Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Nadalator, Apr 5, 2009.
Great articles. That Charlie Bricker sure doesn't pull any punches.
He sure doesn't help his credibility by making two clear and easy factual errors in the first two paragraphs...
Well I think it's true that Federer is probably the last to realise that he might not be able to get his no. 1 spot back.
The second article mentioned the fact that a coach was not going to make him better. This maybe true, but it could help reinvigorate him. He seems to have lost some of his excitement and joy. A coach, a new training method, a new point of view might bring some extra energy to his game.
Take Roddick for example. Every time he gets a new coach he makes a move.
1. Gets Gilbert wins US Open
2. Gets Connors makes final of US Open
3. Gets Stefanki makes semi of Aussie Open and has his best start to a season in his career.
Roddick and Federer are different players and may have different responses to a new coach, but if he really wants to get back to No. 1 one would think he would try whatever he could.
The second article, IMO, is crap. I disagree with it 100%. Yes, he's slower, and he needs to make adjusments to his game. But he's still the most talented player in the world, and therefore he can make those adjusments. If a coach can help him get there, Federer will improve. I also believe Federer is better than Djokovic, even currently, so no way is Federer number 4 in the world.
Nope. Not even close to Nadal in terms of pure talent.
There isn't any way you could intelligibly argue that Fed is more talented.
Fed is a guy who has stretched his talent to absolute limit, with excellent results.
With raw talent, he was nothing more than a top 10 player.
With raw talent, Nadal won a slam, reached #2 in the world, and beat Fed many times on clay and hard.
still up to your trolling ways, i see.
Thanks. Interesting articles.
Bricker's always been a Federer hating hack. Not surprisingly, he's revelling in the current circumstances.
i think you've got it reversed.
Fixed it for you again. Pay more attention next time.
You've got some pretty messed up logic!
Rubber duckies is a troll. Every Fed related thread he/she has to have a word on how Fed is bad,has no talent, and is arrogant. He has a right to be arrogant he has 13 slams. Also, I don't think that Nadal plays beautiful tennis and has more talent than Federer. Let me ask you this, who works harder in their matches?
The question is, what was Federer doing at Nadal's age? The answer is not much, compared. Also, how many hard court finals has Nadal reached in the last year VS. Federer? How many have they won? Last 12 months. Again, note Nadal's age.
Too negative, too pessimistic. He's predicting he can only go down from now on citing old age, which is crap, especially the second article. Others have done it and so can he.
Rafa Nadal will be 22 years, 9 months and 20 days on Monday. At this age, the manacorí has 30 weeks at the top of the world ranking and has an enviable resume with 38 titles, two Davis Cups and an Olympic gold medal.
Nadal has won 6 Grand Slams (4 Roland Garros, 1 Wimbledon and 1 Australian Open), 13 Masters Series-Masters called 1,000 now (4 Montecarlo, 3 Rome, 2 Indian Wells, 1 Montreal, 1 Toronto, 1 Madrid, 1 Hamburg) and 13 singles tournaments (Sopot, Costa do Sauipe, Acapulco, Barcelona -4, Bastad, Stuttgart -2, Beijing, Dubai and Queen's) and 5 doubles (Doha -2, Umag, Chennai and Monte Carlo).
When the "Swiss Express" was Nadal's age, his achievements were only 22titles comprising 2 Grand Slams (1 Wimbledon and 1 Australia), 3 - 1000 Masters (1 Indian Wells and 2 Hamburg), 2 final championships (2002 and 2003), 9 other singles titles (Milan, Sydney, Vienna -2, Marseille, Dubai -2, Munich and Halle) and 6 more doubles titles (Rotterdam -2, Gstaad , Moscow, Miami and Vienna).
I feel sorry for you.
It's kind of hard to measure tennis talent. Roger is obviously very talented but so is Nadal.
If you break down strokes, Nadal now versus Roger at his best, I think Nadal may win out.
The forehands are close with I think a slight edge to Roger in his prime but only slight and you have to give the backhand advantage to Nadal by a BIG margin. Roger has an excellent serve but Nadal's a lefty and can hook you wide on the ad court and his serves have unusual high kick to it.
Speed is very close. I think Roger is smoother but many say Nadal covers more ground.
Stamina is clearly Nadal.
Mentally it's Nadal.
Volleying is close but Roger frames too many volleys and I think Nadal's a bit more solid in volleying.
I think Nadal's reflexes are a bit better.
It's all subjective but I've like to check out everyone's opinions. Maybe someone should start a thread on this topic. Who's more talented Roger or Rafa?
That would actually be a great thread if *******s and *******s didn't hijack it... but you know, they definitely will, so I suggest you don't start one, or it'll just become another useless thread.
IMO, Fed's talent > Nadal's, I think Fed's serve is way better than Nadal's even though Nadal has the advantage of being a lefty. I would also say Fed's net game at his prime > Nadal's, it's just if you compare it now, then I would say Nadal > Fed, but that's because Fed is past his prime. Forehands... would be close, but I'd still give the edge to Fed, backhands definitely to Nadal though, as would mental toughness and stamina. But overall, I still say Fed > Nadal in terms of raw talent.
Of course, raw talent is hard to measure... so who am I to comment .
Separate names with a comma.