Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Extreme Western, Apr 15, 2008.
What do you guys think?
No. 2 very simple reasons -
1. Lefties have an advantage because they are the minority, and they get to serve out wide in the ad court.
2. The big reason - if Nadal was a righty he wouldn't have a winning record agains Fed. Hence, no slams, a lot less titles. In fact he would be just another footnote on Rogers list of victims.
The first one is obvious defcon, the second surely isn't. His leftyness is a problem to federer, but I wouldn't dare saying that Nadal would never have won any Slam if i wasn't for him playing with his lefthand. He has a lot of abilities that make him very strong, especially on clay. His running speed and topspin balls as well as his great ability to make winners under pressure would surely make him more than a footnote on Roger's list. RF might have won a Roland Garros title though, who knows..
Nadal would have beaten Federer in clay even with his right hand.
Are you asking this because he is actually naturally right handed or just as a "He's so much better he'd win with his other hand?" question?
I seem to remember hearing somewhere he is actually right handed, anyone know why he plays as a lefty or did he just pick up the racket that way?
It is interesting though I can play and rally with my left (non dominant hand) and I wonder if with enouogh practice anyone could even out their skills with eith side........
i think i saw him sign autos with his right hand...
maybe his uncle forced the left hand use on him.
and that's the reason why it's so out of proportion with the rest of his body.
Uncle Tony wanted him to learn playing as a lefty since he thought that his strong right hand would help him have a good 2hbh
nah, he would be another andreev
Definitely not as good because his biggest weapon is the massive topspin forehand that curve out and away from his opponent's backhand.
Andreev has huge top spin and is a righty. Probably not as much spin as Nadal but does seem to have more pace and drive.
What's odd is Moya is left handed but plays with his right.
he has much more spin then nadal
with his right hand, he might not get that crazy unnatural amount of spin that he has with his left. that spin just comes with his left hand because its harder to form a swing with your recessive hand. with his right hand, he might hit a more regular shot.
Are you saying that he gets more spin because it is his dominant hand swinging?
we can all speculate but really we have no way of truly knowing, we can say that he wouldn't be because he wouldn't have the lefty advantage on the serve and people are more accustomed to righty so he would not be as good but really we never know maybe his forehand would be even better than it is now as a righty, so really no body knows
He'd be JUST AS GOOD as a tennis player, but probably he'd be a better matchup for some people
he gets more spin because its his non dominant hand. nadal is a natural righty. so he gets that spin because he cant make a normal stroke with that arm becuase its unnatural
Another "what if" thread? Are you people bored or what?
What if Nadal has Roddick's serve, Gasquet's bachand, McEnroe's volleys? Would he be a better player?
what if your avitar was even cooler than it already is(or think it is)?
Nadal wouldn't be able to hit his awesome 2h bh open stance on the run if he was right handed because he would have to rely on his non dominant left leg.
Nadal was two-handed on both sides, (righthanded in writing) but his coach said he had to get at least a forehand, he had to choose with which hand to play forehand and serve, he choose Left.
If Nadal played with his dominant right arm, he would be consistently serving in the 130's given his 6' 2" height and his overall strength. Moreover, his serving technique would be a lot better because he's using his dominant arm. It is nothing short of incredible that Nadal is able to serve with his non-dominant arm, even if he is naturally ambidextrous.
Given his serve would be more dominant, i.e. higher percentage of 1st serve points won, I would hypothesize that he would rely less on his massive defensive skills and have a more aggressive baseliner style than that of a counterpuncher, while still using his massive counterpunching abilities when needed.
Yes he wouldn't have the advantages of serving into a righty's ad-court, since most breakpoints occur on the ad-court: 0-40, 30-40, ad-out (and only one breakpoint occurring on the deuce-court: 15-40), and he wouldn't have the lefty spin, but his overall tennis technique would be better, and hence contributing to a more offensive style. Depending on how he perfected his technique, he would be a much stronger version of Djokovic.
For Nadal to be an insane badass, he would have needed to ditch Uncle Toni, and trained with people to teach him proper technique. Then Nadal would be pretty much unstoppable, combining perfect technique with his superhuman physical abilities.
His backhand would probably be weaker, and his serve would most likely be stronger.
sure he might not have that lefty-forehand 2 righty-backhand advantage.
But I would think that he, being natural righty would have a better forehand (think of a moya forehand with more spin!!) and his backhand might still be powerful but he wouldn't be able to generate those angles.
And yes, the biggest asset would be a better if not extremely good serve.
So all in all, I would say he should have stayed with right hand.
heh. imagine nadal with a 130 mph serve and a beefed up andreev forehand.
with his skills as are.
All points played in the game of tennis are not equal. Some points are more important than others. That is why you can win a match even if you scored less total points than your opponent. Breakpoints are the most important points in tennis.
There is a slight advantage of lefties over righties in tennis. Ask any seasoned tennis pro.
Was right handed? He is right handed!
All this talk of dominance is besides the point. The simple fact is Nadal's mega topspin angled fh to Fed's bh is the 99% of Fed's matchup problem with Nadal. Take that away and there is no way Fed loses all those clay court matches to him. I stand by my original post!
And whats all this about 130mph serve? Thats pure speculation, not at all a given.
Fed just needs a bigger frame to solve all of his baseline problems when he plays Nadal on clay.
There's no need to be ambidextrous to be better with the non dominant side, Its just a matter of practice. Learning with the non dominant side may result in one making a technically purer, more correct motion, even if its slower and less refined at first. (you migth have to ask a neuroanatomy and motor control expert why)That could have been what Nadals coach observed. Then from there its just a matter of practice.
It is a shame that you are not Fed's coach or he does not read this forum. It would solve all his problems and ensure his continued dominance over tennis world in the years to come.
Separate names with a comma.