The shell of Rafa Nadal wins 6 out of the first 8 tournaments he enters, if Novak beats him at RG it will become the husk of a shell of Nadal

First topic message reminder :

Simple Transition era. thumbsup 50% of prime Nadal is enough to mop almost everything today. Sorry

Those who claim that Nadal circa 05-08 is superior to the Nadal of the last couple of years may have a tough time actually marrying the facts to their beliefs. Nadal is on a tear, frankly looks as good as ever or close to it. But I would like to thank the poster who I quoted above for really exposing the hypocrisy of those who all but suggest we are in a weak era today, while at the same time some of the same people argued vociferously with me for months and even years that there are no weak eras, that eras are incomparable and that Nalby, Roddick, Safin, and Hewitt are as tough as any era if there is such a thing. At least now we see what is really behind all this talk about how Nadal is just a shell of himself, it is really a big up on Federer and an attempt to paint the current game and current stars as weak and in crisis. And if they don't like Djokovic or murray it doesn't hurt to take some of the shine off of their accomplishments as well. So ask yourselves when an unprecedented number of journalists and legends are calling the game strong as ever or a golden age how some learned posters come to the exact opposite conclusion. Although they won't use the exact terminology of "weak era" that would be too obvious wouldn't it, they take every opportunity to slag the current stars, the current game, and to try to diminish their accomplishments.

Here is my prediction if Novak beats Nadal, and even if it is an epic of monumental proportions going 9-7 or 8-6 in the fifth Nadal will go from the hottest player on tour the last 3 months to a washed up near has been hobbled and crippled by leg injuries.

antonico wrote:

socal1976 wrote:
Here is my prediction if Novak beats Nadal, and even if it is an epic of monumental proportions going 9-7 or 8-6 in the fifth Nadal will go from the hottest player on tour the last 3 months to a washed up near has been hobbled and crippled by leg injuries.

Congratulations on the prediction of a fifth set between them, and even the score of that set (you don't lose any points for hedging with the 8-6) . Question: since you were certain that Nadal would tottter off into antiquity as a burnt out shell of himself had he lost today (and we can picture you having been on your knees during the match praying for such), what then of Djokovic, now that he's the one who had his long-sought obsession totally in his hands before his heart got ripped out? Is he now going to end up as a washed up shell of a man because of the way he lost today? Or is it your contention that psychological damage from such a 9-7 5th Set bloodbath only applies to Nadal?

No you misread the thread and OP completely. I am the one who argues that Nadal is not far off his best. As I said before, if Nadal loses he will be deemed by some to be a shell of himself, similar to what happened after his loss to Djokovic at MC. I am the one who defends Nadal's level and says that he is still close, close to his best tennis. I am being sarcastic and quoting an individual named Invisiblecoolers who says Nadal is half the player he was.

And if you read my posts on other threads, I state that Djokovic blew it and that this loss will be hard to overcome and will stay with him for awhile. In fact on other threads I state that this very loss will do psychological damage to Djokovic at least in the short term. So you are wrong on both accounts. Please reread the original post and the jist of the thread and you will find out that I am the one who is criticizing people for talking down Nadal.

Red wrote:IC, Socal has just reposted your quote word for word. You said this at Sat May 18, 2013 5:38 pm:

invisibleCoolers wrote:Simple Transition era. 50% of prime Nadal is enough to mop almost everything today.

Did you post that, and if you did, what did you mean by it. I don't want you to get angry, I'm just curious.

I did post that, 50% of prime Nadal is good at times to mop almost everything, we did see that happening in this year's clay season, it says either Rafa is that good or the competition is that bad, its your view to take it.

[quote="socal1976"]

antonico wrote:

socal1976 wrote:
Here is my prediction if Novak beats Nadal, and even if it is an epic of monumental proportions going 9-7 or 8-6 in the fifth Nadal will go from the hottest player on tour the last 3 months to a washed up near has been hobbled and crippled by leg injuries.

No you misread the thread and OP completely. I am the one who argues that Nadal is not far off his best. As I said before, if Nadal loses he will be deemed by some to be a shell of himself...

I'm reading the end from your original topic post - which I quoted in the response I gave. Now I'm reading your reply to my post of your tag line of the original topic thread. If I understand how to read English, your original tag line clearly indicates YOUR "prediction" (made rather unhesistatingly, I might add) was that Nadal would become a "has been" (you wrote that, no?). In response to my quoting your own wrords, you're saying I "misread" ...uh..what YOU wrote, even though I quoted what your wrote directly. You're now saying Nadal will be "deemed by some to..." suffer the same consequences you originally predicted for him. Nice try at the backpedalling. You make a declarative statement regarding an outcome, then you try to divorce yourself form your own declaration by setting up the universal straw-man "some". Man-up already and say you thought what you thought, said what you said, wrote what you wrote - and meant it. Instead of trying to hide behind the straw man "some".

Antonico, I was being sarcastic, I have on dozens of posts on the thread claimed that Nadal is NOT far from his best. If you can't understand sarcasm I suggest you revisit your English teacher and ask them about it. Do you get how I started the thread with Nadal winning 6 out of 8 tournaments and then stated that if he lost he would all of sudden go from the hottest player on tour to shell of himself. It is clear to everyone else on the thread who bothered to read the posts on the thread what I meant. That Nadal by no stretch of the imagination is a shell of himself, I was poking fun at people who claim that. Even if you read the headline where I clearly reference a player who won 6 out 8 tournaments that should have clued you in, but I guess not. Because apparently, Sherlock holmes you are not.

Instead of telling me what I mean, when I explained to you that my meaning is the opposite and I am being sarcastic why don't you just admit that you don't get sarcasm and we can move on. As for creating strawmen that is what you are doing, and you are being hostile and obtuse about it as well.

Did it not ring your sarcasm bell when I said " won 6 out of 8 tournaments he entered in " and then used the language of a "shell" of himself. Go read the thread and stop telling me that I am calling Nadal a shell of himself. Its 200 damn posts long if you can't figure out what I mean after the first few posts or the last few posts then you do have an English comprehension problem, which involves the an inability to deduce sarcasm and satire.

socal1976 wrote:

Those who claim that Nadal circa 05-08 is superior to the Nadal of the last couple of years may have a tough time actually marrying the facts to their beliefs. Nadal is on a tear, frankly looks as good as ever or close to it.

Right there in the OP antonico, in fact it is the first line of my own writing, what part of this simple English do you not understand. If you want to attack my logic at least have the guts to attack my actual position, and not make up a position that I don't have. Funny, everyone else who argued with me about how Nadal is not nearly the player he used to be and actually attacked me for saying Nadal of today is as relevant and competent as ever seemed to figure it out.

For the love of god, I got one group attacking me because I claim Nadal is as good as he was in the early days if not better, than I got antonico going at me because he claims that I am slating Nadal and calling him a shell of himself.

Let me help socal here.

An over complicated formula is constructed which is easily misunderstood. I can help by cancelling out the redundant components and leave you with the simple truth.

Antonico, socal believes that Djokovic is better than Rafa has ever been.

bogbrush wrote:Let me help socal here.

An over complicated formula is constructed which is easily misunderstood. I can help by cancelling out the redundant components and leave you with the simple truth.

Antonico, socal believes that Djokovic is better than Rafa has ever been.

Djokovic is far better than he was during Nadals 'peak' clay court years. So its still quite tough to tell, I would say it doesn't really matter because Nadal has still proven he is better than Novak albeit maybe by just a little bit over 5 sets enough times now, so the point is moot anyway imo.

Nadal is undoubtedly better all round these days then he was even in 2008, that may have come at a cost to his clay court game ever so slightly who knows. This Nadal would beat Nadal 05-08 on a hard court, grass its harder to tell. He clearly worked on his hard court game, probably because like a true champion people told him he couldn't win on it so he became more determined.

socal1976 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Those who claim that Nadal circa 05-08 is superior to the Nadal of the last couple of years may have a tough time actually marrying the facts to their beliefs. Nadal is on a tear, frankly looks as good as ever or close to it.

Right there in the OP antonico, in fact it is the first line of my own writing, what part of this simple English do you not understand. If you want to attack my logic at least have the guts to attack my actual position, and not make up a position that I don't have. Funny, everyone else who argued with me about how Nadal is not nearly the player he used to be and actually attacked me for saying Nadal of today is as relevant and competent as ever seemed to figure it out.

For the love of god, I got one group attacking me because I claim Nadal is as good as he was in the early days if not better, than I got antonico going at me because he claims that I am slating Nadal and calling him a shell of himself.

Now you're equivocating. You state in this quote of your own text above that Nadal is as good as ever, or close to it. So what? As if this statement somehow...makes you some kind of Nadal supporter?? It's totally unrelated to the conclusion you made, which was that a loss to Djokovic today in a brutal match would leave Nadal a hollwed out shell of a former great player, a "has been", as you stated. This one's not even a nice try. You're epic fail in this heavy handed equivocation was almost as bad as the Djokovic smash of Nadal's tweener shot right into the ground. So yeah, I can read English. More importantly, I can also understand it. Which is something you apparently still struggle with. Even with your own writing.

Antonico, you really are thick aren't you?

It's incredible that someone who really loves to use sarcasm (albeit poorly) can't comprehend the obvious sarcasm in the OP.

I'm glad you joined this forum, antonico.

Your wit and intelligence make you a fine poster.

But it took some time for Antonico to realize the socal`s trap.

invisiblecoolers wrote:But it took some time for Antonico to realize the socal`s trap.

I'm not sure that he has realised it yet! Perhaps he is otherwise occupied with being angry?

It's excrutiating to see someone miss the point so frequently.

HM Murdoch wrote:I'm glad you joined this forum, antonico.

Your wit and intelligence make you a fine poster.

Yes and he is handsome and witty as well, he also has a gentle and engaging personality. Three cheers for him. I actually don't mind his arguments but they all seem to be arguments with things that I don't say, maybe one day we can have a discussion about a position I actually have and I am willing to support.

socal1976 wrote: I actually don't mind his arguments but they all seem to be arguments with things that I don't say

Yes, I've had that same pleasure with him.

In my mind he's like an unfunny George Costanza.

HM Murdoch wrote:

socal1976 wrote: I actually don't mind his arguments but they all seem to be arguments with things that I don't say

Yes, I've had that same pleasure with him.

In my mind he's like an unfunny George Costanza.

Up early for the baby, I see. I find it most mind boggling when someone tells you what you think and what your position is when a dozen other people get your meaning, and despite said evidence refuses to budge. It is ok to make mistake, but I don't get the intense desire to stick to something that is obviously not true. Either way, Antonico is new poster and I don't want to be harsh, just please pay attention to what I actually say and don't argue with something I don't say. As others on here can attest to, there are plenty of my actual positions that you can get ticked off about.

CAS wrote:Djokovic is far better than he was during Nadals 'peak' clay court years. So its still quite tough to tell, I would say it doesn't really matter because Nadal has still proven he is better than Novak albeit maybe by just a little bit over 5 sets enough times now, so the point is moot anyway imo.

Nadal is undoubtedly better all round these days then he was even in 2008, that may have come at a cost to his clay court game ever so slightly who knows. This Nadal would beat Nadal 05-08 on a hard court, grass its harder to tell. He clearly worked on his hard court game, probably because like a true champion people told him he couldn't win on it so he became more determined.

I have basically said the same thing CAS and have been hounded from pillar to post, Nadal is what 40 and something and two and going to win the French open again. I watched the man play and he got to some incredible balls, not noticeably off from what I have seen in the past. And his serve recently has been better than ever. Either way, I am happy that this great rivalry will produce some of these encounters into the future, these type of matches are rare and we should appreciate them win or lose.

bogbrush wrote:I'm certainly not watching a peak Nadal here, in fact, today's Rafa Nadal wouldn't get past baked goods against his 2008 incarnation.

Well the above poster as usual shows that he doesn't know very much about the game he is so highly opinionated about. Interesting how my posts that modern Nadal is better than 07/08 Nadal was treated with ridicule and scorn by the same cast of characters JK, Lydian, Haddie, IC, BB etc. and I was told I had a sub 100 iq for thinking that Nadal in recent years was better than Rafa of 07 and 08, now its seems that we have a lot of people who aren't as smart as Mr. sub 100 iq.

Funny I was accused of big upping Djokovic for not agreeing that the Nadal who made minced meat of peak federer at age 21 would kill today's Nadal.
In actuality the fed strokers, were the ones who were big upping Federer's obviously weak competition in his peak by illogically concluding that Nadal peaked at 21 or 22. When did Nadal serve this way in 07/08? When did he step in the court and blast returns for winners? When did he go a whole season where he has exactly 1, 1 loss against top ten players and is undefeated on hardcourt?

The party line that Nadal is worse, Djokovic is just fitter and no one has improved their shots just got fitter has completely and totally been laid to waste by reality like the meeting of the titanic with an iceberg in the Atlantic. And the knowledge lacking posters who assaulted and insulted me on this thread like a sex offender moving next to their kids school have been exposed for the ones who tried to big up Federer by claiming that Nadal at 21 would quote hand out baked goods to today's Nadal. Yeah because Nadal back then was so unbeatable on hardcourt. Their shallow attempts to pump up their idol Fed or to make excuses for their hero Nadal's losses has been completely debunked by reality. Nadal today would violate young Nadal on hardcourt for certain an probably on clay as well.

I don't care much for your responses, probably won't read them, but I could no longer hold my piece at how completely and totally wrong these cast of "experts" were and have been over and over and over again. And then to be insulting and arrogantly yuck it up with vile comments and caricatures, payback is best served up cold.

Nadal today is certainly playing as well on HC as he was when he won his HC Majors and if he continues his current form would beat "young" Nadal on HC, especially as his gameplan is more aggressive than it has ever really been. However, on the red stuff, '08/'10 vintage Nadal still has my entirely hypothetical bet

Rafa 13-0 on hardcourt, yes, yes he is not even 70 percent the player he used to be in the glory days when he was 21 years old. What a crock of crap.

I think the real acid test will come at the US Open. If, as looks a decent possibility, Rafa wins the US Open then will people still be able to argue against it such is the run he is on at the moment?

socal1976 wrote:Rafa 13-0 on hardcourt, yes, yes he is not even 70 percent the player he used to be in the glory days when he was 21 years old. What a crock of crap.

Well, as you change approach through the years and tactics etc it is not unlikely that improving on one surface can slightly reduce dominance on an another. Rafa has made his game more rounded and suited to all surfaces so isn't quite (though still incredible) the force he used to be on Clay in how he would blow opponents away. That is one legitimate theory

I just find it funny Craig that certain people called me unhinged, and said I have sub-100 iq and accused me of making this argument because I was trying to big up Novak's competition. Funny, claiming that Nadal of 20 or 21 would hand out bagel's and breadsticks to the current point leader is not deemed an "unhinged" statement. When in actuality the people who were making these comments about Nadal being better in 07/08 than the last couple of years were the ones who were wrongly big upping Federer's competition. I ask you this question Craig as a neutral, in 07/08 did Nadal serve like this, did he step in on the return like this, did he hit the flat forehand and like this? Did he go 13-0 on hardcourts?

The fact is craig their arguments that Nadal, Djoko, and Murray all peaked or simply got fitter with no better shots since their teens and very early 20s was in actuality a complete bj argument to stroke federer, when they accused me of doing the same thing in big upping Novak's competition. The guy already has more masters than he ever had in his heyday in one season. And the entire year he has exactly one loss against top ten players.

I think he goes in to the Open as the heavy favorite despite Novak and Andy having had better hardcourt records the last couple of years.

CaledonianCraig wrote:I think the real acid test will come at the US Open. If, as looks a decent possibility, Rafa wins the US Open then will people still be able to argue against it such is the run he is on at the moment?

Ah, but could he do it cold Tuesday night in Stoke?

ChequeredJersey wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Rafa 13-0 on hardcourt, yes, yes he is not even 70 percent the player he used to be in the glory days when he was 21 years old. What a crock of crap.

Well, as you change approach through the years and tactics etc it is not unlikely that improving on one surface can slightly reduce dominance on an another. Rafa has made his game more rounded and suited to all surfaces so isn't quite (though still incredible) the force he used to be on Clay in how he would blow opponents away. That is one legitimate theory

Yes, well I never in my OP made this about Nadal on a particular suface. If Nadal is better on hardcourt and slightly worse on clay than he is a better all around player than 07/08, most of the tour is on hardcourt. I think his losses on clay in recent years have been to one player who has greatly improved, ie Novak Djokovic. Who else exactly has been beating Nadal recently on clay that you deem him worse than his glory days at age 20? One loss to Zeballos in his first tournament back from injury and one loss to Roger on the fake blue clay of Madrid, other than that exactly one guy has beat him on clay in like the last 3 years. So is it not more logical to assume that Djokovic has improved and closed the gap on clay as opposed to assume that he is worse than he was at age 20?

I suggest CJ, you read the vile commentary and insults and delusional posts about Nadal being half the player today than he was in 07/08 so that you can
see exactly what kind of rubbish I had to deal with. Bringing back this thread was not directed at you.

I would say that dynamics change though. I mean in 2008 (if memory serves), Roger Federer was obviously a much tougher opponent whereas Djokovic and Murray weren't in peak form and Rafa won a couple of slams. Now though the challengers are different as Federer has faded but Djokovic and Murray are much more of a challenge than they were in 2008 and Rafa (if he wins the US Open) will also have won two slams in the year just like 2008. I am not sure how many Masters titles he won in 2008 but he'd be hard pressed to have won more than he has this year. That may be down to him being physically refreshed after eight months of enforced rest but who knows.

Lol, chill out socal.
Rafa has been playing great in 2013 but not sure the top 10 or 20 has vs previous years.

lydian wrote:Lol, chill out socal.
Rafa has been playing great in 2013 but not sure the top 10 or 20 has vs previous years.

Yes I am sure Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray struggle to find the level of resistance provided by james blake, Tsonga, Fernando Gonzalez, and Davydenko in 07 and 08 when Nadal was losing to these guys on hardcourts. Are you ready now to reassess your opinion that Nadal is 70 percent the player he was in 07/08? Or your assessment that he has changed nothing or improved nothing in his shots from those long gone years? I would be interested in reading your answer.

CaledonianCraig wrote:I would say that dynamics change though. I mean in 2008 (if memory serves), Roger Federer was obviously a much tougher opponent whereas Djokovic and Murray weren't in peak form and Rafa won a couple of slams. Now though the challengers are different as Federer has faded but Djokovic and Murray are much more of a challenge than they were in 2008 and Rafa (if he wins the US Open) will also have won two slams in the year just like 2008. I am not sure how many Masters titles he won in 2008 but he'd be hard pressed to have won more than he has this year. That may be down to him being physically refreshed after eight months of enforced rest but who knows.

He has never won 5 master's in a year, and also remember Craig it was not Federer that was beating Nadal for the most part on hardcourts back then, it was giants like Blake, Gonzalez, Davy, and Tsonga.

Novak has greatly improved on clay (and other surfaces) though dipped a tad this year. However, whilst he was still winning, Rafa wasn't steamrolling lesser foes on clay last yer or this year to the degree he can at his best. This, together with my subjective assessment from watching him is what leads me to say he is marginally worse on Clay than he used to be. However his record this year on HC is improved, though the real test, as CC states, will be USO. Posters were not right to call you stupid for saying Rafa was not peak Rafa but on that surface I do agree with them that he was not. But we should look at form depending on the surface being played on and I do not doubt that Rafa has constantly improved his HC game and Djokovic's victories there in 2011 were against a high level Rafa.

Socal I really cant be bothered raking over all those detailed stat coals again. In 2007 & 2008 Nadal went 5 sets in both Wimbledon finals against prime Federer, winning one of them. This year he lost in the first round to a Belgian journeyman.

Lydian, what do you think about the low bounce of grass combining with Rafa's knees to aggravate them? Some truth their or pure supposition

Remember CJ, the argument was Rafa of 07/08 vs. Rafa of the last couple of years lets 11-13 I never claimed he was better than 2010 Rafa who I think was the best we have seen of Nadal. The argument was that current Rafa was better than the young pre-prime Rafa of 07/08. I would take the Rafa of today and his more varied game over Rafa of 07/08 any day of the week on all surfaces, but certainly without question on hardcourt by the way represents about 60 percent of the tour. We had people claim Nadal was half the player he was in 07/08 and that if Rafa today played 07/08 he would be handed bagels and breadsticks.

In fairness though lydian Rafa has a habit of either going deep and winning Wimbledon or bombing out early. In short - hit and miss compared to other surfaces. He has won Wimbledon twice, been runner-up three times and lost by the 3rd Round on four occasions and remember this year was his first tentative steps back onto grass (a tricky surface) since his knee injury and it showed.

Perhaps CJ but are you blaming that for Rafa's loss?

CaledonianCraig wrote:In fairness though lydian Rafa has a habit of either going deep and winning Wimbledon or bombing out early. In short - hit and miss compared to other surfaces. He has won Wimbledon twice, been runner-up three times and lost by the 3rd Round on four occasions and remember this year was his first tentative steps back onto grass (a tricky surface) since his knee injury and it showed.

He also lost two sets to Robert Kendrick in 2007 and had to come back to win it in 5, and clearly by the third set Rafa was hobbled. If that is the only evidence of Rafa of 21 and 22 being superior to Rafa of today well then I rest my case it is clear who the winner is.

Rafa of today would win on HC for sure. He probably wouldn't win on Clay though his experience might help him. He would have a slender edge on grass as I think the last 2 Wimbledons are non-representative and he now knows how to win 2 GS titles on grass whereas before Wimby 2008 he did not. Maybe. Supposition all of it though

ChequeredJersey wrote:Rafa of today would win on HC for sure. He probably wouldn't win on Clay though his experience might help him. He would have  a slender edge on grass as I think the last 2 Wimbledons are non-representative and he now knows how to win 2 GS titles on grass whereas before Wimby 2008 he did not. Maybe. Supposition all of it though

Of course it is supposition but a lot of times on these threads that is what we are doing. You make a fair assessment although I really don't see how losing to one guy who has clearly improved on clay and in general shows him to be worse on the surface, but you are entitled to your opinion. Lets remember he did lose matches from time to time on clay even back then. If memory serves me didn't he lose to fellow spaniard Ferrero and Moya, that could have been in 2009 or 2010 though, just off the top of my head.

Another interesting thing in old Rafa vs new Rafa on Clay would be the mental bit- 2008 Rafa would never had been pushed as hard as 2013 Rafa would push him, but at the same time he'd also have zero fear as he would never have lost 5-set match on Clay (as opposed to 2013's single loss and odd close match)

ChequeredJersey wrote:Another interesting thing in old Rafa vs new Rafa on Clay would be the mental bit- 2008 Rafa would never had been pushed as hard as 2013 Rafa would push him, but at the same time he'd also have zero fear as he would never have lost 5-set match on Clay (as opposed to 2013's single loss and odd close match)

Lets remember how rusty he was going into RG this year though. With that in mind it would be fanciful for him to not be a tad vulnerable.

Socal, this is all good stuff but you were the one who raised my name as someone denouncing your argument. This discussion is groundhog day because like back in May when this first came up you have moved goalposts. The whole argument was originally around 05-08 vs 09-13 Nadal on clay for which I asserted, and still do, that Rafa was simply better on clay back then.

Back in May you were moving the goalposts to other surfaces to which I replied..."Socal, this origin of this discussion was on clay! Why would I argue hardcourt slams when there's no argument to be had there...So you've neatly sidestepped the clay comparison and moved the goalposts. Funny that."

This why I'm not returning to this discussion...you're broadening the argument to all surfaces when it originally started about clay. Only a fool would say Nadal was better on hard in 05-08 vs 09-13 since when he's won 2 HC slams, etc!

Wrong lydian, why would I say 6 out of 8 tournaments clearly including his win in IW. And if you follow the thread you will see that the discussion is about Nadal on all surfaces. And I clearly excluded 09 and 10, so I don't even know what you are talking about there. If you go back to the OP you will see that at no point do I make the clay distinction that you claim I make. Also if you look at statements of IC and BB they don't make the clay distinction either.

And if this discussion is limited to just clay than why bring up Steve Darcis?

Socal this discussion is going nowhere like it did the first time. Ok, here's my last response on it...zzz.

Forget this actual thread, this was effectively a teaser at the state of the current game vs yesteryear. The original...read ORIGINAL...route into this discussion centered on Nadal's excellent comeback by early May when he had been mainly playing clay of course.

In early May you said, and I quote..."I would take Nadal of 2010-2013 over Nadal of 05-08 anyday of the week and twice on Sunday", i.e. Nadal is a much better player in recent times (2009-2013) vs 2005-2008.

That statement clearly included clay, and at the time we were in the middle of the clay season. So I provided comparative stats to show 09-13 clay Nadal was no better than 05-08 Nadal. Given those 05-08 clay stats were unarguable you then moved sideways to focus on HCs prior to this thread.

But ok, let's broaden it a little...we could discuss his performances on natural surfaces (clay/grass - which was why I brought up Darcis) and his performances on hard. All 05-08 vs 09-13.

First of all, you aren't going to get many takers, still, agreeing his 09-13 stretch on clay & grass is better than 05-08 when he got to Wimb final 3 years running and won Queens in 2008, beating serving machine Karlovic along the way on lightening quick Queens grass. Similarly his clay record back then was outstanding in terms of what and how he won. Remember the consecutive clay streak he had...81 wins? I provided all the stats 05-08 for that so let's not go back there again.

His movement on natural surfaces back then in my opinion was superior to now. He was faster and perhaps slightly more powerful off the mark. Hardly surprising given he had less knee trouble before Miami 2009 when his leg (not feet) woes really started to happen.

However, on hard he has improved alot. It was a very, and literally, unnatural surface for him to start with. It's taken time for him to adopt and adapt the right movement, technique and tactics on hard. The 'unnatural surface' Nadal since AO09 has been much better. No-one but a fool would dispute that. However, some may argue his increased hardcourt prowess comes at a slight expense of his natural surface prowess - in small relative terms. His serve is undoubtedly faster now but that doesn't mean it's any better weapon on clay for example.

In terms of 2013 itself and whether this is "best ever Nadal" as you assert - given you feel this is the golden age of tennis - well he's clearly doing great. However, how does the 2013 field compare as a whole? Novak is out of sorts, Federer has now clearly declined and Murray had one of his worst clay years - remember, clay matches in 2013 still account for around 42 out of 57 matches played. Nadal's serve is very good and he's being more aggressive on HC (to shorten points, protect the knees more and stop flatter hitters dictating) so has clearly evolved there - although I don't buy his ground strokes are actually any better per se, he's just using them differently. On grass we saw the early loss...maybe it was a knee injury maybe not. On clay he struggled a lot more through the season than yesteryear but that's not surprising given the layoff.

I just don't see as a whole, like you do, this is best ever Nadal that's emerged from injury. On HC he's been great and has had to change his approach - clearly a change he should have done years ago. But clay and grass-wise I have no doubt that recent years Nadal is not as good as the one who culminated in those amazing 08RG and 08Wimb wins.

Also...and finally...don't forget surfaces as a whole have slowed down a lot further since 2009 with larger balls being used, carpet courts taken away and more sand in paint on HCs, e.g. IW, hence we see Ferrer reaching the finals of 2 HC masters between Oct12-Apr13, one indoors! Clay and grass have changed little since 2009...but HCs are very different. Perhaps this has somewhat helped Nadal (and others) achieve better results across 2009-2013 don't you think?

Taking on board what you say lydian I feel it is all too soon to make a decision and also all too soon for others (earlier in this thread) to be questioning people's IQ so readily.

Granted Rafa never looked his unbeatable self at RG this year but lets not forget how rusty he was going into that tournament compared to previous years so it is a little unfair to judge the form of his first slam he had played in just under a year. Also at Wimbledon he bombed out but remember it was his first grass court tournament for a year, with the knee injury still playing on his mind I'd say and that showed in his movement - besides early exits at Wimbledon are not unusual for Rafa as he has exited by the Third Round on FOUR occasions. As for his hard court form well it has been breathtakingly good but I want to leave it until after the two week rigours of the US Open to see if he comes through with flying colours before passing judgement. If he wins can it be argued he has ever been better on hard courts (considering his record this year)? But if he loses the question marks will remain.

Questions remain regardless of what happens today. Is he simply too brilliant or has the competition at the top fallen away slightly?

socal1976 wrote:Wrong lydian, why would I say 6 out of 8 tournaments clearly including his win in IW. And if you follow the thread you will see that the discussion is about Nadal on all surfaces. And I clearly excluded 09 and 10, so I don't even know what you are talking about there. If you go back to the OP you will see that at no point do I make the clay distinction that you claim I make. Also if you look at statements of IC and BB they don't make the clay distinction either.

Well you are very well known to pathetically modify your statements to keep the arguments on your side, and every time you are proven wrong, you go on your little rat hole for few months and come back to raise the same old vague argument, I am not returning to your stupid pathetic thread either, its easy to see the Current Rafa has improved in some parts and lost counts on some parts, his stamina levels are not the same, the fighting spirit is not the same, his knees are not the same, his experience is not the same.

Your little mind never understand any concepts, and as told Before only a failure in life keeps bragging about himself in a vague manner.

invisiblecoolers wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Wrong lydian, why would I say 6 out of 8 tournaments clearly including his win in IW. And if you follow the thread you will see that the discussion is about Nadal on all surfaces. And I clearly excluded 09 and 10, so I don't even know what you are talking about there. If you go back to the OP you will see that at no point do I make the clay distinction that you claim I make. Also if you look at statements of IC and BB they don't make the clay distinction either.

Well you are very well known to pathetically modify your statements to keep the arguments on your side, and every time you are proven wrong, you go on your little rat hole for few months and come back to raise the same old vague argument, I am not returning to your stupid pathetic thread either, its easy to see the Current Rafa has improved in some parts and lost counts on some parts, his stamina levels are not the same, the fighting spirit is not the same, his knees are not the same, his experience is not the same.

Your little mind never understand any concepts, and as told Before only a failure in life keeps bragging about himself in a vague manner.

No you want to know what is pathetic is that I have crapped things out of my bum that know more about tennis than you IC. All your are is a sad little troll who stalks about the internet looking to win sympathy from other posters. What is pathetic is that you made a big deal that I fabricated the statement and that you never called this era transitional and claimed Nadal was half the player that he was. You are so dense and you say so many stupid things that you can't even remember the last time your own foot got lodged in your mouth.

In early May you said, and I quote..."I would take Nadal of 2010-2013 over Nadal of 05-08 anyday of the week and twice on Sunday", i.e. Nadal is a much better player in recent times (2009-2013) vs 2005-2008.

That statement clearly included clay, and at the time we were in the middle of the clay season. So I provided comparative stats to show 09-13 clay Nadal was no better than 05-08 Nadal. Given those 05-08 clay stats were unarguable you then moved sideways to focus on HCs prior to this thread.

Excuse me, I never excluded clay or excluded hardcourt from the discussion the very topic of the thread includes his win at IW therefore my statement was about Nadal the complete player. Are you now accusing of saying I excluded clay, no I included both clay and hard court.

And I stand by my statement, even take his best year 2010 out of the picture and the nadal of today is a much more complete player than the player who routinely made Roger cry in 05-08. And his results back it up, he was the points leader in 2012 before his injury, in 2011 he had one of his best statistical years and reached the final of everything for like six months losing to only one player, and this year he has again torn it up.

You have to address where you guys come off calling someone a sub-100 iq individual for making a very reasoned argument that you happened not to agree with. Now you see from my last post with Invisiblebraincells that I have no shortage of ways to call people stupid either. The funny thing is history is proving me correct again and you just chose to bury your head in the sand and hold on to an argument that you already lost. For example, you accuse me of moving the goal poasts earlier but again you claim I said Nadal today is the best Nadal ever, on half a dozen occasions I said he was a bit off his hot streak of 2010, but much better than young Nadal of 05-08. You just made up the straw man of me claiming in May, that Nadal was his best ever, if anyone cares to read the thread they will see that I never said such a thing. AGAIN IN BOLD SO IT DOESN'T GET GARBLED, THE NADAL OF TODAY WOULD MAKE MINCED MEAT OF NADAL OF 05-08. Not of 2010, although I think he is getting closer.

And your own assessment that Nadal was so obviously at 70 percent became even more obviously wrong when he went on to win Rome and RG after that point. The fact remains, you claimed that all these greats Nadal, Djoko, and Murray were finished products basically who only got fitter and did not add any shots.

I ask you again when did nadal step in and effectively blast return winners and serve like this in the PERIOD IN QUESTION 05-08? Because I have asked 3 times and you have refused to acknowledge that these greats do improve their shots and do add weapons.

invisiblecoolers wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Wrong lydian, why would I say 6 out of 8 tournaments clearly including his win in IW. And if you follow the thread you will see that the discussion is about Nadal on all surfaces. And I clearly excluded 09 and 10, so I don't even know what you are talking about there. If you go back to the OP you will see that at no point do I make the clay distinction that you claim I make. Also if you look at statements of IC and BB they don't make the clay distinction either.

Well you are very well known to pathetically modify your statements to keep the arguments on your side, and every time you are proven wrong, you go on your little rat hole for few months and come back to raise the same old vague argument, I am not returning to your stupid pathetic thread either, its easy to see the Current Rafa has improved in some parts and lost counts on some parts, his stamina levels are not the same, the fighting spirit is not the same, his knees are not the same, his experience is not the same.

Your little mind never understand any concepts, and as told Before only a failure in life keeps bragging about himself in a vague manner.

And you lying sack of garbage I want proof of your slander and libel that I modified my statement to change it. You are the one who denied your statement and lied that you never made it and got caught red handed. Either prove your slander that I modified anything on this site which by the way shows the number of times you edit something or retract it. What is pathetic is that you are showing yourself not only to be ignorant about tennis but a known liar who will hurl made up accusations at people. Too bad haddie and lags aren't here for you to hide under their skirt. Show me where I modified any statement you lying sack of garbage.