PDA

View Full Version : Why Nadal is not one of the best ever even on clay.


federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 05:22 AM
Nadal has such weak competition on clay compared to even guys like Muster, Bruguera, and Kuerten; let alone guys like Wilander, Lendl, Borg, and Vilas. That is why he is not one of the best ever even on clay.

Borg had Vilas, Ramirez, Dibbs, Connors, Panatta, as his rivals on clay. Vilas had all the same people except trade Vilas for Borg. Lendl had Clerc, Wilander, Vilas, McEnroe, and Connors, as his big rivals on clay. Wilander had all the same people except trade Wilander for Lendl. Bruguera had Muster, Medvedev, Courier, Chang, as his big rivals on clay when he was on top. Muster had Bruguera, Chang, Costa, Corretja, as his big rivals on clay when he was on top. Kuerten had Bruguera, Muster, Ferrero, Corretja, Costa, Rios, and Moya when he was on top.

Nadal only has Federer who absolutely hates clay, cant stand it. The rest he has for competition is guys like Robredo and Gaudio. With Federer so uncomfortable on clay, until hopefuly this year, he faces nobody to win those titles. Other greats on clay faced 4 or more greats on clay to win all their titles.

federer_nadal
03-02-2007, 05:44 AM
Not true, federer actually played a lot on clay during his early years.

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 05:46 AM
Yeah Federer played alot on clay, so? Sampras has played alot on clay too, does that mean anything.

larlarbd
03-02-2007, 05:57 AM
Nadal has such weak competition on clay compared to even guys like Muster, Bruguera, and Kuerten; let alone guys like Wilander, Lendl, Borg, and Vilas. That is why he is not one of the best ever even on clay.

Borg had Vilas, Ramirez, Dibbs, Connors, Panatta, as his rivals on clay. Vilas had all the same people except trade Vilas for Borg. Lendl had Clerc, Wilander, Vilas, McEnroe, and Connors, as his big rivals on clay. Wilander had all the same people except trade Wilander for Lendl. Bruguera had Muster, Medvedev, Courier, Chang, as his big rivals on clay when he was on top. Muster had Bruguera, Chang, Costa, Corretja, as his big rivals on clay when he was on top. Kuerten had Bruguera, Muster, Ferrero, Corretja, Costa, Rios, and Moya when he was on top.

Nadal only has Federer who absolutely hates clay, cant stand it. The rest he has for competition is guys like Robredo and Gaudio. With Federer so uncomfortable on clay, until hopefuly this year, he faces nobody to win those titles. Other greats on clay faced 4 or more greats on clay to win all their titles.

This probably is the only time I'm gonna agree with ya .

Very Good point - Nadal doesn't have a great clay opponent .

Fed is a fast court player ( he admits it or not - he does hate clay ) & Nadal is *supposedly* the clay court specialist - for FED to even match Nadal is an accomplishment , but I think FED can be way better on clay against nadal - which leaves nadal with the only option - RUN & lose .

Nexttime when FED meets Nadal on clay - Nadal better bring the washing-machine with him caz FED is gonna roll him in the RED clay.

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 06:07 AM
This probably is the only time I'm gonna agree with ya .

Very Good point - Nadal doesn't have a great clay opponent .

Fed is a fast court player ( he admits it or not - he does hate clay ) & Nadal is *supposedly* the clay court specialist - for FED to even match Nadal is an accomplishment , but I think FED can be way better on clay against nadal - which leaves nadal with the only option - RUN & lose .

Nexttime when FED meets Nadal on clay - Nadal better bring the washing-machine with him caz FED is gonna roll him in the RED clay.

Yeah I agree. Fed is a fast court player who does hate clay. He still can play alot better vs Nadal on clay then he has so far and next time he plays Nadal on clay Nadal should be ready for a loss.

DueSouth
03-02-2007, 06:16 AM
He still can play alot better vs Nadal on clay then he has so far and next time he plays Nadal on clay Nadal should be ready for a loss.

I agree. Apparently Federer said - after losing to Nadal in Rome Final - 'I almost had him this time....I think Ive figured out how to beat him on clay'. Looks like all Nadal's clay season points are going to dissapear very soon.

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 06:22 AM
I agree. Apparently Federer said - after losing to Nadal in Rome Final - 'I almost had him this time....I think Ive figured out how to beat him on clay'. Looks like all Nadal's clay season points are going to dissapear very soon.

Yeah that match is a good point to bring up. Fed knows he should have won that match so was very dissapointed, more then any previous loss to Nadal on clay, but also realized after that match how to beat Nadal on clay and that he can do it if he executes what needs to be done. The French Open final nerves got in the way, he was looking good early. Next time he plays Nadal on clay he will remember what he picked up in that Rome final and start to assert himself over Nadal on clay.

javier sergio
03-02-2007, 06:25 AM
Nadal has such weak competition on clay compared to even guys like Muster, Bruguera, and Kuerten; let alone guys like Wilander, Lendl, Borg, and Vilas. That is why he is not one of the best ever even on clay.

Borg had Vilas, Ramirez, Dibbs, Connors, Panatta, as his rivals on clay. Vilas had all the same people except trade Vilas for Borg. Lendl had Clerc, Wilander, Vilas, McEnroe, and Connors, as his big rivals on clay. Wilander had all the same people except trade Wilander for Lendl. Bruguera had Muster, Medvedev, Courier, Chang, as his big rivals on clay when he was on top. Muster had Bruguera, Chang, Costa, Corretja, as his big rivals on clay when he was on top. Kuerten had Bruguera, Muster, Ferrero, Corretja, Costa, Rios, and Moya when he was on top.

Nadal only has Federer who absolutely hates clay, cant stand it. The rest he has for competition is guys like Robredo and Gaudio. With Federer so uncomfortable on clay, until hopefuly this year, he faces nobody to win those titles. Other greats on clay faced 4 or more greats on clay to win all their titles.

I agree with you, He has once in a while someone that can challenge him but not consistently as Borg, Lendl, etc.
I'm glad that someone make this comment to help others realize that Nadal is not such a magnificent player............just lacking of serious opponent in clay.

caulcano
03-02-2007, 06:31 AM
Nadal is not one of the best ever even on clay.

Only 'time' will tell. Similarly only 'time' will tell if FED becomes GOAT.

DueSouth
03-02-2007, 06:37 AM
Only 'time' will tell. Similarly only 'time' will tell if FED becomes GOAT.
Federer already is one of the G.O.A.T...sumthing like 48 career titles.....ten grand slam titles!And this time next year he could have equalled Sampras's record of 14! And he's only 25!

jelle v
03-02-2007, 06:38 AM
Who did Nadal beat when he won his French Opens? Didn't he beat Coria and Gaudio for example?

TennezSport
03-02-2007, 06:39 AM
While I am totally rooting for Fed at the French this year. Fed is going to have the same problem with Rafa this year. On clay, Rafa plays the human soccer backboard game until he gets something short or he can angle a shot to get his opponent off court. This means that Fed will have to attack Rafa most of the time but not make too many UEs doing so. That is a very fine line to walk on clay.

I would rather see Fed mix the game up alot more. Come in and take some of those moon balls out of the air. Drop shot when Rafa is in the far back court and rip/slice angle shots to pull Rafa way off court and cover the angles. Keep Rafa constantly moving to take his legs from him, ala Agassi or Murry. Keep the UEs low which will be crucial.

TennezSport :cool:

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 06:58 AM
Who did Nadal beat when he won his French Opens? Didn't he beat Coria and Gaudio for example?

Nadal beat guys like Ljubicic(2006 semis), and Puerta(2005 final)to win his 2 French Opens. No he did not play Coria or Gaudio in either year.

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 06:59 AM
While I am totally rooting for Fed at the French this year. Fed is going to have the same problem with Rafa this year. On clay, Rafa plays the human soccer backboard game until he gets something short or he can angle a shot to get his opponent off court. This means that Fed will have to attack Rafa most of the time but not make too many UEs doing so. That is a very fine line to walk on clay.

I would rather see Fed mix the game up alot more. Come in and take some of those moon balls out of the air. Drop shot when Rafa is in the far back court and rip/slice angle shots to pull Rafa way off court and cover the angles. Keep Rafa constantly moving to take his legs from him, ala Agassi or Murry. Keep the UEs low which will be crucial.

TennezSport :cool:

Yeah I agree with your analysis of what Fed needs to do vs Nadal on clay. He needs to mix up the play in all the ways you said, and not just let Nadal get in a rythym from the backcourt. On a surface other then clay Federer can beat Nadal however he wants, he just has to not blow it, but on clay he has to have very specific plans and execute within a fine line. Not easy but I know he can do it.

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 07:02 AM
I agree with you, He has once in a while someone that can challenge him but not consistently as Borg, Lendl, etc.
I'm glad that someone make this comment to help others realize that Nadal is not such a magnificent player............just lacking of serious opponent in clay.

Yeah that is what I have been feeling as well watching Nadal dominate the last 2 years on clay. He has some competition from time to time, but nothing like the consistent competition Borg, Lendl, Vilas, Wilander, for example had all playing each other and a group of very consistent clay court specialists.

There isnt even a guy other then Nadal or Federer who consistently makes quarters or better on clay anymore like guys like Ramirez and Dibbs did back in the day. Ljubicic and Nalbandian who arent clay courters were both in the French semis last year, Puerta and Davydenko played in one semis vs each other the year before, it is a bit of a joke at times.

Nadal's competition on clay makes him look so magnificent, not enough of a serious opponent.

jelle v
03-02-2007, 07:13 AM
Nadal beat guys like Ljubicic(2006 semis), and Puerta(2005 final)to win his 2 French Opens. No he did not play Coria or Gaudio in either year.

Ok thanks.

I thought defeating Puerta was pretty impressive though. Not the biggest name, but the tennis was genius from both sides imo.

Still I wouldn't cnsider Nadal the greatest on clay ever (yet).

caulcano
03-02-2007, 07:23 AM
Yeah I agree with your analysis of what Fed needs to do vs Nadal on clay. He needs to mix up the play in all the ways you said, and not just let Nadal get in a rythym from the backcourt. On a surface other then clay Federer can beat Nadal however he wants, he just has to not blow it, but on clay he has to have very specific plans and execute within a fine line. Not easy but I know he can do it.

But NADAL will just take even MORE time between points ... more butt-picking, more slow bounces on serve, more fist-pumping, more drink, more towelling off...

tuk
03-02-2007, 08:11 AM
I agree that Nadal's opponents on clay aren't as good...but I still think Nadal would dominate anyone that has ever been considered a good clay courter....anyone (you name it!)....ever....
but lets wait and see what can Federer do on clay this year, I think he's got a chance against Nadal....after all he(Federer) is the GOAT(IMO) so if he can't, no one does(not now, not 50 years ago)......
but that's just what I think.....

illkhiboy
03-02-2007, 08:26 AM
There are plenty of claycourters today, perhaps more so than in Kuerten's or Muster's time. Calleri, Acasuso, Ferrer, Robredo, Squillari, Guadio, Coria, Nalbandian (whose more an all-surface player but very strong on clay), Davydenko (ditto as Nalbandian), FEDERER, Almagro etc.

I am sure I am missing a few names. Players like Diego Hartfield are no slouches on clay either. Just pick up a draw of a random South American clay court tournament and see the number of super dirtballers there. Oh and I forgot Gonzalez and Massu. Nadal's competition is fine. Give him credit where it is due. He has basically subdeud the wills of his collective opposition.

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 08:50 AM
There are plenty of claycourters today, perhaps more so than in Kuerten's or Muster's time. Calleri, Acasuso, Ferrer, Robredo, Squillari, Guadio, Coria, Nalbandian (whose more an all-surface player but very strong on clay), Davydenko (ditto as Nalbandian), FEDERER, Almagro etc.

I am sure I am missing a few names. Players like Diego Hartfield are no slouches on clay either. Just pick up a draw of a random South American clay court tournament and see the number of super dirtballers there. Oh and I forgot Gonzalez and Massu. Nadal's competition is fine. Give him credit where it is due. He has basically subdeud the wills of his collective opposition.

Calleri, Acasuso, Ferrer, Squillari(does he even still play), Massu, are not real competition. Get real here, naming them is just like naming Gaudenzi, Arrese, Cherkasov, Sanchez, Voinea, or Furlan back before, good journeymen clay courters are not valid for real competition for the top gun. Coria isnt even in the top 100 anymore I think, he definitely is not a threat. Nalbandian, Davydenko, and Gonzalez are not clay court players, they are hard court players, also good indoor players, and Nalbandian and Gonzalez even prefer grass to clay.

The only ones you have any argument for are Federer and Robredo. Federer is not as tough an opponent on clay right now as all the players I listed that Borg, Vilas, Muster, and Kuerten had to deal with. Robredo while a top 10 player whose best surface is clay also is not as tough as the guys Borg, Vilas, Wilander, and Lendl had to deal with.

holera
03-02-2007, 10:48 AM
this is all wrong.

nadal is 1 of the all-time greats on clay. his clay winning streak and wins in MS and RG speak for themselves. he has all the right tools for clay--consistency, spin, footspeed, endurance, plus can hit great winners when necessary.

federer doesn't hate clay. his 1st win was on clay. he won hamburg MS on clay i think 3 times. he bageled kuerten in 02 on clay. beat coria, who was then the world's best claycourter, in 04 final. he made the finals of the 3 biggest clay events last year.

TheTruth
03-02-2007, 01:52 PM
Yeah Federer played alot on clay, so? Sampras has played alot on clay too, does that mean anything.

You're hedging. We all know Federer grew up on European clay!

TheTruth
03-02-2007, 01:57 PM
But NADAL will just take even MORE time between points ... more butt-picking, more slow bounces on serve, more fist-pumping, more drink, more towelling off...

Ahhh, but he's nice after the match. Not bragging on himself and his magnificent talents. Laughing at the ridiculously good shots he made, and amazing himself. How classless!

TheTruth
03-02-2007, 01:59 PM
There are plenty of claycourters today, perhaps more so than in Kuerten's or Muster's time. Calleri, Acasuso, Ferrer, Robredo, Squillari, Guadio, Coria, Nalbandian (whose more an all-surface player but very strong on clay), Davydenko (ditto as Nalbandian), FEDERER, Almagro etc.

I am sure I am missing a few names. Players like Diego Hartfield are no slouches on clay either. Just pick up a draw of a random South American clay court tournament and see the number of super dirtballers there. Oh and I forgot Gonzalez and Massu. Nadal's competition is fine. Give him credit where it is due. He has basically subdeud the wills of his collective opposition.

That is absolutely a true statement!

BeckerFan
03-02-2007, 02:05 PM
There are more compelling reasons why Nadal isn't one of the best clay-court players ... YET.

He's won Roland Garros only twice. Lendl, Wilander and Kuerten won three times. Borg, of course, is miles ahead with six. Cochet won four times (five if you count his 1922 win, when the tournament was all-French). Rosewall won twice, but could have won many more times ... he did win on Paris clay numerous times as a professional.

Nadal needs to stick around for a while before we can dub him one of the 'best' at pretty much anything. Clay-court players have a tendency to fade young, and that could very well be the case here. If he wins the French again this year, then MAYBE we can start talking. But IMO it'll take four titles to really lift him into the top echelon.

4brotherdrive
03-02-2007, 02:32 PM
Nadal has competition. This is the same thing as saying that Federer doesn't play with any great players. So he should lose to make competition. Nadal plays against plenty of claycourt specialist either way. Though he isnt the best yet, he has potential.

tricky
03-02-2007, 02:46 PM
Actually I think the clay court competition is much more rigorous than in any other time; after all, the ball dynamics on clay haven't changed nearly as much as grass or HC.

Fitness, so crucial to cc play, is better than it was even 10 years ago. Many of the clay courters have strong serves and can hit flat/big shots with their strong SW grips.

Many of these players burn out quickly, and so have problems distinguishing themselves with a long enough career. They lack the "brand recognition" of older generations.

jackson vile
03-02-2007, 07:03 PM
Nadal has such weak competition on clay compared to even guys like Muster, Bruguera, and Kuerten; let alone guys like Wilander, Lendl, Borg, and Vilas. That is why he is not one of the best ever even on clay.

Borg had Vilas, Ramirez, Dibbs, Connors, Panatta, as his rivals on clay. Vilas had all the same people except trade Vilas for Borg. Lendl had Clerc, Wilander, Vilas, McEnroe, and Connors, as his big rivals on clay. Wilander had all the same people except trade Wilander for Lendl. Bruguera had Muster, Medvedev, Courier, Chang, as his big rivals on clay when he was on top. Muster had Bruguera, Chang, Costa, Corretja, as his big rivals on clay when he was on top. Kuerten had Bruguera, Muster, Ferrero, Corretja, Costa, Rios, and Moya when he was on top.

Nadal only has Federer who absolutely hates clay, cant stand it. The rest he has for competition is guys like Robredo and Gaudio. With Federer so uncomfortable on clay, until hopefuly this year, he faces nobody to win those titles. Other greats on clay faced 4 or more greats on clay to win all their titles.


No not really, Roger is one of the best clay courters there ever was, if it was not for Nadal Roger would have that cliam also.

Roger would beat all those clay court greats and Nadal would smash all of them.

Like him or hate him Nadal is on his way to the greatest clay courter of all time at this point he has made many records, thing that suprises me is that he is able to do this when clay is last on his list LOL:p

Fedace
03-02-2007, 07:04 PM
Nadal has such weak competition on clay compared to even guys like Muster, Bruguera, and Kuerten; let alone guys like Wilander, Lendl, Borg, and Vilas. That is why he is not one of the best ever even on clay.

Borg had Vilas, Ramirez, Dibbs, Connors, Panatta, as his rivals on clay. Vilas had all the same people except trade Vilas for Borg. Lendl had Clerc, Wilander, Vilas, McEnroe, and Connors, as his big rivals on clay. Wilander had all the same people except trade Wilander for Lendl. Bruguera had Muster, Medvedev, Courier, Chang, as his big rivals on clay when he was on top. Muster had Bruguera, Chang, Costa, Corretja, as his big rivals on clay when he was on top. Kuerten had Bruguera, Muster, Ferrero, Corretja, Costa, Rios, and Moya when he was on top.

Nadal only has Federer who absolutely hates clay, cant stand it. The rest he has for competition is guys like Robredo and Gaudio. With Federer so uncomfortable on clay, until hopefuly this year, he faces nobody to win those titles. Other greats on clay faced 4 or more greats on clay to win all their titles.

Nadal is not one of the best on clay, nadal is the best ever to step on the clay courts period.

hopeless
03-02-2007, 08:35 PM
Nadal has competition. This is the same thing as saying that Federer doesn't play with any great players. So he should lose to make competition. Nadal plays against plenty of claycourt specialist either way. Though he isnt the best yet, he has potential.

yup i agree... the lack of competition arguments for both Nadal (on clay) and Federer (as GOAT) are really ******** and unfair

ibemadskillzz
03-02-2007, 08:51 PM
Clay is one of fed's favorite surfaces along with wimby

alienhamster
03-02-2007, 09:03 PM
I usually hate these "the competition is weaker, therefore the wins are less vaild" type threads. But I have to admit my gut says you might be onto something.

I do feel like, particularly the last 2 years, I've seen less competition from "clay court specialists." Where did Gaudio and Coria go all of a sudden? And Ferrero?

I think Nadal, as good as he is (AND HE *IS* GOOD), is definitely benefitting from a bit of a gap in competitive clay court play.

I hope Fed ovecomes him this year, as much as I want Roddick to overcome Fed on grass (the latter of which will probably never happen).

Zets147
03-02-2007, 09:09 PM
Clay is one of fed's favorite surfaces along with wimby

There are only so many surfaces lol I don't think Federer hates clay, he probably enjoys figuring out how to be the best on clay, while maintaining his throne on the other court types.

krprunitennis2
03-02-2007, 09:42 PM
This probably is the only time I'm gonna agree with ya .

Very Good point - Nadal doesn't have a great clay opponent .

Fed is a fast court player ( he admits it or not - he does hate clay ) & Nadal is *supposedly* the clay court specialist - for FED to even match Nadal is an accomplishment , but I think FED can be way better on clay against nadal - which leaves nadal with the only option - RUN & lose .

Nexttime when FED meets Nadal on clay - Nadal better bring the washing-machine with him caz FED is gonna roll him in the RED clay.

Sadly, I also think Federer will win. =,( The score from the French Final was so close and Federer has been getting better a lot. I have no idea what the out come would be.

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 10:31 PM
I usually hate these "the competition is weaker, therefore the wins are less vaild" type threads. But I have to admit my gut says you might be onto something.

I do feel like, particularly the last 2 years, I've seen less competition from "clay court specialists." Where did Gaudio and Coria go all of a sudden? And Ferrero?

I think Nadal, as good as he is (AND HE *IS* GOOD), is definitely benefitting from a bit of a gap in competitive clay court play.

I hope Fed ovecomes him this year, as much as I want Roddick to overcome Fed on grass (the latter of which will probably never happen).

Good point on Gaudio, Coria, and Ferrero all seeming to have gone away. If they were all still challenging on clay the clay court field might seem atleast reasonable to what it is now. They arent though, and Nadal has no competition on clay except Federer, and Federer is not even totaly comfortable on clay by his own admission. When you think who are the main contenders on clay other then Nadal and Federer you cant name anybody really anymore. It is hard to name players like Ljubicic or Puerta, yet they were guys deepest at the French the last 2 years other then Nadal and Federer so what to make of that?

pj80
03-02-2007, 11:07 PM
that just shows how much clay tennis sucks when 2 of the greatest in the game hate it...

Morrissey
03-02-2007, 11:45 PM
Typical garbage spewing from federerfanatic again. Once again downplaying any sort of achievement Nadal has accomplished. You are the quintessential hater bar none. Nadal win 52 straight matches on clay beating the likes of Federer, Ferrero, Gonzo, Gasquet, Coria, etc. during that streak. All of them while playing good too. But you hate him so much that all that means nothing. He´s not one of the best like you say, he´s just the best and he´s got more room for titles. Today now more than ever there are more clay court specialists and all they do is work hard on their surface and Nadal beats them all convincingly. How many times does he have to keep beating Federer on clay to make you think otherwise? Maybe you´re so hard headed that you´ll never accept it. You´ve would´ve been a great carpenter with your stubborn attitude. I could tell you that the door is white and you´ll disagree and say it´s black just because you can´t admit it´s correct. It´s a testament to Nadal´s greatness when Federer dominates everyone on every surface (even on clay) except Rafa. I´m not sure past clay champs would beat Federer now, this is including Courier, Bruguera, Lendl, Coria, Ferrero, Muster, Gaudio, Moya and so forth. The only past champ that would give Fed and Nadal trouble on clay would be Guga but I think the h2h would favor both Rog and Rafa if they played him enough throughout their career´s. I´ve heard the same argument made about Federer not being the best ever because he has no competition. Maybe, just maybe Roger and Rafa are so f···ing good that they have no peers on their best surfaces. I suppose if they both lost more often on their favorite surfaces people would think different. I don´t know, is Tiger Woods the best ever or is it that he has no competition? Same question would go to Jordan, Schumacher, Rossi, The Smiths, etc.

Nadal_Freak
03-02-2007, 11:52 PM
I didn't know Fed fans would resort this low into downplaying all of Nadal's achievements including knocking off Federer 4 straight times on clay. Pure garbage among Fed fans here.

Morrissey
03-02-2007, 11:59 PM
I didn't know Fed fans would resort this low into downplaying all of Nadal's achievements including knocking off Federer 4 straight times on clay. Pure garbage among Fed fans here.

(clap clap) Wonderful. That fanatic guy has no class, a rabid troll if there ever was one.

JohnS
03-03-2007, 12:11 AM
Very good points. I think Nadal will fall in the same boat as Federer and Borg.

First off, Nadal is like the Yin to Federer's Yang. Federer is so dominate on fast surfaces that no one can really keep up with him. While he grabs all of the hardcourt and grass titles, that leaves only the clay titles; where Nadal will dominate. Nadal's style of play is also significantly more dominate on the clay.

This is where Nadal will fall in the same fate as Federer and Borg. Many speculate that there has been a lack of competition in their era. Unlike the power house decades of Sampras/Agassi and McEnroe/Llendl, we say, "yeah, Nadal and Federer are extremely talented and dominate but there are no big names to rival their dominance." Same as what most speculate about Borg. Therefore, they may never get the respect they truely deserve unless both Federer and Nadal continue to win all four GS's for the next 5+ years or so. But even then, because of how dominate they are, viewers will complain that they have had no real competition, therefore, we cant really consider them the GOATS of the GOATS respectively.