Is this the most critical season of Nadal's career?

In terms of his legacy I think nadal could retire tomorrow and would be considered one of the 5 or 10 greatest players of all time. However, like Borg, the player he is most compared to there would be a grey lining and some lingering questions if in his prime he would be overtaken and if he would fizzle out in what should be his most productive years. Nadal with the mileage and injuries is an old 25 years and his style of play is physically gruelling. The Novak question now buzzes in the ears of Nadal and all of his fans. If this season is a repeat of 2011 I can't see Nadal being happy to play the role of Jimmy Connors to Ivan lendl late in his career losing 13 straight times and keep troopering on. I am not of the mind that Nadal can't turn it around. He certainly can. He is that kind of talent, and Djokovic himself has shown the signs of wear and tear on the body if Novak falls off Nadal has dominated everyone else. Yet more than any other season, I think this year will define Nadal's remaining career and his legacy. Can he strike back and retake it from Nole? Will he put together another run of grandslam success to get the Goat status? Can he psychologically in this most psychological of sports take more and more emotional abuse at the hands of Novak's lethal groundstrokes? If Nadal gets dominated this season and particularly if he gets dominated again by Novak on clay I can't see him being long for the tour. Once you win 10 slams it is really hard to just satisfy yourself with being the bridesmaid at the grandslam level. Also you could put any hope of goathood status out to pasture for Nadal, as his most telling argument for being rated ahead of Federer gets discreditted by the fact that he has now lost 6 straight finals to his biggest rival a player of the same age. Yet, not all is negative, the man is a superiorly gifted athlete and tennis player. If he can get back to equal or near equal footing with Novak and win a couple of big finals against his main rival then that changes everything, and it certainly isn't outside the range of possiblity.

It depends on what he loves more, playing tennis or winning. Feds won 16 yet he's managed to live with being bridesmaid or worse for a while. There's no reason for him to quit, it's only Novak who can beat him. There's literally no one else. If he starts losing consistently to Murray as well then maybe you'd be on to something. What if he wins this slam? Then he's already had the same success as last year.

As for turning things around against Nole, there isn't even a whole lot to turn around. He already leads the H2H by some way and in the matches he lost, if he'd just made a few of those running forehands that he missed then he may have won. The courts all suit his style as well so all in all plenty of reasons to stick around.

It seems to me that Nadal will indeed struggle to accept he is no longer the best. More so than Federer. After dominating Wimbledon and the US Open for many years, Federer has had to settle for less during the past years but it doesn't seem to take away his pleasure in the game nor his self-belief.

The true test of course would be if Nadal starts losing at the French Open. Could he live with being only the 2nd best clay court player? I doubt he could stand it for long.

I have to admit though that Nadal has surprised me a couple of times in the past, so he may surprise me again!

Break in 5th, I disagree I actually don't think that Nadal was as close in his matchups last year against Novak as you claim. If anything the losses to Novak were worse than the score indicated. Take his two losses to Novak in the clay masters, for me the most telling of the matches in their rivalry. In madrid, Novak had a double break lead in the first set, Nadal played a few unbelievable games almost like a kamikaze pilot on his last flight and got the double break back. After losing a double break lead, on clay, in spain to Nadal; Novak promptly broke right back and didn't even let the first set get to a tiebreaker. In Rome Novak had played an exhausting 3 set 3 plus hour semi against murray the day before. Rome was not the faster conditions of Madrid, Novak the fragile one had been pushed to the brink in an exhausiting affair, everyone myself included picked Rafa. Novak beat him routinely in straight sets. If Novak is healthy the gulf between the two in their matchup is huge, much bigger than the gap that Rafa enjoyed over fed in fed's heyday. Now it could be different story with a 30 plus fed.

Prostaff, i agree true test is the french. It is the last bastion of the Nadal empire, if Novak storms the walls their and unseats Nadal in a tournament he has won six times than Nadal really will have some hard questions. I also agree that for Nadal the game of tennis has never held the innate pleasure it held for guys like Connors before him. Nadal's favorite sport is football, for fun he probably prefers fishing and golf. In terms of money he and his family are set and his family in general is on the upper class side of things to begin with. It is one thing being the bridesmaid when you are used to it. It is another to get spoiled by success and then fail at the biggest stage over and over again.

I had the US open in mind when I was thinking about this. Yeah I guess the clay matches were Novak's most convincing wins. I just think that it was only one season and we'd actually need to see it across another season as well. If something similar happens this season then I'll be where you are and consider Novak owning Rafa.

Break in, the USO was closer but Novak tore his back out in that match, he wasn't the same after that match for the rest of the year and he had spent a lot of energy in a classic five setter against Roger and all through the year. If anything that match was more disconcerting even than the clay matches you had a clearly physically hurting Novak still finding away to beat Nadal. 6 straight losses is owning. I am of the opinion Nadal is talented enough and the margins still small enough where he can turn it around to a certain extent. He could make the rivalry more competitive but I would be surprised if he was able to ever get the upperhand again.

Nadal lost 6 matches to Djokovic but these losses all took place during one summer. One summer does not define a career.

Well that year will have given Novak too much confidence to ever let Nadal get the upperhand again; he once said he didn't need to do anything special to win against Nadal either way now that has been partly affirmed. This doesn't mean the success Nadal is left with is too small for him to want to continue playing. He said it himself after the US open he doesn't think he's that good a player that a final is a bad result. BTW I admire Nole's persistence with the US open almost like Federer with the French.

If Nole says so then it must be true. Did Nadal say something like "He is better than me?"

Well if Nadal has said Nole is the best player in the world then your quotation is implied in that.

Hawkeye, the roll started in March and lasted till september, that is a spring and an entire summer. Big losses against your biggest rival in slams is what defines your career that is why those matches are special. And tennis success and dominance is fleeting it isn't something you can just turn off and on, that is to me the most special thing about Fed is that unparralled consistency. But Fed is a typical of tennis champions. When you lose the number #1 and a new dominant force emerges it usually spells curtains for the career of the guy displaced. Look at Mac and Borg, look at what happened to Mac when lendl emerged. I am not saying that it can't happen but regaining the number one ranking after someone else dominates you this way is very rare.

No. His most critcial season was 2010. He made the most of a weak field and that enabled him to add 3 more titles than Wlander and get closer to the all time greats.

Now with Murray and Djoko taking over, Delpo coming back, others arriving the season is not critical...it's about managing the rest of his career.

Tenez you have so much faith in Murray, it's hard to see what his fans have against you.

I agree with Tenez that 2010 was his critical season, but mainly to see if his knee problems had properly gone away to allow him to compete for a full season.

For me 2005 and 2008 were the most critical seasons of career, where he really made his legacy. Whatever happens now he's got what is it 10 slams in the bank.

I think Hawkeye raises a valid point that Nadal's losses occurred over one season. Team Nadal suggests one of the ways they hope to overcome Djokovic going forwards is to add lead to Nadal's racquet.

break_in_the_fifth wrote:Well if Nadal has said Nole is the best player in the world then your quotation is implied in that.

No I was saying its all just talk.