One Step Closer to the Match of the Year

This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

The New York Sun

When the French Open began, one match promised more than all the others: Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal in the final – no. 1 in the world versus no.1 on clay. Tomorrow, only David Nalbandian and Ivan Ljubicic will stand in the way.

Judging by the numbers from this tournament, it would be a surprise if either Federer or Nadal lost.

If not for the fact that the French Open is played on clay,Federer would be the prohibitive favorite. His stat sheet sparkles: He has won 70% of points on his serve, 44% when returning serve, and 56% of points overall, all equal or better to his numbers through the semifinals at the Australian Open this year. He has dropped his serve seven times, best among the men remaining, and is second to Nadal in average service breaks per set, at 1.8. Against Mario Ancic in the quarterfinals, Federer played exceptionally well.

For Nalbandian to score an upset in tomorrow’s semifinal, he will have to reduce his errors: a 19% error rate (i.e., 19 errors every 100 points) is a tad too high for a man who wins with steady play, changes of pace, and smart tactics. He will have to serve better, too. In three more sets than Federer, he has lost his serve 10 more times.

That said, Nalbandian is far more dangerous to Federer than Ljubicic would have been. He has more confidence against the world no.1 (a winning record of 6-5 in his career), and the right mix of defensive skills, endurance, and passing shots – especially his backhand down the line – to prevail, though not if Federer plays his best. No matter what, the contrast in styles ought to produce enjoyable tennis.

Ljubicic’s powerful game might pose some problems for Nadal in tomorrow’s other semifinal showdown. He will need to play aggressive from the opening point and have an excellent serving day (his first-serve rate for this tournament, 59%,will not suffice). Look for him to attack the net and shorten points (like the other semifinal, this match offers appealing contrasts). Ljubicic does not normally excel at returning serve,but at this tournament he is averaging 1.7 breaks a set (perhaps inflated by his easy draw; he has yet to play a seeded player). He will have to keep that up.

Unless Ljubicic has a remarkable afternoon, Nadal should prevail in three or four sets.Nadal was thankful that he did not have to work too hard to defeat Novak Djokovic, who retired with a back injury yesterday after losing the first two sets of his first Grand Slam quarterfinal. Nadal still has played more minutes than the other three men, but not by much, and the statistic is deceiving. Nadal plays slowly – toweling off and adjusting his socks just so (he was warned this week about taking too long to serve). Note that he has played only two more points than Federer.

Another concern about Nadal that might be overblown: his poor percentage on break points (36%). Nadal usually wins more than 50% of break points; last year, he won 59% on the way to his first French title. But look at this data another way. This year, Nadal is averaging 2.1 breaks per set played. Last year? You guessed it, 2.1. Nadal is working harder to break this year, losing and regaining break points before capitalizing. But a break is a break, and he is earning them just as often. One legitimate concern arises on his serve, though: So far, he is losing serve about once a set, compared to 0.75 last year.

After digesting all these numbers, we might as well offer up a rather unscientific prediction for tomorrow and the weekend: Federer versus Nadal in the final, with Federer winning in four or five sets.It’s worth remembering that the last time the top four seeds reached the semifinals in Paris, in 1985, a possible final between top seed John McEnroe and no. 3 seed Jimmy Connors gave way to Mats Wilander (no. 4 and the eventual champ) and Ivan Lendl (no. 2). For my money, Federer versus Nadal would be better than what those famed Americans would have produced, so let’s hope the numbers hold up.

tperrotta@nysun.com


The New York Sun

© 2024 The New York Sun Company, LLC. All rights reserved.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The material on this site is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used.

The New York Sun

Sign in or  Create a free account

By continuing you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use