Rafael Nadal continues to add exclamation points to his record-setting career with a 13th title at Roland Garros.
Remember when everyone was bored with the European clay swing because Rafael Nadal kept winning Roland Garros? That was when he was at his sixth or seventh French Open. The clay season was soooo predictable. Hardly worth watching, they scoffed. They were waiting for Nadal to lose his edge so they could get back to Roland Garros B.N. (before Nadal)–when the likes of a Michael Chang or Gaston Gaudio could conceivably come out of nowhere and win a Grand Slam event.
Because, let’s face it, there is simply no way Nadal would ever, EVER suffer an Ivan Lendl-like meltdown. Chang cramps up and it’s Rafa on the other side of the net instead of Lendl? Chang’s staring down the ruthless Nadal forehand and a mercifully quick end to the match. There is simply no other possible outcome. And let’s not even talk about Guillermo Coria and his yips against Gaudio.
A decade ago, the King of Clay was consistently booed by the Parisienne fans. He worked too hard. He lacked elegance. Worst of all, he kept Roger Federer from winning the last thing he needed to win the career Grand Slam and cement his status as the greatest of all time.
Fast forward six or seven French Open titles, and the boredom is LONG gone, replaced by the sort of stunned, disbelieving fascination that’s usually prompted by witnessing something that shouldn’t be a thing, but is. Like a guy lifting five cinderblocks with his earlobes, or Tibetan monks using only meditation and their body heat to steam cold, wet sheets dry.
And it really shouldn’t be a thing, you know? It’s ridiculous. A 100-2 record is ridiculous. Thirteen titles at the most grueling tennis event on the calendar is ridiculous. Being that much better than that many players for that long is ridiculous. But maybe the most ridiculous thing of all is that after all of those matches, after Nadal is supposed to be winding down, tiring out, he just threw down some of the best clay-court tennis of his entire career to give Novak Djokovic the worst drubbing he’s ever suffered at a slam. Even the crowd in Paris has come around, clearly taking a “if you can’t beat him, join him” approach to the Spaniard.
Of course, there are still complaints from the pundits. They’ve morphed from “clay season is boring because Rafa” to a more generic “men’s tennis is boring because the Big 3.” They’re too dominant. Stefanos Tsitsipas and Daniil Medvedev can’t win when it counts. There have been 427 women’s slam champions while the men basically have the Big 3 plus Andy Murray and Stan Wawrinka in the past two decades.
Don’t get me wrong, I LOVED Iga Swiatek’s run in Paris. It was brilliant and inspired tennis and it made a great story. Certainly, I enjoy that the WTA produces surprise results. But the fact that men’s tennis is led by the three most dominant players of all time offers its own appeal. While it doesn’t offer much in the way of surprises, history is rewritten at every…single….slam.
Put another way, it doesn’t make sense to complain about missing opportunities to discover fresh, new artists when you get to watch Matisse, Van Gogh, and Renoir create masterpieces in front of your eyes.
Enjoy Renoir while he’s still painting.
NNY, yes the 2014 AO final was indeed awful for Rafafans. As others said, it was a match which he really should’ve won – even against this new and improved version of Wawrinka! Rafa had been playing very well – had just beat Fed convincingly in the semis, and at the time Wawrinka had never even won a set against Rafa. Wawrinka had taken out Rafa’s nemesis Novak, and there was no reason to think that Rafa would not win that final. Sampras, who has won 14 slams, had come all the way from LA in order to give Rafa his 14th slam trophy at the beginning of 2014 – if nothing unforseen would happen. Well, something unforseen did happen, and after this final Rafa went into an overall decline which lasted for quite a while. He still managed to win another FO in that season, but he seemed to have lost his joy for the game and the competition, as he admitted much later. It took three years – until the FO 2017 – before he would win another slam trophy! His only highlight was the win of the Doubles goldmedal 2016 in Rio! If someone had predicted back then that Rafa would regroup and and win seven more slams and tie Roger’s slam record, no one would’ve believed it. To be fair, no one would’ve predicted that Roger would come back, too, and win three more slams! Actually no one would’ve even thought that both, Roger and Rafa would still be active in 2020, and that the Big Three would be more dominant than ever!
So that’s why Rafa went into decline in 2014-7? Didnt know that.I wonder if the same thing will happen to Nole now, again, who had a similar decline starting almost after he won the Career Slam .Hard to fathom what going on in players heads sometimes. Nadals career nadir was probably losing early at Wimby to players he really shouldnt have.I wouldn’t begrudge him another deserved title on the grass before he retires .
If not injured, I think Nadal would have stopped Nole in FO 2016.. Also, mental Murray beat Wawrinka in other semi.. and as usual ended being runner up to Nole.
The RG final is up now! There’s a link to it from @sitanyusha’s twitter thread. I just watched the first game, appears to be from Eurosport and no commentary – which is a huge bonus in my book. Very nice quality too. For anyone that hasn’t seen it yet – or would like to see it again – grab it while you can!
https://www.tokyvideo.com/video/rafa-nadal-vs-novak-djokovic-2020-roland-garros-final-full-match
Its only the ladies now with more GS , Graff, Williams ,Court , i think they could match Graff, although Williams and Court might prove more difficult, hmm lets see, fun to speculate, just thought id throw this in for fun ….
Rafa playing Bercy
https://mobile.twitter.com/RafaelNadal/status/1318525934702559233
Oh really??? YESSS!!!… but… but…oh boy!.. I am always nervous when Rafa decided to play here!.. The changing of surface & it’s just 2 months away from AO!…
Where does this guy summon the motivation from🤠just won his 20 th slam and is back to the grind on his least preferred surface
Beats me. My best guess is he doesn’t want to get out of training. Rafa had a real struggle to get back in top form after his pandemic layoff. Besides he really likes competing. But he clearly does not like “bubbling” any more than anyone else does. And maybe he wants another shot at the WTF as well as Bercy.
I think if you’re built like Rafa “least preferred” = “most challenging” and he *loves* a challenge.
I think this is a good decision – to keep playing Paris and maybe London. He’s full of energy, goes through a positive momentum and can add some points and his trophies. Why not?
Yes, good decision to continue playing, because he needs to regain his stamina after a long break. He looked like he was tiring during set three in the FO final, luckily he won in straight sets; should the match drag on into the fourth set, Djoko might be the physically fitter of the two and then began to gain the upper hand.
Regarding the changing of surface, I think changing from clay to HC is still not as bad as changing from clay to grass; three weeks of practicing on the HCs should be fine for him to get used to the HC surface again.
Qn: When Fed returns from injury, would they speed-up the AO courts just like they did in AO 2017? Venus and Fed reached final from out of nowhere.. and Fed won… If they manage to do again, Fed will be goat for some more time. It would be tough for Nole to reach 21.
Fed’s matches will also be scheduled at night or under the roof.
Federer *Grows up in an era of faster courts but plays in a time in which administrators have mostly kept courts relatively slow*
People who don’t like Federer: OmG iTs DiSgUsTiNg HoW ThEy KeEp HeLpInG fEd!
The idea that they sped up the courts for Fed is a joke. They would’ve been under no illusion that he’d win it even if it was played on the fastest court on tour. He’d had a six month injury layoff, hadn’t won a slam in almost five years and was a 25-1 outsider. As you say, he won it from nowhere, just like he won Wimbledon from nowhere on the same slower grass which has persisted since the early 2000s.
It’s because he had such a long layoff that he was able to work on his game – unfair advantage over other players who got thrashed in finals because they never had enough match practise due to layoff.
He did not thrash the 2017 finalist at AO..it was a very closely contested final