Rafa comments on Novak

I had a quick skim through Rafa's autobiography in my lunch hour and found this comment interesting:

"With Federer the rule is always to keep patiently plugging away, knowing you'll force him sooner or later to make mistakes. With Djokovic there is no clear tactical plan. It's simply a question of playing at your very best, with maximum intensity and aggression, seeking to retain control of the point, because the moment you let him get the upper hand, he is unstoppable."

That seems to have been backed up by this years results. When Rafa isn't able to out-do Novak on aggression, he doesn't seem to have anything to fall back on.

Also, there seems to be a belief that Rafa doesn't really like Novak but he was very complimentary of him in his book. He not only praises his tennis but praises his personality and graciousness in defeat too. Novak made similar comments about Rafa on Twitter after Rome (he said how Rafa had made a point of coming to see him in the locker room afterwards to congratulate him).

Nice post murdoch, I like all the top guys I think they are all pretty quality individuals. And Rafa's comments make sense, he doesn't have that clear game plan against Novak because he can't just serve it to his backhand and hit cross court to his backhand all day and expect to get the result. Clearly he is struggling for a new strategic and tactical mix.

"all the top guys I think they are all pretty quality individuals"

Unless its Federer and he gets beat - doesn't usually look at his victor and offers a pathetic handshake.

However I suppose he will getter better as time goes by, as he will inevitably have to get used to it.

SL, i sympathize I think Roger is actually much more diva like than people give him credit for and he is actually been kind of nasty to Andy and Novak over the years. I myself took Roger to task for his post Melzer interview where frankly Roger made one of the most shocking quotes in an interview I have ever seen. Something that if even Connors had said it I would have taken notice. After that loss he claimed one of the reasons he lost the match was because his opponent shanked alot of balls that went in, which I saw that match and he was just blown out by the better player. But all these guys are mixed bags and complex individuals, Roger overral is a very positive and good guy but he has animosities and a dark streak, which is normal. Since he started losing he hasn't won too many more sportsmanship awards though.

sportslover wrote:"all the top guys I think they are all pretty quality individuals"

Unless its Federer and he gets beat - doesn't usually look at his victor and offers a pathetic handshake.

However I suppose he will getter better as time goes by, as he will inevitably have to get used to it.

Unless it's Nadal he loses to, Murray is also quite cold at the handshake when losing.

Agree however that Federer is a bit of a diva when losing nowadays, his expectations are obviously sky high compared to others, so it's going to hurt more when he has to shake the winners hand (unless it's Rafa/Nole)

socal1976 wrote:Nice post murdoch, I like all the top guys I think they are all pretty quality individuals. And Rafa's comments make sense, he doesn't have that clear game plan against Novak because he can't just serve it to his backhand and hit cross court to his backhand all day and expect to get the result. Clearly he is struggling for a new strategic and tactical mix.

I think that's dead right socal and Murdoch. The issue for Rafa is that he got by in the past without a firm plan against Djokovic, who was perhaps a bit up-and-down and didn't fully believe in the biggest matches. Suddenly the tables have turned and he's having to come up with a plan belatedly. I think he probably hoped it was temporary after IW and Miami, but Djokovic shows no sign of letting up.

Positively this I think bothers nadal a great deal, we know that he is a creature of habit as most tennis players are, Nadal especially. He doesn't like to doubt out there or have to overthink what he should do in each situation. Novak presents a riddle because the high spinning shots actually suit his style both on the backhand and the forehand, Nadal's strength plays right into Novak's strength.

because the moment you let him get the upper hand, he is unstoppable."

Hard to argue with this, he wins the first set against Federer in Aus, and he wins match 3-0. Wins first set against Nadal on grass and wins match 3-1, first set against Murray and wins match 3-0.

The other 3 guys need to grow some balls if they've lost that 1st set!

Josiah Maiestas wrote:

because the moment you let him get the upper hand, he is unstoppable."

Hard to argue with this, he wins the first set against Federer in Aus, and he wins match 3-0. Wins first set against Nadal on grass and wins match 3-1, first set against Murray and wins match 3-0.

The other 3 guys need to grow some balls if they've lost that 1st set!

If you look at pretty much any tennis match the player who wins the first set wins the match like 70 percent of the time. But it is true this year Novak has 2 wins against Nadal of all people after losing the 1st set. The most amazing match they played this year was madrid where Novak had a double break lead in the first set on Nadal on the road. He goes on to lose a double break lead which is an unheard of collapse on the ATP tour, then with the crowd going bonkers he promptly breaks Nadal again and doesn't even need a tiebreaker to win 7-5. That one was the win that really let me know he was on a special run. To lose a double break lead on the road and then to still win the set without a tiebreaker against the matador on clay!

HM Murdoch wrote:
Also, there seems to be a belief that Rafa doesn't really like Novak but he was very complimentary of him in his book. He not only praises his tennis but praises his personality and graciousness in defeat too. Novak made similar comments about Rafa on Twitter after Rome (he said how Rafa had made a point of coming to see him in the locker room afterwards to congratulate him).

This is not something what I completely agree to. One can't conclude about the terms and relationship and camaraderie shared between players just based on what they write in a book( non less that an autobiography) or what they say in a press conference or how they appear in promotional events or 'kids day' in front of huge fan crowd. Its is in a match that it really shows how good terms one has with the opponent and how much you respect him as a player. After the match anyone can be whatever he wants to be.There is a famous saying which means something like "In a game we really show what we actually are". Isner and Querrey are have been friends since old days. When he was asked how he felt like playing his good friend Isner, he said that its not easy playing a good friend. You can't be very intense with fist-pumping go over board celebrating the points or the match.

Now why did he say something like this? Because fist-pumping, jumping with joy, going over-board with celebrating, yelling huge 'come-ons' and 'vamos' on an unforced error actually hurts the opponent. It is indeed true that you are celebrating on his(opponents') loss and so how can he feel good about it.

If you see Nadal he is the most expressive when celebrating a tough point that is won by him. Very intense. And this doesn't not change no matter who he plays. If someone can do it even with opponents he says he has good terms with and has respect, then for him that feeling is of very trivial value (almost nothing) compared to winning. Have you seen him signing the TV camera after the match. He is so high that he keeps striking the camera lens with the pen. He may call that he has great terms and gets along nice with Federer but to me it looks like more of an acknowledgement towards the good terms that Federer shows for him. When he won wimbledon defeating Fedrer he climbed the wall jumping around everywhere to celebrate. Did you see the cold handshakes that Nadal gave to Davydenko when in was beating him. But after the match he will always say the usual that anyone says. "he(opponent) played well, was the better play on the day, blah blah.. But did he really feel about him that way in the match. No way. But after the match one can be whatever one wants to be. And not too far ago how warm that handshake was at the wimbledon final 2011 with Djokovic. See it on youtube. Nadal walked away very quicky as Djo was looking to console him with pat on the back. Or maybe he just too disappointed with the loss. Only he can truly know, I'm just stating what I felt looking at it.

See delpotro on the other hand. He is always warm with a lot of player in games and at match end and even in press conf.

Nadal may have come into the locker room to congratulate Djo after Rome.I won't be doubting that Nadal was pretending anything, but the thing is he was not a such a loss still because it was not a GS that Nadal was defending. He knew that this is only a masters and Djo still has not defeated him in a GS in bo5 format. But wimbledon's loss showed what Nadal actually felt for Djo.

Now in his book, he can be all nice and complementary to wards Djo as much as he wants to. And of course Djo will acknowledge it, just as nadal does to Federer. I can't think for Nadal or Federer or Djo and I don't know much about their terms with each other more than they themselves, what this is what I feel from what it shows in matches and interviews.

Raising praises for the opponent is normal now. No player these days openly say things about their peers like what Jonny Mac, Connors, Rios, Pete towards Rafter and Rafter in return used to say. Player these days know that it is important to have a good public image.

Raider I don't know, I think the top guys are on pretty good terms with each other Murray and Novak I think are actually friends. Novak has gone out of his way to praise Rafa and say he is the greatest player ever, although he doesn't say that very much anymore. I think everyone is pretty cool with Rafa I think he is a genuinely modest and almost child like person who few of the players despite his time issues really have any animosity for. Federer and Djokovic don't like each other and that is clear. And that is part of the reason I like their rivalry the most. Andy I think also doesn't have a particular love of the Rog and his ego but respects him a great deal. Novak and Roger play nice because it is like two superpowers who as you say want to have good public relations and be loved by the fans and the media, being catty and being seen as sore sport in the modern corporate sports world is not profitable. So therefore, they stay away from the controversy. But I actually think Roger enjoys beating Novak and Novak enjoys beating Roger more than even Nadal. There is a pretty long history of bad blood between the two, even when Novak was getting the worst of the rivalry he refused to bow to the great man and be as fawning as a lot of other players were.

What annoys me about Nadal's comment is that he tries to make us believe he can play differently to beat Djoko.

He has played like that for 10 years and that's not going to change. His best chance to beat Djoko is if this latter gets injured or tired. Nadal is a one dimensional player. He says it himself when he says that to beat Federer you have to "wait for the mistakes to flow". Frankly that's what he does against everybody but teh problem is that Djoko does the same job but in a much more efficient way.

Tenez wrote:What annoys me about Nadal's comment is that he tries to make us believe he can play differently to beat Djoko.

He has played like that for 10 years and that's not going to change. His best chance to beat Djoko is if this latter gets injured or tired. Nadal is a one dimensional player. He says it himself when he says that to beat Federer you have to "wait for the mistakes to flow". Frankly that's what he does against everybody but teh problem is that Djoko does the same job but in a much more efficient way.

Well Tenez, i will agree with you to a certain extent that Nadal being able to all of sudden change his style in the middle of his career is probably a big ask that may not come about. It certainly isn't something that tennis players usually recover from: when a player figures them out and forces them into a position where they have to make major changes to their game, tactics, technique and strategy to win; when we talk about it happening after 10 years of pro tennis in mid to late part of your career.