Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Doron B.'s avatar

Nadal's reasoning: the racquet was never the problem.

Clear thinking, regardless of the sport.

Holy Ghost Writer's avatar

Lovely piece. I'm a former sports journalist and was present in Monte Carlo in 2006 (I think, without looking it up) for the Masters final which, again if memory serves me, was the first time Nadal and Fed had met in a final of such magnitude. Nadal was actually a relatively limited player at that time and I felt that Fed was a little disrespectful in his pre-match comments. Yet it was on Nadal's beloved clay - and Masters finals were five-setters at the time - and Nadal just kept coming at him. The self-belief was rock solid - even though in a player of less mental fortitude such technical restrictions would have allowed doubts to creep in. I think Nadal won in four. This was April. By the end of the year he was close to or had reached superstar status. What amazed me was his conviction to keep learning; after that Masters win, such was some Spanish players' derision of the grasscourt game, it was easy to write off his Wimbledon chances. But his volleying got better and better, he developed shots all of his own and he bent that turf to his will rather than allowing it to define him. As I read your piece, I wondered whether you'd mention the habitual quirks before he served but that quote of his you refer to on that subject, which i must admit I'd not heard before, shows there was so much more than intensity and physicality and brutal shotmaking to his game. And that was a fierce Intelligence, and I use an upper case I because too many sports stars are considered to play by instinct alone.

1 more comment...

No posts

Ready for more?