Federer's Baseline Arrogance [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer's Baseline Arrogance

yonexforever
06-16-2006, 11:32 PM
Am I the only one who thinks Roger may be smellng himself just a tad?
Believing all thsi greatest ever hype.
It seems to me he is stubbornly playing from the baseline almost to prove he can beat EVERYONE from the baseline.

It didnt work at the French and he seems to have come to the grass again playing from the baseline.

Part of the reason Borg was able to make the transition from clay to grass, was because he played attacking tennis when he got to the grass and he was much better from the baseline than Roger is.

Borg arguably was the Nadal of his day, i dont recall McEnroe trying to beat Borg from the baseline on ANY surface.

ChloeLove
06-16-2006, 11:43 PM
That's an interesting point to bring up. Federer is arrogant in the sense that he refuses to change his game. He is the number one player, it should be his opponent who is having to change their game, not him. Which is what he is probably thinking.

It was definitely the case at the FO. If he had moved up a bit, he probably would've faired better against Nadal. He is stubborn and insists on playing from the baseline. He should play in front of the baseline when needed (prime example, against Nadal . . . on clay especially :rolleyes: ).

yonexforever
06-17-2006, 10:07 AM
That's an interesting point to bring up. Federer is arrogant in the sense that he refuses to change his game. He is the number one player, it should be his opponent who is having to change their game, not him. Which is what he is probably thinking.

It was definitely the case at the FO. If he had moved up a bit, he probably would've faired better against Nadal. He is stubborn and insists on playing from the baseline. He should play in front of the baseline when needed (prime example, against Nadal . . . on clay especially :rolleyes: ).

That's my point exactly...I wonder what the conversaion with Tony Roche after the final was like.

jenanun
06-17-2006, 10:37 AM
i am not sure...

when people asked why he didnt come to the net as often, he said it was very hot or something like that?

i dont think its because his arrogance, i mean come on, its about the roger slam, not a time to be stuborn... i think he doesnt care how he win it if he can, coz roger slam is more important than proving himself better than nadal at the baseline...

Hagar
06-17-2006, 11:59 AM
I simply think he was not at his best in the French Open final, too flat, maybe exhausted by the pressure.
He should draw lessons from the Rome final and the first set in Paris. He can beat Nadal, he is able to execute the shots needed to beat Nadal.
There just needs to be this one moment when all pieces of the puzzle fall together.

I once heard a commentator say about Federer that his problem is the problem of choice: he has too many options because he has so many shots. I think that is true.

azinna
06-17-2006, 02:13 PM
Yes, too many options, plus, I feel he's actually most comfortable working the point from the baseline and coming in only for a sure, knock-off volley winner. That's what we got on Sunday, and he couldn't do more because he was a bit mentally cowered.

For real arrogance see Becker's inexplicable transition to a baseline game in the 1990s. The man thought he was king.