Is it all downhill for Nadal now?

We have to admit Nadal played sub-par at this edition of IW. Balls hit from FH side way too short and slow movement overall.
If I would play the pessimistic guy, I would say that this August will be the last month to have him on the top spot (ever).
 
vive le beau jeu ! said:
slight preference for free-fall here. :)

1zhtzp.jpg
Click to expand...

:lol:

Vamos.
 
heftylefty said:
How come the guys that beat Rafa get no credit for the effort? I guess Nadal only loses when something is wrong with him; it's never the other guy.
Click to expand...

I always give them credit; it's not easy beating one of the most dominant players in the history of men's tennis, especially one who pulls the shenanigans that he does. What frustrates me are the antics and excuses coming from Nadal, his camp and his blind followers.
 
TheRed said:
I'm not sure what evidence you're looking at but Nadal's strokes have changed dramatically in his career, most notably his serve and his forehand. Through the years, he has been hitting his forehand flatter and earlier outside of clay. His serve motion and results have also changed a lot. But you're right, he's still very defensive on returns.
Nonetheless, I think this myth of him being a "grinder" has gone on a bit too long. Yes, he grinds down Fed but that's because it works. Against most other players, he's pretty aggressive. Nadal just happens to also be one of the best defensive players in history. He's really somewhere between an aggressive baseliner and a grinder. In fact, while Djokovic's game translates better on hard courts because he tends to hit earlier and flatter, Nadal is actually better at transitioning from defense to offense.
Click to expand...

He is a grinder of the most shameful kind. How often does he hit more winners than his opponent? It isn't uncommon to see him hit half (or less) the winners, even when he wins many more points than his opponent.
 
Last edited:
Lost in China to joker
Lost in Shanghi to del po
Lost in Paris to FERRER?
Lost in London to joker
Lost in Melbourne to a guy he never lost a set to
Lost in Indian Wells to a guy he never lost a set to

You tell me.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
He is a grinder of the most shameful kind. How often does he hit more winners than his opponent? It isn't uncommon to see him hit half (or less) the winners, even when he wins many more points than his opponent.
Click to expand...

Winners hit in a match does not by itself indicate how a person played during that match. Serve and volleyers often hit more winners in matches but it's just indicative of the nature of serve and volleying. Agassi, later on in his career, often didn't hit more winners than his opponent but he was never a grinder. You don't have to hit winners to be an aggressive baseliner.
Further, there's no "shame" in being a grinder. The object in a professional tennis match is to win. That's how one makes a living and making a good living is nothing shameful. You may care more about the style you play but for those who call it a career, winning matters. For those rely on their tennis as income, it's not exactly comforting to say one played "a solid aggressive match" and left with a $5000 check while that "grinder" may eventually leave with a $35k check.
I said Nadal is not a grinder because his playing style does not resemble guys like Muster, Chang, Hewitt, etc. I wasn't thinking grinding is a dirty word.
 
Last edited:
TheRed said:
Winners hit in a match does not by itself indicate how a person played during that match. Serve and volleyers often hit more winners in matches but it's just indicative of the nature of serve and volleying. Agassi, later on in his career, often didn't hit more winners than his opponent but he was never a grinder. You don't have to hit winners to be an aggressive baseliner.
Further, there's no "shame" in being a grinder. The object in a professional tennis match is to win. That's how one makes a living and making a good living is nothing shameful. You may care more about the style you play but for those who call it a career, winning matters. For those rely on their tennis as income, it's not exactly comforting to say one played "a solid aggressive match" and left with a $5000 check while that "grinder" may eventually leave with a $35k check.
I said Nadal is not a grinder because his playing style does not resemble guys like Muster, Chang, Hewitt, etc. I wasn't thinking grinding is a dirty word.
Click to expand...


Yep but if his last 8 tournaments are any example his grinding strategy does not seem to be working that well. The shot makers are really starting to work him.
 
TheRed said:
Winners hit in a match does not by itself indicate how a person played during that match. Serve and volleyers often hit more winners in matches but it's just indicative of the nature of serve and volleying. Agassi, later on in his career, often didn't hit more winners than his opponent but he was never a grinder. You don't have to hit winners to be an aggressive baseliner.
Further, there's no "shame" in being a grinder. The object in a professional tennis match is to win. That's how one makes a living and making a good living is nothing shameful. You may care more about the style you play but for those who call it a career, winning matters. For those rely on their tennis as income, it's not exactly comforting to say one played "a solid aggressive match" and left with a $5000 check while that "grinder" may eventually leave with a $35k check.
I said Nadal is not a grinder because his playing style does not resemble guys like Muster, Chang, Hewitt, etc. I wasn't thinking grinding is a dirty word.
Click to expand...


Not to mention grinders are hopeless in front of talented shot makers.

Didn't you see Dog beating hard court prime Rafa? :lol:
 
dominikk1985 said:
obviously something is wrong with him. not sure if he has physical problems.
Click to expand...


I really dont think its physical. What I mean is everyone on tour is hurting in one way or another. Its more mental. We all underestimate the pressure he is under to win, and the fact that he is looking at trying to catch Fed. If he wins four more slams it will be the hardest four he has ever had to win. He isnt getting any younger, younger players are getting better. Things are piling up. It happens to everyone. The mental toll is worse than whatever is going on with his body.
 
Annie said:
Not to mention grinders are hopeless in front of talented shot makers.

Didn't you see Dog beating hard court prime Rafa? :lol:
Click to expand...

I hear ya. Like I said, Nadal is somewhere between an aggressive baseliner and a grinder. He was once more of a grinder but has become more aggressive in the last 4-5 years. What separates him from true grinders is that he's very quick at attacking once he gets the chance and he's quite comfortable around the net. He comes forward well but I see where the grinding reputation comes from. To beat him is to overpower him, especially on the forehand side. He won't hand you a victory.
 
TheRed said:
I hear ya. Like I said, Nadal is somewhere between an aggressive baseliner and a grinder. He was once more of a grinder but has become more aggressive in the last 4-5 years. What separates him from true grinders is that he's very quick at attacking once he gets the chance and he's quite comfortable around the net. He comes forward well but I see where the grinding reputation comes from. To beat him is to overpower him, especially on the forehand side. He won't hand you a victory.
Click to expand...

Which brings up a good point. I havent seen all of Rafas matches but has he ever just handed a victory to someone? I do recall some blowouts. But thats when a shotmaker is just smoking him. I cant remember seeing him UE his way out of a match. It probably has happened. But most of these guys who beat him have to be on with their shots consistently. If they are playing 80% they wont win.
 
TheRed said:
Winners hit in a match does not by itself indicate how a person played during that match. Serve and volleyers often hit more winners in matches but it's just indicative of the nature of serve and volleying. Agassi, later on in his career, often didn't hit more winners than his opponent but he was never a grinder. You don't have to hit winners to be an aggressive baseliner.
Further, there's no "shame" in being a grinder. The object in a professional tennis match is to win. That's how one makes a living and making a good living is nothing shameful. You may care more about the style you play but for those who call it a career, winning matters. For those rely on their tennis as income, it's not exactly comforting to say one played "a solid aggressive match" and left with a $5000 check while that "grinder" may eventually leave with a $35k check.
I said Nadal is not a grinder because his playing style does not resemble guys like Muster, Chang, Hewitt, etc. I wasn't thinking grinding is a dirty word.
Click to expand...

Agassi hit a lot of winners even in old age. He would pin someone into a corner and then change the direction of the ball into the open court. He did it off both wings and hit the ball aggressively on the rise, unlike Nadal.

Nadal wins nearly all of his points from behind the baseline off of unforced errors. When he hits a volley, it's an easy put away off of a weak reply that anyone could make.

He is a grinder whether you want to admit it or not. And it is something to be ashamed of.
 
Last edited:
I think it's very funny that all Nadal fans are very mouthy during tournaments, until he loses, then there's complete silence.

Who wants to bet with me that TDK starts a new anti-Federer thread about two weeks from now?
 
WhiskeyEE said:
Agassi hit a lot of winners even in old age. He would pin someone into a corner and then change the direction of the ball into the open court. He did it off both wings and hit the ball aggressively on the rise, unlike Nadal.

Nadal wins nearly all of his points from behind the baseline off of unforced errors. When he hits a volley, it's an easy put away off of a weak reply that anyone could make.

He is a grinder whether you want to admit it or not. And it is something to be ashamed of.
Click to expand...

Why don't you pull up some match stats. We all know how Agassi played, but that doesn't mean he hit more winners than his opponent. As far as shame, I'll take Nadal's shameful supposed grinder career over James Blake's flamboyant shotmaking career. I don't think many will disagree with me. There's also nothing against the rules about grinding.
 
insideguy said:
Which brings up a good point. I havent seen all of Rafas matches but has he ever just handed a victory to someone? I do recall some blowouts. But thats when a shotmaker is just smoking him. I cant remember seeing him UE his way out of a match. It probably has happened. But most of these guys who beat him have to be on with their shots consistently. If they are playing 80% they wont win.
Click to expand...

No, I've never seen him hand anyone a win from UE's. Your 80% line is interesting. Against most "grinders" I see, if the player is talented and aggressive enough, he can still beat a grinder at 80%. You can't do that against Nadal because he'll attack just as well when you make a mistake.
 
insideguy said:
I really dont think its physical. What I mean is everyone on tour is hurting in one way or another. Its more mental. We all underestimate the pressure he is under to win, and the fact that he is looking at trying to catch Fed. If he wins four more slams it will be the hardest four he has ever had to win. He isnt getting any younger, younger players are getting better. Things are piling up. It happens to everyone. The mental toll is worse than whatever is going on with his body.
Click to expand...

Totally agree, and I think the freshness of mind last year was the big difference maker vs. the field. His brutal style of play takes as tough a toll on him as it does the other side. He goes into a match knowing full well what it's going to take to win. Hours and hours of waiting for the error to happen, knowing you can't be the first one to make it. This is apparently one of the big things that drove Borg out of the game.
 
TheRed said:
Why don't you pull up some match stats. We all know how Agassi played, but that doesn't mean he hit more winners than his opponent. As far as shame, I'll take Nadal's shameful supposed grinder career over James Blake's flamboyant shotmaking career. I don't think many will disagree with me. There's also nothing against the rules about grinding.
Click to expand...

It is not so much the grinding but the moon balling that's annoying
 
jussumman said:
Has he peaked in his ATP point total and never come back to match this stat again?

Other than the FO and any clay tournaments, his maximum play on the other surfaces seems to have reached its peak and now on the downside. First the devastating loss to Wawrinka at AO, now on the ropes in the round of 64 against Stepanek and finally Dolgopolov dismissing him. Only injury time off with another round of special treatment will save him from falling.

I think the Indian Wells tournament (which is really what a slam would look like if you had best of 3 sets scheduled) is revealing that Nadal's factor to success is the long best of 5 sets attrition battles, and once you take away that (or his own health downgrades even a little bit) he's not such an invincible warrior.

I don't see him ever reaching the heights again. Though it will be interesting to follow how long his dominance will continue on clay/FO..
Click to expand...

I don't think its all downhill from here ( at least not yet) but I remember Thomas Muster, who was similar to Nadal in a lot of ways and he pretty much ran himself into the ground due to his style of play, the same could be said for Michael Chang.
 
jussumman said:
Has he peaked in his ATP point total and never come back to match this stat again?

Other than the FO and any clay tournaments, his maximum play on the other surfaces seems to have reached its peak and now on the downside. First the devastating loss to Wawrinka at AO, now on the ropes in the round of 64 against Stepanek and finally Dolgopolov dismissing him. Only injury time off with another round of special treatment will save him from falling.

I think the Indian Wells tournament (which is really what a slam would look like if you had best of 3 sets scheduled) is revealing that Nadal's factor to success is the long best of 5 sets attrition battles, and once you take away that (or his own health downgrades even a little bit) he's not such an invincible warrior.

I don't see him ever reaching the heights again. Though it will be interesting to follow how long his dominance will continue on clay/FO..
Click to expand...

reached heights today, no?

10388142_770786532942498_3295579845962820590_n.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Murray to dominate now
Replies
22
Views
1K
cockneyDjoker
cockneyDjoker
D
Djokovic is now the favorite at all slams
Replies
45
Views
2K
Deleted member 307496
D
M
I think it is all bad luck for Federer so far.
Replies
12
Views
2K
Mark Vessels
M
Hitman
I'm calling it right now, for Djokovic's next round...
Replies
0
Views
339
Hitman
Hitman
M
2009 FO Sod beat Nadal and Fed won the title because Nadal was injured
Replies
20
Views
1K
sh@de
S
Back
Top