View Single Post
Old 04-22-2013, 01:39 PM   #2944
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 741

Originally Posted by Feather View Post
I was not talking about what Pete would have done today or how he would have evolved or anything like that. I meant to say that in the 90s Wimbledon and US Open were faster compared to today. It would have certainly helped Roger against Nadal and Djokovic.
Okay. Though I think Wim in the 90's had a lower (and more unpredictable) bounce, more than being *that* much faster. The fact that there were more S/V'ers back then adds to that picture too. Same goes for USO, IMO.

But I am not so sure that Fed would've had his way against Nadal just by making the grass similar to the grass of old.

Originally Posted by Feather View Post
I also felt that he has some mental block against Nadal since RG 2008. However, I feel that a faster grass would have helped him in Wimbledon 2008. Federer's problem of Rafa retrieving all his shots would be lessened on a relatively faster surfaces where he could play his shots. He never showed any of those mental problems in WTF. In fact he bageled him there..
Ah, but they never played a best-of-5 at the WTF (and it's not an outdoor tournament like the slams). And it comes at the end of the season. Sorry, I have to disagree with the extrapolation of their WTF results to faster courts in general.

Originally Posted by Feather View Post
Regarding Djokovic, he had match points in both US 2010/2011 but in 2010 it was on Djokovic's serve. And he played very well then. So you can't call it a choke. Yeah, in 2011 he should have finished the match.

Gotta give credit to Djokovic in one thing, when he is match points down he is totally fearless. He has saved match points against many players in the last couple of years.
Fair enough. My point is that those losses had nothing to do with the courts being slower. Because he was still in a position (or close to it) to win both times.
shakes1975 is offline   Reply With Quote