Brain Game: Roger's New Rafa Tactics

[tented]

Does this article make sense to anyone?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2013/05/21/Brain-Game-Rome-Federer-Nadal.aspx

The end of the second paragraph immediately caught my attention:

"... it was definitely a step in the right direction in trying to battle Nadal on clay on his terms."

The beginning of the third paragraph is also perplexing.

 

[BalaryKar]

I am not too sure if its too late. I still expect Nadal to win majority of the matches comfortably, and the rest majorly through tough matches. Only a few, very few, I expect Rog to win.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

it makes perfect sense..

I said before the match he should do more of this..he has ZERO chance of winning if he stays on the baseline..more s&v drop shots, lobs etc is a good idea..

it didn't work on sunday partly because Federer went from 4 in a row night matches to playing in slower sunny/humid day condition..and rafa was always in the day session, which explains why federers timing was out when it has been really good all week..

the new tactics will carry on at RG and grass, HC, federers too old to be poncing about behind the baseline for 3hrs + if he wants to win,,

just because it didn't work this time no need to give up..especially vs rafa..Federer needs shorter matches and to use his skills to take the baseline boys out of their comfort zone..

its change the strategy or fade for Federer..i know it, other folk know it, feds coach knows it, and so does Federer, as do 'beings from outer space'.

 

[Haelfix]

Does this article make sense to anyone?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2013/05/21/Brain-Game-Rome-Federer-Nadal.aspx

The end of the second paragraph immediately caught my attention:

"... it was definitely a step in the right direction in trying to battle Nadal on clay on his terms."

The beginning of the third paragraph is also perplexing.

I don't really agree. We've seen Federer being too aggressive in recent years against the top players and its caused some really lopsided scores. (See RG 2008 vs Nadal, RG 2012 vs Novak and Olympics vs Murray). Its really easy to simply UE yourself right out of a match, by going for broke. Yes every once and awhile it creates an upset, but I don't feel like Rafa and Roger's level is that far apart that he has to redline his game so early in a match.

In some sense you give the match away before you even get a chance to fight for it.

It's worth comparing this to his early years in 03-04. People will say oh he was so aggressive back then, look at the pace of his groundstrokes on the tape, look how much more he S/Ved. But note, while it looks like he's being very aggressive in those matches, you'll note just how few errors he'd make per match. This was because he was playing within himself.
But more crucially, the thing that was really making it 'appear' like it was so aggressive, wasn't so much that he was going for huge 100mph shots willy nilly, but rather b/c his movement was helping shorten points.

Instead of taking huge Safin like cuts at the ball, Federer could achieve the same result by taking strong motions into the court (typically off the fh side) and cutting the ball off really early in its trajectory. B/c of the great athleticism, he was able to get there before almost anyone else. This is the source of his success. Plenty of guys on tour hit the ball flatter, harder or with more spin. But almost no one hits the ball that early, while still being able to hit relatively hard (90mph instead of 100 mph) and with that type of accuracy and consistency.

His problem with Nadal (which is mostly absent indoors) is that when he tries to do that, he can't quite control the balls bounce and what happens next (either from the fh or bh really). This really takes away his great advantage, and explains why he looks as ordinary as a David Ferrer at times.

Now, its worth noting that Dimitrov played Rafa really tough by hitting the ball well behind the baseline. Instead of trying to take it early, he would simply say, ok you have to beat me, I won't let you make me overhit or try to control something I cannot.

I like that approach. Not b/c I think that it will make things better, but rather it's more relaxed and less frantic. It also allows you to gradually make adjustements to perhaps move in a bit more. Increase the confidence slowly as you get used to the highly idiosyncratic pace and depth of Nadal's ground strokes. Instead of, oh lets just Kamikaze the net on clay against the game's greatest defender and passer...

A lot of times, it seems like Roger doesn't even make use of his great defense against Rafa. He simply gets too frantic and picks the wrong shot and errors himself off the court. He forgets that one of Rafa's weaknesses at times, is that he has difficulty finishing points as his spin allows fast players time to catch up to it. Novak for instance has won hundreds of points this way, and it visibly gets in Rafa's mind.

Yes Nadal is ultimately a better claycourter, and at some point you have to roll the dice with some chancey shots and some redlining. But you can do that at the tail end of sets, rather than simply giving the match away after game 1.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Does this article make sense to anyone?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2013/05/21/Brain-Game-Rome-Federer-Nadal.aspx

The end of the second paragraph immediately caught my attention:

"... it was definitely a step in the right direction in trying to battle Nadal on clay on his terms."

The beginning of the third paragraph is also perplexing.

I don't really agree. We've seen Federer being too aggressive in recent years against the top players and its caused some really lopsided scores. (See RG 2008 vs Nadal, RG 2012 vs Novak and Olympics vs Murray). Its really easy to simply UE yourself right out of a match, by going for broke. Yes every once and awhile it creates an upset, but I don't feel like Rafa and Roger's level is that far apart that he has to redline his game so early in a match.

In some sense you give the match away before you even get a chance to fight for it.

It's worth comparing this to his early years in 03-04. People will say oh he was so aggressive back then, look at the pace of his groundstrokes on the tape, look how much more he S/Ved. But note, while it looks like he's being very aggressive in those matches, you'll note just how few errors he'd make per match. This was because he was playing within himself.
But more crucially, the thing that was really making it 'appear' like it was so aggressive, wasn't so much that he was going for huge 100mph shots willy nilly, but rather b/c his movement was helping shorten points.

Instead of taking huge Safin like cuts at the ball, Federer could achieve the same result by taking strong motions into the court (typically off the fh side) and cutting the ball off really early in its trajectory. B/c of the great athleticism, he was able to get there before almost anyone else. This is the source of his success. Plenty of guys on tour hit the ball flatter, harder or with more spin. But almost no one hits the ball that early, while still being able to hit relatively hard (90mph instead of 100 mph) and with that type of accuracy and consistency.

His problem with Nadal (which is mostly absent indoors) is that when he tries to do that, he can't quite control the balls bounce and what happens next (either from the fh or bh really). This really takes away his great advantage, and explains why he looks as ordinary as a David Ferrer at times.

Now, its worth noting that Dimitrov played Rafa really tough by hitting the ball well behind the baseline. Instead of trying to take it early, he would simply say, ok you have to beat me, I won't let you make me overhit or try to control something I cannot.

I like that approach. Not b/c I think that it will make things better, but rather it's more relaxed and less frantic. It also allows you to gradually make adjustements to perhaps move in a bit more. Increase the confidence slowly as you get used to the highly idiosyncratic pace and depth of Nadal's ground strokes. Instead of, oh lets just Kamikaze the net on clay against the game's greatest defender and passer...

A lot of times, it seems like Roger doesn't even make use of his great defense against Rafa. He simply gets too frantic and picks the wrong shot and errors himself off the court. He forgets that one of Rafa's weaknesses at times, is that he has difficulty finishing points as his spin allows fast players time to catch up to it. Novak for instance has won hundreds of points this way, and it visibly gets in Rafa's mind.

Yes Nadal is ultimately a better claycourter, and at some point you have to roll the dice with some chancey shots and some redlining. But you can do that at the tail end of sets, rather than simply giving the match away after game 1.

Fantastic post.

 

[BalaryKar]

If aggressive players have the so-called "Striking Zone", Nadal has his own invented "Absorbing Zone". So once he absorbs the aggressors speed, very soon he starts fetching the so-called "unforced errors". I still believe its too late for Fed in the day to try this. May be during one of the early clay matches, not anymore.

 

[herios]

Does this article make sense to anyone?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2013/05/21/Brain-Game-Rome-Federer-Nadal.aspx

The end of the second paragraph immediately caught my attention:

"... it was definitely a step in the right direction in trying to battle Nadal on clay on his terms."

The beginning of the third paragraph is also perplexing.

I don't really agree. We've seen Federer being too aggressive in recent years against the top players and its caused some really lopsided scores. (See RG 2008 vs Nadal, RG 2012 vs Novak and Olympics vs Murray). Its really easy to simply UE yourself right out of a match, by going for broke. Yes every once and awhile it creates an upset, but I don't feel like Rafa and Roger's level is that far apart that he has to redline his game so early in a match.

In some sense you give the match away before you even get a chance to fight for it.

It's worth comparing this to his early years in 03-04. People will say oh he was so aggressive back then, look at the pace of his groundstrokes on the tape, look how much more he S/Ved. But note, while it looks like he's being very aggressive in those matches, you'll note just how few errors he'd make per match. This was because he was playing within himself.
But more crucially, the thing that was really making it 'appear' like it was so aggressive, wasn't so much that he was going for huge 100mph shots willy nilly, but rather b/c his movement was helping shorten points.

Instead of taking huge Safin like cuts at the ball, Federer could achieve the same result by taking strong motions into the court (typically off the fh side) and cutting the ball off really early in its trajectory. B/c of the great athleticism, he was able to get there before almost anyone else. This is the source of his success. Plenty of guys on tour hit the ball flatter, harder or with more spin. But almost no one hits the ball that early, while still being able to hit relatively hard (90mph instead of 100 mph) and with that type of accuracy and consistency.

His problem with Nadal (which is mostly absent indoors) is that when he tries to do that, he can't quite control the balls bounce and what happens next (either from the fh or bh really). This really takes away his great advantage, and explains why he looks as ordinary as a David Ferrer at times.

Now, its worth noting that Dimitrov played Rafa really tough by hitting the ball well behind the baseline. Instead of trying to take it early, he would simply say, ok you have to beat me, I won't let you make me overhit or try to control something I cannot.

I like that approach. Not b/c I think that it will make things better, but rather it's more relaxed and less frantic. It also allows you to gradually make adjustements to perhaps move in a bit more. Increase the confidence slowly as you get used to the highly idiosyncratic pace and depth of Nadal's ground strokes. Instead of, oh lets just Kamikaze the net on clay against the game's greatest defender and passer...

A lot of times, it seems like Roger doesn't even make use of his great defense against Rafa. He simply gets too frantic and picks the wrong shot and errors himself off the court. He forgets that one of Rafa's weaknesses at times, is that he has difficulty finishing points as his spin allows fast players time to catch up to it. Novak for instance has won hundreds of points this way, and it visibly gets in Rafa's mind.

Yes Nadal is ultimately a better claycourter, and at some point you have to roll the dice with some chancey shots and some redlining. But you can do that at the tail end of sets, rather than simply giving the match away after game 1.

Fantastic post.

I agree.

 

[huntingyou]

Haelfix dead on point.

as for the writer in this article.........he is clueless and clearly needed something to bable

 

[isabelle]

is it only tactic or also fitness's level ?
Olderer seemed so slow during Roma's final

 

[britbox]

Excellent post Haelfix. Kudos.

 

[Kieran]

I didn't see any mention of the kitchen sink in that article. I think now would be a good time for Roger to use it...

 

[shawnbm]

Excellent post Haelfix. Kudos.

I third this, big time. I failed miserably at trying to say something along these lines on another post. Thank you, Haelfix.

 

[Mog]

Excellent post Haelfix. Kudos.

I third this, big time. I failed miserably at trying to say something along these lines on another post. Thank you, Haelfix.

I join you both, shawnbm znd Britbox.
Excellent post by Haelfix.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

Does this article make sense to anyone?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2013/05/21/Brain-Game-Rome-Federer-Nadal.aspx

The end of the second paragraph immediately caught my attention:

"... it was definitely a step in the right direction in trying to battle Nadal on clay on his terms."

The beginning of the third paragraph is also perplexing.

I don't really agree. We've seen Federer being too aggressive in recent years against the top players and its caused some really lopsided scores. (See RG 2008 vs Nadal, RG 2012 vs Novak and Olympics vs Murray). Its really easy to simply UE yourself right out of a match, by going for broke. Yes every once and awhile it creates an upset, but I don't feel like Rafa and Roger's level is that far apart that he has to redline his game so early in a match.

In some sense you give the match away before you even get a chance to fight for it.

It's worth comparing this to his early years in 03-04. People will say oh he was so aggressive back then, look at the pace of his groundstrokes on the tape, look how much more he S/Ved. But note, while it looks like he's being very aggressive in those matches, you'll note just how few errors he'd make per match. This was because he was playing within himself.
But more crucially, the thing that was really making it 'appear' like it was so aggressive, wasn't so much that he was going for huge 100mph shots willy nilly, but rather b/c his movement was helping shorten points.

Instead of taking huge Safin like cuts at the ball, Federer could achieve the same result by taking strong motions into the court (typically off the fh side) and cutting the ball off really early in its trajectory. B/c of the great athleticism, he was able to get there before almost anyone else. This is the source of his success. Plenty of guys on tour hit the ball flatter, harder or with more spin. But almost no one hits the ball that early, while still being able to hit relatively hard (90mph instead of 100 mph) and with that type of accuracy and consistency.

His problem with Nadal (which is mostly absent indoors) is that when he tries to do that, he can't quite control the balls bounce and what happens next (either from the fh or bh really). This really takes away his great advantage, and explains why he looks as ordinary as a David Ferrer at times.

Now, its worth noting that Dimitrov played Rafa really tough by hitting the ball well behind the baseline. Instead of trying to take it early, he would simply say, ok you have to beat me, I won't let you make me overhit or try to control something I cannot.

I like that approach. Not b/c I think that it will make things better, but rather it's more relaxed and less frantic. It also allows you to gradually make adjustements to perhaps move in a bit more. Increase the confidence slowly as you get used to the highly idiosyncratic pace and depth of Nadal's ground strokes. Instead of, oh lets just Kamikaze the net on clay against the game's greatest defender and passer...

A lot of times, it seems like Roger doesn't even make use of his great defense against Rafa. He simply gets too frantic and picks the wrong shot and errors himself off the court. He forgets that one of Rafa's weaknesses at times, is that he has difficulty finishing points as his spin allows fast players time to catch up to it. Novak for instance has won hundreds of points this way, and it visibly gets in Rafa's mind.

Yes Nadal is ultimately a better claycourter, and at some point you have to roll the dice with some chancey shots and some redlining. But you can do that at the tail end of sets, rather than simply giving the match away after game 1.

federers defense isn't as good as the old days. that's the point..his stamina/concentration isn't what it was in the old days.

so what if it didn't work this time, that was more to do with timing (shankerer, federror, day/night change).

you cant play nadal in your head..fed plays 2000s era tennis he will 100% lose..on clay at least, for sure. the more attacking shot/ court positioning he did is the way ahead..losing on sunday won't change that,

its a waste of time him playing rafa if he continue's to play like the old days..apart from stamina his forehand has lost some pop so winners from anywhere are rarer/ more risky now.

physically its a different Federer. he might as well be someone else completely in that sense.

 

[DarthFed]

Does this article make sense to anyone?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2013/05/21/Brain-Game-Rome-Federer-Nadal.aspx

The end of the second paragraph immediately caught my attention:

"... it was definitely a step in the right direction in trying to battle Nadal on clay on his terms."

The beginning of the third paragraph is also perplexing.

I don't really agree. We've seen Federer being too aggressive in recent years against the top players and its caused some really lopsided scores. (See RG 2008 vs Nadal, RG 2012 vs Novak and Olympics vs Murray). Its really easy to simply UE yourself right out of a match, by going for broke. Yes every once and awhile it creates an upset, but I don't feel like Rafa and Roger's level is that far apart that he has to redline his game so early in a match.

In some sense you give the match away before you even get a chance to fight for it.

It's worth comparing this to his early years in 03-04. People will say oh he was so aggressive back then, look at the pace of his groundstrokes on the tape, look how much more he S/Ved. But note, while it looks like he's being very aggressive in those matches, you'll note just how few errors he'd make per match. This was because he was playing within himself.
But more crucially, the thing that was really making it 'appear' like it was so aggressive, wasn't so much that he was going for huge 100mph shots willy nilly, but rather b/c his movement was helping shorten points.

Instead of taking huge Safin like cuts at the ball, Federer could achieve the same result by taking strong motions into the court (typically off the fh side) and cutting the ball off really early in its trajectory. B/c of the great athleticism, he was able to get there before almost anyone else. This is the source of his success. Plenty of guys on tour hit the ball flatter, harder or with more spin. But almost no one hits the ball that early, while still being able to hit relatively hard (90mph instead of 100 mph) and with that type of accuracy and consistency.

His problem with Nadal (which is mostly absent indoors) is that when he tries to do that, he can't quite control the balls bounce and what happens next (either from the fh or bh really). This really takes away his great advantage, and explains why he looks as ordinary as a David Ferrer at times.

Now, its worth noting that Dimitrov played Rafa really tough by hitting the ball well behind the baseline. Instead of trying to take it early, he would simply say, ok you have to beat me, I won't let you make me overhit or try to control something I cannot.

I like that approach. Not b/c I think that it will make things better, but rather it's more relaxed and less frantic. It also allows you to gradually make adjustements to perhaps move in a bit more. Increase the confidence slowly as you get used to the highly idiosyncratic pace and depth of Nadal's ground strokes. Instead of, oh lets just Kamikaze the net on clay against the game's greatest defender and passer...

A lot of times, it seems like Roger doesn't even make use of his great defense against Rafa. He simply gets too frantic and picks the wrong shot and errors himself off the court. He forgets that one of Rafa's weaknesses at times, is that he has difficulty finishing points as his spin allows fast players time to catch up to it. Novak for instance has won hundreds of points this way, and it visibly gets in Rafa's mind.

Yes Nadal is ultimately a better claycourter, and at some point you have to roll the dice with some chancey shots and some redlining. But you can do that at the tail end of sets, rather than simply giving the match away after game 1.

federers defense isn't as good as the old days that's the point..his stamina/concentration isn't what it was in the old days.

so what if it gignt work this time, that was more to do with timing (shankerer, federror, day/night change).

you cant play nadal in your head..fed plays 2000s era tennis he will 100
% lose on clay at least for sure, the more attacting shot/ court positioning he did is the way ahead..losing on sunday wony change that,

its a waste of time him playing rafa if he continue's to play like the old days..apart from stamina his forehand has lost some pop so winners from anywhere are rarer/ more risky now.

physically its a different Federer. he might as well be someone else completely in that sense.

Spot on here. Haelfix's post would be outstanding for the Federer 5-6 years ago but it's a much different player out there. There is no way he is winning even 1 out of 20 vs. Rafa on clay with controlled aggression. He misses way more than he used to which automatically throws a wrench in being patient on clay where he is hitting backhands over his shoulder all match. Fed simply can't sit back and rally with Rafa all day on clay waiting to get an opening. There is the stamina issue, there is the fact his movement and defense are no longer exemplary and the list goes on and on.

Now I do think Haelfix's post is still something Roger should do more of on other surfaces. The other surfaces mean lower bounces and quicker points so there Roger can be a little more patient but even then he still has to play very aggressive regardless of the court.

 

[Riotbeard]

Federer's tactic for the F.O.:

Djokovic beat nadal in semis. Face Djokovic in final and he at least has a shot.

IN that article, I am not sure how %30 net success rate is sign of a new good tactic.

 

[herios]

Federer's tactic for the F.O.:

Djokovic beat nadal in semis. Face Djokovic in final and he at least has a shot.

.

I think is a better chance that Fed's QF string will come to an end in Paris. At one point it's bound to happen and he never looked shakier going into a slam to me.
Of course, if he gets yet another creamcake draw like in Rome, hel'l avoid it.

 

[Front242]

In fairness he played well against Janowicz and Paire and it's not like it was his fault Djokovic lost early and Murray retired from the tournament.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Federer's tactic for the F.O.:

Djokovic beat nadal in semis. Face Djokovic in final and he at least has a shot.

.

I think is a better chance that Fed's QF string will come to an end in Paris. At one point it's bound to happen and he never looked shakier going into a slam to me.
Of course, if he gets yet another creamcake draw like in Rome, hel'l avoid it.

He's not losing before the QF.

 

[herios]

Federer's tactic for the F.O.:

Djokovic beat nadal in semis. Face Djokovic in final and he at least has a shot.

.

I think is a better chance that Fed's QF string will come to an end in Paris. At one point it's bound to happen and he never looked shakier going into a slam to me.
Of course, if he gets yet another creamcake draw like in Rome, hel'l avoid it.

He's not losing before the QF.

We'll see.