One more myth to be debunked

[tlm]

Originally Posted by BigForehand

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

federer GOAT

Only a loser would say something this stupid, oh thats right you were one of the dreamers that predicted fed would win.

[jackson vile]

Originally Posted by tlm

Only a loser would say something this stupid, oh thats right you were one of the dreamers that predicted fed would win.

A lot of people don't realize that Federer uses polyester as well, and on top of that string savers as they give more spin as well.

[tlm]

Originally Posted by jackson vile

A lot of people don't realize that Federer uses polyester as well, and on top of that string savers as they give more spin as well.

Ya but see thats okay for him, just not for rafa you know it is just one more way that he is cheating.

[lendledbergfan]

Originally Posted by tlm

Ya but see thats okay for him, just not for rafa you know it is just one more way that he is cheating.

You know Fed also relies HEAVILY on spin! Specially when he makes those ridiculous angles on his BH or those inside out FH winners. Before Nadal came along, people were primarily of the notion that Fed uses the heaviest top spin.

[jackson vile]

Originally Posted by lendledbergfan

You know Fed also relies HEAVILY on spin! Specially when he makes those ridiculous angles on his BH or those inside out FH winners. Before Nadal came along, people were primarily of the notion that Fed uses the heaviest top spin.

He is only below in Nadal for RPMs.

[lendledbergfan]

Originally Posted by jackson vile

He is only below in Nadal for RPMs.

exactly. 10char

[Netspirit]

If you want to know who the better shotmaker is, put them against each other on a fast, slick court.

Or the shooting range.

[TheNatural]

Nadal was the more attacking player and the better shot maker. Nadal's agressive ratio was 1.4. Fed's was only 1.2.

"A player's agressive ratio indicates the agressiveness of a player and the ability to hit winners. The formula is derived from a player's winners and opponent's forced errors."

link

[jackson vile]

Originally Posted by TheNatural

Nadal was the more attacking player and the better shot maker. Nadal's agressive ratio was 1.4. Fed's was only 1.2.

"A player's agressive ratio indicates the agressiveness of a player and the ability to hit winners. The formula is derived from a player's winners and opponent's forced errors."

link

Wow, that is a cool stat!

[DjokovicForTheWin]

Originally Posted by jackson vile

He is only below in Nadal for RPMs.

That's not true.

[ACE of Hearts]

Nadal is in Roger's head.The better shot maker is Federer.Federer just doesnt know how to play clean tennis and goes for broke and misses his shots all the time.

[ashitaka2010]

Originally Posted by TennisNiche

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.

Why is it so hard to understand that you don't win 6 Roland Garros with a poor/basic point construction ability.

Get real people.

I agree with the rest though.

[jackson vile]

Originally Posted by DjokovicForTheWin

That's not true.

#1 that says average #2 it is total BS when they have Roddick at virtually same RPM as Nadal.

We are talking about max RPM ie Sampras' serve.

[DjokovicForTheWin]

Originally Posted by jackson vile

#1 that says average #2 it is total BS when they have Roddick at virtually same RPM as Nadal.

We are talking about max RPM ie Sampras' serve.

Who cares about max RPM if you only produce it occasionally. Average is what matters. The data is the data. When you see something you don't like better to question your premises before the validity of the data.

[Towerofpower205]

Originally Posted by BigForehand

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

federer GOAT

The fact of the matter is there ARE poly strings. There ARE bigger rackets fed has every bit of the same access as nadal to get one but he doesn't want to

[olliess]

Originally Posted by ashitaka2010

Why is it so hard to understand that you don't win 6 Roland Garros with a poor/basic point construction ability.

The guy said Nadal didn't show much imagination in his point construction. Not the same as poor ability.

But honestly, if you can hit your normal shot over and over again until your opponent tries something different... and then you just do whatever seems like a good idea at the time (like pass him)... and you keep winning...

That sounds like a pretty solid game plan IMHO.

[lendledbergfan]

Originally Posted by DjokovicForTheWin

That's not true.

This table was ******** the moment it said that Roddick strikes the ball faster than Djokovic or Federer. I mean, this is Roddick the PUSHER we are talking about, who can't even hit a forehand winner these days, leave along a backhand one!

[Bud]

Originally Posted by BigForehand

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

federer GOAT

Federer uses poly too (gut mains and poly crosses).

[TennisFan3]

READ THIS:

Roles reversed as Nadal downs Federer on superior shotmaking

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...dal/index.html

[Fate Archer]

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.

Nope.

There is nothing to debunk, specially when you're taking your conclusions from only one match, and a recent one.
Make no mistake, Nadal is an excelent shotmaker, specially when he is put on defensive positions. One of the best if not the best in history of pulling fantastic defensive shots.

This match had Nadal with more winners (even on Nadal's forehand side), which is often an exception regardless of the surface.
To make a comparison, Federer had significantly more winners than Nadal (specially on the forehand side) on their final match at the AO in 2009, and while Nadal pulled many fantastic shots throughout that match, Federer arguably threw even more as indicated by the superior number of winners.

It's only natural as Federer declines, while his footspeed, footwork and offensive ability decreases, that his rival in physical prime form and on a slow surface where winners are increasingly difficult to be hit, even more so if you account the level of defense Nadal brings, is gonna hit more winners and make a better shotmaking appearance.
It's only the natural way of things, and may happen again if they play again on similar conditions (unless Fed is having a good day on his forehand, which IMO he wasn't hitting that well in their last match).

If you wanna prove that Nadal is a better shotmaker, you better show stats and information that indicate this notion than your impression of their more recent match.