Nadal has a shockingly self-serving agenda

He wanted two-year rankings.

He has recently opposed the 25 second rule, on very honest terms (I can't play like that).

Now he wants fewer hard court events, wrongly arguing they shorten careers. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/21436925

I don't know about others, but this really tarnishes his image in my opinion. No wonder he ended up off the Council. I accept he says he won't see it in his career, but that might not be his belief.
The facts go against him. As we know, there are more old players at the top of the game than at any time since the early 70's, I think, so where's this big need for fewer hard courts?

He can have his opinions, that's fine, but he'd come across more credibly if some of them were not in his interest.

bogbrush. I think not unpredictably you have misinterpreted any "agenda" that Nadal may have.

Nadal pointed out in his comment on the other thread https://www.606v2.com/t40589-nadal-says-the-25-second-rule-will-harm-the-fans that this NEW rule would impact on the quality of play DURING points. He wasn't just saying that he would be less able to produce competitive rally's but was speaking from experience and saying that players in general would be less able to do so. And that it would be the fans who would suffer because tennis woul be less entertaining.

The hard court issue was something that he feels is impacting on the health of all players. He admits that if the ATP were to "care for the players" by limiting hard courts it wouldn't really help him. I think you would agree that Nadal's knees are already damaged? This is the quote from the Guardian that makes this clear.


"The ATP worries too little about the players," said Nadal, who is in Brazil to play his second tournament after a long absence with an injured left knee. "It should care more for them."

The 11-times grand slam winner said he does not expect major changes any time soon but thinks it is time officials start thinking about ways to help improve players' long-term health. "For future generations it would be good to see a less aggressive tennis life," he said. "Not only because of what happens during your career but also because of what happens after your career, about how is your body when your tennis career is over."

The 26-year-old said hardcourts are "too tough" on players' bodies and made it impossible to prevent them from getting hurt from time to time. Tennis is the only major sport where players have to play on cement, said the best clay-court player of the Open era, adding that it is an issue that medical experts must get involved with, not only players.

"This is not a subject for the players, it's a matter for doctors," he said. "The ATP has to start thinking about ways to lengthen players' careers. I can't imagine footballers playing on cement, I can't imagine any other sport involving aggressive movements such as tennis being played on such aggressive surfaces such as ours. We are the only sport in the world making this mistake and it won't change."



http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/feb/12/rafael-nadal-injuries-atp

There is a clear difference between using a personal experience (as Nadal does in both cases) to illustrate a point and complaining about something that only impacts personally. You must know that? So why try and blur the two?

Some might call it self-serving personally I think Rafa dares to voice what others wont even dare to think. There would be many players who would agree if they put their neck on the line.. only because Rafa´s prominence is why he gets the criticism.. if other players lower in the rankings said something similar it would be a valid point. Some may see it as self-serving others see it in the light that he would like to see what has happened to him prevented for others.Depending on your opinion of Rafa is reflected in your viewpoint. I would suggest its getting to the wrong end of his career, the damage having already been done, that any changes now would benefit him to that extent.

Lol BB, the guy is back playing less than a week and the knives are out already - I see why you missed him now and that this builds Barrystar's post earlier...birds of a feather.

None of this is new news. He's consistently talked about less HCs for at least 4 years. After winning AO09 vs Federer...

MELBOURNE, Australia -- A day after winning his first Grand Slam on hard courts, Rafael Nadal called on tennis officials to be mindful of the physical toll the hard surface takes on players in an ever expanding schedule.

"This calendar I am playing with this surface -- hard-court surface -- is tougher than grass or clay for the body, and all the time we are playing more on this surface," said Nadal, who beat Roger Federer 7-5, 3-6, 7-6 (3), 3-6, 6-2 for his first Australian Open title Sunday.

"In my humble opinion, we have to change that a bit more," the Spaniard said. "I can say that because I won a grand slam on hard [courts]."

Nadal, 22, has previously won four Grand Slams on the French Open clay courts, as well as Wimbledon on grass last year.

"Before if I say that, a lot of people think 'He wants to change because he's a clay player.' But believe me, I don't think anything about if I am a clay court player or not.

"When I say this, I think about the best for the players and for the future. It's not possible to have a lot of injuries on tour like this. So we have to try to change something."


What's so controversial about that? Why the extrapolation to self-serving? ...2/4 slams and 6/9 Masters are now played on them. There are 3 large hardcourt seasons (spring, summer, autumn) with Masters 1000s in them. Grass is down to 2 weeks and main clay season is early Apr to end of May. HCs are also slower than ever meaning more time is spent running around on them.

Is anyone going to claim HCs are better for joints than grass, carpet or clay? Was the game invented on cement...and slow cement at that? Cement as a natural surface is quick...as its meant to be but ATP deliberately make the surface like sandpaper with sand-laden paint which means the game is slower and the feet dont pivot or slide naturally.

This all sounds like stating the obvious to me, plus he's probably been directed down this path by media in interviews such as this...again. But he's not saying anything different since at least 2009. The haters will always hate. BB, perhaps you'd rather just see the guy retire, leave the game to go metronomically and give Federer better chance of more slams hey? After all, a Federer fan is never going to call for less HCs is he...

I do admire your innocent willingness to take all that you see in the press from Rafa at face value, HE.

Many people, when keen to get changes made at their place of work, feel that their wish-list will be better received if they imply that their motivation is driven by the greater good of their colleagues and customers, rather than him/herself alone.

If you substitute the references to "players" "our careers" "our bodies " for me, my career, my body .......then I think we're closer to the truth of the matter.

If I'm wrong and Rafa's various concerns are widely shared by a majority of players on the tour (which I happen to doubt) then he should have no difficulty in getting them to back him up strongly and bring about popular change via the Players Council.

I think it's really good to have Rafa back on tour, but it would be better still if we were spared the constant complaints and moaning directed at the administrators of a sport which has brought him untold riches and global fame.

I thought it was a congenital foot problem that was the cause of the knee trouble, not the HC's (or his style of play).

I really don't think the amount of hard courts on the tour has anything to do with Rafa's injury. If it were then how is it that we have players older than Rafa who have been playing on all of these hard courts for longer and are without injury. Heck Jimmy Connors was a hard court monster and he carried on playing until he was knocking on the door of 40.

JuliusHMarx wrote:I thought it was a congenital foot problem that was the cause of the knee trouble, not the HC's (or his style of play).

Julius he does have a congenital foot problem but are you really of the belief that the hard court does any of that any favours. All goes hand in hand if you will pardon the expression !!!

CaledonianCraig wrote:I really don't think the amount of hard courts on the tour has anything to do with Rafa's injury. If it were then how is it that we have players older than Rafa who have been playing on all of these hard courts for longer and are without injury. Heck Jimmy Connors was a hard court monster and he carried on playing until he was knocking on the door of 40.

The why is it that everyone is and has been saying that Rafa´s style of play has taken its toll on his body and that clay is the kinder surface for him .. that is why he chose to come back now instead of before the AO.Yes I will agree that Connors was a monster but he never played the style of tennis Rafa does.. a bull he may have been but his type of tennis was made for hc.

Haddie-nuff wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:I thought it was a congenital foot problem that was the cause of the knee trouble, not the HC's (or his style of play).

Julius he does have a congenital foot problem but are you really of the belief that the hard court does any of that any favours. All goes hand in hand if you will pardon the expression !!!

Yes, but Rafa's argument is that HC's are bad for all players, whereas the evidence seems to be that that is not the case, but that it particularly affects him. Hence his call for less HCs can be seen as self-serving.

Everyone has an opinion dont they ?? I personally would like to see less hc tournaments myself but then thats my opinion. His reasoning is logical whether you want to put a self serving slant on that is up to the individual. Im sure there are a few players who would like to see less clay court tournaments.. equally for their own reasons.. reluctant to name names of course

His reasoning isn't logical, that's the problem. There's no evidence of more knee injuries or careers being shortened, which is the basis of his argument.

Haddie-nuff wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:I really don't think the amount of hard courts on the tour has anything to do with Rafa's injury. If it were then how is it that we have players older than Rafa who have been playing on all of these hard courts for longer and are without injury. Heck Jimmy Connor was a hard court monster and he carried on playing until he was knocking on the door of 40.

The why is it that everyone is and has been saying that Rafa´s style of play has taken its toll on his body and that clay is the kinder surface for him .. that is why he chose to come back now instead of before the AO.Yes I will agree that Connors was a monster but he never played the style of tennis Rafa does.. a bull he may have been but his type of tennis was made for hc.

Yes I see what you are saying but the real damage is done by his style of play and not the surface. He should therefore be looking at ways to adopt a new style that puts less stress on the knee in my opinion. That is the only way and the more dignified way to solve his knee problem.

JM there are far more injuries amongst players now than I have ever known.
Nalbandian hip replacement, Hewitt hip replacement, ankle and knee problems throughout all the players.. including Murray, Monfils, Tsonga Serena Williams.. none of these got these injuries from months of playing tiddlywinks.. I would bet that if you polled the players and ask them what injuries they suffer due to playing tennis I think you may well be surprised. The tennis schedules now are far tighter than they have ever been. The game is faster and more physical... pounding hard courts week after week.
(Please dont let mention RF there is always an exception to any rule.. and even he is suffering with his back ) I cannot remember in my years of watching tennis too many players being out with injuries. And those who were played a very physical game.
In an ideal world we would Im sure like to see more grass courts but this seemingly is not going to happen

Schedules are tighter, the game is more physical - agreed. Yet Rafa wants more time between points so he can play longer rallies. Odd, isn't it?

JuliusHMarx wrote:Schedules are tighter, the game is more physical - agreed. Yet Rafa wants more time between points so he can play longer rallies. Odd, isn't it?

oooooooo!!!! nice one Julius.. try the other thread

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:I really don't think the amount of hard courts on the tour has anything to do with Rafa's injury. If it were then how is it that we have players older than Rafa who have been playing on all of these hard courts for longer and are without injury. Heck Jimmy Connor was a hard court monster and he carried on playing until he was knocking on the door of 40.

The why is it that everyone is and has been saying that Rafa´s style of play has taken its toll on his body and that clay is the kinder surface for him .. that is why he chose to come back now instead of before the AO.Yes I will agree that Connors was a monster but he never played the style of tennis Rafa does.. a bull he may have been but his type of tennis was made for hc.

Yes I see what you are saying but the real damage is done by his style of play and not the surface. He should therefore be looking at ways to adopt a new style that puts less stress on the knee in my opinion. That is the only way and the more dignified way to solve his knee problem.

Thats not a serious answer is it Craig??? you might as well suggest he plays with his right hand and have a single handed back hand ..I cant believe that really !!!

Well think about it. Fore-shortening each point shortens match time and shortens his knee's exposure to hard courts. Rafa's comments would be akin to Murray wanting amendment on the second serve rule. People would rightly say he only wants it changed as it is his achilles heel just as is the case here with Rafa.

Believe me I am understanding of what you are saying but to ask Rafa to change his style of play is asking a leopard to change his spots.. not possible Craig.. he either can manage with the knee problem as is or it will be his undoing.
But to ask him to change his game and believe me I would love him to shorten the rallies and come inside the court more... but Rafa reverts to what he knows and thats it.

Fair enough H-n ......

And that being the case, he really cannot expect the Tour to adjust its rules, surfaces and ranking system to accommodate his chosen "style of play"

I never said he could lags.. as I said I believe that he realises that it would not be in his "lifetime" anyway.. I think he is speaking out because of the injuries which I have already listed amongst players. He speaks out about what he believes in and it is automatically assumed rightly or wrongly that he has self-serving interests.

What I genuinely think is so sad is that he has been back on tour barely a week and there are two threads already on this forum tearing him to shreds.

The vultures are circling overhead

My point, ably made by some others on this thread, isn't that Rafa shouldn't have opinions, or even that his opinions shouldn't be for his advantage, but that he dresses them up in 'concern for the game'. Hence the time rule becomes bad for spectators, the hard courts should reduce because they cause injuries for all.

Neither of these is true, certainly not by reference to any evidence. People have been increasingly vocal over time delays - not just on forums - and injuries aren't rife. Searching back for one off injured players doesn't do it when the fact is that the average age of the top whatever is higher than ever.

Lydian, it isn't that 'he's back' which makes me post this, at least not on the court. It's that 'he's back, making statements about how the game should change, and being disingenuous in my opinion'.

Haddie-nuff wrote:Believe me I am understanding of what you are saying but to ask Rafa to change his style of play is asking a leopard to change his spots.. not possible Craig.. he either can manage with the knee problem as is or it will be his undoing.
But to ask him to change his game and believe me I would love him to shorten the rallies and come inside the court more... but Rafa reverts to what he knows and thats it.

Yes I can see the difficulty of it but it is the only viable option if Rafa wants to prolong his career. As you say though it will never happen so Rafa will just need to be very selective of the tournaments he plays.

Well now you are getting to the nubb of it Craig and I think you will find that is what is on the agenda. Spaniards are not known for their diplomacy .. and have a habit of saying the facts without dressing them up so they are palatable to the recipient. The Brits here often accuse the Spaniards of being rude... they arn´t its the way they see it and so they say it.

Out of interest is it logged anywhere when the injury was aggravated? It is just that his last tournament was Wimbledon (grass) and before that was the clay court season so his previous hard court tournament would have been around 2 or 3 months prior to the injury being aggravated.

One last point from Lydian I missed, I'm not really bothered myself what they do; surface homogeneity has meant it really doesn't matter to some extent. I'd like more grass, that's about all, but it'll never happen because of cost.

As for Federer, he'll be gone soon so it doesn't matter.

Haddie-nuff wrote:Well now you are getting to the nubb of it Craig and I think you will find that is what is on the agenda. Spaniards are not known for their diplomacy .. and have a habit of saying the facts without dressing them up so they are palatable to the recipient. The Brits here often accuse the Spaniards of being rude... they arn´t its the way they see it and so they say it.

If Rafa was saying the facts I wouldn't have a problem.

Cant say I know Craig knowing the Nadal camp it would not have been publicised anyway. I dont think it would necessarily be pin-pointed to a particular match but something happening over a period of time. I mean it has been well documented for years that HC´s have NEVER been to Rafa´liking on the old 606 it was said he was a one trick pony that he would never win anything other than clay. He proved everyone wrong but that does not mean that Hc has not been a problem to him all throughout his career. Indoor HC even more so.

"I can say that because I won a grand slam on hard [courts]."

He then went on to lose to Murray and Ferrer the next 2 years, Federer you god damned IDIOT gifting that slam.

Nadal does seem to favor changes that would favor him. The three mentioned by the OP are things that he would like and that would be better for his career. But in fairness the hardcourt thing is pretty true. I think actually hardcout tennis is the fairest and funnest to watch, I don't like seeing points decided on odd bounces and all the styles can play well on a hardcourt based on its speed and conditions. Also it is the cheapest and easiest to maintain. But frankly, it is freaking killing me. My massage therapist is breaking a sweat squeezing knots out of my body. I have plantar fascitis and sometimes my feet swell to the size of balloons after too many days of hardcourt play, never happens on clay. But I just like playing on a hardcourt more and the clubs clay courts are bit dodgy. The pounding though on a hardcourt is noticeably more. Still I don't know if we can really change that many of the hardcourt tournaments if at all.

I think Nadal is right in saying that hard-courts and other artificial surfaces cause more injury.

Grass is the only natural surface (or wood possibly?) Don't think we can have every tournament on grass

JuliusHMarx wrote:Grass is the only natural surface (or wood possibly?) Don't think we can have every tournament on grass

Grass is better than hard-courts, in terms of less injuries, so I wouldn't mind that

IMBL though grass courts are terrible to maintain and very expensive. Plus it there would be a huge disconnect between how the game is played at every other level and then how it is played on tour. Most people play tennis on hardcourts and then clay, hardly anyone plays on natural grass.

Yes, I see your point.
The grass courts in my local area are a real mess.

Wood you would have to varnish and finish extensively, as a third generation woodworking man myself it would be interesting how different species and different finishes would impact the speed of the court. YOu could have softwood courts and hard wood courts. I bet a highly sanded and varnished teak court for example would be faster than a soft pine court that was much rougher in finish.

I think the ATP should experiment with this stuff.

As long as it's safe to play on, it could be really fun to watch.

Oh it would be safe to play on just like a basketball court is made of wood, and it has been used in the past in tennis although I don't know of any wood courts out there, I bet there are a few still. The wood courts would play like a hardcourt put have a little more natural give to them.

Laverfan, can you find out how the injuries per player ratio has fluctuated over the last few decades?

While I have great respect for Nadal and his accomplishments but yes these things really look bad, he being a global icon should use his voice for the benefit of everybody and not self-serving purpose.

Wood is like lightening. Nadal really would complain then.

socal1976 wrote:Nadal does seem to favor changes that would favor him. The three mentioned by the OP are things that he would like and that would be better for his career. But in fairness the hardcourt thing is pretty true. I think actually hardcout tennis is the fairest and funnest to watch, I don't like seeing points decided on odd bounces and all the styles can play well on a hardcourt based on its speed and conditions. Also it is the cheapest and easiest to maintain. But frankly, it is freaking killing me. My massage therapist is breaking a sweat squeezing knots out of my body. I have plantar fascitis and sometimes my feet swell to the size of balloons after too many days of hardcourt play, never happens on clay. But I just like playing on a hardcourt more and the clubs clay courts are bit dodgy. The pounding though on a hardcourt is noticeably more. Still I don't know if we can really change that many of the hardcourt tournaments if at all.

socal. And you are not a pro. If it's "killing" you imagine what it's doing to those that spend so much time working on such a surface.

The game we know as tennis used to be known as "lawn" tennis. The surface it was to be played on was included in the name. All other playing surfaces were introduced presumably to make the courts cheaper and the game more accessible. Hard courts score highly for being cheaper and more accessible but lowly in terms of how damaging they are to play on. Clay courts fall somewhere in between Hard and Grass in all categories. At what point does cost become more important than potential damage? Could a synthetic court be developed that is less damaging? Should this push come not just from pro players but from recreational players too. It would be a shame if socal could no longer play because of hard court damage.

bogbrush wrote:Wood is like lightening. Nadal really would complain then.

It would be very very fast it would be lower bouncing than hard courts and thus a bit quicker a few dead spots would creep up over time that would need to be repaired

hawkeye wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Nadal does seem to favor changes that would favor him. The three mentioned by the OP are things that he would like and that would be better for his career. But in fairness the hardcourt thing is pretty true. I think actually hardcout tennis is the fairest and funnest to watch, I don't like seeing points decided on odd bounces and all the styles can play well on a hardcourt based on its speed and conditions. Also it is the cheapest and easiest to maintain. But frankly, it is freaking killing me. My massage therapist is breaking a sweat squeezing knots out of my body. I have plantar fascitis and sometimes my feet swell to the size of balloons after too many days of hardcourt play, never happens on clay. But I just like playing on a hardcourt more and the clubs clay courts are bit dodgy. The pounding though on a hardcourt is noticeably more. Still I don't know if we can really change that many of the hardcourt tournaments if at all.

socal. And you are not a pro. If it's "killing" you imagine what it's doing to those that spend so much time working on such a surface.

The game we know as tennis used to be known as "lawn" tennis. The surface it was to be played on was included in the name. All other playing surfaces were introduced presumably to make the courts cheaper and the game more accessible. Hard courts score highly for being cheaper and more accessible but lowly in terms of how damaging they are to play on. Clay courts fall somewhere in between Hard and Grass in all categories. At what point does cost become more important than potential damage? Could a synthetic court be developed that is less damaging? Should this push come not just from pro players but from recreational players too. It would be a shame if socal could no longer play because of hard court damage.

Fortunately we don't need to imagine, we can see them all playing year after year with very little sign of injury to legs or ankles. Indeed, playing and staying at the top for longer in a game that now encourages longer rallies and matches.

He didn't complain when beating Karlovic at the quickest court on tour - Queens back in 2008. He could adapt well to faster courts if he had to, remember he's also a very good doubles player.

The point about Connors playing loads of HC is somewhat moot, it was much faster back then. I mean, look at the photo of modern HC...



Look at how much grit is on the surface in the paint, imagine how that slows the ball down, and how hard it is to turn quickly with rubber tennis shoes.

Socal, I agree, I play on HCs a lot and my knees are almost always sore the day after. It's much harder on the legs than grass, clay for sure. From my point of view, there is too much HC tennis...and it's not like its varied these days as its either DecoTurfII medium, or Plexipave. It's like Formula 1 being driven on the same track all year long.

bogbrush wrote:
Fortunately we don't need to imagine, we can see them all playing year after year with very little sign of injury to legs or ankles.

There are many studies that indicate HCs cause more injuries.
This paper is quite comprehensive in scene-setting and the different stresses and injuries HCs can cause:
http://hartru.com/uploads/downloads/Doc_74.pdf

In particular it states:
- Senior players reported fewer knee problems when they had played predominantly on clay courts, compared to senior players who played predominantly on hard surfaces. (Kulund et al – 1979)
- Fifteen top-ranked tennis players had more back and lower extremity injuries when playing on hard courts than when playing on clay. (von Salis-Soglio – 1979)
- Knee injuries made up 19% of all of the US national teams total injuries. (Renström – 1995)
- Lower extremity injuries on a hard court were twice as frequent as either upper extremity or central body injuries during the US National Boy’s Tennis Championship from 1986 to 1988. (Hutchinson et al. – 1995)
- Injury frequencies were 4 to 8 times smaller for clay than for the four surfaces that did not allow any sliding

It's pretty comprehensive that HCs are more injury inducing.

Well, what will the other players say? let's see what the other players say?

At my club there are hard tarmac courts which I like because of the higher bounce but I rarely get to play on them because older players want to protect their body. To me, playing on tarmac an hour a week is about as bad for the body as getting up in the morning or walking out the front door. Then again, maybe I'm too young or haven't played enough to start to feel it?

I personally would reduce hard courts because one surface dominates and I would like to see more grass, but not reduce hard for the reason Rafa says unless other players support him.

Andre Agassi, a former French Open champion who actually did not like clay and always longed to return to hard courts when he played on clay, and yet made No 1 in the world in his 30s and a slam final in his mid 30s, once reputedly said of Nadal that he was writing cheques his body cannot cash.

So..hard courts favour agressive players who want to hit winners and not physical players. Good...

By the way, isn't there a counter argument here? Hard courts will increase the strain per second on court but will reduce the points' length. Clay courts demand longer point and so longer time on court, more footsteps, more turns which will increase the overall physical demand and injury risk to the player. Clay has been widely regarded as the most physically demanding surface.

Maybe more grass is the answer then?

It doesn't work proportionally like that HB.
The major issue with HC is that you cant slide, you don't decelerate naturally on HC but stop suddenly in a jarring motion.
If you read my post above it said that 15 top ranked players had more back/leg injuries playing on HC vs clay. There are other studies out there.
Clay is demanding, but only mainly a fitness perspective, you get to move much more naturally on the surface, joints aren't jarred the same.

bogbrush wrote:I don't know about others, but this really tarnishes his image in my opinion

Agreed. I'd argue that this is the biggest 'foot in mouth' ever uttered by any of the 'big' 4