Reason why Nadal is so far ahead of Roddick and Hewitt

[8PAQ]

One word: Federer

Both Roddick and Hewitt keep running into Federer where it hurts them the most: turnament finals and semifinals.

For example this year Hewitt lost to Federer:

Indian Wells final --> 30 points lost
Wimbledon semi --> 50 or even 110 points lost
US Open semi --> 50 or even 110 points lost
Total lost = 130 to 250 points lost because of Federer

This of course only counts actual points lost. How about the psychological damage done by Fed to both of those players. I bet Roddick is switching coaches and messing with his game only because of Federer. If not for Federer, Roddick would probably be doing much better this summer. Maybe even winning US Open instead of getting eliminated in the 1st round. He would most likely stick to what worked so well in 2003 for him.


Nadal on the other hand gets most of his points from clay where he doesn't even have to play Federer most of the time and where Federer is not that great anyway. Nadal never gets far enough on fast surfaces to meet Federer like Roddick or Hewitt.

So my point is Roddick and Hewitt are not really that much worse than Nadal like the points would suggest. They are just both unlucky to play their best on Federer’s playground.

If not for Fed I bet Nadal, Roddick and Hewitt would all be in similar 700 – 900 points range right now. We would probably have to wait till Masters Cup to see who comes ahead.

 

[Rataplan]

Wait a minute.

Didn't Nadal run into Federer in the final in Miami?
Didn't Nadal beat him in a SF in France?

That's twice within a couple of months.

 

[8PAQ]

Wait a minute.

Didn't Nadal run into Federer in the final in Miami?
Didn't Nadal beat him in a SF in France?

That's twice within a couple of months.

Yes and he lost only 30 points beause of it. So?

 

[Rataplan]

Don't worry about Nadal so much.

Judging by the many experts in here...he will soon fade away because he was just lucky this year. He has a one dimensional game, is just a baseline basher who has peaked early, only good on clay but many players will figure him out and he will fade away, leaving the Rafa obsessed people with a depression.

 

[8PAQ]

Don't worry about Nadal so much.

Judging by the many experts in here...he will soon fade away because he was just lucky this year and he will fade away, leaving the Rafa obsessed people with a depression.

Nadal wasn't lucky to win all those points. He earned them well. It is just that both Roddick and Hewitt got punked by Federer. So now it looks like Nadal is so much better than those two. And so far I don't see Nadal owning them on fast surfaces to really deserve his #2 ranking over Hewitt or Roddick. I hope Nadal runs into both of them during the indoor season and the year end Master Cup. Then we shall see if he is really so much better than them.

 

[Rataplan]

Why shouldn't he deserve the ranking or are you another clay court snob (besides, not ever point in his ranking comes from clay)?

Why aren't Roddick or Hewitt trying to win more clay court tournaments to win points?

You have a point when you say that both Hewitt and Roddick are probably better on faster surfaces at this stage in Nadal's career (and I'm not projecting to the future on purpose).

Other than that, it's not that easy at the moment to compare Hewitt and Roddick with Nadal at this point.
Will Nadal ever have excellent results on fast courts? He has the potential but it's still uncertain. He might do well on them but he might not.
Will Roddick or Hewitt ever be a dominant player on clay?

 

[araghava]

This is the same argument that was made for Agassi - Sampras. i.e. on the slower surfaces, Sampras never made it to the later rounds to face Agassi. However on the faster surfaces, Agassi would get to the later rounds and then get beaten by Sampras. Hence the lopsided record for Sampras.

 

[8PAQ]

If Nadal beats at least two of (physically healthy):

Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin

in year end Masters Cup then I will 100% agree that he deserves #2 ranking.

Personally I belive he won't even advance past the round robin round if he ends up with a healthy Safin and Hewitt or Safin and Roddick in the same half. He will most likely just beat whoever the 3rd person is (say Davydenko) and lose the other two matches.

Of course he might get lucky and have Hewitt, Agassi and Davydenko in his half. Then he will lose in the Semis to Roddick or Safin or Federer.

 

[rhubarb]

Nadal wasn't lucky to win all those points. He earned them well. It is just that both Roddick and Hewitt got punked by Federer. So now it looks like Nadal is so much better than those two. And so far I don't see Nadal owning them on fast surfaces to really deserve his #2 ranking over Hewitt or Roddick. I hope Nadal runs into both of them during the indoor season and the year end Master Cup. Then we shall see if he is really so much better than them.

I don't see them beating him on clay either. Roddick lost to him in DC, and whilst Hewitt hasn't played on clay this year, Nadal still very nearly beat him at the AO in four sets.

Besides, neither Hewitt or Roddick is in the top three right now. So they can't be pretending to be number two.

 

[Surecatch]

Nadal needs to develop his game into more completeness if he is going to compete with Fed on a larger scale. Roddick on the other hand is at a crossroads. If he doesn't develop a serve and volley game beyond what he currently has, I believe he will soon fall aside and become a non factor. Hewitt is the only player close to Fed right now and even he is a good couple steps behind. It may be one of the up and comers like Ginepri or Blake that provides a true rivalry to Fed in the future.

 

[Rataplan]

He deserves the ranking within the system and he beat the number one and the maestro of the game in the process.

You can keep whining about faster surfaces but that does not change the sport, played on fast and on slow surfaces.


Unless Roddick and Hewitt start winning more on clay courts, Nadal will always have this small advantage on clay and they can get their revenge on faster courts.

 

[Ravi]

Lies, damned lies, and statistics

Career high, most titles won in a year

Hewitt - 6, 2001
Roddick - 6, 2003
Safin - 7, 2001
Agassi - 7, 1995
Nadal - 9, 2005

 

[The tennis guy]

It's partially true. Nadal's best surface is Federer's weakest while Roddick and Hewitt's best surfaces are Federer's strongest as well.

However, neither Roddick nor Hewitt did well at Montreal when Federer didn't play, Nadal won there.

 

[ACE of Hearts]

Nadal has a bright future, i would put him ahead of Roddick but not Hewitt, who is very consistent when it comes to the slams.

 

[8PAQ]

Nadal has a bright future, i would put him ahead of Roddick but not Hewitt, who is very consistent when it comes to the slams.

My thoughts exactly. I consider Hewitt the real #2. After all in the last 7 slams he played he always lost to the eventual winner. Got to two finals and two semifinals. Very consistent. And plays better on clay than Nadal does on grass. A bit better than Nadal on slow hard court. And way better than Nadal on fast hard court. Sounds like real #2 to me.

 

[whealben]

Nadal wasn't lucky to win all those points. He earned them well. It is just that both Roddick and Hewitt got punked by Federer. So now it looks like Nadal is so much better than those two. And so far I don't see Nadal owning them on fast surfaces to really deserve his #2 ranking over Hewitt or Roddick. I hope Nadal runs into both of them during the indoor season and the year end Master Cup. Then we shall see if he is really so much better than them.

Oh I think we can safely say Nadal will be right there on top form. He's 19!! He was brought up on clay for goodness sake. Give him time to adapt to other surfaces. He's definitely got the big game temperament.

He's the only player to get near Federer this year. After winning Junior Wimbledon it took a few years for Rog to hit the big time, whereas Leyton and Nadal (Gasquet too) came in at 17/18 with all guns blazing.

Luck doesn't come into. Huge talent and an enormous capacity to do the training does.
I think (barring injury) that Nadal with Gasquet/Roddick will be Federers only opposition for the next couple of years (although, of course, I'm crossing everything for young Andy Murray ).

Leyton, much as I admire him and his "guts" and "never say die" attitude doesn't ever seen to have been in the same fitness zone since his chicken pox/virus saw him dumped in the first round of the 2003 (?) Aussie Open. He relies on phenomenal speed. Which has been a tad slower since then. :-|

 

[stoffer]

While Nadal has definetly had a good year I would say he isnt really that far ahead of Roddick, and especially Hewitt who has missed some tournies with injuries. Check out this interesting stat:

ATP race points/tournament played.
Fed 80.6
Nad 40.6
Rod 32.2
Hew 35

This just emphasizes how much farther ahead Fed is compared to the rest of the field. The fast indoor courts and TMC are coming up and I think at least Hewitt will close the gap on Nadal. Maybe not total points, but definetly point/tourney.

 

[jackson vile]

The whole point system is BS so no point of arguing anyways.

Do remember that Nadal is only 19 and Fed is what 25, Roddick is somehting like 23?, what is Hewitt?

I know that Hewitt, AA, and others can beat Fed, they just have not been working as hard/smart.

As for Nadal, yes he is a bit more 2 demsnional, but he is young and will work on it as he will have to inorder to win on hard court especially clay.

 

[stoffer]

Fed's 24 (or will be soon) Why is the point system BS? Points are points arent they? I was just highlighting a stat I found interesting.

 

[The tennis guy]

Check out this interesting stat:

ATP race points/tournament played.
Fed 80.6
Nad 40.6
Rod 32.2
Hew 35

This just emphasizes how much farther ahead Fed is compared to the rest of the field. The fast indoor courts and TMC are coming up and I think at least Hewitt will close the gap on Nadal. Maybe not total points, but definetly point/tourney.

Actually the stat is not correct. The number of tournaments played in the race includes the required tournaments (super 9 and grand slam) even if you didn't play. Thus Federer only played 13 (missed Rome and Montreal), Nadal 20 (missed Hamburg), Roddick 16 (missed Monte Carlo), Hewitt 9 (missed Miami, 4 clay including RG).

ATP race points/tournament played:
Federer 93
Nadal 43
Roddick 34
Hewitt 54.

 

[stoffer]

Thanks for that The tennis guy, I didnt know they did that. But those numbers further emphasize what I was trying to point out.

 

[DashaandSafin]

Point is Nadal earns all his points on clay right? That and slow hard courts at Miami and the AO. I always thought Cinci was fast...but i guess i was wrong?
Nadal is the master of Clay but i cant see him beating Hewitt or Roddick or Safin on faster courts.
Dont expect to hear from him for the rest of the year until Masters in Shanghai, where he will get knocked out by any of the top 5. Unless the courts are slow there.

 

[The tennis guy]

Thanks for that The tennis guy, I didnt know they did that. But those numbers further emphasize what I was trying to point out.

I agree. Hewitt has been very consistent this year in big tournaments he played. Except Montreal when he was sick, he got to at least semifinal in all slams and super 9 events.

 

[Phil]

Don't worry about Nadal so much.

Judging by the many experts in here...he will soon fade away because he was just lucky this year. He has a one dimensional game, is just a baseline basher who has peaked early, only good on clay but many players will figure him out and he will fade away, leaving the Rafa obsessed people with a depression.

Finally, you got it right. Hey, Rataplan...Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has
peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has peaked. Nadal has
peaked, etc.

 

[dozu]

Don't worry about Nadal so much.

Judging by the many experts in here...he will soon fade away because he was just lucky this year. He has a one dimensional game, is just a baseline basher who has peaked early, only good on clay but many players will figure him out and he will fade away, leaving the Rafa obsessed people with a depression.

I totally agree...Nadal is too 1-dimentional and too much dependant on grinding, there are too many clay court specialists, and the surface itself is very much a unpredictable one... players will figure him out.

When a super star comes into the scene, there is always this shock effect, e.g. Roddick's 2003 hardcourt season.... I think Nadal is having a similar year on clay.

If you look at his game and this year's French final where Puerta was dictating for about 3/4 of the match.... someone with a bigger game should be able to figure out Nadal.... Nadal hits lot of short balls, I think a well rounded all court player like Federer or Gasguet or Safin should be able to take the ball early and finish off the point.. Nadal hits some unbelievable passing shots and those might have scared his opponents, but nobody can fight geometry forever.

 

[VamosRafa]

Interesting discussion. There's no question that Rafa is the "real" No. 2, because unless my rankings info is incorrect, no one has a statistical possibility of displacing him as No. 2 until Monte Carlo, and likely not before Barcelona or Roma. And we're talking about a guy who started the year at No. 51, and didn't have direct entry into either Paris or Madrid last fall.

And he has nine titles to date, including Montreal. That puts him in an elite group.

Safin just qualified for Shanghai, but it's because of his status as a slam winner. No other player has qualified yet, and Rafa and Roger qualified months ago.

Rafa is happy with No. 2 for the moment. But he wants to be World No. 1, and although he believes Roger is untouchable at the moment, he says, "I'm young, and I can improve. That's my goal - to be No. 1."

As Brad Gilbert said, "Time is on his side."

And what I like is that many current/former players disagree with many of you. They agree with Gilbert, and think that Rafa will be a great player, on more than one surface.

And I think it was very telling when Puerta said this in Montreal, when he lost to Nadal. I mean, he has played Nadal, and that carries a bit of weight:

'Q. What is the problem playing against Nadal? Is it only his speed or is it the spin?

MARIANO PUERTA: (Translated from Spanish by ATP) First of all, you're talking about a player that is probably going to be one of the best players of all time. When you are talking about a player at that level, he's pretty much going to do everything really good. Rafael, he defends really, really well. That makes it that much tougher to beat him. Mariano also feels a lot of players are starting to feel that. It's just getting really hard to play against him."

 

[Andy Hewitt]

Don't worry about Nadal so much.

Judging by the many experts in here...he will soon fade away because he was just lucky this year. He has a one dimensional game, is just a baseline basher who has peaked early, only good on clay but many players will figure him out and he will fade away, leaving the Rafa obsessed people with a depression.

I like your attitude!

 

[VamosRafa]

Yes, when reason fails, sarcasm has its uses. Well done, Rataplan.

 

[NGreenwald42390]

Don't worry about Nadal so much.

Judging by the many experts in here...he will soon fade away because he was just lucky this year. He has a one dimensional game, is just a baseline basher who has peaked early, only good on clay but many players will figure him out and he will fade away, leaving the Rafa obsessed people with a depression.

hmm experts are always right

 

[Rob_C]

Why shouldn't he deserve the ranking or are you another clay court snob (besides, not ever point in his ranking comes from clay)?

Why aren't Roddick or Hewitt trying to win more clay court tournaments to win points?

You have a point when you say that both Hewitt and Roddick are probably better on faster surfaces at this stage in Nadal's career (and I'm not projecting to the future on purpose).

Other than that, it's not that easy at the moment to compare Hewitt and Roddick with Nadal at this point.
Will Nadal ever have excellent results on fast courts? He has the potential but it's still uncertain. He might do well on them but he might not.
Will Roddick or Hewitt ever be a dominant player on clay?

Because Roddick & Hewitt only play clay court tournaments leading up to the French Open. They dont play on clay during the spring or summer hard court season.

Instead of playing Acapulco, Brazil, & Chile on clay, they'll be playing San Jose, Memphis etc on hard courts.

 

[VamosRafa]

Because Roddick & Hewitt only play clay court tournaments leading up to the French Open. They dont play on clay during the spring or summer hard court season.

Instead of playing Acapulco, Brazil, & Chile on clay, they'll be playing San Jose, Memphis etc on hard courts.

Perhaps they should go to Latin America then. I'm sure they would get major appearance fees. Rafa is not playing any of the tournaments you just mentioned. He'll play in Europe at that time.

 

[killer]

It does come down to a matter of court surface, doesn't it? As much as i like the disparity between clay-courters and hard/grass-courters, and root for Gonzo on clay as much as i do AA on hard, therein lies the notion for best player: who can successfully convert their game from surface to surface?
Nadal's lauch into the limelight did come 1/3 through the season, during the clay-court events. His dismal showings at Wimby and USO are indicative that his game isn't well-suited to the hardcourts. While he did beat AA at Montreal, my feeling is that it was more the 'novelty' of Nadal's game on hard that beat AA, not genuine skill or strategy.

It remains to be seen whether Nadal can continue to ride the crest that saw him win 9 tournies this year, though it already appears that strong hardcourters like Blake have managed to defeat his defensive strategy. Perhaps he'll be able to make the adjustments necessary to win on surfaces that won't let you rely on speed alone.

 

[Phil]

Perhaps he'll be able to make the adjustments necessary to win on surfaces that won't let you rely on speed alone.

And perhaps he won't; I'm betting that once everyone on the tour has gone a round or two with him, win or lose, the better players will adjust and spank his punk-counterpuncherass, like at the USO.

 

[Rataplan]

So much wisdom in this message board...

How lucky can a guy get to win RG at his very first attempt, three masters and all these tournaments with only speed as his weapon and with no tough competitors to speak off?

I mean, when he beats a player, it's just because the player is even more limited in his talent or better yet: every tough opponent just happened to be playing like crap that day.
On the other hand, when Nadal gets defeated...it's just a solid proof that the only way for Nadal is down.

People talk about Nadal too much in here.
I do too but hey...I'm just delusional (I'm just having one of my sane moments here). Hell, I'm even a fan of players like Hewitt, Coria and Malisse: how delusional can you get?
A true tennis expert should stick with the solid number one player and leave the other poor players to the delusional.

 

[edberg505]

And perhaps he won't; I'm betting that once everyone on the tour has gone a round or two with him, win or lose, the better players will adjust and spank his punk-counterpuncherass, like at the USO.

Ok dude, I gotta know. Where did you get that picture on your profile? It is funny as hell.

 

[VamosRafa]

Ok dude, I gotta know. Where did you get that picture on your profile? It is funny as hell.

I agree. That's the best part of Phil's posts.

 

[jings]

Mostly agree with Phil on this one, I just dont' think the decline will be that precipitous. He has proved that he can play this year, the mystery is in how much his success has been due to the novelty of his game and how much has been due to his game. I expect he'll continue to base his year around clay where he should be able to garner points quite successfully. As to him trying to be #1, I just don't see that he has a sufficiently strong game at the moment away from the dirt to push aside say Federer over 12 months. The really interesting time will come if / when he decides that his game is strong enough to play a more balanced schedule.

As an aside I'm not a fan of on court histrionics but am also a bit bored by the general niceness shown by everyone on tour to one another these days. If Nadal is really going to continue with the fist pumping in your face "vamoooooos" thing I think he should go the whole hog and really get into racquet bashing, trash talking at change overs, that sort of thing .... maybe beat up the odd woman line judge or something. Be far more convincing I think.

 

[Guga_x]

Why is everyone so scared to admit that Nadal is really good? Probably will be the best conter-puncher ever (yes better than Hewitt and Chang)...

The same way that Federer is one of the best (the best probably) all-courters of all time.

Not every player has to play the same type of game do they?

 

[jings]

Nadal has had a standout season, beaten good players - he's clearly good. Those are facts. What one thinks he goes on to after this is a matter of opinion. Coria if he had lifted RG last year would have had a similar sort of year to Nadal this ... Muster's clay year is a matter of record. The doubters can point to experience where break out clay seasons haven't necessarily been the start of anything. Nadal has yet to show any great pedigree on the faster surfaces (yes he won Torronto but the draw broke kindly for him I would say). He also plays a different game to most and there is certainly some novelty for the top players in working out how to take him on. Not sure he really fits the counter puncher mode does he - he's much more aggressive than that I would say. Still, for you to put him with Hewitt and Chang he'll need to improve results away from clay to prove you right. I certainly wish him well, be great to see him evolve. I have my doubts he'll make it though.

 

[jackson vile]

OK let's go over this yet again. Nadal is only 19 people, how old your you guys?

Nadal has 6 years to get where Federer is, and you people are talking like his whole career is over.

That is just hating, pure and simple, no facts, no nothing, just people trying to make them selves feel better.

Same with the Federer haters, get a life, stop worrying about everyone elses tennis and worry about your own, and just maybe you won't emberass youself playing so often :mrgreen:

 

[The tennis guy]

Nadal has 6 years to get where Federer is, and you people are talking like his whole career is over.

Nadal is only 4 years and 10 months younger than Federer. Where those 6 years come from?

 

[zAllianceBmx]

maybe hes talking about how at age 25 is where a lot of pros start their decline of being on the top of their game.

 

[The tennis guy]

maybe hes talking about how at age 25 is where a lot of pros start their decent of being on the top of their game.

Does this mean Federer hasn't got to top of his game yet?

 

[Babblelot]

Nadal's style of play is soooo unorthodox that it may take a few go-'rounds before others learn to play against him (and since the kid never takes a point off, it remains to be seen what toll this will take on his body). Roddick was very similar during his incredible run in 2003 in the sense that players weren't used to his 1-2 serve-forehand power combo. Today, Roddick's confidence has got to be at an all-time low.

As for Hewitt, he's simply better at what everyone without a punishing weapon does.

 

[Chloe]

Actually the stat is not correct. The number of tournaments played in the race includes the required tournaments (super 9 and grand slam) even if you didn't play. Thus Federer only played 13 (missed Rome and Montreal), Nadal 20 (missed Hamburg), Roddick 16 (missed Monte Carlo), Hewitt 9 (missed Miami, 4 clay including RG).

ATP race points/tournament played:
Federer 93
Nadal 43
Roddick 34
Hewitt 54.

I'm a few pages back, so this may have already been pointed out... but Nadal didn't play Indian Wells either.

Interesting stats, none the less

 

[Chloe]

While he did beat AA at Montreal, my feeling is that it was more the 'novelty' of Nadal's game on hard that beat AA, not genuine skill or strategy.

Okay, you win. After much rumination, I declare this the stupidest comment in this thread.

Congrats. Your prize is in the mail.

 

[VamosRafa]

Okay, you win. After much rumination, I declare this the stupidest comment in this thread.

Congrats. Your prize is in the mail.

Gotta agree. Man, he had to work hard for that.

But people are working hard to justify why a 19-year-old upstart is No. 2 in the World. It's kind of a surprise, but it isn't. Players and former players have been saying for two years that he's going to be great. And he's becoming great, while still learning things.