Great Blog Cheryl. I'd say that from seeing all the articles after Wimbledon it seems that many columnists are now grudgingly admitting what many fans have known all along - that Nadal is an extraordinary player. We are very lucky to have both Rafa and Rodger around.

LIKE BUTTON

(facebook style)

Cheryl, interesting observation and another great blog from you. What I found a bit different this time was that SO MANY Federer fans were going for Soderling in the RG final. They were even mocking and taunting Nadal and his fans on may forums. Then came Wmbly finals and some of them seem to be undecided but after Rafa won, I noticed that many of them felt 'forced' to admit that Nadal had proven them wrong. Kudos to them for admitting being wrong about Nadal only as a clay courter or one-trick pony, etc. I knew long time ago that Nadal would silence a lot of doubters with his racket. It was only a matter of time.

I also notice that when Federer no longer makes it to the end, a lot of his fans disappear or as in the case of RG, go all out to will the opponent to win. By the time Wimbly came, it seems many of them just went flat. And I'm not talking about the fair minded Roger fans around the place but there's not many of them compared to those how seem to hate Nadal for denying Federer some of the biggest moments in the game (eg. Wimbly 08 and AO 09 maybe even RG 08). On the forums there are still many Roger fans who are arguing til they are blue in the face that Nadal's achievemnts are nothing compared to Roger's. They are so busy arguing that they haven't noticed that both guys are still playing!

Vamos Rafa and Vamos Spain!!!

Oh wow, more articles generalization groups of fans, how creative and original!

I'll never understand why Rafa can be so polarizing. I think with this years results including Wimbledon Rafa has entered his own era. Slowly some of those pundits are coming around. Honestly I am more and more impressed by Rafa and the person that he is...an old soul to be sure.

Another great piece Cheryl!... Can't wait for the installments!
An inspiring story is unfolding before our eyes... a lot of lessons.. insights.... all from a young man who keeps on dreaming... and winning!

no one likes nadal winning because he is a defensive moonballer.
federer and sampras are attacking players.
wimbledon rewards attacking play and nadal wins with defense.

nadal would be more popular if he played an attacking style of tennis instead of waiting for errors from the opponent, its unwatchable tennis.

he plays defensive far too often on every surface.

the guy will never be as popular or good as federer simply due to his negative defensive style of game.

if he plays attacking tennis and goes for more winners, he might be accepted by more people.

@atr....rafa won rg and wimbledon by playing some great aggresive tennis actually....i think you do not understand aggresion and defence.....both are part of rafa's strategy...he is the best at switching between these two

I have a scenario I like the debaters to ponder about.
It has been stated that since the days of Sampras, Wimbledon grass has been made to play so much slower, hence not favoring serve and volley players as much as before. I am quite confident that Sampras would have almost always beaten Nadal on the old Grass. My question is would Sampras loose to a Nadal on the current grass courts at Wimbledon? If so, then it seems Nadal has gotten then better of the recent trends in making grass courts slower, hence his higher probability of success against very big hitters on grass. Also note that federers ONLY two CLAY wins against Nadal were on the fast clay courts at high elevation in Hamburg.
These are saying something in my opinion!

vrael: why are you harrassing atr? he's preparing for rafa to win uso. please leave him alone :)

rezz, all the surafces have changed, not just wimb. we can ask the question but we'll never get definite answers because they have not played at the same time on the same surfaces at their same peaks. and the courts aren't the only factors that have differences. it's not a simple matter of only focussing on the court surface.

accused of harrasment??? lol

ok ill shut up...:)

Do remember that both Fed and Rafa won Wimbledon WHEN the grass courts at Wimbledon were being slowed down. No doubt Fed had beaten Sampras in 2001 at Wimbledon, do take into consideration that Sampras was nearing his retirement then and not at his best; Fed then lost to Tim Henman after that Sampras match. I think the grass courts were being slowed down since 2002, and from then Tim Henman can no longer beat Fed there. So its not only Rafa but Fed too benefited from the slower grass surface at Wimbledon. In my opinion, on fast grass, a Sampras at his peak will always beat Fed and also Rafa. On slower grass the chances of Fed and Rafa beating Sampras are much higher. Overall I think Sampras has a better success rate on fast grass, and still can manage to have some reasonable successes on slow grass.

@attackingtennisrulez , 7/10/10 6:44 AM
"nadal ... is a defensive moonballer"

Nadal is an attacking spinballer.

aye, just like in scotland, i support scotland or anyone playing england.

i dont care if he plays attacking or defensive game, he is beating everybody with it and winning grand slams. Nadal has always had a winning record against Fed even in his invincible era. How come everybody has forgotten how nadal can change defence to attack very quickly he leaves his opponent stranded on court. Anyway i dont think he cares about the views of others. He is too busy improving his game. I guess........

Thanks cheryl for another great blog. According to the title I couldn't imagine where this was going, but I knew that there was a twist in the tale and it was great following your trend of thought.

I can understand Fedfans wanting to support anyone but Nadal, they are rivals, and the better one of them does, the worse the other one looks. I remember when Rafa lost to Sod at RG in 2009, I didn't want either of the finalists to win the title, I couldn't even bear to watch it and I felt a body blow when I saw Roger kissing the trophy.

Slowly but surely, Rafa is taking off all the labels people have put on him - he'll never win a h/c GS (tick), he'll never win a grass court GS (tick, tick), he can't cope with big servers (tick, tick, tick...............) he is a one dimentional claycourter (tick, tick.................) his knees have packed up, so he'll never win a major tournament again (tick, tick,..................) his serve is rubbish (tick, tick,.........Murray says it's more difficult to return than people think), he is a defensive moonballer (tick, tick,..............) he'll never regain the No 1 ranking (tick) etc. etc. etc.

I hope Rafa continues to do what he i sdoing, ignore the doubters and keep his racket doing the talking.

I suspect some Fed fans/Rafa haters do not want Rafa to win more slams for fear that one day, Rafa may catch up with Fed in terms of number of slams won. It will take a long time for that to happen, so there should not be any worry.

By the way, I think Rafa will beat Pistol Pete any day. Why don't they play an exhibition match to prove it?

of course pistol pete would lose to rafa on any surface now that pete has grown old... even haas and nando beat him 2 sets on hard courts.... comparing their primes (not sure whether rafa has reached his prime or not)...anyway..i think rafa would humilate pete any day and he is even capable of throwing in a bagel on that surface... on grass, well nature of grass is a factor too, on today's grass mcenroe said after wimby 2010 that nadal would have beaten any player in the history of the game ! speaking abt the grass in the 90s pete would have beaten rafa, on this grass nt sure but may b pete has the edge becoz of his serve. on hard courts, well deco turf pete is gona win that one surely....plexicushion at oz open , tough to call and any one can win that one,may be rafa has the edge..

an yes I would like to see an exho becoz I think pete is gona find it really inconveniet to deal with rafa's cross court forehand, it ws also somewhat visible in their hit for haiti ...

luckystar,
I don't want to pre-empt anything, but if in 5 years time at the age of 28, Rafa had won say 5 more RGs, and three other GS titles, or 3 more RGs and 5 others, he could easily equaly where Fed is today, and that's a conservative estimate, to say that Rafa could win 8 out of 20 slams over 5 years.

nadline,

predicting 5 years ahead is impossible in tennis.

you never know when Rafa wud slow down. mght happen that Nadal might never win a slam after 26 if he loses a yard of pace. (i hope it does not, but you never know)

cheryl,

I should have known immediately the reference point for the title of this blog, but I had to be reminded. I say that I should know, because there have been countless times when I have read Fed fans either here or elsewhere say that they would cheer for anyone but Rafa! I think they would rather walk barefoot on hot coals than ever support Rafa.

I cannot imagine what Rafa needs to do to finally get the respect he deserves. Fed fans are fond of saying that Rafa is "one-dimensional". It's something they heard from Fed and other so-called pundits and analysts and they love to repeat it endlessly. It's the old - Rafa is just a clay court specialist and nothing more - argument. I don't see how that holds up given the fact that Rafa has now won slams on every single surface. Fed only managed to accomplish that feat last year, when Rafa got knocked out of RG by Sod.

Every time Rafa passes another milestone, achieves another record, makes his mark I find myself thinking - now they must finally give him his due! After his second back-to-back triumph at RG and Wimbledon, many seem to finally be coming around. It's about time!

I wonder what they will be saying if Rafa manages to win the USO and achieve the career grand slam at the age of 24? Will we still have to hear the "but's, what-ifs, should-haves, could haves and maybes"? I hope not!

It's interesting that we never hear anyone talk about the slower grass courts at Wimbledon after Fed wins. Hmmm! Coincidence? I think not! The surface is what it is and if a player wins, then so be it. I could care less if Rafa could have beaten Sampras on faster grass courts. I deal with what is, not what might have been! It's not like Rafa personally told Mother Nature to not let it rain for a fortnight at Wimbledon!

It's interesting that the argument doesn't get turned on its head when Rafa wins on faster clay courts. My understanding is that Rome was playing much faster than usual this year. We all know that Madrid is essentially a hard court covered with some clay. It plays extremely fast, yet Rafa beat Fed this year. I also heard that RG wasn't playing as slow as it has in the past, that they had changed the clay to make it faster. So what about those surfaces? How come Rafa still won? You can't stop Rafa on ANY surface when he is playing his best and mentally tough.

A win at the USO this year just might for one put to rest this endless discussion about winning on different surfaces. Everyone is in agreement that the USO hard courts are the fastest. If Rafa can triumph there, then maybe everyone will just shut up about the surfaces and realize that Rafa is good enough to win anywhere, any place at any time!

In the hypothetical (and to my mind pointless) discussion of what would happen if X played Y today, most people ignore the simple fact that great players became great by continuously evolving their game, coupled with the ability to adapt to court conditions and develop tactics to neutralise their opponents' strengths.

To suggest that Sampras, if he were playing today, would not have adapted to the so called 'slower' conditions at Wimbledon is an insult to his tennis intelligence.

btw: Rafa won his first Wimbledon final in rain-sodden conditions: his second on sun-baked, dust-bowl courts. As NNY rightly says: 'You can't stop Rafa on ANY surface when he is playing his best and is mentally tough'.

exactly my point. people who make such comparisons (WITHOUT an open mind) are making pointless arguments. i say open mind because it's fun to discuss but worth remembering that we can't ever get a definite answer to such questions. people who think court surface is the only thing that changed either don't know their history or are kidding themselves. there are so many factors lile rules, courtside assiatance, not to mention technology, and even the simple fact that in the 90s it was impossible for players find proper gym equipment (at the venue or even in hotels) to warm up before a tourney, coaches had to come up with makeshift routines for their players on the road.

native, you do realise that the more those fans call rafa one-dimensional, the more they're saying something about fed who can lose 14-7 (& 5-2 in GS finals) to a one-dimensional player. basically, they're criticising rafa and than insulting fed at the same time. they're arguing with themselves, you just have sit and giggle on the side.

i agree with you point about those fans conveniently not arguing about wimb's surface change. in fact you will remember that tard who went balistic when i was discussing with tj600 about court surfaces and i mention that wimb changed in 2002 and how that benefitted fed and rafa. he asked for links, accused me of lying. ROFL! have you noticed he hasn't returned since the FO final ended? at least not under the same user name!

@ed
excellent point. Sampras would have been able to adopt to the slower grass courts. Look at Federer for example. In 2001,he was serving and volleying a lot on the faster grass. But then compare that to what he was doing in 05,06 etc when the surface was slowed down. He was playing more from the baseline. A player with the same skill set,had adopted to it. Im pretty sure Sampras would have been able to adopt to it,as him and federer are actually quite similar in a lot of ways. (i used to think of Federer as a Euro-Sampras who played with more spin but less power.) And like you said,any all time great has a high tennis IQ,and that would have enabled them to be a great in any era,on any surface.

To anyone interested in the debate on the changes to the Wimbledon surface, here is what head groundsman, Ed Seaward, has to say on the subject:

"What has altered is the height of the bounce. Before the bounce was lower because the ground was softer".

One important aim is to make the grass more playable for all the players. "We hope that with time it may encourage more of the clay court players to come," Seaward emphasises. "We want to help them get over the mind barrier [against grass]. It would be good for the tournament and good for the game." (2003 interview when he stood accused of sabotaging Tim Henman's chances in 2002)


(and from a 2010 interview) Seaward has overseen changes from a grass mixture to a 100 percent rye grass which is tougher and helps to create a harder surface. Critics say the courts have slowed down, penalising the serve-and-volley aficionados, but Seaward, who constantly measures the courts' performance, says speed is unchanged.

"It's slightly less dense which allows more air movement through the grass and that helps the soil get harder quicker which means the ball bounces higher from day one," he said. Players had a fraction of a second longer to reach a higher-bouncing ball, instead of having to catch it low off the ground, he explained.

nadline,

predicting 5 years ahead is impossible in tennis.

you never know when Rafa wud slow down. mght happen that Nadal might never win a slam after 26 if he loses a yard of pace. (i hope it does not, but you never know)

atul1985 , 7/11/10 1:22 AM

This is waht I was responding to:



I suspect some Fed fans/Rafa haters do not want Rafa to win more slams for fear that one day, Rafa may catch up with Fed in terms of number of slams won. It will take a long time for that to happen, so there should not be any worry.

luckystar , 7/10/10 9:20 PM


atul, where did I make a prediction? I was responding to luckystar. Did you see the word IF in what I said? I was just trying to say it is possible, I never said it would happen.

It would be a good idea to read the all the posts before you misinterprete what people are trying to say, the whole thrust of this thread is saying that Fedfans did not want to root for Rafa to win Wimbledon, and I said it's because they don't want Rafa to beat his record.

Well let's respect the fedfans for not rooting Rafa in any of his matches because it is no secret that they don't want the style of play of Rafa. They prefer a ballet dancer kind of tennis so, the rest of them are ballet dancers except Rafa ---> the MACHO DANCER haha.

Raindrops, Lol.

nadline,

point noted. Sorry for this. I missed the small "if" in ur statement and thought u were asserting Rafa wud win 8 slams. apologies

Rafa is no 'dancer'. He was not only a sweet and beautiful, but also a rugged and wild boy. Now he has grown into a handsome and dashing, at the same time, a macho and fine young man!

great blog, cheryl. Still a bit early to call rafa winning wimbie a 'tradition' but he's denfinitely now THE man to beat on grass.

haha what a nice a nice article nadline. i expecially like the very last line "good enough to be called boring".

agree with you alex, 2 wins is not a tradition (yet), 4 finals is more like it :)

homos , 7/11/10 5:04 AM,

I think you made an excellent point in saying that Fed fans who call Rafa "one-dimensional" are actually inadvertently insulting their own man. Great comment! Yes, I remember that "tard" who went ballistic and see that this person has not dared to return, at least under the original screen name. I guess that's what happens when you make a complete fool of yourself.

nadline , 7/11/10 4:17 PM,

Thanks for posting that article. I have read it. I think it says all that needs to be said about how Rafa's game has evolved. I think it was Steve Tignor who wrote that in his blog about rating those who did well at Wimbledon. I cannot improve on it or say it any better.

The other comment that am sick and tired of hearing, is how Rafa will never beat this player or that player. The one thing that I have learned is to never say never when it comes to Rafa. I simply don't understand those who talk in absolutes when it comes to Rafa and his game. I am so proud of Rafa and Uncle Toni for working hard to continuously improve his game. Rafa has never been content to stay static and settle for the status quo. The adjustments he made to his game - better serve, more aggressive, moving into the court, taking the return of serve standing closer into the baseline, great volleying at net, closing out points more quickly, have all payed off handsomely. Rafa has figured out the big guys with their booming serves, and power forehands. He has managed to expoit their lack of movement, lack of natural athletic ability, expose their own lack of a plan "B", when their serve isn't working and provided the blueprint for beating them. As I recall, Rafa also did this with Fed, showing the rest of the pack how to exploit his weak backhand relentlessly and use his relentless movement and quick court coverage to return his best shots.

Rafa is a great tactician and strategist on court, a superb problem solver! He doesn't get the credit he deserves for this kind of intuitive knowledge of tennis, but he sure gets results!

Resszhoeisini! Federer beat Rafa @ hamburg you say on a faster clay court?

Wrong! yes he beat Rafa @ Hamburg once in 2007 and also the clay in Hamburg is heavy and slower than say in Rome! he also beat Rafa in 2009 (all be it Rafa was ailing) in Madrid remember? on a fast court, both times were when Rafa was understandably tired, the first in Hamburg broke Rafas winning streak of 81 straight wins on clay and Madrid also broke a match winning streak since monte-carlo I believe and coming from a 4hr+ match with Djokovic the day before...

hamburg masters was by-far the slowest clay !!!

afrodite and vamosrafa are correct. The clay in Hamburg is slow -- almost mud-like, really. The conditions there are nearly always cold and damp. The concept that Nadal is best on slow clay is a TERRIBLE misunderstanding of his game. Yes, Nadal likes a little time to retrieve, but his game depends, not on the speed of the court, but on whether or not the ball kicks up off his forehand.

The Hamburg courts keep the ball low. That's why Federer was able to beat him there with relative ease.

Not with relative ease though, as Fed still needed three sets to beat a not so fresh Rafa. In 2008, Rafa beats Fed at the same venue, this time Rafa a bit fresher as he exited Rome early due to a foot blister. In order for Fed to beat Rafa on clay, everything has to be in Fed's favor for that to happen, hence we see a H2H of 10-2 on clay in Rafa's favor. Fed came closest to beating Rafa in a best of five sets match on clay at Rome 2006 final. Fed had his chances but did not take them due to his not being gutsy enough to take it to Rafa. Rafa on the other hand was gutsy enough to save match points and winning in the end. I'm afraid Fed had really missed his chances as Rafa had improved so much since then. Rafa has moved so far ahead of the pack on clay that I think he'll dominate on clay for the coming two to three years at least unless his own body fails him. Rafa may end up unarguably as the best on clay in tennis history.

I made a mistake... Roger won the clay court matches on fast clay courts in Madrid, but he lost to Nadal this year when Nadal was fresh. My point was that Federers only wins on clay were in conditions that were relatively fast compared to other clay courts such as Roland Garros, and so helping fed a little more on some points. The reverse is true when slowing a grass court, taking away effectiveness of some classic shots that have been good on grass: ie a slice backhand.

Thanks ed251137 for sharing technicals on how the Grass has been made so the ball bounces 'up' more and we see fewer aces and a different style of play in recent years. Players dont work on their serves as much as they could, perhaps because its less effective. I brought up the Sampras/Nadal at wimbledon question to illustrate that certainly the wimbledon surface trend has been a positive for Nadal. Otherwise it would be really difficult to get so many balls back in play from out wide serves, or to run down so many balls when the ball doesnt bounce so much. Why do I say that? Last year Nadal showed that if he is a split second slower, his playing styles effectiveness comes down, and this was shown at the world championships last year when he didnt win even a single set against so many "inferior players".

did you watch the federer-nadal half grass-half clay contest? the grass they used was artificial and its bounce was even lower than the 1990s grass !! it was an erratic surface... BUT nadal adjusted wonderfully well...he shortened his swings considerably especially on the bakhand side and played more inside the court to avoid time getting away froim him. so these champions can adjust to these minor changes...

and talking abt both madrid and hamburg , didnt rafa avnege both those losses next year when he was relatively more fresh? HE DID , so no point in arguing i think.

Exactly vamosrafa, there is no point in arguing.

Given Rafa's adaptability, fast grass or slow grass, he can always adapt if he really wants to win. We assume hypothetically that Rafa cannot beat Sampras on fast grass or he simply cant win on fast Wimbledon grass, but we sometimes forget that had Rafa being born earlier and played during Sampras' era, who knows he may adjust his play then to suit the fast grass. Rafa is one determined guy that never gives up. I'm sure he'll try his best to adapt and win. I'm keeping my fingers crossed about the USO. If Rafa can win there, I think we shouldn't question him anymore about winning on fast surfaces. On clay, whether it is fast clay or slow clay, Rafa CAN win, the only thing is whether he is fit or not. How many times did he lose on clay during the last five years? If I'm not wrong, I think its about four times - once to Ferrero at Rome 08, twice to Fed - Hamburg 07 and Madrid 09, and once to Sod at RG 09. We've seen Rafa beating these three guys this year - Ferrero at MC; Fed at Madrid and Sod at RG, so no question who is better than who on clay.

Did you see the blisters on the sole of Rafa's feet when Ferrero beat in Rome, he shouldn't have bothered turning up, he was in no fit state to walk, let alone compete.

Hamburg 07, Madrid & RG 2009 - same story, Rafa not 100% fit.

I am positive that no man in the top 500 could ever be considered "one-dimensional". To become a pro you must know how to serve, how to volley, lob, return, use your forehand and your backhand, your slice, and every other aspect of tennis very, very well. From there to #1 it's all a matter of strategic choices. A player will make choices based on his own strengths and the other player's weaknesses. Any top player could certainly Serve and volley if he thought that would win him the match.
I remember Jimmy Connors during Wimby interviewing for TC, being all giddy with Tsonga because the Frenchman said he is all about serve and volley. Connors wants people to go back to that style of play. But look how Tsonga is doing compared to Nadal...
I have sat through enough matches made out of mostly winning serves or S&V to consider them far more boring to watch than a good rally from the baseline. With Rafa you can almost sense how is constructing the point, how he plans out every move, like a chess match: Now to his backhand, now to the forehand, now the slice, now the cross court forehand and bam! the opponent is caught stepping in the wrong direction while Rafa sends a scorching shot which bounces right on the line and bends impossibly away from the opponent, as the ball spins at an insane number of rpm. Now that is tennis at its best! Berdych was a victim of Rafa's superior game, plain and simple. You can't beat Nadal with serve alone.

well since the last five years rafa has lost 5 times, also lost to andreev in valencia 2005 but since MC 2005 rafa has been playing in another league..

Wrong vamosrafa, Rafa lost to Gaudio too earlier in the year 2005 at Buenos Aires. Rafa won in Mexico and Brazil or Chile, lost in Buenos Aires, lost in Valencia before commencing his 81 matches winning streak on clay, starting from MC 05 till Hamburg 07. His four losses that I'm talking about started with the loss at Hamburg 07, after his 81 matches winning streak.

It's unfortunate for the South American tournaments that Nadal no longer plays down there. :) But Dubai pays a whole lot better, so I can understand it. :)

As much as a fan of Rafa as I am, anyone who claims Rafa would have beaten Pete in his prime on old (and proper) grass has to be smoking crack. Comparisons are futile, give Rafa racquets and strings from the nineties, throw him on those surfaces and tell him to play the way he plays today. He wouldn't have been in the top ten.

samprallica, I appreciate your comment but this universe in your imagination where you get to decide which grass is the "proper" grass and where anyone who disagrees with you "has to be smoking crack" doesn't exist.
In your fantasy you take the Rafa of today, somehow send him back in time, give him an old racket and make him play a surface on which he has never played. Then you happen to know what the result of that wild time travel adventure would be.
Still a fantasy, but a bit more realistic would be to imagine that Rafa is older, and that he grew up at the same time as Sampras and that he played with the same gear and on the same surfaces as Pete all his life. I think Pete and Rafa then would be similar to Federer and Rafa today, but that is still a fantasy, pure speculation just like yours... I must be smoking crack...

grafight: 2 me, Karlovic is one dimensional and in top 50, can't be bothered to look him up, too boring! I think many players, especially lofties, have mighty serve and little else.

deuce, it would be stupid of Ivo not to capitalize on his serve, which is his best weapon. But here you can see his touch with a great backhand slice which drops just past the net, followed by a lob which makes Roger run like crazy. Roger playing in GOAT mode does win the point.
Don't get me wrong, I do agree that relying too much on serve is boring to watch, but my point earlier was that players focus on one dimension of their game by choice, specially if you are playing against someone like Roger or Rafa. Sure you have all they shots and moves they have, but theirs are better, so you have to rely on your main weapon, which makes you appear to be one-dimensional.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7DMagN-R5w&feature =PlayList&p=4C57697B96D1DB09&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=88

@publisher , 7/14/10 1:58 PM

Nadal has not played in Dubai for two years (2009 and 2010).

"Sure you have all they shots and moves they have, but theirs are better, so you have to rely on your main weapon, which makes you appear to be one-dimensional." grafight

Absolutely. I don't like the thinking that many fans buy into that player *a* is one-dimensional, while player *b* isn't, just because they find player *a* game style to be boring. It's as grafight says, a matter of capitalizing on one strengths to negate their weaknesses. Karlovic is not a one-dimensional player by any stretch of the imagination. He can serve and volley, slice and lob, and play pretty decently at the net when the need arises. However, he chooses to depend on his serve because it's his go to shot and most certainly his way of earning cheap/quick points, thus making his serve more difficult to break and his matches shorter in duration.

Dr. Ivo would be very stupid to give up his dependence on his main go to shot, and try to play like the other returners and/or counter-punchers, just to lose the designation that's attached to him as *one-dimensional*. IMO, most of the players who have major strengths use them and their reliance on those shots can make them appear to be one-dimensional in some of their matches as they emply different tactics against their various opponents. Nadal's most favored is his use of the topspin and getting high up; Fed his forehand; Djokovic his down the line; and Murray his super speed plus his cat and mouse tactics. The players play to win and if at times, they appear to win by appearing one-dimensional, then so be it.

*emply* s/b employ.

Sampras wasn't that much of a complete player, because he never won anything on clay.

Grafight, not meaning to insult any Rafa fan in any way - considering I'm a Rafa fan myself. All I'm saying is that Rafa with his present game would have been pulverized by Sampras on grass back then; as would Sampras with his game against Rafa on clay.

Tennis used to be a sport where the diversity in surfaces made slight adjustments in gamestyle insufficient to win on all four surfaces (discount Agassi, but even he won only one Wimby and French each). Racquet technology and strings have made the shotmaking higher in quality, but I still havent understood why surfaces needed to be more homogenous - I'd rather have it the old way.

Nevertheless, in your third scenario; I'm quite sure that Pete against Rafa would have been a lot more competitive than Fed against Rafa; for the simple reason that Sampras also had nerves of steel. Its still speculation either way, so saying Rafa would have hammered Pete (who until last year was still the GOAT) is blatant disrespect.

Nadline: just because a player, in this case a 14 GS winner, Pete Sampras, my all time fave, did not win anything on clay, does not make him an incomplete player. He was excellent whenever he played at the other tourneys.

Sampras used the clay season as a sort of rest period because he suffered from thalassemia, a very debilitating disease, and as we know, clay is a very tiring surface.

Given how tennis was played in the nineties, the diversity in surfaces and the strings - Sampras was as complete as it could get at the time. He still would serve and volley better than most players at this age; but it probably wouldn't work for him given today's conditions.

It's difficult to compare players from different eras. If Sampras only S& V, then he couldn't survive in the current era. If Rafa plays the baseline game in Sampras' era, he couldn't survive too! However as I mentioned before, if both Sampras and Rafa are of the same era, most likely they'll played the same style and will survive then. No point arguing there.

One player who truly could adapt well from slow clay to fast grass was Borg. He did the channel slam three times in a row, an amazing feat. It takes two greats like Fed and Rafa to do the channel slam after 28 years since Borg did it, and with the grass surface being slowed down. Amazing that during that 28 years, no one had successfully done the channel slam.

Luckystar, great observation! That is why I consider Federer as the best player ever, then Borg. I can't think of Pete as the GOAT because I think of clay as the king of surfaces. If you can't succeed on clay and you are beaten by nobodies consistently on the first round of the French Open, you are missing something too important to be considered the best ever.

"That is why I consider Federer as the best player ever, then Borg.
I can't think of Pete as the GOAT because I think of clay as the king of surfaces."

There's something that's a bit of a contradiction here. If, going by your rationale, you consider: "Federer, as the best player, ever, then Borg", and you further state: "I think of clay as the king of surfaces", then it would be logical to assume that Nadal and not Federer is the *best ever* player presently. I say presently, because there could be someone else in a few years who could upstage both Nadal and Federer, as both Federer and Nadal have surpassed Sampras and Borg's records. Summation: "clay is the *king of surfaces*", and Nadal's the King of Clay, then the best player, ever (presently) should be: Nadal .... the King of Clay, followed by Borg, the next best player on clay. I'm neither a Nadal nor a Federer fan, but just thought it's only fair to give credit where credit is due.

Question: Where does it state in the ATP/ITF regs and/or analyses by the pundits and greats, et al., of the sport that *clay is the king of surfaces*? Drucker is touted to be the best tennis analyst, and I've yet to hear him state that 'clay is the king of surfaces".

@ed251137 , 7/11/10 10:26 AM

With the soil getting harder, no wonder we don't see players do dive volleys these days. I miss some of the old "arts" of tennis.

grafight , 7/13/10 5:45 PM
S&V doesn't have to be boring. I like to see differing styles of play clash and one fine example is Agassi vs Rafter Wimbledon 2000 semi.

sampras was one of the finest that ever played the game, never boring to watch. how would he cope today on slow surfaces is a good question? much better than dent and navarro for sure.

One more interesting observation about the channel slam. If there is no Rafa, Fed would have done the channel slam four times, from 2006 - 2009. If there is no Fed, Rafa would also have done the channel slam four times, from 2006-2008 & 2010. Of course that is on the assumption that there is no other player capable of stopping Fed at the FO(other than Rafa) and no other player capable of stopping Rafa at Wimbledon (other than Fed) during those periods. Who knows Nole and Roddick may have a say on clay and grass respectively during some of those years. One amazing thing is that Rafa is the only one who stopped Fed from achieving a calendar grand slam on two occasions, in 2006 and 2007; that says a lot about Fed when he is at the peak of his career - only one man can stop him and on one surface only. I'm looking forward to seeing how Rafa will perform during his peak, which I think has just started now. I think I wouldn't count Rafa's mid 2008 till mid 2009 as his peak as he was hampered by injury then; hopefully no more injury for Rafa, now that he has started his run into peak form.

USO - It Must Be Love 2010 is out:

http://www.usopenseries.com/videos/

Borg won the channel slam with wooden racquets; which in itself makes a huge difference given that topspin is your trump card on clay and there wasnt generating much of it back then.

Borg never won the US Open. Given strings and racquets nowadays, you have to be more complete to win at the French than before - but before this decade, winners of the French were more physical than complete. The physical element is still an important factor nowadays on clay.

Given all this, I don't know how you can consider clay "the king of surfaces". Players have varying strengths and the disparity in surfaces meant you couldn't really win on two largely contrasting surfaces. Call Bruguera et all complete if you will. Pete wanted to win Wimbledon and based his game on that - it was his edge on the baseline and passing shots that made him superior to s and vs and pure power players of the time.

Besides, Sampras won 14 majors and still holds the no.1 records (overall weeks and years ended). Not bad for a guy who had Thalassemia, and had two tough years at his peak with Tim Gullikson's illness and death.

Oh please! No rain = clay court for Rafa lol
Cheryl - I know you're glad your boy won. Good for you.

i agree with samprallica that u need a more complete game to win the RG nowadays in comparison to the borg era...and clay being the king of surfaces..well how can you say that, every surface is important in its own right...u can just say that clay tests some features which ohter surfaces dont to that extent...like patience, great physical endurance, ability to maintain concentration for longer duration as we have longer/slower rallies ..and there are quite a few more..

hey i remember , at the start of the year we all made predictions for the 4 slams in 2010... ricky chose a diff winner for each slam, cheryl said rafa for Rg and wimb ! so cheryl has beaten ricky...i too said Rg and wimb for rafa ...lets see what happens at Us open..

Great comments all... I have no authority to state that clay IS the king of surfaces. It is to me, meaning that's the surface better showcases tennis talent in my opinion. Many are likely to disagree.
I do believe that Rafa has the talent to surpass Borg in many accomplishments, including winning the career Grand Slam, total majors and others, but time will tell. He could have an accident (God forbid) and retire tomorrow, and then we would never know.
I am not surprised that some dislike Rafa, and that's OK. It is a testament to the variety of tennis. There are many styles of play and player personalities for us fans to enjoy.
While Roger has awakened many of us who were already tennis fans but losing interest, Rafa has brought a whole new generation of fans with his Rock star charisma, and it's all good for tennis. Let's see if Nole, Murray and the rest can keep the interest alive.

I don't know if I'd agree that clay is the "king" of all surfaces. But it DOES reward the players who are better athletes. It also allows us to examine a player's tennis game without the serve as part of the equation.

clay isnt the "king" of all surfaces. It rewards certain things that other surfaces dont,like stamina,point construction,the ability to move on the clay etc. But at the same time,it lets you get away with certain things. You can get away with having a bad return of serve to some extent,bcoz the surface slows the serve down for you. On faster surfaces,a good return of serve is essential for success. Also,on clay you can get away with dropping the ball short to some extent,bcoz you still have time to chase the next ball down.(particularly on the slower ones.) On a faster surface,the point is basically over if you do so. In the end of the day,all the surfaces require different skill sets for success.

I prefer clay court tennis over other surfaces precisely because of those points that tj brought out. My least favorite surface is the hard courts, where a player with big serve big forehand can win a point in three shots, not much viewing pleasure as well. That's why I dislike that RG semifinal between Sod and Berdych, and hope such style won't have any success on clay, and that's why I so pleased that Rafa beats Sod in straight sets in the Final; clay court style will always triumph on clay over any other styles! Amen to that!

luckystar-I have a feeling that when nadals left the scene,the huge hitters are going to start dominating paris. There is something about the clay at RG thats different to the ones used at the masters series events. All the huge hitters didnt have much success in the masters series events and smaller tournaments,(soderling was coming off a loss to Oliver Rochus) but they were doing well at RG. it was a similar story last year as well. (and the weather was very different last yr.)

Yep tj, I think so too. I hope Rafa can dominate there for a few more years till the next clay court expert comes along to take over from him. At least the current batch of big hitters are around Rafa's age group, so maybe Rafa can hold them back for a few more years. It will be a sad day if one style (the big serve, big hitting) dominates on every surface. We see them doing well this year at the Wimbledon too!

tj: agree with you, clay at RG must be different. cheryl wrote that clay favours "better movers" so how come Soderling does so well, I suppose you could say he's an exception, but honestly his movement is not the best part of his game.

@deuce
soderlings movement is crap,but he isnt the exception. Berdych and Del Potro arent the best movers(although they are better than soderling) but they have had success at RG as well. I think the clay at RG might be faster than the clay used elsewhere,thus soderling doesnt have to do much running. Btw,I cant see soderling ever hoisting a major trophy because of his shocking mobility.(arguably the worst in the top 30)

Did they change the clay surface at RG? Why?

Fortunately, Rafa being the king of clay, can beat anyone regardless of whether it is slow clay or fast clay. I wonder whether it is true that they are trying to homogenize all surfaces, thus resulting in one style fits all kind of game. It would be sad if it is true. At least in Fed and Rafa, we see different style for different surfaces. We see Rafa adjusting his game to win at Wimbledon and at the AO, no one style fits all kind of game from him. I hope the likes of Nole, Murray and Davy will continue to bring varieties to the game too!

Actually deuce, what I wrote is that clay favors better athletes, which it does. Soderling's movement is indeed pitiful. His success at Roland Garros is due in large part to the fact that for the past 2 years, the surface there has been MUCH faster than usual. I have heard no confirmed reports of this, but there seemed to be less clay spread around last year and this.

The top players are not too distant from each other. That's why we see that not only in the majors but the masters and other tournaments, certain players always do well in certain events. There are so many variables that every single tournament is different in surface, climate, court conditions, altitude, etc. so the same people tend to do well there year after year. Monte Carlo probably has the conditions that favor Rafa the most. I don't see anyone beating him there for a long time. In hard Rafa has had most success in Indian Wells (with 2 semis and 2 wins) which is located in the Southern California Desert (close to where I live) It's close to sea level and very hot and dry and the court is relative slow for a hard court surface. However his second best HC Masters is Canada where he has also 2 wins and 1 semi, which shows that Rafa also does well in different sets of conditions, a testament to his versatility and ability to adapt.

@cheryl
on another forum,a person claiming to be a challenger player said that he was practising with Fernando Gonzalez b4 last yrs french. Apparently the challenger players get paid to warm up the pros. Well after hitting for a few minutes,they realised it wasnt the same surface from previous years. They even coined up that Nadal could be beaten on the surface. i guess the surfaces are getting changed all the time.

It doesn't matter to Rafa how they change the court surface at RG, Rafa can still win there as long as he is fit and healthy. We see him winning there five out of six times and I believe he'll win there many more times, be it fast clay or slow clay; hot or cold weather; humid or cloudy or windy. Rafa has proven that he can win on any type of clay - at MC, Rome, Hamburg, Madrid, Stuttgart and RG; even on those make shift clay courts for the purposes of DC ties.

Even on the fast clay court at Rome this year, against one player like Gulbis, who drop shots like crazy, served like crazy, going for broke, Rafa still find a way to beat him. Against a hard hitter like Almagro, on high altitude at Madrid, Rafa still find a way to win. Sod is one lucky fella who caught Rafa at the right time last year, this year he is not so lucky as he is faced with a different Rafa!

tj - that doesn't surprise me in the least. The RG clay used to play like TRUE clay, i.e. like the clay in Monte Carlo. It no longer does.

cheryl: sorry I mis-read you. However, Sod a "better athlete" than many? Can't see it. Surely anyway, all pro tennis players have to be some kind of an athlete in order to routinely survive 3 hour matches? (And it's very easy to tell those who aren't..)
tj: agree completely re Sod om both points. When Sod approaches the net I find myself covering my eyes and shouting "NO!" It looks so clumsy. Berd and JMDP move much better, as you say. Talking of movement, it always surprises me Andy is not better on clay. I think he still doesn't get onto the ball at precisely the right moment. Also surprised Novak doesn't regularly get to the final at RG. He just looks as if he were born to play on clay!

deuce, do you realized that time and again Nole bumped into Rafa at the French Open? Nole had reached the semifinals on two occasions - in 2007 & 2008 - and each time, he was stopped by Rafa. He bumped into Rafa in 2006 too and he retired from that match. So for three straight years he was stopped by Rafa. In 2009, he exited early at the French Open and that was partly due to him being affected both physically and mentally by his match against Rafa again, at Madrid, which lasted for four hours and which Nole lost. This year he was stopped by Melzer in five sets at the QF; I must say Nole wasn't in tip top condition this year.

So, Nole, like Fed, was stopped by Rafa at RG year after year. If there is no Rafa, who knows, we might have seen a few Fed/Nole finals at RG, and who is to say that Nole could not snatch one RG title against Fed?

Poor Nole always seems to bump into the same person who could stop him time after time from winning. At the USO, he bumped into Fed for three straight years - from 2007 to 2009 - once in the final, in 2007, and twice in the semifinals.

Talking about those big giants' movements, I think among the four guys - Delpo, Berdych, Sod and Cilic - Cilic has the best movement. He is quick along the baseline and he is fast enough when moving up the court to the net. His game also has more varieties compared to the other three, though his comes with less power. Among the four, I only like his game and I hope he improves on his consistency. I like his composure too, a bit Federer like, no nonsense, rather business like.

I admire Delpo too, for his mental toughness, he is a bit like Rafa, calm and composed, not to be rushed. He, like Rafa, can perform under pressure. His forehand, together with Fed's and Rafa's, are really awesome. Fed's has the variety, Rafa's with the unique topspin and heaviness, Delpo's with the pace and power.

Among the four giants, Berdych and Sod can excel on all surfaces, esp now with the surface at RG being 'changed' a little; Cilic and Delpo seem to have problem on grass. It will be interesting to see how these four guys fare in future and how the top four guys deal with the rise of these giants.

luckystar: thanx 4 that. Doesn't just happen to Andy then! Cilic is my favourite of the tall guys and of them I too feel he has the most variety in his game, he looks frailer, physically, though.

Cheryl, 2010-07-09 22:55:45 'Look for more installments this week and next.'

I hope you haven't forgotten you promised us more!

No, I haven't forgotten. :) I'm just finishing up.

Shortly after he won his second Wimbledon title in June, Rafael Nadal met with a small group of reporters from international publications, including Sports Illustrated. Some outtakes from that Q&A session:
How much does history motivate you? Do you know, for instance, whose record you tied today?
The history is there for sure, being part of these players -- Connors, Agassi, Lendl -- it's amazing. Just an honor to be close to these players. But I am 24 years old and it's very difficult to talk about the history now, where I am. In my opinion the Grand Slams are not the only thing to value ... I don't have a lot of the information, but what Lendl did at the Masters was amazing. We have to see. We have to value different things, no? We have to see when I finish my career where I am. Right now I am very happy -- I never thought I can be here with 18 Masters 1000 and eight Grand Slams.
Does it mean anything to you that at the same age, you're ahead of where Roger Federer was with Grand Slams?
No, I think every career is different. For me, it's amazing winning here on grass, winning on hard court in Australia. I hope to do well at the U.S. Open for sure -- I've reached semifinals the last two years. For Roger, I think ... maybe it's easier than for me because I am especially [good] on clay and we have only one [clay-court Slam]. I can play very well on grass, too. But hard court players, they have more chances than the clay-court specialists. They have three. We have one. For sure I can play well on grass ... but the chances are less.
Do you still think of yourself as a clay-court specialist, even now that you've won two Wimbledon titles?
I don't feel like a clay-court specialist. Not now and not even when I didn't win [on other surfaces]. In 2005, I won in Montreal, very difficult. I won in Madrid [when it was an indoor event] on a very fast surface, too. I didn't play my best tennis at hardcourt or grass Grand Slams at that moment, but I was able to do it. I think I am a complete player. I can play well on all the surfaces. For me, the clay might be easiest but I am not a specialist on clay. I have five finals at Roland Garros. I have four here.
There are people who say Roger is over the hill, that he won't come to the top again. What's your opinion?
My opinion is that everyone said the same two years ago and after that he won in Australia, he won in Roland Garros, he won Wimbledon, he won the U.S. Open, so we will see what happens. Roger is good enough, he has enough experience. For sure it's difficult what he did the last seven, eight years, impossible to repeat for another player ... Roger is going to be there, I'm sure of it.
You talk about your difficulties, what is not easy for you. Is it more difficult to face problems on court or in your private life? Which, in your opinion, was the biggest problem you ever faced?
You're talking about the divorce of my parents?
No. Everything.
I think the tennis is only a game. You can lose. You can win. After that? In life, there are much more important things than tennis. I know that for sure ... I didn't have a lot of problems in my private life and I feel very lucky for that. But you always have things. For sure, the tennis right is an important pat of my life -- it's my work -- and I have a few health problems for the last few years, especially last year. But I feel lucky. Even then I felt, "You've won six Grand Slams, you've won a lot of titles. You're 23 years old. Be calm and be happy. What you have already is a lot."
Q: Do you believe in God? We see football players crossing themselves. You don't do that. Do you do praying?
A: It's hard to say, "I don't believe in God." I would love to know if God exists. But it's a very difficult thing for me to believe. I don't know. It's private and I don't want to speak about it, but I say, "If God exists, you don't need [to cross yourself] or pray." If God exists, he's intelligent enough to [do] the important things, the right things.
Can you describe glory?
The glory is being happy. The glory is not winning here or winning there. The glory is enjoying practicing, enjoy every day, enjoying to work hard, trying to be a better player than before.


Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/jon_wertheim/07/16/nadal .interview/#ixzz0tvGDkaOw

For Nadal fans only -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEP-olIsa0Q&playnext_from=TL&video s=BCe4FXuPrPA&feature=sub

@imjimmy........a big thank you for sharing the link......loved the video.

imjimmy-
thank you thank you! Absolutely beautiful. I cried through it!

i had some tears too......thanks again imjimmy

Cheers isabeau77 and vrael!

Can't access that youtube video. May I know what is that video about? Why the crying?

this video takes u through the tough rafa faced...loss to murray at ao by retirement...loss to ljubicic....roddick.....then the glory of monte carlo,rome,madrid,RG and wimby.....very well made with good music(piano version of linkin park's "NUMB")

super video

Yes I managed to watch the video, thanks.

We see how Rafa overcomes his struggles and comes back strong again, so much heart, what a spirit, what a soul! That's why fans love him! How can people don't love him? Worst still, how can people hate him? Perhaps what Fed said about Rafa captures it all, "we have yet to see the greatness of Rafa". I believe from here on, we are getting to really see the true greatness of Rafa! Vamos Rafa! May you have many more victories, many more happy moments and soaring to even greater heights in your career and in your life!!

Oh, that video! It brought me to tears! Beautifully done, great music, so emotional. Just reliving those heartbreaking losses and then the glorious wins, was unbelievable! I loved that the match with Hanescu at Rome was included. I think that was probably some of the best pure tennis from Rafa on clay. I loved how they showed all the steps as Rafa found himself again - blowing the field away at MC, then surviving the scare from Gulbis, the match where I think Rafa truly regained his mental toughness and confidence, then the great win over Fed at Madrid and, what I loved most, how they showed Rafa playing Sod in the final and just before he won the match, they switch to the black and white video of Sod hitting the winning shot at RG last year to defeat Rafa! Sheer perfection!

As if I needed a reminder as to how special this time has been for Rafa fans, this incredibly moving video just summed it up so well. No words needed!

imjimmy, thanks for the link. It just sums up Rafa's journey through injury to triumph.

Brilliant!

Yes NNY, the person making this video really has everything properly thought out, from how Rafa struggles and how step by step, he regains his game and his confidence, to finally getting back to his winning ways. This is a very touching/moving video, esp that part about beating Sod at RG this year, in contrast to being beaten by Sod last year.

I also love his match with Hanescu at Rome. I kept mentioning time and again that the match highlighted Rafa's strategic play at its very best; Rafa played like a chess master, planning his every step in advance and anticipating Hanescu's every move. We see in that match how Rafa went about trapping Hanescu until Hanescu simply had no answer and lost the match.

I really love how Rafa is playing now. He is a matured and thinking player. His shot making ability has also improved and we see the variety in his game on different surfaces. A master strategist that comes with excellence in shot making ability, footwork, stamina and mental toughness; no wonder he is so hard to beat and no wonder he is now ranked no.1 in the world.

luckystar,

I think that match with Hanescu should be preserved in a time vault for future players. Rafa just went to a whole other place. He was playing out of his mind! Sometimes you get the chance to see a player "in the zone", as I like to say. Rafa couldn't miss with any of his shots. He was hitting some insane winners from all over the court and even while running off the court! I was giddy just watching it.

For those who say that Rafa's game isn't aesthetically pleasing, I would say to them - take a look at this match! I don't know how anyone, whether you are a Rafa fan or not, could fail to be mesmerized by the overall brilliance of his tennis - the superb movement, the ability to hit forehand winners from everywhere, even when off balance and out of position, the sublime volleying at net, that wicked cross court backhand. I thought that Rafa was almost dancing or moving like the winged horse Pegasus from Greek mythology.

It seemed as though every time Hanescu thought he had a winner, Rafa would pop up almost out of nowhere to send a shot blazing right back! Rafa was everywhere! I said after that match that Hanescu must have felt as though he was playing three people!

I was incredibly moved by the dramatic change to black and white and the video of Sod triumphant after the final shot in last year's RG, then the beautifully conceived transition back to this year's RG and Rafa's final shot for the win.

Rafa is playing at the top of his game. I can only hope that we will be treated to more of the same in the hardcourt season!

Nativenewyorker: Good post. I too thought that one of the best parts of the video, was the flashback to the 2009 F.O. I recall I was concerned about Rafa's form (by his own standards) before the F.O 2010 final. I was expecting the worst, but Nadal suddenly elevated his game and fired on all cylinders to win emphatically and protect his crown.

I guess for Rafa the pain started in Paris 2009 and it was only fitting that he beat the same man in RG 2010 Final to signal that he was well and truly back. After all, how do you kill the monster, without facing it?

On a related note: I also thought Rafa played much better (than I had expected) in Wimb 2010. I'm always concerned about his knees, which might be the biggest obstacle for him to become a tier 1 great player. But it's worth mentioning that not only is Rafa managing his schedule better, he's managing his ACTUAL performances better. That was evident at the French Open 2010 where he wasn't running after every ball early in the tournament (he admitted himself that he wasn't moving as well), and he did seem to give up on lost causes.

Again at Wimbledon, he seemed even MORE efficient, especially with his serve and when it came ending points earlier. Plus he showed this remarkable Fed/Sampras like ability to raise his game whenever he wanted to. Whether or not that seriously changes things in regards to his health is hard to say, but it will definitely help his longevity in the game if he continues this way.

@vrael , 7/17/10 9:30 AM
<<Q: Do you believe in God? We see football players crossing themselves. You don't do that. Do you do praying?
A (Rafa): It's hard to say, "I don't believe in God." I would love to know if God exists. But it's a very difficult thing for me to believe. I don't know. It's private and I don't want to speak about it, but I say, "If God exists, you don't need [to cross yourself] or pray." If God exists, he's intelligent enough to [do] the important things, the right things.

Q: Can you describe glory?
A (Rafa): The glory is being happy. The glory is not winning here or winning there. The glory is enjoying practicing, enjoy every day, enjoying to work hard, trying to be a better player than before>>

I like Rafa's attitude to God, his selfbelief and enjoing life.

@vrael , 7/17/10 9:30 AM Thanks for posting that interview. He has had this amazing philosophy on life since he was a teenager but for a long time it did not come across in interviews conducted in English. Now he is more fluent more people will appreciate what makes him tick and what an incredible champion this young man is.


imjimmy, 7/18/10 10:07 AM What a find!! This has gone straight into my archives and if ever there is a time again when things are looking bleak for Rafa, I will rewatch it and take heart. Thanks again.

cheers,i post almost every interesting article i read on tennis....i feel like making ppl read evrything i like...hehehe...:)

RAFA;
if fully fit,he can beat anyone on any surface everytime,period...

some glorious pics of rafa

http://goo.gl/zYpR

RAFA;
if fully fit,he can beat anyone on any surface ""everytime",period...
arwen , 7/19/10 3:46 PM


<EVERYTIME >...He has yet to be proved himself for it on h/c.. for rest surfaces looks fine.

apparently Australian Open is not a H/C but clay or grass court?

mani4Tennis: You are overlooking a Grand Slam, an Olympic Gold and 6 Masters titles (plus a further 5 runner-up appearances) all of which were on hard courts. Not bad for someone playing on their least favourite surface and who many people (including yourself) seem to write off as a hard court player.

I love Rafa immensely............but im just a little surprised about his feelings on the subject of God.

I think I know where Rafa's thoughts on god come from, he believes in the tangible and its hard for someone like him (or me) to truly believe in something thats needs plain and simple faith. One a side note, I wouldve loved hearing "what ive done" in the background by Linkin Park on that video. Really, what has he done that some people hate him?

Rafa's generation come from parents who were forced into a single dictator-approved religion as kids and didn't like it, so now Atheism or at least Agnosticism are widespread in Spain.

@TorontonianArv,
Hi, fellow Torontonian!
Are you going to the Rogers Cup?

As for Rafa's being open about his agnosticism if not atheism, that's just as straight and open as he is wrt to many questions. Perhaps not the most pc or popular choice in the world to be open about this, even if in the good company of a at least a billion others, but good on him.

Uncle Tony is an atheist, he's said so in interview.

deuce,
I remember Tony saying so a while back, but this is the first time I've heard of the question posed to Rafa.

But honestly, it is nobody business, no? Some people like to talk about their faith/religion while for many it is a personal matter. As a public figure any answer will potentially not be liked by many... whose business it isn't to know... imho.

Monalysa, 7/21/10 4:44 PM,
I am very sad !........God !... Forgive him !.....He is too young !!!!!!!!!

arwen - we'll need to wait and see what happens in New York before we decide that Rafa is unbeatable.

Fortunately for Nadal fans, he shouldn't be overly tired going into the open. He'll basically play the two Masters events as tune-ups and then the Open. Last year he was still hurting and made the semis, so we'll see.....

Yes I agree with cheryl. This year Rafa should be well prepared for the USO, with confidence sky high, with his knees treated, with his body in good condition,ie less tired, more match fit; and most importantly, his desire to win the only slam that he has not won before.

Concerning Rafa's religious belief, like he said it, it is personal so we should not judge him, just leave it to him to decide for himself. If we believe in God, we know that God gives us this freedom of choice. We can only hope he makes the 'right' choice, though we are in no position to tell him what is the 'right' choice. Enlightenment comes from above, and will come at the appropriate time, so don't worry for Rafa. (I think we care too much for Rafa, treating him like our child/brother/family member/lover or whatever!!)

@Ed..

I am completely aware of the facts that u mentioned above.!!

but the words that you has used in your statement is very extereme kind of ..only perfection cam match to make it reality :)

The perfection that rafa has already proved on clay .. the perfection that roger has showed in past on hardcourts & Grass nearly !!

So i dont think ..rafa has till now showed that kind of perfection on h/c's ..but still he has the time :)

>
Roger had been injured from Halle. And sickness. MONO. Pneumonia.etc.

Federer has become weak from the sickness.
And, old age. However, he is tennis.


nadal always uses MTO. That was obviously an sham.

I do not like play style of nadal. sorry

someone gets bored with Nadal style of play as she gets bored too with her old alias that's why she came out with a new alias.

Hello Rogerlove, how are you doing at your deep hole burrow ...haha

@chlorostoma
You bet I will be there cheering for him at the Rogers Cup, just hope he gets to play some games later in the evening, it's been skin burning hot out here.

Tennisnba,
You are obviously a very, very stupid person, and I bet the average Cro-magnon could own your arse in an IQ contest. Let me expain this in terms you won't understand: "Nadal always uses MTO", (first of all, Nadal is capitalized), is a stupid statement and also a lie because "always" means "every singe time". Now, for you to say that, you must have watched every single match Nadal has ever played, even though you "do not like play style of Nadal".
Then you go on to say "That was obviously an sham", whatever the twisted grammar is meant to convey, it seems as though you believe that the times when Nadal used an MTO, he didn't really needed one.
Even if we hadn't already established that you are stupid and a liar, anyone who isn't regularly required to wear a straight jacket when outside their padded cell, and even some of those, know that no one can't really tell if someone else is really in pain at a certain moment or not, and that very few people like to pay large sums of money to have a guy in a white robe inject blood into their meniscus, even a sucker for punishment like yourself.
So wipe the drool from your lower lip and eat your veggies. Your nurse will be in any time to take you to the next shock treatment. They found out you've been a bad patient and used the internet again. And his time the nurse won't clean you up when you soil yourself, leaving you with a nasty rash... then again you might actually enjoy that.

@TorontianArv,
I too hope that Nadal plays night games - so I can watch them :-). I live in Toronto too and yeah, it's been bad, but the heat seems to be going down a bit now. If it happens to still be this hot during the cup I wouldn't worry too much for Rafa as he seems to be very used to and pretty much unaffected by playing in hot weather. It would be tough on Novak though...

I, too, was saddened about Rafa's revelation about his faith or the lack thereof but this doesn't change my admiration for him as a person and an athlete. I understand that's his personal choice but I still hope and pray that someday he will believe that God exists and will know Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Savior. He's too precious to not believe..,,,

there are people who say they believe in god or are 'religious' but behave much worse than those who are agnostic or athiests so what really is the point? look at what happened in northern ireland and muslim fanatics vs rest of the world both accusing each other of being terrorists in their beliefes, etc! religion is so personal, they shouldn't ask him and it shouldn't be news. his high profile is to do with his tennis, not his opinion about the existence of god. perhaps rafa should log on here and post:
i'm so sad my fans believe in god. i hope one day they will the light!

if you were moulded in the same environment as rafa, probably you would also hold the same beliefs as him now. and correct me if i'm wrong but wasn't it jesus himself who taught people not to judge others?

homos: exactly my feelings. Please don't criticise Rafa for his lack of belief, it's a deeply personal matter. What counts is how you live your life and how you treat other people.

i cant believe ppl are saddened by this revelation...i feel its good....completely fine...i actually agree with rafa on the matters of faith as well

VAMOS RAFAEL!!!

I'm still so scared about the second half of 2009 !!!...

As for religion, I think, Rafa is influenced by his uncle Toni.

By Jon Wertheim: ==On the subject of religion, I once asked Uncle Toni about what role of faith plays in life. His response: "I don't believe. I studied history in university. Religion comes from ignorance in people. Tribal societies, when they see a flash of lightning or something unusual, they say it come from the Magician. But when society move forward, and technology discover more, religion goes in the back. For me, is very important to be moral -- to be good person. But not religion." ==
Read more in: "Rafa Nadal and the G Word" http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/jon_wertheim/07/21/mailb ag/#ixzz0uah4KWGD

I am wondering if Rafa had won that important game against Soderling FO2009, he could have been a 5 time consecutive champion. And also, it would not have affected his mental game in the second half of the year.

I hope it won't happen again...

i don't think sod was the only hurdle. someone after sod could have taken rafa out. his knees had finally caught with him after he foolishly forced them through miami, and the whole clay sourt season, especially madrid SF. also, he was trying to reconcile his parents so his mind wasn't all there. well, things happen. what hasn't killed him has made his stronger. considering all that, he made a reasonably 'quick' comeback to win the clay and channel slams get back to no. 1. and it also forced him to change his game. so rafa has turned his bad run into a very positive motivation with spectacular results.

all his fans hope it doesn't happen again. i wouldnt wish it on any other player too. it was a very bad time for him and his fans.

I agree with homos, it was obvious that Rafa wasn't 100% there physically and emotionally in the spring of 2009. I remember his fans urging him to play more aggressive, and at his pressers, he used to say he would play more aggressive next time, but all along he knew that he wasn't fit, that his knees were troubling him and he actually said on his blog with one of the Newspapers that he had issues that he could only discuss with his family and his team, and no one knew what he was referring to. There were speculations that he had split up with his gf, and rumours were rife after he lost to Delpo in Miami, because he had beaten him easily the last time they played and I think that was at I/W.

Also agree with homos that it has been a blessing in disguise, because he has been forced to upgrade his style and he now plays a lot better, with a very good serve, so every cloud has a silver lining.

Well said vamosrafa, I agree with you. Luck did play a part in Fed winning his only FO. If Fed is younger than Rafa, and in his prime when Rafa was aging, Fed would be able to win more FOs. Too bad he is older and facing arguably the best clay court player in history, so he has no chance unless something happens to Rafa.

On the other hand, if Rafa and Fed are of the same age and started off at the same time, and having their prime at about the same time, can Rafa beat Fed on grass?

luckystar,
... at about the same time ...

Why not? I mean, at what age do you consider Fed to have been in his prime? I think he still was two years ago, when Rafa beat him, even if not at the very very top of his prime, and at a time when Rafa was not yet at his prime nor yet playing his best grasscourt game.

congi vamosrafa..........ur team beat the aussies....

VAMOS!!

chlorostoma, I would think so too. In fact this year, I find Rafa playing better than when he was in 2008, both in terms of strategy and tactics. His movement is still very good. In 2007, his level was already very closed to that of Fed's, and I dare say his level had gone up further in 2008 and now in 2010.

One more question for those who are interested: Strategy vs tactics, what is the difference, as some of you here may perceive? Some people argued, on another website, that the strategic part of Rafa's game was thought out by Uncle Toni, Rafa merely executed it to perfection (some even implied that Rafa has no strategic tennis brain! What an insult!). What are your thoughts?

Surely the game plan (or strategy) is something worked out between a player and his coach. Executing that plan depends on tactical skills - which includes that all import 'tennis intelligence' which differentiates the great players from the merely good players.

A major factor in Rafa's success has always been his ability to think on his feet and to adjust his game accordingly during the course of a match.

I think Rafa is both, a brilliant on court strategist and thinker and a great tactician. We saw it when he played Sod in the final at RG. I remember the Fed fans telling all the Rafa fans that this time there would be no excuses, because Rafa was healthy. So how would Rafa win against a guy who appeared to have the kind of game that would give him all kinds of trouble?


Rafa showed everyone how to do it. His superior movement enabled him to chase down shots that would surely have been winners against any other player. Just when Sod thought he had the point won, he saw Rafa make a great get and the play came right back over the net at him again.

Sod has never been a good mover on court and he could never match up to Rafa when it comes to court coverage, so he was under intense pressure all through the match. Rafa brilliantly exploited Sod's lack of movement with his serve placement and his forehand and backhand. He took Sod out of his comfort zone and wore him down.

It was obvious that Rafa and Uncle Toni had a game plan going into this match. Goodness knows they had a lot of time to think about it! This must have been in Rafa's mind for a long time. That loss at RG in 2009 hurt! A healthy Rafa, a Rafa who could chase down every ball and keep on returning it and force Sod to try to find another way to win the point, was simply too much.

I think Rafa was a strategist AND a tactician in that match. He came out and knew what he needed to do to beat Sod and executed it to perfection. Rafa has a way of figuring out players who appear to have the game to dominate him.

I'm feeling better better now.............Thanks God !!!

And now I understand the voice of God !!! My Lord Jesus Christ !!!...
I am no longer worried. Thank God !!!

For those who respond to my question on strategy vs tactics, thank you for your contributions.

To me strategy is like what ed mentioned, a game plan, esp when dealing with player(s) whom one had already had prior knowledge of his/their game(s). I think where strategy is concerned, the coach plays an important part, and that not only applies in Rafa's case. I suppose Delpo's coach, Murray's coach, Nole's coach for example, do discuss strategies with their charge; if not how come I see Murray's coach or Nole's coach watching some of their charge's potential opponents' matches? So it is normal for coach/player discussing strategy, and to say that Rafa has no strategic mind and solely relying on Uncle Toni to do the job is simply not true and in fact very insulting to Rafa. I can understand when Rafa was a seventeen years old, Uncle Toni may be the one who was almost fully in charge of strategy. However throughout all these growing up years, I'm sure Rafa has learned about strategy himself and I think Toni would let Rafa take charge and may be listening to Rafa's game plan (strategy) and giving advice when necessary.

Sometimes having coached a very successful player like Rafa, the coach (in this case Uncle Toni) was given so much credit that everyone thinks that the player,Rafa, cannot do without the coach,Uncle Toni, and Uncle Toni becomes the mastermind of Rafa's success. It is sad that some people still think that Rafa is a dimwit fella that couldn't think on his own and has to rely on others to think for him.

To me, tactics or tactical play, is what one employs during a match, and is the method(s) one employs in order to play out one's strategy(if there is one), of course all these are means to an end, ie to win the match. So, strategy is what one think out before a match most of the time, though sometimes one can form a strategy too while playing a match. Tactical play happens while playing the match, and is in immediate response to the opponent's actions.

I remember tj once said that Fed is a thinker out there, where tactics is concerned. Some of us disagree to that, quoting Fed himself as saying he does not need to think when he goes out there to play, as long as it is not on clay. I think both sides are not wrong, for Fed is so good in his shot making and so experienced as a player that all these tactical plays become part of him and he can play them out instinctively. Prior to becoming instinctive though, Fed has to think a lot, I suppose.

Where strategy is concerned, I think when Fed was at his prime, he didn't come to play a match with any strategy in mind. He just went out there to play, and after a few points, he was able to size up his opponents, and then, because he was so good, he claimed that he played his opponents' games and beat them at their own games! To me that is awesome, and it shows how good Fed was during his prime. Fed in his recent years, as he ages a bit, do come to play some matches with some specific strategies in mind. To quote a few examples, his match against Tsonga at Madrid 2008,R16; his match against Sod at FO 09, final; and his match against Murray at AO 10, final; he never allowed them to play their game(s). Even his previous many matches against Davy (those before Davy got the better of him lately), he never allowed Davy to play his game, knowing very well how dangerous and recognizing how good a player Davy is. It is until lately that Fed, being a step or two slower, that he no longer can afford to just go out there and play and still expect to win over those players whom he previous owned, for eg., those big hitters.

I'm glad that Rafa started off as a 'strategic' or a 'thinking' player, for I think as one grows older, one would have to rely more on strategies than say physical abilities. We see Rafa's ball striking and shot making abilities have also improved tremendously over the years as he matures as a player, and all these skills plus a good thinking tennis brain will serve him well throughout the rest of his tennis career.

I think in Fed's case he doesn't need a coach, even though Luthi is his coach, to prepare his game stratregy, because he's played most of the players he faces umpteen times. I remember at one GS, the USO, a few years ago, he had a player he'd never faced, which was a quaklifier, and he mentioned he did some of his own scouting by asking other players about the guy's game. Additionally, Fed watches tons of tapes, which he studies to prepare for his matches. Therefore, it's only logical to assume that Fed can think through his matches, as there's nothing better than to play a tape and rewind it as many times as he needs to, in order to formulate a winning plan. After so doing, there's very little thinking to be done. Serena Williams does that also. She even watches how the guys play, in order to incorporate some of their shot-making into her shot arsenal.

I remember Fed stated in his early days he would look at tapes of some of the greats, copy their shots, and practase them until they become second nature and then he can play by rote.

For the other players, of course they talk strategy with their coaches. That's why they have coaches and their designation is *coach*. However, it becomes confusing when they have too many people on the team and begin to listen to too many voices.

Von: good point - look what happened to poor Nole! He is still finding his way back to his pre-Martin form.

@Von
excellent point about Federer. You said:"I remember Fed stated in his early days he would look at tapes of some of the greats, copy their shots, and practase them until they become second nature and then he can play by rote. "
You know,I sometimes think of federer as some combination of Sampras and Agassi. He takes the ball on the rise like Agassi did,but he also uses the one hander and versatile all court game of Sampras. Also agree with your other points.

Von, I've also heard about Fed in his early days, watched recorded matches of the past greats like Sampras, Agassi etc. What he did was not only to copy or learn from their styles but to think of a way to beat them. Maybe that explains why Fed was so good during his prime, after mastering all his strokes and finally mastering when to use which shots, he had also master the tactical aspects of the game. That's why he needs no strategy then.

The other players approach may be different. I think for Rafa, strategy came into play first, when his ball striking/shot making abilities were not that great yet, during his earlier years as a teenager. Now we see a matured player in Rafa, with great shot making abilities, good tactical plays and good strategic game plan.

I believe as players mature, they should be able to rely more on themselves rather than on their coach for thinking out a strategy. I think many players watched how others are playing, to either learn from them or to look for weaknesses in their games and think of a way to beat them. Murray is certainly one of them. He watched how Rafa played and noticed how Rafa moved on clay, that Rafa can slide on clay with either leg in front, whilst most players can't, not even Fed. It was mentioned too that Murray watched recorded matches of Sampras and tried to serve like him.

If everyone watches how Rafa plays, they'll soon find a way to beat him, maybe that explains why Rafa said that he has to keep improving, if not others would catch up with him. No wonder until now Fed still can't solve the Rafa puzzle. No wonder when Murray played against Rafa, at least in the past, he remarked that Rafa had yet improved again. No wonder now Rafa seemed to have the numbers of the big hitters. One simply has to improve and if possible improve at a faster rate than one's opponents in order to stay ahead of the pack.

A few years ago Djoko mentioned that he watches tapes of his own matches ( I would imagine he was also watching others') . Painful to watch, he said, but he would do it consistently and learned to improve a lot of his weaknesses this way.

Thanks tj600, lucky and ed for your responses.

Well, only yesterday I was saying Fed has a coach, Luthi, but today I read in Bleacher's Report that Fed will engage the services of Paul Annacone, Pete's (my all time fave) old coach, to help him with his game. I think Annacone was very helpful to Pete psychologically, when Pete was going through a rough patch and had lost confidence in his abilities. He provided Pete with positive reinforcement, not so much tactically but psychologically, which is something Fed needs also at the present time. With Annacone's help and pampering, Pete was able to win his fourteenth and final GS. I hope that Annacone will help Fed in sorting out the mental cob-webs and shed some light on the holes in Fed's game. However, if it is true that Fed's become a step slower and his back is a severe problem, I doubt there's very little Annacone can do to help him physically.

With respect to Fed's studying of tapes and shots of the former greats, I also read that he studies the draws when they come out and watches the most recent tapes of matches of those players he will meet in the draw, to see if there's anything new in their games that they've improved upon since he last played them. He also watches the current matches being played by those players before he meets them. In essence, Fed does a lot of homework, and it's the reason for his success. It's the difference between him and the other players who just go into a match on a wing and a prayer. Fed must have been a good Boys Scout, and never forgets their motto of *be prepared*. I liken a player playing a big match to a college student preparing for mid-term and finals. If they put in the necessary work beforehand, then all that's left is fore them to execute the plan to perfection, and we see it manifested before our eyes every time Fed plays. anyway, only time will tell how this arrangement with annacone will come to fruition. Also, it shows that Fed's still very keen on staying at the top of his game and improving upon his results.