Storyline for Fed in 2008 - the stakes [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Storyline for Fed in 2008 - the stakes

megadeth
09-10-2007, 03:24 AM
Just something to consider: if Federer wins the AO'08, he can tie Pete's slam record in the French with 14... And then it gets interesting - he can break that record in Wimbledon for the 15th slam, and at the same time break Borg's record he shares with a 6th straight title, and finally hold the grand slam.

I really think 2008 would be Federer's best time to pursue history. By the way, he can also have a shot at a Golden Slam with the Olympics to be held.

Your thoughts?

Johnny Groove
09-10-2007, 03:31 AM
Can't see it happening. The younger guys are coming up quicker

Action Jackson
09-10-2007, 03:32 AM
He won't win the Golden Slam.

Allure
09-10-2007, 03:36 AM
He will get three slams next year for a total of 15. After that, he will start declining.

MatchFederer
09-10-2007, 03:42 AM
Federer's chances at of achieving the Golden Slam? 5%

Federer's chances of achieving a Grand Slam? 8%

Next year will be his LAST chance to achieve one of these two awesome feats.


I think he will win 2 Slams and I really hope one of them is Roland Garros.

megadeth
09-10-2007, 03:46 AM
ok, granted that was wishful thinking... ;) but it's possible even to the smallest probability...

but for me, all i want for fed is to win even just 1 french...

CyBorg
09-10-2007, 03:49 AM
He's already declining (from the Mount Everest). I see Rafa taking the French Open yet again. Novak should win one major. That leaves Roger with one or two - respectable, but some people will be disappointed.

Roger will be relying on his serving that much more. His groundies alone won't win him majors anymore. For this reason I think that he has no prayer of winning the French. At his peak in 2006 he came about as close as he could, which frankly was not close at all. His serve will be neutralized by the clay and his backhand will be exposed again. I actually doubt that he'll reach the final, but he might.

It's hard to predict the Aussie without knowing very much about the surface. I keep hearing that it's much like the one in New York. If that's the case I expect another Roger-Djoko showdown. I don't know what to make of Wimbledon - my gut feeling is that Roger is on the verge of losing there. Call it fate, but the five-setter against Nadal spelled the end of an era to me. It might be Nadal that takes it, or Djokovic, or maybe we will even see a Becker-like triumph from someone like Gulbis. Something new and unexpected has to happen and we often see this at Wimbledon.

rofe
09-10-2007, 03:51 AM
Fed should consider it an excellent year if he wins two slams next year. The young guns are catching up.

World Beater
09-10-2007, 04:11 AM
Federer would do well to win 2 slams next year, even one slam actually. He isn't dictating from the baseline like he used to.

Action Jackson
09-10-2007, 04:13 AM
Just get to 15 Slams as soon as possible.

MatchFederer
09-10-2007, 04:14 AM
Yep rofe. If Federer wins 3 again then that would be simply astonishing. I want to believe it is probable but 2 seems far more realistic given the improvements of the young guns. A few more young guns will start to make more profound marks next year too, I'm sure.

0 Slams for Fed? - 7%

1 Slam? - 20%

2 Slams? - 50%

3 Slams? - 15%

4 Slams? - 8 %

MatchFederer
09-10-2007, 04:16 AM
Just get to 15 Slams as soon as possible.

You just want him to have the record? Or hoping that will take away some fire from the belly so that a new era ensues? Or something else?

MrChopin
09-10-2007, 05:44 AM
Maybe I'm being blindly naive, but I find it remarkable how many people predict he will be caught by "the young guns." Only Nadal and Djokovic had a real impact on him, outside of miserable March/Rome. He just disposed of #3, #4, and #5 in straight sets. Against Davydenko and Djokovic, he was error-ridden, returning terribly, serving below par, and playing generally worse than we had seen only a week ago, in Capdeville, Lopez, Roddick, so I don't think it's a question of him being unable to beat opponents strongly. Blake was dumped in Cincy a few weeks ago, and Robredo, Gonzalez, and Lyjubicic are small threats at this points.

That disposes of most top 10+ threats, leaving potential threats like Gasquet, Murray, Baghdatis and Berdych, all of whom have shown only small amounts of consistent promise, and of whom I only see Murray being a realistic threat, provided he finds his form. In the 2007 AO, Federer didn't drop a set. In 2007 USO, he dropped only two sets, both to two huge servers. Only Djokovic and Davydenko were threats from the ground, as much as a straight set win can be considered a threat, so even allowing for Djokovic as a threat with perhaps Murray and a lucky Davydenko or Nadal, I don't see him having much difficulty making it back to the finals at AO or USO (granted, USO is a year away and hard to predict). Until Djokovic takes a non-tiebreak set from him, he still has to prove himself, especially when talking about the slams.

As for the French. I'm probably in the minority to think that Federer was closer in 2007 than 2006, but it seems contradictory to point to his diminishing talent, evidenced by close titles like Djokovic at USO and Nadal at Wimbledon, and then ignore that he had all but won the first two sets of RG this year, as a strong contrast to his one-set wonder against a then-dismal Nadal in '06 (who claimed strong improvement between the two titles). It may be seen as idealistic, but I still think the French is possible.

The addition of a coach is one more element supporting a strong showing for Federer in 2008. The last time he got a new coach was early 2005. From mid/late 2005 until early 2007, he dominated tennis like few others have, in what I would define as "peak-Fed," especially 2006. His forehand used to be a point-ender, but I think that it's a question of tactics, as opposed to form (which I think he's adjusted for clay), and so I think it will be interesting to see if another coach can have a similar "boosting" effect on him as Roche did, this time emphasizing the extremely aggressive play that he used in 2004-2005. If something like this works out, I see 2008 as another great year.

Then again, maybe I'm just hoping for too much of Everest.

dragons112
09-10-2007, 05:48 AM
I cant believe the arrogance of people in here. You dont know him or his game and you suddenly predict the his future and when he will start too decline.

GOD

dragons112
09-10-2007, 05:49 AM
You cant see into the futur this has been a bad year for roger and he still killing the tour. If he gets a coach he will get better

kobulingam
09-10-2007, 05:50 AM
Just something to consider: if Federer wins the AO'08, he can tie Pete's slam record in the French with 14... And then it gets interesting - he can break that record in Wimbledon for the 15th slam, and at the same time break Borg's record he shares with a 6th straight title, and finally hold the grand slam.

I really think 2008 would be Federer's best time to pursue history. By the way, he can also have a shot at a Golden Slam with the Olympics to be held.

Your thoughts?


First he needs to find the big groundstrokes that he seems to have lost (except in patches). It's almost like JCF losing his forehand for no reason.

Action Jackson
09-10-2007, 05:54 AM
You just want him to have the record? Or hoping that will take away some fire from the belly so that a new era ensues? Or something else?

I want him to have the most GS titles it's that simple, facts are he is going to decline whether people or not, and I'd rather him get this achievement sooner rather than later, when his chances are better.

Stensland
09-10-2007, 05:54 AM
brilliant posting, chopin. i agree with almost everything and really have to goodrep you. :)

Beforehand
09-10-2007, 05:56 AM
As for the French. I'm probably in the minority to think that Federer was closer in 2007 than 2006. It may be seen as idealistic, but I still think the French is possible.
I agree on both counts, but it's going to take a Herculean effort. More than the "Oh, I'm awesome, and I"m going to just be awesome today! GO!" type of day. He's really going to have to be willing to get nasty out there, and that's something that we haven't seen, and I imagine, barring the most severe determination, we won't see.

Macbrother
09-10-2007, 06:37 AM
I want him to have the most GS titles it's that simple, facts are he is going to decline whether people or not, and I'd rather him get this achievement sooner rather than later, when his chances are better.

Awe, that's so sweet. Didn't think you had it in you.

groundstroke
09-10-2007, 06:45 AM
IMO, He MUST win the French Open in 2008.

FedFan_2007
09-10-2007, 06:52 AM
I think he still has a shot at 2 more French Opens('08 and '09). After that he'll need serious luck in 2010.

t0x
09-10-2007, 07:08 AM
He needs to find his FH or it will be a struggle. This year he basically served his way to victory at Wimbers and USO.

I think next year is his last shot at RG too. Even if he fails, I expect him to win 2.

Allez
09-10-2007, 07:15 AM
A golden slam is almost impossible. Too much tennis. I like his chances of winning at least two grand slams though. I hope it's the French and Wimbledon. That would be awesome. Unfortunately I too believe 2006 was his best chance to win RG and he messed up after that 1st set big time.

garad
09-10-2007, 08:05 AM
Can't see it happening. The younger guys are coming up quicker

Agreed , I'd be happy if he "only" won Wimby, French and olympics...

FedFan_2007
09-10-2007, 08:25 AM
Golden Slam for 2008! He can do it.

aulus
09-10-2007, 08:31 AM
Maybe I'm being blindly naive, but I find it remarkable how many people predict he will be caught by "the young guns." Only Nadal and Djokovic had a real impact on him, outside of miserable March/Rome. He just disposed of #3, #4, and #5 in straight sets. Against Davydenko and Djokovic, he was error-ridden, returning terribly, serving below par, and playing generally worse than we had seen only a week ago, in Capdeville, Lopez, Roddick, so I don't think it's a question of him being unable to beat opponents strongly. Blake was dumped in Cincy a few weeks ago, and Robredo, Gonzalez, and Ljubicic are small threats at this points.

That disposes of most top 10+ threats, leaving potential threats like Gasquet, Murray, Baghdatis and Berdych, all of whom have shown only small amounts of consistent promise, and of whom I only see Murray being a realistic threat, provided he finds his form. In the 2007 AO, Federer didn't drop a set. In 2007 USO, he dropped only two sets, both to two huge servers. Only Djokovic and Davydenko were threats from the ground, as much as a straight set win can be considered a threat, so even allowing for Djokovic as a threat with perhaps Murray and a lucky Davydenko or Nadal, I don't see him having much difficulty making it back to the finals at AO or USO (granted, USO is a year away and hard to predict). Until Djokovic takes a non-tiebreak set from him, he still has to prove himself, especially when talking about the slams.

As for the French. I'm probably in the minority to think that Federer was closer in 2007 than 2006, but it seems contradictory to point to his diminishing talent, evidenced by close titles like Djokovic at USO and Nadal at Wimbledon, and then ignore that he had all but won the first two sets of RG this year, as a strong contrast to his one-set wonder against a then-dismal Nadal in '06 (who claimed strong improvement between the two titles). It may be seen as idealistic, but I still think the French is possible.

The addition of a coach is one more element supporting a strong showing for Federer in 2008. The last time he got a new coach was early 2005. From mid/late 2005 until early 2007, he dominated tennis like few others have, in what I would define as "peak-Fed," especially 2006. His forehand used to be a point-ender, but I think that it's a question of tactics, as opposed to form (which I think he's adjusted for clay), and so I think it will be interesting to see if another coach can have a similar "boosting" effect on him as Roche did, this time emphasizing the extremely aggressive play that he used in 2004-2005. If something like this works out, I see 2008 as another great year.

Then again, maybe I'm just hoping for too much of Everest.

great post. i mostly agree. getting a coach should be a top priority.

ryanqqq
09-10-2007, 08:39 AM
Agreed , I'd be happy if he "only" won Wimby, French and olympics...

Same here. And if it is to be reduced further, I'm still going to be happy with an Olympic gold and a Wimbledon, or even just Wimbledon. I'm hoping he eventually gets a French much later in his career a la Agassi with a bit of luck on a draw and a possible upset of Nadal. Don't care if it is part of a grand slam calendar streak or not.

RonE
09-10-2007, 08:43 AM
Can't see it happening. The younger guys are coming up quicker

My thoughts exactly. This year was already more of a struggle even if he did manage to reproduce his amazing slam results.

MasturB
09-10-2007, 08:53 AM
Isn't it amazing that a player on the decline this year still managed to win 3 grand slams?

I called it at the Australian that I noticed his forehand wasn't a rocket gun like it was just a few months prior at Shanghai and the USO.

Then at Wimbledon he didn't go for forehand killers against Nadal until it got late in the match.

Maybe Fed is using a more conservative approach of firing away near the end of the match as sort of a changeup to his opponents. If he's beating them in the first few sets just by throwing back at them what they're giving and getting away with it, then when he starts going for outright winners in the late sets it's going to mentally devastate his opponents.

For me it just seems like Fed's footwork as been VERY VERY off since the beginning of Roland Garros. He's not hitting run around forehands like he used to, instead he's using a low backhand slice or just pushing it back with his backhand.

It's kind of sad to see his 1hand backhand declining, as it used to look so beautiful and be so dangerous. Now it's just more of a rally extender than a weapon and he's uncharacteristically had alot of unforced errors with his backhand this summer.

I do feel however that his serve is becoming a great weapon for him. He's been serving his @$$ out of trouble all summer starting with Nadal at Wimbledon. Another idea might be he's focusing more on getting cheap points with his serve so he doesn't have to be in all of those long baseline rallies.

We all saw how Nadal abused his backhand at Roland Garros. Fed is getting pretty up there in tennis years, and Nadal and Joker are still in their early 20's so maybe he feels cheap points at this point in his career are necessary to go against the younger guys like Joker and Nadal.

No way is he going to win baseline rallies against Raffa or maybe even Joker on clay. Nadal made Federer look tired at RG, so he's probably trying to avoid it this time.

Forehander
09-10-2007, 09:00 AM
for people who disagree yous are wrong. Federer will break the record and he will do it with super style. Federer next year will be at his peak IMO due to the records he'll be chasing. I don't expect him to deflate next year. Maybe the year after and so on

Byrd
09-10-2007, 11:34 AM
I personally find it funny how many people are writing Federer off as declining,etc when hes won 3 of the 4 slams this year. I put the IW/Miami and clay season down to being lazy after the AO where he goes on holiday for long periods and the fact he underplayed his forehand to make sure his backhand was good for the clay season which had detrimental effects to his game. Also I only see Nadal and Djoko and perhaps murray as the only ones to challenge him next season, however with nadal & djoko I think it will be harder for them seeing the points they will have to defend (especially nadal with the new schedule) and whether someone like djoko can handle the pressure of this, with federer hiding in the wings to take advantage of this. If some of you guys did actually watch all of Fed's matches at the US Open you would know there isn't anything to worry about.

DDrago2
09-10-2007, 11:36 AM
Fed will win the Golden Slam next year

Action Jackson
09-10-2007, 11:41 AM
Awe, that's so sweet. Didn't think you had it in you.

Federer the player, I enjoy watching him. Federer fans for the most part are as fun as dental surgery with rusty pliers.

bandabou
09-10-2007, 02:34 PM
still see rog win at least 2 majors next year. Guy's still beating his fellow top 10-ers pretty easily..sure the gap is closing, but he still has some good years left.

natasha_nana
09-10-2007, 02:44 PM
going for the golden slam is the kind of thing that would definitely motivate federer...but it would be very tough...the immense pressure of it (at this stage of his career) by itself could prove debilitating...

Steffi did it in the early days of hers, when there was much less expectation, and just wonder at this amazing young thing...it doesnt make it any less remarkable. But Im just saying...

anyway I dont know if Roger Federer will do it...JesusFed probably could. But dunno whether he'll grace the world with his presence consistently all through the year. It's possible...just not probable.

I think his goals should be FO, Wimbledon and Beijing Gold...if he can do that, it will be extraordinary in itself - as he will have tied the Samprass record, broken the Borg record and won a career golden slam.

Go Roger...:rocker2:

Ruski
09-10-2007, 02:48 PM
In my opinion.... winning the French Open title is more important to Roger than trying to tie up with or to break Sampras' grand slam titles record in 2008!

stebs
09-10-2007, 03:15 PM
Any slam next year would be great. Two would be out of this world.

If you give him realistic chances of getting the golden slam you are dreaming.

MatchFederer
09-10-2007, 03:25 PM
As I already stated, I think if Federer could live the year of 2008 20 times, he would do it once. So I hope that once is next year. HA.

DDrago2
09-10-2007, 03:29 PM
Any slam next year would be great. Two would be out of this world.

If you give him realistic chances of getting the golden slam you are dreaming.

2007: Won AO, Wimbledon, US Open; two sets away from RG

2008 he will do it. And finaly win Olympic gold

guga2120
09-10-2007, 03:55 PM
In a 5 set match there seems to be only 2 players who have a chance of beating him, so he could get to 15 and win a gold medal, but he is NOT winning Roland Garros.

lebby
09-10-2007, 03:57 PM
So many people in denial here; so funny. The guy just won his 12 slam losing 2 sets and you speak about the end oh the dominance? Nadal is broken and unable to play hard court tennis. Djoko beat the master once and with 2 tiebreaks and couldn't win a set from a poorly playing Roger.

How can hate blind so many eyes?

R.Federer
09-10-2007, 05:58 PM
If he had a choice between overtaking/matching Sampras versus winning just one more -- the French-- I wonder which he would take.

natasha_nana
09-10-2007, 06:33 PM
If he had a choice between overtaking/matching Sampras versus winning just one more -- the French-- I wonder which he would take.

I suspect it would be winning the French...though I can't be sure.

I would be very surprised if he didn't eventually do both though.

TopShelf
09-10-2007, 09:24 PM
I suspect it would be winning the French...though I can't be sure.

I would be very surprised if he didn't eventually do both though.

My bet would be overtaking Sampras over a French Open win

14 titles is almost a shoe-in for being better then Sampras due to those two Frnech finals IMO, and then a 15th is icing on the cake. Where as finishing with 13 titles, but having all four surfaces beat is a bit shy, due to Roy Emersons name never being mentioned as the greatest of all time (and owns all four) when Sampras and Federer are talked about.

Byrd
09-10-2007, 11:00 PM
This made me laugh

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wimbledon2000/827498.stm

Read Emersons' quotes about sampras' records.