PDA

View Full Version : Why has Federer only been able to push Nadal to four sets instead of five at RG?


2slik
05-21-2010, 07:37 PM
Why has Federer only been able to push Nadal to four sets instead of five at Roland Garros?

Discuss

gold soundz
05-21-2010, 07:40 PM
lol. Because Nadal is the King of Clay?

vortex1
05-21-2010, 07:40 PM
Because Nadal is better on clay. Nothing more to it.

Justdoit10
05-21-2010, 07:52 PM
Because he couldnt convert break points to save his life.

Serendipitous
05-21-2010, 07:55 PM
Because he couldnt convert break points to save his life.

:mad::mad::mad:

Justdoit10
05-21-2010, 07:56 PM
:mad::mad::mad:
Hey how have you been? :)

Serendipitous
05-21-2010, 07:57 PM
Hey how have you been? :)

I'm gud, how are you? :mad:

tennisfan78
05-21-2010, 08:24 PM
because, as the guys above me said , cant convert break points and also he runs out of gas against Rafa. Rafa makes the battle very physical which is unusual for Fed.

kournacopia
05-21-2010, 08:27 PM
Clay is a surface that neutralizes elite tennis skills.

Mick
05-21-2010, 08:43 PM
because (in the words of pete sampras) "nadal is just an animal." :)

abraxas21
05-21-2010, 08:56 PM
Because Nadal is better on clay?

That was hard...

Clay lover
05-21-2010, 09:03 PM
Clay is a surface that neutralizes elite tennis skills.

So being good on clay doesn't require elite clay tennis skills? hmm....

vortex1
05-21-2010, 09:05 PM
So being good on clay doesn't require elite clay tennis skills? hmm....

This doesn't make sense, otherwise Roddick would have swept RG every year. :oops:

Halba
05-21-2010, 09:07 PM
Why has Federer only been able to push Nadal to four sets instead of five at Roland Garros?

Discuss

slowish court when they played. his backhand breaks down under the long slog.

Clay lover
05-21-2010, 09:09 PM
This doesn't make sense, otherwise Roddick would have swept RG every year. :oops:

And Roddick will take every clay title he enters and double bagel Federer in the finals every time because Federer's "elite" skills are somehow neutralized.

kournacopia
05-21-2010, 09:15 PM
So being good on clay doesn't require elite clay tennis skills? hmm....

It just requires less skill than HC or grass, since those surfaces are faster. Faster courts requires faster reflexes and low percentage power shots. Slow down the game by using a tennis ball like a squash ball and my grandma can get a point off Nadal. I hope the analogy is clear for those hard of comprehension.

Radobg
05-21-2010, 09:33 PM
Clay is a surface that neutralizes elite tennis skills.

Oooo come on!!!!Enough with this b..ts!!!Wich is elite tennis skill????The serve!?!?!?!The most boring thing in tennis!!!If you don't like the surface and the players that are good on it-don't watch them and don't comment!You speaking such a crap!!!!

decades
05-21-2010, 09:36 PM
Because Fed tanks against Rafa. He presents no challenge.

svijk
05-21-2010, 09:43 PM
because he lost the 4th....this a stupid thread...nothing to discuss really

bolo
05-21-2010, 09:45 PM
the answer is right there.......

Sentinel
05-21-2010, 10:10 PM
This year I predict Federer will lose, but still push Nadal to 0-6 1-6 0-6 0-6 0-6. It will be very close, with Federer in control of the match throughout.

Safin4ever
05-21-2010, 10:16 PM
It just requires less skill than HC or grass, since those surfaces are faster. Faster courts requires faster reflexes and low percentage power shots. Slow down the game by using a tennis ball like a squash ball and my grandma can get a point off Nadal. I hope the analogy is clear for those hard of comprehension.


so true...

Spider
05-21-2010, 10:17 PM
Because Federer isn't good enough.

TheNatural
05-22-2010, 02:33 AM
Because Fed doesn't bring his bigger racket to the finals.

Cassius Clay
05-22-2010, 07:22 AM
It just requires less skill than HC or grass, since those surfaces are faster. Faster courts requires faster reflexes and low percentage power shots. Slow down the game by using a tennis ball like a squash ball and my grandma can get a point off Nadal. I hope the analogy is clear for those hard of comprehension.

http://www.radiomundial.com.ve/yvke/files/img_noticia/t_risas_282.jpg

statto
05-22-2010, 07:34 AM
At 2 sets to 1 up on clay, Nadal is too strong mentally for Federer. Roger doesn't have the mental strength to fight back on that surface. Grass, yes; hardcourts, yes; clay, no.

Omega_7000
05-22-2010, 07:40 AM
I don't know...Why has Nadal never managed to even face Fed at USO? :confused:

Cup8489
05-22-2010, 07:41 AM
Because if Nadal is able to get 2 sets to 1 up on Federer in Clay, that means that Federer has probably already thrown his best in, because he would rather win in straight sets than get locked into a 5 set war. So if he's unable to win 2 of the first 3, he won't be able to win the 4th. Pretty simple.

kournacopia
05-22-2010, 08:16 AM
A second analogy for the real miscreants. Make a tennis court full of small rocks/pebbles/gravel and maybe even some mud. Take an 11 year old kid who's been playing on it for years - he could beat Federer. Now just extrapolate a little if your minds will allow it, and the answer will become clear.

Cassius Clay
05-22-2010, 08:59 AM
A second analogy for the real miscreants. Make a tennis court full of small rocks/pebbles/gravel and maybe even some mud. Take an 11 year old kid who's been playing on it for years - he could beat Federer. Now just extrapolate a little if your minds will allow it, and the answer will become clear.

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/3267/descojone.gif

kournacopia
05-22-2010, 09:08 AM
http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/3267/descojone.gif

Best show on TV.

Pwned
05-22-2010, 09:10 AM
Because he didn't win the tiebreak in the 4th set 06.

viduka0101
05-22-2010, 09:12 AM
because Nadal is a better player on clay

Wilander Fan
05-22-2010, 09:19 AM
I think clay actually does neutralize power and skill quite a bit but really emphasizes physicality (speed and conditioning) and strategy. 4 sets on clay is much more grueling than 5 sets on grass. As much as I like Federer, I think Nadal succeeds on clay primarily because he is such an intelligent ego-less player. He doesnt go for winners unless they are there, reverts to pusher mode when the other guy gets really hot and really sets up important points with previous play. Its no accident Federer has trouble winning all those break points. Nadal can do this because he knows almost no one is going to blow him off the court on clay.

Not to take away from Federer who would be the greatest clay courter of his generation had it not been for Nadal but alot of his shotmaking and precision get neutralized.

Guys who win on clay are fast, dont get tired and smart. Guys who win on grass have two/three shot power games.

YodaKnowsBest
05-22-2010, 09:35 AM
because nadal = goat? Now go start a new thread...

P_Agony
05-22-2010, 09:59 AM
I think in 2007 he had the best chances, but couldn't convert break points and he usually faeds away mentally very quicky against Nadal on clay.

kishnabe
05-22-2010, 10:01 AM
Federer had chances to push it to five sets like in 2006 4th set tiebreak...andything can happen in a tiebreak. Federer should have won 2007 French open....If he had coverted a breakpoint each time it came...he would have be 2 sets-0 already..then momentum is at his side...He would have won in straights ot rafa would have won or lost in 5. 2008...Nope, Rafa would have won....Roger would have been lucky to even get to a tiebreaker. 2009...Rafa wasn't there in the final.

2010:)....This is the year the First FO five setter between Rafa and Roger....(Who wins...Obviously Federer)

Justin Side
05-22-2010, 07:13 PM
Federer should have won 2007 French open.

Finally we get a unbiased take on things.

mcenroefan
05-22-2010, 08:07 PM
Nadal is a bad matchup for Fed and is an especially bad matchup for him on clay.

Turning Pro
05-23-2010, 03:12 AM
It just requires less skill than HC or grass, since those surfaces are faster. Faster courts requires faster reflexes and low percentage power shots. Slow down the game by using a tennis ball like a squash ball and my grandma can get a point off Nadal. I hope the analogy is clear for those hard of comprehension.

It would take more skill to construct a point and tactics, court positioning and awareness is very important on clay versus faster surfaces. Look at Karlovic on grass for example,40-50 aces per match and it takes less skills than say rallying from point to point, the point ends really quick too.

big bang
05-23-2010, 03:46 AM
since when did power=skills?
clay is the toughest of all surfaces, it requires better physique and tactical skills instead just blast away on a fast surface.
Just look at hoe tennis has evolved.. if they havent slowed down the grass at wimby we would probably seen a crap player like Karlovic winning a wimby or two! tennis is not only a big serve and FH! Imagine that before they slowed down the game a bit many ppl actually preffered wathing WTA because they that way they would get the chance to see some nice rallies..

joeri888
05-23-2010, 07:46 AM
Because Nadal has a solid strategy on big points which will make him win more of them than lose. Federer is the one that needs to do something special/out of his comfort zone on those points. This makes it hard.

On top of that, Nadal's game is more suited for clay.

mcenroefan
05-23-2010, 07:33 PM
Also because Nadal's game is all about consistency and he has more room for error than Fed's game allows him. Nadal is a modern day Borg....they win on clay because they are more consistent than everyone else.

Tennis_Monk
05-23-2010, 08:14 PM
Why has Federer only been able to push Nadal to four sets instead of five at Roland Garros?

Discuss

Federer prefers four sets instead of 5.

World Beater
05-23-2010, 08:58 PM
since when did power=skills?
clay is the toughest of all surfaces, it requires better physique and tactical skills instead just blast away on a fast surface.Just look at hoe tennis has evolved.. if they havent slowed down the grass at wimby we would probably seen a crap player like Karlovic winning a wimby or two! tennis is not only a big serve and FH! Imagine that before they slowed down the game a bit many ppl actually preffered wathing WTA because they that way they would get the chance to see some nice rallies..

so you call nadal's topspin and defensive retrieving "tactical skills"

he plays very similarly on other surfaces - maybe a little more aggressive and closer to the baseline on hard / grass.

but still the same topspin and defense.

slicefox
05-23-2010, 09:29 PM
Clay is a surface that neutralizes elite tennis skills.

^^^^ this.

Because nadal moonballed to fed's backhand.

/thread

Clay lover
05-23-2010, 10:00 PM
so you call nadal's topspin and defensive retrieving "tactical skills"

he plays very similarly on other surfaces - maybe a little more aggressive and closer to the baseline on hard / grass.

but still the same topspin and defense.

Well, what does Federer do differently on the other surfaces? Shank less with the high backhand?

Most tennis players are, in TW terms, one dimensional baseline bashers on all surfaces.

TheTruth
05-23-2010, 10:38 PM
1. I think Nadal really does wear Fed out. By the third set Fed usually is letting the ball go and not trying anymore, unless it's tight and he might have a chance.

But, what I really think it that Fed plays reactive tennins and Nadal seems to know his tendencies, where Fed doesn't seem to understand what Nadal is going to do. Many times Fed looks flat footed when they play.


When he doesn't overanalyze it, and plays more instinctive tennis he does better.

mandy01
05-23-2010, 10:43 PM
Well, what does Federer do differently on the other surfaces? Shank less with the high backhand?

Most tennis players are, in TW terms, one dimensional baseline bashers on all surfaces. ...more like all tennis players from the current era-this is of course according to the so-called 'experts' and 'respected' posters( exactly who respects them so much,I am yet to see.But then,the word is thrown around rather loosely.):)

TheLoneWolf
05-23-2010, 10:51 PM
1. I think Nadal really does wear Fed out. By the third set Fed usually is letting the ball go and not trying anymore, unless it's tight and he might have a chance.

But, what I really think it that Fed plays reactive tennins and Nadal seems to know his tendencies, where Fed doesn't seem to understand what Nadal is going to do. Many times Fed looks flat footed when they play.


When he doesn't overanalyze it, and plays more instinctive tennis he does better.
Very good point, TheTruth! What happens is an inversion of control. Fed likes being in control of points and finishing points early. When he is forced to lose that control, which is what Rafa ends up doing when they play (even outside clay, which is what I find truly amazing) he is simply lost.

TheLoneWolf
05-23-2010, 10:52 PM
...more like all tennis players from the current era-this is of course according to the so-called 'experts' and 'respected' posters( exactly who respects them so much,I am yet to see.But then,the word is thrown around rather loosely.):)
My ears are burning Mandy! LOL. I'm no expert, but thanks anyway. :)

mandy01
05-23-2010, 10:55 PM
My ears are burning Mandy! LOL. I'm no expert, but thanks anyway. :)
My post wasn't directed at you :lol:
LOL you really overestimate yourself :wink:

TheLoneWolf
05-23-2010, 10:57 PM
My post wasn't directed at you :lol:
LOL you really overestimate yourself :wink:
Well, you surely didn't make my day. :-(

Dimension
05-23-2010, 11:01 PM
Well, you surely didn't make my day. :-(

Seeing your sad face doesn't make my day either. :(

TheLoneWolf
05-23-2010, 11:14 PM
Seeing your sad face doesn't make my day either. :(
Seeing your name in the forum made it all better! :)

The only thing that scares me a little is your avatar. But since I know you are using irony, it's OK. :wink:

Dimension
05-23-2010, 11:21 PM
Seeing your name in the forum made it all better! :)
The only thing that scares me a little is your avatar. But since I know you are using irony, it's OK. :wink:

Aww.. why thank you. I am flattered. :)

You got to appreciate the man with the most beautiful game in modern tennis. Similarly, I am trying to illustrate the beauty of my use of irony here. :twisted:

nereis
05-23-2010, 11:22 PM
I think people here neglect the real impact that the mental side of the game has. By the time Roland Garros comes around Nadal usually has at least one clay Masters under his belt, and has beaten Federer black and blue in all the finals. For Federer to come up with the goods in that situation is really difficult. Roland Garros is the one slam where Federer doesn't feel like a god. That's why losing there means less to him than at Wimbledon.

World Beater
05-23-2010, 11:32 PM
Well, what does Federer do differently on the other surfaces? Shank less with the high backhand?

Most tennis players are, in TW terms, one dimensional baseline bashers on all surfaces.

why are you trying to divert the question?

clay doesnt by itself force players to use more tactics.

it totally depends on the player.

TheLoneWolf
05-23-2010, 11:33 PM
Aww.. why thank you. I am flattered. :)

You got to appreciate the man with the most beautiful game in modern tennis. Similarly, I am trying to illustrate the beauty of my use of irony here. :twisted:
You succeed, Dimension! :)

How are you doing with your research?

TheLoneWolf
05-23-2010, 11:36 PM
why are you trying to divert the question?

clay doesnt by itself force players to use more tactics.

it totally depends on the player.
I think the fact is points are in general longer in clay. That's what "using more tactics" means. You are forced to work points longer in clay than in other surfaces.

World Beater
05-23-2010, 11:55 PM
I think the fact is points are in general longer in clay. That's what "using more tactics" means. You are forced to work points longer in clay than in other surfaces.

NO.

it just means grinders get to play pts they want.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Nadal has to use more tactics on a hardcourt because its not natural. he cant just grind his way past del potro or soderling.

federer also has to adapt his game on clay by using more of certain weapons in his game, and less of others. he cant just go for one-two punches against ferrer or canas like he can on fast courts.

--------------------------------------------------------------

TheLoneWolf
05-24-2010, 12:00 AM
NO.

it just means grinders get to play pts they want.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Nadal has to use more tactics on a hardcourt because its not natural. he cant just grind his way past del potro or soderling.

federer also has to adapt his game on clay by using more of certain weapons in his game, and less of others. he cant just go for one-two punches against ferrer or canas like he can on fast courts.

--------------------------------------------------------------
So what you mean by "tactics" is the degree of adaptation each player has to make on his game? That's not what I understand by "tactics." I suppose S/V is a tactic in itself.

Regardless, the point that was being made (if I understood it correctly) is that, in clay, you can't get away with winning fast points, and are forced to build points through rallies. Some people hate that, some actually enjoy it. Those who hate it are not likely to call this "tactics," but "grinding."

Dimension
05-24-2010, 12:42 AM
You succeed, Dimension! :)

How are you doing with your research?

Been a lab slave lately *have to be at the lab even during the weekend to monitor the rats.. brutal lol* But I actually don't mind so I guess it's working out well for me. I've been getting a lot of experience handling lab rats and I just can't bear the thoughts of dissecting them in a couple of weeks. *my friends have been bugging me about this; however it's not really my fault and I understand what it takes to make scientific contribution* :(

I guess that's basic preclinical science for us, the truth.

morten
05-24-2010, 02:14 AM
Fed is too stubburn, he wants to beat opponents with their game.. he said it himself... Does not work against Nadal but he is too stubburn to change ..

zagor
05-24-2010, 03:30 AM
since when did power=skills?

Did Mcenroe or Edberg win on grass/carpet by relying on their power? How about Rafter,did he won 2 USOs blasting people away? Also did Murray(you know the guy who gets pusher label here so often) win all those titles on HC and reached 2 HC slam finals by overpowering players?

Heck the guy who won 9 freakin HC slams in this era-Fed could hardly be characterized as the biggest hitter on tour,has plenty of power sure but there are still plenty players who hit harder.

clay is the toughest of all surfaces.

Depends on who you ask,I'm sure all those claycourters who b!tched about Wimbledon and even boycotted it would tell you the opposite-clay is easiest for them because it suits their game.

it requires better physique and tactical skills instead just blast away on a fast surface.

Better fitness yes but "better" tactical skills no,each surface requires specific tactic,approach,point construction etc.(much less today though due to the surface homogenization).

Or are you gonna tell me Davydenko,Ferrer and Gonzo are better tacticians than Murray?

Just look at hoe tennis has evolved.. if they havent slowed down the grass at wimby we would probably seen a crap player like Karlovic winning a wimby or two! tennis is not only a big serve and FH! Imagine that before they slowed down the game a bit many ppl actually preffered wathing WTA because they that way they would get the chance to see some nice rallies..

Man,the sheer number of times I read this here is simply amazing.

Quite simply NO,Karlovic would not in a million years win Wimbledon in any era even on fastest grass there is.The guy's athleticism and ROS are pathetic for pro standards.

zagor
05-24-2010, 03:35 AM
Clay is a surface that neutralizes elite tennis skills.

No,it's just requires differentset of skills to succeed than other surfaces.

^^^^ this.

Because nadal moonballed to fed's backhand.

/thread

Nadal grinds down Fed's BH on every surface,clay is hardly the exception in that regard.

Gen
05-24-2010, 03:44 AM
A second analogy for the real miscreants. Make a tennis court full of small rocks/pebbles/gravel and maybe even some mud. Take an 11 year old kid who's been playing on it for years - he could beat Federer. Now just extrapolate a little if your minds will allow it, and the answer will become clear.

If you only had some brains, you'd have realized immediately how stupid and boring you are in your hatred to Nadal and clay courts. You have never played on aly. You have never seen a live clay match. Most probably you have never played anywhere at all. None of your comments have ever been anything beyond hatred and abuse. Why don't you see a shrink and comment in these boards after a thourough treatment?

Sentinel
05-24-2010, 06:41 AM
Been a lab slave lately *have to be at the lab even during the weekend to monitor the rats.. brutal lol* But I actually don't mind so I guess it's working out well for me. I've been getting a lot of experience handling lab rats and I just can't bear the thoughts of dissecting them in a couple of weeks. *my friends have been bugging me about this; however it's not really my fault and I understand what it takes to make scientific contribution* :(

I guess that's basic preclinical science for us, the truth.

Congrats Roger. Nice match today. I almost lost mine ;-)
Jo.

billnepill
05-24-2010, 08:11 AM
delete post

flyinghippos101
05-24-2010, 08:21 AM
Because Nadal disabled cheats so Fed can't use god mode

TheLoneWolf
05-24-2010, 08:42 AM
Been a lab slave lately *have to be at the lab even during the weekend to monitor the rats.. brutal lol* But I actually don't mind so I guess it's working out well for me. I've been getting a lot of experience handling lab rats and I just can't bear the thoughts of dissecting them in a couple of weeks. *my friends have been bugging me about this; however it's not really my fault and I understand what it takes to make scientific contribution* :(

I guess that's basic preclinical science for us, the truth.
Don't worry, Dimension. I'm sure you will do fine. :) As for dissecting lab rats, I think it is the ends to what it's done that counts. If you need to experiment on lab rats in order to save lives, I have no problem with that.

Dreamer
05-24-2010, 12:10 PM
It just requires less skill than HC or grass, since those surfaces are faster. Faster courts requires faster reflexes and low percentage power shots. Slow down the game by using a tennis ball like a squash ball and my grandma can get a point off Nadal. I hope the analogy is clear for those hard of comprehension.

LOL that's the stupidest post I ever read. I ban you from using the word "analogy" or any other word above the 2nd grade level that implies that you are capable of critical thinking. It's just deceitful.

billnepill
05-24-2010, 12:21 PM
Nadal has never played a 5-setter at RG :)

Dimension
05-24-2010, 04:10 PM
Congrats Roger. Nice match today. I almost lost mine ;-)
Jo.

Thank you Jo. You played quite an entertaining match too. Look forward to meeting you soon.

Love,
Rodge

Dimension
05-24-2010, 04:11 PM
Don't worry, Dimension. I'm sure you will do fine. :) As for dissecting lab rats, I think it is the ends to what it's done that counts. If you need to experiment on lab rats in order to save lives, I have no problem with that.

Thank you! Now I definitely feel a lot better. I am guilt-free. :)

TheLoneWolf
05-24-2010, 04:13 PM
Thank you! Now I definitely feel a lot better. I am guilt-free. :)
As guilt-free as Nadal in RG 08 final? :wink:

Dimension
05-24-2010, 05:37 PM
As guilt-free as Nadal in RG 08 final? :wink:

Sure! :lol: There is no guilt in demolishing the GOAT. :wink: