WTF SF: Nadal vs Federer

[huntingyou]

I was thinking 2012

 

[DarthFed]

Yea, he beat Blake and Berd in straights but was not impressive and that was after going 5 with Tipsy

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

even though the doc said the actual mono had left his body by indian wells..post mono fatique affected his core fitness untill h

 

[DarthFed]

alright, I

 

[DarthFed]

Im out

 

[huntingyou]

Its was a strange tournament for Roger for sure.....I just saw the SF from a different perspective perhaps

 

[Kieran]

That's right Cali. I didn't get worked up even once. Straight forward stuff, Rafa bossing and Roger allowing him to...

Federer was the better player up through 4-4 in the first set.

But he just doesn't have the mean streak to finish off Nadal. It's hard to fault him for that. He just isn't that kind of hardcore, fierce competitor.

Where was he the better player? He didn't win a point in Rafa's first two service games, and Rafa held easy at 3-4. They were literally even up until 4-4, in every way.

But Rafa had another level he could refer to, and that kicked in...

 

[brokenshoelace]

So I lost count, how many times did Federer go for the forehand down the line winner only to miss? Maybe it is a low percentage play after all, given that Roger hasn't hit that shut well on the run in years. And maybe, just maybe, I'm not stuck in 2006, and realize that Federer's decline in movement and consistency means he cannot fire off winners with the same ease in which he used to, and attempting to do so might result in unforced error galore. Maybe...

Or maybe I just don't know about tennis as much as the great Cali, whose brilliant gameplan surely would have resulted in a Federer win.

 

[brokenshoelace]

That's right Cali. I didn't get worked up even once. Straight forward stuff, Rafa bossing and Roger allowing him to...

Federer was the better player up through 4-4 in the first set.

But he just doesn't have the mean streak to finish off Nadal. It's hard to fault him for that. He just isn't that kind of hardcore, fierce competitor.

LOL sure.

How was he ever in a position to "finish off Nadal"? Please, I'm eager to here your ever so brilliant tennis analysis...

 

[calitennis127]

That's right Cali. I didn't get worked up even once. Straight forward stuff, Rafa bossing and Roger allowing him to...

Federer was the better player up through 4-4 in the first set.

But he just doesn't have the mean streak to finish off Nadal. It's hard to fault him for that. He just isn't that kind of hardcore, fierce competitor.

LOL sure.

How was he ever in a position to "finish off Nadal"? Please, I'm eager to here your ever so brilliant tennis analysis...

The first set. He clearly had the edge up through 4-4. He missed on those break points at 2-2 and that really hurt him.

As for the down the line forehand, you have to be kidding me. Yes, he missed it maybe two or three times, but he overwhelmingly went with the cross court forehand and the same usual nonsense happened.

Going down the line is not even consciously in his gameplan. If he does it, it is purely impromptu in a specific moment.

So I hope he continues with his 10-22 Broken Shoelace strategy. Maybe if he stays around until 2016 and beyond, he can let Nadal get 30 wins on him with that "high percentage" approach of yours.

 

[calitennis127]

That's right Cali. I didn't get worked up even once. Straight forward stuff, Rafa bossing and Roger allowing him to...

Federer was the better player up through 4-4 in the first set.

But he just doesn't have the mean streak to finish off Nadal. It's hard to fault him for that. He just isn't that kind of hardcore, fierce competitor.

Where was he the better player? He didn't win a point in Rafa's first two service games, and Rafa held easy at 3-4. They were literally even up until 4-4, in every way.

But Rafa had another level he could refer to, and that kicked in...

You conveniently gloss over the game at 2-2 when Nadal saved numerous break points.

Do you seriously think Federer was not the more impressive player up to 4-4 in the first set?

Please.

That set was basically what I predicted for set 2. Federer got right down to the business of handing it to Nadal and skipping the first set distraction.

 

[Kieran]

He saved break points, and he served 3 love games. Remember the game on Roger's serve when he came back from 40-0?

They were level at 4-4 in every way. But Rafa was clearly in control after this...

 

[brokenshoelace]

Yes, he missed it maybe two or three times,

More like 9 or 10. It's hard to argue with someone who seems to have watched a different match. I'll gladly rewatch the match and count them for you, the way Britbox did back in 2011 when Nadal beat Murray, but then you'd just ignore my post.

 

[brokenshoelace]

That's right Cali. I didn't get worked up even once. Straight forward stuff, Rafa bossing and Roger allowing him to...

Federer was the better player up through 4-4 in the first set.

But he just doesn't have the mean streak to finish off Nadal. It's hard to fault him for that. He just isn't that kind of hardcore, fierce competitor.

LOL sure.

How was he ever in a position to "finish off Nadal"? Please, I'm eager to here your ever so brilliant tennis analysis...

The first set. He clearly had the edge up through 4-4. He missed on those break points at 2-2 and that really hurt him.

As for the down the line forehand, you have to be kidding me. Yes, he missed it maybe two or three times, but he overwhelmingly went with the cross court forehand and the same usual nonsense happened.

Going down the line is not even consciously in his gameplan. If he does it, it is purely impromptu in a specific moment.

So I hope he continues with his 10-22 Broken Shoelace strategy. Maybe if he stays around until 2016 and beyond, he can let Nadal get 30 wins on him with that "high percentage" approach of yours.

And wait, having break points at 2-2 IN THE FIRST SET means you're in a position to "finish off Nadal"? More world class analysis by Cali...

It's important to note that among those 3 break points, two were saved with forehand winners. The third was when Federer missed a down the line forehand which in fairness, he should have made. I'd still bet my house on Nadal even if Federer had broken. Sorry, but Federer/Nadal matches don't have a doubtful outcome anymore, and I have never, EVER said that in the past. But there comes a point where you gotta call a spade a spade.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Anyway, Nadal needs to raise his level against Novak (if it is indeed Novak). I didn't think he was particularly great today, but then again, there's a certain comfort zone he enjoys against Roger and that's often enough. It's not just about the cross court forehand to Roger's backhand, but little tactical choices that wouldn't work against someone like Djokovic. For instance, as effectively as Nadal served, and as great as his first serve % was, a similar performance likely gets him broken four times against Djokovic. On break points against Roger, he just knows what he has to do, even if it's a second serve.

The short backhands that he plays won't cut it against Novak. Nadal knows that they actually trouble Roger, since they would tempt him to actually go for too much, for some reason. That's just a pattern in their matches, where Rafa goes for a routine rally backhand down the line that barely lands on the service line, and gets away with it.

One thing I noticed is how Rafa wisely ignores his slice against Roger. He knows how Federer can completely destroy Rafa's slice. Even from defensive positions, Nadal will opt to go for a giant step (he almost takes an extra split step within the big step itself) in order to get a two handed backhand.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Regarding Roger's "clear edge" until 4-4 in the first, here is what happened:

First game: Roger holds to 15.
Second game: Nadal holds to love (not a single serve was returned)
Third game: Game goes to deuce on Federer's serve, before Federer goes on to hold.
Fourth game: Nadal holds to love (2 winners, one lucky let chord, and an UE by Fed...just in case you're wondering about Roger's edge)
Fifth game: Federer holds to love.
Sixth game: Federer goes down 30-15. Hits a stunning return winners for 30-30. Then a let chord goes Roger's way as a short ball that Nadal attempts to put away with the forehand clips the top of the net and goes long. Break point for Roger. Nadal saves with an inside out winner. Bad UE by Nadal gives Roger another break point. Roger misses a make-able DTL forehand. Another BP follows, and Nadal saves with another forehand winner and goes on to hold.
Seventh game: Federer holds to love.
Eight game: Nadal holds to love.

So let me get this straight, Federer's "clear edge" until 4-4 of the first set is failing to win a single point on Nadal's serve in three out of four of Nadal's service games, and get break points in one of them? Yeah okay...

 

[calitennis127]

That's right Cali. I didn't get worked up even once. Straight forward stuff, Rafa bossing and Roger allowing him to...

Federer was the better player up through 4-4 in the first set.

But he just doesn't have the mean streak to finish off Nadal. It's hard to fault him for that. He just isn't that kind of hardcore, fierce competitor.

LOL sure.

How was he ever in a position to "finish off Nadal"? Please, I'm eager to here your ever so brilliant tennis analysis...

The first set. He clearly had the edge up through 4-4. He missed on those break points at 2-2 and that really hurt him.

As for the down the line forehand, you have to be kidding me. Yes, he missed it maybe two or three times, but he overwhelmingly went with the cross court forehand and the same usual nonsense happened.

Going down the line is not even consciously in his gameplan. If he does it, it is purely impromptu in a specific moment.

So I hope he continues with his 10-22 Broken Shoelace strategy. Maybe if he stays around until 2016 and beyond, he can let Nadal get 30 wins on him with that "high percentage" approach of yours.

And wait, having break points at 2-2 IN THE FIRST SET means you're in a position to "finish off Nadal"? More world class analysis by Cali...

It's important to note that among those 3 break points, two were saved with forehand winners. The third was when Federer missed a down the line forehand which in fairness, he should have made. I'd still bet my house on Nadal even if Federer had broken. Sorry, but Federer/Nadal matches don't have a doubtful outcome anymore, and I have never, EVER said that in the past. But there comes a point where you gotta call a spade a spade.

Fed's down the line miss at 30-40 was an easy gimme shot that he just hit long.

On that court, with the clear advantages to Fed's game, Federer would have taken the set with that break. Maybe not the match, but he would have won the first set. And that would have made Nadal's task that much harder.

 

[Front242]

Federer was the better player up through 4-4 in the first set.

But he just doesn't have the mean streak to finish off Nadal. It's hard to fault him for that. He just isn't that kind of hardcore, fierce competitor.

LOL sure.

How was he ever in a position to "finish off Nadal"? Please, I'm eager to here your ever so brilliant tennis analysis...

The first set. He clearly had the edge up through 4-4. He missed on those break points at 2-2 and that really hurt him.

As for the down the line forehand, you have to be kidding me. Yes, he missed it maybe two or three times, but he overwhelmingly went with the cross court forehand and the same usual nonsense happened.

Going down the line is not even consciously in his gameplan. If he does it, it is purely impromptu in a specific moment.

So I hope he continues with his 10-22 Broken Shoelace strategy. Maybe if he stays around until 2016 and beyond, he can let Nadal get 30 wins on him with that "high percentage" approach of yours.

And wait, having break points at 2-2 IN THE FIRST SET means you're in a position to "finish off Nadal"? More world class analysis by Cali...

It's important to note that among those 3 break points, two were saved with forehand winners. The third was when Federer missed a down the line forehand which in fairness, he should have made. I'd still bet my house on Nadal even if Federer had broken. Sorry, but Federer/Nadal matches don't have a doubtful outcome anymore, and I have never, EVER said that in the past. But there comes a point where you gotta call a spade a spade.

Fed's down the line miss at 30-40 was an easy gimme shot that he just hit long.

On that court, with the clear advantages to Fed's game, Federer would have taken the set with that break. Maybe not the match, but he would have won the first set. And that would have made Nadal's task that much harder.

Was pretty disgusted he missed that shot as it was a sitting duck and had he won set 1 things may have been different. But we can't change any of it and best to forget about it as I hope Fed will too.

 

[Mastoor]

It doesn't happen often for me to praise Nadal, but I noticed that he halved his service time and against ExFed today he rarely needed more than 20 seconds.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Was pretty disgusted he missed that shot as it was a sitting duck and had he won set 1 things may have been different. But we can't change any of it and best to forget about it as I hope Fed will too.

Yup. He would have lost in three sets instead of two...

OK, just kidding, though that's more than likely true.