[Aloevera]

Originally Posted by Roy Emerson

He won 7 times at Wimbledon.

An opportunist would be someone who gets lucky and wins just once there. A fluke. Never to reach the final again and who won because he avoided the best player on grass.

IF Nadal were to lose in the QF of RG in 2013(to a ballbasher) but then won RG in 2014(avoiding Djokovic and ballbashers), would he be considered an opportunist? Of course not. You don't fluke a slam 7 or 8 times.

I don't mean to say that it would be a mere fluke if he wins a slam these days. Of course he still has to create the opportunity himself. But it's getting harder because he's not as dominant as before where he didn't need to depend much on opportunities unexpectedly arisen in favor of him to win a slam, hence why he's able to win so many times.

[Tag]

won wimbledon, silver medal at olympics, several masters and is no1 in the world

complete mug, this federer

[bounccer]

He's declining since 2007, nothing new here. Simply, he was so high when his fall began, he's still competitive despite struggling against big hitters and losing his power, reactivity, stamina and consistency.

[Johnbert]

everybody knows it will be very hard to get #18. it was already a milestone he achieved #17 and the #1-record at wimby. so there's no reason for panic again. he should rest up and prepare for the indoors season. next try at the ao 2013, simple as that

[Gagsquet]

Originally Posted by scarecrows

2012

quote me in 3 years time

Decent

[finishingmove]

Originally Posted by scarecrows

2012

quote me in 3 years time

u were on the right track

nadal spoiled the party... again

[pray-for-palestine-and-israel]

why not have one more slam run in him?

too much to ask?

meh, what does he really have left to prove?

done it all, won it all

[Sanya]

For me it`s easier with his backhand. Now looks like Fed always had this swing to be his main weakness, but till 2008 I never was scared every time he played backhand. But then... I think it had a lot to do with his loss to Nadal at Wimbledon. Not like before he hit the ball without EU and later couldn`t find a court, but something changed at least in my sensation. Cincy, Toronto, OG, even victory at US - backhand always gave a lot to think about. Hovewer Fed`s forehand remained to destroy opponents from any position.

But at some moment Fed lost it too. I mean he still has some great stretches with different kinds of shots from "open" racquet, but misses started to increase and the feeling about inevitable punishment for player who dared to hit the ball to Federer`s strong hand disappeared.

I was trying to remember my impressions, when I felt it happening the first time, but just can`t. Surely, the most important reason here is declining in speed. A bit worse footwork and so on. Such things always consist of many factors.

Anyone?

[latso]

Federer is still winning slams, playing semis and finals against younger, faster, stronger players.

He's not doing it with his BH slice and will only.

Fed's FH is right there still. You just got confused by the scene, the oponent and the period.

And mainly the oponent. Watch him against Cilic and you don't get any of these mixed feelings.

Watch him winning Wimbie with all the best guys around, etc.

Fed is losing 3 things only - 1. Highest motivation at non slams. 2. His footwork (which increases his semi forced errors and makes him play more defensive BH slices) And last but not least and the part i'm most concerned about - his serve.

I fear his back problems have become irrevirsible and he's doing what he can with the pain constantly there.

You can't lose your speed of serve and coordination just like that, it doesn't take much stamina, it's you and the ball.

And we saw him today trying at times to hit a strong first serve to get a free point and it was going miles away, like 2 meters out.

At this moment he's just serving a strong second serve for his first and a weak second serve as second, which is the prime of his problems imho.

The back is probably why he said he needed longer rest and this kind of pain goes almost fully away only from resting, then it's fully back after one tournament.

That's where all the problems come from.

If Cilic and the type can't do much against a 190kph sliced first serve, being pretty much Roger's maximum atm, it is hardly an issue for the better players.

I fear that during next season Fed's back will force him to retire, maybe after Wimby.

Hopefully his docs find a way to overcome this problem, but often this kind of problem is irrevirsible except with surgery, so i fear it might be the case with Roger.

Anyways, the guy would have retired one year ago, he would still be the best who ever played the game for me, so now with N17 and the OG silver he's there big time already.

[Looner]

Hm, hard to say really. I'd say 2008.

[Alex999]

I don't think he ever lost it per se. He simply started slowing down back in 2008, starting shanking too much and mishitting shots the prime Fed would not miss. It's normal tho. I know many people here see Fed as immortal but he is just human. Nobody can sustain that level of play and Fed will retire at some point. Give a guy a break. Millions of matches on the internet to watch and admire his skills.

I'd say probably the best FH ever, although I'll always fight for Gonzo in this category . Sorry to bring Gonzo here, but when I see his FH I feel like 'I want sex now',

[Whiznot]

Federer has never been the same player since he contracted mono. That year he played lights out for the first two matches of the Aussie Open then won a grueling five setter against Tipsarevic and since then he has never fully recovered.

[Andi-M]

He hasn't lost it it just materialises alot more seldom than it used to. Even in 2012 Fed has played some matches where his Fh has been just superb. He lost the consistancy and aura around it in about 2008 when Rafa started to give him pain.

[leng jai]

When he realised Tdoc rates Nadal's better than his. It's all mental.

[Mark Lenders]

Never. His speed and footwork declined, not his FH per se.