Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#31

Post by bsaul » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 10:08 PM UTC

A bit off topic, but having followed tennis for the last 3 decades, i think the most striking thing on nadal and federer compared to previous generation is how much they improved technically throughout their career, even after their 30s ( after they both had won numerous grand slams). Nadal has improved on serve and volley, federer has improved on backend and serve. Watching young federer or young nadal vs today’s is extremely impressive.

i think that it’s something we should all take lessons from, and is actually very encouraging for everyone in every field: Age limits are being pushed in every dimensions, and no matter where you are in your career, there’s always new things to learn and new limits to overcome.

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#32

Post by addicted » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 10:11 PM UTC

osrec wrote: post #28

Strange article. The point around controlling only 50% - what the heck does that even mean?! As a tennis player, you know there are many variables at play in each rally. This sort of simplistic analysis tells us pretty much nothing. In my opinion, Nadal is great on clay because of his tenacity and ability to play the big points well. The slowness of the court helps him too as it prevents people hitting through him (I…

Often ignored, but extremely relevant IMO, is Nadals tremendous ability to return basically anything he can reach is magnified at RG specifically (which is what we mean by clay, for the most part) by the really deep backcourts. RG has the most space between the baseline and the stands, and Nadal takes full advantage of it.

I’ve always wondered why players haven’t tried taking advantage of that, with maybe an underhanded serve, and for the first time Kyrgios tried that this Wimbledon and actually won the point.

It may not be as useful in RG because of the bounce, but the ability to draw Nadal closer to the Net during serve would be huge IMO.

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#33

Post by addicted » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 10:13 PM UTC

billforsternz wrote: post #24

I remember a Time magazine front cover article on Bjorn Borg in the late seventies (get off my lawn). One quote that stuck with me went something like this: "Borg's dominance is really exaggerated on clay courts. Borg v an average tour player on clay is like the Detroit Lions v a high school football team". Maybe there's something about clay that encourages individual dynasties. Edits: not any tour player, an average…

Clay and grass to a lesser extent are more extreme surfaces, and they benefit certain types of players. Hard courts are far more neutral and allow for a wider range of styles to be competitive.

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#34

Post by sachdevap » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 10:17 PM UTC

greatpatton wrote: post #19

likeabbas wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Highly disagree with your analysis of why most people prefer Federer to him. Most people prefer Federer because Fed was successful first, then Nadal. So, people were used to seeing Federer dominate and then Nadal came in. Nadal is far from a clay court specialist. 2x Wimbledon champ, 5x finalist. 3 US open titles, 1 Aussie open title and 4x finalist. Your metaphor of car manufacturers really doesn’t do Nadal justice.…

Yes but if you remove the French open victories from Nadal total (down to 6) total both Djokovic (down to 14) and Federer (down to 19) have more than twice (or even 3x times) the number of grand slam Victories. (Same for M1000)

Selectively removing clay court titles is not good statistics. Djokovic has 10 hard court victories, and Federer has 11. You don't call Djokovic a hard court specialist.

6 non-clay grand slam titles - Only 20 people across history, other than Nadal, have more than 6 grand slams on any surface. If you add 2 for RG averaging 2 a grand slam, only 7 people other than him in history have 8 GS titles. I think that is enough proof that he is much more than a clay court specialist.

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#35

Post by srib » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 10:19 PM UTC

frereubu wrote: post #29

This - "In any tennis match, you can control roughly 50% of the game: when the ball is in your half of the court." - which is the main thrust of the post, seems very simplistic. There are lots and lots of things that you can do to control more than the time that the ball is in your court. For example, unusual spin, tactics during a rally, etc. I'd recommend reading "Roger Federer as Religious Experience" by David Fos…

The linked piece is excellent. I had not read it before. Thank you sharing it!

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#36

Post by addicted » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 10:20 PM UTC

likeabbas wrote: post #14

toyg wrote: post #3

This is hardly original, Nadal's game has been well-analysed for ages now. However, this is also why a lot of (most?) people prefer Federer to him: because Roger's game is more original and creative. It's a bit like Toyota vs Tesla: one will always sell more cars and make more money because it executes better, but that's not always the point.

Highly disagree with your analysis of why most people prefer Federer to him. Most people prefer Federer because Fed was successful first, then Nadal. So, people were used to seeing Federer dominate and then Nadal came in. Nadal is far from a clay court specialist. 2x Wimbledon champ, 5x finalist. 3 US open titles, 1 Aussie open title and 4x finalist. Your metaphor of car manufacturers really doesn’t do Nadal justice.…

In my experience whether people like Federer or Nadal has little to do with who was successful first, and much more to do with playing styles, but equally, the marketing images that have been built for them.

Federer is presented as this sublime talent, to whom tennis is effortless and natural. Someone who is calm and collected, and is the suave beatiful exponent of the sport. Nadal is presented as the fighting underdog who is extremely passionate and managed to overcome his natural talent and skill limitations with grit, determination, and hard work.

Which is kind of ironic, because once you set aside their playing styles, they both are almost exactly the opposite of their images. Federer was a highly volatile young player who greatly underperformed when he first turned pro, to the point he wanted to quit the sport, and took a long time to win his first GS. Nadal, on the other hand, burst into the scene almost immediately with a GS win, stuff came extremely naturally. Federer also puts far more hours into training and the gym, and has modeled his entire life aroundtennis, while Nadal, until recently didn’t come close. In fact, Nadal is famously quoted as saying that he didn’t go to the gym at all (I personally believe this was exaggerated, but it does have a grain of truth, in that his off court efforts, at least initially in his career, wasn’t close to the other guys).

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#37

Post by sachdevap » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 10:21 PM UTC

toyg wrote: post #3

This is hardly original, Nadal's game has been well-analysed for ages now. However, this is also why a lot of (most?) people prefer Federer to him: because Roger's game is more original and creative. It's a bit like Toyota vs Tesla: one will always sell more cars and make more money because it executes better, but that's not always the point.

> (most?) people prefer Federer to him Any numbers to back that up? Nadal is not sheer force. Coming into the Wimbeldon semi-final with Roger, he had better serve statistics than Federer himself. Being able to curve the ball back into the court from outside the net (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HD8BvwdlhI) is sheer creativity.

Nadal has adapted his game a lot over the years, and people just don't give him the deserved credit. The good thing is that he doesn't really care, and the record speaks for itself.

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#38

Post by dfabulich » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 10:29 PM UTC

osrec wrote: post #28

Strange article. The point around controlling only 50% - what the heck does that even mean?! As a tennis player, you know there are many variables at play in each rally. This sort of simplistic analysis tells us pretty much nothing. In my opinion, Nadal is great on clay because of his tenacity and ability to play the big points well. The slowness of the court helps him too as it prevents people hitting through him (I…

When I first saw this silly article, I thought it was literally the 2007 Onion article, "Rafael Nadal Credits French Open Success To Living In A World Of Clay."

https://sports.theonion.com/rafael-nadal-credits-french-open...

> "I speak, naturally, of clay itself," Nadal added, luxuriating as he worked his handful of clay into his face, neck, and scalp. "Yes. Clay. Yes."

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#39

Post by osrec » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 10:30 PM UTC

addicted wrote: post #32

osrec wrote: post #28

Strange article. The point around controlling only 50% - what the heck does that even mean?! As a tennis player, you know there are many variables at play in each rally. This sort of simplistic analysis tells us pretty much nothing. In my opinion, Nadal is great on clay because of his tenacity and ability to play the big points well. The slowness of the court helps him too as it prevents people hitting through him (I…

Often ignored, but extremely relevant IMO, is Nadals tremendous ability to return basically anything he can reach is magnified at RG specifically (which is what we mean by clay, for the most part) by the really deep backcourts. RG has the most space between the baseline and the stands, and Nadal takes full advantage of it. I’ve always wondered why players haven’t tried taking advantage of that, with maybe an underhan…

Interesting point. Never thought about the area behind baseline, but it's a very valid point. I think you're correct that it gives him time, which given his speed lets him return even more.

I'm personally not a fan of the underhand serve (bit traditional in that regard!), but yeah, it does catch him out sometimes.

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#40

Post by frereubu » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 10:39 PM UTC

srib wrote: post #35

frereubu wrote: post #29

This - "In any tennis match, you can control roughly 50% of the game: when the ball is in your half of the court." - which is the main thrust of the post, seems very simplistic. There are lots and lots of things that you can do to control more than the time that the ball is in your court. For example, unusual spin, tactics during a rally, etc. I'd recommend reading "Roger Federer as Religious Experience" by David Fos…

The linked piece is excellent. I had not read it before. Thank you sharing it!

I just love this bit:

'And there’s that familiar little second of shocked silence from the New York crowd before it erupts, and John McEnroe with his color man’s headset on TV says (mostly to himself, it sounds like), "How do you hit a winner from that position?" And he’s right: given Agassi’s position and world-class quickness, Federer had to send that ball down a two-inch pipe of space in order to pass him, which he did, moving backwards, with no setup time and none of his weight behind the shot. It was impossible. It was like something out of "The Matrix." I don’t know what-all sounds were involved, but my spouse says she hurried in and there was popcorn all over the couch and I was down on one knee and my eyeballs looked like novelty-shop eyeballs.

Anyway, that’s one example of a Federer Moment, and that was merely on TV — and the truth is that TV tennis is to live tennis pretty much as video porn is to the felt reality of human love.'