Whassup with Federer?

[uspta146749877]

footwork of Nadal vs footwork of Federer

I agree with you guys ( oliensis and USPTA) and appreciate the comments and links.

I couldn't agree more that Federer has to attack early in the points and commit to that strategy for at least a set and a part of the second if he's losing.

The truth is he probably needs to commit to that strategy for the whole match, but that may be beyond his mental tolerance if he's losing.

As for Nadal's patterns and the opportunities they present for a talented and clever opponent.

In the matches that I've seen Nadal lose recently on hard court ( didn't see the Ferrero match on clay unfortunately, but I've wondered if Nadal didn't tank a little to rest), he's been beaten by guys talented enough to attack his shots early. Davydenko did this brilliantly in Miami ( of course, Nadal beat him in the rematch on clay).

David Ferrer did this brilliantly in the US OPen. What Ferrer did ( in my eyes) was to key on the fact that almost every Rafa forehand goes crosscourt. So, since he know where the ball was going , Ferrer decided to step in and hit his 2 hander up the line. He killed Nadal with this pattern.

I was yelling for my boy Rafa to hit more inside out forehands to the Ferrer forehand to keep Ferrer honest but he didn't do it.

And , in the link USPTA provided, Darren Cahill describes that Ferrero beat beat Nadal recently by using his two handed backhand up the line as well.

Of course, Nadal is much more vulnerable to this tactic on hard court versus clay.

Actually, that's my main criticism of Nadal's patterns. At times, he goes a little too much to his crosscourt forehand and doesn't take advantage of the fact that guys are overplaying that shot and giving him a lot of room to hit the inside out and down the line forehands.

Of course, on clay he hardly ever loses so why should he change? As Oliensis noted, it also keeps his mind calm in big moments.

But, if would be interesting if one were Nadal's coach, to chart his matches on hard court versus clay and see if there are numbers to support my theory that he should be hitting more inside out and down the line forehands on hard court.

Hi,
couple loose thoughts about Federer and Nadal.

A footwork of Nadal on clay is superior comparing with Federer-this aspect of his game is underrated
at least by some TV commentators.
A length of slide by Nadal and Serbians and Croatians is generally
longer than a corresponding one by Federer.
A more wet clay surface would be an equalizer for Federer
but it does NOT happen very often at Roland Garros.

Another observation is that Nadal does NOT change diagonals
very often by own his initiative.
It may be a result of his confidence that his shot tolerance
is higher than majority of his opponents so there is NO ADDED
VALUE in switching diagonals.
It spares his body as well which is becoming of concern lately
see Brad Gilbert in the latest issue of Tennis.
I have seen rallies as long as 25 touches vs Federer on clay lately.
It is interesting that directionals do NOT ALWAYS apply for Nadal.

See as well about defensive skills of Federer
click

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/french08/news/story?id=3403702

The Nadal"s backhand is basically a defensive tool but it has a significant topspin component to prevent an opponent from attacking.
Some of his backhands are NOT deep enough especially crosscourt.

Majority of high backhands of his oponents are NOT penetrating enough.
Ferrer is an exception here.

Some of those thoughts/observations are NOT original-
see for example an article by Patrick McEnroe I posted at this forum some
time ago.
The question which elements of strategy/tactics to transfer from clay
to hard surfaces is an interesting one.
Another question is whether the Nadal's serve is good enough for grass and
hard surfaces
See as well

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?t=1074

See as well predictions for French Open

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?t=1085&page=2

Back to my nap now
julian uspta 27873

[oliensis]

I totally agree. Looks like the old Fed is back and that's a real relief. To me, Nadal looks unbeatable on clay. Too much power, too much spin, too much quickness, too much touch. The forehand is too good. The backhand is too good. The best chance for Federer would be for Nadal to get hurt in my opinion.

I find it almost heartbreaking that Federer can beat everyone else in the world on clay except for one guy. It's almost unfair that he can't win the French because of one other person.

But this is EXACTLY what makes tennis so enthralling, when it is enthralling. There are 2 characters. There's almost a moral dimension: on clay one guy just appears to be too physically imposing (Nadal) while the other guy has to figure out how to exploit some previously hidden element in the game (Federer). And therein does the battle gain heft, importance, significance, drama.

I root for Federer more on clay than on other surfaces precisely because he does NOT win by dint of talent alone. Were F to win the French against Nadal in the final it would be a victory of cunning, choice of patterns, variety, breadth of game, ability to adapt, persistence, in short, of character. It would be the sweetest sort of victory.

[jeffreycounts]

Sorry, but that's a win for Fed to make the finals on Clay and push Nadal this hard, the way this year has started for Fed. It's also big that he won the second set in a breaker too.

He may not win the French, but he is sliding right in the slot to have a great shot at it.

I totally agree. Looks like the old Fed is back and that's a real relief. To me, Nadal looks unbeatable on clay. Too much power, too much spin, too much quickness, too much touch. The forehand is too good. The backhand is too good. The best chance for Federer would be for Nadal to get hurt in my opinion.

I find it almost heartbreaking that Federer can beat everyone else in the world on clay except for one guy. It's almost unfair that he can't win the French because of one other person.

[airforce1]

Sorry, but that's a win for Fed to make the finals on Clay and push Nadal this hard, the way this year has started for Fed. It's also big that he won the second set in a breaker too.

He may not win the French, but he is sliding right in the slot to have a great shot at it.

[gsheiner]

I agree with you guys ( oliensis and USPTA) and appreciate the comments and links.

I couldn't agree more that Federer has to attack early in the points and commit to that strategy for at least a set and a part of the second if he's losing.

The truth is he probably needs to commit to that strategy for the whole match, but that may be beyond his mental tolerance if he's losing.

As for Nadal's patterns and the opportunities they present for a talented and clever opponent.

In the matches that I've seen Nadal lose recently on hard court ( didn't see the Ferrero match on clay unfortunately, but I've wondered if Nadal didn't tank a little to rest), he's been beaten by guys talented enough to attack his shots early. Davydenko did this brilliantly in Miami ( of course, Nadal beat him in the rematch on clay).

David Ferrer did this brilliantly in the US OPen. What Ferrer did ( in my eyes) was to key on the fact that almost every Rafa forehand goes crosscourt. So, since he know where the ball was going , Ferrer decided to step in and hit his 2 hander up the line. He killed Nadal with this pattern.

I was yelling for my boy Rafa to hit more inside out forehands to the Ferrer forehand to keep Ferrer honest but he didn't do it.

And , in the link USPTA provided, Darren Cahill describes that Ferrero beat beat Nadal recently by using his two handed backhand up the line as well.

Of course, Nadal is much more vulnerable to this tactic on hard court versus clay.

Actually, that's my main criticism of Nadal's patterns. At times, he goes a little too much to his crosscourt forehand and doesn't take advantage of the fact that guys are overplaying that shot and giving him a lot of room to hit the inside out and down the line forehands.

Of course, on clay he hardly ever loses so why should he change? As Oliensis noted, it also keeps his mind calm in big moments.

But, if would be interesting if one were Nadal's coach, to chart his matches on hard court versus clay and see if there are numbers to support my theory that he should be hitting more inside out and down the line forehands on hard court.

[oliensis]

Don't count on it.

Federer has to play great tennis to beat Nadal. He has to take the ball on the rise and attack as he did brilliantly at times today.

Nadal is a machine on clay because he doesn't have to play brilliantly to win.

I believe it was Schopenhauer who wrote that only stupidity creates the necessity for brilliance.

Not exactly transferrable to Federer's game, but I think it's in agreement w/ your comment the advanage afforded Nadal by not having to be brillian with his game to beat Federer on clay...he just has to play w/in himself.

After watching N beat F the last 2 times in the finals, I think F has to be less thin-skinned. Has to continue attacking through both brillian and less-than brillian stretches. Has to not get intimidated and passive when the attacking goes less well. Has to continue to try to force Nadal to be brilliant w/ counterpunching and defense in order to win.

I remember watching Rafter and Todd Martin play in Davis Cup. Came down to 5th set. Martin was playing really well, but I knew that Rafter would win the 5th because he knew exactly how he was going to play while Martin had to decide on his tactics point after point. So, when crunch time came, Rafter had a kind of kamikze serenity that alleviated any nerves. He was going to serve and volley, come hell or high water. And in the absence of any doub he performed up to his capabilities in the clutch. By contrast, Martin missed some easy shots because he was less clear about his game plan.

I think something similar is behind Federer's streakyness and occasional passivity when he plays Nadal on clay. Federer needs to commit to his game plan and only re-evaluate if he goes down a set and a break, or at some other pre-determined benchmark point in the match.

[uspta146749877]

Roddick and French Open

Don't count on it.

Federer has to play great tennis to beat Nadal. He has to take the ball on the rise and attack as he did brilliantly at times today.

Nadal is a machine on clay because he doesn't have to play brilliantly to win.

Please see my addition to one posts above.
It is NOT about Federer but it provides some extra info about French Open.
I hoped you would like to know about it

[lukman41985]

Federer's Journey

Don't stop...

[gsheiner]

Don't count on it.

Federer has to play great tennis to beat Nadal. He has to take the ball on the rise and attack as he did brilliantly at times today.

Nadal is a machine on clay because he doesn't have to play brilliantly to win.

[lukman41985]

Rafa has all the pressure going into the French. Roger won't be scared--it can't be any worse than losing two matches when you have a big lead. Federer playing with no fear against a worn-out Nadal that has all the pressure? I think things are in favor for Roger to take his first title at Roland Garros.

[uspta146749877]

Loosing in Hamburg

I tend to take mostly the view of Lukman, feeling that Fed had to play less rds to stay ready for the big events and not overwork by winning every event he plays in. That is just too much tennis.

Not sure Pete would go over this with him to help him break Pete's record, but sort of feel that on their little tour together it may have come more to Fed's mind how Pete did this. Then the mono thing really drove home how important it is not to overwork! That is a big part in how you get mono is by driving your bodys defenses down with overwork.

In some ways it will be harder to have the confidence to win the majors when u are not winning everything is sight, but in the more important ways, it will help him, especially in the longer haul of getting to play more majors in a more healthy state.

click

http://www.atptennis.com/1/en/2008news/hamburg_final.asp

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=3394790

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=3401952

Federer about Nadal:
"He had a great week and a great clay-court season," said Federer, who finished with 41 unforced errors to Nadal's 28.
The second link above suggests how to win against Federer.
----> French Open and Roddick
Banged-up Roddick (shoulder) pulls out of French Open
Associated Press
DUESSELDORF, Germany -- Andy Roddick, the highest-ranked American man, withdrew from the French Open on Monday because of a right shoulder injury.

The sixth-ranked Roddick, who lost in the first round at Roland Garros the last two years, pulled out of the semifinals of the Rome Masters on May 10. He then skipped the Hamburg Masters last week, but had been expected to play this week at the World Team Cup in Duesseldorf.

"Andy is pulling out with an upper back shoulder injury, the same thing that he had in Rome," said John Roddick, Andy's brother and the U.S. captain at the World Team Cup. "He's pulling out of here and he's also going to miss the French Open

John Roddick said he hoped his brother would be ready for the grass-court tournament at Queen's Club, a key warmup for Wimbledon.

"The shoulder doctor we use is out of New York City so he was right there, and Andy had an MRI and there's some inflammation so he pulled him from here and the French," John Roddick said. "I don't think it's going to be anything that's terribly long and I would be surprised if he was not ready to go for Queens. But as for now he needs to take a good 10 days, 12 days, just rest."

Andy Roddick won his only Grand Slam title at the 2003 U.S. Open. He has reached three other major finals, losing to Roger Federer twice at Wimbledon and once at the U.S. Open.

At the French Open, Roddick's best showing came in his debut in 2001 when he reached the third round. He reached the second round in 2004 and '05, but has lost in the first round four times.

His success this year in Rome had given Roddick hope ahead of the French Open, which starts Sunday.

"He's been playing well all year and he was excited to be playing on the clay and really had a good frame of mind in practice and in his matches," John Roddick said. "He felt really comfortable on the clay this year, so he really liked his chances of doing better than he has, and he did it in Rome. He was optimistic about his draw in France and wanted to come over and try to play well. So for him it's disappointing."

Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press

[airforce1]

I tend to take mostly the view of Lukman, feeling that Fed had to play less rds to stay ready for the big events and not overwork by winning every event he plays in. That is just too much tennis.

Not sure Pete would go over this with him to help him break Pete's record, but sort of feel that on their little tour together it may have come more to Fed's mind how Pete did this. Then the mono thing really drove home how important it is not to overwork! That is a big part in how you get mono is by driving your bodys defenses down with overwork.

In some ways it will be harder to have the confidence to win the majors when u are not winning everything is sight, but in the more important ways, it will help him, especially in the longer haul of getting to play more majors in a more healthy state.

[uspta146749877]

rome

Nadal was reported in The Times as having a blister on his foot the morning before his match with Ferrero.

As for Federer, he didn't play well. Stepanek played very aggressively, focussed on Federer's backhand, got into the net, volleyed competently and hit some very hard slice. Federer looked out of touch.

see as well

http://tennisworld.typepad.com/thewrap/2008/05/rome-no-anti-cl.html

[crosscourt]

Nadal was reported in The Times as having a blister on his foot the morning before his match with Ferrero.

As for Federer, he didn't play well. Stepanek played very aggressively, focussed on Federer's backhand, got into the net, volleyed competently and hit some very hard slice. Federer looked out of touch.

[lukman41985]

Nadal had a blister on his foot and that was problematic for him. But he didn't have the blister in Monte Carlo, did he? He got the blister playing Ferrero, who played flawless tennis in a very long first set.

I'm sure Federer is studying the tape of that match. He should be. Ferror played Nadal's backhand hard, until it opened up the court and then when balls out on the inside-out forehands.

Lots easier if you have a 2-handed backhand, but do-able w/ a one-hander, I think...esp. if you're Federer.

I thought Ferrero played a really smart match.

If you've watched any of Roger's interviews, he tends to talk about how much he enjoys watching all tennis matches. This definitely includes Nadal's matches with other opponents.