Stop using Nadal's being lefty as explanation for his success.

[matchmaker]

I just saw the Murray-Nadal match. No spoiler. I won't discuss the result but the match was both interesting and high quality from both sides. One thing that stood out is that Nadal actually targeted Murray's forehand more than to his backhand.

Reason: Murray's backhand is one of the most dangerous ones on the tour. This also shows that the reason for Nadal's succes is not that he is lefthanded as many pretend.

Instead of pounding high topspin shots on Murray's backhand he chose a more intelligent strategy and went for Murray's forehand both on groundies and on serves. Basically playing Murray as if Murray were a lefty. This shows how easily Nadal adapts to his opponent's weaknesses and to the surface (HC being supposedly his weakest surface).

Too many people say that Nadal is only succesful because of his being lefty and that he only wins his matches by breaking down his opponents backhand. This match shows he is capable of winning rallies against his opponents by opting to hit to their forehand side too.

Moreover Nadal has proven that he can improve on surfaces he did not grew up on, such as grass, so next will be hardcourt.

Another interesting aspect is that his serve starts to become gradually harder and more dangerous. It is not quite there yet but also on this terrain he is moving forward and we know how he can improve and up his game (e.g. his volleys are a lot better than they used to be, the same amounts for the depth of his groundies and you actually get the impression that sometimes he flattens out).

Point is Nadal is already a great champion, we should treat him accordingly and not look for stupid reasons like: he is a lefty, that is why he is almost number one, if he were a righty he wouldn't even be in the top ten.

I tell you, if he were a righty he would be exactly where he is now. Nadal is a born contender. The grittiest and most combattive of all players I have seen. That is his trademark and this determination pushes him forward. Maybe when he looses this impetus his game will totally decompose. But that will only happen if he reaches the goals he has set.

 

[Deleted member 25923]

Yes, but it gives him an advantage over righties with weak backhands. If Nadal had a weak backhand, than it would be much easier for righties to target that stroke.

 

[TopShelf]

Its not a major factor but you can't really ignore it.
Not a drastic advatange as being a left handed pitcher in baseball, thats for sure.

Its not going to win him many points being "a lefty" especially against players you play against on a day to day basis, but there is an adjustment level to playing a south paw and its the opponent who has to adjust his "service plans" not you, if your a lefty for the most part.

 

[chiru]

Yes, but it gives him an advantage over righties with weak backhands. If Nadal had a weak backhand, than it would be much easier for righties to target that stroke.

if nadal had a weak backhand sure. i'm also sure that if he sucked, never played tennis before in his life, and was 100 lbs heavier, it would be much easier for me to beat him.

my criticism is that ppl tend to think nadal has some sort of "lucky" or "unfair" advantage in that he's lefty. 2 problems i have with that
1) any "luck" he has is a natural genetic/god given quality, just like, for instance having a badass serve (ala sampras) or freakishly smooth movement (ala federer) or incredible etc. etc. etc. just cuz he has something that has a 50/50 chance isn't his fault. just like you can't say that sampras wins "only cuz he has a great serve". its just one of the things you deal with.

2) the above argument is a moot point anyhow, because he's NOT lefty but trained himself to play lefty. i donno how anyone can argue that the advantage he got from that is anything less than incredibly earned.

 

[consistency wins]

Did you not see how many backhands Andy blasted into his forehand? It was a pretty equal match outside of a few critical points. I am not sure how the match tonight provoked you to write this. This really has NOTHING to do with the match tonight and the way points were constructed. Rafa and Andy were level in terms of one another dictating points. And, Andy was actually dictating more with the backhand than Rafa....

 

[Benhur]

2) the above argument is a moot point anyhow, because he's NOT lefty but trained himself to play lefty. i donno how anyone can argue that the advantage he got from that is anything less than incredibly earned.

I think that the advantage of lefties in tennis tends to be exaggerated. There is a slight advantage, but not as much as some people think. Things may be different in other sports. For example, in baseball, a left-handed batter has a distinct advantage in that, when he finishes his swing, his momentum carries him naturally toward first base, whereas a right-handed batter has to thrust his body toward third base because of his swing, then, if he gets a hit, has to start running the other way. The lefty gets a kind of head-start on his run, and even if it's only a split second, it is definitely important. Some say left handed batters also have a more straight view of the ball coming from righ-handed pitchers, who are a majority. This may not be as important, but the direction in which the swing carries you is very important. It would be almost as if a right handed tennis player was carried backward with every swing.

 

[oranges]

The issue of playing a lefty is mentioned with absolutely every player who plays left-handed, and for a reason. Nadal's the only one where it's prohibit to bring it up? You can't know what the result of playing right-handed would be, but what does it matter anyway? He's ambidextrous and wisely decided to play a lefty, good for him.

 

[matchmaker]

Did you not see how many backhands Andy blasted into his forehand? It was a pretty equal match outside of a few critical points. I am not sure how the match tonight provoked you to write this. This really has NOTHING to do with the match tonight and the way points were constructed. Rafa and Andy were level in terms of one another dictating points. And, Andy was actually dictating more with the backhand than Rafa....

That is actually my point. Nadal was able to change his tactic and show versatility when faced with Murray's excellent backhand. So the point that Nadal only wins by pounding on his opponent's backhand just doesn't stand. He actually played more on Murray's forehand to avoid that dangerous backhand.

 

[TopShelf]

The "advantage" is there because its a minority, not because its "better or helpful for a reason".

Most baseball players who hit left are not true left handers. Just like in hockey, a "lefty" is probably not going home to sign his checkbook with his left arm. If there was an advantage we would be seeing many left handers in the top 25 (which we don't)

 

[Bassus]

It is not 'lucky' nor is it 'unfair'. But it is an advantage.

This is fairly obvious, and it is no knock on Nadal to say so. It is a credit to Uncle Tony for making the decision to play lefty.

If Nadal played as a righty, then he'd still be great (his serve would likely be more powerful), but I think Federer would have won one or two French Opens.

 

[Clay lover]

No other left hander is in the top ten. It's not that big of an advantage when you think about it.

 

[Bassus]

No other left hander is in the top ten. It's not that big of an advantage when you think about it.

It is an advantage vs Federer. 3 of the 4 French Open matches were largely decided by the Nadal forehand to Federer backhand exchange. When Federer changed it up and went down the line with his backhand to Nadal's backhand it was to avoid the Nadal forehand, but this didn't work too well either because Nadal's backhand is better.

 

[TopShelf]

It is not 'lucky' nor is it 'unfair'. But it is an advantage.

This is fairly obvious, and it is no knock on Nadal to say so. It is a credit to Uncle Tony for making the decision to play lefty.

If Nadal played as a righty, then he'd still be great (his serve would likely be more powerful), but I think Federer would have won one or two French Opens.

And if Federer was a lefty he would of win his match vs DaJoker at the Aussie and should be at about 16 ot 17 G.S's =)

Being left or right (if you got to redo the past) will not change an outcome of a game because you have to understand that the player you are playing against would make adjustments or errors as well.

I don't think Nadals serve would be faster as he was switched to "left" because he could hit harder with that hand. So now its too late and we will never know.

 

[pman76]

My opinion is that it is definitely an advantage. It is not unfair or lucky.

Everything is opposite for lefties, and their natural tendency is to hit to the opposite side of right handed players.

The serves also tend skid opposite to right handed players serves.

Add all this up, and this automatically makes this an advantage.

The perfect example is World team tennis where let calls are played as a point. It takes players quite a few matches to get used to the type of play. Similarly, there aren't enough lefties who are at the top of the game to get used to it.

 

[chiru]

sure it's an advantage. but it's an advantage like any other facet of a players game, such as topspin, flat ball, big serve, forehand, etc. its just that being lefty is not typically seen as the result of "skill" or "hardwork" but more luck. im not saying that's how ya'll treat it, but ive definately heard some ppl make it sound like it's all unfair that Fed wudda had 4 FO's by now if it wasn't for nadal's luck. not saying you guys ascribe to it, but i think we've seen that kinda talk around the boards, and imo it's rubbish.

 

[2nd_Serve]

It's not the biggest explanation, but it is a factor.

 

[matchmaker]

It is an advantage vs Federer. 3 of the 4 French Open matches were largely decided by the Nadal forehand to Federer backhand exchange. When Federer changed it up and went down the line with his backhand to Nadal's backhand it was to avoid the Nadal forehand, but this didn't work too well either because Nadal's backhand is better.

So what you say means that both his FH and BH are great. So doesn't that mean he does not really have an advantage in being lefthanded. If he were righthanded with a good FH and BH, there would be nowhere to go either, would there?

 

[matchmaker]

It is not 'lucky' nor is it 'unfair'. But it is an advantage.

This is fairly obvious, and it is no knock on Nadal to say so. It is a credit to Uncle Tony for making the decision to play lefty.

If Nadal played as a righty, then he'd still be great (his serve would likely be more powerful), but I think Federer would have won one or two French Opens.

With all due respect but I think this is totally untrue. Even if Nadal did not exist and Fed had to play in the Kuerten era he wouldn't have won a single French IMO. I know all kinds of Fed fans will now come down on me but any of the great topspin claycourters with both good BH and FH, that is strong off both wings, would cause problems to Fed. The problem is that we live in a weak era. No real claycourt specialists, no real grass adepts; HC is predominant and so most players have that as their background and do not really play a game suited to other surfaces, that is why Fed reaches the FO final so easily.

 

[Nadal_Freak]

Andreev is the righty version of Nadal. He lacks speed and his backhand is much weaker. I think Nadal would do great if he did the exact same things except with righty spin.

 

[friedalo1]

there not too many good lefty on the tour. A lefty slice or kick serve works better. But I dont see a big advantage.

 

[Vermillion]

It's not unfair, etc.

It's a part of his success. A part of his tennis. Makes him who he is.

 

[Bassus]

So what you say means that both his FH and BH are great. So doesn't that mean he does not really have an advantage in being lefthanded. If he were righthanded with a good FH and BH, there would be nowhere to go either, would there?

No, it is a matter of degree. As a long-rally stroke, I'd rank Nadal's backhand higher than Federer's on clay. But the advantage is not nearly as great for Nadal as the forehand to Federer backhand is. Cross court rallies would take on a different dimension if Nadal were a righty. It certainly would't be easy, but Federer could handle the heavy ball with his forehand better. Nadal would not be able to pin Federer in the ad side of the court like he can now.

 

[Andres]

Nadal hit 64% to Murray's forehand, 67% to Gasquet's forehand, and with Kiefer, it was 50-50

 

[hasema]

It definitely is an advantage. There are not that many left handers out there who are playing world class tennis. It is harder to practice for that type of spin. Adding the fact that Nadal can turn the ball more than just about every other out there compounds that. I think his work ethic towards training and improving is really what allows him to be so effective.

I imagine playing against him is like playing someone in a hire rating than you. Like a 3.5 player playing against a 4.5 guy. The 3.5 player can hang with the 4.5 guy the first set. But that second set the lower ranked player gets mentally and physically tired. Having to concentrate that much more for every point is fatiguing. I might be wrong but it is probably really frustrating not knowing how the ball is going to bounce. So you are spending more attention to the ball after the bounce trying to hit in the sweet spot.

 

[Melissa]

Andreev is the righty version of Nadal. He lacks speed and his backhand is much weaker. I think Nadal would do great if he did the exact same things except with righty spin.

?????????????????????????????????

 

[Deleted member 25923]

if nadal had a weak backhand sure. i'm also sure that if he sucked, never played tennis before in his life, and was 100 lbs heavier, it would be much easier for me to beat him.

my criticism is that ppl tend to think nadal has some sort of "lucky" or "unfair" advantage in that he's lefty. 2 problems i have with that
1) any "luck" he has is a natural genetic/god given quality, just like, for instance having a badass serve (ala sampras) or freakishly smooth movement (ala federer) or incredible etc. etc. etc. just cuz he has something that has a 50/50 chance isn't his fault. just like you can't say that sampras wins "only cuz he has a great serve". its just one of the things you deal with.

2) the above argument is a moot point anyhow, because he's NOT lefty but trained himself to play lefty. i donno how anyone can argue that the advantage he got from that is anything less than incredibly earned.

It's not some unfair advantage, but hey, it's an advantage, and by righties, I mean pro righties, especially the top 10.

And Nadal is a beast, no doubt about it. he would probably serve much better (though he is improving) if he was a righty. But some of the advantages he holds over players disappear.

 

[Nadal_Freak]

?????????????????????????????????

It means that Nadal would have the same success as a righty as being a lefty. Andreev plays with wicked spin on his forehand as well and it is successful. Nadal is great on both sides so his being lefty hasn't done anything to improve his game except maybe players having a harder time with his serve.

 

[matchmaker]

Nadal hit 64% to Murray's forehand, 67% to Gasquet's forehand, and with Kiefer, it was 50-50

Gracias por la información Andrés. You see that is exactly my point. Nadal is not a mindless lefthander who can only pound balls on the backhand of his opponent, what many people seem to think. Against players with an excellent backhand such as Gasquet and Murray he is able to turn around his game plan and to target their forehands. Which is actually more difficult for a lefthander when playing against a righty.

So Nadal is just a top player with extraordinary stamina, will power, spin and versatility in his game plan. Moreover he has been progressing in a constant way on his serves (I have seen him hit several 200+ kmph serves in toronto, serves wide out at the deuce side, which is not natural for a lefy; body serves, trying to keep his opponents guessing) and also on his volleys. He is able to throw in creative shots such as the mind boggling drop shot at breakpoint down against Murray, stunning lobs,....

I think it is time to recognize Nadal for his talent. The man has just won RG and Wimbledon, several masters on different surfaces (consecutive Hamburg, clay - Queens, which is not a masters but still it is the biggest lawn event outside of Wimbledon, grass - Toronto, hard court). He has beaten both Djokovic and Federer, still 3 and 1, three times in direct matches this season. I am not saying he is the GOAT but clearly he is a good player and should be recognized as such, instead of saying: if he were righty he wouldn't even be in the top ten.

 

[Deleted member 25923]

Gracias por la información Andrés. You see that is exactly my point. Nadal is not a mindless lefthander who can only pound balls on the backhand of his opponent, what many people seem to think. Against players with an excellent backhand such as Gasquet and Murray he is able to turn around his game plan and to target their forehands. Which is actually more difficult for a lefthander when playing against a righty.

So Nadal is just a top player with extraordinary stamina, will power, spin and versatility in his game plan. Moreover he has been progressing in a constant way on his serves (I have seen him hit several 200+ kmph serves in toronto, serves wide out at the deuce side, which is not natural for a lefy; body serves, trying to keep his opponents guessing) and also on his volleys. He is able to throw in creative shots such as the mind boggling drop shot at breakpoint down against Murray, stunning lobs,....

I think it is time to recognize Nadal for his talent. The man has just won RG and Wimbledon, several masters on different surfaces (consecutive Hamburg, clay - Queens, which is not a masters but still it is the biggest lawn event outside of Wimbledon, grass - Toronto, hard court). He has beaten both Djokovic and Federer, still 3 and 1, three times in direct matches this season. I am not saying he is the GOAT but clearly he is a good player and should be recognized as such, instead of saying: if he were righty he wouldn't even be in the top ten.

I won't deny it, but that spin allows him to hit to the backhand much more easily. Why else would Uncle Toni have him be a lefty? For it's advantages in tennis and because it's not as common, people have to make last minute adjustments.

If top pros could only hit to a player's FH/BH, then the standard of tennis has fallen.

 

[TheTruth]

Gracias por la información Andrés. You see that is exactly my point. Nadal is not a mindless lefthander who can only pound balls on the backhand of his opponent, what many people seem to think. Against players with an excellent backhand such as Gasquet and Murray he is able to turn around his game plan and to target their forehands. Which is actually more difficult for a lefthander when playing against a righty.

So Nadal is just a top player with extraordinary stamina, will power, spin and versatility in his game plan. Moreover he has been progressing in a constant way on his serves (I have seen him hit several 200+ kmph serves in toronto, serves wide out at the deuce side, which is not natural for a lefy; body serves, trying to keep his opponents guessing) and also on his volleys. He is able to throw in creative shots such as the mind boggling drop shot at breakpoint down against Murray, stunning lobs,....

I think it is time to recognize Nadal for his talent. The man has just won RG and Wimbledon, several masters on different surfaces (consecutive Hamburg, clay - Queens, which is not a masters but still it is the biggest lawn event outside of Wimbledon, grass - Toronto, hard court). He has beaten both Djokovic and Federer, still 3 and 1, three times in direct matches this season. I am not saying he is the GOAT but clearly he is a good player and should be recognized as such, instead of saying: if he were righty he wouldn't even be in the top ten.

Great post! The man is talented. Simple as that. Lefty, righty, one-handed, two-handed, he's been impressive since he came on tour.

 

[matchmaker]

I won't deny it, but that spin allows him to hit to the backhand much more easily. Why else would Uncle Toni have him be a lefty? For it's advantages in tennis and because it's not as common, people have to make last minute adjustments.

If top pros could only hit to a player's FH/BH, then the standard of tennis has fallen.

Granted, against certain players there is an advantage in being lefty.

However the reason uncle Toni turned him into a lefty really beats me.

But anyway we can make one thousand hypotheses about how Nadal would have played if he had remained a righty ...

That is just the point of this thread. We have to accept reality and say that he plays well and is able to adapt to different game plans against different opponents. The only recent time I have seen him really being outplayed was against an otherworldy Tsonga at the AO. Other than that he had to face 4 consecutive lefties at RG, which annihilates completely his supposed competitive advantage. After that he faced the most claycourt winning player on the circuit, then number 3 and 1 on the way to the FO crown.

I won't list his grass court achievements but I think we can agree that he had a superb year until now, expect maybe the first few months.

Nadal deserves recognition. He is a very humble person but I know that is what he longs for and he has shown to be worthy of it.

I am not a Nadal fanboy but I do have a lot of admiration for what he does, his will power, adaptability, attitude, stamina, ... and talent because without that you couldn't do what he is doing now. Let's just give him credit for that just like Federer deserves all credit for his achievements.

 

[bad_call]

Rafa is a smart and skilled player. being a lefty has little to do with his wins. his shot selection does...not to mention his perpetually chasing down balls.