PDA

View Full Version : poll: will nadal ever make it to #1


randomname
02-16-2006, 08:12 PM
well, it sucks for nadal that his career started at the peak of one of the greatest players ever, but do you think that #2 is nadal's glass cieling or will he never make it above federer in the rankings?

big ted
02-16-2006, 08:25 PM
who knows mabye federer will never win another gs tournament.. did anybody suspect mcenroe would never win another after his 84 us open win ? or borg after his 81 french open win ? u just never know

edberg505
02-16-2006, 08:28 PM
who knows mabye federer will never win another gs tournament.. did anybody suspect mcenroe would never win another after his 84 us open win ? or borg after his 81 french open win ? u just never know


I can tell you this, I wouldn't bet against Fed never winning another tournament that's for sure. He pretty much owns Wimbledon and the US Open for as long as he wants.

VamosRafa
02-16-2006, 08:30 PM
It's very hard to say, because we don't know if these guys will stay healthy, who will come on strong, etc.

But I really think that at some point Rafa will be No. 1. And I only think that because he wants it, and I think he'll find a way to get it. But it won't be easy, that's for sure.

Phil
02-16-2006, 08:44 PM
He may get it if he wins as many tournaments as he did last year and Fed gets injured during the same period. It'll be similar to Muster's and Kafelnikov's #1's-occupying the spot for a couple days or so.

Max G.
02-16-2006, 10:17 PM
Or, it might be more like Gustavo Kuerten's year-end #1, if Nadal can make a good show in the Masters cup as well.

Kobble
02-16-2006, 10:33 PM
This kid seems dedicated to winning as much as Federer is. A brief number one is almost a lock, but year end number 1 is a diferent story due to the indoor events.

chrismaylor
02-16-2006, 10:37 PM
unless, roger gets broed or hurt or both he will never see the light of day...he will be in rogers shadow his entire carrer.



chris maylor



http://www.********.com
Serendipity Shoe Lifts ~ Be Taller Now

Buzzlightyear
02-16-2006, 10:48 PM
Given Federer stays healthy, no.

And with his playing style, I believe he'd burnout really fast.

pero
02-17-2006, 02:07 AM
i believe that ljubicic might be #1 :mrgreen:

idle_fire
02-17-2006, 02:09 AM
someday, when federer is up 30

spinbalz
02-17-2006, 02:19 AM
He is still very young and has a lot of time in front of him to reach the N°1 spot, Federer is older than Nadal, and there are chances that he will retire a few years before Nadal, so it should only be a matter of staying healthy long enough, for Nadal to reach the N°1 spot. But let's also face that Nadal's longevity at his best level is still questionable today.

jamumafa
02-17-2006, 03:20 AM
Nadal might do a Moya and go Number 1 for a few days. But it won't happen this year. I think next year if he pulls off a superb clay-court run (Roma , MC , RG) Then he might be able to over take Fed before Fed wins wimby.

sexmachine
02-17-2006, 07:51 AM
I think he still has a long way to go his us open tie against james blake showed that, and he has to impose himself on more than just clay, i'm aware he won and was successful on hard court but i jus don't think he'll make #1 in fact i don't see him keepin #2.....

DashaandSafin
02-17-2006, 08:17 AM
Yea Federer is older but many people have said that Nadal's game is extremly taxing, which i also belive. It has become evident also, ex: skipped AO, injured foot. Unless Nadal can somehow outlast Federer becuase of thier age differenct, i doubt he can do it. Besides, how many 29 or 30 yr old grinders do you see? If he makes it to that age he needs to change his game, or be in superhuman out of this world shape to play that kind of game. Also, even if Federer retires, there may be some newcomer who takes the throne of king.

RogerY
02-17-2006, 08:44 AM
Nadal still has to prove his ability on surfaces other than clay. When there is no dominant player who can take 2 or more of the Grand Slams and the Masters' Cup Final within a season, a specialist in one type of surface may make it to world no. 1. Just like the several years before Federer's dominance, we had several no.1s taking up the position for just a few months.

Not now and not in the near term with Federer's presence.

Max G.
02-17-2006, 09:08 AM
Nadal still has to prove his ability on surfaces other than clay. When there is no dominant player who can take 2 or more of the Grand Slams and the Masters' Cup Final within a season, a specialist in one type of surface may make it to world no. 1. Just like the several years before Federer's dominance, we had several no.1s taking up the position for just a few months.

Not now and not in the near term with Federer's presence.

Well, he's won a Masters series on outdoor hardcourts, a Masters series on indoor carpet, and got to the finals of another hardcourt TMS... not too shabby on non-clay surfaces, though of course not as good as on clay.

Moose Malloy
02-17-2006, 09:30 AM
a Masters series on indoor carpet

Madrid was on indoor hard. Notice how Uncle Tony complained about the surface in Shanghai? That was on carpet.

jhhachamp
02-17-2006, 10:41 AM
I don't think Nadal will ever make it to #1 unless Federer has an injury that keeps him out for significant time within the next 2 years. I think Nadal has the next 2 years to make it to #1, then he will start to go downhill.

legolas
02-17-2006, 11:11 AM
when fed retires

RogerY
02-17-2006, 12:17 PM
Well, he's won a Masters series on outdoor hardcourts, a Masters series on indoor carpet, and got to the finals of another hardcourt TMS... not too shabby on non-clay surfaces, though of course not as good as on clay.

Yes, you're right that Nadal has shown exceptional ability on fast courts too. I also hope to see him continue improving on this. Of the 4 Grand Slams 2 are fast hardcourts and Wimbledon is terribly fast. He can't get to no.1 with getting the French Open only, if there is someone like Federer who may get the other 2 to 3 Grand Slams.

babbette
02-17-2006, 12:43 PM
I think we have to remember he's only 19 and has a lot to improve we know that and he knows that. But to have achieved what he has with these faults in his game says a lot doesn't it? I strongly believe he will be number 1 one day even with federer there.He knows a few little things on how to kick rogers ***, 2-1 ahem.

BaselDazzle
02-17-2006, 03:19 PM
Nadal is definitely capable of reaching number one. Whether or not he will be able to do it while there's a healthy Federer floating around remains to be seen.

I chose the last option - I think that by the time Nadal has a good chance to be year end number one(assuming Fed remains healthy for a while), there will be a whole bunch of other players contending for the position. He's not the only player in the top 20 working towards that #1 slot.

edberg505
02-17-2006, 06:08 PM
I think we have to remember he's only 19 and has a lot to improve we know that and he knows that. But to have achieved what he has with these faults in his game says a lot doesn't it? I strongly believe he will be number 1 one day even with federer there.He knows a few little things on how to kick rogers ***, 2-1 ahem.


Well, looking at his results from last year's grand slams, facing Roger Federer is the least of his worries.

tennis_nerd22
02-17-2006, 06:20 PM
*may as well use my 100th post to support nadal :cool:*

i think nadal can make it to #1, but he has tons of time to get better. look at agassi, he didnt play his first US Open till he was 25, so Nadal has lots of time to improve. once he does, i think he'll be able to beat federer consistently

kbg
02-17-2006, 06:47 PM
tennis_nerd Agassi didn't play his first US Open til he was 25? Then who the hell was that 20 year old that Pete Sampras beat at the USO final in 1990?

Wishful thinking on the part of some people saying that he will "beat Federer consistently." Nadal lost to Alexander Waske and Gilles Muller on grass, James Blake, Hrbaty and Tomas Berdych on fast hardcourts. On clay, yes Nadal has the edge but on other surfaces not so much. Even if Nadal does get to number one I sincerely doubt he'll be as good a number one as Roger currently is. (7,000 plus points, 10 losses in two years, yadda yadda)

splink779
02-17-2006, 07:27 PM
With Ljubicic out of Marseille, I am guaranteeing that he will win the tourney. Although I haven't seen Clement, and he made it this far so he must be playing well.

Nadal can play on hard. I don't know how much more he has to prove on that surface for some of the people here. He is better than most on hard. Grass and carpet are something else, but hard is not a big handicap for him.

Oh and susan, do you have a link to his schedule for this year? Is he planning on playing more hard court touneys instead of dominating the smaller clay court ones?

FREDDY
02-17-2006, 07:53 PM
nadal is a good example on the court. i can make the excuse when i get lazy on some shots. i can say that it was too good nadal wouldnt have been able to get it. haha. btw i voted that Federer will smoke nadal and any other player.

alienhamster
02-17-2006, 08:05 PM
With Ljubicic out of Marseille, I am guaranteeing that he will win the tourney. Although I haven't seen Clement, and he made it this far so he must be playing well.

Nadal can play on hard. I don't know how much more he has to prove on that surface for some of the people here. He is better than most on hard. Grass and carpet are something else, but hard is not a big handicap for him.

Oh and susan, do you have a link to his schedule for this year? Is he planning on playing more hard court touneys instead of dominating the smaller clay court ones? Totally agree splink. Nadal has shown his abilities on all the primary, point-giving surfaces throughout the tour--clay and slow-to-medium hard court. The US Open and Wimbledon will clearly be his toughest--but you certainly don't *need* to win either in one year to get to number one.

Nadal will have a good shot at being number one the first time he can stay injury free for a year.

arnz
02-17-2006, 08:13 PM
The 2 biggest obstacles are his health, and then Federer.

His playing style makes me think his health will be more of a factor in not reaching no 1, unfortunately.

Grimjack
02-17-2006, 08:31 PM
*may as well use my 100th post to support nadal :cool:*

i think nadal can make it to #1, but he has tons of time to get better. look at agassi, he didnt play his first US Open till he was 25, so Nadal has lots of time to improve. once he does, i think he'll be able to beat federer consistently

Agassi plays (played) a game tailor made for longevity. He has simple, efficient groundstrokes, and builds his game around playing forward and minimizing how much he has to move around relative to his opponent. This GAVE Agassi a ton of time to get it right.

Nadal plays a game that would burn out a Greek God before he hit his late 20's. But since Nadal has proven to be fragile, thinking that he'll even hit his mid 20's before a permanent flameout seems ambitious.

VamosRafa
02-17-2006, 09:02 PM
With Ljubicic out of Marseille, I am guaranteeing that he will win the tourney. Although I haven't seen Clement, and he made it this far so he must be playing well.

Nadal can play on hard. I don't know how much more he has to prove on that surface for some of the people here. He is better than most on hard. Grass and carpet are something else, but hard is not a big handicap for him.

Oh and susan, do you have a link to his schedule for this year? Is he planning on playing more hard court touneys instead of dominating the smaller clay court ones?

Yep, just got it. His clay events are the usual suspects during the clay season, plus Bastad and Stuttgart, where he is the reigning champion. Everything else is on other surfaces.

This schedule is in our new format, so all the links don't work and such, but here it is:

http://www.vamosrafael.com/5078/with_flash/html/testcalendar.html

I agree with your comments, Matt. Rafa has time on his side in terms of improving many aspects of his game, including pacing himself to peak at certain events.

156MPHserve
02-17-2006, 10:25 PM
Has to be next year though... Nadal can if he can stay healthy for most of the year. He definitely has the game that Federer wouldn't like to play against. Federer loves pace, and Nadal's tremendous topspin bothers Fed.

The way Nadal challenged Federer at Miami, I think he definitely can win the AO which is even slower and high bouncing.

Nadal can also rack up all the clay TMS and FO.

Then if he does relatively well on the hardcourts and indoor courts which we know he can, he can definitely reach year end number 1.

superman1
02-18-2006, 12:21 AM
Nadal will never be #1. Well, never say never, but I cannot see him going past Federer unless Fed is injured. Federer is older and also plays a game dependent on quickness, but I believe that he will still last longer than Nadal, unless Nadal gets his legs plated with steel or adamantium.

tennis_nerd22
02-18-2006, 11:12 AM
tennis_nerd Agassi didn't play his first US Open til he was 25? Then who the hell was that 20 year old that Pete Sampras beat at the USO final in 1990?

k sorry i got mixed up, now frickin cool down... (he was 20 or so)

jhhachamp
02-18-2006, 11:29 AM
With Ljubicic out of Marseille, I am guaranteeing that he will win the tourney.

Don't you look stupid now...

I don't know how much more he has to prove on that surface for some of the people here.

He has to make it past the 4th round of a non-clay Slam for me. At least a semi result at the US Open this year or I will still feel the same as I do now.

splink779
02-18-2006, 11:39 AM
Don't you look stupid now...

He has to make it past the 4th round of a non-clay Slam for me. At least a semi result at the US Open this year or I will still feel the same as I do now.


Yeah, I didn't see that one coming! Clement is really on fire. The crowd is really helping him. But I don't feel stupid. I mean, did you really see Clement, the aging wildcard, beating Nadal?


I was happy with Nadal winning TWO HARD COURT MASTERS SERIES EVENTS IN ONE YEAR vs Agassi and Ljubicic. At 19 years old. I don't see much shame in losing to an inspired Blake.Most 'hard court' players don't do this their whole lives.

Moose Malloy
02-18-2006, 01:04 PM
think nadal can make it to #1, but he has tons of time to get better. look at agassi, he didnt play his first US Open till he was 25,

He was 16 when he played his first US Open(1986)

I was happy with Nadal winning TWO HARD COURT MASTERS SERIES EVENTS IN ONE YEAR vs Agassi and Ljubicic. At 19 years old. I don't see much shame in losing to an inspired Blake.Most 'hard court' players don't do this their whole lives.

I agree that many in this thread are underestimating Nadal's potential, but the importance of masters series are way overrated on these boards. I'm a big Guga fan, but history will remember him as just a great claycourter. He never made it past the quarters of a slam other than the French. That's a pretty big asterisk for such a great player. His masters series wins are a minor footnote in tennis history.. Nadal needs to make slam semi somewhere other than Paris to show he's the real deal outside of clay. Otherwise he'll be remembered as Bruguera/Muster are now.

splink779
02-18-2006, 01:10 PM
He was 16 when he played his first US Open(1986)



I agree that many in this thread are underestimating Nadal's potential, but the importance of masters series are way overrated on these boards. I'm a big Guga fan, but history will remember him as just a great claycourter. He never made it past the quarters of a slam other than the French. That's a pretty big asterisk for such a great player. His masters series wins are a minor footnote in tennis history.. Nadal needs to make slam semi somewhere other than Paris to show he's the real deal outside of clay. Otherwise he'll be remembered as Bruguera/Muster are now.

Perhaps you are right in regards to the terms of greatness that Nadal is expected of from people like me and a few others here. He may never do well at wimby, but I really think his shot at the AO is huge. I was devastated that he could not play this year. All theese questions to be answered, I can't wait for this year progress!

edberg505
02-18-2006, 02:38 PM
With Ljubicic out of Marseille, I am guaranteeing that he will win the tourney. Although I haven't seen Clement, and he made it this far so he must be playing well.

Nadal can play on hard. I don't know how much more he has to prove on that surface for some of the people here. He is better than most on hard. Grass and carpet are something else, but hard is not a big handicap for him.

Oh and susan, do you have a link to his schedule for this year? Is he planning on playing more hard court touneys instead of dominating the smaller clay court ones?

So much for that guarantee.

splink779
02-18-2006, 02:48 PM
So much for that guarantee.

Yes, no need to rub it in, I'm sure I wasn't crazy thinking Clement would have lost.

edberg505
02-18-2006, 02:59 PM
Yes, no need to rub it in, I'm sure I wasn't crazy thinking Clement would have lost.


Acutally I'm just as shocked as you are about the loss. I was waiting to see a Ancic v. Nadal final.

alienhamster
02-18-2006, 05:04 PM
Let's keep this in perspective here. Yeah, Nadal hasn't made it past the 4th round of a non-clay slam. But even with that "flaw" in his record, he still got to #2 last year. If he had come onto the scene the year Roddick was #1, or the year before when Hewitt was, he very well could have been #1 with the amount of points he's clearly capable of accumulating. He just happened to have an incredibly amazing year at the exact same time one of the best players of all time put forth an even more incredibly amazing (and point consuming) year.

I don't think it's much of a stretch to say that Nadal--playing the way he did last year--has a good shot at #1.

Even if you don't think Masters Series events matter, they sure make a big difference in terms of ranking.

edberg505
02-18-2006, 05:28 PM
Let's keep this in perspective here. Yeah, Nadal hasn't made it past the 4th round of a non-clay slam. But even with that "flaw" in his record, he still got to #2 last year. If he had come onto the scene the year Roddick was #1, or the year before when Hewitt was, he very well could have been #1 with the amount of points he's clearly capable of accumulating. He just happened to have an incredibly amazing year at the exact same time one of the best players of all time put forth an even more incredibly amazing (and point consuming) year.

I don't think it's much of a stretch to say that Nadal--playing the way he did last year--has a good shot at #1.

Even if you don't think Masters Series events matter, they sure make a big difference in terms of ranking.


Yeah, Nadal played a massive amount of claycourt tourneys and won them to put him up to where he was last year. But there is no way he will be number one this year if he doesn't do anything in the slams and you can quote me on that. The only way that happens is if Fed just doesn't play the rest of the year.

splink779
02-18-2006, 05:57 PM
Yeah, Nadal played a massive amount of claycourt tourneys and won them to put him up to where he was last year. But there is no way he will be number one this year if he doesn't do anything in the slams and you can quote me on that. The only way that happens is if Fed just doesn't play the rest of the year.

Without playing the AO this year, I agree that there is absolutely no way he will even be close to #1 this year unless Fed gets a serious injury. But I know he will get it in the future. I mean, if Carlos Moya says it will be so, then it will be so ;)

jhhachamp
02-18-2006, 05:58 PM
I was happy with Nadal winning TWO HARD COURT MASTERS SERIES EVENTS IN ONE YEAR vs Agassi and Ljubicic. At 19 years old. I don't see much shame in losing to an inspired Blake.Most 'hard court' players don't do this their whole lives.

The only thing that matters for top players is the slams. Winning a Masters Series or two is great, but until he at least goes deep in a non-clay slam, I am not convinced of his greatness on surfaces besides clay.

mr.fitch
02-18-2006, 06:10 PM
Unless clay becomes the official (and only) surface on the ATP tour and/or Federer goes crazy and becomes a hermit, he has very little chance. Just kidding.

Well, on a less pessimistic note, I've seen a recent video on a thread with a revitalized Nadal and I believe that he has changed his grip to something a little less western. Maybe he wants to get some more depth on his shots.

I think Nadal will figure something out.

splink779
02-18-2006, 06:19 PM
Well, on a less pessimistic note, I've seen a recent video on a thread with a revitalized Nadal and I believe that he has changed his grip to something a little less western. Maybe he wants to get some more depth on his shots.

I think Nadal will figure something out.

I was watching him at Marseille, I don't think his grip has changed. I'm pretty sure it never will. One of the reasons he is where he is is his grip.

VamosRafa
02-18-2006, 06:35 PM
And he is 19. Where was Fed when he was 19? Rafa has done more at age 19 than most players do in their entire careers. And if we compared Nadal at age 19 and Fed at 19, there would be no comparison.

I just don't understand this tendency to write someone off who has accomplished so much at such a young age. Perhaps he hasn't won more than one slam at age 19, but give the kid a chance!!! Can you wait until his 21 or 22 before you say he's done???

I suppose this same criticism happened to Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Wilander, Agassi and others -- because that is where he is in terms of teenage stats. :D

edberg505
02-18-2006, 06:36 PM
I was watching him at Marseille, I don't think his grip has changed. I'm pretty sure it never will. One of the reasons he is where he is is his grip.

That grip will also be his undoing on grass courts.

VamosRafa
02-18-2006, 06:40 PM
That grip will also be his undoing on grass courts.

So, even if you are right -- and I'm not sure you are -- he won't win one of the 4 or so grass court events each year?

There's still a lot of other tennis to be played.

splink779
02-18-2006, 06:51 PM
Wasn't there some really good tennis player who won everything under the sun time and time again but when it came to a certain surface he just couldn't make it big?

His name was Sampras.

Nadal may not be very good on grass. But as Susan said, he's only out of the equation for the tiny grass season.

By the way edberg505, I just noticed your avatar. MMM MMM b*tch! Great stuff.

edberg505
02-18-2006, 07:42 PM
By the way edberg505, I just noticed your avatar. MMM MMM b*tch! Great stuff.

Hahaha, yeah. I loved that skit. I think it's probably my fav of them all.

serveitup911
02-18-2006, 07:49 PM
I say Nadal has a good shot at #1 by the end of the clay court season for the next 7-10 years.

maconick
02-18-2006, 08:39 PM
Nadal is the only player ever to win 13 atp tournaments in one year (2005) and not not finish no. 1

jhhachamp
02-19-2006, 08:19 AM
I just don't understand this tendency to write someone off who has accomplished so much at such a young age.

Call it a hunch.

armand
02-19-2006, 08:51 AM
And he is 19. Where was Fed when he was 19? Rafa has done more at age 19 than most players do in their entire careers. And if we compared Nadal at age 19 and Fed at 19, there would be no comparison.

I just don't understand this tendency to write someone off who has accomplished so much at such a young age. Perhaps he hasn't won more than one slam at age 19, but give the kid a chance!!! Can you wait until his 21 or 22 before you say he's done???

I suppose this same criticism happened to Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Wilander, Agassi and others -- because that is where he is in terms of teenage stats. :DThat's the double edged sword that Federer and other 'artists' have to deal with. Their games are so elaborate, it takes much more time to master than other playing styles.
I don't think anyone should be surprised that Federer was a bit of a late bloomer.
Nadal is a completely different entity. He's a warrior. He ain't done; he'll find a way.

The tennis guy
02-19-2006, 09:41 PM
And he is 19. Where was Fed when he was 19? Rafa has done more at age 19 than most players do in their entire careers. And if we compared Nadal at age 19 and Fed at 19, there would be no comparison.

I just don't understand this tendency to write someone off who has accomplished so much at such a young age. Perhaps he hasn't won more than one slam at age 19, but give the kid a chance!!! Can you wait until his 21 or 22 before you say he's done???

I suppose this same criticism happened to Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Wilander, Agassi and others -- because that is where he is in terms of teenage stats. :D

Age is different for each player. Nadal plays like a mature person. I doubt he can top 2005 result wise. With 2005 result, he could get to No. 1 at some point.

BabolatFan
02-20-2006, 07:33 AM
Nadal has the potential to get the #1 spot down the road...not in the near future...not by the end of 2006. He's missed alot of tennis and has alot to make up for. I know there's a pack of rising and improved players fighting for the spot besides Federer. If Nadal can stay injury-free, he may have a shot at it.

rhubarb
02-20-2006, 08:02 AM
He *could* make it as soon as soon as the middle of May, but I doubt he will. Whether he will have a chance this year mostly depends on him being able to repeat his clay season and how much time Federer takes off.

Rabbit
02-20-2006, 08:04 AM
I don't think his body is going to hold up in the long term. He's too young to have as many injuries as he does now.

The tennis guy
02-20-2006, 11:01 AM
He *could* make it as soon as soon as the middle of May, but I doubt he will. Whether he will have a chance this year mostly depends on him being able to repeat his clay season and how much time Federer takes off.

How could he be No. 1 in middle of May? Federer is 2400 points ahead of him. Even if Federer doesn't play anymore from now on until middle of May, and Nadal wins everything he did last year or even more, he still won't be No. 1. 2400 is about two slams plus a master event, or 5 master events. Winning smaller events doesn't help Nadal now because he maxes out those points in his current ranking already.

You were still thinking about discussion last year if Nadal won Aussie Open this year, Federer lost early scenerio.

ezdude1970
02-20-2006, 12:57 PM
I have a feeling when Nadal career is over, about 4 years from now, 2005 will be remembered as his best year. His titles total will start declining from year to year. Until he will be completely burned out, absolutely worthless at the ripe age of 24. He has Jim Courier career written all over him, without having as many slams as JC of course. Unfortunately non of you Nadal worthshipers will remember that, because you will have another clay court wonder to drool over.

rhubarb
02-20-2006, 01:35 PM
How could he be No. 1 in middle of May? Federer is 2400 points ahead of him. Even if Federer doesn't play anymore from now on until middle of May, and Nadal wins everything he did last year or even more, he still won't be No. 1. 2400 is about two slams plus a master event, or 5 master events. Winning smaller events doesn't help Nadal now because he maxes out those points in his current ranking already.

You were still thinking about discussion last year if Nadal won Aussie Open this year, Federer lost early scenerio.

Nadal doesn't have to gain that much, the gap can also be closed by Federer losing points. Look at how much Federer has to defend between now and then - Dubai (300), Indian Wells (500), Miami (500), Monte Carlo (125) and Hamburg (500) comes off when Rome goes on, so that would be 1925 points gone already if he doesn't play. And by winning everything (including IW where he didn't play last year), Nadal can gain enough in that time to overtake Federer at number one.

Of course, if Fed defends even just Dubai and Indian Wells successfully then he's safe until Roland Garros. It's unlikely that Nadal will be number one that soon, but theoretically very possible.

The tennis guy
02-20-2006, 03:36 PM
I agree with your comments, Matt. Rafa has time on his side in terms of improving many aspects of his game, including pacing himself to peak at certain events.

Time on his side? With his schedule, he'll be injured quite often. Didn't he want to reduce his schedule this year compare to last year? He is planning 23 tournaments in 9 months. That's 29 weeks of playing out of 36 weeks. That's crazy!

Pomeranian
02-20-2006, 07:23 PM
I really enjoy watching Nadal play more than Federer. It's amazing to see that guy run on the court. As for who will be number 1? I don't know, but I can see Nadal being able to one day.

Tennis_Goodness
02-20-2006, 09:44 PM
Not anytime soon, Federer is just too good. When Federer retires or starts to decline you will see somebody take over the number one position. Nadal is good too but Federer is in another league, Federer is a proven champion and compete on every surface!

Grimjack
02-21-2006, 05:52 AM
I really enjoy watching Nadal play more than Federer. It's amazing to see that guy run on the court.

Like a Spanish Forrest Gump with a tennis racquet, he is.

VamosRafa
02-21-2006, 11:44 AM
Time on his side? With his schedule, he'll be injured quite often. Didn't he want to reduce his schedule this year compare to last year? He is planning 23 tournaments in 9 months. That's 29 weeks of playing out of 36 weeks. That's crazy!

He's scheduled to play that many events. Notice he pulled out of Rotterdam this week. That was strategic. They never had any intent of his playing 3 events before going into IW and Miami.

tennis4losers
02-21-2006, 11:45 AM
ehhh. as long as federer is playing there isnt a chance for anyone else.

veroniquem
08-05-2008, 06:09 PM
Congrats Rafa for exceeding most TW's expectations! (Sorry guys but I couldn't resist digging up that one...)

TheTruth
08-05-2008, 06:28 PM
I can't believe he was being compared to Federer at 19!

veroniquem
08-05-2008, 06:30 PM
Ezdude's post cracks me up :)

Mansewerz
08-05-2008, 06:37 PM
Nadal fans getting off on threads being wrong, what else is new?

TheTruth
08-05-2008, 06:40 PM
Nadal fans getting off on threads being wrong, what else is new?

I enjoy seeing the old posts. It's just a measure of how well people do in their analytical thought process. There's nothing wrong with that. I found it hard to believe that the Fed-Nadal war was going on even then. I mean the kid was only 19. That seems bizarre to me.

TheTruth
08-05-2008, 06:43 PM
Ezdude's post cracks me up :)

My favorite one is Pero's, page 1.

Ljubicic will be #1.

VamosRafa
08-05-2008, 06:47 PM
Well, I thought it wasn't well done to raise this thread from the dead until I saw the comments to some of my points from 2006. Man, this was a tough crowd back then. :-)

VamosRafa
08-05-2008, 06:49 PM
I enjoy seeing the old posts. It's just a measure of how well people do in their analytical thought process. There's nothing wrong with that. I found it hard to believe that the Fed-Nadal war was going on even then. I mean the kid was only 19. That seems bizarre to me.

It's because there were those of us who thought Rafa was going to be a great player -- not just a good one -- and becase there were those of us who were afraid of just that.

That's what all the current sniping is about -- the fear that Rafa will go down in history as one of the greatest players ever, and that his legacy will somehow diminish Federer's. IMO, it is that rivalry that will make both their legacies more memorable and remarkable.

NADALwonWIMBLEDONagain
08-05-2008, 06:49 PM
What a great world we live in.

veroniquem
08-05-2008, 06:50 PM
Nadal fans getting off on threads being wrong, what else is new?
At least we're getting off...

TheTruth
08-05-2008, 07:27 PM
It's because there were those of us who thought Rafa was going to be a great player -- not just a good one -- and becase there were those of us who were afraid of just that.

That's what all the current sniping is about -- the fear that Rafa will go down in history as one of the greatest players ever, and that his legacy will somehow diminish Federer's. IMO, it is that rivalry that will make both their legacies more memorable and remarkable.

I would guess that is indeed the reason. Still, at 19 I find it hard to believe, and your posts were so well thought out, and right! Awesome!

randomname
08-24-2008, 11:45 AM
just thought I would bump this back up

anointedone
09-05-2008, 04:50 AM
It's because there were those of us who thought Rafa was going to be a great player -- not just a good one -- and becase there were those of us who were afraid of just that.

That's what all the current sniping is about -- the fear that Rafa will go down in history as one of the greatest players ever, and that his legacy will somehow diminish Federer's. IMO, it is that rivalry that will make both their legacies more memorable and remarkable.

You are right. When great players go down without having a great rival it is always something that diminishes them to an extent, often through no fault of their own. To have this rivalry only makes both look that much greater when their careers are over. Think of what it does for Martina and Chris, Jimmy and John and Bjorn, how much more fame and recognition they get from it. Conversely Steffi Graf (due to Seles stabbing taking away that rivalry), Ivan Lendl, and to a lesser degree even Pete Sampras, are critiqued by many just for not having a consistent and great rival.

Safinator_1
09-05-2008, 06:18 AM
Many people doubted you Nadal Fans mainly the Fed fans, They all said Nadal's chance on being no.1 were very slim to nothing yet you guys never gave up hope and continued to cheer for Nadal despite all the flames and critisizm from the Fed fans.

*sniff* so beautiful, you guys are truly real Nadal fans *cries*

and for all you Fed fans that said Nadal would never be no.1 *PALM FACE RIGHT THERE* THe only thing that would be more sweet is if Nadal beat your "Hero" again in the final. :P

laurie
09-05-2008, 06:42 AM
You are right. When great players go down without having a great rival it is always something that diminishes them to an extent, often through no fault of their own. To have this rivalry only makes both look that much greater when their careers are over. Think of what it does for Martina and Chris, Jimmy and John and Bjorn, how much more fame and recognition they get from it. Conversely Steffi Graf (due to Seles stabbing taking away that rivalry), Ivan Lendl, and to a lesser degree even Pete Sampras, are critiqued by many just for not having a consistent and great rival.

That's interesting - well Lendl had McEnroe, Connors, Wilander, Becker and Edberg as major rivals.

I still think Lendl is left out of the equation by some people and media because he didn't win Wimbledon.

Now Nadal has won Wimbledon, that has put his career on a whole new level - clearly evidenced by the way the internet imploded almost immediately after that 9.30pm finish that amazing Sunday in July 2008. Plus it's given Nadal a whole new confidence as well as we can see from his new improved hardcourt performances.

woodrow1029
09-05-2008, 07:48 AM
Lets not forget that Pete had Agassi and Becker (early in career).

tennis08tarheels
09-05-2008, 07:49 AM
I'm voting for #2. :lol: