The Hindu : Sport : To dominate Nadal, Federer may need to volley more

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Jul 12, 2006

Sport

Sport

To dominate Nadal, Federer may need to volley more

The most revealing, and irritating, aspect of Federer's triumph was that he did it from the baseline, writes ROHIT BRIJNATH

Yeah, yeah, we concede, Roger Federer could give Rembrandt tutorials in brushwork and hits more high notes than Kiri Te Kanawa ever did. But for a guy with an elastic talent, he can be pretty inflexible in his philosophy.

Federer lost one set at Wimbledon and broke a sweat maybe twice, but the most revealing, and irritating, aspect of his triumph was that he did it from the baseline.

It's irritating because Federer will say, like after the Mario Ancic dissection: "You get to feel that you're absolutely in control, and there's a sense of confidence, you're not afraid to try anything ... "

Except volley, that is.

How does one say this without uprooting one's hair: this Swiss spectacle could write a minor thesis on the volley, yet going into the final, Rafael Nadal, a clay-courter who you'd think wouldn't go the net unless accompanied by an exorcist, had gone forward more times than Federer! There's more. In five of his seven matches, Federer's opponents volleyed more than him!

Of course, the grass is caterpillar slow and guys hit such precise groundstrokes they can part your hair at 40 paces, and Federer's at his happiest at the baseline, and winning easily. So why go to the net?

Well, it'll be nice to watch. But, more pertinently, because he might need to keep his volleys polished if he's going to beat Nadal anywhere else.

Federer's baseline stance, and this is the revealing part, seemed as much his preferred tactic as a declaration. Which read that nobody, especially Nadal, was going to shift him out of his comfort zone (the baseline), not at Wimbledon where every blade of grass swoons at his arrival.

But Federer also admitted last week that he often mimicked his opponents, playing in the style they did, a sort of perverse challenge where, he says, "I want to beat them at their own game."

So beating Nadal at his own game meant out-playing him from the baseline, so what if the match might have concluded faster if the Swiss volleyed more, especially since Nadal's Connors impersonation doesn't extend to his return and he admitted Federer's serve was harder to read than James Joyce. Federer is not absent of ego, but it does not hinder him for his game usually reeks of intelligence. But he must know that the Spaniard is exceptional because he's the only one who gushes about him but doesn't bow. He must know, too, that beating Nadal on grass is a terrific confidence injection, but in the context of the rivalry it means little. Because it's going to be a year before they return to grass, a year full of duels on clay and hardcourts. And to beat Nadal, regularly on those slower surfaces, Federer may have to forget the beauty business, turn his back on his comfort zone, get off the baseline more frequently and use his aggressive, rounded game. Trying to beat Nadal at his own game there could end in tears.

Lessons from Rome

The only time on clay that Federer rattled Nadal this year was in Rome, where he came to the net 84 times and lost in five sets. He won 76 per cent of those net points, advertising not merely his versatility but also that the tactic works. As he said then: "Nadal hardly passed me which was a good feeling, so I have to keep that up." He kept that up by coming to the net just 41 times in Paris!

Sure, the Paris clay was slower, but he's Roger, best player of all time, right? Hard to say that when he's 2-6 to the No. 2 player in this generation.

Australian commentator Wally Masur made a useful point in Paris when he said the less Federer comes to the net, the less certain he is of making tough volleys when he needs to. Even geniuses need match practice, but in Wimbledon no polishing of volleys took place. It was the safest place to try an assertive, all-court game but it was an opportunity Federer didn't take, and even when he did his approaches were hesitant.

Federer is more cultured a practitioner than the blue-collar Nadal, all Ali to his Liston. But the Spaniard's transition to grass — he's only 20 — was bewilderingly precocious. He hit the ball earlier than Paris, was closer to the baseline, sharper with his serve, quicker to the net, more assured with his feet. No normal clay-courter (think Kuerten, Corretja, Moya, Bruguera, Costa) has done that; but then Nadal isn't normal.

It was just his third visit to Wimbledon against a man who has three titles there and he pushed him. It tells us on hardcourt, too, he will be a muscular force. The Spaniard isn't sitting still. Federer cannot afford to either.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Sport