Is Nadal declining ?

[Riotbeard]

You should not use clichés like that. Rafa has never defended any title away from clay
in his entire career. So, it best to say, if any one cannot defend, it will be Rafa.

The only horrible thing I can say in reply to this is, it's true! :lolz: :clap :laydownlaughing

But let's not write young Ralph off too quickly, folks. I'm seeing a lot of silliness above, akin to bandwagonism. We tend to be kneejerk on this forum: an unknown kid has a good tourney and we run polls on how many slams they'll get. I'm still getting giggles outta JJ.

The great Nadal has a slow year, and we get all the naysayers out, certain that his best is behind him.

His best may yet to be. I certainly don't see anything to fear for him, going forward, if his body holds up...

To say his best is behind him, might not yet be fact but is at least supported by patterns of how athletes develop. I don't think anybody is saying there isn't probably still great things ahead of him.

 

[Kieran]

I agree, Riotbeard, but I think people are kneejerking a bit. He was unfortunate in Oz, and he actually did better at Wimbo this year than last ( :snigger ) and I don't see any reason why he won't be as big a threat at the US Open and Oz the next time round again.

Remember, it's only a few months ago that threads were being run writing off Nole, after he lost in Oz and Federer beat him in Dubai...

 

[Riotbeard]

I agree, Riotbeard, but I think people are kneejerking a bit. He was unfortunate in Oz, and he actually did better at Wimbo this year than last ( :snigger ) and I don't see any reason why he won't be as big a threat at the US Open and Oz the next time round again.

Remember, it's only a few months ago that threads were being run writing off Nole, after he lost in Oz and Federer beat him in Dubai...

He is definitely the number 2 favorite for the USO and a case could be made for him being the favorite.

 

[El Dude]

The great Nadal has a slow year, and we get all the naysayers out, certain that his best is behind him.

His best may yet to be. I certainly don't see anything to fear for him, going forward, if his body holds up...

Kieran, I hate to say it but I don't see a lot of naysaying or knee-jerk reactions - no one is saying he is in steep decline (as far as I can tell), only that he probably has dropped a notch from his absolute peak. So maybe you're knee-jerking just a bit?

That said, I know you're Rafa's biggest fan, but isn't it a tad pollyanna-ish to think that his best might be yet before him? Do you actually see a scenario where we see greater dominance from Rafa than what we've already seen? Higher levels of play?[/i]

 

[shawnbm]

After the year he had in 2013, he would have to drop a notch or two, no? I mean, he won 2 majors, a handful of Masters events and another half dozen smaller tournaments on top of those. How could he not decline, even a little? That being said, he has fared more poorly in the smaller tournaments than I personally expected, but he is 28 now (?) and this is the time these things start to happen.

 

[El Dude]

Regarding the Serena comparison, there are some similarities. When you look at Rafa's career, even though he's been overall quite consistent, he's gone up and done in terms of overall dominance. Unlike Roger, whose very peak years were all consecutive (2004-07), Rafa's best are spread out (2008, 2010, 2013). Who knows, maybe he has another year of dominance left in him, in 2015? It would have to be then, I think, as the clock is ticking.

Also, I'd rank him as the second favorite in the US Open. I think it likely that we see a Novak-Rafa final, although I'd give Novak the edge on hard courts at this point. That said, you can never count Rafa out.

 

[Federberg]

The standards we hold these guys to. How can this even be a real question? For a start the data set is too small to have any significance. Secondly the guy just won a slam a few months back. Even if he didn't win another one for the next year and a half I would still have difficulty call the end. We are talking about a GOAT candidate here, a special special athlete.

 

[Kieran]

The great Nadal has a slow year, and we get all the naysayers out, certain that his best is behind him.

His best may yet to be. I certainly don't see anything to fear for him, going forward, if his body holds up...

Kieran, I hate to say it but I don't see a lot of naysaying or knee-jerk reactions - no one is saying he is in steep decline (as far as I can tell), only that he probably has dropped a notch from his absolute peak. So maybe you're knee-jerking just a bit?

That said, I know you're Rafa's biggest fan, but isn't it a tad pollyanna-ish to think that his best might be yet before him? Do you actually see a scenario where we see greater dominance from Rafa than what we've already seen? Higher levels of play?[/i]

Pollyanna-ish? :laydownlaughing

When people run threads like this, I instantly think of bandwagons. Like I say, we had one about Nole in February (I think) and now Nole is fine again, it's Rafa's turn. People are too quick to analyse these things wrongly, I would say. They look at what's happening now, and wonder if that's it. I think a fairer assessment comes from waiting, and looking longer term, while taking into account several factors. In Rafa's case, I think he's having a bad year. I also know his back affected him in oz, and after. Now - let's disregard that. But doesn't that still suggest that when he's back to himself, he's a threat everywhere - as much as he was as recently as six months ago?

No, not always.

But we have no reason to think in this case, there's evidence of deep-seated decline. We have evidence of poor form, but we've seen this before. We have no reason, however, to write him off. Now, I agree, the tone of the thread is balanced, but the idea of the thread is kneejerk. I should probably have addressed that to the OP rather than people in general.

There are different scenarios that can be seen occuring. One is, he just never gets to the heights again, a la McEnroe or Wilander. That's always a possibility. Players lose their urge and motivation and the slightest loss of intensity can be fatal. We've seen this happen even with top players recently, but they recovered.

Can I also see a scenario where there are greater levels of dominance? Of course. I give him a good shot at the next two majors, for example, and if he won them, we'd be back on the Nole thread again.

As for higher levels of play, I'll refer you to my reply in the 2008 v 2014 thread: how are these things being measured? In pure terms, Rafa's highest level was maybe 2010, but that didn't exclude him having a peerless HC year last year. This year, he may win the USO and WTF - but play at the lower level to last year. Nole's marriage might make him sappy with glee, and Rafa wins everything in sight - without having to play great.

There are many possible scenarios - both positive and negative - none of which are relevant until they happen. But I can definitely see one where his best is ahead of him, in terms of dominance. These things only seem possible in hindsight, but nobody after Oz in 2009, for example, would have predicted Roger winning 3 of the next 4 majors - and coming close in the one he lost...

 

[El Dude]

OK, good post Kieran - we're pretty much on the same page. Again, though, I don't see the excessive bandwagoning - even isabelle's original post wasn't all that harsh or knee-jerk.

I do think you're ignoring the age factor, and perhaps that's where the pollyanna comes in ;D. Certainly Rafa is a unique specimen, but his uniqueness may be offset by the wear and tear and physicality of his game so that, in the end it evens out and we may see normal aging patterns. What that would mean, as I've said, is another few years of a high level of play (plateau), with Slams sprinkled in, but probably no return to a 2010-level of dominance (e.g. three Slams), and probably serious decline some time in the 30-32 range.

But who knows? Rafa is always surprising us. I for one would love to see him, after his career winds down, rest up for a couple years and then come back and make a run at Roland Garros in his mid-30s. How sweet would that be?

 

[Kieran]

Brother, I don't even know who Pollyanna is.

The age factor is always one we have to look at. But then we look at how tennis players are coming to their prime later, and also, look at how ineffective the youngsters are in nudging this group aside. I agree - as players get older, they decline. This doesn't need to be said (okay, maybe to Cali it does ) but even still, Rafa had seven months away from the game which may have helped him prolong his career. Or maybe the effect was confined to last year. We'll see.

The scenarios as I outlined - none of them seem outlandish. You put Rafa in a major and he has a shot. And that should be the case for another couple of years.

And next year, with the extra week on grass, the Channel Slam becomes less prohibitive, and he gets an extra week to make the transition. I certainly am much more hopeful for Rafa going forward than I was this time last year - or the summer of 2012 when his withdrawals from tournaments were escalating towards near farce...

 

[El Dude]

Well Cali has a point in that we can see with Roger - at age 32 - he's capable of playing at a very high level for bits and spurts. But we also saw something at the Wimbledon final that we probably wouldn't have seen when he was 25 - he started missing shots and lost his serve in the 5th set, presumably due to fatigue. I also think it is clear that, with Roger, while he's done an amazing job at adjusting and compensating, there's no denying that his physical skills have eroded a bit.

One thing to consider about aging is motivation. I know Roger likes to say he's as motivated and works harder than ever before, but you've got to wonder about the psychological effect when he won his 15th Slam. He was out in open waters, and without Pete ahead of him, there wasn't that extra bit of incentive. I don't know if this has contributed to Roger's slowing down - as I said in the "multi-Slam thread" - I think he was simply eclipsed by a younger, hungrier, and eventually better generation of players. It happens to everyone. Professional sports is a game of millimeters - and if you lose just a bit of edge, you can lose a lot of ground (Or, if you gain just a bit of edge, you can take a massive step forward - which is what I think we're seeing with Dimitrov. The 2014 version isn't that different than 2013 physically, but he's a lot hungrier and more intense).

But if you add the two together - that Rafa is still chasing Roger for the Slam record AND the younger generation, while showing a bit more life of late, is still not much compared to what Roger had to deal with - then perhaps Rafa's decline will be slower and later than it might have been without those two factors.

 

[Kieran]

We'll see. cali's contention is that players don't pysically decline too much when they get older. I think Roger was remarkable in the final - but give him a tough semi to recuperate from and we'd see that he'd find this tougher to achieve than he would when he was 21. You and I would agree here, but Cali mightn't.

As for Rafa facing easier youngsters, well, when Roger was young, he faced a lot easier than he did before Rafa and Nole came along. He got a good head start. I find Rafa remarkable in that he's always had Roger - and then he had Nole. He's quite unique in having two huge historical rivals disturbing his peak. But he's still motoring. I'd agree about the youngsters now though, they seem to be backwards in coming forward. It's almost as if the achievements of Fedal - and to a lesser extent, Novak - intimidated them too much. They seem still in awe, whereas I would prefer they were less respectful.

But they can be less respectful all they want in about 3 or 4 years...

 

[El Dude]

My mention of Rafa facing easier youngsters wasn't to belittle his achievements now and going forward, or to prop up Roger, but merely to point out that Roger's sharpe decline in dominance after 2009 - the year he turned 28, like Rafa - may have been quickened because Rafa had come more fully into his own and Novak and Andy were rising. Rafa really came into his own in 2008, then was injured in 2009, then was at his best in 2010. Then you had Novak's great year in 2011, and then Andy joined the true elite in 2012. In other words, as Roger entered the natural plateau phase, he was also faced with three rising young studs who were entering their primes. In a way it makes his 2012 all the more impressive - he was number one for a time, and hanging with the best in the game as they were all within their peaks.

Now we have Rafa at a similar stage of his career, at least age-wise, as Roger in 2009. Yet while Roger had a 22-23 year old Rafa and a 21-22 year old Novak and Andy to face, there are no true equivalents for Rafa, no elite younger players - only a few who seem like they could be second tier talents. He does have Novak and Andy to face, but he's grown up with them; they are his generation, his peers - like Hewitt, Roddick, Nalbandian, and even Marat Safin for Roger (it is crazy to think that Safin is only a year and a half older than Roger - he's been gone so long). But the best young players on the rise are Raonic, Dimitrov, and Nishikori. I suppose we could throw in Nishikori, Gulbis, Janowicz, etc - but they're all a step down, I think, and/or older and probably have already peaked. Vesely, Thiem, and Kyrgios are all a bit younger and have yet to sniff the top 20.

To put it another way, Raonic/Dimitrov/Nishikori won't quicken Rafa's (and Novak's and Andy's) decline as much as Rafa/Novak/Andy did for Roger. I do have hopes that as Dimitrov enters his peak, and those three enter their plateau, that he'll be on a similar level as them. But we haven't quite seen it yet, but he's close!

As an aside, as a group it seems that Roger had a wider field of very good players to face, but none as good as Novak or Andy. Rafa has fewer very good players, but more great ones to face. I haven't done a close study, though, so am not sure. But it seems that the "second tier" talent was stronger during Roger's generation, but the "first tier" talent weaker.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

hey andy, oh mr murray old bean..did you know that you won stuff via "a spurt of wins" ?.

 

[Fiero425]

hey andy, oh mr murray old bean..did you know that you won stuff via "a spurt of wins" ?.

uzzled :nono

 

[lacatch]

Kieran--I'd like to indulge in whatever you are enjoying lol. While I think Rafa has been and still is a remarkable player, I think it's highly unrealistic that his best/dominance may still be ahead of him. That's both divorced from his recent play, as well as the historical decline of players (most recently Roger) after a certain age. Not to mention the usual high mileage factor.

 

[Moxie]

hey andy, oh mr murray old bean..did you know that you won stuff via "a spurt of wins" ?.

uzzled :nono

Oh, come on, Fiero. You can do better than a string of emoticons when challenged about a statement you made, eh? If you think that's the best Murray's got, you should defend that position.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

ESPY Just gave Nadal the award for the best (declining ) male tennis player.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2014/07/29/Nadal-ESPY-Best-Male-Tennis-Player.aspx

OK. Stop ogling at the photo, guys.

 

[Moxie]

One thing to consider about aging is motivation. I know Roger likes to say he's as motivated and works harder than ever before, but you've got to wonder about the psychological effect when he won his 15th Slam. He was out in open waters, and without Pete ahead of him, there wasn't that extra bit of incentive. I don't know if this has contributed to Roger's slowing down - as I said in the "multi-Slam thread" - I think he was simply eclipsed by a younger, hungrier, and eventually better generation of players. It happens to everyone. Professional sports is a game of millimeters - and if you lose just a bit of edge, you can lose a lot of ground (Or, if you gain just a bit of edge, you can take a massive step forward - which is what I think we're seeing with Dimitrov. The 2014 version isn't that different than 2013 physically, but he's a lot hungrier and more intense).

But if you add the two together - that Rafa is still chasing Roger for the Slam record AND the younger generation, while showing a bit more life of late, is still not much compared to what Roger had to deal with - then perhaps Rafa's decline will be slower and later than it might have been without those two factors.

You've made many good points above, Dude, but I wanted to highlight and discuss this one: That when Roger hit 15 Major wins, he was entering "unchartered waters," as you say. I do believe him when he says he still loves tennis, and he's a great front-runner, but it's hard to imagine how being so far above the field feels. And I do think it helps Nadal to have a specific goal. In this way, he's always been chasing Roger. I'm sure they both try to focus on the task at hand, but it seems that Nadal's "carrot" is more obvious and specific. I'm sure Roger plays for the jazz that comes from winning, and he still believes that he can beat most on any given day. I doubt that somewhere in his mind he doesn't believe he's playing for his legacy, but that is a very nebulous thing.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The psychology part was visible and obvious.

When he lost to somebody from Mallorca in AO 2009, Roger cried; Why, he had
only 13 Slams at that time.

When he lost to JMDP in USO 2009, there was no regret seen from Roger's
post match interview; Why, he had 15 slams at that time. Incidentally,
this was another one of those matches that Roger "should have won".
He was leading and in command and then took the foot off gas.