Can Nadal break the record for most consecutive clay wins?
404245
Nadal can definatly beat Borg's record and I hope he beats Vilas! Nadal played great to beat Federer and unless some other player figures out how to beat him on clay, Nadal could win at least 12 more.
727695
I think Berdych and Nalbandian could beat Nadal, IF they're fit enough and have multiple tactics to overcome Nadal's incredible talent on clay. Playing clay means 'long rallies' and 'strong stamina', and Nadal possesses the fitness and the willingness to 'go-for-more-balls' instead of other players who are 'blank' about the art of playing of clay. Berdych has proved that he's capable of beating Nadal with his shot-making ability and hard serves, but he needs to maintain his consistency in order to match Nadal's greatness on clay.\nBut i think Nalbandian has slightly more chance to beat Nadal.
987420
He should be the #1 ranked in the world. Ok, so if you beat the #1 and you are #2- shouldn't you move up? He is 5-1 against Federer and has a clay court streak, how could he not be #1 this year?
1013015
54 straight matches won on clay
431447
because Nadal is an expert on clay court not like Federer who is only best on grass and hard court
671291
clay is the major surface in spain and playing with that surface would need a lot of spin. As the ball touches the clay, its bounce is lower than from a hardcourt or a grass. That means that the player would have to really get under the ball using western or extreme western to grab the ball and brush through it. Nadal, I would have to say, has the best forehand in clay because he can make the ball bounce so high that it looks like they're not playing on clay.
1050351
I disagree with the "nadal is only good on clay" part. Nadal won hard court titles in Beijing, Montreal and Dubai, which were all hard court events. He even beat Ljubicic in Madrid (indoor). So, facts proves that Nadal is not "only good on clay"\n\nHowever, I must agree that Federer still has the edge over Nadal on grass court. Unless Nadal improves over the years, EX: get a bigger serve, return closer to the baseline, he is no match for Federer. \n\nOne thing we must realize is that the draws in Wimbledon don't always work the way we want them to be. Federer is gonna be the #1 seed, Nadal is going to be the #2 seed. So, the only way they gonna head to head is in the finals. And unfortunately i don't see the picture where Nadal can get to the finals.
442692
the clay surface slows down the hard-hit balls and makes them easier to get to.  Clay matches take forever because there are few easy points.  Thus, a player like Federer, who relies on power, finds that he has less of an advantage because players have more time to get to his shots.  He cannot adapt because he does not know how to play a consist ant game where winners are not necessary.  The clay takes the sting out of his shots.  Nadal, on the other hand, does not have a power game.  He knows how to grind out matches by consistency and not go for winners.  So, he can beat Federer because he can outlast him.
263842
None other than pete sampras. he ws the best of best player in history of tennis. highest number of grandslam singles winner... My vote is for pete sampras
666402
For men, you'd have to say Pete Sampras.  He won Wimbledon 7 times, against relatively tough competition.  For clay, I'd probably pick Borg who won the French Open six times.  Although I'd believe a modern player like Nadal would beat Borg, that has as much to do with modern equipment as anything.  For hard courts, I'll pick Ivan Lendl.  Lendl had perhaps the worst win record of anyone of his talent, but he reached the U.S. Open final from 1982-1989, which is 8 consecutive years in a row, and he won it 3 years in a row.  Had Lendl been just a little tougher mentally, he would be considered the best player ever.\n\nFor doubles, hmm, I'll go with the classic of John McEnroe and Peter Fleming, although there were many very talented doubles teams.  Its popularity has fallen due to a lack of a top singles player.\n\nFor women on grass, I'll pick Martina Navratilova. I know. She won Wimbledon 9 times, and she was a finalist 3 more times.  That's a lot of times to reach the finals.  Steffi Graf won 7 times as a baseliner, but I prefer to see a serve and volleyer on grass, especially considering how few women play this style of tennis anymore.  On clay, Chris Evert was the queen of clay, winning the French Open 7 times and reaching the finals twice more.  Women's hard courts is a close call.  Martina won the US Open on hard court 4 times, but was finalist 4 more times.  Steffi Graf won it 5 times, and was finalist 3 more times.  I'll give the edge to Graf. \n\nFor women's doubles, I'd pick Martina Navratilova and Pam Shriver.  They're the only doubles player to win the Grand Slam.  They won 109 matches in a row, a record.\n\nIf you had to pick mixed doubles, you'd have to pick Margaret Court who won a mixed Grand Slam in 1963 with Ken Fletcher, then again in 1965, with three different partners (John Newcombe, Ken Fletcher, Fred Stolle).
491740
nadal was very very lucky to beat Federer on hard court and he'll have to have all the good luck available in the universe to beat him on grass.\nbut he is good on clay and I'll give him the credit for beating Federer here.but Federer is fast improving on clay also and I'll love to see him defeat Nadal in the final of French Open.
328873
I think Andy Roddick will win another major title. I realize there are alot of strong players in the game today and winning a major is extremely difficult. I think Andy will proabably reach three more grandslam finals during his prime years, and I think he will win two of them. Andy would probably already have three grandslam title to his credit, but he was born at the same time as Roger Federer and that guy is simply unbelievable. Roddick is a tremondous talent, and I enjoyed watching him perform well for the US in Davis Cup.
493078
Its going to be a tough competition between Nadal n Federer. But looking at the superb form of Nadal, I think Nadal might pull off his 2nd Grand SLam title too considering Federer has never gone past the Quarter finals of French Open.
1186746
i totally agree.\nNadal is Hoooooooooooottttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt!\nHe may not be dominating the grass and hard courts but, he is definately the king of the clay. with a little more practice Nadal will be the King of all surfaces.\nNadal is the best!!!!!!!!!!!!!
881333
Tu as oublié la défaite de la finale de Roland Garros contre Nadal, échec en 4 sets après le gain de la première manche 6/1!!!\nMais moi, je pense qu'il est quasiment impossible de ne pas perdre du tout sur une saison... Federer est clairement sur une autre planète, c'est un génie du jeu, et déjà un des plus grands (sinon le plus grand) joueurs de l'Histoire!!! L'an dernier, il n'a perdu que 4 matches sur 85, mais contre 4 joueurs différents... Safin, Gasquet, Nadal et Nalbandian; ce qui prouve bien que, sur un match, il peut être prenable!!!\nMais c'est un monstre absolue qui va battre absolument tous les records du tennis, alors quelque part, je pense qu'il en est capable... de là à ce au'il le fasse vraiment, je pense malgré tout qu'il y a encore de la marge!!!
1164876
Nadal has the perfect clay game - he's left-handed, so he can put crazy spins on the ball that is difficult for any player to handle - even Federer.  Federer has every game he's played against Nadal this year!  Federer is NOT a perfect player, or else Nadal would not be able to play him.  Everyone has a weakness and Federer's has two: clay courts, and underestimating his opponents.  Nadal is an amazing player, and Federer did not take him seriously enough to win the French Open.
883056
If Roddick continues to play the way he does on Hard surface, he has a really good chance of defeating Nadal. You know, i would really like to see Nadal and Blake face off. Blake has beaten Nadal every single time on Hard surfaces. It should be interesting. Can't wait.