Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#61

Post by bsaul » Sun, Jul 14, 2019, 9:57 AM UTC

thinkpad20 wrote: post #44

brookside wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is also quite a bit of incredulity that both Nadal and Federer are performing as they do without performance enhancing drugs. Nadal’s one-time doctor was nabbed, but his blood bags were ordered destroyed by Spanish court: http://en.espn.co.uk/tennis/sport/story/205055.html

I’m curious to what extent this is just innuendo and FUD, and how much there’s legitimate speculation (if there could be such a thing) as to Nadal and/or Federer doping. I’ve never heard even a whisper of doping suspicion with Roger, and this is the first I’ve heard of Rafa, but I don’t follow the sport super closely so maybe there are storylines I’ve missed. I know there have been other high profile tennis players t…

Some famous french tennisman (yannick noah, father of joachim, playing in NBA) accused rafa, as well as pretty much all pro spanish sportsmen in general, of doping, a very long time ago, at the time when nadal started to look overly dominant on the french open. Most people at the timr thought it was just pure jealousy or just a way to appear in the news. I now wonder if he didn’t have insider information, though.

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#62

Post by bookofjoe » Sun, Jul 14, 2019, 4:20 PM UTC

i_am_proteus wrote: post #25

goatlover wrote: post #18

Djokovic has a case for best tennis player ever with his winning record head to head over Federer and Nadal. Federer has a losing record against both. He racked up a lot of his titles before Nadal and Djokovic became world champion players. Of course Nadal is best on clay.

Federer is significantly (5/6 years) older than Nadal and Djokovic, which makes it difficult to compare them in "all time" terms based on head-to-head results.

Federer is 37; Nadal is 33; Djokovic is 32.

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#63

Post by likeabbas » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 12:59 AM UTC

addicted wrote: post #36

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.…

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 underd…

>Nadal is famously quoted as saying that he didn’t go to the gym at all

You're taking it way out of context. That quote was referring to his arm muscularity, not how much he trains.

Everyone in the sport know that Nadal and Thiem are the hardest working tennis players outside of the court. They put in way more time than any other players.

Federer is the definition of "tennis comes easy". His movement, anticipation, and technique are just far above everyone elses. It's why he can return Isner's 145mph serves while standing right on the baseline.

Nadal is the definition of determination. He works hard for every single point, and never gives up. He will chase after every single ball, and play every point like it's his last. He's the John Wick of tennis.

I don't know what tennis you're watching because you are seriously delusional

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#64

Post by likeabbas » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 1:02 AM UTC

toyg wrote: post #22

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.…

> Most people prefer Federer because Fed was successful first With that reasoning, we would still be worshiping Pete Sampras. No, Federer's ball skills are just something else. Which is why his spiritual home is Wimbledon, where skill tends to win over doggedness, and why I suspect he will keep playing longer than Nadal - who is already struggling with serious physical injuries at a much lower age, because his game h…

>With that reasoning, we would still be worshiping Pete Sampras.

If he was still playing. Until he retired, Sampras was far and above the crowd favorite in every match after he reached 8 slams.

>hat does not mean Nadal is not superb at what he does (his stats on returns are incredible), but it's something that's a bit harder to appreciate.

Federer's skills are far and above, but I completely disagree that it's harder to appreciate Nada's play style. I find it hard to appreciate something that comes so easy to someone like Federer, compared to Nadal who works harder than anyone else in the sport to win every single point; he's always fighting till his last breath, chasing down every ball that he can. I appreciate his determination and attitude far and above Federer's pure talent.

Re: Why Nadal is unbeatable on clay

#65

Post by likeabbas » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 1:05 AM 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)

You can't take out the clay, it's a proper surface in tennis. Nadal is the only one of the big 3 to have 2 of each slam surface type. We can point out useless stats all day but there's nothing you can say that can take away the fact that Nadal is in the running to be the GOAT and he has a chance to pass Federer's slam count