MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
People always need to come up with an "If" when Nadal is concerned.
Could Stanimal beat prime Nadal at the FO?
- Thread starter tennis_pro
- Start date
People always need to come up with an "If" when Nadal is concerned.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
3 out of the big 4 were playing well, Delpo was more than solid, Ferrer was still a threat, basically everything besides Fed's terrible year was better then than now. Lendl Murray>>>>Now. 2013 Nadal>>>> now. The top 10 in 2013>>>> now.
zagor
Bionic Poster
Great point about Delpo (I'd love to see the big guy back into the mix even though I don't expect it considering the latest news) but Ferrer? I like the guy but he's never been a threat to the top dogs in his entire career. You can't bring up Ferrer and leave out a guy like Stan that pushed Novak to 5 at AO and beat him in FO final, heck he was one match away from facing him at Wimbledon as well.
Regarding Murray, I agree that he should definitely knock on Lendl's door again before Ivan starts wasting time with Divatrov.
IamGroot
Banned
It's way stronger than 2013. 2013 had a man come back from 7 months off and win tournaments straight away. It also had the number 1 lose in the first round of Wimbledon to a player ranked lower than 100 who was injured. Fed was awful, Novak was choking left and right after the FO. Murray was good but not as consistently strong as this year.
Also, don't give me that hate rubbish. We have discussed this. I don't hate any player. End of story. I'm not gonna respond to you or Rusty anymore regarding tennis. Other stuff, yes. But both of you are way too biased towards Nadal and it clouds your judgement.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
I think Ferrer is definitely worth mentioning as he's easily the best player of the last few years outside of the big 4.
"Have several seats"
Murrayjuannow
Banned
Nadal is carrying a permanent foot injury throughout his whole career and he has been playing with pain all the time and managed to win 14 GS titles.
So, injury can not be an excuse.
Mileage can't be an excuse either. Nadal took 6 months off a year several times and skipped several grand slam matches so he got plenty of time to rest. Also, both of them sleep regularly.
Also, Nadal [29 y.o., turned pro 2001] got beaten by a much older person such as Michael Berrer (35 y.o. turned pro 1999). Mileage is not an excuse.
If mileage is an excuse, then I should beat Nadal because Nadal is more tired than me as he's been playing tennis longer than me.
IamGroot
Banned
It's a fact that 2013 and 2010 in particular had weak fields. End of story. That's a fact and anyone even close to objective can see that. They can try and convince themselves, but they know it's true. Melzer and Youzhy, first round loss to injured Darcis. I would be defensive too.
But Nadal fans can say what they want. The Nole hate is too strong for them to make sense. This year is very strong. The only reason they don't think it is revolves around Nadal getting schooled everywhere.
This thread has gone wayyyyy off topic and is boring so I am leaving and heading to another topic. But enjoyed the laughs and hope they enjoy the rest of 2015
But Nadal fans can say what they want. The Nole hate is too strong for them to make sense. This year is very strong. The only reason they don't think it is revolves around Nadal getting schooled everywhere.
This thread has gone wayyyyy off topic and is boring so I am leaving and heading to another topic. But enjoyed the laughs and hope they enjoy the rest of 2015
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
It's a fact that 2013 and 2010 in particular had weak fields. End of story. That's a fact and anyone even close to objective can see that. They can try and convince themselves, but they know it's true. Melzer and Youzhy, first round loss to injured Darcis. I would be defensive too.
But Nadal fans can say what they want. The Nole hate is too strong for them to make sense. This year is very strong. The only reason they don't think it is revolves around Nadal getting schooled everywhere.
This thread has gone wayyyyy off topic and is boring so I am leaving and heading to another topic. But enjoyed the laughs and hope they enjoy the rest of 2015
K
King Fed WW
Guest
People talking about the strength of 2013. 2015 could be said to be weak but hardly much worse than 2013.
We have to look at it on a tournament by tournament basis.
Delpo had a great year but he didn't play the French Open and was hurt at the US Open (lost R2). So he was strong but not at those two slams. He provided great competition for Nole at Wim 2013. To a lesser extent the same could be said about Murray, he had Lendl but he also skipped the 2013 French Open and wasn't in good shape at the US, he was a threat in Wim and Australia though.
Nadal was very strong but he offered no threat at Wim.
Fed of course was awful in 2013.
Delpo awol in 15. Ferrer declined in 15, but is he really a threat to the big boys ever? If anything he helps them when playing well as he removes more dangerous opponents.
Wawrinka very strong in 2015, esp RG
2015 has the likes of Nishikori and Raonic being a threat. Although the juries remains on how big a threat they are really. But they are certainly stronger that 2013, just like Ferrer is weaker.
We have to look at it on a tournament by tournament basis.
Delpo had a great year but he didn't play the French Open and was hurt at the US Open (lost R2). So he was strong but not at those two slams. He provided great competition for Nole at Wim 2013. To a lesser extent the same could be said about Murray, he had Lendl but he also skipped the 2013 French Open and wasn't in good shape at the US, he was a threat in Wim and Australia though.
Nadal was very strong but he offered no threat at Wim.
Fed of course was awful in 2013.
Delpo awol in 15. Ferrer declined in 15, but is he really a threat to the big boys ever? If anything he helps them when playing well as he removes more dangerous opponents.
Wawrinka very strong in 2015, esp RG
2015 has the likes of Nishikori and Raonic being a threat. Although the juries remains on how big a threat they are really. But they are certainly stronger that 2013, just like Ferrer is weaker.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Murray this year was probably better than 2013 overall. I doubt he'll fade in the second half of the season like 2013 either. Obviously Federer is better this year but Nadal sucks probably worse than Federer did in 2013 at the moment.
Del Potro being gone is a blow for sure though. The #2 Djokovic in 2013 was certainly better than Federer of this year too. I would give the edge to Nadal in terms of competition in 2013 but it's probably not a huge gap when Nadal didn't even play Murray in 2013.
Del Potro being gone is a blow for sure though. The #2 Djokovic in 2013 was certainly better than Federer of this year too. I would give the edge to Nadal in terms of competition in 2013 but it's probably not a huge gap when Nadal didn't even play Murray in 2013.
Rusty Shackleford
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, because a foot fracture that healed years ago is exactly the same as a debilitating back muscle tear that just happened 2 minutes ago. Solid thinking you got there.
Of course, being worn out (especially when people have been predicting your career would not last long due to the physical aspects of your game) after many years playing the tour is no excuse. Right!
Were you the captain of your HS debate team?
To be fair, Novak had a torn rib muscle in the 2011 U.S. open.
Fed's ignorant insult about his "junior trick shot" was the most ignorant thing I've seen. Fed knew he had no business being in the position to brag.
If fed won almost all year and then suffered intense pain, he'd be whining and losing in straights.
In 2013, Novak was severely distracted in June-September. He was really scared of Rafa and still couldn't come to net. He was just going through the motions and choking in 0-40 games.
Fed's ignorant insult about his "junior trick shot" was the most ignorant thing I've seen. Fed knew he had no business being in the position to brag.
If fed won almost all year and then suffered intense pain, he'd be whining and losing in straights.
In 2013, Novak was severely distracted in June-September. He was really scared of Rafa and still couldn't come to net. He was just going through the motions and choking in 0-40 games.
vanioMan
Legend
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
Apparently a certain player ONLY wins a tournament because another player happened to be 'distracted' around the time of that tournament LOL Ive heard it all now. Some people on this forum are ridiculous.
Murrayjuannow
Banned
You said his foot fracture has healed up. Being worn out is not an excuse then. Because tiredness and wear and tear will certainly heal up too.Yeah, because a foot fracture that healed years ago is exactly the same as a debilitating back muscle tear that just happened 2 minutes ago. Solid thinking you got there.
Of course, being worn out (especially when people have been predicting your career would not last long due to the physical aspects of your game) after many years playing the tour is no excuse. Right!
Were you the captain of your HS debate team?
Wawrinka and Nadal started the tournament with the same condition. It is even more impressive that Wawrinka had to beat Djokovic in 5 sets (9-7 in the 5th) and then Berdych in 4 sets before he beat Nadal. Nadal only had a 4 set and a 3 set match before he met Wawrinka. He should have been less tired than Wawrinka. Heck even with a torn muscle Nadal still could manage to get a set of Wawrinka... so injury can not be an excuse: Nadal has proven to the world that we can win while being injured.
If Nadal was so worn out, he shouldn't have jumped up and down during the coin toss or even sprinted like Usain Bolt after the coin toss. Wear and tear is not an excuse.
As for muscle tear, nobody ask him to tear his muscle. It is his own fault, as his forehand technique is tiring but he still prefers to hit forehand with such an arduous style. It is his own fault to wear himself down and it is not an excuse. Tennis players are allowed to learn and play a more relaxed and technically better tennis style which would do good for their body but Nadal did not opt for that. Why play with a tiring technique when you can play with a more relaxed technique that actually can produce more power?
Last edited:
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
No more ignorant than your complete misrepresentation of what Roger actually said after the match. Hilarious that you misquote someone and then grandiloquently proclaim it's the most ignorant thing you've seen.
What Federer said in his post-match presser was, "Just gets the lucky shot at the end, and off you go."
Google it and confirm.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
Talk Tennis Guru
damn that match Mathieu played was awesome, was rooting so hard for him, 4 and half hours for 4 sets! Insane tennis
vanioMan
Legend
Yes, I meant those matches outside of Paris.
At RG - I agree, he faced very few fully zoning players. But Nadal just doesn't allow you to zone. Look at Fed in 06/07/11 or Novak in 12/14. They both zoned for a while (set, set and a half) and still got beaten. Nadal didn't allow them to play their best.
Other matches outside RG are Gulbis in Rome 2010/2013, Ferrer in Rome/Madrid 2013, Hewitt in Hamburg (?) 2007 and Murray in MC 2011.
ImageIsEverything
Rookie
That isnt much better though. As though one of the greatest returners of all time isnt capable of hitting a winner, it must be luck?
TommyA8X
Hall of Fame
So you're saying Nadal played well below his best in the FO/Rome final 2006?
mattosgrant
Banned
Nadal definitely has played better matches all the way through than the 06 French Open final with Federer. He had periods of very poor play in that match.
Rome 2006 he played better than RG IMO, although he has better performances on clay than that too of course. It was probably the very best match Federer has ever played on clay though, no doubt about that, and probably the best match between the two on clay overall.
Rome 2006 he played better than RG IMO, although he has better performances on clay than that too of course. It was probably the very best match Federer has ever played on clay though, no doubt about that, and probably the best match between the two on clay overall.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Out of interest, is there any version of Djokovic that you think could've beaten 2006 Nadal at the French? I think Nadal from that year vs Nole 11/13 could've been very competitive, even at RG.
mattosgrant
Banned
I think the Djokovic of 2011/2013 could have quite possibly beaten any Nadal at RG except 2008, 2012, and maybe 2010. Even in saying that the 2012 Djokovic who was clearly not as good as the 2011 one (atleast on clay) was still competitive and won 7 straight games at one point in the final vs the 2012 NAdal so I guess outside of 2008 there would still be an outside shot.
That isnt to say neccessarily would have. 2006 or 2007 Nadal vs 2011/2013 Djokovic probably could go either way and would depend alot on momentum going in (eg- who prevailed in 1 or 2 close matches prior to gain some momentum and mental edge). I dont even think Nadal those years was that different than the 2011 Nadal who Djokovic dominated though.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, I agree (and said as much as well) - was just curious if there actually were a multitude of zoning players I had overlooked.
The mental part probably prevented both Fed and Djoko from zoning as well. Knowing how well they need to play to beat Rafa there and how hard it is to keep that up for long enough - as well as the effect of the many beatings on Fed in particular.
Rusty Shackleford
G.O.A.T.
You make no sense. A bone fracture can easily be healed in a 18 year old body. As someone ages, "healing" becomes more difficult, because "healing", at its core, involves cellular mitosis, and cellular mitosis is one of the most severely disrupted biological processes in aging organisms. Also, "tiredness" is not the same as a bone fracture.
All I said is that it's quite possible Nadal didn't win AO 04 simply because he was injured. You can't disprove this.
Props to Wawrinka for winning, however. Not that I particularly enjoyed his nasty tirade to the umpire when Nadal took the MTO, but whatever. He won it fair and square. Just because your opponent is injured, it doesn't mean you should throw the match away.
Rusty Shackleford
G.O.A.T.
Nadal in 2013 at RG wasn't even close to his best, and Nole still lost.
Djokovic is being made out to be better than he is because these days he is basically competing against old and injured men.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Nadal in 2007 had arguably his 3rd or 4th best year on clay...look at his dominance/ratio that year and his percentage of service games and return games one. It's right up there.
mattosgrant
Banned
Fair enough. How would you rank Nadal's years on clay. I consider 2012 his 2nd best behind 2008 and a subpar Djokovic still was competitive and won 7 straight games at one point in the RG final.
I just dont find 2011 Nadal horrible on clay like some people, although it was definitely not 2008 esque. I just dont find it that different than many of his other prime years on clay. Horrible is like Nadal of 2015, now it would make total sense then.
I just dont find 2011 Nadal horrible on clay like some people, although it was definitely not 2008 esque. I just dont find it that different than many of his other prime years on clay. Horrible is like Nadal of 2015, now it would make total sense then.
Murrayjuannow
Banned
Oh come on, are you saying tiredness is more difficult to heal than bone fracture? Is Nadal now tired permanently as he is old?
Nadal is not the only one who is aging and tired. Everyone else is aging and worn down too. A lot of them do not take 6 months vacations like Nadal did. Wawrinka is aging too and he is older than Nadal.
All these injury and mileage excuses is just embarrassing.
A 35 y.o. Berrer beating Nadal proves that mileage is not an excuse. Hewitt beating a young Kazakhstan recently proves that mileage is not an excuse. Hewitt had so many surgeries (compared to Nadal) and he even beat Federer on a hardcourt final last year.
Just think:
Wawrinka won, because he hit the forehand and especially backhand bigger and flatter than Nadal. Wawrinka did not give Nadal a lot of easy slow balls to handle. Wawrinka did not give Nadal time. Wawrinka hit such a powerful flat backhand that made Nadal tear his muscle while trying to counter punch it with his defensive, loopy, open stance forehand.
Nadal lost, because he was too defensive and let Wawrinka be the attacker.
At the end of the day, tennis matches statistic does not provide detailed analysis of a player's medical condition for every match they win or lose. It simply shows detailed score, time, serves, unforced errors, break points, winners, aces and so on. It simply does not give consolation points for being injured or being tired. It does not state the percentage of each player's physical condition or even mental condition. If you arrive on court and play, you are ready to battle, no excuses.
However well researched or explained the injury of a player is, it will not change the end result of the match.
A win is a win. A loss is a loss. The only exception is in the Olympics.... if athletes are found to be doping, their victory will be erased and their medal is taken away from them.
I can't imagine a tennis match ended by the umpire saying: game, set and match, 100% healthy Wawrinka 35.5% healthy Nadal.
Last edited:
Rusty Shackleford
G.O.A.T.
No, I actually I agree with most of what you said.
But saying that "Nadal would have probably won AO2014 if he hadn't been injured" is not a contradiction to any of what you say.
And no, Berrer doesn't have the mileage Nadal has. Very few people have Nadal's mileage. I'm guessing Federer does, and also Ferrer.
Murrayjuannow
Banned
Well well, Federer has similar mileage as Nadal you said and Federer is much much more older than Nadal.
How come with this kind of mileage Federer beat Nadal in 2012?
Federer's career Singles win/loss = 1036–234 (81.57%)
Nadal's career Singles win/loss = 739–150 (83.13%)
Which shows, Federer has played more matches than Nadal has. Yet Federer managed to beat Nadal in 2012.
Mileage is not an excuse.
Last edited:
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
Talk Tennis Guru
Also what mileage does not say is how the players train and practice outside the courts, Nadal was always said to practice very intense off the court, probably doesn't help when you get older.
I am no Nadal but if I was him I would have been really happy to win 12 slams and retire when still young to enjoy my retirement (or do something else outside tennis)
I am no Nadal but if I was him I would have been really happy to win 12 slams and retire when still young to enjoy my retirement (or do something else outside tennis)
Murrayjuannow
Banned
I have read a player was interviewed about his experience of practising with Federer regularly in Dubai...I remember he said Federer was always hitting it hard during hitting sessions with him.
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
Talk Tennis Guru
I have heard many times Federer is more relaxed and doesn't practice long, maybe he hits hard but will hit for like 45 minutes or so. Gasquet a few month ago I think went to train in Spain with Nadal and was very impressed (well it's Gasquet
)
Rusty Shackleford
G.O.A.T.
Obviously, Nadal has a soft spot in his heart for Federer. If you were Nadal, wouldn't you let the old man win one or two relatively unimportant matches to make him feel better about himself?
Rusty Shackleford
G.O.A.T.
Yes, but look at the results of that training! Wimbledon SF!I have heard many times Federer is more relaxed and doesn't practice long, maybe he hits hard but will hit for like 45 minutes or so. Gasquet a few month ago I think went to train in Spain with Nadal and was very impressed (well it's Gasquet
Murrayjuannow
Banned
Oh now you are being ridiculous.
moonballs
Hall of Fame
Nadal is the dominant champion? He got beaten 0:7 right after his three slam year and that is the opposite of dominance. He is the most dominant No2 overall and most dominant on clay.It's Djokovic's fault that Stan has peaked. Djokovic isn't a dominant champion like Fed and Nadal were.
Rusty Shackleford
G.O.A.T.
Nadal had a bad 2011, compounded by Djokovic's great 2011. Nobody argues Djokovic was dominant in 2011.
2012? Nadal was really within a whisker of taking the AO. Then, the second half he was off injured. 2013 is history.
As for 2014 and beyond, Djokovic is reaping the success afforded by having as his main opponents an old man father of four and a Nadal at an all-time low.
