Fernando Gonzalez - why can't he beat Federer? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Fernando Gonzalez - why can't he beat Federer?

manec
10-30-2006, 10:35 PM
With all the fantastic shots, why Gonzalez isn't able to beat federer ?

scoobs
10-30-2006, 10:38 PM
Lacks consistency and tends to lose the pressure points.

It's really that simple.

Ernham
10-30-2006, 10:38 PM
With all the fantastic shots, why Gonzalez isn't able to beat federer ?

Gonzo = leper ; Fed = Jesus.(Nadal = Judas)

manec
10-30-2006, 10:39 PM
It's a petty. He has, by far, the best righand of the circuit.

alelysafina
10-30-2006, 10:40 PM
For some reason I though the post was going to say " Is a Sexy Beast!" :lol:

Clara Bow
10-30-2006, 10:41 PM
For some reason I though the post was going to say " Is a Sexy Beast!" :lol:

It would have been true. :drool:

scoobs
10-30-2006, 10:42 PM
He is a sexy beast.

I love the guy - I love how hard he's fought to qualify for the TMC when others like Baghdatis are all "oh I'm sick of it".

We need a couple more like Fernando.

Katastrophe
10-30-2006, 10:43 PM
It's a shame he has such a terrible record against Fed- I'd really love to see Gonzo win one. After watching him play a bunch of times, it seems like he could stand to construct points a little better than he does. He's a great player and it's nearly impossible not to root for him, but his hyper-blast mode is clearly not always the answer.

manec
10-30-2006, 10:44 PM
He is going to play well also in Paris.

He will be at TMC in Shangai !!!!!!!

A_Rod
10-30-2006, 10:45 PM
Fed it's two, three steps above the other players, maybe Gonzalez play good, but Federer is like a machine, he plays with an amazing facility, he doesn't fail, and if he does, it's in a while that it doesn't influence.

Gonzo can put in troubles to many players, Nalbi, Roddick, Ljubo and others... but Federer, it's Federer.

marcelwks
10-30-2006, 10:48 PM
And why Srichaphan doesn't beat Federer with ale this great shots ;)

alelysafina
10-30-2006, 10:48 PM
Fed it's two, three steps above the other players, maybe Gonzalez play good, but Federer is like a machine, he plays with an amazing facility, he doesn't fail, and if he does, it's in a while that it doesn't influence.

Gonzo can put in troubles to many players, Nalbi, Roddick, Ljubo and others... but Federer, it's Federer.

Safin :(

enqvistfan
10-30-2006, 10:49 PM
He is a sexy beast.

I love the guy - I love how hard he's fought to qualify for the TMC when others like Baghdatis are all "oh I'm sick of it".

We need a couple more like Fernando.

:yeah:

Yes, he's playing with his heart !! He's also very tired (not only Roger) at the moment, but he's still fighting and want to go to Shanghai and I really hope that he'll be rewarded because he deserves it !! Big heart and big generosity on the court !!!

Bremen
10-30-2006, 10:56 PM
Yeah I'm cheering for him...losing three finals in a row is tough but getting to the master's cup wil help erase those disapointments. Good luck!:)

chunchojuan
10-30-2006, 10:56 PM
The Gonzo's play style is very comfortable to Federer. The Swiss has some problems with players who take less risk than Gonzalez, since Roger has a great defense that allows him to resist all missiles, and quickly revert the attack in lethal form.

:shrug:
:shrug:
:shrug:

manec
10-30-2006, 11:04 PM
Without Federer in Paris, can Gonzalez win ??

scoobs
10-30-2006, 11:05 PM
I think he has a good a chance as any - tiredness may be the key factor here though.

Peoples
10-30-2006, 11:08 PM
Is an amazing player.

But his return of serve is not the best. It can be spectacular sometimes but this needs consistency against good servers. Lots of much worse players break Federer's serve and fail in other aspects but Fernando always struggles.

shotgun
10-30-2006, 11:12 PM
Another reason is that Federer knows how to explore his backhand - which has definitely improved with the use of slice, and bothers players who love pace such as Safin and Berdych, but consists in a weak spot when facing players like Federer who don't mind changing the rythm of play during a point.

Sunset of Age
10-30-2006, 11:14 PM
I really hope he'll win Paris now that JesusFed won't be there.
Seems like a really lovely guy.
Pretty, too. I don't mind that, as you might have understood by now.

A_Rod
10-30-2006, 11:20 PM
I think that not only Gonzo can't beat Federer... Roddick, Hewitt, Davydenko, Ljubicic, Blake and others... they have not been able to beat Federer, he's accustom to their playstyle.

+alonso
10-30-2006, 11:20 PM
Well apart from that! Feña needs to work out in his mental game against Fed! He needs to believe He can do it!

manec
10-30-2006, 11:32 PM
I agree

zicofirol
10-30-2006, 11:38 PM
It's a shame he has such a terrible record against Fed- I'd really love to see Gonzo win one. After watching him play a bunch of times, it seems like he could stand to construct points a little better than he does. He's a great player and it's nearly impossible not to root for him, but his hyper-blast mode is clearly not always the answer.

Actually Gonzalez has changed his strategy his is playing better percentage tennis and using more variety, this is good against everyone else btu against federer he will pick apart Gonzelz backhand and that slice, I think Gonzalez against Federer should just go for broke, more like he used to play, there is no way he is going to beat federer with consistency so he should just try outwinner him,lol, which is hard enought but I really see it as his only chance.

Yappa
10-30-2006, 11:51 PM
It's a petty. He has, by far, the best righand of the circuit.

I dont know. If it comes to power alone with the forehand, I think Blake is ahead of him.

Fergie
10-30-2006, 11:53 PM
Well apart from that! Feña needs to work out in his mental game against Fed! He needs to believe He can do it!

This could be the key for the next meetings ;)

lordmanji
10-31-2006, 12:00 AM
from a technical standpoint, fernie is basically a claycourter - western forehand and loopy strokes which equals death on a fast indoor like basel. watch the match and you'll see fernie stand quite a ways from the baseline on the defensive while federer can dictate play and go for the outright winner. fernie stands back to retrieve more shots but it's not clay - it goes right past him on indoor.

cobalt60
10-31-2006, 12:22 AM
Actually Gonzalez has changed his strategy his is playing better percentage tennis and using more variety, this is good against everyone else btu against federer he will pick apart Gonzelz backhand and that slice, I think Gonzalez against Federer should just go for broke, more like he used to play, there is no way he is going to beat federer with consistency so he should just try outwinner him,lol, which is hard enought but I really see it as his only chance.

Gonzalez is a changed player since Stefanki took over. He is getting better at constructing the points and being consistent. Can't wait to see where he will be in 6 months as Stefanki works more with him. Who else thinks the coaching change was a great idea!!! :yeah:

ChinoRios4Ever
10-31-2006, 12:38 AM
The Gonzo's play style is very comfortable to Federer. The Swiss has some problems with players who take less risk than Gonzalez, since Roger has a great defense that allows him to resist all missiles, and quickly revert the attack in lethal form.

:shrug:
:shrug:
:shrug:

tenis toda la razon :yeah:

ChinoRios4Ever
10-31-2006, 12:40 AM
Without Federer in Paris, can Gonzalez win ??

great chances this week
but gonzo is tired as hell after 3 consecutives indoor finals

Voo de Mar
10-31-2006, 12:43 AM
With all the fantastic shots, why Gonzalez isn't able to beat federer ?

Inferiority complex

amierin
10-31-2006, 12:43 AM
Oh he is a sexy beast. I think Gonzo is still getting used to the idea that he really is one of the best players out there. He is definitely top five material. He just has to get it out of his head that his chances of beating Fed are slim to none. I think this time next year, if he stays healthy and focused, he may win a few sets off of Fed. I'm not predicting a match yet, but he could make Fed sweat the way Paradorn did.

ReturnWinner
10-31-2006, 12:49 AM
its pretty simple : his game does not match up federer game very much

TennisGrandSlam
10-31-2006, 12:51 AM
I think that not only Gonzo can't beat Federer... Roddick, Hewitt, Davydenko, Ljubicic, Blake and others... they have not been able to beat Federer, he's accustom to their playstyle.

Big server / forehand players cannot beat Rogi, Rogi is a good returner.


3 kinds of players can beat Rogi (Rogi fear these 3 types of players) :

Classic Serve-and-volleyers ~ like Rafter and Young Henman. (Edberg-type)

Top-spinners ~ like Nadal

Double-handed Backhand genius ~ Kafelnikov, fit Safin and Nalby

NYCtennisfan
10-31-2006, 01:53 AM
1. Gonzo's BH, though improved, is not good enough to move Federer around. You need to be able to move him around from both sides and hit back into at least neutral positions onto the other side of he court from both sides, and especially helpful is a CC bh that can attack the Fed BH and Gonzo doesn't have that shot. Safin, Gasquet, Nadal (with the FH), Nalbandian, an Murray all have that good BH CC. When Federer attacks that BH, he gets a lot of shortish replies which he then puts away with his FH.

2. Gonzo isn't a great returner, but seems especially hopeless against Federer's serve. He can't read it at all, doesn't know where it's going, gives Fed too many short replies, etc. It seems that Fed is almost always up 30-0 against Gonzo on Fed's serve games and Gonzo hardly gets a chance to apply pressure on the return game.

3. Gonzo doesn't play good enough defense to force Federer into hitting that extra shot or going for more thereby creating errors. Federer feels comfortable in the rallies and if Federer feels comfortable in the rallies, the opponent has ZERO possibility of winning. Gonzo will get a FH to smack every once in a while, but Fed doesn't give out too many of those opportunities.

zine56
10-31-2006, 02:13 AM
3 pages so far, good opinions and no gonzo bashing! i luv this thread! :bowdown:

cobalt60
10-31-2006, 02:17 AM
3 pages so far, good opinions and no gonzo bashing! i luv this thread! :bowdown:

Everybody loves a winner;) :p

lordmanji
10-31-2006, 02:18 AM
Big server / forehand players cannot beat Rogi, Rogi is a good returner.


3 kinds of players can beat Rogi (Rogi fear these 3 types of players) :

Classic Serve-and-volleyers ~ like Rafter and Young Henman. (Edberg-type)

Top-spinners ~ like Nadal

Double-handed Backhand genius ~ Kafelnikov, fit Safin and Nalby

since when has a classic serve and volleyer last beat roger? im thinking henman back in 02. this isn't aimed at you but im tired of everyone when speaking of ways to beat roger think that serve and volley is the answer. roddick can't beat roger? "he needs to come to the net more." heck, even when roger was playing nadal and losing during the claycourt season, the announcers were saying roger should move in to the net more. serve and volley and coming to the net is not the panacea for losing to an opponent. sometimes it takes playing your own game to beat him like safin, nadal and even roddick did (back in 03). theres a reason why serve and volley is dead!

General Suburbia
10-31-2006, 02:18 AM
3 pages so far, good opinions and no gonzo bashing! i luv this thread! :bowdown:
Gonzo sucks. We can stop worrying now.

tangerine_dream
10-31-2006, 02:20 AM
With all the fantastic shots, why Gonzalez isn't able to beat federer ?
Same reason why nobody else can: Roger's in everybody's head. Except for Nadal's.

KaxMisha
10-31-2006, 02:21 AM
Same reason why nobody else can: Roger's in everybody's head. Except for Nadal's.

Oh, PLEASE. Bullshit alert! :wavey:

tangerine_dream
10-31-2006, 02:25 AM
Oh, PLEASE. Bullshit alert! :wavey:
Having the mental edge over opponents is bullshit in your world?

TennisGrandSlam
10-31-2006, 02:26 AM
since when has a classic serve and volleyer last beat roger? im thinking henman back in 02. this isn't aimed at you but im tired of everyone when speaking of ways to beat roger think that serve and volley is the answer. roddick can't beat roger? "he needs to come to the net more." heck, even when roger was playing nadal and losing during the claycourt season, the announcers were saying roger should move in to the net more. serve and volley and coming to the net is not the panacea for losing to an opponent. sometimes it takes playing your own game to beat him like safin, nadal and even roddick did (back in 03). theres a reason why serve and volley is dead!

Players "come to net" doesn't means that they are good serve-and-volleyers. :devil:

KaxMisha
10-31-2006, 02:49 AM
Having the mental edge over opponents is bullshit in your world?

No. Saying the opponents have given up beforehand is. Look at Federer's latest match against Paradorn in Basel. Paradorn has never come close to beating Federer before, yet played a fantastic match and was a mini-break up twice in the tie break (very close to winning it). Now, if he had already given up beforehand, how come he wasn't steamrolled? And how come Federer had to hit winners to take the mini-breaks back? If Paradorn had given up beforehand, wouldn't he simply choke his lead away?

Federer is way ahead of the rest of the field, TENNIS-WISE. I can't stress that enough. You don't need, arbitrary, intangible, unclear, bullshit reasons to explain his dominance. His tennis is enough to do so. There are only two reasons why anyone would think otherwise. The first one is that the person deep down knows he is wrong, but is comitted by fanboyism to wanting to think otherwise and hence, convinces himself to do so. The second one is that the person doesn't understand tennis at all. A combination of the two is also possible. Now please, do get a grip on reality.

lordmanji
10-31-2006, 02:55 AM
Players "come to net" doesn't means that they are good serve-and-volleyers. :devil:

yes, but watch the matches and you'll hear them say the server should "come to net."

Sparko1030
10-31-2006, 03:00 AM
Well apart from that! Feña needs to work out in his mental game against Fed! He needs to believe He can do it!


I think that is definatly part of the reason. Of course he was also tired and that certainly played into the losses too . Fernando has threatened Roger-at Toronto this year-so I think he is capable of beating him but like you said Alonso, HE has to believe it. Fernando has been so committed to making the changes he's needed to be be the best he can be that I have faith that this mental toughness against Roger will come too.

Regardless, Fernando rocks!!! :rocker2:

Ernham
10-31-2006, 03:01 AM
Really think the only key to beating Roger is "getting into his head" and being extremely quick on your feet. It seems Roger seems to know when he has made a shot that should be impossible for someone to get back across the net. After firing one of these shots, it's like he puts on a mental pause button. He usually doesn't move after firing one of these shots, and drifts off into a sort of lala land for a few brief moments. He can do this to 95% of the players becuase the vast majority of the time they cannot get to that ball. Nadal, however, is one of those players where Roger basically has to make two of those near unreturnable shots to get the point. Roger has begun to realize this and slowly gets better. However, since Nadal is the only guy that has a good record versus him, Nadal can always "get into Roger's head". It's all a head game, and it's the main reason Nadal likes to pull this "talking up" of roger head game he does.

Gonzo has no head game and doesn't quite have the speed. He will never beat Federer in the vast majority of circumstances.

tangerine_dream
10-31-2006, 03:09 AM
No. Saying the opponents have given up beforehand is.
Facts are not bullshit. Many of Federer's opponents *are* beaten before the first ball is struck, and many of them fade away after losing the first set to him. It's not just a Roger thing, it's a dominant player thing. Sampras had the same aura. Rafa has this aura on clay. If you don't think there's no mental warefare going on in sports, and that mentally beating your opponent before they pick up a racket doesn't apply, then you're beyond clueless. The intimidation factor is always part of the equation.

The first one is that the person deep down knows he is wrong, but is comitted by fanboyism to wanting to think otherwise and hence, convinces himself to do so.
You just described yourself to a "T". Thanks for saving me the effort.

KaxMisha
10-31-2006, 03:29 AM
Facts are not bullshit. Many of Federer's opponents *are* beaten before the first ball is struck, and many of them fade away after losing the first set to him. It's not just a Roger thing, it's a dominant player thing. Sampras had the same aura. Rafa has this aura on clay. If you don't think there's no mental warefare going on in sports, and that mentally beating your opponent before they pick up a racket doesn't apply, then you're beyond clueless. The intimidation factor is always part of the equation.


You just described yourself to a "T". Thanks for saving me the effort.

Saying I'm a fanboy isn't just moronic - it's also a blatant lie. I don't give a shit about Federer, nor do I give a shit about Nadal. I'm a fan of tennis. I love Federer's game. I hate Nadal's game. Hence, I want Federer to win. If tomorrow, Federer started playing like Nadal and Nadal started playing like Federer, I would want Nadal to win. That is the essence of anti-fanboyism (I like a certain type of tennis and couldn't care less about who produces it), so tell me, why are you lying?

As for the other part - I didn't say he doesn't have a mental age. I said his dominance isn't a result of it. If we would have player robots, playing exactly like the players, but with no psychological factors in play, the Federer robot would be just as dominant as the Federer human. Do you disagree with this? If you do, you're delusional.

Now as for your post in general - you don't adress any of the arguments I brought up, come up with more bullshit and round it off by lying. Wow! I gotta give it to you - your credibility is shooting through the roof!

P.S. Sampras was never truly dominant. He was the best among equals. Just a small point - not really relevant to the rest of the discussion.

Asmus
10-31-2006, 03:46 AM
I don't think Gonzalez will ever move well enough to beat Federer, nor does he have the consistency.

tangerine_dream
10-31-2006, 03:53 AM
Now as for your post in general - you don't adress any of the arguments I brought up, come up with more bullshit and round it off by lying. Wow! I gotta give it to you - your credibility is shooting through the roof!
The only "argument" you brought up was the "Saying the opponents have given up beforehand is bullshit" which is easily refutable. Plenty of guys lose because they've already convinced themselves that Roger is not beatable.

And I don't know what it is that you're accusing me of "lying" about but your mouth-breathing diatribe definitely betrays your fanboydom.

kronus12
10-31-2006, 04:04 AM
tangerine_dream why do you always come up with these stories about players already losing before the first ball is hit. Alot of the interviews of players playing fed is that it is their dream to play him and also beat them.
I've never heard it or seen it said when a player says that im wasting my time to fed and i just go through the motion and let you dictate play.
You say its fact then please provide us with some links of players actually tanking and admiting it in a interview.
That would put this nonsense to rest. If you have clear evidence then we will believe you or are you just going by how players play and you in your wisdom are guessing thats how they feel, that is not evidence thats more fanboy wishing he's right against a player he dislike.
Waiting for those links to prove you're right when you're ready....

NYCtennisfan
10-31-2006, 04:04 AM
Facts are not bullshit. Many of Federer's opponents *are* beaten before the first ball is struck, and many of them fade away after losing the first set to him. It's not just a Roger thing, it's a dominant player thing. Sampras had the same aura. Rafa has this aura on clay. If you don't think there's no mental warefare going on in sports, and that mentally beating your opponent before they pick up a racket doesn't apply, then you're beyond clueless. The intimidation factor is always part of the equation.



It's obvious that Federer is in his head and it's doubtful whether Gonzo really believes he can beat Federer, but there are a lot of technical reasons why he can't beat Federer that I mentioned earlier. I'm sure Gonzo thought he had a chance early on in their matchups, but the technical reasons why Fed always beat Gonzo rose to the forefront and are there now.

KaxMisha
10-31-2006, 04:06 AM
The only "argument" you brought up was the "Saying the opponents have given up beforehand is bullshit" which is easily refutable. Plenty of guys lose because they've already convinced themselves that Roger is not beatable.

And I don't know what it is that you're accusing me of "lying" about but your mouth-breathing diatribe betrays your fanboydom.

Bullshit. I gave the example of his latest match with Srichaphan - a player he has owned up to that match, but who almost beat him this time around. You didn't answer how this came about. You also didn't answer whether you believe that a Federer robot would be as dominant on a robot tour as Federer is on the ATP tour. As I said - if you don't, you're delusional (as I said). His tennis is enough to dominate the tour in its present state. You don't need to go look for other reasons. Does the concept of lex parsimoniae mean anything to you? Probably not, so go look it up.

As for the fanboyism - I know that people of lesser intelligence cannot appreciate a sport on its own merit and have to cheer for someone for emotional reasons (which is possibly why you cannot grasp the idea of someone not being a fanboy), but I'm not your average beer-drinking fan. To me, the tour could consist of identical-looking, faceless stickmen who never spoke. It wouldn't make it one bit less interesting if the tennis were the same. I don't care about charisma or personality in the context of tennis. I care about tennis. I like or dislike players' games - not players themselves. If you don't understand why this is the exact opposite of fanboyism, I'm afraid there's not much I can do to help you. Now please, answer the questions I've posed and address my arguments or don't bother replying.

KaxMisha
10-31-2006, 04:07 AM
It's obvious that Federer is in his head and it's doubtful whether Gonzo really believes he can beat Federer, but there are a lot of technical reasons why he can't beat Federer that I mentioned earlier. I'm sure Gonzo thought he had a chance early on in their matchups, but the technical reasons why Fed always beat Gonzo rose to the forefront and are there now.

THANK YOU! :worship:

KaxMisha
10-31-2006, 04:08 AM
tangerine_dream why do you always come up with these stories about players already losing before the first ball is hit. Alot of the interviews of players playing fed is that it is their dream to play him and also beat them.
I've never heard it or seen it said when a player says that im wasting my time to fed and i just go through the motion and let you dictate play.
You say its fact then please provide us with some links of players actually tanking and admiting it in a interview.
That would put this nonsense to rest. If you have clear evidence then we will believe you or are you just going by how players play and you in your wisdom are guessing thats how they feel, that is not evidence thats more fanboy wishing he's right against a player he dislike.
Waiting for those links to prove you're right when you're ready....

See Tangerine_Dream, I'm not alone in seeing this, now am I? :wavey:

Action Jackson
10-31-2006, 04:11 AM
There is a psychological aspect for sure, then again there would be if you have lost to the same guy 8+ times in a row.

Gonzalez doesn't have the tactical variation and as Ernham said he doesn't have the quickest of feet or quickest of minds on court, and raw power is something Federer handles quite well. It's a match up issue and Federer can handle what Gonzalez can throw at him.

An example was their RG match where he had set point on Federer's 2nd serve and it wasn't anything special and normally he attack the 2nd serve, but he just a hit tame backhand long. To really know for sure whether he'd shit himself against Federer, he would need to be in a winning position and see how handles it.

KaxMisha
10-31-2006, 04:12 AM
There is a psychological aspect for sure, then again there would be if you have lost to the same guy 8+ times in a row.

Gonzalez doesn't have the tactical variation and as Ernham said he doesn't have the quickest of feet or quickest of minds on court, and raw power is something Federer handles quite well. It's a match up issue and Federer can handle what Gonzalez can throw at him.

An example was their RG match where he had set point on Federer's 2nd serve and it wasn't anything special and normally he attack the 2nd serve, but he just a hit tame backhand long. To really know for sure whether he'd shit himself against Federer, he would need to be in a winning position and see how handles it.

Word. Tangerine_Dream, you're not getting much support, are you? :wavey:

I♥PsY@Mus!c
10-31-2006, 06:01 AM
Not only for him,but also for most of players:
The more they face Federer,the easier Federer beats them! :sad::mad:

General Suburbia
10-31-2006, 07:38 AM
Word. Tangerine_Dream, you're not getting much support, are you? :wavey:
Nah, I'd say his argument is valid enough. Maybe not in the top 5 or 10, but most players go into a match with Fed thinking they'd lose, but that doesn't mean they won't try to play their best. Paradorn wasn't an exception to this rule. He played his best and once he found himself neck in neck with Fed, then his belief came. And Sampras did have that aura of dominance; I remember reading in an interview that most players outside the top 20 would pack their bags before playing the guy, thinking it was hopeless.

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-31-2006, 11:54 AM
Like the rest of the tour Gonzalez is too afraid of Federer to beat him.

KaxMisha
10-31-2006, 11:59 AM
Nah, I'd say his argument is valid enough. Maybe not in the top 5 or 10, but most players go into a match with Fed thinking they'd lose, but that doesn't mean they won't try to play their best. Paradorn wasn't an exception to this rule. He played his best and once he found himself neck in neck with Fed, then his belief came. And Sampras did have that aura of dominance; I remember reading in an interview that most players outside the top 20 would pack their bags before playing the guy, thinking it was hopeless.

I didn't say they don't think they will lose. They do, because they probably will. What I said is that he would win anyway, regardless of what they think. Put it in another way - what I said was that his dominance is a result of his tennis, not of the other players thinking they will lose. THAT'S the invalid part of the argument. I did acknowledge that Federer had a mental age over most, so I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying now. As for Sampras being dominant - I don't know what the other players thought, but looking at his record, you don't see anything close to dominance. He was consistently the best for quite some time, but he never completely dominated the tour like Federer does now.

KaxMisha
10-31-2006, 12:00 PM
Like the rest of the tour Gonzalez is too afraid of Federer to beat him.

This retarded argument has already been adressed. Don't you have anything new to add to the discussion?

alfonsojose
10-31-2006, 12:09 PM
Feña's backhand and returns aren't that good. The forehand is still all or nothing

KaxMisha
10-31-2006, 12:23 PM
Feña's backhand and returns aren't that good. The forehand is still all or nothing

No, you're wrong. Haven't you heard? It's all psychological. Gonzalez is actually a better player than Federer, but he loses because he believes he cannot win. ;)

cmurray
10-31-2006, 12:43 PM
well, there's the fact that Federer is just a better player than Gonzo.

Also, he doesn't play smart tennis. He just feeds Roger tons of pace which Roger eats up like his daily bowl of cornflakes.

And RFK DOES have a point. Gonzalez doesn't believe he has a shot against Roger. THe problem is that he's right, so I'd be hardpressed to blame all of his losses on his lack of belief alone

manec
11-01-2006, 12:12 PM
He will win in Paris

stebs
11-01-2006, 12:22 PM
To beat Federer the key is a strong mind and a strong left hand side. Gonzo is a great player when he's playing well but he doesn't have either of these.

shotgun
01-26-2007, 01:35 PM
Thought it might be a good timing to bump this. :p

KaxMisha
01-26-2007, 01:47 PM
i hope this was joke . gonzo is no way better than fed . he has the most powerful forehand agreed . but as an overall game fed is much better in almost every department . i doubt a player could lose 9 straight matches and win only a couple of sets in them if he was better than his opponent ;)

I hoped the wink (;)) and the "Haven't you heard?" part would make it obvious I was joking, but apparently, I was wrong. Next time, I'll write JOKE in capitals at the beginning of the post so that no one gets confused.

KaxMisha
01-26-2007, 01:49 PM
I didn't say they don't think they will lose. They do, because they probably will. What I said is that he would win anyway, regardless of what they think. Put it in another way - what I said was that his dominance is a result of his tennis, not of the other players thinking they will lose. THAT'S the invalid part of the argument. I did acknowledge that Federer had a mental age over most, so I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying now. As for Sampras being dominant - I don't know what the other players thought, but looking at his record, you don't see anything close to dominance. He was consistently the best for quite some time, but he never completely dominated the tour like Federer does now.

i hope this was joke . gonzo is no way better than fed . he has the most powerful forehand agreed . but as an overall game fed is much better in almost every department . i doubt a player could lose 9 straight matches and win only a couple of sets in them if he was better than his opponent ;)

Watch my quoted post above to learn what I think about the "too afraid to beat him" bullshit.

ChinoRios4Ever
01-26-2007, 02:40 PM
simply
gonzo is just human

fed is out of this world :angel:

my0118
01-26-2007, 02:54 PM
Federer loves to make head-to-head 10:0

NYCtennisfan
01-26-2007, 02:57 PM
To beat Federer the key is a strong mind and a strong left hand side. Gonzo is a great player when he's playing well but he doesn't have either of these.

Yes. Fed always controls the point on his own serve by pounding the Fena BH side. On Fena's serve, Federer plays good defense with the slice until he draws enough errors to get to pressure points like 30-all or 15-30. It's a LOT harder to hit huge on these points. Fena came up with some clutch shots against Nadal at big moments, but for the most part, he has been leading in almost all of his serve games from the beginning of matches. It's been easy for him to hit big without pressure.

Federer will not allow this. He will wrest control of a lot of rallies if Fena offerers up a sitter slice which he has been doing but nobody has been taking advantage of. Fena's improved hitting through of the BH will probably surprise Federer in the first set if Gozo is hitting it.

I think Gonzo comes out hot, surprises Fed a bit with his new game and so he has a chance in the 1st set. If he doesn't win that first set, then it will be business as usual for Federer.

R.Federer
01-26-2007, 02:58 PM
Gonzo has a real chance.

Fed hasn't really played this guy before. He's going to need to figure him out in the first set and a half. But gonz now has power and precision, I just don't see why this can't go the distance EXCEPT for the mental pressure of winning your first slam.

GlennMirnyi
01-26-2007, 02:59 PM
Gonzo has a real chance.

Fed hasn't really played this guy before. He's going to need to figure him out in the first set and a half. But gonz now has power and precision, I just don't see why this can't go the distance EXCEPT for the mental pressure of winning your first slam.

Cincinatti SF, Madrid final, Basel final. Yes, he has played him several times. Yes, the "new" Gonzalez.

jazar
01-26-2007, 03:04 PM
gonzo is trying to overturn a 9-0 H2H record, and not only that, but in his first grand slam final. he must be feeling the heat, and due to this and the sheer brilliance of federer, especially in the latter stages of big tournaments will prevail. at best i see a similar final to last year and similar to those in madrid and basel. gonzo will make a fast start, but the effort of doing that for best of 5 against federer will just be too much

Neely
01-26-2007, 03:11 PM
one of the better bumps for sure :yeah:

After watching his run the last two weeks, I still agree with some things said here, but would also see some aspects differently now :)

R.Federer
01-26-2007, 03:34 PM
Cincinatti SF, Madrid final, Basel final. Yes, he has played him several times. Yes, the "new" Gonzalez.

But you think this will be a shoot out, like with roddick in the semis? I feel that, even if it's straight sets, it will be tight. I do think Federer will "figure him out", whether it's "New Gonzo" or not, but it might take a set and a bit to do it.

I don't know if Gonzo will let the pressure of playing in his first slam finals prevent him from playing his best, that will play a role.

rofe
01-26-2007, 03:43 PM
Gonzo has been playing lights out tennis but there are a few problems for him going into the final:

1) It is a GS final
2) He has a 0-9 h2h
3) His game is a good matchup for Fed

As others have pointed out, he will come out with guns blazing in the 1st set and if Fed is not careful win it too but Fed will adjust and Gonzo's level will drop and Fed will win his 10th slam in 4 sets. If Fed wins the 1st, then it will be three sets.

I do feel that unlike Madrid, it will be closer.

Oh, and the 10th slam will coincide with a 10-0 h2h. ;)

GlennMirnyi
01-26-2007, 03:47 PM
But you think this will be a shoot out, like with roddick in the semis? I feel that, even if it's straight sets, it will be tight. I do think Federer will "figure him out", whether it's "New Gonzo" or not, but it might take a set and a bit to do it.

I don't know if Gonzo will let the pressure of playing in his first slam finals prevent him from playing his best, that will play a role.

Not a shoot out, especially because Gonzalez isn't plain dumb like Roddick to desperate and rush the net behind any shot. I think it will be close, but it will be in straights.

Magus13
01-26-2007, 03:49 PM
Fed does soo many great things on the court that help him dominate other players. His return of serve puts tremendous pressure on the server. The adjustments he makes during a match also get lost sometimes. He can come to net , change pace, work backhand, draw a player to net, pin them at the baseline etc. When you watch what Gonzo did to Blake, Hewitt, Nadal they made no adjustments and got blown of the court. Haas tried to adjust but doesn't have the game. As I said previuosly Gonzo should be the #2 player in the world by years end. Beating Fed in a Grand Slam Final is a whole different ball game.

Gonzo Hates Me!
01-26-2007, 03:49 PM
I think Federer will win... although i think they are similar in some shots they make, and fena is playing superbly, like mary carillo said, unfortunately for myself, "federer has every shot in the alphabet" and right now I think Gonzo is working at just half the alphabet. hehe... i hate you roger federer!

RonE
01-26-2007, 04:16 PM
Ultimately as many have pointed out I think it ill be very tight and close in the beginning of the match but once Roger settles down into his rythm I expect he will do well against Gonzalez:

1. Gonzalez's new style of waiting patiently to set the point up with his BH slice and then rip a big forehand won't be as effective against Federer. Neither Hewitt, Blake, Nadal or Haas could cope with Fena's neutral shots. Especially Blake and Haas being single handers on the BH side showed how limited that stroke is due to the fact that they do not posses an effective enough BH slice or do not use it as frequently. Roger will be able to return those sliced BH's with more slice of his own to draw Gonzlez in and put him out of position for the next shot. One shot to look to in this match would be Roger hitting the low BH DTL slice to Fena's FH forcing Fena to hit over hit FH cross court allowing Roger to take control of the point with his FH. Haas tried to do this a couple of times today but failed to hit the FH with any conviction once he got the reply he was looking for.

2. None of Gonzo's opponents up until this point have come out with a plan B game when things weren't workng. As a result Gonzo kept doing his thing and rightfully won. We know Roger will have a plan B in place and will implement it and it will be interesting to see if that happens will Fena stick to his new style or revert to his old ball bashing ways.

3. None of the players Gonzo beat have the combination of court coverage and the ability to turn defence into attack as well as Roger. Granted Nadal covers a lot of ground but he hit neutral shots for the most part when on the defensive. Roger even when out of position can hit deep agressive shots which force the oppnent to hit a shorter shot allowing Roger back into position and take control of the point.

4. I actually think Fena's old style of bashball tennis was more troubling for Roger because Roger is a player that does extremely well when he gets into rythm and that style of play never really allowed Roger to get into a rythm during their early encounters. Fena's new style of keeping the ball in for several shots may play into Roger's hands, allow him to build up a good rythm early on and if he does that Fena's in trouble.

5. Except for the Del Potro match Fena was never really faced wth a position in which he was with his back to the wall late in a fourth or fifth set. He was always in control against all his other opponents but I doubt he will be able to keep sustained control over Roger so it will be interesting to see how he reacts to these clutch situations.

That is my two cents on the matchup. Of course anything can happen on any given day but assuming both players play true to their styles, strengths and characteristics I would expect Roger to come out on top in three sets, tops four.

FSRteam
01-26-2007, 04:37 PM
Gonzo has been playing lights out tennis but there are a few problems for him going into the final:

1) It is a GS final
2) He has a 0-9 h2h
3) His game is a good matchup for Fed

As others have pointed out, he will come out with guns blazing in the 1st set and if Fed is not careful win it too but Fed will adjust and Gonzo's level will drop and Fed will win his 10th slam in 4 sets. If Fed wins the 1st, then it will be three sets.

I do feel that unlike Madrid, it will be closer.

Oh, and the 10th slam will coincide with a 10-0 h2h. ;)

I thought his level of play would drop against rafa and haas and it did not!!!

I think it will be much closer than madrid and I expect fed to face a tough task...

rofe
01-26-2007, 05:07 PM
I thought his level of play would drop against rafa and haas and it did not!!!

I think it will be much closer than madrid and I expect fed to face a tough task...

You forgot to highlight the previous phrase, "Fed will adjust" and then Gonzo's level will drop.

FSRteam
01-26-2007, 05:26 PM
You forgot to highlight the previous phrase, "Fed will adjust" and then Gonzo's level will drop.

haas also adjusted, ok tried to adjuyt but still what made gonzo an easy prey was that he couldn't keep his level up for an entire match, now it seems he can!

Come on, 3 UEs, that is just :eek: !!!

calvinhobbes
01-26-2007, 05:44 PM
Some of my favorite platitudes:
No match is won before being played.
If I have a 1% chance of winning I must play to win.
If my rival has lost at least once, he´s not invincible.
The more you have to lose the more you´re afraid of losing.
Circumspection is not a winner quality, although it's a defensive one.
If you imitate the playing style of your rival, you have more chances of surprising him.
All of these platitudes (plus some other few ones) led Alekhine to defeat Capablanca in Buenos Aires 1927. All chess fans were giving 90-10 chances in favor of Capa.
Another platitude: It´s dangerous to be completely sure.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

DrJules
01-26-2007, 06:04 PM
Ultimately as many have pointed out I think it ill be very tight and close in the beginning of the match but once Roger settles down into his rythm I expect he will do well against Gonzalez:

1. Gonzalez's new style of waiting patiently to set the point up with his BH slice and then rip a big forehand won't be as effective against Federer. Neither Hewitt, Blake, Nadal or Haas could cope with Fena's neutral shots. Especially Blake and Haas being single handers on the BH side showed how limited that stroke is due to the fact that they do not posses an effective enough BH slice or do not use it as frequently. Roger will be able to return those sliced BH's with more slice of his own to draw Gonzlez in and put him out of position for the next shot. One shot to look to in this match would be Roger hitting the low BH DTL slice to Fena's FH forcing Fena to hit over hit FH cross court allowing Roger to take control of the point with his FH. Haas tried to do this a couple of times today but failed to hit the FH with any conviction once he got the reply he was looking for.

2. None of Gonzo's opponents up until this point have come out with a plan B game when things weren't workng. As a result Gonzo kept doing his thing and rightfully won. We know Roger will have a plan B in place and will implement it and it will be interesting to see if that happens will Fena stick to his new style or revert to his old ball bashing ways.

3. None of the players Gonzo beat have the combination of court coverage and the ability to turn defence into attack as well as Roger. Granted Nadal covers a lot of ground but he hit neutral shots for the most part when on the defensive. Roger even when out of position can hit deep agressive shots which force the oppnent to hit a shorter shot allowing Roger back into position and take control of the point.

4. I actually think Fena's old style of bashball tennis was more troubling for Roger because Roger is a player that does extremely well when he gets into rythm and that style of play never really allowed Roger to get into a rythm during their early encounters. Fena's new style of keeping the ball in for several shots may play into Roger's hands, allow him to build up a good rythm early on and if he does that Fena's in trouble.

5. Except for the Del Potro match Fena was never really faced wth a position in which he was with his back to the wall late in a fourth or fifth set. He was always in control against all his other opponents but I doubt he will be able to keep sustained control over Roger so it will be interesting to see how he reacts to these clutch situations.

That is my two cents on the matchup. Of course anything can happen on any given day but assuming both players play true to their styles, strengths and characteristics I would expect Roger to come out on top in three sets, tops four.


Actually, I think the key possibly may be that Federer has been in 10 grand slam finals, but this is the first final for Gonzalez. The occasion may effect Gonzalez who may not reproduce his form of the last 4 matches which has been more impressive than that of Federer.

R.Federer
01-26-2007, 06:58 PM
5. Except for the Del Potro match Fena was never really faced wth a position in which he was with his back to the wall late in a fourth or fifth set. He was always in control against all his other opponents but I doubt he will be able to keep sustained control over Roger so it will be interesting to see how he reacts to these clutch situations.

He did blow it at 5-6 in the third against lleyton. However, I would not call that a choke, he seemed to go for his shots as always, but didn't work out.

marcRD
01-28-2007, 11:49 AM
Gonzalez forehand has to be perfect against Federer to work. Against Haas or Nadal he hit those inside out forehands, got an easy ball back and finished the point (against Nadal he usualy needed to repeat the shot 3 times). Against Federer that forehand is controlled with a low, angled backhand slice which forces Gonzalez to play backhand and his advantage ends there. Also if he hits to Federers forehand he often gets back incredible countershots, using Gonzalez own pace or sometimes Federer hits back with incredible angle and plays Gonzalez out of the court.

Gonzalez sliced backhand was even easier for Federer whose backhand simply is superior. He just hit great top spin backhands, or slices and covered the net beautifuly to finish the point. Something Haas, Blake, Nadal and Hewitt couldnt do. Federer won 34 points out of 43 at the net and was very aggresive against Gonzalez backhand.

The 3rd differense is the serve, Federers 2nd serve is impossible to attack, he won 78% on his 2nd serve and 82% on his 1st serve, he only served 4 aces. It was the way Federer took advantage of his serve which was impressive always beeing the one controling the point. He is not the best server on the tour but definetly without any doubt the smartest server on the tour.

In the end Gonzalez didnt have many answers to Federer, he just kept fighting and trying to hit the lines with his powerful forehand. The best strategy someone like Gonzalez can have against Federer and he did pressure Federer more than anyone else before in the tournament.

Many may think Gonzales played different from other matches, that is because he had to play different. He had to hit those forehands harder than before or else it would look just like the match against Roddick for Federer. The sliced backhand ofcourse doesnt work at all against someone like Federer who showed once again that his backhand is the most improved shot in his arsenal and the variation of top spin, slice, power and angles was wonderful to see from his backhand. Take someone like Haas who is belived to have one of the best backhands on the tour and had no answer to Gonzalez sliced backhands.

Alonsofz
01-28-2007, 11:51 AM
Because Federer isn't from this world.

stebs
01-28-2007, 11:52 AM
Federer serving in the second and third sets:

6 games held to love
4 games held to 15

That is unbelievable.

marcRD
01-28-2007, 11:52 AM
Because Federer isn't from this world.

That is a good explanation too. :)

Allstar
01-28-2007, 11:54 AM
Gonzalez forehand has to be perfect against Federer to work. Against Haas or Nadal he hit those inside out forehands, got an easy ball back and finished the point (against Nadal he usualy needed to repeat the shot 3 times). Against Federer that forehand is controlled with a low, angled backhand slice which forces Gonzalez to play backhand and his advantage ends there. Also if he hits to Federers forehand he often gets back incredible countershots, using Gonzalez own pace or sometimes Federer hits back with incredible angle and plays Gonzalez out of the court.

Gonzalez sliced backhand was even easier for Federer whose backhand simply is superior. He just hit great top spin backhands, or slices and covered the net beautifuly to finish the point. Something Haas, Blake, Nadal and Hewitt couldnt do. Federer won 34 points out of 43 at the net and was very aggresive against Gonzalez backhand.

The 3rd differense is the serve, Federers 2nd serve is impossible to attack, he won 78% on his 2nd serve and 82% on his 1st serve, he only served 4 aces. It was the way Federer took advantage of his serve which was impressive always beeing the one controling the point. He is not the best server on the tour but definetly without any doubt the smartest server on the tour.

In the end Gonzalez didnt have many answers to Federer, he just kept fighting and trying to hit the lines with his powerful forehand. The best strategy someone like Gonzalez can have against Federer and he did pressure Federer more than anyone else before in the tournament.

Many may think Gonzales played different from other matches, that is because he had to play different. He had to hit those forehands harder than before or else it would look just like the match against Roddick for Federer. The sliced backhand ofcourse doesnt work at all against someone like Federer who showed once again that his backhand is the most improved shot in his arsenal and the variation of top spin, slice, power and angles was wonderful to see from his backhand. Take someone like Haas who is belived to have one of the best backhands on the tour and had no answer to Gonzalez sliced backhands.

Pretty much agree with everything.

Think Gonzo could have done a lot more with the return of serve, perhaps moved up the court and attacked the 1st serve.

KaxMisha
01-28-2007, 11:54 AM
Gonzalez forehand has to be perfect against Federer to work. Against Haas or Nadal he hit those inside out forehands, got an easy ball back and finished the point (against Nadal he usualy needed to repeat the shot 3 times). Against Federer that forehand is controlled with a low, angled backhand slice which forces Gonzalez to play backhand and his advantage ends there. Also if he hits to Federers forehand he often gets back incredible countershots, using Gonzalez own pace or sometimes Federer hits back with incredible angle and plays Gonzalez out of the court.

Gonzalez sliced backhand was even easier for Federer whose backhand simply is superior. He just hit great top spin backhands, or slices and covered the net beautifuly to finish the point. Something Haas, Blake, Nadal and Hewitt couldnt do. Federer won 34 points out of 43 at the net and was very aggresive against Gonzalez backhand.

The 3rd differense is the serve, Federers 2nd serve is impossible to attack, he won 78% on his 2nd serve and 82% on his 1st serve, he only served 4 aces. It was the way Federer took advantage of his serve which was impressive always beeing the one controling the point. He is not the best server on the tour but definetly without any doubt the smartest server on the tour.

In the end Gonzalez didnt have many answers to Federer, he just kept fighting and trying to hit the lines with his powerful forehand. The best strategy someone like Gonzalez can have against Federer and he did pressure Federer more than anyone else before in the tournament.

Many may think Gonzales played different from other matches, that is because he had to play different. He had to hit those forehands harder than before or else it would look just like the match against Roddick for Federer. The sliced backhand ofcourse doesnt work at all against someone like Federer who showed once again that his backhand is the most improved shot in his arsenal and the variation of top spin, slice, power and angles was wonderful to see from his backhand. Take someone like Haas who is belived to have one of the best backhands on the tour and had no answer to Gonzalez sliced backhands.

Great post and a wonderful analysis. I knew as soon as I started watching the final that ignoramuses would say that Gonzalez's level of play fell, but the reality is that though he had many more unforced errors, most of them were forced not by something Federer did, but by what he would have done, had Fernando chosen a safer option. It's really a pity Fernando didn't take tha first set, but I honestly doubt that would have changed the outcome. I would say that it is evident that these are the two currently best players in the world. Look how much Gonzalez has improved from his earlier matches with Federer. he lost his serve just three times. Compare that to last year's finals. He also has bevome much tougher mentally. I was thinking for a while that we'd get 6-2, 6-0 sets when Fernando lost the third, but it wasn't to be. All in all, a great final, both players fully deserved to be there and are without a doubt my two facorite players on tour.

Himura
01-28-2007, 11:58 AM
I knew before the match that his in-side out forehand wouldn`t work against Fed. He has incredible defence, everybody talks about Nadals defence but dosen`t give Feds defence enough credit. And yes his slice dosen`t bother Fed either. To be honsest the only thing I have seen something bother really much is Nadals topspin forehand... it`s really frighting if you think about it.

But I love Forehando....his is incredible, such power and feel at the same time.

Good tournament from both!

FluffyYellowBall
01-28-2007, 12:04 PM
Because Federer isn't from this world.

that is one reason;)

Gonzalez is human. Theres no way he can keep hitting the ball that hard without breaking down. Against his other opponents, he could do that but federer wont give him so many chances like they did. Hes rlly improved but he has to learn how to play better tacticlly when his hard hitting isnt working. Im not saying that he didnt have any game plan but hes mostly depending on hard hitting and finishing the points quickly.

In the mid second set and third set he was obiously wearing out ad his answer to that was finishing points even quicker. Not a good ideaw

TennisGrandSlam
01-28-2007, 12:05 PM
Gonzalez forehand has to be perfect against Federer to work. Against Haas or Nadal he hit those inside out forehands, got an easy ball back and finished the point (against Nadal he usualy needed to repeat the shot 3 times). Against Federer that forehand is controlled with a low, angled backhand slice which forces Gonzalez to play backhand and his advantage ends there. Also if he hits to Federers forehand he often gets back incredible countershots, using Gonzalez own pace or sometimes Federer hits back with incredible angle and plays Gonzalez out of the court.

Gonzalez sliced backhand was even easier for Federer whose backhand simply is superior. He just hit great top spin backhands, or slices and covered the net beautifuly to finish the point. Something Haas, Blake, Nadal and Hewitt couldnt do. Federer won 34 points out of 43 at the net and was very aggresive against Gonzalez backhand.

The 3rd differense is the serve, Federers 2nd serve is impossible to attack, he won 78% on his 2nd serve and 82% on his 1st serve, he only served 4 aces. It was the way Federer took advantage of his serve which was impressive always beeing the one controling the point. He is not the best server on the tour but definetly without any doubt the smartest server on the tour.

In the end Gonzalez didnt have many answers to Federer, he just kept fighting and trying to hit the lines with his powerful forehand. The best strategy someone like Gonzalez can have against Federer and he did pressure Federer more than anyone else before in the tournament.

Many may think Gonzales played different from other matches, that is because he had to play different. He had to hit those forehands harder than before or else it would look just like the match against Roddick for Federer. The sliced backhand ofcourse doesnt work at all against someone like Federer who showed once again that his backhand is the most improved shot in his arsenal and the variation of top spin, slice, power and angles was wonderful to see from his backhand. Take someone like Haas who is belived to have one of the best backhands on the tour and had no answer to Gonzalez sliced backhands.


Big Server is not working for Federer (A-Rod, Gonzo, Ljubo, Philippoussis) :devil:

Only Top Spinner like Nadal will post a threat to Federer. :o

FluffyYellowBall
01-28-2007, 12:10 PM
^^^^ I dont see how people find that watching big servers get crushed by federer is more interesting to watch than watching top spinners.

oz_boz
01-28-2007, 12:19 PM
^^^^ I dont see how people find that watching big servers get crushed by federer is more interesting to watch than watching top spinners.

Because Fed ends so many points with an impressive winner. Topspinner's duels are mostly finished by a UE - boring to some including me.

FluffyYellowBall
01-28-2007, 12:22 PM
Because Fed ends so many points with an impressive winner. Topspinner's duels are mostly finished by a UE - boring to some including me.

Its boring unless its a good match up between a top spinner and another player.

But big servers too. They either finish the point very quickly because of short returns and if their serve isnt working, theyre not always impressive.

Jimnik
01-28-2007, 12:27 PM
Federer has always had the best defensive backhand slice. It's the reason why both Roddick and Gonzalez never get an easy ball after delivering a big serve or forehand. It's extremely tough to hit a good shot against such a low ball.

marcRD
01-28-2007, 12:29 PM
^^^^ I dont see how people find that watching big servers get crushed by federer is more interesting to watch than watching top spinners.

I like watching Nadal play Federer, but to tell the truth there is no rythm in these matches, but I still like the intensity and emotions.

Anyway, Gonzalez is not really classed as big server, he is a power player from the baseline like Blake. While Roddick and Ljubicic are no power players from the baseline but big servers.

FluffyYellowBall
01-28-2007, 01:20 PM
I like watching Nadal play Federer, but to tell the truth there is no rythm in these matches, but I still like the intensity and emotions.

Anyway, Gonzalez is not really classed as big server, he is a power player from the baseline like Blake. While Roddick and Ljubicic are no power players from the baseline but big servers.

I wasnt referring to gonzalez as one of those guys getting crushed by federer!
He has big serve but he doesnt primarily depend on it like roddick and ljubicic do. I agree with jmnik. Thats y nadal and gonzolez are tougher match ups for federer.

SuCiuMH
01-28-2007, 02:15 PM
With all the fantastic shots, why Gonzalez isn't able to beat federer ?

Becoz Federer has a better fantastic shot;)

TennisGrandSlam
01-28-2007, 02:39 PM
Pure Big server cannot win Rogi :cool:

almouchie
01-28-2007, 03:01 PM
i am really really disappointed
i expect a lot more from fernando
especially after all he has showed in his matches, with hewitt,blake, nadal, & has
to lose without playing at level, &throw a great chance with 2 sets point,given his solid serve, is just sad

it wasnt a great match, they played well in patches, but nothing great
fernando kept playing his tame backhand, when he should have run around it & blast a forehand winner
disappointed with his tactics, louzy low percentage choice of shots
i keep think what if he played like against haas, what a match it would be
too little too late

bokehlicious
01-28-2007, 03:12 PM
i am really really disappointed
i expect a lot more from fernando
especially after all he has showed in his matches, with hewitt,blake, nadal, & has
to lose without playing at level, &throw a great chance with 2 sets point,given his solid serve, is just sad

it wasnt a great match, they played well in patches, but nothing great
fernando kept playing his tame backhand, when he should have run around it & blast a forehand winner
disappointed with his tactics, louzy low percentage choice of shots
i keep think what if he played like against haas, what a match it would be
too little too late

Where are you Pete ? :sobbing: :sobbing: :crying2:

NYCtennisfan
01-29-2007, 03:30 AM
i am really really disappointed
i expect a lot more from fernando
especially after all he has showed in his matches, with hewitt,blake, nadal, & has
to lose without playing at level, &throw a great chance with 2 sets point,given his solid serve, is just sad

it wasnt a great match, they played well in patches, but nothing great
fernando kept playing his tame backhand, when he should have run around it & blast a forehand winner
disappointed with his tactics, louzy low percentage choice of shots
i keep think what if he played like against haas, what a match it would be
too little too late

Federer would not allow Gonzo to play the same way against him. Haas did nothing with those fluffy slice BH's. Federer ripped those slices back with penetrating CC BH drives or the inside-out FH with a follow to net. Federer controlled or was neutral in at least 95% of the rallies in which Gonzo didn't hit a big 1st serve. Even then he controlled some rallies after a slice return.

Allure
01-29-2007, 04:23 AM
because Federer is ''too big.''

Aloevera
01-29-2007, 05:11 AM
Gonzalez looked predictable and couldn't take control from Federer when he wasn't allowed to overuse those penetrating forehands.

Sometimes even Fed rushed to the net and then took the backhand slice early to construct a volley winner.