Rafael Nadal's insult utterance to Sampras era

tennissportsrog · Feb 16, 2012

Nadal believes previous tennis eras cannot match the excitement generated by the current stars of the sport.

"Personally, to watch a Pete Sampras versus Goran Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable, It's not really tennis, it is a few swings of the racquet.
It was less eye-catching than what we do now. Everyone enjoys the tennis we play much more. I am not saying we are playing better tennis, just more enjoyable tennis. For me, in the past it was just serve, serve, serve." said Nadal.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/06/25/Wimbledon-Diary-Day-Five.aspx

treblings · Feb 16, 2012

he obviously has an extensive knowledge about the history of his chosen sport.

tennissportsrog · Feb 16, 2012

Arrogant, Smug.

Nadal = clay excluded. Successive win 0. If grass and a hard court are fast. Like Sampras era. Nadal is able to win only with clay. Nadal is the power tennis of defense and muscles. boring. ugly. All the surface is slow now

Nadal has always selfish of two-year-ranking. Nadal criticized joy of Djokovic which won the victory in Madrid. Or, tired comment before Novak's final. Nadal criticized it again. ATP final lost again, After the game with Tsonga, said tired excuse as usual, etc.

fake time-out. gamesmanship. always exaggerated annoying information of self condition. excuse injury. too noisy annoying always. ugly protest.. arrogant annoying blind fans most. really sick..

Migelowsky · Feb 16, 2012

Those matches were sometimes boring ( Rosset, Krajicek ..), but other generations were also great, at one time you got Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Wilander,Mac, Connors, Mecir younger Agassi, Chang, Courier, Sampras, imagine a draw with all those names and different styles of play.

tennissportsrog · Feb 16, 2012

[he obviously has an extensive knowledge about the history of his chosen sport]

I do not think so. Nadal has also looked down on Agassi. When Agassi confesses use of a drug. Roger Federer was by very polite criticism. (Of course, Sampras and Roger's Agassi are friends. I add it impartially.)

However, Nadal's criticism by violent criticism. (I am not a fan of Agassi and dislike a drug. I also add this again.)

The problem, Nadal is not looking at most tennis in front of the Federer era.

When Nadal was age of about 20. The journalist questioned Nadal. "Who is a favorite WTA player?" Nadal said, "Roger Federer..." "Roger Federer? Although it is the WTA player whom I asked ..." Nadal said. "I do not know a WTA player well.."

Nadal is ignorant about the past history. This arrogant utterance comes from his ignorance.

Paul Murphy · Feb 16, 2012

I agree with him in one respect - watching two big servers face off on a fast surface was dull.
But a fast server versus a baseliner highly competent in his passing game - now that was fun.

SystemicAnomaly · Feb 16, 2012

If Nadal was referring to a match in the early or mid 90s on a fast surface, then he is absolutely right. Men's tennis at Wimbledon and other fast surfaces during this time period were very boring. Points often consisted of only 1, 2 or 3 shots. This was particularly true when you had 2 big servers like Pete and Goran.

There was a lot of talk during the 90s about how to reform tennis. There was talk about going back to wood racquets or limiting the size or power of graphite rackets. We saw the introduction of larger balls (6% to 8% larger). When these other ideas failed to garner support, other measures were taken. Balls became brighter. The Slazenger Wimbledon balls, the Dunlop Gran Prix balls and other premium balls are noticeably brighter. The other solution was to slow down the grass of Wimbledon and other fast surfaces.

MixieP · Feb 16, 2012

I agree with Nadal. Spot on, Rafa!

SusanDK · Feb 16, 2012

tennissportsrog said:
"Personally, to watch a Pete Sampras versus Goran Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable,

+1

Migelowsky said:
Those matches were sometimes boring ( Rosset, Krajicek ..), but other generations were also great, at one time you got Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Wilander,Mac, Connors, Mecir younger Agassi, Chang, Courier, Sampras, imagine a draw with all those names and different styles of play.

+1

Paul Murphy said:
I agree with him in one respect - watching two big servers face off on a fast surface was dull.

+1

SystemicAnomaly said:
If Nadal was referring to a match in the early or mid 90s on a fast surface, then he is absolutely right.

+1

treblings · Feb 16, 2012

tennissportsrog said:
[he obviously has an extensive knowledge about the history of his chosen sport]

I do not think so. Nadal has also looked down on Agassi. When Agassi confesses use of a drug. Roger Federer was by very polite criticism. (Of course, Sampras and Roger's Agassi are friends. I add it impartially.)

However, Nadal's criticism by violent criticism. (I am not a fan of Agassi and dislike a drug. I also add this again.)

The problem, Nadal is not looking at most tennis in front of the Federer era.

When Nadal was age of about 20. The journalist questioned Nadal. "Who is a favorite WTA player?" Nadal said, "Roger Federer..." "Roger Federer? Although it is the WTA player whom I asked ..." Nadal said. "I do not know a WTA player well.."

Nadal is ignorant about the past history. This arrogant utterance comes from his ignorance.

my sarcasm was obviously too subtle for you

i agree with Nadal, that watching Sampras-Ivanisevic on a fast court wasn´t always very enjoyable. i disagree with him, if he equates that with tennis of the past.
there were also matches like Vilas-Wilander, where you could take the
dog out for a walk and the rally would still be going when you came back

the most enjoyable tennis, imho, happens often when two players with different tactics play against each other.
i think slowing down the courts has helped that in the same way that graphite rackets have helped speed up clay court matches.
unfortunately, many of todays players have a similar style.i would like to see more diversity

Bender · Feb 16, 2012

tennissportsrog said:
Arrogant, Smug.

Nadal = clay excluded. Successive win 0. If grass and a hard court are fast. Like Sampras era. Nadal is able to win only with clay. Nadal is the power tennis of defense and muscles. boring. ugly. All the surface is slow now

Nadal has always selfish of two-year-ranking. Nadal criticized joy of Djokovic which won the victory in Madrid. Or, tired comment before Novak's final. Nadal criticized it again. ATP final lost again, After the game with Tsonga, said tired excuse as usual, etc.

fake time-out. gamesmanship. always exaggerated annoying information of self condition. excuse injury. too noisy annoying always. ugly protest.. arrogant annoying blind fans most. really sick..

you sound like federerbestclass

Sentinel · Feb 16, 2012

Rafa has a right to an opinion.

I remember watching a downloaded recording of the Federer-Sampras WO 2001 match last year. The longest rally was maybe 3 shots. I never was able to watch the entire match, watched it in many sittings.

TOday's 30 point baseline rallies are slightly more watchable but I don't know for how long.

Nadal_Power · Feb 16, 2012

Lets ban him from tennis?

kiki · Feb 16, 2012

tennissportsrog said:
Nadal believes previous tennis eras cannot match the excitement generated by the current stars of the sport.

"Personally, to watch a Pete Sampras versus Goran Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable, It's not really tennis, it is a few swings of the racquet.
It was less eye-catching than what we do now. Everyone enjoys the tennis we play much more. I am not saying we are playing better tennis, just more enjoyable tennis. For me, in the past it was just serve, serve, serve." said Nadal.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/06/25/Wimbledon-Diary-Day-Five.aspx

Jajajaj.Nadal is a dummie.His era, except partially for Federer is the BORINGEST EVER, and that is a high responsability for Nadal or Djokovic...vamos¡¡¡

sureshs · Feb 16, 2012

Certainly today's players are not 1 dimensional and have all-round skills

kiki · Feb 16, 2012

sureshs said:
Certainly today's players are not 1 dimensional and have all-round skills

ALL ROUND SKILLS????TODAY???? IN THE PAST 12YEARS???

kishnabe · Feb 16, 2012

I guess he was not enjoyed when his Idol Moya got slapped by Sampras at 97 AO.

Still butthurt....though I agree it wasn't great to see Sampras vs Ivansevic.....there were some good matches in Sampras era. 92 Wimbledon final was one, Practically all Agassi matches.

robow7 · Feb 16, 2012

Too often in these discussions we treat court surfaces as though they must be very fast like old grass or slow like red clay. There was a day when the US Open was of such a speed that a variety of games could win on that surface. One year it was a Rafter or Edberg followed by more baseliner like players in Courier and Agassi. Any style of play could win if you did it well enough and oh, the great battles of conflicting styles of play, that's what I yearn for

Crisstti · Feb 16, 2012

Rafa never said a serve and volley match "isn't really tennis". This was already discussed at length at the time... but I guess Federerbestclass (and it has to be him, I refuse to believe there are two guys like that...) thought it appropiate to post about this again... mistranslation included.

treblings · Feb 16, 2012

robow7 said:
Too often in these discussions we treat court surfaces as though they must be very fast like old grass or slow like red clay. There was a day when the US Open was of such a speed that a variety of games could win on that surface. One year it was a Rafter or Edberg followed by more baseliner like players in Courier and Agassi. Any style of play could win if you did it well enough and oh, the great battles of conflicting styles of play, that's what I yearn for

imo, the u.s. open are still played on a surface that suits different kinds of play, the diversity of playing styles just isn´t there. s&v is nearly extinct for example

treblings · Feb 16, 2012

Crisstti said:
Rafa never said a serve and volley match "isn't really tennis". This was already discussed at length at the time... but I guess Federerbestclass (and it has to be him, I refuse to believe there are two guys like that...) thought it appropiate to post about this again... mistranslation included.

there are probably more than two guys like that here

the problem is, that this thread has probably been started as an attack on Nadal and not to discuss his statement, whatever it was he really said

treblings · Feb 16, 2012

double post

Larrysümmers · Feb 16, 2012

good for him. he voiced his opinion.

CDestroyer · Feb 16, 2012

tennissportsrog said:
[he obviously has an extensive knowledge about the history of his chosen sport]

I do not think so. Nadal has also looked down on Agassi. When Agassi confesses use of a drug. Roger Federer was by very polite criticism. (Of course, Sampras and Roger's Agassi are friends. I add it impartially.)

However, Nadal's criticism by violent criticism. (I am not a fan of Agassi and dislike a drug. I also add this again.)

The problem, Nadal is not looking at most tennis in front of the Federer era.

When Nadal was age of about 20. The journalist questioned Nadal. "Who is a favorite WTA player?" Nadal said, "Roger Federer..." "Roger Federer? Although it is the WTA player whom I asked ..." Nadal said. "I do not know a WTA player well.."

Nadal is ignorant about the past history. This arrogant utterance comes from his ignorance.

Dude the way you use words is funny. I am pretty sure you are the same guy that I read on youtube. Your descriptions are hilarious.

God Nadal sounds like Verdasco after getting his ass beat by Raonic.

CDestroyer · Feb 16, 2012

I found it on Youtube. Are you the user overratednadal?

Benhur · Feb 16, 2012

tennissportsrog said:
When Nadal was age of about 20. The journalist questioned Nadal. "Who is a favorite WTA player?" Nadal said, "Roger Federer..." "Roger Federer? Although it is the WTA player whom I asked ..." Nadal said. "I do not know a WTA player well.."

Nadal is ignorant about the past history. This arrogant utterance comes from his ignorance.

Not ignorance not, because when Nadal was age of about 20 he confesses use of english vocabulary in limited amount. However nevertheless didn’t recongnize the word “dublyuteeay” without delay obviously, and in the consequence he only understood "favorite .... player" and naturally thought Federer. When then he understood yet, Nadal wished diplomacy because if mentioning a name of WTA player specific for favorite can arise gossip interpretations.

Mustard · Feb 16, 2012

tennissportsrog said:
Nadal believes previous tennis eras cannot match the excitement generated by the current stars of the sport.

"Personally, to watch a Pete Sampras versus Goran Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable, It's not really tennis, it is a few swings of the racquet.
It was less eye-catching than what we do now. Everyone enjoys the tennis we play much more. I am not saying we are playing better tennis, just more enjoyable tennis. For me, in the past it was just serve, serve, serve." said Nadal.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/06/25/Wimbledon-Diary-Day-Five.aspx

This is old news. Nadal wasn't impressed with the 1994 Wimbledon final. I don't think anyone was, and Wimbledon started slowing down the balls after that.

Crisstti · Feb 16, 2012

treblings said:
there are probably more than two guys like that here
the problem is, that this thread has probably been started as an attack on Nadal and not to discuss his statement, whatever it was he really said

Probably :-?

But really, the way this guy speaks...

CDestroyer said:
I found it on Youtube. Are you the user overratednadal?

overratednadal is federerbestclass, that is pretty obvious

Tshooter · Feb 17, 2012

"Personally, to watch a Pete Sampras versus Goran Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable"

He's correct as far as I'm concerned. That was among the low points for tennis. That W match. Some people might argue that Borg-Vilas, Vilas-Solomon banging out 60 shot rallies was equally boring but I kinda liked it.

Can't speak for the rest of the world but I do think Nadal has it wrong in that tennis was never as popular in the US as it was in the 70s. Even Sampras-Agassi did not capture the public like Connors-Borg did. Or either with JMac.

Paul Murphy · Feb 18, 2012

Tshooter said:
"Personally, to watch a Pete Sampras versus Goran Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable"

He's correct as far as I'm concerned. That was among the low points for tennis. That W match. Some people might argue that Borg-Vilas, Vilas-Solomon banging out 60 shot rallies was equally boring but I kinda liked it.

Can't speak for the rest of the world but I do think Nadal has it wrong in that tennis was never as popular in the US as it was in the 70s. Even Sampras-Agassi did not capture the public like Connors-Borg did. Or either with JMac.

That Wimbledon final put me off tennis for a long time. Dead boring.

rosewall4ever · Feb 18, 2012

how enjoyable something is all relative. values change...

hoodjem · Feb 18, 2012

sureshs said:
Certainly today's players are not 1 dimensional and have all-round skills

Your sarcasm is too subtle for me.

Benhur · Feb 18, 2012

All extremes are boring. People who think current power tennis from the baseline is boring should watch some of the matches in the 80s, especially on clay, especially by some of the Swedes. Endless rallies with high looping balls and not a lot of pace. Pretty soporiferous. Today at least the power with which they hit requires a physical intensity that keeps things more lively, and the points are resolved sooner.

Then on the opposite end you have some of the grass tennis in the 90s, where pretty much all aspects of the game are eliminated except the serve and the occasional putaway volley. Boom boom tennis for a whole match. I don’t know what’s worse. At least the long high looping clay tennis in relative slow motion had some hypnotizing, somniferous effect.

In comparison with the 90s, the grass tennis from the 80s, especially the first half of the 80s, was much more enjoyable. It would be nice to see that again, but it doesn’t seem possible with current equipment and playing styles. McEnroes and Edbergs are not born often. And even if they were re-born, they might not learn to play that way today. Short of that, the current brand of grass tennis is much more enjoyable and varied than the serve fests of the 90s. You see point construction, aggressive rallies, some net approaches, some volleying, some great serves, a bit of everything. I also got turned off fast-surface tennis in the 90s because of the increasing amount of serve fests.

DunlopDood · Feb 20, 2012

Love serve and volley tennis. Nadal is a tool!

Paul Murphy · Feb 21, 2012

Benhur said:
All extremes are boring. People who think current power tennis from the baseline is boring should watch some of the matches in the 80s, especially on clay, especially by some of the Swedes. Endless rallies with high looping balls and not a lot of pace. Pretty soporiferous. Today at least the power with which they hit requires a physical intensity that keeps things more lively, and the points are resolved sooner.

Then on the opposite end you have some of the grass tennis in the 90s, where pretty much all aspects of the game are eliminated except the serve and the occasional putaway volley. Boom boom tennis for a whole match. I don’t know what’s worse. At least the long high looping clay tennis in relative slow motion had some hypnotizing, somniferous effect.

In comparison with the 90s, the grass tennis from the 80s, especially the first half of the 80s, was much more enjoyable. It would be nice to see that again, but it doesn’t seem possible with current equipment and playing styles. McEnroes and Edbergs are not born often. And even if they were re-born, they might not learn to play that way today. Short of that, the current brand of grass tennis is much more enjoyable and varied than the serve fests of the 90s. You see point construction, aggressive rallies, some net approaches, some volleying, some great serves, a bit of everything. I also got turned off fast-surface tennis in the 90s because of the increasing amount of serve fests.

Excellently put - agree entirely.
I bought the Lendl/Wilander FO final recently - very tough to watch.

SystemicAnomaly · Feb 21, 2012

hoodjem said:
Your sarcasm is too subtle for me.

And his kungfu style is superior as well. :twisted:

Mustard · Feb 21, 2012

Paul Murphy said:
Excellently put - agree entirely.
I bought the Lendl/Wilander FO final recently - very tough to watch.

Which final? 1985 when Wilander won or 1987 when Lendl won? I thought the 1985 final was good.

Nadal_Power · Feb 21, 2012

Final from 1987 was hard to watch.. some points with 60-100 shots

But, its still better than today's ''clay'' of Madrid and Roland Garros

Xavier G · Feb 21, 2012

I agree with Nadal. I found the Sampras era generally kind of boring, great player though Pete was. Krajicek and Ivanisevic too were primarily big booming servers. Federer was and is more stylish to watch even though he dominated too. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are better to watch. One player I liked watching was Sebastian Grosjean at his best, an artist.

TimothyO · Feb 21, 2012

I didn't play tennis back then nor did I watch it. I do remember trying to watch it but finding it boring.

A guy would serve and either ace his opponent or hit once or twice and the point was over with the server usually winning.

Now that I know a little more about the game I can see why some who have been around a long time might prefer today's game with the slower surfaces. It takes a greater variety of skills and more physical endurance than just bashing the ball super hard with modern frames on old school surfaces.

Maybe the frame technology was out of sync with the surfaces? And as players became stronger and faster the imbalance grew. Uber powerful frames, uber powerful players, and surfaces designed for wood racquets and guys who never saw a gym.

In some ways maybe the slower surfaces have brought tennis back to its roots. At the 2012 AO there were many epic rallies that were a joy to watch. Some even ebbed from baseline exchnages to net play and back to the baseline. It's like old school, wood frame tennis but at a faster pace.

Q&M son · Feb 21, 2012

I would love to see Sampras vs Rafa in old Wimby grass...
Bored? So what? Maybe some guys can think that a 2 or 3 or 4 hours match over clay passing and passing the ball is bored too.

I believe ATP quiting to carpet surface helps to slow the surfaces too, same for aussie open or us open.
Have you ever played a match over a really fastest surface? Is really fun, try it.

PS: I'm not even close a Federer fan.

richtor · Feb 25, 2012

Big serve tennis with 120+ mph serves is boring but today's big serve tennis with 140+ mph serves is not? Yes a Korlovic v Nadal match today is boring.

Personally today's tour has lost something with the latest string and racket tech. Edberg v Becker on Wimbledon's Center Court was amazing to watch. There are no more Macs, Edbergs, Beckers, Rafters in todays game because of the new tech.

Sid_Vicious · Feb 25, 2012

Crisstti said:
Probably :-?
But really, the way this guy speaks...

overratednadal is federerbestclass, that is pretty obvious

That guy is such a cretin. He has been spamming for about 3 years now. The worst part about it is that he can actually speak english but still chooses to write in such a poor manner.

tennissportsrog · Jun 13, 2012

sucks nadal

Laurie · Jun 13, 2012

tennissportsrog said:
Nadal believes previous tennis eras cannot match the excitement generated by the current stars of the sport.

"Personally, to watch a Pete Sampras versus Goran Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable, It's not really tennis, it is a few swings of the racquet.
It was less eye-catching than what we do now. Everyone enjoys the tennis we play much more. I am not saying we are playing better tennis, just more enjoyable tennis. For me, in the past it was just serve, serve, serve." said Nadal.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/06/25/Wimbledon-Diary-Day-Five.aspx

This quote is a year old, why is it been debated now, it was a big story a year ago.

McLovin · Jun 13, 2012

Laurie said:
This quote is a year old, why is it been debated now, it was a big story a year ago.

It's not. Some dummy ( tennissportsrog ) dug up an old thread and posted a 1-liner which added absolutely nothing to it. Notice the date on the 1st post: Feb 16, 2012.

Laurie · Jun 13, 2012

McLovin said:
It's not. Some dummy ( tennissportsrog ) dug up an old thread and posted a 1-liner which added absolutely nothing to it. Notice the date on the 1st post: Feb 16, 2012.

That quote during Wimbledon 2011 caused a lot of debate and column inches, I wrote an article based on this quote in June 2011.

http://burnstennis.blogspot.co.uk/s...06/rafael-nadals-comments-about-previous.html

6-2/6-4/6-0 · Jun 13, 2012

tennissportsrog said:
Nadal believes previous tennis eras cannot match the excitement generated by the current stars of the sport.

"Personally, to watch a Pete Sampras versus Goran Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable, It's not really tennis, it is a few swings of the racquet.
It was less eye-catching than what we do now. Everyone enjoys the tennis we play much more. I am not saying we are playing better tennis, just more enjoyable tennis. For me, in the past it was just serve, serve, serve." said Nadal.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/06/25/Wimbledon-Diary-Day-Five.aspx

As if I needed one more reason to think Nadal is bad for the game. I think his tennis is about as entertaining as a trip to the dentists office. It is less eye-catching, and absolutely less enjoyable in my book. I would rather see players go back to wooden rackets than see the sport continue a slide into the caveman style of play that Nadal espouses.

Humble, my ***...

pc1 · Jun 13, 2012

It's just an opinion that Nadal voiced and frankly a lot of people at the time when the Wimbledon courts were very fast echoed that opinion. That's why I believe they slowed up the courts almost everywhere and set it up at Wimbledon that the grass is not only slower but has better bounces.

I personally like variety so I wouldn't mind if they had a mixture of different types of courts like old Wimbledon grass so we can see some serve and volleyers again to contrast with the current heavy topspin baseline style. It's great to see a great baseliner play against a great serve and volleyer. Examples are McEnroe-Connors, Evert-Navratilova, Sampras-Agassi, Becker-Agassi.

6-2/6-4/6-0 · Jun 13, 2012

Absolutely. Variety needs to come back into the game and the fact that the powers that be have made all surfaces baseline-basher friendly had been to the detriment of the sport.

Rafael Nadal's insult utterance to Sampras era

Rookie

Hall of Fame

Rookie

Semi-Pro

Rookie

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

Semi-Pro

Banned

Bionic Poster

Banned

Talk Tennis Guru

Professional

Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Professional

Professional

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Professional

New User

G.O.A.T.

Rookie

Laurie

Guest

Legend

Laurie

Guest

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

Similar threads