Nadal broken 6 times against lowly opponent

First topic message reminder :

I had to turn in at 3-3 1st set but even at that stage I could see Nadal was going to have trouble. Golubev was playing flat, attacking tennis and had a chance. As it turned out he just failed to take a set, but broke 6 times. A low 1st serve % looked to have hurt a bit, as he himslef dropped serve 8 times.

Nadal served very big, just as big as last year, but from open play what little I saw was not impressive. His opponent didn't seem at all overwhelmed in the rally. It most closely reminded me of the type of match Nadal used to have with Youzhny, where it was he who looked to be dictated against. How many times was Nadal broken in the USO last year? I seem to recall him protecting the serve very effectively.

Close examination shows how precarious Nadals positions was;

Golubev served at 40-0, 5-3 2nd set,
Had 5-2 double break lead in 3rd.
Golubev is no star; he lost 17 straight matches earlier this year.

1st round and all that, but not a great start for the defending champion. Still, a wins a win they say.

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:I can't agree with the theory put forward here:

tennis style = intelligence.

I propose instead tennis style = talent.

Lat's not forget that there are millions at stake and where there are millions there are always highly intelligent and capable individuals who would do nealrly everything to grab them.

Also Mats Wilander was a lot of more boring to watch than Nadal and I think he is highly intelligent.

I agree that talent is actually what will determine one's tennis style. But having neurones working faster than the opponent (that's what is all about after all) will allow someone to dictate instead of being dictated. It comes so obvious when you see a Federer v Roddick match for instance. How many times have we refered to Roddick as being "outsmarted"?.

However I disagree that Nadal is more exciting to watch than Wilander. I did not like Wilander style but never have I watched such terrible tennis as Nadal especially when his confidence is down like v Anduja at the FO or in his autumn 09 season. His lack of risk taking at times really gets gutless. Wilander was a retriever but there was something smart about him. He used his head more than his muscles unlike Nadal.

Anyone thinking running is just about putting one foot in front of another hasn't done it; a distance runner is engaged in a constant war of nerves and tactics with his opponents, a spinter can't get bored anyway in 9.6 seconds and is a bag of nerves anyway.

What I mean in tennis is that every time you come to the ball you have choices; slice, drive, middle, left right, deep, short, hard, soft, spin. To play the same one, over and over, would be boring to most people. However, if you don't have a very low boredom threshold then you might not mind. It would help in that respect not to be overburdened with imagination.

The other thing is the curiosity to learn how you could cope by playing another way just on that day - the comment about Federer just deciding to play a Robredo match, just to see how it works out, or away from tennis Ronnie O'Sullivan, deciding to play left handed, or to play complete safety for a bit, tallies with the guys extremely low boredom threshold. I suspect Ronnie has a high IQ.

I'm not saying Rafa is thick but he does present as a classic case of a none-too-bright, easily controlled individual prepared to do as he is told and not too strongly motivated by restlessness to insisit on playing around with it. Of course, yhe may just not have a choice and that's another option.

Tenez wrote:

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:I can't agree with the theory put forward here:

tennis style = intelligence.

I propose instead tennis style = talent.

Lat's not forget that there are millions at stake and where there are millions there are always highly intelligent and capable individuals who would do nealrly everything to grab them.

Also Mats Wilander was a lot of more boring to watch than Nadal and I think he is highly intelligent.

I agree that talent is actually what will determine one's tennis style. But having neurones working faster than the opponent (that's what is all about after all) will allow someone to dictate instead of being dictated. It comes so obvious when you see a Federer v Roddick match for instance. How many times have we refered to Roddick as being "outsmarted"?.

However I disagree that Nadal is more exciting to watch than Wilander. I did not like Wilander style but never have I watched such terrible tennis as Nadal especially when his confidence is down like v Anduja at the FO or in his autumn 09 season. His lack of risk taking at times really gets gutless. Wilander was a retriever but there was something smart about him. He used his head more than his muscles unlike Nadal.

Wilanders intelligence was always apparant, and in fact his play was extremely varied.

Although I may agree Nadal doesn't come across as the brightest out there, and that Wilander did have more variety (and a lot of less power) in his game, you can't say that Wilander wasn't prepared to target the opponent's BH again and again and to play one dimensional if this was necessary to get the win

I think sprinters are boring and not intelligent. They should run to the 100m line backwards. ROFL.
Always amusing reading Federer fans saying Nadal's game is boring. Guess what? I find Federer's game even more boring. Infact can't remember the last time I watched any of his matches before the quarters of any tournament. I can count the number of for example Federer-Roddick or other clowns slam finals I did not watch due to the inevitable boredom. By the look of things, our friends clearly watch Nadal from round 1 of every tournament. Dedicated fans I think lol.
Talking about intelligence, if after so many years player can't find a progressive solution to an opponent playing to his backhand or what ever weakness he may have, the that player lacks intelligence.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Always amusing reading Federer fans saying Nadal's game is boring. Guess what? I find Federer's game even more boring. Infact can't remember the last time I watched any of his matches before the quarters of any tournament. I can count the number of for example Federer-Roddick or other clowns slam finals I did not watch due to the inevitable boredom. By the look of things, our friends clearly watch Nadal from round 1 of every tournament. Dedicated fans I think lol.

What amuses me about posters like you, SA, is that you take opinion so personally. I don't see any problem with people discussing aspects of a player, especially when that player has an autobiography just released so is inviting opinion and comment.
Of course people watch Nadal if they are interested in tennis, whether they are particular fans of his game or not - it would be a little strange not to be au fait with how the current US champion is performing atm. They might well be cheering for the other guy.
You don't have to attack posters in a personal way for having an opinion you don't share.

For the record, as a Fed fan I have found it very frustrating that he hasn't been able to find a way to consistently keep Rafa from pummelling his backhand, and I do also find it equally frustrating that he has allowed Rafa to 'get inside his head'. Does Federer lack the courage of Nadal - I've certainly thought so in the past, but now I am not so sure when we watch Rafa suffer in confidence after Djokovic has taken it to him 5 times in a row. Also, I admire Fed for fighting on when clearly he is beginning to fade - how easy would it have been for him to opt out at the top of his game. You see you can have an alternative opinion and remain civil!

You see you can have an alternative opinion and remain civil!

Nah he was obsessed with Federer on bbc606 aswell, I think it's better to just ignore him and he goes away

time please wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:Always amusing reading Federer fans saying Nadal's game is boring. Guess what? I find Federer's game even more boring. Infact can't remember the last time I watched any of his matches before the quarters of any tournament. I can count the number of for example Federer-Roddick or other clowns slam finals I did not watch due to the inevitable boredom. By the look of things, our friends clearly watch Nadal from round 1 of every tournament. Dedicated fans I think lol.

What amuses me about posters like you, SA, is that you take opinion so personally. I don't see any problem with people discussing aspects of a player, especially when that player has an autobiography just released so is inviting opinion and comment.
Of course people watch Nadal if they are interested in tennis, whether they are particular fans of his game or not - it would be a little strange not to be au fait with how the current US champion is performing atm. They might well be cheering for the other guy.
You don't have to attack posters in a personal way for having an opinion you don't share.

For the record, as a Fed fan I have found it very frustrating that he hasn't been able to find a way to consistently keep Rafa from pummelling his backhand, and I do also find it equally frustrating that he has allowed Rafa to 'get inside his head'. Does Federer lack the courage of Nadal - I've certainly thought so in the past, but now I am not so sure when we watch Rafa suffer in confidence after Djokovic has taken it to him 5 times in a row. Also, I admire Fed for fighting on when clearly he is beginning to fade - how easy would it have been for him to opt out at the top of his game. You see you can have an alternative opinion and remain civil!

Well said in a constructive and polite manner.

I happen to think the guy is a Jackass!

So Timeplease thinks others can have an opinion about Nadal's game but I can't have one on Federer's game. Some find Nadal boring, I find Federer's game boring, are both not opinions?
By the way what would you expect from ex-mod Legendkiller? He seems to be fighting himself.

Simple_Analyst wrote:So Timeplease thinks others can have an opinion about Nadal's game but I can't have one on Federer's game. Some find Nadal boring, I find Federer's game boring, are both not opinions?
By the way what would you expect from ex-mod Legendkiller? He seems to be fighting himself.

Ermmm if you read the post, you would see like so many others that having an opinion isn't the problem. Just the way you go about dismissing others opinions and dismissing them in an un-savoury manner.

Though your not the only one who does.

He didn't say you couldn't have an opinion about Federer; the issue is that you get in a hissy if other people have opinions about Nadal.

Just remember; it's Rafa himself who has declared that he's prepared to do the same thing endlessly and it's not unreasonable that others find that noteworthy - after all, he thought it worth writing about.

So Nadal thinks he is prepared to do the same thing over again as it gets him the best result and you have questions about that? I wonder whose intelligence needs questioning.
Usain bolt should run slower. Running faster is doing the same thing over again- winning almost all the time.

I haven't a problem with how Nadal plays his tennis or anyone else for that matter. End of the day he has got the best results from his talent.

I see the same thing over and over on this forum. Nadal fans getting annoyed because Federer fans won't acknowledge or applaude Nadal's results against him. FO 2011 I can't remember a single Federer fan saying well played Rafa. Despite other tennis fans who's favourite player was not in the final and actually congratulating Nadal, though this didn't seem enough for most Nadal fans.

Federer fans do acknowledge that he is not the force he was, but at the same time don't acknowledge Nadal's talent as something that should be worthy of beating someone of Federer's calibre.

Djokovic fans are currently basking in his glory at the moment. Some a little too much, though I don't find it offensive, just not my cup of tea.

Murray fans get annoyed with the Andymoaners who constantly be-little his achievements, family, the guys personally by posters who don't hold a single brain cell. Murray fans are often critical of him if he plays badily and full of praise when he plays well.

There are balanced fans who actually cover the world of tennis very well. Laverfan, Lydian, timeplease, Nore Staat but to name a few who actually take the time to look past the headliners and other aspects of the game that don't normally feature on here.

Also their are the occasional prats that come here and try to make out they know something and don't and tie themselves in knots and end up contradicting themselves or just changing the subject again and again and running around in circles.

That is just me stating my position as someone who actually doesn't side with anyone and will acknowledge good posts as well as the bad posts.

bogbrush; just ignore him and give him this http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=outbollocksed

The problem is doing the same thing when it doesn;t work! Losing 4 straight times to Nole and still doing the same thing the 5th time is questionable....unless Nadal hasn't got the choice due to his limited game, which clearly is what some of us have been saying for a long time.

There is a huge difference between Fed/Nadal and Nadal/Djoko rivalries. In the former, despite the sided H2H the matches are always open and only a point there and then make the difference...even on clay. In the latter, the outcome is simply a certitude as soon as the ball is in play...unless Djoko forgets to put his contact lenses.

Simple_Analyst wrote:So Timeplease thinks others can have an opinion about Nadal's game but I can't have one on Federer's game. Some find Nadal boring, I find Federer's game boring, are both not opinions?

As legend and bb have told you, that is not what I meant at all. You are perfectly free, imho, to express negative opinions about Federer's game and whether it sends you into the Land of Nod.

Simple_Analyst wrote:So Nadal thinks he is prepared to do the same thing over again as it gets him the best result and you have questions about that? I wonder whose intelligence needs questioning.
Usain bolt should run slower. Running faster is doing the same thing over again- winning almost all the time.

Well, yeah I have to agree with you here - of course, ugly though I find it, Rafa's strategy of just hitting and hitting to Fed's backhand is brutally effective and it is the 'intelligent' way for a player like Rafa to play TMF to have the desired effect - eg win!

I think it is legitimate to question the 'obedience' of Rafa and the role of strategist that Toni has played in the light of the wholly unsurprising comments by Rafa in his autobiography, and whether Rafa could have succeeded with another coach. I am torn on this one because Toni is such a domineering presence, but I do feel that like all great champions, Rafa is at his best when he is confident and playing instinctively and producing some great shots under pressure which shows he has great court intelligence.

I reiterate what I said in my first post on here - I would like to see Rafa win a big one without Toni muttering courtside almost continually.

So Federer is doing the same thing against Nadal which doesn't work. Mind he has lost to him 4 straight times in GS finals now. His limited game is clearly getting exposed.
Let us compare. Nadal has beaten Djokovic 16 times but his recent loses against him coming in a 7 month perhod, little time to work out a plan. Federer on the other hand has beaten losing to Nadal since he was 17 and he still remains as clueless as ever picking the odd win here and there.

Nadal doesn't always hit to a players backhand. He is one of the few players to target Murrays forehand with obvious results. Its surprising how many players are too busy stimulating their superior intelect by playing their full repertoire of shots without thinking of cause and effect.

ok, we get it, Federer is rubbish as you say Unbiased Educator. All his slams came in weak era, Nadal is the best ever (happy now?)

I think we are all, Federer fans and Nadal fans alike, in agreement that Nadal has the upper hand over Federer and that their potential contests in the future are unlikely to have the same competitiveness as their earlier meetings because the 5 year age gap is significant at this point in Fed's career. It hasn't been a great match up for Fed, though he has had some notable victories over Rafa and it was wonderful to see him roll back the years at WTF 2010.

At the end of the day, there is no disgrace for Fed in losing to Rafa (I think if he thought there was, he would have hung up his shoes and raquet) and we can all only lament that these two giants of the current era did not meet on US soil when Fed ruled AA, although they managed 3 meetings at W and 3 at RG in the same period (plus 1 at RG this year in Fed's twilight). There have been many great contests in the past, and for neutral fans when Fed was in his heyday, it was a compelling contrast of styles and on court personalities - I think a Telegraph journalist called them 'the Rapier' and 'the Bull fighter' -

Legend - read your post with interest. Have to put my hand up and admit that while I admire Rafa's mental fortitude and his derring do, I find it hard to fully congratulate him when he duffs up Fed - I do try - honest . At the end of the day, it is not, for me, the fact that Rafa's h2h with Fed is in Rafa's favour - I think most tennis fans give Fed the credit for having a good enough clay game to meet the undisputed King of Clay several times which tilts the balance further in Rafa's direction - I sometimes find it hard to fully applaud Rafa's success, while admiring much about him, because of his time wasting tactics and sometimes his tactical MTOs (the latter is of course my opinion). I am always struck by how much I warm to him when watching him interviewed and how likeable he is, but I find it harder to warm to his on court persona 50 percent of the time.

I find it hard to fully congratulate him when he duffs up Fed - I do try - honest .

I do it like Djoko does! "congratulations to Nadal and his team"! Funnily enough Nadal said the same thing to Nole in Wimby's final!

I don't think that Djokovic is trying to be other than sincere in his statements Tenez - he is the first to thank his own team when he wins.

No, I must try harder to practise my 'well done face' for Rafa, but it would help me achieve this if I don't have to see another W, after the last two, where a timely MTO is taken in a tight contest, only for Rafa to begin to play immediately afterwards like an avenging angel rather than an injured/fragile competitor.

time please wrote:I don't think that Djokovic is trying to be other than sincere in his statements Tenez - he is the first to thank his own team when he wins.

Maybe but in 35 years of watching tennis, I never heard an opponent congratulating the player and his team. That can be seen as a nasty comment to the opponent.

I personally don't think it was as innocent as you may think.

Why can't Simplistic Analyst distinguish between perpetually repeating the most effective playing method being a "smart" thing to do, and being able to do the same thing endlessly without getting bored?

I can find it boring to do the same thing (like explain this to you) but accept it's the smart thing to do (no, actually I can't justify it to myself that way).

I think modern tennis is very much more team based, and Novak has his own which he goes to hug and acknowledge immediately after winning. He

However, you may be right and this is a sophisticated and civil form of sledging by Nole

time please wrote:I think we are all, Federer fans and Nadal fans alike, in agreement that Nadal has the upper hand over Federer and that their potential contests in the future are unlikely to have the same competitiveness as their earlier meetings because the 5 year age gap is significant at this point in Fed's career. It hasn't been a great match up for Fed, though he has had some notable victories over Rafa and it was wonderful to see him roll back the years at WTF 2010.

At the end of the day, there is no disgrace for Fed in losing to Rafa (I think if he thought there was, he would have hung up his shoes and raquet) and we can all only lament that these two giants of the current era did not meet on US soil when Fed ruled AA, although they managed 3 meetings at W and 3 at RG in the same period (plus 1 at RG this year in Fed's twilight). There have been many great contests in the past, and for neutral fans when Fed was in his heyday, it was a compelling contrast of styles and on court personalities - I think a Telegraph journalist called them 'the Rapier' and 'the Bull fighter' -

Legend - read your post with interest. Have to put my hand up and admit that while I admire Rafa's mental fortitude and his derring do, I find it hard to fully congratulate him when he duffs up Fed - I do try - honest . At the end of the day, it is not, for me, the fact that Rafa's h2h with Fed is in Rafa's favour - I think most tennis fans give Fed the credit for having a good enough clay game to meet the undisputed King of Clay several times which tilts the balance further in Rafa's direction - I sometimes find it hard to fully applaud Rafa's success, while admiring much about him, because of his time wasting tactics and sometimes his tactical MTOs (the latter is of course my opinion). I am always struck by how much I warm to him when watching him interviewed and how likeable he is, but I find it harder to warm to his on court persona 50 percent of the time.

Thanks TP. I like all debates and opinions, but I do get annoyed though given that Federer fans do most of the time 'constructively' debate, but for some reason instead of the debate turning to a meeting they have had it is fair to say that Nadal fans do quickly tear into Federer fans on 'past' posts or comments and that is why we tend to see so much negativity. It is not that Federer fans are 'dismissing' Nadal's talent, it is just that they are not fans of his playing style. Which is fair game in my view. Some fans take it personally like you have said. Even though the posts or comments themselves are not 'personal'

It is unlike the crap that Murray fans get when you get senseless posts and comments to try and wind up Murray fans and also lower there posts to personal swipes at the player and his family at times. Nothing ever constructive.

From a pure tennis pespective I don't find anything boring about Federer's tennis. It is by and large the 'cleanest' on tour and when I say cleanest I mean in terms of the effort and precision in his playing style. Easy on the eye. Watching Nadal it is more that it is time consuming during rallies or games when you wait for some brilliance. With Federer you can normally get within 2 or 3 strokes whereas with Nadal it is normally 10+ strokes. That being said I enjoy watching Nadal too.

This thread perfectly sums up why I am not too fussed whether Andy wins a slam or not as it won't change people's attitudes or gain him any extra respect or credit on here or other such-like forums.

I mean here is Rafael Nadal who has won multiple slams and here in this thread he is still being targetted for lack of this and lack of that. No mention of what he has achieved in the sport at all just knock knock knock. Okay the majority doing it are Federer fans but remember folks that the majority of his slams have come following wins over your favourite player - so knock him and you are knocking Federer. People aren't doing themselves any favours - just making themselves look terribly Fed fanboyish and sore losers.

Rant over.

PS Just to add - fine if Nadal's style of play is not to your taste just like other fans don't take to Federer's style either and his rather self-opinionated attitude like getting a specially made jacket with an extra slam win on it prior to Wimbledon final - not good at all. Like I say there are good and bad in everyone but I won't waste my time rabbiting on about it like others do - I like to respect all players for what they have achieved.

CaledonianCraig wrote: his rather self-opinionated attitude like getting a specially made jacket with an extra slam win on it prior to Wimbledon final - not good at all.

CC (respectfully)....

"For someone to appear on court with the jacket and for Federer to not mention it himself until pushed neatly represents Federer's understanding of history (and fashion) as well as a subtle humility—indications, therefore, that the jacket was produced as a result of marketing demand rather than a prophetic demand for attention.

In this regard, it is not Federer that should be mauled—instead his Nike representative, or managerial leader, should ideally take the flak. Whoever is tasked with Federer's image needs to remember why he is so rightfully adored by young and old. "

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/217152-roger-federer-and-the-drama-over-that-jacket

In US NBA (Socal can vouch to this, perhaps) that, the two teams in NBA finals have material which represents both as winners, one set never sees the light of the day, except in minor 'faux pas'.

Okay I stand corrected if that is the case but like I said the likes of Federer and Nadal are legends and yet here is a thread that has turned into another Nadal bashing session. Like I say that is why, for the sake of these forums I am not fussed if Andy wins a slam as it hasn't done anything to gain respect for Rafa so it would seem. Pretty sad really.

Oh No! ..not that Jacket again! They all have their slams badges in their bags now. It was a good mkg touch from Nike anyway cause like it or not it was a light hearted gesture.

And if one cannot celebrates winning 3 Wimbies in a row...then we are in a very sad world.

Such is life CC.
Man Utd can win the premiership and the Champions League for the next 10 years running or Tiger Woods can win every major and I still wont like them.

Winning will not stop 'bashing'. It's down personal preference, likes and dislikes.

CaledonianCraig wrote:This thread perfectly sums up why I am not too fussed whether Andy wins a slam or not as it won't change people's attitudes or gain him any extra respect or credit on here or other such-like forums.

I mean here is Rafael Nadal who has won multiple slams and here in this thread he is still being targetted for lack of this and lack of that. No mention of what he has achieved in the sport at all just knock knock knock. Okay the majority doing it are Federer fans but remember folks that the majority of his slams have come following wins over your favourite player - so knock him and you are knocking Federer. People aren't doing themselves any favours - just making themselves look terribly Fed fanboyish and sore losers.

Rant over.

PS Just to add - fine if Nadal's style of play is not to your taste just like other fans don't take to Federer's style either and his rather self-opinionated attitude like getting a specially made jacket with an extra slam win on it prior to Wimbledon final - not good at all. Like I say there are good and bad in everyone but I won't waste my time rabbiting on about it like others do - I like to respect all players for what they have achieved.

To be fair Federer, he was playing Roddick so obviously he would have made that jacket. Do you think if Nadal was in that final, he would have brought 15 slam Gold jacket along?

Back to Legendkiller's pedestrain opinions. Well you don't find anything boring about Federer's tennis i do. Or am i committing a crime for not liking Federer's tennis? You seem to be battling with yourself here. None of the Nadal fans here have actually had any dismissing of any ones opinion rather than forming their own. Who cares if a Federer fan likes Nadal or not? If the head to head was 17-8 if Federer's favour, we will not be having debates like this. As CalendonianCraig is pointing out, just a case of people looking fanboyish and sore losers. Is no ones fault their favourite player can't beat a the alleged 'lack of talent' Nadal.

I want to place on record that I have the greatest admiration for Rafa Nadals achievements on the tennis court. I am no "basher", everyone on the forum will back me up on that.

I do only note that his play is boring and it appears from his autobiography that he's not the most tightly strung racquet in the locker room.

bogbrush wrote:I want to place on record that I have the greatest admiration for Rafa Nadals achievements on the tennis court. I am no "basher", everyone on the forum will back me up on that.

I do only note that his play is boring and it appears from his autobiography that he's not the most tightly strung racquet in the locker room.

I'd agree with that, you always seem fair and reasonable to me.

I think I'll wait until I've read Nadal's autobiography before making my mind up. I did, however, give up long ago on looking to sport to provide my cerebral fix.

I will say though that I think Nadal will just do whatever it takes to win and that desire overrides all else. If I was on the court and had a way to win I think I'd do the same, and hope no one judges me as being a tad simple for saying so...

CaledonianCraig wrote:This thread perfectly sums up why I am not too fussed whether Andy wins a slam or not as it won't change people's attitudes or gain him any extra respect or credit on here or other such-like forums.

CC this thread is not about what how much credit a player deserves or is given by people of this forum for their accomplishments. We are not bringing a whole list for what one has done, its only one match of the 1st round of US Open and we are discussing how it went, how was the play, how the player played and often plays and how he and his team strategically plans for wins etc. To answer to every discussion one can't bring a whole list of what a player has achieved and how much we should respect it. We are discussing certain aspects, that's all.


And how has Andy Murray come into this discussion. I (and can I assume all here) know that you are a big Andy Murray fan but we are talking about Nadal. You have put a picture of Andy Murray as your profile picture. Fine. We were talking about Nadal, and some one has brought Federer which was not exactly needed but is also alright since in their career paths they have crossed each other numerous times and they have dominated tennis for many years together. Most discussions where Nadal is spoken about, Federer will get his name and now Djokovic as well. We know you like to talk about Murray's achievements but how do you say we can bring it when are talking about Nadal and Federer. Murray has very long path to get to that and there have been and will be threads for Murray, his play his performance, etc etc.. Its not necessary to bring out all he has achieved in every discussion and how disrespectful people are towards him and will he win a slam or not how much it would count etc etc.

Y I Man wrote:Such is life CC.
Man Utd can win the premiership and the Champions League for the next 10 years running or Tiger Woods can win every major and I still wont like them.

Winning will not stop 'bashing'. It's down personal preference, likes and dislikes.

Yes Y I Man I fully understand that. My point is though, that those bashing cling to Andy not having won slams as a reason to slate him when in all honesty it would not matter if he had won ten as they'd still berate, bash and bad mouth him so why all the pretence?

time please wrote:No, I must try harder to practise my 'well done face' for Rafa, but it would help me achieve this if I don't have to see another W, after the last two, where a timely MTO is taken in a tight contest, only for Rafa to begin to play immediately afterwards like an avenging angel rather than an injured/fragile competitor.

Hi tp,

I don't like to rehash an old debate, but, whilst I agree that the MTO at Wimbledon in 2009 looked decidedly tactical, I still don't get the fuss around the one this year against Del Potro. Nadal had just hit the shot of the match (in my view) and had a good chance of landing the set. No one has convinced me yet why he would throw a tactical MTO at that juncture.

No r_o_t_l_a this thread began in a fine enough way but sure the OP realised the kind of response he would get ie opening the door to attack Nadal's standing in the game.

As I've already said on another thread you get nothing for being impressive in the First Round so think a mountain is being made out of a mole hill. Now we all know (including Nadal fans) that Rafa is not in the best of form and low on confidence coming into the tournament and the only way to find form is by playing yourself into it which you can only do by winning matches to earn the right to play again which Rafa has done. A win is a win and a building block in restoring confidence.

There you go a Murray fan able to analyse a legendary player without resorting to petty snide remarks questioning his ability and intelligence.

Simple_Analyst wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:This thread perfectly sums up why I am not too fussed whether Andy wins a slam or not as it won't change people's attitudes or gain him any extra respect or credit on here or other such-like forums.

I mean here is Rafael Nadal who has won multiple slams and here in this thread he is still being targetted for lack of this and lack of that. No mention of what he has achieved in the sport at all just knock knock knock. Okay the majority doing it are Federer fans but remember folks that the majority of his slams have come following wins over your favourite player - so knock him and you are knocking Federer. People aren't doing themselves any favours - just making themselves look terribly Fed fanboyish and sore losers.

Rant over.

PS Just to add - fine if Nadal's style of play is not to your taste just like other fans don't take to Federer's style either and his rather self-opinionated attitude like getting a specially made jacket with an extra slam win on it prior to Wimbledon final - not good at all. Like I say there are good and bad in everyone but I won't waste my time rabbiting on about it like others do - I like to respect all players for what they have achieved.

To be fair Federer, he was playing Roddick so obviously he would have made that jacket. Do you think if Nadal was in that final, he would have brought 15 slam Gold jacket along?

Back to Legendkiller's pedestrain opinions. Well you don't find anything boring about Federer's tennis i do. Or am i committing a crime for not liking Federer's tennis? You seem to be battling with yourself here. None of the Nadal fans here have actually had any dismissing of any ones opinion rather than forming their own. Who cares if a Federer fan likes Nadal or not? If the head to head was 17-8 if Federer's favour, we will not be having debates like this. As CalendonianCraig is pointing out, just a case of people looking fanboyish and sore losers. Is no ones fault their favourite player can't beat a the alleged 'lack of talent' Nadal.

Again S_A you seem to want to wage war for war sake. Hawkeye if you looked back moaned about the view of this thread and even said that he/she was not surprised that the Nadal fans went elsewhere. So S_A tell then if my comment was made out of thin air with no relation to what that sentence says?????

You weigh in without reading what was posted and for that You have drawn out your comments towards me which is daft.

Your saying about not liking tennis styles fine, but you could cover up your dislike for the posters a bit better.

The thing is as well is did we get a similar thread having digs at Federer's First Round performance which was not perfect. No - because he won and that is all that matters so why the need to over-analyse and take the chance to character assassinate Rafael Nadal?

Simple_Analyst,

Since we are talking about intelligence, can you use your intelligence to answer this simple question? Are you the pathetic moping WUM unbiased_educator from the old 606 who formerly worked as the Nadal but*-wip*r? Just say yes or no. Is it too tough?

You don't sound as a moron exactly like him. But you do seem to be avoiding answering that question. Why is that so?

bogbrush wrote:

What I mean in tennis is that every time you come to the ball you have choices; slice, drive, middle, left right, deep, short, hard, soft, spin. To play the same one, over and over, would be boring to most people. However, if you don't have a very low boredom threshold then you might not mind. It would help in that respect not to be overburdened with imagination.

That isn't a low boredom threshold, that is extreme self discipline which is to be admired. If you know that your opponent's backhand will start shanking the place up if you keep pummelling it with heavy topspin but you have to stick at it to get results, you would have to be totally stupid or severely lacking in self discipline to attempt anything else or Tursunov.

You think it would be a sign of a high tennis IQ for Karlovic to stop serving bombs and roll a few in just to enjoy the odd rally from the baseline? Of course not. Have the self-discipline to do what you do well over and over until it gets you the W.

The other point is that Nadal doesn't play the same way against everybody. Murray, Gasquet, Nalbandian to name a few have much more reliable backhands than forehands so that is the place that Nadal will target to break down.

To my eyes Nadal plays one of the smartest games out there. Whether it is Nadal alone or Nadal and his team really makes no difference but he/they is/are very adept at finding out exactly what makes the opponent most uncomfortable but in matches Nadal has the tremendous self discipline to stick to the gameplan while it is working and the flexibility to change it when it isn't.

So what about Djokovic? So there is one player who at the moment has his number. Against everyone else he is the heavy favourite, especially in slams. He solves the Djokovic problem and only injury will stand in the way of him getting to 16+ slams.

I still strongly back him to do so but whether he makes it or not, he is still the best tennis player that I have ever seen by some distance.

icecold wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

What I mean in tennis is that every time you come to the ball you have choices; slice, drive, middle, left right, deep, short, hard, soft, spin. To play the same one, over and over, would be boring to most people. However, if you don't have a very low boredom threshold then you might not mind. It would help in that respect not to be overburdened with imagination.

That isn't a low boredom threshold, that is extreme self discipline which is to be admired. If you know that your opponent's backhand will start shanking the place up if you keep pummelling it with heavy topspin but you have to stick at it to get results, you would have to be totally stupid or severely lacking in self discipline to attempt anything else or Tursunov.

You think it would be a sign of a high tennis IQ for Karlovic to stop serving bombs and roll a few in just to enjoy the odd rally from the baseline? Of course not. Have the self-discipline to do what you do well over and over until it gets you the W.

The other point is that Nadal doesn't play the same way against everybody. Murray, Gasquet, Nalbandian to name a few have much more reliable backhands than forehands so that is the place that Nadal will target to break down.

To my eyes Nadal plays one of the smartest games out there. Whether it is Nadal alone or Nadal and his team really makes no difference but he/they is/are very adept at finding out exactly what makes the opponent most uncomfortable but in matches Nadal has the tremendous self discipline to stick to the gameplan while it is working and the flexibility to change it when it isn't.

So what about Djokovic? So there is one player who at the moment has his number. Against everyone else he is the heavy favourite, especially in slams. He solves the Djokovic problem and only injury will stand in the way of him getting to 16+ slams.I still strongly back him to do so but whether he makes it or not, he is still the best tennis player that I have ever seen by some distance.

I beg to differ. This is the USO, not RG or W.

Nadal is not a HEAVY favourite against Murray, Del Potro or Fed if those guys bring their best HC games. I think their fast HC games are superior to Nadal's, especially this Nadal.

Apart from last year's win at the USO, Rafa actually has a poor fast HC resume. Until he proves otherwise, that succes was an anomaly not the norm.

There are many players right now that would fancy their chances against him.

To suggest that he would walk through the rest of the field is blind fanboyism. Rafa has never totally dominated the field, especially not on HC's. Even in his best year (2010) he lost 10 matches; he's never been able to dominate the way Roger did for years, or the way Djoko is doing right now.

16 slams is a long way off, whether or not he does manage to 'solve the Djokovic riddle'. Do you think the field is gonna stand still? Younger players will come through, and as they mature and improve, things will only get harder for Nadal.

Besides, his style is hardly conducive to longevity, and he doesn't have the variety to adapt further; he's already made all the changes to his game that he was ever going to make. Over the years he's learnt to add a small net game (consisting mainly of drop volleys; you'll rarely, if ever, see him play a punch volley), he's learnt to move further up the court, be more aggressive and shorten points. For a while he managed to flatten out his CC BH and he added some pace to his serve.

However, all of this was up untill last year.

THIS year, he has clearly regressed. His game now resemble the 06-07 game but with less explosiveness and a reduced ability to retrieve. His entire arsenal can be summed up as follows: great CC FH and IO FH and still great movement and of course his fighting spirit and endurance. Unfortunately, his BH has become a liability, all he does with it is basically through off-pace loopy shots. They only time he seems to hit it with any pace is when he goes for a passinng shot - he just doesn't have the confidence to do it in the middle of a rally anymore. His net game has been absent since W. His serve has reverted to the 07 level, but the percentages are worse.

Of course, a lot of this is to do with confidence. Nadal desperately needs to get his mojo back, but as long as Djoko is waiting for him at the business end of tournaments I suspect Nadal will continue to play with fear.



emancipator - bringing home reality

THIS year, he (Nadal) has clearly regressed.

Disagree. Last year he simply had no opposition. Most top players were under par or injured. This year take Djoko aside and Nadal would have had his best year thus far!

Nadal is not on the decline. That's really a myth.

icecold wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

What I mean in tennis is that every time you come to the ball you have choices; slice, drive, middle, left right, deep, short, hard, soft, spin. To play the same one, over and over, would be boring to most people. However, if you don't have a very low boredom threshold then you might not mind. It would help in that respect not to be overburdened with imagination.

That isn't a low boredom threshold, that is extreme self discipline which is to be admired. If you know that your opponent's backhand will start shanking the place up if you keep pummelling it with heavy topspin but you have to stick at it to get results, you would have to be totally stupid or severely lacking in self discipline to attempt anything else or Tursunov.

You think it would be a sign of a high tennis IQ for Karlovic to stop serving bombs and roll a few in just to enjoy the odd rally from the baseline? Of course not. Have the self-discipline to do what you do well over and over until it gets you the W.

The other point is that Nadal doesn't play the same way against everybody. Murray, Gasquet, Nalbandian to name a few have much more reliable backhands than forehands so that is the place that Nadal will target to break down.

To my eyes Nadal plays one of the smartest games out there. Whether it is Nadal alone or Nadal and his team really makes no difference but he/they is/are very adept at finding out exactly what makes the opponent most uncomfortable but in matches Nadal has the tremendous self discipline to stick to the gameplan while it is working and the flexibility to change it when it isn't.

So what about Djokovic? So there is one player who at the moment has his number. Against everyone else he is the heavy favourite, especially in slams. He solves the Djokovic problem and only injury will stand in the way of him getting to 16+ slams.

I still strongly back him to do so but whether he makes it or not, he is still the best tennis player that I have ever seen by some distance.

Great post!

Another lame post from someone confusing the wisdom of executing the only tactic that will take you to victory with the intellectual capacity to become thoroughly bored doing it.

I keep wondering why I have so much trouble explaining the difficulty a high IQ person would have with that that I'm starting to wonder whether it's analgous to trying to explain the colour red to a person blind from birth.

Gosh, lot of posts since last visited this thread!

Positively 4th Street wrote:Hi tp,

I don't like to rehash an old debate, but, whilst I agree that the MTO at Wimbledon in 2009 looked decidedly tactical, I still don't get the fuss around the one this year against Del Potro. Nadal had just hit the shot of the match (in my view) and had a good chance of landing the set. No one has convinced me yet why he would throw a tactical MTO at that juncture

Hi Positively - you may well be right, I probably am slightly quick to judge because of 2010 (he didn't compete in 2009). To me, I think it could have waited for one more game and the end of the set, and Rafa went on to play not gingerly, but sublimely after effectively disrupting Delpos' rhythm before serving. If he had fought valiantly and won, but looked as if the ankle/foot was giving him a bit of grief in his movement after that, I wouldn't comment.

icecold wrote:
To my eyes Nadal plays one of the smartest games out there. Whether it is Nadal alone or Nadal and his team really makes no difference but he/they is/are very adept at finding out exactly what makes the opponent most uncomfortable but in matches Nadal has the tremendous self discipline to stick to the gameplan while it is working and the flexibility to change it when it isn't.

I really enjoyed reading your post icecold, I agree with the above - the only caveat I would add is that, while I agree that Team work is important and it really doesn't matter who is the master strategist because at the end of the day it is Rafa who has to execute - I do think that the on court coaching by Toni should have been dealt with very firmly, and that there are many occasion when he should have been banned from the courtside because he is clearly in breach of the rules. I can think of no other player that would not face the severest censure on this board and all others by posters of all persuasions had they related a similar anecdote to the one Rafa did about USO in his autobiography.

Having said all of that - I think Rafa is perhaps the best competitor out of any sports I have ever seen. He is a wonderful player and a true great of the game, I just wish that the on court etiquette was a little bit better on occasions. Futhermore, I wouldn't be surprised to see him beat Fed's 16 because I can't see who will stop him apart from Novak. Both Fed and he are greats of the game, and whoever ends up with the highest amount of slams will not take anything away from the other's achievements imo.

PS to Craig and SA - enough with the jacket ok - the same year Nike had a building size poster of a shirtless Nadal with a deep tan, wearing nothing but a sultry expression and a huge Nike tick on his chest which dominated Paris (bit unfortunate as it turned out!). Of course Fed didn't have a lackey stitching the jacket - it was handed to him before the trophy ceremony. Nike has an image for its three big stars, all of whom have either their name, nickname or initials on their shoes - RF, Rafa, and Delpo and they absolutely will have a '17' jacket waiting in the wings if Rafa is ever on 16 slams and contesting a slam final for his 17th!

icecold wrote:


That isn't a low boredom threshold, that is extreme self discipline which is to be admired. If you know that your opponent's backhand will start shanking the place up if you keep pummelling it with heavy topspin but you have to stick at it to get results, you would have to be totally stupid or severely lacking in self discipline to attempt anything else or Tursunov.

Extreme self discipline can also be seen as lack of creativity, imagination or courage to be able to go out of the usual path. You stick to any level of self discipline which is fine for winning. But if winning is all that matters to viewers in tennis then certainly we all don't watch the same game. Personally I like to see creativity, the courage to be able to dictate play with shot-making, and ability of shrug off the unforced error that may come by, ability to win on one's own game-skill rather than continuously trying to take advantage of the opponent's weakness. In an interview Federer was asked about the large % of unforced errors he was getting in 2008-early 2009, he answered that he never worries about the errors, its all fine as long as it was the right shot.

icecold wrote:
You think it would be a sign of a high tennis IQ for Karlovic to stop serving bombs and roll a few in just to enjoy the odd rally from the baseline? Of course not. Have the self-discipline to do what you do well over and over until it gets you the W.

It would certainly be a sign of courage, creativity and ability to think out of one's comfort zone. And this all needs high IQ. Serve is Karlovic's greatest skill and a positive skill, he didn't try to take advantage of anyone's weakness or breaking down. He need not stop that,he can continue it and try to build a few more things like rallying from baseline. How far can he do it? This depends on his natural talent which I think is limited ( not his fault, the great height gives power and ability to serve with with unique trajectory and great power, but reduces his court mobility).

You keep harping on getting the W. If getting the W is everything then there is nothing left to discuss about tennis at all. The winner is better, the loser is poor. Done. One can win against an opponent but does he/she have the courage to face ones own daemons? The race in the end is always against one's own self. For me playing with creativity, courage and variety is always more important than a W.

icecold wrote:
The other point is that Nadal doesn't play the same way against everybody. Murray, Gasquet, Nalbandian to name a few have much more reliable backhands than forehands so that is the place that Nadal will target to break down.

Nadal doesn't play the same way against everyone? By "same way" its not a literal meaning, its the manner. If he can't break down Murray's backhand he will try to breakdown his forehand. If he can't break down either the he will try outlast him in long rallies and breakdown his stamina and lung capacity.See it now? The attempt is always to play is the same game, trying to breakdown the opponent no matter who he plays.

icecold wrote:
To my eyes Nadal plays one of the smartest games out there. Whether it is Nadal alone or Nadal and his team really makes no difference but he/they is/are very adept at finding out exactly what makes the opponent most uncomfortable but in matches Nadal has the tremendous self discipline to stick to the gameplan while it is working and the flexibility to change it when it isn't.

Smartest is not always the greatest and not even necessarily be positive. If you are overwhelmed by this kind of smartness the there are many cons, politicians, criminals who are very smart in their own deeds to taking advantage of a weak system. Are you still going to appreciate that smartness?

If Nadal had the flexibility to change his "self desciplined gameplan" why he didn't do it in any of the 5 consecutive losses to Djo this year. He could most certainly have tried it defending his wimbledon title. Do you want to say he played any different in any of those games from what he played in the previous matches against Djo. Not at all. If you look at even their all previous matches ( regardless of wins or losses) Nadal has played the same game every single time. But Djo nowadays plays different. See their matches from previous years and you'll know it. Djo has realized that he doesn't need to go for outright winners against Nadal, He can stay in the ralley with him and outlast him. Nadal can't break him down at all, the way he could have to Federer (on clay primarily). See the way he gestures pointing at his head in the 4th set in wimbledon 2011 finals against Nadal( I hope some would remember it, because it was important) as if he exactly knew what he had to do. And he was right.

icecold wrote:
So what about Djokovic? So there is one player who at the moment has his number. Against everyone else he is the heavy favourite, especially in slams. He solves the Djokovic problem and only injury will stand in the way of him getting to 16+ slams.

Not only Djo, even Murray has Nadal's numbers in terms of what game to play against him. After the semis loss in Monte Carlo he said its possible to beat Nadal only if one is patient and is able to ralley with him. If fact anyone's numbers aren't any big secret at all. Its just the ability to be able to execute it is what is the difficult part. Federer's backhand (in fact any SHBH) is weak against high bouncing spinning ball, everyone knew it but only Nadal is the player who was able to execute it perfectly time and again.

icecold wrote: He solves the Djokovic problem and only injury will stand in the way of him getting to 16+ slams.

You say it as if its a matter of a slightest adjustment and it will all be fine. . Don't bring the injury thing. Nadal fans bring injuries as if its only Nadal who gets injuries and had career affected by them. There are numerous skilled good players who have faced injuries and have their careers hampered. If one's own injuries hurt a players' chance to win big in careers then at another time the injuries to other player even benefit them. Lot of players benefit from injuries to other players and that includes Nadal too ( I'm not giving e.g because its not needed ). So usually in the long run they can even out ( not always but largely). Nadal's injuries are self inflicted by his own playing style. The same playing style which has got him 10 slams and 19 masters and thats what fans like you love to watch him play. So don't complain.

icecold wrote: I still strongly back him to do so but whether he makes it or not, he is still the best tennis player that I have ever seen by some distance.

Now this is a Nadal fanboy talking and not an impartial tennis fan. He is the best player that you have seen by some distance. Fine. Anyone is free to pick up their best and greatest players that they have seen. It also comes down to how many players one has one seen playing.

Excellent post raiders.

I agree that I cannot see how Nadal will "solve" the Djokovic problem. He had the advantage of being able to set his game against Federer, who had come before him and whose game was based on something different from Nadal. Against Djokovic the boot is on the other foot; Djokovic has worked out the one key thing about Nadals game that everything else depends on, and sabotaged it. He can outlast him. This leaves Nadal having to do something he basically cannot, which is to hit winners from all over the place for 4 hours - just as Federer can't hit high backhands for 4 hours.

Just as Fed has basically never had an answer to that, neither can Nadal ever answer this problem, especially as his physical peak has been reached.

Think people miss the point of 'Practice makes perfect'

I see the Nadal bashing thread is taking a new direction. I think the above poster is a clear Fed fanboy.

Someone show me a tennis player that picked up a tennis racquet and turned pro by 1 shot. Not going to happen. Even the greatest players in the game had to practice for crying out loud.

Think of your day jobs peeps. That is repetitive. So can I expect a load of P45's being handed in today??