What's the one that got away from Rafael Nadal?

The One That Got Away. It’s one of the oldest themes in the book, and we’re not talking about The Angler’s Digest. Everyone seems to have experienced an unexpected, perhaps even undeserved loss that still inspires regret. It could be a job, a romantic partner, an investment opportunity, a  ... well, a fish. Or a critical tennis match.

Over the coming days, Tennis.com will revisit the most surprising, significant defeats suffered by three iconic tennis stars: Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic.

2017 Australian Open Final

Roger Federer [17] d. Rafael Nadal [9], 6-4, 3-6, 6-1, 3-6, 6-3, in 3:38

• Age: Federer 35, Nadal 30
• Major Titles: Federer 17, Nadal 14
• Major Final Meetings: Nadal led, 6-2
• All Meetings: Nadal led, 23-11

He went for it, and it was the right thing for him to do. Rafael Nadal

It may seem that losing one of the greatest matches ever played would qualify as a player’s most bruising loss. But Roger Federer’s five-set conquest of Rafael Nadal in the 2007 Wimbledon final came relatively early in Nadal’s career. It was not terribly surprising, and it did not really have significant big-picture implications for either player—yet.

The big one that got away from Nadal happened 10 years later, against Federer, in the Australian Open. It was a critical match against his great rival, and it appeared to slip through his fingers at a time when securing the title would have turned up the heat even further on a torrid race among the Big Three to win the Grand Slam singles title derby.

Federer was not just entering the autumn years of his career—the Swiss star had dropped to No. 17 in the rankings and coming off minor knee surgery that forced him to miss the entire second half of 2016. He had not won a major title in five years, and had not beaten Nadal in a Grand Slam final that aforementioned Wimbledon clash.

Nadal was not exactly in the bloom of good health, either. He was emerging from a struggle with a damaged wrist that led him to pull out of Roland Garros and miss Wimbledon altogether. He was seeded a lowly No. 9 in Oz.

Melbourne was not the ideal Grand Slam crossroads for Nadal to ambush Federer. The muscular Spaniard won the title there in 2009, but he was either outplayed or snakebit in the ensuing seven frustrating years. In 2012, he held a 4-2 lead in the fifth set, only to lose a 5:53 final to Novak Djokovic. Perhaps even more crushing was the 2014 final, when Nadal’s back visibly locked up on him for a good portion of his match with Stan Wawrinka. Then too, Nadal was facing an opportunity to rephrase the GOAT debate, but a first-time Grand Slam finalist won.

In his previous appearance on Rod Laver Arena, Nadal simply ran into a buzzsaw, ripped to shreds in the first round by compatriot Fernando Verdasco.

Valid questions about age, injury, and even stamina hovered over “Fedal,” both of whom had barely survived two five-set matches on the way to the final. When they demolished the doubts, the commentariat went into overdrive.

“I think it could be the most historically significant match ever,” Andy Roddick told a Eurosport interviewer in Melbourne. He described the match as a seismic event.

“If you think of where they are in terms of [the Slam count], a Nadal win puts him back in the game. . . A Federer win puts him on 18, and I don’t know that there’s enough time left to make up that difference.”

Federer clearly wanted to avoid getting into a baseline slugging contest, so the match proceeded right from the jump at a brisk pace. (The entirety would consume just 3:38, including a medical timeout taken by Federer at the end of the fourth set). He also eschewed the slice option of his one-handed backhand. Throughout their rivalry, Nadal had feasted happily on the Federer backhand, using his savage topspin forehand to force Federer to hit uncomfortable backhands from shoulder height.

Aggressively taking advantage of the quicker-than-usual court speed, Federer hit flat to topspin backhands, driving the ball with authority at a pace that kept Nadal from seizing control of the points—and running him ragged. Given the chance, Federer belted his forehand with gusto.

“I don’t think it would have been intelligent to try to get into too many long rallies from the baseline,” Nadal said later. “I don’t think he would have won. He went for it, and it was the right thing for him to do.”

But there’s “going for it” and there’s going for it.

After the first four, crisp, see-saw sets, Nadal scored a breakthrough to take a 3-1 lead in the fifth. But Federer was determined to keep pushing, to remain faithful to his strategic goals. He reminded himself to “play free,” both with his hand and in his head, because you don’t really play an opponent—you play the ball. The last thing he wanted to see was his hopes expiring under an avalanche of Nadal forehands.

Federer’s tennis was near flawless as he reeled off the final five games of the match, ripping backhands, crushing forehands, spot-serving with precision, taking time away from Nadal by taking the ball early and constantly pressing forward.

Gracious in the wake of a defeat, Nadal said of the final five games: “The way that he played, he can put the balls in—or not. And he put a lot of balls in, taking a lot of risks, and taking the ball very early, playing very fast. So he had success. Well done for him.”

In the aftermath, Federer was free to bask in the knowledge that this pivotal clash in the Grand Slam title derby left him with an 18-14 lead in major singles titles.

Nadal was probably too disappointed in the outcome to take comfort from the fact that Federer was at least five years older than his main rivals. In just twelve months, Federer would win his 20th and final Grand Slam title on the same Melbourne court. But Nadal would go on to eclipse Federer in the hunt, bagging 22.

And there was Djokovic, waiting, watching from the wings, biding his time, which would come.

Honorable mention: It’s only fitting to give honors to a match involving the third leg of the Big Three tripod. So it’s Nadal’s loss to Djokovic in that nearly six-hour Melbourne clash mentioned above. Djokovic won, 5-7, 6-4, 6-2, 6-7(5), 7-5.