When Fed is aggressive he's unbeatable

M

Mick3391

Professional
It's not just me saying this, I've heard many "Experts" say that when Fed mixes it up, chip and charge, serve and volley, play baseline, he confuses these guys and tears them to pieces.

Saw that with Djokavich in Cincinnati, and today second set he DESTROYED Murray at the net!

It's my opinion that the baseliners are great baseliners, but can't handle true all court playing, I mean it wasn't even close. When Fed hangs back, it seems to be a matter of "Who makes the most mistakes", but when he takes it to them they get confused, they never know if it's going deep or short, and when Fed is at the net his reflexes and experience take over.

He's 31, ancient in Tennis years, but when he's aggressive he just shakes up these baseliners, confuses them and takes them out of their game.
 
Totai

Totai

Professional
This court also helps Fed play his ll court game. The lower bounce helps him not get pushed back on his backhand wing, and also he is able to be aggressive with his back hand.
 
The Bawss

The Bawss

Banned
Ok can we please calm down. Federer was losing that match, lucked out in the tiebreak then Murray played like the mental midget he really is and made 30 UEs to hand Fed an easy victory. Some ****s need to get a grip.
 
N

Netspirit

Hall of Fame
30 is the age when the spine loses flexibility and the blood vessels in it start to get "fossilized" with calcium (so the spine essentially starts to die and this process is irreversible until the very death of the human).

The muscles lose their ability to contract explosively, the brain loses its reaction time, the eyeball muscles begin to degenerate which decreases the ability to track fast-moving objects, the vision itself gets worse, and the stamina is depleted much sooner than during the peak 16-26 age.

The fact that Federer can still hang on with the young and best players in the world is remarkable. The fact that he even beats them from time to time is a biological anomaly.
 
okdude1992

okdude1992

Hall of Fame
The Bawss said:
Ok can we please calm down. Federer was losing that match, lucked out in the tiebreak then Murray played like the mental midget he really is and made 30 UEs to hand Fed an easy victory. Some ****s need to get a grip.
Click to expand...

TB was good. 2nd set Murray collapsed. that 1-1 game was terrible. 3 BH UE's in a row
 
okdude1992

okdude1992

Hall of Fame
Netspirit said:
30 is the age when the spine loses flexibility and the blood vessels in it start to get "fossilized" with calcium (so the spine essentially starts to die and this process is irreversible until the very death of the human).

The muscles lose their ability to contract explosively, the brain loses its reaction time, the eyeball muscles begin to degenerate which decreases the ability to track fast-moving objects, the vision itself gets worse, and the stamina is depleted much sooner than during the peak 16-26 age.

The fact that Federer can still hang on with the young and best players in the world is remarkable. The fact that he even beats them from time to time is a biological anomaly.
Click to expand...

Geez it's not like he is 60. Fed's in great shape for 30, but there are lots of other pros who are still playing well at that age. Look at David Ferrer, playing the best tennis of his life at 30. Tommy Haas is 34, and still top 20!
 
Mustard

Mustard

Bionic Poster
smoledman said:
Mustard is a pure troll.
Click to expand...

What are you on about now? The 2006 Dubai final was a classic case of "punching yourself out". Federer was over Nadal like a rag doll in the first set, showing a lot of aggression, and looked certain to hit the killer blow in both the second and third sets, but Nadal hung in there and managed to deliver the knockout blows himself. Federer was really annoyed when he lost. Then he calmed down and a nice chat with Nadal at the side of the court as they awaiting the trophy presentations.

Federer can lose when he's very aggressive. That match proved it. Now please chill out. Federer is doing fantastic in these World Tour Finals, and has a chance to win it for the seventh time tomorrow, which would be remarkable.
 
smoledman

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
Netspirit said:
30 is the age when the spine loses flexibility and the blood vessels in it start to get "fossilized" with calcium (so the spine essentially starts to die and this process is irreversible until the very death of the human).

The muscles lose their ability to contract explosively, the brain loses its reaction time, the eyeball muscles begin to degenerate which decreases the ability to track fast-moving objects, the vision itself gets worse, and the stamina is depleted much sooner than during the peak 16-26 age.

The fact that Federer can still hang on with the young and best players in the world is remarkable. The fact that he even beats them from time to time is a biological anomaly.
Click to expand...

Fed's spine is dying? :confused:
 
The Bawss

The Bawss

Banned
Mustard said:
What are you on about now? The 2006 Dubai final was a classic case of "punching yourself out". Federer was over Nadal like a rag doll in the first set, showing a lot of aggression, and looked certain to hit the killer blow in both the second and third sets, but Nadal hung in there and managed to deliver the knockout blows himself. Federer was really annoyed when he lost. Then he calmed down and a nice chat with Nadal at the side of the court as they awaiting the trophy presentations.

Federer can lose when he's very aggressive. That match proved it. Now please chill out. Federer is doing fantastic in these World Tour Finals, and has a chance to win it for the seventh time tomorrow, which would be remarkable.
Click to expand...

Come on. "Remarkable" for an achievement like that? If Fed wins tomorrow it would imply a quasi-certainty that we will not see that record surpassed in our lifetimes.
 
Mustard

Mustard

Bionic Poster
The Bawss said:
Come on. "Remarkable" for an achievement like that? If Fed wins tomorrow it would imply a quasi-certainty that we will not see that record surpassed in our lifetimes.
Click to expand...

Didn't people say that about Sampras' 14 majors a decade ago? But yes, it would be hard to believe that someone else could match that for quite some time.
 
smoledman

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
Mustard said:
Didn't people say that about Sampras' 14 majors a decade ago? But yes, it would be hard to believe that someone else could match that for quite some time.
Click to expand...

It's guaranteed we won't see Fed's YEC mark broken for at least a decade or more.
 
T

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
I think you're getting things backwards. When he's winning comfortably, he's confident enough to chip and charge and serve and volley.

Unless you mean more generally aggressive from the baseline - but in that case, Federer is always aggressive. When his shots go in, he wins. When they don't, he loses.
 
Federer20042006

Federer20042006

Banned
Netspirit said:
30 is the age when the spine loses flexibility and the blood vessels in it start to get "fossilized" with calcium (so the spine essentially starts to die and this process is irreversible until the very death of the human).

The muscles lose their ability to contract explosively, the brain loses its reaction time, the eyeball muscles begin to degenerate which decreases the ability to track fast-moving objects, the vision itself gets worse, and the stamina is depleted much sooner than during the peak 16-26 age.

The fact that Federer can still hang on with the young and best players in the world is remarkable. The fact that he even beats them from time to time is a biological anomaly.
Click to expand...

30 flat? Not 31? 32? 29.6374372?

I call BS on this whole thing. If the spine were "starting to die" at 30, nobody would be walking at 90.
 
ductrung3993

ductrung3993

Hall of Fame
TheF1Bob said:
LOL the stupid Fedards with their stupid topics like this. :lol:

Tomorrow, it will be Is Fed Too Old?
Click to expand...

Please help me press the report button for Bob - our year end TT most offensive user. I know that we all have different opinions and thus argue a lot. But most of us dont reach to the extent of offending others like him - the rudest person on this person on this forum perhaps. Please help TT stays clean everyone. Cheers.
 
M

Mick3391

Professional
Geeeez! Everyone insulting and beating each other up.

Any Tennis fans agree that when Fed is aggressive he is unbeatable? I had heard that from experts and I have seen it. I don't care if you love Fed, hate him, hate this poster or that, I'm TALKING TENNIS, anyone care to comment on the question at hand? I don't think I saw one answer.

It seems Fed keeps them off balance, he mixes it up, takes them out of rythmn, he was awesome at the net, just loved it. It would make sense also, if someones main play is back, they don't get as skilled up close.
 
N

Netspirit

Hall of Fame
Federer20042006 said:
I call BS on this whole thing. If the spine were "starting to die" at 30, nobody would be walking at 90.
Click to expand...

Perfect logic. And if I said people stop growing at some age, you would call BS on that too??

30 is the age when aging truly starts and progresses on all fronts until death. It is the age, for example, when people begin to lose their muscle mass. By age 75, the percentage of muscle mass is typically half of what it was during young adulthood, but it begins around 30.

If you watch any sport, tennis included, then 30 is the typical retirement age. There are always exceptions, like Agassi or like Haas now, but they are exceptions and those people usually have to work twice as hard just to hang on.

Remember, it is not "normal life" we are talking about. In normal life people aged 30 are perfectly fine and usually healthy. We are talking about the big sport where human beings "live on the edge" (and often take doping to cross that edge), where everything is a matter of small margins. Even a small degradation in physical abilities can be the difference between top 10 and top 100.

Ask Davydenko. Ask Youzhny. Ask Roddick. It is hilarious how blind people can pretend to be just to argue about something.
 
veroniquem

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Fed is aggressive when his opponent allows him to be. How could he be unbeatable when he lost twice to Delpo recently? (A guy he used to own). Of course he's beatable, more now than ever. Why are Fed fans always so extreme? He's had a fabulous season for his age. It doesn't mean he's unbeatable. Talk about hyperboles.
 
10is

10is

Professional
Netspirit said:
Perfect logic. And if I said people stop growing at some age, you would call BS on that too??

30 is the age when aging truly starts and progresses on all fronts until death. It is the age, for example, when people begin to lose their muscle mass. By age 75, the percentage of muscle mass is typically half of what it was during young adulthood, but it begins around 30.

If you watch any sport, tennis included, then 30 is the typical retirement age. There are always exceptions, like Agassi or like Haas now, but they are exceptions and those people usually have to work twice as hard just to hang on.

Remember, it is not "normal life" we are talking about. In normal life people aged 30 are perfectly fine and usually healthy. We are talking about the big sport where human beings "live on the edge" (and often take doping to cross that edge), where everything is a matter of small margins. Even a small degradation in physical abilities can be the difference between top 10 and top 100.

Ask Davydenko. Ask Youzhny. Ask Roddick. It is hilarious how blind people can pretend to be just to argue about something.
Click to expand...

Well said! Your assertions have scientific merit. Needless to say I too often facepalm at the level of ignorance, lack of intelligence and often utter naivete that exists amongst the posters here.
 
Last edited:
M

Mick3391

Professional
veroniquem said:
Fed is aggressive when his opponent allows him to be. How could he be unbeatable when he lost twice to Delpo recently? (A guy he used to own). Of course he's beatable, more now than ever. Why are Fed fans always so extreme? He's had a fabulous season for his age. It doesn't mean he's unbeatable. Talk about hyperboles.
Click to expand...

Of course I don't mean literally unbeatable.

That is a good point though, is it Fed being aggressive or his opponent allowing it.

I just remember these "Experts" saying what I thought, "If Fed plays aggresive he wins against baseliners", that's all:)
 
Bobby Jr

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
The Bawss said:
Ok can we please calm down. Federer was losing that match, lucked out in the tiebreak
Click to expand...
Say what? After Fed got the break back in the first set he was the better player > that was ages before the tiebreak came along. He won that without any obvious element of luck imo. He's just a great tiebreak player generally.
 
veroniquem

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Mick3391 said:
Of course I don't mean literally unbeatable.

That is a good point though, is it Fed being aggressive or his opponent allowing it.

I just remember these "Experts" saying what I thought, "If Fed plays aggresive he wins against baseliners", that's all:)
Click to expand...


That is definitely how Fed won his match vs Murray today. It doesn't mean it would work every time. He has to be very accurate to manage that, be in the zone. Otherwise, he'll TRY being aggressive but shank a lot of shots.
 
Towser83

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
Mustard said:
Didn't people say that about Sampras' 14 majors a decade ago? But yes, it would be hard to believe that someone else could match that for quite some time.
Click to expand...

In a way something like 7 WTF or 8 MC titles is less likely to be matched than a load of slams. Just the fact that to win 7 titles is going to take 7 years minimum, and if you lose one year that chance is gone for that year, where as with a slam you could be going for number 15, lose but then you have 3 more chances.

14 slams was very hard to beat and 17 would be even harder, but no-one will ever get 17 WTF or any single masters event. 10 would be hard enough to do. So with these one a year events, you don't have to have as many as a banchmark for it to be really hard to surpass.
 
Towser83

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
veroniquem said:
That is definitely how Fed won his match vs Murray today. It doesn't mean it would work every time. He has to be very accurate to manage that, be in the zone. Otherwise, he'll TRY being aggressive but shank a lot of shots.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree. Federer can have spells of being unplayable but it's hard to do that all the time. I'm mean I've seen even him boss Nadal on clay for a set when he was red lining a couple of times, but below that level he couldn't cope which is why he has never beaten Nadal at RG. Doing that vs nadal on clay is one of the hardest things in tennis though, so I don't even feel bad that he can't anymore.
 
Towser83

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
veroniquem said:
7 or 8 at one title is extremely rare but doable. More than 8 is unchartered territory.
Click to expand...

Isn't Nadal the only guy to have 8 titles somewhere, or is that 8 in a row? Next year he gets the chance at 9 which is pretty amazing. I don't see 8 masters titles in a row ever being beaten unless nadal does it next year or something really weird happens in tennis.
 
veroniquem

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Towser83 said:
Isn't Nadal the only guy to have 8 titles somewhere, or is that 8 in a row? Next year he gets the chance at 9 which is pretty amazing. I don't see 8 masters titles in a row ever being beaten unless nadal does it next year or something really weird happens in tennis.
Click to expand...

Yeah 8 in a row is Nadal's exclusive. It's really mindboggling when you think of it. Vilas won Buenos Aires 8 times but only over 7 seasons (because it got played twice one year) and I don't think they were consecutive.
 
Last edited:
N

Netspirit

Hall of Fame
WTF is harder to dominate than a slam, let along a Masters. If Federer wins the WTF seven times I would rank it higher than his 7 Wimbledons since at no Wimbledon he had to beat 4-5 top 8 players in a row.
 
N

Netspirit

Hall of Fame
veroniquem said:
It's not more difficult to dominate than a slam especially now that all the matches are best of 3.
Click to expand...

In a slam you do not have to beat 5 best players. Example: USO 2010.

In the WTF you have to beat them all every single time. 3 sets vs. 5 makes focus and concentration more important than stamina, but does not change the odds.
 
welcome2petrkordaland

welcome2petrkordaland

Professional
"When Fed is aggr... on indoor in 2 out of 3 sets. Fed's weakest shot, the high backhand, can scarcely be exploited on this surface.

Just to throw another dart at the OP's title, I'd say "Fed is nearly unbeatable on indoor in 2 out of 3 sets." IMHO, Nadal hit the wall physically/emotionally a few years ago (when Fed won in 3 vs. Nadal in the final) after his epic 3-setter with Murray the day before. I know, I know I've started another sour grapes version of Nadal never loses vs. Fed. when he's fresh...

We'll see what happens tomorrow.

I do feel Fed indoor is quite dominant (due to aforementioned court conditions which mitigate his vulnerabilities), perhaps a half level under Nadal's clay dominance... which says a lot.
 
smoledman

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
welcome2petrkordaland said:
"When Fed is aggr... on indoor in 2 out of 3 sets. Fed's weakest shot, the high backhand, can scarcely be exploited on this surface.

Just to throw another dart at the OP's title, I'd say "Fed is nearly unbeatable on indoor in 2 out of 3 sets." IMHO, Nadal hit the wall physically/emotionally a few years ago (when Fed won in 3 vs. Nadal in the final) after his epic 3-setter with Murray the day before. I know, I know I've started another sour grapes version of Nadal never loses vs. Fed. when he's fresh...

We'll see what happens tomorrow.

I do feel Fed indoor is quite dominant (due to aforementioned court conditions which mitigate his vulnerabilities), perhaps a half level under Nadal's clay dominance... which says a lot.
Click to expand...

Actually Fed has less problems these days with his backhand on slower surfaces then on faster ones.
 
N

Netspirit

Hall of Fame
The indoor hard is what Fed grew up on. Also clay, but he got unlucky to have the clay dude playing in the same era.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Backspin1183
Diego Schwartzman: RAFAEL NADAL is so hard to play because he's so aggressive
2
Replies
84
Views
4K
sarmpas
S
D
Federer should be more aggressive
Replies
28
Views
2K
HollerOne5
H
M
Djokovich too one dimensional, not all time great
Replies
30
Views
2K
Relinquis
Relinquis
jm1980
Ferrer: "Djokovic is unbeatable. Without a doubt he's making history"
2
Replies
70
Views
4K
donquijote
donquijote
S
Finally others are talking court speed
Replies
35
Views
2K
Wilander Fan
W
Top