The Latest Interview (Nadal's , Who Else's)

First topic message reminder :

Just as we have successfully discussed fast courts to death, to our rescue comes , who else but Rafa Nadal.

In his latest interview, he tackles another 606v2's favourite topics: time violation.

http://www.tennis.com/articles/templates/news.aspx?articleid=16795&zoneid=25

No prizes for guessing what he thinks about them....


The intro and Nadal's interview aside, I think that enforcing the 20 seconds rule would sort out the game quicker & better than anything else.

Since the umpires are obviously gutless and underpaid and don't have any say in all this, the onus is on tournament organisers to install visible clocks on courts and see what happens.

Tenez:

This is what I had:

Set1:
Game 2: 24, 20, 19, 19, 27
Game 4: 34, 19, 20
Game 6: 20, 65 (Nadal racquet change), 20, 18, 40
Game 8: 21, 30, 23, 23, 36

Set 2:
Game 1: 20, 20, 23, 21, 31
Game 3: 34, 37, 28, 26, 33
Game 5: 45, 17, 20, 19, 28
Game 7: 64 (Federer racquet change), 20, 35, 45, 32
Game 9: 39, 24, 21, 32, 47

This is all a manual exercise, so we will not agree exactly but we seem to match the first game quite closely (in fact I think you may have missed one quick 19s point there).

For my averages, I excluded the two points with racquet changes. Federer was serving first in the first set, Nadal in the second. So obviously I did not count Nadal's first service point in each game in the first set (was coming after the changeover) but I did count his first service points in the second set. They do tend to be slower so they push the average up a bit.

Look, I have no reason to intentionally misrepresent the data, given that I am probably much closer to your viewpoint on this topic than to Lydian's. However, it is what it is.

Feel free to spotcheck and if you find errors we can discuss. However, if the numbers hold up, would it be so hard to admit that in this very specific and particular item you were wrong and move on? That does not mean that what Nadal is doing is not deliberate, or perhaps that he may have indeed beefed up his routine over time intentionally, but it does show that he was already on the slow side in 2004.

Yeah, frankly Nitb for me I agree the reason he does it is secondary. He should follow the rule and it should be enforced.

ON lighter note, Gazza out, Murray out; Novak's half opening nicely for him. Although frankly I don't think he needs much help. Always plays this tourney well.

Calder106 wrote:No you are the one showing the bias. If everyone else played inside the rule and Nadal was the only one playing outside of it then he would be isolated and there would be a lot more pressure for him to play inside the rule. By saying its ok for others to do it because Nadal is double standards. Two wrongs do not make a right. I'm not a Nadal supporter and have no issues if he gets time violatons or loses points through it.

You don't want to understand it, do you? As Nadal got away with it ...., the other players got the signal it was ok to break it. There was no serial rule breaker before Nadal hence there was no problem. I can't remember before Nadal, anyone breaking the rule consistently.

If I knew the top player was doping and knew that the ATP and ITF knew it and were saying nothing, I would dope too. Why would I try to come second best every time?

There is no point talking about the successors of the rule breaker cause as the original one was not penalised for it and won 10 slams outside the rule, I can't see why anyone woudl want to respect it....unless it helps their case.

socal1976 wrote:Yeah, frankly Nitb for me I agree the reason he does it is secondary. He should follow the rule and it should be enforced.

ON lighter note, Gazza out, Murray out; Novak's half opening nicely for him. Although frankly I don't think he needs much help. Always plays this tourney well.

But do you see my point regarding Nadal?

Yes, Nole's draw has opened up nicely, his toughest opponent until the semis will be Anderson. I hope they play it in the evening.
Looks pretty hot there at the moment.
Where are you at the moment, US?

summerblues wrote:Tenez:

This is what I had:

Set1:
Game 2: 24, 20, 19, 19, 27

Yes I guess I can trust your data as we have very close results. But to me he is only on the slow side in Miami 04 (though I'd need to see more of it) because he probably got breathless and not because it was planned. Clearly his first game shows no slowness and a will to get on with it. THis is what I always debated. Now he purposedly takes time and get a routine from the word go.

This is why my original point stands. There was a clip on Youtube showing just 10 days later a match between Nadal and Ferrero (I believe) and there you could here the commentator complaining of Nadal's extra taking time (probably the routine being implemented for the first time after the Miami 05 debacle).

This a well known match. Both players seem to violate the rules.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Xua9xHSL7g&feature=BFa&list=PLD2B29FCD7657BCFB&lf=results_main

(Look at Part 14 if this link does not bring up the correct part of the match).

Visual observation will clearly tell which of the two players needs longer recovery from long rallies.

Your usual reply when somebody disagrees with you. 'You don't understand it'. Whatever the problem it is in the present and a number of players are doing it so singling out one because he may have been the first to do it and exonerating the others is wrong.

In your example if you got caught would you say there no point charging me because he did it first.

noleisthebest wrote:I'm almost convinced that number crunching and statistic here are just a smoke-screen.

Oh but that is not a very nice thing to say. I will readily admit that we can only glean so much from my number crunching, and am also happy to hear arguments that explain why the numbers may be misleading (if you think they are). However, a "smoke-screen" suggests a deliberate attempt to mislead. Cannot prove it to you, but I am pretty certain I am not doing that.

socal1976 wrote:Nitb, I am interested in what you and lags have to say. What exactly are you talking about, are you directing your comments at me? Because frankly you are making a point and being vague about it and Lags is right that making assumptions about supposed knowledge people do or do not possess is not a credible subsititute for making a factual argument.

You can understand a problem without having exposure to the problem, but clearly having exposure helps.

You have failed to understand what tiring is at tennis and have made the parallel with biathlon to make it clearer to you but clearly you do not seem to get it.

Nadal himself says he needs more time to play his "amazing" rallies...meaning his rallies woudl be less amazing if he had not that extra time. It also means that without those "amazing" rallies he would be less likely to win as he thrives in those long gruelling ones.

What can yuo really add to that? Your theory that the extra time is an advantage to his opponent shows you don;t understand the different physiques needed for different styles.

summerblues wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I'm almost convinced that number crunching and statistic here are just a smoke-screen.

Oh but that is not a very nice thing to say. I will readily admit that we can only glean so much from my number crunching, and am also happy to hear arguments that explain why the numbers may be misleading (if you think they are). However, a "smoke-screen" suggests a deliberate attempt to mislead. Cannot prove it to you, but I am pretty certain I am not doing that.

I never try to take a long route if there's a shortcut available, that was my point. Esp. if I can get lost by taking the long route. Which is what I did when I started looking at all those figures.

Figures, just like small print just confuse. Me, at least.

Calder106 wrote:In your example if you got caught would you say there no point charging me because he did it first.

Of course. And this is why Odesnik got away with less than a year being caught red handed! In fact the ITF wished teh Australian customs had not caught him in teh first place. Odesnik got a shorter sentence cause he said he would with the anti-doping but what he did actually is no help by not releasing any information. Rusedski also got away like that. "if yuo want to get me, you will have to get the "big name" too.

If Agassi dopes, the ITF knows it and you know teh ITF and ATP are doing nothing, I can't see why I should not dope too. It's very different from suspecting someone of doping but no-one knows, nor the ATP. But once teh referees and ATP accpets that a top player breaks the rule why woudl the other try to enforce it?

We know that the day they enforce it to Nadal, they will enforce it to everybody else. Until then, no point trying to respect it. It woudl be absurd and the first breaking the rule consistently is the main culprit. That's how it works. Two wrongs don't make a right but a wrong and a right make it even less right!

summerblues wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I'm almost convinced that number crunching and statistic here are just a smoke-screen.

Oh but that is not a very nice thing to say. I will readily admit that we can only glean so much from my number crunching, and am also happy to hear arguments that explain why the numbers may be misleading (if you think they are). However, a "smoke-screen" suggests a deliberate attempt to mislead. Cannot prove it to you, but I am pretty certain I am not doing that.

Not from you but for having discussed tennis matter for years with Lydian, I trust "smoke screen" can certainly be an appropriate word.

laverfan wrote:This a well known match. Both players seem to violate the rules.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Xua9xHSL7g&feature=BFa&list=PLD2B29FCD7657BCFB&lf=results_main

(Look at Part 14 if this link does not bring up the correct part of the match).

Visual observation will clearly tell which of the two players needs longer recovery from long rallies.

Nole looks so cute and almost chubby compared to now, in his gluten-free days...

Not getting into the diversion conversation especially on the subject you are trying to raise again. I've said what I think I'll rest my case.

NITB: Fair enough

Another UNBELIEVABLE comment from Nadal:

http://www.tennis.com/articles/templates/news.aspx?articleid=16816&zoneid=25

LOL Tenez.
Firstly as a nadal fan I know nadal had the habit from before 2005, I've watched far more of nadal than you have. Just watch some of his matches, how about his davis cup match against Roddick when he was a teen. I don't have to provide evidence, it's bloomin obvious- just watch it.
Secondly you're attempt of blaming everything on Nadal is pathetic. I believe the rule should be enforced on everyone. You're saying the time taking of Djokovic and co. is Nadals fault- that shows your agenda. Pathetic really.

noleisthebest

That is a great scoop. This article is old news now that Nadal has spoken again. You should do a new article. If you don't maybe I will...

That is the wrong mindset to take into a Djokovic match NITB, serving slower is exactly what Novak feeds on. Rafa's mentally of 'just keep it in and he will rack up the mistakes' will only work agai9nst weak/dire returners.

Nadal is talking about the speed of his serve in mph...I dont agree with him either but its his opinion.

Tenez, I really dont believe you at times. You're the one who talked non-stop about Nadal changing his time strategy between serves after Miami 2005, and that before it he was serving nearly all serves under 20s, etc, etc, many under 17s.

Now that you have been debunked on that utterly and completely you start to wriggle and seek shift the goalposts by talking of others providing smokescreens. Nice try Tenez! Yet you were the one doing that very thing all along in building a smokescreen! Because you were plain wrong...and yet you sought to convince everyone of your story from factually incorrect information. NITB may agree with you in saying its all a smokescreen but perhaps she's forgotten that it was YOU who provided the smokescreen in the first place by going on about Nadal's fast serving prior to clay season 2005! The data provided here on this thread is to show you were wrong. Whether Nadal should stick to 20s or not is a different discussion. This is about you being wrong on those crucial points you have long put forward on Nadal's timing "strategy".

So just admit you were wrong on those facts, like summerblues also says, because you dont have a leg to stand on here regarding your "information"....and everyone can see it. Makes me wonder how much other stuff you go on about is also factually correct seen as you opine everything with such vigour where Nadal is concerned. Its like you just made the "timing strategy" story up and then sought to back-fill it with spurious data....that doesnt stand up to scrutiny from more than 1 person!

Smoke screen again Lydian?

Facts are in Miami 04 and 05 he plays fast many times under 20s even and has no OCD.

What else can you add to that?

Tell us Lydian....is all that sudden time taking after Miami 05 about OCD?

With all due respect to you both Tenez and Lydian - what on earth does it matter if Nadal's time wasting is a bad habit that he is finding difficult to break or something he knowingly does to impose his rhythm on the match? Or even whether he began to do it in 2005 or 2012!

He is old enough and one presumes intelligent enough to know that he is breaking the existing rules and therefore he should be penalised for it just as he would be if he circumvented the rules in any other sport in this way.

If it is a bad habit that the poor little sausage cannot help - surely there must be counselling available, or hypnosis?

It makes a whole difference TP breaking a rule intentionally or not. Knowing that the bad habit suddenly appeared because Nadal lost a 5 setter, losing the last 6 games in a row in Miami 05 is quite different from developing a bad habit unintentionally.

We can see that Nadal in 04 and 05 has no habit as he can serve within 20s systematically when not breathless and within the rule (25s) 75% of the time at least.

I think everybody agrees here that we have not seen Nadal play that fast consistently since Miami 2005...

This conversation is dragging on because Lydian simply doesn't want to admit that he was wrong once again and like a sophist drags the discussion endlessly. His is only trying to save his face now by showing that on a few points, even in 2004 Nadal went over time.

But I admit I get a bit of saddistic pleasure in cornering him.

Lydian is the firm adversary defendant of cheats. I heard she was involved as a witness for the Bernie Madoff trial and that she also took pleasure in Maradona's "hand of God".

Rafa gets away with cheating because of fans like the above refusing to let the player know they are acting inappropriately.

**Ignorance breeds more cheating**

I think most people believe that the time taking/wasting is deliberate, and I would think a fair number of people would also believe that there have been certain MTOs in Rafa's career that have been taken as 'game play' because he always bounces up from the quickest massage from a physio as if he were playing with wings and not nursing a hurt through a tricky match.
My point about it not mattering is that it shouldn't matter to an umpire if he is consciously or unconsciously trying to disrupt the rhythm of his opponent's play in a way that is outside the rules - it is just wrong, as the rules stand at present, and should not be allowed, period.

I think you and Lydian just have to agree to differ (plus ca change ) on this one!

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Lydian is the firm adversary defendant of cheats. I heard she was involved as a witness for the Bernie Madoff trial and that she also took pleasure in Maradona's "hand of God".

Rafa gets away with cheating because of fans like the above refusing to let the player know they are acting inappropriately.

**Ignorance breeds more cheating**

Lydian is entitled to his opinion JM. Most of this forum's liveliest debates are the exchange of views between Lydian and Tenez - and long may it continue.

Rafa gets away with time wasting because the umpires do not enforce the rules and because the top players have been a bit feeble about this, not because his fans give him the benefit of the doubt as to whether he is consciously trying to disrupt the other player. On the subject of the other top player's addressing this problem, Federer should, imo, have come out strongly behind Ljubicic when the latter spoke out about this issue a while ago.

time please wrote:I think you and Lydian just have to agree to differ (plus ca change ) on this one!

I think we can see already we differ. Just that once again, we have more proof that I was right and he was wrong. Now it comes from Nadal's mouth.

Can you imagine before when we discussed it without Nadal confirming my point? Well teh facts still showed Nadal playing way inside the 25s in Miami 05 but Lydian would say Miami was a one-off (though even that did not make sense with his OCD theory!).

Lydian is a sophist, which means he will always have people siding for him as he presents his argument in a complex and appealing way...but those whose logic is sound can see through.

I remember a discussion when he was saying that top spinning required more timing ability than flat hitters. He had most agreeing with him...until I explained a bit more in details why flat hitting was harder. ...Just to say we have had those discussions for years...but hey we are still arguing....

I'm not going to get drawn into an argument between the two of you - you both argue your cases very eloquently and then it is up to individual posters to decide whose point of view they concur with.

I blame the greedy tournament directors. They are the ones that put pressure on umpires.
I wonder what would happen to an umpire if he/she put the foot down and timed 20 seconds on a stop-watch implementing penalites every time the rule was abused.

noleisthebest wrote:I blame the greedy tournament directors. They are the ones that put pressure on umpires.
I wonder what would happen to an umpire if he/she put the foot down and timed 20 seconds on a stop-watch implementing penalites every time the rule was abused.

I think they are simply organising a show we all want to see, they have to make money by getting the star players and allowing them favours is normal. It's teh role of the ATP and ITF to make sure their sport remains a sport and therefore make sure their referees enforce the rules.

Tenez wrote:Lydian is a sophist, which means he will always have people siding for him as he presents his argument in a complex and appealing way...but those whose logic is sound can see through.

I was also called one, IIRC. having argued from both 'sides' of the discussion.

Apart from the Fedal overtones, one noticeable aspect of the ATP streams was that the commentators and the camera have now started showing more of this information. I need to check the Nadal and Djokovic matches, but the Federer-Kudla match had it at Federer-15 seconds, and Kudla at 18 seconds (after the first set, IIRC).

The Old man can really play at lightening speed.

laverfan wrote:

Tenez wrote:Lydian is a sophist, which means he will always have people siding for him as he presents his argument in a complex and appealing way...but those whose logic is sound can see through.

I was also called one, IIRC. having argued from both 'sides' of the discussion.

Apart from the Fedal overtones, one noticeable aspect of the ATP streams was that the commentators and the camera have now started showing more of this information. I need to check the Nadal and Djokovic matches, but the Federer-Kudla match had it at Federer-15 seconds, and Kudla at 18 seconds (after the first set, IIRC).

The Old man can really play at lightening speed.

It is interesting that this is beginning to be discussed in commentary LF - do you think that the cumulative effect of Rafa's various moans during the last 12 months about tournaments, greedy and uncaring officials, Fed and his rose tinted fragance etc etc have meant that he has actually put himself in the hotspot and will be examined much more closer by the media in future?

PS Rog is not called The Federer Express for nothing

time please wrote:
It is interesting that this is beginning to be discussed in commentary LF - do you think that the cumulative effect of Rafa's various moans during the last 12 months about tournaments, greedy and uncaring officials, Fed and his rose tinted fragance etc etc have meant that he has actually put himself in the hotspot and will be examined much more closer by the media in future?

It is good that a discussion has at least been opened. Since Fedal represent the players on the council, it may just be what the doctor ordered. The aspect I dislike is that the public and media facing angle this has brought in.

A specific player under a microscope is not good for the sport. It would have been better to have an internal ATP/WTA/ITF discussion and come up with a conclusion/decision.

time please wrote:PS Rog is not called The Federer Express for nothing

Yesterday, Kudla hammered a couple of shots down the line, and Federer just turned around and showed him a couple of his shots. It was an interesting match despite the gap. Kudla did break Federer, unlike Dubai.

laverfan wrote:It is good that a discussion has at least been opened. Since Fedal represent the players on the council, it may just be what the doctor ordered. The aspect I dislike is that the public and media facing angle this has brought in.

A specific player under a microscope is not good for the sport. It would have been better to have an internal ATP/WTA/ITF discussion and come up with a conclusion/decision

I agree it would be far better if the internal discussion between various authorities a) took place b) had some teeth.

Also agree that it is not a particularly desirable state of affairs to have 'a specific player under the microscope' - I just wonder if because Rafa used the press to air his grievances throughout the latter part of 2011 and the beginning of 2012 he has not put himself there (under the microscope)

You cannot turn the press on and off for your advantage - as many others have found to their cost before.

laverfan - interesting to hear your assessment of Kudla/Fed, I didn't have the luxury of seeing the match

I can imagine just how often a good young player - Kudla was quite a star in junior tennis apparently - is told by their coach ahead of a meeting with one of the really big names ...... don't be intimated, play your game, he's only human like you and he's beatable you know !

They come on court in the understandable hope that this could be my day, hit the ball as hard as they can and often do better than we might expect. But they also invariably come away thinking well, ok .....maybe he IS beatable ....... but making it happen is another matter entirely .........

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Lydian is the firm adversary defendant of cheats. I heard she was involved as a witness for the Bernie Madoff trial and that she also took pleasure in Maradona's "hand of God".

Rafa gets away with cheating because of fans like the above refusing to let the player know they are acting inappropriately.

**Ignorance breeds more cheating**

No. Actually, ignorance is posting comments like that. Judging people when you dont them. That's true ignorance. You casually and conveniently ignore (ignorance...) the many times on this forum, and even this thread!, where I say I do not support his time breaking. As you know absolutely zilch about me keep your ignorant judgements to yourself. Ok?

laverfan wrote:A specific player under a microscope is not good for the sport. It would have been better to have an internal ATP/WTA/ITF discussion and come up with a conclusion/decision.

And who is to blame? Woudl we have to get to discuss such basic fact if Nadal had not broken the rule in teh first place?

This ATP/ITF discussion should have been handled in 2005! Not 7 years and 10 slams later.

I for once am very happy this gets exposed to all. But I am in no illusion that only those who follow the game closely will learn the intent of breaking this rule.

Tenez wrote: I think we can see already we differ. Just that once again, we have more proof that I was right and he was wrong. Now it comes from Nadal's mouth.

Can you imagine before when we discussed it without Nadal confirming my point? Well teh facts still showed Nadal playing way inside the 25s in Miami 05 but Lydian would say Miami was a one-off (though even that did not make sense with his OCD theory!).

Lydian is a sophist, which means he will always have people siding for him as he presents his argument in a complex and appealing way...but those whose logic is sound can see through.

I remember a discussion when he was saying that top spinning required more timing ability than flat hitters. He had most agreeing with him...until I explained a bit more in details why flat hitting was harder. ...Just to say we have had those discussions for years...but hey we are still arguing....

But thats not right is it Tenez. You have proclaimed "facts" that were specifically not correct, as (dis)proved by myself and now summerblues. So, conversely are you telling me that for his first match at Wimbledon in 2003 as a complete rookie Nadal was often taking more than 30s for short ralley points because he already had a strategy for winning by time extending before he had even become established on tour? I find that a ludicrous suggestion if you think that. Otherwise, why was he taking so long between points even back in 2003 as a boy barely out of school? Something he carried forward into Miami 2004, Miami 2005...etc, etc. Did you not note he took roughly as long on average at Wimb 2011 as Wimb 2003 to serve?

So I'm not a sophist (thanks for your personal judgement all the same).
What I do is pull you up on incorrect facts which always target the one player. Its clear that you have an agenda against Nadal, you always have had, you always will. It seems to me that you find whatever spurious opinions and data points you can to support your pre-defined construct.

TP, I'm all for the players following the rules. Rules are rules. However, as the game gets more and more physical the "abuse" of the current 20s rule is only going to increase...this isnt just a Nadal problem...so what do we do? Impose a rule that is becoming more unrealistic for extended ralleys, or relook at the time span. This is surely also important given that ITF and ATP dont even agree on the time span. Surely unification is needed here for a start? Its ridiculous for 5 set matches to play to 20s, and 3 set matches to 25s?

lydian wrote:This is surely also important given that ITF and ATP dont even agree on the time span. Surely unification is needed here for a start? Its ridiculous for 5 set matches to play to 20s, and 3 set matches to 25s?

I quite agree, the anomaly seems ridiculous.

I have to say though that, imo, Rafa quite 'shamelessly' (as the Guardian put it last year after RG,) timewastes to buy himself composure and rattle the other player as much as he does to get his puff back.

It is going to get worse because I don't see how umpires can penalise other players when we have an example of a player who has used this tactic generously in all his slam finals, not to mention hundreds of other matches over the years.

time_please wrote:Also agree that it is not a particularly desirable state of affairs to have 'a specific player under the microscope' - I just wonder if because Rafa used the press to air his grievances throughout the latter part of 2011 and the beginning of 2012 he has not put himself there (under the microscope)

Someone, I do not recall who, had commented that Nadal had become 'his own man' and getting out from under the shadow of Uncle Toni. Perhaps this flurry of comments is what happens when some one sticks a microphone under your chin.

lags72 wrote:interesting to hear your assessment of Kudla/Fed, I didn't have the luxury of seeing the match

Highlights may not do justice either.

Also Watched Nadal-Mayer. Nadal looks in good nick, with both the singles and doubles.

Tenez wrote:I for once am very happy this gets exposed to all. But I am in no illusion that only those who follow the game closely will learn the intent of breaking this rule.

Once the media start asking for polls during matches via Twitter/Facebook, this becomes highly visible. Perhaps 2013 will see some positive movement and resolution.

lydian wrote:
But thats not right is it Tenez. You have proclaimed "facts" that were specifically not correct, as (dis)proved by myself and now summerblues. So, conversely are you telling me that for his first match at Wimbledon in 2003 as a complete rookie Nadal was often taking more than 30s for short ralley points because he already had a strategy for winning by time extending before he had even become established on tour? I find that a ludicrous suggestion if you think that. Otherwise, why was he taking so long between points even back in 2003 as a boy barely out of school? Something he carried forward into Miami 2004, Miami 2005...etc, etc. Did you not note he took roughly as long on average at Wimb 2011 as Wimb 2003 to serve?

WHat do you mean? You want us to check the Wimbledon 03 data now? Though it is clear Nadal played most of his points in Miami 04 and 05 within the rule?

What are we going to find out in that Wimby 03? Has he got a routine or does he get the odd extra breathing time?

You refuse to admit that in Miami 04 and 05 he was playing fast, taking minimum time between points and not imposing his famous OCD...I am not going to check all his previous matches. You are in denial.

The routine and time taking seriously took off after he realised he could lose a 5 setter running out of breath.

THIS IS NO ROCKET SCIENCE FOR ANY PLAYER AND COACH! It was for you though as for years you denied Nadal was doing it pruporsedly. Now you have changed your tune...you are desperately looking for other matches with teh odd long time taking to say "ah! actually this routine was there before when we can clearly see it was not".

And stop saying Summerblues contradicts me. He doesn't. He sees that Nadal plays faster on most points and considerably faster on many points. Hopefully you can see it too. Maybe Amri is on your side....but so far I can't see anyone else siding with you and Rafa I am afraid.

For long ralleys yes I believe he extends to get his puff back...but then again so do other players, even Federer I'm sure.
Its the points between long ralleys where he still takes a long time that I dispute he does to get his puff back. As I said above why would a 16-17 yr old Nadal at Wimb 2003 be taking over 30s regularly to serve after a relatively short ralley (grass was quicker even back then). I honestly believe he is an enormous creature of habit who has set routines mentally and physically he goes through all the time. Nadal has never been a quick server...sure he sometimes dips below 20s but this is rare, very rare. Most of the time he's hovering above 25s unless its a longer ralley. Sure he's a competitive animal and wont be rushed for anyone...he'll be last on court, make the guy wait at the net, fiddle his bottles before getting up to shake hands, be the last to finish warming up, etc (and people say he isnt a creature of habit?) but I dont believe he does this as gamesmanship but understand others may think so. Guys have even tried to unsettle this routine by waiting to be last on court, warm up last, etc, etc...and Nadal just carries on regardless, once he's in the zone after leaving his locker room, he's in the zone.

BUT...I dont agree he should be pushing the time because its breaking the rules. The umpires should have nipped this in the bud long long ago but its not so easy with Nadal because his service routine is extended, its not like he's wandering around at the back of the court...he just takes ages to serve....time him and watch him. Djokovic is similar.

But I agree its getting worse because matches are more physical and slower pace. Something needs to be done so I'm also glad the issue is raised otherwise crowds will start to switch off if every match goes over 4-5 hours.

laverfan wrote:

Tenez wrote:I for once am very happy this gets exposed to all. But I am in no illusion that only those who follow the game closely will learn the intent of breaking this rule.

Once the media start asking for polls during matches via Twitter/Facebook, this becomes highly visible. Perhaps 2013 will see some positive movement and resolution.

I am pretty sure Federer purposedly let it out cause he knows, like I have been saying all along, that we, the crowd are the first responsible for the loosening of the rule. Well the Rafa fans in particular as they don;t mind siding someone playing outside the rules as long as it can help him win.

Had Vincent Spaeda tried to do the same, he woudl have been told off very quickly and teh crowd would not even have noticed he got a warning and a penality.

Tenez, there is no way you can say Nadal was fast serving at Miami 2004...the facts dont support it. He was only under 25s (not even 20s) for about 50% of points...50%!!!...since when was that ever called fast serving???

The Wimb 2003 match is on Youtube. I timed most of the 1st set yesterday...guess what, not much different to Miami 2004. Average over 26 secs. I dont need people to be on my side Tenez, the facts are the facts. He's always been slow...

He was quick here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzKuv4j67aw

lydian wrote:Its the points between long ralleys where he still takes a long time that I dispute he does to get his puff back.

I agree with this lydian, but I'm afraid I think he does this to unsettle the other player, particularly on their serve, or to buy himself composure if the last point went against him.

If it was all purely habit and something almost outside his control because he 'was in the zone' then it would be less disruptive because his time wasting would have a regularity to it rather than increasing noticeably when he is trying to halt the momentum of a match.

Anyway, whatever the motives/drivers behind the behaviour that is, as you have pointed out, no excuse. It should be a level playing field in conditions for all players - and the latter is not a reason to extend the time between points. Player pressure from the whole tour on this matter is a different thing, but I wouldn't mind betting that quite a few of the tour would love to see Rafa's timewasting and MTO taking tactics stamped on and it might give them a glimmer of hope when the momentum was with them - at the moment if it is, Rafa just sits down to have his foot/leg/arm massaged or fixates even more on pulling the armanis out from his a**e

JHM : Indeed !!

Couldn't spot a single butt-picking incident in the whole clip .....

JuliusHMarx wrote:He was quick here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzKuv4j67aw

His shorts don't seem to be giving him so much grief either

This will be the best selling item on the tennis circuit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFgyg7ezM6k&feature=related

lydian wrote:Tenez, there is no way you can say Nadal was fast serving at Miami 2004...the facts dont support it. He was only under 25s (not even 20s) for about 50% of points...50%!!!...since when was that ever called fast serving???

The Wimb 2003 match is on Youtube. I timed most of the 1st set yesterday...guess what, not much different to Miami 2004. Average over 26 secs. I dont need people to be on my side Tenez, the facts are the facts. He's always been slow...

You see him serve his whole 3 first service games in Miami 04 within the time with only 2 points going over the 25s mark out of 11 and you see this as slow? DO you know how long he takes nowadays?

Yes for me it's fast. It's clear however that under heavy rallying in miami 04 (maybe 05 too I have not checked it all), he extends his time. But we can all see it's no routine and in any case he plays much faster than now.

As mentioned many times Miami 04 has even a faster time per point average than Miami 05!!!

This is where I think you are splitting hair cause that is now your only solid ground.

However I have yet to hear from you that Nadal has no OCD in Miami 04 and 05. I know it would hurt you!