why does Nadal get Killed against James Blake?

[Tempest344]

watching some of their Matches and Blake always ends up winning?

it seems that Blake usually destroys most of Nadal's second serves because they sit up nicely for him
plus he can almost match Rafa for speed and court coverage

although Blake has only played Nadal on hard court so it is in his favour in terms of surface......the only surface Blake can play on well for that matter too


why else does Nadal have trouble?

 

[Jimmyk459]

If you have watched Nadal's strokes, especially his forehand, it is incredibly loopy. While his forehand is one of the best shots on the tour, it needs a while to load up in order to be effective. When Blake hits the ball early and flat, it goes through the court and Nadal does not have enough time for a full stroke. What results is a topspin shot that is usually short and that sits up. Blake can just tee's off on those shots all day.

 

[Gut Reaction]

Because Nadals worst surface is hard courts. Its really odd to me....this happens every year.

During the clay court season everyone goes crazy over Nadal that he is going to take over the tennis world.

Then comes the one month grass court season and everyone is amazed at how well nadal does on grass.

Finally then comes the hard court season and everyone starts saying how Nadal is washed up.

There is no mystery here.....with the exception of Federer every player has a surface they do not do well on.

Nadal is a modern day Borg. Both players did great on grass and clay and not so good on hard courts. There is no mystery here.

 

[ufgatorkid]

It's because Nadal does well on the early hardcourt season. Obviously, though, he's drained come the end of the year.

 

[Rickson]

Blake's a flat bomber which gives Nadal less time to react on hard courts so his running down the balls like he does on clay becomes that much more difficult for Nadal.

 

[Deleted member 3771]

simply because blake is a better and more experienced hardcourter and his shots are more suited to hardcourts. If you watch ferrer and nadal play fed at the tennis masters cup, their balls were much too loopy and often too short as well, it was just claycourters doing their best on hardcourts.

In contrast to Ferrer and Nadal in shanghai, Sampras looked like a world champ on hardcourts. Sampras and Blake also have less extreme grips so their technique also allows them use the court to their advantage, take the ball earlier, hit it harder and take a bit more time away from their opponents.

 

[MEAC_ALLAMERICAN]

In addition to his flat strokes, Blake is really speedy around the court, and apparently suits up really well on the hard courts. Since Blake's ranking has dipped a bit, they might meet earlier in some clay court tournaments.

 

[helloworld]

I have a feeling that Nadal will struggle against Sampras, because Sampras doesn't give time to his opponent. I think the result could be even worse than playing Blake.

 

[NadalandFedererfan]

Well:

1. They have never played on anything but hard courts. Put them on grass or clay and Rafa crushes Blake.

2. Blake has nothing to lose vs Nadal since he knows Rafa is twice the player he ever will be, so he lets it loose and goes for broke with absolutely nothing to lose.

3. Blake hits the ball on the rise well so he is able to time Rafa's topspin.

However Blake is going down. If they play ever again Rafa will crush him, even if it is on hard courts. Stick a fork in Blake, he is done.

 

[Nadal_Freak]

simply because blake is a better and more experienced hardcourter

Uh Nadal has better results on hardcourts than Blake. Blake just matches up well to certain players and is very streaky.

 

[NadalandFedererfan]

Uh Nadal has better results on hardcourts than Blake. Blake just matches up well to certain players and is very streaky.

Anyone that says Blake is simply a better hardcourt player then Nadal is a huge troll, but that guy you quote is on my ignore list so he obviously is.

Nadal has 3 Masters titles on hard courts. Blake has 0. Nadal has been to the quarters of 2 slams on hard courts at 21, Blake has been to the quarters of 2 slams on hard courts (or anywhere) at 28.

Nadal has beaten Federer on hard courts twice. Blake could only dream of doing that. Nadal never loses before the round of 16 on hard courts, Blake does many times to worse players then Nadal loses to, Nadal only loses to very dangerous players on hard courts.

Like you said it only a matchup issue, and Blake playing out of his mind whenever he plays the far superior Nadal.

 

[superman1]

Those matches are Blake's to win or lose. If you remember their last match, Blake had a really rough patch in the second set, and it wasn't because Nadal was suddenly playing better.

I always feel bad when thinking about Blake because the guy could have been more than he became. Back when he had hair, before the injury, he was quite a physical specimen. I used to be amazed at how high he could jump. And I'm pretty sure he lost the six pack he used to have back then.

 

[Deleted member 3771]

Blake is a dangerous player. he can spank the ball around and make hardcourt tennis look easier than Nadal does, but he can also be erratic.

Ok Mabe Nadal's better on HC, but when Bake has beaten him I think Blake has been betetr for the reasons I stated before.

If they played in a slam at the AO or US Open I'd favour Nadal.

Anyone that says Blake is simply a better hardcourt player then Nadal is a huge troll, but that guy you quote is on my ignore list so he obviously is.

Nadal has 3 Masters titles on hard courts. Blake has 0. Nadal has been to the quarters of 2 slams on hard courts at 21, Blake has been to the quarters of 2 slams on hard courts (or anywhere) at 28.

Nadal has beaten Federer on hard courts twice. Blake could only dream of doing that. Nadal never loses before the round of 16 on hard courts, Blake does many times to worse players then Nadal loses to, Nadal only loses to very dangerous players on hard courts.

Like you said it only a matchup issue, and Blake playing out of his mind whenever he plays the far superior Nadal.

 

[JRProstaf9]

Blake is a dangerous player. he can spank the ball around and make hardcourt tennis look easier than Nadal does, but he can also be erratic.

Ok Mabe Nadal's better on HC, but when Bake has beaten him I think Blake has been betetr for the reasons I stated before.

If they played in a slam at the AO or US Open I'd favour Nadal.

Hate to break it to you but Blakes first win against Nadal was @ the Open in 2005. And the next two wins were @ Masters events in 2006.

Although I do agree with you, Blake just enjoys playing against guys who hit loopy topspin shots b/c he's able to get on top of the ball and hit on the rise which he looks to do all the time on hard courts.

 

[Morrissey]

I agree with NadalandFedererfan and Nadal Freak on this one. Nadal has better career results on hardcourt than Blake. This being despite the fact that it's Nadal worst surface and Blake's best surface. Blake has no MS titles while Nadal has 3 on hardcourt. He is 2-3 vs Fed on it and Blake is something like 0-5. This is a matchup issue here. Blake just goes for broke and can handle balls up high.

As a matter of fact he has trouble with low slices and being moved around without time to setup the forehand. Fed and Gonzo do it best against him. Nadal pins him in the corner and Blake can run around the bh and hit his way out of trouble, plus the ball is already above the net due to the high bounce so he just whacks it straight with no spin necessary. But if they played now I think Nadal would take him, Blake has dipped since his career year in 2006.

Lastly, I would like to add that these results by Nadal are at 21 yrs of age while Blake's results are at 28 and on the way out. He has nothing to show after all these years. He's overrated.

 

[M J]

The way you beat Nadal is to hit hard and flat to his forehand side. He has long loopy swing on his forehand and doesn't hit it well if you take his time away on that side. The flat inside-out forehand is really Blake's strength. Federer has also figured this out, and if you saw him beat Nadal in Hamburg, he did it with flat inside-out forehands. Part of the reason Nadal is so good on clay is that the slow court makes that weakness much harder to take advantage of.

 

[djsiva]

Who has the best passing shots these days?

Is so hard to tell because no one goes to the net anymore!

It used to be Chang or Wilander.

Nowadays who do you think is the best?

Not that it's even worth practicing. Same thing goes with the topspin lob. Who needs these things nowadays?

In fact, these are shots you don't need these days, volleys, passing shots, lobs, decent overheads.

The shots you see a lot more these days are dropshots and the shot between your legs. I'm even thinking that guys practice this more than their volleys.

 

[zagor]

Is so hard to tell because no one goes to the net anymore!

It used to be Chang or Wilander.

Nowadays who do you think is the best?

Not that it's even worth practicing. Same thing goes with the topspin lob. Who needs these things nowadays?

In fact, these are shots you don't need these days, volleys, passing shots, lobs, decent overheads.

The shots you see a lot more these days are dropshots and the shot between your legs. I'm even thinking that guys practice this more than their volleys.

Nadal has the best passing shots by far at the moment and Hewitt had one of the best in his prime.