[GOAT = Fed]

One thing I don't get about FEderer is why did his decline happen so young? It happened around middle of 2007, imo, and then he was 25, nearly 26. That's very young to have declined to be honest. Look at Djokovic, he's gonna be 26 and has been playing for a pretty long time now and it doesn't seem he has declined, same for Murray. In fact it seems both have improved in recent years rather than decline. Nadal has also declined but it wasn't a surprise given his knees and his playing style. But even then NAdal's level, before his injury at least, was very high. I think Federer declined 2 years too early.

[Saberq]

Originally Posted by Honestly

I have my doubts whether Roger has declined at all. The competition has caught up. Murray was almost unplayable. Add to that a surface that suits him and he is unplayable.

lol of course he declined .........slower,less power,stamina,weaker serve + slower surfaces and better competition all that results in this

[superslam77]

Originally Posted by Saberq

lol of course he declined .........slower,less power,stamina,weaker serve + slower surfaces and better competition all that results in this

agreed but it's not better competition except for djokovic and murray have improved while other 100 players are worse. legends retired and now we have some of the worst youngsters in the history of tennis.

[Topspindoctor]

Originally Posted by superslam77

agreed but it's not better competition except for djokovic and murray have improved while other 100 players are worse. legends retired and now we have some of the worse youngsters in the history of tennis.

What legends? Davydenko, Ljubicic, Hewitt, Blake, Roddick and other juggernauts of Noserer's strong era?

[superslam77]

Originally Posted by Topspindoctor

What legends? Davydenko, Ljubicic, Hewitt, Blake, Roddick and other juggernauts of Noserer's strong era?

you forgot mosquito,agassi,guga,safin,gaudio...slam winners and finalists.

well they are legends especially compared to tipsarevic....old ferrer,nico...i mean really?

then compare the young back then to the young now

[tektonac]

agassi was 33 yo when he won AO and 35 yo as USO runner up.

[rocketassist]

Originally Posted by tektonac

agassi was 33 yo when he won AO and 35 yo as USO runner up.

To be fair Agassi didn't play Wimbledon till 1991 (when he was 21) and didn't play the AO till he was 25, not to mention he had a lean year or two where he lost interest, dropped to 140 and got high on crystal meth. So when he got into his 30s he had less mileage than Federer who has played consistently since he was 19 and Agassi's effortless dictating game meant he didn't need to conserve a lot of energy in general.

[jaymon112]

His forehand and movement were equally if not bigger weapons during his prime, and he did not merely rely on opponents wilting at the end of sets to win points. He's probably become more reliant on the serve as he's gotten older precisely because his groundstrokes and positioning are not as dependable as they were earlier in his career and because he's not as regularly in his opponents' service games.

In his prime, Federer understood the angles just as well as he does today, but had the movement and firepower to find them. Today he resembles a grinder or counterpuncher most of the time because he no longer has the step to take the initiative as consistently and as a result cannot win the baselines firefights he used to take with ease in his prime. If anything, the benefit of Annacone has not been to make Federer resemble a more typical baseliner but to convince him that he cannot win that way and to instead be looking to move vertically whenever the opportunity presents itself and use his variety more effectively to keep opponents off-balance.

The Federer of 2006 was probably the best hardcourt player of all time. I will gladly laugh at the notion that he'd be lucky to hang with the Federer of today, be it rebound ace, decoturf, or plexicushion.

IMO the biggest decline in Federer's game has been his consistency on the serve.

He's always made unforced errors on his ground strokes, but his serve is a lot less lethal nowadays than it used to be. Doesn't hit the spots nearly as well as he used to.

His movement and ball striking are still at 90% of what they used to be.

Good game last night by Murray btw. Lendl has done well to pin-point his shit forehand as the main stroke needing improvement and Murray now has a more complete game.

Federer was hanging on by the skin of his teeth and could have lost that in 3 or 4 had the luck gone Murray's way.

Murray will push Djokovic on Sunday I wouldn't be surprised to see him take it, even though I'll lean to Djokovic ever so slightly.

[Looner]

Originally Posted by tektonac

agassi was 33 yo when he won AO and 35 yo as USO runner up.

And he beat Schuettler in the AO final which would be the equivalent to Roger beating Ferrer in the final. As if that would ever happen.

[rocketassist]

And Clement, although Seb should have made that final

[Topspindoctor]

Originally Posted by Looner

And he beat Schuettler in the AO final which would be the equivalent to Roger beating Ferrer in the final. As if that would ever happen.

Not quite. You also forget that he beat Baghdatis in AO 06 final, who is arguably worse than Shuettler (the german made top 5 at least)

[leng jai]

Why do people keep mentioning Agassi when it comes to longevity It takes 2 seconds of studying his career timeline to realise it's completely irrelevant.

[ssin]

Originally Posted by GOAT = Fed

One thing I don't get about FEderer is why did his decline happen so young? It happened around middle of 2007, imo, and then he was 25, nearly 26. That's very young to have declined to be honest. Look at Djokovic, he's gonna be 26 and has been playing for a pretty long time now and it doesn't seem he has declined, same for Murray. In fact it seems both have improved in recent years rather than decline. Nadal has also declined but it wasn't a surprise given his knees and his playing style. But even then NAdal's level, before his injury at least, was very high. I think Federer declined 2 years too early.

The only proper answer imo is it didn't happen in 2007 at all, it started only in 2010. What happened in 2007-2010? The competition improved, and I think Novak, Delpo and Murray constituted a quantum leap in tennis competition. Add Nadal who is a phenom of his own category, and you have your answer, if we are to speak honestly.

[Honestly]

Originally Posted by leng jai

Why do people keep mentioning Agassi when it comes to longevity It takes 2 seconds of studying his career timeline to realise it's completely irrelevant.

This is MTF

[Brad Motoflou]

Originally Posted by tektonac

agassi was 33 yo when he won AO and 35 yo as USO runner up.

And who's to say Roger won't do the same?