Tweet
Interesting Article "Why I Don’t Like to See Nadal At #1"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I got this article on a weekly newsletter Im suscribed to, and I though it would be nice to post it up here and see what you guys think about it. Besides the butt-picking and the extra time he likes to take between points, I´ve never been a fan of Nadal´s style of play, but I wasnt able to really put my finger on what I didnt like about it. I think this article sums it up really well:
"""Why I Don’t Like to See Nadal At #1
Rafael Nadal has again won the final against Novak Djokovic, this time in Rome. Nadal already won in Monte Carlo against Djokovic and is of course the current #1 player in the world.
But I don’t like to see him there. It’s not that he doesn’t deserve his #1 spot.
He does, but not because he beats his opponents with better tennis, but because his opponents beat themselves.
I would like to see the best player in the world to be a better player than his opponents.
He should be able to attack and exploit all types of weakness and be able to win points in a variety of ways. Roger Federer is the perfect example of what a #1 player in the world should play like.
Roger Federer is able to play any tactic he wants and he can play any shot he wants - and of course he is a master of all of them.
But Rafael Nadal plays different tennis.
The tie-break of the first set in the Rome 2009 final is a great example how Nadal plays and how he wins. I’ll break it down shot by shot so that you can see what goes on…
I’ll look for two major things: what is the INTENTION of each player for each shot they play: is it offense or neutralizing?
Offensive shots mean, that the player is looking to hurt the opponent or finish the point. A player can hurt his opponent with a fast shot, with an accurate shot or looking to make a point.
Neutralizing shots on the other hand are NOT played to win a point directly. They are played to PREVENT the opponent from attacking and to come back from defensive situations.
This can show us who is looking to win points and who is looking to keep the ball in play.
I will also look at who has achieved a better situation in the ball exchange before the last shot - whether it was won or lost. This shows us who can better outplay his opponent and gain advantage in the point.
There were two points in the tie-break which included just the serve and a missed return so I we cannot analyze them in more detail…
0:0 Djokovic serves, Nadal misses a return
1:0 Nadal played 7 neutralizing shots (N) and 1 offensive (O), Djokovic 4 N, 4 O. In better position at the last shot: Djokovic
1:1 Nadal serves, Djokovic misses a return
1:2 Nadal 5 N, 0 O, Djokovic 3 N, 3 O. In better position - Djokovic
1:3 Nadal 2 N, 0 O, Djokovic 0 N, 2 O. In better position - Djokovic
2:3 Nadal 1 N, 1 O, Djokovic 2 N, 1 O. In better position - Nadal
2:4 Nadal 0 N, 3 O, Djokovic 2 N, 1 O. In better position - Nadal
2:5 Nadal 1 N, 1 O, Djokovic 0 N, 1 O. In better position - Djokovic
2:6 Nadal 1 N, 0 O, Djokovic 0 N, 2 O. In better position - Djokovic
Here’s what we can see from this analysis:
Nadal played 6 offensive shots and 17 neutralizing shots and Djokovic played 14 offensive shots and 11 neutralizing shots.
In the 7 points where the players rallied, Nadal played offensive shots in only 4 points. In the same 7 points, Djokovic ended up in a better position in the court 5 times but made unforced errors and missed the final shot.
Djokovic did not make tactical mistakes on those situations since he was inside the court and Nadal was far behind the baseline. It was correct for Djokovic to attack, but the missed the shot. The tactic was correct but the execution let him down.
(If you analyze your mistakes, always check whether you missed because the tactic was not correct or whether the execution was not good enough.)
This tie-break analysis is a great example of how Nadal wins matches and it applies to most matches he plays.
Nadal is not really a better player, he doesn’t really outplay Djokovic, Murray or Federer, but it’s their mistakes that win Nadal more points and he ENDS up winning.
And I’d like to see the number 1 player in the world to play tennis that wins points instead of profiting from unforced errors of his opponents.
So why is Nadal #1?
Because Djokovic, Federer and Murray MISS TOO MANY SHORT BALLS!
They are typically better in ball exchanges and gain advantage in the point but are unable to finish the point. Yes, Nadal passes them sometimes but they shouldn’t miss so many short balls.
Even if Nadal passes them here and there, these 3 guys can still beat Nadal if they would be deadlier on those short balls - like Agassi was for example.
I actually believe that Djokovic, Murray and Federer don’t practice finishing shots from inside the court or even close to the service line because they think they can already make these shots.
The reality is different though; just take a look at the above tie-break video and note what kind of shots Djokovic missed…
Then compare this with the tie-break that Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi played when they were in their prime. No unforced errors in the whole tie break and most points were won by someone!
So what are your thoughts? Do you think Nadal is a good example of the best tennis player in the world?"""
Here´s the link:http://www.tennisthoughts.com/2009/0...ee-nadal-at-1/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I got this article on a weekly newsletter Im suscribed to, and I though it would be nice to post it up here and see what you guys think about it. Besides the butt-picking and the extra time he likes to take between points, I´ve never been a fan of Nadal´s style of play, but I wasnt able to really put my finger on what I didnt like about it. I think this article sums it up really well:
"""Why I Don’t Like to See Nadal At #1
Rafael Nadal has again won the final against Novak Djokovic, this time in Rome. Nadal already won in Monte Carlo against Djokovic and is of course the current #1 player in the world.
But I don’t like to see him there. It’s not that he doesn’t deserve his #1 spot.
He does, but not because he beats his opponents with better tennis, but because his opponents beat themselves.
I would like to see the best player in the world to be a better player than his opponents.
He should be able to attack and exploit all types of weakness and be able to win points in a variety of ways. Roger Federer is the perfect example of what a #1 player in the world should play like.
Roger Federer is able to play any tactic he wants and he can play any shot he wants - and of course he is a master of all of them.
But Rafael Nadal plays different tennis.
The tie-break of the first set in the Rome 2009 final is a great example how Nadal plays and how he wins. I’ll break it down shot by shot so that you can see what goes on…
I’ll look for two major things: what is the INTENTION of each player for each shot they play: is it offense or neutralizing?
Offensive shots mean, that the player is looking to hurt the opponent or finish the point. A player can hurt his opponent with a fast shot, with an accurate shot or looking to make a point.
Neutralizing shots on the other hand are NOT played to win a point directly. They are played to PREVENT the opponent from attacking and to come back from defensive situations.
This can show us who is looking to win points and who is looking to keep the ball in play.
I will also look at who has achieved a better situation in the ball exchange before the last shot - whether it was won or lost. This shows us who can better outplay his opponent and gain advantage in the point.
There were two points in the tie-break which included just the serve and a missed return so I we cannot analyze them in more detail…
0:0 Djokovic serves, Nadal misses a return
1:0 Nadal played 7 neutralizing shots (N) and 1 offensive (O), Djokovic 4 N, 4 O. In better position at the last shot: Djokovic
1:1 Nadal serves, Djokovic misses a return
1:2 Nadal 5 N, 0 O, Djokovic 3 N, 3 O. In better position - Djokovic
1:3 Nadal 2 N, 0 O, Djokovic 0 N, 2 O. In better position - Djokovic
2:3 Nadal 1 N, 1 O, Djokovic 2 N, 1 O. In better position - Nadal
2:4 Nadal 0 N, 3 O, Djokovic 2 N, 1 O. In better position - Nadal
2:5 Nadal 1 N, 1 O, Djokovic 0 N, 1 O. In better position - Djokovic
2:6 Nadal 1 N, 0 O, Djokovic 0 N, 2 O. In better position - Djokovic
Here’s what we can see from this analysis:
Nadal played 6 offensive shots and 17 neutralizing shots and Djokovic played 14 offensive shots and 11 neutralizing shots.
In the 7 points where the players rallied, Nadal played offensive shots in only 4 points. In the same 7 points, Djokovic ended up in a better position in the court 5 times but made unforced errors and missed the final shot.
Djokovic did not make tactical mistakes on those situations since he was inside the court and Nadal was far behind the baseline. It was correct for Djokovic to attack, but the missed the shot. The tactic was correct but the execution let him down.
(If you analyze your mistakes, always check whether you missed because the tactic was not correct or whether the execution was not good enough.)
This tie-break analysis is a great example of how Nadal wins matches and it applies to most matches he plays.
Nadal is not really a better player, he doesn’t really outplay Djokovic, Murray or Federer, but it’s their mistakes that win Nadal more points and he ENDS up winning.
And I’d like to see the number 1 player in the world to play tennis that wins points instead of profiting from unforced errors of his opponents.
So why is Nadal #1?
Because Djokovic, Federer and Murray MISS TOO MANY SHORT BALLS!
They are typically better in ball exchanges and gain advantage in the point but are unable to finish the point. Yes, Nadal passes them sometimes but they shouldn’t miss so many short balls.
Even if Nadal passes them here and there, these 3 guys can still beat Nadal if they would be deadlier on those short balls - like Agassi was for example.
I actually believe that Djokovic, Murray and Federer don’t practice finishing shots from inside the court or even close to the service line because they think they can already make these shots.
The reality is different though; just take a look at the above tie-break video and note what kind of shots Djokovic missed…
Then compare this with the tie-break that Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi played when they were in their prime. No unforced errors in the whole tie break and most points were won by someone!
So what are your thoughts? Do you think Nadal is a good example of the best tennis player in the world?"""
Here´s the link:http://www.tennisthoughts.com/2009/0...ee-nadal-at-1/
Comment