nadal- the most complete player ever?

[Halba]

Based on what we're seeing now, if Nadal wins the us open, we can start to talk about him being the most complete tennis player ever.

no player in history has been dominant on 3 surfaces - hard, grass and clay throughout their career. Nadal is the 1st one. Djokovic has just dominated AO mainly(5 titles) and has not won a clay grand slam so he can't be one of the best.

Both pete and fed(14, 17 GS) were dominant on grass and hard respectively. Fed has only 1RG title(but many finals) when rafa was injured, Pete 0.

All the yester year players cant be compared because they usually won on only 2 surfaces, not all 3 like rafa. And besides, rafa at 12 slams is still not finished. At 27 years of age, he has another 3 seasons of grand slam wins left in him maximum. If he lifts USO, he will have 3 hard court GS, 2 Grass GS, and 8 Clay grand slam.

he could plunder about 5 more grand slams from 3 more seasons of peak capacity, with the pathetic competition from rest of field. Djoko and murray don't have much age advantage either.

 

[cork_screw]

This year the draw really opened up for him. I mean seriously, Robredo in qrts? Then gasquet in semis? Come on, the guy needs a challenge. I wanna see Gulbis or Dimitrov take him on at least. Those guys can at least squeeze a set out of nadal.

I'm not too fond of this year's lack of competition. It has become a bore fest. I feel really bad for all the people who paid money to watch a Robredo destruction.

Yeah, Nadal's playing well. But this year's Grandslam event really is a cakewalk into at least the finals. I can't believe how boring it's been.

Let's wait a few more years and see how nadal holds up before we start to discredit Roger's 17. That is a solid number.

 

[90's Clay]

Ummm no. Hes not an all courter. I don't know how you can be the most complete without an all court game.

Nadal is very good at the net.. But generally guys in eras past posses more "complete' game based on their ability all court

 

[monfed]

Not the most complete player ever but quite possibly the mentally toughest player ever, don't think I've seen anyone save as many BPs and win crunch situations on such an alarming regularity as he does. You just know deep down that when Ralph is 0-30 down he'll get it back to 30-30 or 40-30. That RG 5th set was just jaw dropping retrieving, he went into a complete lockdown. Unreal,haven't seen anything like it.

 

[Omega_7000]

Please. Anyone can look like a complete player in this pathetic era.

 

[timnz]

Not the most complete player ever but quite possibly the mentally toughest player ever, don't think I've seen anyone save as many BPs and win crunch situations on such an alarming regularity as he does. You just know deep down that when Ralph is 0-30 down he'll get it back to 30-30 or 40-30. That RG 5th set was just jaw dropping retrieving, he went into a complete lockdown. Unreal,haven't seen anything like it.

Agree that Nadal is the most mentally tough player. I have never seen a player that just plays one point at a time, regardless of the score, with such intensity.

 

[monfed]

Agree that Nadal is the most mentally tough player. I have never seen a player that just plays one point at a time, regardless of the score, with such intensity.

Yea in that RG 5th set he was playing as if his entire life depended on that one match, you could easily tell that he's desperate to break Fed's slam record and knew that if he lost his outpost he might fall short, no other reason to win an 8th RG,already has the RG record.

 

[rodrigo_palacio88]

no...

even in this time of slower surfaces , great part of his archivements are in clay.

and the fast courts are very slows.

 

[Omega_7000]

Not the most complete player ever but quite possibly the mentally toughest player ever, don't think I've seen anyone save as many BPs and win crunch situations on such an alarming regularity as he does. You just know deep down that when Ralph is 0-30 down he'll get it back to 30-30 or 40-30. That RG 5th set was just jaw dropping retrieving, he went into a complete lockdown. Unreal,haven't seen anything like it.

I would agree

 

[90's Clay]

I was on the "Most Mentally tough" bandwagon with Nadal too.. Then 2011-early 2012 Nole happened.

I still think Sampras and Laver were mentally tougher. Neither guy would let another post 7 or 8 high profile win on ALL surfaces vs. them

 

[rodrigo_palacio88]

laver mentally tougher????'

how old are you????

 

[90's Clay]

laver mentally tougher????'

how old are you????

Laver was NO ONE's pigeon in his prime years. Can't exactly say the same for Federer or even Nadal in lesser sense (Considering what Nole did to him those two years)

 

[rodrigo_palacio88]

laver had negative h2h against rosewall I think , but after that ken become more older and started to lost.

other players too.

 

[BreakPoint]

Based on what we're seeing now, if Nadal wins the us open, we can start to talk about him being the most complete tennis player ever.

Not until he starts serving and volleying and chipping and charging like Edberg or Sampras. :shock:

 

[90's Clay]

laver had negative h2h against rosewall I think , but after that ken become more older and started to lost.

other players too.

No.. Laver owned the h2h 80-63

 

[HailDjokovic]

Please. Anyone can look like a complete player in this pathetic era.

we had 4 different people win the 4 grand slams last year you dumbass... Which means a competetitive era.
The top 4(murray,djokovic,nadal,and fed) ARE the most complete players of all time, they have mastered the baseline in a way no other tennis player has ever done. Granted the four don't have exceptional volleying like the intricate players of the past, they still win 80% of their nets points when they go in for the kill. Djokovic,Nadal,and Murray both have very deadly serves as well. Nadal(unbroken this whole u.s open)(djokovic winning 25 consecutive serve points)(murray with his high percentage first serve.lacking kick serve speed i know, but it still kicks very hard). You can see how they do against player out of the top 4 what complete players they are.

 

[rodrigo_palacio88]

No.. Laver owned the h2h 80-63

laver took advantage of the age in that match-up too.

ken was more old

 

[monfed]

we had 4 different people win the 4 grand slams last year you dumbass... Which means a competetitive era.
The top 4(murray,djokovic,nadal,and fed) ARE the most complete players of all time, they have mastered the baseline in a way no other tennis player has ever done. Granted the four don't have exceptional volleying like the intricate players of the past, they still win 80% of their nets points when they go in for the kill. Djokovic,Nadal,and Murray both have very deadly serves as well. Nadal(unbroken this whole u.s open)(djokovic winning 25 consecutive serve points)(murray with his high percentage first serve.lacking kick serve speed i know, but it still kicks very hard). You can see how they do against player out of the top 4 what complete players they are.

Yea but what about the surface polarisation towards the slow end of the spectrum? Gotta factor that in and as much as I think Ralph really gets up for the big matches, I think his non-existent transition and net game really goes against him in the versatility contest.

 

[BobbyOne]

laver mentally tougher????'

how old are you????

Nadal might be a bit stronger than Laver mentally but the Rocket was at least as complete a player.

 

[Omega_7000]

we had 4 different people win the 4 grand slams last year you dumbass... Which means a competetitive era.
The top 4(murray,djokovic,nadal,and fed) ARE the most complete players of all time, they have mastered the baseline in a way no other tennis player has ever done. Granted the four don't have exceptional volleying like the intricate players of the past, they still win 80% of their nets points when they go in for the kill. Djokovic,Nadal,and Murray both have very deadly serves as well. Nadal(unbroken this whole u.s open)(djokovic winning 25 consecutive serve points)(murray with his high percentage first serve.lacking kick serve speed i know, but it still kicks very hard). You can see how they do against player out of the top 4 what complete players they are.

LOL A 31 year old bad back Federer winning Wimbledon and getting to number 1 proves my point. :lol:

Nadal won FO and then what? Lost in 1st Round at Wimb and then disappeared until FO this year....

 

[droliver]

Yea but what about the surface polarisation towards the slow end of the spectrum? Gotta factor that in and as much as I think Ralph really gets up for the big matches, I think his non-existent transition and net game really goes against him in the versatility contest.

Do you actually watch these guys play? I think you're confusing "serve & volley" with transition and net games. These guys (like most of the tour) are lethal in transition from midcourt to the net as they murder anything short forcing easy putaways at net. It's not your parent's kind of all-court tennis, but it's where we are with the speed and pace of the game. Nadal and Murray both have an excellent technical volley (Novak.....you may have a point there )

 

[HailDjokovic]

Yea but what about the surface polarisation towards the slow end of the spectrum? Gotta factor that in and as much as I think Ralph really gets up for the big matches, I think his non-existent transition and net game really goes against him in the versatility contest.

Yep i agree. Got also factor in racket technology. Players these days are capable of incredible passing shots, and more top spin on the strings means that the ball is able to go over the net, so you can see why most people don't like to volley any more. Nadal's net game is passable but by no means sensitive and weak, he is much more comfortable at the baseline which means he thinks he does there best

 

[monfed]

I was on the "Most Mentally tough" bandwagon with Nadal too.. Then 2011-early 2012 Nole happened.

I still think Sampras and Laver were mentally tougher. Neither guy would let another post 7 or 8 high profile win on ALL surfaces vs. them

Yea I bet Laver got to a lot of balls being so tall n all. :lol:

 

[MichaelNadal]

Not the most complete player ever but quite possibly the mentally toughest player ever, don't think I've seen anyone save as many BPs and win crunch situations on such an alarming regularity as he does. You just know deep down that when Ralph is 0-30 down he'll get it back to 30-30 or 40-30. That RG 5th set was just jaw dropping retrieving, he went into a complete lockdown. Unreal,haven't seen anything like it.

Good to see some honesty from you :shock:

 

[monfed]

Good to see some honesty from you :shock:

Thanks,your turn. :lol:

 

[Crisstti]

Not the most complete player ever but quite possibly the mentally toughest player ever, don't think I've seen anyone save as many BPs and win crunch situations on such an alarming regularity as he does. You just know deep down that when Ralph is 0-30 down he'll get it back to 30-30 or 40-30. That RG 5th set was just jaw dropping retrieving, he went into a complete lockdown. Unreal,haven't seen anything like it.

Good to see you in awe of Rafa

Laver was NO ONE's pigeon in his prime years. Can't exactly say the same for Federer or even Nadal in lesser sense (Considering what Nole did to him those two years)

More like 1 year, IW 2011 - AO 2012.

And Nadal has actually has turned it around, what does that tell you about his mental strength?.

 

[Crisstti]

BTW, lol once again at Fed fans talking about weak eras and opponents.

 

[Omega_7000]

ROFLMAO @ Nadal fans saying this is a strong era! Just LMAO!

 

[Crisstti]

ROFLMAO @ Nadal fans saying this is a strong era! Just LMAO!

He will at least have to beat one of Novak/Murray to win, which is more than you can say for many of Fed's slams.

 

[GoaLaSSo]

Nadal is a very well rounded player, but he is not the most complete player. He still does not fair well on low bounce/fast surfaces. However, I feel like he would succeed regardless of the general court makeup, just not quite as much.


I don't see how you can overlook federer in terms of complete players. He is good on all surfaces and has shown success playing everything from serve and volley to baseline tennis. He could have been the best clay court player of the generation if the clay goat didn't exist. He had few weaknesses, if any, during his good years (except to a certain someone :twisted:.)

I would also like to throw Borg in there as well. He could do almost anything he wanted to on a tennis court and was also great on all surfaces.

Era discussion is also worthless. It is something that is not quantifiable and is subjective. Records and stats are objective, so lets stick with that.

 

[Bender]

Based on what we're seeing now, if Nadal wins the us open, we can start to talk about him being the most complete tennis player ever.

no player in history has been dominant on 3 surfaces - hard, grass and clay throughout their career. Nadal is the 1st one. Djokovic has just dominated AO mainly(5 titles) and has not won a clay grand slam so he can't be one of the best.

Both pete and fed(14, 17 GS) were dominant on grass and hard respectively. Fed has only 1RG title(but many finals) when rafa was injured, Pete 0.

All the yester year players cant be compared because they usually won on only 2 surfaces, not all 3 like rafa. And besides, rafa at 12 slams is still not finished. At 27 years of age, he has another 3 seasons of grand slam wins left in him maximum. If he lifts USO, he will have 3 hard court GS, 2 Grass GS, and 8 Clay grand slam.

he could plunder about 5 more grand slams from 3 more seasons of peak capacity, with the pathetic competition from rest of field. Djoko and murray don't have much age advantage either.

Federer still more complete. Volleyed better in his prime, and could place any shot anywhere in the court. Nadal's backhand in comparison for eg goes cross court 99% of the time.

But he's far more complete than Djokovic that's for sure, even if Djokovic comes to the net more often (on account of Nadal being the better volleyer between the two).

Murray has the same issue as Nadal, but with his forehand. Everyone knows it will go cross court. That's changed recently, however.

 

[Omega_7000]

He will at least have to beat one of Novak/Murray to win, which is more than you can say for many of Fed's slams.

The same Murray that Fed owns in majors? Murray only started to beat him on the big stage after Fed turned 31....even then he lost to him at Wimbledon.

The same Djokovic that Federer beat at 30 when he was at the peak of his career? and the same Djokovic he beat at Wimbledon and overtook as # 1 at the age of 31? :lol:

If Fed can do so much damage post 30 to these strong era champions, it would be complete annihilation during Federer's peak.

Let's see how well Nadal does when he turns 32.

 

[Crisstti]

The same Murray that Fed owns in majors? Murray only started to beat him on the big stage after Fed turned 31....even then he lost to him at Wimbledon.

The same Djokovic that Federer beat at 30 when he was at the peak of his career? and the same Djokovic he beat at Wimbledon and overtook as # 1 at the age of 31? :lol:

If Fed can do so much damage post 30 to these strong era champions, it would be complete annihilation during Federer's peak.

Let's see how well Nadal does when he turns 32.

Rafa would face two time slam champion Murray though, so much tougher than the Murray Fed faced. And let's not pretend like his winning h2h against Roger means nothing, it's still better than what Fed's toughests opponents, Roddick and Hewitt had.

And Djokovic would still do better against Fed than the players he regularly faced. How many first time slam finalists he beat in finals?.

The BEST you can try to argue (and it's still a very weak argument) is that Nadal has faced a similar level of competition. So really, Federer fans have no business complaining about Nadal's draws.

 

[granddog29]

I love how Feddie fanboys act like Federer past his prime getting the occasional big win over say Djokovic somehow means Djokovic is a mug who would be a cakewalk everytime for prime Federer on any surface. What a joke. If that logic were true what would that say about Federer who at his absolute peak started off 1-6 vs 17-19 year old Nadal (1-2 on hard courts, with the only win gifted by a HUGE choke by Nadal from 2 sets to 0 and a break up). I guess that means a prime Nadal would crush everytime right?

Agassi at 34 and 35 and barely able to walk with a nerve problem in his back was pushing Federer to the limit most times they played. Navratilova at 34-36 was posting wins over a prime Graf. Yet people are supposed to be in awe and suddenly dump Djokovic and Murray down to the level of Roddick or Ljubicic because an 29 or 30 year old Federer beat them once in awhile. Nice try, but wont work with anyone with half a brain, sorry.

Let's see how well Nadal does when he turns 32.

If a time machine were invented even 32 year old Nadal would probably still own any version of Federer, just like he always has. The reaction of Feddies would be priceless to see.

 

[fatichar]

I was on the "Most Mentally tough" bandwagon with Nadal too.. Then 2011-early 2012 Nole happened.

I still think Sampras and Laver were mentally tougher. Neither guy would let another post 7 or 8 high profile win on ALL surfaces vs. them

Oh! IW2011 - AO12 happened not because Nadal was mentally weak. It was because djoko outplayed him.

Had he not been mentally as tough, he would have become djoker's pigeon forever. But no. He improved from wimby to USO, then came really close at AO, and then restored the order. You think a mentally weak Rafa could have overcome a 0-40 deficit in the 4th set of AO to just stay in the match? Out of those 7 losses, only in Wimby final did I think that he is not playing his normal. And USO 4th set.

 

[cork_screw]

I gotta say beyond Nadal's groundstrokes, he is a very good volleyer. His drop volleys are on a dime. He has tremendous confidence at the net and you rarely see him get passed. Also, this guy is hands down by far the best passer ever. The dude can pass you running wide 15 feet from the singles line. Even when someone hits a shot that looks far wide and out of reach he finds the ball then places it where the opponent is not. In fact, I can't remember a time where nadal has tried to hit a passing shot and placed it center of the court, he seems to find the it up the line or far wide. Nadal is shaping up to be a really complete player, but he is still behind on the slam count.

 

[Crisstti]

Oh! IW2011 - AO12 happened not because Nadal was mentally weak. It was because djoko outplayed him.

Had he not been mentally as tough, he would have become djoker's pigeon forever. But no. He improved from wimby to USO, then came really close at AO, and then restored the order. You think a mentally weak Rafa could have overcome a 0-40 deficit in the 4th set of AO to just stay in the match? Out of those 7 losses, only in Wimby final did I think that he is not playing his normal. And USO 4th set.

Not to mention, breaking Novak's serve when he was serving to win that USO final in straight sets. ANd then winning the tb.

 

[veroniquem]

He's getting to be. Seriously he 's amazing at net right now. And so aggressive. It's funny because in 2005, I thought Rafa would end up dominating every surface comprehensively. But on hard, it never really turned out that way and I thought I just overestimated his capacity for adjusting to that surface but lo and behold he's done it! It just took him 8 years!!! Absolutely crazy. I still have to pinch myself, this feels so unreal. But I always thought he had even more potential than Fed (mentally, athletically). It just took him much longer to own hard than I thought it would originally.

 

[Russeljones]

Based on what we're seeing now, if Nadal wins the us open, we can start to talk about him being the most complete tennis player ever.

no player in history has been dominant on 3 surfaces - hard, grass and clay throughout their career. Nadal is the 1st one. Djokovic has just dominated AO mainly(5 titles) and has not won a clay grand slam so he can't be one of the best.

Both pete and fed(14, 17 GS) were dominant on grass and hard respectively. Fed has only 1RG title(but many finals) when rafa was injured, Pete 0.

All the yester year players cant be compared because they usually won on only 2 surfaces, not all 3 like rafa. And besides, rafa at 12 slams is still not finished. At 27 years of age, he has another 3 seasons of grand slam wins left in him maximum. If he lifts USO, he will have 3 hard court GS, 2 Grass GS, and 8 Clay grand slam.

he could plunder about 5 more grand slams from 3 more seasons of peak capacity, with the pathetic competition from rest of field. Djoko and murray don't have much age advantage either.

Are you on drugs? Or are you pretending Federer has not been dominant on indoor hard? Some place your 'most complete player ever' has fallen flat on his face each and every year. Comparing that to Federer's weakest surface - 1 title and 4 finals? The Nadal sychophancy on here is getting worse each and every day.

 

[Bender]

Are you on drugs? Or are you pretending Federer has not been dominant on indoor hard? Some place your 'most complete player ever' has fallen flat on his face each and every year. Comparing that to Federer's weakest surface - 1 title and 4 finals? The Nadal sychophancy on here is getting worse each and every day.

Nadal's worst is worse than Federer's worst in this regard.

Damn, Nadal is also better at being bad at something than Federer is; Nadal GOAThood confirmed!

 

[Sid_Vicious]

If a time machine were invented even 32 year old Nadal would probably still own any version of Federer, just like he always has. The reaction of Feddies would be priceless to see.

Your signature showcases one of the most hilarious cases of 90s-phillia I have ever seen on this forum.

 

[MTF07]

Based on what we're seeing now, if Nadal wins the us open, we can start to talk about him being the most complete tennis player ever.

no player in history has been dominant on 3 surfaces - hard, grass and clay throughout their career. Nadal is the 1st one.

Nadal is hardly what anyone would consider dominant (career-wise) on grass or hard courts. What?

 

[MTF07]

Not to mention, breaking Novak's serve when he was serving to win that USO final in straight sets. ANd then winning the tb.

And then getting crushed 6-1 in the 4th?

These are the type of threads that prop up when you have tools like McEnroe calling Nadal the best volleyer in the game. It's a joke.

 

[Omega_7000]

Rafa would face two time slam champion Murray though, so much tougher than the Murray Fed faced. And let's not pretend like his winning h2h against Roger means nothing, it's still better than what Fed's toughests opponents, Roddick and Hewitt had.

And Djokovic would still do better against Fed than the players he regularly faced. How many first time slam finalists he beat in finals?.

The BEST you can try to argue (and it's still a very weak argument) is that Nadal has faced a similar level of competition. So really, Federer fans have no business complaining about Nadal's draws.

Oh and I'm not kidding about Murray...With the surfaces being faster there is NO WAY in hell Murray defeats peak Fed in a major. none. period.

A 31 year old, bad back, wayyyyyyyyy past his prime Federer took out Murray and Novak in Wimbledon to become # 1 and you think he would lose at his peak to them? No way!

Fed also took out Novak at his peak on his worst surface when he was 30 years old and again wayyyyyyyyy past his best. Something Nadal failed to do in multiple attempts. Hell he even almost took Novak out at the USO...A few points decided that match.

Let's face it. If Nadal did not go AWOL during last years USO and did not lose in the 1st round at this years Wimb, Murray would have zero slams. It's Nadal's fault for being inconsistent and taking 7 months off....If Fed had taken 7 months off, lost in 1st Rounds, there would be multiple slam winners in his era too, they would gain confidence and would come after him more aggressively....and his era would look strong.

So basically what you're saying is that Federer should not have been so consistent...lose more often...and he would be playing in a stronger era...good logic!

 

[Omega_7000]

If a time machine were invented even 32 year old Nadal would probably still own any version of Federer, just like he always has. The reaction of Feddies would be priceless to see.

We're not taking about Nadal and Federer matches...

Nadal would be losing not only in the 1st round of wimbledon TWO years in a row, he would also lose in the 1st round everywhere else when he turns 32 buddy....LMAO! Every mayve RG where he would still go deep but no way does he win it at 32 unless he takes a two year break in between or something.

Yeah let's see how Nadal is doing when he's played 1100+ matches.

 

[fatichar]

We're not taking about Nadal and Federer matches...

Nadal would be losing not only in the 1st round of wimbledon TWO years in a row, he would also lose in the 1st round everywhere else when he turns 32 buddy....LMAO! Every mayve RG where he would still go deep but no way does he win it at 32 unless he takes a two year break in between or something.

Yeah let's see how Nadal is doing when he's played 1100+ matches.

Yeah, first round everywhere at 32. What would you have predicted for Ferru at 32, 5 years back?

 

[ASH1485]

can we atleast wait till he wins the USO

 

[kiki]

Nadal is not even the most complete of his generation
As for menthal strength, he is the toughest. ..of a weak era
Would like to see him in an era with menthal giants
Newk,Laver,Smith,Connors,Gonzo,Borg,Wilander,Mc Enroe till 84, Becker, Wilander and Sampras to just name some

 

[NatF]

Nadal is not even the most complete of his generation
As for menthal strength, he is the toughest. ..of a weak era
Would like to see him in an era with menthal giants
Newk,Laver,Smith,Connors,Gonzo,Borg,Wilander,Mc Enroe till 84, Becker, Wilander and Sampras to just name some

That's like 3 different era's atleast...lol.

 

[Crisstti]

And then getting crushed 6-1 in the 4th?

These are the type of threads that prop up when you have tools like McEnroe calling Nadal the best volleyer in the game. It's a joke.

That didn't have to doo do with mental toughness.

Oh and I'm not kidding about Murray...With the surfaces being faster there is NO WAY in hell Murray defeats peak Fed in a major. none. period.

A 31 year old, bad back, wayyyyyyyyy past his prime Federer took out Murray and Novak in Wimbledon to become # 1 and you think he would lose at his peak to them? No way!

Fed also took out Novak at his peak on his worst surface when he was 30 years old and again wayyyyyyyyy past his best. Something Nadal failed to do in multiple attempts. Hell he even almost took Novak out at the USO...A few points decided that match.

Let's face it. If Nadal did not go AWOL during last years USO and did not lose in the 1st round at this years Wimb, Murray would have zero slams. It's Nadal's fault for being inconsistent and taking 7 months off....If Fed had taken 7 months off, lost in 1st Rounds, there would be multiple slam winners in his era too, they would gain confidence and would come after him more aggressively....and his era would look strong.

So basically what you're saying is that Federer should not have been so consistent...lose more often...and he would be playing in a stronger era...good logic!

I guess by that logic Rafa would beat prime Fed every time at the USO, since he beat him in Dubai in 2006.

Who else during Fed's peak reached as many slam finals as Murray?, not even Roddick. So no. Not to mention the much lesser players than Roddick and Hewitt that Fed won slams against.