[Thunder Hoad]

He's the combination of (a) superior athleticism, (b) awesome tennis talent and (c) being a rock mentally.

Proof
a) outlasted all the top guys in 5-set marathons; grinds opponents down to a nub
b) rarely loses cat and mouse points at the net; most unique and vicious forehand; solid backhand
c) except for the biggest miss of 2012 at AO he's a mental giant

So with that combination he's excelled in one slam with seven and got four at the other three. He doesn't have any obvious weaknesses like Olderer. So are his achievements so far an underachievement? In advance, he's obviously still a living legend (he's accomplishment more than most people can fathom) and the only reason the underachievement idea is in play because he is so talented (despite the media's narrative).

[duarte_a]

On the contrary he is an overachiever. Has won much more than he should have and has won some tournaments on hardcourt only due to the "excellent" services of the ATP regarding surface speed.

[Ash86]

He has 11 slams at the age of 26 and the greatest record on clay ever. How is that underachieving? He has worked hard to maximise his talents and if anything, given the position his career was in at the end of 2005, with the real possibility of a congenital foot problem sidelining him from professional tennis completely, he's achieved a remarkable amount.

As for those whining about surface speed, their favourites have also won on the same surfaces and there's no knowing how they would have fared if courts were much faster too. You'd think every tournament played like the French Open when it clearly doesn't.

Nadal has nothing to regret. I'd say Djokovic is the underachiever if anything - he basically wasted a period from his first slam in 2008 to his second in 2011. Only really started contending again for slams by US Open 2010 - had a lot of odd losses and slumped for most of 2010. Nadal, even in his worst years, has won a slam and a masters. With Murray, I think he's always tried hard and come up against better players so can't put down his lack of early slam success due to underachievement.

[GSMnadal]

If it wasn't for those dodgy knees, he'd be the GOAT already.

[duarte_a]

Originally Posted by GSMnadal

If it wasn't for those dodgy knees, he'd be the GOAT already.

nadal's playstyle -> slam wins and nadal's playstyle -> dodgy knees so slam wins and dodgy knees are a bundle. You can't have one without the other.

No dodgy knees means nadal wins a lot less slams. nadal's tactic is to tire his opponents and force them into errors. It's almost like he makes the opponent lose the match instead of him winning it.

Lucky for Roger talent doesn't equate physical problems. Too bad nadal is severely lacking on that department.

[Pratik]

No

/thread

[Andy1402]

He has achieved exactly what was expected of him..
Nadal has a game tailor made for slow courts and he has dominated clay like no other. I was really surprised he was able to win Wimbledon with his game, but that was pure hard work and adjustment, with some slowing down of the court.
If anything, he is a bit of an overachiever. And to do all this, with knees that could give out at any moment is amazing.
But fitness is as much a part of the game as talent..

[viruzzz]

Nah.
Great player, for sure, but he benefits so much of the slowering of the surfaces.
He just can't play very well in fast-courts.

He is the best claycourter ever, and he's winning the ammount of clay titles the ClayGOAT deserves, but he would have never won Wimbledon on 90s grass.

[duarte_a]

Originally Posted by Andy1402

If anything, he is a bit of an overachiever.

Yes.

Originally Posted by Andy1402

And to do all this, with knees that could give out at any moment is amazing.

He highly benefited from medical advancements namely the PRP injections.

Originally Posted by Andy1402

But fitness is as much a part of the game as talent..

Too bad there aren't PRP injections for talent.

[Ash86]

Originally Posted by duarte_a

nadal's playstyle -> slam wins and nadal's playstyle -> dodgy knees so slam wins and dodgy knees are a bundle. You can't have one without the other.

No dodgy knees means nadal wins a lot less slams. nadal's tactic is to tire his opponents and force them into errors. It's almost like he makes the opponent lose the match instead of him winning it.

Lucky for Roger talent doesn't equate physical problems. Too bad nadal is severely lacking on that department.

Would be good if you read up a bit - Nadal has a problem in his left foot that he was born with - nothing to do with his playstyle - which means he wears insoles that lead to more pressure on his knees and back. Sure his style would always be more tough than Roger's but Roger isn't dealing with the extra physical issue that Nadal has which means his knees suffer more than the average persons. Blaming it all on style is simplistic. Nadal is very talented - you don't win as much as he has done without being so - primarily he's talented in terms of technical skills, the rest is what really separates him as an all time great.

[GSMnadal]

Originally Posted by duarte_a

nadal's playstyle -> slam wins and nadal's playstyle -> dodgy knees so slam wins and dodgy knees are a bundle. You can't have one without the other.

Biggest myth in tennis. There are plenty of guys out there who do more running than Rafa, and yet somehow they don't have health issues with their knees. Strange right?

It's just bad luck.

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by Ash86

Would be good if you read up a bit - Nadal has a problem in his left foot that he was born with - nothing to do with his playstyle - which means he wears insoles that lead to more pressure on his knees and back. Sure his style would always be more tough than Roger's but Roger isn't dealing with the extra physical issue that Nadal has which means his knees suffer more than the average persons. Blaming it all on style is simplistic. Nadal is very talented - you don't win as much as he has done without being so - primarily he's talented in terms of technical skills, the rest is what really separates him as an all time great.

Talent is something you're born with. So his left foot problem simply is part of the talent equation - he would have even more without it, but it's there so he hasn't.

It is quite conceivable that he would be better served by adopting a more aggressive playstyle from the start, given his physical limitations, but of course - at that time nobody knew.

[Ash86]

Originally Posted by Litotes

Talent is something you're born with. So his left foot problem simply is part of the talent equation - he would have even more without it, but it's there so he hasn't.

It is quite conceivable that he would be better served by adopting a more aggressive playstyle from the start, given his physical limitations, but of course - at that time nobody knew.

How is having a physical problem a lack of talent?! Having a body suited to a sport isn't talent. To me talent is a skill - so Roger's natural shotmaking ability and read of the game is a talent, his body is not.

[Aloevera]

He's overachiever. He's so lucky to go this far rather than unlucky that he hasn't been able to achieve more.

[motorhead]

dumbest thread of the year?