Madrid 2013 F: Nadal vs Wawrinka

[Iona16]

Congrats to Rafa. Yet another masters title. A frightening total.

BTW what is with Tiriac naming the trophy after himself. How big is his ego?

 

[tented]

Congrats to Rafa. Yet another masters title. A frightening total.

BTW what is with Tiriac naming the trophy after himself. How big is his ego?

So big he needs a golden toilet brush.

 

[calitennis127]

That's why I went Nadal in 2, and that's why in another thread, when someone asked about Wawrinka potentially troubling the top dogs on clay, I said Nadal in particular would be a nightmare for him.

In fairness, Stan was obviously not at his best. He looked pretty lethargic, a touch slow, and nothing was really clicking (the serve in particular killed him). However, in spite of that, you could still see the match-up problems, particularly on this surface. If you can't step inside the court, take the ball early and take the initiative, you're going to get slaughtered by Nadal on clay.

Wawrinka's natural game is to stay far behind the baseline to line-up his shots and take huge cuts at the ball (particularly with his beautiful backhand). He can afford to do that for the most part because he has natural fire power, and is really good at producing his own pace. Against Nadal on clay, that can't work. At least not consistently. You're giving up ground, allowing him to move you around, and most importantly, giving him the opportunity to get angles on his cross court forehand. Thus, he'll move you around all day, open up the court, and set up his favorite pattern (CC forehands before finishing with the inside out). Rafa's forehand was exploding off the court and Stan should have made the adjustment to step inside (he did for a while but not consistently). That's the main reason why Stan's DTL backhand was nonexistent in this match. He had to step in and use it to change direction. It's just not going to do a lot of damage from so far back on this surface, as Nadal will have enough time to track it down. In fact, in many ways it becomes counterproductive since it opens up the court and Nadal can capitalize with his CC backhand.

Just not a good day at the office for Wawrinka on every level. Pretty good performance by Rafa on the other hand.

Hey Broken, do you think Nadal is back or do you still need more matches to decide?

I'm just wondering how long until you come down with your verdict, because back in February you seemed extremely uncertain about this matter.

 

[Moxie]

That's why I went Nadal in 2, and that's why in another thread, when someone asked about Wawrinka potentially troubling the top dogs on clay, I said Nadal in particular would be a nightmare for him.

In fairness, Stan was obviously not at his best. He looked pretty lethargic, a touch slow, and nothing was really clicking (the serve in particular killed him). However, in spite of that, you could still see the match-up problems, particularly on this surface. If you can't step inside the court, take the ball early and take the initiative, you're going to get slaughtered by Nadal on clay.

Wawrinka's natural game is to stay far behind the baseline to line-up his shots and take huge cuts at the ball (particularly with his beautiful backhand). He can afford to do that for the most part because he has natural fire power, and is really good at producing his own pace. Against Nadal on clay, that can't work. At least not consistently. You're giving up ground, allowing him to move you around, and most importantly, giving him the opportunity to get angles on his cross court forehand. Thus, he'll move you around all day, open up the court, and set up his favorite pattern (CC forehands before finishing with the inside out). Rafa's forehand was exploding off the court and Stan should have made the adjustment to step inside (he did for a while but not consistently). That's the main reason why Stan's DTL backhand was nonexistent in this match. He had to step in and use it to change direction. It's just not going to do a lot of damage from so far back on this surface, as Nadal will have enough time to track it down. In fact, in many ways it becomes counterproductive since it opens up the court and Nadal can capitalize with his CC backhand.

Just not a good day at the office for Wawrinka on every level. Pretty good performance by Rafa on the other hand.

Hey Broken, do you think Nadal is back or do you still need more matches to decide?

I'm just wondering how long until you come down with your verdict, because back in February you seemed extremely uncertain about this matter.

Cali, it doesn't totally matter what Broken thinks, or anyone else. There are subtleties to comebacks, and it doesn't matter how people in the blogosphere assess them. It will still be down to the player. Bullying a "verdict" out of Broken would still mean nothing. There is still a lot of wait-and-see. As there always is. No need to corner Broken to an opinion as to how the rest of Rafa's year will play out.

 

[DarthFed]

:huh: I hope you are kidding. Nole doesn't have a one handed backhand. This isn't Rafa vs. Fed on clay. If Rafa doesn't face Nole at RG his chances are 99.99% of winning. But we will see if Nole leaves the door open at RG by losing to a nobody like he did here. I wouldn't count on it and I wouldn't count on Fed handing Rafa the trophy by taking out Djokovic either. If it is Rafa-Nole it's going to be a hell of a battle, I wouldn't anticipate the latter playing as weak as he did in the final last year.

When did I mentioned Nole? Let's take a step further; who says a hypothetical match between those two will be easy?

My point is merely looking at Rafa in a vacuum, his body language and concentration through out the match was encouraging to see. Mentally, he is reaching that level of comfort with his game and body....something he will need to establish the de facto pecking order at Philippe chatrier.

IF Rafa wins Rome, (possible right?) then his confidence will be at the highest.......thus my proclamation of "last stand" to the field to derail the train.

As usual, you ignore Rafa and solely place the determining factor to his opponent; in this case Novak.

Fair enough, you don't anticipate Roger handling Nadal the trophy but in the other hand; you shouldn't anticipate Nadal trembling in his feet at the business end of a set; this is no longer 2011.

If you think Novak was weak in 2012 against Rafa, by the same standard how do you rate Nadal's 2011 performance against Novak on clay?

By saying the FO is a foregone conclusion if Rafa wins Rome you are implying that Djokovic has no chance in a possible matchup there. You are smart enough to know that is a rather optimistic thing to say considering Djokovic handily beat him a few weeks ago on a surface that's even better for Rafa than RG is.

Rafa's performances in 2011 were not strong and it was clear by Rome that Nole was in his head, though it was a place he had earned by beating Rafa in Indian Wells, Miami and Madrid. Last year was different. Clearly Djokovic did not play well really from clay season through the Olympics. He had more pressure than now, had to deal with the death of his grandfather, etc. And going into RG Rafa had beat him handily twice and Nole wasn't playing great that tournament even though he made the final.

We all know how big the psychological factor is in tennis and last year it was on Rafa's side at RG while the year before it was especially on Djokovic's side at Wimbledon and the USO. If these 2 meet in Rome it will be huge and if Djokovic wins he would have a similar situation to 2011 IMO.

And just so you know I am not in any way saying Nole is equal to Rafa on clay. Overall it is not close and weeks like this prove it. Djokovic can lose to a whole slew of players on clay while Rafa pretty much can only lose to one. But when it comes to the matchup then its a different story.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I wouldn't read too much into the Madrid trophy. As stated earlier, the Spanish let him play in daytime every match (great spin, no sleep issues), and he faced an empty tank Stan who played 9 out of the last 10 days, included two late night matches. Let's see after Rome and Roland Garros what the situation is----Ralph can shine with everyone except Novak who makes him wet his pants lol.

Yeah I wouldn't read much into it either for the exact same reasons you mentioned. Lots of sleep and lots of sun. After all, we all know Nadal needs all the help he can get on clay, as he did in all of his 40 clay titles. He wouldn't have stood much of a chance had the organizers not favored him, and he's definitely lucky Stan had an empty tank, otherwise that 8-0 winning record Nadal has over him would have bit him in the ass big time.

---

Nadal played very well in Rome last year but again Novak double faulted on match point. He can surely only improve on that.

Nadal was already up a set and a break before Novak double faulted (meaning the double fault gave Nadal his second break of the set). That match was done and dusted before Novak double faulted.

Anyway, your overall point stands and I'll say this: At Nadal's current level, if he plays Djokovic in Rome, Rafa loses.

---

Hey Broken, do you think Nadal is back or do you still need more matches to decide?

I'm just wondering how long until you come down with your verdict, because back in February you seemed extremely uncertain about this matter.

Define "back." Do wins over him count for less because of the layoff? No. He's won 5 tournaments since returning, including two masters. He must be doing something right. In that regard, he's definitely back.

However, he's really played close to his best tennis in about 3-4 matches since returning (the final with Ferrer, the final couple of matches at IW, and the final with Stan). In general, his serving is quite below par (I think you'd agree, quality wise), his movement is absolutely not as consistently good as it can be (I'm being fair by the way. For instance, he was moving great at Indian Wells. I just haven't been impressed with his movement in any of the clay tournaments he's played this year), his physicality is definitely lacking on a point-by-point basis (he twice admitted as much, first after the Novak match by talking about his inability to keep up intensity, and secondly after the Stan match by saying that he's hoping his aggression would compensate for his occasional "lack of legs"), and his net game is garbage at the moment (this one is undeniable). I think his ground strokes are looking sharp though, and the forehand in general has been quite encouraging with the exception of very few matches. That's always important.

So my issues with his game are more form related, rather than anything that has to do with the layoff. So to answer your question, sure, he's back. I just don't think he's playing his best tennis, which in fairness, is something that can have nothing to do with the layoff, as it's not like he's always at his best when healthy.

 

[huntingyou]

By saying the FO is a foregone conclusion if Rafa wins Rome you are implying that Djokovic has no chance in a possible matchup there. You are smart enough to know that is a rather optimistic thing to say considering Djokovic handily beat him a few weeks ago on a surface that's even better for Rafa than RG is.

Rafa's performances in 2011 were not strong and it was clear by Rome that Nole was in his head, though it was a place he had earned by beating Rafa in Indian Wells, Miami and Madrid. Last year was different. Clearly Djokovic did not play well really from clay season through the Olympics. He had more pressure than now, had to deal with the death of his grandfather, etc. And going into RG Rafa had beat him handily twice and Nole wasn't playing great that tournament even though he made the final.

We all know how big the psychological factor is in tennis and last year it was on Rafa's side at RG while the year before it was especially on Djokovic's side at Wimbledon and the USO. If these 2 meet in Rome it will be huge and if Djokovic wins he would have a similar situation to 2011 IMO.

And just so you know I am not in any way saying Nole is equal to Rafa on clay. Overall it is not close and weeks like this prove it. Djokovic can lose to a whole slew of players on clay while Rafa pretty much can only lose to one. But when it comes to the matchup then its a different story.

Remember, I used an IF scenerario to declare my initial statement of forgone conclusion. You are absolutly right; if Novak beats Rafa next saturday, then your scenario will apply. Novak will be the heavy favorite and Rafa might need more luck or an increidble turns of events to overcome Djoker.

Going back to my original point, I know Rafa's body language better than anyone.....I can tell you even before the first ball will be struck if he is feeling good about his game or not. This is what he said after the final yesterday:

“Since we started playing on clay in Europe, I've realised that my drive is working again at its high level. I'm able to open the angles and play a lot of winning points,” said Nadal. “I couldn't do that in Barcelona or Monte Carlo; over here I could… It's true these last matches I have been able to reach that place where I want to be playing, the kind of play that I'm aiming for.”

Do you understand my orginal post now?

 

[the AntiPusher]

By saying the FO is a foregone conclusion if Rafa wins Rome you are implying that Djokovic has no chance in a possible matchup there. You are smart enough to know that is a rather optimistic thing to say considering Djokovic handily beat him a few weeks ago on a surface that's even better for Rafa than RG is.

Rafa's performances in 2011 were not strong and it was clear by Rome that Nole was in his head, though it was a place he had earned by beating Rafa in Indian Wells, Miami and Madrid. Last year was different. Clearly Djokovic did not play well really from clay season through the Olympics. He had more pressure than now, had to deal with the death of his grandfather, etc. And going into RG Rafa had beat him handily twice and Nole wasn't playing great that tournament even though he made the final.

We all know how big the psychological factor is in tennis and last year it was on Rafa's side at RG while the year before it was especially on Djokovic's side at Wimbledon and the USO. If these 2 meet in Rome it will be huge and if Djokovic wins he would have a similar situation to 2011 IMO.

And just so you know I am not in any way saying Nole is equal to Rafa on clay. Overall it is not close and weeks like this prove it. Djokovic can lose to a whole slew of players on clay while Rafa pretty much can only lose to one. But when it comes to the matchup then its a different story.

Remember, I used an IF scenerario to declare my initial statement of forgone conclusion. You are absolutly right; if Novak beats Rafa next saturday, then your scenario will apply. Novak will be the heavy favorite and Rafa might need more luck or an increidble turns of events to overcome Djoker.

Going back to my original point, I know Rafa's body language better than anyone.....I can tell you even before the first ball will be struck if he is feeling good about his game or not. This is what he said after the final yesterday:

“Since we started playing on clay in Europe, I've realised that my drive is working again at its high level. I'm able to open the angles and play a lot of winning points,” said Nadal. “I couldn't do that in Barcelona or Monte Carlo; over here I could… It's true these last matches I have been able to reach that place where I want to be playing, the kind of play that I'm aiming for.”

Do you understand my orginal post now?

Interesting..good stuff from the small quote from Rafa.

 

[Kieran]

Put Djokovic at his best on clay against Nadal at his best on clay, and Djokovic wins 9 times out of 10.

You musta been really angry with somebody when you wrote this - are you okay now? :s

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

Congrads to Rafa. He not only got the money and the trophy but got to pose with the ball girls!

 

[Denis]

IMO, on the clay Nadal at his best beats Djokovic at his best 8/10 times.

On clay, Novak's a grinder and relies on supreme baseline consistency and supreme physical and mental stamina to beat Nadal. At his best, Nadal is aggressive with his court positioning and forehand, and doesn't play timid and short.

Natural weapons with supreme defending skills beats consistency with supreme defending skills 8/10 times.

Ah yes. Of course. Djokovic is just a pusher who puts Nadal’s amazing shots back in play until he misfires. No weapons at all this Djokovic dude. Backhand? What backhand? ROS? Mediocre. Forehand? Very unnatural shot. Not a weapon at all.

---

Rafa's body language and concentration was telling, he just didn't want to win by default but play great tennis within his own lofty expectations; a task he accomplished.

Rome is the last stand, if Rafa marches through to yet another title; outside of unexpected injury or Robin like performance; the ITF might as well handle him the trophy at RG.

:huh: I hope you are kidding. Nole doesn't have a one handed backhand. This isn't Rafa vs. Fed on clay. If Rafa doesn't face Nole at RG his chances are 99.99% of winning. But we will see if Nole leaves the door open at RG by losing to a nobody like he did here. I wouldn't count on it and I wouldn't count on Fed handing Rafa the trophy by taking out Djokovic either. If it is Rafa-Nole it's going to be a hell of a battle, I wouldn't anticipate the latter playing as weak as he did in the final last year.

Exactly.

In fact I think that Djokovic is just a bad matchup for Nadal. It’s not like Djokovic is a better clay courter than Nadal or anything (clearly he’s not), but even if Nadal is on his very best I would not put my money on him these days. It’s like Federer and Nadal on grass. Federer is a better grass player, but struggles heavily against Nadal. Same for Nadal and Djokovic on clay. Nadal can’t hurt Djokovic enough and Djokovic in his turn can break down the Nadal backhand. I’d give Djokovic the slight edge on clay if they both play on their very best.

---

Congrads to Rafa. He not only got the money and the trophy but got to pose with the ball girls!

Nice pic! The Tiriac trophy is a bit of a ... well uh misfit there?

 

[brokenshoelace]

but even if Nadal is on his very best I would not put my money on him these days.

Very best "these days" or very best "all-time"? There's a difference there. These days? I agree. All-time, meaning Nadal's highest level ever produced on clay? You'd be a few dollars short.

 

[Denis]

but even if Nadal is on his very best I would not put my money on him these days.

Very best "these days" or very best "all-time"? There's a difference there. These days? I agree. All-time, meaning Nadal's highest level ever produced on clay? You'd be a few dollars short.

Yeah I see. I wasn't sure. I find it hard to assess the difference between Nadal 2011 and Nadal 2008 for instance. I would like to know your or anyone elses opinion on that. I think Djokovic played one of the best clay matches of his career at Rome 2011. What was Nadal lacking there compared to 2008? Or before? Just curious. When was Nadal's highest level of clay court tennis ever? And why would 2011 Rome Djokovic not be able to beat him?

 

[brokenshoelace]

but even if Nadal is on his very best I would not put my money on him these days.

Very best "these days" or very best "all-time"? There's a difference there. These days? I agree. All-time, meaning Nadal's highest level ever produced on clay? You'd be a few dollars short.

Yeah I see. I wasn't sure. I find it hard to assess the difference between Nadal 2011 and Nadal 2008 for instance. I would like to know your or anyone elses opinion on that. I think Djokovic played one of the best clay matches of his career at Rome 2011. What was Nadal lacking there compared to 2008? Or before? Just curious. When was Nadal's highest level of clay court tennis ever? And why would 2011 Rome Djokovic not be able to beat him?

I can't tell you that 2011 Rome Djokovic would not be able to beat him. I can tell you that IMO, he wouldn't be favored.

Now, let's start with the match you're referring, which is widely tipped to be Djokovic's best clay court display ever (rightly so), and that's Rome 2011:

As good as Djokovic played, the match was actually ultimately decided by a couple of points here and there (though Novak vastly outplayed Nadal throughout). That's generally the case at the highest level between two elite players. A few points decide the outcome. Now, at the level Novak was playing at that day, he's definitely equipped to put any version of Nadal in a lot of trouble from behind the baseline. There's no way to deny that when you factor in just how cleanly he was hitting the ball and how early he was taking it.

However, what a lot of people seem to conveniently ignore in that match was the amount of times Nadal put Djokovic on the defensive (he did it far more than he did in their earlier match in Madrid), only to lose the point through Novak's otherworldly counter-punching (I've never seen Djokovic hit so well off the backfoot before or since, which is saying something considering how good he is in that particular aspect in general).

Now people will look at Novak's ability to take Nadal's ball on the rise and put him on the defensive and pinpoint it as the reason he won, when in fact he'd always been able to do that. The real difference was the extra bit of physicality (and therefore, consistency) that Novak gained that year. Throughout 2011, in all of their matches, Novak was able to physically fend off Nadal (Miami was a prime example, as was the US Open). It's not uncommon for Nadal to get out-played by Djokovic from behind the baseline (though there have been numerous exceptions on clay), but what changed that year, was that Nadal was not able to compensate with his physicality.

Nadal from 2008 was a different physical beast (beyond any version of Novak. That much is undeniable), and a better mover. It really doesn't take a tennis expert to realize the importance of those two factors on clay. That makes a huge difference on a point-to-point basis, where the extra bit of speed and explosiveness allows you to track down balls and put them back with interest (something Djokovic did throughout the Rome match in 2011).

I first noticed Nadal's decline in movement on clay in 2009 during Monte Carlo, and it was actually a highly debated point on the old forums. Then, when it really hit me that he would never be quite as fast on clay was during a match with Dolgopolov at Madrid in 2010. Then, it became clear that Nadal was still capable of moving as good as ever on clay (he did it in Monte Carlo that year, and later against Soderling at the FO final), but just not with the same consistency. This became quite evident in the increased number of unforced errors he started producing on the surface (which was still better than all of the tour, but below par by his standards). That was a result of a slight decline in movement and/or overhitting to compensate (the 2010 FO stats were pretty telling in that regard, with the exception of the final).

Now, there wasn't much wrong with Nadal's movement against Novak in that match (Rome 2011), but there was definitely something wrong with his backhand. I find it funny that people equate Nadal not playing bad in that match (and don't get me wrong, he didn't) with "Novak beating Rafa at his best." Well, by the same token, Novak didn't play bad in Rome last year, does that mean Rafa beat him at his best? But no, I have to hear about how Novak didn't play as well as he did the previous year (which is true), and yet, there's no room to make the very obvious argument: that Nadal didn't play in 2011 as well as he did in 2008.

Nadal's backhand was so shaky in Rome that year that he resorted to awful moonballs that landed short and gave Djokovic put aways. And he did it repeatedly too. Compare the way he hit his backhand in that match to his backhand in the 2008 FO semi final against Novak, and the difference is evident. Moreover, Rafa's return of serve was actually consistently more solid back then, and that was before he inexplicably went through patches where he'd struggle to change directions with his forehand and go up the line. All these factors are vital against Djokovic, and break the predictability that Nadal is guilty of in their matches.

I find the whole argument to be really filled with double standards by the way. The H2H on clay is so staggeringly in Nadal's favor, that making such a claim is dubious to begin with. Why? Well, the double standards start with the fact that people want to disregard Nadal's wins when he was at his best (2008), because that wasn't Novak at his best. Yet, Novak's wins over Nadal in 2011 and this year tell the whole story. Why? Oh, I forgot, it's because Nadal has already won so many titles this year, and had already reached so many finals in 2011, and the only player he was losing to was Novak. I see. Then maybe someone can correct me here, but I'm pretty sure in 2008, when Nadal racked up 3 consecutive victories (two on clay and once at Queens), Novak came in with the Australian Open title AND the Indian Wells title under his belt (which are better results than the ones leading up to the clay court season this year). Moreover, Novak actually won the Rome Masters that year too, on clay, obviously. So why aren't Nadal's victories over Novak during that period seen as telling in any way? Because Novak has improved since then? That's difficult to deny, but so is the fact that Nadal played better clay court tennis in 2008 than he did in 2011 or this year (and even last year for that matter).

The fact is, when you're playing your best, you're also preventing the other guy from playing his. That's why people have such distorted views on these things. Ultimately, IMO, the H2H doesn't lie. Look at Novak's level at Hamburg in 2008, Monte Carlo 2009 or Madrid 2009 and tell me what was wrong with his game (not much). Again, the H2H difference on the surface is too big to make such wild claims. You could argue that Novak was unable to bring his best in many of their clay matches, but if anything, that only shows who the better player when they meet really is, most of the time. If he's not good enough to bring his best more often than not (or if his opponent prevents him from doing so), what does that tell you?

PS: Biggest indicators with regards to Nadal's slight decline in movement are two things: Increased number of unforced errors, and more tellingly, the quality of his passing shots. He still makes some great passes, but really, not nearly as much as he used to. Back then, he almost literally never missed. You might win the point by hitting a volley off of his pass, but he almost never actually missed the pass itself.

 

[DarthFed]

By saying the FO is a foregone conclusion if Rafa wins Rome you are implying that Djokovic has no chance in a possible matchup there. You are smart enough to know that is a rather optimistic thing to say considering Djokovic handily beat him a few weeks ago on a surface that's even better for Rafa than RG is.

Rafa's performances in 2011 were not strong and it was clear by Rome that Nole was in his head, though it was a place he had earned by beating Rafa in Indian Wells, Miami and Madrid. Last year was different. Clearly Djokovic did not play well really from clay season through the Olympics. He had more pressure than now, had to deal with the death of his grandfather, etc. And going into RG Rafa had beat him handily twice and Nole wasn't playing great that tournament even though he made the final.

We all know how big the psychological factor is in tennis and last year it was on Rafa's side at RG while the year before it was especially on Djokovic's side at Wimbledon and the USO. If these 2 meet in Rome it will be huge and if Djokovic wins he would have a similar situation to 2011 IMO.

And just so you know I am not in any way saying Nole is equal to Rafa on clay. Overall it is not close and weeks like this prove it. Djokovic can lose to a whole slew of players on clay while Rafa pretty much can only lose to one. But when it comes to the matchup then its a different story.

Remember, I used an IF scenerario to declare my initial statement of forgone conclusion. You are absolutly right; if Novak beats Rafa next saturday, then your scenario will apply. Novak will be the heavy favorite and Rafa might need more luck or an increidble turns of events to overcome Djoker.

Going back to my original point, I know Rafa's body language better than anyone.....I can tell you even before the first ball will be struck if he is feeling good about his game or not. This is what he said after the final yesterday:

“Since we started playing on clay in Europe, I've realised that my drive is working again at its high level. I'm able to open the angles and play a lot of winning points,” said Nadal. “I couldn't do that in Barcelona or Monte Carlo; over here I could… It's true these last matches I have been able to reach that place where I want to be playing, the kind of play that I'm aiming for.”

Do you understand my orginal post now?

So Rafa feels better about his game after beating up on Wawrinka as compared to when he lost MC for the first time in 9 years to a way better player than Wawrinka...go figure.

I will take your word regarding Rafa's body language. Similar to how many Fed fans can tell when Federer is getting nervous despite the constant talk of his body language and facial expressions always being the same. Certainly Rafa's confidence level is getting higher and higher but it wasn't exactly low going into the MC final was it?

 

[SF Nadalite]

I think it's rather obvious that this is hardly Rafa's finest season - almost as obvious that it's not Fed's nor Novak's best season.

While it doesn't do much for my blood pressure, it's great for the game.

 

[huntingyou]

So Rafa feels better about his game after beating up on Wawrinka as compared to when he lost MC for the first time in 9 years to a way better player than Wawrinka...go figure.

I will take your word regarding Rafa's body language. Similar to how many Fed fans can tell when Federer is getting nervous despite the constant talk of his body language and facial expressions always being the same. Certainly Rafa's confidence level is getting higher and higher but it wasn't exactly low going into the MC final was it?

you are smarter than this!

Who cares about wawrinka? I'm talking Rafa's confidence in himself and the satisfaction with his game.

Last Sunday for the first time on clay this year; I saw Rafa's frame and overall body language improve....it has nothing with what happened on the court or who his opponent was.

It's the satisfaction you get when you aim at the line and actually hit the lines......call it "groove".

and not, he felt good at MC but never please with his game........Novak asked question he wasn't ready to answer. We'll see what happens this week. It should be fun!

 

[Denis]

but even if Nadal is on his very best I would not put my money on him these days.

Very best "these days" or very best "all-time"? There's a difference there. These days? I agree. All-time, meaning Nadal's highest level ever produced on clay? You'd be a few dollars short.

Yeah I see. I wasn't sure. I find it hard to assess the difference between Nadal 2011 and Nadal 2008 for instance. I would like to know your or anyone elses opinion on that. I think Djokovic played one of the best clay matches of his career at Rome 2011. What was Nadal lacking there compared to 2008? Or before? Just curious. When was Nadal's highest level of clay court tennis ever? And why would 2011 Rome Djokovic not be able to beat him?

I can't tell you that 2011 Rome Djokovic would not be able to beat him. I can tell you that IMO, he wouldn't be favored.

Now, let's start with the match you're referring, which is widely tipped to be Djokovic's best clay court display ever (rightly so), and that's Rome 2011:

As good as Djokovic played, the match was actually ultimately decided by a couple of points here and there (though Novak vastly outplayed Nadal throughout). That's generally the case at the highest level between two elite players. A few points decide the outcome. Now, at the level Novak was playing at that day, he's definitely equipped to put any version of Nadal in a lot of trouble from behind the baseline. There's no way to deny that when you factor in just how cleanly he was hitting the ball and how early he was taking it.

However, what a lot of people seem to conveniently ignore in that match was the amount of times Nadal put Djokovic on the defensive (he did it far more than he did in their earlier match in Madrid), only to lose the point through Novak's otherworldly counter-punching (I've never seen Djokovic hit so well off the backfoot before or since, which is saying something considering how good he is in that particular aspect in general).

Now people will look at Novak's ability to take Nadal's ball on the rise and put him on the defensive and pinpoint it as the reason he won, when in fact he'd always been able to do that. The real difference was the extra bit of physicality (and therefore, consistency) that Novak gained that year. Throughout 2011, in all of their matches, Novak was able to physically fend off Nadal (Miami was a prime example, as was the US Open). It's not uncommon for Nadal to get out-played by Djokovic from behind the baseline (though there have been numerous exceptions on clay), but what changed that year, was that Nadal was not able to compensate with his physicality.

Nadal from 2008 was a different physical beast (beyond any version of Novak. That much is undeniable), and a better mover. It really doesn't take a tennis expert to realize the importance of those two factors on clay. That makes a huge difference on a point-to-point basis, where the extra bit of speed and explosiveness allows you to track down balls and put them back with interest (something Djokovic did throughout the Rome match in 2011).

I first noticed Nadal's decline in movement on clay in 2009 during Monte Carlo, and it was actually a highly debated point on the old forums. Then, when it really hit me that he would never be quite as fast on clay was during a match with Dolgopolov at Madrid in 2010. Then, it became clear that Nadal was still capable of moving as good as ever on clay (he did it in Monte Carlo that year, and later against Soderling at the FO final), but just not with the same consistency. This became quite evident in the increased number of unforced errors he started producing on the surface (which was still better than all of the tour, but below par by his standards). That was a result of a slight decline in movement and/or overhitting to compensate (the 2010 FO stats were pretty telling in that regard, with the exception of the final).

Now, there wasn't much wrong with Nadal's movement against Novak in that match (Rome 2011), but there was definitely something wrong with his backhand. I find it funny that people equate Nadal not playing bad in that match (and don't get me wrong, he didn't) with "Novak beating Rafa at his best." Well, by the same token, Novak didn't play bad in Rome last year, does that mean Rafa beat him at his best. But no, I have to hear about how Novak didn't play as well as he did the previous year (which is true), and yet, there's no room to make the very obvious argument: that Nadal didn't play in 2011 as well as he did in 2008.

Nadal's backhand was so shaky in Rome that year that he resorted to awful moonballs that landed short and gave Djokovic put aways. And he did it repeatedly too. Compare the way he hit his backhand in that match to his backhand in the 2008 FO semi final against Novak, and the difference is evidence. Moreover, Rafa's return of serve was actually consistently more solid back then, and that was before he inexplicably went through patches where he'd struggle to change directions with his forehand and go up the line. All these factors are vital against Djokovic, and break the predictability that Nadal is guilty of in their matches.

I find the whole argument to be really filled with double standards by the way. The H2H on clay is so staggeringly in Nadal's favor, that making such a claim is dubious to begin with. Why? Well, the double standards start with the fact that people want to disregard Nadal's wins when he was at his best (2008), because that wasn't Novak at his best. Yet, Novak's wins over Nadal in 2011 and this year tell the whole story. Why? Oh, I forgot, it's because Nadal has already won so many titles this year, and had already reached so many finals in 2011, and the only player he was losing to was Novak. I see. Then maybe someone can correct me here, but I'm pretty sure in 2008, when Nadal racked up 3 consecutive victories (two on clay and once at Queens), Novak came in with the Australian Open title AND the Indian Wells title under his belt (which are better results than the ones leading up to the clay court season this year). Moreover, Novak actually won the Rome Masters that year too, on clay, obviously. So why aren't Nadal's victories over Novak during that period seen as telling in any way? Because Novak has improved since then? That's difficult to deny, but so is the fact that Nadal played better clay court tennis in 2008 than he did in 2011 or this year (and even last year for that matter).

The fact is, when you're playing your best, you're genuinely preventing the other guy from playing his. That's why people have such distorted views on these things. Ultimately, IMO, the H2H doesn't lie. Look at Novak's level at Hamburg in 2008, Monte Carlo 2009 or Madrid 2009 and tell me what was wrong with his game (not much). Again, the H2H difference on the surface is too big to make such wild claims. You could argue that Novak was unable to bring his best in many of those matches, but if anything, that only shows who the better player when they meet really is, most of the time. If he's not good enough to bring his best more often than not (or if his opponent prevents him from doing so), what does that tell you?

PS: Biggest indicators with regards to Nadal's slight decline in movement are two things: Increased number of unforced errors, and more tellingly, the quality of his passing shots. He still makes some great passes, but really, not nearly as much as he used to. Back then, he almost literally never missed. You might win the point by hitting a volley off of his pass, but he almost never actually missed the pass itself.

Thanks Broken, I like you're breakdown - convincing - and agree with most of this. Just one thing on the H2H, it obviously has a lot to do with how Djokovic improved since 2011. You're saying this too, but in terms of assessment who would win if the best version of both players would play each other, the H2H is not all that important. There is no denying that Rafa is a much better clay court player than Djokovic and owned him the vast majority of times they played on the surface. But Djokovic found something in 2011 and maybe Nadal dropped a little. So the H2H is not the best criterion to make this difficult comparison I think.

Anyway, hope they both make the semis for another classic. Although it might be better for Djokovic to face Nadal at RG after MC for the first time. After a couple of defeats Nadal gets way more competitive (AO 2012 final), so maybe its better for Djokovic to keep the fireworks for RG.

 

[DarthFed]

So Rafa feels better about his game after beating up on Wawrinka as compared to when he lost MC for the first time in 9 years to a way better player than Wawrinka...go figure.

I will take your word regarding Rafa's body language. Similar to how many Fed fans can tell when Federer is getting nervous despite the constant talk of his body language and facial expressions always being the same. Certainly Rafa's confidence level is getting higher and higher but it wasn't exactly low going into the MC final was it?

you are smarter than this!

Who cares about wawrinka? I'm talking Rafa's confidence in himself and the satisfaction with his game.

Last Sunday for the first time on clay this year; I saw Rafa's frame and overall body language improve....it has nothing with what happened on the court or who his opponent was.

It's the satisfaction you get when you aim at the line and actually hit the lines......call it "groove".

and not, he felt good at MC but never please with his game........Novak asked question he wasn't ready to answer. We'll see what happens this week. It should be fun!

HY, my point is that I take what Rafa says with a HUGE grain of salt these days. Remember that 2 days before the final he had a tough match with grinder Ferrer and his knees and form were not right. 2 days later he feels incredible after walloping a 3rd tier player.

We can all agree on this: confidence is based largely on results and the level of one's play is based at least partially on the opponent across the net. Wawrinka, like 99.9% of the tour, is not beating Rafa on clay even if the latter is having an awful day. Rafa is high on confidence right now but I think this has been the case since Indian Wells. Did he play better at Madrid than MC? It is an honest question as I didn't see much of either tournament. Going on results Rafa had one tough match before the final in each and then won in Madrid vs. Stan and lost MC vs. Djokovic. If it was only the final that Rafa looked better in you might consider all the factors. Fed always looked better vs. Roddick than he did vs. Rafa right?

 

[huntingyou]

HY, my point is that I take what Rafa says with a HUGE grain of salt these days. Remember that 2 days before the final he had a tough match with grinder Ferrer and his knees and form were not right. 2 days later he feels incredible after walloping a 3rd tier player.

We can all agree on this: confidence is based largely on results and the level of one's play is based at least partially on the opponent across the net. Wawrinka, like 99.9% of the tour, is not beating Rafa on clay even if the latter is having an awful day. Rafa is high on confidence right now but I think this has been the case since Indian Wells. Did he play better at Madrid than MC? It is an honest question as I didn't see much of either tournament. Going on results Rafa had one tough match before the final in each and then won in Madrid vs. Stan and lost MC vs. Djokovic. If it was only the final that Rafa looked better in you might consider all the factors. Fed always looked better vs. Roddick than he did vs. Rafa right?

I don't pay attention to what Rafa says, remember I made my comment before I saw his interview. The thing is, what I saw in his body language was confirmed by what he said later on......and that's the only reason I quoted him.

Like you, I realize Rafa talks a lot of BS so we are at the same level there. To be fair to Ferrer, he was amazing for 2 sets and it's inaccurate to call him a grinder after his beautiful display at the net and attacking tennis.....nobody grinds Rafa on clay...not even Novak; you have to take it to him; period.

Between MC, Barcelona and Madrid....Rafa played his highest level in the final of Madrid. I'm talking purely from his ability to change direction with the forehand, hit the lines on the serve and drive the backhand with confidence.

Would have been enough to beat Novak? Not if Novak plays at the level he showed at MC but it would have been a 3 setter for sure with tight score at the end.

Finally, you sell Rafa to high on clay vs the field. Grigor took a set of him and had him on the ropes and then Ferrer was two points away from winning the match. He is not as invincible as he was but there is room for improvement between now and the second week at RG.