Extensive online interview with Nalbandian by H. de La Peña, translation and transcription by me. Excerpts.

[I get cramps]

1)

Horacio De La Peña - You have tennis information that very few people have. How on earth did you manage to know so much about the game?

Nalbandian - To know so much stuff?

HDLP - I will tell you things and examples, and you will say to me if you knew about them by chance, by instinct, because they crossed your mind, because one day you grabbed the grip one way and you felt comfortable or you knew how you should organise your shots? The number of things I saw you do that you did better than your peers surprised me.

Nalbandian: Even though you coached me as a kid for a year and a half, I was in your house.

HDLP - Look, one of the anecdotes from https://www.atptour.com/en/players/franco-squillari/s568/overview that I tell has its roots in the day we met you. You were coming with your brother, and I told him, "Look, before I tell anyone anything about his tennis, I need to feel his ball. I first trained with Totó [Franco Squillari's nickname]...

Nalbandian: And you were coaching Totó at that time? I don't remember that.

HDLP - I was coaching Totó and Gaudio. I was in the middle of a hitting session with them. They were two of the guys who, in ‘brick dust,’ hit the ball the hardest...

Nalbandian - Totó's [Squillari] forehand, especially [Albert Costa can attest to this].

HDLP - Right, and on the backhand side, Gaston's ball was hard. We finished the hitting session, and you and I played alone. Then I go to lunch with them, and I tell them: ‘Do you know that this pendejo hits the ball hard?’ And they both started to make fun of me; they laughed, ‘No! After a few weeks of the three of us training with you, Franco says to me: ‘Pulga [Horacio's nickname], there's one thing that's pissing me off. We've been training with you for over two years, and I've volleyed a million times the way you ask me to, and I'm still having too much trouble getting it right. Well, this kid [David N] just came in and is doing whatever he wants to do with the volley with no effort. How the hell does he do it?

Nalbandian: (Smiling) You mean that flat volley you were infatuated with, or what else are we talking about?

HDLP - That one! (They both laugh).

Nalbandian: What happens to me, or used to happen to me, with tennis was that things came to me effortlessly. You would tell me: ‘Develop this skill or do these drills.’ I felt and understood the execution of what I was told as something natural for me: the shots. Except for a skill that required me to have some confidence to perform, I would practice and incorporate what I saw. The same thing happened to me when reading my opponents to see how to play them.

HDLP - What does someone who wants to be a professional tennis player need? Of all the skills a tennis player can have, please rank them in order of importance to start being a professional. Coria told me there are seventeen different skills (Horacio laughs).

Nalbandian: Yes..., but in our game, you have a technical deficiency, and you don't get where you want to go. I mean, you have to have too many planets aligned correctly to be able to play tennis professionally. The jump from junior to pro is the hardest. I would stay with a few skills to start and then go on. First of all, you need to possess a very high competitive mentality. If you don't have that mentality in juniors, you can win many matches despite that; playing against professional tennis players, you can't because they don't give anything away.

Ball quality is essential because, at that age, you can have very good ball quality and not be consistent. Consistency can be achieved gradually; however, if you don't have ball quality at that age, it will be very difficult to acquire it later. You need ball quality when you are 16, 17, or, at the latest, 18. That will determine whether you get there or not.

HDLP - I always tell the kids: ‘You have to have a weapon that stands out from the average...

Nalbandian - They will have no way to make it to the pros. You'll be one of 20,000 tennis players in the world. It's mathematical.

HDLP - I was pretty surprised by the match I saw you play against Chapu [if I'm not mistaken, Chapu is Marcelo Charpentier] in the semis [it was 1999]...

Nalbandian - I don't remember anything about that match.

HDLP - I remember the match for you now. You lost against Chapu in a very even third set [it was a semis match played in a Future tournament in Argentina]. El Chapu then [1999] was like Rambo for you. He hit the ball very hard, and he was mad as a hatter...

Nabaldian - His ranking in Argentina was one of the best.

HDLP - And El Chapu was weird because he liked making beautiful points. He didn't think they should count on the scoreboard if they weren't attractive. He would win a point and say: ‘We'll play it again because the crowd didn't celebrate the play.’ I loved him. I was watching you and asked myself: ‘How can an 18-year-old kid dare to play one of the best forehands in Argentina at the time? How did you come up with the idea of attacking his forehand?

Nalbandian: Tactically, why go to his forehand?

HDLP - But you used to look for the forehand of Chapu, Federer, Fernando Gonzalez, Grosjean, and the forehand of... You were never afraid to look for the better shot of your opponent!

Nalbandian - It's straightforward, and I think we talked about it once or twice when I was a kid. If you don't hit a very good shot to the natural court side of your opponent's best shot, they start to cover too much court without hitting their not-so-good shot. If you hit that first damaging shot to the side of their best shot, you can play them in that little bit of court space so they don't have control of the point being played.

With that first damaging shot, I have enough space to attack their backhands, both DTL and crosscourt, So... It is impossible to dodge the great shots of the great players. So you don't have a choice; you always have to try, as I mentioned, to make that court space bigger so that they have to hit as many times as possible with their not-so-good shot-

 

[Galvermegs]

Nalbandian in form made baseline tennis look easy. Point construction and anticipation there onscreen to help many a budding junior.

I dont know if the conversation covered davids serve as he probably would be all aware that held him back from greater success. If he had even a connors/hewitt/agassi serve it would be a big boost.
That said he is the last argentian man to make a wimbledon final, and really was equally worthy of the us open in 2003 so it speaks volumes how much power he had off the ground.

 

[I get cramps]

2)

Nalbandian - So you have to face their better shots many times.

For example, if the guy has a bad backhand, I will find it two or three times in a row, but if one of those two or three consecutive shots of mine to his backhand, cross-court, or DTL is not good, the guy will run around his backhand. So, instead of going for a winner with my first shot, I prefer to hit an excellent shot to his forehand. If I execute that first shot well, everything I hit on my side of the court, he will have to hit it with a backhand, unless it's Rafa moving incredibly, in which case he'll hit a forehand again.

So, if you are confident as the point progresses, you hit to his forehand. You can even hit to his forehand and go to the net because he won't be able to hit accurately enough to an excellent passing shot or make you volley uncomfortably.

What you tell me is logical for a professional tennis player, but for a 17-year-old kid? El Chapu hit his forehand almost as hard as Squillari, and you received his ball like candy.

Nalbandian - I don't remember the match with Chapu. Still, the approach is very similar to what I would do later, even with Rafa Nadal, because my backhand held very well against the best forehands, preventing them from taking me out of position. With my backhand, I could easily handle the forehands of the left-handers because I always tried to take the ball on the rise. They fed me pace to attack them, and I didn't have to lose position going backward.

HDLP - You grip the racket's handle with such force that every time you touch the ball, you move the tip of the racket very well, no matter what ball you receive or who is hitting it. Who taught you to grip the racket with such strength?

Nalbandian - It helped me to start playing on cement [Spanish speakers say cement as often as hard court], where you are forced to develop better timing and acceleration than strength. To build strength, we have clay. As for timing, they hardly taught me anything; I always had perfect timing. I rarely shank balls, and of course, I had a good feeling with the ball...

HDLP - I was surprised your racket never hit the ball on the same line. You always hit the ball on the rise at the right angle, you lifted the racket controlling the height you were looking for, and when you had the ball under control, you let the ball go, and it fell in. You had so much power in the rotation of your upper body. When you were in the backhand position, you could get four inside-out forehand balls and return them cross-court, and if you suddenly got a rocket offset forehand, you would hit DTL, and your opponent would stare at you in amazement.

Nalbadian - To do that and have it do damage, think about when your opponent isn't expecting the change of direction for a while.

HDLP - I have 48 years of tennis, and you have to understand, S*B, that I have seen very few people do that [Horacio de La Peña turned pro in 1984].

To mention something, you would hit a first serve to Federer's backhand, and 99 percent of the players worldwide would prepare to send Roger's return to his backhand. Well, as soon as Roger took a step, you would play to his forehand. He would hit it hard, and you would find his backhand. Because he was on the run, he couldn't do much with the ball, and you would find his forehand again.

Nabaldian - I did it to create space to play.

HDLP—Yeah, but if I told someone I was coaching to imitate that pattern when he gets the first rocket from Federer, he chickens out and looks for cover. He hits Roger's backhand and runs around it, and my student will die.

Nalbandian - You know your opponent's strengths and weaknesses. Federer started his career with a very weak backhand. He played a lot of slices at the beginning of his career. Over time, he found consistency and began to change directions. Then I thought, "If he scores points by serving wide and then hitting a forehand to the other side, I will be unperturbed, but when the ball is in play, I cannot lose the point." Otherwise, I will never beat him. So, if I have time and can take it away from him on the side of his forehand, I cannot miss that chance. I would not hit to his forehand side if I knew that I would not be able to do it with the depth and the weight of the shot and the angle and then go for his backhand. I was focused on winning 90 percent of those points because otherwise, there's no way to beat these guys. And, of course, I have to put as much pressure on his backhand as possible, but I have to put even more pressure on his forehand side because otherwise, I don't have the space to play against him.

HDLP - It's hard for them to understand when you teach teenagers why you must create space to do what you're talking about or hit a drop shot.

Nalbandian: Look, I think there are many things you don't understand, so to speak. You know them. Even with all the coaches and players explaining things or game situations...

HDLP - Did you steal things from everybody?

Nalbandian—From everybody. No coach doesn't know something that you can't incorporate, and indeed, not all of them are geniuses.

I always thought the tennis court was huge, so you must make your opponent see it even bigger. The guy will hardly move if I repeat directions with my shots. I understood that after hitting a good shot to force my opponent from his comfortable positions on the court, I had to hit another one to keep him in constant motion. Why? First, I need to create disorientation and uncertainty about where I will hit my next shot and put as much fatigue in him as possible.

When I felt tired, I thought, "How's he going to be physically if he's running a lot more than I am?" You can't afford to let your opponents hit stationary, so you have to vary the depths, angles, directions, and heights.

If the opponent is very good, he will hurt you, so you cannot repeat the same shot. He'll put you on the run if you repeat that very good shot. If I hit a crosscourt forehand and have to hit another forehand immediately, it should at least be to the short angle...

HDLP - Don't play too close to the baseline when dictating the play to punish your opponent so that you don't miss a shot and interrupt the punishment.

Nalbandian - A mistake I see a lot is changing direction when the player is not confident or hitting a shot that he either doesn't know or doesn't think he knows. The DTL backhand never comes out, or I hit it mediocre, so I will never be able to make my opponent run. This is one of the main problems in junior or amateur tennis. It is no wonder that this happens at the professional level as well. And if your opponent is very good and you suffer from this problem, you will never be able to beat him.

 

[I get cramps]

3)

HDLP - I'm an old man [55 years old when this interview took place in 2020], David; I do not need to flatter you. It amazes me that the more I saw you play, the more I admired you.

In one of your interviews, you said it helped you grow as a player to be with Guillermo Coria because you were training together; he was climbing the rankings, and you wanted to do the same. At one point, you had two of the best backhands in the world. Your forehand wasn't spectacular, but it worked very well if we consider how you built your game, and the same can be said about Coria. Now, there was one shot I was under the impression that the same person taught you both: the drop shot. Which one of you copied it from the other? [Horacio gets very serious] Don't lie to me, eh!

Nalbandian - Guille [short for Guillermo] used the drop shot more than me; since we were kids, he always used the drop shot more than me. But if you've followed our careers with a lot of attention, I was incorporating the drop into my game more and more as time went by because I started playing tennis on cement, and therefore, my tennis was more aggressive than his. And because I didn't have to cover as much space on hard court as on clay, there weren't as many situations where I needed to use it. However, when we were kids, we competed all year round on clay, and inevitably, we required the drop, so I was learning it and incorporating it into my game and having the facility to do the latter, I used it more and more, although only as a weapon because of the danger that comes with its abuse if you play against an intelligent, fast and skillful opponent.


HDLP - But you have so many technical and game variations. You see, after Martin Vasallo beat Grosjean in the third round at Roland Garros in 2006, his opponent in the round of 16 was you. I told him, ' Look, when you play against David, there is a significant problem. Every time he touches the ball, you're going to feel like a goalkeeper at a penalty shootout; playing against him will demand a lot of attention, creating a tension that will gradually tire you out.

Nalbandian - When you play against a guy who, from anywhere on his side of the court, can put the ball anywhere on your side, you don't end up being well-balanced, thankfully (smiles).
You keep asking me who taught me to grip the racquet handle so hard. I'll tell you nobody; it's a matter of common sense. How else are you going to take a brutal hit from the opponent?

HDLP - We talked about that when we were dealing with the netgame. Roy Emerson told me in Gstaad that nothing can move from the elbow to the tip of the racquet; everything has to stay firm. You used to cut the air when you were a kid, and Squillari lost his nerves watching you do it. I kept asking myself, ‘How does this S*B do this so that the racquet never moves a millimeter when he volleys?

Nalbandian: I had strength. My upper body was always strong. Rarely did an opponent's shot move my hand, including on the volley.

HDLP - Another thing. You took the ball on the rise very early with your backhand; from that wing, you had a lot of feel for the ball, but with your forehand, you didn't have the same feel for the ball, and you waited longer for the incoming ball before hitting it, even though you had plenty of power. I explain to my students that we all have one side that we handle better than the other, and in the latter, we compensate for that lack of feel in our good side with more strength or by acquiring more and better technique. Did that happen to you?

Nalbandian: Yes. On the backhand side, I didn't care if the ball came higher or stronger, with more spin or different effects. On my forehand side, I thought about what to do with the incoming ball. If I got a good shot to my forehand, I would hold or wait for the ball to go a little higher to see what I would do. If I had had to play 62 days in a row with just my backhand, I would have been able to do it without wearing myself out mentally at all, but if I had had to play just with my forehand the same number of days, the mental exhaustion I would have suffered... I wouldn't have been able to cope with it, as the execution of the stroke and the psychological stress would have been added.

HDLP - It makes me nervous when someone repeats to a kid: ‘Hit the ball in front of your body, hit the ball in front of you.’ Hit the ball in front of you when? When you see it, if you're not a talented guy and a heavy ball comes at you and want to hit it on the rise, the ball will go over the fence.
You played with Grosjean in Australia [in the third round in 2007]. You drove balls to his forehand for two sets, and the guy hit some terrific forehands. As if he were Fernando González, I had never seen Grosjean hit his forehand like that. He crushed you incessantly with it and had 3 match points. You served 0-40 when you were 4-5 [5-7, 4-6, 7-6 (4), 6-4, 6-1] and you didn't let up in your madness. You served to his forehand; you kept going to his forehand, and you beat him S*B!

Nalbadian - At some point, he had to get a little tired (Laughs). It's a good thing he got tired while time remained.

HDLP - Who taught you to push the ball so accurately with your legs when you hit it?

Nabaldian - My brother Javier, when I was a kid. Because of playing on cement, we always worked a lot on technique, which was in the legs. Those phrases, ‘he has excellent hands,’ don't mean anything. Point number one: to play tennis, you have to be able to move very well.

HDLP - You can't start playing if you don't move very well.

Nalbandian - You generate all the heavy balls with your legs. Nobody accelerating with just their upper body is going to hurt you. It's like how a corkscrew works; it's precisely the same. You crouch down, turn and twist, and then return to your starting position by rotating and bending with your torso, and you have a cannonball from both wings. If you do this, it only takes a little bit of timing for you to hit a spectacular stroke. If you don't have these automatisms, you will never have ball quality, no matter how many people say, ‘What great hands he has.’

Look, you coached Feña. [Feña is the nickname of Fernando González.] Feña used to get 80 percent of his strength from his legs, and he would break walls. It's always been like that.

HDLP—After the legs push and the rotation, quite a few guys' chests open up, their shoulders stay back, and their hand buckle.

Nalbandian—That can be due to a lack of coordination and timing issues between the eye and the incoming ball.

 

[Frankc]

Very, very nice - thank you for your efforts -
very interesting

 

[I get cramps]

Very, very nice - thank you for your efforts -
very interesting

Thank you for reading.

 

[I get cramps]

4) The following is an interview with Juan Ignacio Chela from TV, a program that gave me more information/context about Nalbandian. I will continue with the rest of the interview Horacio did with David:

Nalbandian was disadvantaged when playing clay tennis at a slightly older age than his Argentinean peers - he couldn't slide on clay as they could. David hails from Córdoba, a province in Argentina. Although he began playing on cement at 4, he did not compete in the pre-infantile category until age 10, and as mentioned above, on clay, a surface foreign to him then.

Nalbadian's family lived with little, so traveling to competitions in lower categories in Argentina cost them money. When he began to compete and win at the South American level, the ITF began to pay for his travel (in quotes, free) so that he could go to Europe to compete.

According to him, he reached his learning ceiling in his province of Cordoba at fourteen, so David went to Buenos Aires to continue his training as a tennis player, abandoning his academic studies. Around this time, he began traveling abroad, including a trip to the Orange Bowl at 12. Guillermo Coria, a close friend of David's, went to Miami to train at 14.

It took David longer to go from junior to pro than it did for Coria. In the satellites and futures, he had to play against 30-year-olds competing for their families' livelihoods.

The first ATP tournament Nalbandian talks about is the 2002 edition of Estoril, a tournament Nalbandian will win https://www.atptour.com/en/players/...matchType=Singles&year=2002&tournament=468_WS. He remembers the matches against Ferrero and Moyà as two very tough matches. Overall, he was impressed with how well his opponents played. David started his ATP career in 2001. The 2002 Estoril tournament was played in unfriendly conditions with too much wind. Wins over Ferrero and Moya gave him confidence. He thought he could beat good players on clay.

Juan Ignacio Chela asks him about the 2005 Tennis Masters Cup, the first year-end tournament for which three Argentine players qualified. Two Argentine players qualified, but since Nadal was injured, he could not participate, and David entered the tournament.
David was called up as a substitute, but he did not think going to Shanghai in such a condition was worth it. It was only when he was called to inform him that Nadal would not be able to attend the event that David traveled to Shanghai.

On the Wimbledon final of 2002:

Nalabandian believes he could have been a finalist because he grew up playing on cement, even though Argentina has no grass courts.

That year, David was knocked out early at Roland Garros and decided to take a plane back to Argentina and train on cement. A few days before leaving Argentina for London, David played at the Hurlingham Club, the only place in the country with grass courts. However, the conditions in which he trained were very different from those he would find at Wimbledon, as it was winter in Argentina then.

According to David, when he arrived at the AELTC, he could not beat any player during the practice sessions before the start of the Slam. He was quite lucky with his draw, according to him https://www.atptour.com/en/players/...matchType=Singles&year=2002&tournament=540_GS , because the first two matches with David Sanchez and Mathieu helped him to get into a rhythm and good hitting sensations. If he would have had to play Wayne Arthurs in the first round according to the draw, he would have knocked him out.

David never saw himself in the tournament final; he just played matches. Nalbadian suffered on grass, saying, "On grass, I would start playing one way and unconsciously switch to another without realizing it." When he noticed this discomfort, a friend told him, "But have fun!"

David is unsure if he won the first two sets of his semifinal match against Xavier Malisse, but he remembers he was playing well, and suddenly, Malisse raised his level of play. According to David, Malisse suddenly calls for an MTO and leaves the court. Five to ten minutes pass before Xavier returns to the court. The Belgian starts to play well and David despairs. There is hardly any light left as Malisse wins the fourth set. The umpire stopped the match, which helped Nalbandian because David would not have won the match if the umpire had not done that.

Nalbandian thinks he won the next day's decider 6-2 [David is a man who often doubts his memory] without suffering while playing it. That set was played on Saturday, and the final against Lleyton would be the next day; according to David, as soon as he finished his semifinal match, he began to feel stress after having wonderful feelings minutes earlier in the final set against Malisse.

David had not been on Center Court until he entered it with Lleyton to play the final, although an exception was made for him. A while before the start of the final, he was allowed to enter Center Court without the public to "warm up" [a euphemism] for not having played a single match on the court, which, according to Nalbandian, is different from the rest of the courts in the club, and this is noticeable when playing.

Nalbandian says that Lleyton was the best player in the world at the time, and it showed on the court.

In January 2003, David became a top-ten player. That's when David really speaks for all players. The pressure and burden of responsibility increase, and you become a contender in virtually every event. That changes not only you but also the people around you.

David tore his abdominal muscle at the end of his 2003 USO quarterfinal match against El Aynaoui so that he could do little with his serve. https://www.atptour.com/en/players/...matchType=Singles&year=2003&tournament=560_GS He goes into the semis thinking about serving softly but putting all his serves in. However, Nalbandian claims to have felt the ball very well.

 

[I get cramps]

5) Nalbandian - I don't remember who was leading when the score was 4-3 in the first set. Roddick served, and I hurt the back ulnar of my hand.

Chela: Because of the power of his serve?

Nalbandian - It kicked very high to the side of my backhand, and I hit the ball over my head. It was amazing. Subsequently, I noticed that I couldn't hit my backhand, so I started using the slice (4-3 in the first set). I get two sets to zero up on the scoreboard. It would have been impossible for me to play in the final had I won this match. We are in the tie-break of the third set, and I have matchpoint. Roddick serves to the body, and I can only stop the ball from hitting me. We were 6 to 5 for me or tied at 6 in the tie-break when I heard: "Out!" and hit the ball out of bounds, thinking I had lost the point. Well, that out didn't come from anyone working on the court. All hell broke loose... I lost the tie-break and played the last two sets with my hand in that state; I hit the ball as well as I could. I had no more chances to win the match.

Chela - I want you to tell me about the Davis Cup semifinal doubles match you played against Káfelnikov and Safin in Russia. You won by a score of 19-17 in the fifth set. We suffered a lot. Gastón had a matchpoint ball...

Chela - Yes, Gastón had two matchpoint points when Káfelnikov was serving, and he lost his singles against Yevgeny 6-8 in the fifth set https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/yevgeny-kafelnikov-vs-gaston-gaudio/k267/g374. Surface: Taraflex.

Nalbandian: I was feeling a stress that you can't imagine. That was a fantastic match. The court was lightning-fast. Lucas Arnaldo Ker and I prepared the whole week for the doubles we would play. Safin in 2002, with a desire for good play and a good mood? I think we did a great job. We seemed to be playing forever [4-6, 4-6, 7-5, 6-3, 19-17]. I was starting to get a headache during the fifth...

Chela: Do you remember how long the match lasted?

Nalbandian - 6 and a half hours. The Davis Cup, for me, had nothing to do with the rest of the competitions, and the differences made me love competing in the Davis Cup. It was a great experience. There was tension in the atmosphere.

Chela: And then they tell you that you have to play the fourth match of the tie where you are down 1-2 against Russia.

Nalbandian: Yes, because they told me that Gastón, whatever. I don't even remember what they said to make me do so. It was a last-minute decision, so I returned to the hotel to get what I needed to play and back to the stadium. Safin beat me in four sets.

Chela: Was there any tournament that was your favorite, and did you plan it in particular?

I organized my next season around the slams, the Davis Cup, and the Masters 1000, but not all of the latter. I paid particular attention to tournaments where I was defending points. I didn't give much importance to the 500s, although eventually, I had to do it sometimes. I would try to play a small tournament before a Masters 1000 or a slam.

Chela: Tell me about your rivalry with Federer. How did it start, and what is your strategy for facing him?

Nalbandian—Roger and I played since we were 16; he is one year older than me. I beat him in the final of the US Open juniors in ‘98, which was the first match we played. He beat me in the semi-final of the Orange Bowl, and then in the final, he beat Guille [short for Guillermo Coria]. From then on, we played like pros from the beginning of our careers.

So Roger's backhand wasn't as good as it would be as time went on. I am a good returner, and I can find his backhand anywhere on the court, hitting high balls at him. I could also do it on outdoor hard courts and even carpets. When Roger made a qualitative leap with his expertise in using that stroke...

Chela: What improved the most during his career was his backhand.

Nalbandian - Undoubtedly. In his beginnings as a professional, he played too much slice, and if he had to hit topspin three times in a row, he would either shank the ball or throw it several feet out of bounds. He didn't have a good feel on his backhand. When he acquired it, later on, things got complicated [Laughs].

Chela - He became a virtually unbeatable player.

Nalbandian - Virtually? No, invincible [Laughs].

Chela - You became the indispensable tennis player of the Argentine Davis Cup team. How did you feel about it?

Nalbandian - I loved it. The sensations that playing the Davis Cup for your country gives you have nothing to do with any other competition. There is not a single player who plays in the Davis Cup as he does in the circuit. Somehow, playing the Davis Cup affects you; it does not allow players to maintain the same emotional state that they have in other competitions. I was motivated by the fact that it was Argentina's only title that it was missing as a country [that is a subjective point of view].
An Argentinean had won all the tournaments at one time or another [Sabatini came close to winning Wimbledon but was not champion]. As I liked to play on all kinds of fast courts, I was very important for the Davis Cup team in the ties played abroad. Given the players we had, except for Spain, the nations we were competing with were putting us on carpet [and Australian grass] as the surface to play on.

Chela - You won all the singles you played in the Davis Cup finals. Playing impeccably, you defeated David Ferrer in Buenos Aires on carpet with great ease; in 2006, you beat Safin in Russia in straights and Davydenko also in singles, Hewitt in straights in 2005 on Australian grass (6-2, 6-4, 6-4). Which of your performances do you think is the best?

Nalbandian - The singles match against Hrbaty in Slovakia. The guy was undefeated on that court [in 2005]. During the match, I felt that I couldn't win. It was a very fast court; it was a fantastic match. I happened to lose the first set and I told Alberto Mancini [the Argentine team captain]: “Luli [Mancini's nickname], I have no chance of winning.

In the second set, Hrbaty and I were tied at two games all. I sliced the ball, and he shanked it. I played the slice again, and Hrbaty responded with a high ball that allowed me to dictate play. Using my slice, I realized that I could beat him. I took control of the match and won in four sets. In the rest of the matches you mentioned, I was always ahead on the scoreboard, and at no time did I doubt myself. I played really well in those matches. Against Hrbaty, I struggled to find a way to beat him.

Chela: What about the match against Hewitt? I'm telling you because of the animosity in that tie and for playing on Lleyton's surface and his court.

Nalabandian - We had never won a tie on grass as a visiting team. Several Argentine players had given positive results in doping tests. In the stadium stands were banners with syringes drawn alluding to our condition, generalized, of dopers, of cheaters, to put it mildly. And that was great for me; they really helped me. And although I think I just played well, Hewitt suffered a lot of pressure from his crowd and performed below par.

 

[I get cramps]

6)

Nalbandian - Our most significant problem in the Davis Cup was the difficulty of winning ties against strong teams when we played as hosts.

In 2006, we lost 3-2 to Russia in the Moscow taraflex, the decisive fifth match. In 2008, playing as hosts against Spain, our biggest problem was that we could not use clay, our natural surface, against the Spanish; it was the only country against which we could not do so.

The choice of indoor-hard to play against Spain turned out to be the right one, as Rafa did not come once that decision was made. I preferred to play in Córdoba, at altitude, because Juan Martín [Delpo] and I like to play at altitude, and Rafa and David Ferrer do not. We changed location and thought of playing in Mar de Plata. Then, Juan Martín loses a key match against Feliciano [López]. Agustín [Calleri] and I lose a close game against Feliciano and Verdasco. And on Sunday, the Spaniards chose Verdasco to play against Acasuso instead of Ferrer. We lost.

In 2011, going to Spain to play the Davis Cup final on clay was an incredible challenge. Juan Martín played phenomenally but lost [he lost in 5 sets on Friday against Ferrer and on Sunday in 4 against Nadal] against two masters of the clay game. Eduardo [Schwank] and I won the doubles match, but from the beginning, we knew that beating them on clay was almost impossible.
They were heavy favorites in the tie.

Chela - Throughout your tennis career, you had daring experiences like swimming with sharks, leaping from a tall tower in Vienna, and taking part in car rallies. Many people accused you of a lack of dedication to the profession, or at least journalists. Why did you take these risks?
Whenever I engaged in those activities, it was always during my leisure hours escaping from tennis. The rally was an ATP activity, mind you! It allowed me to go out for an evening. I was so tired of traveling so much that I was exhausted. Some people like to go to the theater or watch a film, but I like things like the ones you mentioned. I believe those distractions did not affect me negatively, but mentally, they were good for me to continue playing.

Chela - You made semis in all the slams. What made you able to compete on any surface?

Nalbandian - Not being a true specialist on any surface, as with those who won the slams in my time. Hewitt was a much better grass-court player than me; Gastón was a much better clay-court player than me, and I can say the same about Roddick on cement. And, hey, winning a grand slam is difficult. Everybody thinks they can make a living as professional tennis players, and they also belittle those who win a grand slam; it must be easy for them to win a grand slam.

I go back to the interview with Horacio de la Peña:

HDLP - Fighting Roger when he is on a roll, or rather, in one of the multiple rolls a player will experience playing against him, causes a ton of players to throw in the towel. Why didn't those moments when Roger couldn't stop painting the lines affect you in that way?

Nalbandian - Because my feeling was that the match was far from over. My head-to-head with Roger since we were juniors https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/david-nalbandian-vs-roger-federer/n301/f324 is probably the fundamental difference for me, not to act like those players. Had I never defeated him, my state of mind when Roger was unplayable would have been different. IMO, Federer is one of the greatest players of all time, hands down, even if perhaps about some facet of his game that may have to do with taste [I'm afraid David doesn't believe in that “GOAT” debate nonsense]. When I had Roger in front of me, I did not see an idol of mine as a rival for the reasons I mentioned, and as I beat him many times, I wanted to beat him again every time I had him in front of me.

HDLP - And he was aware of that.

Nalbandian - Obviously, we're not just fans watching our favorite actors on the big screen. We are not watching legends, the “characters”.

HDLP - In Shanghai, he was two sets up...

Nabaldian - And his level of play dropped. The guy is great. His playing intensity dropped until the beginning of the fifth set, so I beat him easily in the third and fourth sets. When Roger is cornered in the fifth, 2-4 or 1-4? he returns to his standard level of play and the first two sets we had played. When you play against these guys, and they are in their standard playing conditions, you either play perfectly at the tactical and execution level, or you have no chance to beat them.

HDLP - When you're playing in the AO semis against...

Nalbandian - Wawrinka.

HDLP - No, against...

Nalbandian - That's right, Baghdatis.

HDLP - The guy for the first few sets couldn't hurt you, and then at the end of the second set, he uses the audience, and you get slightly confused. Then he breaks your serve. You pull yourself together and win the second set. At 3-2 in the third set, he orchestrates the audience... In tennis players' careers, some moments and events happen... I was watching the match and thought: “Tough luck” because that was the season when you could have tried to fight to be number one.

Nalbandian: No doubt. I had played Federer in the Masters final a month before.

The match against Baghdatis, I had it under control. After what you mentioned, he started to play differently. He began to serve better, hit his forehand better, and take a significant risk with his backhand by hitting the ball very flat, without too much pace, and with the ball bouncing very low. At that time, the AO surface had a lower bounce than it would have later. So the balls didn't come so high, and he started to make things difficult for me with his backhand. Baghdatis had a jump in quality of play, and I lowered mine slightly because otherwise, it's a kind of match where he would win the third, and I would recover and win the match in the fourth. Especially considering how well I had been playing. Then we would realize that Baghdatis had a good game as time passed.

HDLP - Who was watching that third set and imagined that Baghdatis would have that kind of game?

Nalbandian - At that time, we didn't know Baghdatis.

 

[I get cramps]

7)

Nalbandian - That same year, in the RG semis against Federer, I was ahead on the scoreboard when I tore my abdominal muscle and had to retire. At that time [June 2006], I wouldn't have lost to Roger on red clay if I hadn't injured my abdominal muscle.

HDLP - (Laughing) I am amused by what you are saying because you sent Zabaleta a message telling him that he could not lose to Federer in Monte Carlo! “You can't lose to Federer!” (Thunderous laughter).

Nabaldian: But I sent that message to Zabaleta in 2001 or 2002, that was a maturing Federer. Nobody knew at that time the caliber of player we would be playing two or three years later.

HDLP - Salatino [an Argentine sports journalist] laughs when he sees me because he told me in 2001 that Roger would be the best tennis player in history, and I fluffed him off. I told him: “You don't watch tennis well. Federer has a mess of a backhand.”

Nalbandian - He didn't have a good backhand then.

HDLP—Roger hit with Franco Squillari during practice, and ten minutes after they started playing, I said to Roger, “Roger, stop it. Hit three balls in a row to the player you're hitting with.” His impact point was pretty bad and very inconsistent.

Nalbandian - Yes, it was not uncommon for Roger to shank a ball instead of gradually improving his rhythm on the third consecutive backhand ball or shooting it out of bounds. He would stop hitting the ball in the sweet spot and give you the initiative. I explained to Zabaleta that you would never beat a South American or Spaniard player on clay if you can't hit three consecutive well-impacted backhand shots. The problem was that Zabaleta couldn't hit two consecutive crosscourt backhands correctly. Yes, Zabaleta would cough up a short backhand and his opponent would reverse his forehand [that's Spanish for run around your backhand] putting Zabaleta on the run.

HDLP - Did you switch to playing with a longbody racquet at some point?

Nalbandian - What year did I start using a long racquet? Let's see, Chang's racquet was the first long body racquet that hit the market. Coria and I both played with Prince. I think the first longbody to appear was the half-inch, and a little later, the full-inch was the one we both ended up using.

I think they give you a reach advantage because of the longer length. The only disadvantage is that when they serve to your body in a really centered way it becomes more difficult to return.

HDLP—At present, thanks to the latest materials (string pop), only Schwartzman is playing with a long body and with a racquet that we could call an almost long body is Djokovic. This is the information I got from the racquet stringers I asked. The rest of the players, looking for more racquet head acceleration, prefer conventional racquets.

Nalbandian—Yes, you move the racquet faster that way, but the weight and balance of the racquet are essential.

I just wanted to ask you this question. We South American tennis players, or perhaps Argentine players, inherited a terrible habit from Vilas. Namely: very heavy racquet and very little balance [making possible a great control of the racquet handle]. I think it is a bad habit that Vilas' enormous ascendancy over us led us to make our own, and I think the rest of South American tennis players as well. If I were to start my career again, I would choose a light racquet with practically all the weight in the head of the racquet, with a very high balance. To accelerate the racquet head more quickly, avoid having so many wrist, elbow, and shoulder problems. You end up suffering a lot more injuries following Vilas' precept.

When I started to hold the racquets of Spanish tennis players... I grabbed Carlos Moyà's racquet, which weighed 200 grams less than mine, and it fell to the ground [if I remember correctly, Carlos played with a balance of 37]. I grabbed Carlos' racquet and it seemed just as heavy as mine and yet it weighed 200 grams less. I would advise a kid starting to play tennis to focus on getting as much feel for the racquet head as possible.

HDLP—At my age and with my body frame, I still play with a 387-gram racquet. That's a lot of weight.

Nalbandian, are your hand and arm joints okay? Let's see if you agree with me.

HDLP - Absolutely. You know that Coria watched the match between you and El Chapu, hiding behind the scoreboard?

Nalbandian - (laughing) We were always spying on each other.

HDLP - You spied on players and coaches?

Nalbandian - I watched every one. When we were kids, thank God, we trained like beasts, and the rest of the day, we talked about tactics and what to do, what not to do, and how to improve. We did it with people with excellent knowledge of the game and with others who hardly knew anything, but suddenly, they would tell you something valuable. We saw as many matches as we could. We were stealing as much information as we could. We would see players who had given their best and were in their decline—people who had played a lot abroad. Given our young age, beating these guys was very hard for us. They didn't miss a ball. They chased down every ball.

We saw that hunger, in the precise sense of the word, is fundamental in our sport. We wanted to show them that even though we were kids, we could either beat them or at least compete one-on-one with them. We would never settle without playing three sets against them with the non-negotiable desire to beat them.

And immodestly said, a characteristic virtue of mine was my ability to read my opponent well enough to beat him, even if I didn't feel the ball well. Secondly, to avoid choosing in my shot selection to rely on my backhand if I am not feeling it as usual. So, what weapons do I have to win in these circumstances, considering how my opponent plays? Do I need to play ugly to win today? No problem.

HDLP - But in the real world, there are often guys who want to stick to and execute the patterns of play they have been taught and have practiced hard when they find themselves playing against an opponent whose patterns they can identify. They can't conceive of varying their game if their learned patterns aren't working for them. It is something like going home with the feeling of having done their duty by giving their all, yet they lost and did not seek risk because they were behind on the scoreboard by doing something improvised.

 

[I get cramps]

8) 2020

Nalbandian—Imagine if I hadn't been injured and had been able to beat Federer in the semis of RG 2006. It's hard to imagine such a result. Roger was losing three or four matches a year at the time. Well, then, upon beating Roger, I've yet to beat Rafa on Sunday in Bo5. Do you realize how much chance I had of winning that slam?

The circumstances presented to us South Americans to have the regularity of the American and European players of Roger, Rafa, and Nole make this very complicated. No South American player has ever been able to have that consistency, and there is no need to mention why. They lose in a slam or a 250, and how long does it take them to be at home resting or preparing whatever it is? This is an example that is almost unimportant, next to other causes.

HDLP - Let's talk about something else because we can't change that.

Medvedev came back from two sets down against Rafa in the 2019 USO. Does it seem normal for a 33-year-old to outlast a 23-year-old in a fifth set? That wouldn't have happened to the young Safin. I think this generation lacks courage. Thiem beats Rafa in Barcelona or Rome, but come RG, and Rafa eats him alive!

Nalbandian: I just think, Horacio, that these guys are playing against the three best players in history, helped by advances in medicine and preventive medicine and whatever you want, but honestly, they are the three best players in the history of tennis. These guys have too much respect for the trio; they idealize them. If you've beaten each of them a couple of times at their age, you have no choice but to go to war with them.

HDLP - That's why I'm telling you. The audacity that Becker had that Nadal had.

Nalbandian - But why doesn't it happen today? Why doesn't that kind of guy show up?

HDLP - IMV, they lack the level of play to go on the assault.

Nalbandian - I could agree with what you say if you told me they have that level, but they show it and keep it for a very short time.

HDLP - Kyrgios has the game to outplay them, but he has a loose screw. When he watches Tsitsipas play, Coria finds nine ways to attack him. When Agassi squared up to Mcenroe, he made a fool of him, and John was a genius, very old, yes, but a genius. As Sampras did, they retired Mcenroe. You haven't experienced our speed.

Nalbandian - These guys have unlimited ball speed but lack tactical order. Shot selection? I destroy the ball. Out of bounds. Do they think about the causes of their errors in a severe way, or do they continue to destroy balls?

HDLP - And when the score is 5-5, Djokovic makes a perfect shot selection.

Nalbandian—Novak gets to that 5-5 tie by taking a reasonable risk margin, while the equalizer did it by playing low percentages. Now we're 5-5, and thoughts start to creep in.

HDLP - Remember what happened to Djokovic in his first RG final, where he is the favorite. He couldn't withstand Wawrinka's ball; why didn't a Thiem hold his pace in the Australian final in the fifth set?

Nabaldian - They also can't stand the reality that they can't pull the trigger if a point takes 60 ball exchanges to win or win the game. Nobody can make a mistake when it's 6-5 and 15-all for the following three points. You have to maintain incredible concentration, not a fly in the stadium, and if that means playing a point of 60 ball exchanges with the need to win it, then you win it; there's no alternative. I will have to hit with a little less ball quality, but I have to force my opponent to maintain a very high concentration level for as long as it takes. If, at that moment, your opponent hits a ball out, you think and feel: ‘Thank you, what a gift you just gave me’! You can shoot a lob to your opponent's ‘tremendous’ forehand at those points. You're giving him to understand, of course: ‘Dare to hit a winner like you did three games ago at this point, come on!’ They're not going to do it! Suddenly, they are taking into account the percentages! Very few players dare to play that winner at that moment.

HDLP - Who the hell taught you to return so well?

Nalbandian - When you learn to play on cement, you develop your reflexes without knowing it. I read my opponents' toss very well. There are a couple of crucial things. No takeback, then you must hit with great precision, giving the ball the direction you want it to go. The return is timing. Two: keep your legs open and rotate quickly, especially with the two-handed backhand; with one hand, things are a bit different, but with two hands without moving your feet, rotating a little to the left or right, you don't need to exert force.

HDLP - On the first serve, where do you aim for?

Nalbandian - To the middle with as much depth as possible.

In the games, let's call them, of minor importance. A good server will make you see all kinds of serves and his repertoire. But when we get to 4 games all, he will choose the ones he plays better or with a better percentage. Therefore, in those ‘unimportant’ games, you have to pay close attention to his serves to see if you can anticipate what choices the server will make later.

 

[Galvermegs]

I enjoy this interview...but... he criticises the medvedev loss.. but still lost from a lead to roddick and baghdatis in 2 hard court majors.

Also he ended up being federers pigeon in majors, all 4 majors saw a loss although i cant say he is deluded to think he would beat federer injury free.. he just would have to play better than he did when he looked good at rg04

 

[Angrybirdstar]

HDLP - Who the hell taught you to return so well?

Nalbandian - When you learn to play on cement, you develop your reflexes without knowing it. I read my opponents' toss very well. There are a couple of crucial things. No takeback, then you must hit with great precision, giving the ball the direction you want it to go. The return is timing. Two: keep your legs open and rotate quickly, especially with the two-handed backhand; with one hand, things are a bit different, but with two hands without moving your feet, rotating a little to the left or right, you don't need to exert force.

HDLP - On the first serve, where do you aim for?

Nalbandian - To the middle with as much depth as possible.

Nalbandian gets it!

 

[I get cramps]

Nalbandian gets it!

Sorry @Angrybirdstar

I could have been misleading by giving you incomplete information because David's sentence is precisely this, so I translated it literally: ‘To the middle with as much depth as possible.’ To begin with, David's sentence lacks a verbal regime. It does not use the verb aim or any other synonymous verb. Its circumstantial complement of place is unfinished as there are different centers on the server court where to return.
When you try to translate what an athlete says, you often come across all sorts of things that they take for granted. They are very lazy in the way they speak.


I had not yet finished translating the conversation interview between De la Peña and Nalbandian. It will be Horacio who, subsequently, will clarify this point for the listeners: ‘(...) in the middle of the baseline, as Agassi and Nole used to do to make the server give ground, put him leaning on his back foot, and so the returner takes the initiative from the fourth shot’.


Horacio De la Peña goes on to explain how he described to a player like Fernando Gonzalez what moves an opponent was more likely to play when he became irate. That level of detail in his analysis enthralled the Chilean; however, De La Peña unequivocally tells us that with a player of David's perceptiveness, you don't need to work that hard as a coach, not by a long shot.

Nalbandian goes as far as saying that when you are almost about to hit an incoming ball, you have to be able to see where your opponent is, or at least be able to see out of the corner of your eye where he is going (has he taken a step to the left, right, diagonals, backward or forwards? Seems straightforward, no, but is it straightforward considering the way these people move?) And of the above, he states: ‘I think that's crucial to understand our sport.’ It will be easier if you are already in the net because your opponent is closer.

HDLP—I love two of your matches: one is the one you lost to Agassi in the 2003 Tennis Masters Cup in Houston, in which Agassi beat you, but at one point, he outplayed you [6-7 (10), 3-6, 6-4]; and the second is one you won against Davydenko (https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/david-nalbandian-vs-nikolay-davydenko/n301/d402 in Paris). Davydenko was a fantastic ball striker, clean like very few others.

Nalbandian - Davydenko and I played tough matches. He was a player who was able to impose his rhythm of play very fast, hitting everything on the rise, very organized, very fast on his legs, with DTLers from both wings that he hit whenever he wanted, and that was very destabilizing because of how inside the court he played. It was also complicated to destabilize him, in a sense, like David Ferrer. Because both defended very well, except on grass, they played at a very high level on all surfaces. You couldn't beat those two if you didn't have an excellent ball quality or impact.