Why picking on Federer's mental strength?

Federer's (lack of?) mental strength is not the main reason he lost the match against Nadal.
All those top players are mental giants, otherwise they wouldn't be so high ranked. But it's the match-up that's killing Federer. It has become even worse than in the past. It's not just TS forehand to 1H backhand anymore. I only saw the last set of the match, but wherever Nadal was firing his pacy, heavy topspin balls, it got Federer into trouble. As soon as he had to run, the point was basically lost. Federer doesn't have the speed or stamina (anymore?) to cope with this physical brand of tennis his rivals are playing. Whether it's age or lack of physical training, I don't know. No wonder he opted for the ultra-agressive approach, which we all know doesn't do the job against Nadal these days on these courts. The better Federer hits his shot, the better they come back. I saw him hit perfect forehands that on faster courts would have been instant winners, only to get owned by the return (like on his breakpoint in the final game). Federer is still playing well, but his game, which worked so well several years ago, is getting hopelesly outdated (at least against his rivals).

So what were people expecting? That Federer would get the belief to beat Nadal out of nowhere, while he had barely beaten him in these conditions his whole career? That he would push a magic button so every shot would find the lines ten times in a row until he had the point? Everyone (except the most ardent Federer fans) knew Nadal was going to win. I knew it, despite having been a big Federer fan in the past, Nadal knew it (read his book), I guess Federer himself knew it. Winning tennis matches is about playing in your comfort zone, which Djokovic and Nadal have been doing extremely well recently. Having to hit 10 'would be' winners in a row to get a point, and repeating this for several hours, is playing extremely out of your comfort zone, even for Federer. So while Federer starts to tire quickly mentally, Nadal knows he just has to hang in till results go his way. No wonder he has a 'mental edge' over Federer. No wonder we saw no belief in Roger's eyes and body language. We don't see the belief in Nadal when he plays djokovic either, despite being a mental giant. Why? Because he has to go out of his comfort zone, becoming ultra-agressive with the forehand (at least) to beat Djokovic, while the Serb simply plays his game. I have to admit, mental strength plays its part. Roger's clueless kamikaze rushes to the net show that he's not mentally 100% against Nadal. But Nadal's missed smashes against Djokovic on keymoments tell the same story. But the mental edge is often merely a by-product of the edge gamewise.

I read people blaming Federer for not having worked Nadal out after all these years. Honestly, Nadal has been worked out. What you need to beat him is great speed and stamina and a doublehanded backhand. You would have to play what Tenez calls 'the physical game'. It would be a huge transformation of Federer's game, I don't think its realistic. Unfortunately I have to agree with what some Nadal fanatics like to say all the time: For the last several years Federer hasn't beaten Nadal (outdoor) when Nadal was fit. He can't. And he won't do it either in the future. He might give his fans a glimp of hope by winning a set or go up a break, eventually the result is as predictable as me playing against Nadal. The result is out of Federer's control.

I must say there have been some well presented and articulate postings on this forum today, including this one. I like the idea of "player comfort zones"

I agree with the gist of this particularly the way the odds were stacked but I think Fed could have still played a lot better today which may have made the difference. But yeah he was really up against it from what you have outlined and it takes a different kind of mental strength to play his game as opposed to that of his rivals.

Actually I don't even think the match up played a big part in today loss,Roger choked.It was a massive massive massive choke job on his part,the worst one I think thats come on the hard court.I think he played much better at the 09 AO .Even though the surface favoured Nadal more especially now that its slower then ever,I think his backhand held up pretty well throughout the match,it was his forehand and serve that fell apart
As soon as Roger was ahead in the match he choked,he couldnt hold serve more because of all the unforced errors and dip in 1st serve % rather then Nadal actually breaking him.He blew many opportunities because when Roger plays Nadal he becomes extremely nervous and makes the most ridiculous errors
As soon as he lost the second set the way he did,I knew it was all over,he didn't remotely look like he believed he was going to win.At least Nadal fights and believes,Roger just doesn't believe he can beat Nadal

break_in_the_fifth wrote:I agree with the gist of this particularly the way the odds were stacked but I think Fed could have still played a lot better today which may have made the difference. But yeah he was really up against it from what you have outlined and it takes a different kind of mental strength to play his game as opposed to that of his rivals.

I understand what you mean, I often had the same feeling. But the same could be said when Nadal played Djokovic in their six matches last year. Or when Roddick plays Federer. History shows that the bad error here, the missed opportunity, which obviously in the eyes of the spectator could have made the difference, matter little in the grand scheme of things. A tennis match lasts long enough to give victory to the statistics, like Rafa's winning % when pounding the Roger backhand (whatever it is, it must be high). I adopt a generalizing view to every tennis match, instead of looking at the individual points.

Veejay wrote:
As soon as he lost the second set the way he did,I knew it was all over,he didn't remotely look like he believed he was going to win.At least Nadal fights and believes,Roger just doesn't believe he can beat Nadal

But how does that come? The answer, I believe, is in the article.

I have to say though I only saw the fourth set. So maybe I missed what you called the epic choke job.
Anyway, I didn't see anything that I hadn't seen before in years past. Actually, the storyline of the fourth set looked all too familiar to me.

63 UEs from the racquet of Fed, without looking at any individual one tells the story. I'm not thinking of any particular point, even his one two combo of wide serve then forehand into the open court was consistently let down by his forehand. Sure Rafa may have retrieved the forehand but at least get that far before we say Roger had no chance.

63 UE is what he gets for playing out of his comfort zone. But he probably wouldn't fare any better with another approach.

Many of his routine forehands that would have put him in a good position if not won him the point didn't see the other side of the court. Your article, while some of it rings true here is more suited to last years FO final. His comfort zone is attacking. I'll admit there are a few things which I thought were ridiculous like the backhand smash retrieved for a winner which is shot of the day on the official site. If Fed had played close to what he was capable of and the match persisted like that and he'd still lost then I'd agree.

One thing you may have a point on is Fed coming to the net so much even off of nothing shots. Perhaps thats because he knew he'd need to conserve energy.

By the way I think it was to do with not finding timing and maybe a slight drop of mental strength. Any drop of mental strength, although it affects his game, isn't enough to accuse him of lacking in that department as the mental strength required to play the way he does is already way beyond that of his rivals. So while it may be partially to blame for the loss, he's no way lacking compared to the others.

For me I think today's match was decided by the 'mental' factor. I think Roger if anything 'overplayed' in parts of the match to which I think cost him the match. It almost felt he was trying to play above his level when he was broken back on the respective breaks of serve. If he had relaxed and continued playing how he was, he would've won.

I think that a more calm and patient approach would have been better (like he actually did at WTF). Today he tried to go for winners often instantly, what I suppose you mean by overplaying. But a more patient approach would have meant longer rallies, and maybe he doesn't feel physically up to that, like i said in the article.

Btw the article is not only an analysis of today's match, but of their whole rivalry (mental- and gamewise). It can be applied to most matches they play. Yes, maybe today we saw some nervosity from Federer, but that's only a consequence of the manner in which Nadal pushes him to the extreme. From what I saw, Federer played quite well, but matchup wise Nadal was owning him, having an answer for everything, and I knew it was only a matter of time before Nadal would get the victory. Even when Federer got those breakpoints in the fourth set, I was convinced it would be to no avail.

Things looked good when he broke straight away in the second but then to just hand it back? He missed a few too many forehands for me to say he was playing well, even the simple routine ones that I mentioned that follow from his out wide serve.

I'm just glad I didn't watch more than first 5 games.

A good article with many good points but I still think mental is a key factor in this match up.

Also, Federer is not mentally weak - he is light years ahead of some players, e.g. Gasquet, Verdasco, but I do think he is a notch or two below Nadal and Djokovic who are particularly strong.

The writing is on the wall now for Federer. He is unlikely to win big events if Nadal or Djokovic are in the way. I only caught the third set and little bit of the 4th set of the Nadal/Fed semi final but could see where this rivalry is going.

On the the majority of the surfaces on the ATP world tour Nadal will simply be too strong for Federer. Fed's UE count was too high as per usual in a Nadal match and he was going for too much. It is very sad to watch but you have to give Nadal credit as well I suppose.

Fed's unforced errors against his three rivals are now becoming the norm. 17 months ago at the Canadian Masters he sprayed the ball all over the place and that was against Murray

Was it the US Open semi, where he made 50+ errors?

Frankly, whilst I agree that the courts favour Nadal and they are too slow, the reason for his defeats are not just the courts

And yes mentally, for someone who has won so much he is relatively mentally weak. How many times does he win a first set against the others and lose?

However, I also think that Fed is intent on playing the game his way - realising that he could compromise and increase his chances, but refuses to do so

And for that he has my utmost admiration

I mean I suppose it is only 1 guy that only truly has is number at the moment and he could get lucky and not face Nadal in the latter stages of a tournament.

Fed showed he could beat Djokovic last year and should have put him away in the US semi-finals. However the older he gets you would expect their head to head to become increasingly lop-sided in Djoko's behaviour.

Time is running out for Federer.

The third set TB, he fought back from 5-1 to 6-5 and almost got the set. Is that a reflection of 'weak' mental strength?

banbrotam wrote:Was it the US Open semi, where he made 50+ errors?

Total points played in AO 2012 match (vs Nadal - 4 sets - Two TB sets)-

Federer 130/276, Nadal 146/276
UEs - 63, 34

Average points per set - 69

http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/scores/stats/day16/1602ms.html

Total points played in USO 2011 (vs Djokovic - 5 sets - 1 TB set, 1 7-5 set)

Federer - 143/304, Djokovic - 161/304
UEs - 59, 35

Average points per set - 60+

http://2011.usopen.org/en_US/scores/stats/day19/1601ms.html

In the AO 2009 final, Federer won more points total than Nadal, but still lost.

banbrotam wrote:However, I also think that Fed is intent on playing the game his way - realising that he could compromise and increase his chances, but refuses to do so

Just a few racquet tweaks, but the same racquet since Sampras introduced it to Federer in 2002, IIRC.

Chydremion wrote:I think that a more calm and patient approach would have been better (like he actually did at WTF).

Chydremon I like the title of your article. Thise who think it;s in the mind cannot be more wrong. Considering the pressure it is to play Nadal with a single HBH and nornal stamina, he did very well to take the first set. It was very courageous once again. He goes in the ring mentally very strong and only when his physical edge goes that his shots become more and more risky.

You refer to the WTF but you cannot compare Nadal of 2 months ago with today's. It's a different player and the balls he was sending were much more powerful.

As I said we know how different is normal Nadal from the slam-fit Nadal. It's obvious.

However, I also think that Fed is intent on playing the game his way - realising that he could compromise and increase his chances, but refuses to do so

Federer tries to hit through Nadal and rush the net, almost played like Llodra...

Tenez wrote:

As I said we know how different is normal Nadal from the slam-fit Nadal. It's obvious.

Clutching at straws?

Of course Nadal plays higher intensity for Grand Slams, they're the most important tournaments. Also in best of 5 sets he is tougher to beat. Simples.