Sure there are a ton of options, lol, that you can't see them does not make them go away. This is a great example of how the beginner's mind works in tennis. I never stated that Roger or Paul "haven't thought of or explored" as you say. Thats just where your frantic mind took you. I even stated he has used the strategy in the past and as recent as the OZ Open on a big hitter like this. I'm not trying to take credit designing the better strategy here, but have observed Fed use it! So your whole premise never even gets a start. I'm simply stating that of the options that Fed has used in the past, he chose the WRONG one for this match. He even went to it for a period of the 3rd set where he dominated handily. We can only guess why he didn't stay the winning course. As for me questioning his choice of strategy...well that is not near as out of place as you questioning mine. As a young 3.5 closing in on 4.0, your trying to make sense of what you are seeing to pass judgement is far, far more of a stretch than me doing it with my experience as a player and coach. So with Occam's razor, it's a no brainer to go with my assessment over yours (to use your thinking), especially considering yours and Feds was proven unsuccessful! At least mine still is has the chance it could be better, where yours is in the books as a loss. Funny you ref Occam's, but say I may be too simplistic and suggest I have too few data points when you have no idea how many I have. : ) reaching greatly. Yes, I know you are thinking yours is better because it lines up with Fed, maybe the GOAT, BUT he did lose this one and I think we all know it was a winnable match for him if he could have made some better decisions. So stick with Occam, but learn to use it better. The simple solution is not usually one already dis-proven and a 3.5 rarely has better insight than a much higher level player/coach.