Nadalites – Rafa Nadal Talk

[El Dude]

Rather than do yet another round of pointless tit-for-tat (I've deleted my past attempt), I've coined a new term (based on Godwin's Law):

Moxie's Law: "As a discussion with Moxie about Nadal grows longer, the probability that she wildly misinterprets something as an attack on Nadal approaches 1."

 

[Moxie]

I said its not a knock on Rafa because I (rightfully, unfortunately) predicted you would--yet again--completely misinterpret my words to the negative and go into the defensive. I get it, you adore Rafa and love arguing on the internet, but all I can say is--again--I wasn't knocking Rafa. Your response is based on misinterpreting what i said as a dig - which is familiar territory for us (do we really have to do this again?).

I said absolutely nothing negative about him in that post, nor implied that he wasn't great off clay. That is just your misinterpretation at work. I'm not saying he's Sergi Bruguera but yes, he specialized on clay, which is why the bulk of his accomplishments came on clay. He's less "equilateral" and more "scalene" than Roger and Novak, but the triangle is no less impressive.

I don't think I'm misinterpreting you. You say that that Roger and Novak are more "generalists," and that's not actually true. Well, the one who has adapted best to all surfaces is Novak, but it did help that his biggest competition was getting older and wearier when he still had time on his legs. Try to cop for a second to your own tilt on things, instead of just laying it on others. You did call Rafa a "clay specialist," and I think that notion got retired years ago, by people paying attention.

 

[El Dude]

Moxie, see my revised post.

 

[El Dude]

Moxie, obviously he's not just a clay specialist - but he does specialize on clay, which is why the bulk of his accomplishments are on clay. He was great off clay, too. Again, scalene vs. equilaterial. It is a spectrum with Rafa being more specialized than Roger, both of whom were more specialized than Novak.

 

[Moxie]

Moxie, obviously he's not just a clay specialist - but he does specialize on clay, which is why the bulk of his accomplishments are on clay. He was great off clay, too. Again, scalene vs. equilaterial. It is a spectrum with Rafa being more specialized than Roger, both of whom were more specialized than Novak.

See, you have to walk it back a bit. You don't have to be insulting to admit you got it a bit wrong. With your "Moxie's Law." This IS a fan thread, after all, and I'm going to hold your feet to the fire on your words. I'll stand by for your apology on being so rude to me.

 

[Jelenafan]

The short answer is no. Rafa is a bit different than the other two because of his clay dominance. Almost all of the records listed above are either directly or indirectly tied to his clay prowess.

This is not a knock on Rafa, but he's essentially a clay specialist, while Roger and Novak are generalists, with Novak possibly being the most "surface balanced" player ever, or at least in the Open Era. But Rafa's "untouchableness" is due to cornering the clay market for most of 18 years - and at a level previously unforeseen, or at least for that long (Borg was almost as dominant on clay, just for about a third the time Rafa was, and without focusing on clay like Rafa did).

It is a knock because he won 8 nonclay Grand Slams. He is one of only a handful of players who won in 2013 the HC Fall Trifecta of both the Fall Masters ( Cincinnati, Canadian) and the US Open, all on hardcourts. Did I mention he also won the indian Wells Masters on HC earlier in that year? Won 10 Masters on HC. Rafa overall won 25 HC titles, 4th in the Open era and ahead of HC players such as Edberg, Becker, Murray, Agassi, etc. He also was the current holder of the last clay, grass & hardcourt grandslams in Jan 2009 & Sept 2010. So IMO in that sense he was more a generalist than Federer.

He qualifies as an all time great on just his non clay record.

 

[Jelenafan]

Moxie, obviously he's not just a clay specialist - but he does specialize on clay, which is why the bulk of his accomplishments are on clay. He was great off clay, too. Again, scalene vs. equilaterial. It is a spectrum with Rafa being more specialized than Roger, both of whom were more specialized than Novak.

Perhaps the wording; it’s more appropriate to say Rafa dominates on clay, there’s a difference.

Otherwise one could say , in comparison, Federer specialized on HC since 22 of his 28 Masters were on that surface, “only” winning 6 Masters on clay.

 

[Moxie]

^ That's a good response, @Jelenafan.

Jon Wertheim, in this week's mailbag, was asked to name the 5 best forehands in men's tennis. His list:

1. Juan Martín del Potro
2. Rafael Nadal
3. Pete Sampras
4. Roger Federer
5. Fernando Gonzalez? - (the question mark is his, but the guy did have a monster FH)

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

^ That's a good response, @Jelenafan.

Jon Wertheim, in this week's mailbag, was asked to name the 5 best forehands in men's tennis. His list:

1. Juan Martín del Potro
2. Rafael Nadal
3. Pete Sampras
4. Roger Federer
5. Fernando Gonzalez? - (the question mark is his, but the guy did have a monster fhand

Moxie,
I was at the 2007 AO and watched Gonzalez in the QFs defeat Rafa in straight sets, he went onto the final where he played Federer and lost, he does have a massive fhand., I would have rated his fhand in the top 5.
I would put Rafa's fhand at No 1, because I feel he has more 'spin on it' and he also used "side spin" on his fhand, than Del Potro,' which was soo difficult to return, hard to see on TV, though live it was incredible

 

[Moxie]

Moxie,
I was at the 2007 AO and watched Gonzalez in the QFs defeat Rafa in straight sets, he went onto the final where he played Federer and lost, he does have a massive fhand., I would have rated his fhand in the top 5.
I would put Rafa's fhand at No 1, because I feel he has more 'spin on it' and he also used "side spin" on his fhand, than Del Potro,' which was soo difficult to return, hard to see on TV, though live it was incredible

Of course, I love if you rate Rafa's #1, but having seen both live, I agree, both were stunning. I saw JMDP play Juan Monaco on Armstrong at the USO, in very close seats. His FH was so hard and flat, it looked like it was going through the net, not over it, and I mean from very close. It was huge, and came on you very fast. Rafa's was so tricky and heavy, with the spin. You had more time to see it, but, as John McEnroe once said, after hitting with Rafa, (on clay, I think,) he said it made you feel like your arm was being ripped out of the socket. That was why it wore players down, and esp. the one-handed backhand, like Roger's. Also, it was impossible to gauge, with all the spin. You may remember in the early years that Rafa's balls often got called wrongly out, a bit early, because it looked like they were going out. Lines people got used to it, finally. I once sat behind the server at an exho between Rafa and JMDP, (coincidentally to this conversation,) and I saw Rafa's ball do the oddest thing: Just as it was heading about 6" beyond the sideline, it turned 45 degrees and dropped in. It was honestly the weirdest thing I've ever seen on a tennis court. I'd heard commies say to try to sit behind the server and see that happen live, and I did, just the once. And that was on a hard court. Imagine on clay!

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Of course, I love if you rate Rafa's #1, but having seen both live, I agree, both were stunning. I saw JMDP play Juan Monaco on Armstrong at the USO, in very close seats. His FH was so hard and flat, it looked like it was going through the net, not over it, and I mean from very close. It was huge, and came on you very fast. Rafa's was so tricky and heavy, with the spin. You had more time to see it, but, as John McEnroe once said, after hitting with Rafa, (on clay, I think,) he said it made you feel like your arm was being ripped out of the socket. That was why it wore players down, and esp. the one-handed backhand, like Roger's. Also, it was impossible to gauge, with all the spin. You may remember in the early years that Rafa's balls often got called wrongly out, a bit early, because it looked like they were going out. Lines people got used to it, finally. I once sat behind the server at an exho between Rafa and JMDP, (coincidentally to this conversation,) and I saw Rafa's ball do the oddest thing: Just as it was heading about 6" beyond the sideline, it turned 45 degrees and dropped in. It was honestly the weirdest thing I've ever seen on a tennis court. I'd heard commies say to try to sit behind the server and see that happen live, and I did, just the once. And that was on a hard court. Imagine on clay!

Sad to say I never saw Del Potro live, though on TV his fhand looks 'bullet like" hard and flat, this is where I feel Rafa's fhand does have more variety on it, the amount of spin he can get, also the side spin I mentioned in my post.