Mens Tennis Forums banner

How would you rate his chances

  • Would be hard pressed, Would be in Category of Muster and Bruguera

    Votes: 23 37.1%
  • Would be a Solid player like Kafelnikov,Rafter

    Votes: 4 6.5%
  • Be quite successful, Would be in the bracket of Jim Courier

    Votes: 21 33.9%
  • No Way he could be in Bracket of Sampras and Agassi

    Votes: 14 22.6%
1 - 20 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Simple question.

In the faster courts of the 90s what chances his moon balling style had

In the Hard Courts
In the Grass Courts
In the Clay courts


Also what chances he would have had against Sampras,Agassi,Kafelnikov etc..In general...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
903 Posts
He would still be a monster on clay in his early years but would not stand a chance against Sampras/Agassi/Rafter USO and Sampras on grass would destroy Nadal on fast grass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
633 Posts
I don't see him winning anything outside of clay personally - of course we are not taking into account how exactly he would have played in such conditions. But with his current game style he would only have chances on clay in the 90s
 

·
Onwards and Upwards!
Joined
·
46,453 Posts
He wouldn't win anything in the 90s. He'd just be another generic claycourter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,371 Posts
On clay he would and I think he would snatch 1 or 2 in the Australian Open aswell, but I doubt he would ever win the other 2 slams in the 90s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
802 Posts
I think he'd dominate clay anyway.
Hard he would have similar success as now i tihnk.
Only difference i see is grass, he wouldn't be able to cope with that old grass surface against good serve and volleyers.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,179 Posts
@mods

this topic's been discussed already, merge this duplicate thread with the earlier one.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
If Nadal was at the level he was in '05 in '02, what would he have gone onto achieve?

If he gets the same perks in the 90's as he does in the 00's he gets a shot at Wimbledon '02, a past his prime Sampras at USO and some shocking AO's. He wouldn't have the same amount of SF's/F's at Wimbledon/USO, but he'd still have a decent shot of winning a career Slam.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Becker, Edberg, Stich, Sampras, Ivanisevic, Agassi, Krajicek, Rafter, Henman would eat him for breakfast in Wimbledon.

haha...Thats nice.


I have got a poem for it

Look over your back Nadal buddy

If Goran wont eat you, Rafter will, If Rafter wont,Stich will, If Stich wont,Kafelnikov will,Becker will, If Becker wont Edberg will, If Edberg wont Agassi would, If Agassi wont then Sampras will.


Nowhere to hide Nadal ....:toothy::toothy::toothy:


@STG, the Title hasnt been discussed. Have used the Search Option and plus there is an intellectually stimulating Poll attached to it. :)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,667 Posts
haha...Thats nice.


I have got a poem for it

Look over your back Nadal buddy

If Goran wont eat you, Rafter will, If Rafter wont,Stich will, If Stich wont,Kafelnikov will,Becker will, If Becker wont Edberg will, If Edberg wont Agassi would, If Agassi wont then Sampras will.


Nowhere to hide Nadal ....:toothy::toothy::toothy:


@STG, the Title hasnt been discussed. Have used the Search Option and plus there is an intellectually stimulating Poll attached to it. :)
Unfortunately Wimbledon is dead for couple of years. From day when Rafa won.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,179 Posts
Unfortunately Wimbledon is dead for couple of years. From day when Rafa won.
wimbledon 2002 1st round - mario ancic def. roger federer 6-3, 7-6(2), 6-3

wimbledon 2003 1st round - rafael nadal def. mario ancic 6-3, 6-4, 4-6, 6-4
 

·
Hakeem
Joined
·
5,234 Posts
Just like the Federer thread, another impossible question to deal with logically since who knows how his play style would have evolved had he been born to play in the 90s. Maybe he would not have been a lefty, maybe he would have had a one-handed backhand, who knows. However, if we were to look at this in terms of his current play style (which is really irrational either way) then I don't think he would be nearly as successful overall.

First of all, Nadal has benefited greatly from the technology of strings and rackets. Although rackets were similar, they are still quite different to many of the larger head rackets we have today. At the same time, his unorthodox forehand would cause him a bit of trouble on the faster surfaces. Sure, he is great at passing shots, but you see how the court speed and bounce greatly affect his ability to do so, not to mention, many of these guys do it right off the serve unlike players here who try to work the point and then try to come in. At the same time, we all know how much he has struggled against big servers throughout his career. Couple this with low, quick bouncing surfaces, it will be very hard for him to grip his teeth into his opponents' service games. I mean you can see how Agassi and Courier, and to a lesser extent Kafelnikov were the only players in the 90s that had success at Roland Garros AND success at other slams. Everyone else - Gomez, Bruguera, Muster, Kuerten, Moya - only won at the French Open and they all had much more similar styles to Nadal, as in they were true clay courters unlike the previous three who were more fast-court baseliners who had great groundstrokes that translated well on clay. If we really look at this objectively, virtually no true clay courter from 70s onward had success at the other slams. Sure, we had players like Borg who won Wimbledon and the French Open on so many occasions, but who are we kidding, players like Borg were much more similar to Federer than Nadal, at least when it came to playing outside of Roland Garros.
 
1 - 20 of 90 Posts
Top