Discussion in 'Pro Match Results and Discussion' started by SQA333, Nov 11, 2012.
Put the ball in the court until he misses.
yesss, it worked 11 our of 81 times this season
I think that's why Federer is so popular. He is relatable to us club players who spend thousands on expensive lessons, top of the line racquets, the latest string technology, and the coolest looking designer polo from Nike, yet lose to some get-the-ball-back-in-play-**** with his Wal-Mart racquet and Goodwill getup. Like us, Federer's biggest struggles come against pushers. Like us, he loves playing big hitters and shotmakers. He hates losing to get-the-ball-back-in-play-tards as much as we do. He feels our pain, and we feel his.
Yes you also know the thrill of winning 17 grand slams!
I know the thrill of winning 36.
Or winning, no scratch that, playing a pro level match.
Best post of the year.
oops........ He has a winning record against the big 4 this year. Damn.
You evidently missed that 22 stroke rally.
BTW, instead of "misses" you mean shanks/dumps backhand into net.
That was an outlier.
Federer hates playing the big hitters these days.
He was getting bullied around all first set long...once he climbed back into that one and won it, he turned it around.
since when did Murray become a big hitter??
Uh, since he hit the world record forehand and can hit 100+ MPH on the backhand and Lendl told him to start using his unbelievable power?
Maybe you should try that. See how far you get with that plan.
Fed beats himself up imo. The other guy needs to bring it though.
We will see this tomorrow. 8)
Yup. Although his mind really doesn't match his power. I've never seen a counterpuncher/defensive-minded player hit the ball that hard off the ground.
Also, his first serve was as sizzling this week as I've ever seen it. What was his MPH average this match, anybody know? I'd venture to say it was in the high 120's range.
Like 128 or something lol he hit a 136 today
I don't get this. So, is a first set six games now? Or what? I really don't understand this sentence, because it's so contradictory it's not even funny.
hehehe nice 1
Try this sequence:
1. Bend both knees and rest them on the ground
2. Place your hands in a palm-to-palm-position
3. Look skyward.
4. Silently or very quietly, oath these words..."Our Father who art in heaven..."
5. Repeat steps 1-4 on every changeover
Nah, that doesn't work either.
Nadal tried that and look what happened to his knees.
It only has, at best, a 1 in 7 or so success ratio. As for Rafa, take some Advil, rub some Ben-Gay on la rodilla and play ball!
He is one of the big 4. I sure hope he has a winning record against himself
Overall, he has a losing record vs 2 of the top 3, nothing to brag about.
It depends at which event. At WTF, granted, it's hard. In other events, not so much. He hasn't won USO since 2008 for instance. That means someone has found a way to beat him 4 years in a row. He's also never won Rome. He's not that hard to beat sometimes.
His only bad record is Nadal. Given his age, his records against much younger guys is pretty good. A lot better than Sampras did against Hewitt and Safin, and he didnt even play on that long. It's amazing how Fed is still making things competitive with Rafa, Andy and Novak
There are almost 10 years difference between Sampras and Hewitt/Safin. Only 5 between Rafa and Fed. Big difference.
Not vs Murray in slams. The fact that Federer at 31 is defeating any of these players such as Nadal, Murray and Djokovic speaks to how talented Federer is. Now you don't have to like him but you can't deny his greatness as a player and what he has accomplished.
Where is Nadal by the way? His "comeback" has been delayed once again I understand. More gym time and no court time.
I acknowledged his record with Nadal, no? It's 7 years with Nole and Andy?
When Safin beat Sampras for the first time, he was 20 y o.
When Nadal beat Federer for the first time, he was 18 y o.
So, in reality, it counts, when the respective younger players managed to get their first win (if the results that followed were consistent, and they were).
So substract 2 years from that 10 years age gap ..... which is actually 9.
We come to the pretty figure of 7 years vs. 5 for Federer vs. Nadal.
Not bad for an old man.
The age difference remains the same, no matter when they play. It's not like this year, we're gonna have 5 years and next year 6 lol. 18 or 20, the point is Sampras was older than Fed when he got beat by Safin and the age difference was greater. Fed was not even at the end of his prime when he got beaten by Nadal, he was at the beginning of it, so age was not an excuse one bit.
no, but his left hand is excuse enough
The age is not the only variable, that comes into play, when you look up such results. Some players are early bloomers, and present the same danger much earlier, thus extending the age gap. Nadal reap the fruits of being an early bloomer, but his fans will have to put up with the fact, that it also has negatives in such comparisons.
The age difference was greater, but it was not 5 vs. 10 years. (not to mention, that de facto it was 9)
Where is Mustard, when you need him?
Be Novak Djokovic.
Unless you're in SW19 or Cinci. BTW, I hear Swiss bagels are a delicacy in Serbia, especially the gluten-free variety!
No, it's six.
aside from nadals play, it seems that roger struggles with heavy hitters like berdych and delpo (as of late). not sure why, it seemed that his chances to imporvise and mix were cut down in some way.
He struggles with heavy hitters like Berd and Delpo and vs great movers and defenders like Nadal, Murray and Djoko. So who doesn't he struggle with exactly?
Good thing about your posts is, that a couple of years from now, you will have to completely change your tune, because Nadal will have his ass handed to him from everybody. Hypocracy will be your constant companion. You are digging a nice hole for yourself here.
BTW. What is this craziness? You seem to have posted multiple times in everythread that I check? Do you have personal problems and are venting some anger here? Or just feeding off of negative (in your mind) things?
I cannot decide. Can you help me out?
It's hypocrisy by the way. I don't know. You're the one who seems in need of anger management right now. Don't freak so much. I'm sure Fed will win matches again. That 1 final was not the end of the world.
Thanks for the correction. English is not my first (or second :twisted: ) language, so it is a good exercise, to write here and be corrected.
I am merely enjoying your (and others) posts. I am sure Federer will win more matches and titles. It seems, that you and others are convinced otherwise.
But, this was a serious question. You post like crazy. Having in mind, that your favourite was not involved, and you do not play the game, there sure must have some special reason, why you post so much.
Which of the two things is true?
English is your third language? congrats, you're good.
I guess I'm a fan of tennis first and foremost. I don't post about only 1 player. You seem more like "Fed or nothing". Too bad. There are plenty of great matches to enjoy around the clock.
You comments here are too snarky, to pass them as a general interest.
Besides. You do not stop much in the Pro Player section, I presume. You would have noticed, that I am interested in many more matches than just what Federer is doing.
Presuming from our own experience, are we?
Yep, too true
Just like Djokovic did here...
Separate names with a comma.