Did Marat stop Fed's Grand Slam dreams ? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Did Marat stop Fed's Grand Slam dreams ?

TheMightyFed
01-31-2005, 02:16 PM
I see Safin's victory as a sign that the best guys have already raised their level of play and of concentration to approach Fed's, and the confirmation that in today's tennis it's almost impossible to do what Laver did in 62 and 69 ...
Fed could have taken advantage of the "surpise effect" of his invicibility in 2004 but now, he's like a rabbit and he will have to face many hunters in the coming months.

wipeout
01-31-2005, 02:36 PM
It all obviously depends on Federer's confidence. We'll just have to wait and see how Roger reacts.

I guess Federer will be wary of Safin and also the best guys on clay and maybe not be his confident self against them, so the French Open has perhaps got a bit tougher now for him.

Everyone else, though, I'd still expect Federer to believe in himself to the extent the match is business as usual for him.

I'm guessing Roger's thinking will be for the season that well, okay, now there's Safin... but there's only really Safin. And maybe Nalbandian.

fedpras
01-31-2005, 02:39 PM
I never really expected Roger to win the Grand Slam, but I don't think one loss signals the end of his dominance in tennis.

WyveN
01-31-2005, 02:40 PM
I see Safin's victory as a sign that the best guys have already raised their level of play and of concentration to approach Fed's


Top guys?
I still dont believe Hewitt or Roddick or Agassi will have anymore success against Federer this year then they did last year. It was always known that Safin can beat anyone.


, and the confirmation that in today's tennis it's almost impossible to do what Laver did in 62 and 69 ...


Considering that the last few times someone has won 3 slams in a season, they have went slamless the following year very few people were seriously expecting Roger to win the grand slam. And he wouldnt have won it even if he won every match at AO in straight sets.


Fed could have taken advantage on the "surpise effect" of his invicibility in 2004 but now

Surprise? I hardly think he won all those titles in 2004 because other players were surprised and underestimated him.

jtipson
01-31-2005, 02:41 PM
Did Marat stop Fed's Grand Slam dreams?
No. He just stopped him being able to execute them in 2005 ;)

TheMightyFed
01-31-2005, 02:47 PM
What I mean is that Marat produced such a level of focus and skills because that was Fed. Now he's too much of a target to do the Grand Slam, even if he stays dominant on the tour. To do it in 06, 07 or later will be much harder IMO. But if he does, he's the GREATEST...

TheMightyFed
01-31-2005, 02:53 PM
Surprise? I hardly think he won all those titles in 2004 because other players were surprised and underestimated him.

Nope but it's tough to imagine that some players will win three out of four GS in the season... And he did. He's become a bit THE DOMINATOR. The goal is to stop the domination in GS to get the maximum recognition. I think that Safin was almost happier to beat Fed in SF than to get the trophy.

AnnabelLee
01-31-2005, 02:59 PM
i'm really dissapointed that safin beat roger, but I hope they will play against each other many times this year. i don't hate safin but I hate his game, it's all about power nothing else.

jtipson
01-31-2005, 03:00 PM
The goal is to stop the domination in GS to get the maximum recognition. I think that Safin was almost happier to beat Fed in SF than to get the trophy.

Surely the goal is to win GS? I think he would have been pretty pissed off if he'd have lost the final.

WyveN
01-31-2005, 03:02 PM
Surely the goal is to win GS? I think he would have been pretty pissed off if he'd have lost the final.

I agree. If he had lost the final Lleyton would get all the credit and the fact that Safin beat Federer would be almost forgotten. As Safin himself said "no one remmember you if you lose final".

RonE
01-31-2005, 03:06 PM
I don't think winning the Grand Slam was ever a realistic prospect, not even for Federer. There were matches last year in slams that he won but could have just as easily lost a point here and there making the difference just like it did against Marat.

That is the nature of the game- it is nigh impossible to go through a slam draw without having at least one tough match where you might be in serious danger of losing. That, and the different surfaces you need to specialize on, and the proximity of FO and Wimby are the main factors IMO why achieving the feat in today's game is impossible and will not be done.

Puschkin
01-31-2005, 03:16 PM
I guess Federer will be wary of Safin and also the best guys on clay and maybe not be his confident self against them, so the French Open has perhaps got a bit tougher now for him.


I think the opposite is true. He will be more motivated for RG with this defeat than without it.

And I also think that his tennis and character are strong enough not to lose it all after a single, close defeat.

TheMightyFed
01-31-2005, 03:17 PM
the fact that Safin beat Federer would be almost forgotten.".

Not so sure... Let's see. But as everyone remembers Chang beating Lendl in FO 89 (4th round), who will remember this 05 finals Marat-Hewitt ?

jtipson
01-31-2005, 03:21 PM
Not so sure... Let's see. But as everyone remembers Chang beating Lendl in FO 89 (4th round), who will remember this 05 finals Marat-Hewitt ?

But Chang won the final anyway, so it was part of his run. If Edberg had won it, he would held the Wimbledon and Roland Garros titles at the same time, and that would have been bigger than Chang beating Lendl I guess.

TheMightyFed
01-31-2005, 03:30 PM
But Chang won the final anyway, so it was part of his run. If Edberg had won it, he would held the Wimbledon and Roland Garros titles at the same time, and that would have been bigger than Chang beating Lendl I guess.
You're partially right, but still, beating the dominating number 1 with an underarm service is quite a feat ! ;)

Auscon
01-31-2005, 03:33 PM
no, I dont think so

I'm sure he would have had many dreams of achieving the feat in 05, so he'll no doubt be pissed, but he's got many years left

Would be a phenomenal achievement, so I wouldnt mind being able to say I was following the game when he did it......but it'll take a whole lot of things to fall into place, one of those being luck

undomiele
01-31-2005, 03:39 PM
I don't think Marat will be the only one to stop Roger's Grand Slam dreams :devil: ;)

He would have to improve his fitness for RG if he wants to go far there. I don't think you can realistically win that GS without having a good record for 5 setters. (Actually was there ever an RG champion who won without having to go through a 5 set match? Borg maybe? Kuerten? If anyone knows please let me know.)

WyveN
01-31-2005, 03:46 PM
(Actually was there ever an RG champion who won without having to go through a 5 set match? Borg maybe? Kuerten? If anyone knows please let me know.)

Kafelnikov only lost one set on his way to the title in 1996 (and it was in a tiebreak). A very underrated feat.

RogiFan88
01-31-2005, 03:49 PM
Did Rogi really think he could win the GS this year?? I agree w RonE... nobody can win the REAL GS anymore... I don't see anyone who can. [even SerenaSlam isn't a REAL GS... just her self-proclaimed one].

RogiFan88
01-31-2005, 03:50 PM
Now people s be asking "Can Marat win the GS?" ...

jtipson
01-31-2005, 03:51 PM
(Actually was there ever an RG champion who won without having to go through a 5 set match? Borg maybe? Kuerten? If anyone knows please let me know.)

Borg in 1980 I think, and that was the last time it was done in any Grand Slam, not just Roland Garros. Have a look at the ITF database.

TheMightyFed
01-31-2005, 03:55 PM
Borg in 1980 I think, and that was the last time it was done in any Grand Slam, not just Roland Garros. Have a look at the ITF database.

What about Roger in Wimby 04 ? He had 2 4-setters and that's it...

niko
01-31-2005, 03:56 PM
There's no doubt that Safin is a geat player, but it was all about tiebrake in the 4th set. My prediction Roger ends up #1 in 2005 with almost the same record he had in 2004, Safin won't do any better he did last year.

TheMightyFed
01-31-2005, 03:57 PM
Now people s be asking "Can Marat win the GS?" ...
No way, he says himself he's crap on grass, while Roger's always said he's grown up on clay...

Auscon
01-31-2005, 03:57 PM
Borg in 1980 I think, and that was the last time it was done in any Grand Slam, not just Roland Garros. Have a look at the ITF database.

the last time anyone won a GS without having to play a 5 setter? even just recently, Fed Wimbledon and Aus open

do u mean winning without having to go any more than 3 sets?

jtipson
01-31-2005, 04:06 PM
the last time anyone won a GS without having to play a 5 setter? even just recently, Fed Wimbledon and Aus open

do u mean winning without having to go any more than 3 sets?

Sorry, yes I mis-read that and did mean without dropping a set. Would have to check for the other. I'm guessing it might be Lendl.

Lendl did it in 1986, dropping a single tb set to Andres Gomez 6-7 7-6 6-0 6-0. Would need more time to check the rest....

MissMoJo
01-31-2005, 04:15 PM
Now people s be asking "Can Marat win the GS?" ...
These are the same people who are already proclaiming that Marat will be #1 by the end of the year.

I honestly don't think anyone seriously thought that Rogi could win the GS, especially taking the RG title with guys like Coria,Nadal,Gaudio et al in the draw. I suppose part of his training with Roche is to get better on clay (perfecting the drop shot etc.). Safin hardly is and won't be the only obstacle in his way to winning the GS.

Puschkin
01-31-2005, 04:26 PM
I honestly don't think anyone seriously thought that Rogi could win the GS, especially taking the RG title with guys like Coria,Nadal,Gaudio et al in the draw.


GS might be quite a long shot, but winning the French is not so far fetched, and as posted elsewhere, I repeat that he is more likely to achieve it after what happened in Melbourne than if he had won the tourney.

Doris Loeffel
01-31-2005, 04:30 PM
Well he for sure did this year - but might be cause that he eventually can make it an other year - well one's allowed to dream right??

The GS is a feat wich is really dam hard to accomplish these days - there are a lot of factors who need to come together to be able to do so. I doubt it'll be ever made again but keep the fingers crossed that Roger will be the one doing it one time.

MissMoJo
01-31-2005, 04:35 PM
I repeat that he is more likely to achieve it after what happened in Melbourne than if he had won the tourney.

I agree that he'll be motivated now to take RG. He's very aware that people will tout you as the future of tennis one day, then write you off the next if you don't meet their grand expectations. He'll be especially determined to prove himself.

magdanovich
01-31-2005, 04:36 PM
I agree with most responses here. The likelihood of ANY player achieving a GS in the modern era is very, very small. There's too much competition, too many tournaments and too many points to defend along the way to keep a well-placed ranking spot.

Federer has excited more hopes than most surely because of his almost unique ability to play well on all surfaces - a pre-requisite for the GS if there ever was one. This counts out just about any other 'premiership' player - Safin can play hard courts and clay, but not grass, and seems particularly prey to other environmental factors - wind, excessive heat; Roddick's play is blunted by clay; Hewitt would die of exhaustion before getting to the USO if he had actually managed to fight his way through the first 3 majors. The only other real contender, if he could find his winning ways, would be Nalbandian, who like Feds, is more or less comfortable on all surfaces - but he can't even pick up a TMS trophy it seems, so some way to go there I think!

undomiele
01-31-2005, 04:47 PM
I agree that he'll be motivated now to take RG. He's very aware that people will tout you as the future of tennis one day, then write you off the next if you don't meet their grand expectations. He'll be especially determined to prove himself.


Having a lot of motivation isn't enough to win though. I never really liked this argument because its so "so what?". There will be quite a few players who feel they have a lot to prove at that venue and will be equally or even more motivated to win (eg: Ferrero, Coria, etc.). Its not like theyre not going to be training for it just as hard as Roger. When you consider how relative it all is the "motivation argument" isn't a very good argument to make --especially if its the only argument you're using. Its good to use in combination with other factors, how well a player seems to be playing, etc. But its not good on its own.

We're just going to have to wait and see how the clay season pans out. Roger has the goods, but then so do a lot of other guys. Thats all.

TheMightyFed
01-31-2005, 04:48 PM
Despite his versatility, Fed is more committed to win many Wimbies, which is too bad in one sense, as it's so close to RG in the schedule. And Pete's done the 7 titles' record. I hope Fed's secret goal is to achieve the Borgian RG-Wimby once in his career, that would be fun...

Puschkin
01-31-2005, 04:53 PM
IOW:the "motivation argument" isn't a very good argument to make when its the only one you're using.


You are right, motivation alone is not good enough, but it's a start and without it nothing else is enough ;)

MissMoJo
01-31-2005, 04:57 PM
Having a lot of motivation isn't enough to win though. I never really liked this argument. Its such a "so what?" argument. There will be quite a few players who feel they have a lot to prove at that venue and will be equally or even more motivated to win (eg: Ferrero, Coria, etc.). Its not like theyre not going to be training for it just as hard as Roger. It really is very relative. The "motivation argument" isn't a very good argument to make when its the only one you're using.

We're just going to have to wait and see how the clay season pans out. Roger has the goods, but then so do a lot of other guys.

Read my earlier post, i said that it was unlikely that he would win RG because of Coria, Nadal etc in the draw. Another poster told me that him winning that tourney is not that farfetched, and is probably more likely after losing at this year's AO. The motivation argument was not used to say that he could win RG on that alone, but that the AO loss would be an extra incentive for him to do well there considering that he's said his main goals this year were to keep the #1 ranking and win Wimby.

undomiele
01-31-2005, 05:11 PM
Read my earlier post, i said that it was unlikely that he would win RG because of Coria, Nadal etc in the draw. Another poster told me that him winning that tourney is not that farfetched, and is probably more likely after losing at this year's AO. The motivation argument was not used to say that he could win RG on that alone, but that the AO loss would be an extra incentive for him to do well there considering that he's said his main goals this year were to keep the #1 ranking and win Wimby.


Cool beans. ;) I understand.

But Im sure he'll be able to keep the #1 if he wins the US Open and Wimby plus other tournaments. But I guess that will depend on where Marat's brain will be at this year. I could see him contesting Roger at the US Open, as he's won it before, but definitely not at wimbledon. All i can hope is that the new Marat stays.

renatoal
01-31-2005, 05:21 PM
This year he stoped for sure, but I think Federer will win the true Grand Slam ... maybe next year, who know ?

star
01-31-2005, 06:03 PM
I don't think Marat will be the only one to stop Roger's Grand Slam dreams :devil: ;)

He would have to improve his fitness for RG if he wants to go far there. I don't think you can realistically win that GS without having a good record for 5 setters. (Actually was there ever an RG champion who won without having to go through a 5 set match? Borg maybe? Kuerten? If anyone knows please let me know.)


Definitely not Kuerten. I think He's played five set matches every time he's won. He's a heart stopper. :)

Borg cruised to victory in 78 and 80 without losing a set. In 79 he played 3 four set matches. In 81 didn't drop a set until he played Lendl in the final and that was a 5 set battle. In 75 he played one four set match against Panatta who beat him the next year at RG. In 1974, he played a 3 five set matches including the final against the great Manuel Orantes where Borg lost the first two sets and then won the last three sets 0, 1 and 1.

jacobhiggins
01-31-2005, 07:33 PM
No one knows what will happend? I think a lot is resting on how Federer will respond to this lost. He was considered the favorite to win everything, when you have that much pressure it's tough. Marat certianly stopped it from happening this year. I've always thought however, The test of a true champion is not in how he handles victory, but in how he handles defeat. We clearly know what Marat is capable of, Who knows what Federer is capable of?

Skyward
01-31-2005, 08:01 PM
We clearly know what Marat is capable of, Who knows what Federer is capable of?

What do you mean?

little duck
01-31-2005, 09:02 PM
How comes that nobody thought of Marat Safin winning a GRAND SLAM this year??

Ha ha, now that would be cracking!!

He is capable of winning RG, he already won US Open, and about Wimbledon... will be difficult, but as John McEnroe had put it, Safin actually does have the game for the grass much more than he thinks, and Lundgren surely believes he does.

So ho knows? I think Roger would hang him self if that happens!

mitalidas
01-31-2005, 10:49 PM
I think my worst nightmare is if Roger does end up winning the next 3 slams,
and wonders about that matchpoint away from the AO final.... ugh

RogiFan88
02-01-2005, 01:55 AM
I don't know why Marat hates the grass so much... can someone tell me?? Maratski, help!

I doubt Rogi [or anyone] will win the next 3 slams... who is THAT good on ALL surfaces anyway???

BlackSilver
02-01-2005, 02:19 AM
I don't know if Federer really believed that he could win the Grand Slam, but for his interviews the idea that he passed is that it would be almost impossible.

wipeout
02-01-2005, 03:08 AM
I think Marat's comments about grass were just him being a bit over the top after some frustrations on the surface. ;)

His record at Wimbledon is actually very similar to Federer's record at Roland Garros, with both going out, on average, between the 2nd and 3rd rounds and a single 1/4 final as their best result.

jacobhiggins
02-01-2005, 03:44 AM
What I meant was Safin has the goods to win multiple slams, he is definatley one of the top players in the world and one of the most talented, but Federer has the potential to be something unbelievable. It's not a knock on Safin just a compliment to Federer.

maratski
02-01-2005, 08:40 AM
I don't know why Marat hates the grass so much... can someone tell me?? Maratski, help!

I doubt Rogi [or anyone] will win the next 3 slams... who is THAT good on ALL surfaces anyway???

Marat doesn't have the patience for the surface I think and therefore believes he can't play on it or win Wimbly. He was saying different things though in 2001. ;)

TheMightyFed
02-01-2005, 08:45 AM
Marat doesn't have the patience for the surface I think and therefore believes he can't play on it or win Wimbly. He was saying different things though in 2001. ;)

Maybe that now he starts to beat Fed he will want to get him in "his" garden, Wimbledon. That would be great but unlikely to happen.
Marat can do the Small Slam however with RG and USO. Fed would be stunned...

martinaHforever
02-01-2005, 09:01 AM
Federer will never win the French Open.

*karen*
02-01-2005, 09:07 AM
They've all raised their games. I still think Fed will win more slams though

TheMightyFed
02-01-2005, 09:23 AM
Federer will never win the French Open.
Why not ?
He cannot beat Coria, Gaudio on clay ? No
His game has been developped on other surfaces ? No
He hasn't won Masters Series on clay ? No

So why not ???

Art&Soul
02-01-2005, 10:40 AM
His loss at AO 05 could make him stronger and stay alert with every opponent and its no surprise to me if he would get 3 GS left. Well sometimes i believe i can fly, why him not? :D :wavey: :D

MissMoJo
02-01-2005, 11:33 AM
They've all raised their games.

You could probably say this about Marat, but there's no indication that his results concerning the rest of the top 10 would be any different than they were last year. It's too early in the season to make this conclusion

yanchr
02-01-2005, 02:50 PM
Federer will never win the French Open.
Actually with what has already happened in AO, I really think he will be more motivated to win FO THIS year, with no pressure (from the media and around) to win the real GS, and to finally win his only missed Grand Slam. If that should be at the cost of AO, then it all is worthy.

Fumus
02-01-2005, 03:02 PM
No because he wasn't going to win RG anyways. Safin can beat him on clay too because Safin has a better backhand and that is probably the single most important shot to be a succesful clay court player. Look at all the greats on clay, Agassi, Kafel, Muster, Keurten, and Coria now. The all have/had great backhands.

WyveN
02-01-2005, 03:14 PM
Safin can beat him on clay too


So far their meetings on clay havent quite worked out like that.


because Safin has a better backhand and that is probably the single most important shot to be a succesful clay court player.


That is one of the craziest theories I have read in a while.

1) Since when did Muster have a great backhand? Musters backhand was a weakness which was very well exploited by serve volleyers who just kept serving to that side and putting away the volleys.

2) What about Courier who had an average backhand at best?

3) Bruguera had a better forehand then backhand.

4) Edberg who had one of the best backhands of all time and he never was a great clay court player.

Puschkin
02-01-2005, 03:17 PM
Actually with what has already happened in AO, I really think he will be more motivated to win FO THIS year, with no pressure (from the media and around) to win the real GS, and to finally win his only missed Grand Slam. If that should be at the cost of AO, then it all is worthy.


Ahah, finally somebody is willing to support my theory. Welcome to the club ;)

TheMightyFed
02-01-2005, 03:17 PM
No because he wasn't going to win RG anyways. Safin can beat him on clay too because Safin has a better backhand and that is probably the single most important shot to be a succesful clay court player. Look at all the greats on clay, Agassi, Kafel, Muster, Keurten, and Coria now. The all have/had great backhands.
Fed has a bad BH ? Ask Roddick what a shity BH is, he'll tell you !!! :)
The real weakness of Fed is stamina on clay, but with a good draw he can do it for sure...

undomiele
02-01-2005, 03:28 PM
For Roger to win RG:


1)Roger has to improve his GS 5 set record -- no player has won RG without winning a tough, drawn out 5 set match in the last 6 years.
2) He has to improve his fitness. He's not used to long matches and it showed at the AO.
3) It would be in his best interest to learn how to drop shot and slide more effectively. The best dirtballers have that down to an artform, and the classic dirtballers are the guys who generally win the whole thing.
4) He has to be good enough to beat an in-form Ferrero ;), or Nadal, or Guga, etc. (I believe Ferrero will be in shape for RG this year --unless he catches SARS or something :rolleyes: )
5) He has to get over his hangups with Court Chartier.

Conclusion: he won't get it this year. In the future? Maybe. It all depends on who well he improves on these 5 points.

Jimena
02-01-2005, 03:32 PM
Fed has a bad BH ? Ask Roddick what a shity BH is, he'll tell you !!! :)
The real weakness of Fed is stamina on clay, but with a good draw he can do it for sure...

Just out of curiosity, has Roger had an easy draw (like Roddick at this Aus Open) since he became an elite player?

Fumus, with all due respect, your theory is oh so very bad. WyveN already answered you quite effectively, but I have to add one more: Moya's forehand is his strength, not his backhand. And I would never put Agassi in the group of the best clay courters.

Puschkin
02-01-2005, 03:32 PM
For Roger to win RG:


1)Roger has to improve his GS 5 set record -- no player has won RG without winning a tough, drawn out 5 set match in the last 6 years.
2) He has to improve his fitness.
3) It would be in his best interest to learn how to drop shot and slide more effectively. The best dirtballers have that down to an artform, and the classic dirtballers are the guys who generally win the whole thing.
4) He has to be good enough to beat an in-form Ferrero ;), or Coria, or Nadal, or Guga, etc. (I believe Ferrero will be in shape for RG this year --unless he catches SARS or something :rolleyes:)
5) He has to get over his hangups with Court Chartier.

Conclusion: he won't get it this year. In the future? Maybe. It all depends.

I can agree with all your points, but not with leading to your conclusion.
(And Ferrero' s problem is not only his shape, but his confidenc, which does not mean that I am happy about it).

TheMightyFed
02-01-2005, 03:40 PM
Safin has a better backhand and that is probably the single most important shot to be a succesful clay court player.
Fumus, now that we know the secret of clay champions, I think we should launch the Backhand Claycourt Academy... Bolletieri, you can prepare for a great competition ! ;)

undomiele
02-01-2005, 03:41 PM
I can agree with all your points, but not with leading to your conclusion.
(And Ferrero' s problem is not only his shape, but his confidenc, which does not mean that I am happy about it).

I don't think you can say Roger DOESN'T have a confidence problem at Chartier either though. At least Ferrero is still the King of Clay. ;) But realistically we'll have to wait to see how the clay season pans out. :)

Puschkin
02-01-2005, 03:47 PM
I At least Ferrero is still the King of Clay. ;)


He was the king of clay in 2003. I like JCF's tennis, his tenacity, his footwork, his will to work hard, but his career is at a crucial stage and the way back is long, ask Marat Safin about it ;)

As for Roger fearing the Chartrier court, this is a job for Tony Roche ;)

WyveN
02-01-2005, 03:54 PM
but I have to add one more: Moya's forehand is his strength, not his backhand.

Very true, knew I missed someone.

undomiele
02-01-2005, 04:04 PM
He was the king of clay in 2003. I like JCF's tennis, his tenacity, his footwork, his will to work hard, but his career is at a crucial stage and the way back is long, ask Marat Safin about it ;)

As for Roger fearing the Chartrier court, this is a job for Tony Roche ;)

I meant he's King of Clay in the sense that when JC is in form, he's the best on the stuff. Yes, much better than Roger!! :P And Id say even better than Coria (and I love Coria). But he's pretty much recovered from his injuries now, he only needs matchtime to get back in form. The clay season is up ahead!!! :yeah:

RogiFan88
02-01-2005, 08:20 PM
Fumus forgot Gaudio's BH...

Action Jackson
02-02-2005, 02:27 AM
Fumus forgot Gaudio's BH...

He forgets a lot of things.

RogiFan88
02-02-2005, 02:30 AM
hee hee, George!