Novak admits that Roger is playing the best tennis of his career

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

Serve&Bash said:
You MUST be joking or weren't into tennis back in 2006.

Federer's forehand was absolutely abysmal last night. I am positive Federer never missed easy forehands the way he did last night back in his prime. In fact, Federer was vary that everyone avoided his forehand so whenever he did get a chance to hit a forehand, he made it count. His forehand is still good, but movement effects that shot quite a bit and Federer just seems weak when he forced out wide to the foreahnd.

I've always considered this a weakness of Federer. I remember Patrick McEnroe making a comment during the 2009 Aussie Final about Federer hitting his forehand well when moving to his right (and noted that he had often struggled with that). Just look at some of the comments in this thread from 2005.

Federer does not really have weakness and maybe the most balanced defense and offensive game in history.
But if you have to pick one, his 1 handed backhand and forehand on the run when stretched
wide (these two are things that Safin exploited).
And maybe if he had stronger net game, he could have easier time with Nadal...
I assume that is why he hired Tony Roche....

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/what-is-the-weakness-of-federer.28194/

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/rogers-weakness-in-his-game.63866/

I don't think moving him about to his right is anything new. He's been vulnerable to that play for a long time.

Sreeram · Sep 14, 2015

Federer is admitting that he is playing better than his past. He admits that his confidence is not same as how it was when he won 40 matches in a row. Now that is mental. Federer achieved what he achieved because of low competition that gave him great confidence to keep crushing his opponents. Now with players challenging him, even though Fed plays better he cannot win slams.

Fed is a perfectionist, when people like this are challenged by equally or more powerful players, they will crumble. That is why he crumbled in the US Open final. He is mentally Weak Period. Loses confidence when other players challenge him with equal or more power.

He was very lucky to play in an era when there was no one to challenge him.

augustobt · Sep 14, 2015

I'm pretty sure that people haven't seen Federer in his absolute best by 2005-6 when they say that Federer is serving better and have a better forehand now, hahahahaha.

RF20Lennon · Sep 14, 2015

augustobt said:
I'm pretty sure that people haven't seen Federer in his absolute best by 2005-6 when they say that Federer is serving better and have a better forehand now, hahahahaha.

Basically this.

I think his backhand is better but that's about it. Just look at his court coverage and explosiveness 10 years ago. Almost non existent now. Not to mention no forehand.

hoodjem · Sep 14, 2015

"Best tennis of his career". And yet Djokovic still wins.

Hmmm. Is this an example of a self-serving compliment?

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

augustobt said:
I'm pretty sure that people haven't seen Federer in his absolute best by 2005-6 when they say that Federer is serving better and have a better forehand now, hahahahaha.

He is serving better. That is the one thing you can prove through data.

1st Serve %:
2015 - 64%
2006 - 63%

1st Serve points won:
2015 - 80%
2006 - 77%

2nd serve points won:
2015 - 58%
2006 - 59%

BPs faced:
2015 - 177
2006 - 399

Service games won:
2015 - 93%
2006 - 90%

Service points won:
2015 - 72%
2006 - 70%

Roger actually faced BPs more frequently in 2006 than he does today. Statistically, the biggest difference between his game then and now is on the return. He won 32% of his return games and converted 43% of BPs in 2006 compared to 27% and 39% in 2015. However, he is winning a higher % of return games this season than he was winning in 2009.

augustobt · Sep 14, 2015

Tennis is not all about stats. Worth to mention that in 2006 Federer made - if I'm not mistaken - all the finals of masters until Cincinnati apart from Hamburg that he didn't played, counting some more BO5 games in this resume - which would perfectly explain the discrepancy of those lower % - specially in 4/5 setters on clay against Nadal like in rome.

Anyway, it's even idiotic to compare the actual Federer with his former level. If you keep saying that Federer is serving better and hitting better FH's now than in 2006 you'll lead us to the conclusion that you do not watch tennis, only read some articles on wikipedia and check the stats on ATP's website.

SoBad · Sep 14, 2015

Dragan said:
Federer 2015 compared to Federer 2006:

Serve: better
Forehand: better
Backhand: better
Net play: better
Tactics: better
Movement: worse
Stamina: worse

Federer movement has improved marginally over the past 10 years, while stamina remained roughly level. I would say the most staggering improvement has been on the backhand side.

BGod · Sep 14, 2015

Not even Federer's serve is better now. I'm just tired of arguing with fanboys who like to cross compare eras.

Federer's prime years were 03-08 with his apex being 05-06. If you didn't see him back then, that's your misfortune. When he recovered from mono, 2009-2010 were solid years too.

You've got scraps now. Transitional era is now which is why Agassi was doing so well 02-05 himself.

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

augustobt said:
Tennis is not all about stats. Worth to mention that in 2006 Federer made - if I'm not mistaken - all the finals of masters until Cincinnati apart from Hamburg that he didn't played, counting some more BO5 games in this resume - which would perfectly explain the discrepancy of those lower % - specially in 4/5 setters on clay against Nadal like in rome.

Anyway, it's even idiotic to compare the actual Federer with his former level. If you keep saying that Federer is serving better and hitting better FH's now than in 2006 you'll lead us to the conclusion that you do not watch tennis, only read some articles on wikipedia and check the stats on ATP's website.

I didn't say it was all about stats, did I? I simply provided data that shows that Federer is serving better today than he was in 2006. I define "better" by achieving one's ultimate objective in a service game, which is to hold serve.

The data also shows that he's returning worse than he did then.

And what's up with these "you must not watch tennis" comments? That has to be the most repeated thing on this site.

RF20Lennon · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
I didn't say it was all about stats, did I? I simply provided data that shows that Federer is serving better today than he was in 2006. I define "better" by achieving one's ultimate objective in a service game, which is to hold serve.

The data also shows that he's returning worse than he did then.

And what's up with these "you must not watch tennis" comments? That has to be the most repeated thing on this site.

I think his serve has improved! But despite that he is unable to concentrate in the big moments and drops serve being 40-15 up. But in his prime although the serve wasn't as good, he was just on target and made sure he held and never wavered.

mistik · Sep 14, 2015

RF20Lennon said:
I think his serve has improved! But despite that he is unable to concentrate in the big moments and drops serve being 40-15 up. But in his prime although the serve wasn't as good, he was just on target and made sure he held and never wavered.

At his peak years he doesnt have to rely on big serve that was the reason. Sampras wasnt just a big server in his peak between 1993 and 1997 either.

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

RF20Lennon said:
I think his serve has improved! But despite that he is unable to concentrate in the big moments and drops serve being 40-15 up. But in his prime although the serve wasn't as good, he was just on target and made sure he held and never wavered.

Except against Nadal, of course.

Anybody ever notice that Federer loses to the same handful of guys? Murray has beaten him 11 times. Nadal has beaten him 23 times. Novak has now beaten him 21 times.

Maybe, just maybe, this is because these guys are really that good. Most guys are lucky to score one victory against Federer whether you're talking about 2005 or 2015. It's only these three guys who are in the double digits in their victory counts over Federer.

RF20Lennon · Sep 14, 2015

mistik said:
At his peak years he doesnt have to rely on big serve that was the reason. Sampras wasnt just a big server in his peak between 1993 and 1997 either.

Yeah basically. He just doesn't have the focus to finish things on the big stage.

swizzy · Sep 14, 2015

ha! watch some tape from a few years back.. fed was unimaginably clutch [forget the nadal kryptonite for a bit] last night was not particularly great from either guy.. if djokovic doesn't faceplant in the first set it might have been a blowout. fed gets into a decent rhythm by the second set.. that rhythm might never have happened if he gets smoked in the first and is broken early in the second.

ABCD · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
I didn't say it was all about stats, did I? I simply provided data that shows that Federer is serving better today than he was in 2006. I define "better" by achieving one's ultimate objective in a service game, which is to hold serve.

The data also shows that he's returning worse than he did then.

And what's up with these "you must not watch tennis" comments? That has to be the most repeated thing on this site.

If you would assess Federer's game would you say that overall he is 1) weaker, 2) similar or 3) better player than he was in 2006? I believe that the quality of balls your opponent sends you is a crucial factor that is often disregarded. It is not the same what you can do against Djokovic's balls and balls of someone else.

RF20Lennon · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
Except against Nadal, of course.

Anybody ever notice that Federer loses to the same handful of guys? Murray has beaten him 11 times. Nadal has beaten him 23 times. Novak has now beaten him 21 times.

Maybe, just maybe, this is because these guys are really that good. Most guys are lucky to score one victory against Federer whether you're talking about 2005 or 2015. It's only these three guys who are in the double digits in their victory counts over Federer.

Murray has only beaten Federer on the big stage once so I don't really include him but the other two I agree. Nadal has always been an issue. No argument there.

Djokovic I think started to become an issue after the 2010 USO and 2011 USO when he blew 4 MP's. Djokovic just turned into a rock solid competitor who would not submit or crack. So for Federer to win like he did in Cincy he has to serve really well and hold and make use of the opportunities. But last night he was getting broken after leading in service games, he just couldn't stay focused to close it. That's credit to Djokovic though for keeping his resolve and staying strong while Federer just kept creating opportunities and blowing them.

RF20Lennon · Sep 14, 2015

ABCD said:
If you would assess Federer's game would you say that overall he is 1) weaker, 2) similar or 3) better player than he was in 2006? I believe that the quality of balls your opponent sends you is a crucial factor that is often disregarded. It is not the same what you can do against Djokovic's balls and balls of someone else.

It is slightly weaker in terms of shotmaking, better in terms of backhand and serve and considerably weaker in terms of movement. But that's still not why he lost last night.

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

ABCD said:
If you would assess Federer's game would you say that overall he is 1) weaker, 2) similar or 3) better player than he was in 2006? I believe that the quality of balls your opponent sends you is a crucial factor that is often disregarded. It is not the same what you can do against Djokovic's balls and balls of someone else.

I don't think his passing shots are as money today as they were back then. He played very well off the ground this tournament but I don't think he's as consistent off the ground as he was then. But I don't think these differences are significant (when looking at his USO performance strictly). However, I don't think you can really afford to lose anything against Djokovic.

I also agree that the type of ball your opponent send back makes a difference. That's why Fed was not able to run through Djokovic the way he did his six previous opponents. As much as people say "the match was 100% on his racquet," there was a guy across the net from him last night who DID have some say in the matter.

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

RF20Lennon said:
Murray has only beaten Federer on the big stage once so I don't really include him but the other two I agree. Nadal has always been an issue. No argument there.

Big stage or not, what other players have beaten Roger Federer at least 11 times?

RF20Lennon said:
Djokovic I think started to become an issue after the 2010 USO and 2011 USO when he blew 4 MP's. Djokovic just turned into a rock solid competitor who would not submit or crack. So for Federer to win like he did in Cincy he has to serve really well and hold and make use of the opportunities. But last night he was getting broken after leading in service games, he just couldn't stay focused to close it. That's credit to Djokovic though for keeping his resolve and staying strong while Federer just kept creating opportunities and blowing them.

Last night was ugly. But sometimes it beez that way. Not every tennis match can be a Miss America pageant.

RF20Lennon · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
Big stage or not, what other players have beaten Roger Federer at least 11 times?

Last night was ugly. But sometimes it beez that way. Not every tennis match can be a Miss America pageant.

Exactly. You can't have conditions tailor made to suit your game every time. You find a way to win. When you create opportunities you take them.

I think Federer struggled against Murray early on because it was new to him? But he's reversed that trend now. He's won 10 straight sets against him.

ABCD · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
I don't think his passing shots are as money today as they were back then. He played very well off the ground this tournament but I don't think he's as consistent off the ground as he was then. But I don't think these differences are significant (when looking at his USO performance strictly). However, I don't think you can really afford to lose anything against Djokovic.

I also agree that the type of ball your opponent send back makes a difference. That's why Fed was not able to run through Djokovic the way he did his six previous opponents. As much as people say "the match was 100% on his racquet," there was a guy across the net from him last night who DID have some say in the matter.

Thanks. When I watched Djokovic vs Federer on USO SF 2011 my impression was that Djokovic tried deliberately to go through Federer's forehand first 2 sets he lost. I don't know why was that, but I thought that Djokovic attempted to send a message that he can beat him even when playing through his priced forehand. When he lost these 2 sets, I felt that Djokovic realised that he can't do that and reverted to standard pattern of play by pounding backhand. Do you think that there is something in my interpretation of this match, or I am just plainly wrong?

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

ABCD said:
Thanks. When I watched Djokovic vs Federer on USO SF 2011 my impression was that Djokovic tried deliberately to go through Federer's forehand first 2 sets he lost. I don't know why was that, but I thought that Djokovic attempted to send a message that he can beat him even when playing through his priced forehand. When he lost these 2 sets, I felt that Djokovic realised that he can't do that and reverted to standard pattern of play by pounding backhand. Do you think that there is something in my interpretation of this match, or I am just plainly wrong?

I'd have to go back and watch it. My recollection of most of these matches is fuzzy. The only match I can really remember blow for blow is the Wimby '08 Final. And that's because I had no fewer than 88 heart attacks during that match.

Deleted member 307496 · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
Except against Nadal, of course.

Anybody ever notice that Federer loses to the same handful of guys? Murray has beaten him 11 times. Nadal has beaten him 23 times. Novak has now beaten him 21 times.

Maybe, just maybe, this is because these guys are really that good. Most guys are lucky to score one victory against Federer whether you're talking about 2005 or 2015. It's only these three guys who are in the double digits in their victory counts over Federer.

Hewitt's beaten Federer 9 times.. perhaps he's better than you make him out to be.

ABCD · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
I'd have to go back and watch it. My recollection of most of these matches is fuzzy. The only match I can really remember blow for blow is the Wimby '08 Final. And that's because I had no fewer than 88 heart attacks during that match.

Who is your favourite player

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

Sabratha said:
Hewitt's beaten Federer 9 times.. perhaps he's better than you make him out to be.

I never said Hewitt was garbage. I said I never particularly cared for him. Besides, Hewitt was completely pwned by Federer during his prime, losing to him 15 times in a row. Murray was actually able to run up the score on Fed pretty quickly (in Fed's prime) and only (and oddly) fell behind in the H2H count recently.

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

ABCD said:
Who is your favourite player

Overall, probably Federer. I prefer him style-wise.

I like Nadal too. I like his fight.

I like Novak's personality and how he seems to feed off adversity. I kinda wanted him to win last night just to give a big FU to all of the people cheering against him.

I pretty much like all 3 equally. But I've been pulling for Novak more and more in recent years. Sometimes I pull for Nadal. I pull for Fed the least (when playing against these two) because he's already won a buttload of titles. It would be like hoping Bill Gates earns that extra billion dollars. I just can't feel sad for someone who's already accomplished more than any other male tennis player in history.

ABCD · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
Overall, probably Federer. I prefer him style-wise.

I like Nadal too. I like his fight.

I like Novak's personality and how he seems to feed off adversity. I kinda wanted him to win last night just to give a big FU to all of the people cheering against him.

I pretty much like all 3 equally. But I've been pulling for Novak more and more in recent years. Sometimes I pull for Nadal. I pull for Fed the least (when playing against these two) because he's already won a buttload of titles. It would be like hoping Bill Gates earns that extra billion dollars. I just can't feel sad for someone who's already accomplished more than any other male tennis player in history.

Thank you for your responses. Did you have an opportunity and ambition to become a profession player

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

ABCD said:
Thank you for your responses. Did you have an opportunity and ambition to become a profession player

Yeah...when I was like 13. I liked basketball more than tennis so moved that direction instead. Didn't play that professionally either lol.

Gazelle · Sep 14, 2015

RalphJ said:
"The world number one admitted he had struggled for form throughout both events but appearances are often deceptive with Djokovic, who has a habit of saving his best for the heat of a grand slam.'

That was the crux of the whole article. Djokovic only pushes it in the Slams. He lets these guys win the smaller ones.

Just like during the clay season.

ABCD · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
Yeah...when I was like 13. I liked basketball more than tennis so moved that direction instead. Didn't play that professionally either lol.

Pleasure talking to you. All the best to you and your family.

RF20Lennon · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
Overall, probably Federer. I prefer him style-wise.

I like Nadal too. I like his fight.

I like Novak's personality and how he seems to feed off adversity. I kinda wanted him to win last night just to give a big FU to all of the people cheering against him.

I pretty much like all 3 equally. But I've been pulling for Novak more and more in recent years. Sometimes I pull for Nadal. I pull for Fed the least (when playing against these two) because he's already won a buttload of titles. It would be like hoping Bill Gates earns that extra billion dollars. I just can't feel sad for someone who's already accomplished more than any other male tennis player in history.

That seems rational. Wish I could be that way. But I'm still a fan desperately waiting for the 18th!

HoyaPride · Sep 14, 2015

ABCD said:
Pleasure talking to you. All the best to you and your family.

Likewise.

Deleted member 307496 · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
I never said Hewitt was garbage. I said I never particularly cared for him. Besides, Hewitt was completely pwned by Federer during his prime, losing to him 15 times in a row. Murray was actually able to run up the score on Fed pretty quickly (in Fed's prime) and only (and oddly) fell behind in the H2H count recently.

Murray beat him in the Masters events but couldn't beat him where it mattered (the slams) until 2013.. Federer's worst year on tour since 2002.

But keep trying to spin the story in a different light. Hewitt owned Federer (lead him 7-2 in the H2H) before Federer hit his peak (not just his 'prime') and beat him more often than not.

Serve&Bash · Sep 14, 2015

HoyaPride said:
I've always considered this a weakness of Federer. I remember Patrick McEnroe making a comment during the 2009 Aussie Final about Federer hitting his forehand well when moving to his right (and noted that he had often struggled with that). Just look at some of the comments in this thread from 2005.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/what-is-the-weakness-of-federer.28194/

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/rogers-weakness-in-his-game.63866/

I don't think moving him about to his right is anything new. He's been vulnerable to that play for a long time.

It wasn't a weakness at all in his prime IMO. Nobody on the tour thought that Federer was slow to cover the court to his forehand side or recover to the center of the court afterwards. There is a reason in his prime, Federer would leave a big chunk of the court open on his forehand side and dare people to hit there so he can get a forehand. It's not much of a big "weakness" if it supposedly came out against massive ball strikers like Safin, Nalbandian and Davydenko. This little strategy "making run out wide to the forehand and then blast a shot into his backhand" works incredibly well against Nadal as well, who has got several classic beatdowns because of it. I have seen Nadal get bludgeoned to the death so many times by guys who are willing to angle him out wide, wait for his loopy little running forehand and then blast it into his backhand corner. Djokovic has and continues to give Nadal a lot of grief with his tactic despite the fact that Nadal is one of the most explosive dudes ever when it comes to running down forehands.

Absolutely no one in tennis moves to their forehand well enough to comfortably handle Safin/Davydenko/Nalbandian caliber groundstrokes; when you hit as early and powerfully as they do, the ball is low, heavy, and hard to whip back the way Nadal/Federer love or loved to in their primes.

HoyaPride · Sep 15, 2015

Serve&Bash said:
It wasn't a weakness at all in his prime IMO. Nobody on the tour thought that Federer was slow to cover the court to his forehand side or recover to the center of the court afterwards. There is a reason in his prime, Federer would leave a big chunk of the court open on his forehand side and dare people to hit there so he can get a forehand.

That's not my recollection at all. We'll just agree to disagree here, and that's fine. Sampras used to camp in his backhand corner in an effort to bait opponents to go to his forehand. Federer almost always repositions to the center of court during rallies.

Serve&Bash said:
It's not much of a big "weakness" if it supposedly came out against massive ball strikers like Safin, Nalbandian and Davydenko.

I wouldn't refer to Davydenko as a "massive" ballstriker. A clean ballstriker, yes.

Weakness is relative. Bernard Tomic can't pull Federer out wide on his FH on a consistent basis. Djokovic and Murray can. It's more or less against the elite tier of guys that this "weakness" can be exposed.

Serve&Bash said:
This little strategy "making run out wide to the forehand and then blast a shot into his backhand" works incredibly well against Nadal as well, who has got several classic beatdowns because of it. I have seen Nadal get bludgeoned to the death so many times by guys who are willing to angle him out wide, wait for his loopy little running forehand and then blast it into his backhand corner. Djokovic has and continues to give Nadal a lot of grief with his tactic despite the fact that Nadal is one of the most explosive dudes ever when it comes to running down forehands.

Okay. But what does Nadal have to do with this? We were discussing Federer's running forehand.

HoyaPride · Sep 15, 2015

Sabratha said:
Murray beat him in the Masters events but couldn't beat him where it mattered (the slams) until 2013.. Federer's worst year on tour since 2002.

But keep trying to spin the story in a different light. Hewitt owned Federer (lead him 7-2 in the H2H) before Federer hit his peak (not just his 'prime') and beat him more often than not.

You guys keep drawing too many ******** distinctions.

Peak vs Non-Peak

Prime vs Non-Prime

Major vs Non-Major

What difference does it make? "Oh, but Murray never beat him in the Majors!" Nobody else is beating Roger Federer that many times anywhere. By the end of Federer's prime (2010), Murray actually had a winning record against him (10-8). Hewitt, on the other hand, lost to Federer 15 consecutive times over a five-year span. It's clear that Murray could bother a "prime" Federer in a way Hewitt never could.

I don't even know what you're arguing at this point. It's like you're trying to argue that Hewitt was just as much a problem for Federer as Murray has been. That's not true if you look at the balance of their overall head-to-head or the matches played during Federer's prime.

Deleted member 307496 · Sep 15, 2015

HoyaPride said:
You guys keep drawing too many ******** distinctions.

Peak vs Non-Peak

Prime vs Non-Prime

Major vs Non-Major

What difference does it make? "Oh, but Murray never beat him in the Majors!" Nobody else is beating Roger Federer that many times anywhere. By the end of Federer's prime (2010), Murray actually had a winning record against him (10-8). Hewitt, on the other hand, lost to Federer 15 consecutive times over a five-year span. It's clear that Murray could bother a "prime" Federer in a way Hewitt never could.

I don't even know what you're arguing at this point. It's like you're trying to argue that Hewitt was just as much a problem for Federer as Murray has been. That's not true if you look at the balance of their overall head-to-head or the matches played during Federer's prime.

2004-2005 Federer >> 2010 Federer.

Stick prime Hewitt into 2010 and he'd also beat Federer occasionally outside majors. It matters nothing.

Bilders · Sep 15, 2015

Serve&Bash said:
You MUST be joking or weren't into tennis back in 2006.

Federer's forehand was absolutely abysmal last night. I am positive Federer never missed easy forehands the way he did last night back in his prime. In fact, Federer was vary that everyone avoided his forehand so whenever he did get a chance to hit a forehand, he made it count. His forehand is still good, but movement effects that shot quite a bit and Federer just seems weak when he forced out wide to the foreahnd.

The Federer forehand of 2005-2006 is the most feared shot in the history of men's tennis.

HoyaPride · Sep 15, 2015

Sabratha said:
2004-2005 Federer >> 2010 Federer.

Stick prime Hewitt into 2010 and he'd also beat Federer occasionally outside majors. It matters nothing.

Better yet, stick prime Hewitt into Federer's prime and watch him lose 15 times in a row.

I mean, is your argument here that Hewitt is a better player than Murray? Is your argument that Hewitt is more of a challenge to Federer than Murray? Or are you just arguing?

Deleted member 307496 · Sep 15, 2015

For the record, Federer played some of his best tennis in 2003 and Hewitt still scored a win over him.

Deleted member 307496 · Sep 15, 2015

HoyaPride said:
Better yet, stick prime Hewitt into Federer's prime and watch him lose 15 times in a row.

I mean, is your argument here that Hewitt is a better player than Murray? Is your argument that Hewitt is more of a challenge to Federer than Murray? Or are you just arguing?

My argument is that Murray really isn't that much more of a challenge than prime Hewitt, it's just that Murray caught Federer towards the end of his prime, while Hewitt met him at his absolute peak.

You really think Murray would touch Federer of 2004-2005 in majors? He'd do about as well as Hewitt did. If you think otherwise you're delusional.. just look at how a 33-34 year old Federer still beats him more often than not.

NatF · Sep 15, 2015

HoyaPride said:
He is serving better. That is the one thing you can prove through data.

1st Serve %:
2015 - 64%
2006 - 63%

1st Serve points won:
2015 - 80%
2006 - 77%

2nd serve points won:
2015 - 58%
2006 - 59%

BPs faced:
2015 - 177
2006 - 399

Service games won:
2015 - 93%
2006 - 90%

Service points won:
2015 - 72%
2006 - 70%

Roger actually faced BPs more frequently in 2006 than he does today. Statistically, the biggest difference between his game then and now is on the return. He won 32% of his return games and converted 43% of BPs in 2006 compared to 27% and 39% in 2015. However, he is winning a higher % of return games this season than he was winning in 2009.

That's was all valid up until you mentioned break points. You do realize Federer played over 30 more matches in 2006 compared to his 2015 to date...

Bilders · Sep 15, 2015

The only thing Hewitt lacked at his best in comparison to Murray is a big serve. Everything else I rate Hewitt as superior. Only Murray's backhand could be comparable.

ABCD · Sep 15, 2015

The beauty of the internet is that it puts on equal footing someone who is expert in the field (like HoyaPride here) with someone who is a lay person and doesn't have a clue. Thus, heated discussions between, as an example, Boris Becker and a teenager/pensioner who plays recreationally are quite interesting prospect that could never happen in real live.

HoyaPride · Sep 15, 2015

Sabratha said:
My argument is that Murray really isn't that much more of a challenge than prime Hewitt, it's just that Murray caught Federer towards the end of his prime, while Hewitt met him at his absolute peak.

Lleyton Hewitt went six years without a victory over Roger Federer. Between January 2004 and January 2010, Hewitt lost to Roger Federer 15 times in a row. Murray scored 8 victories over Federer between 2005 and 2010 (including a victory over Federer at "his absolute peak" in 2006). I don't see how Hewitt is roughly the same challenge to Federer that Murray is when Murray beat "peak" Federer, which Hewitt was never able to do, and also beat him consistently at a time when Federer was No. 1 and winning Majors.

Sabratha said:
You really think Murray would touch Federer of 2004-2005 in majors? He'd do about as well as Hewitt did. If you don't think otherwise you're delusional.. just look at how a 33-34 year old Federer still beats him more often than not.

That's because 33-34 Federer is really good. That or Murray is far, far worse than he was back then.

icedevil0289 · Sep 15, 2015

I don;t know why it is so hard for some people to admit that some things have declined and somethings have improved. His fh/stamina/movement etc and ground game have all declined while serve/net play and overall tactics have improved. He is playing smarter in most cases, but a lot of the things that have helped him win the slams back in the day have declined and I don't know why that is so hard to admit. This is not ****ing rocket science. Most players naturally decline with age/mileage etc

HoyaPride · Sep 15, 2015

ABCD said:
The beauty of the internet is that it puts on equal footing someone who is expert in the field (like HoyaPride here) with someone who is a lay person and doesn't have a clue. Thus, heated discussions between, as an example, Boris Becker and a teenager/pensioner who plays recreationally are quite interesting prospect that could never happen in real live.

Funny.

ABCD · Sep 15, 2015

HoyaPride said:
Funny.

I am positive that there are people here that never touched a racket and yet commenting with great confidence and authority.

Deleted member 307496 · Sep 15, 2015

HoyaPride said:
Lleyton Hewitt went six years without a victory over Roger Federer. Between January 2004 and January 2010, Hewitt lost to Roger Federer 15 times in a row. Murray scored 8 victories over Federer between 2005 and 2010 (including a victory over Federer at "his absolute peak" in 2006). I don't see Hewitt is roughly the same challenge to Federer that Murray is when Murray beat "peak" Federer, which Hewitt was never able to do, and also beat him consistently at a time when Federer was No. 1 and winning Majors.
Hewitt had 4 surgeries in that timeframe. Prime Hewitt didn't even exist post 2005.

HoyaPride said:

That's because 33-34 Federer is really good. That or Murray is far, far worse than he was back then.

Click to expand...

Some would say Murray is better now.. And Federer's certainly declined even from 2012..

Novak admits that Roger is playing the best tennis of his career

Professional

Professional

Legend

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Legend

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Legend

Hall of Fame

Professional

Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Legend

Legend

Professional

Professional

Legend

Hall of Fame

Professional

Deleted member 307496

Guest

Hall of Fame

Professional

Professional

Hall of Fame

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Legend

Professional

Deleted member 307496

Guest

Semi-Pro

Professional

Professional

Deleted member 307496

Guest

Semi-Pro

Professional

Deleted member 307496

Guest

Deleted member 307496

Guest

Bionic Poster

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Hall of Fame

Deleted member 307496

Guest

Similar threads