-
He did not win because he made adjustments. I saw the same game styles like always. Federer always has chances if he has a good day, if Nadal has a lesser day (at the end Nadal had a few very unusual misses) or if both happens. The odds are imo very low 1:15 or 1:20. Do not put your money on Federer at RG. -
I'm sure he will answer your question, but I wanted a shot at it- without having watched it yet.
I'm guessing that if you used my charting approach that Fed was on the attack (having received a mid court reply) more often than Rafa, when the points ended. I expect Rafa defended these attacks solidly but that Roger's attacking execution %'s were much better than past matches with Rafa, meaning less UEs and more shots that forced errors from Nadal. I'm also guessing not so many clean winners though.
I'm guessing that Rafa was able to attack to a lesser extent from Roger's mid ct balls and that Roger defended better than usual in these situations.
Overall expecting that Fed was able to earn more point ending opportunities as usual, but more importantly was able to do more with less; meaning that he didn't press as much for clean winners to end points, while staying aggressive overall. Better shot tolerance, without losing the aggressive play. I'm guessing that Fed was able to avoid pressing to finish prematurely.
out on a limb,
Can't wait to see and chart this one.Last edited by airforce1; 05-18-2009, 01:04 PM.Leave a comment:
-
Sir,
Do you have a technical/strategic explanation for Federer's win?Leave a comment:
-
Djokovic is adjusting to Nadal
Djokovic is adjusting
I am writing this the moment Djokovic won the first set 6-3 to Nadal (semi-final Madrid Open 2009). My Dutch commentator (Jan Siemerink, ex-professional) doesn’t know what is happening. I think it is pretty obvious. Djokovic is adjusting to the gameplay of Nadal. He is copying Nadal’s ball trajectories and he is waiting to end the rally with his better than Nadal’s all court strokes.
The final in Monte Carlo showed already that Djokovic was adjusting. The BH technique produced the same ball trajectories as Nadal. I think they are equal over there even though I can’t see if Djokovic is using BH1A or BH2A. Because of the double-handed technique I think it is not so relevant. With the FH he was already creating the same ball trajectories. But now they are more forcing. His body is more behind the shot. Although it is defenitely not a FH2 technique like Nadal. But he is reversing like Nadal. Maybe his body is “finding” the FH2 (Forms Follow Function)?! Like Nadal maybe once did. Till that time Djokovic will have the same shot but without the bigger contact point area which FH2 will give you.
One of the very few mental things I acknowledge is what I maybe saw in the Monte Carlo final. Djokovic hardly used the reversing technique in the previous rounds. Although he must have been training the shot for a while. Even in the final’s first set it was not that obvious. The second set he won mainly by creating the ball trajectories like Nadal always does for his opponents. (Like now it is funny to see Nadal missing the shots he always produces himself.) And than I thought I saw Djokovic realizing that he found the way to beat Nadal. That is what I recognize. You feel that you have found the solution to make a big step forward. But because it is so new it looks like you first have to convince yourself that you can do it.
But now Djokovic is getting used to the idea. You can see it. Now it is 5-5 second set and Djokovic is getting impatient. He makes a few “old” mistakes which almost cost him the second set. Even if he loses today he will review this match and will adjust before Roland Gaross. With that fine tuning phase to come I want to give you the advice to also put some money on Djokovic.
By the way Andy Murray is adjusting in the same way like Djokovic. He produces also the same ball trajectories like Nadal. But his reversing technique is not like Djokovic is at the moment.
Nico Mol
Leave a comment: