EVERYONE ADMIT: FEDERER IS A FIGHTER!! [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

EVERYONE ADMIT: FEDERER IS A FIGHTER!!

makro120
04-03-2005, 07:57 PM
Stand in line to admit you were wrong, everyone who didn't see Federer as a fighter!

Now he has everything to win roland garros!!!

Cervantes
04-03-2005, 07:57 PM
What do you mean? He just gave Nadal a head start to make things a little more interesting.

Foxy Smile
04-03-2005, 07:59 PM
:worship: :worship: Federer :worship: :worship:

makro120
04-03-2005, 08:00 PM
yeah, he wanted to give some excitment to all people in this forum who think he is boring. Stop reading menstennisforum, Federer! I will have a hearth attack!

El Legenda
04-03-2005, 08:00 PM
Stand in line to admit you were wrong, !

When did I say Roger was not a fighter..why dont you stand in line and tell me.
you did say you..so mean everyone who reads this....

PaulieM
04-03-2005, 08:04 PM
:bowdown: roger i almost died during that match. i love you :worship:

Noodles
04-03-2005, 08:06 PM
I wish I could've seen this match. Incredible.

NYCtennisfan
04-03-2005, 08:08 PM
I was wrong. He was so negative at 4-1 down in the 3rd. This makes 4. matches this year that he has displayed a fighting attitude that I didn't think he had. Against Safin at the AO, against Minar and Ferrero at Dubai and now here.

Bibir
04-03-2005, 08:09 PM
Roger is a great fighter!!! :yeah:

But life's a bitch. :sad: Rafa :sad:

Anyway, my hippo will be too heavy for him at Roland Garros. :p

aceit
04-03-2005, 08:09 PM
Duh.

onewoman74
04-03-2005, 08:25 PM
Fed has learned to be a clutch player...I think losing a five setter to Safin at a slam was a wake up call he needed...he is a good student and learned his lesson verrrryyy well!!!

NYCtennisfan
04-03-2005, 08:30 PM
Fed has learned to be a clutch player...I think losing a five setter to Safin at a slam was a wake up call he needed...he is a good student and learned his lesson verrrryyy well!!!

Yes indeed. If Fed is going to get to double digit Grand Slam titles and 5 or 6 eyar #1's he will have to win some tough 5 setters where he is not playing all that well.

onewoman74
04-03-2005, 08:46 PM
Yes indeed. If Fed is going to get to double digit Grand Slam titles and 5 or 6 eyar #1's he will have to win some tough 5 setters where he is not playing all that well.

That's a true champion...u better believe it!! Fed now I truly believe in u!!!

:hatoff: :bigclap: :hearts: :worship:

ClaycourtaZzZz.
04-03-2005, 08:49 PM
I wish I could've seen this match. Incredible.

I recorded the match on DVD:)

Sjengster
04-03-2005, 08:53 PM
Hold your horses makro, one comeback against a very good clay-type player does not necessarily mean he has everything that's needed to win in Paris. This is certainly a step in the right direction, but heck, can you imagine the kind of nightmares Nadal would give Federer on clay over five sets with his topspin and retrieval abilities considering how tough a match he gave him on hardcourt? The result will give Federer more confidence, I hope, for the clay season but this is only the tip of the iceberg.

Billabong
04-03-2005, 08:55 PM
I also taped the match, but half of it has the commercials because I was away for a big part;)!

makro120
04-03-2005, 10:51 PM
Hold your horses makro, one comeback against a very good clay-type player does not necessarily mean he has everything that's needed to win in Paris. This is certainly a step in the right direction, but heck, can you imagine the kind of nightmares Nadal would give Federer on clay over five sets with his topspin and retrieval abilities considering how tough a match he gave him on hardcourt? The result will give Federer more confidence, I hope, for the clay season but this is only the tip of the iceberg.


I understand what you mean, if he had such problems against Nadal on hard court how will it be on clay?

But Federer learns something about his opponent for every game, even during the game as was seen in this game. Even if Nadal lost most of his physical and mental energy, Federer figured out how to play against him. Next time they meet I expect Federer to have learned some lessons from this match.

JeNn
04-03-2005, 11:07 PM
Federer has a champion's mentality, but it certainly helps him that his opposition, with the possible exception of Hewitt who does not have the game to challenge him seriously, have the mental fortitude of a souffle.

I am telling you now he won't win RG. To win seven matches there is going to have to be absolutely on top of his game. I have seen little evidence of that this year. Yeah sure, his win-loss record is AMAZING but he has played so many three setters against medium level opponents where he has prevailed on his guts and class alone after not playing particularly well. And this is on fast courts where he is supposed to be all dominant. On clay the range of players who can challenge him grows wider, and his assuredness is ever so slightly lower. I wouldn't be suprised if some of those three set wins turn into three set defeats. As for RG? Well he doesn't have the type of stamina needed to guts out 5 set matches in the first week and have enough left for the later rounds. So he either brings his A-Game from day one to get some relatively straight forward wins, or his challenge fades with each passing round.

makro120
04-03-2005, 11:12 PM
Federer has a champion's mentality, but it certainly helps him that his opposition, with the possible exception of Hewitt who does not have the game to challenge him seriously, have the mental fortitude of a souffle.

I am telling you now he won't win RG. To win seven matches there is going to have to be absolutely on top of his game. I have seen little evidence of that this year. Yeah sure, his win-loss record is AMAZING but he has played so many three setters against medium level opponents where he has prevailed on his guts and class alone after not playing particularly well. And this is on fast courts where he is supposed to be all dominant. On clay the range of players who can challenge him grows wider, and his assuredness is ever so slightly lower. I wouldn't be suprised if some of those three set wins turn into three set defeats. As for RG? Well he doesn't have the type of stamina needed to guts out 5 set matches in the first week and have enough left for the later rounds. So he either brings his A-Game from day one to get some relatively straight forward wins, or his challenge fades with each passing round.

The only avarage players he lost sets against in the 33 matches he has played this year was Ivo Minar and Zabaleta! So I don't know what you are talking about? Does anyone have better statistics against avarage players?

Alan
04-03-2005, 11:13 PM
the match was truly unbelievable!

JeNn
04-03-2005, 11:30 PM
The only avarage players he lost sets against in the 33 matches he has played this year was Ivo Minar and Zabaleta! So I don't know what you are talking about? Does anyone have better statistics against avarage players?

Did I say anyone did? Of course they don't. What a silly question and completely besides the point.

Ancic, though a good player, and Ferrero in his current form aren't exactly players he should be losing sets to either. And he has been played tight by the likes of Davydenko. Just this week he GAVE sets to Zabaleta and Ancic mainly through erratic play, it doesn't exactly fill me with confidence about how he will cope with similar early round challengers on clay.

I don't see why everyone gets so uptight when someone has an opinion. I don't think he will win Roland Garros. I know it might sound stupid considering he has started this year better than last year in terms of win-loss, but I just don't think he is playing as well overall as he was at times last year, although the positive thing is he seems to bring his A-Game against the top players. But the problem on clay will be the early rounds, where he has proved most vulnerble overall in his career. We'll see I guess when we get on clay, but it wouldnt suprise me if he loses a couple of matches people expect him to win.

makro120
04-03-2005, 11:36 PM
Ok, if you want to call Ancic and Ferrero avarage it still are only 4 lost sets. I can't remember Federer winning in straight sets against every avarage player ever in his career. Actualy federer always used to have problems playing many straight tournaments, in the beginning of last year he constantly lost after winning a big tournament. Like loosing in rotterdam after AO, miami after indian wells, Roland Garros after Hamburg, Cincinati and Olympics after Toronto. All against avarage players (I guess Henman is avarage if Ancic is and Guga if Ferrero is).

Now he can win one tournament after the other, he is 49-1 since USopen, he never ever played constantly on such a high level as he is playing right now. He is in the form of his life if you ask me.

PaulieM
04-03-2005, 11:36 PM
Did I say anyone did? Of course they don't. What a silly question and completely besides the point.

Ancic, though a good player, and Ferrero in his current form aren't exactly players he should be losing sets to either. And he has been played tight by the likes of Davydenko. Just this week he GAVE sets to Zabaleta and Ancic mainly through erratic play, it doesn't exactly fill me with confidence about how he will cope with similar early round challengers on clay.

I don't see why everyone gets so uptight when someone has an opinion. I don't think he will win Roland Garros. I know it might sound stupid considering he has started this year better than last year in terms of win-loss, but I just don't think he is playing as well overall as he was at times last year, although the positive thing is he seems to bring his A-Game against the top players. But the problem on clay will be the early rounds, where he has proved most vulnerble overall in his career. We'll see I guess when we get on clay, but it wouldnt suprise me if he loses a couple of matches people expect him to win.

i agree with you for the most part. i think it will be increadibly difficult for roger to win RG. and yes he hasn't been playing quite as well as last year, but i don't really think it's fair to say that the current ferrero and ancic aren't players that he should be losing a set to. it can happen to anyone, and i think roger can get himself into a lot of trouble if he thinks that he shouldn't be losing a set to certain players. although there have been times when he definitely should have tightened his game, i'm sure he tried, every player is a threat and well sometimes shit happens.

Dirk
04-03-2005, 11:40 PM
Exactly Paulie. I am sure if this board was around in the Pete era; they would be saying the exact same thing when he drop sets in events that he ended up winning. :rolleyes: It's more wishful thinking about him losing and not winning this and that than anything else.

makro120
04-03-2005, 11:42 PM
Have you ever checked Sampras on his best years, he lost sets like a madman against nobodies. Ok, Sampras is a bad example for RG. Let take coria last year on clay:

Squillari, Franco 6-3 4-6 6-1
Monaco, Juan 7-6(10) 3-6 6-1
Pavel, Andrei 4-6 6-1 6-4
Almagro, Nicolas 3-6 6-4 7-5
Horna, Luis 6-2 3-6 6-2
Ljubicic, Ivan 3-6 6-1 6-4

Everyone looses sets and even matches here and there against quitte avarage players, there are no exceptions!

JeNn
04-03-2005, 11:42 PM
i agree with you for the most part. i think it will be increadibly difficult for roger to win RG. and yes he hasn't been playing quite as well as last year, but i don't really think it's fair to say that the current ferrero and ancic aren't players that he should be losing a set to. it can happen to anyone, and i think roger can get himself into a lot of trouble if he thinks that he shouldn't be losing a set to certain players. although there have been times when he definitely should have tightened his game, i'm sure he tried, every player is a threat and well sometimes shit happens.

Definitely. But I think he has to make sure shit DOESN'T happen on clay. I don't think he can't afford losing sets to players he shouldn't be losing sets to; (a) because, on clay, he is slightly less effective and many players are more effective than they are on fast courts and might go on to beat him if he gives them a way into the match (b) even if he does win, too many long matches early will sap his energy. Basically if he plays to his ability he wins, if he plays well and gets outplayed well too bad, but I just hope he doesn't give away sets through poor play like he has a couple of times this year. It may bite him on the ass.

Hopefully he has been saving up his best form for the clay season :)

BlackSilver
04-03-2005, 11:43 PM
I understand what you mean, if he had such problems against Nadal on hard court how will it be on clay?

But Federer learns something about his opponent for every game, even during the game as was seen in this game. Even if Nadal lost most of his physical and mental energy, Federer figured out how to play against him. Next time they meet I expect Federer to have learned some lessons from this match.

Perhaps, but don't expect something miraculous. Federer was doing what he should be in strategic terms and simply wasn't working. I believe that he will do better in the tactical part next time but Nadal also can find one or two things to improve

PaulieM
04-03-2005, 11:43 PM
Definitely. But I think he has to make sure shit DOESN'T happen on clay. I don't think he can't afford losing sets to players he shouldn't be losing sets to; (a) because, on clay, he is slightly less effective and many players are more effective than they are on fast courts and might go on to beat him if he gives them a way into the match (b) even if he does win, too many long matches early will sap his energy. Basically if he plays to his ability he wins, if he plays well and gets outplayed well too bad, but I just hope he doesn't give away sets through poor play like he has a couple of times this year. It may bite him on the ass.

Hopefully he has been saving up his best form for the clay season :)
:yeah: agreed.

makro120
04-03-2005, 11:43 PM
I don't even know if anyone since 84 have the stats of Federer has had the last 6 months in matches, sets, against good, avarage, bad players?

JeNn
04-03-2005, 11:45 PM
Have you ever checked Sampras on his best years, he lost sets like a madman against nobodies. Ok, Sampras is a bad example for RG. Let take coria last year on clay:

Squillari, Franco 6-3 4-6 6-1
Monaco, Juan 7-6(10) 3-6 6-1
Pavel, Andrei 4-6 6-1 6-4
Almagro, Nicolas 3-6 6-4 7-5
Horna, Luis 6-2 3-6 6-2
Ljubicic, Ivan 3-6 6-1 6-4

Everyone looses sets and even matches here and there against quitte avarage players, there are no exceptions!

yes, Sampras is a bad example for RG and Coria is a bad comparison to Federer. Two completely different players. Coria grinds out a lot of his matches, so of course he might lose a set here or there to good players on a hot streak, same with Hewitt. With Roger's ability the loss of sets is usually a sign of poor play from him.

makro120
04-03-2005, 11:48 PM
BUT NO ONE HAS EVER LOST LESS SETS IN SUCH A LONG PERIOD THAN FEDERER SINCE MCENROE 84!!! HOW MUCH MORE CAN YOU DEMAND FROM SOMEONE?

makro120
04-03-2005, 11:49 PM
Its only stupid excuses to me. Wishful thinking from nonFederer fans.

makro120
04-03-2005, 11:50 PM
yes, Sampras is a bad example for RG and Coria is a bad comparison to Federer. Two completely different players. Coria grinds out a lot of his matches, so of course he might lose a set here or there to good players on a hot streak, same with Hewitt. With Roger's ability the loss of sets is usually a sign of poor play from him.

So do you know someone who plays good in every set he has ever played?

JeNn
04-03-2005, 11:55 PM
BUT NO ONE HAS EVER LOST LESS SETS IN SUCH A LONG PERIOD THAN FEDERER SINCE MCENROE 84!!! HOW MUCH MORE CAN YOU DEMAND FROM SOMEONE?

I'm not demanding anything from Roger. His record is amazing and in the end people only remember the wins and the tournament wins and don't remember if you lost sets to nobodies along the way.

However and you might call it wishful thinking, but from what I've seen of Roger this year he has the tendency to have lapses in his matches, and that concerns me in assessing his FUTURE prospects for the clay season, particularly RG. At certain times last year he just didn't laspe for whole tournaments at a time.

Of course if Roger keeps dropping sets and keeps winning then it doesn't matter a shit whether I think he has reached his 2004 level of form or not. However I'll think you will find that with each set he drops on clay, whether he goes on to win the match or not, his capability to continue his streak will diminish. This is particularly true at RG.

Auscon
04-04-2005, 12:31 AM
I thought everyone already saw that in AO05 v Safin....

RogiFan88
04-04-2005, 12:51 AM
not just rafa! guille, gaston, carlos, guga, marat, juanqui even, the list goes on and on and on... but yes, that was a nice claycourt lesson rafa gave rogi today! ;) you gotta start somewhere!

tennis4you
04-04-2005, 12:53 AM
What do you mean? He just gave Nadal a head start to make things a little more interesting.

lol!

ys
04-04-2005, 12:53 AM
Fighter? He is just 10 levels above everyone, except, probably, Safin. He played like a shit, yet when he needed, he elevated his level just enough.

WyveN
04-04-2005, 02:36 AM
So do you know someone who plays good in every set he has ever played?

No but I think the point is that he will most likely have to do so for 2 weeks to succeed at the French Open.

WyveN
04-04-2005, 02:38 AM
Fighter? He is just 10 levels above everyone, except, probably, Safin. He played like a shit, yet when he needed, he elevated his level just enough.

when your a few points from losing the match and 2 sets down, its about 95% mental rather then tennis skills.

jacobhiggins
04-04-2005, 02:41 AM
Losings Sets????? He's not perfect and he's expected to lose sets, i'm glad somebody brought up Sampras's recrod, it shows you what people are expecting from Roger! Roger's talent is so good it gives off the perception of invicibility, he's expected not even to drop a set to some decent players. That's how dominant he is and how people percieve him. No tennis player ever has had as many expectations as Federer! I can't believe people are on him about losing sets, I think he's doing fine, better to win close matches then to lose them right????????

Blaze
04-04-2005, 02:48 AM
If Federer blows opponents of the court, they say his dominance is borig.


If he loses a few sets here and there, then he is not being dominant enough to win Rg.

We can't have it both ways people.

NYCtennisfan
04-04-2005, 03:55 AM
If Federer blows opponents of the court, they say his dominance is borig.


If he loses a few sets here and there, then he is not being dominant enough to win Rg.

We can't have it both ways people.

Exactly! BTW, he's 32-1.....32-1!!!!!! At this point last year, he was 21-2. He might be a match point away from being perfect (of course you can say the same thing the other way concerning Fed's match with Ferrero). People have to give this dude a break.

Federerhingis
04-04-2005, 04:07 AM
Blaze I am so with you on this, people are just too cynical I guess at times, it either is too boring seeing him dominate, or oh look wheres the God given talent, was he not supposed to shank or mishit, of course he can, he's human after all. Give the guy a break, everyone is gunning after him and he's still managed to be way ahead in the race rankings, If he continues this run by Wimbledon if he indeed defends his title he will have claimed the year end #1 ranking as long as he defends most of his clay court points or wins a title or defends Hamburg, he can gain at Rolland Garros by making a quarter or semifinal. Then hes got so many points up for grabs during the indoor season which he couldnt play until late october. Should he do all this, continue his good form winning a tournie or two during the hard court season and should he make the semis of the U.S open he's pretty set on that year end #1 Ranking.

Dirk
04-04-2005, 07:42 AM
It is not a bad example. Pete was the dominate one in his day and I am sure he didn't want to lose sets. Why make it harder to win? This historical perspective is just damning proof that what Federer is going through (dropping some sets) is not atypical. JeNn and co. just are looking for anything, hoping for a sign that Roger will fade so their less talented and less deserving players can win big events again. Remember JeNn how did you feel during 02 season when everyone wanted Hewitt out of the top spot? Don't try to make others feel that same way.

Chloe le Bopper
04-04-2005, 08:40 AM
It's obvious to me that Nadal was only ever in that match because Federer was just not trying to 2.5 sets. So I'm not sure I can consider his performance yesterday to be a great "fight", because there was nothing to fight against. Nadal has a junior calibre game. Didn't y'all get the telegram?

misyou25
04-04-2005, 04:40 PM
that was the very first time i saw federer winning a 5-set match, honestly

misyou25
04-04-2005, 04:41 PM
chloe, you're right...it's terrible for the nerves to play against world's number 1 at his age (19, right?) and then to be 2-0 leading and then he's coming back

Rex
04-04-2005, 04:52 PM
fedface is a fighter indeed- it was a spectacular match

uNIVERSE mAN
04-04-2005, 05:00 PM
It's obvious to me that Nadal was only ever in that match because Federer was just not trying to 2.5 sets. So I'm not sure I can consider his performance yesterday to be a great "fight", because there was nothing to fight against. Nadal has a junior calibre game. Didn't y'all get the telegram?

Is there some sort of inside joke I'm missing? I thought you were a Nadal fan, I'm seeing some contrasting comments from you. :scratch:

mangoes
04-04-2005, 05:01 PM
What do you mean? He just gave Nadal a head start to make things a little more interesting.



LOLOLOLOL.............That's funny. He did fight..........Congrats Roger!!

Chloe le Bopper
04-04-2005, 05:30 PM
Is there some sort of inside joke I'm missing? I thought you were a Nadal fan, I'm seeing some contrasting comments from you. :scratch:
I'm just doing my service by feeding the fantwat trolls.

NATAS81
04-04-2005, 06:05 PM
Roger isn't a fighter so much as he is a thinker and executer of shots.