of his dry wit and throw my hands up in frustration (figuratively, although maybe literally a couple of times ;).) I personally think that Roger has more personality then Pete or Borg ever did (no slam on them.) Luckily, the "boring" mantra against Roger has died down and now we see more "Borg-like" references to his on court demeanor.

If both Rafa and Roger were American, I really do believe that tennis would have a resurgance in the US. Two very different personalites on the court, and two likeable, very decent fellow off the court who are appreciative of fans and what the sport has given them.

I don't think you could say any of these three if all were spinning on all cylinders and were all Yanks would be the "ultimate" fan favorite- I think there would be different camps that would like different players for different reasons.

But in the end- I like that Rafa is Spanish and Roger is Swiss, I believe it helps define who they are and their personalities. I just wish that more folks in the US could appreciate players who are not American. I share Mary Carillo's sentiments in this regard. From an article in today's Ventura County Star

Although American success is always better for ratings, Carillo is fed up with viewers tuning out if the players remaining aren't from down the block.

"People need to embrace Federer and Nadal for their tennis and not care about what country they reside in," Carillo said. "The best part of tennis is it's an international sport. Why not celebrate that? The jingoism is wearing on me. It really is."

charlie666
08-25-2006, 06:16 PM
...because only Americans are fan favorites? :confused: :shrug:

nobama
08-25-2006, 06:48 PM
Exactly!

Rafa would be "TENNIS" if he was American.

He brought so many people, including tons of Americans of all ages, back to tennis during his amazing RG 2005 run. Many hadn't followed tennis for twenty years or more.

Roddick caused a blip, but he's proven to be Grade A Prick in addition to playing like crap. And Fed is so boring only the diehard tennis fans who never veered away knew or cared who he was.

Rafa's the charismatic star tennis needed, worldwide. And there's no doubt he'd be an even bigger star if he was American, like Agassi.

But, bottom line, he's doing just fine. :) :spit: Show me factual proof that tons of Americans of all ages are now tennis fans because of Nadal. The viewership stats/ratings on the FO final this year weren't that much higher than last year. And certainly nothing like Wimbledon or the US Open. If what you say is true, why did ESPN dump the FO? TTC is carried in far fewer homes than ESPN is.

nobama
08-25-2006, 06:55 PM
I think if Rafa were American he would be pretty big here. He does have a good persona for marketing too, intense on court, and nice and polite outside of the tennis facilities. PLus, he can be cheeky and have a nice sense of humor as witnessed in some of his Spanish interviews and even some English ones. :)

But- I don't see any need to bash Roddick or Federer to prop Nadal up. If Roddick had won more GS titles, he would be bigger here. And he is still pretty well known (he is in the likes of Us Weekly and hosted Saturday Night Live, etc.) And while I can see why some may not like his on court behavior sometimes, he seems to be a very good egg off the court- with some of the best interviews in sports. (Plus- I am not ready to write him of as just having one GS by the time he retires.

Likewise - I think that Federer would be very big here if he were American. I think he would be bigger then Pete was. It used to drive me bonkers when media folks would describe Federer as "boring" a couple of years ago. I would read his interviews and see some of his dry wit and throw my hands up in frustration (figuratively, although maybe literally a couple of times ;).) I personally think that Roger has more personality then Pete or Borg ever did (no slam on them.) Luckily, the "boring" mantra against Roger has died down and now we see more "Borg-like" references to his on court demeanor.

If both Rafa and Roger were American, I really do believe that tennis would have a resurgance in the US. Two very different personalites on the court, and two likeable, very decent fellow off the court who are appreciative of fans and what the sport has given them.

I don't think you could say any of these three if all were spinning on all cylinders and were all Yanks would be the "ultimate" fan favorite- I think there would be different camps that would like different players for different reasons.

But in the end- I like that Rafa is Spanish and Roger is Swiss, I believe it helps define who they are and their personalities. I just wish that more folks in the US could appreciate players who are not American. I share Mary Carillo's sentiments in this regard. From an article in today's Ventura County Star :worship: Great post. It's only natural if either one of them were from the USA they'd have a bigger following. But right now they're just being sterotyped as Roger being "boring" (someone from Yahoo sports said this the other day when interviewing John Wertheim) and Nadal being charismatic.

Radek Stepanek
08-25-2006, 07:07 PM
Being Spanish adds to his whole persona! It's hot to be Spanish!

Clara Bow
08-25-2006, 07:09 PM
But right now they're just being sterotyped as Roger being "boring" (someone from Yahoo sports said this the other day when interviewing John Wertheim) and Nadal being charismatic.

The media does like to paint in broad strokes. I also often see Federer decribes as "classic" and "graceful" while Nadal is seen as "brash" and "bold." Yes, the two have different on court personas, but that is not the end all be all of who they are. Roger can be a fun goofball and Rafa can be a real sweetie. But it is easier for the media to just paint them as one dimensional. But as someone who likes to fart around on the job and has a myriad of research tools at my disposal- it is fun to see that there is more than one color to these players.

I have been happy to see that after the past couple of GS's Roger and Rafa are getting a bit more respect mainstream sports show such as Pardon the Interuption for example. They give Roger mad props for his skills and no longer use the word boring and they can finally talk about Nadal's talent independent of his choice in tennis clothing.

~*BGT*~
08-25-2006, 08:33 PM
I don't think he needs to be American to be big. He just needs to speak prfect English a la Sharapova. She speaks perfect English, but people don't care that she's Russian by birth. Because Rafa is not fluent and has just started learning within the past years (I believe), he's never going to speak it perfectly. But I don't care, his accent is endearring, like Gasquet and Berdych.

partygirl
08-25-2006, 08:43 PM
He just needs to speak prfect English a la Sharapova. She speaks perfect English, but people don't care that she's Russian by birth. Because Rafa is not fluent and has just started learning within the past years (I believe), he's never going to speak it perfectly. But I don't care, his accent is endearring, like Gasquet and Berdych.
Rafa english is so:inlove:

maria has been in the US forever...she's American, why doesn't anyone just say that...it upsets me don't come here to take advantage of everything and basically become a shining example of Americanism & yet still claim Russia.
...bugs me for some reason

mongo
08-25-2006, 08:47 PM
Doubtful. We don't really care for dirtballers. Now... if he was able to win the U.S.Open or Wimbledon.. maybe.

True. Sadly, we don't cover the European tour. He'd have to alter his summer schedule to taylor it to the American fan base. Roddick and Blake play at least 3 USO Series events. Agassi has won LA and New Have at least 4x each, etc..

Jim Courier had won four slams and was year end #1 for a couple of years before Sampras won his second slam, or Andre had won his first. But Pete and Andre were the "ultimate fan favorites" in the states.

~*BGT*~
08-25-2006, 08:48 PM
Rafa english is so:inlove:

maria has been in the US forever...she's American, why doesn't anyone just say that...it upsets me don't come here to take advantage of everything and basically become a shining example of Americanism & yet still claim Russia.
...bugs me for some reason

It annoys me too. Bolletieri isn't helping this either. Jancovic, Sharapova, and Vaidisova have all trained and lived in his academy, but still play for their home countries. if you're going to play for your country, then train and live there.

Jennay
08-25-2006, 08:50 PM
Maria does speak fluent English but I still hate listening to her talk. :p

Nadal is huge in the U.S. already, regardless if he was Spanish or American.

Jennay
08-25-2006, 08:54 PM
It annoys me too. Bolletieri isn't helping this either. Jancovic, Sharapova, and Vaidisova have all trained and lived in his academy, but still play for their home countries. if you're going to play for your country, then train and live there.
Bollettieri isn't helping or not helping anything. These women go to the academy to train and play tennis, no one can force them to play competitively for the U.S. Out of all the kids that attend the academy from the U.S. or anywhere else, not many have had professional careers anyways.

DrJules
08-25-2006, 10:18 PM
It annoys me too. Bolletieri isn't helping this either. Jancovic, Sharapova, and Vaidisova have all trained and lived in his academy, but still play for their home countries. if you're going to play for your country, then train and live there.

So much for internationalism. Surely players should have the freedom to train where they want to train regardless of the country for which they play.

I think Andy Murray has been training there for a week. Does that mean he should be classified American? :lol: :lol:

And how many of the top 30 train in Florida?

DrJules
08-25-2006, 10:25 PM
Rafa english is so:inlove:

maria has been in the US forever...she's American, why doesn't anyone just say that...it upsets me don't come here to take advantage of everything and basically become a shining example of Americanism & yet still claim Russia.
...bugs me for some reason

Ethnically and on her passport Maria is Russian. Some people have strong attachments to their indentity and origins. Going to the US is a sporting, business and commercial decision which is far less deep than identity.

Enjoying the global and international world should not involve sacrificing your cultural and ethnic origins.

nobama
08-25-2006, 11:15 PM
I have been happy to see that after the past couple of GS's Roger and Rafa are getting a bit more respect mainstream sports show such as Pardon the Interuption for example. They give Roger mad props for his skills and no longer use the word boring and they can finally talk about Nadal's talent independent of his choice in tennis clothing.Well it does help that the pirate pants have bit the dust.

Clara Bow
08-25-2006, 11:26 PM
Mirkaland- agree. :)

But I must apologize for my quoted post as I am posting while at work. Looking at my posts in hindsight makes me realize that I read like frozen cavewoman tennisfan. Sorry!

DDrago2
08-25-2006, 11:39 PM
Nadal has many fans, but it seems he is even more loved buy the medias. If he grew up in America however, I think he would be very different person. So you can't tell

16681
08-25-2006, 11:44 PM
Americans like Nadal now. And the more he speaks English so more people can understand him the more he will be known and liked :D

Kalliopeia
08-26-2006, 12:32 AM
If what you say is true, why did ESPN dump the FO? TTC is carried in far fewer homes than ESPN is.

Because ESPN is run by a bunch of lobotomized monkeys. They don't know what to do with tennis when they have it, so why not give it to another network?

nobama
08-26-2006, 01:15 AM
Because ESPN is run by a bunch of lobotomized monkeys. They don't know what to do with tennis when they have it, so why not give it to another network?But why did they choose to give away FO, if it's the case that the rise of Nadal and his clay court run is bringing so many new fans in America to tennis. If the FO was giving them the biggest ratings I think they would have paid to keep it.

Kalliopeia
08-26-2006, 01:51 AM
But why did they choose to give away FO, if it's the case that the rise of Nadal and his clay court run is bringing so many new fans in America to tennis. If the FO was giving them the biggest ratings I think they would have paid to keep it.

Well I'm not the one who made that argument, but the post you're referring to said, I think, that he brought people back to tennis. And I believe this is true because I am one of them, as are a few others I know. If you want something more scientific than that, I got nuthin'. :) I don't think there are a lot of people who have never been tennis fans who are paying much attention, though.

cmurray
08-26-2006, 02:15 AM
I'm an American and Nadal is my absolute favorite player along with Safin.

As for ESPN giving up coverage to the FO, that is just poor vision on their part. Nadal is only just getting international headlines because he keeps beating the Fed-man. People are taking notice. If Rafa continues to win and especially if he makes a deep run at the USO this year, Americans will start taking notice. Next year, the French will be of great interest and people won't be able to watch it unless they pay extra to buy the tennis channel (that's what I had to do).


Cheryl

Deboogle!.
08-26-2006, 02:24 AM
If Rafa had been American, he wouldn't even play the same way most likely. It's sort of a moot point to say what Americans would like if he were American b/c he would almost surely play a different gamestyle.

Anyway, I wonder why Americans get such a bad rap and I see some of the posts in this thread. It's not like these foreign players are going through the USTA system. Then I'd be annoyed. There are guys like Dent and Delic who could play for other countries, but have gotten support from the USTA and they play for the USTA. Since when are our private facilities only for us? They pay the money, they can go. I don't really see a valid argument that people who attend a private facility have to then represent the US. If a foreign student attends a US university, I wouldn't expect them to stay and work in the US. I see attending a private tennis academy no differently.

Merton
08-26-2006, 02:34 AM
If Rafa had been American, he wouldn't even play the same way most likely. It's sort of a moot point to say what Americans would like if he were American b/c he would almost surely play a different gamestyle.

Anyway, I wonder why Americans get such a bad rap and I see some of the posts in this thread. It's not like these foreign players are going through the USTA system. Then I'd be annoyed. There are guys like Dent and Delic who could play for other countries, but have gotten support from the USTA and they play for the USTA. Since when are our private facilities only for us? They pay the money, they can go. I don't really see a valid argument that people who attend a private facility have to then represent the US. If a foreign student attends a US university, I wouldn't expect them to stay and work in the US. I see attending a private tennis academy no differently.

Very good point Deb, Nadal grew up playing futures and challengers on clay in Europe and that formed his style quite differently than if he grew up tennisticaly here. One can see that point watching for example Djokovic or Berdych, versus young Americans. Of course I am not saying that there is any superiority on clay itself, it is just different.

Deboogle!.
08-26-2006, 02:37 AM
Very good point Deb, Nadal grew up playing futures and challengers on clay in Europe and that formed his style quite differently than if he grew up tennisticaly here. One can see that point watching for example Djokovic or Berdych, versus young Americans. Of course I am not saying that there is any superiority on clay itself, it is just different.I mean, that, and they just start at a very young age and that's what they know. That's the biggest problem with US tennis on clay - there aren't enough clay courts. Most of these guys don't play on red clay much at all growing up, and the coaches here don't, in general, teach the same kinds of things, etc. etc. etc. Rafa would still be a good player b/c he's still physically gifted, but to say Americans wouldn't like him because he's a dirtballer is irrelevant, you have to take the hypothetical all the way :)

gusman890
08-26-2006, 02:42 AM
If Nadal were american...

first off, Under Armor would be giving alot of money trying to endorse this kid because he looks like he a football player and since thats the kind of people they are used to endorsing, it would be a corprate fight between them and nike.

and 2nd, Roddick wouldnt be in the spotlight all the time as the top american, meaning blake would fuck up because he isnt the under dog anymore and that people except him to win now that he is(and soon to be former no.1 American),

Rafa would show that Tennis is a sissy type sport in america and that kids who are strong would see tennis for the game it is, rather then for snobby rich kids who get picked on in school because they cant bench 200 pounds. (which sounded better in the 1980s, now that the game has become more phyiscal, there are probally 3/4 the tennis players today could bench 200)

but the publicy would go through the roof and more kids would want to play and therefore the USTA wouldnt be as bad in investing in young talent (IE Donald Young) and we woulc preduce more champions in the future.

BUT thats if only Rafa was from america...... :rolleyes:

croat123
08-26-2006, 03:30 AM
how can being american be a determining fact to being an ultimate fan favorite?

~*BGT*~
08-26-2006, 03:45 AM
how can being american be a determining fact to being an ultimate fan favorite?

I think he'd be the ultimate fan favorite in the US, mayb like Peyton Manning, A-Rod, or Lebron James. Fan favorite in the whole world? I don't know about that.

neenah
08-26-2006, 04:32 AM
I don't know how much it would affect the "fan favorite"-ness of it all, but I know the American media would pay more attention to him if he was from the US. But I don't know how many fans really base their favorites by what country players come from? I know I dont :D

sssss
08-26-2006, 09:38 AM
Exactly!

Rafa would be "TENNIS" if he was American.

He brought so many people, including tons of Americans of all ages, back to tennis during his amazing RG 2005 run. Many hadn't followed tennis for twenty years or more.

Roddick caused a blip, but he's proven to be Grade A Prick in addition to playing like crap. And Fed is so boring only the diehard tennis fans who never veered away knew or cared who he was.

Rafa's the charismatic star tennis needed, worldwide. And there's no doubt he'd be an even bigger star if he was American, like Agassi.

But, bottom line, he's doing just fine. :)


I am the other way around. Federer is the most interesting and entertaining tennis player I have ever watched. It's because he can play all shots in tennis and has a great variety and class. He makes tennis look like an art. He plays the game with such a beauty, grace and elegance that any sane person would love to admire. He is the reason why I started watching Tennis in the first place. Also, he is a freindly, charming and fun loving person. I just wonder why some people always label him boring. I am sure any person who can appreciate talent, art and beauty would enjoy watching Federer in action. So it means that many people in our modern world do not have any passion for beauty, grace and elegance. And coming to Nadal, it is really his game that bores me to death. Agreed he is a great player and I respect him a lot, but still he doesn't have the same class, elegance, beauty, variety and charm that Federer has. He is all about running and retrieving every ball like a machine, jumping like crazy and those annoying fist pumps. I do not find anything interesting or entertaining about him. It's really a matter of wonder to me how people admire Nadal's mechanical and routine game over Federer's beautiful and artistic tennis. Unfortunately, the modern society produces so many shallow sighted people who cant see and admire beauty. Nothing against Nadal, but on reading your biased post, I am unable to resist writing my views. And coming to charisma, there are many players many times more charismatic than Nadal. Marcos Baghdatis is the most charismatic I feel. Safin, Ferrero, Roddick and Federer are also very good looking. Nadal is like a boring robot. And finally, sorry for my poor English.

Naranoc
08-26-2006, 10:04 AM
It's very natural that some people will get 'bored' of the same classy, polite guy artistically and beautifully winning all his matches day in, day out. Nadal fits the image of the rebel perfectly, and his contarst to Federer's elegance is what would make him popular. Tennis needs excitement, and viewers won't get that if one player is dominating the tour and winning all the slams. In fact, Federer can speak perfect english, yet that still hasn't (to my knowledge) brought him closer to the American public.

sssss
08-26-2006, 10:24 AM
It's very natural that some people will get 'bored' of the same classy, polite guy artistically and beautifully winning all his matches day in, day out. Nadal fits the image of the rebel perfectly, and his contarst to Federer's elegance is what would make him popular. Tennis needs excitement, and viewers won't get that if one player is dominating the tour and winning all the slams. In fact, Federer can speak perfect english, yet that still hasn't (to my knowledge) brought him closer to the American public.

Nadal also wins consistently. He has won 60 straight matches on clay and doesn't ever look like losing that streak. Is Nadal's dominance also not boring by your logic? But nobody seems to have any problem in that. Why do people adopt one attitude towards Federer's dominance and a different attitude towards Nadal's dominance? Why this double standards? Suppose imagine Nadal becomes an unbeatable player and wins every slam on his sight. Going by your logic, people should get bored of that also and crave for a fitting rival against Nadal in the same way they are doing now for Federer. But unfortunately, they won't do. I hate this double standards. And secondly, everone knows that Nadal is dominating this rivalry against Federer and in reality it's hard to call it a rivalry at all because Nadal wins almost all his matches against Federer. 6-2 is not a rivalry and Nadal is the favorite everytime they meet may be except on grass. It is Federer who is the underdog against Nadal. Still why do people support Nadal against Federer inspite of him being the favorite in this matchup and having beaten Federer time and again? Why not they support the underdog (Federer) which is more sensible? By the way it is going, it looks like Nadal will put a complete end to Federer's career. In that case, people like me won't be able to watch beautiful and elegant tennis anymore. Then, where do people like me who appreciate these qualities go? Why not people realize this reality? So you can win people's hearts only by being a rebel is it? Any I am completely different from others. I like only artistry and elegance and only Federer has it what pleases me the most. Frankly, I am not bored even if he keeps winning for ever.

Naranoc
08-26-2006, 10:55 AM
Nadal also wins consistently. He has won 60 straight matches on clay and doesn't ever look like losing that streak. Is Nadal's dominance also not boring by your logic? But nobody seems to have any problem in that. Why do people adopt one attitude towards Federer's dominance and a different attitude towards Nadal's dominance?

How on earth is Nadal dominating on clay comparable to Federers 54 match winning North American streak. To Americans, this would be far more impressive, and as someone previously posted anyway on Americans 'we don't really care for dirt-ballers'. In pretty much every event Federer enters, he's guaranteed to reach the final. For Nadal, this isn't the case, and it's the way he grinds out his wins and works hard for them that people like.

DrJules
08-26-2006, 11:14 AM
How on earth is Nadal dominating on clay comparable to Federers 54 match winning North American streak. To Americans, this would be far more impressive, and as someone previously posted anyway on Americans 'we don't really care for dirt-ballers'. In pretty much every event Federer enters, he's guaranteed to reach the final. For Nadal, this isn't the case, and it's the way he grinds out his wins and works hard for them that people like.

It should be added that while Nadal has only achieved domination on 1 surface, Federer has done it on 2. It will be interesting to see who indoor carpet favours my money would be on Federer again.

Federer has dominated on 2 surfaces with long winning periods; hard courts and grass. Nadal has done it on 1 surface; clay.

sssss
08-26-2006, 11:27 AM
How on earth is Nadal dominating on clay comparable to Federers 54 match winning North American streak. To Americans, this would be far more impressive, and as someone previously posted anyway on Americans 'we don't really care for dirt-ballers'. In pretty much every event Federer enters, he's guaranteed to reach the final. For Nadal, this isn't the case, and it's the way he grinds out his wins and works hard for them that people like.

So, do you mean to say that Federer and other players are not working hard? Federer also works very hard during his matches but unfortunately he plays his game in such a way that he gives an illusion that it's very easy and effortless. But in reality it is not so and it's very difficult to do what Federer does. According to me, Federer's success is much more impressive than Nadal's success because Federer is neither physically well built nor mentally very tough like Nadal. Federer uses his sublime talent to win matches. He and no body else for that matter has the stamina and endurance like Nadal to grind out matches. Nadal comes from an athletic family. His physical strength, stamina and endurance comes from his athletic genes. Just look at his uncles and his other family memebers? Also I read somewhere that he is gifted with a superior cardio vascular system that has extra oxygen carrying capacity thus accounting for his stamina and non fatigue. Also, Nadal is gifted with a tough brain that would never succumb to nerves. So, in a way Nadal is very fortunate that he is blessed by nature with extra ordinary genetics and cardio vascular system and an extremely strong mind. These are all inborn qualities. So, considering these facts, it's no wonder to me that he is able to run continuously for hours like a machine and work extremely hard and win tough matches. But considering Federer also does the same thing that Nadal does and has an equally good success rate and wins as much titles as Nadal using sheer talent alone inspite of not having such great genetics and physics is what is most impressive. But people don't realize this fact.

Castafiore
08-26-2006, 11:41 AM
But considering Federer also does the same thing that Nadal does and has an equally good success rate and wins as much titles as Nadal using sheer talent alone inspite of not having such great genetics and physics is what is most impressive.
Well, yes...people say that Nadal has been gifted by nature with great genetics and physique.
But, that alone is not enough to make it to the number two spot and to get the clay court streak: that requires talent, hard work. You can't break down his success to genes and physique.
Those genes didn't bring him to the number two spot. Sure, they helped to bring him there so fast but it takes genes + talent + the right motivation + a lot of hard work.

Besides, Federer is not exactly a slouch as far as physique is concerned. He may not walk around with sleeveless shirts (that's simply not his style, I think) but he's a good athlete! I also think that Federer was gifted by nature with a good tennis brain and with amazing talents but it requires the right motivation and hard work to get him to the top spot and to keep him there
What both these guys are doing is working hard to make sure that these given talents pay off.

These guys are just different in style, game,...but - as far as I am concerned - it's just different and not a question of "why on earth would people prefer this player over that player".
When people look at tennis that amuses them, excites them, moves them even... they're not all looking for the same things, are they?
Different people get excited about different things.

***
Furthermore, I think that Federer's domination is far more general. No matter the surface or the circumstances, Roger starts as a top favorite.
I just feel that Nadal isn't there (yet?). Some (I know, I know...not all) are hoping for another Nadal vs Federer final but Nadal still has to convince me as a force on a fast surface. He's only 20 so he has time but Roger already has accomplished that: he's a favorite on any surface. People are not surprised to see Nadal in a final of course but it's more of a given at this point for Roger.
That doesn't mean that Roger's domination is boring perhaps but it's interesting to see others chasing that top spot.

oz_boz
08-26-2006, 12:01 PM
If Nadal was American, he would be the Houston champ for the next ten years.

sssss
08-26-2006, 01:18 PM
Well, yes...people say that Nadal has been gifted by nature with great genetics and physique.
But, that alone is not enough to make it to the number two spot and to get the clay court streak: that requires talent, hard work. You can't break down his success to genes and physique.
Those genes didn't bring him to the number two spot. Sure, they helped to bring him there so fast but it takes genes + talent + the right motivation + a lot of hard work.

Besides, Federer is not exactly a slouch as far as physique is concerned. He may not walk around with sleeveless shirts (that's simply not his style, I think) but he's a good athlete! I also think that Federer was gifted by nature with a good tennis brain and with amazing talents but it requires the right motivation and hard work to get him to the top spot and to keep him there
What both these guys are doing is working hard to make sure that these given talents pay off.

***


I agree that hard work is very essential for success and is the only way to achieve success. But one should agree that not everyone can work hard like Nadal. It requires lots of motivation, stamina and above all mental toughness and concentration. Some people have weak head that make them difficult to concentrate and focus their minds and therefore difficult to work hard. It all comes to the mental makeup i.e. the brain patterns. Thus, not everyone can concentrate hard and work like a machine. For example, consider Marat Safin. It seems that he is weakminded and therefore he just cant focus on the game and finds it difficult to work hard. My point is that you can't blame Safin for that and you can't expect him to work like Nadal. Just his brain is built differently. Considering my own case, even if I want to work hard, I find it difficult to focus my mind continuously and I often lose my concentration and subjected to many diversions. The reason is that my head is not strong.

DDrago2
08-26-2006, 01:42 PM
I agree that hard work is very essential for success and is the only way to achieve success. But one should agree that not everyone can work hard like Nadal. It requires lots of motivation, stamina and above all mental toughness and concentration. Some people have weak head that make them difficult to concentrate and focus their minds and therefore difficult to work hard. It all comes to the mental makeup i.e. the brain patterns. Thus, not everyone can concentrate hard and work like a machine. For example, consider Marat Safin. It seems that he is weakminded and therefore he just cant focus on the game and finds it difficult to work hard. My point is that you can't blame Safin for that and you can't expect him to work like Nadal. Just his brain is built differently. Considering my own case, even if I want to work hard, I find it difficult to focus my mind continuously and I often lose my concentration and subjected to many diversions. The reason is that my head is not strong.

What you are saying comes down to saying that you can't blame anyone for anything. No one is guilty for his genes, and no one is guilty for his up-breeding - and if you think that capacity for hard work, motivation, action come out of these - no one of us is responsible for anything.

Eden
08-26-2006, 02:21 PM
I am the other way around. Federer is the most interesting and entertaining tennis player I have ever watched. It's because he can play all shots in tennis and has a great variety and class. He makes tennis look like an art. He plays the game with such a beauty, grace and elegance that any sane person would love to admire. He is the reason why I started watching Tennis in the first place. Also, he is a freindly, charming and fun loving person. I just wonder why some people always label him boring. I am sure any person who can appreciate talent, art and beauty would enjoy watching Federer in action. So it means that many people in our modern world do not have any passion for beauty, grace and elegance. And coming to Nadal, it is really his game that bores me to death. Agreed he is a great player and I respect him a lot, but still he doesn't have the same class, elegance, beauty, variety and charm that Federer has. He is all about running and retrieving every ball like a machine, jumping like crazy and those annoying fist pumps. I do not find anything interesting or entertaining about him.

:yeah: I couldn't agree more. I am watching tennis since 20 years now and there has never been a player apart from Roger who captured me so much which his kind of play. It is always such a pleasure to follow a match of Roger. Often I'm breathless because of the quality Roger produces. This is the tennis I want to see and can't get enough of.
Everyone who meets Roger says how nice he is not just on but also off the court. I think there has never been a number one who was so popular among his tennis colleagues and the media.
Maybe it is natural that the media concentrates on someone new when he has achieved a level like Nadal did, but would he really cause such an attention without his rivalry with Roger? I don't think so.

If Roger would be American he would definitely be huge in the US. He has everything - success, good look, nice attitude. He speaks perfect English and knows how to express and his charity work is also very remarkable.
I can't understand what people claim to be boring of him, but everyone is free to have his own opinion.

Rafael would also be very huge when he would be American. There is no doubt. He and Roger would probably be what Sampras and Agassi were for the US some years ago.

Castafiore
08-26-2006, 04:00 PM
Maybe it is natural that the media concentrates on someone new when he has achieved a level like Nadal did, but would he really cause such an attention without his rivalry with Roger? I don't think so.
Rafa would still get quite a bit of attention...winning RG at his first attempt as a teenager, the clay court streak...those things would earn him attention anyway.
Yes, the media tends to focus on this so-called rivalry thing (which is exaggerated IMO...).
But...I think that this rivalry thing works both ways as far as media attention is concerned. Rafa would perhaps get a bit less attention in some sections of the media without it but so would Roger IMO. The contrast between the two which is milked so much: the intense energy vs the smooth elegance for example.


When Rafa came on the scene some time ago, I remember reading a column about this in my newspaper. Some expert said that Roger could use a great rival, somebody who stands in contrast to him because at that point, many people seemed to take Roger for granted a bit but set somebody opposite him and he will get more attention and more people will realise the extent of the talent of Roger.

tangerine_dream
08-26-2006, 05:40 PM
Judging by the large American crowds both Roger and Rafa attract at various American tournaments, I wouldn't worry too much about whether the Americans will embrace them, because they obviously have. :)

R.Federer
08-26-2006, 08:01 PM
Judging by the large American crowds both Roger and Rafa attract at various American tournaments, I wouldn't worry too much about whether the Americans will embrace them, because they obviously have. :)
I think the sentiment of the original post is that it has taken more work and more success for Rafa the kind of publicity that an American player gets with much less success.

For instance, Andy enjoyed enormous popularity in the States even before he won the USO. A very large part of that is that he is American and thus obviously a natural choice for the rich media houses that are mostly on Madison Avenue. He still gets ad campaigs, despite not having nearly the success that Roger or Rafa have.

That definitely suggests that Rafa would have had enormous ad appeal had he been American, because he is at least as flamboyant and has oodles of personality, and more tennis success than Andy has had.

nobama
08-26-2006, 08:21 PM
That definitely suggests that Rafa would have had enormous ad appeal had he been American, because he is at least as flamboyant and has oodles of personality, and more tennis success than Andy has had.Just curious what personality he has off court though? I don't doubt that he's a nice guy, great guy, but to me off court he doesn't ooze personality/charisma any more than any other player does. Seems to me because Federer is sterotyped as being bland and boring they have to sterotype Nadal as being the exact opposite because that just adds to the whole rivalry they're trying to create.

neenah
08-26-2006, 08:27 PM
Just curious what personality he has off court though? I don't doubt that he's a nice guy, great guy, but to me off court he doesn't ooze personality/charisma any more than any other player does. Seems to me because Federer is sterotyped as being bland and boring they have to sterotype Nadal as being the exact opposite because that just adds to the whole rivalry they're trying to create.

That's a good point. It shows how much the media plays things up, such as Fed and Rafa's rivalry. That's not saying I don't like Fed or Rafa, they're among my favorites :D :D

R.Federer
08-26-2006, 08:31 PM
Just curious what personality he has off court though? I don't doubt that he's a nice guy, great guy, but to me off court he doesn't ooze personality/charisma any more than any other player does. Seems to me because Federer is sterotyped as being bland and boring they have to sterotype Nadal as being the exact opposite because that just adds to the whole rivalry they're trying to create.
I didn't say off court (although maybe he is very charismatic off court and I don't know about it), but on court he certainly has a lot of personality, regardless of whether some people love it and others don't-- and THAT'S what people see, him on court.

neenah
08-27-2006, 04:32 AM
I didn't say off court (although maybe he is very charismatic off court and I don't know about it), but on court he certainly has a lot of personality, regardless of whether some people love it and others don't-- and THAT'S what people see, him on court.

I see what you mean now, but I'm not sure that would come into play if you're considering the popularity Rafa would have as an American.

Meaning, I think being popular for your personality on-court and being popular because of the country you are from do not affect one another - having one will not affect the other.

I'm not sure how much sense I'm making or if I even understood what you were trying to say :D

Castafiore
08-27-2006, 08:50 AM
. Seems to me because Federer is sterotyped as being bland and boring they have to sterotype Nadal as being the exact opposite because that just adds to the whole rivalry they're trying to create.
With all due respect but I think that you're looking at Rafa too much from a Roger point of view.
They say that about Rafa...but Roger...
Rafa plays like that...Roger however...
They say that of Rafa...why don't they say this about Roger...
They show that about Roger...They don't show this about Rafa...
Roger has accomplished this...Rafa...
....


They don't paint Nadal's personality just to put a contrast with Roger IMO. They talked about Nadal's personality and charisma before they talked about the rivalry.

World Beater
08-27-2006, 09:14 AM
They don't paint Nadal's personality just to put a contrast with Roger IMO. They talked about Nadal's personality and charisma before they talked about the rivalry.

No, i dont think so. "They" being the american media didn't talk about nadal's qualities until he actually started beating roger in big tournaments. Americans have historically paid least attention to the french because their players have done the worst there. Nadal as far as i can tell gained minimum attention here, and nobody talked about him until he had success on hard courts. His success coincided with beating federer, thus it was convenient to paint a contrast. American media for whatever reason tries to create rivalries and contrasts when they dont exist. Its apparently the only way to promote the sport. i live here so i do read what they write.

here its easy...i can do it too

fed-righty
rafa=lefty
fed-ice cool
rafa-hot fire
fed-boring
rafa-blazing

insert your own here *----*

Castafiore
08-27-2006, 09:54 AM
Well yes, you have a point. The US media (as far as I can tell) seems to usually ignore the RG winner. Has Kuerten ever received attention as a RG winner other than just mentioning his victories? (he received quite a bit of attention where I live but in the US? I don't know)

I agree that they write about this rivalry too much and they love to put the two in contrast which is probably BS if you get to know these guys but we can't tell because we don't know them.

As I said, I think that both Roger and Rafa receive more attention in the US right now because of that stupid rivalry angle they love exploring.
For me personally - going on topic - I'm happy with Roger being Swiss and Rafa being Spanish and they don't need to be "big in the USA" for me to respect and admire them.

Looking at it from a broader (press in general, worldwide) perspective, Rafa's personality and charisma has been talked/written about before the rivalry thing. So, it's not like they invented stuff just because they were looking for that contrast in this rivalry thing. It just receives more attention because of the rivalry thing.
But, I'm sure that the ATP has several very interesting and fun personalities that we don't get to hear about because they haven't done anything to catch the attention of the media. Tursunov was discovered due to his blog. Maybe there are others like him lurking in the shadow?

zaboomafoo
08-28-2006, 06:38 PM
Just wait for his 1st round loss :o Nobody in the US will recall his name by the Sunday's finals times :p

jmpower has the best drugs avaible, first class!!

aIrSaMpRaS14
08-28-2006, 06:40 PM
If he were American, i'd hate him even more than I do now..