More Talent. Federer or Nadal?

More talent?

  • Total voters
    304
  • Poll closed .
T

ThreadintheNeedle

Banned
Who gets the nod in your book? I think Nadal is more talented. Federer does seem to have nice effortless looking game but IMO that doesnt make you more talented. Federer is a baseliner just like Nadal. He is far from an all courter. Nadal pretty much volleys better than him. Nadal hits a cleaner ball most of the time and is agressive without making horrendous errors like Federer every now and then. Even if their tennis skills are even, I gave the edge to Nadal because he is physically and mentally more talented than Federer, which are all important part of the game. What are your thoughts

1273987095075.jpg
 
Last edited:
Federer. Nadal's an incredible tennis player, but Federer's more talented. You'd have to be blind not to see that. Blind or deluded.
 
My thoughts are you're delusional if you think Nadal has more talent. Federer's hands down the more coordinated and talented player. Just watch both their games and who comes across as more fluid. Federer can hit winners between the legs, sick drop shots, one handed flick passing shots, down the line backhands etc. Nadal rarely if ever does any of that. He wins by crazy ball retrieving and frustrating opponents into errors. His serve is also pretty lackluster.
 
Ray Mercer said:
My thoughts are you're delusional if you think Nadal has more talent. Federer's hands down the more coordinated and talented player. Just watch both their games and who comes across as more fluid. Federer can hit winners between the legs, sick drop shots, one handed flick passing shots, down the line backhands etc. Nadal rarely if ever does any of that. He wins by crazy ball retrieving and frustrating opponents into errors. His serve is also pretty lackluster.
Click to expand...
I love how you polarized this. Lets see some things Federer cant do that Nadal can do, shall we? Nadal can barrel passing shots from anywhere on the court way better than federer, his crosscourt backhand is way more lethal, He hits far better angles than Federer, he can hit precise backhand passes on the complete stretch. Id say that you are being delusional as well.
 
ThreadintheNeedle said:
What makes you say this? Please explain. What is it about Federers game that makes him more talented than Nadal?
Click to expand...

The shotmaking for a start. The on-court vision, the soft hands.

Shots like those vs. Djokovic in 2008/2009 set him apart in terms of talent. No one else on the tour can do that. He also hits the ball on the rise, which is incredibly tough to do.

I'd like to see you make a case for NAdal being more or even as talented as Federer.


ThreadintheNeedle said:
I love how you polarized this. Lets see some things Federer cant do that Nadal can do, shall we? Nadal can barrel passing shots from anywhere on the court way better than federer, his crosscourt backhand is way more lethal, He hits far better angles than Federer, he can hit precise backhand passes on the complete stretch. Id say that you are being delusional as well.
Click to expand...

Federer flicks more spectacular passing shots than Nadal. Nadal's instinct isn't nearly as good as Federer's. Nadal could never even conceive of hitting a smash-lob, let alone execute it.
 
ThreadintheNeedle said:
I love how you polarized this. Lets see some things Federer cant do that Nadal can do, shall we? Nadal can barrel passing shots from anywhere on the court way better than federer, his crosscourt backhand is way more lethal, He hits far better angles than Federer, he can hit precise backhand passes on the complete stretch. Id say that you are being delusional as well.
Click to expand...

Nadal does not hit better angles. Federer has bent shots around posts from ridiculous angles. There's a reason why there are a million Federer highlights and far fewer Nadal. the reason being a Nadal compilation would have a lot of unforced errors within them. Nadal has hit some pretty amazing running passes I will admit but nowhere near the Federer tweener on Djokovic, Henman and the overhead slice on roddick back in 03.

Nadal is an excellent brutish athlete with excellent consistency and ball retrieving skills. Those are his strengths.
 
Last edited:
thejoe said:
The shotmaking for a start. The on-court vision, the soft hands.

Shots like those vs. Djokovic in 2008/2009 set him apart in terms of talent. No one else on the tour can do that. He also hits the ball on the rise, which is incredibly tough to do.

I'd like to see you make a case for NAdal being more or even as talented as Federer.
Click to expand...

Nadal hits shots that set him apart from the tour as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghL9EPs1NYw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-lvdvrw5yA
 
ThreadintheNeedle said:
Nadal hits shots that set him apart from the tour as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghL9EPs1NYw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-lvdvrw5yA
Click to expand...

Lots of people hit shots round the net post. Murray did an even better one at the same tournament. And the second one is a great shot down the line, but it's speed that got him there, not talent. It's a good shot but in the end, it's simply a brilliant forehand down the line. It's not as out of the ordinary as a tweener or a smash-lob.
 
Every aspect which makes Nadal one of the Greats is worked....

From playing with two hands, fitness, strentgh, power, stamina its all worked to a ferocious level...Its all forced, and learned with great effort and desire.

His tenacity, his ability to reboot before every point, none of that comes from natural talent if you ask me.

Honestly, this is a no contest, ur deluded if you think Nadal is more talented than Federer
 
petetheileet said:
Every aspect which makes Nadal one of the Greats is worked....

From playing with two hands, fitness, strentgh, power, stamina its all worked to a ferocious level...Its all forced, and learned with great effort and desire.

His tenacity, his ability to reboot before every point, none of that comes from natural talent if you ask me.

Honestly, this is a no contest, ur deluded if you think Nadal is more talented than Federer
Click to expand...
Deluded? I think your are ridiclously biased. Everything forced? are you kidding me. There are players out there that have great work ethics and desire but they simply dont have the tools to make it big. Nadal is truly special as a tennis player. He is naturally more talented then Federer. He has been proving this point more and more every year.
 
ThreadintheNeedle said:
Deluded? I think your are ridiclously biased. Everything forced? are you kidding me. There are players out there that have great work ethics and desire but they simply dont have the tools to make it big. Nadal is truly special as a tennis player. He is naturally more talented then Federer. He has been proving this point more and more every year.
Click to expand...

How?
10 char
 
ThreadintheNeedle said:
Deluded? I think your are ridiclously biased. Everything forced? are you kidding me. There are players out there that have great work ethics and desire but they simply dont have the tools to make it big. Nadal is truly special as a tennis player. He is naturally more talented then Federer. He has been proving this point more and more every year.
Click to expand...

Yeah way to prove your more talented when your opponent is at the end of his career. When Federer was in his prime people were saying the guy was ridiculous and by far the best they had ever seen even when he was well short of the grand slam record. With Nadal most people say ahh he just grinded his way to another title. There's nothing spectacular about it. It's a bunch of unforced errors and ball retrieving. The guys a reincarnation of Wilander.

Lastly how can the guy be more talented when he's won only 1 hardcourt slam in his 7 years on tour and lost to multiple players. Hardcourt makes up 50% of the slams. Technically speaking he's 1 for 14 at hardcourt majors with no other finals appearances.
 
Last edited:
ThreadintheNeedle said:
1. Better groundstrokes. His ground game is on another level. Passive agressive with min. UE.
2. Much better at playing smart tennis. There is a reason why he wins big points much better than anyone else.
3. No obvious weakness like Federer (backhand).
Click to expand...

Neither of the highlighted points are talent based. If anything, number 2 points to the opposite of that.

And I disagree that his groundgame is on 'another level' - his forehand is not better than Federer's and his slice is nowhere near as good.
 
thejoe said:
Neither of the highlighted points are talent based. If anything, number 2 points to the opposite of that.

And I disagree that his groundgame is on 'another level' - his forehand is not better than Federer's and his slice is nowhere near as good.
Click to expand...

Nadal's serve is also garbage. The serve is a great testament of skill.
 
"Talent" ??? How general is that? They're both talented I don't think one has more talent than the other. They have different talents and those are the types of responses you're going to be getting. Maybe focus on something different?
 
So if Roger isn't more talented, isn't as mentally tough, is slower, weaker, and doesn't have a lefty advantage. How did he manage to win 16 majors? Did he just magically get lucky 16 times? There has to be something
 
Ray Mercer said:
Nadal's serve is also garbage. The serve is a great testament of skill.
Click to expand...

the serve is a huge part of tennis, you are correct. but how does this illustrate one's talent? karlovic and isner aren't particularly talented yet they have fantastic serves...
 
Fed by a mile.
Compare the two's training.
Nadal, is crazy on the practice court. He works meticulously on everything perfectly so that he is 100% when he walks out on the court.
Fed is very lackadaisical on the practice court, then goes out and whips some poor b*astard.

I think there is a vast difference, fed is definetly the greater 'talent'. Pretty general word to use though.
 
Nadal spends more time on courts = he has less talent = logic fail

A guy can have loads of talent and still work hard, which definitely is the case for Nadal.

But yeah, I still believe Fed is the more talented. Just pointing out the logic fail of some of you guys.
 
hmm talent.. Nadal plays left handed but hes righ handed, if thats not talented I dont know what is. You guys talk about Feds and Nadals shot repertoire, yeah Fed can hit some shots that Nadal cant and Nadal can hit shots that Fed cant, BUT I dont recall Fed being able to play left handed??..
 
I'm a Federer fan so I voted for Federer, that's all these threads ever are. When you compare the two, their game play is...exactly the same.

In Nadal's games you'll notice that he uses the reverse forehand for a lot of topspin to make his opponent's keep playing the game. From here, they either make a mistake or he waits for a short or weak ball that he can attack easily.

In Federer's game, if a ball comes too fast at him he slows it down. Even if he has time to set up on his one-handed backhand he slices it, and on his forehand he just hits it back deep. He proceeds to do this until they make a mistake or he can come up and attack a short or weak ball.

They're both consistency players, but their differences are this:

Nadal hits with major topspin to make the ball have a high net clearance chance and to make it bounce higher.

Federer keeps the ball low so certain grips have disadvantages to their shots against those low balls.
=================================================Talent is different.

Talent would be learning how to hit a forehand/backhand just once, and then playing the game. Whoever would do better, has more talent.

Most of us don't know their childhood pasts which would help determine who has more talent.

With practice though, one can equal them, or further excel them. ^^
 
GetBetterer said:
I'm a Federer fan so I voted for Federer, that's all these threads ever are. When you compare the two, their game play is...exactly the same.

In Nadal's games you'll notice that he uses the reverse forehand for a lot of topspin to make his opponent's keep playing the game. From here, they either make a mistake or he waits for a short or weak ball that he can attack easily.

In Federer's game, if a ball comes too fast at him he slows it down. Even if he has time to set up on his one-handed backhand he slices it, and on his forehand he just hits it back deep. He proceeds to do this until they make a mistake or he can come up and attack a short or weak ball.

They're both consistency players, but their differences are this:

Nadal hits with major topspin to make the ball have a high net clearance chance and to make it bounce higher.

Federer keeps the ball low so certain grips have disadvantages to their shots against those low balls.
=================================================Talent is different.

Talent would be learning how to hit a forehand/backhand just once, and then playing the game. Whoever would do better, has more talent.

Most of us don't know their childhood pasts which would help determine who has more talent.

With practice though, one can equal them, or further excel them. ^^
Click to expand...

By that definition, Nadal, Hewitt, and many other early bloomers would be better than Federer then, since they excelled in the pros tour in their teens, while Federer struggled in the tour for a few years before he became dominant.
 
Nadal is raw athletism. This has a lot to do with genetics.

Federer is textbook complete. This is a lot of genetics too.

So they are both talented, their talents are just different.

Federer's A-game stimulates my brain much more with its geometry, variety and elegance. It's like a diamond, sharp and brilliant. I personally do not care about mountains of sweaty muscles - but I can understand women and gays who do. It's just a different part of the brain to stimulate.
 
Yeah way to prove your more talented when your opponent is at the end of his career. When Federer was in his prime people were saying the guy was ridiculous and by far the best they had ever seen even when he was well short of the grand slam record. With Nadal most people say ahh he just grinded his way to another title. There's nothing spectacular about it. It's a bunch of unforced errors and ball retrieving. The guys a reincarnation of Wilander.

Lastly how can the guy be more talented when he's won only 1 hardcourt slam in his 7 years on tour and lost to multiple players. Hardcourt makes up 50% of the slams. Technically speaking he's 1 for 14 at hardcourt majors with no other finals appearances.
 
They're both extremely talented.

They both have different strengths.

How you can quantify which talent is greater boggles my mind. That's like saying who's the greatest artist Da Vinci or Rembrandt. A totally subjective opinion with no basis in logic. People simply like what they like.

This would be similar to saying who's more talented, Gasquet or Monfils? And then saying Gasquet because his game looks more fluid in your opinion. That still doesn't answer the question of talent. It simply shows your preferences.

But, if I had to pick I'd say Nadal:

Playing with your non-dominant hand and being #1 in the world twice and amassing 8 major titles is unheard of.

Also, his shots are unbelievable, maybe not as much variety, but definitely more effectiveness.

He also makes less errors, has no weaknesses, and doesn't shank many balls.

His footwork is astounding and his on-court strategy incomprehensible.

His ability to adapt unparalleled and the notion that there's still room to improve, commendable.

His humilty is an added bonus.

Tennis is a sport, not a dance recital. In sport I want to see a warrior, not a dancer, so maybe that's why I'm not impressed.

Monfils vs. Gasquet?

I can't say really, they both have talent, but I don't get into Gasquet's game either. Flashy, but ineffective. I hardly rate his talent as mega, since it takes many more components to equal talent.
 
TheTruth said:
They're both extremely talented.

They both have different strengths.

How you can quantify which talent is greater boggles my mind. That's like saying who's the greatest artist Da Vinci or Rembrandt. A totally subjective opinion with no basis in logic. People simply like what they like.

This would be similar to saying who's more talented, Gasquet or Monfils? And then saying Gasquet because his game looks more fluid in your opinion. That still doesn't answer the question of talent. It simply shows your preferences.

But, if I had to pick I'd say Nadal:

Playing with your non-dominant hand and being #1 in the world twice and amassing 8 major titles is unheard of.

Also, his shots are unbelievable, maybe not as much variety, but definitely more effectiveness.

He also makes less errors, has no weaknesses, and doesn't shank many balls.

His footwork is astounding and his on-court strategy incomprehensible.

His ability to adapt unparalleled and the notion that there's still room to improve, commendable.

His humilty is an added bonus.

Tennis is a sport, not a dance recital. In sport I want to see a warrior, not a dancer, so maybe that's why I'm not impressed.

Monfils vs. Gasquet?

I can't say really, they both have talent, but I don't get into Gasquet's game either. Flashy, but ineffective. I hardly rate his talent as mega, since it takes many more components to equal talent.
Click to expand...

I think Federer has superior hand eye coordination and better hands. Nadal has stronger legs and better endurance.
 
Can't Roddick play good lefty? And doesn't all of TW agree that he is a talentless hack who barely scrapped a major in a weak era? Now if he barely plays lefty and is decent at it, then obviously if he played since he was 3 he would be pretty amazing no?
 
big bang said:
hmm talent.. Nadal plays left handed but hes righ handed, if thats not talented I dont know what is. You guys talk about Feds and Nadals shot repertoire, yeah Fed can hit some shots that Nadal cant and Nadal can hit shots that Fed cant, BUT I dont recall Fed being able to play left handed??..
Click to expand...

John Elways is right handed but he bats left handed since that is how he was taught by his father. It has an advantage of being closer to first base. Nadal can't do anything else with his left hand except play tennis.
 
OKUSA said:
I think you're overrating being able to play lefty even though you're righty
Click to expand...

Me?

No, I'm a lefty. My right hand is useless. It does nothing except hold objects. Playing with a non-dominant hand is way beyond a talent for me.

Are you ambidextorous? Because I simply cannot believe someone can get to #1 with a non dominant hand. In fact, the more I think about it, the more amazing it becomes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

VivalaVida
Why do people blatantly assume Federer has more talent than Nadal?
5 6 7
Replies
339
Views
23K
VivalaVida
VivalaVida
atp2015
McEnroe - Kyrgios more talented than Federer and Nadal
2 3
Replies
108
Views
8K
big ted
big ted
Backspin1183
How many slams would Nadal win with Federer's talent?
Replies
47
Views
4K
Deleted member 307496
D
T
Is Djokovic More Talented Than Nadal?
2 3 4
Replies
167
Views
13K
MrBen
M
ARIARAIDEN
Who do you think is/was more talented than Federer?
2 3
Replies
139
Views
20K
Fabresque
Fabresque
Back
Top