Nadal on being the greatest on clay:"Leave it to historians"

Nadal is such a boss on that surface...ridiculous. Best ever player on a particular surface.
Sampras wouldn't have a chance on clay. Few do..
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
We have many historians in the forum and Rafa believes it's their assessment that matter regarding the greatest on clay. Humble guy! :D


Pete the current GOAT, has some input on how he would play Rafa on clay.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anCS8U9mMQA
But what does the clay GOAT Borg say? ;)

I think Pete would play Nadal with a white flag on the end of his racket.

Good video. Thanks for posting it.



Was. Until he ran into the king of clay on grass. :)
Erm who is the current and 7 times wimbledon champion?

Always a pleasure to laugh at your arrogance and foolishness.
 

ultradr

Legend
We have many historians in the forum and Rafa believes it's their assessment that matter regarding the greatest on clay. Humble guy! :D
Nadal will cement his status on clay soon.

It will be like Laver's 2 grand slams. His records will be untouchable.

Long term dominance on clay hardly happens in entire tennis history.

Unlike Wimbledon which tradition completely changed since 2003,
French Open maintained its tradition pretty much same for over 200 years.

This becoming real historic record in this generation.
 

jrs

Professional
Hmmm Pete GOAT - typo?

We have many historians in the forum and Rafa believes it's their assessment that matter regarding the greatest on clay. Humble guy! :D


Pete the current GOAT, has some input on how he would play Rafa on clay.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anCS8U9mMQA
There appears to be typo there Pete & GOAT? Is his GOAT title sitting in the place of the missing French Open title in his trophy room?

Yeah - the fact only 1 person ever beat Nadal at the French Open to me means he is Clay GOAT - don't need historians - just some one with basic knowledge of Tennis.
 
M

monfed

Guest
Nadal will cement his status on clay soon.

It will be like Laver's 2 grand slams. His records will be untouchable.

Long term dominance on clay hardly happens in entire tennis history.

Unlike Wimbledon which tradition completely changed since 2003,
French Open maintained its tradition pretty much same for over 200 years.

This becoming real historic record in this generation.
Calm down,it's just clay,nobody watches claycourt matches. :lol:
 

Tennis_Monk

Hall of Fame
We have many historians in the forum and Rafa believes it's their assessment that matter regarding the greatest on clay. Humble guy! :D


Pete the current GOAT, has some input on how he would play Rafa on clay.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anCS8U9mMQA

Pete isnt GOAT. Lets get that aside first. Pete is ofcourse entitled to his opinion and probably has best credentials than most.

Raafi Yale Nahdal is ofcourse Clay court GOAT. What future holds for him (being the GOAT) , everyone can speculate.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
There is no grass masters and there are far more tournaments on clay. So thats an unfair comparison.
It's unfair to Rafa. More difficult to have a higher winning % with more events, especially events with a high level of competition. Fed didn't have to face a very strong field for most of the Halle he won. Even if you limited the comparison to the slam, it's obvious that Nadal's domination of clay far surpasses Fed's one on grass. Fed at W: 7 titles + 7 losses. Rafa at RG: 8 titles + 1 loss.
 
M

monfed

Guest
It's unfair to Rafa. More difficult to have a higher winning % with more events, especially events with a high level of competition. Fed didn't have to face a very strong field for most of the Halle he won. Even if you limited the comparison to the slam, it's obvious that Nadal's domination of clay far surpasses Fed's one on grass. Fed at W: 7 titles + 7 losses. Rafa at RG: 8 titles + 1 loss.
And who did Ralph face to win his clay titles? A Federer whose weakest surface is clay and whose BH Ralph can easily moonball to,yea that's the hardest challenge Ralph had. He didn't face a real threat who would actually dethrone him permanently like Kuerten and when he did meet his match in Djokovic 2.0,he had a lucky escape in RG 2011. So, please sell your weak era crap elsewhere. Nadal's clay competition has been an utter and complete joke.
 
M

monfed

Guest
Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Ferrer... All of the top players actually.
Fed's weakest surface is clay so that doesn't count as strong competition.His 1HBH is easily exploitable by Ralph's moonballing.

Djokovic 2.0 handily thrashed Ralph in two consecutive masters and would've completed the humiliation had they met in the RG 11 final, lucky escape for Ralph yet again.

Murray and Ferrer? Please don't make me laugh.

Ralph to this day never faced a pure claycourter of the caliber of a Kuerten. Never happened.
 

NamRanger

G.O.A.T.
Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Ferrer... All of the top players actually.


All who are by far incredibly weak on clay except Ferrer. Federer, Djokovic, and Murray are just top players on clay just by default because they are simply better than everyone.


Nadal maybe plays like 2-3 matches a year on clay that are actually tough. Everything else is a cakewalk because everyone simply sucks on the surface.
 
M

monfed

Guest
And who exactly would beat Federer if the grass was fast? ISNER? Nadal would struggle even more in the first 4 rounds as he does on green clay.
Ralph should thank his stars the grass is as slow as it is today, else he wouldn't be getting past the first week.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
And who did Ralph face to win his clay titles? A Federer whose weakest surface is clay and whose BH Ralph can easily moonball to,yea that's the hardest challenge Ralph had. He didn't face a real threat who would actually dethrone him permanently like Kuerten and when he did meet his match in Djokovic 2.0,he had a lucky escape in RG 2011. So, please sell your weak era crap elsewhere. Nadal's clay competition has been an utter and complete joke.
True, all these people are better on HC. Coincidentally Federer won the bulk of his grass and HC titles before they peaked, and even managed to lose to a weak CC era GOAT on grass and HCs. If there is no CC competition and Federer's managed to get to major finals, then that must be because he had no competition. Federer should be removed from all CC GOAT discussions.

See how that line of thinking doesn't work? If records are everything as Fed fans would have us believe (which incidentally I agree with), then don't adopt a separate standard for Nadal and then dismiss it when talking about Federer.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
All who are by far incredibly weak on clay except Ferrer. Federer, Djokovic, and Murray are just top players on clay just by default because they are simply better than everyone.


Nadal maybe plays like 2-3 matches a year on clay that are actually tough. Everything else is a cakewalk because everyone simply sucks on the surface.
It really doesn't matter. It's still an incredibly strong field compared to whom Fed had to face in Halle most of the time.
 

Clarky21

Banned
Fed's toughest competition at Wimbledon was a clay courter and he lost to him LOL.
This is true and I have brought this up before on here. What does it say for the competition on grass when Fed's only competition there for years was a dirtballer? The grass court field is far weaker than the clay court field could ever dream of being.
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
Fed's weakest surface is clay so that doesn't count as strong competition.His 1HBH is easily exploitable by Ralph's moonballing.

Djokovic 2.0 handily thrashed Ralph in two consecutive masters and would've completed the humiliation had they met in the RG 11 final, lucky escape for Ralph yet again.

Murray and Ferrer? Please don't make me laugh.

Ralph to this day never faced a pure claycourter of the caliber of a Kuerten. Never happened.
Nadal doesn't moonball, he pounds Federer's backhand mercilessly. I don't think you know at all what moonballing is. You'll see a lot of moonballing here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2ibF4iz6u8

Nadal hits the ball harder than just about anyone on tour. Watch these guys in person and you'll see.

Also...if you want to talk about Nadal and "pure claycourters"...Coria, Rome 2005? Again, don't think you know what you're really saying. You should drop the hate.
 

Vish13

Semi-Pro
It's unfair to Rafa. More difficult to have a higher winning % with more events, especially events with a high level of competition. Fed didn't have to face a very strong field for most of the Halle he won. Even if you limited the comparison to the slam, it's obvious that Nadal's domination of clay far surpasses Fed's one on grass. Fed at W: 7 titles + 7 losses. Rafa at RG: 8 titles + 1 loss.
I don't think we can even compare clay court success with grass court success. On one hand one can rightly argue like you have done that with more tournaments on clay it make competition tougher. On the other hand the less tournament on grass, barely 2-3 with one being a grand slam, makes it tougher for someone to impose his/her supremacy. If I am better than others on one surface, I would like to play as much as possible on it as I can. Yes there would be more competition but because there are lot of tournaments and because I am better than others, I would be in a better position to improve my game further and dominate. Plus on grass the margin of error, I feel, is less. It is easy to recover in a rally on clay than on grass. Wherever the margin of error decreases, there are more chances of upsets.

So for me, we can't really say which is tougher, being dominant on grass or being dominant on clay.
 

Vish13

Semi-Pro
Ralph should thank his stars the grass is as slow as it is today, else he wouldn't be getting past the first week.
I won't say that he would not be getting past the first week, but definitely it would be comparitively tough for him and we would have seen a couple of more Rosol types of upsets. I am amused why many think that this would not be the case.

When grass was fast, most of the baseliners used to go packing in first week. Courier once reached the final, and if I remember correctly some experts pointed out at that time, that due to very less rains the grass settled quickly and there was a kind of hard court like bounce that year. And thats why Agassi's win at Wimbledon 92 was truly hailed as a masterpiece. He defeated big servers (Goran) and grass court specialist (Becker) enroute to the title.
 

Vish13

Semi-Pro
Fed's toughest competition at Wimbledon was a clay courter and he lost to him LOL.
In trying to pull down Federer you are pulling down Nadal as well by terming him a "clay courter" which essentially puts him in bracket with Muster, Ferrero et. al.

Nice work.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
In trying to pull down Federer you are pulling down Nadal as well by terming him a "clay courter" which essentially puts him in bracket with Muster, Ferrero et. al.

Nice work.
I'd say he was using it to point out why the argument doesn't work even from that perspective, rather than to seriously suggest that Nadal is a pure dirtballer.
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
Grass and Clay field are both shallow, and have been for a long time. HC field is at its greatest depth the past few years.

Not taking anything away from Federer or Nadal, they can only play who stands across the net from them, but both benefited from weak fields...This does not take away from their prowess on their respective surfaces, however.


LOL at the posters who say Federer's toughest competition was a clay couter. That is extremely disrespectful to Nadal, who is more than a glorified clay courter.

And just as a side note - Federer beat a seven time Wimbledon champion, considered by many as the greatest on grass at that point. Has Nadal beaten ANY multi time FO champion at RG? Just askin.
 

Feather

Legend
And who did Ralph face to win his clay titles? A Federer whose weakest surface is clay and whose BH Ralph can easily moonball to,yea that's the hardest challenge Ralph had. He didn't face a real threat who would actually dethrone him permanently like Kuerten and when he did meet his match in Djokovic 2.0,he had a lucky escape in RG 2011. So, please sell your weak era crap elsewhere. Nadal's clay competition has been an utter and complete joke.
lolz @ this post

Fed's weakest surface is clay so that doesn't count as strong competition.His 1HBH is easily exploitable by Ralph's moonballing.

Djokovic 2.0 handily thrashed Ralph in two consecutive masters and would've completed the humiliation had they met in the RG 11 final, lucky escape for Ralph yet again.

Murray and Ferrer? Please don't make me laugh.

Ralph to this day never faced a pure claycourter of the caliber of a Kuerten. Never happened.
lolz, if not for Rafa, Roger would have been sitting on 5-6 RGs. IMO, he would have won RG in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2011. And you had the audacity to say that Roger would not count as strong competition..

There is no guarantee that Djokovic would have beaten Rafa in RG 2011. Roger bagelled Rafa in Hamburg and still couldn't beat Rafa in the RG of the same year. Beating Rafa in clay masters is not similar to beating Rafa at RG and you obviously know that!

Rafa is light years ahead of Guga on clay. I have seen Guga play and used to like him too. In fact he is/was the ONLY clay courter I ever liked. A Sampras fan like me who never used to like clay courts was fond of Guga. Still facts are facts. Guga used to lose to absolute nobodies on clay and even Federer was much more consistent than Guga at RG. If Guga and Rafa had careers entwined, there is no way that Guga would have ended up with three RGs
 
Last edited:

Clarky21

Banned
Nadal doesn't moonball, he pounds Federer's backhand mercilessly. I don't think you know at all what moonballing is. You'll see a lot of moonballing here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2ibF4iz6u8

Nadal hits the ball harder than just about anyone on tour. Watch these guys in person and you'll see.

Also...if you want to talk about Nadal and "pure claycourters"...Coria, Rome 2005? Again, don't think you know what you're really saying. You should drop the hate.

You're wasting your time trying to explain what moonballing is to Monfed. I've already tried but he just doesn't get it because he doesn't want to.
 
M

monfed

Guest
True, all these people are better on HC.



Coincidentally Federer won the bulk of his grass and HC titles before they peaked,
Umm Fed's beaten peak Hewitt,Nalby,Roddick,Agassi to name a few very able HCers. It's funny you suggest HC given that it's the one surface which has been most competitive over the last decade.

As far as grass goes, he faced peak Roddick in Wimby finals who would've won against anyone else other than Fed, he also beat Sampras playing his OWN game, beaten Hewitt too a former Wimby champion and plenty of big servers on his way to his 7 Wimby crowns. So the grass field is still better than the joke clay field where the closest resemblance to a pure claycourter is freakin Nicholas Almagro who is a certified headcase.

and even managed to lose to a weak CC era GOAT on grass and HCs.
Ralph is the worst possible matchup for Fed and he's lost like 99% to him on slow surfaces(slow HC+ clay),Dubai 06 being the lone exception. Fed has schooled him on quicker surfaces and Ralph would've got beaten handily had they met at the USO in Fed's peak years. Why didn't Ralph hold up his end of the deal when Fed was showing up in virtually every clay court final? That H2H is misleading when scrutinised.



If there is no CC competition and Federer's managed to get to major finals, then that must be because he had no competition. Federer should be removed from all CC GOAT discussions.
Fed's never been in CC GOAT discussions in the first place so I have no hangups if you wanna exclude him,feel free to do so. Fed's legacy has never been built on clay anyway, he's happy he got his lone RG to complete the career slam and that's about it.
OTOH, Ralph's entire resume crumbles since 70-80% of his titles are on clay in an extremely weak clay era. Seriously the only true claycourter he beat was Coria in Rome 05 when Coria was a mentally broken player since that RG 04 loss and even then their match went to a tight 5 set finish.


See how that line of thinking doesn't work? If records are everything as Fed fans would have us believe (which incidentally I agree with), then don't adopt a separate standard for Nadal and then dismiss it when talking about Federer.
Records aren't everything, not in my book anyway so we have a fundamental difference of principle here. Fed is GOAT in my book not for his 17 slams or his plethora of records but because of the way he plays the game, the man is the most complete player I've ever seen and has beaten players at their own games as opposed to standing in the corner of the court and hitting 99% of shots to his opponent's BH,exploiting a broken game mechanic to the hilt. Commentators were calling him a potential GOAT when he had won only 5 slams, no other player has had that kindof praise showered on them in the current era.
I dare you to name a more versatile player than Fed whose game is relevant across all surfaces and across multiple eras. His game can nicely translate with a wooden racquet as well so he'd do fine in the 60 and 70s as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Vish13

Semi-Pro
Fed is GOAT in my book not for his 17 slams or his plethora of records but because of the way he plays the game, the man is the most complete player I've ever seen and has beaten players at their own games as opposed to standing in the corner of the court and hitting 99% of shots to his opponent's BH,exploiting a broken game mechanic to the hilt. Commentators were calling him a potential GOAT when he had won only 5 slams, no other player has had that kindof praise showered on them in the current era.
I dare you to name a more versatile player than Fed whose game is relevant across all surfaces and across multiple eras. His game can nicely translate with a wooden racquet as well so he'd do fine in the 60 and 70s as well.
This part and especially the one in bold is exactly the reason why he is my favourite. I was an avid tennis follower during days of Edberg and Becker (early 90s) but somehow drifted away during Sampras' era. It was Federer alone who got me hooked back to the game.
 
M

monfed

Guest
Nadal doesn't moonball, he pounds Federer's backhand mercilessly. I don't think you know at all what moonballing is. You'll see a lot of moonballing here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2ibF4iz6u8

Nadal hits the ball harder than just about anyone on tour. Watch these guys in person and you'll see.
Ralph generates on average the most topspin than any other pro(something around 5000 RPM which is called moonballing) and standing in the corner of the court and hitting to his opponent's BH is his primary strategy. Ralph doesn't strike the ball cleanly(very rarely does he ever do it) and just waits and waits for his opponent to make an error. That's a pretty cowardly strategy if you ask me.


Also...if you want to talk about Nadal and "pure claycourters"...Coria, Rome 2005? Again, don't think you know what you're really saying. You should drop the hate.
Yea sure when Coria was a mentally broken man since his inexplicable RG 04 final defeat and even then it was an extremely close match which could've gone either way,as usual Ralph capitalised when his opponent is in the dumps as always,the eternal opportunist that is Ralph.

Besides, one match isn't a large enough sample size and thanks for acknowledging Ralph's weak clay competition when you have to go all the way back to 05 to find a decent claycourter. :lol:
 
Top