Roger Federer Has a Plan

"He is ignorant, who reveals all the answers at unimportant times"

- Voltaire

After beating Roger in Madrid, it seems sliced in stone that the Spaniard is going to win the French Open. It seems like we are back to old times. But something very minor is different.

In all the previous years in the Roland Garros press area, you never got the feeling that Roger ever wanted to play the Spaniard. Just the subtle nuances behind his answers showed his need for the trophy and a relative fear of the Spaniard as a immovable, maybe insurmountable, obstacle.

Mainly because it always seemed like Roger never had a plan for the lefty game on clay. And the Spaniard knew it. And Roger knew it. And we knew it.

But, somehow, in someway, this year is different. Roger has, to the surprise of many Federer-phobes, admitted that the one of the main things missing from his resume is beating his archrival at the French Open.

But compared to last year, after his 3 game defeat in 2008, his tone seems to be more inviting, like he knows something we dont.

With half a smirk on Sunday, he says "I hope I'll be playing the finals. If it's him, it's perfect.".

The reason this is not just an overanalyzed piece of fandom, is that its role in the bigger picture because of three reasons.

Firstly, according to L. Jon Wertheim, the Sports Illustrated tennis columnist in his podcast, Federer, in his first two matches, has played 21 drop shots. The most confounding part of it is that 13 have been forehand droppers, which is an incredible stat, considering Roger's normal forehand trajectory. After his second round matchup against Alejandro Falla, Roger mentioned Severin Luthi's , the Swiss Davis Cup Captain and the closest thing to a coach that Roger has, advice. "Be aggressive early and work on more drop shots late".

Secondly, if anyone saw the final in Madrid, there were two instances in the first set, in which Federer played forehand droppers. Sure Roger has played drop shots with relatively more frequency since last year, but what was most amazing was that they completely caught the Spaniard, the only man in this era who on most nights has all the answers against Roger, off guard. Another feature of Roger's game was taking the backhand early, which also won him a few points.

The most interesting thing was, after breaking back in the first set using these, Roger just stopped, almost like putting the tactics into a vault for a later time. (Noticed first here in the New York times Tennis blog). If people, also watched the match the Spaniard played against Ernests Gulbis, in Monte Carlo, you realized, Gulbis was making his opponent uncomfortable. The main feature was him playing a lot of dropshots. Eventually, because of his pedigree, he played far too many and eventually lost in the third.

Against the Spaniard, Roger has never found a go-to discomfort causing shot, like he does to him. His missed breakpoint chances speak to that, over the years.

Lastly, if Roger triumphs against the Spaniard in the French Open, it would be absolutely shocking. And perfectly poetic. After getting beaten at his homecourt, will it be Roger's turn to return the favor and strike the last blemish on his record out? A win against the Spaniard in Roland Garros has more historical consequences that one realizes.

But that is unimportant at this juncture. What the most interesting thing is, that it seems like maybe after 5 years, after 14 losses, after crying openly in Sydney, after losing the greatest match of all time that, Against Rafa, Roger finally has a plan.

"No problem can withstand the assault of sustained thinking".

-Voltaire