Is Fed still in his physical prime?(poll coming up)

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by kraggy, Apr 22, 2009.

?

Is Fed still in his physical prime?

  1. Yes he is , his losses are mainly because his opposition has caught up

    15 vote(s)
    12.2%
  2. Yes, his losses are mainly because of mental issues . Competition isn't a significant factor

    12 vote(s)
    9.8%
  3. Yes he is, his losses are a combination of tougher opposition and mental issues

    24 vote(s)
    19.5%
  4. No, he isn't in his physical prime,but also has mental issues and faces tougher competition

    57 vote(s)
    46.3%
  5. No,he isn't in his physical prime. Mental issues don't help. Competition is not a big factor

    15 vote(s)
    12.2%
  1. kraggy

    kraggy Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    769
    Since there has been so much discussion on this I thought I would do a poll to see the forum general opinion.

    THIS IS ONLY A POLL THREAD . DON'T TURN THIS INTO A DISCUSSION, we have enough of those threads and every ******* , ******* and *********** will swoop in like a vulture on the African Savannah.

    Factors to consider:

    1) Performances over the past year (objective- results based)
    2) Performances over the past year (subjective - does he look as good as he did before)
    3) Change in Competition - Is the current competition better/worse/the same
    4) Mental Issues - No one can deny that he is having some mental blocks. How much of his results are because of these?
     
    #1
  2. Clydey2times

    Clydey2times Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    2,511
    Yes, he is. Mental issues and change in competition are the main factors.
     
    #2
  3. Leublu tennis

    Leublu tennis Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,426
    Location:
    Moldova
    I think its just a natural physical decline and, because the decline is now so noticeable, the mental factor starts to come into play. The net result is down, down, and down we go.
     
    #3
  4. It's a young man's game. Always has been. Winning majors in the later year like Pete and Andre for example, is the exception not the norm.
     
    #4
  5. Bud

    Bud Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Messages:
    31,168
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Bingo! :twisted:
     
    #5
  6. Tennis_Bum

    Tennis_Bum Professional

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    997
    I agree but Fed is looking for pathetic lately. His tummy is getting bigger. I don't think he trains hard enough anymore. If he trained hard as Agassi did, he would have a chance to win slam, but as for now, he may as well pack it in. Unless he starts to train hard again.

    Yes, it's tough to win slams in your later years, but I think players now are much more fit and can really hit mean balls, relative to players in the past. It just seems today players are bigger, stronger and faster. Not necessarily better players or play better games then players in the past but physically speaking, they are just seem to be fitter and stronger athletes. So Agassi and Sampras, to me only, didn't have to face the same players as today. Again, today players are fitter and stronger, but not necessarily better than those of the past because they play a different game now.
     
    #6
  7. King of Aces

    King of Aces Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    Messages:
    951
    Its all mental.

    He needs a shrink.
     
    #7
  8. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689
    Slam results indicate he is still in his physical prime. Mentally.. Well thats another story. If reaching every slam final isnt considered a player's "prime" then I dunno what the hell is
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2009
    #8
  9. Cyan

    Cyan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,372
    Yes he is , his losses are mainly because his opposition has caught up. If it wasn't for Nadal, Fed would have won the last 4 slams in a row! Hello........ FO 2008, Wimbledon 2008, USO 2008, AO 2009. That is the last 4 slams Fed would have won if not for Nadal. A player that is past his physical prime does not reach the last 4 slam finals in a row.
     
    #9
  10. P_Agony

    P_Agony Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Messages:
    13,186
    It's isn't for Federer. A slam final is considered a "weak" result for him. Did you see his movement lately? His forehand? Did you see his serve %? Where are all the aces he used to hit on BPs? How come they turned into double faults? If you really think Fed is in his prime you are in denial.
     
    #10
  11. Lsmkenpo

    Lsmkenpo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,915
    In nearly every sport in the world athletes reach their physical prime at around 27 years old, tennis is no exception, the difference is mental focus, when players are young their only focus is tennis, Andy Murray doesn't even have a drivers license let alone a new wife and a kid on the way , Federer's focus is not as strong mentally as it once was that tends to happen to all champions once they have been at the top of their game for years that is the difference between him and the young players, physically he is still at his peak.
     
    #11
  12. Nadal_Freak

    Nadal_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    10,625
    Location:
    Harker Heights, Texas
    He still is in his prime. His competition got tougher though.
     
    #12
  13. OrangePower

    OrangePower Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,071
    Location:
    NorCal Bay Area
    Physically, he is at 90% of his prime. Mentally, maybe at 60%. So the mental factor is much more significant than the physical factor, but nevertheless, he is no longer still in his physical prime.
     
    #13
  14. prosealster

    prosealster Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    968
    I agree, he is definitely not in his prime. Most evidently on his movement I think. It's just that he was so far above the competition even when he clearly deteriorated, he is still making finals and winning them....

    He is not in denial, he is just a *********** :evil:
     
    #14
  15. All-rounder

    All-rounder Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    6,301
    Location:
    Transitional era
    You consider him in his prime just because he makes slam finals
     
    #15
  16. Jay_The_Nomad

    Jay_The_Nomad Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    Messages:
    967
    Over the hill this guy.

    Something was seriously wrong with his health last year... he looked too skinny.
    I suspect Mirka stole all his food.
     
    #16
  17. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973
    Yes he is and competition and mental issues are a problem. Fed is still in his prime even if it is the end of it most likely but to say he is not is pretty odd. Fed is not peaking anymore prime does not mean Fed needs to win 3 slams a year. 2003 and 2008 were prime years for Fed. Hell Lendl's prime in my opinion started in late 82 and ended in 90. He didn't win slams in 82, 83 or 88 and only had 2 multi slams year..Federer is still capable of winning slams and being a top 5 player, it is impossible to make claims he is not in his prime. He is not playing the abosulte best he can but he is still capable of top level play. Federer's pre prime years are 98-02 but he is now playing well in his prime.

    03 (prime)
    04-06 (peak)
    07-09 (prime)

    In 2007 Fed was not playing like 2006 but still pulled out 3 slams, because he still had not had his confidence broken. The biggest factor I feel for Fed's apparent decrease in results is Nadal. Mentally and physically Nadal is currently superior to him and this leaves Fed more vulnerable. Nadal knocked him off his pedestal and is not going to just give it back, Fed has not had to work like this before. A disadvantage that I feel comes with being so dominate, Sampras when he lost the number 1 didn't stress because he had been in situations where he lost it and had to work to gain it back. Fed has not experienced this. I think Fed's overall performance has come due to a shock to him as he is not the man on top anymore, Nadal is that man. He has placed too much pressure on himself over the past 4 years and right now is in a meltdown. If Fed snaps out of it I think we can see him make good runs and score some wins against the top 4 outside of that probably not happening.
     
    #17
  18. dincuss

    dincuss Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,639
    Location:
    World
    I think he might not be in the physical shape he used to be, but hes not in bad shape, C'mon guys, hes a world class athlete.
     
    #18
  19. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,084
    Location:
    New York
    Winning them.
     
    #19
  20. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,084
    Location:
    New York
    He was "so far above" some of the competition, guys like Roddick and Davydenko. Fed was never "so far above" Nadal even at his best in 2005 or 2006. Murray has also been a problem to him right away (2006, 2007). Fed should have anticipated that those guys were not gonna go away and that the problems would get worse, he should have worked to adjust his game to the new opponents as early as 2006, even though everyone thought he was unbeatable, he should have known better. Now Nadal and Murray have gotten a big edge on him and I feel it's too late to try and counteract.
     
    #20
  21. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689
    Its not weak since he is losing to who? A peak Nadal? A player who has always given him trouble. Other than the AO loss against Djoker which he had mono
     
    #21
  22. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689
    Against a Peak Nadal? Fat chance. Pre puberty Nadal was on the of the only ones beating Fed when he was at his peak. Even back in 06 when Fed went 92-5 or whatever it was.
     
    #22
  23. LanceStern

    LanceStern Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,332
    If people think he's in his physical prime...

    He moves slower, swings the racket slower, had so much trouble with the forehand and serve. I don't know how his game declined so immediately, but it's still good enough to beat everybody but the other 3 Top Dogs.

    Wawrinka was just "another one of those days"
     
    #23
  24. papucla10

    papucla10 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    129
    He is just 27 is nothing physical everything is Mental.
     
    #24
  25. paulorenzo

    paulorenzo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,587
    Location:
    Virginia Beach
    so, by this logic, sampras was in his prime in 2000, right? which was a better year for sampras than fed's 2008 year.
    he was in 2 slam finals, won one of them, was in the semifinals of the AO but lost in 5 sets, semifinal in the masters tournament compared to federer(who didn't even go pass round robin), and actually won a master's shield. but it was far from prime sampras. anyone who thinks these were the years of sampras's prime is pulling at very fine, brittle straws.

    competition to me always changes, but it doesnt necessarily mean it's better. faces within the top ten constantly change, but the hype/hope that comes with each new batch is in one accord. last year, the top ten was "deep", filled with future champions, or so it seemed, but what happened? Tsonga got injured, people figured out how to play simon, del potro lost fire although he resurged, ferrer lost fire period, youhzny, tursinov, etc. who stayed among the top aside form the top 4? Roddick and davydenko. players from federer's generation.
    i do not think the competition outside the top 4 got better per se, but just a new, fresh batch of players arrived, replacing most of the older players.
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2009
    #25
  26. Bloodshed

    Bloodshed Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,158
    Location:
    Orléans, Canada
    To me, Fed seems a tad slower now for court coverage, hitting with his forehand /backhand than what he used to (probably why he shanks much more now than before).

    I'd say the competition in general was stronger back at his prime days (with the exception of Nadal and Murray) but the biggest problem now is that he has a mental block against those 2 guys that normally he never used to have with anyone else at the time. I mean sure Safin beat him at the classic AO 04 SF and he would loose to Gasquet at Monte-Carlo in the QF but he always managed to have his revenge and beat them comfortably afterwards without ever doubting himself.

    Now everytime he faces Nadal or Murray, he doubts his abilities, he's lacking confidence in his shots and he crumbles under pressure (something he rarely did between 04-07). I'm hoping it's something Federer will fix in the longrun.
     
    #26
  27. rafan

    rafan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    4,212
    I notice he has far less luck with placing his balls now. Whereby in the past you could be certain that he had a winner, now its quite a surprise to see that he hasn't delivered. His serve lets him down also - this used to be his great chance of a revival in the past, when a point or two down. Something I noticed when he was playing last, he had a slight pot - is he training as much I wonder?
     
    #27
  28. devila

    devila Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,749
    He was suddenly old and frail after the loss against Djokovic last year. lol
    I wish I could get to lucky semis and finals, lose them, also win lucky semis and finals against fat, disinterested opponents, and still pretend I'm at a higher intellectual standard than all players in history.
    He was dominated on hardcourts and clay by Canas and Volandri, so the bad fitness excuse is weak.

    Not winning Slams means you were outsmarted....not because you suddenly declined in a few month's time. He got the lucky US Open, with great gifts from Roddick and Djokovic. Get over it, spoiled, delusional people.
     
    #28
  29. mandy01

    mandy01 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    11,518
    ....says one of the biggest trolls in the forum.. :mrgreen:
     
    #29
  30. paulorenzo

    paulorenzo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,587
    Location:
    Virginia Beach
    among the many things that are arguable in your statement, shouldn't the fact that he lost to volandri and canas speak for the fact federer had lousy fitness at the time?
     
    #30
  31. devila

    devila Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,749
    2007--A time when he won over and over? Including a Nadal beatdown.
     
    #31
  32. paulorenzo

    paulorenzo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,587
    Location:
    Virginia Beach
    how does that enhance your argument at all? please explain. are you saying volandri and canas are better players?
    are you saying federer was lucky his whole career?
    again, please explain.
     
    #32
  33. Well said,agree.
     
    #33
  34. devila

    devila Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,749
    He didn't decline physically and mentally until he lost more than 5-6 matches a year.
    Federer had a week vacation in the 2007 Wimbledon joke. This looked like the 2002 Hewitt Wimbledon celebration.
    Nadal still had 15-40 on Federer's serve and Federer whined about Nadal's correct line call challenge in the 5th set ("it's killing me").
    He had free walkovers in the 2004 US Open, and 2008 Indian Wells quarterfinal. He was sooo sick and tired.

    He faced match points 3 years ago on grass versus Rochus.

    He needed Roddick's chokes on 3 match points in Shanghai, and at Wimbledon.
    Federer was down 0-40 in the 3rd set in the '06 US Open final against a clowning Roddick.

    Kiefer choked while serving 30-0 5-4 in the Wimbledon 4th set.
    Soderling choked on match point on Halle grass.
    Ramirez-Hidalgo choked twice while serving 5-2 and 5-4 on clay.
    All long before Federer's disastrous decline to #2.
     
    #34
  35. paulorenzo

    paulorenzo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,587
    Location:
    Virginia Beach
    all this says volumes about how strong a player roger was in tight situations back in the day, and how much he differs then from now. from winning 3 slams in 2007 and the year end masters title, to losing 3 slams in a row, and not even making the semis in the yearend masters. big difference in a very short time. he has declined in a big way.
    he doesn't seem to find the ability to keep his mental game going when odds fall against him.
     
    #35
  36. Joseph L. Barrow

    Joseph L. Barrow Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,255
    Tennis is a sport that breaks you down physically at a younger age than most, due to its long season and intense, grinding schedule, with dominant guys like Federer playing upwards of 80 matches a year, along with the fact that most of these guys have been keeping up a full routine since they were about 12 years old. Federer, in his prime, was able to maintain an almost unnatural level of play for a seemingly unnaturally long amount of time unbroken because of his combination of incredible talent, incredible skill, outstanding confidence and poise, and his astoundingly perfect health, being seemingly impervious to sickness or injury, never once missing a Slam, retiring from a match or even withdrawing during an event. Over the last year-and-a-half or so, now, things have really started catching up with him, with his severe illness in early '08 followed by chronic back problems suffered later in the year and purportedly continuing into this one.

    These kinds of problems prevent you from maintaining the freakish physical conditioning and sharpness of form Federer used to demonstrate, and they crop up more and more as you get into your later 20s with year upon year of that grinding schedule wearing at you. Combine that with his development of mental weaknesses and the improvement in his competition, and it becomes pretty clear-cut why Federer can't dominate tennis anymore.
     
    #36
  37. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689
    I will agree that the game is more taxing on the body today than it was in Laver or Emerson or Budge's day. But its not like its impossible to be successful and still at least semi dominate into later stages of the career. Many players have done it. 27 years old, is no spring chicken in tennis but I dont think its "old" by any means.
     
    #37
  38. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,408
    Physically, he's fine. He just needs to pull his head out of his butt and grow a pair of Wilanders when he plays Nadal.

    Sincerely,
    Roger's biggest fan
     
    #38
  39. Bassus

    Bassus Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2006
    Messages:
    249
    Sadly, he is most likely past his physical prime. That is the brutal truth of tennis. Players peak from about 22-26, and then it is decline.

    Agassi is the only exception I can think of, as he peaked at age 29. But of course he was less devoted to tennis in his early-mid 20s, so his peaking at a later age may have been solely a result of that.

    But Federer is definitely not over the hill yet. His problem is as much mental now. Mentally speaking, he has been completely broken and dominated by Nadal, and I think that has served to finally spill over to Federer's play against other players. I really think if he had not choked against Nadal in this year's AO final, then he would have played much better in the events after. I think he has lost a lot of confidence. The AO final seems to have been especially devestating and has taken a lot out of him.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2009
    #39
  40. tennis-hero

    tennis-hero Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,090
    Location:
    uk
    IF he can learn anything from Andy roddick

    its push push and PUSH for your life against Nadal on clay, and it will eventually wear Nadal down enough to be broken
     
    #40
  41. Lsmkenpo

    Lsmkenpo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,915
    I don't believe tennis is any where close to being as taxing physically as pro basketball or pro football on the human body, and 27 is considered prime age in those sports. I believe the let down is mental in tennis not physical.
     
    #41
  42. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,408
    I agree. Federer should aspire to replicate Roddick's clay-court prowess.
     
    #42
  43. prosealster

    prosealster Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    968
    fed was >4000 points above nadal (almost doubled nads) in 2006 I can recall, and he pretty far ahead in 2005 I can recall...How is that not so far above?? Close matches between them was because Nad is just a bad match up for fed.. Just like sampras had a losing h2h against paul haarhuis..but no one would disagree that pete is light years ahead of paul....
     
    #43
  44. prosealster

    prosealster Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    968
    well..have u ever played elite level in both sports?? singles tennis is predominately a running game, and regarding the hitting component, your reflex, reaction time all decline before mid 20s...hence 27 is not prime age for tennis... in basketball and football....u have team mates to cover for each other, so that no one is sprinting constantly...they peak later because the game awareness takes time to develop...
     
    #44
  45. Bassus

    Bassus Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2006
    Messages:
    249

    Football...no, but tennis has got to be more punishing physically than basketball.
     
    #45
  46. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689
    Tennis is more taxing than Basketball, baseball definitely . The main 3 sports (Basketball, Football, baseball) have off seasons where a player can heal etc. Tennis is all year round. No offseason.

    Players in basketball dont even hit their primes until their late 20s.
     
    #46
  47. DarthFed

    DarthFed Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    4,468
    Location:
    Queens, NY
    More importantly they don't have a team to pick up the slack when they have brain cramps...it's all them

    It's why i love this sport
     
    #47
  48. Lsmkenpo

    Lsmkenpo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,915
    Bunch of BS, I played all 3 sports at a high level, tennis is not anywhere close
    to being as strenuous as basketball or football physically, the NBA plays an 82 game schedule and NBA players are some of the best conditioned athletes in the world.

    No pro tennis player is anywhere close to being as physically conditioned as any NBA or NFL player, tennis can not compare to either, and it is a joke to think otherwise.

    Regarding the hitting aspect of the sport it is much harder to hit a baseball and most major league batters hit their prime after 27 so that blows your theory to shreds.

    Tennis players lose their mental edge as they get older, priorities change and their focus suffers, younger players like Nadal, Murray, and Djokovic can concentrate 24-7 on their game, Federer has more to deal with off the court than the young guys do right now, that is one of the major reasons his game has declined this year.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2009
    #48
  49. LanceStern

    LanceStern Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,332
    This comment never happened
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2009
    #49
  50. Lsmkenpo

    Lsmkenpo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,915
    Never said baseball was more strenuous,I said basketball and football.

    The baseball comment was in regards to hand eye coordination declining after 27 years old, baseball hitters blow that theory out of the water.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2009
    #50

Share This Page