Federer, Nadal and the US Open - why it should never be
Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal have fought thrilling duels on the biggest stages in the tennis world. Just not on the largest of all, numerically: in Arthur Ashe Stadium at the US Open.
by Andrew Gruenwald
last edit: Aug 28, 2022, 09:04 am
14 times we have seen Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal duel like gladiators on the biggest stages of the tennis world. Four times in Melbourne (3-1 for Nadal), six times in Paris (6-0 for Nadal) and also four times in Wimbledon (3-1 for Federer). But there is a gap in the head to head of the two. “Fedal” have never met in New York. But why is that? Let's make it simple: Until 2009 it was Nadal who couldn't make the dream duel possible and from 2010 it was Federer who failed.
The interesting thing: Federer was the best player at the US Open in the decade from 2000 to 2009. He triumphed five times in a row at Flushing Meadows (2004-2008) and lost the final to Del Potro in a five-set thriller in 2009. Fun fact: If Federer were allowed to play a match again, then, he said, it would be this final against the Argentine. And that's because the Maestro is convinced that he shouldn't have lost this match.
The best player of the US Open in the following decade was then permanent and favorite rival Rafael Nadal. The Spaniard made eight appearances from 2010 to 2019, winning four titles (2010, 2013, 2017, 2019) in the city that never sleeps.
The problem: In "Federer's decade" Nadal never made it to the final, in "Nadal's decade" Federer was in the final in one of the years when Nadal himself failed early on.
Federer and Djokovic, there was something
Particularly bitter: In 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013 and 2017 we were only one match away from a clash between the two legends.
In 2008 and 2009, Nadal lost in the semifinals when Federer was already waiting in the final. The Iberian's defeat against Sir Andy Murray in 2008 was particularly surprising. In a match marked by rain interruptions, Nadal lost in four sets. This was so unexpected because Nadal played the tennis summer of his life in 2008. He won the French Open without dropping a set, was finally able to triumph at Church Road in Wimbledon, secured Olympic gold in singles on Beijing's hard court and was victorious at the Rogers Cup, one of the two Masters tournaments leading up to the US Open. In short: Nadal cleared 2008 - even became number one in the world for the first time. Nevertheless, it wasn't enough for his first final at the US Open.
In 2010 and 2011 it was Federer who failed in the dream final. He lost to the third of the big three, Novak Djokovic, in the semifinals. The fact that Federer had two match points against the Serbs in both 2010 and 2011 that went unused is particularly dramatic. In 2011 even with his own serve and 40:15 in the fifth set. This story should be repeated elsewhere...
A Fedal final at Arthur Ashe Stadium thus failed at one point for two years in a row. At a single point - crazy.
And then?
In 2013, the tableau was already looking for a confrontation. In the quarterfinals it could have already come to a classic. No, should come! But a Spaniard had other plans. Not Nadal, Tommy Robredo thwarted tennis fans. He beat Federer in three sets in the round of 16 in an uninspired performance by the Swiss. "Rafa" avenged his friend in the quarter-finals when he gave Robredo only four games and more than confidently advanced to the semi-finals.
In 2017 it should have come to this - one thought. Because it was the year of Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal. The Swiss won the Australian Open in a legendary final against Nadal, who then won the French Open before Federer struck at Wimbledon. Before the US Open 2017, Rafa and Roger had made all the Grand Slams of the year among themselves. The draw provided for a direct duel in the semifinals. Federer would probably have gone into this match as a favorite after beating Nadal in all three duels on hard court in 2017.
One man wasn't in the mood for the spectacle, though: Juan Martin Del Potro, Tandil's rook, seemed (as he did in 2009 when he outplayed Nadal in the semifinals) to be very unenthusiastic about a Fedal matchup. He won in four sets in the quarterfinals against Federer, but then lost in four sets in the semifinals to Nadal, who defeated Kevin Anderson in the final.
A conclusion
So why was it that we never got to see a match between the two megastars in New York, while the two crossed paths at least four times at every other major?
The fact that in the 40 (!) direct duels so far there has never been a clash in the last major of the year seems like one of those facts that you have to research first in order to believe them (another fact of this sort for lovers of the Big Four : Federer and Murray played each other 25 times, but never on clay). The tennis gods just had something against it - period!
How else to explain Nadal winning everything in the summer of 2008 but not the semi-final against Murray? Why else should Federer give away two match points in the semifinals against Djokovic two years in a row and why (seriously, why?!) did “King Roger” have to lose to Robredo, whom he otherwise won in all other eleven games?
And why exactly couldn't it just work out in 2017? Both were at a very high level - not their highest, but still. This duel would have guaranteed a high entertainment value. Just imagine: Federer and Nadal in the night session at Arthur Ashe, the largest tennis stadium in the world, in front of the crazy and, above all, loud New York audience. It would be a treat of the really big kind.
But we don't give up hope! Both are still active in the tennis circus, so there is still a chance that there will be a duel in New York (but as we now know, not in 2022).
And who knows, maybe Fedal's last dance will be at the US Open - right where it seemed bewitched so far.
It's a shame they didn't meet when both were in their prime. Nevertheless, it would also have a special charm if the two fan favorites could arrange to meet in the Big Apple in the fall of their careers.
Let's hope together.
And if not, then we can say with certainty: it wasn't meant to be. For whatever reason.