Will Nadal pass Federer?

[Kieran]

Yes poor poor Wafa has had a wide array of issues. Hard to keep up with them, almost would be as fun as keeping up with the Kardashians. Anyways, what do the last few seasons have to do with whether or not he played RG 2009?

Who said they had anything to do with the Kardashians? Or 2009? It's a simple question. Wrist injury - the right wrist, so surely nothing to do with his "ugly demanding style" - appendicitis, what a bummer, eh? But I'm not going through the complete litany, life is short but I think we've agreed here, they'd had an adverse effect on his career.

Tendinitis is an inflammation. The definition might not be "injury" or "ailment" - these would be layman terms, although a quick survey discovers a medical dictionary which writes of it as an injury - but the effect is the same, as in, it's a severe bummer if you're a tennis star, right? Doubtful it arose just suddenly in the Soderling match, I think we'd agree on that one too, brother...

 

[shawnbm]

I have only read the last two pages and it is degenerated into a FEDAL war, naturally. ;-)

 

[Front242]

Yes poor poor Wafa has had a wide array of issues. Hard to keep up with them, almost would be as fun as keeping up with the Kardashians. Anyways, what do the last few seasons have to do with whether or not he played RG 2009?

Who said they had anything to do with the Kardashians? Or 2009? It's a simple question. Wrist injury - the right wrist, so surely nothing to do with his "ugly demanding style" - appendicitis, what a bummer, eh? But I'm not going through the complete litany, life is short but I think we've agreed here, they'd had an adverse effect on his career.

Tendinitis is an inflammation. The definition might not be "injury" or "ailment" - these would be layman terms, although a quick survey discovers a medical dictionary which writes of it as an injury - but the effect is the same, as in, it's a severe bummer if you're a tennis star, right? Doubtful it arose just suddenly in the Soderling match, I think we'd agree on that one too, brother...

I know guys who lift massive amounts of weight with tendinitis and just wear straps/supports. It's not the end of the world and said guys told me they can lift away and play football fine. I'm sure it got aggravated by the walloping he was getting in many of his losses where he was run ragged but that's his choice of game style. Play more aggressively and you run less. Many tennis players play with strapping year long but it's mostly Nadal fans excusing losses for this reason whereas others just put up with it like real men. In fact the women players moan less about it as do their fans.

 

[Kieran]

I know guys who lift massive amounts of weight with tendinitis and just wear straps/supports. It's not the end of the world and said guys told me they can lift away and play football fine.

Are any of them the Pope?

 

[Front242]

Not sure why I'm bothering to answer such a response but have a guess.

 

[Kieran]

Not sure why I'm bothering to answer such a response but have a guess.

One of them? Will you tell him I think he's a wonderful man, but to remember he's only infallible under certain circumstances, and none of them relate to tennis...

 

[brokenshoelace]

I'm intrigued. What 'woulda coulda'?

...the past 3 pages of this thread? The part where I brought up Nadal's injuries, DarthFed brought up Fed's mono (and said it was the same thing even though Roger never missed time), me saying Nadal would have won RG in 2009, etc... I don't blame you for skipping through all that if you did, but yeah, that woulda coulda.

Rafa missed RG 09? That's news to me. Remind me, how is 09 RG different than Roger's 2008? Surely Rafa's knees were made worse when the Swede ran him ragged and helped book his flight back to Mallorca in such beautiful fashion

Did I say he did? Is this a joke? He missed Wimbledon. Jesus.

Meanwhile, Federer was reaching major finals in which he was only losing to the best player in the world, and then won the US Open. Hardly the same.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Rafa missed RG 09? That's news to me. Remind me, how is 09 RG different than Roger's 2008? Surely Rafa's knees were made worse when the Swede ran him ragged and helped book his flight back to Mallorca in such beautiful fashion

Roger's 2008? What happened?

Am I missing something here? Did Roger skip a slam somewhere and I didn't hear about it?

Did he even skip a tournament?

What are you referring to? :s

Did Rafa skip 2009 RG? He was clearly not injured enough to play RG and smoke his first 4 opponents... Roger wasn't sick enough to skip AO 2008 and other tournaments either. Both guys played way worse than we were accustomed to seeing but they showed up, they played, and they lost. So again, what is the difference between Rafa and his knees in RG 09 and Roger and his mono in 2008?

...Nadal's knee injuries forced him to skip a major in which he was the defending champ?

 

[brokenshoelace]

He's been run ragged by nobodies in a lot of those losses and since he knows pretty much no other way to play than run after the ball like Lassie playing catch it probably doesn't help.

This is what this board has been reduced to. That sort of "analysis." Nadal only knows how to play tennis by running after the ball. Yup. That's it.

 

[Front242]

He's been run ragged by nobodies in a lot of those losses and since he knows pretty much no other way to play than run after the ball like Lassie playing catch it probably doesn't help.

This is what this board has been reduced to. That sort of "analysis." Nadal only knows how to play tennis by running after the ball. Yup. That's it.

Clearly what I'm alluding to is that he runs after way more balls than most besides Ferrer and a few others who play a grinding style. This is not an "analysis" but reality. His success has largely been built on running down the most impossible balls and hitting mad banana passing shots, etc but it's clearly affecting his longevity somewhat already and while he does play more aggressively these days he based much of his early career playing like this and now has to pay the price. Guys like Federer have not put their bodies through as much mileage due to the more aggressive style and hence why it's plain annoying when posters say Federer is "lucky" or has great genetics and is therefore not injured as much as Nadal. It's not luck, it's called using your head more than your legs. Likewise Nadal hasn't been unlucky, it's to be expected to have more wear and tear when you play like he does. You reap what you sow.

 

[Kieran]

Appendix was wear and tear, was it? What about the right wrist going after Wimbledon? Have you any analysis of him that isn't reliant on lazy cliches? What about Federer, he actually plays a grinders game at Wimbledon compared to Sampras, whose idea of a long rally was having to hit a second serve. After a certain point, Pete more or less reneged on clay and was tailoring his game to suit certain parts of the season. Pete wasn't a grinder, but he faced similar wear and tear to what Rafa is facing, including slams missed or skipped.

These things affect players when they get to a certain stage. It isn't all so simple as saying, uh, Rafa grunts and runs a lot, so, um, that's it...

 

[Front242]

Appendix was wear and tear, was it? What about the right wrist going after Wimbledon? Have you any analysis of him that isn't reliant on lazy cliches? What about Federer, he actually plays a grinders game at Wimbledon compared to Sampras, whose idea of a long rally was having to hit a second serve. After a certain point, Pete more or less reneged on clay and was tailoring his game to suit certain parts of the season. Pete wasn't a grinder, but he faced similar wear and tear to what Rafa is facing, including slams missed or skipped.

These things affect players when they get to a certain stage. It isn't all so simple as saying, uh, Rafa grunts and runs a lot, so, um, that's it...

Federer grinder? That's about the most hilarious thing I've read in years. Pretty much all players these days are baseliners and Federer is an aggressive baseliner. You rarely ever seen him simply push the ball back, unless he's out of position. He also knows when there's no point running after something that could potentially strain him. He tries to win points quickly and hence why he doesn't end up with as much wear and tear.

Nadal's appendix was clearly just bad luck but don't be a smart ass you know the rest is just down to how he plays. Nadal's issues have been largely knee tendinitis so stop trying to divert this to Federer or Sampras of all people. It has nothing to do with either of them 'cos none of them play/played like Nadal does. Not even one bit. How much spin does Nadal put on the ball? Quite a lot, right? How hard does Del Potro hit the ball? Quite hard, right? Note the common denominator here? It's choice. Not bad luck again and not a lazy cliché. If they didn't play like this they wouldn't suffer the consequences.

 

[DarthFed]

Roger's 2008? What happened?

Am I missing something here? Did Roger skip a slam somewhere and I didn't hear about it?

Did he even skip a tournament?

What are you referring to? :s

Did Rafa skip 2009 RG? He was clearly not injured enough to play RG and smoke his first 4 opponents... Roger wasn't sick enough to skip AO 2008 and other tournaments either. Both guys played way worse than we were accustomed to seeing but they showed up, they played, and they lost. So again, what is the difference between Rafa and his knees in RG 09 and Roger and his mono in 2008?

...Nadal's knee injuries forced him to skip a major in which he was the defending champ?

And yet he still played RG '09...that was before he skipped Wimbledon. Is anyone going to respond to the question regarding the fact that being run ragged by the Sod may have had something to do with Rafa not playing Wimbledon?

 

[Kieran]

Appendix was wear and tear, was it? What about the right wrist going after Wimbledon? Have you any analysis of him that isn't reliant on lazy cliches? What about Federer, he actually plays a grinders game at Wimbledon compared to Sampras, whose idea of a long rally was having to hit a second serve. After a certain point, Pete more or less reneged on clay and was tailoring his game to suit certain parts of the season. Pete wasn't a grinder, but he faced similar wear and tear to what Rafa is facing, including slams missed or skipped.

These things affect players when they get to a certain stage. It isn't all so simple as saying, uh, Rafa grunts and runs a lot, so, um, that's it...

Federer grinder? That's about the most hilarious thing I've read in years. Pretty much all players these days are baseliners and Federer is an aggressive baseliner. You rarely ever seen him simply push the ball back, unless he's out of position. He also knows when there's no point running after something that could potentially strain him. He tries to win points quickly and hence why he doesn't end up with as much wear and tear.

Nadal's appendix was clearly just bad luck but don't be a smart ass you know the rest is just down to how he plays. Nadal's issues have been largely knee tendinitis so stop trying to divert this to Federer or Sampras of all people. It has nothing to do with either of them 'cos none of them play/played like Nadal does. Not even one bit. How much spin does Nadal put on the ball? Quite a lot, right? How hard does Del Potro hit the ball? Quite hard, right? Note the common denominator here? It's choice. Not bad luck again and not a lazy cliché. If they didn't play like this they wouldn't suffer the consequences.

Read it properly: Federer plays a grinders game at Wimbledon compared to Sampras. And he does, and he has. And he's played that baseline game on all surfaces, for the complete season, for more than ten years, and yet Pete was getting these normal wear and tear things at a much youngr age than Roger is now.

But finally you're getting something right, while screwing it up at the same time: you're blaming Rafa for the injuries you denied he had earlier today. That's called trying to have it both ways...

 

[Front242]

Probably not. They live in denial. Federer's even been called a grinder now :cover

 

[Kieran]

Probably not. They live in denial. Federer's even been called a grinder now :cover

Front, try read it properly, son. I made it simple for you to understand. I know you read the Pope and then misquote him, and you get a bit flustered, but don't go misquoting me, because I'll see it. The Pope doesn't mind, but he's a much nicer man than I am...

 

[Front242]

Appendix was wear and tear, was it? What about the right wrist going after Wimbledon? Have you any analysis of him that isn't reliant on lazy cliches? What about Federer, he actually plays a grinders game at Wimbledon compared to Sampras, whose idea of a long rally was having to hit a second serve. After a certain point, Pete more or less reneged on clay and was tailoring his game to suit certain parts of the season. Pete wasn't a grinder, but he faced similar wear and tear to what Rafa is facing, including slams missed or skipped.

These things affect players when they get to a certain stage. It isn't all so simple as saying, uh, Rafa grunts and runs a lot, so, um, that's it...

Federer grinder? That's about the most hilarious thing I've read in years. Pretty much all players these days are baseliners and Federer is an aggressive baseliner. You rarely ever seen him simply push the ball back, unless he's out of position. He also knows when there's no point running after something that could potentially strain him. He tries to win points quickly and hence why he doesn't end up with as much wear and tear.

Nadal's appendix was clearly just bad luck but don't be a smart ass you know the rest is just down to how he plays. Nadal's issues have been largely knee tendinitis so stop trying to divert this to Federer or Sampras of all people. It has nothing to do with either of them 'cos none of them play/played like Nadal does. Not even one bit. How much spin does Nadal put on the ball? Quite a lot, right? How hard does Del Potro hit the ball? Quite hard, right? Note the common denominator here? It's choice. Not bad luck again and not a lazy cliché. If they didn't play like this they wouldn't suffer the consequences.

Read it properly: Federer plays a grinders game at Wimbledon compared to Sampras. And he does, and he has. And he's played that baseline game on all surfaces, for the complete season, for more than ten years, and yet Pete was getting these normal wear and tear things at a much youngr age than Roger is now.

But finally you're getting something right, while screwing it up at the same time: you're blaming Rafa for the injuries you denied he had earlier today. That's called trying to have it both ways...

I read it properly. He is not and never will be a grinder. Federer is a baseliner. It suited Sampras to play S&V 'cos the courts were so much faster. You can't do that these days except maybe the first few rounds as Stakhovsky proved was possible. Pete had wear and tear from his slam dunks most likely. Imagine the pressure on your body launching yourself miles into the air and landing on cement or grass. It looked cool but in the long term it sure wasn't clever. Also, the explosive stop, start motion of S&V is hard on the joints as you're bending down a lot for low volleys. Likewise with running down impossible balls, it's impressive and Nadal has hit plenty of spectacular passing shots on the run but he's paying the price for it now.

I never denied he had injuries, I said you can play no problem with tendinitis. And I also don't consider tendinitis an injury. Strap yourself up, you use deep heat or anti inflammatories. Players are doing this day in day out but somehow Nadal's the only one it's an issue for. Unreal. It's a condition that can be controlled and can flare up at any time, maybe, just maybe when a big hitting Swede is knocking the cover off the ball and making you run a lot due to tons of short balls from poor play.

 

[Kieran]

I read it properly. He is not and never will be a grinder. Federer is a baseliner. It suited Sampras to play S&V 'cos the courts were so much faster. You can't do that these except maybe the first few rounds as Stakhovsky proved was possible. Pete had wear and tear from his slam dunks most likely. Imagine the pressure on your body launching yourself miles into the air and landing on cement or grass. It looked cool but in the long term it sure wasn't clever. Likewise with running down impossible balls, it's impressive and Nadal has hit plenty of spectacular passing shots on the run but he's paying the price for it now.

I never denied he had injuries, I said you can play no problem with tendinitis. And I also don't consider tendinitis an injury. It's a condition that can be controlled and can flare up at any time, maybe, just maybe when a big hitting Swede is knocking the cover off the ball and making you run a lot due to tons of short balls from poor play.

No, you're not quoting it properly and I'm gonna keep pulling you up on it until you sit quiet and pay attention to what you're being told, because I know you have a ridiculously short attention span.

Nobody called Federer a grinder - I said that he's a grinder at Wimbledon compared to Sampras which is true: he stayed back all those years and rallied, whereas to Pete, a long rally - as I said before, was having to hit a second serve.

Try understand the comparison that's been made. Don't think in simple terms.

Your remark that Pete got the wear and tear from slam-dunking all day is hilarious. It's truly witty. Wrong, of course, but salaciously funny. He withdrew from Oz in 1999 citing fatigue after the effort of hanging onto #1 in 1998, to set the record. He was only 27 at that stage, so it shows you how normal wear and tear affected him, and he played brief points, and mainly wasn't a feature on clay. It had nothing to do with leaping up in the air and landing on cement... :laydownlaughing

 

[I.Haychew]

So...If you look-up "asterisk" in the tennis dictionary, will you see a picture of Federer, Soderling, or both?

 

[Front242]

I read it properly. He is not and never will be a grinder. Federer is a baseliner. It suited Sampras to play S&V 'cos the courts were so much faster. You can't do that these except maybe the first few rounds as Stakhovsky proved was possible. Pete had wear and tear from his slam dunks most likely. Imagine the pressure on your body launching yourself miles into the air and landing on cement or grass. It looked cool but in the long term it sure wasn't clever. Likewise with running down impossible balls, it's impressive and Nadal has hit plenty of spectacular passing shots on the run but he's paying the price for it now.

I never denied he had injuries, I said you can play no problem with tendinitis. And I also don't consider tendinitis an injury. It's a condition that can be controlled and can flare up at any time, maybe, just maybe when a big hitting Swede is knocking the cover off the ball and making you run a lot due to tons of short balls from poor play.

No, you're not quoting it properly and I'm gonna keep pulling you up on it until you sit quiet and pay attention to what you're being told, because I know you have a ridiculously short attention span.

Nobody called Federer a grinder - I said that he's a grinder at Wimbledon compared to Sampras which is true: he stayed back all those years and rallied, whereas to Pete, a long rally - as I said before, was having to hit a second serve.

Try understand the comparison that's been made. Don't think in simple terms.

Your remark that Pete got the wear and tear from slam-dunking all day is hilarious. It's truly witty. Wrong, of course, but salaciously funny. He withdrew from Oz in 1999 citing fatigue after the effort of hanging onto #1 in 1998, to set the record. He was only 27 at that stage, so it shows you how normal wear and tear affected him, and he played brief points, and mainly wasn't a feature on clay. It had nothing to do with leaping up in the air and landing on cement... :laydownlaughing

Keeping smoking the funny stuff, man 'cos like it or not this most definitely had an effect on his wear and tear and to think otherwise is plain dense. And I've a perfectly good attention span, thanks. What I don't have is much patience for many Nadal fans besides a select few who don't make excuses for practically every loss, proclaim him to be so injured he's like Stephen Hawkings and basically agree with every dumb thing he and his camp say and do.

Yeah btw, this is great for your joints. Everyone should do this. I mean it looks cool, sure, very healthy jumping on cement no doubt. Keep telling yourself it had no effect on him.

[video=youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvpW6thKKPI[/video]