Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by joeri888, Mar 9, 2012.
na, just find it annoying that Nadal does the same damn thing over, and over, and over.
I think Feds game is great but my own personal attitude in life has always been to admire the folks who look like they were not blessed with all the skills but yet fought their way through. There's no doubt a champion like Fed is extremely hard working too but the very ' lazy elegance' that draws people to him is not endearing to me. Fed is like James bond, always cool and collected, everything under control. What attracts me to folks with games like rafa and djokovic is sort of the rockyesque attitude - the willingness to keep taking blows but standing up until the opponent has bowed to your will.
And for the record, just like it is irritating to hear Rafa fans make generalizations like ' everyone loves Rafas humility' it is equally irrititating to hear SOME ( see how to avoid generalizations?) fed fans claim that any real tennis fan loves Feds game.
Agree with your last sentence.
What I don't agree with is how people seem to think Nadal has no talent and just worked extremely hard. Dude has INSANE amounts of talent. Just working hard is NOT going to get you to the top of the tennis world.
Oh definitely , I think it's important to remember that these assessments are somewhat relative to the highest standards. Fed is insanely hard working and nadal is insanely talented. But in just comparing the two it might be fair to say that fed is the more talented and Rafa is the more hardworking one.
Both Fed and Nadal require talent and hard working to be where they are right now. But...
Rafa's achievements were due to his hard working, more than his talent. For Fed it's the other way around because he's more talented than Rafa.
Or have a losing H2H against Nadal
Well since Nadal doesn't count as a man, it's not really a big deal to have a losing h2h against him since he shouldn't be on tour anyway.
Delete post lol
You said they hate his game yet not his style? Please explain the difference. I said they hate his game so you seem to agree with me.
how do you figure that?
Rafa has a grinding game that is based on retrieving every ball possible
Fed's is an attacking game that is based on hitting winners and ending the point at the first possible opportunity.
One appears harder working because his game is designed to be that way.
Plus it takes more unique and revolutionary talent to play the shots Nadal plays. Federer basically just copied the textbook.
On top of that, Nadal is right-handed and relearned tennis with his left-hand.
And how many players have mastered the textbook?
dont bother with this guy. roflmao.
yes, Rafa revolutionized moonballing to the next level.
Probably a thousand. But of course, most of them make more unforced errors than Federer (though Federer makes an awful lot of unforced errors anyway).
sage words my friend.
Yeah, I should probably stop. But I have one more question for him.
Do you play tennis?
Rafa didn't relearn anything. He played two handed and decided to use a lefty forehand LOL.
does making an unforced error immediately mean you lose a match if you do it? because if not, who cares?
Federer has been more successful than Nadal with his game... so if i have to make alot of unforced errors to get 16 majors instead of making few errors to get 10.. no thinking needed. I'll take the 16
Do you play tennis, Bullzilla? Because you'll realize that there's different strokes, playing styles, and approaches to tennis for different people.
You'd probably be surprised that I play more like Nadal than Federer , with steady and consistent play until i get a window to go for a bigger shot, because I can't hit someone off the court; but if I could have a choice between Rafa's game and Fed's game, it'd be Fed's, no doubt.
Actually they both do the same damn thing over and over otherwise Fed wouldn't be abused.
I dunno, I find that flaw on his BH side only thing I "hate" about his game.
Oh I wasn't referring to effort during the match but rather to the prep hours put in. I may be wrong but many reports/ commentators talk about how intense and long Rafas training sessions are compared to other players and how he is out practicing even after just finishing a match while most other players take time off.
Nadal doesn't know his right from his left.
I think you have Rafa confused for George W Bush
LOL..... He wrote the new edition of the textbook. You think it's a coincidence that players began improving all aspects of their game after watching him?
If Rafa could have a choice between his game and Federer's it would be Federer's. I can't see how people can say they don't want Federer's game. It's sort of like asking people would you rather have Shaqs game(an extremely effective one) or an elegant game like Kobe's? Nadal will be remembered for his incredible athleticism and Federer will be remembered for pulling amazing shots that most would only try on a practice court like that one insane forehand in the 2004 USO final where Federer hit it ridiculously short and it double bounced before Hewitt could get it.
'...like that one insane forehand in the 2004 USO final where Federer hit it ridiculously short and it double bounced before Hewitt could get it.'
Heh heh, I know the point. It was a brilliant shot.
I can't remember.
I hate Fed's game AT TIMES cause my heart is usually in my mouth.
Whew, was curious and found it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfb2PDlIc3o&t=6m32s
Where is the proof of that? All we've seen in the last 10 years is fewer and fewer players coming to the net. Federer virtually gave up on serve-volley/net-charging when Hewitt owned him. The only way for Federer to beat Hewitt was by sticking to the baseline. It worked, but Federer decided to stay at the baseline vs everyone else too. If only we had Goran, Sampras and Rafter in the last 10 years....
Nadal is the revolutionary of the 21st century. Nadal is the player who lifted tennis to a level beyond anything we've seen before. The physicality Nadal brought to tennis has changed it forever. Just ask Agassi. And of course we've never seen a forehand like Nadal's lasso forehand. Though nobody will be able to copy that. Nadal's backhand running passing shots are unmatched today, another example of pushing tennis to the physical limits. And Djokovic followed him to those limits and they will push each other to even greater levels over the coming years.
Nadal will be remembered for his incredible athleticism AND his amazing shots. Like this one against Fed at this year's AO:
Or this running FDTL against Berdych:
Or this banana shot against Kholschreiber:
Or this forehand against Verdasco:
I could go through YouTube and find hundreds of amazing, insane shots from Nadal just as you could find many from Federer. Those of you who refuse to acknowledge Nadal's fabulous tennis playing ability and incredible shots are just being petty and spiteful. It doesn't matter if you prefer Federer's style and I prefer Nadal's but you should at least try to be fair and realistic about the fact that Nadal is an absolutely marvelous tennis player too.
best Nadal shot EVER. tops Fed in every way possible.
Have to agree, I always considered Nadal to be one of the best shotmakers on tour despite his grinder mentality. His actual talent is underrated IMO, even among a number of his fans.
Unlikely. Maybe jealous people.
Logic is not one of your strong suits, is it.
WHY do you think Nadal took the game to the level he did? There was a guy named FEDERER in his way..it's long been discussed that rafa would've been number 1 for a longer period of time had Federer not had such a stranglehold on the ranking... and Nadal had to continually work at raising his game until it was finally good enough to take number 1 from Fed in 2008. No fed, he has no one to chase from 2006 on, and so who's to say he raises his game to the levels of 2008? No reason to assume he'd have been able to if he was already number 1, as we've seen both times he's BEEN number one he overplays and burns himself out trying to hold it.
But, I suspect you'll say that even though he was clearly raising his level to match Federer's, that Federer somehow didn't make that happen by being the most dominant number 1 in history.
Or some other BS about it being a weak field despite Rafa being unable to dominate it himself.
Federer was only 'in Nadal's way' on grass. And Nadal had only played 4 grassccourt matches before 2006, so it was no surprise :lol:
Nadal only ever lost 1 match on outdoor hardcourts to Federer. And dominated Federer on clay. So Federer wasn't 'in Nadal's way'. Nadal began his career even more physical than he plays today. It had nothing to do with Federer. If Federer never came along, Nadal would still have been reliant on brilliant athleticism. Would still be using a lasso forehand etc.
Uh, yeah. congratulations on stating the obvious. You still didn't address the fact that in order to be number one/win wimbledon, Nadal's two greatest goals, he had to go through Federer AT Wimbledon, which he didn't do until 2008.
He would probably have beaten anyone BUT Federer in 2007 Wimbledon, but because Federer was in the way, he had to raise his level further to take what he wanted most.
Or don't you understand that? LOL.
You ignore my point, that Nadal revolutionized the game more than anyone, because of his physicality. Nadal didn't "UP" his physicality to beat Federer at Wimbledon. Nadal had that physicality from the beginning. All Nadal did different in 2008 was learn how to play on grass. He couldn't learn with just 2 years of experience obviously. So the qualities that made Nadal special, his physical game, would have existed regardless of whether Federer was born or not.
Uh, again, No. There's been PLENTY of guys who focused heavily on the physical aspect of the game before Nadal. He didn't 'revolutionize' anything. Except that silly reverse forehand.
not such a big "revolution"- Connors did that already.
no, clueless. He didn't revolutionize game through his physicality. The likes of borg, vilas, lendl, muster etc did it MUCH before him - they knew and did play physical game as and when required !
how strange that Bulzilla is so resembling to King of Aces...
Funny post actually. Those that truly hate Fed's game also hate the Beatles. Even though both are GOAT and the haters must recognize that none before or after will be as great/influential/remembered.
I'm not a personal fan of Fed, but his game is pure grace.
Agreed. To pretend Nadal doesn't make amazing gets and only moonballs is beyond inane.
Nadal was at a level to beat Fed when they first met on a tennis court and at that time he was a strict clay courter. He raised his game to elevate his game to other surfaces. How has Nadal emulated anything from Federer. He has his own unique style since the day he came onto the scene.
Federer has been one of the most dominant #1's in history, but from the time Nadal came on the scene he has been unique, and still is.
Did you forget that Nadal had no experience on grass and still took sets against Federer in his infancy? The third time was the charm in the 2008 final, the greatest match ever. That was once he gained the experience.
Surely, you can see that. .
I didn't say Nadal emulated federer, but rather was forced to raise his game to be number 1. I didn't say he had to raise his game to beat Fed, since obviously he was doing it right from the get go, but rather he had to match Federer's overall level of play against the field in order to become number one; my point was that because of how dominant Federer was, Nadal had to chase him for a longer period than anyone else in history *hence the longest period of time at number 2 ever.
I recognize Nadal has a unique game, but I'd say the only thing he's really revolutionized is being able to defend all day long, but also be able to turn that defense immediately to attack, something only Djokovic currently does better.
But bullzilla constantly claimed Nadal's physicality is revolutionary, which is simply not true, as you've got guys like Borg, Lendl and Agassi who all focused tremendously on being at the absolute maximum level of fitness.
But Nadal had to raise his game to overtake Federer, because Federer himself had raised the bar to a new level by being so dominant, and so Nadal, who probably wouldve been number one by summer of 07 if he was in a race with anyone OTHER than Federer, was forced to work extremely hard to get the two things he wanted most, namely the top ranking and Wimbledon.
That's why I believe Rafa may never have become as good of a player as he is without Federer, and this is the point I was trying to make.
too much logic in that post. Not allowed on TTW :mrgreen:
Separate names with a comma.