Federer was playing better in 2008

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by roysid, Sep 24, 2009.

?

Federer played better in 2008 or 2009

Poll closed Oct 24, 2009.
  1. 2008

    19 vote(s)
    16.1%
  2. 2009

    99 vote(s)
    83.9%
  1. Carsomyr

    Carsomyr Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,210
    Location:
    Winesburg, Ohio
    It's probably about the same. In both years, he relied pretty heavily on his "B" game to coast to victories rather than play his best tennis. However, since he lost some weight this year, his movement for the most part looks to be a little better. I think his Cincinnati performance was the best he's played either year and was reminiscent of his 2004-2006 stretch.
     
    #51
  2. Iron Man

    Iron Man Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    231
    of course this year is much better than last year for Federer
    especially in the second half
     
    #52
  3. mandy01

    mandy01 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    11,518
    For one,he's on a scary streak and its going to end at some point .This year he got out of a lot of matches he was very very close to losing.I'm not saying he'll fall off the radar...but we could be in for an early loss in a GS or two next year. And I'm talking of 'big' drop by Roger's standards..I know Roger is hard to beat in a best of five match but he can very much lose on a bad day.
     
    #53
  4. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    Let's quantify this Roger had a crap hard court season, and went on straight losing streaks, cried at the AO to a player that can even play on hardcourts, gained FO title by default, almost lost to "ANDY RODDICK!!!" at Wim., Tsonga kicked his @$$ and then when on to mentally crumble and be out played by a 20 years old with little experience at the USO especially in a final.


    2009 sounds a lot worse than 2008, consider that if Nadal was out early in the FO and did not play Wim in 2008 Roger would have 3 titles.
     
    #54
  5. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    Show me the # of losses from 2009 vs 2008, show me that he cried in 2008, if not for absent Nadal Roger would have 0 titles this year.


    "Thank god the hardcourt season is over." ?
     
    #55
  6. akv89

    akv89 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,587
    Well 2009 certainly didn't start off very well, but it was clear to see the quality of his movement increase mid season.

    If you insist, Roger's record during 2008 was 66-15(81%). This includes losses to Mardy Fish, Radek Stepanek (on clay), and Ivo Karlovic. Not to mention he also came dangerously close to losing to guys like Ruben Ramirez Hidalgo and Robby Ginepri.

    In comparison, his record in 2009 is currently at 55-8 (87%). Significantly better overall than 2008.
     
    #56
  7. SuperDuy

    SuperDuy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    2,518
    My opinion he played best in 2005/2006, i was wathcing old tape and every shot is a winner in the corners. plus he hit way harder.
     
    #57
  8. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,356

    And he had a fantastic HC season last year, right?


    And he was a worldbeater on HC in 2008.

    Mmm hm.
    Ok then, Nadal gained the Wimby and AO title by default. There you go.

    Guy sucks on grass, we get it.

    6-2 6-3 6-2

    6-2 6-2 6-2
    Sure it does.

    Considered.
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2009
    #58
  9. Baikalic

    Baikalic Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    748
    to clarify, who is this you're quoting? Sorry lazy to look back on the thread.
     
    #59
  10. mandy01

    mandy01 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    11,518
    yeah..and if not for a mono Fed,darkness( since every individual reacts differently to light),etc etc..just throw in any excuse.... Nadal would not have a Wimbledon.
    And if not for Roger's bad back,pressure etc wtc...just throw in any excuses-Nadal would never have the Australian Open.
    Man..Deluded.Deluded.Deluded.Thats the word for you *******s.
     
    #60
  11. Steve132

    Steve132 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    840
    \

    You have simply regurgitated your earlier post without addressing any of the issues that I identified. Since The Fifth Set has already dissected your arguments, I'll just focus on one of your claims. Federer did not win the French Open "by default." He was one of 128 men entered in the tournament, and won by winning seven consecutive matches - just as all other winners of majors have done since 128 man draws became standard. If you can't see this you're either blinded by hatred or simply don't know much about tennis.
     
    #61
  12. David L

    David L Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,581
    Location:
    London
    Federer is playing better this year. I posted the comments below in another thread, but they are relevant here also.

     
    #62
  13. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    Don't be a fool, only reason Roger won was because Nadal was not there. Fact is that is the only way Roger was ever going to win the FO.

    As for being blind you must be the blind one as Roger never has and never will defeat Nadal at the FO end of story.
     
    #63
  14. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    There is no logic here, in 2008 Roger did not lose as many sets in the FO as in 2009. When is the last time Roger dropped 2 sets to two people at the FO?

    For Andy Roddick to be able to push Roger that hard at Wim is plain sad, Grass is Roger's best surface end of story.

    Someone needs to pull up the amount of unforced errors, serve percentage etc etc and average them for 2009 and 2008.

    That will tell us which year was better, at the very best they are the same.

    Roger did just as well with wins etc as in 2008, only thing was different was that he did not have to play Nadal at the FO and since Roger is the #2 best clay courter he won.
     
    #64
  15. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,211
    Ony a fool who believe rafa wasn't at the FO. Fact was he played insane tennis during the early round at the FO and people were already crowned him as 2009 RG champion. It had to take Soderling to play out of his mind to beat him. If you don't believe upset can happen in any sport, then open your eyes.

    TMF will never beat rafa at the FO? Do you have a crystal ball. If you don't then save your idiotic opinion to yourself. The only know FACT is Soderling beat Rafa at the FO and he end up losing to TMF in the final. End of story.
     
    #65
  16. mandy01

    mandy01 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    11,518
    There was no logic in your post either..I just wrote my post based on your own logic.
    If Roger dropped two sets to two people at the FO no one gives a damn..I've seen both those matches and Roger was NOT playing bad at all.Infact he was playing much much better than last year only under far more pressure and thats true.
    FYI-Roger did not drop a single point on his serve in the first set against Haas..he just played a poor tiebreak.He wasnt playing bad.And Haas himself was playing very well.
    And against Del Po-Youd be crazy not to admit the guy was playing out of his mind.
    And Roger played MUCH worse in 2008..his movement was just plain bad.This year he's been far more aggressive with his tennis.Last year he was content with baseline rallies and he was moving just bad.He lost to a number of guys he had ridiculous records against.
    He's regrouped very well this year.And Nadal simply couldnt keep up his level.Deal with it.
    And for Andy Roddick to be able to push Roger is not sad at all.Like I said you *******s are just a deluded lot who think only Nadal is capable of giving Roger troubles.Roger is a horrible match-up for Andy but only someone blind will not appreciate the kind of work the guy put in , in that match.And this was with Roger playing much better from the start as compared to last year.
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2009
    #66
  17. David L

    David L Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,581
    Location:
    London
    Firstly, Nadal was at the French Open. Secondly, Nadal is only one player. He is not bigger than the sport of tennis or the combined total of every other player. The fact that he got knocked out in the 4th Round did not help any of the other 126 competitors win the title, so why should we consider it did for Federer? The fact is that Nadal could not make it to the last hurdle because he was beaten by quality opposition. The same opposition Federer had to overcome, with incredible pressure I might add.

    Never say never, because it might come back to bite you.
     
    #67
  18. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    http://www.tenniscorner.net/index.php?corner=m&action=matchstats&playerid=FER001

    Here are the facts


    66-15 (playing 18 more than 2009)
    2008 @slams Roger losing 15 sets, wins 1 slam
    AO 4 sets lost (defeated)*Out early in semis*
    FO 6 sets lost (defeated)
    W. 2 sets lost (defeated) *only in finals to Nadal*
    US.3 sets lost (winner) *absolutely crushed everyone, murray, etc*

    55-8 (losing to all the people he crushed the previous year)
    2009 @slams Roger losing 16 sets, wins 2 slam (FO being a gimme)
    AO 3 sets lost (defeated)*Nadal of all people*
    FO 5 sets lost (winner) *Nadal knocked out early and still only lost 1 less*
    W. 3 sets lost (winner) *Lost more sets even though he is the winner?*
    US.4 sets lost (defeated) *Oddly losing to Delpo who he crushed many times*


    I find it odd that Roger is playing more the year he is sick and injured, and less the year that he is fine?

    If Nadal had made it to the finals the contrast would be even greater. So I ask you did Roger have a "great" year at all and if so was it because he won the FO alone? What would be the odds of Roger beating an unhealthy Nadal at the FO? Were Roger's sats raised in 2009 because of Nadal's absence?

    IMO if not for Nadal being out this year would have been a tragedy for Roger, but even with good fortune on Roger's side he still had a worse year than when he was supposedly sick and injured.
     
    #68
  19. David L

    David L Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,581
    Location:
    London
    So what? Federer lost many more sets in the 2006 Australian Open than he did in 2007, where he never dropped one, yet many think of 2006 as his best year. Have you considered the fact that maybe his opponents where playing excellent tennis, with the added advantage of having to play with considerably less pressure. Dropping sets does not necessarily mean you played worse or are worse as a player. It just means you dropped some sets, for whatever reason.

    Also, Wimbledon 09 was not the first time Roddick has had a close match with Federer. Many times he has been able to win sets and get to tie-breaks. He is a former No.1 after all, as well as a multiple Slam finalist, with wins over Federer, Sampras, Agassi, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and many other quality players.

    In addition to quotes I posted above, here's another voice from someone who knows a thing or two about tennis.

     
    #69
  20. Cesc Fabregas

    Cesc Fabregas Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    8,318
    Theres not much difference between 08 Federer and 09, in the French Open this year he dropped more sets up and till the final than last year and at Wimbledon he dropped a few sets up and till the final last year he dropped none, the difference is last year he played the great Nadal in both finals and this year he has played his pidgeons Soderling and Roddick.
     
    #70
  21. David L

    David L Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,581
    Location:
    London
    Did Nadal in 2008 benefit from Federer's illness, subsequent loss of fitness/preparation and back problems? Works both ways.
     
    #71
  22. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    See that is what I am saying, Roger did not paly any worse. Since he won the FO people want to pretend like it was an amazing year or something, don't get me wrong it is an amazing mile stone but he did not play better tennis in 2009 than in 2008.

    The thing that gets me is that Roger was supposed to be injured and sick in 2008, the stats say otherwise with a man playing much more and not losing much more than the next year he is fine, what is with that?
     
    #72
  23. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    Take a look at what I am saying, I contend that Roger was just fine in 2008 and that is why there is not much of a difference between 2008 and 2009.

    As for Nadal if 2010 ends up same as 2009 then I say he is full of BS also. I don't see Roger being ill and palying better in Wim 2008 than wim 2009, how the heck does that work??? 2008 and 2009 wim were the exact same scinerio except it went the other way this time.

    Listen if you are sick you aren't able to play more, you play less and have to withdraw a heck of a lot of tournaments, further more you don't make it to all these finals in slams.

    How does a sick injured man playmore and make it to all the slam finals, and then blame losing ont he sickness when they paly the same way the year they are of good health????
     
    #73
  24. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,916
    Location:
    U.S
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2009
    #74
  25. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,916
    Location:
    U.S
    He has had problems this year too - back problems. Now do some more research before coming up with such statements that he has been of "good health" throughout the year

    BTW as has already been stated by someone before in this very thread, he had ZERO losses to players outside the top 20 last year, he had SEVERAL last year.

    And for those who can see properly, he is moving clearly better this year than last year

    One thing I can agree on is he was playing very well in wimbledon both years.

    As for the bold part, the difference is VERY clearly illustrated in the previous post
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2009
    #75
  26. David L

    David L Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,581
    Location:
    London
    Well sorry, I'm afraid you're wrong. The effect of Federer's illness, not only on his health, but also on how well prepared and fit he was able to be in 2008, is well documented. After missing out on training blocks in December 07 and February 08, he was playing catch-up all year with his fitness and form and said so at the US Open last year. His trainer, Pierre Paganini, has given a detailed account about the havoc mono created for his game in 08. You can choose to ignore this, but these are the facts. Sure he was still able to play once the acute symptoms had passed, but he was nowhere near as fit, prepared, confident or effective as he would have been throughout 2008 had he not contracted glandular fever in the first place, not to mention the stomach bug in Australia and the back problem. All of this is part of sport however. I doubt there is any player, let alone Federer and Nadal, who go through an entire year in perfect health with no setbacks or niggling ailments. We just don't hear so much about them.

    Federer had his biggest health problems in 2008 and Nadal in 2009, and either can be said to have benefited from the other. The slight difference with Nadal is that his success depends on him running himself into the ground. He is not adequately equipt to win and remain physically okay for long stretches of time, so this is really a limitation in his game, not bad luck. I doubt 2009 will be the last time Nadal has some sort of physical problem which makes him pull out of an event.
     
    #76
  27. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York


    That is quite undeniable. There is absolutely no way Fed would have beaten Rafa in a best of 5 on clay (it's already eminently debatable whether he could beat Rafa in a best of 5 on other surfaces, much less on clay)
     
    #77
  28. VivalaVida

    VivalaVida Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,958
    He didnt have to. Nadal got his teeth kicked in by Soderling in 4 Sets.
     
    #78
  29. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York
    IMO, no. The only one that benefited is Djoko. I will give you the fact that Fed was below his usual level for 2008's first 3 months. He was fine during the clay season though (made tons of finals) and better than fine during the grass season (won Halle with the best stats ever). Rafa beat him in both slams fair and square. The back injury didn't happen until fall 2008 so I don't see any way it could have affected Fed's play several months beforehand!
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2009
    #79
  30. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York
    Undeniable as well :) but then again it's also undeniable that Rafa was injured during that match (took him more than 2 months off the tour to fix his knees...)
     
    #80
  31. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,916
    Location:
    U.S
    The only tiny little flaw in this argument is that if fed was better during AO, he may have won it , probably wouldn't have the string of losses in the HC season , confidence would be higher etc etc .... you can extend it ..so djoko wasn't the only one benefitting
     
    #81
  32. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York

    I don't believe that for a second. Given the shape Rafa was in at RG, he would have beaten Fed in the final of RG in straights no matter what (maybe Fed would have doubled his # of games won :twisted:) but Rafa would have arrived at W with the same high confidence.
     
    #82
  33. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,211
    Sure! If if helps you sleep well at night.
     
    #83
  34. grafselesfan

    grafselesfan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,594
    Federer was playing awful at the 2008 French. To me it really exposed how weak the clay court field today is that he even made the final playing that poorly.
     
    #84
  35. shabby

    shabby Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    168
    Not a chance, Nadal's fitness is what won him the match.
     
    #85
  36. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,916
    Location:
    U.S
    I don't doubt rafa would've beaten fed at the FO, , but if fed was more confident wimbledon would be a tossup and perhaps tougher for rafa to win...
     
    #86
  37. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,916
    Location:
    U.S
    eh, I was talking about AO 2008 SF vs novak there
     
    #87
  38. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,211
    In addtion, failed to make the final robbed Roger from improving his h2h record.
     
    #88
  39. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York
    Why would it?
    Let's see what happens in 2010 if Rafa and Fed get to meet in a slam...
     
    #89
  40. shabby

    shabby Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    168
    Oh, sorry. Regardless, I don't actually believe in this Mono garbage. But that's just me and the thousands of other bright folks.
     
    #90
  41. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,916
    Location:
    U.S
    Correct >> rafa is dominating over a very weak CC field. Next please !
     
    #91
  42. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York
    + Nadal never lost to Fed in straight sets at W, pushed him to 5 sets twice.
    At RG, Fed never pushed Nadal to a 5th and managed to win only 4 games last time they met there.
    Sorry but no comparison between the 2.
     
    #92
  43. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,916
    Location:
    U.S
    Fine, then please explain then why did he skip doha ( he was defending champion there ) and kooyong ( exhibition series ) and come into aussie open without any match practice ? He did say he skipped them because he was sick . And this was before his SF loss to novak.
     
    #93
  44. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,211
    There wasn't any talk about his injury, tired, gas out, or anything what so ever after he domolished Hewitt. Did anyone ever doubt that rafa wouldn't be able to defend his title? No.

    The injury excuse flooded every tennis boards after Soderling beat him.
     
    #94
  45. shabby

    shabby Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    168
    How could someone with a fever reach a slam semi final?

    I'll let you think you think about that.
     
    #95
  46. grafselesfan

    grafselesfan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,594
    It benefits Roger more than Nadal though since Nadal is good enough to dominate and do outstandingly even vs a very tough clay field. Sure he might lose a few more matches over the years or have a bit more struggle at the French, but he would still win many French Opens and be capable of being quite dominant. Federer on the other hand is not a true top notch clay courter, even when playing his best as opposed to the very subpar tennis he played at the 2008 (and before the final even 2009) French Opens, so he would not do nearly as well vs a deeper clay court field than the current one. His somehow making the final in 2008 despite playing some of his worst tennis ever was proof of just how weak the current clay court field is. Yeah Rafa may benefit a bit but not much as he is so great on clay he would do extremely well vs even a much tougher clay court field.
     
    #96
  47. David L

    David L Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,581
    Location:
    London
    In a Wimbledon interview on the Tennis Channel this year (it will be on their site), Federer mentioned how losing a slight edge may not affect you against the lower ranked players, but will make a difference at the very top, alluding to 2008. Even as late as the US Open last year, Pierre Paganini, just prior, talked about how Federer's game was still affected by the setbacks experienced at the start of the year. Federer himself also mentioned in his 08 USO interviews how he had been playing catch-up all year, so he was affected throughout the year, despite putting in some good performances.

    The difference between success and failure at the top can be so small, that the most subtle of changes can have huge implications on outcomes. We will not know what might have happened, but Federer was undoubtedly adversely affected throughout 08 by the setbacks he experienced at the start of the year. The guy is human, not an automaton. Being healthy, fit and possibly winning the Australian Open and one or two tournaments early last year could have changed the whole complexion of the year and who was ranked where at the end of it. I know Federer had to put in a lot of physical training during Indian Wells, Miami and the clay season when he would normally use this time to rest. The guy was knackered, but had to catch up with his fitness. He did very well to do as well as he did last year. Courier also made the point that in many ways 2008 could be considered Federer's most impressive year, given the circumstances.
     
    #97
  48. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,916
    Location:
    U.S
    1. That doesn't answer my question , does it ?

    2. If you'd read about mono, you'd come to know the answer to your question .
     
    #98
  49. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,211
    hmm.....could it be he's just much better than other players, despite being sick?

    Remember Jordan had a terrible flu in 1997 playing against the Jazz, but still dominate the game and led his team to victory.
     
    #99
  50. shabby

    shabby Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    168
    1. You have not answered my LOGICAL question.

    2. If you have mono, you are in bed and DEFINITELY not playing any sports.

    3. I've come across this excuse before, you won't fool anyone who has a brain.
     

Share This Page