Is Rafa in Decline?

[Kirijax]

He might have one more Slam left in him, but yes. Nadal has seen his best days. But it's funny how a guy who still can win a Grand Slam is considered in decline. That's a testament to how good Nadal is.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Not really. Tommy Haas has broken practically every bone in his body and is back next month at nearly 37.

Can you PLEASE STOP with the awful analogies?

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Not really. Tommy Haas has broken practically every bone in his body and is back next month at nearly 37.

Oh please I cant see Rafa playing at age 37.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Well Rafa isn't in his prime years anymore,I also think if Rafa isn't winning tournaments and playing to his best competitive level he will retire,he wont stick around for the love of tennis,just my opinion.It would not surprise me if he retires after the Olympic year in 2016.Rafa has said many times his wish is to play at the Olympic in 2016 and he will then revise his situation.

Are you basically saying that he does not love tennis? (or at least not as much as winning).

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Well Rafa isn't in his prime years anymore,I also think if Rafa isn't winning tournaments and playing to his best competitive level he will retire,he wont stick around for the love of tennis,just my opinion.It would not surprise me if he retires after the Olympic year in 2016.Rafa has said many times his wish is to play at the Olympic in 2016 and he will then revise his situation.

Are you basically saying that he does not love tennis? (or at least not as much as winning).

Rafa is very competitive,my point is,if he cant play at a competitive level and dosent win tournaments,I can see him retiring.I dont think he will stick around not like other players.Just my personal opinion and my observation of Rafa since he first started the tour.

 

[Front242]

Not really. Tommy Haas has broken practically every bone in his body and is back next month at nearly 37.

Oh please I cant see Rafa playing at age 37.

When did I say I expected him to. What I did say though is it's not a big deal if you have another injury when other players with much worse injuries are coming back at 37.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Not really. Tommy Haas has broken practically every bone in his body and is back next month at nearly 37.

Oh please I cant see Rafa playing at age 37.

When did I say I expected him to. What I did say though is it's not a big deal if you have another injury when other players with much worse injuries are coming back at 37.

Well you did post that fact straight after I said if Rafa had another injury if could put a huge cloud over his playing career,which I believe it could.

That is Tommy Haas decision to come back to play.Personally I think he should retire,yes he has suffered many injuries in his career,I have always been a fan.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Not really. Tommy Haas has broken practically every bone in his body and is back next month at nearly 37.

Oh please I cant see Rafa playing at age 37.

When did I say I expected him to. What I did say though is it's not a big deal if you have another injury when other players with much worse injuries are coming back at 37.

Are you serious with this logic?

 

[Front242]

Oh please I cant see Rafa playing at age 37.

When did I say I expected him to. What I did say though is it's not a big deal if you have another injury when other players with much worse injuries are coming back at 37.

Are you serious with this logic?

Yes 100% What's not to understand?! Tommy Haas has had multiple major shoulder surgeries and therefore cannot serve or hit the ball at all properly. Can Nadal serve? Yes. Can Haas? No. Did Nalbandian say he could rally fine from the baseline despite his shoulder problems but yet they prevented him from continuing to play because he simply couldn't serve and that put him at a pretty obvious disadvantage? Yes. Fact is, shoulder problems are one of the worst injuries you can get as a tennis player and have ended many careers. Nadal has lost a bit of speed but is still very fast. He's lacking match play and therefore fitness. What injury does he have now? None. If he has another will it set him back? Of course, like any other player... but he'll also recover just the same as anyone else too unless he has a bad shoulder injury as per the above two players: Haas and Nalbandian in my oh so terrible analogies.

Fact is, Haas had undergone tons of surgeries and yet is still making a comeback and Nadal is hardly as banged up as Haas is despite some of the silliness people type here. He's not quite on a Zimmer frame yet by a long margin and last time I checked he was still the favourite for the next slam.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Interesting tidbit: When asked whether whether he will return for the Rio tourney next year,
Rafa did not quite commit. He answered by saying he will come back for the Olympics in Rio.

So, it looks like Rafa will stop playing in the Golden swing from next year. That actually
makes sense as it is the clay season before the clay season. Also, the tourneys do not
keep paying top dollars as appearance fee for the same player again and again. So, it
makes financial sense also.

 

[Billie]

When did I say I expected him to. What I did say though is it's not a big deal if you have another injury when other players with much worse injuries are coming back at 37.

Are you serious with this logic?

Yes 100% What's not to understand?! Tommy Haas has had multiple major shoulder surgeries and therefore cannot serve or hit the ball at all properly. Can Nadal serve? Yes. Can Haas? No. Did Nalbandian say he could rally fine from the baseline despite his shoulder problems but yet they prevented him from continuing to play because he simply couldn't serve and that put him at a pretty obvious disadvantage? Yes. Fact is, shoulder problems are one of the worst injuries you can get as a tennis player and have ended many careers. Nadal has lost a bit of speed but is still very fast. He's lacking match play and therefore fitness. What injury does he have now? None. If he has another will it set him back? Of course, like any other player... but he'll also recover just the same as anyone else too unless he has a bad shoulder injury as per the above two players: Haas and Nalbandian in my oh so terrible analogies.

Fact is, Haas had undergone tons of surgeries and yet is still making a comeback and Nadal is hardly as banged up as Haas is despite some of the silliness people type here. He's not quite on a Zimmer frame yet by a long margin and last time I checked he was still the favourite for the next slam.

I think they might object to this logic because Rafa is a multiple slam winner, they probably don't want him to just play without winning majors. Tommy probably wants to play more because he likes to.

Anyway didn't Rafa recently say that he hopes he can play for many more years? Somebody was telling me about it.

 

[Front242]

Haas didn't win majors 'cos of his problems between his ears mostly but even with Nadal in decline he's still the French Open favourite and will be next year too even if he breaks both his legs tomorrow. That was my point really but some people here take things way too seriously. He's already proven last year he can win the RG title with notably worse movement and play than previous years.

 

[Billie]

Haas didn't win majors 'cos of his problems between his ears mostly but even with Nadal in decline he's still the French Open favourite and will be next year too even if he breaks both his legs tomorrow. That was my point really but some people here take things way too seriously.

Shocking!!!:snicker

 

[herios]

Not really. Tommy Haas has broken practically every bone in his body and is back next month at nearly 37.

Tommy comes back probably on a farewell tour. I would be shocked if I am seeing him again in the top 20.
And that is the issue with Rafa as well. It takes more and more time for him to adjust when he comes back after each and every injury.

 

[brokenshoelace]

When did I say I expected him to. What I did say though is it's not a big deal if you have another injury when other players with much worse injuries are coming back at 37.

Are you serious with this logic?

Yes 100% What's not to understand?! Tommy Haas has had multiple major shoulder surgeries and therefore cannot serve or hit the ball at all properly. Can Nadal serve? Yes. Can Haas? No. Did Nalbandian say he could rally fine from the baseline despite his shoulder problems but yet they prevented him from continuing to play because he simply couldn't serve and that put him at a pretty obvious disadvantage? Yes. Fact is, shoulder problems are one of the worst injuries you can get as a tennis player and have ended many careers. Nadal has lost a bit of speed but is still very fast. He's lacking match play and therefore fitness. What injury does he have now? None. If he has another will it set him back? Of course, like any other player... but he'll also recover just the same as anyone else too unless he has a bad shoulder injury as per the above two players: Haas and Nalbandian in my oh so terrible analogies.

Fact is, Haas had undergone tons of surgeries and yet is still making a comeback and Nadal is hardly as banged up as Haas is despite some of the silliness people type here. He's not quite on a Zimmer frame yet by a long margin and last time I checked he was still the favourite for the next slam.

This is some of the most nonsensical logic I've recently encountered this side of auto-pilot. Your argument regarding Nadal's injuries/decline/movement is that...some other players (who were never absolute top players anyway) are doing worse? Yeah, no $hit. How is that relevant?

 

[brokenshoelace]

Haas didn't win majors 'cos of his problems between his ears mostly but even with Nadal in decline he's still the French Open favourite and will be next year too even if he breaks both his legs tomorrow. That was my point really but some people here take things way too seriously.

Shocking!!!:snicker

Irony.

 

[Front242]

Are you serious with this logic?

Yes 100% What's not to understand?! Tommy Haas has had multiple major shoulder surgeries and therefore cannot serve or hit the ball at all properly. Can Nadal serve? Yes. Can Haas? No. Did Nalbandian say he could rally fine from the baseline despite his shoulder problems but yet they prevented him from continuing to play because he simply couldn't serve and that put him at a pretty obvious disadvantage? Yes. Fact is, shoulder problems are one of the worst injuries you can get as a tennis player and have ended many careers. Nadal has lost a bit of speed but is still very fast. He's lacking match play and therefore fitness. What injury does he have now? None. If he has another will it set him back? Of course, like any other player... but he'll also recover just the same as anyone else too unless he has a bad shoulder injury as per the above two players: Haas and Nalbandian in my oh so terrible analogies.

Fact is, Haas had undergone tons of surgeries and yet is still making a comeback and Nadal is hardly as banged up as Haas is despite some of the silliness people type here. He's not quite on a Zimmer frame yet by a long margin and last time I checked he was still the favourite for the next slam.

This is some of the most nonsensical logic I've recently encountered this side of auto-pilot. Your argument regarding Nadal's injuries/decline/movement is that...some other players (who were never absolute top players anyway) are doing worse? Yeah, no $hit. How is that relevant?

How is the fact that they are doing worse my argument exactly? My argument if you want to call it that eventhough it's not an argument but a mere fact, is that the guy is able to play after tons of injuries and still take it to the absolute best when fit. The only nonsensical logic is all that you missed from what I've typed :s

 

[brokenshoelace]

Yes 100% What's not to understand?! Tommy Haas has had multiple major shoulder surgeries and therefore cannot serve or hit the ball at all properly. Can Nadal serve? Yes. Can Haas? No. Did Nalbandian say he could rally fine from the baseline despite his shoulder problems but yet they prevented him from continuing to play because he simply couldn't serve and that put him at a pretty obvious disadvantage? Yes. Fact is, shoulder problems are one of the worst injuries you can get as a tennis player and have ended many careers. Nadal has lost a bit of speed but is still very fast. He's lacking match play and therefore fitness. What injury does he have now? None. If he has another will it set him back? Of course, like any other player... but he'll also recover just the same as anyone else too unless he has a bad shoulder injury as per the above two players: Haas and Nalbandian in my oh so terrible analogies.

Fact is, Haas had undergone tons of surgeries and yet is still making a comeback and Nadal is hardly as banged up as Haas is despite some of the silliness people type here. He's not quite on a Zimmer frame yet by a long margin and last time I checked he was still the favourite for the next slam.

This is some of the most nonsensical logic I've recently encountered this side of auto-pilot. Your argument regarding Nadal's injuries/decline/movement is that...some other players (who were never absolute top players anyway) are doing worse? Yeah, no $hit. How is that relevant?

How is the fact that they are doing worse my argument exactly? My argument if you want to call it that eventhough it's not an argument but a mere fact, is that the guy is able to play after tons of injuries and still take it to the absolute best when fit. The only nonsensical logic is all that you missed from what I've typed :s

"Fact is, Haas had undergone tons of surgeries and yet is still making a comeback and Nadal is hardly as banged up as Haas is despite some of the silliness people type here. "

That analogy baffles me.

 

[sid]

Come RG,odd's are Nadal will Win again,only Nole might win,if Nadal is below par.

 

[auto-pilot]

Nadal was below par last year, losing in the QF of Monte Carlo, QF of Barcelona, won Madrid but lost to Djokovic at Rome.

Nadal also got cramps in the 4th set of the French Open Final, but Djokovic still wasn't good enough to extend the match.

Nadal has been in decline since 2008, but Djokovic still can't beat him at Roland Garros.