I think Federer needs to fire Tony Roche (might be a spoiler)

[Klippy]

Originally Posted by Shaolin

His game sucks now compared to 2004.

Lols. I liked the 2003 Roger best. He didn't...dominate everything. But he was still a great player.

[Fedubai]

I know what you mean Klippy, but I don't think it's got anything to do with Roche or his hair, haha. I don't think he's arrogant or anything, he's just getting older and more confident now. He was definitely more shy a couple years ago, but I think now we're finally seeing what he's like when he's not faced with 20 cameras and a national audience. It's been interesting to watch. He's definitely more confident though I think, but not arrogant.

Cute story last year at Dubai, if I remember right a little girl was at one of his practice sessions along with a crowd, and he was giving autographs if I remember right, and she fell or hit her head or something and got a bloody nose and was crying and everything, and so she got to go sit with Federer. Guess what he gave her? A hug.

Thought it was pretty cool. You get to expect these guys to plaster on a smile and give some autographs these days, but that shows again Federer's geniune realness.

[Keifers]

Yeah, Roger is real alright. He has a big heart and is a very warm person behind that cooler public image. He takes his role as world #1 very seriously because he knows the impact he can have as #1, especially with kids.

This kind of understanding and dedication is quite remarkable considering his age. It's one of the major reasons I admire him so much.

[dirkgnuf]

Congrats, Breakpoint, looks like you were right in your prediction,
although it took a year though

[Tennis_Monk]

Originally Posted by dirkgnuf

Congrats, Breakpoint, looks like you were right in your prediction,
although it took a year though

Sure. Here is another prediction. All current Tennis players will change their coaches in 10 yrs or less from now.

[ubel]

Originally Posted by dirkgnuf

Congrats, Breakpoint, looks like you were right in your prediction,
although it took a year though

very w3rd. Marius was right as well, Federer hasn't made much progress with Roche; it just took Federer 3 very early losses (2 from someone who has been training his *** off and IMPROVING in his off time) to realize he needs to change in order to stay at the top.

Who wouldn't like to see a more aggressive Federer annihilate his opponents from the back court, coming in when the opportunity arises and showing us not only his incredible power, but also the ungodly touch and grace he possesses.. In the words of Dick Enberg, I can only describe this radical change and transformation with two words:

[larlarbd]

They did split *FINALLY* .

http://www.espnstar.com/tennis/tenni...l_5864573.html

But me thinks Feddy needs to fire more than coaches to get back on winning ways .

[Shaolin]

Nice prediction/analysis from Breakpoint. I hope things work out better now for Fed.

[rwn]

Originally Posted by Shaolin

Nice prediction/analysis from Breakpoint. I hope things work out better now for Fed.

Hilarious post. Keep up the good work.

[rwn]

Originally Posted by ubel

very w3rd. Marius was right as well, Federer hasn't made much progress with Roche; it just took Federer 3 very early losses (2 from someone who has been training his *** off and IMPROVING in his off time) to realize he needs to change in order to stay at the top.

Who wouldn't like to see a more aggressive Federer annihilate his opponents from the back court, coming in when the opportunity arises and showing us not only his incredible power, but also the ungodly touch and grace he possesses.. In the words of Dick Enberg, I can only describe this radical change and transformation with two words:

Incredibly funny! How do you come up with these gems?

[tennis_hand]

Fed isn't really a serve and volleyer. so he can't do very well at the net.

but if Fed always stays at the baseline, he can't beat Nadal on clay either. Nadal has the highest percentage of shots at the baseline on clay. How can Fed beat him? So either Fed stays at the baseline and lose to Nadal in all finals, or try to beat him at the net. It is a sure thing to lose to Nadal at the baseline, but it is risky at the net, so at least the risk is shared by Fed and Nadal when Fed is at the net.

So personally I don't think Roche's strategy failed. It is that Fed can't execute it well, or he is not the type of player to execute it well. If this is true, then Fed is destined to be beaten by Nadal on clay in his entire career.

Or maybe this is true. Fed tried S&V and lost to Roddick in Koon Yoong. Look that is Roddick! not Nadal! Nadal certainly can hit passing shots better than Roddick from the baseline.

so I think Fed still has to mix up his game more, attacking the net on opportunity and finish it at the net. He probably can't play a pure baseline or a pure S&V game.

I think Fed and Tony had some arguments in the strategy against Nadal, not that Fed completely think Tony is wrong. But Fed has had doubt ever since IW, so they parted ways.

[helloworld]

Originally Posted by tennis_hand

Fed isn't really a serve and volleyer. so he can't do very well at the net.

Actually he can serve and volley well, but he's certainly not the best at it. He was like Sampras on his early career, pretty much all serve and volley(with big forehand). Watch the match of Sampras VS Federer. It's so funny to see Fed rushed to the net after his serve every single time !

[LarougeNY]

He definitely has the skills at net, imo there aren't many players more skilled at net that play singles mostly.

[fastdunn]

Originally Posted by helloworld

Actually he can serve and volley well, but he's certainly not the best at it. He was like Sampras on his early career, pretty much all serve and volley(with big forehand). Watch the match of Sampras VS Federer. It's so funny to see Fed rushed to the net after his serve every single time !

Federer did not follow up his 2nd serves with net rush.
But at the time, even some of baseliners did that at Wimbledon.

So he was already more baseliner than average baseliners of 90's and up until 2001...

And he sucked at S&V anyway. He had a couple of early round exits while S&Ving at Wimbledon
until 2002, except that one good match against aging Sampras in 2001.

Federer himself said he realized he rushed to net whenever he got panic.
He found his calm baseline game and started to win majors from 2003.
(Coincidentally, surfaces started to get slower sround that time.....)

[helloworld]

Originally Posted by fastdunn

Federer did not follow up his 2nd serves with net rush.
But at the time, even some of baseliners did that at Wimbledon.

So he was already more baseliner than average baseliners of 90's and up until 2001...

And he sucked at S&V anyway. He had a couple of early round exits while S&Ving at Wimbledon
until 2002, except that one good match against aging Sampras in 2001.

Federer himself said he realized he rushed to net whenever he got panic.
He found his calm baseline game and started to win majors from 2003.
(Coincidentally, surfaces started to get slower sround that time.....)

No, he don't sucked at S&V and most player in his generations were already a baseliner anyway. There's no reason to compare him to the early 90's since he turned pro in the late 90's.

[Fedace]

Originally Posted by helloworld

Actually he can serve and volley well, but he's certainly not the best at it. He was like Sampras on his early career, pretty much all serve and volley(with big forehand). Watch the match of Sampras VS Federer. It's so funny to see Fed rushed to the net after his serve every single time !

Fed is actually very good serve and volleyer, it is just that game has changed, and fed does not have the biggest serve in the world either. These days, it is so difficult for pros to serve and volley cause the racket tech. You can hit a 130mph serve and come in and you find the return coming back on your feet at 135 mph. so if you are coming in, you barely left the service motion and the ball in on your shoe lace. that is part of the reason why Federer does not serve and volley all the time.

[Khforever8]

Originally Posted by Destructo

I believe that Federer should not have hired Roche in the first place. I remeber him playing so beautifully before when he didn't even have a coach a couple of years back. But now it seems that he comes to the net way too much and I just don't see his game being as fluid as it was anymore. Total bummer. (Though his game still pretty much kicks ***. It's a highly subjective matter I guess.)

Yeah I agree

[fastdunn]

Originally Posted by Fedace

Fed is actually very good serve and volleyer, it is just that game has changed, and fed does not have the biggest serve in the world either. These days, it is so difficult for pros to serve and volley cause the racket tech. You can hit a 130mph serve and come in and you find the return coming back on your feet at 135 mph. so if you are coming in, you barely left the service motion and the ball in on your shoe lace. that is part of the reason why Federer does not serve and volley all the time.

And the thing is that he does not have (did not have) motivation to
attack the net. He keeps winning as he increasingly pins himself
as the baseline. Why should he ?

Maybe he will from now.

But the thing is that other players have been increasingly experimenting
more at the net (in order to beat Federer) and Federer has been
increasingly hiding more at the baseline. For example, Nadal approached
net more times than Federer many matches in 2006 Wimbledon !

Of course, all the religious Federer fans *believes* Federer is a good net player.
In fact, he never has been successful at the net yet.
Well "he has not, but he'll do excellent if he does" is more of belief
not fact. It's largely unknown. He did it some before 2003 when other
players did. He did less frequently than other players and wasn't that
successful...

[tennis_hand]

I think he should not oblige himself to go to the net. Instead he should do it whenever he feels he can by following a good shot.

[The Ripper]

Maybe Roger will return to being his own coach and go on to win RG. I think he has tampered too much with his game and it has been costing him. Watching replays of last year's Monaco and RG, Fed was playing much better against Nadal than he has this year - although Nadal has definitely become more deadly since last year. Maybe it was the coaching, maybe Roger is burned out - with Coach Roche out of the picture, maybe it wasn't burn out, but frustration in trying to change his game. He was brilliant without a coach, and I'm sure he learned a lot from Roche - I'm hoping he gets it together in the next two weeks and makes a relaxed (but effective) RG comeback in the nick of time!!

Go Roger