After Roger Federer lost the first set to Rafael Nadal in a 6-2 lambasting, I was preparing in my mind to write a post that spoke of how different the scene is on the ATP Tour than it was one year ago. Heading into Roland Garros last year, Federer played two close finals with Nadal, the most memorable being the five-set classic in Rome. Roger went into the French Open with the knowledge that he was very, very close to beating Nadal on clay, and if just a few small things went his way, the result would be in his favour.

This year, it’s been a different story for Federer. In Monte Carlo, his effort was rather poor against Nadal, especially when you compare it to the preceding year’s final at the same venue. Then there was the loss to Filippo Volandri in Rome. Now it wasn’t just Nadal who could vex Federer, but anyone could, on any given day - especially on clay.

So I’m watching Roger go down a set to Nadal on Sunday morning, in short order, with the broadcast nearly replicating his meek performance at this year’s Monte Carlo Masters. At this point, I can only conclude that it is a different scene this year - Federer is further behind Nadal than he was in 2006, and the French Open title seems all the more elusive.

But really out of nowhere, Federer snagged the second set, setting the tone early. He would end up winning it by the same 6-2 score he was on the wrong side of in the prior set, in large thanks to his serve, which was his most important weapon on the day. Roger’s erratic forehands have been his undoing during his recent losses on clay, but I think that his poor service was just as much a reason for his struggles. Relying on a second serve against someone as potent and explosive as Nadal is a recipe for disaster - so when Roger finally got some first serves in with regularity, his fortunes started to turn around. On the ATP feed, I believe that the commentators mentioned 15 points won to 14 points lost on Federer’s serve in set one - in set two, those numbers changed to 17 won as compared to only six lost.

It was not just the serve that was on for Federer in the second set, though - he also had little trouble when Nadal was serving. Roger dictated the points much more than he has done in previous matches against Nadal, and he capitalised often with this assertiveness. Importantly, he did so in the final game of the second set, squaring the match at one set a piece, which also gave Roger the serve to start the final set.

On the first point of the third set, Federer got a favourable bounce from a ball that struck the net cord, giving him the point. Originally, I thought that Roger would need all the breaks he could get against Nadal (it certainly wouldn’t hurt), but it was soon evident that Federer’s game on this day and in this set would be enough to hold its own. He took the first game in routine fashion, and with similar ease, broke Nadal immediately to capture a 2-0 lead. After this early break, an ATP commentator mentioned that Nadal needed to be a bit more aggressive. When’s the last time you ever heard that statement uttered?

The success for Federer would continue, as he easily held serve, and then broke Nadal yet again. Up a double break, Federer surely had to have some thoughts dancing in his head of last year’s Rome final, where he led 4-1 but ultimately lost in a tie-breaker. But Roger soon eliminated that possibility by holding serve and stretching his lead to 5-0. Just a few minutes later, a Nadal shot went long, and Federer had accomplished the unthinkable - he beat Rafael Nadal on clay, 2-6, 6-2, 6-0.

After Sunday’s match, we are in a different environment in the tennis world - just not the same one that I envisioned only hours earlier after Nadal won the first set. The upcoming French Open discussion has certainly taken a bit of a twist after Sunday’s proceedings. Federer has finally shown that he can defeat Nadal on his surface, which is a major burden lifted off of his shoulders.

Nadal’s clay-winning streak is over at 81 matches, and while I never thought that the record carried a weight on Nadal, it’s one less thing that will be talked about, which is probably a benefit to him. Both players will have a week off to further prepare for Roland Garros, during which time there will be extensive banter over the possibility of a meeting between these two in the final – but with the result of that scenario not a forgone conclusion. The anticipation for this encounter will increase with each passing round, once the Grand Slam commences.

I do agree with Peter Bodo that the Hamburg final was of critical importance to Federer. In short, he noted before the match that, “If Nadal wins, not a whole hail of a lot matters over the next three weeks. And if TMF [Federer] wins, all bets for Roland Garros are off, and everything matters.”

You can start the hype and conversation whenever you like, but one thing is for certain - the 2007 French Open has become far more interesting after Sunday, because now we’re in a whole new world.

*** For more tennis coverage, go to www.gasquetandracquet.com ***

Can Federer repeat the feat in Paris? Post a comment below or submit an article to Sportingo.