Case FOR Nadal. From Wuiches. Thanks.
Posted by tennisplanet on October 13, 2010
At this point of their careers I do think that Roger is the best of both. His records sheet is just amazing. However I think that they are not competing in equal circumstances.
Tennis has a complexity, it’s played in 3 different scenarios that change considerably the skills needed to succeed on each one. There are a lot of examples that prove that, past and present.
That’s why I consider that to compare 2 tennis players you must be able to compare each player’s performance on each of the 3 surfaces that tennis has. But to see such performance you must give them exactly the same opportunities on each surface.
All of you say: “Roger has won 100 titles per year during 100 years” or “Roger has been the #1 for 100 years” or “Roger has won 100 slams”. It’s true he has been impressive, but also keep in mind that Roger has had much more chances than Nadal to reach such numbers.
Roger is a hard court specialist. All of you know that the ATP calendar has almost 70% of the tournaments on hard courts, 2 out of 4 GS and 6 out of 9 1000’s(and Rafa has more). Now imagine this scenario, where would Nadal be right now if the Calendar was exactly the opposite, 2 clay slams and 6 1000’s and 70% of the calendar on clay every year? And where would Roger be? Nadal would have now more than 60 clay titles(now has 29) including 10 slams! And of course he would be the #1 since 2005!!!
I’m not saying that because of this Nadal is better, in fact Roger has proved to be so far the best all court player of his generation and maybe all time (so far), that’s why I consider him a much greater player than Sampras, because Sampras performance on slow courts was almost non-existent, even at the OZ he had a “bad performance” compared to the USO and Wimby being the OZ a much slower court than the other 2.
Again, I’m not saying that for this Nadal is the best, I’m just asking you not to be so unfair with the kid, actually he has a hard court record a little bit better than Roger’s clay court record. If we had 3 1000’s on each surface, 3 slams per year 1 on each surface, and the same amount of 250’s and 500’s on each surface so every player can sign on his favorite tournament then we would have equal circumstances to compare each player performance on each surface and then we could compare their records sheet.
I’m just saying that this is another reason (age) why is so difficult to compare them.