Fed up with Fed love
Prevailing opinion would have it that Federer lost the French Open because he played a game that was below his abilities. This is not only false, it is insulting to another future legend: Rafael Nadal. Nobody ever plays a good game against Nadal because he forces players to make mistakes, to take chances, by neutralizing what would normally be a winner. So, when I hear professional sports pundits, people who get paid to write and think about sports, whine about how Federer will never win a French Open if he keeps making those kinds of unforced errors, I would like to remind everyone that this is what makes Nadal great. He forces the types of risks that create errors. It’s not a very spectacular tactic, like the Italian football defensive play, but it works. And it continues to work against the greatest player of all time.
Furthermore, it must be demoralizing for Federer, used to easy wins and control of play, to finally be flummoxed. Nadal has a steel will and in a Nietzschean sport such as tennis, this cannot be underestimated (Richard Gasquet needs a footnote here… the guy has the mental fortitude of a bagel left out in the rain).
And for those who cite Hambourg, let’s remember that the surface was more humid, thus denser and more compact. This reduces the spin and plays the court almost like a hard surface. This renders Nadal’s heavy topspin somewhat less lethal. And, it’s a best of three. If it had been a best of five, like the Rome final from 2006, I’m sure the result would be surprising.
being fan, are you ?
King said
I’ve liked that part about Tennis as a “Nietzschean sport”
LPC said