PDA

View Full Version : Spoiler -- What Federer did right today


crosscourt
04-27-2008, 07:25 AM
Given the year that he's had so far I thought Federer did pretty well this week. Yesterday's first set against Nalbandian was superb tennis, and he did very well most of today. The key improvements seem to me to be

1. Backhand -- putting more air on the ball.
2. Dropshots -- pulling Nadal back and forwards works, and has been a tactic absent from Federer's armoury in the last few years.
3. Keeping the ball deep -- see 1 above, but also on the forehand, he kept Nadal deep in the court. As we have seen in other matches, Nadal can struggle to generate pace off high deep balls and makes errors.

I also thought that tactically Federer got away from his backhand more cannily than in the past. This may be the influence of Higueras. Nonetheless, he still has to work too hard to protect his backhand and makes too many forehand errors doing so. It was no surpirse that Nadal got consistently onto Federer's backhand in his run of five games in the second set, and then again when he broke to win the match. Mentally, Federer has to learn to battle Nadal using the higher ball backhand as something other than a last resort. The hapless shot with which he lost the match showed that he isn't there yet.

The huge plus point for Federer is how well he is serving. If he cuts out some of the aimless slicing on his backhand and remembers that serving and volleying gainst Nadal on clay is just giving him target practice, he has a real chance. Well, maybe.

cc

rommil
04-27-2008, 07:32 AM
Very good points. Unfortunately Nadal is just a better player on clay. With a lot of topspin, Nadal is able to create angles better and has more time to get to the ball.

lukarf
04-27-2008, 07:49 AM
I think you've seen in the first set on 4-3 Federer that Nadal mis-hit a ball but that jumped so high that Federer coul hardly reach it. That's why he's so strong on clay, because of its topspin. Then we have to consider the surface, which is the slowest clay out there and the ball really bounces high. Federer has done very well in these days but Nadal is a beast on this kind of clay. We should see in Rome if he can achieve some extra results. Anyway good points...

Nadal_Freak
04-27-2008, 07:59 AM
On clay, the only way to beat Federer is with topspin. Nalbandian and Djokovic have a better shot to beat Fed on hard courts. Fed takes advantage of the extra time against most opponents but this matchup with Nadal is a nightmare for Fed. So hard to control the ball with a 1 hand backhand over the shoulder. Fed is forced to loop the ball so much to be cautious. He does as well as he can with this weakness.

Zaragoza
04-27-2008, 08:00 AM
I think you've seen in the first set on 4-3 Federer that Nadal mis-hit a ball but that jumped so high that Federer coul hardly reach it. That's why he's so strong on clay, because of its topspin. Then we have to consider the surface, which is the slowest clay out there and the ball really bounces high. Federer has done very well in these days but Nadal is a beast on this kind of clay. We should see in Rome if he can achieve some extra results. Anyway good points...

Nadal shanked that ball and the bounce was weird. Thatīs why Federer was surprised on that point, it wasnīt a conventional topspin shot. Federer also won some points shanking the ball. The clay has actually been fast in the 2nd half of the week, you wonīt see it faster in R.Garros. Federerīs serve really helped him today. Rome isnīt different from Montecarlo. The only different thing is that Nadal could be out of gas with the terrible schedule the ATP made this year.

Nadal_Freak
04-27-2008, 08:04 AM
Nadal shanked that ball and the bounce was weird. Thatīs why Federer was surprised on that point, it wasnīt a conventional topspin shot. Federer also won some points shanking the ball. The clay has actually been fast in the 2nd half of the week, you wonīt see it faster in R.Garros. Federerīs serve really helped him today. Rome isnīt different from Montecarlo. The only different thing is that Nadal could be out of gas with the terrible schedule the ATP made this year.
Nadal has a choice. I guess he chooses that he wants to defend all his points. I don't agree with it. It is such a short term goal that could lead to an injury or losses. I would've skipped Barcelona if I were him. Ferrer already decided to skip. I don't see why Nadal can't skip as well.

Otherside
04-27-2008, 08:08 AM
great match from both players!!
Love watching Fed play onclay, the angles he creates with the forehand are amazing and his netgame is sweet!!
I would like to see flatten his forehand more often. He gets so many chances it the midcourt to pound the forhand down the line a little inside out but he chooses not to. He has to play riskier to win

crosscourt
04-27-2008, 08:18 AM
Very good points. Unfortunately Nadal is just a better player on clay. With a lot of topspin, Nadal is able to create angles better and has more time to get to the ball.

I agree that Nadal is a better player than Federer on clay. If Federer wants to win at Roland Garros he has to beat a player who should beat him. That's why the clay court swing before the French is the best part of the season for me -- Nadal keeps setting the target for his own greatness on clay. Federer has to try to pull off that one win that puts him at the top of the list of the all time greats. From what I have seen today Federer is getting to the point where he may have the shots to do it. The next question is whether he has the mind to match Nadal on clay.

califsurferboy33
04-27-2008, 08:27 AM
i want him to slice more, and a couple of more drop shots would have worked well, plus i think hes being slightly too agressive, he needs to more nadal around more, i want to see nadal vs. djocokic on clay because djockovic was not scared to go to feds forehand yesterday, and i want to see if he'll be scared to go to nadals forehand

Sentinel
04-27-2008, 08:31 AM
I think Federer and his coach would have learned a lot from today's match, what are his weaknesses against Nadal. He can work over the same over the next month to have a better chance against Nadal in the FO, if they matchup again.

dh003i
04-27-2008, 08:46 AM
I think Federer and his coach would have learned a lot from today's match, what are his weaknesses against Nadal. He can work over the same over the next month to have a better chance against Nadal in the FO, if they matchup again.

No, no, don't you realize? Fed just can't beat Nadal on clay. His improved strategy and results here show nothing. It just doesn't matter. He might as well just quit, not have a coach at all, take a break until the grass-court season. ;-P

kalika
04-27-2008, 08:53 AM
No, no, don't you realize? Fed just can't beat Nadal on clay. His improved strategy and results here show nothing. It just doesn't matter. He might as well just quit, not have a coach at all, take a break until the grass-court season. ;-P

Federer still beats plenty of players on clay so he shouldn't just take a break until grass. He's a good clay court player. I also don't think he would want to just give up. He has an idea of how to beat Nadal on clay. He just can't keep it up for a whole match. When Nadal came back today in the second set it was mostly on Federer's errors. By then Federer's spirit seemed broken and it was over.

RoddickistheMan
04-27-2008, 09:05 AM
I really want to see another federer and nadal french open final. I think Federer really has to change up his game if he wants to beat nadal on clay. Rallying from the baseline jsut seems to be a recipe for disaster for fed especially when nadal attacks his backhand. I think fed should work on his approach shots and end points at the net if he wants to take out nadal. He has to try something new.

Chopin
04-27-2008, 09:10 AM
Federer played well and should take a lot away from the match, being up a break at 4-3 in the first and taking that very commanding 4-0 lead in the second was impressive, he showed some great stuff but ultimately made too many unforced errors. All credit to Nadal though--an unbelievable comeback, you can never count him out of a match.

Glad to see that Roger has found his form again but Nadal is such an amazing clay court player (player for that matter). I'm looking forward to the rest of the clay court season.

MAX PLY
04-27-2008, 09:14 AM
Interesting match. The best player on clay proved why he was the best on clay and Roger continued to prove he was the second best on clay (Fed did take 10 games, pretty much double the number of each of Nadal's last three opponents). I think it is fair to conclude that Federer's play is improving for 2008 but he is going to have to serve better and iron out some of the forehand errors if he is going to be successful playing the aggressive game it will take to beat Nadal. Nadal, on the other hand, I think keeps the mental edge over Roger on clay (Fed has got to be thinking he had chances to win both sets but could not close the deal). Anyway, it made for some good tennis and a great start for the clay season.

dh003i
04-27-2008, 09:19 AM
The mental aspect of the game is over-rated. Champions don't let others get in their head.

Tennis and Tennis
04-27-2008, 09:24 AM
I gotta say Federer played great these couple of weeks.

Lotto
04-27-2008, 09:33 AM
I'm not happy with Rogie at all. He really annoyed me today. Yes, I'll admit he played well but he messed up badly at the crucial moments, them being at 4-3 up in the 1st set and him losing his serve and then at 4-1 in the second set AND 4-3 in the second set. He needs to sort out his mental game if he wants to beat Rafa, and that's all it was. If he held his head and kept it cool he would have probably won the first set 6-4 and the second 6-2!!!! Donkey! I hope he sorts out his mental game and fast! Get on it Higueras!

Also, his mental game contributed to not only his bad 1st serve percentage but also his silly forehand errors.

Bjorn99
04-27-2008, 09:34 AM
I don't think anyone with a one handed backhand is going to beat Nadal. On clay. I really fell sorry for Nadal actually. If he didn't have the bum knees, and ankles, he would be trashing everyone. But, the great guy in the sky always seems to leave a weakness in everyone for the others to prey upon.

And don't worry, I won't take this time to promote the left handed forehand. Or did I just do that inadvertantly, anyways? Orange Reptilian?

seestern
04-27-2008, 09:41 AM
I think he just has done his best today. Like Ferrer vs Nadal in quarters (begin 2nd set), he could only play his best game some games and must down a bit, and so on...
I have not seen something much difference comparing to last clay court finals between Fed and Rafa.

flyer
04-27-2008, 09:43 AM
I think he just has done his best today. Like Ferrer vs Nadal in quarters (begin 2nd set), he could only play his best game some games and must down a bit, and so on...
I have not seen something much difference comparing to last clay court finals between Fed and Rafa.

yeah your right, people keep trying to disect it and say Fed just needs to keep doing this and stop doing that, etc but thats been the case for 3 years now, its a whole lot of nothing Federer just cant sustain the level he needs to on clay to beat a 100% Nadal, all the analysis is the same as before as is the fact that Nadal is just that much better on clay

FedForGOAT
04-27-2008, 09:53 AM
yeah your right, people keep trying to disect it and say Fed just needs to keep doing this and stop doing that, etc but thats been the case for 3 years now, its a whole lot of nothing Federer just cant sustain the level he needs to on clay to beat a 100% Nadal, all the analysis is the same as before as is the fact that Nadal is just that much better on clay

Federer always has a chance against Nadal on clay, most players don't even get to that point. Now, I think that Federer definitely improved at least his strategy. He was up 2 breaks in the 2nd! if he cut down the unforced errors (erros Nadal didn't force him into making) the match could have easily gone to three sets. I hope roger comes out of this loss with a still positive attitude, because he had his chances, and that shows that if things go his way, he can beat Nadal on clay, IMO.

flyer
04-27-2008, 10:17 AM
Federer always has a chance against Nadal on clay, most players don't even get to that point. Now, I think that Federer definitely improved at least his strategy. He was up 2 breaks in the 2nd! if he cut down the unforced errors (erros Nadal didn't force him into making) the match could have easily gone to three sets. I hope roger comes out of this loss with a still positive attitude, because he had his chances, and that shows that if things go his way, he can beat Nadal on clay, IMO.

how is that any different from rome two years ago? he was more agressive there and still lost, his strategy against Nadal on clay has been the same for two years, maybe you think he improved the execution of his strategy, but the result is still the same

also he was up two breaks because he was being more agressive, but thats also why he started to hit errors, because he was going for a lot, so for him to cut down on the errors he needs to be less agressive, but accroding to you he needs to both be agressive and not commit errors, which was possible for 4 games but its nearly impossable to sustain that level for a whole match which is what you need to do to beat a 100% Nadal on clay, so its really not as simple as being agressive and not comiting errors like you think(because they go hand in hand, you dont get one without the other), ya follow me?

Djokovicfan4life
04-27-2008, 10:27 AM
Federer was up when he started coming in to net more, but then his strokes went off and he couldn't come in behind them any more.

Nadal looked much more off balance when Federer was at net, as far as groundstrokes on clay NOBODY stands a chance against him.

Satch
04-27-2008, 10:45 AM
I'm not happy with Rogie at all. He really annoyed me today. Yes, I'll admit he played well but he messed up badly at the crucial moments, them being at 4-3 up in the 1st set and him losing his serve and then at 4-1 in the second set AND 4-3 in the second set. He needs to sort out his mental game if he wants to beat Rafa, and that's all it was. If he held his head and kept it cool he would have probably won the first set 6-4 and the second 6-2!!!! Donkey! I hope he sorts out his mental game and fast! Get on it Higueras!

Also, his mental game contributed to not only his bad 1st serve percentage but also his silly forehand errors.

this is 100% true actually...
he have some mental problems i have never saw before, you see him being nervous rushing to the net and leaving easy pass for Rafa.
Or shouting a easy forehand 2 meters behind the baseline, or when he misses 1st serve you can see in some moments that he is very nervous by his gestures and so on.

ninman
04-27-2008, 10:58 AM
this is 100% true actually...
he have some mental problems i have never saw before, you see him being nervous rushing to the net and leaving easy pass for Rafa.
Or shouting a easy forehand 2 meters behind the baseline, or when he misses 1st serve you can see in some moments that he is very nervous by his gestures and so on.

Definitely, Federer has all the tools, the talent and the ability to defeat Nadal regularly on clay, he just doesn't have the mental will power. He had an advantage in the first set, twice, and a really big advantage in the second. I won't go as far as to say that the score would've been 6-4, 6-2, but it definitely could've been 7-6, 6-4 Federer, one good service game in both of those sets would've seen him serve for both of them.

I think he has an inferiority complex to Nadal, I don't think he genuinely believes he's going to do it, even when he's up and winning.

NamRanger
04-27-2008, 11:29 AM
how is that any different from rome two years ago? he was more agressive there and still lost, his strategy against Nadal on clay has been the same for two years, maybe you think he improved the execution of his strategy, but the result is still the same

also he was up two breaks because he was being more agressive, but thats also why he started to hit errors, because he was going for a lot, so for him to cut down on the errors he needs to be less agressive, but accroding to you he needs to both be agressive and not commit errors, which was possible for 4 games but its nearly impossable to sustain that level for a whole match which is what you need to do to beat a 100% Nadal on clay, so its really not as simple as being agressive and not comiting errors like you think(because they go hand in hand, you dont get one without the other), ya follow me?


Wrong, Federer was hitting the ball much harder and deeper then years past. He has added the drop shot, and is coming to net ALOT more.

stormholloway
04-27-2008, 11:57 AM
Definitely, Federer has all the tools, the talent and the ability to defeat Nadal regularly on clay, he just doesn't have the mental will power. He had an advantage in the first set, twice, and a really big advantage in the second. I won't go as far as to say that the score would've been 6-4, 6-2, but it definitely could've been 7-6, 6-4 Federer, one good service game in both of those sets would've seen him serve for both of them.

I think he has an inferiority complex to Nadal, I don't think he genuinely believes he's going to do it, even when he's up and winning.

I agree here. Federer should have won that in straights. His attempts to consolidate were very poor, and I don't care what surface it is, Federer shouldn't squander a 4-0 lead.

Nadal_Freak
04-27-2008, 12:06 PM
Definitely, Federer has all the tools, the talent and the ability to defeat Nadal regularly on clay, he just doesn't have the mental will power. He had an advantage in the first set, twice, and a really big advantage in the second. I won't go as far as to say that the score would've been 6-4, 6-2, but it definitely could've been 7-6, 6-4 Federer, one good service game in both of those sets would've seen him serve for both of them.

I think he has an inferiority complex to Nadal, I don't think he genuinely believes he's going to do it, even when he's up and winning.
Actually he doesn't. The 1 hand backhand has proven to be a liability against Nadal. That and he doesn't move quite as well on clay as Nadal. His game is too high risk when he plays Nadal as well.

Hot Sauce
04-27-2008, 12:12 PM
No, no, don't you realize? Fed just can't beat Nadal on clay. His improved strategy and results here show nothing. It just doesn't matter. He might as well just quit, not have a coach at all, take a break until the grass-court season. ;-P

He has beaten Nadal on clay. He beat him last year in the Hamburg finals. Higueras has been good for Federer, but they haven't been working together for that long yet. If we're seeing improvements in such a short period of time, I don't see why there can't be more to come.

Zaragoza
04-27-2008, 12:15 PM
I think the same.
Monkey face (Rafa) will have big troubles next weeks.

Yes, this is the 4th year heīs having big troubles, troll.

Zaragoza
04-27-2008, 12:23 PM
I'm not happy with Rogie at all. He really annoyed me today. Yes, I'll admit he played well but he messed up badly at the crucial moments, them being at 4-3 up in the 1st set and him losing his serve and then at 4-1 in the second set AND 4-3 in the second set. He needs to sort out his mental game if he wants to beat Rafa, and that's all it was. If he held his head and kept it cool he would have probably won the first set 6-4 and the second 6-2!!!! Donkey! I hope he sorts out his mental game and fast! Get on it Higueras!

Also, his mental game contributed to not only his bad 1st serve percentage but also his silly forehand errors.

So Federer playing well lost in straight sets, is it encouraging?
Yes, Federer would have probably won 6-4 6-2 if...how many ifs have I read in the last 3 years when Federer plays Nadal? Federer played against one of the greatest players on clay ever, does it have something to do with it?
Can you even say that Federer wasted multiple break point chances?
It never stops amazing me how delusional some Federer fans can be.

Nadal_Freak
04-27-2008, 12:23 PM
We'll see...
Rafa is the for ever champ WITH NO DOUBT in three aspects:
1) Monkey face (primate)
2) *** biter.
3) Playstation fan and a totally punk!

Bye... If Rafa looses next weeks (very possible) you will see me again waiting for you:twisted:
Troll alert.

zacinnc78
04-27-2008, 12:34 PM
nadal pounded feds backhand ...it wore him out ....fed has to really attack nadals serve with reckless abandon i think because he can hold his own serve pretty good ...thats the only area i think he can improve ...its tough to hit a hundred ohbh in a row and keep them deep and consistant

flyer
04-27-2008, 01:51 PM
Wrong, Federer was hitting the ball much harder and deeper then years past. He has added the drop shot, and is coming to net ALOT more.

really!? hes coming to net more than in rome '06?

ninman
04-27-2008, 02:06 PM
I agree here. Federer should have won that in straights. His attempts to consolidate were very poor, and I don't care what surface it is, Federer shouldn't squander a 4-0 lead.

That's the second time I've seen him do that, the other time was the 2005 Wimbledon final against Roddick. He was 4-0 up in the second and Roddick came back to 4-4 but Federer held on and won it on a tiebreaker.

I really hope that his coach is giving hell for that defeat, Nadal didn't defeat Federer, Federer defeated himself.

johnny ballgame
04-27-2008, 02:15 PM
People, Fed is getting dominated by Mardy Fish and he's hanging on for dear life against the likes of Ramirez Hidalgo.

FORGET ABOUT THE FRENCH, because it's never gonna happen. Accept it.

zagor
04-27-2008, 02:22 PM
No, no, don't you realize? Fed just can't beat Nadal on clay. His improved strategy and results here show nothing. It just doesn't matter. He might as well just quit, not have a coach at all, take a break until the grass-court season. ;-P

Yeah,you're right to be sarcastic.Fed played the right way today and was close to winning.Nadal prevailed in the end,that's why he is already one of the best claycoruters ever but I'm surprised how defensive Nadal fans are if someone even dares to imply that Federer has a chance to beat him.I mean Nadal is the heavy favourite for any tournament he enters on clay,no one disputes that but should we just give him trophies in advance? Why do the other players bother to show up then? Nothing is sure in tennis and upsets can happen.

NamRanger
04-27-2008, 02:28 PM
really!? hes coming to net more than in rome '06?


He should have won Rome 06 also, he completely squandered his lead, and missed two easy forehands on match point.

zagor
04-27-2008, 02:28 PM
People, Fed is getting dominated by Mardy Fish and he's hanging on for dear life against the likes of Ramirez Hidalgo.

FORGET ABOUT THE FRENCH, because it's never gonna happen. Accept it.

Did he play on the same level against Mardy Fish and Hidalgo as he did against Nalbandian,Djokovic and Nadal(was leading 4-0 in the second set) ? If you think so than you're blind.Federer is not likely to win the FO with Nadal around I accept that but to say he has no chances at all? He is a two times FO finalist and he played Nadal close today so I would say he has a chance although a small one.

herosol
04-27-2008, 02:29 PM
you guys are all sad like Federer was playing Rafa on Hard court.
It's the frikkin clay.

You EXPECT Rafa to Win Clay.
EVERYTIME

CyBorg
04-27-2008, 02:37 PM
Roger used spin well. He had brilliant stretches. What he needs is to play brilliantly with some consistency.

Easier said than done, of course, and frankly too much to ask on this surface.

flyer
04-27-2008, 02:48 PM
He should have won Rome 06 also, he completely squandered his lead, and missed two easy forehands on match point.

"should of" means nothing, Nadal should have won Wimbledon last year and he didnt, no matter how agressive he plays federer cant beat a 100% Nadal on clay, he might string together a couple games but he cant sustain that level eventually he will either get passed or commit errors, just accept Nadal is a whole lot better than Federer on clay

I hate how you people think the outcome of a Federer vs. Nadal clay court match is completely based on how Federer plays like its his match to win or lose...its not its the other way around, its Nadals to win or lose, if he plays his best clay tennis Federer cant beat him no matter what his tactics/execution are, its only on an off day Federer can beat Nadal on clay

TheTruth
04-27-2008, 02:51 PM
"should of" means nothing, Nadal should have won Wimbledon last year and he didnt, no matter how agressive he plays federer cant beat a 100% Nadal on clay, he might string together a couple games but he cant sustain that level eventually he will either get passed or commit errors, just accept Nadal is a whole lot better than Federer on clay

I hate how you people think the outcome of a Federer vs. Nadal clay court match is completely based on how Federer plays like its his match to win or lose...its not its the other way around, its Nadals to win or lose, if he plays his best clay tennis Federer cant beat him no matter what his tactics/execution are, its only on an off day Federer can beat Nadal on clay

Excellent post!

ninman
04-27-2008, 02:52 PM
"should of" means nothing, Nadal should have won Wimbledon last year and he didnt, no matter how agressive he plays federer cant beat a 100% Nadal on clay, he might string together a couple games but he cant sustain that level eventually he will either get passed or commit errors, just accept Nadal is a whole lot better than Federer on clay

I hate how you people think the outcome of a Federer vs. Nadal clay court match is completely based on how Federer plays like its his match to win or lose...its not its the other way around, its Nadals to win or lose, if he plays his best clay tennis Federer cant beat him no matter what his tactics/execution are, its only on an off day Federer can beat Nadal on clay

The reason Nadal wins on clay so much is purely and simply because of his speed, not his tennis skills. When he loses his speed he will very quickly become a distant memory on clay.

crawl4
04-27-2008, 02:53 PM
I agree that Nadal is a better player than Federer on clay. If Federer wants to win at Roland Garros he has to beat a player who should beat him. That's why the clay court swing before the French is the best part of the season for me -- Nadal keeps setting the target for his own greatness on clay. Federer has to try to pull off that one win that puts him at the top of the list of the all time greats. From what I have seen today Federer is getting to the point where he may have the shots to do it. The next question is whether he has the mind to match Nadal on clay.

exactly.. even though he made many errors today he almost needed to. The points which went for a long time nadal dominated and for federer to be up 4-0 he had to use extreme angles and variety to counter the defense of rafa. Its exactly what ferrer and davydenko tried doing but couldnt keep it up for 2 sets. Its positive signs for roger though, nadal doesn't look unbeatable.

stormholloway
04-27-2008, 02:55 PM
The reason Nadal wins on clay so much is purely and simply because of his speed, not his tennis skills. When he loses his speed he will very quickly become a distant memory on clay.

Ridiculous. He's made two Wimbledon finals. You have to be a shotmaker to do that, period. Nadal has superb speed, footwork, and racquet control. He's already one of the greats of all time.

ninman
04-27-2008, 02:58 PM
Ridiculous. He's made two Wimbledon finals. You have to be a shotmaker to do that, period. Nadal has superb speed, footwork, and racquet control. He's already one of the greats of all time.

He made two Wimbledon finals because:

a) He had a horribly easy draw.

b) His opponents got injured/he got a little luck.

Yes you're right he can make shots, but to make shots you have to get to the ball. The reason he can keep getting all those balls back is because of his speed. When he slows down people will be able to get more winners against him because he won't be a human wall.

He'll probably still defeat weaker players on clay even when he slows down, but you can't deny that it'll definitely make him much more beatable.

(FEDERER)vs(NADAL)
04-27-2008, 02:58 PM
Given the year that he's had so far I thought Federer did pretty well this week. Yesterday's first set against Nalbandian was superb tennis, and he did very well most of today. The key improvements seem to me to be

1. Backhand -- putting more air on the ball.
2. Dropshots -- pulling Nadal back and forwards works, and has been a tactic absent from Federer's armoury in the last few years.
3. Keeping the ball deep -- see 1 above, but also on the forehand, he kept Nadal deep in the court. As we have seen in other matches, Nadal can struggle to generate pace off high deep balls and makes errors.

I also thought that tactically Federer got away from his backhand more cannily than in the past. This may be the influence of Higueras. Nonetheless, he still has to work too hard to protect his backhand and makes too many forehand errors doing so. It was no surpirse that Nadal got consistently onto Federer's backhand in his run of five games in the second set, and then again when he broke to win the match. Mentally, Federer has to learn to battle Nadal using the higher ball backhand as something other than a last resort. The hapless shot with which he lost the match showed that he isn't there yet.

The huge plus point for Federer is how well he is serving. If he cuts out some of the aimless slicing on his backhand and remembers that serving and volleying gainst Nadal on clay is just giving him target practice, he has a real chance. Well, maybe.

cc

federer played very well

flyer
04-27-2008, 03:01 PM
He made two Wimbledon finals because:

a) He had a horribly easy draw.

b) His opponents got injured/he got a little luck.

Yes you're right he can make shots, but to make shots you have to get to the ball. The reason he can keep getting all those balls back is because of his speed. When he slows down people will be able to get more winners against him because he won't be a human wall.

He'll probably still defeat weaker players on clay even when he slows down, but you can't deny that it'll definitely make him much more beatable.

soderling, youghnzy, berdych, fish.....easy? thats about 100 times harder than federers draw.....you biased idiot

ninman
04-27-2008, 03:04 PM
soderling, youghnzy, berdych, fish.....easy? thats about 100 times harder than federers draw.....you biased idiot

Wimbledon 2006, was 2 points away from going out to a guy ranked 100 or so, played one seeded player in the 6 matches en route to the final.

Wimbledon 2007, gets an ordinary draw and again comes extremely close to losing in round 3 to Soderling, is 2-0 down to Youzhny who gets injured, Berdych decides that he can't bothered playing that day, Djokovic retires with an injury.

slice bh compliment
04-27-2008, 03:08 PM
"should of" means nothing...

Obviously, the guy was trying to say "should HAVE" not should OF. Come on, man, it's an iNformal little tennis forum, right, so why make a big deal about it?

;-)

stormholloway
04-27-2008, 03:18 PM
He made two Wimbledon finals because:

a) He had a horribly easy draw.

b) His opponents got injured/he got a little luck.

Yes you're right he can make shots, but to make shots you have to get to the ball. The reason he can keep getting all those balls back is because of his speed. When he slows down people will be able to get more winners against him because he won't be a human wall.

He'll probably still defeat weaker players on clay even when he slows down, but you can't deny that it'll definitely make him much more beatable.

Your analysis is twisted. Djokovic is a quitter, and Nadal would have trashed him under any circumstance. This is the same Nadal that nearly beat Federer in the final. Djokovic didn't stand a chance.

After 2006 everybody said Nadal lucked into the final. I went on record saying that luck had nothing to do with it. I can't believe after the 2007 final people are saying he lucked into that situation. It's ridiculous.

zagor
04-27-2008, 03:20 PM
soderling, youghnzy, berdych, fish.....easy? thats about 100 times harder than federers draw.....you biased idiot

The same guy who said that he can't wait for Federer to get his ***** kicked is calling someone biased? Lol,funny stuff.

bluescreen
04-27-2008, 03:42 PM
i personally took a lot of things out of this match, all good things for federer.

for one, this tournament proved hugueras is a great choice as a coach. this tournament was by far the best federer has played all year. he's slayed two of his demons (nalby and djoker) and put up a respectable fight against nadal. if monte carlo is any sign of federer's clay court performances to come, i think we'll be in for a real treat.

johnny ballgame
04-27-2008, 03:55 PM
The reason Nadal wins on clay so much is purely and simply because of his speed, not his tennis skills.

Speed is a tennis skill. So is patience. So is physical stamina. So is determination. So is mental toughness.

Bjorn99
04-27-2008, 04:08 PM
Federer was going to lose to Nadal at Wimbledon, THEN he fluked out when Nadals knee started to go on him. Nadal is already for sure, one of the top twenty players of all time. And could have been top five.

flyer
04-27-2008, 04:11 PM
The same guy who said that he can't wait for Federer to get his ***** kicked is calling someone biased? Lol,funny stuff.

yes that was me, i predicted a match wrong im sure it happens to you from time to time too genius

ninman is biased in his analysis, im not, even though i want certain players to win, i dont make excuses and say they should have won when they dont and post 50 times about how they got robbed

flyer
04-27-2008, 04:12 PM
Obviously, the guy was trying to say "should HAVE" not should OF. Come on, man, it's an iNformal little tennis forum, right, so why make a big deal about it?

;-)

i know he meant "should have," thats what i was responding to, not the improper grammar, read the rest of there post

flyer
04-27-2008, 04:19 PM
Wimbledon 2006, was 2 points away from going out to a guy ranked 100 or so, played one seeded player in the 6 matches en route to the final.

Wimbledon 2007, gets an ordinary draw and again comes extremely close to losing in round 3 to Soderling, is 2-0 down to Youzhny who gets injured, Berdych decides that he can't bothered playing that day, Djokovic retires with an injury.

he also had to play like 5 best of five set matches in 6 days or something like that, federer got a retirement and nadal had already turned the youhzny match around before injury, nadal was out right beat berdych.....your making excuses for every one of his wins the the consistent fact is that he still wins

zagor
04-27-2008, 04:27 PM
yes that was me, i predicted a match wrong im sure it happens to you from time to time too genius

ninman is biased in his analysis, im not, even though i want certain players to win, i dont make excuses and say they should have won when they dont and post 50 times about how they got robbed

It's not about the outcome of the match you predicted(I would be first to agree that Nalbandian had a good chance that day and was maybe even a slight favourite going into the match) but the way you predicted it.You said it in such a way that one could draw conclusion that you derive satisfaction when Federer loses therefore you're biased against him.So while I agree that ninman is biased so are you in my opinion.

OrangeOne
04-27-2008, 04:28 PM
he also had to play like 5 best of five set matches in 6 days or something like that, federer got a retirement and nadal had already turned the youhzny match around before injury, nadal was out right beat berdych.....your making excuses for every one of his wins the the consistent fact is that he still wins

...as long as the month is Febraury to early June, and usually as long as the surface is dirt.

NamRanger
04-27-2008, 04:54 PM
"should of" means nothing, Nadal should have won Wimbledon last year and he didnt, no matter how agressive he plays federer cant beat a 100% Nadal on clay, he might string together a couple games but he cant sustain that level eventually he will either get passed or commit errors, just accept Nadal is a whole lot better than Federer on clay

I hate how you people think the outcome of a Federer vs. Nadal clay court match is completely based on how Federer plays like its his match to win or lose...its not its the other way around, its Nadals to win or lose, if he plays his best clay tennis Federer cant beat him no matter what his tactics/execution are, its only on an off day Federer can beat Nadal on clay


Federer at full steam could completely blow Nadal off the court, even on clay. He has small stretches where he is in complete control of the match.


"Should of" means nothing? Federer choked big time on an EASY put away forehand on match point at Rome 06.



You are so biased it's ridiculous. Even Morrissey and Nadal_Freak, who are two big Nadal fans will tell you that Federer is still and always a threat to Nadal on clay. Right now, Federer has really started to play his own aggressive play on clay. With slightly better concentration and a better mental game, Federer CAN beat Nadal. Rome 06 he came real close if not for his mental lapses, and here in Monte Carlo he had chances to win both sets. The opportunities are there, just that every time Federer has a chance to close out Nadal, he mentally collapses for one reason or another.



Why do you think Federer BAGELED Nadal at Hamburg? Because he knew he had to keep up his high level to prevent himself from mentally lapsing.

Nadal_Freak
04-27-2008, 05:50 PM
Federer at full steam could completely blow Nadal off the court, even on clay. He has small stretches where he is in complete control of the match.


"Should of" means nothing? Federer choked big time on an EASY put away forehand on match point at Rome 06.



You are so biased it's ridiculous. Even Morrissey and Nadal_Freak, who are two big Nadal fans will tell you that Federer is still and always a threat to Nadal on clay. Right now, Federer has really started to play his own aggressive play on clay. With slightly better concentration and a better mental game, Federer CAN beat Nadal. Rome 06 he came real close if not for his mental lapses, and here in Monte Carlo he had chances to win both sets. The opportunities are there, just that every time Federer has a chance to close out Nadal, he mentally collapses for one reason or another.



Why do you think Federer BAGELED Nadal at Hamburg? Because he knew he had to keep up his high level to prevent himself from mentally lapsing.
Federer relies on the conditions to play his aggressive style. Hitting balls above his shoulder a lot is not going to allow him to take it to Nadal. Yes the conditions need to be slower for him to do this. He'll get less free points on his serve though in expense to getting lower balls but I think that is the loss that he is willing to take to make Nadal's spin less effective. Hamburg is low bouncing and slow as an example of this.

FedForGOAT
04-27-2008, 06:00 PM
how is that any different from rome two years ago? he was more agressive there and still lost, his strategy against Nadal on clay has been the same for two years, maybe you think he improved the execution of his strategy, but the result is still the same

also he was up two breaks because he was being more agressive, but thats also why he started to hit errors, because he was going for a lot, so for him to cut down on the errors he needs to be less agressive, but accroding to you he needs to both be agressive and not commit errors, which was possible for 4 games but its nearly impossable to sustain that level for a whole match which is what you need to do to beat a 100% Nadal on clay, so its really not as simple as being agressive and not comiting errors like you think(because they go hand in hand, you dont get one without the other), ya follow me?

I think Fed had a very good chance to win the FO in 06'. He gave Nadal a breadstick and lost in a 4th set tiebreak. If Nadal was playing a bit worse, and Fed was a bit luckier, that matcch could have gone much differently.

flyer
04-27-2008, 06:04 PM
Federer at full steam could completely blow Nadal off the court, even on clay. He has small stretches where he is in complete control of the match.


"Should of" means nothing? Federer choked big time on an EASY put away forehand on match point at Rome 06.



You are so biased it's ridiculous. Even Morrissey and Nadal_Freak, who are two big Nadal fans will tell you that Federer is still and always a threat to Nadal on clay. Right now, Federer has really started to play his own aggressive play on clay. With slightly better concentration and a better mental game, Federer CAN beat Nadal. Rome 06 he came real close if not for his mental lapses, and here in Monte Carlo he had chances to win both sets. The opportunities are there, just that every time Federer has a chance to close out Nadal, he mentally collapses for one reason or another.



Why do you think Federer BAGELED Nadal at Hamburg? Because he knew he had to keep up his high level to prevent himself from mentally lapsing.

I want Nadal to win but I completely agree that Federer is a threat to Nadal on clay I never said he wasnt, what I did say, and think hard about this, is that Federer must relay on other factors to beat Nadal on clay, such as Nadal being physically and mentally worn out(Hamburg), and the clay playing to his liking(Hamburg=low bouncing), its not Federer's match to win or lose, its not like he can say "as long as I play my best clay court tennis I will win," its the other way around because Nadal's best is better than Federer's best on clay, but no doubt hes a threat, got it big guy?

slice bh compliment
04-27-2008, 06:08 PM
i know he meant "should have," thats what i was responding to, not the improper grammar, read the rest of there post

I know. I read the whole thing.

I was making fun of you.
Then I was making fun of myself for having made fun of you.

That is what the winking emoticon was all about.

Back to the tennis: frankly, as a fan of tennis, I like Rafa even more now (for having fought like a champion in singles AND dubs)...AND I feel Federer's best shot at him is this June iN Paris. I reeeeallly hope both get to the finale.

flyer
04-27-2008, 06:10 PM
I think Fed had a very good chance to win the FO in 06'. He gave Nadal a breadstick and lost in a 4th set tiebreak. If Nadal was playing a bit worse, and Fed was a bit luckier, that matcch could have gone much differently.

yes but you can say that about a lot of atp matches, the reality is that at that level the total points differential is many times less than 10 total points won difference, a break points here, a double fault there, etc..... but what makes the difference is that the better player steps up and wins the big points when he needs to, and thats what makes him the best player on the day, so those could have, should have, would have, scenarios that people like to come up with are meaningless in reality

NamRanger
04-27-2008, 06:53 PM
Federer relies on the conditions to play his aggressive style. Hitting balls above his shoulder a lot is not going to allow him to take it to Nadal. Yes the conditions need to be slower for him to do this. He'll get less free points on his serve though in expense to getting lower balls but I think that is the loss that he is willing to take to make Nadal's spin less effective. Hamburg is low bouncing and slow as an example of this.


Federer at his best can beat Nadal, even with conditions favoring Nadal. There is no question about it. Monte Carlo was a pretty good example where he showed flashes of what he can do if he was consistent enough.

flyer
04-27-2008, 06:58 PM
Federer at his best can beat Nadal, even with conditions favoring Nadal. There is no question about it. Monte Carlo was a pretty good example where he showed flashes of what he can do if he was consistent enough.

what you dont seem to understand is that when your going for that much on your shots it might work for a while but its nearly impossable to do that consistently throughout a whole match to beat a 100% nadal, and thats what it takes, the reason they were flashes is because hes not good enough to do that consistently, nobody is and thats why Nadal in the king of clay

johnny ballgame
04-27-2008, 07:05 PM
Federer at his best can beat Nadal, even with conditions favoring Nadal. There is no question about it. Monte Carlo was a pretty good example where he showed flashes of what he can do if he was consistent enough.

So, getting beat in straight sets is a good example of how Fed can beat Nadal on clay? Confusing.

tlm
04-27-2008, 07:23 PM
It is amazing isnt it, Fed loses 99.9% of the time to Rafa on the clay. Does not take a set today, even with a 4-0 lead but he can still blow Nadal away even on clay.

Or he should have won today + on +on. The thinking of the fed fans is really hard to understand, you have to be in fed la la land to get it. Its the same thing over+over shoulda, coulda, woulda, obviously a lot of slow learners out there.

How many times has Nadal beat fed on clay? What is thier head to head record? I know let me guess, that does not matter. Because everyone knows that fed shoulda won most of those matches if this+ that + this + that.

It is the same load of B. S. every year, you fed lovers should go back the past 3 years + read your posts. You keep hoping for these theorys of yours to come true, but the best clay court player of all time is there to shut your boy down again+again.

But you still wont accept it, there is always a 100+1 excuses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OrangeOne
04-27-2008, 07:35 PM
It is amazing isnt it, Fed loses 99.9% of the time to Rafa on the clay. Does not take a set today, even with a 4-0 lead but he can still blow Nadal away even on clay.

Or he should have won today + on +on. The thinking of the fed fans is really hard to understand, you have to be in fed la la land to get it. Its the same thing over+over shoulda, coulda, woulda, obviously a lot of slow learners out there.

How many times has Nadal beat fed on clay? What is thier head to head record? I know let me guess, that does not matter. Because everyone knows that fed shoulda won most of those matches if this+ that + this + that.

It is the same load of B. S. every year, you fed lovers should go back the past 3 years + read your posts. You keep hoping for these theorys of yours to come true, but the best clay court player of all time is there to shut your boy down again+again.

But you still wont accept it, there is always a 100+1 excuses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A post despising exaggeration starts with an extreme exaggeration. Sad, really.

It's 87.5% of the time.

crosscourt
04-28-2008, 02:14 AM
One of the things that makes Nadal so good is that he plays the big points so very well. Even serving with a double break advantage Federer knows that to win the set he has to play extremely well. Nadal won't give him anything: Nadal will make him fight for every shot that goes back over the net, and will put Federer under extreme pressure just at the point at which Federer hopes that he has got some momentum or mastery or something that is going to help him get a couple of easy points to help him close out the set.

Having said that, my feeling was that Federer looked yesterday as if he was beginning to marshall a basic game against Nadal that relies on clay court strategy and clay court nous. In the past he has relied too much on getting his ususal game out there and hoping it is at a high enough level to win a match against Nadal.

pound cat
04-28-2008, 03:53 AM
[QUOTE=Bjorn99;2288949]I don't think anyone with a one handed backhand is going to beat Nadal. On clay. I really fell sorry for Nadal actually. If he didn't have the bum knees, and ankles, he would be trashing everyone. But, the great guy in the sky always seems to leave a weakness in everyone for the others to prey upon.

QUOTE]


Despite his bum knees and ankles. Nadal has won the last 97 out of 98 matches on clay. Imagine what his record would be with perfect joints. LOL

caulcano
04-28-2008, 04:11 AM
Federer at full steam could completely blow Nadal off the court, even on clay. He has small stretches where he is in complete control of the match.

"Should of" means nothing? Federer choked big time on an EASY put away forehand on match point at Rome 06.

You are so biased it's ridiculous. Even Morrissey and Nadal_Freak, who are two big Nadal fans will tell you that Federer is still and always a threat to Nadal on clay. Right now, Federer has really started to play his own aggressive play on clay. With slightly better concentration and a better mental game, Federer CAN beat Nadal. Rome 06 he came real close if not for his mental lapses, and here in Monte Carlo he had chances to win both sets. The opportunities are there, just that every time Federer has a chance to close out Nadal, he mentally collapses for one reason or another.

Why do you think Federer BAGELED Nadal at Hamburg? Because he knew he had to keep up his high level to prevent himself from mentally lapsing


I have to disagree. Even as a Federer fan, if Federer & Nadal both played at 100% on clay, there is no doubt in my mind that Nadal would win. Nadal's record on clay speaks for itself.

As for Federer's chances in the future, of course he has a chance (better than anyone else) but I wouldn't bet against Nadal. :)

superman1
04-28-2008, 04:14 AM
I didn't watch it but how did he let Nadal back into the second set? Stupid errors or Nadal just upped his game? Knowing Federer it was probably just stupid errors, because I'm of the opinion that if he's playing at his VERY BEST, then he'll beat anyone on any surface.

crosscourt
04-28-2008, 04:43 AM
I didn't watch it but how did he let Nadal back into the second set? Stupid errors or Nadal just upped his game? Knowing Federer it was probably just stupid errors, because I'm of the opinion that if he's playing at his VERY BEST, then he'll beat anyone on any surface.

Probably a combination of things, but I think that the pressure from Nadal was immense. Made Federer go for too much too soon and too many mistakes followed. Towards the end, the only time that Federer looked confident/secure was before a first serve.

cc

leonardtay
04-28-2008, 05:18 AM
People, Fed is getting dominated by Mardy Fish and he's hanging on for dear life against the likes of Ramirez Hidalgo.

FORGET ABOUT THE FRENCH, because it's never gonna happen. Accept it.

Making extreme predictions leaves you wide open to having to eat your hat... ask a certain Mr Djokovic how that feels...

leonardtay
04-28-2008, 05:20 AM
[QUOTE=Bjorn99;2288949]I don't think anyone with a one handed backhand is going to beat Nadal. On clay. I really fell sorry for Nadal actually. If he didn't have the bum knees, and ankles, he would be trashing everyone. But, the great guy in the sky always seems to leave a weakness in everyone for the others to prey upon.

QUOTE]


Despite his bum knees and ankles. Nadal has won the last 97 out of 98 matches on clay. Imagine what his record would be with perfect joints. LOL

He has bum knees and ankles because of the way he plays... so you could say that if he did not have these injuries, he would not be the Nadal of today because he would have to play another way... in other words... he would have to be Roger!!!

johnny ballgame
04-28-2008, 05:39 AM
Making extreme predictions leaves you wide open to having to eat your hat...

Fed never winning the French is not an 'extreme prediction' in my view.

As for the Fish and Hidalgo matches, those weren't predictions... they already happened.

NamRanger
04-28-2008, 09:47 AM
I have to disagree. Even as a Federer fan, if Federer & Nadal both played at 100% on clay, there is no doubt in my mind that Nadal would win. Nadal's record on clay speaks for itself.

As for Federer's chances in the future, of course he has a chance (better than anyone else) but I wouldn't bet against Nadal. :)


Have you seen what Federer can do at 100%? Try watching the U.S. Open 2004, where he double bagels an on fire Lleyton Hewitt with ease.

Nadal_Monfils
04-28-2008, 10:30 AM
^^ You realized the US Open is played on hard courts right?

flyer
04-28-2008, 02:40 PM
I didn't watch it but how did he let Nadal back into the second set? Stupid errors or Nadal just upped his game? Knowing Federer it was probably just stupid errors, because I'm of the opinion that if he's playing at his VERY BEST, then he'll beat anyone on any surface.

Federer was going for a lot and he was kinda in a zone hitting a couple good winners consecutively so he got the double break, since he was being so aggressive though he hit a few errors consecutively too, basically its almost imposable to keep up the level he was in for a whole match so eventually Nadal who was just more consitent through out and the better player so he won...

Federer's very best on clay does not beat Nadal's very best, Federer can only be so aggressive because eventually if hes to aggressive he just hits errors, honestly hes not good enough to be consistent AND aggressive enough to beat a 100% Nadal on clay, he might get on a role for a bit but if Nadal is 100% playing his best on clay hes much better than Federer and will eventually win, Federer needs other factors such as Nadal being physically or mentally worn out, injured, the court to play to his liking, etc, hes not good enough to just say "as long as I play my best clay court tennis I will win," because Nadal's best is better as he has proven over the last 3 years