PDA

View Full Version : How is it possible to defeat nadal?


Headshotterer
03-06-2012, 05:13 PM
He is the definition of pure talent tennis machine. He is right handed but plays with his left for gods sake! His spirit, agility and effort are unsurpassable! It is no surprise federer is his wipping boy. Djokovic must be a cheater.

Clarky21
03-06-2012, 05:16 PM
He is the definition of pure talent tennis machine. He is right handed but plays with his left for gods sake! His spirit, agility and effort are unsurpassable! It is no surprise federer is his wipping boy. Djokovic must be a cheater.



Sarcasm alert. :lol:

Nbhasin7
03-06-2012, 05:18 PM
Lol Troll more please.

kishnabe
03-06-2012, 05:25 PM
Not sure if trolling or serious.

Nadal is talented but is not perfect. He can easily be beaten by a few top players. It just Nadal handles pressure better, and understands his game well.

Novak knows how to handle Nadal games and is not pressure prone like in the past. Beating Nadal gave him that confidence. I fully expect Nadal to beat Djokovic a few times this year.

5-4 h2h in 2012 with Djokovic with the 5 wins I think.
Nadal going to floor him in IW, Miami, MC.

tenniselbow1
03-06-2012, 05:41 PM
Epic troll post. Middle aged obsessed female crazed in anticipation of seeing her boy play in a few days it seems. Nadal is the least talented of the big 4, that's a no brainer. He's been extremely fortunate to have used what talents he does have to their maximum potential. The slowing down of the surfaces has single handedly handed him 3-4 slams he would not have had in any other tennis era. He's a slightly upgraded version of bruguerra or kuerten who's taken advantage fully of these changes over the last 4 years.

MichaelNadal
03-06-2012, 06:36 PM
He is the definition of pure talent tennis machine. He is right handed but plays with his left for gods sake! His spirit, agility and effort are unsurpassable! It is no surprise federer is his wipping boy. Djokovic must be a cheater.

He does play like he's using a PS3 controller at times o_O

Mustard
03-06-2012, 06:46 PM
The slowing down of the surfaces has single handedly handed him 3-4 slams he would not have had in any other tennis era. He's a slightly upgraded version of bruguerra or kuerten who's taken advantage fully of these changes over the last 4 years.

Believe me when I say that it has far more to do with modern tennis technology than the surfaces, apart from the lack of old grass Wimbledon and carpet courts on the tour. Nadal hits crazy topspin because of the new technology. He wouldn't have hit that much topspin, or have gotten that much depth, had he been playing in the 1990s.

monfed
03-06-2012, 06:55 PM
Believe me when I say that it has far more to do with modern tennis technology than the surfaces, apart from the lack of old grass Wimbledon and carpet courts on the tour. Nadal hits crazy topspin because of the new technology. He wouldn't have hit that much topspin, or have gotten that much depth, had he been playing in the 1990s.

Which explains why he's so poor indoors and on a fast court like Cincinatti. Sorry,not buying.

Mustard
03-06-2012, 06:58 PM
Which explains why he's so poor indoors and on a fast court like Cincinatti. Sorry,not buying.

Cincinnati is arguably the fastest hardcourt on the tour. And yes, Nadal's indoor record leaves much to be desired, but the indoor season scarcely exists these days apart from a few events.

monfed
03-06-2012, 07:05 PM
Cincinnati is arguably the fastest hardcourt on the tour. And yes, Nadal's indoor record leaves much to be desired, but the indoor season scarcely exists these days apart from a few events.

Then saying "it has far more to do with modern tennis technology than the surfaces" is moot because it's a well known fact that the slams have been slowed down which have aided Nadal's topspin. Unless you're saying slams haven't been slowed down which would lead to a whole new debate.

Mustard
03-06-2012, 07:07 PM
Then saying "it has far more to do with modern tennis technology than the surfaces" is moot because it's a well known fact that the slams have been slowed down which have aided Nadal's topspin. Unless you're saying slams haven't been slowed down which would lead to a whole new debate.

The strings have aided Nadal's topspin and depth of shot. The surface differences are exaggerated in most circumstances.

Paul Murphy
03-06-2012, 07:09 PM
He is the definition of pure talent tennis machine. He is right handed but plays with his left for gods sake! His spirit, agility and effort are unsurpassable! It is no surprise federer is his wipping boy. Djokovic must be a cheater.

Yep, he's got it all - pity about his serve and his backhand though.
The forehand is landing a bit short these days too.

Sentinel
03-06-2012, 07:10 PM
Which explains why he's so poor indoors and on a fast court like Cincinatti. Sorry,not buying.
Why can't both co-exist.

Technology aids his topspin, which gives him an advantage on slower courts. But fast or low bouncing courts nullify or reduce that advantage. (Sorry, i haven't gone through ur discussion, just the last 2 posts).

monfed
03-06-2012, 07:26 PM
Why can't both co-exist.

Technology aids his topspin, which gives him an advantage on slower courts. But fast or low bouncing courts nullify or reduce that advantage. (Sorry, i haven't gone through ur discussion, just the last 2 posts).

They do, point being majority of the surfaces(including slams) have been slowed down which aid his topspin thus making him successful outside of clay. Players say it, tournament officials have said it,commentators keep going on about it.
I'd take their view over a biased internet poster anyday.

Evan77
03-06-2012, 07:40 PM
oh boy, this thread is just so wrong, lol. trolling at it's best. just hilarious. I don't even know why I'm bothering typing this stuff. simply stupid.

decades
03-06-2012, 08:16 PM
wipping boy?

roysid
03-07-2012, 01:42 AM
Nadal is always suspect is non-clay tournaments. He has won 11 harcourt compared to 32 clay court titles and only 3 on grass. Not only that, his hard court final record is 11-15 (clay is 32-4). So it is not only djokovic who beats nadal.

vive le beau jeu !
03-07-2012, 02:51 AM
Why can't both co-exist.

Technology aids his topspin, which gives him an advantage on slower courts. But fast or low bouncing courts nullify or reduce that advantage. (Sorry, i haven't gone through ur discussion, just the last 2 posts).

They do, point being majority of the surfaces(including slams) have been slowed down which aid his topspin thus making him successful outside of clay. Players say it, tournament officials have said it,commentators keep going on about it.
I'd take their view over a biased internet poster anyday.
so in other words, both have evolved in favour of the nadal's ugly game.

but i still think the most penalizing thing for him is to negate his topspin (it's a bit like a legless bull or a slimeless slug).

axel89
03-07-2012, 03:14 AM
follow these videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLBY788OKeA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLBY788OKeA
from the lines of robbie koening '' you have to keep the rallies short you have to come in the net.''

Andres
03-07-2012, 03:40 AM
Believe me when I say that it has far more to do with modern tennis technology than the surfaces, apart from the lack of old grass Wimbledon and carpet courts on the tour. Nadal hits crazy topspin because of the new technology. He wouldn't have hit that much topspin, or have gotten that much depth, had he been playing in the 1990s.
If Bruguera and Berasategui (or Muster, why not?) could, why not Nadal?

I don't think Bruguera's FH was significantly less spinny than Nadal's. If anything, it was comparable.

phnx90
03-07-2012, 04:42 AM
Then saying "it has far more to do with modern tennis technology than the surfaces" is moot because it's a well known fact that the slams have been slowed down which have aided Nadal's topspin. Unless you're saying slams haven't been slowed down which would lead to a whole new debate.

Slowing down surfaces per se does nothing to aid Nadal's topspin. WTF is a slow HC, but he's won as many titles there as I have on that surface. Rather, spin-friendly, fast surfaces would probably benefit Rafa's groundstrokes more. That could explain why Rafa has done so well in Wimbledon.

The only real benefit slow surfaces give Rafa is that it makes retrieving a lot easier, which does play a substantial part of his game. But then again, retrieving is a large part of everybody's game. It's just that Rafa happens to be the poster child of that style, which does actually include other big players like Murray and Djokovic, the latter whose popularity (come to think of it) has conveniently spiked exponentially ever since he started winning everything last year.

monfed
03-07-2012, 05:21 AM
Slowing down surfaces per se does nothing to aid Nadal's topspin. WTF is a slow HC, but he's won as many titles there as I have on that surface. Rather, spin-friendly, fast surfaces would probably benefit Rafa's groundstrokes more. That could explain why Rafa has done so well in Wimbledon.

The only real benefit slow surfaces give Rafa is that it makes retrieving a lot easier, which does play a substantial part of his game. But then again, retrieving is a large part of everybody's game. It's just that Rafa happens to be the poster child of that style, which does actually include other big players like Murray and Djokovic, the latter whose popularity (come to think of it) has conveniently spiked exponentially ever since he started winning everything last year.

WTF is a medium-fast HC with low bounce(A slow HC would be AO,Miami,IW..WTF plays nothing like the aforementioned.). This explains why Fed was able to hit through the court, as was Tsonga. Like you said,a faster HC takes time away from Nadal and his retrieving ability is curbed to a great extent(but that is secondary to his primary weapon his vicious topspin FH). A 30 YO grandpa Fed spanking a prime Nadal 6-3 6-0 (that too with all the supposed mental edge that Nadal has and being a nightmare matchup) is telling.

Please do enlighten me which are these "spin friendly fast surfaces".
Incase you're gonna say USO, know that the tournament officials,players have complained how it's been slowed down.

Also, Nadal's indoor season is ALWAYS dismal by a top player's standards(esp no1/no2). It's almost akin to Pete's clay season. They're barely a factor.

Nadal's record in Cincy(one of the fastest HCs) is anything but stellar. The guy hasn't even made a final there and has lost to virtual nobodies in earlier rounds.

Nadal takes a month off(skipping Bercy) to prepare for WTF yet falls short. If anything Nadal should thank his stars that AO was changed from RA to PC(in 2008, incidentally has been doing well since then winning in 09) , USO was slowed down. The majority of the HC season has slow HC, which heavily favours a grinder like Nadal.

CMM
03-07-2012, 05:35 AM
from the lines of robbie koening '' you have to keep the rallies short you have to come in the net.''

Djokovic said you have to outlast him.

celoft
03-07-2012, 05:58 AM
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Sport/Pix/pictures/2011/8/29/1314616669992/Novak-Djokovic-007.jpg

LuckyR
03-07-2012, 07:10 AM
Beat Rafa? Easy really. Just start acting (real or imagined) like you are absolutely dead tired, that you are having trouble even standing up. Then he will hit the rest of the balls right at you, so you don't have to do any running to get to his shots.

It seems to work just about 100% of the time.

Mustard
03-07-2012, 07:21 AM
If Bruguera and Berasategui (or Muster, why not?) could, why not Nadal?

I don't think Bruguera's FH was significantly less spinny than Nadal's. If anything, it was comparable.

Relatively speaking, it's close, but Nadal's forehand has more power on it in absolute terms. The technology makes that possible. Bare in mind that I'm comparing Nadal, a modern day player, to players like Muster, Bruguera and Berasategui as they played in the 1990s. If Nadal played in the same era as the other three, it would be much closer.

phnx90
03-07-2012, 08:28 AM
WTF is a medium-fast HC with low bounce(A slow HC would be AO,Miami,IW..WTF plays nothing like the aforementioned.). This explains why Fed was able to hit through the court, as was Tsonga. Like you said,a faster HC takes time away from Nadal and his retrieving ability is curbed to a great extent(but that is secondary to his primary weapon his vicious topspin FH). A 30 YO grandpa Fed spanking a prime Nadal 6-3 6-0 (that too with all the supposed mental edge that Nadal has and being a nightmare matchup) is telling.

Please do enlighten me which are these "spin friendly fast surfaces".
Incase you're gonna say USO, know that the tournament officials,players have complained how it's been slowed down.

Also, Nadal's indoor season is ALWAYS dismal by a top player's standards(esp no1/no2). It's almost akin to Pete's clay season. They're barely a factor.

Nadal's record in Cincy(one of the fastest HCs) is anything but stellar. The guy hasn't even made a final there and has lost to virtual nobodies in earlier rounds.

Nadal takes a month off(skipping Bercy) to prepare for WTF yet falls short. If anything Nadal should thank his stars that AO was changed from RA to PC(in 2008, incidentally has been doing well since then winning in 09) , USO was slowed down. The majority of the HC season has slow HC, which heavily favours a grinder like Nadal.

Actually by spin friendly fast surface, I'm actually referring to the Wimbledon grass. It's slower than before, but much more spin-friendly and still the fastest surface amongst the four slams.

I wouldn't really say WTF court is medium-fast. I'd put it at medium. I had tickets to something like 6 matches at WTF 2010, so I can say that it's actually surprisingly slow. Not AO-slow, but definitely not that fast. It seems about the same as AO 2009.

Nadal may be in his prime right now, but he was playing terribly in WTF 2011. Also, indoor is still Fed's turf, though of course it wouldn't negate Fed's nutcase routine whenever he finds Rafa on the other side of the net.

BeHappy
03-07-2012, 08:36 AM
Relatively speaking, it's close, but Nadal's forehand has more power on it in absolute terms. The technology makes that possible. Bare in mind that I'm comparing Nadal, a modern day player, to players like Muster, Bruguera and Berasategui as they played in the 1990s. If Nadal played in the same era as the other three, it would be much closer.

I agree with Andres, I see no difference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoMBxY7hgcQ



Until 2007, Nadal was losing to journeymen everywhere on hardcourts, except for the slow hard courts leading into the claycourt season. These slow high bouncing hardcourts were the only place Nadal could transfer his clay court game to.

Then the AO was slowed down, then the end of year World Championship was slowed down when it moved to London, then all the hard courts leading into the USO were slowed down(remember how unbelievably fast Cincinnati was?), then the USO. What little indoor tournements are left are all ultra slow.


Nadal has only ever been able to play on ulta slow high bouncing courts, and in the last 5 years virtually the entire tour has been changed to his preferred speed and bounce height, except the French which is actually faster.

MichaelNadal
03-07-2012, 08:38 AM
^^Did you ever consider his game is better than it was in 2007? What a see-thru hater.

BeHappy
03-07-2012, 08:45 AM
^^Did you ever consider his game is better than it was in 2007? What a see-thru hater.

Nadal was always good on slow hard courts, now most of the tour is slow hard courts but he still loses on low bouncing courts whenever he plays on them.

clayqueen
03-07-2012, 08:51 AM
Epic troll post. Middle aged obsessed female crazed in anticipation of seeing her boy play in a few days it seems. Nadal is the least talented of the big 4, that's a no brainer. He's been extremely fortunate to have used what talents he does have to their maximum potential. The slowing down of the surfaces has single handedly handed him 3-4 slams he would not have had in any other tennis era. He's a slightly upgraded version of bruguerra or kuerten who's taken advantage fully of these changes over the last 4 years.
Like Federer's weak era!!!!!!!

clayqueen
03-07-2012, 08:53 AM
I agree with Andres, I see no difference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoMBxY7hgcQ



Until 2007, Nadal was losing to journeymen everywhere on hardcourts, except for the slow hard courts leading into the claycourt season. These slow high bouncing hardcourts were the only place Nadal could transfer his clay court game to.

Then the AO was slowed down, then the end of year World Championship was slowed down when it moved to London, then all the hard courts leading into the USO were slowed down(remember how unbelievably fast Cincinnati was?), then the USO. What little indoor tournements are left are all ultra slow.


Nadal has only ever been able to play on ulta slow high bouncing courts, and in the last 5 years virtually the entire tour has been changed to his preferred speed and bounce height, except the French which is actually faster.
Just like Federer made his name against journey men.

clayqueen
03-07-2012, 08:55 AM
Epic troll post. Middle aged obsessed female crazed in anticipation of seeing her boy play in a few days it seems. Nadal is the least talented of the big 4, that's a no brainer. He's been extremely fortunate to have used what talents he does have to their maximum potential. The slowing down of the surfaces has single handedly handed him 3-4 slams he would not have had in any other tennis era. He's a slightly upgraded version of bruguerra or kuerten who's taken advantage fully of these changes over the last 4 years.

Isn't it funny how the 'most talented' is the whipping boy of the 'least talented?:???:

clayqueen
03-07-2012, 09:08 AM
He is the definition of pure talent tennis machine. He is right handed but plays with his left for gods sake! His spirit, agility and effort are unsurpassable! It is no surprise federer is his wipping boy. Djokovic must be a cheater.

Never a truer word said.

tennis_pro
03-07-2012, 09:13 AM
Interviewer: "Has the rivalry with Nadal pushed you to new heights"?
Djokovic: "What rivalry? I win all the matches."

Limpinhitter
03-07-2012, 09:14 AM
He is the definition of pure talent tennis machine. He is right handed but plays with his left for gods sake! His spirit, agility and effort are unsurpassable! It is no surprise federer is his wipping boy. Djokovic must be a cheater.

Don't forget, Ralph sniffs crack before every serve!

Mustard
03-07-2012, 04:47 PM
Interviewer: "Has the rivalry with Nadal pushed you to new heights"?
Djokovic: "What rivalry? I win all the matches."

Yet Djokovic still has a losing head-to-head against Nadal, and Nadal is not deterred by those 7 losses to Djokovic. He will keep trying until he gets it right.

monfed
03-07-2012, 04:50 PM
I agree with Andres, I see no difference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoMBxY7hgcQ



Until 2007, Nadal was losing to journeymen everywhere on hardcourts, except for the slow hard courts leading into the claycourt season. These slow high bouncing hardcourts were the only place Nadal could transfer his clay court game to.

Then the AO was slowed down, then the end of year World Championship was slowed down when it moved to London, then all the hard courts leading into the USO were slowed down(remember how unbelievably fast Cincinnati was?), then the USO. What little indoor tournements are left are all ultra slow.


Nadal has only ever been able to play on ulta slow high bouncing courts, and in the last 5 years virtually the entire tour has been changed to his preferred speed and bounce height, except the French which is actually faster.

Excellent post!

Biscuitmcgriddleson
03-07-2012, 04:58 PM
Slowing down surfaces per se does nothing to aid Nadal's topspin. WTF is a slow HC, but he's won as many titles there as I have on that surface. Rather, spin-friendly, fast surfaces would probably benefit Rafa's groundstrokes more. That could explain why Rafa has done so well in Wimbledon.

The only real benefit slow surfaces give Rafa is that it makes retrieving a lot easier, which does play a substantial part of his game. But then again, retrieving is a large part of everybody's game. It's just that Rafa happens to be the poster child of that style, which does actually include other big players like Murray and Djokovic, the latter whose popularity (come to think of it) has conveniently spiked exponentially ever since he started winning everything last year.

Spin friendly an fast don't seem possible to me. For the surface to take spin doesn't the surface have to be much rougher in texture? Miami is suppose to be like sand paper and I recall drakulie saying it just destroys your shoes playing on that surface due to the amount of sand mixed in the top coat.

Biscuitmcgriddleson
03-07-2012, 05:00 PM
Actually by spin friendly fast surface, I'm actually referring to the Wimbledon grass. It's slower than before, but much more spin-friendly and still the fastest surface amongst the four slams.

I wouldn't really say WTF court is medium-fast. I'd put it at medium. I had tickets to something like 6 matches at WTF 2010, so I can say that it's actually surprisingly slow. Not AO-slow, but definitely not that fast. It seems about the same as AO 2009.

Nadal may be in his prime right now, but he was playing terribly in WTF 2011. Also, indoor is still Fed's turf, though of course it wouldn't negate Fed's nutcase routine whenever he finds Rafa on the other side of the net.

Fast when it's new grass maybe, but not in the second week. Also if I'm driving 30 mph and others are going 15 mph, I am the fastest of the bunch but it doesn't make me fast.

tennis_pro
03-07-2012, 05:03 PM
Yet Djokovic still has a losing head-to-head against Nadal, and Nadal is not deterred by those 7 losses to Djokovic. He will keep trying until he gets it right.

Enjoy it as long as you can.

monfed
03-07-2012, 05:04 PM
Actually by spin friendly fast surface, I'm actually referring to the Wimbledon grass. It's slower than before, but much more spin-friendly and still the fastest surface amongst the four slams.

Ok understood and yes I agree.



I wouldn't really say WTF court is medium-fast. I'd put it at medium. I had tickets to something like 6 matches at WTF 2010, so I can say that it's actually surprisingly slow. Not AO-slow, but definitely not that fast. It seems about the same as AO 2009.

I thought Bercy and WTF played pretty much the same speed this year,although Bercy 2010 was lightning quick.



Nadal may be in his prime right now, but he was playing terribly in WTF 2011.


His UE count was less though. But maybe you're right. I guess his performance in WTF 2010 was better but he still lost quite convincingly in that final too imo(last set being a blowout).


Also, indoor is still Fed's turf, though of course it wouldn't negate Fed's nutcase routine whenever he finds Rafa on the other side of the net.

I personally think the mental edge is exaggerated, it's more the matchup issue that really bothers Fed. Nadal can't seem to breakdown Fed's BH wing indoors, that takes pressure off Fed's FH which is vital.

FlashFlare11
03-07-2012, 05:57 PM
I personally think the mental edge is exaggerated, it's more the matchup issue that really bothers Fed. Nadal can't seem to breakdown Fed's BH wing indoors, that takes pressure off Fed's FH which is vital.

I thought this too and I still try to convince myself that this is all it is. But then I see Federer time and again lose when being in a largely advantageous position and the mental disadvantage comes back. The match-up disadvantage plays a huge part in why Federer loses to Nadal so frequently, but time and again I hear tennis commentators mentioning that Nadal's level doesn't really rise or fall during his matches with Federer, it's Federer's level that drops, and part of that, I believe, is due to the mental demons Federer has against Nadal.

NamRanger
03-07-2012, 06:03 PM
The strings have aided Nadal's topspin and depth of shot. The surface differences are exaggerated in most circumstances.



Someone who doesn't play tennis simply wouldn't understand.


The strings that most players use have been around for a very long time. Graphite, oversize racquets, etc. etc. have been around since the 90s.


What happened was the entire tour shifted towards a medium paced/slower paced speed, thus leading to the popularity of polys.


Trust me, play on a real grass court or fast hardcourt/carpet court and you'll find that oversize racquets/poly strings aren't gonna do you any favors at all.


The notion that the surface change had nothing to do with how the players play now adays is completely absurd. The notion that technology has everything to do with what is going on right now is even more absurd, considering no new significant technologies have been introduced into tennis (unless you count Luxilon, which is simply a refinement of poly strings).

flyinghippos101
03-07-2012, 06:07 PM
Be Djokovic. Seems to be working out so far

/thread

Biscuitmcgriddleson
03-07-2012, 06:09 PM
Someone who doesn't play tennis simply wouldn't understand.


The strings that most players use have been around for a very long time. Graphite, oversize racquets, etc. etc. have been around since the 90s.


What happened was the entire tour shifted towards a medium paced/slower paced speed, thus leading to the popularity of polys.


Trust me, play on a real grass court or fast hardcourt/carpet court and you'll find that oversize racquets/poly strings aren't gonna do you any favors at all.


The notion that the surface change had nothing to do with how the players play now adays is completely absurd. The notion that technology has everything to do with what is going on right now is even more absurd, considering no new significant technologies have been introduced into tennis (unless you count Luxilon, which is simply a refinement of poly strings).

^This guy gets it.

Mustard
03-07-2012, 06:23 PM
The notion that technology has everything to do with what is going on right now is even more absurd.

Wimbledon grass courts have changed and carpet courts have been fazed out of the tour, so that is a surface change. Oh, and Rebound Ace has been dumped for Plexicushion as well.

considering no new significant technologies have been introduced into tennis (unless you count Luxilon, which is simply a refinement of poly strings).

It's clear that something has changed about the way the shots are hit because there's no way Nadal hits his topspin shots with that much spin and that much depth in the 1990s. While it would be impressive by 1990s standards, it wouldn't have the kind of spin or depth it has nowadays. And I'm talking about 1990s clay-courts here as well, which weren't exactly fast. The guys today hammer the ball harder than any previous generation.

FlashFlare11
03-07-2012, 06:25 PM
Someone who doesn't play tennis simply wouldn't understand.


The strings that most players use have been around for a very long time. Graphite, oversize racquets, etc. etc. have been around since the 90s.


What happened was the entire tour shifted towards a medium paced/slower paced speed, thus leading to the popularity of polys.


Trust me, play on a real grass court or fast hardcourt/carpet court and you'll find that oversize racquets/poly strings aren't gonna do you any favors at all.


The notion that the surface change had nothing to do with how the players play now adays is completely absurd. The notion that technology has everything to do with what is going on right now is even more absurd, considering no new significant technologies have been introduced into tennis (unless you count Luxilon, which is simply a refinement of poly strings).

I use a 90 sq. in. racquet and when I play on a fast, indoor surface or even wood, I can definitely feel myself hitting the ball much cleaner on both wings (I use a single-handed backhand). My backhand especially becomes more of a weapon on faster surfaces than on slower ones. I can definitely see and feel the difference between the two and see why Nadal's success indoors and on faster surfaces is lackluster.

Crazy man
03-08-2012, 04:23 PM
Wimbledon grass courts have changed and carpet courts have been fazed out of the tour, so that is a surface change. Oh, and Rebound Ace has been dumped for Plexicushion as well.



It's clear that something has changed about the way the shots are hit because there's no way Nadal hits his topspin shots with that much spin and that much depth in the 1990s. While it would be impressive by 1990s standards, it wouldn't have the kind of spin or depth it has nowadays. And I'm talking about 1990s clay-courts here as well, which weren't exactly fast. The guys today hammer the ball harder than any previous generation.

Did you ever watch Bruguera? (Serious question)

Mustard
03-08-2012, 05:00 PM
Did you ever watch Bruguera? (Serious question)

What a question. I saw Bruguera loads of times. Very impressive topspin by 1990s standards, but not compared to Nadal in this era.

Mike Sams
03-09-2012, 08:44 AM
Cincinnati is arguably the fastest hardcourt on the tour. And yes, Nadal's indoor record leaves much to be desired, but the indoor season scarcely exists these days apart from a few events.

Roland Garros is faster than the AO. :lol:

mattennis
03-09-2012, 09:21 AM
Wow, I loved that match (Bruguera-Muster Rome'95 Final), I remember it as if it was yesterday.

Bruguera and Muster were other two of my favourite players to watch (well, I may have more than 200 favourites players to watch, but that is why I love the sport, tennis).

Bruguera started playing great that final, winning the first set 6-3 IIRC. But little by little Bruguera was losing faith against Muster (as many times happened to him against Thomas), because he knew, better than anyone, that Muster would not slow down, that Muster would fight more and more till the end, and physically Muster was a beast, usually playing better and better as the hours passed by. Muster won something like 3-6 7-6 6-2 6-3.

I would have loved to see a RolandGarros Final between them (Muster and Bruguera). That year it nearly happened, but Bruguera lost surprisingly against Chang in the SF (Chang actually moonballed all the match and Bruguera selfdestructed), and Sergi later said he had a severe sore back during the match that clouded his mind.

mattennis
03-09-2012, 09:24 AM
And when I said moonballing, I mean it. Nothing to do with what Nadal does sometimes.

What Chang was doing during that match was hitting real moonballs, like 15 meters high, with no pace at all, no spin at all, knowing that Bruguera liked to hit the ball when going down, so he went farther and farther back behind the baseline to return those moonballs, instead of stepping inside the court and hitting them from up to down (Sergi was not good at it).

mattennis
03-09-2012, 09:41 AM
Mustard, I respect you a lot (you are one of the fairest and most sensible poster here), but I don't agree with you.

Put many tournaments today with this court and balls http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtNPXVOcZfY (the Grand Slam Cup was one of the fastest indoor carpet of the 90s) and Babolat OS racquets and Poly strings would help you very little.

In those conditions you had no time to think, no time to setup your shots, everything went just too fast. The simpler (and shorter swings) and flatter your strokes, the better.

The GrandSlam Cup was maybe even faster than some grasscourts, but (and this is a GREAT difference) with a perfect bounce.

In that court playing against Ivanisevic, Stich, Wheaton, Rosset, Larsson, Krajicek,....was like playing the lottery. If they had a great day, you're dead (if you are a baseliner I mean).

Curiously enough, Michael Chang played great in that tournament many times, defeating Agassi, Courier, Ivanisevic,....many great players.

He was finalist two straight years IIRC, but the thing is that Chang was incredibly fast and he had a good serve (given his height) and good volleys, and very simple baseline strokes (nothing to do with Bruguera baseline strokes).

Korda was another baseliner that played amazingly well on really fast indoor carpet. He won the tournament one year I believe. But Korda forehand and backhand were great to fast conditions, very simple mechanics, very flat hitting.

1997 was the last year they used that amazingly fast carpet. In 1998 and 1999 they changed to a slower court.

Mustard
03-09-2012, 11:09 AM
Mattennis, I agree about the carpet courts factor (they no longer exist on tour since the end of 2006, and started to be fazed out in 1997) and the fact that the Wimbledon grass became 100% Rye in September 2001.

Wow, I loved that match (Bruguera-Muster Rome'95 Final), I remember it as if it was yesterday.

I loved the match too.

Bruguera and Muster were other two of my favourite players to watch (well, I may have more than 200 favourites players to watch, but that is why I love the sport, tennis).

Bruguera started playing great that final, winning the first set 6-3 IIRC. But little by little Bruguera was losing faith against Muster (as many times happened to him against Thomas), because he knew, better than anyone, that Muster would not slow down, that Muster would fight more and more till the end, and physically Muster was a beast, usually playing better and better as the hours passed by. Muster won something like 3-6 7-6 6-2 6-3.

Correct. They played again in the semi finals of the 1995 Stuttgart Outdoor tournament, and Muster recovered from a 6-7, 2-5 (2 breaks) deficit, to win 6-7, 7-6, 6-2. Bruguera was despairing in his chair at the end, tears in his eyes. Muster was just relentless and refused to give in, no matter how hopeless the situation had looked.

I would have loved to see a RolandGarros Final between them (Muster and Bruguera). That year it nearly happened, but Bruguera lost surprisingly against Chang in the SF (Chang actually moonballed all the match and Bruguera selfdestructed), and Sergi later said he had a severe sore back during the match that clouded his mind.

Despite the fact that Bruguera was 2-time defending French Open champion, Muster would most likely have beaten Bruguera had they met in the 1995 French Open final. Muster just had that edge on Bruguera because he was so consistent and relentless throughout.

Regarding Bruguera's loss to Chang in the 1995 French Open semi finals, Bruguera avenged that loss at the 1997 French Open, beating Chang in the R16.