View Single Post
Old 11-20-2012, 05:21 AM   #29
namelessone
Legend
 
namelessone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by monfed View Post

All this indicates is that Coria wasn't very consistent,but his claycourt prowess is undeniable,you're just trying to downgrade him because he wasn't Ralph's main rival from his RG winning years.
Gee, that was kinda my point. He had clay skills but he was inconsistent yet you and a couple others here herald him as a future beater of Nadal when Guillermo, in his prime, lost to a 18 year old Nadal. Even before the rise of Nadal in 2005, he lost in RG, not to nobodies, but he lost.
Now tell me the last time Nadal lost on clay(and lest we forget, in his prime) to someone ranked 99.


Quote:
Originally Posted by monfed View Post
I guess using your logic , Ralph is a bottom-tier grasscourter(on slow grass) losing to so many players over the years in Queens and Rosol this year.
Wow, is this supposed to be your argument? Queens? Nadal and almost everybody that plays this event gets 2-3 matches under their feet before going to WB. Few have Queens as an objective. Anyway, Nadal is clearly a second rate grasscourter with only 5 WB finals to his name.


Quote:
Originally Posted by monfed View Post
Ralph got super lucky in that Rome final, just like the one against Fed in 06.
Nadal was lucky in all his finals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by monfed View Post
Also Federer beat Kuerten in Hamburg(infact he bagelled him) ,doesn't make Fed a better clay courter than Kuerten,not in my book anyway.
I loved watching Kuerten play but I would give them a neck a neck status, for RG at least. Yes, Kuerten had 3 titles and Fed 1 but Kuerten beat good/great claycourters whereas Federer was consistently stopped 4 times by a legend of this surface and he made 5 FINALS in RG.



Quote:
Originally Posted by monfed View Post
Coria was a broken man after the RG 05 final but ok I guess everyone's broken after a loss to Ralph,whatever makes you happy.
I obviously didn't mean it like that but whatever floats your boat. And it was 2004 RG final, not 2005.

Quote:
Originally Posted by monfed View Post
Age is of little relevance, noone could handle Ralph's moonballing,it's as simple as that, whether he moonballs at 16/35,doesn't matter. There's a reason he can play like crap on clay and still win relatively comfortably because he has the luxury of moonballing to weaker BHs all day,don't deny it.
So I take it that almost everybody in the 2005-2012 period bar Djokovic 2.0 had weak BH's? Weak era indeed. And yeah, Nadal can clearly play at 26 just like at 19, no problem for him. Actually, the reason he can still be competent on this surface after so many years is because:

-the surface is mostly slow so he has time to retrieve and more importantly, set up his shots.
-it's softer on his body.
-his forehand kicks like crazy on clay.



Quote:
Originally Posted by monfed View Post
Only Djokovic 2.0 could standup to that onslaught and dismissed Ralph from his presence in 2011. I say Djoker 2.0 because his BH was at an insane level,nothing seemed to go past it. When Djoker's level dropped in 2012,Ralph capitalised.
You are saying that it took one of the guys who had one of the best seasons in the Open era(top 5 probably, if not better) probably to shake Nadal on his best surface and he had to make sure everything needed to be into place to do it. Thanks for the compliment, I guess.

And if we reduce it to GREAT BH = BEAT NADAL, even on clay, then why haven't Murray/Nalbandian/any other great BH beat Nadal on clay? The only guy to beat Nadal(and a injured Nadal at that) in RG had a massive FOREHAND for a weapon and merely a serviceable BH. The other guy that was close to a surprise in RG, Isner, almost beat him with pace and serve.

Do you believe, for example, that Agassi(RG winner lest we forget and a terrific BH to boot), would beat Nadal in RG?



Quote:
Originally Posted by monfed View Post
Looks it's just my opinion, don't know why you're still so insecure about Ralph's claycourt prowess after all the success he's had.
I'm not insecure, I'm merely arguing your points, which in my opinion aren't very strong to say the least. You are saying that a talented but inconsistent claycourter, Coria(who wasn't even the best claycourter of those times), would become a rival/thorn in the side of the guy who is probably among the top 2 claycourters of the open era, if not ever. It sounds kinda silly to be honest.

As I said, Coria was good but if a prime Coria is having trouble(twice) at MS level with a 18 year old kid(this was Nadal before even entering RG for the first time) and losing to guys barely in the top 100 on his best surface, I'm not betting the house on him being a worthy rival for Nadal after 2005.

He was good but he wasn't that good.

Last edited by namelessone : 11-20-2012 at 05:27 AM.
namelessone is offline   Reply With Quote