Federers Rally-Revenge vs Nadal at the AO Eight Years Later

kOaMaster

kOaMaster

Hall of Fame
Probably the best rally I have ever seen in tennis was a Nadal vs Federer rally in 2009 at the Australian Open:

Nadal won that insane rally and the match.
However, the rally in their 2017 final is resembling this one a lot - just with Federer being the winner of both rally & match.

Conincidence? Fate?

Whatever it is - those are two of the greatest rallys of the two greatest players in history. How could anyone not love tennis watching it?
 
BeatlesFan said:
The first clip shows how both Fed and Nadal have declined in speed and velocity since '09.
Click to expand...
That's kind of true although I'm not really sure whether it's just that one rally or generally. but if you have those directly compared it is quite a difference, also in shot quality.
 
maruzo said:
After watching the 2 rally, I see a more pronounced decline from Rafa, rather than Federer.

Rafa was much, much faster in 2009, both in terms of foot speed and racket head speed. While Fed really hasn't lost that much foot speed or power.
Click to expand...

Yes, Federer hasn’t lost speed or power as a 35.5 year old (in the clip). He’s the only player ever in any sport to be just as athletic at 36.5 as he was at 21 and 24 and 27, etc.

Federer is always peaking; it doesn’t matter if it’s 2004, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015, 2017, 2018...doesn’t matter. Federer is always at his very best when he loses while others are injured, distracted by external factors, not motivated, lost their physical gifts (as you mention).

Of course.
 
Maestronians need everything lol. The 2009 point is way better. Nadal is slow af in the second point, though he's hitting good groundies, he's barely making Federer run.
 
ghostofMecir said:
Yes, Federer hasn’t lost speed or power as a 35.5 year old (in the clip). He’s the only player ever in any sport to be just as athletic at 36.5 as he was at 21 and 24 and 27, etc.

Federer is always peaking; it doesn’t matter if it’s 2004, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015, 2017, 2018...doesn’t matter. Federer is always at his very best when he loses while others are injured, distracted by external factors, not motivated, lost their physical gifts (as you mention).

Of course.
Click to expand...

It is what it is, I'm not the first to say it, Nadal is visibly slow in the second video. It doesn't matter how old Federer is, they play 2 different styles of tennis and Federer's to his credit is more efficient.
 
MichaelNadal said:
It is what it is, I'm not the first to say it, Nadal is visibly slow in the second video. It doesn't matter how old Federer is, they play 2 different styles of tennis and Federer's to his credit is more efficient.
Click to expand...
MN, I can always depend on you writing something that makes sense right in the middle of the hype. ;)

Above all I'm aware that Nadal won 50% of his return points on clay in 2008, and also 50% of return games. That was around his absolute peak in running down everything. Like all aging players aspects of his game have improved, but age always trumps everything else. His insane speed was what allowed him to win on grass and HCs while using a style that still looked basically like a clay court player, including the deep return position.
 
@Gary Duane thanks for putting these two rallies side by side! It is so cool to see them like that. I remember well what it was like, rooting for Roger, when the 2009 point happened. I was shocked, and I had the feeling that Roger was not going to win the match after Nadal pulled that off. It was like, you know how there are just those points that make a statement? Like Rafa was telling him "it doesn't matter what kind of incredible shots you hit. I will run everything down. I will reply. I have only answers." :)

And then when Rog hit that shot in 2017, and he just looked at his box, and didn't even celebrate besides the look. Like "i'm not finished yet. i'm not stopping."

How cool to see those two iconic rallies side by side - thanks again for posting.
 
JackGates said:
Actually there was a rally in the same match earlier when Nadal in the end hit some sort of forehand slice squash winner, that rally was as amazing than the one in the fifth.

But, yeah in the end karma prevailed and Fed got revenge for Australian open 2009.
Click to expand...

Squash shot was in set four. And it was a MASSIVE shot!
 
JackGates said:
Yeah, it was amazing, that rally is even better for me than the last one. Because you never see Nadal hitting those type of shots, this means, he was really playing way above himself.
Click to expand...

Oh, I have definitely seen him that squash shot before...on the full stretch out wide.

Just don't remember him doing it in a slam final against Roger...though I could be wrong!
 
Jmauer said:
Oh, I have definitely seen him that squash shot before...on the full stretch out wide.

Just don't remember him doing it in a slam final against Roger...though I could be wrong!
Click to expand...
But hitting that shot once or twice is still rare. Federer consistently hits shots like that, that's why for me Rafa's shot was special, he was at 110% and always brings his best versus Federer at majors.
 
kOaMaster said:
That's kind of true although I'm not really sure whether it's just that one rally or generally. but if you have those directly compared it is quite a difference, also in shot quality.
Click to expand...

No comparison - Fed 2017 would not have the same results against Nadal 2009. AO 2009 was the highest level of tennis I’ve seen - ever. Both were on fire the first 4 sets.

Pity my man wasn’t able to exorcise his 2008 demons in that match and got tight in the important moments.

I’m really happy however he’s through with all that now and plays more freely. A free Fed is an awesome Fed, regardless of however old. In a way 2017 Fed is rewriting the book on how to play post prime with the craziest type of tennis in the modern era.

Backwards half volleys? SABR????? What’s next?

Fed’s the man.
 
Hydrocella said:
No comparison - Fed 2017 would not have the same results against Nadal 2009. AO 2009 was the highest level of tennis I’ve seen - ever. Both were on fire the first 4 sets.

Pity my man wasn’t able to exorcise his 2008 demons in that match and got tight in the important moments.

I’m really happy however he’s through with all that now and plays more freely. A free Fed is an awesome Fed, regardless of however old. In a way 2017 Fed is rewriting the book on how to play post prime with the craziest type of tennis in the modern era.

Backwards half volleys? SABR????? What’s next?

Fed’s the man.
Click to expand...
A guy who barely won 1 AO title and needed two five setters is on par with peak play with 6 AO champions? No way.

That's like saying Djokovic is on par with Rafa, because he pushed him to five once on clay and gave him some tough matches.

Also how was Fed AO09 his peak? He almost lost a five setter to Berdych and actually lost the final, while in 2007 Fed won without losing a set.

No, it's pure fluke that Rafa's peak seems as high as Fed's peak due to lefty thing and Fed past his peak.

Come on, can Rafa bagel people like Hewitt in GS finals?
It's like saying Davydenko's peak on HC is the same as Rafa's peak, just because he matches up well against Nadal.

Why do people just use a few matches? Isner took Rafa to five at RG, doesn't mean his peak is as good as Federer's on clay.
 
Also, just because a player beats peak Federer a couple of times, doesn't mean it's special, even peak Federer had some matches where he played terrible, nobody can play 95 matches at their highest level lol, even peak Federer had bad days. That's why peak Safin and Delpo are so overrated.
 
Gary Duane said:
MN, I can always depend on you writing something that makes sense right in the middle of the hype. ;)

Above all I'm aware that Nadal won 50% of his return points on clay in 2008, and also 50% of return games. That was around his absolute peak in running down everything. Like all aging players aspects of his game have improved, but age always trumps everything else. His insane speed was what allowed him to win on grass and HCs while using a style that still looked basically like a clay court player, including the deep return position.
Click to expand...

Sense is rare in these parts :p
I'm as #TeamRafa as it gets, but I've liked him more than long enough to remove my bias from what I see.
 
MichaelNadal said:
It is what it is, I'm not the first to say it, Nadal is visibly slow in the second video. It doesn't matter how old Federer is, they play 2 different styles of tennis and Federer's to his credit is more efficient.
Click to expand...

So if it doesn't matter how old Fed is, why was he able to hang with the best Rafa from the baseline in 2009 AO until the 5th set? Fed's serve was off that day so it was a baseline war.

It takes two players to have a great baseline contest, do you agree?
 
Gary Duane said:
MN, I can always depend on you writing something that makes sense right in the middle of the hype. ;)

Above all I'm aware that Nadal won 50% of his return points on clay in 2008, and also 50% of return games. That was around his absolute peak in running down everything. Like all aging players aspects of his game have improved, but age always trumps everything else. His insane speed was what allowed him to win on grass and HCs while using a style that still looked basically like a clay court player, including the deep return position.
Click to expand...

Yes, saying age doesn't matter in Fed's case makes so much sense.

2004-2007 Fed used to play a ton of 5 setters on HC at his peak, skip clay, arrive injured at USO and lose to a clown like Goffin at WTF.

Makes sense when you think about it, no question.
 
Last edited:
maruzo said:
After watching the 2 rally, I see a more pronounced decline from Rafa, rather than Federer.

Rafa was much, much faster in 2009, both in terms of foot speed and racket head speed. While Fed really hasn't lost that much foot speed or power.
Click to expand...

If he hasn't, then why didn't he trounce Rafa in 2017 AO final then?

Something is very off here. Nadal fans are claiming Nadal declined a lot from 2009 AO and Fed hasn't in the slightest yet both of their AO finals went to 5 sets.

I smell hypocrisy and double standards.
 
MichaelNadal said:
It is what it is, I'm not the first to say it, Nadal is visibly slow in the second video. It doesn't matter how old Federer is, they play 2 different styles of tennis and Federer's to his credit is more efficient.
Click to expand...

Damage control is Nadal fan best friend right now because his fans were (over)confident of a Nadal victory in AO17 along with Nadal fans hoping Nadal would prove Federer’s win at AO17 was a fluke which failed miserably.
 
Hydrocella said:
No comparison - Fed 2017 would not have the same results against Nadal 2009. AO 2009 was the highest level of tennis I’ve seen - ever. Both were on fire the first 4 sets.

Pity my man wasn’t able to exorcise his 2008 demons in that match and got tight in the important moments.

I’m really happy however he’s through with all that now and plays more freely. A free Fed is an awesome Fed, regardless of however old. In a way 2017 Fed is rewriting the book on how to play post prime with the craziest type of tennis in the modern era.

Backwards half volleys? SABR????? What’s next?

Fed’s the man.
Click to expand...

And Nadal of 2017 wouldn't be #1 or win USO against Fed or 2009 field but I'm happy he took advantage of his main rival being a 36 year old who can't play full season and that 250 USO draw.

Nadal's the man.
 
Well, 2017 proves h2h doesn't matter, Nadal fans claim Rafa was nr.1 in 17 when being 0-4 vs Federer.

So, who cares if Rafa is 3-1 vs Fed at the AO, doesn't prove anything.
 
JackGates said:
Well, 2017 proves h2h doesn't matter, Nadal fans claim Rafa was nr.1 in 17 when being 0-4 vs Federer.

So, who cares if Rafa is 3-1 vs Fed at the AO, doesn't prove anything.
Click to expand...

It sure won’t matter if Nadal can’t stop Federer from putting Grand Canyon size gap between the two given that Federer is 5 yrs older. Nadal’s no. 1 is hallow because Federer didn’t play the clay season and is still close enough to take the ranking. I think Federer doing everything he can to stay competitive including skipping the entire clay season is the right thing to do because it doesn’t allow Nadal the breathing room his fans want.
 
@Gary Duane

Here, I'll even dig out some stats for you since I know you love those:

In 2004-2007 period, for 8 HC slams Fed plays two 5 setters combined.

2017 Fed, he plays five 5 setters in two HC slams. Two of them occuring in the first two rounds.

Age doesn't matter for Fed, the ever peaking vampire. Poor declined slow footspeed 31 year old Rafa who plays 80 matches a season and has the most dominant FO run of his career.
 
fedtennisphan said:
It sure won’t matter if Nadal can’t stop Federer from putting Grand Canyon size gap between the two given that Federer is 5 yrs older. Nadal’s no. 1 is hallow because Federer didn’t play the clay season and is still close enough to take the ranking. I think Federer doing everything he can to stay competitive including skipping the entire clay season is the right thing to do because it doesn’t allow Nadal the breathing room his fans want.
Click to expand...
I still think Fed should risk it. Just play one clay masters, to feel things out, just to see how his game works there. If he does poorly, no biggy, he just pulls out.

And Rafa might not be 100%. He is old, plus under so much pressure of reaching 20. So, Fed might have a chance now, Fed is in Rafa's head.
 
Hitman said:
Thread should be called @zagor 's Rally-Revenge.
Click to expand...

Not at all, I'm just asking a few questions in hope of being illuminated by objective tennis experts and analysts.

As I admitted, my simple mind just can't grasp the logic that states Fed hasn't aged a day since their 2009 AO final while Nadal has suffered massive physical decline in the meantime yet the 2017 AO final between vampire Fed and Karlovic footspeed Nadal still went to 5 sets. You'd expect such a gap in quality between two players to result in a straightfoward match, yet Fed had to come back from a break down in the 5th set.

I'm also interested in why Nadal's massive physical decline disappears when he's not facing a player with a strong BH wing or we're in the CC season. Do you remember people remarking on how slow and old Nadal looks during his 2017 FO campaign of terror? I can't seem to recall it personally (though of course, I could be very wrong).
 
zagor said:
So if it doesn't matter how old Fed is, why was he able to hang with the best Rafa from the baseline in 2009 AO until the 5th set? Fed's serve was off that day so it was a baseline war.

It takes two players to have a great baseline contest, do you agree?
Click to expand...

BC Federer is the GOAT!
 
zagor said:
Not at all, I'm just asking a few questions in hope of being illuminated by objective tennis experts and analysts.

As I admitted, my simple mind just can't grasp the logic that states Fed hasn't aged a day since their 2009 AO final while Nadal has suffered massive physical decline in the meantime yet the 2017 AO final between vampire Fed and Karlovic footspeed Nadal still went to 5 sets. You'd expect such a gap in quality between two players to result in a straightfoward match, yet Fed had to come back from a break down in the 5th set.

I'm also interested in why Nadal's massive physical decline disappears when he's not facing a player with a strong BH wing or we're in the CC season. Do you remember people remarking on how slow and old Nadal looks during his 2017 FO campaign of terror? I can't seem to recall it personally (though of course, I could be very wrong).
Click to expand...

No one is saying nadal is permanently slow, wow u woke up sensitive today. He got Murkd in IW and Miami and was totally fine. Going into the AO last year he wasn't that confident and said himself he didnt even start to feel like a contender until he beat Zverev, and the final was his third 5 setter. The guy looked tired at the end of the tournament and Fed didn't. That has nothing to do with Fed being able to beat the best Rafa (he can). All we are saying is clearly Nadal's style has taken more of a toll on him (especially late in tournaments) than it has Federer. Wasn't it always supposed to, or is that not what's been said since 2005?

Hitman said:
Thread should be called @zagor 's Rally-Revenge.
Click to expand...

 
zagor said:
Not at all, I'm just asking a few questions in hope of being illuminated by objective tennis experts and analysts.

As I admitted, my simple mind just can't grasp the logic that states Fed hasn't aged a day since their 2009 AO final while Nadal has suffered massive physical decline in the meantime yet the 2017 AO final between vampire Fed and Karlovic footspeed Nadal still went to 5 sets. You'd expect such a gap in quality between two players to result in a straightfoward match, yet Fed had to come back from a break down in the 5th set.

I'm also interested in why Nadal's massive physical decline disappears when he's not facing a player with a strong BH wing or we're in the CC season. Do you remember people remarking on how slow and old Nadal looks during his 2017 FO campaign of terror? I can't seem to recall it personally (though of course, I could be very wrong).
Click to expand...

From what I read, Nadal was in bad form up until the start of the clay season. Then kept good form until Shanghai semi. That is what I read here.
 
kOaMaster said:
Click to expand...
1452161125531.jpg

kOaMaster said:
Click to expand...
drake_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqZPnXlBHEdt8AtjizIYNgmZhw_iIPZqUNP2EjAIFcGyw.jpg
 
MichaelNadal said:
BC Federer is the GOAT!
Click to expand...
Why can't it be both, he hasn't aged, and he is the goat? I just watches a bit of AO 09 and here is what I saw:
Fed was a bit faster, but he wasn't hitting as hard. He was also hitting backhand with much more topspin, hardly being dangerous, it was slow and went short, wasn't bothering Rafa at all. Then, Fed was taking ball much later, giving Rafa extra time. Fed's serve was big in 09, but he got nervous too much, so his % dropped, plus his accuracy wasn't as good as in 2017.

The biggest difference in 2017 was Fed's anticipation and mental toughness. Fed put more tough balls in play, due to just moving the right way, so he compensated for his speed, it was incredible. And on big points, Fed was incredible, saving more than 20 break points.

So, it's really tough to compare which version was better.
 
MichaelNadal said:
BC Federer is the GOAT!
Click to expand...

Not an answer to my question, I don't give a flying fig whether Fed's the GOAT or not (I never called him such myself).

If we presume that 2009 AO featured much higher level of play from the baseline (something I firmly believe myself), do you agree that it takes two players to produce such a match?

If you do then we can conclude tha half of the reason 2017 AO final was lower quality is due to Fed's diminished footspeed and ballstriking.
 
zagor said:
Not an answer to my question, I don't give a flying fig whether Fed's the GOAT or not (I never called him such myself).

If we presume that 2009 AO featured much higher level of play from the baseline (something I firmly believe myself), do you agree that it takes two players to produce such a match?

If you do then we can conclude tha half of the reason 2017 AO final was lower quality is due to Fed's diminished footspeed and ballstriking.
Click to expand...

I do think it takes 2 to have a great match. My point is the 09 match is much better, and Nadal is visibly slower now. I'm not sure why your claws are out over that, kitty. The only reason 2017 is a "great" match is because it went 5 and team Maestro finally got to see Federer come out on top (a reason to understandably be happy). Nadal really should have lost in 3-4.
 
MichaelNadal said:
I do think it takes 2 to have a great match. My point is the 09 match is much better, and Nadal is visibly slower now. I'm not sure why your claws are out over that, kitty. The only reason 2017 is a "great" match is because it went 5 and team Maestro finally got to see Federer come out on top (a reason to understandably be happy). Nadal really should have lost in 3-4.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree Nadal is slower, but he changed his game to compensate for that, he is more aggressive and his serve is improved. But, Fed also changed the way he plays against Rafa too, so Rafa being slow is not the main reason why he lost.

Also, why is this a surprise? Fed always was technically better, so when Rafa and Nole lose the legs, it's over.
 
MichaelNadal said:
I do think it takes 2 to have a great match. My point is the 09 match is much better, and Nadal is visibly slower now.
Click to expand...

That 2009 AO match was much better is something I never disagreed with, quite the opposite.

My point is, Nadal is visibly slower and Fed supposedly isn't yet it still went 5 sets. Something doesn't fit here. Could it possibly be that Fed himself played much better in 2009 AO final compared to 2017?

MichaelNadal said:
The only reason 2017 is a "great" match is because it went 5 and team Maestro finally got to see Federer come out on top (a reason to understandably be happy). Nadal really should have lost in 3-4.
Click to expand...

Yes, being up a break in the 5th just screams you should have lost in 3 or 4.
 
JackGates said:
Yeah, I agree Nadal is slower, but he changed his game to compensate for that, he is more aggressive and his serve is improved. But, Fed also changed the way he plays against Rafa too, so Rafa being slow is not the main reason why he lost.

Also, why is this a surprise? Fed always was technically better, so when Rafa and Nole lose the legs, it's over.
Click to expand...

My point exactly, I'm confused why we're all sensitive over a true statement.

zagor said:
That 2009 AO match was much better is something I never disagreed with, quite the opposite.

My point is, Nadal is visibly slower and Fed supposedly isn't yet it still went 5 sets. Something doesn't fit here. Could it possibly be that Fed himself played much better in 2009 AO final compared to 2017?



Yes, being up a break in the 5th just screams you should have lost in 3 or 4.
Click to expand...

It screams Nadal is epic
hippie7.gif

Ever watched him after a smoke? :D good gawd, YAAASSS Gohan, kill them all.

DelightfulDefenselessFugu-size_restricted.gif
 
Hitman said:
From what I read, Nadal was in bad form up until the start of the clay season. Then kept good form until Shanghai semi. That is what I read here.
Click to expand...

Conversely Fed played his career best tennis in 2017 AO and was just brimming with confidence after missing 6 months at 35.

Apparently, Glassikori, HC pigeon Stan and slow as molasses and massively declined Nadal are all quite capable of pushing the best ever HC version of Fed to 5 sets.

Makes you wonder who was Fed facing in the rest of his HC slam titles, TW posters? Mr. Anderson?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MichaelNadal
Nadal's most common rally at RG? The answer is surprising :)
Replies
22
Views
2K
MichaelNadal
MichaelNadal
skypadq
peak federer is really weak at baseline rally compare that peak djokovic or peak nadal ?
Replies
12
Views
922
blablavla
B
clayqueen
Here’s How Nadal Plays Tennis Like A Chess Grandmaster
Replies
25
Views
2K
Hitman
Hitman
B
Sampras vs Nadal: the ultimate match up
2 3 4
Replies
154
Views
15K
Sunny014
Sunny014
J
Nadal at the age of 40.
Replies
3
Views
1K
Cormorant
Cormorant
Back
Top