PDA

View Full Version : Reason for Federer's Recent Losses


Jimmyk459
01-10-2009, 10:11 AM
One word... simple as that... DEPTH!!!!!!!!!!!


If you watched his matches with Murray, all of his shots were landing one or two feet passed the service boxes. Murray was able to stay at the baseline instead of being forced back. Murray, on the other hand, was hitting his shots hard and deep consistently a foot near the baseline which made it hard for Federer to be agressive.



anyone else have any ideas?

Sentinel
01-10-2009, 10:18 AM
Federer was hitting the lines, and the corners. He had Murray running left and right. The only thing yesterdays match proved to me is that Murray does not have the stamina to match Federer/Nadal.

Murray was just pushing the ball back.

I think that Federer's less extreme grips on both wings could be contributing to his overhitting, but he *was* overhitting.

Murray was almost dying in the 3rd set. Personally i think that at this moment, its more of a mental issue with Fed. However, his competition is improving too.

ThA_Azn_DeViL
01-10-2009, 10:18 AM
I was watching Roddick vs. Murray, Roddicks shots were also very shallow, I havent seen Federer play so i cant say anything, but depth is the most important aspect in the game.

SirBlend12
01-10-2009, 11:20 AM
I'm gonna guess that he was just trying out new strategies. Losing a tourney like Doha means nothing to him anymore. He doesn't need the money, he doesn't need the points, he doesn't need the experience. What he needed was a warmup and a chance to play with some "new toys". Now that he's tested the "new toys", he can go into the AO with a big list of results from his little experiment and play it from there.

All he wanted to do was test things against Andy and be done with it. He probably knows that Andy may very well be the only thing standing between him and another AO trophy. So what to do? Get warmed up and back in the groove for the season, test some new stuff he jotted in the playbook, take a nice analysis of how it worked AND how your main opponent/threat is playing, and dip out to rest until the 19th.

He knows what he wants nowadays, and I would highly doubt a Doha title and a couple hundred grand are it. He's waiting for his next Slam.

It's just a theory, but at least it seems logical (maybe only to me, but that's alright). You certainly don't win 13 Slams by being a dumbass.

TennezSport
01-10-2009, 12:01 PM
^^^SirBlend12^^^

There is a lot of truth is what SB12 said as Fed is looking at the big picture. I have often thought this about Fed as I used to with Sampras. But I also think that Fed wanted to do better in this match for the mental confidence.

I think that is where he is lacking so far, as the UEs keep building up. He even stated in his post match press conference, that he was upset in his performance in the 3rd set. You know that will be greater motivation for him at the AO, if he can just keep those UEs in check.

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

GameSampras
01-10-2009, 12:30 PM
Fed wanted that match. He was cursing up a storm and look extemely ****ed off. Fed's recent losses havent came at the hands of anyone but Murray recently. Murray is just a problematic matchup for ROger. Would be against any Roger. Murrays a strong guy, whos mental toughness is increasing and he can manage to get alot of Fed's shots back in play and force fed into overhitting a shot or into the net. Fed had game even back at his peak where great returners could force fed into bad shots. Its not like its just NOW that Fed has become an UE machine.

TennezSport
01-10-2009, 12:50 PM
Fed had game even back at his peak where great returners could force fed into bad shots. Its not like its just NOW that Fed has become an UE machine.

That is so true but in the past Fed would figure a way to turn things around and execute it. His winners usually out numbered his UEs and this is not the case in the last year or so. I think it's a combo of physical and mental (more mental) fatigue in holding the #1 position for so long; no small feat indeed.

I still believe that we will see a little more Fed magic before he is done. He just has to mentally re-group and the magic could flow once again; here's hoping.

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

l_gonzalez
01-10-2009, 12:50 PM
Fed wanted that match. He was cursing up a storm and look extemely ****ed off. Fed's recent losses havent came at the hands of anyone but Murray recently. Murray is just a problematic matchup for ROger. Would be against any Roger. Murrays a strong guy, whos mental toughness is increasing and he can manage to get alot of Fed's shots back in play and force fed into overhitting a shot or into the net. Fed had game even back at his peak where great returners could force fed into bad shots. Its not like its just NOW that Fed has become an UE machine.

Difference is, he used to win those matches, now he loses them.

I don't buy into the whole "testing out new things" theory. He lost cos he's not playing well enough, and it's mostly if not 100% mental.

Frankly, if any player goes on court thinking "i couldn't care less whether i win or lose" then they shouldn't even play. You play to win or you don't play.

You really think Roger wants to get beaten time and again by Murray? Hell no, he wants to beat him, but since the US Open final, he can't find a way.

sureshs
01-10-2009, 01:10 PM
His small head racquet could be the reason for his frequent weak low-depth shots.

Mick
01-10-2009, 01:16 PM
the reason is murray has become a better player. not only has he beaten federer but he also has beaten nadal, djokovic, etc...

TheTruth
01-10-2009, 01:31 PM
Fed's had an incredible run year in and year out. He's stood alone at the top of the mountain, except for a kid named Nadal. No worries, Nadal was only a clay courter, so he could deal with that. But in the interim the other good players have started to grow up and mature as well. The entire Nadal, Tsonga, Simon, Djokovic, and Murray group are coming into their prime (21-23).

Fed knew this day was coming, knew it would be hard to keep up his pristine achievements and is pushing the panic button a bit.

The problem is mental. What he should do is just play without trying to get back to #1, tie or surpass Pete, just play his game.

His nerviness and high UFE totals point to his lack of confidence.

fps
01-10-2009, 01:40 PM
OP may be right. Lack of depth is definitely pulled out as a reason why Nadal's results on hard courts fail to match up to his clay/grass levels, it may apply to Fed now.

Richie Rich
01-10-2009, 01:48 PM
i agree with the some other posters and i think fed is getting some matches under his belt and saving himself for a chance to tie pete at the aussie open. there is no way he would be giving 100% in the exo 2 weeks ago and in doha.

i think if the match with murray had been the semis of the aussie open the outcome would have been different.

thejoe
01-10-2009, 02:02 PM
I don't by the whole "only the slams matter" thing. To me, it sounds like a bad excuse for bad form. I agree that Roger can lift his game more in the slams, but that is just an instinct, it isn't anything he has control over in the smaller tournaments. The reason Roger lost yesterday was because he served very badly, and his unforced error count was high. Winning is a habit, and I don't think Roger could switch that instinct off in any competitive match, even a "small" one like Doha. He beat Murray in the US Open final so convincingly because he played more like the Federer of old, with the amazing forehand and fearless strokes. This meant that getting the ball back was not enough for Murray. In their matches, Murray has done nothing special. He has served well and kept his number of errors down.

Otherside
01-10-2009, 02:21 PM
Look at a clip from - 05 or -06 and the answer is obvious, the intensity and smoothness he had in his footwork back then was unmatched and I dont think we will ever see someone move like that again. He still moves great but not like that. I don't feel like he has done his homework in December, if he plays like he did in the USO final he will take the AO but in that final he had one of those days, the old Fed was always that good.
Watching Fed play his best is out of this world and I hope we'll get to see it again, I doubt it will happen in AO but maybe sometime later in the year.

swedechris
01-10-2009, 02:40 PM
i think fed was very very close to taking this match against Andy Murray last night in 2 straight sets. he had 3 bps at 2-1 up in the 2nd set and all the momentum on his side, he was in control, no doubt about it. next time, especially if in a GS i think the tables will turn.
i think he will do it already in the OZ open.he will rebound.

luckyboy1300
01-10-2009, 03:23 PM
One word... simple as that... DEPTH!!!!!!!!!!!


If you watched his matches with Murray, all of his shots were landing one or two feet passed the service boxes. Murray was able to stay at the baseline instead of being forced back. Murray, on the other hand, was hitting his shots hard and deep consistently a foot near the baseline which made it hard for Federer to be agressive.



anyone else have any ideas?

this was also mentioned by the commentators. murray almost always hits deep, especially on his backhand, leaving roger no room to attack. meanwhile, while federer also hits his strokes deep at every corner once in a while, his shots almost always bounce near the service line.

janipyt05
01-10-2009, 06:30 PM
Man it was for me sad to see Federer lose the way he did. Federer had 3 break points and Murray defends all and wins the game Federer faded after that, there has been only 2 matches that i have seen Federer fade French open last year and Against Murray. Federer almost never shows he is struggling but he let it all out. He was rushed, made many errors, rushed, made to run all over and became sloppy.

First it was Nadal he was having a hard time with now its Federer.

tennis_hand
01-11-2009, 05:39 PM
Murray is 6 years younger than Fed. and Murray is still before his age of peak form.

Mansewerz
01-11-2009, 05:41 PM
I wasn't heartbroken after watching Federer's loss.



:twisted:






Because I didn't watch it. Knowing that he lost was heartbreaking.

GameSampras
01-11-2009, 05:43 PM
Small potatoes to Roger losing to Murray at Doha, Masters, YEC. Fed is at the point in his career like most of the greats were by that age, the most important tournaments are the slams. Especially when you are chasing the GS record. Pete was suffering the same problem at around the same age. More emphasis on the Slams and worrying about kicking into that extra gear when it matters most. I doubt Fed is too concerned in getting number 1 and playing the week in week out tennis again.

When Fed starts getting whooped like that by Murray at the slams, then there is a problem. Until then...

veroniquem
01-11-2009, 05:43 PM
I wasn't heartbroken after watching Federer's loss.



:twisted:






Because I didn't watch it. Knowing that he lost was heartbreaking.
You're definitely NOT Nadal Freak then :)

veroniquem
01-11-2009, 05:46 PM
[quote=GameSampras;2998277]Small potatoes to Roger losing to Murray at Doha, Masters, YEC. Fed is at the point in his career like most of the greats were by that age, the most important tournaments are the slams. Especially when you are chasing the GS record. Pete was suffering the same problem at around the same age. More emphasis on the Slams and worrying about kicking into that extra gear when it matters most. I doubt Fed is too concerned in getting number 1 and playing the week in week out tennis again.

When Fed starts getting whooped like that by Murray at the slams, then there is a problem. Until then...
He may not have gotten whooped by Murray yet but he got whooped by Nadal alright, so the slam whooping has already started for poor Fed :twisted:

Mansewerz
01-11-2009, 05:46 PM
You're definitely NOT Nadal Freak then :)

But I even used the signature :twisted:........

jetlee2k
01-11-2009, 09:28 PM
Small potatoes to Roger losing to Murray at Doha, Masters, YEC. Fed is at the point in his career like most of the greats were by that age, the most important tournaments are the slams. Especially when you are chasing the GS record. Pete was suffering the same problem at around the same age. More emphasis on the Slams and worrying about kicking into that extra gear when it matters most. I doubt Fed is too concerned in getting number 1 and playing the week in week out tennis again.

When Fed starts getting whooped like that by Murray at the slams, then there is a problem. Until then...

I don't buy this reason at all.. A champion never wants to lose .. it's either pee wee tennis.. WII tennis.. ping pong.. or just in and exhibition.. Federer of course wants to win badly but somehow he's so inconsistence.. he lost the confidence and his strokes start flying every where.. His forehand use to be a weapon but now is also his weakness.. It's heart broken to see him keep losing all the time now..

DJG
01-11-2009, 09:33 PM
It is unrealistic to expect Federer, after all his years at the top, to continue to play at the same level, at 27 with all these hungry young guns. Things change. Roger still has a number of good years ahead of him, but there is also competition on the horizon.

Make no mistake, he is still a hugely talented competitor and will still wow us with "how the hell did he do that" shots, at least for the forseeable future. But he will also lose some, that is all part of the game. I for one am very happy with the level of current competition - diversity is always a good thing.

DoubleDeuce
01-11-2009, 09:55 PM
It is unrealistic to expect Federer, after all his years at the top, to continue to play at the same level, at 27 with all these hungry young guns. Things change. Roger still has a number of good years ahead of him, but there is also competition on the horizon.

Make no mistake, he is still a hugely talented competitor and will still wow us with "how the hell did he do that" shots, at least for the forseeable future. But he will also lose some, that is all part of the game. I for one am very happy with the level of current competition - diversity is always a good thing.

Very reasonable comments. The competition has grown no doubt and hugely because of Roger himself. 27 is older than his main competition but not old for the game at all. He can still improve and adjust to new challenges he is facing considering the genius he is. Previously, I had preferred him skipping the exos and small tournies and focus on practice and fitness but now I see he wanted the experience and adjustments.
I am wishing him success in up coming big events so we all can enjoy watching him play and amaze us with his talent.

martini1
01-11-2009, 10:37 PM
It is unrealistic to expect Federer, after all his years at the top, to continue to play at the same level, at 27 with all these hungry young guns. Things change. Roger still has a number of good years ahead of him, but there is also competition on the horizon.

Make no mistake, he is still a hugely talented competitor and will still wow us with "how the hell did he do that" shots, at least for the forseeable future. But he will also lose some, that is all part of the game. I for one am very happy with the level of current competition - diversity is always a good thing.

Very reasonable comments. The competition has grown no doubt and hugely because of Roger himself. 27 is older than his main competition but not old for the game at all. He can still improve and adjust to new challenges he is facing considering the genius he is. Previously, I had preferred him skipping the exos and small tournies and focus on practice and fitness but now I see he wanted the experience and adjustments.
I am wishing him success in up coming big events so we all can enjoy watching him play and amaze us with his talent.

Fed will win another slam (or more) in the next few years but he should face the fact that he can't win them all like back in 04, 06, or 07. Once he got beaten a few times everybody will study those videos like hell and find the way to crack him again. The scary thing is there will be an unknown kid from nowhere that Fed knows nothing about; comes out and may just beat him in center court like what he did to Sampras.

That is the only golden rules in sports. You can't win them all and you can't last forever. No one did.

DoubleDeuce
01-11-2009, 11:06 PM
Fed will win another slam (or more) in the next few years but he should face the fact that he can't win them all like back in 04, 06, or 07. Once he got beaten a few times everybody will study those videos like hell and find the way to crack him again. The scary thing is there will be an unknown kid from nowhere that Fed knows nothing about; comes out and may just beat him in center court like what he did to Sampras.

That is the only golden rules in sports. You can't win them all and you can't last forever. No one did.

Yes, Noone can win them all and obviously noone lasts forever. But Even in 04,06,07 he didn't win them all either and I am sure he has no illusion about that for future nor should his fans or others.

martini1
01-12-2009, 12:05 AM
Yes, Noone can win them all and obviously noone lasts forever. But Even in 04,06,07 he didn't win them all either and I am sure he has no illusion about that for future nor should his fans or others.

:) Almost...win them all.

Dark Victory
01-12-2009, 02:13 AM
There were times against Murray when Fed would try to serve-and-volley or chip-in-charge. Too bad they weren't effective. But still, I guess there's merit to speculation that he's trying new things out without being too mindful of results.

No doubt he's thinking long-term and has realized his game needs some tweaking in order to stay above, or at the very least, be on par with a largely homogeneous competition pool.

I wish Fed had a serve like Pete's to easily win free points. That way, even with his diminishing agility, he could still play economical and relatively effort-free games.

I think it'll become even more apparent soon that his movement is not what it used to be (he peaked in 05 and gradually declined/slowed down from 06-08 ) and that he can now be overpowered and muscled around.

luckyboy1300
01-12-2009, 03:16 AM
I don't buy this reason at all.. A champion never wants to lose .. it's either pee wee tennis.. WII tennis.. ping pong.. or just in and exhibition.. Federer of course wants to win badly but somehow he's so inconsistence.. he lost the confidence and his strokes start flying every where.. His forehand use to be a weapon but now is also his weakness.. It's heart broken to see him keep losing all the time now..

whatever idealism you want to believe, tanking is and has been a part of all sports, and tennis is not excluded. true champions love to win, of course. but there are places where they want to win and places for preparing to win. doha is just a preparation. we'll see real tennis at the australian open.

JankovicFan
01-12-2009, 03:53 AM
Murray was almost dying in the 3rd set. Personally i think that at this moment, its more of a mental issue with Fed. However, his competition is improving too.

I didn't get that. While there have been times, especially in five set matches, that Murray was definitely out of legs, he was going strong against Federer. Murray is somewhat like Simon, who can look like he is about to go into cardiac arrest and is still winning points. That in contrast to Federer, who one has to watch closely to even notice some sweat. Murray's fitness seems better but won't be tested until a five set match after a tough match the day before. That's where he has faded badly on more than one occasion in the past and why he has worked so hard on being stronger.

shakes1975
01-12-2009, 02:38 PM
I don't buy this reason at all.. A champion never wants to lose .. it's either pee wee tennis.. WII tennis.. ping pong.. or just in and exhibition.. Federer of course wants to win badly but somehow he's so inconsistence.. he lost the confidence and his strokes start flying every where.. His forehand use to be a weapon but now is also his weakness.. It's heart broken to see him keep losing all the time now..

No champion wants to lose ... period. But how badly do they want to win in a warm-up tournament compared to a slam ? I guarantee you that if fed had played against andreev in cincinnatti instead of the USO 4th rd last year, he would've lost that match. But just bcos it was the USO and his last chance to win a slam last year, he dug in a little more deeper than he would otherwise have done.

he didn't do that against murray last week.

Lendl and Federer Fan
01-12-2009, 10:11 PM
If you go back and watch the Federer in 04, 05 &06, he enjoyed the long rallies and tennis, now it is more like a job for him to break Pistol Pete's 14 GS record. Federer is not going to win more than 3 more GS if he treats tennis like a job. :twisted::)

Lendl and Federer Fan
01-12-2009, 10:20 PM
It is all in his head. And I don't like him adding more margin of error in his game. Remember Becker, Becker didn't lose his edge until he tried to be more consistent with his forehand and especially his serves, by being more conservative started in 1990 or 91. Although Becker had initial success by being more consistent, but it was all down hill from that point on.

If you look at Federer's game, his groundstrokes are not as penetrating and forceful as before. I think he adds too much topspin to his groundies, and that makes it easier for his opponents to be able to stay with him. Simply put it, Federer is not dictating the plays like he did before.

yellowoctopus
01-13-2009, 05:48 AM
Fed will win another slam (or more) in the next few years but he should face the fact that he can't win them all like back in 04, 06, or 07. Once he got beaten a few times everybody will study those videos like hell and find the way to crack him again. The scary thing is there will be an unknown kid from nowhere that Fed knows nothing about; comes out and may just beat him in center court like what he did to Sampras.

That is the only golden rules in sports. You can't win them all and you can't last forever. No one did.

Well put.

Although, I believe that losing at Wimbledon will always be the most challenging for Federer to cope.

martini1
01-13-2009, 06:01 AM
Well put.

Although, I believe that losing at Wimbledon will always be the most challenging for Federer to cope.

Of course. But in pro sports they also have shrinks to help them to over come tough breaks. They have to move on and keep on being competitive. I am very interested to see how Fed comes back to Wimbledon this year. He still got good chances to make a 6th final, and win it. If it is Nadal vs Federer again it would be the most interesting.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 06:08 AM
Of course. But in pro sports they also have shrinks to help them to over come tough breaks. They have to move on and keep on being competitive. I am very interested to see how Fed comes back to Wimbledon this year. He still got good chances to make a 6th final, and win it. If it is Nadal vs Federer again it would be the most interesting.
If it is Fed vs Nadal, I'll bet you any amount that Nadal wins again (he's in Fed's head too much). The best chance for Fed to recover the title is if Nadal has a mishap before the final (same thing for the FO).

ericsson
01-13-2009, 10:07 AM
It is unrealistic to expect Federer, after all his years at the top, to continue to play at the same level, at 27 with all these hungry young guns. Things change. Roger still has a number of good years ahead of him, but there is also competition on the horizon.

Make no mistake, he is still a hugely talented competitor and will still wow us with "how the hell did he do that" shots, at least for the forseeable future. But he will also lose some, that is all part of the game. I for one am very happy with the level of current competition - diversity is always a good thing.

Second that!
Ohh it will be a nice Aussie Open i think, he's still the favorite but a lot of sharks out there and some are hungry...

batz
01-13-2009, 10:11 AM
According to one poster on RF.com, the loss in Doha was due to the events in Gaza!:shock: