but to say he doesn't have any talent is ludicrous
---------------------------------
I thought you were an honest debator! Are you saying that the top 50 players have no talent?

50 Haas, Tommy (GER)
51 Young, Donald (USA)
52 Kukushkin, Mikhail (KAZ)
53 Muller, Gilles (LUX)
54 Llodra, Michael (FRA)
55 Paire, Benoit (FRA)
56 Lu, Yen-Hsun (TPE)
57 Chardy, Jeremy (FRA)
58 Soeda, Go (JPN)
59 Karlovic, Ivo (CRO)
60 Lacko, Lukas (SVK)
61 Mayer, Leonardo (ARG)
62 Klizan, Martin (SVK)
63 Darcis, Steve (BEL)
64 Querrey, Sam (USA)
65 Ito, Tatsuma (JPN)
66 Rochus, Olivier (BEL)
67 Roger-Vasselin, Edouard (FRA)
68 Fognini, Fabio (ITA)
69 Dimitrov, Grigor (BUL)
70 Goffin, David (BEL)
71 Mahut, Nicolas (FRA)
72 Matosevic, Marinko (AUS)
73 Falla, Alejandro (COL)
74 Kavcic, Blaz (SLO)
75 Malisse, Xavier (BEL)
76 Ebden, Matthew (AUS)
77 Stebe, Cedrik-Marcel (GER)
78 Jaziri, Malek (TUN)
79 Volandri, Filippo (ITA)
80 Bellucci, Thomaz (BRA)
81 Ungur, Adrian (ROU)
82 Ramirez Hidalgo, Ruben (ESP)
83 Chela, Juan Ignacio (ARG)
84 Kamke, Tobias (GER)
85 Stakhovsky, Sergiy (UKR)
86 Lorenzi, Paolo (ITA)
87 Gulbis, Ernests (LAT)
88 Phau, Bjorn (GER)
89 Cipolla, Flavio (ITA)
90 Montanes, Albert (ESP)
91 Blake, James (USA)
92 Garcia-Lopez, Guillermo (ESP)
93 Andreev, Igor (RUS)
94 Beck, Karol (SVK)
95 Zopp, Jurgen (EST)
96 Machado, Rui (POR)
97 Starace, Potito (ITA)
98 Zeballos, Horacio (ARG)
99 Dodig, Ivan (CRO)
100 Rosol, Lukas (CZE)

Aren't those guys talented? extremely talented in fact!

For me, he could be so much better. The power is there but it is not utilised to its full potential. The serve could be a lot stronger and the forhand could be used far more potently if he stepped into the ball, hit flat, eary and though it.
------------------------------------
And what do you think prevents him to hit both the serve and FH flatter?

You can see a lot he could do better but this guy has been hitting the ball everyday since the age of 5...yet he is unable to take the ball earlier consistently.

You might say he is using his left arm, despite being a righty. That again just shows that his "innate" skills are not used!

The only argument I read in favour of his talent is his slam count! No skill he can do others can't based on talent alone.

It's called talent

I think you missed the point there Tenez.. I know its early...I am saying that Nadal does have talent - of course he does..You need it, plus the other attributes mentioned to win major Tourneys.

Of course the above players have talent, but they don't posess the all round attributes in enough measures to win at the very highest level which is what seperates the great from the very good.

Some players show it in patches which may be enough in the Masters tourneys form time to time but that isn't enough in GS's. that is why 28 out of 29 GS's have been won by the top three best players in the world

The aim is to win matches and Nadal has a strategy to do that which has worked very nicely thank you very much.

Earlsfield put it very well a couple of posts back BTW

I don't know you were talking about those who say he has "no talent". No-one said that, afa I can read.

Talent is an aptitude to make difficult things look easy, and Nadal doesn't make tennis look easy at all. I am right in saying that there are at least 50 players who are more talented than him. But as you say winning slams and TMS require much more than talent. One huge weapon could be enough to give you the chance to win slams, especially since it woudl help the mental side as well.

Give Karlo the Wimby 1990s conditions and his mind will get stronger knowing his serve won't be breakable. Make the conds so slow that no-one can hit a ball through Rafa and that will boost him his mental strength. Give him conds where a good shot is a winner guranteed and you will see him panick like we did last Thursday.

On another point look at Granollers ranked in the 20s does it prove he is more talented than Blake or Gulbis both in the 90s? No, he has other things to make up and do better than them over the last 12 months.

Here my point is about talent and nothing else. And I have yet to read why Nadal is as talented as Kholi for instance.

Is talent about making things look easy? That is a debate in itself...

There is footage of Nadal playing at an early age. Toni obviously saw something and realised what could be achieved. I think he got to the 3rd round of Wimby as a 17 year old on his worst surface - not bad. I wonder where Kholie was at that age...

Between them, they have developed a way for Rafa to play which pretty much guarentess success on Clay. I would think Toni is a pretty good judge...

Due to the fact the other surfaces have become fairly similar, he has been able to transfer his ability on clay to the other surfaces.

Rafa is unique in his mental toughess, only Connors comes close IMO. But he still has to get the job done, which he is able to do better than anyone else with the tools he has. 11 times encounting he has been better than anyone else

What is interesting is Rafa's own admission of inferiority to the likes of Fed - that is what drives him on. He knows himself he is not the best but he has the confidence in his own abilities to get though when it counts and always gives 100%.

If only Murray could have show the same attributes in the GS finals he has been in...to me, he never looked like he believed he could win those matches as much as anything else.

So is your main argument about Nadal being more talented than Kholi the fact he reached Wimbledon's 3rd round at 17?

The other strength you find him is his mental toughness. Is mental toughness a skill like playing music, drawing or playing tennis?

I actually do not see Rafa as mentally strong either. He has a game which certainly helps the mind a lot. He does take less risk than anybody else and in that respect his mental strength is certainly helped. As he says himself why hitting a shot which has 65% of being a winner when 3 or 4 rallies down the line this percentage can go as high as 85 %? You can only apply such a relaxing strategy for the mind if you have the legs and lungs to retrieve almost any shot.

On fast surfaces, or when Nadal is not "slam fit", his mental strength is actually also very average. Not winning a set for 6 months versus a top 8 player is poor. Being bagelled by Federer and Murray, despite being still fitter than them, but not as fit as usual is also pretty poor. Losing all his close matches versus Djoko the only player who could keep rallying with him (challenge him physically) doesn't show strong mind either. Imagine if he had to take riskier shots cause not as fit as he is, his mind woudl be even weaker.

So it's very important to look at the strengths and weaknesses of players objectively. I have never said Nadal is weak physically. I know what his strength is. Pushing the bar physically that high is what gave him 11 slams and the slow surfaces gives him peace of mind.

But I will always be reluctant to call a player scared to hit risky shots on constant basis, a mental force.

What would have been the chance of Nadal winning a match injured like Federer just did today?

We'll never know... Fed took 8 minutes off or so for some back treatment before showing Malisse whose boss.

Fed is the exception to the rule, in as much as he exerts little pressure on his body due to his exceptional movement and general conditioning. Minimal effort is used. He always looks pretty much the same at the end of a match as he does at the beginning.. The only time I have ever seen him look worn out was at the end of the AO09 final where the tiredenss was mental as much as physical as he just couldn't find a way past the Spaniard.

I still feel if he had coach for the AO09 and USO09 finals he would have won both. I remember Toni saying he felt Fed had no game plan for the AO final which contributed to his loss along with some uncharacteristicly poor serving. He got his tactics all wrong in the USO final too though DP was at the top of his powers and was proving a handful to all and sundry

It all depends on the level of the injury Tenez. Nadal played with injury during the 2009 FO which partly accounted for his lack of movement and overall mediocrity against the Sod.

Nadal also knows he hasn't got long in the game if he plays with injury. He is a big man and the knees etc take a fearful battering, hense he is more careful now than he used to be. Its all about keeping the career going for as long as possible.

Why play with an injury if it going to have possible long term implications? Its a no brainer

I also feel Fed knows he hasn't got much longer at the top and is prepared to take a bit more of a risk - taking any opportunity to stay in the big ones for as long as he can.

He has had an amazing run of consistency and fitness over the years, something that is not always fully appreciated out there.

Frankly, Fed shoudl have lost today. He played terrible but was lucky his opponent was nervous and maybe also partly injured.

I appreciating debating with you Earl but I must say I see things quite differently than you.

To start with Federer's strength is that he has no plan! He can assess the situation quicker than most if not all and pull the right shot at the right moment cause the situation is never exactly the same for him. Nadal needs a plan, Federer needs to keep his edge.

The AO final is a weird one cause federer actually had teh perfect plan as 2 or 3 points there and then woudl have him won the AO in 3 sets. That's all it took.....3 key points played badly but also down to Nadal amazing physique able to run and get to balls that were not retrievable by anyone else. Of course helped by particularly slow conds. I could pin point you to those key points if you are interested.

I do question Nadal's injury. To me he was not injured in that FO09....no more than he was injured against Rosol. Big hitters will always have a chance to blast him off court (unless conds get as slow as FO12).

But teh response to my question was that Nadal simply can't win if not 100% fit...I am even tempted to say if not 110%.

And finally I'd say Federer has actually been more injured (or hill) than we are told. He even admitted it in his interview last week so we are told to believe that he has had an injury free career but I don;t think that's the case.

His losses at the AO 09 and USO09 are in fact most likely result of physical problems as his time out tennis before and after prove to some extend.

This thing that conditions at Australian Open and Wimbledon are slow is a myth.

Yes the conditions have been slow but they are not as slow as some people make them out to be and still Wimbledon and AO and US Open are quite fast.

No matter how much I not like nadal but he brings something special to slams. Wimbledon is missing him. It feels as if something is not there.
Miss you nadull

really? Yes he is a great player to have cause his losing provides as much joy as my favourite player winning.

And afa I am concerned, the sooner he loses he better.

I need to dust off my "Nadal's slippery slope" thread!

But tenez tbh, there is not much fun without nadal. There is nothing better than to see him lose but this one came too early

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Well said Sideshow!

nadal is fine player but he lacks that continous attacking ability that a champion player has. he's mentally weak but one of exciting players in tennis

ali babar are you happy now. what became of your Girl friend?

Cheba Nadal's supreme quality is that he is mentally strong and yet you are saying he is mentally weak.

I don't have a girlfriend as I am married happily!