Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
They are athletes. Roger is a tennis player.
I may even rate Borg higher than Nole merely as an athlete.
'Rafael Nadal is possibly the greatest athlete ever in tennis' - Rod Laver
- Thread starter Backspin1183
- Start date
I may even rate Borg higher than Nole merely as an athlete.
Deon Sanders
Legend
Can one be the greatest athlete if they have to cheat to catch their breathe on every service point?
Most say no
Most say no
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
The problem is linking athleticism with fitness/endurance. There has never been a more fit player than Nadal. It often does not help him much on fast surfaces.
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
If I am given 15 seconds more than Nadal to catch my breath, I’ll beat him right away.
One moment, don’t Nadal’s cheated opponents share the extra time to catch their breaths during Nadal’s serving games?
FiReFTW
Legend
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Even the most ardent Fed fan would not say he is the greatest athlete. The way Fed would leave rally balls if he has to stretch when he is ahead in the game
-
zverev2018
Semi-Pro
I agree about Nadal’s great athletic body especially his nice butt.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
Got absolutely crucified when I suggested Federer was around 15 percent bodyfat based on pics like this years ago. Like so bad the thread had to be shut down...
Don't think I was wrong, if anything the number may have generous...
TahoeTennis
Legend
There is no question that Nadal and Fed are the 2 greatest tennis players to ever live, twin goats and true ambassadors of the sport.
War is over fedalunited war is over
War is over fedalunited war is over
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
LOL.
EloQuent
Legend
only one shall wear the crown
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
Fedal united in fear of resurgent Djokovic.
EloQuent
Legend
I'll worry when he has 18
Winners or Errors
Legend
Nadal is a force of nature. I don't think you can say that about any other tennis player except maybe Muster before the accident. Though I think they were/are machines, Djokovic and Borg were/are very different kinds of athletes than Nadal. He is the animal of tennis. I'd never say that about Djokovic and Borg. As for Sampras, people saying he was a great athlete just leave me scratching my head. I have him the Federer skills group, not the "I'm gonna' grind you into dust group."
TahoeTennis
Legend
the consensus is that Fed Rafa and Nole are:
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
Mury GOAT.the consensus is that Fed Rafa and Nole are:
One does not need to have a great looking body or muscles to be a great tennis player. Roger may not have a muscular body, but it must have something special for Roger to have been so successful a tennis player.
Purplemonster
Hall of Fame
Nalbandian ??
Atherton2003
Hall of Fame
Nadal is the greatest tennis player.....good on all surfaces (not just clay) and the body is sensational too. Laver is correct.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
Nadal is the best athlete probably although Djokovic's flexibility and speed might make him a better "tennis athlete" or at least equivalent off of clay where Nads spin and footwork takes him over the top in terms of grinding.
I would agree that overall as a physical specimen, Nadal is the only 1 who's really a "force of nature"
The Sampras/Federer type is definitely more skills related.
I get the argument about different kinds of athleticism besides just endurance, grinding, and lateral movement---and Sampras (and Fed) to an extent do have some great athletic skills, showcased particularly on grass. The slam dunk overhead takes some serious fast twitch athleticism...
But, it's just not the same thing to me, Fed, Sampras are just more skills based and eye/hand coordination as compared to Nadal (and to a smaller extent Djokovic) who are physical marvels.
There is no shame in it either way so not sure why people get bent out of shape about this. In fact, you could argue "more skills" is the better thing to have.
Of course Nadal/Djokovic has plenty of skills and Sampras/Fed has plenty of athleticism but in general terms I think the breakdowns of types are fine and everyone sort of knows it's true.
The other thing to note is the grinding types really helps them win more points from athleticism; when it doesn't work say on a faster surface it is because the skills types can hit thru the court more taking away the athletic advantage of the grinder. (Think Fed vs Nadal at WTF)
It is not that the skills type of guy is using supreme athleticism to win in his preferred environment, whereas the grinder definitely does in his. The type of athleticism that a Sampras/Fed might showcase looks cool (think a slam dunk by Sampras)but it doesn't give the same type of edge that a grinder gets from his athleticism on a slower court. The edge is from skills and eye hand coordination.
I think people get all bent out of shape from this because everyone wants to be "athletic", but the reality is all these guys are VERY athletic, just some more than others.
Just like all of them are VERY skilled with great eye-hand coordination, just some more than others.
I would agree that overall as a physical specimen, Nadal is the only 1 who's really a "force of nature"
The Sampras/Federer type is definitely more skills related.
I get the argument about different kinds of athleticism besides just endurance, grinding, and lateral movement---and Sampras (and Fed) to an extent do have some great athletic skills, showcased particularly on grass. The slam dunk overhead takes some serious fast twitch athleticism...
But, it's just not the same thing to me, Fed, Sampras are just more skills based and eye/hand coordination as compared to Nadal (and to a smaller extent Djokovic) who are physical marvels.
There is no shame in it either way so not sure why people get bent out of shape about this. In fact, you could argue "more skills" is the better thing to have.
Of course Nadal/Djokovic has plenty of skills and Sampras/Fed has plenty of athleticism but in general terms I think the breakdowns of types are fine and everyone sort of knows it's true.
The other thing to note is the grinding types really helps them win more points from athleticism; when it doesn't work say on a faster surface it is because the skills types can hit thru the court more taking away the athletic advantage of the grinder. (Think Fed vs Nadal at WTF)
It is not that the skills type of guy is using supreme athleticism to win in his preferred environment, whereas the grinder definitely does in his. The type of athleticism that a Sampras/Fed might showcase looks cool (think a slam dunk by Sampras)but it doesn't give the same type of edge that a grinder gets from his athleticism on a slower court. The edge is from skills and eye hand coordination.
I think people get all bent out of shape from this because everyone wants to be "athletic", but the reality is all these guys are VERY athletic, just some more than others.
Just like all of them are VERY skilled with great eye-hand coordination, just some more than others.
Last edited by a moderator:
Vanilla Slice
Professional
Quite undeniable that the two most athletic tennis players ever are Djokovic and Nadal in my opinion
NONSENSE! Roger and Novak are better than Nadal on HC and Grass. Nadal is only superior on Clay. Novak has 8 HC slams, Nadal has 3. Novak has 4 Grass slams, Nadal has 2. Novak has 5 indoor HC ATP YE titles, Nadal has 0. Roger's superiority is even greater than Novak's on HC, Indoor and Grass.
clout
Hall of Fame
Yea it's hard to dispute that anymore. Guys like Nadal and Djokovic could definitely take up other sports if they dedicated themselves to it. I can see Rafa playing soccer or American football and Novak in track and field. Borg was also quite the athlete too from what I've heard and Sampras could definitely play a sport like basketball with his hops and overall explosiveness. Federer is athletic too of course, but I cant see Roger playing any other sport besides tennis.
Last edited:
Thundergod
Hall of Fame
In what event? Djokovic would not be able to cut it in any of the running events and I don't think he has a gift of an arm for something like javelin either.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
What position for Rafa in NFL? I could see him only as a receiver or cornerback based on his size, but I think he would actually be able to do it, no joke.
My concern would be which of those 2?
WR might seem like a better choice, as it can require less NBA type insane atheticism than cornerbacks who are the most athletic guys on the field, although size wise he'd be a bit slim but there are still plenty at around his size...I dont think he has the longish arms or big hands most receivers have though.
CB physically in terms of size, build, etc he would be perfect for. But as athletic as he is, I don't know if he could quite do that. It's a unique skill running backwards, and all cornerbacks are elite athletes in an American type of NBA mold. To be as PC as I can, I'll just say non-black cornerbacks are unheard of.
Still think he could do it, but would have to think a bit which position would maximize his abilities. Of course, a total hypothetical.
Last edited by a moderator:
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
Borg won the channel slam 5 times when Wimbledon grass was 4,000 times faster than now. The transition then was unreal. He also routinely ran 6 miles in training in 37 minutes. Neither Fed, Nadal or Djoker could possibly match that.
AiRFederer
Hall of Fame
Sure
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
And your guys aren't even in the discussion in other people's opinions. Please read, if you dare.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-17/is-federer-the-greatest-athlete-of-them-all/8714850
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
No, you are misunderstanding, that means "best athlete" in the sense of best "sportsperson". I know you will argue this as it doesn't explicitly say so and you rarely if ever admit being wrong, but it is rather obvious that is what it means.
The list mentions Jack Nicklaus in honorable mentions for example...
Athlete in this sense means purely physical athleticism. Monfils could actually be up there too in that definition. It doesn't mean best tennis player.
Edit: Another obvious clue that what I am saying is correct is that all of the people listed are the greatest in their sports or have a strong argument for it. Clearly it doesn't mean solely "most athletic" (what are the odds that the best in each sport are also the most athletic), but "athlete" is being used as synonymous with "sportsperson"
Try to understand, if you dare.
This is very deceitful of you, but I think you didn't know better in this case!
Thundergod
Hall of Fame
Monfils is probably at the top with Nadal, since he was actually a legit sprinter nationally. I think these discussions are about the ATG players though.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
Agreed, he would have to be.
As far as all time greats I think Nadal and DJ are close, but give edge to Nadal. Djoks flexibility is a very tennis related skill though that also requires a lot of athleticism.
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
He actually won Channel Slam three consecutive years 1978/79/80.
He won 6 RG and 5 Wimbledons, but the other years he won them they were not both RG and Wim in the same years.
Agree that Channel Slams were much difficult. I don't understand how Borg could not win a USO open. He lost several finals, though.
EloQuent
Legend
Borg was a soft court specialist. Wasn't as good on HC. Also in general he was disoriented in NY and he was more fragile mentally than people thought.
clout
Hall of Fame
He has the flexibility for Javelin but yea he'll probably need to cut his gluten-free diet in order to strengthen those arms of his. He wont make it for short sprint but he might have the endurance to do longer distance runs or marathon-like runs. The only tennis player that can legitimately challenge in sprinting is probably Gael Monfils.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
I could see Djokovic as a good swimmer actually
clout
Hall of Fame
He has the physique to become a corner-back imo since he has the speed complimenting his strength and if he actually did play American football then his strength would certainly be even greater than he is right now. Although Nadal's style and physique has the potential in NFL, the chances of him even taking up the sport is super unlikely since he's from Spain and the only football ppl care about there is futbol.
I think Rafa could be pretty good at basketball too. He's 6'1/6'2 ish so he could probably be a Derrick Rose like point guard with his athleticism and explosiveness. Rafa's also had a ton of success in team tennis events such as winning the Olympic gold in doubles, 4 Davis Cups, a few masters doubles titles and a Laver Cup so he certainly wont be a selfish, ball hog like player either despite his profession being an individual sport. Seeing how he went up to Fedr during his match at the Laver Cup to help give him tips/game plans also makes me believe he'd make a great team leader
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
I agree cornerback would be the best bet physically just from his build and size and physical tools, I just wonder because of the insane athleticism required, it's very unique actually it wouldbe like NBA PG as you mention, I could see it based on his size, speed etc but could he dunk? Again a type of athleticism not sure he has but he might.
I think he is actually a bit less than 6'1 barefoot, but would easily be listed at 6'2 in the NBA. Wouldn't be much smaller than the top PG's . But PG in NBA does require certain physical traits like WR...long arms, big hands, a lot of these guys are actually a bit disproportionate looking.
That's why I think cornerback would be the best because it's just pure athleticism, doesn't require some of the weird physical quirks that many American sports positions reward. But you do have to be insanely, insanely athletic to play it. Many of the guys who are CB's could easily have been track and field stars.
Obviously, he would also probably be a good futbol player.
titoelcolombiano
Legend
Agreed Mr Laver - Rafa - Legend!
You don't win two channel slams and at least two slams on all three surfaces for no reason!
You don't win two channel slams and at least two slams on all three surfaces for no reason!
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
This must make Borg superhuman since he did this 5 times and didn’t just make the semis, he won the event. And he did it on super slick fast grass.
Three times. He didn't win RG in 1976 or 1977. He won RG in 1974, 1975, 1978, 1979, 1980, and 1981.
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
"Disoriented in New York" Very big city LOL. He got lost in the subway.
Soft court, first time I hear that classification. Is it just to pair clay with grass leaving out hard court?
I have never seen a tennis player good in "soft court" (clay + grass), and not good in hard court.
But I don't know if we can say that about Borg as he reached many USO finals. Did not have luck there.
clout
Hall of Fame
Yea it's always a bit tough for non-Americans to take up American sports since a lot of their sports require certain physical gifts that only ppl born and raised in America would develop. I think he'd have a decent shot at the NBA since basketball is all about athleticism these days (i.e. LeBron and Westbrook), he seems to have the leadership skills as well and there have actually been a decent amount of NBA players who originate from Spain (most notably the Gasol bros).
Had he played futbol he could've been a forward/striker like C. Ronaldo who is also an athletic freak with an incredible work ethic and always carries the never say die attitude. They both love to play on the big stages as well so I can definitely see a comparison there. Also, Spain has arguably been the best soccer nation over the last 10 years, so if Rafa wanted to take up futbol, the access would've been everywhere.
Last edited:
EloQuent
Legend
I remember reading that the rowdy crowds threw him off. Idk, could be wrong.
Soft court- saw someone on Twitter once call Muguruza a soft court specialist, since she's won RG and Wim but not HC. It doesn't make much sense to me but it's a fact that some players just don't do as well on HC. Borg had a better record on clay, grass and carpet than on HC.
clout
Hall of Fame
I wouldn't say he was "bad" on HC since he reached 4 finals there losing to USO ATG's like Connors and Mac each time. Plus HC's were still a relatively new surface during Borg's time so I'm sure a ton of players were still trying to adjust to it. Even Rafa struggled on HC's for the first few years of his career despite owning clay and having really good numbers on grass (7 of his first 8 slams and 9 of his first 10 slam finals were all on either clay or grass). The only ATG where we could say they were truly "bad" on a particular surface was Sampras on clay. Pete's best ever showing at the French was one semi-final appearance and his overall record on clay was just very poor.
EloQuent
Legend
Agreed, wouldn't call him bad on HC. Still something like a 75% win%. But he's over 80% on all other surfaces.
Pete on clay was like under 70%
clout
Hall of Fame
Pete's overall win percentage on clay was 63% and at RG it's 65% so yea clay was anything by his forte. It's a real shame cuz his game on fast HC's and grass was absolutely electrifying and he's arguably the greatest ever on fast courts. It's unfortunate that he couldn't find a way to translate his game onto his weaker surfaces the way other ATG's have done. If he even had Fed's career on clay I feel like ppl wouldn't have been so quick to shut down Pete from the GOAT debate the moment Fedal began making their charges in the mid/late 2000's
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
Possibly
Vanilla Slice
Professional
This list isn’t really the most athletic but listed by best sports person...
To me, any list of best athletes should have Lebron James on it. Seeing him in person was an experience of athleticism I hadn’t seen before in person.
Of course, Federer is very athletic, but I’d say Djokovic and Nadal are more athletic than he is. Just my opinion.
Similar threads
