re: Kornheiser: Nadal has removed Federer from the discussion of G.O.A.T

quote:

---

Bobby was pimping some 18 year-old Aussie who won a match in the French Open. I've never seen him play, but reports are he seems like he could be a good one.

There's no obvious prodigy on the way like when Rafa was in the junior ranks.

---

quote:

---

I was, and he could be good, but I'm still having to look for these guys. With guys like Agassi, Mcenroe, Sampras, Nadal and Becker, you didn't have to look. No research was involved. They were just there, and they were kicking arse.

---

quote:

---

I always find it interesting that Rafa was the more highly acclaimed prospect whereas Fed kinda snuck-up on people. Probably has a lot to do with Rafa's sheer athleticism, but I always assumed Fed was one of those can't miss, once in a generation guys coming into the ranks

---

quote:

---

I liked this grantland quote on Nadal's legacy in regards to whether he can win any slams other than the FO going forward:

---

quote:

---

Until this tournament, I never fully realized how much Nadal means to tennis. I knew he was a great player, obviously. But I'm a goner for Federer, and Nadal has often felt to me like an infuriating obstacle, a berserk dervish with the demonic power to out-frenzy Roger's grace and lucidity. His tennis was a bludgeoning adrenaline rush, a Ramones song that lasted four hours. Had he never been born, Federer would have won the 20 majors he seemed destined for in 2007. I admired what Nadal had done, and I loved the insanity at the top of the men's bracket. But deep down, in some atavistic corner of my sports fan's heart, I kind of wanted him gone.

What I realized during this Australian Open is that Nadal sets the tone for this state of affairs more than anyone else, certainly more than Federer. Roger is so cool and frictionless that, most of the time, he seems less like a prism of epic intensity than a dispassionate analyst of it.6 Djokovic, since his ascent, has been so much better than everyone else that he's largely been able to act like a careful clinician, the administrator of his own talent. And Murray has lost to the other guys so often that his anger and frustration seem basically inconsequential. In other words, the game may be epic for the fans, but you won't always catch that ground note of holy-shite intensity if you only watch the other three players. Left to themselves, they don't exactly project deep contact with the secret fires of time.

Nadal, though? He plays like he's fighting giants. It's not just the sneer, or the muscles, or the hair, or that forehand — you know, the one where he swoops the racket all the way around his head like he's whipping the team pulling his chariot. It's also that frantic tenacity that used to drive me so nuts. Federer seems devastated when he loses but he also seems to sense losses coming and accept them before they arrive. When Nadal falls behind, he turns the match into life and death. He gets mad. He hesitates less. He hits the ball harder. He doesn't look sad or scared. He looks defiant, and he plays like he's possessed.

As a result, he carries matches to a higher plane than they have any business reaching. Djokovic could and should have won the Australian final in four sets, but Nadal refused to surrender, played lethal tennis, and took Djokovic to a place he'd never been. Instead of notching a routine victory, Djokovic had to tap into the same well of inspiration that Nadal was already drawing from. You could say that all these guys have learned what it means to fight on the plains of Troy because Nadal does it in every match. And we see him do it, so we know what it means, too.

---

quote:

---

Yeah, I almost posted a disclaimer that I thought the first portion of the quote was a little harsh on Nadal. I do think he's making a very valid point overall though.

---

quote:

---

Nadal, though? He plays like he's fighting giants. It's not just the sneer, or the muscles, or the hair, or that forehand — you know, the one where he swoops the racket all the way around his head like he's whipping the team pulling his chariot. It's also that frantic tenacity that used to drive me so nuts. Federer seems devastated when he loses but he also seems to sense losses coming and accept them before they arrive. When Nadal falls behind, he turns the match into life and death. He gets mad. He hesitates less. He hits the ball harder. He doesn't look sad or scared. He looks defiant, and he plays like he's possessed.

---

quote:

---

As a result, he carries matches to a higher plane than they have any business reaching. Djokovic could and should have won the Australian final in four sets, but Nadal refused to surrender, played lethal tennis, and took Djokovic to a place he'd never been. Instead of notching a routine victory, Djokovic had to tap into the same well of inspiration that Nadal was already drawing from. You could say that all these guys have learned what it means to fight on the plains of Troy because Nadal does it in every match. And we see him do it, so we know what it means, too.

---

quote:

---

Rafa translation haha.

---

quote:

---

Dude, I do it all the time. Talking in Rafa-speak is just tons of fun, no?

---