But what will happen at the French w/this tactic, where rally tolerance becomes a greater factor and nobody's likely going to be hitting through anybody, save for a fluke like Delpo or Soderling getting hot?
Nadal has no chance against Novak on clay for the very reason that Nadal is the one that gets moved around on clay, and has no way to hit through Novak on the clay. People who keep believing that somehow just because Nadal is great on clay that he will magically figure out how to beat Novak on clay. Clay is the surface that exposes your weaknesses as a tennis player most; Nadal's weakness is his one dimensional style of play. Once he got figured out by Novak, he's pretty much done for on a surface where you have to straight up outplay your opponent rather than try to go for broke.
Djokovic won 4 straight sets against Nadal on clay. Nadal actually got closer to beating Djokovic on hardcourts last year.Nadal always is the favorite against whoever is on the opposite side of the court in a clay match. And Nadal isn't one dimensional when playing a clay. He has the best claycourt records of all time.
But what will happen at the French w/this tactic, where rally tolerance becomes a greater factor and nobody's likely going to be hitting through anybody, save for a fluke like Delpo or Soderling getting hot?
Nadal always is the favorite against whoever is on the opposite side of the court in a clay match. And Nadal isn't one dimensional when playing a clay. He has the best claycourt records of all time.
Nadal always is the favorite against whoever is on the opposite side of the court in a clay match. And Nadal isn't one dimensional when playing a clay. He has the best claycourt records of all time.
I think the FO will play faster than the AO.
Unless it's as sunny and hot at the French Open as it was in 1996, that isn't going to happen. I'm baffled by those saying Plexicushion is slow, when Rebound Ace was slower.
Are you serious? Plexicushion is much slower than Rebound Ace.
Novak utterly bludgeoned Nadal to death on clay in straight sets. The Nadal fans who would tell you that he "declined" are all absolute idiots. Novak made Nadal look bad because clay is the one surface where you can't run and gun your way out of situations with a serve or a big forehand like Nadal did countless of times at the AO.
Clay is a surface where you have to craft points, move your opponent around, utilize the WHOLE court, and just simply play better tennis all around.
Nadal is a one dimensional player, especially on clay. All he can do is play the most phenomenal defensive baseline game of all time. It is still ONE DIMENSIONAL. Djokovic just exposes this, and finds it even easier to do so on clay because Nadal has no opportunities to hit through Djokovic anymore. The last two matches on clay are a testament to this. Nadal had no answer and had no way to hit through Novak.
The Nadal fans who would tell you that he "declined" are all absolute idiots.
And yet the ones that think that a player is in his prime in his 7TH season(2011) dominating that surface(2005-2010) think themselves geniuses.
Nadal loses sets on clay to nr.130 in the world, gets taken to five by Isner in RG, is nearly breadsticked by a guy who made 2 clay finals by 25, has trouble dispatching a 30 year old favorable matchup(even with Nadal being prime/peak and Fed being post prime in this scenario) in the final.
Yup, sounds like prime Nadal on clay. Peak, now that I think about it.
Novak utterly bludgeoned Nadal to death on clay in straight sets. The Nadal fans who would tell you that he "declined" are all absolute idiots. Novak made Nadal look bad because clay is the one surface where you can't run and gun your way out of situations with a serve or a big forehand like Nadal did countless of times at the AO.
Clay is a surface where you have to craft points, move your opponent around, utilize the WHOLE court, and just simply play better tennis all around.
Nadal is a one dimensional player, especially on clay. All he can do is play the most phenomenal defensive baseline game of all time. It is still ONE DIMENSIONAL. Djokovic just exposes this, and finds it even easier to do so on clay because Nadal has no opportunities to hit through Djokovic anymore. The last two matches on clay are a testament to this. Nadal had no answer and had no way to hit through Novak.
Nadal better hope for a hot and dry day where the ball is flying. Thus allowing quicker conditions.
Nadal better hope for a hot and dry day where the ball is flying [on clay]. Thus allowing quicker conditions.
Does anyone see the irony in this! LOL
Yep a lot harder to hit through Djoker on clay. Djokovic is king of all surfaces now but maybe is most vulnerable on a fast court.
And yet the ones that think that a player is in his prime in his 7TH season(2011) dominating that surface(2005-2010) think themselves geniuses.
Nadal loses sets on clay to nr.130 in the world, gets taken to five by Isner in RG, is nearly breadsticked by a guy who made 2 clay finals by 25, has trouble dispatching a 30 year old favorable matchup(even with Nadal being prime/peak and Fed being post prime in this scenario) in the final.
Yup, sounds like prime Nadal on clay. Peak, now that I think about it.
This however isn't given that you claimed Fed was at his peak (so not even merely prime) in 2008-2009 as far as HC(slams) go yet he was on the brink of losing in 3d/4th round in 2008 AO, USO and 2009 AO, also keeping in mind that Janko/Andreev were closer to beating Fed by some margin than Isner was at any point to beating Nadal.
I'm pretty sure I said Fed was still prime in slams until mid 2010(so including 2008,2009), not peak. Federer's peak years ended in 2007.
As far as I remember you claimed Fed didn't decline as far as slams(including HC slams) go in 2008-2009.
Declining from peak level of play is still a decline.
Just as it apparently wasn't outrageous to claim Fed hasn't declined on HC in 2008 and 2009 (heck there are people here who claim Fed still hasn't declined or even that he's playing better than ever) it isn't outrageous to claim Nadal hasn't decline on clay in 2011 either, afterall he did win MC+RG and reached the final in every clay tourney he entered.
The other part of the story is that Djokovic played amazing IMO on clay especially against Nadal. His Rome 2011 Final was possibly the best tennis I saw from him in 2011. Nadal actually didn't play that bad in the Rome final, but still got straight setted. Djokovic (perhaps mindful of the fatigue from the SF against Murray) was on FIRE and just bludgeoned everything Rafa threw at him.
Can Djokovic produce the same level in 2012? I don't think he's played that well since. Sure, if he does, then Nadal's screwed pretty much. But yeah, if Rafa ups his game a little bit he may give Djokovic a run for his money, even if it likely won't be enough to beat him.
Wow..I didnt expect this fom a guy with who has so much knwledge about tennis..i hve seen videos of both rebound ace and plexicusion and plexicusion is hell lot slower then rebound ace..Anything slower then plexicusion surface is be clay..Unless it's as sunny and hot at the French Open as it was in 1996, that isn't going to happen. I'm baffled by those saying Plexicushion is slow, when Rebound Ace was slower.
Who ever moves best with best endurance wins, all else being equal.
No, it isn't. Ask Lleyton Hewitt.
Wow..I didnt expect this fom a guy with who has so much knwledge about tennis..i hve seen videos of both rebound ace and plexicusion and plexicusion is hell lot slower then rebound ace..Anything slower then plexicusion surface is be clay..