-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Is Nadal Finished?
- Thread starter bombermick
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- May 6, 2007
- 48,206
- 31,391
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Tottenham Hotspurs, Melbourne Vixen
Lets pretend this thread never happened ey?
- Banned
- #203
Surprising that he's only won 5 slams outside the French Open in 13 years of professional tennis. That's a poor strike rate for a player of his ability.
Some pretty unconvincing posts worried that Nadal will overtake their man Fed express.
Even if he doesn't get to 17 slams he has been a fantastic player.
But it would be great if he did so that these sort of posters can choke on humble pie.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Banned
- #205
Nadal will win at least 17 or 18 titles, but it will be a case of 12 of them being French Opens. Then you have to analyse his record beyond just counting the number of slams.
Yes, let us analyse properly.
How many has Fed won at Wimbledon? 7.
How many has Sampras won at Wimbledon? 7
This is because it was their best surface.
There second best surface is/was hard-court. Which both the US and Australian opens are.
Nadal's best surface is clay.
Perhaps if either the US or Australian opens were clay Federer would be on about 12 and Nadal on 18 already?
In any event, it is truly incorrect to say that Nadal has a poor strike rate outside of the French Open when he has won 5 Grand Slams only one less than Djokovic.
Nadal missed the Australian Open in 2003, 2006 and 2013. He won in 2009. He has won 1 of 8.
Nadal missed the US Open in 2012. He won in 2010 and 2013. He has won 2 of 10.
Nadal missed Wimbledon in 2004 and 2009. He won in 2008 and 2010. He has won 2 of 10.
French OPEN Nadal has won 8 of 9.
13 grand slams from 37 attempts.
Bear in mind that Nadal was 17 in 2003, 18 in 2004, 19 in 2005, 20 in 2006, 21 in 2007, 22 in 2008 etc.
Who exactly has a good strike rate? Federer? Djokovic?
Australian OPEN Federer has won 4 of 15.
US OPEN Federer has won 5 of 15.
Wimbledon Federer has won 7 of 15.
French OPEN Federer has won 1 of 15.
17 grand slams from 60 attempts.
I am sure that Djokovic's record is poorer than Federer's.
I'm not sure what you analysed.
Thrawn
Premium Platinum
Some pretty unconvincing posts worried that Nadal will overtake their man Fed express.
Even if he doesn't get to 17 slams he has been a fantastic player.
But it would be great if he did so that these sort of posters can choke on humble pie.
I will stick by what I said - he won't overtake Federer.
When he wins here he'll have won every GS twice.....not many have done that.
- Banned
- #211
That's less than half his current total of slams, nowhere near as reliant on his favourite surface as Nadal is (8/13)
Same
Right, and Federer has won 9 titles on hardcourt. Again, not as dependent on his favourite surface when he's won more slams on his second favourite surface.
Outside of the French Open, Nadal has 5 GS titles in 13 years, which is about Jim Courier level.
Abdullahmonim
Rookie
- Apr 11, 2014
- 35
- 1
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
We are talking about Rafael Nadal,he is never finished....he has come back time to time...
his mental and physical strength will do the work for him once again...
Only 3 more to go
You can keep going on and on about this but the patently obvious thing, which I'm sure you're aware of, is that the grass courts play fairly similarly to the hard courts these days. So if you're one of the top 3 or 4 players and you're not a clay court specialist then you've got a bloody crack at 3 Grand Slam tournaments every year. Massive advantage, whether Federer slightly prefers grass to hard courts is hard to say but in reality it makes bugger all difference.
As someone else pointed out, imagine if two of the GSs were played on clay and the other two on hard/ grass?
Nadal has got the best all court game.
I'll take you back to 2007 and 2008.
Federer was the best player ever at that point and Nadal was what 20/21?
French Open final 2007 he played Federer and beat him with ease and then played him in the Wimbledon final and put up a good fight but lost in 4 sets.
A year later he absolutely wiped the floor with Federer at the French to the point of embarssment and then beat him at Wimbledon (& it would have been in 3 sets without the rain).
And there you have it Federer at his absolute peak was smashed to pieces on Nadal's favourite surface and then soundly beaten on his own favourite surface.....and Nadal was far from his own peak.
What Nadal had to then face in the following years was a rampant Djokovic and for the only time in his career had to re-invent parts of his game to meet the challenge.
If Nadal had had half of his career with a clear run of having no absolute champion as a main rival as Federer did he would have already been over 17 GS, unfortunately for him he had to meet the challenge of Federer in his younger years and then when he got to his peak he had another all time great reaching his peak at the same time.
Even if we treat grass and hard courts as being very different we still have the anomaly of two GS on hard. Imagine we only had 3 GS tournaments, 1 on grass, 1 on hard court, 1 on clay, whichever results you took out, AO or USO, then suddenly you see how Nadal compares with Djokovic or Federer and the advantage that certainly the latter has had over him by having 2 hard court GS every year.
How many hard court GS has Federer got.....9
How many FO has Nadal got......... 9....but from half the opportunity.....equal it up with 2 clay court tournaments and it's a different picture.
JackNah_8
TheBrownDog
- Jan 15, 2012
- 50,177
- 52,707
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Wimbledon is starting this month so I am curious to see how Nadal performs on grass, I just hope he doesn't lose in the 1st rd.
Nadal looking pretty good at the moment.
I'm probably wasting my time with the following post, particularly on an-AFL focussed forum, but I just feel the need to get a few things off my chest.
How so many can still rate Federer as the GOAT is beyond me. Furthermore if one brings Nadal into the GOAT comversation it's scoffed at. As was mentioned earlier, the GOAT needs to be able to hold his own against all opposition. Fed won at least half of his Majors at a time when no other players were able to seriously and consistently challenge for major titles on a consistent basis. Sampras and Agassi were past their best. By this I mean that they were already outside the Top 5 when Fed started winning Majors. Nadal & Djoker had only just come on the scene. He only had to contend with the likes of Roddick, Hewitt, old-man Agassi, Baghdatis, Ferrero, even the Poo on one occasion. Too demonstrate how weak this period of tennis was, you need only look at Hewitt being able to hold down No.1 for 18mths! Now don't get me wrong, Federer is a champion player that clearly deserves to be in the mix when discussing the greats of tennis, but the reputation earnt, due in large part to his 12 pre-2008 majors is significantly over-inflated.
Nadal on the other hand, has now twice reinvented himself to overcome seemingly immovable obstructions to remain on top. He found a way to beat Federer away from clay, and continue to beat him. Then he found a way to beat Djokovic, after the devastating 2011/12 run against him. Unlike Federer, he has had to contend with out and out champions throughout his career, yet still managed to pick up 14 majors along the way. Only 1 of these 14 was he gifted by avoiding a matchup with one of his Big 4 rivals along the way. Of the 38 completed Grand Slams he has competed in, he has reached the final of 20 and won 14. Compare that to Federer's 59 and 17 from 24. He also has a winning head to head record against every othe player in the top 30.
Now Nadal may not be the GOAT just yet, but surely he deserves to be considered ahead of Federer at this point? Borg and Laver are probably still way out in front at the present time. Federer I would consider possibly the most gifted of all time but definitely not the greatest. To me, sport is all about getting the most out of yourself and nobody can doubt Nadal's supremecy in this area.
The doping issue really concerns me. Before the Lance Armstrong fiasco, I wasn't too bothered, but now it has shaken my confidence in all sportsmen. The rumours are there, the uncanny physique and recovery speed is there, which leads me to believe that if I dig my head out of the sand, the guilt will be there too. Therefore on this issue, I choose to keep my head firmly buried.
I'm probably wasting my time with the following post, particularly on an-AFL focussed forum, but I just feel the need to get a few things off my chest.
How so many can still rate Federer as the GOAT is beyond me. Furthermore if one brings Nadal into the GOAT comversation it's scoffed at. As was mentioned earlier, the GOAT needs to be able to hold his own against all opposition. Fed won at least half of his Majors at a time when no other players were able to seriously and consistently challenge for major titles on a consistent basis. Sampras and Agassi were past their best. By this I mean that they were already outside the Top 5 when Fed started winning Majors. Nadal & Djoker had only just come on the scene. He only had to contend with the likes of Roddick, Hewitt, old-man Agassi, Baghdatis, Ferrero, even the Poo on one occasion. Too demonstrate how weak this period of tennis was, you need only look at Hewitt being able to hold down No.1 for 18mths! Now don't get me wrong, Federer is a champion player that clearly deserves to be in the mix when discussing the greats of tennis, but the reputation earnt, due in large part to his 12 pre-2008 majors is significantly over-inflated.
Nadal on the other hand, has now twice reinvented himself to overcome seemingly immovable obstructions to remain on top. He found a way to beat Federer away from clay, and continue to beat him. Then he found a way to beat Djokovic, after the devastating 2011/12 run against him. Unlike Federer, he has had to contend with out and out champions throughout his career, yet still managed to pick up 14 majors along the way. Only 1 of these 14 was he gifted by avoiding a matchup with one of his Big 4 rivals along the way. Of the 38 completed Grand Slams he has competed in, he has reached the final of 20 and won 14. Compare that to Federer's 59 and 17 from 24. He also has a winning head to head record against every othe player in the top 30.
Now Nadal may not be the GOAT just yet, but surely he deserves to be considered ahead of Federer at this point? Borg and Laver are probably still way out in front at the present time. Federer I would consider possibly the most gifted of all time but definitely not the greatest. To me, sport is all about getting the most out of yourself and nobody can doubt Nadal's supremecy in this area.
The doping issue really concerns me. Before the Lance Armstrong fiasco, I wasn't too bothered, but now it has shaken my confidence in all sportsmen. The rumours are there, the uncanny physique and recovery speed is there, which leads me to believe that if I dig my head out of the sand, the guilt will be there too. Therefore on this issue, I choose to keep my head firmly buried.
It's a great debate, but I think the mentality of tennis pundits is that grass court and hard court titles count more than clay titles, which may be viewed as more like a boutique surface.
Therefore, Nadal's French dominance gets less respect than say Federer or Sampras dominance on grass.
Nadal's dominance on clay is unprecedented across any surface.
The fact he has won 5 titles across the other three surfaces is a strong career alone apart from half a dozen or so players of all time.
So saying he is GOAT is fine with me - though a third Wimbledon would be quite a handy exclamation mark!
Therefore, Nadal's French dominance gets less respect than say Federer or Sampras dominance on grass.
Nadal's dominance on clay is unprecedented across any surface.
The fact he has won 5 titles across the other three surfaces is a strong career alone apart from half a dozen or so players of all time.
So saying he is GOAT is fine with me - though a third Wimbledon would be quite a handy exclamation mark!
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Moderator
- #220
no, it just a clear weakness.
Nadal has a weakness against big powerful flat hitters. if they can hit broke, he struggles. . Grass just emphasis this weakness, as his big defensive weapon isnt as big on grass(top spin). its happening a lot more now that he is getting older with the wear and tear on the tour. they just pounding him into submission.
added to that u got Nadal return game.
u should never rule out a champion, but i doubt he will win another Wimbledon title. he just never looked right this year or the last couple. dropping sets against players outside the top 100 doesnt instill great confidence.
- Moderator
- #222
he pretty much bossed everywhere during that period. Rosol was the turning point though. i think it is more the opposition mindset than Nadal himself. they know they can beat him now if they just go for it.
i think it shows that it is the beginning of the end; a glimpse of the future in a couple of years time on other courts. he just cant cope with grass anymore against this power hitting.
of course he is a champion so it wouldnt surprise me if this post is bumped in a years time with Nadal holding the gold trophy but he is 28 now, the same age as Fed was when he won his only French Open. Age waits for no man.
It's more physical than mental. In the last two years he was not able to move properly and bend low to hit his ground strokes. This year he was in much better shape physically but ran into a red hot Kyrigos who played the match of his life. There were many instances in the match where Kyrigos was 0-30 or 15-30 down on his serve but he was able to come out of that with big serves. It was his day. IMO Nadal played well enough this year, much better than the last two years.
On hard courts, I think Nadal is still second favorite after Djokovic.
Too early to say that. He is 28, so should have at least 2-3 years to compete depending on the condition of his knees. He needs a favorable draw early on. For example had he played the players Federer or Murray did, he would be in the semi at least. He got the worst possible draw he could imagine this time with all these big servers.