Roma!!

[klacr]

Agree. Tomas just needs a break!

I'm awful at tournament predictions but I'm ok at predicting player success. 7-8 years ago I thought Djokovic would be the next player. Here's my limb....

Outside the big 4, Tsonga, Berdych and Del Potro have the best shots. Tsonga is capable of beating anyone but to beat 2 of the big 4 is hard. And he's not young anymore. Berdych is so close too. I think he can get one in but he needs some luck. Like Roddick, bad timing. Del Potro has the advantage of being slightly younger than either. But he's not getting any better since his all-court skills are not at the same level as the others. Stan isn't at the same level of talent although he's trying and peaking.

Jerzy is good but he won't crack the top 5 for another 2 years. When Fed and Nadal go away and he's 26-28 years old, he should get into the top 4-5 and possibly 1-2 major finals (or more?). As good as his movement is, it's not as good as a player 6'1-6'4" or one of the big 4 (5). That's very important since movement is a major part of winning. Raonic is very dangerous but just doesn't hold up in movement. He could get to a finals of Wimbledon or US Open maybe 3 years from now. Maybe even a major title. Nishikori can be a finalist at a major, either Australian or US Open. I was never big on Querrey or Cilic as a major SF.

I think the next great player may be Grigor Dimitrov. He has the pedigree (#1 ITF and junior Wimbledon and US Open Champion). He has the all-court game, the speed, the weapons, he already beat Novak and nearly toppled Murray. He played Murray close all 3 times. He went 3 sets with Nadal bother times he played. His return game could get better and he will get fitter (like Djokovic).
He has not done well at majors...so far. Expect him to be a QF this year or next year to make his break through into the top 10. Because of the big 4 block, he may not win one until 3 years from now when I think he will be top 5 (bumping Federer and maybe Nadal). Dimitrov may be the next multi-major champion.

The best American we will hear of in about 2-3 years will be Alex Domijan. He has a great chance of cracking the top 50 after 18 months on the tour like John Isner, similar in size (6'7"). Despite playing for Virginia, his game is probably already around #100-150 ATP. Alex should surpass Isner and should be a consistent top 10 player 4-5 years from now. His teammate Jermere Jenkins should be a top 50 ATP player (e.g, like Benjamin Becker) but top 20 is hard.

Of course, if my crystal ball was flawless, I would be sitting with millions from Wall Street....

Thanks for chiming in Doug. Your contributions to the forum are always beneficial.

What you say about Tsonga, Del Potro and berdych are spot on. Del Potro has been the only one to defeat two of the top 3 and go onto win the US Open in 2009. Tsonga is capable of beating anyone, but also losing to many and I don't think he has the mental consistency to beat two of the players back to back.
Berdych beat Federer in quarterfinals and Djokovic in semis at Wimbledon in 2010 but Djokovic was not at the level he is now.

II can see Dimitrov becoming real big and making a run, but so many cvariables involved as well. It's always tough to predict these things. The other names you mention are legitimate as well. No arguments here.

Like many of us, I cannot predict the future either. If I knew what was going to happen hours, days, weeks, months or years from now, I probably wouldn't be teaching tennis for a living.


Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

Nadal vs. Federer...Final of Rome

Federer has very little to win in a match with Nadal. He is low on the motivation side for his semi-final. I have never seen his opponents play but the outcome will be interesting either way. If Roger loses then I see it as one more indication that professional tennis has gone the way of Big Time Wrestling. If he wins...I am afraid that he will be cat food for Nadal. The crosscourt forehand of Nadal crushed any hope that Berdych may have had for the afternoon. When it wasn't the crosscourt it was down the line. When it wasn't either of these two it was the reverse down the line or the reverse crosscourt. In other words...Berdych was unable to exploit the Nadal backhand because he could not stand up to the punishment of the forehand.

So far Djokovic is the only one to either figure out that you have to take it early or somehow you must play the forehand to get at the backhand. Djokovic is the only one that has the guts to do it and he is the only one to have the strokes to do it. Nadal can really spread it out when he is controlling play on the forehand. Djokovic is the only one to figure out to take a little air out of the balls and slow things down to where he can dictate the pace. To do this he has to attack the forehand initially to move Nadal over to his left just a bit and prevent him from camping out there to hit just forehands. Once he has Nadal leaning left a bit then he starts to work on the backhand while maintaining the pressure on the forehand. Djokovic has the ability to take the Nadal forehand early and to flatten it out...nobody else has demonstrated this talent.

It should be interesting to see how motivated Roger is to get to the finals to meet the Spanish "Raging Bull". "Just give me a stage where this Bull can rage"...Robert DeNiro as Jake Lamotta.

Nadal vs. Federer in the final tomorrow. This should be interesting.

[stotty]

I thought Paire was amazing...so smooth, so talented. But Federer is so good at eking the win in these kind of matches. The difference between the two players was slender until it came to the crunch.

I liked the way Paire sneaks in to the net now and again. He volleys well. He has lovely touch and feel. It's the first time I have seen him play. I was impressed. He reminds me a little of Mecir.

Beating Nadal looks an impossible task for Federer. I just cannot see it happening. Nadal is just so difficult to beat on clay. The only player that can do it is Djokovic...for reasons already accurately stated by don_budge.

Roll on Roland Garros...

[don_budge]

Mirror Tactics of McEnroe vs. Borg...Federer against Nadal compliments of don_budge

Beating Nadal looks an impossible task for Federer. I just cannot see it happening. Nadal is just so difficult to beat on clay. The only player that can do it is Djokovic...for reasons already accurately stated by don_budge.

Roll on Roland Garros...

Since Roger elected to move into the finals against Nadal he cannot afford to roll over like a good boy and play dead. He cannot think about rolling on towards Roland Garros just yet. What he has to do is he has got to do something different. He has to rethink his tactical approach on clay versus the current King of Clay.

The biggest advantages that Nadal has over Federer is his fitness and his quickness...in addition to his topspin forehand. The player that will play the most balls from a balanced position more often than the other is going to be the victor. It is very difficult to move Nadal into a position where he is off balance. This is what Djokovic manages to do. Djokovic can manage this because he also has that uncanny ability to get himself balanced when he hits his shots. In fact...he is the best at it and that probably above all else is the reason that he is the number one player on the tour.

Djokovic manages this special skill with his quickness, his anticipation and his ability to prepare himself to go forwards into the ball before he actually gets to the ball. Early preparation. Once he gets there he has the ability to do something with the ball from any position to answer whatever his opponent throws at him. This includes Nadal's forehand.

So is there anything that Roger Federer can do to increase his chances of defeating the Spanish southpaw in Rome. At this point his record against Nadal is 2 wins and 12 losses on the dirt. Always change a losing game. Their overall record is 19-10 to Nadal so if you take away the dirt results it's a pretty even matchup...on paper.

One year at the French Open, I cannot remember if it was last year...maybe it was the year before, I was lamenting that Federer plays the Nadal forehand way too often off of his backhand. Federer hits with topspin right into the teeth of Nadal's forehand and after a couple of a mean topspin forehands to the Federer backhand it is all over more often or not. I would suggest to Federer to take a page out of the McEnroe book of playing players with strong gripped forehands and two handed backhands. Since Roger is right handed and Nadal is left handed this makes a lot of sense.

What was it that McEnroe did to neutralize the players that fit this description when they started to emerge from the ranks most notably from the tiny little country of Sweden. How did he manage to neutralize Björn Borg back in the waning days of classic tennis? Did you know that McEnroe beat Borg the very first time that he played him...and that was in Stockholm in 1979? But anyways...McEnroe often employed a combination of tactical shots in order to throw his Swede counterpart off balance and one of his favorite combinations were sliced balls off of his backhand down the line which would set up a number of interesting possibilities. Once he had Borg off balance down the line of the backhand he could shoot something angled crosscourt or deep into the corners. Borg himself admitted in a book that I just read recently..."I never knew what John was going to do with the ball." Roger has to make good use of the available geometry and real estate out there today if he hopes to win. It will be great practice for the French Open. If he can come up with some workable tactics he can neutralize the fitness and conditioning factor by getting more work out of Nadal on a point by point basis.

Somehow Federer must take out his topspin crosscourt backhand out of the equation as the basis of his attack against Nadal. It has been demonstrated that this tactic is suicidal. It's a losing game. Always change a losing game...never change a winning game. Strange as it may sound...the Rosewall or McEnroe technique might be the way to go here (take a look at my tactical practice in bottle's New Year's Serve post #1575). Some of this tactic is going to have to be applied to balls that Federer is going to take early or on the rise...the shorter technique of yesteryear may be more applicable here. The thrust of this tactic is not to win with speed off of this shot but to get the Spaniard off balance and stretched out on the backhand side of the court so that Federer can turn the table in the momentum of the points. If Federer can somehow get Nadal engaged in backhand exchanges down the line he stands a far better chance than his crosscourt exchanges into the lefty forehand.

Djokovic has demonstrated that varying the depth and the speed to Nadal's backhand is more successful than trying to attack on the basis of speed alone and I would suggest that the key to Federer's attack should keep this element in mind. Variation...throw the Nadal out of his rhythm. The more that Roger can turn the match into a tactical contest instead of a physical contest the better it will be for him. That being said...I sometimes wonder about the tactical acumen of Federer. He might have been better off playing more doubles...ala McEnroe. Again...here we are talking about the architecture of a tennis player and a tennis match. Assessing the relative strengths and weaknesses and trying to build something that will fundamentally stand up to all of the variables. A sound combination of art in terms of awareness and perception and applying good intelligent engineering principles. From the mouth of Federer's coach Paul Annacone himself...with a little help from yours truly...don_budge.

Take a look at the old McEnroe vs. Borg matches. It will be like looking in the mirror for Roger.

[don_budge]

The performance of...

...Roger Federer was very lackluster. Very disappointing to hand it over to Rafael Nadal. To not leave it all on the court must feel disappointing. At times it appeared that there might be some thoughtful tactics but there was no perseverance. On a clay court one must demonstrate first of all patience. Federer could be in control of a point and then just give it away with a "careless" error. He showed very little emotion...never appeared to want it and never appeared to be disappointed in his performance.

Very mysterious. 32 unforced errors. Many of them careless.

[GeoffWilliams]

It's called over thirty, no more testosterone for small tournaments, and fuel for the french open final. He doesn't care about these non slams. Why half kill himself to beat nadal when he knows only a flat out effort will do. His strings are set too low, at 48.5/46.5lbs.

[stotty]

...Roger Federer was very lackluster. Very disappointing to hand it over to Rafael Nadal. To not leave it all on the court must feel disappointing. At times it appeared that there might be some thoughtful tactics but there was no perseverance. On a clay court one must demonstrate first of all patience. Federer could be in control of a point and then just give it away with a "careless" error. He showed very little emotion...never appeared to want it and never appeared to be disappointed in his performance.

Very mysterious. 32 unforced errors. Many of them careless.

I'm with Geoff on this one. He just didn't fancy it on the day. He would have to pull of the performance of his life to beat Nadal on clay. You need a strong stomach for a scrap like that. Better to save it for RG.

I just wish he wouldn't make it so obvious...

[don_budge]

Wait a minute...it's ok to tank?

I'm with Geoff on this one. He just didn't fancy it on the day. He would have to pull of the performance of his life to beat Nadal on clay. You need a strong stomach for a scrap like that. Better to save it for RG.

I just wish he wouldn't make it so obvious...

Now just a minute here. This sort of performance should be condemned with strong language I think. What kind of example does this set for any of the millions of tennis players that look to this guy for inspiration? What a poor example that was today and it isn't the first time that I've seen it.

It's called PDS...Prima Donna Syndrome. More of the Big Time Wrestling behavior and from Roger Federer no less. Roland Garros isn't for another couple of weeks. Strong stomach for a scrap like that? That is what he is paid some millions and millions of dollars to do. Strong stomach my ass...it's all about respect.

If I ever hear a coach condoning something like that...saving it for another day...I swear it makes me want to throw up. I don't care what his name is. I don't care how old he is. I don't care what tournament is coming up. If he can't show the interest and make the best effort on any given day in a professional tournament final, then he is redefining the word professional. He went down like a pussy...no sense in mincing words.

It's a sad day to witness that kind of performance in the finals of a tournament that big with that big a purse. That kind of performance spells out D-I-S-R-E-S-P-E-C-T for everything that the great game of tennis means to me. First of all...it is disrespectful to all of the other players who competed in the draw that fought tooth and nail to get where they are. It is disrespectful to the paying customers. But most of all it is disrespectful to the game itself. Everything it stands for. The words to the poem "If" may not be on display at the Rome tournament but they should be etched in the hearts of every single tennis player that competes in tennis tournaments...professional or amateur. What are the lessons in life to be gleaned from competition? Throw in the towel when you just don't give a damn. Nonsense...you play whatever mind game that you have to on yourself, get out there and give it hell. I try to convince my students that this is the way to play tennis...this is the way to practice tennis. This is the way to live life. Anybody can go through life not giving a crap...but with the proper training...oh forget it. It's a sign of the times.

Especially if you are considered one of the greatest players to ever play the game. The more that I think about it...it's disgraceful. I am becoming less of an admirer of Roger Federer the more that I witness this kind of lack of competitive spirit. If you are too old to make the ultimate effort when you lace them up to walk out on to the court for the finals of a big tournament...it is time to hang 'em up. You owe it to your opponent to give it everything you got. When you go up to the net afterwards to shake hands...you gotta shake hands like a man. You got to look him in the eye and both of you should know that the best man won. Not like some pansy that threw in the towel without a fight. Pancho Gonzales he is not.

[stotty]

Hold your horses...

Now just a minute here. This sort of performance should be condemned with strong language I think. What kind of example does this set for any of the millions of tennis players that look to this guy for inspiration? What a poor example that was today and it isn't the first time that I've seen it.

It's called PDS...Prima Donna Syndrome. More of the Big Time Wrestling behavior and from Roger Federer no less. Roland Garros isn't for another couple of weeks. Strong stomach for a scrap like that? That is what he is paid some millions and millions of dollars to do. Strong stomach my ass...it's all about respect.

If I ever hear a coach condoning something like that...saving it for another day...I swear it makes me want to throw up. I don't care what his name is. I don't care how old he is. I don't care what tournament is coming up. If he can't show the interest and make the best effort on any given day in a professional tournament final, then he is redefining the word professional. He went down like a pussy...no sense in mincing words.

It's a sad day to witness that kind of performance in the finals of a tournament that big with that big a purse. That kind of performance spells out D-I-S-R-E-S-P-E-C-T for everything that the great game of tennis means to me. First of all...it is disrespectful to all of the other players who competed in the draw that fought tooth and nail to get where they are. It is disrespectful to the paying customers. But most of all it is disrespectful to the game itself. Everything it stands for. The words to the poem "If" may not be on display at the Rome tournament but they should be etched in the hearts of every single tennis player that competes in tennis tournaments...professional or amateur. What are the lessons in life to be gleaned from competition? Throw in the towel when you just don't give a damn. Nonsense...you play whatever mind game that you have to on yourself, get out there and give it hell. I try to convince my students that this is the way to play tennis...this is the way to practice tennis. This is the way to live life. Anybody can go through life not giving a crap...but with the proper training...oh forget it. It's a sign of the times.

Especially if you are considered one of the greatest players to ever play the game. The more that I think about it...it's disgraceful. I am becoming less of an admirer of Roger Federer the more that I witness this kind of lack of competitive spirit. If you are too old to make the ultimate effort when you lace them up to walk out on to the court for the finals of a big tournament...it is time to hang 'em up. You owe it to your opponent to give it everything you got. When you go up to the net afterwards to shake hands...you gotta shake hands like a man. You got to look him in the eye and both of you should know that the best man won. Not like some pansy that threw in the towel without a fight. Pancho Gonzales he is not.

I spoke from Roger Federer's perspective, not mine. I am not condoning it, quite the reverse. Don't forget I spotted this going on in him before others did. He's done this a number of times when things haven't gone his way early on in a match. I am just guessing at what is going through his mind and I think I am right. These ATP 1000 events don't seem to mean that much at times. I don't know what you and Geoff pay for your satellite TV but mine is nearly £1000 per year...and I only use it for tennis...I, too, want my money's worth!

He's not the only one doing this. Djokovic has done it also. Nadal never has...or not that I have witnessed.

[DougEng]

Federer has very little to win in a match with Nadal. He is low on the motivation side for his semi-final. I have never seen his opponents play but the outcome will be interesting either way. If Roger loses then I see it as one more indication that professional tennis has gone the way of Big Time Wrestling. If he wins...I am afraid that he will be cat food for Nadal. The crosscourt forehand of Nadal crushed any hope that Berdych may have had for the afternoon. When it wasn't the crosscourt it was down the line. When it wasn't either of these two it was the reverse down the line or the reverse crosscourt. In other words...Berdych was unable to exploit the Nadal backhand because he could not stand up to the punishment of the forehand.

So far Djokovic is the only one to either figure out that you have to take it early or somehow you must play the forehand to get at the backhand. Djokovic is the only one that has the guts to do it and he is the only one to have the strokes to do it. Nadal can really spread it out when he is controlling play on the forehand. Djokovic is the only one to figure out to take a little air out of the balls and slow things down to where he can dictate the pace. To do this he has to attack the forehand initially to move Nadal over to his left just a bit and prevent him from camping out there to hit just forehands. Once he has Nadal leaning left a bit then he starts to work on the backhand while maintaining the pressure on the forehand. Djokovic has the ability to take the Nadal forehand early and to flatten it out...nobody else has demonstrated this talent.

It should be interesting to see how motivated Roger is to get to the finals to meet the Spanish "Raging Bull". "Just give me a stage where this Bull can rage"...Robert DeNiro as Jake Lamotta.

Interesting statement. I know what you mean and many would agree.

However, rationally, he has everything to gain from beating Nadal. Less to gain from beating Nole or Andy. Fed is often written off before the match begins against Nadal. He has nothing to lose now and everything to gain. Imagine if now, in the late stage of his career, he beats Nadal a couple times on clay. He can get the monkey off his back and he can gain confidence to win another major (since he knows he can beat Nole or Andy...but not Rafa). It's worth experimenting against Nadal to get better. That's very much the measure of his success now besides doing well in majors.

Roger has already proved he can beat anyone anywhere. Except Nadal on clay consistently. That is his challenge now besides trying for 1-2 more majors.

Admittedly he may not look at it that way, unfortunately but more resigned to his fate. I think he hears too many people saying he needs to be on top of his game to win. Ferrer has taken Nadal twice to the distance in his last two clay court matches despite running a ridiculous negative streak. Same for Gulbis...twice 3 close sets (hard and clay). Roger needs to look at that as news that if you play hard, you can go tight with Rafa.

I think it's more fun thinking about what he could do. Today he tried a few more slice approaches to the backhand that didn't work. Slices just don't beat Rafa...just a bad idea. Below is a suggested Christmas wishlist for Fed:

1) Hypnosis...50% of the problem is mental. Roger needs to fool himself he is playing Nole or someone else. Seriously, Roger should consider a hypnosis expert.

2) Offensive Serve Return...players give Nadal trouble if they have any of a) a great serve return, b) blazing speed, c) huge offense from the baseline. He did unlaunch one run-around forehand late in the match from the doubles alley. He needs more of that.

3) A More Consistent Slice...Roger misses way too many defensive slices. Not even against Nadal but against everyone. And it's worst against Nadal since working slices does NOT bother Nadal. Either more consistent or don't use it at all!!

4) Heavier Shots And Angles. Of the big 4, Roger has the worst angles. Therefore he cannot play the same side-to-side game as Nole, Andy or Rafa. Roger's strength is forehand inside-in and inside-out and XC. That's more classic. Roger needs to consider going slightly more western on his grip against Rafa. He needs to come over the backhand like he did at his last RG against Rafa where he played Nadal close. What Roger can learn is how Rafa loses.
Roger is also the one player who has the talent to use a different technique and win still. Remember he has more forehands types than the number of Spanish players in the top 300.

5) Experiment With Equipment! Roger never liked to change his racquet and won't experiment as much as Nole or Rafa. That's his weakness. He's a bit stubborn. If he had a racquet with a slightly bigger head, he probably won't shank forehands under pressure and his backhand would be easier to come over. Or reverse his stringing job. That's important since he could hit heavier or with more pace. Roger doesn't hit hard enough to beat Nadal with power. So Roger lacks Soderling, Delpo or Gulbis pure baseline power. Considering Roger likes to drive with depth like those big guys, he needs 5% more pace to keep Nadal under pressure. Even Isner took Nadal to 5 sets at RG. If Roger can't learn from that, it's tough.

6) Rip It! With the slightly better equipment, Roger might be able to rip the ball more aggressively like Soderling or Gulbis.

7) Learn to fight and win like a bull. Yes, he can learn something from Nadal or Djokovic. Again, another reason he can use a sport psychologist besides a hypnotist. Even Andy Murray is more of a bull (in the gym). Get to the gym a bit more, Roger! He does train hard and his stamina is amazing...but another couple pounds of muscles might help overpower Nadal. He just can't do it the way it is now.

8) Tactics:
A. Use the serve-and-volley from the ad court to Nadal's backhand...Roger does serve-and-volley but almost never this tactic. He tries to serve Nadal wide...the problem is that opening the court against Nadal can be risky.
B. Better angles and spin can allow him to play Nadal side-to-side better.
C. More aggressive return.
D. Hit through and overpower.
E. Fight like Ferrer.

What he may not be able to improve
1. Foot speed...at his age, tough one.
2. Serve...it is almost as good as it will be. He just needs a bit more consistency to give him more matches with 70+% first serves in.
3. Volleys...they won't get better. He just needs to choose approach shots better or use other tactics to come in (more).

[don_budge]

Actually this is the more interesting post..

Since Roger elected to move into the finals against Nadal he cannot afford to roll over like a good boy and play dead. He cannot think about rolling on towards Roland Garros just yet. What he has to do is he has got to do something different. He has to rethink his tactical approach on clay versus the current King of Clay.

The biggest advantages that Nadal has over Federer is his fitness and his quickness...in addition to his topspin forehand. The player that will play the most balls from a balanced position more often than the other is going to be the victor. It is very difficult to move Nadal into a position where he is off balance. This is what Djokovic manages to do. Djokovic can manage this because he also has that uncanny ability to get himself balanced when he hits his shots. In fact...he is the best at it and that probably above all else is the reason that he is the number one player on the tour.

Djokovic manages this special skill with his quickness, his anticipation and his ability to prepare himself to go forwards into the ball before he actually gets to the ball. Early preparation. Once he gets there he has the ability to do something with the ball from any position to answer whatever his opponent throws at him. This includes Nadal's forehand.

So is there anything that Roger Federer can do to increase his chances of defeating the Spanish southpaw in Rome. At this point his record against Nadal is 2 wins and 12 losses on the dirt. Always change a losing game. Their overall record is 19-10 to Nadal so if you take away the dirt results it's a pretty even matchup...on paper.

One year at the French Open, I cannot remember if it was last year...maybe it was the year before, I was lamenting that Federer plays the Nadal forehand way too often off of his backhand. Federer hits with topspin right into the teeth of Nadal's forehand and after a couple of a mean topspin forehands to the Federer backhand it is all over more often or not. I would suggest to Federer to take a page out of the McEnroe book of playing players with strong gripped forehands and two handed backhands. Since Roger is right handed and Nadal is left handed this makes a lot of sense.

What was it that McEnroe did to neutralize the players that fit this description when they started to emerge from the ranks most notably from the tiny little country of Sweden. How did he manage to neutralize Björn Borg back in the waning days of classic tennis? Did you know that McEnroe beat Borg the very first time that he played him...and that was in Stockholm in 1979? But anyways...McEnroe often employed a combination of tactical shots in order to throw his Swede counterpart off balance and one of his favorite combinations were sliced balls off of his backhand down the line which would set up a number of interesting possibilities. Once he had Borg off balance down the line of the backhand he could shoot something angled crosscourt or deep into the corners. Borg himself admitted in a book that I just read recently..."I never knew what John was going to do with the ball." Roger has to make good use of the available geometry and real estate out there today if he hopes to win. It will be great practice for the French Open. If he can come up with some workable tactics he can neutralize the fitness and conditioning factor by getting more work out of Nadal on a point by point basis.

Somehow Federer must take out his topspin crosscourt backhand out of the equation as the basis of his attack against Nadal. It has been demonstrated that this tactic is suicidal. It's a losing game. Always change a losing game...never change a winning game. Strange as it may sound...the Rosewall or McEnroe technique might be the way to go here (take a look at my tactical practice in bottle's New Year's Serve post #1575). Some of this tactic is going to have to be applied to balls that Federer is going to take early or on the rise...the shorter technique of yesteryear may be more applicable here. The thrust of this tactic is not to win with speed off of this shot but to get the Spaniard off balance and stretched out on the backhand side of the court so that Federer can turn the table in the momentum of the points. If Federer can somehow get Nadal engaged in backhand exchanges down the line he stands a far better chance than his crosscourt exchanges into the lefty forehand.

Djokovic has demonstrated that varying the depth and the speed to Nadal's backhand is more successful than trying to attack on the basis of speed alone and I would suggest that the key to Federer's attack should keep this element in mind. Variation...throw the Nadal out of his rhythm. The more that Roger can turn the match into a tactical contest instead of a physical contest the better it will be for him. That being said...I sometimes wonder about the tactical acumen of Federer. He might have been better off playing more doubles...ala McEnroe. Again...here we are talking about the architecture of a tennis player and a tennis match. Assessing the relative strengths and weaknesses and trying to build something that will fundamentally stand up to all of the variables. A sound combination of art in terms of awareness and perception and applying good intelligent engineering principles. From the mouth of Federer's coach Paul Annacone himself...with a little help from yours truly...don_budge.

Take a look at the old McEnroe vs. Borg matches. It will be like looking in the mirror for Roger.

Here is the blueprint that is probably the best possibility for Roger to topple Nadal given the relative strengths and weaknesses of the two players.

It is not by slice alone...not by playing defensively mind you. It is the combination of everything and I have cited McEnroe's tactics against Borg as an example. A textbook example.

With all of the different combinations of slice and drive that Roger has at his command and he limits himself to a very narrow range of shots when playing against Nadal is really not a very intelligent way to approach the problem.

McEnroe on the other hand possessed something that obviously Federer does not...a tactical acumen for any and all occasions. When Johnny was playing the game there was a little bit of this...a little bit of that. The game was not so nearly one dimensional as it is now. Perhaps the biggest difference was that every player knew how to use the whole court from anywhere they were on their own side of the court.

There were times during the match that Federer used some tactical acumen and he had Nadal "off balance" but he would prematurely go for the winner and he made a slew of careless unforced errors. The mental toughness was not present and what it amounted to was a half-assed effort in my book. There were times that he half heartedly attempted to serve and volley but it looked to me that it was just a way to get another point out of the way quickly so that he could get back to the comfort of his hotel room.

What Djokovic does very effectively against Nadal is that he subtly moves him up and back with variation of depth and angle plus he is subtly changing the spin and pace on the ball. Djokovic is content to manipulate Nadal for as many shots as it takes until he finally has him in a position where he can apply the knockout punch. You can see that no amount of power is going to overpower Nadal...that is what he thrives on. That is the game that he wants to play. To beat him you must make him play a game that he does not want to play. He does not want to play cat and mouse and what is more his game and grips are not suited for that type of play.

When Roger has him deep to the forehand side he should be looking to move him shallow to the backhand. When Roger has him shallow on the backhand side he should be looking to move him deep into the forehand corner. After doing these patterns a couple of times...he can have him on a string...looking for one or the other then crossing him up in the other direction. This is what Djokovic is doing to him. First he establishes that he will play the forehand and he shows Nadal that he is not intimidated by it...then once he establishes this he start to work on his real game plan which is to exploit the backhand which he does in a number of different ways and always using the Nadal forehand side of the court to move him over and open up the weaker side.

In the wonderful duels between the American Volcano and the Swedish Ice Bear...the Super Brat was alternating between short slice to the backhand then topspin drive deep to the backhand. There were a plethora of possibilities...endless permutations and combinations that he used to make his opponent feel like he was bleeding to death...instead of mindlessly bludgeoning him to unconsciousness. Borg said as much..."I never knew what John was going to do". You gotta be like that against Nadal...just like against Borg. If you allow a player of this nature to get into a rhythm you are cooked...you cannot possibly beat them at their game.

It's like the Artist vs. the Engineer (Magician vs. Mechanic)...if the Engineer is allowed to repeat the same motions nonstop without interrupting the variances and tolerances it will persevere in the end. But if the Artist will patiently dissect using his racquet as a brush or a surgeon's scalpel he will always have a chance to disrupt the flow of the machine. I would suggest throwing a little sugar into the tank...that always works.

[don_budge]

Continued....on and on and on...

I have suggested a change in the brush or the scalpel many times in the past...an absolute must to get on more even footing. Calculate the statistical chances of hitting the sweet spot in any and all given situations and you will find that it adds up to a significant digit during the course of a tennis match when it is all said and done. Many times matches are decided by just a handful of important points...or even just one.

There is a huge amount of material here for any tennis aficionado to ponder...from subjects that range in the metaphysical. The psychological, the attitude, the emotional, courage, intestinal fortitude, physics and equipment, tactical acumen, the ability to adapt, impressing your game on your opponent.

Beyond all of this...Federer must possess the patience to play out such tactics. He must have faith and trust. He must believe in his mission. It doesn't appear that these are components of the current equation that he is working with. He must find value in manipulating his opponent and keeping him on a string for as long as he can. There may be points that he might just lose in the end but if he can get work out of his opponent the points may just actually be a win in some respects. He has got to work Nadal every single point without letup. He has got to MAINTAIN PRESSURE ON HIS OPPONENT. He should have been beaten 6-1, 6-0. It was almost as if Nadal gave him a couple of games so that it wouldn't look as pathetic as it did.

Federer must take the edge off of Nadal's physical superiority and confidence...and the only way the Roger can do this at this point is to outthink him. But he has to keep this mental pressure on for the duration of the match...through the ups and downs. The peaks and valleys. This is what Djokovic is also doing so effectively...staying in the game. Weathering the storms. He is waiting for the game to come to him. But this is the thing...to outthink him appears to be a stretch for him. And what is Paul Annacone being paid to do as well? The coach...the architect should be coming up with the blueprint. There has been a failure in the process. Sadly...Federer seems to be a bit mechanical and far less creative than he needs to be at this point.

If I am Federer...two things. I change my equipment and I change my coach. Nothing short of either John McEnroe or myself will do. Annacone is far too complacent and content to allow his charge to finish out his career disgracefully. He is afraid of insulting "The King" and losing his cushy seat where he is most comfortable. McEnroe just might put some edge into the Federer game which he sorely needs. Some fire in his belly. I would get myself fired before the first ten minutes into the interview...unless he is a little smarter than I am giving him credit for now. Even though I would be telling him word for word the same thing that McEnroe would be telling him.

Super comments and great food for thought...Doug.

[don_budge]

Horses...oh yeah. Sorry about that Stotty.

I spoke from Roger Federer's perspective, not mine. I am not condoning it, quite the reverse. Don't forget I spotted this going on in him before others did. He's done this a number of times when things haven't gone his way early on in a match. I am just guessing at what is going through his mind and I think I am right. These ATP 1000 events don't seem to mean that much at times. I don't know what you and Geoff pay for your satellite TV but mine is nearly £1000 per year...and I only use it for tennis...I, too, want my money's worth!

He's not the only one doing this. Djokovic has done it also. Nadal never has...or not that I have witnessed.

Oh yes...lest I forget about you my friend. Not for a second was I thinking of you when I was wailing on the coaches. But my point is...for all of the coaches out there. First round or finals. Wimbledon or Timbukto. That display sucked for all time.

DO NOT CONDONE THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR FROM ANY STUDENT EVER! I AM DEEPLY DISAPPOINTED IN ROGER FEDERER...THAT WAS ONE PISS POOR EXAMPLE OF ONE OF THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS OF A TENNIS PLAYER...GUTS!!!

[jbill]

Disgraceful

I couldn't agree with don_budge more. Federer was disgraceful today. I had the same thought. If he can't get into it more, he should retire. Totally unprofessional. Just disrespectful to everyone: his opponent, the fans and himself. It actually occurred to me while the match was going on, how many more years did he say he was going to play? Why not retire? He was just so emotionless today. No interest, no motivation. It was so obvious!

Yeah, I have often wondered about his "tactical acumen" also. Come on Fed, try something different. He has gotten beat by Nadal on clay so many times exactly the same way. Yeah, and what is Anacone paid to do anyways? I totally agree. At Fed's age he is not going to overpower Nadal. So as don_budge says, he has to outsmart him. As good as Fed has proven he could be in the past, you would think he would relish taking on a different tactical approach in order to still prove he has what it takes to be a champ.

Today Fed showed absolutely no sense of pride whatsoever. There just was no honest effort on his part at all. It was like he stepped onto the court with a foregone conclusion in his head. He met his obligation to show up, nothing more.

Doesn't say much for professional tennis players or professional tennis. Are we close to Big Time Wrestling like don_budge suggests?

Nice post by Doug Eng, too. Very interesting tactical points for Federer to consider.

jbill

[stotty]

The last bastion of a Nadal invasion...indoors.

This has been a great thread. Just sorry not to have seen tennis_chiro's hot tip for the future, Jerzy. I keep missing this guy.

Doug and don_budge's thoughts on Federer's tactical approach, or lack of it, are interesting. The business about angles is interesting. The two handers seem to get acute angles of their backhands in ways a one-hander player can't. Paire hit some lovely angled backhands when he played Federer in the round before.

Bit late in the day now but maybe Federer should have opted for the two-hander when he was young...might have made all the difference in his match up with Nadal.

The only bastion Federer has left over Nadal is indoor tennis. Because this isn't just a problem restricted to clay courts as some might think. Nadal is better on all surfaces, including grass. Maybe it's not that he's better. It's just the match up doesn't suit Federer.

Had Nadal been a righty, Federer might have won some of these contests.

Does anyone know what Nadal has been up to from a training standpoint during his seven month lay off? McEnroe went out of the game for six months and was never the same again after...Nadal has never been better. Are we sure he wasn't in secret training somewhere, and that his injury was merely a decoy...just joking, but it makes you wonder.

I think mixing things up like Djokovic is the best approach. Players who have copied Djokovic's tactics when they play Nadal seem to have done the best. I think trying to play an intricate game using slice would be too much to ask unless Federer can get in a position to start commanding things. I think the return of serve is the most critical element because if Nadal gets the upper hand rallies from the get-go it's hard to reverse that.

I love the way Djokovic can stem momentum, not just against Nadal, but anyone. Sometimes it looks for all the world like Djokovic might lose a set from, say, 2-5 down but he then comes surging back. His only flaw are these inexplicable lapses he has...like against Berdych...and dropping the third set in his Wimbledon final against Nadal when the game was a rout...things like that...must be concentration or just complacency.