Fiddling Federer

Well, we couldn't let Bloody Wednesday pass us by without comment - I'm trying hard to remember the last time a clay-court Masters (or any main-tour clay event) lost three of its top seven seeds on the same day. If anyone wants to take a shot at researching it, be my guest and get back to me when you have an answer (which should be in, oh, about 17 months).

I watched parts of the first set between Juan Carlos Ferrero and Rafael  He Who Shall Now Be Named Nadal in the office of our publisher, partly to catch a glimpse of Asad Raza, our intrepid Rome correspondent this week. He was clearly visible in a corner seat close to the court, and seemingly awake  despite having put in a few 3 A.M. nights in Roma. I was surprised when Ferrero dismissed those Nadal set points and held serve near the end of the first set, but unprepared for the unraveling that would follow. So what did it all mean?

As if I would know.

That's the thing about events like Bloody Wednesday;  they're like a  massive hurricane that decimates a strip of shore and the very next morning the air is clear, cool, and birds are once again warbling. It's like the first day of a new life, and I can't help but believe that his is going to energize and inspire a whole cluster of players, especially the Nicolas Almagros of this world. This is their best shot at maximizing their performance at a tournament most suited to their predilections. But let's look at what - if anything - Bloody Wednesday suggested about some of the critical personages in the game, starting with the shell-shocked upset victims.

Rafael Nadal - To me, the negativity that has hung like a faint odor over Nadal's spring is an area of greater potential concern than his actual physical condition, or the fact that he was beaten by Ferrero (with an assist to an obvious, painful injury). Attitude is a critical component in any athlete's aspirations, and to that end I wish Nadal had just skated over the questions about the clay-court schedule after his loss to Ferrero; instead, he got lured into another airing of grievances, including this seemingly bitter comment about a potential summit with ATP CEO Etienne de Villiers: "I don't have nothing to speak with this man, no? Not more." I wish I had been present in the room when he said to take measure of his tone.

Beyond that, in this month's 3 Reasons Why column in Tennis magazine, Brad Gilbert takes the position that Nadal will not win the French Open. His reasons are:  He's a half-step slower (partly due to injury), Less of an air of invincibility, and More contenders. In  his last two tournaments, Nadal pretty much made Gilbert's stance look foolish. But remember, Roland Garros is still almost a month away.

I don't think Nadal needs to obsess about the insane number of points he's defending; he's not going to overtake Roger Federer anyway unless he begins to win more events on surfaces other than clay.  But I do think that Nadal has to set aside the distractions and do what he feels he must to give himself the best possible shot at Roland Garros. If that means pulling out of Hamburg, so be it. If that means letting go of these calendar-related beefs, so be it. He needs to keep in mind Rule no.1 of winning tennis at the highest level:  Disgruntled players are rarely winners, and I think Nadal would take another Roland Garros title over having de Villier's head brought to him on a platter. He must remind himself of that.

David Ferrer - He was in a good position to strengthen his hold on the No. 5 ranking, because he  lost in the first round in Rome last year. So it was a blown opportunity, although Ferrer has picked up so much ground in the past year that he can't be too perturbed about a glitch here or there. What he needs to do, though, is prove that he can hang in there at the edges of the Big Time and leap at any opportunity to insert himself in the tussle at the top by winning big events where his nemeses falter. And he was unable to do that in Rome.

David Nalbandian - Well, he was the reason I wrote "what - if anything - Bloody Wednesday suggested. . ." This loss suggested nothing when it comes to Nalbandian.  It was just business as usual for a talented by unpredictable, undisciplined guy.

The old saw that one man's loss is another man's game can be applied with welcome clarity to tennis, so let's look at the players most likely to benefit from Bloody Wednesday:

James Blake - With Nadal out of his quarter, Blake must be feeling pretty good about getting a quarterfinal date with Stan the Man Wawrinka.

Andy Roddick - Nikolay Davydenko has been the potential quarterfinal stumbling block all along, and that has been unaffected by Bloody Wednesday.

Nikolay Davydenko - He's one of the two big winners in many of the potential equations here. Tommy Robredo will be no pushover, but getting Andy Roddick to play, potentially, Blake in the semis? Kolya the No Longer Obscure must be loving life, even if Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic loom in the other half.

Novak Djokovic - This is the other big winner, although nothing that's happened so far has changed the fact that Federer lies in wait in the semis. Beating Federer and Nadal back-to-back to take the Italian Open title has been an unlikely scenario from the start, but now the mission is simplified: beat Federer. Of course, Nicolas Almagro will be no pushover, but Djokovic will have only himself to blame if he blows this opportunity to accumulate points - and big-match mojo.

Roger Federer - It must be an enormous relief to have Nadal out of the way at a clay event, and while that might inspire The Mighty Fed to soar, it will also put him under a lot more pressure. I wouldn't underestimate the importance of that - you all remember how Ilie Nastase was a prohibitive favorite to win Wimbledon when he refused to join the ATP boycott in 1973. And how he lost in the quarterfinals to a little-known American attacking specialist, Sandy Mayer.

Okay, TMF is not Nastase (a man of whom Ion Tiriac, Nastase's mentor, coach and frequent doubles partner, once side, "What goes through Nastase's brain? Nastase doesn't have a brain, he's got a bird flying around in there.") I still say that even if Radek Stepanek (TMF's next opponent) doesn't look much tougher just because Nadal is out, Djokovic sure will.

Still, you couldn't blame Federer if he started fiddling while Rome burned on Wednesday. He now has his best shot at winning his first title in the Eternal City.