Peakerer's close calls [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Peakerer's close calls

Johnny Groove
10-20-2011, 01:00 PM
As we all know, from TMC 2003 to Dubai 2007, Fed went 264-15.

However, he had many more close calls during that span, and could have lost a few more matches.

TMC 2003 RR Federer def. Agassi 6-7, 6-3, 7-6. Close match, this, could have easily gone either way. This was the match that really took Federer to the next level with his confidence.

Agassi Indian Wells 2004. Agassi was good vs. early peak Roger, Fed had to battle to take this one 6-4 in the 3rd.

Davydenko Miami 2004. Fed won this 7-5 in the third, I think Roger was tired after that Indian Wells event.

Gaudio Hamburg 2004. Gaston had a chance in this, losing 4-6 in the 3rd. Not sure if the Argie had a break in the 3rd.

Roddick Wimbledon 2004. Andy had him on the ropes here before the rain delay, but Roger ended up winning this.

Karlovic Gstaad 2004. 7-6 in the third, Ivo was serving bombs. Fed also went 6-4 in the third w/ Sexy Stepanek in the QF, and 6-3 in the third with Starace in the SF.

Agassi USO 2004. Incredible match, great quality, Fed won it 6-3 in the 5th.

Paradorn in Bangkok 2004. Good atmosphere, but Roger won 6-3 in the third.

Moya TMC 2004. Fed won it 6-3 in the third, Carlos was the only one to take a set from him at the Masters that year.

Ljubicic Rotterdam 2005. Fed played pretty bad, Ljubo had 4-2 in the 3rd set tiebreaker before losing it.

Ivo Minar and JCF in Dubai 2005. Fed had to go to a 3rd set tiebreak w/ both of these guys. Ferrero had a break in the third and had 2 match points in the TB, but Roger was too good.

Zabaleta and Ancic in Miami 2005. Zabaleta too him to 6-3 in the third and Ancic took him to 6-4 in the 3rd.

Nadal Miami 2005. Nadal really messed this one up. 2 sets and a break I think, also had 5-3 in the 3rd set TB before Fed came all the way back to win in 5.

Gonzalez Monte Carlo 2005. Fed won it 6-4 in the third, Fena was really blasting it in this one.

Soderling in Halle 2005, Soderling really had a chance here, and Safin had a chance in the final, 6-4 in the third.

Kiefer and Ginepri in Cincy 2005. Fed had to scrape through this one, 6-4 in the third on both, played like shit.

Nalbandian and Ljubo in TMC 2005 RR. Had to go 6-4 and 7-6 in the third here.

Haas in AO 2006 and Davydenko too. Both guys had an excellent chance to knock off a well sub-par Fed here.

O. Rochus Indian Wells 2006. Fed had to go 7-5 in the third here.

Djokovic Monte Carlo 2006. Young Nole pushing Fed to 6-3 in the third.

Almugro and Nalby in Rome 2006, taking Fed to 7-5 and 7-6 in the third.

Nalby in RG 2006, had a set and a break before getting injured.

Richie and Rochus in Halle 2006, both had him on the ropes.

Malisse, Gonzo, Gasquet in Canada 2006, all had chances.

Suzuki in Tokyo 2006. Fed was shitting his pants here, 7-6 in the 3rd.

Srichaphan in Basel 2006. 7-6 in the third, Paradorn was playing really well.

Roddick at TMC 2006. Rod fucked this one up, a few match points.

Pless and Djokovic in Dubai 2007. Both took him to 6-3 in the third.

As you can see, Fed even at his best had plenty of close calls.

rocketassist
10-20-2011, 01:08 PM
Almagro and Nalbandian in Rome were brilliant matches.

That Rome tournament was fantastic, capped off by the Fedal final.

Sunset of Age
10-20-2011, 01:09 PM
Almagro and Nalbandian in Rome were brilliant matches.

That Rome tournament was fantastic, capped off by the Fedal final.

Tournament AND final of the decade imho. :worship:

rubbERR
10-20-2011, 01:16 PM
Albert Einstein like Conclusion: Fed overachieved, really BIG.

theKSHE
10-20-2011, 01:24 PM
So? Pointless thread, c'mon, you can do better than this...

manadrainer
10-20-2011, 01:38 PM
Albert Einstein like Conclusion: Fed overachieved, really BIG.

He also had pretty close losses... Safin AO 2005, Nadal Rome 2006, RG final 2007 he was 1/17 on BPs, Nalby 2005 TMC 6-7 in the 5th on one leg...

Sham Kay
10-20-2011, 01:59 PM
Well you're not going to go on runs like that without some close calls and matches going the distance. He might have been called Jesus Fed or Godmode Fed or whatever but he obviously isn't Jesus or God. He actually exists.

Lopez
10-20-2011, 02:19 PM
What a mental midget this Federer, winning so many close matches when not playing his best (or when the opponent was playing very well)

:rolleyes:

Kudos for the work :yeah:

juan27
10-20-2011, 02:19 PM
As we all know, from TMC 2003 to Dubai 2007, Fed went 264-15.

However, he had many more close calls during that span, and could have lost a few more matches.

TMC 2003 RR Federer def. Agassi 6-7, 6-3, 7-6. Close match, this, could have easily gone either way. This was the match that really took Federer to the next level with his confidence.

Agassi Indian Wells 2004. Agassi was good vs. early peak Roger, Fed had to battle to take this one 6-4 in the 3rd.

Davydenko Miami 2004. Fed won this 7-5 in the third, I think Roger was tired after that Indian Wells event.

Gaudio Hamburg 2004. Gaston had a chance in this, losing 4-6 in the 3rd. Not sure if the Argie had a break in the 3rd.

Roddick Wimbledon 2004. Andy had him on the ropes here before the rain delay, but Roger ended up winning this.

Karlovic Gstaad 2004. 7-6 in the third, Ivo was serving bombs. Fed also went 6-4 in the third w/ Sexy Stepanek in the QF, and 6-3 in the third with Starace in the SF.

Agassi USO 2004. Incredible match, great quality, Fed won it 6-3 in the 5th.

Paradorn in Bangkok 2004. Good atmosphere, but Roger won 6-3 in the third.

Moya TMC 2004. Fed won it 6-3 in the third, Carlos was the only one to take a set from him at the Masters that year.

Ljubicic Rotterdam 2005. Fed played pretty bad, Ljubo had 4-2 in the 3rd set tiebreaker before losing it.

Ivo Minar and JCF in Dubai 2005. Fed had to go to a 3rd set tiebreak w/ both of these guys. Ferrero had a break in the third and had 2 match points in the TB, but Roger was too good.

Zabaleta and Ancic in Miami 2005. Zabaleta too him to 6-3 in the third and Ancic took him to 6-4 in the 3rd.

Nadal Miami 2005. Nadal really messed this one up. 2 sets and a break I think, also had 5-3 in the 3rd set TB before Fed came all the way back to win in 5.

Gonzalez Monte Carlo 2005. Fed won it 6-4 in the third, Fena was really blasting it in this one.

Soderling in Halle 2005, Soderling really had a chance here, and Safin had a chance in the final, 6-4 in the third.

Kiefer and Ginepri in Cincy 2005. Fed had to scrape through this one, 6-4 in the third on both, played like shit.

Nalbandian and Ljubo in TMC 2005 RR. Had to go 6-4 and 7-6 in the third here.

Haas in AO 2006 and Davydenko too. Both guys had an excellent chance to knock off a well sub-par Fed here.

O. Rochus Indian Wells 2006. Fed had to go 7-5 in the third here.

Djokovic Monte Carlo 2006. Young Nole pushing Fed to 6-3 in the third.

Almugro and Nalby in Rome 2006, taking Fed to 7-5 and 7-6 in the third.

Nalby in RG 2006, had a set and a break before getting injured.

Richie and Rochus in Halle 2006, both had him on the ropes.

Malisse, Gonzo, Gasquet in Canada 2006, all had chances.

Suzuki in Tokyo 2006. Fed was shitting his pants here, 7-6 in the 3rd.

Srichaphan in Basel 2006. 7-6 in the third, Paradorn was playing really well.

Roddick at TMC 2006. Rod fucked this one up, a few match points.

Pless and Djokovic in Dubai 2007. Both took him to 6-3 in the third.

As you can see, Fed even at his best had plenty of close calls.

it`s obvius, the opponents played too.

federer was great in that time, but the rivals played too, he is greate but not perfect jajaj.

another demostration that the circuit were more hard than now, the agassi of 2004 and 2005 for me in fast courts was more dangerous than murray in a slam

The Magician
10-20-2011, 02:33 PM
very smart subtle attack on Fed :yeah: Why don't you go into the close matches he lost, especially in 2005 when 2/4 losses were in some of the greatest matches of all time and 1/4 was in a final set tiebreak 10-8. Obviously he's won some close ones, the real story is how close he came in 2005 to losing one match all year and how high quality the opposition was (peak Fed vs. peak Safin vs. peak Nalbandian was scary) :wavey:

Shirogane
10-20-2011, 03:02 PM
I remember the Agassi RR match very well and I agree with you... too bad we can't seem to find this one on the internet.

The last two sets of their US Open QF were played in very windy conditions, but the first three had been very good quality indeed -- as it would also be the case in their US Open final the next year.

Naudio Spanlatine
10-20-2011, 03:13 PM
great thread johnny:yeah:

paseo
10-20-2011, 03:25 PM
Albert Einstein like Conclusion: Fed overachieved, really BIG.

For that kind of talent, I think he underachieved.

barbadosan
10-20-2011, 03:32 PM
I remember the Agassi RR match very well and I agree with you... too bad we can't seem to find this one on the internet.

The last two sets of their US Open QF were played in very windy conditions, but the first three had been very good quality indeed -- as it would also be the case in their US Open final the next year.

Actually you can - try rogerfedererpoints - in the matches section. If you have a problem, pm me, I know other sources

Arakasi
10-20-2011, 03:57 PM
I didn't realise every 3 set match is considered a close call. :rolleyes:

Benny_Maths
10-20-2011, 04:12 PM
Well you're not going to go on runs like that without some close calls and matches going the distance. He might have been called Jesus Fed or Godmode Fed or whatever but he obviously isn't Jesus or God. He actually exists.

Sick burn.:D Anyway your post reminds me of some youtube comments about 'Jesus Fed' which go along the lines of "I wish people would stop comparing Federer with Jesus, he's good but he's not Federer".:D

Sophocles
10-20-2011, 04:25 PM
A list of victories to savour.

Johnny Groove
10-20-2011, 05:08 PM
Almagro and Nalbandian in Rome were brilliant matches.

That Rome tournament was fantastic, capped off by the Fedal final.

Great event.

So? Pointless thread, c'mon, you can do better than this...

I'm just pointing out that even Federer at his best had to fight to get a lot of his wins, even against so called "mugs".

He also had pretty close losses... Safin AO 2005, Nadal Rome 2006, RG final 2007 he was 1/17 on BPs, Nalby 2005 TMC 6-7 in the 5th on one leg...

Yes, plenty of close losses at his peak as well.

Hrbaty in Cincy 04, Berdych in Olympics 04, Safin in AO 05, Gasquet in Monte Carlo 05, TMC 05 final vs. King Dave, Nadal in Dubai 06, Nadal in MC and Rome 06, even the French in 06 Fed had a shot.

it`s obvius, the opponents played too.

federer was great in that time, but the rivals played too, he is greate but not perfect jajaj.

another demostration that the circuit were more hard than now, the agassi of 2004 and 2005 for me in fast courts was more dangerous than murray in a slam

Oh yeah Oldassi would own Murray these days.

very smart subtle attack on Fed :yeah: Why don't you go into the close matches he lost, especially in 2005 when 2/4 losses were in some of the greatest matches of all time and 1/4 was in a final set tiebreak 10-8. Obviously he's won some close ones, the real story is how close he came in 2005 to losing one match all year and how high quality the opposition was (peak Fed vs. peak Safin vs. peak Nalbandian was scary) :wavey:

Yep, had a few close losses too.

I remember the Agassi RR match very well and I agree with you... too bad we can't seem to find this one on the internet.

The last two sets of their US Open QF were played in very windy conditions, but the first three had been very good quality indeed -- as it would also be the case in their US Open final the next year.

Yeah Agassi gave Fed a few great battles early in Fed's peak.

great thread johnny:yeah:

:yeah:

I didn't realise every 3 set match is considered a close call. :rolleyes:

Not every match, just a good number of them.

EddieNero
10-20-2011, 06:16 PM
What a mug, this Roger. Dared to play some tight matches.

Haelfix
10-20-2011, 06:25 PM
If Federer's wins are close, it means the opposition has poor mental strength. Also Federer has poor mental, b/c he should beat the mugs by a much wider margin.
If Federer wins by a huge margin, it means his competition have no talent and are mentally weak..
If Federer loses by a close margin, it means that Federer has poor mental strength and his ability is less than that of his opponent (who should win more often).
If Federer loses by a large margin it means that Federer is both mentally weak and its proof positive that he has no ability!

Therefore, under no circumstance can we ever conclude that Federer has any tennis ability or mental strength whatsoever! QED

juan27
10-20-2011, 06:38 PM
all the greats of the history had very close victories.

sampras,federer,nadal and anybody.

but I am totally sure that in that era , the top 10 were better than today, with the exeption of nole and sometimes murray.

but, agassi even in his 35 years old was a better opposition in the slams of hard court than murray, agassi motivated when he faced the best and played great tennis level and he had all the experience and mentality , murray in the big stages with the greats he fails many times and his mentality is poor in that stages.

Pirata.
10-20-2011, 07:43 PM
If Federer's wins are close, it means the opposition has poor mental strength. Also Federer has poor mental, b/c he should beat the mugs by a much wider margin.
If Federer wins by a huge margin, it means his competition have no talent and are mentally weak..
If Federer loses by a close margin, it means that Federer has poor mental strength and his ability is less than that of his opponent (who should win more often).
If Federer loses by a large margin it means that Federer is both mentally weak and its proof positive that he has no ability!

Therefore, under no circumstance can we ever conclude that Federer has any tennis ability or mental strength whatsoever! QED

NID

manadrainer
10-20-2011, 07:46 PM
If Federer's wins are close, it means the opposition has poor mental strength. Also Federer has poor mental, b/c he should beat the mugs by a much wider margin.
If Federer wins by a huge margin, it means his competition have no talent and are mentally weak..
If Federer loses by a close margin, it means that Federer has poor mental strength and his ability is less than that of his opponent (who should win more often).
If Federer loses by a large margin it means that Federer is both mentally weak and its proof positive that he has no ability!

Therefore, under no circumstance can we ever conclude that Federer has any tennis ability or mental strength whatsoever! QED

This.

niksonion
10-20-2011, 08:16 PM
Excellent work,Johnny...but,I have to admit that this Fed did lose so many tight matches through the years when he was multiple matchpoints up,so the thread about it would be usefull as well...By the way,in 2nd round of Tokyo 06 he beat Troicki 7:6,7:6 when Viks ranking was at low 200...

Corey Feldman
10-20-2011, 08:18 PM
yeah he won nearly all in those days, but thinking of his fine chokes stacking up these last years

2005 m.carlo v Gasquet 7-6 2-6 6-7 (lost MP)
2005 AO v Safin 7-5 4-6 7-5 6-7 7-9 (lost MP)
2005 TMC Final Nalbandian 7-6 7-6 2-6 1-6 6-7 (served for match at 30-0)
2006 Rome Nadal 7-6 6-7 4-6 6-2 6-7 (4-1 up in fifth, lost MP)
2007 Miami Canas 6-7 6-2 6-7 (up break in the third)
2009 Montreal Tsonga 6-7 6-1 6-7 (up 5-1 in third set)
2009 US Open Final v Del Pot 6-3 6-7 6-4 6-7 2-6 (on serve at 5-4 30-0 in second set)
2010 Indian Wells Baggy 7-5 5-7 6-7 (lost MP)
2010 Miami Berdych 4-6 7-6 6-7 (lost MP)
2010 Halle Final Hewitt 6-3 6-7 4-6
2010 US OPen Nole 7-5 1-6 7-5 2-6 5-7 (lost MP)
2010 Paris Monfils 6-7 7-6 6-7 (up 4-2 in third set, 7 MP's lost)
2011 Rome Gasquet 6-4 6-7 6-7 (up a break 4-2 in second set)
2011 Wimbledon Tsonga (lost from 2 set up)
2011 US Open Nole (2 sets up, 2 MP's on serve in fifth set)

there are so many other horrible tight 3 set loses i can remember (Nole montreal final 2007, gonzo 2007 shanghai, hrbaty 2004 cincinnati, berdych 2004 olympics, costa 2003 Miami, Karlovic 2007 cincinnati, benneteau 2009 Paris, denko 2009 London semis, roddick 2003 Montreal, hewitt 2002 shanghai, hewitt 2003 DC semi final, haas 2002 AO

guga2120
10-20-2011, 09:26 PM
During those years the hype in the media about Federer being the possible "goat" was crazy. So many times the other players, except Nalbandian and kiddie Rafa, would play him like he was that. They would just try to keep it respectable and when they would outplay him they would choke b/c they would not think they should beat him.

Those numbers are a bit ridiculous though going into 2007, thank goodness for Willy Canas.

Vida
10-20-2011, 09:30 PM
smart move by op.

rocketassist
10-20-2011, 09:38 PM
During those years the hype in the media about Federer being the possible "goat" was crazy. So many times the other players, except Nalbandian and kiddie Rafa, would play him like he was that. They would just try to keep it respectable and when they would outplay him they would choke b/c they would not think they should beat him.

Those numbers are a bit ridiculous though going into 2007, thank goodness for Willy Canas.

Federer outplayed just about everyone else, not the other way round. In those three years I'll give the Davydenko AO 06 and RG 07 as chokes when the better player, and Djokovic was competitive at the USO final and should have won the first set, but who else was there?

barbadosan
10-20-2011, 09:38 PM
If Federer's wins are close, it means the opposition has poor mental strength. Also Federer has poor mental, b/c he should beat the mugs by a much wider margin.
If Federer wins by a huge margin, it means his competition have no talent and are mentally weak..
If Federer loses by a close margin, it means that Federer has poor mental strength and his ability is less than that of his opponent (who should win more often).
If Federer loses by a large margin it means that Federer is both mentally weak and its proof positive that he has no ability!

Therefore, under no circumstance can we ever conclude that Federer has any tennis ability or mental strength whatsoever! QED

That about sums up the default position of the Fed-dislikers (I'm assuming people don't actually hate someone they've never even met)

Orka_n
10-20-2011, 09:41 PM
6-3 or 6-4 in the third isn't that close. Otherwise a fairly interesting list, though I don't really see the purpose of it. Most of the people here who are claiming their fave "cannot lose if healthy" are Nadaltards, not Fedtards.

Jesmond10
10-20-2011, 10:41 PM
6-3 or 6-4 in the third isn't that close. Otherwise a fairly interesting list, though I don't really see the purpose of it. Most of the people here who are claiming their fave "cannot lose if healthy" are Nadaltards, not Fedtards.

I think Federer's fan have always felt that even in the years of his dominance he was never that far from losing. To the casual fan, it looked like he was winning everything easily, without trying all that hard, and it seemed inevitable and boring. Actually, it was the opposite, and his recent run of heart-breaking losses has only reinforced this.

Some players can get hot for a few weeks. Pete Sampras would red-line his game for a few months. Federer sprinted along a tightrope for four and a half years. He would imply that this was the case all the time when asked, but everyone assumed he was merely being modest when he said that winning all the time was actually really difficult.

Others have mentioned the RR match against Agassi at the 2003 TMC, and I agree that this is one of the most pivotal matches. To be flagrantly self-advertising, here is my write-up of it (http://www.thenextpoint.com/?p=114). And yes, if you want to download it - and you should - rogerfedererpoints is the place.

Johnny Groove
10-20-2011, 11:54 PM
Nice to see this thread getting some good discussion going.

I especially enjoyed Jesmond's article about that TMC 2003 match, very intelligent stuff.

That was the match that turned him into a beast. He proceeded to shit on everyone the rest of that event, and cemented his status at the AO 2004, beating Hewitt, Nalbandian, Ferrero, and Safin all in a row.

Topspindoctor
10-21-2011, 12:28 AM
As we all know, from TMC 2003 to Dubai 2007, Fed went 264-15.

However, he had many more close calls during that span, and could have lost a few more matches.

TMC 2003 RR Federer def. Agassi 6-7, 6-3, 7-6. Close match, this, could have easily gone either way. This was the match that really took Federer to the next level with his confidence.

Agassi Indian Wells 2004. Agassi was good vs. early peak Roger, Fed had to battle to take this one 6-4 in the 3rd.

Davydenko Miami 2004. Fed won this 7-5 in the third, I think Roger was tired after that Indian Wells event.

Gaudio Hamburg 2004. Gaston had a chance in this, losing 4-6 in the 3rd. Not sure if the Argie had a break in the 3rd.

Roddick Wimbledon 2004. Andy had him on the ropes here before the rain delay, but Roger ended up winning this.

Karlovic Gstaad 2004. 7-6 in the third, Ivo was serving bombs. Fed also went 6-4 in the third w/ Sexy Stepanek in the QF, and 6-3 in the third with Starace in the SF.

Agassi USO 2004. Incredible match, great quality, Fed won it 6-3 in the 5th.

Paradorn in Bangkok 2004. Good atmosphere, but Roger won 6-3 in the third.

Moya TMC 2004. Fed won it 6-3 in the third, Carlos was the only one to take a set from him at the Masters that year.

Ljubicic Rotterdam 2005. Fed played pretty bad, Ljubo had 4-2 in the 3rd set tiebreaker before losing it.

Ivo Minar and JCF in Dubai 2005. Fed had to go to a 3rd set tiebreak w/ both of these guys. Ferrero had a break in the third and had 2 match points in the TB, but Roger was too good.

Zabaleta and Ancic in Miami 2005. Zabaleta too him to 6-3 in the third and Ancic took him to 6-4 in the 3rd.

Nadal Miami 2005. Nadal really messed this one up. 2 sets and a break I think, also had 5-3 in the 3rd set TB before Fed came all the way back to win in 5.

Gonzalez Monte Carlo 2005. Fed won it 6-4 in the third, Fena was really blasting it in this one.

Soderling in Halle 2005, Soderling really had a chance here, and Safin had a chance in the final, 6-4 in the third.

Kiefer and Ginepri in Cincy 2005. Fed had to scrape through this one, 6-4 in the third on both, played like shit.

Nalbandian and Ljubo in TMC 2005 RR. Had to go 6-4 and 7-6 in the third here.

Haas in AO 2006 and Davydenko too. Both guys had an excellent chance to knock off a well sub-par Fed here.

O. Rochus Indian Wells 2006. Fed had to go 7-5 in the third here.

Djokovic Monte Carlo 2006. Young Nole pushing Fed to 6-3 in the third.

Almugro and Nalby in Rome 2006, taking Fed to 7-5 and 7-6 in the third.

Nalby in RG 2006, had a set and a break before getting injured.

Richie and Rochus in Halle 2006, both had him on the ropes.

Malisse, Gonzo, Gasquet in Canada 2006, all had chances.

Suzuki in Tokyo 2006. Fed was shitting his pants here, 7-6 in the 3rd.

Srichaphan in Basel 2006. 7-6 in the third, Paradorn was playing really well.

Roddick at TMC 2006. Rod fucked this one up, a few match points.

Pless and Djokovic in Dubai 2007. Both took him to 6-3 in the third.

As you can see, Fed even at his best had plenty of close calls.

:facepalm: So many people choked against him :facepalm:

You'd think he was playing on WTA tour :o

barbadosan
10-21-2011, 01:30 AM
:facepalm: So many people choked against him :facepalm:

You'd think he was playing on WTA tour :o

Haelfix so accurately summed you up earlier

If Federer's wins are close, it means the opposition has poor mental strength. Also Federer has poor mental, b/c he should beat the mugs by a much wider margin.
If Federer wins by a huge margin, it means his competition have no talent and are mentally weak..
If Federer loses by a close margin, it means that Federer has poor mental strength and his ability is less than that of his opponent (who should win more often).
If Federer loses by a large margin it means that Federer is both mentally weak and its proof positive that he has no ability!

Therefore, under no circumstance can we ever conclude that Federer has any tennis ability or mental strength whatsoever! QED

dodo
10-21-2011, 08:50 AM
Good thread, Johnny Groove, was hoping for something like this for a while.
Any chance you could write a few more sentences about those matches if you remember them?

Deivid23
10-21-2011, 08:58 AM
A better approach for this kind of thread should be in which of those clashes Federer was the underdog at some point of the match, imo.

sexybeast
10-21-2011, 09:31 AM
As we all know, from TMC 2003 to Dubai 2007, Fed went 264-15.

However, he had many more close calls during that span, and could have lost a few more matches.

TMC 2003 RR Federer def. Agassi 6-7, 6-3, 7-6. Close match, this, could have easily gone either way. This was the match that really took Federer to the next level with his confidence.

Agassi Indian Wells 2004. Agassi was good vs. early peak Roger, Fed had to battle to take this one 6-4 in the 3rd.

Davydenko Miami 2004. Fed won this 7-5 in the third, I think Roger was tired after that Indian Wells event.

Gaudio Hamburg 2004. Gaston had a chance in this, losing 4-6 in the 3rd. Not sure if the Argie had a break in the 3rd.

Roddick Wimbledon 2004. Andy had him on the ropes here before the rain delay, but Roger ended up winning this.

Karlovic Gstaad 2004. 7-6 in the third, Ivo was serving bombs. Fed also went 6-4 in the third w/ Sexy Stepanek in the QF, and 6-3 in the third with Starace in the SF.

Agassi USO 2004. Incredible match, great quality, Fed won it 6-3 in the 5th.

Paradorn in Bangkok 2004. Good atmosphere, but Roger won 6-3 in the third.

Moya TMC 2004. Fed won it 6-3 in the third, Carlos was the only one to take a set from him at the Masters that year.

Ljubicic Rotterdam 2005. Fed played pretty bad, Ljubo had 4-2 in the 3rd set tiebreaker before losing it.

Ivo Minar and JCF in Dubai 2005. Fed had to go to a 3rd set tiebreak w/ both of these guys. Ferrero had a break in the third and had 2 match points in the TB, but Roger was too good.

Zabaleta and Ancic in Miami 2005. Zabaleta too him to 6-3 in the third and Ancic took him to 6-4 in the 3rd.

Nadal Miami 2005. Nadal really messed this one up. 2 sets and a break I think, also had 5-3 in the 3rd set TB before Fed came all the way back to win in 5.

Gonzalez Monte Carlo 2005. Fed won it 6-4 in the third, Fena was really blasting it in this one.

Soderling in Halle 2005, Soderling really had a chance here, and Safin had a chance in the final, 6-4 in the third.

Kiefer and Ginepri in Cincy 2005. Fed had to scrape through this one, 6-4 in the third on both, played like shit.

Nalbandian and Ljubo in TMC 2005 RR. Had to go 6-4 and 7-6 in the third here.

Haas in AO 2006 and Davydenko too. Both guys had an excellent chance to knock off a well sub-par Fed here.

O. Rochus Indian Wells 2006. Fed had to go 7-5 in the third here.

Djokovic Monte Carlo 2006. Young Nole pushing Fed to 6-3 in the third.

Almugro and Nalby in Rome 2006, taking Fed to 7-5 and 7-6 in the third.

Nalby in RG 2006, had a set and a break before getting injured.

Richie and Rochus in Halle 2006, both had him on the ropes.

Malisse, Gonzo, Gasquet in Canada 2006, all had chances.

Suzuki in Tokyo 2006. Fed was shitting his pants here, 7-6 in the 3rd.

Srichaphan in Basel 2006. 7-6 in the third, Paradorn was playing really well.

Roddick at TMC 2006. Rod fucked this one up, a few match points.

Pless and Djokovic in Dubai 2007. Both took him to 6-3 in the third.

As you can see, Fed even at his best had plenty of close calls.

Feds lost matches and oppurtunities are way more close and amazing than those "close calls" where he won. In your list only Roddick TMC 2006, Nadal in Miami 2005, Rochus in Halle 2006 and Soderling in Halle 2006 were matches his opponents shouls have won. Nadal in Miami is probably the only semi-important match where his opponent should have won. Against Rochus I remember still that Federer played great on matchpoints and Rochus did nothing wrong, against Agassi in TMC 2003 Federer played some out of this world shots in the deciding points and having matchpoints against him. You also say Federer played bad against Haas in 2006 when it actually was a brilliant match, the best match of that Australian Open between 2 wonderful shotmakers and artists (Haas in topform in his favorite tournament).

Here are much more important matches Federer should have won, first 3 incredible matches that made Federer go 81-4 instad of an incredible 84-1 year:

Safin AO 2005, Federer blew a 2 minibreak lead in the 4th set tiebreak.

Gasquet Monte carlo: Federer constantly had chanses and had matchpoints on his serve, Gasquet played one of the 3 best matches he played his whole career (including the one he lost against Nadal later in Monte Carlo SF that year and Roddick in Wimbledon 2007). Still Gasquet was 17 years old and Federer should just have been mentally stronger.

Nalbandian 2005. Federer had a 2-0 lead so he should have won, Nalbandian had 4-0 in the 5th set so he should have won there, Federer was serving for the match 30-0 up so he should have won there. Federer blew big leads 2 times and Nalby one time, overall this match was in Federer's hands more often than in Nalby's hands.

Then we have the horrible match against Rafa in RG 2005 SF, he was actually up a break in the 4th set but just played horrible tennis against a Rafa that was not yet a beast and lost sets against the likes of Grosjean and Stepanek on clay, had a WTA serve aswell. If Federer would play the clay tennis he played post 2006, he would have won against young Rafa.

Then we have in 2006:

Federer-Nadal in Dubai. Federer won more points and blew Nadal out of the court in the first set. Just couldnt win the important points however, Nadal just sneaked away with this victory with 2 bad service games by Federer in each set.

Federer-Nadalx3 on clay:Federer in Monte Carlo was really outplayed and did great to take 2 sets to tiebreaks, still he really should have the momentum in the 4th set going back 2 breaks down and then having minibreak on tiebreak. Federer went on to have minibreak in the 2nd and 5th tiebreak set in Rome and in the 4th tiebreak set in RG but just couldnt ever take advantage of minibreaks against Nadal. Also had the momentum having broken back in 2006 RG final set. Also destroyed Rafa in the first set of RG, but couldnt keep up with the momentum. To tell the truth Rafa just sucked in the first set, Federer played good but then like always just couldnt take advantage of the momentum.

However only in Rome Federer should have won and was playing better than Nadal, maybe he played his best match on clay ever. I still dont know how he lost that match. One match that could turn the matchup around a little and make Nadal shake his boots a little in the RG final.

2007:

1/17 breakpoints in RG final says it all.

Wimbledon 2007 was a 50/50 match just like Wimbledon 2008 where Federer played great in the 4 break points he faced in the 5th set and played an amazing game to break Nadal, not much Nadal could do different there. It is just fair that they got one each in 2007 and 2008. Federers best mental match of all time.

Djokovic in Montreal and Canas in Miami 2 3 setters lost the same way with Federer sucking in tiebreaks and overall outplaying his opponent and winning more points.

2008:
As I said it was fair Nadal won Wimbledon 2008 and Federer still played a great mental match from the 3rd st on.

However once again Federer was just incredibly weak mentally in Monte carlo and Hamburg against Nadal, lead sets 4-0 and 5-1 and still lost them. Should have won in Hamburg where he looked stronger than Nadal and this was Federer's favorite clay tournament.

2009-2011 Usopen
2 chokes where Federer should have won and the other he had 2 match points, Del Potro's was worst because he would have won a record 6 times and had the mental advantage having destroyed Del Potro so many times. Djokovic in 2010 deserved to win, but in 2011 Feder choked.

2009 Australian Open final:

Federer was the better played for 4 sets, blew break leads again against Nadal in the 1st set, blew set points in the 3rd set. His backhand was great in this match but where did his serve go?

2009 Wimbledon final

Ok, this is one Federer shouls have lost. Just wanted to include another one of those rare matches Federer wins because of mental strength, probably because he was seeing Roddick at the other side of the net.

We have some 3 setters ofcourse like the one with Tsonga, unbelivable choke there. We have that match against Davydenko in TMC which was incredible but Federer should have won that one, we have the incredibly 7 matchpint choke against Monfils in Paris. Miami/Indian Wells 2010 were chokes aswell. Probably many more I just cant remember.

2011:

Choke against Nadal in RG once again, 3 first sets Federer played better and won more points than Nadal. Should have won 2 sets atleast. Lost momentum once again in 4th set.

Lost 2-0 up against Tsonga in Wimbledon, not really a choke because Tsonga was serving from a tree and played some incredible points to win the match. Still, Federer was mentally weak in the couple of early breaks he gifted Tsonga.

So goes the list of lost oppurtunities in Federer's career, he certanly is a strange GOAT without that Jordan/Pele/Sampras/Phelps/Ali/Graaf magical champion's strength to just do whatever it takes to win that important match/point/goal and do all that is possible with the one oppurtunity to everlasting greatness that is given. It is a sign of great talent to get GOATlike resume without normal GOAT mental strength. Reminds me of athletes like Ian Thorpe, Mike Tyson and Maradona, just amazing talents and just could blow opponents away because they were just in a whole different league but they didnt really have the champions aura in the moment they were pushed to a corner and had to elevate themselves to another level in deciding moments. Actually Federer mostly reminds me of the kind of timid and very correct super athlete Ian Thorpe really, because Tyson and Maradona had real personal problems and were headcases, something I cant relate to Federer.

EddieNero
10-21-2011, 12:21 PM
Nadal had 3 times more close calls than Federer with some massive chokes included and I don't see anyone whining about that or questioning his legacy.

Shirogane
10-21-2011, 12:48 PM
What a mug this Fedmug; should have won every tight match and looked powerless in all his defeats instead.

Sham Kay
10-21-2011, 12:58 PM
All threads like this prove is that Federer was a practically invincible beast during this rather large time period. Out of all his wins, he naturally had a few tight ones as shown here, resulting in him mentally out-muscling his opponents. Almost all of his losses (and how few they were) were tight ones, many of which he probably should have won anyway.

Not sure what the intention of this thread is, but it's a nice compilation of further proof of Federer's greatness.

juan27
10-21-2011, 03:57 PM
Feds lost matches and oppurtunities are way more close and amazing than those "close calls" where he won. In your list only Roddick TMC 2006, Nadal in Miami 2005, Rochus in Halle 2006 and Soderling in Halle 2006 were matches his opponents shouls have won. Nadal in Miami is probably the only semi-important match where his opponent should have won. Against Rochus I remember still that Federer played great on matchpoints and Rochus did nothing wrong, against Agassi in TMC 2003 Federer played some out of this world shots in the deciding points and having matchpoints against him. You also say Federer played bad against Haas in 2006 when it actually was a brilliant match, the best match of that Australian Open between 2 wonderful shotmakers and artists (Haas in topform in his favorite tournament).

Here are much more important matches Federer should have won, first 3 incredible matches that made Federer go 81-4 instad of an incredible 84-1 year:

Safin AO 2005, Federer blew a 2 minibreak lead in the 4th set tiebreak.

Gasquet Monte carlo: Federer constantly had chanses and had matchpoints on his serve, Gasquet played one of the 3 best matches he played his whole career (including the one he lost against Nadal later in Monte Carlo SF that year and Roddick in Wimbledon 2007). Still Gasquet was 17 years old and Federer should just have been mentally stronger.

Nalbandian 2005. Federer had a 2-0 lead so he should have won, Nalbandian had 4-0 in the 5th set so he should have won there, Federer was serving for the match 30-0 up so he should have won there. Federer blew big leads 2 times and Nalby one time, overall this match was in Federer's hands more often than in Nalby's hands.

Then we have the horrible match against Rafa in RG 2005 SF, he was actually up a break in the 4th set but just played horrible tennis against a Rafa that was not yet a beast and lost sets against the likes of Grosjean and Stepanek on clay, had a WTA serve aswell. If Federer would play the clay tennis he played post 2006, he would have won against young Rafa.

Then we have in 2006:

Federer-Nadal in Dubai. Federer won more points and blew Nadal out of the court in the first set. Just couldnt win the important points however, Nadal just sneaked away with this victory with 2 bad service games by Federer in each set.

Federer-Nadalx3 on clay:Federer in Monte Carlo was really outplayed and did great to take 2 sets to tiebreaks, still he really should have the momentum in the 4th set going back 2 breaks down and then having minibreak on tiebreak. Federer went on to have minibreak in the 2nd and 5th tiebreak set in Rome and in the 4th tiebreak set in RG but just couldnt ever take advantage of minibreaks against Nadal. Also had the momentum having broken back in 2006 RG final set. Also destroyed Rafa in the first set of RG, but couldnt keep up with the momentum. To tell the truth Rafa just sucked in the first set, Federer played good but then like always just couldnt take advantage of the momentum.

However only in Rome Federer should have won and was playing better than Nadal, maybe he played his best match on clay ever. I still dont know how he lost that match. One match that could turn the matchup around a little and make Nadal shake his boots a little in the RG final.

2007:

1/17 breakpoints in RG final says it all.

Wimbledon 2007 was a 50/50 match just like Wimbledon 2008 where Federer played great in the 4 break points he faced in the 5th set and played an amazing game to break Nadal, not much Nadal could do different there. It is just fair that they got one each in 2007 and 2008. Federers best mental match of all time.

Djokovic in Montreal and Canas in Miami 2 3 setters lost the same way with Federer sucking in tiebreaks and overall outplaying his opponent and winning more points.

2008:
As I said it was fair Nadal won Wimbledon 2008 and Federer still played a great mental match from the 3rd st on.

However once again Federer was just incredibly weak mentally in Monte carlo and Hamburg against Nadal, lead sets 4-0 and 5-1 and still lost them. Should have won in Hamburg where he looked stronger than Nadal and this was Federer's favorite clay tournament.

2009-2011 Usopen
2 chokes where Federer should have won and the other he had 2 match points, Del Potro's was worst because he would have won a record 6 times and had the mental advantage having destroyed Del Potro so many times. Djokovic in 2010 deserved to win, but in 2011 Feder choked.

2009 Australian Open final:

Federer was the better played for 4 sets, blew break leads again against Nadal in the 1st set, blew set points in the 3rd set. His backhand was great in this match but where did his serve go?

2009 Wimbledon final

Ok, this is one Federer shouls have lost. Just wanted to include another one of those rare matches Federer wins because of mental strength, probably because he was seeing Roddick at the other side of the net.

We have some 3 setters ofcourse like the one with Tsonga, unbelivable choke there. We have that match against Davydenko in TMC which was incredible but Federer should have won that one, we have the incredibly 7 matchpint choke against Monfils in Paris. Miami/Indian Wells 2010 were chokes aswell. Probably many more I just cant remember.

2011:

Choke against Nadal in RG once again, 3 first sets Federer played better and won more points than Nadal. Should have won 2 sets atleast. Lost momentum once again in 4th set.

Lost 2-0 up against Tsonga in Wimbledon, not really a choke because Tsonga was serving from a tree and played some incredible points to win the match. Still, Federer was mentally weak in the couple of early breaks he gifted Tsonga.

So goes the list of lost oppurtunities in Federer's career, he certanly is a strange GOAT without that Jordan/Pele/Sampras/Phelps/Ali/Graaf magical champion's strength to just do whatever it takes to win that important match/point/goal and do all that is possible with the one oppurtunity to everlasting greatness that is given. It is a sign of great talent to get GOATlike resume without normal GOAT mental strength. Reminds me of athletes like Ian Thorpe, Mike Tyson and Maradona, just amazing talents and just could blow opponents away because they were just in a whole different league but they didnt really have the champions aura in the moment they were pushed to a corner and had to elevate themselves to another level in deciding moments. Actually Federer mostly reminds me of the kind of timid and very correct super athlete Ian Thorpe really, because Tyson and Maradona had real personal problems and were headcases, something I cant relate to Federer.

great post!!!!!

federer has maybe the perfect tennis but not the perfect mental strenght!!!!

when he was young his mentality was even worst, federer improve very much his mental strenght but obviusly he not became a sampras or nadal.

every great has is good and bad things, roger`s mentality is not the best ( sampras,nadal, borg had better mental strenght) but his tennis is the best of all and with that he won and dominate without a great mental strenght, he`s talent do all the job , he never need a great mental force for dominate

Sophocles
10-21-2011, 04:38 PM
Peak Federer's mental strength wasn't poor, except arguably against Nadal, but it was considerably worse than that of several other greats, such as Sampras, Nadal, Borg, & Connors. I'd put him below McEnroe, Laver & Gonzales as well. On a par with Agassi & Lendl, or maybe a notch above.

Obviously now it's pathetic.

Sunset of Age
10-21-2011, 04:47 PM
Peak Federer's mental strength wasn't poor, except arguably against Nadal, but it was considerably worse than that of several other greats, such as Sampras, Nadal, Borg, & Connors. I'd put him below McEnroe, Laver & Gonzales as well. On a par with Agassi & Lendl, or maybe a notch above.

Yep, fully agree. People also tend to forget that in his younger days, he was a total hot-headed headcase. No surprise he needed a relatively long period to mature and become the monster he ultimately became, but bits and parts of his headcase-ry of course never went away completely, as it's an integral part of the animal that is Federer.

Obviously now it's pathetic.

:sad: but true.

Naudio Spanlatine
10-21-2011, 05:02 PM
great post!!!!!

federer has maybe the perfect tennis but not the perfect mental strenght!!!!

when he was young his mentality was even worst, federer improve very much his mental strenght but obviusly he not became a sampras or nadal.

every great has is good and bad things, roger`s mentality is not the best ( sampras,nadal, borg had better mental strenght) but his tennis is the best of all and with that he won and dominate without a great mental strenght, he`s talent do all the job , he never need a great mental force for dominate

thats why at the end rafa got the best of him "MENTALLY", cause fed cant handle a guy who has improve dramatically, he more of a poor loser to djokovic than anyone else, he can except the fact that djokovic is better than him, and rafa prove to everyone that he mentally has the edge over him, thats why that wimby 2008 was the testing point for fed because he NEVER thought that rafa could win him on grass, most of their finals in wimby went the distance a bit, but that final was the most talked about final ever since, ive never seen him cry with anyone else but he cried when he lost to rafa in 2009 aus open final and i can see that he realized how great rafa is against him

juan27
10-21-2011, 05:46 PM
thats why at the end rafa got the best of him "MENTALLY", cause fed cant handle a guy who has improve dramatically, he more of a poor loser to djokovic than anyone else, he can except the fact that djokovic is better than him, and rafa prove to everyone that he mentally has the edge over him, thats why that wimby 2008 was the testing point for fed because he NEVER thought that rafa could win him on grass, most of their finals in wimby went the distance a bit, but that final was the most talked about final ever since, ive never seen him cry with anyone else but he cried when he lost to rafa in 2009 aus open final and i can see that he realized how great rafa is against him

djokovic better than federer???? jajaja it`s a joke.

if a federer with 30 years old was the only capable to defeat peak nole and the only of had matchpoints against him is worst than nole???

nadal`s tard are very irrationals, the humilliation of nadal with nole affects very much I see.

prime nadal can`t won nole......even can`t won two sets and he has 25 years old!!!!!!

I see nole better than nadal , not federer.

nadal defeat federer outside clay when federer past his peak , nadull won his slams outside clay because the only opposition was a past peak federer , when a player of his same age and in peak too appears , he was destroyed by nole.

the period 2008-2011 , nadal was beneficit by a past peak federer and pre-peak nole in fast courts.

Naudio Spanlatine
10-21-2011, 06:20 PM
djokovic better than federer???? jajaja it`s a joke.

if a federer with 30 years old was the only capable to defeat peak nole and the only of had matchpoints against him is worst than nole???

nadal`s tard are very irrationals, the humilliation of nadal with nole affects very much I see.

prime nadal can`t won nole......even can`t won two sets and he has 25 years old!!!!!!

I see nole better than nadal , not federer.

nadal defeat federer outside clay when federer past his peak , nadull won his slams outside clay because the only opposition was a past peak federer , when a player of his same age and in peak too appears , he was destroyed by nole.

the period 2008-2011 , nadal was beneficit by a past peak federer and pre-peak nole in fast courts.

ok lemme try to explain myself a bit further, what i meant to say is that while nadal was now dominating him from 2008-2011, i think other players do realized that fed was mentally weaker than ever, what i meant to say about djokovic is that last year djokovic finally realized what it takes to beat fed, he realized what rafa had realized he seems to not like anyone challenging him mentally and maybe somewhat physically, when i saw that match between nole and fed, i wanted fed to win the match so that he can make history with rafa meeting him in all four grand slams of the year but when i saw the ending of the match, i realized that this match reminded me of wimby 08 final, the way nole stayed in the match and how he fought very hard mentally and physically and found his way to beat fed, i dont think fed could ever forget that match, and the same thing happen this year, the same story and same scenario, nole last year in that semi final realized that in 5sets fed cant win matches like this, its impossible for him to win these types of matches, he even say in his interview this year after his loss to djokovic,"how can someone play and work hard like this", basically i think its somewhat what he said but what that means is that fed jus cant see why players win like that, like matches should not be this long or this gruelling, and what he realized is that rafa and finally nole is starting to get to fed, back then fed was dominating them we all know that but rafa was the first younger generation to actually figured fed out, then andy and NOW nole

so that what i wanna tell you

DrJules
10-21-2011, 06:22 PM
Does anybody have a list of matches that Federer has lost from match points up and match points down.

I am sure he has lost far more matches from match point up than down.

juan27
10-21-2011, 07:35 PM
ok lemme try to explain myself a bit further, what i meant to say is that while nadal was now dominating him from 2008-2011, i think other players do realized that fed was mentally weaker than ever, what i meant to say about djokovic is that last year djokovic finally realized what it takes to beat fed, he realized what rafa had realized he seems to not like anyone challenging him mentally and maybe somewhat physically, when i saw that match between nole and fed, i wanted fed to win the match so that he can make history with rafa meeting him in all four grand slams of the year but when i saw the ending of the match, i realized that this match reminded me of wimby 08 final, the way nole stayed in the match and how he fought very hard mentally and physically and found his way to beat fed, i dont think fed could ever forget that match, and the same thing happen this year, the same story and same scenario, nole last year in that semi final realized that in 5sets fed cant win matches like this, its impossible for him to win these types of matches, he even say in his interview this year after his loss to djokovic,"how can someone play and work hard like this", basically i think its somewhat what he said but what that means is that fed jus cant see why players win like that, like matches should not be this long or this gruelling, and what he realized is that rafa and finally nole is starting to get to fed, back then fed was dominating them we all know that but rafa was the first younger generation to actually figured fed out, then andy and NOW nole

so that what i wanna tell you

it`s logical.....

always the yougers generations They are going to end up by conquering those of the old generation.

it`s happen with to all the greats of the history, also to federer is happening.

but the only he was the really mental advantage with federer is nadal and nobody more , nadal has the perfect style of game to defeat federer`s tennis , because this federer ends frustrate with rafa, nadal is his achille`s heel for his style of game.

but federer won very close matches in 5 sets too, What happen now it is that when you begin the decadence and start to lose with several rivals, the confidence and the mental strength also low too and because of it often it fails, when federer was in his unbeatable stage not lost these matches with exepcion of nadal.