My verdict on Nadal

First topic message reminder :

He will be back and will reach close to the level he had prior to the injuries, very close to that level. I don't see any reason why he can't. I was pretty impressed with his serve, his forehand's timing is not there yet. It isn't as lethal and it is creating a lot of errors, which makes sense he has a big swing, with an extreme grip, and a lot of wrist snap on the ball; all these working pieces being synchronized and consistent will take time. It is typical for a player with a two handed backhand that when he leaves match play and returns that the backhand and serve comeback much faster than the forehand. If I don't hit for awhile the first couple of times I play my forehand is always my biggest liability, although when I am in match shape that shot is probably my biggest weapon. The two handed backhand is a shot that I can not play for a year, pick up a racquet and hit it about 95-98 percent as well as when I have my timing down. The forehand, especially Nadal's complicated and unorthodox forehand is another matter entirely. Especially, since that is the shot you look to dictate with. The serve as well since it is easier to practice on your own and involves hitting your own toss will typically comeback faster than the forehand. In particular his short forehand doesn't look as commanding. In the past dropping the ball short to Nadal's forehand, especially on clay was death sentence. Right now he still is not timing the ball well enough and taking command as easily with that shot. Again short forehand is something that requires a great deal of timing, the pros make that shot look easy, but it is actually a harder shot to hit because you are moving into the court than the baseline forehand. It is easier to hit it for a winner but if you are off it is also easier to hit for an error or in the alternate to not do enough damage with it and have your opponent expose your advanced position with a pass or with a shot that drives you back on the next ball.

Also Nadal is still tentative with his defense. And partially that is because he just is not going to sell his body out in the Brasil open. He isn't fighting as hard with his legs and I am sure once he gets back to Europe for masters and slams that he will push himself more to close down the court. He looks as fast to me, but he just isn't going to ask his body to cash any checks right now, which again is very typical for a player nursing himself back from injury.

As usual the naysayers will be proven wrong, the man will be a force to reckoned with again. Everything looks normal and natural. The movement issues are probably him taking care of himself and not selling out as much when he doesn't have to in order to defend, and of course the timing of the footwork as well on the attack isn't as crisp yet. And the forehand in terms of shots, especially one as complicated as Nadal's takes more time than the other areas to get back into shape.

Actually its way too early to judge his comeback, yes at the moment his play looked comical when Zeba beat him in the finals, but if in time he gets his confidence back he will be the clear cut favourite for RG, but will he get his confidence back and will he get a favourable draw have to be seen.

If Rafa draws DP in 4th round, Djoko in quarters, Fed in semis and Murray in finals and if still wins would clearly rank as the best GS win ever.

invisiblecoolers wrote:Actually its way too early to judge his comeback, yes at the moment his play looked comical when Zeba beat him in the finals, but if in time he gets his confidence back he will be the clear cut favourite for RG, but will he get his confidence back and will he get a favourable draw have to be seen.

If Rafa draws DP in 4th round, Djoko in quarters, Fed in semis and Murray in finals and if still wins would clearly rank as the best GS win ever.

Ha ha! That draw looks about right. Murray usually has a clear path in slams. Lucky losers, surprise winners, maybe a "hot" and dangerous Chardy in the semi's and a walkover against an injured Rafa in the final. But of course all wins are equal and it's not his fault if other players are not as strong as him.

Seriously if Rafa was fit that draw would be fine for Rafa. It's not like he loses many sets even against quality opponents and having Murray in a RG final would be like a christmas present. In fact some people might even attach an * to his 8th title... But of course that's all dependent on his knees.

socal1976 wrote:Hey what does IMBL get if Nadal doesn't win the french open, did I miss that part? Is a bet fair if there is no payoff that makes the risk worthwhile? IMBL how about if you win Julius has to change his name to the THE DIC(k)tator and only post as such for 3 weeks? Just a suggestion.

The bet is with lags, not me. I was just facilitating a non-monetary alternative. And IMBL is offering odds of 50-1 against Rafa winning, so lags 'payment' should be 50 times less severe.

It Must Be Love wrote:Since when was a point deducted for arguing with the umpire?
Second serve max.

more arguing! 40: -15

JHM is right ..... the bet was with me, not him.

So I will now have to think up a suitable payment/forfeit that is - as JHM rightly proposes - fifty times less severe, thus reflecting the generous odds offered by IBML.

(might not be able to post again until much later in the day but will do my best to come up with something as a 'payment').

Meanwhile I managed to grab a few minutes earlier to ask some well-known sports bookmakers what I could get by betting on Rafa for another RG victory. I thought to myself, if a devoted fan such as IBML puts him at 50/1 then perhaps the bookies will offer even more. And I can really clean up ......

First was Ladbrokes :

Me : "I'd like to bet on the men's winner for this year's French Open tennis please"
Ladbrokes: "Sure ... who's your pick ...?"
Me : "Oh, he's a rank outsider. Rafa Nadal."
Ladbrokes : " We've heard of him. He's won it seven times hasn't he...?

They then checked their in-house computer system for the relevant odds. It was 6/4 (but 50/1 on Berdych if I was interested)

Oh dear. How do these people stay in business ....?

So I then tried William Hill. Surely they know more about tennis and who the true runners & riders are.

Similar conversation. But then they had the nerve to offer me just 11/10 on a Rafa win at RG !!!!!

Anyway all is not lost, I thought, as I proudly produced my betting slip from last week and demanded to be paid out for Berlocq's win over Nadal in Sao Paulo.

But Berlocq didn't win, said the man at William Hill. Of course he did said I, there must be some mistake .... his biggest fan told me he did, in fact here is the evidence .......

by It Must Be Love on Sat Feb 16, 2013 12:22 am

summerblues wrote:
It Must Be Love wrote:
Berlocq has already won.



Who are you rooting for?

Fully behind Berlocq of course.
It was a good win for him.



Whereupon the man at William Hill looked at me with a wry, sympathetic smile and said :

"I'm afraid sir, that you were sadly misinformed by the big Nadal fan IMBL. In fact, I can only imagine that in announcing unequivocally "Berlocq has already won" that IMBL had fallen victim to what is known in tennis forum circles as Premature Speculation"

I'm sure this article has nothing to do with the emergent consensus that the game is in severe transition and that Djokovic is reigning over what the OP would class as an obvious weak era.

lags72 wrote:IMBL had fallen victim to what is known in tennis forum circles as Premature Speculation"

Eggcellent, Lags.

bogbrush wrote:Djokovic is reigning over what the OP would class as an obvious weak era.

Kick 'em when they're up, Kick 'em when they're down

http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Dirty-Laundry-lyrics-Don-Henley/FA45294BB52EC2E6482568E000122C73

lol BB...I'm sure that's what the OP meant ;-)

bogbrush wrote:I'm sure this article has nothing to do with the emergent consensus that the game is in severe transition and that Djokovic is reigning over what the OP would class as an obvious weak era.

No I would not, obvious weak era, name one of fed's competitors not named nadal that are better than murray. Nadal is hurt for six months and is still a reigning grandslam champion. In the generation of players that I have deemed weaker. Which of the rollover guys is better than murray?

lydian wrote:lol BB...I'm sure that's what the OP meant ;-)

I thought you conceded that said era in question suffered from quote "an underutilization of talent" Now that deserves a CAPITAL LOL!!!!! with multiple exclamation points.

Hey? What have you been smoking? I was amused by the sarcastic tone of BBs response...how you formulated that response I'll never know....[multiple exclamations]

lags72 wrote:
IMBL had fallen victim to what is known in tennis forum circles as [i]Premature Speculation

Lags is this offer only for you? or open to public so I can join the bet as well, the best bet I have won on Nadal match is $100 for a $10 bet on Zeba in the recently concluded match, pity me I missed the Rosol match bet, you see I love placing bet on underdogs, and if Nadal is the underdog in FO then why not

ic : I can only refer you to IMBL for further information .......

Wow, this has officially become the Paddy Power thread...

lags72 wrote:JHM is right ..... the bet was with me, not him.

So I will now have to think up a suitable payment/forfeit that is - as JHM rightly proposes - fifty times less severe, thus reflecting the generous odds offered by IBML.

(might not be able to post again until much later in the day but will do my best to come up with something as a 'payment').

Meanwhile I managed to grab a few minutes earlier to ask some well-known sports bookmakers what I could get by betting on Rafa for another RG victory. I thought to myself, if a devoted fan such as IBML puts him at 50/1 then perhaps the bookies will offer even more. And I can really clean up ......

First was Ladbrokes :

Me : "I'd like to bet on the men's winner for this year's French Open tennis please"
Ladbrokes: "Sure ... who's your pick ...?"
Me : "Oh, he's a rank outsider. Rafa Nadal."
Ladbrokes : " We've heard of him. He's won it seven times hasn't he...?

They then checked their in-house computer system for the relevant odds. It was 6/4 (but 50/1 on Berdych if I was interested)

Oh dear. How do these people stay in business ....?

So I then tried William Hill. Surely they know more about tennis and who the true runners & riders are.

Similar conversation. But then they had the nerve to offer me just 11/10 on a Rafa win at RG !!!!!

Anyway all is not lost, I thought, as I proudly produced my betting slip from last week and demanded to be paid out for Berlocq's win over Nadal in Sao Paulo.

But Berlocq didn't win, said the man at William Hill. Of course he did said I, there must be some mistake .... his biggest fan told me he did, in fact here is the evidence .......

by It Must Be Love on Sat Feb 16, 2013 12:22 am

summerblues wrote:
It Must Be Love wrote:
Berlocq has already won.



Who are you rooting for?

Fully behind Berlocq of course.
It was a good win for him.



Whereupon the man at William Hill looked at me with a wry, sympathetic smile and said :

"I'm afraid sir, that you were sadly misinformed by the big Nadal fan IMBL. In fact, I can only imagine that in announcing unequivocally "Berlocq has already won" that IMBL had fallen victim to what is known in tennis forum circles as Premature Speculation"

No, no Berlocq did win.
Unfortunately William Hill has put wool over your eyes and tried to trick you.

Invisible Coolers... the deal is on.

socal1976 wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I'm sure this article has nothing to do with the emergent consensus that the game is in severe transition and that Djokovic is reigning over what the OP would class as an obvious weak era.

No I would not, obvious weak era, name one of fed's competitors not named nadal that are better than murray. Nadal is hurt for six months and is still a reigning grandslam champion. In the generation of players that I have deemed weaker. Which of the rollover guys is better than murray?

You're starting to sound a bit shrill on this. I think you know that without Federer this is looking wobbly. Ramping Murray really shows a weakness in your argument. remember; this is the era with David Ferrer at #4 post 30. I mean, really!

AS THIS ARTICLE is entitled "My Verdict on Nadal"

I innocently thought that this article may be in someway related
correct me if Im wrong

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1535495-rafael-nadal-breaking-down-the-stars-return-to-form

I apologise if its off topic !!!!!

I haven't looked at the link yet, but odds are 3-1 on that it is on topic.

how about 50-1

Article commenting on how Nadal is right to be angry with Armstrong...
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1538541-rafael-nadal-outspoken-tennis-great-right-to-take-shot-at-lance-armstrong

What caught my eye were the first few comments under the article...that Nadal has supposedly fallen out with Djokovic? Anyone heard of this before or just a poster made up comment?

Maybe his inside sources informed him

I have had the belief (and its only my own you understand) that things were not all they seemed between the two.. I didn´t put it down to professional rivalry because in truth I dont think Rafa would be into that. Never really gave it any more thought beyond that.... but lets be fair Novak´s name has been bandered around along with Rafa´s since the Armstrong case .. hard to sort fact from fiction.

I think in the end you look for major changes in performance to lead you to the guilty. It doesn't prove it but it sure constitutes a smoking gun.

Nadal - for all the muscles etc. - has pretty much been the same way for the duration of his career; in fact his abuse of the time rules were recently admitted to being necessary for him to play his game, hardly the sign of a person playing outside the limits. Federer is going backwards physically just as you'd expect for a guy the wrong side of 30. I don't see any signs that lead me really to suspect either is up to no good.

Fair comment BB.

Thank you.

In fact I can't think of a top player who has experienced a dramatic change in his physical prowess.

“Cases like the one of Armstrong or the one of Operation Puerto are the cancer of sport".
Unfortunately phrasing after Armstrong recovered from cancer. I'm sure Armstrong will be straight on twitter to deliver a response, just as soon as he gets round to catching up with the other 10,000 people having a go at him.

I'm not sure about BB's argument on Nadal. He made a sudden improvement in 2005, and has been the same since then. It might be less suspicious if he'd steadily built up strength over time. Not saying he's guilty, just saying that in my opinion someone being the same way for their whole career is only evidence of non-doping if they weren't doping at the start. It's also possible that they started out doped.

And then there is the issue that modern drugs improve performance without necessarily adding huge muscles.

Perhaps, I didn't think that far back for sure.

By "physical prowess" I wasn't limiting it to muscles. Endurance is just as important, in fact more so in todays game.

bogbrush wrote:Thank you.

In fact I can't think of a top player who has experienced a dramatic change in his physical prowess.

what time frame are we talking about as dramatic? from one season to the next?

Henman Bill wrote:

I'm not sure about BB's argument on Nadal. He made a sudden improvement in 2005, and has been the same since then. It might be less suspicious if he'd steadily built up strength over time. Not saying he's guilty, just saying that in my opinion someone being the same way for their whole career is only evidence of non-doping if they weren't doping at the start. It's also possible that they started out doped.

And then there is the issue that modern drugs improve performance without necessarily adding huge muscles.

Me thinks your wanting to see evidence about Nadal that just isn't there. Nadal jumped to the top in 2005 at a very young age. Prior to that his precocious talent and athletic body shape was clearly evident.

Have you ever seen a more muscular baby than this?

https://th807.photobucket.com/albums/yy353/sagep/Tennis/Rafa%20Nadal/th_babyrafa.jpg

At the age of 14 Nadal beat Pat Cash who I believe was the Wimbledon Title holder at the time. In 2004 he beat the world number two Andy Roddick as part of the Spanish Davis Cup winning team. His break out year at the age of 18 could hardly be considered to be entirely unexpected. Do you really think his middle class parents would have filled their first born and only son full of drugs from baby hood in a gamble to get him to the top at tennis? As that would be the only way to explain his outstanding achievements even as a child.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2004-12-06/teenager-nadal-beats-cashs-davis-cup-record/598080

At the age of 14 Nadal beat Pat Cash who I believe was the Wimbledon Title holder at the time.

Did Pat Cash win Wimbledon in 2001?

Ha ha! You got me there. I meant to say "A Wimbledon title holder". My points about Rafa still stand.

I think it is too early really to cast a verdict on Nadal.

Clearly he is still in recovery of form and fitness and I think even then it will still take time for him to adjust to a routine and rythym that will serve him on tour this year and beyond. His body is hurting and no doubt he has to really manage his schedule in the most meticulous manner possible if he is to survive on tour.

I kinda get the feeling that if he under-performs at the Slams this year that he may well consider retirement. It's not fun playing when your losing, but if your hurting physically and losing? Might be the last straw.

I certainly think he needs more tournaments under his belt before we can really gauge where he is at physically and mentally.

LuvSports! wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Thank you.

In fact I can't think of a top player who has experienced a dramatic change in his physical prowess.

what time frame are we talking about as dramatic? from one season to the next?

Yes, that sort of thing. Maybe a two year transformation perhaps.

hawkeye wrote:
Have you ever seen a more muscular baby than this?

https://th807.photobucket.com/albums/yy353/sagep/Tennis/Rafa%20Nadal/th_babyrafa.jpg

That baby is obviously on PEDs.

Worryingly, I can see that Nadal has had the same slightly lop-sided twist to his mouth/eyes from the start. It clearly is him. Hell, there's even evidence that he's being forced to shake the rattle left-handed.