Match Stats/Report - Safin vs Federer, Australian Open semi-final, 2005

Marat Safin beat Roger Federer 5-7, 6-4, 5-7, 7-6(6), 9-7 in the Australian Open semi-final, 2005 on hard court

Safin would go onto win the title, beating Lleyton Hewitt in the final. Federer had been the defending champion (having beaten Safin in the final) and would go onto win the title the following two years. This would turn out to be the last of Safin’s 2 Slam titles and 4 finals

Safin won 194 points, Federer 201

Federer serve-volleyed about a third off the time off first serves, Safin about half of that

Serve Stats
Safin...
- 1st serve percentage (123/207) 59%
- 1st serve points won (91/123) 74%
- 2nd serve points won (44/84) 52%
- Aces 17 (1 not clean), Service Winners 3 (1 second serve)
- Double Faults 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (56/207) 27%

Federer...
- 1st serve percentage (107/188) 57%
- 1st serve points won (88/107) 82%
- 2nd serve points won (41/81) 51%
- Aces 22, Service Winners 1
- Double Faults 8
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (62/188) 33%

Serve Pattern
Safin served...
- to FH 22%
- to BH 71%
- to Body 7%

Federer served...
- to FH 38%
- to BH 52%
- to Body 9%

Return Stats
Safin made...
- 118 (43 FH, 75 BH)
- 4 Winners (2 FH, 2 BH)
- 39 Errors, comprising...
- 14 Unforced (6 FH, 8 BH)
- 25 Forced (10 FH, 15 BH)
- Return Rate (118/180) 66%

Federer made...
- 150 (35 FH, 115 BH), including 3 runaround FHs & 5 return-approaches
- 4 Winners (4 BH)
- 36 Errors, comprising...
- 10 Unforced (4 FH, 6 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 26 Forced (7 FH, 19 BH)
- Return Rate (150/206) 73%

Break Points
Safin 4/13 (7 games)
Federer 4/14 (8 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding aces)
Safin 42 (17 FH, 11 BH, 2 FHV, 7 BHV, 5 OH)
Federer 46 (15 FH, 13 BH, 5 FHV, 6 BHV, 7 OH)

Safin's FHs - 8 cc (1 return, 1 pass), 3 dtl (2 passes at net), 1 dtl/inside-out, 2 inside-out, 1 inside-in return, 1 drop shot at net and 1 longline
- BHs - 5 cc (1 return, 2 passes), 4 dtl and 2 inside-out (1 return)

- 5 from serve-volley points
- 3 first volleys (1 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)
- 2 second volleys (2 BHV)

- 1 other BHV was not clean
- 3 OHs were on the bounce - 2 from no-man's land

Federer's FHs - 2 cc, 1 cc/inside-in, 1 dtl pass at net, 5 inside-out, 1 inside-out/longline, 1 inside-out/dtl and 3 inside-in (1 at net)
- BHs - 1 cc, 3 dtl passes (1 return), 4 inside-out (3 returns), 2 drop shots and 1 lob

- 9 from serve-volley points
- 6 first 'volleys' (2 FHV, A BHV, 1 OH, 1 FH at net, 1 BH at net)... the BH at net wasa drop shot
- 2 second volleys (1 BHV, 1 OH)
- 1 third 'volley' (1 BH at net)... which was also a pass

- 2 from return-approach points (1 FHV, 1 OH)

- 2 other FHVs were swinging shots - 1 a non-net shot
- 1 other OH was on the bounce

Errors (excluding returns and serves)
Safin 92
- 56 Unforced (27 FH, 26 BH, 1 FHV, 2 BHV)... with 1 BH pass attempt & 1 swinging FHV
- 36 Forced (16 FH, 15 BH, 3 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 Sky Hook)
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 47.0

Federer 88
- 50 Unforced (29 FH, 19 BH, 1 BHV, 1 OH)... with 1 FH pass attempt at net
- 38 Forced (14 FH, 18 BH, 2 FHV, 2 BHV, 1 Tweener, 1 Back-to-Net BH)... with 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net & the Back-to-Net BH was a net shot
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.7

(Note 1: all half-volleys refer to such shots played at net. Half -volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke counts)

(Note 2: The 'Unforced Error Forcefulness Index is a measure of how aggressive of intent the average UE made was. 60 is maximum, 20 is minimum. This match has been scored using a four point scale - 2 defensive, 4 neutral, 5 attacking, 6 winner attempt)

Net Points & Serve-Volley
Safin was...
- 46/62 (74%) at net, including...
- 15/18 (83%) serve-volleying, comprising..
- 13/16 (81%) off 1st serve and...
- 2/2 off 2nd serve
---
- 2/3 (67%) forced back

Federer was...
- 50/66 (76%) at net, including...
- 26/32 (81%) serve-volleying, comprising..
- 22/27 (81%) off 1st serve and...
- 4/5 (80%) off 2nd serve
---
- 3/5 (60%) return-approaching
- 0/1 forced back

Match Report
High quality serving & returning, baseline & net play, everything’s on show from both players. The contest is tight - both on the whole and by parts, with neither player able to gain clear ascendancy over even brief periods. And the match progresses beautifully - the first 3 sets are more tough than brilliant but the tennis touches top-drawer heights for much of remainder with plenty of tension thrown in. Court is normal paced, maybe tilted to slow side

Both serve well - in slightly different ways. Safin’s the more powerful, Federer the more precise and varied

Both return well - in significantly different ways. Safin attacks second serves all match - he does damage, he encourages double faults and he makes errors so doing. Fed’s blocked returning against very powerful serve, including body serves, stands out and he’s a lot more conservative/orthodox in returning second serves, only occasionally attacking it

The match isn’t a coin flip affair and breaks and sets are decided on level of games, not a point-here-point-there. Though too close for there to be some neat, single factor that pushes things Saf’s way, the difference in returning style against second serves is one of the major differences, particularly towards the end. Still, its not clear cut (more on that later)

Other significant differences are the movement and fitness. Fed’s movements are excellent, a step above Safin’s standard good. Other than in the last set, where fitness becomes bigger factor. By 5th set, Fed’s tiring and both his movement and hitting strength drops

In play, the two play very similarly and are virtually equal. Hard-hitting, dual winged groundstrokes is the staple. Short/weak balls are rare, but sooner rather than later, both players look to hit wide and get on the attack. There’s plenty of net play - including serve-volleying and just a bit of return-approaching from Fed

And all of it comes out near enough equal. Overall, Fed has thin and indecisive advantage. He wins 50.9% of the points while serving 47.6% of them.

Break points read - Saf 4/13 (7 games), Fed 4/14 (8 games)

Fed leads unreturned serves 33% to 27% but also double faults 8 times to Saf’s 1
Points won via unreturned serve and double faults - Saf 64, Fed 63

Points won in play (I.e when return is made) - Saf 130, Fed 138 with Saf serving 150 points, Fed 118 or Fed winning 51.5% of the points while serving 44.0% of them. That actually looks comfortable for Fed

In short - Fed leads unreturned serves cancelled out by his double faulting and Fed getting a little bit better of play

By parts, Fed has noticably better of first set, Safin is the stronger player in the last - and the middle 3 sets are all up in the air

Safin being “stronger player” in the 5th doesn’t necessarily mean “better”. With Fed apparently tiring, for the only time in the match, one player (Saf) enjoys a hitting advantage over the other. Saf’s the one stepping in and hitting hard, Fed is falling back and counter-punching if not feebly, a lot softer than Saf is. Also for only time in match, Saf enjoys a movement advantage, with Fed’s having dropped significantly (rest of match, Fed’s the better mover)

Such being play, for Fed to win the set would probably need Safin messing up or choking. Or Fed would have to find just the right moments to come up with particularly good finishing shots from backwards position. He does some of the latter - and Saf flirts dangerously with choking

While Saf is always ahead in the decider - he serves first, breaks first, fails to serve out the match - both players have chances. Saf serves 59 points to Fed’s 50 and break point numbers read -
Saf 2/7 (4 games)
Fed 1/5 (3 games)

There’s another game where serving at 15-30, Saf smacks a BH dtl that’s called in for a winner. The ball was 2 inches out - and score should be 15-40 and two break points for Fed. Saf goes on to win the next 2 points to hold

Earlier in the 4th set, Fed has match point in the tiebreak, having played an almost perfect one to advance to 6-5 with a service point to come. He boldly chooses to serve-volley off a second serve - and probably wishes he hadn’t as Saf blasts the return. Still, Fed’s up to making a difficult wide volley first up and another difficult, high stretch volley that he has little choice but to drop to follow-up. Saf’s on to it in a hurray and runs-down-drop-shot lobs Fed at net. Fed’s back in good time and has time to move aside to play a turnaround FH pass, let alone a back-to-net lob. Instead, he chooses to play a tweener down the middle that he nets, with Saf right there to dispatch the volley if it had come over. A poor choice of shot from Fed

Its the only 2nd serve-volley point the server loses in the match (Fed wins rest of his 4, Saf is 2/2),

One of the strangest stats I’ve ever come across has to do with first serve-in count. You’d think with two such great servers that first serve percentage would be important. And the winner Safin does indeed have higher in-count, and while the margin is a slim 2% (59% to 57%), in a match this close its often minor things like this that push the result the way it falls. Better to serve at 59% than 57%, but…

All 5 sets are won by the player with lower first serve percentage
1st set - Fed wins, Saf leads in-count by 23%
2nd set - Saf wins, Fed leads in-count by 8%
3rd set - Fed wins, Saf leads in-count by 13%
4th set - Saf wins, Fed leads in-count by 11%
5th set - Saf wins, Fed leads in-count by 4%

Federer wins sets where his in-count is 43% and 50%. He loses sets where its 69%, 62% and 61%. In other words, he wins the 2 sets he had his lowest in-counts in and they happen to be particularly low. Very weird

Safin wins sets where his in-counts are 50%, 58% and 61%. He loses sets where its 73% and 56%. Normal enough

There’s no consistent pattern to 1st serve won or 2nd serve won percentages determining outcome of sets. So apparently, get fewer first serves in than your opponent is the path to victory. And ironically in that context, the winner having match long in-count advantage

If it suggests anything, its that sets are decided by court game, not big serving. A good sign for liveliness and quality of match

Play is not only near even between the 2 players for almost entire match, but they play very similarly of style. Powerful serving - Saf more powerful, Fed more precise. Excellent returning - Fed excelling at making the tough return, Saf more adventurous in attacking second serves. Baseline play is hard-hitting and dual winged, with both players looking to attack from there, and both apt to go attackingly wide sooner or later. The two are evenly matched in their hitting and so overt chances to seize attack are not common

Plenty of net play, including serve-volleying, by both players - with very high success rates

Playing standard isn’t uniform. First 3 sets are better described as tough tennis than brilliant. It picks up after that and the 4th set is as good as it gets. The decider is also lively, with the caveat that that’s the case due to imbalance in hitting allowing a clear lead-react dynamic for the only time in the match, with Safin leading (as opposed to the more gritty play coming out of equal hitting)

Serve & Return
Good job by both on both the first 2 shots

Safin has more powerful first serve and avoids Fed’s FH with both serves. He gets them wide enough to be troubling, but Fed’s movement on the return against powerful serves is outstanding. Ghosts over and gets tough, wide serves back in play. Also handles Saf’s huge body serves looking reasonably comfortable

Saf directs second serves to Fed’s BH like clockwork, sending down just 6/83 to the FH, usually kicked. Just the occasional powerful second serve (he has 1 service winner), but otherwise, routine, solid serving

Fed’s serve isn’t as powerful but is wider placed, and with Safin moving ‘just’ normally, does damage when its wide. Commentators mention that a very high proportion of Fed’s aces in general are in 203-207 km/h range. Events prove them right. That’s a very narrow range to regularly be hitting

Fed’s second serving is more varied of direction (it’d be hard not to be) and type. Kickers and slices and flat ones and higher lot placed damagingly wide

Its under pressure because Saf looks to blast second serve returns all match. Misses going for big shots, but also puts Fed on defensive with the big returns. Brute force and depth are his main weapons on the return. He doesn’t go wide often, but most Fed second serves are thrashed hard

Fed largely sticks to safely putting second serve returns in play. He does pick the odd one to attack - he has 4 BH inside-out return winners, 3 runaround FHs (that he blasts) and 5 return-approaches. That’s a balanced, smart showing - going for it to an extent, in context of sure, consistent returning

How does it look in numbers?

Fed leads aces/service winners 23-20. He serves an unreturnable 21% of first serves to Saf’s 15% (Saf also has a second serve service winner)

Full unreturneds from returners point of view
- aced/service winner’d - Saf 23, Fed 20
- return FEs - Saf 25, Fed 26
- return UEs - Saf 14, Fed 10

Close enough to even. With Saf returning much more attackingly, the UE rate is a relative win for him

More summarily, unreturned rates read Saf 27%, Fed 33%. With Fed serve-volleying considerable amount of the time (about a third of first serves) and more than double the rate Saf does, that’s potentially close to even (in terms of Fed’s higher serve-volleying rate opening up chances for Saf to win points directly with the return)

In the event, Fed dominates serve-volley to tune of winning 81% of points (Saf’s even higher at 83% but has more surprise element working in his favour), so 33% to 27% for Fed can be taken at face value

Only Fed double faults 8 times to Saf’s 1. And its not hard to see why, with Saf blasting returns

Points won via unreturned serves and double faults - Saf 64, Fed 63. Can’t get much more even than that

Both players scrape a tick over breaking even on their second serve points (Saf 52%, Fed 51%), which has different implications for how they play and their approach to such points, in line with how differently they return

With Saf blasting returns and Fed double faulting 8 times, Saf’s often in good position after Fed’s counter-punched or even defensive third ball. Sans the doubles, Fed wins healthy 56% of his second serve points

Saf’s attacking returning has big hand in his 14 return UEs, but with 8 double faults from Fed, and regular defensive third ball shots, Saf could expect to win considerably bigger lot of Fed’s second serve points

Some excellent handling of the blasted returns by Fed. Flicks third balls back off the baseline and even looks comfortable doing it. He outplays Safin on his second serve points, often from reactive or defensive postions - good job

Fed’s second serve returning varies across match. Starts orthodoxly putting them in play. Shifts to slightly more passively chipping/blocking them back. And attacks a bit

With Saf serving so relentlessly to his BH, there’s a lot of scope for Fed to attack that he declines. Normal for him

He’s backing himself to outplay Saf from neutral or slightly reactive starting points. And he can’t do it, with Saf winning 52% of his second serve points

Unlike Saf, Fed’s 10 return UEs aren’t product of attacking returns, they’re just the odd missed regulation ball. Scoring as he does with his 3 BH inside-out winners (all of them taken very early) and runaround FHs and return-approaches (wins 3/5), he’s coming off second best from the neutral or near neutral starting points

Gist of 2nd serve points

- Saf gets to start his neutrally or with slight initiative, due to Fed returning normally. And Saf ends up winning the bulk of points. Lots of scope for Fed to attack more. Its outside his norm and he’s doing well enough returning orthodoxly that he wouldn’t feel compelled to attack.

No easy or obvious decision in how to return for Fed, but he’d probably have been better off attacking more, given predictability of Saf serving almost always to his BH. Particularly in the last set, when he’s being outhit and needs something extra to start rallies to have good prospects of winning points

- Fed double faulting a bit and Saf making ‘good’ errors (I.e. through aggression) largely cancelling out and Saf constantly hammering returns leaves Saf in good postion to start rallies. In fact, Fed does well to resist giving up third ball errors to deep balls to get a rally going at all

With equal play, prospects would favour Saf from there and Fed does exceptionally well to win bulk of points

Play - Baseline, Net & Serve-Volley
The two play very similarly and just about equally

Baseline rallies are hard-hitting, dual winged based. Both players look to attack from there - but short/weak balls are long in coming, and both are adventurous enough to go on the attack anyway by hitting wide sooner or later.

Both come to net plenty to augment their game, including via serve-volleying. Fed serve-volleys considerably more (also, return-approaches a bit), Saf has more oppurtunity to come in from rallies where his serve has put him in lead position for

Points won in play (I.e when a return is made) - Saf 130, Fed 138, of which Saf serves 150, Fed 118 or Fed winning 51.5% of the points while serving 44.0% of them. That looks fairly comfortable for Fed. Its another way of saying he holds more easily on average - which is reflected in total point served (Saf has to serve 52% of them)

How similarly the two play - and how evenly matched they are in virtually all areas are well reflected in the numbers

For starters, winners/UE differentials - Saf -14, Fed -4
Winners + errors forced/UE differentials - Saf +24, Fed +32

Good numbers from both and with hard hitting staple, the UEs are relatively tough and usually don't come quickly

Fed has 4 more winners, 6 fewer UEs and Saf forces 2 more errors. Very small differences over such a long match. The breakdowns by shot are remarkably similar off both wings and the volley

FHs
- winners - Saf 17, Fed 15
- UEs - Saf 27, Fed 29
- FEs - Saf 16, Fed 14

BHs
- winners - Saf 11, Fed 13
- UEs - Saf 26, Fed 19
- FEs - Saf 15, Fed 18

Volleys/OHs & Others
- Winners - Saf 14, Fed 18
- UEs - Saf 3, Fed 2
- FEs - Saf 5, Fed 6

Even the UE breakdowns are similar
- Neutral - Saf 27, Fed 28
- Attacking Saf 19, Fed 11
- Winner Attempts - Saf 10, Fed 11

Few points. The neutral hitting is about even off both sides. Its a bit surprising for Fed to match Saf off the BH for strenght of shot. Saf does hit a bit harder, but just a bit. BH-BH rallies look like a contest between equals. And statistically, Fed has better of it on both winners and UEs

That’s deceptive as Saf is able to come to net after gaining advantage off the BH, but initial advantage is gained usually through the serve or return, not hitting advantage in rallies. BH-BH rallies are just about equal - of strenght and consistency. Given the match-up, a relative win for Fed

Handling slices is a general weakness of Saf's. He's not tested much. Fed sticks to driving the BH. He's doing dandy doing so, so why would he change?

To be clear, Saf does hit harder and attack more of the BH, but difference is slim. Biggest difference in numbers is Fed with 6 fewer BH UEs and 8 fewer attacking UEs, which are directly related. Saf uses dtl to attack and has 4 winners baseline-to-baseline. Fed has 0. Little slicing by Fed, he goes toe-to-toe with Saf and holds even. Saf's BH also gets the shakes late in the match, when he's looking to beat a reactive Fed down

Another way of looking at it is Fed's BH being the consistency leader. The 3 other groundies are clumped together in UEs (26, 27 and 29) and Fed's BH stands out some with relatively lower 19. And its not at the cost of being passive. Generally, when Fed can achieve this, it leaves him free to fire off the other side - and that tends to end well for him

Not here because FH play is even too (in fact, Saf shading it). Again, hitting strenght is equal. And its Saf who keeps better, more solid court postion. Baseline-to-baseline, he has 6 cc winners (Fed has 3 cc based). Fed has 7 inside-out based winners (and 3 inside-in), Saf has just the 2 inside-out

All things being equal, its better to be getting results with basic cc shots than back-away inside-out and inside-in ones. Saf controlling the staple diagnol is very good sign for him

The FEs and attacking errors are important, given Fed's considerably faster and better defensively. In that light, Fed can reasonably look to force more errors out of Saf. He doesn't - Saf has 36 FEs, Fed 38. Saf 19 attacking errors to Fed's 11 is only real difference between the 2 on UE front, so Fed has gained something out of his better defence in Saf straining to end points and missing as a result

Finally, there's net points and serve-volleying. 1st serve and serve-volley related stats -

1st serve aces/service winners frequency - Saf 15%, Fed 21%
1st serve-volley frequency - Saf 15%, Fed 32%
1st serve-volley winning rate (sans aces/service winners) - both 81%
1st serve winning rate staying back (sans aces/service winners) - Saf 67%, Fed 75%

Small number of second serve-volleys too (Fed wins 4/5, Saf 2/2)
Rallying to net, Saf's 31/44 or 70%, Fed 21/29 or 72%
Total net points - Saf 46/62 at 74%, Fed 50/66 at 76%

Like everything else - very evenly matched

Saf in particularly is at his best when coming forward. Not that he flops attacking from the back, but as the relatively high attacking UEs indicate, he is apt to miss considerably more than Fed is. Both serve and return gives him lead positions to start rallies and he shades BH hitting strenght, so he has more chances to come in. Could probably do with coming in more. While Fed's ability to block powerful serves back is very good, he doesn't do much that looks threatening to serve-volleying. Not too many difficult volleys for Saf to make, but not putaways either. He gets regular volleys to make - and is sure on them. Misses little (3 UEs), punches them through and wide of Fed

Fed serve-volleying a third off first serves is a high figure for him. He's tested on the volley considerably more than Saf is, and Fed's handling of powerful passes is the highlight of net play. 4 volleying FEs (Saf has 5), while facing a higher lot of difficult volleys. He handles the regulation stuff just as efficiently as Safin

Gist - both players deal with routine volleys efficiently, Saf gets powerful passes/returns off more often and Fed deals with the difficult volleys a little better

Gist of all play - essentially, equal in all areas - off both sides of the ground and at net. Of consistency and of being damaging. Small differences that emerge - Fed's BH a little steadier than other groundies, Saf hitting a bit harder off the BH, hitting being equal of FH but Saf keeping central court postion while Fed sacrifices it to be damaging with back-away shots, Fed that much quicker and corresponding harder to beat-down or putaway - rest within overal context of equality

Match Progression
Federer has the better of the first set and barely loses points on serve. To be exact, he loses 4 points in his first 5 holds. Safin has it a bit harder, being taken to deuce twice, having to save a break point in one of the games, but is fairly comfortable too

Fed’s blocked returning against huge Saf serves is impressive, though Saf usually goes on to win the points. Saf tees off on Fed’s second serves, and Fed is similarly impressive in handling the brute hits

With Saf serving at large 73% and Fed a low 50%, both are necessary

2 long games starting at 5-5 decide the set. Fed holds a good, 10 point game (no break points) to move to 6-5. And a poor game from both players after that sees Fed break to take the set, with 9/10 points ending with UEs (including a return), man of them very poor misses or routine shots

In second set, Fed’s in-count goes up and Saf’s goes down. Fed starts serve-volleying more and wins all 8 such points, but a loose game off the ground (pair of FH winner attempt misses and pair of routine BHs misses) sees him broken early to fall behind 1-2. Its the a 10 point game and the only one he doesn’t serve-volley in at all

Fed has break point late in the set, snuffed out by Saf taking net to hold for 5-3. He serves out the set in his next servie game, finishing with a couple of strong points

Action gets tougher in the third set. Saf starts overpowering Fed more often from the back and coming to net more to finish (including serve-volleying), Fed experiments with his returning - chipping more than he earlier had, but chip-charging a bit too. The chipping returns and getting overpowered more often are probably related

Couple of loose BH errors by Saf, following a Fed BH dtl pass winner gets Fed early break and 3-0 lead. Saf breaks back to trail 2-3 soon after - a great BH dtl point finishing shot by Saf on break point, but 2 double faults from Fed in the game. There are 3 long games (8, 10 and 10 points) in a row towards the end, with both players holding through it

Fourth set is the best of the match. Fed returns to semi-regular serve-volleying and Safin joins him in it. Seeing hitting advantage is slipping towards Saf, its a good move from Fed while Saf cuts out the middle-play of overpowering before taking up net. Both hold serve comfortably and off the ground, UEs come at lowest rate for match

No break points heading into tiebreak and it turns into a glorious one, though strangely, both abandon the serve-volleying that had helped them hold with ease to get to it. Fed’s up 5-2 and 2 mini-breaks. He gains the first when Saf misses a difficult BHV to go lead 2-0 and the second with a spanking BH inside-out return winner to move to 5-2, with 2 service points to follow

He doesn’t win another service point. Saf takes net with an identical (and not good) longline approach that had lost him the first mini, and this time, Fed shanks the BH pass. Then Fed misses a FH he had to move to but was there for in good time. 5-4 Fed with 2 Safin serves to come

Fed pinches the second of them with his second drop shot winner in the game. He’d virtually played no drop shots in match prior (probably literally too). There follows Fed’s match point described earlier - and its 6-6

Saf claims his 4th return point in a row, starting with a powerful FH cc return that leaves him in charge and he’s at net to finish with a BHV winner. On his first set point, Saf draws a routine BH mishit to send match into decider

Fed undergoes treatment to his arm and hand at changeover between sets and later, has his back and hips stretched out. His movement, including on the return drops in final set

The tennis remains lively, with caveat. For only time in match, Safin has significant hitting advantage from the back - and plays turns into Saf leading, Fed counter-punching or slips upto Saf attacking, Fed defending. Fed goes for his shots more adventurously and makes most when he tries, but play is on Saf’s racquet

Saf survives 2 early break points with net play and aces to hold. And overpowers Fed to break for 4-2, with Fed double faulting on break point

Saf serves for the match at 5-4 and 2 aces brings him to 40-30. Misses couple of attacking BHs, smacks a BH cc winner from regulation position to save Fed’s first break point. Fed courageously ‘waft’ return-approaches, leaving Saf time to line up the pass, but Fed’s upto making difficult BHV before going on to end with a smash. On second break point, Saf misses a routine third ball BH slice to put match back on serve

Match continues with tension. Fed saves a break point to even 5-5. Down 15-30 next game, Saf misses a BH dtl but its called in and he wins the next 2 point to hold. The 2 trade tough holds shortly after - Saf saving a breakpoint, Fed 2, including with Saf missing a routine second serve return

Great game by Saf to finally put the match to bed, opening with a FH cc return winner, beating serve-volleying Fed after drawing a half-volley first up, yorking Fed with a return to the baseline and on his second break/match point of the game, a BH dtl does all the damage to leave a putaway FH longline from mid-court to finish

Summing up, a great match where all the skillsets of tennis are on show from both players and they stay neck & neck from start to finish - of score, from the baseline, at net, and even of shot types. Both serve well - Safin more powerful, Federer more precise. Both return well - Safin with greater attacking vigour, Federer with swifter ability to cope with difficult returns. Things are virtually a wash off FH, BH and and at net - Federer perhaps shading BH play, Safin FH. On the whole, Federer has slightly better of action

Federer's the better mover and stronger defensively. Safin is fitter and more willing to take chances, especially on the return. By the deciding set, the fitness shines through. Match is his to win or lose as for first time, he's able to boss play. Federer hangs in best he can and Safin isn't far from throwing away his advantage, before eventually, drilling the last nail in

Stats for Federer's quarter-final with Andre Agassi - Match Stats/Report - Federer vs Agassi, Australian Open quarter-final, 2005 | Talk Tennis (tennis-warehouse.com)

Peak Federer losing the fitness battle on a faster court against playboy/part-time tennis player Safin. Hmm what it tells us? Good match though.

One of the most underrated matches of this century. Very high level from both players, sustained through almost 5 hours. Fun match to re-watch.

Great work as always, Waspsting. I had forgotten how effective Safin was at net, your stats show it.

BeatlesFan said:

One of the most underrated matches of this century. Very high level from both players, sustained through almost 5 hours. Fun match to re-watch.

Great work as always, Waspsting. I had forgotten how effective Safin was at net, your stats show it.

Click to expand...

I would not call it underrated lol

But yeah, fantastic match. It might be my favorite because of just how many different parts of the game are involved and just how well they’re executed. Serve, return, forehands, backhands, offense, defense, net games, the whole package. Plus the fourth and fifth sets are some of the highest-quality two-way tennis ever imo.

Waspsting said:

One of the strangest stats I’ve ever come across has to do with first serve-in count. You’d think with two such great servers that first serve percentage would be important. And the winner Safin does indeed have higher in-count, and while the margin is a slim 2% (59% to 57%), in a match this close its often minor things like this that push the result the way it falls. Better to serve at 59% than 57%, but…

All 5 sets are won by the player with lower first serve percentage
1st set - Fed wins, Saf leads in-count by 23%
2nd set - Saf wins, Fed leads in-count by 8%
3rd set - Fed wins, Saf leads in-count by 13%
4th set - Saf wins, Fed leads in-count by 11%
5th set - Saf wins, Fed leads in-count by 4%

Federer wins sets where his in-count is 43% and 50%. He loses sets where its 69%, 62% and 61%. In other words, he wins the 2 sets he had his lowest in-counts in and they happen to be particularly low. Very weird

Click to expand...

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen a match with these sorts of first serve percentage stats.

Elite all-court tennis for five straight sets from two peaking players on a neutral surface conducive to multiple styles. Honestly can't think of another instance where something like this happened. All the stars aligned here, it's probably as close as it gets to a perfect match.

Awesome stuff, few nits to pick though.

First set was tremendous quality, Fed was clutch to escape at 5-5. No way the next game had 9/10 UFEs, off the top of my head, Fed wrongfooted Safin out wide once, there was the Fed miss moving forward with Safin covering the line (very makeable but not a UFE), and then there's the ninja BH stab by Fed. Also another high octane baseline exchange where Fed moves like a cat from the back and wrongfoots Safin, a UFE yes, but with an asterisk. Safin did make a couple regulation UFE including the last point, but the game to get broken in the third at the end was worse.

Also while Safin maybe did look a bit fresher in the 5th, I wouldn't say the match was on his racket (I mean it was factually, but not in terms of play). They traded 3 game runs, but Fed had good looks in 4 separate serving games, including twice before he got broken the first time, mostly great serving from Safin and that line call. Safin's returning in the last game gave him the decisive edge.

This was an incredible job on the BH by Fed, but even still the truth belies the stats as his BH was clearly the weakest of the 4 shots and by far the most likely to leak an attackable ball (most of which Safin attacked with his FH). He did admirably well for the most part but Safin's BH is too good to rally with and time for just about anyone on these courts, including even Agassi the year before. Safin goes DTL more than anyone which is why he makes a good number of BH UFEs but BH to BH, no one can match up to him on these courts. In the TMC match, with the slicker court that was not the case, although of course Fed didn't want to make a habit of engaging in those rallies.

Third Serve said:

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen a match with these sorts of first serve percentage stats.

Click to expand...

Well both guys have absolutely top class second serves (besides PETE and Roddick, definitely the two best and most reliable of any #1 players), GOAT peak players off the ground. Fed was also going for quite a bit on his serve due to Safin's returning, he remembered the 2nd of TMC where Safin was absolutely clocking like 75th percentile first serves. Fed went for a lot on both firsts and seconds here and 82% first serves won and 8 winners/forced errors on 2nd serves doesn't lie. Still, the dam broke in the last game.

First serve% was never Safin's strongest suit, but he also usually didn't care too much about missing them since his 2nd serve was fabulously reliable and effective (when he was focused) and he's a monster from the ground. So he racked up the aces as well.

metsman said:

Awesome stuff, few nits to pick though.

First set was tremendous quality, Fed was clutch to escape at 5-5. No way the next game had 9/10 UFEs, off the top of my head, Fed wrongfooted Safin out wide once, there was the Fed miss moving forward with Safin covering the line (very makeable but not a UFE), and then there's the ninja BH stab by Fed. Also another high octane baseline exchange where Fed moves like a cat from the back and wrongfoots Safin, a UFE yes, but with an asterisk. Safin did make a couple regulation UFE including the last point, but the game to get broken in the third at the end was worse.

Click to expand...

Game in question starts at about 7:59 into this video:


First two points are nice, lively rallies that end in errors. I wouldn't call them hardline unforced given the length and intensity of the rallies as well as the positions both players were in. But I think the second one was makeable. First is probably a forced error though.

Third is just a plain old UFE.

Fourth is also a long rally but Safin sprays what could have been the point-winning BH several feet long off of what's effectively a neutral shot.

Fifth is a missed volley from Safin. I think he should have put this one away.

Sixth is an ace.

Seventh is an indisputable UFE... Safin goes for just too much here, like on the BH in the fourth point.

Eighth is a fairly meek second serve return into the net.

Ninth is a great point up until the end -- a shank.

Tenth is a fairly routine BH sprayed quite wide.

The rallies themselves are great but the endings are ugly for the most part. I don't know if I'd be so harsh on the first two points (first one was outright forced imo) but the remaining ones would qualify as UFEs in my mind.

Third Serve said:

Game in question starts at about 7:59 into this video:

First two points are nice, lively rallies that end in errors. I wouldn't call them hardline unforced given the length and intensity of the rallies as well as the positions both players were in. But I think the second one was makeable. First is probably a forced error though.

Third is just a plain old UFE.

Fourth is also a long rally but Safin sprays what could have been the point-winning BH several feet long off of what's effectively a neutral shot.

Fifth is a missed volley from Safin. I think he should have put this one away.

Sixth is an ace.

Seventh is an indisputable UFE... Safin goes for just too much here, like on the BH in the fourth point.

Eighth is a fairly meek second serve return into the net.

Ninth is a great point up until the end -- a shank.

Tenth is a fairly routine BH sprayed quite wide.

The rallies themselves are great but the endings are ugly for the most part. I don't know if I'd be so harsh on the first two points (first one was outright forced imo) but the remaining ones would qualify as UFEs in my mind.

Click to expand...

agree on the first 3 points 2nd one though makeable goes down as forced because safin was closing in.
4th one was a little tougher than that given fed's bh was a little deep. still a UFE though if asked.
agree on 5th to 8th
9th one, federer wrong footed safin with the BH DTL. shank makes it look worse than it was. I'd mark that as forced.
10th one , fed's fh was deep. this one is close to 50-50 on forced/UFE for me.

so I have UFEs on 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th for sure. Maybe on the 10th. so 5-6 UFEs, with the cavaet as you said rallies themselves werre great.

Waspsting said:

Safin being “stronger player” in the 5th doesn’t necessarily mean “better”. With Fed apparently tiring, for the only time in the match, one player (Saf) enjoys a hitting advantage over the other. Saf’s the one stepping in and hitting hard, Fed is falling back and counter-punching if not feebly, a lot softer than Saf is. Also for only time in match, Saf enjoys a movement advantage, with Fed’s having dropped significantly (rest of match, Fed’s the better mover)

Click to expand...

metsman said:

Also while Safin maybe did look a bit fresher in the 5th, I wouldn't say the match was on his racket (I mean it was factually, but not in terms of play). They traded 3 game runs, but Fed had good looks in 4 separate serving games, including twice before he got broken the first time, mostly great serving from Safin and that line call. Safin's returning in the last game gave him the decisive edge.

Click to expand...

yeah, Fed's movement dropped a bit in the 5th set, but nowhere enough to give Safin the movement advantage.

Third Serve said:

Game in question starts at about 7:59 into this video:

First two points are nice, lively rallies that end in errors. I wouldn't call them hardline unforced given the length and intensity of the rallies as well as the positions both players were in. But I think the second one was makeable. First is probably a forced error though.

Third is just a plain old UFE.

Fourth is also a long rally but Safin sprays what could have been the point-winning BH several feet long off of what's effectively a neutral shot.

Fifth is a missed volley from Safin. I think he should have put this one away.

Sixth is an ace.

Seventh is an indisputable UFE... Safin goes for just too much here, like on the BH in the fourth point.

Eighth is a fairly meek second serve return into the net.

Ninth is a great point up until the end -- a shank.

Tenth is a fairly routine BH sprayed quite wide.

The rallies themselves are great but the endings are ugly for the most part. I don't know if I'd be so harsh on the first two points (first one was outright forced imo) but the remaining ones would qualify as UFEs in my mind.

Click to expand...

The volley wouldn't be a UFE in my mind. Makeable but below the height of the net and no open court. Incredible reactive stab from Fed (after an already Fed-only return to draw Safin in)

The rest I agree with in terms of UFE, but on the 9th, the wrongfooting BH from Fed is a brilliant piece of movement and timing, and in general a great rally. The third point UFE by Fed is a very low margin attempt that doesn't miss by much. A UFE, but a UFE that has more watchable quality than most rallies lol

A larger point is that on basically all these points apart from Feds mugged return, such misses are in the context of extremely high intensity to begin with, making seemingly routine balls low margin because of how early the ball has to be taken and how cleanly it has to be struck to compete in such rallies. A UFE in this match, but not all UFEs are created equal as basically all matches in tennis history outside a handful simply do not test players to this degree. Both Safin BH misses are in high intensity rallies, on the set point look how quickly and explosively he moves his feet to get into position to take that ball early in a closed stance. It's a remarkable piece of movement for basically anyone, much less a guy 6'5" (yet another example why anyone comparing Medvedev movement to this guy needs a long and hard prison sentence). I don't think anyone above about 5'10" (to exclude Hewitt and Chang) moved into a 2HBH as explosively as Safin and that's a good example. Due to how early Fed took the FH and hit a heavy ball with excellent depth, basically anyone else would have taken that in an open stance and yielded a defensive ball for Fed to tee off on, but instead it goes down as a UFE. This is a good illustration of what I always complain and whine about, because how can you compare this match to a match in which no one on any point ever executes a footwork pattern like that?

Mivic said:

Peak Federer losing the fitness battle on a faster court against playboy/part-time tennis player Safin. Hmm what it tells us?

Click to expand...

The decline has set in earlier than we thought.

Mivic said:

Peak Federer losing the fitness battle on a faster court against playboy/part-time tennis player Safin. Hmm what it tells us? Great match though.

Click to expand...

Biotic said:

The decline has set in earlier than we thought.

Click to expand...

Fed had blisters, that hampered his movement only a bit in the 5th set. nowhere near as much as waspsting makes it out to be.
RA wasn't a faster court either.
But trust the shameless ********* to butt in without a clue. for them tennis started in 2011 essentially.

You know what's underrated? @Waspsting threads

abmk said:

Fed had blisters, that hampered his movement only a bit in the 5th set. nowhere near as much as waspsting makes it out to be.
RA wasn't a faster court either.
But trust the shameless ********* to butt in without a clue. for them tennis started in 2011 essentially.

Click to expand...

Excuse me? I'll have you know that tennis started in 2008, not 11. Get it right!

In all seriousness, Fed did not look one bit hampered until the very last game. Obviously it wasn't the most physically demanding 5-setter ever, but both players were still razor-sharp throughout the 5th. So many epic MP saves from Fed.
In the end Safin won the peak-for-peak contest, fair and square. If only he had the mentality to maintain that level, we could've had one of the greatest rivalries of all time.

King No1e said:

Excuse me? I'll have you know that tennis started in 2008, not 11. Get it right!

In all seriousness, Fed did not look one bit hampered until the very last game. Obviously it wasn't the most physically demanding 5-setter ever, but both players were still razor-sharp throughout the 5th. So many epic MP saves from Fed.
In the end Safin won the peak-for-peak contest, fair and square. If only he had the mentality to maintain that level, we could've had one of the greatest rivalries of all time.

Click to expand...

You're not a ******** though. You are a Baggy bot

abmk said:

You're not a ******** though. You are a Baggy bot

Click to expand...

Guilty as charged
On topic:

Super underrated match from my fav tournament

metsman said:

The volley wouldn't be a UFE in my mind. Makeable but below the height of the net and no open court. Incredible reactive stab from Fed (after an already Fed-only return to draw Safin in)

The rest I agree with in terms of UFE, but on the 9th, the wrongfooting BH from Fed is a brilliant piece of movement and timing, and in general a great rally. The third point UFE by Fed is a very low margin attempt that doesn't miss by much. A UFE, but a UFE that has more watchable quality than most rallies lol

A larger point is that on basically all these points apart from Feds mugged return, such misses are in the context of extremely high intensity to begin with, making seemingly routine balls low margin because of how early the ball has to be taken and how cleanly it has to be struck to compete in such rallies. A UFE in this match, but not all UFEs are created equal as basically all matches in tennis history outside a handful simply do not test players to this degree. Both Safin BH misses are in high intensity rallies, on the set point look how quickly and explosively he moves his feet to get into position to take that ball early in a closed stance. It's a remarkable piece of movement for basically anyone, much less a guy 6'5" (yet another example why anyone comparing Medvedev movement to this guy needs a long and hard prison sentence). I don't think anyone above about 5'10" (to exclude Hewitt and Chang) moved into a 2HBH as explosively as Safin and that's a good example. Due to how early Fed took the FH and hit a heavy ball with excellent depth, basically anyone else would have taken that in an open stance and yielded a defensive ball for Fed to tee off on, but instead it goes down as a UFE. This is a good illustration of what I always complain and whine about, because how can you compare this match to a match in which no one on any point ever executes a footwork pattern like that?

Click to expand...

Indeed, it's important to consider whole points and ballstriking quality in general on display, not just the point-ending shot. This game may have 7/10 UEs by a reasonable standard, yet it certainly is better than a generic error-low game due to the quality of shots; there are only a few mostly unprompted errors (and the only one completely unprompted is the rofl 2nd serve return slice into net).

King No1e said:

In all seriousness, Fed did not look one bit hampered until the very last game. Obviously it wasn't the most physically demanding 5-setter ever, but both players were still razor-sharp throughout the 5th.

Click to expand...

Many wish they were as mobile as this injured Fed, lol.

metsman said:

Also while Safin maybe did look a bit fresher in the 5th, I wouldn't say the match was on his racket (I mean it was factually, but not in terms of play). They traded 3 game runs, but Fed had good looks in 4 separate serving games, including twice before he got broken the first time, mostly great serving from Safin and that line call. Safin's returning in the last game gave him the decisive edge.

Click to expand...

That's certainly true. Fed was actually the better player early on but Safin was very clutch getting himself out of trouble with massive serving/serve+1 then Fed caved in a bit when he faced trouble. After that, they constantly were in each other's service games (except one game for either where the server got all 1st serves in) but there was only one break against the match for Federer until the last game where Safin just took over with unstoppable tennis.
Fed's movement clearly dropped in the fifth set around the time he got broken first but he still moved great, just not outrageously so as he had before. Safin's movement advantage stayed small until the end.

Biotic said:

The decline has set in earlier than we thought.

Click to expand...

Very troubling indeed.

My favorite ever match. A bit too many unforced errors one could say, but that's because of the high level of the match, both players needed to go for their shots a lot.

Safin almost chokes it in the end, he had MPs on several different games in the third but Federer saved MPs on his serve, then broke back when Safin served for it and had MPs again, and then after holding he wasn't too far off breaking Safin again to serve for it. Only in his seventh MP could Safin close it. The tie break in the fourth was really good too.

Mivic said:

Peak Federer losing the fitness battle on a faster court against playboy/part-time tennis player Safin. Hmm what it tells us? Great match though.

Click to expand...

I mean, if you hang tough with him until a 5th, Fed is pretty vulnerable then. That's his biggest weakness.

Third Serve said:

I would not call it underrated lol

Click to expand...

I should have clarified that I mean it is underrated here on TTW. 80% of people here never saw the match and 30% of people here weren't even alive when the match was played. That's why whenever this match is mentioned, we get the obligatory "weak era mug" remarks. In the real world, obviously it is regarded as a monumentally important and high quality match.

BeatlesFan said:

I should have clarified that I mean it is underrated here on TTW. 80% of people here never saw the match and 30% of people here weren't even alive when the match was played. That's why whenever this match is mentioned, we get the obligatory "weak era mug" remarks. In the real world, obviously it is regarded as a monumentally important and high quality match.

Click to expand...

Even on TTW this match is very frequently called the greatest of all time. And even some of the more vitriolic Fed haters are in agreement that this was an epic. There's a couple of trolls (some of whom are now banned) who downplay it, but they're a minority.

Peak mythical Safin is overrated here but this is a great match.

BauerAlmeida said:

A bit too many unforced errors one could say, but that's because of the high level of the match, both players needed to go for their shots a lot.

Click to expand...

By Tennis Abstract charting this match had 24% of the points ending in UE.
To put into perspective AO 09 semi had 24% as well, AO 09 final had 34% and AO 12 final had 33%.

It's toward the cleaner side of the matches, though it is to be expected given the nature of the points.

InsideOut900 said:

By Tennis Abstract charting this match had 24% of the points ending in UE.
To put into perspective AO 09 semi had 24% as well, AO 09 final had 34% and AO 12 final had 33%.

It's toward the cleaner side of the matches, though it is to be expected given the nature of the points.

Click to expand...

The official stats of AO 2005 semi have 119/395 (30.13%) ending in UFEs

2009 AO final: 105/347 = 30.26%

2009 AO SF: 101/385 = 26.23%

2012 AO final: 140/369 = 37.64%

abmk said:

The official stats of AO 2005 semi have 119/395 (30.13%) ending in UFEs

2009 AO final: 105/347 = 30.26%

2009 AO SF: 101/385 = 26.23%

2012 AO final: 140/369 = 37.64%

Click to expand...

So TA is ruled by Djoko fans then?

Very lucky for RF to get a depleted version of Safin in the AO 04 final.

Also lucky to get GOATippoussis and depleted Safinoussis in the first two slam finals. Compare this to Murray's first two slam final opponents...

Sometimes it's all about who you get in your early slam finals.

InsideOut900 said:

So TA is ruled by Djoko fans then?

Click to expand...

heh no.
The charter for AO 12 final, Amy though is just below par at charting. Have seen many basic mistakes (in objective stats from her, leave alone UFEs)
The charter for AO 05 semi appears to be a bit lenient, but I can only confirm after I've done the stats myself.

UnderratedSlam said:

Very lucky for RF to get a depleted version of Safin in the AO 04 final.

Also lucky to get GOATippoussis and depleted Safinoussis in the first two slam finals. Compare this to Murray's first two slam final opponents...

Sometimes it's all about who you get in your early slam finals.

Click to expand...

Federer faced Roddick in Wim 03 semi and peak level Roddick in Wim 04 final (Hewitt in Wim 04 QF) just after that.
Had faced Hewitt, Nalbandian, ferrero and Safin (albeit a depleted one) at AO 04.

sometimes its better to stay silent than to speak out and confirm your ignorance.

abmk said:

Federer faced Roddick in Wim 03 semi and peak level Roddick in Wim 04 final (Hewitt in Wim 04 QF) just after that.
Had faced Hewitt, Nalbandian, ferrero and yes a depleted Safin at AO 04.

sometimes its better to stay silent than to speak out and confirm your ignorance.

Click to expand...

RF won his first slam without facing any slam champs.

Does this fact trigger you?

Weak Era dominator, as all 22nd-history books will confirm...

UnderratedSlam said:

RF won his first slam without facing any slam champs.

Does this fact trigger you?

Click to expand...

no, it doesn't. Fed put in arguably the best SF/F combo at any Wimbledon in Wim 2003.
does that trigger you?

UnderratedSlam said:

Weak Era dominator, as all 22nd-history books will confirm...

Click to expand...

sorry, you've mixed up with Djokovic and Nadal who've vultured the most in the weakest period in open era (16-current) - 10 slams and 7 slams respectively.
2 of THE most useless gens ever in slams - generation worst and generation suck. late 89 to 99 - utterly useless with a little exception for maybe Thiem.

federer OTOH had only 1 relatively weak year from 2003 to 09 - that is 2006. 2006 comparable to 2010 and 2015. Every year from 2016 onwards worse than 2006/10/15.

abmk said:

no, it doesn't. Fed put in arguably the best SF/F combo at any Wimbledon in Wim 2003.
does that trigger you?

Click to expand...

Yes, it does.

It triggers laughter.

abmk said:

The charter for AO 05 semi appears to be a bit lenient, but I can only confirm after I've done the stats myself.

Click to expand...

No you can't

AnOctorokForDinner said:

No you can't

Click to expand...

yes, I can.
I can't prove it (neither can anyone else for that matter), but I can give a better informed opinion.

UnderratedSlam said:

Yes, it does.

It triggers laughter.

Click to expand...

understood, your self delusions cause that.

does it trigger you that fed beat 3 slam champs each in AO 04, Wim 04 and USO 04 ?
(plus slam finalist in AO 04)

3 slam champs in Wim 05
2 slam champs+slam finalist in USO 05

abmk said:

heh no.
The charter for AO 12 final, Amy though is just below par at charting. Have seen many basic mistakes (in objective stats from her, leave alone UFEs)
The charter for AO 05 semi appears to be a bit lenient, but I can only confirm after I've done the stats myself.

Click to expand...

Yeah, AO 12 probably had more UE than the others. It would be impossible given how the rallies were played and the court speed

InsideOut900 said:

Yeah, AO 12 probably had more UE than the others. It would be impossible given how the rallies were played and the court speed

Click to expand...

yeah, its obvious AO 12 final had the highest % of UFEs among those 4 matches.

Safin Paris 00 final vs Nalby Paris 07 final?

RS said:

Safin Paris 00 final vs Nalby Paris 07 final?

Click to expand...

Very little Nalby can do against an in form Safin

InsideOut900 said:

So TA is ruled by Djoko fans then?

Click to expand...

Tbf trying to determine UEs vs FEs in a match like the AO 12 final sounds like hell on earth. A molasses slow court, extremely long rallies, and two of the most talented movers ever who can stretch to get a racquet on what would be outright winners against most of the tour. hard to do.

But even aside from all that, it was still sloppy iirc.

abmk said:

yes, I can.
I can't prove it (neither can anyone else for that matter), but I can give a better informed opinion.

Click to expand...

Better than who? Or you mean better than you can now.
Too much is made out of error percentage reflecting match quality.

abmk said:

understood, your self delusions cause that.

does it trigger you that fed beat 3 slam champs each in AO 04, Wim 04 and USO 04 ?
(plus slam finalist in AO 04)

Click to expand...

The Weak Era triggers plenty of amusement.

Even now, many years later, much amusement, because Fedfans still refuse 21-20-20 as a reality.

All the premature declarations of GOAT, the hype, the lies ---------- all crushed like lambs years later. Theories that time killed.

AnOctorokForDinner said:

Better than who? Or you mean better than you can now.
Too much is made out of error percentage reflecting match quality.

Click to expand...

better informed than what I have now.
error% is just one of the factors in match quality. there are multiple others.