Where is the Federer that used to bring his best tennis in finals? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Where is the Federer that used to bring his best tennis in finals?

LinkMage
09-12-2007, 02:29 AM
Fed used to bring his "A" tennis in important finals, but his last 3 GS finals (especially Wimbledon and US Open finals) have been disappointing quality wise. I've noticed Fed has looked really tight and nervous in both of them. You would have thought he was playing a GS final for the 1st time instead of being an experienced guy who had been through that several times.

He has been very passive in both of those finals. I got the feeling he was waiting for his opponent to make UEs instead of playing his usual attacking tennis and trying to take control of the points. In Wimbledon Nadal was more aggressive than him for most of the match, which was shocking to see. Only in the last part of the 5th set in Wimbledon did he play the way we were used to and it made all the difference.

Is he lacking confidence in his shots that he doesn't go for them too much? Or is the pressure of reaching 14 GS really affecting him? I hope he goes back to playing the way he was late last year and beginning of this year. That was a great pleasure to watch.

El Legenda
09-12-2007, 02:31 AM
he is currently on vacation.

turkjey5
09-12-2007, 02:49 AM
it's called Father Time.

dwynn10
09-12-2007, 02:49 AM
Fed used to bring his "A" tennis in important finals, but his last 3 GS finals (especially Wimbledon and US Open finals) have been disappointing quality wise. I've noticed Fed has looked really tight and nervous in both of them. You would have thought he was playing a GS final for the 1st time instead of being an experienced guy who had been through that several times.

He has been very passive in both of those finals. I got the feeling he was waiting for his opponent to make UEs instead of playing his usual attacking tennis and trying to take control of the points. In Wimbledon Nadal was more aggressive than him for most of the match, which was shocking to see. Only in the last part of the 5th set in Wimbledon did he play the way we were used to and it made all the difference.

Is he lacking confidence in his shots that he doesn't go for them too much? Or is the pressure of reaching 14 GS really affecting him? I hope he goes back to playing the way he was late last year and beginning of this year. That was a great pleasure to watch.

I have to agree that he has seemed to tighten up in the majors' finals this year. It's not surprising really. The older you get and the weight of expectations increases as you get closer to history (i.e. how close Fed is to overtake Sampras's record), you lose that sense of fearlessness that youngsters have. And that would tend to make you feel pressured. Fed is only human after all, and getting older would have to slow him down physically. That he's managed to win 3 out 4 this year is precisely because of his experience in controlling the nerves well enough to win, even if he's not playing his best.

MisterQ
09-12-2007, 02:52 AM
The standard he's being held to is unreasonable, imo.

Look at any of the other greats in tennis, and you'll see that some of their GS wins were dominating performances, while others were hard-fought, gritty battles. Federer is no different.

fmolinari2005
09-12-2007, 02:57 AM
I dont know. I would ask a different question: what tournament Roger played the best match on a final?! Or, at least, a great match on a final. Lets see:

Wimbledon 03: the semi-final was better, but he played great the finals. Australia 04: I agree. Wimbledon 04: not Roger's greatest match. USO 04: best final ever from Roger. Wimbledon 05: great final. USO05: average final, with ups and downs (I wouldnt say that Roger played his A game on most of the match), AO06: average match, but far from his A game (Roger won the last set with Baggy very tired), SW19 06: average match, the worst he played on that year (Roger was amazing up until the finals). USO 06: average match, Roger played what he needed to play (Roger had to play a better match this year against Pandy). AO 07: a good final, but impossible to top his semi-final performance. SW19 07: average performance, on an average tournament overall. USO07: worst match he played on a final, but overall he played a great tournament.

So ... It is not as if Roger always played great matches on finals. I guess memory can be a bit tricky sometimes.

celia
09-12-2007, 03:00 AM
He shows up only when he has to. He didn't have to this USO. He knew that the occasion would get to Nole. He was right.

World Beater
09-12-2007, 03:00 AM
I dont know. I would ask a different question: what tournament Roger played the best match on a final?! Or, at least, a great match on a final. Lets see:

Wimbledon 03: the semi-final was better, but he played great the finals. Australia 04: I agree. Wimbledon 04: not Roger's greatest match. USO 04: best final ever from Roger. Wimbledon 05: great final. USO05: average final, with ups and downs (I wouldnt say that Roger played his A game on most of the match), AO06: average match, but far from his A game (Roger won the last set with Baggy very tired), SW19 06: average match, the worst he played on that year (Roger was amazing up until the finals). USO 06: average match, Roger played what he needed to play (Roger had to play a better match this year against Pandy). AO 07: a good final, but impossible to top his semi-final performance. SW19 07: average performance, on an average tournament overall. USO07: worst match he played on a final, but overall he played a great tournament.

So ... It is not as if Roger always played great matches on finals. I guess memory can be a bit tricky sometimes.

There you go.

Plus i federer played quite well at the AO. We must give some credit to his opponent - esp nadal who some believe shouldnt even win games off federer on grass.

The djokovic final is much more worrying when it comes to passive play. If he plays like that, things will become different.

fmolinari2005
09-12-2007, 03:06 AM
The djokovic final is much more worrying when it comes to passive play. If he plays like that, things will become different.


I agree with you. Hopefully it wont become a pattern indeed. Maybe this is the new step on his career, that is making him a bit nervous, like when he was to win his first one. Maybe it is the last obstacle before he can really make a definitive move at breaking Sampras' record.

LinkMage
09-12-2007, 03:41 AM
USO 06: average match, Roger played what he needed to play (Roger had to play a better match this year against Pandy).


That was a great final from Fed, he had something like 60 winners and only 20 UEs. It doesn't get much better than that.

celia
09-12-2007, 03:44 AM
That was a great final from Fed, he had something like 60 winners and only 20 UEs. It doesn't get much better than that.

He had too many double faults and faced too many break points. But he had the confidence to know how to handle the moment while Nole did not.

uNIVERSE mAN
09-12-2007, 03:47 AM
why does he do the ridiculous backhand chip return time and again to Djokovic? Djokovic is not Roddick, Federer gives up a massive disadvantage on that first shot and is constantly behind in all the points he does that in. Why not go for broke once in a while like Blake does, if you put a couple together you have a break game.

Allure
09-12-2007, 03:57 AM
With age comes deterioration.

FedFan_2007
09-12-2007, 04:07 AM
Boohoo - Fed doesn't double-bagel his GS final opponent every time. He must suck horribly.

celia
09-12-2007, 04:11 AM
Boohoo - Fed doesn't double-bagel his GS final opponent every time. He must suck horribly.

Being a fan doesn't mean that you can't acknowledge his weaknesses.

Or Levy
09-12-2007, 04:15 AM
Sorry, I don't think it's age - it's a choice of tactics. Roger was definitly as fast as ever throughout his matches at the USO. The slice, slice, slice was a tactic he thought would be affective against djoko, and I dare say he won't use it again - even though he won at 3.

FedFan_2007
09-12-2007, 04:18 AM
Weakness beeing inablity to match his 2004 USO performance every time?

Marek.
09-12-2007, 05:47 AM
He's playing his best when it really counts in the matches so can't really complain about that. I'll start worrying when he's losing GS finals due to this kind of play.

Allure
09-12-2007, 05:49 AM
He knows his opponents will choke anyways so it doesn't matter if he plays his B game.

MrChopin
09-12-2007, 06:43 AM
Sorry, I don't think it's age - it's a choice of tactics. Roger was definitly as fast as ever throughout his matches at the USO. The slice, slice, slice was a tactic he thought would be affective against djoko, and I dare say he won't use it again - even though he won at 3.

Ha, he'll probably employ it less frequently, but with more emphasis in their next meeting. Did you see how many errors Djokovic had off of the backhand side, trying to deal with the low, short slice? Someone on another board nicely noted how many times Djokovic was pushing the ball as a result of the low slice, unable to generate enough spin to hit through it. Federer is already exposing weakness in Djokovic's game.

And yeah, Federer's return was pretty poor and with too much defensive slice, but as the match wore on, you could see him returning better, picking it up and directing it back with pace more easily. The same thing happened with Roddick and Lopez, so it's no surprise that he had to adjust to Djokovic as well.

groundstroke
09-12-2007, 06:48 AM
He doesn't have to bring his A game out to beat most players, so he's less tired?

FedFan_2007
09-12-2007, 06:58 AM
Federer must win every GS final 6-0, 6-0, 6-0. Or else he's worse then Oscar Hernandez.

dwynn10
09-12-2007, 07:31 AM
Ha, he'll probably employ it less frequently, but with more emphasis in their next meeting. Did you see how many errors Djokovic had off of the backhand side, trying to deal with the low, short slice? Someone on another board nicely noted how many times Djokovic was pushing the ball as a result of the low slice, unable to generate enough spin to hit through it. Federer is already exposing weakness in Djokovic's game.

And yeah, Federer's return was pretty poor and with too much defensive slice, but as the match wore on, you could see him returning better, picking it up and directing it back with pace more easily. The same thing happened with Roddick and Lopez, so it's no surprise that he had to adjust to Djokovic as well.

Good point. He basically just tried to block the serve in the first two sets. It was a little frustrating to watch, but part of it could have been due to nerves; part of it could have been tactical to figure out Djokovic's serve. In the final set, his return was more the norm, with pace and decisiveness. And, yes, the low, short slice induced a lot of errors by Djokovic, including the times when he came to the net. The kid did not seem comfortable with low balls at the net.

megadeth
09-12-2007, 08:17 AM
geez... the federer who won A0'06 wasn't at his best, the one who won USO'05 wasnt' at his best...

not all his final wins before USO'07 were at his best so what are you complaining about?

Apemant
09-12-2007, 08:48 AM
Damn, I must admit we're getting ridiculous here... the guy has just won his 12th GS and we're still not satisfied. Talk about great expectations... poor Rogi. :devil:

As GWH said, I wish he gets to 15 ASAP, then people will give him a break finally :worship:

FedFan_2007
09-12-2007, 09:08 AM
Come on Rog, win 3 more slams and then we can really start partying!

Action Jackson
09-12-2007, 09:12 AM
Come on Fed_Fan, get on the Djokovic bandwagon when you can.

Wow, Federer has won 12 from 14 GS finals and they are already wanting to bring the pallbearers.

Facts are Federer does not get extra fucking style points for beautiful tennis in finals, as long as he wins them, that's what counts. If he wanted style or artistic merit points, then he'd have done gymnastics, synchronised swimming, diving or ski jumping.

Rogiman
09-12-2007, 09:44 AM
Hard to judge.

Players like Roddick and Blake insist on playing at a high pace against him, plus their defense is not the best, and that pays right into his hands which results in many winners and seemingly spectacular matches.

Guys like Rafa and Djokovic take him more out of his comfort zone and force a more complicated match with longer rallies and a pretty bad winners/UE ratio, and from the spectator's point of view that kind of match is low-quality.

2005 Wimbly final, for instance, seemed to many like a great performance, whereas it was mainly Roddick's poor tactical game that made life exceptionally easy for Federer. Same with the 2006 USO final, which was quite a spectacle IMO, but not really a complicated match.

aulus
09-12-2007, 10:30 AM
geez... the federer who won A0'06 wasn't at his best, the one who won USO'05 wasnt' at his best...

not all his final wins before USO'07 were at his best so what are you complaining about?

his tactics. he doesn't seem to use his slice as much except defensively. (his resurrection of slice in ATP, imo, has been just brilliant, and is 1 of my favorite parts of his game.)
he's not hitting his FH, probably the best FH in history, as aggressively. his FH in 07 USO final was drastically different from his FH of 03-06.
you're right he wasn't at his best in AO 06 or USO 05 finals, but he still played his aggressive style. now he has been playing more passively off the ground.
naturally, a spectacular aggressive player like federer attracts fans of that kind of tennis, so now that he seems to not be playing that same game, some fans are disappointed. and of course many federer fans like me are spoiled by his results.

nisha
09-12-2007, 10:34 AM
when you win so much i suppose the feeling of nearly losing it to then win it tastes amazing

leng jai
09-12-2007, 10:38 AM
He can't be fucked trying hard when hes playing clowns that can't even challenge his B game.

stebs
09-12-2007, 02:48 PM
Beats world #5, world #4, world #3 all in straights to win USO and yet he is being criticised heavily for poor performance.

That's a big compliment for Federer.

victory1
09-12-2007, 02:56 PM
Beats world #5, world #4, world #3 all in straights to win USO and yet he is being criticised heavily for poor performance.

That's a big compliment for Federer.

Agree!:wavey:

FedFan_2007
09-12-2007, 03:37 PM
Federer is half-arsing slam finals. He's dat good.

LinkMage
10-22-2007, 04:27 AM
6-4 record this year in finals so far. Another AMS final lost, his record for the year in AMS finals is now a mediocre 2-3. Fed must be hoping they bring back best of 5 finals in 2009.

preNadal care
10-22-2007, 04:49 AM
The logic behind this thread is incorrect, IMO. It wasn't the finals that brought out the best in Federer. It was the competitors that actually competed against Federer that required him to raise his level. Federer has had the ability to play phenomenal tennis, but he's smart enough to know to conserve and mainly play it when it is required. Today wasn't his best day, but it was his first tournament back since the USO, right? Making the final isn't THAT bad, especially since Nalbandian was having a good run this week. It's not like Nalbandian didn't raise his level extremely high to win the title. I know Federer's "supposed" to win everything, but you can't win them all. No one is superman. No one can be perfect. I think some people trick themselves into believing fairy tales are true.

Federerhingis
10-22-2007, 05:08 AM
I totally agree with Pre Nadal, not only are some folks ridiculous pretending to believe the tennis world is coming to an end because Federer has lost yet another tournament final.

He is human and it has long been known, he just tends to be superior in general to his peers over the past 40 months or so. Besides he usually succumbs to the pressures of facing David and Rafael, these two force him into silly errors and make him miss shots that he would traditionally not miss against other opponents or in general. He knows a good approach shot is never enough and his passing shots are never perfect enough against either of these two. Novak with his superior court coverage and amazing defense is rapidly becoming another great adversary for Mr. Fed. So I don't see what's the big fuss all about.

I totally have disagreed all week with Koenig or however you spell the last name of the fool who does commentary for the Master series events; I find it laughable whenever he exclaimed "I've never seen Federer play as well from the beginning of a tournament as he has in Madrid".
Yeah Fed played solidly throughout the tournament especially against Ginepri who was playing well and for his revenge match against Canas, the motivation was very high so that helped as well. Nevertheless, honestly I did not see anything superb in Federer's form during all of the madrid tournament. Perhaps he was playing better than when he played in Montreal where his form was atrocious and it only looked worst at Cinci.

This result is not at all surprising to me, especially after seeing how Nalbandian handled Novak so handidly, and Novak to me had going very good form and his groundies and serve were looking a lot crisper than Federer's all week. Then again Novak these past months has been hitting and striking a cleaner ball from the backcourt than Federer, especially on the three most important aspects: depth, consistency and pace wise his ground stroke have all looked better than Federer's.

Furthermore, Nalbandian knows how to play Federer and his gorgeous and lethal backhand has always been Federer's worst nightmare until Nadal's fierce forehand and topspin created his worst series of nightmares the past few years. ;)

Corey Feldman
10-22-2007, 05:11 AM
Its as if he's been conserving energy for 2008 - all of this year!

Serena Williams like schedule, and some pansy ass performances everywhere else (by his usual standards that is)

anyhow, he saved his best stuff for the main places this year.. the slams, so he gets it right.

and he'll be as fresh as a daisy for The Golden Slam in 08.

MrChopin
10-22-2007, 05:42 AM
Maybe it's also because there's a lot more competition from rounds 2-5 than there use to be. Of the tournaments I've now seen a lot of matches from, he's been required to bring some of his A game before the final.

At Wimb '06, he drew Gasquet, Henman, Berdych, and Ancic, all before the semis, and he destroyed them all.

AO '07 was as good, where he flattened Youzhney, Djokovic, Robredo, and Roddick, all before beating an on-fire Gonzalez in straights.

His path in USO '07 is overlooked, though several have noted the incredible hardcourt tennis strength he had to beat. He handled Capdeville at his best with ease. He then stopped Isner at his best. He then waded the storm of Lopez playing out of his mind, winning 30+ straight points on serve to close the match. Then he gets world #5 Roddick who plays nearly flawless. His W/UE ratio in these four matches is: 45/11, 37/11, 44/12, 48/18. After that, it's expected that anyone would drop in performance. So what does he do? Take out world #4 Davydenko and world #3 Djokovic, both in straight sets. Granted, neither is as pretty as his previous rounds, but that's #5, #4, and #3 (all of which are great hardcourt tennis players playing near their best, as a contrast to what Djok did at Montreal or Nalbandian at Madrid). And these three are after playing a monster serve and a huge LH server at his very peak. He is human.

Myrre
10-22-2007, 05:44 AM
No one has more Slams than Navratilova and I remember her saying the older she got the more nervous she became. The pressure of being the old experienced favourite (making history) and the fear of losing to some young hotshot can get to everyone (maybe even Federer).

World Beater
10-22-2007, 05:50 AM
No one has more Slams than Navratilova and I remember her saying the older she got the more nervous she became. The pressure of being the old experienced favourite (making history) and the fear of losing to some young hotshot can get to everyone (maybe even Federer).

When federer was schooling his peers, interviewers asked him questions as to wherer his challenge would come from. Federer admitted that his greatest challenges will come from the younger generations and not the current one.

madmanfool
10-22-2007, 08:14 AM
3 grand slams + 1 grand slam final and he has the year end ranking locked up..me think he's fine

FedFan_2007
10-22-2007, 08:29 AM
Yeah Federer is fine. When he loses the #1 ranking and/or AO/Wimby/US Open then let's talk.

nanoman
10-22-2007, 09:25 AM
I actually thought he brought his A-game yesterday. For the first 2 sets anyway. First set was brilliant, superb hitting. Second set he had one sloppy game, but he was still great and came close to break back, but Nalbandian was amazing and didn't choke for once.

Third set however was a disgrace from Fed. But then again, how many times did Fed need to win a final in the deciding set throughout his career ? So I would say, there is nothing out of ordinairy about yesterday's performance.

RonE
10-22-2007, 09:38 AM
Fat Dave was so hungry that he ate him :awww:

jasmin
10-22-2007, 01:30 PM
you can't be the same every year. God bless...maybe he will win all 4 slams easily. Just not realistic to expect him to do certain things every year. There's always a down year here and there.

Fumus
10-22-2007, 02:51 PM
Until he loses a gs final on something other than clay, this thread should be locked.

FedererSlam
10-22-2007, 05:28 PM
He isn't in his greatest form at the moment. That may change but either way he is still managing to win slams and reach finals.

Apemant
10-22-2007, 06:05 PM
Is he lacking confidence in his shots that he doesn't go for them too much? Or is the pressure of reaching 14 GS really affecting him? I hope he goes back to playing the way he was late last year and beginning of this year. That was a great pleasure to watch.

I think it's the pressure, yes. He even admitted to thinking a lot about that record lately. Up until now he's always rejected that kind of pressure, saying that it's a long road till there. But recently he seems aware that it's within his grasp, so I guess the constant pressure of expectations make him sorta tight.

I predict that Federer will have one more spring in his game, when he relinquishes his #1 spot and ppl start to write him off. Then he will be deadly once more for a while, before really retiring.

RagingLamb
10-22-2007, 06:17 PM
the guy's only 26, with 12 slams. and in his off year he's appeared in every slam final and won 3 of the 4.


there is still a lot left of Roger Federer.

I noticed he wasn't too fired up or upset when losing Madrid.

How can you expect him to bring the same intensity that he brings to a slam to a master's tournament? It's not going to mean much to him anymore, and at some point it won't mean a thing.

Commander Data
10-23-2007, 11:10 AM
I see the following reasons:


- Some players have learned better tactics to play against him.
- The fire is not so strong anymore
- Other players have gotten better
- He is more tense cause he wants to beat the records
- age
- he is just human. he gets tense against certain players who have shown to be able to beat him (Nadal, Nalbandian...)
- he makes so many finals, he just can't hold the intensity up all the time


It all very natural I think. Every great player will sonner or later stop to dominate. It is a wonder how long Roger as been able to keep it up really.
Some day he will lose number one and then I hope he will come back like so may great players before him (agassi, Sampras). If he still has the fire then, he will be again number one :-)

FedererSlam
10-23-2007, 11:34 AM
Since Rome Roger has made W, F, W, F, W, W, F...... One final loss was on clay and the other two were masters series finals which are not his main priority anymore (no credit taken away from the champions who beat him).

Bobby
10-23-2007, 11:59 AM
Since Rome Roger has made W, F, W, F, W, W, F...... One final loss was on clay and the other two were masters series finals which are not his main priority anymore (no credit taken away from the champions who beat him).

Are you saying that Federer doesn't try that hard when he plays masters series finals? Shouldn't winning every match be the goal for a tennis player?

glomasterg
10-23-2007, 01:10 PM
I feel that Federer has lost that hunger in wining titles. He has dominated tennis for the past 5-7 years and has won a lot of money. I think he is lacking focus and determination. He has proven to many of us that he is one of the best tennis players ever. He is only 2 grand slam titles away in tieing Pete Sampras record so I would expect him to play at his greatest at the slams. As far as the other tournaments during the year, he will do what the williams sisters have done for the past 2 years and that is play very little tennis and pursue other interests.

glomasterg
10-23-2007, 01:15 PM
Are you saying that Federer doesn't try that hard when he plays masters series finals? Shouldn't winning every match be the goal for a tennis player?


Yes, I feel that Federer has lost a bit of his drive and his motivation to win. He has nothing to prove to us nor does he need the money. His sole focus is the grand slams so he can catch Pete Sampras. Look at it this way, if Federer isn't dominating the field like he has done in the past but the still wins 15 grand slams in his career, will that tarnish his legacy?

I think not. All it matters now is to win grand slams.

mineralwater
10-23-2007, 01:26 PM
Yes, I feel that Federer has lost a bit of his drive and his motivation to win. He has nothing to prove to us nor does he need the money. His sole focus is the grand slams so he can catch Pete Sampras. Look at it this way, if Federer isn't dominating the field like he has done in the past but the still wins 15 grand slams in his career, will that tarnish his legacy?

I think not. All it matters now is to win grand slams.

As a Federer fan too, I have to agree with you. i watched some of his Madrid matches on TV and in some places he just looked bored - even though some of his tennis was superb. i think players do get a little burnt out around the age of 25-26. This is NOT an excuse to why he lost. I thought Nalby played v well and deserved it.
I think Federer losing is good for him too as it keeps his motivation up. I think he's determined to get the slam record and other stuff even masters events are not as high priority

jasmin
10-23-2007, 02:27 PM
Well he can't worry about that now or at least it's obvious that winning in between tournaments isn't priority for him. Now that he's so close to Pete that's more on his mind. I think winning slams (Wimby and perhaps the French) and trying to stay number one is his main goal. Really playing in every final (win or lose)in all the tournaments is taxing so you have to pace yourself even if you were younger. I don't care how young you are because if you are going the distant in most tournaments or all (Federer) is taxing. Look at Nadal by the end of the 2nd half of the season.

I also think when Fed loses to a certain player it's a motivation so it's good to lose sometimes.

trixtah
10-23-2007, 03:01 PM
why does he do the ridiculous backhand chip return time and again to Djokovic? Djokovic is not Roddick, Federer gives up a massive disadvantage on that first shot and is constantly behind in all the points he does that in. Why not go for broke once in a while like Blake does, if you put a couple together you have a break game.

That's why he's the #1 pro :)

Dougie
10-23-2007, 03:08 PM
Yes, I feel that Federer has lost a bit of his drive and his motivation to win. He has nothing to prove to us nor does he need the money. His sole focus is the grand slams so he can catch Pete Sampras. Look at it this way, if Federer isn't dominating the field like he has done in the past but the still wins 15 grand slams in his career, will that tarnish his legacy?

I think not. All it matters now is to win grand slams.

Well put. If he can win more GSs than any other player in the history, no one will remember if he won Madrid -07 or not. And you canīt blame the guy. If you can eat stake every day, why bother fighting over a Big Mac?

rofe
10-23-2007, 03:58 PM
Well put. If he can win more GSs than any other player in the history, no one will remember if he won Madrid -07 or not. And you canīt blame the guy. If you can eat stake every day, why bother fighting over a Big Mac?

Haha, well put.

guy in sf
10-23-2007, 05:14 PM
This is a worthless thread. As good as Federer is you can't expect him to be super good in every tournament and every final and every year. One can only stay as dominant as he's been for a good while and sooner or later, age, burnout, your competition catching up to you and occasional bad days that reinforce that you're still human are always going to affect you no matter how good you are. His domination is slightly on the decline because I feel that he's reached his peak already and it only gets tougher and tougher from now on. He's 26 and that's middle age in tennis. He's said before that he wants to play til 35 and physically he might be able to but as he reaches his late 20's his quality of play will go down and the young guns like Murray and Djokovich will only improve as time progresses, that's just how things work in this world. I see Federer only lasting til his late 20's and the reason I say that is because a player like him who's already touted as the greatest of all time won't settled for anything less than number 1 and he's not going to be number 1 til 35. Players like Federer should go out in style and not staying when he's not at his absolute best so his image as the greatest ever stays intact.

tangerine_dream
10-23-2007, 05:14 PM
Who the heck is Berrer and why did Roger just lose a set to him?

Well put. If he can win more GSs than any other player in the history, no one will remember if he won Madrid -07 or not. And you canīt blame the guy. If you can eat stake every day, why bother fighting over a Big Mac?
If I had to choose between eating a stake and a BigMac, I'd take the somewhat more edible BigMac.

Apemant
10-23-2007, 05:38 PM
Who the heck is Berrer and why did Roger just lose a set to him?

Some clutch play (and good serving) from Berrer and a whole truckload of shanked forehands from Federer = he loses a set. :devil:

ChrisDoesDallas
10-23-2007, 05:49 PM
Am I the only one who saw how devastated Federer looked after he lost the Madrid final? He looked absolutely crushed, and I immediately pointed it out to my mother who also makes the claim that his losses are due to "throwing them away," or whatever else.

He wants to win every match he plays like any other sane professional tennis player and hopefully every other pro sportsman in general. When he loses it's not because he doesn't have the determination or drive, he got outplayed.

That said, this is a ridiculous thread since he's likely going to pass the 14 slam record at Wimbledon or the US Open next year, so who cares.

Eden
10-23-2007, 05:56 PM
Apart from the losses to Canas and Volandri he only lost in the finals of
tournaments against the number 2 and 3 players of the world and a former no. 3, who will surely climb again in the rankings.
It's ok not to see everything through rose-coloured glasses, but some of the comments most of the time when Roger loses a match just show how incredible high he set the standards. Have a look at the performances of former number one players and compare them with Rogers achievements. Every player has bad match-ups, off days, but above all opponents who are able to play tennis as well and are especially motivated to competete against the best player of the world.

cmurray
10-23-2007, 06:04 PM
Apart from the losses to Canas and Volandri he only lost in the finals of
tournaments against the number 2 and 3 players of the world and a former no. 3, who will surely climb again in the rankings.
It's ok not to see everything through rose-coloured glasses, but some of the comments most of the time when Roger loses a match just show how incredible high he set the standards. Have a look at the performances of former number one players and compare them with Rogers achievements. Every player has bad match-ups, off days, but above all opponents who are able to play tennis as well and are especially motivated to competete against the best player of the world.

I think part of the problem is that there are certain fans of Roger's who simply expect him to win every event he enters that isn't on clay. The fact that this isn't happening anymore is making people tweaky. :shrug:

You think this is bad? Wait until he loses his #1 ranking.

Eden
10-23-2007, 06:33 PM
I think part of the problem is that there are certain fans of Roger's who simply expect him to win every event he enters that isn't on clay. The fact that this isn't happening anymore is making people tweaky. :shrug:

You think this is bad? Wait until he loses his #1 ranking.

Not everyone who gives his opinion on Roger here on GM is automatically a fan of him ;) Most of the people I consider as fans of him and experienced tennis fans through posts seem to be realistic as they follow tennis for a while and know the game and respect the achievements of him.
Of course as a fan you want the best results for your favourite player and to see him in the best possible form, but it's also part of the game to give credit to the opponents when they were the better player, which was the case in the match between Roger and Nalbandian.

I don't understand the bad reputation Rogers fanbase seems to have on MTF. There are users who are very aware of the weaker performances of Roger and not afraid to criticize him for this. It's the tards and trolls who give the fanbases a bad name, no matter if it's the so-called Fedtards, Rafatards, Djokotards. Yes, there will probably be "fans" of Roger who will stop supporting him once he loses the No.1, but the same goes for other "fans" of players. That's life and we don't have an influence to it.

cmurray
10-23-2007, 06:49 PM
Not everyone who gives his opinion on Roger here on GM is automatically a fan of him ;) Most of the people I consider as fans of him and experienced tennis fans through posts seem to be realistic as they follow tennis for a while and know the game and respect the achievements of him.
Of course as a fan you want the best results for your favourite player and to see him in the best possible form, but it's also part of the game to give credit to the opponents when they were the better player, which was the case in the match between Roger and Nalbandian.

I don't understand the bad reputation Rogers fanbase seems to have on MTF. There are users who are very aware of the weaker performances of Roger and not afraid to criticize him for this. It's the tards and trolls who give the fanbases a bad name, no matter if it's the so-called Fedtards, Rafatards, Djokotards. Yes, there will probably be "fans" of Roger who will stop supporting him once he loses the No.1, but the same goes for other "fans" of players. That's life and we don't have an influence to it.

I said CERTAIN Federer fans. These posters tend to be very vocal and very smug until Roger loses.

And I wasn't trying to imply that a bunch of people would stop being a fan after the #1 reign is over. I just think we'll see a bunch of tweaking.

Allure
10-23-2007, 06:51 PM
He doesn't care about non slams tournies anymore.

cmurray
10-23-2007, 06:53 PM
He doesn't care about non slams tournies anymore.

Could be. Sampy did the same thing.

jasmin
10-23-2007, 09:09 PM
All athletes have off days and will lose. It would be nice for them to win but it's crazy to think the best won't lose sometimes. It's unrealistic to think they will play the same year in, year out and everytime they play. It's just not human and I do hate the 'he's human' comment. I mean really how silly are these journalist and commentators. They've always been human. They just have been blessed with phenomenal gifts.

rofe
10-23-2007, 09:35 PM
He doesn't care about non slams tournies anymore.

I don't buy it with respect to Madrid. He cared enough to reach the finals. He simply got outplayed by Nalby. I don't know why it is such a big deal after his losses to Caņas and Volandri.