I was perusing a website that was making predictions about the Monte Carlo semifinals which pitted Novak Djokovic against Fernando Verdasco and Rafael Nadal against David Ferrer.

The thinking went something like this.  Given that Nadal had easily mowed through his first two rounds, dropping one game each, and given that he dropped 6 games against Juan Carlos Ferrero, the thought was, a player of David Ferrer’s caliber, would make Nadal’s life tough, but more of the 6-4 6-4 variety.  No one really predicted Ferrer would push Nadal to 3 sets, but no one thought Ferrer would lose easily either.  The actual truth came closer to losing easily with Ferrer losing 6-2, 6-3.

Indeed, Ferrer had recently lost to Nadal in Miami on hard courts, 7-6, 6-4, so there was some thought that he could provide an equal challenge on clay.

The harder prediction was Djokovic vs. Verdasco.  The fact of the matter is Verdasco hadn’t beaten Djokovic since 2007.  However, Verdasco had taken one set from Djokovic in their last 4 meetings, so he had been a tough customer.  Djokovic had been struggling, losing early in both Indian Wells and Miami, but with his recent parting from Todd Martin, and a relatively easy victory over David Nalbandian, the thinking was that Djokovic had finally resolved his problems.

This, despite the fact that Nalbandian just only came back on tour, and just only started playing somewhat good.  It’s not like he has had the success of, say, either Juan Carlos Ferrero or David Ferrer, who met in two consecutive finals after the Australian Open (on clay).  Even so, many felt that Djokovic was playing good tennis again.

Despite the relatively easy Nalbandian win, it was Verdasco that won easily.  Few predicted that Djokovic would implode and that Verdasco would play good, solid, steady tennis and give Djokovic all sorts of problems.  This was further compounded by the match against Montanes where Verdasco looked like he’d easily win the second set, then completely melted down to give the second set away before coming back strong to win a third set at love.  It was Verdasco, not Djokovic, was considered mentally fragile.  So, given the head-to-head lead of Djokovic over Verdasco, Djokovic’s somewhat easy win over Nalbandian, and Verdasco’s second set meltdown, it wasn’t surprising many predicted Djokovic to win in either two tight sets or three sets.

The final is interesting.  The common wisdom is Nadal is back.  He’s dropped very few games heading into the final.  Despite not having won a tournament since Rome, last year, everyone feels Nadal is back in charge.  Thoughts of mental weakness which lead to a Ljubicic loss in Indian Wells and a Roddick loss in Miami seem to have disappeared.  There’s also the thinking that, for all of Verdasco’s power, he’s still mentally a bit frail.

Many feel that Nadal has just won too easily, and with a 9-0 head-to-head record, Verdasco isn’t ready to topple Nadal.  The expectation is that Verdasco hits hard enough that the match should be close, perhaps of the 6-4, 7-5 varierty.  It’s possible if Verdasco has a meltdown, he could lose more easily than that.  What few expect is Verdasco to lose the first set easily, then win two tight sets to claim the victory over Nadal.  The reason is “head-to-head” plus the familiarity with clay.

Could Verdasco pull the upset?  It is possible.  Verdasco would have to play reasonably aggressive and serve well, and Nadal would have to get nerves again and falter.  Both happening at once seem unlikely, but at least, the formula for beating Nadal has been to go for big shots, and Verdasco’s game is at least conducive to that style of play.

Even so, the prediction should lean to a close Nadal win.  If Nadal loses, then we’ll really question Nadal’s head, because he’s on his favorite surface trying to regain the confidence he’s been missing since the clay season last year.