Fed doesn't have the athlete's brain like Novak and Rafa.

edmondsm

edmondsm

Legend
Federer has always had a problem with wanting to win "artistically". It's 30 all, 4 all, in the 4th set and he's down 2 sets to one. Play a couple bad points and he hands Novak the match. In the same position Novak or Rafa would have done the practical thing. Take a little off the first serve, move your feet, keep the ball in play, don't let your shots land short.

What does Fed do? Try to serve and volley behind two second serves. Novak just brushed him aside and they were shaking hands two minutes later.

Don't get me wrong, Fed is the greatest ever. But having watched his whole career I can tell you for a fact that he would have many more trophies in his cabinet if he wasn't so stubborn and obsessed with being clever and regal.
 
D

Defcon

Hall of Fame
he has always been stubborn, anyone who's followed his career knows that. He could've won a lot of his finals with little adjustments instead of being obstinate. But we can't know, that same mentality worked for him all this time - there's a fine line between confidence and arrogance.
 
U

ultradr

Legend
Defcon said:
he has always been stubborn, anyone who's followed his career knows that. He could've won a lot of his finals with little adjustments instead of being obstinate. But we can't know, that same mentality worked for him all this time - there's a fine line between confidence and arrogance.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Why would he listen to anybody's advice if he could win 3 slams/year for multiple times with it.

Stupendously stubborn strategy simpleton.

He is absolutely GOAT stubborn.
 
Elektra

Elektra

Professional
Federer has let his talent put him on the road to victories. Overall his game is not deisgned for physicality nor is he the most natural gifted athlete, he has the athletics for tennis and that is it. Guys like Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal are natural born athletes who can easily crossover to different sports. They both have shown they have the natural athletic gifts for different sports and have show consistency they are elite level athletes not just tennis players.
 
Shaolin

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
edmondsm said:
Federer has always had a problem with wanting to win "artistically". It's 30 all, 4 all, in the 4th set and he's down 2 sets to one. Play a couple bad points and he hands Novak the match. In the same position Novak or Rafa would have done the practical thing. Take a little off the first serve, move your feet, keep the ball in play, don't let your shots land short.

What does Fed do? Try to serve and volley behind two second serves. Novak just brushed him aside and they were shaking hands two minutes later.

Don't get me wrong, Fed is the greatest ever. But having watched his whole career I can tell you for a fact that he would have many more trophies in his cabinet if he wasn't so stubborn and obsessed with being clever and regal.
Click to expand...


Real problem there. His overly artistic style won him 17 majors, more fans than any other player and most consider him the goat.

Consider that playing creatively is probably what motivates him and could be one of the things keeping him in the game this long as well.
 
swordtennis

swordtennis

G.O.A.T.
I am not going to agree with this. Fed is one of the greatest athletes of all time. Ridiculous talent and athlete. last night he won the most spectacular points of the match.
Federer came along at that time where tennis had one foot in old and one in new he had one foot in the old school world door and one foot in the modern tennis world. he paved the way for nadal and then djokovic.
Federer has always been in the mould of the classic tennis player with a modern baseline game blended in.
I really do not compare prime fed with djokovic. Fed style just has problems with Nadal and Djoker. Not his fault. Just timing. He would not be Fed if he did not.
 
weakera

weakera

Talk Tennis Guru
Lol at putting Djokobore in the same league as Rafa mentally. Peak Rafa is the toughest athlete mentally ever.
 
Sartorius

Sartorius

Hall of Fame
edmondsm said:
Federer has always had a problem with wanting to win "artistically". It's 30 all, 4 all, in the 4th set and he's down 2 sets to one. Play a couple bad points and he hands Novak the match. In the same position Novak or Rafa would have done the practical thing. Take a little off the first serve, move your feet, keep the ball in play, don't let your shots land short.

What does Fed do? Try to serve and volley behind two second serves. Novak just brushed him aside and they were shaking hands two minutes later.
Click to expand...

Easy to say in hindsight. Something tells me that if he did play safe and lost those points all the same (very likely) you would be telling us he should have been aggressive.
 
Z

zeekhoe

Rookie
edmondsm said:
Federer has always had a problem with wanting to win "artistically". It's 30 all, 4 all, in the 4th set and he's down 2 sets to one. Play a couple bad points and he hands Novak the match. In the same position Novak or Rafa would have done the practical thing. Take a little off the first serve, move your feet, keep the ball in play, don't let your shots land short.

What does Fed do? Try to serve and volley behind two second serves. Novak just brushed him aside and they were shaking hands two minutes later.

Don't get me wrong, Fed is the greatest ever. But having watched his whole career I can tell you for a fact that he would have many more trophies in his cabinet if he wasn't so stubborn and obsessed with being clever and regal.
Click to expand...
rafans don't have brains, period.
 
Bobby Jr

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
Sartorius said:
Easy to say in hindsight. Something tells me that if he did play safe and lost those points all the same (very likely) you would be telling us he should have been aggressive.
Click to expand...
Yeah, exactly. The first twos sets were good by Djokovic but Federer was plainly feeding the net without much help from Djokovoc.

Players have really off days and it took Federer an hour before he started even connecting with the ball well yesterday. It happens. This is no different to looking at badly one-sided losses suffered by Nadal or Murray at the hands of Fed at the WTF in the past (or losses Djokovic has suffered - e.g. Cinci 2012, WTF 2010) and criticising them for being inane reasons like being too stubborn or not taking a bit off their serve and playing more carefully. Some days the wheels just fall off and there's not a lot you can do about it. Playing safe is a 100% losing option for these guys - only a club hack can pull off that sort of rethink. At least in this instance Federer did find some range eventually but the scoreboard pressures were just too heavy by that stage.
 
icedevil0289

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
Elektra said:
Federer has let his talent put him on the road to victories. Overall his game is not deisgned for physicality nor is he the most natural gifted athlete, he has the athletics for tennis and that is it. Guys like Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal are natural born athletes who can easily crossover to different sports. They both have shown they have the natural athletic gifts for different sports and have show consistency they are elite level athletes not just tennis players.
Click to expand...

LMAO!! omg at what i am reading...what are people smoking up in here

also wasn't fed a good soccer player? he seems to in general have that athlete instinct mind, or well once did. also i dont get how one is bringing murray into this.... like none of this makes any sense whatsoever and you make it sound like somehow tennis itself doesn't require a ton of athleticism like oh yeah roger has just enough for tennis but not for other sports...
 
Legend of Borg

Legend of Borg

G.O.A.T.
i got cancer reading some of these comments

this one in particular gave me Ebola


Elektra said:
Federer has let his talent put him on the road to victories. Overall his game is not deisgned for physicality nor is he the most natural gifted athlete, he has the athletics for tennis and that is it. Guys like Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal are natural born athletes who can easily crossover to different sports. They both have shown they have the natural athletic gifts for different sports and have show consistency they are elite level athletes not just tennis players.
Click to expand...
 
dunlop_fort_knox

dunlop_fort_knox

Professional
edmondsm said:
Federer has always had a problem with wanting to win "artistically". It's 30 all, 4 all, in the 4th set and he's down 2 sets to one. Play a couple bad points and he hands Novak the match. In the same position Novak or Rafa would have done the practical thing. Take a little off the first serve, move your feet, keep the ball in play, don't let your shots land short.

What does Fed do? Try to serve and volley behind two second serves. Novak just brushed him aside and they were shaking hands two minutes later.

Don't get me wrong, Fed is the greatest ever. But having watched his whole career I can tell you for a fact that he would have many more trophies in his cabinet if he wasn't so stubborn and obsessed with being clever and regal.
Click to expand...
true but nobody has ever looked so glorious getting his butt whomped.
 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
Attila_the_gorilla said:
His instinct is to play short points, win or lose. Maybe that's what has given him longevity.
Click to expand...
Agree with that. And it is an interesting dichotomy because a "quick score" might typically be associated with instant gratification, rather than extended (over nearly two decades) rewards. Personally, I'll take some of the infuriating in-match decisions if it means getting to enjoy that excellence beyond the typical expiration date.
 
West Coast Ace

West Coast Ace

G.O.A.T.
Defcon said:
he has always been stubborn, anyone who's followed his career knows that. He could've won a lot of his finals with little adjustments instead of being obstinate. But we can't know, that same mentality worked for him all this time - there's a fine line between confidence and arrogance.
Click to expand...
Great post. The Delpo USO final comes to mind.

But the OP is way off. There's no way Fed is ever going to out-rally Djokovic or Nadal. Ditto Murray. He has to be aggressive - it's just a matter of how and when.
 
M

markwillplay

Hall of Fame
total horse poo. He is simply not as good as Joker when both are playing well. He knows he has to play above the level that can play to beat all other players. That probably makes him press, but it does not matter right now. The weapons he has used his entire career to hurt opponents don't hurt Joker as much when Joker is playing at his best. People are so funny how they speculate on Federer's "level of play" early in the tournament like somehow it comes down a bit when he plays Joker...His best is simply not good enough to beat Joker on a day when Joker is at his best. Federer relies on getting returns (more often than not) that are somewhat shorter so he can go on the offensive...and I love it...but Joker is the best returner in the game and Fed is constantly hitting balls from his shoe laces that are being returned deep. Then Joker has such good ball striking...power....and flexibility, it just pushes Fed into pressing. Fed still may have one in him, but I don't think it will be against that man. I still believe that Joker remembers Federer wagging his number one finger going to the net at the french when he beat him in the semis there....won't ever forget it. He seems to be able to really get to his top level against Fed now.
 
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
He doesn't have a champion's brain either really.. Hes just pure talent and ability and he spent his career cakewalking through individuals with a fraction of talent he had.. But when two individuals came along with a talent on par with Federer, that put Fed's will/ mental toughness etc. into question.. And thats when he was exposed. He couldn't steamroll these guys like he could everyone else. The only time Fed was EVER comfortable is when he was blowing guys off the court. Guys who put up no resistance.


His deciding set records over the years CAN'T be pretty.
 
Elektra

Elektra

Professional
90's Clay said:
He doesn't have a champion's brain either really.. Hes just pure talent and ability and he spent his career cakewalking through individuals with a fraction of talent he had.. But when two individuals came along with a talent on par with Federer, that put Fed's will/ mental toughness etc. into question.. And thats when he was exposed. He couldn't steamroll these guys like he could everyone else. The only time Fed was EVER comfortable is when he was blowing guys off the court. Guys who put up no resistance.


His deciding set records over the years CAN'T be pretty.
Click to expand...

Love that!

aganfuG.gif
 
S

sportsfan1

Legend
This is a theory floated often here and it won't go away. But Federer himself has said many times in interviews that he doesn't care how he wins, whether it looks good or not is beside the point. Of course people here counter with "he just says that for the press or viewers", but it would be obvious that any player would take a win over how their shots looked.
 
D

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
I would say that rather he is not stubborn enough. He keeps the option of playing from the back court open and usually beats a retreat once Nole passes him a few times. But he cannot beat him from the baseline anymore so what's the point? Fed did not have a problem in this match up (though it was always a tough one) until his baseline game deteriorated.
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
edmondsm said:
Federer has always had a problem with wanting to win "artistically". It's 30 all, 4 all, in the 4th set and he's down 2 sets to one. Play a couple bad points and he hands Novak the match. In the same position Novak or Rafa would have done the practical thing. Take a little off the first serve, move your feet, keep the ball in play, don't let your shots land short.

What does Fed do? Try to serve and volley behind two second serves. Novak just brushed him aside and they were shaking hands two minutes later.

Don't get me wrong, Fed is the greatest ever. But having watched his whole career I can tell you for a fact that he would have many more trophies in his cabinet if he wasn't so stubborn and obsessed with being clever and regal.
Click to expand...
I think you have a point, but Nadal has stubbornly stuck to his game plan too. Return too far back, spin the serve too much, over spin everything rather than go more flat. That's got him 14 slams. Using your logic, he could have won more.

Novak, I think, is the smartest of all of them. I don't like his game, but he has huge gifts which he uses and has not hesitated to turn former weaknesses into solid play (net, overheads) and his biggest weakness is now a huge strength - serve, especially the second serve.
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Dolgopolov85 said:
I would say that rather he is not stubborn enough. He keeps the option of playing from the back court open and usually beats a retreat once Nole passes him a few times. But he cannot beat him from the baseline anymore so what's the point? Fed did not have a problem in this match up (though it was always a tough one) until his baseline game deteriorated.
Click to expand...
The problem with this logic is that during the time his baseline game got worse Novak has gotten better in all areas. I don't accept that peak Federer could best this present version of Novak. I just think that peak Fed would win more often and could still grab a slam, now and then.
 
ProStaff forever

ProStaff forever

Rookie
swordtennis said:
I am not going to agree with this. Fed is one of the greatest athletes of all time. Ridiculous talent and athlete. last night he won the most spectacular points of the match.
Federer came along at that time where tennis had one foot in old and one in new he had one foot in the old school world door and one foot in the modern tennis world. he paved the way for nadal and then djokovic.
Federer has always been in the mould of the classic tennis player with a modern baseline game blended in.
I really do not compare prime fed with djokovic. Fed style just has problems with Nadal and Djoker. Not his fault. Just timing. He would not be Fed if he did not.
Click to expand...
This is the most perfect statement I've ever read.
 
Prabhanjan

Prabhanjan

Professional
If Fed had played the defensive game and not the Fed game, the scoreline in yesterday's match would have been 6-1 6-2 6-0 or even worse. That he took the 3rd set is only because he played his own game. The first two set dominance is more in due credit to Nole. In fact, if it were Fed playing the defensive game, he would not even be playing Nole in the slam matches since 2012. He would have been long retired.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
90's Clay said:
He doesn't have a champion's brain either really.. Hes just pure talent and ability and he spent his career cakewalking through individuals with a fraction of talent he had.. But when two individuals came along with a talent on par with Federer, that put Fed's will/ mental toughness etc. into question.. And thats when he was exposed. He couldn't steamroll these guys like he could everyone else. The only time Fed was EVER comfortable is when he was blowing guys off the court. Guys who put up no resistance.


His deciding set records over the years CAN'T be pretty.
Click to expand...
Stretch is just a weak era beneficiary dude, beating a 30+ Fed for his slams. Soon enough his fans will consider him greater than Sampras.
 
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
Sabratha said:
Not to the same extent as Stretch. At least his main rival(s) weren't 35 years old/out of form.
Click to expand...


If we take Fed out of 2003-2007 and stick Nole of the last few years in there, would Nole really accomplish any less?


Agassi was 34- 35 with a bad back. Physically much worse off than Fed is now. Nadal was a pup. Roddick was useless. Hewitt was alright, but not a world beater or anything especially after 2005. Definitely wouldn't beat Nole. I don't see Nole having issues with that field.
 
D

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
Gary Duane said:
The problem with this logic is that during the time his baseline game got worse Novak has gotten better in all areas. I don't accept that peak Federer could best this present version of Novak. I just think that peak Fed would win more often and could still grab a slam, now and then.
Click to expand...
Oh, I am not going down the usual Fed fan fantasy wherein peak Fed demolishes any version of Nole and I do believe the current version would be a tough match up for Fed. I am just saying hanging with Nole from the baseline wasn't a problem for Fed up to 2012. He still lost matches to him but the point is now Nole beats him so easily in the rallies that he has to adopt a much riskier strategy to even make a match of it. He can't hang with Murray either from the baseline but his aggressive tactics work better against Murray.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
90's Clay said:
If we take Fed out of 2003-2007 and stick Nole of the last few years in there, would Nole really accomplish any less?
Click to expand...
Considering he lost to Nishikori at the USO and a 39 year old Karlovic, you'd think so.


90's Clay said:
Agassi was 34- 35 with a bad back. Physically much worse off than Fed is now.
Click to expand...
Could still bring it and arguably play at a higher level than current Fed when all cylinders are running. He didn't nearly beat Fed at the USO in 2004 for nothing.
90's Clay said:
Nadal was a pup.
Click to expand...
Was still No. 2 the whole time, made slam finals on grass + won RG every year. Better than current Fed..
90's Clay said:
Roddick was useless.
Click to expand...
Would still provide more of a battle than some of these guys currently. Look at their H2H.
90's Clay said:
Hewitt was alright, but not a world beater or anything especially after 2005. Definitely wouldn't beat Nole.
Click to expand...
Still think he'd be able to beat him at the USO/Wimbledon if the circumstances arose. He's no Sampras/Fed at the faster slams.
90's Clay said:
I don't see Nole having issues with that field.
Click to expand...
I see him having more issues than Fed. Probably more issues than Sampras if we stuck him into that time period too.
 
metsman

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Sabratha said:
Considering he lost to Nishikori at the USO and a 39 year old Karlovic, you'd think so.



Could still bring it and arguably play at a higher level than current Fed when all cylinders are running. He didn't nearly beat Fed at the USO in 2004 for nothing.
Was still No. 2 the whole time, made slam finals on grass + won RG every year. Better than current Fed..
Would still provide more of a battle than some of these guys currently. Look at their H2H.
Still think he'd be able to beat him at the USO/Wimbledon if the circumstances arose. He's no Sampras/Fed at the faster slams.
I see him having more issues than Fed. Probably more issues than Sampras if we stuck him into that time period too.
Click to expand...
definitely more issues than Sampras. People forget that when the grass was mildly fast back in 2012-2013 Djoker did not win a set against Murray and has lost to him more than a few times on faster hard. He's going to have real problems with 04-05 Hewitt on grass/faster hards. 04 hewitt was bad in the USO final, but 05 semifinal was taking it to fed so considering what Nishikori did 05 Hewitt could take him out. And 04 Agassi could just as easily take him out considering Novak hates the wind. He would also struggle to get through the Blake/Davydenko/Roddick gauntlet that Fed faced at the 06 USO considering who he was losing sets to in 2015 and considering Roddick/Blake are bad matchups. Roddick would be a real danger to him at the 07 USO too and would stand an excellent shot at beating him at 04 Wimby. At the end I think Djoker would find a way win 2004, 2006-2007 AO, 2005-2006 Wimby(although hewitt would not be easy for him in 05), 2007 USO and that's it. So if he played in 04-07, I would give him 3 AO, 0 RG, 2 Wimby, 1 USO. 6 majors in 4 years...surprise that's EXACTLY what he did in the all time golden strong era of 2011-2014 or 2012-2015...however way you wanna count his 4 best consecutive years.

Peak Sampras would have some problems with Hewitt but I can't see him losing to him at Wimby/USO. However he was prone to upsets at the USO so I would see him getting 1 AO, 4 Wimby, 2-3 USO in 04-07.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
metsman said:
definitely more issues than Sampras. People forget that when the grass was mildly fast back in 2012-2013 Djoker did not win a set against Murray and has lost to him more than a few times on faster hard. He's going to have real problems with 04-05 Hewitt on grass/faster hards. 04 hewitt was bad in the USO final, but 05 semifinal was taking it to fed so considering what Nishikori did 05 Hewitt could take him out. And 04 Agassi could just as easily take him out considering Novak hates the wind. He would also struggle to get through the Blake/Davydenko/Roddick gauntlet that Fed faced at the 06 USO considering who he was losing sets to in 2015 and considering Roddick/Blake are bad matchups. Roddick would be a real danger to him at the 07 USO too and would stand an excellent shot at beating him at 04 Wimby. At the end I think Djoker would find a way win 2004, 2006-2007 AO, 2005-2006 Wimby(although hewitt would not be easy for him in 05), 2007 USO and that's it. So if he played in 04-07, I would give him 3 AO, 0 RG, 2 Wimby, 1 USO. 6 majors in 4 years...surprise that's EXACTLY what he did in the all time golden strong era of 2011-2014 or 2012-2015...however way you wanna count his 4 best consecutive years.

Peak Sampras would have some problems with Hewitt but I can't see him losing to him at Wimby/USO. However he was prone to upsets at the USO so I would see him getting 1 AO, 4 Wimby, 2-3 USO in 04-07.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree with this.
 
PeterHo

PeterHo

Hall of Fame
Sabratha said:
Considering he lost to Nishikori at the USO and a 39 year old Karlovic, you'd think so.



Could still bring it and arguably play at a higher level than current Fed when all cylinders are running. He didn't nearly beat Fed at the USO in 2004 for nothing.
Was still No. 2 the whole time, made slam finals on grass + won RG every year. Better than current Fed..
Would still provide more of a battle than some of these guys currently. Look at their H2H.
Still think he'd be able to beat him at the USO/Wimbledon if the circumstances arose. He's no Sampras/Fed at the faster slams.
I see him having more issues than Fed. Probably more issues than Sampras if we stuck him into that time period too.
Click to expand...

Lol roddick.. Novak retuRNs his serves deep and he is a goner. Just another Raonic. Serves with power but thats about it. Sampras has better serves, and actually knows what to do with the ball when its returned. And there's no way a player who is ranked 198 in career return games won can break nole. Lol.

Hewitt, not going to beat Nole from the baseline. Hewitt is only great against volleyers, ie. Sampras, and volleying Federer. Trying to beat the the GOAT baseliner? Lol. Will he outgrind Nole? No. Hit through Nole? No.

Agassi, well, looked very slow compared to any top player in the current era. Nole will just wear him out from the baseline with endless rallies. Agassis winners against most will not be enough to hit through Novak. The same story for most players. UE galore for him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Why doesn't fed, novak and rafa practice with each other?
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shank Volley
Shank Volley
Spencer Gore
Would Novak have preferred to play Rafa?
Replies
49
Views
876
Spencer Gore
Spencer Gore
tennisaddict
  • Poll
Would Rafa prefer losing to Novak/Fed or Brown/Darcis/Rosol/Kyrgios ?
Replies
23
Views
1K
Defcon
D
GabeT
Fed and Novak at Wimbledon
2 3 4
Replies
196
Views
4K
Holmes
Holmes
Federev
Fed/ Novak/ Rafa. Asking the Wrong Questions
Replies
24
Views
716
vex
vex
Top