Cincinnati Master 1000

[The Strokes]

Wrong, I don't think Nadal has more physical strength than the others big 3, Novak has showed and impressive strength, Murray too, he has the stronger legs and body of all the tour but not his head, and of course Federer it doesn't matter his style or whatever you think about it, he had when he was younger and now with 36 years old has showed it in different occasions. In one word all of them need a lot of strength otherwise they never could be in the place they are

LOL agree re Nadal and strength, though he looks more ripped. Murray has tree trunk legs; Djok certainly has the endurance.
Nadal's left arm is in a class by itself in all of tennis though. No-one has a bicep like that. He needs it for the way he hits his FH.
Actually, looking through my Rafa pix for the bicep, I have to agree with Mrzz--he is definitely the most muscled of the big 4 (at least visibly)
I have never seen any player with that kind of definition on vastus medialus, just spectacular. And I haven't even't talked about his glutes, oh don't get me started on Rafa's body ... If he gave us nothing else, that would have been enough.

 

[Carol]

LOL agree re Nadal and strength, though he looks more ripped. Murray has tree trunk legs; Djok certainly has the endurance.
Nadal's left arm is in a class by itself in all of tennis though. No-one has a bicep like that. He needs it for the way he hits his FH.
Actually, looking through my Rafa pix for the bicep, I have to agree with Mrzz--he is definitely the most muscled of the big 4 (at least visibly)
I have never seen any player with that kind of definition on vastus medialus, just spectacular. And I haven't even't talked about his glutes, oh don't get me started on Rafa's body ... If he gave us nothing else, that would have been enough.

Of course he has a strong body but we have to count with his genes, look his uncles and father, their body frame look strong even with the age so with exercises and some weights they have very easy to build the muscles tough it's also easy to get more injuries. My brother has that kind of body, arms and legs even without to do too much weights (thanks to heaven my body is more slim like my mother )

 

[mrzz]

Wrong, I don't think Nadal has more physical strength than the others big 3, Novak has showed and impressive strength, Murray too, he has the stronger legs and body of all the tour but not his head, and of course Federer it doesn't matter his style or whatever you think about it, he had when he was younger and now with 36 years old has showed it in different occasions. In one word all of them need a lot of strength otherwise they never could be in the place they are

First, you seem to equate "strong" and "stronger". Obviously they are all strong, and them all have stamina. Anyway, I don't even understand why you are replying to a purely rhetorical argument... you are defending Nadal against a guy who just said that his main driver of success is his talent. But if you want to say that I am wrong, fine. I would then just want to know why the hell people call the guy "Bull"...

 

[mrzz]

Did you see KYr vs. Karl? zzzzzzzzzzzz

I agree with you, but I have to say that regarding Karlovic, and also Isner in fact, they at least try to have a game. Isner goes for his shots, his forehand in fact became better with time -- he even tries banana shots this days when dealing with low balls, and Karlovic tries to have a net game based as much on touch and angles than on power. If they succeed is another story, but I give credit to them at least for trying...

 

[Carol]

First, you seem to equate "strong" and "stronger". Obviously they are all strong, and them all have stamina. Anyway, I don't even understand why you are replying to a purely rhetorical argument... you are defending Nadal against a guy who just said that his main driver of success is his talent. But if you want to say that I am wrong, fine. I would then just want to know why the hell people call the guy "Bull"...

My point is that Nadal is not stronger than the others top guys even that his body seems that, all of them are equal in strength and talent

 

[atttomole]

It's arguable that they have the same strength, but they are certainly not equal when it comes to talent.

 

[The Strokes]

I agree with you, but I have to say that regarding Karlovic, and also Isner in fact, they at least try to have a game. Isner goes for his shots, his forehand in fact became better with time -- he even tries banana shots this days when dealing with low balls, and Karlovic tries to have a net game based as much on touch and angles than on power. If they succeed is another story, but I give credit to them at least for trying...

Agree, that's why I never use the term "servebots" that's so common among posters. It's not like none of them can play. How they play is limited by their height--they don't bend as well, they don't change directions as well, etc.etc.
Ideal height is around 6'1"--6'4" for combination of power and mobility--but now taller guys are more mobile, well AZ is a good example. SHort guys like Shwartzman and Ferrer have to be extremely mobile and almost never miss. I notice short players cannot afford to be headcases--they are all mental rocks. Nish is a bit of an exception--short guy with aggressive game.

 

[Carol]

It's arguable that they have the same strength, but they are certainly not equal when it comes to talent.

So of the top four players who you think has more talent?

 

[The Strokes]

So of the top four players who you think has more talent?

Roger said it was Rafa, so it must be Rafa! hehe

 

[The Strokes]

First, you seem to equate "strong" and "stronger". Obviously they are all strong, and them all have stamina. Anyway, I don't even understand why you are replying to a purely rhetorical argument... you are defending Nadal against a guy who just said that his main driver of success is his talent. But if you want to say that I am wrong, fine. I would then just want to know why the hell people call the guy "Bull"...

They call him the bull for his stubornness, his refusal to give up. Even when he's playing like crap, it's true

 

[The Strokes]

So of the top four players who you think has more talent?

I think talent is very hard to measure in tennis--I realize it means natural ability, what no amount of work will produce. What is already just there. Then hard work adds things, refines things, etc. etc. Then there's the mental aspect, which has nothing to do with talent.
Obviously Kyr has enormous talent, you can just see it, and it's a well known fact he doesn't put much time in on the practice courts or gym.

As far as the hands go, and maybe timing as well,--Fed.
But Rafa has something special on clay than the others don't have--Toni said he could see it when Rafa was just 4 or something, the way his feet moved. That's talent too, right? Rafa has a lot of just general athletic talent--he could have been a soccer player were it not for a congenital bone problem in his foot, and he is considered an extremely good golfer. He's the best at the very hardest shot in tennis, the Bh overhead smash.
Djok's ball striking (when in top form) and dynamic balance, is that talent or something he learned?

I think it's very tricky to separate what's talent and what's not. You need enormous talent to do that.

 

[atttomole]

So of the top four players who you think has more talent?

Without any doubts its Federer.

 

[The Strokes]

Without any doubts its Federer.

Fed said it was Rafa. YOu wouldn't want to go against what Fed said would you?

Pasted in from MTF, but the original is in Tennis Magazine:

Roger Federer news update: Swiss thinks he wasn't as talented as Rafael Nadal, Martina Hingis and Tiger Woods

Former world's no.1 Roger Federer thinks while he was oozing with potential in the early years of his tennis career he wasn't as prodigious as fellow tennis players Rafael Nadal, Martina Hingis and pro golfer Tiger Woods.

Tennis Magazine had an opportunity to interview Federer, who is currently training hard after suffering a knee injury a month ago.

According to the 34-year Swiss, he was already aware of enormous talent in him since the early phase of his pro career, though he wasn't able to convert it into positive results right away. Unlike Hingis and Nadal, who both easily breezed through the competition at an early age, Federer waited at least half a decade to win his first Grand Slam in 2003.

 

[Front242]

He's not gonna just say it's him but it's obvious to anyone watching tennis. He has every shot in the book and more, eg. SABR and is the tweener maestro. And no one to date has been able to re-invent themselves to the extent he has, still at the top of the game against guys half his age thanks to more aggressive, first strike tennis and a greatly improved backhand. The other guys his age have barely adapted at all and play the same games they always did and that's why they've stagnated or retired already. His tennis also looks so effortless by comparison so it's a non discussion imo. He was just being PC

 

[Carol]

Without any doubts its Federer.

Why? because he has much better serve and then can do more free points on HC and grass than Rafa but definitely NOT on clay? come one, each one has their own abilities depending the stroke besides they are trying to improve along the years of their career. Also one thing is to have more talent or to have better head. I consider Muzz a smart player, his game is like tthe chess but at the same time he can't be too consistent and one of the reason is his carácter which goes against him when he gets mad, with others players sometimes it works better (Novak or McEnroe) but not with him. Also I give a lot of credit to Nadal to have the same coach during all his career been able to choose whoever could help him even more like the others players are constantly trying to do changing coaches to improve their game and he never made it until this year, it means that he has enough talent.

 

[Front242]

^ Or it could mean he's stubborn, refuses to change. He definitely should have cut down on the grinding and stopped staying 15 feet behind the baseline. That doesn't show a high tennis IQ.

 

[Carol]

Fed said it was Rafa. YOu wouldn't want to go against what Fed said would you?

Pasted in from MTF, but the original is in Tennis Magazine:

Roger Federer news update: Swiss thinks he wasn't as talented as Rafael Nadal, Martina Hingis and Tiger Woods

Former world's no.1 Roger Federer thinks while he was oozing with potential in the early years of his tennis career he wasn't as prodigious as fellow tennis players Rafael Nadal, Martina Hingis and pro golfer Tiger Woods.

Tennis Magazine had an opportunity to interview Federer, who is currently training hard after suffering a knee injury a month ago.

According to the 34-year Swiss, he was already aware of enormous talent in him since the early phase of his pro career, though he wasn't able to convert it into positive results right away. Unlike Hingis and Nadal, who both easily breezed through the competition at an early age, Federer waited at least half a decade to win his first Grand Slam in 2003.

Fed said it was Rafa. YOu wouldn't want to go against what Fed said would you?

Pasted in from MTF, but the original is in Tennis Magazine:

Roger Federer news update: Swiss thinks he wasn't as talented as Rafael Nadal, Martina Hingis and Tiger Woods

Former world's no.1 Roger Federer thinks while he was oozing with potential in the early years of his tennis career he wasn't as prodigious as fellow tennis players Rafael Nadal, Martina Hingis and pro golfer Tiger Woods.

Tennis Magazine had an opportunity to interview Federer, who is currently training hard after suffering a knee injury a month ago.

According to the 34-year Swiss, he was already aware of enormous talent in him since the early phase of his pro career, though he wasn't able to convert it into positive results right away. Unlike Hingis and Nadal, who both easily breezed through the competition at an early age, Federer waited at least half a decade to win his first Grand Slam in 2003.

And Rafa says the same about Roger......hmmm too much diplomacy between both

 

[The Strokes]

And Rafa says the same about Roger......hmmm too much diplomacy between both

Does he still?
I know Rafa said that up till a point, maybe 2013? Then Rafa started calling Fed "one of the alltime greats" as did many commies and pundits that year, when it looked like Rafa was better. Then in 2015 they all changed their minds again, now it was Djok; I think at that point Some were calling the Djok the GOAT, others saying "three alltime greats" then AO it was Fed again, after FO "two alltime greats"

It's really a definitive concept!

OK but let's not stir up that tired dead dog--I just had to poke some fun at it--because now there's a Big 4 free 1000 final about to start with Baby Fed and Just Baby. LOL

This should be fun. Dimi better not collapse.

 

[herios]

I hope Grigor wins

 

[The Strokes]

So far, looks like I thought it would:
Nick acing his way through, Dimi playing his way through
2 DFs from Dimi in last game worrying

 

[herios]

Grigor breaks!