Nadal vs Davydenko at Qatar Open 2010 - extended highlights

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 512391
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 512391

Guest

Arguably the second best match between these two (next only to Rome SF in 2007).
Even though he was destroyed in the first set, Davydenko came back strong and won the match, after saving two match points.
Both players played very good (rejuvenated Nadal with better serve and more aggressive mindset, after disappointing end of 2009 and Davydenko in superb form), had more winners than unforced errors. Davydenko demonstrated how to beat Nadal by exploiting his customary court position (by having him out of the middle of the court as much as possible). Also, this video shows how good Davydenko was, incredible footspeed and footwork, superb backhand, great forehand and, most importantly, no fear of Nadal.

It is worth to mention that this is probably the only match where Nadal held match points, but ended up defeated and one of the rare matches where he lost, even though he won more points.

The video is in Russian, because I couldn't find any English version.

33vysr8.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Martin J said:
Highlights of the match.

Arguably the second best match between these two (next only to Rome SF in 2007).
Even though he was destroyed in the first set, Davydenko came back strong and won the match, after saving two match points.
Both players played very good (rejuvenated Nadal with better serve and more aggressive mindset, after disappointing end of 2009 and Davydenko in superb form), had more winners than unforced errors. Davydenko demonstrated how to beat Nadal by exploiting his customary court position (by having him out of the middle of the court as much as possible). Also, this video shows how good Davydenko was, incredible footspeed and footwork, superb backhand, great forehand and, most importantly, no fear of Nadal.

It is worth to mention that this is probably the only match where Nadal held match points, but ended up defeated and one of the rare matches where he lost, even though he won more points.

The video is in Russian, because I couldn't find any English version.

33vysr8.png
Click to expand...

Goodness, that means Davydenko hit 50 ground stroke winners in 2 sets. Scary level

Another scary level by the robot has been in the same Doha against Federer where he served at 90% throughout the match, and at one stretch had 28 or so consecutive first serves in.
 
kandamrigam said:
Goodness, that means Davydenko hit 50 ground stroke winners in 2 sets. Scary level

Another scary level by the robot has been in the same Doha against Federer where he served at 90% throughout the match, and at one stretch had 28 or so consecutive first serves in.
Click to expand...

Wow, I didn't know that. Sounds just crazy, even though he doesn't have a killer serve, 90% in is..ridiculous. It's funny that he beat both Nadal and Federer in two consecutive tournaments (WTF and Doha). Too bad he couldn't maintain this form/mindset in Majors.
I remember that he was killing Federer in their AO match in 2010, had a chance to go two breaks up and then just fell apart mentally.
 
kandamrigam said:
Goodness, that means Davydenko hit 50 ground stroke winners in 2 sets. Scary level

Another scary level by the robot has been in the same Doha against Federer where he served at 90% throughout the match, and at one stretch had 28 or so consecutive first serves in.
Click to expand...

50 groundstroke winners in three sets you mean. Regardless, it's still awesome.
 
MichaelNadal said:
Nadal had no business losing this match with the match points. He was playing sick, sick tennis.
Click to expand...

I agree, this is one of the rare matches where Nadal played exceptionally well (AO 2012 and Wimbledon 2007 - up until 4:2 for Federer in the fifth set, when he surrendered mentally - are other examples), but lost anyway.
 
The Green Mile said:
50 groundstroke winners in three sets you mean. Regardless, it's still awesome.
Click to expand...

The first set was a bagel. I dont know how many Koyla hit there. Must be less. I gave a generalized statement there. More like 45 ground stroke winners in 2 sets. That's scary tennis for a regular Bo3 with TB rule.
 
Martin J said:
Wow, I didn't know that. Sounds just crazy, even though he doesn't have a killer serve, 90% in is..ridiculous. It's funny that he beat both Nadal and Federer in two consecutive tournaments (WTF and Doha). Too bad he couldn't maintain this form/mindset in Majors.
I remember that he was killing Federer in their AO match in 2010, had a chance to go two breaks up and then just fell apart mentally.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I always believed peakest of peak tennis is by Koyla. It's unfortunate that he wont be consistent even for a whole match. You could at least think of Safin being Safin for a whole tournament. When Koyla clicks, he is the most consistent hitter to the lines. Never seen someone more accurate. 27 consecutive first serves in? What!
 
Davydenko was so good at times. Those ground strokes were so dangerous. I'd like to have seen him meet the older more aggressive Nadal - with the diminished movement.

He was giving Federer all he could handle at the AO that year too, until Federer took that infamous bathroom break...
 
NatF said:
Davydenko was so good at times. Those ground strokes were so dangerous. I'd like to have seen him meet the older more aggressive Nadal - with the diminished movement.

He was giving Federer all he could handle at the AO that year too, until Federer took that infamous bathroom break...
Click to expand...

I believe if Koyla was in that form he would still beat today's Rafa. Rafa was pretty attacking in that game.

-------------------
This is one of those rare matches someone was bagel-ed despite playing well. Typically the guy who gets bagel-ed will be playing horribly. Koyla played way better imo
 
NatF said:
Davydenko was so good at times. Those ground strokes were so dangerous. I'd like to have seen him meet the older more aggressive Nadal - with the diminished movement.

He was giving Federer all he could handle at the AO that year too, until Federer took that infamous bathroom break...
Click to expand...

The bathroom break is a myth brought on by federer joking about it with Courier. The break was after set 1. After the break, davydenko broke federer, had BPs for 2nd break .... it was only after that federer turned the match around.
 
abmk said:
The bathroom break is a myth brought on by federer joking about it with Courier. The break was after set 1. After the break, davydenko broke federer, had BPs for 2nd break .... it was only after that federer turned the match around.
Click to expand...
Exactly, here are the paragraphs on this topic from the Telegraph UK:

"Federer opted for the bathroom break after the first set. Judging by the prolonged time it took to go through his ablutions the principal motive for the hiatus was not the need to spend a penny.

It made no noticeable difference. Having hung on just to his opening service game, Federer was torched by Davydenko’s howitzer returns in his second. The Russian was behaving like a Bolshevik in 1917 St Petersburg; irreverent beyond belief.

The spell was broken when Davydenko netted an easy pass, which would have given him a 4-1 lead. Federer fed on the momentum swing to hold on to his serve and break back in the next."

Davydenko, simply, fell apart mentally and lost the momentum (and the match), after having an opportunity to go two breaks up. It's not like it was the first time it happened to him against Fed.
 
abmk said:
The bathroom break is a myth brought on by federer joking about it with Courier. The break was after set 1. After the break, davydenko broke federer, had BPs for 2nd break .... it was only after that federer turned the match around.
Click to expand...

Thanks for correcting me on that.
 
Martin J said:
I agree, this is one of the rare matches where Nadal played exceptionally well (AO 2012 and Wimbledon 2007 - up until 4:2 for Federer in the fifth set, when he surrendered mentally - are other examples), but lost anyway.
Click to expand...
Yeah you could really see Nadal give up mentally at the 4-2 game...not like 3 aces whizzed past him or anything....
 
metsman said:
Yeah you could really see Nadal give up mentally at the 4-2 game...not like 3 aces whizzed past him or anything....
Click to expand...
The mental surrender is not the best explanation, I agree. I should have said that Federer became unplayable and Nadal realized nothing he could do to turn the match around.
 
Watch out for your fingers: beautiful lawn-mower celebration at 17:35

Martin J said:
It is worth to mention that this is probably the only match where Nadal held match points, but ended up defeated and one of the rare matches where he lost, even though he won more points.
Click to expand...
Not the only match, but one of only seven (under "Matchs perdus après avoir eu des balles de match").

About the points anomaly, aka Simpson's Paradox, The Atlantic had a great stats article on that a few years ago. Federer is the great loser, and serveborgs (Isner) and uber-clutch players (Nadal) are the winners of the tennis scoring system.
 
Tenez! said:
Watch out for your fingers: beautiful lawn-mower celebration at 17:35


Not the only match, but one of only seven (under "Matchs perdus après avoir eu des balles de match").

About the points anomaly, aka Simpson's Paradox, The Atlantic had a great stats article on that a few years ago. Federer is the great loser, and serveborgs (Isner) and uber-clutch players (Nadal) are the winners of the tennis scoring system.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the links and stats, it's definitely interesting. Didn't know that Fed was the great loser, at least when it comes to matches where opponent is not Nadal.

And I had to laugh at "beautiful lawn-mower celebration". :D
 
Martin J said:
Thanks for the links and stats, it's definitely interesting. Didn't know that Fed was the great loser, at least when it comes to matches where opponent is not Nadal.

And I had to laugh at "beautiful lawn-mower celebration". :D
Click to expand...
He's only the "great loser" in that the 28 matches he had then experienced where the winner won fewer points than the loser, broke 4-24 his way. I.e. he won 4 such matches, but lost 24.
Conversely, Nadal won about 20 matches while losing a majority of points, and Isner about 25 such matches. It's all in the article, check it out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

vanioMan
Nadal vs. Davydenko - Rome 2007 SF
Replies
9
Views
2K
zagor
zagor
@wright
Davydenko/Hewitt
Replies
6
Views
927
Keifers
K
W
Duel Match Stats/Reports - Davydenko vs Nadal, Shanghai 2009 & Doha 2010 finals
Replies
28
Views
2K
Third Serve
Third Serve
W
Match Stats/Report - Davydenko vs Nadal, Miami final, 2008
Replies
7
Views
973
Hitman
Hitman
Hitman
What was the bigger challenge for Nadal? Federer on Indoor HC or Davydenko on any HC?
Replies
6
Views
426
nolefam_2024
N
Back
Top