Why Roger Federer Lost To Nadal
Although there are many smaller reasons why Roger Federer lost to Rafael Nadal in the recent French Open 2007 final, there is one major reason.
It can be found even in many of his interviews after the match and it’s included in the recent post 5 Things You Can Learn From Federer And Nadal.
So what is it?
Here is what Roger said: So I knew that I would have to take my chances.
This is the major reason why Federer lost. He has to take chances and Nadal doesn’t. In the long term the statistics doesn’t work for you.
That’s why Federer’s head to head against Nadal on clay is 1:6 and 3:1 on other surfaces. When Federer plays Nadal on grass or hard court he feels that he can win with good tennis and doesn’t risk too much.
And when they play on clay, Roger feels that he has to go for more.
But is he right?
This is where our assumptions and predictions can mislead us.
Has Roger ever tried playing his normal tennis against Nadal? I don’t think so. He always goes for too much (on clay), loses and then thinks that he must risk even more.
I disagree.
The mental battle that goes on is this one:
Nadal: I don’t think you can beat me.
Federer: Yes, I can.
So Roger falls into this trap of attacking, risking and going for his shots, while Nadal plays high percentage tennis. Guess who wins?
What Roger needs to do is this:
Roger: I don’t think you can beat me if I play my solid tennis. I’ll attack you when there is clear opportunity but otherwise I am good enough and fit enough to rally with you from the baseline.
I don’t think you can hurt me much with those exaggerated top-spins.
And now Nadal can become impatient, start thinking what’s going on, he will start attacking balls that he is not used to and start making more mistakes.
Of course Roger will probably have to play solid tennis without too much risk for 1 or 2 hours before Nadal starts to break down.
Roger needs to show Nadal that he is confident playing with him from the baseline. When Roger starts attacking and going for his shots, he sends a CLEAR message to Nadal that he is afraid of him.
He shows that he cannot win with his normal game so a logical conclusion of this is that he admits to Nadal that he is a better player.
Nadal of course understands this message which comes from the #1 player in the world: you are better than me. Guess what happens to Nadal’s confidence after that? 
There is no doubt in his mind that he will win. And there is a lot of doubt in Roger’s mind.
So the end result is totally predictable and logical.
I personally think that Federer is skilled enough and fit enough to play his normal tennis with Nadal and he would probably win more than half of the matches.
But I don’t think Federer is so good that he can beat Nadal every time no matter how he plays.
That’s the nature of sport and life.
- Related posts:
July 8th, 2008 at 9:13 am
roger lost also cause he didnt serve as well as he knows, that made him loose service games and struggle to win his own. that’s not like him. he normally cruise through his service game what puts more pressure on his opponents.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:18 am
I do believe Nada was that much hungrier to win. I believe Federer needs to get down and dirty, do what ever it takes to get a shot back to Nadal, even if he does not look stylish or looks awkward.
It seemed running around his backhand in the ad court side left many easy shot to Nadal.
Footing unsure coming to net it looked like Federer did not even try to get some of the passing shots. My god if you want to win you would be diving for those balls.
August 14th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
All of your deductive reasoning as to why Federer can’t beat Nadal on clay sounds logical, but misses the more salient facts.
Nadal is younger, stronger and hits with much more safety(i.e. - topspin) than Federer, so if Roger plays his “normal” game, Nadal will win 99 out of 100 times.
Nadal has gotten better the past three years, while Roger has posted three(3) of the greatest seasons in tennis history, similar to Laver ‘62 and ‘69. Nadal has improved first and second serve, backhand drive and plays every point like his life depended on it.
Federer should hire Brad Gilbert or Darren Cahill to better exploit Nadal’s weaknesses and other tactical advice from either gentleman. How about bringing Nadal to the net or mid-court and make him beat you with volleys.
Federer needs to gain about 10 pds of mucle and lose 5 pds of fat to withstand Nadal’s physicality. In the women’s game, Martina Navratilova’s athletic all court game made Chris Evert become fitter and a little stronger. Maybe a trainer similar to Doug Spreen could assist Fed get stronger.
Fed needs to be more aggressive on his first serve by stepping up with his right foot and using more torque from the kinetic chain. He normally hits 125. 135 flat and more spin out wide would win him more free points.
How about a little bigger racket face? His Wilson is 90″ and he should go about a 100.” He is mishitting his forehand more often with the tiny sweet spot and he should address it.
If you look at world class athletes like Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson, they kept improving their games even when they were maybe the best players on the planet during their time. Both improved their outside shot. Magic added baby sky hook. MJ got stronger to get past the bad boy Pistons.
I don’t know if Roger has continued to add to his game from 2005-2007. Who can blame him? He was a transcendent player and was almost unbeatable, except against Nadal. Time is not on his side, physically he is becoming weaker over time.
Sometimes the characteristics that make a player great, are their achilles heel. Just because you are #1, you still need to add new elements to your game because there will be new compeititors coming along like Nadal, Murray and Djokovic.
Craig Wakai
August 15th, 2008 at 2:04 am
Very good points, Craig, thanks for sharing!