PDA

View Full Version : Rafael Nadal - Will he ever reclaim the throne of men's tennis?


Augustus
09-20-2009, 12:38 PM
IMO Rafael Nadal is one of the greatest competitors of all time in tennis, and arguably the GOAT on clay. His 2008 season was unbelievable; he finally dethroned Federer in one of the best matches of all time and became the first man since Borg to win the French and Wimbledon in the same year.
He continued his dominance at the Australian Open and proved he was one of the best on (slow) hardcourt as well.

Unfortunately his kneed didn't hold up and we all know the rest of the story.
Although he came back and reached the semis of the US Open, his groundstrokes don't have the same penetration anymore.

Although I'm a big fan of Federer, I truly hope Nadal will return to peak form next year, but I doubt it. I think the start of 2010 will be critical; if he doesn't win the French next year, that might prove the final blow. Another injury could be too much as well.

What are your thoughts on this? Will Nadal regain his 2008 form and maybe become No. 1 again, or are his best days behind him?

flying24
09-20-2009, 12:41 PM
I dont think he will ever have a year like 2008. He could return to #1 again at some point but I wouldnt bet on it either. I do think with his latest bout of injuries he has already lost a bit physically, and he also had built the perfect momentum and while he was gone some others shone and it will be hard to get all that momentum back again.

Ledigs
09-20-2009, 12:43 PM
I don't think it's all or nothing in 2010 for him. He's not old and the other top 5 besides fed are not consistent winners. He has plenty of opportunity to win more majors so be back on top. He's not going to play a perfect delpotro every tournament. Unless djoke Murray or dp become freakishly consistent like fed, nadal is there with the best of them

flyinghippos101
09-20-2009, 12:50 PM
Agreed to your post. It at this point seems very likely that the Nadal that provided some good results on hard pre-dead knees is gone, I have a feeling he'll regress to the primarily "clay courter" He'll make occasional deep runs at the AO and US and make a few more finals, but don't expect any more wins from Nadal at the GS besides the French.

aphex
09-20-2009, 12:53 PM
no.

federer provided the blueprint of how to destroy nadal even on clay at madrid.

and there are guys who can do it even better than federer.

Ledigs
09-20-2009, 12:53 PM
Which would still be impressive. Why are we more impressed with hc wins than clay? He'd be a winner on hc if he had grown up on them

aphex
09-20-2009, 12:55 PM
Which would still be impressive. Why are we more impressed with hc wins than clay? He'd be a winner on hc if he had grown up on them

fyi, federer grew up on clay.

Ledigs
09-20-2009, 01:00 PM
Oh interesting. Well he's still great on clay but nadal is better. I never said anything bad about fed. He is goat on all surfaces. But winning French many times is nothing to sneeze at, especially when beating fed in prime on the surface he also grew up on

aphex
09-20-2009, 01:07 PM
Oh interesting. Well he's still great on clay but nadal is better. I never said anything bad about fed. He is goat on all surfaces. But winning French many times is nothing to sneeze at, especially when beating fed in prime on the surface he also grew up on

no, i said it regarding your earlier statement that nadal would win hc slams, if he had grown up on HCs...

IvanAndreevich
09-20-2009, 01:08 PM
I think so. He'll have a great chance after French Open / Wimbledon next year.

Ledigs
09-20-2009, 01:09 PM
no, i said it regarding your earlier statement that nadal would win hc slams, if he had grown up on HCs...

So you dispute this?

aphex
09-20-2009, 01:23 PM
So you dispute this?

too hypothetical...maybe he'd be a great hc player but a crap clay player...

noone knows...all i'm saying is not having grown up on hc is not an excuse (as federer has proven)

Ledigs
09-20-2009, 01:24 PM
The guy has six slams already and made semis of his worst tournament

sanchino
09-20-2009, 02:02 PM
I think Nadal will be more careful in selecting where and how much to play and fully expect him to be a threat at the French and Wimbledon. I have never considered him a major threat at the US Open anyway.

The-Champ
09-20-2009, 02:16 PM
no.

federer provided the blueprint of how to destroy nadal even on clay at madrid.

and there are guys who can do it even better than federer.



He provided that "blueprint" in Hamburg 2007 as well, with an even more convincing numbers.....but what happened when they met at the french?

myalterego
09-20-2009, 03:01 PM
I think Nadal has great shot at winning the AO, FO, and Wimbledon. Considering he's won them all at some point, and has beaten Federer several times in these finals, I'm sure he can do it again when he's healthy.

Turning Pro
09-20-2009, 03:11 PM
He provided that "blueprint" in Hamburg 2007 as well, with an even more convincing numbers.....but what happened when they met at the french?

lol absolute ownage. PEAK fed is 0-4 v nadal at the french , madrid isn't even close.

big bang
09-21-2009, 01:45 AM
no.

federer provided the blueprint of how to destroy nadal even on clay at madrid.

and there are guys who can do it even better than federer.

why do people keep bringing this one up??? Rafa was done before the match started, 4 1/2 hour against Djoko the evening before! every decent top 10-20 player would have won that match. Rafa was slow and made more UE than ever seen because he came late to every shot.
Its so funny to hear *******s saying this over and over again, but guess it will stop when the claycourt season stars next year:)

TheMagicianOfPrecision
09-21-2009, 01:52 AM
why do people keep bringing this one up??? Rafa was done before the match started, 4 1/2 hour against Djoko the evening before! every decent top 10-20 player would have won that match. Rafa was slow and made more UE than ever seen because he came late to every shot.
Its so funny to hear *******s saying this over and over again, but guess it will stop when the claycourt season stars next year:)
Vi e hviiiide...vi e rööööe...fantastic theory! Did u come up with that on ur own?? Well , Fed lost to Nadal in AO because Mirka was pregnant!

TENNISSLAVE
09-21-2009, 01:52 AM
He will be a contender. ..but not a domimator.

He has Soderling , DP, Murray, Fed , Djokovic that hurt him continously. Then there are about 5 -8 other guys in the top 30 that can upset him on any surface except clay . Not very promising.

mandy01
09-21-2009, 06:04 AM
Yes,he can.He has not much pressure to perform the rest of the season..so he can just relax and come back strong.He's still the best on clay.One loss at the FO wont change the fact that he has the best of abilities on the surface.
I dont know about AO.I guess the second week of AO should be a good indicator of whether or not he'll start strong.I reckon he will.
Overall next year looks better for him.He has virtually nothing to defend at 2 of the four slams.He could gain a massive number of points at Wimbledon.So I do think he has excellent chances to come back to the no.1 spot though of course I would more than love to see Roger continue his fantastic run st the top.

Sentinel
09-21-2009, 06:26 AM
Very likely, other than Roger the others are patchy/streaky.

Augustus
09-21-2009, 09:33 AM
A lot of people underestimate the mental effects of an injury like the one Nadal had. Not only he needs to fully recover physically, but he has to regain the momentum he lost.

Although he is a mentally very strong player, every setback makes it more difficult. First he lost to Soderling and missed Wimbledon, and when he came back he lost all the matches against his rivals comprehensively. Especially the schooling he received from Del Potro was a major blow IMO.

That's why I think the start of 2010 will be crucial for Nadal, like I said in my first post. He really needs some success in the not so distant future, and more disappointments in the next months might prove too much.

If Nadal wins no Slams next year and comes back in full force in 2011 or even 2012, I'll admit I was totally wrong, no problem, but I highly doubt it.

rommil
09-21-2009, 10:16 AM
I think he can. Next question is how long? He seems to take up the challenge well but not the pressure.

Nadalfan89
09-21-2009, 10:19 AM
It's been said before and I'll say it again.

Nadal has 6 GS's at 23 years old. He has a gold medal in singles and he just made it to the semi-finals of his worst tournement after coming back from an injury - the injury lost him his 1st place ranking.

He'll be back on top by 2010 easily. He get's written off so easily on this board it's as if he was Gulbis.

rommil
09-21-2009, 10:24 AM
It's been said before and I'll say it again.

Nadal has 6 GS's at 23 years old. He has a gold medal in singles and he just made it to the semi-finals of his worst tournement after coming back from an injury - the injury lost him his 1st place ranking.

He'll be back on top by 2010 easily. He get's written off so easily on this board it's as if he was Gulbis.

Yes, yes those informations are not entirely guarded in the archives of the CIA. Since you sound very confident about it, when in 2010 do you reckon Nadal will grab the top spot again?

Turning Pro
09-21-2009, 10:26 AM
around the rg - wimbledon period

Nadalfan89
09-21-2009, 10:30 AM
Yes, yes those informations are not entirely guarded in the archives of the CIA. Since you sound very confident about it, when in 2010 do you reckon Nadal will grab the top spot again?

When Wimbledon comes around and Nadal has 0 points to defend, He'll retake number 1. Of course if he has a good clay season, including a FO win, he could be number 1 before Wimbledon.

JoshDragon
09-21-2009, 10:31 AM
When Wimbledon comes around and Nadal has 0 points to defend, He'll retake number 1. Of course if he has a good clay season, including a FO win, he could be number 1 before Wimbledon.

Totally agree. Unless he's injured, he'll be number 1 again for sure.

Ledigs
09-21-2009, 10:31 AM
If someone besides Federer wins AO (like ... Roddick), then Nadal has a great chance to get back to No. 1

Ledigs
09-21-2009, 10:37 AM
Yes but many other players have had injuries (Murray) a lot. I think they all do.

rommil
09-21-2009, 10:58 AM
around the rg - wimbledon period

Until when?

jonnythan
09-21-2009, 11:00 AM
I don't know. I don't think he will ever again totally dominate, but he has a few more Slams in him.

tacou
09-21-2009, 11:02 AM
I think it'll be one of two extremes. Either next year he will be back to top shape and dominate everyone except Del Potro and the occasional hard court hot streaker (i.e. a Tsonga or Soderling)

or

It will an injury plagued year that will prove to be one of his last

Ledigs
09-21-2009, 11:04 AM
That would be very disappointing

big bang
09-21-2009, 11:53 AM
Vi e hviiiide...vi e rööööe...fantastic theory! Did u come up with that on ur own?? Well , Fed lost to Nadal in AO because Mirka was pregnant!

hmm I thought it was because he was pregnant???
you think its a theory LOL, playing the longest 3 set match in history and have to play the next day again.. it doesnt sound like a theory, well perhaps if you are swedish:)

IvanAndreevich
09-21-2009, 12:06 PM
hmm I thought it was because he was pregnant???
you think its a theory LOL, playing the longest 3 set match in history and have to play the next day again.. it doesnt sound like a theory, well perhaps if you are swedish:)

Nadal is fit, unlike some of his "fans" here believe. Trust me.

big bang
09-21-2009, 12:10 PM
Nadal is fit, unlike some of his "fans" here believe. Trust me.

no matter how fit you are you cannot play at 100% the next day after a match like that..

Agassifan
09-21-2009, 01:09 PM
He continued his dominance at the Australian Open and proved he was one of the best on hardcourt as well.



Let me correct you... one of the best on slow hard courts.

That said, I won't write off Nadal just yet. He is still the favorite to get to No. 1 once federer declines further.

Winners or Errors
09-21-2009, 06:55 PM
Didn't Nadal just make the semis of the US Open with a torn or pulled stomach muscle? Are people writing this guy off too soon? He had some very solid matches in the Open, and if he can get injury free for another run I think he could win there... Losing to Del Potro when you can barely move or serve over 100MPH is far from an embarrassment.

jonnythan
09-21-2009, 07:02 PM
Didn't Nadal just make the semis of the US Open with a torn or pulled stomach muscle? Are people writing this guy off too soon? He had some very solid matches in the Open, and if he can get injury free for another run I think he could win there... Losing to Del Potro when you can barely move or serve over 100MPH is far from an embarrassment.

Well you can't discount the injuries entirely.

We're not discussing what his potential is. He has the potential to be one of the best of all time and rack up 20 slams. But the reality is that he has been injured for most of this year with two or more fairly serious injuries. He's young and plays very hard and very fast so it's entirely possible or likely that injuries will follow him around for the remainder of his career.

navratilovafan
09-21-2009, 07:07 PM
Didn't Nadal just make the semis of the US Open with a torn or pulled stomach muscle? Are people writing this guy off too soon? He had some very solid matches in the Open, and if he can get injury free for another run I think he could win there... Losing to Del Potro when you can barely move or serve over 100MPH is far from an embarrassment.

The semifinals was a total smackdown. His play wasnt that much impacted by an injury to explain that on its own. The only real difference was the serve which is never very good anyway . Being completely healthy would not have made the difference enough for him to win, maybe not even win a set since he was never in any of the 3 sets. Yeah with an injury he made the semis but it is not like his draw was that tough. Two decent but vastly overrated (atleast on TW) players. If he had played someone more dangerous like Soderling, Verdasco, Roddick, Cilic, or even Del Potro himself being he was the 6th seed, in the round of 16 or quarters he might well not have made the semis with his injury.

Cup8489
09-21-2009, 07:42 PM
why do people keep bringing this one up??? Rafa was done before the match started, 4 1/2 hour against Djoko the evening before! every decent top 10-20 player would have won that match. Rafa was slow and made more UE than ever seen because he came late to every shot.
Its so funny to hear *******s saying this over and over again, but guess it will stop when the claycourt season stars next year:)

why do people keep bringing this up? the official match time was 4:02, not your overhyped statement. secondly, nadal and djokovic were stalling so much they actually only played tennis a third of that time. it's so funny to see *******s make excuses. Nadal should've put djokovic away sooner. if he planned his schedule more accordingly, he wouldnt have lost to fed, or to Soderling for that matter.

stop being stupid.

rafan
09-21-2009, 09:48 PM
Oh my. Only last year we were hearing: "Federer has had his day, he will never win another slam" and so on and so on. What a load of bunkum is talked about Nadal and Federer who have conquered these so called big hitters time and time again. Nadal cruised past Soderling earlier this year and there is no reason when he is completely fit again that he will not beat him again. These guys didn't get where they are with a defeatist attitude. Lets see how long the big hitters can keep their game going before they feel the effects of modern day tennis also and have to pull out because of injury

malakas
09-21-2009, 10:24 PM
No.In my opinion he won't ever again manage to become no.1. Though that doesn't mean he won't win a couple of more slams.
I think after Federer falling down again,it will be Murray the next no.1.:/

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
09-21-2009, 10:32 PM
Nadal is fit, unlike some of his "fans" here believe. Trust me.

Are you saying there is no such thing as tired Nadal?

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKDEL8154420080106

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
09-21-2009, 10:35 PM
why do people keep bringing this up? the official match time was 4:02, not your overhyped statement. secondly, nadal and djokovic were stalling so much they actually only played tennis a third of that time. it's so funny to see *******s make excuses. Nadal should've put djokovic away sooner. if he planned his schedule more accordingly, he wouldnt have lost to fed, or to Soderling for that matter.

stop being stupid.

One third of that time? OK, so that's about 1 hour and 20 minutes. That's how long Madrid was without the "stalling".

So, correct me if I'm wrong: Djokovic-Nadal match in Cincinnati was about 1.5 hour long. Now, one third of that is: 1/2 hour. So, the match in Cincinnati was really only 1/2 hour long, but it was extended to 1.5 hours because of stalling. Right?

Am I using your logic correctly?

zagor
09-22-2009, 06:25 AM
I think there's a very good chance he'll get back to #1 sometimes in the future but I don't see him ever becoming as dominant as Fed or Sampras.

Ledigs
09-22-2009, 06:27 AM
No.In my opinion he won't ever again manage to become no.1. Though that doesn't mean he won't win a couple of more slams.
I think after Federer falling down again,it will be Murray the next no.1.:/

In the non-Fed eras, winning one or two slams would be enough to put him at number 1.

rommil
09-22-2009, 06:33 AM
If Nadal is just going to zip back and forth to the top spot then I think it's better for him just to concentrate on winning the big ones. If he plays well, is ranking would not matter much anyways. He stands so very far away in breaking that consecutive number 1 record and his game and mentality doesn't entirely contribute to that. He has however, a chance to make a dent at other records while he is younger. Like what he should have done before, he needs to be wise with his plans and scheduling.

malakas
09-22-2009, 06:34 AM
In the non-Fed eras, winning one or two slams would be enough to put him at number 1.

I don't think so.If the other Slam winners have done semis and above in all the slams,and have won plenty of Masters during the whole season no.
Heh,Murray is Slamless and he still managed to surpass albeit for a short while,Nadal who had won a slam.


What should be Nadal's focus right now is not no.1 but getting healthy,win/defend/regain a GrandSlams and be able to finish a whole season for once.:-?

mandy01
09-22-2009, 06:41 AM
One third of that time? OK, so that's about 1 hour and 20 minutes. That's how long Madrid was without the "stalling".

So, correct me if I'm wrong: Djokovic-Nadal match in Cincinnati was about 1.5 hour long. Now, one third of that is: 1/2 hour. So, the match in Cincinnati was really only 1/2 hour long, but it was extended to 1.5 hours because of stalling. Right?

Am I using your logic correctly?
Well there was an article posted on the forum which calculated the total time wasted by Nadal and Djokovic to 1 hour.That was,I think discounting the medical time-outs taken by both.Not to mention,its pretty apparent how much time got wasted when you watch the match.
Lets face it ,they both waste a lot of time on court with their repsective routines .