2018 US Open Quarter-final - Rafael Nadal (1) vs Dominic Thiem (9)

[mightyrick]

the last point was a forced error. federer's BH wasn't remotely close to the middle of the court. it was closer to the baseline than the service line.

watch after 1:50.

that shank probably made it look much worse than it was.

I've watched that point dozens of times. I don't need to watch it again. I've probably watched it many more times than you or anyone else here.

We aren't going to agree on the shot obviously, so there's no point in really discussing it.

 

[abmk]

You’re right but unfair to compare anyone to Fed.

Also, Nadal is the top ranked player in the world whereas Sampras had dropped off significantly in 2001.

sampras was playing considerably better in his Wimby match vs Fed than Nadal was in his match vs Thiem.
And Sampras was 4 time defending champ at Wimb. Hardly an easy job to finish off him, let alone with a return game like Federer did (he had to be clutch in his previous service game to hold IIRC)

 

[abmk]

I've watched that point dozens of times. I don't need to watch it again. I've probably watched it many more times than you or anyone else here.

We aren't going to agree on the shot obviously, so there's no point in really discussing it.

that BH drive from fed was clearly closer to the baseline than center of court/service line. that's a fact. not an opinion.

if you want to disagree with a fact, that's on you.

 

[abmk]

Honestly, Nadal is practically begging someone to beat him at this US Open and they all crumble down because they might have the game but are mental midgets. What happened to believe in yourself? Do they not understand the value of mental coaching? It is not a question of Big 3 superiority anymore but that Next Gen after Next Gen are incompetent, no mental fortitude babies. Thiem should have nightmare after nightmare after this match. Remember that serve return of Djokovic's against Federer at US Open 2011, that smirk and fu attitude?That took guts, these are all gutless.

doesn't need to be anything remotely close to djoko's return or belief in that match in general (that's too high a standard)
Just close out sets when you are in a position to.

 

[brinkeguthrie]

One of the toughest matches I've ever seen. almost five hrs and they're hammering the ball at 2am local time.

 

[brinkeguthrie]

This match really isn't different than many other Nadal matches. I watched Thiem's press conference and honestly, it was like a repeat of many other players before.

It comes down to one thing... to beat Nadal... you absolutely must win the critical points. Both your own set points as well as defending set points against you. You cannot fail or you lose. I've heard Thiem's story from uncountable other players... Gulbis, Djokovic, Dimitrov, Tsonga, Goffin, Isner, on and on and on. This is nothing new.

You have to step on Nadal's neck and finish the job because the guy will not beat himself. He will not pull a Roddick in 2009 Wimbledon. You have to have a robotic, sociopathic mindset in that moment. You have to become Soderling, 2011+ Djokovic, Davydenko, Federer. Your mindset must be that you are going to kill him on the court. The aforementioned guys all have the mindset of an on-court serial killer.

Anything less and you will lose. Thiem needs that mindset. Hell, a bunch of the top next-gen players need that mindset.

That's the playbook there. Kyrgios could use that mindset, no?

 

[mightyrick]

that BH drive from fed was clearly closer to the baseline than center of court/service line. that's a fact. not an opinion.

if you want to disagree with a fact, that's on you.

DUDE READ. I SAID UP THE MIDDLE. You Federer jock-sniffers are the worst on this board, I swear. Anytime anyone remotely implies that someone could hit an unforced error off of a Federer shot... you simply go crazy.

It's no wonder this world is so screwed up, Someone tells you, "There a fire!" You read it as, "Somebody got fired?!?!"

 

[NuBas]

Thiem should have won that match. I’m still sulking.

Yeah but after watching his press conference I feel much better. Thiem was very business-like about the loss which tells me he is mentally strong. No doubt he will be back next year.

 

[Antonio Puente]

Might have some Nadal/Thiem RG finals in the coming years that are real matches.

 

[mike danny]

We saw what happened to his serve when he wasn't in perfect physical shape against Millman. The heat got to him and his serve went AWOL. You think it's easy to keep serving that well for 3-4 hours?

Well now it was different. Last year at the USO too.

Of course when not in good physical shape any top player will look bad. Nadal did so at AO 2014 too.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Thiem should have won that match. I’m still sulking.

Nah, if anything Nadal should have won in 4 when he had MP

 

[abmk]

DUDE READ. I SAID UP THE MIDDLE. You Federer jock-sniffers are the worst on this board, I swear. Anytime anyone remotely implies that someone could hit an unforced error off of a Federer shot... you simply go crazy.

It's no wonder this world is so screwed up, Someone tells you, "There a fire!" You read it as, "Somebody got fired?!?!"

you also said middle of the court in your next statement and didn't clarify what you meant at first.
whether you meant horizontally or vertically.

yes, every player who faced Federer has hit unforced errors off a federer shot...this one was a forced error.
but then you being an absolute jackass, having your head up his own a** goes on with cr*ppy made up bullsh*t like the above one.

Here, commentary from the Guardian:

"And he only needs the one chance, pushing Roddick miles beyond the baseline and forcing the error."

I suppose in your deluded little mind, now the Guardian commentator is also a Federer jock-sniffer.

 

[TennisFan3]

Good stuff. As you can imagine I'm a veteran Thiem watcher so allow me to enlighten on what Thiem was doing in this match on return which was really amazing:
Set 1. Thiem started the match with his typical deep hard court return bunting (returns up close for the bunt) and even on 2nd serve for the most part. He was wildly successful against a coldish Nadal as the time taken away was enough to get Nadal hitting shorter. (Aside: This result was a beautiful mauling which shows what Thiem can do against lesser players or those off. Thiem 100% of first serve points in the first set and allowed Nadal only 7 points. He did similar to Nishikori at RG where a cold Kei won only one return point in the first two sets. Thiem also blanked Anderson for the first two sets pretty much this year at US Open. And then he mauled Delpo last year in that great US Open match for the first two sets. Baseline domination of the highest order.)
Set 2. Nadal came out much, much stronger near the start of the 2nd and started moving much, much better with excellent aggression from the ground. Thiem's return style in the first was not working as well because of this and he started varying return position (going back deep to run around and hit heavy forehands). Overall this return approach was not working and this was despite Nadal still be clearly tight on serve and not hitting it all that hard (average serve speed for set was 101 mph).
Set 3 and beyond. Thiem went with a return style I've never really seen him do much of before. He was trying to crush 2nd returns (something he definitely added to his game in early 2018, but sparingly used). But this quickly morphed into Thiem standing up close on return and trying to hit hard over every ball to take maximum time from Nadal. A lot of these shots were a tad blocky off the backhand of course, but he upped the return pressure immensely and the seeds of this probably started with his late break of Nadal in the 2nd. Nadal responded to this with much, much bigger serving that was clearly on par with his 2017 serving performance. Average serve speed hit 107 mph in set 3 dwindling to 104 mph by the fifth. Nadal served extremely well in sets 3-5 and Thiem had the best returning of his career during this period and more importantly it was different from what he's done in the past. Perhaps you thought Nadal's serve was not great because of the Thiem returning, but it was some of his highest quality in my mind. I'd love to have mph stats from 2017 US Open on Nadal, but I don't see them available any more.

Nadal was a deer in the headlights the first set, but I'll disagree with you and say that matches his best on hard courts in 2017 and as I think about it more. I think Nadal's level in sets 3-5 was higher than anything in 2017 where he did not face great competition at the US Open.

Understanding the greatness of Thiem's adjustments on return I think brings into focus just how well Nadal had to play in this match. Nadal's ground game starting in set 2 had Thiem under tremendous pressure. Thiem was forced to go really, really big from the ground or he would have been wiped out in every neutral rally. It was an amazing turn around by Nadal who was getting wiped out in neutral rallies. Nadal returned Thiem's first serve beautifully from set 2 onwards and had Thiem under immense pressure. Thiem's 2nd serving for this match was surprising heroic given the dire situation in the neutral rallies with Nadal. It was an amazing performance by both.

I agree 100% with you on Nadal tired at the end of the 4th and beyond. Unfortunately he didn't drop much. His serving still had plenty of sting and high percentage for how hard he was serving. Thiem also was gassed by early in the fifth. You could see it in his biggest strokes where he just didn't have the same control, but luckily settled into some tired, but loose slugging that kept him in the match. One great thing for Thiem is despite being punch drunk he found some first serves especially under pressure. Both played worse in the 5th and were leaking a few errors, but still it was a tremendous battle to the last gasp (that overhead.)

Thanks so much for the insightful analysis. I really enjoyed reading it.

I don't disagree with anything other than Nadal's serving performance. I don't think it was close to 2017 and obviously a far cry from 2010/2013 - where he used to serve much better. I will try to dig up some serve stats to support this.

To combat the serve decline, Nadal is trying to play a more all court game, mixing it up with volleys, slices and drop shots. Still, winning no cheap points hurts him a lot. Nadal's second serve/1st serve pts won were low by his standards. Even against Thiem, who is not an elite returner. Against someone like Djokovic, it would be downright embarrassing.

Also props to Thiem. Very impressive. If he can work a little bit more on volleys and strategy, he could be a major force to reckon with going forward.

 

[abmk]

That's fair. The only one I'm not sure I agree on is backhand. But I haven't watched either match in a while.

Roddick's BH was the best its been in Wim 09 4R-final.
it was good (not great) in Wim 04 final (better than what many think), but not as good as in the 2009 final.

It's mostly as it should be: both served better in the later match, as we should expect players to do, as they have had more time to practice and hone their technique. Both returned worse in the later match, as return relies more on reaction time, whereas serve is a stand-alone shot. It should be the case for most players that their return gets worse over time while their serve gets better. And it does often seem to be that way.

agreed.

 

[Bhagi Katbamna]

I always felt that Nadal won many clutch points in set 4 and 5 by running up to the net behind his forehand when he saw Thiem ready to hit a slice. He did miss a couple of sitters that he makes 99 out of 100 times though because of the pressure. Good match analysis by Meles.

 

[weakera]

no, it wouldn't be , clueless. It'd be right on the baseline.
Like I said, you can continue having your head up you know where and keep defending thiem's easy missed smash >>> you look even more pathetic than usual.

So now you at least admit he'd be ON the baseline? And that's an easy smash?? Lol

 

[abmk]

So now you at least admit he'd be ON the baseline? And that's an easy smash?? Lol

I said .. "If he had allowed it to bounce, he'd be a step back or two (which wouldn't be behind the baseline)"

a step behind, he'd be ahead of the baseline. 2 steps behind, he'd be on the baseline.

and yes, a smash from the baseline is easy for a pro player.

 

[weakera]

I said .. "If he had allowed it to bounce, he'd be a step back or two (which wouldn't be behind the baseline)"

a step behind, he'd be ahead of the baseline. 2 steps behind, he'd be on the baseline.

and yes, a smash from the baseline is easy for a pro player.

LOL. All of this backpedaling from you now

 

[TennisFan3]

The proof will be in the pudding with what Rafa does the rest of the way. Delpo is undoubtedly more rested this year and at a higher level. I doubt Nadal will come out cold like with Thiem and also Delpo last year. If Nadal wipes out Delpo in three then we know his level is high and game on for the final. Djoko knows how to play Nadal for sure, but remember he struggled at Cincy with a lot of three setters. Djoko's stamina was very questionable just a short while ago so Nadal could easily beat him pretty badly towards the end of a long 4 or 5 setter. Given the amount of play so far Nadal must wipe out Delpo and I suspect his team is well aware. Looking forward to what unfolds.

Another good post. I'm sure that Nadal can't come out hu hum against Delpo as he did last year. If Delpo hadn't been gassed, the match would have been very different. On Friday, if Nadal loses the 1st set in routine fashion, Delpo won't let him come back in them match.

I just feel that with Rafa this tournament, he hasn't quite been able to play his very best. He is just scrapping through with barely enough using all his experience and his fortitude when his back is against the wall. As the competition goes up with Delpo/Djokovic, I think Nadal will lose unless he starts to get his A game. Which I don't think has been there in 2018 in general.

 

[abmk]

LOL. All of this backpedaling from you now

no backpedallng at all in reality, you delusional fella.
only in your highly deluded world where that wasn't a bad miss.

he should have been able to hit the smash directly. IF he felt he couldn't, then should have let it bounce and then hit it. Both very makeable.
That has been my position from the start.

and keep making a joke of yourself with deluded stuff like thiem would have to be behind the baseline for a smash after bouncing when he was mid-way b/w the baseline and service line.

 

[weakera]

no backpedallng at all in reality, you delusional fella.
only in your la la world.

he should have been able to hit the smash directly. IF he felt he couldn't, then should have let it bounce and then hit it. Both very makeable.
That has been my position from the start.

and keep making a joke of yourself with deluded stuff like thiem would have to be behind the baseline for a smash after bouncing when he was mid-way b/w the baseline and service line.

That point and Rafa's win really hurt you, eh?

 

[abmk]

That point and Rafa's win really hurt you, eh?

the point is you are f***** delusional..

and obviously disturbed in general-- hence the choosing of your username. its that deep.

yes, I'm pissed Nadal won, but it won't matter if Nadal loses in the semi or the final.

I wasn't particularly pissed at that point anyways. it was more the 3rd set choke.

 

[Harry_Wild]

Rafa post match debriefing!

 

[Meles]

2010 was an outlier, he had a completely different service motion but he couldn't sustain it because it messed up his shoulder. He used it for like one tournament after the US open (Tokyo) and then went back to his normal service motion. He served well in 2013, with average serve speeds of ~114-115 mph, last year too his serve speeds were in that range. This year it's down by 3-4 mph on average. Del Potro is not an elite returner. He gets a lot of balls in play but the quality of his returns is not top class. So Nadal's ground game would decide how he plays his service games. Djokovic is a completely different proposition though as he can easily destroy Nadal's serve.

So you're talking about average first serve speed. Great to see these numbers. For the Thiem match for Nadal:
set 1 111 mph (got mauled by Thiem)
set 2 108 mph, but he was winning with just righting his ground game
set 3 112 mph
set 4 and 5 110 mph

Maybe I was fooled by the contrast between sets 2 and 3, but I thought Nadal served rather well with just a minor tail off in speed in the 5th.

Nadal tournament first serve stats (and average serve speed):
Match 1: 108 mph average first serve speed (102 mph)
Match 2: 111 mph (107 mph)
Match 3: 110 mph (103 mph) (Khach)
Match 4: 109 mph (103 mph)
Match 5: 111 mph (105 mph) (Thiem)

A big miss in all this analysis is the Nadal 2nd serve which is what has made his serve game in 2017 and 2018. His results seem way down for points won and in the Pospisial Nadal was a measely 50% 2nd serve points won.

@TennisFan3 I'm forced to curb my enthusiam; Nadal's serve is definitely still weaker than 2017 at the US Open.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

nadal, djoko, fed calibre ?

these guys aren't even close to hewitt-roddick-safin-delpo-wawrinka-murray etc. calibre let alone nadal-djoko-fed calibre.

is that too much to ask ?

we've already had worst gen/fail gen (nishi-raonic-dimi gen) and thiem is now 25.

Ok probably being murray goat level is too much to ask

 

[Daniel Andrade]

You're angry with Thiem after this match?

I shouldn't be.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

nadal, djoko, fed calibre ?

these guys aren't even close to hewitt-roddick-safin-delpo-wawrinka-murray etc. calibre let alone nadal-djoko-fed calibre.

is that too much to ask ?

we've already had worst gen/fail gen (nishi-raonic-dimi gen) and thiem is now 25.

I got another idea from another commenter.

Why should we be angry with Thiem for today's loss?
Because he lost to Nadal?
And should we be happy when Fed beats him?
When Fed beats Thiem he's ageless but when Nadal does it, it's because Thiem is a choker?

As far as I read here (I didn't get to see the match) Thiem gave great entertainment to the crowd.
So if he gaves us good enjoyment, why would we be angry with him?
It certainly shouldn't be because he lost to a player we don't like.
It sure isn't easy.

 

[mightyrick]

I suppose in your deluded little mind, now the Guardian commentator is also a Federer jock-sniffer.

Uh, the inverse would probably be easier to answer. Is there a commentator who isn't?

 

[abmk]

Uh, the inverse would probably be easier to answer. Is there a commentator who isn't?

your response is a perfect illustration of what I said in my post -- those 3 words (deluded little mind)

 

[Meles]

@Meles: Thiem played very well for the most part and the encouraging thing for him, I think, is that he still has room for improvement. These days, making adjustments post-25 is certainly possible. As you discussed, Stan managed it when way older than Thiem is now. (Dimitrov is approaching the age where if he is to break through, his career arc will be Stan-esque. If Thiem made the Australian Open semis or final or won Roland Garros, he'd still be a lot younger). A few things I thought Thiem could work on:

1. Net work, as you mentioned.
2. Slicing the backhand more.
3. Shot selection. This is a big one. He still occasionally seems a bit wild, and overall his game is a little raw. For example, on at least three or four occasions in quick succession in the middle of set four, he was standing barely to left or right of the baseline T and decided to attempt a really tight-angled cross-court winner, only to end up missing the line. But the shot just wasn't really on, and it'd have been better to be more patient. Having more confidence in his net work would have a spillover effect here, as he could ghost in behind a less powerful but better angled shot in those positions. Even some of the shots that he made seemed to me inadvisable, as he would miss far more often than not in such situations.
4. Occasionally, he came under his backhand too much. It was overall good for him to play at night on hard courts rather than clay in the day so that Nadal couldn't get the ball up too high on his backhand. But sometimes he needed to come over the backhand more so as to minimize its likelihood of flying long.

Overall, he seemed faster, more nimble, and fitter than Nadal, all of which are impressive achievements. And he had the better of most of the driving baseline rallies. He was pretty good under pressure, but to be confident of beating Nadal, you don't want to have to rely on edging out a tight match. You need to be able to stamp him out long before. I think with some of those changes above, he would have a decent shot of doing that next time they play in a hard-court Slam.

Good analysis.

With all these things whatever we see from Thiem here that looks great needs to be tempered. Thiem is unlikely to meet the seemingly great potential shown in this match.

I'm not so sure slicing against Nadal is advisable unless you have the Fed short slice. Yeah I agree he might have bailed to the slice when he shouldn't have. Generally he was aware not to slice, but often times its simply his only shot when rushed for time or in awkward position. Overall Thiem did a great job in this match on shot selection given the pressure he was under in the baseline rallies; he's typically much worse.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

BTW, Thiem won more games and points lol

Thanks to the first set bagel.
After that Nadal won more.

I don't know what to make of it.
Does it mean winning one set in amazing fashion is worthless if after it another player gives you the smackdown?

 

[TennisFan3]

@TennisFan3 I'm forced to curb my enthusiam; Nadal's serve is definitely still weaker than 2017 at the US Open.

Absolutely. I even thought his serve in 2017 wasn't all that great compared to 2013 and 2010.
This year, 2018 has been even worse than last year. Taking it into abysmal territory.
That is why Rafa even struggled more on clay relative to last year. I don't think he is playing as well as last year, and no where close to 2010/2013 obviously. I loved 2013, when he won both Montreal and Cincy and was on fire in the UsOpen.

 

[mightyrick]

Does it mean winning one set in amazing fashion is worthless if after it another player gives you the smackdown?

This has happened with Nadal more than a few times. I can remember when Gulbis beat Nadal 6-1 in the first set in Rome a few years back. He started out just like Thiem. 100% on all shots, swinging for the lines, everything went in, and Nadal was put back on his heels.

Nadal won the next two sets and took the match.

Afterwards in the press conference, Gulbis was talking about how he was the better player in the match -- but still lost. Complaining about how Nadal started absorbing all his pace, taking pace off the ball, and hitting higher arcing shots to give himself more time. It was probably one of the most classic interviews I've ever seen.

But at the end of the interview, full credit to Gulbis, because I remember him saying, "I don't want to just 'play good'. I want to win. All I know is at the end, he didn't miss... and I missed." He was fully admitting that hitting hard shots, being fearless, and looking awesome doesn't matter. The wins matter. The points matter. Solving problems and finding solutions are what matters.

 

[Meles]

Fair enough.

Nadal did goad him into beating himself and that's what he did. Thiem hit a massive 128 mph serve down the middle at 5-3 30-40 and Nadal just chipped it back really short with no pace on it and what did Thiem do? He tried to bash another crosscourt backhand which he missed by 3 feet. There he got broken. He made two backhand errors like that in that game by trying to go for too much.

No one is saying he choked but hitting big like that at that point is not the way to go. Conservative is the way to go when you're break point down unless you have a clear shot for a winner. Thiem should have chipped that backhand for a dropshot since Nadal was 10 meters behind the baseline at that point and not go for another 95+ mph backhand. That actually does come down to shot selection and knowing when to pull back and play a safer shot. That's what he needs to learn.

I'll agree on 2nd serve. On first serve if you want to go big it requires an early commitment while the return ball is in the air and Nadal's short slice just was more awkward than Thiem anticipated. Thiem often does go for shots that are too low percentage so you're 100% right, but he did a fine job in this match except perhaps in some of those critical non-holds where I maintain his penchant for trying to go big in the pressure moments is his undoing against better opponents on hard courts. It only takes one such mistake when Nadal is goating on return.

 

[Meles]

It's not just about stamina. We know something about Nadal's level right now already: it is not at all high by his standards. The extra day off will definitely help, not just with regard to fitness, but also getting his level up closer to where it needs to be. Djokovic often and Del Potro occasionally have demolished him on hard courts. If he doesn't improve his level, I can't see a match against Djokovic being close enough for him to take advantage of a stamina advantage. Wiping out Del Potro quickly is not only important in terms of stamina but also and I think more importantly in showing that he's found a higher level.

Reviewing the serve stats I can see I've over rated Nadal's serve in the latter part of this match. His ground and return game looked awfully good against Thiem to my eyes so we shall see with Delpo.

 

[NoleFam]

I'll agree on 2nd serve. On first serve if you want to go big it requires an early commitment while the return ball is in the air and Nadal's short slice just was more awkward than Thiem anticipated. Thiem often does go for shots that are too low percentage so you're 100% right, but he did a fine job in this match except perhaps in some of those critical non-holds where I maintain his penchant for trying to go big in the pressure moments is his undoing against better opponents on hard courts. It only takes one such mistake when Nadal is goating on return.

Yea Nadal plays scoreboard pressure better than almost anyone and Thiem learned that the hard way last night. Thiem didn't choke. He did the opposite and went too big in those moments and that's something he has got to learn and be able to decipher between going for full out power or 3/4 shot with more spin.

 

[Meles]

Federer-Roddick had to play 3 more sets after that.
and Roddick was facing Roger freakin' Federer at his prime, confident , fresh off his RG victory.

Nadal was facing Thiem. so he got away with it.

even though Roddick was playing much better in his final than Nadal in his match yesterday.

Roddick is a joke as was Federer for most of that 2009 Wimby final. Delusional comparing that match with this.

 

[abmk]

Roddick is a joke as was Federer for most of that 2009 Wimby final. Delusional comparing that match with this.

ha ha ha ha ha.

massive joke from the guy who started watching tennis in 2015 or so.

yes, its delusional comparing these 2 matches.Wim 09 final was a much better quality one than this one. no contest.

 

[Steve0904]

This match really isn't different than many other Nadal matches. I watched Thiem's press conference and honestly, it was like a repeat of many other players before.

It comes down to one thing... to beat Nadal... you absolutely must win the critical points. Both your own set points as well as defending set points against you. You cannot fail or you lose. I've heard Thiem's story from uncountable other players... Gulbis, Djokovic, Dimitrov, Tsonga, Goffin, Isner, on and on and on. This is nothing new.

You have to step on Nadal's neck and finish the job because the guy will not beat himself. He will not pull a Roddick in 2009 Wimbledon. You have to have a robotic, sociopathic mindset in that moment. You have to become Soderling, 2011+ Djokovic, Davydenko, Federer. Your mindset must be that you are going to kill him on the court. The aforementioned guys all have the mindset of an on-court serial killer.

Anything less and you will lose. Thiem needs that mindset. Hell, a bunch of the top next-gen players need that mindset.

Nice post.

I think the most important thing needed to beat Nadal besides obviously mindset is just the ability to capitalize and really put him in a hole on the scoreboard if/when you get the chance. Which I guess is the point you made about capitalizing on SPs. Not in the 4th when you've already choked the 3rd and are down 2 sets to 1, but in the 3rd when you have a chance to stay ahead of him. Both Thiem and Khachanov failed badly there. They played better from behind than they did when they were ahead. In essence, looking too far ahead and maybe being afraid to actually beat Nadal.

 

[Plamen1234]

Roddick is a joke as was Federer for most of that 2009 Wimby final. Delusional comparing that match with this.

Firstly you insult PETE,secondly you insult Roddick and Federer.What this shows is that you have started watching tennis from few years,2010 at best.Insulting Federer and Andy can be forgiven but not PETE.

 

[Meles]

Absolutely. I even thought his serve in 2017 wasn't all that great compared to 2013 and 2010.
This year, 2018 has been even worse than last year. Taking it into abysmal territory.
That is why Rafa even struggled more on clay relative to last year. I don't think he is playing as well as last year, and no where close to 2010/2013 obviously. I loved 2013, when he won both Montreal and Cincy and was on fire in the UsOpen.

I'll agree on the first serve, but Nadal's 2nd serve performance was spectacular in 2017 and the season stats show it as the best not to mention quite a bit of study. Its what brought his game back. There is no doubt 2018 serve is worse than 2017. I had high hopes for Thiem in this match coming in because of the decidedly weaker serving at Rogers Cup and here coming into this match. 2010/2013/2017 are fairly close, but won't dispute your love of 2013. A lot is who you play and 2013 featured a faltering Fed and later Murray heading towards back surgery. Of course Nadal had cake US Open draw in 2017 so we'll never really know, but I'm coming around to your kind of thinking.

Again I'll be keen to see how Nadal finishes the tournament. I think if he cleans up then we hold the Thiem v Nadal match in much higher regard, lower if he goes down. We'll also have to see if Thiem backs up this match with much better results until the 2019 clay season.

It has to be said that Darren Cahill who was courtside rated this match extremely highly as one of the best slam matches as did Pam Shriver. Chris Evert rated the best level in a slam match, even better than 2008 Wimby final. Of course they're trying to pump ratings etc., but I'd say it was pretty genuine. If Nadal devours Delpo General Pro will be getting a thread on the subject.

By the way McEnroe's commentary on this match has me thinking he might need to retire lol. I love the guy, but wow did he sound like a broken record with his typical commentary.

 

[mightyrick]

Nice post.

I think the most important thing needed to beat Nadal besides obviously mindset is just the ability to capitalize and really put him in a hole on the scoreboard if/when you get the chance. Which I guess is the point you made about capitalizing on SPs. Not in the 4th when you've already choked the 3rd and are down 2 sets to 1, but in the 3rd when you have a chance to stay ahead of him. Both Thiem and Khachanov failed badly there. They played better from behind than they did when they were ahead. In essence, looking too far ahead and maybe being afraid to actually beat Nadal.

Some players just are not good playing with a lead. It has always boggled my mind. Even outside of tennis. Some players and/or teams have a mindset of needing a target instead of leading a target. The truly great players don't have that mindset.

Sam Querrey comes immediately to mind. I cannot count how many times he absolutely dominates the first set... then loses the second set... might even be down in the third set... and then comes roaring back. Maybe he wins... maybe he loses.

I just don't get it.

 

[Meles]

Firstly you insult PETE,secondly you insult Roddick and Federer.What this shows is that you have started watching tennis from few years,2010 at best.

Number one I'm not the one entertaining delusion fantasies about bringing up players from 25 years ago into the present game (Pete). Leave me out. Number two most of the Federer fans here insult his greatness with their weak era nonsense. I consider him the GOAT hands down now because of what he's done post 2014. I just have to put in the good fight against all the fraudulent Fed fan posting to build up his adversaries and players to which he's lost. The Hall of Clowns:
1. Safin - big fan of his two slam wins
2. Roddick - completely outclassed and rendered a 2nd rate player by the transition to Poly when he became Pushdick
3. Bendych - an old favorite foe because he beat Fed once at Wimbledon
4. Delpo - a fine player and love him, but because he gives Fed trouble he gets built up way too much.
5. Nadal on hard courts before 2009 (frankly his grass game is over rated as well)
6. Murray or Djoko before they hit their prime in 2011-12 (Murray is complicated)
7. Davydenko - pathetic slam results and when he had them went down hard in the end.

I enjoyed Roddick's early years as much as anyone, but once the big 4 showed up he was horribly outclassed.

Federer is GOAT in my view also because he's maintained a very good head to head with prime Djoko from 2011 onwards despite a huge age gap being completely in Djoko's faver. Even if Nadal catches him in slam count, again Fed is way, way better and should not be penalized because Nadal has been able to expose his game a lot. Nadal has been far too inconsistent in general to ever be GOAT. I don't mind Federer one bit. Its his fans who seek to undermine everyone else in the game except of course for the Hall of Clowns.

I dislike Roddick even more then Bendych. I am so glad they are pretty much gone and we have players like Thiem finally showing up for some big matches rather than the same old pigeons over and over and over and over again.

 

[Meles]

ha ha ha ha ha.

massive joke from the guy who started watching tennis in 2015 or so.

yes, its delusional comparing these 2 matches.Wim 09 final was a much better quality one than this one. no contest.

 

[Plamen1234]

Number one I'm not the one entertaining delusion fantasies about bringing up players from 25 years ago into the present game (Pete). Leave me out. Number two most of the Federer fans here insult his greatness with their weak era nonsense. I consider him the GOAT hands down now because of what he's done post 2014. I just have to put in the good fight against all the fraudulent Fed fan posting to build up his adversaries and players to which he's lost. The Hall of Clowns:
1. Safin - big fan of his two slam wins
2. Roddick - completely outclassed and rendered a 2nd rate player by the transition to Poly when he became Pushdick
3. Bendych - an old favorite foe because he beat Fed once at Wimbledon
4. Delpo - a fine player and love him, but because he gives Fed trouble he gets built up way too much.
5. Nadal on hard courts before 2009 (frankly his grass game is over rated as well)
6. Murray or Djoko before they hit their prime in 2011-12 (Murray is complicated)
7. Davydenko - pathetic slam results and when he had them went down hard in the end.

I enjoyed Roddick's early years as much as anyone, but once the big 4 showed up he was horribly outclassed.

Federer is GOAT in my view also because he's maintained a very good head to head with prime Djoko from 2011 onwards despite a huge age gap being completely in Djoko's faver. Even if Nadal catches him in slam count, again Fed is way, way better and should not be penalized because Nadal has been able to expose his game a lot. Nadal has been far too inconsistent in general to ever be GOAT. I don't mind Federer one bit. Its his fans who seek to undermine everyone else in the game except of course for the Hall of Clowns.

I dislike Roddick even more then Bendych. I am so glad they are pretty much gone and we have players like Thiem finally showing up for some big matches rather than the same old pigeons over and over and over and over again.

Thiem impressed me yesterday.I watched the match until the end of the 4th set.He played amazingly in the first set.I expected Nadal to win in 4 but Thiem really put a fight and if he managed to serve out the third set he probably would have won the match.Anyway there is positives for him to take from this tournament imo.It will be interesting to see how he does in the next HC tournaments.

 

[helterskelter]

Good analysis.

With all these things whatever we see from Thiem here that looks great needs to be tempered. Thiem is unlikely to meet the seemingly great potential shown in this match.

I'm not so sure slicing against Nadal is advisable unless you have the Fed short slice. Yeah I agree he might have bailed to the slice when he shouldn't have. Generally he was aware not to slice, but often times its simply his only shot when rushed for time or in awkward position. Overall Thiem did a great job in this match on shot selection given the pressure he was under in the baseline rallies; he's typically much worse.

Definitely agree with your first point. When a player is raw, their strengths always appear magnified, because they aren't doing enough to guard their weaknesses. Doing that will invariably result in diminishing their strengths somewhat.

Yeah, I've seen his shot selection be worse, but I think that he pulled the trigger too soon sometimes, partly because he didn't trust himself to finish points at net after drawing Nadal out wide.

I don't agree that Nadal was playing well. I think he was well below par, and that Thiem had the edge in most of the rallies. Nadal no doubt picked his moments well and his problem solving and what not were good. But I don't think his groundstrokes are in very good shape. I felt the same about the Khachanov and, to a lesser extent, Basilashvili matches.

 

[Meles]

Thiem impressed me yesterday.I watched the match until the end of the 4th set.He played amazingly in the first set.I expected Nadal to win in 4 but Thiem really put a fight and if he managed to serve out the third set he probably would have won the match.Anyway there is positives for him to take from this tournament imo.It will be interesting to see how he does in the next HC tournaments.

This match is being overblown at the moment. Going to have to sit back and see where it sits in the season. Thiem back to his old tricks on hard courts the rest of the season then this is just a close slam match in my mind no matter how impressive the play appeared to be. Thiem does not like fast hard courts so I'm not expecting much this Fall save perhaps Vienna where they try their best to suit Thiem, but perhaps low bouncing Auz Open might yield the next step (SF on hard.)

 

[helterskelter]

@Meles One other thing: I think Thiem was very clutch when he was behind (most notably, holding serve from 0-40 at 5-5 in the fifth and the wonderful retrieval on Nadal's serve for 3-3 in the fifth set tiebreak) but not quite as clutch when he was ahead or in a position to move ahead. The most obvious examples were the end of the third set and the stretch from 3-1 to 4-4 in the fourth set. But perhaps of most significance, I didn't agree with the ESPN commentators that Nadal's second serve at 4-5 in the fifth set tiebreak was that wonderful. Thiem missed the return and it really cost him.

 

[Meles]

get an *****' clue about tennis before 2015 or so.
keep your dislike of Roddick aside.

Wim 09 final >> this match and it ain't even close.

I saw the match and Fed was sickeningly bad in that match until he saved the day in the end. That match made me sick to watch. The fact that Fed owned Roddick in slams should clue you in that it was not a great day for him or match.

 

[Plamen1234]

This match is being overblown at the moment. Going to have to sit back and see where it sits in the season. Thiem back to his old tricks on hard courts the rest of the season then this is just a close slam match in my mind no matter how impressive the play appeared to be. Thiem does not like fast hard courts so I'm not expecting much this Fall save perhaps Vienna where they try their best to suit Thiem, but perhaps low bouncing Auz Open might yield the next step (SF on hard.)

It was good that he finally reached QF at HC Slam after having 4 consecutive 4th Round losses at HC Slams.The last year the loss to Del Po was just brutal.