Federer vs. Becker

sawan66278 said:

In terms of ability, skill, and overall talent, how do you feel that Boris Becker compares to Roger...Boris won Wimbledeon at 17...which in many ways impacted his career in such a way that I believe he really didn't tap into his complete abilities...

To be honest, I really believe that at their peak, on almost every surface, they would split their meetings head to head, with Boris having the advantage on an indoor carpet, and Roger having the advantage on clay...

Opinions

Click to expand...

Boris Becker had a very promising early career, in part due to his emergence in an era with no legendary player. In the late 80's to early 90's, this was a transitional period where Lendl, McEnroe et al were fading and Sampras/Agassi had not yet developed. As you can see it's not really difficult to see that most of Slam damage was done during this period.

Boris never had a great work ethic, he carried all kinds of nagging injuries esp. knee problems through most of his mid 20's and on, this was mostly attributable to him being out of shape most of the time, after the age of 23, he was close to 200 lbs. He wasn't very fast around the back of the court and usually bailed out of long rallies. Becker had the ability to thrash people he was supposed to beat hence the great career W/L record. He was one of the first players to bring the boom boom style of power tennis into play, so he's a pioneer in some respects. But in terms of his game, he was very mechanical (but effective) from the backcourt (his defence was not very good though), but what separated him was his great transitional game where he could break a point open with a forehand up the line, or a low slice where he could thunder in and attack the net.

Boris was a great player but he's never really going to be placed as a legend. He's on that second rung. You only have to look at his head to head against Sampras/Agassi to see how he compares. Head to head against Federer would be lop-sided in Federer's favour.

Reading comprehesion problem, deliveryman?

Click to expand...

You know, if you're going to start making personal attacks over a tennis conversation, especially over one's reading ability, you might want to be able to spell "comprehension" correctly. But that's beside the point.

Roger has great, great passing shots and has the ability to hit winners from ANYWHERE on the court. His back to front movement is just as impressive as his side to side. Becker's S/V game would be torn to shreds, as Federer would hit passing winner after winner after winner, if he's playing his best.

EDIT: 2005 Wimbledon final ring a bell? Please don't get me wrong, I am by no means comparing Roddick's S/V to Becker's, but there's no denying that Roddick played unbelievably well, and S/V out of his mind the entire tournament. I don't doubt that if Roger didn't play as well as he did, Roddick could've won. Instead, what happened? He got a beatdown.

My point is this: When Roger Federer plays his absolute best tennis, there's nothing anyone can do to beat him. He is by far, ions, lightyears ahead of Becker when it comes to sheer talent. And if both used their respective talents to it's full potiental on the same night, Federer would walk away with an easy straight sets victory.

BigboyDan said:

Reading comprehesion problem, deliveryman?

Federer can not thrash ANY pure S/Ver who also can play baseline, much less someone who has the GAME like a 1985/1990 Becker. Becker's GAME at its best, had no weaknesses to exploit, Federer best GAME does. THAT'S the POINT!

Sheesh! Andre is playing Federer at the END of his career!

Learn the game, dude.

Click to expand...

For someone who has seen both playing at their peak I beg to differ here.

Federer has proven himself against the serve and volleyers (the few he has played)- Henman, Rusedski, Suzuki at this year's Australian.

Granted, Henman had his number earlier but Roger has figured out how to deal with him.When he needs to Roger can return very efficiently dipping the ball at the feet of the incoming volleyer forcing that player to hit up and set up the passing shot. His variation of spin and pace has left many a net rusher dumbfounded.

Granted, Becker at his peak had a very powerful baseline game but you are forgetting one thing. As was mentioned earlier Becker was the pioneer of the modern power game. Nothing of the sort had ever been seen in the game and the rest of the field was playing catchup. By toay's standards, power bashing alone would not achieve much. Look at Gonzalez and Roddick. For Becker to have to theoretically be able to hang in with a peak Federer he would need more patience in his backcourt game- he would need to trade groundstrokes like an Agassi or a peak Safin and mix it up with his volleying.

While we are on the subject of his volleying there is another point that needs to be made- when I look at his volleys they were exploitable especially the FH volley. He had a bit of an unorthodox teechnique and while he did have a huge wingspan and made many dramatic dive volleys (his trademark) he didn't have the fleetfootedness of his greatest rival Edberg or like that of Rafter for example. Those two were textbook serve and volleyers with the footwork and agility and technique perfected down to a T.

So when you combine all the aforementioned factors here is the summary that ensues:

- Becker has powerful groundstrokes but too inconsistent. Federer would win most of the backcourt rallies as he shows more patience and can generate more spins, angles and changes of pace thus denying Becker any real advantage there.
- In order to volley Becker would need to get Federer on the defensive either with a forceful approach shot or with a hard serve. If a baseline rally ensues he may find it difficult (see point above), off the serve he will have some success but Roger can also return very effectively. On the forehand he can hit forecful returns off an aggressive serve and make the ball deep at the feet of the incoming volleyer. On the backhand he can either slice the return or block it making it dip or at times even flick it back with interest using the wrist.
- Becker wasn't really known for his great return game. Federer with a good serving day would not be broken too often against him (if at all).

In short, I like Roger's chances against Becker even on the faster surfaces.