PDA

View Full Version : Federer's current form is irrelevant


Defcon
06-07-2008, 01:11 AM
General opinion seems to be that the way fed struggled in the semi-final means he has no chance against Nadal. This is nonsense.

1. Fed will have to play the match of his life against Nadal. You don't play that 2 matches in a row, if he had triple bagelled Mofees it would be hard to expect that form to keep up.

2. It doesn't matter how bad/well he does against others, except for fitness, and Fed is supremely fit. You cannot prepare for Nadal! No amount of match play will help you in getting ready to face Rafa.

Fed knows what he has to do against Nadal. At least I hope he has a gameplan, or Higueras does. One of Fed's greatest strengths is his adaptability, the ability to switch tactics. He has not done in the last 2 finals, I hope he stays focused mentally. Thats the most important thing he needs to do.

armsty
06-07-2008, 01:13 AM
You couldn't have used one of the other 10 threads to voice your opinion?

Rhino
06-07-2008, 01:27 AM
I also doubt he put as much into planning to play Monfils as he has done in planning to play Nadal. He was talking about game-plans for meeting Nadal in the final after the Gonzalez match, he knew he could beat Monfils and it didn't matter if Monfils upped his game it just meant it might be a 4-setter.

I may start a new thread for this point :)

flyer
06-07-2008, 06:10 AM
General opinion seems to be that the way fed struggled in the semi-final means he has no chance against Nadal. This is nonsense.

1. Fed will have to play the match of his life against Nadal. You don't play that 2 matches in a row, if he had triple bagelled Mofees it would be hard to expect that form to keep up.

2. It doesn't matter how bad/well he does against others, except for fitness, and Fed is supremely fit. You cannot prepare for Nadal! No amount of match play will help you in getting ready to face Rafa.

Fed knows what he has to do against Nadal. At least I hope he has a gameplan, or Higueras does. One of Fed's greatest strengths is his adaptability, the ability to switch tactics. He has not done in the last 2 finals, I hope he stays focused mentally. Thats the most important thing he needs to do.

Good points, some very good points, I think your right in a sense but I think in terms of confidence you always want to come in playing good tennis against the best players in the world, you want to feel like you can play at your highest level, so I think it does matter to an extent thought, form usually keeps up for a short period of time

your right about the match of your life thing though, thats unpredictable no matter what your form is, and I think thats really the only way Federer will win, he will need to play the match of his life

Swissv2
06-07-2008, 07:46 AM
Since Fed is the clear underdog in the finals...he really has nothing to lose.

That should technically put less pressure on him - and all he has to do on Sunday is play his heart out.

WBF
06-07-2008, 07:50 AM
1. Fed will have to play the match of his life against Nadal.


However you want to justify it, this seems to be the case, and I can't remember the last time I saw Federer play the tennis that would earn him this champinoship. Without a miracle, he will be crushed.

NamRanger
06-07-2008, 07:57 AM
However you want to justify it, this seems to be the case, and I can't remember the last time I saw Federer play the tennis that would earn him this champinoship. Without a miracle, he will be crushed.


He has been playing tennis specifically geared for playing against guys like Nadal. It may have cost him a set or two along the way, but he's gotten to the final without too much trouble.


He will be fine in the final; I highly doubt Nadal can crush Federer. It will be warmer, but nowhere near as hot or dry as the years before. The conditions are perfect for Federer; He just needs to execute his gameplan instead of trying to outmuscle Nadal from the back of the court.

cueboyzn
06-07-2008, 08:04 AM
Monfils was just a distraction on the way to the final against Nadal. Roger probably played Monfils with half his mind on his gameplan on Sunday. Hes already shown what kind of form he can produce against Montanes Ancic and Gonzales. Especially Gonzales. Roll on the Final between the 2 heavyweights of world tennis.

daddy
06-07-2008, 08:12 AM
General opinion seems to be that the way fed struggled in the semi-final means he has no chance against Nadal. This is nonsense.

I think that General opinion has much more to do with the fact that he lose so many matches on clay vs this oponent. Anyways if you want to further analyse their matchup it gets worse for Federer. He managed to win 3 meetings on hard, 2 on grass and 1 on clay. But the very first time he run into the Kid from Mallorca he lost - on hard court in Miami 04. Then again was very close to losing in Miami 05 where he lost first couple of sets then to come back and win 3-2. Then he lost not only in RG but in Dubai - fastest HC thre is. Why all this talk ? Well back then he was not paying much attention to the kid, meaning he was not going to specially prepare some tacticts for the 90th ranked Spaniard in Miami. Year after you can say the same thing - Rafa was in 30 - 50th place rankingwise. Only after the RG 05 did Roger start and think what to do with him - because he had to. He was getting beat at hard and clay at that time. His tactical changes worked well preventing Rafa from owning him at faster surfaces but the only way to play against him - to attack - is not the best way to play on clay so its a two way highway. You have to go for it and attack on the surface which is slowest and unpredictable.

Matchupwise this is Roger Federer's nightmare. He is so unlucky for this kid to have developed so fast, if Nadal was a late bloomer I feel Roger would be well and truly at 15 slams with a couple of RG titles at least.

jrachiever
06-07-2008, 08:23 AM
I think that General opinion has much more to do with the fact that he lose so many matches on clay vs this oponent. Anyways if you want to further analyse their matchup it gets worse for Federer. He managed to win 3 meetings on hard, 2 on grass and 1 on clay. But the very first time he run into the Kid from Mallorca he lost - on hard court in Miami 04. Then again was very close to losing in Miami 05 where he lost first couple of sets then to come back and win 3-2. Then he lost not only in RG but in Dubai - fastest HC thre is. Why all this talk ? Well back then he was not paying much attention to the kid, meaning he was not going to specially prepare some tacticts for the 90th ranked Spaniard in Miami. Year after you can say the same thing - Rafa was in 30 - 50th place rankingwise. Only after the RG 05 did Roger start and think what to do with him - because he had to. He was getting beat at hard and clay at that time. His tactical changes worked well preventing Rafa from owning him at faster surfaces but the only way to play against him - to attack - is not the best way to play on clay so its a two way highway. You have to go for it and attack on the surface which is slowest and unpredictable.

Matchupwise this is Roger Federer's nightmare. He is so unlucky for this kid to have developed so fast, if Nadal was a late bloomer I feel Roger would be well and truly at 15 slams with a couple of RG titles at least.

Rafa was #2 when he beat Federer in Dubai in 06'. But yes, aside from that match Federer has owned him on non-clay since then.

PCXL-Fan
06-07-2008, 08:29 AM
Rafa was #2 when he beat Federer in Dubai in 06'. But yes, aside from that match Federer has owned him on non-clay since then.

While i love Federer (not in a gay way), he doesn't own Nadal. They are usually tight and fairly competitive matches, and some like last years Wimbledon Final are monumental challenges for Federer.

TheTruth
06-07-2008, 09:06 AM
General opinion seems to be that the way fed struggled in the semi-final means he has no chance against Nadal. This is nonsense.

You're right. Current form means nothing. Roger will lift his game to play Nadal. All champions do!

prince
06-07-2008, 11:32 AM
roger just neds to play consistent good tennis all match vs nadal
their last meeting on clay he had opportunities to win but cannot sustain the level needed to beat rafa.

cmb
06-07-2008, 11:44 AM
the comment about the conditions is right on the money. I am in Paris now, and playing on some clay around the city, the sun is not out baking the dirt dry, the balls are not bouncing up too high and IT IS SLOW! Fed has a great chance if these conditions continue throughout tomorrow, its a partly cloudy forecast for tomorrow so hopefully the clouds will stay as long as possible!

Lets have a great final!

Zaragoza
06-07-2008, 12:12 PM
the comment about the conditions is right on the money. I am in Paris now, and playing on some clay around the city, the sun is not out baking the dirt dry, the balls are not bouncing up too high and IT IS SLOW! Fed has a great chance if these conditions continue throughout tomorrow, its a partly cloudy forecast for tomorrow so hopefully the clouds will stay as long as possible!

Weather conditions are overrated. Nadal has played his best tennis this year in cloudy days and has beaten Federer under all possible conditions.
On the other hand Federer has played his worst tennis at RG in the last 3 years. I think Federer was playing very well in Montecarlo and Hamburg prior to the final but he still lost to Nadal. I donīt see him playing that well now.
On the other hand Nadal is playing his best tennis on clay this year, his backhand is being scary,the bounces are higher on this court and itīs a best of 5 which makes it even tougher to beat him.
Anything can happen in one particular match but I canīt see any objective arguments to be optimistic about Federerīs chances.

TheTruth
06-07-2008, 01:00 PM
Weather conditions are overrated. Nadal has played his best tennis this year in cloudy days and has beaten Federer under all possible conditions.
On the other hand Federer has played his worst tennis at RG in the last 3 years. I think Federer was playing very well in Montecarlo and Hamburg prior to the final but he still lost to Nadal. I donīt see him playing that well now.
On the other hand Nadal is playing his best tennis on clay this year, his backhand is being scary,the bounces are higher on this court and itīs a best of 5 which makes it even tougher to beat him.
Anything can happen in one particular match but I canīt see any objective arguments to be optimistic about Federerīs chances.

Very well put!

NikeWilson
06-07-2008, 01:04 PM
Mofils is no comparison to Nadal.
Federer is going to get straight-setted in the Final.

Nadal_Freak
06-07-2008, 01:06 PM
Yeah Roland Garros is the highest bouncing clay I've seen. Maybe Green Clay is higher bouncing. I've heard it was but got to see it to believe it. Vamos Rafa.

Tempyst
06-07-2008, 01:07 PM
To me, whether Federer wins or loses is less important than making it a good match that showcases the best of the both players. Three consecutive French Open finals is good enough for me to believe that he is GOAT.

Philcoa
06-07-2008, 01:23 PM
Federer's a great player but apart from Nadal on clay and maybe Djokovic in recent times when everything is right for him, Federer's opposition has been really weak. The likes of Roddick (three times), Bagdhatis, Hewitt are not top drawer players and they can offer nothing but token opposition in to a true top flight player. Nadal on clay aside, in his Slam finals and earlier rounds Federer seldom had to face anyone of the caliber of McEnroe, Borg, Vilas, Connors, Lendl, Edberg, Wilander, Becker, Chang, Stich, Agassi at his best, Courier, Sampras, Bruguera, Kuerten, Courier, Kafelnikov or Rafter so he's had a really cushy ride so far. Despite his confident talk, once again I don't expect him to seriously challenge Nadal in the Roland Garros final.

2nd_Serve
06-07-2008, 03:51 PM
Monfils took Federer to four sets because he was playing with big confidence, and really went for things. Think about it. If you won five tournaments in a row, you'd be confident with your game, and just try and go for winners right? And that confidence would keep the balls in a paint the lines. Thats why Monfils took Federer to four sets. But you know, even thought I want Federer to win, and have some reasons why I think he will win, I know, in the back of my mind, that Nadal will most likely be the winner.

veroniquem
06-07-2008, 03:53 PM
Monfils took Federer to four sets because he was playing with big confidence, and really went for things. Think about it. If you won five tournaments in a row, you'd be confident with your game, and just try and go for winners right? And that confidence would keep the balls in a paint the lines. Thats why Monfils took Federer to four sets. But you know, even thought I want Federer to win, and have some reasons why I think he will win, I know, in the back of my mind, that Nadal will most likely be the winner.
Monfils won 5 tournaments in a row? Which ones?

daddy
06-07-2008, 04:02 PM
Monfils won 5 tournaments in a row? Which ones?

Cmon dont be an ***. 5 matches in a row is what he ment, and you know it.

BkK_b0y14
06-07-2008, 05:06 PM
Federer's a great player but apart from Nadal on clay and maybe Djokovic in recent times when everything is right for him, Federer's opposition has been really weak. The likes of Roddick (three times), Bagdhatis, Hewitt are not top drawer players and they can offer nothing but token opposition in to a true top flight player. Nadal on clay aside, in his Slam finals and earlier rounds Federer seldom had to face anyone of the caliber of McEnroe, Borg, Vilas, Connors, Lendl, Edberg, Wilander, Becker, Chang, Stich, Agassi at his best, Courier, Sampras, Bruguera, Kuerten, Courier, Kafelnikov or Rafter so he's had a really cushy ride so far. Despite his confident talk, once again I don't expect him to seriously challenge Nadal in the Roland Garros final.

Can people seriously quit comparing Fed's competition to Pete's? Sheesh.

Nadal_Freak
06-07-2008, 05:09 PM
Can people seriously quit comparing Fed's competition to Pete's? Sheesh.
Pete's from USA so of course people will overrate him. If you ask my opinion, Fed is clearly better.