Why is Nadal so dominant at the French Open?

The tennis ball loses a lot more energy than other courts in the process of bouncing on clay, so the ball speed will become very slow, which gives the player more time to run in place to hit the ball, Nadal runs very fast, and he can slide on clay, so even if the opponent is very tricky, he is likely to run in place. The super topspin ball, characterized by slow ball speed, high bounce, and high height over the net, and at the same time because of aerodynamic reasons, the ball falls very quickly, so this kind of ball is not easy to go down the net and not easy to go out of bounds, and it becomes difficult to hit the super topspin ball, because the bounce is high, so it must be hit over the shoulder, plus strong rotation, making the shot difficult to control, easy to make mistakes. Especially with a single counter-attack, the height of the shoulders is too difficult to maintain stability.

I feel that the main reason why Nadal can have such a high status at the French Open is that his ability is relatively strong, and he has also given a lot, so his status is also relatively high.

The key to Nadal's dominance at the French Open is his skill and pace, and most importantly his hunger to win.

Because Nadal is familiar with the rules of the French Open, has a talent for tennis, and has trained hard and adapted, he has dominated the French Open for a long time.

Nadal's success at the French Open is mainly related to his technical characteristics. Nadal has excellent physical strength and stamina, and is good at running, which is what we often call "running to death". The French Open is the perfect place to play this role, and the French Open is played on clay, and Nadal is known as the king of clay.

The characteristics of the laterite field are that it is more elastic, softer and rougher than the general hard court, the ball bounces higher, the speed will be reduced, and the landing point will become irregular. Clay courts are the quintessential example of sand courts, where players can even make sliding moves when they come to a sudden stop. Due to the slow speed of the ball, there is often more support between the two sides, which is a great test of the physical strength and endurance of the golfers, and it is also a very test of the patience of the athletes, not impatient.

Clay courts are a paradise for many baseline players, and those who are adept at using serve to the net tend to be less dominant. And Nadal's characteristics are exactly the right match for the French Open. On clay, Nadal is able to bring out the best in himself, and many players are proud to have beaten Nadal once on clay.

Nadal's high win rate on clay is mainly due to the following advantages:

First, he is physically strong and has good physical strength, although he is not as explosive as Federer, but Nadal's endurance and physical strength are better, and he is good at playing protracted battles. That's why he's able to get a foothold on clay.

The second is that Nadal has a tenacious willpower, and the clay court is not only a test of the athlete's physical strength, but also a test of the athlete's willpower. Without a firm will, it is difficult to hold out until the final victory.

The third is that the left-hand spin is more suitable for clay courts. Nadal's left-handed play really makes it difficult for opponents to adapt, coupled with his topspin play, which makes the ball bounce more violently on the bouncy clay court, and the direction of the ball bounce is more difficult to judge, which makes it difficult for opponents to adapt and need more runs to catch the ball, which consumes the opponent's physical strength to a certain extent.

Nadal began to reduce some topspin in 2013 and put more emphasis on ball speed, which gave him an increase in his strength on hard courts, which allowed him to beat Djokovic to win the US Open in '13. However, there is still a certain gap compared to the top players on hard courts.

A big reason why Nadal doesn't perform as well on hard courts as on clay is that the ball speed is faster on hard courts, and the physical strength and endurance on hard courts are not as effective as on clay. There are a lot of power-type and heavy artillery players who can show their strength on hard courts, but it is difficult to show their strength on clay courts. For example, Roddick is known for his big heavy artillery, but every time he goes to the French Open, it is difficult to show his strength on the clay court.

There are also some players who are good at the net who can also play to their strengths, and these are Nadal's weaknesses, so he is not as good on hard court as he is on clay, but he has also won the Australian Open and the US Open.

To sum up, Nadal is simply the "king of clay" born of clay, so his results at the French Open are far better than other Grand Slam tournaments.

The reason why Nadal is so partial to the French Open and rarely wins other Grand Slams is that Nadal's physical strength is very strong, and the red clay happens to be very physically demanding, so Nadal will maximize his advantages when he is in the French Open, and the probability of winning is greater. Other Grand Slams are not so dominant for Nadal, so Nadal has won very few Grand Slams outside of red soil.

One of the characteristics of the French Open is its red soil, other tennis balls are often relatively rough, and the ground of the red soil is softer than the grass, and at the same time there is more sand, so it will be more rough, so when the opponent hits the ball, the tennis ball will actually have a greater rotation when it hits the ground, and it will be subject to greater friction when it lands, so the ball speed will also slow down, and the tennis ball cannot be judged according to common sense after falling to the ground.

In addition, compared with the grass, the red land is particularly slippery, so when the red land is played, athletes rarely choose the ball in front of the net, because they are likely to slip in the process of running, and it is particularly physically demanding, because in the red land game, most of the players will stalemate on the bottom line for physical competition, and the bottom line requires more endurance.

Nadal's biggest advantage as an athlete is his physical strength, he often fights with his opponent to win the tie-break, and physical strength is the key to victory, so Nadal is actually like returning to his home field when he is on red soil, he can give full play to all his skills and advantages, and it is naturally easier to win the championship at the French Open.

But if you go back to the grass, because the ball speed will become very fast, Nadal's reflexes will definitely not be as good as that of young players, so he will expose his weaknesses, and if his weaknesses are caught by the opponent, it is easy to be chased by the opponent all the time, so Nadal has a lower probability of winning in matches other than the French Open. Of course, not all players are all-rounders, for example, Djokovic is actually very good at the Australian Open, but on red soil is Nadal's world.

To be precise, Nadal's French Open results are too good, overshadowing the brilliance of other venues, and his hard court Grand Slam US Open has 4 titles, second only to Sampras and Federer's 5 titles, which can be called the king of fast hard courts, so it is inappropriate to say that he is biased, we use data to speak, Nadal's Grand Slam has 7 crowns without 12 French Open titles, which is comparable to Agassi (who also removed his 1 French Open crown for fairness) with 7 titles. Agassi's Grand Slam is only a fraction of Nadal's, but Agassi was the second highest player in status after Sampras in that era, and he was also a former player, so Nadal's strength is even more highlighted.

The French Open is played on clay, and the clay is relatively soft and rough, Nadal has a strong attack power on the clay, so he has won more championships in the French Open, and there are few Grand Slams in other competitions!

There is no bias in itself, but the red clay is too strong to cause this illusion. Clay is heavier than other courts, the ball speed is slow, there is enough time to adjust, and the topspin is more obvious than other courts. Coupled with the fact that he has been practicing on clay since he was a child, the advantage is more obvious.

Because the French Open is all on clay, and Nadal has been training on clay since he was a child, so he is more familiar with the French Open, so he is so biased towards the French Open.

Nadal's shots are more suited to clay, while he is much less of a threat on grass and hard courts, where the ball is faster.

Nadal is a generation of stars on hard courts, grass courts, and clay courts, and of course, he plays more clay tennis in Spain, so he is also the king of clay in the international arena.

Nadal has 20 Grand Slams, 13 at the French Open, and 7 in the other three, not that he has won very few other Grand Slams, but that he has won too many at the French Open, and it seems that there are few other Grand Slams. Is Agassi comprehensive enough? Has anyone questioned Agassi's bias?

Outside of the French Open, there are also 7 Grand Slams. Edberg and Becker, who are not good at playing on the dirt, have six in the other three Grand Slams combined, which is less than Nadal. Wieland plus the French Open three Grand Slam titles a total of 7.

A generation of kings Lundl does not count the net, only 5 Grand Slams. How the hell is Nadal biased?

The Open era began, and so far, ask the four Grand Slam champions, which of the four Grand Slam champions can dominate a court for more than 10 years, and which player can win more than 95% of the same Grand Slam? Can Sampras? Or can Federer?

Fei Tianwang's favorite Wimbledon, how many did he take? Ruled for a few years?

It's pure nonsense to say that natto is biased, and I see that others have taken more Grand Slams, and I began to find reasons to deny it, and it is also a Grand Slam 20 that non-cattle fans can say that the opponent of the old cow is relatively weak, and how many of them are won by Doude? People are biased, how do you say that you are still trying to be very poor?

Because he is in the same era as the top three all-time best. The first person in the history of the Australian Open, nine champions, Federer eight Wimbledons. Nadal has reached the final at least five times in all four Grand Slams, and he has beaten Agassi.

For example, according to the full score of 100 points in each subject, the Chinese test is 99, and the other subjects are 91, and then you say that he is partial to the language?

I don't agree, he's just too dazzling on clay, not anything else.

Wait for someone else to take the Golden Slam and then talk about it.

Regardless of the French Open, how many men's tennis players have won seven Grand Slams in history? So your conclusion might be that he has won the French Open too much.

Tennis rankings are based on points, and the points of a tennis match can be kept for one year, which means that if you win the French Open this year, you can keep your points until the end of the French Open next year.

So if you win this year, +2000 points, a) if you don't play next year, after the French Open, you will have -2000 points, +0 points, b) next year, second place, -2000, and then +1000, c) next year, you will win the championship again -2000, +2000, so because the previous year, Deyue lost the top 4, and then this year he reached the final, so after this year's French Open, his score is -600, +1000, so his points have improved.

Nadal was very similar to Deyue before the French Open, and after the French Open, although Nadal won but he had +0 points, and Deyue had +400 points, and then he surpassed Nadal.

Because he is the defending champion, even if he wins, he can't add points.

The reason why Nadal prefers the French Open is because Nadal pays more attention to physical fitness and strength, and the French Open is also a test of the combination of physical fitness and strength for players, so Nadal likes the French Open even more, and has won 12 Grand Slam titles at the French Open.

Nadal has won 19 Grand Slam titles to date, including one Australian Open, two Wimbledon, four US Opens, and 12 French Opens. Then we can also see that Nadal is extremely biased, especially Wimbledon and the Australian Open, Nadal has only won the championship once at the Australian Open, and it can be said that Nadal has not been able to achieve his satisfaction in the Australian Open micronet.

Federer dominates Wimbledon and Novak Djokovic dominates the Australian Open, with each player having their own winning recipe on their own net, while Rafael Nadal loves the French Open and has won 12 Grand Slam titles at the French Open.

Nadal has been practising on clay since he was a child, and Nadal is more comfortable with clay playCompared with hard and grass, clay has soft and rough characteristics, especially when landing, the speed of tennis is slower, and irregular jumping will occur, which requires tennis players to have excellent stamina and physical strength on clay, Nadal belongs to such players.

Nadal has also won four French Opens, two Wimbledon and one Australian Open. He has also won the Olympic singles title and has completed the Golden Slam.

Nadal is a very well-rounded player, and Nadal has reached the finals of the other three Grand Slams many times, and although he has only won seven titles, Nadal still has a chance.

Nadal's 19 Grand Slam titles at the French Open are definitely a feat, and now Nadal's clay legend continues, and Nadal is the king of clay today, and we have reason to believe that Nadal's red French Open titles will continue to improve.

Nadal is good at playing from the bottom line, and the French Open is a red land, and the ball speed is slow, which is very suitable for Nadal, so Nadal is biased towards the French Open.

Because he is good at playing from the bottom line, the French Open is a clay court, and the ball speed is relatively slow, which is good for the baseline play. Other grass and hard ground are relatively fast, and the playing style in front of the net is advantageous.