Nadal takes Federer on clay

2010-05-16 21:42

Madrid - Rafa Nadal reasserted his dominance over Roger Federer on clay and laid down a marker for the French Open when he overwhelmed his arch rival 6-4 7-6 in the final of the Madrid Open on Sunday.

Federer beat Nadal in last year's final before going on to claim the French Open and Wimbledon crowns and snatching back the world number one ranking from the Spaniard.

The eagerly-anticipated match in a packed and rowdy Magic Box arena graced by Spanish Queen Sofia was their first meeting since the 2009 title match and sets Nadal up for a run at regaining his Roland Garros crown when the grand slam starts next Sunday.

Nadal brought the partisan crowd to their feet when he took the first set and the noise reached ear-splitting levels as their hero fought back from 4-2 down to take the tiebreak before throwing himself face down on the clay.


  • Gen30 - 2010-05-16 22:43

    VAMOS RAFA!!!!!!!! Must say the 2 best tennisplayers of all times, and both Gentlemen, Nice win Rafa xoxoxoxoxox

  • Lily White - 2010-05-17 06:47

    Vamos Rafa!!! What a match! Best of all, I didn't even have to switch channels since Fed spared us the tears this time around. I guess having 2 baby girls made him realize who has the right to cry like a baby. Can't wait for ze French Open.

  • Abi - 2010-05-17 09:05

    Good game, though I wish that Federer start using both hands. He should also show some emotions. Rafa is definitly king of the clay cause he is pumped up but also relax. Clearly at home while Federer looks out of place. We are in for a treat with the French open. Can't wait!!!

  • Rafa fan - 2010-05-17 09:18

    RAFA youre the best! Vamos! but not even a mention of your record breaking win in the Business Day? Good luck for Paris

  • Jeaninho - 2010-05-17 11:25

    What beats me ,though, of you prickheads, is that your comments were missing in action when Knee-dal couldnt manage one win after 9/11 (Roland Garros). He was destroyed by Soderling and not for once did he admit Soderling's superiority over him that day. Fatigue and the old story of sore knees as usual.His outstanding record is clay-court domination. In my books can he only be regarded as aclay-court specialist. Bad sportsman anyway with lots of excuses when he is about to lose (Read Australian Open). He will never be a great against the background as "Greatness per definition". But I will admit he is the greatest Clay-courter.

  • Nordic - 2010-05-17 13:00

    "Overwhelmed his arch rival..." Am I missing something here? The scoreline was 6-4 7-6, wasn't it? I'll admit that Rafa is a better clay courter than Federer, but he was hardly "overwhelmed". Look at the 2008 French Open final to see what "overwhelmed" looks like. Maybe our reporter here chose the wrong synonym from the dictionary...

  • Jeaninho - 2010-05-17 14:52

    I agree with you Nordic. Not that I want to make an excuse for Roger's loss, but he is mostly the architect of his own downfall. Nordic dont even look at last years final. Look at the Kee-dal / Soderling clash. Overwhelmed par excellence. What furthermores f*&cks me more, is the subjective commentary by the likes of Robbie Koenig finding excuses for Kee-dal's pathetic performances on other surfaces. Always injuries or his parents divorces. It actually struck me that Nadal looks more like Uncle Tony than his own father. Reason for that divorce?

  • vamos NADAL - 2010-05-17 15:59

    the king of clay is on course to dominate French open once again.but that match was tite,i think the clay in madrid is faster n i think the ones in France are slower n with NADAL in great shape i don't c him losing a set there

  • Lily White - 2010-05-17 18:24

    uhm... what??? Nadal is the only player that can challenge and beat Federer. I think we would all agree that Federer is probably the best player, but having said that, look at the stats. Nadal leads their overall head-to-head series 14-7 (Nadal leads 10-2 on clay, Federer leads 2-1 on grass, they are tied (3-3) on hard courts). Actually make that 15-7 after yesterday. Yes, most of those wins are predominantly on clay, but the point is he beats Federer 2 times out of every 3 clashes. Ofcourse Federer has been beaten and destroyed by some unknowns recently, but I'm sure you overlook that. With his 'knees' and still beating the best player in the world! Actually, sod that. Nadal is the best player in the world. VAMOS RAFA!!!

  • S - 2010-05-17 20:39

    I would say the match was more tightly contested than any other clay court final I have seen them play. RF was not in the best of form- unforced errors quite often. But I think that if he was striking the ball as well as he did in the Roland Garros final of 2009, he could beat Rafa. So I hope to see the same two again at Roland Garros. Especially since potentail upsetters like Del Potro, Davydenko and Djokovic are out of form. Best rivalry in sport history to me. I'm a RF fan. I say a more solid game wihtout conceding cheap points, and being patient, is the way to beat RN. The record does not matter. RN dominates over the clay court stint. RF is more consistent during the year on all surfaces. I suppose that if RN were not around, RF would have set unreachable records. So RN keeps him honest. Always good to watch, whether you win or lose....the matches always have that edge above any other match.

  • Kris - 2010-05-18 06:54

    Jeaninho... I’m a massive Fed fan, but you can’t say Nadal can only be regarded as a clay-court specialist. If he takes the US Open he becomes a great... Simple as that. To win slams on all surfaces, and to beat Fed in the finals of them, speaks for itself. On the Madrid final, Fed’s tactics were a bit odd, while Nadal’s were way to predictable again (backhand, backhand, backhand), but Fed is a master at peaking at the right time. If both get to finals of the French it could easily still go either way to be honest. If Fed’s serve is on the money, he is unbeatable and that will probably be the key.

  • Jean - 2010-05-18 13:48

    I would tend to agree with you Kris, but is greatness really define in terms of winning on all four surfaces? Bjorn and even McEnroe are regarde as being great, but look at their respective records. It is the total package which qualify you as a "great'. Lets be honest Kris and I can go as far as a couple of 1000 finals ago where Federer had the edge over Nadal, but where his rhythm was disturbed by so-called medical breaks from Nadal. Look at the facts buddy. If ever yoy want a true sportsman look no further tha Federer and Sampras. Why do you think there was a personal attack from Agassi on Sampras. Now answer the question. He has won 28 out of 39 titles on clay. What the fuck is that.

  • FedFan - 2010-05-18 13:50

    I am a Federer fan but also enjoy Nadal's game. Have to say that the only other person I would not mind seeing up in No 1 spot once Federer has to finally reliquish the 'crown' is most definitely Nadal. He I think will be the most deserving.

  • jb - 2010-05-19 15:49

    Where is Rafa in a US Grand Slam Final for the last 5 years ? Oh....sorry...he's not good enough. Roger will whip him in this French. Roger have less pressure to win now and will not go down easilly on Grand Slam that is now his....mark my words. Hope Rafa don't meet Soderling in the French....hate to see him losing for a 3rd time in a row against is right...Soderling whipped Rafa on a hard court after that. Soderling plays very flat shots, not something that fits Rafa's style of play....if you could call that a style of as fast as he can and hit the ball back...he said that himself. Then off course Mr Gulbis is another factor...he took the first set of Rafa in this year's clay court season.

  • Lily White - 2010-05-19 18:37

    What all you RF fans seem to forget is that Rafa is still only 23! Most Spanish are naturally gifted on Clay, so no wonder he wins most of his tourneys on that surface. But him winning Wimbledon and Australian Open means he is improving on other surfaces. RF won his first slam at 21 in 2003 Wimbledon. Rafa at 17! I know RF is great. But I believe Nadal is and will continue to be his Achilles heel. As a side note, Rafa has faced and beaten RF in the finals of all the slams he won. Federer on the other hand faced lesser opponents. In short, if Rafa was not around, RF would have +6 more slam titles.

  • Jeaninho - 2010-05-20 13:30

    LilyWhite has it ever occured to you that RF is the only player to have beaten Nadal in clay finals. Has it ever ocurred to you that Kee-dal has reached pensionable age at a very fragile 23 years. Of course he has improved on other surfaces, cause in the competetive world of sport that is bound to happen. But Knee-dal has basically just a claycourt record to be proud of. Period. Roger at 5years his senior is his only real threat with the likes of gulbis now emerging. Roger doesnt have Knee-dals physical attributes, yet he matches him time and again. Where were you and your praises when Knee-dal was losing and all were excusing him for so called medical reasons. When Roger had mono, did he ever for once complain? I think you should just shut the fuck up. Some people are just fools and by opening their mouths they just prove it.

  • Lily White - 2010-05-20 15:08

    Your post certainly proves that you should most definitely shut up. You are basically saying your your precious Federer was beaten by a pensionable player!!! With fans like you, who needs enemies??? It's a wonder you manage to make it through the day without harming yourself!

  • Jeaninho - 2010-05-21 09:20

    Lily the only harm I experience is reading your comments. But coming from a clown, it makes my day. I take it you had your brains removed not long ago. Stop listening to that vacuum between your ears. Its embarrasing.Maybe I should engage my 12 year old kid to communicate with you. He will take you and your whole family apart

  • Lily White - 2010-05-21 09:50

    My mom used to say, '... don't argue with a fool, people might end up not knowing the difference. And he will always beat you at his game.' For the first time ever I truly understand what she was saying. Thanks for the abject lesson. I hope at some point you teach your son that cannibalism is a crime in most parts of the world.

  • Jeaninho - 2010-05-21 10:25

    I take it you are older than 20 years and for you to understand what your mother was saying only now????? Dammn. Someone must be stupid here. It couldnt be your mom. Or is it. You obviously dont know what a methaphor is. Let me guess.....You are Zimbabwean.... Better even, you are Malema's secretary

  • pages:
  • 1
Report Comment