The Rafa Nadal Interview by Andy Roddick
- Thread starter Hitman
- Start date
GrassMasters
Rookie
Former pro players por favor. Also where is the Fed interview?
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Turning Pro
Hall of Fame
Def looking forward to watching this.
What a kick. Who said wrestlings fake!?!!? Lol
TheFifthSet
Legend
Roddick tries too hard and could benefit from some improved word economy but Rafa was great here, one of his most insightful interviews.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Any particularly interesting tidbits?
Last edited:
TheFifthSet
Legend
Lots of stuff that many of us already assumed but it was refreshing to hear it from him and listen to him talk about his own game beyond generalities…called grass his second favourite surface and explained why he preferred it to HC, expressed regret over not preparing better for the ‘05 grass season after RG, talked about the importance of sliding, how he felt comfortable slicing off both sides, balancing defence and offence, Big 3 match-up dynamics (“Fed was at his best in ‘17” aside, it was interesting) etc.
Last edited:
NatF
Bionic Poster
Federer approached the match-up best in 2017 or he played his best in 2017?
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Both from the way Rafa explains it
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
Actually for me, yeah. His talking about switching offense to defense, but his zones talks gives a great peak into strategies. And then, I am always appreciative of how Raf works in mindset and self-programming for success, in tennis and life.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Things I expected but did not get response a lot
What was happening in 2023/24. This should have been studied a bit
How he sees Alcaraz , his own country man and future of tennis.
Yes both things are discussed at brief. But not enough at all.
What was happening in 2023/24. This should have been studied a bit
How he sees Alcaraz , his own country man and future of tennis.
Yes both things are discussed at brief. But not enough at all.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Fed wasn't at his best in 2017...
He played aggressively, but not at the same level at his peak.
The big difference in their match up was the loss of leg speed.
There were many matches were peak/prime/younger Fed played very aggressively against him and hit shots that would easily be winners against most players. But Nadal's wheels were quick and when he got to a ball, even out of position, he was able to turn it around, turn defence into offence and frustrate Fed.
Put this into perspective, AO17 final, Nadal was not playing anywhere near his peak, yet he was up a break in the fifth... sorry, but 2017 Nadal v peak Fed is not going 5 sets... lucky to take it to 4 tbh.
He played aggressively, but not at the same level at his peak.
The big difference in their match up was the loss of leg speed.
There were many matches were peak/prime/younger Fed played very aggressively against him and hit shots that would easily be winners against most players. But Nadal's wheels were quick and when he got to a ball, even out of position, he was able to turn it around, turn defence into offence and frustrate Fed.
Put this into perspective, AO17 final, Nadal was not playing anywhere near his peak, yet he was up a break in the fifth... sorry, but 2017 Nadal v peak Fed is not going 5 sets... lucky to take it to 4 tbh.
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
Also of note, but everyone knows. talking about the popularity of his rivalry against Fed as what was what kept the Fedal era as a golden age of tennis, compared to ending his career against Djo. Again, the talk of strategy there is cool, but still not anything that has not been milled through.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Nadal did not say that. Where did he ?
Also they were less successful because of each other definitely rafa and novak who are same aged , not more .
The damage they did is far more than whatever they learned from these matches.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Roger would have been more successful without them, there's no doubt about that...
Whether he'd be as good or not, I tend to think he wouldn't have been as good because prior to Nadal, there were no weaknesses being exposed, to beat him, you had to play your absolute best for hours like Safin in AO05. Having that weakness exposed forced him to try and improve areas of his game.
Whether he'd be as good or not, I tend to think he wouldn't have been as good because prior to Nadal, there were no weaknesses being exposed, to beat him, you had to play your absolute best for hours like Safin in AO05. Having that weakness exposed forced him to try and improve areas of his game.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Roger might have benefitted a tiny bit but he also lost many important matches , it doesn't balance out. They would be happier if other guy did not exist at all. And more successful.
RS
Bionic Poster
Going to watch it in the evening seems a fitting time to watch it.
Enjoy.
RS
Bionic Poster
While most of us on here would disagree on here pretty strongly I don't find it surprising Nadal said that because Fed was a lot more competitive with Nadal than he was in most earlier matches and he was blasting winner and after winner in the last set. Nadal probably felt on edge in a way he didn't earlier.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
When Roddick mentions it he quickly confirms it.
And yes, without each other they would not have been as successful, because they wouldn't be pressed to winning 20 slams or more, in an effort to keep up with each other. They would all be done and dusted, many slams earlier if they knew they had the record and there was no one else around to challenge them for it.
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
For someone with English as his 4th language, Rafa shined more than Roddick whose first and only language is English.
Vamos Rafa!!
Vamos Rafa!!
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Ok I have to go back to watch roddick part again
For the second pt I think this is pure interpolation and not a good one. You just assume that they only played for records and not because they enjoyed and could still play at highest level
Even without each other they would have kept on playing till mid 30s and without each other one guy would easily reach 30+
And I mean easily.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
They've gone on and said it several times in the past also.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
No, they say other guy made them better, as in technically. Only our Djokovic foolishly says that he is so successful because of fedal.
Nadal flat out said he is not happy Djokovic exists and that is the truth for all 3. They would be slightly worse without each other but far more successful and only success can be measured at the end of the day.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Dude, they have said several times in the past that the others motivated them to continue pushing themselves, not lose their hunger. They have all said at least once that while life would have been easier without the other two, they don't think they would be motivated to win as much, as they needed each other to keep pushing forwards. These are their words, not mine.
He likely would have better achievements on paper, but it’s an undeniable fact that the presence of prime Fedal in his early and middle career made him a better tennis player overall.
Nothing pushes you like a rival does.
RaulRamirez
Legend
I was going to reply with something similar. He readily agreed with Roddick on that.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Yes, exactly.
jl809
Legend
He comes across as simultaneously very proud and frustrated about his career on grass. He pointed out the finals he made in a row and that he adjusted to it quickly in his career, then frames his results in 12-16 as due to an inability to be allowed to play on the surface by his knees, rather than fundamentals in his game which made him vulnerable, and distinguishes the 2017 loss (which was also early) from those ones because he says that was when the knees were up to it again. Rated his matchup with Djoker on grass more than HC which is borne out by results in the H2H too. Also he kinda implies that he felt he would have had a deep run in 05 if he (Nadal) hadn’t treated the surface like a filthy casual
Also Djoker having the best control of the ball of anyone he's ever seen is a huge complement.
Also Djoker having the best control of the ball of anyone he's ever seen is a huge complement.
RaulRamirez
Legend
Fun interview, and I hope that, in time, Andy will do other full interviews with the greats of the game.
I'm not sure what my main takeaways were, but it was a pleasure to see/hear a long interview with a very relaxed Rafa talking about tennis with a former rival who really knows the game.
I enjoyed the segments about - not in any order:
I'm not sure what my main takeaways were, but it was a pleasure to see/hear a long interview with a very relaxed Rafa talking about tennis with a former rival who really knows the game.
I enjoyed the segments about - not in any order:
- his decision to retire
- their first couple (h2h) matches: US Open and Davis Cup
- carrying the Olympic torch
- their agreement that Rafa was naturally better on grass than HC. I liked the discussion here that grass gave Rafa clarity in having to play more aggressively
- just a little tactical insight (but not too much, actually) about facing both Roger and Novak. I wish they could've worked in more about some of their most climactic matches
The stronger BH would’ve helped if he had it in those 2009, 2012 matches. I do agree though, 2012 fed gets it done in 4 vs 2017 Nadal. Don’t even think fed was at his best in the AO, very up and down. IW, Shanghai, Halle, Wimbledon he was dialled in.
BallisticMissileFonseca
Semi-Pro
humble fisherman
PedrosCousin
Rookie
This was an interview, not a competition. And obviously Roddick is better at English than Rafa. What a weird comment.
with no Nadal, Federer probably wins a CYGS, possibly 2, then could retire early aged 31/32 with 22/23 slams having won each slam 4-5 times with 8 Wimbledon titles. Previous record was 14. No chance do any of them go to 30 imo.
Rafa played fed, umpteenth times. We didn't . So when Rafa said it, I just believed.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
I think Federer wins multiple cygs without Nadal.
He didn't seem to lack motivation making a mockery of the tour minus Nadal on clay.
imo, no Nadal and Fed wins:
AO: 04, 06, 07, 09, 10
RG: 05, 06, 07, 09, 11
WIM: 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 12
US: 04, 05, 06, 07, 08
Nadal really only became the thorn in his off clay slam haul from 08 onward.
messiahrobins
Legend
Think Rafa was basically doing Novak a favour here with that 2017 Fed at his best line. It basically was a subtle way of closing down CIE arguments. Professionals detest weak era arguments, as they respect fellow professionals way more than armchair fans.
messiahrobins
Legend
The ultimate respect the Big 3 have of each other renders all of us who have spent years fighting look like total mugs. Great interview.
messiahrobins
Legend
Roddick should have asked Nadal what he thinks about fans saying last 4 years are a weak era and CIE. Rafa's response i think would have been legendary and the ultimate of ultimate of putdowns to all of us who fight online lol.
Terrific interview with some gem insights. I always wondered what was Rafa's 2nd best surface, now we know definitively.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
I agree to an extent.
Federer's motivation before Nadal and then Djokovic arriving was his desire to overtake Sampras. He already had a goal set. And yes, I do agree the chances of his winning CYGS without Nadal goes up. But I also think without those two, if he gets the CYGS and surpasses Pete, and he knows there is no one around, his desire will decline massively. A big drop in 2010 apart from slipping from his prime was also that he had broken the record and was so far ahead, he was struggling to get motivation for a while.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
I don't think he will disrespect Nadal by asking him about something that is a tool being used between online fans to fight over GOAT.
messiahrobins
Legend
Statement of the obvious really. Its why Sinner being banned isnt great for Alcaraz.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
You don't even need to go that far...
Look at McEnroe and him pleading Borg not to go because he knew his own motivation would take a massive hit, even if it meant losing slams to Borg.
messiahrobins
Legend
Yes absolutely. Rivalries in sport are absolutely vital. Its what makes athletes get up at 5am on Christmas Day to train hard thinking that if they dont their rival will be doing so and getting ahead.
Its why Novak is struggling now. AS much as he tries to create a rivalry with Sinner and Alcaraz, deep down he knows they are not rivals, the age gap is just too big. You called it already about the hiring of Murray as coach. Thats been done to try and sort of keep the old times going, just seeing Murray's face in his corner sort of rolls back the years perhaps, or thats the idea.
RaulRamirez
Legend
As a side (point), far be it for me to not consider this forum to have more importance than it really does.
I truly don't think that Andy and Rafa are sitting there thinking about peak/prime arguments or weak eras, or CIE, or about how certain partisan fans will weaponize their comments.
...
For instance, my takeaways, anyway:
If Rafa agrees with Andy that each of the Big 3 made one another better, it was in the spirit of being motivated to compete with two equally great players who were just as driven to be #1 and win slams, etc. They became better players, as they had to be -- to beat their two main rivals. I don't think they're going year by year as to which additional slams they may have won were it not for the other two.
Per 2017, I think Rafa was mostly saying that Roger became harder to game plan against and defeat. Even if they may have lost a half-step, they were still #s 1 and 2 in the world. I guess that "Joe from the couch" would rather hear, "At the 2017 Australian Open, Roger and I were nowhere near our peaks, but became the top two in the world due to Novak's slump and because no all-time greats were born between Djokovic and, possibly, Sinner. We were playing a poor brand of tennis, but because of the Career Inflation Era... If you watch our matches in 2017, it was nowhere close to the level of 2009. Most of the winners in that match would've barely been good rally shots 8 years earlier."
I truly don't think that Andy and Rafa are sitting there thinking about peak/prime arguments or weak eras, or CIE, or about how certain partisan fans will weaponize their comments.
...
For instance, my takeaways, anyway:
If Rafa agrees with Andy that each of the Big 3 made one another better, it was in the spirit of being motivated to compete with two equally great players who were just as driven to be #1 and win slams, etc. They became better players, as they had to be -- to beat their two main rivals. I don't think they're going year by year as to which additional slams they may have won were it not for the other two.
Per 2017, I think Rafa was mostly saying that Roger became harder to game plan against and defeat. Even if they may have lost a half-step, they were still #s 1 and 2 in the world. I guess that "Joe from the couch" would rather hear, "At the 2017 Australian Open, Roger and I were nowhere near our peaks, but became the top two in the world due to Novak's slump and because no all-time greats were born between Djokovic and, possibly, Sinner. We were playing a poor brand of tennis, but because of the Career Inflation Era... If you watch our matches in 2017, it was nowhere close to the level of 2009. Most of the winners in that match would've barely been good rally shots 8 years earlier."
Hitman
Bionic Poster
He's basically the last gunslinger left, he's just waiting to take his last ride into the sunset.
messiahrobins
Legend
Must be lonely now. People forget that tennis a job, like all of us in the office we talk to colleagues etc. We all tend to hang out with our own age group, rivals or not. Novak is old enough to be most top players fathers now. He will not have much in common off the court banter wise with the lads when they are all relaxing etc. That means hanging out with his own team more presumably which can get a bit boring id think week in week out.
FedForGOAT
Professional
Athletes are notoriously biased/inconsistent/delusional etc. regarding their own careers. I mean have you seen how many boxers have to be carried out on a stretcher because they think they totally “still have it”?
I will say that I think that the big three and Rafa specifically are pretty clear-eyed, about their careers, but I definitely don’t take their opinions as gospel.
FWIW, I do recall Rafa saying circa 2017, that if he had his 2017 game plan in 2008, then…
So it seems like he knows that his athletic ability was much better earlier, but he compensated with a more aggressive approach.
