I think Roger was defeated because of his own stubbornness...If only he could have hit more to Nadal's backhand!
Rafa is really in Roger's head, that's confiremd full and final!

My take:
Roger Federer- Responsible for his own Downfall? http://bit.ly/zpv4QI

But not to take away anything from Nadal who played really well and stuck to his game plan as always!

Roger is just too stubborn indeed. Rafa just sticks to his gameplan, however boring it may be, and delivers high balls to the backhand side about 95% of the time. Still, Nadal barely manages to win more than 50% of the points. Should Federer ever play a more onesided game, i.e. playing over 80% to Nadal's backhand.....

Rafa is going to win his 2nd Australian Open trophy on Sunday!!! He lifted up his game match by match, it should be a repeat of his victory in 2009! Vamos Rafa!

why do i even bother with you?!

Had to watch this with Matts Wilander's commentary. I've heard some bad ones, Greg Rusedski is tough going, well loads of them are really. But this was just pure, raw, relentless verbal diarrhea.

I love how NADAL was the winner, and all Peter talks about is Federer! Dude I understand you tabbed/wanted him to come out victorious, but how about giving some credit to the man who has dominated your precious Federer in their h2h meetings. The lack of well-deserved credit from you, for Rafa is incredible!

Unbelievable how even when Federer loses against him, you find a way to insult Rafa. Your prejudice is beyond belief!

S(panish)tone beats S(wiss)cissors

Kudos to Steve Tignor for being the only one to pick Nadal.

I've never understood why Federer never made any backhand adjustment for that high-bouncing Nadal forehand, when for so long, Rafa was his only nemesis. I'm not talking about adding a two-handed option, but maybe adjusting the timing on the backhand side?

pete bodo... you are a joke. what do you mean by "federer was put on this earth to make rafa look good"??? Do not be a sore loser and pls give rafa some credit for actually beating your favourite. this is just a disgusting, sad and unbalanced article. Give Rafa credit, you constant moaner. P.S please bodo, i hope you back rafa's opponent again in the final.

Record on outdoor hard court, federer 1:5 Nadal.

Roger will never win another Grand Slam title. Federer is aging rapidly while Nadal and Djokovic are in their prime. Sure, Federer may put up a fight like he did here, but in the end he will no longer have enough in the tank to win a best of five set match against Nadal or Djokovic .

The Men's Grand Slam singles title record will be 16 unless Nadal surpasses that number.

Bodo, you ARE one of Federer's "minions"

It hurts you so greatly to praise Nadal that you'd rather emphasize what Federer did wrong than give Nadal his due. If you can't be impartial, you really should stop covering The Rivalry.

Followin your hack job "Bouncing Roger," you still found a way to avoid admitting you were wrong.

Your pro-Federer BS is very hard to take seriously.

For those, like Pete, who downplay Nadal's dominance in The Rivalry based on clay results, I will finish with this...

Nadal vs. Federer

Overall: 18-9
Best Of Five: 10-3
Grand Slam: 8-2

Non-Clay Overall: 6-7
Non-Clay Best of Five: 3-3
Non-Clay Grand Slam: 3-2

Yeah, not so "dominant" over Nadal on grass and hard courts.

In fact, it appears Nadal is better in bigger matches, no matter the surface.

It's depressing to watch Federer lose repeatedly to Nadal on the big stage. I don't think I will ever watch him play Nadal again. He broke too many hearts a little too many times. This is the absolute rock bottom. Unless he overcomes that mental block against Rafa, there is no way I see him beating him in a grandslam. By the way, Novak has the same kind of mental edge against Nadal right now. After Novak wins the final over the weekend, Nadal fans will feel what all Federer fans are feeling right now.

Federer just doesn't match up well against Nadal, esp on these types of surfaces, due to the extreme spin vs. Fed's swing shape. The ball rarely falls in Federer's wheelhouse, and when it does, he has no rhythm. So he can't fully swing away without errors. That's why he looks like a brilliant shotmaker against Delpo and then error-prone against Rafa. Fed has a low-margin game, whereas Nadal has made a career on a high-margin, physical game.

Pete--I happen to like drama (which almost rhymes with Rafa) in sports. Not the racket-braking, referee abusing, crowd taunting type. But, the momentum swings, come-from-behind, raising one's game to another level type that Rafa has produced over the years, especially when playing Federer.

Personally, I think that both Roger and Murry frustate Nole far more than Rafa, but after the year-end thrashing that Rafa received from Roger, its great to see Rafa show that he is still a top contender at the big ones.

Vamos!

So Federer lost in 4 sets on hard court in a GS semifinal because he stepped on his own genius, huh? Truly incisive, impartial analysis - it's almost like you've got 50 crates of RF merchandise just sitting in your garage that you're trying to unload. He got bored! (50 percent off all hats). He's so complicated! (Come around back, I've got a track suit with your name on it!)

I predicted it right :), well.. easy prediction.. any way.. I think Novak is going to take the title... but as a Rafa fan... Go Rafa... prove yourself..

Federer is a tennis genius, and we may not see that kind of player in near future.. And, in my personal opinion in terms of versatility he is better than any player who played in the past too.. But, Nadal's game simply nullifies Federer's game.. I also think, Nadal being a lefty is a major reason for that. I hope Federer does not really take this to heart.. and still continue to play for 2 or 3 more years.. It will be sad to see the day when he retires...

Wow, so many sour grapes here being thrown around in here. I guess Federer fans have something in common with the Republicans here in the States: facts don't matter. Anytime Federer loses against Nadal, it's because of his stubborn "genius," or the fact that he's "bored" with winning strategies.

Give me a break! Why wouldn't Federer execute what Djokovic does on a continuous basis if he knew it would win him the match? Because he's too "whimsical" for his own good? And what if that was true? That's genius right there, being obdurate and refusing to yield to common sense even while knowing you have a better chance of winning if you did? Of course not.

In fact, you'd be the world's most foolish athlete if this were true. And, as an aside to Bodo, one might argue that, even this so-called artistic spontaneity of Federer is itself a "go-to set-play," as he so tendentiously but subtly puts it, just to undercut Nadal's superior performance against Federer on this day without making himself look so pathetically petulant.

Give Nadal credit where it's due. The truth is, Nadal smothers Federer, and doesn't let him go to his backhand as much as he would like. This was evident time and time again, when Nadal would keep brushing forehands to Nadal's backhand, tempting him to return unnecessarily difficult down-the-line shots in pressure situations, so he wouldn't be pinned to the corner of the baseline.

This is why your comment, T, is also subject to these same criticisms.

Oops, I meant "This was evident time and time again, when Nadal would keep brushing forehands to FEDERER's backhand, tempting him to return. . ."

Congrats to Nadal. Fell asleep before the 3:30 am but pleased to see him through. Nadal is just not a good match up for Fed. At least Fed took the first set.

this pete bodo guy... what a joker!!!! i cannot believe tennis.com allowed him to post this garbage on their site. what a loser!!!!

when are you reporters going to see what is right under your noses?Rafa is one hell of a tennis player!!!Did you see those passing shots tonite?No more clay court specialist,so you got to find another excuse everytime he dismantles your darling!

Whilst reading this it felt like exactly why this rivavlry gets the wrong press, then I realised who wrote it......

Again you fail to acknowledge Nadals contribution. He forces Fed to play his best tennis consistently, something that no one else has done save perhaps Djoko last year (although he never managed it when Fed was at his peak). He forces Fed to sustain such a high attacking level of perfection. Then he will come back with some of his own attacking perfection.

Nadal had cahnces in the first set tie-break, he playe a loose game at the start of the second set, he let 3 BPs go in the third. It wasn't only Fed that let the momentum switch, it wasn't all about him.

I'll say this yet again. Federer is a better player than Nadal. And yes there does seem to be a bit of a mental problem when facing him. However, the reason for all his wins against Fed is nothing to do with hime being a lefty, clay courts, Fed blowing it or whatever. He has just simply stepped up to the plate on most of their matches, Fed brings out the best in him most of the time. This is similar to Tom Watson vs Nicklaus in golf. Everyone knows who the better player was, yet Watson got the best of him more often than not.

If Nadal was some journeyman or top 30 player you would have a point about match ups, lefties, court speed, Fed blowing it etc. However, he isn't he is a ten time grand slam champion for a reason, and has a winning h2h against all of his main rivals (they can't all be blowing it can they?). Like I said he isn't as good a player as Fed but he has earned his 18 victories, so show him some credit.

I used to believe years ago that Fed-Nadal matches were in Roger's racket and he somehow always failed to play to his level. But by now it's clear to me that is not the case and Rafa simply beats Federer because he is considerably stronger in this match up

So Federer lost because he squandered his opportunities?
It's all Federer's fault?
Why can't you give Rafa some credit? He was clearly the better player in most of the important points they played. He beat the Almighty Fed fair and square.
I hope this big win of Rafa will feel like a slap on your face, Mr. Bodo.
You've been very harsh on Rafa in your recent columns: "Rafa rhymes with drama," "Put off and put upon" and let's not forget you picked Berdych and the Almighty Fed to win over him.
Guess who got the last laugh?

Charlie dear, I did also watch the match with Matts commentary. I find you are beeing very unfair with your judgement, I hope you are a junior and you can still learn. Otherwise I am afraid you will lose your mind in negativiness. Wilander is indeed a honourable man, has always been!

This article is a shame!

Its hilarious how little credit you give Rafa. More like embarrassing. 8-2 in majors. At some point it's not a fluke anymore. Just give credit where it is due (i.e. like Rafa does to Djokovic when he loses). Nothing more, nothing less.

Fed was "bored" - seriously?

C'mon Pete. Give Rafa his due.

Perhaps true genius is getting your legs under you, figure out the rhythm of the match and then patiently work the court until you win. Doesn't matter if the set scores were 7-6 or 6-1 - all you need is the win...

18-9 is a clear indication the strategy works.

RECsGuy's #s above tell the tale of the true head to head.

Pete, get a grip! Rafa out played Fed once again, especially on the big points. Your article is a joke and insulting to Rafa's greatness! But somehow it seems you intended it that way.

Well said Charlie. I know Mats was on drugs and all earlier in his life, but he sounds like a retard. And boy does he love taste of federers balls...

I gotta say to you Pete, and others; the narrative that Roger is inherently more skilled than Nadal, is laughable. Does Roger possess better hand-eye coordination than Nadal? Or Speed? Or quickness? Or athleticism? Sure, he is a remarkably fluid athlete, but I don't think physically he is ANY more skillfull a tennis player. They are both marvelous athletes and tennis players, but this crap about matchups is WAY overrated. PMac is guilty of the same tedious narrative, i.e. Federer the maestro doesn't play up to his potential against Nadal, B.S.!!! It is not like Rafa played "lights out"; he actually could have won this in straights. I just wish he were given more credit for winning his matches rather than that Roger loses them.
The narrative just gets tedious, and while containing some truth, does not come CLOSE to telling the real story.
Thanks, VAMOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In terms of the match I didn't think that quality wise it was there best but it was still compeling with some flashes of great shot making.

Nadal didn't play consistently great throughout the match but bar the first set tie-break he raised his level when needed to. I wonder if we'll ever see the caliber of the 07 08 W finals or the AO 09 final again from these two as Fed isn't getting any younger.

Fed played well at times however, when Nadal cahged back to attatcking his backhand I never really felt he was going to break Nadal much more again in the match.

In the end Nadal was the better player when you take into account the whole match, Fed showed flashes, but couldn't really produce his best tennis against the opponent he really needed to, unlike his opponents in previous rounds.

I still put Djoko as favourite if he gets to the final, and if Murray gets there I would put Nadal as a slight favourite.

Bodo,
i think this match proves that what you wrote about rafa's tactics vs rog (re: fh vs bh) is ridiculous.

Pete Bodo Says: "Federer was beaten by Nadal—but undone by his own genius."

Are you for real???? plz bodo, get your fat head off federer's ass and give rafa some credit for this win. so roger was undone by his own genius 18 times, 5 times on an outdoor hard court( Rafa is a clay-courter, so says sad bodo).
This article stinks. Bodo, what a sado!!!

people liberally throw around genius about play --that's ok. but this is a competition. I'll take the warrior over the artist anyday. if i want artistry i'll go to the Louvre. I want a battle and I'll take the warrior anytime. does anyone out there think that the term genius would be thrown around if rafa was the same age or older than fed? does anyone think that the genius would still have all those majors? artwork is pretty hanging on the wall.

Mr. Bodo, I am sorry, but this piece is really disrespectful. Did you see those brillant shots of Nadal to win TWO points and get the 4-2 break in the second set? Had Federer done this, it would have been shots of a genius - beyond words, of course. Can't believe you call Nadal a "bricklayer". Your emotions for Federer seem to have overwhelmed you, otherwise your knowledge of tennis is grossly overrated.

It is most unfortunate that while we live in the golden era of men's tennis we have to read about it in the dark ages of journalism. This was a wonderful performance by two of the greatest players of all time; two of entirely different styles and characteristics. Rafa won, because he fights for every point, no matter how lost is looks or how brutal this is.

Can someone direct me to a blog or article where I can actually read about this game of these TWO great players, instead of how one player lost a game while playing alone?

Pete - Still waiting for a post from you titled

"Some things never change"

And I think Wilander said it best. He's been saying it for quite a while now.

Contrary to popular opinion, Federer is not a naturally aggressive player.
He serves great, works the point well and gets into good positions to leave him an easy finishing shot. He never has been comfortable going into the net.
He doesn't like going for the lines unless he is ahead in the match or far behind in games.

Thats why he loses to Nadal. He can't get him out of position enough to play 'safer'winners. He has to go for more because Nadal gets back more and with more interest(spin).

Volleying for him is especially hard against Nadal because when his balls dips short over the net it still has 5000 rpms on it unlike a regular bunt other players provide him with.

That's what makes him nervous and shaky against Nadal.

DJB

[mod-edited]. Roger is the most overrated GOAT candidate of all time. I am not even going into detail. That should be clear to everyone by now. Nadal is superior player or he wouldn't have 18 wins, simple as that. Even Novak has 10 wins, it is 5-4 in GS for Fed vs Novak. First 4 wins Federer had over him when he was outside of top 10, and just 18-19. On top of that even freaking Murray leads him H2H.

i am astounded and dumbfounded by your incredulous take on the Rafa-Roger match. Bodo, you should be Roger's manager or PR guy or something and not be a sports analyst. How insulting to Rafa and to his legions of fans that after beating Roger, you give Rafa no credit at all for his win! You make it look like Rafa was just a neutral bystander where Roger just kept on making mistakes without Rafa having anything to do with it> Could it be Rafa is also good, that his dogged persistence and never say die attitude and his not-so bad forehand had something to do with it?
It's a shame that you should be publishing this analysis.
VAMOS!

" sgt616 01/26/2012 at 08:47 AM
Federer just doesn't match up well against Nadal, esp on these types of surfaces, due to the extreme spin vs. Fed's swing shape. The ball rarely falls in Federer's wheelhouse"
--------------------

"These types of surfaces" apparently means all surfaces that aren't indoors, all surfaces from January to the WTF. After 8 years and 27 matches, why has Fed never adjusted to the extreme spin. Might taking the ball earlier help the ball falling into his wheelhouse?

Mr. Bodo, when 90% of the comments tell you the same thing, doesn't it make you think? Or... were you also undone by your own genius?

Wow, a double whammy

first a lousy prediction.

and then WHAM (John Madden voice)

a really poorly though out piece (of junk I might add)

The record now stands 8-2 in Majors for Rafael Nadal, who has proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that HE is the better player between these two.

So many people (including Mr. Bodo) were writing Nadal off as if he were a lowly ranked player. To count Nadal out of a match is probably up there in the foolishness range as trying to hit a tweener off a Karlovic serve. This matchup is like a football derby; throw form out the window and may the better team (or man) on the day win. I feel for Fed, he's definitely one of my favorite players, but Nadal has got the perfect game to beat him. Given that, this was a great match. Very dramatic at times and wholly unpredictable. Was Roger going to break Rafa at 4-3 and serve for the set? Was he going to break with Nadal trying to serve out the match? Congrats to Rafa and good luck in the final. Tough luck to Roger. Keep your head up and do well the rest of the season.

Roger made way too many forehand errors to win this match.

It may sound cruel, but Federer didn't deserve a win here. He was such an overwhelming favorite based on his form, their WTF meeting, his results on hard court and unbeaten run dating back to the US Open (although saving yourself from a Tsonga whooping counts as the end of a run), that Rafa for the first time in a long time was a genuine underdog, and needed something extraordinary to win. Which turned out to be the ordinary Federer whooping, incredible performance by Nadal. Hopefully he'll get Djokovic in the final and see what HE can do about his nemesis.

This so called experts (not all) need to understand that one hand backhand will ALWAYS have problem with hard shots or top spin that nadal produces. It's just how it is. The reason why he beats him on indoors is because there is no bounce and Nadal can't hurt him, plus Nadal is usually done by then.

He can't somehow magically improve his BH so much that he doesn't get exposed. If you want it's not scientific.

@Torrey 01/26/2012 at 08:51 AM

Torrey, I'm not trying to not give Rafa credit. You'll never catch a fish if you don't cast your rod. Of course he played a great match and yes, he deserved to win.
I do believe Federer should be able to consistently beat Nadal if he takes the Djokovic road. His failure to do so is, well, a failure. Whether it's because of his stubborn "genius"" or the fact that he's "bored" with winning strategies, in the end it all boils down to some form of stupidity.
Rafael's diligence wins the game, not that Mr Bull has no skill, quite the contrary!
By the way, should Nadal abandon his game plan and stop pounding the backhand and lose, it wouldn't be a win by Federer, but a loss by Nadal. And then you may call that "bored with winning strategies", though we both know it would mean Nadal played retarded.

And my apologies! I totally forgot to congratulate Rafael Nadal and his fans! Here's to you! Cheers.

Wow why can't people on all sides just appreciate a great match and not go into bashing. Seriously it's so disrespectful and immature.

Nadal played a great match and played better in the key moments. Fed also played great and had lots of chances but just couldn't convert them and thus was beaten. That's it.

Now please bring on a Djokovic-Nadal final instead of a Muzz fizz out against Nadal!

By the way

The clay courter has now made 7 of the last 9 semis at Hard Court slams, with 2 QFs, 1 final loss and 2 final wins.
Not to mention the 5 consecutive finals at Wimbledon (not counting missed 09) winning 2 of them.

And yeah, that safety lob on last-minute breakpoint was THE LUCKY SHOT not Return King Djokovic's winner on match point. So Roger, is Rafa cut from the same cloth as Nole, "raised like that"?

I agree that it's odd for an article to be so blatanly biased toward the loser, but having watched the match, I agree that it was more about Fed's mistakes than Nadal's play. Neither player played well, but Federer just refused to play intelligently.

Overall, it's sad that history will remember this rivalry in the wrong context. Nadal and Fed are not peers, but are regarded as such. Fed is 5 years older, which represents the length of a career. It's more like McEnroe/Lendl. Few regard Lendl as having a better career than Mac, but he had a winning record against him, due to the fact that he was younger. His high level of play during his "post-prime" probably hurts his legacy. If he had muddled along like Sampras did, he would still have the slam record and not have such a poor record against Nadal.

the experts have spoken. most chose federer to lift his 17th slam. of course, these so called experts must be having a hard time accepting their failure as proven by this hallelujah piece for a fallen hero. this is the first time that i have read a loser so highly praised that one wonders who fell harder - Federer or Bodo.

Must be very difficult to be undone by your own genius Mr. Bodo? Or was this piece as much about you as it is about Federer?

you've gotta concede that Rafa just has the edge over Roger in big matches. Neither one played particularly well, but Federer made more mistakes on the big points.

Very disappointing and biased article. If Fed has improved against Nadal, Nadal has improved more. Thats the fact. Fed is able to hit more from his backhand and at the same time Rafa was getting into lots of Feds service games and punishing his second serves.

Nadal needed this win more than anyone...he deserved this win more than federer....i just admire this guy and thats what i expected from you...peter bodo.....but you were too busy with federer that you forgot to see the player on the other side of the net....LOL

A questiona nd answer from Fed's press conference, have a read Pete...

"Q. You're having trouble with your forehand. Was there any reason for that, do you think?

ROGER FEDERER: I don't think it was that bad. I'm always gonna miss forehands because I have to go after the ball. If I just put it into play he'll smack it. So it's pretty simple. I have to keep him driving it, and obviously at times I clipped the tape a bit too often.

But I hit flatter than Rafa, so it's always gonna happen, some of it. I thought I retrieved well again. Obviously the surface is not the fastest, but he does a good job getting a lot of balls back and staying in the points.

And then obviously he's got great passing shots and so forth. You have to, you know, go after it and try your best there."

Mr. Bodo, this is an incredible article! How did you manage to avoid writing about the winner of the match, a 10-time slam champ, and instead focus almost exclusively on how the loser lost? You need to write another one, lol! This is a little embarrassing. I think even the Federer fans would appreciate an unbiased report.

Well, Nadal has only won because Roger gave him the decisive points. Rafa just did not earn the points!

Of course this does not praise Rogers accuracy today, but how many times did he miss the line by a few cm or how many times did he caught the top of the net facing the big points? In these points Roger was today more unlucky, while Rafa was lucky. These points can highly discourage and give a huge mental edge to the opponent. This is not an excuse for Federer, but this is the reason why Rafa won.

That's the truth guys, sorry.

Fascinating.

Well played Nadal, tonight. Much the better player on the night - no ifs, ands or buts.

But I'm in complete agreement with Pete that "Federer repeatedly found himself in the driver's seat but always slid across the bench and allowed Nadal to take over the wheel." Federer broke first in each of the first three sets, and couldn't make any of them stand up.

It might come as a surprise to posters who rail against Pete for supposedly being in the tank for Federer that literally no other tennis journalist is detested as much among Federer's own fans at his website for his habitual and blatant anti-Federer bias.

Me, I think Pete calls matches and players as he sees them. I wish the result were different, but I can't say it or Pete's take is in anyway unfair.

This is the best Roger vs. Rafa match up since 08 SW19. Bravo to both players. I'd like to point everyone's attention to one word that keeps popping in all conversation on Rafa and Roger; it's the "R" word RIVALRY. Seriously folks can an 18-9 head to head record be called a rivalry? Isn't more like a domination. Earlier on when the differential was closer it might have been a rivalry but Nadal has blown this thing wide open long time ago and just to prove his dominance over Roger he has gone one on take Roger down on a grass court surface slam and a hard court surface slam, arguably two of Roger's best surfaces; meanwhile on my last count Roger is 0-6 against Rafa at Roland Garros.

Rivalry--You cannot be serious! If Nadal had 18-9 record against anyone else would y'all call it rivalry? I rest my case.

To all those folks who thought the match in London last fall meant Roger had turned a new page against Rafa--I told you so!

A few words on the women's semi final last night: it has come to my attention of late that tennis media elites (including some who work for this publication) have taken it upon themselves to crown Kivitova tha next great ladies champion. Let me go on the record and say I don't agree with this presumption. I know Kivitova will win multiple slams (with her big hitting she'll be a fool not to) To assume she will be the dominant women's player is a complete misreading of her talent. In my opinion Petra Kivitova biggest short coming is consistency from match to match and consistency from one major to another; because of this reason I believe she will not be dominant at the majors as everyone in the establishment is now jumping on the wagon to proclaim.

"One theory that might explain how and why that happened is that, genius that he is, creative talent that he is, versatile and fully-formed as he is, Federer just doesn't like the discipline of the set play (leave that to the bricklayers of the tour, like Rafa, who's always working his go-to ploy: Kicker to the backhand/step around and hit the forehand off the return)."

Peter Bodo, I can see the pain on your words. You know that Rafa is more than that. Regards Friend.

Sorry folks, this was a choke job pure and simple. If Federer doesn't choke, Rafa still quite possibly wins. However, Federer DID choke. How many double faults at key moments? Missed crucial first serves? Sitter forehands that hit the tape?

The fact that there were so many sitters for Roger to botch, shows that Rafa is not playing at his typically high level; this trend does not bode well for him in the final against Nole. Nole will feast on that all day long. If it's Murray, well the title is Rafa's...

Despite the layer of snark that Pete can only add on this article, this is a very accurate analysis of this match.

I hope the foregone-conclusion feel of this match (notwithstanding the set and a break lead Fed had) means that for once and for all the hard court element of the head-to-head is seperated into indoor and outdoor: 5-1, 0-4.

Let's hope for a semi between these two at Wimbledon: that 2-1 head-to-head needs clarifying ;-)

@ hack (appropriate name, BTW)

Here's a thought: Maybe, juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuust maybe, Nadal's play forces Federer to make mistakes and keeps the Swiss from imposing an "intelligent" strategy.

Federer's "unforced" errors in his matches against Nadal are really forced errors. Go watch Nadal's topspin at court level. Then all those Federer "mistakes" will begin to make sense.

Federer doesn't have brain farts. He just can't handle Nadal's shots in a lengthy rally, especially over the course of 5 sets.

You all Nadal fans, pray so he doesn't get beaten on SUNDAY... Tennis is a duel, one must go down and it happens to be Federer when facing Nadal. It also happens to Nadal lately when facing Djoker. So we'll see. And I'm not Fernando.

Ha, ha, trying to make it sound like Federer beat himself. Please Bodo you'll have to do better than that. "Undone by his own genius", ha, ha, for such a genius he sure suck when he is presented with a task of figuring out a way to win a match agains Nadal, and Djokovic of late.

You can talk about strategy and tactics all you like but at the end of the day it all comes down to one thing - belief. When it comes to Rafa, Roger doesn't have it, not over 5 sets anyway. His level dropped today by at least 20% on previous matches. It's the Rafa factor at work i'm afraid.
Rafa was no more than solid today, with the occassional piece of brilliance and in the end won fairly comfortably.

Sometimes it seems that Pete Bodo was put on this earth not so much to write objectively about tennis, but to make his idol look good and his nemesis look bad.

Looks like someone spoiled the party here..

What's all this talk about Roger's creativity, brilliance, being bored and so on?

I tell you, He wasn't bored by any means; desperarate is the right word here because he knew once again he didn't have the tools to beat Nadal in a GS match.

Rafa, the "bricklayer" is the one who always comes up with the most stunning shotmaking in this rivalry. Today was no difference. The way he hits those passing winners on the run out of postions, where's he almost in the catacombs is just plain unrivaled.

But then again, the grapes are sour.

i find it incredible when people say rafa has a bad record against federer on hard courts. Try and break the stats down and not throw garbage about, like our tennis expert and roger's dad, Mr Pete Bodo.

Record on INDOOR HARD-COURT
FEDERER 4-0 NADAL

Record on OUTDOOR HARD COURT
FEDERER 1-5 NADAL

Australian open is an outdoor hard court, a nadal win was the obvious choice if you removed your federer-tinted glass and looked at the stats properly.

Unfortunately Mr. Bodo has his federer-tinted glass permanently glued to his face.

One more time, Bodo, you blew it by abandoning Rafa! When these two play each other Rafa is BETTER. 80% BETTER in grand slams and 66% career overall. Rog is just not tough enough for Rafa. Nole is and Andy is too on hard courts.

Roger is 30 going on 31, Rafa is a terrible match up for him and with age it gets worse. He cannot outhit Rafa on a slow outdoor court. He can take sets of Rafa but he cannot beat him best of 5. Roger can beat all the other players because he matches up very well against flat hitters such as DelPo, Murray or even the Djoker. Roger tried everything today, but he looked a bit tired and out of breath...he didn't have his legs anymore at the end. At 30, this is not a surprise. Roger is not a retrieving machine, he is an offensive weapon, if this gets slowed down by the court and Rafa's fantastic spin retrieving, he cannot win. Today's match perfectly fit the pattern of previous GS matches between the two. Always close, but you could always sense that Roger was on a tight rope and Rafa was going to win. This is never going to change. Doesn't mean Rafa will win the final nor does it mean that Roger is done. It is what it is between the two. Roger accepts this (see the interview), but he won't try to blow this out of proportion. Rafa lost to the Djoker 6 times last year in finals, if he beats him in the final, noone will care. There is always the next match between the fantastic four. And Rafa and Roger will meet again at least once this year in a GS....and the hype will be back. This story continues....we are lucky to witness it.

just wanted to add something, this is rafa's fourth straight final. had it been fed in his fourth straight one, every tennis critic would be drooling. congrats to rafa, he played a good match

Rafa owns Rodger from 16 years old to 25 years old. Lets get over it!!!

I like how this Fedlover add numbers on Fed age when it suits them hehehe. HE IS 31! They say. Completely ignoring that he is 30. And that Rafa is closer to being 26 then Roger is to being 31 hehe so cute. That's what means being in denial

I think it will have big problems novice against Murray. If Murray wins I think rafa no chances in the final.

"Federer was beaten by Nadal—but undone by his own genius"

To borrow the words of the man himself: "Are you kidding me!?"

Peter Bodo has long displayed HIS inability to do something too: write a balanced assessment of a match between Roger and Rafa. And because of this, there's ample fuel to conclude one thing: he's a Federer fanboy.

Why did Fed not continue to "work" a winning game plan? One thing COMPLETELY ignored: playing against the heavy, heavy ball takes a significant toll. When that happens, players fall back on their "safest" shots which fall into their comfort zones. Doing the things that got Fed the lead took him a hour and half of intense baseline play (which still required a tiebreak). He's 30 years old, and, inevitably, the weight of Rafa's shots got. How many players can hit with this amount of weight, while playing this type of defense? Only Rafa.

Another mental breakdown from Federer!

Credit to Nadal for doing whatever he needs to win. As usual a boring one dimensional game and just play to weakness of the player. He doesn't need to entertain and play something that he doen't know how to play. He just wants to win by whatever means or tricks.

Andrew Burton,

Fed may have found himself in the driver's seat (and perhaps he is fundamentally a better tennis player than Rafa) but Rafa is much more disciplined - which clearly is the determining factor in the head to head results.

Fed is rattled by Rafa, even when he is in control of the match, because Rafa will not go away - he is simply too disciplined to cave and always goes back to the game plan. Everyone else on tour (minus Djoker 2.0) caves when Fed takes control; their game plan, as sound as it may be, goes out the window.

Pete,

At some point you need to give Rafa his due. He owns the GOAT, not because he has better ground strokes, a better serve or net game, he owns him because when his back is to the wall he is the first to go back to fundamental tennis: watch the ball, get it in play, and make your opponent hit one more shot.

Peter Bodo said all the things Nadal's fans try to deny i.e Federer really beats "Federer" against Nadal except on Clay. Anyway now that my beloved RF is out I'll be rooting for Novak to win the whole thing. Rooting for anyone who can stop Nadal from reaching the 16 GS. Go Nole (but really Go Fed)

Calling Rafael Nadal a bricklayer is so disrespectful I won´t ever come back to tennis.com to read Pete Bodo anymore. He just does not know a single bit of Tennis.

Period. So long Bubble Bodo

Roger has always been 2nd best against Rafa.It doesn't take away Roger's achievements but truth must be told.

Too much idiotic, blurred partiality in both article and comments. This was an intense match with loads of lovely shots. Three of four sets could have gone any which way. Fed clearly has to press more against Rafa than anyone else. It's a great dynamic enhanced by both players' supreme talent and athletic gifts. Whenever these guys meet, either one or both of them ends of playing exceptional. Will look forward to the next one...

Hi Pete

"Sometimes it seems that Roger Federer was put on this earth not so much to blow away the all-time Grand Slam singles title record than to make his all-time rival look good. "
SPOT ON

"Federer repeatedly found himself in the driver's seat but always slid across the bench and allowed Nadal to take over the wheel." Also TRUE

He risks too much and loses all the important points, always. How\s that genius lob" of Nadal on BP to make it 5-5 in 4th?

Somehow I knew getting up this morning that Roger had lost, but he certainly made Nadal earn the win. However, I’m consoled by the same feeling that Nadal will NOT bag the title. It really doesn’t matter anyway, because I’m hoping it’s Murray’s turn this time.

The important thing to me though, is that win or lose, Roger made it as far as he did, and that at 30, he’s still a major threat to everyone on the court.

Also as Federer make Nadal look good, there is a nemesis for anyone, no? Rafa made Novak look good last year...

Bodo's Federer bias is in open view in this article. I've read posts on other articles accusing Bodo of this slant, and know am a full believer that he can't hide his preference for Federer. In fairness to Bodo, I didn't watch this match but followed the late sets on the score tracker. Regardless, Bodo is essentially saying that Nadal's simple mindedness allowed him to triumph over a more dynamic and creative player - the steady work man lost the to artistic genius. He paints Federer's loss as the defeat of a tragic artist, too blessed with other worldly skill and a deft touch that just doesn't compute in the world of mortals. By implying that Federer strives to play a better rounded game (an otherworldly game, even) he is at a disadvantage; Federer's genius and ambition get the better of him. Perhaps there is some truth to this, but I'd like to read a more objective analysis of the match rather than an elegy to Federer's demise in Oz.

Anyone think this article has elements of McPhee's Levels of the Game? Bodo describes Federer as Ashe-like in his grace and guts, and Nadal as the the steady, one dimensional Graeber. Whereas McPhee's description of Graebner was humane and generous, Bodo comes across with a shot or two to take at Nadal.

But it is so much fun to look all the match-ups really.

Federer made DelPo look bad (which I think would not be the case if DelPo even in this form played anyone else... or the way he schooled Tomic - Novak beat him at Wimby but it was a match, this 4R wasn't, it was a lesson) and Nadal made it look easy (sorry Fed fans but seem to me Nadal did not have to play "out of his mind" to win, just a standard same all safe game of running and waiting opportunities and forcing Fed to doubt himself)

Even though it was great win for Nadal (he is in the final) I don't it will matter much if Nadal plays Nole. This tactics against him does not work.

In the ES commentary they said Nole watched and was happy Nadal won and Murray was not happy(they think if he goes to final a better opponent for him was Fed)

Peter,

I have read your blog and all comments so far and here is one simple conclusion: NONE of the people here (including myself) said that you wrote it right.

Here is another conclusion: with this writing of yours you created BAD BLOOD here.

This is not the place to congrats to any of the players. I hope that Steve will come up with some of his exceptional writing about this match.

All the best and singing off,
k4

Just for the record:

There is no such thing as a "Heavy Sitter." Roger missing a forehand into the tape while making contact at the service line is an unforced error. There is nothing forced about this from Rafa's great spin. Also, unless you want to argue that Roger's toss was metaphysically influenced by Rafa's spin, you can't state that his first serve percentage was also caused by Rafa...

This doesn't discount that Rafa on many occassions has beaten Roger with his own abilities. However on this occassion, the match was on Roger's racquet because Nadal's level made it so. Roger had an incredible opportunity to hit winners from the mid court, and found a way to hit the net. This is a Roger choke, pure and simple.

Enjoy this win Rafa fans(I won't congratulate you... simply because that just seems weird to me...I don't expect a congratulations when Roger or Milos wins). This is a great result for him, and we'll see what the final holds for him. All I hope for is an entertaining final.

Cheers.

k4 I say I agree with Pete Bodo on this one

As long as Nadal and Djokovich are around (and they will be for at elast 4 more years), Federer will never win another slam because he will have to beat both of them in succession. Also why he rarely plays Murray anymore. With all due respect to John Newcombe and Jimmy Connors, unless Federer changes his tactics against Rafa, he will also never be #1 again. As a long time Fed fan, it is sad reality.

Agree with Damian - Nadal played exactly the same as he did in prior rounds. A good measure is that in the earlier matches, Rafa had just under 6 unforced errors per set vs. Roger's 8 per set. In the semi-final, Rafa's unforced count increased to only 8.5 per set while Roger's increased sharply to nearly 16 per set, a very telling sign.

I thought Roger would give Rafa a much tougher match vs. what Berdych was able to accomplish, because I thought surely Roger won't make nearly as many unforced errors as Berdych. But in the end, he actualy made more, 63 vs 56 while Rafa's unforced error count was about the same in both matches (30 and 34 respectively). Consequently, the results were nearly identical in each match.

"Federer was beaten by Nadal—but undone by his own genius."

Pete, are you claiming that Federer is an oxymoron?

Oh Rog, if you would have only stuck to the plan so well executed in the first set. I thought you made inroads...oh well. there's always Wimbledon.

Rafa is indeed incredible in anticipating the next ball that's why he gets to have most running shots. Run here and there... that's fantastic.

Real problem is with Fed. There really must be something that bothers him whenever he plays Rafa. Like Johny mac said, "Fed seems... bored". I believe mac...i do think he really is bored or he just doesn't like seeing Rafa running crazily around the court for every point. hehe...

It's too obvious, First set was 3-0. c'mon... 4-1... this must be too crazy to think for Fed, imagine a #2 seed in the world, getting a crack up of 6-0 in the semi finals, so Fed did stirred and mixed it up and end up getting bored.

We'll another funny thing was, whenever Rafa misses a running shot, he covers it with looking on his knee??? ankle? haha... blame it on the a-a-aa-aankle hehe... really, this is a big drama. Rafa is the only guy i know who has knee/ankle problem that runs furiously all around the court, then after getting the shot, jumps and fists, then after winning the game, kneels down flexibly bended... C'mon... Drama rafa indeed. =)

Anyway, better luck next time for Rog, but i hope next time, he should take it seriously as he's not the only one that gets affected, but also his fans especially his beloved team.

"The bottom line is that Federer's impulsive, creative, mix-it-up style almost always blows up in his face when he's matched with Nadal...he failed to consolidate a break in the first game of the second set. In all fairness to Federer, Nadal snapped to life after the break, but this point also marked a shift away from the successful tactics employed by Federer in the first set......On this night of blown opportunities, Federer was beaten by Nadal—but undone by his own genius."

Ok so Fed's creativity hurts him when he plays Nadal. Didnt you write an article about how Monfils who likes to play, shall we say, "creatively" was silly for not just focusing on winning? Is this not sort of the same thing? Focus on winning even if its not going to be "creative" whether its with ur variety of shots or movement? Sure it means Fed isnt Fed, but would u rather he wasnt Fed for a night and into the final or continue to suffer losses in this H2H?
Whatever won Fed the first set as you said, he should have kept employing with bricklayer tenacity, not trying to mix it up (if thats what u say cost him) b/c by now hasnt he learnt that impulsive play doesnt work with Nadal? This is a tragic genius indeed. Well, maybe on the 28th try. I think the first posters said it: Fed is stubborn but creative.

It all comes down to winning the points, not so much mixing it up or variety (though that is for viewing pleasure and apparently is a measure of greatness). Variety can win u points but apparently not with one track Nadal.

Serious commiseration to Federer's fans. I know how disappointed you must be. It really felt like Fed had turned a corner.

BTW, is it necessary for this site to flash the huge 'doubling up' banner? I don't mind when it's done to celebrate a milestone, like someone winning their first major, or someone reaching number one.

But this just seems to be in really bad taste.