Who is most talented: Lendl,Nadal or Djokovic?
- Thread starter lud
- Start date
C
Chadillac
Guest
Lendl by far, i dont see these two other clowns getting someone else to #1.
A 1h backhand is usually a sign of intelligence.
A 1h backhand is usually a sign of intelligence.
mtincoronel76
Rookie
if we talk about talent, should be talking about McEnroe, Edberg, Nastase, Ríos ... Nadal and Lendl? All time Greatest by a combination of different aspects, not by a talent (that they had it, of course, but at top level there were more).
of three, Djokovic, of course
of three, Djokovic, of course
TheAverageFedererFan
Professional
Nadal is not a robot.
Out of the robots, I say Djokovic (just generic I guess, no disrespect to Nole, great player.)
Out of the robots, I say Djokovic (just generic I guess, no disrespect to Nole, great player.)
ojo rojo
Legend
Lulz. Someone even suggesting such a ridiculous notion signals quite the opposite
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
They're all talented, especially Nadal and Djokovic. Nadal was the last highly talented teenager in tennis. You don't beat former world number 1s at the age of 14-15 without great talent.
Noelan
Legend
You have to use both sides of the brain, there are more neurons that make the bridge to connect left and right hemisphere.
Apun94
Hall of Fame
Oh for sure. Heard Einstein had a mean single hander
JoelSandwich
Hall of Fame
Think Djokovic and Lendl had to work a lot harder to get to where they got.
Nadal had to work as well of course, but he was a freak even as a teenager so I’d go with him.
Nadal had to work as well of course, but he was a freak even as a teenager so I’d go with him.
Jaitock1991
Hall of Fame
Why would they do so? Logically they would want Djokodal to be as great as possible, no(without either of them topping Fed himself of course)? By talking down Djokodal they indirectly talk down Fed as well.
George Turner
Hall of Fame
All three guys are the definition of hard work, hard work, hard work. Their natural talent is limited compared to a Mcenroe or Becker even though the latter two won less majors. McEnroe hardly ever trained outside of matches and Becker was addicted to booze, women and sleeping pills.
None of the three robots are winning many majors living like that. I would say Nadal is the most talented of them but only because of his Clay niche. Outside of clay he's the least talented of the three. (except maybe Lendl on grass.)
None of the three robots are winning many majors living like that. I would say Nadal is the most talented of them but only because of his Clay niche. Outside of clay he's the least talented of the three. (except maybe Lendl on grass.)
C
Chadillac
Guest
Laver, Sampra and Fed. Graf and Court for the women.
The greatest players of all time used 1 handed backhands.
The most creative players (Mac, edberg bharami etc) also used 1h.
The most fit and athletic (ped) used 2h.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
i'm hesitating between lendl and djokovic
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Someone other than the one whose style resembles this...
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Lendl would have 0 FO in Nadal era. Djokovic a superior clay player.Nadal..he'd destroy Lendl
ADuck
Legend
Like Thiem?
Apun94
Hall of Fame
Ease up. It was a joke
S
SafinSucks
Guest
Close between Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic, but Djokovic's "hands" at the net is a let down. Rafael Nadal's backhand slice is also better.
Rafael Nadal prevails between the three.
Roger Federer number 1 overall (obviously), and Kei Nishikori number 2.
Rafael Nadal prevails between the three.
Roger Federer number 1 overall (obviously), and Kei Nishikori number 2.
ojo rojo
Legend
This may be true but it isn't the reason most children are taught a two-hander. It's purely down to lack of strength at an early age. Some switch to a one-hander if it feels more natural once they have enough strength. This switch does not come down to intelligence.
S
SafinSucks
Guest
Andre Agassi was an intelligent player (read his book). Pretty sure Bjorn Borg was too.
Noelan
Legend
ofc it' isnt, since it's easier to do things including hitting the ball with your dominant hand.This may be true but it isn't the reason most children are taught a two-hander. It's purely down to lack of strength at an early age. Some switch to a one-hander if it feels more natural once they have enough strength. This switch does not come down to intelligence.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
But the question was about talent, not greatest peak player. Lendl had limited talent but totally dominated from '85-87.
ojo rojo
Legend
ofc it' isnt, since it's easier to do things including hitting the ball with your dominant hand.
Therefore I am exceptional! As my backhand (1h) is my better side however I'm a bit dim.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Tough call:
- Nadal has the best hands and feel for the ball. I consider him the best athlete (though Djokovic and his flexibility have a compelling argument)
- Djokovic with his ball striking (and ROS) maybe has the best hand eye coordination. Does things on the court movement wise no one else can do
I'll go with Nadal because he's a better shotmaker IMO, though Djokovic is of course spectacular as well.
Lendl was an incredible player but I'd rank him a bit below Djokovic. He had similar strengths to Novak, both great off the ground, both with very good serves etc...he was a little better at net but not as good off the return (though still great). However I don't think he was such a special athlete as Djokovic is.
So Nadal > Djokovic > Lendl for me
Also when you have 3 guys who have all worked incredibly hard at their games it's tough for me to look past the fact that Nadal has so far won the most out of these guys.
- Nadal has the best hands and feel for the ball. I consider him the best athlete (though Djokovic and his flexibility have a compelling argument)
- Djokovic with his ball striking (and ROS) maybe has the best hand eye coordination. Does things on the court movement wise no one else can do
I'll go with Nadal because he's a better shotmaker IMO, though Djokovic is of course spectacular as well.
Lendl was an incredible player but I'd rank him a bit below Djokovic. He had similar strengths to Novak, both great off the ground, both with very good serves etc...he was a little better at net but not as good off the return (though still great). However I don't think he was such a special athlete as Djokovic is.
So Nadal > Djokovic > Lendl for me
Also when you have 3 guys who have all worked incredibly hard at their games it's tough for me to look past the fact that Nadal has so far won the most out of these guys.
Last edited:
chicagodude
Hall of Fame
Ah yes the talent debate!
Always laughable to see how
1) people confuse an aesthetically pleasing style (in their eyes at least) with talent
2) how narrow a definition people here use for "talent"
First of all, there is no clear definition of talent. Do you mean natural aptitude for the techniques involved in tennis? How about natural movement ability (see Federer's easy movement across court), natural flexibility (Djokovic), natural strength (Nadal)? You could put those under physical talent if you will.
Apart from that, I would offer that the ability to put in the effort every day, train hard, make sacrifices, and be disciplined, are also part of your talent (call it mental/psychological talent if you will).
Example obviously Kyrgios, who does not seem to possess the psychological talent to make sacrifices and put in the hard work. Thiemo de Bakker has great technical ability and could/should easily have been in the top-50 for years, but has absolutely no mental talent to actually put in the work.
Anyway, all top players who won multiple slams have insane amounts of talent and I don't think any of us are capable of really discerning differences in "talent" between them.
Always laughable to see how
1) people confuse an aesthetically pleasing style (in their eyes at least) with talent
2) how narrow a definition people here use for "talent"
First of all, there is no clear definition of talent. Do you mean natural aptitude for the techniques involved in tennis? How about natural movement ability (see Federer's easy movement across court), natural flexibility (Djokovic), natural strength (Nadal)? You could put those under physical talent if you will.
Apart from that, I would offer that the ability to put in the effort every day, train hard, make sacrifices, and be disciplined, are also part of your talent (call it mental/psychological talent if you will).
Example obviously Kyrgios, who does not seem to possess the psychological talent to make sacrifices and put in the hard work. Thiemo de Bakker has great technical ability and could/should easily have been in the top-50 for years, but has absolutely no mental talent to actually put in the work.
Anyway, all top players who won multiple slams have insane amounts of talent and I don't think any of us are capable of really discerning differences in "talent" between them.
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
It's Djokovic. Nadal is very talented but his biggest assets were/are his physicality and mental strength.
Djokovic when relaxed hits every shot cleanly and through the ball, with the exception of the overhead. Nadal BH down the line is not clean as he hits across it.
As for Lendl his lack of Wimbledon success shows he is a distant third in terms of natural talent. His BH was weak in comparison to the other two and his volleys were not good enough under pressure.
AngryBirds
Semi-Pro
Nadal was already beating all time greats at the age of 14-15. You can't do thet without huge talent. What was Federer doing at that age? Playing juniors?
Similar threads
