It was a jumpy match, as we might have expected. Roger Federer was either off the ground or swinging above his shoulders most of the afternoon, while Rafael Nadal was flicking upward and falling backward, unable to get the ball to penetrate through the court the way he had for two weeks. It was a match of shanks, uncharacteristic errors, head-scratching tactics, and balls sailed wide and long for no particular reason. Nothing caught fire. In the end, though, it was also a tremendous achievement by one player.
I'll start with the other player, the No. 1, the guy who had the crowd behind him, and who U.S. broadcasters John McEnroe and Mary Carillo were clearly and somewhat obnoxiously pulling for. Federer had his moments, and he played better than he did in last year's final, which is not saying too much. This year, he managed to take control of points at the net and with his crosscourt backhand, and he worked harder to get around and dictate with his forehand. But the result was exactly the same, as Federer's own lack of execution, the peculiar way his game matches up with Nadal's, and the Spaniard's iron will in the clutch brought him nothing but frustration again.
Federer was damned if he did, damned if he didn't. In the first set, it appeared that he was going to rally his way down the tubes quickly. He allowed Nadal to establish his forehand to Federer's backhand, a no-win situation for the Swiss. I spent the set wondering, "Why doesn't he do whatever it takes to hit a forehand?" He did just that on his way to winning the second set, but it's never that simple when he plays Nadal. First, Rafa's a master at floating his backhand down the line and within inches of the sideline, where Federer simply can't get around it. Second, even when Nadal leaves a forehand hanging at midcourt, which he did a lot today, the ball is still moving to Federer's left. There were many times when Federer seemed to have a clear shot at a forehand but couldn't quite get all the way around and into position for it.
Still, there was no reason or excuse for many of Federer's misses. He had been hitting winners on similar balls all tournament, and many lesser players have no trouble cracking forehands against Nadal. The only possible explanation for many of his blatant UFEs on Sunday is that Federer is just not as confident against Nadal as he is against everyone else. He loses just enough of his self-belief to make him hesitate.
Should his fans, and tennis fans, be disappointed in him? It's hard to say that; Federer has done more on clay than Sampras, Edberg, Becker, and Connors. He stands with Andre Agassi and Rod Laver as the best all-surface players of the Open era. But watching him during the trophy presentation, I wondered: Does he think he did everything possible to win? I'm sure he did everything that he would allow himself to do to win. But Federer is a stubborn guy bent on doing it his way—this is a guy who seemed happiest without any coach. Again he spent long periods letting Nadal control the rallies, and he rarely used his backhand slice to Nadal's backhand, a tactic that would seem to be a no-brainer for a player with a one-handed backhand.
Standing next to Nadal and trophy-presenter Gustavo Kuerten, two three-time French champions, Federer, the 10-time Slam winner, actually looked diminished. He wasn't a vanquished warrior, but a guy who had made a confused hash of his second chance at the Grand Slam, who couldn't find a path that would let him rise to the occasion. If Federer never wins the French Open, he won't be able to point to these two losses to Nadal as glorious efforts, even though he did give his best. I think most tennis observers and his fans will remember them as inexplicable and wrenching disappointments.
But enough about Federer—it was the performance of Rafael Nadal, as nervous and ragged as much of it was, that should be remembered. From the start, he sent more balls than usual flying out or diving into the middle of the net, and he served with little pace or variety (which may have been his tactic). If you believe that champions find a way to win without their best (I actually believe it's the opposite, that non-champions—the Nikolay Davydenkos of the world—find a way to lose when they are playing their best), then even a Federer fan has to credit Nadal with a champion's performance.
I'll boil it down to three examples. Nadal fought off, I believe, 10 break points in the first set alone. Some were on nervous Federer errors, but one was on a brilliantly all-or-nothing play. Federer had chipped a backhand short and wide. Nadal came forward in the doubles alley and decided his only hope was to go up the line. But if he was going to hit that shot, it would have to be good, so Nadal went the whole nine yards, sending the ball into the doubles alley with just enough hook to bring it back in at the last second. It won him the point and may have saved him the first set.
Up 1-0 in the fourth set, Federer earned another break point (was it his final one of the match?). The momentum had gone back and forth through all four sets, and this was a major chance for Federer to grab it back after Nadal had won the third set. The two played a long point and stretched each other across the court more than once. Finally, Nadal saw a small opening up the line with his forehand and took it, drilling the ball into the corner, winning the point, and ending Federer's hope for another quick momentum swing in his favor. It's that kind of well-timed daring—and the nerve to execute it—that makes Nadal more than just the one-dimensional slugger he's often accused of being.
The third signature moment for Nadal was actually a series of them at the end of the match. I said earlier that he didn't play well Sunday, but he pulled it all together in the fourth set when he needed to hold four straight times to win the title, never a sure thing on clay. Nadal sent his serves closer to the lines, flattened out his ground strokes, and cut out the errors. In the final game, he forced mistakes from Federer with two strong forehands and a deep first serve. Last year, Nadal gagged and was broken at this point; this year, he may have played his best game of the match.
The U.S. broadcasters spent a lot of time talking about how unlucky Federer is to have Nadal around, and what an accomplishment it would be for him to beat him. But look at it from Nadal's side for a second. He's just had to beat the best player in the world, the guy who will likely be considered the best ever, three straight years at a major, two of those times in finals. Forget the fact that it's on clay; Federer is better than everyone else on dirt anyway, so Nadal's wins can't be diminished by pointing to the surface. It's not as big a deal as winning a calendar-year Slam, but Nadal's trifecta over Federer makes his current run at the French Open an accomplishment worth celebrating and remembering—shaking your head at, even—in its own right.