Dust in the Wind

All I have to say about the Federer loss to Nadal yesterday is that, after the first set, I thought history would run its course and destiny would be fulfilled--and that Fed's achievement would act as a sort of foil to Sampras 14-slams milestone--but I still had this nagging sense that all was not right. Nadal is simply too tough to fold up, even after a thrashing such as he received in the first set (6-1). And that talent was proven: He wore Federer out, so that by the fourth, Fed has abandoned his attacking game and reverted.

But reverted to what? Fed's big advantage over any other recently dominant player on clay is that he actually grew up playing on the stuff. So he has a much better chance to pull of the Grand Slam than, say, McEnroe or Sampras did. However, on clay, and especially when the going gets tough, I think he reverts to the style of his youth, more of a backcourt, basliner, move-the-ball around strategy.

When he overcomes this and begins to create the midcourt attacking opportunities he needs to defeat Nadal on clay, he'll probably win the French. Shame it couldn't have been this year.

Yes, I called the Grand Slam--calendar year, by the way--a month or so back. Not sure Fed will ever have this good a chance again: easy wins leading up to final, energy-preserving semifinal forfeit by Nalbandian, memory of a near-win at Rome fresh in his mind. But we'll see.

On an other front, look for the resurgence of Roddick at Wimbledon. Hey, imagine that Fed plays the same three guys in slam final for the next five years? Nadal at the French (and eventually at the US Open), Roddick at Wimbly, and say Nalbandian at the Oz. It would be weird.