Nadal Playng the Best Clay Court Tennis of His Life?

[Meles]

First of all, you're assuming he will win Madrid, Rome and RG without losing a set. A red-lining Del Potro can definitely steal a set at any of those tournaments.

Secondly, Nadal won 81 consecutive MATCHES on clay from 2005-2007 beating superior clay players like peak Coria and peak Fed, which to date is still the longest single surface winning streak. I'd say that was even better.

Coria was coming down with the serving yips in 2005 and well lets face it never had a strong serve game on clay. Peak Fed was good, but the backhand gag was working pretty well then.

Del Potro does not share your optimism about clay. He's beaten two top 5 players on clay and that was early in his career (Murray and Soderling.)

 

[every7]

I have only just returned from being away and I am just discovering what Nadal has done during the last tournaments looking at results.

From what I have had a chance to check with the statistics so far it looks like his backhand stroke mechanics and also from a strategic / efficiency standpoint he is even better than before?!

Is this correct? What has the serve and court positioning been like? I assume the court position has been even more defensive than earlier this year at AO?

What has his athleticism been like? Has this been the one element that people could agree has fallen slightly since last clay campaign?

Thanks everyone for the discussions, and am catching up on what I missed with this thread.

 

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

Thiem and Goffin are still getting their games back after injury layoff.

Thiem was crushed by Verdasco 6-4 6-0 even before his injury layoff. His last 5 sets vs Nadal on clay have been to the score-lines of 6-3 6-4 6-0 6-0 6-2. Goffin's clay score-lines are only slightly better at 6-3 6-1 7-6 6-2 6-4 6-0. At least he only got bageled once, I guess..

All three may be considerably better by RG and then you have a field.

I agree with this. It's still not much of a field though. Instead of losing sets to Nadal 6-0, they'll lose it 6-2. They still don't compare as competition to peak Djokovic, Fed, Murray, Wawrinka. Del Potro is probably the likeliest candidate to push Nadal and he's pushing 30.

Thiem torpedoed Nadal at 2017 Rome and that's arguably the worst beating given to prime Nadal on clay (2015-2016 does not count.)

2017 Nadal is not prime Nadal. It's definitely a dominant victory, but I would argue Djokovic's 2011 Rome final and 2013 MC final were more far impressive against a peak Nadal.

 

[BrokenGears]

Can't believe people think 2017 Nadal is comparable against past Rafas

 

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

Coria was coming down with the serving yips in 2005 and well lets face it never had a strong serve game on clay. Peak Fed was good, but the backhand gag was working pretty well then.

Del Potro does not share your optimism about clay. He's beaten two top 5 players on clay and that was early in his career (Murray and Soderling.)

The Rome 2005 and 2006 finals will tell you what peak Coria and peak Fed were capable of on clay. I agree that Coria had declined a bit in 2005, but he was still good enough to push Nadal all the way in the Rome final in 2005. Peak Fed did the same in 2006 in one of the greatest clay matches of all time. Even if both Fed and Coria had their weaknesses, I think they still obliterate Thiem, Goffin, Dimitrov, and Zverev as far as how they compete with Nadal.

Don't get me wrong, I don't expect Del Potro to beat Nadal or win a tournament, but he can definitely make a QF or SF and take a set. Thiem is also capable of that, but he looks to be in worse form compared to 2017. He's already lost a lot of points in Rio, Monte Carlo and Barcelona.

 

[Bartelby]

He doesn't really have to run to hit a serve, so that is a matter of confidence.

All the stats show it is his return game that is winning on clay, and he just hasn't got this off clay.

Yep. Plus much better serving, backhand, and forecourt game.

 

[Meles]

Thiem was crushed by Verdasco 6-4 6-0 even before his injury layoff. His last 5 sets vs Nadal on clay have been to the score-lines of 6-3 6-4 6-0 6-0 6-2. Goffin's clay score-lines are only slightly better at 6-3 6-1 7-6 6-2 6-4 6-0. At least he only got bageled once, I guess..



I agree with this. It's still not much of a field though. Instead of losing sets to Nadal 6-0, they'll lose it 6-2. They still don't compare as competition to peak Djokovic, Fed, Murray, Wawrinka. Del Potro is probably the likeliest candidate to push Nadal and he's pushing 30.



2017 Nadal is not prime Nadal. It's definitely a dominant victory, but I would argue Djokovic's 2011 Rome final and 2013 MC final were more far impressive against a peak Nadal.

Thiem had just won the week before in Buenos Aires. Nadal has lost early in the clay season as well, so not exactly sold that one match in Rio means Thiem is in decline when his stats are still improving. You do realize that Thiem would have won a whole lot on clay last year if Nadal had not been in his way?

The field is young. Thiem is getting stronger in the stamina department year by year. I'd definitely rate Thiem and Zverev much more highly than Wawrinka and Murray at the same age. I might even rate them higher than peak Murray and Wawa, since Zverev is undefeated against Wawa and Djoko. Thiem has beaten Wawrinka on clay and Murray as well. Murray appears to not match up that well with Thiem on any surface would be my guess. Despite a clear matchup issue with Nadal, Zverev is still excellent on clay.

I hope Delpo does well on clay this year, but I expect you're going to be in for a rude awakening this year. People mistake weak field right now on clay because all the geriatric pigeons are dead meat on clay. With all the youth coming up the clay field looks very secure for years to come.

Lets face reality, if Bjorn Borg was trying to come up against Nadal he probably would have had a stinted career due to the constant bruising of his ego. The guy retired as soon as he had any whiff of competition for #1. Don't think he would have enjoyed being 2nd fiddle to Nadal or even Peakovic for that matter. The clay field is loaded with young talent right now if you remove Nadal from the picture.

 

[Meles]

He doesn't really have to run to hit a serve, so that is a matter of confidence.

All the stats show it is his return game that is winning on clay, and he just hasn't got this off clay.

Did you miss the US Open last year?

Your losing all credibility when you say its Nadal's return game this is winning for him on clay. Over 2017-2018 his entire resurgence has been all about Moya's work particularly on his 2nd serve game. (There have been several articles even on the subject.) His return game is surprisingly good still for his age. You'll find if you look at this same stretch last year that Nadal had very positive return numbers, so I wouldn't say that this year is much different.

 

[Julian Houston]

Thiem had just won the week before in Buenos Aires. Nadal has lost early in the clay season as well, so not exactly sold that one match in Rio means Thiem is in decline when his stats are still improving. You do realize that Thiem would have won a whole lot on clay last year if Nadal had not been in his way?

The field is young. Thiem is getting stronger in the stamina department year by year. I'd definitely rate Thiem and Zverev much more highly than Wawrinka and Murray at the same age. I might even rate them higher than peak Murray and Wawa, since Zverev is undefeated against Wawa and Djoko. Thiem has beaten Wawrinka on clay and Murray as well. Murray appears to not match up that well with Thiem on any surface would be my guess. Despite a clear matchup issue with Nadal, Zverev is still excellent on clay.

I hope Delpo does well on clay this year, but I expect you're going to be in for a rude awakening this year. People mistake weak field right now on clay because all the geriatric pigeons are dead meat on clay. With all the youth coming up the clay field looks very secure for years to come.

Lets face reality, if Bjorn Borg was trying to come up against Nadal he probably would have had a stinted career due to the constant bruising of his ego. The guy retired as soon as he had any whiff of competition for #1. Don't think he would have enjoyed being 2nd fiddle to Nadal or even Peakovic for that matter. The clay field is loaded with young talent right now if you remove Nadal from the picture.

The weakness is no matter what Thiem plays with one hand, he will never beat Nadal in RG and when it matters.

I rate a 2 hander and ball basher higher chance than him on clay.

 

[mightyrick]

My word, you are start raving mad. Does it bother you that much that no one has beaten prime Nadal on equal footing at RG? At least Thiem outside of RG has given prime Nadal the worst beating of his career.

It bothers me that absolutely zero of the young up-and-coming talents are not making serious runs at majors. It's not good for the sport. I give Federer and Nadal full credit for playing well and I recognize their GOATness, but the only factor isn't Federer and Nadal's talent. These are two players over 30 who are shadows of their peak/prime selves. Tennis is in a really sad state that not one single nextgen player is taking the tour by storm.

I'm not asking for another Federer, Nadal or Djokovic. I'm asking for another Soderling, Nalbandian, Davydenko, Roddick, Ferrer, Del Potro, or Berdych. None of the nextgen players are even close to that level.

There's a big power vacuum filled with 30+ year olds who are just waiting for someone to come along and take the prize. But nobody is.

 

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

Thiem had just won the week before in Buenos Aires. Nadal has lost early in the clay season as well, so not exactly sold that one match in Rio means Thiem is in decline when his stats are still improving. You do realize that Thiem would have won a whole lot on clay last year if Nadal had not been in his way?

The field is young. Thiem is getting stronger in the stamina department year by year. I'd definitely rate Thiem and Zverev much more highly than Wawrinka and Murray at the same age. I might even rate them higher than peak Murray and Wawa, since Zverev is undefeated against Wawa and Djoko. Thiem has beaten Wawrinka on clay and Murray as well. Murray appears to not match up that well with Thiem on any surface would be my guess. Despite a clear matchup issue with Nadal, Zverev is still excellent on clay.

Have Theim's stats improved this year? He's already lost quite a few points on clay this year compared to last year, and it's starting to hurt his ranking. He's dropped down to no. 7 with a boatload of points to defend in Madrid, Rome and RG.

Thiem isn't that young anymore, though. He has a good clay resume, but if he were ever to challenge Nadal for the biggest clay titles, you would expect that he would be pushing Nadal harder by now, given that he's in his physical peak while Nadal is turning 32. I will concede that Thiem and Zverev are doing better than Wawrinka and Murray at the same age, but they're still far below Djokovic and Federer. Don't get me wrong, I want these guys to do well, but they've disappointed time and time again that I just can't be optimistic.

I hope Delpo does well on clay this year, but I expect you're going to be in for a rude awakening this year. People mistake weak field right now on clay because all the geriatric pigeons are dead meat on clay. With all the youth coming up the clay field looks very secure for years to come.

Lets face reality, if Bjorn Borg was trying to come up against Nadal he probably would have had a stinted career due to the constant bruising of his ego. The guy retired as soon as he had any whiff of competition for #1. Don't think he would have enjoyed being 2nd fiddle to Nadal or even Peakovic for that matter. The clay field is loaded with young talent right now if you remove Nadal from the picture.

I don't really expect Delpo to win anything, but I am hoping that he can have some confidence-boosting wins. While there's a lot of young talent making steady progress, I just have certain expectations as to how they perform. I think the young guys are supposed to move the game forward by driving the "geriatric pigeons" into retirement, not wait for them to decline so they can pick up the scraps. A 32 year old Nadal hasn't lost a single set this clay season. Thiem, Zverev, Tsitsipas, Dimitrov and Goffin were all swatted aside like bugs. It saddens me that the closest that Nadal came to losing a set was to journeyman Klizan instead of to the younger generation who are supposed to take over the game.

 

[Julian Houston]

Nadal playing aggressive and stepping in because of weak competition, all these players can't defend and rally, use 3 attacking shots against them will be beaten. Whenever he sees talented player he will stand behind. I have to concede Murray and Djokovic disappear from tour gives Federer & Nadal hope to revive career. But it goes both ways, both will keep winning slams until another champion appear. Its supposed to be Djokovic feasting against this era as predicted many yrs back.

 

[every7]

Thiem had just won the week before in Buenos Aires. Nadal has lost early in the clay season as well, so not exactly sold that one match in Rio means Thiem is in decline when his stats are still improving. You do realize that Thiem would have won a whole lot on clay last year if Nadal had not been in his way?

The field is young. Thiem is getting stronger in the stamina department year by year. I'd definitely rate Thiem and Zverev much more highly than Wawrinka and Murray at the same age. I might even rate them higher than peak Murray and Wawa, since Zverev is undefeated against Wawa and Djoko. Thiem has beaten Wawrinka on clay and Murray as well. Murray appears to not match up that well with Thiem on any surface would be my guess. Despite a clear matchup issue with Nadal, Zverev is still excellent on clay.

I hope Delpo does well on clay this year, but I expect you're going to be in for a rude awakening this year. People mistake weak field right now on clay because all the geriatric pigeons are dead meat on clay. With all the youth coming up the clay field looks very secure for years to come.

Lets face reality, if Bjorn Borg was trying to come up against Nadal he probably would have had a stinted career due to the constant bruising of his ego. The guy retired as soon as he had any whiff of competition for #1. Don't think he would have enjoyed being 2nd fiddle to Nadal or even Peakovic for that matter. The clay field is loaded with young talent right now if you remove Nadal from the picture.

One of Thiem's early "signature wins" was a victory against Murray on U.S. hardcourt. Even at a very young age Thiem was laying the groundwork for what appeared to be a blistering, attacking game with very high margin for error that could overpower even elite all court HC players on their preferred surface. It's a very good clay game. He is still suffering at the moment with some lag after over-coaching, over-training and over-playing the last 1-2 years. This will be in the rearview soon and will look like nothing more than a blip on the radar in 2-3 years time imo. We are looking at a future force on clay AND slow outdoor HC. The only concern will be if the ATP pulls a switcheroo and re-indexes hardcourt speed to turn all the serious hardcourt surfaces into servebot-approved ice-rinks, something we don't want to see.

 

[MichaelNadal]

The fact that we are pushing up to 2020 in a year and a half and still even needing to ask this, is epic within itself

 

[Deleted member 733170]

yes, he's been unlucky in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017 ...oh wait, maybe not ...maybe its that his reduced athleticism , being more passive has played a significant role in that.

Some of us actually watch tennis and some of us make assumptions based on statistics.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

The Rome 2005 and 2006 finals will tell you what peak Coria and peak Fed were capable of on clay. I agree that Coria had declined a bit in 2005, but he was still good enough to push Nadal all the way in the Rome final in 2005. Peak Fed did the same in 2006 in one of the greatest clay matches of all time. Even if both Fed and Coria had their weaknesses, I think they still obliterate Thiem, Goffin, Dimitrov, and Zverev as far as how they compete with Nadal.

Don't get me wrong, I don't expect Del Potro to beat Nadal or win a tournament, but he can definitely make a QF or SF and take a set. Thiem is also capable of that, but he looks to be in worse form compared to 2017. He's already lost a lot of points in Rio, Monte Carlo and Barcelona.

Nadal was 19 back in 2005 (probably a doped 19) but he was a long way away from the utter monster he has become now.

Corea would be absolutely pulverised against Nadal of today.

 

[Gary Duane]

My word, you are start raving mad. Does it bother you that much that no one has beaten prime Nadal on equal footing at RG? At least Thiem outside of RG has given prime Nadal the worst beating of his career.

Close, but not quite true.

Ferrero got him worse in 2008 in Rome, round of 32.

Rome has been Nadal's weakness, comparatively, and may be again this year.

 

[Gary Duane]

Some of us actually watch tennis and some of us make assumptions based on statistics.

What in heaven's name does "watching tennis" have to do with Nadal's failure on grass????

 

[Deleted member 733170]

What in heaven's name does "watching tennis" have to do with Nadal's failure on grass????

As was discussed previously, he has been unlucky to face players red lining it at Wimbledon over the last few years.

 

[Gary Duane]

As was discussed previously, he has been unlucky to face players red lining it at Wimbledon over the last few years.

And I totally disagree.

No one is redlining him on clay. Why is that?

Grass is his worst surface now, and he always had to play the most out of his normal style to win on it.

He gets too much credit for his play on grass.

Fed gets too much credit for his play on clay. Or did...

Any fair observer knows which surfaces these ATGs are most comfortable on. And that simply is not grass for Nadal.

Could he win Wimbledon again?

Probably, but that's only because it's never wise to count an ATG out at any major, especially an ATG who already has slams at that major.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

And I totally disagree.

No one is redlining him on clay. Why is that?

Grass is his worst surface now, and he always had to play the most out of his normal style to win on it.

He gets too much credit for his play on grass.

Fed gets too much credit for his play on clay. Or did...

Any fair observer knows which surfaces these ATGs are most comfortable on. And that simply is not grass for Nadal.

Could he win Wimbledon again?

Probably, but that's only because it's never wise to count an ATG out at any major, especially an ATG who already has slams at that major.

That’s a deft move to cover the very real possibility he can win another Wimbledon!

The Muller match went to the wire, with Muller having the tournament of his life, serving better than he ever has before.

But yeah I agree, Nadal’s forte is clay..

 

[TheFifthSet]

Dlt stoopid poast

 

[zagor]

Man, Coria's court sense, movement, dropshot, consistency from the backcourt was like night and day compared to Dimitrovs, Nishikoris or whatever of today (that don't even like clay). I sincerely doubt 2017/2018 Nadal would be toying with him the way he is with the current competition.

 

[Gary Duane]

There is a difference between length of a peak the the height of the peak.

That’s a deft move to cover the very real possibility he can win another Wimbledon!

No move though. A guy who can beat Fed at Wimbledon, even when he was not having his best year, is dangerous, and this may continue to be a weird year.

 

[Pagoo]

It bothers me that absolutely zero of the young up-and-coming talents are not making serious runs at majors. It's not good for the sport. I give Federer and Nadal full credit for playing well and I recognize their GOATness, but the only factor isn't Federer and Nadal's talent. These are two players over 30 who are shadows of their peak/prime selves. Tennis is in a really sad state that not one single nextgen player is taking the tour by storm.

I'm not asking for another Federer, Nadal or Djokovic. I'm asking for another Soderling, Nalbandian, Davydenko, Roddick, Ferrer, Del Potro, or Berdych. None of the nextgen players are even close to that level.

There's a big power vacuum filled with 30+ year olds who are just waiting for someone to come along and take the prize. But nobody is.

This what Federer told Zverev at the beginning of the year (Make a move and I will go quietly.) Like you said, nobody is making a move.

 

[Julian Houston]

Its very likely want to settle the slam race this year, Nadal going for USO and Wimb, so is Federer.

 

[RS]

Hard to say if he is playing better than his 2005- RG 2014 form on the dirt. Even more so his peak 2007-2008 2010 2012-2013 form.

 

[abmk]

Some of us actually watch tennis and some of us make assumptions based on statistics.

and some of us watched the matches and make logical conclusions based on records/stats. We also understand the nature of grass court tennis.
Players redline at Wimbledon, that's the nature of grass court tennis. The question is what someone like Nadal can do to prevent that or cut down the impact.
He was able to do that with his better athleticism, aggression from 06-11 - sometimes well and sometimes barely escaping.

He couldn't do the same from 2012 onwards due to reduced athleticism/aggression & hence reduced confidence. Not that he has been consistently unlucky.

 

[VoodooChild24]

On the eye test it is really is difficult to fault Nadal.

He’s hitting harder than ever before as well opening up the court and and finding some great angles. Moreover he is really swinging with confidence.

He’s making everyone look average at the moment.

Like Federer at the Aussie, you have to hand it to Nadal that this is up there with the best he has ever played.

Phenomenal stuff really.

Great observation and I was seeing the same thing. I told my wife during the last year that Fed plays differently just by eye test alone. He plays so aggressive and just toying with everyone. Same thing last year and this year with Nadal on clay. He just bludgeons the ball and so aggressive.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Fed plays so aggressive and just toying with everyone. .

Strongly disagree. Fed has not played aggressively at all throughout any part of 2018. He hardly served and volleyed at all at AO, Rotterdam or the Sunshine double. Had he bothered to be aggressive, he would have dispatched Del Po by simply approaching the net on one of his three MP's. He has also gone back to more slicing of his BH, which again contradicts aggressive play.

The last time Fed was playing truly aggressive tennis was the summer of 2015 when he was SABR-ing everyone successfully and coming in. He has not used that style of play since, sadly. In 2017, he had strong patches of aggressive play, but none in 2018.

 

[Tennisgods]

I heard that part so many times and never materialized.

I know, I know. But I think it’s on this year.

 

[Pheasant]

Using the eye test, Nadal was at his absolute peak on clay in 2006. That guy ran down some sick shots. I even remember Nadal running down the most insane shots on grass back then too. The 2006 Rome final was the best clay court match that I've ever seen. Unfortunately, Federer lost that match. But Federer in 2006 was a monster on all surfaces, including clay. Anybody that goes 3-0 vs 2006 Federer on clay is clicking on all 12 cylinders. Rafa couldn't be beaten on clay that year.

The problem with Nadal is that he's had so many incredible years on clay, that it's almost impossible to pick his best year. Nadal's backhand this year is the best that it's ever been. It is a massive weapon now. Perhaps his 2018 season could end up in his top 5 of all time on clay. We shall see.

For Rafa, I'd say that the following are his best years on clay:

1. 2006
2. 2010
3. 2008

 

[Username_]

Nadal is fat

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

and some of us watched the matches and make logical conclusions based on records/stats. We also understand the nature of grass court tennis.
Players redline at Wimbledon, that's the nature of grass court tennis. The question is what someone like Nadal can do to prevent that or cut down the impact.
He was able to do that with his better athleticism, aggression from 06-11 - sometimes well and sometimes barely escaping.

He couldn't do the same from 2012 onwards due to reduced athleticism/aggression & hence reduced confidence. Not that he has been consistently unlucky.

Have you written off Rafa from grass altogether ?

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Man, Coria's court sense, movement, dropshot, consistency from the backcourt was like night and day compared to Dimitrovs, Nishikoris or whatever of today (that don't even like clay). I sincerely doubt 2017/2018 Nadal would be toying with him the way he is with the current competition.

2006 Nadal beat Coria 61 61 in the Monte Carlo QF. Coria was 24 at the time.

 

[NatF]

2006 Nadal beat Coria 61 61 in the Monte Carlo QF. Coria was 24 at the time.

Do you not know anything about tennis from that period? Coria was already on the way down a bit in 2005 with his serving problems (yips), he finished 2006 ranked outside the top 100.

You damn wikipedia warriors smh.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Do you not know anything about tennis from that period? Coria was already on the way down a bit in 2005 with his serving problems (yips), he finished 2006 ranked outside the top 100.

You damn wikipedia warriors smh.

Yes fair point, but let’s also not romanticise Coria as some giant of the clay game.

The real point is that Nadal has snuffed out all the saplings before they got to see the light. Coria has a better clay CV than he probably deserves and I don’t think he would have made an impact beyond the likes of Nishikori if he was also born in 1987.

 

[NatF]

Yes fair point, but let’s also not romanticise Coria as some giant of the clay game.

The real point is that Nadal has snuffed out all the saplings before they got to see the light. Coria has a better clay CV than he probably deserves and I don’t think he would have made an impact beyond the likes of Nishikori if he was also born in 1987.

Better than he deserves? Man all you're doing is convincing me how little you've seen him play Only the Big 3 stand above Coria as clay courters in the last 10-15 years.

Next you'll be telling me Nadal snuffed out Ferrero too.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Better than he deserves? Man all you're doing is convincing me how little you've seen him play Only the Big 3 stand above Coria as clay courters in the last 10-15 years.

Next you'll be telling me Nadal snuffed out Ferrero too.

Yes, Ferrero would also have been snuffed out if he happened to be born in 1987.

Wawrinka and indeed Murray may have something to say about their clay prowess vis-a-vis Coria too.

 

[NatF]

Yes, Ferrero would also have snuffed out if he happened to be born in 1987.

Wawrinka and indeed Murray may have something to say about their clay prowess vis-a-vis Coria too.

Murray

Ferrero is up there with Djokovic/Federer in terms of clay court level, guy was taking it too peak Kuerten as a 20 year old.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Murray

Ferrero is up there with Djokovic/Federer in terms of clay court level, guy was taking it too peak Kuerten as a 20 year old.

Nadal would draw the curtain on Kuerten in this hypothetical game of being born at the same time as the cursed ‘lost gen’.

 

[NatF]

Nadal would draw the curtain on Kuerten in this hypothetical game of being born at the same time as the cursed ‘lost gen’.

Maybe, but their matches would be a lot closer than anyone else Nadal has had the pleasure of feasting on.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Maybe, but their matches would be a lot closer than anyone else Nadal has had the pleasure of feasting on.

I don’t know about that, as the OP suggested Nadal is currently hitting with a weight of ball of both wings that we hitherto have not seen before.

So I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that he would be feasting on whichever unfortunate sod the other side of the net, past or present, he would make them look ordinary.

It really is astonishing.

 

[NatF]

I don’t know about that, as the OP suggested Nadal is currently hitting with a weight of ball of both wings that we hitherto have not seen before.

So I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that he would be feasting on whichever unfortunate sod the other side of the net, past or present, he would make them look ordinary.

It really is astonishing.

Unconvinced that he's hitting the ball harder than ever off both wings. Regardless he's also playing a field that hitherto has never been weaker.

 

[JackGates]

Unconvinced that he's hitting the ball harder than ever off both wings. Regardless he's also playing a field that hitherto has never been weaker.

I don't agree that the field is weak. I think that the big 3 era was the pinnacle of tennis evolution and you can't really play much better than that, so younger guys have no room to improve. In the past there was always some room to go. Better rackets, strings, speed, fitness, endurance, tactics, technique. But now we are maxed out.
The same way how running records aren't being broken and if they are, there is hardly any statistical difference.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Unconvinced that he's hitting the ball harder than ever off both wings. Regardless he's also playing a field that hitherto has never been weaker.

Well my personal view is that the field as a whole is hitting the ball harder, opening up the angles, serving better than it was 12-15 years ago. So yes, I think the general standard of play is higher.

What the field has not yet been able to produce is a crop of new stars regularly beating up the old guard. This makes the field look weak, but if the current level of play on the eye test is higher than 15 years ago, the weak era argument has no real credibility. What the new generation are perhaps guilty of is lack of consistency or maybe more to the point the technological levelling off and brilliance of the elite 3-5 or even 10 players has crowded out the emergence of the young saplings growing into mighty oaks.

Given that, I think it is a real stretch to say so and so from the past is better on an absolute level than so and so of today, based solely on historical achievements in what was a very different playing environment.

In this ‘what if’ mind game we enjoy playing, it is fair to speculate that the greats of the past would struggle enormously in the current era.

 

[mightyrick]

Only the Big 3 stand above Coria as clay courters in the last 10-15 years.

Robin Soderling says hello.

 

[NatF]

I don't agree that the field is weak. I think that the big 3 era was the pinnacle of tennis evolution and you can't really play much better than that, so younger guys have no room to improve. In the past there was always some room to go. Better rackets, strings, speed, fitness, endurance, tactics, technique. But now we are maxed out.
The same way how running records aren't being broken and if they are, there is hardly any statistical difference.

These are just excuses, the Big 3 are all over 30 and most of these young guns are barely even making the second week of slams or the later rounds of tournaments - they're just historically poor.

Well my personal view is that the field as a whole is hitting the ball harder, opening up the angles, serving better than it was 12-15 years ago. So yes, I think the general standard of play is higher.

What the field has not yet been able to produce is a crop of new stars regularly beating up the old guard. This makes the field look weak, but if the current level of play on the eye test is higher than 15 years ago, the weak era argument has no real credibility. What the new generation are perhaps guilty of is lack of consistency or maybe more to the point the technological levelling off and brilliance of the elite 3-5 or even 10 players has crowded out the emergence of the young saplings growing into mighty oaks.

Given that, I think it is a real stretch to say so and so from the past is better on an absolute level than so and so of today, based solely on historical achievements in what was a very different playing environment.

In this ‘what if’ mind game we enjoy playing, it is fair to speculate that the greats of the past would struggle enormously in the current era.

The top 100 as a whole probably does hit the ball bigger than ever, but there's more to tennis than just hitting the ball hard - glorifying hit and miss ballbashers just shows how sad of a state the game is in. And even if the average level of play of the top 100 is better if the at the top level we're left with the guys we have now then that doesn't really say much...

If a young Federer, Nadal or Djokovic was coming up they'd be feasting on these #NextGen players - hell even Murray, would they be feasting on Nadal on clay? No, they wouldn't but they'd fancy their chances on HC and grass against him and Federer for certain. I'm totally unconvinced any of the players since the Nadal/Djokovic/Murray generation are fundamentally better players than someone like Davydenko or Nalbandian, let alone a guy like Roddick or Hewitt or Safin or Ferrero etc...

 

[Deleted member 733170]

These are just excuses, the Big 3 are all over 30 and most of these young guns are barely even making the second week of slams or the later rounds of tournaments - they're just historically poor.



The top 100 as a whole probably does hit the ball bigger than ever, but there's more to tennis than just hitting the ball hard - glorifying hit and miss ballbashers just shows how sad of a state the game is in. And even if the average level of play of the top 100 is better if the at the top level we're left with the guys we have now then that doesn't really say much...

If a young Federer, Nadal or Djokovic was coming up they'd be feasting on these #NextGen players - hell even Murray, would they be feasting on Nadal on clay? No, they wouldn't but they'd fancy their chances on HC and grass against him and Federer for certain. I'm totally unconvinced any of the players since the Nadal/Djokovic/Murray generation are fundamentally better players than someone like Davydenko or Nalbandian, let alone a guy like Roddick or Hewitt or Safin or Ferrero etc...

I’m afraid the modern game is about weight of ball and spin which has made volleying and touch play an unattractive risk reward option for effective percentage tennis.

With your concluding comments we are back to square one with the ongoing unprovable hypothesis. I am reluctant to convey a definitive opinion on this as it’s impossible to do so. So call me sceptical.

Where I will agree is that clearly the Big 3 are very special, possibly the greatest 3 players the game has seen

 

[NatF]

I’m afraid the modern game is about weight of ball and spin which has made volleying and touch play an unattractive risk reward option for effective percentage tennis.

With your concluding comments we are back to square one with the ongoing unprovable hypothesis. I am reluctant to convey a definitive opinion on this as it’s impossible to do so. So call me sceptical.

Where I will agree is that clearly the Big 3 are very special, possibly the greatest 3 players the game has seen

The three best? Probably, the greatest? Don't think so.