PDA

View Full Version : ...So in hindsight, are you surprised by what Federer has achieved so far in 2009?


GasquetGOAT
10-11-2009, 12:30 PM
...given the kind of year he had in 2008?

After the masters cup last year, I've heard many say, ''done'', ''dusted'', ''retiring out of shame'', ''no slams'', ''1 slam if lucky'', ''no way he repeats another 2+ slams season'', "would be lucky to stay top 5", "in fact top 10 would've done very well for his age"....

And what are you seeing for 2010?:twisted:

TheMagicianOfPrecision
10-11-2009, 12:33 PM
...given the kind of year he had in 2008?

After the masters cup last year, I've heard many say, ''done'', ''dusted'', ''retiring out of shame'', ''no slams'', ''1 slam if lucky'', ''no way he repeats another 2+ slams season'', "would be lucky to stay top 5", "in fact top 10 would've done very well for his age"....

And what are you seeing for 2010?:twisted:
Yes yes, great thread. We have heard it all, that he should retire, lightyears past his prime- Feels SO GOOD that Fed had such an unbeliavable year in 2009!
In 2010 i see AO: W FO: SF Wimby: W USO: F
And Yes...even I couldnt possibly dream that it would be such a great year :)

JeMar
10-11-2009, 12:33 PM
Good thread.

I am most definitely surprised by what Federer achieved this year. I was counting on his Wimbledon title, but I can't say I was expecting him to also win Roland Garros.

mandy01
10-11-2009, 12:34 PM
surprised?...in a way. this year has been so surreal to me as fan.
Am I getting ahead of myself for next year? No.

DarthFed
10-11-2009, 12:36 PM
The wimbledon didn't surprise me. Losing the AO was a surprise, winning the french (in the fashion he did) was a surprise.

What really caught me off was the two MS wins..i really thought he didn't give two *****s about those. Also he had beaten Nadal and Murray to win them.

All things considered i was surprised..but in a very positive way. Don't think 2010 will be the same but it should be a good year maybe not my his ridiculous standards but a good year nonetheless.

valiant
10-11-2009, 01:45 PM
The wimbledon didn't surprise me. Losing the AO was a surprise, winning the french (in the fashion he did) was a surprise.

What really caught me off was the two MS wins..i really thought he didn't give two *****s about those. Also he had beaten Nadal and Murray to win them.

All things considered i was surprised..but in a very positive way. Don't think 2010 will be the same but it should be a good year maybe not my his ridiculous standards but a good year nonetheless.

Totally agree with you on that.

Agassifan
10-11-2009, 01:51 PM
I admit I thought before USO 2008 that fed would struggle to win 3 more slams for the rest of his career. Lo and behold.. he won 3 of the next 4. But in hindsight, other than the french, this shouldn't be a major surprise. Afterall, all this was done in the midst of his 22 slam semi streak and 17/18 finals. It is not like he got busted in the 4th round or something. The guy has been putting himself in place to win every slam in the last 5-6 years. Now that he is past his prime, we cant expect him to win everything... but expect a slam or two per year for the next 2-3 years.

P_Agony
10-11-2009, 02:05 PM
After the AO loss, craptaciular peformences on Miami, IW, MC, and Rome, I thought Fed will never break the record. Then, out of nowhere, he wins Madrid, RG, Wimbly, and Cincy. Incredible year.

Sartorius
10-11-2009, 02:24 PM
Call me a fool or crazy on this but I always had the feeling that at some point Federer was going to win the French. So that and obviously the following Wimbledon victory, actually didn't quite surprise me.

But I was very, very surprised that how quickly he got his act together after the first part of the year (and also incredibly surprised how well Federer reflects on himself, see the following parenthesis) ... After the "racket-smashing" match in Miami (where before the tournament he said: "a semi-final would be a good result"), I really thought that Federer finally hit the bottom and it was going to take some time for him to recover... But somehow, apparently after that magical practice week after Monte Carlo (after losing to Wawrinka: "I had to see what I need to work on") and before Madrid (before the tournament: I think I'm ready to win this tournament), he not only regrouped, he also played a litte different than before... A lot of people thought his victory against Nadal there didn't mean much, but I was one of the people thinking otherwise. Because that victory against Nadal alone wasn't the real important thing, the important and surprising thing was that he played a lot better than he had been playing merely weeks ago.

Darth_Timmaayyy!!
10-11-2009, 04:04 PM
I also thought he was going to win the French at some time, and was happy that he did this year.. What I was surprised at, was that he lost the US Open. Even in the third set of the final I thought it was a done deal..But two majors in one year isn't all that shabby...

Blinkism
10-11-2009, 04:19 PM
Let's all be really, really, honest-

After the poor HC season Fed had after the AO, and his early loss in Monte Carlo

Very, very, few were optimistic about his prospects for the rest of 2009.

We all had low expectations, and Fed proved us all wrong - even most Federer fans.

That being said, I half-expected Fed to take Wimbledon, but I had doubts after Miami

Fed's 2009 was definitely a surprise, overall

JennyS
10-11-2009, 04:21 PM
FO win was a great early birthday present!

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-11-2009, 04:24 PM
Most people would say yes, definitely.

But it was also a little surprising he didn't win USO. Although, considering

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zu-2yRSduu0

hmmm, maybe not? ;)

IvanAndreevich
10-11-2009, 04:24 PM
Overall, I was a bit surprised by how long it took him to get back on the right track, actually.

OliverSimon
10-11-2009, 07:55 PM
2009 was a great year for Roger

edmondsm
10-11-2009, 08:55 PM
Not surprised that Nadal had an injury that kept him from winning the FO and Wimbledon. Not surprised that Federer won both of them in his absence.

RCizzle65
10-11-2009, 09:12 PM
I thought it was very surprising that he won the French of course. The first day of the tournament, seeing the clay and people playing on the big screen on Tennis Channel, I just had a good feeling, and what do you know, Federer ends up winning it. Wimbledon I wasn't as surprised, but the two Master Series were surprising as well, since you can tell he doesn't care about them that much....but Cincinnati looked like he peaked a couple weeks too early!

lawrence
10-11-2009, 09:16 PM
Federer said "thank god the hard court season is over"
and people laughed at his comments.
he then went on to smash the FO and wimbledon, and lost at the USO

so indeed, he really was thankful the hard court season was over, as it was his worst surface this year

baek57
10-11-2009, 09:47 PM
I'm surprised he didn't win more.

mandy01
10-11-2009, 10:28 PM
Call me a fool or crazy on this but I always had the feeling that at some point Federer was going to win the French. So that and obviously the following Wimbledon victory, actually didn't quite surprise me.

But I was very, very surprised that how quickly he got his act together after the first part of the year (and also incredibly surprised how well Federer reflects on himself, see the following parenthesis) ... After the "racket-smashing" match in Miami (where before the tournament he said: "a semi-final would be a good result"), I really thought that Federer finally hit the bottom and it was going to take some time for him to recover... But somehow, apparently after that magical practice week after Monte Carlo (after losing to Wawrinka: "I had to see what I need to work on") and before Madrid (before the tournament: I think I'm ready to win this tournament), he not only regrouped, he also played a litte different than before... A lot of people thought his victory against Nadal there didn't mean much, but I was one of the people thinking otherwise. Because that victory against Nadal alone wasn't the real important thing, the important and surprising thing was that he played a lot better than he had been playing merely weeks ago. Well said..I cannot help but be amazed how Roger gets the goal he sets more often than not..its pretty incredible..especially when his game is on.

iriraz
10-12-2009, 05:26 AM
Winning two slams isn`t that big of a surprise.Obviously at Wimbledon he was the big favourite and i thought he had a bigger shot at Us Open rather then French.Australian Open is a coinflip how everyone starts the new year so it can produce surprises.Unlike Wimbledon where Federer doesn`t have any big hurdles until the finals at the French it was clear he can`t straight set everyone till the finals.A couple of tough 4 or 5 setters are for him every year at the French so coming through those was great for him.

8pNADAL
10-12-2009, 06:40 AM
if nadal didn't play in 2008 then federer would have won 3 slams in 2008, so clearly 2009 is no surprise.

Steve132
10-12-2009, 10:18 AM
If Nadal didn't play in 2008 then Federer would have won 3 slams in 2008, so clearly 2009 is no surprise.

He was not a lock to win at Roland Garros in 2008. Djokovic was playing as least as impressively as he was.

Agassifan
10-12-2009, 10:24 AM
If Nadal didn't play in 2008 then Federer would have won 3 slams in 2008, so clearly 2009 is no surprise.

well.. nadal did play in 3 slams THIS year

and oh! the results would be the same even if he had played in all 4.

Agassifan
10-12-2009, 10:44 AM
The same? Do you mean Federer would Lose to Nadal like he did previously?

Nadal wouldn't have made the finals of wimby and he didn't make the RG/USO final.. so he would've had zero impact on those 3 slams as far as fed is concerned

kishnabe
10-12-2009, 11:19 AM
Great year indeed with the French open win but i would have preffered if he has won the 2007 version. Wimbledon win was a dissapointment and the US open loss was a dissapointment. But i was only suprised by nadal dropout from rolland and wimby. Not suprised that federer would win french open.
Next year Fed will win AO and RG but lose in the finals of Wimby and US open.

Spider
10-13-2009, 06:15 AM
Winning two slams for someone as dominant as Federer shouldn't come as a *surprise* for anyone. It took Nadal almost 5 hours to beat him at Wimbledon last year so Federer was clearly the biggest favorite there this year and that wasn't a surprise. RG was the biggest surprise, if it was US open or AO then it wouldn't be that surprising but RG was a big milestone in his already phenomenal resume.

Getting back his world number one position is again not a *surprise* when you know he held that position for 237 straight weeks previously. His desire to succeed inspite of achieving so much is something to be admired about (case in point is his much talked about emotional outburst at the AO final, this guy had 13 slams to his name at that point in time). This shows what it means to him which I think should be something each and every player who aspires to play tennis should take a note off (that's the only way you can consistently succeed at anything).

jackson vile
10-13-2009, 10:34 AM
...given the kind of year he had in 2008?

After the masters cup last year, I've heard many say, ''done'', ''dusted'', ''retiring out of shame'', ''no slams'', ''1 slam if lucky'', ''no way he repeats another 2+ slams season'', "would be lucky to stay top 5", "in fact top 10 would've done very well for his age"....

And what are you seeing for 2010?:twisted:

Look back at my posts, I predicted that his fans were wrong in writing him off.

I also predicted that Nadal was bound to lose the FO and the only way Roger would win it would be if Nadal was knocked out or absent.

I guarnteed that Roger would win with no Nadal at Wim, but was supprised that he had a more difficult time this year than previous years, especially against Roddick.

The USO was a huge suprise, and I was 100% wrong here. Delpo gave Roger a sound beating, I did not think that was possible.

Roger will be seeking a AO and USO title, the AO title is likely IMO but the rest of the titles in 2010 are going to be one hell of a battle for him and are very unlikely.

Make sure to mark this post and refer back to it.

pame
10-13-2009, 11:53 AM
Look back at my posts, I predicted that his fans were wrong in writing him off.

I also predicted that Nadal was bound to lose the FO and the only way Roger would win it would be if Nadal was knocked out or absent.

I guarnteed that Roger would win with no Nadal at Wim, but was supprised that he had a more difficult time this year than previous years, especially against Roddick.

The USO was a huge suprise, and I was 100% wrong here. Delpo gave Roger a sound beating, I did not think that was possible.

Roger will be seeking a AO and USO title, the AO title is likely IMO but the rest of the titles in 2010 are going to be one hell of a battle for him and are very unlikely.

Make sure to mark this post and refer back to it.

Do you just use hyperbole because it sounds good? If losing in 5-sets is a "sound beating", how on earth do you describe the "6-2,6-2,6-2 results???

Nadalfan89
10-13-2009, 12:12 PM
Congratulations to Federer for Nadal being hurt.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
10-13-2009, 12:14 PM
Congratulations to Federer for Nadal being hurt.
Come on man... the History books will not have a note after every Fed record saying "Nadal injured"

Jason Lives
10-13-2009, 12:17 PM
Congratulations to Federer for Nadal being hurt.

And congratulations for roddick being unexperienced in 5th setters in grand slam finals and for choking.

mandy01
10-13-2009, 12:22 PM
Come on man... the History books will not have a note after every Fed record saying "Nadal injured"he'll probably make notes in his history book about it :lol:

pame
10-13-2009, 12:31 PM
he'll probably make notes in his history book about it :lol:

:) [10 char]