French Open Preview: Nadal Repeat?

Some years, magic happens at Roland Garros. Small miracles of sorts. Often, a champion emerges that leaves even the most passionate of tennis fans asking, "Who in the name of Gustavo Kuerten is he?"

In 1997, Kuerten was that miracle. The unseeded and relatively-unknown Brazilian shocked the tennis world that year by reaching the French Open final and erasing veteran clay-court specialist Sergi Bruguera in straight sets to win the title.

While Albert Costa had already made a name for himself on the ATP Tour by 2002, his triumph that year at Roland Garros was nothing short of shocking. Once again, an unseeded player toppled a heavily-favored opponent (this time the victim was Spaniard Juan Carlos Ferrero) in the championship match.

The same sort of miracle graced the French Open in 2004. Unseeded Argentine Gaston Gaudio rolled through the likes of Lleyton Hewitt and David Nalbandian en route to a final clash with countryman Guillermo Coria. At the time, Coria dominated the clay the way Rafael Nadal does now. Five sets later, after squandering a two-set lead and two match points in the fifth set, Coria was reduced to just another victim of Roland Garros magic. On the other side of the coin, Gaudio entered the tournament destined to be forgotten by history, but left a history-maker.

Of course, in other years, the champion has been exactly who we anticipated. Following his stunner in 1997, Kuerten slowly evolved into a clay-court force with whom the Roland Garros faithful fell in love. By the turn of the century, with no French hometown hero as a true contender, he was the man the crowd rooted for and expected to win. He did just that in both 2000 and 2001.

At the 2003 French Open, Ferrero was No. 3 in the world, but easily the top clay-court player. He finally realized his potential and erased the disappointment of falling to Costa the previous year.

And we all remember what happened last year, when Spanish sensation Rafael Nadal rode a tidal wave of momentum into the French Open by dominating the clay-court season. As expected, he could not be stopped at Roland Garros.

Lest we forget, however, even when the odds-on favorite has triumphed at the French Open, the magic is never lost. When Ferrero won in 2003, the runner-up was Dutch giant Martin Verkerk. I must admit I had never heard of him before that tournament. Not once. He had done nothing before, and has done nothing since. Adding to the shock factor is that Verkerk's game was best-suited for grass — clay should have been his worst surface. His run to the 2003 French Open final is something that can never be explained — it was truly a miracle.

Similarly, little-known and now-forgotten Mario Puerta stormed into last year's championship match and gave Nadal everything he could handle. Like Verkerk, Puerta had done absolutely nothing before his coming out party at Roland Garros. And all he has done since is test positive for performance-enhancing drugs (his second offense) and get banned for eight years from the ATP tour.

Needless to say, the forecast for what will take place at Roland Garros is never clear. Sometimes it calls for a miracle, other times it calls for the old reliables to put the upstarts in their place. It's impossible to know, but here is my best shot at a preview for the 2006 French Open.

Contenders

Rafael Nadal — He has won a record 53-straight matches on clay. He is three-for-three in clay-court tournaments this year, including Masters Series titles in Monte Carlo and Rome. Not only is he playing better than anyone else at the moment, but Nadal has also learned to play the big points better than anyone else (see: Rome final against Roger Federer when he saved two match points in the fifth set). Of course, at this year's French Open, he may not face any crucial points unless he plays Federer in the championship. Right now, Federer is the only player who can stay on a clay court with the Spaniard. Nadal is the overwhelming favorite to win the tournament and should not be bet against at any cost.

Roger Federer — Overall, he's still the best player in the game, although Nadal always gets hyped up during the clay-court season. At any other Grand Slam tournament — especially Wimbledon — Federer would be an even bigger favorite than Nadal is here. As the top two seeds, Federer and Nadal will be on opposite sides of the draw, so Roger should get to the finals. If Nadal somehow gets bounced along the way, Federer would instantly become the favorite, but even if he does go up against Nadal in the championship, his showing in Rome proves he still has a legitimate chance.

David Nalbandian — In my mind, he is definitely the third choice to win the tournament. The Argentine won the year-end Masters Cup last year in a five-set epic over Federer, and the momentum has carried over into 2006. He has a whopping 24-6 record for the year, including a semi-final appearance at the Australian Open. Without question, Nalbandian is unfazed on tennis's grandest stages. He has also been thriving on clay as of late. He won three weeks ago in Estoril, and had strong showings at both Rome and Monte Carlo, losing in three sets to Federer and Tommy Robredo, respectively. Nalbandian should be seeded third at Roland Garros, so he can avoid Nadal and Federer until the semis.

Tommy Robredo — He is coming off the biggest win of his career, crushing Radek Stepanek in straight sets to win the Masters Series Hamburg on Sunday. Robredo certainly benefited from the absence of Nadal and Federer, but he still had quality wins over David Ferrer and Mario Ancic, in addition to his domination of Stepanek. The Spaniard also reached the quarterfinals of Monte Carlo (lost to Gaudio) and the finals of Barcelona, where he gave Nadal a decent match. Robredo is playing the best tennis of his life right now, and if he receives a favorable draw (i.e., avoiding you know who), he can do some serious damage.

Pretenders

Since "pretender" is synonymous with "American" at Roland Garros, I'll just put all the notable American players in this category. Hey, it's exactly where they belong.

Andy Roddick — I remember a few years ago when Roddick lost to Nadal in the Davis Cup final on clay and I considered it an upset. All I can do now is laugh hysterically at myself for thinking that. Roddick stinks on clay. He's played two tournaments on the red stuff this year and has produced no notable results. Tommy Haas took him out in Houston in early April, and 19-year-old Gael Monfils erased him in two uncontested sets in Rome. Adding insult to injury, Roddick has not even played well on the hard courts this year. His loss to Marcos Baghdatis in Australia is somewhat explicable (the Cypriot was unconscious the entire two weeks), but losses to David Ferrer, Igor Andreev, and Julien Benneteau are simply unforgivable. He'll be gone the first time he sees a seeded player, if not before.

James Blake — He's actually playing decent tennis right now and is really the only hope for an American man to get past the third round. Blake has had his fair share of clay-court disasters in the past, though, so advancing well into the second week would be a stunner.

Robby Ginepri — He's won three times in 2006 ... I'm talking about matches, not tournaments.

Taylor Dent — Please.

Mardy Fish — Zzzzz.

Paul Goldstein, Vince Spadea — That's when you know it's time to stop analyzing.

Ripe For an Early Upset

Lleyton Hewitt — He just played his first match of the year on clay two days ago, and to say it did not go well would be the understatement of the season. The fiery Australian lost to someone named Marcos Daniel from Brazil. The rest of Hewitt's 2006 campaign hasn't been much better. He has reached the quarterfinals of the French Open twice, in 2001 and 2004. He won't get close to that far this time around.

Gaston Gaudio — He is lethal on clay, as we all saw in 2004. But Gaudio embodies the unpredictability of the French Open better than any other player. He could either win the tournament or lose in the first round. After losing to Robin Vik last week in a World Team Championships match, Gaudio said, "I think I have to start again from scratch. That's as bad as I'm playing at present. I am very frustrated and simply only bad on the court." Uh, sounds like a first round exit is the safer bet.

Guillermo Coria — He spared himself by withdrawing from the tournament. Coria cited an elbow injury, but more likely is that he understood how bad he was playing.

Miracle Workers?

David Ferrer — The Spaniard is ranked 15th in the world and clay is by far his best surface, so it would only be a miracle if he won the whole thing. Ferrer has the tools to do it, but probably lacks the mental game to survive two grueling weeks at Roland Garros. He's a good choice to reach the quarterfinals, but if he goes down a set to one of the big guns once he gets there, he'll probably go in the tank and not come out.

Jose Acasuso — Another clay-court specialist who will never do anything noteworthy on any other surface. But the Argentine has had a good summer on the dirt, and he gained some valuable experience last year at the French Open in beating Roddick on his way to the fourth round. Acasuso has stormed into the top 30 in the ATP rankings, so he should be seeded at this year's proceedings. That will spare some other seeded player a terrifying early-round matchup.

Nicolas Almagro — This probably evokes a who-in-the-name-of-Gustavo-Kuerten-is-he kind of response from most readers, as Almagro is a relative no-name despite his recent climb to No. 42 in the rankings. With any luck, however, the 20-year-old Spaniard will make his presence known at Roland Garros. His record in 2006 is a mind-boggling 17-6 and recently he's been as hot as the summer sun. So far on clay, he has reached the semis of Acapulco, the semis of Barcelona (lost to Nadal), and the quarters of Rome, where he lost to Federer 7-5 in the third set. Almagro also won his first ATP tournament in Valencia. Still, however, his ranking won't earn him a seed at the French. Sound the upset alert.

Bottom Line

The ingredients are there for a miracle of Kuertenian and Verkerkian proportions to take place once again on the hallowed grounds of Roland Garros. At the same time, however, the tournaments two biggest stars are more-than-capable of fending off the magic that the upstarts will attempt to throw at them.

So that leaves me with only one option for my fearless French Open predictions. On one half of the draw, I expect the unexpected. On the other half, order will be restored. Quite frankly, I am way too terrified (and also too smart) to pick against Nadal, so it will be Federer who bows out prematurely. Nadal, meanwhile, will storm through the field en route to the finals, where he will play the Martin Verkerk of 2006. Until the draw comes out, it is anyone's guess as to who that player will be.

What I do know, however, is that there's a reason why that player will be the "Martin Verkerk" of 2006 rather than the "Gaston Gaudio" of 2006.

Gaudio won the whole thing.

He didn't have to play Rafael Nadal in the finals.

Comments and Conversation

May 27, 2006

anonymous:

As a player on the ATP tour, I would like to say that we (all the tour players) know that Nadal (among others) is taking performance enhancing drugs. He is taking drugs that can not yet be tested for. He is a cheat and a disgrace to the game. More should be done to improve drug testing capabilites. Even if he wins the title, he will not have done so honestly. It is very sad for tennis to have him as an elite representation of the sport.

May 27, 2006

Chris:

You are correct about the American’s projected early exit in Paris! This French open is so clearly a Nadal-Federer showdown it isn’t even funny! Even the notable clay cout player in the world haven’t been able to touch these two on clay! Theer is only one match that is of interest to me this year and it will be on the final sunday of the tournament where Nadal will beat Federer in 4 sets to claim his second French open in a row! Not to worry Roger….You will win your 4th Wimbledon in a row this year by beating someone other than Roddick in the finals because, quite frankly Roddick has been sliding slowly downward ever since he dumped Brad Gilbert as his coach a couple of years ago!!!

May 31, 2006

Moppy:

I have never been all that interested in or had the time to watch much of the French Open, but having read both of Ricky’s analyses, I am psyched to do so now!

June 5, 2006

shameer:

It is Federer who is goin to win 2006 french open beating Nadal in the final. Federer was too close to Nadal in their last final this year. Once he get to that point nobody can beat him.Remember Hewit lead Federer 7-1 once. Now it is 7-11.

June 7, 2006

Anonymous:

The french open is my favorite tournament. I think that an argentinian will make it to the finals. In this case that argentinian will be Nalbandian, beating Federer in a five set marathon. This year´s final will be Nalbandian vs. Nadal, and who knows? the final matches should be first played, nobody can say that Nadal can easily beat Nalbandian, can you?

June 11, 2006

Ricky:

Nadal over Federer

i hope that outrageous “player on the ATP tour” enjoyed every minute of it…

July 4, 2006

Frank:

anonymous ATP player -

Your post was made 5 weeks ago…now it’s been reported that Nadal “may” be linked to the doctor in Spain that supplied cyclists with illegal performance enhancing drugs.

Question for you: what % of tennis players (men or women) would you say cheat in this manner? and why do you say this about Nadal? what is your evidence?

thank you

July 5, 2006

James:

I think Nadal is definitely taking performance enhancing drugs. The question is why is it not detected till now.

July 6, 2006

Jamie:

Lol.. anonymous ATP player my arse

July 6, 2006

Frank:

James..

why do you say definitely? Because of his appearance? That’s a pretty shaky thing to base that on. I’m just curious how it is that some people think they know this to be true. The “ATP” guy said this several months ago, long before the Spanish doctor thing came out.

Smoke = fire ????

July 6, 2006

Jamie:

One thing… if Nadal is known by “all the tour players” (including our ‘very real’ friend up there), to be taking performance enhancing drugs, then I really don’t think they would definitely still be playing him in a sporting manner, and indeed playing him at all, and still giving him credit when he wins. If our very own ‘tour player’ knows this, is he happy with Nadal taking performance enhancing drugs, and would he be happy facing Nadal knowing he is ‘cheating’? No he wouldn’t to be fair. If they all knew, there would be outcry, all refusing to play him. Just because he has a strong physique doesn’t automatically mean he takes drugs you know.
Ok maybe that was more than one thing… :)

July 9, 2006

pete:

I can’t prove it but I am very suspicious that Nadal is using some kind of performance enhancing drugs.

Why?

a) his physique - people need to remember that Nadal had this massively muscular physique when he started on the tour. But he was then very young - around 17/18. It is extremely unusual for anyone to develop naturally in this way. Even for people who are doing a lot of weights. I know may athletes in many sports who did a lot of weights from 14 which is pretty much as young as you should start and they look nothing like Nadal did. Only weight lifters and body builders look like that., but they develop like that for a reason. On the other hand if you look at the physique of those who do take drugs, such as football players, baseball players and indeed tennis players such as the argentinians who were caught for drugs they do look like Nadal.

b) I can tell you for an absolute fact that it is widely believed by those on the tour and by coaches who are connected that he is taking drugs.

c) there have been suspicious ‘injuries’. For example - he had what was described as an ankle injury for 3 months before the clay court season this year. He then came back and won in (I’m pretty sure it was Dubai in the heat with absolutely no signs of any cardio loss or any other loss of edge whatsoever. By ‘coincidence’ three months is a period that is perfect for cycling drugs into and out of the body. To set him up ready for the clay court season.

July 9, 2006

pete:

a couple more things

Jamie says “I really don’t think they would definitely still be playing him in a sporting manner, and indeed playing him at all, and still giving him credit when he wins. If our very own ‘tour player’ knows this, is he happy with Nadal taking performance enhancing drugs, and would he be happy facing Nadal knowing he is ‘cheating’? No he wouldn’t to be fair. If they all knew, there would be outcry, all refusing to play him.”

the Federer Nadal rivalry is dramatic. It is the best thing for tennis which thrives on high profile rivalries. You can be very confident that the absolutely last thing that anyone in the sport wants is for this to come out. It would hurt the sport and thereby hurt everyone. Nobody wants a baseball like scandal in tennis. There is a long history of the organizing bodies turning a blind eye to drugs in many sports.

July 9, 2006

pete:

and one last thing

Nadal didn’t go to Barcelona or any of the other major centers to train when he was young. He stayed on his island with his uncle. I think it would have been much harder to put a drug routine together as a young athlete in the relatively controlled environment of an academy compared with home under the care of his uncle.

July 9, 2006

Ricky:

the only thing definitive that has come out of this is that “pete” is shooting the bull and has absolutely no basis for what he is saying

Nadal is way to smart to be taking drugs

and pete is not smart enough to realize that

July 10, 2006

pete:

Ricky

what kind of a contribution is that?

Many athletes take drugs. Many of them think it’s smart because it makes them successful and success brings many benefits. Can you spell ‘cyclists’? Do you have any reason to believe that Nadal is ‘way to smart to be taking drugs’ or did you just pull that our your ass?

You have no idea how smart I am or aren’t. But when you say I am shooting bull your are quite wrong. I am perfectly well aware that some of what I am saying is circumstantial - but I say so. And I can tell you as a matter of absolute fact of which I have direct personal experience that there are many pros (players and coaches) who strongly suspect he has taken drugs.

If you just want to blow off some steam. That’s fine. But if you want to have a debate, say something intelligent.

For example, do you have any comment on his physique at 17? Have you seen the members of his family? Do you know other kids who look like that without artifical aid? Remember that when baseball players started juicing people were more naive about what it did to bodies and took the massive muscle gains as a testament to training. Now we know better.

July 10, 2006

pete:

Apparently some tennis players take drugs!


‘The International Tennis Federation decided to ban Argentine star Mariano Puerta for eight years after he tested positive for a banned substance following this year’s French Open final.’

‘The lefthanded Puerta is not the only Argentine to serve a drug suspension, as his countrymen Guillermo Coria, Juan Ignacio Chela and Guillermo Canas, who is currently suspended, have all been penalized by the ITF, the governing body of tennis.’

But I guess Argentinians just aren’t as ‘smart’ as Spaniards. Or maybe they just have better doctors?

I think you’re a little naive about this, Jamie. You remind me of the guys out there who stil think Barry Bonds is a virgin.

July 10, 2006

pete:

French Davis Cup player Escude said: “To say that tennis today is clean, you have to be living in a dream world.”

it is this reality combined with some circumstantial factors that make many suspicious of Nadal.

July 10, 2006

pete:

The doctor at the center of the Spanish doping investigation has said he treated footballers, athletes and tennis players as well as cyclists.

However, Doctor Eufemiano Fuentes, who was held for questioning by police in May, denied his methods could be classed as doping.

Fuentes’s declarations come in stark contrast to a statement released by the Spanish government on Tuesday that said no footballers or tennis players were implicated in the investigation.

“I’m angry about the whole matter,” Fuentes told the Cadena Ser radio station on Wednesday.

“Names have appeared of people that I don’t even know and there are others that haven’t come out and I’ve no idea why but my professional oath forbids me from revealing their names.

“Treatment only for cyclists? I’m also indignant about that. I’ve worked with other sports, like athletics, tennis and football. There are a lot of names that haven’t come out, there has been only selective leaks. I don’t know why.

July 10, 2006

pete:

On the issue of being able to ‘see’ whether someone is taking drugs.

At World Gym in San Francsco, general manager Rory Kurtz insisted that drug use is not tolerated. He also said prohibitions are widely ignored — because the drugs obviously give bodybuilders the desired results. “So many people are on stuff these days, it’s kind of one of those things,” he said. “I can point to people and can just tell by looking at them. Even some smaller guys you might not suspect, but you can tell. (!!!!)You’d be amazed how many people take stuff.”

July 10, 2006

Jamie:

So your telling me that you would be ok with your biggest rival being able to beat you only due to the fact that he’s taken performance enhancing drugs, and thereby getting more credit than you have only by cheating? And knowing this, you would happily accept that? Maybe its just me… but I wouldn’t be happy. There would be no way such a widespread scandal could be kept under wraps.

July 10, 2006

Ricky:

yes I know members of his family. His uncle was the “Monster of Mallorca,” one of the best soccer players around in Spain during his time.

July 12, 2006

pete:

I understand your scepticism but look at what has actually happened in other sports.

The reaction of other athletes has been to either
a) take the drugs themselves. In some sports drug taking becomes endemic but even then it is amazing how long a conspiracty of silence continues for. Those who benefit commercially from the sport are lothe to create a scandal. Just look at how long it took for steroids baseball to be taken seriously. Consider that boxing has ignored steroids until very very recently.
b) the athlete stays clean but keeps his mouth shut. He doesn’t want to be the one who rocks the boat because everyone is feeding from the same trough. It is exactly the same as the cop who looks the other way and won’t ‘rat’ on a dirty colleague. It is very striking how these are the very guys who come out of the woodwork with their stories AFTER they have retired from active participation nthe sport. A very good example of this is the way that Lance Armstrong’s ex colleagues and ex girlfriends and ex wives are only now coming out with their stories.

It isn’t as simple as “I wouldn’t be happy”. You are absolutely right - you wouldn’t be happy, but what are you going to do about it? Do you want to be ostracized and hated? Do you want your life and that of your family ruined as you are defamed? Just look at how Lance Armstrong has gone after his accusers. A lot of people think about it and decide it just isn’t worth it. They’re not going to be the one.

I know this is morally disappointing but it has always been this way.

July 13, 2006

pete:

ricky
when I referred to the members of his family my point was to compare his physique with that of the members of his family. I too know of his uncle and now coach and he never looked anything like as mesomorphic as rafa.

July 13, 2006

Jamie:

I find that sad. I’m not trying to argue with you at all pete, i accept what your saying thoroughly, i just find it disappointing. I suppose not being in that position myself i can’t imagine all of the different things that would result, however i still imagine it would be so hard to keep under wraps. When you say ‘would i want to be hated’, by whom do you mean? also referring to his physique, i myself am no arnold schwarzenegger, however am a national standard weightlifter which i do through my school (i am 17). My training methods to be honest are not that regular, and i don’t go the gym to work on body building specifically that much, in fact only once (yesterday) in the last 2 months or so. i havent competed since the nationals in february, but my physical stature isn’t one that i would say is bad, its not massively muscular, but its fairly muscular. And there are more muscular people of my age, as i have a fairly slim build anyway. So from my point of view, knowing my training frequency (and lets be fair how hard i work - not hard enough), i can see how people of my age could be very muscular if they train hard. so from his physical image, it may be hard for some to imagine that its without the use of drugs, but i would say its very possible. But thats just my point of view. Obviously theres a lot i dont know, i accept that. Its a very touchy subject, but with the drug testing methods, i imagine if would be hard to bypass these. For example, do you not think that when some people are caught, for example Puerta, that more would come out? Obviously some get found out, why not the others if there are such regular tests?

July 13, 2006

Ricky:

i knew exactly what you were referring to when you asked about his family members


and you’ve got the wrong uncle, pete

his uncle who is also his COACH does not look like an athlete and probably never had anything to do with sports

his OTHER the uncle is the one i was referring. So yeah, go ahead and take a look at him since you apparently have never seen him and had no idea who i was even talking about.

July 13, 2006

Ricky:

from one of pete’s posts: “French Davis Cup player Escude said: ‘To say that tennis today is clean, you have to be living in a dream world.’”

yeah, obviously. Two Argentines have been suspended from the tour in the past year. Of course tennis isn’t clean. In no wau does what Escude said have anything to do with Nadal. It’s simply a beyond obvious statement that is less than noteworthy.

July 13, 2006

Ricky:

another pete postL “b) I can tell you for an absolute fact that it is widely believed by those on the tour and by coaches who are connected that he is taking drugs.”

PROVE IT

no seriously, prove it now

July 20, 2006

pete:

ricky
I can’t prove it. And I could be wrong. But that doesn’t mean I am wrong and there is circumstantial cause for concern.
A lot of people blindly refused to accept that baseball was dirty, they even refused to accept what Jose Conseco was saying even when he confessed and spelled out from A to Z what had been happening. People just don’t like to discover their heroes have feet of clay.
I’m sure there are still a lot of people who don’t believe that pro cycling is dirty despite all the evidence to the contrary.
And I’m sure that as the evidenc emounts in tennis (and there is already more than you seem to realize) there will be may people who won’t want to hear it.
It is incredibly difficult to prove that an athlete is dirty as Lance Armstrong has proven.
Tennis players are tested 8-12 times a year. Many of the drugs in question - IF EXPERTLY ADMINISTERED - cycle out of the body in a few days. EPO for example was very hard to test for as it was gone within 3 days. Steroids can aid training and then ‘vanish’. It is very very hard to detect some of these substances and the chemists creating them invent slightly modified molecules to beat the tests. The ‘window’ in which testing can detect the drug is smaller than many seem to realize. Furthemore, the doctors who administer these drugs have a carefully prepared fallback strategy eg contiminated supplements, over the counter cold medications etc etc. Some of these commonly available ‘remedies’ are known to have diuretic side effects that can mask steroids for example. So this is a true battle of wits.
In fact it is so hard to prove an athlete is doping by direct means that the doping agency has recently explicity expanded the criteria it uses to determine whether someone is doping to include more general ‘circumstantial’ evidence.
Don’t mean to throw cold water on your hero worship but eventually the truth on this may out because British scientists are developing a totally different way of detecting doping that measures whether the receptors in the body that are ‘switched on’ by the drugs have been artificially ‘tampered’ with. Hence they don’t need to know exacly what chemical to test for. They simply look at the body and see if it has been reengineered. If the testing bodies keep A and B samples in storage then at a future date many of these ambiguities may be resolved beyond any doubt.

July 20, 2006

pete:

oh - by the way

his uncle Miguel Angel Nadal - the beast of Barcelona - wasn’t remotely as mesomorphic as Rafa and neither are ANY of his family that I’ve seen on TV or pictures of.

May 16, 2007

bbking:

So listen to this. I played tennis every day from 7yrs old to 18. I taught tennis, I love tennis. I go to the ericcson open every year. The first time Nadal played I instantly disliked him. Something was not right. My cousin was a pro on tour, and i have seen thousands of tennis bodies and this one was not right. One of my arms developed larger than the other from playing so much but his is obviously enhanced. Think of it as the moon landing. You can’t prove it, but you know it happened. You don’t HAVE to have proof for everything, that is just some american upbringing talking to you.

My proof to myself has been when canas beat federer. I sat in the first row, and as I haven’t played seriously in years, i had no idea about canas or drug allegations of him or nadal, i just watched the match, and the whole time all i could think was how could this guy, with those shots, be beating the greatest player I have ever seen? Something’s not right. How are his legs so huge, and he is able to stay up after chasing every ball in a five set match. Michael Chang’s legs were not as big as this guys, and michael changs upper body was not as overdeveloped as this guys. So i go home and start reading about the guy, all of the sudden I see the allegations of drugs, and it all made sense. So now I have kind of dedicated myself to posting these types of comments, because tennis is too perfect of a sport to be screwed with by desperate guys who can’t win because they don’t have the head for the game. I even think federer is a little arrogant and annoying, always accepting his trophies in the third person, but when you watch him play you fall in love with his game, and it hurts me to see someone cheat to take that away from him.

June 11, 2007

anonymous:

well,

i can’t prove that the spanish took drugs. i don’t know any top players in the circuit who could prove either (ok i don’t know them all ). But i do know some top players who are “convinced” that he took some and he keeps taking drugs.
The main reason is that it is impossible to play without getting tired. Never. But he does.
But he s not the only cheater and everybody knows them.

Eg, there are cheaters who after winning matches, go back to the lockeroom, and who see other clean players who just look at them with the sign of a serynge on their arm to simulate drugs taking.

Since it happens in “public” in the lockeroom, everybody knows about the drugs and the cheaters, the journalists, the International tennis federation, the coaches, etc…everybody!

it’s just up to you to boycoyt to force them to take the needed measures if you can t see cheaters.

Bye.

July 7, 2008

Borggy:

All this talk about Nadal is interesting. I’m just amazed by the sheer power in his game. And also his fitness level. Am writing this after he won against Roger in Wimbledon 2008. How can anyone beat Nadal on this form? He has taken tennis to a new level in terms of sheer power and aggression, as well as such a high fitness level. When you look at it, it’s rather absurd — how will he be able to sustain this over the longer term? Is it humanly possible without getting long term injuries? There are some serious allegations out there - reading the posts, but what is the evidence? I still can’t figure this out.

June 8, 2009

Phil Coates:

When people write that “The first time Nadal played I instantly disliked him” they surely can’t expect to be taken seriously and they totally betray any willingness to make a rational analysis before reaching an opinion.

Someone said he never gets tired. Well he lost to Murray in the US final because he was tired after a grueling previous match. He lost in the Madrid final after a another grueling match against Djokovic the previous night. These egregious baseless comments scarcely merit attention and belong in the worst kind of gutter tabloids.

June 6, 2010

what the heck?:

All these posts and comments are so perfectly formulated that I can’t see how any of you can make comments better than mine. I think, without being able to prove it, that all of you making comments are juiced. Shame on you!

June 6, 2010

Fool number two:

That makes no sense at all. Maybe it is a function that tennis sucks and therefore anything related to drugs and tennis is not worth speaking about. By the way, does anyone know where I can get performance enhancing drugs?

October 27, 2011

Jack:

- Nadal complains that the testing is too stringent.

- Nadal has more speed, strength, and stamina, than any other tennis player has or had, IN THE HISTORY OF THE GAME !

- Nadal defends other drug CHEATS (Gasquet, Wickmayer, Malisse).

- Nadal has numerous injuries, that cause him to miss tournaments, then magically heals himself in a few days, and plays at 100%, without having to rebuild his fitness over time.

- Nadal’s serve magically jumps up by 10 mph for certain tournaments (USO, Wimbledon), then falls back within days for his following tournaments.

- Nadal cheats in other ways (timewasting, mis-using Medical time outs for strategic purposes, illegal coaching).

- Nadal uses two Spanish doctors to “prepare for competition”.

- Nadal gets PRP treatment on his “knees”. PRP has been studied, and shows no significant benefit for tendonitis. PRP HAS been used as a ruse by unscrupulous doctors (ask Tiger Woods about this) to inject growth hormones to enhance physical strength.

- Nadal is from Spain, where doping is rampant, and the authorities refuse to do anything about it.


The likelyhood that Nadal is clean, is about the same as the likelyhood that the earth is flat. Only a severely blinded fanboy/girl would fail to see that this guy is a BLATANT CHEAT !

Leave a Comment

Featured Site