Federer won't lift another Slam trophy, claims Toni Nadal

[jm1980]

Bald prediction: if Fed doesn't win a Slam next year he will retire

 

[OhYes]

Tsk tsk! Suresh knew this way back in 2009

Should I dare to ask how did you "remember" this ?

 

[junior74]

Should I dare to ask how did you "remember" this ?

You may. A quick search, just for fun. And to remind us all that we never know. But I think you're right this time, or at the very least; you're probably more right than Suresh Allmighty was back in 2009

 

[NatF]

I doubt sport was watching tennis back then

By default on here I assume most haven't watched a single point of tennis.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Fedr will never lift one of his 20 GS trophies.

That's what his butler is for.

 

[clayqueen]

Fedr's friends at Tennis Australia like Craig Tilley will give him all the help they can to smooth his path to lifting the 2019 trophy.

 

[cluckcluck]

Didn't Toni say this in 2010, 2013, 2015, and 2016?

 

[True Fanerer]

Fedr's friends at Tennis Australia like Craig Tilley will give him all the help they can to smooth his path to lifting the 2019 trophy.

 

[clayqueen]

Bald prediction: if Fed doesn't win a Slam next year he will retire

Since 2008 it's been slim pickings for Fedr as far as slams go. It's normal for him not to win any slam in a season.


Fedr's most fruitful period was before the advent of Rafa and Djoker

 

[True Fanerer]

Since 2008 so it's been slim pickings for Fedr as far as slams go. It's normal for him not to win any slam in a season.


Fedr's most fruitful period was before the advent of Rafa and Djoker

Too bad you couldn't hide those two little green slivers on the far right LOL. Oh you edited it

 

[clayqueen]

Fedr's early years were a disaster in slams

 

[Sport]

lol

According to TA, Federer approached the net 98 times, Sampras 122 times and of those 88 for Federer were S&V (48.6% of all serves) versus 112 for Sampras (61.9% of all serves). Now the actual number of approaches is probably far higher than this because generally approaches behind an unreturned serve or ace aren't counted as net approaches, as it happens Federer had slightly more aces and unreturned serves than Sampras. Federer won 65 of his 190 points in the match at net e.g. 34%, Sampras 69 of 180 e.g. 38%. When you factor in unreturned serves it seems unlikely that Federer won significantly more points from the baseline than at the net - if at all.

So both guys attacked the net a lot in that match, yes Federer returned and played better from the baseline but he also blended in great attacking net play as well. Federer did indeed win that match playing S&V, obviously he didn't play S&V on return which I shouldn't need to spell out for you.

Your break down of the last point is another lol moment, Federer hit a superb return winner off a Sampras first serve (his 12th), Sampras himself hit 8 return winners. The crux of the match was that Federer was a better athlete and shotmaker in that match, but to deny that Federer was attacking the net a lot and using a lot of S&V is downright absurd. Often times in the 90's what separated Sampras from the other big servers was his ability to connect with returns and pass - Federer beat him at his own game, he backed up his serve with great play at the net and then separated himself on the return.

See? I was right. As you mention in your message, Federer approached the net in 48% of his serves, while Sampras approached the net in 61% of his serves. That is to say, Federer did not approach the net in more than half of the serves. So he played a bit more from the baseline than from the net. And Sampras approached the net significantly more than Federer, as I correctly said. Federer won because of his returns in the form of passing shots. The last point summarize what I said: Sampras served a second serve and approached the net like a crazy, giving Federer a giant space to make an easy passing shot. That match should have been called "The death of serve and volley". It proved that approaching the net in the mayority of your serves is not the best strategy.

 

[Otacon]

Clayqueen at the moment

 

[NatF]

See? I was right. As you mention in your message, Federer approached the net in 48% of his serves, while Sampras approached the net in 61% of his serves. That is to way, in more than half of his serves, Federer did not approach the net. So he played a bit more from the baseline than from the net. And Sampras approached the net more than Federer, as I correctly said. Federer won because of his returns in the form of passing shots. The last point summarize what I said: Sampras served a second serve and approached the net like a crazy, giving Federer a giant space to make an easy passing shot. That match should have been called "The death of serve and volley". It proved that approaching the net in the mayority of your serves is not the best strategy.

No, you were wrong. As I pointed out and @AnOctorokForDinner pointed out, nearly all the first serves that weren't counted as net approaches were unreturned. Federer was coming forward on virtually every first serve and about 45% or so of his second serves. As far as it being the depth of S&V Federer lost to Henman in the next round a S&V player and two S&V players contested the final - with the best baseliner of the last decade losing in the SF.

Cherry picking just the first line of my reply so that you can try and form an argument is probably better than your usual strategy of ducking it completely, but it's no less embarrassing.

Also it was a first serve not a second on the match point...

 

[clout]

It'll be VERY tough for him to win another slam although I'm pretty sure he'll win a BO3 tourney or two such as Basel, Halle or Dubai.

If he can actually win another major next year, that'd be absolutely incredible given his age

 

[BGod]

Well when you look at it most recently you've got QF-W-QF-R16. When you look at it after his 2010 Aussie Open Title, Federer has won 4 of 31 Slams played. So I mean really, it's about a 13% chance overall but I guess if you're just concentrating on AO & WB it's closer to 40%?

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Fedr will never lift one of his 20 GS trophies.

That's what his butler is for.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Clayqueen at the moment

Love it.

 

[Subway Tennis]

Didn't Toni say this in 2010, 2013, 2015, and 2016?

Where did you read him saying that before? I always thought he was inclined to flatter Federer (and Djokovic) in the past, always talking about how skillful he was?

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Where did you read him saying that before? I always thought he was inclined to flatter Federer (and Djokovic) in the past, always talking about how skillful he was?

He have said similar things in the past.

Tio is the master of the puppet.

 

[maratha_warrior]

Fedr's friends at Tennis Australia like Craig Tilley will give him all the help they can to smooth his path to lifting the 2019 trophy.

What if djokovic decides to troll Craig Tilley and reaches the Final?

 

[Subway Tennis]

He have said similar things in the past.

Tio is the master of the puppet.

Do you have any citations? Not disbelieving you, but would like to read it. Or are they not in print, and instead from TV/radio/broadcast.

My fear is that he has been misquoted in one of these online blogs like tennisworld but i dont know enough about it.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Do you have any citations? Not disbelieving you, but would like to read it. Or are they not in print, and instead from TV/radio/broadcast.

My fear is that he has been misquoted in one of these online blogs like tennisworld but i dont know enough about it.

I don't bother with recording such minutiae, because it is unnecessary for my purposes work, but I am sure that it will not be extremely difficult to find quotes from Tio, where he compliments Nadal's rivals, just to put Nadal above them in the next paragraph, or, if that suits his agenda, to put one of Nadal's rivals over the other depending on the current status quo.


That is why, often, when Nadal is beaten by either, he touts their result as massive achievement, only to say afterwards that this or that was a problem for the real Nadal to make an appearance, or when for example Djokovic has taken over the tennis yet again, to take the view that it is him, who is the best player he has ever seen (but only after an "unlucky" Nadal, of course), despite of the blatant ridiculousness of the statement, when he doesn't even bother to point out at his criteria for this, etc., etc..

The repertoire is really big, but the purpose is always the same, prop up Nadal, put down his opponents by either taking the side of the stronger at the moment over the other, or engaging in hypotheticals of "what might have been" with Nadal against them.

 

[Sentinel]

"I’m not sure what we can expect from 2019, but it seems difficult for us to see Federer lifting another Grand Slam trophy,” Toni Nadal wrote in his weekly column for El Pais.
“I have to confess, though, that I have said this on other occasions about him and he has repeatedly surprised me.”

Nothing to write home about.

Seems a very reasonable thing to say, although nothing new as you say/

However the OP has made it quite negative resulting in people mocking poor old Toni. I actually have begun to respect Toni quite a bit.

 

[Subway Tennis]

I don't bother with recording such minutiae, because it is unnecessary for my purposes work, but I am sure that it will not be extremely difficult to find quotes from Tio, where he compliments Nadal's rivals, just to put Nadal above them in the next paragraph, or, if that suits his agenda, to put one of Nadal's rivals over the other depending on the current status quo.


That is why, often, when Nadal is beaten by either, he touts their result as massive achievement, only to say afterwards that this or that was a problem for the real Nadal to make an appearance, or when for example Djokovic has taken over the tennis yet again, to take the view that it is him, who is the best player he has ever seen (but only after an "unlucky" Nadal, of course), despite of the blatant ridiculousness of the statement, when he doesn't even bother to point out at his criteria for this, etc., etc..

The repertoire is really big, but the purpose is always the same, prop up Nadal, put down his opponents by either taking the side of the stronger at the moment over the other, or engaging in hypotheticals of "what might have been" with Nadal against them.

Sounds almost a little bit like the champion's mantra: "when you are at your weakest, pretend you are at your strongest" and vice versa. A form of mental warfare and obfuscation.

Have you seen any of the training programs that Toni has been producing online? A lot of tactical discussions but more on court based play patterns and strategy.

 

[Angelito Tan]

so much hypocrisy from the nadal camp, when all he is - is a clay court master. They had to convince tennis officials to slow down the hard court and grass court for the unsportsmanlike nadal to win anything outside clay. Every time nadal loses theres ALWAYS EXCUSES of INJURIES.

 

[Rhino]

I've been hearing this from one person or another for a decade now.

 

[justasport]

I've been hearing this from one person or another for a decade now.

THEY NEVER LEARN! THIS IS ROGER FEDERER WE ARE TALKING ABOUT!

 

[Fedforever]

Yeah you sure didn't learn from history. One more crow Toni....then you will keep your filthy mouth shut forever. But don't stop....keep praying

This guy is just so much more dislikeable than his nephew. What business is it of his what Federer does?

He's a bit obsessed to be honest.

 

[clayqueen]

THEY NEVER LEARN! THIS IS ROGER FEDERER WE ARE TALKING ABOUT!

Yes, the same Roger Federer who has to have his path smoothed to win titles by cushy draws, preferential scheduling, closed roof in bright sunshine, etc. etc. etc.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Yes, the same Roger Federer who has to have his path smoothed to win titles by cushy draws, preferential scheduling, closed roof in bright sunshine, etc. etc. etc.

 

[smash hit]

Toni thinks this would some how demoralize Fed. It could be the opposite. Who knows his nephew could win nothing in 2019. Should be worried about that rather than predicting Fed's future.....

He didn't exclude his nephew from his answer to a question.

This is what he actually said, in Spanish and with a google translation.

Ha confesado esta semana en un artículo de opinión que ve difícil que Roger Federer vuelva a levantar un Grand Slam. ¿Sostiene esa postura?

- Yo decía, con todo mi respeto, que llega un momento en que será difícil que con 38 años pueda ganar un torneo con partidos a cinco sets. Alguna opción tendrá en Wimbledon, pero cada año que pasa me parece más difícil. Lo mismo que me pasa con Rafael.

- El duelo entre Rafa y Roger alcanza los 48 partidos, pero en 2018 por segunda vez en 15 años no se han visto las caras sobre la pista. ¿Ese duelo ya pertenece a la historia?

- ****e o temprano se va a dar esa posibilidad de que dejen de enfrentarse. Antes a las grandes finales llegaban casi siempre Roger, Novak y Rafael, pero una vez que se abre el abanico de candidatos es más fácil que alguno de ellos falle. Es ley de vida, supongo que se dará algún enfrentamiento más pero cada año será más difícil.

He confessed this week in an opinion piece that sees it difficult for Roger Federer to lift a Grand Slam again. Do you hold that position?

- I said, with all my respect, that there comes a time when it will be difficult for the 38-year-old to win a tournament with five-set matches. Some option will have in Wimbledon, but every year that passes seems more difficult. The same thing that happens with Rafael.

- The duel between Rafa and Roger reaches 48 matches, but in 2018 for the second time in 15 years they have not seen the faces on the track. Does that duel already belong to history?

- Sooner or later they will give themselves that possibility to stop confronting each other. Before the great finals almost always Roger, Novak and Rafael, but once the range of candidates is open it is easier for one of them to fail. It is a law of life, I suppose there will be some more confrontation but every year it will be more difficult.