Top 10 Men's Tennis Players of All Time
#4
Rafael Nadal
The defending U.S. Open champion has established himself as not only one of the best players of today, but one of the all-time greats. Since making his debut at 15, the 24-year-old Nadal has already won a Career Grand Slam and has nine Slams total along with an Olympic gold medal.
Also a nice RAFAHOLICs Type article here:
Nadal deserves title of world's best athlete
source
By MARK WHICKER
Among the many aspects of life that Tiger Woods has abandoned in the past 10 months is the honorary title of World's Best Athlete.
It has not stayed undetermined for very long.
The top sportsperson in the world today is Rafael Nadal, who won the U.S. Open on Monday and became the seventh men's tennis player to win all four Grand Slam events in his lifetime.
Nadal also won the Australian and French Opens this year, while Roger Federer made the finals in only one Slam. It is agreed that Nadal is the best tennis player at the moment, but even that is colossal understatement. There is no one else in any sport, worldwide, that approaches Nadal's dominance.
Nadal is the only one of the seven career Slam-masters who grew up on clay and had to adjust to the faster lanes of hard courts and grass. He is the first Spanish player to win New York since Manuel Orantes in 1975, and that was on clay at Forest Hills.
This is a far more complicated affair than trying to win one golf tournament on bent grass and another on Bermuda. Tennis surfaces dictate wild stylistic swings.
John McEnroe and Pete Sampras never won the French; Bjorn Borg never won New York; Ivan Lendl and Jim Courier never won Wimbledon.
Before Nadal stuffed the French Open into his pocket with five victories in six years, eight of the previous nine French men's champions never won another Slam and were rarely a factor. If you actually know that Gaston Gaudio and Albert Costa were on that champions list, then you're either Argentinian or Spanish, or you're Bud Collins.
Nadal was powerful and visionary enough to reach beyond the red dirt. He beat Federer at the '08 Wimbledon final (grass) and in the '09 Australian (hard court).
Nadal's knee betrayed him in '09. He missed Wimbledon entirely. Once he got healthy he seemed bent on re-establishing truth.
In his three Slam victories this year he has lost only one set in the finals, and that was in a tiebreaker to Novak Djokovic on Monday.
Ten years ago Djokovic might have been No. 1. But as defeat loomed, he felt free to express his amazement over Nadal. Stripped of alternatives, he kept trying drop shots when Nadal was on the baseline, and when Nadal finally failed to return one for a winner, Djokovic laughed and raised his arms in triumph. Mostly he just shook his head wistfully, appreciatively, as if he were losing a piano recital to Mozart.
New York gave Nadal six consecutive victories in Slam finals, and he is 11-2 overall.
But why does Nadal occupy higher ground than other champions in other sports? Why should we rank him above Usain Bolt or Michael Phelps?
One difference is competition.
Nadal is putting himself on the line four times a year, in two-week chapters, against the best players in the world. It is possible for Player No. 200 to knock off a Federer or Nadal, if the fates permit, whereas Bolt and Phelps face seven other guys at the most, most of them hopeless.
The track and swimming surfaces are fairly uniform, and Bolt and Phelps make limited appearances.
It could be argued that Grand Slam tennis is the most complex and challenging test of any sport. There are no teammates. There is a coach and an entourage, but they are up in the stands. All they can do is give furtive (and illegal) signals. A golfer at least has a caddie; a quarterback does not even make the play-calling decisions. Nadal is out there with his racket and little else.
Tennis players also have to deal with nature. In New York it was broiling the first week, windy and shivery the next. They sometimes began playing before lunch, sometimes played way past midnight.
And since a 5-set match can last 90 or 240 minutes, tennis players have a trickier time with preparation than anybody. There is no set tee time. Getting loose, staying loose, figuring out mealtimes – it varies with every day, and the walls of the locker room can close in when you have been waiting for three hours. And when the only other person there is your rival.
Nadal does not turn 25 until next June, after the Australian and French. He wins those two and he has 11 Slam titles, Federer won his 11th when he was 25, too, and has won five since. But now it will be a major jolt if Federer or anyone else wins another.
Everyone who has a chance to watch Nadal on TV or in person should make it a priority. His degree of mastery is not just good for tennis. In case we've forgotten, it shows us why all these games are necessary.
Also a nice RAFAHOLICs Type article here:
Nadal deserves title of world's best athlete
source
By MARK WHICKER
Among the many aspects of life that Tiger Woods has abandoned in the past 10 months is the honorary title of World's Best Athlete.
It has not stayed undetermined for very long.
The top sportsperson in the world today is Rafael Nadal, who won the U.S. Open on Monday and became the seventh men's tennis player to win all four Grand Slam events in his lifetime.
Nadal also won the Australian and French Opens this year, while Roger Federer made the finals in only one Slam. It is agreed that Nadal is the best tennis player at the moment, but even that is colossal understatement. There is no one else in any sport, worldwide, that approaches Nadal's dominance.
Nadal is the only one of the seven career Slam-masters who grew up on clay and had to adjust to the faster lanes of hard courts and grass. He is the first Spanish player to win New York since Manuel Orantes in 1975, and that was on clay at Forest Hills.
This is a far more complicated affair than trying to win one golf tournament on bent grass and another on Bermuda. Tennis surfaces dictate wild stylistic swings.
John McEnroe and Pete Sampras never won the French; Bjorn Borg never won New York; Ivan Lendl and Jim Courier never won Wimbledon.
Before Nadal stuffed the French Open into his pocket with five victories in six years, eight of the previous nine French men's champions never won another Slam and were rarely a factor. If you actually know that Gaston Gaudio and Albert Costa were on that champions list, then you're either Argentinian or Spanish, or you're Bud Collins.
Nadal was powerful and visionary enough to reach beyond the red dirt. He beat Federer at the '08 Wimbledon final (grass) and in the '09 Australian (hard court).
Nadal's knee betrayed him in '09. He missed Wimbledon entirely. Once he got healthy he seemed bent on re-establishing truth.
In his three Slam victories this year he has lost only one set in the finals, and that was in a tiebreaker to Novak Djokovic on Monday.
Ten years ago Djokovic might have been No. 1. But as defeat loomed, he felt free to express his amazement over Nadal. Stripped of alternatives, he kept trying drop shots when Nadal was on the baseline, and when Nadal finally failed to return one for a winner, Djokovic laughed and raised his arms in triumph. Mostly he just shook his head wistfully, appreciatively, as if he were losing a piano recital to Mozart.
New York gave Nadal six consecutive victories in Slam finals, and he is 11-2 overall.
But why does Nadal occupy higher ground than other champions in other sports? Why should we rank him above Usain Bolt or Michael Phelps?
One difference is competition.
Nadal is putting himself on the line four times a year, in two-week chapters, against the best players in the world. It is possible for Player No. 200 to knock off a Federer or Nadal, if the fates permit, whereas Bolt and Phelps face seven other guys at the most, most of them hopeless.
The track and swimming surfaces are fairly uniform, and Bolt and Phelps make limited appearances.
It could be argued that Grand Slam tennis is the most complex and challenging test of any sport. There are no teammates. There is a coach and an entourage, but they are up in the stands. All they can do is give furtive (and illegal) signals. A golfer at least has a caddie; a quarterback does not even make the play-calling decisions. Nadal is out there with his racket and little else.
Tennis players also have to deal with nature. In New York it was broiling the first week, windy and shivery the next. They sometimes began playing before lunch, sometimes played way past midnight.
And since a 5-set match can last 90 or 240 minutes, tennis players have a trickier time with preparation than anybody. There is no set tee time. Getting loose, staying loose, figuring out mealtimes – it varies with every day, and the walls of the locker room can close in when you have been waiting for three hours. And when the only other person there is your rival.
Nadal does not turn 25 until next June, after the Australian and French. He wins those two and he has 11 Slam titles, Federer won his 11th when he was 25, too, and has won five since. But now it will be a major jolt if Federer or anyone else wins another.
Everyone who has a chance to watch Nadal on TV or in person should make it a priority. His degree of mastery is not just good for tennis. In case we've forgotten, it shows us why all these games are necessary.
0 comments