I think we owe Federer (and his backhand) an apology

[monfed]

Djokovic would've destroyed Nadal had he survived his RG 11 SF test, unfortunately Fed shot his own foot. Nadal lucked out thanks to Fed. What a cruel irony.

 

[monfed]

I think a bigger point here than the whole BH thing which I'm not really concerned about is that Djokovic is proving to us a bit indirectly how impressive Federer's lone RG title really is.

The fact that Federer was able to capitalize on the ONE TIME in 67 matches that Nadal lost at RG, by winning a French title is pretty remarkable when you really think about it.

Djokovic also keeps showing us how stupid the whole "weak era" thing is because for all the talk about strong eras, truth is, the young players are not really making a mark now. There are 2 players head and shoulders above everybody else, and even then one of those is prone to cracking at the most inopportune times.

Umm Djokovic hasn't had his 09 moment that Fed had so I don't know why you're dragging Nole to prove Fed's greatness?

Btw I don't deny that Fed's RG is great, it absolutely is since he took his opportunity when it came.

 

[hoodjem]

Fit and trim body is a must for Novak. He looked like roddick, and he still performed better than roddick.
This is not about blocking backhands and winners.
He required mobility and an attitude adjustment.
He needs to take tennis more seriously. Now is not the time to worry about his baby or the Davis cup team.

He really couldn't care less when he started feeling lethargic in the 2nd set, as last year At French open & us open.

He was out of control. A total mess and he stared at the coaches with bored looks at them.
You can't hit winners on this clay with overrated moonball pony, whose game never works when djoko plays to his potential.
The French open semi and 2012 final proved how vulnerable nadal is on his fave court.
Novak is stubborn. He wants to get away with mediocre fitness and then pretends he'll face a speedy superrobot nadal. We heard that same crap when 2003-2006 jerks played fed.

Despite being sluggish and disinterested in bs like fedal and Sampras records, he had nadal against the ropes again.

He doesn't fear nadal. He fears himself and his constantly changing mind and body. He had tons of media people hounding him in different languages. I just feel he isn't thinner and fitter at the slams.
That is why he destroys the fedal fake rivalry propaganda but then has no ambition left other than beat a bunch of top players in every other tourney without being very fast.

Gulbis mentioned that they struggled badly. This is hardly a clay event that is fair involving a moonball one-trick fake magician.
Thanks to fed and Roddick, Novak said he showed with illnesses and bad athleticism because the media bashed him for having the undiagnosed gluten allergy.

I agree with WhiskeyEE.
"That's another advantage Novak had. He knew he would have a chance whether he was up or down".

Every masters1000, masters cup, etc. title got easier and easier for him to win, therefore he just does stupid things before and during slams, as his unimportant afterthoughts.

Djoko now claps a lot when he doesn't give a worrying thought. He has been like this since 2012, but despite what people say about him needing risky shots to win, he actually played dominating tennis with safe shots.

He listened to klutzes vajda & Becker about requiring line hitting winners and he was always slow and disinterested at the French open.
Novak needs a real tactic coach and good practice partners, not his untalented brother, etc.
why did vajda or Becker make him gain even more weight to be slower?
I noticed he was heavier in the legs...
He got slower and after a few months, twice as slow as he was in 2013 Australian open. He had no business losing to querrey, isner, del po, dmitrov & fed.

Novak already won many tournaments in 6 months, so it's not like he played a bunch of 2nd rate clay events.

In slams, He always only practices with nadal when nadal is hitting short shots, and getting broken easily.
Nadal was very beatable, but djoko just really cares about dominating the tour, not dealing with the fact that he doesn't need to do boring rallies with Stan, Murray, wawrinka & nadal in 4-5 setters. He didn't trust himself since 2012.

Nadal fakery is well-known.
He is obsessed with pretending Novak did major things for French open. If he did so much, he wouldn't have just slowed down and boringly smacked the ball with no purpose in several French opens.

Nadal had to admit that he was lucky time after time only vs. Novak, but he certainly played nothing worth praising after what djokovic did -- nothing in slams. Nadal did the same things every year in each match.
Novak just pretends to care about the court & crowd and claps a lot in slams to not hurt nadal's feelings.

Boy, you read minds really well.

You should do it for money . . . at the circus.

 

[Swissinator]

At least for his failures against Nadal on clay, anyway.

The fact of the matter is, you could give Federer Djokovic's backhand and he still wouldn't be able to beat Nadal at the French Open.

Federer didn't fail against Nadal because of his backhand, nor because of some "mental block." Beating Nadal on clay is pretty much mission impossible, and it ain't the easiest thing to do anywhere else, either.

If you gave Federer (while in his prime) Djokovic's backhand, return of serve included, I predict that he would have won several more GS titles and scored many more victories against Nadal, very possibly also at the French Open. Nadal's irritating "I'll-just-keep-hitting-my-forehand-with-huge-topspin-to-your-backhand-millions-of-times-until-it-breaks-down" strategy wouldn't have worked against Federer had he had Novak's backhand, which would certainly have made many of their matches much more competitive and interesting. Why does acknowledging that mean "insulting" Federer's backhand?

 

[objectivity]

If you gave Federer (while in his prime) Djokovic's backhand, return of serve included, I predict that he would have won several more GS titles and scored many more victories against Nadal, very possibly also at the French Open. Nadal's irritating "I'll-just-keep-hitting-my-forehand-with-huge-topspin-to-your-backhand-millions-of-times-until-it-breaks-down" strategy wouldn't have worked against Federer had he had Novak's backhand, which would certainly have made many of their matches much more competitive and interesting. Why does acknowledging that mean "insulting" Federer's backhand?

well first of all, if Federer had Djokovic's backhand, he wouldn't have his slice backhand anymore. now, if we are to believe that Federer is some "all-courter" then surely that slice backhand is going to be rather important, no? unless you agree that Federer is just another baseliner (which he is factually)?

 

[Swissinator]

well first of all, if Federer had Djokovic's backhand, he wouldn't have his slice backhand anymore. now, if we are to believe that Federer is some "all-courter" then surely that slice backhand is going to be rather important, no? unless you agree that Federer is just another baseliner (which he is factually)?

The point you're making is more general than mine. I don't disagree with you that Fed would have been a very different player with Novak's backhand. Perhaps that would have disadvantaged him in some respects, though overall I'm not sure it would since Fed has always mostly relied on his serve and forehand to beat his opponents. I was just pointing out that the hypothetical scenario imagined by the OP would have deprived Nadal of a simple but foolproof strategy against Federer at the French (and even other surfaces), which I believe casts doubt on the OP's assertion that, even then, Fed wouldn't have been able to beat Nadal there.

 

[Federer20042006]

If you gave Federer (while in his prime) Djokovic's backhand, return of serve included, I predict that he would have won several more GS titles and scored many more victories against Nadal, very possibly also at the French Open. Nadal's irritating "I'll-just-keep-hitting-my-forehand-with-huge-topspin-to-your-backhand-millions-of-times-until-it-breaks-down" strategy wouldn't have worked against Federer had he had Novak's backhand, which would certainly have made many of their matches much more competitive and interesting. Why does acknowledging that mean "insulting" Federer's backhand?

Because he wouldn't. Djokovic is faster than Federer ever was and there is still little he can do about Nadal's "go to the backhand, pin the opponent to BH corner, come back with the FH down the line" pattern.

Federer's forehand down the line, even in his prime, still wasn't precise enough to trouble Nadal with the pattern in reverse. Advantage Nadal.

You could give Djokovic prime Federer's forehand, he still wouldn't be able to beat Nadal at RG. In fact, it might even be worse, since Federer takes more risks and makes more errors with his.

 

[edk1512]

A complete non-sequitur. What in the hell does that have to do with what I'm talking about?

The FH down-the-line and inside-out forehand from the back are just two of the many different variations of the forehand. Nadal excels most at those two shots...more than Federer and Djokovic. It's especially the DTL forehand that makes the difference. Both Djokovic and Federer can hit the CC backhand quite well, but it plays right into a shot that Nadal hits almost effortlessly.

If Nadal were right-handed, he would lose to both of them the majority of the time. The patterns completely change. As another poster mentioned, a righty Nadal isn't going to be serving out wide to the ad and then immediately flip a winning backhand down the line repeatedly.

Everyone knows lefties have an advantage in tennis. Even lefties don't like to play against other lefties because 95% of the opponents that they are used to playing are righties so their patterns of play are ingrained from an early age to trouble righties.

Besides, most game points and break points are decided in the ad court where lefties have the natural advantage.

That is quite wrong. How long have you been watching professional tennis? What's true of Nadal is the same thing that was true, in different ways (because they played different styles), of McEnroe and Laver before him. Being able to impose patterns of play during points involves more than just skill or natural talent. It involves repetition of those patterns. The more frequently you use them, the more natural and nearly automatic they become. A lefty plays against right-handers in 90 percent of his matches, and therefore is employing the same patterns virtually all the time. A right-hander simply doesn't have the same opportunity to groove his play against left-handers.

At this year's Roland Garros, Nadal and Djokovic each played six straight right-handers before the final. In the final, Nadal played another right-hander. Djokovic played a left-hander, and suddenly had to be conscious of changing his patterns of play and switching around many of his groundstrokes.

As for studies, see the citations in the post right above yours.

Nadal does 1-2 things better than them, and those 2 things happen to be the deciding factor in RH vs. LH matchups.

When Djokovic and especially Federer go down the line with their FH, they have a tendency to hook it back in toward the center of the court. Their FHs down the line don't hug the line or hook from outside the line back in to drop right on the line the way Nadal's FH does. This is largely because they have different stroke motions. Nadal's FH lends itself perfectly to spin and hence he has the "banana shot" in his repertoire.

When Nadal hits a FH down the line, it's either a winner or a short reply. When Federer or Djokovic try it, it hooks back towards the middle of the court and allows Nadal to run it down much more easily.

The blueprint for beating Nadal off the ground is low-percentage for guys who don't share his FH down the line capabilities (everyone else in tennis). The inverse of what he does. Work the backhand, either on the serve or with your CC forehand, and eventually go down the line. Or, you can try low percentage backhands down the line to try to keep it away from his FH, but he still has the right of first reply (CC to the RH's open FH side).

It's Nadal's nasty topspin cross-court forehand in combination with his left-handedness that gives him an edge.

If Nadal were a righty, Federer (and others, especially those with 1hbhs like Wawrinka), would have a much easier time dealing with that shot because it would be going to their forehand.

This is probably why Zeballos, a low-ranked lefty with a 1hbh, could beat Nadal in a clay-court final.

Meanwhile, righties cannot counter-exploit Nadal's backhand because no righty can generate similar topspin.





Maybe in the past, but today I don't see very many good lefties aside from Nadal. Who's the next highest ranked lefty? If anything, lefties seem to be underrepresented towards the top.

My theory is that historically the primary lefty advantage was with the serve (especially coupled with the volley). However, slower courts, poly strings, and the 2hbh have weakened or eliminated this advantage.

I also did a rudimentary statistical analysis of lefties in the top 100 and found no lefty advantage.

http://beveldevil.blogspot.com/2013/06/atp-top-100-statistics.html

Guys who are saying Nadal has a sizable advantage because of being lefty, do you agree then that his matches against Roger Federer or Novak Djokovic are on his own racket not the other way around?

 

[Federer20042006]

Guys who are saying Nadal has a sizable advantage because of being lefty, do you agree then that his matches against Roger Federer or Novak Djokovic are on his own racket not the other way around?

Yes, I would agree with that.

 

[helloworld]

I have always said that it's Nadal's head that makes ALL the difference. Djokovic is better than Nadal at virtually everything, yet he can't beat Nadal to save his life when it matters. Nadal is a genius at playing tennis. He knows how to win matches despite having only 1 weapon, the forehand, in his arsenal. Give Nadal Federer's physical abilities and he'd win every slams for 20 straight years.

 

[objectivity]

I have always said that it's Nadal's head that makes ALL the difference. Djokovic is better than Nadal at virtually everything, yet he can't beat Nadal to save his life when it matters. Nadal is a genius at playing tennis. He knows how to win matches despite having only 1 weapon, the forehand, in his arsenal. Give Nadal Federer's physical abilities and he'd win every slams for 20 straight years.

i definitely agree with that.

 

[agreed]

Fed is so great, he lost to djokodalray in peak and old years when they didn't have tough semis and injuries. What a genius fed is.

 

[cknobman]

Watching Djoker lose to Nadal repeatedly at the FO does make me think Fed deserves an apology.

Many used to think that it was just Federer and his game style that were unable to conquer Nadal at the FO. Some said it was his refusal to alter his style of play, his tactics, his backhand, and lack of mental edge.

I think seeing Novak lose repeatedly, who has a game style and track record of being able to defeat Nadal on clay, give a better realization of just how hard it is to defeat that man at the FO.

 

[BreakPoint]

Watching Djoker lose to Nadal repeatedly at the FO does make me think Fed deserves an apology.

Many used to think that it was just Federer and his game style that were unable to conquer Nadal at the FO. Some said it was his refusal to alter his style of play, his tactics, his backhand, and lack of mental edge.

I think seeing Novak lose repeatedly, who has a game style and track record of being able to defeat Nadal on clay, give a better realization of just how hard it is to defeat that man at the FO.

Well, I guess we now know what's going to be on Robin Soderling's tombstone. :wink:

 

[hoodjem]

Well, I guess we now know what's going to be on Robin Soderling's tombstone.

He is the Panatta of his generation.

 

[JMR]

Guys who are saying Nadal has a sizable advantage because of being lefty, do you agree then that his matches against Roger Federer or Novak Djokovic are on his own racket not the other way around?

I'm not fond of the "on his racket" metaphor, because different players have different strategies. Generally, the expression is applied to more aggressive players, who take the initiative frequently and look to end points with winners as much as possible. However, the fact that a player chooses to employ a more defensive strategy doesn't necessarily mean that he has lost control of the match. He may rightly assume that the necessary shotmaking percentage from the player "with the match on his racket" is too high to be feasible. In Nadal's case, he usually prefers to take advantage of his superior ability to gradually impose patterns of play than to go for winners.

I will say that on the rare occasions on which Federer and Djokovic were able to fire at will on clay with great consistency — whether in a best-of-three match or for a set or two in a best-of-five match — yes, they were able to blast Nadal and win on their own terms. But given that neither player has been able to defeat Nadal at the FO, and that both have losing clay records against him in best-of-three matches too, I don't think it should be much consolation to claim, "Well, I lost, but the match was on my racket."

 

[tennisfreak]

I don't forgive Fed because Soderling beat Nadal on clay. Soderling of all people.

In fact, I don't forgive Djokovic either.

 

[BreakPoint]

I don't forgive Fed because Soderling beat Nadal on clay. Soderling of all people.

In fact, I don't forgive Djokovic either.

Soderling has also beaten Federer at the French Open.

Only man to have beaten BOTH Nadal and Federer at the French Open. :shock:

Soderling is da man! :wink:

 

[merwy]

Yeah I guess you're right OP. This also has been an eye-opener on Federer wasting opportunities. We were giving him a hard time for not capatalizing on the 5-2 lead in 2011, but here's the oh-so-mentally-tough Djokovic ruining opportunities left and right, especially the break up in the fifth in 2013. It's just not so easy to do when Nadal is on the other side of the court.

 

[Fed881981]

Fed's backhand here: I think I owe Nadal an apology!

 

[Jaitock1991]

Lol..

 

[ivan_the_terrible]

I can't believe how many of these poasters are now banned, although I'm sure they're here "in spirit"

 

[Charlemagne]

I can't believe how many of these poasters are now banned, although I'm sure they're here "in spirit"

Lol wasn't it Federer20042006 who famously said Current fed has the forehand of Santoro? Lol wow. So many heavy hitters on this risen from the dead thread

 

[beltsman]

These legends should not be banned.

 

[KINGROGER]

The only surface Nadal troubled Fed's BH on was clay.

During their peaks, Fed's BH comfortably dealt with whatever topspin spam Nadal threw at him quite easily, off clay where the ball doesn't bounce so high.

 

[Charlemagne]

The only surface Nadal troubled Fed's BH on was clay.

During their peaks, Fed's BH comfortably dealt with whatever topspin spam Nadal threw at him quite easily, off clay where the ball doesn't bounce so high.

I'm not sure I'd say only clay. On slow hardcourt the spin bothered Federer. I'd also argue that it wasn't just his BH that was troubled, but also his FH to some extent.

 

[KINGROGER]

I'm not sure I'd say only clay. On slow hardcourt the spin bothered Federer. I'd also argue that it wasn't just his BH that was troubled, but also his FH to some extent.

True but I always loved it when Wimbledon rolled around after the clay season and Rafa's moonball to BH tactics didn't work and he got outplayed on the grass by Fed.

But by 08 Fed had declined and Rafa was hitting insane winners from all angles.

 

[Fed881981]

Lol wasn't it Federer20042006 who famously said Current fed has the forehand of Santoro? Lol wow. So many heavy hitters on this risen from the dead thread

Since that statement, Fed played the final of Wimbledon twice, the final of the US once and won the AO. Not too bad.

 

[Luckydog]

At least for his failures against Nadal on clay, anyway.

Djokovic has one of the greatest 2-handed backhands in history, has all-time great court coverage, and a great forehand and elite return of serve, grew up on clay, has all-time great stamina, and has developed mental toughness and the belief and knowledge that he can beat Nadal, and yet he still can't get it done at the French Open. He's now 0 for 3 since hitting his peak.

The fact of the matter is, you could give Federer Djokovic's backhand and he still wouldn't be able to beat Nadal at the French Open. The patterns are the patterns, and Nadal's ability to play left-handed is the biggest key to his near-invincibility. Serve out wide to whoever's backhand, open up the court, whip his inhuman LH forehand down the line for the easy winner. Step around the backhand and whip the inside-out forehand to the RH player's FH side, left open based on the ubiquitous tactic of a player covering his BH side. Winner or short reply. Rinse, repeat.

If Nadal played as a righty, Federer and Djokovic would likely have a winning records against him, and Nadal wouldn't have had half the career he has had...assuming he had the same strengths and weaknesses

But he doesn't, and he doesn't. That's life.

Federer didn't fail against Nadal because of his backhand, nor because of some "mental block." Beating Nadal on clay is pretty much mission impossible, and it ain't the easiest thing to do anywhere else, either.

In fact,if the ball does not bounce too high,Nadal's LH topspins are not so mighty.With the help of the courts(especially the slow & high bounce courts,such as clay courts),his FH looks much more agressive.But if the ball bounces lower,it is not.The best examples occured at WTF where Federer handled Nadal's topspin-FH very well,even using his so-called "weak backhand".Nadal's only win against Federer at WTF by now came from Federer's career low in 2013.Besides this,he only won 1 set from Federer in 2010 WTF final.

 

[Luckydog]

besides, your first point -- what has that go to do with being lefty? its just that Nadal has a better forehand than them. what has that got to do with being lefty?

think. please.

Nadal's forehand is good, that's for sure.But the factor which is much much more important than his forehand is his unbelievable foot work ! Without this talent, it's impossible that he could claim so many clay titles. If you pay a little bit attention to his performance when his foot work became slower, he even could not fight any top 10! It's not an assumption, it's the fact !

 

[AceSalvo]

Nadal's forehand is good, that's for sure.But the factor which is much much more important than his forehand is his unbelievable foot work ! Without this talent, it's impossible that he could claim so many clay titles. If you pay a little bit attention to his performance when his foot work became slower, he even could not fight any top 10! It's not an assumption, it's the fact !

Same can be said of Fed who slowed down a wee bit since 2008 which would explain most of his untimely losses. The GOAT movement that got him on a rampage 2004-2007 had to fall short just by a millisecond to bring him down. Happens to all the greats in time.

 

[Luckydog]

Same can be said of Fed who slowed down a wee bit since 2008 which would explain most of his untimely losses. The GOAT movement that got him on a rampage 2004-2007 had to fall short just by a millisecond to bring him down. Happens to all the greats in time.

Just looks similar but different in nature. Even without fast foot work, Fed is still able to fight top guys at many important events.He stopped Djoker a few times during these years in which Djoker looked invincible .
Indeed, Fed lost 3 GS finals to Djoker since 2014 , it has something to do with slowing down.But his complete skills support him to stay at relative high level. Meanwhile, without fast enough foot work, Nadal even couldn't defeat a top 10. His topspin forehands were usually short and his baseline defence had so many holes when he's slowed down, even if a little bit. That's why he couldn't get qualified to the last 8 of GS for as long as 31 months.
In general,Fed's fast foot work helps him better, even without it ,he is still a very good player. But Nadal's fast foot work is his motor of gameplan,without it, Nadal will be a dead car.
That's the difference.