Who was going to tell Roger Federer, that Federer who dominated the circuit with an iron fist and who was predestined to rule tennis autocratically for many years, that the boy he invited to the box in Indian Wells (2004) for him to watch their quarterfinal match would end up cornering him. “The forehand is his best shot, and also his mobility throughout the court. He has a different character and is very confident in his fighting ability. He hits the ball with a lot of spin and that makes the bounce very high. I tried to avoid it, but I couldn’t,” said the Swiss just two weeks after that invitation, when the Spaniard had already surrendered to him for the first time. It happened in Miami, on the old Key Biscayne. One was 22 years old, had won all but one of his matches since November and was the undisputed king of the circuit; the other, 17 years old, had definitely come out: double 6-3, in 70 minutes. It was the first time of the 40 that they faced each other.
“As tennis players we are completely different, but if we talk about our way of seeing life, we are very similar,” Nadal explained at the O2 in London, almost two decades after that crossing in Florida, excited at the farewell of his most admired rival. . Federer was leaving, the man he martyred with his drive and its effects; the ideal partner, the sporting better half of a rivalry as antagonistic as it is exemplary. Never have two such contrasting proposals mixed so well, because a common background was added to the attractive contrast in form. Nadal cannot be understood without Federer, in the same way that the Spaniard’s overwhelming emergence further enhanced the Swiss’s greatness. It’s the perfect mix. There were ups and downs behind the idyllic relationship – divergences during the joint presidency of the ATP Player Council – but chivalry always presided over the connection.
“I feel his passion for me, I suppose, for my person; and that is something that makes me proud. We have always been very connected. It has been great, I think we have enjoyed each other’s company,” said Federer in his professional farewell, 2022. Behind them were delicious confrontations, none like the one they starred in at Wimbledon Cathedral in 2008. That episode showed that Nadal had arrived to make people suffer. to Federer, who also suffered the following year in Melbourne—the famous “God, its’ killing me (God, this is killing me)”—and that, at that time, he couldn’t find a solution for his setback to resist punishment. He did achieve it in the final stretch of his career, when he reformulated his strategy and transformed his reverse, defensive up to that point, into an offensive tool, anticipating the possible flight of the ball through the early dribble.
This is how the Swiss won the last grand final they played in (Australia 2017) and the last meeting (Wimbledon 2019). In any case, Nadal was able to assault his green kingdom (1-3) and play one-on-one quickly (9-11), while the genius never quite found the way to replicate on clay (14 -2). The history between the two reflects a 24-16 favorable score for the Spaniard, who also managed to overtake him in the great historic race. He could not, however, with the third piece of the great triangle. Back in 2006, a certain Novak Djokovic appeared and from the duo he switched to three voices. In the end, the Serbian prevails, dominating the individual against both – 27-23 with the one from Basel and 31-29 with the one from Manacor, in the most repeated fight in history – and has also managed to prevail on the stage of the Grand Slams. Faced with the harmony and affection dedicated to one bond, the sparks and harshness of the other.
“For him it would have been a bigger frustration not to get it.”[elrécordde[elrécorddemajors]. And perhaps that is why he has achieved it, because he has taken his ambition to the maximum. I have been ambitious, but with a healthy ambition that has allowed me to see things in perspective, not be frustrated, not get more angry than necessary on the track when things were not going well. It’s my way of living it, they are different cultures,” Nadal said in September of last year, to which Djokovic replied a month and a half later: “I’m going for all possible records, I’ve never had a problem saying it. And that’s why certain people don’t like me. “I don’t pretend like others and say that records are not my goal and then behave differently.”
There has traditionally been friction between Nadal and Nole, in the same way that both profess great sporting respect for each other. Both have clashed dialectically on various occasions, directing barbs between the lines or hidden messages, but in parallel they have fought some of the most exciting battles in the history of their sport. Remember the longest final of all time —5h 53m in Australia 2012—, or passages like the “Hello Madrid! that influenced the closure of the Roland Garros final in 2014, or the closed roof and suspension in the 2018 Wimbledon semifinal. “We started like this, and I wanted to maintain those conditions. I expressed myself because they asked me my opinion,” Djokovic alleged.
There was never excessive feelingfar from friendship, but the recognition is reciprocal and in the same way that when Federer left, a part of the Spaniard left — “in some way, a part of my life is leaving and it is difficult,” declared the second —, now As this disappears from the plane, a part of the Balkan leaves, who at the time pointed out: “Rafa is a great warrior, my greatest rival; You have to respect and admire him. I have tons of respect for him. He is a tireless fighter. I remember McEnroe saying that when Borg retired, a part of him did too, even though he continued to play. And my feeling is very similar, it is a strange feeling.”
Nadal, for his part, highlights the versatility of an opponent that forced him to reinvent himself and permanently give another plus, reflected above all in the final they played in October 2020 at Roland Garros. That afternoon, the Spaniard controlled the game for an hour and a half, until Nole managed to at least make a mess in the third set. Based on that action-reaction that defines the dispute between the two, the Serbian responded two years later in Paris. Of course. “He is the perfect tennis player, he has no weak points. Even if he plays on dirt, hard or grass, he is capable of winning. Even on those days when things don’t seem to go his way, you have the feeling that he will end up winning,” the Spaniard described to him in 2021. And he added this year, in an interview with La Sexta: “The numbers say yes. , for me, yes; It’s the best I’ve ever seen. The image it projects is worse than it really is. I think he is a good person; with his mistakes, because I think that with his behavior he accentuates them and when I see someone with so much success get so angry while playing, I don’t like it. But I think it’s good.”
With Federer retired and the Mallorcan now leaving, only the Serbian remains standing, the last line of the equilateral triangle.
