Nadal had the most difficult route to win his 22 slams than other rivals

[The_Order]

It's you who wasn't born back then and that's why you think Nadal would be a top 2 favorite just because he is Nadal.

Nadal wouldn't have been a favorite above Safin or Nalbandian at that event. Nalbandian had just won the YEC beating FEDERER in a Bo5 final and Safin was defending champion and three-time finalist.

Nadal had as strong 2006 too and didn't make SF in 2007. Then again in 2008 after a strong 2007. So apparently it had zero bearing.

All your points fall flat. Davydenko owns Nadal on HC and Nalbandian pre-hip surgery won two matches and had like 5 match points in the other one, although none of them had faced Nadal yet at that time, but they would have a very strong of beating him. And if both Safin and Nadal had played, Safin would definitely be seen as a bigger favorite. But you wouldn't know because you weren't watching tennis back then.

Yeah, nah... you weren't even born mate....

Safin missed pretty much second half of 2005...

Nalbandian choked up 2 sets to Baghdatis...

Again, your points all fall flat, you have no idea what you're on about.

Nadal was ranked #2, won HC Masters events even with Bo5 finals, had the edge over Federer in outdoor HC matches... he would have been top 2 favourite going in, even in terms of ranking, he would have been #2 seed...

BauerAlmeNOIDEA

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Yeah, nah... you weren't even born mate....

Safin missed pretty much second half of 2005...

Nalbandian choked up 2 sets to Baghdatis...

Again, your points all fall flat, you have no idea what you're on about.

Nadal was ranked #2, won HC Masters events even with Bo5 finals, had the edge over Federer in outdoor HC matches... he would have been top 2 favourite going in, even in terms of ranking, he would have been #2 seed...

BauerAlmeNOIDEA

Yeah, Nadal who didn't make a HC slam semi until 2008 was going to be favorite lol. You are a clueless fanboy.

 

[Mustard]

Yeah, Nadal who didn't make a HC slam semi until 2008 was going to be favorite lol. You are a clueless fanboy.

You're using hindsight when you shouldn't. Nadal in 2005 had won 11 tournaments (a career high to this day), including 3 on hardcourt (2 of those masters in Montreal and Madrid, the latter then on indoor hardcourt) and had his year cut short.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

You're using hindsight when you shouldn't. Nadal in 2005 had won 11 tournaments (a career high to this day), including 3 on hardcourt (2 of those masters in Montreal and Madrid, the latter then on indoor hardcourt) and had his year cut short.

I agree he would be among THE favorites had he played, but not right after Federer. I'd say Nalbandian was the 2nd favorite after Federer having won the YEC beating Federer himself (and if not for that choke it would have been the final). Hewitt would also be ranked higher than him although he flopped (lost to Chela and he had beaten him in 2005 in a VERY heated match), but pre-tournament he would have been considered a bigger favorite having made the final in 2005 and having lost only to Federer in the other 3 HC slams in a two-year period. Safin, who also was injured, would have been a bigger favorite if healthy being the defending champion and 3-time finalist. Both Nadal and Safin ended 2005 with injuries, but if they were healthy, at that time Safin would be a bigger favorite. After Federer, Nalbandian, Hewitt and Safin it's possible Nadal would be the biggest favorite, even above Roddick, etc.

I'd argue hindsight is also the reason someone would consider Nadal the 2nd favorite, because he went on to win 22 slams, including 6 on HC, etc. But at the time he wasn't that strong of a favorite on HC yet. Different story for instance at USO 2012 when he missed it given he was the best HC after Djokovic already (given Federer wasn't performing that well at slams at the time).

 

[Mustard]

I agree he would be among THE favorites had he played, but not right after Federer. I'd say Nalbandian was the 2nd favorite after Federer having won the YEC beating Federer himself (and if not for that choke it would have been the final). Hewitt would also be ranked higher than him although he flopped (lost to Chela and he had beaten him in 2005 in a VERY heated match), but pre-tournament he would have been considered a bigger favorite having made the final in 2005 and having lost only to Federer in the other 3 HC slams in a two-year period. Safin, who also was injured, would have been a bigger favorite if healthy being the defending champion and 3-time finalist. Both Nadal and Safin ended 2005 with injuries, but if they were healthy, at that time Safin would be a bigger favorite. After Federer, Nalbandian, Hewitt and Safin it's possible Nadal would be the biggest favorite, even above Roddick, etc.

I'd argue hindsight is also the reason someone would consider Nadal the 2nd favorite, because he went on to win 22 slams, including 6 on HC, etc. But at the time he wasn't that strong of a favorite on HC yet. Different story for instance at USO 2012 when he missed it given he was the best HC after Djokovic already (given Federer wasn't performing that well at slams at the time).

Nadal was more favoured than Nalbandian at the 2008 Australian Open, despite Nalbandian's Madrid Indoor and Paris Indoor exploits in late 2007. So imagine 2 years earlier, when Nadal had been winning multiple hardcourt masters in recent months and dominating on clay so strongly (36 clay wins in a row, a run that would eventually reach 81) while still a teenager.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Nadal was more favoured than Nalbandian at the 2008 Australian Open, despite Nalbandian's Madrid Indoor and Paris Indoor exploits in late 2007. So imagine 2 years earlier, when Nadal had been winning multiple hardcourt masters in recent months and dominating on clay so strongly (36 clay wins in a row, a run that would eventually reach 81) while still a teenager.

Yeah, definitely agree about 2008 but not 2006. Nalbandian had been declining since mid-2006 despite those Paris-Madrid runs and was doing poorly at slams and Nadal had been evolving and in 2007 almost beats Federer at Wimbledon and was a three-time slam winner (Indian Wells 2007 was also some of his best hard court form). Different scenario in 2006 despite him having a very strong 2005.

But regardless of who was more favorite or less, I don't think it's a slam Nadal would have won had he played, even if Federer was subpar and he's a bad matchup. He was still green outside clay.

 

[Razer]

Yeah, definitely agree about 2008 but not 2006. Nalbandian had been declining since mid-2006 despite those Paris-Madrid runs and was doing poorly at slams and Nadal had been evolving and in 2007 almost beats Federer at Wimbledon and was a three-time slam winner (Indian Wells 2007 was also some of his best hard court form). Different scenario in 2006 despite him having a very strong 2005.

But regardless of who was more favorite or less, I don't think it's a slam Nadal would have won had he played, even if Federer was subpar and he's a bad matchup. He was still green outside clay.

You are right, back in 2006 the fav of the Aus open after Federer were many players who were not Nadal.

Nalbandian, Roddick and Hewitt were the 3 favs. Even Gonzales and Ljubicic were seen as guys who had chances to go really deep into the tourney. At that time Nadal was still seen as a 1 trick Pony and a clay specialist, Nadal only shrugged off this image at the end of 2006. The year 2006 helped Nadal look like he could play on others surfaces against Federer too. In 2007 at the time of the AO Nadal was the second fav, followed by Marat Safin who was still seen as a force despite being ranked outside top 20-25 ranks..

 

[GabeT]

The better you are the easier everything appears to be

 

[Holmes]

If Rafa was not there, Fed would have won it from Djoker... what's your point.

Excellent satire.

 

[Mustard]

You are right, back in 2006 the fav of the Aus open after Federer were many players who were not Nadal.

Based on what? Nadal had won Montreal (August 2005) and Madrid Indoor (October 2005), i.e. two masters on hardcourt, had 11 tournaments wins in 2005 (a career high for Nadal to this day). Nalbandian wouldn't have even played at the 2005 YEC that he ended up winning if several other players hadn't missed it. Nalbandian was ranked world number 12 at the time of the 2005 YEC, and got into that YEC because Nadal, Hewitt, Roddick and Safin pulled out of it.

The overrating of late 2005-early 2006 Nalbandian compared to Nadal is amusing. Nadal was world number 2 with a couple of hardcourt masters wins.

Nalbandian, Roddick and Hewitt were the 3 favs. Even Gonzales and Ljubicic were seen as guys who had chances to go really deep into the tourney. At that time Nadal was still seen as a 1 trick Pony and a clay specialist, Nadal only shrugged off this image at the end of 2006. The year 2006 helped Nadal look like he could play on others surfaces against Federer too. In 2007 at the time of the AO Nadal was the second fav, followed by Marat Safin who was still seen as a force despite being ranked outside top 20-25 ranks..

In 2006, Nadal did worse on hardcourt than in 2005, at least after beating Federer at 2006 Dubai anyway. And some people in this thread are using that hindsight (and Nadal's 2007 hardcourt form being like his 2006, apart from his excellent 2007 Indian Wells form) to underrate Nadal's odds had he played at the 2006 Australian Open, which would have been based on Nadal's 2005 form.

I don't think Nadal had a better hardcourt season than 2005 until 2013, to be honest. Sure, he had some excellent individual hardcourt tournaments (2007 Indian Wells, 2008 Canadian Open, 2008 Beijing Olympics, 2009 Australian Open, 2009 Indian Wells, 2010 US Open etc.), but he didn't better his hardcourt season of 2005 until 2013. 2013 was Nadal's best hardcourt season, where he won Indian Wells, and then did the Canadian Open-Cincinnati-US Open triple.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Nadal had the most difficult route to win his 22 slams than other rivals​

 

[Razer]

Based on what? Nadal had won Montreal (August 2005) and Madrid Indoor (October 2005), i.e. two masters on hardcourt, had 11 tournaments wins in 2005 (a career high for Nadal to this day).


In 2006, Nadal did worse on hardcourt than in 2005, after beating Federer at 2006 Dubai anyway. And some people in this thread are using that hindsight to underrate Nadal's odds had he played at the 2006 Australian Open, which would have been based on Nadal's 2005 form.

Winning Montreal did not do anything. Federer put out Nadal in Miami and even though he lost the french open encounter there was no such image of Nadal being a threat to Federer outside Clay despite the Monreal win. Rafael was by an large seen as a 1 trick pony at the end of 2005. Heck his foot was diagnosed in the indoor season, I dont rem him being seen as a threat to Fed outside clay in the minds of anyone.

This perception changed in 2006 - Nadal's win over Federer in Dubai was big, it is a small title but that win caught some attention for Nadal rising outside clay. Nadal obv beat Fed in the clay season again and again, then reached the finals of wimbledon .... everyone just knew that this guy will rise, Federer himself understood that Nadal cannot be swatted as just a clay courter. Pivotal year 2006 for Nadal.

 

[Mustard]

Nadal had the most difficult route to win his 22 slams than other rivals​

All people have to do is imagine being in Nadal's shoes circa April 2006, heading into Monte Carlo. Everyone is assuming that Federer is going to sweep you aside, everyone is singing Federer's praises in the most glowing terms imaginable. There's insinuations that you aren't in the same league as Federer. And even after Nadal beats Federer in the 2006 Monte Carlo final, then there's Rome, where Federer denies even having a rivalry with you before the final there.

 

[GabeT]

A never ending list of excuses

 

[Mustard]

Winning Montreal did not do anything.

Have you seen Nadal's matches at the 2005 Canadian Open? His serving was excellent, not in a 2010 US Open way, but in a nonchalent commanding way, which commentators mentioned compared to the clay tournaments that he had been winning where he was largely spinning the serve in. Interestingly in hindsight, Toni wasn't at the 2005 Canadian Open, with Francisco Roig doing Rafa's coaching that week. It was an excellent tournament by Nadal, and he looked commanding on hardcourt that week. The loss to Berdych at 2005 Cincinnati was a classic, where Nadal lost after having 3 match points. At the 2005 US Open though, Nadal looked largely out of sorts from the beginning, against 2 American wildcards and then losing to Blake in 4 sets in the third round. Nadal's tournament wins in Beijing and Madrid later in the year were pretty good without being brilliant like in Montreal, although the Madrid final was a classic against Ljubicic from a drama standpoint.

Federer put out Nadal in Miami

After Nadal led by 2-0 in sets, and 4-1 in the third set, and was close in the third set tiebreak. That remained Nadal's only loss from 2 sets up before 2015.

and even though he lost the french open encounter there was no such image of Nadal being a threat to Federer outside Clay despite the Monreal win.

Key Biscyane? Nadal almost beat him in the final there in 2005, and did beat him there the year before when ranked 34 in the world.

Rafael was by an large seen as a 1 trick pony at the end of 2005.

He certainly was not. End of 2006 and end of 2007 in some anti-Nadal quarters, but not in late 2005.

Heck his foot was diagnosed in the indoor season,

After winning in Madrid in epic fashion against in form Ljubicic from 2 sets down.

I dont rem him being seen as a threat to Fed outside clay in the minds of anyone.

Nadal was well ahead of the pack in second place at the end of 2005. Of course the tennis establishment expected Federer to put Nadal in his place in due course, including on clay.

This perception changed in 2006 - Nadal's win over Federer in Dubai was big,

Yes, but Nadal didn't carry that hardcourt form on in the rest of 2006. He lost to Blake again (like at the 2005 US Open) at 2006 Indian Wells, then lost to Moya at Key Biscayne early on. Nadal was later losing to Berdych and Youzhny in the summer, and losing to Berdych much more easily at 2006 Toronto than in their 2005 Cincinnati classic.

it is a small title but that win caught some attention for Nadal rising outside clay. Nadal obv beat Fed in the clay season again and again, then reached the finals of wimbledon .... everyone just knew that this guy will rise, Federer himself understood that Nadal cannot be swatted as just a clay courter. Pivotal year 2006 for Nadal.

Nadal's last tournament win in 2006 was the French Open. In 2005, Nadal won 5 titles after the French Open, 3 of those on hardcourt.

 

[Born_to_slice]

Nadal holds the record of most Slam trophies won beating a Big 3 member. So he had it the hardest.

Yes he suffered so much at RG