Roger Federer vs Rafael Nadal Stats

Stats from the 2007 French Open Final:

Nadal's service Game Stats:
1st serve points won= 77%
2nd serve points won= 69%
Break Points Saved= 94% (Fed wins 1/17 BPs)

Federer's Service Game Stats:
1st serve points won= 65%
2nd serve points won= 54%
Break Points Saved= 60% (Nadal wins 4/10 BPs)

Now the point of this thread isn't about Nadal winning... anyway I think most tennis fans will agree that Nadal is favourite vs Federer for a clay match, and there have also been much more one sided wins for both Fed and Nadal against each other than this.

But what I do find interesting about these stats is the huge discrepancy. For Federer's service game it's relatively normal- he has won 60% of points when break point down, and that is more or less his normal percentage of points on serve. However for Nadal's service game it is nowhere near the average.
Federer only converted 1 of 17 break points, meaning Nadal has a 94% rate on break point down, which is far higher than his normal percentage of points on serve.
Why is this?
Some may say to explain Nadal beating Fed on clay: 'high topspin to Federer's BH'- but the topspin for Nadal does not magically get higher on break points. Tenez may argue 'fitness'- but Nadal's fitness does not increase on break points. Remember to even get to a break point, it means before that Federer has won more points than Nadal on his service game and has won a minimum of 3 points.

So what explains it?
Could Nadal's mental strength be a factor?


Some more Stats:

WIMBLEDON 2008 FINAL wrote:Wimbledon 2008 Final:

Roger Federer:
Receiving Points Won: 33%
BP Conversion Ratio: 7% (1/13)

Rafael Nadal:
Receiving Points Won: 33%
BP Conversion Ratio: 30% (4/13)

Once again for Nadal the BP conversion and normal returning points is quite similar, but a big difference for Roger on his BPs.

US OPEN 2013 FINAL wrote:US Open 2013 Final: 

Rafael Nadal:
1st Serve Points Won
65% (51/78)
2nd Serve Points Won
55% (24/43)
Break Points Saved
72% (8/11)

Novak Djokovic:
1st Serve Points Won
57% (40/69)
2nd Serve Points Won
48% (16/33)
Break Points Saved
45% (5/11)


How about that?
Still a disparity, but not as much as in Fedal matches, but a crucial disparity nonetheless. Nadal winning around 11% more points BP down than normal, Djokovic around 8% less!

Amri, you don't understand what mental strength is.
You are confusing it with competitiveness.

Nadal is an excellent competitor with excellent focus. That's his strength.
His game, however is cowardly.
He stands behind the base-line and hits the ball safely very hard for very long periods of time.
His strength and endurance are not natural.
That's why he commands zero respect from people who appreciate proper, attacking tennis which does not rely on fitness.
Everyone knows it, even Nadal.
The fact he has been allowed to carry on like he does and win what he has won has nothing to do with him being a great player.
He isn't a great player.
He is just someone who has benefited from a set of circumstances and a lot of cheating.
Happens every day in all walks of life.

I think it was Teddy Tinling who suggested that left-handers should serve from the ad court on the first point, to negate the unfair advantage they get on break points, serving out wide to the right-handers backhand.

That may be so, but Nadal is not a natural lefty.

noleisthebest wrote:That may be so, but Nadal is not a natural lefty.

Edited - see above

That is not Nadal's main advantage. His unnatural fitness which enables him to generously impart the spin from behind the base-line with zero ball-striking risk is the key to his success against everyone.
In fact, knowing that he is a natural right-hander I marvel at the fact that he can serve as a lefty at all.
He does not beat Federer because he plays as  a lefty. There are plenty of other left-handed players who don't.

noleisthebest wrote:Amri, you don't understand what mental strength is.
You are confusing it with competitiveness.

Nadal is an excellent competitor with excellent focus. That's his strength.

And Federer isn't?
And surely if he focuses on all points, then there shouldn't be such a large discrepancy.

Julius- that is a good point actually; Nadal gets a serve spinning away from Roger on the Ad-Court.

However, it does not still explain the big discrepancy. If he was winning 94% of AD points, then on the DEUCE points he would be at around 30%... and this simply isn't the case.
Furthermore having watched the match a few hours ago on youtube, I noticed Fed's BPs mainly came in clusters at 15-40 ... this explains how he created 17 BPs but obviously not in 17 different games. That means from 15-40 Fed would have a pop on the deuce court as well as the AD court, so clearly Fed wasn't doing great on the Deuce Court on break points either.

'Cos it was clay?

mikeyM1000 wrote:'Cos it was clay?

No, because it was clay for all the service points.
There's a discrepancy between break points and normal service points for Nadal, it's not as if an extra layer of clay is added on break points.

Jeez, it was 6 years ago. I don't know. I sort of lost interest in it sometime around Christmas 2011.

mikeyM1000 wrote:Jeez, it was 6 years ago. I don't know. I sort of lost interest in it sometime around Christmas 2011.

Nearly 7 years ago, and I lost interest a few days after I saw the match but that isn't the point.
The discrepancy shown in this article is present in most of the matches between these two, and even if the extent is smaller than in the article, it is these little margins which is a key factor as to why Federer has not been able to win more matches against his arch rival.

You made a good point with the AD. Court thing, then you make a ridiculous point about the clay surface after that.

It's clay - who is more likely to win any given point on clay? Rafa. So you'd expect Rafa, on serve, to be more likely to win any given point. That in itself probably accounts for at least 9 of the 16 points he won - 'cos he's better on clay. The ad court thing, maybe that's another 3 and Fed may have messed up 2 other.
So that only leaves 2 points unaccounted for.

Maybe when break point down he deliberately draws the rallies out more to ensure that on those particular key points his fitness wins the point - that would be a good tactic. Uncle Toni probably gives him the signal

Good question amri, Good thread.
 
I must say that 1 in 17 is very much an oddity. Those things are rare but they happen. Federer certainly was very unlucky on some of those. I remember a couple where nadal frames the ball, yet the ball just bite the line by the thinnest margins....so suddenly you can have a curse or a mental block on the following ones.
 
Having said that there is still as I mentioned so many times the added pressure of crossing the "lines" versus defending players, especially on slower surfaces when you know that if you do not conclude, you are less likely to do it down the line. How many matches Nadal has won despite having lost the first set or one of the first set....and how many times has he won with a much easier score as the match goes on....often finishing with a 61 or 62 despite having struggled in the first sets.
 
So when you have a BPs v Nadal, Murrray or Djoko, it's not like having a BP versus a lesser fit player. The point becomes crucial, much more important as they are key to have a chance to close the match in 2 or in 3.
 
Nadal doesn't have that stress. Nadal stresses at the beginning...when the player is fresh and can shorten rallies. In fact he often looks very panicky when the first few games he does not see the ball, be it v Federer (yes even on clay) or Davy, Delpo, Nalby. Nadal only starts to relax when the game extends and sees his opponent losing that key sharpness. The FO 2006 and 2007 are actually showing that, especially 2006. In fact even in 2011 where he ever had to ask for time out to have his tape redone as he could not let Federer fly and gain confidence.
 
Nadal's clay game is far from being the best over a set....but over 5 his physical superiority certainly made the difference....when talent has completely vanished from his opponent.

Interesting post Tenez, but I will respond to Julius' first if you don't mind.

I'll be honest Julius, I question the seriousness of your post, but will approach it as if it is anyway.

mikeyM1000 wrote:It's clay - who is more likely to win any given point on clay? Rafa. So you'd expect Rafa, on serve, to be more likely to win any given point. That in itself probably accounts for at least 9 of the 16 points he won - 'cos he's better on clay.

This is really illogical, all 16 points were on clay, and I don't see why clay would give him an advantage on break points but not service points.

So that only leaves 2 points unaccounted for.

This part of your post is just bizarre. What do you mean?

Maybe when break point down he deliberately draws the rallies out more to ensure that on those particular key points his fitness wins the point - that would be a good tactic. Uncle Toni probably gives him the signal

Julius he could do that on every point, if it is 'deliberate' - so I don't see how it just applied to break points.

I'll be honest Julius I do question whether that response was very serious at all, it seemed to be a bit ridiculous.

Tenez wrote:Good question amri, Good thread.

Thankyou
 

I must say that 1 in 17 is very much an oddity.

Indeed, I'm not claiming this is normal. However it does happen regularly in Fedal matches, albeit to a smaller degree... but even these small margins decide matches.

Federer certainly was very unlucky on some of those. I remember a couple where nadal frames the ball, yet the ball just bite the line by the thinnest margins....

I just watched the match today afternoon, there was any occasions where he framed it and it hit the line, but I can remember one time when Nadal framed it, but the margin was good so it landed safe... still even if we don't count that 1/16 isn't great.

Nadal doesn't have that stress. Nadal stresses at the beginning...when the player is fresh and can shorten rallies. In fact he often looks very panicky when the first few games he does not see the ball, be it v Federer (yes even on clay) or Davy, Delpo, Nalby. Nadal only starts to relax when the game extends and sees his opponent losing that key sharpness. The FO 2006 and 2007 are actually showing that, especially 2006.

Tenez I'm not sure if you can remember, but I have done a stats analysis on Federer vs Nadal matches a time ago, where I showed that Nadal has got both the first break and first set in the majority of his matches against Federer.
I also did a very similar research on Nadal Djokovic recently, where I showed that in his last 6 wins against Djokovic he has broken early and won the first set on every single occasion apart from Rome 2012.

Having said that there is still as I mentioned so many times the added pressure of crossing the "lines" versus defending players, especially on slower surfaces when you know that if you do not conclude, you are less likely to do it down the line.

I did consider this as a reason, but I realised that it was illogical for the following reasons:
a) Nadal's fitness does not improve during those break points, nor does Federer's get worse
b) Federer, upto that point in the game, has won atleast 1 more point than Nadal
c) Federer has already won a minimum of 3 points in that game (as he has a BP)

So when you consider those 3, why can Federer not think like this: 'I have won more points than Rafa in this game, if I do more of the same I will break.' And as we know, if his BP conversion was even the same as his normal 'return point conversion', then he would have done much better. Remember Federer with a BP leads Nadal in a game, so he has won more points in that game, despite lower fitness levels. So why should it simply get in the way on break points particularly?
 

Moving on to another example FO2011, consider what could have happened if Federer had played better on the big points, and Nadal hadn't.
-1st set, Federer had set point and hit a ridiculous drop shot when an easy winner had more margin for error and was a much harder for Rafa to return. So he could have won the first set, if he had won that key point.
-2nd set, on the biggest points, ie the tiebreak, Federer played worse on his service point than he did on his normal service points throughout the set. Again, another discrepancy in crucial points in favour of Nadal. If Federer had just played like he had during the set, he could have won the TB.
-Federer won the 3rd set. The fact he did so shows that it was unlikely he was totally out of energy in the 2nd set, so he could have won the 2nd set tiebreak. The only way this is not the case is if Federer magically hugely boosted  his stamina in between sets 2 and 3, which is unlikely given they have like a 3 minute break between sets.
So, if Federer had won the crucial points, he could have won it in straights. Without any changes to the fitness of either player.

Julia Santamaria wrote:I'll be honest Julius, I question the seriousness of your post, but will approach it as if it is anyway.

mikeyM1000 wrote:It's clay - who is more likely to win any given point on clay? Rafa. So you'd expect Rafa, on serve, to be more likely to win any given point. That in itself probably accounts for at least 9 of the 16 points he won - 'cos he's better on clay.

This is really illogical, all 16 points were on clay, and I don't see why clay would give him an advantage on break points but not service points.

So that only leaves 2 points unaccounted for.

This part of your post is just bizarre. What do you mean?

Maybe when break point down he deliberately draws the rallies out more to ensure that on those particular key points his fitness wins the point - that would be a good tactic. Uncle Toni probably gives him the signal

Julius he could do that on every point, if it is 'deliberate' - so I don't see how it just applied to break points.

I'll be honest Julius I do question whether that response was very serious at all, it seemed to be a bit ridiculous.

Obviously the advantage is to Rafa on every one of is service points because a) he's the server and b) it's on clay where he's the better player.
Each point is a discreet entity, so at the beginning of every point where Rafa is serving, he starts as the favourite to win the point. You'd expect him to save over half of the break points (say 9 out of 16) on that basis alone.
You'd expect him to save, say 3 more, simply because of the left handed advantage serving in the ad court.

If Fed threw a couple away with poor shots, that would leave 2 points of the 16 that were saved through other means.

It's not my post that's ridiculous, it's your singular lack of comprehension.

The Uncle Toni bit was a joke though - although you didn't comprehend that either.

mikeyM1000 wrote:
Obviously the advantage is to Rafa on every one of is service points because a) he's the server and b) it's on clay where he's the better player.

Yes, I know.
But this is always the case when he was serving during the match. Why the discrepancy on break points?

You'd expect him to save, say 3 more, simply because of the left handed advantage serving in the ad court.

The percentage points he won BP down on both the AD court and the Deuce Court was BOTH higher than his normal average.

If Fed threw a couple away with poor shots, that would leave 2 points of the 16 that were saved through other means.

But Federer can throw poor shots in any point, why was his BP conversion ratio so much lower than his normal return ratio?

Let's see Nadal v Federer in 1980.  You know, when tennis was tennis.

FedererKing wrote:Let's see Nadal v Federer in 1980.  You know, when tennis was tennis.

Great post FK, very relevant to the thread.

Julia Santamaria wrote:

FedererKing wrote:Let's see Nadal v Federer in 1980.  You know, when tennis was tennis.

Great post FK, very relevant to the thread.

This thread was designed with an ulterior motive.  Most people aren't stupid enough to miss spotting it instantly.

FedererKing wrote:

This thread was designed with an ulterior motive.

I could easily argue you constantly repeating 'Nadal has no talent' etc. has an ulterior motive of being negative about Nadal, atleast I back up my arguments with logic and explanations.
I don't think my conclusions about these stats, which I will go into tomorrow (hint- mental strength) is controversial at all. I was discussing this with a Fed fan on another forum and we reached nearly full agreement (on how mentally Nadal is better on big points).

In terms of this thread,
The theme of Nadal winning crucial points and having a discrepancy in terms of saving BPs compared to normal points against Federer is actually quite common, as I said to Tenez this 1/17 is more rare but essentially we see this played out on a smaller scale... but even this margin can make a big difference.

I don't think even Federer fans can argue against that, can they? Tenez yet to reply to my response.

Feds ability to "get " to break point but not convert the break is much discussed on his official website fan forum. Not only against nadal but others, and there seems to be no solid answer to it. Many think he becomes less aggressive at break point, pointing out how he will chop on the return. Many think its mental. Some have done excellent analysis breaking down what the server did right vs what fed did wrong at break point- like hitting an I returnable serve. Frankly, I've seen no definitive answer, it may just be one of those flaws all players have in se aspect of game

truffin1 wrote:Feds ability to "get " to break point but not convert the break is much discussed on his official website fan forum. Not only against nadal but others, and there seems to be no solid answer to it. Many think he becomes less aggressive at break point, pointing out how he will chop on the return. Many think its mental. Some have done excellent analysis breaking down what the server did right vs what fed did wrong at break point- like hitting an I returnable serve. Frankly, I've seen no definitive answer, it may just be one of those flaws all players have in se aspect of game

I think it's the contrary actually. The best demo of this is on the first BP of the 2011 WTF semi v Nadal when he beats him 63 60. THat match was one way traffic but could have been very different had Fed missed his first BPs again. And there on this first BP, he decides to rally and not rush and wait for the right opportunity to be aggressive.

It is no different than Djoko beating Nadal. That is in my view Djoko's main strength (and we saw it again in his last encounters) and why he can beat Nadal when everybody else cannot.

It's the typical scenario between a defender and an attacker. An attacker plays relax before the big points and can find himself with those BPs...but when under pressure of those BPs, the attacker still has to deliver the thin margins, risky points...but for some reasons with a special hit and hope and rush factor and it is this extra rush that takes them out of their comfort zone and rush them into mistakes....while on a more relax situation they would easily make those points. It is also for these reasons that a defender becomes a defender cause he knows he cannot produce those risky shots under pressure (typical Murray).

Though the 1/17 BP success is a rare oddity it is quite typical to have an attacker having bad BPs stats v defender of Nadal or Hewitt calibre. Federer managed to beat Hewitt consistently when also he stopped rushing and agreed to rally with Hewitt and find better opportunities to go for broke. He says it himself. The problem is that Fed was fit enough to rally with Hewitt...but it became much harder with an even higher fitness bar...plus Nadal's spin.

And I will finish with the spin. Fed like all other players never has other opportunity to train v Nadal bar on finals and great pressure times. No one else can spin the ball like Nadal so in effect Federer plays a different game when playing Nadal and that is Nadal's main advantage v everybody else. I am quite convinced that had Federer trained v Nadal more often in relax atmospheres, he would have had a much better record....like he was actually getting in end 2007 winning 5 of their last 7 matches if I remember correctly cause he was playing him a lot....until he got back and mono problem throwing everything (including confidence) down the drain.

truffin1 wrote:Feds ability to "get " to break point but not convert the break is much discussed on his official website fan forum. Not only against nadal but others, and there seems to be no solid answer to it. Many think he becomes less aggressive at break point, pointing out how he will chop on the return. Many think its mental. Some have done excellent analysis breaking down what the server did right vs what fed did wrong at break point- like hitting an I returnable serve. Frankly, I've seen no definitive answer, it may just be one of those flaws all players have in se aspect of game

Hi Truffin,
it's not rocket science. Problem is Fed's SHBH with a bit late timing against supermoonlight powerful lefty FH. What is more, his enormous twist from closed stance, plus his past heavy racket caused him increasing back trouble. I think that he has had his back trouble quite long time. Then no wonder that Fed's chance to go for a winner from his SHBH DTL is very low.
Only match I don't wanna see at AO is Nadal vs. Fed. I think that Fed will avoid to face Nadal if he goes that far.

Paul, if that was the case, Fed would struggle getting to BPs even. Though I agree it is one factor....It's not the main one. The main one is much simpler and I explain it above:
Pulling winners under higher pressure, in particular with the feel to rush for a quick make or break winner.
 
Exactly what Djoko does in the matches he loses v Nadal....and what he doen't (rush) in the matches he wins.

truffin1 wrote:Feds ability to "get " to break point but not convert the break is much discussed on his official website fan forum. Not only against nadal but others, and there seems to be no solid answer to it. Many think he becomes less aggressive at break point, pointing out how he will chop on the return. Many think its mental.

This is an interesting post, and having watched the FO 2007 match yesterday the idea of him chop/slice the BH return on Break Points (much more on break points than normal points) did stand out.
Against Nadal, the mental strength in key points does come into it as well, absolutely.

Tenez wrote:Paul, if that was the case, Fed would struggle getting to BPs even. Though I agree it is one factor....It's not the main one. The main one is much simpler and I explain it above:
Pulling winners under higher pressure, in particular with the feel to rush for a quick make or break winner.
 
Exactly what Djoko does in the matches he loses v Nadal....and what he doen't (rush) in the matches he wins.

Ten,
all players who play against Fed to save BP's play and must play the same, i.e. into Fed's BH. When you playing with opponents who has UE ratio between sides about 30/70, it is logical how to play. Mental aspect is beyond that. Mental fragility comes out pretty from the match when a game pattern causes you a big problem, which is exactly what Fed knows well.

Re Nole vs. Nadal, when Nole plays well, he does not have any problem with Nadal's FH. Nole is just better player, only thing he needs is to time his FH well, then he can smash Frankie quite soon.
Nole is generally much more dominant player on the court against Nadal. And I hope that you agree, as I remember that you has also written that before   

Tenez wrote:And I will finish with the spin. Fed like all other players never has other opportunity to train v Nadal bar on finals and great pressure times. No one else can spin the ball like Nadal so in effect Federer plays a different game when playing Nadal and that is Nadal's main advantage v everybody else.

No Tenez, now you're making the same mistake as Julius did with his 'cos it's clay' line.
Nadal  hits with spin on normal service points, as well as break points (just like both the normal service points and break points are both on clay). The question in this article is why there's a discrepancy between average service point percentage for Nadal, and BP Saved percentage.

paulcz wrote:Hi Truffin,
it's not rocket science. Problem is Fed's SHBH with a bit late timing against supermoonlight powerful lefty FH. What is more, his enormous twist from closed stance, plus his past heavy racket caused him increasing back trouble. I think that he has had his back trouble quite long time. Then no wonder that Fed's chance to go for a winner from his SHBH DTL is very low.

Nope you've made the same mistake as Tenez did just now (see above), and Julius a bit earlier.
(btw the discrepancy was there on both Ad.Court and Deuce Court)

Tenez wrote:It's the typical scenario between a defender and an attacker. An attacker plays relax before the big points and can find himself with those BPs...but when under pressure of those BPs, the attacker still has to deliver the thin margins, risky points...

Tenez, you've already made this point earlier in this thread, and I directly responded to it and showed why it is illogical (check my post yesterday at 23:54).
Furthermore truffin's point with the 'chip return' thing made much more sense, if I recall correctly Nadal hit around 8 winners out of those 16 BPs- higher than his normal percentage of winners. This leads onto what my reason is for this discrepancy.

I said that the LH serve to the RH SHBH accounted for maybe 3 of the BPs. I haven't watched it, so maybe that is a 'mistake', but it doesn't seem an unreasonable guess.

It's well known (leaving aside Fed and Rafa) that the leftie serve out wide to the RH BH causes problems from the ad side. Maybe Rafa served down the T for all those BPs - I don't know. Maybe he served down the T when it was 15-30, lost the point and then served out wide on BP.

But it's just an oddity that happened nearly 7 years ago and means very little, if anything at all, in isolation.

mikeyM1000 wrote:I said that the LH serve to the RH SHBH accounted for maybe 3 of the BPs. I haven't watched it, so maybe that is a 'mistake', but it doesn't seem an unreasonable guess.

As I said the discrepancy is on both Ad.Court and Deuce Court- in terms of percentage of BP saved.

Maybe he served down the T when it was 15-30, lost the point and then served out wide on BP.

No he was serving to the Fed BH on nearly all points on the Ad.Court.

mikeyM1000 wrote:
But it's just an oddity that happened nearly 7 years ago and means very little, if anything at all, in isolation.

Yes, as I said to Tenez, the margin of this stat is rare, but this discrepancy on a smaller scale has occurred consistently in Fedal matches. And even on a smaller margin, it can make a huge impact on the match.
I do agree that this case is accentuated, I have not claimed anything differently.

Has anyone explained why Rafa managed to get 10 BPs but converted less than half of them?

mikeyM1000 wrote:Has anyone explained why Rafa managed to get 10 BPs but converted less than half of them?

That is the normal service point ratio (Fed winning 6 out of 10 points BP down), ie the percentage of points he wins on his serve break point down is 60%, which is more or less exactly the number he won normally in that match on serve. So there is no discrepancy.

Meanwhile there is a huge discrepancy on the Nadal service game/BP down stats.

Can you understand?

JS's word of the day/thread:

Discrepancy. 
D-I-S-C-R-E-P-A-N-C-Y, Discrepancy.

luvsports! wrote:JS's word of the day/thread:

Discrepancy. 
D-I-S-C-R-E-P-A-N-C-Y, Discrepancy.

OK I'll use disparity from now on.   

But that word has been important here, if not for anything but because people are not realising what my question is- I'm not asking why Nadal beats Fed on clay normally.

Anyway what do you think LS? (ie about the thread)
And don't say 'cos it's clay', I may have to bring out the D word again.

I haven't really followed this thread so forgive me if this has already been answered. 
Do you know the breakdowns on bp's for other matches they have played on clay in comparison to hard/grass court meetings?

I am sure it has something to do with Nadal's mental strength. Like truffin said it is probably down to a number of factors.

luvsports! wrote:
Do you know the breakdowns on bp's for other matches they have played on clay in comparison to hard/grass court meetings?

I haven't checked all of them, but it seems the disparity is there, albeit not as accentuated as the stats in this thread.

luvsports! wrote:
I am sure it has something to do with Nadal's mental strength. Like truffin said it is probably down to a number of factors.

Indeed.

Sorry the disparity between clay and the other surfaces are quite stark? 
I know you just said not to say, "cos its clay", but generally if fed's bp conversion rate is lower on clay, is that not evidence that on clay, nadal saves more bp's against feds on clay than on other surfaces?

luvsports! wrote:Sorry the disparity between clay and the other surfaces are quite stark? 
I know you just said not to say, "cos its clay", but generally if fed's bp conversion rate is lower on clay, is that not evidence that on clay, nadal saves more bp's against feds on clay than on other surfaces?

I will check, but it would be strange if that was the case.
Remember the disparity I'm talking about here is the comparison of normal service points vs break points down points. I don't see how the surface can have much relevance, in a clay match both normal service points and break points are played on clay; on grass they are both played on grass etc.
Anyway let me check Wimbledon 2008 and see what I find, I suspect the disparity will be there but not as obvious as in FO 2007.

Wow, Wimbledon 2008 is surprisingly similar to FO 2007. I thought the trend would be there but not on such a large margin, but it is pretty big still.

Roger Federer:
Receiving Points Won: 33%
BP Conversion Ratio: 7% (1/13)

Rafael Nadal:
Receiving Points Won: 33%
BP Conversion Ratio: 30% (4/13)

Once again for Nadal the BP conversion and normal returning points is quite similar, but a big difference for Roger on his BPs.

Now just 20 more match stats for you to compile

Now for the USO 2013 final between Nadal and Djokovic:

Rafael Nadal:
1st Serve Points Won
65% (51/78)
2nd Serve Points Won
55% (24/43)
Break Points Saved
72% (8/11)

Novak Djokovic:
1st Serve Points Won
57% (40/69)
2nd Serve Points Won
48% (16/33)
Break Points Saved
45% (5/11)


How about that?
Still a disparity, but not as much as in Fedal matches, but a crucial disparity nonetheless. Nadal winning around 11% more points BP down than normal, Djokovic around 8% less!

I believe it's Nadal's stunning mental strength which is crucial to him saving so many break points in the crucial moments against Roger Federer.
In the biggest moments, as we say in the USO final agianst Djokovic 0-40 down third set 4-4, Nadal can save break points with his best tennis. Federer has the ability to do so against many, but against Nadal he struggles mentally on break points.

Amri,
Nadal has zero mental strength.
People with mental strength are brave, not superstitious and full of fears like him.
His tennis mirrors his character.
It's not brave, quite the opposite.

No amount of stats and contrived scenarios are going to change it.

I don't know why you have such problem understanding it.

Federer - tennis genius, regardless of BP conversion ratio.
Nadal- unnaturally fitness advantaged physical counterpuncher benefiting from slow conditions.

Enjoy his "winning" and take it for what it is, don't try to make him what he is not.

noleisthebest wrote:Amri,
Nadal has zero mental strength.

Yes, good point.

Julia Santamaria wrote:I believe it's Nadal's stunning mental strength which is crucial to him saving so many break points in the crucial moments against Roger Federer.
In the biggest moments, as we say in the USO final agianst Djokovic 0-40 down third set 4-4, Nadal can save break points with his best tennis. Federer has the ability to do so against many, but against Nadal he struggles mentally on break points.

Oh thank god for that - you've finally answered your own question. I'm surprised you didn't think of it earlier. What's that? You thought that all along, but couldn't be bothered to post it? How grown up of you.
Still, I'm glad we cleared it up. Here's me thinking that it was Rafa's mental weakness in that he can only concentrate on break point down, and that if only he was mentally strong he would win 16 out 17 points on his serve all the time. Silly old me.

mikeyM1000 wrote:
Oh thank god for that - you've finally answered your own question. I'm surprised you didn't think of it earlier. What's that? You thought that all along, but couldn't be bothered to post it? How grown up of you.
Still, I'm glad we cleared it up. 

You really are quite nasty aren't you?

I wanted to read some other people's views not the topic before posting mine, I did say in the article I saw mental strength as a factor (and I still believe so). I don't see any problem with that.

I can get sarcastic when I see people behaving in a poor way or a silly way or a juvenile way or a smug way etc etc. Sometimes I keep a lid on it, other times it brings out the worst in me. Guilty as charged.

Mikey can I ask what you like about otf and v2 respectively?