Why Tenez is wrong on Nadal- Detailed analysis

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:06 am

I initially sent this to Tenez via PM, but he convinced me to post it on forum said he would moderate the thread closely if needed, so here it is.

A few pre-warnings before I post it:
-If any part of your post contains something that I interpret as an insult towards me, I will simply ignore all of your post.
-If your post is a generic and irrelevant criticism of Nadal, then I will not respond, but hopefully people will address what I've written on the thread rather than repeating what they've already said they dislike about Nadal.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The main question I will be asking, is this: Nadal has earned probably more than £100 million through sponsors and prize money. Very few would turn that down. So why do more people not do exactly what Nadal does, and have the same success? If Tenez's theory is right, at some point there must be a 'barrier'- a barrier which means that we don't get 2 million other people doing exactly what Nadal is doing.

So let's start, and see where this barrier is:
-Nadal's strength is his stamina. Stamina and endurance can be obtained using a cocktail of drugs.
-ITF anti-doping is either complicit or incompetent. Well, that's good news for everyone isn't it. With a useless anti-doping agency, nothing can stop millions taking peds or similar drugs that aren't yet banned. So no barriers yet.
-Nadal has limited tennis talent. Well, pretty self explanatory here, having limited tennis talent is not a barrier to anyone.
-Toni forced Nadal to change from playing right-handed to left-handed. (Tenez is actually wrong with this one, as I've explained at great length, Toni actually changed Nadal from a left handed double handed forehand, to a left handed single handed forehand. And yes, there's a difference between right and left handed double handed forehands, it's the stronger hand closer to the body. I have provided evidence from enyclopedia Britannica, as well as Nadal's autobiography, as well as some videos. But Tenez keeps on repeating it as true, so let's just go along with it anyway, as I've promised to assume so for the sake of this argument). Well this isn't much of a barrier, as people have two hands, and one of them will be the left hand.
-Nadal has huge muscles. I have seen my friends who don't take peds and still have bigger muscles than Nadal. So not really a big barrier, considering peds are freely available.
-Nadal takes a lot of time between points, and is not punished strongly enough by ATP. Well this isn't a big barrier, unless people are very impatient and want to serve quickly. So no, it's not a barrier.

So there we have it. According to Tenez's theory, there is basically nothing stopping millions of people into turning into Nadal, and sharing the massive bank balance that lies in Rafael's bank in Mallorca. Either Tenez has got it wrong, or millions of people are very very stupid, and turning down millions of $$$ for no reason.

------------------------------------------------
Nadal is not just a tennis superstar, his game is so effective that he is an incredibly difficult match up for everybody. Nadal fans should stop talking about his H2H against Federer, and start talking about his H2H against everyone. Yes that's right, if we add up all of Nadal's H2Hs, ie overall Win/Loss ratio, Nadal ranks as the number one of all time. No one in the current top 50 has a winning record against him, and he's played 46 of them, can you remember such an occurrence before? Very few players, some all time greats at most can boast this.
So what is it, which means his game can't be copied by thousands of others?
To find out out, I asked my coach if we could do a little experiment at my tennis club David Lloyd, and as it was actually very educational, he agreed to try it out on his group, who he teaches for 2 hours after my morning lesson. (If you remember, I did actually say on OTF a few weeks ago that I was going to do this experiment, I've not talked about the results, so that I could add it now).
Normally the group just does a drill and competitive match, so even they seemed to be quite enthusiastic with this change-up. To sum up my idea, we basically had 15-20 minute sessions with everyone trying out a new forehand grip, and having forehand cross court rallies with each other.
So he went through all of them, continental first (not in much use these days, but the group found it quite easy), then eastern (most said this was easiest to play), and then semi-eastern (which people found harder than the precious two, but was not a huge problem to hit at a medium to medium fast pace).
Then lastly, we tried the Nadal forehand. It's closer to a western grip than semi-western, open stance; my coach had researched this and made clear the cross-court forehand's detail, grip, stance, take-back, follow through.
And you know what happened? A disaster, well of sorts. Forget generating 3000 rpm which Nadal does, people were finding it incredible difficult to time the ball, we had some balls land up bouncing twice before it even hit the net, many shanked way out.
Even I had a try at this, normally I play with a semi-eastern, applying a bit of topspin (don't worry I still follow through and grunt to imitate Nadal), but this time I genuinely tried to replicate his forehand, with his grip. And I was horrific. Normally my forehand is very reliable, but I found with this grip that it was very hard to time. It also felt very weird hitting the ball, I'm not sure I can describe it really.
Tenez's theory that muscles apparently give a huge extra advantage with this pretty much fell flat, one of the people people who struggled most was the guy with the probably the biggest muscles, he was shanking forehands like there was no tomorrow.

Thus I figured, to be able to execute this difficult shot with great consistency, takes a lot of hand-eye coordination and talent. Being able to time the ball, and generate the ball at 3000 rpm is extremely difficult- but if you do have the ability to do it, as Nadal does, it gives you a fantastic advantage.
It enables you to be able to hit relatively low risk (in terms of high net clearance) shots at high pace with vicious spin, that is extremely difficult for your opponent to deal with. What more could you want?
The catch is of course, that the shot is very difficult to play, and unless you have sensational timing generating huge rpms at that pace will be a bigger danger to the crowd getting hit, rather than to your opponent.
Sometimes Tenez, and NITB say that the barometer for forehands is how quickly you finish a point. It never fails to make laugh. Really? Really? Who cares if you win a point in 3 shots or 6. When I go on court it's to give myself the best chance of winning, I couldn't care less how many shots that takes.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:07 am

Nadal videos, not bad for a guy with 'no talent':

Hotdog Lob:

Fantastic trickshot:

Sensational feel on volley:

Amazing reflexes against Federer:

Banana shot puts Verdasco in disbelief:

And if people still doubt that this genius doesn't have unbelievable hand-eye coordination, then take a look at this- he has timed a ball from BEHIND him against Federer. Yes, you're reading that correct, the ball is behind him:
Skip to 8:15 for that

by noleisthebest Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:42 am

JuliaSantamaria wrote: Either Tenez has got it wrong, or millions of people are very very stupid.

Tenez has not got it wrong.
Millions od people are very, very stupid, unfortunately.

JuliaSantamaria wrote: Who cares if you win a point in 3 shots or 6

Those who understand what tennis is about.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 12:48 pm

Once again JS your main arguments do not hold any ground. You do not have millions of people having access to top PEDs with the know how to pass the anti-doping basic tests. Neither do we have millions of people, when young wanting to take the risk, or have access to the best doctors who have proofed their knowledge with many other athletes. In fact millions of people are against drugs or doping.

Toni had that knowledge and contacts. His brother "the beast" of Barca was probably an excellent entry point. Don't expect those doctors who monitor athletes to advertise their services to millions. So you can throw your main point out of the window already.

Then you marvel at Nadal's shots but once again what makes nadal's shots good is that they are safe (bog margins" yet powerful....and that can only be down to power. Every commentator, Federer and other players say so. It's the power not the skills. When you have someone hitting the ball all day long since the age of 5, you are bound to have some good tennis learnt skills and nadal has seriously improved since his arrival on the main tour as well, he even played his best tennis last year and I expect him to improve his shot making skills till he is 40. It doesn't mean that is all natural...on the contrary. Even in your club you have pulled amazing shots like your other members despite having a fraction of Nadal's biceps, fitness and training time. We know too well it's not Nadal's great shot that win him matches...it's his opponents' UEs.

So there is your second point out of the window.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 2:36 pm

You think access to performance enhancing drugs is limited, and hence people can't use them?
I just typed into google www.buysteroidsuk.com and have got a multitude of possible options.
And it's not just countries with high GDP and top class science facilities, I mean there was a spate of athletes in Jamaica who were caught doping, and perhaps some that haven't been caught yet.

So even if we get 0.001% of the population who can afford and obtain top quality peds... that is still around 70,000 people. So your argument has not really moved forward here.

As for your second point, you talk about power. Power from what exactly? Power from his muscles? As I said, I have seen people with bigger muscles than Nadal who simply go to the gym often.
And it is not the power on the forehand which makes it so effective. Well certainly it is not what makes it unique.
What makes his forehand unique, is the fact that he can put so much topspin, 3000 rpms (more than any other player at the moment, who have access to same tech) at high pace.
Also you haven't said it this time, but before you keep on repeating this fallacy that big muscles make it easier to time the ball with huge amounts of topspin. It's a fallacy, it's simply not true, I'm not sure why you keep repeating it. Give a guy with big muscles a racket, ask him to hit with the rpms and spin Nadal does, he will do no better if not worse than normal tennis players.
What makes Nadal's forehand so effective that it is difficult to deal with, due to that high spin, and the fact it's relatively low risk with high net clearance.

Either way, certainly there is nothing you have provided above which would show your theory is sufficient to explain why Nadal is so unique in is success.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:02 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:You think access to performance enhancing drugs is limited, and hence people can't use them?
I just typed into google www.buysteroidsuk.com and have got a multitude of possible options.

Sure...and good luck passing the wada tests with those! Besides all athletes are already using the basics...you need a know how!

And it's not just countries with high GDP and top class science facilities, I mean there was a spate of athletes in Jamaica who were caught doping, and perhaps some that haven't been caught yet.

Thanks for confirming my very point! Powell and co have millions in the bank to already access the best doctors and drugs....yet it was not good enough. Can't you see you are helping me here??!??

So even if we get 0.001% of the population who can afford and obtain top quality peds... that is still around 70,000 people. So your argument has not really moved forward here.

70 000 is probably close to the numer of wannabe professional athletes worldwide...you would not expect all those to become tennis player, would you? There are other sports you know. A fraction have access to tennis courts all year round.
Now work out the chance of taking your nephew at 5 and turn him into 13 slams chanpion.....I'd like to know what odds Willaims betting would be prepared bet on that! 1-0.001% woudl not surprise me.

As for your second point, you talk about power. Power from what exactly? Power from his muscles? As I said, I have seen people with bigger muscles than Nadal who simply go to the gym often.
And it is not the power on the forehand which makes it so effective. Well certainly it is not what makes it unique.
What makes his forehand unique, is the fact that he can put so much topspin, 3000 rpms (more than any other player at the moment, who have access to same tech) at high pace.
Also you haven't said it this time, but before you keep on repeating this fallacy that big muscles make it easier to time the ball with huge amounts of topspin. It's a fallacy, it's simply not true, I'm not sure why you keep repeating it. Give a guy with big muscles a racket, ask him to hit with the rpms and spin Nadal does, he will do no better if not worse than normal tennis players.
What makes Nadal's forehand so effective that it is difficult to deal with, due to that high spin, and the fact it's relatively low risk with high net clearance.

Either way, certainly there is nothing you have provided above which would show your theory is sufficient to explain why Nadal is so unique in is success.

You see you don't know about tennis. If you want to control a ball you need to keep it longer in your racquet and the way to do that is top spinning, especially clearlng the net by so much. Pros calls this "muscling" the ball for a very good reason cause muscles help. So once again I am talking sense but you do not. This is why they all spin more that 2nd serve than the first cause it allow them to control that power and ball. Honestly, you do not know what your are talking about technically. All those players have increased their muscle mass by 10kilos over the last 5 years according to Roddick....he knows what he is talking about .

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:14 pm

Tenez wrote:Thanks for confirming my very point! Powell and co have millions in the bank to already access the best doctors and drugs....yet it was not good enough. Can't you see you are helping me here??!??

What percentage of Jamacian athletes have been banned for doping? Not very many.

Tenez wrote:Now work out the chance of taking your nephew at 5 and turn him into 13 slams chanpion.....I'd like to know what odds Willaims betting would be prepared bet on that! 1-0.001% woudl not surprise me.

Yes, I'm not arguing that Toni could be sure that a 5 year old Nadal would be able to have so much success, I don't think it's possible to say that when someone is 5 year old.

Tenez wrote:You see you don't know about tennis. If you want to control a ball you need to keep it longer in your racquet and the way to do that is top spinning, especially clearlng the net by so much. Pros calls this "muscling" the ball for a very good reason cause muscles help. So once again I am talking sense but you do not. This is why they all spin more that 2nd serve than the first cause it allow them to control that power and ball.

As for the second serve, there is another factor of service speed, a drop in speed can also give you more control; players choose if they can do put in a ball with topspin at 100mph let's say, as it's harder to put away compared to a flat ball, as a higher net clearance can ensure the ball kicks up.
You have provided no reason as to why huge muscles would help generate 3000 rpms. From the empirical evidence, it seems your claim is simply fabricated.
And even if you are right, it is not difficult to have the muscles Nadal has, as I have said I have seen people who achieve that simply by going to the gym very often.

by noleisthebest Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:15 pm

I think Amri can't discern a clean, talented ball-striker, that's the problem.
And how hard it is to be one!
I would recommend to go to Wimbledon during week one and try and see, esp. "hear" how the ball is struck, both on ground strokes and serve.
I'd start with Mannarino.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:18 pm

noleisthebest wrote:I think Amri can't discern a clean, talented ball-striker, that's the problem.
And how hard it is to be one!
I would recommend to go to Wimbledon during week one and try and see, esp. "hear" how the ball is struck, both on ground strokes and serve.
I'd start with Mannarino.

I've seen quite a lot of Mannarino, but Im not sure how that addresses my point in the article.

If all that is needed to generate 3000rpms and such vicious topspin on your forehand is big muscles, then we would see more people in the top 100 have that forehand... but people can't... the proof is in the pudding.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:41 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:What percentage of Jamacian athletes have been banned for doping? Not very many.

What's the sense of that point? moving the goal post? The answer is actually a very high percentage of those at the top! Jones, Powell, Simpson, Allison Randall, Traves Smikle, Demar Robinson Veronica Campbell-Brown.....In other words roughly only Bolt got away so far. So you make a bad point and but worse you make it wrong.

Tenez wrote:Now work out the chance of taking your nephew at 5 and turn him into 13 slams chanpion.....I'd like to know what odds Willaims betting would be prepared bet on that! 1-0.001% woudl not surprise me.
Yes, I'm not arguing that Toni could be sure that a 5 year old Nadal would be able to have so much success, I don't think it's possible to say that when someone is 5 year old.

Yes though Toni seemed pretty sure of his plan....and it was a good plan...I'll give him that!

You have provided no reason as to why huge muscles would help generate 3000 rpms. From the empirical evidence, it seems your claim is simply fabricated.

I can take the horse to the pound, I can't force him to drink. You throw a rpm number hoping this would close the debate. We all know now that such rpms can be produced by most top players....they don't cause it's tiring and inefficient...unless you have trained all your life doing so and more importantly you have the energy to maintain that power for 5 hours. This is where Nadaldistinguishes himself from the rest.

And even if you are right, it is not difficult to have the muscles Nadal has, as I have said I have seen people who achieve that simply by going to the gym very often.

Those muscles are no good if you don't have the stamina behind. In that respect Nadal seems to have reached a physical level not matched by anyone else.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:54 pm

Tenez wrote:What's the sense of that point? moving the goal post?

The vast majority of Jamacian athletes who won medals at the Olympics, have not been banned.
And was it not you who said that 'failing a drugs test is like failing an IQ test'?
But you cannot have it both ways. If the ITF doping policy is so stringent, then why can one not argue that it is plausible that it enforced Nadal not to dope, but simply achieve physical fitness through legal means?

Tenez wrote:We all know now that such rpms can be produced by most top players..

How could we know that?
How could we possibly know that most top players can produce such spin on the ball.

If they could have Nadal's forehand, why would they not? It's probably one of the most effective shots of all time, low risk and yet incredibly difficult for an opponent to deal with.
If having big muscles is all it takes to have that forehand, then many others in the top would atleast try it... but barely any do... once again the proof is in the pudding.

So far the only real argument you're making as to why Nadal's game is so unique, is that the ITF anti-doping policy is stringent.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:57 pm

I'm afraid, you simply cannot be right.
You must go back to the drawing board, as I've shown here pretty convincingly; according to your theory there is nothing stopping anyone with access to tennis courts from becoming Nadal and sharing the millions of dollars... apart from a strict ITF doping policy (you've seemed to have conveniently shifted your position there?), and even then you really have no foot to stand on, as the ITF do not even ban 5 players a year.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:05 pm

For me, these are 4 of the key factors as to why Nadal stands out:

Hand-eye coordination, and timing:
To be able to time the ball with such consistency, putting huge topspin with an incredibly difficult grip and at high pace; takes immaculate timing. Not many other players can pull off Nadal's forehand with any consistency, the grip itself means it is very easy to shank the ball.

Reflex on Defence:
Players know that Nadal has stunning reflexes, and with his brilliant timing, can stick his racket out form nearly impossible positions and get the ball back into play. This has a dual effect, as it also means opponents have to take huge risks when attacking, which mean they make more errors.
Scroll up to the top of the thread, and watch those videos... espeically the last one against Federer.

Stamina:
Nadal has a good 5 set record, due to the fact he has stamina and fitness. I would say that physcially, Ferrer Murray and Djokovic all have as much if not more stamina than Nadal

Mental strength:
Nadal has incredible focus, which means so far in his career he rarely loses his intensity for prolonged periods.
It's this combined with his will to win, and determination to never give up, which makes him a hugely difficult player to deal with. He also has a tendency of stepping his play up a level in the crucial moments of a set.

See... my theory makes sense; simply because one can draw from my post that it will be difficult for there to be many people who replicate what Nadal does.
If what Tenez says is true... anyone with access to peds who can get round ITF can replicate Nadal basically.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:05 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:I'm afraid, you simply cannot be right.
You must go back to the drawing board, as I've shown here pretty convincingly; according to your theory there is nothing stopping anyone with access to tennis courts from becoming Nadal and sharing the millions of dollars... apart from a strict ITF doping policy (you've seemed to have conveniently shifted your position there?), and even then you really have no foot to stand on, as the ITF do not even ban 5 players a year.

I explain clearly why you, me or anyone else would not have access to top drugs and top doctors (teams as the players call them nowadays) but you ignore it. Now don;t complain if posters call you names easily.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:09 pm

But it simply isn't true... accessibility to top level performance enhancing drugs is not difficult.
I took my 5 minutes, and I had the option of having a cocktail of peds being delivered right to my house within a click of a button.

The only real argument you have left... is the ITF are so stringent with their drugs policy, that they create the barrier.
But this isn't what you've been arguing, you've been arguing so far that the ITF are incompetent.
If not, then one cannot have it both ways, if you argue the ITF are stringent, then I can argue it is therefore plausible to suggest that means Nadal must improve fitness through legal means.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:15 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:For me, these are 4 of the key factors as to why Nadal stands out:

Hand-eye coordination, and timing:
To be able to time the ball with such consistency, putting huge topspin with an incredibly difficult grip and at high pace; takes immaculate timing. Not many other players can pull off Nadal's forehand with any consistency, the grip itself means it is very easy to shank the ball.

So why does it do so badly on green grass which is the surface that best requires eye/hand coordination? Why can't he cope with Rosol's ball when Kholi dismissed him easily? Why does he stand so far back when he coudl take th eball earlier and dictate like his worse opponent Djoko does (according to nadal)?

R

eflex on Defence:
Players know that Nadal has stunning reflexes, and with his brilliant timing, can stick his racket out form nearly impossible positions and get the ball back into play. This has a dual effect, as it also means opponents have to take huge risks when attacking, which mean they make more errors.
Scroll up to the top of the thread, and watch those videos... espeically the last one against Federer.

Bizarre. That is everything bar a reflex shot. How can you call a reflex shot that is travelling the whole length of a tennic court? Amazing power certainly to generate so much power while beoing in a terrible technical position.

Stamina:
Nadal has a good 5 set record, due to the fact he has stamina and fitness. I would say that physcially, Ferrer Murray and Djokovic all have as much if not more stamina than Nadal

I give you that though Nadal beats those guys on the stamina flat out.

Mental strength:
Nadal has incredible focus, which means so far in his career he rarely loses his intensity for prolonged periods.
It's this combined with his will to win, and determination to never give up, which makes him a hugely difficult player to deal with. He also has a tendency of stepping his play up a level in the crucial moments of a set.

Very strong mentally when he knows his opponent will tire...get so nervous and panics when he does npt see his opponent tiring and therefore uses and abuses MTOs to unsettle his opponent. Worse doesn;t not even defend Wimbledon when he thinks he is not 110% cause of fear of facing a defeat! That is appauling and will make him the worse champion ever.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:16 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:But it simply isn't true... accessibility to top level performance enhancing drugs is not difficult.
I took my 5 minutes, and I had the option of having a cocktail of peds being delivered right to my house within a click of a button.

The only real argument you have left... is the ITF are so stringent with their drugs policy, that they create the barrier.
But this isn't what you've been arguing, you've been arguing so far that the ITF are incompetent.
If not, then one cannot have it both ways, if you argue the ITF are stringent, then I can argue it is therefore plausible to suggest that means Nadal must improve fitness through legal means.

Repeating the same non-sense ignoring the reality. In short you are a fan who has not matured in the 2 to 3 years we have known you. Sad!

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:26 pm

Tenez wrote:So why does it do so badly on green grass which is the surface that best requires eye/hand coordination?

Does he do badly?
He reached the final 5 times in a row between 2006 and 2011 (apart from 2009).

Tenez wrote:Bizarre. That is everything bar a reflex shot. How can you call a reflex shot that is travelling the whole length of a tennic court? Amazing power certainly to generate so much power while beoing in a terrible technical position.

Which shot are you talking about?
The one where the ball was behind him? Certainly it's not as if Federer was beaten by the power, it was pure timing from Nadal. Ask a guy with poor hand-eye coordination to hit that shot... no chance.

Tenez wrote:Very strong mentally when he knows his opponent will tire

Oh really? When he was a break down in the final set against Djokovic in the French Open 2013, he played his best most aggressive tennis... how on earth would he have info that Djokovic (who has fantastic stamina) would tire or not.

Tenez wrote:Repeating the same non-sense ignoring the reality.

I'm afraid it's the other way around!
According to your theory, the main reason why thousands of people aren't becoming Nadal, is because they don't have access to peds. But I think even you know that can't be right, they are freely available on the legal market.
And the only place you turn to then, is contradicting what you've been saying for years now... and argue that the ITF anti-doping policy is so stringent that it is creating this barrier! In which case, any Nadal fan can pick up that argument and argue thus Nadal can only improve fitness through legal means.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:39 pm

Were you referring to one of these two shots:

Skip to 8:15:

It is clear that both those shots require immaculate timing... imagine if Nadal had missed either the hotdog lob or 'behind' shot by half a second... no chance either would go in. Timing, hand-eye coordination, and sensational reflexes.
But yet, Tenez does not admit it... simply because he will never allowed himself to describe a Nadal shot in that terms... he may well have not pressed play!

by noleisthebest Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:01 pm

Amri, it's clear you don't know what timing is, that's why I advised you to go and listen to ball-striking in Wimbledon (or anywhere else where you can get close to players.
If you play yourself, you should know it already.

by noleisthebest Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:05 pm

noleisthebest wrote:Amri, it's clear you don't know what timing is, that's why I advised you to go and listen to ball-striking in Wimbledon (or anywhere else where you can get close to players.
If you play yourself, you should know it already.

And in case you are again wondering what has that got to do with your topic, the answer is: everything!
Once you understand that talented ball-striking achieves the same or more pace with infinite less energy, than muscled bashing you will finally grasp why Nadal has very little talent, why his only way of playing is the way it is and why the only way he can play like he does is by being heavily doped.
No dope, Nadal doesn't feature in top 500.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:11 pm

You don't think that hot-dog lob requires timing?

Either way, you are not actually addressing my points.
NITB, forgetting what Tenez has suggested, why do you think we are not seeing hundreds of replica Nadals?

If your theory is to be believed, the answer is basically nothing, and thus the theory must be wrong.

by noleisthebest Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:15 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:You don't think that hot-dog lob requires timing?

Either way, you are not actually addressing my points.
NITB, forgetting what Tenez has suggested, why do you think we are not seeing hundreds of replica Nadals?

If your theory is to be believed, the answer is basically nothing, and thus the theory must be wrong.

Tenez explained it really well, I have nothing to add to it.

by truffin1 Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:20 pm

I am not so far over to one side on the Nadal no talent issue as some on here, so I’ll try and explain it to you Amri.

Peds are enhancers- they enhance what’s already there. They cannot take you and me and make us something we are not- but they can take a very good to great athtlete and make him a superstar. The list is countless of those that it has worked for. Armstrong was a good rider who became a dominant one- based on Peds, Bonds was a good baseball player who became dominant- based on Peds, McGwire a good homerun hitter who became a record breaker based on Peds…    They took a very good athtlete in Nadal and made him a dominant one.

You think because other players have access to dope and don’t become as good as Nadal proves something? That’s an incredibly naïve line of thinking. Lets flip that-   Why isn’t every baseball player as good as Arod, Bonds? They all have the same access, they are all the cream of the crop to make it to the major leagues. Why was LA able to dominate the Tour…we know other riders were doping too? The anwer is because a certain few have a better base to enhance.   A certain few have attributes or talent that suit the conditions better. McGwire doped up wouldn’t have helped him as much in an era where the ball was put in play in the field you had to rely on speed and base running and you also had to be a great fielder on defense to be a superstar. His attributes were perfect for his era because the PEDS made him into a muscle bound power hitter and the conditions got perfect for that…

That’s the answer-   Unlike some on here, I think Nadal does have talents.   Just like the Russians, Chinese, plenty of countries have done with countless athtletes- Nadal was recognized at an early age as having some special attributes- Toni hit on a style that perfectly suited those attributes, the Spanish sports powers then began their programs which we know for a fact that do- doping their young cyclists, soccer players, tennis stars- and out of those multiple kids- Nadal rose to the cream of the crop.

So what though- the best I can say for Nadal is he is a good tennis player who doped which made him a great tennis player, and then he got lucky with the technology coming into play just as he arrived that also enhanced his style, and even more so- the powers of the sport began to create conditions with the balls and courts that also enhanced his style. All that combined made him into statistically- one of the greats.

Your experiment is so comical- it’s really not even worth discussing. Nadal began hitting the way he hits as a kid- has hit millions of balls that way- of course he develops timing, abilities that some club player taking lessons can’t even start doing.   Take any top player and pick out a signature shot and try your group on that- it will be a disaster as well… Maybe not to your untrained eye- you’ll see someone hit a one handed backhand and it will land in- but trust me- it’s nothing like what a Federer can hit.   Other top players could hit more like Nadal if they wanted to, but it’s not who they are and it’s not how they were taught and trained for years. At the Federer/Roddick MSG expo- someone yelled out “Go Rafa” to Roddick as he was getting ready to serve. As a joke he started whipping the ball just like Rafa, crazy top spin right at Federers backhand. Grunting like Rafa.. Went right at Fed’s backhand. You know what happened. Fed took a backhand up around his shoulders and went long..   It was a carbon copy of Nadal/Federer patterns.    Roddick could hit just like Nadal if he wanted too and spent the time Nadal did honing that style, but it’s not who he is. Players have their own style- they don’t care to replicate what they weren’t trained in- did Frazier, Foreman try to fight like Ali when Ali was dominating? No- because their talents were in other areas and they had spent thousands and thousands of hours.
Nadal was trained with a fairly unorthodox style that he has spend untold time honing. Unless you go and take a young boy who is a very good athlete- and begin training him in that style, throw in the very best medical technology sponsored in part by government, and come back to us 20 years from now- there is no valid experiment that you can perform that means anything in terms of why or how Nadal is so good.
I don't know if Nadal would have been less than a top 50 player if clean like some on here say, I don't know if he would have been top 5...   what I do know- is he is not clean- so it's taints everything he has done.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:42 pm

I don't follow cycling or American sports much, so I can't really respond to those specific references.

truffin wrote:they can take a very good to great athtlete and make him a superstar.

But there are many of these athletes, no?

I highlighted 4 key attributes that make Nadal stand out:

Hand-eye coordination, and timing:
To be able to time the ball with such consistency, putting huge topspin with an incredibly difficult grip and at high pace; takes immaculate timing. Not many other players can pull off Nadal's forehand with any consistency, the grip itself means it is very easy to shank the ball.

Reflex on Defence:
Players know that Nadal has stunning reflexes, and with his brilliant timing, can stick his racket out form nearly impossible positions and get the ball back into play. This has a dual effect, as it also means opponents have to take huge risks when attacking, which mean they make more errors.
Scroll up to the top of the thread, and watch those videos... espeically the last one against Federer.

Stamina:
Nadal has a good 5 set record, due to the fact he has stamina and fitness. I would say that physcially, Ferrer Murray and Djokovic all have as much if not more stamina than Nadal

Mental strength:
Nadal has incredible focus, which means so far in his career he rarely loses his intensity for prolonged periods.
It's this combined with his will to win, and determination to never give up, which makes him a hugely difficult player to deal with. He also has a tendency of stepping his play up a level in the crucial moments of a set.

truffin wrote:At the Federer/Roddick MSG expo- someone yelled out “Go Rafa” to Roddick as he was getting ready to serve. As a joke he started whipping the ball just like Rafa, crazy top spin right at Federers backhand. Grunting like Rafa.. Went right at Fed’s backhand. You know what happened. Fed took a backhand up around his shoulders and went long.. It was a carbon copy of Nadal/Federer patterns.

Are you having a laugh? Is this a genuine argument?
Firstly it was an exhibition, and in that rally both players were playing at 1/4 pace... if Nadal played like that Federer would just smash the ball for a winner. Roddick did not actually have the grip Nadal uses, and as I said hit the ball with not much pace.
Secondly Roddick was playing right handed, so it was certainly not a 'carbon copy' of any Fedal pattern.
'Fed took a backhand up around his shoulders and went long..'
This is just a total lie. Roddick actually won the point after hitting an angled winner from a Federer drop-shot.
...but see
This is proof. You are literally willing to fabricate anything if it conveniently helps your argument, and here it's been shown.

Take any top player and pick out a signature shot and try your group on that- it will be a disaster as well…

No, I mean every grip we did was a signature shot of a top player, I just spoke about Nadal's the longest as it was more relevant to the thread. eg for the eastern we have a copy of JDMP's forehand etc.
And I'm aware of course that in such a short amount of time, the forehand will not be identical, but we used consistent parameters. However I am not claiming this is proof, certainly unless it was repeated many times over a longer period of times with many groups, I cannot claim it as conclusive.

truffin wrote:Roddick could hit just like Nadal if he wanted too and spent the time Nadal did honing that style, but it’s not who he is.

Really?
You think if Roddick wanted he could hit Nadal's forehand, with the consistency and accuracy Nadal has?

by noleisthebest Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:47 pm

truffin1 wrote: Unlike some on here, I think Nadal does have talents. Just like the Russians, Chinese, plenty of countries have done with countless athtletes- Nadal was recognized at an early age as having some special attributes- Toni hit on a style that perfectly suited those attributes, the Spanish sports powers then began their programs which we know for a fact that do- doping their young cyclists, soccer players, tennis stars- and out of those multiple kids- Nadal rose to the cream of the crop.

Not sure why you used plural here, for me, when it comes to tennis, there is only one talent I have in mind and that's ball striking.
Everything else: athleticism, movement, focus, stamina etc. I view more as skill, something that defines and helps any athlete, not just a tennis player.
The way Nadal strikes the ball, to me is the opposite of how a talented player strikes it. Simple as that.

by noleisthebest Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:52 pm

By your logic, Silvester Stallone is a talented actor because he has made millions, so why aren't millions and millions of stupid people with pumped muscles, wearing a bandana and fake tan just going to Hollywood and pocketing all that easy cash!

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:57 pm

I don't know Stallone's career inside out, nor do I know the ins and outs of acting.
I guess these days first acting in plays, and then auditioning for small parts in films to start of?

Certainly something must make Nadal stand out, he has a positive H2H against everyone he's played more than once part from Davydenko... and no can argue Davydenko plays like Nadal.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:26 pm

Truffin I do not agree on the fact that PEDs are PEDs. It's like a F1 some have a better car than others. Like some have a better team of doctors than others. This is what Tyler Hamilton himself was saying and he knows I guess what he was talking about. PEDs creates an unfair advantage even amongst those who dope.

Nadal has talent as much as Gasquet is very fit. I know very well what talented players can do and I know how hard work can help stay with the talented ones. I was in a tennis boarding school young though was only there for the studies not tennis but that is how I knew a lot of young tennis talents and I had regular trips to George Deniau academy (Guy Forget coach) and I know that if you take a normal, good healthy kid and you put him in a 4 hour 5days a week training, he will get to top national level...then very quickly it's down to motivation and health. I am part of a tiny club here in London and already we have 2 kids at national level and another one who was number 14 in the country at the age of 14 before he sustained a back injury. Is it luck to have 3 hopeful players in such a tiny club?? No it was simply that in every case their parents were extremely dedicated and focused giving up all their free time and weekends for their kids competition and investing lots of money on coaching and so on. . Margins that will separate them from the top players at adult stage will be very thin....But motivation and dedication are key to be there or thereabout at the top. Then of course you have talent making the difference between the better ones and more than ever fitness. And having the right team is essential.

To me it's clear that Nadal's talent is average compared with the top 100...His footwork is one of the best and I guess that is his main talent but his ball striking is one of the worst. If you look at many rallies....he is often in a situation to put the ball away but simply has not the guts because the skills to do it. You can even see that in the rally v Djoko Amri posted above. Having talent means being able to take the ball early. Its' as simple as that. This is why he does not do well on fast green grass despite having that huge physical advantage. Losing to Dodig or being bagelled by guys like Lacko says it all. The fact he lost on fast grass last summer against an injured player means that he simply has not the basic talent to get away when not 100%. As Bluenose says a not very fit Nadal does not win many matches.

And this is why he panics so much when his body is not 110%. Wilander pointed that out and again he is spot on.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:30 pm

noleisthebest wrote:
truffin1 wrote: Unlike some on here, I think Nadal does have talents. Just like the Russians, Chinese, plenty of countries have done with countless athtletes- Nadal was recognized at an early age as having some special attributes- Toni hit on a style that perfectly suited those attributes, the Spanish sports powers then began their programs which we know for a fact that do- doping their young cyclists, soccer players, tennis stars- and out of those multiple kids- Nadal rose to the cream of the crop.

Not sure why you used plural here, for me, when it comes to tennis, there is only one talent I have in mind and that's ball striking.
Everything else: athleticism, movement, focus, stamina etc. I view more as skill, something that defines and helps any athlete, not just a tennis player.
The way Nadal strikes the ball, to me is the opposite of how a talented player strikes it. Simple as that.

The main thing is that it is all relative. As I said gasquet has talent and is very fit. His fitness is poor compared to Nadal though....and likewise I think Nadal's talent is poor compared to Davydenko.

Talent doesn't mean silver...on the contrary. It's only one factor...and a very small one nowadays....unless you are Federer.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:31 pm

noleisthebest wrote:By your logic, Silvester Stallone is a talented actor because he has made millions, so why aren't millions and millions of stupid people with pumped muscles, wearing a bandana and fake tan just going to Hollywood and pocketing all that easy cash!

Good one!

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:35 pm

With the the exception of Federer, I don't think anyone can really argue there's been a greater player than Nadal in the past decade.
My theory may be right or it may be wrong, but certainly there's a possibility it's correct, as the combination of my factors could explain why Nadal is so unique in his game and stands out as one of the most successful.
With Tenez's theory, this possibility doesn't arise, or so I've tried to argue. Tenez's main response has been two fold; firstly to suggest that it's the availability of peds which is limited. I think it's fair to say that considering peds are freely available and in huge supply in the legal market even in the UK... this is not much of a barrier. Secondly he argued that it could be getting past the ITF drugs test... this is contradictory to his normal stance which is that the ITF is incompetent. If the ITF is so stringent, then any Nadal fan could use that to argue that Rafa uses legal means to boost his performance.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:44 pm

Really Tenez?

You see a point where Nadal hits a hotdog lob, and the first thing that comes to your mind is that he doesn't have much talent?

by noleisthebest Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:48 pm

Tenez wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
truffin1 wrote: Unlike some on here, I think Nadal does have talents. Just like the Russians, Chinese, plenty of countries have done with countless athtletes- Nadal was recognized at an early age as having some special attributes- Toni hit on a style that perfectly suited those attributes, the Spanish sports powers then began their programs which we know for a fact that do- doping their young cyclists, soccer players, tennis stars- and out of those multiple kids- Nadal rose to the cream of the crop.

Not sure why you used plural here, for me, when it comes to tennis, there is only one talent I have in mind and that's ball striking.
Everything else: athleticism, movement, focus, stamina etc. I view more as skill, something that defines and helps any athlete, not just a tennis player.
The way Nadal strikes the ball, to me is the opposite of how a talented player strikes it. Simple as that.

The main thing is that it is all relative. As I said gasquet has talent and is very fit. His fitness is poor compared to Nadal though....and likewise I think Nadal's talent is poor compared to Davydenko.

Talent doesn't mean silver...on the contrary. It's only one factor...and a very small one nowadays....unless you are Federer.

Not sure what your point is here.
Talent is not an absolute quantity, of course it varies, some have more and some less of it.
And of course it doesn't feature much in slow conditions where shot-making - the most obvious manifestation of talent is not rewarded with balls being easily retrieved for as long as it need be.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:51 pm

Tenez wrote:
Julia Santamaria wrote:Really Tenez?

You see a point where Nadal hits a hotdog lob, and the first thing that comes to your mind is that he doesn't have much talent?
It is honestly absurd that you base your argument about nadal having talent on a lob! let me remind you that his talented lob did not save hiim from a straight loss on his home soil that day. You have such points from every 100 top players and i am sure from the top 1000. It does not prove anything.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:54 pm

noleisthebest wrote:
Tenez wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
truffin1 wrote: Unlike some on here, I think Nadal does have talents. Just like the Russians, Chinese, plenty of countries have done with countless athtletes- Nadal was recognized at an early age as having some special attributes- Toni hit on a style that perfectly suited those attributes, the Spanish sports powers then began their programs which we know for a fact that do- doping their young cyclists, soccer players, tennis stars- and out of those multiple kids- Nadal rose to the cream of the crop.

Not sure why you used plural here, for me, when it comes to tennis, there is only one talent I have in mind and that's ball striking.
Everything else: athleticism, movement, focus, stamina etc. I view more as skill, something that defines and helps any athlete, not just a tennis player.
The way Nadal strikes the ball, to me is the opposite of how a talented player strikes it. Simple as that.

The main thing is that it is all relative. As I said gasquet has talent and is very fit. His fitness is poor compared to Nadal though....and likewise I think Nadal's talent is poor compared to Davydenko.

Talent doesn't mean silver...on the contrary. It's only one factor...and a very small one nowadays....unless you are Federer.

Not sure what your point is here.
Talent is not an absolute quantity, of course it varies, some have more and some less of it.
And of course it doesn't feature much in slow conditions where shot-making - the most obvious manifestation of talent is not rewarded with balls being easily retrieved for as long as it need be.

When we talk professional sport talent has to be compared with those who play that sport professionally. So no-one is saying that Nadal has no talent in absolute value but, at least for me, not much in relative value.

In fact as I said a 1000 times, Toni's plan is to take talent out of the equation and this is why, on this point I disagree with Truffin.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:57 pm

Tenez wrote:
Julia Santamaria wrote:Really Tenez?

You see a point where Nadal hits a hotdog lob, and the first thing that comes to your mind is that he doesn't have much talent?
It is honestly absurd that you base your argument about nadal having talent on a lob! let me remind you that his talented lob did not save hiim from a straight loss on his home soil that day. You have such points from every 100 top players and i am sure from the top 1000. It does not prove anything.

I am not basing my argument one one lob!
And yes I know he lost that day, so? He still has one of the best h2h vs Djoko.

And you do not get that sort of genius from normal top100 players... I watch a lot of tennis including 250s, 500s, challengers... not many have the ability to play that hotdog lob with the timing and precision he did.

by noleisthebest Fri Feb 14, 2014 7:21 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:
And you do not get that sort of genius from normal top100 players... I watch a lot of tennis including 250s, 500s, challengers... not many have the ability to play that hotdog lob with the timing and precision he did.

Why Tenez is wrong on Nadal- Detailed analysis The_Scream

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 7:35 pm

by truffin1 Fri Feb 14, 2014 9:22 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:I don't follow cycling or American sports much, so I can't really respond to those specific references.

truffin wrote:they can take a very good to great athtlete and make him a superstar.
But there are many of these athletes, no?

I highlighted 4 key attributes that make Nadal stand out:
Hand-eye coordination, and timing:
To be able to time the ball with such consistency, putting huge topspin with an incredibly difficult grip and at high pace; takes immaculate timing. Not many other players can pull off Nadal's forehand with any consistency, the grip itself means it is very easy to shank the ball.

Reflex on Defence:
Players know that Nadal has stunning reflexes, and with his brilliant timing, can stick his racket out form nearly impossible positions and get the ball back into play. This has a dual effect, as it also means opponents have to take huge risks when attacking, which mean they make more errors.
Scroll up to the top of the thread, and watch those videos... espeically the last one against Federer.

Stamina:
Nadal has a good 5 set record, due to the fact he has stamina and fitness. I would say that physcially, Ferrer Murray and Djokovic all have as much if not more stamina than Nadal

Mental strength:
Nadal has incredible focus, which means so far in his career he rarely loses his intensity for prolonged periods.
It's this combined with his will to win, and determination to never give up, which makes him a hugely difficult player to deal with. He also has a tendency of stepping his play up a level in the crucial moments of a set.

truffin wrote:At the Federer/Roddick MSG expo- someone yelled out “Go Rafa” to Roddick as he was getting ready to serve. As a joke he started whipping the ball just like Rafa, crazy top spin right at Federers backhand. Grunting like Rafa.. Went right at Fed’s backhand. You know what happened. Fed took a backhand up around his shoulders and went long.. It was a carbon copy of Nadal/Federer patterns.
Are you having a laugh? Is this a genuine argument?
Firstly it was an exhibition, and in that rally both players were playing at 1/4 pace... if Nadal played like that Federer would just smash the ball for a winner. Roddick did not actually have the grip Nadal uses, and as I said hit the ball with not much pace.
Secondly Roddick was playing right handed, so it was certainly not a 'carbon copy' of any Fedal pattern.
'Fed took a backhand up around his shoulders and went long..'
This is just a total lie. Roddick actually won the point after hitting an angled winner from a Federer drop-shot.
...but see
This is proof. You are literally willing to fabricate anything if it conveniently helps your argument, and here it's been shown.

Take any top player and pick out a signature shot and try your group on that- it will be a disaster as well…
No, I mean every grip we did was a signature shot of a top player, I just spoke about Nadal's the longest as it was more relevant to the thread. eg for the eastern we have a copy of JDMP's forehand etc.
And I'm aware of course that in such a short amount of time, the forehand will not be identical, but we used consistent parameters. However I am not claiming this is proof, certainly unless it was repeated many times over a longer period of times with many groups, I cannot claim it as conclusive.

truffin wrote:Roddick could hit just like Nadal if he wanted too and spent the time Nadal did honing that style, but it’s not who he is.

Really?
You think if Roddick wanted he could hit Nadal's forehand, with the consistency and accuracy Nadal has?

Your 1st question- yes there are many good athletes who dope and some become superstars, some don't, the Peds just make them all better than they would be naturally... So what? What is your point ? If 100 athtletes dope, they all are enhanced beyond their natural abilities- but the best of those 100 will still rise even higher. Then you throw in circumstances and conditions that might make some rise even more than others. All you can say is Nadal is the best of the dopers.. Wow, something to be proud of..   I have no interest in cheering for the best of the cheaters...  the fact he cheats instantly cancels him out IMO. Many fans don't care, they just like his tennis.

2 I was at the MSG show and yes- you are right- I forgot how the point ended.. So what-- it doesn't change my greater point...  It's funny- you cry about how people pick on you and declare this thread a no insult thread- but you have no problem calling me a liar because I misremember some inconsequential moment. You talk about people making up stuff,etc- yet you are the one with fake sources that give you wrong information about court speeds, you make up that you are the first to break doping news when the truth is it's already all over the place, you make up so and so told you this and that- always to the benefit of Nadal. You're comeback against Rochus doping allegations is that he accused Federer yet you didn't give me a link or source when asked. You make up that Toni's friend and official documentary maker is a liar and fake random twitter poster- the guy who Toni uses to break news of when and where Nadal is playing- a guy who the Nadal fans sites rely on to break news. Just because he posts Toni admitting he coaches- you then call him a nobody...    Quit being a hypocrite.

3. If you see my statement about Roddick could hit just like Nadal- I say if he had spent the same time Nadal did working on that skill...   Roddick is a world class player, former #1, Major winner, top 10 player over several eras- yes- if he had been raised hitting like Nadal from the start, was doped starting as a junior- had spend all the same time Nadal has honing his style-- Roddick could definatly hit just like Nadal.   Players are molded into who they become from the start.    I can't believe you can't understand that.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 9:37 pm

1. I'm not saying that Nadal dopes.
What I'm trying to argue is that even if we are to believe what Tenez is saying, then we reach a situation where we have countless numbers who can do what Nadal is doing... but that simply isn't the case. There very few who can play like Nadal.
Don't take my assumption for the sake of this debate that Tenez is right, as a substitute for me saying Tenez is right.

2. What annoyed my was not the fact you remembered it wrong, it's that your conclusions from your false evidence happened to exactly match with what would be convenient for you in the debate... the idea that Roddick could break down Federer's backhand with topspin in a exhibition devalues what Nadal has been doing to Federer.
If it is a coincidence, that you misremembered the event in such a way that helped your argument... then my apologies.

3.

had spend all the same time Nadal has honing his style-- Roddick could definatly hit just like Nadal. I can't believe you can't understand that.

Really, could you say that for definite?
It's very easy to say you know things for definite.
In reality, how would you know whether Roddick would have the talent, timing to be able to constantly hit at 3000 rpms at high velocity. How would you know whether he has the stunning reflexes that Nadal always shows during defending.
He was a great player, but serve rather than groundstrokes have always been a strong point. Of course it's possible that he could hit like Nadal... but to say it's definite is taking a huge leap. I would say more than unlikely.

by truffin1 Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:18 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:1. I'm not saying that Nadal dopes.
What I'm trying to argue is that even if we are to believe what Tenez is saying, then we reach a situation where we have countless numbers who can do what Nadal is doing... but that simply isn't the case. There very few who can play like Nadal.
Don't take my assumption for the sake of this debate that Tenez is right, as a substitute for me saying Tenez is right.

2. What annoyed my was not the fact you remembered it wrong, it's that your conclusions from your false evidence happened to exactly match with what would be convenient for you in the debate... the idea that Roddick could break down Federer's backhand with topspin in a exhibition devalues what Nadal has been doing to Federer.
If it is a coincidence, that you misremembered the event in such a way that helped your argument... then my apologies.

3.
had spend all the same time Nadal has honing his style-- Roddick could definatly hit just like Nadal. I can't believe you can't understand that.
Really, could you say that for definite?
It's very easy to say you know things for definite.
In reality, how would you know whether Roddick would have the talent, timing to be able to constantly hit at 3000 rpms at high velocity. How would you know whether he has the stunning reflexes that Nadal always shows during defending.
He was a great player, but serve rather than groundstrokes have always been a strong point. Of course it's possible that he could hit like Nadal... but to say it's definite is taking a huge leap. I would say more than unlikely.

If it's just an argument between what Tenez thinks and what you think- then fine. I've said I don't agree he is without talent or with the angle that anyone or countless could just pick up a racquet, dope and be as good as Nadal. I'm trying to answer the greater question that you keep posing-- the answer is that Nadal has enhanced what he could do naturally with Peds, by a stroke of luck (born in right era) or by the ATP looking for a counter to Federer dominance to generate interest the conditions were perfect for his style, and the new technology came into play which also suited his style- and all these things have resulted in him being a statistically greater player than he would otherwise.

I assure you that my throwaway antecdote that popped into my mind about the expo I was at while I was spending all of 5 minutes writing a post was hardly meant as major evidence to my point. It was just a point- and regardless of how the point ended- still fits. You like to nitpick at the smallest things because it enables you to ignore the greater truth. I wasn't trying to fit anyting into what I was saying by lying- it was simple mistake- but we can move on from that.

You say I have know way of knowing if Roddick could do this and that.... you are right- I shouldn't say definite............. but really no different than you saying unlikely. You have no way of knowing either. It's just that a player of Roddicks caliber, his talents-- I THINK based on my knowledge, my experience.... if you started moulding him at an early age- and added in peds,etc that I believe Nadal has-- you could create just about anything you wanted. I value my opinion more so than yours on the subject :-)... clearly you think not... just remember though- you are the one who admitted after the AO and posted it for all to see that "you know nothing about Tennis"... I've never admitted to such. :-)

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:23 pm

I am now not just arguing that Tenez is probably wrong, I am saying that his theory simply cannot be correct.

What Truffin was saying on the other hand, can actually be true, although he did not really explain what he thinks makes Nadal so unique (to be fair to truffin I did not ask him... but perhaps I can now. Truffin, according to your theory many players could be on peds, so peds aside; what do you think makes Nadal so unique on the court... what makes him stand out?).

Back to what Tenez was saying, any reasonable theory on Nadal would have to mean that there is something special and unique about him.
In the last decade I don't think apart from Federer you can name another player who has had the success he has had, and certainly Federer does not have the same style as Nadal.
So what is it about Nadal's game and play, that makes him so tough to beat? What makes him stand out?

My theory highlighted 4 key areas:
-talent and hand-eye coordination to hit his forehand with such timing and precision, hitting 3000 rpms consistently and giving his opponent huge problems with topspin
-reflex on defence, connected to the first point in many ways, but the guy has stunning reflexes and agility that means he is a superb defensive player.
-stamina, I think he's right up there, level with Murray, Djokovic, Ferrer now
-mental strength, by this I think his focus his extraordinary so far during his career, very rarely loses his intensity

So you can see what I'm saying, and it may not be exactly right, but you can understand why the combination of these 4 factors, all of which Nadal is strong at, makes him stand out.

But if you were to read what Tenez has to say on Nadal, you cannot reach that same conclusion, as there is nothing that would make him stand-out.
He has muscles? I've seen people with bigger muscles than him, who simply go to the gym regularly
He has stamina? Well there are many legal ways, such as a strict diet and a fitness regime that can improve your fitness. Even past this, if he has peds, they are widely available even on the legal market. So many people can do this.
The ITF doping agency are tough to get past? Well Tenez hinted at this now today, but all the while has been arguing the opposite, he has been saying how incompetent the ITF are. If he's right now with this U turn, and they is really stringent testing, then Nadal fans can use the same argument to say that this means Nadal must be working within legal means.

So what do we have at the end? A theory which adds up to thousands of people who will be able to do the same thing as Nadal. As Tenez said, the 'proof is in the pudding'- it is simply not the case that so many could, or they would have done so. Any argument about Nadal being able to time the ball well is dismissed, I think the fact Tenez watched Nadal hit an incredible hot-dog lob and his first reaction he said was 'Nadal does not talent to hit that' (or something to that effect), it is clear whatever Nadal does, or whatever the evidence is, Tenez will come to the same conclusion.

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:29 pm

Look at talent. It took a MTO in that AO final to throw Stan's down the drain and lose a set versus an injured Nadal, despite crushing Nadal with that talent for a set and a half.

talent is fragile, and Nadal's game certainly isn't. From the little I read from Nadal's biography he seems to admit himself that he is not that talented and Toni told him not to worry about it he will beat those talented guys with other weapons.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:29 pm

truffin wrote:I value my opinion more so than yours on the subject :-)

I've argued against many things on this forum, but not going to argue against this.
I am sure you do!

As does everyone really, if they didn't believe something, it wouldn't be their opinion would it Run

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:33 pm

Tenez wrote:Look at talent. It took a MTO in that AO final to throw Stan's down the drain and lose a set versus an injured Nadal, despite crushing Nadal with that talent for a set and a half.

talent is fragile, and Nadal's game certainly isn't. From the little I read from Nadal's biography he seems to admit himself that he is not that talented and Toni told him not to worry about it he will beat those talented guys with other weapons.

Stan got nervous as he was on the brink of the biggest victory of his career... but he picked himself up for the 4th set, and credit to him.
'Talent is fragile.' Saying something doesn't mean it's true.
As for your quote, most of that seems to be made up. It is true that Nadal never seems to rate himself in interviews though, but this is part of his mentality, he uses the mentality to drive himself... nothing wrong with that.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:36 pm

No relevant response to my argument then (I mean a few clichés, false quotes, and a AO'14 reference), so can we take it then you admit that your theory has basically been debunked.
I mean it's not like you have much space left, all you can really do is go down the 'only Nadal has access to special peds' or your u-turn over the competence of ITF; both arguments which I think we can agree to be very unconvincing.

(If this sort of post won't get Tenez into a reply, nothing will Winking

)

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:44 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:Back to what Tenez was saying, any reasonable theory on Nadal would have to mean that there is something special and unique about him.

Pilpoul! Have you googled the word yet? You have such a fallacious reasoning. It's a pleasure to point it to you!

Yes, Toni, his team and his uncles relations. That's what SO special about Nadal, what is so unique. You can see that just by the on court coaching. Nadal is Toni's pigmallion. Nothing special about Nadal otherwise he woudl not need Toni (and his coaching) so desperately.

But what is even more true than my theory is that you as a FAN, that's the last thing you want to admit.

In the last decade I don't think apart from Federer you can name another player who has had the success he has had, and certainly Federer does not have the same style as Nadal.
So what is it about Nadal's game and play, that makes him so tough to beat? What makes him stand out?

Success can come in many forms and shapes. Federer with Talent, Nadal with bizarre extraordinary fitness. Very simple. Pete's was essentially his second serve on fast surface! They are many ways to get to the top.

My theory highlighted 4 key areas:

What have theories got to do with facts, bar self-inflating your ego?

But if you were to read what Tenez has to say on Nadal, you cannot reach that same conclusion, as there is nothing that would make him stand-out.

..aaagggaiiinn Toni and his team! You don;t want to see it do you fan?

by Tenez Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:49 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:Stan got nervous as he was on the brink of the biggest victory of his career... but he picked himself up for the 4th set, and credit to him.

Oh thanks I did not notice.

'Talent is fragile.' Saying something doesn't mean it's true.

Saying it does not mean it true does not mean it's not true. Doh

An MTO through Stan's edge out. This is why so many players complain about Nadal cause Nadal knows that rattling the a bit is enough to throw their edge off. Connors was the king at rattling his opponents.

by N2D2L Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:54 pm

Been a long long time since I've seen you struggle like this in a debate. Or maybe it's just me.

Tenez wrote:..aaagggaiiinn Toni and his team!

OK, Toni gave Nadal potty training when he was younger, now helps Nadal brush his teeth.
Right, from now on, to ensure you can't say this to every relevant question I ask you, I will refer to Nadal by 'Nadals' or 'Nadal Ltd'.
Toni isn't a fairy godmother.
Toni did not move Nadal to a tennis academy in Madrid, he could have. What does Toni have that the tennis academy doesn't.

What have theories got to do with facts, bar self-inflating your ego?

This genuinely made me laugh.

But really here, Tenez, this is not convincing.
The very idea that Nadal's precision and timing which enables him to generate 3000 rpms and huge topspin so consistently may help him, or that he has sensational agility and reflexes which means he has an incredible defence... you are so so fearful of even admitting it. It's like a little girl seeing a spider, you simply don't want to go near it!

by Sponsored content

Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30