Why Federer won?

Why Federer won?

  • Poor game by Nadal.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Federer did not care to lose to Nadal any more

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • New racquet finally payed off

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    6

mrzz

Hater
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
6,331
Reactions
3,253
Points
113
^That´s really a good question. Being the great tactician he is, for sure there was a reason behind it. In fairness, maybe he felt he wasn´t so sharp, but I guess it has to do more wth the fact that Federer´s serve is much harder to read. Raonic will serve bombs but Nadal was always at the right spots (credit to him), (and, by the way, Raonic was indeed trying to sacrifice pace to put a little more variation on it. Bad opponent to try this...).
 

shawnbm

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
3,597
Reactions
1,294
Points
113
Why did he win? How about he is pretty damned skilled tennis player who played well, particularly in the crucible that is the fifth set?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moxie and britbox

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,639
Reactions
5,729
Points
113
I had to re-watch the entire fifth set, and my impression is slightly different from before. Both Roger and Rafa were playing very, very well - and, in some ways, typical of their strengths. Roger was creating a ton of breakpoints with incredible shot-making, but Rafa was coming up with his signature incredible shots at the most crucial moments.

Now after Rafa broke Roger to start the set, rather than Roger collapsing he kept steady and put the pressure on Rafa, winning most of his service games relatively easily, while creating a ton of break opportunities. The 6th game was, of course, the turning point and it really looked like Rafa was going to drive the point home on the way to victory. But Roger kept pressing, and eventually Rafa hit that ball wide, evening up at 3-3. When Roger held quite easily to go up 4-3, and then went up 40-0 on Rafa's service game, it looked like the wind had been knocked out of Rafa. But Rafa did what he does best: he came back.

So the pivotal games were the 6th, when Roger broke back, and then the 8th, when he broke Rafa again. In both cases, Roger did something he hadn't really been able to do against Rafa, at least for years: he fought on and found a way to beat him his own way. He stayed to his game plan, being both aggressive and varying his shots. That fifth set, especially after the first game, was really Roger at his finest. We've seen Roger play this way before, but not against Rafa - at least in the last decade or so.

Another thing I noticed is that for the first time ever Roger was hitting his backhand hard cross court into Rafa's forehand. It really looked like he was attacking it, sort of like Novak does. In the past, when he's hit that shot, I've winced because he wasn't hitting it with much force and it wasn't really because he wanted to, he was just trying to rally and stay in the point hoping (futilely) for a chance to hit a forehand. Not this time. Seemed to me it wasn't about Rafa's level dipping, Rafa just wasn't able to adjust to the brutality of Roger's deep backhands.

It made me wonder if Novak has identified something about Rafa's forehand stroke production that might be a slight chink in his armour. We are so used to Rafa hitting winning forehands from dominant set ups, is it possible that he isn't so impregnable if he's not given quite as much time on the forehand?
 
Last edited: