T
TheMagicianOfPrecision
Guest
Havent seen any thread discussing this yet...
Federer isn't GOAT, he hasn't had enough grass.
I don't think it's necessarily grass. If it were a choice between the 4 slams, then yes, Wimbledon would be the one he's been underperforming at the most. But if there were more tournies on grass, I don't think he would overall perform the worst there. For example, I think Fed has better chances against Nadal on grass, than on slow HC, for example.
I think it's close between grass and slow HC.
Last slam he won is on slow HC while the same year he almost went in the first round at Wimbledon and this year he loses 2-0 set lead there for the first time in his career, sorry but there's no comparison.
It's not just about where he has a better shot against Nadal but rather where he does worse/better against the field.
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).
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.
The GOAT (Laver) hasnt played competitive tennis in decades. Thus I have no idea what you are talking about.
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.
Yeah since Tsonga and Berdych are the ultimate clay courters.Yup, green clay is not much fun to watch.
Yeah since Tsonga and Berdych are the ultimate clay courters.
I don't even like Nadal. I just find it funny that those complaining about the speed of surface should really be hoping for the courts to slow down more like at the French Open for the sake of Federer. He just couldn't get enough returns back against Tsonga. Simple as that.Don't be a hypocrite. You post garbage about surface speeds all the time when you assume that it favors Nadal.
I don't even like Nadal. I just find it funny that those complaining about the speed of surface should really be hoping for the courts to slow down more like at the French Open for the sake of Federer. He just couldn't get enough returns back against Tsonga. Simple as that.
Djokovic just won Wimbledon. I never said I thought US Open was the fastest. And what is good for Nadal doesn't mean it isn't good for Federer as well. Federer's biggest decline is his return of serve. It is most noticeable on fast surfaces.You have, in the past, insinuated that court speeds were slowed down in order to favor Nadal over Djokovic/Murray, who apparently thrive on faster surfaces according to you. I mean how can you be wrong? Djokovic and Murray certainly possess a US Open trophy to justify your claim.
Maybe because its not thaat interesting...
Yup, green clay is not much fun to watch.
Interesting. I bet none here thought Federer had another Wimbledon in him.
To be fair, nor did I.
A good run at Wimbledon one year where the Earth was moved for him doesn't mean he has not declined the most on grass. On hard courts he generally always makes the semifinals (apart from the US Open this year) and on grass he's only made it to the quarters for a couple of years before his win this year.
A good run at Wimbledon one year where the Earth was moved for him doesn't mean he has not declined the most on grass. On hard courts he generally always makes the semifinals (apart from the US Open this year) and on grass he's only made it to the quarters for a couple of years before his win this year.
The GOAT (Laver) hasnt played competitive tennis in decades. Thus I have no idea what you are talking about.