Originally Posted by TheFifthSet
Yeah, some points. If Federer was as befuddled as you make him out to be, it wouldn't be as close as it was.
Well now this is just semantics. Surely you can concede that some talent is necessary to be a great server. Every shot requires mechanics that were tinkered, plus practice and repitition. No shot is perfect on the surface. I doubt Nalby and Feds mechanics are the same now as when they first picked up a racquet.
NO! You don't get it. I'm saying Federer does things with his athleticism that are conducive to winning matches. His footwork, his grace afoot, those are the marks of a talented mover. He's not just fast or athletic. His movement is amazingly suited for tennis, unlike Blake or Monfils. Those guys are FAST. But they're NOT talented movers.
Also, going by your serve logic, footwork would have to be the antithesis of the serve then right? Because it's not something you can really practice. I mean sure you can work on it (footwork drills, strengthening your legs), but I don't see how any amount of tinkering would make Nalbandian even in the same league as a mover.
I dunno, I think the main difference between Nalbandian and Federer's movement isn't footwork, it's speed. I mean Federer might be better, but that isn't the slam dunk. The speed is.
I personally felt that Nalbandian typically outsmarted him more often than the reverse, in those matches. He certainly didn't overpower him.