Sean, you nailed it when you said someone else needs to take out Nadal for Fed to win the French. And although that is the more likely scenario, Nadal, barring injury, is so tough on clay that is is still unlikely. Djoko doesn’t seem to move as well on clay as I suspected. Safin has the game, but needs a shrink. Nalbandian has ground himself down. Ivo… no chance. I almost think someone else needs to step up. I know I’ve said it before, but Gonzo also has the game to take Nadal on clay, and he’s become one of the fittest guys on tour, so look for him to challenge Nadal depending on the draw. Canas might be in there, but if he gets a few early five setters in him, he’ll go away.

However, if someone where to beat Nadal, he would probably give Fed a lot of trouble. There are a few players who can take Roger on clay. It’s such a tough surface for him because he takes that backhand on the rise extremely early. On hard courts, that’s a plus… on clay, no so good.

It would be great to see Fed win the French, but
he may pull a Pete. It just goes to show, like I always say, Agassi is THE man. And Nadal’s going to get even better as we approach the French. He is the Borg of this decade. If I were Fed, I would be very worried about Wimbeldon. Nadal’s serve is going to get better, his return will get better… Fed could be in trouble this year on the lawn.

Nadal’s “habbits” are very telling of his personality. He is SO focused, that everything becomes a mission. Those water bottles have to be lined up exactly. His socks must be perfectly even. His underwear has to be precisely picked. Whatever he focuses on at the moment is his world. And when that yellow ball is flying through the air, he must crush it! He’s a machine. I suspect severe OCD… and it makes him the ultimate dirt baller.

If only Guga would return for real!

Sean,
did you watch over PC? I watched the match on tvu. in the morning it was not very bad, but very patchy in the afternoon. I wonder if it was the tennis channel or tvu.

Nadal is taking much less time and has cut down on his routine. I read that uncle Toni gave him those tasks to do to slow down his serve and make him focused and it helps.yesterday the crowd was trying to lift up Roger’s game by cheering loudly, but it didn’t affect Rafa a bit, as it didn’t in the French Open. He is very concentrated.

he also works very hard. Didn’t he immediately go to practice his serve after Berdych match to improve the 48% number? If Fed shows such dedication, strangely it is not reported.

I noticed those extra pounds around Fed’s belli in Indian Wells and also his face. He needs to be careful.

Those said, I think you are being harsh on fed. He is definitely in the mix with Rafa on clay. He didn’t drop a set coming to the finals and gave Rafa more workout than any one during last weeek did. He has been to every final of every clay tournament he attended. So to me he is #2 on clay. #1 is Rafa and I hope he maintains his health and his level of play to lift the French Open trophy for a third time.

Sean,

I saw a different match. Maybe it’s because I watched it on TV and you watched it on the internet.

From my point of view, Roger didn’t play his best and Nadal played extremely well. If my memory is correct, Roger’s plus/minus was -19 (19-38) and Nadal’s was 0 (19-19). Too many unforced errors for Roger.

On the long rallies, I thought that they pretty much broke even.

There were only 2 breaks of serve in the match. Roger had a couple of break chances but failed to convert.

I thought Roger should have had more aces.

In your favor, I thought Roger choked on the important points. Nadal didn’t.

Roger needs more time on clay.

If I’m right, Rome should be different. Last year Nadal beat Federer 6-7(0), 7-6(5), 6-4, 2-6, 7-6(5) in 5 hours and 5 minutes.

Question: Will Rome also change to best of 3 this year?

Nadal is definitely ahead of Fed on clay, no doubt. But don’t forget that Nadal is probably the 3rd or 4th best clay courter EVER (borg, lendl, maybe guga ahead of him?). Sampras was never good enough to challenge guys like Muster on clay - he even lost to Bruguera all the time (on clay). If Fed hadn’t been the 2nd best clay courter today, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

Fed is clearly the 2nd best clay courter today. Its not just Fed, there’s NOBODY who can challenge Nadal on clay today. 67 straight matches man! Sampras was never even a top 10 clay courter of his time.

So give Fed a break. Nadal is just an absolute freak of a creation on clay, and left handed, which helps him against most players, since he is used to playing right handed players, but they don’t get to play lefties often.

Though I do feel that luck will be needed for Fed to win the french.

I think we have an exciting tennis this year.

We have 2 top player who will share silverwares this year, 2 record smashing players! 2 aliens

you have roger, the dominator on hard and grass, and nadal the dominator on clay and dangerous on gras and hard.

other players, are currently just sparing partner for roger and rafa

i think you should not complain too much about their abilities. i like the way it is. if roger would win everything, so what is the point guys?

no one would watch tennis…

it is an exciting movie right now with 2 from other planet

Terrific comments. Am a big fan of Fed myself, but he seemed to simply lose his nerve in the second set. From what I’ve seen these past four years of his playing, he does not do well when he’s coming from behind. Fed largely wins when he is in front, and doesn’t seem to have the will to fight back when he’s losing. That’s the critical difference here. Nadal fights for every point, Fed does ONLY when he’s winning. It’s almost illogical, but there it is! I actually read that Fed was largely working on his fitness during the break, so don’t know where all this belly-talk is coming from. I think if Fed shows the same intensity he did when he took down Nadal at the Masters’ Cup in Shanghai last year, he will win the French Open. Perhaps we should get Mats Wilander to speak once again of his lack of cojones, and goad him into action. It will be a pity if Fed doesn’t win the French Open. He clearly is still the best player around.

Fed had a real chance when was 3-4 and missed 3 breakpoints. Last year he missed two (or three ?) balls to win Roma.

I think a lucky Roger CAN beat Rafa.

I have to agree that Federer certainly was no match for Rafa on sunday. Nadal played an amazing match and played so much better than Federer done. I do certainly believe that Federer can beat Nadal on clay by using different tactics and mixing up the play like was said earlier. For example the first set of the RG final last year woz a stunner from Federer. He did everything right and it certainly looked like he would go on to win, but then he decided to start trading from the baseline. I do question why he chooses to do that but it is certainly something Federer cannot afford to do with Nadal. I myself am sure that he has scoured the tapes of the Rome and RG final last year to work out tactice but he just doesnt seem to exectued them nearly enough. However saying that. I do still feel like Federer will take a masters on clay this year and the french open, i feel like he is going to come up with a few surprises. Its looking like Hamburg is his best bet as i dont think Nadal is playing that event and hopeully if he wins one he will gain the confidence back in his game which he no doubt lost over the past few weeks. Federer will always be my favourite for every tournament he plays, regardless of opponent or surface.He is the best around

“Nadal’s “habbits” are very telling of his personality. He is SO focused, that everything becomes a mission. Those water bottles have to be lined up exactly. His socks must be perfectly even. His underwear has to be precisely picked. Whatever he focuses on at the moment is his world. And when that yellow ball is flying through the air, he must crush it! He’s a machine. I suspect severe OCD… and it makes him the ultimate dirt baller.”

That’s a complete reflection of Lletton Hewitt now that I think about it.

I think that Federer is going to have a “normal” year as a pro and maybe even lose his No-1 spot. So what? In a 15 year career, Sampras also lost his no-1 status a couple of times. But he is still remembered as the Pistol Pete. Eulogies apart, I think Federer seems to have mentally reconciled that he is going to be the second-best to Nadal on clay. That resignation was evident in the fact that Federer did not try anything at all after being down a break in the 2nd set. A champion player that he is, he should have somehow found a way to take this to a third. Even at the French Open last year, he gave Rafa some tense moments late in the 4th set..but better late than never. Now, he seems to be content that he can beat all others except Rafa on clay. So he must be hoping that Nadal somehow loses his way in the French early on, while he himself manages to reach the final. This thought of comfort is the danger zone and effectively begins the ’slide’ which can ultimately kill competitive interest for Federer..but what the heck, he will still end up with 12 odd GS titles..It would be funny if Rafa loses in French and Federer faces a certain G. Canas in the 3rd or 4th round..that would be a interesting proposition wouldnt? But not for the Swiss fans..

Canas is no Nadal.

Fed certainly has to mix it up more and try something different. Easier said than done though. NOBODY else has been able to do that anyway. Fed has been the CLOSEST to nadal on clay the last couple of years.

However, I agree with one point - Fed does sometime drop his shoulders. There’s no excuse for that. He has to view it as a boxing match and fight every point as if his life depended on it. that’s what nadal does.

nadal will last only a couple more years, but by then fed may be too old for the french. so he has to win it this year or the next.

If he doesn’t win the french this year, he should replace tony - he’s too old now anyway. Fed needs Lendl as a coach - steely nerve, strong one-handed backhand. Lendl would have beaten nadal on clay.

SB, Fed will NOT lose his No.1 spot this year.
Haven’t you checked the rankings?
He’s still 2,400 points ahead of Nadal! Nadal
has all these points to defend on the clay courts and even IF he successfully defends all of them, he will still have to make it to the finals of Wimbledon if he is to be within firing range of Fed’s ATP points.

And 12 GS titles? What are you talking about?
Fed’s only 25 with 10 titles. He will definitely break Pete’s record.

Sean,
Don’t you think this is all a bit too premature? This is Federer’s first clay court tournament (his worst surface nonetheless), makes the final without dropping a set and loses to the best clay court player around. Remember, there was every possibility of the match turning around if Federer had made something of those more than a couple breakpoints in the first set. So, I think just give the dude some time, okay. I really think you guys are stretching the issue too much. BTW Sean, its good to read that you finally agree that Federer can beat Nadal from the baseline on grass and hard courts. Last I read, before Wimbledon last year,you were giving Federer no chance at all against Rafa from the baseline-your logic being “Nadal had superior groundstrokes”. You changed your opinion this year I see. So, I guess its hard for me to accept your opinion that Federer can’t beat Nadal from the baseline.

Sean, Federer should have won the first set. He had break chances — he gave that set to Nadal. After that, his frustration overtook his desire. Yet he was still saving breaks on his own serve in the second set. I disagree with you. Federer played poorly and was still close. There’s nothing to dispute about that. It was there for all to see. And Nadal played great. Federer is right to be encouraged — I mean this wasn’t like a Serena beat down on Sharapova.

I’m definitely a Federer fan, I’ve decided he’s THE ONE i want to see winning a Grand Slam. I hoped that was the year but the last events - double Canas defeat, montecarlo defeat in straight sets - turned my hopes down.
I’m on the group who think that Roger ’suffer’ Nadal in a psycological sens, but I hoped this problem was solved after Shanghai, rather than in Wimbledon, where, in my opinion, he suffered too much considering previous matches and Nadal’s level on gras - (he almost lost to Kendricks, he had a very comfortable draw, no Gasquets, no Ancices, etc).
My hope - simply a hope - is that Roger, if he and Tony have a new strategy (which could be something very similar with the Rome’s one, or not), they will keep for themeselves until Paris.
Consider that Paris could have become an obsession, and that in the same time staying on the baseline seems to allow roger to keep the edge against other players (and not to lose Atp points, if he reach every clay tournament final).
I first was very disappointed for the defeat but afterwards I considered:
- he played a good tournament, despite the double-shock defeat in march, and a lack of real tennis playing: he said that he mainly trained his fitness, in these last months, and that he scheduled everything to ‘peak’ in Paris. His level is more likely to raise than to fall.
- Roger’s backhand seems definitely improved. Sometimes he played some winners, often he seems able to play against rafa’s forehand. I think that a normal Federer - better forehand and service - should have been very close to Rafa, even not mixing up.
- Rafa, in the same time, seemed very close to his top. We are still 40 days far from Paris final…
I’m looking forward the next tournaments, we’ll see if something is to change.

Anyone wondered that clay court tennis changed completely since the advent of “power” racquets with oversized heads?

In the 70s and 80s, French champions would routinely win majors on other surfaces (Borg, Lendl, Wilander, even connors won on clay at the US open, Mcenroe was no pushover on clay, etc.).

Chang 1989 was the transformation year. Since then, tennis has really become two different sports - clay, and other surfaces. RARELY does a french champion win anything else (Agassi? Kafelnikov? - that too the AUS open, which is a very slow hard court). and RARELY does any other grand slam champion win the french. It was not like that earlier.

The reason? Modern racquets give players the easy way out - build up stamina, run fast, build up muscles to hit the ball hard, don’t need to be a superhero in the pure skill department, and the defensive strategy of less errors pays off. Since they can now hit the ball hard from 20 feel behind the baseline, they can just stay behind. Was not like that earlier.

What a pity. This leads to freaks like Nadal, who make tennis a bit boring, and reduce the role of skill in clay court tennis, increasing the role of fitness, speed, and power beyond what it should be.

This trend is going to increase, not decrease. Just like Chang showed that you can win the french with those tactics, Nadal has stepped it up a notch. He will inspire a generation of players like him. What a pity.

Nadal may win an odd AUS open, but he is never winning anything else. Especially after 2006 - players no longer fear him on hard courts. He doesn’t have a shot on grass. 2006 final at wimbledon was a freak of the draw he got. he’s not getting anywhere near the final this year.

Point is - for Fed to win the french open in this age, would be an achievement greater than anything seen in tennis before. After all, its two different sports now!

The commentaries on this site are great. Thank goodness there are so many rabid tennis fans.

i agree that Roger has a chance on clay. Despite the uncharacteristic shankings and net balls we saw on Sunday, Roger held up and Rafael only had one break of serve per set. It wasn’t a demolition.

Not every match of Roger’s will be as inhumanly dominating like the Aussie Open semi against Roddick. Like he said, he needs to warm up on clay to get used to it and heck, he made the bloody final and had break points against Nadal whch no one else came close to doing.

Bring on the clay!

VAMOS RAFAEL the saviour of tennis! I do love it when he beats the supreme arrogance right out of that princess Roger haha! And KADs like Sean Randall are left humbled and scratching their heads in the aftermatch. Suddenly they\’re not crowing so loudly anymore about Federer\’s dominance and that can only be a good thing for tennis.

I know I’m going to get killed with this comparison.

When I watch Nadal on clay versus Serena on clay, I see two dramatically different styles.

Nadal hangs behind the baseline about 8 feet, even on second serves.

Serena is about 4 feet in front of the baseline on second serves.

Now I know their opponents are much different, but isn’t there some opponent of Nadal that can take advantage of his playing back so far?

I once saw Anna Chakvetadze return a serve with a drop shot. What an interesting shot. Total surprise.

Maybe Djokovic or someone else could beat Nadal with a ton of excellent dropshots.

Maybe someone emulating Serena’s game will beat Nadal.

It’s going to take something special to break his current streak on clay.

Its just fitness and racquet technology, that is making clay court tennis so boring. Wait another couple of years, when Nadal is out of puberty, he’s not winning any major after that. Fed’s last major (most likely the 2012 wimbledon) will be AFTER nadal’s last major (most likely the 2009 French). And Fed will have 3 times the number of majors Nadal has when both are retired (18-6).

speaking of federer’s awesome AO semi against roddick. that and his final match against blake in shanghai last year were, as roche said, the best roger has ever played. he just played unstoppable tennis beyond anything that has ever been done before. and i mean so what if it’s straight sets. 1 break per set is actually extremely close and nadal admitted that the match was closer than the score, and the score wasn’t that far off. if federer can peak and get that spark during the french open final against nadal and play out of his mind for 3 straight sets like he did against roddick, there’s no doubt in my mind he’ll win. big if but i think it’s pretty likely.

A fair article but i dont think we are about to find what Federer can or cannot do this clay season(well duh). Though it surely looks unlikely. We can all talk how close he s been and what not but truth is he was Never in control except that one break chance. Regarding some of the comments, somebody mentioned this Nadal as a bad precedent for sport? Thats the worst kind of nonsense I ve ever heard. He s strong obviously but thats Not what gets him there. Success is the sum total of a lot of parameters and determination perhaps ranks just below talent. And I simply havent seen anyone more a more determined and committed tennis player than Nadal. Which means that rest assured he’s not going to simply blow away like other former clay courters. Besides he’s 20 years old and there’s no telling what he ll do in future given his drive. i certainly think he has the character to change his game sufficiently to have a shout on other surfaces. Trying to mow him down by the silly “he’s not talented enough and Shouldn’t win” is utterly inane.

Nadal is 21 in 6 weeks.

Nobody is saying that he doesn’t deserve to win. He’s just made clay court tennis more boring, by taking a bit of skill out of it, and replacing it with muscle. I guess it might draw in some boxing fans now, but it has certainly turned off some tennis fans like me. Its not his fault though, he’s just a creature of evolution, given the racquet technology, it had to happen.

Why just Fed, why not question the others who are consistently losing to nadal on clay?

Why not past champions like Sampras, who lost much more often to clay courters, even weaker ones like bruguera?

As for Nadal’s tennis skills, we saw them in plenty in 2006 once the french open was done.

Nadal doesn’t win matches. He makes others lose. There’s a subtle difference, but an important one, that takes the fun out of a sport.

im not gonna lie, i used to believe nadal was just really lucky and pretty low on the talent list. but im telling all you haters now that nadal is one of the most talented players ever. just because his game looks unorthodox and all doesn’t mean anything. his unbelievable determination has helped him fully exploit his talent and that’s how he consistently hits the fuggin lines dead on almost every single time he hits the ball. hes unbelievable. but so is federer. i want federer to win the french this year and the whole year slam, but after that i only want him to win the olympics. if nadal happens to win everything else, so be it. hes great, he works hard, he deserves anything and everything he wins.

Nadal is very talented. He hits those amazing shots and his determination really showed. He deserves all those win. If he does win RG and everything else on clay,so be it. I don’t mind at all. But he definitely didn’t win because of muscles. Agassi Fan, so that means Fed’s skills lost to Nadal’s muscles? Get real.

I think tennis really needs Roger or someone to beat Nadal on clay otherwise this entire clay court season (like the last 2 years) is just a foregone conclusion. For people who said Roger was making tennis boring by winning everything… what do you think about Nadal on clay? He’s now at, what - 67 matches and counting? Why watch clay court events since you know who the winner will be before the tournament even begins? Wasn’t that their reasoning with Roger and why he was making tennis boring (I didn’t agree)…but my point is - if Roger was making tennis boring by winning everything…then you have to think that same way about Nadal and clay. More so with Nadal and clay since Roger did occassionally lose some on hardcourts. Nadal doesn’t lose on clay so why would you even get excited for a clay court tournament that he’s in since you already know who the winner will be?

And for alal of those people slamming Roger for losing to Nadal… I pity the other player’s fans then because what in the world do you say to them? (the Safins, the Nabaldian fans, the Davydenko fans, the Gonzalez fans, the Roddick fans, etc.)? Roger has made the finals in the last 4 clay court events he’s played in. If he’s so bad on clay - what do you consider those other players? When you look at it from that stand point - hey, Roger’s not doing too bad after all - is he!

And for the record…I still have faith that Roger can and will win the French!

Great insight all around, folks.

John, you bring up a great point. Realistically to beat Nadal on clay you have to take him out of what he like doing the best – playing from the back court and getting into a groove – and make him start doing things he doesn’t want to do, like playing around the net. And that’s where the drop shot comes into play. Fed rarely used that tactic, but someone like Djokovic ala what Murray did at Australia, could routinely hit that shot because he knows staying at the baseline is more than likely a losing proposition against Nadal.

Sure, Nadal has a lot of speed and is quite handy around the net, but the odds of you winning the point have to go up considerably than if you were to stay at the baseline and try to trade groundies.

And that’s true for most players, that is, making your opponent hit shots they don’t want to hit. Murray does an excellent job of that, Fed does it as well. Getting your opponent out of their “comfort zone” will give you a better look in the end.

Yellowballspanker, very true. Gonzo would certainly be in the mix against Nadal if he’s on, which is a 50/50 prop as usual. But the way Nadal’s playing right now I don’t think Gonzo has quite enough variety to pull that one out. Guga in his prime…wow.

As for Fed, if Nadal were to get knocked out early I think the tournament would be his. I can’t see anyone stopping him then. He would be beyond determined and I think the other players would recognize that and almost in some ways let the guy have it. And I think you still have to tab Fed the heavy, heavy favorite to win Wimbledon.

Zola, one thing you have to look at – and I guess I am nitpicking here – the only real solid dirtballer Fed beat was Ferrer, and Ferrer had a good look at winning that first set. Ferrero I know is tough, but I don’t see him as even a French quarterfinalist anymore. And Fed did struggle with Seppi early, while Nadal absolutely destroyed better opposition.

Joseph O’Brien, yeah, the way it sounds Nadal will pass on Hamburg, and perhaps Fed, as well. Though Fed has won there before but reports are the surface – usually less slick – is far different than that of the French, which is close to Monte Carlo. Rome is allegedly very slick clay. But so I’m told…

Hrishikesh, I’ll have to check that remark! But if I said it, then so be it. Fed’s improved that backhand making it more steady so it’s less vulnerable on the faster surfaces now against Nadal. Nadal’s groundies are still superior and more consistent, but Fed has more variety. So if I had the choice to have someone’s groundies, I guess I got to go Fed, that is unless I could have Andre’s. Or maybe even Guga!

Agassi Fan, you are way off. Nadal isn’t all muscles. Sure, he’s got ‘em. But he’s lightning fast and he’s as mentally tough as anyone. He’s not an “old school” clay courter, either, who waits for the other person to miss. Basically if you leave anything hanging in the middle of the court to Rafa, Nadal ends the point. That’s not waiting for someone to miss…

Fan of Tennis, would have to agree. I’m sure Roger would love to see someone get to Nadal. Anyone, just to inject a bit of doubt in his mind because right now Nadal’s confidence must be sky-high.

Regarding Roger’s clay success on clay, true. He’s done well, for sure. But so many of us hold such lofty standards for him that if he doesn’t win the title then it’s a letdown. There really isn’t much shame in losing to Nadal on clay, or on any other surface really, but Fed seemed to have turned the tables on his rival beating Nadal the two times prior entering Monte Carlo. But after Sunday it almost feels like Fed’s back to square one, and all the progress over the last year has been lost. We’ll see…

We’ve seen Nadal burnout last year after his Wimbledon run. I think it could’ve happened to Roger too after he made the French Open final. He was extremely lucky to not have collapsed before his Wimbledon triumph.

I think Federer got to know his absolute limit physically last year and he’s making sure to get the timing right so that he peaks at the French Open this year without risking complete exhaustion at Wimbledon.

It’s all a matter of who burns out first and who achieves the peak in the finals. This year we won’t be seeing Nadal in Wimbledon final. Nadal would be so exhausted by the time he reaches Roland Garros that Federer may have it easy, if they both get to be in the finals.

Nadal isn’t boring, he’s completely different from some ‘old school clay courters’, like Bruguera, Berasategui, and so on, who simply were waiting for your mistake. He can produce very nice winners both on attack and defense. In the same time I think that, if there’s one who deserve scoring a Grand Slam, that’s Roger, so I’m strongly rooting for him to win in june.
Even if Roger body language, and Tony’s and Mirka’s faces during monte carlo final don’t help me to believe it, I still hope he has a strategy kept for himself self. I hope that this strategy include the drop-shot. About drop shot, I’ld add: Murray, in Melbourne, not only used it to produce winners, but he often approached the net after a drop shot, to ‘close-the angles’ to his opponent and to move him out of his comfort zone. This is something that Edberg used to do efficiently, on his best clay court performances, and that Roger should absolutely do to turn a standard baseline rally in a volley vs volley (and/or lob etc) one…
Another problem. He should be more aggressive returning the service, expecially the 3/4 speed first service that Rafa usually serve to him. It’s very strange that a men who can return so well a Roddick/Ancic/Ljubicic 230 Km/h ball is not able to do a good job with such a ball… I think he should move one step ahead, and anyway he should take some risks. No matter if he made some mistakes: if he still waits, he lose the point as well and furthermore he gives even more rythm to rafa. About returning with a dropshot: I’ve seen him doing it one time against the korean (I was in Monte Carlo), the shot landed yust ahead the service line and stopped, Hyung Taik-Lee was there but unable to react to the sudden stop of the ball and returned the ball to the net. Anyway I think that one break per set on claycourt is not too much. Fed’s main problem are returning games.
About other opponents, I remember Djokovic struggling pretty well against rafa, before injury, in RG 2006: and now he has improved, and beaten Rafa once. I’ve not seen rafa-berdych, but second set seems to have been very close - with a decisive, early break. Consider that Tomas lost first set both against Robredo and Soderling before winning easily: he seemed to need a long warm-up. RG is three sets out of five instead 2 out of 3. I’ld like to see Nalbandian at his best against Nadal (no official match between the two) and even the best Gonzo.

is there anybody wanting to play the fantasy game of the Masters Cup Shanghai 2007,just log on http://others.sports.sina.com.cn/tennis/TMCfantacy/
I am a definetely Fed fan,a undergraduate student from China.that final was not a good-looking match.for me ,it’s for real.

forger to say that I am not helping someone do advertising .I just told you another way to win a ticket of Masters Cup.if any of you need some translation,you can add me to your MSN.My Email guogtm_2005@yahoo.com.cn

I for one think it’s great for tennis that Roger is dominated by Nadal on clay. It’s no fun when 1 person wins everything, and Nadal reversed Fed’s 2 match winning streak against him, keeping the rivalry interesting.

I think Fed is susceptible to losing to a lesser claycourter than Nadal. Ferrero certainly let his chances slip away in Monte Carlo…a break up and a break point for a double break squandered. While Ferrero has the skillz, he probably still lacks the confidence to take down the big guns. However…who else is showing themselves to be a clay court god this year? No one yet…we’ll have to see what happens.

Nadal not having a defensive game? that’s crap. See the stats. He ALWAYS wins due to less errors, not due to more winners. That’s defensive game.

If stamina, muscles (power) and racquet technology do not have a big role to play in Nadal’s success on clay, then answer this question - if you give all tennis players today, just out of the blue, a wooden racquet, you think Nadal will still be as dominant on clay? A hypothetical question I agree. But he won’t be. He will lose out more than some of the other players who rely more on skill than physical abilities.

You go to be blind to undermine the role of physical ability in Nadal’s success. Again, doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve his wins. Just means its a different sport.

Agassi Fan said: “Nadal doesn’t win matches. He makes others lose.” - PERFECT! You’re absolutely right! Are the others completely blind or what? Everytime Fed plays vs Nadal, it’s the same picture - UEs, UEs and UEs… Too many opponents’ UEs - that’s what wins Nadal those matches… You simply can’t beat this freak on clay by trading groundies from the baseline - either you’ll miss, or he’ll make you miss… I’m not saying Nadal doesn’t deserve all those clay titles, but he’s making tennis a waiting game… He’s not the one who creates - he’s just messing the game up!

Right…. So all those dudes losing playing Nadal because they had so many UEs… So all this time Nadal’s making people doing errors…. Wow.

“A different sport.” This is getting funny now. Muscles? Next you ll be saying that a lot of fitness(like a lot of muscle) Also makes a different sport. I mean seriously, if a player is hyper fit(you runs 20 hours a day as practice) and consequently reaches all the balls but with little muscle to show for, does that make a different sport? So lets remove muscle and fitness from defining “quality of tennis” since thats the different sport. So the only way of judging skills in tennis is to have a court about 5 feet wide and for people to hit balls back and forth right? Would that be ok?
Sarcasm apart,you should understand that moving on clay is an integral part of clay court tennis which(Read:Part of the sport) nadal does rather better than everyone else. He has a great defensive game and thats a talent too my dear(Tactics hello?). Which Federer Lacks. A good defense is part of good tactics so that Is part of the game. And he has a fabulous forehand and consistently hits the line.
And the “statistic” about winners is nothing short of hilarious. Also, “he s going to be 21 soon?” as opposed to being 20? As long as ur bring funny, I have nothing against that statement.

I couldn’t agree with you more. I’m sick and tired of Roger’s excuses. The only thing strange about this match compared to previous meetings was that it was Roger’s forehand, not backhand, that broke down. I don’t think this is a good sign for Roger.

Haha! Thanks dave. You have a near 70 match consecutive winning streak, two grand slams and all the masters series on clay by having less unforced errors than the opponent?
This discussion is Funnnn!

I’m with you samps. This discussion does getting funny, and with the wooden racquet thing all of a sudden, haha.

There is much to like about Nadal - his fighting spirit, his tenacity, his idiosyncratic strokes, his aw-shucks demeanor off court - but . . .

would someone, anyone, please hand this kid a loss on the dirt?! Anything to dent his confidence a bit on the red stuff. Please. Thank you.

I guess I’m still hoping Fed can pull a rabbit out of a hat and win Roland Garros, so I sure wish someone would beat up on Rafa just a little during this clay season. Where’s Canas, Almagro? Hell, Murray can play on clay, let’s get him in there to give Nadal a real fight. How about Paul-Henri Mathieu? Headcase that he is, he gave Rafa all he could handle at last year’s French Open. Maybe Davydenko the human backboard could outlast him . . .

Just someone pound this kid with a bit of relentless artillery to the point that his confidence is dented and he’s softened up a bit for Fed to finally take him out in the RG final.

Seth, I wouldn’t mind Fed winning RG after beating Nadal as long as he gets utterly whupped after that on Wimbledon. You can hope for Fed winning on clay and i shall hope that he gets it in grass. since we ‘r on the “domination is boring, thread” Fed dominating on all surfaces is infinitely worse than Nadal dominating on clay.

check your facts guys, Nadal wins matches by making less errors, not by hitting more winners. That’s a fact.

No wonder his matches are boring.

lol at all the delusional federer fanboys who actually believe federer could beat nadal on clay. keep dreaming! fed is simply not good enough for the raging bull. His arrogance over other players does not work with a supreme being like Nadal who refuses to choke and hand Roger wins.

Thanks to Nadal tennis is exciting again. Vamos Rafael!!!

Dave, how would you describe a situation when your opponent constantly stands 3 m behind the baseline and returns EVERYTHING that you throw at him, until you make that error? Everytime when Nadal plays Fed on clay, he ISN’T the one who’s creating, but the one who’s MESSING the game up… 90 % of his shots are not intended to produce winners, but to make the opponent miss… It may sound funny, but that’s how it is… But I’m sure it’s better than firing 50 winners per match:-), isn’t it?

I am a Rafa fan, but you Fed fans can be really harsh on your man. As if this is not the guy with 10 grand slam titles and No 1 for how many years. Wasn’t it the same story last year? Maybe there is something in Rafa’s game that doesn’t let the other guy execute his game. So many players just get discouraged to play with him. He doesn’t just win, he destroys if he can. Federer has been trying to figure out Rafa’s game ( which he says is one-dimensional). At least he is trying.
I relly hope the French Open goes to Rafa, but after that Roger will take the crown back when the hard court season comes.

Messing it up? I have a different perspective. Federer is simply NOT good enough to hit winners past Rafa on clay. It needs a better player, which federer is not. So there.
Imagine if this were boxing. What Skorocel is saying is that one shouldn’t defend. The tactic of wearing down your opponent by good defending, before smacking his ass is Messing the match up. its a different sport according to another. sure thing pals.
If it was all about standing 3 m behind the baseline we would be having loads of 68 match winning streaks which, hold your breath fellas, we Dont… And you do understand the notion of arclength and radius right? If you stand 3 m behind ur going to have to cover a lot more ground so please lets stop this. its getting tedious now.

One more thing i ve noticed about federer fans and federer too is what sore losers they are. Federer always keeps finding ways to put down nadal. He whines about how 1-dimensional his game is, about the fact he s always close to beating him(when he’s actually been close ONCE) and this and that.
During Wimbledon he was talking about Nadal’s easy draw. sure whatever. And Nadal? “Federer is the best of all time and always the favourite”.
There’s the difference. Maybe federer will beat Nadal on clay but it wont change the fact that he s a sore loser.

No matter what y’all nadal fans say he doesn’t have any talent.What can he do other than run 20 hours a day and smash the balls harder than anybody on the tour..does he have a fantastic serve like roddick’s?
a return like roger’s,a backhand that is as good as Djokovic’s,great volleying skills like sampras. I mean what is his killer weapon?The answer is nothing.Some of y’all might say court coverage but that is just part of fitness.If your extremely fit , you can run fast you can cover the court well and be consistent with those same boring shots that he plays.He doesnt really have any shot that makes people go “WOW!!!!” And he shouts during every shot so that his opponents lose their focus, takes long breaks between serves so that his opponents lose their rhythm or in other words winning by hook or by crook. The only good thing that he has, is determination.He may win matches but for me his game is 1 dimensional.Federer , Safin,Nalbandian,Monfils,Gasquet, Djokovic , even Youzhny are much more talented than him. As for Roger beating him , it’s either of these 2 scenarios;
1)Roger has figured him out but doesnt really want nadal to know that and be prepared.So he might just go for that strategy during the french.
2)Roger is still searching for answers.
But that killer attitude that he had in shanghai against nadal was missing in monte carlo.3 aces in the first game of the match.Go Roger…..

If Nadal is so “skilled”, why does he lose so much on other surfaces? He is not even a top 10 player on hard courts.

He’s just a clay court freak due to fitness and racquet technology.

samps… Federer or his fans are not sore losers. Since you’re quoting… How about the stupid quote Nadal always say “Roger is the favorite”. Please! You’ve won almost 70 straight matches on clay, the last 2 French Opens, have beaten Roger in every clay court match…how in the world can you sit there and say Roger is the favorite? Just own up to it Nadal… Stop lying and speak the truth! There is no way in …. that Roger can be the favorite when both of them play on clay. Everyone always say how “humble” Nadal is…but that statement is just plain crazy. So everyone in the world knows Nadal is the favorite except himself? Please!

Samps, I’m not a sore loser! Nadal surely DESERVES all those claycourt successes and praise, but his game is simply one-dimensional, like it or not… As Ryan says (and every tennis writer/blogger will confirm you), he’s nowhere near the likes of Safin, Nalby, or Djoker (not to mention Fed) in the talent department. His main weapons are determination and immense physical condition, which (as you may know) are one of the main facets of claycourt tennis nowadays…

You said that Fed isn’t good enough to hit winners past Rafa on clay - but WHO IS? 50 or so players tried it, but NO ONE succeeded! No wonder, when there’s a human backboard on the other side of the court…

Say what you want, the guy’s just MESSING the opponents’ game up! Most of the times, he doesn’t go for a winner unless he’s 100 % sure - even on clay! He simply MAKES THE OPPONENT MISS - you can’t deny that! Or shall I read you some stats from that FO final last year?

Fed as a sore loser? Just read some of Nadal’s comments when he loses a match… A pain in ass (we all know WHO was the real pain:-)), this injury or that injury (despite Nadal moving as if nothing had happened throughout ENTIRE match), etc. Everytime he loses, he ALWAYS mentions these things… And just as Fan of Tennis pointed out, he should’ve learned after those 5 wins over Fed WHO’s actually the favourite when these two next play on clay…

Nadal’s playing in Barcelona now:

Here’s my guess for his opponents:

68 - R of 32: Vliegen (Nadal won 6-1, 6-2)
69 - R of 16: Johansson
70 - QF: Chela
71 - SF: Ferrer
72 - F: Canas

If this is how it plays out, might Canas be the one to break his streak?

Vamos Rafa. How anyone can say the #2 in the world is without talent is beyond comprehension. Let’s face it– anyone in the top 20 is a great player with amazing skills. It’s been a blast to read these letters, very fun….

Ok i’m sorry for saying that federer fans are sore losers. thats unfair and silly. But i’m not impressed about federer’s(recent that is)attitude at all. You must understand that I’ve been a Sampras fanatic for life(Since before he won That US open). And considering his game, it seems natural that I would hold Federer in similar regard. And I do think Federer is better overall(greater or not time will tell). But the Federer mania is ridiculous. Why does everyone Want him to win the Grand Slam. If he can he does! A great player is measured by the opponents he has. If Federer wins the French Open beating Nadal, now that would be an achievement because Nadal is (Whatever you attribute it to) as great a clay courter as Anyone in history(lendl, vilas,guga whoever). He’s way out of the league of brugera and company. So Dont mow him down. Even if Federer Doesent win French, He ll still be considered the greatest since Nadal was Always around.
Regarding Federer being a sore loser, I stand by it. At Indian Wells, he gets beaten by Canas and says “I should have won that!”. Wtf are you talking about dude? I saw the match and he’d been outplayed fair and square. He kept acting as though there were extraneous factors that caused the win. And he’s had it for some time, not aided by all those eulogies (which he Nearly deserves). And the biggest issue is when he’s around Nadal. He simply cant seem to accept that he should be losing to him (no doubt proceeding along the same line of reasoning as his fans). I mean if ur close to figuring him out we would find out in the next match so stop f***ing telling us the same nonsense all the time.

Regarding Nadal, he lacks talent? Thats nonsense. Its Not all fitness and pace. In fact the best measure was wimbledon. His draw was admittedly easier but what about the Federer match? I thought he played excellently with some wonderful winners.
He’s just 20(going on 21 or whatever) and we simply don’t Know what he’s going to do. In fact if you watch the last clay court season and this one you ll find that Nadal is way more attacking this season and superbly aggressive. He’s been crushing Everyone. Or Indian Wells for the matter. His game has changed for the better. What I am saying is we ve seen him do a few things over the past few years but he Has been adapting and i think he has the character and talent to prove himself on other surfaces. He might not but it seems to me that he has a pretty good chance.

And he Rarely blames injuries. He has done that occasionally and went on to miss a few titles. But he Always acknowledges the fact that he played well and got beaten by a great opponent. Something federer does too, but only when he wins. I agree his losses are rare but he’s really not charitable when he does lose. Ok that favourite tag he attaches to fed on clay is silly. And i have no clue why he does it. But i think its better than being a sore loser.

If nadal has such a good game, why does he lose so often on hard courts? And why doesn’t he win matches by hitting more winners, rather than less errors?

If someone can answer these two questions……

Come on guys. Federer lost to Nadal that day simply because Nadal was better. Simple as that. Anyone being no 2 in the world is of course talented. Sure he did say injuries and all at his post-match interview but not often and he did praise Djokovic and all. Federer? Every interview he stated he should have won, it was close, he could have break point bla bla… Then, if his opponents say if they fix some things then they too could win those matches. It could go on and on.
And please don’t bring Roddick up here. Re-watch their match in Indian Wells please.
Um Nadal used the same “fitness/running/messing/make opponent miss” style playing on hard, so why didn’t he win those matches. He does have WOW shots, what bout those incredible hit-dead-on-line shots, did you really watch his game. His serve, volley, drop shots are getting better. Give this 20 year old guy a break.
Ok this is getting nonsense. Can’t you just admit that Federer lost on clay rather than making lame excuses, he won and will win on all the other surfaces, you fanboys should be very happy, just leave Nadal peacefully alone on his beloved clay.

Samps….you need to know the facts.First of all Federer never said that he should have won in Indian Wells against Canas but he did say that he should have won in Miami because it was extremely close in the 3rd set tie break.Federer does give credit to his opponents even when he loses.For eg after the French open 2006 he had said that Nadal was a fighter a, a grinder and he deserved to win that title.He even said that canas played very well in Indian wells.There is so much pressure on him to win the french from the media and the fans,so obviously he has to say something like he’s figuring out nadal’s game or something like that.He can’t just say that he will never win against nadal on clay and that nadal is better than him just because their head to head record is in nadal’s favour…..because that would be as crazy as nadal saying that Federer is the favourite on clay.Plus I think it is frustrating for Federer to see raw muscle power always getting the better of him.I personally believe Federer is not arrogant.Imagine how it would be if Hewitt was in his place.

Agree with Ryan and others. People hold Roger differently than other players…and maybe since he is #1 that’s fine. But on one board a fan commenting about Nadal always saying Roger is the favorite - even on clay said that was Nadal’s way of pumping himself up to be the underdog to try and win. I say poppy-cock! How rediculous the statement would be if Roger would say “I’m not the favorite at Wimbledon - Rafa is since he hold the head-to-head record. I’m the underdog at Wimbledon”. People would then come down on Roger so hard for being ’stupid’ or something….yet those same folks make excuses for Nadal. I think we need to hold both of them to the same degree.

Now another thing. Someone also asked why does everyone want Roger to win the grand slam? Maybe it has to do with history in the making, or maybe - just maybe - people like the guy! How many #1 players are so loved by his own tennis players ever like they do Roger? I’ve heard so many times that other players say once they are out of the tournament they are actually pulling for Roger! Amazing! Maybe he really is a good guy? You think? Your own peers know you more than just the average fan. Maybe they know something since they have voted him to win their own Sportsmanship award the last 2 years. I mean, how honored are you when you’re the one for the most part kicking everyone’s butt - yet they still like you! It’s amazing, isn’t it? Yet some “fans” think they know Roger so well they always call him arrogant, and say he’s bad for the sport. Since I have never meet him personally (and probably 9 out of 10 who post here can say the same), I’m going to base my views on not only what I see and hear, but from the players views and thoughts about Roger too.

I bet if we took a poll of the players, 9 out of 10 would be pulling for Roger to win the French this year. Now for a guy who wins just about everything else, that really say a lot about his character that the players too, are pulling for him. That’s taking nothing against Nadal, but Nadal is not in the same league as Roger with the players of the ATP. That seems weired if, as some fans say, Roger is as arrogant as they picture him to be.

So many players hate nadal, everyone loves Roger. Ever figured why? They lose to federer more than they lose to nadal.

Nadal is just an unsporting, pretentious beast.

well im fairly knew on the tennis scene i have been doin some research and reading all these comments as well as many other sites over the past 6 months but HELLO nadal is the no. 2 without any talent, he makes ppl miss, he may not have as many winners as fed but maybe just maybe thats why fed is no.1! and hes ruining the sport r u serious hes been on the clay scene 2 years know imagine federer won the ‘grand slam’ for 2 years and does it again for a third. wow that wud be fun. and the errors by fed in monte-carlo he thought the key to winning was to create chances, and so he went for chances that simply werent there. makes ppl miss r u serious r u forgetting the famous nadal passing shot. seriously just admit that he is a great player. vamos rafa!!!

What an idiotic comment, Agassi Fan.

agassi fan, which players sed they hate rafa. and unsporting pretentious beast? he does great things for the game, i mean u have the graceful gentleman that is roger federer for a no.1 and a rugged muscular man’s man for a no.2 i think that draws in a whole different category of fans.

Claycourtrafa, check this out: http://2006.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/scores/stats/day20/1127ms.html

As you can see in Fed’s UE department, there’s some 20 UEs+ of a margin… And I can GUARAN