Respect to Nadal

[golds girl]

Apparently Rafa is playing Davis Cup? whatttt let the man rest >_<

I thought Spain was out of DC.

It's to get into world groups next year. They play against Ukraine.

http://www.daviscup.com/en/draws-results/tie/details.aspx?tieId=100019832

maybe he'll drop out?

Spain runs too deep to need Nadal to play vs. Ukraine. He will probably drop out.

 

[Moxie]

i usually appreciate your posts. but i never bought into the A game brouhaha - there's tons of nuances in every point, and i don't see what can be achieved by putting A,B,C categories over that.

Sure, that's true. But I think a lot in the match depended on Djokovic hitting too many UE's. If he keeps that in check he can eventually overpower Nadal. Like he did in that 53 shot rally in the second set to take the break. So the match was on Djokovic's racket IMO. He handed it to Nadal by hitting too many UEs.

No Denisovich, this is a fallacy that a lot of Fedfans cling to as well: the match is on his racket against Nadal and if only for them pesky UE's he'd have won, as if Nadal is a passive beneficiary of his opponents carelessness.

Nadal forces his opponent to go for too much and they miss. Why they're called "unforced errors" is a mystery, or perhaps it's a media thingy to distinguish then from impossible to hit shots, which are called forced errors. Djoker's best wasn't good enough to keep Rafa down, especially in the third set, when he was standing deep for returns and playing less aggressively than he did in the first and fourth sets. Nadal is forcing Djoker to go for even more - and he isn't able to, at present.

He did in 2011 and Oz 2012, but that looks more like an anomaly than a standard, to me...

I agree on the UFEs - I've always thought the term was a little silly.

I don't think going for too much was Djokovic's undoing. These matches are usually determined on a small number of critical points. The momentum swing following Djokovic's failure to convert on that triple break point opportunity in the third set was massive. That was a set where you felt Djokovic probably played the better tennis. Nadal has a habit of winning those critical points more often than not and it's by design not luck.

Pretty much.

Again, regarding unforced errors, it's tough to criticize a guy for unforced errors when you're engaging in 20+ rallies, covering every inch of the court, hitting preposterous shots from insane angles, all the while being aggressive. Yeah, you're going to miss on occasions. Likewise, if you're trying to end the points earlier, and you know who you're up against, you're also going to miss sometimes.

Not saying Djokovic shouldn't have played a cleaner match, but still...

Yes, Djokovic should have played a cleaner match, and you made a good case about the notion of UFE's above, broken. I also take your point, otherwise stated on this thead, about the irritation with folks saying that "the match was on (add name here)'s racquet. I chose to quote this post because of the clarity of the argument, and Britbox's comment above: the momentum swing in the 3rd set was critical. I had to go back and watch the 2nd half of that set, just to believe it, as it seemed to happen so quickly. But it was signature Nadal. He played each point with conviction, didn't lose focus, and, just when I was still hoping he'd get to a tie-break, he'd won the set 6-4.

Nadal has turned around sets that appeared to be lost in more than a few important matches, (specifically against Federer and Djokovic.) I know that irritates some people, and is one of the reasons Cali refers to him as a "gnat," but I think, looking at that set, specifically, we can say it is part of his greatness. However many errors are forced onto the other, however much opportunism is involved: as britbox said, "it's by design, not by luck" Certainly, Rafa 'stole' the 3rd set off of Novak, but he did it because he could. Nadal makes his opportunities, and some are gifted, but, either way, he doesn't often pass them up.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

This year at Roland Garros, Djokovic got on a roll toward the end of the 4th set and led 4-2 in the 5th set. Nadal then realized Djokovic was going to hit Nadal off the court, unless Nadal decided to hit Djokovic off the court first. Nadal hit 22 winners in the fifth set (while Djokovic hit 13 winners). If Djokovic had played a cleaner US Open final, Nadal would have gone into "winner mode" and again knocked Djokovic off the court. That is what Nadal has learned since 2012.

 

[Front242]

I suppose touching the net and eventually losing the break was all down to Nadal winners too? The 5th set was not all about winners. Had Novak held for 5-2 who knows what would have happened.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I suppose touching the net and eventually losing the break was all down to Nadal winners too? The 5th set was not all about winners. Had Novak held for 5-2 who knows what would have happened.

I agree, that set wasn't all about winners. It was also about Nadal not being able to immediately shake off the effects of him twice serving for the match -- and failing -- in the fourth, playing a horrible opening game in the 5th, and getting broken.

Likewise, Djokovic's final service game of the match (and final game in general) was really poor on his part.

Everything in between was gold though.

PS: A lot of the "turning point" talk about Novak touching the net in the 5th (and don't get me wrong, it was), conveniently ignores that the match shouldn't have gotten there to begin with, since Nadal twice bottled it when serving to close out the match in the 4th.

 

[isabelle]

Apparently Rafa is playing Davis Cup? whatttt let the man rest >_<

I thought Spain was out of DC.

It's to get into world groups next year. They play against Ukraine.

http://www.daviscup.com/en/draws-results/tie/details.aspx?tieId=100019832

maybe he'll drop out?

Spain runs too deep to need Nadal to play vs. Ukraine. He will probably drop out.

According to l'Equipe he'll be there next week end with Spain team

 

[calitennis127]

This year at Roland Garros, Djokovic got on a roll toward the end of the 4th set and led 4-2 in the 5th set. Nadal then realized Djokovic was going to hit Nadal off the court, unless Nadal decided to hit Djokovic off the court first. Nadal hit 22 winners in the fifth set (while Djokovic hit 13 winners). If Djokovic had played a cleaner US Open final, Nadal would have gone into "winner mode" and again knocked Djokovic off the court. That is what Nadal has learned since 2012.

Absurdity.

 

[tented]

I suppose touching the net and eventually losing the break was all down to Nadal winners too? The 5th set was not all about winners. Had Novak held for 5-2 who knows what would have happened.

I agree, that set wasn't all about winners. It was also about Nadal not being able to immediately shake off the effects of him twice serving for the match -- and failing -- in the fourth, playing a horrible opening game in the 5th, and getting broken.

Likewise, Djokovic's final service game of the match (and final game in general) was really poor on his part.

Everything in between was gold though.

PS: A lot of the "turning point" talk about Novak touching the net in the 5th (and don't get me wrong, it was), conveniently ignores that the match shouldn't have gotten there to begin with, since Nadal twice bottled it when serving to close out the match in the 4th.

What is most conveniently ignored is that The Net Touch was his third or fourth break point THAT GAME. I'm so sick of people acting like the entire match turned on that point. If he had been able to convert any of the break points preceding it, The Net Touch would have never happened.

 

[Kieran]

The net touch was the same as "that" backhand miss by Rafa in Oz: a player making a basic error because of the pressure they felt to get the job done...

 

[Denis]

I prefer not to think about what happened after 4-2 in the third set. It was bad, really bad. The good thing from the second and early third set is that I am now convinced that Djokovic's A game is better than Nadal's A game. The problem is consistency indeed.

i usually appreciate your posts. but i never bought into the A game brouhaha - there's tons of nuances in every point, and i don't see what can be achieved by putting A,B,C categories over that.

Sure, that's true. But I think a lot in the match depended on Djokovic hitting too many UE's. If he keeps that in check he can eventually overpower Nadal. Like he did in that 53 shot rally in the second set to take the break. So the match was on Djokovic's racket IMO. He handed it to Nadal by hitting too many UEs.

Let me preface my post with the following:

- Djokovic was clearly below his best throughout the match (with the exception of some phases) and made too many unforced errors.

However, there is a problem with some of what you said:

The way Novak played in 2011, especially against Nadal, is inhuman. Going in 30+ strokes rallies, while being the aggressor, and almost never missing, with that sort of physicality, is really dumbfounding. However, I think, like many, you're still hung up on his 2011 level, and want to see THAT. The mere fact that you say "all he has to do is keep the UE in check" and proceed to cite a 54 stroke rally as an example really highlights my point... it is damn near impossible to that over and over for an entire match (not necessarily the 54 stroke part, since that's an extreme example, but the consistent aggression). The level of focus, physicality, and execution required is huge.

Now keep in mind, Novak is absolutely capable of doing that. He's shown it before. But we'll both agree that his level, on average, is not his 2011 level. That was an all time great year. You can't possibly expect that every single time he plays Nadal. Now, to be clear, Djokovic does not necessarily need to play that well to beat Nadal on hards. He took him to the limit in Montreal without necessarily playing his 2011 level. But still, to just simplify matters and limit them to "keep the UE in check" in a best of five set match against Rafael Nadal is a bit of a stretch. Yes, Novak could, and should have played cleaner. But as Nadal said, when asked about Novak making too many unforced errors: You have to separate some UE's from others. An unforced error after an 20+ stroke rally is understandable. I can see why you're spoiled in that regard, since Novak routinely engaged in such rallies in 2011, and almost never missed. But again, with such aggression, it's a huge ask for him to do it all set long.

What really hurt Djokovic is not the overall number of UE's. He was being aggressive, so that can be forgiven. What hurt him is the silly, quick errors in key moments. THOSE are the unforced errors that hurt. And those didn't come after 20+ rallies. The other thing that hurt him is the now customary slow start. He can get away with it against most, but against Nadal, it becomes an uphill battle.

Keep this in mind, Novak's 2011 level is not the norm, until proven otherwise. With that said, he's far removed from that form at the moment, and that's the problem. He can play better than this without necessarily matching his 2011 highs.

Djokovic didn't have the match on his racket, by the way. He had the third set on his racket when he led by a break. That's the only definition of "having the match on his racket." Once he got broken back, it was no longer on his racket, and not on Nadal's. When he led 0-40 on Nadal's serve, Nadal saved two of those points with winners (one forehand DTL after a deep return by Novak, and one with his only ace of the match).

Novak really outplayed Nadal from the second half of the second set, till the second half of the third (when he gifted him the break back). It's quite convenient to ignore the two sets he was thoroughly outplayed him. And before anyone points it out, yes, he wasn't playing well at all in those two sets, but that means he got outplayed, since you know, his opponent actually played better.

I agree with most you said. I tried to keep it as succint as possible referring to the UE's. Still think that is key. 53 UE's and 19 points difference between them. It would have been a lot closer if he would have let Nadal make the UE's. Difficult I know, but once you start breaking the wall its possible. I thought he did it after the second set, but he let Nadal back in. Usually Nadal starts hitting a bit more UE's if the confidence is a bit lower. One more UE by Nadal in most of the rallies they are playing is one less for Djokovic and means everything for momentum.

Consistency, in that respect, is key against Nadal. You just need to keep on going. And not necessarily with high pressure shots all the time. Actually, I wonder if a counterpunching style on HC's would work better against him...

Anyway, I am out of here. I'll see you guys when the Australian Open starts. I have had my fair share of Nadal domination on tv and reading about Nadal-related stuff on these boards this year.

Anyway, have a good one here everyone. :wave

 

[Kieran]

Cheers Denisovich! Don't go too far, eh?

 

[DarthFed]

I suppose touching the net and eventually losing the break was all down to Nadal winners too? The 5th set was not all about winners. Had Novak held for 5-2 who knows what would have happened.

I agree, that set wasn't all about winners. It was also about Nadal not being able to immediately shake off the effects of him twice serving for the match -- and failing -- in the fourth, playing a horrible opening game in the 5th, and getting broken.

Likewise, Djokovic's final service game of the match (and final game in general) was really poor on his part.

Everything in between was gold though.

PS: A lot of the "turning point" talk about Novak touching the net in the 5th (and don't get me wrong, it was), conveniently ignores that the match shouldn't have gotten there to begin with, since Nadal twice bottled it when serving to close out the match in the 4th.

What is most conveniently ignored is that The Net Touch was his third or fourth break point THAT GAME. I'm so sick of people acting like the entire match turned on that point. If he had been able to convert any of the break points preceding it, The Net Touch would have never happened.

I thought it was on Deuce in that game?

 

[Kieran]

It was. And Novak won the next point...

 

[Didi]

Anyway, I am out of here. I'll see you guys when the Australian Open starts. I have had my fair share of Nadal domination on tv and reading about Nadal-related stuff on these boards this year.

Anyway, have a good one here everyone. :wave

It's a pity to see you go as I always appreciate your output on these boards.
Hope to see you back in January when the Slam Down Under comes around.
Take care, Denis.

 

[shawnbm]

Look forward to your posts in January of 2014, Denisovich.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Cheers Denisovich. I hope it wasn't us that pushed you away. See you in January.

 

[Moxie]

Cheers Denisovich. I hope it wasn't us that pushed you away. See you in January.

...if not sooner, Deni. Hopefully, you'll start to miss us before then.

 

[tented]

What is most conveniently ignored is that The Net Touch was his third or fourth break point THAT GAME. I'm so sick of people acting like the entire match turned on that point. If he had been able to convert any of the break points preceding it, The Net Touch would have never happened.

I thought it was on Deuce in that game?

You're right, Darth:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/video/djokovic-forfeits-point-touching-net-152257209.html

It was. And Novak won the next point...

That it was deuce, and Novak won the next point speaks even more to my argument that the whole match didn't rest on the net touch.

Had Novak touched it on championship point, then it would have been the big deal some Novak fans have been making of it ever since. But it wasn't. He didn't win or lose even one game. He had already had break points which he couldn't convert, blah, blah, blah.

 

[tented]

Anyway, I am out of here. I'll see you guys when the Australian Open starts. I have had my fair share of Nadal domination on tv and reading about Nadal-related stuff on these boards this year.

Anyway, have a good one here everyone. :wave

I missed you before the USO began, Denisovich, and now you're leaving already.

But not until Australia? Is that your way of saying Djokovic won't win anything until then?


[I'm hoping if I provoke him, he'll stay. ]

 

[calitennis127]

The net touch was the same as "that" backhand miss by Rafa in Oz: a player making a basic error because of the pressure they felt to get the job done...

Disagree....in Nadal's case, he just missed it. But in my mind that makes up for the scores of matches in which his artificial consistency has won him so many points that frankly he should not have won.

In Djokovic's case, it was just bad luck more than anything. But he should have put the inferior player away in that match (and never should have even gotten to a 5th set against Nadal at Roland Garros; yes Broken, I said that - his play early at both Roland Garros and the US Open was inexcusable).