Federer's prime likely to end atleast half year later then Nadal in fact!

[capriatifanatic]

In tennis years Nadal is probably as old or older then Federer. The reason I say this is Nadals prime started when he was a few months from turning 19. Federer's prime probaly started when he had turned 22 a few months before that. So Nadal's prime really started 3.5 years younger then Federer's did.

At to that a player with Nadal's type of game is likely to have a shorter prime then Federer. His prime is bound to be atleast 2 years shorter then Federer's.

So add the 3.5 years younger Nadal's prime started then Federer's, and the 2 years minimum shorter prime he will have, his prime will end at an age 5.5 years younger then Federer's does or more. Federer is almost 5 years older then Nadal, that is all.

Federer's prime will end atleast slightly later then Nadal's in fact in all likelihood.


If Nadal's prime ends at 23 in the middle of 2009 for example expect Federer's to end at 28 at the end of 2009 as good estimate.

If Nadal's prime somehow ends at 25 in the middle of 2011(doubt it would be that late)expect Federer's to end at 30 at the end of 2011 most likely.

If Nadal's prime ends at the end of next year 2007 the year he turned 21 halfway through, Federer's would probably end in the middle of 2008 somewhere around when he turns 27.

That is also why I doubt Nadal has more improvement left then Federer. He is likely slightly closer to ending his prime, and eventual retirement as well, then Federer is.

 

[Nadal_Freak]

I'll enjoy the moment when Nadal proves you wrong.

 

[Rafa's best friend]

In tennis years Nadal is probably as old or older then Federer. The reason I say this is Nadals prime started when he was a few months from turning 19. Federer's prime probaly started when he had turned 22 a few months before that. So Nadal's prime really started 3.5 years younger then Federer's did.

At to that a player with Nadal's type of game is likely to have a shorter prime then Federer. His prime is bound to be atleast 2 years shorter then Federer's.

So add the 3.5 years younger Nadal's prime started then Federer's, and the 2 years minimum shorter prime he will have, his prime will end at an age 5.5 years younger then Federer's does or more. Federer is almost 5 years older then Nadal, that is all.

Federer's prime will end atleast slightly later then Nadal's in fact in all likelihood.


If Nadal's prime ends at 23 in the middle of 2009 for example expect Federer's to end at 28 at the end of 2009 as good estimate.

If Nadal's prime somehow ends at 25 in the middle of 2011(doubt it would be that late)expect Federer's to end at 30 at the end of 2011 most likely.

If Nadal's prime ends at the end of next year 2007 the year he turned 21 halfway through, Federer's would probably end in the middle of 2008 somewhere around when he turns 27.

News flash for you, RAFA will be playing great and winning French opens til he is 35, just like Agassi, so fed can kiss his chance of winning french open, Good Byee................................:grin:

 

[krprunitennis2]

? How can you calculate how long someone's best years of tennis will be?

 

[bluescreen]

i dont know, rafa's best friend. nadal has, imo, the most physically demanding style of play of anyone on tour. i think he's just gonna wear himself our too soon. at the end of this year's season he looked tired at every tournament, which might explain why he didnt win any. i wouldnt be surprised if he retired before 30.

 

[prophet34]

I think there's a lot of wishfull thinking in saying that Nadal's prime Stop before Federer but I' m partially agreeing to qhat you said in the sense that history shows us that players who gets lots of success young often slow down faster than guys like Federer who had to mature before getting the same kind of success... There are plenty of examples...

Also, it' s pretty clear that the style of play of Nadal is extremly hard on his body... unlike Fed...

Don't have anything to say concerning the well thought answers of RBF....

 

[Feña14]

i dont know, rafa's best friend. nadal has, imo, the most physically demanding style of play of anyone on tour. i think he's just gonna wear himself our too soon. at the end of this year's season he looked tired at every tournament, which might explain why he didnt win any. i wouldnt be surprised if he retired before 30.

I would be surprised if he makes it past 26. Hewitt's game was as tough on the body as Nadal's is and he reached the very top of the game and stayed there for around 3 years. If Nadal can stay at the top for double that amount of time he will of done VERY well for himself. When you are still growing but have the muscles that he does, and bounce round the court as much as he does... your going to have problems down the line.

 

[Rafa's best friend]

I think there's a lot of wishfull thinking in saying that Nadal's prime Stop before Federer but I' m partially agreeing to qhat you said in the sense that history shows us that players who gets lots of success young often slow down faster than guys like Federer who had to mature before getting the same kind of success... There are plenty of examples...

Also, it' s pretty clear that the style of play of Nadal is extremly hard on his body... unlike Fed...

Don't have anything to say concerning the well thought answers of RBF....

You just have to remember RAFA is the best conditioned athlete in the world, and a prime specimen of pure athleticism, he is like great walter payton, and he will never run out of energy as long as he paces himself and not play so many tournaments. RAFA will only concentrate on the slams in the future...

 

[bribeiro]

You just have to remember RAFA is the best conditioned athlete in the world, and a prime specimen of pure athleticism, he is like great walter payton, and he will never run out of energy as long as he paces himself and not play so many tournaments. RAFA will only concentrate on the slams in the future...

Lol, too funny.

 

[ollinger]

Perhaps Rafa's best friend should also pace himself....over 23 posts per day seems like the definition of having no life.

 

[Andres]

? How can you calculate how long someone's best years of tennis will be?

GS titles square minus overall titles, multiplied by the 7th part of their age, counted in days.

Plus 1.

 

[prophet34]

I would say RBF that I prefer this comment to most of the one's I; ve seen from you... It's true that if Nadal concentrates only on Grand Slams he has a better chance on the long run, but that does' nt seem to be the case right now...

He' s playing a lot ang getting lots of small injury's that will hurt him in the long run... Still, he his a monster worker, mover and has great confidence in himself...

 

[VamosRafa]

Who cares? As I've said before, I'd rather have a few years of watching someone entertaining than 15 years of watching a Jiri Novak. (Sorry, Jiri, but it does seem as though you've been around forever without registering much on the excitement meter. Can't say that about Nadal around this place.)*

So Rafa won't be Jiri Novak, but who wants him to be?



*Incidentally, Jiri has just retired. And I do wish him the best.

 

[Rafa's best friend]

I would say RBF that I prefer this comment to most of the one's I; ve seen from you... It's true that if Nadal concentrates only on Grand Slams he has a better chance on the long run, but that does' nt seem to be the case right now...

He' s playing a lot ang getting lots of small injury's that will hurt him in the long run... Still, he his a monster worker, mover and has great confidence in himself...

He is right now Young and full of Energy and spirit, but as he gets older, he will learn to pace himself and stay out of needless injuries.

 

[Feña14]

*Incidentally, Jiri has just retired. And I do wish him the best.

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Where did you hear that? :shock:

 

[prophet34]

Hope for him, cause if he wants to stay there in his H2H against Federer, He' ll have to keep him little mental advantage and get better in his overall game...

We all know that Fed had problems with lots of guys but when he starts to turn things around, he doesn't look back after that... ( Nalbandian, Agassi, Hewitt, Henman)

And there are still possibility's that he could get better, that has been the case in the last two years after a stellar 2004 year....

 

[Zuras]

I'd guess Nadal has another 2 years in him of being number one on the clay. Clay courter careers are generally short lived because the surface favors youthful attributes. Then again, maybe Nadal will make a transition to a more all-court game. Not many clay courters have done that, but he seems to have the work ethic and determination to do it.

 

[krprunitennis2]

GS titles square minus overall titles, multiplied by the 7th part of their age, counted in days.

Plus 1.

There are less GS titles than overall titles for every player(I think). So if you subtract overall titles from GS titles, you'd have a negative number.

Multiply a negative number by any positive number(since you can never have -xxxxxx of days in your life), results in a negative number. Add one to that, you won't even reach a positive number since all players are over 15.

^_^ Nice try.

 

[krprunitennis2]

I think you guys have a point that Nadal might stress down his body. =\ Maybe he should play more video games...he's still a kid.

 

[dh003i]

you make a good point about the likely length of their primes, and likely who will exit their prime first...

however, the way in which you make your argument suggests that there's a correlation between their primes. There is absolutely no correlation between the athletic prime of Federer and that of Nadal. Zero. It is not the case that if one of them exits their prime, the other is more or less likely to do so. The two events are independent of eachother.

 

[capriatifanatic]

you make a good point about the likely length of their primes, and likely who will exit their prime first...

however, the way in which you make your argument suggests that there's a correlation between their primes. There is absolutely no correlation between the athletic prime of Federer and that of Nadal. Zero. It is not the case that if one of them exits their prime, the other is more or less likely to do so. The two events are independent of eachother.

Actually you are right. In the end I worded my final examples wrong, I should have said the latest conceivable time I could see Federer exiting his prime would be this point, for Nadal this point; or the earliest for Federer this point or Nadal this point. In other words the average likelihood of place of exit of their primes might be about half a year later for Federer, but the conceivable range for both is large and not neccessarily related at all you are right.

 

[8PAQ]

What difference does it make how long Nadal's prime will last compared to Federer? Not like he ever will be #1 anyway. After Federer it will probably be Gasquet or maybe Djokovic. Nadal will be lucky to finish 2007 at #2. My guess is that he will lose #2 ranking to Andy Roddick right after 2007 Wimbledon.

 

[Rafa's best friend]

What difference does it make how long Nadal's prime will last compared to Federer? Not like he ever will be #1 anyway. After Federer it will probably be Gasquet or maybe Djokovic. Nadal will be lucky to finish 2007 at #2. My guess is that he will lose #2 ranking to Andy Roddick right after 2007 Wimbledon.

This one really does not make sense, no offense. But in order for Andy to take over the #2 spot, he will have to either win Wimbledon or Aussie open. Now it is a given FACT that RAFA will repeat as French open champion(unless he breaks his leg or something like that), and RAFA will at least get to 4th round of each of Aussie open and Wimbledon, so it is Mathematically impossible for Andy to overtake RAFA at #2 by end of Wimbledon. Thank you for your attention.................:grin:

 

[8PAQ]

This one really does not make sense, no offense. But in order for Andy to take over the #2 spot, he will have to either win Wimbledon or Aussie open. Now it is a given FACT that RAFA will repeat as French open champion(unless he breaks his leg or something like that), and RAFA will at least get to 4th round of each of Aussie open and Wimbledon, so it is Mathematically impossible for Andy to overtake RAFA at #2 by end of Wimbledon. Thank you for your attention.................:grin:

How about Nadal does not win as many clay court matches as in 2006 and doesn't do that well in AO and Wimbledon? Nadal has lots of points to defend from clay and grass.

Andy on the other hand has almost no points to defend on clay and grass and even spring hard courts. So lets say Andy wins Queens, gets to Wimbledon final, AO final or semi, does well in Miami and Indian Wells. Gains some points on clay.

Andy did better 2nd half of 2006 than Nadal and he will still have those points after Wimbledon. So he doesn't even need to do better than Nadal 1st half of the 2007. Just good enough. I think Wimbledon final and AO semi plus some other finals or semis are very likely for him.

 

[AAAA]

Who cares? As I've said before, I'd rather have a few years of watching someone entertaining than 15 years of watching a Jiri Novak. (Sorry, Jiri, but it does seem as though you've been around forever without registering much on the excitement meter.

Agree with that. With sporting performances I look for how brightly a flame will burn not for how long(yawn).

 

[Andres]

There are less GS titles than overall titles for every player(I think). So if you subtract overall titles from GS titles, you'd have a negative number.

Multiply a negative number by any positive number(since you can never have -xxxxxx of days in your life), results in a negative number. Add one to that, you won't even reach a positive number since all players are over 15.

^_^ Nice try.

You took the fun out of it. Thank you.
I hope you're glad... you broke my heart...