If you don’t love Nadal you don’t love tennis. Let me just say before I make my point that I love Nadal. How can you not?
But.
When Nadal is losing in major tournaments, he often seems to come up with an injury of some sort. The knee at Wimbledon last year vs. Petzschner. And last night, the thigh against Ferrer.
Nadal seemed to be moving well around the baseline chasing Ferrer’s onslaughts, however he was having trouble getting to wide balls. Was Nadal a little banged up after his monumental 2010? Is he still sub-100% Rafa?
Or is it possible Nadal has lost something from all the blood, sweat and tears he poured on the court last year? Like how Nicolas Massu has never been the same player since his superhuman effort at the 2004 Olympics in singles and doubles.
Nadal is right around the age when Lleyton Hewitt and Michael Chang, two of the fleetest battlers in tennis history, began to lose their phenomenal speed. Nadal is carrying about 30 pounds more on his frame than Chang or Hewitt.
Could the thigh ache be a creation of his mind to rationalize the defeat?
Or has Ferrer become a better player for 2011, playing at a new level we have never seen before?
Who knows. Maybe Nadal has lost a half step of his speed, as well as a fraction of motivation after finally conquering the hard courts of the U.S. Open last September. What else is there for Nadal to win? He’s done everything already, there are no more new challenges, new barriers to knock down. To expect him to win a grand slam – all four majors in one year – is too much to ask. With that achievement looking impossible, there isn’t any new mountains to climb, no new special challenges to overcome. It’s just to go out and keep playing the same old tournaments.
The youthful enthusiasm and exuberance of Nadal might be disippating, as Nadal is now becoming a veteran. He could be a fraction slower now.
But then again, you can never count out Nadal. He could come back stronger than ever and sweep through Indian Wells and Miami and the clay court season.
No tags
Dan Markowitz · January 27, 2011 at 1:19 am
Scoop, I love your posts I feel like I can follow the Aussie OPen from here in Costa Rica, where I dont want to rub it in, but it was 80 degrees on the beach in Jaco and I played Fast Ball, a Brazilian racket game where you stand 10 feet apart from another player with a wooden racket and you zoom hit a small pink ball back and forth. Almost died in a serious undercurrent, too. As I got beyond the break line of the waves and a team of surfers was getting ready to pick me up, but I made it back in on my own.
Anyhow, Im curious not having seen the match, but surprised, in fact, incredulous that Nadal could lose straight-sets to Ferrer, how did it happen? Did Nadal make errors or did Ferrer move up in court and just hit winners?
Andrew Miller · January 27, 2011 at 2:38 am
Wilander lost gears after his three slams in ’88 (age 24). Federer started playing slightly worse tennis at 24-25. So it could be mental fatigue.
Nothing better to revive the competetive juices though than some distance from the game.
Wonder how much pressure this puts on Murray/Djokovic/Federer – even Ferrer knowing that Nadal is out of the tournament. All of them enter the semis fresh.
Federer also senses his chances when Nadal’s out – he must be feeling like the guy to beat.
Mitch · January 27, 2011 at 3:09 am
You could have made the same argument a year ago and then, as is also the case now, it would have been premature. Nadal, like Federer, seems to be more motivated by a desire to improve his game and test his limits rather than the more tangible goals of winning a grand slam, being number 1, etc. His body might fail him, but never his motivation or the mental side of his game.
marc · January 27, 2011 at 11:29 am
Rafa was deeply focussed on achieving the ‘Rafa Slam’. The anguish and despair on his face were enough to indicate that he certainly hadn’t conjured up a hamstring injury out of thin air.
As good as Ferrer is, he simply doesn’t have the weapons to beat Rafa when Rafa is 100%.
Its just isn’t Rafa’s style to fake an injury just because he felt he wasn’t winning.
Scoop Malinowski · January 27, 2011 at 2:11 pm
Welcome to the site Marc. Rafa kept implying that to win the Rafa Slam was almost impossible, I don’t think he really wanted to achieve the Rafa Slam as mush as he wanted to win his first US Open last Sept.
Dan, enjoy Costa Rica, it’s even nicer there than here in FL (60’s). Damn, that sounds like a close call, be careful. Nadal was playing his game but Ferrer wasn’t missing and just kept playing the perfect shots. He wasn’t missing, kind of like Davydenko can do to Rafa on hard court when he’s at his best. Rafa’s first service game was a marathon and he got the message early it was going to be a dog fight. Ferrer got in his head early. Ferrer clearly has no fear of Rafa, unlike the other Spaniards who seem to defer to him. Mitch, I think Rafa is losing an iota of motivation. He’s won all these events before, after his spectacular 2010 I think Rafa is due for a lull. Last year is a tough act to follow, with how many great players there are out there trying to take him down. Like our old pal Dman says, “Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown.” Nadal looked uncomfortable at this tournament. Declines do happen to many great players by their mid 20s. Andrew, good point about Wilander.
Dan Markowitz · January 27, 2011 at 2:25 pm
Scoop,
You are lucky man being in Fla. Maybe I can join you in Feb in Delray but dont know yet. Hey, you and I are the soothsayers, the predicters-grande, dude. Your Na Li pick is looking very prescient right now and I believe my Djoko winning 10 plus slams might become a reality after seeing that he disposed of Roger in straight sets. Has the mantle been passed? Is it now for Rafa, Murray and Djoko to battle for supremacy in the tennis world with Roger taking a back seat? Djoko might just be the best of the three on hard courts. I still think he would have had an even shot against Nadal if not for the Federer semifinal in New York last Sept.
Enjoy and whats your next prediction: Kournikova makes a comeback and wins a Slam?
tom michael · January 27, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Nadal lost a step in Melbourne because he was injured. His hamstring strain makes him vulnerable to the wide forehand, just like Federer was during the Spring/Summer 2010. Why was Rafa injured? He had the flu, and it weakened him. He lost muscle mass, and it made him vulnerable to injury.
Ferrer is not the one anyone should play when less than 100% fit. Credit to Ferrer in one way. He totally beat him. It did not go four sets like back in the US Open round of 16 of 2007. It was one-sided, as it should be against an injured opponent. He can be a challenge for Murray (who also needs to be 100%) to put away. A night match at Melbourne plays slow similar to clay (so Djoker beat Fed with clay court patterns and strategies last night). Ferrer has beaten the crap out of Murray on clay, and if the conditions are slow the coming night, Murray will have his hands full.
About Ferrer being the only Spaniard to not defer to Rafa. Not true! Rafa has lost to many Spaniards when not 100% in motivation or health: Garcia-Lopez in Thailand last year, F. Lopez in Queeens Club last year, Ferrero in Rome in 2008, and Ferrer now. Moya and Ferrero beat him in 2007 on hard courts. Verdasco had a near win over him in Melbourne 2009, one of the greatest matches of all time. Almagro and Robredo had near wins over him after being up either match points, or even a set up and a break up in the second. None of the Spaniards defer to Rafa, and never give him quarter, nor does Rafa expect it. They are just a professional band of brothers.
And a final note! Djoker will not win 10 or more majors because he will need to win 3 this year to make this an even possibility, and he has not won the title yet. Let us not be too premature. And Novak got beaten handily by Nadal in the finals of the US Open last year. Djoker had two rain delays to recover his form for the final: one on Sunday to move the final to Monday, and a two hour one during the final match itself at 6/4 4/4. No excuses about playing Federer in a five set thriller on Saturday is applicable.