Roland Garros 2011

[don_budge]

But Don...Fed's backhand vs. Nadal's forehand?

Those last few are very insightful and meaningful posts. But unfortunately, meaningless in the commercial engine that drives big time tennis today.

2. It's really sad to hear that Roger made those comments. But, two points could have made a helluva difference.

don

Interesting comments...as usual. But Don...what about this issue of Roger not playing Nadal's backhand? I was watching the match with my wife and every time Federer had a choice between hitting to the backhand or the forehand and he hit to the forehand I reprimanded him out loud in my living room as he continued to rack up losing points by doing so. When on the other hand he chose to go to the backhand side it was quite clear, even to my wife who knows little about tennis, that this was a better strategy. While Nadal may hit an occasional spectacular forehand from his backhand side of the court, he does not have the angle on Federer's backhand from that side of his court that he exploited throughout the match. This reverse crosscourt forehand for Nadal is obviously a lower percentage shot as well. It looks to me that Roger's tactical choices lost him the match, not just a couple of close points...period. I think a change in tactics...and a rather simple one at that, would of made a helluva difference. Maybe he should read a bit more...you know to exercise the muscle between the ears. So much for his coaching staff as well. What is it that they are doing to earn their salaries if not providing sound tactical strategies?

I'll say another thing with regard to Nadal's two hand backhand...that shot works just fine when you hit hard and waist high to it but it is quite a different story when you constantly hit off speed, variety of spin, and variety of depth and height to it. It seems to me that it is a bit more difficult to slug the two hander when you must generate your own energy and pace. If I was Roger...I would do a bit of a rope a dope on Nadal's backhand right from the beginning of the match then it would not be long before he would be tagging Nadal with a variety of knockout blows all over the court. Once he establishes the game over on the backhand...once he establishes that he can win that game, it opens up the rest of the court. Federer has all of the shots to make such a strategy work...none of the other players on tour have this option.

Roland Garros 2011...should be remembered for two things. Number one is Federer's defeat of Djokovic. Number two is Federer's failure to adapt his tactics to his opponent in the finals. Alright three things, reluctantly...number three...Nadal's victory. The women's side was completely forgettable...except for all of the infernal screaming and grunting.

[tennis_chiro]

Not that easy to do

Interesting comments...as usual. But Don...what about this issue of Roger not playing Nadal's backhand? I was watching the match with my wife and every time Federer had a choice between hitting to the backhand or the forehand and he hit to the forehand I reprimanded him out loud in my living room as he continued to rack up losing points by doing so. When on the other hand he chose to go to the backhand side it was quite clear, even to my wife who knows little about tennis, that this was a better strategy. While Nadal may hit an occasional spectacular forehand from his backhand side of the court he did not have the angle on Federer's backhand that he exploited throughout the match. This reverse crosscourt is obviously a lower percentage shot as well. It looks to me that Roger's tactical choices lost him the match, not just a couple of close points...period. I think a change in tactics...and a rather simple one at that, would of made a helluva difference. Maybe he should read a bit more...you know to exercise the muscle between the ears. So much for his coaching staff as well. What is it that they are doing to earn their salaries if not providing sound tactical strategies?

I'll say another thing with regard to Nadal's two hand backhand...that shot works just fine when you hit hard and waist high to it but it is quite a different story when you constantly hit off speed, variety of spin, and variety of depth and height to it. It seems to me that it is a bit more difficult to slug the two hander when you must generate your own energy and pace. If I was Roger...I would do a bit of a rope a dope on Nadal's backhand right from the beginning of the match then it would not be long before he would be tagging Nadal with a variety of knockout blows all over the court. Once he establishes the game over on the backhand...once he establishes that he can win that game, it opens up the rest of the court. Federer has all of the shots to make such a strategy work...none of the other players on tour have this option.

Don_Budge
I think it's a lot harder to go after Rafa's backhand than you point out here. Also, I'm not saying those two points would have changed the outcome; but I think they certainly would have swung the momentum much more in Roger's favor. As for the backhand, I think the idea was to keep Rafa away from the inside out forehand which he hits really well (I think I am disagreeing with your basic premise here; I think Rafa's backhand is a really good shot that he hits flatter than his forehand so that it gets to the target quicker) and to put him under pressure out wide on his forehand where very few dare to attack him. (Didn't Tilden say to break down your opponent's strength, ...if you could.) In addition, Rafa hits the inside in from that corner really well. I thought he was pretty successful attacking, but the guy is such a force of nature. I don't think Roger's volleying skills are as good as they were 6 or 7 years ago (although maybe better than the last 3 years) when he used to go to the net a lot more. Perhaps he could have used a stronger ratio of shots to Rafa's backhand corner, but I don't think you can feed him a steady diet of anything. To my mind, this was the first time I'd seen Roger really push Rafa around with some regularity on Rafa's service games. Unfortunately, I don't have a video of the match to go back and replay it. I may have to break down and get cable. I know if I do that I'll end up spending too much time watching this stuff!

don

[don_budge]

Tilden...

Tilden says that to use a tactic that is an attempt to break down your opponents strength is a more DANGEROUS strategy.

It was so obvious from where I was sitting that Nadal dominated that match with cross court forehands to Roger's backhand. From Nadal's point of view...he executed a tactic that exploited his opponent's "weakness". Nobody will argue that Federer has a weak backhand, but nobody is going to assert that his backhand is stronger than his forehand, either.

"I think it's a lot harder to go after Rafa's backhand than you point out here." tennis_chiro

I didn't say it was going to be easy. My basic premise is that Nadal's forehand did the most damage to Federer's goal of winning the match, therefore Federer should of done everything he could to keep it away from the worst source of his problems as much as he could. Please do not misinterpret that.

And thanks for the reply!

[gzhpcu]

Just to terminate my grumbling: Federer's friend Lüthi carries his tennis bags on court. Federer never does.

Federer always insists on the very best lodging. During the Olympics, he refused to lodge with the Swiss athletes in the Olympic village, he opted for a 5 star luxury hotel.

In restaurants, Federer never orders himself. He has Lüthi or Mirka order.

The guy has a complete lack of humility.

[florian80]

I believe that it is a matter of how Federer hits those backhands cross-court. Does he have an offensive or defensive mindset with the shot ?

Djokovic has shown us that the key to beating Nadal, even on clay, is to take balls on the rise relentlessly. Djokovic did this extremely well with his backhand in those matches against Nadal before the French.

To me it appears like almost anytime Federer has the guts to really go for his backhand and take it early with confidence he wins a lot more points than he looses against Nadal. Unfortunately he does so only for short periods of time. It is of course extremely hard to do that with a one-hander against Nadal's kind of spin but I think Federer can do it.

Also he probably has a major mental issue playing big matches against Nadal by now. It almost seems like he will find a way to loose when he plays Nadal in a big match!

Some pretty exciting stuff to follow though...curious how Wimbledon will turn out!

[tennis_chiro]

Absolutely right

I believe that it is a matter of how Federer hits those backhands cross-court. Does he have an offensive or defensive mindset with the shot ?

Djokovic has shown us that the key to beating Nadal, even on clay, is to take balls on the rise relentlessly. Djokovic did this extremely well with his backhand in those matches against Nadal before the French.

To me it appears like almost anytime Federer has the guts to really go for his backhand and take it early with confidence he wins a lot more points than he looses against Nadal. Unfortunately he does so only for short periods of time. It is of course extremely hard to do that with a one-hander against Nadal's kind of spin but I think Federer can do it.

Also he probably has a major mental issue playing big matches against Nadal by now. It almost seems like he will find a way to loose when he plays Nadal in a big match!

Some pretty exciting stuff to follow though...curious how Wimbledon will turn out!

Florian,
I think you are right on. And in the successful parts of the match for Roger, he was hitting those backhands much more agressively than I ever remember seeing him hit them on the clay against Rafa.

I don't know if it was fatigue or maybe a little bit of that groin pull, but he seemed to lose the ability/will to do that at the end of the match. He really needed to convert one of those break points in the 1st game of the 4th set. After that, it was the same old pattern we've seen between them at Roland Garros so many times before.

don