Hopefully, it can be resolved

I watched most of Federer's consecutive defeats to Canas earlier this year, all of his loss to Nadal at Roland Garros and some of the action from his loss to Djokovic at Montreal. I also saw him struggle through the Wimbledon final, where he pretty much served his way out of trouble and then played vintage tennis for the final four games. Of course, besides these, I watched most of his Grand Slam matches (thus, victories) and some of the ones he played at the Masters series. Now, 10 or so days after his loss to Nalbandian at Madrid, which I slept through, I am watching the two go head to head in Paris. Nalby is up a double break in the first set.

Nalbandian was a revelation at Wimbledon'02 where he reached the finals from nowhere. Hewitt rolled over him in the championship match, but Nalby's clean hitting off both flanks made people take notice of his talent. Further, it was presumed that he had the game to be a contender on all surfaces, unlike most of his countrymen. Over the next couple of years, he rose to the top echelons of the sport and was a fairly consistent presence at the second week of a Slam.

During this period, with enormous expectation, due to his potential and his impressive record against Federer, I've watched a few of their matches (Not the Masters'05 though), where unfailingly, he produced uninspiring tennis. So much so, that I was inclined to switch channels mid-match. When Nalby plays badly it is so easy for the viewer to get disillusioned since his body language exudes disinterest. Having developed an apathy, I did not care for his semifinal runs at the Australian Open'06 and French Open'06. Soon after, his results nosedived. He fell out of the top 10. This year, he hardly created a ripple. Until Madrid.

Delivering a career verdict with a happy ending - top talent, shone early, struggled for a few years with a few highlights and playing inch perfect tennis now - would be easy, but unfair, since I have hardly followed his career with interest.

Now though, I am watching him, and I can say with assurance that he is hitting the ball as cleanly as anyone, including Federer, can. This is not meant to indicate that he is playing at the level of vintage Federer, for one can lay claim to that only if one can invent new angles for strokeplay every alternate point. But he is probably playing as well as anyone else can play this game. He is yanking Federer around the court and dominating him with his baseline hitting.

Update: Federer down a set and a break. Nalbandian serving for the match.

Like I said, I witnessed most of Federer's losses this year, which isn't a lot anyway. I've also watched his victories. Through all of them, it is noticeable that his forehand topspin is misfiring. Again, I say this with assurance and (I believe) not as a knee jerk reaction.

With everything else in place, Federer can win Slams with a misfiring forehand. That is precisely what he has done. Lest anyone needs reminding, he won 3 Slams this year. But it is when he has his forehand firing that he can dish out those bagel sets at will. On those instances, his opponents haven't a chance. They don't have a place to go to, on court.

I don't have the stats with me, but I do not remember any bagel sets this year. No one needs to remind me of the Federer - Roddick game at the Aus Open. He played that match as well as tennis could be played. But has he bageled anyone this year? He probably did, but I don't remember any. Which means that there weren't too many. This is in complete contrast to his results over the last three years. My sincere apologies Sir Federer, but there are just too many forehands of yours that go long/wide or are completely mis-hit during prolonged rallying. There is just no place for that in your game.

I feel guilty saying this, for this is like asking Sampras to work on his serve, but if Federer intends to fulfill his stated ambition of staying on top when the 2012 London Olympics come up, he better work on his topspin forehand.

Update: Nalbandian wins 6-4 7-6(3)!