Talk:Rafael Nadal/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Nadal has career grand slam?...not yet

He still has to win the US open(it shows up in the records he's achieved) although he may do that this year.-Anonymous

Nadal's overall record

his # finals reached in 2008 needs to be updated. he should have 10 not 7. french, wimby, miami, monte carlo, hamburg, chennai, queens, olympics, barca 64.162.56.198 (talk) 22:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

is record at 239-60. Anyone care to check this out? EDIT: Okay, I just saw the "includes Davis Cup statistics etc," so I assume that's where the discrepancy comes from? And if so, would it be helpful to list his records in the bitch same area as the other tournaments? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.218.84.248 (Talk) (talk • contribs) 02:53, 12 August 2007

and he's won 3 clay masters= mc rome hamburg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.178.194.63 (talk) 18:25, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Some times there are discrepancies within a bio as some editors update in an inconsistent manner. Ideally, there should only be updates after a tournament, but some keep raising win numbers for every win during a tournament in the infobox, in the performance timeline, both places, or randomly. This is done mostly in good faith, but is very annoying for editors who then have to make time-consuming consistency checks after tournaments. In the current case, Nadal was, according to the ATP 239-59 going into the 2007 Canada Masters. This is what I have reverted things to in the infobox, as his earnings will not be updated on the ATP site before Monday August 13 ("239-60" makes no sense). Hence, it makes no sense to update the infobox to 242-60 yet. In the singles performance timeline, however, it is stated correctly that it is updated up to and including Canada Masters, making his total record 242-60 (three wins and a loss added). So as of this instance the article is consistent given the information provided. But I sure would hope that people would leave the numbers alone during tournaments. --HJensen, talk 11:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.--GregCujo 07:43, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on some sad bastard sitting on the edit page waiting for Nadal to win wimbeldon and suddenly editing. What a loser. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.191.29 (talk) 20:18, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

dude you did it as well, you silly billy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.0.242.16 (talk) 20:29, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Just because Nadal won Wimbledon doesn't change his ranking to #1. Hahaha. Someone change it back.

You have to notice that Nadal is now ranked 3rd in the ATP and not 2nd as posted in the main wikipedia article of Nadal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.6.195.74 (talk) 16:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Popular culture

My only wish is to get this link into the article somehow, even it is't just one of the external links below. I'm not sure how to introduce the satire link without runing the encyclopedic tone. Any thoughts? --Evilbred (talk) 17:15, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. It is quite funny, but has no place in the article at all. As you have noticed, it is a satirical piece.--HJensen, talk 21

46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone have the story about why he bites his trophies? Just think that it's an interesting tidbit that people, obviously myself included, might like to know. 98.193.75.7 (talk) 18:35, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone know why he picks his underwear everytime he is about to serve? Might make a more interesting story. (Bad case of wedgies?) KiNgFrOmHeLl (talk) 16:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Cortex???

Cause in close up photos you can tell that his cortex is a just painted strip of yellow 64.162.56.198 (talk) 22:14, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

How do we know that he use aero pro drive without Cortex????????????????????????????Kraufte 20:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Bias

This article has so much bias and opinions. Someone should really keep this article in check because week after week random viewers keep "adding their own thoughts" which are not encyclopediac, or ruining the article structure. For example, someone totally screwed up the "Playing Style" section; and the Wimbledon 2006 final about Nadal is very opinionated saying things such as "Nadal played well in the final after a sluggish start." There are many other areas with opinionated sections.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.209.145.113 (talk) 02:44, April 20, 2008

I agree. Anyway, I reverted the Playing Style section back to a previous version because the version being replaced was very POV. oncamera^(t) 20:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I was noticing this statement in the playing style section "He uses an extreme western grip forehand, which allows him to hit heavy, powerful topspin forehands giving him a smaller margin of error because of the height in which he clears the net and the speed of which the ball drops because of the topspin that is employed on the ball." Doesn't that allow a LARGER, not SMALLER, margin of error? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.231.88.4 (talk) 12:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I haven't a clue, but if it's wrong then change it so it makes sense. oncamera^(t) 19:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

No, the heavy topspin does give a much smaller margin for error, and the statement should be replaced if it was removed. Mortal 13:02, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

there are errors in this article

The blurb about the movie ghost and el florero is obviously made up..it needs to be removed. Also, lleyton hewitt has never won the australian open, but this article states that he was the eventual winner in 2005

He is currently world #3 not #2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.74.208.134 (talk) 21:25, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

It says "He has a storied rivalry with Roger Federer, most notably for defeating the world number one at the French Open in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008" but he did not play Roger Federer in 2005 at the French Open. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.217.2.181 (talk) 21:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

• Of course Nadal played Federer at the French Open in 2005. Semifinal match 78.27.12.42 (talk) 20:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
• How can that error of 2005 at the French Open still be there 2 days later. As previously said he won the semifinal against Federer in 2005. DavidAlonso (talk) 22:02, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
• 2nd paragragh needs to be corrected from: "Nadal has a storied rivalry with Roger Federer, most notably for defeating the world number one at the French Open in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008, so far denying Federer a Grand Slam.", to "Nadal has a storied rivalry with Roger Federer, most notably for defeating the world number one at the French Open in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008, so far denying Federer this Grand Slam. " —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.81.221.42 (talk) 11:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

"Grand Slam" in this sense means winning all four Grand Slam titles. The phrase can be used in a number of different ways, but as it can cause confusion I'll amend. Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Links

Hi everyone,

I've tried to improve the links on the page and they are quite comprehensive, I hope this is OK but I have tried to ensure that only needed links have been placed in the text.

Kind regards

Jay —Preceding unsigned comment added by Red jay85 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Best achievement in US Open

As I know, Nadal reached 2006 US Open QF but not in 2007 US open. In 2007, he lost to David Ferrer in 4th round. So the Grand Slam Result in the box should be: "US Open QF (2006)" not "US Open QF (2007)". i cannot edit it because it is semi-protected. tq :) blizzard_youkai (talk) 20:58, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Corrected. Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Nadal's best performance at the US Open now, of course, is the semifinals this year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.97.181.73 (talk) 07:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Player Stastistics

I don't think Nadal's stats. should be on a seperate page since Federer's doesn't either and Federer has more titles than Nadals, and so does McEnroe, Sampras, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.110.216 (talk) 21:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

It was moved to a separate page for reasons of length, as there was a "may be too long" tag. Personally I think the problem is not with the statistics section but with the career section, which should be written in a summary style. At the moment virtually every tournament he's played over the last four years is described in chronological order – it's too much. Each year should be summarised, with the most significant events described first. Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the statistics should not be on a separate page. - ARC Gritt^TALK 22:27, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, many other tennis player articles are quite long, and the statistics are not on a separate page. For example, Steffi Graf (100,945 bytes), Roger Federer (104,595 bytes) and Pete Sampras (83,692 bytes) compared to the 72,792 bytes of this page. - ARC Gritt^TALK 22:32, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The Rafael Nadal statistics and results should now be deleted or turned into a redirect to this article. 74.208.16.88 (talk) 09:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Mercedes Cup 2008

Nadal will skip it because of a knee injury Please add He is the defending champion

Ref: http://tennis.com/news/news.aspx?id=139480

Thanks a lot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yosef1987 (talk • contribs) 00:59, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

 DoneDone it myself after the lock was removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yosef1987 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Playing Style Section

the playing style section seems like a lesson on topspin. It's over-long, in my opinion, and too much about topspin than about nadal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.253.160.107 (talk) 02:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

try to use this http://www.tennis.com/yourgame/instructionarticles/strategy/strategy.aspx?id=49566 for info, i'll look for more —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yosef1987 (talk • contribs) 07:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

"Nadal plays left-handed despite being naturally right-handed, and uses his dominant right hand as an anchor for his double-handed backhand. Although right-handed, Nadal claims he is left-footed and that it is difficult for him to play with his right hand." I removed this because it is completely wrong, and this information is not in the citation. He plays with his left hand because his uncle forced him to, and its difficult with his right hand because he's been playing with his left hand his whole life. Mortal 13:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

¿¿¿WHAT???

At the 2008 French Open, Nadal won his first round match in straight sets by beating Brazilian Thomaz Bellucci 7–5, 6–3, 6–1. In his second round match, Nadal beat Frenchman Nicolas Devilder 6–4, 6–0, 6–1. In his fourth straight day on the court, he disposed of the Finn Jarkko Nieminen 6–1, 6–3, 6–1 in the third round. In the fourth round, Nadal beat Spaniard and 22nd seed, Fernando Verdasco 6–1, 6–0, 6–2. This was Nadal's 4th straight left hander in the French Open. In the quarterfinals, Nadal beat another Spaniard, the 19th seed Nicolas Almagro, 6–1, 6–1, 6–1. He had dropped just 25 games to this point (a record for fewest games lost through the quarterfinals of a Grand Slam event in the Open Era), an average of five per match. In his semifinal, Nadal overcame third seed Novak Djokovic, 6–4 6–2 7–6(3), to book a place in the final against Roger Federer. He is the third player in history (after Bjorn Borg and Ivan Lendl) to play four consecutive French Open finals. Nadal won the final match over Federer 6–1 6–3 6–0, tying Bjorn Borg's record of four consecutive Roland Garros singles titles. He won the tournament without dropping a set, thereby becoming only the 5th player to have completed this feat, after Bjorn Borg, Ken Rosewall, Ilie Nastase, and Roger Federer during the open era.[citation needed]

¿What? Roger Federer did not win any Roland Garros, which is the trophy from the "winning the trophy without losing a set" record belongs to... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.57.212.145 (talk) 22:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it doesn't make much sense, and it's uncited too. I've removed it for now; it can go back in if someone can find a source (and work out what was actually meant).Pawnkingthree (talk) 08:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

it actually meant as a grand slam champion not particularly a roland garros winner —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yosef1987 (talk • contribs) 07:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

That's quite a bold claim (Sampras never managed it?). Certainly needs a reliable source. Pawnkingthree (talk) 08:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Sampras didn't actually Yosef1987 (talk) 12:46, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

ATP Website article http://www.atptennis.com/1/en/2008news/rg_sunday3.asp. Sampras never managed it (although it doesn't explicitly say it, need another source for that).78.27.22.132 (talk) 10:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Same data is also shown elsewhere on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_statistics#Winning_a_Grand_Slam_singles_title_without_losing_a_set 78.27.22.132 (talk) 10:48, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

As a nerd of all things Sampras, I can definitely tell you for a fact that he didn't do it. The closest he came was the 1994 Wimbledon, where the only set he lost was to Todd Martin. There are also a couple of others where he lost two sets, but he never went through a major completely unscathed, whereas a ton of women have done it. I suspect this is because it's easier to sweep a best of three tourney than it is to run through a best out of five match without losing a set. Obviously that doesn't help in terms of sources, but, well, I saw this comment and it brought out the inner Sampras nerd in me, 'tis all. Trip to Your Heart (talk) 06:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

so i'm watching this, editing wiki. i read a little and can't edit it due to prior vandalism..... "Miguel Ángel Nadal, is a retired professional football player" he plays futbol with an accent --jc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.208.127 (talk) 12:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Nadal's total prize money

I just checked the article and it said that Nadal has a total of ~56 Million US Dollar. How could that be possible? Roger has 'only' won ~42 Million so far, considering the difference on total number of titles both player won, the figures are just incomprehensible for me... Can anyone fix this? whether the error is on Rafa or Roger's article, or if it's actually the correct figure, can anyone verify this fact, but seriously.. is that even possible, this is the first year that he's been more productive than R-Fed... I also remember the number was 30 something million dollars. 125.160.96.104 (talk) 15:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. Someone changed it to 56. —M.C. (talk) 16:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Wew, 30 Mil... guess that's overestimation from my part... But has the prize money from his recent success been included in it... I supposed winning Wimbledon and most recently Rogers Cup would brought his tally over 20 mil already...125.160.96.104 (talk) 16:17, 29 July 2008 (UTC)