Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,187 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
that he is able to keep the match tight and wear his opponent down, only to be punished by the passing shot of his opponent when facing set points, like when he was "prime", rather than given breadsticks and bagels

Kudos to Olderer, even if he loses today, he has maximized the probability that his main rivals' grand slam count will not increase at this tournament
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,227 Posts
It's not just the BH, you would hardly find "prime Federer" sustain 40+ strokes rallies at high intensity like he did, Wimbledon 2019.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
His BH is better because of the racquet change in 14. Had he done that in his prime he would have had a much deadlier BH in his prime. Even won matches consistently against Nadal, even on clay.
It has nothing to do with his age or post-17.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,082 Posts
Afraid to watch back old Federer matches? Wait it was Roddick faults for not sustaining 40 + rallies.
I'm not sure what your point is. It's clear that Roger Federer was far more attacking from the back of the court during his prime. How are you supposed to "sustain" a 40 stroke rally, when you're hitting bullets from the back and treading the margins so finely?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,187 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
His BH is better because of the racquet change in 14. Had he done that in his prime he would have had a much deadlier BH in his prime. Even won matches consistently against Nadal, even on clay.
It has nothing to do with his age or post-17.
no,his tactics changed
less slice,more wide angle shots
works great against baseline defence
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
no,his tactics changed
less slice,more wide angle shots
works great against baseline defence
His tactics change because of the change of racquet which allowed him to play differently. He used to slice more using the old racquet. Wide angle shits weren't possible/ effective on a regular basis, which is why his BH was never consistent. Had great days, and bad days.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,077 Posts
Afraid to watch back old Federer matches? Wait it was Roddick faults for not sustaining 40 + rallies.
I've watched dozens of them and you're talking shit with the false equivalence of 40+shot rallies to great baselining. Rallies that long basically don't happen unless the players are pushing (see Simon-Monfils 71-shot point for example). Go find out and tell me how many 40+shot rallies have Djokovic and Nadal played in their career matches, I know it's a single digit number. In fact, there are few points going beyond 20 shots (30 shots on clay), 1-2 per set on average. As for peak/prime Federer's ability to maintain 10-30-shot rallies, go watch Federer-Nadal in 2005-09 (overall Nadal had a solid edge in that category on clay but only a slight edge off clay), or to see Federer best a great though not all-time great baseliner, Federer-Hewitt 2004-05.
 

·
justice for all
Joined
·
15,154 Posts
That's false news, OP.

Old Fed's BH >> Current Fed's BH
Old Fed's FH >>>> Current Fed's FH
Old Fed's serve >> Current Fed's serve
Old Fed's movement >>>>> Current Fed's movement
Old Fed's endurance >>>> Current Fed's endurance

The only shots that are comparable to his prime are purely technical ones, i.e. volleys and drop shots.

This man is approaching 40 years of age, FFS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,187 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
His tactics change because of the change of racquet which allowed him to play differently. He used to slice more using the old racquet. Wide angle shits weren't possible/ effective on a regular basis, which is why his BH was never consistent. Had great days, and bad days.
the "allowing" you mentioned happened years later than the racquet change
he was playing great in 2015 without doing this
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,227 Posts
I'm not sure what your point is. It's clear that Roger Federer was far more attacking from the back of the court during his prime. How are you supposed to "sustain" a 40 stroke rally, when you're hitting bullets from the back and treading the margins so finely?
Against elite defense, you need to sustain attacking play. One of the reason a 2004-2007 Fed was having troubles with early Nadal, Canas, Simon and the likes was the regularity from the back of the court. Of course i wouldn't say Federer's weapons are more potent now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,227 Posts
I've watched dozens of them and you're talking shit with the false equivalence of 40+shot rallies to great baselining. Rallies that long basically don't happen unless the players are pushing (see Simon-Monfils 71-shot point for example). Go find out and tell me how many 40+shot rallies have Djokovic and Nadal played in their career matches, I know it's a single digit number. In fact, there are few points going beyond 20 shots (30 shots on clay), 1-2 per set on average. As for peak/prime Federer's ability to maintain 10-30-shot rallies, go watch Federer-Nadal in 2005-09 (overall Nadal had a solid edge in that category on clay but only a slight edge off clay), or to see Federer best a great though not all-time great baseliner, Federer-Hewitt 2004-05.
Watch Federer at last Wimbledon, he was rallying with the best Nadal and Djokovic in many 30+ shots rallies, and don't tell me those are pushers.

I don't think Hewitt was anywhere near Nadal/Djokovic level, probably closer to Murray and we have seen how an older Federer has owned Andy Murray.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,077 Posts
Watch Federer at last Wimbledon, he was rallying with the best Nadal and Djokovic in many 30+ shots rallies, and don't tell me those are pushers.

I don't think Hewitt was anywhere near Nadal/Djokovic level, probably closer to Murray and we have seen how an older Federer has owned Andy Murray.
Lol at these Nadalovic being at their best now. Watch the strokes, and don't forget to count the number of 30+shot rallies you're blabbering about here.

The Fedray match-up history is routinely misanalysed, a correctly construed narrative considering the circumstances cannot be found, neither do you appear capable of appreciating it so no argument shall be entered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,954 Posts
His BH is better because of the racquet change in 14. Had he done that in his prime he would have had a much deadlier BH in his prime. Even won matches consistently against Nadal, even on clay.
It has nothing to do with his age or post-17.
Against Nadal with a 35-40 seconds respite time between the points Federer's OHBH in his prime would've still had next to zero chances of survival in bo5 rubbers on clay and slower HC, regardless of the racquet size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,255 Posts
It's not just the BH, you would hardly find "prime Federer" sustain 40+ strokes rallies at high intensity like he did, Wimbledon 2019.
His game isn’t to try and rally forever like Dull and Djokovic, his game is aggressive and trying to win the points early.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top