Is 2009 Federer's last chance to win Wimbledon #6? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Is 2009 Federer's last chance to win Wimbledon #6?

FedFan_2007
06-15-2009, 10:47 PM
With Murray, Djokovic, DelPo all banging on the door it seems that starting 2010 there will be a new champion for sure. Which is why 2009 is Roger's last chance.

Certinfy
06-15-2009, 10:47 PM
I would imagine so :)

Dini
06-15-2009, 10:48 PM
Never write him off. I thought you learnt your lesson Fedfan. :p

FedFan_2007
06-15-2009, 10:51 PM
Nadine - I'm not writing him off. I'm just saying that Rog is not going to view winning 2009 Wimby as "optional". He will put 100% into this knowing full well that 2010 Murray is going to win it for sure.

PiggyGotRoasted
06-15-2009, 10:51 PM
No it isnt.

FedFan_2007
06-15-2009, 10:53 PM
With all the talk over the years about his closing window at Roland Garros nobody really spent time thinking about his closing window at all the slams. It seems like even Roger has written off any chance to win AO #4.

cocrcici
06-15-2009, 10:54 PM
No

Everko
06-15-2009, 10:58 PM
The only way is if he is is able only to win the Wimbledon this or the last year.

Dini
06-15-2009, 11:24 PM
Nadine - I'm not writing him off. I'm just saying that Rog is not going to view winning 2009 Wimby as "optional". He will put 100% into this knowing full well that 2010 Murray is going to win it for sure.

Yes but that doesn't mean it's his last chance. ;) To me he's the best grass courter currently active as shown by his record, and only a healthy Nadal/inspired Murray and injury could stand in his way. If he serves as well as he has been over the past few weeks he'll be really tough to beat.

Sapeod
06-15-2009, 11:25 PM
I have a feeling it is :shrug:

Jimnik
06-15-2009, 11:27 PM
No

buzz
06-15-2009, 11:34 PM
Yeah, because 2010 will be his last chance to win #7 ;)

Everko
06-15-2009, 11:36 PM
No

No it isn't

NO

genius answers :rolleyes:

twisturhead
06-15-2009, 11:44 PM
yeah it is cause now he doesnt have the rain delay advantage he had in previous years

dodo
06-16-2009, 12:05 AM
yeah it is cause now he doesnt have the rain delay advantage he had in previous years
why wouldnt everyone conspire in his favour? i mean, they did 14 times already.

dumb thread.

Dini
06-16-2009, 12:07 AM
why wouldnt everyone conspire in his favour? i mean, they did 14 times already.

dumb thread.

I mean Fed has to be Jesus. There is no other explanation. The tennis God is so nice to him, he has to be his son. How else do you explain his lucky 14 GS? :confused:

MacTheKnife
06-16-2009, 12:08 AM
No, he will be a viable contender for at least 2 or 3 more years. His game was made for todays grass.

Joao
06-16-2009, 12:14 AM
Murray? Why? Because he won Queens? Many players won Queens but never won Wimbledon. And on top of that, Murray has the whole country on his shoulders to deal with ...

Until someone not named Nadal or Federer actually wins it, Federer will always be the favourite to win Wimbledon!

Dusk Soldier
06-16-2009, 12:23 AM
no

prima donna
06-16-2009, 12:26 AM
Go away.

rubbERR
06-16-2009, 12:31 AM
absolutely...his last chance, because next year he will miss those forehands 10 meters and its all over

FedFan_2007
06-16-2009, 12:39 AM
Matches played by year

Federer

2003 - 95
2004 - 80
2005 - 85
2006 - 97
2007 - 77
2008 - 81
2009 - 39

2003-2006 avg 89 matches
2007-2008 avg 79 matches
2009(proj) 78 matches

Agassi

1997 - 21
1998 - 57
1999 - 50
2000 - 36
2001 - 45
2002 - 43

As you can see Federer has had alot more matches headed into his late 20s compared to Agassi. Makes me wonder if having played 805 career matches, if there isn't much left in the tank.

Dini
06-16-2009, 12:42 AM
Is 97 matches a year a record or something?

NinaNina19
06-16-2009, 12:44 AM
Yes, because Del potro and Djokovic are going to beat him at Wimbledon. Dimitrov has more chance.

FedFan_2007
06-16-2009, 12:45 AM
Is 97 matches a year a record or something?

Actually Sampras once played 101 matches in a year :eek: But the record is by Vilas or somebody around 130 matches. :eek:

BTW, Roger & Pete have both played 800 matches at roughly the same age. That's another amazing parallel.

leng jai
06-16-2009, 02:51 AM
Yes because there are so many contenders on grass these days...

Frank Winkler
06-16-2009, 02:57 AM
wimbledon will be the tournament he will have a chance at least another 3 years.
All you need is a great serve to have a chance. eg. Andy Roddick.

marcRD
06-16-2009, 03:02 AM
Matches played by year

Federer

2003 - 95
2004 - 80
2005 - 85
2006 - 97
2007 - 77
2008 - 81
2009 - 39

2003-2006 avg 89 matches
2007-2008 avg 79 matches
2009(proj) 78 matches

Agassi

1997 - 21
1998 - 57
1999 - 50
2000 - 36
2001 - 45
2002 - 43

As you can see Federer has had alot more matches headed into his late 20s compared to Agassi. Makes me wonder if having played 805 career matches, if there isn't much left in the tank.

That is interesting, I think part of it is because Federer plays clay season, about 15 matches more than Agassi only there, also Federer consistantly goes far in grand slam tournaments while Agassi didnt.

Overall I think Federer needs to cut his schedule next year to be safe, he shouldnt play Doha, Monte Carlo, Paris, Halle, Dubai and if he can afford it cut down some tournaments indoor. I think he should be alright playing about 60 matches per year, as he every year plays 27-28 matches in slams that leaves him with another 30-35 matches on best of 3 set format, could be done in about 8 tournaments.

GlennMirnyi
06-16-2009, 03:05 AM
Another awful thread by Gloryhunter2007.

HKz
06-16-2009, 03:28 AM
Sure, there are these youngins coming up to the top, but again, Roger is only 27, just about to turn 28 in August. Obviously it will be tougher as the months pass by, but look at the Federer vs Del Potro French Open semis and the final against Soderling. He seemed at least three times fresher than either player and they are both years younger. And this is after playing a couple longer matches. I still think he has a couple more Grand Slams left under his belt, so maybe at the end of 2010 is when I think we'll see a much more evident decline. After that he'll just be regarded as dangerous, no more, no less.

Verve
06-16-2009, 03:38 AM
I think Wimbledon will always be potentially winnable for Roger until the end of his career. Even if, let's say, in 3-4 years, another big favourite will stand up, Roger will be a threat to win the title as long as he shows up in decent form and condition, just as even an "old" Pete Sampras was never to be counted out on the green grass.

Besides, of all these supposedly soon-to-take-over up-and-comers, only an inspired and courageous Nadal could barely hold him off the title once in the past 6 years.

If anything, it will not only depend on the next generation, but for a big part on Roger himself whether he'll be able to add up to his Wimbledon tally in coming years.

mark73
06-16-2009, 03:49 AM
Another awful thread by Gloryhunter2007.

ya..but you think almost everything is awful, as ive observed over my month on MTF. :haha::haha:

FedFan_2007
06-16-2009, 04:50 AM
The problem with Roger reducing his schedule is that the frakken ATP requires him to play 8 Masters 1000 events and 5 ATP 250 events or some other combination involving ATP 500 events. No matter what Roger will either burn out from too many matches, or be forced to tank some events(2006 Cincy comes to mind).

Arkulari
06-16-2009, 06:28 AM
Paris (Masters) and MC will be tanked :o

Ivanatis
06-16-2009, 06:31 AM
oh dear..:o

Chiseller
06-16-2009, 08:35 AM
Oh stop it Nadullfan_2007

FedFan_2007
06-16-2009, 08:37 AM
Oh stop it Nadullfan_2007

You're just another hapless GM termite.

Chiseller
06-16-2009, 08:52 AM
you are a poor man's claydeath, try harder.

rwn
06-16-2009, 08:57 AM
Go away Nadulltroll_2009 :rolleyes:

Goldenoldie
06-16-2009, 09:00 AM
Absolutely not. We will still have a chance next year, and the year after, and the year after that, unless he retires.
He may not be as good as he was, but he is still better than most.

born_on_clay
06-16-2009, 12:35 PM
2008 was Federer's last chance

Commander Data
06-16-2009, 12:48 PM
Another awful thread by Gloryhunter2007.

I agree really aweful thread. fed will have achance to win wimbledon as long as he plays.


Murray has yet to prove himself in Slams. Fed has incoporated the drop shot in his game in order to win against the grinders like murray that play 6 m behind the baseline.

Turbosupermario
06-16-2009, 01:09 PM
Yeah, because 2010 will be his last chance to win #7 ;)
and 2011 will be his last chance to win #8.
and 2012 will be his last chance to win #9.

Yes, this year is his last chance to win #6.