The only contradiction is you. Federer lost that match because he had back problems. Simple as that.
The six things Roger Federer needs to improve to beat Nadal
- Thread starter plum
- Start date
The only contradiction is you. Federer lost that match because he had back problems. Simple as that.
Um, i think the older Federer gets the harder it'll be for him to beat Nadal, other than physical reasons.
Main reason:
To neutralize Nadal's forehand (even on the hard courts) you're going to have to time the ball exceptionally well, or risk dropping the ball short or long. Both would probably give Nadal the point or at least give him the advantage in the rally. But as Fed gets older and older, his timing to take the ball early would deprove accordingly, making it more difficult for him to come up with winners on a consistent basis. Hence, i see him continuing the trend of giving Nadal a really good fight, but coming up short most of the time on important points like break points, and maybe even match point.
But having said that, Fed on a good day where he is on the zone and serving well would definitely give Nadal a good fight, and i'd take him over Nadal on the faster courts.
Main reason:
To neutralize Nadal's forehand (even on the hard courts) you're going to have to time the ball exceptionally well, or risk dropping the ball short or long. Both would probably give Nadal the point or at least give him the advantage in the rally. But as Fed gets older and older, his timing to take the ball early would deprove accordingly, making it more difficult for him to come up with winners on a consistent basis. Hence, i see him continuing the trend of giving Nadal a really good fight, but coming up short most of the time on important points like break points, and maybe even match point.
But having said that, Fed on a good day where he is on the zone and serving well would definitely give Nadal a good fight, and i'd take him over Nadal on the faster courts.
Omega_7000
Legend
Nadal vs Djokovic played the longest 3 set match in history...Why am I not surprised? :roll:
Excuses Excuses Excuses...
Mustard
Bionic Poster
I totally disagree with that.
T
TennisandMusic
Guest
He's not a "little" deluded, he's extremely so. He thinks Federer lost with a horrible performance in what is generally universally deemed the "greatest match of all time"? LOL. But, conversely, he thinks Nadal played great at Madrid 09?
It's like bizarro world, or something. This guy STILL thinks Nadal "cheated" in Wimbledon this year LOL. All he is now is a pile of rage and indignation.
P_Agony
Banned
Huh? But Nadal didn't. It took his best efforts to defeat Federer in 2008 that it backfired in 2009. That is exactly what I adore about Fed - he has managed to keep himself fit and almost injury-free for many years and still playing at a consistently high level. This is what Nadal hasn't been able to achieve. Who knows, maybe he will repeat his 2010 results again in 2011, but so far, there weren't two years in a row where Nadal has won more than 1 slam.
As for 2008-2009, yes, Nadal beat Federer at Wimbly and AO finals. But those were tough 5-setters, not easy walks in the park. Do you think its a given that Nadal would have beaten Federer in the 2009 Wimbly final as well if he was to play? How about AO 2010? You are talking as if Nadal dominated Fed at W and AO for a number of consecutive years, the same way he dominated Fed in RG. That's insane!
Nadal needed 3 grass matches to finally beat Fed in the last one and it was probably the toughest match of his life. Nadal needed a tough 5-setter to beat a no-serve Federer at the AO, where Fed controlled most of the match and won more overall points. Why don't you claim that Nadal won the USO benefiting from the absence of the USO owner, sir Federer himself? Double standards much?
Fed is not his consistent old self anymore, but on a good day he can still beat anyone, including Nadal, if he really believes in himself.
P_Agony
Banned
I never said Nadal played amazing in Madrid, but again, you read what you want to read, as always.
Nadal cheated at Wimbly and that's a fact.
Go practice some clay matches, thinker.
P_Agony
Banned
Man, that was tough to watch. In addition to some great points, these guys took their time like time-wasting was the real contest, not the tennis itself. I remember both taking at times more than 50 seconds between points, and ESPN actually showed the timer. It was insane.
Sartorius
Hall of Fame
So you can read minds. Cool.
Can you read what I'm thinking of you in this very second?
In the primary way yes (wining all grand slams),
however, I feel he has to beat Nadal.
In other words, all there is to be done includes (arguably) beating your prime nemesis rival during his prime.
Problem is The Cross-over point (between one pros coming-up and another's fading-away) makes this argument tricky.
Because Nadal is younger, now Federer is waning and it may be too late to account for this issue?
Maybe we'll never know if a young Federer would have the answers to Nadal's game if both the same age.
Of course now I am falling into the kind of stuff that makes me hate these forums, so pardon me.
Ultimately, I was just curious what the answers for Federer currently might be.
Thanks for the feedback...
Last edited:
roundiesee
Hall of Fame
Actually, this post reminded me of this year's US Open final; I did catch a bit of the end of set 1 and most of set 2, and I thought both these players were taking their own sweet time serving; does the ATP ever enforce the 20 second ruling at all? I mean both of them are great players but really they should not be allowed to take so much time to prepare their serves.
abmk
Bionic Poster
explain .....
he played better at the AO in 2009 , FO as well , wimby was almost the same, only USO performance was worse ...
also won 2 masters ( madrid and cincy ) both in very convincing fashion compared to zero in 2008
was upset a lot more in 2008 : fish, karlovic, stepanek, simon ,blake....
in 2009, his loses to players outside the top 10 :benneatueu ( 49), wawrinka (16)
game wise, he was clearly moving better in 2009, when compared to 2008, his FH was clearly better as well ...( he had many more shankfests with his FH in 2008 than in 2009)
Last edited:
Dilettante
Hall of Fame
He beat Nadal even on clay. And Nadal was on his prime already.
(K)evin
Rookie
I would say:
1) CONFIDENCE
2) Play a true all court game that day(don't just slug it out on the baseline, the fake s&v he did in madrid was awesome)
3) angles, angles, angles
4) drop service bombs
5) hit a flatter ball (don't play the nadal spin game)
6) go a bit tighter on the tension
7) movement needs to be in god mode
8) don't gas out on the 5th set (like he did with delpo and at the aussie final in 2009)
9) return aggressively and run around the backhand
10) play your best on break points
I think the only thing Fed needs to do at this point to secure his GOAT title is win all 4 majors and win the olympic gold at London
1) CONFIDENCE
2) Play a true all court game that day(don't just slug it out on the baseline, the fake s&v he did in madrid was awesome)
3) angles, angles, angles
4) drop service bombs
5) hit a flatter ball (don't play the nadal spin game)
6) go a bit tighter on the tension
7) movement needs to be in god mode
8) don't gas out on the 5th set (like he did with delpo and at the aussie final in 2009)
9) return aggressively and run around the backhand
10) play your best on break points
I think the only thing Fed needs to do at this point to secure his GOAT title is win all 4 majors and win the olympic gold at London
Last edited:
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
PrinceMoron
Legend
McEnroe turned his results around against Lendl by hitting approach shots down the middle. Not the most intuitive thing to do, but simple and effective. I can't recall who gave the advice - Tony Palafox? At the time you would have thought McEnroe would never ever get near Lendl again.
Anyway imho
simple things can make a big difference, especially when the win/lost points ratio is close.
The worrying thing is that Federer has the smarts to understand his game and know what he has to do, so if he is not doing it then you think maybe there is no answer.
Anyway imho
simple things can make a big difference, especially when the win/lost points ratio is close.
The worrying thing is that Federer has the smarts to understand his game and know what he has to do, so if he is not doing it then you think maybe there is no answer.
