Why don't Federer try different things against Nadal

[roysid]

Like Roddick did in the Miami semifinals and it paid off. I was seeing the match and felt it's just a matter of time before Nadal wraps it. He was getting whacked from the baseline. But taking crazy shots, serve and volley worked.

So, why doesn't Federer try that. Of course he is much better than Roddick at the baseline but even he can't cope with Nadal from there. He should try different things. Even if you loose, it's better than engaging in a baseline battle and losing it.

 

[Augustus]

It's no secret Federer is pretty stubborn, and rightfully so in my opinion. Nadal is just a great player that happens to be a bad match-up for Federer as well, but if you watch their matches closely, you can see Federer trying different things against Nadal.

For example in their infamous F0 2008 final, Federer came to the net a lot (like people often advice him to), but it didn't work. In the AO 09 final, Fed played agressively from the baseline and actually was outplaying Nadal during most of the match. Their latest match, Madrid 2009, was played very smart by Federer, he used the inside-in fh to Nadal's bh a lot and finished a fair amount of points at the net.

 

[AM95]

It's no secret Federer is pretty stubborn, and rightfully so in my opinion. Nadal is just a great player that happens to be a bad match-up for Federer as well, but if you watch their matches closely, you can see Federer trying different things against Nadal.

For example in their infamous F0 2008 final, Federer came to the net a lot (like people often advice him to), but it didn't work. In the AO 09 final, Fed played agressively from the baseline and actually was outplaying Nadal during most of the match. Their latest match, Madrid 2009, was played very smart by Federer, he used the inside-in fh to Nadal's bh a lot and finished a fair amount of points at the net.

imo thats exactly how he has to play nadal on clay.

forehand to backhand, then either come to net or play a drop shot.

but i think that that day in madrid, federer was mentally there. he executed impeccably well. i dont think that i've seen him ever do better vs nadal in terms of execution.

 

[Augustus]

imo thats exactly how he has to play nadal on clay.

forehand to backhand, then either come to net or play a drop shot.

but i think that that day in madrid, federer was mentally there. he executed impeccably well. i dont think that i've seen him ever do better vs nadal in terms of execution.

I agree, his BP conversion rate was 2/2, while Nadal's was 0/4. Actually it wasn't a brilliant match from Federer in my opinion, but he played very smart on the big points. If you look at the AO final for example, Federer played brilliant for parts of the match but wasted tons of BPs by being passive.

 

[roysid]

One point came out is that too play aggressively on break points. Don't hope for Nadal do an UE and give the point. Because that won't happen. That's why he saves a lot of breakpoints.

 

[forzamilan90]

cause he hasn't played him in a year? i really do think the next match they play will have some new things, hopefully fed can get past the backhand problems from rafa

 

[bodave2]

Like Roddick did in the Miami semifinals and it paid off. I was seeing the match and felt it's just a matter of time before Nadal wraps it. He was getting whacked from the baseline. But taking crazy shots, serve and volley worked.

So, why doesn't Federer try that. Of course he is much better than Roddick at the baseline but even he can't cope with Nadal from there. He should try different things. Even if you loose, it's better than engaging in a baseline battle and losing it.

I dont think its a matter of tecnique that he needs to worrie about. If he shanks balls all day like he has been he could have an hour inbetween each point to plan and still loose.

 

[NamRanger]

Roddick took a whole lot more risk against Nadal than Federer ever does. He took huge cuts at the returns and forehands. Plus, Roddick when taking huge cuts at the forehand like that actually hits the ball faster than Federer can (he has way more power than Federer, which is exactly what Nadal does not like).



If you look at the 2nd set return statistics, Roddick was winning a ridiculous amount of points off of Nadal's serve, especially on Nadal's 2nd.

 

[borg number one]

Federer has been really good when using that short, slice backhand to draw opponents closer to the net to open up points/rallies. I thought he used that technique really well during last year's French Open.

I think that Federer is going to play aggressively versus Nadal if they play on clay, to let the chips fall where they may. He can't just sit back and consistently outslug Nadal from the baseline. Against Nadal on clay especially, his backhand tends to cost him, while he is not able to generate enough great forehands to take control of the match.

 

[David L]

Like Roddick did in the Miami semifinals and it paid off. I was seeing the match and felt it's just a matter of time before Nadal wraps it. He was getting whacked from the baseline. But taking crazy shots, serve and volley worked.

So, why doesn't Federer try that. Of course he is much better than Roddick at the baseline but even he can't cope with Nadal from there. He should try different things. Even if you loose, it's better than engaging in a baseline battle and losing it.

It's not so much about strategy as execution. It does not matter what strategy you use if you do not execute it well enough. Roddick beat Nadal because he executed better than him during key moments. It might not work out like that next time. Let's also remember Roddick has the best serve in the game, along with Karlovic and Isner. Tsonga played a great match against Nadal at the AO 08, but has never beaten him since in 4 meetings. There really are no secret strategies that can guarantee success.

As for Federer, he has had success against Nadal, but on clay Nadal is the better player. Outside of clay, Nadal has had to play his absolute best or rely on a dip in Federer's form to win. I don't think the issue is the strategy Federer adopts, it's the execution. He will know better than anyone what needs to be done, but doing it is another matter. Easier said and all that....

 

[Agassifan]

He did, in his last match.. and it worked... very well.

 

[Anaconda]

Roddick took a whole lot more risk against Nadal than Federer ever does. He took huge cuts at the returns and forehands. Plus, Roddick when taking huge cuts at the forehand like that actually hits the ball faster than Federer can (he has way more power than Federer, which is exactly what Nadal does not like).



If you look at the 2nd set return statistics, Roddick was winning a ridiculous amount of points off of Nadal's serve, especially on Nadal's 2nd.

I don't know. Guys like Nalbandian, Djokovic and Ferrer don't have insane power but have done well against Nadal before.

 

[AM95]

Federer has been really good when using that short, slice backhand to draw opponents closer to the net to open up points/rallies. I thought he used that technique really well during last year's French Open.

I think that Federer is going to play aggressively versus Nadal if they play on clay, to let the chips fall where they may. He can't just sit back and consistently outslug Nadal from the baseline. Against Nadal on clay especially, his backhand tends to cost him, while he is not able to generate enough great forehands to take control of the match.

i dont really recall him doing that as much as using the drop shot. but even if he does do that, this tactic DOES NOT WORK WITH NADAL.

the backhand chip short is a slow ball, nadal has plenty of time to get to his forehand, even go inside out or in (obviously to federer's backhand), and just pull up on the ball with that insane topsin he has, and feds stuck fighting off an insanly high ball to his backhand, which is a really difficult shot.

imo, for fed to beat nadal on clay in the FO, he needs to play like he did in madrid. the break points HAVE GOT TO BE CONVERTED. thats really the difference in all of their matches. in the Wimby 08 Final, Federer had 12 BP opportunites, and capitalized on only 1.

like i said, three things need to happen for Fed to beat nadal on clay.

1) Federer needs to be there mentally 100%
2) Federer needs to look to be agressive, use the dropshot , and come into net like he did in madrid at the right time.
3) Break point conversion needs to be 65-100%. I would even say 75%.

 

[borg number one]

i dont really recall him doing that as much as using the drop shot. but even if he does do that, this tactic DOES NOT WORK WITH NADAL.

the backhand chip short is a slow ball, nadal has plenty of time to get to his forehand, even go inside out or in (obviously to federer's backhand), and just pull up on the ball with that insane topsin he has, and feds stuck fighting off an insanly high ball to his backhand, which is a really difficult shot.

imo, for fed to beat nadal on clay in the FO, he needs to play like he did in madrid. the break points HAVE GOT TO BE CONVERTED. thats really the difference in all of their matches. in the Wimby 08 Final, Federer had 12 BP opportunites, and capitalized on only 1.

like i said, three things need to happen for Fed to beat nadal on clay.

1) Federer needs to be there mentally 100%
2) Federer needs to look to be agressive, use the dropshot , and come into net like he did in madrid at the right time.
3) Break point conversion needs to be 65-100%. I would even say 75%.

Yes, break points are important, and he fares better when aggressive. As far as that short shot, I'm referring to that short angled backhand with lots of backspin, that stays low and forces one to hit up and over the net. He was using it effectively, in my opinion to open up the court. Out of the blue, he hits that hardly hit, chip shot that can be difficult to attack. I agree that Nadal is the fastest guy out there, so it can't be used improperly. It works against others really well, but against Nadal, he can use it at times after Nadal is pulled way wide and deep on his forehand side. At times, Federer can hit a short slice shot to the Nadal backhand, just before unleashing that inside-out forehand.

 

[sh@de]

He needs to crush Nadal's second serve by sometimes running around his backhand.

 

[big bang]

i dont really recall him doing that as much as using the drop shot. but even if he does do that, this tactic DOES NOT WORK WITH NADAL.

the backhand chip short is a slow ball, nadal has plenty of time to get to his forehand, even go inside out or in (obviously to federer's backhand), and just pull up on the ball with that insane topsin he has, and feds stuck fighting off an insanly high ball to his backhand, which is a really difficult shot.

imo, for fed to beat nadal on clay in the FO, he needs to play like he did in madrid. the break points HAVE GOT TO BE CONVERTED. thats really the difference in all of their matches. in the Wimby 08 Final, Federer had 12 BP opportunites, and capitalized on only 1.

like i said, three things need to happen for Fed to beat nadal on clay.

1) Federer needs to be there mentally 100%
2) Federer needs to look to be agressive, use the dropshot , and come into net like he did in madrid at the right time.
3) Break point conversion needs to be 65-100%. I would even say 75%.

sure and at the same tme he must play the same washed up version of Nadal as in Madrid!

 

[Anaconda]

sure and at the same tme he must play the same washed up version of Nadal as in Madrid!

Actually at that point in time Nadal was #1 and was dominating on clay and had won the AO, Indian Wells, nearly the clean sweep on clay. So Nadal was in the form of his life going into that match. He didn't play amazingly well but saying he was washed up is ridiculous.

 

[aldeayeah]

Federer always has chances against Nadal*. Last year in Madrid, he happened to seize them.

* Except FO 2008.

 

[NamRanger]

I don't know. Guys like Nalbandian, Djokovic and Ferrer don't have insane power but have done well against Nadal before.

Nalbandian and Djokovic both play very low percentage shots and make alot of them; for instance, both of them like to play the backhand down the line from the middle of the court, which is an extremely difficult shot to make as there's almost no room for error, especially since they both usually hit that shot very flat.




Ferrer has had success because of his excellent return of serve, and the fact that he is fast enough and fit enough to grind with Nadal. He's basically the only guy who can do it.

 

[Anaconda]

Nalbandian and Djokovic both play very low percentage shots and make alot of them; for instance, both of them like to play the backhand down the line from the middle of the court, which is an extremely difficult shot to make as there's almost no room for error, especially since they both usually hit that shot very flat.




Ferrer has had success because of his excellent return of serve, and the fact that he is fast enough and fit enough to grind with Nadal. He's basically the only guy who can do it.

Federer's main problem IMO is that is low percentage shots weren't going in. Whether his footwork that year was the cause of it i don't know; his footwork is key to his forehand IMO.

Guy's like Safin like to play BH DTL and are very good at it. He has played Nadal twice i believe but hasn't won a set. Berdych and Gonzo are streaky; the chances of them playing awsome against one player there whole careers is slim.

Ferrer has a great return (up there with Murray and Nalbandian). I haven't watched him much but i don't see him 'go for broke' like Nalbandian to be honest. He's like Murray; chips it back and covers wide areas good.

_______________________________________

I definately think Federer should take cuts in big points on Nadal's serve. Hell he did it against Roddick in 2007 so against Nadal it would be no problem. He should also try serving over 50%.

 

[IvanAndreevich]

imo thats exactly how he has to play nadal on clay.

forehand to backhand, then either come to net or play a drop shot.

but i think that that day in madrid, federer was mentally there. he executed impeccably well. i dont think that i've seen him ever do better vs nadal in terms of execution.

That only works if Nadal feels bad about his BH for some reason. Fed tried the same against Nadal at the AO and Nadal just ripped the BH cross into the open court. Fed totally on the run after that.

 

[Augustus]

That only works if Nadal feels bad about his BH for some reason. Fed tried the same against Nadal at the AO and Nadal just ripped the BH cross into the open court. Fed totally on the run after that.

Federer actually outplayed Nadal for most of the match in the AO final, he was very solid off the ground during the first four sets, his backhand was working very well too. In my opinion Fed should have won that match by converting one of the many breakpoints he held at the end of the third set. So I disagree that Nadal had Federer 'on the run' in that match, although he hit some very nice backhand winners.

 

[piece]

Federer always has chances against Nadal*. Last year in Madrid, he happened to seize them.

* Except FO 2008.

Exactly. Almost every single match that Fed and Nadal have played on clay has seen Fed up a break in one or more sets only to lose the break and then proceed to lose the set. At very least federer will have between half a dozen and twenty break points and convert an insanely small percentage of these (Only exception I can think of is FO 2008). And this is on CLAY. What this suggests is that while there are problems with the way Federer plays Nadal in general, these problems pale in comparison to those associated with the way he plays nadal on the big points. As others have said, it's his passive play that seems to be the problem here.

I actually think that, while Madrid was a really good performance from Federer in terms of strategy execution, his strategy here was no better than the one he employed in the AO final, although it was a different strategy. People might balk at what I'm saying because Federer straight-setted Nadal at madrid and yet lost the AO final. But the problem in the AO final was that he wasn't executing his strategy as consistently well as he was in Madrid (at the AO he mixed brilliance with federrorness) and, in australia, he would all of a sudden decide to forego his aggressive baseline strategy everytime he got a break point, and almost every time he attempted to hold serve after breaking nadal.

Now obviously the ao and madrid are different surfaces, and each strategy was tailored to the specific surface it would be used on, but i thought AO strategy was just as good as madrid. Baseline aggression will, if Fed is playing well, win him hardcourt matches against nadal. And I actually think that suggestions that Fed should be even more aggressive by coming into net on hardcourts more often against nadal are misguided. Take a look at the highlights from the first two sets of 2005 miami final. Fed was hitting aggressive forehands that he comes in to net on and wins the point against 99% of the atp tour, but against nadal they weren't cutting it. Fed got passed dozens of times off perfectly good approaches. If instead he'd stayed on the baseline after hitting such a forehand, he could have finished the rally off with just 2 or 3 more shots. And this is the kind of strategy I feel he employed at the AO. So he should be aggressive, but it should be baseline aggression, and he should only come to net when his approach is a sure thing, not when it's merely "good enough".

 

[NamRanger]

Federer's main problem IMO is that is low percentage shots weren't going in. Whether his footwork that year was the cause of it i don't know; his footwork is key to his forehand IMO.

Guy's like Safin like to play BH DTL and are very good at it. He has played Nadal twice i believe but hasn't won a set. Berdych and Gonzo are streaky; the chances of them playing awsome against one player there whole careers is slim.

Ferrer has a great return (up there with Murray and Nalbandian). I haven't watched him much but i don't see him 'go for broke' like Nalbandian to be honest. He's like Murray; chips it back and covers wide areas good.

_______________________________________

I definately think Federer should take cuts in big points on Nadal's serve. Hell he did it against Roddick in 2007 so against Nadal it would be no problem. He should also try serving over 50%.

Matching up Safin who was out of his prime and vs. Prime Nadal is hardly a match-up I would call fair.



Ferrer's success against Nadal usually happens when he is able to pin Nadal to his forehand corner, and then go for the inside in forehand. He is fit and patient enough to stay with Nadal in the baseline rallies, but immediately takes control when he has an opportunity.




Most of Federer's success against Nadal has come when he is able to pin him to his forehand corner, as is most of the success of the other guys. Murray for instance can really pin Nadal into his forehand corner well with his backhand, same with Djokovic and Nalbandian. That's actually the key play against Nadal; if you can pin him well behind the baseline into his forehand corner, you open up the court alot as he will likely drop a short ball to you.

 

[Anaconda]

Matching up Safin who was out of his prime and vs. Prime Nadal is hardly a match-up I would call fair.



Ferrer's success against Nadal usually happens when he is able to pin Nadal to his forehand corner, and then go for the inside in forehand. He is fit and patient enough to stay with Nadal in the baseline rallies, but immediately takes control when he has an opportunity.




Most of Federer's success against Nadal has come when he is able to pin him to his forehand corner, as is most of the success of the other guys. Murray for instance can really pin Nadal into his forehand corner well with his backhand, same with Djokovic and Nalbandian. That's actually the key play against Nadal; if you can pin him well behind the baseline into his forehand corner, you open up the court alot as he will likely drop a short ball to you.

1) Fair enough. Safin would cause Nadal problems but his brain cramps certainly wouldn't help.

2) Thankyou. Ferrer isn't a pusher. He is just a road runner with great retrival skills and can play aggressive. He like Hewitt; solid in every department but is a great mover around the court.

3) Agree. Most guys that beat Nadal hit hard to the Nadal forehand; where on this shot you can't really play defensive off and balls land mid court for you to pummel.

Well, where Murray actually beats Nadal is off his serve. I have noticed that posters like to overrate Nadal's return vastly. Nadal's return is average but his return game is good (from the backcourt, if you get me). You might not believe this but Murray (when serving 60+% off 1st serve) can dominate Nadal right from the off and can come to the net. He also covers the wide returns well, which against Nadal is handy to do.



I don't buy into this crap of 'Nadal making Federer serve bad'. Federer for the last 3 years has been relying on his serve and if you're going to do so then serve above 50% like Nadal. Or on 2nd throw in a kicker and come in. Similar of what Roddick did in Miami. Federer doesn't posses Roddick's serve but his kicker is good and like i said, against Nadal your serve doesn't need to be 'Karlovic' like.

 

[AM95]

That only works if Nadal feels bad about his BH for some reason. Fed tried the same against Nadal at the AO and Nadal just ripped the BH cross into the open court. Fed totally on the run after that.

not at all! Fed would hit a forehand to nadal's backhand, then when he got the short ball, he would move in by hitting it to nadal's forehand, and of course rafa would come up with a crazy pass.

in madrid federer was hitting the ball completley to nadal's backhand, only going to the forehand, once or twice per rally, especially when federer was in attack mode. the only time i can remember nadal passing federer in that match in madrid was when federer went to nadal's forehand. in fact that happened in the first point.

heres a video comparison
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iK3y7gpX2kQ&feature=related -australia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a -madrid (watch rally at 1 :48 for proof of what i mean)