Really? Um no. His uncle has on multiple occasions been caught on camera telling him to move forward and he only did it then. I don't for one second succumb to the notion of his supposed amazing tennis IQ. After slagging Federer for failing to capitalize on the 2 match points at Wimbledon, the site's biggest Nadal tards had no comeback when I said Nadal the great quickly found himself in a major rut in the USO final. If he's so great then how did that happen? Because he's not. He got lucky Medvedev squandered his break points.
So let's examine this:
1) According to you guys, he's not as good a shot-maker as some of the other players on tour (ridiculous, only 2 guys at the most are better, but I'll play along).
2) He doesn't have a great tennis IQ.
3) He feels the need to cheat to win by wasting time, change bandages, and call medical TMO's.
4) He's so dumb he doesn't understand that he needs to move forward without his uncle telling him to do so (and apparently is so dumb that despite playing hundreds of matches, still needed his uncle to tell him that, instead of figuring out that it works).
Can someone please explain how a player who suffers from ALL of the above is currently the second most successful tennis player of all time? Something doesn't add up here.
You can say you don't buy Nadal's tennis IQ, but you never actually back it up with anything. So here's some concrete tennis talk:
1) Nadal is by far the best player in the world in terms of shot selection. Nobody else comes close. He almost literally never picks the wrong shot. Whether it's knowing when to change direction and go up the line, go for a wrong footer, when and how to use the slice, when to attack the net, etc... He also has BY FAR the best sense of when to use the drop shot. Almost never uses it at the wrong time. These are things you have to do in a split second during the rally. You can't pause the rally to look at your uncle, as I'm sure you're aware.
2) Nadal, despite not having a great serve, is amazing at using his serve smartly. In fact, no other player would have ever maximized the success of a largely unremarkable serve the way he did. Be it placement, spin, when and how to change things up (how many times does he go up the T on break points on the ad side? Just ask Federer). And this was all before he improved the speed of his serve. The way he uses it to set up the points is uncanny.
3) Nadal's adjustments in terms of how he returns are spot on. I am not just referring to his positioning on the return, but what he actually does with it. When he chips it, when he runs around the backhand on second serve, when he hits it loopy and deep, when he goes for it...In fact, in almost all of Nadal's matches in which he's struggling to read or return his opponent's serve well, he finishes the match by returning much better, further proving how great he is at adjusting.
4) His anticipation is out of this world. I really don't have to say more in that regard. Again, these are instinctive things and decisions that can only be made in the heat of the moment. Split second decisions mid rally. People are way too simplistic: They see him hit a great passing shot for example, and only focus on the explosiveness, speed, and athleticism aspect of it. What they neglect is the anticipation it takes for him to guess where the approach is going. You don't always have the luxury of seeing where the ball is going then making your move, especially in defensive positions. Obviously anticipation isn't limited to that but I can go on forever about other examples.
5) Nadal, at this point in his career, plays with the second most variety on tour. Yes, I am 100% responsible for this. He's got more tools in his arsenal in terms of variety than anyone not named Roger. Whether it's his overall net play (which I've always called overrated but at his point he's legit one of the better volleyers on tour), his great slice (which has improved so much over the years) which he uses A LOT, the occasional moonballs (legit moonballs, not the ones Cali calls moonballs), drop shots, serve and volley tactics, being able to defend, stepping up and attacking, hitting with different spins (who else has such a heavy loopy backhand yet also have one of the better flat cross court backahnds on tour?), the ability to do anything with the forehand, etc...
Now variety alone isn't necessarily an indication of IQ, but the way he's able to use it is what sets him apart. Why is Nadal almost always able to set up his forehand? It's because he knows how to perfectly compliment it by using the rest of his game to set up his main strength, and this goes back to when his game was far more limited and less diverse than it is now.
6) His point construction is the best on tour, and only Djokovic compares (prime Federer is obviously up there but he was such a terrific shot maker that it often eclipsed that aspect).
7) Nadal is the best at winning matches in which he's getting "outplayed." I mean even you guys can't dispute that since this is what you all lament. And how do you think he's able to accomplish that? Simply by being a wall and running for hours? At his age now? You don't think it takes a lot of intelligence to navigate matches in which your opponent is outhitting you? Do you have any idea how much problem solving this requires?
So, Front, if you feel the need to explain to me why you think these points are invalid and how they're not indicative of tennis IQ, I'm all ears. Otherwise, please stop with the ridiculous bias. It's pretty embarrassing.
But Nadal has a more unique game with so much diversity, he is handling the new gen the best... 
