Nadal & Federer’s Strategy vs Del Potro / 2009 US Open

Your analysis helps me to better understand strategy and execution at the professional level.

why didn't i see the video,what's wrong?

it;s great

Thanks for the analysis Will. Unfortunately, I did not see much of the match. I understand the strategy of hitting "flat" to DP down the middle and that it was effective until sometime in the second set.

Did Federer stop using this approach (and if so why) or did DP adjust (and if so how).

I apologize if this has already been answered.



K

Nice job Will.

Your analysis helps me to better understand strategy and execution at the professional level. And it makes watching tennis matches more fun. I understand a little better all the factors that impact a player's tactics going in to a match. One player's ball flight, spin, pace, and angles may change an otherwise effective strategy against an opponent.

As a counterpoint, Antonico makes a good point about Del Potro using Nadal's strategy and going at Federer's backhand. In this case Del Potro attacked with hard flat balls instead of the high spinning Nadal shot. It's an example of the same strategy working for a variety of ball flight characteristics.

Thanks for the good work.

I used to like this channel, and this guy, when he's just teaching tennis. His unconditional, unbridled love for Federer is just too much to take. Gavin and Michael are right. This guy is in love with Federer; wishes he could have Federer's children; wants to smell Federer's farts, etc. The whole obsession, blind love package. As is predictable, or a pattern with Federer, once a match starts to get tight, Federer does too. Safin had said of Federer's MO: "He (Federer) destroys you in just four games." Fine and good - except when someone stays with him game by game. When a match starts to get tight, Federer normally waits for someone to lose the match to him; he himself starts playing "not to lose". That's why Federer's 5-Set Record is just barely over .500. Once Del Potro started firing his forehand inside-out to Federer's backhand the match was over for Federer. Del Potro adapted his own version of the Nadal Playbook: instead of going with heavy spin he went with heavy pace to Federer's one-handed backhand, and time and again he was rewarded. JMDP played a VERY intelligent match. Some of those shots looked like they were ready to yank Federer's arm out of the socket, such was their pace. The shanks and mis-hits started piling up for Federer - and once a 5th Set arrives, it's a 50-50 bet Federer will start to choke. Truth is Martina pointed out on Tennis Channel Fed's choke actually began in Set 2. Serving for it at 5-4 30-love, Federer had been 15-of-17 at the Net up to that point. JMDP connected with 2 passes to level at 30-all, broke there and basically that was the end for Federer. From that point on (5-4 30-0 in Set 2), Federer went something like 16-of-40 in the forecourt. Choke. Choke. Choke.

Del Potro is having his true Break Out Year now at age 20, and it's awesome to see. The one issue he will have is a physical one. At 6'6", that high Center Of Gravity he has will eventually start to overload the joints: ankles and knees especially. He has to weigh at or over 200 lbs. that's a lot of weight to keep pounding week after week with no consequences.

Nadal, as he stated in his press conference after losing to Del Potro, talked about the adema he had in his abdominal that finally ruptured. He couldn't turn to his right at all. That's why all his serves were down the middle: he couldn't go wide to either side without turning into the ruptured muscle. That might have had something to do with his method of "playing down the middle" to Del Potro. He had virtually no other choice. And he paid dearly for it.

I hope Rafa is watching this analysis.... even i felt for a guy like 6'6 more flat balls were needed, btw nice analysis.

I was prompted by your analysis to do a little arithmetic. The question is how much additonal flight time is there if a ball travels an additional twenty feet. Here goes. Say the shot is travelling at 50mph, that's (50x5280)/3600 feet per second or 73 feet per second, so 20 feet takes 20/73=.27 seconds. To think of it another way, baseline to baseline is 78 feet. Adding 10 feet on one end adds about 13 percent, so DelPotro has roughly 13 percent less time to react to Federer's shot than he does to Nadal's. If Fed's shot is faster, then Delpo's time is further reduced. Of course when Delpo hits one of his 100mph forehands from his baseline to Fed's baseline, Fed nor anyone else has time to react and Delpo wins the point. I think that we have seen the future of men's tennis: over 6'6", great movement and BIG strokes.

Nice work! I like it.

Agreee with Gavin and Michael. Fed's 1st serve percentage to the ad court was dismal during the match especially the last 3 sets, and especially when he aimed at Del Po's backhand. However, there was an external factor that miffed Fed during the second set which was in my opinion the turning point of the match. Please revisit the first set and the first half of the second. Here is when Fed was completely dominating Del Po, with strategies such as the one described in the analysis. Then recall when during the 2nd set Fed aced Del Po and Del Po asked the chair for Fed to repeat because someone was moving in the back and distracted him. There was a bit of gamesmanship here by Del Po which paid off since the chair made Fed to repeat. Fed eventually won the game but this event (and a few others later, like allowing Del Po too much time after a point had ended to request a challenge) made Fed to play with a discomfort I have rarely seen in him (maybe only when Rafa finished him in 3 straight sets at the French). Fed's issue was mental. As the Best Ever, this is something Fed has been able to control better than anyone, but this time, it got the best out of him. We sometimes forget he's only human. And Del Po played a geat match, one has to give it to him. By the way, Rafa would have flattened his forehand more if he could have; flattening the forehand with pace to the center takes a lot more physical effort that top spinning it. Rafa's abdominal injury did not only affect his serve...

I, for one, was surprised that Rafa didn't try to flatten out his forehand a little bit. He did so in the Australian Open, and that's part of the reason he won. You'd think that after two hard-court warm-up events (Montreal and Cincy) he would remember to hit his shots a little flatter. This kind of clay-court tennis doesn't lend itself to success at the U.S. Open, regardless of how well he can defend.

I couldn't agree more with Gavin!

Will, I'm a little confused. Last time I checked, Del Potro won the match ;-) Whatever strategy Federer may have employed that was more effective than Nadal's, it would seem that it wasnt quite effective enough! I think in this case, it was simply a bad day at the office for Federer. You will not win the US Open serving at 50% (and double faulting 11 times!) and shanking groundies like he was later in the match. In the final two sets Del Potro served over 70% and Fed, well, didnt. Federer I think, at his best, is a better player than Del Potro at his best. In my humble opinion this was more a question of execution than strategy.

Hey Gavin. The point of the video is to clarify a point I made in previous videos. Several people were confused when I said that Nadal got victimized by hitting the ball down the middle of the court while Federer was more successful using the same strategy.

I don't think you're giving Del Potro enough credit for his win. IMO, he won the match -- Federer didn't lose it.

Sure, Federer didn't serve great -- 50% is pretty bad. But Del Potro didn't show up to play for the first set and a half.

Stat sheet is only partially explains the outcome of this match. I think the mental side (particularly Del Potro's mental toughness) was the most important factor in the match.

Well I suppose so Will, if by "more successful" you mean that Fed was able to make a match of it, while Nadal was simply flattened ;-) It just seems a little contradictory to speak of Federer's "effective strategy", since he lost the match.

I certainly didnt mean to short change Del Potro. After what looked like a severe case of nerves in the first set and a half, he lifted his game for sure, while Fed continued so serve poorly, and began to miss shots he just doesnt miss when his A game is on. All credit to DP, he won it fair and square, but if a tennis match consists of execution and strategy, I think execution was the key here, and certainly mental toughness plays a role in that.

nice analysis, looking forward to more :) (if there will be), by the way who else do you think will make it to barclays? im looking very forward to it