|
Wide Ball
|
01/30/2009 - 11:09 AM
|
 |
"What happened to serve and volley?" It's one of the most tired complaints in tennis, and one that I dearly hope will never be uttered again after last night's Australian Open semifinal between Rafael Nadal and Fernando Verdasco, this year's Aussie surprise.
For five hours and 14 minutes--an Australian Open record--Nadal and Verdasco not only played the best match of this tournament, they preached--loudly, boldly and repeatedly--the virtues of the modern baseline game. No ball is safe, no matter where it lands. What happens when Nadal crushes a forehand that bounces 15 feet outside the baseline? Verdasco returns it, with interest, down the line for a winner. When Verdasco smashes an overhead at Nadal's ankles? Nadal flicks his wrist, waits, and then whips a dipping forehand pass (Verdasco had to smile at his friend after that one, and Nadal smiled back). When, at deuce late in the second set, Verdasco hits a sidespin slice that curls into the doubles alley? Nadal, on the run, curls a forehand down the line, sliding to a stop and pumping his fist. Set point.
Has a tennis court ever been so wide as it is in the modern game? It's no wonder you can't approach the net consistently these days. Oftentimes, the only approach shot good enough is one that goes for a winner anyway, or near so.
Even when Nadal and Verdasco engaged in long rallies, they weren't rallies in the traditional sense of the word. Ivan Lendl and Mats Wilander used to rally. These guys murder--absolutely murder--the ball, unless they're in such bad position that they must slice (the backhand slices of both men were low and biting all night long), loop, or apply more spin to angle the ball so absurdly that it seems to come in sideways. From defense to offense and back again they went, relentlessly running each other from one doubles alley to the other. All night long, it took several shots that might ordinarily go for winners to win a point (as Verdasco put it, "With Rafa, you need to win the point three times, more than with all the others"). The scrambling and remarkable defense from both men often defied belief. One Spanish reporter, seated behind me, said after one of Nadal's galloping, sliding, arm-twisting, wrist-snapping forehand winners (right on the line, of course), "Rafa's going to explode." That was in the second set.
Speaking of winners, Verdasco hit 95 of them, a remarkable sum against anyone, never mind against Nadal. Nadal hit 52 and--brace yourself--committed just 25 unforced errors to Verdasco's 76. Yes, 25 errors over five sets and five hours. He absorbed blow after blow, ace after ace, from a man playing far and away the best tennis of his life. He withstood an assault in the fourth-set tiebreaker (Verdasco, playing at full throttle, claimed the first six points) and survived another 54 minutes of tense tennis, as the backhand and forehand winners flew off Verdasco's racquet.
Finally, after many hours of beating back break points (he saved 16 of 20 for the match) Verdasco cracked. He double faulted to give Nadal a 0-40 lead in the final game. Nadal, overcome by emotion and drained from having concentrated so intently for so long, said he began to cry. The tension was too much. Two points later, Verdasco double faulted again. It was the only sour note in a match of the finest quality. Nadal fell to his back, reminiscent of the Wimbledon final.
"For sure I will have this match in my mind all my life," Verdasco said.
Nadal has now played in six of the best matches of the last decade--two in Rome, against Guillermo Coria and then Roger Federer, one in Monte Carlo against Federer, two at Wimbledon against Federer, and this semifinal against Verdasco--and won all but one of them. On Sunday, he has a chance for one more miracle, a victory that would deny Federer from making history by tying Pete Sampras' record of 14 major titles.
Nadal, speaking in Spanish, said he would like to see Federer win his 14th major--just as long as it doesn't happen against him on Sunday. Could he possibly have enough energy to win the title? If we were talking about anyone else, I would say no. Nadal, amazingly, just might.
120 Comments
|
|
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
|
Posted by pscb |
01/30/2009 at 11:13 AM |
it was a great semi only one question -
when fed has a five setter it is said "he survived"
but when nadal wins a five setter it is said " he is magical"
looks like Mr. Perrotta has his favorites |
|
Posted by Passamonte |
01/30/2009 at 11:21 AM |
FIRST?
Nice piece Tom. I would sincerely say that Nadal has not many chances against Federer this time because I´ve seen the Spaniard playing, in some way, like a clay player again, letting a lot of short balls in the middle of the court. But who knows, "Rafa is Rafa", he´s the number one and has a clearly mental battle won over Roger |
|
Posted by pscb |
01/30/2009 at 11:30 AM |
agreed - rafa is in fed's head and if he cannot shake that off then rafa takes it easily |
|
Posted by eh? |
01/30/2009 at 11:41 AM |
that was a slice not an overhad that nadal hit the forehand off of |
|
Posted by eh? |
01/30/2009 at 11:42 AM |
nvm |
|
Posted by Dejo |
01/30/2009 at 11:47 AM |
Great post Tom. It was an insane match. Some of the best tennis I've seen. Still, two hours after the match I can't stop smiling. Let's just hope that Rafa recovers and they give us another classic. |
|
Posted by Andrea |
01/30/2009 at 11:48 AM |
i don't think rafa will prevail this time. too much on the line for fed and he is playing unbelievably. as pscb noted, both have now had a 5 setter but roger was able to put his behind him in about 3 hours and rafa had to go on for over 5 hours. besides those 5 setters, neither have dropped a set in any other match.
with all the talk of people writing him off, the up and comers taking over......the freight train of federer is heading for the trophy. |
|
Posted by Sher |
01/30/2009 at 11:51 AM |
"he would like to see Federer win his 14th major--just as long as it doesn't happen against him on Sunday"
Heh, typical :) |
|
Posted by ac |
01/30/2009 at 11:52 AM |
I feel bad for Rafa that he has to play the final tomorrow after a match like that. Something always seems to get messed up with scheduling at the slams, if they want the semifinals to be on different days, maybe the second one should be a day match. If anyone can take it though, Rafa can. Verdasco had an amazing tournament, I hope to see more of him. |
|
Posted by ac |
01/30/2009 at 11:57 AM |
I love how even though Roger knows Rafa has the best chance of beating him, he wants to play him anyway. That's why their matches are so awesome, they both want to win so badly. |
|
Posted by Roger for President |
01/30/2009 at 11:58 AM |
Anybody, anywhere, still misses the serve and volley matches that used to bore the public just ten years ago?
It was a brilliant match yes, but, don´t you feel something strange, somewhere on the back of your brain, like a little voice comming from your inside that says:
"yes, this was a tense, long and beautiful match, ... but it still was a semifinal on earth...
wait til sunday to see a final played in heaven!!!!!!! |
|
Posted by Lynne Danley |
01/30/2009 at 12:06 PM |
As much as Rafa has improved, I don't think he will be in Federer's head on a hardcourt. Federer knows he can beat Rafa on that surface. And he is just so hungry again. I think Federer will win, albeit not easily. I hope it is as great a match as Wimbledon, with Roger coming out on top this time! |
|
Posted by marcelo_brazil |
01/30/2009 at 12:11 PM |
rafa did pull off some magic today! I admire him for every bit of his game, but got to agreed with "pscb" and "passamonte". Nadal was on the defense for pretty much the whole game, and let's say in his normal brilliant self. I don't think it's bad to play defensively, not if your game is enormous like Rafa's. But I tend to agree with those who say that when Roger wins in five, he's struggling, and when Rafa does, he is amazing, etc, etc. I think there's too much lack of patience with Roger, especially if you compare some criticism towards him to the adjectives that have been used to describe Rafa lately. I love both of them, I think they're gigantic, the greatest athlets of this dacade... I think we're looking into another memorable match, and this time I believe Roger will get the upper hand. |
|
Posted by Alvaro Acosta |
01/30/2009 at 12:13 PM |
Roger's fans do not want to admit that there is a new kid in the block. His name is Rafael Nadal from Mallorca Spain. He is playing marvelous tennis. Even if he loses on Sunday Verdasco-Nadal was the best match at the Australian Open. Thank you very much! |
|
Posted by Vie |
01/30/2009 at 12:26 PM |
Thanks, Tom for this article. Verdasco was very much the attacking player and that drove the match for 5 sets. Verdasco's intuitive style With , he can hit much anywhere in the court. Rafa's style was more deliberate and consequently less aggressive. But he won the match.
Wasn't Rafa just great! Fighting off his demon in hardcourt and this demon of an Australian Open surprise in Fernando Verdasco. Very happy for him.
|
|
Posted by skip1515 |
01/30/2009 at 12:28 PM |
I no more yearn for boring serving and volleying than I do for boring baseline rallies, too frequently ended by unforced errors due to overly ambitious shot selection.
This is not what we saw in this match, which is why it pegged the Fabulous Meter.
With all due respect, I don't think it's tired to wonder where serve & volley went. Amer Delic proved in the match against Djokovic that it is still a valid tactic. Verdasco came in on 12.5% of the total points played (as did Nadal, more or less), and, tellingly, saved his first two match points by coming in, as well.
The desire to see more serve and volley, and more volleying in general, has more to do with wanting to see variety than with a wish for players who volley 'cause they can't hit groundies, as was too frequently the case years ago. Believing that today's players are stroking machines that rip every passing shot they attempt (under pressure) for a winner is a mistaken belief, and ignores the outcome of a slew of excitingly decisive points. |
|
Posted by gillyrosh |
01/30/2009 at 12:34 PM |
Aw, man! I need to see a replay or highlights of this match. Anyone know where I can find 'em? |
|
Posted by |
01/30/2009 at 12:40 PM |
Tom I think for fairness you should include Federer-Nadal in the semifinals of the masters cup two years ago, which, although it was straight sets to Federer, was very close, and seemed to me one of the very best matches they have ever played. |
|
Posted by jpark |
01/30/2009 at 12:41 PM |
skip1515: Well, not every player on the ATP can play baseline tennis the way Roger, Rafa, Murray and Djokovic do. Add Tsonga, Gulbis, Simon, Verdasco, Nalbandian, Safin (when he's on) to that list. But that's why we don't watch the guys playing on court 16 in the early rounds. We tune in to watch the "big names". |
|
Posted by |
01/30/2009 at 12:46 PM |
Like I said yesterday, Rafa is the greatest player of all-time!!! Federer's great but Rafa quite simply owns him therefore Fed CAN'T be considered the greatest ever dont just look at the stats everything looks good on paper thats why you play the games. When its all said and done, Nadal will DEFINITELY be in double digit grand slam victories.. MARK MY WORDS!!!!! |
|
Posted by |
01/30/2009 at 12:47 PM |
Like I said yesterday, Rafa is the greatest player of all-time!!! Federer's great but Rafa quite simply owns him therefore Fed CAN'T be considered the greatest ever dont just look at the stats everything looks good on paper thats why you play the games. When its all said and done, Nadal will DEFINITELY be in double digit grand slam victories.. MARK MY WORDS!!!!!
|
|
Posted by randomlurker |
01/30/2009 at 12:48 PM |
If Rafa is recovered enough he should put up a big fight. Fed will be very hungry to win that 14th major, but Rafa has equal incentives. Think about it- a hardcourt major. He'd have 3 out of 4 (at the age of 22)! Putting himself in a very good position to get the grand slam at some point in his career.
Tom: The debate has long since been Fed at RG or Rafa at Wimbledon. That one's answered. Which of these do you think is likelier to happen: Fed at RG or Rafa at the US Open?
|
|
Posted by |
01/30/2009 at 12:49 PM |
i,m from egypt and saw the match it was very good and i hope see anoher good match like this in final |
|
Posted by arbitrer |
01/30/2009 at 12:50 PM |
If I recall correctly, it was around his 6th/7th slam that people started having the GOAT discussions about Roger. A Rafa win would make it 6 and like randomlurker pointed out 3 out 4. But the GOAT debate won't surface readily because of the style of play. |
|
Posted by Rafa Rocks - and Nando too! |
01/30/2009 at 12:54 PM |
O my god, what a great match! best match since Wimbles no? im very proud of both of them. Fernando proved that he has not only great talent but also big heart and despite the double faults in the last game, he showed unbelievable mental toughness.
As for Rafael, well he showed again why is he my fav player ever. He fighted unbelievable.
I don't think he has a chance in the final. His tank must be empty and Federer is playing unbelievable. When Federer is at his best on hc, he can beat anyone. and of course the schedule helped him a bit no?
Will be the first ever time that i will watch a Rafael/Federer final without nerves or tension. Im just very happy he is in his first hc gs final. there is no shame in losing to the greatest player of all the times. If Federer win, we and our boy will congratulate him for the record. he is a great champion an deserves it. Although I would have liked him to do it against player other than Rafael but it's probably destiny. Just like Rafa prevented him from achieving the the gs, i think he will be very hungry and motivated for the revenge.
But.... VAMOS RAFAEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
We are no longer accepting comments for this entry.
|