beard
Legend
Nadal started career as great clay counter, winning only clay slams, but soon he started winning grass and hard court slams, beating great Federer...
Till end of 2010 Nadal won all slams... He had 5 FO's and 4 other slam... It's skewed resume, I know, but not that bad...
But, from 2011 he started winning super predominantly clay slams over hard court and grass... He won 8 clay slams, and only 3 others, of which 0 grass and 3 USO's (2013 is great, and two easy draw slams, IMO)... He haven't won Wimbledon for 11 years and SO for 12 years...
So:
2005-2010... 5 clay slams + 4 other
2011-2021... 8 clay slams + 3 other
My basic question in this thread is why is Nadal's resume more and more skewed in time? We say/know that as player gets older it's harder to win clay and relatively easier to win grass and hard... And with Nadal it's opposite... We know he is monster on clay, but why he doesn't translate this success to other surfaces?
My first thought is that Novak that Great emerged, and off course Nadal was often injured off clay... Any other opinion and explanation?
Till end of 2010 Nadal won all slams... He had 5 FO's and 4 other slam... It's skewed resume, I know, but not that bad...
But, from 2011 he started winning super predominantly clay slams over hard court and grass... He won 8 clay slams, and only 3 others, of which 0 grass and 3 USO's (2013 is great, and two easy draw slams, IMO)... He haven't won Wimbledon for 11 years and SO for 12 years...
So:
2005-2010... 5 clay slams + 4 other
2011-2021... 8 clay slams + 3 other
My basic question in this thread is why is Nadal's resume more and more skewed in time? We say/know that as player gets older it's harder to win clay and relatively easier to win grass and hard... And with Nadal it's opposite... We know he is monster on clay, but why he doesn't translate this success to other surfaces?
My first thought is that Novak that Great emerged, and off course Nadal was often injured off clay... Any other opinion and explanation?