Originally Posted by powerangle
Sorry have to disagree here. If you're going to point out that he won AO last year, then we are heading into slam territory again, which was precisely my point. If you only consider slams, then of course Fed has underperformed the most at Wimbledon. Fed hasn't the chance on more grass tournaments to prove his worth, and right now his track record on grass the last two years may just be anecdotal, who knows.
Overall, if Fed played the same amount of tournaments (slams and other tournaments) on both slow HC and grass, I think his overall success against the field would be about equal, Nadal or not. Fed has a greater shot to go deep or win tournies on hard courts in general because he has many more chances to.
As for crapping out a 2-0 sets lead to Tsonga, that was a mental cramp more than anything. He had the game to take out Tsonga fairly easily (which was why he even got a 2 sets lead in the first place).
Federer lost to Hewitt in the final of last year's Halle, too...so I'm not so sure.
If he's going down 2 sets to Falla (and having to break to keep from losing in 4), blowing a 2 set lead against Tsonga, losing back-to-back years in the QF at Wimbledon, and losing the final to an over-the-hill Hewitt, that's not very encouraging for his shot against strong fields in hypothetical "grass 1,000's."
The level Nadal and Djokovic played in the Wimbledon final this year, Federer would've been steamrolled going against either of them on grass. And if it were fast enough to just be a serve-and-return contest, Federer's mediocre returning and tendency to have a bad game every now and then during the match on his serve would seal his fate against guys who excel in serve/return contests.
Either way, Federer used to be virtually unbeatable on grass for the field...the courts have definitely continued to slow down since Federer won his first 3-4 Wimbledons, and his once breathtaking grass court ground game is completely non-imposing. He looks like a pusher on grass.