Federer has not really played the same level of competition as Nadal has thus far, but he made his match with Youzhny, a very competent player who had himself not dropped a set in the tournament, look like a training session with a junior player. Youzhny, toward the end of the match, actually appeared ecstatic after winning points, as if he was just happy to be out there with the best player in the world in front of a lot of people. If you can make opponents think that way, then you've already done most of your job. Federer has re-sculpted his unbeatable mystique and so it will accompany him on court in his quarterfinal with the Spaniard Tommy Robredo.
It is worth mentioning that a number of players have had impressive runs through to the quarters. Canas and Davydenko have been killing people. Canas has already beaten Federer twice this year on clay, and you have to imagine that would help him if they end up squaring off in the semi-final. Both Davydenko and Canas have made mince-meat of their opposition in the first four rounds of play. I haven't been able to watch either one yet. Davydenko's game is most kin to Mats Wilanders. He is unbelievable steady, returns well, and has an incredible backhand. He makes his opponents beat him and all the while seems to be ratcheting up the sting on his shots and the amount of ground he covers. Canas, for me, is more capable of winning the tournament, because he has more variety and more sting from the back court.
Djokovic, who along with Canas is McEnroe's dark horse pick, stumbled in his match with inspired Frenchy Olivier Patience. But he managed to gut out a fourth set tie-break when Patience was playing at his very best and then used the fifth set to show why he was the better player. He then killed Verdasco today to reach the quarterfinal, and having watched him play twice now, I have to say that his combination of speed, power, and accuracy is very impressive. His game doesn't have the variety that either Nadal or Federer possess, but he covers the court very well and with youthful exuberance. His shots penetrate on the clay from both sides.
Carlos Moya has earned ole timer's rights in the tournament by breaking the improbable run of 35 year-old net-rushing Swede Jonas Bjorkman. Moya, though, is not a young man anymore and doesn't have the same sting on his forehand as he did when he won the tournament. He has to play Nadal, a fellow Mallorcan, and that will probably be his fond farewell at the hands of a protégé.
You may have noticed that I keep using the word "variety" as if it were a technical term in tennis. What I mean by variety is the number of types of ball a player can hit. Generally, variety in a player's game refers to whether a player can hit with topspin, slice, and flat with forehand, backhand, and serve. But it also has to do with how well a player hits improvised shots when the court has changed shape on them. These include dinks, chips, and pokes from the mid-court and net, and also all manner of recovery shots from deep and wide on both sides.
Federer has the most variety of any player in my lifetime except maybe Becker. He can hit with all three spins from either side, and he has a preternatural feel for how to disrupt his opponents rhythm by moving them side to side, forward and back. While most players have a notion of how to run an opponent back and forth, Federer seems to have the ability to actually foul up their footwork so that they never feel comfortable, and that's what makes his opponents feel so desparate. It's like being in a fight with a boxer you can't hit, and who's hitting you harder than you expected at will.
Nadal, with his heavy Western forehand, has less variety than Federer, but red clay teaches improvisation, particularly in recovery, and he has a feel for the court than cannot be taught. From the backhand side he hits an effective slice and he can hit huge angles from both sides. He will often, given an opening, step up and swing huge at a shot but instead of flattening it for a winner will hit a huge rolling topspin angle. His motion freezes his opponent, the angle fools them, and by the time they see what's happening they either can't reach the shot or arrive in total desperation. The beauty of this play is the margin for error Nadal affords himself. He hits over the low part of the net, adds clearance with the looping top, and can sit and watch it all play out from the middle of the court.
The other part of Nadal's game that is surprisingly good is his short court game. He chases down and deals with drop shots better than anyone else. He usually arrives in time to set up and dispatch the shot, but in case he gets there late, is remarkably adept at shoving balls deep or clipping off drops.
McEnroe, who as you might have gathered, I respect very much, had fingered Canas and Davydenko as contenders because they are both mature players who have big match experience, and because they have good variety in their games.
The reason variety is so important at the French is that it is the answer to a player who finds a rhythm. Tennis players at this level can all find rhythm and play extremely well, almost unbeatably well, until they either fall out of rhythm or are thrown out of rhythm. In a tournament like the French Open, the eventual champion will likely run into an opponent in rhythm at least once. Players like Federer and Nadal adjst their games by shifting the hitting zone for their opponent until they find a place that allows that person to cool off. Federer will use his short cutting slice backhand to force players to move into the midcourt and hit off of their shoetops. He then hits the next shot with heavy topspin and aims deep, so that his opponent ends up having to block or half-volley from the baseline. The result is that if a player tries to groove their backhand against him, he yanks them forward in this fashion.
Nadal is as effective as he is because his shots don't look like anyone else's. He's a lefty, which helps, and his Western forehand is so heavy, the bounce so high, that it's downright uncomfortable. He plays astounding defense and shots that are routine winners against anyone else, will float back with no pace and land near the baseline unless you follow your stingers to net. I think to beat Nadal you have to be successful enough at net that he has to think about his recovery shots. If you stay back, he will just chase and push and then take a hack that turns the point back to his terms.
Federer demoralizes his opponents by making them believe they cannot even get their feet underneath them, that they are standing on marbles in a match against a guy who can hit it anywhere anytime.
Nadal demoralizes opponents by repeatedly turning points on a shot, so that just when they think they have control of a point by hitting two great shots in a row, they are back to zero for a moment, and then have lost. The repetition of this pattern is infuriating and can make the best players feel like their best ammunition is worthless. In the case of his match with Hewitt, Nadal made the Aussie play totally outside of his comfort zone. Hewitt hit unbelievably well in the third set and attempted to dictate play, but he had to raise his game to a level he could not maintain under pressure, and ultimately lost every important point.
When Nadal and Federer collide, both each is capable of demoralizing the other in the exact ways I have specified. But in order for Federer to do it to Nadal, he has to incorporate net play to end points, otherwise Nadal ends up taking too much out of Federer in the early sets, so that his shots don't sting as much in the last two.
Which brings us now to the issue of tournament navigation. Both me have played the minimum number of sets thus far and had a day's rest between each match. They should both feel pretty decent. In setting up their collision, let's see if either one of them gets stretch to five sets in the next rounds, because many, many players have had heroic runs at the French end in dismal finals due to leg-weariness.
We have arrived at the quarterfinal round of play at the 2007 French Open with our hopes of an epic Nadal/Federer final very much intact. Neither player has lost a set in their first four matches and each has displayed the kind of tennis expected of them. Federer, for his part, has exhibited more patience than usual, has served extremely effectively, and has used his normal jaw-dropping array of shots to open up the court for winning shots from every angle and depth. 