David Ferrer ...what a talent!

'making the game look easy'- this is far too simplistic to be a definition of talent in my opinion.

Can you explain why you think Nadal is more talented than Ferrer? I am interested to hear your views in a lengthy reasoned post. You go about it a lot on 606v2. SO please be as garrulous as you like.

luvsports! wrote:Can you explain why you think Nadal is more talented than Ferrer? I am interested to hear your views in a lengthy reasoned post. You go about it a lot on 606v2. SO please be as garrulous as you like.

OK sure:

Yesterday I showed the aspects I see under talent in the sport of tennis:

-ability
-reflexes/ hand-eye coordination
-shot selection
-reproducibility of shots
-mental strength

Nadal for me is ahead in all of those aspects. He has the ability to pull off outrageous winners from almost nowhere, and he is very difficult to play against as he plays with a unique grip that can create ridiculous amounts of topspin (more RPMs than any player currently...). His hand-eye coordination is stunning- to play the shots he does from nowhere to bend the ball in- sometimes quite literally sticking his racket out and timing and directing the ball with perfection. Shot selection wise- both players are pretty sound in choosing from their armoury- but Ferrer sometimes in big points against top players can be a bit wild. Reproducibility of shots- this is probably Ferrer's biggest strengths- it's one thing being able to play a good shot, but being able to do it more consistently is a sign of talent. Nadal is so strong in this category it's unreal- he beats Ferrer. In terms of mental strength- both players are strong- but Nadal is ahead. It's one thing being able to play well on break points and crucial points as Nadal does- but having an intensity throughout the match as Nadal does (Nadal doesn't let his performance fluctuate like a normal player during a match... he stays so intense and focused) puts him ahead.

What would everyone's top 10 tennis talent leaderboard be and why?

luvsports! wrote:What would everyone's top 10 tennis talent leaderboard be and why?

Good idea, why not start a seperate thread?

kl

Kim Jong-Un wrote:'making the game look easy'- this is far too simplistic to be a definition of talent in my opinion.

It's actually the definition.

Is Nadal good at tennis? No....he says it himself in his book. I know you will never accept what your hero says himself.

Kim Jong-Un wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Can you explain why you think Nadal is more talented than Ferrer? I am interested to hear your views in a lengthy reasoned post. You go about it a lot on 606v2. SO please be as garrulous as you like.

OK sure:

Yesterday I showed the aspects I see under talent in the sport of tennis:

-ability
-reflexes/ hand-eye coordination
-shot selection
-reproducibility of shots
-mental strength

Nadal for me is ahead in all of those aspects. He has the ability to pull off outrageous winners from almost nowhere, and he is very difficult to play against as he plays with a unique grip that can create ridiculous amounts of topspin (more RPMs than any player currently...). His hand-eye coordination is stunning- to play the shots he does from nowhere to bend the ball in- sometimes quite literally sticking his racket out and timing and directing the ball with perfection. Shot selection wise- both players are pretty sound in choosing from their armoury- but Ferrer sometimes in big points against top players can be a bit wild. Reproducibility of shots- this is probably Ferrer's biggest strengths- it's one thing being able to play a good shot, but being able to do it more consistently is a sign of talent. Nadal is so strong in this category it's unreal- he beats Ferrer. In terms of mental strength- both players are strong- but Nadal is ahead. It's one thing being able to play well on break points and crucial points as Nadal does- but having an intensity throughout the match as Nadal does (Nadal doesn't let his performance fluctuate like a normal player during a match... he stays so intense and focused) puts him ahead.

Again how can you talk reflexes and Nadal in the same sentence? He is the one who stands further to the baseline in order to be able to time a ball correctly. Nadal admits that his strength over Djoko is that Djoko can take the ball earlier than him. If Nadal were a bit more talented he would be impossible to beat, cause imagine having this power and on top using the ball's pace to inject more pace (taking the ball earlier). He'd pull winners right and left and had knees and wrist of a young boy....instead of being worn out and obliged to miss half the year for the last 3 years!...at an age where he should be about reaching his peak!!!

Mental strength? Are you jocking? He doesn't even try to fight when he is not 110%. he avoid confrontation and as soon as his opponent is close to being fit he panicks. Nadal is full of fears...it's obvious. Federer is able to pull the riskiest shots, lowest margins in all circumstances....that's what mental strength is...not clearing the net and line by 3 meters to fear of rendering an UE....and that can only be done by compensating with a huge fitness...hence his physical problems now.....it all makes sense!

Tenez wrote:

Kim Jong-Un wrote:'making the game look easy'- this is far too simplistic to be a definition of talent in my opinion.

It's actually the definition.

Is Nadal good at tennis? No....he says it himself in his book. I know you will never accept what your hero says himself.

I would add that is the definition of talent in general, not just tennis.
If you are good at something without even trying too hard, it's a guarantee you have a gift.

In opera, nobody can fake a good voice, same with a musical instrument etc.. give someone a pencil and ask them to draw  a portrait of you - there too you can't cheat a talent.

Tenez wrote:
Is Nadal good at tennis? No....he says it himself in his book. I know you will never accept what your hero says himself.

Just because you took a huge felt tip pen and scribbled 'NOT GOOD AT TENNIS' all over his autobiography doesn't mean it's actually in there.

cop out

Nadal is a bit like Justin Biber: very popular, successful, millions of facebook fans...but will anyone remember him or buy his records in 10 years' time?

Tenez wrote:Again how can you talk reflexes and Nadal in the same sentence?

There's a reason very few people can pull off the incredible defensive shots that he does. It's one thing not making unforced errors, but having the hand-eye coordination to time the ball when his opponent is attacking with pace, and then bend the ball the way he does is unreal.
When people play against Nadal they know they have to attack and go for it, so in general people will be hitting the ball with real pace... thus he probably has to deal with pacier balls than most even though he's standing further back.

Tenez wrote:It's actually the definition.

'the definition' meaning 'your definition'; for me talent is about aptitude and for tennis I highlighted the specific aspects I see under that in tennis.

Tenez wrote:Mental strength? Are you joking? He doesn't even try to fight when he is not 110%. he avoid confrontation and as soon as his opponent is close to being fit he panics.

He always tries to fight, obviously if he's injured then the wise thing to do is not aggravate the injury in the long term by playing and worsening the injury. It's true as you said he gets injured often; but it's bizarre to claim that means he isn't mentally strong.
He's one of the mentally strongest tennis players to have lived, his intensity is unbelievable, and he has the ability to raise his game in the biggest moments.

Also you did not respond to my comprehensive take-down of your draw-rigging theory

noleisthebest wrote:Nadal is a bit like Justin Biber: very popular, successful, millions of facebook fans...but will anyone  remember him or buy his records in 10 years' time?

That's a very mean comparison- one the one hand we have a young star who has no talent but is only successful because of our warped world where people have lost a sense of taste; and is only relevant because of horny teenage fan girls who are attracted to him- and then on the other hand we have Justin Beiber.

Kim Jong-Un wrote:

Tenez wrote:Again how can you talk reflexes and Nadal in the same sentence?

There's a reason very few people can pull off the incredible defensive shots that he does. It's one thing not making unforced errors, but having the hand-eye coordination to time the ball when his opponent is attacking with pace, and then bend the ball the way he does is unreal.
When people play against Nadal they know they have to attack and go for it, so in general people will be hitting the ball with real pace... thus he probably has to deal with pacier balls than most even though he's standing further back.

Reflex is measured by how well you are able to control the ball when it's at its fastest (at the net) or on the rise (on the baseline or inside the court).

Nadal deals with the ball the opposite way: he waits for it to lose all its bite by standing as far away from it as possible and then whacks it back safely, loaded with spin.
No player with talent will want to do it as it would wear them out very quickly. It also requires additional sources of energy in order to sustain it.
When Nadal starts taking the ball early, is not afraid of spending time INSIDE tennis court, then we can talk about his talent.

No player could do it if they tried... pulling off the incredible defensive shots he does on a consistent basis... as they don't have the talent to do so.

Kim Jong-Un wrote:No player could do it if they tried... pulling off the incredible defensive shots he does on a consistent basis... as they don't have the talent to do so.

That is highly incorrect.  Any ATP player with the physicality and having trained to hit it like that from way back on the court since a little child would be able to pull off the shots. That takes average talent, but extreme conditioning and extreme repetitive training.  To Toni's credit, he devised a style that worked for Nadal that fit perfectly whatever skills he had. 

Now I don't go as far as some and say Nadal does not have talent- I believe it does. IMO- top class talent... but it's been enhanced by style and peds- to make him the player you marvel at.

truffin wrote:That is highly incorrect.  Any ATP player with the physicality and having trained to hit it like that from way back on the court since a little child would be able to pull off the shots.

Ha ! No way. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkC7d-mrkMQ

Kim Jong-Un wrote:No player could do it if they tried... pulling off the incredible defensive shots he does on a consistent basis... as they don't have the talent to do so.

You are being cornered here. Defense is about getting to a ball that would be winner....therefore it;s about legs and power as one needs to send the ball back from an imposed position. A retriever is in the hands of the attacker and just hopes for a miss from his opponent. If Nadal could win with facility (definition of talent), he'd try to play without risking to worsen his injury....but he knows he can't. Federer and most of the other players play through injury...not Nadal...cause we, and more importantly, he knows that he can't get close to winning a top 50 without being 100%.

Kim Jong-Un wrote:

truffin wrote:That is highly incorrect.  Any ATP player with the physicality and having trained to hit it like that from way back on the court since a little child would be able to pull off the shots.

Ha ! No way. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkC7d-mrkMQ

What a stupid comment from the commentator. "he can do anything with his FH"..well yes except hit an easy winners like any average player. He has to look like a stupid idiot at the mercy of Harisson smash quality. I would be ashamed to have to scrap right and left from the line judge chairs.....

And after seeing that rally, you still think he wins points with ease? That's a joke! No talent at all......all about running fast and big arms as said.

Can't you see either the link between this kind of tennis and his regular absence from the tour. He spends 3 times as much energy than any other player on tour! I am at a loss to read that some (Truffin here) thinks he had talent let alone top class talent! What is his talent truffin? What does he do that the average top 100 player can't do? except running as much, for as long and hitting so much power from 5m behind the baseline?

Tenez wrote:Federer and most of the other players play through injury...not Nadal...cause we, and more importantly, he knows that he can't get close to winning a top 50 without being 100%.

It is true Nadal gets injured more often than most, but you keep saying about how he should play through injury... if he's not at a level to compete and he could risk long term damage then it's ridiculous for him to play.
If the injury is not that bad and there's no long term risk of aggravation, then you can make an argument for him playing; if not it's lunacy.

Tenez wrote:A retriever is in the hands of the attacker and just hopes for a miss from his opponent. If Nadal could win with facility (definition of talent), he'd try to play without risking to worsen his injury....but he knows he can't.

Come one Tenez... even you know this is naive and simplistic.
Every player has to find a right balance between attack and defence- and then after finding that balance has to hope the play that balance brings can make it tough for his opponent to beat him. It's not necessary all players always try to attack and then defend when they fail; some people make the calculation that the percentages work best if they play a certain balance between attack and defence- and that balance may lie closer to defence than attack.
As it is, it's served Nadal pretty well; he's a 14 time Grand Slam champion and win more matches on average than any other player in history.

Tenez wrote:

Kim Jong-Un wrote:

truffin wrote:That is highly incorrect.  Any ATP player with the physicality and having trained to hit it like that from way back on the court since a little child would be able to pull off the shots.

Ha ! No way. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkC7d-mrkMQ

What a stupid comment from the commentator. "he can do anything with his FH"..well yes except hit an easy winners like any average player. He has to look like a stupid idiot at the mercy of Harisson smash quality.  

Seriously ? You see Nadal hit a smash off a smash with perfect timing, one of the most incredible shots of the past decade, and you say Nadal looks like a stupid idiot ? How are biased are you ? I mean you say he looks like a stupid idiot when he hits that amazing shot, I must think you're even harsher when he misses a first serve or something, gosh.


That is such a difficult shot to hit, and the timing of the jump and the forehand smash has to be absolutely perfect. I've seen people try to hit a smash off a smash, it's unbelievably difficult and requires ridiculous hand-eye coordination. (probably why Nadal was able to do it)

That contra-lob is regularly hit by old men and women playing doubles on a club night and, just with less muscle.

Tenez what about these 2 videos?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hp-EArV6s8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCownMHsCTI

I got to agree with Amrit on this one. I think that's an incredible shot, both from feds and rafa.

noleisthebest wrote:That contra-lob is regularly hit by old men and women playing doubles on a club night and, just with less muscle.

The lengths people go to to disparage Nadal !

LS wrote:Tenez what about these 2 videos?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hp-EArV6s8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCownMHsCTI

I got to agree with Amrit on this one. I think that's an incredible shot, both from feds and rafa.

Both unreal shots, and thankyou LS

Kim Jong-Un wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:That contra-lob is regularly hit by old men and women playing doubles on a club night and, just with less muscle.

The lengths people go to to disparage Nadal !

But it's the truth.
You'll have to play the game in order to understand the mechanics of ball-striking.

We have no reason to disparage Nadal. Nor to praise him because we are paid to do it.

Amri has said he plays quite a lot. Right Amri?

Kim Jong-Un wrote:
Come one Tenez... even you know this is naive and simplistic.
Every player has to find a right balance between attack and defence- and then after finding that balance has to hope the play that balance brings can make it tough for his opponent to beat him. It's not necessary all players always try to attack and then defend when they fail; some people make the calculation that the percentages work best if they play a certain balance between attack and defence- and that balance may lie closer to defence than attack.
As it is, it's served Nadal pretty well; he's a 14 time Grand Slam champion and win more matches on average than any other player in history.

You still don;t get it. One can defend with talent (Coria, Simon, even Monfils defends with certain talent) but Nadal uses muscles lots of them to the point of getting injured so BY DEFINITION he has NO NATURAL ABILITY do defend.

A bird has the ability to fly. It doesn't get hurt flying. Men have not that ability and they got hurt badly trying to fly. Can it be any clearer?

Kim Jong-Un wrote:

Tenez wrote:

Kim Jong-Un wrote:

truffin wrote:That is highly incorrect.  Any ATP player with the physicality and having trained to hit it like that from way back on the court since a little child would be able to pull off the shots.

Ha ! No way. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkC7d-mrkMQ

What a stupid comment from the commentator. "he can do anything with his FH"..well yes except hit an easy winners like any average player. He has to look like a stupid idiot at the mercy of Harisson smash quality.  

Seriously ? You see Nadal hit a smash off a smash with perfect timing, one of the most incredible shots of the past decade, and you say Nadal looks like a stupid idiot ? How are biased are you ? I mean you say he looks like a stupid idiot when he hits that amazing shot, I must think you're even harsher when he misses a first serve or something, gosh.  


That is such a difficult shot to hit, and the timing of the jump and the forehand smash has to be absolutely perfect. I've seen people try to hit a smash off a smash, it's unbelievably difficult and requires ridiculous hand-eye coordination. (probably why Nadal was able to do it)

I hav edone shots like that..at my level. If you look at it is no different than a serve!!! except that instead of hitting in the small service box, nadal has the all court to aim at. What is amazing there is getting to the ball! But it had been more impressive he had smashed that right after the bounce. I am known in my club to return serve closest to the srvice line and block smashes back into the smasher court (you sometimes see this in double). That is really impressive. But showing a successful shot from Nadal when he may have missed 10 similar to this one is absurd to show talent, especially as I said he does it from the furthest corner of the court.

luvsports! wrote:Tenez what about these 2 videos?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hp-EArV6s8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCownMHsCTI

I got to agree with Amrit on this one. I think that's an incredible shot, both from feds and rafa.

An incredible shot doesn;t make players talented. If you hit millions balls a years you are bound to come up with incredible shots. Even in the average club you get amazing shots too.

Fed's first smash is more impressive cause federer clearly aims for a DTL smash....teh second one is not that impressive cause he does not seem to aim..very much like Nadal's. But regarldess how amazing they are they only record the successful ones while we do not see the many they miss.

luvsports! wrote:Amri has said he plays quite a lot. Right Amri?

Yes very often, but to be honest I have can't say I have experience in hitting a smash off a smash in all my time playing tennis

Tenez wrote:If you look at it is no different than a serve!!! except that instead of hitting in the small service box, nadal has the all court to aim at.

What ?
No different to a serve, are you even being serious ? With the serve you can toss the ball up so timing the ball is easier, when you are hitting  a smash off a smash the timing is very difficult and to jump in the way Nadal did meant he needed perfect hand-eye coordination.

Tenez wrote:One can defend with talent (Coria, Simon, even Monfils defends with certain talent) but Nadal uses muscles lots of them to the point of getting injured so BY DEFINITION he has NO NATURAL ABILITY do defend.

A bird has the ability to fly. It doesn't get hurt flying. Men have not that ability and they got hurt badly trying to fly. Can it be any clearer?

Uh oh, you have lost any sort of reasonable argument in this debate, and now you're clutching at the tightest of straws by suggesting that he has no talent just because he is injured often and comparing him to a man trying to fly.
Nalbandian, Haas are both injury prone; you've talked about how badly injured Federer has been with his back... not because they have no talent.

Talented Dolgo being thrashed by talentless 34yo Ferrer...again!

Some explanation needed here.

Impatient Dolgo ground by a Spaniard. Nothing new.

Did not see teh match..but I believe there was more to it.

I saw a few games.

Ferrer is mostly a defensive retriever, but so would most players be at his size.  He's a small player, and the margins are much harder.  The fact he's been ranked so high is a mark in his favour. There are so few small players in the power - dumb down era. Saying that, he has won very little - and if he had the talent he'd have a Slam to his name.  He doesn't.  It's preposterous pretending he has huge talent when he does not. And look at his h2h vs Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic. It's shocking against all 3 and probably the rest of the top 10.

As for Nadal, he's old news. He's a limited player and we're all laughing at him.

It's true that Ferrer would've been a more succesful player if he were two inches taller - his serve would've probbably been better...but then again - look at Dolgo, he is smaller than Ferrer but can generate fantastic serves/speed.

Main thing for pros is to find the game they can consistently play week in week out within themselves, and that roughly shows the level of their talent even in these slow conditions.

I value attacking players as the most talented, and how many of those do we have in top 10?

Actually, after checking their height, I was wrong. Didn't realise Dolgo is 1.83cm tall, that's nearly 3-4 inches taller than Ferrer.
I suppose Nishi is a better comparison with Ferrer.

I admit, there were moments where I enjoyed watching Ferrer play.
Even he has some rhythm and flying momentum.
Quite impressive he's been able to survive in this cutthroat physical era at the top.
He's had a great career.

I don't see Ferrer as a retriever. He only retrieves versus the big hitters Berdych type or those who take time away from him (fed) but most of the time he really tries to be aggressive. However he hasn't got flat shots but compensate by hitting with spin and power. But he tries to go for depth and angle with more risk than the 3 usual best RRunners we have.

He doesn't play with guile nor flair, but I maintain that he has an excellent pace/safety compromise, especially considering his built. And that's very crafty.

This is talent
https://www.facebook.com/ATPWorldTour/videos/vb.24410993700/10153782712273701/?type=2&theater&notif_t=mentions_reply

at professional level this is not talent....it's madness, careless, or showboating.

Great shot.....but until he wins decent tournaments with shots like that, I am reluctant to call this talent.

Give over Frenchy

yeah. was a bit harsh...but I like consistency in talent. So I am more impressed on how someone keeps timing the ball than those crazy shots they all do every know and then.

I am known in my club for my shot making! I am not known for consistency and delivering those under pressure. So in a way I am very much an amateur Paire.

If I were pro, I would try to channel that talent into winning more matches. Not make the Hot Shot hilights.

luvsports! wrote:This is talent
https://www.facebook.com/ATPWorldTour/videos/vb.24410993700/10153782712273701/?type=2&theater&notif_t=mentions_reply

Yes, that was gorgeous!
I have enjoyed his tennis this week so much. So exciting!

Tenez wrote:at professional level this is not talent....it's madness, careless, or showboating.

Great shot.....but until he wins decent tournaments with shots like that, I am reluctant to call this talent.

He has a chance...ultra aggressive but also beginning to be disciplined.

If he can shorten his FH swing he'll be superb. Everything about his game is very natural incl his movement and that can only be talent.

His only "problem" is probably lack of workaholic gene, but that's usually the plight of happy, talented people and he seems to be one.
Not a bad balance overall I'd say.
But I agree, it would be good if he could start winning tournaments. Which again is harder than ever for players like him when balls keep coming back from average fit players even in early rounds now

Tenez wrote:yeah. was a bit harsh...but I like consistency in talent. So I am more impressed on how someone keeps timing the ball than those crazy shots they all do every know and then.

I am known in my club for my shot making! I am not known for consistency and delivering those under pressure. So in a way I am very much an amateur Paire.

If I were pro, I would try to channel that talent into winning more matches. Not make the Hot Shot hilights.

Paire is a mental headcase who has no forehand; great backhand and can be very fun to watch.

He'll never break into the top 10, but at the same time won't be on my retirement list either.

Without a doubt Ferrer is a great talent and has patterns that work very well against a majority of players with more flair, but that doesn't change that he is incredibly dull to watch. I would certainly not pay to watch im play.