Extreme Western
New User
What do you guys think?
What do you guys think?
Are you asking this because he is actually naturally right handed or just as a "He's so much better he'd win with his other hand?" question?
I seem to remember hearing somewhere he is actually right handed, anyone know why he plays as a lefty or did he just pick up the racket that way?
It is interesting though I can play and rally with my left (non dominant hand) and I wonder if with enouogh practice anyone could even out their skills with eith side........
Andreev has huge top spin and is a righty. Probably not as much spin as Nadal but does seem to have more pace and drive.
with his right hand, he might not get that crazy unnatural amount of spin that he has with his left. that spin just comes with his left hand because its harder to form a swing with your recessive hand. with his right hand, he might hit a more regular shot.
Are you saying that he gets more spin because it is his dominant hand swinging?
Another "what if" thread? Are you people bored or what?
What if Nadal has Roddick's serve, Gasquet's bachand, McEnroe's volleys? Would he be a better player?
If Nadal played with his dominant right arm, he would be consistently serving in the 130's given his 6' 2" height and his overall strength. Moreover, his serving technique would be a lot better because he's using his dominant arm. It is nothing short of incredible that Nadal is able to serve with his non-dominant arm, even if he is naturally ambidextrous.
All of this assumes Nadal has really a very dominant right side. I don't believe this is possible. People who are able to switch the playing arm so relatively easily are ambidextrous or nearly ambidextrous to begin with. Anybody with a very dominant one side dexterity try playing tennis with the other hand, to see what I mean.
If Nadal really had a dominant right side, then of course it would have been extremely stupid to force him to switch. But then again, he would not have been able to switch to begin with because there would have been an immediate huge drop in his tennis ability, and they would have realized that it was stupid to continue along that path. So I don't believe Nadal is a righty in the same sense I and many other people are righties.
Yes he wouldn't have the advantages of serving into a righty's ad-court, since most breakpoints occur on the ad-court: 0-40, 30-40, ad-out (and only one breakpoint occurring on the deuce-court: 15-40)
I've commented on this several times before. The ONLY advantage lefties have is the relative lack of familiarity players have with their spins, especially on the serve, since you play against a lefty roughly 1 out of 10 matches. Players usually handle this by trying to hit with a lefty as soon as they know they are playing a lefty next. And after a few games with a lefty, you do get used to it.
Other than that, all the talk about the ad court, being able to pull righties wide to to their backhand and so on -- all that is just a mirror image of what righties enjoy on the deuce court. The point leading to a break point is just as important -- since you cannot have a break point without getting to break point. Right?
And, as I've also said before, more points in a match are served from the deuce court than from the ad court. This imbalance occurs because all games ending at 15 have one more point served from the deuce court than from the ad court. All other games end with an equal number of points served from each side. So there IS an imbalance here, and it is to the righties advantage.
In addition, the supposed lefties advantage does not seem to be born out by available statistics. The number of lefties in tennis seems to reflect the percentage of lefties in the general population, though this seems to change considerably from one decade to another. But if the advantage were real, it would have to show somehow statistically across diferent periods.
So the answer to the question is: if Nadal were a distinctly right-side-dominant righty, he would have been better playing right handed. But in that case he would not have switched to begin with.
Since he is ambidextrous (or nearly) then he probably would play just about the same with his right as he plays with his left.
Nadal wouldn't be able to hit his awesome 2h bh open stance on the run if he was right handed because he would have to rely on his non dominant left leg.
All this talk of dominance is besides the point. The simple fact is Nadal's mega topspin angled fh to Fed's bh is the 99% of Fed's matchup problem with Nadal. Take that away and there is no way Fed loses all those clay court matches to him. I stand by my original post!
And whats all this about 130mph serve? Thats pure speculation, not at all a given.
All of this assumes Nadal has really a very dominant right side. I don't believe this is possible. People who are able to switch the playing arm so relatively easily are ambidextrous or nearly ambidextrous to begin with. Anybody with a very dominant one side dexterity try playing tennis with the other hand, to see what I mean.
If Nadal really had a dominant right side, then of course it would have been extremely stupid to force him to switch. But then again, he would not have been able to switch to begin with because there would have been an immediate huge drop in his tennis ability, and they would have realized that it was stupid to continue along that path. So I don't believe Nadal is a righty in the same sense I and many other people are righties.
I've commented on this several times before. The ONLY advantage lefties have is the relative lack of familiarity players have with their spins, especially on the serve, since you play against a lefty roughly 1 out of 10 matches. Players usually handle this by trying to hit with a lefty as soon as they know they are playing a lefty next. And after a few games with a lefty, you do get used to it.
Other than that, all the talk about the ad court, being able to pull righties wide to to their backhand and so on -- all that is just a mirror image of what righties enjoy on the deuce court. The point leading to a break point is just as important -- since you cannot have a break point without getting to break point. Right?
And, as I've also said before, more points in a match are served from the deuce court than from the ad court. This imbalance occurs because all games ending at 15 have one more point served from the deuce court than from the ad court. All other games end with an equal number of points served from each side. So there IS an imbalance here, and it is to the righties advantage.
In addition, the supposed lefties advantage does not seem to be born out by available statistics. The number of lefties in tennis seems to reflect the percentage of lefties in the general population, though this seems to change considerably from one decade to another. But if the advantage were real, it would have to show somehow statistically across diferent periods.
So the answer to the question is: if Nadal were a distinctly right-side-dominant righty, he would have been better playing right handed. But in that case he would not have switched to begin with.
Since he is ambidextrous (or nearly) then he probably would play just about the same with his right as he plays with his left.
Fed just needs a bigger frame to solve all of his baseline problems when he plays Nadal on clay.