Would Nadal win Roland Garros with this draw?

[George Turner]

R1; Jim Courier 1992
R2; Thomas Muster 1995
R3; Gugu Kuerten 2001
R4; Guillermo Vilas 1977
QF; Mats Wilander 1985
SF; Ivan Lendl 1986
F; Bjorn Borg 1978

Feel free to pit different versions of Nadal against this draw i.e. 2005, 2008, 2015, 2017.

 

[ojo rojo]

Si, no?

 

[EloQuent]

Connors in 5.

 

[Mainad]

 

[BenC]

With a modern racket and poly strings? I'd be surprised if he lost a set.

 

[ak24alive]

R1; Jim Courier 1992
R2; Thomas Muster 1995
R3; Gugu Kuerten 2001
R4; Guillermo Vilas 1977
QF; Mats Wilander 1985
SF; Ivan Lendl 1986
F; Bjorn Borg 1978

Feel free to pit different versions of Nadal against this draw i.e. 2005, 2008, 2015, 2017.

I think we should not kid ourselves to believe that the players from 1970s and 1980s stand a chance against Nadal or any top player for that matter on any of the slow surfaces at least. I think Cilic would win RG given this draw. Why? Because of the way the game has evolved. Topspin, Power, Gym and improved athleticism of modern day players. I think the 90s players might be a bit more difficult for today's players because technology already made its mark on tennis in the 90s with Agassi like players with a perfect baseline game.

 

[ak24alive]

Connors in 5.

Zverev in 5

 

[George Turner]

Zverev in 5

Zverev would beat the lot of then in 5.

 

[Standaa]

R1; Jim Courier 1992
R2; Thomas Muster 1995
R3; Gugu Kuerten 2001
R4; Guillermo Vilas 1977
QF; Mats Wilander 1985
SF; Ivan Lendl 1986
F; Bjorn Borg 1978

Feel free to pit different versions of Nadal against this draw i.e. 2005, 2008, 2015, 2017.

Aren’t you the guy that complained Nadal’s RG draw is too easy?

If you ask us whether he wins with this hypothetical draw from hell, then surely no version of the 2018 draw could cause a problem, no?

 

[George Turner]

I think we should not kid ourselves to believe that the players from 1970s and 1980s stand a chance against Nadal or any top player for that matter on any of the slow surfaces at least. I think Cilic would win RG given this draw. Why? Because of the way the game has evolved. Topspin, Power, Gym and improved athleticism of modern day players. I think the 90s players might be a bit more difficult for today's players because technology already made its mark on tennis in the 90s with Agassi like players with a perfect baseline game.

I question the idea of "evolution" meaning "better." It's easy to disprove by making comparisons.

-Borg was a better player than Connors, before quitting in 1981. Yet an aged Connors competed at top 10 level until the end of the 80's and had a USO semi final run aged 39 in 1991.
-Lendl had a winning h2h record over 90's players Agassi and Courier. Lendl beat Sampras as late as 1993 when Lendl was way past his prime.
-90's player Agassi competed at a top level until 2005 when he got old.
-Kuerten beat Fedr in 2004 FO.

Looking at these examples there is no reason evidence that 'modern' players are better than players from the 80's and 90's

 

[ak24alive]

I question the idea of "evolution" meaning "better." It's easy to disprove by making comparisons.

-Borg was a better player than Connors, before quitting in 1981. Yet an aged Connors competed at top 10 level until the end of the 80's and had a USO semi final run aged 39 in 1991.
-Lendl had a winning h2h record over 90's players Agassi and Courier. Lendl beat Sampras as late as 1993 when Lendl was way past his prime.
-90's player Agassi competed at a top level until 2005 when he got old.
-Kuerten beat Fedr in 2004 FO.

Looking at these examples there is no reason evidence that 'modern' players are better than players from the 80's and 90's

You make a nice point about players from 80s giving some stiff competition to the guys from 90s and some players(this is mostly about Agassi) from 90s continuing strong into early 2000s but if you watch matches from the 80s and the present day matches you will see how strong today's players are and how much power they put into their ground strokes and no matter how skillful the oldies were they will be blown out of court by these baseline bullies.
Also keeping in mind that this was originally about Nadal I stick to the opinion that none of them troubles Nadal.

 

[BeatlesFan]

You have to clarify whether Rafa plays with a wood racket and non-poly strings. Under those circumstances, Rafa loses to them all except Courier. Without modern technology, his topspin would be half of what it is now and guys like Borg or Lendl would destroy him. Muster would too, as well as Mats. Hell, they all would except Courier.

 

[Big_Dangerous]

I think we should not kid ourselves to believe that the players from 1970s and 1980s stand a chance against Nadal or any top player for that matter on any of the slow surfaces at least. I think Cilic would win RG given this draw. Why? Because of the way the game has evolved. Topspin, Power, Gym and improved athleticism of modern day players. I think the 90s players might be a bit more difficult for today's players because technology already made its mark on tennis in the 90s with Agassi like players with a perfect baseline game.

Not to mention the rallies are longer on average, the chip and charge or serve and volley play is becoming more of a change up in the modern game as opposed to previous generations where that style was almost relied on heavily by the players. You never saw guys standing literally a foot in front of the back wall to return serve like you do today.

 

[Big_Dangerous]

You have to clarify whether Rafa plays with a wood racket and non-poly strings. Under those circumstances, Rafa loses to them all except Courier. Without modern technology, his topspin would be half of what it is now and guys like Borg or Lendl would destroy him. Muster would too, as well as Mats. Hell, they all would except Courier.

Don't you think he could get by on fitness though? Let's face it, the guys who play today are much fitter than those from previous generations. I mean he wouldn't need the racket skills with the wooden racket like a McEnroe or Borg, but he could definitely outlast them by just making the points as long as possible.

 

[George Turner]

You make a nice point about players from 80s giving some stiff competition to the guys from 90s and some players(this is mostly about Agassi) from 90s continuing strong into early 2000s but if you watch matches from the 80s and the present day matches you will see how strong today's players are and how much power they put into their ground strokes and no matter how skillful the oldies were they will be blown out of court by these baseline bullies.
Also keeping in mind that this was originally about Nadal I stick to the opinion that none of them troubles Nadal.

The pace was slower in Borgs time because of wooden racquets. Obviously for these theoretical match ups to occur you would have to give them the same racquets as Nadal, thus their power would increase.
As for strength, Borg was as fit as Nadal.

You have to clarify whether Rafa plays with a wood racket and non-poly strings. Under those circumstances, Rafa loses to them all except Courier. Without modern technology, his topspin would be half of what it is now and guys like Borg or Lendl would destroy him. Muster would too, as well as Mats. Hell, they all would except Courier.

I was imagining they all would play with modern technology, to make the matches fair.

 

[clout]

Whenever we're doing these hypothetical comparisons, we have to know which era we're playing in. If they're playing with modern technology under today's conditions, Rafa wouldn't break a sweat beating any of these guys. If they're playing with older tech under the yesteryear conditions, then it would be a lot tougher for Rafa to generate offense, which would automatically benefit the older players. The one thing that benefits Rafa regardless of eras is that athletes get better over time. Players nowadays, Rafa included, are much taller, faster, stronger, athletic and have greater stamina then ever before.

 

[clout]

If I had to make a prediction though, I'd have to say yes, he can still win RG even with that draw. Well at least the peak version of him would (so pretty much '08 Rafa).
I think he gets through Courier, Vilas, Muster and Wilander without too much trouble, but Keurten, Lendl and Borg could all give him a run for his money.

 

[Phoenix1983]

Nadal is the moral hypothetical winner of any possible set of matches he could face.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

2015 would struggle - all other versions would get the job done - King of Clay!

 

[TheAverageFedererFan]

Yes.

 

[sanak]

R1; Jim Courier 1992
R2; Thomas Muster 1995
R3; Gugu Kuerten 2001
R4; Guillermo Vilas 1977
QF; Mats Wilander 1985
SF; Ivan Lendl 1986
F; Bjorn Borg 1978

Feel free to pit different versions of Nadal against this draw i.e. 2005, 2008, 2015, 2017.

Why not.. he already proved it by winning RG 2017. Almost the same level of competition if not better.

 

[slal1984]

R1; Jim Courier 1992
R2; Thomas Muster 1995
R3; Gugu Kuerten 2001
R4; Guillermo Vilas 1977
QF; Mats Wilander 1985
SF; Ivan Lendl 1986
F; Bjorn Borg 1978

Feel free to pit different versions of Nadal against this draw i.e. 2005, 2008, 2015, 2017.

Nope...gugu would stop his butt picking..!!

 

[Sport]

You have to clarify whether Rafa plays with a wood racket and non-poly strings. Under those circumstances, Rafa loses to them all except Courier. Without modern technology, his topspin would be half of what it is now and guys like Borg or Lendl would destroy him. Muster would too, as well as Mats. Hell, they all would except Courier.

Untestable claim. That's like claiming that Federer would have been destroyed by Borg with old racquets at the old Wimbledon.

The point is that you can't refute the claim "Lendl or Borg would have destroyed Rafa with wooden racquets" and it doesn't mean it is a true assertion. You also can't refute the claim "unicorns exist in an alternative universe" and it doesn't mean the claim is true.

Untestable claims are without merit.