Rafa returns to South-America in 2008 [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Rafa returns to South-America in 2008

yana
03-08-2007, 06:20 PM
8 clay turnaments for Rafa in 2008

According to spanish press, next year, Rafa will not play Marseille and Dubai anymore, and will return to the south-american clay turnaments: Vina del Mar, Costa de Sauipe, Buenos Aires and Acapulco. This decision is due to avoid injuries (he's playing with special isoles right now).

http://img211.imageshack.us/my.php?image=marca0703071zg2.jpg

scoobs
03-08-2007, 06:24 PM
I wonder if he's pencilling in any post-Wimbledon clay tounrnaments for this year too...

bokehlicious
03-08-2007, 06:25 PM
Wise decision Rafa, should avoid playing off clay as often as he can :o

jazar
03-08-2007, 06:25 PM
he just wants to win more tournaments

scoobs
03-08-2007, 06:28 PM
I think it's a smart thing to do - when you're low on confidence you go back to the surface you're best on and help to rebuild it.

yana
03-08-2007, 06:29 PM
he just wants to win more tournaments

No, he's dealing with a left foot injury that seems to be more serious that he would like to let us know IMO. :confused:

mickymouse
03-08-2007, 06:32 PM
I think he's thinking about securing his 2nd ranking just in case his form doesn't pick up for the HC season and indoor season after Wimbledon.

Blue Heart24
03-08-2007, 06:35 PM
Good decision for him.He needs to stick to clay as long as he can

Feketepuss
03-08-2007, 06:39 PM
It's almost a year until this become relevant news. Plenty of time to change his mind. Surely if he is seriously worried about injury, he'd be adjusting his schedule now rather than pencilling in changes for the distant future.

Carito_90
03-08-2007, 06:43 PM
Yaaaay. :banana:

Fumus
03-08-2007, 06:43 PM
Umm...

Rafa has been making a number of questionable decisions for his career lately.

Byrd
03-08-2007, 07:05 PM
I think it would be a good idea as it would help build his confidence and get his 'aura' back on the one surface which hasn't deserted him yet. I also see him playing Bastaad and Gstaad this year if he loses early at Wimby.

edit:just noticed my typo lol

t0x
03-08-2007, 07:14 PM
Dunno about this...

I mean when he switched from these clay tournies to Marsielle/Dubai I thought it was a step in the right direction, and that it showed his dedication to improving on faster surfaces....

Although, from his recent results, you can see why this switch back is a good idea. He doesn't look so confident out there, so this is a good opportunity to rebuild.

Fumus
03-08-2007, 07:21 PM
C'mon Rafa...flatten your forehand out, move up on the return, and hit those serves like you did at Wimbly this year. You will be beating arses like Youzhny in no time.

GlennMirnyi
03-08-2007, 07:26 PM
It's very clear: he finally realised that moonballing doesn't work against decent players outside clay. Simple.

tennisgal_001
03-08-2007, 07:27 PM
For someone who's low on confidence, shouldn't he wait till after the FO to start making such hasty decisions? The '07 clay season is yet to start and he's presuming that regardless of what happens there, he will still be shaken. Goes to say a lot about where he is right now, mentally.

Adler
03-08-2007, 07:41 PM
And people were laughing at me when I wrote that his mental toughness is overrated... ha ha ha

yana
03-08-2007, 07:43 PM
For someone who's low on confidence, shouldn't he wait till after the FO to start making such hasty decisions? The '07 clay season is yet to start and he's presuming that regardless of what happens there, he will still be shaken. Goes to say a lot about where he is right now, mentally.

it's not a matter of mentallity, it's about his injuries. From what it is said in this article, his foot problem is not so risky on clay.

Horatio Caine
03-08-2007, 07:43 PM
Could be a move to boost his results and confidence, but surely he is planning a little too far ahead for that? I mean, we're only 3 months into an 11-month season! It isn't as if he is doing badly at the moment, and he might well get better as time goes by...

Klaas_nalbandian
03-08-2007, 07:44 PM
Ai no Rotterdam for Rafa also then

tennisgal_001
03-08-2007, 07:47 PM
it's not a matter of mentallity, it's about his injuries. From what it is said in this article, his foot problem is not so risky on clay.

He prescheduled his events a YEAR in advance. Also, foot injuries are risky on all surfaces, especially with the kind of intense game Rafa possesses. Seriously, injury who?!

NicoFan
03-08-2007, 07:54 PM
He should play on clay...that's his specialty.

I don't see the hardcourt players choosing to play on clay when they have a choice during a particular week. EDIT: And even when there isn't a choice, most hardcourt players just SKIP the clay tournaments. :rolleyes:

Why should a claycourt player play on hardcourts when they have an option to play clay. :shrug:

I want Rafa to become a good overall player, but while there are clay court tournaments to be played, why not go with the surface that's his best.

Plus it will be nice for a change to have a top player actually support the Latin American swing tournaments.

shotgun
03-08-2007, 07:56 PM
Cool, I'm not sure about his reasons, but it will be great for the Latin American tournaments to have him back. :D

marti_228
03-08-2007, 08:16 PM
I hope this is true, I'm really looking forward to it.
As on 2005, BsAs without round robin and with Nadal.

MaryWalsh
03-08-2007, 08:22 PM
The article says it is to reduce injury and that is a good enough reason for me. One reason he and his team may be announcing it so far in advance is that he is a big draw and it gives tournament planners and fans, including his large following of young kids, more time to get used to the idea. For me, for any athlete, health comes first. So I am pleased with this move. I don't see it as a retreat, but rather to protect his very long career ahead. Rafa wants to be an all-court player and the switch to percentage serving and the clay court swing, IMO, does not reflect a permanent backing off from this desire or its implementation.

But hey this is MTF GM, so of course this news is a great opportunity for the anti-Rafa faction to mobilize. :cool:

jazar
03-08-2007, 08:25 PM
he is never going to improve as a player if he runs off and plays on clay all the time and avoids hard courts

scoobs
03-08-2007, 08:34 PM
I am worried that injuries are already becoming a concern and that he needs to protect them so soon in his career.

RickDaStick
03-08-2007, 09:04 PM
Finally the ass picker realized his only chance is on clay. Good boy.

DrJules
03-08-2007, 09:30 PM
Nadal has abandoned thoughts of being number 1.

ChinoRios4Ever
03-08-2007, 09:56 PM
OMG!!!! Rafa in Viña could be a dream... it's difficult to see him playing in Viña because of the high guarantees of $$$$$ for Gonzo and Massu for playing at home

i think he could play in Baires and Acapulco, maybe Costa...

Hendu
03-08-2007, 10:30 PM
Great News!

he is never going to improve as a player if he runs off and plays on clay all the time and avoids hard courts

going to South America doesn't mean "playing on clay all the time and avoiding hard courts".
Gonzalez and Nalbandian chose to play in the South American clay season in 2007, and I wouldn't say their calendar is all clay...

OMG!!!! Rafa in Viña could be a dream... it's difficult to see him playing in Viña because of the high guarantees of $$$$$ for Gonzo and Massu for playing at home

i think he could play in Baires and Acapulco, maybe Costa...

The article says that he will change Marseille and Dubai for Buenos Aires and Acapulco, and thinks about playing Costa do Sauipe.

Now the tournaments should open their wallets and bring Robredo, Davydenko and Safin! :p

Then I'll be satisfied.

RonE
03-08-2007, 10:34 PM
This means less roastings :bigcry:

Such a shame- the Dubai BBQ was one of the better ones we recently had :awww:

Jimnik
03-08-2007, 10:41 PM
A bit early to be making this decision, no?

Peoples
03-08-2007, 10:50 PM
Finally he realized that he belongs to clay courts and he should simply stick to his strengths rather than keep getting roasted all the time.

Hendu
03-08-2007, 10:59 PM
Finally he realized that he belongs to clay courts and he should simply stick to his strengths rather than keep getting roasted all the time.

Won AMS Montreal and AMS Madrid.

Runner up in Wimbledon and AMS Miami.

He also won Beijing and Dubai.

if he belongs only to clay... then why do the players in your avatar dare to play on fast surfaces?

Kalliopeia
03-08-2007, 11:50 PM
He's only giving up two hard court tournaments. I don't think this is all that big a deal, or a blow to whatever his plans for improving on the surface are. Especially considering it's all hard courts from July through January. If he wanders off to clay tournaments then, I'll be worried.

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-09-2007, 12:04 AM
The reason is just complete rubbish. Clay is far worse on the body than hard courts, especially when you're playing 100-shot moonball rallies all the time. Why do you think nobody can dominate the surface for more than a couple of years? (Borg was the exception). Look at Guga and his mashed-up body. Look at JCF, who is past it at the age of about 25. The Latin American/ Spanish moonball crew always have short shelf lives, because the way they play and the surface they play on ruins their bodies. It's already started happening to Rafa and he's not out of his teens yet. More clay tournaments is the worst possible thing he could do for his fitness - this is just about short-term ranking points, nothing else.

sawan66278
03-09-2007, 12:06 AM
Again, we are all speculating about Rafa's mental state, etc. because of this change in scheduling for 2008. In my mind (again pure speculation), Rafa us trying to maintain his health (a la Muster), make certain his ground strokes are grooved, and keep up his level of confidence. Why not play on the clay instead of chasing the cash dollars of Dubai?

So long as he plays the two Masters series hard courts and maybe picks up Washington leading up to the Open, I think the strategy is sound all the way around.

FraudMeloAgony
03-09-2007, 12:08 AM
South America is nice place, no?

clay is good surface

Action Jackson
03-09-2007, 01:19 AM
The reason is just complete rubbish. Clay is far worse on the body than hard courts, especially when you're playing 100-shot moonball rallies all the time. Why do you think nobody can dominate the surface for more than a couple of years? (Borg was the exception). Look at Guga and his mashed-up body. Look at JCF, who is past it at the age of about 25. The Latin American/ Spanish moonball crew always have short shelf lives, because the way they play and the surface they play on ruins their bodies. It's already started happening to Rafa and he's not out of his teens yet. More clay tournaments is the worst possible thing he could do for his fitness - this is just about short-term ranking points, nothing else.

What are you on man? Clay is actually a lot easier on the body and the joints, that's why it's better for young players to grow up on it and learn the game, while their joints and limbs are still developing.

Next fallacy, Muster cause of his injury in the car accident which left one leg shorter than another played more on clay cause it was better for his body and he could only play a few weeks in a row on hardcourts cause of the problem. His hip went out on him, when he improved his game on hardcourts and was playing more on it.

Go out and run on a road and then go run on a natural surface or sand as it absorbs the shock, and tell me where you will find the more impact on your body.

It's a difficult surface mentally and that the points are longer generally, not cause of the actual surface itself.

Merton
03-09-2007, 01:22 AM
It sounds like great news for the South American tournaments, I am not sure it is the best choice for Nadal but he is at a point where he should know what is best for him.

fmolinari2005
03-09-2007, 01:46 AM
What are you on man? Clay is actually a lot easier on the body and the joints, that's why it's better for young players to grow up on it and learn the game, while their joints and limbs are still developing.




You make a valid point about clay being easier on the body. But for a guy that was trying to find ways to end the points faster, getting back to playing the south american clay season is a odd thing to do.

But, as Merton wrote, Nadal probably knows what is best for him.

bedfordfalls8000
03-09-2007, 02:12 AM
Rafa is just avoiding Roger as much as he can
Besides, by next year maybe his ranking is only good enough to get
to Main Draw in those South American tournaments........

Johnny Groove
03-09-2007, 02:19 AM
The reason is just complete rubbish. Clay is far worse on the body than hard courts, especially when you're playing 100-shot moonball rallies all the time. Why do you think nobody can dominate the surface for more than a couple of years? (Borg was the exception). Look at Guga and his mashed-up body. Look at JCF, who is past it at the age of about 25. The Latin American/ Spanish moonball crew always have short shelf lives, because the way they play and the surface they play on ruins their bodies. It's already started happening to Rafa and he's not out of his teens yet. More clay tournaments is the worst possible thing he could do for his fitness - this is just about short-term ranking points, nothing else.

Rafa is just avoiding Roger as much as he can
Besides, by next year maybe his ranking is only good enough to get
to Main Draw in those South American tournaments........

2 more retards for the ACC, GWH :retard:

Action Jackson
03-09-2007, 02:31 AM
You make a valid point about clay being easier on the body. But for a guy that was trying to find ways to end the points faster, getting back to playing the south american clay season is a odd thing to do.

But, as Merton wrote, Nadal probably knows what is best for him.

For Nadal well if he wants to improve and get better on faster surfaces, then he has to play on them and take the losses and learn from them.

At the same time it would be great for South American events, if he plays there next year. It will be better for his body, but not necessarily the best for his tennis in the longer term.

RickDaStick
03-09-2007, 02:32 AM
Rafa is just avoiding Roger as much as he can
Besides, by next year maybe his ranking is only good enough to get
to Main Draw in those South American tournaments........



:yeah:

RickDaStick
03-09-2007, 02:32 AM
I just turned bedford to green from red. VAMOSSS

Merton
03-09-2007, 02:49 AM
Thank you. Why the myth that clay is harder on the body persists, I don't understand.

It is because matches on clay tend to last longer than matches on hard.

Action Jackson
03-09-2007, 02:57 AM
It is because matches on clay tend to last longer than matches on hard.

They are different kinds of matches, but too many people miss the obvious.

Macbrother
03-09-2007, 03:00 AM
Thank you. Why the myth that clay is harder on the body persists, I don't understand.

It exists for the exact reasons Fed=Atptourkilla pointed out. The surface itself is not bad on the body. The type of game played on it is.

happy928
03-09-2007, 03:00 AM
what a wuss.

kobulingam
03-09-2007, 03:57 AM
Clay tennis is more TIRING (both mentally and physically) but HC tennis puts more stress on the joints, muscles, etc.

mangoes
03-09-2007, 03:59 AM
Nadal has abandoned thoughts of being number 1.

:shrug: He'll be picking up quite a bit of points that should help his cause to get to no. 1. He hasn't been able to pick up those points by playing Dubai, etc.

On a positive note, I think it's great news for the South American tournaments.

jacobhiggins
03-09-2007, 04:20 AM
This does seem like for now Rafa has given up on becoming Number 1. I do view this as a step backward not to mentioned he will not be facing as tough opposition as well. I don't see how you can benift from playing small events when you have been playing the best in the world. The only benifit I see is in the rankings and points, but in the long run it will do you no good I think.

DrJules
03-09-2007, 05:15 AM
:shrug: He'll be picking up quite a bit of points that should help his cause to get to no. 1. He hasn't been able to pick up those points by playing Dubai, etc.

On a positive note, I think it's great news for the South American tournaments.

Is South America the best preparation for the compulsory high point events; Indian Wells and Miami.

Dubai is a potential 60 race point event. None of the South American are.

mangoes
03-09-2007, 05:48 AM
Is South America the best preparation for the compulsory high point events; Indian Wells and Miami.

Dubai is a potential 60 race point event. None of the South American are.

No, I don't think it's the best preparation. However, he had his best showing in Miami coming off of the South American swing :lol:

I also don't think it will hurt his ranking. The sum of points he can gain from playing all 4 tournaments will be a positive rather than negative when coming to his ranking. Isn't each tournament about 45 points?? That's 180 points he can safely pick up between the AO and IW. Rafa can hold on to his no. 2 ranking if he dominates on clay. That should be quite easy on the South American tour. And he just needs a decent showing in IW and Miami. Then, it's back to the clay where he needs to dominate. So, in theory, this strategy should not affect his ranking.

Assuming it's 45 points per tournament.......

Nadal can pick up 180 while Roger can pick up 60 from Dubai. :shrug: Not bad for Nadal if he is trying to gain on Roger.

Hendu
03-09-2007, 06:25 AM
Is South America the best preparation for the compulsory high point events; Indian Wells and Miami..

no it is not, but in 2005 (the only year he came to SA) after winning Acapulco, he missed Indian Wells and got to the final in Miami.

Not bad at all.


Dubai is a potential 60 race point event. None of the South American are.

In 2005, Nadal got 465 entry ranking points. (winning Acapulco and Costa do Sauipe and making the quarters in Buenos Aires)

Hendu
03-09-2007, 06:28 AM
No, I don't think it's the best preparation. However, he had his best showing in Miami coming off of the South American swing :lol:

I also don't think it will hurt his ranking. The sum of points he can gain from playing all 4 tournaments will be a positive rather than negative when coming to his ranking. Isn't each tournament about 45 points?? That's 180 points he can safely pick up between the AO and IW. Rafa can hold on to his no. 2 ranking if he dominates on clay. That should be quite easy on the South American tour. And he just needs a decent showing in IW and Miami. Then, it's back to the clay where he needs to dominate. So, in theory, this strategy should not affect his ranking.

Assuming it's 45 points per tournament.......

Nadal can pick up 180 while Roger can pick up 60 from Dubai. :shrug: Not bad for Nadal if he is trying to gain on Roger.

No way he is playing the 4 South American tournaments. I think he will play two, maybe three.

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-09-2007, 07:36 AM
They are different kinds of matches, but too many people miss the obvious.

I think you guys are the ones missing the obvious. :rolleyes: Rallies on clay are at least twice as long as rallies on hard. It follows that, unless clay is half as demanding on the joints (which it is not), playing on clay is worse for you.

Are we getting there yet? :)

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-09-2007, 07:38 AM
I would add that Muster is a bad example because his body was busted and he couldn't play on hard at all.

Kolya
03-09-2007, 08:12 AM
I would add that Muster is a bad example because his body was busted and he couldn't play on hard at all.

Muster suffered injuries due to the car accident at the Lipton. One of his leg became shorter which caused his hip injury.

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-09-2007, 08:26 AM
Not necessarily, because your assumption is that there is a one-to-one ratio between wear and time. I run at the gym on machines for a full hour (sometimes more) three or four times a week without any problems; but get me running down the street on pavement and my knees start hurting inside of fifteen minutes. Does this automatically mean that gym treadmills are four/five/six times less taxing than pavement? :shrug:

No question matches on clay last longer but the added shock absorption on clay reduces fatigue the same way good treadmills do for runners, and it also reduces the risk of injuries. :shrug:

"your assumption is that there is a one-to-one ratio between wear and time" - you've just made the same assumption, only in reverse. For all you know, the proportional effect of longer rallies might be greater than the effect of the harder surface.

The thing to do would be to find evidence of which is worse, i.e. do people who play predominantly on clay bust their joints faster than people who play predominantly on hard? AFAIK it's the Latin American/ Spanish moonball amigos who end up in wheelchairs at 25, not the hardcourters. Maybe someone who has more time than me could check that? :)

Apemant
03-09-2007, 08:39 AM
I think you guys are the ones missing the obvious. :rolleyes: Rallies on clay are at least twice as long as rallies on hard. It follows that, unless clay is half as demanding on the joints (which it is not), playing on clay is worse for you.

Are we getting there yet? :)

Not really.

Someone might make 30 push-ups without hurting his wrists or elbows, but 250 lbs on a bench might as well destroy them. The dependency is not linear. Sliding on clay is much less taxing for ankles than sudden changes of direction on HC.

Apemant
03-09-2007, 08:43 AM
The thing to do would be to find evidence of which is worse, i.e. do people who play predominantly on clay bust their joints faster than people who play predominantly on hard? AFAIK it's the Latin American/ Spanish moonball amigos who end up in wheelchairs at 25, not the hardcourters. Maybe someone who has more time than me could check that? :)

I guess it has more to do with their style of playing, which they try to implement even on HC, not just on clay. Sampras' S+V is certainly better for body than 20-shot rallies over and over.

Action Jackson
03-09-2007, 08:52 AM
I think you guys are the ones missing the obvious. :rolleyes: Rallies on clay are at least twice as long as rallies on hard. It follows that, unless clay is half as demanding on the joints (which it is not), playing on clay is worse for you.

Are we getting there yet? :)

Speaking as someone who has had knee and ankle injuries, and have played on both surfaces quite a bit, when it comes down to it after the match I have more soreness in the joints from playing on a hardcourt than on clay. The movement is different and there is constant jarring cause there is no give on hardcourts or are you going to deny that as well?

I explained what happened to Muster beforehand, and Kolya explained it for you twice. Kent Carlsson a player who originally injured his knee on a hardcourt and after all the operations, he played only on clay under medical advice cause the other surfaces at the time would have made his knee even worse than it was. Would you like more examples?

In other words can you admit you don't have a clue. It's the physical style of play and endurance levels needed on clay that make it difficult, not the actual surface itself, hence it's harder to dominate for a lengthy period of time

Go do the experiment I suggested and tell me what you find.

Pixie
03-09-2007, 08:54 AM
The thing to do would be to find evidence of which is worse, i.e. do people who play predominantly on clay bust their joints faster than people who play predominantly on hard? AFAIK it's the Latin American/ Spanish moonball amigos who end up in wheelchairs at 25, not the hardcourters. Maybe someone who has more time than me could check that? :)

No need to go that further. If you play competition tennis yourself, you probably has had/will have injuries and perhaps with a bit of luck problems with joints. Then you'll go to your sports doctor who will tell you to play on clay to protect your body in the long term. That's why, like some mates of my new club, I play on clay.

scoobs
03-09-2007, 09:02 AM
I do wonder if this reflects a shift in emphasis from getting to #1 or even staying at #2, towards having as long a career as possible, playing good tennis in a style he is comfortable with, enjoys playing and has confidence in, and letting the rest take care of itself.

He's not Roger Federer, and, while he can adapt aspects of his game to incorporate some more aggressive strategies when he needs them, he's not going to change his game to big serving full-on attacking tennis - that's just not who he is.

The argument that he needs to be more aggressive, shorten the points, flatten out the forehand...well maybe at this stage he feels he just can't do that and still play the way he likes to play and has had a lot of success playing. Maybe he's decided that, while he wants to add things to his game, he wants the base to be what he's been doing all his life. If that ends up meaning his successes are primarily on clay and his record on hard is less distinguished, maybe he thinks "so be it"

mangoes
03-09-2007, 09:16 AM
I do wonder if this reflects a shift in emphasis from getting to #1 or even staying at #2, towards having as long a career as possible, playing good tennis in a style he is comfortable with, enjoys playing and has confidence in, and letting the rest take care of itself.

He's not Roger Federer, and, while he can adapt aspects of his game to incorporate some more aggressive strategies when he needs them, he's not going to change his game to big serving full-on attacking tennis - that's just not who he is.

The argument that he needs to be more aggressive, shorten the points, flatten out the forehand...well maybe at this stage he feels he just can't do that and still play the way he likes to play and has had a lot of success playing. Maybe he's decided that, while he wants to add things to his game, he wants the base to be what he's been doing all his life. If that ends up meaning his successes are primarily on clay and his record on hard is less distinguished, maybe he thinks "so be it"

That may indeed be one train of thought that is fueling his decision. Another could be the fact that he is trying to follow the schedule of his most successful year on the tour :shrug: If he misses IW in 08 and plays Miami, I'll give the latter some serious thought.

I find it hard to believe that Nadal would settle for leaving his gain of the no. 1 ranking up to chance.

shotgun
03-09-2007, 12:08 PM
Acapulco is the biggest of the Latin American tournaments. It gives 50 race points and 250 entry points for the winner, while the other three give 35 race points and 175 entry points.

kobulingam
03-09-2007, 12:48 PM
I think you guys are the ones missing the obvious. :rolleyes: Rallies on clay are at least twice as long as rallies on hard. It follows that, unless clay is half as demanding on the joints (which it is not), playing on clay is worse for you.

Are we getting there yet? :)


Conclusion still stands: Clay tennis is less stressful on the joints.

cmurray
03-09-2007, 01:25 PM
I have to side with GWH and J'torian on this one.

Clay matches are more tiring, for sure. Much longer rallies, much more running. And a player who is particularly susceptible to fatigue would probably say that clay is "harder". In reality though, hardcourts cause FAR more injuries than claycourts do. I'm constantly hearing tennis "experts" lamenting the fact that the hardcourt season is so long...because of player injuries.

And in response to the people who point out that clay-courters never last that long at the top....you're right. But did you ever stop to think about why that might be? Could the problem possibly be that claycourters get into real injury trouble when the play their claycourt game on hards? Rafa is a great example. He runs his ass off no matter which surface he's playing on. When he's on clay, all the sliding and running isn't so bad, but once he gets to hards it wreaks havoc on his body. It seems quite probable that clay courts themselves are not the problem, but more that the kind of physical tennis that works great on clay spells injury disaster on other surfaces.

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-09-2007, 03:56 PM
Thank you, because that is exactly my point: how can you base your claims on that type of reasoning if it's fallacious for me to apply that type of reasoning to an analogous, opposing argument? If my use of that assumption makes my argument unfounded, it calls into question why you based your own argument around it.

Well, I meant that you had a fair point about my post but then turned round and did the exact same thing yourself...

Furthermore, there is another obvious reason why I'm right. :) Players' bodies get strained not just by running on a hard surface, but by the actions of serving and hitting groundstrokes. The strain imparted on your back/ arms etc by hitting a forehand is the same on clay as it is on hard - the only difference is that you do it many times more on clay.

Diego Moonballer hits far more forehands than American Hardcourter and therefore puts far more strain on his arm/shoulder/hips whatever else you use to hit a forehand (and I bet all that topspin ruins his wrist, as well). Wasn't it Guga's hips that ended up getting ground into bone-dust?

So there we have it...the assortment of tards and trolls who blundered in to criticise me should have thought a bit harder first!

GlennMirnyi
03-09-2007, 04:05 PM
I think you guys are the ones missing the obvious. :rolleyes: Rallies on clay are at least twice as long as rallies on hard. It follows that, unless clay is half as demanding on the joints (which it is not), playing on clay is worse for you.

Are we getting there yet? :)

What if clay is 10% less demanding? Then you could play 10 times as much. :retard:

Well, I meant that you had a fair point about my post but then turned round and did the exact same thing yourself...

Furthermore, there is another obvious reason why I'm right. :) Players' bodies get strained not just by running on a hard surface, but by the actions of serving and hitting groundstrokes. The strain imparted on your back/ arms etc by hitting a forehand is the same on clay as it is on hard - the only difference is that you do it many times more on clay.

Diego Moonballer hits far more forehands than American Hardcourter and therefore puts far more strain on his arm/shoulder/hips whatever else you use to hit a forehand (and I bet all that topspin ruins his wrist, as well). Wasn't it Guga's hips that ended up getting ground into bone-dust?

So there we have it...the assortment of tards and trolls who blundered in to criticise me should have thought a bit harder first!

Guga hip went kaput when he stressed it beyond limits in the HC tournaments in America. The last drop was during the US Open.

Action Jackson
03-09-2007, 04:22 PM
Guga's hip degeneration was caused from playing on the hardcourts as was Magnus Norman's.

Keep using spin Fed=ATPTourKilla, it's not a question of trolling, just a question of you don't know what you are talking about and this has been clearly shown up, but you can't see this.

It's basic science that cement which is not a natural surface is not going to have the same give and respite to the joints as clay which is a natural surface. If you can't accept that, then you don't think the Earth spins around the sun for 365 1/4 days of the year (366 in a leap year).

There have been numerous examples of players where it was better for their game and their health to play on clay, and cmurray makes the point about the surface transition which is a bigger problem as their games and it can be problematic to adjust especially with a physical style of game.

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-09-2007, 04:37 PM
Keep using spin Fed=ATPTourKilla, it's not a question of trolling, just a question of you don't know what you are talking about and this has been clearly shown up, but you can't see this.

Heh. :) I think that looks like a good example of "trolling" to me. Just an insult without responding to the points I made:

(i) although clay is easier on the joints, the joints do a lot more running around on clay;

(ii) hitting groundstrokes places equal strain on the body irrespective of surface, and since more groundstrokes are hit on clay, that will mean more stress on the parts of the body involved in hitting groundstrokes.

I predict that point (ii) will continue to be dodged by the trolls concerned. :)

Re: Guga - the actual injury may have taken place on a hard court but wasn't it the result of long-term degeneration?

GlennMirnyi
03-09-2007, 04:47 PM
Heh. :) I think that looks like a good example of "trolling" to me. Just an insult without responding to the points I made:

(i) although clay is easier on the joints, the joints do a lot more running around on clay;

(ii) hitting groundstrokes places equal strain on the body irrespective of surface, and since more groundstrokes are hit on clay, that will mean more stress on the parts of the body involved in hitting groundstrokes.

I predict that point (ii) will continue to be dodged by the trolls concerned. :)

Re: Guga - the actual injury may have taken place on a hard court but wasn't it the result of long-term degeneration?

About Guga: no.

CyBorg
03-09-2007, 05:36 PM
It's the right thing to do. Clay is his best surface - he should pile up the titles while he's still young.

Jim Courier
03-09-2007, 06:18 PM
I do wonder if this reflects a shift in emphasis from getting to #1 or even staying at #2, towards having as long a career as possible, playing good tennis in a style he is comfortable with, enjoys playing and has confidence in, and letting the rest take care of itself.

He's not Roger Federer, and, while he can adapt aspects of his game to incorporate some more aggressive strategies when he needs them, he's not going to change his game to big serving full-on attacking tennis - that's just not who he is.
I agree, anyway the only way i could see Nadal become number 1 was if he had beaten Federer in the Wimbledon final, it would have been so huge anything could have happened.

For now it looks very unrealistic to hope that Nadal does as well or better on hard than last year. Better accumulate points and confidence on clay with less risk of injury than doing a Coria and fading after a series of bad losses and injuries.

Courier started to lose when he tried to change his game, Nadal should keep his style and make it evolve at the margins. He's much better off with his 75% 1st serve than with his unreliable direct offensive shot, it just isn't his style.

Anyway i wouldn't bury Nadal before clay season, but then he has to get some results or the year will be rough. The 07 clay season will be very important for him (and Federer).

Rafa = Fed Killa
03-09-2007, 06:41 PM
He is more confident and at home on clay.

Therefore more clay tournaments will increase his confidence and ranking points while decreasing the risk of injury.

Good choice by the Nadal camp.

scoobs
03-09-2007, 06:50 PM
Ultimately I'll support anything that brings back his smile. I'd like to see him bounce back and start to enjoy his time on court again - these days he walks out on court and he looks like he's attending a firing squad and he's the guest of honour. He doesn't seem to be having any fun with his tennis anymore.

Merton
03-09-2007, 06:57 PM
Heh. :) I think that looks like a good example of "trolling" to me. Just an insult without responding to the points I made:

(i) although clay is easier on the joints, the joints do a lot more running around on clay;

(ii) hitting groundstrokes places equal strain on the body irrespective of surface, and since more groundstrokes are hit on clay, that will mean more stress on the parts of the body involved in hitting groundstrokes.

I predict that point (ii) will continue to be dodged by the trolls concerned. :)

Re: Guga - the actual injury may have taken place on a hard court but wasn't it the result of long-term degeneration?

What long-term degeneration? Guga was one of the most economical players, he would normally spend less time on clay than the typical clay court player. His hip just gave up at the 2001 US Open and arguably the situation was made worse by him continuing to play after that tournament, trying to defend his #1 ranking. But attributing the hip injury to his prior clay court play is just wrong.

cmurray
03-09-2007, 06:58 PM
Ultimately I'll support anything that brings back his smile. I'd like to see him bounce back and start to enjoy his time on court again - these days he walks out on court and he looks like he's attending a firing squad and he's the guest of honour. He doesn't seem to be having any fun with his tennis anymore.

Expectations. He knows that if he loses a match people are going to pounce on his failure. He has his own expectations too - and they seem to be laying heavily on him at the moment. Actually, I think it would be nice to see him win a tourney off clay...it will help his confidence immensly.

Pfloyd
03-09-2007, 07:03 PM
This was a good choice by Nadal.

However, I am quite curious to see if Nadal performes well in this years clay tournaments. Maybe he lack of confidence could be an issue for Nadal on clay...

Then again, there is no tough match-up for Nadal on clay, maybe an in-form, Rome-like Roger Federer, but that's it.

Then again, eliminating those 5 set finals in master series may benefit Federer...

yana
03-09-2007, 07:04 PM
Ultimately I'll support anything that brings back his smile.


I miss his smile too. Till he came back, here you go!

http://www.thestranger.com/blog/files/2006/05/Nadal.jpg

Rafa = Fed Killa
03-09-2007, 07:05 PM
Then again, eliminating those 5 set finals in master series may benefit Federer...

It will as it is tougher to beat Nadal on 5 on clay than on 3. Same as it is easier to beat Fed in a best of 3 than a best of 5 off of clay.

Peoples
03-09-2007, 08:53 PM
It's always good to admit your failures and just move on. It's not surrendering, no, it's just moving on.

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-09-2007, 10:33 PM
What long-term degeneration? Guga was one of the most economical players, he would normally spend less time on clay than the typical clay court player. His hip just gave up at the 2001 US Open and arguably the situation was made worse by him continuing to play after that tournament, trying to defend his #1 ranking. But attributing the hip injury to his prior clay court play is just wrong.

I did a bit of research on this.

www.revolutionarytennis.com/download/rebuttalforehand2.pdf

That says Guga's injury was caused by his open forehand stance. In other words, was down to long-term degeneration. It's more difficult to attribute the injury to the amount of clay matches he played, but what I said earlier stands: there are longer rallies on clay, more groundstrokes hit, more stress on the parts of the body used to hit groundstrokes and therefore a greater chance of injury. If Guga's injury was caused by his forehand, it really isn't too much of a stretch to say there is a link with the amount of clay matches he played.

So I think what I said at the start was quite reasonable: "avoiding injury" is a bogus reason for Rafa to go back to clay. It should really be quite obvious that a surface with so many long, gruelling rallies is not exactly going to leave your body refreshed and injury-free. What he is really avoiding is more defeats. :D

Merton
03-10-2007, 03:36 AM
I did a bit of research on this.

www.revolutionarytennis.com/download/rebuttalforehand2.pdf

That says Guga's injury was caused by his open forehand stance. In other words, was down to long-term degeneration. It's more difficult to attribute the injury to the amount of clay matches he played, but what I said earlier stands: there are longer rallies on clay, more groundstrokes hit, more stress on the parts of the body used to hit groundstrokes and therefore a greater chance of injury.

Correlation is not the same as causation. All I saw was that the open forehand stance stresses the body. Do you have any evidence that other players following the same technique developed similar problems as Guga did?

Furthermore, do you also argue that the stress on the body is less on hardcourts than on clay? Guga in particular was not characterized by long, grinding matches on clay. It is not just "more difficult to attribute the injury to the amount of clay matches he played", it is impossible.

If Guga's injury was caused by his forehand, it really isn't too much of a stretch to say there is a link with the amount of clay matches he played.

Your conjecture is invalid, all you have is that Guga's forehand stressed his hip. Therefore it really is too much of a stretch to claim that an injury that occured on hardcourts was related to matches on clay.

Macbrother
03-10-2007, 03:49 AM
So I think what I said at the start was quite reasonable: "avoiding injury" is a bogus reason for Rafa to go back to clay. It should really be quite obvious that a surface with so many long, gruelling rallies is not exactly going to leave your body refreshed and injury-free. What he is really avoiding is more defeats. :D

It's not really bogus if you think about it. The key factor is that Nadal plays long, grueling rallies on every surface -- that's the problem, and that's probably why he has the injury troubles. It's a simple fact that clay has more cushion and support than hardcourts, so if he's going to play that style of game, that is the best surface to do it on.

Action Jackson
03-10-2007, 06:43 AM
Heh. :) I think that looks like a good example of "trolling" to me. Just an insult without responding to the points I made:

(i) although clay is easier on the joints, the joints do a lot more running around on clay;

(ii) hitting groundstrokes places equal strain on the body irrespective of surface, and since more groundstrokes are hit on clay, that will mean more stress on the parts of the body involved in hitting groundstrokes.

I predict that point (ii) will continue to be dodged by the trolls concerned. :)

Re: Guga - the actual injury may have taken place on a hard court but wasn't it the result of long-term degeneration?

I have already answered your points and given specific examples of players and these have been addressed by others as well.

Seriously go to an experienced sports doctor and ask them what surface is better to play on in the longer term?

1. Well since clay is easier on the body, they can play these extended points over a period of time and build up their endurance levels. The problem lies when they try to play the same way on hardcourt which has no give and recovery is harder.

2. It relates back to point 1 and stroke technique, when the player lands on the surface after hitting the ball, then the jarring of the joints is much greater on a hardcourt than clay. Also with the specific movement on clay with the sliding takes pressure off the body and saves energy in the progress.

Stress fractures are caused mostly by running on hard surfaces and not soft ones or would you dispute that?

As for Guga and his hip problem, this type of injury has increased greatly due to the hardness of the surfaces as much if not more than technical issues with the groundstrokes. This combination of stroke and hardcourt surface which is a lot harder on the joints, therefore it does not make sense to relate it to his play on clay where the hip problem before the US Open wasn't an issue.

You are just arguing a basic premise that cause the matches on average are longer on clay then it must be tougher on the body, when this is clearly not the case and you are clearly overlooking all factors especially the individual surfaces yourself.

Don't bitch about people not addressing your comments, when you have not addressed all the points that have been raised by other posters :)

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-10-2007, 10:31 AM
Correlation is not the same as causation. All I saw was that the open forehand stance stresses the body. Do you have any evidence that other players following the same technique developed similar problems as Guga did?

Yes, I do. Magnus Norman was another open-stance forehand player. It doesn't stop there. Read this article:

http://www.sunmagazines.com/Tips/hip.html

"One of the common findings among hip injuries in frequent players is that the injury almost always occurs on the dominant side - that is the side the player holds his racquet on. So a right handed player often has right hip problems. One of the proposed mechanisms of this injury is from the loading on the dominant side hip with the open-stance forehand."

I can't believe that playing so many clay matches helped. Another thing about clay (and people who've played on the surface will know what I'm talking about) is that, because the bounce kills the pace of the ball, you need to generate all the power yourself. In other words, you need to give your forehands a bit extra compared to other surfaces. As I said, it isn't too much of a stretch to connect Guga's forehand technique, the amount of forehands he hit on clay (needing to generate his own pace) with the injury.

GlennMirnyi was plainly wrong when he said Guga's injury wasn't degenerative, as was GWH when he said the injury "came from playing on hard courts."

Furthermore, do you also argue that the stress on the body is less on hardcourts than on clay?

It depends which part of the body you're talking about. The parts involved in hitting groundstrokes will be significantly more stressed on clay, because so many more groundstrokes are hit and more effort needs to go into those groundstrokes. I can't believe people are still arguing about this, because it is quite obviously true! Ankles, maybe hardcourt is worse - and some hardcourts do have a bad reputation for injury, e.g. Rebound Ace.

It is not just "more difficult to attribute the injury to the amount of clay matches he played", it is impossible.Your conjecture is invalid, all you have is that Guga's forehand stressed his hip. Therefore it really is too much of a stretch to claim that an injury that occured on hardcourts was related to matches on clay.

I think it follows from what I've said earlier that this isn't right.

Burrow
03-10-2007, 10:46 AM
Why can't he be persistent? Cant he take a couple of losses? He wants to improve on other surfaces so why go back to clay, especially on these smaller tournaments where he could use them as practises for bigger tournaments.

Action Jackson
03-10-2007, 01:14 PM
I can't believe that playing so many clay matches helped. Another thing about clay (and people who've played on the surface will know what I'm talking about) is that, because the bounce kills the pace of the ball, you need to generate all the power yourself. In other words, you need to give your forehands a bit extra compared to other surfaces. As I said, it isn't too much of a stretch to connect Guga's forehand technique, the amount of forehands he hit on clay (needing to generate his own pace) with the injury.

I grew up playing on clay as most players based in Europe and South America do. It's actually how much clay is laid on the court, the way its swept and local weather conditions that impact the way it plays. Rome is hot and less clay on the surface and harder, hence it's faster with a higher bounce. Hamburg is heavy cause of the climate and the amount of clay and it's like mud and the ball doesn't get up as much, therefore it plays a lot differently.

It's not just about power, it's the ability a vast range of shots with differing spins and speed levels and exude control over a longer period of time on average. All of these factors are related.

You go on about these shots, here is a very simple lesson for you. With shit footwork and bad movement, then the groundstrokes will never be at their best. The legs, ankles the hips and the lower back are the areas that feel the most impact as they have to twist, turn, slide, change direction and get to the pitch of the ball to make the strokes as good as they can be.

How come you have not adressed the various points relating to the different in soft and hard surfaces on the body? How can doing a high impact and physical activity on a hard synthetic surface with no give be better on the body than doing that activity on a soft natural surface?

Johnny Groove
03-10-2007, 02:32 PM
GWH, one must appreciate your constant effort to get this blatant Fedtard to understand logic and reasoning. But that is not his purpose. His purpose is merely to troll with anti-Rafa propaganda.

Action Jackson
03-10-2007, 02:40 PM
GWH, one must appreciate your constant effort to get this blatant Fedtard to understand logic and reasoning. But that is not his purpose. His purpose is merely to troll with anti-Rafa propaganda.

He has secured his place in the 256 draw anyway.

As for the subject at hand I can understand why Nadal would go and play Buenos Aires and Acapulco after the AO and DC, then Safinator and what some others say is just as valid as well about he could persist playing the schedule he has this year. 2008 is a long way away.

Johnny Groove
03-10-2007, 02:44 PM
He has secured his place in the 256 draw anyway.

As for the subject at hand I can understand why Nadal would go and play Buenos Aires and Acapulco after the AO and DC, then Safinator and what some others say is just as valid as well about he could persist playing the schedule he has this year. 2008 is a long way away.

indeed, i think its a fine decision. hes a player that needs to play alot of matches to feel on form. by basically having those titles locked up right now, he'll get some much needed confidence and match play. Much better than losing QF in Dubai halfway around the world.

Merton
03-10-2007, 05:23 PM
Yes, I do. Magnus Norman was another open-stance forehand player. It doesn't stop there. Read this article:

http://www.sunmagazines.com/Tips/hip.html

"One of the common findings among hip injuries in frequent players is that the injury almost always occurs on the dominant side - that is the side the player holds his racquet on. So a right handed player often has right hip problems. One of the proposed mechanisms of this injury is from the loading on the dominant side hip with the open-stance forehand."

I can't believe that playing so many clay matches helped. Another thing about clay (and people who've played on the surface will know what I'm talking about) is that, because the bounce kills the pace of the ball, you need to generate all the power yourself. In other words, you need to give your forehands a bit extra compared to other surfaces. As I said, it isn't too much of a stretch to connect Guga's forehand technique, the amount of forehands he hit on clay (needing to generate his own pace) with the injury.

GlennMirnyi was plainly wrong when he said Guga's injury wasn't degenerative, as was GWH when he said the injury "came from playing on hard courts."


Again, your link supports the claim that certain stances put stress on the body, increasing the likelihood of injuries. But nobody disputed that to begin with. Your argument can be summarized as follows:

-Player A (and B now, where B=Magnus Norman) plays a lot of matches on clay.
-Player A has a certain groundstroke technique.
-Player A developed a hip injury
Therefore, the hip injury was caused by player A playing on clay.

Your conclusion is blatantly false. Guga (and Magnus Norman) also played on hard courts or did you miss that? It is just speculation to assume that Guga's injury that occured on a hard court was a result of chronic degeneration arriving from playing on clay.

Let me sketch the type of research that should be done to address this question. You document all top-100 player injuries from, say, 1985-2006. You categorize the type of injury (ankle, elbow, hip, wrist, knee and so on). Then you track player's time of play per surface, surface of accident and time played until injury. Actually a thorough study presents many interesting challenges but lets not go there. Then we can start talking.

Presenting two data points is not going to convince anybody. Even the study that I sketch suffers from some issues, glaring in particular is the fact that we would be biased missing players that never made it to the top-100 and in what type of surface their progress was stopped due to injuries but you get the point.

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-10-2007, 06:21 PM
Again, your link supports the claim that certain stances put stress on the body, increasing the likelihood of injuries. But nobody disputed that to begin with. Your argument can be summarized as follows:

-Player A (and B now, where B=Magnus Norman) plays a lot of matches on clay.
-Player A has a certain groundstroke technique.
-Player A developed a hip injury
Therefore, the hip injury was caused by player A playing on clay.

Your conclusion is blatantly false

Well, it sounds blatantly false when you blatantly misrepresent it. :) I am getting bored with this thread. :(

The argument is this:

- Hitting groundstrokes places strain on several parts of the body;
- The amount of stress placed on those parts of the body used to hit groundstrokes is the same irrespective of surface;
- More groundstrokes are hit on clay than on hard (2x or 3x - I don't know exactly how many);
- Therefore, the body parts involved in hitting groundstrokes will be placed under significantly more stress on clay than on hard.

Last time I'm posting this because it is quite obviously correct - a bit of a shame that nobody is prepared to admit it, but there you are. :(

As regards the hip injury - of course I can't say for certain that "it was caused by clay, full stop." I'm arguing this:

- Guga's open stance forehand placed a lot of stress on his hip;
- He developed that forehand as a claycourter because he needed to generate power from "dead" balls;
- He played a disproportionate amount of claycourt matches;
- In those claycourt matches he placed extra stress on his hip, both because of the number of forehands he hit and because he needed to generate more of his own pace by hitting the ball harder;
- his hip injury is therefore connected to the amount of clay matches he played.

Of course, he played on hardcourts as well. We can't say what would have happened if he had only played on hardcourts. It is my opinion, and I don't claim to be infallible, that the long and gruelling claycourt seasons took their toll on Guga's hip. The open stance forehand was not fatal to guys who played a lot on hardcourts without the same number of clay matches eg Agassi (although I think he did have a less severe hip injury once).

Certainly what I am suggesting is about a thousand times more plausible than the nonsense written by some other posters - GlennMirnyi "Guga's injury wasn't degenerative"; GWH "Guga's hip injury was caused by playing on hardcourts."

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-10-2007, 06:29 PM
GWH, one must appreciate your constant effort to get this blatant Fedtard to understand logic and reasoning. But that is not his purpose. His purpose is merely to troll with anti-Rafa propaganda.

Heh. Well don't start crying when your boy ends up in a wheelchair at 25 along with the rest of them. :) I'm sure he will return fresh and uninjured after slugging it out for 1,000 shots per rally with the rest of the gang.

We like to play the moonball rallies, no? Then on to Chile Accident & Emergency Unit, no?

Merton
03-10-2007, 06:35 PM
Well, you just repeat your argument without addressing why I think it is blatantly wrong, you don't quote that part of my post.

Well, it sounds blatantly false when you blatantly misrepresent it. :) I am getting bored with this thread. :(

The argument is this:

- Hitting groundstrokes places strain on several parts of the body; True
- The amount of stress placed on those parts of the body used to hit groundstrokes is the same irrespective of surface; False
- More groundstrokes are hit on clay than on hard (2x or 3x - I don't know exactly how many); True
- Therefore, the body parts involved in hitting groundstrokes will be placed under significantly more stress on clay than on hard. (2) is False, so irrelevant

Last time I'm posting this because it is quite obviously correct - a bit of a shame that nobody is prepared to admit it, but there you are. :(

As regards the hip injury - of course I can't say for certain that "it was caused by clay, full stop." I'm arguing this:

- Guga's open stance forehand placed a lot of stress on his hip;
- He developed that forehand as a claycourter because he needed to generate power from "dead" balls;
- He played a disproportionate amount of claycourt matches;
- In those claycourt matches he placed extra stress on his hip, both because of the number of forehands he hit and because he needed to generate more of his own pace by hitting the ball harder;
- his hip injury is therefore connected to the amount of clay matches he played.

Of course, he played on hardcourts as well. We can't say what would have happened if he had only played on hardcourts. It is my opinion, and I don't claim to be infallible, that the long and gruelling claycourt seasons took their toll on Guga's hip. The open stance forehand was not fatal to guys who played a lot on hardcourts without the same number of clay matches eg Agassi (although I think he did have a less severe hip injury once).

Certainly what I am suggesting is about a thousand times more plausible than the nonsense written by some other posters - GlennMirnyi "Guga's injury wasn't degenerative"; GWH "Guga's hip injury was caused by playing on hardcourts."

Well, I understand it is much more fun speculating on the imminent demise of players you dislike, as Blaze said before. :wavey:

Andre'sNo1Fan
03-10-2007, 07:21 PM
What a surprise this thread has reached 7 pages already :lol:

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-10-2007, 07:38 PM
The amount of stress placed on those parts of the body used to hit groundstrokes is the same irrespective of surface; False

Ridiculous. There was me thinking it was all in the arms and the rotation of shoulders and hips. I stand corrected and now realise that the "hardness" of the court is magically transmitted upwards, and hitting ten shots per rally will lead to a lot less injuries than hitting three.

FYI I do not actually dislike Rafa at all. You may care to check the "piggy" thread and you'll find that I stopped posting there ages ago. I only found it fun when he was winning all the clay matches. It's not as much fun kicking him when he's down.

But it is simply a fact that he is avoiding defeats here, not injuries.

Action Jackson
03-11-2007, 11:15 AM
Ridiculous. There was me thinking it was all in the arms and the rotation of shoulders and hips. I stand corrected and now realise that the "hardness" of the court is magically transmitted upwards, and hitting ten shots per rally will lead to a lot less injuries than hitting three.

But it is simply a fact that he is avoiding defeats here, not injuries.

Still going on about this? You are just repeating a lot of the same things and try and answer the below questions. As for nonsense, well considering personally I have had knee and ankle problems and know exactly which surface my joints feel better on after a long match.

You overlooked some very simple mechanics and answer the below if you can.

With shit footwork and bad movement, then the groundstrokes will never be at their best. The legs, ankles, the hips and the lower back are the areas that feel the most impact as they have to twist, turn, slide, change direction and get to the pitch of the ball to make the strokes as good as they can be.

- How can doing a high impact and physical activity on a hard synthetic surface with no give be better on the body than doing that same activity on a soft natural surface?

Aphex
03-11-2007, 12:01 PM
So when is the "inflating your ranking" argument going to come up? Or has it already?

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-11-2007, 12:13 PM
GWH, your posts on this thread descended into silliness quite a long time ago. I'll write one more reply, and that's it!

Still going on about this? You are just repeating a lot of the same things and try and answer the below questions. As for nonsense, well considering personally I have had knee and ankle problems and know exactly which surface my joints feel better on after a long match.

You overlooked some very simple mechanics and answer the below if you can.

Fine, let's listen, I could do with a good laugh.

With shit footwork and bad movement, then the groundstrokes will never be at their best. The legs, ankles, the hips and the lower back are the areas that feel the most impact...

This is a giant non-sequitur. There is no logical connection whatsoever between statement (1) "With shit footwork and bad movement, then the groundstrokes will never be at their best" and statement (2) "The legs etc are the areas that feel the most impact." You're just talking complete rubbish again. :( Yes, your groundstrokes will be shit if your footwork is but in no way does it follow from that that groundstrokes impact the legs most. Groundstrokes impact your arms, shoulders most. The hips and lower back, maybe, but the stress is caused by the rotation of the body as you hit the shot. It does not magically increase because you are standing on a hard surface. I have said this about 50 times and it does you no credit to keep denying it to save face. Boring thread. :(

How can doing a high impact and physical activity on a hard synthetic surface with no give be better on the body than doing that same activity on a soft natural surface?

You say you've had knee and ankle problems. I can accept that a nasty hard court may be worse for your knee and ankle than a clay court. Although even then, your post is extremely exaggerated and silly: "soft natural surface" - you make clay sound like some sort of giant marshmallow or bouncy castle. Ridiculous. Please just admit you are wrong, which you are, and leave the thread! :)

Edit: I'll add that I doubt you hit your groundstrokes with anything like the ferocity the pro claycourters do - so you can probably play quite happily on the surface without running the injury risks that they do.

Action Jackson
03-12-2007, 07:35 AM
GWH, your posts on this thread descended into silliness quite a long time ago. I'll write one more reply, and that's it!.

You have been providing the humour throughout this thread. We can going around in circles if you want.

This is a giant non-sequitur. There is no logical connection whatsoever between statement (1) "With shit footwork and bad movement, then the groundstrokes will never be at their best" and statement (2) "The legs etc are the areas that feel the most impact." You're just talking complete rubbish again. Yes, your groundstrokes will be shit if your footwork is but in no way does it follow from that that groundstrokes impact the legs most. Groundstrokes impact your arms, shoulders most. The hips and lower back, maybe, but the stress is caused by the rotation of the body as you hit the shot. It does not magically increase because you are standing on a hard surface. I have said this about 50 times and it does you no credit to keep denying it to save face. Boring thread.


In other words you have shown that you can't comprehend simple and basic physics. As I said go to a qualified doctor and ask them which surface overall has the greater chance of causing long term damage to your body?

Wrong again I used the terms legs, hips, ankles and lower back together, this is doesn't indicate just the legs. In other words you are spin doctoring again, looking at one thing and ignoring the rest.

The whole body has to work as one and if someone is all arms and shoulders then there is no control and that is just poor technique. Considering good hip rotation is vital in generating power and court movement, the legs support your weight and the lower back is important for core stability and balance. The lateral deltoids and the upper back for the shoulders. So in other words the whole body has to work together.


You say you've had knee and ankle problems. I can accept that a nasty hard court may be worse for your knee and ankle than a clay court. Although even then, your post is extremely exaggerated and silly: "soft natural surface" - you make clay sound like some sort of giant marshmallow or bouncy castle. Ridiculous. Please just admit you are wrong, which you are, and leave the thread!

Edit: I'll add that I doubt you hit your groundstrokes with anything like the ferocity the pro claycourters do - so you can probably play quite happily on the surface without running the injury risks that they do.

Do you actually play tennis or what? I gave the Muster and Kent Carlsson example of professional players and also Goran Prpic is another one who couldn't play too many weeks in a row on a hardcourt and that's what happened to Guga after the US Open and not the fact he played a lot of clay matches. Have you actually played tennis on clay at all?

How is clay harder than cement? The sliding isn't just for looks, it relieves stress and saves energy and that's significantly different from hardcourt where the start, stop and even the take off point has a greater force than on clay and if you don't get that, then you don't understand Physics 101.

oz_boz
03-12-2007, 11:52 AM
Maybe a good decision and it might not change his possibilities of getting #1 spot. It could happen if Nadal improves on faster surfaces but a more likely scenario is Nadal winning tons of points on clay and Federer dropping his level and losing a few more.

We'll see.