If the Jacket Fits, Wear It!


If the Jacket Fits, Wear It!

Posted 7/9/2006 @ 2:57 PM
image not availableHe was poised at the baseline, in a crouch, hair
spilling over his very carefully placed headband like stalks and
tendrils overflowing a hanging flower basket. Lethal? You must be
kidding.

He twirled his racquet, that red-and-silver wand with the handle
bandaged in white, and awaited the serve, swaying leisurely and
lightly, much like a hooded cobra, testing the air, in no hurry to
make the inevitable strike, that lightning quick yet absolutely
certain and in no way rushed attack.

Lethal? And how.

Rafael Nadal served and Roger Federer struck; Nadal lashed out, a
struck man defending himself, but the cobra had withdrawn to strike
again, something it would have no need of doing as Nadal?s forehand
smacked the net and fell dead.

The shot gave The Mighty Federer his last and decisive service break
in the four-set Wimbledon final that he would ultimately win to add a
fourth (consecutive) Wimbledon title to his collection.

This year, the patch on TMF?s swell cream-colored blazer featured
three racquets and his star sign (Leo); next year Nike should apply
something numerological to pay tribute to his run of fours; a
rainbow-colored petit-four bon-bon? How about a little embroidered
slogan, ?Too Hot 4 You!?

Oh, it?s been as much fun writing about Federer?s emerging
Metrosexuality (I hear TMF is leaving Mirka for a supermodel who?s a
student of history, knowing that the principals in the Seven Years War
were Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie) as about Rafael?s rapid mastery
of the grass-court game, which he has attacked with the same, slashing
gusto as a shot to his forehand wheelhouse, or the English language.

But the bottom line is that Federer?s leisurely, almost self-effacing
excellence is as deadly as it is casual (I think this is called
verisimilitude), and that was the element in the final that was most
easily overlooked - before, during and even after.

Shortly before the match, I thought there was one factor that I hadn?t
really figured into my analysis; with all that conspicuous pressure on
Federer, it was easy to forget that fact that Jet Boy might find his
first Wimbledon final somewhat intimidating (look at how tight he was
in the first set of that recent French Open final), even if he
experienced not a moment of tight nerves in the run up to the main
event.

This, clearly, proved to be the case.

Yet, even then. . . I felt going in that Federer couldn?t beat Nadal
from the backcourt, which is exactly what he did. The degree to which
TMF was able to stay in and win rallies from the baseline was
striking, and something you had to put down more to his own quickness
(as opposed to Jet Boy?s), and the nature of the surface, before you
even began to contemplate the relative form Nadal displayed in the
match.

To some degree, this was conspicuously a matter of court position,
anticipation and quickness; no previous opponent of Nadal brought
anything like a comparable level of those three elements of retrieval
to the dance.

But it is also organic in TMF?s most foundational feeling for and
vision of the game; that is, it's vital to what makes Federer of
Federer.

In Nadal?s presser, I suggested that he had not been on top of his
game to the same degree as in previous matches, and you had to love
the honesty ? and sophistication ? of his reply:

Maybe in the first set was tough for me because he's playing
different than the other guys, other players. He play with more slice.
He change a lot the game. And is difficult because, sure, he begin
well, he break me the first game. So that's tough for me.

And after, I don't see very well the goal in the game, no? Not the
goal. I don't see very well the strategy of the game, no, because he
was playing different with his slice. And after he change the rhythm.



Cliff-notes version: He bamboozled me with the variety and cunning of
his game.

Federer?s serve was another key element. Again, forget any question of
whether or not Nadal was in over his head of slightly out of sorts;
the plain fact is that Jet Boy had a lot more trouble with TMF?s serve
? nobody ever talks of it as a ?dominating? serve ? than most of us
expected.

And Nadal gave a terrific explanation for this in his presser. Here is
the key exchange:

Q. Can you explain what makes Roger's serve so difficult to
return?

Rafael Nadal: Because is tough because I can't (He spoke Spanish
to the interpreter, who translated: I cannot see where he serves, read
his serve.)

Rafael Nadal: I cannot see where he serves, no? So he change very
good angles. And for him is the same. He can put (toss) the ball like
this (at this point, Nadal literally illustrated his point by
imitating a service toss).

He can serve here, he can serve there. Is not some guy if he serve
(meaning tosses) the ball here, (he) serve here, or serve here. He
change all the time (In other words, his toss is variable, but always
impossible to read). That's tough, especially in this surface because
it's faster, no?



image not availableWell, that explained that. I hope you all
understood.

As for the turning point, Jet Boy gave this sweet précis of the ebb
and flow of the match.

[i/'>So it was tough. . .the first start. (Nadal then spoke briefly
with the interpreter, who then explained that Rafa found it tough to
find his best game). But after I have a little bit good luck in the
first game of the second set. Maybe I play very good second set, no?

Finally I play bad the 5-4, for sure (Nadal was broken when he served
for the set). But for that, maybe in this these moments, maybe I lost
a match, no?

But after I play very good the tiebreak of the third. Sure, the third
set I play very well. And in the fourth I play good. I play good, too,
but I miss the volley in the breakpoint down, and that's decisive, no?

Okay. English is not this kid?s first language, and you have to work a
little, but this is a pretty nifty little run of analysis. No?

Some of my colleagues, in casual conversation, felt that this match
was not entirely satisfying. One of them, a TMF Kool-Aid Drinker, said
he had hoped that Roger would win in a more ?imposing?, unambiguous
way ? that is, by playing in a way that didn?t merely enable him to
win, but exposed why he?s light years ahead of Nadal on a fast
surface. You know, kind of how an observer might have felt if TMF had
serve-and-volleyed his way to this title.

We?ve come to see that this is not TMF?s way. And, at least on this
occasion, it now looks like a wise and courageous decision he took to
change absolutely nothing. After all, there was tremendous pressure on
Federer coming into this match. Nadal, everyone agreed, was in his
head. Nadal had been the borderline magical story of this tournament.

The conventional logic coming from the Federer camp had always been
that things would be different when the battle was joined on TMF?s
home turf, grass. I mean, Federer probably couldn?t even go shopping
for a decent hair conditioner without thinking that it had come to
this: that he now had to defend house and home against this marauding
pirata!

Here?s how TMF replied to my question about this pressure:

I'm very well aware of how important this match was for me. If I
lose, obviously it's a hard blow for me. He wins French, Wimbledon,
back to back. I was twice in the finals. That already hurt alone, but
it was still great tournaments for me.

It's important for me to win a finals against him for a change and
beat him for a change. At Wimbledon I knew it was gonna be the place
for me to do it the easiest way. Turned out to be tough and it shows
how much he's improved over maybe an entire year.

But maybe, you know, I had the pressure he had at the French Open,
you know. I was trying to break his clay court streak there. He tried
to break my grass court streak here. I think it was kind of tough to
play each other again.



So Federer?s reaction to the pressure was to remain true to himself
and play the game he likes to play, rather than try to come up with
one to beat Nadal - a guy whose ability to beat him on grass had yet
to be determined. It was as if TMF was saying : Change my game? In my
house? As the three-time defending champ? What do I look like, some
vacillating Gemini?

And remember, there were those ? me included, but by no means
exclusively ? who felt that Jet Boy would just eat up Federer?s slice
backhands and spit them back for winners.

The bottom line on this match is that it was neither the breathtaking
display of shotmaking nor the impossibly close five-set war (Rome,
anyone?)that everyone hoped for to see and many predicted. It was a
great, meaning-laden occasion that produced a conservatively played
match that pointed toward a maturation of a rivalry rather than the
definition of one. Let the discussion over what it portends begin.

In that regard, I want to say that the most significant story here was
not Federer?s ability to beat Nadal on his own turf and on his own
terms, nor even the overnight transformation of Jet Boy into a force
on grass. The biggest story here on the men?s side is the emergence of
Rafael Nadal as a champion for all seasons and surfaces ? something
that did not at all seem like a sure thing before this fortnight.

Consider how many clay-court champions, starting with the beloved
Gustavo Kuerten, and including almost all the so-called ?clay-court
specialists? of recent years, have simply never even bothered to try
to become a force on any other surface. And at last year?s final Grand
Slam, it appeared that Rafael Nadal might be traveling down the same
road. He showed up in New York for the U.S. Open talking about how
?tired? he was, and he went out in the third round. Then, citing a
foot injury, he took a pass on the Australian Open.

It was easy - and fair - to wonder, then, if we weren?t just seeing in
Nadal the second coming of,oh, Sergei Bruguera. This clearly is not
the case, not from what Nadal showed (and said) here.

Quick story: After Roger Federer?s big win over the most potentially
dangerous opponent he faced, Mario Ancic, Jet Boy approached TMF in
the locker room and told him, ?Roger, those first three games you
played against Mario, they were incredible. The best tennis I ever
saw!? To which TMF replied, ?Thanks, Rafa, much appreciated!? (Hat tip
to Alejandro Delmas of Diario As, to whom Rafael confided this story).

So, near the end of Jet Boy?s presser, I mentioned his reverence for
Wimbledon (oh how refreshing it was to hear him call it the
?cathedral? of tennis, and to flat-out say he wanted to win the title,
no asterisks attached), and asked if he felt the same way about the
next major where he and TMF might meet.

He replied:

Yeah, sure, I want to play good in the US Open, no? Is one of a
special goals of this year, no, because I never play good there. So
this year I say a lot of times, and I speak with my team always about
that. So I need have a good preparation for the US Open, no, because
last year I arrive there without hundred percent mentality, no? I need
to stay hundred percent for this tournament. I want to play a very
good tournament there, no? I gonna try. I gonna do (smiling)



I gonna try. I gonna do.

We gonna watch.
.