PDA

View Full Version : Nadal: The Greatest Competitor


Conquistador
11-04-2009, 03:55 PM
A hero to many, a fighter to some, a warrior to everyone who has seen rafael nadal play. A physically imposing force that leaves tennis fans everywhere amazed everytime he touches a racquet. Rafael Nadal is the greatest competitor in the game of tennis. Nadal is a man whos exuberance and frantic nature has left him in high order in tennis history. Nadal, a self imposed kamakaze on the court pushes his body to the limits more than any other tennis player. Try Steve Nash plus Tiger Woods with a putt for the win on the 18th hole, and you get an idea of how this kid plays. Nadal has already achieved glory, having put 6 grand slam titles on his back all before his 23rd birthday. For lack of judgement, Nadal does not possess the kind of shotmaking and skill of the great roger federer. Nadal does not employ any kind of above average strategy while on the court either. Perhaps Nadal is caught up in an aura about who can sustain the most endurance on the court while hitting a couple of big forehands. What sets Nadal apart is that he plays like a wild-card. Because when the chips are down, Nadal comes back again and again and again. No other player has come back from being down a set or two early and winning the match. Nadal is the greatest competitor in the game of tennis today.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_SNzNdyLkAiU/Si8EqFNgQHI/AAAAAAAAJGU/7qHE3ZJZR-E/s400/03m.jpg

Toxicmilk
11-04-2009, 03:59 PM
A hero to many, a fighter to some, a warrior to everyone who has seen rafael nadal play. A physically imposing force that leaves tennis fans everywhere amazed everytime he touches a racquet. Rafael Nadal is the greatest competitor in the game of tennis. Nadal is a man whos exuberance and frantic nature has left him in high order in tennis history. Nadal, a self imposed kamakaze on the court pushes his body to the limits more than any other tennis player. Try Steve Nash plus Tiger Woods with a putt for the win on the 18th hole, and you get an idea of how this kid plays. Nadal has already achieved glory, having put 6 grand slam titles on his back all before his 23rd birthday. For lack of judgement, Nadal does not possess the kind of shotmaking and skill of the great roger federer. Nadal does not employ any kind of above average strategy while on the court either. Perhaps Nadal is caught up in an aura about who can sustain the most endurance on the court while hitting a couple of big forehands. What sets Nadal apart is that he plays like a wild-card. Because when the chips are down, Nadal comes back again and again and again. No other player has come back from being down a set or two early and winning the match. Nadal is the greatest competitor in the game of tennis today.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_SNzNdyLkAiU/Si8EqFNgQHI/AAAAAAAAJGU/7qHE3ZJZR-E/s400/03m.jpg

I can think of a few.

Mr.Brightside
11-04-2009, 04:01 PM
I can think of a few.

lol me too

Vyse
11-04-2009, 04:01 PM
This is so true. I made fun of your federer one but this one is pretty sweet. VAMOS RAFAAAA!!!

OddJack
11-04-2009, 04:52 PM
Yeah, good writing Conq. Just edit that whipped cream about down a set and two and you're fine.

pame
11-04-2009, 05:01 PM
I can think of a few.


ironically including Fed against the same Nadal (miami 2005)

Outbeyond
11-04-2009, 05:28 PM
"...For lack of judgement, Nadal does not possess the kind of shotmaking and skill of the great roger federer. Nadal does not employ any kind of above average strategy while on the court either. Perhaps Nadal is caught up in an aura about who can sustain the most endurance on the court while hitting a couple of big forehands..."

'Thought you could slip that stuff in there, huh? :) In truth, what you write is laughable, particularly considering that Nadal still beats The Fed more than The Fed beats Nadal. Your logic's unfathomable! But, hey, it's late where I am and your writing is a light read and there are no new Agassi quotes out there to divert us further...you're it, sweetie!

SuperFly
11-04-2009, 05:49 PM
YEAHHHHH here we go again

A hungry guy to many, a fighter to some, a starved kid to everyone who has seen Takeru Kobayashi eat. A physically imposing force that leaves fans everywhere amazed everytime he eats 45 cheeseburgers in a minute. Takeru Kobayashi is the greatest competitor in the game of eating large amounts of junk food. Kobayashi is a man whos exuberance and frantic nature has left him in high order in eating history. Kobayashi, a self imposed kamakaze on his digestive system pushes his body to the limits more than any other person who eats. Try Joey Chestnut plus Eric Booker with 100 polish sausages, and you get an idea of how this kid eats. Kobayashi has already achieved glory, having put enough food in his body to feed Nambia for a day in his stomach all before his 30th birthday. For lack of judgement, Kobayashi does not possess the kind of timing and skill of the great Joey Chestnut. Kobyashi does not employ any kind of above average strategy while on the chair either. Perhaps Kobayashi is caught up in an aura about who can sustain the most endurance (as in, who can eat the most before puking their digestive systems out.) What sets Kobayashi apart is that he eats like a group of obese people at Popeye's. Because when the kielbasas are down, Kobyashi comes back again and again and again. No other eater has come back from puking out his liver and winning the match. Takeru Kobayashi is the greatest competitor in the game of competitive eating today.

http://i13.tinypic.com/2mcslyo.jpg

JoelDali
11-04-2009, 06:31 PM
A hero to many, a fighter to some, a warrior to everyone who has seen Neil Peart play. A physically imposing force that leaves progressive rock fans everywhere amazed everytime he touches a drum stick. Neil Peart is the greatest drum god in the game of progressive rock. Neil Peart is a man whos exuberance and frantic nature has left him in high order in progressive rock history. Neil Peart, a self imposed kamakaze on the stage pushes his body to the limits more than any other progressive rock drummer. Try Steve Nash plus Tiger Woods with a putt for the win on the 18th hole, and you get an idea of how this kid plays. Neil Peart has already achieved glory, having put 4 Grammy Awards on his back all before his 27th birthday. For lack of judgement, Neil Peart does not possess the kind of drumming and skill of the great Buddy Rich. Neil Peart does not employ any kind of above average strategy while on the stage either. Perhaps Neil Peart is caught up in an aura about who can sustain the most endurance on the stage while hitting a couple of big cymbal crashes. What sets Neil Peart apart is that he plays like a hungry artist on the streets of London. Because when the chips are down, Neil Peart comes back again and again and again. No other drummer has come back from being down a #1 CD or two early and winning a Grammy. Neil Peart is the greatest drum god in the game of progressive rock today.

http://www.timboucher.com/journal/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/Neil_Peart.jpeg

kishnabe
11-04-2009, 06:50 PM
Here we go again!:)

JeMar
11-04-2009, 07:03 PM
A hero to many, a fighter to some, a warrior to everyone who has seen Wile E. Coyote chase the roadrunner. A physically imposing force that leaves children everywhere amazed everytime he runs on air for several seconds before he looks down. Wile E. Coyote is the grittiest competitor in the history of animal-on-animal highway chases. Wile E. Coyote is a coyote whose drive and resourcefulness have left him in high order in cartoon history. Wile, a self imposed kamakaze on the chase allows more anvils to fall on his head than ANYONE in the history of anvils-falling-on-people's-heads. Try Yosemite Sam plus Tom (the cat) and you have an idea of how hard this coyote tries. Wile E. Coyote has already achieved glory, having put put ACME, INC. on the map. For lack of judgement, Wile E. Coyote does not posses the brain or the speed of the Roadrunner, and he does not plan his strategies very well. Perhaps he is caught up more with the aura of who can tire the other out, not realizing that he's chasing the freaking Roadrunner. What sets Wile E. Coyote apart is that he plays like a wild-card. Because when the chips are down, Wile E. Coyote comes back again and again and again. No other player has come back from being down a set or two early and winning the match. Wile E. Coyote is the greatest competitor in tour highways today.

I left the bolded part for the pure WTFness of it all.

http://capsicumsunset.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/wile_e_coyote-gravity-lessons.jpg

By the way, has anyone actually tried reading these messes of threads? I mean, like actually reading it and trying to make sense out of it. Half the stuff he writes makes no sense whatsoever. Just try reading the entire second half of the OP.

Toxicmilk
11-04-2009, 07:14 PM
YEAHHHHH here we go again

A hungry guy to many, a fighter to some, a starved kid to everyone who has seen Takeru Kobayashi eat. A physically imposing force that leaves fans everywhere amazed everytime he eats 45 cheeseburgers in a minute. Takeru Kobayashi is the greatest competitor in the game of eating large amounts of junk food. Kobayashi is a man whos exuberance and frantic nature has left him in high order in eating history. Kobayashi, a self imposed kamakaze on his digestive system pushes his body to the limits more than any other person who eats. Try Joey Chestnut plus Eric Booker with 100 polish sausages, and you get an idea of how this kid eats. Kobayashi has already achieved glory, having put enough food in his body to feed Nambia for a day in his stomach all before his 30th birthday. For lack of judgement, Kobayashi does not possess the kind of timing and skill of the great Joey Chestnut. Kobyashi does not employ any kind of above average strategy while on the chair either. Perhaps Kobayashi is caught up in an aura about who can sustain the most endurance (as in, who can eat the most before puking their digestive systems out.) What sets Kobayashi apart is that he eats like a group of obese people at Popeye's. Because when the kielbasas are down, Kobyashi comes back again and again and again. No other eater has come back from puking out his liver and winning the match. Takeru Kobayashi is the greatest competitor in the game of competitive eating today.

http://i13.tinypic.com/2mcslyo.jpg

nice! aha. I was just about to do one on this guy...

jamesblakefan#1
11-04-2009, 07:17 PM
By the way, has anyone actually tried reading these messes of threads? I mean, like actually reading it and trying to make sense out of it. Half the stuff he writes makes no sense whatsoever. Just try reading the entire second half of the OP.

I put myself at risk of a brain aneurysm every time I read one of Conquistador's OPs.

ninman
11-04-2009, 07:35 PM
You know what's interesting, I actually can't think of an occassion where Nadal has come back from 2 sets behind to win a match. I can think of plenty of occassions where he folded however, Gonzalez at the Australian, Del Potro at the Open, and many others. People call him the greatest fighter because when his chips are down he resorts to classic pushing, just keep the ball in play as long as possible, and of course all the fist pumping and so on.

In my opinion Federer is the greatest competitor ever. He never ever gives up, and he's lost so many heart breaking matches in his career, but he still keeps coming back. If you want proof just watch the French Open this year. 2 sets to love down 4-3 and break point down, and he pulled it out of the fire. Yeah we've seen him winning easily too, but Federer will never give up.

The only match where I can say I saw Federer fold, genuinely fold, was in the French Open final last year. Nadal played great, but Federer really just gave up.

JeMar
11-04-2009, 07:37 PM
You know what's interesting, I actually can't think of an occassion where Nadal has come back from 2 sets behind to win a match. I can think of plenty of occassions where he folded however, Gonzalez at the Australian, Del Potro at the Open, and many others. People call him the greatest fighter because when his chips are down he resorts to classic pushing, just keep the ball in play as long as possible, and of course all the fist pumping and so on.

In my opinion Federer is the greatest competitor ever. He never ever gives up, and he's lost so many heart breaking matches in his career, but he still keeps coming back. If you want proof just watch the French Open this year. 2 sets to love down 4-3 and break point down, and he pulled it out of the fire. Yeah we've seen him winning easily too, but Federer will never give up.

The only match where I can say I saw Federer fold, genuinely fold, was in the French Open final last year. Nadal played great, but Federer really just gave up.

That's very interesting, I can't think of Nadal coming back from two-sets-down, either. I can think of plenty of matches where Nadal gets behind and starts calling his opponent dirty names in Spanish, though, haha.

T1000
11-04-2009, 07:46 PM
You know what's interesting, I actually can't think of an occassion where Nadal has come back from 2 sets behind to win a match. I can think of plenty of occassions where he folded however, Gonzalez at the Australian, Del Potro at the Open, and many others. People call him the greatest fighter because when his chips are down he resorts to classic pushing, just keep the ball in play as long as possible, and of course all the fist pumping and so on.

In my opinion Federer is the greatest competitor ever. He never ever gives up, and he's lost so many heart breaking matches in his career, but he still keeps coming back. If you want proof just watch the French Open this year. 2 sets to love down 4-3 and break point down, and he pulled it out of the fire. Yeah we've seen him winning easily too, but Federer will never give up.

The only match where I can say I saw Federer fold, genuinely fold, was in the French Open final last year. Nadal played great, but Federer really just gave up.

I think Hewitt is one of the best competitors ever. It would be interesting to see how many times Fed and Hewitt came back from 2-0 or 2-1 down. Neither give up and keep fight to match point and they play their game, not pushing. I can think of so many classic Hewitt matches where he came back to win it and I can only think of recent ones of Fed

jamesblakefan#1
11-04-2009, 07:51 PM
That's very interesting, I can't think of Nadal coming back from two-sets-down, either. I can think of plenty of matches where Nadal gets behind and starts calling his opponent dirty names in Spanish, though, haha.

The only one I can think of is Wimbledon 06 vs Kendrick.

edmondsm
11-04-2009, 08:12 PM
Nadal is a great competitor. But why does the OP have to put a dorky photo there? I'll tell you why. Because like most Nadal fans, he likes Nadal much more then he likes tennis. How many Nadal threads have we seen descend into a juvenile conversation about how cute he is? I can think of half a dozen. Groupies, not tennis fans, groupies.

edmondsm
11-04-2009, 08:14 PM
The only one I can think of is Wimbledon 06 vs Kendrick.

A complete choke job by Kendrick. I remember thinking, "well that's why you're a journeyman Robert, and he's a grand slam champ. Absolutely no back bone when it counts."

Agassifan
11-04-2009, 08:18 PM
I am not a Nadal fan, but I gotta give it to him in terms of fighting spirit.

akv89
11-04-2009, 08:20 PM
The only one I can think of is Wimbledon 06 vs Kendrick.

I think Youzhny was up 2 sets to love against Nadal at the 07 Wimbledon and Ljubicic was up 2-0 in Madrid 05 final.

Recon
11-04-2009, 08:32 PM
The guy gets off by writing, he think his writing is supreme. Dude join a college class or something, don't use Talk-Tennis as your writing playground.

Bjorkman & Johnny Mac
11-04-2009, 08:36 PM
Great competitor for sure.. The greatest competitor or rival? Definitely not due to his inability at the USO to reach a final there. But he is a great. Very tough rival for Fed for sure over the years. But he has his limitations. He has the ability to beat Fed due to his heart and determination and mental toughness which Fed doesnt prefer dealing with but at the same again.. Big limitations to his game.

jamesblakefan#1
11-04-2009, 09:01 PM
Nadal is a great competitor. But why does the OP have to put a dorky photo there? I'll tell you why. Because like most Nadal fans, he likes Nadal much more then he likes tennis. How many Nadal threads have we seen descend into a juvenile conversation about how cute he is? I can think of half a dozen. Groupies, not tennis fans, groupies.

Conquistador is about the biggest Fed lover on here. Didn't you see his thread devoted to Fed the other day?

I'm not sure who he's a fan of though. I think he's the biggest fan of himself. The guy just comes off as an arrogant blowhard reading his posts. Kinda like stormholloway, only dumber and less angry.

namelessone
11-04-2009, 11:52 PM
I think the whole coming down from two sets down thing is irrelevant when we are talking about "fighting spirit". There is no way to measure this accurately. Fighting spirit needs to be coupled with tennis capacity and versatility on different surfaces. I don't think Roddick lacks fight,for example,on clay but he doesn't have the game for it. Nadal also fights hard on HC but doesn't have the game for it. To put it simply,if someone leads Roddick 2-0 sets on clay he pretty much has it in the bag. Same with Nadal on HC. Whereas,Fed,who is comfortable on all surfaces,can never be counted out. You need to pull something pretty good to be leading Federer at all and you probably were playing great tennis if you were leading 2-0.

No matter how much "fight" some players have in them,everyone gives up at some point in a much after seeing that they just can't do it,no matter how hard they try.Nadal,who is probably the biggest fighter out there,kind of gave up in the third against delpo in USO because he saw there was nothing he could do and he tried pretty hard in the first 2 sets. However he kept up the fight against sod in RG because he knew he could do something there. Federer kept up the fight against Nadal for about 3 years in RG but in the 4th he kind of gave up in the middle of the second set,getting breadsticked and bageled. He also seemed like he had given up in the final set in AO.
Also,I don't even have to tell you how hard joker fought against Nadal in this clay season but towards the end he seemed like he had given up.

Nadal doesn't seem like the guy to come back. Nadal is the guy comfortable leading,even squandering leads a couple of times. He likes to take charge of the match,he doesn't like to come back. And it's understandable when you consider that Nadal straight-setting someone takes a long time and takes it's toll on his body,how would a 5 setter be for Nadal? I can't remember the last time Nadal played 2 consecutive 5 setters in a slam.

My conclusion is this: getting yourself out of a very tight situation(being lead 2-0)has as much to do with your tennis skill/versatilty as it has to do with "fight".

CMM
11-04-2009, 11:55 PM
Nadal is a great competitor. But why does the OP have to put a dorky photo there? I'll tell you why. Because like most Nadal fans, he likes Nadal much more then he likes tennis. How many Nadal threads have we seen descend into a juvenile conversation about how cute he is? I can think of half a dozen. Groupies, not tennis fans, groupies.
http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/9444/114rmvcrop.jpg :mrgreen:
True. It's also true that many people like Federer not because of his beautiful game or his great skills, but because he wins all the time.

dropshot winner
11-05-2009, 12:09 AM
http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/9444/114rmvcrop.jpg :mrgreen:
True. It's also true that many people like Federer not because of his beautiful game or his great skills, but because he wins all the time.

LOL, did you photoshop his face?

CMM
11-05-2009, 12:13 AM
LOL, did you photoshop his face?

Doesn't matter. I just wanted to point out how cute he is.

aphex
11-05-2009, 12:16 AM
Doesn't matter. I just wanted to point out how cute he is.

that's one scary picture.

<3tennis!!!
11-05-2009, 12:17 AM
into those plasticity features eh?

CMM
11-05-2009, 12:23 AM
I've got the feeling that some of you haven't seen Rafa smiling. That is his smile.
http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/4917/avt8yei6f3b7778a20d7024.jpg

zagor
11-05-2009, 12:32 AM
Great competitor for sure.. The greatest competitor or rival? Definitely not due to his inability at the USO to reach a final there. But he is a great.

Eh what? I'm not really a fan of the guy but he won slam on 3 different surfaces and reached 2 USO semis in a row.If we follow your logice than Sampras isn't among greatest competitors as well since he never reached a FO final,heck he reached one SF in his whole career,Nadal already has 2 and despite what people say at the moment I don't believe he's done.

Very tough rival for Fed for sure over the years. But he has his limitations. He has the ability to beat Fed due to his heart and determination and mental toughness which Fed doesnt prefer dealing with but at the same again.. Big limitations to his game.

You do realize that first of all he has an actual gameto beat Fed and on top of that he has determination and mental tougness(which is the icing on the cake)? The amount of time people in this forum say Nadal beats Fed solely because of his mental toughness really makes me laugh.

The main reason Nadal beats Fed so often is because he has the best lateral movement in the game and because his huge lefty FH exposes some limitations in Fed's BH which although overall is a good shot(he handles pace with it well,has a very good slice and very good passing shots)his topspin BH can break down in long rallies,isn't hit with great power like some other one-handers(like Wawrinka for example),isn't that comfortable going DTL and as the vast majority of one handers is simply vulnerable to getting back Nadal's FH so often.

Even when Fed runs around and hits a FH he founds Nadal's amazing defense hard to penetrate.Fed has to have a great serving day,find the lines and keep points short(because long rallies don't suit him in this case)if he is to beat Nadal.He's the one that has to adjust and be way more agressive than usual and take all the chances while Nadal can just play his main game,his A plan and be succesful against Fed,he doesn't need to adjust.

The guys that Nadal does need to adjust much more than against Fed are Delpo,Nalbo,Novak,Kolja,maybe even Cilic in the future because those guys handle Nadal's main weapon(his amazing lefty FH)much better than Fed and against them Nadal is the one who needs to adjust and mix it up to win.

rafan
11-05-2009, 03:01 AM
Anyone who saw him play the AO couldn't rate him anything other than a hero. He came out of a gruelling match with Verdasco to take on the great Federer and win the title in some of the hottest conditions known in that area for some time. Come to think of it a lot of the players can be rated heroes when you consider what they have to go through and always expected to perform at their very best. Then people wonder why Rafa needs to take time out with injuries sometimes, when he gives 1000% to the game

Gorecki
11-05-2009, 03:17 AM
A Cartoon to many, a Bear to some, a Yellow tv personality to everyone who has seen Winnie the Pooh live. A physically imposing force that leaves the forest animals everywhere amazed everytime he touches a beehive. Winnie the Pooh is the greatest Honney eater in Ashdown forest. Pooh is a bear whos exuberance and frantic nature has left him in high order in Cartoon history. Pooh, a self imposed Caniformia Irsidae on the forests pushes his body to the limits more than any other teddy bear. Try Baloo plus kissyfur with a red plaid pick-nic basket for the win on the grass, and you get an idea of how this bear works. Edward "the pooh" Bear has already achieved glory, having put 6 family pick-nics to an end all before his 23rd birthday. For lack of judgement, Pooh does not possess the kind of Beehive hunting of the great Yogi. Pooh does not employ any kind of above average strategy while on the forest either. Perhaps Winnie is caught up in an aura about who can sustain the most endurance on the pick-nic trashing while hitting a couple of big hist against Park Ranger Smith. What sets Pooh apart is that he frightens campers like a wild-card. Because when the chips are down, "The Poohmeister" comes back again and again and again. No other fictional bear has come back from being down a Basket or two early and winning the blueberry pie. Winnie is the greatest competitor in the game of Beehive & Pick-nic Basket stealing today.

http://listentoleon.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/winnie-the-pooh-evil.jpg

NamRanger
11-05-2009, 05:42 AM
I think the whole coming down from two sets down thing is irrelevant when we are talking about "fighting spirit". There is no way to measure this accurately. Fighting spirit needs to be coupled with tennis capacity and versatility on different surfaces. I don't think Roddick lacks fight,for example,on clay but he doesn't have the game for it. Nadal also fights hard on HC but doesn't have the game for it. To put it simply,if someone leads Roddick 2-0 sets on clay he pretty much has it in the bag. Same with Nadal on HC. Whereas,Fed,who is comfortable on all surfaces,can never be counted out. You need to pull something pretty good to be leading Federer at all and you probably were playing great tennis if you were leading 2-0.

No matter how much "fight" some players have in them,everyone gives up at some point in a much after seeing that they just can't do it,no matter how hard they try.Nadal,who is probably the biggest fighter out there,kind of gave up in the third against delpo in USO because he saw there was nothing he could do and he tried pretty hard in the first 2 sets. However he kept up the fight against sod in RG because he knew he could do something there. Federer kept up the fight against Nadal for about 3 years in RG but in the 4th he kind of gave up in the middle of the second set,getting breadsticked and bageled. He also seemed like he had given up in the final set in AO.
Also,I don't even have to tell you how hard joker fought against Nadal in this clay season but towards the end he seemed like he had given up.

Nadal doesn't seem like the guy to come back. Nadal is the guy comfortable leading,even squandering leads a couple of times. He likes to take charge of the match,he doesn't like to come back. And it's understandable when you consider that Nadal straight-setting someone takes a long time and takes it's toll on his body,how would a 5 setter be for Nadal? I can't remember the last time Nadal played 2 consecutive 5 setters in a slam.

My conclusion is this: getting yourself out of a very tight situation(being lead 2-0)has as much to do with your tennis skill/versatilty as it has to do with "fight".




Nadal has won multiple masters on HCs and won a slam. Reached 2 SFs at the USO. Yeah, Nadal is terrible on HCs :rolleyes:

drakulie
11-05-2009, 06:24 AM
Nadal didn't defend his wimbledon title this year. Only two players in it's history have failed to defend. (one had retired, the other boycotted along with 80+ other pros).

This definitely takes the winds out of his sails for being called, "greatest competitor".

Anaconda
11-05-2009, 07:02 AM
Hewitt is a greater competitor.

jazzyfunkybluesy
11-05-2009, 07:03 AM
Nadal didn't defend his wimbledon title this year. Only two players in it's history have failed to defend. (one had retired, the other boycotted along with 80+ other pros).

This definitely takes the winds out of his sails for being called, "greatest competitor".

You make it sound like he lost. He didn't even play. If he did play I bet he would have made it deep in the tournament injured.

TheFifthSet
11-05-2009, 07:06 AM
Nadal didn't defend his wimbledon title this year. Only two players in it's history have failed to defend. (one had retired, the other boycotted along with 80+ other pros).

This definitely takes the winds out of his sails for being called, "greatest competitor".

No ">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>" to be found anywhere in your post?

:shock:

drakulie
11-05-2009, 07:26 AM
You make it sound like he lost. He didn't even play. If he did play I bet he would have made it deep in the tournament injured.

He wasn't injured.

Bjorkman & Johnny Mac
11-05-2009, 09:09 AM
Eh what? I'm not really a fan of the guy but he won slam on 3 different surfaces and reached 2 USO semis in a row.If we follow your logice than Sampras isn't among greatest competitors as well since he never reached a FO final,heck he reached one SF in his whole career,Nadal already has 2 and despite what people say at the moment I don't believe he's done.



You do realize that first of all he has an actual gameto beat Fed and on top of that he has determination and mental tougness(which is the icing on the cake)? The amount of time people in this forum say Nadal beats Fed solely because of his mental toughness really makes me laugh.

The main reason Nadal beats Fed so often is because he has the best lateral movement in the game and because his huge lefty FH exposes some limitations in Fed's BH which although overall is a good shot(he handles pace with it well,has a very good slice and very good passing shots)his topspin BH can break down in long rallies,isn't hit with great power like some other one-handers(like Wawrinka for example),isn't that comfortable going DTL and as the vast majority of one handers is simply vulnerable to getting back Nadal's FH so often.

Even when Fed runs around and hits a FH he founds Nadal's amazing defense hard to penetrate.Fed has to have a great serving day,find the lines and keep points short(because long rallies don't suit him in this case)if he is to beat Nadal.He's the one that has to adjust and be way more agressive than usual and take all the chances while Nadal can just play his main game,his A plan and be succesful against Fed,he doesn't need to adjust.

The guys that Nadal does need to adjust much more than against Fed are Delpo,Nalbo,Novak,Kolja,maybe even Cilic in the future because those guys handle Nadal's main weapon(his amazing lefty FH)much better than Fed and against them Nadal is the one who needs to adjust and mix it up to win.



People are citing Nadal as if he is the greatest competitor of all time. THats very arguable. Every player has his matchup problem with another. Even Federer and Nadal is it. But when you look back over the years, Competitor, rival whatever you call it has Nadal been the greatest? For quite a few years he was just a great clay court player, nothing huge on hardcourts, and still learning on grass.. Not to mention now his peak was cut short due to constant nagging injuries. Dont kid yourself though.. Its Nadal unwillingness to go down when placed in a tough situation in a match and just give up like or tremble in fear at the sight of Federer on the court like others players have done. But there is a also a significant age difference between Rafa and Fed. So we dont know how it would have played out if they were actually much closer in age.. When Fed was at his peak, Nadal wasnt at his.. When Nadal was at his, Fed wasnt. 5 years age difference is quite a bit in tennis. You take in the age difference, Nadal's inability at the USO, and be constantly injury plagued and burned out anymore, things are put a bit more into perspective. Agassi and Sampras had something that Nadal probably wont have. A long term career spanding around a decade either. We may have seen the best that Nadal has to offer already. And who knows he may be done winning slams. Agassi wasnt as dominant as Nadal in a short time span. But me, I prefer the long term winning and a career slam and masters record, over 1-2 years of big time dominance. But thats me

CMM
11-05-2009, 09:44 AM
You just have to watch this to see what a great competitor he is. He was a child and he wasn't at all intimitated of facing the best player in the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLQ_pEVU-eQ

ninman
11-05-2009, 12:37 PM
Yet people forget that Federer took out Sampras at Wimbledon, the 7 time champion and 4 time defending champion, playing for the first time on centre court at Wimbledon at just 19 years of age. Mental toughness isn't just about how you win, or how you act or if you do fist pumps all the time, it's about how you react when you face defeat.

You know in the old days Federer would lose like 7 times in a row, so that's 7 tournaments and 7 first round exits. He would get downed in the first round a lot of times in tournaments when he was young. How can you believe that you are good enough to be the best when you are losing all the time? I mean take Mathieu, he was defeated in the Davis cup when he was 2 sets up, and it destroyed his career. Federer on the other hand has lost loads of matches like that in his career, and when you look at players who beat Federer, and see them rise and fall, Federer is still there winning and making finals.

You think Del Potro will defend his US Open title, or Nadal defend his AO title, or Murray get to another GS final? Meanwhile Federer has been in the final of 17 of the last 18 slams, and probably would have been 18 out of 18 if not for a bout of mono.

Blinkism
11-05-2009, 01:12 PM
A hero to many, a fighter to some, a warrior to everyone who has seen Neil Peart play.

There is truth in your parody, sir!

AJK1
11-05-2009, 01:16 PM
A hero to many, a fighter to some, a warrior to everyone who has seen rafael nadal play. A physically imposing force that leaves tennis fans everywhere amazed everytime he touches a racquet. Rafael Nadal is the greatest competitor in the game of tennis. Nadal is a man whos exuberance and frantic nature has left him in high order in tennis history. Nadal, a self imposed kamakaze on the court pushes his body to the limits more than any other tennis player. Try Steve Nash plus Tiger Woods with a putt for the win on the 18th hole, and you get an idea of how this kid plays. Nadal has already achieved glory, having put 6 grand slam titles on his back all before his 23rd birthday. For lack of judgement, Nadal does not possess the kind of shotmaking and skill of the great roger federer. Nadal does not employ any kind of above average strategy while on the court either. Perhaps Nadal is caught up in an aura about who can sustain the most endurance on the court while hitting a couple of big forehands. What sets Nadal apart is that he plays like a wild-card. Because when the chips are down, Nadal comes back again and again and again. No other player has come back from being down a set or two early and winning the match. Nadal is the greatest competitor in the game of tennis today.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_SNzNdyLkAiU/Si8EqFNgQHI/AAAAAAAAJGU/7qHE3ZJZR-E/s400/03m.jpg

I'm glad you are proud of your sexuality.

jamesblakefan#1
11-05-2009, 01:48 PM
Curious...it seems as though another one of my great Conquistador parodies got 'misplaced'. Really disappointing. :roll:

Serendipitous
11-05-2009, 01:55 PM
Curious...it seems as though another one of my great Conquistador parodies got 'misplaced'. Really disappointing. :roll:

Huh? What happened?

TheTruth
11-05-2009, 04:28 PM
A hero to many, a fighter to some, a warrior to everyone who has seen Wile E. Coyote chase the roadrunner. A physically imposing force that leaves children everywhere amazed everytime he runs on air for several seconds before he looks down. Wile E. Coyote is the grittiest competitor in the history of animal-on-animal highway chases. Wile E. Coyote is a coyote whose drive and resourcefulness have left him in high order in cartoon history. Wile, a self imposed kamakaze on the chase allows more anvils to fall on his head than ANYONE in the history of anvils-falling-on-people's-heads. Try Yosemite Sam plus Tom (the cat) and you have an idea of how hard this coyote tries. Wile E. Coyote has already achieved glory, having put put ACME, INC. on the map. For lack of judgement, Wile E. Coyote does not posses the brain or the speed of the Roadrunner, and he does not plan his strategies very well. Perhaps he is caught up more with the aura of who can tire the other out, not realizing that he's chasing the freaking Roadrunner. What sets Wile E. Coyote apart is that he plays like a wild-card. Because when the chips are down, Wile E. Coyote comes back again and again and again. No other player has come back from being down a set or two early and winning the match. Wile E. Coyote is the greatest competitor in tour highways today.

I left the bolded part for the pure WTFness of it all.

http://capsicumsunset.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/wile_e_coyote-gravity-lessons.jpg

By the way, has anyone actually tried reading these messes of threads? I mean, like actually reading it and trying to make sense out of it. Half the stuff he writes makes no sense whatsoever. Just try reading the entire second half of the OP.

This was too funny!

TheTruth
11-05-2009, 04:31 PM
Doesn't matter. I just wanted to point out how cute he is.

You're right about that! Adorable, just adorable.

CCNM
11-05-2009, 04:36 PM
Rafa is a great tennis player. Superfly-I've seen that Kobayashi kid compete in a hot-dog eating contest on tv, I was fascinated by him. :)

SuperFly
11-05-2009, 04:40 PM
Rafa is a great tennis player. Superfly-I've seen that Kobayashi kid compete in a hot-dog eating contest on tv, I was fascinated by him. :)

Eating 40 gyros in 3-4 minutes is pretty fascinating.

bolo
11-05-2009, 05:43 PM
I think the whole coming down from two sets down thing is irrelevant when we are talking about "fighting spirit". There is no way to measure this accurately. Fighting spirit needs to be coupled with tennis capacity and versatility on different surfaces. I don't think Roddick lacks fight,for example,on clay but he doesn't have the game for it. Nadal also fights hard on HC but doesn't have the game for it. To put it simply,if someone leads Roddick 2-0 sets on clay he pretty much has it in the bag. Same with Nadal on HC. Whereas,Fed,who is comfortable on all surfaces,can never be counted out. You need to pull something pretty good to be leading Federer at all and you probably were playing great tennis if you were leading 2-0.

No matter how much "fight" some players have in them,everyone gives up at some point in a much after seeing that they just can't do it,no matter how hard they try.Nadal,who is probably the biggest fighter out there,kind of gave up in the third against delpo in USO because he saw there was nothing he could do and he tried pretty hard in the first 2 sets. However he kept up the fight against sod in RG because he knew he could do something there. Federer kept up the fight against Nadal for about 3 years in RG but in the 4th he kind of gave up in the middle of the second set,getting breadsticked and bageled. He also seemed like he had given up in the final set in AO.
Also,I don't even have to tell you how hard joker fought against Nadal in this clay season but towards the end he seemed like he had given up.

Nadal doesn't seem like the guy to come back. Nadal is the guy comfortable leading,even squandering leads a couple of times. He likes to take charge of the match,he doesn't like to come back. And it's understandable when you consider that Nadal straight-setting someone takes a long time and takes it's toll on his body,how would a 5 setter be for Nadal? I can't remember the last time Nadal played 2 consecutive 5 setters in a slam.

My conclusion is this: getting yourself out of a very tight situation(being lead 2-0)has as much to do with your tennis skill/versatilty as it has to do with "fight".

good post as usual. I actually don't think nadal minds coming back. It's telling imo that he chooses to receive when he wins the toss. Imo it keeps him sharp to see the other guy "ahead". I can think of lots of instances of him coming back in sets, many times against federer and djokovic on clay. But whether he does it more than others etc., hard to say without actually crunching the numbers.

Nadal played 2 consecutive 5 setter at the 2009 AO. He also played 2 consecutive 5 setters in the 2007 wimbledon although I think he was aided in the 2nd one by youzhny getting hurt.

drakulie
11-05-2009, 05:44 PM
Huh? What happened?

he was trolling, and making fun of another poster so the mods must have deleted the post.

rommil
11-05-2009, 05:48 PM
Eating 40 gyros in 3-4 minutes is pretty fascinating.

Wait til Nalbandian comes back. He will beat Roger, Rafa and everybody else back to back and will eat 40 gyros during changeovers.

veroniquem
11-05-2009, 06:00 PM
People are citing Nadal as if he is the greatest competitor of all time. THats very arguable. Every player has his matchup problem with another. Even Federer and Nadal is it. But when you look back over the years, Competitor, rival whatever you call it has Nadal been the greatest? For quite a few years he was just a great clay court player, nothing huge on hardcourts, and still learning on grass.. Not to mention now his peak was cut short due to constant nagging injuries. Dont kid yourself though.. Its Nadal unwillingness to go down when placed in a tough situation in a match and just give up like or tremble in fear at the sight of Federer on the court like others players have done. But there is a also a significant age difference between Rafa and Fed. So we dont know how it would have played out if they were actually much closer in age.. When Fed was at his peak, Nadal wasnt at his.. When Nadal was at his, Fed wasnt. 5 years age difference is quite a bit in tennis. You take in the age difference, Nadal's inability at the USO, and be constantly injury plagued and burned out anymore, things are put a bit more into perspective. Agassi and Sampras had something that Nadal probably wont have. A long term career spanding around a decade either. We may have seen the best that Nadal has to offer already. And who knows he may be done winning slams. Agassi wasnt as dominant as Nadal in a short time span. But me, I prefer the long term winning and a career slam and masters record, over 1-2 years of big time dominance. But thats me


1-2 years of big dominance? Rofl
Nadal has been #2 or 1 for 5 consecutive seasons already. He's won at least 5 tournaments a year of which at least 1 slam and at least 1 master for 5 consecutive seasons. How many players do you think have done that much? Lots? At any age? Noone because even Sampras and Federer haven't been able to win at least 1 master shield for 5 years in a row, they did 4 which is the next best.
Still learning on grass? When do you mean that? At 18, 19? You mean at the age when Fed was still trying to win his first ATP tournament? Please find me a player who has won Queen's and made at least 3 consecutive Wimbledon finals of which at least 1 title that you would not consider a great grass court player? I'm waiting with the utmost interest :shock:
I have no idea what you would consider "huge" on hard courts but by 23 Nadal had 5 master titles on hard courts, 1 Olympic gold and 1 slam title. Which current player has done better than that? Surely not Fed, who at that age had 1 slam title and 2 master titles to his name on hard. Anyone else? Roddick? Safin? I don't think so!
Finally: is Nadal's career done? Let's see, he's #2, he's leading in # of tournaments won this year, he's 1 of the 3 players who won slams this year, he's leading in # of masters won this year. Maybe you're gonna have to wait until his numbers drop a little bit more before announcing his death, no?

TheFifthSet
11-05-2009, 06:51 PM
Surely not Fed, who at that age had 1 slam title and 2 master titles to his name on hard.

Federer actually had 2 slams on hardcourts, 2 Masters Cups, and 4 Masters Series when he was 23 year and 8 months old (I pick that age because that is how old Nadal will be at the start of the Australian Open next year.)

When Federer was 23 years and 6 months old (Nadal's current age), he had 2 slams, 2 MC's, and 3 Masters on hardcourts (total of 17 titles, Nadal has 9.)

kishnabe
11-05-2009, 07:54 PM
Curious...it seems as though another one of my great Conquistador parodies got 'misplaced'. Really disappointing. :roll:

Ya it seems it happened twice. That why for post like these, you keep a cop on Microsoft Word?

Bjorkman & Johnny Mac
11-05-2009, 08:35 PM
1-2 years of big dominance? Rofl
Nadal has been #2 or 1 for 5 consecutive seasons already. He's won at least 5 tournaments a year of which at least 1 slam and at least 1 master for 5 consecutive seasons. How many players do you think have done that much? Lots? At any age? Noone because even Sampras and Federer haven't been able to win at least 1 master shield for 5 years in a row, they did 4 which is the next best.
Still learning on grass? When do you mean that? At 18, 19? You mean at the age when Fed was still trying to win his first ATP tournament? Please find me a player who has won Queen's and made at least 3 consecutive Wimbledon finals of which at least 1 title that you would not consider a great grass court player? I'm waiting with the utmost interest :shock:
I have no idea what you would consider "huge" on hard courts but by 23 Nadal had 5 master titles on hard courts, 1 Olympic gold and 1 slam title. Which current player has done better than that? Surely not Fed, who at that age had 1 slam title and 2 master titles to his name on hard. Anyone else? Roddick? Safin? I don't think so!
Finally: is Nadal's career done? Let's see, he's #2, he's leading in # of tournaments won this year, he's 1 of the 3 players who won slams this year, he's leading in # of masters won this year. Maybe you're gonna have to wait until his numbers drop a little bit more before announcing his death, no?


And How many of those seasons exactly would u consider Nadal a dominant force overrall thoughout the year actually? 2008 and early 2009 until early 2009? I didnt see a dominant season overrall from Nadal from 04-07. I like Nadal too.. But Fed has been the dominant overrall force through of these season from 2004 on outside of 2008. Lets just look at it the way it is. Nadal maintained a consistent Number 2 ranking through most of these years, but I just dont see too many years of clear cut dominance thus far from Nadal. THough I do believe Nadal's big period of dominance was cut short this year due to injury which is a shame because he was just about to make his move into being the top dog and take over the reigns from Fed in defense of him. But it didnt happen

Vyse
11-05-2009, 08:43 PM
Nadal and Federer will not be leaving the rankings anytime soon like people seem to believe. They will, along with Murray, win a slam next year. Which one is debatable but they will all b top players for at least a few more years whether you like it or not

Gen
11-05-2009, 11:20 PM
Nadal also fights hard on HC but doesn't have the game for it. I can't remember the last time Nadal played 2 consecutive 5 setters in a slam.


But of course he doesn't. He only won an slam, 6 masters and Olympic Games on HC. For many players it would be a dream come true. But not for you.

Your memory is real bad. Remember Australian Open 2009? Well, Nadal played a 5-setter vs Verdasco in the semifinal and a 5-setter vs Federer in the final. Both matches are unforgettable,the semifinal because of its quality, the final because of the hysterical show after it.

aphex
11-06-2009, 12:15 AM
1-2 years of big dominance? Rofl
Nadal has been #2 or 1 for 5 consecutive seasons already. He's won at least 5 tournaments a year of which at least 1 slam and at least 1 master for 5 consecutive seasons. How many players do you think have done that much? Lots? At any age? Noone because even Sampras and Federer haven't been able to win at least 1 master shield for 5 years in a row, they did 4 which is the next best.
Still learning on grass? When do you mean that? At 18, 19? You mean at the age when Fed was still trying to win his first ATP tournament? Please find me a player who has won Queen's and made at least 3 consecutive Wimbledon finals of which at least 1 title that you would not consider a great grass court player? I'm waiting with the utmost interest :shock:
I have no idea what you would consider "huge" on hard courts but by 23 Nadal had 5 master titles on hard courts, 1 Olympic gold and 1 slam title. Which current player has done better than that? Surely not Fed, who at that age had 1 slam title and 2 master titles to his name on hard. Anyone else? Roddick? Safin? I don't think so!
Finally: is Nadal's career done? Let's see, he's #2, he's leading in # of tournaments won this year, he's 1 of the 3 players who won slams this year, he's leading in # of masters won this year. Maybe you're gonna have to wait until his numbers drop a little bit more before announcing his death, no?

learn what the word dominance means.

zagor
11-06-2009, 12:30 AM
People are citing Nadal as if he is the greatest competitor of all time. THats very arguable. Every player has his matchup problem with another. Even Federer and Nadal is it.

Agree,Nadal being the greatest competitor is arguable,he's one of the best in that department I've seen but it's hard to say whether it's him Sampras,Chang,peak Courier,Borg etc. there are just too many candidates to select one as the undisputed best.

For quite a few years he was just a great clay court player, nothing huge on hardcourts, and still learning on grass.. Not to mention now his peak was cut short due to constant nagging injuries.

Disagree completely,he was winning masters shields on HC as early as 2005 and reached Wimbledon final as early as 2006.He was never just a great claycourter,IMO anyway.

Dont kid yourself though.. Its Nadal unwillingness to go down when placed in a tough situation in a match and just give up like or tremble in fear at the sight of Federer on the court like others players have done.

Heh,I'm hardly kidding myself,we just have a different opinion.I think Nadal's mental toughness is merely an icing on the cake when it comes to facing Fed,I think first of all he has the game for Fed,the right combination of tools to expose few weaknesses in Fed's game.I know I'm probably in minority about this but that's my opinion.

Also keep in mind that confidence goes along with the game side by side.If you're facing a player who you know you're a tough match-up for you'll have more confidence cause you know you can just play your normal game and you'll be fine but when facing a player that can render your normal A game less effective you have less confidence against him and you know you have to adapt and change or atleast modify tactics.

But there is a also a significant age difference between Rafa and Fed. So we dont know how it would have played out if they were actually much closer in age.. When Fed was at his peak, Nadal wasnt at his.. When Nadal was at his, Fed wasnt. 5 years age difference is quite a bit in tennis.

Yeah,rivalry would have been better if both of them were similar ages.However keep in mind that Fed is a late bloomer and Nadal an early one so that narrows age gap a bit.

It would have never been Sampras-Agassi though,attacking all-courter and best server in the game against great baseliner with the best return of serve in the game is probably the best match-up there is.

I also think pure S&V Vs baseline like say Rafter-Agassi matches are a blast to watch.

Agassi and Sampras had something that Nadal probably wont have. A long term career spanding around a decade either. We may have seen the best that Nadal has to offer already. And who knows he may be done winning slams. Agassi wasnt as dominant as Nadal in a short time span. But me, I prefer the long term winning and a career slam and masters record, over 1-2 years of big time dominance. But thats me

Look I understand what you're saying here but as much as things may seem doom and gloom for Nadal now I'd still wait to see whether Nadal will reach his 2008 level again and have a few more dominant years or whether he'll fade away.His playing style is brutal but I think he can still play at a pretty high level for a few more years and maybe he'll adapt his game so he can have more longevity(more agressive from the baseline,improve serve,going to the net more etc.),it's still early to say.

mandy01
11-06-2009, 04:58 AM
^^ couldnt agree more with zagor on everything he said.Although I do think the age gap is showing now.
Though of course Nadal always had the lead in h2h.

mandy01
11-06-2009, 05:03 AM
http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/9444/114rmvcrop.jpg :mrgreen:
True. It's also true that many people like Federer not because of his beautiful game or his great skills, but because he wins all the time.Your post is crap but boy Nadal looks awesome in this pic.Gotta love that smile...and that dimple..awww....

mandy01
11-06-2009, 05:05 AM
A Cartoon to many, a Bear to some, a Yellow tv personality to everyone who has seen Winnie the Pooh live. A physically imposing force that leaves the forest animals everywhere amazed everytime he touches a beehive. Winnie the Pooh is the greatest Honney eater in Ashdown forest. Pooh is a bear whos exuberance and frantic nature has left him in high order in Cartoon history. Pooh, a self imposed Caniformia Irsidae on the forests pushes his body to the limits more than any other teddy bear. Try Baloo plus kissyfur with a red plaid pick-nic basket for the win on the grass, and you get an idea of how this bear works. Edward "the pooh" Bear has already achieved glory, having put 6 family pick-nics to an end all before his 23rd birthday. For lack of judgement, Pooh does not possess the kind of Beehive hunting of the great Yogi. Pooh does not employ any kind of above average strategy while on the forest either. Perhaps Winnie is caught up in an aura about who can sustain the most endurance on the pick-nic trashing while hitting a couple of big hist against Park Ranger Smith. What sets Pooh apart is that he frightens campers like a wild-card. Because when the chips are down, "The Poohmeister" comes back again and again and again. No other fictional bear has come back from being down a Basket or two early and winning the blueberry pie. Winnie is the greatest competitor in the game of Beehive & Pick-nic Basket stealing today.

http://listentoleon.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/winnie-the-pooh-evil.jpg
Priceless as ususal :lol: Just gotta quote it :lol: