One more myth to be debunked

[hawk eye]

So many seem to have this notion, "Federer is the better shotmaker, Nadal Nadal wins by consistency, grinding, pounding Fed's BH etc. "

The last may be true, but last match, like many of the previous matches between these two, I noticed Nadal makes the most unbelievable shots and was the one who gets the biggest ooh's and aah's from the crowd. His passing shots on the run, in ' beaten' position when he's almost in the stadium's catacombs, flying past a stunned Fed who jsut thought he has hit a winner, are unique in the game and unrivaled in tennis history.
He's also the only one who can pull off curling forehands regurlarly, and hit BH passing shots with pace and accuracy when the ball is already behind him..

But still, Fed's the 'shotmaker'. the only reason I can think of is because usually he hits more winners, also due this stronger serve which gives him more chances to end the point quickly. He's also more agressive and has a more fluent style but that doesn't make him a better shotmaker.
But I'd say the definition of a greatest shotmaker is the one who makes the most 'impossible' shots, which leave the public totally surprised and speechless. Yes, Fed made some spectacular tweeners and overheads over the years, but these still are an exception where Nadal makes his trademark shots every match multiple times. Often on important points, too.

To me people are just echoing each other, because "a grinder just can't be a better shotmaker". The type "Lendl has no talent, but is all hard work" talk you had for along time when he was dominating the game. In retrospect, the common opinion on that one has at least slightly changed.

[snowpuppy]

True. However, for most people the preconceived notion of shot making is offensive. So when somebody is "shotmaking" defensively, they are just counterpunching or worst pushing with some umpth. As for Lendl? Well, his genius is recognizing that fitness is the tennis of the future.

[BigForehand]

if it wasn't for polyester this guy would be nothing

federer GOAT

[willshot]

Originally Posted by BigForehand

if it wasn't for polyester this guy would be nothing

federer GOAT

Nadal can still beat fed with cheap nylon strings from kmart. get over it *******s. lol

[TennisNiche]

Of course Nadal is a unique talent - I don't think many people would legitimately doubt that.

It's also not his fault that the surfaces in tennis have been homogenised to the extent that one style of play can be used across all four (four? I forgot, carpet doesn't exist anymore) surfaces without being limited by it.

But I think one thing even the most die-hard Nadal fan should acknowledge, is that his strengths lie more in physical and mental ability than purely technical. He is a physical specimen with a never say die attitude, but I wouldn't say he is the most blessed as far as hand-eye coordination, creativity or flair. This is because he doesn't regularly take the ball early and clean on either wing, hit particularly proficient drop shots, or show much imagination in his point construction (his ruthlessly effective plays are legendary but again, VERY repetitive)

What he is strong, is, as you say in his freakish ability to hit passing shots from almost any position. I think this is a testament to the fact that he is primarily a reactive player, a problem solver.

[Rock Strongo]

Originally Posted by BigForehand

if it wasn't for polyester this guy would be nothing

federer GOAT

Federer is also a poly man. Sure, only a half set, but poly is poly.

[willshot]

Originally Posted by hawk eye

So many seem to have this notion, "Federer is the better shotmaker, Nadal Nadal wins by consistency, grinding, pounding Fed's BH etc. "

The last may be true, but last match, like many of the previous matches between these two, I noticed Nadal makes the most unbelievable shots and was the one who gets the biggest ooh's and aah's from the crowd. His passing shots on the run, in ' beaten' position when he's almost in the stadium's catacombs, flying past a stunned Fed who jsut thought he has hit a winner, are unique in the game and unrivaled in tennis history.
He's also the only one who can pull off curling forehands regurlarly, and hit BH passing shots with pace and accuracy when the ball is already behind him..

But still, Fed's the 'shotmaker'. the only reason I can think of is because usually he hits more winners, also due this stronger serve which gives him more chances to end the point quickly. He's also more agressive and has a more fluent style but that doesn't make him a better shotmaker.
But I'd say the definition of a greatest shotmaker is the one who makes the most 'impossible' shots, which leave the public totally surprised and speechless. Yes, Fed made some spectacular tweeners and overheads over the years, but these still are an exception where Nadal makes his trademark shots every match multiple times. Often on important points, too.

To me people are just echoing each other, because "a grinder just can't be a better shotmaker". The type "Lendl has no talent, but is all hard work" talk you had for along time when he was dominating the game. In retrospect, the common opinion on that one has at least slightly changed.

I agree with you. His defensive shotmaking is ridiculously insanly good shotmaking..

[Rozroz]

Sad days for the tennis sport.
Turned to a total grindhouse.

[willshot]

Originally Posted by Rozroz

Sad days for the tennis sport.
Turned to a total grindhouse.

grindhouse is better than UnforcedError shankhouse?

[Al Czervik]

Originally Posted by BigForehand

if it wasn't for polyester this guy would be nothing

federer GOAT

I always thought this was telling.

According to McCain, so staggered was Pete Sampras by the string's ability to turn defensive baseliners into forceful counter-punchers that he dubbed it "Cheatalon."

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/ten...ory?id=3064206

[Federer_pilon]

If I'm not mistaken, Nadal had more forehand and backhand winners than Federer!

[darthfedererr]

Originally Posted by willshot

Nadal can still beat fed with cheap nylon strings from kmart. get over it *******s. lol

highly doubt it, think about it.

[Rock Strongo]

Originally Posted by darthfedererr

highly doubt it, think about it.

He used 15 gauge Duralast for the longest of times, does that qualify?

[hawk eye]

Originally Posted by TennisNiche

Of course Nadal is a unique talent - I don't think many people would legitimately doubt that.

It's also not his fault that the surfaces in tennis have been homogenised to the extent that one style of play can be used across all four (four? I forgot, carpet doesn't exist anymore) surfaces without being limited by it.

But I think one thing even the most die-hard Nadal fan should acknowledge, is that his strengths lie more in physical and mental ability than purely technical. He is a physical specimen with a never say die attitude, but I wouldn't say he is the most blessed as far as hand-eye coordination, creativity or flair. This is because he doesn't regularly take the ball early and clean on either wing, hit particularly proficient drop shots, or show much imagination in his point construction (his ruthlessly effective plays are legendary but again, VERY repetitive)

What he is strong, is, as you say in his freakish ability to hit passing shots from almost any position. I think this is a testament to the fact that he is primarily a reactive player, a problem solver.

Well I can partly agree with you that purely technical speaken, he relies more on strength than Federer, Berdych or Nalbandian. But his hand eye coordination must be exceptional, given his ability to control and redirect such vicious 'would be winners' shots for winners and given his ability to hit wich so much topspin consistently. At the same time his stroke mechanics, which are invented for maximum TS, is what makes him not that outstanding in taking the ball on the rise. The flatter hitter have less margin when clearing the net, but more at contact point and thus can take the bal early with less shanking risks. It's a tradeoff.. But he still has developed a lot in that respect over the years. Remember how far he was standing from the baseline in 2005.

[markwillplay]

Watchiing Fed over the last couple matches, it played out as I thought it would. Delpo played well and Feds aggressive play from the baseline (hovering close, taking bals early, coming in) dominated him. This is Fed at his best beatng a somewhat one demensional power player. He played the first part of the match today like that and there was nothing Nadal could do...nothing..he even admitted it. But it is another thing to keep that up over an entire match with Nadal. Nadal is so mentally tough and you just have to beat him on every point. Fed is more up and down and his up is better than anyone ever in my opinion...no doubt. But if you have lulls in perfection against Nadal, he wins those points. He is sooo steady and certainly does have the ability to make great shots as well.

It was clear to me (as always is when they play) that Fed has the bigger "upside' I guess you would say...but also clear that if he falters at all, the steady play of Nadal and mental toughness on big points makes the difference. Playing the same up and down way he did today, Fed would beat all but a couple players even at their best. I think that Nadal is the absolute best I have ever seen at "weathering the storm" and maintaining belief that he will have his chances...and taking advantage when he does. Belief make a huge difference there. I also think that is why Joker owns him now....Jokers game is much like his..steady and not as up and down...no real storm to weather there..just someone doing things the way you do but doing them a bit better all along the way...and believing that he will get him eventually.

I said it in a post earlier and I will say it again..Fed' s best is the best you will ever see, but Nadal is the one person that he has to (or at least he thinks he has to) maintain that level against the longest to beat. No doubt that being in the back of fed's mind effects him. I think it makes him press at times when he does not even need to. But that is all part of the game ain't it...

[mandy01]

Nadal can only do these 'amazing' curved passing shots on surfaces where the ball bounces high enough to give him time. Watch him on an indoor court or any fast/ low bouncing court where the ball just dies and the entire tide is reversed. That is why the guy doesn't perform well on such surfaces. Unfortunately, these events are too few in number for this to get highlighted.

[hawk eye]

Originally Posted by mandy01

Nadal can only do these 'amazing' curved passing shots on surfaces where the ball bounces high enough to give him time. Watch him on an indoor court or any fast/ low bouncing court where the ball just dies and the entire tide is reversed. That is why the guy doesn't perform well on such surfaces. Unfortunately, these events are too few in number for this to get highlighted.

I don't know, but he seemed to have picked of many of those almost from the ground.. he gets very low and then just seems to flick those balls with a very quick motion past his opponent. Then again, it must be the strings..

To me his sub par indoor game is often more due to his usual end of season burn out than anything else. It shows in his whole energy level and body language.

[jackson vile]

Don't let it get to you, just enjoy the tennis. There are tons and tons of myths about Federer. His fans can be delusional at times making him out to be something that he is not. Also, take a look, where did the majority of Federer's shots land on Nadal's side of the court?

Originally Posted by hawk eye

So many seem to have this notion, "Federer is the better shotmaker, Nadal Nadal wins by consistency, grinding, pounding Fed's BH etc. "

The last may be true, but last match, like many of the previous matches between these two, I noticed Nadal makes the most unbelievable shots and was the one who gets the biggest ooh's and aah's from the crowd. His passing shots on the run, in ' beaten' position when he's almost in the stadium's catacombs, flying past a stunned Fed who jsut thought he has hit a winner, are unique in the game and unrivaled in tennis history.
He's also the only one who can pull off curling forehands regurlarly, and hit BH passing shots with pace and accuracy when the ball is already behind him..

But still, Fed's the 'shotmaker'. the only reason I can think of is because usually he hits more winners, also due this stronger serve which gives him more chances to end the point quickly. He's also more agressive and has a more fluent style but that doesn't make him a better shotmaker.
But I'd say the definition of a greatest shotmaker is the one who makes the most 'impossible' shots, which leave the public totally surprised and speechless. Yes, Fed made some spectacular tweeners and overheads over the years, but these still are an exception where Nadal makes his trademark shots every match multiple times. Often on important points, too.

To me people are just echoing each other, because "a grinder just can't be a better shotmaker". The type "Lendl has no talent, but is all hard work" talk you had for along time when he was dominating the game. In retrospect, the common opinion on that one has at least slightly changed.

[olliess]

Originally Posted by jackson vile

Also, take a look, where did the majority of Federer's shots land on Nadal's side of the court?

Out?

[tlm]

Originally Posted by hawk eye

So many seem to have this notion, "Federer is the better shotmaker, Nadal Nadal wins by consistency, grinding, pounding Fed's BH etc. "

The last may be true, but last match, like many of the previous matches between these two, I noticed Nadal makes the most unbelievable shots and was the one who gets the biggest ooh's and aah's from the crowd. His passing shots on the run, in ' beaten' position when he's almost in the stadium's catacombs, flying past a stunned Fed who jsut thought he has hit a winner, are unique in the game and unrivaled in tennis history.
He's also the only one who can pull off curling forehands regurlarly, and hit BH passing shots with pace and accuracy when the ball is already behind him..

But still, Fed's the 'shotmaker'. the only reason I can think of is because usually he hits more winners, also due this stronger serve which gives him more chances to end the point quickly. He's also more agressive and has a more fluent style but that doesn't make him a better shotmaker.
But I'd say the definition of a greatest shotmaker is the one who makes the most 'impossible' shots, which leave the public totally surprised and speechless. Yes, Fed made some spectacular tweeners and overheads over the years, but these still are an exception where Nadal makes his trademark shots every match multiple times. Often on important points, too.

To me people are just echoing each other, because "a grinder just can't be a better shotmaker". The type "Lendl has no talent, but is all hard work" talk you had for along time when he was dominating the game. In retrospect, the common opinion on that one has at least slightly changed.

This post is exactly right.