I have a problem, his name is Rafael Nadal

[brokenshoelace]

Having watched them in Madrid (I am aware it is not the same) , I am putting my money on Kei to be a candidate to bother Rafa at RG should they meet.

There's zero chance of that happening. Kei is way too small and doesn't have enough fire power. He takes the ball early but given his size he will be forced to go for too much. He also won't physically hold up. There are two matches I really want to see at the FO next year just based on what I think are false knee jerk reactions to isolated matches: Rafa vs Stan and Rafa vs kei. Neither will be competitive.

Everyone.. remember this certainty and copy this into the RG chat if it's refuted! :laydownlaughing

Absolutely. Notice, I rarely stick my neck out like that when it comes to Nadal. But I am absolutely certain these two would have no chance at RG. A terrible match-up is a terrible match-up, and it's going to take way more than that to stop Nadal in Paris.

 

[TsarMatt]

There's zero chance of that happening. Kei is way too small and doesn't have enough fire power. He takes the ball early but given his size he will be forced to go for too much. He also won't physically hold up. There are two matches I really want to see at the FO next year just based on what I think are false knee jerk reactions to isolated matches: Rafa vs Stan and Rafa vs kei. Neither will be competitive.

That makes zero sense, since Kei already proved he can bother Rafa on clay. In fact everyone here acknowledges Madrid was his, before the injury. Notice, I did not say he would WIN against Rafa at RG. I said he is a candidate to BOTHER him. If you think there is zero chance of that, you might have missed his improvement in the last couple of years.

No you're right it makes zero sense. The fact that the h2h is 7-0 in Nadal's favor, with Nishikori taking a grand total of two sets, coupled with the fact that Nishikori is physically fragile, lacks a huge serve, lacks the ability to create his own fire power (at least compared to the top 10), relies on taking the ball early which is extremely difficult to do at the FO against Nadal given how high the ball is bouncing, AND the fact that there FO meeting in 2013 resulted in a straight set beat down, is absolutely irrelevant in face of irrefutable data in the form of Nishkori winning a set against Nadal in Madrid when Rafa was playing his worst tennis of the season. You're right, that makes zero sense.

I don't care how improved Nishikori is. We're talking about Nadal at the French Open. Please, let's list the players who have bothered Nadal at the FO in 10 years because I'm pretty sure there's only a handful, and none of them are 5 ft 10 who's entire game revolves around taking the ball early and clean. Nishikori cannot create his own power like say, Soderling or Djokovic, and he lacks a big serve like Isner. Am I missing anyone who's bothered Nadal at RG? Because that's about it.

Yeah sorry, I'm not putting too much stock in a guy taking a set off Nadal at a non major clay event. Otherwise, we might as well hype up Nicolas Almagro and David Ferrer as guys who could trouble Nadal at Roland Garros since, you know, they actually beat him this year.

I sort of agree with Murat, but I also see your point, especially when it comes to the stats and whatnot. I mean, yeah, the likelihood of Kei defeating Nadal at Roland Garros in a best-of-5-set match is extremely thin, but I think Nishi could pose a threat to some degree. He could stretch it to 4 close sets or even 5. Remember their encounter at the AO this year? Rod Laver is a pretty slow court, and the way Kei played was beyond impressive. His fitness has improved greatly since, too. But hey, that's a different Slam on a different surface.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

BS, I am aware of their past. I am making my assumption based on the last clay match I have seen them play, and also on the upward trajectory of Kei's game. Sure he is fragile, but my assumption that he can bother Nadal at RG is assuming he is healthy.

Have you seen the first set and a half of the Madrid match between them ? Kei did not let him play at all, period. He dominated everything , took every ball early, finished points quick. If he can do that there, he has the potential to do it again and maybe take a set at RG , and in my book, that qualifies as bothering Nadal.

Again, nobody is talking about beating Nadal, just causing problems.

 

[Front242]

Given their respective rankings I presume they could only play on Chatrier? Plenty of guys out there could cause Nadal trouble on Lenglen on a cold day as it's night and day difference and a much faster court and given that the weather in Paris is crap the last few years it's not as straightforward as all that except for matches on Chatrier. Even then he was far from impressive for much of last year's RG imo. Only for Ferrer admitting he gave up he had a good shot in that match in the quarters against him and Nadal played no one good before that. And yes I'm including Thiem in no one good 'cos he isn't any challenge to the top guys yet.

 

[brokenshoelace]

BS, I am aware of their past. I am making my assumption based on the last clay match I have seen them play, and also on the upward trajectory of Kei's game. Sure he is fragile, but my assumption that he can bother Nadal at RG is assuming he is healthy.

Have you seen the first set and a half of the Madrid match between them ? Kei did not let him play at all, period. He dominated everything , took every ball early, finished points quick. If he can do that there, he has the potential to do it again and maybe take a set at RG , and in my book, that qualifies as bothering Nadal.

Again, nobody is talking about beating Nadal, just causing problems.

I am not talking about Kei beating Nadal either. I'm talking about causing problems. Forget the H2H for a second since some of those matches occurred before Kei's improvement. Even Davydenko, who has probably given Nadal more match-up nightmares than anyone on hards, never really trouble Nadal on clay because, as long as Nadal is not feeding you short balls the way he was in Madrid this year, you're just not going to hit the ball cleanly enough and with enough consistency to handle him when you're 5 ft 10. I don't see how this is anything but a nightmare match-up for Kei. It's going to be one of those match-ups where Nadal doesn't even need to do anything special beside playing with depth, and you're going to see Kei hit a great backhand CC winner followed by two unforced errors for the duration of the match.

I don't think people realize how terrible this is on paper for Kei. He can't even rely on his serve to set up one two punches and get cheap points since it's so streaky and on average, not that big.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Given their respective rankings I presume they could only play on Chatrier? Plenty of guys out there could cause Nadal trouble on Lenglen on a cold day as it's night and day difference and a much faster court and given that the weather in Paris is crap the last few years it's not as straightforward as all that except for matches on Chatrier. Even then he was far from impressive for much of last year's RG imo. Only for Ferrer admitting he gave up he had a good shot in that match in the quarters against him and Nadal played no one good before that. And yes I'm including Thiem in no one good 'cos he isn't any challenge to the top guys yet.

On average, you're not going to play anyone good before the 4th round if you're a top seed. Let's get that out of the way.

I like theory match-making as much as the next guy but please name me the "plenty of guys" who can cause Nadal trouble on Lenglen. I agree with you that they'd have a better chance on that court than Chatrier, but I'm curious to know who these guys are. I'm also curious in defining "trouble." Taking a set? More? Have a chance at winning?

Because the above seems to state: Plenty of guys can cause Nadal trouble at the FO if:

A) He's playing as badly as he was this year (when he still won it anyway).
B) The match is on Lenglen (where the majority of his matches won't be taking place)
C) The weather is cold.

That's already a lot of ifs. Hence the 9 FO titles.

 

[Front242]

Given their respective rankings I presume they could only play on Chatrier? Plenty of guys out there could cause Nadal trouble on Lenglen on a cold day as it's night and day difference and a much faster court and given that the weather in Paris is crap the last few years it's not as straightforward as all that except for matches on Chatrier. Even then he was far from impressive for much of last year's RG imo. Only for Ferrer admitting he gave up he had a good shot in that match in the quarters against him and Nadal played no one good before that. And yes I'm including Thiem in no one good 'cos he isn't any challenge to the top guys yet.

On average, you're not going to play anyone good before the 4th round if you're a top seed. Let's get that out of the way.

I like theory match-making as much as the next guy but please name me the "plenty of guys" who can cause Nadal trouble on Lenglen. I agree with you that they'd have a better chance on that court than Chatrier, but I'm curious to know who these guys are. I'm also curious in defining "trouble." Taking a set? More? Have a chance at winning?

Because the above seems to state: Plenty of guys can cause Nadal trouble at the FO if:

A) He's playing as badly as he was this year (when he still won it anyway).
B) The match is on Lenglen (where the majority of his matches won't be taking place)
C) The weather is cold.

That's already a lot of ifs. Hence the 9 FO titles.

Nadal hasn't been particularly impressive at RG in the last 3 years and yes I know he still won but he was there for the taking, just that no one cleaned up their game enough to maintain the form to do so. 2011 he was very much there for the taking but luckily for him he got his preferred match for the final and even then Roger gave him a tough match except for that crap 4th set, 2012 Novak was frankly pretty damn crap the first 2 sets of the final and double faulted away a set and the match as in Rome the month before, 2013 was anyone's match in the semi and the final was one way traffic as that wasn't one of Ferrer's better performances and even when he has one of his better performances like this year he admits he gave up after a set and 4-4 when he lost serve, hardly the mentality needed to win. And finally this year the final was a mediocre performance from both Novak and Rafa with the former puking due to a virus at one point and both of them physically wrecked in set 4. That more than anything was Novak's chance but he didn't feel great that day, neither of them did and Rafa said if Novak had won set 4 he'd likely have won but we'll never know.

As to who could trouble Nadal on Lenglen, any big guy who can hit hard through the court has a chance of an upset on a coolish day as Brands proved. Gulbis on a good day has given Nadal a hard time everywhere and at Rome too and a good serving performance and clean match from him would be tough for Nadal on Lenglen. If he wasn't out so long and physically in good nick Del Potro could be tricky on Lenglen and if he plays this year at RG he'll be either unseeded or seeded very low so they could meet. Basically anyone with punishing hard groundstrokes could prove troublesome on the faster Lenglen court if the temperature is below 18C or thereabouts. Actually, regarding Del Potro, if he plays his way into form but doesn't manage to get his ranking up much before RG he's gonna be tough for anyone he faces.

And btw, trouble means chance of winning.

 

[Front242]

BS, I am aware of their past. I am making my assumption based on the last clay match I have seen them play, and also on the upward trajectory of Kei's game. Sure he is fragile, but my assumption that he can bother Nadal at RG is assuming he is healthy.

Have you seen the first set and a half of the Madrid match between them ? Kei did not let him play at all, period. He dominated everything , took every ball early, finished points quick. If he can do that there, he has the potential to do it again and maybe take a set at RG , and in my book, that qualifies as bothering Nadal.

Again, nobody is talking about beating Nadal, just causing problems.

I am not talking about Kei beating Nadal either. I'm talking about causing problems. Forget the H2H for a second since some of those matches occurred before Kei's improvement. Even Davydenko, who has probably given Nadal more match-up nightmares than anyone on hards, never really trouble Nadal on clay because, as long as Nadal is not feeding you short balls the way he was in Madrid this year, you're just not going to hit the ball cleanly enough and with enough consistency to handle him when you're 5 ft 10. I don't see how this is anything but a nightmare match-up for Kei. It's going to be one of those match-ups where Nadal doesn't even need to do anything special beside playing with depth, and you're going to see Kei hit a great backhand CC winner followed by two unforced errors for the duration of the match.

I don't think people realize how terrible this is on paper for Kei. He can't even rely on his serve to set up one two punches and get cheap points since it's so streaky and on average, not that big.

Nadal and Davydenko played 3 matches on clay, 2 of which Nadal won pretty easily but the 2007 Rome match was far from easy. A great match I remember well to this day.

 

[brokenshoelace]

BS, I am aware of their past. I am making my assumption based on the last clay match I have seen them play, and also on the upward trajectory of Kei's game. Sure he is fragile, but my assumption that he can bother Nadal at RG is assuming he is healthy.

Have you seen the first set and a half of the Madrid match between them ? Kei did not let him play at all, period. He dominated everything , took every ball early, finished points quick. If he can do that there, he has the potential to do it again and maybe take a set at RG , and in my book, that qualifies as bothering Nadal.

Again, nobody is talking about beating Nadal, just causing problems.

I am not talking about Kei beating Nadal either. I'm talking about causing problems. Forget the H2H for a second since some of those matches occurred before Kei's improvement. Even Davydenko, who has probably given Nadal more match-up nightmares than anyone on hards, never really trouble Nadal on clay because, as long as Nadal is not feeding you short balls the way he was in Madrid this year, you're just not going to hit the ball cleanly enough and with enough consistency to handle him when you're 5 ft 10. I don't see how this is anything but a nightmare match-up for Kei. It's going to be one of those match-ups where Nadal doesn't even need to do anything special beside playing with depth, and you're going to see Kei hit a great backhand CC winner followed by two unforced errors for the duration of the match.

I don't think people realize how terrible this is on paper for Kei. He can't even rely on his serve to set up one two punches and get cheap points since it's so streaky and on average, not that big.

Nadal and Davydenko played 3 matches on clay, 2 of which Nadal won pretty easily but the 2007 Rome match was far from easy. A great match I remember well to this day.

They played 4 matches on clay. Other than the one you mentioned, the other 3 finished 6-3 6-2, 6-3- 6-2 and 6-2 6-2. Yeah, I'm going ahead and assume Rafa managed just fine.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Nadal hasn't been particularly impressive at RG in the last 3 years

And yet, not only did he win, but was only taken to a fifth set once, by Djokovic, after failing to serve out the match in the 4th.

he was there for the taking, just that no one cleaned up their game enough to maintain the form to do so.

Gee I wonder why.

2011 he was very much there for the taking but luckily for him he got his preferred match for the final and even then Roger gave him a tough match except for that crap 4th set, 2012 Novak was frankly pretty damn crap the first 2 sets of the final and double faulted away a set and the match as in Rome the month before, 2013 was anyone's match in the semi and the final was one way traffic as that wasn't one of Ferrer's better performances and even when he has one of his better performances like this year he admits he gave up after a set and 4-4 when he lost serve, hardly the mentality needed to win. And finally this year the final was a mediocre performance from both Novak and Rafa with the former puking due to a virus at one point and both of them physically wrecked in set 4. That more than anything was Novak's chance but he didn't feel great that day, neither of them did and Rafa said if Novak had won set 4 he'd likely have won but we'll never know.

So basically you're saying the one man who can beat Nadal at Roland Garros is...Djokovic? Yeah, that's kinda what we've all been saying all along. Unless you're seriously suggesting Ferrer or Federer.

As to who could trouble Nadal on Lenglen, any big guy who can hit hard through the court has a chance of an upset on a coolish day as Brands proved.

So, other than Soderling coming out of retirement, since some still seem to hold out hope for that (the same Soderling who proceeded to get his clock cleaned by Nadal at FO in 2010 and 2011), who matches that description? Del Potro following his 19393th return from his 282828th injury? Berdych? Because something tells me he hasn't exactly done well vs Rafa. Tsonga? I'm running out of names.

Gulbis on a good day has given Nadal a hard time everywhere and at Rome too and a good serving performance and clean match from him would be tough for Nadal on Lenglen.

See, I actually agree with that, but...I'll get back to that a little later.

If he wasn't out so long and physically in good nick Del Potro could be tricky on Lenglen and if he plays this year at RG he'll be either unseeded or seeded very low so they could meet.

Another "if." Well, hate to break it to you, but Del Potro HAS been out for so long so basically that rules him out. We'll ignore the part where Nadal moves him around like a yoyo, too.

Basically anyone with punishing hard groundstrokes could prove troublesome on the faster Lenglen court if the temperature is below 18C or thereabouts.

Basically another vague argument that revolves around theory (describing a player) but starts to sound way less likely once you actually look at the players who match the description you mentioned. I mean, you actually tried to name a few and ended up with Gulbis and a Del Potro who needs to a) come back form injury b) play himself into form c) play himself into the best form of his life to actually stand a chance to do what only one man has managed in ten years d) happen to play Nadal on Lenglen and e) happen to play Nadal on Lenglen when the temperature below 18 degrees. Yup, sounds simple enough, and "anyone with punishing ground strokes can do it"...that's why you proceeded to narrow down the conditions and circumstances to some of the most selective anyone could hope for.

And btw, trouble means chance of winning.

Oh, in which case, disregard what I said about agreeing about you re: Gulbis.

And, basically, the answer is... Djokovic. Which is what everyone has been saying all along.

 

[Front242]

Nadal hasn't been particularly impressive at RG in the last 3 years

And yet, not only did he win, but was only taken to a fifth set once, by Djokovic, after failing to serve out the match in the 4th.

Newsflash. Often a tight 3 set match could be almost as close as a 5 set one or even more so if the 5th set was a blowout. An example would be Nadal v Darcis, which could've easily ended as straight sets to Nadal as much as the reverse or better still the Wimbledon match between Berdych and Gulbis where Gulbis won in three straight tiebreaks. A few points decided the outcome there rather than a potential 5th set which could've been totally one sided.

he was there for the taking, just that no one cleaned up their game enough to maintain the form to do so.

Gee I wonder why.

My point is he used to be so much better in the past and win more convincingly without dropping sets and now loses sets to nobodies in the early rounds, almost going down 2 sets to 0 to Brands, losing a set to Klizan etc. If the guys who lost those matches rewatched the matches they lost they should feel gutted 'cos they didn't really need to do much to win as Nadal was far from impressive and it was more their levels going down than his drastically changing in any way.

2011 he was very much there for the taking but luckily for him he got his preferred match for the final and even then Roger gave him a tough match except for that crap 4th set, 2012 Novak was frankly pretty damn crap the first 2 sets of the final and double faulted away a set and the match as in Rome the month before, 2013 was anyone's match in the semi and the final was one way traffic as that wasn't one of Ferrer's better performances and even when he has one of his better performances like this year he admits he gave up after a set and 4-4 when he lost serve, hardly the mentality needed to win. And finally this year the final was a mediocre performance from both Novak and Rafa with the former puking due to a virus at one point and both of them physically wrecked in set 4. That more than anything was Novak's chance but he didn't feel great that day, neither of them did and Rafa said if Novak had won set 4 he'd likely have won but we'll never know.

So basically you're saying the one man who can beat Nadal at Roland Garros is...Djokovic? Yeah, that's kinda what we've all been saying all along. Unless you're seriously suggesting Ferrer or Federer.

Not in the slightest and that's why I said big hitters could potentially take him out on the faster Lenglen court in the early rounds. Roger had his best chance in 2011 and if he couldn't do it then he's hardly doing it when 4 years older in 2015. Ferrer had a really good chance this year but shamefully gave up after losing a mere service game at 4-4 in set 2 having won set 1 convincingly. That mentality will be why he'll never win anything big so forget him.

As to who could trouble Nadal on Lenglen, any big guy who can hit hard through the court has a chance of an upset on a coolish day as Brands proved.

So, other than Soderling coming out of retirement, since some still seem to hold out hope for that (the same Soderling who proceeded to get his clock cleaned by Nadal at FO in 2010 and 2011), who matches that description? Del Potro following his 19393th return from his 282828th injury? Berdych? Because something tells me he hasn't exactly done well vs Rafa. Tsonga? I'm running out of names.

I didn't name Berdych or Tsonga for a reason, namely 'cos they haven't a hope. Berdych at his best may win a set but Nadal is a nightmare match up for Tsonga on clay and also Tsonga is 30 next year and he's really starting to get more recurring knee injuries of late so he hasn't a hope.

Gulbis on a good day has given Nadal a hard time everywhere and at Rome too and a good serving performance and clean match from him would be tough for Nadal on Lenglen.

See, I actually agree with that, but...I'll get back to that a little later.

If he wasn't out so long and physically in good nick Del Potro could be tricky on Lenglen and if he plays this year at RG he'll be either unseeded or seeded very low so they could meet.

Another "if." Well, hate to break it to you, but Del Potro HAS been out for so long so basically that rules him out. We'll ignore the part where Nadal moves him around like a yoyo, too.

Players being out a long time and yet still surprising people is nothing new. Were you predicting Nadal to win as much as he did in 2010 or 2013? I'm pretty sure the answer is no so there's your answer to that. While it's easy to predict Del Potro will make no impact he'd have 5+ months prep on tour before that. No one predicted Clijsters would make such an impact on her return after a lengthy break but I actually made a mint backing her to win the USO twice and yes, I know the WTA is far different than the ATP, but surprises happen. Del Potro may return to the tour in poor form and take most of the year to reach a decent level but who knows really. I still wouldn't imagine any top player would fancy playing him in the first few rounds of any slam.

Basically anyone with punishing hard groundstrokes could prove troublesome on the faster Lenglen court if the temperature is below 18C or thereabouts.

Basically another vague argument that revolves around theory (describing a player) but starts to sound way less likely once you actually look at the players who match the description you mentioned. I mean, you actually tried to name a few and ended up with Gulbis and a Del Potro who needs to a) come back form injury b) play himself into form c) play himself into the best form of his life to actually stand a chance to do what only one man has managed in ten years d) happen to play Nadal on Lenglen and e) happen to play Nadal on Lenglen when the temperature below 18 degrees. Yup, sounds simple enough, and "anyone with punishing ground strokes can do it"...that's why you proceeded to narrow down the conditions and circumstances to some of the most selective anyone could hope for.

Regarding the weather it's nothing vague at all. Climate is changing worldwide year to year and cool temps in May in Paris and elsewhere seem to be the norm the last few years so there's a high chance of cool weather in May for the start of RG. If Murray of all people who is not known for his skills on clay can take it to Nadal in Rome (winning a set 6-1 no less) in cool conditions there a number of way more aggressive players besides him who can potentially beat Nadal in these cooler, damp conditions.

And btw, trouble means chance of winning.

Oh, in which case, disregard what I said about agreeing about you re: Gulbis.

And, basically, the answer is... Djokovic. Which is what everyone has been saying all along.

Finally, in line with this thread, I'd have to disagree with Djokovic's own admission of his problem being Nadal. The main problem for Novak imo is between his ears. His focus goes to complete crap inexplicably out of nowhere for the last few years as we've all witnessed, and aside from Wimbledon 2014 where he kept a high level pretty much all match (that was very much the exception), he's shown poor lack of focus at key points in slam semis and finals and it's cost him dearly. He more than definitely has the game and approach to beat Nadal and his dips in focus at the wrong time are his main hurdle and in fact are what he hired Becker for in the first place. Fix that and he has a very good shot.

 

[Kieran]

^^ You realise Nole has played Rafa seven times over five on clay - 6 of them at RG - and he's only won 4 sets?

I hope this doesn't become a new narrative, that the match is on Nole's racket and Rafa only wins because Djoker can't get it together between the ears.

In Paris, the match is on Rafa's racket, no matter who he plays. He'll have to have a bad day there for anyone to beat him...

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

^^ You realise Nole has played Rafa seven times over five on clay - 6 of them at RG - and he's only won 4 sets?

I hope this doesn't become a new narrative, that the match is on Nole's racket and Rafa only wins because Djoker can't get it together between the ears.

In Paris, the match is on Rafa's racket, no matter who he plays. He'll have to have a bad day there for anyone to beat him...

I am quite amused by some of the poster's thoughts regarding Rafa and RG.I mean one just has to look at his stats... this year Rafa's clay results have been sub par for him,still once he gets to his'back yard' he just comes into his own.I have had the pleasure of watching Rafa live at RG over the years,you really have to watch him live to appreciate what he does on the clay.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Newsflash. Often a tight 3 set match could be almost as close as a 5 set one or even more so if the 5th set was a blowout. An example would be Nadal v Darcis, which could've easily ended as straight sets to Nadal as much as the reverse or better still the Wimbledon match between Berdych and Gulbis where Gulbis won in three straight tiebreaks. A few points decided the outcome there rather than a potential 5th set which could've been totally one sided.

This has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've read around here. No, a straight set match can NEVER, under any circumstances be as close as a 5 setter. I can't believe I'm actually having to explain the following:

Let's see, in a 5 setter, the losing player actually wins two sets, while in a straight setter, he doesn't. It doesn't matter whether or not all 3 sets in the straight setter are close, because he LOST them. So in other words, after two sets in a straight setter, he's down two sets to love, even if they end on a tie-break. Do you think he goes "I fancy my chances here, both sets were close"? No. By contrast, after two sets in a five setter, unless he went down two sets to love before a comeback, or won the first two, both players usually trade sets. It doesn't matter whether both sets ended 6-0, they are tied a set apiece and are both are two sets away from victory. By definition, this is closer.

There is no close straight set match, ever. There's a COMPETITIVE straight set match, which is vastly different.

The Nadal vs. Darcis analogy is flawed because there's no telling how the match would have unfolded if Nadal won the first set. You're assuming every set would have went exactly the same way subsequently but with Nadal winning them. It doesn't necessarily work that way.

My point is he used to be so much better in the past and win more convincingly without dropping sets and now loses sets to nobodies in the early rounds, almost going down 2 sets to 0 to Brands, losing a set to Klizan etc. If the guys who lost those matches rewatched the matches they lost they should feel gutted 'cos they didn't really need to do much to win as Nadal was far from impressive and it was more their levels going down than his drastically changing in any way.

Nadal isn't as good as he used to be on clay. That much is generally accepted. The problem with the examples you're giving though, is all you have to do is look at the names you're mentioning: Brands and Klizan. Yeah, there's a reason these guys are ranked as low as they are. And a no name surprisingly making a competitive match against a huge favorite only to be unable to keep it up is hardly a novelty. In fact, it's pretty much the norm whenever these no names are able to make it competitive. Otherwise they'd win more matches. Now, if it had been a top 10 player who went up a set against Nadal and could have won the second, it would be more relevant to bring that up because theoretically, a top 10 player should be able to maintain his level.

Top seeds struggling early happens all the time. Nadal struggling with Klizan or Brands isn't necessarily an indicator of much.

Not in the slightest and that's why I said big hitters could potentially take him out on the faster Lenglen court in the early rounds. Roger had his best chance in 2011 and if he couldn't do it then he's hardly doing it when 4 years older in 2015. Ferrer had a really good chance this year but shamefully gave up after losing a mere service game at 4-4 in set 2 having won set 1 convincingly. That mentality will be why he'll never win anything big so forget him.

Yes, and the big hitters you were able to name were Gulbis (lol) and a Del Potro who needs about 1010202 things to go in his favor. Got you. Again, you're still unable to come up with names. Only description of players.

I can easily do the same: A huge serve with phenomenal movement and huge ground strokes who keeps unforced errors to a minimum and possesses great counter-punching could beat Nadal on clay. There, problem solved. Except that description fits zero players.

You can't name a single big hitter who's a serious threat. Tsonga? Berdych? Injured Del Potro? Seriously, who?

I don't care when Roger had his best chance (it wasn't in 2011 by the way, it was when he was in his prime), and what Ferrer lacks mentally. Those are just more reasons why these two are not realistic options which you acknowledged above, so there's no point in bringing them up when assessing who can trouble Nadal at the FO.

.

I didn't name Berdych or Tsonga for a reason, namely 'cos they haven't a hope. Berdych at his best may win a set but Nadal is a nightmare match up for Tsonga on clay and also Tsonga is 30 next year and he's really starting to get more recurring knee injuries of late so he hasn't a hope.

Agreed, but that kinda reinforces my point. Who are these big hitters if the best big hitters on the tour stand no chance?

Players being out a long time and yet still surprising people is nothing new. Were you predicting Nadal to win as much as he did in 2010 or 2013? I'm pretty sure the answer is no so there's your answer to that.

Leeeeeeeeet me stop you right there: Del Potro is no Nadal buddy. Not by a long shot. Irrelevant comparison. When was the last time Del Potro did anything of note? Oh what's that? 2009? Yeah, that's what I thought. So 5 years ago (six, by the time Roland Garros is here). Yeah, there's a reason I'm so quickly dismissing him.

Essentially what you're saying is: even though there's about 1% chance of this happening, there's a chance nonetheless. That reminds me of that Jim Carrey line from the first Dumb and Dumber movie. Because realistically, what are the odds that Del Potro will A) Return to form B) Return to form as quick as the FO C) Actually be better than ever, which is what it would take for him to beat Nadal at the FO (his "form" wouldn't be good enough) D) Actually be better than ever as early as the FO. You see why it's so unlikely? Might as well discuss Nadal getting struck by lightning.

While it's easy to predict Del Potro will make no impact he'd have 5+ months prep on tour before that. No one predicted Clijsters would make such an impact on her return after a lengthy break but I actually made a mint backing her to win the USO twice and yes, I know the WTA is far different than the ATP, but surprises happen.

You pretty much answered your own argument. WTA =/= ATP.

Also, what baffles me is what you're ignoring: It's not just about Del Potro returning to form. It's about doing what only one man has done in 10 French Opens. I don't care what Clijsters did, she didn't have to face the equivalent of Nadal at the FO, not even close.

Regarding the weather it's nothing vague at all. Climate is changing worldwide year to year and cool temps in May in Paris and elsewhere seem to be the norm the last few years so there's a high chance of cool weather in May for the start of RG. If Murray of all people who is not known for his skills on clay can take it to Nadal in Rome (winning a set 6-1 no less) in cool conditions there a number of way more aggressive players besides him who can potentially beat Nadal in these cooler, damp conditions.

Rome, last I checked, is no Roland Garros. There's a reason why, in 10 FO's, you can literally count the amount of matches Nadal was in jeopardy in on one hand. The idea is not Nadal losing on clay. This has been happening with more frequency. The idea is Nadal losing at the FO. Which has only happened once. I'm sure you realize the difference.

I'm sure Nadal played dozens of matches in cool conditions at the FO, unless worldwide climate has started to change this year (is this reverse global warming?), and I'm sure you can't name a single match he was in danger of losing in said conditions.

Finally, in line with this thread, I'd have to disagree with Djokovic's own admission of his problem being Nadal. The main problem for Novak imo is between his ears. His focus goes to complete crap inexplicably out of nowhere for the last few years as we've all witnessed, and aside from Wimbledon 2014 where he kept a high level pretty much all match (that was very much the exception), he's shown poor lack of focus at key points in slam semis and finals and it's cost him dearly. He more than definitely has the game and approach to beat Nadal and his dips in focus at the wrong time are his main hurdle and in fact are what he hired Becker for in the first place. Fix that and he has a very good shot.

Lol, back to that lazy excuse. Yeah, I'm sure it's "inexplicable" why everyone loses focus against Nadal at the FO. It must be the same reason why you think Federer's level "inexplicably" drops against Nadal.

 

[Front242]

^^ You realise Nole has played Rafa seven times over five on clay - 6 of them at RG - and he's only won 4 sets?

I hope this doesn't become a new narrative, that the match is on Nole's racket and Rafa only wins because Djoker can't get it together between the ears.

In Paris, the match is on Rafa's racket, no matter who he plays. He'll have to have a bad day there for anyone to beat him...

I am quite amused by some of the poster's thoughts regarding Rafa and RG.I mean one just has to look at his stats... this year Rafa's clay results have been sub par for him,still once he gets to his'back yard' he just comes into his own.I have had the pleasure of watching Rafa live at RG over the years,you really have to watch him live to appreciate what he does on the clay.

Except he didn't come into his own. He was sub par in many of the matches he played including the final. Yeah, he still won but in the past 3 years his performance has been way down despite winning and that's why he's beatable if the right person shows up and plays like a winner instead of a total loser.

 

[Kieran]

^^ You realise Nole has played Rafa seven times over five on clay - 6 of them at RG - and he's only won 4 sets?

I hope this doesn't become a new narrative, that the match is on Nole's racket and Rafa only wins because Djoker can't get it together between the ears.

In Paris, the match is on Rafa's racket, no matter who he plays. He'll have to have a bad day there for anyone to beat him...

I am quite amused by some of the poster's thoughts regarding Rafa and RG.I mean one just has to look at his stats... this year Rafa's clay results have been sub par for him,still once he gets to his'back yard' he just comes into his own.I have had the pleasure of watching Rafa live at RG over the years,you really have to watch him live to appreciate what he does on the clay.

Except he didn't come into his own. He was sub par in many of the matches he played including the final. Yeah, he still won but in the past 3 years his performance has been way down despite winning and that's why he's beatable if the right person shows up and plays like a winner instead of a total loser.

He's been better than the field. If somebody plays better, then maybe so will Rafa. It's always on Rafa's racket in Paris. I'm sure you didn't mean to suggest that if Nole gets "between his ears sorted" he'll be favourite...

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

^^ You realise Nole has played Rafa seven times over five on clay - 6 of them at RG - and he's only won 4 sets?

I hope this doesn't become a new narrative, that the match is on Nole's racket and Rafa only wins because Djoker can't get it together between the ears.

In Paris, the match is on Rafa's racket, no matter who he plays. He'll have to have a bad day there for anyone to beat him...

I am quite amused by some of the poster's thoughts regarding Rafa and RG.I mean one just has to look at his stats... this year Rafa's clay results have been sub par for him,still once he gets to his'back yard' he just comes into his own.I have had the pleasure of watching Rafa live at RG over the years,you really have to watch him live to appreciate what he does on the clay.

Except he didn't come into his own. He was sub par in many of the matches he played including the final. Yeah, he still won but in the past 3 years his performance has been way down despite winning and that's why he's beatable if the right person shows up and plays like a winner instead of a total loser.

Well I am yet to see a player win against Rafa at RG in 5 sets? please look at his over record at RG for starters.He is the Greatest Clay Court player I have seen,Borg was my idol,I never thought anyone could take Borg's place on clay,Vilas another good dirtballer,until this young kid won his first RG title in 2005,I was there live by the way.Of course I am not delusional to think that one day Rafa will be beaten,Novak is too good of a clay player not to win RG.Still lets give credit where it is due,I doubt we will Ever see another player like Rafa on clay,well not in my lifetime,quite frankly there aren't any younger players coming through at the present time on clay that have caught my eye.

 

[Front242]

Well he doesn't need any credit since he won the past 3 years so that's credit enough but I wasn't impressed by his form and doubtless many Nadal fans weren't either but he still won so frankly most people won't care as the win is all that counts. Soderling didn't even need 5 sets btw. Someone could just as easily win in 3 or 4 if they played well. Brands came up just short of a 2 set lead and he's hardly anything special. In fact I've barely seen him play since so if someone relatively unheard of can almost win the first 2 sets then Nadal's level is clearly not that high anymore and he's therefore quite beatable and that was my point.

 

[Kieran]

Does the fact that he's still won while playing poor not tell you something?

 

[Front242]

^ Yeah it tells me what I've already written above. Guys like Brands and to a lesser degree Klizan should feel gutted if they rewatched those matches they lost 'cos they didn't need to do all that much more to win. A botched volley messed up Brands' tiebreak or he may well have been close to going up 2 sets to zip.