Federer's Backhand the Key to Victory Over Nadal

===

Lot's of lingering thoughts regarding Roger and Rafa's 28th tilt, so I figured I'd take to the blog to express some of them.

Federer's win—his first on an outdoor hardcourt vs. Nadal since 2005—was made possible for two reasons:

1. His backhand was amazing today.

and

2. Nadal refused to flip the script.

Let's start with the backhand. I've long felt that the key stroke in any Nadal-Federer match is Roger's backhand. It's no secret, pretty much everybody agrees with that, even Roger and Rafa. What's usually so fascinating about their matchups is the way that each works to either hide or expose Roger's backhand, and to what degree.

But yesterday, try as he did (especially with the serve), Nadal found nothing to expose when it came to Roger's backhand. Federer used the shot eloquently, whipping it cross-court, even on Nadal's nastiest of slice serves on the ad-side, all afternoon. I think Federer's day was actually made a lot easier by the fact that Nadal kept going there. Perhaps Nadal just assumed that he'd break it down eventually, but I think he really lost the match when he didn't adapt his game to what was really happening out there.

Nadal's reluctance to deviate from the script probably made it a lot easier for Federer than it might have been. Think about it: Somebody serves to your backhand 95 percent of the time, even though you are in the zone. What could be better than that?

Am I being naive here? To me it seemed like Rafa needed to try something different in this match, yet he never did.

He even alluded to his problem after the match, commenting that his topspin/kick serve was not getting up as high on Federer due to the conditions, wind, etc...

Was this just a poor match played in tough conditions, or was it further proof that Rafa is a better active player than a reactive one? Is Rafa a problem solver? We know he's a problem creator, but based on his work against Djokovic over their last seven matches, there's some pretty compelling evidence that he's not making the highest marks when it comes to solving.

(Who could blame him for being stubborn, really, or sticking with what has worked so often?)

Federer was able to do two things that he usually isn't able to do with his backhand against Nadal yesterday: First, he hit over the cross-court ball and stretched Rafa out by creating some sick angles. Second, he used the down-the-line consistently, which kept Nadal honest, and probably more importantly, kept him from unleashing his fearhand.

This was the perfect match for Federer in terms of the backhand, and it reminded me of his 2011 World Tour Finals victory over Nadal when he also did lots of damage from that side. Also, I can't help wondering if going three sets with Thomaz Bellucci in the fourth round helped Federer get the reps that he needed on one-hander.

If it did, would it be possible for Federer to pay Bellucci more than he earns on the ATP tour to be his practice partner?

Either way, yesterday's 28th Nadal-Federer match was, like all of them have been, a fascinating encounter that highlighted tennis in all its chess-like glory. All of the elements that fascinate were present: the quest for each player to find each other's backhand, the constant battle for court positioning, the never-ending search for short balls to pulverize, the finer points of shot selection, as in where to put the ball, with what spin, and how often? and of course, the ability of each player to deal with mother nature.

Everything was in play yesterday, but somehow Nadal seemed to miss the big thrust of the match. Federer's backhand was on fire, and Nadal should have left it alone for a while in the hopes that it would have cooled off by the time he resumed his exploitation of it.

Moving forward, does it mean that Federer's backhand has turned a corner? Perhaps all these years of getting worked over by Nadal's buggy-whipped topspin drives is helping him improve?

Will he be able to use the shot in the future with more versatility, power and consistency like he did today?

Could this be yet another twist—another evolution so to speak—of the rivalry?

Hard to say, but easy to think and write about.

Nadal's Inflammatory Comments: Self-Interest or Selfless?

===

You knew it would have to happen sometime. The always congenial and typically amicable rivals are finally experiencing a modicum of tension. Or, at least, it's what you will read and hear.

Now, before we try to make a mountain out of molehill of Rafael Nadal's thoughts on Roger Federer's lack of support for the player's movement with regard to the ATP schedule, let's state with equanimity that Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer have always held each other in high regard. In fact, I'm quite sure they still do, and the fact that Rafa is willing to set off on a different course than Federer with regard to the great big elephant in the room known as the ATP schedule, does not in any way, shape or form renounce the mutual respect that the pair share for one another.

That said, Rafa's comments do make for a good read, and maybe -- should the longtime rivals meet in the Australian semifinals -- good fightin' words too.

"For him it's good to say nothing," Nadal told reporters in Spanish, in response to hints that Federer disliked hearing players complain about problems on the tour because it tarnished the image of the sport. "Everything positive. 'It's all well and good for me' and the rest can burn themselves."

"He likes the circuit. I like the circuit," added Nadal. "He finishes his career fresh as a daisy because he is physically privileged, but neither Murray nor Novak Djokovic and I are fresh as a daisy."

Strong words from the world's No. 2, quite obviously, and courageous too. Considerable credit has to go to Nadal here for stating his mind and for not being afraid to send a message to Federer.

Nadal's stated concerns about the rigor of the ATP's schedule are certainly not only his own. But the toll that his commitment to supporting Spain's Davis Cup aspirations -- a commitment that Federer regularly eschews when it comes to playing for Switzerland -- is somewhat unique. Perhaps, Nadal, ever loyal patriot that he is, does harbor some underlying bitterness for Federer's perceived lack of "love of country."

But, as with Nadal's current beef, there is always more than one side to the story. Doesn't Switzerland value Federer's Grand Slams more than it would value a Davis Cup title, and isn't Federer's reluctance to attempt an all-out pursuit of the latter at the expense of the former really the most patriotic endgame in reality?

The issues are complex, to say the least. And while Nadal's willingness to come out in support of the poor, the tired, the huddled masses of tennis players who do not benefit from being physically privileged like Federer, wouldn't he be wise, at this point in his career to take a page from the Federer playbook and stop hanging himself out to dry when doing so isn't required by the tour?

His well-documented frustration with the rigors of the tour is warranted -- no doubt -- and his desire to have Federer show more support for the grinders on tour is understandable, but is it realistic?

Tennis, individual sport that it is, is driven by self-interest, and Federer is interested in cementing his legacy, not helping other, younger and more physically robust players, end it. Can you blame him?

Nadal, also is driven by self-interest. He wants an easier road to hoe, and he doesn't quite know how to get it without offending his own innate sense of honor. He'd like the tour to make it easy for him to stay healthy and be able to perform at his highest level for the most important events. He can state that he's out to see all the players benefit, but are his intentions really so selfless?

At the essence of the argument is this: Tour solidarity is in the interest of Nadal, but it is not in the interest of Federer. So it's only natural that the narrative has turned.

It is an interesting time for tennis, and there is a lot to play for -- both on the court and off. Nadal's fiery comments prove so much.

A little off-court fire to the rivalry might be just the thing to make it more compelling on the court. Not that it needed it, but it probably won't hurt.

Roger-Rafa: 10 Quick Thoughts

===

Roger Federer defeated Rafael Nadal 6-3, 6-0 today in London. Here are 10 quick thoughts on the match.

1. It just occurred to me that Rafa's period of dominating Federer might be coming to an end. I didn't consider this to be a possible byproduct of the drop in confidence that 2011 might have caused Nadal, but it makes sense. Is it happening, or was today's result a one-off?

2. One possible implication of Roger having more success against Rafa (assuming that it actually happens) is that Slams come back to the table in the short term. Federer's match-up problem has been Nadal, not Djokovic. If Fed proves that he's capable again of beating Rafa in a Slam, we could see No. 17 as early as February.

3. I can't quite put my finger on what is missing from Rafa's game right now. How is it that Roger is hitting him off the court? Has Rafa lost a step or has Roger gained another? Today's winner count: Federer, 28 Rafa, 4

4. Federer is playing perfect tennis right now. But you know what? There were a lot of other losses to Nadal where Federer played perfect tennis. Rafa had an answer and then some back then; today he's got nothing but confusion.

5. This is what I love so much about tennis: There is always another chapter, another set, ANOTHER GAME. Anything can happen and quite often, when it does happen, it will be when you least expect it.

6. Flashback to Roland Garros, when Federer broke Djokovic's streak to set up a final date with Nadal. I was not happy at the time because I felt (knew?) that Rafa was going to demolish Fed in that final. If it happens again next year, I will not assume that Rafa is going to demolish fed -- even on clay in a Slam.

7. How is Federer -- at 30 -- looking more sprightly than Rafa, who is 25? You have to hand it to Federer here for being healthy when everybody else is in walking wounded mode. Hey, staying healthy is a big part of the sport, and Federer gets the "check" in that column every time.

8. Did you know that today was the first time that Roger and Rafa have met where neither player was ranked No. 1 in the world? It truly is a new era...

9. Is it safe to say that there is no dominating force in tennis anymore? Maybe Novak Djokovic will have something to say about that, but my gut tells me that Djokovic will drop a level and Rafa and Roger will both come up a level next year. That's a three-way dogfight at the top with Muzz and Tsonga and maybe a few other courageous souls creating major chaos at the Slams. I welcome that wholeheartedly.

10. Food for thought: True or False? The "Annacone effect" is playing a large role in Roger's recent rejuvenation.

Second Serving: Day 1 WTF's: Federer Loves Indoor Courts and More

===

Editors Note: From this point forward, The Fan Child will refer to the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals as the "WTF's." Please take note.

Now, let us dissect day 1...

Rafa? Roger? Anybody? Beuller?

Was it just me, or did it seem like everybody had a difficult time maintaining an elite level today. Roger was guiding the ball rather than driving it. Rafa's forehand was too round, and his slice was too fluffy. Jo-Wilfried was asleep for the first 30 minutes. Fish was good at times, but his forehand lost its will at others.

In other words, it wasn't necessarily pretty...

Let's Talk About Day 2 Then:

Murray-Ferrer and Djokovic-Berdych are on tap for Monday. Here are some stats/ analysis:

Murray leads Ferrer 5-0 on hard courts, but let's not forget how tough Ferrer played Muzz in their biggest match of 2011. Ferrer won the first set and also pushed Murray to second and fourth set tiebreakers in their Australian Open semifinal match.

Djokovic on His Shoulder:

"I have been serving almost 100 percent the last two or three days," said Novak. "So for me the shoulder is fine at this moment." My worry: Almost 100 percent? I'm not sure that's such thrilling news...

Tracking Back to Noah's PED rant:

Read about it: Rafa's reaction, Uncle Toni and Ferrer were quoted in this Telegraph Piece.

Fed With Gimel:

On Sunday, Tennis Channel aired Fed's interview with Justin Gimelstob on the practice courts (filmed at least a day before his first match). Federer expressed minor concerns about the speed of the London courts. "I think conditions are a bit faster here. I'm still struggling a little out here a bit actually, so that's a little bit of a slight worry, but I still have another day to prepare," said the five-time WTF titlist. "The thing with Tsonga, and with Fish -- because he's also in my group -- is they can sort of hit you off the court."

Fed also said that indoors are a great love of his: "This is where I did the breakthrough, back in '98 actually. I went to the quarters of Toulouse, and then the year after that I had the breakthrough beating Moya, who was world No. 4. So I think indoors has always been sort of my first love on tour."

Doubles?

You want dubs? We got your dubs...

Both doubles tilts went to Match Tiebreaks today, and both ended 11-9. The Indo-Pak express had the balls to serve, up 6-3 vs. Nestor and Myrni, but still lost. One of the teams I know the least about, Fyrstenberg and Matkowski (Who? The ATP website is calling them 'Polish Power') pulled a big upset against Zimonjic and Llodra in the other 11-9 Match Tiebreak.

On Monday, The No. 1 Bryan Bros. will battle Jurgen Melzer and Philipp Petzschner. Incidentally, the Bryans own a 4-0 vs. MelPetz. Mahesh Bhupathi and Leander Paes will face Robert Lindstedt and Horia Tecau for the first time in the other round-robin tilt.

The O2 Arena: an awesome tennis venue:

Check out this photo of the 02 Arena ready for tennis. The court looks like an oasis of light. This is rock-n-roll tennis, baby. Let's hope the players follow suit tomorrow...

Making Sense of a Match Point Miracle

===
Tennis's version of a "The Shot Heard 'Round the World" came late in the 5th set of the US Open semifinal yesterday, with Roger Federer serving for the match at 5-3, 40-15. Novak Djokovic, about to be bounced from the draw, would later say he gambled, and he would say it with a smile.

But Djokovic's face told a different story in the moments leading up to the madness. A glimpse at the tape reveals a Djokovic who is resigned to his fate. He isn't wearing that lucid glare that we expect future miracle makers to wear. He's not calm, steely or focused; he's just plain miffed, and for good reason. Djokovic had just handed a service break to Federer in the previous game; now here he was, facing tennis's version of walking the plank, about to be aced out of the championship while 23,000 screaming fans cheered for his rival.

Then, POW!, Djokovic unleashed the mighty cross court blast that is destined to be referenced in US Open lore from this point on. The shot was a blur. A meteor. It was not a tennis ball hitting the ocean-blue hardcourt just inside the sideline, it was a ball of gas.

30-40. Still, Djokovic remains on the plank; he's got another match point to wiggle out of. Federer is ready to serve, but what's this? Djokovic is pleading to the crowd for support -- and getting it! He is smiling as Federer prepares to blast another serve in his direction...

When it was all said and done, Djokovic would produce another miraculous return, which would send Federer into a tailspin and breathe enough life into Djokovic to get him off the plank and into the finals by winning the last four games of a 6-7, 4-6, 6-3, 6-2, 7-5 instant classic.

Afterwards, we were left to ponder: How could one shot start such an avalanche of momentum? Did Federer choke, or was Djokovic simply too good? Is Djokovic the luckiest man on the planet or was his strategy of throwing caution to the wind the right one for the moment?

Federer didn't think so highly of Djokovic's gunslinging. "Confidence? Are you kidding me?" he said, when asked if Djokovic's match point meteor was a function of his confidence. "I mean please. Look, some players grow up and play like that...I never played that way...so for me, this is hard to understand how you can play a shot like that on match point."

But Djokovic was still smiling, and still feeling lucky. "Yeah, I tend to do that on match points," he said. "It kinda works."

Not only did it work, it also sucked the confidence from Federer. Seven unforced errors would immediately follow Djokovic's heroics and related crowd-rallying, in the haze that was the final four games of the match.

But Djokovic's defining moment might not have been the impossibly good forehand he hit. His insistence on calling for crowd support before Federer served the second match point might have have been the real shape-shifter. The press questioned Djokovic on whether or not he had crossed a line with the gesture, but Djokovic wasn't taking the bait. "I was trying to get the crowd on my side, and you know, I did," said Djokovic. "At this level you need that in order to win."

"As long as it's sportsmanship, I don't care," said Federer. "I don't know what he did, so it's not an issue."

While Djokovic's first match point may have been pure serendipity, his next shot was a skillful defensive return against a nasty Federer body serve. And it was done with a crowd firmly sensing -- and wanting -- something special from the Serb. Still, Federer had a chance to hit a fairly routine winner and quiet the masses, and failed.

His forehand clipped the tape, landed wide, and the dominoes fell after that, one by one.

"It's awkward to explain this loss because I feel like I should be doing the other press conference," said Federer.

"Well, I would lie if I say, you know, I didn't think I'm gonna lose," said Djokovic.

That is where the psychology becomes so interesting to dissect: if Djokovic hadn't been resigned to losing, could he have hit the shot that enabled him to win? If he hadn't taken the time to win over the fans before the second match point, would Federer have been more decisive on the forehand he missed?

This was the perfect moment where courage and hopelessness overlapped to change the entire complexion of a match. Then nerves and momentum got involved to finish the deal.

And, as is always the case in tennis, timing was everything.

Tuesday's Rainout Will Make Repeating Tougher For Nadal

===
I've chosen the obligatory Jimmy Connors washout video to accompany the bad news that is coming from the US Open on Tuesday. With the rain nixing Rafael Nadal's 4th-round match with Gilles Muller (along with three other men's 4th-round tilts), I immediately wondered the following: Can we really expect Nadal to defend his title by winning four best-of-five set matches in five days? The same goes for Andy Murray, and the other six players who were scheduled to battle for spots in the quarterfinals today.

I just don't know how they are going to get through this. There's rain in the forecast for six of the next seven days and there's no roof.

Then I started thinking: Is there any way that we can get Larry Ellison in so that he could fly all players and ticket holders from New York to Indian Wells?

Excuse me if I sound like an anti-USTA ranter at the moment, but really, it's kind of hard to be anything but at this point. There is no roof at the National Tennis Center, nor is one likely for at least 10 years, and to make matters more complicated, the US Open remains as the only Grand Slam that plays the semifinals and finals on back-to-back days.

That double-whammy has made for more headaches than great tennis in recent years. Super Saturday at the US Open supposedly began for the sake of the fans (let's be honest: it's really more about the advertisers), but does anybody really benefit from having a Grand Slam final played less than 24 hours after the semifinals? It makes no sense, especially when you consider the way tennis is played these days. The points are longer, the matches are longer and the physical rigor of the game is exponentially greater.

With Tuesday's play cancelled, it appears as if the players won't even be fresh when Super Saturday begins, and the advantage has swung decidedly in favor of the four players who are already through to the quarters: Novak Djokovic, Roger Federer, Janko Tipsarevic and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. If rain causes no further cancellations, each will still have to play three matches in five days, but that seems a lot more manageable than the herculean task that the other eight players slated to play fourth-rounders tomorrow face.

Of course, I'm operating under the assumption that matches will be played on Wednesday through Saturday, but we all know mother nature might have other designs. So, here we are, at the mercy of factors beyond anybody's control, in a tournament that has already proved that they care more about TV ratings than ensuring that their finalists are rested and ready to go for the final (I'm all for commercialization, but prefer to draw the line a little closer to the player's wishes).

You do the math, if you can stomach the conclusion: advantage, mother nature.

All we can do now is cross our fingers and hope and pray that an equable solution drops out of the sky with all those raindrops.

Tsonga's Higher High

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga staged an improbable comeback against Roger Federer to reach the Wimbledon semifinals.

===

Frenchman Jo-Wilfried Tsonga -- he of the infectious smile and unabashed joie de vivre -- has done the unthinkable against Roger Federer.

And he made it look easy.

Before the quarter-finals began on Wednesday, Federer was 178-0 after winning the first two sets of a match in a Grand Slam. Now's he's 178-1.

The Le Mans, France native, also a quarter-finalist last year at Wimbledon, kept Federer at bay throughout his improbable rally by serving flawlessly and relentlessly attacking the six-time Wimbledon champion with free swings and steady nerves.

The result? An awe-inspiring victory from one of tennis' most dynamic talents. The fallout? More 'what's wrong with Federer?' conversation, and the harsh reality that Federer's regal domination of the Wimbledon grass is almost certainly a thing of the past as he approaches his 30th birthday.

But let's focus on the magic of Tsonga before we contemplate what might become of Federer and his lush legacy.

Long considered one of the most entertaining and athletically gifted players on the ATP Tour, Tsonga was nothing short of majestic today. Blasting serves in the upper 130's and racing to the net behind has explosive groundstrokes, Tsonga forced Federer back on his heels in the final three sets -- and he never let him recover.

Those familiar with Tsonga's game were not surprised that he could take the game to Federer. What was surprising was that he could manage his nerves (or not even experience nervousness -- it was hard to tell) and stay out of his own way long enough to finish the Swiss Maestro off. Stretches of sublime greatness are par for the course for the powerfully-built 6'2" Frenchman. The big surprise was that he did it with such a steady emotional cadence, and that he did it for so long.

Tsonga, 26, served 9 aces and only committed 4 unforced errors in the final two sets. Additionally, he won 13 of 16 second serve points in the final two sets, and never faced a break point after his first service game of the match.

How is that possible? Was Tsonga that good or was Federer that bad? What is good and what is bad, anyway?

What was good for Tsonga is that he played a match for the ages. He stormed back to take this one from Federer with a panache, boldness and precision; he summoned all his magic and he let it spill forth without inhibition. What was bad for Federer was that he never found an appropriate response.

Tsonga's rousing run at the 2008 Australian Open, one that saw him defeat Nadal in the semis then lose to Djokovic in a hard fought final, was the previous high point of his career. With a semifinal upcoming vs. Djokovic, it's not hard to imagine a higher high.

As good as Tsonga is, there's always been the feeling that he could be better. Perhaps this Wimbledon is his time to silence that notion.

Faith in Fighting

Rafael Nadal's 6th French Open title was all about attitude. Because he stayed positive, he peaked at the right time.

===

There was an air of defeatism in Roger Federer's body language when Rafael Nadal dialed up his game at the end of yesterday's first set. And who could blame him? It was the French Open final and Federer looked to be cruising to an early lead when Nadal summoned his inner Tasmanian Devil. Suddenly Nadal was a hot-blooded animal in search of its prey. Bam! Just like that the Spaniard was up a set and a break, and looking for more.

Nadal's shift from 0 to 60 was so definitive it should have come with an explosion. And it wasn't purely physical, either. It was something more omniscient, more imperious. The wires connecting the desire and the strokes were sizzling. Nadal played with the swagger of a man who knew he had no reason to doubt. As good as Federer was playing, there was a feeling that he'd have to do it for an impossibly long time and an impossibly high level to deny Nadal the crown.

"It's a big satisfaction," said Nadal, "to win the tournament, especially when you started without playing your best. My mind was open to change the situation, so that makes the victory probably more special."

That's the essence of Nadal. He's got the implicit understanding of how important his attitude is to the bigger picture. And you get the feeling he practices his mental approach almost as much as he practices his devastating ground strokes. It's a simple element of his game, one that often gets overshadowed by his pulsating on-court persona, but Nadal's attitude might be the key ingredient to his now undeniable greatness.

"What I said one week ago is that I'm going to put everything to try and change the situation, to try and to play better," said Nadal. "That's what I did. I tried my best in every moment with the right attitude all the time, so finally I was able to play my best when I needed my best."

Nadal's physical prowess is well-documented, and the way he's revolutionized tennis with mind-bending topspin strokes is too, but it's Nadal's faith in good old-fashioned commitment -- both mentally and spiritually -- that functions as the engine that fuels his success. Think about it: can anybody spur himself to elevated tennis like Nadal can?

Nobody could in Paris, that's for sure.

Yesterday, Nadal reached the rarefied air that previously only Bjorn Borg had held at Roland Garros. With his 7-5, 7-6 (3), 5-7, 6-1 victory over Roger Federer, Nadal is now looking at another banner year, and he doesn't appear satisfied in the least.

Because yesterday's final was similar to his previous 4 victories over Roger Federer at Roland Garros, it felt somewhat routine, but the implications were anything but. With the milestone victory, Nadal becomes the second-youngest man in tennis history to win his 10th Grand Slam (Almost a year behind Borg but 173 days ahead of Federer, who is 3rd) and the 2nd man (along with Borg) to hold 6 French Open titles.

It forces us to consider the question: If Roger Federer is considered as a GOAT (greatest of all time) candidate, then mustn't we also automatically consider Nadal for the same lofty standing in the tennis hierarchy? The Spaniard has kept Federer at bay regularly since 2008 (4-0 in Grand Slam finals and 9-2 overall), and also managed to win 10 out of 12 Grand Slam finals over the course of his career, including the last 4 in just over a year.

It may take time, but even if Nadal's pace of world-beating slows, he'll surely be knocking at Sampras' and Federer's door in terms of total Slams won at some point. Unless Djokovic becomes Nadal's kryptonite the way that Nadal has become Federer's, there is seemingly no reason (other than loss of interest -- dream on -- or injury) that Nadal shouldn't win more Slams. If he does, the mystique quotient surrounding Rafa will only grow.

So here we are, at yet another precipice in the tennis season as well as a pivotal point of tennis history as we know it. What will become of Nadal in the next few years? Is there room for him to improve or even maintain this pace? Can anything or anybody put a dent in the giant bucket of confidence that he brings to the court at each and every Grand Slam?

As we learned from Federer's magical victory over Djokovic at the French, nothing is out of the realm of possibilities. And as we also learned from Federer, total domination for an extended period of time is one of those possibilities.

With Nadal's positive attitude and core of belief firmly anchoring his scintillating tennis, his boldest strokes may have yet to come.

Archie's Picks: Federer-Nadal

Archie's head is with Rafa, but his heart is with both players as they prepare for the French Open final.


===
Well, we are just moments away from the men's final, and Archie is so nervous he won't even snack on kibble. We hope you've enjoyed following along with us. For the record, Archie has picked 6 out of 10 matches correctly, but he wants you to know that he's learned a lot and he promises that he'll do better at Wimbledon.

See Archie's Li-Schiavone pick Here

See Archie's Sharapova-Petkovic pick Here

See Archies Azarenka-Li pick Here

See Archie's Nadal-Soderling pick Here

See Archie's Schiavone-Bartoli pick Here

See Archie's Sharapova-Li pick Here

See Archie's Djokovic-Federer pick Here

See Archie's Murray-Nadal pick Here

***Archie also picked Murray over Chela and Djokovic over del Potro (no posts for those picks).

There's not really much I can tell you guys about this one that you don't already know. I can honestly say that I've gone from worry to resignation to hope that this final will be a classic on par with some of Rafa and Roger's previous finals.

The players are out on the court already, so without any further ado, here is Archie's pick.

Federer-Nadal: H2H

Archie's Pick: Nadal
Why: Archie believes in making the trend his friend. Rafa has always shown superiority to Roger on clay, especially at Roland Garros, so why should anything change?

My Pick: Nadal
Why: I think that Roger is in miracle mode, and I want to believe that he can do this, because it would completely erase all the doubt that any of Nadal's previous victories over Roger has caused me about his otherworldliness, but I think that a win is too big of an ask for Federer. Still, I'm hoping it goes 5.

But let's be honest here: Roger isn't the only player who wants this title. Rafa wants it too, and even though there hasn't been too much talk about Rafa and his game over the fortnight, there's still this trivial detail to consider: Rafa's the best clay court player of our era, and he should push through for his record-tying 6th French Open title today.

Enjoy the match!