Is Nadal just now entering his Prime or.....

[drakulie]

...... have we been witnessing "prime years" for some time now?

I have been reading many posters saying Nadal is just now entering his prime, and others stating he has yet to enter it. Nadal has recently become (for the second time) the world # 1 player.

With this in mind, I pose the following question:

If Federer had never existed, based on the numbers Nadal has put up since the time he first reached number 2 in the world, Nadal would surely be the clear number #1 player since 2005? That is a period of 6 years being the number 1 player in the world. That is a lot of years to be at the very top, to suddenly say, Nadal is just NOW entering his prime. Now, if this is the case, does anyone believe, since he is just now "entering his prime", we could expect Nadal to be the number 1 player in the world for the next 6 years??

Mind you, this would mean he would be the number 1 and/or 2 players in the world for a period of over 12 years.

IMO, Nadal has been in his prime for a few years now. This does not mean I think he will suddenly collapse, and fall off the rankings anytime soon. However, I can't recall anyone in the open era who was the clear number 1 or 2 player for a period of 5+ years, then entering his prime, which would mean an additional 5 years of being # 1.

Thoughts???

 

[rovex]

2008 was his prime, His level was higher than it is now.

 

[dmt]

Here's how i see it:

I think he's been playing his best from 08 onwards, except the period from June09-march of this year. I wouldnt say he's just entered his "prime". "Peak" might be a better word

If federer didnt exist, then yes Nadal would be the no 1 guy from 05 and 06, largely because of his dominance on clay. 07 was the first year when Nadal seriously challenged for a major outside of roland garros and came pretty close at wimbledn

 

[Sentinel]

Aren't prime and highest level a tad different ?

Regardless of rankings, he's been in his prime for a few years. Becoming number one, does not make this his prime as far as performance.

 

[LeoR]

Nadal has been a great player since 2005 and was improving each year until 2008 where he finally reached a new level, won his first slam outside of clay at Wimbledon in an epic match and during a great run (Hambourg, RG, Queen's, Wimbledon, Canada + MC, Barcelona and Olympic).

He then continued what he showed and won his first hardcourt clam , then won Indian Wells again. It was his best. And then, the problems started, he still won MC, Barcelona and Roma but was not playing as well and finally his injury became heavy and his level dropped heavily after that big injury.

To me, Nadal is coming back where he left after IW2009. He was at his absolute best at MC, won RG without losing a set and was great in the second week of Wimbledon.

 

[TennisandMusic]

Here's how i see it:

I think he's been playing his best from 08 onwards, except the period from June09-march of this year. I wouldnt say he's just entered his "prime". "Peak" might be a better word

If federer didnt exist, then yes Nadal would be the no 1 guy from 05 and 06, largely because of his dominance on clay. 07 was the first year when Nadal seriously challenged for a major outside of roland garros and came pretty close at wimbledn

But he probably would have won Wimbledon 06 and surely 07 without Federer there, so maybe in 05 he would have been number 1 by mostly dominating clay, but he did well on hard courts too. I have to agree with Drakulie on this one. He's been at the top of the game a long time. More so than just about any other person. Sampras did it for six years and started to slide...Federer has been at the top since the end of 2003 pretty much, and started sliding...not sure how people can expect Nadal to be on top another 4 years or what not. That would just be unheard of.

 

[dmt]

But he probably would have won Wimbledon 06 and surely 07 without Federer there, so maybe in 05 he would have been number 1 by mostly dominating clay, but he did well on hard courts too. I have to agree with Drakulie on this one. He's been at the top of the game a long time. More so than just about any other person. Sampras did it for six years and started to slide...Federer has been at the top since the end of 2003 pretty much, and started sliding...not sure how people can expect Nadal to be on top another 4 years or what not. That would just be unheard of.

I agree, he probably has 2 or so years left, maybe 3 but i doubt it. And i am a huge fan

 

[tennisplayer666]

I would say Nadal has been in his prime ever since he won his second FO, so 2006. You don't dominate like he did and not be in your prime. Sure he hasn't dominated to the extent of Federer yet, but still, he is in his prime for sure and has been since 2006.

 

[Nadalfan89]

I don't think we've seen anything yet. Now that Federer is out of the way, Nadal is free to scoop up every major he enters, save for the USO which will always be a battle.

Prepare yourselves for double digits boys!

 

[bluetrain4]

When he won 2008 FO, 2008 Wimbledon, and 2009 AO, he was in his prime. This year is just a continuation of his prime after some injury and bad play in 2009.

 

[Li Ching Yuen]

I think this is the best he has played in his career.

During the clay season, he established himself as a player that WON"T lose to anyone. There was a whole vibe going on in the spring that no one can beat him.

Almagro and Gulbis took a set of him by just hitting insane shots that no normal player would go for, or if he did, probably just a couple of times per match. Those matches had this imagery of one guy trying to put down a monster that's triple his size.

And this formed continued into Wimbledon. Sure, he had some matches that he was lucky to get out from but that's due to the surface for the most part.

In 2008 he played great too, but that wasn't as dominant in the clay season AND most certainly not as dominant at Wimbledon. ( in the latter stages).

 

[bolo]

I don't think we've seen anything yet. Now that Federer is out of the way, Nadal is free to scoop up every major he enters, save for the USO which will always be a battle.

Prepare yourselves for double digits boys!

Vaaaaaaaamoooooooooooooooooooooooos.

 

[Cyan]

Nadal has won slams for 6 years in a row. The record for years in a row winning slams in the Open era is 8 years in a row, shared by Borg, Sampras and Federer. Nadal has been in his prime since 2008 when he won his first slam off clay. The 2 questions are if Nadal can win slams for 8 years in a row like Borg, Sampras and Federer have and if Federer can become the first player to win slams for 9 years in a row in the Open era by winning at least a slam in 2011.