Mens Tennis Forums banner

The Federer Decline Thread

113K views 2K replies 396 participants last post by  Rychu 
#1 ·
An interesting piece from Tom Perotta

Relax Federer faithful, it's only March

by Tom Perotta
Special to ESPN.com


No, dear fans of Roger Federer, the sky isn't falling. The No. 1 ranking is not in jeopardy just yet. It isn't time for your man to do something drastic, like hiring Brad Gilbert as a coach, shaving his head or asking Wilson to design him a new racket or some new strings. He doesn't need any encouragement from Tiger Woods, who has been tightening his grip on the title of "most dominant athlete in the world." He doesn't need to change his technique or his strategy or his training methods. One loss to Andy Murray at a small tournament in Federer's de facto home of Dubai doesn't doom a career.

Still worried? That's reasonable enough. Federer looked flat in Australia, understandable considering the food poisoning he had before the tournament began. It was also recently revealed the Swiss had mononucleosis -- unbeknownst to him at the time -- Down Under. However, before he played Murray, he said he was fit and eager to play. He seemed ready to make a statement, that statement being, "I'm Roger Federer, and you are not." He had to have been confident despite not playing in five weeks, since he had won in Dubai in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2007 -- and lost in the final in 2006.

This would be his first appearance since losing to Novak Djokovic, the man most people peg as the next No. 1 player in the world (the confident Djokovic is no doubt one of those people). It was the Swiss' first chance to remind his rivals who runs the tour. Instead, Murray was only reminded that Federer's forehand occasionally disappears for games at a time.

Perhaps you're not worried about the Murray match, but something else? You're concerned that Federer has a long year ahead of him. He's scheduled to play more tournaments than usual, plus the Olympic Games in Beijing. He also has more good players to contend with than at any other point in his career. In four years as the No. 1 player in the world, Federer hasn't had to overcome a lot of obstacles at one time. He's had no season-ending injuries, no personal tragedies and no consistent threats on the tour other than Rafael Nadal on clay and, the past two years, Nadal at Wimbledon.

In the next two years, he'll face adversity, in the form of Djokovic, Nadal, Murray and maybe, just maybe, a player like Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, wherever he goes. He'll have to worry more about injury as he ages. He'll have to worry about losing motivation or confidence if he loses a few more matches. He'll have to deal with the pressure of being two major titles away from Pete Sampras' record of 14 -- so close, but still quite far away considering how abruptly a dominant tennis career can end (a 25-year-old John McEnroe won two majors in 1984 but couldn't win another one in his final eight years on the tour).

Federer has a lot on his mind, and a lot left to accomplish, but there's no cause for worry. In tennis, confidence comes and goes quickly. Remember how things looked in November? Federer dominated his last three matches at the Masters Cup and Djokovic ended the year with five consecutive losses and seemed destined for a slump in 2008.

Andy Murray wasted no time derailing Roger Federer's hopes of getting back on track in Dubai.
A little more than three months later, Djokovic is the Australian Open champion and taken seriously when he makes absurd comments, like: "Considering the results this year, I expected Murray to win." No doubt, Murray was going to have a chance, but Djokovic expected Murray to win? Really? What results was he looking at? Couldn't have been that first-round loss Murray suffered at the Australian Open to Tsonga. Maybe it was his first-round loss to Robin Haase, ranked No. 94 in the world, in Rotterdam a few weeks ago. A convincing performance indeed.

There was a lot to dislike about the way Federer played against Murray. He returned terribly (he didn't win a single point against Murray's first serve in the third set, 0-for-14) and he sprayed a lot of forehands. He was aced 10 times -- a credit to Murray but rare against Federer (Andy Roddick usually won't ace Federer that often in three sets).

Still, there was a lot to like, too. Federer frequently attacked the net, as he did in Shanghai last year. He served well in the first and third sets. He seemed to move well, which wasn't the case by the end of the Australian Open. Why doubt that he'll return to the form he had just a few months ago? He's had cold streaks before and come out of them just fine. Remember Guillermo Canas and Filippo Volandri? Canas beat Federer twice last year and Volandri beat him once. By the end of 2007, did those losses mean anything at all?

While the early loss in Dubai deprived Federer of a few useful warm-up matches leading up to Indian Wells, it might also help him. He can now fly to the United States sooner than he might have planned for the Sampras exhibition next week. Last year, Federer lost his first match at Indian Wells, in the second round, after winning it the previous three seasons. He stands to gain a lot of ranking points if he does well. He could gain a few more in Miami, where he lost in the fourth round. If he wins both tournaments and performs well at Estoril, Portugal, where he didn't play last year, he'll have a cushion over Nadal in the rankings that the Spaniard won't be able to top without a Federer flop at Roland Garros or Wimbledon, or a sensational hard-court season from Nadal (which has yet to happen). Djokovic has a lot of points to defend in the coming weeks, too, and he's still 1,300 points behind Federer.

If Sampras double-bagels Federer at their exhibition Monday night, maybe then Federer fans will have something to worry about. Otherwise, remember that it's only March. You might end up remembering this season as the best of Federer's career.

Tom Perrotta is a senior editor at Tennis Magazine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eden
#1,148 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Federer will drop to number 4 next year)

Seriously man, just give it up.

Let's imagine you could somehow prove Federer played in a weak era. You won't, but for argument's sake let's say you did. What exactly would that prove?

Nothing. It's not like Federer can be blamed for the supposed shortcomings of his opponents. You have to beat whoever is in front of you and that's what Federer did in his prime and what he's doing even now at 30+. Stop trying to discredit his achievements, no one reasonable will buy into that nonsense.
 
#1,150 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Federer will drop to number 4 next year)

Seriously man, just give it up.

Let's imagine you could somehow prove Federer played in a weak era. You won't, but for argument's sake let's say you did. What exactly would that prove?

Nothing. It's not like Federer can be blamed for the supposed shortcomings of his opponents. You have to beat whoever is in front of you and that's what Federer did in his prime and what he's doing even now at 30+. Stop trying to discredit his achievements, no one reasonable will buy into that nonsense.
There is nothing to give up here. I'm only making a simple point about the merit of success and how a weak field helped Federer look a lot better than he actually is. Whether or not I stop posting or replying to the simpleton Fed fanboys doesn't mean I would give up, it would only mean I've had enough fun reading their silly excuses.
 
#1,152 ·
Start da Greatness is doing what MIMIC used to do, arguing all he can that Federer has not actually declined, that he was just overtaken by better players - players that incidentally lose to mugs as often as olderer and MORE often than 04-07 Fed used to. :scratch:

I don't even understand his argument to be honest. Nadal for example was very much active and winning slams even in Fed's prime but got taken out in countless non-clay events by the very players Greatness claims sucked. Baffling really.
 
#1,153 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Federer will drop to number 4 next year)



Everyone sees right though Greatness motive. " to make Novak look good"
All this era talk is just a smoke screen. Feds Prime ran currently to 04-07.
However she pushed it further back to 03-06 why . He pushed it back because fed beat Novak in USO. He was " young" but a few months later he won AO. He suddenly got good.
I am surprise he/she didn't state 1999/ 2003.
 
#1,155 · (Edited)
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Federer will drop to number 4 next year)

From the Connors era on (i.e. ignoring Laver, Rosewall and the greats who came before them when eras were so different making things difficult to compare) the most amount of slams that anyone won between the age of 0-25 is 11 (Federer tied with Borg), the most amount of Slams that anyone won between the age of 26-30 is 6 (Federer tied with Lendl) and the most amount of Slams won from age 31 onwards is 2 (Connors). The arc of tennis careers do not all peak at the same time but I think from 0-25 most tennis players are at their physical peak, from 26-30 is the post-peak period, while anything from 31 on is considered a bonus since many tennis players have already retired by that age or are lucky to win slams at that age. It's specious to criticize Federer for not winning as much from 2008 on as proof that he was "overrated" and benefited from weak competition, when Federer not only is tied with Borg for most dominant peak but also tied with Lendl for most dominant post-peak of any tennis player. The simple fact is that tennis players do not win as often as they get older. It is unreasonable to say that because Federer did not win as often from 2008 on that should be regarded as proof that he wasn't really that good from 2003-2007. On the contrary, the fact that Federer has won 6 Slams during his post-peak (and is ranked #1 at 31 years of age) in what many consider one of the toughest eras ever should be considered as supporting evidence of how good he was during his peak. If Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are so great, why has the old man won the most slams between age 26-30 (tied with Lendl) than anyone else from the Connors era onwards? If Federer really was not that good why has he won so much at such an advanced age while clearly playing inferior to his level between 2003-2007? It is interesting to note that since Nadal won his first Slam in 2005 at Roland Garros, Federer has won 13 Slams while Nadal has won only 11. Since Aussie 2008, Nole has won 5 Slams while Federer has won 5. Even as he ages, Federer has been able to keep up with the young guys in their prime.

People like to belittle Federer's competition but it is interesting that past his prime Roddick has been able to beat Djokovic and Murray at Grand Slams during this "glory era" between 2008-2012; past his prime Safin beat Nole at Wimbledon during this era; Gonzalez beat Murray at the French; Tommy Haas beat Djokovic at Wimbledon. Guys who were years removed from their best tennis were still good enough to beat this era's greats while Djokovic and Murray were in their prime. Let us remember that it was 29 year old Federer that beat supreme Djokovic at Roland Garros ending his 43 match winning streak after Djokovic had been thrashing Nadal during the clay season. Furthermore, Federer at 30 years of age just beat #1 seed Djokovic and #4 seed Murray at Wimbledon. Let us also keep in mind that conditions (court surfaces, tennis balls) have slowed the game considerably and that post-peak Federer has been able to have this remarkable success in conditions that favour defensive-minded players more than at any time in tennis history. If anything, Federer's accomplishments from 2008 on are evidence of his greatness not the opposite.
 
#1,158 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Federer will drop to number 4 next year)

The idiots trying to float the Federer weak era stuff remind me of creationists spouting "Evolution is only a theory" and talking about stuff they just don't understand, like trying to use the crocoduck.

I'm embarrassed for them.
 
#1,159 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Federer will drop to number 4 next year)

Why is this boring thread still going on? :zzz:
 
#1,172 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Federer will drop to number 4 next year)

Roger Federer would stay No 1 as long as 2014

Rest of guys all mug

Nadal over spend to have two and half great years but now it's completely done

Djoker back to Normal, only have one and half great years
 
#1,184 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Federer will drop to number 4 next year)

2006 Federer would win 3 slams 2005-2008, 2010-2012 and 4 slams every other year since the start of time. Dispute that tards.
 
#1,185 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Federer will drop to number 4 next year)

tennis gets suck but

Rest of guys mug but Fed
 
#1,186 ·
Will Federer win another slam?

After today's match, it's obvious that the age is catching up with the old man and he can no longer beat a top player unless they choke. RG is obviously out of question as is AO (too slow). Uso also looks unlikely as he simply can't hang against guys who can read his serve. That leaves wimbledon. Question is, will he get another easy draw, weak finals player and an indoor final?

Vote!
 
#1,211 ·
Re: Will Federer win another slam?

Uso also looks unlikely as he simply can't hang against guys who can read his serve.
How many players can do that?

This didn't look like an acceleration in his decline at all. His movement was good, even to his forehand side: it's just Berdych was able to anticipate his shots and send them back with interest. The forehand errors in the 1st 2 sets cost Fed the match, & I would attribute them to rustiness.
 
#1,190 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Federer will drop to number 4 next year)

For those who want to think Fed is done, then go ahead.
 
#1,196 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Is he done, will he win another Slam)

I thought the same...and then today happened. I've had to quickly unlearn the Wimbly lesson :p
Hope there is a bit more of unlearning in the future. In the meantime, go have a ball!:devil:
 
#1,200 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Is he done, will he win another Slam)

It's very interesting to see what would happen to Fedal next year. To see what was left in their tank. I always believe their fate in tennis were intertwined together, though they are 5 years apart.

I think Federer would win 1 more slam in the next 2 years. As long as he can qualify to QF and SF regularly, he would continue playing and anything can happen from there. I think he can do this as the field before QF is still wide open for him.

Nadal's presence in slams would affect him in tricky way. He has good chance on all surfaces, but he couldn't just face what's thrown in front of him anymore. I think Federer is truly disappointed losing against Berd, because he comes here as the favorite and No. 1 player, so he wants to win a slam with that status, NOT as an "opportunist". But sadly, I'm afraid he has to be more like an "opportunist" if he wants to win a slam. I hope he can win just 1 more slam as No. 1 and the favorite, but it's more unlikely than being an opportunist, I guess.
 
#1,201 ·
Re: The Federer Decline Thread (Is he done, will he win another Slam)

It's very interesting to see what would happen to Fedal next year. To see what was left in their tank. I always believe their fate in tennis were intertwined together, though they are 5 years apart.

I think Federer would win 1 more slam in the next 2 years. As long as he can qualify to QF and SF regularly, he would continue playing and anything can happen from there. I think he can do this as the field before QF is still wide open for him.

Nadal's presence in slams would affect him in tricky way. He has good chance on all surfaces, but he couldn't just face what's thrown in front of him anymore. I think Federer is truly disappointed losing against Berd, because he comes here as the favorite and No. 1 player, so he wants to win a slam with that status, NOT as an "opportunist". But sadly, I'm afraid he has to be more like an "opportunist" if he wants to win a slam. I hope he can win just 1 more slam as No. 1 and the favorite, but it's more unlikely than being an opportunist, I guess.
Even if he'd managed to do the impossible and win here some people would still have called him an opportunist due to Rafa's absence...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top