Nadal: This injury is different
- Thread starter OddJack
- Start date
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Like I predicted, Nadal is going down the same route Safin and Hewitt went down, just at a slightly older age.
skraggle
Professional
Bingo.
I think Nadal is realizing that playing every possible tournament and putting 100% effort into every calendar year is a losing physical proposition. It just takes too much out of you to be be playing 2-3 more matches than most players week in and week out--especially given his physical style of play. Look at the toll it took on Djokovich last year, where his body just gave out in the World Tour Finals.
The comparison with the Williams sister is spot on, because they are out of action with various injuries for most of the year, only to somehow get healthy for each slam. Then, fresh and hungry, they have the best shot to win.
I love watching tennis, but I feel guilty that these guys get just six weeks off each year to rest up and get healthy, part of which is spent getting ready for the next season. So like the rest of us, they call in sick to work sometimes to just get some needed time off.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
I do hope he can play the US Open. It won't be the same without him.
henryshli
Semi-Pro
No, no. I agree. Rafa did something horrible and he signed a silent ban with the ATP! No doubt about it!
He doped, and then the ATP forced him to first tank against Rosol, then miss X amount of tournaments. It makes perfect sense.
It also explains what happened in RG 09. He didn't lose against Soderling, he simply was forced to tank and then miss Wimbledon 09 as punishment.
No he got spanked by Soderling and then Rosol even after doping hence he is crying at home now
Zarfot Z
Professional
And even then, it would be a nearly impossible task. Assuming that Federer does not win a slam for the rest of his career, which is incredibly unlikely, Nadal would have to win 7 Grand Slams to be in GOAT contention.
Where is he going to get those 7 slams? Roland Garros only comes around every year, and despite NSK's musings, there is no way he is going to win it into his 30s when his body is already crippled at 26.
Not all "injury" is simply a cause of an action you made.
My father in-law was a great athlete back in the day he had a promising career based of his early college results. He was running one day nothing to hard and the next morning he said his feet and knees felt like they were on fire and they spent months trying to figure out the injury.
at age 22 he was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis and his days of sports instantly ended and today he normally sleeps in his chair downstairs because the effort required for him to go upstairs is sometimes to much for him.
Hopefully for Rafa's sake it's nothing that serious but when you play for years used to always being a little sore or some what injured it can often mask underlying problems you don't realize you have.
just like Agassi's battle with sciatica
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
He could, once again, come back and take three in one year.
D
Deleted member 21996
Guest
wow... lots of abusive language and insults in this thread...
Last edited by a moderator:
Totai
Professional
Tennis players play about 20 tournies a year, lets take a best case scenario where the player actually wins all the tournaments he enters:
4 Slam x 2 weeks =8 weeks (play every other day)
15 non slams x 1week = 16 weeks (Top players get some byes in the first rounds)
1 WTF x 2 weeks = 2 weeks
Total # of weeks in play: 26
And that is considering they win everything, which leaves them with 26 weeks of downtime, where they can practice as hard as they want, or not at all.
Not a bad gig at all if you ask me, and no, you should not feel bad that they get "only 6 weeks off". The average person would be lucky to get 4 weeks off a year, at a ****ty desk job.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
It makes you wonder how much effect it will have on Federer in the coming years to be able to play whenever he wants with no obligations on minimum tournaments etc. I wonder how much difference it really makes to someone like him to have a few more 2-3 week gaps through the year to recoup and prepare.
Rock Strongo
Legend
Laverdad? Surely he's not alive still?
D
Deleted member 21996
Guest
DeShaun
Banned
You said exactly what I was thinking when reading Roger's comments. He is so adept at the use of language that I got the distinct impression that he was subtly taunting Rafa with those comments. "Gosh it's really too bad because Rafa is such a swell guy. I just love playing him because his game does not torture me with boredom but is actually so much fun to deal with and positively excites and engages me. Well, I sure hope that he recovers soon. I am just so hurt and confused by his lengthy absence due to injury, especially because of how thoroughly he mowed down the competition throughout the clay season and did not appear injured nor speak of any injury (until sustaining his most shocking loss of his career), given how Rafa is such a sharing individual, one hardly able to restrain himself from talking publicly about any injury the very instant he perceives even the tiniest pain ;-)," is essentially what Roger seemed to be saying to my ear.
Also, the bit about choosing not to participate is suggestive of the idea that Rafa chose not to defend a non clay title; there is potentially so much going on in Roger's comments, on so many levels, that it's deafeningly loud.
Last edited:
SwankPeRFection
Hall of Fame
Rafa will go down in history with about as much fanfare as Borg did. Borg wasn't the best at everything and he didn't spend a lot of time at #1, yet everyone seems to think he was one of the greats. How so? He was good, but not super good. That's one of the reasons why he bailed. Things started to not go his way and he bolted. Rafa will probably do the same. Ironically, they're both very close in terms of weeks at #1. 102 vs 109
LOL good pun on his knees
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Nadal is right up there with Federer and is ahead of Djokovic and Murray. He's the best clay courter on tour, he's very good at something.
He did alright by making the Indian Wells and Miami finals last year when he returned from an injury.
But let's just hope he'll make it to the Us-open.
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
It's nice to dream, i know
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
Congratulations, you just made a fool of yourself. Borg didn't even play the AO and retired at 26. If he had stuck around and played AO he would have probably retired with 20+ slams.
The guy made the final in USO 4 times. Don't blame him for having to play with other legends like Connors and McEnroe in USO finals, vs mugs like Roddick and a senile 35 year old Agassi.
Seriously, the lack of historical perspective in the forums is amazing. 10 years after Federer's retirement he will be appreciated much more objectively than he is now.
Think you just made a fool of yourself...
He's been doing it for 88 times on the "Is a part of Federer's success cemented on Nadal's failure" thread.
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
When people don't have anything intelligent to say they resort to silly things like counting posts.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
i agree that borg would have won more slams if he played the AO, and that he was unlucky to run into 2 of the best US Open champs in history, but saying he probably would have had 20+ slams (even if he had stuck around til 30) is ridiculous hyperbole.
kishnabe
Talk Tennis Guru
You do undestand that they do physical workouts, technical workouts, and practice sessions in order to keep the feel of the ball.
Us Weekend hashers can be okay with 1-2 week breaks between the time times they play. For Pros....that could be the difference from winning a losing a match.
Sharapova only took 3 days off after Wimbledon and Federer usually takes 1 week off after Wimbledon. Why not rest more...well they don't want to cool down their body down too much, it won't be as receptive in there leading practices.
26 weeks of Tournament Tennis + Media Demands+ Physical Training+ Tennis Practice= I doubt they have 5 good weeks of rest.
Yeah a Desk Job might seem hard and their life is easier. Well at least we get to spend time with our family after 5pm.....these professionals have to sacrifice their desire to spend time with family,kids and friends for this sport. Tennis doesn't reward all of the either, we may be jealous of their money, but they are jealous of us too I bet.
We don't need to be in the eye of the media, and we get to have a social life while they rarely have one barring some of them.
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
Why so? The AO was held in grass, which Bjorg was totally dominating in. If he would have taken as many AO titles as Wimbledon titles up to age 26, he would have had 16 slams, with 4 left to reach 20. Not a ridiculous hyperbole at all.
I happen to think that even with McEnroe's and Lendl's ascent, Borg could have probably passed 20 slams.
Last edited:
Geez, you guys take this pretty serious!
I agree with this guy even though he seems pissed, Borg retired at 26 and still has great stats, who knows how far he could have gone.
I wonder how the greats of the past would have done if they had modern equipment, I think it's a great question.
OddJack
G.O.A.T.
Stats are not great after 26 for guys who won RG multiple times.
You can't just go back in time, and change things without a ripple effect. Your simplistic thinking is laughable at best, if he had played every AO it literally opens up thousands of different ways this could have impacted his career.
Fatigue from travelling, picking up a career ending injury, suffering beat downs from rivals effecting his mental game, meet a sexy girl in OZ and quit the game, who knows...
He did what he did, and no more. All this "he could have potentially done...bla bla bla" is one of the worst arguments anybody can make, and just signifies that the poster has used up any relevant evidence they may have had to support their argument.
In Imaginationland my favorite player Marat Safin could have won at least 5 more slams if bla bla bla bla. You hear it all the time, I love Marat, he achieved what he achieved, I'm not under any illusions he could have done better.
Last edited:
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
RoFed has nothing to worry about then.
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
Yes, exactly like when Fed fanatics claim the H2H is skewed because of clay, even when Nadal has won against Fed in grass and hardcourt slam finals. The H2H is what you got, so stop complaining about clay. If you don't like it, write a letter to your demigod (DRII(TM)) asking him to stay home come May.
Wow, nice completely irrelevant come back there.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
Because tennis is unpredictable, fabricating 9+ slams is absurd.
First, Mats Wilander won 2 AO's on grass, so he should have won Wimbledon right? No he didn't even make a semi. Just assuming Borg would win 5 AO titles is vast speculation. It is unlikely he would go on a run of 10 grass slams, especially as he had a fair share or 5 set struggles at Wimbledon.
in 1977 5 set matches against Edmonson in the 2nd round, and back to back 5 setters in the semis (Guralitus) and final (connors) In 1978 a 5 set 1st round (Amaya) in 1979 5 setters in the 2nd round (Amritraj) and final (Tanner) in 1980 a 5 set final (Mac) - 1976 is the only year he won without having to go 5 sets so he was hardly invulnerable on grass.Impossible tosay he'd have won 5 AO's, an even if he did, maybe he would have been too tired later in the season to win Wimbledon.
after 26, it is also impossible to say with Mac and other players around, whether he'd have ever won another slam, nevermind 4. Not saying he wouldn't, but in tennis you just don't know. who would have predicted the shift from Nadal to Djokovic from 2010 to 2011? In 2010 no one would have said nadal would be here in 2012 with only 2 more slams.
maybe you think so, but that is wild speculation, not "probably"
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
True to a point. All I'm saying is that the Fed camp does that same thing changing the argument all the time.
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
I agree there is a great degree of uncertainty. What I'm saying is that it is not unlikely. Borg is one of the best players ever. You can't argue that missing the AO for so many years and retiring so young must have had a noticeable impact in his slam count. To what degree I don't know, but arguing for a much higher number is not out of the realm of possibility.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
It's possible, but you treat it like it's highly likely (you said "probably"), even though it means adding at least 10 slams (almost doubling his slam count) I'd say that's a huge shot in the dark. Possible of course, but a massive guess.
As I said, I DO think he'd have more. I'd say 3-5 more slams is a resonable guess. More or less is possible, but I personally can't believe winning 20+ slams is so easy. There's not an endless well of energy, determination, drive etc
Some do, the more intelligent Fed fans (like myself) don't linger over it (17 slams is just fine , Nadal leads the H2H, and there is no denying that he's the better player in that particular match up, but only marginally. However the way some people throw the stat about you'd think it was 18-2...18-10 is not a huge difference, beating Nadal 10 times is good going.
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
OK, I can agree with this. I think 6 more is quite likely (no, not certain or very likely, just quite likely).
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
My apologies, Seany. There are plenty of good Federer fans, and you must be one of them. Some times I overreact for all the flack some of the bad ones dish out (particularly against Nadal).
Arguing the H2H is one thing. Talking of PEDs, making jokes about child abuse, calling Nadal a PIG and a MONKEY, are rather different things.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
cool. I mean I don't rule out more that that, but it's too hard to figure in all the variables. Sadly we'll never know, but he's still an all time great.
Oh agreed. Unfortunately the anonymity of the internet allows people to express far stronger opinions than what they actually believe, things they really wouldn't say in a face to face discussion. It gets to the point where they actually say things opposite to that of what they believe, just to intensify the battle/debate.
I'm sure NSK is perfectly polite little boy, sitting behind a computer raging on about Nadal while his mom brings him cookies and milk, but only after homework is done
Last edited:
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
I'm sure NSK is perfectly polite little boy, sitting behind a computer raging on about Nadal while his mom brings him cookies and milk, but only after homework is done
I am on email with NSK now and then, and he's a cool guy actually. Intelligent, smart and witty. I know he comes across quite differently on our forum. None of these other accounts are him, these are some impostors posing as him, or just accidentally confused for him. NSK has a good job, a hot gf and lives in an apartment on the Upper East Side.
I am asking him to get back on TW after requesting the mods to reopen his account, but he's a bit upset and maybe stubborn.
tusharlovesrafa
Hall of Fame
merlinpinpin
Hall of Fame
Congratulations to you, too, you just made another stupid assertion. There are, in life, a few things called *facts* that seem to bother you no end.
Fact: Borg didn't stick around
Fact: Borg didn't play AO
Fact: Borg didn't win 20+ slams
For the record, I thoroughly disagree with the "Borg wasn't that good" premise (because he was). But *fact* is, he couldn't stand the pressure/life of a top tennis player past 25 and called it a day. All these "what if" scenarios are just wishful thinking that don't have anything to do with the truth.
Comedy gold to see you write that considering the threads you seem so fond of creating. Well done! :lol:
Last edited:
merlinpinpin
Hall of Fame
The H2H *is* unbalanced because they played the majority of their matches on clay (and shouldn't have, "theorically") and Nadal is so good on the surface, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It does, obviously, so it's stupid to say otherwise. As things stand, it's not a fair representation of their rivalry as clay is so preeminent and the actual result would probably be much closer had they played on a more balanced representation of surfaces, but who cares? It's not important in the end, and there are cases in which H2H is even more skewed, with no matches whatsoever say, on clay, or on grass. You take what you've got, that's all there is to it, really.
Last edited:
merlinpinpin
Hall of Fame
In case you didn't realize, he's already past 26 and seems to be doing just fine, so I wouldn't worry too much about him.
But thanks for trolling anyway!
underground
G.O.A.T.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
I think we are putting too much into what Fred is saying in terms of interpreting. If he was implying that Nadal is not injured, he would not be concerned.
It's ridiculous to think of Nadal's ego being bruised by ONE LOSS. When he admitted a lack of confidence (or whatever it was) after being beaten by Joker in 2011, and then came back to beat him 3 times, why should one loss to a nobody send him into a 5 month break ???
Maybe the knee is not responding to the usual treatment. Maybe it's become worse. At any rate, his prolonged absence is a loss to tennis for most tennis fans.
Similar threads
