Who Is Going To Win Australian Open 2015?

This time last year talk was all about then seemingly unstoppable Nadal and Djokovic.

Rafa wanted to be the first man to hold all 4 slams twice (*after Laver), Nole was going to be the first man to win it 4 times in a row.
History pages were left blank on this occasion...

However, after a very long time we had a new slam champion - Stan The Man!

A year on, and Nole still remains the main favourite (this time going for being the first player to win AO 5 times), with Nadal lurking in the shadows.

How about the rest?

Federer looks as good as he can after the winter break, Stan just the same.
Andy Murray remains a big question mark, yet, he managed to dismantle Nadal in Abu Dhabi exo last week.

Kei Nishikori in a fine form likes slower hard courts, as well.

So.....who will it be, who will lift this trophy on the 1st of February?

I suppose Tenez will vote for Raonic, unless Fed can somehow stop him in the final.

Yes...so is that why you did not put raonic?

I actually didn't think of anyone in particular when I checked for "someone else". I think Djoko  Fed and nadal are certainly favorite. Murray could do some damage too.

No, not really. I just don't see him as one of top favourites.

To me he is a slightly more mobile version of Isner, except that Isner does not panic and has a better serve.

More than ever, a lot will depend on draw, scheduling, weather...these days one can learn a lot from just looking at a draw, those that believe draws are riigged, that is

noleisthebest wrote:No, not really. I just don't see him as one of top favourites.

To me he is a slightly more mobile version of Isner, except that Isner does not panic and has a better serve.

More than ever, a lot will depend on draw, scheduling, weather...these days one can learn a lot from just looking at a draw, those that believe draws are riigged, that is

I do believe draws have been rigged, will be rigged but I am not sure they all are. With Fed and Djoko ebing number 1 and 2, Nadal has no choice but to go through both if he wants to win so I am not sure which order he'd prefer. Probably Fed first. But I am not sure the TD are very concerned atm. It's not like when it was all about Fedal....even if it is still.

I think TDs are still quite involved with the draws, generally favouring Nike players.
I even noticed Dimi and Raonic now have easier routes and are quite pushed by the media...and Coric&Zverev behind them.

You'll never see Nishi or Stan treated like that or any French young players...
Not to mention Nole...number one, still having to plough through energy sapping opponents, whereas Nadal always gets either big servers, useless Spaniards, light-weight DBH-ers, SBH Germans....or "nobodies".
Fed's had it very kind, but I don't mind him, that's a small recompense for slowed down conditions.

Djoko is still the favourite IMO.   He will be sharp and ready to go.

Nadal will have to play himself into shape and hope for a good matchup in quarters (berdych) then Fed in semis.  I don't see him beating Djokovic.

Federer is full of confidence and is playing beautifully, can beat anyone in a one off match-- but I think the heat and grind will wear him down come quarters,semis.   He'll be a hot favourite to reach semis though.  If Nadal is there, I don't think Fed will beat him over best of five.  IF someone else, and Fed has managed his path well so there is gas in the tank- I think he will be a favourite to go to the final.

Against Djoko- I think Djoko will hold him off on this surface, though Fed does have a good matchup generally against Djokovic. It would be a great close match IMO..

Anyone else, not named Nadal and I think Federer would be favorite in the final.

Nishi would be a great dark horse IMO

Fed is clearly struggling with recovery these days, but in slams with a day off between matches, it's probably easier for him despite the best of 5 format.
The thing also is that the tour has considerably consolidated now, a lot of players hit the ball hard and consistently and even average percentage players can have their day to, if nothing else - be banana skins.

It will be interesting to see how AO play this year. Hopefully not too slow.

noleisthebest wrote:Fed is clearly struggling with recovery these days, but in slams with a day off between matches, it's probably easier for him despite the best of 5 format.
The thing also is that the tour has considerably consolidated now, a lot of players hit the ball hard and consistently and even average percentage players can have their day to, if nothing else - be banana skins.

It will be interesting to see how AO play this year. Hopefully not too slow.

I think the past few best of 5 slams though-   fatigue has caught up to him near the end. 

He will be lucky in the sense that most of his matches will be night matches and less heat,  but unlucky in that those same night matches are usually quite slower than day at the AO

I actually think that Fed much prefers to play under the heat than at night when the chill gets in and freezes his back.

I am surprised he hasn't put his foot down about it. I would.
I really admire how players manage to last the whole season carrying injuries, playing through them as well as maintain this ridiculous level of fitness.

Tenez wrote:I actually think that Fed much prefers to play under the heat than at night when the chill gets in and freezes his back.

yes, that is another factor for sure.    I believe quarters and semis are played at night at the AO so he will face that problem either way, right?

Quarters can be in the day. I remember he destroyed Delpo in '12 aus. For most of that tournament he was brilliant until Nadal came along as per.

luvsports! wrote:Quarters can be in the day. I remember he destroyed Delpo in '12 aus. For most of that tournament he was brilliant until Nadal came along as per.

Fed played great for nearly a set and then had nothing left.

I just watched a summary of this semi between fed and Nadal.....impressive display of fitness from Nadal. Especially compared to the 63 60 thrashing he got from fed a couple of months before in London.

Tenez wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Quarters can be in the day. I remember he destroyed Delpo in '12 aus. For most of that tournament he was brilliant until Nadal came along as per.

Fed played great for nearly a set and then had nothing left.

I just watched a summary of this semi between fed and Nadal.....impressive display of fitness from Nadal. Especially compared to the 63 60 thrashing he got from fed a couple of months before in London.

How can Fed have nothing left only after 1 set which he played brilliant and won? I remember Fed played great  period. even to break Nadal's serve early in the 2nd set and go 2-0 up. And then the 3rd game Nadal got almost an impossible ball in from 6m behind for a pass. 

Fed is always going to be an underdog against Nadal. His match-up against is worst possible and we can't deny this. Fed with a weaker BH gets handcuffed with that lefty spinny high rising forehand. Not that Fed can't beat Nadal, he can and he has on many occasions. But he needs to play his best and over the long period. Not an easy thing, and Nadal doesn't crumble under any mental pressure. So Nadal will always be winning most of their matches.

And I'm fine with this setup.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

Tenez wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Quarters can be in the day. I remember he destroyed Delpo in '12 aus. For most of that tournament he was brilliant until Nadal came along as per.

Fed played great for nearly a set and then had nothing left.

I just watched a summary of this semi between fed and Nadal.....impressive display of fitness from Nadal. Especially compared to the 63 60 thrashing he got from fed a couple of months before in London.

How can Fed have nothing left only after 1 set which he played brilliant and won? I remember Fed played great  period. even to break Nadal's serve early in the 2nd set and go 2-0 up. And then the 3rd game Nadal got almost an impossible ball in from 6m behind for a pass. 

I think I have given the reasons many times! The kind of sharp timing of the ball Federer produced in that first can only be done with a minimum of composure and fitness. As soon as you have been forced to run and get a bit breathless sharpness goes. Exactly like the biathlon athletes start to miss their target after a few rounds of skying.

Fed is always going to be an underdog against Nadal. His match-up against is worst possible and we can't deny this. Fed with a weaker BH gets handcuffed with that lefty spinny high rising forehand. Not that Fed can't beat Nadal, he can and he has on many occasions. But he needs to play his best and over the long period. Not an easy thing, and Nadal doesn't crumble under any mental pressure. So Nadal will always be winning most of their matches.

And I'm fine with this setup.

If it was just about match up as you seem to suggest, Fed would simply struggle from the word go. However I have shown in an old thread that in their 30 encounters or so Fed has started the strongest nearly 7 times out of 10. What I mean is that Fed was a break up first, in the first set. The argument that being tired after one set doesn;t hold, is wrong. 100m racers are completely exhausted after 9secs and they are lucky they only go in one direction.....no many change of direction like on a tennis court. This is why tennis has a 1m30s rest every other game. If you play the game and run right and left at full speed, you will see what I mean.

Of course fed is not tired like he can;t run anymore after a set, but he loses his edge and that means he has to play safe, meaning in turn, Nadal can get more easily on his shots and make him run instead.

It is a very thin line and having a bigger frame then woudl have made a huge difference cause the pace on the BH would have forced Nadal to keep on his toes, less shanking too but more so more running for Nadal and less for Federer.

Lydian had the same argument than you when I was discussing this on v2 "one cannot be tired after a set". Then he created a thread a year or so ago, after we were gone, that actually a player could be tired/lose edge after just a few rallies.  Anyway, anyone who plays the game knows that one or 2 long rallies are enough to reverse a match.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuFXqFifRew

Usually when playing federer, His tining is so good that most players get out of breath before him cause he forces the running but not that new generation. They have 4 lungs each and can force fed to rally as well as doing the rallying themselves.

There are cases where Nadal doing too much rallying got to him (Miami 05, Wimby 07) but that is not usually the norm and fed needs to be helped by some quick short points (aces essentially).

I think the worst damage is done to the legs in those long rallies.
They go to jelly and by the time you recover two games can come and go turning the momentum which is then not easy to restart.

I still think Fed could beat Nadal in AO, though. He has more weight on both wings now, but would require immaculate focus not to fall into the trap of long rallies if he can.

That's probably the toughest bit now.

noleisthebest wrote:I think the worst damage is done to the legs in those long rallies.
They go to jelly and by the time you recover two games can come and go turning the momentum which is then not easy to restart.

I still think Fed could beat Nadal in AO, though. He has more weight on both wings now, but would require immaculate focus not to fall into the trap of long rallies if he can.

That's probably the toughest bit now.

the arm is actually suffering first. Like in biathlon....the shooters don;t need their legs once they lie to shoot but regardless precision is gone.

I am not sure Fed has the mental strength to go through the long rallies forced upon him by Nadal.

I have been reading a bit on v2 earlier as I was trying to find the post where Lydian says that players can get tired after a few games...quite fun.

I am quite aware of the arm fatigue, as I play with a SBH, too.
I have never had to deal with hard bouncy spin on it, though,  so can just imagine how bludgeoning it must feel, esp on higher balls.

As for the mental strength forced by Nadal, I think Federer must still feel he can beat him, despite probably inevitable long rallies.
His will must feel refreshed, though with the confidence of the bigger frame.

He is too much of a competitor not to. Deep inside him, he's got to want to have another crack at it with the new racquet.
Mind you, Nadal is hitting his FH harder than ever now.

Back to legs... although I stopped watching before the TB, what do you think caused Federer to "mysteriously" drop his service game after he had 2:0 in the 2nd set? (Brisbane final against Raonic). It was so unexpected.

Did he have a Nole moment where he just relaxed mentally/focus after getting the break?

I was typing a comment during that game so didn't even get to see how it happen...only that he suddenly look a step too slow.
I was so glad to see he won in the end.

Tenez wrote:the arm is actually suffering first. Like in biathlon....the shooters don;t need their legs once they lie to shoot but regardless precision is gone.

I am not sure Fed has the mental strength to go through the long rallies forced upon him by Nadal.

I have been reading a bit on v2 earlier as I was trying to find the post where Lydian says that players can get tired after a few games...quite fun.

I just had a look, too.
Name-changing is in vogue there...I wonder how many have joined here under different names, there are many registered posters who never said anything which is a shame.

Aaaaah, the art of agreeing to disagree...

Even while we were there I almost never read any of your "debates" with Lydian, I simply don't have your patience.

I wonder if Lydian has registered here. I am pretty sure he misses you badly

noleisthebest wrote:I am quite aware of the arm fatigue, as I play with a SBH, too.
I have never had to deal with hard bouncy spin on it, though,  so can just imagine how bludgeoning it must feel, esp on higher balls.

It's not so much the bludgeoning of the arms by Nadal's shots as much as it is simply lacking o2. the arm muscles loses first its precision, strength. Your legs can carry you easily for 20kms, your arms are done after 20 push ups, yet they carry half the weight of the legs when doing push ups.

As for the mental strength forced by Nadal, I think Federer must still feel he can beat him, despite probably inevitable long rallies.
His will must feel refreshed, though with the confidence of the bigger frame.

I wish but I doubt. That 2012 AO semi was a mental melt down knowing he had no energy too keep on fighting.

Back to legs... although I stopped watching before the TB, what do you think caused Federer to "mysteriously" drop his service game after he had 2:0 in the 2nd set? (Brisbane final against Raonic). It was so unexpected.

Yes fatigue most likely, back probably also. He took a break at the end of teh first set so I think he was feeling it there already.

Did he have a Nole moment where he just relaxed mentally/focus after getting the break?

Don't think so.

I was typing a comment during that game so didn't even get to see how it happen...only that he suddenly look a step too slow.
I was so glad to see he won in the end.

Not sure either except that he slowed down!

noleisthebest wrote:I wonder if Lydian has registered here. I am pretty sure he misses you badly

Funnily he always agreed with me on players we liked (Lendl for instance) but asa it was a player we did not share we had arguments. Funny thing though is that now he likes Federer a bit more so I am pretty sure he has rallied on a lot I was saying. What stunned me is that him writing about players losing edges in the first set after long running. I was speechless after his debating for so long that players were perfectly fine after 3 sets!

At least it shows he can change his views......as long as he doesn't have to admit it to me!

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I am quite aware of the arm fatigue, as I play with a SBH, too.
I have never had to deal with hard bouncy spin on it, though,  so can just imagine how bludgeoning it must feel, esp on higher balls.

It's not so much the bludgeoning of the arms by Nadal's shots as much as it is simply lacking o2. the arm muscles loses first its precision, strength. Your legs can carry you easily for 20kms, your arms are done after 20 push ups, yet they carry half the weight of the legs when doing push ups.

I only felt like that once and it was terrible.
It wasn't even hard-hitting, just little adjustment steps all over the court.

And then you have people saying how AO 2012 final was played by clean players...still, I am in awe that Nole subdued Nadal there.
The sheer enormity of the physical feat.

Their careers have changed since then.
Nole trying to learn to shorten points, Nadal breaking his body with pushing it to higher physical level...

noleisthebest wrote:

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I am quite aware of the arm fatigue, as I play with a SBH, too.
I have never had to deal with hard bouncy spin on it, though,  so can just imagine how bludgeoning it must feel, esp on higher balls.

It's not so much the bludgeoning of the arms by Nadal's shots as much as it is simply lacking o2. the arm muscles loses first its precision, strength. Your legs can carry you easily for 20kms, your arms are done after 20 push ups, yet they carry half the weight of the legs when doing push ups.

I only felt like that once and it was terrible.
It wasn't even hard-hitting, just little adjustment steps all over the court.

And then you have people saying how AO 2012 final was played by clean players...still, I am in awe that Nole subdued Nadal there.
The sheer enormity of the physical feat.

Their careers have changed since then.
Nole trying to learn to shorten points, Nadal breaking his body with pushing it to higher physical level...

Yep...though Nadal also tries to shorten the points V Djoko...it was pretty clear in 2013. ...I think.

Very true!

I noticed that esp in RG final. They were both physically dead because of the heat, but Nole definitely has better stamina than Nadal and only because of his energy more efficient ball striking.

I saw it in the 4th set and shouted "Vamos-tamos, gotov je, Nole!" encouraging him to extend the rallies as Nadal looked spent, and he nearly managed to do it...I'll never forget that point in which Nole trying to end the long point sent the BH just out...and that was it.

Whether he really couldn't physically prolong that rally and keep the ball in play or just saw he could pull off the trigger and missed...only he knows.

I just had a look at last year's final...seems like eternity away...what a great match from Stan, he held his nerve through all Nadal's antics!

yes he was composed like he never was and never been since.

Nole.

I hope I am wrong.

How does seeding a draw work?

here is the seeding:
5. Kei Nishikori (Jpn)
6. Andy Murray (GB)
7. Tomas Berdych (Cze)
8. Milos Raonic (Can)
9. David Ferrer (Spa)
10. Grigor Dimitrov (Bul)
11. Ernests Gulbis (Lat)
12. Feliciano Lopez (Spa)
13. Roberto Bautista Agut (Spa)
14. Kevin Anderson (SA)
15. Tommy Robredo (Spa)
16. Fabio Fognini (Ita)

Is it to say that number 4 seed (Nadal) is bound to have either Murray or Nishi on his side or can number 3 have any of the top 5 to 8 on his side?

I would expect seed 1 and 2 to have either seed 7 or 8 but seed 3 and 4 to have either 5 and 6. However I am not sure that is how it works.

Shoudl Nadal have berdych and lopez...I woudl be tempted to believe it is rigged.

Tenez wrote:

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

Tenez wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Quarters can be in the day. I remember he destroyed Delpo in '12 aus. For most of that tournament he was brilliant until Nadal came along as per.

Fed played great for nearly a set and then had nothing left.

I just watched a summary of this semi between fed and Nadal.....impressive display of fitness from Nadal. Especially compared to the 63 60 thrashing he got from fed a couple of months before in London.

How can Fed have nothing left only after 1 set which he played brilliant and won? I remember Fed played great  period. even to break Nadal's serve early in the 2nd set and go 2-0 up. And then the 3rd game Nadal got almost an impossible ball in from 6m behind for a pass. 

I think I have given the reasons many times! The kind of sharp timing of the ball Federer produced in that first can only be done with a minimum of composure and fitness. As soon as you have been forced to run and get a bit breathless sharpness goes. Exactly like the biathlon athletes start to miss their target after a few rounds of skying.

Fed is always going to be an underdog against Nadal. His match-up against is worst possible and we can't deny this. Fed with a weaker BH gets handcuffed with that lefty spinny high rising forehand. Not that Fed can't beat Nadal, he can and he has on many occasions. But he needs to play his best and over the long period. Not an easy thing, and Nadal doesn't crumble under any mental pressure. So Nadal will always be winning most of their matches.

And I'm fine with this setup.

If it was just about match up as you seem to suggest, Fed would simply struggle from the word go. However I have shown in an old thread that in their 30 encounters or so Fed has started the strongest nearly 7 times out of 10. What I mean is that Fed was a break up first, in the first set. The argument that being tired after one set doesn;t hold, is wrong. 100m racers are completely exhausted after 9secs and they are lucky they only go in one direction.....no many change of direction like on a tennis court. This is why tennis has a 1m30s rest every other game. If you play the game and run right and left at full speed, you will see what I mean.

Of course fed is not tired like he can;t run anymore after a set, but he loses his edge and that means he has to play safe, meaning in turn, Nadal can get more easily on his shots and make him run instead.

It is a very thin line and having a bigger frame then woudl have made a huge difference cause the pace on the BH would have forced Nadal to keep on his toes, less shanking too but more so more running for Nadal and less for Federer.

Lydian had the same argument than you when I was discussing this on v2 "one cannot be tired after a set". Then he created a thread a year or so ago, after we were gone, that actually a player could be tired/lose edge after just a few rallies.  Anyway, anyone who plays the game knows that one or 2 long rallies are enough to reverse a match.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuFXqFifRew

Usually when playing federer, His tining is so good that most players get out of breath before him cause he forces the running but not that new generation. They have 4 lungs each and can force fed to rally as well as doing the rallying themselves.

There are cases where Nadal doing too much rallying got to him (Miami 05, Wimby 07) but that is not usually the norm and fed needs to be helped by some quick short points (aces essentially).

Alright, but do you want to suggest that Nadal winning most of their matches has nothing to do with the match-up? You seem to be suggesting it. So many players have acknowledged it, this has to be of significance. Playing a lefty is like playing a totally new game and Fed has struggled with Nadal being a lefty compounded with those heavy spinny balls.

Also many ocassions against Nadal, Fed has been struggling even from the first game. He was close to getting broken even in 2010 WTF finals early on.

Unless Fed serves aces, he never has a comfortable game against Nadal. Against Nadal his biggest and the most reliable weapon is his serve. So unless that serve is really firing all guns, Fed will struggle. And this happens from the very first point.

Tenez wrote:How does seeding a draw work?

here is the seeding:
5. Kei Nishikori (Jpn)
6. Andy Murray (GB)
7. Tomas Berdych (Cze)
8. Milos Raonic (Can)
9. David Ferrer (Spa)
10. Grigor Dimitrov (Bul)
11. Ernests Gulbis (Lat)
12. Feliciano Lopez (Spa)
13. Roberto Bautista Agut (Spa)
14. Kevin Anderson (SA)
15. Tommy Robredo (Spa)
16. Fabio Fognini (Ita)

Is it to say that number 4 seed (Nadal) is bound to have either Murray or Nishi on his side or can number 3 have any of the top 5 to 8 on his side?

I would expect seed 1 and 2 to have either seed 7 or 8 but seed 3 and 4 to have either 5 and 6. However I am not sure that is how it works.

I'm not 100% sure how they do it either; from memory, there is no automatic draw, not even that number one gets number 4, that was never the case, hence all the  12/12 rigging when Nole was number 3 (and later 2).

Here is 2014 draw:

http://2014.ausopen.com/en_AU/scores/draws/ms/msdraw.pdf

So far, Nadal generally had Raonic in slams and I wouldn't be surprised if that remained the case, despite Raonic's recent improvement.
I am pretty sure though we won't see Nishi in his half/quarter.
I reckon Stan will get Nishi, Nole Berd, Fed Murray and Nadal Raonic.
Particularly interesting will be the first three rounds. They will be the key for Nadal. Any element of surprise will have to be eliminated, as, unlike other top players he seems to be the most vulnerable in early rounds (bar RG).

Draw is coming out on Friday.

Never thought I'd say it, but predicting draws is more fun now than predicting match winners...

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Alright, but do you want to suggest that Nadal winning most of their matches has nothing to do with the match-up? You seem to be suggesting it. So many players have acknowledged it, this has to be of significance. Playing a lefty is like playing a totally new game and Fed has struggled with Nadal being a lefty compounded with those heavy spinny balls.

Yes I think it has not much to do with match up. Fed has shown multiple times that he can handle Nadal on whatever surface.....for a set only though, even beating Nadal on clay with sets of 60 and 61.! If it was match up the score in the first sets would be more or less like in the 4th, however this is certainly not what we have been seeing. Also if it was match up the score is likely to be the same on whatever surface but clearly the fact clay or slow hard court (surface where fitness play a greater role) was essentially where fed stumbled against Nadal. The surfaces where his shots were not hurting as much and had to produce 4 BH to have a chance to win a point. The fact is that in most matches Fed started to shank his BH often after a set or even towards the end of the first set (FO 06, FO 07, FO11, AO 09, AO 12, etc.....). And yes fed shanks more when nadal has the "extra" energy to add that crazy spin. That spin is hard to time when you have been running a bit. It;s like having to write with a pen after you had a race, the precision of your writing is going to suffer a bit. Whereas Nadal high margin shots do not suffer that loss of precision. This is the strategy developed by modern tennis: don;t care how good you are, can you be good enough over 5 sets?

Also many ocassions against Nadal, Fed has been struggling even from the first game. He was close to getting broken even in 2010 WTF finals early on.

I don;t think that is quite true as I did check over their 30 encounters. But yes, 4 points can quickly come and go and Fed may have been close to get broken in the first games of WTF10 but we can't quite draw conclusions on a game. If you really look in details Fed was a break up in 70% of their encounter and lost 70% of his matches v Nadal. That to me says a lot about fitness. Nadal says it himself in his book. Something like "I know against Fed that I have/had to be patient". That is simply the proof that Nadal is waiting to bring the fight on the physical arena away from the eye/hand coordination battle. But this is so true of so many matches of Nadal against everybody else that I am not sure why we argue about it. It's not only Fed which has a "bad match up" v Nadal....it's everybody else.  

Unless Fed serves aces, he never has a comfortable game against Nadal. Against Nadal his biggest and the most reliable weapon is his serve. So unless that serve is really firing all guns, Fed will struggle. And this happens from the very first point.

And why do you think those aces are important? cause they save dramatically some critical energy. Disagree. Watch the Rome 05, FO06, FO7, FO11 first sets. I am only mentioning clay here as it shows that even on clay fed is better than Nadal.....in teh short distance!

Tenez wrote:Yes I think it has not much to do with match up. Fed has shown multiple times that he can handle Nadal on whatever surface.....for a set only though, even beating Nadal on clay with sets of 60 and 61.! If it was match up the score in the first sets would be more or less like in the 4th, however this is certainly not what we have been seeing. Also if it was match up the score is likely to be the same on whatever surface but clearly the fact clay or slow hard court (surface where fitness play a greater role) was essentially where fed stumbled against Nadal. The surfaces where his shots were not hurting as much and had to produce 4 BH to have a chance to win a point. The fact is that in most matches Fed started to shank his BH often after a set or even towards the end of the first set (FO 06, FO 07, FO11, AO 09, AO 12, etc.....). And yes fed shanks more when nadal has the "extra" energy to add that crazy spin. That spin is hard to time when you have been running a bit. It;s like having to write with a pen after you had a race, the precision of your writing is going to suffer a bit. Whereas Nadal high margin shots do not suffer that loss of precision. This is the strategy developed by modern tennis: don;t care how good you are, can you be good enough over 5 sets? 

If matchup was not an issue why would it ever come up? How many players current/retired have acknowledged it? Numerous and on numerous occasions. Does the matchup issues against any other comes up? NO. Fed himself acknowledged practising with Goran before playing Nadal due to him being a lefty. Why would he need it if it was meaningless? He also acknowledges playing Nadal is totally different from playing someone like Muray or Djokovic, the points are played differently and its like a total new game. If this match-up  issue was as meaningless or insignificant as you are saying, it never would have been brought up at all. Just like nothing about match-up is mentioned playing Murray against whom too Fed had a losing h2h uptill very recently.    

Fed losing edge as the match goes long because its simply difficult for Fed to rally with Nadal. And it just becomes more difficult given the added physical and mental fatigue as the match goes on. Its not like Fed gets tired and loses his edge from the word go.

 Nadal keeps bringing a lot of balls in, and with heavy spin and pace. He plays almost tirelessly with higher margins and has no effect on Fed's SHBH slice to keep the ball low. Hitting DTL  with SHBH on deep high rising heavy balls is difficult for Fed and he will miss more often if he has to keep doing it over and over. His BH isn't powerful enough to change the direction of the ball like DHBHers ( Djokovic, Murray) or Stan's BH. 

This setup is totally manufactured to neutralize Fed's natural game and makes him totally uncomfortable. Fed's best chance it to win the points as early as possible, either with some good serving or S&V or going for risky winners.

Fed has lost a lot of matches against Nadal due to fatigue, I agree but this fatigue sets in faster against Nadal for the kind of questions he asks Fed. 

Rallying with Nadal is difficult for Fed and that's why he loses most of his matches either closely or poorly going for broke. He just has no other option. Serving saves critical energy for fed. Yes. But they actually and more importantly prevent the rallying because its difficult and longer they go, Fed's chances to win points reduce. And on Nadal's terms he wants to keep them plugging in, because Fed will give eventually in an error on most occasions going for a risky shot.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:If matchup was not an issue why would it ever come up? How many players current/retired have acknowledged it? Numerous and on numerous occasions. Does the matchup issues against any other comes up? NO. Fed himself acknowledged practising with Goran before playing Nadal due to him being a lefty. Why would he need it if it was meaningless? He also acknowledges playing Nadal is totally different from playing someone like Muray or Djokovic, the points are played differently and its like a total new game. If this match-up  issue was as meaningless or insignificant as you are saying, it never would have been brought up at all. Just like nothing about match-up is mentioned playing Murray against whom too Fed had a losing h2h uptill very recently.

Depends on what you define by match up then. The reason so called pundits talk about Nadal being a bad match up for Nadal is because Fed (and not Nadal) beats everybody else. So Nadal is the bad "match up". But if you look at it everybody has a bad match up v Nadal. But "pundits" never say it. Murray was never a bad match up cause most of the time the losses were down to Fed being under par. The proof is that he made up that uphill despite getting older and Murray getting better.

You are ignoring the point I make of Federer consistently beating Nadal on his best surface for a few game. It's crucial in understanding the point. I don;t care what teh pundits say though they also all say that Nadal is extremely physical and can run for ever. Don't they? My point is that when Fed is on form, Nadal doesn't even see the ball. He is too far away from it. And not only on serve. Problem is doing it over the distance!

Fed losing edge as the match goes long because its simply difficult for Fed to rally with Nadal. And it just becomes more difficult given the added physical and mental fatigue as the match goes on. Its not like Fed gets tired and loses his edge from the word go.

Fed used to have prior to 2006 matches of only 2 to 3 shots rally when he was on top of his form and crushing everybody. Actually he was still losing at first to guys like Hewitt and Nalby who made him run much more than he woudl have liked. he said he hated playing against them because for him (his own words) "it was a bad match up". When he became fitter he was able to rally with them and reversed the "bad match up". With Nadal the physical bar was simply too high. Until you start playing tennis and forced to play those longer rallies you might not see the effect it has on the precise shots. As I said even Lydian agreed to it!!!! That says a lot!

 Nadal keeps bringing a lot of balls in, and with heavy spin and pace. He plays almost tirelessly with higher margins and has no effect on Fed's SHBH slice to keep the ball low. Hitting DTL  with SHBH on deep high rising heavy balls is difficult for Fed and he will miss more often if he has to keep doing it over and over. His BH isn't powerful enough to change the direction of the ball like DHBHers ( Djokovic, Murray) or Stan's BH. 

Of course the spin plays a role. Without the spin Nadal woudl do all the running and federer would finish Nadal 60 60 and woudl have never lost a single game v Nadal. The spin and power is Nadal's strength. But Fed can beat that ..at first.

So how do you explain that fed beat nadal very convincingly on quite a few occasions? even on clay?

This setup is totally manufactured to neutralize Fed's natural game and makes him totally uncomfortable. Fed's best chance it to win the points as early as possible, either with some good serving or S&V or going for risky winners.

But don't you see that it neutralizes all other players as well? And the only player who can actually challenge Nadal is the one able to keep running with him?

Fed has lost a lot of matches against Nadal due to fatigue, I agree but this fatigue sets in faster against Nadal for the kind of questions he asks Fed.

 Yes it sets in faster cause fed can't control Nadal energetic ball as well as the other players'. Especially on the distance.

Rallying with Nadal is difficult for Fed and that's why he loses most of his matches either closely or poorly going for broke. He just has no other option. Serving saves critical energy for fed. Yes. But they actually and more importantly prevent the rallying because its difficult and longer they go, Fed's chances to win points reduce. And on Nadal's terms he wants to keep them plugging in, because Fed will give eventually in an error on most occasions going for a risky shot.

yes... So we agree. You see a bad "match up" I see physical reasons. Let's say nadal's fitness is a bad match up for Fed. I say that without this fitness, Nadal is simply crushed by Federer....even getting bagelled on clay.

It's always a tough ask before a tournament, to say who will win it. Djokovic is the default favourite, but he has been ever since his miraculous 2011 with the exception of RG.

I rate his chances the best, that's why I chose him. But imho it is way more open this year than the last few years. Multiple guys can have a good shot at it or at least destroy other favourites' good chances by dragging them to tough five sets.  

I don't believe, Nadal will be ready to do much damage at the AO. Unless of course he gets the best possible draw, i.e. Berdych in the QF and Fed in the SF. Even then he wouldn't be the favourite to win it, should Djokovic make the final. This isn't a given either. We know, both - Nishikori and Wawrinka can take him out and I believe Raonic will have a shot too, seeing how Djokovic struggled to return Karlovic.

Murray is incredibly hard to assess. Yes, he had this win against Nadal, but the same Nadal was winning the wooden spoon in Doha, losing to Michael Berrer of all people. So - I don't believe that Murray can win it, but he always has the chance to tire the seed he is drawn with, increasing the difficulty of prediction.

Re: the Nadal-Fed match-up: The fact that Nadal is a lefty and plays a different ball from everybody else surely plays into it imho. The way he can neutralize patterns Fed loves to play like the offensive slice, makes him difficult. These patterns work so well against everybody else. Obviously without his incredible fitness he still wouldn't be a "bad" match-up because he wouldn't be able to run around his bh so much. Nobody can play more forehands than Nadal (except maybe Ferrer  )

Nadal also returns the Fed serve rather well, i.e. puts them back into play rather than granting cheap points and thereby he forces him to win every point. Otoh Fed returns the Nadal serve rather bad. He seems especially to struggle with the wide slice serve out on the bh. I'm judging mainly from the last 2 matches between the 2 here. At the AO 14 he also had this very weird tactic of retreating further back on return, allowing Nadal more angles on the serve. He should maybe cheat a bit to the bh at times on return and try to cut off the angles, because 90% of the Nadal serves go to the BH + Nadal doesn't have the fastest serve out there and against Fed takes off even more pace.

I'd love to see the match-up again, but rather not at the AO. I want to see them at Indian Wells.

I would like to see the new Fed v Nadal. I think some might be surprised by the effect of the bigger frame....should his back hold on.

Nadal is rusty and has already declined hugely; it won't even be a competitive match if they met.

If that was the case Nadal wouldn't have even had the guts to turn up.

Of course, I wouldn't mind if he got a first round thrashing, but as always, he'll get an easy draw...Ginepri has been knocked out in R1 of qualifications, but there are plenty of other candidates...

Couldn't find live stream for the draw ceremony, it's meant to be on Friday (and it's Friday morning there already) the website doesn't even mention the time the draw will start. Strange...

While I was looking for draw info, I was shocked to see the names scrambling to qualify...Paire, Harrison, Mahut all out in round one!

Draw ceremony should be at 10.30 a.m. local time which would be in an hour and a half. Don't believe in a 1st round thrashing for Nadal, but until QF everything is possible. (depending on the draw, hope the friend of the AO'll get a tough one for once)

Yes, just saw it on ATP website, they even have a link for the stream!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8t2Ri7GoBa0
http://www.ausopen.com/index.html

Hopefully, I won't drop off again...

noleisthebest wrote:If that was the case Nadal wouldn't have even had the guts to turn up.

That's so true. he carees too much about his record, H2H and so on.

Those saying he has declined are the same saying that Nadla only loses when not 100%!

Autumnleaf wrote:It's always a tough ask before a tournament, to say who will win it. Djokovic is the default favourite, but he has been ever since his miraculous 2011 with the exception of RG.

I rate his chances the best, that's why I chose him. But imho it is way more open this year than the last few years. Multiple guys can have a good shot at it or at least destroy other favourites' good chances by dragging them to tough five sets.  

I don't believe, Nadal will be ready to do much damage at the AO. Unless of course he gets the best possible draw, i.e. Berdych in the QF and Fed in the SF. Even then he wouldn't be the favourite to win it, should Djokovic make the final. This isn't a given either. We know, both - Nishikori and Wawrinka can take him out and I believe Raonic will have a shot too, seeing how Djokovic struggled to return Karlovic.

Murray is incredibly hard to assess. Yes, he had this win against Nadal, but the same Nadal was winning the wooden spoon in Doha, losing to Michael Berrer of all people. So - I don't believe that Murray can win it, but he always has the chance to tire the seed he is drawn with, increasing the difficulty of prediction.

Re: the Nadal-Fed match-up: The fact that Nadal is a lefty and plays a different ball from everybody else surely plays into it imho. The way he can neutralize patterns Fed loves to play like the offensive slice, makes him difficult. These patterns work so well against everybody else. Obviously without his incredible fitness he still wouldn't be a "bad" match-up because he wouldn't be able to run around his bh so much. Nobody can play more forehands than Nadal (except maybe Ferrer  )

Nadal also returns the Fed serve rather well, i.e. puts them back into play rather than granting cheap points and thereby he forces him to win every point. Otoh Fed returns the Nadal serve rather bad. He seems especially to struggle with the wide slice serve out on the bh. I'm judging mainly from the last 2 matches between the 2 here. At the AO 14 he also had this very weird tactic of retreating further back on return, allowing Nadal more angles on the serve. He should maybe cheat a bit to the bh at times on return and try to cut off the angles, because 90% of the Nadal serves go to the BH + Nadal doesn't have the fastest serve out there and against Fed takes off even more pace.

I'd love to see the match-up again, but rather not at the AO. I want to see them at Indian Wells.

Yep good summary AL. I think it is going to be another Djoko/Nadal final.

L
O
L

Nadal gets Youzhny immediately, and then Rosol in Round 3.
Curtains for Nadal.

Bloody lucky Nadal gets Birdych.....the easiest seed in the top 8!

Nadal got an incredibly easy draw, couldn't handpick it any better for him. Youzhny, Gasquet, Berdych, really? Djokovic and Wawrinka with a good draw too. Fed's incredibly tough, Chardy in R3, Dimitrov projected seed in R4, unpredictable Murray QF, Nadal SF, will be roughed up, should he make it so far. 

Tough draw for Djoko and Federer.....pretty easy for Nadal as expected. I said earlier Berdych woudl be Nadal's easiest opponent....and he gets him!

Very very lucky this Nadal.

sorry, mixed that one up, Dimitrov is projected R4 for Murray of course, it's Robredo for Fed