Nadal's Phenomenal, Unexpected, And Wonderful Achievement

First topic message reminder :

Nadal is now number one in the rankings having played for only part of the period being assessed for ranking purposes. He did not play during the period October 2012 - February 2013. As far as I know no player has ever gained the number one ranking by playing part time. To do this he has had to win virtually every tournament he has played and has only failed to reach a final once. I don't see that his achievement will be easy to repeat and it must go down as one of the greatest achievements of a single sports person.

I have edited the headline of this article as there were many objections to my use of the term "part-time". Instead I have used a description suggested by Johnyjeep. I like to please

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well I did say (in my post) he missed the second half of last season so the blank canvas was the hard court season. Also take into account that Novak's form has dipped this year as did Murray's at that time (compared to last year) and that opened the door right up. Very true though that Rafa's run of results have been stunning on hard court but lets keep things is perspective.

Stop it your making me laugh! Rafa's rise up the rankings had something to do with "Murray's dip in form"?

Craig - when I read your post it was not clear to me that you meant Nadal's blank canvas to be the hardcourt season (assuming the late summer US). I'm talking semantics, sorry, but you said once back on the comeback trail. The comeback trail started in February. 13 finals out 14 tournaments entered doesn't need under-writing with any perspective. It would be truly remarkable whichever player managed to achieve that.

And talking about Djokovic and Murray's dip in form is as a bad as trying to down play any of what they achieved last year because Nadal was either defeated or not entered.

This is why I enjoy the sport so much. I found it remarkable what Djokovic did in 2011 - fascinating to watch. And who would have thought that Federer would have achieved so much to regain No. 1 in 2012, and then to see Murray win his Slams. All remarkable. Which is why I think it worth celebrating what Nadal has managed to achieve without the need to keep it an sort of context.

Cav wrote:  Craig - when I read your post it was not clear to me that you meant Nadal's blank canvas to be the hardcourt season (assuming the late summer US).  I'm talking semantics, sorry, but you said once back on the comeback trail.  The comeback trail started in February.  13 finals out 14 tournaments entered doesn't need under-writing with any perspective.  It would be truly remarkable whichever player managed to achieve that.

And talking about Djokovic and Murray's dip in form is as a bad as trying to down play any of what they achieved last year because Nadal was either defeated or not entered.  

Agreed, although some Rafa fans did exactly that.

Cav wrote: This is why I enjoy the sport so much.  I found it remarkable what Djokovic did in 2011 - fascinating to watch.  And who would have thought that Federer would have achieved so much to regain No. 1 in 2012, and then to see Murray win his Slams.  All remarkable.  Which is why I think it worth celebrating what Nadal has managed to achieve without the need to keep it an sort of context.

Agreed again, although it's hard not to keep it in context when the OP states belief in the context as being "one of the greatest achievements of a single sports person".

What nonsense.  No player comes back from a real disability even better especially without any surgery.  It's a lie.  It doesn't get any more obvious than that.

Just to clarify HE. And I think I speak for the majority of people, that what Nadal has done is phenomenal. A truly unexpected, and wonderful achievement.

It is the utter tripe you spout in trying to convey that message. And you feel the need to try and elevate it still further like we are not capable of observing this ourselves. Stuff like, he is a part time player. It's, quite clearly, nonsense.

Let Nadal's story tell itself. It doesn't need any help. or embellishment.

I think the fact that Rafa had virtually nothing but the spring clay points in his ranking points on his return make it a more remarkable feat than if he'd had a complete blank sheet. That meant he was under great pressure to defend (albeit where he is most comfortable). Heading to South America was such a good scheduling move to build up confidence and some ranking points to replace the AO.

The dominance of hard courts has been such a big feature of his year though, and his performance in BO3 events has exceeded any previous year (I recall having a conversation with IMBL/Red/Amritia on the subject before Indian Wells about how susceptible to odd losses at hard court Masters he was). Is this simply because he has improved on hard court (more aggressive), has been more focused due to the need to make up for missed tournaments, or because the field is a bit poorer than in the past? Probably a bit of all 3 to be fair.

Is it "one of the greatest achievements of a single sports person"? Depends how many greatest achievements you want to count. I'm not sure it's in my list.

I just want to thank you guys. This thread made my morning and the wit has been sublime  

Johnyjeep wrote:Just to clarify HE. And I think I speak for the majority of people, that what Nadal has done is phenomenal. A truly unexpected, and wonderful achievement.

It is the utter tripe you spout in trying to convey that message. And you feel the need to try and elevate it still further like we are not capable of observing this ourselves. Stuff like, he is a part time player. It's, quite clearly, nonsense.

Let Nadal's story tell itself. It doesn't need any help. or embellishment.

I have edited the title of my article. I quite liked the description "part -time" but there have been lots of objections to this so I have used yours instead

Federer paid tribute to his friend and rival Rafael Nadal, whom he trails 10-21 in their FedEx ATP Head2Head. The Spaniard rose to No. 1 in the Emirates ATP Rankings on Monday.

"I think [it's] an unbelievable comeback, no doubt about it," said the Swiss right-hander. "One year ago people were saying he might never play tennis again. One year later he's world No. 1. That's how quick things can go in tennis, which is great. On the other hand, you've got the other extreme sometimes, you write off a player a little bit too fast."

Federer said he was pleased for the left-handed Mallorcan. "I'm really happy that Rafa's proven himself, for himself personally clearly, but also to the rest of the world that you never write off someone like him... The US Open was an unbelievable victory."

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2013/10/41/Shanghai-Monday-Federer-Preview.aspx

Wish the fans of the sport were equally respectful, without dragging discussions into the perennial GOAT debates.

How can anyone not like Federer?

He was saying the same when people were writing Nadal off.

FootieFan wrote:What nonsense.  No player comes back from a real disability even better especially without any surgery.  It's a lie.  It doesn't get any more obvious than that.

Well thank God for the "nonsense" of Federer... but then of course he doesn´t know what he is talking about
he really should be a Footie Fan

Quote our Rog

"I think [it's] an unbelievable comeback, no doubt about it," said the Swiss right-hander. "One year ago people were saying he might never play tennis again. One year later he's world No. 1. That's how quick things can go in tennis, which is great. On the other hand, you've got the other extreme sometimes, you write off a player a little bit too fast."

Fed usually speaks out honestly. When it's a nice honesty (like the above) everyone likes him. When it's a harsh honesty, he gets a lot of flak.

That's always the way of it though isn't it? If someone you competed with at your local club returned from an injury break to win the club singles and beat you in the final then you might say "Its great that he is back and kudos that he played a fantastic match" - everyone appreciates the sentiment. Conversely, you might say "he only won because he kept shanking lucky shots and because my back was hurting". That may equally be true but people would take a dim view of you saying it!

Well fair dues... Rafa has paid Roger a fair number of compliments over the years... he is now reaping what he sowed. Rumour has it that Roger kept in touch with Rafa whilst he was recovering. He probably is more aware than most.

Regarding Nadal's comeback its astonishing what he can do   , but to say this as record  , you can make more records, one of them is Rafa being the only player in the world who has never lost a match when he is fully fit according to Rafa fan club.

invisiblecoolers wrote:Regarding Nadal's comeback its astonishing what he can do   , but to say this as record  , you can make more records, one of them is Rafa being the only player in the world who has never lost a match when he is fully fit according to Rafa fan club.

I guess you are not a Rafa fan?

hawkeye wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:Regarding Nadal's comeback its astonishing what he can do   , but to say this as record  , you can make more records, one of them is Rafa being the only player in the world who has never lost a match when he is fully fit according to Rafa fan club.

I guess you are not a Rafa fan?

I certainly don't like Rafa's style of play, but I do like him for his die hard spirit , hard work and the person he is, if you celebrate his 8th FO its understandable, if you celebrate his 2nd USO its meaningful and if you had celebrated his back to no.1 its respectful but this thread is pure fan fantasy HE, sorry to say that.

invisiblecoolers wrote:Regarding Nadal's comeback its astonishing what he can do   , but to say this as record  , you can make more records, one of them is Rafa being the only player in the world who has never lost a match when he is fully fit according to Rafa fan club.

Well that is total codswallop ic.... he lost yesterday didn´t he ???? whilst fully fit as far as I can see so what Rafa  fan club are we talking about. ???

Haddie-nuff wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:Regarding Nadal's comeback its astonishing what he can do   , but to say this as record  , you can make more records, one of them is Rafa being the only player in the world who has never lost a match when he is fully fit according to Rafa fan club.

Well that is total codswallop ic.... he lost yesterday didn´t he ???? whilst fully fit as far as I can see so what Rafa  fan club are we talking about. ???

I read on another forum (!) a Rafa fan making excuses about his knees before the Beijing final. Must be that fan club

That is not the answer JM ... who said he only lost when he was not fully fit. ??? We dont quote other forums on here remember

That's true H-N. We let the other forums have the riff-rafa.

hawkeye wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well I did say (in my post) he missed the second half of last season so the blank canvas was the hard court season. Also take into account that Novak's form has dipped this year as did Murray's at that time (compared to last year) and that opened the door right up. Very true though that Rafa's run of results have been stunning on hard court but lets keep things is perspective.

Stop it your making me laugh! Rafa's rise up the rankings had something to do with "Murray's dip in form"?

Of course it did as did Novak not being in the kind of form he had in 2011. If you cannot see that then that is your short-comings that is all. Novak has had a dip in form this year (would anyone disagree with that?) and so has lost against the likes of Dimitrov and such-like and dropped big points (the sort of points that would right now have kept him at No.1) whilst Murray has had back issues dropping big points in the clay court season and in the hard court season.

Craig, to an extent you could say about all no.1's that they only reached that position because the other players didn't win as much. Rafa still had to win his matches. Some of Djokovic's rather bizarre losses in the masters certainly helped the speed that Rafa overtook him though - avoiding just one or two of those could have saved him the ignominy of being overtaken by a "part time" player.

CaladonianCraig.

Djokovic had an amazing year as far as results go in 2011 but by Nadal's standards Nadal had a poor one. Why should that year be used as the standard? If you do that Djokovic has had a "dip in form" for the majority of his career. And as a Murray fan you should be pleased that he didn't have to meet Nadal especially on clay (or American hard court too this year...) as form or no form, bad back or no bad back their H2H suggests just one winner.

I'm not sure you fully understand how ranking points work. Winning points in a previous year doesn't affect a players ability to win them again. Nadal will not have less chance of winning RG next year because he won it this year and won't enter it disadvantaged because he won 2,000 points this year. Maybe you should look at the race points instead as they are easier to understand. All players start the year with no points and every time they win they can gain them (unless the ranking system plays a cruel trick ) At the end of the year the race equals the ranking anyway. That way you don't have to see a player as disadvantaged when they "defend" points.

YvonneT wrote:Craig, to an extent you could say about all no.1's that they only reached that position because the other players didn't win as much. Rafa still had to win his matches. Some of Djokovic's rather bizarre losses in the masters certainly helped the speed that Rafa overtook him though - avoiding just one or two of those could have saved him the ignominy of being overtaken by a "part time" player.

Djokovic should have signed a petition to have Rafa seeded higher at the French. I did try and point out at the time that not seeding Nadal correctly wouldn't damage Nadal but other players and potentially would be most detrimental to Djokovic. If that had been done Djokovic would probably still be clinging onto number one with 480 extra ranking points

Funnily enough, if Murray hadn't missed RG with his back, everyone from Federer down would have moved down a seed and Nadal would have ended up on the opposite half of the draw to Djokovic. It's a fair assumption that Djokovic would have ended up with finalist points in that scenario and still have been no.1 right now. So it actually could well be attributed to Murray's back issues after all!

YvonneT. I believe Rafa was seeded 4 at RG. If Murray had played it would have been 5. Rafa could have played Djokovic in the quarters... Maybe Djokovic should consider he was lucky?

hawkeye wrote:YvonneT. I believe Rafa was seeded 4 at RG. If Murray had played it would have been 5. Rafa could have played Djokovic in the quarters... Maybe Djokovic should consider he was lucky?

He was seeded 3.

Yeah, Rafa trounced Djoko at the FO. There's no way it could have turned out differently if they'd played on a different day.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Yeah, Rafa trounced Djoko at the FO. There's no way it could have turned out differently if they'd played on a different day.

If only a butterfly had flapped it's wings in Australia Monfils would have thrilled France with his RG win... sigh...

hawkeye wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:Yeah, Rafa trounced Djoko at the FO. There's no way it could have turned out differently if they'd played on a different day.

If only a butterfly had flapped it's wings in Australia Monfils would have thrilled France with his RG win... sigh...

In other words, you can't think of a good counter-argument.
It's not enough for you Rafa won the actual match, now you have him winning fantasy matches, with no possibility of defeat, playing part-time, blindfolded, whilst juggling on a unicycle, and wearing a halo with the word 'hawkeye' engraved on it.

are you really debating about this? 14 tournaments 13 finals 10 titles. 2 slams 5 masters. it doesnt matter if he was coming from injury or not. the year is historic

JuliusHMarx wrote:
It's not enough for you Rafa won the actual match, now you have him winning fantasy matches, with no possibility of defeat, playing part-time, blindfolded, whilst juggling on a unicycle, and wearing a halo with the word 'hawkeye' engraved on it.

Ha ha! I would say that there would be few fantasy matches that Nadal could win that could possibly live up to his real ones. Although this year he got to number one by playing part-time I admit he wasn't blindfolded, juggling or playing on a unicycle. But maybe he's saving those extra tricks for next year? Just to keep things interesting   (The halo thing would be a bit silly though don't you think...)

Sorry Hawkeye but I am not one for backside licking unlike yourself as this thread displays. And before you retort I said earlier it was a great achievement by Rafa but years down the line it will be forgotten as an achievement. His winning the French Open and US Open will be remembered and heck even his defeat to Darcis will be remembered more than an achievement that holds no name.

hawkeye wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:
It's not enough for you Rafa won the actual match, now you have him winning fantasy matches, with no possibility of defeat, playing part-time, blindfolded, whilst juggling on a unicycle, and wearing a halo with the word 'hawkeye' engraved on it.

Ha ha! I would say that there would be few fantasy matches that Nadal could win that could possibly live up to his real ones. Although this year he got to number one by playing part-time I admit he wasn't blindfolded, juggling or playing on a unicycle. But maybe he's saving those extra tricks for next year? Just to keep things interesting   ....

Are you saying you might get bored of Rafa? That I find the most hard of all to believe. If people can put up with Fed repeatedly winning three slams a year, I'm sure they'll manage to put up with Rafa winning two without yawning too much :)Especially with Murray winning at least one as well, just to keep everyone happy. Well, maybe not quite everyone...

Edit - I should, of course, refer to him as Andy 'part-timer' Murray.

I love HE!

I've been on this forum for about two and half years now and I still can't decide if Hawkeye posts this stuff just to get a reaction or if it's really how she sees the world!

hawkeye wrote:YvonneT. I believe Rafa was seeded 4 at RG. If Murray had played it would have been 5. Rafa could have played Djokovic in the quarters... Maybe Djokovic should consider he was lucky?

As BS said, Rafa was ranked 4 and third seed. I think they draw the numbers for the seeds so we know where all the seeded players would be had Murray not withdrawn. Of course, my post was a not entirely serious addition on whether Murray's condition affected Rafa's year. Equally, if Ferrer hadn't made the final at RG, he would have remained below Rafa, who then wouldn't have been drawn against Darcis at Wimbledon...

HM Murdoch wrote:I've been on this forum for about two and half years now and I still can't decide if Hawkeye posts this stuff just to get a reaction or if it's really how she sees the world!

Mostly the former, but in fairness, doesn't everyone here see the achievements of their favourites as more impressive than achievements of players they are less invested in? Perhaps you could say that the less invested will be more objective - but maybe in this instance they look at some of Rafa's draws and see him winning as inevitable when the reality is that it takes more effort to beat the field than we give credit for.
(I also reckon if people posted about Murray's slam wins in the way that Craig does here about Rafa, he'd be seething).

naxroy wrote:are you really debating about this? 14 tournaments 13 finals 10 titles. 2 slams 5 masters. it doesnt matter if he was coming from injury or not. the year is historic

Wouldn't you say that 2010 was more impressive? I don't know how many titles and finals there were that year, but the titles were of better "quality" (1 Wimbledon beats several 250's and 500's).

YvonneT wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:I've been on this forum for about two and half years now and I still can't decide if Hawkeye posts this stuff just to get a reaction or if it's really how she sees the world!

Mostly the former, but in fairness, doesn't everyone here see the achievements of their favourites as more impressive than achievements of players they are less invested in? Perhaps you could say that the less invested will be more objective - but maybe in this instance they look at some of Rafa's draws and see him winning as inevitable when the reality is that it takes more effort to beat the field than we give credit for.
(I also reckon if people posted about Murray's slam wins in the way that Craig does here about Rafa, he'd be seething).

To be fair YvonneT I do believe I was very level-headed during Murray's successful period from last summer to the end of this summer. Two slam titles and an Olympic Gold but I never came up with a thread as nauseously backside licking as this one and never will. I'll take pride and satisfaction in Andy's wins/titles/achievements but don't create articles over-emphasising them. I don't think that is a boast either but just a fair assessment if biased.

Buttsratcher!

Buttscratcher! No Peter! Buttscratcher! Peter no! BUuuttttttsssscccrrraaatttcccheeerrrrr

CaledonianCraig wrote:Sorry Hawkeye but I am not one for backside licking unlike yourself as this thread displays. And before you retort I said earlier it was a great achievement by Rafa but years down the line it will be forgotten as an achievement. His winning the French Open and US Open will be remembered and heck even his defeat to Darcis will be remembered more than an achievement that holds no name.

CaledonianCraig wrote:
To be fair YvonneT I do believe I was very level-headed during Murray's successful period from last summer to the end of this summer. Two slam titles and an Olympic Gold but I never came up with a thread as nauseously backside licking as this one and never will. I'll take pride and satisfaction in Andy's wins/titles/achievements but don't create articles over-emphasising them. I don't think that is a boast either but just a fair assessment if biased.

CC. I think you are probably right in the sense that this year will just be a small part of what is remembered of Nadal's career. But I think it's pretty good  and I'm sure no other player has come back after 8 months injury to reclaim the number one position just 8 months later. Maybe someone knows of another sportsperson who has done something similar but I can't think of anyone. I certainly thought it something worth saying. My original title was IMO quite modest "Part-time player becomes number one" and I agree that the present title is a little gushing. But I only changed it because so many objected to the words "part-time" and wanted to please.

It's nice that you enjoyed Murray win his two slams and Olympic gold and I agree you appear to take great pride in them. But this year Nadal has won 2 slams and 6 Masters roughly the equivalent of Murray's entire top trophy cabinet (I believe Murray has 9 Masters titles). Nadal may not have won Olympic gold this year but he did win his home tournament of Barcelona for the eighth time so a similar emotional home win? All of this and only playing part-time too. If you think Murray's career has been impressive you must agree that what Nadal has done is pretty good

legendkillarV2 wrote:I love HE!

Let's not forget that 2 of the top 3 are part-timers and that Andy won Wimby as a part-timer.
Does it show what a weak era we're in that 2 part-time players won the last 3 slams?  

hawkeye wrote:

...................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................


If you think Murray's career has been impressive you must agree that what Nadal has done is pretty good

And there we have - in a single sentence - a definitive illustration of the fundamental difference
in attitude between hawkeye and the poster to whom this comment was addressed, ie. Caledonian Craig ; the perennial and heavily-laced bias versus the wider, more balanced outlook.

I don't believe CC has ever shown reluctance to be complimentary towards ANY particular player for achievements of note ; hawkeye -  in stark contrast - has, afaik, yet to concede fair and UNEQUIVOCAL praise for either of Murray's two Slam titles or Olympic Gold.

Julious. Well it is true that Murray missed two weeks in May so he is practically part-time. I didn't realize he also managed to get to number one with that big gap in his calender. But if he did then he has practically achieved the same as Nadal. Did you know they practically grew up together in Majorca? They are practically like brothers... although of course Murray is probably the more talented.

Sigh... some supporters hate it if their favorite gets left out.

hawkeye wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I love HE!

Embrace the love!

hawkeye wrote:Julious. Well it is true that Murray missed two weeks in May so he is practically part-time. I didn't realize he also managed to get to number one with that big gap in his calender.

Er. me neither, hence I referred to him as number 3