Former great Wilander tells players to get inside Federer's head

[federrero]

AFP Friday January 27, 12:03 PM

Seven-time Grand Slam champion Mats Wilander has some advice for today's players as they struggle to keep up with Roger Federer -- get into his head and under his skin.

Wilander, the Swede who dominated tennis in the mid 1980s, winning seven Grand Slam titles, said it was sad to see so many players almost expecting to lose to the world number one and they needed to adopt more ruthless tactics.

"The other guys are actually not that sorry to lose to him, which I kind of miss a little bit," he said in the Melbourne Age.

"They're not doing everything within the rules to disturb him, like talk to him, or nudge him, or get in his head.

"Can you imagine John McEnroe not getting into Roger's head? No. Jimmy Connors. No. Boris Becker. No.

"I have to say he wins a lot of matches in the first 40 minutes and it just looks like 'Oh well, he's too good'."

'I think maybe you've got to find something to fuel you against Roger Federer because it ain't enough to just play tennis."

Federer is the measuring stick for all his rivals on the men's tour and he has reigned as number one on the ATP rankings for almost two years.

With six major titles he is eight short of the record held by Pete Sampras, but such is his dominance of men's tennis that he is averaging two Grand Slams a year in his three years at the top.

Wilander said the advantage that Federer has is that he's not worried about how he's playing.

"When you're No.1, when you feel like you're the best player in the world, you are not worried about how you are playing," said the Swede, a former world number one himself.

"It doesn't boil down to tennis anyway, it boils down to the mental side, that's why you're number one."

While Wilander has nothing but praise for Federer and the way he handles being No.1, he said he feared the 24-year-old could soon get sick of all the attention.

"I think it's possible he could get sick of the attention because he's too much of a regular guy to enjoy the attention," he said.

"But I think he's realising that if these two go hand in hand, he'll gladly take the attention."

Federer bids to make the Australian Open final for the second time when he plays German Nicolas Kiefer later Friday. The Swiss won the title in 2004.

[jings]

Yup that's definitely what we need, more trash talking at change of ends, spitting, name calling, questioning of calls, ill-temper, racquet throwing, annoying pump up gestures, abuse of lines men etc. Perhaps if you started smacking one of the ball boys about that might disturb Fed's cool a bit. Way to go Wilander. Does it ever occur to people who make these idiotic observations that a) Fed is so far inside everyone else's head right now that it's a non starter and that b) Fed is so relaxed it wouldn't bother him. The only way to get into Fed's head is to beat him on the court. He was getting mighty gnarly in the Davydenko match and if you read their interviews post match both knew that the result was very close to being the other way around. Hewitt's about the biggest getter inside other guy's heads on the ATP with all his c'mons and he's got a superb record against Fed ... wot a load of ...

[fastdunn]

I have a feeling that Kiefer can take up that role....

[West Coast Ace]

Originally Posted by jings

Yup that's definitely what we need, more trash talking at change of ends, spitting, name calling, questioning of calls, ill-temper, racquet throwing, annoying pump up gestures, abuse of lines men etc. Perhaps if you started smacking one of the ball boys about that might disturb Fed's cool a bit. Way to go Wilander. Does it ever occur to people who make these idiotic observations that a) Fed is so far inside everyone else's head right now that it's a non starter and that b) Fed is so relaxed it wouldn't bother him. The only way to get into Fed's head is to beat him on the court. He was getting mighty gnarly in the Davydenko match and if you read their interviews post match both knew that the result was very close to being the other way around. Hewitt's about the biggest getter inside other guy's heads on the ATP with all his c'mons and he's got a superb record against Fed ... wot a load of ...

Agree 100%. As smart as some of the former pros are, they do make some moronic statements at times. Bringing a pro wrestling mentality to tennis isn't the answer to more competition for Fed or to raise ratings.

I think to beat Fed you have to surprise him - come to the net (on good approach shots) and bring him up to the net and make him volley. And if his backhand shows any signs of going bad, hit every ball to it. I know, easy to say and tough to pull off.

[arosen]

Kiefer would be perfect. All the crappola and verbal abuse Kiefer can throw at Fed in German, aah what a world of opportunity for Nikolas. And if that doesnt work, he can always throw his stick at thim, or a water bottle.

[jings]

Actually I've just thought what might be the ultimate weapon. You could start hitting on Mirka during the match and if she started looking disinterested you could just start hitting AT her. Now that would surely get Fed a little rumbled. On the other hand it might also prompt him to go to the changing room for a comfort break and install fedbot version x, first trialled at the US Open 2004 final against Hewitt. The programme developed a chronic maximising bug in the second set which was remotely re programmed at the start of the third to the correct minimising setting. In version x no opponent wins any points, again, ever ...

[lanky]

Im going to come in here as I played and watched a lot of tennis from the era of Mcenroe etc.I totally agree with Mats and have even been saying the same thing (to my friends who could be bothered to listen!) for some time.Its incredible to me the way a lot of the modern professionals play somebody like federer and let him cruise along in the zone at a nice pace.Never would this be allowed to happen by the players of the 70s/80s.Each had their style e.g.lendl would slow the game down to a snails pace between points- but they would all disrupt the pattern of the game and prevent what we see today of a good player cruising happily to victory.

[ohplease]

Originally Posted by lanky

Im going to come in here as I played and watched a lot of tennis from the era of Mcenroe etc.I totally agree with Mats and have even been saying the same thing (to my friends who could be bothered to listen!) for some time.Its incredible to me the way a lot of the modern professionals play somebody like federer and let him cruise along in the zone at a nice pace.Never would this be allowed to happen by the players of the 70s/80s.Each had their style e.g.lendl would slow the game down to a snails pace between points- but they would all disrupt the pattern of the game and prevent what we see today of a good player cruising happily to victory.

I think Mats has a point - to an extent. In most sports there's someone who's competetive with the best, who relies on headgames to get them over the top. In tennis that someone is Lleyton Hewitt. You'll note that even he cuts that garbage out when he plays Federer - because it doesn't work, at least not in that matchup.

Now, someone like Nalbandian has both the matchup and animosity to compete with Federer (and it shows in their record) - but at the moment he's more of a spoiler than a foil as he has made exactly one slam final.

Either way, the level of tennis is so high now that gamesmenship might win you one more round (see: Nicolas Kiefer), but it ain't winning you a slam no more. That's a good thing.

[The Pusher Terminator]

Federo,

As I believe most on this board already know, I have recently discovered how great a champion Mats really was. Its funny to me that you have to actually introduce Mats as "former great" because some people don't know.Mats knows what Fed is thinking because in 1988 Mats was as dominant as Fed ever was. There are not many players on this earth who really know what Fed is thinking ...but if anyone does its Mats. Check out these old quotes to gain more insights:

Originally Posted by The Pusher Terminator

I found some interesting Wilander quotes:

"all my career I dreamed of being number one. But when I finally achieved it and the initial excitement wore off, I felt nothing. I had no sense of elation or pride. I was world champion but so what? It got to the stage where I got more satisfaction out of cutting the grass than playing tennis."


"They (John McEnroe, Ivan Lendl, and Jimmy Connors) were not the nicest people in the world, they were the most selfish tennis players, but they were great for the game. Tennis needs people who don't care about pleasing the sponsors, who don't care about being nice." (1999).

"

[swedechris]

and maybe he will be in rogers this final.. certainly the crowd will be there to remind roger should he forget...!!
i think baghdatis has a charisma and flair that will be able to gradually get "annoying" to roger.. if not fully this time maybe next .. i feel mats for sure has a point.. most guys on the atp tour are good at hitting the ball but less capable of using tactics or changing game plans during the course of a match execept perhaps knowing how to slow things down abit when being run all around the court ..i.e. tacking longer time between points.. and making play go against the current for federer.. yes he is really a fanatastic player but unless you get something extra involved than jsut teh shotmaking you are bound to be in trouble..
so get in there marcos and enjoy and use all you have + draw upon the crowd and the tfact that fed is the the favorite and should be a bit anxiuos ..

[pound cat]

Oh, I think Marcos will get under Federer's skin. Not only does he play great tennis and has already taken a set off Federer at age 18, he will actually enjoy being there and smiling and gesturing to his loud Greek supporters..and having fun. And showing no fear. And it may not be so much fun for Federer to face an opponent who feels that he's destined for greatness in the tennis world. I hope the final is memorable...and fun...and a display of great tennis.

Paul McNamee should be bowing to the ground to Baghdatis for making this AO one to remember seeing as at the outset it seemed like it would be a bust with 3 top players missing.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by lanky

Im going to come in here as I played and watched a lot of tennis from the era of Mcenroe etc.I totally agree with Mats and have even been saying the same thing (to my friends who could be bothered to listen!) for some time.Its incredible to me the way a lot of the modern professionals play somebody like federer and let him cruise along in the zone at a nice pace.Never would this be allowed to happen by the players of the 70s/80s.Each had their style e.g.lendl would slow the game down to a snails pace between points- but they would all disrupt the pattern of the game and prevent what we see today of a good player cruising happily to victory.

Rules are much stricter today. A McEnroe type will not get away with that kind of behavior. It is also important for players today to maintain a clean image for sponsorship and the charities they do.

[Grimjack]

First, I don't necessarily disagree with Mats in principle. Fed is clearly so much better than everybody else in the game at the physical aspects of tennis that beating him mentally is the only real hope. The problem there is that Fed's atop the mental game as well. But at least there's hope of catching him, there. Why not try to irritate him? Mock him? Slow him down? Whatever it takes? Give it a go, I say. Nothing to lose.

Second...

Originally Posted by federrero

Wilander, the Swede who dominated tennis in the mid 1980s...

...this will come as quite a shock to Ivan Lendl.

Third, although the advice is good, Wilander would never, in a million years, take so much as a set off Federer.

[The Pusher Terminator]

Originally Posted by Grimjack

First, I don't necessarily disagree with Mats in principle. Fed is clearly so much better than everybody else in the game at the physical aspects of tennis that beating him mentally is the only real hope. The problem there is that Fed's atop the mental game as well. But at least there's hope of catching him, there. Why not try to irritate him? Mock him? Slow him down? Whatever it takes? Give it a go, I say. Nothing to lose.

Second...



...this will come as quite a shock to Ivan Lendl.

Third, although the advice is good, Wilander would never, in a million years, take so much as a set off Federer.

On clay I think that Wilander would have given Fed a run for his money.

[skip1969]

some good points.

things is, sometimes you come across someone who just isn't bothered by headgames . . . who never seems to get rattled. by anything. and that air of invincibility comes once they reach the top of their games and they start kickin' a**! who knows what that person will seem like on the outside - laidback and carefree or in your face - but on the inside, they are . . . destroyers.

chrissie was like that. all quiet and polite (they didn't call her the 'ice princess' for nothin') until she got on the court and mowed all the other girls down. matina, who always played like it was her against the world, with a big chip on her shoulder. johnny mac, who seemed too pre-occupied with rattling everyone else to be rattled himself. lendl, who i remember hating cos he was so cold and brutal (though man, did i respect him. or fear him). he was a friggin' machine out there, impervious. steffi pounding forehand after forehand past the entire tour. la-la-la, winner, winner, winner. . .

sometimes, it was a surface thing. like sampras on grass or kuerten on clay. they were like, skipping along . . . dooo-da-dooo-da-dooo . . . i'm the best, you can't beat me. oh look, another trophy! for ME?

even wilander was like that for a little while, in his casual way. ruthless.

maybe we've forgotten how people dominated the tour just 10-20 years ago because it's been a while since a player stood out so much from the crowd the way fed has the last couple of years. he's dominating the whole tour, and the surface doesn't even seem to matter to him. but it happens. it's cyclical. and he just may be one of these special cats who couldn't be the least bit distracted by his opponent, yelling or stalling or trying to rattle him. cos he's already at that point where he KNOWS just how good he is. he initmidates just about everyone out there.

he's ALREADY in everyone else's heads.

[Aykhan Mammadov]

Wilander never was great, he was working horse, all his matches I watched are most boring matches I ever seen. So he really couldn't advise anything worth against genius Fed except disturbing him by words, because he doesn't know what to do against real tennis players in such situations.

[pound cat]

great post 1969. Talented ruthlessness wins, whether it's sports , politics, or business.

[troytennisbum]

I don't think trying to get "into Fed's head" will do much. He's just the best tennis player out there period. It's a physical fact, not just a psychological one. In fact, if someone tries to irritate him, it might actually backfire and just increase his resolve/determination to destroy his opponents.

[devila]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/tennis...319451352.html

"When I scramble, it is usually because my opponent is playing well," he said.

[The Pusher Terminator]

Originally Posted by Aykhan Mammadov

Wilander never was great, he was working horse, all his matches I watched are most boring matches I ever seen. So he really couldn't advise anything worth against genius Fed except disturbing him by words, because he doesn't know what to do against real tennis players in such situations.

This is exactly what I mean. Mats is the most underated player of all time. How can you say that Wilander was never great? How do you have the balls to say that Mats doesnt know what to do against real tennis players.

First of all he added the serve and volley to his game and in 1983 and he won the US open, French open and Australian open in 1988. After doing it all he just got bored,,,he said "mowing the grass became more interesting than tennis".

He was able to win grandslams on grass, hard court and clay. Who else could do that? Not Borg, Mcenroe, Lendl, Sampras, Federer.....still dont think Wilander was great?

Mats also won 7 grand slams ...as many as John Mcenroe....still not a great player?

In 1982 he set a world record winning four matches against top five players to win the French. Only Bagdatis has the same chance...except even if Bag wins he will not have played 4 matches against top 5 players but rather only top 10 players....still dont think Wilander was great?


Wilander was also able to win Wimbledon in doubles.....proving that he could serve and volley VERY well..... Do you stillthink that Mats was not a great player?

I guess beating players suh as Lendl, Mcenroe, Edberg on most surfaces mean he doesnt know how to play against "real tennis players"?

Akyan, don't feel bad....most people under rate Mats. Its really sad. I do think that he was a great player and he does know how to beat "real" tennis player. I think you need to eat your words.