Who Will Retire First, Federer Or Nadal?

The answer is not as obvious as their age might suggest.

I reckon they will both retire in 2014.

Roger = if not after the olympics then 2013
rafa = aged 29 ( i just worry that's he's knees are going to give out at some point in the near future)

fernando wrote:Roger = if not after the olympics then 2013
rafa = aged 29 ( i just worry that's he's knees are going to give out at some point in the near future)

Assuming Nadal is 25 , that means 2015.

I honestly don't think Nadal will be able to hold on at the top for long. I don;t believe the injuries will be the problem. I stopped believing in those knee problems in 2009. Science can give you new and stronger knees nowadays. However, his game is going to be overtaken by the new generation very quickly. Despite all people say, his game is one dimensional and it's a question of time before the new players handle this heavy CC topspin FH. Especially now that all players have a DHBH.

In the past Nadal had one or 2 tough earlier rounds in slams and TMS but soon everybdoy will give him a hard time. He will be spent like Ferrero before reaching the final stages.

He'll have a quick end (or drop the ranking) like Chang, Wilander, Borg (had he stayed), Hewitt, Bruguerra and many others. If anything I am surprised he was not overtaken earlier but that is due to a poor form of top players in 2010 and of course science maintaining him healthy. But science cannot give you a new game.

I am happy to take bets on.

Tenez wrote:I honestly don't think Nadal will be able to hold on at the top for long. I don;t believe the injuries will be the problem. I stopped believing in those knee problems in 2009. Science can give you new and stronger knees nowadays. However, his game is going to be overtaken by the new generation very quickly. Despite all people say, his game is one dimensional and it's a question of time before the new players handle this heavy CC topspin FH. Especially now that all players have a DHBH.

In the past Nadal had one or 2 tough earlier rounds in slams and TMS but soon everybdoy will give him a hard time. He will be spent like Ferrero before reaching the final stages.

He'll have a quick end (or drop the ranking) like Chang, Wilander, Borg (had he stayed), Hewitt, Bruguerra and many others. If anything I am surprised he was not overtaken earlier but that is due to a poor form of top players in 2010 and of course science maintaining him healthy. But science cannot give you a new game.

I am happy to take bets on.

So who do you think will retire first?

I don't know but the younger will go down the ranking faster than the other.

Nadal has pretty much won everything, and in my opinion does not look as hungry as Federer.
Federer does not have Davis Cup (little chance for that) and he does not have an Olympic singles medal.
I somehow I have the feeling he also thinks/wants that extra week or more as a number one, so he has plenty of motivation.
I may be wrong because I have never followed Nadal closely, but from my perspective he comes across as someone who doesn't enjoy tennis.
I also think he hates not being number one even more than Federer, despite the "humble" talk.
2012 will be a great inidcator where he goes, more so than for Federer who seems to have found his cruise mode and schedule.

noleisthebest wrote:Nadal has pretty much won everything, and in my opinion does not look as hungry as Federer.

I think Nadal had an opportunistic approach. Everythong he won was great and almost a surprise. I don't think he could have envisaged doing as well with his tennis. But he got used to success though.

Federer does not have Davis Cup (little chance for that) and he does not have an Olympic singles medal.

He only has next year for the singles gold but I m not sure he is desperate for either.

I somehow I have the feeling he also thinks/wants that extra week or more as a number one, so he has plenty of motivation.

agree. I think he is annoyed to have missed out on that number of weeks cause of a bug before Dubai.

I may be wrong because I have never followed Nadal closely, but from my perspective he comes across as someone who doesn't enjoy tennis.

You right. It's physically too demanding for him to enjoy it. He doesn;t play around with the ball, he whacks it.

I also think he hates not being number one even more than Federer, despite the "humble" talk.

I think what he hates is being moved around by more skilful players such as Davydenko, Djoko, Murray (more recently). He knows he has to cover lots of ground to stay with them and he really looks outsmarted. That he hates I am sure. He managed to win a lot of these matches over the distance when those guys were younger but now that they can stay with him, he hates it. In a way very much like Borg hated being outplayed by McEnroe.

2012 will be a great inidcator where he goes, more so than for Federer who seems to have found his cruise mode and schedule.

2012 will indeed be crucial for Nadal but Fed also cause though I think he plays as well as ever he is certainly going to feel it physically very soon, so if he wants to add slams it's 2012...or never.

Federer today:

“I always plan in the long term,” Federer said. “I know how grueling it is out there. Even I need my time away.”

That's what "we" don't see. We think it;s a tennis match but physically it's bloody tough.

I said on the old 606 that when Nadal goes, it'll be like he drove off a cliff. There'll be no middle ground for that guy; one minute he'll look like the Rafa of the last 6 years, the next thing he'll be ragged.

I have no idea when that will happen. Right now only one player has really sorted out how to do him, although I think Murray may have picked up much of the play (though his hopeless forehand really does hold him back). What might keep Nadal at the top of the game is how long it's going to take for a few younger players to adopt the same style.

Tenez wrote:Federer today:

“I always plan in the long term,” Federer said. “I know how grueling it is out there. Even I need my time away.”

That what "we" don't see. We think it;s a tennis match but physically it's bloody tough.

I never, ever think "it's a tennis match" although I have never played anywhere near their level (and even that sounds too kind to my skill ).
I have pushed myself, though, so I have the rough idea how a body feels after a bit of effort. I have nothing but utter admiration for what Nole has done this year bearing in mind what competition he had to face and how physically stronger they are than him.
I seriously don't know how they can get their bodies going during those back to back day after day matches masters tournaments, let alone 5 setters at slams, despite all the physios etc. They are all so disciplined and hats off to them all, really.

Yes and this is why youngsters can't get through anymore. As talented as they can be, if they haven't got an gully grown adult body, they won't get far down the draw.

Neither of them will retire before Djoker!

Ha ha! So all the exclusive fans of Federer and Djokovic hope sorry predict an early retirement for Nadal. Nadals retirement has been predicted for years. Yawn...

Tenez wrote:Yes and this is why youngsters can't get through anymore. As talented as they can be, if they haven't got an gully grown adult body, they won't get far down the draw.

That is part of the problem; the other problem is that we haven't had a tennis prodigy for a while now.
Talented, yes, but not outrageously talented, which is normal, just look at the state of WTA.

Rafa's going nowhere soon.

He has been written off before and come back strong.

Only Djokovic this year has shown that he can best Nadal in a best of five match when the latter is fit. How long can Novak keep this up.? I'm pretty certain that The Nadull has a few slam vctories over Novak left in him.

As for the other guys, Fed has little chance of beating Rafa in BO5 format. Murray too judging by this year. The rest of the top ten even less. There is NO-ONE in the 'new breed' that can live with Rafa.

Rafa will be around for a long time.

He is a beast. His inherent advantages of being a lefty and having that incredible topspin FH will ensure that he remains a top contender for a number of years yet. He is still probably the fittest guy on tour.

I expect him to decline slowly, similar to Fed, maybe slightly more precipitiously.

When all is said and done, I have no doubt that The Nadull will have a fearsome legacy to rival even that of Federer's.



emancipator - there is no place for fanciful, wishful sentiment.

hawkeye wrote:Ha ha! So all the exclusive fans of Federer and Djokovic hope sorry predict an early retirement for Nadal. Nadals retirement has been predicted for years. Yawn...

I must admit I reckoned without the various treatments such as the blood therapy, but then excuse me for not knowing the latest versions of medical treatment.
Indeed they might keep him going for years, and with the lack of depth in the game today - probably unparalleled - maybe you're right and he'll stay at the top for ages. Certainly I've never seem a time when every Masters and Slam has been owned by the top 4, and indeed at the big events there's hardly been any disturbing the top 4 from the semi-final berths.

And they call this a Golden Era!

hawkeye wrote:Ha ha! So all the exclusive fans of Federer and Djokovic hope sorry predict an early retirement for Nadal. Nadals retirement has been predicted for years. Yawn...

Nobody predicted an early retirement for Nadal yet. I'm assuming you are a Nadal fan, so knowing him better what do you think?

noleisthebest wrote:

Tenez wrote:Yes and this is why youngsters can't get through anymore. As talented as they can be, if they haven't got an gully grown adult body, they won't get far down the draw.

That is part of the problem; the other problem is that we haven't had a tennis prodigy for a while now.
Talented, yes, but not outrageously talented, which is normal, just look at the state of WTA.

We actually don't know about that cause it's simply too physical. Federer is probably the most talented in history, yet already in 2000/02 it was too tough physically for him to make a impression and win a slam at 17 or 20 like his precessors did. With Nadal's arrival that put the bar even higher. Djoko was abit lucky to get his slam at 20 without having to face Nadal or a fit Federer cause he had to wait another 3 years to get finally slam fit.

I actually think some youngsters are immensely talented but we will only find out when they are 24. It's getting like cycling actually. There is no prodigy in cycling winning the TDF cause regardess of teh skills, it's too physical.

nitb

Don't rule out Novak going before either especially if he continues to punish his body picking up all that Siverware!

However hopefully not.

"Djoko was abit lucky to get his slam at 20 without having to face Nadal or a fit Federer cause he had to wait another 3 years to get finally slam fit. "

Spoken like a true Federer fan, he,he....
As for the other argument, I think 22-23-24 is the ideal time for starting winning slams on a regular basis.
Nole is a prodigy, maybe not to your liking, but he is one.
I agree that physicality of the game now has made it more difficult, but definitely not impossible. You just need someone with a great serve and forehand and you can be off and away (Tsonga).
Look at Simon, Davydenko, Tsonga etc, I don't think it's the fitness that's stopped them from winning a slam.

sportslover wrote:nitb

Don't rule out Novak going before either especially if he continues to punish his body picking up all that Siverware!

However hopefully not.

Nole is way too hungry to be even thinking about retirement. He may slow down if he develops serious injuries, I trust he is smart enough to have realised that by now and will act and plan his schedule accordingly.

He has already fulfilled a lot of his ambition, but he absolutely madly loves tennis to be tiring of it even without having to strive towards winning Wimbledon and becoming world number one.
I think he is enjoying the new role very much and has probably found it quite an honour and new challenge he probably wasn't aware of while he was in the process of achieving it.

For any successful professional tennis player to retire early it would take a catastrophic career ending injury or a decision to stop playing because they no longer enjoy it.

Both are relatively rare although I can think of some recent examples in the womens game. Who could predict the first cause. With the second I believe there are sometimes signs. I certainly don't see any of these signs in Nadal, Federer (he is of course getting older so he won't have an "early" retirement) or Djokovic. I did earlier this year and last year think that Murray didn't look too happy. But he's looked a lot jollier lately.

noleisthebest wrote:"Djoko was abit lucky to get his slam at 20 without having to face Nadal or a fit Federer cause he had to wait another 3 years to get finally slam fit. "
Look at Simon, Davydenko, Tsonga etc, I don't think it's the fitness that's stopped them from winning a slam.

It is. It's producing those great shots over time and under pression. Pressure is greater for them than the physical players who gain in confidence as the match extends.

It's actually what Tsonga said when facing your man. "You pull a great risky shot but it comes back and then yu have to do it again and again. " or something like that.

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:"Djoko was abit lucky to get his slam at 20 without having to face Nadal or a fit Federer cause he had to wait another 3 years to get finally slam fit. "
Look at Simon, Davydenko, Tsonga etc, I don't think it's the fitness that's stopped them from winning a slam.

It is. It's producing those great shots over time and under pression. Pressure is greater for them than the physical players who gain in confidence as the match extends.

It's actually what Tsonga said when facing your man. "You pull a great risky shot but it comes back and then yu have to do it again and again. " or something like that.

You're making it sound like Nole's a counter-puncher which he is not.
If you go into a tennis-mindset you can either go for it full-on (if you've got an exceptional serve and forehand) or if you don't you can refuse to give an inch of your territory and strike as soon as the opportunity presents itself, or...I don't even want to contemplate the other options, they may provide a good setting, but are frustrating to play. Counter-puncing is almost like wumming.

If those shots were so "great" they wouldn't need to be produced over and over again. Shots down the line rather than cross-courts are always an option, but few chose to use it...

noleisthebest wrote:If those shots were so "great" they wouldn't need to be produced over and over again. ...

You would think that. Not anymore unfortunately. They do come back....like they came back to Nole when he was being beaten by Nadal.

Fed will retire when his wifes says so.
Nadal, when his knees crumble.
Djokovic, when he wins enough money.

If Fed does not win a slam in 2012(very likely since we see his struggles in BO5 these days for 2 yrs. now), then he will retire at the end of 2012. In BO3, Fed still has chances but in BO5 we can see his last 2 slam performances he was 2 sets up and lost! Bad omen for the future at slams. If slams were BO3, Fed would have won his matches at Wimbledon vs Tsonga and at USO vs Djokovic. But BO5 is a another story...