My analysis of the final: How Federer beat Nadal. What's your take?

[veroniquem]

Fed's aces at the end of the 5th, wow. Rafa put maximum pressure. Fed's serve made the difference.
Fed looked so happy and Rafa so sad at the end, damn. A bit heartbreaking. Fed reacted like a kid on Xmas morning !! This was probably his most unexpected victory ever

 

[Vcore89]

Simply, give credit to Federer's team especially to Ljubicic [the master of pulverising high-bouncing balls with a one-handed backhand return].

 

[moonballs]

Simply, give credit to Federer's team especially to Ljubicic [the master of pulverising high-bouncing balls with a one-handed backhand return].

Interesting point. Considering Fed hired him mainly to solve the djokovic puzzle, sometime things really worked out in strange ways.

 

[wangs78]

Rafas predictability on the forehand side helped I believe. When he tries to pin the righty to backhand side, he uses spin and placement while sacrificing pace of the shot. This actually opens up the angles for the backhand reply. Nadal uses this play against Fed a lot. And he uses it almost exclusively on big points neutral rallies. Kudos to Fed for pulling the trigger on attackable ball.

Yes. I've seen Roger attack with his BH cross court on indoor (WTF) before but not outdoor. I think his ability to go for sharper and sharper angles on this shot ultimately puts him at an adavantage to either pull Rafa wide so Fed could hit a FH winner DTL or to draw an error from Rafa. The thing is it is easier for a OHBH to hit sharply angle BHs bc of greater reach whereas with a two-hander the player has to move himself much closer to the ball to get that angled shot. This is a play that will really hurt Rafa now esp since he is no longer as fast as he used to be.

 

[eliars]

Rafas predictability on the forehand side helped I believe. When he tries to pin the righty to backhand side, he uses spin and placement while sacrificing pace of the shot. This actually opens up the angles for the backhand reply. Nadal uses this play against Fed a lot. And he uses it almost exclusively on big points neutral rallies. Kudos to Fed for pulling the trigger on attackable ball.

Good point.

I also got frustrated with Nadal's predictability with his FH patterns at some point (think it was in the fourth). As @ForumMember pointed out, Nadal only really got aggressive with the forehand - meaning hitting dtl/inside out - when in trouble (facing BPs) most of the match through.
But just like Fed stuck to the gameplan of controlled aggression (and rallying with Nadal) even though it didn't work all the time, the same did Rafa with the FH-BH play, even though he lost quite a few of those. But I definitely would have liked to see Nadal mix it up more, especially considering that he hits a faster shot inside out (or BH cc) and the fact that Federer defends worse off his FH side than his BH side.

I feel like Nadal did the same mistake in the Dimitrov match, but there he managed to come through despite of his FH pattern predictability.

 

[eliars]

Simply, give credit to Federer's team especially to Ljubicic [the master of pulverising high-bouncing balls with a one-handed backhand return].

Still remember that IW SF Nadal played vs. Ljubicic. Ljubicic pulled Nadal off che court hitting a lot of topspin FHs to Nadal's backhand wing, giving him a taste of his own medicine. As I wrote in the OP, that's something Fed did really well (that Djokovic is great at too)

 

[Nostradamus]

Fed's aces at the end of the 5th, wow. Rafa put maximum pressure. Fed's serve made the difference.
Fed looked so happy and Rafa so sad at the end, damn. A bit heartbreaking. Fed reacted like a kid on Xmas morning !! This was probably his most unexpected victory ever

unexpected ? Roger thought this was as good of chance as he ever had of beating RAFA. Fast court, Nadal on the downswing of his career, Roger playing well, and most fans want to see Roger win,,,,, Well.....it was the right timing for Roger..

 

[eliars]

Anyone talking court surface? I find it plausible that early exits of Murray and Joker could also be attributed to higher speed. Also interesting that on a faster configuration, 3 out of 4 semi finalists were OHBH.

Quicker balls that don't get fluffy as quickly is what I've heard.

Don't know if there are any data to back that up.

 

[eliars]

Anyone talking court surface? I find it plausible that early exits of Murray and Joker could also be attributed to higher speed. Also interesting that on a faster configuration, 3 out of 4 semi finalists were OHBH.

Quicker balls that don't get fluffy as quickly is what I've heard.

Don't know if there are any data to back that up.

The backhand is what won it for Fed. That's it.
Sure, he served well, hit many FH winners, some FH errors, etc. But that is all expected and par for the course.
The biggest difference between this match and previous encounters was Fed's BH: Taking it early, redirecting, and hitting TS / flat rather than chip / slice.

Yup I agree. That's why I mentioned that as the first key factor.

 

[eliars]

SMILE - JUST SMILE

Yes to the backhand, aggressive serve return, standing tall on the baseline, ending points early, change in frame, and Nadal's ageing from his own peak.

Yes to all of this.

Federer plays his best relaxed, everyone does, but Federer needs to be less-stressed more than most on tour because he's playing very very early - on the rise, inside the goddamn baseline and flat - its insanely difficult. Go ahead any of you, try it against someone your level.

For me personally, as I was watching this match, when Nadal hit that amazing FH stretch slice winner and Federer looked to him with an applaud, and smile, in an important moment, it told me where his mind was at. He was relaxed. And then I was reassured, because as I continued to watch yet another Federer final it wasn't so much in dread or apprehension of another loss, win or lose this would feel different: He would do it on his terms. His post match speech was reflective of this new found inner zen.

The moment in the match where Fed applauded and smiled back at Nadal reminded me of another moment, this one in an old Jackie Chan movie. He's playing an older guy who's had his ass handed to him already. As he trains and recovers from the pasting, a friend tells him to "smile". Just that, to smile. In a rematch with a guy that pasted him before, at a critical moment, he remembers to smile.

Here it is - the smile bit occurs at about 5:30'ish.

PS
People might look at Dimitrov's strokes, form and fluidity and conclude he's another Fed but he can't be as "aggressive" as FedEx, or take away the "time" that Fed does from his opponents. I don't really see Dimitrov having that natural aggression to jam through the more tricky defenders [Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and anyone else that plays this style well] with early timing.

Yeah it is. That's why he's the greatest.

Good point. I didn't think of that. But it's true. When Federer and Nadal are applauding points, you know at ease and have composure. I also vividly remember Nadal applaudong Djokovic for one of his shots in that 2014 RG final (in the second set I believe). That's when I knew Nadal would probably win this match.

Also agree. Dimitrov doesn't have that aggressive mindset yet, nor the ability to take the ball on the rise as consistently as Fed. Maybe it'll come later on in his career, because he surely can do it (judging from his highlight reel shots)

 

[eliars]

SMILE - JUST SMILE

Yes to the backhand, aggressive serve return, standing tall on the baseline, ending points early, change in frame, and Nadal's ageing from his own peak.

Yes to all of this.

Federer plays his best relaxed, everyone does, but Federer needs to be less-stressed more than most on tour because he's playing very very early - on the rise, inside the goddamn baseline and flat - its insanely difficult. Go ahead any of you, try it against someone your level.

For me personally, as I was watching this match, when Nadal hit that amazing FH stretch slice winner and Federer looked to him with an applaud, and smile, in an important moment, it told me where his mind was at. He was relaxed. And then I was reassured, because as I continued to watch yet another Federer final it wasn't so much in dread or apprehension of another loss, win or lose this would feel different: He would do it on his terms. His post match speech was reflective of this new found inner zen.

The moment in the match where Fed applauded and smiled back at Nadal reminded me of another moment, this one in an old Jackie Chan movie. He's playing an older guy who's had his ass handed to him already. As he trains and recovers from the pasting, a friend tells him to "smile". Just that, to smile. In a rematch with a guy that pasted him before, at a critical moment, he remembers to smile.

Here it is - the smile bit occurs at about 5:30'ish.

PS
People might look at Dimitrov's strokes, form and fluidity and conclude he's another Fed but he can't be as "aggressive" as FedEx, or take away the "time" that Fed does from his opponents. I don't really see Dimitrov having that natural aggression to jam through the more tricky defenders [Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and anyone else that plays this style well] with early timing.

Yeah it is. That's why he's the greatest.

Good point. I didn't think of that. But it's true. When Federer and Nadal are applauding points, you know at ease and have composure. I also vividly remember Nadal applaudong Djokovic for one of his shots in that 2014 RG final (in the second set I believe). That's when I knew Nadal would probably win this match.

Also agree. Dimitrov doesn't have that aggressive mindset yet, nor the ability to take the ball on the rise as consistently as Fed. Maybe it'll come later on in

 

[Fed881981]

In his interview with ESPN after the match, Fed said that his coaches (Servin and Evan) told him something like "it's all mental because you've got the game". It looks like that helped. His mental strength after dropping the 2nd set, the 4th set and being a break down in the 5th was amazing!

 

[Krish872007]

In his interview with ESPN after the match, Fed said that his coaches (Servin and Evan) told him something like "it's all mental because you've got the game". It looks like that helped. His mental strength after dropping the 2nd set, the 4th set and being a break down in the 5th was amazing!

And now everyone's wondering why they didn't mention that it was all mental a good 7-8 years ago

 

[JohnnyMac Fan!]

I posted this as a reply, but thought it'd be good to have a whole thread dedicated to analyzing this final in what made Federer beat Nadal for his 18th slam.

So here's my take. I think these were the most important key factors to Federer beating Nadal today:

There were so many key points you could point to from both Fed and Nadal. They both fended off a ton of BPs. So let's look at this from an overall standpoint.

What I saw from Federer today that I think ultimately made him beat Nadal were:

a) His backhand. That backhand today was crucial. I think Fed might have hit his topspin backhand about 85-90 % of the time today (don't know if there's stats to back that up and it'd be interesting to see a comparative metric of this in his former matches vs. Nadal). Both in the rallies but also off the returns. In the rallies Federer managed to take his backhand early and pulled it wide hitting into Nadal's forehand side. He also managed to neutralize the rallies a lot by going down the line in the same vein Dimitrov managed to do it. Federer ended up hitting a lot of backhand winners and that was gold today. That bigger frame definitely aided Federer to be capable of doing this. Remember this is only the second time they play head to head since Federer switched to a bigger racket I believe. As a side note, Nadal couldn't find that first serve from the deuce court to Fed's backhand today. He missed it countless times today. Also played a crucial factor.

b) His patterns of play. Besides the patterns of play with his backhand that I already alluded to, Federer did so well in constructing the points. When Federer wasn't withstanding the FH cc from Nadal, Federer played a lot of topspin forehands to Nadal's backhand side. Djokovic-esque stuff there. When he was in control of the rally, he kept Nadal on the backhand wing an extra time, before eventually extracting the error from Nadal, pressuring Nadal to slice it up high with Fed finishing it at the net or finally going into the open court (the latter didn't happen that often to be honest; the first two outcomes happened most often).
Federer's inside out was also great and it was even more effective today, as you could see Nadal was moving slowlier to his forehand side today, given he probably was feeling the Dimitrov match in his legs. Nadal didn't make those running forehand shots today. He was too late to be in the right positions to hit them.

c) His serve. Federer's first serve was in the mid sixties every single set (apart from the last actually, where it dropped to 52%; Nadal's first serve in the fifth was 85%! - all the more impressive that he won that fifth set)
We all know how much damage Federer can do when he serves well. He did that to Nadal too. Especially come crunch moments which leads to me to fourth key point.

d) Federer's mentality. He did not choke. Well, on his first match point he did. And maybe a few other times. But as a whole, he was rock solid mentally. Just incredible to watch how clutch Federer was. Obviously, considering that's where he often loses to Nadal - in the mental battle. That point that set up BP at 4-3 in the fifth I believe, was just out of this world. You know, the rally where Federer finished with the forehand down the line? Spectacular. This was the paramount question leading into this battle. Would the match up have the same dynamic as a Fedal slam match? It proved not to be the case. Federer was as clutch as Nadal. Even more so given he won. I think Federer's attitude coming into the open with no expectations really helped him. That and the fact that they havn't met in a Slam in three years (and only played one match since that AO SF). Must be amazing for you Fed fans to watch him come through like that.

I think these were the most important key factors to Federer beating Nadal today and taking that #18th slam.

You forgot:

E) Nadal had one less day of recovery and a longer match against Dimitrov. Nadal moved considerably better on that match. Nadal seemed more erratic on the Fed match, probably do to stamina issues. That said, that how Slams are and Nadal was not fit enough to maintain the high level required to take to Fed.

 

[maruzo]

I wouldn't necessarily put it that way.

Getting ready in time for the scheduled match is just part of the pro tennis player's life.

There are no excuses worth mentioning since you live or die by the system, and there are no special circumstances provided to favor anyone.

To bring that up as an excuse kinda diminishes rafa's efforts and accomplishments in this match.

Rafa did push federer to 5 sets, and he was up a service break as well.

Fed just played better than Rafa that day. End of discussions.

 

[Rina]

Interesting point. Considering Fed hired him mainly to solve the djokovic puzzle, sometime things really worked out in strange ways.

But it is not that strange if you think about it. Even Djokovic admitted he is a bit unsettled that Federer hired Ljubicic since he knows his game so well. By that time Djokovic has pretty much solved the Nadal puzzle and hence that knowledge was valuable to Federer as well. If I recall correctly, Djokovic tried to take every ball from Nadal early, and that is what I saw from Federer on Sunday, grip the baseline and take the ball early.

 

[moonballs]

Good point.

I also got frustrated with Nadal's predictability with his FH patterns at some point (think it was in the fourth). As @ForumMember pointed out, Nadal only really got aggressive with the forehand - meaning hitting dtl/inside out - when in trouble (facing BPs) most of the match through.
But just like Fed stuck to the gameplan of controlled aggression (and rallying with Nadal) even though it didn't work all the time, the same did Rafa with the FH-BH play, even though he lost quite a few of those. But I definitely would have liked to see Nadal mix it up more, especially considering that he hits a faster shot inside out (or BH cc) and the fact that Federer defends worse off his FH side than his BH side.

I feel like Nadal did the same mistake in the Dimitrov match, but there he managed to come through despite of his FH pattern predictability.

As a Fed fan I was always worried the FH BH pattern would finally break down Feds backhand, after seeing it play out so many times. Nadal did nothing wrong strategy wise. It took him a year to mix in the dtl FJ after Djokovic punished his CC FH in 2011. It is not easy to change a "perfect" recipe.

 

[Polvorin]

The number one thing was not getting discouraged, and continuing to go for it and play early even when he was making errors at times. In the past Roger would give up on attacking and try to play Rafa at his own low risk game, which is never going to work. Also..

Staying aggressive on the serve return (without going for outright winners) was big in particular, it seemed like in sets 3 and 5 he was in almost every single return game putting pressure on Rafa.

Willingness to play backhand to forehand, thus forcing Nadal to cover the whole court and not be able to cheat over to the deuce court as much...keeping him off balance (something Rafa normally does to Roger, and is really the only player who gets him off balance)

---sure glad I kept on watching, even though it looked like history would repeat... the mental demons were vanquished

 

[eliars]

ou forgot:

E) Nadal had one less day of recovery and a longer match against Dimitrov. Nadal moved considerably better on that match. Nadal seemed more erratic on the Fed match, probably do to stamina issues. That said, that how Slams are and Nadal was not fit enough to maintain the high level required to take to Fed.

Yeah, the point of the thread was mostly to focus on what Federer did to beat Nadal for a change. But as I briefly mentioned in my post Nadal looked slow some of the times out there and that probably also played a factor in the outcome of the match.

 

[smoledman]

Suddenly Federer has this Nadal-like 'it's never over' mentality that will make him super dangerous in 2017.

 

[Chanwan]

In his interview with ESPN after the match, Fed said that his coaches (Servin and Evan) told him something like "it's all mental because you've got the game". It looks like that helped. His mental strength after dropping the 2nd set, the 4th set and being a break down in the 5th was amazing!

it really was. But the mental demons were also still there on full display in some of the errors he made to gift breaks and momentum away at crucial times. In the end, play free, you got nothing to lose, won however.
Look at 2008, as Fed did in an interview. He got beat three times in the clay season, including the humiliation at the FO. And then they play at Wimbledon a few weeks later. And then in Australia six months later with no matches in between to regain some mental footing. That hurt him mentally.
I also think a crucial factor was time. It's been 3 years since Rafa last beat him. As opposed to say

And now everyone's wondering why they didn't mention that it was all mental a good 7-8 years ago

Good question, did he even have a coach then? Also, see the time factor above.
I also think a fair amount of credit should be given to Ljubi. Can't recall seeing Fed's backhand this good and offensive vs. Rafa outdoors - though IW 2012 was pretty good too and won him the match iirc, if wasn't this good.

 

[GabeT]

When you compare the 2017 final stats with the 2009 final stats what strikes me is that Nadal appears to be worse across the board while Federer clearly improved his serve.

 

[moonballs]

When you compare the 2017 final stats with the 2009 final stats what strikes me is that Nadal appears to be worse across the board while Federer clearly improved his serve.

The third sets 6:1 beat down should distort Nadal stats. Think how sad I would be had Fed lost in five with the breadstick given to his opponents.

 

[Sartorius]

http://deadspin.com/science-shows-that-roger-federers-backhand-in-fact-def-1791829176

Science! Shows That Roger Federer's Backhand In Fact Defeated Rafael Nadal

Yesterday we argued that Federer’s unusually strong backhand anchored his Australian Open win over Rafael Nadal, and today we found a startling statistical basis for that claim. It comes courtesy of the always helpful Jeff Sackmann at TennisAbstract. Relative to other sports, tennis remains fairly data-poor, but Sackmann’s hacking away at the problem with his Match Charting Project, which rallies volunteers to log tennis matches shot-by-shot, producing a granular picture of a sport usually painted in simplistic narrative strokes.

Sackmann used those logs to home-brew a stat he calls backhand potency (BHP), meant to gauge the efficacy of that particular stroke over the course of a match by assigning values to each of the specific outcomes it produces. Here’s the very reasonable methodology:

BHP approximates the number of points whose outcomes were affected by the backhand: add one point for a winner or an opponent’s forced error, subtract one for an unforced error, add a half-point for a backhand that set up a winner or opponent’s error on the following shot, and subtract a half-point for a backhand that set up a winning shot from the opponent. Divide by the total number of backhands, multiply by 100*, and the result is net effect of each player’s backhand. Using shot-by-shot data from over 1,400 men’s matches logged by the Match Charting Project, we can calculate BHP for dozens of active players and many former stars.

There’s a lot to be gleaned here. For one, despite worldwide slobbering over its aesthetic perfection, Fed’s backhand posts only a +0.2 figure over his career; he does most of the damage with his serve and forehand. And as any eye test would confirm, Nadal’s topspin has a way of harassing that backhand and turning it into a liability. Sackmann isolated the Grand Slam meetings between these two players and listed Federer’s BHP in each case:

You’ll note that there’s only one time his backhand ever produced positive outcomes overall, and that was this Sunday, when he posted an anomalous +7.8 figure.

Among the other good tidbits here: my favorite backhand on tour, Kei Nishikori’s smooth and accurate two-hander, boasts the highest BHP among top players at +3.6. The slappy backhand of Jack Sock, who makes a living on his mortar of a Western forehand, earns a sad BHP of -6.6. Looking to the past, Andre Agassi, considered a master of the shot, posted a +5.0 over his career.

Tennis is a fluid sport, yielding only a handful of sturdy analytic distinctions (forehand/backhand, crosscourt/down-the-line, groundstroke/volley), and even those can turn murky. The box score stats flashed onscreen during a match tell a reductive story, and bake in-the-moment judgment calls deeply into their core (are you sure that error was unforced? Were you reading the spin?). But thanks to some enterprising volunteers, we’re finally making some headway—you can support Sackmann’s work here.

 

[manley0702]

Nadal needs more free points on his serve to bail him out of tough positions when is down in his service game. He cannot rely on on his ground game as much as in the past anymore.

In the end it was really a close match, it could have gone either way. Federer won the important points in the 5th set.

That was my thought after the match too. Federer basically gets two free points every service game. He basically spots himself 30-0 going into by having an unreturnable or getting a short return. Rafa, on the other hand, has to fight for every single point on his service games. The last game of the match was a classic example. Federer played really tight but had enough good serves to bail him out.

 

[purple-n-gold]

It was the shoes man! Ever time Rafa wears pink ones he loses in a slam. Of course he had to look at Feds pink ones to so he was totally mind f@€<•d

 

[Steve0904]

When you compare the 2017 final stats with the 2009 final stats what strikes me is that Nadal appears to be worse across the board while Federer clearly improved his serve.

That's not surprising. Federer served like crap in the 2009 final for his standards in 2009. He even DF'ed on a Nadal SP in the 3rd set TB. He was down 6-3 anyway, but my point is that he rarely DF's in that scenario. I don't think it has as much to do with an improvement in serving as he's gotten older as it does with the idea that Federer simply served better in one match than the other.

However, I will say this. Federer's serve is the one shot that may have gotten better (or at least not declined) over time.

 

[brianb76]

My analysis:
Since Bio Passport Fed 2-0
Since bigger racquet Fed 2-0

/thread

 

[smoledman]

My analysis:
Since Bio Passport Fed 2-0
Since bigger racquet Fed 2-0

/thread

Fed 2-1, you forget the 2014 AO semis loss?

 

[roysid]

He fought like crazy in 5th set. That made the difference. Nadal was also too defensive and just waited for Fed's mistakes.

 

[moonballs]

Fed 2-1, you forget the 2014 AO semis loss?

No 2:0 is fair. The sample collection of the bp started in September 2013. In the early months the collections were only for the purpose to establish a dependable baseline. It wasn't until September 2014 the entire program became fully functional. The program gained deterrence power some time over the ramp up period. But I'd say the point of time is much later than just four months into it. Maybe FO 14 was the first slam the top 50 players played under the watch of bio passport.

Also the benefits of ped don't disappear immediately after you stop taking them. Researchs have shown there is a period of months the measured physical performance is still enhanced after stoppage. That is another reason the effectiveness of bio passport was not 100% from the first day of operation.

Olympics still remains the most strict ped testing sports event. In addition to BP, they also retest stored samples over a decade. Usain Bolt just lost a gold because one of his relay teammate's sample saved from the beijing event retested positive. Tennis players like Roger Federer and Andy Murray have advocated to save current samples forever for re-testing. But this is not what the current bio passport in tennis does, as far as I know. To do the future testing you just need to save the current samples, and make a policy to retest it once a while in the future. You don't even need the bio passport.

 

[hoodjem]

One thing: topspin backhand that looked as good as any backhand I've seen for any player - ever. Still can't figure where that came from...

I saw a stat that Fed had more errors on his forehand than backhand.

Does anyone know the actual number of UFEs on Fed's forehand versus backhand?

 

[caulcano]

I wonder if Nadal got complacent after breaking Federer in the 5th set. It seemed to me like Federer didn't allow it to affect him.

 

[veroniquem]

unexpected ? Roger thought this was as good of chance as he ever had of beating RAFA. Fast court, Nadal on the downswing of his career, Roger playing well, and most fans want to see Roger win,,,,, Well.....it was the right timing for Roger..

Nadal was still the overwhelming fav. Most Fed fans were eager to agree BEFORE the match. Not sure what the official betting odds were though.

 

[smoledman]

It's amazing how early he took the ball and it worked.

 

[lud]

My analysis:
Federer played better. Simple as that.

 

[tennis24x7]

agree w op.

MENTALITY. that' is whats biggest. he didn't fold. he didn't quit. he bel18ved.
(see what I did there? )

but yes, tactically...
backhand was money today. almost looked wawrinka like.

Wow Fed's backhand is maybe 35% of wavrinkas.

 

[tennis24x7]

Until Nadal gets his forehand again like before(atleast 75%) anybody even Fed with a bum backhand can beat him. So let see both Feds and Nadal's FHs are their weapons. Still it took Fed 5 sets to beat Nadal who was lacking his weapon?