What player would give Federer the most problems winning since 1984?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by pc1, Feb 5, 2010.

  1. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,344
    We all know that Rafa Nadal is the player who gives Federer fits when they play. He's probably the player Federer fears most in any major final.

    My question is who would be the player that would give Federer the most problems in recent years? I want to keep it relatively recent so let's keep it since 1984, about 25 years plus.

    Lot of good choices here, McEnroe, Lendl, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, Mecir, Sampras, Agassi and even Nadal.

    I'd be curious about the logic and reasoning behind the choices. It could be that you may just think that player is better than Federer or perhaps the style of that player is annoying to Federer.
     
    #1
  2. djokovicgonzalez2010

    djokovicgonzalez2010 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    11,865
    Location:
    SW Virginia, USA
    Nadal then Agassi
     
    #2
  3. shazbot

    shazbot Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    410
    Location:
    MA
    Ehh, I don't think Agassi would "bother" him that much. Andre hits the kind of ball Fed loves; hard and flat.

    There's a reason Fed owns players like Del Potro and Davydenko.
     
    #3
  4. dropshot winner

    dropshot winner Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,852
    Nadal. There isn't a more problematic match-up for Federer in the open-era, at least on the slow courts we have today.

    On the really fast surfaces Sampras would trouble Federer, but I'm not sure if he could win the majority of tiebreaks against him.
     
    #4
  5. deltox

    deltox Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,639
    Location:
    NC, USA
    id love to see jimmy c or j mac v fed.

    i dont think either would win but id love to see him adapt.
     
    #5
  6. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,344
    A McEnroe c. 1984 would be very interesting because McEnroe's natural serve in the ad court goes to Federer's backhand and with McEnroe at the net Federer couldn't just block it back like he normally does or else McEnroe would put the volley away. Federer's short crosscourt slice backhand would be tough also since it goes to McEnroe's forehand and he could hit it down the line and approach the net.

    With Sampras I would tend to favor Sampras on faster surfaces like the old Wimbledon grass and Federer would be favored on red clay.
     
    #6
  7. dropshot winner

    dropshot winner Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,852

    84 McEnroe vs. 05 Federer would be an amazing match to watch. There would be lots and lots of volley- and passing shots winners.
     
    #7
  8. Markov

    Markov Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    462
    AO 2007 Federer would really trouble 2010 Federer.
     
    #8
  9. samprasvsfederer123

    samprasvsfederer123 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Messages:
    714
    Location:
    Inside Federer's Mind
    that would be legendary,
     
    #9
  10. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,344
    I guess both Federers would cry. One for winning and the other for losing. lol.

    I know this is out of the parameters that I mentioned on the thread but Ilie Nastase c. 1973 would be an amazing match against Federer. Nastase with his great combination of speed, power and touch against Federer. It would be especially great with a wood racket but I could see Nastase being extremely competitive with the rackets of today.

    Kuerten around 2000 on clay I think would be a great match against Federer. I would favor Kuerten on red clay but the rallies would be great.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2010
    #10
  11. fhdowntheline

    fhdowntheline Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2009
    Messages:
    288
    I would think that of all those players, Mats Wilander would give Federer some trouble with his dogged persistence.

    Apart from Nadal, he would be the only player who would create 'doubts' into Federer's mind and eventually his shotmaking.

    The rest, Fed would be able to handle with ease. I'd love to see him handle Edberg's down-the line kicker first serve though.
     
    #11
  12. djokovicgonzalez2010

    djokovicgonzalez2010 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    11,865
    Location:
    SW Virginia, USA
    Fed07 def. Fed10 7-6 (5) 6-3
     
    #12
  13. Cesc Fabregas

    Cesc Fabregas Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    8,316
    Sampras in his prime would beat Federer most times on fast surfaces like carpet, Wimbledon and the USO.
     
    #13
  14. swordtennis

    swordtennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    4,020
    Sampras was great on fast courts but being objective one has to also understadn fed would be even better on fast courts as well. Slow courts even out skill sets and stamina and fitness come into effect more. So if one wants to look at it objectively Fed has a had to work harder. Give him fast courts I see him being even more dominant.
     
    #14
  15. coloskier

    coloskier Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    5,487
    The thing that give Fed more problems, besides Nadal's topspin, and big, flat hitters that take away time from Fed. Which is exactly what Sampras IN HIS PRIME would have done. The faster the court, the more I bet on Sampras. People seem to forget that Sampras had the best forehand of his time, adding to the S&V that would take away Fed's time on faster courts.
     
    #15
  16. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,344
    It was funny that in one of the three exhibitions that Sampras and Federer played in 2007 that in the one match Sampras won, that Federer complained the court was too fast. Amusing to me since Federer is so much younger and still tournament tough, unlike Sampras.
     
    #16
  17. cquandt

    cquandt New User

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Messages:
    42
    mcenroe or connors. they have so much on-court BS that fed would get bothered. nadal and fed both are very prim and proper, and he gets wound up with players who argue too much and whatnot. also, he couldn't do anything with john's ad serve.
     
    #17
  18. Chopin

    Chopin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,103
    Location:
    St. John, USVI
    I doubt that. Sometimes--yes. Most of the time? No. And besides, you don't specify which surfaces were talking about (e.g. old Wimbledon v. new Wimbledon).

    I give Sampras a slight edge on a fast indoor carpet, Federer an edge on the new grass at Wimbledon, call it about even on the old Wimbledon grass, and a give Federer a definite edge at the US Open. Hewitt and Safin showed me too much in straight setting Sampras in those two US Open finals for me to call it even there. Of course, Pete was past his prime, but even so, I think Federer is the stronger fast hard court player.
     
    #18
  19. swordtennis

    swordtennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    4,020
    Cmon. To discredit Roger that much is just not right. At the very least these 2 greats would be batting .500 with each other. Believe me Pete was great. But Federer is...well Federer.
     
    #19
  20. shazbot

    shazbot Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    410
    Location:
    MA
    Well Agassi played both Pete and Fed in their primes. Agassi said Federer is the better player.

    So by doing some logical thinking, one would assume that Fed would get the better of Pete.

    Federer is better then Agassi.
    Agassi was able to beat Pete MANY times.
    Therefore, Fed would probably have the better H2H with Pete. Federer is excellent at returning big servers and Fed is better off the ground than Pete.

    But, we will never know :(
     
    #20
  21. dh003i

    dh003i Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,050
    I think Federer would start serving aces while McEnroe was busy arguing with the lines-person when he should have been ready to return serve. That's what players should have done to him.
     
    #21
  22. kOaMaster

    kOaMaster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,971
    Location:
    Basel/Switzerland
    I'm not sure about sampras. federer very close to a copy of sampras (a slightly better one). don't think this is a kind of a player that troubles him too much. not as much as nadal.

    I think Lendl would've had the best shot.
     
    #22
  23. kraggy

    kraggy Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    769
    Too much of a logical leap there because tennis is all about match ups A> B and B> C does not mean A>C.

    Fed crushes Blake and Blake can hold his own against Nadal. By your logic Fed would spank Nadal which we all know is far from the truth.

    I personally think Fed is blessed with a game that matches up well against 99% of players whereas some of the other greats don't have that.

    So while I can't comment on what the Fed-Sampras H2H or Fed-Mcenroe H2H would be , if they were all in the same generation, my money would be on Fed to be ranked No1 because ranking is based on how well ur game matches up with the overall field and that's where I see Fed being a clear leader.
     
    #23
  24. Polvorin

    Polvorin Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    817
    Hah, that doesn't surprise me. It looked like those courts were made for Sampras' serve. I know the matches were only for show but I think they wanted to make it competitive, and a regular court would have seen a spanking.

    I don't think any player would trouble Federer like Nadal. Maybe Corretja but only because he played a similar style to Nadal.
     
    #24
  25. DownTheLine

    DownTheLine Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,406
    No not really.
     
    #25
  26. swordtennis

    swordtennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    4,020
    Polvorin,
    Is that a real photo in your Avatar?
    If it is that must be Fed God mode.
    Holy macaroni if it is...
     
    #26
  27. Slazenger07

    Slazenger07 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,068
    Hmmm. Idk, Fed 2010 is pretty ****in amazing
     
    #27
  28. cquandt

    cquandt New User

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Messages:
    42
    Ha, they should have. But Fed wouldn't, he just would get pissed off. I doubt McEnroe would have come out on top, but I do think problems wise, this would get into his head.
     
    #28
  29. cork_screw

    cork_screw Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    2,569
    You should read more carefully. What's "would?" Hypothetical, it's not hypothetical when it's already proven. If he said, who "gives" federer... that would mean what's factual or in this case present. And Nadal would be a valid mark.

    I think it's a given that nadal gives federer most trouble, so it wouldn't be a hypothetical.



     
    #29
  30. davey25

    davey25 Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    5,059
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Well of all the players since 1984 it might well be the one who would give him most trouble is already there. That is Nadal. Who would he have a worse head to head against than 7-13 and 2-6 in slams? Probably nobody. If I had to make the list of who would give the most potential trouble in order it would be:

    1. Nadal
    2. Sampras
    3. Connors
    4. Mcenroe
    5. Becker or Lendl

    Of course that is purely a guess on my part. I do not believe even prime Agassi would have been one of his toughest opponents.
     
    #30
  31. T1000

    T1000 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    4,341
    Location:
    Connecticut
    84 mac and 05 fed would crush sampras in his prime
     
    #31
  32. davey25

    davey25 Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    5,059
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Stupid statement. You cant possibly "crush" a guy with a serve like Sampras, not to mention the overall ability and skill level. Players today cant even crush Karlovic, I cant remember the last time he was "crushed" in a match, and it is all because his serve makes it impossible as he will hold serve the vast majority of the time. So how would anyone crush Sampras who serves like Karlovic, and has 10 times more back to back up his serve.
     
    #32
  33. Chopin

    Chopin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,103
    Location:
    St. John, USVI
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8oTmQDu8Gw
     
    #33
  34. Chopin

    Chopin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,103
    Location:
    St. John, USVI
    ^^I still agree with you though.
     
    #34
  35. edmondsm

    edmondsm Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2005
    Messages:
    6,902
    Location:
    In an in between place.
    Nadal, Muster, McEnroe, Connors, seeing a pattern?
     
    #35
  36. kishnabe

    kishnabe G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    Messages:
    17,105
    Location:
    Toronto
    1984 McEnroe would destroy Federer of any year. McEnroe was unstoppable and he should have won the French if it weren't for his mind choking to a choker!
     
    #36
  37. corners

    corners Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    5,441
    In an article from a couple days ago Wilander said that his tennis wouldn't be competitive with Sampras and Agassi, let alone Federer. It was a humble statement and a real insight into the quality of the game today. I watched a lot of tennis in the eighties and early nineties and when people say that the Lendl, Becker, Edberg, Wilander era is so great I always imagined Fed smoking them all. Of course, what do I know, but Wilander said he simply didn't hit the ball hard enough:

    Never mind tennis, Wilander rates Federer up there with sport's all-time greatest athletes and can see no end to the mighty Swiss's global domination.

    "I think it's his style. He's gone through three generations, three eras and his style is fine with each era," the Swede said.

    "My style, it wouldn't be good enough to play with Sampras and Agassi. I couldn't beat them.

    "I was good, but it's just hitting the ball too softly. I never missed. They would hit winners."


    Here's the full article:

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...-tricks-to-spare/story-e6frf9if-1225825044981

    I think Sampras, Becker and Agassi would have given Roger the most trouble, in that order, and I think Sampras is the only one who would have had a chance to have a winning record against him. Becker could beat anyone when he was on, but even when on I think Roger does everything, including serve, better than him. McEnroe has said he wouldn't have done well against him.
     
    #37
  38. Datacipher

    Datacipher Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,611
    You really shouldn't take the public statements of Mcenroe/Wilander etc to seriously. What would you have them say? Imagine if they said the reverse "I don't think Roger would have done too well against me..." Imagine, how people would jump on them, screaming bloody murder!

    Laver was a master of this, always WAY downplaying himself, complimenting the new generations, saying he wouldn't have had a chance...

    If Pete even SUGGESTS he would have great matches with Roger, Fed fanboys get irate!

    Their candid feelings? Hard to know....Wilander didn't think too much of Federer's gonads when he was being candid...and it was a young Agassi who felt he had to rise before he could challenge players like Wilander! (before Wilander went on vacation for the rest of his career)

    Mcenroe has said more than once, and said again after Nadal/Fed wimb final, that he believed Sampras would get the better of Fed (bear in mind, Mcenroe is THE single most fickle expert on the planet).

    Basically, any notion that these guys would get blown away is not "real insight", it's BS. It's amazing that people make that kind of erroneous comparision from say Laver or Mcenroe to current players....but to do it with Sampras and Agassi? Wow...hilarious. The same Agassi, who 3 steps slower, and with a crippled back, competed against these same players? Hmmm......

    It's an open question to exactly who is better but, it would be extremely competitive.
     
    #38
  39. ALten1

    ALten1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    200

    Sampras is an athlete, pure and simple. Comparing primes, Federer isn't the athlete Sampras was. I like Sampras in this matchup.
     
    #39
  40. ALten1

    ALten1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    200
    Nadal said Murray was going to win the AO this year. Agassi may have been on hemp when he was quoted
     
    #40
  41. shazbot

    shazbot Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    410
    Location:
    MA
    Yes but Pete is not a bad match up, like Nadal is. I understand the match up thing, but Pete would NOT be a bad match up for Fed. Fed returns well against big servers, and once the point was started, I think Fed has the edge majority of the time.
     
    #41
  42. Changmaster

    Changmaster Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Messages:
    316
    Oh really? It's well known that Fed could easily have gone pro in football/soccer. He didn't even decide to focus on tennis completely until I think he was about 12. Whereas Sampras was all about tennis since he could hold a racket. Could he have gone pro in another sport?

    It's just laughable to suggest that Sampras is more athletic than Federer. Both are incredible athletes, though if I had to pick the more athletic player, I would lean towards Fed. Not only is he a better tennis player, but he probably could have gone pro in more sports than Sampras.
     
    #42
  43. BorisBeckerFan

    BorisBeckerFan Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,164
    I love how people state opinions as if though they are facts! Who knows what would have happend if Fed and Pete's careers had overlapped more?
     
    #43
  44. World Beater

    World Beater Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,745
    interesting you say that. Somewhere Andre was quoted as saying he thought federer moved better than pete, which i found interesting.

    sampras had great straight line speed, but i think federer was as powerful and possibly a more versatile mover. Many people forget how fast roger used to be, though pete is for sure very fast himself.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUnCOhMV-1U
     
    #44
  45. Wilander Fan

    Wilander Fan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,546
    2 points

    I remember hearing an analysis on Fed's game during the AO that mentioned the striking speed and extreme angles from the baseline have pretty much marginalized S&V tennis. Basically, you can get the same angled winners from baseline winners now that you normally had to serve and volley for. This is something that was unique to Fed's game though the new guys have this weaponry as well. Based on this, a matchup between Fed and Sampras on any surface would favor Fed since Sampras relies on a riskier play (S&V) to get his winners while Fed can sit back and hit a winner off the baseline at extreme angles.

    The second point is that I dont believe talent is the only reason for this. What Fed is doing is a natural extension of the Sampras running forehand which is a shot no one had prior to Sampras. It was an amazing shot - just a flick of risk at full speed and the ball flies back at heavy pace and topspin. Prior to Sampras, this shot was always a stretch defensive lob just to get it back into play but Sampras was hitting winners off the stretch. Now this shot is in basically every top ten player's arsenal.

    Sampras came up around the same time the exotic ceramic frames started coming out. The difference between these frames and, for example, the graphite dunlap McEnroe was using or the f200 that Wilander was using was like the difference between those rackets and wooden frames. If you grew up using one of the old graphite composites, its likely you stuck with them when the thick ceramic rackets came out because the ball response was so different you had to change the way you hit the ball. On the other hand, young kids who grew up with the monsters learned to hit the ball to take advantage of the new rackets and started doing things like hitting heavy topspin running forehands on the stretch. Even on amateur levels the amount of spin and pace people would get from these rackets was significantly different. The men's game in the 90s was ridiculous with these rackets as it became all about the new rackets.

    Basically what I am saying is you cant put Fed up there with any of the 80s players because he would be playing with superior equipment. Guys like Wilander and McEnroe would not be able to adjust to the new rackets and I dont think Fed would be able to hit the shots he hits with an 80s racket.
     
    #45
  46. Marius_Hancu

    Marius_Hancu G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    17,790
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Sampras at the top would deal with him. Not that he would beat him all the time.
     
    #46
  47. fed_rulz

    fed_rulz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,614
    not to mention that Fed's fitness is seldom an issue, but Pete's always is due to his blood condition. Pete's slam-dunk smash propagates the myth that he is "more" athletic than anyone else.
     
    #47
  48. Enigma_87

    Enigma_87 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,360
    Federer beat Sampras on the old grass as a defending champion with the two of them off their prime, but surelly Sampras was closer to his.


    It was a tought 5 setter - not much of an indicator, but still that means that Federer could hold his own against Sampras on fast grass.

    Federer is fitter than Sampras ever was, he'd be close to 100% most of the time. He's also a better HC player so I'll give him the edge there...
     
    #48
  49. slice bh compliment

    slice bh compliment G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,026
    I think Kuerten would continue to do well against him, especially on clay. But Roger would turn the Head-To-Head around on the other surfaces (not that Guga was weak on any surface).

    I think the attacking players like Mac, Stich, Krajicek, Rafter, Becker, Edberg and Pete would have bullied him for a while, too, but Roger would turn those around like he did so often. Roger's combination of talent, agility, quickness, alertness, court sense and overall health/fitness/injury avoidance is really unprecedented in tennis.

    I think Rios and Arazi would have success over Roger at times, too. Lefty, spin, patience with some variety....that sort of thing.

    Muster as well, in a Rafa way. And Kafelnikov, in a subtle, Murray sort of way.

    Overall, though, it would take a lot. I think we'd all have to work hard to build the perfect anti-Federer. To borrow a phrase, he doesn't lose much, he just runs out of time sometimes.

    EDIT:
    I might be believin' the hype here, but I actually think Murray's got a shot at him in slams.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2010
    #49
  50. All-rounder

    All-rounder Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    6,223
    Location:
    Transitional era
    Delete post
     
    #50

Share This Page