Since I started writing a weblog, I haven't spent nearly as much time as in the past in the curious zoo called the player lounge, with its colorful assortment of characters, ranging from scores of former stars to the most irritating - and sometimes bizarre - assortment of behind-the-scenes operatives, hangers on entitled scenemakers, and Ion Tiriac. It's a little easier to get that kind of valuable down time a little later in the tournament, so yesterday I wandered down into the lounge.
Within minutes, I bumped into Tiriac, and then old friend and former champion (1978) here, Virginia Ruzici. Not long thereafter, the woman she beat in that final, Mima Jausovec, showed up. They're friends; Mima (who won at Roland Garros the previous year), is staying at Virgi's flat this week, just reliving old times. Pat Cash walked by, waving "hi." Then I encountered Andres Gomez, champion here in 1990, and you might find some of what he told me about the men's final interesting.
I'll paraphrase, because I didn't jot notes. Basically, Gomez thinks Roger's best chance to beat Rafa is on a damp court on a cool day - which goes against the conventional wisdom that a dry, hot day - a day when the court plays "fast" - offers Federer his best chance. Andres's reasoning was refined. He thinks that on a fast clay court, Nadal's forehand simply has too much power and action for The Mighty Fed to handle on the backhand side. It leaps high, and arrives so "heavy" that Roger has a hard time getting his racket around to drive it with sufficient pace and accuracy.
A slower court, however, reduces both the bounce and pace. Theoretically, it gives Federer a greater chance to draw a bead on the ball, as well as to employ his slice approach shot and drop shot. The idea, which often goes unremarked, is that Nadal has plenty of power to compliment his extraordinary retrieving and angular shotmaking. Anything that takes Nadal's power away gives TMF more chances - and opportunity to use his versatility.
While this analysis came from Gomez, bear in mind that he's good friends with Federer's new coach, Jose Higueras. In fact, the two of them have appeared on camera here, watching a Nadal match (among others). So I think it's pretty safe to assume that even if this analysis is all Gomez, Higueras certainly has heard it. And remember, as a former Roland Garros champ (which Higueras was not), Gomez has what you might call street cred. The weather, incidentally, is supposed to be cool with scattered clouds. If the showers forecast for tomorrow materialize, we might get a chance to see how much of Gomez's analysis shows up in TMF's game.
What I really like about this entire scenario is that here you have two of the great clay-court players of their era, one from Spain and one from Equador, working with a Swiss kid who's best on grass and hard courts - despite the fact that Nadal is Spanish. It's funny, but Higueras won't even discuss Nadal with the Spanish press in his official capacity as TMF's coach. Is there a more emblematic comment on the transnational nature of tennis?
I think one other factor may come into play here. I noticed during TMF's match with Fernando Gonzalez that he seemed to take particular pleasure in ripping his flat or topspin backhand down the line. This shot, while conceivably the toughest ask in the groundstroking repertoire, is also the most dangerous. And given that Nadal is a lefty, who really enjoys pinning Federer in his backhand corner, the shot could be of particular value to Federer.
