Unfortunately, the source file was missing a few games, including most of the second set. Also, some points do not have audio. I hope you enjoy the tennis!
That was such an insane first point too. Roger sets up a perfect inside out forehand winner, and Rafa absolutely sprints to it and hits an amazing running forehand pass
Should have won against his all-time nemesis? This is Nadal we're talking about, the greatest of all time on clay, the very one who DESTROYED Federer for years except at Wimbledon (then even beat him there), until Federer finally 'figured him out' in his mid-30s, at the point Nadal had already won something like 10x French open and was physically slowing down a bit.... This first historical win of Roland Garros at 17, followed by a dozen others to show it wasn't a fluke, is definitely meant to be. I say that as a Federer fan. Nadal was just something else on clay (and in general, but even more so on clay).
Well played Nadal but seriously how bad Federer played here. So many double faults, forehand unforced errors. Gave away 4th set just with a poor game filled with errors.
I would say Nadal was his nemesis rather than clay - Federer was a great clay courter in his own right, he was just unfortunate enough to repeatedly play the best clay court player of all time.
Yes, especially having to deal with Nadal in his physical prime. I don’t think there is a soul who would ever be capable of pushing prime/peak Nadal to 5 sets on clay. There are a few who would be lucky to take him to a 4th set.
Federer backhand was so weak, a lot of unforced error, no power and that force him to take a lot of inside out forehand and that open the court for Rafa, if Roger had Novak’s backhand he would have won a lot more against Rafa
prime federer beat *Only 7* times nadal from 21 matches in *7 years* between 2004-2010. prime djokovic beat 7 times *PRIME* nadal from 7 matches in *10 MONTHS* between 2011indian wells until 2012 Australien open. And still people want potrying djokovic as a weak era champion after this stats:))
The problem with your logic is that Nadal is a horrible matchup with Federer whilst he isn’t with Djokovic. I could easily reverse the same logic and say why was an out of prime Federer in 2011 much harder competiton at slams than prime Nadal was during 2011?
It’s easier to beat someone lots of times in the same year than do so over multiple years, because over time your game and their game is evolving. Federer himself found this in 2017 when he had a nice period where he matched up really well with Nadal and beat him 4 times
