Rafael Nadal Is Making His Last Claycourt Preparations For Hamburg [Video]
by Tom Gainey | July 22nd, 2015, 10:07 am
  • 26 Comments

Ahead of Hamburg, Rafael Nadal has been practicing hard at his home in Mallorca. The former No. 1 was joined on the courts by good friend Juan Monaco who will also play Hamburg.

Nadal hasn’t won a European clay title since the 2014 French Open.

Juan Monaco talks about training with Rafa:


You Might Like:
ATP d Hamburg in Landmark Jury Trial
Rafael Nadal Gets Into Shouting Match With Fabio Fognini During Hamburg Final [Video]
Basilashvili Wins ATP Hamburg
Rafael Nadal Is On His Way To Hamburg [Video]
Nadal, Federer Pass on Hamburg

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

26 Comments for Rafael Nadal Is Making His Last Claycourt Preparations For Hamburg [Video]

Okiegal Says:

Go for it, Rafa. Hope you have great tournament! It would be nice to see you bite another trophy!!


Okiegal Says:

21 wins and 7 losses on clay this year….not too bad for an off year…..


chris ford1 Says:

Okiegal – I’d say that it IS that bad, that Novak finally broke down Rafa’s clay Bastion of near invulnerability. All his career, Rafs could skip whole seasons, but still be in Top5 or better if he had good clay results, since clay could be counted on for comprising most his ATP points each year. And it’s not just Novak – others have been a part of those 7 losses.

I’d say he needs to be on clay for sure, to get his mojo going, his confidence..rather than run to the hated hardcourts to try and challenge Djokovic.

Federer weathered a horrible year and came back. So can Rafa.

Fan or not, with Fed’s aging, there are two great talents, with worthies like Andy and Stan striving as well.
But Djokovic-Nadal is still the top two pure talents in the ATP.
(And either would love to play as well as Fed does at 34. Novak’s dream, among many not yet realized, is to have Roger’s or Andre’s late, competitive longevity.)


Okiegal Says:

Well, Chris Ford, it could have been so much
worse……


wilfried Says:

Strange.
Pico practising with Rafa.
I thought he was injured at his right wrist, as he gave that as a reason to desist from Davis Cup this past weekend.
Hope Nadal fares better at the ATP 500 in Hamburg than Pico at the ATP 250 at Bastad in Sweden (the latter lost there in the 1st round).


Mary Says:

Well maybe it is not economic stimulus in the narrow sense i.e. as a fiscal or monetary policy change ( eg increased government spending or changes in interest rates or….) but it definitely stimulates the economy. You can say it is increased spending by private sector starting with the donor. Building even a useless road leading to nowhere creates jobs, more income, more spending, more retail sales, more jobs, more producer goods sales, more jobs, more income and so on. Rub is obviously smart, not a celebrity who poses with disadvantaged kids or hungry people. Obviously celebrities want a big bang for their buck. Not that Rub doesn’t. But he has amassed his millions by being smart so he does a lot more for the people. Gives them the monument and creates jobs.


Okiegal Says:

@Mary…..You might as well save your breath….
Didn’t you know that the men on TX are smarter than the women?? You’ll never win an argument on here! I don’t care what you say, positive or negative, there is always someone on this forum that will make a federal case out of your comment!


sienna Says:

meanwhile nobody talks about Rafa last CM appearance. Tom Gainey knows about Rafaels future in tennis. It ends this year.


wilfried Says:

@ Mary
Good comment to me.
But we can say the same for Federer’s charity projects,as I assume the people who are educating or teaching kids in his charity projects don’t do it completely for free and get paid for what they do.
In that sense Roger is creating jobs as well and is stimulating local economy in the regions where he does run his projects.
And the same goes for Nadal? Djokovic and other tennis stars.


calmdownplease Says:

`Fan or not, with Fed’s aging, there are two great talents, with worthies like Andy and Stan striving as well…`

Andy is not a `worthy`.
I agree Novak and Rafa are better players than Andy, they have far better careers, end of discussion.
But I’ll be damned to agree that they have more `pure talent` than he does.
Neither are more talented at playing tennis in the `pure` sense than Andy is.
They can’t even do a lot of the stuff he can do.
Their successes come more from their consistency of shot making and incredible mental strength and spirit more than their superior skills (although they are both still extremely skillful)
And just because Stan sneaks 2 slams in his johnny-come-lately manner doesn’t mean he is to be lumped in with a player that’s been in the top 4 almost all of his career!


calmdownplease Says:

In my view, Andy Murray is a relative underachiever when one takes into account what he can do on the court.
Still, we are certainly not done yet (as much as certain fans of other players would like to think so) & he might just finally see the light.
Stranger things have happened.


Gypsy Gal Says:

CDP i agree,i do think Andy and Stan for that matter have more talent than their rivals Novak and Rafa,not saying they are not talented,but its as you say they seem to be tougher mentally,i think Andy has been more consistent throughout his career making more GS finals,winning more Masters etc,if i were a betting woman i think going forward both will win more GS,but Andy will end his career with more JMO and a better career,Stan has made 2 finals and won both Andy has made a number of finals,they both have two GS but if they finished their respective careers now,it would be sudden death,as you would be talking finals,QTRs,RUs etc,so it would be hands down Andy GOAT ha ha,as if we would discuss souch a thing here?….


Ben Pronin Says:

“But I’ll be damned to agree that they have more `pure talent` than he does.”
What is pure talent?

“Neither are more talented at playing tennis in the `pure` sense than Andy is.”
What is the ‘pure’ sense of playing tennis?

“They can’t even do a lot of the stuff he can do.”
And he can’t do a lot of the stuff they can do? No let me amend that, all 3 can do some things the other 2 can’t, but I wouldn’t say “a lot”.

“Their successes come more from their consistency of shot making and incredible mental strength and spirit more than their superior skills (although they are both still extremely skillful)”
What is the point of tennis if not to be more consistent than your opponent? And if you’re more consistent, then you are, by definition, more skillful. So this statement makes no sense.


Gypsy Gal Says:

Rafaels future in tennis ends this year,right glad we got that one sorted out then,just more posters stating an opinion as a fact,as they have all done before by predicting then end of Rafas career,nothing that hasnt been said before,err moving on…


calmdownplease Says:

Good grief!
How does it not make sense then Ben?
How can I put this in a way more understandable to you and others who always weigh in like this.
Andy plays a more skillful game in the pure sense of using variety and producing houdini like shots that almost no other tennis player can produce with regularity.
Fed is similar in that sense of course, although he does it in a different style (ie more stylish & rhythmic) to Andy.
The consistency of Novak and Nadal is, I think, based on the relative simplicity of their games.
ie they do tend to do most things (esp Novak) repetitiously from the baseline, but do them all incredibly well.
Its more like 2D tennis to Andy’s 3D tennis
It’s just that both of their dimensions seem to be better (or more successful)than Andy’s more complicated game.
But the differences aren’t huge.
Andy is also mentally tough, its just that they seem to be a little tougher, & it’s the same with the range of their abilities on court
But small % clearly make a difference
I’m making a judgement call in what I like from a tennis player as are you, its why Im a fan of Andy’s not Novaks or Nadal’s. As long as that’s understood I don’t see the problem.
`Pure Talent` was my interpretation of CF1 post on this.
Pure talent is to me the actual game itself rather than the other very important elements that make up a champion (as discussed)
Have I clarified my position to your satisfaction now?

`And he can’t do a lot of the stuff they can do? No let me amend that, all 3 can do some things the other 2 can’t, but I wouldn’t say “a lot”.

You’re correct.
`A lot` was misworded (and I’ve corrected it as you can see)and wasn’t my argument anyway. But it’s certainly quite a bit or I would have seen some of it after this time. However, their games are developed for winning rather than just how well they can produce shots and use variety.


calmdownplease Says:

@gypsyG

`Andy GOAT ha ha,as if we would discuss such a thing here?..`

Not without the most appropriate and deeply layered asbestos infused clothing could we even contemplate something like THAT.
;-)


Ben Pronin Says:

“Andy plays a more skillful game in the pure sense of using variety and producing houdini like shots that almost no other tennis player can produce with regularity.”

What is a more skillful game? Murray is capable of playing junk ball tennis that Djokovic and Nadal, well, I don’t think they can pull it off quite as well on the pro level. They can probably do it in practice but they probably couldn’t get away with hitting as many junk ball shots as Murray does. This doesn’t mean his game is more skillful. They also don’t need to play junk ball tennis because they are more consistent than Murray. In other words, they’re more skilled because they’ve done a better job of mastering the fundamental strokes in tennis than Murray has.

The consistency of Djokovic and Nadal is not based on the simplicity of their games. Have you ever watched Nadal play? Does his forehand look simple to you? And what about Djokovic and the insane angles he can hit off both sides with regularity, what’s so simple about pulling that off?

And last I checked, both Nadal and Djokovic, who everyone will admit don’t have the natural feel and soft hands that Murray does, have been much more inclined to improve their transition and net play in order to become even more complete players. Murray, on the other hand, still stays far behind the baseline and makes little effort to move forward on any thing that can be defined as a regular basis.

You making a judgement call as a fan doesn’t make what you’re saying correct. I’m not a fan of Nadal but I’m not going to say Dolgopolov is a more skillful or talented player than he is just because I enjoy his game more (and coincidentally he’s another master of junk ball tennis).

“However, their games are developed for winning rather than just how well they can produce shots and use variety.”
What??? Isn’t the point in tennis, or any competition, to win? And doesn’t winning necessitate the production of shots and employing variety as best as possible when needed? What are you even saying??

Nothing you said clarified anything. You just added more ridiculous and often contradictory statements.

Djokovic and Nadal are more successful because they are better at winning because they are more skillful and better players than Murray. Now that’s simple.


calmdownplease Says:

`Djokovic and Nadal are more successful because they are better at winning because they are more skillful and better players than Murray. Now that’s simple`

Yes, simple being the operative word.
Okay, I’m just going to agree to disagree with you
because theres not a lot to be done about it
But `Junkballing`?
:)


Margot Says:

And I’m going to agree with CDP ….quel surprise!
Rafa/Nole/Fed are more successful than Andy because they have steel in their veins MOST of the time, whereas Andy has steel in his veins ….a bit of the time ;)
But “more skillful and better” than Andy…go away!
Just a subjective opinion, as is mine.


Gypsy Gal Says:

CDP LOL and just to clarify before Sienna gets her bloomers in a twist when i said GOAT i meant between Andy and Stan,and thats it….


Nitesh Says:

Federer is GOAT then came nadal threatening to take away ” GOAT ” but bang came djokovic beat him in three straight grand finals. I think nadal’s loss against djokovic in three finals & against Stan in Australian open halted his march towards No 18 then again injuries so there is only one GOAT .


calmdownplease Says:

There are many Goats!
Muching grass and looking like the devil’s spawn on pastures and hillsides all over the world
As for the GOAT
Such a disrespectful notion and a bit vainglorious/tacky too
vroom vroom


Gypsy Gal Says:

I repeat that i prefer to talk about all the all times greats rather than one out and out GOAT,after all there are many amazing players past and present in their own particular areas of greatness or GOATness as the case may be….


Gee Says:

Beating roddick, a floundering baghdatis and old cortisone injected, struggling agassi doesn’t make fed the best player.

Fed never beat novak when novak won the first set, but roddick could brag about how he “battled” against novak while novak couldn’t play at all at the 2009 australian open.
Pathetic.


Markus Says:

Murray being more skillful than Djokovic is highly debatable. But my theory as to why Andy is less successful is because he has more weak points.


Tennis fan Says:

For past 10 years i could see only big 3. No way andy can match other guys

Top story: Halep, Wozniacki Lead Loaded Wuhan Field; Kerber v Keys, Svitolina v Sabalenka Tues.