Federer 2009 v. Federer 2012 [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer 2009 v. Federer 2012

Busterovic
05-13-2012, 12:32 PM
On the surface, this seems like it would not even be a contest. In 2009, Federer compiled a 61-12 record, reached the final of every GS, won 2 GS's, won the career GS, and beat Nadal on clay, and won 2 AMS1000 events. On paper, one of the greatest single seasons ever.

Records in tennis though often times don't tell the story about how well a player is playing. Even though he won his one and only French Open that year, Nadal was injured at Roland Garros and didn't even play Wimbledon. At the French, Fed struggled mightily going 4 sets with Acasuso and Mathieu and went the distance against Del Potro and Haas. In fact, against Haas Fed was down 2 sets and was in trouble deep in the 3rd.

At Wimbledon, Federer probably had his easiest road to the title playing the likes of Kohlscrieber, Karlovic, Haas and eventually Roddick where he was just barely able to hold on.

After Wimbledon, Fed's up and down play continued as Fed blew a huge lead at Flushing Meadows chasing a USO title and 2009 was the last year that Roger didn't win the WTF.

Compare that to early 2012 where Federer has already won an AMS 1000 event (probably 2 after today), has 7 wins over top 10 players, and has seemed almost unbeatable at times.

I've watched the majority of Federers matches thus far this year and I remember his level in 2009 and in my mind theres absolutely zero question that 2012 Federer is playing A LOT better than 2009 Fed but it will be extremely difficult for him to accomplish half of what he did in 2012. Thats how well the rest of the tour is playing.

Topspindoctor
05-13-2012, 12:37 PM
Olderer didn't deserve any slams after AO 2007, sadly players were either injured or choked against him (W2007, USO 2007)

GSMnadal
05-13-2012, 12:37 PM
Fed got gifted the two slams, by Rafa's injury and Roddick choking it up. He's actually pretty impressive this year, it's just that when he meets Rafa/Nole in a slam, they step it up and he's toast.

He might soon be #2, but he is not one of the top two players in the game

Looner
05-13-2012, 12:40 PM
It's Federer 2012. And that's not because Fed got lucky as some idiots above might suggest. In 2009, Fed's passive game had reached its peak and this led to him losing the almost won final against JMDP. The Federer of today has everything better than the one in 2009 except possibly recovery powers.

Chase Visa
05-13-2012, 12:47 PM
Olderer didn't deserve any slams after AO 2007, sadly players were either injured or choked against him (W2007, USO 2007)

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4020/4460134178_102779e9cf.jpg

shadows
05-13-2012, 12:53 PM
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4020/4460134178_102779e9cf.jpg

This is implying anyone bites on topspindarling's attempts.

BroTree123
05-13-2012, 01:06 PM
Olderer didn't deserve any slams after AO 2007, sadly players were either injured or choked against him (W2007, USO 2007)

I'm surprised you say that he deserved AO 2007. It was a cakedraw for him and no one even turned up to play. If they did, they would have roasted him :shrug:

paseo
05-13-2012, 01:08 PM
'05-'06 Fed would crush either of them.

duong
05-13-2012, 01:13 PM
I think that the Federer from 2011 was overall better than the Federer from 2009, which I think was his worst year tennis-wise together with 2010 since 2003, but for 2012 it's too early to say, it's just the beginning of the year.

Fed this year has not been great yet (well, except Indian Wells semifinal and Rotterdam final, that's already something :) ), he was great in some matches last year (esp. RG and US Open)

Topspindoctor
05-13-2012, 01:16 PM
I'm surprised you say that he deserved AO 2007. It was a cakedraw for him and no one even turned up to play. If they did, they would have roasted him :shrug:

I am a reasonable poster, bro. Not a hater.

I can admit Olderer played well and deserved it.

However after that he relied only on serve (W 2009), injury (W 2007), choke (US 2007) and beating Mugs (US 2008, AO 2010) to win his slams.

BroTree123
05-13-2012, 01:19 PM
I am a reasonable poster, bro. Not a hater.

I can admit Olderer played well and deserved it.

However after that he relied only on serve (W 2009), injury (W 2007), choke (US 2007) and beating Mugs (US 2008, AO 2010) to win his slams.

He didn't play one single decent player in AO 2007. Everyone in the draw was burnt out with long matches in early rounds and a few fixing mugs here and there, so how would you know he deserved it in the end?

I will admit this though, when he won USO 2008 and AO 2010 he did a good deed in stopping Mugray from winning a slam. Mugray had bigger flukes in his runs to the final than Federer's 16 GS glories combined.

rocketassist
05-13-2012, 01:20 PM
I'm surprised you say that he deserved AO 2007. It was a cakedraw for him and no one even turned up to play. If they did, they would have roasted him :shrug:

Gonzo was playing brilliantly in that tournament. Fed also schooled Nole and Roddick that event.

dazed1
05-13-2012, 01:20 PM
Olderer didn't deserve any slams after AO 2007, sadly players were either injured or choked against him (W2007, USO 2007)

Your avatar tell us all, troll4life.

Fed got gifted the two slams, by Rafa's injury and Roddick choking it up.

And how many slams does Federer gifted to Nadal etc by choking up? be silent Rafatards.

BroTree123
05-13-2012, 01:27 PM
Gonzo was playing brilliantly in that tournament. Fed also schooled Nole and Roddick that event.

I wish Gonzo won that, he was awesome throughout. But I knew he'd fold so badly against Fed in the final. He should have had that first set, then who knows.... Fed getting lucky again, how surprising :o. I'm sure Doc would agree ;)

Anyways Novak back then was no where near as complete as he is today and Roddick is...Roddick.

70-68
05-13-2012, 01:28 PM
I wonder what Moonballnurse would say about Nadull's slams after AO '09, that he won against pre peak Novak, and slamless chokers like Berdych, Sod, and Murray.

MachineGun
05-13-2012, 01:29 PM
What does mean to not deserve a slam, exactly? You fight, you win the tournament. You don't chose your opponents. Nadal also has had some cake draws when winning some of his 10 GS. That doesn't mean he didn't deserve them.

I have to say, though, that Roger's 2012 level is better than 2009's, in my opinion. His 2009 level was enough to win all he won. But his game is much more solid and he seems mentally stronger. 3 slams are still to be played this year, and I can certainly see him winning Wimbledon and the US Open. He also has a decent chance at RG.

duong
05-13-2012, 01:34 PM
Besides, one should not forget that Fed had some great moments in 2009 as well :

Cincinnati final two matches were Goat-like,
Wimbledon also was apart from the final and despite a tough draw,
the US Open was great between R16 and SF,
in Australia he was Goat-like against Del Potro, one of the best matches he ever player imo,
in RG he played great from the QF.

duong
05-13-2012, 01:37 PM
I wonder what Moonballnurse would say about Nadull's slams after AO '09, that he won against pre peak Novak, and slamless chokers like Berdych, Sod, and Murray.

Nadal's year in 2010 was very similar imo to Fed's 2009 :

- they were lucky that their main opponents were bad that year.

- they both had great stats in their serving games that year, their best year for that, but bad stats in return games, their worst year for that.

The main difference being ... Del Potro in the US Open 2009, who was great, Nadal didn't have to face anybody like that in the US Open 2010.

70-68
05-13-2012, 01:47 PM
Nadal's year in 2010 was very similar imo to Fed's 2009 :

- they were lucky that their main opponents were bad that year.

- they both had great stats in their serving games that year, their best year for that, but bad stats in return games, their worst year for that.

The main difference being ... Del Potro in the US Open 2009, who was great, Nadal didn't have to face anybody like that in the US Open 2010.

Agree.

But in the end, both deserved to win. I mean, they were the best players in those tournaments, who else would deserve it more :shrug: And it's not like other all time greats never had some weaker draws at a slam.

drazyc
05-13-2012, 01:48 PM
I think Federer (and Annacone) realized during 2011 that he needs to be more selective in strategy and preparations. He cannot afford to play defensive tennis against the top guys any longer. He is not the same flexible mover as he was in his best days. His biggest weapon now is his enormous attacking arsenal. I believe his serve, volley and backhand are just as good as before, maybe even better.

In 2009 he was sticking to that all court game with a lot of baseline bullying. Just look at the Delpo match at US Open. He played so defensively in most of that match. In Paris it was just meant to be for him - he didn't play a very good tournament apart from in the final against Soderling.

The aspects suffering today is his defense and return game. His return game has cost him at Wimbledon in two consecutive years. That is also why I think it is hard for him to win another Wimbledon title.

ServeVolley
05-13-2012, 01:49 PM
Olderer didn't deserve any slams after AO 2007, sadly players were either injured or choked against him (W2007, USO 2007)

Another one for the ignore list. Bye bye troll. :wavey:

JurajCrane
05-13-2012, 02:04 PM
I am a reasonable poster, bro. Not a hater.
.




GOOD SHIT. :cool:

Bigselber
05-13-2012, 02:07 PM
I think Federer (and Annacone) realized during 2011 that he needs to be more selective in strategy and preparations. He cannot afford to play defensive tennis against the top guys any longer. He is not the same flexible mover as he was in his best days. His biggest weapon now is his enormous attacking arsenal. I believe his serve, volley and backhand are just as good as before, maybe even better.

In 2009 he was sticking to that all court game with a lot of baseline bullying. Just look at the Delpo match at US Open. He played so defensively in most of that match. In Paris it was just meant to be for him - he didn't play a very good tournament apart from in the final against Soderling.

The aspects suffering today is his defense and return game. His return game has cost him at Wimbledon in two consecutive years. That is also why I think it is hard for him to win another Wimbledon title.

The semi-final against Del Potro was fantastic, Del Potro was in God-mode..

On topic, it's hard to say at this point. But I think his avreage level now is better, but his highest level was better in 2009.

ServeVolley
05-13-2012, 02:22 PM
Amazingly, Federer only has a negative HTH against one person this year...

* Argentina Juan Martín del Potro 4–0
* Russia Nikolay Davydenko 2–0
* Canada Milos Raonic 2–0
* Brazil Thomaz Bellucci 1–0
* Spain David Ferrer 1–0
* France Richard Gasquet 1–0
* United States Ryan Harrison 1–0
* Croatia Ivo Karlović 1–0

* United States Denis Kudla 1–0
* Russia Alexander Kudryavtsev 1–0
* France Michaël Llodra 1–0
* Spain Feliciano López 1–0
* France Nicolas Mahut 1–0
* United Kingdom Andy Murray 1–0
* Finland Jarkko Nieminen 1–0
* Italy Andreas Seppi 1–0

* Serbia Janko Tipsarević 1–0
* Australia Bernard Tomic 1–0
* Russia Mikhail Youzhny 1–0
* Slovenia Grega Žemlja 1–0
* United States John Isner 1–1
* Spain Rafael Nadal 1–1
* United States Andy Roddick 0–1

He lost to Nadal at the AO and Isner at Davis Cup, but he avenged both of those losses during Indian Wells. So, the only person he actually has a negative HTH versus is... Roddick (amusing, I know, but still amazing). :)

GOAT = Fed
05-13-2012, 02:44 PM
One main difference from 2009:

Roger's BH now is very solid, from 2008-2010 is was very, very shaky and shanks were imminent at any time.

Apart from that I'd say his movement has regressed a LITTLE BIT. But everything else is the same, if not marginally better.

Ash86
05-13-2012, 02:48 PM
Amazingly, Federer only has a negative HTH against one person this year...

* Argentina Juan Martín del Potro 4–0
* Russia Nikolay Davydenko 2–0
* Canada Milos Raonic 2–0
* Brazil Thomaz Bellucci 1–0
* Spain David Ferrer 1–0
* France Richard Gasquet 1–0
* United States Ryan Harrison 1–0
* Croatia Ivo Karlović 1–0

* United States Denis Kudla 1–0
* Russia Alexander Kudryavtsev 1–0
* France Michaël Llodra 1–0
* Spain Feliciano López 1–0
* France Nicolas Mahut 1–0
* United Kingdom Andy Murray 1–0
* Finland Jarkko Nieminen 1–0
* Italy Andreas Seppi 1–0

* Serbia Janko Tipsarević 1–0
* Australia Bernard Tomic 1–0
* Russia Mikhail Youzhny 1–0
* Slovenia Grega Žemlja 1–0
* United States John Isner 1–1
* Spain Rafael Nadal 1–1
* United States Andy Roddick 0–1

He lost to Nadal at the AO and Isner at Davis Cup, but he avenged both of those losses during Indian Wells. So, the only person he actually has a negative HTH versus is... Roddick (amusing, I know, but still amazing). :)

That's not that amazing given he hasn't faced many quality opponents multiple times. I'm sure if Nadal faces Monfils & Verdasco again he could even it up; same for Djokovic vs Isner or Tipsarevic etc. It's luck of the draw whether you face the same players multiple times.

drazyc
05-13-2012, 02:54 PM
One main difference from 2009:

Roger's BH now is very solid, from 2008-2010 is was very, very shaky and shanks were imminent at any time.

Apart from that I'd say his movement has regressed a LITTLE BIT. But everything else is the same, if not marginally better.

His return game is worse than in his best days. But that development perhaps started even before 2009. If he could just return like Djokovic, he would be impossible to beat. Especially off second serves. Too many easy return misses.

drazyc
05-13-2012, 02:58 PM
The semi-final against Del Potro was fantastic, Del Potro was in God-mode..


I remember it as a very exciting match, but not spectacular. Federer did not play that well.

But it is of course easy to forget those brilliant matches in 2009. Cincy matches against Murray and Djokovic were simply amazing. Even at Wimbledon he played some really good matches, especially against Haas in the semi. He did well in Australia as well before the final, although he was shaky against Berdych. His quarterfinal match against Del Potro was stunning.

GSMnadal
05-13-2012, 03:03 PM
Your avatar tell us all, troll4life.



And how many slams does Federer gifted to Nadal etc by choking up? be silent Rafatards.

How about none... at RG, he never got close. Wimbledon 08, only one who choked there was Nadal, should've won in 3 or 4. Wimbledon and US Open 2010..too bad Rafa didn't face Roger there, would've annihilated him.

Only one you could make a case for is AO 2009, but only for the final set, but was it a choke or was he just drained by Nadal in the previous sets.

GOAT = Fed
05-13-2012, 03:08 PM
How about none... at RG, he never got close.
You cannot deny that Federer did choke last year at RG.
Wimbledon 08, only one who choked there was Nadal, should've won in 3 or 4.
I agree.
Wimbledon and US Open 2010..too bad Rafa didn't face Roger there, would've annihilated him.
Sorry but this is 'tard logic. :stupid:

Only one you could make a case for is AO 2009, but only for the final set, but was it a choke or was he just drained by Nadal in the previous sets.

I wouldn't neccessary call AO '09 a choke by Federer though, he wasn't ever in a winning position in that final. He just didn't turn up for the final set, it wasn't a choke, because at that moment in time, Federer did not have the capacity to go 5 sets with Nadal because of his, let's say 'fear' of Nadal, and also a testament of how good Nadal was playing at that time, AO 2009 was truly an incredible tournament for Nadal.

GSMnadal
05-13-2012, 03:13 PM
You cannot deny that Federer did choke last year at RG.

I agree.

Sorry but this is 'tard logic. :stupid:



I wouldn't neccessary call AO '09 a choke by Federer though, he wasn't ever in a winning position in that final. He just didn't turn up for the final set, it wasn't a choke, because at that moment in time, Federer did not have the capacity to go 5 sets with Nadal because of his, let's say 'fear' of Nadal, and also a testament of how good Nadal was playing at that time, AO 2009 was truly an incredible tournament for Nadal.

He choked a set last year, he was never winning the match.

Not tard logic, it's called a no brainer. Rafa was playing some of his best tennis and Roger some of his worst. Add the whole slam match up stories in there, it would've looked nasty.

Agreed on the final part

BauerAlmeida
05-13-2012, 03:17 PM
2012.

reery
05-13-2012, 03:20 PM
Voted 2012.

TigerTim
05-13-2012, 03:23 PM
Federer is on fire in 2012 - 2012 it is

MaxPower
05-13-2012, 03:24 PM
Maybe let 2012 Federer finish his season before comparing....in particular if RG/W/USO is the big arguments brought up from 09. Also funny the poll is the way it is when we only played 1 out of 4 slams. What if Federer wins the remaining 3? just sayin. I know this is MTF where patience is in short supply and logic is banned but this thread is premature.

emotion
05-13-2012, 03:26 PM
I said 2009, but it is close. After sucking for post-AO 2010 and much of 2011, Federer has gone back to, while not his God mode, his level at the beginning of his decline it seems

asmazif
05-13-2012, 03:27 PM
Correlating this far in the year, got to be Fed 2012. Had a slump in form for much of the first half of 2009 after that AO final - playing bad matches v Stan in MC, Nole in Miami and fairly average v Nole in Rome and Murray in IW. Then picked it up at this sort of time, going on to take Madrid, RG, Wimbledon and Cincy.

Obviously far too early to compare whole seasons, but up to this point in both years, 2012 results-wise and game-wise.

Mystique
05-13-2012, 03:39 PM
what about waiting another couple of months AT LEAST before comparing Fed of 2009 and 2012?
In slams, Fed was still a beast in 09. He was starting to show the sign of decline (evident from the USO final debacle) at that stage too, but still he reached all 4 slam finals that year, winning the all important Channel Slam.
It doesnt matter if Fed wins like 3 or 4 MS and 500s this year, if he doesnt get the results at the slam stage, Fed09 will still thump him.
However, I have no doubt that Fed2012 is playing cleverer and more clutch tennis. Physically though, he has declined a lot more than people like to accept in these forums, that shows at the slam stage in BO5.

sexybeast
05-14-2012, 01:27 PM
Federer 2009-2011 started to have a hard time with the hard hitting quartet (Sod, Berdych, Del Potro and Tsonga), in his peak he would barely lose a set against any of them.

It seems to me Federer of late 2011 to 2012 has somewhat solved this problem. Now he got 10 victories in a row against Berdych, Tsonga and Del Potro.

Chase Visa
05-14-2012, 01:29 PM
His losses since Shanghai 2011.....

Nadal @ AO
Isner @ DC
Roddick @ Miami

Having a tough time against the big servers it seems.

sexybeast
05-14-2012, 01:32 PM
His losses since Shanghai 2011.....

Nadal @ AO
Isner @ DC
Roddick @ Miami

Having a tough time against the big servers it seems.

Isner was played on crazy uneven clay with bad bounces everywhere, the Roddick match was a fluke.

I dont think Federer is going to have a hard time with big servers when it matters.

Tsonga, Del Potro, Berdych and Soderling have all beaten Federer in slams between 2009-2011.

GOAT = Fed
05-14-2012, 01:36 PM
He choked a set last year, he was never winning the match.
He chocked a set as well as a tie break. To me that is a pretty big choke in a final.

Not tard logic, it's called a no brainer. Rafa was playing some of his best tennis and Roger some of his worst.
I think the months preceding the US tournament swing he was playing some of his worst tennis in a while, but once the US hardcourt swing began he was playing some pretty good stuff. Nadal was playing at a good level, but not anywhere near, say, AO 2009. The only thing that dramatically improved in his game during that US open was his serve. I would think it would have been a close match with perhaps Nadal edging it. Using your logic, before a final, they may as well give the trophy to the one going in with the highest chances. It's a sport for a reason ;).
Add the whole slam match up stories in there, it would've looked nasty.

Just like how it looked nasty at RG 2011 and AO 2012....

..oh wait.

To be honest, Fedal have always had tight matches in the best of five sets. The only time where you can say Nadal destroyed Federer was at RG '08, but at that moment in time Nadal was playing possibly the highest level ever seen on a clay court.


His losses since Shanghai 2011.....

Nadal @ AO
Isner @ DC
Roddick @ Miami

Having a tough time against the big servers it seems.

Nadal is a big server?

isthisreallife.jpeg

Chase Visa
05-14-2012, 01:40 PM
He chocked a set as well as a tie break. To me that is a pretty big choke in a final.


I think the months preceding the US tournament swing he was playing some of his worst tennis in a while, but once the US hardcourt swing began he was playing some pretty good stuff. Nadal was playing at a good level, but not anywhere near, say, AO 2009. The only thing that dramatically improved in his game during that US open was his serve. I would think it would have been a close match with perhaps Nadal edging it. Using your logic, before a final, they may as well give the trophy to the one going in with the highest chances. It's a sport for a reason ;).


Just like how it looked nasty at RG 2011 and AO 2012....

..oh wait.

To be honest, Fedal have always had tight matches in the best of five sets. The only time where you can say Nadal destroyed Federer was at RG '08, but at that moment in time Nadal was playing possibly the highest level ever seen on a clay court.




Nadal is a big server?

isthisreallife.jpeg

He wasn't even beating Nadal that much when he was GOATerer. So that loss was kinda expected.

GOAT = Fed
05-14-2012, 01:42 PM
He wasn't even beating Nadal that much when he was GOATerer. So that loss was kinda expected.

Lol yeah I know.

Fuser59
05-14-2012, 02:47 PM
Olderer didn't deserve any slams after AO 2007, sadly players were either injured or choked against him (W2007, USO 2007)

Well then you obviously started watching tennis later than that...

Fuser59
05-14-2012, 02:55 PM
I think Federer (and Annacone) realized during 2011 that he needs to be more selective in strategy and preparations. He cannot afford to play defensive tennis against the top guys any longer. He is not the same flexible mover as he was in his best days. His biggest weapon now is his enormous attacking arsenal. I believe his serve, volley and backhand are just as good as before, maybe even better.

In 2009 he was sticking to that all court game with a lot of baseline bullying. Just look at the Delpo match at US Open. He played so defensively in most of that match. In Paris it was just meant to be for him - he didn't play a very good tournament apart from in the final against Soderling.

The aspects suffering today is his defense and return game. His return game has cost him at Wimbledon in two consecutive years. That is also why I think it is hard for him to win another Wimbledon title.

I'ma afraid I have to agrre with you on this one...

samanosuke
05-14-2012, 03:12 PM
Fed 2012 > Fed 2009 . that RG and W wins were two slams that Fed won with worst form. He won it just because it was destiny and had to win it . Still don't know how he survived some of the matches

Sophocles
05-14-2012, 03:18 PM
Too early to say. The clay-grass swing is the pivotal part of the season and in 2009 Federer came up with the goods when he had to, playing brilliantly against Monfils & Soderling at R.G. and for most of Wimbledon. Let's see how he does this year.

mark73
05-14-2012, 03:29 PM
Fed got gifted the two slams, by Rafa's injury and Roddick choking it up. He's actually pretty impressive this year, it's just that when he meets Rafa/Nole in a slam, they step it up and he's toast.

He might soon be #2, but he is not one of the top two players in the game

You are being too generous. Fed was gifted all 16 of his slams because he never faced a guy who was better than him during those slams. What a lucky guy that he never faced a better player.

abraxas21
05-14-2012, 03:47 PM
he hasn't improved. he's just gotten more lucky

in fact, all of federer's 16 GS are mostly due to pure luck one way or another

barahmasa
05-14-2012, 03:50 PM
The semi-final against Del Potro was fantastic, Del Potro was in God-mode..

On topic, it's hard to say at this point. But I think his avreage level now is better, but his highest level was better in 2009.

I agree on his highest level, Roger can't do a lot of things now he could in 2009. His level today is overrated, he'll end the year with zero slams again and that will be the answer to this question. But he is more consistent than in 2009.

One of the most important differences - he can't compete for 5 sets anymore, in 2009 he could. That's why he ain't winning slams anymore (surely he ain't gonna beat Rafa or Nole in straights in slams).

ServeVolley
05-14-2012, 03:57 PM
he hasn't improved. he's just gotten more lucky

in fact, all of federer's 16 GS are mostly due to pure luck one way or another

I hope this is sarcasm. If not; :facepalm:

dazed1
05-14-2012, 04:03 PM
I'ma afraid I have to agrre with you on this one...


I was often arguing with many of my friends about that issue, Federer used to wait his opponents to make a mistake, which lead him in many lost sets/gems/brakes and even matches cause of it, like he was waiting them to be scared of him and choke, so he can save energy and win easy...but if not, he often ended being frustrated, nervous(tons of UE) and disappointed - lost match.

Was so angry when i was seeing that game-style it was frustrating, passing the ball just deep enough to not let your opponent into clean position to attack is not enough! you need to attack! there is no need to get to long points vs 5 years younger players....my friends used to make fun of me "yes your the expert ect" but that's pure true! if Federer wants to win, he must attack at every shorter-mid filed returned ball, he must play even more aggressive in he wants to win, waiting your opponent to make mistake is so wrong at that age, and with that attacking skills! when you already have Nadal vs you, you cant take the risk to let him fire like 20 shots on your backhand, just attack at once when you get the ball on your forehand and that's it! better to risk this way, then lose later in frustration with miss-hit from his backhand wich will end at the audience (UE) = and that will lead into losing confidence for next backhand hits as well = lost match....better risk and get much better chance to win, then wait and lose ANYWAY.

duchuy89
05-14-2012, 04:24 PM
2009 - off course!

BroTree123
05-14-2012, 04:52 PM
Federer is an overrated forehand-bashing, serve bot who took advantage of an extremely weak era. He only appears to be "godly" because the era during his so-called "reign" was at an all time record low.

GOAT = Fed
05-14-2012, 05:05 PM
Federer is an overrated forehand-bashing, serve bot who took advantage of an extremely weak era. He only appears to be "godly" because the era during his so-called "reign" was at an all time record low.

Please bro,....


......

......


...stay safe.

dazed1
05-14-2012, 05:17 PM
Federer is an overrated forehand-bashing, serve bot who took advantage of an extremely weak era. He only appears to be "godly" because the era during his so-called "reign" was at an all time record low.


http://i45.tinypic.com/2hwcu3q.gif

GSMnadal
05-14-2012, 05:20 PM
I hope this is sarcasm. If not; :facepalm:

Know your posters, abraxas is pro-Fed

out_grinder
05-14-2012, 05:21 PM
I am a reasonable poster, bro. Not a hater.

I can admit Olderer played well and deserved it.

However after that he relied only on serve (W 2009), injury (W 2007), choke (US 2007) and beating Mugs (US 2008, AO 2010) to win his slams.

Be quiet.

You hate every player on the face of the earth besides Nadal. If I had a dollar for every time the word 'mug' is mentioned on your posts...

And you hate Nadal when he gets smashed by someone who figures out how to beat his one tactic. Hopefully you will be hating Nadal more and more these days.

GSMnadal
05-14-2012, 05:23 PM
You are being too generous. Fed was gifted all 16 of his slams because he never faced a guy who was better than him during those slams. What a lucky guy that he never faced a better player.

It counts as lucky when the worlds best player and defending champion is injured and can't play because of that, now doesn't it?

What if Djokovic, Federer and Nadal are all injured come RG and Muzza grabs it, would you not say it's a lucky win?

Johnbert
05-14-2012, 05:26 PM
It counts as lucky when the worlds best player and defending champion is injured and can't play because of that, now doesn't it?

What if Djokovic, Federer and Nadal are all injured come RG and Muzza grabs it, would you not say it's a lucky win?

what a great post... :haha:

BroTree123
05-14-2012, 05:29 PM
It counts as lucky when the worlds best player and defending champion is injured and can't play because of that, now doesn't it?

What if Djokovic, Federer and Nadal are all injured come RG and Muzza grabs it, would you not say it's a lucky win?

Sorry to piss on the bonfire, but Mugray still won't manage it.

dazed1
05-14-2012, 05:31 PM
It counts as lucky when the worlds best player and defending champion is injured and can't play because of that, now doesn't it?

What if Djokovic, Federer and Nadal are all injured come RG and Muzza grabs it, would you not say it's a lucky win?

And who the *uck cares if Nadal was injured? have you ever asked your self why Federer is not injured? that's Nadal problem, and has nothing to do with luck, Nadal wants to run perma - play physical tennis, and push his body to it's limits = knees fail= hes fault! no luck or any other BS, stop embarrassing your self, clown.

GSMnadal
05-14-2012, 05:32 PM
Sorry to piss on the bonfire, but Mugray still won't manage it.

Naturally, but I had to name someone, and Murray looked like the perfect example.

BroTree123
05-14-2012, 05:33 PM
Naturally, but I had to name someone, and Murray looked like the perfect example.

I think if you said Bogomolov, you would have strengthened your argument.

GOAT = Fed
05-14-2012, 05:36 PM
It counts as lucky when the worlds best player and defending champion is injured and can't play because of that, now doesn't it?

What if Djokovic, Federer and Nadal are all injured come RG and Muzza grabs it, would you not say it's a lucky win?

So was tennis in such a weak era during Nadal's prime (2009) that he was the ONLY threat to Federer?

Well that's what you deduce using your logic. Seems like you are grossly underestimating the other 126 players that enter a draw.

samanosuke
05-14-2012, 05:52 PM
And who the *uck cares if Nadal was injured? have you ever asked your self why Federer is not injured? that's Nadal problem, and has nothing to do with luck, Nadal wants to run perma - play physical tennis, and push his body to it's limits = knees fail= hes fault! no luck or any other BS, stop embarrassing your self, clown.

great intro, mate . keep it up :yeah:

show pig tards where they belong

pascal'rG
05-14-2012, 05:52 PM
I read recently that Federer had back problems for 2 years now (started around 2009) that stopped him from training correctly or playing at his full capacities.
I never heard about that before but it was quite a reliable source (Mouratoglou). Did you have any infos on that ?
Anyway it could be a logical explanation of the dropped level in the 2009-2011 years.
It seems that now he manages to solve some of his problems and his results (since middle 2011) are better now.

Arakasi
05-14-2012, 05:59 PM
I read recently that Federer had back problems for 2 years now (started around 2009) that stopped him from training correctly or playing at his full capacities.
I never heard about that before but it was quite a reliable source (Mouratoglou). Did you have any infos on that ?
Anyway it could be a logical explanation of the dropped level in the 2009-2011 years.
It seems that now he manages to solve some of his problems and his results (since middle 2011) are better now.

Federer has had back issues his entire career. It didn't start in 2009.

dazed1
05-14-2012, 06:05 PM
great intro, mate . keep it up :yeah:

show pig tards where they belong

:wavey:

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
05-14-2012, 10:07 PM
I wonder what Moonballnurse would say about Nadull's slams after AO '09, that he won against pre peak Novak, and slamless chokers like Berdych, Sod, and Murray.

love it

took a couple of seconds to register- but awesome

:sport:

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
05-14-2012, 10:13 PM
Federer has had back issues his entire career. It didn't start in 2009.

agassi had them too

must be a symptom of legendary players who can hit clean balls early on the rise

i think andre is the biggest drama queen on the planet the way he made it out like he had a broken back everytime he lost after 2003- but you can tell that it stopped him from winning more in his 30s

(speaking of agassis book- i think its appauling he went after steffi (graf) when she was in a relationship- i think its worse that he actually slept with barbara steisand- but worst of all he actually enjoyed her singing- took much crystal meth at that point in his life)