A very interesting article about Tony and Rafa :

Whether or not Rafael Nadal extends his mastery of red clay to 73 consecutive matches at the BNL d’Italia Masters Series tournament here today, there are many things of which you can be certain. He will put his shoes on properly, he will not throw his racket, he will not harangue his opponent, he will respect the umpire and his face will bear no trace of a scowl, win or lose.

Yes, he will keep his opponent – Daniele Bracciali, of Italy, is next in the eye of the storm – waiting at the net while he sips on his prematch drink, he will bounce up and down during the coin-toss, he will zigzag his way back to the baseline and will strike the ball during the warm-up almost as hard as he will when the match starts. Oh yes, he will definitely pick at his pants before and after – one of these days he will try it during – each point.

But of the many things that commend the performances of Nadal, the world No 2, there are many more that speak highly of his development as a man. In the stands at the Foro Italico today, as watchful as he has been in the 16 years he has coached his prodigious nephew, will be Toni Nadal.

For all the horror stories of tennis relatives who ought to have played no part in the sport, that of the Nadals is an object lesson in familial harmony. It might appear too cosy to some and yet Toni, 47, confesses to being a “difficult coach”. He played in the second division of the Spanish football league, passing his coaching badge 27 years ago, one of his four brothers, Miguel Ángel, was the famed “Beast of Barcelona”, the rock of Spain’s defence in three World Cup finals and another, Sebastian, fathered a boy 20 years ago who has become the pride of his nation.

Since Toni, who has coached Rafael since he was 4, persuaded his right-handed protégé to switch from a double-handed stroke on both flanks at the age of 10, the world No 2 has felt more at ease playing left-handed. Toni has been there all the way, as guide and mentor.

“He was always a very good pupil, because he was disciplined, I did not have to demand that,” Toni said. “We have a relationship that is different to other players because I can talk about behaviour in a way that someone else could not tell him. The people look at him and see a guy who always plays with a big illusion [light]. Before he played, I saw on television so many players who went out with a bad face. I detested that. Rafael wants to win but he wins with good manners.

“I said to him from the time he was very young ‘Rafael, you must play always with a good face. It is impossible to learn with a bad face.’ I say to my own kids [Toni has children aged 3, 4 and 5], long faces are not for us, there are people in Africa who have big problems. We don’t have problems, or if we do, they are only little ones.

“I say to Rafael sometimes when he misses a shot and has a long face – ‘You are not too good yet, you must still learn, the ball has gone out, it is only one thing.’

“Rafael has never thrown his racket. For me it is unbelievable how some people treat what they are given. He has never trodden the backs of his shoes, he gets them for nothing and yet for other people, they cost €100 [about £70]. There are players who have their rackets strung, they don’t use the racket and they go back the next day to have them strung again. That is bad.”

Could he ever see the time when he and Rafael might go their separate ways? “I would not want to coach anyone else,” he said. “I don’t need to work, for me it is good just to be behind this boy, he is as much my son as he is my nephew. I would not want to carry the rackets of anyone else.”

Unlike those who feel his physical style cannot be sustained deep into his twenties, Toni has a different view. “He needed that aggression when he was 17, 18, but we have changed some things,” he said. “I have told him, he cannot be the No 2 player and run more than the No 15, No 25, or No 50 player. Against the No 5, that’s OK and against [Roger] Federer, that’s normal, because he is too good. Rafael is learning all the time.”

link here

I wish I could like Rafa's game but I don't like bankers!
I prefer artists and risk takers!

I did like Rafas game once...evidently he was Sanchez-Vicario then ;)

Come on guys..Ok Rafa is a great defender but still you cannot say he is purely that: His FH is an aggressive weapon, the spin on it come on..

OK he is using mainly from the baseline..But still he definitely have a great ability of playing it deep and with pace so near and close to the lines that you cannot say that he is a pure defender without an attacking part on it.

I mean: Rafa Tennis could be not so spectacular than the Roger (pure artist GREAT :wub: ) one at his best, e.g. at the Wimbledon semi in 2003 or at semi aginst Safin in 2004 or at the USO final the same year against Hewitt -Hewitt a real pure defender player IMO- and so on and so forth... This is clear guys... Still Rafa is more than a simple defender player. :rolleyes:

I have to agree with TV here. Classing Nadal as a solely defensive player is the same as pigeonholing him as a 'clay court specialist' i.e. simplistic and unfair, ignoring much evidence to the contrary.

Take a look at his SF against Roddick this year (really the entire week at IW)--he was relentlessly aggressive and on the offence, systematically creating and taking full advantage of openings. In general he utlilises a mix of both offensive and defensive play, and at his best combines them, as with his trademark running forehand he likes to whip round the post and catch the corner, or his ability to hit stunning passing shots even from out of position. There's a highlight of one such shot against Youzhny up on the Masters Series site, a match in which he hit 23 winners in just 16 games in taking out Youzhny yesterday (with 9 UEs).

In fact it's when he gets overly defensive and gets that hunted look on his face that you know he's probably going to lose, such as Toronto against Berdych, USO against Youzhny, and the first set of Miami against Djokovic. Defence is his greatest strength, no doubt, but it serves him no good without positive play to back it up. It's really only against Federer where he happily sits back and lets the No 1 defeat himself with UEs, errors that aren't even really unforced seeing as they come from the Spaniard's tremendous topspin and penetrating depth, and even then he still goes for clean winners if he gets the chance (which just isn't often against Federer).

Mind you I fully understand why some fans mightn't find his game fun to watch, but I just happen to enjoy players who can run down the unlikeliest balls and come up with the most brilliant gets out of nowhere--for instance I was a fan of Hewitt at his best, and like to watch Clijsters when she is playing well. I realise it's not for everyone.

He is becoming a very good player, I agree. But my point remains. It is the way he approached the game that I do not particularly enjoy. It's only my taste and not a critic as such. Someone sending balls high over the net and making sure it is well inside the baseline and prepare his body so that he can retrieve good attacking shots is not the way I play and would enjoy it, Nadal is an accountant, not an artist, in that respect.

Now he has recently developed so much power and can generate so much spin that his average secure shot on clay is as good as an attacking player. No doubt. But he did not learn the game trying to impose his will on the court but rather containing his opponents shots.

The best defensive player I did enjoy and love was Sanchez-Vicario and it will remain as such.You know so many guys are hypocrites because they were saying it was boring with Federer winning everything,well I find it even more boring with Nadal winning everything on clay,its sickening actually,but he is good and I respect him for that!

With regards to the claycourt specialist thing,he is just that a claycourt specialist.15 out of his 20 titles I think have come on clay and 5 on hard.Go figure.Nadal is pure defence,he only attacks really short balls,very seldom do you see him creating a big shot out of nothing unless he is on the run.Hewitt on the other hand is also defence but had the ability to make plays regardless of hum being on the run or not.I did happen to like Hewitt until hit racist nature and annoying fist pumping became OTT....

In terms of a defensive player that is offensive as well you would have to use a peak Hingis as Prime example coz she is brilliant at Defense and attack for someone with minimal power too...

PS Its my 1900th post :yahoo:

You see, I never liked those 2 players game. And I am not surprised they are nowhere now.

Federer is also extremely good at retreiving amazing shots but only if he has to and not as a plan in the match. In fact, the reason he played crap against Robredo at the AO, Canas twice and Volandri yesterday is that you feel he gets really depressed knowing he will have to grind it out against those players.

Grass is his heaven, because there his genius is best expressed and all the those grinders look poor to him in comparison.

I like Rafa's game, although he is not an artist like Federer that is for sure. I would pay double to see Federer play a match there is no doubt there.

Having said that I would like to see a change towards a slightly more attacking and aggressive game so he could maybe win a slam outside of RG giving the ATP a bit more unpredictability...

EDIT:- Just as much as I would love Roger to up his clay court game and make the clay court side of the ATP a bit less predictable.

I think Manzikert hit the nail on the head here ;) : Fully agree with you.. :D

With a little discrepancy: No way, I was able to appreciate Hewitt even at his peak. This guy was really too much for me :o . At the contrary, I find very entertaining Rafa when clearly he is not playing the 100% defence strategy, i.e. most of the time when he is playing in his fav surface, i.e. clay. :rolleyes:

To make it clear, I like to watch Nadal play against a good attacking player. He is a marvellous benchmark for them. But a Canas/Rafa would bore me to death. I thought the Barca final was doomed from the 1st point.

I take it that you loved the contrast between Agassi and Sampras then as I did.

With all due respect, it's very, very easy to just like players whom you know will always do well and win effortlessly and repeatedly. I prefer to enjoy a contrast of styles among players and watch the flux of the sport as its lights shine brightly or fade out. There's no real sense of satisfaction for me if I just single out one or two players (for instance Federer and Djokovic) and say I only want to watch them play and win, and to hell with all those 'inferior' players. How much more excitement when I see someone whose game I admire fight the odds and overcome them!

Yes, Federer is a genius on court but I get no feeling of real sacrifice, grit or suffering in his game. In fact if he can fall to Volandri just because he doesn't feel like making the effort when his shots aren't coming, at least as you are suggesting, then I have to say I find that poor and not reflective of a champion, which of course he undisputably is.

But as you say it's a matter of taste rather than objective fact. And for TV and Dark, let me hastily add that I liked Hewitt's game just on tennis terms. His on-court personality, of course, left a lot to be desired as you say. :P

HI DN - I liked their matches but they were not my favourites. Agassi was not the strongest player mentally, especially against Pete.

For me though its always personality that goes hand in hand with the teniis.I never like Sampras because his tennis was so robotic and mundane and his personality was also boring with the tongue out on the side.His shouts of come on and the kinda excitement he showed after winning a big point to me seem very plastic and false.The only time I appreciated his emotion was when he won the 99 Wimbledon final coz that was pure.Nevertheless he was a genius!

Now Rafel Nadal with his fist pumpimg and cheering errors really put me off him in a big way coz its all unecessay,unless he knows he has to run the Green Mile to win points therefore his excitement could be justified but still its annoying and thats his personality.Then we have Andy Murray who just has a bad attitude and therefore I dont like his tennis.

So all in all for me I like a good personality that compliments the tennis!

Hi bud... I was saying that you liked the contrast forget the mentality.They did more often than not match up really well!Often enough though it made Pete played better most of the time hence their H2H.....

Manzi - We are saying the same thing in essence but I am not sure about that bit:

It is easy to like it because it is extremely difficult to achieve. Before Federer, I did not know a player who could do just that. Plenty had talent but amongst the most talented ones, none were consistent in their results.

Maybe Laver was an equivalent but I haven't seen enough of him and the game was not pushed to todays' level. (still an exceptional player).

Agreed DN.

I also enjoy players with similar strength facing each other: Pete v Edberg, Becker v Sampras, Becker v Edberg etc....

And surprisingly, a Coria v Nadal gave us amazing matches too. I actually am a huge fan of Coria despite his retrieving game. I found his movement beautiful, he was extremely talented with an amazing sense of anticipation and in my book is an exception of a defensive player with a weak mind.

I think he was the only, with Federer, capable of beating Nadal on clay. But he really had a mental problem.

We think alike thats why we like the same tennis.Coria was really amazing but he also could execute well and not just run to the worlds end.Yes,the choke demons possessed him so bad that at this stage he is somewhere in the Argentinian realms unable to even serve.Truely sad is this headcase.

Another person I firmly believe who could beat Nadal on clay provided they get exorcised of all head demons is Marat Safin.This something I believed in for a long time.But alas does he even care anynore?

Agreed agaon reg Safin. But we may have to forget about it now.

Nalby, also, the way he played the first set and a half against Fed at last year FO semi.

Which is so sad regarding Safin...Nalby was on fire last year until he pulled a donut muscle in his stomach then it was all over!

Random bit of useless information about Nadals - Miguel Angel Nadal, Captain of Mallorca and Spain, was the man who missed spain's final penalty in their penalty shootout defeat by England in Euro 96! David Seaman making the stop! :D

Fair enough.

This, for me, is a driver in watching tennis. I can appreciate the skills of players, but if their personality is dreadful...then it's harder to appreciate their game!
For me I have always been a fan of Fed, but let's face it-it's hard not to appreciate his game...! And Nadal, I've always admired his humble attitude...

Quite often it's why I champion A-Rod.

Murray-however, I know how he has improved, but I don't particularly like him, so find myself picking holes in his groundstrokes etc.

Ditto Ljubicic, Hewitt...etc.

I know it's silly, but I can't always separate the two!

Sara - Have a look at Davydenko's game. He is currently playing Robredo. The way he dictates and plays is a joy to watch (even if he is struggling to win his game).