Why did Federer lose to Nadal?

Question

2008 Clay court match. 6-1, 6-3, 6-0

Answer 1

Nadal is the king of clay. OUt of 120 matches he played on clay, he only lost 3. Plus Aeropro drive rules.

Answer 2

no one can beat nadal on clay

Answer 3

WOW! That is like asking who really killed J.F.Kennedy?

Maybe we'll go to our graves not knowing.

Some suggestions:

1. Rafa played the perfect ,unbeatable game against which NOBODY could have won. (Fed fans and Rafa haters will reject this answer outright)

2. everybody is entitled to a bad day and you can't win ,or even do well,at absolutely ALL your matches -not even Federer!

My choice? a combination of both. The perfect nadal stared across the net at the imperfect federer. The odds of these two  coinciding in their respective states of grace and (un)grace on the last day of RG were slim but it happened.

ADD. Notes: my vote for whtennis up above for Best Answer.  It was certainly entertaining and informative and even plausible. However,I still think we will never know what really happened out there. We witnessed something we will remember for years after,you'll see.

Answer 4

Nadal is basically the master of the clay court.

Also strength is a major advantage when playing on clay. Nadal 's shots are always explosive, whereas Federer  plays intelligently. He goes for his opponents weakness and hits a lot of smart shots ;)

Answer 5

I think there were a lot of factors that contributed.  Let me just say first to one of the answerers that said that Federer is not good on clay... He is the second best clay courter in the world.  He's been to the French open final 3 years running now and was in the semis the year before that.  He has a 123-40 match record on clay which is very strong.  Most likely if not for Nadal, Federer would have 3 French Open titles already and two consecutive calendar year grand slams. To say that Federer is not good on clay is crazy.

And all that is what makes the massacre by Nadal so surprising.  Nadal is absolutely phenomenal on clay.  I'd say specifically he won because he was able to break down Federer's backhand like he has done every year.  They showed a statistic during the match, 100% of Nadals serves were directed to Federer's backhand!  He did run around some on the deuce court for a forehand but every single one was sent toward his backhand wing... 100%!!!

I was joking with my g/f, "I'll give you every dollar I have if nadal goes down the middle on the ad side next time" and he never did.  

Besides picking on Federer's backhand so effectively with the high topspin serves and groundstrokes and preventing him from attacking, when Federer did attack the clay blunted it enough for Nadal's superior speed to let him reach the ball and hit incredible passing shots and angles.  

The score was so lopsided I think because Federer spent the whole match trying to figure something out to beat these advantages.  He never had a strong game plan that he could stick to and execute.  He was full of indecision simply because he didn't know what would work against Nadal.  And you know what?  Everyone else Nadal played on clay during the tournament had the same problem or if they had a plan it didn't work.  

You could see Federer change his mind mid shot sometimes because he didn't know what to do and he missed.  

Federer may be the best all around player ever to play the game(and is the 2nd best clay court player out there), but its a testament to just how good Nadal is on clay that he was made to look like he did.

Answer 6

Because Nadal played about as perfect of a match as he possibly could have, and Federer didn't play anywhere near his best.  Putting those two factors together, that's the result, a totally one-sided match.

Answer 7

the same reason he lost to him before in the final. which is that Nadal is better than him on clay.

Answer 8

I guess on clay Rafa is simply just the better of them two... I think with time IF and only IF Rafa is not around Federer eventually will will that title cause he seems to beat everyone else and get to the final all the time but then he finds himself against that big wall whom is Rafa and he just simply can't out play him.  You also have to understand that Nadal grew up playing on these clay courts and that home for him as opposed to Federer.  For him this is the his least favorite surface to play on yet he does it really well there too but for as long as Rafa can be healtly and give his all like he's done 4 yrs now, that would be the only mayor that would perhaps elude Roger for the rest of his career just like it did to Sampras.

Answer 9

As with the Williams sisters during this event, I have never seen a top player play without drive or passion. Federer's entire body language basically said, "Either give me the Championship or I won't bother playing." Quite frankly, I think he, and the others as well, are simply bored of winning! I guess the fame and fortune gets kinda old after a while, don't ya think?

Answer 10

That's the biggest mystery to have come out sweetie. I too can't seem to find the most rightful response to that massacre.

Answer 11

clay

Answer 12

I'm not surprised. In the last few matches on clay that they had, Rafa would go down and then come back strong... almost like as if he was toying with federer. At the French Open, he didn't let federer take any sort of lead and just punished him from the beginning.

People say fed had too many unforced errors. But, isn't that what Rafa does to you? He makes it so hard for you to win points that you have to try more low percentage shots and hence the unforced errors.

Answer 13

because on clay, rafael is the best. among today's generation players, he is the best. period.

for that matter, whether it's a federer or a djokovic or anybody else, they dont stand a chance on rafael's good day at the office.

Answer 14

simply because rafa played better.-

Answer 15

Rafa is King Of Clay :) He just outplayed Roger that day. Sorry

Answer 16

Because Nadal is a defensive player who relies on physical quickness and endurance matches, making him an ideal clay (read slow) court tennis player and because Federer tried to play defensive tennis with Nadal last year and Rafa just wore him down so his strategy this year was to be (too) aggressive and relied on hard ground strokes-for-winners and lastly, Nadal was just on fire all tournament.

Answer 17

Why ask why you already know the answer.

Answer 18

The first of all reasons: Nadal was basically born on clay. If all the tennis courts in the world were clay- he'd be #1 in the world.

The second: Federer couldn't get his shots over the net very well. He hit a lot of those balls into the net as if there was a magnet pulling the balls to it.

The third: It's Nadal's fourth final at the French Open. Pretty sure that anyone could of guessed he'd win.

Answer 19

because nadal is a better player

Answer 20

clay is nadals surface he is the best at it! and this is coming from a federer fan. GRASS IS NOW THIS IS FEDERERS TURF BEWARE!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 21

it's because federer cant play well on clay

i mean he's never won a single french title

nadal is beast on clay

plus federer made lots of mistakes..i mean he kept driving the ball into the net. also he either used to much power or too little power when balls came his way. thats the effect clay has on u.

i was hoping federer would win though =[

Answer 22

Nadal played the game of his life on his best surface of which he is the best in the world on. Federer made many errors and was generally off-form on a surface he is far inferior on to Nadal. It was that simple. In set 1 and 3 Nadal didn't have to play anywhere near his best to win.

Answer 23

Two reasons.-

1. Federer played a hideous match.

2. Nadal is pretty much unbeatable on clay. At the French Open, everyone else is playing for runner-up at best.