The majority of Europeans grow up playing on clay courts (like Americans grow up playing on hard courts) and thus have great results during the clay court season, and of course in the French Open. The last American to win the championship was Andre Agassi in 1999. Since Agassi, there hasn’t been an American player who has the playing style conducive to compete for the title. But that doesn’t seem fair to American tennis, as no player has had a chance to win the title since Rafael Nadal began streaking in 2005.
He has only lost one time at the French Open, and that loss came when he was dealing with extreme tendinitis in both of his knees- an injury that prevented him from defending his Wimbledon crown a month later. The loss came in 4 sets and was downright difficult to watch because Nadal was in such evident pain. Not to take anything away from Robin Soderling (the only player to ever beat Nadal at the French), or Roger Federer (who needed this injury to finally claim his first and only French Open after losing to Nadal four previous times), but without this knee issue, Nadal would still be undefeated at the French Open. His resume would include 8 straight titles and 56-0 overall. Say that outloud, “56-0”. If he never played another match, Nadal, at 26 years of age, would be the greatest clay court player of all time.
This doesn’t bode well for the rest of Europe’s clay court specialists as they continue the dream to win their most coveted title. But Nadal continues to struggle more and more with health issues as his career marches on. It seems unavoidable that eventually the “King of Clay” will be dethroned. Who has the best chance of taking the title when Nadal slips? The obvious answers, and only real contenders are; Djokovic, Federer, and Murray.
Novak Djokovic has been knocking on the door to complete his career grand slam (winning all 4 majors) the past several years, and has the most complete game of anyone on tour. He is also the only player that has a real chance to beat Nadal at this event. He possesses amazing court coverage (especially since moving to a gluten-free diet a few years ago), which is necessary for winning the French Open.
At sea level, the ball obviously doesn’t fly through the air as far as it does at a higher elevation. And with the high humidity in Roland Garros, the ball doesn’t travel through the air as quickly. This condition slows the game down and allows players who use a defensive style (clay court specialist) to be successful. It allows players more time to travel to the ball, neutralizing an offensive player’s powerful shots (hence the 14 year drought of an American champion). These players use their conditioning as one of their best attributes.
Djokovic is incredibly fit. At 6 feet 2 inches tall, 175 lbs., and an extremely slender flexible body, he has the prototypical tennis frame. Djokovic’s hybrid all-court game can beat Nadal because of his combination of power hitting, and his excellent conditioning as a defensive player (he is #1 in the world for this reason).
He can quickly move from offense to defense and back to offense again, which is crucial if he has hopes to beat Nadal. He also has the consistency from the baseline to play shot for shot with Nadal. The way Djokovic has been playing these last few years, he should be favored against Nadal with any conditions other than at the French Open. If they meet againin this year’s finals? Flip a coin. That’s how close the gap has become.
A big reason why Roger Federer hasn’t had any success against Nadal is the grueling red clay of Roland Garros- grueling because the surface absolutely kills the ball speed when it lands. The clay also produces a high bouncing ball, which lends itself to players who camp far behind the baseline and play a defensive style (because a slower ball and a higher bounce gives you more time to travel to the ball). The offensive player in some cases has to hit 3 or 4 more powerful shots (or winners) to win the point than he would on any other surface. Because of this, it creates more opportunities for unforced errors for the offensive player.
With Roger Federer, his problem is less moving from defensive to offensive or his conditioning, and more Nadal’s high bouncing heavy topspin shots to Federer’s one handed backhand. The hardest shot in tennis for a player with a one-handed backhand is a shot above his shoulder on the backhand side. This forces Federer to make a decision: he can either move further behind the baseline and take the ball later when it has a chance to fall to his waist–which would nullify his offensive strength and force him to play a defensive game.
Or, he can attack the ball before it bounces high and stay closer to the baseline to keep an offensive position in the point. The latter route is his best chance of winning, but it’s a high-risk style that has helped him post a 0-5 record against Nadal at the French Open. But in his defense he has pretty much tried every strategy against Nadal and nothing has worked. This analysis might seem like the red clay isn’t great for Federer’s game, but he is still arguably the second best clay court player of all time—and it’s his worst s
Even though Murray pulled out, here is where he sizes up in this event. He finally broke through in a major last September at the US Open. Murray’s crafty defensive style suits this event, he doesn’t have the weapons to beat Nadal. Tennis is a game of match-ups, and he doesn’t match-up well against Nadal on this surface. To beat him you need to be able to pull him off the court using a combination of power and consistency. Murray won’t be able to take the offensive in enough points to win three sets. However, Murray could spoil the party for a Federer/Nadal or Djokovic/Nadal final. His conditioning is tremendous and since he finally broke through in a major, any pressure has completely lifted off his shoulders. He could play freely and make the semifinals without surprising anyone. But unless he gets help from Novak, a runner-up finish is as far as he can go.
In theory:
Murray can beat Federer or Novak, but not Nadal.
Federer can beat Novak or Murray, but not Nadal.
Novak can beat Nadal, but lose to Federer or Murray.
Nadal can only lose to Novak.
No one else in the field has a chance
Rafael Nadal is the best bet because the combination of the event conditions, court surface, and current racquet technology. He has a two-handed backhand, so he doesn’t have to deal with high balls on his backhand side. He was gifted with ridiculous quickness, which almost completely dampens anyone who isn’t careful with his offensive shot selection.
The new racquet technology over the past 10 years coupled with newstring technology has allowed for his very heavy topspin, which multiplies the effect of the high bouncing ball. Nadal is also a lefty, which normally just means he is better against right-handed players than they are against him, but in this case it is beneficial because it is kryptonite for Roger Federer. The Swiss Maestro would have 7 or 8 more Grand Slam titles if it weren’t for Nadal, 5 of them coming at the French Open. Nadal’s lefty serve on the ad service court (left side) pulls Federer out wide to his backhand and spins either high or away from him.
Both are incredibly difficult shots for a right-handed player with a one-handed backhand. It is no coincidence that the number of players with a one-handed backhand on the tour has dropped considerably over the years. The new racquet technology and transition tennis has made to players primarily rallying from the baseline has allowed for more two-handed backhands. But again, this is justnit picking.
Roger Federer has won 17 Grand Slam titles and is the greatest tennis player ever, with a one-handed backhand in an era where baseliners are game planning to pick on it- or at least trying to. Finally, there isn’t a whole lot that separates tennis players at the top of the game. Matches often times are decided late in sets during crucial points. Like golf, much of tennis is between the ears. If a player doesn’t contain a Tiger-like focus during the critical moments of a match, he is Guillermo Coria.
Looking back at the 2004 French Open Final, Guillermo Coria dropped the 3rd and 4th to Gaston Gaudio after coming out of the gate sizzling to win the first two sets. The pressure begins to mount as it does any time a player begins to lose such a substantial lead. He is squeezing the racquet too tight as if to not let this lead out of his grasp. He continues to either go for too much or not enough. His legs are shaking. His strokes are abbreviated. Coria played tennis his whole life for this moment and he can feel it slipping away. In football, a few pick-sixes and the game can turn around in a matter of moments. Coria has felt every moment of this comeback. He has had two hours to think about it and no one to talk about it with.
However, Coria still found himself at the finish line deep in the 5th set. Being up a break and serving for the match twice (at 5-4 and 6-5), Coria reaches two championship points to capture the title. But he couldn’t close. Guillermo Coria eventually lost the final to the inferior form of himself. It was like Alabama losing to a mid-major school that prides itself on running the ball and playing tough defense. Blame it on the 4th set leg cramps if you’d like, but what happened in 2004 in Paris was one of the largest collapses in tennis history. Not necessarily because of the score but the mental collapse that submerged Coria was proof that it takes more than ideal physical attributes to win in Roland Garros- or any big stage for that matter.
Professional athletes like Jennifer Capriati, Sergio Garcia (as recently as the 2013 Player’s Championship), Greg Norman (obviously), the ’86 Red Sox, and the ’92 Oilers all experienced similar meltdowns at the peak of their sport. Rafael Nadal, on the other hand, is a machine. The closest he came to choking was at Wimbledon in 2008 when he lost a two sets to none lead against Roger Federer, the then 5-time reigning champion.
Roger’s game was perfect for the quick low bouncing surface of the grass at Wimbledon. Nadal was the clay court specialist that couldn’t possibly win three sets and dethrone the King of Grass. But he did, in the “Greatest Match Ever Played,” in an epic 5 set battle to become the first Spaniard to win at Wimbledon since Manuel Santana did it in 1966. Nadal didn’t relinquish the title, he held on.
That is the difference between him and Guillermo Coria (that and 11 Grand Slam titles). So like Tiger in a major or Jordan in the playoffs, Rafa in Paris won’t give away an inch. At least he hasn’t… yet.