How great is Nadal on clay? Check it out! (Page 1 of 2)

Great summary Don!!! You are totally right - the man is a clay court machine who is so fun to watch and who does not give up ever. He's also a nice person, so I am so happy for him. Nice to see him back on top.

I honestly believe that Toni Nadal underestimated the damage hard courts would do to Rafa's knees, partly because, in Spain, it's always been a clay court game.  They just didn't know. 

Combine the damage hard courts just naturally do to knees with Rafa's absurdly physical running style (which is, after all, why you have to hit 5 winners in one point to win a point) and you've got trouble. 

Now they know.  So far, they're being as smart as -- well, the Nadals, I guess. 

So I believe and profoundly hope that Rafa plays ONLY the Canadian or Cincinnati, not both, and no other hard court tourneys at all before the U.S. Open.  If they do that from now on, Rafa can stay #1 till well after he's 30...

...or until Del Potro lives up to his potential, which is another story entirely.  If he does, it will get interesting.  And, of course, some other young kid will come along doing something nobody's done before... 

Still, last year Aiur predicted that, if Rafa's knees hold up, he will win at least 18 slams.  I think that's probably about right, though it could be more, especially if Rafa wins another one or two this year.  People playing him may start to lose belief on other surfaces, like most of them have on clay.  It's especially hard to win a match from a guy you know is going to beat you. 

Personally, I hope Rafa stays #1 so long he breaks the record for that, too.  I just love the kid.  He's so humble and kind and funny, but so amazingly fierce and unyielding on the court.  It's just great as far as I'm concerned. 

I actually believe Rafael Nadal is, by a substantial margin, the greatest natural athlete ever to play tennis.  I also believe that he could probably be all pro -- and maybe one of the all time greats -- in virtually any sport they had chosen to train him for, from soccer to cycling to boxing to basketball to whatever.  He might have become one of the great rushers in the history of the NFL: the kid's a physical monster who's REALLY got wheels!  Being a tennis fan, I'm most appreciative that they chose tennis.   

Thanks to you both for the VERY kind comments about the Nadal piece.  It makes it worthwhile.

Aiur, I certainly respect your opinion, as you've proved yourself a very intelligent observer. 

For instance, I believe you're right that Rafa's knees are not without some ongoing damage.  I agree that the way he runs will continue to create problems for him on hard courts.  Still, it's obvious that he has recovered full mobility and that his knees are MUCH better than they were a year ago.  The trick will be to sufficiently limit play on hard courts so that he doesn't exacerbate the knee issue. 

I hope and believe that Toni Nadal has learned enough -- and is interested enough in prolonging Rafa's career -- that they will do what works.  Toni Nadal is a very savvy guy who, I believe, will find a way to keep the money tree blooming as long as possible.  How many tens of millions (or is it hundreds of millions with endorsements?) of euros per year will the family lose in income once Rafa's career is over???

Not only are they limiting Rafa's play, they're changing his game.  He is playing ever more aggressively, taking more risks.  He is not willing to grind it out for hours against a guy ranked in the 20s or 30s anymore.  He seeks to end points earlier.  He spent less time on court during this Roland Garros than he did two years ago when he also didn't drop a set in the tournament.  So they're working on this from more than one direction.  Give them credit.  The Nadals are smart.  Very, very smart.

So far, thanks be to God,  Rafa's feet and knees have been the only real problem areas.  As far as I know, they figured out a way to solve the blister issue, leaving only the knees.  I have a different opinion about how that will go than you do.

I hope Rafa will never have shoulder or wrist issues like a fair number of players do.  Del Potro is out right now with a serious wrist injury similar to the one that plagued Davydenko.  Because of today's style of play, wrist injuries are becoming more common, sadly.  Pat Rafter, my favorite player of all time (see photo), had serious ongoing shoulder problems, as have Tommy Haas and many others.  The body mechanics of the serve have a lot to do with that.   Then there's tennis elbow.  I think Rafa's extraordinary physical strength and level of conditioning serve him extremely well in regard to avoiding all these problems -- in spite of what is, on the forehand side anyway, a pretty violent groundstroke motion.   

So I'm concerned, of course, about Rafa's knees and overall health.  However, I am not at all convinced that Rafa has only 4 years left in him, like you claim.  I'll make a gentlemen's wager on that one with you.  I say Rafa will be an active player ranked in the top 5 on his 30th birthday.  Take the bet?

One more thing.  You're dead on about Federer.  The main reason he has always been injury free is that he absolutely glides around the court, seemingly almost friction free even when running his fastest.  The only player I can remember who moved as gracefully as Federer is Evonne Goolagong.  Even Roger's most powerful shots are controlled aggression.  He is always within himself, whereas Rafa is always stretching himself.  So, yes, no doubt, Federer will be a contender for more total years than Rafa in all probability.  I can see Federer playing competitively well into his 30's if he wants to.  I can think of few top players in the modern era who remained as injury free as Roger.  Like his talent, the way he moves is a gift.  Add to that the fact that Roger trains in Dubai to get into top shape in the real heat, and you can see why he'll be able to play for years. 

You're right that Roger will probably win a few more majors.  I don't think he's done quite yet.  No one will ever match Roger's long term consistency at an extremely high level on all surfaces.  No one is going to 23 consecutive grand slam semifinals ever again.    Second best is 10!  Breaking Nadal's record for consecutive clay court wins AND Di Maggio's hitting streak is a piece of cake compared to breaking that mark.  Roger also holds the record for second most consecutive grand slam finals with 8.  He was eclipsed by -- himself -- with 10.  Not bad.  Combined with the probable duration of Roger's career, I doubt that Rafa will challenge Roger as the greatest of all time.  Rafa seems to have accepted this, given the great deference with which he treats Roger and speaks of him -- even though Rafa is the better athlete, and a better player who absolutely has Roger's number, and who will continue to dominate him head to head for as long as they both shall play.

Now that I think about it, if Roger Federer is the greatest tennis player of all time -- which undeniably he is -- then Rafael Nadal is the best tennis player who ever lived.

Last edited by DonDenman (Jun. 8, 2010 4:20pm)

Aiur, much as I respect you, we need to talk about rehab for you.

Rafa had his stomach taped.  So what?  I can never remember a tennis player whose career was cut short by abdominal injury.  No worries there!

Indian Wells and Miami aren't a problem.  Maximum of 12 matches, best ot 3 sets, over a 4 week period, and you always get a day's rest in between.  What's more, Rafa has never done well at both.  No, the bad part of the schedule -- just exactly as you say -- is Canada and Cincinnati back to back.

I predict that Rafa will NOT play all the hard court masters events ever again.  He will not play both Canada and Cincinnati so long as they are back to back.  Write it down.  You heard it here first.

In my opinion, it would not be smart to play Dubai in the future either.  No reason to, really.  I hope Rafa doesn't. 

Either I'm overestimating or you're underestimating how intelligent the Nadal camp is. 

I'm glad you decided to accept (even if only implicitly) my wager.  In six years we'll see who was right.  I like Rafa's chances to be in the mix then.

Last edited by DonDenman (Jun. 9, 2010 1:07pm)

Good job of defending your position.  Hope I'm right, too.

Nadal going out early at Wimbledon would absolutely astonish me.  The last three times he played Wimbledon he split with Federer (1-2) and beat everybody else.  That's 3 consecutive finals appearances for Rafa.

In 2006 Federer won in four sets.  In 2007 Federer won in 5 sets.  In 2008 Nadal won in 5 sets.  See a trend?

The last Nadal/Federer match at Wimbledon was instantly hailed as the greatest tennis match of all time.

Last edited by DonDenman (Jun. 11, 2010 2:52pm)

Another Federer/Nadal final would not be the slightest bit surprising, and would be most welcome.  It's already the greatest rivalry in the history of the sport and Rafa just turned 24!  In all likelihood, we won't be disappointed. 

I agree that on grass Federer is (barely) the favorite over Nadal.  It's the U.S. Open where Federer's advantage is most pronounced.  Because the Aussie is slower, that's more of a tossup.  On 3 of the 4 surfaces, Federer MAY still have a very slight edge (well, in America a little more than that -- which is exactly why the Nadal camp is most focused on winning the U.S. Open right now). 

Still, heads up, my money's on Nadal every time, so long as it's not in the U.S.   

On clay, forget it.  Federer could be a top 5 clay court player, all time.  Probably is.  How would we know?

And, yes, Aiur -- tennis owes Andy Roddick a debt of gratitude for not turning the 2009 Wimbledon final into a snoozefest.

Last edited by DonDenman (Jun. 11, 2010 10:04pm)

Sampras and Agassi did not consistently play at a high level against each other, like Federer/Nadal.  Not even vaguely close, really -- though they did have a very few great matches.

The only rivalry with anything close to the same fire and greatness was Borg/McEnroe.  And even that falls a little short of Federer/Nadal, in my opinion anyway.

And I guess I do need to address Rafa's mastery of Fererer.  What makes the rivalry wonderful anyway is that, yeah, Rafa is ahead of Federer 10-2 on clay, and Federer was lucky to win 2.  Apart from that, it has been very, very competitive.  Federer is by FAR the greatest all-surface player ever, and Rafa is trying (and I believe it will be successfully) to displace him.  Obviously, Rafa is the greatest clay court player ever -- and was at the ripe old age of 22.  It's not fair to expect Federer to compete with Rafa on clay without a kryptonite racquet.

Federer is not some chump they just happen to call "the greatest tennis player of all time."  They call him that because he earned it.  Anybody who can come within spitting distance of dominating "the greatest of all time" has to make life interesting, though.  That's why you have to love Federer/Nadal -- the greatest rivalry in tennis history, and one of the greatest rivalries in the history of sports.

As to Nadal/Del Potro, yup, that has the potential to ring the bell big time.  Both players are unique in the history of the sport, for very different reasons.  They are compelling figures.  Too bad one is Spanish and the other Argentine, because the English-speaking world will not EVER embrace that rivalry, and it will be our loss.

But supplant Federer/Nadal?  I doubt it.  I REALLY doubt it.

Last edited by DonDenman (Jun. 12, 2010 2:08am)

Nobody can compete with Rafa on clay and hope to break even.  Not Delpo, not anybody.  Not gonna happen.  Rafa is the greatest clay court tennis player of all time and I'm certain that won't change any time soon.

Before his injury, Delpo had become as good as anybody on a hard court, though.  I'll give you that.  You aren't going to win the U.S. Open against the field of players competing today without being extraordinarily good.

I do think that wins over Rafa in 2009 are a little suspect, though.  Rafa had knee problems all year long.  He was not his usual self when it came to movement.  So I wonder whether Delpo is really better than Rafa on hard courts. 

I hope Delpo recovers and comes back strong.  He seems like a nice kid, and it's definitely a good thing to have other players challenging the two great players at the top of the game.  As I've said before, it seems to me far more likely that Del Potro can get to #1 eventually than that Murray or Djokovic or Soderling can.  Of course, he'll have to get healthy and stay that way to have a realistic chance to accomplish such a feat.

Last edited by DonDenman (Jun. 12, 2010 5:22pm)

The game has become much more physical than it once was.  There are far more hard court tournaments now than "back in the day," and hard courts take a toll on your body.  Combine that with how long the season runs, and a dramatic increase in injury is the inevitable result.

The season needs to be shortened.  Some of the tournaments need to disappear.  This is difficult to do politically.

In the meantime, many of the players -- especially those who are not at the very top -- feel compelled to play way more than they should -- and way more than they would if the decision whether to play was made based on health considerations.  It's a dangerous situation.

Last edited by DonDenman (Jun. 12, 2010 6:35pm)

Right. 

It's extremely important to the players to be ranked high enough that they don't have to play as a qualifier at the Masters Series events.  And, of course, you'd like to be ranked high enough to be seeded in the majors, right?  You don't want Federer or Nadal in the first round at Wimbledon. 

It's all about the points, for sure.  So the temptation to play more than is really advisable is a strong one. 

The top players can, and usually do, play less.  I doubt you'll see much of Rafa other than at the majors and Masters Series events in the future.  But even highly ranked players sometimes overdo it.  Rafa certainly used to.  Even though Melzer and Almagro are tough opponents, I think too much play explains the losses by both Ferrer and Verdasco at Roland Garros, for instance.  Davydenko, like Kafelnikov before him, has always played way too many tournaments.

Frankly I think there should be a maximum on the number of tournaments a player can enter in any given year, maybe in any given three month period for that matter.  If everybody had to live with such limitations, players would get a lot smarter about what tournaments they do and don't play.  The problem is that everybody who has a tournament wants as many of the top players as they can get.  And therein lies the rub.

Leading off from what don said, it would not be such a good idea to limit the amount of tournaments each player participates in each year/three month period. Tournament directors rely on big time players to attend their events, and limiting the amount they play in could result in the tournament losing a lot of money because people want to see big stars like Nadal and Federer. If there was a limit, they would only play in tournaments in which they recieve a great amount of points, such as Masters 1000 events and Grand Slams.