Federer should use the French Open to practise different approaches vs Nadal

[kraggy]

I think Fed might have done a disservice to himself by getting so close to Nadal at Wimby 08 and AO 09. In his mind , he must be thinking, "all I need is a bit more consistency and my current A-game should be good enough to beat Nadal ". It's possible that Fed's reluctance to change his game is because he hasn't yet been spanked by Nadal outside of clay. Going into the French open though, Fed should know that his chances of winning with his regular game are very slim barring injury to Nadal. So he should change things up and see how that works. He has absolutely nothing to lose and if he thinks he does , then he is delusional and has the wrong mindset. If he can even take a set of Nadal at the FO , it would be a huge confidence booster for him and he might also discover some new ways to hurt Nadal that will help him at the other slams.

 

[LeftySpin]

I understand what you'er saying, but at the same time, if it doesnt work then he might be saying to himself "I should have done things the old way, it would have worked better" Also, he's been playing tennis like that since he entered the pro tour, its hard to change your game drastically. I'm sure that tennis is second nature to him.

 

[wangs78]

I get the feeling that at the '08 FO Fed DID try to change his tactics and what happened was he got SPANKED. There's not much Fed can do on clay against Nadal. Nadal has an inherent (not due to ability) advantage bc he's a lefty who can easily hit the ball with heavy spin to Fed's 1H backhand. If Nadal was a righty, there's no way Fed would be 0-4 against him at the FO. There's a REASON why Nadal gives Fed so much trouble and not other players. Fed's 1H backhand is especially vulnerable to high-bouncing balls that only a lefty could hit so consistently to Fed's BH side. Other players have 2HBH's which neutralizes this advantage that Nadal has against Fed.

So the question is, should Fed switch to a 2HBH? IMO, it's waaaay too late for Fed to change that. If he was 19-20 years old, maybe.

And don't get me wrong, Nadal is a great player. He's beating pretty much everyone on tour now. But part of it has to do with the aura of invincibility that he now has (that Fed used to have). And he gained that aura by regularly defeating the now deposed king (Fed). In other words, Nadal is a worthy #1, but I don't think Fed's losses to Nadal should undermine his achievements. IMO, he is the GOAT.

 

[bolo]

I think you have a good point, he has said for a long time that he thinks he knows how to play nadal and these close losses probably support that belief in his mind.

It's interesting that he says that he has to play aggressive now, because at somepoint he said in the beginning he was too aggressive against nadal and had to play less aggressive. It seems like he is still trying to figure out the right balance.

I am looking forward to wimbledon, nadal says that's his favorite surface to play on.

 

[VGP]

Hey, if I were Federer I wouldn't worry about playing Nadal at the finals of Roland Garros unless it happens. Nadal could lose or be injured. Federer might not even make the finals.

I wouldn't use a GS singles final to "experiment." That's just stupid. You go balls out to try and win the match. See what the conditions are and how to work through them and your opponent. Draw on your past experiences. Experimenting in a GS final for play at some future date? Whatever.

The experimentation could come in the finals of Rome or Madrid prior to RG if they make the finals of both or either one. Or other events for other surfaces.

No wonder they always say they take it one match at a time. That's just the way it is.