To rest his knees, Nadal may not play Indian Wells...shocker?
- Thread starter cluckcluck
- Start date
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
makes more sense to play Miami if he does skip one of them I guess. Federer is not playing Miami, meaning Nadal would be 4th seed instead of 5. Imagine the crap he will get if he plays an exhibition match though? But it is only one match, not a whole tournament, and it would be a little warm up on HC, so maybe not a bad idea.
Fearsome Forehand
Professional
This is reminiscent of Muster. He avoided hard courts because they were so hard on his bad knee and racked up most of his points on clay.
Last edited:
mariecon
Hall of Fame
He's only allowed to skip one Masters but he's already alluded to the fact that he might skip both so if he does, what kind of penalty will he face? I've never heard of a player actually being penalised for skipping a mandatory tournament without a valid excuse. It seems they say they're injured and that's all it takes.
As far as penalty for skipping one, or two in this case for Rafa, it just means that rather than 19 tournaments counting to your ranking, only 18 can. So if rafa played 19 tournaments this year for say 11500 points in total, then the win last week, as a non mandatory, may be the one that wouldnt count. so 11250 instead.
is that right?
is that right?
Clay lover
Legend
Might as well skip IW and try to win Miami since he hasn't won there before.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Moo-point until we're actually at the event. We all know he's going to flip flop like 20x before committing to a decision.
Murrayfan31
Hall of Fame
To rest his knees, he should avoid those slippery surfaces. Like in Brazil. lol
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Multiple facepalm.
RAFA2005RG
Banned
Rightly so. He is only just starting to feel comfortable on the tennis court. It would be a mistake, medically speaking, to expose it to hardcourts so soon after returning. He's not doing anything questionable by skipping the hardcourt events.
RAFA2005RG
Banned
This was scheduled a long time ago, at a time when he expected to play the Australian Open. Not sure what you mean by strange. He can always back out. But if he does play, its not like he has to do much running. These events are always very light-hearted hit-and-miss deals.
Rogael Naderer
Semi-Pro
Exhibition match = Light practice session, with less intense movement.
Fearsome Forehand
Professional
He could do what many do, what Sampras did at times, show up and lose in the first or second round, then go home early and rest for the majors.
If his knee still hurts he won't want to play too many hardcourt events due to the stress they will put on it.
I am a big Rafa fan but I worry a bit about the knee talk for months to come. He has just come back so it will be a focus at the moment but I wouldn't like to be going into RG with the talk still about his knee.
Hopefully he has turned a corner and will get back to his best over the coming months but if not it will be unfair to always focus on his knee problems if he loses.
I am a big Rafa fan but I worry a bit about the knee talk for months to come. He has just come back so it will be a focus at the moment but I wouldn't like to be going into RG with the talk still about his knee.
Hopefully he has turned a corner and will get back to his best over the coming months but if not it will be unfair to always focus on his knee problems if he loses.
underground
G.O.A.T.
Until Nadal actually plays on hard courts, or face against the top players on clay, his 'amazing' 'the impossible' comeback as *******s suggest still needs a huge asterisk next to it.
RAFA2005RG
Banned
But the only tournament that matters is Roland Garros. The other slams are almost irrelevant. It is a mere bonus if Nadal wins the others. Roland Garros is all that matters. And Roland Garros is Djokovic's top priority too. And by the way, if Nadal's parents didn't split up in 2009, Federer would also deem Roland Garros as the top priority. Its all about Roland Garros. In other words, hardcourts are meaningless.
McLovin
Legend
Bingo! Agassi was also famous for that.
However, he can't 'tank' as they'll fine him for that. So he would have to go out and put on a good show, but just not play smart.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Or, he can start losing matches, because he is getting old, and, as he loses speed, more and more players will be able to beat him.
batz
G.O.A.T.
I thought Rafa's excuse for losing to Soderling was his knees?
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
No, it won't. He's still won the 4 slams, something that very few players have achieved. And winning slams for 9 consecutive years would be a unique record.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
If at all he wins FO and sucks at others, even if he gets up to 15 majors, it will be a huge gap with respect to Fed, who has such a diverse beautiful resume. But he can be at the level of Sampras.
RAFA2005RG
Banned
Nadal is the only man in world history to win slams on clay, grass and hardcourt in a Calendar Year. It is the most difficult feat a player has ever achieved in a Calendar Year. Also, Nadal has dominated one slam event more than any man has ever dominated a slam event, and that slam event is Roland Garros - Nadal has won it 7 times from 8 attempts. To give you an idea of how special that is, Federer needed 14 attempts to win 7 Wimbledons. Additionally, Nadal is currently tied for the most Masters Shields Titles, and is also tied for the most consecutive slam-winning years. He can take both of those outright. Also, Nadal has spent 102 weeks with the number one ranking, just for good measure, and has finished the year ranked number one in 2008 and 2010. Nadal has won 81 straight matches on clay, the single-surface record. Yet you call all this "a CV sorely lacking" :lol:
RAFA2005RG
Banned
Federer is not the king of any of the slams. None. The Australian Open leadership is shared by Agassi, Djokovic and Federer. Roland Garros is owned by Nadal, outright. Wimbledon is shared by Sampras and Federer. US Open is shared by several. The only GOAT of a slam event is Nadal. The others are shared. That's a big hole in Federer's CV, the fact he doesn't own a slam event. Also, Nadal has won at least 2 slams on clay, grass and hardcourt. Federer hasn't. Another big hole in the Federer CV. Federer almost doesn't even have the Career Grand Slam. Nadal gifted him that in 2009, as we know Federer would never have beaten Nadal at Roland Garros.
sillymonkey
Hall of Fame
Change the thread title to "wild speculation".
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
I said that if Nadal is now only going to excel on clay that 'his CV will become sorely lacking", so you've just invented a quotation from me that is entirely false.
Bizarre!
Bizarre!
Last edited:
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
The other way of looking at this is that Nadal is a brilliant clay courter who couldn't achieve the same level on other surfaces in slams.
Borg's six FOs and five Ws is better than seven FOs and two Ws.
Borg's six FOs and five Ws is better than seven FOs and two Ws.
Last edited:
Mainad
Bionic Poster
He already has 2 IW titles (2007 & 2009) so he may be thinking that if he has to skip one of them it may as well be the one he has already won twice and play the one he is yet to win ie. Miami (3 losing finals in 2005, 2008 & 2011).
Mainad
Bionic Poster
That's an odd way of putting it. Currently, Federer is the king of 2 of the Slams ( Wimbledon 7 titles & USO 5 titles) and joint king of one other (AO 4 titles). No other active player can match him in that regard. That makes him the present day king of three quarters of the Slams. Of the other multi-Slam winners, Nadal is only king of one (RG) while Djokovic is only joint-king of one (AO)!
Well, Nadal wasn't good enough to get past Soderling that year and Soderling was comfortably taken out by Federer in the final so if Soderling had choked away his match with Nadal (lesser players have been known to do that) and Nadal had struggled through to the final, he may not have had enough in the tank to beat Federer on that occasion. Soderling may actually have done Nadal a favour that year and inadvertently helped him preserve his unbroken record in RG finals!
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
RAFA2005RG banned? shocker!!!!
Tropikal_Knights
Banned
Now this is a new one......trying to define who is the GOAT of various slams......Mildly amusing if it was not so silly.....
Anyways as for Nadal how is it a shocker when he is on record recently saying that hard courts are a killer for his knees?
As for the various surfaces....I think there is no argument......
The only reason is the favorable matchup of nadals vs fed otherwise he would not have a winning record against him nor won a couple of slam finals against him such as the aussie open and wimby.....
Basically he would have retired with like one wimby, no aussie opens and like 12 french opens.......history will regard him as the ultimate competitor, battle hardened with a never say die attitude.
the only problem for him and the fall of him was the rise of another slugger who had the same attributes only tenfold more in Lance.
Anyways as for Nadal how is it a shocker when he is on record recently saying that hard courts are a killer for his knees?
As for the various surfaces....I think there is no argument......
The only reason is the favorable matchup of nadals vs fed otherwise he would not have a winning record against him nor won a couple of slam finals against him such as the aussie open and wimby.....
Basically he would have retired with like one wimby, no aussie opens and like 12 french opens.......history will regard him as the ultimate competitor, battle hardened with a never say die attitude.
the only problem for him and the fall of him was the rise of another slugger who had the same attributes only tenfold more in Lance.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Tweet him for a refund.
Goosehead
Legend
it was always a big chance he wouldnt play indian wells on HC..playing 3 tourneys in 4 weeks after 7months off is plenty..he needs to give his body a rest.
Antonio Puente
Hall of Fame
Here's yet another way of looking at it: The guy has won everything. He has a Career Golden Slam. Nadal is only one of two players, I believe, with at least two slams on all three surfaces. I would say that is well-rounded enough. Nadal is so dominant on clay that people forget these things. In an odd way, by some(mainly Americans with their anti-clay mentality), he is penalized for his dominance.
Last edited:
N
Nathaniel_Near
Guest
World history, man, I love it. World history...
cluckcluck
Hall of Fame
Considering he wins all tournaments he enters. He's also got points to defend from 2012. So adding new points might not be as easy as one thinks.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Winning the career Grand Slam is not enough?
Okay, but he's still won 2 Wimbledons, an Australian Open, a US Open, 2 Canadian Opens, 2 Indian Wells, and a Madrid Indoor. And his dominance on clay is extraordinary, with 7 French Opens, 8 Monte Carlos, 6 Italian Opens, a Hamburg, a Madrid, many other clay-court titles etc. He also has an Olympic gold medal, and 3 Davis Cup triumphs (4 if you count 2008, when he missed the final).
Yes, but the one negative with Borg's career is no US Open title.
Similar threads
