Nadal vs. Federer: Who Needs the 2011 US Open More?

Rafa and Roger have both looked rusty and vulnerable recently, and at times even lackadaisical. It's not a look we're used to seeing from these two greats, especially with the 2011 U.S. Open approaching.

Toppling Nadal or Federer in a Masters series event is no small feat. However, it's certainly more attainable than defeating either man in a best-of-five scenario in a grand slam.

The two players know that legacies are defined by a single number, their total grand slam wins. It's why they up their level of performance when reaching a semifinal, and it's why they rarely fall out in early rounds. 

It's also why anything other than a championship at this year's U.S. Open would be a major disappointment. Each man has different motivations and needs a win badly for different reasons, but who needs it more?

Rafael Nadal

Tennis careers always have highs and lows, but who wouldn't want a low that includes a French Open title, Wimbledon final and a No. 2 ranking?

Rafael Nadal, that's who. The 2011 U.S. Open is a critical tournament for him for a few reasons.

If Rafa wins the tournament, it would be the first time that he's successfully defended a championship on hard courts, as well as the first on any surface other than clay in consecutive years. If he is to fully shed the King of Clay mantle and wear the King of Tennis crown, then he'll need to start doing this more.

Secondly, a win in New York would also mark Rafa's first back-to-back multiple slam years, something which should have happened in 2009, when Nadal admitted he was hampered by off-court issues.

You may recall that Federer won three grand slams in 2004, 2006 and 2007. No other man has done this more than once.

Rafa's advantage was winning slams at a younger age than Federer. Roger broke through at age 21, while Rafa had won four French Opens by the time he was around that same age.

But that advantage might even out, since Rafa is less likely to remain injury-free until he's 30. He will likely miss some more slams in the next five years and be in worse shape than Federer once he reaches his late 20s and early 30s.

If Nadal doesn't win the 2011 U.S. Open, he would need to win two slams each year from 2012 through 2014 and hope for one more after age 28.

However, winning the Open would give him the ability to have another year like 2009 and still remain in the hunt. With some of the pressure off his back, he would likely play more freely and be less inclined to play through an injury. 

Roger Federer

Federer's biggest motivation for winning the U.S. Open is probably the chance to put the "he's-too-old-and-past-his-prime" narrative being written about him to rest. Even the unflappable Federer has been abrasive about it at times, and understandably so.

A win in New York would be the best way to tell guys like me to put a sock in it.

Beyond that, Roger must be thinking that while 16 slams is a number Nadal could catch, 17 would be nigh unreachable. Getting past it to 18? Exceedingly tough. Nadal never had the hard-court prowess that Federer did, and is facing a deeper field now than Roger had to face from 2004 to 2007.

A win at Flushing Meadows would be significant for a couple other reasons, as well. It would be Federer's sixth title overall, an unmatched record in the Open Era, breaking the tie with Pete Sampras and Jimmy Connors. Federer's five in a row already stands alone.

The victory would also mean that Federer had won at least one grand slam for 9 consecutive years. Right now, he's tied with Borg and Sampras at 8 years.   

The Real Pressure Is Still on Nadal

So who needs the title more? Rafael Nadal.

The Swiss maestro's motivations amount to legacy insurance.

Federer is guarding against Nadal or perhaps some future star, but he's not really chasing anybody or a clear goal. Rather, it's an abstract desire to simply fight off the specter of irrelevance for a few more months or seasons.

It's a yearning to go out on a high note rather than simply fade away. Maybe that will be enough motivation for Roger Federer, too, just as it was for Sampras.

By contrast, the Mallorcan Matador needs to prove that he can dominate in his prime. He's not only chasing Federer, but trying to keep Djokovic, Murray and other deeply motivated rivals at bay.

Intimidation and momentum are critical in tennis. They are what gave Roger such an immovable position at the top for so many years, and they are what Rafa will need to reinsert himself in "greatest of all time" conversations.

Nadal cannot afford to carry around an aura of fallibility. He simply has too much to prove, and too many places in which he needs to shore up his place in history.

Rafa cannot retreat to again being only a King of Clay. That's why this U.S. Open title is so critical.