Champion Nadal wins a Federless Final

By Vinay Verma / Roar Guru

There are champions in sport and there are greats. Federer and Nadal are already greats and in company with Laver, McEnroe and Borg. Djokovic has the credentials, but not the results.

We have been denied the joy of watching Nadal and Federer this year. Life is not a fairytale. If it were, broadcasters would have had many dream finals between Federer and Nadal.

Nadal went through last year with his parents separating and an injury. Federer is coming to terms with being a father. For him, suddenly, winning another Grand Slam is not the most important thing in the world.

Kids do that to you. Along with a resurgent Novak Djokovic.

On the other hand, women may cope better as Mother Kim proved with her demolition of Zvonereva.

The single-minded focus, to the exclusion of all else, is what separates the greats from the champions. Coming into this final I felt Nadal was the more single-minded. Not that Federer has been lax in his training and practice, but that Federer has more to distract him.

As Nadal said: “When I go to practice I don’t go just to practice. I go to learn and improve.”

The one factor that had me believing Federer could beat Nadal was his mastery of the half-volley, one of the most difficult shots to execute consistently well. The half-volley taken off the toes, both backhand and forehand.

And for added effect, the change of direction. Instead of hitting it back in the direction it came from, a flick of the wrist sends it cross-court or down the line. But first he had to get past Djokovic.

Nadal duly won his semi-final against Youznhy and the TV moguls held their breath for Federer to get through his semi.

Nadal’s great strength is his retrieving. He has the tenacity of Rosewall and the explosiveness of Pancho Gonzales. And a burning self-belief. Also a sense of destiny.

If you can imagine a raging Pamplona bull with the legs of a cheetah, then you have Nadal.

Federer versus Nadal was going to be the biggest men’s match at the US Open since Sampras and Agassi in the 2002 final. This was going to be Federer’s seventh successive US Open final appearance.

He had won five in a row from 2004 to 2008. He lost the 2009 to Del Porto. Nadal had not been past the semis here but was coming off wins at the French and Wimbledon.

He was going for a career Grand Slam.

This then was the background to Federer’s semifinal against Djokovic.

Djokovic fronted Federer and went shot for shot with the great man. At two sets all and 5-5 in the final set Djokovic finally broke Federer and served for the match.

In the tenth game Djokovic had saved two match points and, as he said after his victory: “I just closed my eyes and kept hitting the forehand. I got lucky.”

Luck had very little to do with Novak’s victory. He was the better man on the day and Federer was the man lucky to have stayed so long in the match.

This was not going to be everyone’s dream final but Djokovic was a worthy opponent. Would he have enough in reserve? Had he already played his final against Federer?

Nadal came out like a boxer, skipping and shadow boxing. Djokovic was subdued but steely. One had energy to burn, the other careful, lest he splutter and smoke.

Djokovic’s parents were in the stands sporting T-shirts with their son’s picture. But the picture was stony faced and not smiling.

Nadal imposed himself on the match by breaking Djokovic in the first game. He consolidated by holding his serve for 2-0. The pivotal moment in this opening set was 30-30 and Djokovic striving to establish a break point.

He could not. Nadal is like the waves that keep pounding away at stony cliffs.

Djokovic was always behind in this first set and his frustration boiled over at the end of the fifth game. He pounded his racket repeatedly into the court and mangled it beyond recognition. This was one of the few victories he had on the night.

Nadal can rally till the cows come home and Djokovic looked like a tinman, in need of oiling, early in these opening encounters.

Nadal was content to sit on his break and only exerted himself when serving. Djokovic made 12 unforced errors to Nadal’s 7 and the first set went to Nadal 6-4.

Djokovic held his serve in the opening game of the second set. Nadal was only serving at 58 % first serves but his ground strokes were heavy and carried an indomitable message with every grunt.

Djokovic hit a superb running forehand cross court and showed he had the skill. Nadal raised a quizzical eyebrow at this brilliance and redoubled his focus. Nadal turns defence into attack quicker than any other player.

He retrieves like a golden spaniel and then suddenly unleashes like a snarling Alsatian.

Nadal’s serve had Djokovic further behind the baseline than in his match with Federer. Nadal is inexorable and drives you back inch by inch till there is no more room to backpedal.

Back to the wall is what Nadal drives you to.

Djokovic lifted and became more aggressive just as Nadal relaxed for an instant. Djokovic broke in the fourth game for a 3-1 lead and consolidated to 4-2. He served in the seventh game looking to go 5-2. He had Nadal at 40-30 and failed to put him away. Djokovic saved two break points but the third was one too many and Nadal had restored parity.

One felt now that Djokovic may not have the reserves to fight back again.

Nadal held serve for 4-4 and once again Djokovic was serving to establish a lead. This ninth game would settle the match. Novak is a lucky man and the rain delay gave him a chance to recover. After a two hour break Djokovic started quicker and had the set 7-5.

Nadal was not going to be denied. He broke early, and in a repeat of the first, always had something in reserve to take it 6-4

Djokovic was hanging on by the skin of a Sremska sausage. Every service game was a marathon: Djokovic in full flight, with a running forehand hit with both feet off the ground as he took the ball on the rise; Nadal with his torturous top-spun forehand continually kissing the lines.

Nadal must have been the original Wichita Linesman.

In the end this was more a battle of wills than skills. Both players were playing a powerful brand of modern tennis that was ages removed from the wooden racquet.

The first point of the deciding fourth set saw Nadal hit a lob and Novak let it go only to see it just land in. Djokovic kept pounding his shots but Nadal had a reply more often than not. 6-2 to Nadal and he could afford to buy 5th Avenue. He had the full set of Slams now.

The two players embraced. Novak in exhaustion and Nadal in respect.

These three players, Djokovic, Federer and Nadal, are tremendous ambassadors for the game. This is a golden age for men’s tennis and these three have won 25 Slams between them.

Djokovic proved today that he belongs with the other two.

Both these players are under 25 and the scary thing is that they will improve. Federer is approaching 30 and will need to get on his bike if he is going to keep pace.

Nadal, on the other hand, could cycle up the Alps and not be breathing heavy.

For Djokovic, it was a case of the sausage having too much pork and not enough beef!

The Crowd Says:

AUTHOR

2010-09-16T01:32:53+00:00

Vinay Verma

Roar Guru


Rory,you are right. There is a regal air about Federer. Also perhaps as you suggest an ego. If so justifiably so. He has been without a coach for a while. I think Tony Roche improved his net play and perhaps he needs a Darren Cahill in his corner for the next 18 months. Because Nadal has caught him and perhaps even passed him. Can he dig deeper and come again? This will be answered over the next 12 months. I think he can.

2010-09-16T00:24:27+00:00

Rory

Guest


I think Federer's next step is to approach matches against Nadal, Djokovic and Murray with serious tactics. I don't believe he has ever played Nadal tactically, rather he seems to try to beat him with sheer finesse. It has been like a badge of honour he has worn - the greatest shall not stoop to lowly tactics in accumulating his trophies, but shall win at all times with superior skill alone - but the head to head record suggests it is more of an albatross. This just doesn't work against someone who chases every single shot as if it is the last tennis ball in existence bouncing towards the river, and is quite prepared to grind the cartilage in his knees down to a mushy paste in the process. Whether he works this out himself or with the help of a coach, he needs to find Nadal's achilles heel (there must be something) and expose it ruthlessly. At 29 there is not much choice.

2010-09-15T15:52:36+00:00

Plasmodium

Guest


KERSI - Muscles was the ultimate pro. I saw him play Denis Ralston at the 28th Street Armory in NY once and Ralston had match point. But Rosewall noticed a small tear in the carpet and called to have it fixed. It wasn't gamesmanship, he just didn't want to get a bad bounce. So we all waited twenty minutes for the carpet to be fixed. Play resumed, and Muscles lost the point and the match. But he'd done the right thing. Gonzales was an enigma. I've seen him hornet mad against Laver at Peacock Gap, CA, when Rod consistently passed him, glowering across the net and muttering to himself, and so angry at line calls at Queens ("Boy, do you need glasses," he said to the umpire) that he was tossed off the court by the referee. And I've seen him having a whale of a time enjoying himself playing doubles, smiling and joking just like any Sunday duffer. Of all the players then and now he had the best serve. It was not only faster than Hoad's or Kramer's it was incredibly reliable. His first serve percentage in most of his matches was 70%. Federer/Nadal can only dream of a number like that. SHEEK - I saw Santana play doubles in Mallorca BN (Before Nadal) a few years after his Wimbledon triumph, and he unleased a forehand that brought gasps from the crowd. Some people thought Hoad had the best forehand but Manny's was right up there with Lew's. Wooden racquets, regular cat gut, but they could skim that ball an inch over the net and still get it to drop in.

AUTHOR

2010-09-15T11:01:03+00:00

Vinay Verma

Roar Guru


Paul, On reflection perhaps I did get a bit carried away by Federer;s deftness on the half-volley. I am just awe struck with his control on what is a reflex shot. Well he has to find a way and I am not sure if he should take a break like Kim did. Maybe after 16 he needs to motivate himself differently. He will not out-fnesse Rafa and he may have to place his serves better and get some cheap points. Maybe he has to volley more.There is no question that he has to take his game to another higher level. Because Rafa is not going to stand still. Does Federer have the hunger? The next match up with any of these three is going to be rivetting. All have bragging rights to protect. How will Rafa take to being the hunted? This is every bit as good as Borg v McEnroe.

2010-09-15T09:20:53+00:00

Paul Adelaide

Guest


My view is that Federer is the best timer of a tennis ball and has a complete game. But he lacks the brutishness of Nadal, who can muscle the ball. His double-handled cross court backhand has been discussed before and is a big points winner for him. I thought Federer was a little lost for an answer against Djokovic. Novak would not go away and was tenacious and courageous on crucial points, specifically the two match points against him. How he played them defined the mindsets of both players. I'm sure Roger can do better against Nole next time. I'm not sure that Federer's skill with half volleys is enough to beat Nadal. That is only an extension of his elegant all-round game, but doesn't add the shot to unsettle Rafa.

2010-09-15T05:48:45+00:00

sheek

Guest


Yeah Djokovic is a very likeable guy also. He has a very mean streak on the court, which you need to be the best, but is very affable off-court.

AUTHOR

2010-09-15T04:27:11+00:00

Vinay Verma

Roar Guru


Plasmodium,Sheek,Kersi and Whiteline, A point I did not make in my piece was that Nadal created 26 break opportunities and only converted 6. It says a lot about the fighting qualities of Djokovic. On the other hand I think Djokovic only had 4 in the whole match and converted two.( I stand to be corrected) Nadal has improved his service speed and was landing them at 132MPH. It is his desire to improve that impresses me. I know Federer can lift and it will be interesting to see what his next move is. I have no doubt that Federer does not like losing. But he has got to learn a few new tricks otherwise Nadal will boss him. And Sheek,I like them both,or even all three. They are not prats.

2010-09-15T04:09:31+00:00

sheek

Guest


Vinay, When I first started following tennis in the mid-60s, Manuel Santana was one of the best players in the world, & a Spaniard. He won 4 majors - French twice, Wimbledon & US once each. It's fair to say Nadal has supassed him as Spain's finest ever male tennis player. I look forward to seeing Nadal win more majors, I like the guy.....

2010-09-15T00:35:09+00:00

Kersi Meher-Homji

Guest


Vinay, I'm pleased you brought in my favourites 'Muscles' Rosewall and Pancho midway through your epigramatic piece. Loved the Vinay-ism: "A raging Pamplona bull with the legs of a cheetah and you get Nadal." Also Nadal retrieving like a golden spaniel and unleashing like a snarling Alsatian. Some one should put all your metaphors together in a booklet form. Enjoyed both the semi and the final but the semi more because my hero Novac Djokovic won the semi.

2010-09-14T23:29:38+00:00

whiteline

Guest


Nadal is certainly one of the best of all time. Not that this result confirms it, it just adds to the story. If he stays healthy, who could predict what he might do? But then again, there might be another prodigy waiting to hit the scene and take the glory - a bit like Nadal has to Federer the past 3 or so years.

2010-09-14T20:11:41+00:00

Plasmodium

Guest


Top drawer reporting, Vinay. Thing of it is, a player has to have physical fortitude to win seven in a row at a Slam, and Djokovic does not enjoy the best of respitatory health, Also, he had a huge semi and Rafa had a breeze. They used to say that the French was the hardest Slam to win because of the slow surface (it's faster these days) but now NY is the toughest because the network, CBS, pulls the strings and will brook no arguments. Every other Slam has a rest day between the men's semis and final, (the Aussie has two rest days I believe) but not NY. It's been suggested that the final be moved to Monday night but that would mean CBS would have to bump its hugely popular NFL program, Monday Night Football. Also, the network pays Les Moovnes, CBS boss, huge bucks to get the programming right - to compete with the other networks, going up against their sit coms and cop shows etc, and CBS is terrified of getting a poor Neilson rating by showing tennis which is not America's game. Hence, the tennis players have to back up Saturday and Sunday. So if you can win the US Open, and a male player might have to play several five setters before the final, you're an ironman. Like Nadal. Welcome to the club, Rafa. That's some company you're keeping.

Read more at The Roar