N
Nuclear
Guest
Statement
(a)Rafa's playstyle (which, coupled with other factors such as mental strength and physical preparation, increases his probability of winning Slams)
causes (b) Extreme strain on body
which increases chances of (c) Injury
which causes (d) Absence im Slams.
(a) => (b) => (c) => (d)
Contrapositive
not (d) => not (c) => not (b) => not (a)
To be present in more Slams, Nadal would have to be uninjured. For this to be more likely, he'd have to put less strain on bis body which implies he'd have to change his playstyle which may reduce his success in Slams.
You could imagine a Nadal with as much Slam participation rate as, say, Federer. But this Nadal would have to play a significantly less physically taxing (thus fundamentally different) tennis.
Perhaps this is achievable, considering his natural ballstriking and volleying skills coupled with his acute strategic awareness and outstanding mental strength.
Would he be as dominant on clay?
Maybe not as much but he would be up there at the top. In fact, Federer himself (whose playstyle makes him much less injury prone) would've won countless RG titles if it wasn't for Nadal.
Would he have more HC and Grass Slams? Very likely.
So why does this Nadal not exist? Why did we get a constantly injured Nadal instead? Nadal's team must have thought of overhauling his game right?
Unfortunately, he has shown inability to become an elite server(lack of accuracy, confidence, or sustained focus, I am unsure).
Additionally he doesn't seem to have the reaction speed necessary to be an elite aggressive returner.
Finally, bad luck. However, he has never radically changed his diet, reduced his weight and muscle mass or done extensive work on flexibility(great for joints) and balance(crucial for aggressive return of serve).
He has clearly not left every stone unturned so is bad luck that important a factor? After all, he hit the genetic lottery and was coined a once in a lifetime phenom.
I could elaborate on how that relates to his simple and straight to the point, somewhat conservative and sometimes stubborn nature. And how this nature comes with pros and cons. Same goes for his peers.
It's just hard to imagine a fundamentally different Nadal. Maybe the Rafa we got is one of the most successfull versions out of all "alternate universes" containing Federer and Djokovic? Who knows.
Causality is a fundamental concept that makes you realize just how much constraint there is in the world and how difficult it is to think of a viable alternate sequence of events.
(a)Rafa's playstyle (which, coupled with other factors such as mental strength and physical preparation, increases his probability of winning Slams)
causes (b) Extreme strain on body
which increases chances of (c) Injury
which causes (d) Absence im Slams.
(a) => (b) => (c) => (d)
Contrapositive
not (d) => not (c) => not (b) => not (a)
To be present in more Slams, Nadal would have to be uninjured. For this to be more likely, he'd have to put less strain on bis body which implies he'd have to change his playstyle which may reduce his success in Slams.
You could imagine a Nadal with as much Slam participation rate as, say, Federer. But this Nadal would have to play a significantly less physically taxing (thus fundamentally different) tennis.
Perhaps this is achievable, considering his natural ballstriking and volleying skills coupled with his acute strategic awareness and outstanding mental strength.
Would he be as dominant on clay?
Maybe not as much but he would be up there at the top. In fact, Federer himself (whose playstyle makes him much less injury prone) would've won countless RG titles if it wasn't for Nadal.
Would he have more HC and Grass Slams? Very likely.
So why does this Nadal not exist? Why did we get a constantly injured Nadal instead? Nadal's team must have thought of overhauling his game right?
Unfortunately, he has shown inability to become an elite server(lack of accuracy, confidence, or sustained focus, I am unsure).
Additionally he doesn't seem to have the reaction speed necessary to be an elite aggressive returner.
Finally, bad luck. However, he has never radically changed his diet, reduced his weight and muscle mass or done extensive work on flexibility(great for joints) and balance(crucial for aggressive return of serve).
He has clearly not left every stone unturned so is bad luck that important a factor? After all, he hit the genetic lottery and was coined a once in a lifetime phenom.
I could elaborate on how that relates to his simple and straight to the point, somewhat conservative and sometimes stubborn nature. And how this nature comes with pros and cons. Same goes for his peers.
It's just hard to imagine a fundamentally different Nadal. Maybe the Rafa we got is one of the most successfull versions out of all "alternate universes" containing Federer and Djokovic? Who knows.
Causality is a fundamental concept that makes you realize just how much constraint there is in the world and how difficult it is to think of a viable alternate sequence of events.