Wow Cheryl, thanks for the blog. Never thought would read such glowing blogs about Rafa so soon after the Delpo drubbing at USO last year.
:)

At the same time never thought Fed would be in the dumps again so soon :) :)

great blog cheryl..
the match against roddick, was that the first time you saw nadal play??

great blog cheryl

Yes, it was the first time I saw him on court, clayking.

I'd heard about the Miami match against Federer, but I didn't watch it - and I wouldn't have been able to pick him out of a crowd either.

okay..
so that means i spotted you before him!! :P
but once again i say, it feels great to read this homage to the best clay courter of this era..
thanks for the blog

Gr8 blog cheryl. Your writing is quite poetic at times too.

*i spotted him before you!!

p.s. i should be more careful while typing

thank you all for the lovely compliments.

clayking, I admit I was rather late to the party on that score. :)

cheryl,

It's funny that you decided to write this blog, because after seeing Rafa play such incomparable tennis against Hanesuc at Rome, I have been thinking about how beautiful and mesmerizing his clay game can be when he is at his very best. We have heard the tributes to Fed, his amazing grace on court, the way he seems to almost float effortlessly when he is playing, his brilliant shots, that forehand, the serve, all of it. But lately I have been thinking of how aesthetically pleasing Rafa is on clay. You are someone who has managed to put into words what I have been thinking.

There was a time not too long ago when I wondered if we would see Rafa at his best. All it took was for him to get back on his beloved clay to finally end the title drought and once more play like no one else on this surface. In the match with Hanescu, Rafa seemed to be everywhere. Hanescu must have felt as though he was playing three people. Just when you thought there was no way Rafa could get to one of Hanescu's shots - there he was hitting it back for a winner. Rafa seemed to be dancing on the court. Maybe I appreciated it more because it has been a while since we have seen this Rafa. I wanted time to stop and let me just sit back and appreciate the wonder and magic that is Rafa on clay.

I think Rafa has his own grace when he is sliding smoothly on the clay. I think there is much beauty in his lighting speed, his ease of movement, shots made from everywhere, even when he is well off the court on the dead run. I thought he was in the zone during that match. He has been playing well in so many matches lately, but that match was the essence of Rafa when he is feeling it. Somehow he gets to drop shots that have been placed perfectly, somehow he can hit a down the line forehand winner when he running toward the stands, somehow he can send a blistering backhand from anywhere.

I am so happy that you decided to write this. It's like you said exactly what I have been thinking!

Thanks for the wonderful post! I think we all remember the first time we saw Rafa Nadal. The first time I saw Rafa I was rooting for Andre on his farewell season at Wimbledon and I had no idea who this kid who somewhat resembled a young Agassi with the long hair, rebel looks and big muscles was. But boy, could he move on grass! Then I started to look him up and was astonished at his clay game. I was an instant fan.

Grafight, the first time I saw Rafa was in RG 2005......and ive been in love ever since!!......thats more than you can find in most marriages!......lol!!!

I agree that the match against Hanescu in Rome was one of the best matches that I've seen Rafa played. It was clay court tennis at its very best. What we saw was a chess master at work; a magician at work. The tennis racket in Rafa's hand on that day had turned into a magic wand. He simply directs the ball wherever he wanted it, hitting winners wherever he wanted it. His point construction was simply excellent, anticipating almost every step that Hanescu planned to take, and it seemed that Rafa was planning three four steps in advance, like a chess master. Hanescu must have felt trapped, no matter how well he played, Rafa always came up with something to counter him.

Who says Rafa isn't playing beautiful tennis? His movement on clay is simply beautiful and breath taking. Its not only his speed, its his control of his speed and direction - how he slide into position just in time to get to the ball and hit it back with interest. Also I love the way he plays with awesome power and finesse at the same time. He is not afraid to show off his awesome masculine power, and to me that is beautiful to watch. His finesse is also manifested the many times he came to the net and wins the point with his soft touch.

luckystar,

It feels so good to be able to share our joy at watching Rafa play sublime tennis again. I felt as though I was on a natural high after watching that match. I even gave Rafa my own personal standing ovation at the end!

I first saw Rafa at the 2007 Wimbledon. After hearing about this great young player named Nadal, finally I was persuaded to watch tennis after taking a few years off. For me the excitement just wasn't there anymore. The moment I saw Rafa's first match, I knew that he was the one! I got chills down my spine as I watched this unbelievable young man. I actually thought he was several years older because of how composed and poised he was on court. When I found out he was just turning 21, I was amazed! I knew that I was seeing something extraordinary, something rare and that great things were going to happen to him. I saw every single match Rafa played in that tournament. When he pushed Fed to five sets, I wasn't surprised. I was watching the next great champion coming of age right before my eyes. I only wish that I hadn't stopped watching tennis, because then I would have seen Rafa when he first arrived. It has been one of the most wonderful rides that I have ever been on in my life. I don't want it to ever end!

Thank you Cheryl for this eloquent eulogy to Rafa. You have captured to perfection the hypnotic power of his presence on the court.

NNY: Like you, I too had drifted away from watching tennis during the robotic Sampras era - apart from Wimbledon which continued to be an annual pilgrimage . But after seeing Rafa play at RG in 2005 I was hooked once again. I wonder just how many people he has been responsible for awakening (or re-awakening) a passionate interest in the game.

I first watched Nadal at Oz Open 2005 where he scared the bejesus out of Hewitt by nearly beating him. It was the year Hewitt made the fianls and lost to Safin. I felt Nadal was going to be a force to be reckoned with. Ed, before that, I was bored with tennis too although been watching it for years. I followed JCF quite a bit as I liked him but other than that, the womens and men's game bored me quite a bit became quite predictable and unexciting for a while.

Quite a candid little summary of how one of the world's excellent clay court tennis players is visioned by a good friend.
To me as a tennis fan, indeed I mentioned before, subhemently thereby, I thought I'd seen Raf at the 2004 Aust Open, which Miri of Nadal News confirmed on one of those articles 2009. Raf seemed devoted to the game and was yet to destine in his future, but the next time I recaptured him was 2009 as I use the net for the first time in my then 34 years.
I had seen his record breaking Semi Final match against F Verdc in the Aust Open 09, and again in the Final with R Federer. I watched him in the Monte Carlo Final 09, followed by a match with Ferrer in the Barcelona Final. He sailed ahead to seal his three victory in a row at Rome of 2009. However, I also managed to view his round at the Roland Garros where he bowed out to R Soderling. It would be decent to suggest that mayhap the young man was worn and it was somebody's else's turn.
I hired a tennis court about this time and at the end found the sport to be of belligerence occurence - that a player needs to have complete control and not failing to see ideally presented mis-chances.
Rafael Nadal has been immense of pure success in the preceding five years of his career as a professional sportsman as Roger plus a long line of many more.
A very last point - they should count their blessings and always remember their fellow players, y'know, to submit to the truth when and as it shall be unfold.. ..

ed,

Great as always to see you on this great blog sharing your thoughts about when you first saw Rafa. I wish that I had listened to all those who begged me to come back to the sport I had always loved to watch, if only to just once see a young man who played like no other. It would take much longer for my curiosity and all the buzz to get me to come back to tennis. I am glad that I did.

Think what I would have missed! :)

I first saw Rafa's matches at late 2005 or early 2006. He was already world no.2 then. Prior to that, I had never heard of him. Fed was winning everything then and I remembered I was so bored watching him dismantling everyone, and esp Roddick. Then came Rafa and I was immediately hooked, as this boy played very differently from the rest of the players. He was so passionate, so eager to win and practically ran after everything. The best part was how he celebrated his win, even if it was just one point - leaping into the air and followed that with a fist pump.

I still remembers how he had beaten Fed in the FO 2006 and went on to reach the final of Wimbledon. He was so sweet and polite to Agassi at their match at Wim 06. I had watched all his Wim 06 matches and marveled at how determined he was and came back from two sets down and beat Kendricks in five sets.

Since then, he has become my favorite player and I practically watched all his matches, even buying DVDs of his matches, both current ones and those that I missed during his earlier days. I know he has the making of a great and legendary player and that is why I am so sad about his injury last year. I thought that might affect his career badly but I'm so happy that now I see a more aggressive Rafa and he has started winning again. I hope he'll continue to scale new heights in his career and truly becomes an unforgettable legend the day he retires. Vamos Rafa!!

Thank you for this Cheryl, very eloquently put.

Rafa is truly magic on court and I for one am glad we're all here to witness it.

yes the clay season was a massive Rafa's show and for six years many players many coaches non of them could solved the secret behind the top spin guy he came against few losses but the percentage of his sucess is crazy talking about streaks am sure his on clay are destined to last.
you cant but to respect his dominance there whether you like him or not Federer said last night " he crushed my dreams" " he is un believable guy" that says it all
good article

So happy to see people sharing the same interest as me for Rafa! I discovered him during RG 2005 and have been a fan ever since. That guy is simply the best, on court and off court. I have seen no other player with his game and his behaviour combined. I get shivers too watching him play! Let's hope he wins RG again this year and many many more : )

cheryl, Thank You. A fitting homage indeed! I just love reading glowing accounts of the man with the X-Factor. As vmk1 says, towards the end of last year, loads of people thought we'd never see such high praise heaped on Rafa again.

I just keep my fingers crossed that he will sweep the claycourt season in style, and move back up the rankings.

Vamos!

Thank you for another very well written and heartfelt article, Cheryl!

Like several commentors here I discovered Nadal at RG in 2005. I too had stopped watching tennis for several years until that Saturday when flipping channels I came upon the first set of his semi-final against Roger. Well before the match was out I had become a Rafa fan. Over time I became a fan of Roger too but never in the same complete way as of that boy from the village bringing flowers, as an article from those years described the nephew of the Beast of Mallorca.

To fully appreciate Nadal's skills and consistent performance you probably would need to watch the entire matches in slow motion.

Nadal is the complete package. He has an instant impact when seen for the first time and that first impression lasts and only gets better. There is a special kind of involvement in the match when the all time King of Clay, so far, Rafa Nadal is on court strutting his stuff. Other players gain fans with results and achievements, with Rafa his achievements are just the cream on top of the charismatic cake.

What a brilliant article! i remember that i was watching out for this young teen called nadal because the commentators were asking the audience to watch out for when he takes off his shirt! I was intrigued because i had never heard of anything similiar being said in tennis in all my years of watching the sport :) that was usually reserved for football wasn't it.

I didnt particularly like his style of play because the kind of game rafa has makes me sad for tennis but i was in love from the first to his great attitude... he was THE complete warrior out there, and it didnt matter AT ALL who the other player was. it was mesmerizing that that kind of sagely focus on the Now could be practiced by someone so young... I knew the then (2004) that fed had a new threat looming in his horizon.

Why sad for tennis with Rafa's game? I know for sure that as Rafa grows up and his game evolves, he'll cut down on the chasing after balls, and add on more finesse to his game. This is a logical process and progress for any player. When they were younger, they were more like unpolished gemstone; as they grew up, they would be polished by then.

Rafa has proven that my thinking is correct. Just look at his game now, he has added so much varieties to his game, his volleying skills has improved so much. He no longer needs to rely on his running to do the job, he'll just let some of the balls (esp those drop shots by his opponents) go, knowing that he'll still be able to win the game/set or match. He is now a complete player, able to win slams on all surfaces (I'm waiting for him to win the USO and am confident that he'll do that one day).

luckystar, I can answer your question.

Nadal's game was crafted from the ground up to win (or more accurately, make his opponent lose) - NOT with aesthetics in mind. And that means that he is ready, willing and able to win ugly when necessary. This mindset has always been offensive to those who prefer a more pure style.

There are plenty of fans who would have considered the "pure" serve and volley game of Edberg to be dead-boring. It's all good.

i think Rafa actually would prefer to win ugly if given the choice. I think what please him more is when he wears down an opponent than when he easily dominates. The wearing down gives him that physical victory that his warrior mentality craves for.
It is just his phenomenal talent that makes even this style of play look appealing. I mean just look at a hewitt, even if he pulls it off, he can still manage to give everyone a headache.

@cheryl, that is what I meant too...

I think Rafa would actually prefer to win ugly if given the choice. I think what pleases him more is when he wears down an opponent than when he easily dominates. The wearing down gives him that physical victory that his warrior mentality craves for.

It is just his phenomenal talent that makes even this style of play look appealing. I mean just look at a hewitt, even if he pulls it off, he can still manage to give everyone a headache.

By the way cheryl, does 'pure' tennis have to be serve and volley tennis?

FEDistheGOAT - That's the traditional definition, though of course there really aren't any serve/volleyers left any more. Still, few purists enjoy the games of players who don't have a net game, so...yes and no. :D

Bill Tilden, one of the fathers of the cannonball serve, nevertheless preferred to play from the backcourt and liked nothing better than to face an opponent who threw powerful serves and ground strokes at him and who rushed the net -- one way or another Tilden would find a way to hit the ball past him.

Tilden may also have spent more time analyzing the game of tennis than anyone before or since.


His book Match Play and the Spin of the Ball is still in print and is the definitive work on the subject. In it, Tilden propounds the theory that by definition a great baseline player will always beat a great serve-and-volleyer; his returns of service will, by definition, be impossible to hit for winning volleys.


Certainly the theory worked for Tilden for many years; and some of the best matches of all time have pitted great baseliners such as Björn Borg or Andre Agassi or Rafael Nadal against great serve-and-volleyers such as John McEnroe or Pete Sampras or Roger Federer.

I feel I must share one more memo'ir with you all.
I met guitarist Ian Moss of Australia's Cold Chisel in our hometown, but as my curiosity boardened as to why all of a sudden I got the chance, when I was on my own learning right at this time his song he penned call BOW RIVER at my home. So growing up in New South Wales, I learned he was doing a gig in a suburb a few minutes train ride from where I stayed with cousins. We drove pass there - was where I took night lessons for Shorthand. Top of the class straight up!
I decided to cruize on down to see him a last time and to give some photos of the family away for a weekend because we had a lovely chat in our auditorium after his then show. So I did. I gave him a big kiss on his right cheek although when I arrived, the receptionist could not locate my promised in an envelope ticket. So I spent some time crying over huge embarrassment.
I arrived back in Brisbane the following Monday 7 July, 09. Everything was cool. So I was told about Facebook, searching for any implementation to help me secure my interest in the internet itself.
I first added Roger Fedz then Rafa Nadal. I was confirmed some weeks later, with a line of friends I scored, some were duxes and head-boys from a boarding school I attended. I did state in the account I had been in a fight in High School, two times, each time I won largely but it was through no fault of mine. I also recall I was trying to push my nose back to its precinct position from fighting alot with my flatmate. I'm hoping Rafael did not take so in fear, because I know I deleted both him and Roger the next day as a good friend left the clan. I re-added him weeks afterhand which in recognition was granted to me as well. The friends on their accounts for me has to be well above a certain level.
And I have been very sincere from there-on-in.
I learned he won the Monte Carlo Trophe five times as also the Barcelona, with the Rome four times, or is it five? As well as that he also won for the first time the Aust Open 09 and Indiana Wells straight after.
He developed a knee injury in suffice of contrived info during the Monte Carlo Series World No.2, Roger Federer had become married in a secret ceremony in that Roger did a great interview call 'I'm really happy!'. The World No.1 at this time was Rafael Nadal.
I've watched his comeback this year. He is playing acute succeeding in some rounds etc. The rest he endured would create for him much confidence through any appertunances he discovered. With thanks ...

Clayking,

Thanks for the link to the aweful story. federer hasn't changed one bit! He has always made under handed comments about his rivals whenever he loses. Never been a graceful loser.

This sums up federer perfectly:
'No one can dispute Roger Federer's lofty place in tennis history. No one wants to diminish his 16 Grand Slam titles, his better than 60 career ATP wins, or his countless weeks at number one. As a tennis player, he ranks amongst the best of the best. But in terms of character, there's an awful lot to be desired.

Federer is the type of guy who loves the media attention, he loves to be complimented on his game and periodically reminded of how awesome he is. But in the rare event that things go a bit sour, the "gentleman" Roger quickly turns into a cursing, racquet breaking, passive aggressive insult hurling adolescent. What was the meaning of bringing Nadal's name up? Is it the lingering fact that the only mark on his legacy is his inability to conquer his biggest rival? That Nadal's existance casts a shadow of doubt on Federer's claim as the Greatest Player of All Time? Or is it jealousy over Nadal's recent clay court form (The Spaniard is not 12-0 on the dirt in 2010)?

For all of those Federer supporters who claim that he feels he has nothing left to prove, his recent comments prove that he in fact doesn't share that belief. The fact that he would make such comments about a guy who has shown him nothing short of the utmost respect, shows that his 7-13 head to head record against Nadal does weigh on him. He's still trying to cope with those losses. He is still trying to rationalize the failures. He has not come to grips with the fact that he's stumbled across someone he simply can no longer beat.'

and:

'Federer the tennis player is unbelievable, Federer the man is even more uneblievable...and not in a good way.' Touche Timmy!!!

Tim forgot to mention a few months later, a journalist asked roger about his one-dimensional comment and roger said it was actually meant as a compliment. What a joke!!

This is confirmed by a comment roger made many years ago that someone posted here:
"I prefered it when I didn't have a rival" (ooohh, shows you his mentality, likes things easy, cries when it's not).

Ruffin hates federer as much as I do and for exactly the same reasons. Urgh!! What an appalling representative for the beautiful sport. He could have been ever greater if he was genuinely humble and graceful. Now....it's not only his H2H that leaves doubts but the holes in his character too.

Best to post links like these in a Fed thread so it doesn't taint a brilliant blog like this one!!

Thanks Cheryl and FEDistheGOAT for your responses. I agree with both your comments, and want to add some more of my own thoughts. Actually both Fed and Rafa are great warriors. I think both of them cherish the fights that they have to do on the tennis courts. For Fed, when he was at his peak, would enjoy coming onto court and ALLOWED his opponents to play their games; after a few games, based on his own talent, he soon figured out what his opponents' games were all about and he basically played his opponents' games to beat them.

For Rafa, he enjoyed going out there to fight, in other words, he want his opponents to play their games and he himself would play his own game and he used his OWN game to beat them. Sometimes that might turn into so called ugly grinding or attrition wars.

Fed now has moved on from that stage and he now DOES NOT ALLOW his opponents to play their game. Likewise for Rafa, he has also moved on as his game develops and evolves (development hastened by his own injuries) and he now prefers to shorten the point and plays more aggressively. I guess that is a logical progression for both of them as they grow older, they have to play smart to last longer in the tours.

Jean,

I subscribe to and get e-mails with their latest articles. I read Fed's latest comments and am officially furious. Some things never change. What really got to me, is that I was on another tennis forum and a Fed fan started posting about how Rafa was a "one-dimensional" player. Now I know where he got it from! His fans take what he says and then mindlessly repeat it as if it was a sacrament.

I won't say anymore, because I really want this blog to be about celebrating the incomparable beauty and greatness of Rafa's tennis. We don't have to worry about Rafa ever disparaging any of his competitors. The man is a class act on and off the court! I am so proud of the way he has battled to come back from so much adversity. He has a warrior's heart and spirit!

Cheryl - fantastic blog. I agree with you on all areas. Rafa has an extremely exciting game, and is great in many areas of the game. Watching him on clay when he is at his best is a real treat.

Jean,

Federer was trying to illustrate a point, namely that clay is the great neutralizer. It rewards long rallys, and lots of running and stamina. It's harder to win with a strong serve and volleying skills. Clay suits Rafa's game better than Roger's.

I think it is highly unwise to hate someone without knowing them personally. Sure, he can be rather arrogant sometimes, but none of us are perfect. Federer has a lot more to him than that!

Back in 2006, Rafa's game probably could be described as one-dimensional. It is no longer so, and Rafa has been rewarded with superb results on all surfaces.
Consider this for a moment, if Federer was really so disrespectful, why, year after year, is he nominated for the sportsmanship award? They are in a better position to judge than we are.

Federer has praised Rafa numerous times, and supported him throughout last year.

My apologies for this off topic post.

@champion7
agree with you totally. Its no coincidence that the writer of the article,Tim Ruffin, took a few words of what Fed siad at the interview, and used it to illustrate his point.Thats jounalism at its worst-take words out of context,and spin the meaning of them to emphasise what you want everyone to believe.

Federer, in an interview with the Spanish newpaper El Pais

On clay you don't need a volley or a serve. You just need legs, an incredible forehand and backhand, and to run after every ball. I'm not trying to take anything from Rafa: He has been successful in other surfaces as well. But on clay you can get away, you can be competitive even with a very incomplete game. I'm not saying it's so simple, but it's too easy.

Ahh, the old "I'm not trying to, but ..." trick. What it essentially means is "Please don't think I'm a jerk simply because I'm telling you what I perceive to be the truth." Federer doesn't say Nadal isn't great, just that he thinks winning on grass and hard courts is more impressive than winning at Roland Garros.

The "clay courters are junkers" stereotype is like the "grass courters are big servers" one. These beliefs exist for a reason but are as messy as all mass generalizations. Federer may be right, he may be wrong, but he's almost definitely a little bitter about Nadal's clay-court success. If Federer had three French Open titles instead of one, do you think he'd be taking shots at clay?

It's only fair to say that Federer was effusive in his praise of Nadal throughout the interview. He says his problems aren't with the surface at Roland Garros but with Rafa, who is "unbelievable."


**************************

Federer cannot help putting Rafa down, it's no use people saying he is saying what he thinks and being honest, he shouldn't be thinking in such negative terms about his peers. If it was that easy on clay, he's got legs, all of them have legs, they could chase every ball if that's all that it takes to win on clay.

He sticks the knife in, twists it, and then puts a sticking plaster and a soothing balm on the wound, by speaking from the other side of his mouth to praise, just to pretend he didn't mean to stick the knife in after all, but the damage is already done.

Champion7 , 5/13/10 10:35 AM
The problem a lot of people have is that even when he is praising Rafa fullsomely, more often than not there is a sting in the tail. To Rafa's credit he never rises to the bait and I dont think any interviewer has ever elicited a disparaging remark from him about another player least of all Roger who he patently admires and continues to look up to. As NNY pointed out, he is a class act.

And for anyone who has ever said, or thinks, that Rafa is less than articulate when being interviewed should take the time to watch the videos (with English sub titles) of a recent extended interview he gave on Spanish radio.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYgtFbItOvM

I agree with Ed and this is the single reason why I don't like Roger. I stopped being a fan when he started these stinging jibes. So unfortunate, it's been going on for years.

I also agree with NNY that we should get back to Cheryl's beautiful blog about this great young man Rafa!

ed251137,

I agree with you on your views on Rafa's character, and that is the main reason I am a fan of both Rafa and Roger. He hardly ever has any disparaging comments on his other players, and I greatly admire that in him.

What I take issue with in this instance, however, is the way the author has twisted Federer's actual words. Here is what Federer had to say in full, however.

''It is less natural for me on clay. A big serve and volley doesn't give you an advantage necessarily on clay, like it might give me on other surfaces. On clay you can win if you have an amazing forehand & backhand, and you are quick and fast. Now don't read into this as a jab against Rafa -- I'm not saying this is all he has, since he clearly has the game to win on other surfaces. I'm just saying on clay, people in general can find ways to win without an all-round game.''

He did not mean it as a jab against Rafa. He mentioned Rafa while trying to illustrate a (right or wrong) point. Because he believes that players with less developed all round game are able to be more successful on clay. And he mentioned Rafa because he did NOT want to be twisted as saying that he thought Rafa was one-dimensional.

The fact is, Roger is not a big server, and it's questionable that he is even a volloyer.

Anyway, back on topic. Rafa is certainly a remarkable young man, in many more ways than one. I wish all the best for his future.

He ALWAYS sugar coats his jibes. There are always those who identify them and those who see nothing wrong with his words.

"I'm just saying on clay, people in general can find ways to win without an all-round game.''
If this isn't a jibe at the clay specialists, I don't know what is. Sigh.

I agree with Nadline. Henman, Sampras are S&Vers. There are those who don't consider Roger a S&V but a baseliner. I will however add that he does have one of the most complete games, no doubt about that. He would have been better off saying he came up against someone too good on clay like Roddick coming up against Roger without who Roddick would have won more slams. Acknowledging a great rival is better than bitterly putting them down. Sounds a bit spoilt to me.

Actually whatever Fed said, that was his own opinion and he was entitled to it. I won't be bothered by what he said and I think Rafa would not either. I think what prompted Fed to make such comments was not Rafa but rather his own losses on clay this season, to the likes of Gulbis and esp Montanes, who is truly a clay courter.

Who knows, Rafa may have thought of the hard court tennis as just favoring those big serve big forehand and three shots to win a point players and nothing else. Of course Rafa is diplomatic enough not to say anything like that!

I guess how one player feels about the court surfaces very much depends on his own game, whether his game suits whichever type of surfaces. If one were to ask Rafa, I'm sure he'll say that his game doesn't come off naturally on the hard courts.

So for me Fed can say what he wants, as long as he does not say that right in the face of Rafa. If that happens then I think Rafa should respond.

@champion7, 5/13/10 11:57 AM
you may say he has taken the thing out of context..
but if you sift through the comments the article has received, then you will know that he has not done that and then you will better understand tim's point of view..
his main problem is that roger takes every chance to take a jab at rafa..
even if roger is praising rafa, somewhere he will slip in that jab and then say he does not mean it..
for further info, read the comments the article got..
and if my memory serves right, the word "jab" was not used by fed at all..

when federer's biterness starts, that means nadal is playing well.

when federer starts praising nadal's game, that means nadal is longer a threat to federer.

federer's bitnerness towards nadal in 2008 was pathetic.

federer is not a good loser.

nadal's game is more complete than sampras' game.
sampras was only big serve and serve and volley.
had no baseline game.

nadal has a baseline game aswell as a transition game coming into net.
only weakness is nadals serve.

stats wise sampras is superior to nadal but game wise nadal would beat sampras alot of the times if they met.
nadals awesome passing shots will make sampras' S&V game look ordinary.
sampras has never faced someone with passing shots as good as nadal.
S&V players have tried many times to beat nadal, but that happens very very rarely.
nadal's weakness is big hitter that go for broke.
usually the theory is that players standing way behind the baseline like nadal are beatable by S&V players, but nadal is an exception to that rule.
nadal has passing shots that has never ever been seen with his spin and dip and speed. once he gets into a rhythm with those passing shots, he can break u at will.

federer tried the S&V game vs nadal but never works.
u need a soderling style game or a tsonga aussie open 2008 style where u smash the big forehand and come to net to finsih the point.
but that was a one off.

here is a nadal interview in spanish with english subtitles:

http://rafaelnadal.com/content/rafa-cadena-ser

ATR, include those short balls as one of Nadal's weakness especially when he is returning serves. That gives his opponents opportunity to hammer the ball, so often.

P.S. have you just administered your medication? You are very sound today my friend !!!

@atr,
to support nadal, why do you have to bring sampras in??
just so you know, nadal struggles against guys with big serves..
and the serve and volley players have big serve..
so one cannot say what would have happened if nadal plays sampras..
what you said may be possible..
at the same time this may be possible that nadal is unable to get into position in time and cannot hit passing shots..
so just don't say for the sake of arguing nadal will defeat sampras..
he would have trouble defeating edberg ..
of course i am speaking of grass and hards..

by the way cheryl, forgot to mention..
the first paragraph..
SUPERB!!!!
in free time do write about it..
it would be priceless..
the 2nd paragraph is no less good !!
you so well know how to capture the attention o readers!!

oh dear. This thread is in danger of descending into yet another confrontation between the two camps. Admittedly it is hard to discuss Rafa without mentioning Roger - their careers are inextricably bound together and each owes the other for the role their rivalry has played in those careers.

But couldn't we just this once follow the spirit of Cheryl's blog and celebrate the phenomenon which is Rafa (without taking pot shots at Roger) and rejoice in his return to the form which makes him such a joy to watch.

PS: I was guilty of joining in a discussion which never should have started in the first place.

btw ATR: I had already put that link up at 11.41am. It throws a whole different light on Rafa doesn't it when you see him relaxed and completely at ease speaking in his own language.

@clayking
on the fast grass courts in the 90s, nadal would have ZERO percent chance against Sampras. Even andre agass,who in my humble opinion is a better returner than nadal, couldnt break him in the 99 final.(incidentally,it was the first time i saw sampras play at wimbly) Btw I would only give federer 30-40% chance of beating sampras on the fast grass courts used in the 90s. (on the slow ones used today,i would give fed around 60% chance of beating him)

@nadline
agree with you there. hes not a big server,but a clutch server.Hes primarily an offensive baseliner who comes to the net to finish points off. But he can S&V,as he showed us in the 01 wimbly match against sampras. He doesnt use it any more,as the surfaces have slowed down and he doesnt have to take the net away from S&V. Speaking of surfaces changing,have they sped up the french? Someone on another forum said he had heard of that happening...

@clayking
i read through the comments on that article. its long and confusing. some people have said that the comments were out of context and have provided their arguments.But others have disagreed. But now some posters have started insulting rafa(see ending comments) and saying that hes not exactly humble either. Not that im surprised that it happened, on any article to do with fed or nadal, a battle between their fans starts

On slow grass, Rafa definitely has a chance against Sampras, as he has his passing shots. The S & V works well on fast surfaces more than slow ones. Actually if Rafa was born during Sampras time, I won't be surprised that he would be able to adapt his game for fast surfaces. Who knows, given Rafa's determination, he may even win one Wimbledon then. The guy has tremendous determination and adaptability, don't count him out on any surface. In fact I'm waiting for him to adapt his game to win the USO and the year end TMF. The day that he wins those, I think we'll have to cast our doubts aside and accept him as a complete player who can win on any surface.

Sorry I mean year end TMC or what they call WTF now.

Roger has a great serve but I wouldn't call it a big serve. His serve has got him out of trouble loads of time, and if his serve is not working then he is at a big disadvantage against anyone. Roger tried S&V against Rafa at RG in 2008, and he was wiped off the court.

It will do Roger good, for his own peace of mind to just accept that someone else is far better than him on clay. It must be torture and a stab to his heart everytime they list Rafa's achievements on clay. The other thing is, since Rafa has now surpassed him in Masters titles, he is suddenly not bothered about that record.

Well...we were doing well for a little while, anyway. :) I think it is now safe to assume that Roger and Rafa are now destined to be talked about as a pair - like..Tom and Jerry. You can't have an article about Tom without somebody saying "if only Jerry hadn't tormented him...."

clayking - I'm glad you noticed the Tsonga comments. :D

ed251137 , 5/13/10 2:24 PM ,

I agree wholeheartedly with the spirit of your comments! I said what I thought about Fed, but then urged that we continue in the spirit of cheryl's lovely blog and celebrate the resurgence of Rafa! I also want to follow Rafa's example. He never says anything that could even remotely be picked apart to find a single negative comment about Fed or any of the other tennis players. In tribute to this extraordinarily gracious, poised champion, in Rafa's name, I will not again address these unfortunate comments and instead, choose to congratulate Rafa on his great win against Isner today! From what I am hearing and taking a look at the stats, he played some great tennis.

I intend to focus on Rafa's quest to win Madrid and by doing so, break Agassi's record of 17 Masters titles, and make history by winning all three Masters titles in the clay court season.

Vamos, Rafa always and forever! :)

Here's another little homage to Nadal and a pleasant surprise to all Harry potter fans who like nadal :)

Turns out we have much more to thank Nadal for than giving us one of the greatest rivalries and for being a roadblock on the FedExpress Highway. He gave us one of the greatest literary sensations of the Open Era in addition to his sensational tennis...

As one of the fan's said:
"The character who is quite possibly the most famous literary figure in history was named after Nadal.
What do you have to say about that, Federer?!?! Never mind. With Federer?s luck, James Bond was probably named after him."




+++++++++++++++

Nadal inspires ?Harry Potter? author ? JK Rowling

Interview:
Q: A long journey has come to an end?
JKR: Yes (laughs). I feel like a burden has been removed from my shoulders.

Q: So now its back to real life, is it?
JKR: I suppose so (reluctantly giggles). Even if only for a while. I find it very hard to stop imagining.

Q: Tell us, which parts of your fable were inspired by elements of reality?
JKR: Well I always search for magic in the real world, and the sport of Quidditch is a direct example of that.

Q: Really? Most muggles can only dream about playing Quidditch. Tell us what inspired you to envision such a sport?
JKR: Moonballing.

Q: What?
JKR: Moon-balling! It?s a technique in tennis where you just lob the ball high over your opponent?s side. The higher the ball goes, the better the moon-baller! I distinctly remember; after my tenure as a teacher in Portugal and writing of the third draft of the first book, I had a hiatus in Spain, and I was passing this club, where I saw an 11-year-old boy practicing tennis. I think it was Rafael Nadal. Every ball his opponent flung at him, he lobbed back high in the air, and this went on and on. He never had problems in returning the balls if the opponent smashed it back?you see, because he could cover his court area very well, but he slowed down the game considerably, ?and this went on and on till the ball just kept going higher and higher and it kind of hung in the air refusing to come down. And I started imagining things?What if the ball just stayed there? What if it grew wings? Obviously, the players would need to jump or fly high enough to get to it. And what better way to do it than navigate yourself with broomsticks? So there you have it, the origins of The Golden Snitch (see pic) and Quidditch!



Q: Wow! So you?re saying that Nadal was the real inspiration behind Quidditch? You?ve never mentioned this before?
JKR: Well, no one ever asked me this before (shrugs). People blindly assume that the game was based on soccer. (guilty now) But I have mentioned Nadal as the inspiration?in my own ?mysterious author-like? ways. Since he enjoyed digging his nose into the clay court so much, I kind of named the sport after him replacing the suffix ?pro-quo?, with ?ditch?. Besides, I even surnamed the protagonist after him.

Q: ?Harry ?Potter??
JKR: Yes. It was so charming; the way Nadal rolled on clay every time he won a point. Since pots are made of clay, I felt this might be an apt tribute? In fact, the complete name was ?Hoggy Potter?, but my contacts at Bloomsberry declined, saying the name wouldn?t sell (rolls her eyes). They settled for a household name instead. As you can see, they weren?t half as imaginative, but it can?t be undone (regrets).

Q: You piggy-backed on a tennis-prodigy for your personal writing glory. And yet your tributes to him have been so secretive till now. Explain.
JKR: Now, now?You are reading things out of context.
You?re making it sound like I?m hogging on the limelight all by myself. That?s not true. You are forgetting that I even named the school ?Hogwarts?,hoping it would spawn an entire generation of moonballers! What can be a bigger tribute to the world of sports, huh?

Q: Was he the only inspiration?
JKR: For Quidditch?yes! But the inspiration for the series came when I was travelling in a train. I happened to see a cow chewing grass delightfully as if there was nothing better in the world?And all of a sudden I had the complete vision (closes her eyes meditatively and slips into a trance)?

When contacted, World # 2, Rafael Nadal had a few good words for the author himself:

Nadal: She very good, no? She write very creative, for sure. I also very creative. When I moonball, I try to very hard concentrate, so I jump. Try to fly, hit very high the ball, so it stay there. But Harry even better. He have broom, no? I not that good without broom. But I young. Still only 21. Have great years ahead of me. We will see.


++++++++++++++++++



I am sorry if this has been posted before. I just came across it for the first time and felt that this blog was a fitting place to share it

FEDistheGOAT - did that "interview" by any chance come from The Onion? Or Mens Tennis Forums?

It's a joke. :)

:) It is funny. Reality is flexible innit?

FIG - You throw a "moonball" like this into what is a Nadal tribute and then have the nerve to pout about being called "FedGloat". If you NEED to dish it out then you sure as hell should be able to take it. That's all I'm sayen......

Maya, the article doesn't call nadal a moonballer.. it just says that as a kid he was seen so.. and everyone does it when they are training first as kids. You have to hit balls into the court without power when till you learn to control them. You wouldnt know since with your attitude, you probably wouldn't be allowed outdoors for fear of 'dishing things out' and challenging people to 'take it'. I mean dont you get bored of that litany? or maybe you dont have the attention span required to read through a long post and only caught one bad word and came running with it shouting about me 'dishing something out'. Please spare me, you can have your candy and your carrot.

anyway, it was not a derogative interview in my opinion but if you want to see bad everywhere, even genuinely funny things can be mad into imaginary dark matter i guess.

PS. Don't expect me to reply to your juvenile rants anymore.

IMO the article is everything but funny...the boy who played his first pro match at the age of 15 deserves respect and admiration...and the rest of his achievements are very well known...and I hate moonballing and resent any analogy made with Rafa's game...

@natashao, i am sorry if it offends any rafa fan. I just stumbled across it and thought it was worth sharing. I still dont find anything offensive to rafa in it, but as i said, i apologize if it offends you. I must say tough that I was sent this article by one of the most hard core rafa fans i know (even carrie wouldnt hold a torch to him!).

no problem, FedistheGOAT...these days I tend to be over sensitive and somewhat reactive when it comes to Rafa and can't even take a joke properly..:( this must be due to the fact that we are getting close to FO and 'positive' tension is in the air..:)) ...it's ok really...cheers

FistheG, the story is cute, not offensive. Thanks for posting. :)

FIG - The speech that Nadal makes at the end of your little article is offensive and don't pretend not to know it. And then the jab "reality is flexible". Yes it's a dig on your part, but your not man enough to own up. I could care less if you reply to anything I write, but be sure to know if your being an ass you will hear from me.

@maya, ooh i am so scared to be 'hearing from you'. But i want to clarify that there was no 'jab' from me - "reality is flexible" is no reference to rafa my dear girl, it was in response to cheryl and what I meant is fiction being as real as non-fiction. Read up on stuff like "Maya" which by the way happens to be your screen name too.

maya, don't worry about it. i also didn't like it but let's just get back to paying tribute to the herioc young spanish champ!!

vamos rafa against monfils!! hope our champ can take the next match.

FIG - The piece you posted is not a homage to Nadal. It's a satirical piece probably written a couple of years ago since it mentions his age is 21. At that time Rafa was often criticised for being one dimensional (moonballing being part of that dimension). Nothing but a dirt baller, yada, yada. Satire by definition is the use of ridicule and sarcasm to lampoon an individual. No doubt there is some satire that's funny, but most often it's funny to those people who are critical of the issue or person being satirized.

Now I know Nadal is not your fav, but putting this post on a site where people are paying "homage" to Rafa seems particularly bitter.

Last week you were very offended when a poster referred to you as "FedGloat". Personally, I thought the name was gifted and wished I had thought of it myself, but decided against using it because you appeared to be hurt by it.

After I read the satire you posted I realized how hypocritical you are. You want others to be sensitive to you, but your more than willing to hit below the belt if you think you can get away with it.

I'll tell you what, why don't you find a satirical article written about Federer and post it. Not on a "homage" or "tribute" blog, because that wouldn't be right, but just a regular blog and then we can both laugh together.

Hey Homos - I wrote my post before I read yours. I said my piece and I'm good to go.
Vamos Rafa!!!!!!

Roger was SICKNESS.Roger was sickness in 2008 and 2009 (mono). And, in 2010. Now again. GO Roger

psssttt RogerLove, MONO is for year 2008 until this time of last year 2009. Now year 2010 it's lung infection so get your facts straight. NOT ALL MONO.

Roger wasn't sick in 2009.

@rogerlove, roger was only sick in the first half of 2008! howcome he produced that US open 2008 masterclass (one of his best finals ever perhaps) if he washampered by mono?? roger fans say he was hampered by mono in RG and wimb BUt howcome in a span of a few weeks did he manage to recover soooo much and produce his utter best in that final against muzza??!!! is he superman with super recuperating skills? so he was only sick till march-april i guess and he admitted that too..... likewise rafa fans CAN give the knee excuse (which is clearly more valid) for the past 3 years or so, so if they to so u have no right to blame them....

@vamosrafa
the reason fed had his slump was not directly becoz of his mono(alto it was clear to me he was affected by an illness at AO 08) it was becoz of the MENTAL doubts that crept into his mind becoz of it. Its the same with nadal. Half the time during his mini-slump, he wasnt injured. The reason he wasnt winning titles because he doubted himself a bit more. Also,Federer was unable to train at the beginning of the season, and that physically compromised him for the rest of the season imo. His feet werent moving as well(and affects his game a lot) and he couldnt play his best on a consistent basis. At the beginning of 09,it was mental as well,as he kept losing to the big 4. Once he got over the hoodo,he ended up having a decent season.

@tj, injuries hurt you in two ways, 1 hamper u physically 2. induce doubts in ur mind

i dont want to make this comparison at all but just to make things clear....fed Aus 08 scenaio (mono) vs Rafa(09 RG knee issue) ....roger DID NOT know before the end of Oz open that had mono so u can remove that no.2 factor i mentioned !! injuries are at thier lethal worst when the player knows he is injured so he starts doubting himself, so nadal's issue was more complicated .

BUT, roger was surely hampered at OZ 08 and he as a result started losing confidence and as u mentioned, u started getting his confidence back in 08 , after those heroic at RG.

Just to get back to topic :-), another reason Federer lost matches after the mono was over was the same he lost often before. A moonballer from a tiny island played unbeatable claycourt tennis that year and in the RG final for which Roger had high hopes he played miles above the goat, hence the unexpected scoreline.

Same thorn in the eye played fantastic tennis on grass that year, winning Queens and WImbledon in a trot right after RG: Ca il faut le faire!at Queens. This time said thorn get broken only once in 5 sets if memory serves, almost won in three, almost won in four and finally won in a the fifth. He'd raised his level over three Wimbledon finals against Roger. Roger played excellent tennis in a match we watch all Sunday long, what with rain delays. Roger did not look like he had doubts that day. But did not break Rafa once and was broken multiple times. In the end he and many others blamed the loss on the dimming light, but to all who watch one of them played a bit better than the other. It is possible, no?, for someone to play better than the goat on a number of occasions, no?, it is not written in stone that the goat shall ever lose an important match only due to circumstances. Had Rafa not lost his nerve a little the match may have been over in four sets at either of two match points. The same Rafa won several more tournaments on hardcourt including at the Olympics.
Roger's main goal that year must have been to win gold in singles in Bejing: other than RG this was the main tournament he had not won in his career. I don't believe it was doubts that made him lose there, was it? A very tired Nadal then still made it further than before at the US Open and went on to win at the Australia Open, despite a day less rest and that epic 5 setter against Verdasco. I didn't see doubts in Federer's game that day coming from the previous year: he had already been playing extremely well for months. Rafa was the better player that final, despite less rest.

Federer was a bit out of sorts in 2007, and a number of times lost matches surprising everyone. At the start of 2008 the mono impacted him, yes. But come RG he was playing very fine claycourt tennis - better than in 2009. If he had doubts in playing against Rafa at RG it came from finding it so hard to beat him almost each time they met on any surface, nothing to do with 2008. If he lost at Wimbledon, I did not see any particular doubts: they both played top level tennis there.

Sorry for the typos and such in the previous post, also for leaving my first version (Rafa did not get broken once at Wimbledon, which is how I remembered it but then checked on the net)... post written too fast with not enough time taken to edit and shorten.

vamosrafa: you might want to tell that to your buddy maxi. She's claiming all over the web that Rafa was NOT hurt at FO because he didn't announce it to everyone directly after the match he lost.

Hey FiG, 5/13/10 8:33 PM

What a wonderful post that was! I apologize that some nadal fans doesn't have a sense of humour, but that is because they are trying to be intense warriors like nadal himself!

But I must say I really loved that interview, and almost wish that it were true!! Wow, that would have been something!! Sooo cute!

By the way, to all fedtards who are claiming that nadal faked an injury, please for heavens sake understand what an allegation that is and take a leaf out of the book of fed fans like FedistheGoat who is always so appreciative and supportive of nadal.


love jkrowling, Harry potter and Nadal. and even though the story may not be true, i am going to try my best to tell it at every occassion as if it were true!!

Vamos! Rolland Garros, here we come!!

yes, sorry we don't have a warp sense of humour

wow serious help needed