First

What a great match. It will be a sad day indeed when both of these guys retire.

Steve, no offence to your writing here, but even good writing like yours can't bring back the glamour of these matches;

"Real" tennis as you chose to call it, is/has to be played for something. ALWAYS!

What was Nadal playing for?
Beating Federer? No.
What did Federer play for?
Beating Nadal. Yes.

I just hope this fact does not mean we shall never see Federer in Nadal's half again.

Oh, and btw, I haven't even seen the match. I've seen it all before.

Yet Nadal won. And not many are surprised.

Every Mozart has his own Salieri.
F***!

They have taunted me as age begins to sap the energy from my bones.
Yes supporters of a fierce and worthy rival whose spirit has been far
stronger than mine, especially in the most crucial of times.
He has attempted to take ownership of that which I vacated... my throne.
And yet he has had but a brief time at the top... A balkan King stalked him
and kicked him off to the curb. The dark haired king shut the door and left
the spaniard out in the cold hurting alone.
They taunted me, they that followed the sign of taurus.
They that lazy on their backs and grow as fat as a walrus.
They yelled "show us those dancing feet that we may sweep them from under thee."
"Show us that backhand that our charge may attack it with glee."
And yet I have not said anything.
What is there to be said? Nothing.
There will be those as unwise to know when they have a diamond in the rough.
To know and appreciate that what I have done is nothing short of tough.
My achievements are never to be replicated and others will fall in attempts
to even come close to duplicating what they couldn't even have fabricated.
So I shall exit the stage smiling at those who thought they had trapped
me in a cage. Don't worry loyal fans I shall write my final page the way I wish.
And when I am gone and tennis is nothing but a sour memory of what it should have been.
When giants rule the courts and approaches to the net are seldom unseen,
when the slice is but a mere whisper and double handers dominate like hister.
When the magic is drained and gone,
they that scorned me will beg for my return.
They will cry out "Save us"
And I will look down upon them and reply "No."
-RF

It's a shame that this is such a matchup problem for Federer. The naive tennis fan/observer thinks that Nadal is the superior player. It'll forever trouble Federer and his fans.

Another brilliant match by two of the bhest players of all time.

Raffa in particular was just outstanding tonight - he seems to play better against Federer than any of his other opponents (eg tonight) or... not turn up at all (eg London last year).

Based on the evidence of this match, there is still a small but perceptable difference between the top three and Andy Murray.

After 8 years and 27 matches, why has Fed never adjusted to Nadal's extreme spin? Might taking the ball earlier help the ball falling into his wheelhouse?

Ian, the "naive tennis fan/observer" cares about the slam record above all - so Federer and his fans need not be troubled.

Nadal is to Federer what top notes were to Domingo: a very solid reminder of mortality; a cosmic joke.

Rafa fan here with tremendous respect for Roger. A Fedal fan. It was like watching brothers fighting against each other. Trying to cheer for both, but that's impossible. Great for tennis. I want Roger to beat Novak! Let's hope Murray does the job.

question how can fed be classed the goat when he has lost 8 from 10 slam matches,on all surfaces

lendl(early in his career yes but after that he was great),borg,laver,sampras has never been owned like that

i called it rafa in 4 and i was right,fed hasnt had it in him to beat nadal when it realy matters since they first played each other.fed fans were mocking nadal foir his london loss,but i stated then he wouldnt beat rafa when it realy mattered and fed fans abused me,just sayin

i hope it is a murray nadal final,and murray plays like he did in tokyo,didnt give rafa a hope,but i think nole will win in 3-4 sets but the ,match is on murray to make it a classic

These matches are becoming as painful as Roddick-Federer matches..which should frankly be banned..and I say that as a Fed fan. Its just painful to watch.

The only difference is that Fed has multiple chances to win in multiple matches...but they all end with the same result.

It dosen't matter if its 5 hrs 15 min, or 4 hrs 30 min, or 4 hrs 40 min, or 4 hrs 45 min.

The wheel keeps turning, the result never changes (except indoors). Props to Federer for trying again and again...but he can't keep on..NOT taking his chances. I know Rafa makes it tough to capitalize on chances..a breakpoint isn't really a breakpoint with Rafa unless its plural..but if he can create those chances over and over again in almost 15 of those matches, its a mystery why he can;t take them. Its been 8 years. Someday, he's not even going to get those chances to take anymore.

Unbelievably stupid performance by Roger. His backhand has improved greatly to the point where Nadal's main gameplan of pelting his backhand wing doesn't work nearly as well anymore. Yet consistently hitting it to Rafa's backhand would be too easy for Roger. As a long-time fan of Federer I've got to say this match was bullshit. Roger had the depth of shot to hurt Rafa consistently on his backhand, yet instead he gave him forehand shots.

It was as if Roger wanted to eliminate the possibility that someone might say "Well you only beat Rafa today because you hit it to his backhand"... So he tried to do far too much, especiallly going for very low percentage shots on the highest pressure moments. I understand that when you're that much of a genius at anything you don't want to take the easy road, but this was ridiculous. Learn from Rafa Roger, you are a better player shot-wise than him, but he plays conservative on the pressure points, lets you make the error, while you put it on your shoulders to hit a screaming down the line redirected backhand winner for no good reason.

From a man who is lauded as one of the smartest players of all time on the court, there is something abotu this rivalry that makes Roger beat himself.

Sad to watch

Just been looking at the whole list of the rivalry.

Of the 27 matches, 14 were up to the end of 2007, when Roger was still king. The head to head was 6-8, with Federer getting his only victory on outdoor hard, winning the 2007 Wimbledon 5-setter, and chasing Nadal very hard in Rome in 2006

Of the 13 matches since the rise of Nadal to general preeminence the head to head is a far more unbalanced: 3-10. Of Fed's three, two are indoors - the stand out result here was the (thoroughly deserved) victory in Madrid in 2009 against a grumpy Nadal.

I wish I had known in 2006 that the Miami result would need treasuring so much ;-)

"Of the 13 matches since the rise of Nadal to general preeminence the head to head is a far more unbalanced: 3-10. Of Fed's three, two are indoors"

This can only get worse in the next few years.

Thanks Steve. Readers can always count on you for great writing!

How lucky are we as fans of the game to continue to be treated to the era of Federer-Nadal. Tennis at its best!

I am on the Nadal side of Fedal but props as always to Fed. I thought Rafa was cooked this time after I saw how Fed dismantled DelPo in the last round.

Kudos to Rafa for playing within himself while leaving everything he had on the court (and the sidelines as Steve notes above).

Ladyjulia - until Rafa falls off *his* plateau .... whenever that may be.

Roger gave me a glimmer of hope when he started using the Djokovic-inspired strategy of hitting to Nadal's backhand and opening the court. Then he abandoned that strategy. Then Federer's serve abandoned him. Then the unforced errors increased. A lot. Then he squandered break points with impatience and it was over.

So frustrating to see how the match could've been won only to see it play out like it always has.

Very well written like most of your articles Steve. You seem to be the only unbiased writer here! I wouldn't say the quality of this match was up there with the best, but the drama certainly was. You could definitely see how 3 of the 4 sets could've gone either way. I thought Fed was going to break with Rafa serving at 3-4 in the third. Very exciting match. These two players epitomize today's game. Fantastic players (2 of the best ever without a doubt) and real gentlemen on and off the court. I respect them more for that than anything. Good luck to Rafa in the final and good luck to TMF for the rest of the year. I'd love to see him win the USO one more time.

OMG...Tennis became sooo boring...its like math...1+1 will always equal 2

CJ,

"Ladyjulia - until Rafa falls off *his* plateau .... whenever that may be."

I don't think it will be anything drastic with Rafa. It will be the same as Roger...subtle difference mentally and physically.

But owning is owning. And will remain so in this case is my guess (Novak-Rafa rivarly is still young..and i think that's easier to push either way as compared to Fedal rivarly). I don't think Rafa even has to pay the mortgage.

By the way, are *any* of Miami, IW, Rogers Cup or Cincy played on a fast hard court? Or are they all much of a muchness. Also, is AO any slower than that lot?

"By the way, are *any* of Miami, IW, Rogers Cup or Cincy played on a fast hard court?"

Cincy is faster than Miami, IW, Roger's cup..as well as AO I think. Between USO and Cincy, not sure which is faster.

I do not know what to say about Federer's loss against Nadal once again. I as a Federer's fan always blamed many things why Roger lost to Rafa, but maybe it is just because of Nadal being better player. I can't find other explanations, cause I am already tired of excuses made by Fed's fans.

Sadly it is federer's stubborn nature and ego which has made him Rafa's bunny. He keeps on trying to match Rafa by that single handed backhand again and again, year after year and rafa pounds him into the ground EVERYTIME. I am a HUGE federer fan, but I cannot accept that he has not been able to get around this problem since the last 7-8 years! It is just shocking! And what is paul annacone's contribution? what has he brought to the table? His ward, federer, is still playing that unidimensional, brainless, strategyless tennis against rafa that he used to play. Paul annacone has failed as a strategist.
Now, the bitter truth for us federer fans is that rafa has beaten federer COMPREHENSIVELY on outdoor hardcourts, however slow and sticky they maybe. Sadly Roger never had the opportunity to play him on faster hardcourts of cincinnati and us open as rafa was never good enough to face him over there.
So, federer is rafa's bunny. it hurts me to say that, but we all know it to be true. BUT NOW THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT RAFA IS DJOKER'S BUNNY AS WELL. we will see that once again in the finals. so what goes round comes round.
I would like to conclude by saying that since Roger has lost in a similar, pathetic, strategyless, depressing manner to rafa, paul annacone should go back to America. clearly nothing has changed due to him.
Prashant

I still maintain the same point in regards to people not giving Nadal any credit (see Bodo's article on this match).

If Nadal was a journeyman or just ranked within the top 30 in the world then you could bring in all the left handed, surface speed, Fed's head stuff.

However, when the guy has won ten slams been consistently at the top of the game for years and has a winning h2h against all of his main rivals, including Djoko. Then he can't just be branded Fed's 'bogey man', the lefty he can't deal with blah blah blah.

Nadal is too godd a player to chalk all his victories down to Fed underperforming.

ladyjulia: "Novak-Rafa rivarly is still young..and i think that's easier to push either way as compared to Fedal rivarly"

You might be surprised to learn that while Fedal have played 28 times, Novak-Rafa is already at 29 meetings.

I don't know if Fed is up to it, but if he can weather the next few years Nadal and Djoker will likely be out of tennis due to serious injuries because of their playing style. I haven't witnessed any potential greatness from the next generation of players. Hypothetically, he could go out in blaze of glory.

Thanks, Steve, a lovely article. Thank goodness someone around here can write decent ones. :)

@nick
nick federer is 30 years old turning 31 this year. He doesnt have the luxury of a 'few years'. This might be his last year as a serious contender in slams.

tina,

"You might be surprised to learn that while Fedal have played 28 times, Novak-Rafa is already at 29 meetings."

True..but the rivarly is swinging only since last year. That's what i meant by young.

"I would like to conclude by saying that since Roger has lost in a similar, pathetic, strategyless, depressing manner to rafa, paul annacone should go back to America. clearly nothing has changed due to him."

While he was actually working for the LTA (not in America) before being hired by Fed, Prashant,
I just posed a question about Annacone on the Racquet Reaction. Fed did astoundingly well without a "proper" coach for years, and while it's clear that Annacone gets on well with Fed, with Mirka, and I suppose with Severin Luthi, he's become a bit of a glorified "walker" or "umbrella carrier". What has he brought to the table in the past 18 months? Fed cleans up indoors for 2 months a year?

Have to say I agree with DJB.
If Nadal's wins against Federer are put down to Fed not performing then we could just as easily say Nadal's losses to Djokovic are due to him not performing.

In both cases it is a mixture of the two. If Nadal is playing at high level then he will make Federer will start to make bad decisions/ get nervous. Exact same case as when Djokovic plays Nadal.

@tina
i agree 100%. it doesnt matter where annacone was before being hired ..:) what matters is that he has done nothing SINCE being hired. Clearly federer is too stubborn and annacone is afraid of giving him a piece of his mind? and what is severin luthi doing there anyways? is he a 'ghost coach'? is he there to undercut annacone? i dont know.
i agree that federers indoor wins dont matter now. not at this twilight stage of his career. he needs to win at least 2 more slams somehow as rafa is very very close. and he is still 25.

@prashant
Agassi was a serious slam contender until 35 when he lost to Fed in the 05 USO. Sadly he retired one yr too late but it's possible.

"What has he brought to the table in the past 18 months? Fed cleans up indoors for 2 months a year?"

That's better than not winning anything down the line whole year.

After AO 2010, Fed lost in QF both at RG and Wimby. He hired Annacone after his 2010 losses where he was getting passive in his gameplan.

In 2011, atleast he made semis of 3 GS...including one final. I would say Annacone and Luthi have made some improvements in his mindset and play. His returning has improved..his BH has improved, he is no longer passive against players ranked lower than 5.

So, atleast some improvements compared to 2010 Roger.

It's true that Federer had some really awful moments in this match. I respect him for coming right back and fighting, however -- and was able to incorporate some brilliance while doing so.

It just wasn't enough, however. Rafa scrambled as though the rest of his season depended on it. Maybe it did, or will. He made his own fair share of mistakes, and there were a handful of times that I thought he would just beat himself up and play half-heartedly to a loss. People talk about Rafa's tenacity, but I've seen matches where he loses that tenacity and can't pull himself together again. ...This match, however, was not one of those situations.

Both men fought hard, regardless of their mistakes -- and they battled with respect. I'm glad I tuned in.

well, nadal will surely lose to novak..so sorry for rafa fans

vamos rafa!! love your writing steve as always.. hopefuyl nadal regains his confidence with Djoko!!!

When the magic is drained and gone,
they that scorned me will beg for my return.
They will cry out "Save us"
And I will look down upon them and reply "No."
-RF
----------------

oh man, @11:48, is this for real? It takes a special kind of fan to write elegiac poems in the voice of one's idol.

Rafa does play better against Roger.
I also think Nole plays better against Rafa, even though we may need to see half a dozen more matches before drawing that conclusion.
Its a match up thing. Sometimes when you get into someone's head and make a home, guess what, it will be like coming home next time you meet :-D

Sorry to gate-chrash the party, but there's nowhere else here to express the madness I feel right now:

Finally, something to be excited about, the second semi-final of Australian Open 2012.

Born within the week of each other.
The story begins.
Two friends.
Two rivals.
Same dreams.
Here's where the story ends:
The Underdogs.

Enjoy (or at least give it a try):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsKbL4mQCAU

COME OOOOOOOON, NOLEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!

LJSDLAtennis: I agree 100 percent. I was staring at my television, and listening to the commentators echo those same sentiments. After Roger is up 3-0 in the first set, pelting Nadal's backhand, how does Roger not keep doing that? Some of those down the line forehands he tried were so low percentage, especially in sets 2-4. He has success in the first set tiebreak blistering Nadal's backhand again, going away from it after breaking in the 2nd set, and got broke again.
Woof. It is frustrating. You hope Anacone or someone shows him the tape and says "Look dude, if you keep cross courting to Nadal's BH, you're going to win."
He did that same thing in the World Tour Finals and it was 6-3, 6-0. Why stray from that successful game plan? Boggles my ind.

It was an interesting match to watch. Disheartening that Roger did not play as much offense in set two and lost it by being too passive, letting Rafa pick up speed. But I'm happy I have somebody to root for in the final!

Rock, paper, scissors..

Nadal beats Fed

Djoker beats Nadal

Fed (sometimes can) beat Djoker

Roger: I love you man, but the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. You can't out Rafa Rafa. You need to do something drastically different and shake it up. Go big or go home.

Nice write up Steve. I so want Rafa to win this thing again, will this win give him more confidence? I have a feeling (in me waters) That Andy is going to beat Djoker - do you think that will make a difference? I did laugh when Rafa gave his free advice to Andy "Be more aggressive" and then "but he shouldn't listen to me - Nole has beaten me 6 times already"!!! THAT is class & English/Scottish humour

Tina--I think Paul A. improved Federer's approach to matches at this point in his career. There was a brief period in which he was becoming too passive and Annacone helped bring that to an end. I also think we have to keep in mind here that Nadal is in the the absolute prime of his tennis career, or at least 25 is that for most players, and Federer is pretty near the end of this career. The fact that he's still beating everyone except Nadal and Djokovic pretty consistently is rather impressive. He was one centimeter away from beating Djokovic who was at the very peak of what was, up to that point, just about the best year ever (as I obviously don't need to remind you!). To do that at this stage in one's career is no small feat.

I'd love to see Federer take one late slam like Sampras did, but it's hard to imagine it happening. He's performing much better overall than Sampras did at this age but he doesn't have the same single overwhelming weapon. Of course he's also facing one of the greatest players of all time who is in his prime and another player in his prime who could end up with a similar stature and has already proven himself. Sampras wasn't facing players of this sort in his last few years.

The course of their match followed the usual formula. Roger came out strong taking the lead, and Rafa just weathered the storm by sticking to his game plan. He never looked in doubt about the outcome of the match. Every time they play, Roger seems to bring out Rafa's best, on the other hand Nadal brings Fed to frustration ( this time it was very noticable) The main question still remains - Will Federer be able to ever again beat Nadal in a best of five match in a slam ??? Thanks Steve, nice piece..

Federer lacks a killer instinct., something Nadal has although he seems such a gentle soul off court. Federer won all those GSs by the sheer force of his genius alone. If he had a killer instinct he would have relentlessly and mercilessly attacked Nadal's backhand -he would used all means at his disposal, including winning ugly. Perhaps he should hire Brad Gilbert as his coach.

lol @frank,fans like you are deluded,if fed kept playing like that for the whole match rafa would of won more convincingly,fed has beautiful attacking shots and movement but it is useless against nadal who gets everything and wins the points.everyone of the fed minions go on about london and 6-3,6-0 at the end of the year,indoors were 1 masters title is played and rafa always under 60% by the time he gets to the event,to show how much he cares about it he skipped it 2 times.federer beat rafa once in a match worth nothing,beat tsonga a few times who got beat and outhit by nishikori in the heat and a exhausted berdbrain.the end of season was terrible quaility and standard.

accept nadal is a better player,in the pressure moments where titles and matches are won and lost,noone who is considered a goat has been OWNED like fed has,i laughed when deluded fed fans where saying fed was playing better now than in 2006 and was going to hand rafa a bagel feast based on london,lol keep dreaming,as i said before i would bet on rafa 100% in the importants matches and points vs fed it is realy no contest

I thought this match was clear cut after the first set and Fed was battling uphill:
Fed didn't mix up his backhand;
his dropshot's failed;
forehand was of target;
no depth in his game;
he didn't get the angles;
to many second serves;
no stepping up another gear (whereas Rafa did);
and he was not light footed;
Clear cut...you loose.

I wonder if Roger is still called the GOAT if Rafa ever makes 16 GS's?

Great match by Rafa and Roger. I am glad Rafa was able to pull it off.Federer came to this match with a great winning streak and started it as aggressively as possible. I thought it would be Fed in 4!

Many people attribute Rafa's win to Fed's breakdown. But it is WON by Rafa's brilliant play. TAkin Fed's wide serve and attacking Fed's forehand as well as the backhand. Fed won Rafa 63 60 in the year-end masters. It is not like he doesn't know how to play against Rafa. It just did not work last night. RAfa had his own game plan.

Thanks Steve for this nice article. Awesome match indeed.By two great champions.

Some of the Fed fans here including Bodo, should read Federer's presser and follow his example. Fed was as calm and respectful for Rafa as it can be.

Indeed it will be a sad day when these two great champions retire from tennis. I hope they both stay healthy and motivated for many more years.

To all those people saying that Federer employed poor tactics... take a step back. Federer is probably one of the smartest tennis players of all time.

The bad matchup is fundamental. Unless Fed changes his backhand (which would be a bad idea 'cause it's awesome against all others), it can't be changed.

People ask how Federer can be the GOAT if he loses to one single player consistently. He can be because the GOAT should be defined by how well he or she does against the field, rather than a single player.

Remember, James Blake had the upper hand on Nadal until recently in terms of head-to-head matchups. No one would say that he was a better player though.

@Christopher

Just like Sampras didn't have to face many great ones in his latter career, even though you're choosing to ignore Agassi's career during that point, i'll give you that.

I don't remember a 19 yr old Federer reaching his 1st Wimbledon final against a 25 yr old Sampras like in W 06 when Nadal made the final.

I think you'll get my point.

Steve excellent writing capturing all the terrific skills shown in this match. True champions that have broadened worldwode audience for tennis. Match was so enthralling made it easy to watch 4 hours into the night. Fireworks were added bonus!

muarry is nowhere near the top 3s league - sry

he doesnt have the power- never did

If nadal can reach 13 slams he will be goat

Love this quote Steve, it epitomizes Nadal's will!

"I look up and Federer is watching something in the air. It’s the ball. Apparently Nadal has retrieved it."

I am barely able to read this. I've erased the match from my DVR without watching it. It's too painful. I sorta saw it coming. How many times have we seen Roger breeze through the draw and then come up against the buzz saw that is Rafa. Well done, Rafa. Commiserations to all my fellow Fed Fans.

Federer didn't apply bad tactics, but most people are failing to see that this is a common trend with Federer.

Take the Del Potro match (both the last one and the USO '09 finals). Or even the WTF finals with Nadal. He starts very strong, doing everything correct -- serves, backhand, volleys, aggression. He never can keep up that level and slows down in the middle engaging into rallies. He went to 3-0 leads in each of the above matches (including the ones with Potro) and then slowed down. It is his game -- while he is a very aggressive player, he is still not a naturally offensive player (ie looking to come forward at all times). Plus, that wide serve requires a lot of skill. He does it at the start, and then his %age falls -- it happens always -- and so he has to change his tactics midway.

As Rafa said, that when Roger plays at his highest level, he is impossible to play against. But he cannot sustain that highest level throughout and there are periodic dips. Against most, he gets away with it (remember Potro broke back Fed when the latter was serving for the set, but then double faulted at set point) but against Rafa and Djoker -- they feed off these small drops in level.

Others do not punish him or pressure him consistently during those drops, so Fed can come back to his vintage form. But Rafa and Djoker pounce on him on the smallest available opening, and then on he finds it tough to come back to his best.

Also, it is easy to be at your highest level when you can easily hit a winner and toy with the opponent. Totally different thing when you have to play three points to win one.

I think Pete and most other experts are too nice with Federer. I am a Fed fan and I think it was really stupid of him to not use the hit to backhand strategy after the first set. Arguments like he is too much of a genius to follow are strategy are all being too kind to Federer. Its not like it was ok for him to loose here, either he is being too stubborn or he just cannot stick to the strategy under pressure, and is too arrogant to realize and accept these flaws.

YES! An article that isn't discussing who is the greatest but just an article about the best rivalry in tennis. You can learn something about this Matt ;)

Sorry,but roger ain't the best tennis player of all time.He does not learn from previous rafa defeats.

Spot the occasional commenter..

First of all, Michele, you nailed it: Federer just abandoned that backhand strategy. Related, I actually agree with something Mats W said on commentary, something which more satisfactorily sums up this crazy rivalry better that any other analysis I've come across or tried myself: that Federer simply he doesn't do tactics, or rather he can't. Such is the guy's natural, wizard-like genius that he's a player who just flows, who just plays on extinct, goes whichever way his wind blows, and assumes - nearly always correctly - that his magic is more than good enough. He's Roger Federer, he doesn't need tactics! Pah! Except that, against Rafa, he sorta does.

Meanwhile, is it me or is this men's tournament in danger of telling us absolutely nothing. Assuming Novak wins the final two matches, we have: the top 4 being the final 4 again; Rafa beating Roger again; Murray looking great until he meets someone ranked above him, again; Novak beating Rafa again; Novak winning again. The whole scenario is some way from coming to pass yet, but I have a definite deja vu thing going down here...

Oh and time for some pointless pedantry - I'm guessing that Roger's two slam wins vs Rafa didn't end on a forehand error. Or any sort of Roger error in fact. Nevertheless, the fact that so many of his slam defeats to Rafa have ended on a forehand miss - rather than that backhand Nadal eats for breakfast - is kinda crazy, right? I like Steve's analysis of that one.

Great writting from Steve (first of all), but also from posters...

Tina: It's harder to get the ball on the rise and besides more often then not, Roger didn't have to get in position...

Hats off to KA at 11:48, for his poem, in the other thread.

I was suprised by how fast Rafa moved this time (eventually draining Roger) and how many FHs Roger missed...

I have to watched some of the recorded match (like from 0-3 to 5-5 and the whole second set) that was missing this version to try to get a better understanding of what transpired, but I've also liked Rafa's serve and harder shots.

Would those be enough to make a difference against Nole? Probably, but maybe not enough for a win actually...

@Ian

You are right about the field argument.
Only fault there is Nadal/Djokovic/Murray are not part of the field.

Anybody could play some player in Doha or Dubai or be unlucky or be injured for a total of 6-8 matches and be on the losing end 3-5 or something like that.

It is about bettering the best.

The GOAT is titled to a player that

1. has more wins than any
2. has better technique and more shots in the bag than any
3. represents the sport better than any

Nadal is a great player. nobody will ever play like him again, his style is very personal and a little awkward. But....is his playing-style the kind of tennis we wish our kids to learn from? He's a grinder and Federer is a maestro...watch the halfvolley in the first breaker at 5-3...pure art.

next in line to be called the GOAT is Sampras...not Nadal...
but not saying that he isn't great...

Does anyone know if this is the first time in the Australian Open that BOTH semifinals matchups are former AO finals? Or even the first time in Open Era Grand Slam History?

Not sure why this is such a huge discussion. ROger has not beaten Nadal when it counted since 2007 and even that was an unusual event.
Nadal owns him, period.

My only interest in this match was to see whether Rafa's mental strength had suffered due to being owned by Joker.

And first few games he seems like maybe he was not the same v Roger, but then he broke back - and this became like very other match we've witnessed bwteen these two for maybe 8-9 years: great points - but Nadal is tougher. Period.

Roger will never beat this guy in a Slam again barring injury. That sounds harsh but IMO it;s a damn safe bet.

Federer is very lucky that Novak is in charge now and keeps his record safe. Without that Nadal would be the undisputed GOAT.

I am not saying that what Gunter Parche (Steffi Graf fan) did to Monica Seles was right, but after watching the Federer-Nadal match today, I understand.

LOL!

I think Fed probably has too much respect for Rafa.
The thing is when the margin for error is so small, sometimes it takes anger/desperation to bring out the extra-OOMPH to adrenalize the real "will".

I don't see anyone except the others in top 3 really being consistent trouble makers for Fed. The only one of them for whom Fed has real respect is Rafa. That is why in very tough matches Fed loses to Rafa. He lacks that over over-drive to get him through.

A possibility, that's all.

Fernando says Maestro plays the big points very poorly against Rafa and cannot hold his nerve when Rafa retrieves a ball that is a winner against any other Maestro opponent. This deflates Maestro- you can see it. It's the "What have I got to do look." Rafa is also too physical over the best of 3.

Maestro was up a break twice in the 3rd set and just gave them both back easily. He lacks confidence becasue he knows the margins are so small for him to win. And it iss so freustrating becasue Rafa' level never dips no matter what the situation- it gets better.

The Bull is 25. First entering his prime. If he is not now, he will be GOAT by the end of his career. Fernando loves Maestro. He tool tenis to another level. And his game is beautiful.

The Bull is 25. First entering his prime. If he is not now, he will be GOAT. Accept this, please and enjoy the power and majesty of The Humble Bull.

I am Fernando

Fernando, unfortunately for you, Nadal will never be GOAT because of Novak. If he loses the eventual final vs him, the big question is if he will ever recover and continue play tennis anymore.

too bad for roger...the stars seemed to be lining up for him in this GS. nadal really plays outrageously good against roger...they definitely bring out the best (or worst) in each other. it is always a treat to watch them play, despite the results which turn in favor of nadal.

ah well....time to watch re-runs of the bagel beat down roger gave nadal at the year end championships. it is nice once in a while to see nadal truly at a loss on the court. i guess i have to root for novak to win now.

Briefly - my compliments, good article.

This was outstanding match for Nadal and once more, he showed that he is the best when is needed the most. Bravo!

For me, the whole match was mastery of Nadal. Before the match, everyone was talking that Nadal will only force that Federer's BH and that Federer will serve better. Nadal did forced that BH, but not only that, he outplayed Federer even in aspects perviously considered as Federer weaponry.

Nadal was the one serving better (77% to 63% 1st serve %), he won more points not just on his 1st serve (68% to 66%), but even more on his 2nd (62% to 55%), all the way making less double faults (1 to 5). Still, Federer had more aces (11 to 4), but Nadal was the one taking more receiving points (51 to 46).

Federer was better in short rallies (3 to 8 shots) winning every second of them, but Nadal was outstanding at short rallies as well, winning astonishing 47%.

Federer had more winners (46 to 36), but he erased all of those with unbelievable high number of unforced errors (63 to 34 in his favor). I don't have the whole Federer Ausie statistics for unforced errors, but it's sound that he made more in this single match he didn't in all his matches before.

With all that said, it's look like that Nadal won in guest field making his victory even greater.

I looked this match twice and beside Steve's insight observation, I would like to add one more: At the begging of the fourth set and after Nadal broke his serve once more, Federer was looking desperate that much, that at one point looked like he could totally give up. But the Ausie crowd brought him back and he tried to fight back for the last time.

Congratulation to Federer, he did all that he could.

I was "really" hoping that Nadal might suffer some mental doubts after spending all last year as Joker's you-know-what.

But no. He owns Fed 7-2 (now 8-2) in Slams.

Once Nadal righted himself in the 2nd there was no doubt in this one. ROger cannot match him mentally at all.

Too bad, would have liked to see Fed get a chance at Joker in the final.

I only have one comment about the "coach". How do any of you know Paul has done nothing? Perhaps he's done a lot, but the ego doesn't listen. Wouldn't be the first time a "star" doesn't like taking advice.

"The Bull is 25. First entering his prime. If he is not now, he will be GOAT. Accept this, please and enjoy the power and majesty of The Humble Bull. "

Fernando,

you know you're asking the impossible, don't you....nobody watches tennis for power display...and as for majesty...(sorry, have to dash out and have a glass of water after a near-choke)

As a painfully disappointed Fed fan, after a night of restless sleep, my thoughts go to Roger's legacy, with which Nadal's presence seems intertwined: a cosmic joke, as one commenter observed, at least for those of us who have Roger at the centre of our tennis universe.

I notice the talk about Roger's GOAThood being brought into question. This bothers me because from my earliest memories of seeing him play, I knew it to be so. Surely this was before his grand slam titles were manifold; surely before Rafa became even a splinter, let alone a thorn, in his side.

But he's lodged firmly there now. I find ways to reconcile this in my mind: the looping forehand to single-handed backhand; the slow courts; the string technology; the darkness on that deathly afternoon in London. I find Wikipedia lists of Roger's records, compare them against Nadal's, find them richer and lengthier, more impressive, soothing. But still the thorn is there, in those pages, in his side. In my side.

Roger is delusional. He's mind is stuck in the pre 2007 era...

Steve

Many thanks for your insightful post on this match between Rafa v Roger.

You again 'Nailed It'

I too was there live.Being a Rafa fan since he first came on the tour and going through the good times and bad as a fan does.I knew after his game with Berdych he sent out a strong message and was confident he coudl defeat Roger.

I guess the fans at Rod Laver saw again what Rafa is Made of.The shot making between these 2 players was just awesome at times.I have and will be in 'awe'of Federer and it will be a sad day in tennis for everyone when these two Great Champions retire.

I left Rod Laver stadium last night with a smile upon my face cause again I was priviledge to see thesew 2 Great Champions on court

Thank you Rafa and Roger.

I guess GOAT is in the eye of the beholder and generation.
Sampras saw Rod Laver
Federer saw Sampras
todays sees/saw Federer
tomorrows sees... Nadal/Novak?
...if Novak remains healthy (he looked a bit dim in the eyes in his previous match) I give him a better chance than Nadal.
I see Nadal to Federer as Agassi was for Sampras, one of the great players but not a GOAT.

I guess what is left for Fed to do is to go Sampras on Nadal's ass, attack, attack, attack....

It was not meant to be for Roger to beat Nadal . Nadal played very well when it was nescessary.. That is what counts. I will not be impressed with Nole,Andy,or Nadal until they turn 30 and still play at this level..In my opinion,Roger is playing better than he has in many years..He may not be getting the results that everyone wants but it is just a matter of time and some luck of the draw. 10 years from now, everyone will remember Roger for his talent and class on all surfaces and Nadal for his fighting spirit and success on clay...Everyone else has many years to edge their name in that company..Taking nothing from Novak at all. Having these 4 at the top makes the sport very exciting to watch....

I wanted to see a Federer / Djokovic final!!!

Federer's genius was the cause of his undoing today. It was really hard to understand his stubborn approach at times to hit to Nadal's forehand whereas Nadal stuck to his game plan of hitting only to Fed's backhand. Darren Cahill also said that during 2009, when he and Federer were together for 2 weeks, he told Federer that he was not being aggressive on breakpoints and that's y he had converted only 1 out of 14 BP against Nadal. But Federer was adamant that he was being aggressive. Then they sat down and watched the tape and then only fed realized that what Darren was saying was true. So probably when Federer will go back and watch this tape again, he will realize his mistake of not hitting more shots to Nadal's backhand (something which Djokovic exploited pretty well in 2011)
I think Federer was responsible for his own downfall today: http://bit.ly/zpv4QI

Am not suggesting Nadal is better than Federer or anything.
Quoting Pete "no draw is hard/easy until it isn't"

Federer's 16 slams are supposed to make him the GOAT.

Federer's slam wins - opponents and opponents rankings overview of players faced by Federer during his slam wins.

Federer didn't face anyone from the top 4 when winning 7 of his 16 slams.
Twice he faced 2 top 4 players (Hewitt-Roddick and Davy-Djoko)

In total he has beaten top 4 players 11 times during his slam runs.
Ferrero - 1 (AO)
Davydenko - 1 (USO)
Roddick - 2 (W)
Hewitt - 2 (W,USO)
Nadal - 2 (W)
Djokovic - 2 (USO)
Murray - 1 (AO)

Nadal has beaten top 4 players 12 times during his slam runs.
Federer - 7 (RG,W,AO)
Ljubicic - 1 (RG)
Djokovic - 2 (W,USO)
Murray - 2 (W,RG)

Thanks for the write-up, Steve.

I agree with the posters who've said that Federer got this match tactically wrong, and that he departed from the winning gameplan in London, which was to keep the ball relentless on Nadal's backhand until there was a clear opening. Like one poster said, it's almost as though he treats this tactic the way he used to treat the dropshot, as somehow cheap. When he stuck to Nadal's backhand, he won the vast majority of points. Cahill said that Nadal's backhand was actually close to breaking down (according to Rafter).

On the other hand, Nadal's forehand was incredible tonight, as was his retrieving. Just astounding stuff from the Spaniard. As soon as he could get set on that side, he almost never relinquished control of the point.

Another thing that bears mentioning is Federer's returning. His choice to come over his backhand is laudable in its way, but he missed far too many returns. Everyone says a chipped return will merely grant Nadal the initiative in the rally, but that's surely preferable to losing the point outright.

Anyway, my take on it: http://www.thenextpoint.com/?p=1658

Fed/Novak final would have the same outcome, Fed loose.

Fed needs to learn that running Nadal from corner to corner will not give him a win as Nadal is all to happy doing just that...running along the baseline. Fed needs to move him forwards and backwards as well, all I saw was topspin backhands from Fed. Well that will work if you're Novak and making the angles, but Fed doesn't so why he stuck with it can only mean one thing. Fed didn't have a plan B and stayed in his usual reactive tennis mode...Nadal knows that plan as we saw again and again and again in past and present times. Poor Fed, I like him a lot but he's like an old monkey learning new tricks...not gonna work.

But hats of for being so consistent in all your ways, your level and wins and losses.

Call me crazy but ...

I never thought Sampras was the GOAT. Wasn't he fodder during the clay season? This is Federer by virtue of the important titles he's won (I'm counting the YEC). Nadal surpasses Federer (in my eyes) if he (Nadal) wins at least 1 more AO and USO, and 1 YEC. [The 2 HC slams will mean Nadal won all 4 major titles at least twice. Federer can only trump this scenario if he wins FO again.]

I will start including Djokovic in the Nadal-Federer discussion once he defends one of his Slams this year or wins the French. He had a superb season last year, no arguments there. I'm not asking that he repeat that superhuman effort - just win 1 of those slams again or the FO.

I will start believing that there's "Big 4" if and only if the Top 4 male players have at least a Slam under their belts. So that's either Del Potro gets to #4 again, or Murray finally wins one OR the Top 5 (Ferrer) wins a slam and moves to #4.

So sad, so tired. all thing make this result is...
just only Rafa is better.

http://fedtennis.blogspot.com/

@LJSDLAtennis

You may not have said anything more true in your tennis blogging life. Federer has the skill, notice how i don't say talent, the skill to beat nadal. He loses, nadal doesn't win.

@ LJSDLAtennis, Michele, Prashant, Richard, Frank

Guys I am in full agreement with your analysis. Nadal's backhand can be broken, you just have to keep there again and again till it breaks down. The moment ball goes to Nadal's forehand he is in total control and the point is gone. You have to keep peppering that backhand. Onec in while he comes up with a great passing shot. But you still keep going there till it breaks down.

I also have a theory why it breaks down. Nadal is naturally right handed and therefore his double handed backhand is like a two handed forehand to him. Under pressure, when stretched he also take his one hand off.

I think Federer actually started well with the strategy and was attacking Nadal's backhand but he was trying to keep Nadal honest (according to me not necessary. Just pin him down to his backhand) and lost the plot. He did go to Nadal's backhand towards the very end of the match. But it was too late.

By the way for all Nadal fans I am not trying to put Nadal down. I am a Fed fan and enjoyed watching the match. Have a lot of respect for Nadal for his tenacity, mental strength and never say die attitude which eventually got him across the line.

Tina at 1:18

I think the RF means Robert Frost.

I remember one poster right at the beginning of Roger's dominance,I think it was after he lost his first French against Rafa.

He said Roger can't beat Rafa because he was to self conscious about looking good while winning and that he couldn't get down and dirty to win.Rafa is more earthy and manafactured in a lot of ways.He has an urban style of playing the game.

He doesn't have the gift from the gods game so he relies on patterns of play,percentages and determination.He feels safe playing that way and knows what he is good at.

Roger wants to win looking elegant and powerful and balletic.Rafa forces him out of that and he won't lower himself to go to the well over and over again,hence the one dimensional comment from Roger about Rafa a couple of years ago.He respects Rafa but not his style of play.It's why he continues to lose.

@Simon

If the match is on your racquet over and over again and you keep losing, then your racquet simply isn't good enough.

I enjoyed this piece of your writing, like many other pieces before. Thank you for seeing and conveying so accurately the beauty of Nadal's game. It is not about technical fluidity or balletic movement. It is about the passion and tenacity in human spirit. "You get the feeling that Nadal would have tracked down a ball hit outside of the stadium at that stage." This, and only this, not the number of Grand Slams won or who is the GOAT, is what I watch tennis for.

"question how can fed be classed the goat when he has lost 8 from 10 slam matches,on all surfaces"

Because he has 16 slams, and has won on all surfaces. The only contenders today would be Sampras/Laver. Sampras has 14 and no French, and Laver (while a case could be made for him) is five behind.

That he loses to Nadal is only relevant if Nadal gets to say 13 or 14 slams, and his H2H remains what it is with Federer. At ten, with the mix he has, Nadal lags behind Borg, Laver and Sampras, not to mention Federer.

Pretty simple, really.

In total he has beaten top 4 players 11 times during his slam runs.
[snip]
Djokovic - 2 (USO)

*** and what was Djokovic when he was beaten at the FO?***

Not that it matters, 16 slams is what does.