Is Nadal the greatest prodigy in tennis?

[FedTheMan]

I believe that Nadal is the greatest prodigy in tennis as he demonstrated throughout the early years of his illustrious career.

He was playing the likes of Moya during his teenage years while other kids around the world were playing against players near their own age.

His career just speaks volume about how talented he was as a kid and how he fulfilled the potential where so many others failed in tennis.

The highlights of his career which prove his prodigious talent are shown below:

• At 14 years old, he beat a 36 year old, Pat Cash in a clay court exhibition match.
• At 15 years old, he turned professional and by the end of 2001, he was ranked 811 in the world.
• At 16 years old, he was ranked 75 in the world.
• At 17 years old, he was ranked 49 in the world.
  • He beat the number 1 player in the world: Roger Federer at a masters 1000 tournament.
  • He won his first ATP tournament
• At 18 years old, he broke the Top10 in rankings and won 2 masters 1000 tournaments.
• At 19 years old, won a Grand slam.
  • This GS win included beating the number 1 player in the semis.
  • Won 4 more masters 1000s including hard court and indoor.
  • He became number 2 in the world and held that spot for the record number of weeks.
• By 20 years old, he won 2 GS and 8 Masters 1000 titles.
  • He made a GS final off clay at the 2006 Wimbledon.
• By 21 years old, he won 3 GS and 10 Masters 1000 titles.
  • He made 2 GS finals that year for the second time, narrowly losing to Federer.
• By 22 years old, he won 6 GS and 14 Masters 1000 titles and became No 1 in the world.
  • This included his thrilling win in 5 sets over Federer at Wimbledon.
  • He won the Olympic Gold in singles.
  • He beat Federer at the AO in another 5 sets to have beaten him on all surfaces in GS tournaments.
  • He won a slam without dropping a set.
• By 23 years old, he won 17 Masters 1000 titles.
• By 24 years old, he won all the slams.
  • He won 3 GS in one year, on all surfaces.
  • He returned to Number 1 in the world.
  • He had a total of 9 GS and 18 Masters 1000 titles.

Nadal is definitely a special talent in the open era and of all time in singles tennis.

 

[smoledman]

Nadal is the greatest prodigy, Fed is the greatest overall.

 

[xFedal]

Guess who won 16 titles as a teenager Yes thats right 'yours truly' Mr Rafael Nadal Parera.

 

[Tenez!]

And at 25 meets his nemesis who hands him seven consecutive defeats in finals.

But undeniably, he was an early prodigy. Beating Coria in Rome 2005 (fifth set tie-breaker) really must have anchored the merits of perseverance in him.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

I'm not sure. Some of the things you listed are truly impressive such as a win over world number 1 at 17.
But Lleyton Hewitt has quite a few records that are better. Won a tournament at age 16 which included a win over Agassi in the SF. Youngest player to be number 1 in the world. Won the tour finals in 2001 as a 20 year old.
Obviously i'm not saying Hewitt is better but idk. It's near impossible to compare these things. He was amazing when he was younger, that's for sure though

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

Isn't the the youngest in modern era to win career slam? Thats pretty much sums it up for me. Actually a career golden slam by 24. That record I would think will be untouchable for many years. Incredible really. Dream of a youngster.

 

[Luckydog]

Nadal is just the greatest prodigy of stamina.

 

[Gary20]

And at 25 meets his nemesis who hands him seven consecutive defeats in finals.

But undeniably, he was an early prodigy. Beating Coria in Rome 2005 (fifth set tie-breaker) really must have anchored the merits of perseverance in him.

Did you forget the following 4 out 5 Major wins for Nadal over the greatest ever no.3?

 

[xFedal]

Did you forget the following 4 out 5 Major wins for Nadal over the greatest ever no.3?

Gary20 this time I got to hand it to you, your main boy Nadal was a great prodigy.

 

[Gary20]

I believe that Nadal is the greatest prodigy in tennis as he demonstrated throughout the early years of his illustrious career.

He was playing the likes of Moya during his teenage years while other kids around the world were playing against players near their own age.

His career just speaks volume about how talented he was as a kid and how he fulfilled the potential where so many others failed in tennis.

The highlights of his career which prove his prodigious talent are shown below:

• At 14 years old, he beat a 36 year old, Pat Cash in a clay court exhibition match.
• At 15 years old, he turned professional and by the end of 2001, he was ranked 811 in the world.
• At 16 years old, he was ranked 75 in the world.
• At 17 years old, he was ranked 49 in the world.
  • He beat the number 1 player in the world: Roger Federer at a masters 1000 tournament.
  • He won his first ATP tournament
• At 18 years old, he broke the Top10 in rankings and won 2 masters 1000 tournaments.
• At 19 years old, won a Grand slam.
  • This GS win included beating the number 1 player in the semis.
  • Won 4 more masters 1000s including hard court and indoor.
  • He became number 2 in the world and held that spot for the record number of weeks.
• By 20 years old, he won 2 GS and 8 Masters 1000 titles.
  • He made a GS final off clay at the 2006 Wimbledon.
• By 21 years old, he won 3 GS and 10 Masters 1000 titles.
  • He made 2 GS finals that year for the second time, narrowly losing to Federer.
• By 22 years old, he won 6 GS and 14 Masters 1000 titles and became No 1 in the world.
  • This included his thrilling win in 5 sets over Federer at Wimbledon.
  • He won the Olympic Gold in singles.
  • He beat Federer at the AO in another 5 sets to have beaten him on all surfaces in GS tournaments.
  • He won a slam without dropping a set.
• By 23 years old, he won 17 Masters 1000 titles.
• By 24 years old, he won all the slams.
  • He won 3 GS in one year, on all surfaces.
  • He returned to Number 1 in the world.
  • He had a total of 9 GS and 18 Masters 1000 titles.

Nadal is definitely a special talent in the open era and of all time in singles tennis.

Nadal for me is the GOAT. However greatest prodigy i would say is Becker. Wimbledon is by far the biggest tournament in the world, he won it at 17, then backed it up at 18!! Agassi was a great prodigy albeit kept failing in finals.

Becker must look at Nadal with envy as Becker could have had the career nadal had albeit at W rather than FO. Ive always thought Becker's best on grass was unbeatable. In the 1995 W final for 1 set Becker and sampras were at their best at the same time and Becker just nudged him. Becker for me should have had 9 Majors which would have fulfilled that prodigious talent he had.

Sampras was also a prodigy...and also a gret veteran.

Problem with all these threads, it is Sampras who starts to remind us how brilliant that guy was.

 

[Gary20]

Gary20 this time I got to hand it to you, your main boy Nadal was a great prodigy.

He was but not the greatest. Becker gets that accolade. Nadal clearly the GOAT though. Agassi agrees with me, that all the assurance i need!

 

[xFedal]

He was but not the greatest. Becker gets that accolade. Nadal clearly the GOAT though. Agassi agrees with me, that all the assurance i need!

By the age of 24 Nadal 9 Slam champion with Golden Slam this encircles everybody else's achievement in close proximity.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

until what age do you look at the achievements to compare "prodigies" ?
several teenagers outperformed the nadal in slams... i'd say it's between becker, borg and wilander.

multiple slam QF before turning 20 (AO,RG,W,USO)

6 becker (1,2,2,1)
5 borg (0,2,2,1), wilander (1,3,0,1)
4 cash (2,0,1,1)
3 ivanisevic (1,1,1,0), edberg (2,1,0,0), agassi (0,1,0,2), chang (0,3,0,0), medvedev (0,2,0,1)
2 mcenroe (0,0,1,1), federer (0,1,1,0), kyrgios (1,0,1,0), amritraj (0,0,1,1)

multiple slam SF before turning 20 (AO,RG,W,USO)

4 becker (0,1,2,1), wilander (1,3,0,0)
3 borg (0,2,0,1), agassi (0,1,0,2)
2 mcenroe (0,0,1,1), cash (0,0,1,1)

multiple slam F before turning 20 (AO,RG,W,USO)

3 wilander (1,2,0,0)
2 borg (0,2,0,0), becker (0,0,2,0)

multiple slam W before turning 20 (AO,RG,W,USO)

2 wilander (1,1,0,0), borg (0,2,0,0), becker (0,0,2,0)

(feel free to correct !)

 

[Gary20]

By the age of 24 Nadal 9 Slam champion with Golden Slam this encircles everybody else's achievement in close proximity.

24 isnt young in tennis terms. Prodigious talent is what players do in their teens.

 

[xFedal]

Nadal may have been the best Prodigy but Novak will have the greatest Resume after Turning 27.

 

[Gary20]

until what age do you look at the achievements to compare "prodigies" ?
several teenagers outperformed the nadal in slams... i'd say it's between becker, borg and wilander.

Great post.

 

[xFedal]

until what age do you look at the achievements to compare "prodigies" ?
several teenagers outperformed the nadal in slams... i'd say it's between becker, borg and wilander.

Nadal is the greatest prodigy at age 24 Golden slam champion that encompasses careers of other legends like Becker and Wilander.

 

[Gary20]

Nadal may have been the best Prodigy but Novak will have the greatest Resume after Turning 27.

LMAO....you guys get more out there by the day!! 27? Is their a significance about 27? Seriously, in Serbia is that the right of ascension or something? Please explain, love learning about different culutres and evidently im unaware of this historical significance of turning 27.

 

[xFedal]

24 isnt young in tennis terms. Prodigious talent is what players do in their teens.

Yh but Becker soon went down hill he did a lot for a teenager but as he reached his physical prime he seemed to have gotten worse.

 

[Gary20]

Yh but Becker soon went down hill he did a lot for a teenager but as he reached his physical prime he seemed to have gotten worse.

But this thread is about greatest Prodigy which i take to mean what was achieved in that prodigal period!!

 

[xFedal]

But this thread is about greatest Prodigy which i take to mean what was achieved in that prodigal period!!

But OP has written achievements all the way to age 24, so staying relevant to the age the achievements OP written don't you agree Nadal at age 24 > Everyone else?

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

LMAO....you guys get more out there by the day!! 27? Is their a significance about 27? Seriously, in Serbia is that the right of ascension or something? Please explain, love learning about different culutres and evidently im unaware of this historical significance of turning 27.

... maybe connors reaching the SF of the 1991 USO is also an amazing "prodigy achievement" ?

 

[President]

He definitely developed extremely quickly. That 2005 breakout season was ludicrously awesome for an 18/19 year old. His game wasn't even complete yet, but he already had one of the best forehands ever, was an unbelievable athlete, and had crazy mental strength. Can you guys imagine Stefan Kozlov, Francis Tiafoe, or Alexander Zverev having a season like that today?

 

[Nachiket Nolefam]

Yep, he did win 4 masters in 2005, and a slam. For a 19 year old, that's ridiculous.

 

[FedTheMan]

until what age do you look at the achievements to compare "prodigies" ?
several teenagers outperformed the nadal in slams... i'd say it's between becker, borg and wilander.

Yes, when most people look at prodigies, they look at the their teen years. So you would be correct. That's why this thread is here for discussion.

I went to age 24 because it rounded off perfectly for Nadal as he won all the slams. Borg was of similar accomplishments by that age. McEnroe entered his peak during that time, etc. It was just an arbitrary cut off point.

Also, I am currently 23 years old and it was to relate to most kids around the world. By 22 years old, people have graduated university and are now on their way to their future careers.

However, tennis players like Nadal have literally had legendary careers by the age when they "should" be entering their primes.

This also affected my reasoning for the cutoff.

 

[Chadillac]

He has overtaken hewitt as a prodigy, but its hard not to put an * by his name because he did it in the dr fuentes era (operation puerto), and doing it again since he was released.

 

[Gary20]

But OP has written achievements all the way to age 24, so staying relevant to the age the achievements OP written don't you agree Nadal at age 24 > Everyone else?

obviously he is yes, but i dont think 24 is prodigious, i think that is the very peak of a players career.

Unfortunately the likes of Raonic, Nishikori, Dimtrovand others are so lacking in talent/heart they have achieved nothing when they should now be the main guys.

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

Nadal is the greatest prodigy, Fed is the greatest overall.

Agree with this.

 

[President]

Yep, he did win 4 masters in 2005, and a slam. For a 19 year old, that's ridiculous.

Really a crazy breakout season to announce his presence on tour, he also made the 2005 Miami Masters final against Federer and lost when he was 2 sets to love up IIRC. And two of those Masters titles he won were on hardcourt, both extremely fast (Brad Gilbert and Patrick McEnroe said that Montreal tournament was the fastest hardcourt they had seen in years). It actually took very strong performances by Lleyton Hewitt (a brutal 5 set match, and at arguably the peak of Hewitt's career) and James Blake to take him out at the hardcourt slams that year too. Half of those achievements were when he was 18 too, not that it matters.

 

[Gary20]

Yep, he did win 4 masters in 2005, and a slam. For a 19 year old, that's ridiculous.

Sampras got USO at 19, that was pretty amazing. To then win it again at 32 defies logic.

The more i post the more in awe of sampras i get!

 

[6august]

His comebacks after a thousand severe injuries is a miracle.

 

[ultradr]

Tennis is easy for Nadal.

I was certainly shocked to see a 17 year old kid defeating then #1 Federer in straight set on hard court, master 1000 tourney, but ......

The most amazing thing to me has been his come backs after breaks ranging from couple of months to 6+ months due to injury.
(maybe exception of 2015. He is still #5-6 in the world !)

I have never seen a player who can come back this easily and quickly multiple times.

Tennis is very easy for Nadal.

 

[Inanimate_object]

You make a very compelling case. Having all his early accomplishments summarized together is pretty intimidating. Well done. I'm convinced.

 

[Livedeath]

obviously he is yes, but i dont think 24 is prodigious, i think that is the very peak of a players career.

Unfortunately the likes of Raonic, Nishikori, Dimtrov and others are so lacking in talent/heart they have achieved nothing when they should now be the main guys.

It is unfair to say that they are lacking in talent, they are talented, but they are unable to propel themselves to the next level which is partly due to the belief in themselves and also due to the insatiable appetite of the 3-4 players eating away all the major tourneys coming their way. Stan had this issue too but he got the belief, thanks to Norman, and rest is history. I agree with you with last part but this is why they are now called the lost generation.

 

[6august]

Yeah yeah...

Rafael Nadal, Alberto Contador, Eufemiano Fuentes, Puerto Operation... those are Spanish maspterpieces!!!

 

[BeatlesFan]

Nadal isn't even in the discussion when Borg, Wilander, Chang and Boris won majors all when they were 17. Pete is equal to Rafa as a prodigy since he won the USO at 19.

But for my money, Agassi is the greatest prodigy of all. His game at 17 was superior to these other guys, but his mentality and immaturity did him in as a youngster.

 

[President]

It is unfair to say that they are lacking in talent, they are talented, but they are unable to propel themselves to the next level which is partly due to the belief in themselves and also due to the insatiable appetite of the 3-4 players eating away all the major tourneys coming their way. Stan had this issue too but he got the belief, thanks to Norman, and rest is history. I agree with you with last part but this is why they are now called the lost generation.

It isn't only due to belief, it is because the big 4 flat out have more ability than the 23-25 year olds on tour today. It isn't like they are only losing to the big 4, all 3 of them (especially Dimitrov) lose to plenty of other players as well. And Kei Nishikori is my favorite player on tour, I don't hate on the young guns for no reason.

 

[Nachiket Nolefam]

Nadal isn't even in the discussion when Borg, Wilander, Chang and Boris won majors all when they were 17. Pete is equal to Rafa as a prodigy since he won the USO at 19.

But for my money, Agassi is the greatest prodigy of all. His game at 17 was superior to these other guys, but his mentality and immaturity did him in as a youngster.

But his mentality wasn't and that's enough to make or break the case. He was reaching semis and finals of kids younger than him and beaten. Sampras, Courier.

 

[smoledman]

Will Baldal still be dominating #2 at 34?

 

[Luckydog]

He was but not the greatest. Becker gets that accolade. Nadal clearly the GOAT though. Agassi agrees with me, that all the assurance i need!

You must assure that when Agassi said these words he was not in the process of taking drugs.

 

[Luckydog]

Tennis is easy for Nadal.

I was certainly shocked to see a 17 year old kid defeating then #1 Federer in straight set on hard court, master 1000 tourney, but ......

The most amazing thing to me has been his come backs after breaks ranging from couple of months to 6+ months due to injury.
(maybe exception of 2015. He is still #5-6 in the world !)

I have never seen a player who can come back this easily and quickly multiple times.

Tennis is very easy for Nadal.

Well,logically,you must assure that his "injury" is the real "injury".

 

[ForumMember]

I think if you compare with the 80's, you'll find Nadal exceptional with respect to champions of that times. All great players of 80's started very early and was achieving great success when still in teens. Of Course Becker leads the pack there for me. But others like Agassi, Edberg, Mc'nero reached top tier very soon. Sampras too won at the age of 19.

However 21st century has been different. Mere talent is not enough to win a slam. You have to back it up with consistency and mental fortitude. That is the reason now even early 20's known as young in tennis and we still call Theim's and Sock's of the world as prodigious talent. Because of this reason I think Nadal would rank as the most prodigious to me. He did it in teens when tennis players are starting to get success only in earlier part of mid-20's

 

[NoleFam]

I think if you compare with the 80's, you'll find Nadal exceptional with respect to champions of that times. All great players of 80's started very early and was achieving great success when still in teens. Of Course Becker leads the pack there for me. But others like Agassi, Edberg, Mc'nero reached top tier very soon. Sampras too won at the age of 19.

However 21st century has been different. Mere talent is not enough to win a slam. You have to back it up with consistency and mental fortitude. That is the reason now even early 20's known as young in tennis and we still call Theim's and Sock's of the world as prodigious talent. Because of this reason I think Nadal would rank as the most prodigious to me. He did it in teens when tennis players are starting to get success only in earlier part of mid-20's

I think Chang won his one and only Slam at age 17 as well. It was the same for the women. They usually broke through early but to me, the dynamics of the game have changed. I think it's because the sport is much more physical now and just being a great tennis player is not going to cut it anymore. You have to be fit, strong and mentally tough to battle. Players are going into their prime later and playing at a high level longer.

 

[kishnabe]

Donald Young....will win every grand slam twice.

 

[VexlanderPrime]

At 29 he was completely done.
At 30 he....???? TBD

 

[Dave1982]

24 isnt young in tennis terms. Prodigious talent is what players do in their teens.

I'd normally agree however with average age of Top 10 now nudging 30, evidence is there to suggest 24 is the new 19-21!

I'm not sure. Some of the things you listed are truly impressive such as a win over world number 1 at 17.
But Lleyton Hewitt has quite a few records that are better. Won a tournament at age 16 which included a win over Agassi in the SF. Youngest player to be number 1 in the world. Won the tour finals in 2001 as a 20 year old.
Obviously i'm not saying Hewitt is better but idk. It's near impossible to compare these things. He was amazing when he was younger, that's for sure though

Yeah I thought Hewitt when trying to think other great child prodigies who essentially made it on the Pro Tour...Hewitt definitely falls into that category but agree that Nadal is simply on another level!

 

[StannisTheMannis]

yes

 

[mightyrick]

No. That was Pancho Gonzalez.

 

[imajica77]

Martina Hingis was the greatest prodigy. Won a singles grand slam at age 16 and was number one in the world at 16 also.....

 

[pc1]

So many great prodigies. There were players like Lenglen, Wills, Vines, Borg, Evert, Goolagong, Hingis, Chang, Agassi, Hoad, Rosewall, Connolly. Since the 1950s, the most dominant was Connolly who after losing the first two majors she entered as a teen proceeded to win the next nine majors she entered and won the Grand Slam in 1953!

Lenglen was so dominant players barely won games from her. Push comes to shove I would say the greatest prodigy is Lenglen. Her record is awesome.