Nadal is finished and should retire

BVSlam

Professional
#51
Some of you guys make it sound like the only thing on a tennis player's mind is: "Okay I need to stop now before people think I'm actually a really bad player who has just lucked his way to 60+ titles and 14 slams (or 80+ and 17 slams in Fed's case)". Legacy this, legacy that. It's not so much the "deciding when someone should retire" but the fact that random tennis followers think they know what's really important for a tennis player.

As long as he enters tournaments, he has reasons to play, whether it's his belief he can raise his level or the fact that he just enjoys the fight as well. Or maybe the fact that leaving a tour which has basically completely decided your life is not all that easy.

These guys play this sport for a living. It's their life. It's not easy to quit what is basically your life. If everyone who had almost no chance of winning titles would retire, there would be a tiny group of people playing this sport. There's obviously more to it than that, even for extremely accomplished champions such as Rafa and Fed, who likewise has gotten retirement advice from random people since 2008.
 
#52
Being a favorite to win and winning is not the same. I also think he will not win FO.
What I find strange is how some folks attack Djokovic fans who are saying he won't win much more, but when talking about Federer's GS record, they attack Djokovic fans even when they say that he will get close. What is the problem there?
This is a thread about Nadal...why are Djokovic fans talking about their player, it is chip on the shoulder of the highest order.
 
#54
Alot of you are saying Nadal wil lretire when he pleases. That is of course a statement that is obvious, but then Nadal fans cant then say when Djokovic keeps hammering him that those results dont count as its a weak era as Nadal is way past his best. This what Federer fans try and it is disingenious.

Nadal's best, as was Federer's was better than Djokovic, Murray and others but to see them now lose to regularly to Djokovic and sporadically to players in their heydey they would have crushed with ease is very sad to see.

Federer is a more controversial issue as he is still competitive but Nadal frankly is woeful now and its going to get worse...mark my words.
 
#55
You should look the first couple of messages. It is a Nadal fan who brought Djokovic up.
I can ask the same question to you about mentioning Nadal in that thread Djoko 5 AOs vs Fed 5 USOs.
I dont pay as much attention as you do to who said what and where, but if i did mention Nadl it probably was by way of comparison or a reference point whereas in this particular thread i fail to see the relevance of Djokovic. Federer i can totally understand of course as there are parrallels, two ATGs past their best, but not Djokovic, he is in his prime so this thread wont be relevant to him for probably another 2 years maybe
 
#56
For a second I thought I accidentally time traveled to late 2009 when Nadal was finished. And then again in 2011 when he was finished. And in 2012 when he was finished.

Silly me.
 
#57
I dont pay as much attention as you do to who said what and where, but if i did mention Nadl it probably was by way of comparison or a reference point whereas in this particular thread i fail to see the relevance of Djokovic. Federer i can totally understand of course as there are parrallels, two ATGs past their best, but not Djokovic, he is in his prime so this thread wont be relevant to him for probably another 2 years maybe
I can see you are not paying attention, which is why you quoted me instead of the guy who brought Djokovic up. Nadal was not the player who was supposed to be compared in that other thread.
Anyway, you should expect much worse cases of threads being derailed (not from me though). Clay court greatness thread turned into a discussion how Novak should have won less Wimbledons, Fed vs Davydenko 2007 FO thread turned into Fed-Djoko peak to peak debate, and so on...
 
#58
I can see you are not paying attention, which is why you quoted me instead of the guy who brought Djokovic up. Nadal was not the player who was supposed to be compared in that other thread.
Anyway, you should expect much worse cases of threads being derailed (not from me though). Clay court greatness thread turned into a discussion how Novak should have won less Wimbledons, Fed vs Davydenko 2007 FO thread turned into Fed-Djoko peak to peak debate, and so on...
Do you have that much time on your hands you remember every thread and what is posted? That is impressive, i have to be honest ive no idea what you are talking about, i just get involved on a discussion on a given day then think nothing of it, ive no ida who said what previously.

All i know is from what i have read from posters who have ben here years is that according to them Djokovic fans have massive chips on their shoulders and it did ring true to an extent when i had a quick look here and saw comments about Djokovic which were irrelevant as to whether nadal should retire.
 
#59
Do you have that much time on your hands you remember every thread and what is posted? That is impressive, i have to be honest ive no idea what you are talking about, i just get involved on a discussion on a given day then think nothing of it, ive no ida who said what previously.

All i know is from what i have read from posters who have ben here years is that according to them Djokovic fans have massive chips on their shoulders and it did ring true to an extent when i had a quick look here and saw comments about Djokovic which were irrelevant as to whether nadal should retire.
I don't have much time. Until you quoted me I didn't know myself who started a discussion about him, so I went to the start of the thread to see who was it. My point is you shouldn't complain to me because I am not the one who caused the thread to be slightly derailed.
 
#60
I don't have much time. Until you quoted me I didn't know myself who started a discussion about him, so I went to the start of the thread to see who was it. My point is you shouldn't complain to me because I am not the one who caused the thread to be slightly derailed.
Jeez didnt think anyone coould be so sensitive..i just saw your comment and quoted it as it was nearer the end, i wasnt necessarily blaming you!!
 
#61
One tournament????
Whole 2015, AO16 first round, Doha final embarrassment of the GOAT, Buenos Aires open to a kid....
It is unfortunate to see Rafa becoming a punching bag
Well you did say he cant even win a 250 tournament, now you mention the whole of 2015. I think youll find he won a few tournaments last year , reached 2 GS quarters and finished the year quite strongly for his indoor standards.
So your point is really about 2016, in which case, yes hes only competed in 1 clay tournament....
 
#63
Well you did say he cant even win a 250 tournament, now you mention the whole of 2015. I think youll find he won a few tournaments last year , reached 2 GS quarters and finished the year quite strongly for his indoor standards.
So your point is really about 2016, in which case, yes hes only competed in 1 clay tournament....
The title of the thread is - Nadal is finished, meaning, we will not see the old Nadal.
I added - yes, he cannot even win the lowest level on his favorite surface (after the struggles in 2015 and hopes and optimism in the fall of 2015 and then three total disappointments so far in 2016: Doha embarrassment, AO embarrassment and BAO Embarrassment.
 
#64
The title of the thread is - Nadal is finished, meaning, we will not see the old Nadal.
I added - yes, he cannot even win the lowest level on his favorite surface (after the struggles in 2015 and hopes and optimism in the fall of 2015 and then three total disappointments so far in 2016: Doha embarrassment, AO embarrassment and BAO Embarrassment.
No you said he cant even win a 250 event on clay, which you then added 2015 in your argument. Did you forget he won on clay in 2015? A 500 event and a 250 I may add. So maybe think before you post ;)
 

WarrenMP

Professional
#65
Nadal should not retire. He still has a lot of good tennis in him. Even if 2016 is not good, a good 2017 is an achievable goal for all the changes he is facing.
 
#66
No you said he cant even win a 250 event on clay, which you then added 2015 in your argument. Did you forget he won on clay in 2015? A 500 event and a 250 I may add. So maybe think before you post ;)
Again, you are focused on one statement instead of broader picture.
Nadal did give people some hope in 2015, especially toward the end. However, the questions are back now, after first three tournaments in 2016.
The King of Clay failed to win a clay 250 tournament...something is wrong...and some, yet still believe he has a shot at FO16
 
#67
Again, you are focused on one statement instead of broader picture.
Nadal did give people some hope in 2015, especially toward the end. However, the questions are back now, after first three tournaments in 2016.
The King of Clay failed to win a clay 250 tournament...something is wrong...and some, yet still believe he has a shot at FO16
Only the most blind of Nadal fans, and generally they tend to be female groupies, think Nadal has a chance at FO 2016.

he has no chance at FO, Murray has a much bigger chance as does Federer Lets for a moment say Djokovic got injured or had flu and so missed the FO. Do we think Nadal would win FO? Im saying no chance. Id argue Raonic has more chance than Nadal now.
 
#69
I am not a Nadal fan. But, he has outside chance at FO. He would have to have a good draw and probably have to have someone else or an injury take out Djokovic. But, I would put Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka and maybe a few others with a better chance than Nadal. I watched Nadal vs Theim match and honestly it was a very close match but Nadal didn't look good. Commentators remarked that Theim's 2nd serve was almost as fast as Nadal's 1st serve which is concerning. Nadal's serve has declined a lot. Nadal's movement was not great and he made more unforced errors in each set than you would normally see in an entire match when he was in his prime.
 
#70
It's something that Federer and McEnroe have but Nadal, Murray and Djokovic do not have.
Borg hit a million balls against a garage wall. It's all just hard work at the right age. And then more hard work. Helps to be a little bit mad, or back in the day to live in Communist Bloc.

The ones with God given talent don't even play tennis.

Not saying JPM was a shining example of gym work and putting in the hours but he was driven.
 
#73
From what I've seen of Nadal so far this year babe, that would take one extraordinary performance from him. Novak won't ever win RG, but I'm not sure I see Rafa being the one to take him out again.
Its very hard to see Djokovic not winning the FO. And I'm not that saying that because I'm a novak fan.
 
#75
Nadal's been done at the top since he hurt his wrist. In a career full of bummer injuries that robbed him of momentum right when he was catching fire, that was the coup de grace.
 
#76
It always boggled my mind how many ignorant Nadal fans and Feddie cheerleaders thought Nadal was going to march right up to 18. From the minute the new and improved Nole showed up in 2011 17 was safe. I said it over and over. 14 would be tough to catch, 17 impossible. A back injury will keep the clowns comparing him with Pete for years, when it's not even close. Let me repeat, Sampras never made a RG FINAL, let alone win one.
 
#77
It always boggled my mind how many ignorant Nadal fans and Feddie cheerleaders thought Nadal was going to march right up to 18. From the minute the new and improved Nole showed up in 2011 17 was safe. I said it over and over. 14 would be tough to catch, 17 impossible. A back injury will keep the clowns comparing him with Pete for years, when it's not even close. Let me repeat, Sampras never made a RG FINAL, let alone win one.
Are you saying you'd possibly consider Pete greater than Nadal if he'd at least reached a FO final winstonplum?
 
#80
If that's all you got from my words . . . then sorry.
So what do you think Pete needed to do at RG to be considered greater? Personally I think the Career Grand Slam should only be brought up when discussing who is the greatest of all time, not when it's about two players who don't quite make the cut.
 
#81
So what do you think Pete needed to do at RG to be considered greater? Personally I think the Career Grand Slam should only be brought up when discussing who is the greatest of all time, not when it's about two players who don't quite make the cut.
So Federer is the only one who is worthy of being called the GOAT?
 
#88
Yes I do. And remember that I (as a fairly new member on this board) knocked some sense into you! :p I believe you also took a few days off from this board after RG 14.
You have a very good memory mate and yes, you were definitely a very level-headed new member who tried his best to make me believe in Novak again during those very dark days and I thank you for that from the bottom of my heart. :) Little did I know at the time that this incredible champion would go on to win Wimbledon just a few weeks later and completely resurrect his(and Becker's) career. Ever since that gorgeous, sunny day 19 months ago I was able to see the light once more and the world has been a truly wonderful place to live in ever since. :p
 
#90
You have a very good memory mate and yes, you were definitely a very level-headed new member who tried his best to make me believe in Novak again during those very dark days and I thank you for that from the bottom of my heart. Little did I know at the time that this incredible champion would go on to win Wimbledon just a few weeks later and completely resurrect his(and Becker's) career. Ever since that gorgeous, sunny day 19 months ago I was able to see the light once more and the world has been a truly wonderful place to live in ever since. :p
Those were dark times for me also. After the AO 14 loss I must admit that I lost some faith in Novak and didn't think he would win as much as I thought he would. But I wasn't at the point where I thought he wouldn't win any. After AO 14 I would have taken 9 or 10 slams to end his career with TBH. Those losses 2012-2014 hurt a lot because I truly believed he should have won atleast 3 more slams in that time. Wimbledon 2014 was a big sigh of relief.
 
#91
Those were dark times for me also. After the AO 14 loss I must admit that I lost some faith in Novak and didn't think he would win as much as I thought he would. But I wasn't at the point where I thought he wouldn't win any. After AO 14 I would have taken 9 or 10 slams to end his career with TBH. Those losses 2012-2014 hurt a lot because I truly believed he should have won atleast 3 more slams in that time. Wimbledon 2014 was a big sigh of relief.
At that time my friend you were my strength when I was weak, you were my voice when I couldn't speak. You were my eyes when I couldn't see, you saw the best there was in Nole. Lifted me up when I couldn't reach, you gave me faith cos you believed. I'm everything I am because you reassured me! :p:p
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
#95
Those were dark times for me also. After the AO 14 loss I must admit that I lost some faith in Novak and didn't think he would win as much as I thought he would. But I wasn't at the point where I thought he wouldn't win any. After AO 14 I would have taken 9 or 10 slams to end his career with TBH. Those losses 2012-2014 hurt a lot because I truly believed he should have won atleast 3 more slams in that time. Wimbledon 2014 was a big sigh of relief.
The parallels with Lendl are just so amazing; I can't get past it! Ivan had to wait his turn when the top ranked players were still divvying up the spoils! The only reason Borg, Connors, and McEnroe didn't have more titles was they tended to skip the AO and FO (Jimmy/John anyway)! When Ivan finally ascended the throne in '85, there was more to appreciate since he had to endure so much to get where he was! We have the same thing going on now with Nole who at times still has to deal with the legend of Fedal! He's knocking out the record books all the time! I feel fortunate to have seen the success of the 2 greatest artisans of all time; Lendl and Djokovic! :rolleyes: :p :)
 
#96
The parallels with Lendl are just so amazing; I can't get past it! Ivan had to wait his turn when the top ranked players were still divvying up the spoils! The only reason Borg, Connors, and McEnroe didn't have more titles was they tended to skip the AO and FO (Jimmy/John anyway)! When Ivan finally ascended the throne in '85, there was more to appreciate since he had to endure so much to get where he was! We have the same thing going on now with Nole who at times still has to deal with the legend of Fedal! He's knocking out the record books all the time! I feel fortunate to have seen the success of the 2 greatest artisans of all time; Lendl and Djokovic! :rolleyes: :p :)
You should feel fortunate that I'm not sure whether this is meant to be an insult or not
 
Top