Whassup with Federer?

[ochi]

in case you don't get Tennis Channel...

This is baffling. First, Djokovic says no mas!, I'm dizzy, then the curse of the UEs strikes Federer again -- a total of 44, to 23 winners, after feebley having given away his final service game. And it wasn't as if he was trying to hit winners off most of those 44. Otherwise, he played well, aggressively, going to net a lot, but blew a 4-0 lead in the second set.

Score was 7-5, 7-5, Nadal, who hit 15 winners and 20 UEs. How long until he becomes no. 1? With him, you know what you're going to get, every time.

[uspta146749877]

espn.com/tennis comments

This is baffling. First, Djokovic says no mas!, I'm dizzy, then the curse of the UEs strikes Federer again -- a total of 44, to 23 winners, after feebley having given away his final service game. And it wasn't as if he was trying to hit winners off most of those 44. Otherwise, he played well, aggressively, going to net a lot, but blew a 4-0 lead in the second set.

Score was 7-5, 7-5, Nadal, who hit 15 winners and 20 UEs. How long until he becomes no. 1? With him, you know what you're going to get, every time.

see

http://www.tennis.com/news/news.aspx?id=127508

[uspta146749877]

stategy?

I take my hat off to Federer for his play yesterday and today. Whatever has been troubling him, he has played manfully these last two days. I even see him starting to work out a clay court strategy for his backhand against Nadal. Now, if he can just get the mental side right for Roland Garros...

What was the strategy?
Slice?

[lukman41985]

Rafa is just one hell of a fighter.

This was a HUGE week for Federer despite not winning. He had nice leads in both sets but gave both up.

I think he's confident he's made some progress against Nadal despite the loss. Sounds like he played a different match and just choked a little. Not a big deal. There's still time until Roland Garros.

Onto Rome!

Shame on Djokovic...I dislike this guy and his parents.

[uspta146749877]

44 errors in 24 games

Rafa is just one hell of a fighter.

This was a HUGE week for Federer despite not winning. He had nice leads in both sets but gave both up.

I think he's confident he's made some progress against Nadal despite the loss. Sounds like he played a different match and just choked a little. Not a big deal. There's still time until Roland Garros.

Onto Rome!

Shame on Djokovic...I dislike this guy and his parents.

44 errors in 24 games amounts to almost 2 error per game.
How do u win a match in this scenario?

[ochi]

What did I miss, USPTA146749877?

Thanks for suggestion. I did just read the Tennis.com story. It's well-written and thorough, for a deadline story; but what explanation did I miss, besides Federer being disappointed with himself? There's the usual, "Federer committed too many unforced errors, surprisingly on his forehand..." BUT THAT'S THE WAY ITALWAYS IS -- predominantly forehand UEs. Surely, Jose Higueras has noticed that, and figured out the glitch, for a glitch there must be. And, I'm sure that John Yandell can spot it, too, and most likely has by now. And if Federer can endure watching a tape of the match without grinding his teeth, I bet he'll see what it is. The special May issue of Tennis magazine features "4 Secrets to Federer's Forehand." I'd better read it. Maybe the secret to his UEs can be found there. Then again, the heck with it. I'd much, much rather read about 4 secrets to Nadal's forehand, especially how he gets so much heat into his topspin, and how he varies the spin.

[oliensis]

Federer, Nadal, and Diagonals

Last year I noted on one of these boards that I thought Federer should do everything in his power to NOT play the Federer-backhand-to Nadal-forehand diagonal...as much as possible.

Let's assume for this post that Federer is on the south end of the court and that Nadal is on the north end...so F should try not to play the south-west to north-east (SW-NE) diagonal, but should rather play the SE-NW diagonal.

F did a lot to emphasize the "correct" diagonals in today's match...lots of down-the-line backhands and cross-court forehands. But what I noticed is that Federer looked almost as uncomfortable playing the SE-NW diagonal as he does playing the SW-NE diagonal against Nadal. Why? Well, what it looks like to me is that it's built into almost every aspect of F's game, from how he thinks to how his strokes are constructed. F did not look comfortable rallying cross-court from his forehand side. Obviously he can hit great winners cross-court on the forehand, but he just doesn't seem to have the mind-set or tools to pound Nadal's backhand and make Nadal choose the WRONG down-the-line backhand--make him make the wrong choice about changing direction.

Part of that is that Nadal, being a lefty who's playing a righty, is used to defending the effort to play the SE-NW diagonal. And the corollary to that is that Federer, being a righty playing against a lefty, is less practiced at forcing this geometry than Nadal is at defending it. (N runs around the backhand very well.)

F's game is constructed around certain patterns (most effective against righties) and when he's gotta think in a mirror image of those patterns, he's still a terrific player, but he's not "himself." He's not "TMF" (the mighty Federer).

In the simplest terms, it may be that Nadal's backhand against Federer's forehand may be better than Federer's backhand against Nadal's forehand.

And I think it is all these factors that make Federer press on his forehand...he goes for too much when he gets the chance...rushes himself, tries to hit winners rather than just very forcing shots. It's like trying to hit homers in baseball...bad approach, better to just hit hard line drives and let the homers take care of themselves. Same thing here.

One more point...I think that Federer will have to take losing points at the net in stride if he's ever going to beat Nadal on clay. The great aussie net rushers didn't mind getting passed, as long as it was less than half the time. I'm not sure Federer has the confidence in a net-rushing game to take getting passed 40% or 45% of the time without "learning the lesson" that he shouldn't come to net so much.

I think we saw in stretches today how Federer could beat Nadal on clay again...slices, looping short angles to N's backhand, short-angle slices to N's forehand...but I think F will have to be thicker skinned about losing a large % of points when he's not playing his normal game in order to sustain those kind of tactics for 3 or 5 sets.

Best,
ao

[uspta146749877]

an espn blog

Last year I noted on one of these boards that I thought Federer should do everything in his power to NOT play the Federer-backhand-to Nadal-forehand diagonal...as much as possible.

Let's assume for this post that Federer is on the south end of the court and that Nadal is on the north end...so F should try not to play the south-west to north-east (SW-NE) diagonal, but should rather play the SE-NW diagonal.

F did a lot to emphasize the "correct" diagonals in today's match...lots of down-the-line backhands and cross-court forehands. But what I noticed is that Federer looked almost as uncomfortable playing the SE-NW diagonal as he does playing the SW-NE diagonal against Nadal. Why? Well, what it looks like to me is that it's built into almost every aspect of F's game, from how he thinks to how his strokes are constructed. F did not look comfortable rallying cross-court from his forehand side. Obviously he can hit great winners cross-court on the forehand, but he just doesn't seem to have the mind-set or tools to pound Nadal's backhand and make Nadal choose the WRONG down-the-line backhand--make him make the wrong choice about changing direction.

Part of that is that Nadal, being a lefty who's playing a righty, is used to defending the effort to play the SE-NW diagonal. And the corollary to that is that Federer, being a righty playing against a lefty, is less practiced at forcing this geometry than Nadal is at defending it. (N runs around the backhand very well.)

F's game is constructed around certain patterns (most effective against righties) and when he's gotta think in a mirror image of those patterns, he's still a terrific player, but he's not "himself." He's not "TMF" (the mighty Federer).

In the simplest terms, it may be that Nadal's backhand against Federer's forehand may be better than Federer's backhand against Nadal's forehand.

And I think it is all these factors that make Federer press on his forehand...he goes for too much when he gets the chance...rushes himself, tries to hit winners rather than just very forcing shots. It's like trying to hit homers in baseball...bad approach, better to just hit hard line drives and let the homers take care of themselves. Same thing here.

One more point...I think that Federer will have to take losing points at the net in stride if he's ever going to beat Nadal on clay. The great aussie net rushers didn't mind getting passed, as long as it was less than half the time. I'm not sure Federer has the confidence in a net-rushing game to take getting passed 40% or 45% of the time without "learning the lesson" that he shouldn't come to net so much.

I think we saw in stretches today how Federer could beat Nadal on clay again...slices, looping short angles to N's backhand, short-angle slices to N's forehand...but I think F will have to be thicker skinned about losing a large % of points when he's not playing his normal game in order to sustain those kind of tactics for 3 or 5 sets.

I assume you have read

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=3361454

Best,
ao

I assume u know
the following blog

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=3361454

[uspta146749877]

see my post below

Thanks for suggestion. I did just read the Tennis.com story. It's well-written and thorough, for a deadline story; but what explanation did I miss, besides Federer being disappointed with himself? There's the usual, "Federer committed too many unforced errors, surprisingly on his forehand..." BUT THAT'S THE WAY ITALWAYS IS -- predominantly forehand UEs. Surely, Jose Higueras has noticed that, and figured out the glitch, for a glitch there must be. And, I'm sure that John Yandell can spot it, too, and most likely has by now. And if Federer can endure watching a tape of the match without grinding his teeth, I bet he'll see what it is. The special May issue of Tennis magazine features "4 Secrets to Federer's Forehand." I'd better read it. Maybe the secret to his UEs can be found there. Then again, the heck with it. I'd much, much rather read about 4 secrets to Nadal's forehand, especially how he gets so much heat into his topspin, and how he varies the spin.

Please see my post below pointing to the espn blog

[lukman41985]

44 errors in 24 games amounts to almost 2 error per game.
How do u win a match in this scenario?

He must have done something right to be up a break in the first set and be up 4-0 in the second set.

[ochi]

Damn right, he did, Lukman! He played well for most of the first set, and great for the first four games in the second set. He was aggressive, he didn't make many simple errors on gimmes -- and then he did, bigtime. How come? That is the mystery. Is it Blake's Syndrome? Sublime to abysmal and back again. Is it the same thing that made Yevgeny Kafelnikov hang his head like a pouting kid as he muttered to himself late in his career? Is it the same thing that made Boris Becker scream expletives at himself in gutteral Deutsch late in his career?

I take it back -- I don't think even John Yandell can explain it, and Jose Higueras is not about to tell. Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi could tell us, but they won't. Better not to ask. Just hope that Federer can, with the help of Higueras, get his head right and keep it right. I want to see more of him floating to balls, more of him hitting impossible shots.

[lukman41985]

Getting beyond the Federer choked thing...

How about the level of respect Federer has for Nadal? AWESOME to see.

Check out this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJvikkmiu4g

Fast forward to 7:29--Federer up 4-0 in the second, Nadal serving @ 30-15. What ensues is a monster 25 shot rally. Federer plays the backhand to backhand down-the-line directonal, even throws in the down-the-line slice that formed his "secret strategy" (credit to John Yandell) at Wimbledon. Rafa still wins the point! And at the 8:05 mark, you hear Federer let out a "WOO HOO!" after Nadal hits a cross court forehand winner. This is tennis at the HIGHEST level it's maybe ever been played, at the very least, on a clay court.

We're lucky...

[ochi]

Lukman, who said he choked -- used that word?

Even though it must have been a mental lapse.

It cannot be that he choked. He is maybe the best of all time, number one in the world for six years. He knows himself, and how to deal with his dips.

But does his knowing segue into doing?

And how is choking defined at that level, not counting how Djoker does it? (Allowing that Djoker might really have a physical malady that has not yet been diagnosed.)

Maybe Federer got a little tight or a little careful, and started THINKING in the dangerous verbal way? What else could account for it? Ran out of adrenalin? No more endorfins?

It is not for us posters to say.

If John Yandell does not go out on a limb on this, good on him.

Someday, Federer, himself, will tell us.

[oliensis]

re: diagonals

I assume u know
the following blog
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/ten...ory?id=3361454

I saw that blog. Thought it was good esp. re: slice backhand, but it didn't go into that much detail about court geometry and lefties.

The other thing I suspect Federer has to be able to do is attack the Nadal serve better. I know that's a tall order, but I think chip-&-charging to the backhand should be in the game plan at least occasionally.

[uspta146749877]

an article by Patrick McEnroe

I saw that blog. Thought it was good esp. re: slice backhand, but it didn't go into that much detail about court geometry and lefties.

The other thing I suspect Federer has to be able to do is attack the Nadal serve better. I know that's a tall order, but I think chip-&-charging to the backhand should be in the game plan at least occasionally.

There was an article in NY Times last year about Nadal vs Federer
I will try to find a pointer-it was I think written by Patrick McEnroe.
I cannot find it online.
It was in one of Sundays issues of NY Times August or September last year