Is it over for Fed on Grand Slam?

[NGM]

Is it over? or not?

He still went deep occasionally on Grand Slam and made it competitive. But going deep and win the whole thing is very, very different *animal*. The last man stand usually is the best man. I really doubt it. I think he lost his magic in the biggest stage. May he stay with the number he has now.

 

[junior74]

He played better and better throughout 2014. It is not over.

 

[Sentinel]

After Nole and Nadal retire, the grand old man will rack up a few more grande slames.
He needs to channel his inner Randal MacMurphy, and go into Hannibal mode.

 

[falstaff78]

After Nole and Nadal retire, the grand old man will rack up a few more grande slames.
He needs to channel his inner Randal MacMurphy, and go into Hannibal mode.

After Nadal and Djokovic retire there will be a new crop of 23-27 year olds to contend with. Just as after Fed was done annihilating his own generation, nadz and djok popped up.

But grandpa might sneak a major or two.

(And I say grandpa with tongue firmly in cheek as he is 3 years my junior. And no, this response isn't for you, but for the people who will react to your finely crafted bait.)

 

[RF-18]

I see one more slam in him. Best chances is in wimbledon but will be tough. If the slams were played Bo3 his chances would have increased drastically. But It's hard for a 33 year old playing bo5 for two weeks and then has to go in to marathon matches in semis and finals to pull it off.

He hasn't much to proove anymore. Just stay on the top of the rankings, go deep into tournaments and be consistent. Win masters here and there. Everything else will be a bonus.

 

[Bender]

I see one more slam in him. Best chances is in wimbledon but will be tough. If the slams were played Bo3 his chances would have increased drastically. But It's hard for a 33 year old playing bo5 for two weeks and then has to go in to marathon matches in semis and finals to pull it off.

He hasn't much to proove anymore. Just stay on the top of the rankings, go deep into tournaments and be consistent. Win masters here and there. Everything else will be a bonus.

A 17 slam winner hasn't got anything to prove.

And I think we're not giving Djokovic's grass prowess nearly enough credit.

It's a little awkward to watch (to put it mildly), but I think this year's Wimbledon going five sets had more to do with Djokovic than Federer to be honest.

Still, you're right - WC is his best slam at this point, though I wouldn't be surprised if he gets far (or even win) any of the remaining slams. At 33, he's still that good.

 

[zep]

Hard to tell. If he gets a bit of help from the draw and can avoid Nadal and Djokovic he can still win against anyone else. He lost his best opportunity at the US open. But time is running out for him. I still think he might win one more.

 

[zep]

But grandpa might sneak a major or two.

(And I say grandpa with tongue firmly in cheek as he is 3 years my junior. And no, this response isn't for you, but for the people who will react to your finely crafted bait.)

It's funny how in everyday like early 30s is actually considered young. People start new careers at that age. But in sports, tennis to be specific a 33 year old seems so old.

 

[RF-18]

Hard to tell. If he gets a bit of help from the draw and can avoid Nadal and Djokovic he can still win against anyone else. He lost his best opportunity at the US open. But time is running out for him. I still think he might win one more.

Yea, that opportunity he got was very rare. If he gets those again he will win. But I doubt that such an opportunity will rise again.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

You can't count out the World No 2 for the upcoming season. Chance he bags one about 33% in my opinion.

 

[zep]

Yea, that opportunity he got was very rare. If he gets those again he will win. But I doubt that such an opportunity will rise again.

His best chances are going to be at Wimbledon.

 

[jga111]

I would love to see him win another Slam because I think he is the best ambassador to tennis we'll have in our lifetime. No doubt he can beat anyone, currently he is playing with a great variety of shots and tactics, the best I've seen him actually, a joy to watch. But over a course of two weeks I'm not convinced he can now recover well enough from any grueling encounters. He will need to keep rallies short to stand a chance and stay as fresh as possible.

 

[NatF]

I think it's probably over for him. But I still believe he can get one more.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

#Bel18ve.

We must.

 

[moonballs]

Of course he can. Just take a look at the two finalist of the US Open you will realize the field at the top is very much in flux. And I think he will.

The biggest concern I have is his back. I think he should give up playing the AO or the FO.

 

[D.Nalby12]

His success in major events next year vastly depends upon how efficiently and effectively 'Biological Passport' will be implemented. After establishing blood profiles of athletes which generally takes 3-5 tests, it's expected to catch top dopers now. I'm not sure he would've made it Top 2 at age of 33 in pre passport era. With we are already witnessing some top physical grinders feeling energy less or running away from competition for not finding themselves enough competitive without any apparent injuries in very first year of implementation, I'm very eager to see how it goes!

It's all about in which direction ITF wants to drive Tennis. If they choose relatively clean direction, I can see Federer making it to Finals of major tournaments at least next year where outcome depends on different factors like surface, opponent, time spent on court in run to Final. I believe if wants to have any chance to win slam, he need to avoid physically demanding five setter before finals. From recent experience, he suffers a beat down in next round after lengthy match since his body can't recover that fast now.

 

[Sentinel]

^ I think its unfair targeting certain players for doping without any evidence, esp when they have never skipped a test, or tested positive earlier. It also creates a lot of rancour and backlashes in our forum.

In case you refer to Nadal, he has always had injury issues even prior to this BP (bio passport) thing. His injuries are nothing new.

In any case, there are plenty of other players Fed is vulnerable to now, so it's really going to be a bolt from the blue if he can squeak one in.

 

[chjtennis]

He had a few good runs in slams in 2014. He could've won Wimbledon and US Open with a bit of luck. I think he still has a shot (even though not big) in all tournaments he enters with a bit of luck. However, it will be very difficult for him to win one. I think 1 or 2 slams is not totally beyond the realm of reality.

 

[MatsPhilander]

I wouldn't totally rule it out-but it is highly unlikely-there is an outside chance he could win the US & a decent chance he could win Wimbledon again if Murray, Novak or Nadal is not his opponent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84gmKIKTk40

 

[Russeljones]

Is it over? or not?

He still went deep occasionally on Grand Slam and made it competitive. But going deep and win the whole thing is very, very different *animal*. The last man stand usually is the best man. I really doubt it. I think he lost his magic in the biggest stage. May he stay with the number he has now.

I don't think you will hear any of his rivals say he's not a threat at a Slam. This is, of course, because they are not regulars at this tennis knowledge lighthouse. They are not scholars at this library for titans of tennis expertise. Otherwise they'd know. Federer is can only bring it in best of 3. If said idol is injured, of course.

 

[kOaMaster]

Who knows what he shows next year?
I wouldn't rule it out, you never know with such players...

But of course it would need a big effort and perhaps some luck too. He was very close this year imo. Just ran into an unstoppable Cilic.

 

[D.Nalby12]

^ I think its unfair targeting certain players for doping without any evidence, esp when they have never skipped a test, or tested positive earlier. It also creates a lot of rancour and backlashes in our forum.

Is this bold statement or sheer ignorance? With some famous cyclists has already shown it's possible to receive performance enhancing treatments or drugs for years without getting caught by conventional methods of testing, it takes courage to believe those conventional screening tests can do their job. Not to mention ITF replaced it with new Passport system which can catch abusers without failing drug tests because they found it ineffective. Imv past record of tests has little significance, since if Top cyclists can afford that then I'm sure top Tennis pros can too. While past record of lower pros has some significance Imv since it's little difficult for them to manage all this financially and for having less chances to be covered by ATP/ITF if caught.

About skipping tests, be sure that athletes who spends months away from competition receives much lesser tests than pros in competition. Data shows 15% of total tests carried out off competition in 2012. Even if one gets off competition test, they can drill hole in system further filing TUE for healing joint injuries and receiving P.E. substances without fear of getting caught since they gets free pass for those substances he received for healing purpose.

Player repeatedly files TUE and receives substances through different unproven treatments for healing joints, spends months away from competition, performs much better than before without any recovery period which generally needed for those having real injuries is Top suspect in my opinion. Little bit off topic stuff, sorry for that.

In case you refer to Nadal, he has always had injury issues even prior to this BP (bio passport) thing. His injuries are nothing new.

In any case, there are plenty of other players Fed is vulnerable to now, so it's really going to be a bolt from the blue if he can squeak one in.

No particular player, I just want clean sport with no unfair advantage to Top pros or those abusing holes. I'm even OK with it if new system catches Nishikori or my other favourites or even Federer.

I just believe for Federer with stricter anti doping measures winning major tournaments little easier, this is true for others too.

 

[Hoshi]

Its going to get harder but lets be honest it can happen.

All that he needs is to catch fire for two weeks and get a lucky draw. I thought for a while he was done winning slams but after seeing his draws at Wimbledon and the US Open he could have won two this year!

As long as he can avoid Nadal and get the draw he needs it is doable if unlikely.

 

[Bukmeikara]

Offcource he can, he is number 2 in the world

 

[Chico]

Fed is done winning slams. Sorry.

 

[Gemini]

He's got 1 more in him definitely, but like any contender that is not in his physical prime, the draw has work out favorably. He needs a combination of relatively easy early round matches coupled with his most dangerous opponents going out early.

 

[TheMusicLover]

As much as it's most definitely wrong to 'write off' a #2 on the ATP ranking list, I personally think this ship has sailed at Wimbledon 2014. I would be over the moon to be proven wrong though.

 

[jm1980]

He's got 1 more in him definitely, but like any contender that is not in his physical prime, the draw has work out favorably. He needs a combination of relatively easy early round matches coupled with his most dangerous opponents going out early.

This exact scenario played out in the USO, where he was given a clown draw and the title was practically handed to him when they stacked Novak's draw and then forced him to play in the heat. Fed still couldn't win.

 

[Sysyphus]

This exact scenario played out in the USO, where he was given a clown draw and the title was practically handed to him when they stacked Novak's draw and then forced him to play in the heat. Fed still couldn't win.

Stacked, really? He played poor-form Murray, and lost to Nishikori. The fact is it was a great chance for Novak to win it, and he didn't capitalize either. Still, you probably wouldn't use it as proof of him being unable to win any more slams?

Fed not winning more slams is, as far as I can tell, surely the most likely outcome. But there should be no doubt that he still has a significant chance at one more hurray. The current state of tennis, and him being #2 in the world, should be clear indicators of this.

 

[jaggy]

He can but I am not expecting it, Aus is his best shot

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Is it over? or not?

He still went deep occasionally on Grand Slam and made it competitive. But going deep and win the whole thing is very, very different *animal*. The last man stand usually is the best man. I really doubt it. I think he lost his magic in the biggest stage. May he stay with the number he has now.

He has one more major to win. I've said this for the past few years, and despite his twilight years age, I stand by that prediction.

 

[Sysyphus]

He can but I am not expecting it, Aus is his best shot

Srs? No Wimbledon?

 

[D.Nalby12]

Stacked, really? He played poor-form Murray, and lost to Nishikori. The fact is it was a great chance for Novak to win it, and he didn't capitalize either. Still, you probably wouldn't use it as proof of him being unable to win any more slams?

Fed not winning more slams is, as far as I can tell, surely the most likely outcome. But there should be no doubt that he still has a significant chance at one more hurray. The current state of tennis, and him being #2 in the world, should be clear indicators of this.

Not really. That was Murray's best match of 2014. First two sets were hard fought tie breakers lasted over 2 hr. 20 minutes. Score was identical to their AO final 13 match. If that was poor Murray, I'm sure 2013 Murray was poor too!

 

[Sirius Black]

I have to believe that he has one more in him. There just has to be.

 

[Sysyphus]

Not really. That was Murray's best match of 2014. First two sets were hard fought tie breakers lasted over 2 hr. 20 minutes. Score was identical to their AO final 13 match. If that was poor Murray, I'm sure 2013 Murray was poor too!

Yes, he was in poor form going into that USO, and didn't have any results to show for. About that particular match, I agree, he played quite well. There is also the fact that Nole let him do that to an extent as he was not at his best, something that showed in his loss in the next match. So no, Nole didn't play a "completely stacked draw" compared to what Fed did – that was the original discussion.

 

[jm1980]

So no, Nole didn't play a "completely stacked draw" compared to what Fed did – that was the original discussion.

Oh yes, he did.

Players on Djokovic's side of the draw that could realistically beat him:

• Isner: big server who always troubles Novak playing in home soil
• Tsonga: won Montreal, has beaten all of the Big Four in Slams
• Murray: former USO champ
• Wawrinka: current AO champ
• Nishikori: solid player on the rise; bageled Novak on HC in 2011

Players on Federer's side of the draw that could realistically beat him:

• Error: No player could be found

 

[Sysyphus]

Oh yes, he did.

Players on Djokovic's side of the draw that could realistically beat him:

• Isner: big server who always troubles Novak playing in home soil
• Tsonga: won Montreal, has beaten all of the Big Four in Slams
• Murray: former USO champ
• Wawrinka: current AO champ
• Nishikori: solid player on the rise; bageled Novak on HC in 2011

Players on Federer's side of the draw that could realistically beat him:

• Error: No player could be found

Hi, read the word "play". We were discussing what went down, not what might have, could have, should have. That would be meaningless.

;-)

 

[D.Nalby12]

Oh yes, he did.

Players on Djokovic's side of the draw that could realistically beat him:

• Isner: big server who always troubles Novak playing in home soil
• Tsonga: won Montreal, has beaten all of the Big Four in Slams
• Murray: former USO champ
• Wawrinka: current AO champ
• Nishikori: solid player on the rise; bageled Novak on HC in 2011

Players on Federer's side of the draw that could realistically beat him:

• Error: No player could be found

This is not true. He had Birdman who has already beaten Fed twice before in GS including USO12. Djokovic's draw looked tough on paper than Federer's but Federer's proved much tougher with eventual champion in SF.

Be aware of the fact that Federer lost to eventual champion while Djokovic lost too journeyman who was playing his first GS semifinals, got completely obliterated in Final by opponent that beat Federer .

Federer's draw unquestionably proved harder since he had eventual champion in SF.

 

[Steve0904]

Oh yes, he did.

Players on Djokovic's side of the draw that could realistically beat him:

• Isner: big server who always troubles Novak playing in home soil
• Tsonga: won Montreal, has beaten all of the Big Four in Slams
• Murray: former USO champ
• Wawrinka: current AO champ
• Nishikori: solid player on the rise; bageled Novak on HC in 2011

Players on Federer's side of the draw that could realistically beat him:

• Error: No player could be found

Don't leave out the facts. Fact is, Murray played great for 2 sets, and then lost his legs, and Nishikori had played 3 5 setters in a row. Novak was expected to dismantle him, and he played a terrible match, crumbling in the 3rd set TB. The draw was tough on paper, but Djokovic never played any of those players besides those 2 so it's a moot point. That's why you can only worry about who you play and not what your "draw" is.

As it is, Federer lost to the eventual champion.

And Nishikori bageling Djokovic on HC in 2011 sounds nice as a reason why he's a threat, but again, the fact is that Djokovic was completely burned out when Nishikori done that in 2011. He was done physically after the USO.

Djokovic had no excuse for losing to him. He cracked in the 3rd set and then folded completely in the 4th. His only "excuse" was "Mommy, it's too hot out here, can I go home?"

 

[jm1980]

Hi, read the word "play". We were discussing what went down, not what might have, could have, should have. That would be meaningless.

;-)

Well, that's kind of what a stacked draw means, isn't it? There were many good players on Novak's side, which meant he was pretty much guaranteed to play hard matches throughout. Which is exactly what went down, with the exception of Isner.

 

[newpball]

Is it over? or not?

Totally over!

I have a feeling 2015 is going to be another 2012 shankerer and worse, but for sure that is not going to stop the usual pre slam F hype from some of his fans.

Good for tennis to changing of the guards!

Dimitrov and Kyrgios are promising for 2015.

:grin:

 

[Sysyphus]

Well, that's kind of what a stacked draw means, isn't it? There were many good players on Novak's side, which meant he was pretty much guaranteed to play hard matches throughout. Which is exactly what went down, with the exception of Isner.

Yes, but that's not how it played out, so it's a meaningless discussion and not really relevant to the discussion. The point was that the way it played out, Novak had just as nice a chance to win it, and was indeed expected to, and he failed to capitalize too, not just Fed. That was my original rebuttal, no? ;-)

 

[Sysyphus]

Totally over!

I have a feeling 2015 is going to be another 2012

I'm glad you think so!

 

[Krish872007]

Totally over!

I have a feeling 2015 is going to be another 2012 shankerer and worse, but for sure that is not going to stop the usual pre slam F hype from some of his fans.

Good for tennis to changing of the guards!

Dimitrov and Kyrgios are promising for 2015.


:grin:

Sorry, did you say "2012 Shankerer"?

 

[Sysyphus]

Sorry, did you say "2012 Shankerer"?

Freudian slip by Newpie, revealing his innermost desire to see papa Fed win Wimbledon and get to #1 once more. Actually, everything makes so much sense now. Someone has a suppressed love for the Fed.

;-)

 

[newpball]

Oops, I just did a major mess up, did I really say 2012? :shock:

I meant to say 2013.

 

[D.Nalby12]

Yes, he was in poor form going into that USO, and didn't have any results to show for. About that particular match, I agree, he played quite well. There is also the fact that Nole let him do that to an extent as he was not at his best, something that showed in his loss in the next match. So no, Nole didn't play a "completely stacked draw" compared to what Fed did – that was the original discussion.

Staked draw was invented by Djoko fans to cover up his failure. He actually lost much inferior exhausted player than Federar.

Not to mention this is 'Prime Djokovic', the draw he faced is nothing difficult for player of his calibre and ability to handle different playing styles.

I'm not sure Djokovic will be good enough to loose Top player at 33 let alone eventual champion in SF. :lol:

 

[underground]

He can still get one more. Definitely. If not then at least 2 more slam finals.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Totally over!

I have a feeling 2015 is going to be another 2012 shankerer and worse, but for sure that is not going to stop the usual pre slam F hype from some of his fans.

Good for tennis to changing of the guards!

Federer is the human embodiment of tennis.

Federer wins = Tennis wins.

 

[zam88]

I mean on one hand when you are still in semi-finals (3 of those this year) and 1 final you are definitely still in the conversation for winning a slam.

On the other hand, he had a dream draw in both Wimbledon and the USO... ESPECIALLY the USO and couldn't get it done... close.. but yet so far away.

You don't get those type of draws very often... and it's pretty obvious he's not getting better at tennis.. just worse at one of the slowest rates of all-time.


So.. can he win a slam? Sure he can.. anyone who was in 3 semi-finals the previous season is going to be a candidate... hell, Wawrinka and Cilic won titles and Federer is better than both of those guys right now..... I still don't understand how Cilic destroyed Roger in the semis... but it's really Roger's fault for having to use way too much energy to beat Monfils.

If I were betting though, I wouldn't really put much stock into a guy who hadn't won a major in over 2 years though and who has at least 2 guys on tour who he cannot beat in a 5 set match - Djoker and Nadal.