Fedal Technical Analysis

[bjsnider]

I guess the relevance is in question here since the tour really isn't about their rivalry anymore. I favour neither player. I respect them both as everyone should.

I watched many Fedal matches, including the RG finals from 2006, 2007, and 2011. The Madrid 2009, and AO 2009 matches. Several WTF matches. The AO semi from 2012. Shanghai 2006. I wanted to watch Rome 2006, in which Federer had match points but lost anyway, but it's not available.

The matches that are most relevant to the rivalry, in my view, are the RG finals. That's a victory Federer desperately wanted and never got. Federer basically owns Nadal on faster surfaces like the O2 and Wimbledon, although most of their matches are close no matter where they play. The RG conditions heavily favour Nadal for reasons I will explain.

A few points need to be made. Both players have a tendency to be able to produce incredible, unexpected shots to bail themselves out of trouble. This means that, no matter how perfect their tactics are, they can't and won't win every point. This holds true for all surfaces and conditions. Both players's second serves are toast. Both players tend to win most of their first serve points. The Nadal strategy is to raise the first serve percentage over 70 as much as possible, because it increases the likelihood of holding serve. Federer does not reciprocate that strategy. There's typically a 15-20 mph spread in the speed of their first serves, indicating Federer is playing a more conventional strategy.

What's the Deal at RG?

I've noticed after watching a lot of matches on a lot of different surfaces that there's a kind of spongy effect to Roland Garros. Energy is sucked out of the ball more than at any venue I've seen. This means it encourages players to hit harder. That's the trap. The harder you hit, the more errors creep into your game. It's the tennis equivalent of quicksand. All anyone has to do is just lay on top of quicksand and they'll float to the surface. It's when they struggle that it pulls them down.

Nadal's game is designed to take advantage of that trap. He hits with heavy top and side spin, so he can put more energy on the ball without making errors, and I've noticed he positions himself to encourage players to overhit to his forehand side. Mac also noticed this, and suggested Nadal was "baiting" or "daring" Federer.

Federer's game is built around defense and redirecting power. Federer likes to go cross court on both wings into a righty's backhand. Most of Federer's opponents in his heyday were too slow to punch holes in his defense.

During the 2012 AO semi, P-Mac suggested Federer should be using what he called "plays" against Nadal, that had a high chance of success. This series of captures, from the 2011 RG final, is a bit like what P-Mac thought would work:

Federer serves from the deuce side, wide to Nadal's backhand, and Nadal barely gets stick on it:

Federer then moves into position and hits a forehand to the same spot. Note the court positioning -- Federer is hitting well inside the baseline, Nadal is in a defensive position several steps behind his baseline. Federer controls this point.

Nadal gets even less stick on Federer's follow-up. Federer moves in to close the angles.

But Nadal misses that shot (ball is over the IBM ad). This is an error from a defensive position, or a forced error.

P-Mac had suggested Federer take something off the serve and hit to Nadal's backhand virtually every time, and then follow up with high, looping forehands, a shot we've seen Federer use, but not often. Keep hammering away until Nadal errors out or Federer hits a winner.

Questionable Tactics by Federer

In this section I want to show what I think might be instances in which Federer allowed himself to be pulled into unprofitable exchanges. All captures are from the 2011 RG final.

Federer serves from the deuce side to Nadal's backhand, just as in the point captured above. Nadal always wants to return this ball, which he knows is coming, to Federer's backhand, which he does here.

Federer hits the backhand to Nadal's backhand, keeping the ball on the ad side of the court. Note the court positioning.

All Nadal can do with it is one-hand bunt the ball with his back to the court. Note the court positioning.

The ball shifts more to the center of the court. Nadal shuffles towards the center on his side. Federer is firmly in control of the point and must be feeling good about it.

I'm using two captures here at almost the same moment, because this is the critical decision for Federer. Inside in, or inside-out? P-Mac would say, keep hammering away at the backhand. Hit it inside-in towards the ad corner, make it a looper so it bounces high. What does Federer do?

Federer goes cross court, inside-out, as is his wont. But Nadal has baited him. The RG surface saps the life out of the ball. Nadal smacks a forehand...

...which gets past Federer, who was slow to cut off the angle. But why hit to Nadal's forehand at all? Why take the bait? Well, it would work against a righty.

Questionable Pattern of Play #2

Federer serving once again on the deuce side to Nadal's backhand.

Nadal is unable to return the ball to the ad side, thus Federer can hit a forehand. Decision time. Inside-in or inside-out? Look how Nadal is leaving the deuce side open to bait Federer again. Hit it here! You can make it! Just put a little more heat on it!

Federer hits to Nadal's forehand again. Nadal gets to the ball and once again goes from defense to offense in one shot.

Federer can't get to the ball in time and hits a weak defensive forehand...

...that lands out (the ball is to Nadal's right a few feet behind the baseline).

 

[bjsnider]

More Questionable Patterns of Play

This was a very important point. It earned Nadal a break point, and he eventually did break to go up 5-1. This point had Federer shaking his head afterwards as if he knew he'd done the wrong thing.

Federer serves in the deuce court to Nadal's backhand. Nadal responds.

The return is hit weakly cross court right into Federer's wheelhouse. Note again the court positioning. Time to take a big swing.

With the entire deuce court wide open Federer hits a forehand up the line, or tries to.

The ball actually curves towards Nadal, who hits a defensive lob 4k feet in the air. Federer watches it closely as it drifts back. This capture shows the ball's impact point.

Federer rushes his response, trying to hit while it's over his head for more power.

Nadal responds with a forehand up the ad side line.

Federer runs around his backhand to try to regain the advantage. Note the court positioning.

Nadal doesn't run around his own backhand, and instead hits to the open deuce court. It was Federer himself that left that side open to execute the previous shot. Note the court positioning.

Federer is unable to do anything with the forehand because he was too far out of position.

The ball hits the net.

Alright, no more captures for now. The 2011 RG looked like this after 3 sets:
Nadal 7 7 5
Federer 5 6 7

Total points won: Federer 117, Nadal 116
Break points: both players were 5-12.

Federer had 0-40 on Nadal's serve at the start of set 4 and failed to convert. He got into more of Nadal's service games that set. This was an incredibly close tennis match. A few points here and there decided it. The tactics Federer used would have worked against anyone else on the tour. The righties have trouble with the inside-out forehand because it goes into their backhands. The lefties have more holes in their defense than Nadal because of their lack of footspeed. This is what Federer means when he complains about how much different than a typical match it is to play Nadal.

What Didn't Federer do

Federer did not try ruthlessly and relentlessly hitting to Nadal's backhand in any of the matches I watched, going back to Nadal's teen years. Federer didn't try taking speed off his first serve in an effort to get more of them in play. In the RG 2011 final, there was a 17 mph spread, despite the fact that Nadal had shown at the 2010 Open that he could hit serves well above 120 mph and even above 130 mph. Federer didn't try junkballing Nadal, as recommended by McEnroe during commentary for the 2006 RG final (also a close match). Despite the fact that Federer was successful at the net in every one of the matches I watched, winning around 65% of his net points, he didn't try hitting to the deep middle and approaching most of the time.

What Federer Did do

It's not true to say Federer never changed tactics. His response to Nadal's serve in 2006 was in no sense aggressive. By 2011 he was running around his backhand on second serves and aiming riskily on backhand returns, as well as crowding the baseline. Federer has gradually improved his serve. It was magnificent during the 2011 RG and even better in 2015. Federer started using a cross court backhand to deal with Nadal, and used it to devastating effect during, for example, the 2009 AO final. He uses that shot on fast courts like Wimbledon and the O2 as well. The shot surprises Nadal and gets the ball out of the ad side, where Nadal likes to pound Federer's backhand. Obviously everybody knows Federer introduced the drop shot in 2009, which definitely helped him win RG. He won some points with it in the 2011 final too.

Conclusion

Commentators often talk about Federer's problem against Nadal being "lack of aggression" on returns and so forth. But Federer has become more aggressive. The main thing Federer has not changed is his first serve. He's still capable of missing a bunch of them in a row and getting broken. That's what I think is the problem in his Nadal strategy. Federer doesn't like to overhit the ball and often errors out when doing so. Being more aggressive will only increase the errors. Forget about the return game. Federer usually breaks Nadal once or twice per set. That's not bad. What he needed to do is harden his own service games to Nadal's level. P-Mac suggested Federer may consider this strategy "too boring." Darren Cahill suggested Federer is "too stubborn" to make such a radical change.

Maybe these tactics would have worked, maybe not. Both players are such sensational shot makers, and so fleet-footed, or were in those days, that any tactic would meet with limited success.

Federer complained about Nadal's tactics after the 2011 RG final. But that's not what counts. The only thing anybody cares about is the W and the L. There's no asterisk, and there are no points for moral victories. Changing your tactics to deal with one guy may result in a boring afternoon. On the other hand, three hours of boredom is a small price to pay for not feeling as terrible as Federer did after the 2009 AO final.

 

[smoledman]

No matter how you slice it, Federer is f***** against Nadal on any slow surface.

 

[metsman]

This is spot on. When Federer did use the "hit everything to nadal's backhand" in 2012 AO it yielded great results, putting him up a set and a break. However, he then got away from that a bit, nadal hit some crazy forehand passes and everything went to ****. That's mental.

Rome 06 he was hitting to nadal's backhand a lot and approaching with great results. However, he kind of abandoned that after the first set of RG 06 and started spraying too. He still had chances in the third and fourth though. That's why that Rome match was so critical. Winning it could have given Fed the confidence of adopting that strategy permanently and perhaps made a difference in some key matches like 2006 RG, 2008 Wimby, 2009 AO, 2011 RG, 2012 AO. It's all mental. If there was one shot I could have back in fed's career it would been those forehands on MP in Rome....hitting on one would have made a big difference down the road imo.

Your theory of just slicing the first serve into Nadal's backhand and keeping the percentage up is a good one too imo...the problem is that Federer can never seem to sustain a gameplan against Nadal. He doesn't have confidence in himself against Nadal and when Nadal hits some crazy passing shots, Fed lets it get into his head instead of brushing it off and falls apart.

This is great great stuff though, one of the best posts I have seen here.

 

[SpinToWin]

Great job, kudos!

I will add that it is kinda hard to tell Federer to take a bit off the serve and serve to Rafa's backhand though, particularly on the deuce side, as Rafa's open stance return when stretched wide can be very dangerous when there is not enough on the ball. On the ad side it is a very good strategy generally though.

 

[Jokervich]

No matter how you slice it, Federer is f***** against Nadal on any slow surface.

^ This.

Also Federer needs to win matches in 4 sets max. When matches go to 5 sets, he mentally implodes and usually ends up losing. He's a great front-runner, but give him a close match and he completely crumbles.

 

[TheMaestro1990]

Fantastic analysis. Keep them coming

 

[Aretium]

ok.

 

[cockneyDjoker]

The technical Analysis I got from that is neither are as good as Djokovic in his prime.

 

[nowhereman]

Excellent analysis. Serving to Nadal's backhand and putting him on the defensive all the time would be a great strategy, but as metsman said, the problem is mental. Fed just can't seem to maintain a proper and fixed game plan against Nadal, even when he's winning or has the advantage. There have been countless matches where he came out guns blazing and where took a big lead, only for him to crumble mentally after Nadal raised his level. As metsman also said, a big turning point and cause for this was probably the 06 Rome final where he blew away match points. Now I'm not saying that the only reason Nadal wins is because Federer crumbles mentally, but it seems to be a pretty significant factor. But even if Federer wasn't as mentally weak against Nadal, I would still say Nadal leads the h2h. However, it would be much closer imo.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Excellent analysis. Clay requires patience, not something very artistic but hitting repeated shots consistently and Nadal has the patience.

Fed's backhand was particularly great in FO finals, the RG2006 final was very good shotmaking from both where his crosscourt backhand was devastatingly powerful, hit with huge topspin. This is new angle that his inside out don't work a lot on slow courts vs Nadal and gets sprayed a lot. The man had best inside out forehand so its hard to convince him to not use it.

 

[Charlemagne]

Excellent stuff man. Always love to see this level of detail and commentary.

 

[SpinToWin]

Excellent analysis. Serving to Nadal's backhand and putting him on the defensive all the time would be a great strategy, but as metsman said, the problem is mental. Fed just can't seem to maintain a proper and fixed game plan against Nadal, even when he's winning or has the advantage. There have been countless matches where he came out guns blazing and where took a big lead, only for him to crumble mentally after Nadal raised his level. As metsman also said, a big turning point and cause for this was probably the 06 Rome final where he blew away match points. Now I'm not saying that the only reason Nadal wins is because Federer crumbles mentally, but it seems to be a pretty significant factor. But even if Federer wasn't as mentally weak against Nadal, I would still say Nadal leads the h2h. However, it would be much closer imo.

I think people underestimate how big of an adjustment Nadal forces Fed to make… Both guys had absolutely dominant strategies against the field and used them against everybody, but Fed could not use his dominant strategies against Nadal in particular. This includes his knifed backhand slice cross court for instance, as Nadal just eats that shot up with his forehand, whereas the rest of the tour struggles to put something on it. It is a classical matchup issue, and it is significantly more difficult to force yourself to use strategies you are not accustomed to throughout a match, than to stick to what always works. Nadal just continued doing what he always does (though usually raising his level in that regard), whereas Fed had to change his approach quite noticeably in order not to play into Nadal's hands. This is (IMO) why you see Fed gradually backing off the game plan that works, as he is consciously forcing himself to play that way, which is mentally tiring.

 

[zep]

While your analysis is quite interesting, it is based on a few cherry picked points. I am sure there were times when Federer continuously attacked Nadal's BH too. You have to remember that on clay it is difficult to burn Nadal on the BH side. When he has time and he is playing well, he can hit the BH almost as powerfully as a FH due to his strong right hand. So if you keep going there all the time with an inside-in FH he can hurt you with the BH too, he just needs one strong crosscourt BH to put you in a defensive position. You have to mix it up and keep him guessing which is easier said than done.

 

[metsman]

^ This.

Also Federer needs to win matches in 4 sets max. When matches go to 5 sets, he mentally implodes and usually ends up losing. He's a great front-runner, but give him a close match and he completely crumbles.

were you alive in 2007?

 

[Tennis_Hands]

OP, I enjoyed reading your post.

Great job, kudos!

I will add that it is kinda hard to tell Federer to take a bit off the serve and serve to Rafa's backhand though, particularly on the deuce side, as Rafa's open stance return when stretched wide and can be very dangerous when there is not enough on the ball. On the ad side it is a very good strategy generally though.

Bingo!

 

[Tennis_Hands]

were you alive in 2007?

He was 1 then, which makes his current age of 9 fitting for his comment.

 

[nowhereman]

I think people underestimate how big of an adjustment Nadal forces Fed to make… Both guys had absolutely dominant strategies against the field and used them against everybody, but Fed could not use his dominant strategies against Nadal in particular. This includes his knifed backhand slice cross court for instance, as Nadal just eats that shot up with his forehand, whereas the rest of the tour struggles to put something on it. It is a classical matchup issue, and it is significantly more difficult to force yourself to use strategies you are not accustomed to throughout a match, than to stick to what always works. Nadal just continued doing what he always does (though usually raising his level in that regard), whereas Fed had to change his approach quite noticeably in order not to play into Nadal's hands. This is (IMO) why you see Fed gradually backing off the game plan that works, as he is consciously forcing himself to play that way, which is mentally tiring.

True. It seems like every strength or weapon Fed has is either ineffective or countered by Nadal. And that presents a huge dilemma as Fed would basically need to change his entire playing style just to overcome one player. And who knows how that would've turned out. If he did do something as drastic as that, he might end up having a much better h2h with Nadal, but he would not be the Federer that we know and love and we would have no idea how he would match up against his other rivals or the rest of the field.

 

[metsman]

True. It seems like every strength or weapon Fed has is either ineffective or countered by Nadal. And that presents a huge dilemma as Fed would basically need to change his entire playing style just to overcome one player. And who knows how that would've turned out. If he did do something as drastic as that, he might end up having a much better h2h with Nadal, but he would not be the Federer that we know and love and we would have no idea how he would match up against his other rivals or the rest of the field.

that being said, I still would have liked to see him target the backhand throughout the duration of a match much more than he did and not make dumb approaches to the forehand or short to the backhand. If you are going to go down the line to the forehand with your forehand, make it really down the line. Unforced errors will happen anyways...I would rather them be when Federer tries to take control of a point by going close to the lines than by overcooking a desperation forehand or sending another backhand into the net.

 

[SpinToWin]

that being said, I still would have liked to see him target the backhand throughout the duration of a match much more than he did and not make dumb approaches to the forehand or short to the backhand. If you are going to go down the line to the forehand with your forehand, make it really down the line. Unforced errors will happen anyways...I would rather them be when Federer tries to take control of a point by going close to the lines than by overcooking a desperation forehand or sending another backhand into the net.

Again, that's easy to say when you're not in the driver's seat, but part of the reason why these guys are so good is that they can play on instinct and win, which needs much less conscious effort than (re)considering every shot. The latter is rather tiring and extremely hard to keep up over a Bo5 match, as lapses of concentration and thus errors or lax shots tend to creep in. When you notice that as a player, you usually automatically reverse to a less mentally taxing style, the one you are must accustomed to (and the one which Rafa takes advantage of in this case). Rafa has an extreme mental edge due to the nature of their matchup issue, and that is more of a factor in their matches than people give credit for.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Again, that's easy to say when you're not in the driver's seat, but part of the reason why these guys are so good is that they can play on instinct and win, which needs much less conscious effort than (re)considering every shot. The latter is rather tiring and extremely hard to keep up over a Bo5 match, as lapses of concentration and thus errors or lax shots tend to creep in. When you notice that as a player, you usually automatically reverse to a less mentally taxing style, the one you are must accustomed to (and the one which Rafa takes advantage of in this case). Rafa has an extreme mental edge due to the nature of their matchup issue, and that is more of a factor in their matches than the people from the ************* give credit for.

FTFY

 

[vernonbc]

The problem with your theory is that Nadal beat EVERYONE on clay for many years. Not one single guy could figure out a strategy to consistently beat him. Maybe Rafa is just that good. Ever consider that?

 

[Tennis_Hands]

The problem with your theory is that Nadal beat EVERYONE on clay for many years. Not one single guy could figure out a strategy to consistently beat him. Maybe Rafa is just that good. Ever consider that?

Depends on what you mean by "consistently" but otherwise I can think of one.

 

[AceSalvo]

2011 RG final???

being 30 and playing on Clay is the worst combination ever.. dont care about about tactis, can't overrun and overpower the KOC...

 

[metsman]

2011 RG final???

being 30 and playing on Clay is the worst combination ever.. dont care about about tactis, can't overrun and overpower the KOC...

no one is saying he could have beaten Nadal at RG (well I hold that with these tactics consistently applied he could have done it in 2006) just a general trend that could have served him well in some of the close matches he lost off clay at AO and Wimby. In 2011 RG I think Federer should have taken Nadal 5 sets and some of this analysis shows why he didn't.

 

[AceSalvo]

no one is saying he could have beaten Nadal at RG (well I hold that with these tactics consistently applied he could have done it in 2006) just a general trend that could have served him well in some of the close matches he lost off clay at AO and Wimby. In 2011 RG I think Federer should have taken Nadal 5 sets and some of this analysis shows why he didn't.

and if Fed would have employed other tactics, he could have equally failed.. it would take a similar analysis of Fed's previous RG finals to see what other tactics did he use.. whatever it was, it did not work..

until 2015 only one player defeated Nadal in RG.. I dont think he had any specific tactic other than Brute Force.. he had a better vantage point than Fed to burn those FH.. mayb the RF 97 would have helped Fed in 2011, though its speculation again at best..