Mens Tennis Forums banner

Is Nadal really the king of MS1000

4K views 76 replies 33 participants last post by  Cloren 
#1 ·
Yes he has 27 and counting, but:

1- 19 of them on clay.
2- Previously finals were played on a BO5 not BO3. It made it very difficult. In fact, many players chose not to play all MS events.
 
#13 · (Edited)
No it's not.
Nadal have 3 Masters on clay, his best surface, where he can inflate his Masters count.
Federer have 0 Masters on grass, he can't inflate his Masters count.

Pretty much everyone can play good on hardcourt.
While most of the clay specialists, can't play good on grass and viceversa.

Hardcourt is not too slow like clay and not too fast like grass.
If you're a clay specialist, you can play on HC, same with a grass specialist.
That's why hardcourt is universal, while clay and grass are not.
 
#5 ·
He clearly is. And what's up with 3 clay masters? It's only one third. While this may be a somewhat higher percentage than clay tournaments overall, you can also argue that clay in general is underrepresented (grass even more obviously, especially given that it is the original tennis surface). It's not like those best-of-5 finals cut people's count in half by the way. He'll win over 35 titles before he's done.
 
#69 ·
oh yeah, he has the Monte Carlo and Rome which even the GOAT would like to get one ;)
 
#25 ·
It is inflated but considering he is a better player than Frauderer, I am glad he also has more master titles
 
#26 · (Edited)
King of Micky Carlo. And dulltards claiming HC is not the universal surface :superlol:

BTW who cares about Masters titles? I can't even remember how many Masters titles Federer has won.
The most important numbers measuring a player's greatness are Grand Slam counts, Weeks at No.1 and WTF titles. I'm expecting Dulltards' unevoluted brains will never understand this. All that they can read are clay-inflated H2Hs and Masters titles.:shrug:
 
#33 ·
I mean Fed is not good enough on hard court, even you had 6 titles a year he can not win a lot.
We know he is 2-9 against Rafa.
He is 1-6 against Andy Murray in masters, almost all in final or semi final, The truth is Fed can not beat these strong guy on his own, Roddick is the guy he should thanks for, not the surface at all

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App
 
#35 ·
All that neutral surface crap, absolutely ridiculous. Hardcourt like grass and clay has a very specific way you need to move on it, when you are good at that, hardcourt favours you. Djokovic's sliding and way of moving on hardcourt sets him apart just as much as Nadal's movement on clay.

It's not a neutral surface, and no, not everyone plays well on hardcourts (who's the idiot that claimed that?). It takes a different skillset to win on it compared to clay and grass, but since there isn't a 'standard' in tennis, there's no way to label that different skillset as a 'neutral' ground. There are hardcourt specialists just like there are clay and grasscourt specialists. There are more hardcourt specialists? Gee, that might just be because 70% of the tour is hardcourt dominated these days. Just because it's dominant doesn't make it neutral, make 70% of the tour claycourts and you'll see a lot of claycourt specialists. Would that make it a neutral surface? Of course not, because there's no such thing in tennis.

As for the bad bounces, hardcourts have those too, less obviously, but that's hardly relevant in this discussion.
 
#37 · (Edited)
Yes he has 27 and counting, but:

1- 19 of them on clay.
2- Previously finals were played on a BO5 not BO3. It made it very difficult. In fact, many players chose not to play all MS events.
:haha:

He is, by far, the king of the clay M1000...

Overall, hell no.

overinflated 27 because of clay titles...I didn´t know it was this huge, I thought it was only 12 or something...

Anyway, people complainin about the surface... so ZERO M1000 on grass clearly brings a disadvatantage to federer no???? :rolleyes:

still, he´s the TOP 3 on masters titles...
 
#38 · (Edited)
Some stats(Finals - Wins - Finals win percentage)
Rafa - 40 - 27 - 67.5%
Roger - 36 - 21 - 58.33%
Novak - 29 - 19 - 65.55%

Wins on clay - runner up - win percentage(Clay MS/Total MS)
Rafa - 19 - 6(lost only to Roger and Novak in a clay MS Final :eek:) - 70.37%
Roger - 6 - 9(Lost only to Rafa and Stan(2003 loss to Felix)) - 28.57%
Novak - 5 - 4(Lost only to Nadal on all occasions in a clay MS Final :eek:) - 26.32%

Wins on HC- runner up - win percentage(HC MS/Total MS)
Rafa - 8 - 7 - 29.62%
Roger - 15 - 6 - 71.43%
Novak - 14 - 6 - 73.47%(The only loss in a HC final post 2011 god-form was to Roger(Cinci'12))

I absolutely agree that when Rafa was peaking, there was no competition and he brushed aside any challenge on clay. He used it to his full advantage to prop-up his master's title count.

But one has to see that HC is more competitive and there are more players having various chances to win. Given that, Roger has made same clay finals as Rafa has made on HC and Rafa winning a title more. Djokovic is another animal on HC and 10 of 14(71.24%) of his HC masters are since the onset of 2011.

It is just absolutely awesome how only these guys have reached large number of finals and fought it out among themselves to stay on top. This is incredible.

In short, All of them are equally good and Rafa had the advantage on clay and made most use of it, like Djokovic is making use of it since 2011. :yeah:
 
#40 ·
What I've always wondered is why is the year end championship never counted as a Masters title (it's certainly tougher to win than any 1000 event). It should be and then Federer is up to 27 also.
 
#44 ·
You can't discount Nadal's clay titles either, not when 6 Masters events are played on Hard

the unlucky ones are the grass kings (Fed, Sampras, Murray) who never got the chance to stack up Masters titles on a surface they love.
 
#45 ·
You can't discount Nadal's clay titles either, not when 6 Masters events are played on Hard

the unlucky ones are the grass kings (Fed, Sampras, Murray) who never got the chance to stack up Masters titles on a surface they love.
This is all we are saying. No one is discounting dull's clay titles. If there were an equal amount of MS on grass and clay, lets say 5 in hard and 2 each on clay and grass, then things would have looked considerably different. But of course for dulltards with their 2 brain cells this is simply way too difficult to grasp.
 
#46 · (Edited)
Statistics don't lie. He has the most masters titles. He just so happens to be the best clay courter of all time.
 
#49 ·
#60 ·
it's always awkward when people try to diminish Nadal's Master 1000 stats by claiming that there are an incredibly high amount of clay Master's 1000s. there are THREE. how many HC Master 1000's are there? oh wait, all the other ones (5) are on hardcourt! stop making excuses
it would be similar to discounting Nadal's GS count by claiming that there are too many clay GS's. :rolleyes:

what's even worse is that the haters say this sort of stuff when Nadal has won practically every HC and grass event (I know there are only a handful). Indian Wells x3, Canada x2, Madrid (when it was indoor), US Open x2, Australian Open x1, Cincinatti x1, bundles of Miami finals, WTF finals x2, etc. and a bundle of more finals at the ones he has won.

the argument is dead in the sand. and of course he is the King of MS1000.
 
#72 ·
Because haters are not objetive, and anglo people underrate clay because they cant win there. And you have to be sure nobody care about big bowl, nascar or nfl/ mbl, americans believe what they think is normal or useful applies to the world. Go out of that bubble for once..
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top