PDA

View Full Version : My take on the USO final, and future of Federer


MichaelChang
09-15-2009, 12:23 AM
Being a fan of Federer, I am here to only present objective comments. I do not intend to bring up anything related to GOAT, nor do I intend to bring up comparison to Sampras or Nadal. SO please, no trolling or flaming in this thread. Thanks.

Many Fed fans have said that they feel less sad compared to his loss in AO2009. I beg to differ. I think his loss today indicates quite some negative look on his future. Here are my reasons:

1. Before this match, Federer is only vulnerable to Nadal in slams (barring his loss to Djoko in AO08 due to mono). After this match, it is all changed. It gives hope to other young guns to take out Fed in slams. It proves Fed is not invincible in slams.

2. I think today´s loss defines a turning point in his career. Some might say AO08 defines a turning point, but that may be cuz of his mono. Some might say AO09 defines a turning point, but that he lost to his nemesis Nadal. But today´s loss is something diffrent, it shows he is no longer to adjust to his best level for the last stage in a slam, and it shows he can no longer adjust his game strategy and win based on his experience in slams. It also shows he is slightly less motivated, as he himself shows less emotion after the loss. The next definite turning point of Federer, would be the moment his stops his semi final streams in a slam.

3. Today´s match shows Federer has lost a step during the later stage in the 4 hour match. It is inevitable as he ages up. Sad but true. Quite often he can not reach or could barely reach some balls which he should have no problem when he was younger.

4. Some has said Federer´s serve is on par with Sampras´s. Today´s match proved them wrong. No, Federer´server is not as consistent as Pete. Having a great serve is very important for an aging champion on the tour, and can quickly save them out of trouble. I wish Federer could keep this up for the rest of his years remaining on the tour.

5. Many has already jumped onto the Del Potro wagon. Sure I like this kid too. He deserves the win today. But based on his physique and size, I have to say I think he might not be the next great. He may not be the next one who can win 6+ slams. His legs/fitness might breakdown sooner than other players such as Djoko or Murray. Anyway, I wish I am wrong.

ArrowSmith
09-15-2009, 12:25 AM
MichaelChang - remember Sampras didn't even play the '99 US Open because of back injury. Fed has already surpassed Sampras' slam total and will win more.

mandy01
09-15-2009, 12:27 AM
Sadly you make a lot of sense :sad:

Olorin
09-15-2009, 12:28 AM
I'll admit, this is a shock and I still can't believe he lost. But I don't believe that he won't win slams. I don't think we can reach conclusions so quickly.

He won 2 out of 4 slams. That is a good year for Federer ! Not a bad one. I'm happy that Del Potro won. But admittedly, I am still a bit upset because Federer had ample opportunities to close the match out.

His first serve left him. Big time. In fact his serve altogether was not great hitting 8 (I think) double faults in the match. But by no means do I feel that it's the end of Federer just because he lost a slam.

People win and lose. Federer has been the most dominant in slams this year. That's about all I could have asked for.

MichaelChang
09-15-2009, 12:28 AM
MichaelChang - remember Sampras didn't even play the '99 US Open because of back injury. Fed has already surpassed Sampras' slam total and will win more.

I agree. I said I am not trying to compare the 2. And I surely believe Fed can win more slam titles. The only reason I bring up Pete is that I wish Federer stables his serve. Honestly, when he gets close to 30, he really need that shot to be with him ALL THE TIME.

Olorin
09-15-2009, 12:30 AM
Michael,

Are you telling me that Sampras never had an off day with serving in a slam ? Ever ?

dwhiteside
09-15-2009, 12:30 AM
Are you the real Michael Chang?

wyutani
09-15-2009, 12:31 AM
future of fed? not too bright but i thnk he'll win one more gs and thats it.

ArrowSmith
09-15-2009, 12:31 AM
MichaelChange - I think the combination of getting the record + the twins + the rain delays did him in this weekend. Come 2010 Aussie Open it's going to be Fed lowering the hammer again.

flying24
09-15-2009, 12:33 AM
Federer is still in a much better place than he was a year ago. He has won 2 slams and a Masters title, already more than he won last year. He has won his last 5 matches combined with Nadal, Djokovic, and Murray who he was fareing poorly against for awhile. So essentialy you make no sense. Things were looking much more doomful for Federer less than a year ago than they do now. His chances for future success are looking more promising today than they were earlier this year.

As for your last comment Del Potro will have a better career than either Murray and Djokovic, and Djokovic the weakest of those 3. Djokovic will be lucky to win 1 more slam in his career in fact.

ArrowSmith
09-15-2009, 12:35 AM
flying24 - on the contrary I think Djokovic has potential to be a 4-6 slam winner.

flying24
09-15-2009, 12:38 AM
flying24 - on the contrary I think Djokovic has potential to be a 4-6 slam winner.

You are entitled your opinion. Time will tell. I personally think his career has already seen its best days.

JohnnySpot
09-15-2009, 12:39 AM
The future of Federer is diaper change!

sh@de
09-15-2009, 12:40 AM
Hmm... OP actually is probably right on most points. It's just I'm not sad about Fed's loss because I kind of don't mind if he retires now... but of course I'm not saying I would like him to... it's so hard to explain.

ArrowSmith
09-15-2009, 12:45 AM
Right now I think they're all tired and need a long rest.

namelessone
09-15-2009, 12:46 AM
I don't think Fed fans should be too upset. This was bound to happen sometime but Federer is not finished,not by a long shot. You really though Fed would be winning everything even with young guns rising? The guy is human no matter how many "fed is god" threads keep popping up.

I'm a Nadal fan so perhaps I am not quite objective but here's my deal on the whole Federer situation. After RG Federer is playing DETACHED,with little to no pressure. He himself said that he plays more freely now but it's a double edged sword because he can either click and be in god mode(see cincy) or ******** can show up on any given day and roger can look like he doesn't give a f**k.

When he got beat time and time again at the RG he had a ultimate challenge to look forward to,beating Nadal there and securing Career Slam. He didn't get to beat Rafa but he won RG and it took the pressure off his shoulders. He played sublimely in Wimbledon but was pushed to 5 by roddick of all people but came up with some terrific serves in clutch moments and got taken to 5 by JMDP,a GS final virgin, in USO and got beat.
Federer has been in near god mode this USO but in my opinion this caused him to get cocky and it cost him the final.Case in point,Fed had 30-0 at the end of the second but decided on some beauty shots instead of closing out the set. And this wasn't just a one time affair,Roger toyed with DelPo throghout the first two sets and to be honest I didn't like it,it felt a bit disrespectful on Roger's part. He clearly dominated DelPo for the first 2 sets but this "playful" behaviour cost him the second set and the match because it boosted DelPo's confidence once the big guy came back to win the second.

The match would have been played on a different level with Federer leading 2-0. Federer has another year of making Slam finals IMO and in 2,3 years tops he retires. Fed has a huge ego,he cannot take big defeats and move on so quickly. It's ok to lose once in a while for him but if he starts losing at the big events frequently he will retire. The year when Fed doesn't reach any Slam Finals is the year he retires IMO. I don't think that's the case for now.
Fed should consider himself lucky to have made 15 and Career Slam. A few months ago almost no one would have considered this a possibility,quite the contrary.

JustBob
09-15-2009, 12:49 AM
"Today's match shows..."
"Today's match proves..."

That every win and (especially) loss is overanalyzed and overscrutinized. He lost. He didn't have his 'A' game. Today. In this one match. That's all this "shows" or "proves". Supremely gifted athletes essentially create a "monster" and when they lose or don't perform to their usual level, people go "oh my god, what's wrong with him!". Then they start overanalyzing every minute detail of their performance and jump to premature, and often silly, conclusions.

bluetrain4
09-15-2009, 12:52 AM
5. Many has already jumped onto the Del Potro wagon. Sure I like this kid too. He deserves the win today. But based on his physique and size, I have to say I think he might not be the next great. He may not be the next one who can win 6+ slams. His legs/fitness might breakdown sooner than other players such as Djoko or Murray. Anyway, I wish I am wrong.

I generally agree with this. He's a great player and right now the bandwagon is large. And, why not. He played great, beat Nadal and Fed and showed some heart. He's got real weapons and when he's "on" he can beat anyone.

But as always when a player plays great and wins, everyone assumes that Slams will come in bunches. I'm not saying Delpo couldn't win 4-6 Slams, but he could just as easily end with 2.

Also, as much as I think people jump on the bandwagon too quickly, they also jump off too quickly. Let's say Delpo suffers a "bad" loss at the AO or the French (plays a bad match where the shots aren't falling to someone he should beat, loses to a hot inconsistent player like Tsonga), I know people will be jumping off the bandwagon and saying the USO was a fluke. But, it happens. We've gotten so use to Fed and Nadal, who while they dominated hardly ever had bad losses. Yet most champions do. Careers ebb and flow (look at Agassi).

SoCal10s
09-15-2009, 12:53 AM
The future of Federer is diaper change!

this is Fe-dear-er ,he just loses focus and gets all emotional for reasons beyond those of a great champion ... he gets into his funk and he completely loses it ... it's happening all the time now.. first he starts double faulting like crazy,then he starts shanking balls all over the place,then comes all the un-forced errors, then he looks for reasons to blame(racket,challenge system,umpire,ect)he's stating to act like a little b!tch like his friend Tiger Woods.. he should be more like Sampras and not let things bother him as much... and what's with tears when he loses?

lambielspins
09-15-2009, 12:53 AM
Agassi is not a typical tennis career at all. One shouldnt expect a career with such highs and lows from even lesser greats than Agassi.

AndrewD
09-15-2009, 12:53 AM
This really shouldn't be such a surprise. Federer misses an opportunity to close out the match, his opponent gets a second wind, stays with Fed in the 5th and Fed folds/chokes/whatever you like to call it. He did it against Nadal at the 08 Wimbledon and he used to do it regularly in the early part of his career. If you can hang with him he is very prone to nerves. Nadal has been able to do it, Murray has been able to do it (in lesser events), Hewitt was able to do it (albeit against a less mature Fed - but that doesn't make it insignificant) and now Del Potro has done it.

Sure, we didn't expect it to happen but it's really not the biggest surprise in the world because, if you've been paying attention, it is something we have seen before.

velkov
09-15-2009, 12:58 AM
a lot of sense i guess !!! agree in full !!

tata
09-15-2009, 01:19 AM
Well federer cant win it all i guess?I mean this isnt to say that fed is vulnerable to potro (he still leads a strong h2h) but i think it marks a transition period from federer to the young guns now. Kind of like when fed first beat sampras in wimbledon. And Nadals knees arent getting any younger are they?This is totally normal i rekon. Even if fed just wins 1 slam a year for the next 2-3 yrs, thats still a pretty healthy record he is going to hold in terms of slams. 17-18 or so.

JohnnySpot
09-15-2009, 01:30 AM
JMDP eats baby tennis balls for snacks! roar-nom!

Fedfan1234
09-15-2009, 01:37 AM
Being a fan of Federer, I am here to only present objective comments. I do not intend to bring up anything related to GOAT, nor do I intend to bring up comparison to Sampras or Nadal. SO please, no trolling or flaming in this thread. Thanks.

Many Fed fans have said that they feel less sad compared to his loss in AO2009. I beg to differ. I think his loss today indicates quite some negative look on his future. Here are my reasons:

1. Before this match, Federer is only vulnerable to Nadal in slams (barring his loss to Djoko in AO08 due to mono). After this match, it is all changed. It gives hope to other young guns to take out Fed in slams. It proves Fed is not invincible in slams.

2. I think today´s loss defines a turning point in his career. Some might say AO08 defines a turning point, but that may be cuz of his mono. Some might say AO09 defines a turning point, but that he lost to his nemesis Nadal. But today´s loss is something diffrent, it shows he is no longer to adjust to his best level for the last stage in a slam, and it shows he can no longer adjust his game strategy and win based on his experience in slams. It also shows he is slightly less motivated, as he himself shows less emotion after the loss. The next definite turning point of Federer, would be the moment his stops his semi final streams in a slam.

3. Today´s match shows Federer has lost a step during the later stage in the 4 hour match. It is inevitable as he ages up. Sad but true. Quite often he can not reach or could barely reach some balls which he should have no problem when he was younger.

4. Some has said Federer´s serve is on par with Sampras´s. Today´s match proved them wrong. No, Federer´server is not as consistent as Pete. Having a great serve is very important for an aging champion on the tour, and can quickly save them out of trouble. I wish Federer could keep this up for the rest of his years remaining on the tour.

5. Many has already jumped onto the Del Potro wagon. Sure I like this kid too. He deserves the win today. But based on his physique and size, I have to say I think he might not be the next great. He may not be the next one who can win 6+ slams. His legs/fitness might breakdown sooner than other players such as Djoko or Murray. Anyway, I wish I am wrong.

Well all I can say is that we have to wait and see. Like you said a lot of people though AO 2008 was the end, after that AO 2009 and now people are already saying that this is the end. Don't forget Federer was serving for a 2 set lead when he messed up, if he had won that game it would have been different. At some point in the match he was also 2 (consecutive) points away from the win. In the end Del Potro deserved to win, but still it could have gone either way. Federer has at least 2 more good years to go. These years probably will be less good than others, but he will still reach finals and semi-finals. If he can reach these stages he can still win more slams. However I do think he does miss a lot of rythm in his slam matches, because he does not play for such long times. I think he needs to balance this better. He is afraid to get injured if he plays too much I can understand, but I think he now plays too little matches.
I disagree on Del Potro, he probably will not win as much as Federer or Sampras, but he is a big champion in the making. I think he has chances on basicly every surface. Not so sure about grass but I think he can learn. He seems to be very consistent as well, QF USO 08, QF AO 09, SF RG 09, USO 09 win. Injury problems are a possibility, but he won't be injured for 8-10 years.

PCXL-Fan
09-15-2009, 01:43 AM
I don't think today marks a major turning point for Federer, if anything it marks a turning point for Del Potro. All players have ups and down. Delpo would have beaten any player other than Federer, and surely Djokovic as well.
Federer's serve has been decent all tournament except this match. Federer was red hot from the Cincinnati Semis and to the USO semis, with many saying Federer had not performed this well in years.

ruerooo
09-15-2009, 01:54 AM
5. Many has already jumped onto the Del Potro wagon. Sure I like this kid too. He deserves the win today. But based on his physique and size, I have to say I think he might not be the next great. He may not be the next one who can win 6+ slams. His legs/fitness might breakdown sooner than other players such as Djoko or Murray. Anyway, I wish I am wrong.

*sigh*
I got "on the bandwagon" when JMDP won Stuttgart in '08. He's my next favorite player after Rafa and Roger (see icon).

That said, the man was pounding out some forehands surpassing 100 mph. Roger's head may have gone away at some points -- the Hawkeye thing was a big problem; he couldn't shake it and he just needed to let it go -- but he didn't lose to "just some young guy".

I'm not a Djoker fan, but I give credit to him for improving immeasurably in the past year. We didn't see him in the final.

There were people that stopped watching the match after the 2nd set b/c they thought it was pretty much over, because Roger was playing a ridiculous level of tennis and they thought it was all over. He's that good.

I think an occasional loss keeps him humble, but I wouldn't count him out of the game and have his professional funeral just yet.

BreakPoint
09-15-2009, 02:07 AM
His first serve left him. Big time. In fact his serve altogether was not great hitting 8 (I think) double faults in the match.
Federer hit 11 double faults in the match. That's got to be a record for him. Yes, his serve was almost nonexistent today. Maybe he can go commiserate with Sharapova? :shock:

BreakPoint
09-15-2009, 02:11 AM
I don't think Fed fans should be too upset. This was bound to happen sometime but Federer is not finished,not by a long shot. You really though Fed would be winning everything even with young guns rising? The guy is human no matter how many "fed is god" threads keep popping up.

I'm a Nadal fan so perhaps I am not quite objective but here's my deal on the whole Federer situation. After RG Federer is playing DETACHED,with little to no pressure. He himself said that he plays more freely now but it's a double edged sword because he can either click and be in god mode(see cincy) or ******** can show up on any given day and roger can look like he doesn't give a f**k.

When he got beat time and time again at the RG he had a ultimate challenge to look forward to,beating Nadal there and securing Career Slam. He didn't get to beat Rafa but he won RG and it took the pressure off his shoulders. He played sublimely in Wimbledon but was pushed to 5 by roddick of all people but came up with some terrific serves in clutch moments and got taken to 5 by JMDP,a GS final virgin, in USO and got beat.
Federer has been in near god mode this USO but in my opinion this caused him to get cocky and it cost him the final.Case in point,Fed had 30-0 at the end of the second but decided on some beauty shots instead of closing out the set. And this wasn't just a one time affair,Roger toyed with DelPo throghout the first two sets and to be honest I didn't like it,it felt a bit disrespectful on Roger's part. He clearly dominated DelPo for the first 2 sets but this "playful" behaviour cost him the second set and the match because it boosted DelPo's confidence once the big guy came back to win the second.

The match would have been played on a different level with Federer leading 2-0. Federer has another year of making Slam finals IMO and in 2,3 years tops he retires. Fed has a huge ego,he cannot take big defeats and move on so quickly. It's ok to lose once in a while for him but if he starts losing at the big events frequently he will retire. The year when Fed doesn't reach any Slam Finals is the year he retires IMO. I don't think that's the case for now.
Fed should consider himself lucky to have made 15 and Career Slam. A few months ago almost no one would have considered this a possibility,quite the contrary.
I'm not upset that Federer lost. I'm upset at the way he played and the manner in which he lost. It was as if he didn't take the match seriously or that he didn't really want to win it. Delpo handed the match to him on a silver platter but Federer refused to take it. The way Federer played today, he deserved to lose.

tricky
09-15-2009, 02:16 AM
I didn't really view this loss as a turning point. If you look at the entire year, he's had stretches where the UEs just pack up on his FH side in addition to the on-and-off aspect of his BH. That happened today. Could be wind. Could be fatigue. Could be that he couldn't handle Del Potro's pace.

He essentially lost the Australian Open due to the service problems, and in the prior game against Djokovic, he was searching for his serve through the first set. But here, even if he had his first serve going, it would have been very close.

Nowadays, Federer is mostly about optimal point construction patterns to defeat his opponents. The inherent problem with Del Potro is that DelPo's game has rapidly evolved over the past year. He was a different opponent than the one he saw at Australian Open, and different from the one he saw at the French Open.

IvanisevicServe
09-15-2009, 03:03 AM
Being a fan of Federer, I am here to only present objective comments. I do not intend to bring up anything related to GOAT, nor do I intend to bring up comparison to Sampras or Nadal. SO please, no trolling or flaming in this thread. Thanks.

Many Fed fans have said that they feel less sad compared to his loss in AO2009. I beg to differ. I think his loss today indicates quite some negative look on his future. Here are my reasons:

1. Before this match, Federer is only vulnerable to Nadal in slams (barring his loss to Djoko in AO08 due to mono). After this match, it is all changed. It gives hope to other young guns to take out Fed in slams. It proves Fed is not invincible in slams.

2. I think today´s loss defines a turning point in his career. Some might say AO08 defines a turning point, but that may be cuz of his mono. Some might say AO09 defines a turning point, but that he lost to his nemesis Nadal. But today´s loss is something diffrent, it shows he is no longer to adjust to his best level for the last stage in a slam, and it shows he can no longer adjust his game strategy and win based on his experience in slams. It also shows he is slightly less motivated, as he himself shows less emotion after the loss. The next definite turning point of Federer, would be the moment his stops his semi final streams in a slam.

3. Today´s match shows Federer has lost a step during the later stage in the 4 hour match. It is inevitable as he ages up. Sad but true. Quite often he can not reach or could barely reach some balls which he should have no problem when he was younger.

4. Some has said Federer´s serve is on par with Sampras´s. Today´s match proved them wrong. No, Federer´server is not as consistent as Pete. Having a great serve is very important for an aging champion on the tour, and can quickly save them out of trouble. I wish Federer could keep this up for the rest of his years remaining on the tour.

5. Many has already jumped onto the Del Potro wagon. Sure I like this kid too. He deserves the win today. But based on his physique and size, I have to say I think he might not be the next great. He may not be the next one who can win 6+ slams. His legs/fitness might breakdown sooner than other players such as Djoko or Murray. Anyway, I wish I am wrong.

You make some good points, but I don't agree with some things:

2. He didn't look any less motivated to me. He looked like he was better able to handle the loss since he didn't break down and cry again, but then he was embarrassed about what happened in Australia and probably told himself over and over again "You won the FRENCH OPEN this year. Oh, and Wimbledon too, for that matter. And you have the Grand Slam record."

But if you saw how snippy he was today, I don't see how you can question his motivation. He wanted it. BAD. For a moment I thought he was going to break his racket when he was UP a set and a break because he couldn't get a first serve in. I thought he was ready to snap at the end of the 4th set and punch out the umpire. He looked flat-out ****ed at the way he felt he was getting hosed by BS.


3. Last year against Igor Andreev in the USO 4th round his movement looked awful toward the end as well. But I think that has more to do with the fact that he's confused and not exactly sure how to play the guy because he's being pressed. Del Potro was blasting 100+ MPH forehands his way. It's not easy to hold your ground against those.


4. I agree that it's not on par with Sampras', but this was THE worst day he has EVER had serving...probably since the juniors. I almost doubt he had a day as bad as today in that area even then. This made his serving performance at the AO this year in the final against Nadal look GOOD by comparison. In the first 2 sets, I swear, it seemed like his percentage must have been under 25%. He was missing 8-10 in a row at a time before getting 1 in.

Polvorin
09-15-2009, 03:09 AM
I didn't really view this loss as a turning point. If you look at the entire year, he's had stretches where the UEs just pack up on his FH side in addition to the on-and-off aspect of his BH.

Yeah, his forehand just deserts him sometimes. That never used to happen in the past. Like Miami earlier this year when he smashed the racket. It wasn't quite that bad today but still pretty horrendous compared to how it was against Djokovic the day before.

He essentially lost the Australian Open due to the service problems, and in the prior game against Djokovic, he was searching for his serve through the first set. But here, even if he had his first serve going, it would have been very close.

It was very close even without a serve. I think if he has a normal serving day this thing is straight sets.

drakulie
09-15-2009, 04:23 AM
He got beat. Delpo stepped it up, fed didn't. Move on

Sartorius
09-15-2009, 04:25 AM
"Today's match shows..."
"Today's match proves..."

That every win and (especially) loss is overanalyzed and overscrutinized. He lost. He didn't have his 'A' game. Today. In this one match. That's all this "shows" or "proves". Supremely gifted athletes essentially create a "monster" and when they lose or don't perform to their usual level, people go "oh my god, what's wrong with him!". Then they start overanalyzing every minute detail of their performance and jump to premature, and often silly, conclusions.

Indeed.

If there is any player out there that won't make such overanalyziations for himself, it's Federer. From his post-match interview:

But, you know, you can't have them all and can't always play your best. He hung in there and did well. In the end, he was just too tough. Just the way it is.

fed_rulz
09-15-2009, 06:10 AM
1. Before this match, Federer is only vulnerable to Nadal in slams (barring his loss to Djoko in AO08 due to mono). After this match, it is all changed. It gives hope to other young guns to take out Fed in slams. It proves Fed is not invincible in slams.

2. I think today´s loss defines a turning point in his career. Some might say AO08 defines a turning point, but that may be cuz of his mono. Some might say AO09 defines a turning point, but that he lost to his nemesis Nadal. But today´s loss is something diffrent, it shows he is no longer to adjust to his best level for the last stage in a slam, and it shows he can no longer adjust his game strategy and win based on his experience in slams. It also shows he is slightly less motivated, as he himself shows less emotion after the loss. The next definite turning point of Federer, would be the moment his stops his semi final streams in a slam.

3. Today´s match shows Federer has lost a step during the later stage in the 4 hour match. It is inevitable as he ages up. Sad but true. Quite often he can not reach or could barely reach some balls which he should have no problem when he was younger.

4. Some has said Federer´s serve is on par with Sampras´s. Today´s match proved them wrong. No, Federer´server is not as consistent as Pete. Having a great serve is very important for an aging champion on the tour, and can quickly save them out of trouble. I wish Federer could keep this up for the rest of his years remaining on the tour.

5. Many has already jumped onto the Del Potro wagon. Sure I like this kid too. He deserves the win today. But based on his physique and size, I have to say I think he might not be the next great. He may not be the next one who can win 6+ slams. His legs/fitness might breakdown sooner than other players such as Djoko or Murray. Anyway, I wish I am wrong.

MichaelChang, your post is partly right, in that Fed may not have as much success as before. But one match does not prove anything, especially in comparison to Pete's serve.... If you take the wimby finals as your sample point, then you could easily say "today's match clearly proves that Fed has a better serve than sampras....". It may be true that Pete has a better serve, but this one match does not prove it. And how does this one match prove that he "no longer" can adjust his strategy etc..

fed_rulz
09-15-2009, 06:16 AM
"Today's match shows..."
"Today's match proves..."

That every win and (especially) loss is overanalyzed and overscrutinized. He lost. He didn't have his 'A' game. Today. In this one match. That's all this "shows" or "proves". Supremely gifted athletes essentially create a "monster" and when they lose or don't perform to their usual level, people go "oh my god, what's wrong with him!". Then they start overanalyzing every minute detail of their performance and jump to premature, and often silly, conclusions.

+1 . Great post, completely agree

AAAA
09-15-2009, 06:27 AM
Michael,

Are you telling me that Sampras never had an off day with serving in a slam ? Ever ?

We don't even need to look that up. The fact that Sampras at his best according to his fans can beat any one of his generation and the fact he age vs age accomplished less than Federer shows he had more off days in slams.

kkm
09-15-2009, 06:39 AM
The start of Fed downfall yesterday was his playing the critical game in the second set(his serve) too casually, which DelPo ended up winning to get it back on serve. Worst was his hitting that shot just over his head instead of a serious attempt at a lob, which was followed by DelPo's consecutive forehand winners.
Fed was the one who looked to stay rattled as the match went deeper into the fourth. He takes the ball early, but seemed to be sacrificing some pace especially on his backhand side, which also seemed to be noticeably less stable as his frustration mounted. DelPo hit a number of his big forehand winners on the run, too. What a crazy match. Fed started well, DelPo started nervously, then it became a tight match, DelPo had a little meltdown to gift Fed the third, then he recovered, Fed had a meltdown but didn't recover, which DelPo capitalized on, credit to him. Fifth set score was same as the Aussie fifth, eh?

kkm
09-15-2009, 06:40 AM
We don't even need to look that up. The fact that Sampras at his best according to his fans can beat any one of his generation and the fact he age vs age accomplished less than Federer shows he had more off days in slams.

But Sampras didn't really have any epic meltdowns, I think?

darthpwner
09-15-2009, 06:44 AM
Being a fan of Federer, I am here to only present objective comments. I do not intend to bring up anything related to GOAT, nor do I intend to bring up comparison to Sampras or Nadal. SO please, no trolling or flaming in this thread. Thanks.

Many Fed fans have said that they feel less sad compared to his loss in AO2009. I beg to differ. I think his loss today indicates quite some negative look on his future. Here are my reasons:

1. Before this match, Federer is only vulnerable to Nadal in slams (barring his loss to Djoko in AO08 due to mono). After this match, it is all changed. It gives hope to other young guns to take out Fed in slams. It proves Fed is not invincible in slams.

2. I think today´s loss defines a turning point in his career. Some might say AO08 defines a turning point, but that may be cuz of his mono. Some might say AO09 defines a turning point, but that he lost to his nemesis Nadal. But today´s loss is something diffrent, it shows he is no longer to adjust to his best level for the last stage in a slam, and it shows he can no longer adjust his game strategy and win based on his experience in slams. It also shows he is slightly less motivated, as he himself shows less emotion after the loss. The next definite turning point of Federer, would be the moment his stops his semi final streams in a slam.

3. Today´s match shows Federer has lost a step during the later stage in the 4 hour match. It is inevitable as he ages up. Sad but true. Quite often he can not reach or could barely reach some balls which he should have no problem when he was younger.

4. Some has said Federer´s serve is on par with Sampras´s. Today´s match proved them wrong. No, Federer´server is not as consistent as Pete. Having a great serve is very important for an aging champion on the tour, and can quickly save them out of trouble. I wish Federer could keep this up for the rest of his years remaining on the tour.

5. Many has already jumped onto the Del Potro wagon. Sure I like this kid too. He deserves the win today. But based on his physique and size, I have to say I think he might not be the next great. He may not be the next one who can win 6+ slams. His legs/fitness might breakdown sooner than other players such as Djoko or Murray. Anyway, I wish I am wrong.
My thread is similar to yourshttp://tt.tennis- warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=3941041#post3941041 (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=3941041#post3941041)
I agree I think this might be Federer's true decline like Sampras was in 2000-2002 after Wimbledon

darthpwner
09-15-2009, 06:45 AM
But Sampras didn't really have any epic meltdowns, I think?

Look at it this way. Sampras lost mainly in early rounds when he did lose. When Federer loses, its the finals of a slam.

crazylevity
09-15-2009, 06:46 AM
Federer lost this match, which he could have won. It's a little disappointing, but being a fan, I'm very encouraged by this hardcourt season.

From Cincinatti till the USO semis, Federer showed SUBLIME FORM, even at his age. He took on all the young guns that came his way and blasted all of them off the court in straight sets. We haven't this level of Federer for a while now, so it's very encouraging.

bruce38
09-15-2009, 06:48 AM
To me it kinda seemed like Fed didn't care as much. Which makes sense now that he's done it all. In that second set when he was up a break, previous Fed would have buried him. But he started losing focus. His level is certainly lower in general overall, but c'mon he played very badly in the final compared to the previous rounds. I think he can win a couple of more slams and will continue to go deep into them.

cknobman
09-15-2009, 06:49 AM
It Feds own fault he lost and I dont feel sorry for him.

Fed was running away with match in 2nd set but started fracking around. Crowd was loosing hope and interest, Fed sensed it and so did everybody else. Then Fed let off pedal and before he knew it Delpo actually started gaining momentum.

Last night was a perfect lesson on why you never let off the pedal in a match no matter how lopsided a match is because once the momentum turns it can be impossible to get back.

10ACE
09-15-2009, 06:56 AM
Fed was in every major final this year. Hmmmmm I think he's loosing his touch.

Those who played Federer had to play their best tennis.

To say Federer has lost anything or is in dire straits seems far fetched.

Henry Kaspar
09-15-2009, 07:00 AM
Federer is 28, few slam titles are won at that age. Any player runs out of time at some point.

icedevil0289
09-15-2009, 07:15 AM
Everyone's run has to come to end sometime and roger's run at the USO did so tonight. No one can continue to win forever. Anyways, this year has certainly been a great year for him professionally and personally, so as fans we really have nothing to feel bad about. I think people should realize that he is getting older and his game has been in decline for quite some time now and will only continue to get worse, not better. He might win more slams, or he might not, but I'm okay with that.

icedevil0289
09-15-2009, 07:16 AM
It Feds own fault he lost and I dont feel sorry for him.

Fed was running away with match in 2nd set but started fracking around. Crowd was loosing hope and interest, Fed sensed it and so did everybody else. Then Fed let off pedal and before he knew it Delpo actually started gaining momentum.

Last night was a perfect lesson on why you never let off the pedal in a match no matter how lopsided a match is because once the momentum turns it can be impossible to get back.

I disagree. Del Potro had a huge role in why fed lost. He was just playing really well, serving well, blasting those forehands. Yes fed's serve abandoned him and he did make quite a few errors, but dpot just outplayed him, plain and simple.

dh003i
09-15-2009, 07:18 AM
People seem to impute a lot of things from a few shots by Federer. He may have made a mistake on one shot vs. Del Potro in the 2nd set when up 30-0...but it looked like he was out of position and had no choice anyways.

He lost the match because he had a bad serving day and Del Potro upped his level and took advantage. Congratulations to Del Potro.

It doesn't "prove" or "show" anything about Federer, except what everyone should have known all along: that he is beatable. He's really good and really consistent, but everyone has bad days, and there isn't a button that he can press to suddenly start playing his best tennis.

He got to the final of all 4 majors. He won 2 of them -- the 2 most important ones for him, imo, the FO and Wimbledon. He played exceptional clay-court tennis to beat Nadal at Madrid, and at the FO with that great drop shot. He was incredibly clutch against Roddick at Wimbledon, with 51 aces; he served great there. He served poorly at the AO and maybe even more-so at the USO. He still made his opponents go 5 sets. I don't think he looked tired at the end, he just wasn't serving well enough to hold against Del Potro who was playing really well.

It is really pretty crazy when a 2-slam year where you make all of the slam finals is treated like some indicator of doom. It is bound to happen that at some point, he'll be beaten at the USO. And it did. That isn't really some horrible thing that is a strike against him. It wasn't bound to happen that he'd win the FO, yet he did, and that's a great accomplishment.

Turning Pro
09-15-2009, 07:24 AM
MichaelChang - remember Sampras didn't even play the '99 US Open because of back injury. Fed has already surpassed Sampras' slam total and will win more.

But wait, the pressure of winning the french and breaking the GS total makes Federer even MORE confident and will make him the favourite of winning all the slams from now on :roll:

tlm
09-15-2009, 07:34 AM
Its funny how so many say fed is the goat,But when he gets pushed in a gs final he folds up like a lounge chair.

I thought this is were the real champions are supposed to win, not crumble from the pressure.

He did come through against roddick barely, but of course that is roddick his favorite pigeon.

He is a great front runner, but when a player like rafa, safin+ now delpo give him a challenge in a gs he cant come up big when it counts.

zagor
09-15-2009, 07:35 AM
Fed will be fine,IMO he has more slams left in him,not as many people thought maybe but still a few,hope he does well at AO next.

Turning Pro
09-15-2009, 07:35 AM
^well roddick did bow to hism aster in the 2nd set tie-break, losing 4 CONSECUTIVE set points for a 2 set to love lead. So you're indeed correct.

David L
09-15-2009, 07:53 AM
"Today's match shows..."
"Today's match proves..."

That every win and (especially) loss is overanalyzed and overscrutinized. He lost. He didn't have his 'A' game. Today. In this one match. That's all this "shows" or "proves". Supremely gifted athletes essentially create a "monster" and when they lose or don't perform to their usual level, people go "oh my god, what's wrong with him!". Then they start overanalyzing every minute detail of their performance and jump to premature, and often silly, conclusions.
Precisely.

David L
09-15-2009, 07:58 AM
Federer is 28, few slam titles are won at that age. Any player runs out of time at some point.
Yes, but few players are as good as Federer. In fact, no players have been as good as Federer. Expect him to do considerably better than Agassi post 28 and post 30, provided he remains healthy and motivated.

ac3111
09-15-2009, 08:10 AM
Michael Chang you neglect one very important thing. Federer served at 43% in the Final... If that continues then your thread has some point, if not then I don't think a bad serve day can become a turning point for such a successful player's career even if that bad serve day cost him a US open trophy.

cknobman
09-15-2009, 08:21 AM
I disagree. Del Potro had a huge role in why fed lost. He was just playing really well, serving well, blasting those forehands. Yes fed's serve abandoned him and he did make quite a few errors, but dpot just outplayed him, plain and simple.

Ok when I said its Feds own fault I meant:

Fed was running away with match when he lost concentration or let off gas in the 2nd set. The crowd was loosing faith and interest and Delpo looked out of it. Fed lower his level for that little bit gave Delpo enough hope and belief to get back into the match.

From that point on Delpo did have a huge role in why Fed didnt win. He was getting everything and smacking huge groundstrokes.

But I dont think that would have ever happened if Fed handnt slacked in the 2nd and let Delpo back in the match.

LeftSHBH
09-15-2009, 08:22 AM
I still don't understand how some of you can challenge his GOAT status...
Anyway, like icedevil said, DelPo outplayed Fed. Fed was not playing his top game. Do any of you really think he is beatable when he's in top form? Look what happened to Roddick in Wimby. The only one who can claim anything is Nadal, and it's definitely mental issues he has against him.

Stinkdyr
09-15-2009, 08:25 AM
Fed must be regretting those charity points and games he threw in the 2nd set. And his serve % was low throughout. He should have used a strategy of making the big guy cover more court side to side to exhaust him. And finally, Fed ran out of gas in the 5th cuz he is entering the twilight of his career.

tlm
09-15-2009, 08:26 AM
Please dont use roddick the choker as an example. Tell me what delpo did so special in the 5th set? He just played solid+ let your goat beat himself!!!!!!!!!!

All-rounder
09-15-2009, 08:36 AM
He got beat. Delpo stepped it up, fed didn't. Move on
I agree too much speculation

ac3111
09-15-2009, 08:36 AM
The guy went the final to a 5th setter with a 40% first serve...
Who other in the world apart from Nadal could go this match against this Del Potro in 5 sets having such a low first serve percentage?

MichaelChang
09-15-2009, 10:13 AM
First thanks to all the replies, whether you partially agree with me, or disagree with me.

The reason I think this loss is a turning point for Federer, is because since his prime he has not lost to anyone in a slam (except Nadal, and I do not count the AO08 loss to Djoko due to mono). Think about this, he almost lost to Andreev in US08, but he survived, he almost lost to Berdych in AO09 but he survived, he almost lost to Haas and DelPo but he survived, and then he almost lost to Roddick but again he survived. That, my friend, is not a fluke. Whether it is because he adjusted his game plan/strategy as the match goes on, or his opponent choked, or his opponent´s fear of Federer, whatever the reason is, the fact is Federer was able to win at the end. Is Federer playing his A game all those matches? I don´t think so, but he was able to win at the end, regardless how ugly the process has been, even with his B game.

But this time it is different. He lost, in a slam final, to someone other than Nadal. That took something out of Federer. That is what I feel. That also sends a signal to the rest of the field, that Fed is not just beatable by Nadal, in a slam. It is the beginning of an end. Hence a turning point.

Now, do you really think the H2H betwen Fed and DelPo has any meaning from now on? Now imagine if starting today we reset their H2H to 0:0, going forward, who will lead the H2H? Federer, or DelPo?? Tell me from the bottom of your guts. I say DelPo. It is inevitable, just like when Federer beat Sampras for the 1st time. The torch is tranfered from the legend to the next generation.

David L
09-15-2009, 10:42 AM
First thanks to all the replies, whether you partially agree with me, or disagree with me.

The reason I think this loss is a turning point for Federer, is because he has not lost to anyone in a slam (except Nadal, and I do not count the AO08 loss to Djoko due to mono). Think about this, he almost lost to Andreev in US08, but he survived, he almost lost to Berdych in AO09 but he survived, he almost lost to Haas and DelPo but he survived, and then he almost lost to Roddick but again he survived. That, my friend, is not a fluke. Whether it is because he adjusted his game plan/strategy as the match goes on, or his opponent choked, or his opponent´s fear of Federer, whatever the reason is, the fact is Federer was able to win at the end. Is Federer playing his A game all those matches? I don´t think so, but he was able to win at the end, regardless how ugly the process has been, even with his B game.

But this time it is different. He lost, in a slam final, to someone other than Nadal. That took something out of Federer. That is what I feel. That also sends a signal to the rest of the field, that Fed is not just beatable by Nadal, in a slam. It is the beginning of an end. Hence a turning point.

Now, do you really think the H2H betwen Fed and DelPo has any meaning from now on? Now imagine if starting today we reset their H2H to 0:0, going forward, who will lead the H2H? Federer, or DelPo?? Tell me from the bottom of your guts. I say DelPo. It is inevitable, just like when Federer beat Sampras for the 1st time. The torch is tranfered from the legend to the next generation.
Yes I do, because it's not as if Federer played well and lost to Del Potro. I would expect Federer playing well to win against the rest of the tour, including Del Potro. Serving at 50% in a match and in the 40s for most of it, is not going to cut it most of the time against the top players. That's what you saw on Monday, and even then he still almost won.

The fact is that people overreact every time Federer experiences a loss. When he lost to Gasquet in Monte Carlo, Berdych at the Olympics, Djokovic in Australia, Tsonga this year, Fish last year, Safin in AO 05, Nalbandian at the Madrid and Paris Masters in 07, Murray at the end of last year and beginning of this one, Nadal at Wimbledon and in Australia. Every time he loses, someone predicts this is the end, yet, as we speak, he has 2 of the 4 Slams, was in the final of the other 2, is ranked No.1 and still wants to play for many more years racking up titles.

Careers undulate. They do not follow a set or predictable pattern, so some wins and losses will be unprecedented, such as the win this year at the French or the loss at the US Open. Federer has too much ability to go away. Just watching his match against Soderling at the US Open this year was amazing. There is no one playing who can play this well. The guy is good for a lot more in the future.

nikdom
09-15-2009, 10:56 AM
Del Po played great when Roger allowed him to get back in the match, playing a sloppy 2nd set. Roger had a dismal first-serve percentage.

So while all credit goes to Del Po for winning this and I'm so happy for him, any predictions of Roger's demise are foolhardy. He's playing too well to fade away, unless that's just what you're wishing for disguised as analysis.

ArrowSmith
09-15-2009, 11:05 AM
What's the griping about? I already know Fed will win 2010 CYGS.

MichaelChang
09-15-2009, 11:11 AM
Yes I do, because it's not as if Federer played well and lost to Del Potro. I would expect Federer playing well to win against the rest of the tour, including Del Potro.

I like that. I too believe when Federer is playing his normal game, he is not going to lose this final. But there are 2 problems I think:
1. Did you think DelPo played his best game throughout the final? No. He is tight is the 1st set, and semi-choked up in the 3rd set.
2. No doubt that Federer can still play his best (or, at least an average+ of his standard) in a slam. But would that happen as consistent as before? Can he do that in semi AND final? I mean he was in glorious shape in the semi, but then turned up a different person in the final. Not his fault though. It is the nature of aging champion. You can't ask him to perform his best game all the time.

I have never said Federer will not win more slams, nor did I write him off. I believe, and hope, that he could reach 18. But had he won the final yesterday, I then would have strongly believed he can reach 20.

P_Agony
09-15-2009, 11:15 AM
Being a fan of Federer, I am here to only present objective comments. I do not intend to bring up anything related to GOAT, nor do I intend to bring up comparison to Sampras or Nadal. SO please, no trolling or flaming in this thread. Thanks.

Many Fed fans have said that they feel less sad compared to his loss in AO2009. I beg to differ. I think his loss today indicates quite some negative look on his future. Here are my reasons:

1. Before this match, Federer is only vulnerable to Nadal in slams (barring his loss to Djoko in AO08 due to mono). After this match, it is all changed. It gives hope to other young guns to take out Fed in slams. It proves Fed is not invincible in slams. He's not invincible, he never was, but he's still the man to beat in slams. He's making final after final, even Nadal is not that consistent in slams, and with making so many finals he's bound to win at least a few.

2. I think today´s loss defines a turning point in his career. Some might say AO08 defines a turning point, but that may be cuz of his mono. Some might say AO09 defines a turning point, but that he lost to his nemesis Nadal. But today´s loss is something diffrent, it shows he is no longer to adjust to his best level for the last stage in a slam, and it shows he can no longer adjust his game strategy and win based on his experience in slams. It also shows he is slightly less motivated, as he himself shows less emotion after the loss. The next definite turning point of Federer, would be the moment his stops his semi final streams in a slam. If that's the case, it's not that bad, Fed has won 15 slams, is he really hungry for more? It's tough to keep such a high level of both game and will. However, despite Fed's crappy tactics, bad serving day, and an inconsistent FH, it still took DP to play his best tennis and win in 5.

3. Today´s match shows Federer has lost a step during the later stage in the 4 hour match. It is inevitable as he ages up. Sad but true. Quite often he can not reach or could barely reach some balls which he should have no problem when he was younger. Fed is the fittest player on tour (with Nadal). I think it was more mental than anything else. In the early stages Fed felt confident and as a result crushed the ball and DP along the way. When his strokes started to betray him, so did his return of serve and his movement.

4. Some has said Federer´s serve is on par with Sampras´s. Today´s match proved them wrong. No, Federer´server is not as consistent as Pete. Having a great serve is very important for an aging champion on the tour, and can quickly save them out of trouble. I wish Federer could keep this up for the rest of his years remaining on the tour. BS. Fed's 2nd serve was his only saving grace that match. If Fed didn't have such a great serve he wouldn't even last 5 sets, it'd be over sooner. Despite the low % and too many DFs, Fed's 2nd serve was still a beast. He almost won the match with only his 2nd serve.

5. Many has already jumped onto the Del Potro wagon. Sure I like this kid too. He deserves the win today. But based on his physique and size, I have to say I think he might not be the next great. He may not be the next one who can win 6+ slams. His legs/fitness might breakdown sooner than other players such as Djoko or Murray. Anyway, I wish I am wrong. DP's FH was scary. It was too good, too powerful, I couldn't even see the ball in some of the FHs. But DP's real test is just starting, will he be able to keep that level of play for years to come. We'll see at the AO.

Well, I replied in the bolded parts.

David L
09-15-2009, 11:34 AM
I like that. I too believe when Federer is playing his normal game, he is not going to lose this final. But there are 2 problems I think:
1. Did you think DelPo played his best game throughout the final? No. He is tight is the 1st set, and played poorly in the 3rd set.
2. No doubt that Federer can still play his best (or, at least an average+ of his standard) in a slam. But would that happen as consistent as before? Can he do that in semi AND final? I mean he was in glorious shape in the semi, but then turned up a different person in the final. Not his fault though. It is the nature of aging champion. You can't ask him to perform his best game all the time.

I have never said Federer will not win more slams, nor did I write him off. I believe, and hope, that he could reach 18. But if he would have won the final yesterday, I then would have strongly believed he can reach 20.
He can reach 20, but it doesn't all have to happen now. Agassi, whose game was much more limited than Federer's and who was much less consistent, won 5 Slams from the time he was 28. I think Federer will achieve more than this, provided he is healthy and remains motivated. He has said many times that he wants to play for many more years. That includes beyond the 2012 Olympics.

Federer has never always played his best at any stage in his career. In each of his years on tour he has had good and bad performances, this bad one just happened to be in a Slam final. It does not have to mean anything. The fact is that Federer is still the best player on tour and is having the best year. Del Poto beating him does not change that, just as it did not change when Safin beat him in 5 sets in Australia in 2005. You win some, you lose some. I would expect a healthy Federer to continue doing most of the winning over the coming years, but not all years are going to look the same because there are always so many moving variables, seen and unseen. I any case, losing to any particular player has never prevented Federer from returning the favour and continuing to add to his legacy. That's the nature of sport. Win some, lose some.

federerfanatic
09-15-2009, 11:36 AM
First thanks to all the replies, whether you partially agree with me, or disagree with me.

The reason I think this loss is a turning point for Federer, is because since his prime he has not lost to anyone in a slam (except Nadal, and I do not count the AO08 loss to Djoko due to mono). Think about this, he almost lost to Andreev in US08, but he survived, he almost lost to Berdych in AO09 but he survived, he almost lost to Haas and DelPo but he survived, and then he almost lost to Roddick but again he survived. That, my friend, is not a fluke. Whether it is because he adjusted his game plan/strategy as the match goes on, or his opponent choked, or his opponent´s fear of Federer, whatever the reason is, the fact is Federer was able to win at the end. Is Federer playing his A game all those matches? I don´t think so, but he was able to win at the end, regardless how ugly the process has been, even with his B game.

But this time it is different. He lost, in a slam final, to someone other than Nadal. That took something out of Federer. That is what I feel. That also sends a signal to the rest of the field, that Fed is not just beatable by Nadal, in a slam. It is the beginning of an end. Hence a turning point.

Now, do you really think the H2H betwen Fed and DelPo has any meaning from now on? Now imagine if starting today we reset their H2H to 0:0, going forward, who will lead the H2H? Federer, or DelPo?? Tell me from the bottom of your guts. I say DelPo. It is inevitable, just like when Federer beat Sampras for the 1st time. The torch is tranfered from the legend to the next generation.

Federer will have a winning head to head with Del Potro from this point forward and even it he doesnt he can still win more slams since Del Potro will be much better than the overrated Murray and Djokovic from this point forward. Perhaps even better than Nadal from this point forward (not career wise neccessarily considering what Nadal has already done) if Nadal cant get completely healthy and if he has truly lost a bit of speed.

David L
09-15-2009, 11:38 AM
What's the griping about? I already know Fed will win 2010 CYGS.
This would not surprise me at all. He was very close to doing it this year as well.

JustBob
09-15-2009, 11:50 AM
I mean he was in glorious shape in the semi, but then turned up a different person in the final. Not his fault though. It is the nature of aging champion.

That illustrates my previous point. Why do you automatically conclude that his lack of form in the final is due to aging? Statistically speaking, you can't draw conclusions like this based on one match.

endbegin
09-15-2009, 11:52 AM
I agree with namelessone about how he started taking the second set lightly when he was up a break. I remember he tried 2 drop shots in a row, both of which JMDP reached easily. For the first time, I was not unhappy to see Fed lose, for a lot of reasons: like he has got the FO monkey off his back and is the GS title leader, because I like JMDP as a player and liked to see him win ... Perhaps Fed started believing his own hype too much and didn't take JMDP seriously enough. It reminded me somewhat of AO2005 and how he was crazy enough to hit a 'tweener shot against Safin in SF while being matchpoint up.

One last thought: Fed lost two GS finals this year and won two. In the two that he lost, he served extremely poorly. The two that he won, he served brilliantly. Serving lights out and keeping points short during his return game is what will win majors for the aging Fed.

kkm
09-15-2009, 11:56 AM
Look at it this way. Sampras lost mainly in early rounds when he did lose. When Federer loses, its the finals of a slam.

That's true.

btw isn't it supposed to be "pwn3d?" - referring to your sig. and "n00b?" your username could be "darthpwn3r"

Funny how they play star wars music when introducing Federer.

marcl65
09-15-2009, 12:00 PM
For the first time, I was not unhappy to see Fed lose, for a lot of reasons: like he has got the FO monkey off his back and is the GS title leader, because I like JMDP as a player and liked to see him win
I felt the same way. How can you not like a guy like JMDP? It sucked seeing Fed play so poorly but I can't think of another guy on tour that I'd rather see take the trophy from Fed.

What teed me off was Dick Enberg refusing to let JMDP have the microphone during the awards ceremony. Jeez, the guy just Federer in 5 sets...let him have his moment Dick.

EKnee08
09-15-2009, 12:13 PM
I felt the same way. How can you not like a guy like JMDP? It sucked seeing Fed play so poorly but I can't think of another guy on tour that I'd rather see take the trophy from Fed.

What teed me off was Dick Enberg refusing to let JMDP have the microphone during the awards ceremony. Jeez, the guy just Federer in 5 sets...let him have his moment Dick.


Yes, he wasn't going to let Delpo speak until a producer told Enberg that he had to let Lexus get their plug in. Even after that Delpo had to plead with him and it was clear on the mic, so Enberg realized that he would look even more foolish if he didn't let Delpo speak.

EKnee08
09-15-2009, 12:18 PM
I agree too much speculation


I agree. Yes, his is an aging champion and most champions age 28 since the 90s do not have many more slams in them particularly when they become content with their personal life and career goals but Fed got to the finals of all four slams and won two.

Time will tell.

kkm
09-15-2009, 12:32 PM
JMDP seems like a gentle giant, except for his shots, which are far from gentle

myalterego
09-15-2009, 12:34 PM
Del Potro simply outplayed Federer yesterday.

Still, though, Fed has 15 Grand Slams, and now that Del Potro beat him in a GS Final, the pressure will be on Del Potro to win much more often. We will see how things go, I guess.

ShooterMcMarco
09-15-2009, 12:35 PM
"Today's match shows..."
"Today's match proves..."

That every win and (especially) loss is overanalyzed and overscrutinized. He lost. He didn't have his 'A' game. Today. In this one match. That's all this "shows" or "proves". Supremely gifted athletes essentially create a "monster" and when they lose or don't perform to their usual level, people go "oh my god, what's wrong with him!". Then they start overanalyzing every minute detail of their performance and jump to premature, and often silly, conclusions.

This is true. The better player won for that day, it really is that simple but some people choose to make the situation more complex.

BreakPoint
09-15-2009, 02:00 PM
Its funny how so many say fed is the goat,But when he gets pushed in a gs final he folds up like a lounge chair.

I thought this is were the real champions are supposed to win, not crumble from the pressure.

He did come through against roddick barely, but of course that is roddick his favorite pigeon.

He is a great front runner, but when a player like rafa, safin+ now delpo give him a challenge in a gs he cant come up big when it counts.
Um...didn't Sampras lose to both Safin and Hewitt in straight sets in two consecutive US Open finals?

At least Federer was able to push it to 5 sets even though he played one of the worst matches of his life.

gflyer
09-15-2009, 03:34 PM
IMO you are making too much of a big deal out of his loss. It was just one of THOSE matches.
If the damn 2nd set went to Roger (as it should have) I think we were here celebrating his victory today.
He lost the 2nd on a couple of crazy shots that JM will remember for ever (when he got broken on 5-4 if I remember correctly). I think those two shots were the turning point of the match.
JM started to build confidence and Roger started to give up. I think in his mind he was thinking that it was just a bad day. Too bad it was on a slam's final.
JM from that point played an almost-perfect match.

As Roger's fan I don't expect him to win all the slams. He is human at the end, isn't he?

gflyer
09-15-2009, 03:43 PM
I don't think Fed fans should be too upset. This was bound to happen sometime but Federer is not finished,not by a long shot. You really though Fed would be winning everything even with young guns rising? The guy is human no matter how many "fed is god" threads keep popping up.

I'm a Nadal fan so perhaps I am not quite objective but here's my deal on the whole Federer situation. After RG Federer is playing DETACHED,with little to no pressure. He himself said that he plays more freely now but it's a double edged sword because he can either click and be in god mode(see cincy) or ******** can show up on any given day and roger can look like he doesn't give a f**k.

When he got beat time and time again at the RG he had a ultimate challenge to look forward to,beating Nadal there and securing Career Slam. He didn't get to beat Rafa but he won RG and it took the pressure off his shoulders. He played sublimely in Wimbledon but was pushed to 5 by roddick of all people but came up with some terrific serves in clutch moments and got taken to 5 by JMDP,a GS final virgin, in USO and got beat.
Federer has been in near god mode this USO but in my opinion this caused him to get cocky and it cost him the final.Case in point,Fed had 30-0 at the end of the second but decided on some beauty shots instead of closing out the set. And this wasn't just a one time affair,Roger toyed with DelPo throghout the first two sets and to be honest I didn't like it,it felt a bit disrespectful on Roger's part. He clearly dominated DelPo for the first 2 sets but this "playful" behaviour cost him the second set and the match because it boosted DelPo's confidence once the big guy came back to win the second.

The match would have been played on a different level with Federer leading 2-0. Federer has another year of making Slam finals IMO and in 2,3 years tops he retires. Fed has a huge ego,he cannot take big defeats and move on so quickly. It's ok to lose once in a while for him but if he starts losing at the big events frequently he will retire. The year when Fed doesn't reach any Slam Finals is the year he retires IMO. I don't think that's the case for now.
Fed should consider himself lucky to have made 15 and Career Slam. A few months ago almost no one would have considered this a possibility,quite the contrary.
I didn't read this post.
Totally agree with you! Nice post.

gsquicksilver
09-15-2009, 04:30 PM
federer actually had a great year even though he didn't win the USO. think about it:

1. runner-up in AO
2. FO Champion
3. Wimbly Champion
4. runner-up in USO

he made 4 finals this year and won 2. that's actually quite an accomplishment for any tennis player.

samster
09-15-2009, 04:49 PM
just as above poster stated. fed got to all 4 grandslam finals and won 2 out of 4. to say that he is no longer dominant after this year's US Open is premature.

Chadwixx
09-15-2009, 04:51 PM
I guess this is the only fed match of the tournament chang saw...

OddJack
09-15-2009, 05:14 PM
Being a fan of Federer, I am here to only present objective comments. I do not intend to bring up anything related to GOAT, nor do I intend to bring up comparison to Sampras or Nadal. SO please, no trolling or flaming in this thread. Thanks.

Many Fed fans have said that they feel less sad compared to his loss in AO2009. I beg to differ. I think his loss today indicates quite some negative look on his future. Here are my reasons:

1. Before this match, Federer is only vulnerable to Nadal in slams (barring his loss to Djoko in AO08 due to mono). After this match, it is all changed. It gives hope to other young guns to take out Fed in slams. It proves Fed is not invincible in slams.

2. I think today´s loss defines a turning point in his career. Some might say AO08 defines a turning point, but that may be cuz of his mono. Some might say AO09 defines a turning point, but that he lost to his nemesis Nadal. But today´s loss is something diffrent, it shows he is no longer to adjust to his best level for the last stage in a slam, and it shows he can no longer adjust his game strategy and win based on his experience in slams. It also shows he is slightly less motivated, as he himself shows less emotion after the loss. The next definite turning point of Federer, would be the moment his stops his semi final streams in a slam.

3. Today´s match shows Federer has lost a step during the later stage in the 4 hour match. It is inevitable as he ages up. Sad but true. Quite often he can not reach or could barely reach some balls which he should have no problem when he was younger.

4. Some has said Federer´s serve is on par with Sampras´s. Today´s match proved them wrong. No, Federer´server is not as consistent as Pete. Having a great serve is very important for an aging champion on the tour, and can quickly save them out of trouble. I wish Federer could keep this up for the rest of his years remaining on the tour.

5. Many has already jumped onto the Del Potro wagon. Sure I like this kid too. He deserves the win today. But based on his physique and size, I have to say I think he might not be the next great. He may not be the next one who can win 6+ slams. His legs/fitness might breakdown sooner than other players such as Djoko or Murray. Anyway, I wish I am wrong.

Thanks.. .but nothing new here, really.

He aged, he is more vulnerable, he doesnt serve as good...sooo what?
As if we expected to go on like this forever? At 28 he is at the top of tennis world...

After the match ended yesterday, somone asked JMc, what would Federer think when he gets out of here? Mc said: " That he is the greatest ever"

The best days of us Fed fans maybe over, but from time to time we still get our moments, like we did this time.

And I don't understand why you "beg to differ" when people find this less sad than AO? How that can be? Rodge himself, during the ceremony, said " I am quite relaxed".
So are most of his fans.

And I only feel so lucky to have lived during the time the best ever tennis player lived.

raisethe3
09-15-2009, 05:24 PM
Agreed. And he wanted the FO in which he waited, and waited for a long time. I think that's satisfying.
federer actually had a great year even though he didn't win the USO. think about it:

1. runner-up in AO
2. FO Champion
3. Wimbly Champion
4. runner-up in USO

he made 4 finals this year and won 2. that's actually quite an accomplishment for any tennis player.

JennyS
09-15-2009, 05:31 PM
Older players have a history of struggling with the back to back semis and finals at the US Open. Remember Pete Sampras in the 2000 and 2001 finals?

2000: lost to Safin in straight sets and had 8 aches and 4 double faults

2001: Lost to Hewitt in straight sets and had 11 aces and 6 double faults

JennyS
09-15-2009, 05:33 PM
federer actually had a great year even though he didn't win the USO. think about it:

1. runner-up in AO
2. FO Champion
3. Wimbly Champion
4. runner-up in USO

he made 4 finals this year and won 2. that's actually quite an accomplishment for any tennis player.

Federer had better year in Slams in 2009 than he did in 2005, which was one of his most dominant years!

valiant
09-15-2009, 06:48 PM
My thoughts - Good that Delpo won or else Namranger would be having -" I am clown" in his signature. :P

sliceroni
09-15-2009, 07:03 PM
Very premature IMO.. as someone stated, finalist in ALL slams winning two of them. Even the best has a bad day at big stages. Far more deep in the 5th at Wimbledon his serve did not falter him as it did in USO. Bad serving day period, it happens. He has plenty of more slams to win, tennis seems to be more easy on his body then past champs because his movements are so much more efficient on court. If he stays healthy and I hope he does, this year shows he will still be the most consistent contender for the slams for the next 2-3 years.

Mkie7
09-15-2009, 07:06 PM
"Today's match shows..."
"Today's match proves..."

That every win and (especially) loss is overanalyzed and overscrutinized. He lost. He didn't have his 'A' game. Today. In this one match. That's all this "shows" or "proves". Supremely gifted athletes essentially create a "monster" and when they lose or don't perform to their usual level, people go "oh my god, what's wrong with him!". Then they start overanalyzing every minute detail of their performance and jump to premature, and often silly, conclusions.

I think you are right. When I watched Fed. play Djokovic.. just a day earlier... his serves were amazing and he came up with some of the best shots in his career.

If we are looking for a declining trend in form and competetiveness... we should look at the big picture. These men are not machines.. they have their good days and bad days. If only Fed. took those two points where it mattered.... this post would not exist. Few of those line calls which went DP's way by a hair.... or if Federer did not have to re- serve that ace.... we can go on and on.

All these lil' things probably annoyed Fed. and he let the umpire have it. The crowd (guessing mostly Nadal Fans.. :) ) rallied behind DP just to root against Fed... probably had a role to play as well.

Simple truth... Federer lost and Delpo won.... Credit to the champ and credit to Federer as well. Getting to the finals is not an easy task and he did come close to 16 IMO. He has a lot of miles left. It does not end here.

We will have to see how DP holds up. He did great and he deserved a GS. It was only a matter of time.

trenzterra
09-15-2009, 07:21 PM
IMO perhaps Federer doesn't have anything to prove against JMDP. I think maybe the reason he's still in here is that he wants to even his H2H with Nadal one day. What do you guys think?

Chadwixx
09-15-2009, 07:24 PM
Fed still puts up a good fight even when he isnt playing 100%, very underrated characteristic.

One of the reasons he has such consistency and success. His offgame is still pretty darn good, unfortunatly sometimes the other guys step up like yesterday.

Nadal got steamrolled by delpo, fed at least put up a nice fight. Neither was at their greatest.

rocket
09-15-2009, 07:34 PM
2. I think today´s loss defines a turning point in his career. Some might say AO08 defines a turning point, but that may be cuz of his mono. Some might say AO09 defines a turning point, but that he lost to his nemesis Nadal. But today´s loss is something diffrent, it shows he is no longer to adjust to his best level for the last stage in a slam, and it shows he can no longer adjust his game strategy and win based on his experience in slams. It also shows he is slightly less motivated, as he himself shows less emotion after the loss. The next definite turning point of Federer, would be the moment his stops his semi final streams in a slam.

Don't you worry, Fed will be in slam finals more often than anyone else currently. Whether he'll win more slam titles or not will depend on the day.

We're so used to seeing him 3 slam titles per year, so when he was down to 1, many say his days are over. Don't forget that he won already 2 this year.

Gut Feeling
09-15-2009, 07:34 PM
Has Federer ever lost when he was on his game?

AAAA
09-15-2009, 07:43 PM
But Sampras didn't really have any epic meltdowns, I think?

Sampras just lost in 3 sets(Krajicek, Hewitt, Safin, Phillippousis) instead. So yeah no meltdown because he never faought back by winning a set.

Edit: For meltdowns look up the Krosero thread of articles with Pete's actual comments regarding his losses on clay at the FO. His brain was addled.

AAAA
09-15-2009, 07:44 PM
federer actually had a great year even though he didn't win the USO. think about it:

1. runner-up in AO
2. FO Champion
3. Wimbly Champion
4. runner-up in USO

he made 4 finals this year and won 2. that's actually quite an accomplishment for any tennis player.

A bad year for Federer is better than Pete's best year ever.

bakla
09-15-2009, 08:01 PM
Talk about an overreaction. Roger had a major off-day at the service line. He struggled to hit his spots and had an uncharacteristic number of doubles.

Despite an abysmal first serve percentage, he had multiple opportunities to win the match and was a mere 2 points from victory in the 4th set.

At the end of the day, it was just one match. Looking back on the year, he was in all 4 finals and won 2 of them. In his 2 losses, he extended both to the 5th set, a mere handful of points from a calendar slam.

I think he's fully recovered from his mono and back problems, is relaxed and feeling no pressure. I look for him to win more majors next year, possibly even a calendar slam.

BreakPoint
09-15-2009, 10:13 PM
My thoughts - Good that Delpo won or else Namranger would be having -" I am clown" in his signature. :P
I'd bet NamRanger was sweating bullets for the first set and 3/4 of the 2nd. Ha ha ha....LOL :lol:

vicnan
09-16-2009, 11:15 AM
Those two points at 5-4 in the second set turned the match around. If he had won that set, the whole tone of the rest of the match would have been completely different and the forum would be abuzz about why there are no real challengers to RF.

The guy won 2 majors convincingly and lost the other two in 5 sets -- in fact, he had a good chance to win both. Had a few points gone his way in both matches, we would now be talking about this year as the Annus Mirabilis in Tennis.

Edit: Along with '62 and '69.

Gut Feeling
09-16-2009, 11:17 AM
.

The guy won 2 majors convincingly

Didnt Nadal pull out of Wimbledon? Who did Federer beat at the FO?

FlamEnemY
09-16-2009, 11:50 AM
Didnt Nadal pull out of Wimbledon? Who did Federer beat at the FO?

The guy who beat Nadal. Problem with that?

MichaelChang
09-16-2009, 01:14 PM
Soderling is probably a little unlucky in this wimby and USO. Both he run into Fed too early. If he was in the other half of the draw, I expect him to have a little deeper run in these 2 slams.

roundiesee
09-17-2009, 12:52 AM
It wasn't just the second set that Fed blew (At 5-4 in the second he played some silly drop shots which didn't work at all); I think in the fourth he had 3 breakpoints on Del Potro's service games but just could not break (played too passively?); if he had broken he would have mostly likely held serve throughout the 4th to take the title. That's how crazy a tennis match can get; I doubt that that's the last we'll see of Federer though... :)

cueboyzn
09-17-2009, 01:16 AM
Originally Posted by JustBob
"Today's match shows..."
"Today's match proves..."

That every win and (especially) loss is overanalyzed and overscrutinized. He lost. He didn't have his 'A' game. Today. In this one match. That's all this "shows" or "proves". Supremely gifted athletes essentially create a "monster" and when they lose or don't perform to their usual level, people go "oh my god, what's wrong with him!". Then they start overanalyzing every minute detail of their performance and jump to premature, and often silly, conclusions.


Good post.

I would like to know why it is that when Tiger Woods loses in a Major, people accept it as part and parcel of Golf and don't write him off as being a spent force? Why Federer? Why, because a couple of points never went his way and he didn't have his A Game on the day? It happens, even great sportsmen are human and not infallible, sometimes they (gasp) lose. Look at how many putts Tiger Woods missed in the last major he could have won. The only thing it "shows" or "proves" is that sport is unpredictable and on the day any player can lose, even great ones. Tennis "Fans" are extremely fickle these days. Essentially Roger Federer summed it up at the Australian Open 2008 when he lost to Djokovic, he has indeed created a monster with so much success. 17 of the last 18 Grand SLam finals, 22 consecutive Grand Slam Semis, 5 consecutive titles at both Wimbledon and US Open. Career Slam. Grand Slam Record. I could go on.

Give the guy a break just like Tiger Woods. These guys are NOT machines, even though people might think they are.

rafanadal
09-17-2009, 03:09 AM
technically, no one can compete with fed (and i think he is GOAT in terms of technique). nevertheless, at 28, physically he is on the down side, so it will be more open in future grand slams of 5-set

definitely i think he won't win french open again but saying he is out is just rubbish talk. logically i cannot agree with saying one's career is finished when he won 2 Grand slams and 2 first runner-up.......

Cyan
09-17-2009, 09:50 AM
^His best chance is at Wimbledon for sure.

rocket
09-17-2009, 10:25 AM
logically i cannot agree with saying one's career is finished when he won 2 Grand slams and 2 first runner-up.......

The guy's been in all 4 slam finals this year. Yeah, his future is pretty bleak everyone. ;)

JoelDali
09-17-2009, 12:26 PM
Are you the real Michael Chang?

I love when people ask this.

Intelligence is a gift.