Federer is and always has been the cause of his own undoing against Nadal

PSNELKE

Legend
There is nothing to face dude.
Fed simply has a UE prone game... against Nadal it's fatal.
You cannot exclude the errors, it's part of his game.
Nadal's defensive skills are the reason for those... bringing every ball back in play provokes the error from Fed.
For him and a lot others it is just disturbing being always forced to hit an extra shot.
Or as soon as Nadal gets the chance he will rip the ball for a winner.

That undoing is caused by Nadal's defensive skills and his mental inferiority against Nadal.
Don't let it look like Fed was giving away those matches, just because your hero gets owned badly.
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
So much for the best player that day winning, yet again Federer only loses because of him.:roll:
Federer has a better hard court game and had chances to win sets 3 and 4.

Nadal is mentally superior. That's an important part of the game, hence Nadal is the deserving winner as nearly always. Nadal WAS the best player on the day.

Doesn't mean that Federer didn't contribute to his loss though. Basically his best would be enough to beat Nadal, but Nadal is far better at playing his best against Federer than Federer is against Nadal. Nadal will play 2 brilliant points at exactly the right time, and Federer will then pick this time to play 2 of his worst points.
 
Last edited:

Mick

Legend
in my opinion, nadal moved quite well for this match. some of his returns were unbelievable. federer could have won this match if nadal's movement was off by a little bit.
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
For those that think/say that Federer is mentally weak against Nadal please answer these -

1)Nadal(17 YO,practically new born kid) beat Federer in Miami(slow HC) in their VERY first encounter. Federer didn't even know who Nadal was so how would he even fear him?


2) In WTF 2010, Federer lost the second set and the momentum was with Nadal. So how's it that Federer won the last set 6-2? How's it that Federer didn't mentally checkout?
Good points, but I'd say in the case of Miami 2004, Federer had jsut won Indian Wells was playing some guy he probably never heard of in the first round, so the normal thing is to play 60% of your game, win easily without trying, save yourself for later matches. The shock of playing nadal must have been huge. He probably just couldn't adjust to his game and the fact it was coming from some unknown guy.

Also sometimes he can avoid choking against Nadal.I think at the WTF2 2010 nadal sort of helped him out because after winning that second set I think it took a bit out of him and dipped slightly. Maybe he believed Federer would falter so he relaxed a bit and Federer for once ran away with it. Also the court suited him far more and in a slam I think he feels much more pressure, especially now that he hasn't won one in 2 years
 

chrischris

Hall of Fame
Let's face it, folks. Rafael Nadal is a remarkable competitor and always seems to show up against Roger Federer on the biggest of stages. But despite this fact, in basically all of their important non-clay matches, Federer has had opportunities galore to secure wins against his biggest rival.

Take this latest loss to Nadal for example. He wins the first set, barely, in a tiebreaker after starting the match super hot and taking a 4-1 lead and almost securing the double break. Then as usual and right on time the inexplicable happens, he gets visibly rattled which then affects every single point he plays. Nadal hits one or two great shots and no matter how dominant Federer had been overall up until then, he loses belief. He's scarred. Crippled. Traumatised from previous encounters. He... chokes.

In the second set, again Federer plays well enough to give himself ample opportunities to take the set, but falters immediately after gaining the upper hand. He breaks... then cannot consolidate and gets broken to love. Did Nadal play spectacular to secure the re-break? In this case (as in most cases) not particularly. Federer hits the net cord, plays a silly and out-of-place dropper, hits out, frames it, etc. Opportunity and advantage and the upper hand lost.

In the third set, again he has the chance to take the set. Fails. How? Errors. Nadal plays well but he's not blazing winners past Federer on most points. Of course he plays his share of amazing points where Roger doesn't stand a chance winning the point, or forces the error, but most of the time Roger dismantles himself and wastes any opportunity that that he has earned for himself. In the breaker he inexplicably shoots himself in the foot with his play and goes down 1-6.

In the fourth, again, Federer up 4-3 has a break point on Nadal's serve. He can serve for the set if he only can secure it. No. Fails.

This pattern can be seen in so many of their matches. Even last year's French Open. He gains the upper hand only to suddenly become error prone and tight, creating poor play on crucial points. Not to take away from Nadal as he does play many points brilliantly on the defence, but Federer has shown many times that it is he who ends the point (by losing it with a nervous shot).

It's truly sickening and stomach-churning to watch as a fan of his. But in some ways it makes me think. Perhaps it's better this way than if Roger just could not beat Rafa, that he just doesn't have the game, the ability, the talent. This is clearly NOT the case. He trembles playing Nadal and his game suffers rightly so for it.

What do you guys think? Is it better knowing that Federer's lack of self-belief is the main obstacle and the main cause of his undoing against Nadal, or would it be better if Roger just didn't have the game to beat Nadal and we as fans could just concede that Nadal is the overall better tennis player?

I think watching Roger playing his archenemy Rafa is like sitting through a Greek tragedy; the hero being fatally flawed. It is tragic that Federer can't overcome his trembling, unconfident, error-prone play against his main historical rival because he's such a great champion... but ultimately, a very flawed champion.

I fully agree , this analysis is quite correct.
 

Butters!

Semi-Pro
Can't really agree with this. Last 2 sets, Nadal had another gear to access whenever he felt like it. Nothing Fed could do when Nadal decided to play this gear. Just got totally owned. On the other hand Fed can only access his high gear at the beginning when Nadal is still warming up. The times have changed.
This is a good observation.
 

RF_fan

Semi-Pro
For those that think/say that Federer is mentally weak against Nadal please answer these -

1)Nadal(17 YO,practically new born kid) beat Federer in Miami(slow HC) in their VERY first encounter. Federer didn't even know who Nadal was so how would he even fear him?


2) In WTF 2010, Federer lost the second set and the momentum was with Nadal. So how's it that Federer won the last set 6-2? How's it that Federer didn't mentally checkout?
I thought it was 6:1... Maybe because Federer never lost to him indoors?
 

sbengte

G.O.A.T.
Can't really agree with this. Last 2 sets, Nadal had another gear to access whenever he felt like it. Nothing Fed could do when Nadal decided to play this gear. Just got totally owned. On the other hand Fed can only access his high gear at the beginning when Nadal is still warming up. The times have changed.
Yes, they have.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Agree that AO 2012 was the biggest robbery along with RG 2011 and Rome 2006.

He's the better player but allows those lucky unbelievable passing shots to get into his head and rattle him.
 

sportsfan1

Hall of Fame
He just had to work on his top spin BH. It took over a decade and a half, Nadal playing to his BH like 99% of the time, countless coaches including celebrities, until the bald guy from croatia told him so. It's stunning because it was that simple. Meanwhile Fed worked on his FH, volleys, and everything else except the BH. :confused:
 

Wander

Professional
He already possessed the backhand, but I don't think he was able to play it consistently enough - or at least he didn't have the confidence to do so - until he switched to the new racket. Still took some years.
 

Charlemagne

Hall of Fame
He just had to work on his top spin BH. It took over a decade and a half, Nadal playing to his BH like 99% of the time, countless coaches including celebrities, until the bald guy from croatia told him so. It's stunning because it was that simple. Meanwhile Fed worked on his FH, volleys, and everything else except the BH. :confused:
The funny thing is there'd be stretches in past matches, where Fed would play the bh well and take it early etc. Then as soon as he gets broken, it's back to shanking and slicing returns o_O
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
Top