Roger Federer and RG 2019

[Feather]

There are enough posts in this forum about Roger Federer and RG 2019 but I couldn't help creating one myself. Sorry about that!

Almost three or four days back, I was of the opinion that Roger Federer should skip clay entirely. I thought he could make maximum fourth round in RG and he could never win a clay masters 1000 too. I expected him to be beaten badly by Dominic Thiem. Since Roger has a great serve, I never expected bakery products. I thought Roger will not win more than four games in a set. As they say what happened is history. He had even two match points, though not even one in his serve. Even in the third set, after going a break down against probably the hottest player on clay at the moment, he fought back and got back on serve.

After this performance, it would be intellectual dishonesty to write him off completely. I consider him as the fourth favorite at RG, after Rafa/Novak/Thiem. I really believe and hope that Roger plays both Rome and RG. If he plays like how he played yesterday he has a very good chance to reach SF (if he can avoid Thiem in QF) If Roger plays well, I firmly believe that he can take out anyone on clay except these three on a a good day.

That said, I don't intend to say that he is a lock to beat any other player except these three. We didn't expect him to lose to Kevin Anderson at Wimbledon or John Millman at US Open or Stefana Tsitsipas at AO, did we? Upsets are part of the game. At his age, sorry to broach about it, and in his worst playing surface he is prone to more upsets than on the other surfaces. It's natural and expected. But there is no point in avoiding battles. You can get glory only by taking these risks.

When Roger Federer won Wimbledon 2017, many posters said skipping clay helped. When Roger Federer lost in Wimbledon 2018, many posters said skipping clay backfired. I don't know what is true or whether there is any correlation between both. However I know one thing that there is no guarantee that Roger Federer will win Wimbledon 2019, if he skips clay season in 2019. So why not play clay?

Also, this is highly subjective, the artistry of Roger Federer was best expressed on natural surfaces than on hard courts. So a part of me was always missing him play on clay. Though I never complained since we Maestro fans were happy to see him win Wimbledon 2017!

Allez Roger Federer! Please play both Rome and RG

 

[ABCD]

There are enough posts in this forum about Roger Federer and RG 2019 but I couldn't help creating one myself. Sorry about that!

Almost three or four days back, I was of the opinion that Roger Federer should skip clay entirely. I thought he could make maximum fourth round in RG and he could never win a clay masters 1000 too. I expected him to be beaten badly by Dominic Thiem. Since Roger has a great serve, I never expected bakery products. I thought Roger will not win more than four games in a set. As they say what happened is history. He had even two match points, though not even one in his serve. Even in the third set, after going a break down against probably the hottest player on clay at the moment, he fought back and got back on serve.

After this performance, it would be intellectual dishonesty to write him off completely. I consider him as the fourth favorite at RG, after Rafa/Novak/Thiem. I really believe and hope that Roger plays both Rome and RG. If he plays like how he played yesterday he has a very good chance to reach SF (if he can avoid Thiem in QF) If Roger plays well, I firmly believe that he can take out anyone on clay except these three on a a good day.

That said, I don't intend to say that he is a lock to beat any other player except these three. We didn't expect him to lose to Kevin Anderson at Wimbledon or John Millman at US Open or Stefana Tsitsipas at AO, did we? Upsets are part of the game. At his age, sorry to broach about it, and in his worst playing surface he is prone to more upsets than on the other surfaces. It's natural and expected. But there is no point in avoiding battles. You can get glory only by taking these risks.

When Roger Federer won Wimbledon 2017, many posters said skipping clay helped. When Roger Federer lost in Wimbledon 2018, many posters said skipping clay backfired. I don't know what is true or whether there is any correlation between both. However I know one thing that there is no guarantee that Roger Federer will win Wimbledon 2019, if he skips clay season in 2019. So why not play clay?

Also, this is highly subjective, the artistry of Roger Federer was best expressed on natural surfaces than on hard courts. So a part of me was always missing him play on clay. Though I never complained since we Maestro fans were happy to see him win Wimbledon 2017!

Allez Roger Federer! Please play both Rome and RG

Roger Federer is one of the best players ever who has massively improved in last few years. He is among favorites any time anywhere. He can win RG 2019.

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

Roger Federer is one of the best players ever who has massively improved in last few years. He is among favorites any time anywhere. He can win RG 2019.

Tennis IQ wise, yes..
Game wise, nope...
Physically, nope...
Clutchness, nope...

 

[TheMaestro1990]

I already created the important Fedr RG thread.

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

I already created the important Fedr RG thread.

Which thread, Raz ols??

 

[Deleted member 743561]

I already created the important Fedr RG thread.

I created the most important one.

 

[Feather]

Tennis IQ wise, yes..
Game wise, nope...
Physically, nope...
Clutchness, nope...

Don't respond to troll comments. Please ignore it

 

[Towny]

Although a QF is the result I expected, the way that the match played out was better than I hoped. Thiem is tough on clay, and Fed was very close to beating him. Now obviously, Bo5 on clay is a different story and will be more difficult for Fed. I still dont think he has much chance of winning RG, but I think he could maybe make a SF. And I'd take that in a heart beat

 

[ADuck]

If I were Fed I'd only play Madrid and RG. However, I'm gonna be annoyed if Fed pulls out of Rome since because of him Thiem is in Nadal's quarter

 

[Sport]

Roger Federer is one of the best players ever who has massively improved in last few years. He is among favorites any time anywhere. He can win RG 2019.

Why do you think Roger played over-aggresive against Thiem, with serve and volley on clay (!?) and risky shots all the time? He wanted to avoid long rallies which could make him get tired easily. 2004-2009 Federer would not have any problem to interchange long rallies with Thiem as he had way more stamina and speed than nowadays. After all, Roger is almost 38. If that is not declining the level due to age, I don't know what it is.

 

[EasyGoing]

Why do you think Roger played over-aggresive against Thiem, with serve and volley and risky shots all the time? He wanted to avoid long rallies which could make him get tired easily. 2004-2009 Federer would not have any problem to interchange long rallies with Thiem as he had way more stamina and speed than nowadays. After all, Roger is almost 38. If that is not declining the level due to age, I don't know what it is.

Careful with the logic and common sense, you are addressing a “distinguished professor with over 100 published scientific articles on ageism” who will serve you Federer’s self-assessment quote from 2015 to:
1) “prove” how wrong you are
2) end the “debate” by wishing you a good day/life.

You can’t go against that, mate, it’s foolproof!

 

[Sport]

Careful with the logic and common sense, you are addressing a “distinguished professor with over 100 published scientific articles on ageism” who will serve you Federer’s self-assessment quote from 2015 to:
1) “prove” how wrong you are
2) end the “debate” by wishing you a good day/life.

You can’t go against that, mate, it’s foolproof!

I acknowledge that you won the debate.

However, and running out of topic, how many of those 100 articles have been published alone or as the first author by you? How many of those articles have been cited over 1.000 times? As far as I am concerned, the number of cites is an indicative of how influential a work has been. An article with over 1.000 cites is an "all-time great" in an academic field. Do you have any "all-time great" article with over 1.000 cites?

 

[EasyGoing]

I acknowledge that you won the debate.

However, and running out of topic, how many of those 100 articles have been published alone or as the first author by you? How many of those articles have been cited over 1.000 times? As far as I am concerned, the number of cites is an indicative of how influential a work has been. An article with over 1.000 cites is an "all-time great" in an academic field. Do you have any "all-time great" article with over 1.000 cites?

You should direct these questions to the “Professor” @ABCD
I have never made any such claims nor do I support any of his claims, topic relevant or non-relevant. In fact, I completely agree with your previous, topic related post.

 

[Sport]

You should direct these questions to the “Professor” @ABCD
I have never made any such claims nor do I support any of his claims, topic relevant or non-relevant. In fact, I completely agree with your previous, topic related post.

Haha you fooled me. I thought you were "the Professor" @ABCD in your previous post. You imitated him so well, 10/10.

 

[Silentchimera]

Federer can win RG again. He nearly just beat Thiem who straight setted Nadal in Barcelona. Federer can beat Djoko and Nadal as well. Don't write him off.

Don't forget what happened to Djoko in 2011 at the French. The age gap between them is still the same as what it was. Nadal has not looked as good as what he has in previous years and Federer is playing well and has beaten him five times in a row. Federer now has more of a mental edge than what he had in the past when he lost in some close four setters.

I have the favourites in this order:

Nadal
Djokovic
Thiem
Federer

I see Federer making the semis but he can win the whole thing if he plays his best tennis and remains healthy.

 

[Sport]

Federer can win RG again. He nearly just beat Thiem who straight setted Nadal in Barcelona. Federer can beat Djoko and Nadal as well. Don't write him off.

Don't forget what happened to Djoko in 2011 at the French. The age gap between them is still the same as what it was. Nadal has not looked as good as what he has in previous years and Federer is playing well and has beaten him five times in a row. Federer now has more of a mental edge than what he had in the past when he lost in some close four setters.

I have the favourites in this order:

Nadal
Djokovic
Thiem
Federer

I see Federer making the semis but he can win the whole thing if he plays his best tennis and remains healthy.

I don't think Federer has the stamina to defeat Thiem or Djokovic in a best of 5 match, let alone Nadal. You may not have seen Nadal's match against Wawrinka. He is back at 2017/2018 level. It's over for Federer. Only an inspired Djokovic or Thiem have a chance.

 

[Silentchimera]

You may not have seen Nadal's match against Wawrinka. He is back at 2017/2018 level. It's over for Federer and Thiem. Only an inspired Djokovic has a chance.

No I didn't see his match with Wawrinka, just saw the scoreline. I watched some of his Monte Carlo and Barcelona matches though and he just looked a little slower. I won't dispute he played well against Wawrinka but he also destroyed Bautista Agut before throwing in an ordinary performance against Fognini. Although I haven't seen the match I don't read to far into his victory against Wawrinka because he is yet to prove himself after coming back from injury. Wawrinka has surely thrown in some solid performances though.

I still think Fed can beat Nadal at RG if he remains healthy. He has beaten Nadal on hard court five times in a row including slow Miami. There is no reason to believe he can't win a five setter if he could take Nadal to four whilst lacking the mental edge in 2011. Yes Nadal is the big favourite but Federer certainly has a shot if he remains healthy which is a big if at nearly 38 years of age.

 

[Silentchimera]

Federer very nearly straight setted Thiem. There is no reason to believe he can't win a third off him at RG. Thiem is yet to fully prove himself at the Grand Slams and will be facing immense pressure unlike Federer who really has nothing to lose. Federer is also much more experienced in the bigger moments. I still have Thiem as the favourite but I never write off Federer like some here still stupidly continue to do.

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

Don't respond to troll comments. Please ignore it

I try my best not to respond
But these trolls spread the venom so much that sometimes I can't resist myself

 

[Mark Asher]

You never know when Nadal is going to get a Nadal injury.

You never know when Djokovic will go mental again and disappear into the forest in his head.

You never know when Thiem...well, I don't know a lot about Thiem. He hasn't quite become the Dominicnator yet, however.

You do know that Federer still has game enough to compete with anyone. Hail Fed!

 

[MeatTornado]

You never know when Nadal is going to get a Nadal injury.

We do know: Not during clay season.

 

[Mark Asher]

We do know: Not during clay season.

Ha ha -- good answer.

 

[True Fanerer]

You never know when Nadal is going to get a Nadal injury.

You never know when Djokovic will go mental again and disappear into the forest in his head.

You never know when Thiem...well, I don't know a lot about Thiem. He hasn't quite become the Dominicnator yet, however.

You do know that Federer still has game enough to compete with anyone. Hail Fed!

Exactly.

He's easily the darkhorse in this field. No one else is consistent enough to deserve the label.

 

[ghostofMecir]

Careful with the logic and common sense, you are addressing a “distinguished professor with over 100 published scientific articles on ageism” who will serve you Federer’s self-assessment quote from 2015 to:
1) “prove” how wrong you are
2) end the “debate” by wishing you a good day/life.

You can’t go against that, mate, it’s foolproof!

He said this?