PDA

View Full Version : Nadal: Overrated?


theagassiman
08-06-2009, 04:13 PM
Don't get me wrong.
I think Nadal is an outstanding player.

But I think he is overrated.
Unlike many, I don't believe he is a great.
He is just an outstanding player.
At least for now.

Why do all the Nadal fanatics tout him a great?
Well, they say, Nadal has a leading h2h against possibly THE GOAT, Roger Federer.

Okay, you have all heard this crap a million times now.
But if you agree with me and think Nadal is not a great, and is simply an outstanding player, how come he has a leading h2h record against GOAT candidate Federer?

Well, some people say Nadal hits the ball in such a way as to keep Federer from dictating the points.
I believe however, this is wrong.

I think, like a lot of you may think, that Nadal only has a leading h2h against Federer because Federer doesn't do the right things.

All Nadal does is get the ball over the net and create that uncertainty in Federer's mind.
But that's fine.
That's enough to beat him.

But for that alone, I don't think Nadal should be called a great.
For now he should just be an outstanding player.

What do you think?

~ZoSo~
08-06-2009, 04:21 PM
Statisticaly speaking, he is far from overrated in the fed warehouse.
Your post seems to suggest that their matches consist of nothing but errors from fed. The fact is that while his game is more defensive than feds, nadal gets many winners against fed from some crazy angles, not to mention 1 or 2 aces. It all depends on ones definition of greatness i would say

P_Agony
08-06-2009, 04:27 PM
I don't think Nadal is overrated, however I think his H2H with Fed is HIGHLY overrated, especially by some Nadal fans and Smaprastards around here. Truth is, Nadal is a bad matchup for Federer, and add to that his huge atvantage of being a leftie, you get why he has a winning record.

Fed still has better records over the rest of the field.

dh003i
08-06-2009, 04:28 PM
Don't get me wrong.
I think Nadal is a great player.

But I think he is overrated.
Unlike many, I don't believe he is a great.
He is just an outstanding player.

He has 6 Major wins. Shouldn't that alone qualify him as a great player? Right now, most consider him to be in the second tier among all-time greats, along with Lendl, McEnroe, Wilander, Agassi. I'd rate those guys above him, but say Nadal is above Edberg, Becker, etc. For now.

So no, I don't think he is over-rated for the most part.

Tiberius
08-06-2009, 04:29 PM
I don't think Nadal is overrated, however I think his H2H with Fed is HIGHLY overrated, especially by some Nadal fans and Smaprastards around here. Truth is, Nadal is a bad matchup for Federer, and add to that his huge atvantage of being a leftie, you get why he has a winning record.

Fed still has better records over the rest of the field.

The truth is that *******s & ***********s have nothing else left to criticize Fed, so now they are grasping at anything they can...Perfect example of "grasping at straws."

Tiberius
08-06-2009, 04:29 PM
To the OP, Nadal is not overrated...

~ZoSo~
08-06-2009, 04:31 PM
The truth is that *******s & ***********s have nothing else left to criticize Fed, so now they are grasping at anything they can...Perfect example of "grasping at straws."

Grasping at roids.

FedFan_2009
08-06-2009, 04:33 PM
Overrated in what sense? If you're saying he's GOAT-level, then yeah. Otherwise he's knocking on the door to legend-status with one more slam win. Some think he's already there with 6 and a Channel Slam.

FitzRoy
08-06-2009, 04:34 PM
I don't think Nadal is overrated, however I think his H2H with Fed is HIGHLY overrated, especially by some Nadal fans and Smaprastards around here. Truth is, Nadal is a bad matchup for Federer, and add to that his huge atvantage of being a leftie, you get why he has a winning record.

Fed still has better records over the rest of the field.

Does he?

Federer's H2H against Djokovic is 7-4, against Murray it's 2-6.

Nadal's H2H against Djokovic is 14-4, against Murray it's 7-2.

Those are the two other most important players to compare H2H, IMO.

Nadal's combined H2H against Djokovic, Murray, and Federer is 34-13.

Federer's combined H2H against Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal is 16-24.

JeMar
08-06-2009, 04:35 PM
Does he?

Federer's H2H against Djokovic is 7-4, against Murray it's 2-6.

Nadal's H2H against Djokovic is 14-4, against Murray it's 7-2.

Those are the two other most important players to compare H2H, IMO.

Nadal's combined H2H against Djokovic, Murray, and Federer is 34-13.

Federer's combined H2H against Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal is 16-24.

Tournaments allow more than four players to enter...

The field isn't limited to possible semi-final opponents.

theagassiman
08-06-2009, 04:36 PM
He has 6 Major wins. Shouldn't that alone qualify him as a great player? Right now, most consider him to be in the second tier among all-time greats, along with Lendl, McEnroe, Wilander, Agassi. I'd rate those guys above him, but say Nadal is above Edberg, Becker, etc. For now.

So no, I don't think he is over-rated for the most part.

Yes Nadal has 6 Grand slam titles.
That's not bad, least to say.

But how many were against someone he could not give make uneasy as he could Federer?
If memory serves me rightly, one.

The French Open 2005.

All the others you speak of: Lendl, McEnroe, Wilander, Agassi.
ALL won their grand slams against more than two opponents in the final, unlike Nadal.

FedFan_2009
08-06-2009, 04:36 PM
FitzRoy - true Fed looks bad right now H2H vs top 4 guys. However, his legacy is not going to be determined by that. He won like 90% against the top rivals of HIS generation.

Fedfan1234
08-06-2009, 04:37 PM
Only overrated by die-hard Nadal fans. Everybody else seems pretty objective. On clay he is clearly the best, on grass second best and hardcourt he has only shown his skills in one AO. Not convinced he is so great on HC. Federer could and should do better against Nadal on HC and grass. He should mix it up more, instead of playing endless rally's. Nadal gets into his head and Federer does not seem able to play at his best against Nadal in most occasions. Ofcourse that is a quality to, but I agree with you that if Federer would have played a little different in his finals at wimbledon 2008 and AO 2009 he would not have lost.

FitzRoy
08-06-2009, 04:49 PM
Tournaments allow more than four players to enter...

The field isn't limited to possible semi-final opponents.

Certainly Federer is better at beating the rest of the field in best-of-five on all the surfaces than those other three. Which is not to be underrated. And against Djokovic and Murray, I think he has a significant mental edge when the match is meaningful (IE, grand slam). Also not to be underrated.

But in a smaller tournament where the mental side is a bit less important, I'd say Djokovic and Murray will both continue to improve the H2H against Roger.

koopa_troopa
08-06-2009, 04:49 PM
I don't think he is overrated. He won the French Open at the age of 19 and has continued to win 6 GS titles by age 23. He is young and has accomplished a lot. If he stays healthy he can be one of the GOATs. I doubt he will, but there is the possibility.

theroleoftheunderdog
08-06-2009, 04:51 PM
nope nadal is not overrated he's just the best backboard you'll ever play against

JennyS
08-06-2009, 05:06 PM
I don't think Nadal is overrated, however I think his H2H with Fed is HIGHLY overrated, especially by some Nadal fans and Smaprastards around here. Truth is, Nadal is a bad matchup for Federer, and add to that his huge atvantage of being a leftie, you get why he has a winning record.

Fed still has better records over the rest of the field.

Funny thing is that if Fed had the 5-2 lead in Slam finals, Nadal would only have 3 Slams and Fed would have 18!

clayman2000
08-06-2009, 05:18 PM
Funny thing is that if Fed had the 5-2 lead in Slam finals, Nadal would only have 3 Slams and Fed would have 18!

Ya but if Roddick was 4 - 0 against Fed and Rafa was 7 - 0, then Federer would have 9 slams, Rafa would have 8 and Roddick would have 5....


Nadal is not overrated. The only thing against him is his slam count. In my mind, he beats guys like Agassi, Mcenroe and Wilander in every area minus slams. When (in my mind) he gets his 7th slam, he will leapfrog them and will be on par with Connors and Lendl

OddJack
08-06-2009, 05:35 PM
Don't get me wrong.
I think Nadal is an outstanding player.

But I think he is overrated.
Unlike many, I don't believe he is a great.
He is just an outstanding player.
At least for now.

Why do all the Nadal fanatics tout him a great?
Well, they say, Nadal has a leading h2h against possibly THE GOAT, Roger Federer.

Okay, you have all heard this crap a million times now.
But if you agree with me and think Nadal is not a great, and is simply an outstanding player, how come he has a leading h2h record against GOAT candidate Federer?

Well, some people say Nadal hits the ball in such a way as to keep Federer from dictating the points.
I believe however, this is wrong.

I think, like a lot of you may think, that Nadal only has a leading h2h against Federer because Federer doesn't do the right things.

All Nadal does is get the ball over the net and create that uncertainty in Federer's mind.
But that's fine.
That's enough to beat him.

But for that alone, I don't think Nadal should be called a great.
For now he should just be an outstanding player.

What do you think?

Well, here is a lot of nonsense.

There is no such a thing as overrated or underrated in today's tennis.
Whenever tis overrated crap comes up, I usually ask one simple question:

Who is Nadal rated over unjustifiably? If you can name him get back to me, I have a couple of more questions to ask you.

deltox
08-06-2009, 05:45 PM
Ya but if Roddick was 4 - 0 against Fed and Rafa was 7 - 0, then Federer would have 9 slams, Rafa would have 8 and Roddick would have 5....


Nadal is not overrated. The only thing against him is his slam count. In my mind, he beats guys like Agassi, Mcenroe and Wilander in every area minus slams. When (in my mind) he gets his 7th slam, he will leapfrog them and will be on par with Connors and Lendl

i dont see him winning one more slam and being on par with agassi, agassi has the career slam. nadal has to match that career slam to leapfrog him

pmerk34
08-06-2009, 05:51 PM
He has 6 Major wins. Shouldn't that alone qualify him as a great player? Right now, most consider him to be in the second tier among all-time greats, along with Lendl, McEnroe, Wilander, Agassi. I'd rate those guys above him, but say Nadal is above Edberg, Becker, etc. For now.

So no, I don't think he is over-rated for the most part.

Wilander is not in McEnroes class.

Conquistador
08-06-2009, 07:19 PM
The same question always seems to surface...Who Better Than Federer?

clayman2000
08-06-2009, 07:22 PM
i dont see him winning one more slam and being on par with agassi, agassi has the career slam. nadal has to match that career slam to leapfrog him

This is a joke right.... Nadal has 4 straight years in the top 2, likely 5 after 09. He has slams on 3 surfaces, 15 Shields.... At least 5 titles every year since 05, at least 3 Masters every year since 05, except 06 (Dubai is like a Masters tho).

If Nadal wins 1 more slam hed lack only 1 slam from Agassi and 2 Masters.

And this would be over a course of 5 years, while Agassi did it in 15

sh@de
08-06-2009, 08:09 PM
I don't think he's too overrated... he's definitely a great player, 6 slams at such a young age... and I'm sure he'll win another few.

Zeppy
08-06-2009, 08:14 PM
I don't think he's overrated. Many critics have been making predictions about how he'll never succeed in certain tournaments but he ended up proving them wrong over and over again.

deltox
08-06-2009, 08:14 PM
This is a joke right.... Nadal has 4 straight years in the top 2, likely 5 after 09. He has slams on 3 surfaces, 15 Shields.... At least 5 titles every year since 05, at least 3 Masters every year since 05, except 06 (Dubai is like a Masters tho).

If Nadal wins 1 more slam hed lack only 1 slam from Agassi and 2 Masters.

And this would be over a course of 5 years, while Agassi did it in 15

your right, IF it was the USO, until he can beat that one he cannot pass agassi for me. i dont use at such and such age to judge. its achievment over your career be it however long you play. we all know nadal could be gone from tennis with one wrong turn and is in chronic pain. you cannot rule anything out, IF and i mean IF he returns at even near 100%

Tennis_Monk
08-06-2009, 08:29 PM
Nadal is very overrated. Ofcourse he is... he won a mere 6 slams. big deal-- any TW POSTEr with a racquet can match that feat.

He has won french-wimb in the same year. Big deal -- i can win it every single time on my WII video game.

He is called best clay courter..big deal , any one can play on that dirt.

..you get the point.

There isnt anything called overrated or underrated. Its results that matter. Nadal , so far , has excellent results in his career.
if this trend continues, he is right up these with the tennis elite.

drakulie
08-06-2009, 09:04 PM
Nope, he ain't over rated. One of, if not the best clay courter of all time. Nuff said.

coyfish
08-06-2009, 09:17 PM
I think he is overrated at least here on these boards. Its not him just his fans. Hes an outstanding player but people speak of him like hes remotely in GOAT territory. He and GOAT shouldn't even be in the same sentence. He has 6 slams which is remarkable but still not nearly what many others have done.

Hes a great player but only time will tell if hes among the best of all time which his fans seem to think.

In tennis age has no bearning. IT doesn't matter if you win at 16 or at 36. What matters is the career as a whole.

drgreenthumb
08-06-2009, 09:33 PM
overrated? i think the grand slam trophies speak for themselves as well as the longest winning streak in the history of clay.

overrated players usually have a lot "icing" BUT no results to show. you can them politicians too

p.s. only federer fantotsi will say this

DarthMaul
08-06-2009, 09:51 PM
Nadal is not overrated. Gulbis, Simon, Young, Tsonga, etc... These guys are overrated, not Nadal.
Overrated means that the guy is not up to the expectations. You cannot say that about Nadal with his achievements.

GameSampras
08-06-2009, 09:52 PM
Nah Nads isnt overrated. 6 slams at only 23 speak for themselves all of which he has beaten Fed to get.

I dunno how u can call that overrated. And Nadal is too young anyways to cast any great longevity and career so no one places him up there with Laver, Roger, Borg etc. But he is approaching if he can just continue to stay healthy and be somewhat dominant. We cant expect him to have the longevity of a Pancho or Laver.. The game is just too physical today

deltox
08-06-2009, 09:52 PM
Nadal is not overrated. Gulbis, Simon, Young, Tsonga, etc... These guys are overrated, not Nadal.

thats a good list of overrated players for sure.

GameSampras
08-06-2009, 09:53 PM
Djoker and Murray are really turning out to be overhyped and overrated though at this particular point in time sorry to say. They havent lived up the expectations placed on them.. Djoker moreso since he was a dynamo last year and turning out to be the next big thing

goyeji
08-06-2009, 09:54 PM
Nadal is not overrated. Agassi, Federer, Young, Tsonga, etc... These guys are overrated, not Nadal.

Agree with your statement with minor edits.

zagor
08-06-2009, 10:27 PM
No,don't think he's overrated overall.Hard to overrate a guy who won 6 slams by the age of 23,he's a tennis legend.

rafan
08-06-2009, 10:39 PM
No,don't think he's overrated overall.Hard to overrate a guy who won 6 slams by the age of 23,he's a tennis legend.

I quite agree and Nadal himself hints that he is overated compared to Federer but why? Truth will out when you see the head to head statistics - and just how dull tennis is without him!

namelessone
08-06-2009, 10:52 PM
Let me see:Rafa won his first ATP match when he was 14 years and 10 months old.At Wimbledon,he was the youngest guy to reach third round since Becker in 84'.He was top 50 by 16 years old.When he was 18 he helped Spain win Davis Cup by beating Roddick in the final.
Nadal has been winning slams since he was 19,beating federer in the final or in the way to the final.Other guys from his generation are struggling just to reach a Slam final,let alone beat Fed in it.
He is one of the best,if not the best,claycourters of all time.He has won GS on 3 freaking surfaces,just like Federer.Has won 6 GS despite the presence of Fed,the potential GOAT.Is one USOpen away form completing a Career Slam,he would be just the 7th player,if I am not mistaken,to do it.Is one of the few guys to pull of the RG-WB double.He also has a Gold Medal in the Olympics.Holds the record for longest winning streak on any surface,with 81 wins on clay.Has had the "luck" of being the in the same era with Fed and as a teenager he spent 160 weeks at number 2 but he finally managed to secure nr.1 place,at least for 48 weeks.

Although it's not something major,at least no for me,he has a winnig h2h against the potential GOAT,which again is amazing no matter how you look at it.I don't think Fed is bothered by the fact that Nadal is a lefty.Fed beats Verdasco all the time and the guy is the second best lefty in the world.Fed's problem with Nadal is that he spins a lot and that he doesn't back down,an attitude that has baffled Federer for some quite time.It's not just getting the ball back as some put,it's staying aggresive with those balls and to keep your opponents on his toes.It's difficult to play against someone when you know you have to paint the lines and serve bombs in order to win.

Despite being labeled "just a claycourter",he has 3 WB finals and 1 AO final,plus 1 USOpen semifinal at the young age of 23.Most of his titles are on clay but he has won/made finals in most of the important HC tournaments:Indian Wells,Montreal/Toronto,Madrid(when it was HC),Paris,Miami,Beijing,Dubai,Chennai,Rotterdam etc.

Yeah,overrated:rolleyes:

DarthMaul
08-06-2009, 10:53 PM
Agree with your statement with minor edits.

Funny. Feel free to add Djoker to my ORIGINAL list.

Dutch-Guy
08-07-2009, 01:15 AM
6 GS,16 MS,39 titles overall at 23 at you call him overrated? *Sigh*.

mandy01
08-07-2009, 01:20 AM
He's not overrated.Period.He deserves his accolades and Roger deserves his.
And winning slams on all surfaces does make him a great.I wont say he's on par with some other greats yet but he's well on his way.

dragonfire
08-07-2009, 01:21 AM
the guy's won 6 slams at 23, not a bad feat. the likes of gasquet, nalbandian and safin are vastly overrated though

trinidad204
08-07-2009, 01:23 AM
noooooo hes not overrated. hes just injured. leave him alone.

Conquistador
08-07-2009, 07:09 PM
Nadal is the greatest player ever-if you don't count that Roger guy.

Serendipitous
08-07-2009, 07:14 PM
Nadal is the greatest player ever-if you don't count that Roger guy.

Hello Conquistador. :)


How are you today?

Nadalfan89
08-07-2009, 07:56 PM
Singles gold medal in Olympics, 6 grand slams, more than 12 masters won, huge winning record against GOAT and all at the age of 23.

Yup, he's overrated.