More Talent. Federer or Nadal?

[Vcore89]

Um...Sampras was not subjected to playing in the era of Luxilon strings and "spaghetti string-like" amounts of ridiculous spin to have to deal with like Federer does. All Sampras had to deal with was Agassi's hard, flat shots, something that Federer can handle with ease in his sleep. Everyone knows that Federer can outhit Sampras from the baseline any day of the week.

Absolutely deserves a ''Like''!

 

[RF-18]

I'd pick 21-10 :wink:

Im so tired of hearing that. Do you know how many clay tournaments there is every year? Over 20. How many Grass? Halle and wimbledon. Then some hard Court tournaments but not as near as how many clay tourn. is being played.

Cant you see the connection? Of course nadal will lead in h2h because the seasons is in favour for nadal than Federer. Im not blaiming the atp or Anybody for this, but im just pointing out why the h2h loks like that if you compare then two, playing styles and so on.

Anyhow, Fed has broken the most records, Holds the most wins of Grand slams, most atp world tour finals titles, most weeks as number one, and is considered as the bes tennis player of all Times by majority of the experts and Pelle around tennis.

EDIT: sorry if there is spelling issues, im writing from My iPad

 

[Vcore89]

Is that why he could barely beat him in the Exo's?

For obvious reasons, not barely...

 

[RF-18]

Im so tired of hearing that. Do you know how many clay tournaments there is every year? Over 20. How many Grass? Halle and wimbledon. Then some hard Court tournaments but not as near as how many clay tourn. is being played.

Cant you see the connection? Of course nadal will lead in h2h because the seasons is in favour for nadal than Federer. Im not blaiming the atp or Anybody for this, but im just pointing out why the h2h loks like that if you compare then two, playing styles and so on.

Anyhow, Fed has broken the most records, Holds the most wins of Grand slams, most atp world tour finals titles, most weeks as number one, and is considered as the bes tennis player of all Times by majority of the experts and Pelle around tennis.

EDIT: sorry if there is spelling issues, im writing from My iPad

*people around tennis at the end

I Would most certainly pick that over Nadals accomplishments, Face it, Federer is more succesfull.

 

[Vcore89]

Federer is obviously far and away more talented than Nadal; even Gasquet is leaps and bounds more talented than Nadal (now, if you would excuse Rich's lack of slams in his resume). Safin is way more talented than Nadal, unfortunately he knows how to mix booze and Gatorades (whatever) in his drinking bottle (he took it easy, so to speak. and so he won sparingly.).

 

[Crose]

It's quite upsetting to see just how badly people disrespect Nadal on here. His talent is off the charts.

Anyone who thinks that you can teach everything he does on the court is just a moron.

 

[TheF1Bob]

Federer. He oozes arrogance.

 

[Tenez101]

Federer clearly has more talent. Doesn't mean he's a better tennis player though.

 

[TheTruth]

It's quite upsetting to see just how badly people disrespect Nadal on here. His talent is off the charts.

Anyone who thinks that you can teach everything he does on the court is just a moron.

It's amazing, and strangely, this talentless guy can beat all of the other more talented players easily.

I would be changing my definition of "talent" if it didn't fit reality.

 

[Tenez101]

It's quite upsetting to see just how badly people disrespect Nadal on here. His talent is off the charts.

Anyone who thinks that you can teach everything he does on the court is just a moron.

Nadal is probably the second most talented player in this era, if not all time.

 

[RF-18]

Nadal is probably the second most talented player in this era, if not all time.

Rofl.. What Would he be without his physic, seriously tell me!?

 

[Crose]

Rofl.. What Would he be without his physic, seriously tell me!?

His physique is a result of his insane work ethic and will to win. 2 characteristics which YOU CAN'T TEACH.

Disrespect Nadal all you want, it just comes off as sad and ignorant.

 

[grafforehand]

Im so tired of hearing that. Do you know how many clay tournaments there is every year? Over 20. How many Grass? Halle and wimbledon. Then some hard Court tournaments but not as near as how many clay tourn. is being played.

This shows you are clueless to the composition of the tour. There are far more tournaments on hard courts, especialy outdoor hard courts, than they are on clay. There are 6 Masters on hard courts and 2 slams. Only 3 Masters and 1 slam on clay. Many more tournaments on hard courts too. BTW Nadal leads Federer 7-6 on hard courts, 7-2 on outdoor hard courts, and 2-0 in slams. This in addition to the 13-2 or something record on clay. On grass they have barely played, Federer leading 2-1 by virtue of being World #1 at the time of all 3 matches, and playing 20 year old diapered Nadal in the 2006 Wimbledon final, while avoiding likely losses to Nadal at Wimbledon in 2010 and 2011 with his own premature losses (and Nadal's WD in 2009).

 

[Backspin1183]

They're both very talented. You can't train someone to be a Nadal or Federer. They're that good.

Federer has more natural talent than Nadal. Nadal may have turned out a better tennis player though.

 

[irishnadalfan1983]

How does a guy with so much more talent lose to the less talented guy 21 times? Ummmmmmm.....

 

[Backspin1183]

How does a guy with so much more talent lose to the less talented guy 21 times? Ummmmmmm.....

because natural talent isn't everything. Also Nadal himself is highly talented as a tennis player and an amazing athlete.
Roger is a great player but I think Rafa is slightly better as he has less weak spots in his game and is better at exploiting a chink in opponent's armour.

 

[mistik]

Fed as usual takes too much credit because of his classical style of play. 10 or 15 years later Fed style of play wouldnt have been praised all that much by tennis community since it is obvious that it isnt the most effective way of playing anymore. Fed has some huge weakness his game you guys like it or not and he couldnt find a single solution to them through out his carrer.If this is the dream talent you guys talking about i am laughing so hard.

 

[Rusty669]

Federer has more talent, but it is honestly awesome to see what Nadal has managed to achieve inspite of his lesser given talent.
That is not to say he isn't talented, only a fool would suggest that.

Who is more talented, Messi or Ronaldo?Difficult to say when it comes to 2 superb athletes, who differ so much in their respected qualities.
It's the same with Federer and Nadal. But I honestly believe that if there were to be a worldwide poll regarding this question, more people would pick Fed over Rafa.
Federer's game just looks so much more effortless, and that's what defines talent.

 

[Overdrive]

Wow, 260 to 55?!

 

[Death Master]

the ultimate objective is to win in this sport. everything else is just cheap talk.

he is required to kill so he kills. what else is there?

 

[Federer20042006]

Nadal's a better athlete and that matters more in the modern game.

Trick shots don't win titles. Athletic ability, serves, forehands, backhands, and return ability do.

 

[Death Master]

the game has changed. now you have to defend as well as attack.

there has to be just the right/optimal mix of both at precisely the right time.

 

[irishnadalfan1983]

because natural talent isn't everything. Also Nadal himself is highly talented as a tennis player and an amazing athlete.
Roger is a great player but I think Rafa is slightly better as he has less weak spots in his game and is better at exploiting a chink in opponent's armour.

I would go with that. However some suggesting Fed is like WAY more talented is ridiculous. I do think Fed is more naturally gifted....However Nadal may go down as the best ever tennis player. Time will tell I suppose.

 

[irishnadalfan1983]

Nadal's a better athlete and that matters more in the modern game.

Trick shots don't win titles. Athletic ability, serves, forehands, backhands, and return ability do.

Good point.

 

[BobbyOne]

How does one define tennis talent? It's helpful to analyze what constitutes tennis talent. Here are some things to consider:

1. Mobility- Does a player move well and reach tough shots? Great players tend to have great and mobility. Not many great players have even average mobility. Also, consider the ability of a player to hit great shots on the run. What about footwork and the ability to always get in proper position quickly in various spots all over the court?

2. Stamina- Can a player sustain a high level of play and great mobility even after several hours of play? How about playing long matched back to back, which is recovery? That speaks to a certain resilience.

3. Reflexes- Does a player have the ability to handle shots well that are hit right at them with pace? How about the ability to quickly react and reach shots that may seem out of reach to most other players?

4. Racquet speed-Can a player generate great power and spin through high racquet speed?

5. Rallying/Ballstriking - Is a player able to hit the ball solidly and consistently over and over again, without having strokes break down? Hitting screaming winners once in a while and going on hot streaks can be wonderful for a player, but how about sustaining long rallies? How about maintaining consistency over the course of long matches and over the course of entire tournaments? Does a player have the ability to hit those great shots under pressure?

6. Balance off both wings- Does the player have the ability to attack and play well on both sides, not just one side or the other? Opponents should not be able to simply concentrate on one side of an opponent in order to neutralize strengths. A player should be able to consistently attack on both sides.

7. Touch- Does a player have the the ability to lob, drop shot, hit angles, be quickly deceptive, and change pace?

8. Serving - A player does not necessarily have to hit extremely hard serves, Consistency and placement are critical. The ability to hit a great variety of serves is very important , as is the ability to hit great first and second serves. How about the players ability to serve under pressure (break points, big points/match points)?

9. Are you a left handed or right handed? - Nadal is a special case of course, but let's face it, being a lefty is a advantage in tennis. This can be viewed as a talent, just like being born with great physical gifts. So many GREAT players, such as Laver, McEnroe, Vilas, Nadal, Navratilova, Roche, Drobny, Ivanisevic, Seles, Rios, Orantes, and Muster are lefties.

10. Mental Strength/Mental Game- This can be tough to define, but mental strength is critical for a great tennis player. Mental strength is also a talent. Like the rest of this list, it tends to be partly genetic, yet socialization/training also plays a huge role. It takes BOTH. Even the ability to work very hard can be considered a talent. It's a talent that is developed over time.

For example, Jimmy Connors had great mental strength. He was a huge fighter. Yet, it's not that simple. He also had the ability to hit the correct shot at the right time. Jack Kramer, Ken Rosewall, Rafael Nadal and Jimmy Connors are all great in terms of mental strength. Ken Rosewall instinctively knew where to position himself to hit the best possible shot. This is also related to the mental game. Many players just hit away at the ball and really have no logical plan at all. They just go for it and "hope for the best". The truly great ones do that at times as well and of course some are better than others, but they also tend to have plans B, C, and D.

When you look at all these aspects of tennis talent, I think it gives you a framework for evaluating players. It's just not as simple as well, I think player A looks more talented than player B. Well, what exactly does that mean? Player A may be more talented in certain ways than Player B and vice versa. Then, you have to make an assessment as to which player is more talented overall.

borg number one, Thanks a lot for this thoughtful and convincing analysis. Going through your ten points, I come to the conclusion that Rosewall, Laver, Gonzalez, Tilden and Borg might be called the 5 all-time greatest.