PDA

View Full Version : I've lost some faith


Lotto
04-17-2009, 12:05 AM
*Please Note, this thread is to for Federer fans or other fans that want to discuss how they currently feel about Roger and his game now. Please don't post if you're going to bash. No Federer/Nadal arguements aswell*



I must say that after watching Roger's match against Stan yesterday I've lost my faith in him. I'm not a Federer fanboy or ******* or anything like that but he is my idol. Even through his toughest times I will fight with him. But watching that match yesterday was PAINFUL. He doesn't have "that look" he had in 2006. You know the one, where you can see in his face the amount of confidence and self-belief he has. His face is almost "glowing" with confidence. It's hard to explain but you know what I mean.
Now, he's dull. He doesn't have that same confidence and self-belief, you can see it in his face.
Also, I was watching highlights of Rome 06 the other day right before his stan match and he's not bouncing up and down on his feet like he used to.
I feel really sorry for the guy. I hope he breaks Pete's record but the way it's looking right now it doesn't look good :cry:


Thoughts on this?

ramseszerg
04-17-2009, 12:21 AM
He is still head and shoulders above every player except Nadal. He just has to figure that out, and even if he doesn't, he will surpass Sampras's record for sure.

Laker
04-17-2009, 12:34 AM
I think his mind is just miles away from tennis nowadays.
After a long-term domination, when tennis was his whole world, multiple changes in his life on and off-court put him in the need to seattle at a completely different level of playing and mindset.
At this point of their life and career someone like Borg retired, someone like Sampras or Agassi refocused themselves to come back and win again.
Supposing for Federer a Borg-like or Sampras/Agassi-like future depends on how strong is your faith, as a Federer style of play fan my vote is still for the Sampras/Agassi one.

Nadalfan89
04-17-2009, 03:16 AM
Can anyone pin-point the moment where he fell apart? I know Wimbeldon 2008 was tough but he bounced back and won the USO. Aussie 2009 was tough but he was in a 5 set final...

Eiffel59
04-17-2009, 03:28 AM
He is still head and shoulders above every player except Nadal. He just has to figure that out, and even if he doesn't, he will surpass Sampras's record for sure.

Anyone that is "still head and shoulder" above every competitor doesn't make 22 unforced FH errors as he did yesterday...probably is not focused on his gameplay...or simply suffers from heavy competition...like he never did b4 :-?

Ljubicic for number1
04-17-2009, 04:00 AM
Can anyone pin-point the moment where he fell apart? I know Wimbeldon 2008 was tough but he bounced back and won the USO. Aussie 2009 was tough but he was in a 5 set final...

It was a long time before those events, more like just before the US Open 07. Even though he has won a couple of US Opens since then. It has been a steady decline in performance and a steady incline in excuses.

All-rounder
04-17-2009, 04:31 AM
It was a long time before those events, more like just before the US Open 07. Even though he has won a couple of US Opens since then. It has been a steady decline in performance and a steady incline in excuses.
my opinion he declined after AO 07 that was the last of the Federer that players feared remember he went the tournament without dropping a set

coloskier
04-17-2009, 05:29 AM
Anyone that is "still head and shoulder" above every competitor doesn't make 22 unforced FH errors as he did yesterday...probably is not focused on his gameplay...or simply suffers from heavy competition...like he never did b4 :-?

I don't necessarily think it is the heavy competition or that other players have caught up to him. I think he has gone back down to other players, especially in the mental department. He doesn't seem to have the fire that he used to, and his concentration has definitely waned in the past 15 months.

jaggy
04-17-2009, 05:35 AM
I put him way behind Nadal but to be fair the first clay court event can often be difficult after hard courts so still a season to go.

VGP
04-17-2009, 05:36 AM
It's called burnout.....

cknobman
04-17-2009, 05:37 AM
Ive lost faith in feeling confident he will contend at every event.

I dont think its necessarily the competition either.

I only see spurts of the 05-07 Fed during matches now and have become accustomed to watching him mentally leave a match before its over. Roger has started to form somewhat of a bad habit of coming out and playing fine for a set/set and a half and then just going to poop.

Watching him it just looks like he dosnt have the drive he used to.

pc1
04-17-2009, 05:50 AM
I've never been a Federer defender but the guy was winning virtually every match for years and now he's winning 18 out of 23 for the year and everyone is calling him a near has been. You can't count him out yet but he's clearly not head and shoulders over everyone.

The guy did win the U.S. Open last year and was in the final of the Australian and that's better than Murray or Djokovic in those tournaments.

I don't think he's going to collapse totally and hit rock bottom yet. These things are usually a gradual decline and who knows, he could return to the top. We all have to wait and see.

bladepdb
04-17-2009, 06:06 AM
Can anyone pin-point the moment where he fell apart? I know Wimbeldon 2008 was tough but he bounced back and won the USO. Aussie 2009 was tough but he was in a 5 set final...

Most would argue that it was his battle with mono early in 08. I would argue it was the compilation of his losses in 08 which started to chip away at his confidence, which were not necessarily a result of his mono.

Remember when Gilles Simon, some dude no one really knew, came out and beat Fed? You could probably make a case for Djokovic beating Fed at AO as a blow to his confidence as well. Obviously Nadal's beat down at FO and his breakthrough at Wimby would certainly devastate Fed as well....so hopefully that's pin-points it enough lol.

charliefedererer
04-17-2009, 06:10 AM
His age, marriage, fatherhood, other committments will all rob the ego-centric focus he had before. It will take longer to recover from minor aches and pains.
His career path is likely to be more like Sampras' last two years where fans will question whether he should retire because he is no longer dominant.
But I certainly hope he continues playing. even if he falls all the way to #4 or 5.
Is that so bad?

mikeler
04-17-2009, 06:52 AM
His forehand is failing him now. I think he has been so obsessed with beefing up his backhand against Nadal, he has ignored his forehand problems. He shanks the ball quite a bit off the forehand now. I do the same thing on my forehands, but I'm a club level player so I have an excuse :)

caulcano
04-17-2009, 06:53 AM
*Please Note, this thread is to for Federer fans or other fans that want to discuss how they currently feel about Roger and his game now. Please don't post if you're going to bash. No Federer/Nadal arguements aswell*



I must say that after watching Roger's match against Stan yesterday I've lost my faith in him. I'm not a Federer fanboy or ******* or anything like that but he is my idol. Even through his toughest times I will fight with him. But watching that match yesterday was PAINFUL. He doesn't have "that look" he had in 2006. You know the one, where you can see in his face the amount of confidence and self-belief he has. His face is almost "glowing" with confidence. It's hard to explain but you know what I mean.
Now, he's dull. He doesn't have that same confidence and self-belief, you can see it in his face.
Also, I was watching highlights of Rome 06 the other day right before his stan match and he's not bouncing up and down on his feet like he used to.
I feel really sorry for the guy. I hope he breaks Pete's record but the way it's looking right now it doesn't look good :cry:


Thoughts on this?

I agree. It is painful.

Federer no longer plays the way he use to play & I don't think he'll be able to.

However, I think he'll be able to sneak 1 maybe 2 (max) grand slams in the next few years to tie or just break Sampras' record.

deltox
04-17-2009, 06:59 AM
you ever been with a pregnant woman for 9 months?


it will mentally kill you

supersmash
04-17-2009, 07:07 AM
He doesn't look as invincible as he once did. How did a man who only lost 4 matches in a season turn into the man we're watching today?

Rog, where is your fire?!

dugger5688
04-17-2009, 07:30 AM
Can anyone pin-point the moment where he fell apart? I know Wimbeldon 2008 was tough but he bounced back and won the USO. Aussie 2009 was tough but he was in a 5 set final...

I don't think he's played well consistently since having glandular fever during the Australian Open (08), he probably should have taken a month or two off. Since it really only gets cured by laying in bed for however long your body needs to fight it off.

Grampy
04-17-2009, 08:38 AM
you ever been with a pregnant woman for 9 months?


it will mentally kill you

LOL, I agree. You have to go through it to understand.:)

I've not lost faith in him yet though. He gave Nadal a tough time just a few months ago in the AO. He's in a slump. Maybe he'll bounce back after his offcourt life settles down.

GeoffB
04-17-2009, 08:42 AM
Fed's performance lately has me thinking about Pete's mid-late career. I was looking over Pete's record on wikipedia, and he had plenty of "poor" performances in majors like Indian Wells or Miami in '97 and '98 (yet he still finished the year at #1 and continued to win majors). A big part of this depends on how well Fed can manage his fall from #1. Can he be the kind of player who remains a big threat even though he's not always the favorite?

Ironically, Pete was probably helped by the intensity of competition and the relatively specialized nature of his game. Even when he was #1, he still never did well at the french and often lost in the early rounds on clay. This may have provided Sampras with two valuable things 1) an ability to live with his limitations and move on, and 2) an understanding of his tools and game and how to use them to win. And even when Pete was dominant, he was still frequently knocked off the pedestal by Courier, Agassi, and others - which meant that he could lose, even badly and frequently, without being perceived as "in decline."

The problem for Fed is that he doesn't seem to have a magic button he can press that, for better or worse, defines his game - unless you call "sheer brilliance" his game. Sampras had Wimbledon (on faster, lower bouncing courts) as his go-to surface, perfectly aligned with his ethereal serve and volley abilities. In a way, there was a space where Pete could retreat to make his stand in his late career years.

Roger, on the other hand, just seems vulnerable. His sheer brilliance has faded, and unlike Sampras, he doesn't have a clearly marked territory. Maybe the faster hardcourts of the US Open? The slower and higher bouncing but nonetheless grass courts at Wimbledon?

I'm rooting for Fed, but we'll just have to see.

hoahuyen
04-17-2009, 09:00 AM
Fed's performance lately has me thinking about Pete's mid-late career. I was looking over Pete's record on wikipedia, and he had plenty of "poor" performances in majors like Indian Wells or Miami in '97 and '98 (yet he still finished the year at #1 and continued to win majors). A big part of this depends on how well Fed can manage his fall from #1. Can he be the kind of player who remains a big threat even though he's not always the favorite?

Ironically, Pete was probably helped by the intensity of competition and the relatively specialized nature of his game. Even when he was #1, he still never did well at the french and often lost in the early rounds on clay. This may have provided Sampras with two valuable things 1) an ability to live with his limitations and move on, and 2) an understanding of his tools and game and how to use them to win. And even when Pete was dominant, he was still frequently knocked off the pedestal by Courier, Agassi, and others - which meant that he could lose, even badly and frequently, without being perceived as "in decline."

The problem for Fed is that he doesn't seem to have a magic button he can press that, for better or worse, defines his game - unless you call "sheer brilliance" his game. Sampras had Wimbledon (on faster, lower bouncing courts) as his go-to surface, perfectly aligned with his ethereal serve and volley abilities. In a way, there was a space where Pete could retreat to make his stand in his late career years.

Roger, on the other hand, just seems vulnerable. His sheer brilliance has faded, and unlike Sampras, he doesn't have a clearly marked territory. Maybe the faster hardcourts of the US Open? The slower and higher bouncing but nonetheless grass courts at Wimbledon?

I'm rooting for Fed, but we'll just have to see.

Very good analysis.
IMO, we have been treating Federer like the God of Tennis. That puts so much pressure on him. While in the past, Sampras was just considered as a great tennis player. It's easier for Sampras to deal with his decline then Fed.

CCNM
04-17-2009, 09:02 AM
I've been doing some thinking, and I think Roger's days of winning every tournament he enters are over. I'm sure He's got some titles left in him though

danb
04-17-2009, 09:17 AM
I am a Rafa fan and I have to tell you : Calm down, ROger is fine.
1) He got burned out - give him time to recover (Remember Agassi)
2) Mirka is pregnant - that can't be easy for him (moody woman + pro tennis = NOT good)
3) He got a step slower - he needs to acknowledge that and go back to the gym (again see Agassi case). The alternative is to change his playing style - Pete became a more aggressive player after he reached 29 and lost a step. For now Roger is in denial but he will eventually do something and make a comeback.

I say this year will be "a write off" then I expect things to change.

120mphBodyServe
04-17-2009, 09:21 AM
Pfffftttt.. Gimme a break...
Roger is still playing good tennis. He suffered an unexpected loss last year to Stepanek in Rome yet still made it to final of FO. Lack of practise, back injury and the wedding have slightly set him off course. He knows he has work to do, and I'm sure he'll improve in the weeks to come...

textbook strokes
04-17-2009, 10:40 AM
Pfffftttt.. Gimme a break...
Roger is still playing good tennis. He suffered an unexpected loss last year to Stepanek in Rome yet still made it to final of FO. Lack of practise, back injury and the wedding have slightly set him off course. He knows he has work to do, and I'm sure he'll improve in the weeks to come...

Agree... .I think people ask too much and due to his astonishing dominace in previos years, sees him as a fallen demi-god, doom to the underworld.
Why not just a player who had a bad day on his less favourite surface?.

ATXtennisaddict
04-17-2009, 10:44 AM
Damn it fed, why did you have to go get Mirka preggerz and marry now? Couldn't you have won 15 slams THEN create babies?

gsquicksilver
04-17-2009, 10:53 AM
same crap happened to sampras after he won his 13th grand slam. he couldn't win anymore. i tell you, it's the curse of #13!!!!

Leublu tennis
04-17-2009, 10:56 AM
He is still head and shoulders above every player except Nadal. He just has to figure that out, and even if he doesn't, he will surpass Sampras's record for sure.Well I would not go that far. Although I support Federer and want him to keep playing, he is just fading out of his many year dominance. First it was Nadal but now other top 10 or even 20 players are knocking him off. Nothing shameful in that. Its just life. The old is renewed by the new.

jamesblakefan#1
04-17-2009, 11:48 AM
I'm not a Federer fan, but I have to say, for people to be panicking when the guys still #2 in the world just shows how great the man was and hopefully still is.

Clay is never been his best surface, so don't let this one loss force you to jump off the bridge just yet. It still is ALL ABOUT THE SLAMS. These losses early(for Federer's grand standards) in tourneys like Monte Carlo aren't as bad as if he loses early in slams, which he still has yet to do.

Panic time is when he starts to go out early in the slams. Sure he's not as dominant as he used to be, but that was an impossible standard to live up to for his entire career.

Hopefully, Roger will loosen up more and focus on other things in life, like his marriage, a new baby on the way, etc. And get better results in the Slams.

Seeing who my favorite player is, you can see how I've learned to be optimistic (sometimes too optimistic) in my rooting interests.:)

So Fed's not dead, he's just in a slump. Even Tiger went through a slump and came back better than ever. If I were a Fed fan, this would be my train of thought.

Ljubicic for number1
04-17-2009, 04:24 PM
Here we go, he has the wife and baby excuse too now, add that to the imaginary mono, the bad light, the wind, the other player taking injury time outs. He must have all bases covered now.

I wish he could just lose like a man.

RFRF
04-17-2009, 04:41 PM
do punks like yourself and others just WAIT for him to lose so you can quickly go on and post this s**T???????????????

RFRF
04-17-2009, 05:01 PM
Fed's performance lately has me thinking about Pete's mid-late career. I was looking over Pete's record on wikipedia, and he had plenty of "poor" performances in majors like Indian Wells or Miami in '97 and '98 (yet he still finished the year at #1 and continued to win majors). A big part of this depends on how well Fed can manage his fall from #1. Can he be the kind of player who remains a big threat even though he's not always the favorite?

Ironically, Pete was probably helped by the intensity of competition and the relatively specialized nature of his game. Even when he was #1, he still never did well at the french and often lost in the early rounds on clay. This may have provided Sampras with two valuable things 1) an ability to live with his limitations and move on, and 2) an understanding of his tools and game and how to use them to win. And even when Pete was dominant, he was still frequently knocked off the pedestal by Courier, Agassi, and others - which meant that he could lose, even badly and frequently, without being perceived as "in decline."

The problem for Fed is that he doesn't seem to have a magic button he can press that, for better or worse, defines his game - unless you call "sheer brilliance" his game. Sampras had Wimbledon (on faster, lower bouncing courts) as his go-to surface, perfectly aligned with his ethereal serve and volley abilities. In a way, there was a space where Pete could retreat to make his stand in his late career years.

Roger, on the other hand, just seems vulnerable. His sheer brilliance has faded, and unlike Sampras, he doesn't have a clearly marked territory. Maybe the faster hardcourts of the US Open? The slower and higher bouncing but nonetheless grass courts at Wimbledon?

I'm rooting for Fed, but we'll just have to see.well said Geoff

Bassus
04-17-2009, 06:07 PM
Can anyone pin-point the moment where he fell apart? I know Wimbeldon 2008 was tough but he bounced back and won the USO. Aussie 2009 was tough but he was in a 5 set final...

But it was a 5 set final he should have won. He could have won Wimbledon last year, but I wouldn't say he should have since he was fighting from behind almost the entire time (though he did have the first break point opportunity in the fifth set, but of course didn't convert). But that is the difference; he could have won Wimbledon, but he shoud have won this year's AO. I mean, he was up a break twice in the first set but couldn't hold it. Then he had Nadal at 0-40 in one game and 15-40 in another in the third set but was unable to break, and then he completely folded in the fifth.

And winning the US Open last year was great and a testament to his resiliency, but he didn't beat Nadal in the process, and that is what he must do now.

Ljubicic for number1
04-17-2009, 06:13 PM
do punks like yourself and others just WAIT for him to lose so you can quickly go on and post this s**T???????????????

I guess you are referring to my post. I don't care for Fed, never have, but I have put that aside in my post, he has been is a steady decline for some time, he cant help it, he is getting old. I just cant stand the excuses and denial.

He needs to Man Up.

120mphBodyServe
04-17-2009, 07:31 PM
I'm ready to man up. :-P

Safinator_1
04-17-2009, 07:38 PM
Yes he's on a steady decline as of late but by no means done. Why are you losing faith in the 2nd best player in the world right now. He has still got a fair lead from no.3 and by no means is he dropping like rock off a cliff it may be decline but very slowly. 1 Clay match doesn't mean anything compared to how he has done this far in the season. Have more paitience and faith if you really are his fan. Be realistic no one can hold that sort of dominance for so long and Fed is no exception

Ljubicic for number1
04-17-2009, 07:41 PM
Yes he's on a steady decline as of late but by no means done. Why are you losing faith in the 2nd best player in the world right now. He has still got a fair lead from no.3 and by no means is he dropping like rock off a cliff it may be decline but very slowly. 1 Clay match doesn't mean anything compared to how he has done this far in the season. Have more paitience and faith if you really are his fan. Be realistic no one can hold that sort of dominance for so long and Fed is no exception


He is ranked number 2 but I am sure any non biased on looker would agree that he is currently the 4th best or equal 3rd at best. Murray is clearly the number 2 right now even if the rankings don't support that.

Safinator_1
04-17-2009, 07:49 PM
He is ranked number 2 but I am sure any non biased on looker would agree that he is currently the 4th best or equal 3rd at best. Murray is clearly the number 2 right now even if the rankings don't support that.

Correct IMO Roger's performance is 3rd/4th leaning more towards 4th if Djoko makes final can be argued. 2nd best player in the world right now 'in ranking' which means he still has a lot of tennis to play before passing judgement so early. If you are really gonna access his CLay court season compated to how hes done so far please wait after RG then blabber all you want i'll be more than happy to listen

roundiesee
04-17-2009, 08:33 PM
I think for Fed fans, there's really no need to be depressed. Sure, it's torture to watch him play now because his game appears to be riddled with errors, especially on the forehand side. That's just tennis; it's the nature of the game to lose (can't win 'em all) especially to opponents who play well on the day and have no more fear of him and his reputation. But to me, Fed is a tennis genius. He plays the game like no other and he just needs to figure out what's truly ailing him. There appears to be a fine line for him between playing really badly and going back to his old self. He is floundering at the moment, but all he needs is that one moment of inspiration and I'm sure he'll be back. Fed fans just need to be patient and wait for his form to return......

Joseph L. Barrow
04-17-2009, 09:09 PM
In a sport with a schedule as demanding as tennis, particularly when you're as dominant as Federer was (meaning you play more matches more frequently), you're not going to be able to maintain maximum intensity and performance for more than a few years. Federer's decline is, I think, really a pretty natural thing, and something I was largely expecting. The chinks were starting to appear in his armor during '07, and I predicted after one of his indoor losses to Nalbandian that he wouldn't be winning three Slams again in '08.
The illness he had in early 2008 no doubt hastened his fall from grace, but something like that was a long time coming, in a sense, given his astonishingly perfect health from '04-07 (never retired from a match, seemingly never sick or injured, playing at or near his best virtually every time and maintaining a 95% winning average). It really isn't all that unusual a phenomenon, historically speaking, for a top five player to have rough patches and suffer odd losses to top 20 level guys. Although it feels much more distressing in this instance because that player is Federer, it is really not some terrible crisis or cause for retirement. Only if one is expecting Federer to regain dominance of the sport or somesuch (almost definitely not going to happen, in my opinion) is he really in any crisis.

grizzly4life
04-17-2009, 09:12 PM
great thread.........

i do understand roger has made 17 GS semi's or something like that in a row (not sure of exact number). so all this talk of him doing so badly is a bit much (and i'm a contributor).

but i do have to agree that sampras doing poorly on clay was probably a good thing. he realized he needed to focus on what he was best at whereas fed probably thinks he's "god's gift" which he is. but roger needs to really look at his game closely.

one other i would point out. sampras was pre crazy-internet. i think it makes a difference. people probably didn't even know or care sampras had lost in something like monte carlo. but they probably would today.

i think roger needs to focus on shorter points, bigger serve and return. if he can do it without bigger racquet then fine, but it seems pretty obvious step for roger

moonbat
04-17-2009, 09:59 PM
Ive lost faith in feeling confident he will contend at every event.

I dont think its necessarily the competition either.

I only see spurts of the 05-07 Fed during matches now and have become accustomed to watching him mentally leave a match before its over. Roger has started to form somewhat of a bad habit of coming out and playing fine for a set/set and a half and then just going to poop.

Watching him it just looks like he dosnt have the drive he used to.

I wonder if he's similar to Hingis, in that she was winning everything, then came up against the big bashers, and started losing. She refused to get another coach, even though it was obvious her mother was no longer effective. Fed relies on Mirka to be his sounding board, and everything has to go through her, which seems to be detrimental to him right now since most people think he needs a fresh perspective.

tangerine
04-18-2009, 08:49 AM
Karma's a b*tch. :D

NandoMania
04-18-2009, 10:48 AM
you ever been with a pregnant woman for 9 months?

it will mentally kill you

I can't agree with you there. I spent 9 months with a pregnant woman, and it was an extremely positive, life-affirming experience! :D