A critical time for Federer's career [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

A critical time for Federer's career

Tourmalante
11-06-2005, 10:08 AM
I honestly believe the upcoming slam is the most pivotal one of Roger's career. If he wins it, 2006 is basically a wrap because it will allow him to relax so much, that the probability he won't get at least one of the three remaining slams is nil. And the momentum an AO title gives to the two hardcourt TMSs and the clay-court season is immense. If he wins the AO, his chances of finally getting his coveted Roland Garros title are close to definite. His win will be especially helpful to maintaining his aura if he happens to beat Marat on his way to the title. Right now Roger is like a racecar in the pole position with his competitors nipping at his heels. If he wins the AO, it will be like he popped a Speed Racer button in his car and spilt some oil on the track to foil his pursuers for the remainder of the year. If he doesn't win the AO it will be an uphill battle that Roger is certainly capable of winning but it will become unnecesarily taxing for his mental reserves. This year was a crucible of sorts and he doesn't want to attempt jumping through the fire again.

Along with an AO win he should really try to win either Rome or Monte Carlo as it will really help his chances at the FO. Adding 10 or so mph to his serve, working on a more threatening backhand topspin drive, generally adding some length to all his shots, and adopting a more offensive returning philosophy at critical moments will all help him tremendouslyAlso Federer should pick some tournaments where he won't mind losing and resolve to win the tournament with only non-stop serve-and-volley blitzing. It is of utmost importance that he not get bogged down from discouragement by succesful passes and resolve to continue coming in on every point and play the percentages. Now is the time for him to usher in a renaissance in serve-and-volley tennis. He has proven his baseline talent, but must play an increasingly efficient style in order to keep his body fresh. He may even have to allow 15 or so losses on the year(making sure they don't occur in Slams) while he retools his style.

The secret to longevity in anything is reinvention. You must tirelessly remake yourself, present a new and startling face to the enemy in order to continue your winning ways. Conservatively resting on your laurels allows you to "calcify" and lose sight of the developing trends in the game. The only way to keep "in the loop" is to be the one creating the new trends, the one controlling the flow and ebb of tennis's evolution. Roger's the DJ that has to keep everyone dancing to his tune by mixing in new beats, a con-artist who needs to stay ahead of the police by constantly running new gigs. Only by bamboozling his opponents in this way can he ensure his continued dominance.

1sun
11-06-2005, 12:28 PM
i dont agree, the ao isnt of huge importance, obviously it will release alot of pressure but isnt absolutely needed

Deivid23
11-06-2005, 12:43 PM
So if Federer doesn´t win AO he´s done for the year? :lol:

avocadoe
11-06-2005, 12:48 PM
I don't agree...AO would be nice start to the year and I hope he does it but since he lost last year in the semi to Safin and went on to win IW and Miami TMS's your point isn't a good one. The French is a separate challenge that must be scaled or not. At Wimby he'll have his confidance even if nothing else happened all year :) and so on. What is key is Roger's feet, healthy, he'll win a lot. Also Nadal's development matters. I would think AO surface would be a very good one for him, too.

TennisGrandSlam
11-06-2005, 01:24 PM
I hope Roger to win both Australian Open and Roland Garros, he can finish year-spanning Grand Slam!

Carito_90
11-06-2005, 01:37 PM
Oh dear lord :haha:

sigmagirl91
11-06-2005, 02:05 PM
Oh, please, get outta here!!!

star
11-06-2005, 02:36 PM
:lol: :lol:

I think this guy was hoping to create as much controversy with this Federer thread as with his Roddick thread.

He must need the vCash. :bolt:

R.Federer
11-06-2005, 03:15 PM
I think the poster "YS" also makes a similar prediction for 2005, and when he did not win in the AO of FO, he predicts he will go without a slam for 2005.

It is reall a credit to Roge that with all that pressure he then wins 50% of the "SLam Pie" after all in 2005. I hope he gets FO and WImbledon in 2006, anyting else to me is bonus

frederer
11-06-2005, 03:57 PM
Jesus it's so stupid....

Flibbertigibbet
11-06-2005, 04:14 PM
You know, it would be interesting to see Federer serve and volley exclusively to win a tournament.

Tourmalante
11-06-2005, 05:50 PM
Guys come on, I'm not predicting a slamless year if he doesn't win the AO. I said he is perfectly capable of all three of the rest if you saw at the bottom of the first paragraph. I am just saying it would take more mental discipline than he might want to expend for a second year in a row. With an AO win he can start the year with a more free-wheeling approach, and we all know that Roger is most dangerous when he is most spontaneous in his play. 2005 offered new challengers and changed the dynamic of tennis at the top despite Roger's continued dominance. An AO win would send a proper message to the more ambitious challengers. And Carito, was it necessary to come into the thread and start laughing? Have I done anything to you the Andy Roddick debate aside? I haven't carried any feelings of animosity towards the people who were against me in the thread and I expected everyonelse to be mature enough to move on. At the end of the day personal grudges are too tiring.

Horatio Caine
11-06-2005, 05:54 PM
Tourmalante - Federer didn't win the AO and suffered an agonising loss to Safin in the SF even after having mp....would I be wrong in saying he has rebounded rather well? :shrug: :lol:

Horatio Caine
11-06-2005, 05:55 PM
Roger is the best in the world and will claim 2 Slams next year as a minimum. :bigwave:

Tourmalante
11-06-2005, 06:02 PM
A feature tying all three people who defeated Federer in 2005(except possibly Safin at the AO) is a lack of mental pressure in playing Federer as compared to the enormous pressure placed on Federer with every match (especially against teenage opponents who he wants to start the series off well in the anticipation that they may be a future threat, so he can have a psychological advantage). Gasquet produced the type of uninhibited hitting that can only come from a mind unburdened by expectations and pressure. Nadal went into the FO semi thinking he was the underdog, which probably helped him mentally. Federer needs to make things easier for him by attempting to remain "eternally young" in his mental mindset without carrying the immaturity, inexperience, and other baggage typical of a young player. One of the things that I think typified Becker's career was a move from an almost blaise unthinking confidence in the 80's to an all too a weary adult recognition and awareness of the importance of every match he played on his career. This with his aging, and the emergence of several promising players like Agassi and Sampras made winning slams a lot harder for him. The becker of 85 and 86 was rooted completely in the moment, while the Becker of the 90's entertained flights of fancy and and what if musings. Roger would do well to maintain a mental state of intelligent nonchalance because it will keep him swinging like a hungry, fearless rookie well until the end of his twenties.

Whistleway
11-06-2005, 06:25 PM
The secret to longevity in anything is reinvention. You must tirelessly remake yourself, present a new and startling face to the enemy in order to continue your winning ways.

I don't agree with the rest, but this point is well said. !! I am sure roger and coach roach is thinking about it too.. and to counter nadal and paris.

Seleshfan
11-06-2005, 06:44 PM
A feature tying all three people who defeated Federer in 2005(except possibly Safin at the AO) is a lack of mental pressure in playing Federer as compared to the enormous pressure placed on Federer with every match (especially against teenage opponents who he wants to start the series off well in the anticipation that they may be a future threat, so he can have a psychological advantage). Gasquet produced the type of uninhibited hitting that can only come from a mind unburdened by expectations and pressure. Nadal went into the FO semi thinking he was the underdog, which probably helped him mentally. Federer needs to make things easier for him by attempting to remain "eternally young" in his mental mindset without carrying the immaturity, inexperience, and other baggage typical of a young player. One of the things that I think typified Becker's career was a move from an almost blaise unthinking confidence in the 80's to an all too a weary adult recognition and awareness of the importance of every match he played on his career. This with his aging, and the emergence of several promising players like Agassi and Sampras made winning slams a lot harder for him. The becker of 85 and 86 was rooted completely in the moment, while the Becker of the 90's entertained flights of fancy and and what if musings. Roger would do well to maintain a mental state of intelligent nonchalance because it will keep him swinging like a hungry, fearless rookie well until the end of his twenties.

Well, this is a hell of a periphrastic way to state the obvious, that players play better when they're uninhibited.

nkhera1
11-06-2005, 06:45 PM
Why should Federer retool when nobody can beat him except for on clay? Sure he can work to improve his backhand and volleys but who said he needs to retool. Just because he has been out for a while doesn't mean he suddenly forgot how to play.

Tourmalante
11-06-2005, 06:46 PM
Well, this is a hell of a periphrastic way to state the obvious, that players play better when they're uninhibited.

Sometimes you have to spell things out.

Seleshfan
11-06-2005, 06:47 PM
Sometimes you have to spell things out.

This wasn't that time.

Whistleway
11-06-2005, 06:51 PM
Why should Federer retool when nobody can beat him except for on clay?

Because he would want to stay that way when the next generation young guns come to force. You gotta keep the bar raising or fall behind..

Tourmalante
11-06-2005, 06:51 PM
Why should Federer retool when nobody can beat him except for on clay? Sure he can work to improve his backhand and volleys but who said he needs to retool. Just because he has been out for a while doesn't mean he suddenly forgot how to play.

You are right that he is dominant with his current skillset, but he has to keep changing. I like to think of Microsoft as a sort of analogy. They have such a large piece of the OS market and dominate with their explorer browser that they could be content to rake in the cents on every copy of windows forever. But they know that they have companies like Google probing their weakpoints and taking advantage of the fact that Microsoft's very sucess has left it too large and inflexible to adapt a changing enviorment. As a result you see them trying to expand into the video gaming industry, and develop searching algorithms as sophisticated as Google's.

Horatio Caine
11-06-2005, 06:52 PM
Sometimes you have to spell things out.

If you're gonna spell things out then:

(a) - type less to a post so people can get the essence of what you are saying - or space things out more.

(b) - Use fewer long words! :haha: :scratch:

NYCtennisfan
11-06-2005, 08:11 PM
You make some interesting points. If Federer does win the AO, I do think he will own 2006 and if he doesn't, he may not. The thing that takes some pressure away from Federer is that he didn't win the AO this year and still had an incredible year. Things might change a bit though if Nadal is breathing down his neck for #1.

dkw
11-06-2005, 08:16 PM
(a) - type less to a post so people can get the essence of what you are saying - or space things out more.

God gave Tourmalante hands, so he types :rolleyes:

idolwatcher1
11-06-2005, 08:26 PM
Tourmalante, I think you're jumping way too ahead of yourself here...First of all, let's wait to see if Roger is even in top-form/healthy by the time the AO starts...Injuries happen, and they can happen to ANYONE! Aggravations to previous injuries also may occur, and Roger is no exception, plus Marat may not even play in the AO...It's far too early to predict an entire year's worth of outcomes, when you have almost nothing to base them on...Plus, Roger lost AO this year, but still went on to win 2 slams...so the outcomes are not based on each other...and they never have...

There are also many players who are rising to contention and will make 2006 harder to predict than people are making it out to be...Federer may not lose form at all, but that's not to say that other players won't start matching his form...There are players who want the slam wins just as much as Federer...

megadeth
11-06-2005, 11:44 PM
each slam is independent of the other. we all saw it this year. fed lost both AO and FO but went on to win W, and USO.

people like you would've probably said that after fed lost the first 2, he was done.

really... :rolleyes:

and hello, would winning the AO really have enough momentum to carry you all the way through the 3 other slams? c'mon...

megadeth
11-06-2005, 11:47 PM
You are right that he is dominant with his current skillset, but he has to keep changing. I like to think of Microsoft as a sort of analogy. They have such a large piece of the OS market and dominate with their explorer browser that they could be content to rake in the cents on every copy of windows forever. But they know that they have companies like Google probing their weakpoints and taking advantage of the fact that Microsoft's very sucess has left it too large and inflexible to adapt a changing enviorment. As a result you see them trying to expand into the video gaming industry, and develop searching algorithms as sophisticated as Google's.

you probably love listening to your own voice don't you? :lol:

savesthedizzle
11-06-2005, 11:49 PM
Roger's the DJ that has to keep everyone dancing to his tune by mixing in new beats, a con-artist who needs to stay ahead of the police by constantly running new gigs. Only by bamboozling his opponents in this way can he ensure his continued dominance.


This was my favorite part by far :rolls:

megadeth
11-06-2005, 11:55 PM
tourlamente, i think your sole purpose for this thread is to impress folks here with your analogies... :lol:

well, it's irritating actually. yea, you have the right to ramble on, but i'd probably think twice before i read any other threads you will start in the future.

sigmagirl91
11-06-2005, 11:59 PM
Why is the AO a benchmark tournament for Roger anyway? He doesn't really need it to prove anything. He's done quite well with or without the AO. Now if you were to consider the big W in the equation, then maybe the original post would have validity somewhat.

TenHound
11-07-2005, 12:57 AM
By Definition, the Physical Prime of an athletes life, is Always the Critical time of their career. So what else is new!

wcr
11-07-2005, 01:26 AM
You are right that he is dominant with his current skillset, but he has to keep changing.

This is what all great players do who wish to get to the top and stay there. The question is what are those who are not ranked #1 going to do to their games to overtake Federer who we know is always developing his game? Or, do they simply wait for another injury to win titles in his absence?

So far, the only player I've seen in 2005 who's actually making changes to his game is Hewitt, and, it paid off. He won a set off of Federer at the USO! That's much better than the double bagels he was served in the USO 2004 final.

Tourmalante
11-07-2005, 02:06 AM
each slam is independent of the other. we all saw it this year. fed lost both AO and FO but went on to win W, and USO.

people like you would've probably said that after fed lost the first 2, he was done.

really... :rolleyes:

and hello, would winning the AO really have enough momentum to carry you all the way through the 3 other slams? c'mon...

Did you even read any of what i wrote? I repeatedly said that an AO loss would not stop Roger from conquering the other three but that it would require a greater expenditure of mental effort. Continually taxing your mental reserves can lead to burn out. Apparently this just flew over your head. And anyone with any sense recognizes that the slams are not completely exclusive but are intertwined. Good results at one begets good results at the others. And what was with the second post? If you don't like the thread simply leave, personal attacks are demeaning. What the hell is a name like megadeth? Are you some loser heavy-metal groupie?

champlingo
11-07-2005, 03:52 AM
While I do not totally agree with Tourmalante's original post here, I do agree with what he is saying. 100%. Federer needs to improve and indeed can improve, regardless of his current stature. His serve is not necessary a WMD ala Ivanisevic, Sampras, or even Roddick. It's okay, on par with the upper echelon of players today, but nothing spectacular. He not a natural volleyer and while he can be comfortable S/V, it's not his style. Thus, he needs to excel on the S/V and S/V'ers will beat the best of the baseliners. His backhand is average in comparison to the elite players today; never really lethal and occasionally doints and skyball. It too needs to improve. So Federer has a complete game, but not necessarily the best in any one area when you break his game down, but the whole package makes him who his is coupled with is mental toughness.

So... Tourmalante...bravo, you are correct. Federer is at a crossroads. Win big next year and his legend will be assured. Faulter and rest on what he's got in his current arsenal without any attempt to improve or reinvent himself, then he's due to be dethroned. Can't agree more.

disturb3d
11-07-2005, 04:13 AM
While I do not totally agree with Tourmalante's original post here, I do agree with what he is saying. 100%. Federer needs to improve and indeed can improve, regardless of his current stature. His serve is not necessary a WMD ala Ivanisevic, Sampras, or even Roddick. It's okay, on par with the upper echelon of players today, but nothing spectacular. He not a natural volleyer and while he can be comfortable S/V, it's not his style. Thus, he needs to excel on the S/V and S/V'ers will beat the best of the baseliners. His backhand is average in comparison to the elite players today.Roger has the best serve on tour, the most natural volleying ability of any player to date, and one of the most efficient backhands in the game.

There is no aspect of Roger's game that isn't on-par with the elite players.
And while volleying may not be his style, anyone with half a brain will tell you that his transition to the net is the most natural of any player.

If there were one quality that Roger could alter to improve his game, it would be to take more chances on his backhand side.

megadeth
11-07-2005, 05:55 AM
Did you even read any of what i wrote? I repeatedly said that an AO loss would not stop Roger from conquering the other three but that it would require a greater expenditure of mental effort. Continually taxing your mental reserves can lead to burn out. Apparently this just flew over your head. And anyone with any sense recognizes that the slams are not completely exclusive but are intertwined. Good results at one begets good results at the others. And what was with the second post? If you don't like the thread simply leave, personal attacks are demeaning. What the hell is a name like megadeth? Are you some loser heavy-metal groupie?

well excuse me for overlooking that, you're post is so long and redundant that i'll make sure i'll read this when i have trouble falling asleep. :rolleyes:

"Good results at one begets good results at the others" --- REALLY? :rolleyes: tell that to nadal and justin henin who won the FO and lost early in Wimby, tell that to safin who won AO and couldn't survive after that, tell that to wilander who won 3 slams in one season and not won another slam ever again after that.

intertwined.... hah! :rolleyes:

and who gives a damn about my music preferences? at least i know pure metal. you probably just listen to those pathetic 3-min pop rock shit.

and what kind of a name is tourmalante? a person combined with tourette's syndrome? :lol:

champlingo
11-07-2005, 07:10 AM
Roger has the best serve on tour, the most natural volleying ability of any player to date, and one of the most efficient backhands in the game.

There is no aspect of Roger's game that isn't on-par with the elite players.
And while volleying may not be his style, anyone with half a brain will tell you that his transition to the net is the most natural of any player.

If there were one quality that Roger could alter to improve his game, it would be to take more chances on his backhand side.

His serve is adequate for an elite player. And perhaps among the best in today's ranks, but certain not in the league of Sampras, Ivanisevic. So, an improvement is in order, both in the angles and in the pace. He is not a natural volleyer. His tendency is to stay at the baseline. I would put Rafter and Edberg as more natural (and superior) volleyers than Federer. I not so certain by him having one of the most efficient backhands in the game. Even in the mid 30s, Agassi's backhand at this years USO was as good if not better than Federer's in that match. I also didn't think his backhand was all that remarkable against Nadal at RG this year.

etiage
11-07-2005, 07:39 AM
His serve is adequate for an elite player. And perhaps among the best in today's ranks, but certain not in the league of Sampras, Ivanisevic. So, an improvement is in order, both in the angles and in the pace. He is not a natural volleyer. His tendency is to stay at the baseline. I would put Rafter and Edberg as more natural (and superior) volleyers than Federer. I not so certain by him having one of the most efficient backhands in the game. Even in the mid 30s, Agassi's backhand at this years USO was as good if not better than Federer's in that match. I also didn't think his backhand was all that remarkable against Nadal at RG this year.

even though it's still pretty damn good, i'm not too impressed with his backhand now either.

i remember his 2003 tmc backhand. now that is a bh worth mentioning, depth, power, and angle, nothing like the one seen against agassi in US final. i miss it

WF4EVER
11-07-2005, 04:50 PM
When I read the first few lines of this thread I had to check the date to make sure it wasn't a resurrected thread. Because it sure sounds like one. Wasn't the same thing said leading up to the 2005 AO?

In fact when he hadn't won a Slam by the end of the FO it was pretty much regurgitated again. So what are the Powerball numbers for the next draw?

Skyward
11-07-2005, 06:30 PM
When I read the first few lines of this thread I had to check the date to make sure it wasn't a resurrected thread. Because it sure sounds like one. Wasn't the same thing said leading up to the 2005 AO?



Yeah, I remember a similar thread when Federer lost to Hrbaty and Berdych in 2004. :lol:

I think top players constantly face a lot of pressure to deliver great results and improve themselves. It can make you or break you.