I know, I know, they’ve played more than twice. However, their meetings in the final of the French Open are the most interesting.
Nadal just won the first set. It’s not looking good for Federer, though he came out huge in the first 6 games.
Predictions? I’m predicting Nadal in 4 sets.
Federer missed an amazing number of chances in the first, and just hasn’t played that well so far. Then again, he’s managed to not get blown out of the water in spite of those failures… and here come three more break chances!
And he finally got one.
Of course I’m watching! I’m rooting for Nadal. Federer is dominant on all other surfaces. I really like the fact that someone can beat and/or challenge him. It makes the final so much more interesting.
The Henin final was a snoozefest.
Federer wins set 2. I’m not rooting for either man, just enjoying some kickass tennis. So far my favorite is the game where Federer was trying to break Nadal for the set and Nadal kept saying “NO!” and Federer kept saying, “Hell, yes!” and it took forever for them to finish the game. I’ve seen shorter sets in this tournament.
Hmmm…
I’m still hoping for Federer, but Nadal is really taking the lead.
If Federer doesn’t win this tournament, will he be forever compared to Sampras, who had the same struggle?
The comparison will be right there - along with comparisons to a number of other greats who didn’t win in Paris - but Federer’s results at the French are way better than Sampras’s.
Nadal takes set 3. He’s not looking real beatable. There was a backhand where he was about ten feet behind the baseline and he hit it for a crosscourt winner, it went over the net by about a nanometer and dropped into the court by about an inch. It was so good it was eerie.
Nadal makes short work of Federer in the fourth, winning the Open. Kinda makes you wonder how Federer manages to beat Nadal and everybody else’s ass so handily in all the other tournaments.
Federer really is better than everyone, including Nadal. He beat him just before this tournament on the same surface.
Nadal is just the best on clay.
I know. He just didn’t look all that better than Nadal in this match. Looked worse. I’ve played on clay myself, it’s a really different surface. Fun, though.
Clay is a ridiculous surface if you know how to play it. If you’re prone to pulled groinage, don’t ever play it. 
That was a solid defeat. Rafael Nadal is a machine on clay.
What I can’t quite figure out is whether it’s that Nadal is amazing on this surface or that he’s a southpaw, or a combination of those two important factors. One thing’s certain: Nadal can ski the clay effectively. Christ, it looked like he was telemarking in tight groom.
Something this seems to say about Roger Federer is that he’s not (to this point at least) willing to sacrifice the rest of his career to become a demon on clay. It will be interesting to see how he reacts to this third-in-a-row loss at Roland Garros.
Yep, and I think Federer looked a little off for a good bit of the tournament. Notably, he seemed to give Davydenko a lot of opportunities.
Clay is the best surface for Nadal, who is good on other surfaces but not the greatest, and the worst for Federer, who is easily the best on everything else. I think their head-to-head record would be slanted Federer’s way if they met more often in hardcourt tournaments, but I think seven of their 12 meetings have been on clay.
(Whispering, because my wife’s a Federer Fan) I’m happy for Nadal. He seems to be a good kid. And frankly, I’m a little tired of Federer winning just about everything.
However, I’ll concede that Roger’s the best player of all time, even without a French Open win.
Now the question is- will Nadal even beat Federer in a final not on clay?
Quite likely, I think. Nadal has just turned 21, Federer’s what, 26-27? Rafa will still be in his prime 5 years from now, while Roger will be just a little over the hill.
And for that matter, Nadal might just be good enough to take a final from Fedex, at any time, in any of the other majors.
I think Nadal is improving on the other surfaces. However, if he’s not careful, he could injure himself. Hard surfaces especially are not very forgiving on ankles and knees.
The great thing about Nadal is not just that he’s such an athlete, but he’s also smart. Some players are just not intuitive on the court (e.g. Andy Roddick) and this cannot be taught. Grass will be his biggest challenge because it’s so much slower than clay and he’s not comfortable with the slower pace.
I am glad that Nadal beat Federer today because it will hopefully motive each man to continue to improve. Federer’s only weakness is clay and he’s such a perfectionist that that has to bother him. The French Open is obviously very important to him and his legacy and it was evident today. It’s good to see him nervous for a change. If he’d won today, what would he have left to reach for?
Nadal, on the other hand, is young enough to learn some of the techniques that Federer has already mastered (e.g. net play, drop shots), so that he doesn’t beat his body into the ground before he’s 25. Only when he develops all aspects of his game will he truly be able to challenge Federer on grass and hard court.
Clay is the slowest surface.
Federer is 25, but that doesn’t detract from your point in the least. In tennis years, he is already past his prime.
They were talking about “early” retirements in tennis. Borg retired when he was 25. On the women’s tour it’s even worse: Clijsters just retired at friggin’ 23! What I take away from this is even more admiration and respect for Agassi and Sampras, who met in the US Open finals back in 2002 when both were in their 30s.
Another question- once Federer goes downhill, are there any youngsters out there who will challenge Nadal? Roddick and Hewitt aren’t getting any younger and don’t look to reprise their glory days again. Who else is out there?
Just because you are great on clay it does not mean that it will translate to other surfaces. Clay is the slowest surface. Nadal has not done particularly well at Wimbledon.
Federer has dominated on all other surfaces. Additionally, unlike Sampras, Federer is actually a credible contender to win the French Open. I’m not sure Sampras ever even made a final.
Great win for Nadal but I personally don’t expect him to win 3 other non-French Open majors.