PDA

View Full Version : Federer: I don’t work on weaknesses


TheNatural
02-26-2009, 03:29 PM
This idea of not working on his weaknesses is not working. Nadal has beaten him 5 times in a row now by picking apart his weaknesses. How many slam finals in a row does Fed have to lose to Nadal before it clicks for him?

Is Federer talented enough to evolve the weaker parts of his game? Id like to see him evolve his net game, play more aggressive returns instead of blocking them always, and make his backhand a weapon. The rivalry with Nadal will get boring unless Fed evolves some other parts of his game. :)



Federer: I don’t work on weaknesses (http://www.xpress4me.com/sport/uae/tennis/20012102.html)


By Jaydip Sengupta, Sports Writer - 26 Feb 09

Dubai - Talking of great tennis obsessions, you need not look beyond Ivan Lendl’s laboured attempts at trying to win on the treacherous Wimbledon grass or Pete Sampras’s failed forays on the ridiculously slow clay of Roland Garros.

At 13 Grand Slam titles and with arguments still raging about his status of being the greatest player of all time, World No 2 Roger Federer has his own goals to achieve and for the moment, the French Open isn’t one of them.

Talking to XPRESS on the sidelines of the Jura Coffee Cocktail Launch event, Federer said: “It’s difficult to judge who is the greatest of all time. Winning the French Open would of course round off what has already been an incredible career for me but right now my priority is getting past Sampras’s record of 14 titles.

I believe it’s important to chase your dreams and one of them is also to win the Olympic singles gold on the grass courts of Wimbledon in 2012. I am still young in tennis terms and still have some bit to go. And I know I have many more slams and another seven to eight years left in me.”

That recent Australian Open final defeat still hurts, but being the champion that he is, Federer has managed to get over it.

“You can’t win everything. The idea is to take positives from those setbacks and work at getting better. “I have never believed in working on my weaknesses. My serve and my forehand are my strengths and I work on them to get better,” he said.

And despite having to sit out one of his favourite tournaments, the Barclays Dubai Tennis Championships, with a recurring back injury, the Swiss maestro believes he has made the right call to take it easy.

“I am disappointed about not playing in Dubai, but unlike last year when I chose to play on despite not being fully fit, I have decided to recover completely before taking the court again in a few weeks’ time. I am feeling much better this year physically, but I need to be 100 per cent fit to play again,” he said. And the reason for that, according to Federer, is his desire to play on for as long as he can. “Look at Agassi and Connors, they are my inspiration.

I have already played three generations of tennis stars. I started with Sampras and Agassi, then moved on to the likes of Roddick, Hewitt and Safin and now I am playing against Nadal, Djokovic and Murray,” he said.

Federer’s feats

Federer is second in the all-time men’s singles Grand Slam titles list with 13 He trails American Pete Sampras who has won 14 titles.

He won Wimbledon five consecutive times from 2003-2007, the US Open five consecutive times from 2004-2008 and the Australian Open three times – 2004, 2006 and 2007.

The only Grand Slam to elude the Swiss so far is the French Open in which he has been a finalist for the past three years.

obnoxious2
02-26-2009, 03:43 PM
That's why he's just gonna cry more when he loses the next GS final.

oneguy21
02-26-2009, 03:45 PM
I admire Federer's longevity. He is willing to play for eight or seven more years and that just shows the commitment to this sport.

You don't always see that kind of thing in tennis - Clijsters retired early and Sharapova even claims she would like to retire when she's young.

marc45
02-26-2009, 03:48 PM
fascinating statement...i posted the 100% comment earlier but didn't know he said something even more or at least as interesting in the same article...tt psychologists begin

OddJack
02-26-2009, 04:11 PM
Of course, there is not much weaknesses anyways. Makes sense, to just keep doing what he has since it has given him exceptionally great achievements, maybe some minor strategy and planning changes.

6rump
02-26-2009, 04:12 PM
that's not a good idea, or maybe he really like slice backhand so no need top spin...??!!? LOL

Frankauc
02-26-2009, 04:15 PM
lol at olympics gold in 2012

koalakoala
02-26-2009, 04:22 PM
I have reservations on the credibility of this report.

I just don't believe Roger actually said those things.

icedevil0289
02-26-2009, 04:23 PM
oh dear fed. With that attitude, your goal of breaking sampras's record is going to be harder to achieve.

veroniquem
02-26-2009, 04:24 PM
"I have never believed in working on my weaknesses". At least he realized he HAS weaknesses, that's a start I guess :???:

veroniquem
02-26-2009, 04:27 PM
I have reservations on the credibility of this report.

I just don't believe Roger actually said those things.
Do you believe he said that from now on he will only play when he is feeling 100%? Because that sounded equally weird to me.

federerdomination
02-26-2009, 04:27 PM
"I have never believed in working on my weaknesses". At least he realized he HAS weaknesses, that's a start I guess :???:

Wait. Hold on. Federer has weaknesses? *stands shocked* :)

lol

skip1969
02-26-2009, 04:34 PM
i don't know why we put so much stock in what players say at press conferences or interviews. as if they are 100% candid, 100% of the time. for the most part, these are opportunities for soundbites, nothing more.

in every sport i can think of, players, coaches, etc. reveal only what they want to reveal. most of the real info, they keep to themselves, and the people in their camps.

no offense to "Jaydip Sengupta, Sports Writer" . . . but i doubt he's in fed's inner circle.

koalakoala
02-26-2009, 04:51 PM
i don't know why we put so much stock in what players say at press conferences or interviews. as if they are 100% candid, 100% of the time. for the most part, these are opportunities for soundbites, nothing more.

in every sport i can think of, players, coaches, etc. reveal only what they want to reveal. most of the real info, they keep to themselves, and the people in their camps.

no offense to "Jaydip Sengupta, Sports Writer" . . . but i doubt he's in fed's inner circle.

I bet this report is fabric.

Nadal_Freak
02-26-2009, 04:52 PM
Yes Fed has weaknesses. High backhand is pretty obvious. Has he been working on that particular shot? I remember him practicing with a lefty just for Nadal in RG 2007.

icedevil0289
02-26-2009, 04:56 PM
Yes Fed has weaknesses. High backhand is pretty obvious. Has he been working on that particular shot? I remember him practicing with a lefty just for Nadal in RG 2007.

so much for not working on weaknesses.

marc45
02-26-2009, 05:16 PM
forehand volley needs work, relatively speaking

ThA_Azn_DeViL
02-26-2009, 05:19 PM
Interesting article, only time will tell if he will uphold his own promises, this is beginning to look like Obama's promises...

veroniquem
02-26-2009, 05:36 PM
did roger ever say he did not have weaknesses or he was a perfect player?Don't confuse his statements for the statements of *******s. Anways, this article seems wierd to me, but its most likely that I'm biased. I just think the "never" part of it is a very extreme thing to say, even for him.
He said he created a monster :p

samster
02-26-2009, 05:38 PM
Does everyone believe that Federer doesn't work on his weaknesses? Come on...

veroniquem
02-26-2009, 05:40 PM
Does everyone believe that Federer doesn't work on his weaknesses? Come on...
Why? You see him improving on them?

Nadal_Freak
02-26-2009, 05:42 PM
Why? You see him improving on them?
Good point. But you could also say hasn't improved his strengths. He has stayed closes to what they were a few years ago but a little less aggressive and not quite as fast.

raygo
02-26-2009, 05:58 PM
I don't even know how Fed would TRAIN to hit high backhands against Rafa's massive topspin. Nadal hits with more spin than any other player, let alone any lefty Fed could find to train with. Fed's backhand isn't even really a weakness unless he's playing Rafa.

Rafa's honed his physical, functional, never-gonna-give-up juggernaut tennis to the point that Fed can't awesome him off the court like he does to everyone else--even when he's playing WELL. Rafa's improved his weaknesses visibly over the years (to the point where he basically has NONE), but maybe Fed doesn't really know WHAT to work on anymore.

To me, Fed just doesn't have the fire that GOT him to where he's at anymore. He's not old, just not young enough to hang with the younger and hungrier. He can want the hell out of that 14th+ Slam, but he's gonna have to come up with something better than fixing his high topspin backhand.

icedevil0289
02-26-2009, 06:07 PM
He said he created a monster :p

he did create a monster in the sense that he produced really great results and along with that came high expections. That doesn't mean he thinks he's a perfect player or has weaknesses. I've read interviews in which he aknowledges that his backhand is weakness.

Mick
02-26-2009, 06:13 PM
tony roche: let's work on your weaknesses.
roger federer: i don't work on weaknesses and you're fired
:)

marc45
02-26-2009, 06:15 PM
Interesting article, only time will tell if he will uphold his own promises, this is beginning to look like Obama's promises...
what, did obama promise to play davis cup this year?

veroniquem
02-26-2009, 06:41 PM
tony roche: let's work on your weaknesses.
roger federer: i don't work on weaknesses and you're fired
:)
:lol::lol:
10 chars

icedevil0289
02-26-2009, 06:51 PM
tony roche: let's work on your weaknesses.
roger federer: i don't work on weaknesses and you're fired
:)

haha, nice:)

CyBorg
02-26-2009, 07:49 PM
It's interesting how Nadal is the exact opposite of Federer. He constantly makes adjustments. All the time. On the go.

Federer is stereotypically Swiss. So much so that it is funny. He simply refuses to believe that he could possibly be wrong, even when the evidence to the contrary stares him right in the face.

moonbat
02-26-2009, 08:15 PM
^^^^^^^
So true. Maybe Mirka needs to set up an intervention: "Roger, honey, you know I love you, but we could use some more millions in the bank and your signature fragrance just isn't gonna do it."

lawrence
02-26-2009, 08:22 PM
if fed said any of this in 2006, people would be like Wow fed is the greatest.
now that he's said it and isn't winning 3 slams a year, he suddenly sucks?

jeeze

mandy01
02-26-2009, 08:26 PM
IMO He cannot be obsessed with his weaknesses.There are things he can't change in his game.Its always wise to prioritise on working on your strengths.I knew this comment was going to be ripped apart by the usual suspects.Its his choice,no? He's been there,done that.Geez Nadal fans just want to pick him apart for anything and everything . Whatever he's done its worked so far.He cant be like Nadal-they're different individuals with different priorities.Besides I think his was an overstatement-Surely,he must've worked on something thats why he has been on top for so long.

TheNatural
02-26-2009, 08:54 PM
Hes been there done that versus weaker competition. It was good enough not to work on his weaknesses much when Hewitt and Roddick were Fed's main competition, but not any more.

I remember when Roche had plans to improve Feds net game to use net play a lot more in his play and Fed resisted saying that he was only interested in results not improvement. He Sacrificed long term improvement by not taking a few risks and developing other parts of his game more and perhaps risking a few more losses in minor competitions along the way. Now hes paying for it.

IMO He cannot be obsessed with his weaknesses.There are things he can't change in his game.Its always wise to prioritise on working on your strengths.I knew this comment was going to be ripped apart by the usual suspects.Its his choice,no? He's been there,done that.Geez Nadal fans just want to pick him apart for anything and everything . Whatever he's done its worked so far.He cant be like Nadal-they're different individuals with different priorities.Besides I think his was an overstatement-Surely,he must've worked on something thats why he has been on top for so long.

TheNatural
02-26-2009, 08:58 PM
he fired Roche because Roche had big plans to improve his net game, while Fed wanted to continue winning in the same way forever. :)

tony roche: let's work on your weaknesses.
roger federer: i don't work on weaknesses and you're fired
:)

TheNatural
02-26-2009, 09:17 PM
To add insult to injury Giles Simon doesn't think Federer can improve:


Roger Federer becomes the world's most vulnerable tennis ace (http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,24897939-23216,00.html)

"I don't think (Federer) can improve his game now, but I think he's a very good player - maybe the best player of history," Simon said.

mandy01
02-26-2009, 09:22 PM
you're posting old stories.. .I see he has also joined in the 'patronize Roger club'

Gen
02-26-2009, 09:48 PM
Does everyone believe that Federer doesn't work on his weaknesses? Come on...

I do. He's been struggling against Nadal for nearly 5 years, and never did anything to find a way of opposing him. Since Nadal's mentality and approach are dramatically different, and he is working at his weaknesses and improving his game, their latest H2H is 5:0. Some time ago I thought that Federer should hire a coach who could do analytical work for him, generate strategies for beating Nadal, outline the areas of concern. Now I think that there's something wrong with Federer's intelligence. He is either completely overtaken by megalomania, or just commonly stupid.

TheNatural
02-26-2009, 09:51 PM
The original article was written on the 26th of Feb it's new. Simon's comment was quoted in a recent article i referenced and is relevant now unless Simon has suddenly changed his mind and now thinks he can improve.

Besides I want Nadal to have some competition in the slam finals they play - I want Fed to try to improve. It's getting boring. It would be sad if Fed loses to Nadal for the 4th slam final they play in a row by losing the French open final while playing in the same predictable way. :)


you're posting old stories.. .I see he has also joined in the 'patronize Roger club'

Mkie7
02-26-2009, 09:57 PM
oh dear fed. With that attitude, your goal of breaking sampras's record is going to be harder to achieve.


There may be some advantages in working on strength instead of worrying about weaknesses. Working on one's strength can defuse the need to worry about weakness.

Mkie7
02-26-2009, 10:03 PM
I do. He's been struggling against Nadal for nearly 5 years, and never did anything to find a way of opposing him. Since Nadal's mentality and approach are dramatically different, and he is working at his weaknesses and improving his game, their latest H2H is 5:0. Some time ago I thought that Federer should hire a coach who could do analytical work for him, generate strategies for beating Nadal, outline the areas of concern. Now I think that there's something wrong with Federer's intelligence. He is either completely overtaken by megalomania, or just commonly stupid.

for a guy who has achieved what he has both in his career and his charity work.... he's stupid??? You have such high standards... wonder if YOU can keep up with the standards you set for other people.

380pistol
02-26-2009, 10:29 PM
tony roche: let's work on your weaknesses.
roger federer: i don't work on weaknesses and you're fired
:)

Nicely done.

luckyboy1300
02-26-2009, 11:01 PM
There may be some advantages in working on strength instead of worrying about weaknesses. Working on one's strength can defuse the need to worry about weakness.

the problem is that when someone like nadal abuses on his weakness, he's being kept away from his strengths.

zagor
02-26-2009, 11:05 PM
Am I the only one who actually read the whole article?

Fed said:

“I have never believed in working on my weaknesses. My serve and my forehand are my strengths and I work on them to get better,”

Focusing on further improving your strengths so you can impose your game on your opponent is a pretty common approach in ANY sport not just tennis.

But obviously I'm wasting my time as this thread has degenarated into another Fed bash contest,how surprising(not).

Bash the man all you want(not that opinions of keyboard "experts" matter that much)but he won 13 slams and is still reaching slam finals and contending for them at the age of 27(will turn 28 this year)so I'm sure he must be doing something right.

zagor
02-26-2009, 11:13 PM
for a guy who has achieved what he has both in his career and his charity work.... he's stupid??? You have such high standards... wonder if YOU can keep up with the standards you set for other people.

Ridiculous I know but that is the way of fanatics.From the amount of bashing that Fed receives on this forum you'd think he's a top 30 player at best yet the guy won 13 slams.

THERAFA
02-26-2009, 11:26 PM
Federer's biggest weakness is his mind and it overrides all his strengths when he plays Rafa so:
Why
Improve
The
Strengths?

tahiti
02-26-2009, 11:35 PM
Well I disagree here with Federer. You're meant to work on your weaknesses to turn them into strengths. Logical isn't it?

Gen
02-26-2009, 11:35 PM
The reasonable, logical, sensible strive of any person is to improve. In most cases improvement means "eliminate your weak spots". Universally applicable (job, sports, bodies, etc.). If I know that my backhand is lousy (it is NOT about Federer), I jump out of my pants to work at my backhand, so that I am not bashed by the whole club which will hit all the shots to my backhand, and make me a continuous loser. What is wrong with this rationale?

1970CRBase
02-27-2009, 12:05 AM
I recall a Mats Wilander interview in Tennis Australia back in the mid nineties. Mats' favourite player was, naturally, McEnroe. He loved just watching Mac. Lendl's particular game bored him in the sense that Lendl set him problems which were tough but not necessarily interesting. But Mats had the greatest admiration for Lendl and his ability to overcome his weaknesses. Remember that Lendl started with a big forehand, no backhand, no volleys, no physique, no endurance and no mental game; yet Lendl fixed everything one at a time until he became a machine. According to Mats, Lendl used to give away sets once it got to 4-4 and things got tight. Every single time. Lendl would just cave in. Then couple of years later, they would get to the same point in a set and Mats recalled thinking that there was no possible way he was going to take it away from him......

P_Agony
02-27-2009, 01:32 AM
Well, I see where he's coming from. I mean, he can't change his backhand to work better against Nadal (He can't switch to 2HBH all of the sudden or find some magical way to deal with all the constant spinny forehands coming to his backhand), so he's working on things he can improve, like his forehand and serve. Personally, I don't think his backhand is a weakness, and I believe it played a major part (not less than the FH or serve) in his success. I do think he needs to get a bit more depth with it to actually draw errors (maybe flatten it a bit?) and use the slice more effectively against Nadal.

Underhand
02-27-2009, 01:50 AM
Federer's only weakness is that he's too perfect - and his opponents exploit this!

THERAFA
02-27-2009, 02:18 AM
His weakness is he feels too nervous on big points v Rafa so he needs sports psychology to:
Overcome
It

Gen
02-27-2009, 03:57 AM
Federer's backhand used to be very efficient. Nowadays it works from time to time too. He has an absolutely wonderful flick which works great dtl. Saw some of them in AO. It is still so fast, so much pace on it, that it looks like the best offensive weapon. God only knows why he switched to slice almost completely.

P_Agony
02-27-2009, 03:59 AM
Federer's backhand used to be very efficient. Nowadays it works from time to time too. He has an absolutely wonderful flick which works great dtl. Saw some of them in AO. It is still so fast, so much pace on it, that it looks like the best offensive weapon. God only knows why he switched to slice almost completely.

I actually think he doesn't use the slice much. He should use it more often against Nadal. At the AO final he barely used his slice.

Satch
02-27-2009, 04:00 AM
"I have never believed in working on my weaknesses". At least he realized he HAS weaknesses, that's a start I guess :???:

that's because he has't got them.

topher.juan
02-27-2009, 04:15 AM
Upset to hear Roggie say this; I do not think that is what a #1 player says when facing someone like Nadal. If that's his attitude, he better be content with being #2. Nadal's game is all about finding & wearing down his opponents weaknesses, at any cost/requirement (ie. changing HIS game). You can hardly call any shot of Roggie's a weakness, but there's cracks that Rafa relentlessly chips away at. Fed seems to play 'his' game against anyone he plays, which works 99.99% of the time; Rafa's the enigma he can't solve, or doesn't really TRY to? I think that frustrates/rattles Fed; his regular formula doesn't cut it against Rafa anymore. Rafa changes his game far more from player to player or court to court than Roger and I think that is going to be the difference between being #1 or #2 now. Adapting your game/style is what it's going to take to be #1 these days. Look at Nadal tinkering with his forehand for hardcourt, Fed never tinkers with his strokes for clay; as of now he'll only have a chance of winning the french if Rafa doesn't make the final. Nadal aside, he's never needed to change his game, if Nadal wasn't in the picture it would be fine to not work on his weaknesses. Roger NEEDS to change his game against Nadal, focus on his weaknesses, fix those holes Rafas been plowing through, work around them, whatever it takes.. serve and forehand isn't going to cut it anymore, not against Rafa.

Gen
02-27-2009, 04:31 AM
I actually think he doesn't use the slice much. He should use it more often against Nadal. At the AO final he barely used his slice.

I don't think slice works very well against Nadal. When Federer shoots this "finger-snap" flick, Nadal doesn't have time for proper positioning. Slice is ever so slow, and when Nadal is in the right position he makes very few unforced errors.

pmerk34
02-27-2009, 04:32 AM
Upset to hear Roggie say this; I do not think that is what a #1 player says when facing someone like Nadal. If that's his attitude, he better be content with being #2. Nadal's game is all about finding & wearing down his opponents weaknesses, at any cost/requirement (ie. changing HIS game). You can hardly call any shot of Roggie's a weakness, but there's cracks that Rafa relentlessly chips away at. Fed seems to play 'his' game against anyone he plays, which works 99.99% of the time; Rafa's the enigma he can't solve, or doesn't really TRY to? I think that frustrates/rattles Fed; his regular formula doesn't cut it against Rafa anymore. Rafa changes his game far more from player to player or court to court than Roger and I think that is going to be the difference between being #1 or #2 now. Adapting your game/style is what it's going to take to be #1 these days. Look at Nadal tinkering with his forehand for hardcourt, Fed never tinkers with his strokes for clay; as of now he'll only have a chance of winning the french if Rafa doesn't make the final. Nadal aside, he's never needed to change his game, if Nadal wasn't in the picture it would be fine to not work on his weaknesses. Roger NEEDS to change his game against Nadal, focus on his weaknesses, fix those holes Rafas been plowing through, work around them, whatever it takes.. serve and forehand isn't going to cut it anymore, not against Rafa.

This may be a McEnroe-Borg type thing except Roger hasn't quit because of it like Bjorn did.

Toxicmilk
02-27-2009, 04:57 AM
Didn't Roger say during the AO that he has been working on his backhand? At least down the line...

bolo
02-27-2009, 07:09 AM
I don't even know how Fed would TRAIN to hit high backhands against Rafa's massive topspin. Nadal hits with more spin than any other player, let alone any lefty Fed could find to train with. Fed's backhand isn't even really a weakness unless he's playing Rafa.

Rafa's honed his physical, functional, never-gonna-give-up juggernaut tennis to the point that Fed can't awesome him off the court like he does to everyone else--even when he's playing WELL. Rafa's improved his weaknesses visibly over the years (to the point where he basically has NONE), but maybe Fed doesn't really know WHAT to work on anymore.

To me, Fed just doesn't have the fire that GOT him to where he's at anymore. He's not old, just not young enough to hang with the younger and hungrier. He can want the hell out of that 14th+ Slam, but he's gonna have to come up with something better than fixing his high topspin backhand.

It's not necessarily just nadal who can find federer's backhand like no tomorrow, but it's also murray and to a lesser degree djokovic. They have some dimensions comparable to federer's which in turn also allows them to exploit federer's backhand. If you told me no big deal these guys aren't good enough to keep meeting federer in slams, then that's fine, just keep working on the things that have gotten you the 13 slams. But that's no longer true, he has faced at least each one of these guys in each of the last 5 slams.

That quote is also interesting, because it puts a new spin on all the training he has done with lefties over the years (levine, esseyeric(?)). Is he having them hit to his backhand or is he training with them to figure out ways to get his forehand in play. probably some of both, but I guess most people just assumed more of the first but maybe that was a bad assumption.

Jim A
02-27-2009, 07:27 AM
It's obvious he's chosen to make the remaining GS his priority for 2009, with Wimbledon/USO the main targets to get the monkey off his back.

Not everything said to the media is true obviously and well its not like he's fallen off the rankings, #2 and 19 straight GS Semi's and beyond are a good track record for someone's game who based on these boards is in terrible disarray

Nadal_Freak
02-27-2009, 07:31 AM
It's not necessarily just nadal who can find federer's backhand like no tomorrow, but it's also murray and to a lesser degree djokovic. They have some dimensions comparable to federer's which in turn also allows them to exploit federer's backhand. If you told me no big deal these guys aren't good enough to keep meeting federer in slams, then that's fine, just keep working on the things that have gotten you the 13 slams. But that's no longer true, he has faced at least each one of these guys in each of the last 5 slams.

That quote is also interesting, because it puts a new spin on all the training he has done with lefties over the years (levine, esseyeric(?)). Is he having them hit to his backhand or is he training with them to figure out ways to get his forehand in play. probably some of both, but I guess most people just assumed more of the first but maybe that was a bad assumption.
Fed admits that he has weaknesses against leftys. Thus him working with a lefty is working on his weakness. When Fed was young, all his shots were weaknesses. He worked on them as well. ;)

miyagi
02-27-2009, 07:54 AM
I'mnot sure how anyone can look at this in a positive light?

Right now Roger is the extreme opposite of Rafa....and it shows.

I always hear Rafa saying he has to imporve....and we can visibly see him trying to improve his serve, his back hand, his slice and even his forehand.

Fed is nuts if he thinks that he is going to win more slams when he is older and not playing his very best tennis....

beneszilo
02-27-2009, 08:01 AM
He should improve his topspin backhand, if he wants to be #1 again.

edmondsm
02-27-2009, 08:15 AM
i don't know why we put so much stock in what players say at press conferences or interviews. as if they are 100% candid, 100% of the time. for the most part, these are opportunities for soundbites, nothing more.

in every sport i can think of, players, coaches, etc. reveal only what they want to reveal. most of the real info, they keep to themselves, and the people in their camps.

no offense to "Jaydip Sengupta, Sports Writer" . . . but i doubt he's in fed's inner circle.

Exactly. Way too much is made out of what these guys say.

GameSampras
02-27-2009, 08:17 AM
Well his weakness only show when he plays Nadal usually. SO unless he has to continue dealing with Nadal at the slams he still in line for a couple more slams anyways.

miyagi
02-27-2009, 08:19 AM
Exactly. Way too much is made out of what these guys say.

How else can he say " I dont work on my weaknesses"?

Why would he lie?

It's not like Nadal was patiently waiting for this interview to decide his next stratergy to beat Roger......

He said it, he meant it!

edmondsm
02-27-2009, 08:25 AM
How else can he say " I dont work on my weaknesses"?

Why would he lie?

It's not like Nadal was patiently waiting for this interview to decide his next stratergy to beat Roger......

He said it, he meant it!

Did I imply that he lied or that Nadal was waiting for his next interview? It seems to me that that is what other people in this thread are doing. It was one sentence, and we have a 4 page thread picking it apart. It's a waste of time IMO.

miyagi
02-27-2009, 08:28 AM
That's fine, but I don't think there should be a thread this long about one sentence a tennis player said. It's a waste of time IMO.

In light of his current performances where the same tatic is employed (Fed dumps back hand into the net on break/important points) and the same result occurs (Fed looses match and Slam) dont you think this sentance is significant?

If this sentance came out of the mouth of any other player you would understand the importance of it!

ttbrowne
02-27-2009, 09:09 AM
I love it! Here's a guy who is a couple Majors away from be GOAT and he doesn't give a damn about impressing the purists with his work ethic. He's done it "his way".
Way to go, Fed.
EVERY guy on tour wants to have his Majors wins.

tahiti
02-27-2009, 09:26 AM
Lets face it. Against most other players until maybe recently, Roger has never been under any real pressure. When he plays Rafa's he under it continually and then he just makes a lot of errrors.

rich01
02-27-2009, 10:27 AM
I don't know if he will play in 2012. I think if he surpasses 14 GS and either wins Roland Garros or realizes he'll never win it, he'll probably get bored.

bolo
02-27-2009, 10:50 AM
If you think that federer loses to nadal mostly because of his backhand then there is no good way to think about this comment. Basically, even if nadal does not improve at all, it means that federer will do likely no better versus nadal than he has done in the past.

P_Agony
02-27-2009, 11:22 AM
I don't think slice works very well against Nadal. When Federer shoots this "finger-snap" flick, Nadal doesn't have time for proper positioning. Slice is ever so slow, and when Nadal is in the right position he makes very few unforced errors.

Actually the short slice proved to be very effective against Nadal in the Wimbeldon 2008 final, and and commentators and myself wondered why he doesn't use that shot more often. Federer's slice is one of the most effective shots in the tour.

VivalaVida
02-27-2009, 11:27 AM
that is too bad coming for fed. No wonder we saw rafa overtake him gradually while federer slipped down further. He should have realized by now that although his forehand is his greatest weapon, his rival always exploits his weakness

fastdunn
02-27-2009, 04:55 PM
backhand : there's innate limitation of 1 handed backhand against high bouncing lefty spin. You gotta run around and use forehand more.

net game : basically you got to be born with. Plus the net game is not a deciding factor any more in today's tennis.

shakes1975
02-27-2009, 05:20 PM
Hes been there done that versus weaker competition. It was good enough not to work on his weaknesses much when Hewitt and Roddick were Fed's main competition, but not any more.

I remember when Roche had plans to improve Feds net game to use net play a lot more in his play and Fed resisted saying that he was only interested in results not improvement. He Sacrificed long term improvement by not taking a few risks and developing other parts of his game more and perhaps risking a few more losses in minor competitions along the way. Now hes paying for it.

While I agree with your comment about Fed sacrificing long-term improvement for short term results, I cannot understand this thing about clown era stuff.

Not surprisingly, it is the sampras fans who dislike fed who are coming up with this stuff. The respectable ones like Laurie, fastdunn, fiveo etc. are not so cheap like yourself, 380pistol, gamesampras etc. as your very happiness as far as the game is concerned is linked to somebody (anybody) who can stop fed from reaching sampras' slam marks. Sad, really.

As far as I am concerned, it is Open Era. And that's all that matters.

Mkie7
02-27-2009, 10:48 PM
the problem is that when someone like nadal abuses on his weakness, he's being kept away from his strengths.

Federer lost the AO '09 because his serves did not work and he was not able to convert break points IMO. His serve is supposed to be his strength and he couldn't convert because of mental strength which used to be his strength. Yes he has weaknesses but and nadal exploits it... but he could have won the Wimbledon and the AO if some of the above worked a lil' better don't you think?

TheOneAndOnly
02-27-2009, 11:39 PM
This idea of not working on his weaknesses is not working. Nadal has beaten him 5 times in a row now by picking apart his weaknesses. How many slam finals in a row does Fed have to lose to Nadal before it clicks for him?

Is Federer talented enough to evolve the weaker parts of his game? Id like to see him evolve his net game, play more aggressive returns instead of blocking them always, and make his backhand a weapon. The rivalry with Nadal will get boring unless Fed evolves some other parts of his game. :)



Federer: I don’t work on weaknesses (http://www.xpress4me.com/sport/uae/tennis/20012102.html)


By Jaydip Sengupta, Sports Writer - 26 Feb 09

Dubai - Talking of great tennis obsessions, you need not look beyond Ivan Lendl’s laboured attempts at trying to win on the treacherous Wimbledon grass or Pete Sampras’s failed forays on the ridiculously slow clay of Roland Garros.

At 13 Grand Slam titles and with arguments still raging about his status of being the greatest player of all time, World No 2 Roger Federer has his own goals to achieve and for the moment, the French Open isn’t one of them.

Talking to XPRESS on the sidelines of the Jura Coffee Cocktail Launch event, Federer said: “It’s difficult to judge who is the greatest of all time. Winning the French Open would of course round off what has already been an incredible career for me but right now my priority is getting past Sampras’s record of 14 titles.

I believe it’s important to chase your dreams and one of them is also to win the Olympic singles gold on the grass courts of Wimbledon in 2012. I am still young in tennis terms and still have some bit to go. And I know I have many more slams and another seven to eight years left in me.”

That recent Australian Open final defeat still hurts, but being the champion that he is, Federer has managed to get over it.

“You can’t win everything. The idea is to take positives from those setbacks and work at getting better. “I have never believed in working on my weaknesses. My serve and my forehand are my strengths and I work on them to get better,” he said.

And despite having to sit out one of his favourite tournaments, the Barclays Dubai Tennis Championships, with a recurring back injury, the Swiss maestro believes he has made the right call to take it easy.

“I am disappointed about not playing in Dubai, but unlike last year when I chose to play on despite not being fully fit, I have decided to recover completely before taking the court again in a few weeks’ time. I am feeling much better this year physically, but I need to be 100 per cent fit to play again,” he said. And the reason for that, according to Federer, is his desire to play on for as long as he can. “Look at Agassi and Connors, they are my inspiration.

I have already played three generations of tennis stars. I started with Sampras and Agassi, then moved on to the likes of Roddick, Hewitt and Safin and now I am playing against Nadal, Djokovic and Murray,” he said.

Federer’s feats

Federer is second in the all-time men’s singles Grand Slam titles list with 13 He trails American Pete Sampras who has won 14 titles.

He won Wimbledon five consecutive times from 2003-2007, the US Open five consecutive times from 2004-2008 and the Australian Open three times – 2004, 2006 and 2007.

The only Grand Slam to elude the Swiss so far is the French Open in which he has been a finalist for the past three years.

very interesting article.

if true, that's a dangerous statement fed is making; he says he has 8 more years of tennis?

sounds a bit overconfident to me. nobody knows the future whether one has 1 or 2 or 50 more years of tennis.

sounds overconfident to me.

also, that's a new kind of thinking to not have to work on weaknesses but on the strengths.

being the aggressor in tennis is key. but to do so by working on strengths and forgetting weaknesses may not fly well in the face of nadal.

tennis is about errors, not winners.

reduce your errors, or eliminate them completely to zero "0", and you may win almost or virtually every match you play. isn't this a true statement?

edberg505
02-28-2009, 12:27 AM
If you think that federer loses to nadal mostly because of his backhand then there is no good way to think about this comment. Basically, even if nadal does not improve at all, it means that federer will do likely no better versus nadal than he has done in the past.

That is exactly why he loses to him. Have you seen their last 3 matches?

THERAFA
02-28-2009, 01:29 AM
Federer's backhand is a weakness v Rafa but the main reason for Federer's losses is his lack of mental toughness as he continues to:
Lose
Big
Points

In particular Federer is way too passive on:
Breakpoints

OTMPut
02-28-2009, 01:53 AM
Actually the short slice proved to be very effective against Nadal in the Wimbeldon 2008 final, and and commentators and myself wondered why he doesn't use that shot more often. Federer's slice is one of the most effective shots in the tour.

Indeed. In AO '09 final, whenever he sliced or used drop shots, nadal was not very comfortable. It disturbed his rhythm and created more opportunities for Fed to use his f/h. I was surprised that he used slice very sparsely.
I think the big occasion froze him up.

THERAFA
02-28-2009, 02:41 AM
Yes ^^ Federer did freeze up in the Final whereas Rafa was the opposite and kept playing dropshots on the:
Big
Points

Jay_The_Nomad
02-28-2009, 03:32 AM
I admire Federer's longevity. He is willing to play for eight or seven more years and that just shows the commitment to this sport.

You don't always see that kind of thing in tennis - Clijsters retired early and Sharapova even claims she would like to retire when she's young.

I think female tennis players are a different beast altogether.

Most women wouldn't want to wait too long to have a baby...

Guys are different... just bam bam... and its done.

cucio
02-28-2009, 03:40 AM
I think there is a flaw in Roger's reasoning. Sure, improving his major weapon, his incredible forehand, is all dandy and cool, but...

Think for a moment... how many friggin' forehands is someone like Nadal or others going to let him hit?


That's what I thought.

All that training and improvement is for naught if he can't put it in practice during the match.

So I don't get it. In this particular case I think the obvious strategy is strengthening your weaknesses. For Federer that means improving the consistency of his BH DTL.

TennezSport
02-28-2009, 09:44 AM
Well we all know that Rafa exploits Fed by continually hitting to the BH until he can do some damage or force an error. It's the only place where Rafa can hurt Fed so why change a winning plan.

However, if Fed really said this then it is a bad way to resolve the problem. I remember when Becker had a problem with his backhand and started throwing heavy logs to strengthen his muscles on the BH side. Becker turned his weak BH into a weapon.

Fed needs to stop running around his BH and do the same by giving Rafa (in Agassi's words) no place to go. Fed should learn to drive Rafa hard to the forehand with with his backhand and then turn the tables on Rafa, by hitting to Rafa's weaker side. Most of all cut out the UEs and keep Rafa running as much as possible; Rafa's knees will not stand up to it. Exploit the tactics that the players who beat on Rafa use. But Fed is so stubborn that he consistently beats himself (with Rafa's help :wink: ) .

Cheers, TennezSPort :cool:

Lotto
02-28-2009, 10:59 AM
he fired Roche because Roche had big plans to improve his net game, while Fed wanted to continue winning in the same way forever. :)


And I bet if he wasn't so stubborn he'd regret that now.

TheTruth
02-28-2009, 11:50 AM
Here's another theory; Personally, I like looking at several sides of the issue rather than holding onto one train of thought like a jealous lover.

OK, here goes:

Maybe the real reason Fed doesn't beat Nadal is his usual tactics don't work. I'm not talking about forehands I'm talking about ferocity. Fed is not used to players a. standing up to him, b. staring him down, and c. staying in the match for the long haul.

It used to be he could hit a few winners and the opponent would stop, stare, and admire his handiwork. They would then pack their mental bags, desire, and sense of competition up and quit playing with their tails between their legs. After all, isn't that what the commentators were all suggesting they do?

Only Rafa, the man-child didn't ascribe to this theory. "I can still fight, no?"

So, when Federer is faced with opposition that fights back many times he is stumped and the errors start to flow. A good example of this is the Berdych match.

Berdych couldn't believe he was beating Fed so easily. Manhandling him, actually, and while he contemplated what was going on before him, he lost his concentration, and not ready for the big win. He lost. That's when Fed pounced. When a weakened Berdych dropped the reins.

For me, I can't think of very many matches (outside of Nadal) where the opponent came to play Fed, stayed in the moment, and fought tooth and nail until the end. Had they done that, who knows what would have happened?

I'm not saying Fed wouldn't have won his fair share of those matches, but we'll never know seeing as how many times the competition folded.

Flame on...

TennezSport
02-28-2009, 12:24 PM
Here's another theory; Personally, I like looking at several sides of the issue rather than holding onto one train of thought.

Maybe the real reason Fed doesn't beat Nadal is his usual tactics don't work. I'm not talking about forehands I'm talking about ferocity. Fed is not used to players a. standing up to him, b. staring him down, and c. staying in the match for the long haul.

Good points all around but if you look at the stats, Feds tactics do work and work very well. Fed just seems to tighten up when he has Rafa on the ropes. We have seen this numeous times. Rafa plays the percentage game and Fed overhits; to many UEs thus beating himself.

It used to be he could hit a few winners and the opponent would stop, stare, and admire his handiwork. They would then pack their mental bags, desire, and sense of competition up and quit playing with their tails between their legs. After all, isn't that what the commentators were all suggesting they do?

Not sure I agree here as I think that players try to overcompensate when they play Fed and make too many errors themselves. They are still trying, but begin to play outside their game making too many errors

Only Rafa, the man-child didn't ascribe to this theory. "I can still fight, no?" So, when Federer is faced with opposition that fights back many times he is stumped and the errors start to flow.

Rafa's game plan has always been very simple. Play a high percentage retrieving game until you get an opening and then go for a high percentage winner. If you look at the overall stats Rafa plays a Futbol style causing the opponent to make UEs, so opponents UEs usually double the number of Rafa's winners. Fed know this but still plays a precision game and falls into the same trap of UEs.

A good example of this is the Berdych match. Berdych couldn't believe he was beating Fed so easily. Manhandling him, actually, and while he contemplated what was going on before him, he lost his concentration, and not ready for the big win. He lost. That's when Fed pounced when a weakened Berdych dropped the reins.

Fed also changed tactics and began to move Berdych around more. This stopped Berdych from being able to set up and blast winners. I think this was a matter of Fed starting slow and Berdych going for broke. Had Rafa played Berdych I do not think he would have escaped that match. Playing 20 feet behind the baseline would have played into Berdych hands. Rafa needs rhythm and Berdych was giving none of that.

For me, I can't think of very many matches (outside of Nadal) where the opponent came to play Fed, stayed in the moment, and fought tooth and nail until the end. Had they done that, who knows what would have happened? I'm not saying Fed wouldn't have won his fair share of those matches, but we'll never know seeing as how many times the competition folded.

Not many players can do that for long periods of time, especially in 5 set matches. This is what makes Fed and Rafa very special. Fed has the game to beat Rafa but does not keep his cool against Raf any longer. This is why their matches are so close. This all comes from confidence and right now Rafa is full of it :wink:

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

TheTruth
02-28-2009, 12:39 PM
Good points all around but if you look at the stats, Feds tactics do work and work very well. Fed just seems to tighten up when he has Rafa on the ropes. We have seen this numeous times. Rafa plays the percentage game and Fed overhits; to many UEs thus beating himself.

I agree Fed's tactics work most of the time against other players, but why do you think he tenses up everytime he meets Nadal? I suppose Rafa makes him uncomfortable getting everything back. This might explain why Fed has trouble with Murray, Nalbandian (when he's on) and Simon because they get a lot of balls back too. Obviously this unnerves Fed.

Not sure I agree here as I think that players try to overcompensate when they play Fed and make too many errors themselves. They are still trying, but begin to play outside their game making too many errors

True, I've thought about that too. Sometimes I'm scratching my head thinking the same thing. Good point.

Rafa's game plan has always been very simple. Play a high percentage retrieving game until you get an opening and then go for a high percentage winner. If you look at the overall stats Rafa plays a Futbol style causing the opponent to make UEs, so opponents UEs usually double the number of Rafa's winners. Fed know this but still plays a precision game and falls into the same trap of UEs.

Not sure what you mean here. What do you think Fed needs to do to combat this, then?

Fed also changed tactics and began to move Berdych around more. This stopped Berdych from being able to set up and blast winners. I think this was a matter of Fed starting slow and Berdych going for broke. Had Rafa played Berdych I do not think he would have escaped that match. Playing 20 feet behind the baseline would have played into Berdych hands. Rafa needs rhythm and Berdych was giving none of that.

I'll take your word for it. I saw a look in Berdych's body language that signaled to me that he was caving in. I turned after that and heard the result later. I can't stand watching matches where the other player doesn't fight till the end. Don't know if Rafa would have escaped or not, so I won't speculate.

Not many players can do that for long periods of time, especially in 5 set matches. This is what makes Fed and Rafa very special. Fed has the game to beat Rafa but does not keep his cool against Raf any longer. This is why their matches are so close. This all comes from confidence and right now Rafa is full of it :wink:

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

Nice to be able to discuss theories objectively. I enjoyed your posts and reasonings. Cheers!

TennezSport
02-28-2009, 12:59 PM
Nice to be able to discuss theories objectively. I enjoyed your posts and reasonings. Cheers!

Thanks sir and right back at ya :wink:

Cheers, TennezSport :cool: