View Full Version : Major Slumps and RF

07-04-2012, 02:40 AM
I was reading this interesting post from NadalAgassi about Steffi Graff:
"Steffi could have become the greatest tennis player ever but a number of flaws prevent her ranking over the likes of Navratilova, Court, or Evert:
-Her major slump from 1990-1994, right in the middle of what should have been her prime. Resulting in only 1 slam win in 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, even with only Seles in 91 and 92 only as real competition."

And the I thought that maybe Federer is living this major slump for 3 years now.
Maybe if he in wimbledon this year he's gonna win other GS, who knows...

Are there other male players who faced the same major slump before and succeeded in winning GS again?

07-04-2012, 02:50 AM
Roger seems well past his prime in terms of his legs having any high-level work left in them. Movement is more important to success in tennis now than ever. He is unable to move like a number-1 anymore. He has other skills, but it is these mainly, I think, by which he is barely hanging on. Murray will pass him next year IMO. Rafa too may fall off quickly once Roger retires--I feel like those two are joined at the hip career-wise. Nadal always struck me as a symbiote who latched onto Roger somehow.

07-04-2012, 02:56 AM
Roger is past his prime, but that doesn't mean he could not win more Slams. Wimbledon is a big if, but IF he can conquer DJokovic at the lawns of the all england club, the new number 1 seed has even more chance at the US Open. I don't see him going into some renewed dominance mode however. IF he wins Wimbledon, it's wide open for Roger to be the no. 1 player of 2012, win the US Open and/or olympics etc. but that's mostly confidence then. He just doesn't have the same legs and fitness as Djokovic anymore.

Winning Wimbledon is more important though. Don't see him do it, but it's "only" 3 matches

Hi I'm Ray
07-04-2012, 03:03 AM
I think Agassi also went through a major slump in his prime years but made a come back.

Nothing against Roger, but he's past his prime.

07-04-2012, 10:52 PM
The gap between Sampras' last two majors I believe was exactly what Fed's would be if he were to win this Wimbledon. Although I'd hardly call Fed's a slump, versus Sampras who was outside the top 10, Fed is still in the last 4 of almost every major.

07-04-2012, 11:09 PM
He is 31 years old. Lock this thread.

07-05-2012, 01:18 AM
He is 31 years old. Lock this thread.

So what?
The guy still owns everyone on fast courts (paris, london) and even slow HC (IW) and of course blue clay (madrid).
He's having trouble with GS matches that's it