By the start of 2009, people were looking at Nadal as being the next champ. He had claimed the number 1 spot, beat Federer at a Slam besides Wimbledon or the French (the Aussie Open) and left the number 1 in tears. Few expected 2009 to turn out the way it has. Nadal went into the French as the prohibitive favorite. He had never lost at the French as a pro. He won Monte Carlo, Rome, Barcelona, and was a runner-up to Federer in Madrid.
When Robin Soderling beat Rafael Nadal in the fourth round, he had Nadal playing defensive tennis. Many wondered who Robin Soderling was and whether this was a fluke. Instead, Soderling worked his way into the top 10 showing that that win was on fluke (much like Tsonga’s victory over Nadal in the semifinals of the Australian Open in 2008 was no fluke as Tsonga has also reached the top 10).
After losing in the French Open, Rafa decided to skip Wimbledon, and pretty much skipped every hard court event until Montreal. He played Montreal and Cincinnati, though he lost somewhat early in both. Nadal would reach the semifinals of the US Open once again, but get totally bludgeoned by Juan Martin del Potro. Nadal would play reasonable well the rest of the year, but fail to win a title. His low point? The ATP World Tour Finals where he finished round robin play 0-3, losing to Soderling, Djokovic, and Davydenko.
Everyone keeps pointing out how Rafa has not won a title since Rome, but he’s actually reached a few finals. Since Rome, Rafa reached the finals of Madrid, Shanghai, and Doha. Rafa has generally exited in the semifinals, including Cincinnati, the US Open, Beijing, Paris, Indian Wells, and now Miami. Thus, in 9 tournaments, Nadal reached the semifinals or better. Nadal almost never loses in the opening few rounds of a tournament no matter how poorly he’s playing.
Nadal has had three losses recently that have followed a similar pattern. In Doha, Indian Wells, and Miami, Nadal won the first set playing very solid tennis, and then lost the next two sets. The losses in Indian Wells and Miami were to players that had a big serve and potentially big groundstrokes. Ivan Ljubicic plays good offensive tennis, and can hit winners from his forehand to anywhere. Roddick hasn’t played this style in a while, preferring his counterpunching style, but he has always had the ability to up the pace of his groundstrokes, and chose to play power tennis to take the two sets.
It helped both Roddick and Ljubicic to have big serves and bail them out of games where Nadal was threatening to break.
Nadal plays more aggressive on hard courts compared to clay. When Nadal was losing in the ATP World Tour Finals, he played nervous tennis, hitting shots up the middle and allowing his opponents to take the game to him. Since January, and especially since returning back to tour at Indian Wells, Nadal has been working on his aggression, going for bigger shots. When his shots go in, Nadal’s groundstrokes are like half a level higher than almost every pro on the tour. His opponents struggle to reach the ball and hit a meaningful shot. If they hit a weak shot, Nadal puts the ball away.
Nikolay Davydenko doesn’t quite fit the mold of either Ljubicic or Roddick. Davydenko’s serve has improved over the years so he can use it as a decent weapon, though nothing like, say, del Potro. However, Davydenko plays better than almost anyone right at the baseline, and he creates huge angles from there that push a player off the court. One reason players come to net is to cut the time off from their opponents.
Back when players used to hit with wooden racquets and lacked the power to hit winners from the baseline, the net was their ally. They would come in, and cut the time the opponent had to hit the ball, plus produce bigger angles than they would have at the baseline. But with modern racquets, those angles can be created in the backcourt, even many feet behind the baseline. Nadal is a good example of a player that can produce winners despite standing far from the baseline.
Davydenko cuts off time by hugging the baseline and producing angles from back there. He cuts his own time off too, and therefore needs to be speedy enough to retrieve balls and hit them with authority. A typical strategy by Davydenko is to hit a sharp angle crosscourt shot. The response would typically be another crosscourt shot. Davydenko, still near the baseline, would then hit a shot up the line, one that Nadal would be hopelessly out of position to get to. Against a player that plays that far back, say, Andy Murray, that shot would need to be hit much better, much harder, to create the desired winner, and would therefore be a riskier shot.
Most people have known that to beat Nadal, you generally need to have a big shot, typically, a big forehand, and a big serve. Your backhand also needs to be solid enough not to be a liability. And it helps to volley decently, so you can apply pressure to him. All three players were able to overcome a hot Nadal at the start of the first set, and keep even with Nadal, until they played a very solid game to break. For Davydenko, he had to win a tiebreak in the second set, one that found him saving match points, but then Davydenko is more skilled off the baseline than Roddick or Ljubicic, and he had found some mental toughness.
Indeed, Federer’s two losses to Baghdatis and Berdych were partly due to these players not choking at the end. They continued to play aggressive tennis and make shots, and it was Federer that folded in the end.
Nadal’s losses come partly from a loss of the single minded mental toughness that allowed him to beat Djokovic three times last summer, including an epic match in Madrid where Djokovic had match points and still couldn’t beat Nadal. It should be noted that Nadal’s losses have come on hard courts where a well struck shot has some pace on it and can bother Nadal. Nadal has yet to show that he’s vulnerable on clay, with the loss to Soderling excepting.
Much like players have learned how to play Murray (be aggressive), they’ve learned how to play Nadal (be aggressive). Nadal’s the tougher guy to beat because his groundstrokes are so heavy. Nadal’s near winners produce weak replies that he pounces on, where Murray plays more of a retrieving style. His goal is not to hammer you with hard shots until you produce a weak one that he then hits for a winner.
If Nadal has a weakness, it’s hitting his forehand on the run out wide. He frequently hits the ball in the net, out wide, or long. But lately, his other weakness has been his mind. If you can stay close with Nadal, and manage to hold your serve, then you can pressure Nadal into errors. Sometimes Nadal totally regresses into spinny shots up the middle.
Nadal shows that a tough mind is key to a champion. Oh sure, if Nadal returned even better than he does, or if he didn’t cheat so much to his right so he could hit an inside out forehand, he might not be so vulnerable and perhaps win more matches from a technical standpoint, but Nadal used to never lose these matches because he could will himself to win points. His knee issues seem to have put just a bit of fear into him.
It could be part of a bigger plan. Perhaps Nadal doesn’t want to win so many tournaments. There’s a sense that Roger Federer isn’t always interested in winning anything outside the Slams. Would he intentionally play awful tennis so he can preserve his body for the Slams? It’s so audacious a thought, but Roger hasn’t won a tournament since the Australian Open. And the last tournament he won before that? Cincinnati. He’s even had trouble reaching finals. Since the US Open, Federer has not reached the final of any tournament except the Australian Open.
Does Nadal think this is a good idea? It seems Nadal is too competitive to lose intentionally and it makes more sense that he is suffering from a bit of confidence when players have played him close. Once the clay season starts, it will have been nearly a year since Nadal has won a tournament.
If he gets his mental edge back, this strategy of playing him close may not be enough to win, but for now, this is how he’s lost his last few big matches.