Battle lines drawn as Roger and Rafa get set for combat

But by the climax of the French Open, there was no doubting Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal will remain on collision course for a good while yet.

Federer and Nadal have won 26 grand slam titles behind them – weighted 16-10 in Federer’s favour – and can claim with some confidence to be contesting the greatest two-way tussle for supremacy that the men’s game has ever seen.

They would find few rivalries to better theirs outside of the sport as well.

Now that Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson are no longer the dominant characters at the head of golf, only Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo could possibly hold a torch to Nadal and Federer, and even then it is with some similarity.

Ronaldo occupies the Nadal role. The Spanish matador, the strength, the physique, the athleticism, if not always the humility.

Messi is Federer. Touch, grace and incredibly easy on the eye.

The duo have gone head-to-head in the Primera Division for the last two seasons and are comfortably the best players in the world.

Rafa and Roger have been at it for a lot longer than that.

Three years have passed since they played out the greatest Wimbledon final of all time, and in many ways that match proved to be the momentum changer in their ongoing duel.

Until Nadal was able to lift that crown he had largely been regarded as a clay-court specialist whose unbelievable desire kept him afloat on other surfaces.

Federer was the king on every other court and well on his way to being regarded as the greatest player of all time.

With his 16 slams, he has achieved that, but something, or rather someone, is constantly nibbling away at his aura.

Since that monumental 2008 final, Nadal has reduced Federer to tears by beating him at the Australian Open, while he has also won two more French titles, one US Open and another Wimbledon.

At 25 he has reached double figures for slams won, and it may just be a matter of when rather than if he overtakes his old friend.

For so long their rivalry has been founded on cordiality and respect, but after Nadal again got the better of Federer when it really mattered at Roland Garros at the start of this month, the Swiss gave the slightest of hints that he was starting to view the Spaniard as a genuine threat to his standing in the sport.

“Who cares where you stand?” he responded, when asked if he thought Nadal could catch him.

Federer clearly cared when he had a bespoke jacket prepared for when he won his 15th title at Wimbledon in 2009 – at a tournament Nadal missed through injury.

A 17th grand slam title, and a seventh to equal the modern-day haul of Pete Sampras would be a popular victory because Federer has been a wonderful champion.

Federer at his best plays the game with an economy of effort which was bewitching to behold. He was a master of finding angles, a thinking man’s sportsman blessed with natural athleticism and subtle power.

His dominance in an era of frantic competition places him above Pete Sampras and Rod Laver in the pantheon of greatness.

Federer may turn 30 in August – only three players in the last 30 years have lifted the famous gold trophy at the age of 29: Goran Ivanisevic when he became the first wild card to win the title in 2001, Sampras when he defeated Pat Rafter in 2000 and Jimmy Connors when he beat John McEnroe in a five-set epic in 1982 – but he cannot be ruled out. He still retains the hunger to win trophies so his children can witness his greatness and he moves beautifully on a slick surface which rewards fluidity and an all-court game.

Federer caresses the ball where Nadal bludgeons it.

He glides where Djokovic stamps.

He does not batter his body like so many of the rest.

Grass and Federer have always been in the sweetest synchronicity.

That is a big advantage when the grass season lasts for little more than a month, leaving players not as disposed to the surface with little time to prepare.

While sure to praise Nadal after his Paris triumph, Federer also made another remark that suggested the rivalry is no longer one built only on friendship.

“It’s always me who’s going to dictate play and decide how the outcome is going to be,” the 29-year-old Swiss said. “If I play well, I will most likely win; if I’m not playing so well, that’s when he wins.”

Most experts agreed Federer had been excellent in the French final, which detracts slightly from his statement. It was also thought that he played sublimely at Wimbledon in 2008 and brilliantly in Melbourne in 2009.

But while Federer’s view of Nadal’s dominance over him may be somewhat distorted, what the final did was bring their rivalry flying back to the top of the agenda ahead of Wimbledon, the very place where it really kicked off.

The emergence of Novak Djokovic in 2011 and his brilliant 41-match unbeaten run had not only relegated Federer to third on the bill, it also threatened to take the No 1 ranking away from Nadal.

But, surely scalded by the fact that he was fast becoming a second-tier attraction, Federer arguably played better at Roland Garros than he did when winning there in 2009 – when an injured Nadal lost in the fourth round – and pushed himself firmly back into the box office.

For his part at this year’s French, Nadal did what he did best.

Having struggled at the start of the tournament while adapting to the new balls being used, he scrapped his way into the latter stages before clicking into gear against Robin Soderling, Andy Murray and then Federer.

It remains untold how the Mallorcan feels about Federer’s claims that he will win if he plays well, but Nadal, just as many observers are starting to, could say: Beat me on the big stage and we’ll talk.

The good news is that the latest instalment of this battle for the ages is just about to get under way.

Let battle commence.

[email protected]