wilander: Federer Can't Beat Rafa

[MEAC_ALLAMERICAN]

Wilander has said something that is true and very obvious in observing the match up between Nadal and Federer on clay. However, Rodger has been preparing for the clay court season, and has worked on his game to hopefully be strong enough to take Nadal out, but only time will tell.

Mats Wilander is one of the tennis clay court legends, but sometimes when he speaks it has to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[Moose Malloy]

At least this time Rafa is the favorite. Ever since the final of the Roland Garros last year, Federer has always been the favorite everytime he met Rafa in a tournament.

Also Federer was the favorite(in a betting sense) when he played Nadal in Monte Carlo & Rome last year, albeight a slight favorite. Nadal was the favorite in the French Open final. The odds for Fed are +170 tomorrow, which are still close odds. Its strange seeing a + next to Fed's name though, it hasn't happen much since '04.

Best of 3 final makes Fed a good bet.

 

[Mick]

Anyone can lose anytime in any surface.

That's why matches have to be played.

it reminds me of the old days when Wilander would play Lendl. You would look at Lendl's arsenals and think Wilander had no chance. But Wilander occasionally managed to beat Lendl.

Beating Nadal on clay is quite tough but a champion has to find a way to accomplish that. If Federer can't then he will be the runner up.

 

[sureshs]

Wilander is correct, but the problem is he has shown a special personal dislike of Federer, which makes his comments suspect. Not unusual for a past player who wants to be in the news as much as possible and has an ego problem with current players. Since he won only 3 of the Slams, he is probably praying that Federer doesn't win the French. Nadal is not a threat to him, with only one of the Slams so far. Reminds me of what Vilas said before Nadal surpassed his record - something like it wasn't the same because of the number of consecutive matches played, or something. It takes a truly great player like Laver to not have the insecurities of these folks.

 

[The Gorilla]

^^

what are you talking about?

Wilander LOVES Federer, it's embarassing listening to him.

 

[megaforcetkd]

As I had mentioned in my previous post, he has so far been incredibly lucky in this tournament. Unfortunately for him, luck is not enough to compete against top players on a consistent basis. He should retire.

I'm trying to see things from your point of view, but I can't get my head up my arse any further.

 

[latinking]

don't listen to wilander, his game was so boring!! his words are too!

I agree who cares what he thinks. He just needs something to talk about. Just another former pro hatin

 

[ACE of Hearts]

I dont know about that laurie.If Roger can beat Nadal on clay in monte carlo tomorrow, it will open a pandora's box for Roger in my mind and put doubt on Nadal.I am hoping that Roger can finally pull it off but Nadal is the heavy favorite.

 

[tricky]

If Federer can keep his topspin BH under control against Nadal's FH, in my mind, it wouldn't matter whether Fed actually won the match. He would have solved the puzzle and won the war (i.e. the FO.) It's what that in mind that I think his BH still isn't ready. Even if he uses the Roche net style, he'll have to play a clean game in order to beat Nadal.

 

[Phil]

So many people say so many things...The fact that Federer has consistently done well on his weakest surface speaks volumes about the well-rounded game he has. To be the best player on HC and Grass, and the second best player on Clay says a lot about his game. It wouldn't suprise me in the least if Federer makes the finals of all the clay events (again), and loses to Nadal in every final (again). This would make the h2h 9-3, and the Fed haters/Nadal trolls would go on and on and on about how Nadal owns Fed, etc., yet the fact that Nadal has made so few HC finals lately (one in the last year, to be exact) really skews the h2h numbers.

Federer's not "weak" on clay. I'm not even sure it's accurate to say it's his "weakest" surface-technically, I guess it is since he hasn't won RG.

He is the world's best clay court player not named Nadal. But for ONE PLAYER-the best clay specialist in the world, Federer might have two RG titles. That's not "weak", but stacked against his successes on grass and hard court, sure, obviously people are going to say it's a weak surface for him. For HIM, yes. For just about any other player...his clay record would be a career.

 

[Deleted member 4983]

Wilander is a legend of the game. Heed his words. He speaks the truth. Atta boy, Mats.

 

[Ethan04]

Nadal is the king of clay. Federer (the 2nd best player on clay) has the best chance to beat Nadal. Has Better chance than anyother players.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Jeeze. what is is about Nadal's game--coupled with that surface--that Federer fails to overcome? Is this a case of Roger not "getting" clay? Looking ahead to the FO, will he (ultimately) join the ranks of history's hyper-talented who made the finals, but failed to capture just ONE FO like McEnroe & Edberg?

What is the answer??? Because it is disturbing as hell to see Roger fall short to a guy (honestly) not in his league.

 

[pound cat]

Wilander is a legend of the game. Heed his words. He speaks the truth. Atta boy, Mats.

I agree. Too bad Marat stopped being coached by Mats, although it had somehting to do with Wilander's family obligations at the time. Interestingly, he has said only good things about Safin...probaly wishes he had been able to coach him longer

 

[tlm]

Nadal is not in federers league huh?Thats funny they have played 10 times + nadal has won 7 times, but he is not in feds league!Ya that sounds logical, how many more times does rafa have to put the smackdown on fed before he is in his league?

 

[oscar_2424]

Nadal is not in federers league huh?Thats funny they have played 10 times + nadal has won 7 times, but he is not in feds league!Ya that sounds logical, how many more times does rafa have to put the smackdown on fed before he is in his league?

who said that???

 

[tlm]

Thundervolley

 

[snapple]

Nadal is not in federers league huh?Thats funny they have played 10 times + nadal has won 7 times, but he is not in feds league!Ya that sounds logical, how many more times does rafa have to put the smackdown on fed before he is in his league?

Does that mean Canas is also in Fed's league?

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Nadal is not in federers league huh?Thats funny they have played 10 times + nadal has won 7 times, but he is not in feds league!Ya that sounds logical, how many more times does rafa have to put the smackdown on fed before he is in his league?

I'm talking about as a player overall. Compare the records. Take Nadal away from clay and how does he fare? Meanwhile, aside from one surface, Federer is soaring toward immortality..not just tennis, but sports in general.

 

[Baghdatis72]

As I had mentioned in my previous post, he has so far been incredibly lucky in this tournament. Unfortunately for him, luck is not enough to compete against top players on a consistent basis. He should retire.

Rofl whatever you do don't become a tennis commentator as you are SoBad at it. Federer retire? Rofl lmao lol :lol: Yeah he is such a failure not to win all the events all the time and play at his 100% form continuously that your post is so justified. Then every other ATP pro should have retired ages ago.
This is the funniest forum on the net...so much crap thrown so fast at us :lol:

 

[Mick]

I'm talking about as a player overall. Compare the records. Take Nadal away from clay and how does he fare? Meanwhile, aside from one surface, Federer is soaring toward immortality..not just tennis, but sports in general.

to be fair, you have to compare federer's records at 25 with nadal's records at 25. Nadal is only 20. He will accomplish more by the time he's 25.

If you want to compare Federer with Nadal today, you should compare Federer's records at 20 vs Nadal's records at 20.

 

[laurie]

Really despite what Wilander said or what people think of the historical context, I said yesterday that Federer's chances today were increased because it was best of 3 only and it was a chance to impose his will not having to worry about a potential 4 hour battle.

In fact, I watched the whole match and despite a 6:4 6:4 scoreline, Federer lost quite easily. He never looked he would win after he lost the 1st set. Nadal consistently attacked Federer's backhand on serve and off the ground - then Federer would get frustrated and start running round his backhand to hit the forehand and make even more errors as a result. A similar thing happened against Canas. Federer looked a bit lost, similar to last year's French Open final. Surprisngly Federer looked good at net but seems reluctant to employ that strategy on a more consistent basis (not all the time, just more often).

Federer has to hope someone else will beat Nadal in Paris because other players don't have the consistency off the ground to trouble Federer.

Just one last point, players with one handed backhands sure hate it up high, someone mentioned slice - that's an idea, like Steffi Graf did, high to low on the bachand. Gustavo Kuerten must have had one hell of a backhand for clay.

 

[Aykhan Mammadov]

Wilander is the negative legend IMHO. He couldn't win Wimbledon and in difference from Lendl started state that W is the least important slam.

If u watched his matches then u'd cry and stop watching. The most boring tennis I ever watched. The most intalented many (7) slams-winner player is Wilander. How could u believe to him? Probably he doesn't understand himself completely how he could defeat his opponents with such a second-class tennis that he showed. How can he understand anything in the modern tennis? Especially in Federer's game?

 

[laurie]

Aykhan, are you a nutter?

Here you are crticizing Wilander for giving his views on Federer yet you start a thread criticizing Federer yourself.

You can't have it both ways. You are not the only person in the world who is allowed to give an opinion on Federer's game.

 

[Aykhan Mammadov]

Aykhan, are you a nutter?

Here you are crticizing Wilander for giving his views on Federer yet you start a thread criticizing Federer yourself.

You can't have it both ways. You are not the only person in the world who is allowed to give an opinion on Federer's game.

Not, of course.

But there is difference. Here above I also gave my views on Wilander. Can't I ?

Then I just criticized Fed and didn't give an ultimate conclusion while Wilander gave such a final conclusion: "Fed can't defeat Nadal on clay". His statement is 1-dimensional and very stupid. How could he know that if even Nadal or Fed can't know this completely?

Don't u find that high-level specialist can't say something in such a way?

 

[Rataplan]

Isn't it a bit on the silly side to bash Wilander for merely saying things you don't want to hear? Fair enough if you, in your endless wisdom, disagree with him but Mats deserves just a bit more respect for what he accomplished throughout his career.

 

[tricky]

People gotta look at the bigger picture: can anybody beat Rafa on clay? It's been like 2 years and he still hasn't lost.

Gustavo Kuerten must have had one hell of a backhand for clay.

I think most clay courters who have a 1H use the SW grip, which gives them more stability against the high bounce. And Kuerten's may be the best of the lot. Federer uses an Eastern backhand, and he probably uses a lighter racquet with smaller head. It's inherently more difficult.

How can he understand anything in the modern tennis? Especially in Federer's game?

Wilander was the most cerebral player of his generation, that's how he beat people with superior strokes and athleticism. He's what Brad Gilbert thinks he is. Wilander is a loose canon with his mouth, but what he said was true.

 

[laurie]

People gotta look at the bigger picture: can anybody beat Rafa on clay? It's been like 2 years and he still hasn't lost.



I think most clay courters who have a 1H use the SW grip, which gives them more stability against the high bounce. And Kuerten's may be the best of the lot. Federer uses an Eastern backhand, and he probably uses a lighter racquet with smaller head. It's inherently more difficult.



Wilander was the most cerebral player of his generation, that's how he beat people with superior strokes and athleticism. He's what Brad Gilbert thinks he is. Wilander is a loose canon with his mouth, but what he said was true.

Well, I actually think it's true up to a point. Because you have to think there will come a time when Federer will beat Nadal on clay, even if it's just once. Federer will get opportunities probably in Rome and Paris, if he doesn't beat Nadal after this then questions really would have to be asked.

But anything is possible, Nadal could get knocked out in Paris by having an off day or suffering an injury - and unless someone gives it their all like Canas then I still think there is no one else to stop Federer. He still has a good chance to win in Paris with some luck. It's a real tightrope situation.

 

[tricky]

The upside for Fed is that this was his first clay tourney this year, and I think he only had really one match (Ferrero) where it seemed like he was consistently striking the ball clean. He will get better, of course. I didn't think Fed would make the Monte Carlo final, and I didn't think his BH's success on the HC was really an adequate indication of it against clay. So I think his success so far has been positive. Much better than last month.

But, I think what's lost in these threads is the true level of dominance Nadal has on clay. It's not as if we've seen any kind of game plan or shot combination or precedent really to say "okay, this is how you beat Rafa on the dirt." None at all. In fact, it's difficult to even speculate because he dominates the clay so much.

 

[laurie]

Well Tricky you make a nice observation.

That's why I think Nadal's streak must come to an end and Federer is waiting to pounce.

It really is this simple. It can't be relied on just one man to deny Federer history.

If Nadal wins Paris for the 3rd year in a row denying Federer, he will be a very mighty young man. That's a long way off at the moment.

 

[tlm]

Yea tricky i agree for fed on clay he played pretty good, but it does show the true level of dominance by nadal.

I dont know what laurie is talking about though.How is it a long way off for nadal to win the FO again?As long as nadal stays healthy he can definitely be relied on to deny fed history!

 

[laurie]

I'm just saying there are no guarantees in life. Federer looked out of it today.

However, it is plausible Nadal can have an off day in Paris and lose. Guess who will take advantage.

If Nadal is taken out there is noone else to defeat Federer in Paris.

 

[tlm]

Right there are no guarantees, but i also would not say that there is no other player that could take fed out at FO.Who would have thought canas could take fed out in 2 hardcourt tourneys.

 

[dh003i]

Nadal is not in federers league huh?Thats funny they have played 10 times + nadal has won 7 times, but he is not in feds league!Ya that sounds logical, how many more times does rafa have to put the smackdown on fed before he is in his league?

Most of their meetings are on clay. The correct way to interpret it is that Nadal isn't good enough to consistently get to finals on grass or hard-courts, and when he did get to Wimby final, Federer laid on the beat-down. Federer, on the other hand, is good enough to get to the finals on clay, which favors Nadal's game (not to mention his breaking the time limit rules).

No, Nadal is not in Federer's league. Not anywhere close to Federer's league. Someone had a left-handed compliment for Nadal: "The best player ever never to be number 1". And that's how he's probably going to end his career. His game isn't long-lasting enough for him to become #1 after Federer leaves, and he'll never be #1 with Federer around. In other word, that means, Nadal is never ever going to be a candidate for GOAT: in other words, not in Federer's league.

10 grand slams to 2. Not in the same league.

Wilander has bitter grapes over never winning the most important slam.

 

[TheTruth]

Most of their meetings are on clay. The correct way to interpret it is that Nadal isn't good enough to consistently get to finals on grass or hard-courts, and when he did get to Wimby final, Federer laid on the beat-down. Federer, on the other hand, is good enough to get to the finals on clay, which favors Nadal's game (not to mention his breaking the time limit rules).

No, Nadal is not in Federer's league. Not anywhere close to Federer's league. Someone had a left-handed compliment for Nadal: "The best player ever never to be number 1". And that's how he's probably going to end his career. His game isn't long-lasting enough for him to become #1 after Federer leaves, and he'll never be #1 with Federer around. In other word, that means, Nadal is never ever going to be a candidate for GOAT: in other words, not in Federer's league.

10 grand slams to 2. Not in the same league.

Wilander has bitter grapes over never winning the most important slam.

Age 20 to 26. He's got time. At his age, Fed had zero slams, and few, if any TMS shields. Just keeping it real!
It's funny how everyone wants to "believe" the experts when they're saying what they want to hear. How many people said I'll believe the experts over some ____ on a message board. Well, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either you believe the "experts," or you don't!

 

[FarFed]

If Nadal does step it up on other courts, then that's argument is fine. Fed was not touted to be a clay court specialist at age 20, but beating Sampras on a Wimbledon center court did send other signals to the "experts" you so quickly dismissed.

Age 20 to 26. He's got time. At his age, Fed had zero slams, and few, if any TMS shields. Just keeping it real!
It's funny how everyone wants to "believe" the experts when they're saying what they want to hear. How many people said I'll believe the experts over some ____ on a message board. Well, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either you believe the "experts," or you don't!

 

[fastdunn]

The shot Fed's unforced error came most from was his forehand.

Nadal attacks Fed's backhand but Nadal also makes Federer hit
his forehand on the run stretched wide or hit a run around forehand.

This is exactly what Nalbandian and Safin used to do.
Nadal's game is perfect for doing that job. Effects doubles on clay.
That's what Wilander meant.

 

[tricky]

The shot Fed's unforced error came most from was his forehand.

Yeah, that was the most surprising, and Fed even spoke to that. His BH was actually "okay" today, but he couldn't find his range at all with his FH. Then again, he was also forcing inside-out FHs seemingly due to a loss of faith in his BH (a la Roddick.)

Though to be fair, the wonkiness in his FH, seem to be more an issue overall this year than last.

 

[Dark Victory]

The shot Fed's unforced error came most from was his forehand.

Nadal attacks Fed's backhand but Nadal also makes Federer hit
his forehand on the run stretched wide or hit a run around forehand.

This is exactly what Nalbandian and Safin used to do.
Nadal's game is perfect for doing that job. Effects doubles on clay.
That's what Wilander meant.

Agreed. And angle aside, Fed's running forehand technique imo just couldn't generate the kind of pace needed to hurt Nadal.

On clay, that is.

 

[fastdunn]

Though to be fair, the wonkiness in his FH, seem to be more an issue overall this year than last.

Yes. But it essentially has been like this for 3 years now, more or less.

I think his backhand on the run is actually better than his forehand on the run.

And I always thought his foot speed is not as great as everybody thinks now...

 

[tricky]

And I always thought his foot speed is not as great as everybody thinks now...

I've always felt that Fed had terrific foot speed, as would befit a terrific soccer youth. Guys like Blake, Nadal (fast feet himself) and Sampras have superior sprint speed.

Yes. But this essentially has been like this for 3 years now, more or less.

Truly I think this year there's been a noticeable rustiness to his FH. It was more like it used to be in 2003 and before that; some days it was on, some days it would spray. I don't think it's something he can seriously control until he plays more matches. Game speed and all that.

 

[Rataplan]

I know that some feel the need to keep reminding people that Federer is the GOAT, the numero uno, in a league of his own, the Fedmeister, the chosen one,...

No problem. I agree that he's simply fantastic and great for the sport.

However, the need to put him even higher on that pedestal by pushing others down is really silly IMO.
Mats Wilander deserves respect. If anybody has heard him talk often enough about Federer (and not just a quote or two from that famous interview after RG 2006), they would be able to tell you that Mats has huge respect for Federer. Maybe he doesn't kiss his ass all the time like so many others do but that's still no reason to bash him, to diminish what he's accomplished. To suggest that his opinion is worthless because he's bitter,.... I personally think that this says more about your own way of thinking than anything else.


To say that Nadal will never have a career like Federer, that he will never be the GOAT, the numero uno, in a league of his own, the Nadmeister, the chosen one,...
Fine. If it makes you feel better about the situation. I agree that he will probably never have a career like Federer, although he's still having an amazing career of his own.

I'm just happy to be able to watch these two great tennis players. I don't really understand why the fan groups of both players need to be so confrontational all the damn time (and please, don't give me the "but they started it, they are worse,...yada yada yada" BS excuse. ).

 

[swedechris]

new tactics.. for fed to beat nadal..

what new tactics could fed use to disturb nadal on clay .. ?
let me knwo what you guys think .. and think hard too for he needs it ( fed..)

1st thing to instinctively pop into my head .. the slice..
if fed sliced his backhand a lot with force and weight , especially when he can to nadals backhand , it would maybe set fed up better .. that way he could get some more balls to whack at with his forehand + the change of pace will be more rough on nadal than what fed used at m.c final yesterday .. there he palyed into nadals rhytm 80-85 % percent of the rallies.
also he coudl drop a few short and have nadal guessing a bit more that he is now .

also i think fed needs to hit his forehand more flat .. more like blake / youzny / berdych have done with success in side out to nadals forrehand.. he maybe wont get outright winners like on hard courts ( where those guys got wins against rafe ..) but it would maybe set him up better ..

last but not least .. does fed have the stamina ? only he knows.

 

[tennis_hand]

Fed is No 1 overall, esp on grass. But on clay court, you can say Nadal is No 1 and Fed is No 2.

Nadal could beat Fed on a hard court, so could Fed beat Nadal on the clay.
It is not impossible for a No 2 to beat No 1 when the position is switched. It is just more difficult.

About the foot speed, Nadal's movement is built for clay court. This is why he dominates the clay court but suffers a lot on other surface. But Fed's is slightly inferior than Nadal's because his is built for fast courts using small steps. Obviously Fed made footwork adjustments for clay surface. You can see some clay court specialists including Nadal even slide on hard court, but you seldom see Fed do it.

 

[HollerOne5]

People can take this for what its worth, but I can guarantee what happened to Rafa after Wimbledon last year (not making a final and losing in every tournament) will not happen again this year. I'm sure he learned from that experience....

Thats not to say that Federer isn't #1 anymore, but people are making too big a deal out of Federer being far superior than Nadal....its not true, you just have to give it time to see. Comparing people that are 6 years apart, you can't really. In fact....

At the same age, Federer was just winning his first masters shield in Hamburg, and had 0 slams. Nadal just won his 8th shield folks, and is in line to win more over the next 2 weeks, and his 3rd slam possibly by age 21?

Of course the haters will say that they are 2 different styles of games, and that Nadal will burnout. But Nadal, even being injured and already having slumping parts of his season, still continues to turn it out at times. He has 2 shields this year (2 different surfaces) while Federer has 0, but does have a slam.

You just can't compare yet folks

Note - Nadal is already 4th on the all time list of Masters Series Shield winners, with Agassi at 17, Federer at 12, and Sampras at 11. Just think about it for a second folks (Oh, and 3 of his have been on hard courts!)

 

[tlm]

Thank you hollerone5,these are all important facts that most fed fans fail to acknowledge.They forget fed didnt win a gs untill he was 22.

 

[stician]

Wilander is still cocky. Did he say something along the lines on a tv interview that if he didn't play tennis, he would have been a champion football and/or hockey player? He believed he would be a champion as long as it involved a ball. I wonder what F1 drivers think of his comment?! You need two big balls for that sport.

 

[fastdunn]

I've always felt that Fed had terrific foot speed, as would befit a terrific soccer youth. Guys like Blake, Nadal (fast feet himself) and Sampras have superior sprint speed.



Truly I think this year there's been a noticeable rustiness to his FH. It was more like it used to be in 2003 and before that; some days it was on, some days it would spray. I don't think it's something he can seriously control until he plays more matches. Game speed and all that.

I know you and I differ in Fed's foot speed. In fact, everyone doesn;t think so.
I think I should use "sprint" speed as you pointed out. Federer's footwork
is great. No doubt about it. But I don't think he has explosive sprint speed
of some other athletic players...

I agree it's largely due to rustiness. I'm just pointing out that Nadal always does
excellent job of not giving Roger any good rythm on his forehand...

 

[Aykhan Mammadov]

I continue to count that it is necessary to condemn Wilander. Wilander is nothing in tennis, I never enjoyed his boring game, just watch before talking, boys. It is catastrophee. It is some kind of stupid endurance game having nothing common with tennis, in the style of Bruguera.

Why? U may ask, why to bash him even if he is weak. Because 7 times Slam winner has no right publicly attack one of 2 players, attack psychologically saying that "Federer has no game to defeat Nadal". It is not correct. Because Federer in his 25 is a boy in the end (despite he is older than Nadal) with very fragile psychology and everybody knows that this genius is attempting to win FO. Why to hurt him ?

Yes, I can tell these words, u can tell, but authorities to whom these 2 players may listen - have no right.

Then, I really consider- it is my sencere belief that a PRO can't be regarded as a great if he never win Wimbledon. It is where real, unexpected and fantasy tennis is going on which demands great reaction from a player. Genius of tennis must win W at least once in a career.

Grass is where birds are flying over, and clay is worm's place.

 

[tennisjunkiela]

People can take this for what its worth, but I can guarantee what happened to Rafa after Wimbledon last year (not making a final and losing in every tournament) will not happen again this year. I'm sure he learned from that experience....

Thats not to say that Federer isn't #1 anymore, but people are making too big a deal out of Federer being far superior than Nadal....its not true, you just have to give it time to see. Comparing people that are 6 years apart, you can't really. In fact....

At the same age, Federer was just winning his first masters shield in Hamburg, and had 0 slams. Nadal just won his 8th shield folks, and is in line to win more over the next 2 weeks, and his 3rd slam possibly by age 21?

Of course the haters will say that they are 2 different styles of games, and that Nadal will burnout. But Nadal, even being injured and already having slumping parts of his season, still continues to turn it out at times. He has 2 shields this year (2 different surfaces) while Federer has 0, but does have a slam.

You just can't compare yet folks

Note - Nadal is already 4th on the all time list of Masters Series Shield winners, with Agassi at 17, Federer at 12, and Sampras at 11. Just think about it for a second folks (Oh, and 3 of his have been on hard courts!)

great points!