PDA

View Full Version : Roger Federer 2009 USO Champion!


Claudius
08-08-2009, 04:04 PM
You heard it here first.

Lionheart392
08-08-2009, 04:05 PM
I would go along with that.

FredMurray
08-08-2009, 04:07 PM
You heard it here first.

Wow, that is one hell of a prediction.


Roger winning a slam? surely you jest?

Claudius
08-08-2009, 04:08 PM
My "Roger Federer 2009 Wimbledon Champion!" thread made Roddick miss the backhand volley at 6-2 in the second set of the Wimby final.

I suppose this thread will bring Federer similar luck.

FedFan_2009
08-08-2009, 04:34 PM
Yes I'll agree with that! Give this guy a beer!

ubermeyer
08-08-2009, 04:51 PM
I hope so.

BreakPoint
08-08-2009, 05:28 PM
Was there ever any doubt? :)

yung goon
08-08-2009, 05:29 PM
Hahahahahahahaha

VivalaVida
08-08-2009, 05:31 PM
Yeah! Vamos Federer.

Commando Tennis Shorts
08-08-2009, 05:36 PM
Bold prediction there. You've got balls of steel

GameSampras
08-08-2009, 05:38 PM
Feds the best pick at this point.. Not sure how Murray's confidence is going to be as he just doesnt seem to be the slam winner champion everyone expects him to be.. Djoker has NO CONFIDENCE.. ANd Nadal probably wont be 100 percent.

fed is the favorite for sure. Not a very bold prediction.

Cyan
08-08-2009, 05:41 PM
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

フェデラー
08-08-2009, 05:46 PM
This thread wins :):):)

DarthMaul
08-08-2009, 06:37 PM
You heard it here first.

Amen to that!

stanfordtennis alum
08-08-2009, 06:41 PM
pretty high chance...

dincuss
08-08-2009, 06:47 PM
You heard it here first.

You also said that Gulbis would win :D

bolo
08-08-2009, 06:49 PM
Yep, the favorite going iin.

sh@de
08-08-2009, 06:56 PM
I hope this happens... :)

flyinghippos101
08-08-2009, 07:06 PM
Federer if he can maintain his momentum

Djokovic if he gets his head out of his *** and plays his best tennis all year

Murray if he can maintain his excellent performance and consistancy

Nadal if Federer,Murray or Djokovic all die in a freak accident.

The-Champ
08-08-2009, 08:55 PM
Federer if he can maintain his momentum

Djokovic if he gets his head out of his *** and plays his best tennis all year

Murray if he can maintain his excellent performance and consistancy

Nadal if Federer,Murray or Djokovic all die in a freak accident.


Where they dead at the AO this year? How about wimbledon 2008?

:)

mandy01
08-08-2009, 09:09 PM
You'll be eating your words if he isnt..you might want to wait and see how the HC season turns out.
Fed's play on HC has dramatically declined.
I highly doubt it.Just because he won the last 2 slams dosent mean he's an automatic lock for the USO.Nadal won 2 slams last year...couldnt get the USO.

grafselesfan
08-08-2009, 09:25 PM
You'll be eating your words if he isnt..you might want to wait and see how the HC season turns out.
Fed's play on HC has dramatically declined.
I highly doubt it.Just because he won the last 2 slams dosent mean he's an automatic lock for the USO.Nadal won 2 slams last year...couldnt get the USO.

I have to laugh at you since you are a supposed big Federer fan who is a far bigger Federer pestimist than I am, and I am one of the biggest Federer haters out there. I even remember during Wimbledon your predicting him to lose before every match even with his joke draw, LOL! I one of the biggest Federer haters out there will go on record right now as saying Federer is atleast 60% likely to win this years U.S Open (unfortunately) all things considered, with the next most likely no more than 20%.

mandy01
08-08-2009, 09:53 PM
^I just dont take things for granted...as for the rest your post-whatever :roll:

Sentinel
08-08-2009, 10:03 PM
You heard it here first.
What are your reasons for this outrageous prediction ???


My "Roger Federer 2009 Wimbledon Champion!" thread made Roddick miss the backhand volley at 6-2 in the second set of the Wimby final.

I suppose this thread will bring Federer similar luck.

Not good enough. Sorry.

BreakPoint
08-08-2009, 10:42 PM
Where they dead at the AO this year? How about wimbledon 2008?

:)
Were they dead at the US Open 2008?

US Open 2007?
US Open 2006?
US Open 2005?
US Open 2004?
US Open 2003?

norbac
08-08-2009, 10:55 PM
I sure as hell hope not....

maximo
08-09-2009, 01:53 AM
I sure as hell hope not....

Yeah.

This thread Sucks.

Watch when Murray, Nadal or Djokovic kick his arse. ;)

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-09-2009, 01:56 AM
Yeah.

This thread Sucks.

Watch when Murray, Nadal or Djokovic kick his arse. ;)
But Maximo, You see, Us Open is played in best of 5 sets matches:twisted:

maximo
08-09-2009, 01:58 AM
But Maximo, You see, Us Open is played in best of 5 sets matches:twisted:

That makes hardly any difference.

These guys are fit enough to last.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-09-2009, 02:01 AM
That makes hardly any difference.

These guys are fit enough to last.
They are physically, but mentally? In a 5 setter? Against Roger? In NYC? The city where the crowd is absolutely crazy about him?? Naah! Djokevich can expect the same treatment in Us Open that Nadal got at the FO against Soderling this year.

maximo
08-09-2009, 02:07 AM
They are physically, but mentally? In a 5 setter? Against Roger? In NYC? The city where the crowd is absolutely crazy about him?? Naah! Djokevich can expect the same treatment in Us Open that Nadal got at the FO against Soderling this year.

Djokovic certainly struggled with Federer in a 5 setter in Australia. Location has no bearing on how he plays.

batz
08-09-2009, 02:10 AM
I thought Donald Young and Alex Bogdanovic were the 2 most likely to win the USO this year. But now I've read this thread, I too think the guy that won the last 5 USOs and the last 2 slams might be favourite.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:11 AM
It would be great to see Fed win the US Open.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:13 AM
They are physically, but mentally? In a 5 setter? Against Roger? In NYC? The city where the crowd is absolutely crazy about him?? Naah! Djokevich can expect the same treatment in Us Open that Nadal got at the FO against Soderling this year.

Lol at maximo claiming Djokovic and Murray are fit enough to outlast Federer. I assure you maximo, if Murray or Djoko are to beat Federer, they better do it in less than five sets, especially Djokovic, but Murray too isn't exactly the king of fitness.

They aren't fit physically. When was the last time Djoko and Murray played and won a five-setter?

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-09-2009, 02:13 AM
Djokovic certainly struggled with Federer in a 5 setter in Australia. Location has no bearing on how he plays.
As Jim Courier said during that AO-SF (a former world no 1 and a guy who knows the game fairly ok): "-Whats wrong with Federer, he looks a lot slower"
The crowd in NYC has not forgotten about his speech after he defeated Roddick last year, they will make his life hell if he is to play Roger on AA-stadium ill tell you that for sure.

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 02:13 AM
It would be great to see Fed win the US Open.

It would be great to see Sela or Wawrinka win the US Open.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-09-2009, 02:14 AM
Lol at maximo claiming Djokovic and Murray are fit enough to outlast Federer. I assure you maximo, if Murray or Djoko are to beat Federer, they better do it in less than five sets, especially Djokovic, but Murray too isn't exactly the king of fitness.
I agree, why do some ppl think Feds fitness isnt great?? I think he is among the top 6-7 fittest guys on tour

batz
08-09-2009, 02:14 AM
It would be great to see Fed win the US Open.

It is with absolutely no malice that I say it would also be great to see someone other than Fed win the USO.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-09-2009, 02:15 AM
It is with absolutely no malice that I say it would also be great to see someone other than Fed win the USO.
Then i suggest you start watching the slams in year 2012:twisted:

maximo
08-09-2009, 02:16 AM
Lol at maximo claiming Djokovic and Murray are fit enough to outlast Federer. I assure you maximo, if Murray or Djoko are to beat Federer, they better do it in less than five sets, especially Djokovic, but Murray too isn't exactly the king of fitness.

They aren't fit physically. When was the last time Djoko and Murray played and won a five-setter?

Federer's growing a little beer belly. Saying Federer is fitter than Murray is a joke. Murray won against Wawrinka in 5 sets just to let you know.

This guy makes me laugh.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:17 AM
It is with absolutely no malice that I say it would also be great to see someone other than Fed win the USO.

I wouldn't mind Andy winning it (either Roddick or Murray), I would really want for Gasquet or Sela to win it but that has 0% chance of happenning, so I would at least want both to make it to the QF (can happen).

I want Fed to win because after all I am a fan, but if he doesn't it wouldn't be a huge disaster.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:18 AM
It would be great to see Sela or Wawrinka win the US Open.

Agreed, agreed and agreed. Will never happen though, so I'm keeping things realistc.

maximo
08-09-2009, 02:21 AM
I want Fed to win because after all I am a fan, but if he doesn't it wouldn't be a huge disaster.

Err... if he loses to Nadal ESPECIALLY, then the FO and Wimby can be stripped right off him. :shock:

allcourter2008
08-09-2009, 02:22 AM
Err... if he loses to Nadal ESPECIALLY, then the FO and Wimby can be stripped right off him. :shock:
That's not how sports work.

veritech
08-09-2009, 02:22 AM
It is with absolutely no malice that I say it would also be great to see someone other than Fed win the USO.

i respectfully agree.

Federer's growing a little beer belly. Saying Federer is fitter than Murray is a joke. Murray won against Wawrinka in 5 sets just to let you know.

This guy makes me laugh.

saying anyone else is fitter than federer is also a joke. 30 games into the 5th set at wimbledon and he was hardly sweating.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:26 AM
i respectfully agree.



saying anyone else is fitter than federer is also a joke. 30 games into the 5th set at wimbledon and he was hardly sweating.

Murray has shown he can collapse physically. We've seen it time and time again, for example against Verdasco at the AO and against Roddick at Wimbly. Djokovic is even worse, his fitness is the one thing that hurts him the most in a lot of GS matches that go for a little longer than he expected. The decline in his game is very apparent too, his serve is just not going in, he's strting to DF like Dementieva, it's sad to see, even for someone like me who dislikes Djokovic.

Federer survived two 4 setters and two 5- setters at RG and was still fresh after all those matches. There is no player on tour that is fitter than Fed, end of story.

sixone90
08-09-2009, 02:32 AM
That's not how sports work.

Well apparently, that's how it works around here

mandy01
08-09-2009, 02:35 AM
Murray has shown he can collapse physically. We've seen it time and time again, for example against Verdasco at the AO and against Roddick at Wimbly. Djokovic is even worse, his fitness is the one thing that hurts him the most in a lot of GS matches that go for a little longer than he expected. The decline in his game is very apparent too, his serve is just not going in, he's strting to DF like Dementieva, it's sad to see, even for someone like me who dislikes Djokovic.

Federer survived two 4 setters and two 5- setters at RG and was still fresh after all those matches. There is no player on tour that is fitter than Fed, end of story.
I dont know,with the deepness of the field , if Fed can win it but I have to agree that Federer's fitness is superb when a match goes to five sets.
But more than that its his conditioning that is better than the rest.
Roger played a lot of other sports like basketball,football and squash to improve his hand-eye coordination skills and footwork.
If you want to win more points without running too much or serving and volleying, Fed is the man.His point construction when he's on,is exquisite.
He also trains ridiculously hard in the off-season...(so much that his practice partners cant keep up with him and have to keep rotating) and paces himself when a tournament starts.

maximo
08-09-2009, 02:36 AM
There is no player on tour that is fitter than Fed, end of story.

You seriously do make me laugh..

Nadal and Murray are much fitter than Federer. Just look at the AO final where he smashed him after the longest match ever against Verdasco.

Nadal is truly remarkable. Federer gets easy draws and that's why he's always fresh at the end.

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 02:36 AM
Agreed, agreed and agreed. Will never happen though, so I'm keeping things realistc.

Realistic?

Then it will be Murray. 2009 USOpen Champion and GOAT!


Nadal is probably fitter than Federer, considering the energy he expends during matches. How he came back after Verdasco match is beyond me. But I do also remember plenty of matches where Nadal was plain tired.

Federer on the other hand never looks tired. The ******* is starting to **** me off.

mandy01
08-09-2009, 02:38 AM
You seriously do make me laugh..

Nadal and Murray are much fitter than Federer. Just look at the AO final where he smashed him after the longest match ever against Verdasco.

Nadal is truly remarkable. Federer gets easy draws and that's why he's always fresh at the end.
Shows nothing but your ignorance.You obviously didnt follow the sport for more than year or two.Either that,or you are simply BSing.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:39 AM
Realistic?

Then it will be Murray. 2009 USOpen Champion and GOAT!

The only reason I don't want Murray to win is because of maximo. Other than that, I would like that to happen. GOAT is a little too soon I'd say.

maximo
08-09-2009, 02:40 AM
Shows nothing but your ignorance.You obviously didnt follow the sport for more than year or two.Either that,or you are simply BSing.

Oh year, Wimbledon and the French this year really does support your claim. :roll:

allcourter2008
08-09-2009, 02:41 AM
You seriously do make me laugh..

Nadal and Murray are much fitter than Federer. Just look at the AO final where he smashed him after the longest match ever against Verdasco.

Nadal is truly remarkable. Federer gets easy draws and that's why he's always fresh at the end.
Nadal is probably fitter than Federer, but not Murray. Murray struggled in the USO final after he had beaten Nadal. I doubt that Nadal or Federer would have had problems with a situation like that.

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 02:41 AM
The only reason I don't want Murray to win is because of maximo. Other than that, I would like that to happen. GOAT is a little too soon I'd say.

That's a bad reason. Look at my sig. That's from a Fed fan but it would be dumb to hate Fed because of him.

mandy01
08-09-2009, 02:42 AM
Oh year, Wimbledon and the French this year really does support your claim. :roll: Yes it does indeed.Just because you cannot appreciate the efforts of anybody other than Nadal or Murray dosent mean we all have to be as ignorant as you are.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:42 AM
Shows nothing but your ignorance.You obviously didnt follow the sport for more than year or two.Either that,or you are simply BSing.

Oh is that what he's saying? Ha ha. Thank god he's on my ignore list.

Murray fitter than Federer? What a joke.

I bet he thinks Murray also has a better 2nd serve than Federer?

What he doesn't understand is that Murray got the easiest draw ever at Wimbly, much easier than Fed's, and he still couldn't even reach the final. Murray couldn't even reach the final in AO and FO.

maximo
08-09-2009, 02:42 AM
The only reason I don't want Murray to win is because of maximo. Other than that, I would like that to happen. GOAT is a little too soon I'd say.

Blame me for what?

For saying your beloved hero isn't fitter than Nadal? :lol:

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:43 AM
That's a bad reason. Look at my sig. That's from a Fed fan but it would be dumb to hate Fed because of him.

I'm far from hating Murray. He is currently one of my favorites, but I have to admit, maximo is an irritating person. I'm sure you can admit that even as a Murray fan.

mandy01
08-09-2009, 02:44 AM
Oh is that what he's saying? Ha ha. Thank god he's on my ignore list.

Murray fitter than Federer? What a joke.

I bet he thinks Murray also has a better 2nd serve than Federer?

What he doesn't understand is that Murray got the easiest draw ever at Wimbly, much easier than Fed's, and he still couldn't even reach the final. Murray couldn't even reach the final in AO and FO.

Murray can win a GS ,no doubt..he can win the USO..But his conditioning is not as good as Fed's.He hits a good gear in the beginning of the match but if it starts to get tough he goes passive.He's young I know but I'm just ponting out the current situation.

maximo
08-09-2009, 02:45 AM
That's a bad reason. Look at my sig. That's from a Fed fan but it would be dumb to hate Fed because of him.

P_Agony is incompetant. He thinks a 28 year old is fitter than 22 year olds. :-?

BTW, Djokovic was diagnosed with breathing problems, counting him would be wrong.

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 02:46 AM
P_Agony is incompetant. He thinks a 28 year old is fitter than 22 year olds. :-?

He's got a point. Federer is quite fit. He doesn;'t look like it, but he is.

Have you ever seen a match where Federer was dead tired and couldn't run anymore? He outlasted Roddick at Wimby. In the last few games Roddick was framing the ball all over the place and Fed looked just fine.

allcourter2008
08-09-2009, 02:46 AM
I can only repeat it. Murray didn't look exactly fit after his semifinal match with Nadal at the US Open last year.

Such circumstances would be no problem for Nadal and Federer.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:47 AM
Murray can win a GS ,no doubt..he can win the USO..But his conditioning is not as good as Fed's.He hits a good gear in the beginning of the match but if it starts to get tough he goes passive.H'es young I know but I'm just ponting out the current situation.

And Djokovic's conditioning is even worse. The only player who is on par with Fed's fitness is Nadal, but I still think Federer has a better fitness. Nadal is stronger mentally tough.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-09-2009, 02:47 AM
P_Agony is incompetant. He thinks a 28 year old is fitter than 22 year olds. :-?
Thats not a very strong case Maximo, i thought u knew better, Agassi in his 30`s was THE fittest player on the atp-tour.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-09-2009, 02:48 AM
And Djokovic's conditioning is even worse. The only player who is on par with Fed's fitness is Nadal, but I still think Federer has a better fitness. Nadal is stronger mentally tough.
Agree, look at the Wimbledon final of 2008, Nadal was totally exhausted, Federer looked more or less that if he was about to start playing.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:49 AM
Thats not a very strong case Maximo, i thought u knew better, Agassi in his 30`s was THE fittest player on the atp-tour.

Yep.

The only time I saw Federer sweat badly was against Tipsy in that AO 2008 match, but Federer was ill yet still ran nicely and won the match 10-8 in the 5th.

mandy01
08-09-2009, 02:49 AM
And Djokovic's conditioning is even worse. The only player who is on par with Fed's fitness is Nadal, but I still think Federer has a better fitness. Nadal is stronger mentally tough.
Federer more than being fit is better conditioned than everybody..He knows how to make economical use of his energy.He knows where and when to stop.I love his work ethic.I think its a perfect formula for success.

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 02:49 AM
BTW, Djokovic was diagnosed with breathing problems, counting him would be wrong.

That topic can go on and on until the judgement day.

He had some kind of surgery done in 2006, but it seems like he still has problems. I remember he seemes out of breath in AO08 semis at the beginning of the second set.

I think he still has some medical problems, not just fitness. I can't believe that a top player can have such a bad conditioning. There must be something else.

maximo
08-09-2009, 02:51 AM
Thats not a very strong case Maximo, i thought u knew better, Agassi in his 30`s was THE fittest player on the atp-tour.

No.

Agassi was playing his best tennis in his 30's. That doesn't mean he was the fittest player on tour. I thought you knew better. :(

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:52 AM
That topic can go on and on until the judgement day.

He had some kind of surgery done in 2006, but it seems like he still has problems. I remember he seemes out of breath in AO08 semis at the beginning of the second set.

It's true Djokovic is having health problems, but if they were serious, the doctors wouldn't have allowed him to play tennis. Not only that, he's a top 5 player so the problems must not be so serious.

However, I've seen Djokovic collapse physically in quite a few matches. His game as directly affected, he couldn't serve, couldn't hit a FH, it was a bad sight.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-09-2009, 02:52 AM
No.

Agassi was playing his best tennis in his 30's. That doesn't mean he was the fittest player on tour. I thought you knew better. :(
Well...and WHY do u think he was playing his best tennis in his 30`s? Because he finally got married?

allcourter2008
08-09-2009, 02:52 AM
No.

Agassi was playing his best tennis in his 30's. That doesn't mean he was the fittest player on tour. I thought you knew better. :(
Agassi was definately one of the fittest in his 30s, he was so good because he could wear down everyone.

Marathon runners are often at their best in their late 20s and early 30s.

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 02:53 AM
No.

Agassi was playing his best tennis in his 30's. That doesn't mean he was the fittest player on tour. I thought you knew better. :(

Old players can have better fitness than young. Look at Rod-Djoko at this year's AO.

DarthMaul
08-09-2009, 02:53 AM
You seriously do make me laugh..

Nadal and Murray are much fitter than Federer. Just look at the AO final where he smashed him after the longest match ever against Verdasco.

Nadal is truly remarkable. Federer gets easy draws and that's why he's always fresh at the end.

That cost him at least a knee.

batz
08-09-2009, 02:53 AM
Murray has shown he can collapse physically. We've seen it time and time again, for example against Verdasco at the AO and against Roddick at Wimbly. Djokovic is even worse, his fitness is the one thing that hurts him the most in a lot of GS matches that go for a little longer than he expected. The decline in his game is very apparent too, his serve is just not going in, he's strting to DF like Dementieva, it's sad to see, even for someone like me who dislikes Djokovic.

Federer survived two 4 setters and two 5- setters at RG and was still fresh after all those matches. There is no player on tour that is fitter than Fed, end of story.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with this. Murray lost both of those matches because the guy on the other side of the net was better than him on the day, not becasue of any 'physical collapse'. Did Roger have a 'physical collapse' againt Rafa at the AO this year? After all his final set loss was worse than either of Murray's final sets in the two matches you allude to.

I don't think you can really accuse Murray of losing a match due to fitness since Nalby @ Wimby 2005. AO 07 possibly.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:54 AM
Well...and WHY do u think he was playing his best tennis in his 30`s? Because he finally got married?

Haha, just yesterday maximo said Agassi was better in is prime during the Sampras era. Now he has changed his mind, claiming Agassi played his best tennis in his 30s.

I doubt this guy even watched tennis pre-Murray.

maximo
08-09-2009, 02:55 AM
Old players can have better fitness than young. Look at Rod-Djoko at this year's AO.

But Djokovic has breathing problems CHB. :(

maximo
08-09-2009, 02:57 AM
Haha, just yesterday maximo said Agassi was better in is prime during the Sampras era. Now he has changed his mind, claiming Agassi played his best tennis in his 30s.

I doubt this guy even watched tennis pre-Murray.

You truly are stupid.

I said His prime was 00, 01 and 02. Go read the thread again genius.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-09-2009, 02:58 AM
Haha, just yesterday maximo said Agassi was better in is prime during the Sampras era. Now he has changed his mind, claiming Agassi played his best tennis in his 30s.

I doubt this guy even watched tennis pre-Murray.


Thats the impression i get discussing tennis with fans of Nadal and Murray, IF u happen to mention something that happened before their favourites came along they are totally lost and can say just about anything, would be better to say nothing.

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 02:59 AM
But Djokovic has breathing problems CHB. :(

Yeah, but that's the point. Everyone is different. Federer has an economic game and was a bit lucky not to get any injuries, and as a result he is one of the fittest on the tour at 28. You gotta give it to him.

But don't worry, Murray's got the US in a bag. :)

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 02:59 AM
Sorry, but I have to disagree with this. Murray lost both of those matches because the guy on the other side of the net was better than him on the day, not becasue of any 'physical collapse'. Did Roger have a 'physical collapse' againt Rafa at the AO this year? After all his final set loss was worse than either of Murray's final sets in the two matches you allude to.

I don't think you can really accuse Murray of losing a match due to fitness since Nalby @ Wimby 2005.

No, Roger had a mental collapse. Murray's game is directly affected by his fitness. He can start playing aggressive and lose it at some point and it looks like he doesn't have the strength anymore. Yes, Roddick played great, but Murray's fitness just wasn't there like in the first few sets.

maximo
08-09-2009, 03:02 AM
No, Roger had a mental collapse. Murray's game is directly affected by his fitness. He can start playing aggressive and lose it at some point and it looks like he doesn't have the strength anymore. Yes, Roddick played great, but Murray's fitness just wasn't there like in the first few sets.

Roger had a mental collapse after getting squashed by Murray 4 times in a row. Keep them excuses coming. Reading your posts is agonizingly painful. :lol:

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 03:02 AM
Thats the impression i get discussing tennis with fans of Nadal and Murray, IF u happen to mention something that happened before their favourites came along they are totally lost and can say just about anything, would be better to say nothing.

Maximo will stay on my ignore list. His posts are meanningles to me.

veritech
08-09-2009, 03:02 AM
But Djokovic has breathing problems CHB. :(

correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't he have surgery to fix that?

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 03:03 AM
No, Roger had a mental collapse. Murray's game is directly affected by his fitness. He can start playing aggressive and lose it at some point and it looks like he doesn't have the strength anymore. Yes, Roddick played great, but Murray's fitness just wasn't there like in the first few sets.

I think Murray improved his fitness quite a bit in the last year. I mean, he's a counterpuncher and you have to be fit for that. He played too passive at Wimby. That's the main reason he lost.

But, Djokovic is a different league altogether.

correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't he have surgery to fix that?

He had something done, but he never exactly specified what.

maximo
08-09-2009, 03:05 AM
P_Agony acts like a fan of Murray, but in truth he knows zit about him. He's no better than vtmike who got banned thank god. Fednatics like him deserve to be punished anyway.

I feel bad for gj011, he was never the bad guy. The real bad guys are people like P_Agony.

batz
08-09-2009, 03:07 AM
No, Roger had a mental collapse. Murray's game is directly affected by his fitness. He can start playing aggressive and lose it at some point and it looks like he doesn't have the strength anymore. Yes, Roddick played great, but Murray's fitness just wasn't there like in the first few sets.

Murray lost the 4th set to Roddick in a tiebreak. In what way was this a 'physical collapse'? IMHO Murray lost to Roddick because one of the foundation stones of his game (his passing) simply did not work on the day - due to some extent to the quality of Roddick's net approaches. But I've seen no commentator describe Murray's loss as a 'physical collapse'.

mandy01
08-09-2009, 03:09 AM
I think Murray improved his fitness quite a bit in the last year. I mean, he's a counterpuncher and you have to be fit for that. He played too passive at Wimby. That's the main reason he lost.

But, Djokovic is a different league altogether.



He had something done, but he never exactly specified what. I agree with that but the whole point of argument is that Murray isnt as well-conditioned as Federer which also could've resulted in passive play.

dragonfire
08-09-2009, 03:09 AM
murray is phycially fit, but his game takes so much out of him

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 03:10 AM
I think Murray improved his fitness quite a bit in the last year. I mean, he's a counterpuncher and you have to be fit for that. He played too passive at Wimby. That's the main reason he lost.

But, Djokovic is a different league altogether.



He had something done, but he never exactly specified what.

Fair enough, I said from the start Djokovic is especially affected by his fitness. I agree Murray's fitness has improved and still is improving. He's stil not in Fed's and Nadal's level of fitness, but he's getting there.

Djokovic, on the other hand, will not be able to be a major contender of every title unless he improves that area vastly.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 03:11 AM
Murray lost the 4th set to Roddick in a tiebreak. In what way was this a 'physical collapse'? IMHO Murray lost to Roddick because one of the foundation stones of his game (his passing) simply did not work on the day - due to some extent to the quality of Roddick's net approaches. But I've seen no commentator describe Murray's loss as a 'physical collapse'.

At the start of the match Murray actually outserved Roddick, but his service games became less reliable and his 1st serve % dropped after a while.

I think the first shot that's affected by fitness is the serve. Djokovic can tell you all about it.

batz
08-09-2009, 03:12 AM
I agree with that but the whole point of argument is that Murray isnt as well-conditioned as Federer which also could've resulted in passive play.

It costs far less energy to be ultra agressive that it does to be uber-defensive. In the former, points are won (or lost) quickly. I don't think the argument you are making holds much water. Tired players look to end points quickly, not extend them.

dragonfire
08-09-2009, 03:13 AM
I agree with that but the whole point of argument is that Murray isnt as well-conditioned as Federer which also could've resulted in passive play.

that is a crock of ****

maximo
08-09-2009, 03:16 AM
Maximo will stay on my ignore list. His posts are meanningles to me.

Hope you like my sig Mr. Agony. :lol:

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 03:17 AM
It costs far less energy to be ultra agressive that it does to be uber-defensive. In the former, points are won (or lost) quickly. I don't think the argument you are making holds much water. Tired players look to end points quickly, not extend them.

But Federer has proved he can play passively and still win a 5-setter. At the Wimbly final Fed was ultra passive, didn't go for his shots, and it was Roddick who was the aggresive one. Same goes for the Haas and Delpo matches at the FO. Federer was NOT in control of the these matches until the 3rd-4th sets in those. Berdych in AO 09 is antoher example. Fed was passive until the 4th set.

Federer has proved he can survive by fitness and heart alone without having his usual aggressive gameplan working for him at all.

batz
08-09-2009, 03:18 AM
At the start of the match Murray actually outserved Roddick, but his service games became less reliable and his 1st serve % dropped.

I think the first shot that's affected by fitness is the serve. Djokovic can tell you all about it.

Even if I accept your assertion that Murray's serve went off against Roddick as the match went on (and I'm not sure I do) - I simply don't accept your contention that it was due to fitness. I also reject the notion that Murray lost the match because he didn't serve well enough toward the end of the match. Murray lost because he hardly made a pass all day - he got a code violation for swearing when the umpire mis-heard him shout 'make a pass.' Murray didn't lose becasue of fitness.

Incidentally, I bet if I found a match where Roger's serve deteriorated as the match went on then that wouldn't be a sign of fatigue, but something else - am I right?

dragonfire
08-09-2009, 03:19 AM
murray lost because roddick played really well. Period

TheFifthSet
08-09-2009, 03:20 AM
It seems as if everyday is "roast Maximo" day.

Federer's growing a little beer belly. Saying Federer is fitter than Murray is a joke. Murray won against Wawrinka in 5 sets just to let you know.

This guy makes me laugh.

In terms of games, the 2009 final was about 40% longer than the Wawrinka-Murray. I believe the first four sets ALONE were longer than the Wawrinka match. And Federer hit something like 20 aces in the final set!!

Federer gets easy draws and that's why he's always fresh at the end.

Wimbledon '09:

Federer beat Soderling in the 4th round, who is now 24-4 since the beginning of the French open, 3 of those loses coming against Federer, Karlovic in the Quarters, Haas in the Semi's, who beat Djokovic twice in two weeks, and then Roddick, one of the best grasscourters of this generation.

Murray beat Kendric, Gulbis, Troicki, Wawrinki (8-10 career record on grass), and Ferrero (never won a grasscourt title, has won only one title in the past six years, and that was on clay) before bowing down to Roddick.

French Open '09:

Murray beat Chela (183) Starace (104) Tipsarevic (64) and Cilic (13) before losing to Gonzalez.

Federer beat Martin (98.) Acasuso (45) Mathieu (35) Haas (63) Monfils (10) Del Potro (5) and Soderling (25)

Granted, neither draws were overwhelmingly difficult but Murray's was less impressive. Federer had to face Del Potro, who is about as difficult as Gonzalez on clay, Monfils who made the Semi's last year, a rejuvinated Haas (won Halle and made the Semi's of Wimby after RG), the crowd favourite Mathieu, and a guy who beat Ferrer, Nadal, Davydenko, and Gonzalez.

Australian Open 2009:

Murray beat Pavel (1141) Marcel Granollers (51) Jurgen Meltzer (32) before losing to Verdasco, a tough matchup who had a great tournament . . . . but not exactly a hardcourt whiz.

Federer beat demolished Roddick, Delpo, beat Berdych, Safin, and took Nadal to five sets.


So where are these easy draws? I'd like to know, gosh-darn it. Boy, would I luuuuuuuv to see these draws.

batz
08-09-2009, 03:21 AM
But Federer has proved he can play passively and still win a 5-setter. At the Wimbly final Fed was ultra passive, didn't go for his shots, and it was Roddick who was the aggresive one. Same goes for the Haas and Delpo matches at the FO. Federer was NOT in control of the these matches until the 3rd-4th sets in those. Berdych in AO 09 is antoher example. Fed was passive until the 4th set.

Federer has proved he can survive by fitness and heart alone without having his usual aggressive gameplan working for him at all.



Who said he couldn't? For the record, I'm also not saying that Murray is fitter than Roger. What I am calling you out on is your assertion that Murray is prone to 'physical collapse' and that the 4th set against Roddick and the 5th set against Verdasco at AO can both be described as such.

mandy01
08-09-2009, 03:21 AM
It costs far less energy to be ultra agressive that it does to be uber-defensive. In the former, points are won (or lost) quickly. I don't think the argument you are making holds much water. Tired players look to end points quickly, not extend them. Who gave you that idea? Roger just has a better transition game which allows him to get into the offensive mode easily and even if he's on the defensive he can take control and end the point.Thats the whole point of being better-conditioned.His footwork allows him to get into an offensive mode better .

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 03:22 AM
Even if I accept your assertion that Murray's serve went off against Roddick as the match went on (and I'm not sure I do) - I simply don't accept your contention that it was due to fitness. I also reject the notion that Murray lost the match because he didn't serve well enough toward the end of the match. Murray lost because he hardly made a pass all day - he got a code violation for swearing when the umpire mis-heard him shout 'make a pass.' Murray didn't lose becasue of fitness.

Incidentally, I bet if I found a match where Roger's serve deteriorated as the match went on then that wouldn't be a sign of fatigue, but something else - am I right?

If you find a Roger match where he served great until the middle of it and then started serving like crap (and I don't mean a slight drop, I mean a big one) then yes, one might suspect it was fatigue. If I'm not mistaken Murray's % on the 1st serve took a huge hit in the later sets.

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 03:23 AM
But Federer has proved he can play passively and still win a 5-setter. At the Wimbly final Fed was ultra passive, didn't go for his shots, and it was Roddick who was the aggresive one. Same goes for the Haas and Delpo matches at the FO. Federer was NOT in control of the these matches until the 3rd-4th sets in those. Berdych in AO 09 is antoher example. Fed was passive until the 4th set.

Federer has proved he can survive by fitness and heart alone without having his usual aggressive gameplan working for him at all.

Endurance is not just a fitness thing. It also depends on the belief that you will eventually win those 3 sets and the match. Federer has the belief even when he plays badly. Haas, Berdych, Roddick and DelPo didn't have it.

And Fed plays differently. His passive play is not like Murray's or Rafa's.

Part of what propels Fed is that he knows he cannot lose to blackhorses in big events. It's probably arrogance, I guess. There was simply no way that he's gonna lose to Haas and Berdych and Roddick (I could have bet anything on that.)

Murray and Djokovic still don't believe that they have a right to be in every final. And so they sometimes lose concentration against weaker players.

mandy01
08-09-2009, 03:25 AM
If you find a Roger match where he served great until the middle of it and then started serving like crap (and I don't mean a slight drop, I mean a big one) then yes, one might suspect it was fatigue. If I'm not mistaken Murray's % on the 1st serve took a huge hit in the later sets.
Federer either consistently serves bad or good most of the times..I havent seen him go from good to bad during a course of a match often.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 03:25 AM
Endurance is not just a fitness thing. It also depends on the belief that you will eventually win those 3 sets and the match. Federer has the belief even when he plays badly. Haas, Berdych, Roddick and DelPo didn't have it.

And Fed plays differently. His passive play is not like Murray's or Rafa's.

Please explain the bolded sentence.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 03:26 AM
Federer either consistently serves bad or good most of the times..I havent seen him go from good to bad during a course of a match often.

Precisely, that's what I mean. I have seen Djokovic and Murray serve for great to awful in one match. With Federer the 1st set is an indication for the entire match - either that or it will improve, but most likely stay at the same area of %.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-09-2009, 03:28 AM
Who gave you that idea? Roger just has a better transition game which allows him to get into the offensive mode easily and even if he's on the defensive he can take control and end the point.Thats the whole point of being better-conditioned.His footwork allows him to get into an offensive mode better .
Thats correct! When he is at his best he switches from defense to ofense so fast and easy

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 03:30 AM
Please explain the bolded sentence.

Well, he never plays like an ordinary pusher the way Murray sometimes did against Roddick (especially on important points). He basically let Roddick take charge, come to the net and dictate play.

Federer never plays like that. His "passive play" has much more variety.

Actually, I'm not sure what do you mean by Federer's passive play.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 03:31 AM
Well, he never plays like an ordinary pusher the way Murray sometimes did against Roddick (especially on important points). He basically let Roddick take charge, come to the net and dictate play.

Federer never plays like that. His "passive play" has much more variety.

I don't know, I've seen some passive play from Fed latley, especially against Soderling at Wimbledon. It was a super passive match from Fed. Barely any winners whatsoever.

batz
08-09-2009, 03:35 AM
If you find a Roger match where he served great until the middle of it and then started serving like crap (and I don't mean a slight drop, I mean a big one) then yes, one might suspect it was fatigue. If I'm not mistaken Murray's % on the 1st serve took a huge hit in the later sets.

The 2 tiebreak scores in those sets were 9-7 and 7-5. So Murray took 12 games and had 2 close tbs with an ultra-hot Andy Roddick whilst 'serving like crap' due to 'physical' collapse', but lost the first set 4-6 whilst fresh as a daisy and serving well?

That doesn't make a lot of sense .

batz
08-09-2009, 03:37 AM
Precisely, that's what I mean. I have seen Djokovic and Murray serve for great to awful in one match. With Federer the 1st set is an indication for the entire match - either that or it will improve, but most likely stay at the same area of %.

In just about every one of Roger's losses to Murray, his serve has been @rsegravy by the end of the third set, often after being brilliant in the 1st set.

CountryHillbilly
08-09-2009, 03:37 AM
I don't know, I've seen some passive play from Fed latley, especially against Soderling at Wimbledon. It was a super passive match from Fed. Barely any winners whatsoever.

That's because Soderling was going for broke on all his shots. And there were a huge number of unreturned serves. Serve fest mostly. And on important points Federer was better. Thats was enough for a win.

mandy01
08-09-2009, 03:37 AM
The 2 tiebreak scores in those sets were 9-7 and 7-5. So Murray took 12 games and had 2 close tbs with an ultra-hot Andy Roddick whilst 'serving like crap' due to 'physical' collapse', but lost the first set 4-6 whilst fresh as a daisy and serving well.

That doesn't make a lot of sense . What you have to understand is that Murray's conditioning is very good..the point is its not yet as good as Federer or Nadal.He gets too passive sometimes.

mandy01
08-09-2009, 03:40 AM
In just about every one of Roger's losses to Murray, his serve has been @rsegravy by the end of the third set, often after being brilliant in the 1st set.
Sorry but no..its not.Roger first serve percentage is pretty much similar.It dosent drastically drop.His problem is the lack of patience against guys like Murray.Patience is one area where Murray,when matched up with Fed is stronger.

batz
08-09-2009, 03:42 AM
What you have to understand is that Murray's conditioning is very good..the point is its not yet as good as Federer or Nadal.He gets too passive sometimes.

And what you have to understand is that I have never argued that Murray's conditioning is as good or better than Roger's or Rafa's - what I am arguing about is PA's contention that Murray is prone to 'physical collapse' and the matches he cited as evidence for this.

Murray doesn't need to be tired to be too passive - he can be that at anytime.

batz
08-09-2009, 03:44 AM
Sorry but no..its not.Roger first serve percentage is pretty much similar.It dosent drastically drop.His problem is the lack of patience against guys like Murray.Patience is one area where Murray,when matched up with Fed is stronger.

Are you really telling me that Roger served as well in the final set @ IW (where he lost 1-6) as he did in the second set and won 6-4? Did you watch that match?

mandy01
08-09-2009, 03:47 AM
Are you really telling me that Roger served as well in the final set @ IW (where he lost 1-6) as he did in the second set and won 6-4? Did you watch that match?
yes I did watch the match..And I saw more of mis-firing of forehands and backhands than serve..I thought he didnt serve great throughout the whole match.Also note,I said his serve percentage is similar not exactly same.There isnt a drastic fall in that area.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 04:09 AM
In just about every one of Roger's losses to Murray, his serve has been @rsegravy by the end of the third set, often after being brilliant in the 1st set.

It was less his serve and more his strokes, and it was clear Federer was mentally "wrong".

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 04:12 AM
The 2 tiebreak scores in those sets were 9-7 and 7-5. So Murray took 12 games and had 2 close tbs with an ultra-hot Andy Roddick whilst 'serving like crap' due to 'physical' collapse', but lost the first set 4-6 whilst fresh as a daisy and serving well?

That doesn't make a lot of sense .

Served like crap for his standards. If I'm not mistaken well below the 50% 1st serve in (though I might be mistaken, I'm speaking from pure memory here).

maximo
08-09-2009, 04:13 AM
^^ Keep playing the choke card, it won't prove anything.

Murray, Nadal and Djokovic always attack his 1 hander. That is why they have had soo much success against him. Not because 'He's mentally unstable'. Fednatics never give any credit to other players. The funny thing is, Federer does the exact same thing.

batz
08-09-2009, 04:19 AM
Served like crap for his standards. If I'm not mistaken well below the 50% 1st serve in (though I might be mistaken, I'm speaking from pure memory here).

I'm only going from memory too mate - and I don't remember thinking his serve was the reason he lost, or that the reason his serve was so bad was because he had 'physically collapsed'. Seriously, how can two close tiebreak sets be described as a 'physical collapse'? It's not as if Murray was cruising and then went to ratsheet and lost meekly in the final set (like he did v Nalby in 2005).


I guess what I'm saying is that in order for there to be a physical collapse, there has to be a collapse. Murray's losses to Roddick and Verdasco cannot be described as collapses.

JoshDragon
08-09-2009, 11:32 AM
You have just jinxed Roger. He will now lose the finals to Nadal after being up 6-2 in the second set tie-break. He'll miss a smash and will proceed to lose the match in a tight five sets.

P_Agony
08-09-2009, 11:38 AM
I'm only going from memory too mate - and I don't remember thinking his serve was the reason he lost, or that the reason his serve was so bad was because he had 'physically collapsed'. Seriously, how can two close tiebreak sets be described as a 'physical collapse'? It's not as if Murray was cruising and then went to ratsheet and lost meekly in the final set (like he did v Nalby in 2005).


I guess what I'm saying is that in order for there to be a physical collapse, there has to be a collapse. Murray's losses to Roddick and Verdasco cannot be described as collapses.

Fair enough, maybe a physival collapse is too strong for this match. However, Murray did seem tired to me in the 4th set, and he had more trouble with his service games. It was clear Roddick was the fresher of the two, and Murray was barely hanging on. Granted, he did hang on until the TB, but don't forget he had the ultimate support of the crowd too.

FredMurray
08-09-2009, 12:30 PM
Unlike Wimbledon where Federer is unstoppable before the final, at the US Open he appears to be more vulnerable to an early upset.





Federer Prime 2003 - present

Wimbledon - before final


1 set lost - wimbledon 2009
0 set lost - Wimbledon 2008
1 set lost - wimbledon 2007
0 set lost - wimbledon 2006
1 set lost - wimbledon 2005
1 set lost - wimbledon 2004
1 set lost - wimbledon 2003


US Open - before final


4 set lost - us open 2003 (failed to reach final)
3 set lost - us open 2004
2 set lost - us open 2005
1 set lost - us open 2006
2 set lost - us open 2007
3 set lost - us open 2008

JoshDragon
08-09-2009, 12:38 PM
Unlike Wimbledon where Federer is unstoppable before the final, at the US Open he appears to be more vulnerable to an early upset.





Federer Prime 2003 - present

Wimbledon - before final


1 set lost - wimbledon 2009
0 set lost - Wimbledon 2008
1 set lost - wimbledon 2007
0 set lost - wimbledon 2006
1 set lost - wimbledon 2005
1 set lost - wimbledon 2004
1 set lost - wimbledon 2003


US Open - before final


4 set lost - us open 2003 (failed to reach final)
3 set lost - us open 2004
2 set lost - us open 2005
1 set lost - us open 2006
2 set lost - us open 2007
3 set lost - us open 2008
4 set lost - us open 2009 (failed to reach final)

Fixed it.^^ :)

FredMurray
08-09-2009, 12:40 PM
Fixed it.^^ :)

lol

I can only hope that happens....

JoshDragon
08-09-2009, 12:44 PM
lol

I can only hope that happens....

I think it will. Federer is obviously following a pattern of how many sets he will lose each year, before the finals of the US Open. His OCD will force him to lose the US Open this year.

flyinghippos101
08-09-2009, 01:03 PM
Where they dead at the AO this year? How about wimbledon 2008?

:)

I do not deny the quality of play and awesomeness of Nadal at Wimby 2008 and AO, as a matter of fact, playing and winning two 5 setters in a row is nothing short of inhuman. However considering that Nadal is playing on grandpa knees at the moment, it would be logical to assume that Nadal would have to play his absolute best to win the US Open(need I remind you, his worst surface and the fastest surface) in such conditions.