Jump to content

Nadal tribute thread

BacktoCricaddict

By BacktoCricaddict
in Chit Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

coffee_rules Grand Master

coffee_rules

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

Hmmm ... I would say GOAT on clay. Overall ATG, with Djokovic being the overall GOAT.

Yes, that's what I meant. Hoping fellow Spaniard Carlos Alcaraz to take that crown from both Nadal and Djokovic!!

My order of GOATS - Djokovic, Federer, Nadal... sliced bread ... Sampras

Muloghonto Grand Master

Muloghonto

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bharathh said:

Somehow because of Fed could never really like Nadal. However, def one of the greatest tennis players of all time. 

As a Fed fan, i've always liked Nadal. Its Pushovic that i don't like mostly coz he lucked out the most and his game is faltu against peak Fed/peak Nadal. 

Nadal i've always ejoyed, because the challenge of Nadal is exceptional - not only is the man hitting overspun balls ( man had the most revs on ball by a country mile for pretty much his entire career), it ALWAYS spins the wrong way to most, coz well, he's a leftie. 


Nadal is the ultimate meat-n-potatoes blue-collar worker guy of tennis and i love him for that. In terms of 'technical talent', then man is pretty much only good at touch play and even then nowhere close to the GOAT Fed ( at touch-play). Had a **** serve, entire ground stroke game is to not hit fast but highly spun balls all over the court, so no freebies there either, not one thing about his ground strokes stands out like a weapon, like Federer/DelPos forehands, Sampras's serve, Agassi & Djoker's backhand, etc. 


Also riddled with injuries, man is not a blessed athlete the way Federer or Elastic-ovic are. 
Yet, by FAR the mentally strongest player of the big 3, he made it up with sheer grit, hard work, inexhaustable stamina and a game tailormade for precisely these attributes by him and his uncle Tony. 

The never-say die attitude, the clarity of thought throughout his points ( never had brainfades like Fed being too cutesy or Djok-smash retardation that even a club level player will go wtf to a pro, let alone #1, let alone goat contender- nothing) and his singular focus were the main drivers of his game. 

 

As for where he ranks - he is easily in GOAT debate, by virtue of being the most crazy good player at any given surface - in his case, clay - tennis has ever seen and mark my words- will ever see. 14 slams on the same surface is just...nuts. Especially when its just 1 slam a year. FYI, the most HC slams held by a single player is 13- by Djokovic- and even then, Aussie & US opens are not exactly the same surface. The next best is Fed with 11 HC slams. For grass, its 8 by Fed and 7 for Djoker & Sampras. 

 

On top of that, clay is the hardest slam on the body, the surface that nullifies most weapons and thus, is the most unpredictable to win- until Nadal came along. FYI, before Nadal, the heavyweights of clay usually won 2-3 clay slams and Borg is the next best with 6, with nobody else crossing 5 IIRC in open era. yet, in this slam, he has 14. 
FOURTEEN !!!!!!!!!!

That....is just nuts crazy. The kind of dominance we will never ever see in tennis. 

 

Now before someone goes 'ya ya he is clay GOAT, but not real GOAT', consider this - Nadal has six hard court slams and two wimbies to go along with it. Ie, in HC play,he is tied with hard court  all-time greats Agassi and Connors for 4th most hard court slams won in open era, after Djok,Fed and Sampras. 

 

If you include wimby, thats 8 titles and thats more slams won in the 3 slams combined, excluding one's best slam, than anyone not named Fed & Djok. 

 


So where would i rank him ? easily in the GOAT contention with Fed & Djok and IMO, at his peak, the clear-cut favourite amongst the big 3, as he used to dominate both Federer and Djokovic and it wasnt till his late 20s, with injury-hit comebacks and all that djokovic was able to get ahead in the h2h ( i think nadal got to #1, then got injured again and when he got back, djokovic won like 10 straight against him - that doesnt take away djok's incredible 2011 where he beat Nadal 6-7 straight as well, but that was a temporary flood in an otherwise lopsided h2h with Nadal owning djok most of the time).


his dominance of Fed, before Fed neo-backhand 2.0 (which came at a cost of that most didnt see- his forehand weakened and it mattered against Djok) was absolute and it was Thanos-like in its inevitability : While most saw his dominance of Federer's backhand as the key to their tussle, this doesn't tell the full story of Nadal's mastery of Federer. Ofcourse, there is no way humanly possible for a single handed backhand to deal with hyper-spun and hard hitting leftie forehand- the physics of tennis does not allow it, even for a demi-god like Federer, as we all saw.

But, few notice his ability to neutralize Federer's serve better than anyone not named Djokovic and maybe Murray on his best days and his absolute mastery of Federer's return game: Indeed, his service games against Federer was often clinical display of clear-cut thinking and planning- serving well enough, but never too hard, having well over 70% of first serves in matches, opening up the court and finishing points with aggressive intent when given the slightest scope to do so. 

 

Indeed, many often miss, Nadal is a CLINICAL DISPLAY on how to dominate service games without a good serve and its his entire serving mentality that is a clinic in knowing you are limited but still maxing out on results based on just clear cut planning of points. Always making sure he goes high on SHB's backhand on serve on the ad-side, always making sure he doesnt offer enough pace on the serve to hit clear-cut return winners for the returner. 
One will often see, Djokovic or Murray for eg, hit a lot more return winners against even strong servers like Fed than Nadal ( and they crush weak servers all the time with return winners, so its not just speed factor, but ALSO spin factor). 

 

As for his nemesis - Djokovic - i have seen them both at their peaks and i have never felt that a prime Nadal could be beaten by a prime Djokovic. Ofcourse, even though they are close in age, their primes are a world apart. Nadal's prime is 05-11, with a brief return to prime post injury in 2013 and then off his prime, while Djokovic's prime was from 2011-2016. While their primes did intersect in 2011, i think Nadal's true best years were  05-08, before he lost a bit of foot-speed due to his first major injury as a pro. 

At his best, there simply is no hanging around with Nadal for anyone who isnt an aggressive hitter, as the man will chase everything down and then some. Only way to win is being aggressive, which only a player like Fed or Sampras could. 

On clay, there is simply no contest between Djok & Nadal and while Djok does hold dominance in HC, i believe he was lucky to avoid Nadal most of Nadal's peak period to not see him on HC courts as before 2011 it'd have been a massacre most of the time. 

Yet, i think grass is where Djok lucked out the most, because he never faced Nadal on grass till the very end of Nadal's peak. 

 

So all in all, i'd say- as a Federer fan - that Nadal is the strongest contender for goat, if goat was about h2h with the contenders at their primes on almost all surfaces : 
he's clear cut favourite vs Fed on clay, even on HC and sightly worse on grass at their peaks, vs Djok he is clear cut fav on clay & grass IMO, with Djok being clear cut fav on HCs. 

 

But goat is more than just slam numbers and also more than just h2hs, so I'd rate Nadal as the clear cut #2 alltime behind Fed, which is ironic, since he is the one player with the most clear-cut dominance over Fed ever. 

 

All in all, a great, great athlete and role model, while always being humble and a genuinely nice guy. 

In fact, i firmly believe that his hero-worship of Federer at the beginning of their careers ( when Nadal was a nobody, Fed had already won half a dozen slams, widely considered the clear-cut best, etc etc) that lead to Federer-Nadal rivalry being such a bromance over the much more normal and toxic nature of Djok-Nadal/Djok-Federer rivalries. All in all, he will be sadly missed, as forget his dominance on maati tennis, his dominance in terms of sheer grit and will power will never be seen in tennis again.

 

 

 

putrevus Grand Master

putrevus

Posted
Posted (edited)

Best clay court player. But he was always injured for other tournaments but never for French Open.Too much drama queen for me trying to portray himself as some warrior.

 

Novak is the undisputed GOAT.

 

Unlike Federer who made won all those slams when there was no one there.2005-2009 was weakest era when he won all those slams.

 

 

Novak

Big Gap

Federer

Gap

Nadal.

Edited by putrevus
coffee_rules Grand Master

coffee_rules

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

As a Fed fan, i've always liked Nadal. Its Pushovic that i don't like mostly coz he lucked out the most and his game is faltu against peak Fed/peak Nadal. 

Nadal i've always ejoyed, because the challenge of Nadal is exceptional - not only is the man hitting overspun balls ( man had the most revs on ball by a country mile for pretty much his entire career), it ALWAYS spins the wrong way to most, coz well, he's a leftie. 


Nadal is the ultimate meat-n-potatoes blue-collar worker guy of tennis and i love him for that. In terms of 'technical talent', then man is pretty much only good at touch play and even then nowhere close to the GOAT Fed ( at touch-play). Had a **** serve, entire ground stroke game is to not hit fast but highly spun balls all over the court, so no freebies there either, not one thing about his ground strokes stands out like a weapon, like Federer/DelPos forehands, Sampras's serve, Agassi & Djoker's backhand, etc. 


Also riddled with injuries, man is not a blessed athlete the way Federer or Elastic-ovic are. 
Yet, by FAR the mentally strongest player of the big 3, he made it up with sheer grit, hard work, inexhaustable stamina and a game tailormade for precisely these attributes by him and his uncle Tony. 

The never-say die attitude, the clarity of thought throughout his points ( never had brainfades like Fed being too cutesy or Djok-smash retardation that even a club level player will go wtf to a pro, let alone #1, let alone goat contender- nothing) and his singular focus were the main drivers of his game. 

 

As for where he ranks - he is easily in GOAT debate, by virtue of being the most crazy good player at any given surface - in his case, clay - tennis has ever seen and mark my words- will ever see. 14 slams on the same surface is just...nuts. Especially when its just 1 slam a year. FYI, the most HC slams held by a single player is 13- by Djokovic- and even then, Aussie & US opens are not exactly the same surface. The next best is Fed with 11 HC slams. For grass, its 8 by Fed and 7 for Djoker & Sampras. 

 

On top of that, clay is the hardest slam on the body, the surface that nullifies most weapons and thus, is the most unpredictable to win- until Nadal came along. FYI, before Nadal, the heavyweights of clay usually won 2-3 clay slams and Borg is the next best with 6, with nobody else crossing 5 IIRC in open era. yet, in this slam, he has 14. 
FOURTEEN !!!!!!!!!!

That....is just nuts crazy. The kind of dominance we will never ever see in tennis. 

 

Now before someone goes 'ya ya he is clay GOAT, but not real GOAT', consider this - Nadal has six hard court slams and two wimbies to go along with it. Ie, in HC play,he is tied with hard court  all-time greats Agassi and Connors for 4th most hard court slams won in open era, after Djok,Fed and Sampras. 

 

If you include wimby, thats 8 titles and thats more slams won in the 3 slams combined, excluding one's best slam, than anyone not named Fed & Djok. 

 


So where would i rank him ? easily in the GOAT contention with Fed & Djok and IMO, at his peak, the clear-cut favourite amongst the big 3, as he used to dominate both Federer and Djokovic and it wasnt till his late 20s, with injury-hit comebacks and all that djokovic was able to get ahead in the h2h ( i think nadal got to #1, then got injured again and when he got back, djokovic won like 10 straight against him - that doesnt take away djok's incredible 2011 where he beat Nadal 6-7 straight as well, but that was a temporary flood in an otherwise lopsided h2h with Nadal owning djok most of the time).


his dominance of Fed, before Fed neo-backhand 2.0 (which came at a cost of that most didnt see- his forehand weakened and it mattered against Djok) was absolute and it was Thanos-like in its inevitability : While most saw his dominance of Federer's backhand as the key to their tussle, this doesn't tell the full story of Nadal's mastery of Federer. Ofcourse, there is no way humanly possible for a single handed backhand to deal with hyper-spun and hard hitting leftie forehand- the physics of tennis does not allow it, even for a demi-god like Federer, as we all saw.

But, few notice his ability to neutralize Federer's serve better than anyone not named Djokovic and maybe Murray on his best days and his absolute mastery of Federer's return game: Indeed, his service games against Federer was often clinical display of clear-cut thinking and planning- serving well enough, but never too hard, having well over 70% of first serves in matches, opening up the court and finishing points with aggressive intent when given the slightest scope to do so. 

 

Indeed, many often miss, Nadal is a CLINICAL DISPLAY on how to dominate service games without a good serve and its his entire serving mentality that is a clinic in knowing you are limited but still maxing out on results based on just clear cut planning of points. Always making sure he goes high on SHB's backhand on serve on the ad-side, always making sure he doesnt offer enough pace on the serve to hit clear-cut return winners for the returner. 
One will often see, Djokovic or Murray for eg, hit a lot more return winners against even strong servers like Fed than Nadal ( and they crush weak servers all the time with return winners, so its not just speed factor, but ALSO spin factor). 

 

As for his nemesis - Djokovic - i have seen them both at their peaks and i have never felt that a prime Nadal could be beaten by a prime Djokovic. Ofcourse, even though they are close in age, their primes are a world apart. Nadal's prime is 05-11, with a brief return to prime post injury in 2013 and then off his prime, while Djokovic's prime was from 2011-2016. While their primes did intersect in 2011, i think Nadal's true best years were  05-08, before he lost a bit of foot-speed due to his first major injury as a pro. 

At his best, there simply is no hanging around with Nadal for anyone who isnt an aggressive hitter, as the man will chase everything down and then some. Only way to win is being aggressive, which only a player like Fed or Sampras could. 

On clay, there is simply no contest between Djok & Nadal and while Djok does hold dominance in HC, i believe he was lucky to avoid Nadal most of Nadal's peak period to not see him on HC courts as before 2011 it'd have been a massacre most of the time. 

Yet, i think grass is where Djok lucked out the most, because he never faced Nadal on grass till the very end of Nadal's peak. 

 

So all in all, i'd say- as a Federer fan - that Nadal is the strongest contender for goat, if goat was about h2h with the contenders at their primes on almost all surfaces : 
he's clear cut favourite vs Fed on clay, even on HC and sightly worse on grass at their peaks, vs Djok he is clear cut fav on clay & grass IMO, with Djok being clear cut fav on HCs. 

 

But goat is more than just slam numbers and also more than just h2hs, so I'd rate Nadal as the clear cut #2 alltime behind Fed, which is ironic, since he is the one player with the most clear-cut dominance over Fed ever. 

 

All in all, a great, great athlete and role model, while always being humble and a genuinely nice guy. 

In fact, i firmly believe that his hero-worship of Federer at the beginning of their careers ( when Nadal was a nobody, Fed had already won half a dozen slams, widely considered the clear-cut best, etc etc) that lead to Federer-Nadal rivalry being such a bromance over the much more normal and toxic nature of Djok-Nadal/Djok-Federer rivalries. All in all, he will be sadly missed, as forget his dominance on maati tennis, his dominance in terms of sheer grit and will power will never be seen in tennis again.

 

 

 

 

This comparison of prime phases is all fan talk. Players mature over time, just because Nadal game was all clay and nothing on grass when Federer was on peak, you say H2H is better for Nadal. Nole has beaten both greats and have better h2h on all courts. It is diffcult ro stay on top of ATP for record time, for that reason itself Nole gets the GOAT status. I am a big Nadal fan and liked to watch him play with all the physical ability. But it is hard to go against nuumbers for Nole. 

Muloghonto Grand Master

Muloghonto

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, putrevus said:

Best clay court player. But he was always injured for other tournaments but never for French Open.Too much drama queen for me trying to portray himself as some warrior.

 

Novak is the undisputed GOAT.

 

Unlike Federer who made won all those slams when there was no one there.2005-2009 was weakest era when he won all those slams.

 

 

Novak

Big Gap

Federer

Gap

Nadal.

Nole is the luckiest one, he pretty much became relevant once Federer hit regular retirement age and had the easiest era of alltime to deal with in the post 2015 period. 

Nole gets his numbers simply by the virtue of being the last man standing. As for always injured late in the year and always fit for clay - that is normal for clay specialists who take extra load on the clay season. Players like Bruguera, Kuerten, Muster, etc- all clay greats- missed large chunk of the latter half of the season regularly. 

 

singhvivek141 Grand Master

singhvivek141

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Nole is the luckiest one, he pretty much became relevant once Federer hit regular retirement age and had the easiest era of alltime to deal with in the post 2015 period. 

Nole gets his numbers simply by the virtue of being the last man standing. As for always injured late in the year and always fit for clay - that is normal for clay specialists who take extra load on the clay season. Players like Bruguera, Kuerten, Muster, etc- all clay greats- missed large chunk of the latter half of the season regularly. 

 

I don't agree with this.
What Djokovic has achieved is coz of the peak fitness that he has. Sure, asthetically Federer is more pleasing and Nadal is all about passion, but Djokovic symbolises determination and mental strength. He has upper hand against both Nadal and Federer has been able to extend his dominance for a much longer period. Even at this age Djokovic doesn't give up and is very much honest about his game. I accept that I don't watch tennis often, and he's kinda a late bloomer, but watching his games tell you that he's a battle hardened soldier who will not give up. His W-L % is also highest.

Djokovic for me is the GOAT, Federer being the second as they have dominated other courts as well. Nadal comes third as he hasn't even won 5 Grand Slams on any other court except clay, 14/22 are on clay.

Edited by singhvivek141
Muloghonto Grand Master

Muloghonto

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

I don't agree with this.
What Djokovic has achieved is coz of the peak fitness that he has. Sure, asthetically Federer is more pleasing and Nadal is all about passion, but Djokovic symbolises determination and mental strength. He has upper hand against both Nadal and Federer has been able to extend his dominance for a much longer period. Even at this age Djokovic doesn't give up and is very much honest about his game. I accept that I don't watch tennis often, and he's kinda a late bloomer, but watching his games tell you that he's a battle hardened soldier who will not give up. His W-L % is also highest.

Djokovic for me is the GOAT, Federer being the second as they have dominated other courts as well. Nadal comes third as he hasn't even won 5 Grand Slams on any other court except clay, 14/22 are on clay.

Man gained upper hand over Federer after Federer was 34-35. Which is past retirement for 80% of tennis players. Man didnt have edge over Nadal till nadal got hit by injuries. Yes, he is fit, extermely fit, but he is also much luckier with injuries than the other two of the big3. 
None of the big3 or great ones give up, thats not really a factor of evaluating tennis greats. The ones who give up dont get to be great in the first place- look at Kyrgios for eg. 

Winning 5 slams outside your best slam is not a thing in tennis till the big3 showed up. Literally only Borg and Sampras have ever done it in tennis history till the big3 so i dont know why that is even a factor of consideration. 

 

Looking at slams, two things emerge as a clear-cut pattern in men's tennis : French Open is the hardest slam to be a multi-winner at and US open is the hardest slam to win consecutively. The fact that Nadal won the hardest slam to win multiple times a jaw dropping 14 times- thats 4 clear of anyone else winning a single slam at a single surface and that Federer won 5 US Opens consecutively are far bigger factors in my eyes than Nole's AO record or Wimby record. 

 

The funny thing is, 2019 wimby sealed the GOAT debate for me in favour of Federer. Because how the hell can Novak be the goat, when at just a couple of years after his absolute peak, while being world #1, got thoroughly outplayed by a 38 year old at wimby final and required the greatest choke in wimbledon finals to win ? 

The GOAT in tennis is not supposed to be the guy who as reigning world #1 produces a performance as wimby 2019 **AGAINST** a geriatric guy in tennis terms. 

 

This is the cricket equivalent of having a peak Dale Steyn/peak Bumrah getting ripped apart in a spell for like 5-0-50-1, with the guy holing out on the last ball of the spell, when the guy is a 42 year old geriatric batsman. If that happens, then well, those players lose the 'claim' to be GOAT in my eyes. 

 

Make no mistake, Djokovic has oodles of mental fortitude, perhaps second/third after Nadal & Sampras in my eyes and he has the best all-round game : A serve that isnt dominant but isnt a weak serve like Nadal's, top 2/3 alltime return game, a forehand that is accurate and can hang with monster forehands like the ones of Federer or Del Potro and one of the best double-handed backhands the game has seen with possibly only Agassi having a comparable/better backhand, though Agassi was not half the athlete in pure athletic prowess as the big 3/Sampras/becker etc.

 

But Djokovic got lucky by the virtue of Federer getting old & Nadal getting seriously injury hit after 2012, with Murray and Wawrinka both declining significantly after 2015. 

 

People forget, that in pre 2010s era, there were a lot more upsets throughout tennis. Not just top 4 getting beaten, but also top 8, top 12, etc. Looking at tourney records,, the 2010-2020 period sees the most seeded players making it to their designated seeded rounds ( what this means, is #8 is supposed to make it to QF and lose, #4 is supposed to get to SF and lose, #16 is supposed to get to round of 16 and then lose etc if seedings were predictable). 


What this means, is that tennis became a lot more predictable for the slightly better player to win, eliminating upsets that were more a factor of 'i am world #30, but on my best day, i can beat world #1 on his bad day' and that factor declined, making it easier for top players to earn slams in this period. Yes, Rafa also benefitted from this and so did Federer ( 2018 AO is a clear example of this) but Nole benefitted by far the most of it. 

 

Federer i rate as the best because not only are his accomplishments literally mindblowing for the era he came from, he also straddles the era that sees S&V die out and baseline sluggery thrive. This requires a far greater adjustment to one's game in their playing career than coming in at a stable era and just playing your game from day1 like a Nole/Rafa/Alcaraz are doing. 
Look at Federer's  iconic match vs Sampras in wimbledon 2001. That match looks alien to what Federer played in 2007/8 finals and its almost all S&V. The only difference between Fed and Sampras being Sampras came to the net on his second serve as well, while Fed stayed back on his 2nd serve. 

 

To go from an attacking S&V player to a baseline attack freak is crazy hard to do and arrests one's development - it would be the equivalent of teaching Sehwag how to bat like Dravid - you know even if Sehwag did try 100% to do it and learnt the method, it would still take a coupe of years of development. 

 

 

putrevus Grand Master

putrevus

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 10/11/2024 at 1:48 PM, Muloghonto said:

Nole is the luckiest one, he pretty much became relevant once Federer hit regular retirement age and had the easiest era of alltime to deal with in the post 2015 period. 

Nole gets his numbers simply by the virtue of being the last man standing. As for always injured late in the year and always fit for clay - that is normal for clay specialists who take extra load on the clay season. Players like Bruguera, Kuerten, Muster, etc- all clay greats- missed large chunk of the latter half of the season regularly. 

 

You need to have better understanding of tennis and its history.

 

Federer is not even in same ballpark as Nole .Novak is best clay court player after Nadal and Borg.He was the only guy who could beat Nadal at his best in Roland Garros.

 

He is a better grass court player than Federer.He beat him straight in three wimbledon finals.Where he fought not just his opponent but the crowd also.He promptly wins wimbledon when Nole was injured in 2017.

 

Federer was the one who took advantage of weakest era in tennis history.2005-2009.Where his main rival was Nadal who was a clay court specialist.He never sniffed another US open 2008, he would not have sniffed another Australian open if Nole was not having his injury issues.

 

 

This is after he was Nole getting  ban where he was not allowed to compete in some grand slams.Plus one year he was DQed from US open after line judge accidently.

 

Nole before this year had reached finals 50% of the slams he competed that is just insane.

 

Nadal and Federer had one major problem after 2010, that is the GOAT other wise they have ended up with lot more grand slams.

 

 

 

 

Edited by putrevus
putrevus Grand Master

putrevus

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 10/11/2024 at 2:04 PM, singhvivek141 said:

I don't agree with this.
What Djokovic has achieved is coz of the peak fitness that he has. Sure, asthetically Federer is more pleasing and Nadal is all about passion, but Djokovic symbolises determination and mental strength. He has upper hand against both Nadal and Federer has been able to extend his dominance for a much longer period. Even at this age Djokovic doesn't give up and is very much honest about his game. I accept that I don't watch tennis often, and he's kinda a late bloomer, but watching his games tell you that he's a battle hardened soldier who will not give up. His W-L % is also highest.

Djokovic for me is the GOAT, Federer being the second as they have dominated other courts as well. Nadal comes third as he hasn't even won 5 Grand Slams on any other court except clay, 14/22 are on clay.

Spot on, if you deep dive in Federer's career, he won 15 of his grandslams when there was no other ATG player in circuit during 2004-2009 .Sampras and Agassi were done. Andy Roddick and Nadal were his main Wimbledon rivals during his wins.No offence to Roddick he was  one dimensional.

Edited by putrevus
Real McCoy Veteran

Real McCoy

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, Gollum said:

Happy retired life to the third greatest tennis player of all time :hatsoff:

 

Only GOAT Nole left standing now. 

 

Agree with this. As great as Nadal was, he will be known as next to Djokovic and Federer. Still a great career.

coffee_rules Grand Master

coffee_rules

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

 

Agree with this. As great as Nadal was, he will be known as next to Djokovic and Federer. Still a great career.

Nadal fans will squeeze him above Fed and below Djokovic . Based on  view ratings, h2h , peaks and competition during peak and tennis ability on clay. Serve and volley tennis that Fed mastered  is no great viewing pleasure.  Slam count is a good indicator 

Edited by coffee_rules
Real McCoy Veteran

Real McCoy

Posted
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Nadal fans will squeeze him above Fed and below Djokovic . Based on  view ratings, h2h , peaks and competition during peak and tennis ability on clay. Serve and volley tennis that Fed mastered  is no great viewing pleasure.  Slam count is a good indicator 

 

Sure. Nadal fans may even claim he's above Djokovic but may find it hard to claim it. I'm sure you being a Nadal fan know Nadal is not better than Djokovic :--D Nadal fans have the bragging rights over Federer as he had the mental edge over him at the start. They can't claim the all court dominance that Fed had over other opponents especially in grass and hardcourts. I have to correct you that Fed was never a serve and volleyer and I'm quite sure he is not a master of it like Edberg, Becker, or Sampras

Edited by Real McCoy
Real McCoy Veteran

Real McCoy

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Nadal fans will squeeze him above Fed and below Djokovic . Based on  view ratings, h2h , peaks and competition during peak and tennis ability on clay. Serve and volley tennis that Fed mastered  is no great viewing pleasure.  Slam count is a good indicator 

 

Nadal's slam count was due to his dominance in clay not overseeing his non-clay performance. If you take away his clay count, his other court slams add up to 8.

Texan Veteran

Texan

Posted
Posted (edited)

Djoker record is now safe for another 8-10 years at least :--D

 

On a side note, few things about Nadal -

 

Good stuff:

  • Nobody could have ever thought two decades ago that it was possible to win 14 Grand Slams at a single event. Nadal did it. It will never be repeated. I stand to be corrected but I don't think anybody will achieve this in the future.
  • Was able to beat peak Federer in Fed's backyard (Wimbledon) one time.
  • Best Grand Slam final conversion ratio indicating that when he reached a Grand Slam final, he used to level up.

 

Not so good stuff:

  • Nadal was always disrespectful to Djokovic despite Djokovic always being respectful to him. Contrast this to how he treated Federer.
  • Never won the year end slam that pitted the top 8 players against each other in a different format. Makes you wonder if he was ever the "BEST" in any year, let alone GOAT debate
  • Lost many times in early rounds in non Clay court tournaments as against Federer & Djokovic, who routinely made the last rounds. Makes you wonder if he had the game to always beat players of lower skill levels. I remember he lost two matches to Dustin Brown (including at Wimbledon), an unorthodox player, who played a very different game and primarily looked to entertain.
  • Number of weeks as World number 1 is below Djoker, Fed, even Sampras, Lendl and Connors, which indicates he was not consistently the top player during his playing time.

 

Edited by Texan
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...