Why do people forget about Federer's Mono?
 

I was re-watching the Madrid 2009 win for Federer today and the Wimby final. I was pretty upset with the youtube comments, claiming that Federer beat Nadal in Madrid because Nadal was tired, so i thought i'd share my views and maybe get some opinions from you.

This year, prior to his French Open victory, everyone was talking about how Federer beat a tired, injured Nadal in the final of Madrid, and that this result would not pertain to the outcome of the French. Maybe we all seem to forget that Federer lost to Nadal in 2008 injured/ill as well?

In my mind, the only loss that i count is the AO 2009 loss to Nadal, where Federer played a horrible match. But lets face if, even if Federer won, Nadal was tired.

Federer wasnt ill in the FO and W match against Nadal.Nadal won it.Just like Federer won this year's FO and Wimby.
I believe the mono affected his level of play and he's never been the same since then but that cant be given as an excuse to lose to Nadal in the finals of a slam.
Anyway-Nadal is always tired and injured .Thats why when he wins,he's such a hero :wink:

People also forget his win against Nadal at Hamburg in 07. Go figure.

Both of the excuses are lame @$$ for Nadal and Roger.

"He's still not the same after mono...." Get real!

taking out of context much?
To put it simply-the mono sped up a basically inevitable decline.Its obvious Roger is no longer his former self .

You're kidding me right? Roger is his former self? The guy was in every single final in 2009 unlike 2008.

How the hell that is a decline I dont' know LOL

Listen Roger was out played at the AO, Roger was again out played at the USO.

Roger a decline, you saw Wim, you can't really believe that. Roddick will never play the well agian in his entire life, and he still could not beat Roger.

The difference has nothing to do with Roger and everything to do with the fact that the top 10 is more competitive than possibly even Pete's golden era.

Federer hasn't been the same since the Australian Open 2007. Since then, he's followed a pretty solid pattern: make every grand slam final in sight, while being inconsistent in Masters and lower level events. Obviously, that was before mono, so I don't know how much mono really affected him beyond the 1-2 months after he had it. He was already in a decline (compared to his 2004-2006 form) even before mono. But even then, it's really not much of a decline.

Anyone who's followed Roger closely knows his level of play is nowhere close to its former self.
He's consistent and he does well in slams .His overall level of play though HAS declined.

Roger is the #1 right now and anyone in their right mind wouldn't say he's the same guy in 2005/06. No way.

Fed's mono was done by March 08. But the consequence of not being able to do 2 training blocks(Dec 07, Feb 08) would prove fatal vs Nadal in the spring/summer matches.

I think the mono sped up his overall decline.He no longer moves as well as he did before.Its obvious his baseline game,his anticipation ,his timing,hell,his backhand-none of these components are like what they used to be.He was obviously better in 2007 although in decline than he is now.
Even his forehand can be inconsistent these days.He's still a great player,obviously.Just not like he used to be.
But like I said before,it dosent excuse his losses.If you come out on court you beat the opponent or just accept the loss.And Nadal was playing great too so credit to him.

Probably because he never really had mono. ;)

I think the real answer is that he doesn't bounce back from matches as well as he used to. I mean look at the US Open QF vs Soderling. He was moving like the wind in that one and then so sluggish against Djokovic 3 days later. He moved great in Cincy too. I think what we'll see from Federer is bursts of the old brilliance followed by monoFed.

A win is a win, no matter who it's against. To win a slam you have to win 7 matches in a row, and your opponents aren't your decision. The fact Nadal lost early at the FO takes nothing away from Fed's win. As for Madrid 2009, if Nadal decided to go up the court, in my book he was 100%. He wouldn't play the match if he didn't believe in his chances to win it, right? Same goes for Rog at all the early tourneys in 2008.

I'm not saying Federer played his best tennis in 2008 and Nadal played his best tennis at Madrid 2009, I'm just saying they were physically good to go.

Oh yeah, Fed was so injured and tired that year that he played 19 tournaments among which 3 slam finals. If he was so tired and sick, don't you think he would have played fewer tournaments? :roll:
He even won a title between his RG and W final that year. Get real, noone cares about the mono because it is A MYTH like Ulysses' mermaids and cyclops :lol:

This. Nadal was fit enough to make the Madrid final and Federer fit enough to make the FO and W finals, obviously they were not suffering that much.

So Nadal's tendinitis and knee injuries are just a myth and he really just lost to Soderling on clay. You can't have a double standard. Supposedly according to many reports Nadal's injuries occurred during the clay season. Ok, so how does a guy with severe tendinitis that keeps him out of the most prestigious tournament in the world is capable of winning 2 Master Tournaments, including another smaller tournament, on the most physically exhausting surface where rallies last the longest?

Lmao you've obviously never had mono. I don't think that Federer lost a ton of matches because of it and it's a tired excuse on these boards, but to call it a myth is absolutely ridiculous. It definitely affects people and it can be tough to recover from.

And Nadal was perfectly healthy when he lost to Soderling in the FO. If he was so injured, do you not think he wouldn't have played?

It's been three bleedin' years since the mono. Get over it.