All in all, has the new racket been good for Federer?

[Ihatetennis]

@BreakPoint

 

[HRB]

Well I see a few folks once again "liked" a post where I pointed out to BP how insufferable he is! Weird, we must be part of the "club" he mentioned in one of his ummnn..."comebacks" at me, you know the one filled with folks who can't stand his illogical rants; aka 90% of TT! Seriously, do yourselves a favor and add him to ignore list...you'll all have lower blood pressure when you read threads he is ruining.

Hell, part of me wanted to read his latest nonsense answer to my last post..BUT IT'S NOT WORTH IT!

Remember folks, we are all wrong by not agreeing with him, and since Roger won 17 slams with a sub 90 sq inch head, and none since, he is clearly an idiot as are we!!! LMAO..HAPPY NEW YEAR!

 

[HRB]

Breakpoint is gonna feel a world of factual pain when i show these stats

Federer 2006

SERVICE RECORD
Aces 656
Double Faults 118
#PhraseItemNotFound# 63%
1st Serve Points Won 77%
2nd Serve Points Won 59%
Break Points Faced 399
Break Points Saved 70%
Service Games Played 1,229
Service Games Won 90%
Total Service Points Won 70%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 35%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 54%
Break Points Opportunities 875
Break Points Converted 43%
Return Games Played 1,190
Return Games Won 32%
Return Points Won 42%
Total Points Won 56%



Federer 2012

SERVICE RECORD
Aces 665
Double Faults 120
#PhraseItemNotFound# 63%
1st Serve Points Won 78%
2nd Serve Points Won 60%
Break Points Faced 299
Break Points Saved 69%
Service Games Played 1,042
Service Games Won 91%
Total Service Points Won 71%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 31%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 51%
Break Points Opportunities 630
Break Points Converted 42%
Return Games Played 1,020
Return Games Won 26%
Return Points Won 39%
Total Points Won 54%



Federer 2015


SERVICE RECORD
Aces 597
Double Faults 125
#PhraseItemNotFound# 64%
1st Serve Points Won 80%
2nd Serve Points Won 57%
Break Points Faced 228
Break Points Saved 68%
Service Games Played 890
Service Games Won 92%
Total Service Points Won 72%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 33%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 50%
Break Points Opportunities 585
Break Points Converted 41%
Return Games Played 875
Return Games Won 27%
Return Points Won 40%
Total Points Won 55%




Fed had a higher % of first serve points won than in 2006 or 2012 in 2015. with less aces than in both those years.
Fed won a higher % of his service points and games than in 2006 or 2012 in 2015

also with an average of 6 more doubles faults than in 2006 or 2012

Fed had lower first serve return points won in 2015 than in 2006 but higher than in 2012 and lower second serve return points won than in both those years

Fed had lower win % in return games won in 2015 than 2006 with 1% more than in 2012

Fed had lower % in return points won in 2015 than in 2006 but higher than 2012

Fed won less total points in 2015 than in 2006 but more than in 2012



here i am comparing peak federer to 2012 federer and 2015 federer

almost all stats are lower in 2012 than in the other two years which show that federer declined from 2006 to 2012

the rise in stats from 2012 to 2015 show federer is a better player in 2015 than in 2012 and is better at serving now than in his prime(less aces but higher winning percentages)


with this data we can conclude that federer's new racket did bring his level up. the decrease in stats 2006 to 2012 also shows a decline in ability(age related)

We can conclude that federer would in fact be better off with a 97 than a 90 today.

Don't even bother, facts and Break Point DON'T mix!

 

[Bobby Jr]

Seriously, do yourselves a favor and add him to ignore list...you'll all have lower blood pressure when you read threads he is ruining.

Good advice. I have done so. I expect to see 2016 vastly improved on these boards by missing most of his insane muppetry.

 

[Sander001]

BTW, I'm sure Federer feels pressure from Wilson to continue using the RF97A. It's making Wilson tons of money. They certainly want to avoid a repeat of the Jimmy Connors fiasco.

(In case you don't know, Jimmy Connors helped Wilson to design the original Pro Staff 85 as a racquet to use himself but then only used it for a few months before dumping it and going back to his trusty but discontinued T-2000. Wilson will do whatever it can to avoid a repeat of that.)

I actually agree with you. Wilson did that by having him play with a black frame for a good long while so that if he switched back to his old racquet, he could do so freely. And then he actually did switch back to his old racquet for a while, just to make sure he was making the right choice by dumping it again.

 

[smalahove]

Of the top 10 ATP players, only Fed and just recently Ferrer* are actually playing the same frame they endorse.
To me, this goes to show this isn't nearly the negative sales/brand factor that many on TT claim it to be.
If Fed went back to his PS90, they'd just give it the PS97/RF97A PJ and only a few hundred TT'ers would care.
I mean, just look at all the silly Burn PJs on thin beamed, heavy player's frames ...
One of my reg playing partners (4.5) keeps mentionning every second time we play, that his G(XT)SPs are the same Novak uses. I've tried telling him, but you know, he's stuck in that fairytale, so ...

* He just switched to Babolat Pure Drive (extended version)

 

[RanchDressing]

Why do you need information about Federer's exact customized specs to customize YOUR OWN racquet to YOUR OWN liking? Do you play exactly like Federer?

Yes, you can modify a retail RF97A to exactly Federer's specs. But why would you want to?

Yes, you can modify a retail Tour 90 to what Federer actually used. His frames were not lighter. A little lead tape at the top of the hoop will dramatically increase the swingweight without increasing the static weight very much. Besides, lighter Tour 90s were also sold at retail, they were called the Asian versions.

The re-occuring theme of you bypassing the point that someone else makes, to make some useless/unrelated point, in an attempt to shout over them remains constant in all of your posts.

My point was that wilson uses this as a marketing tactic, when in reality the frame is not what roger uses. It's important for people to realize that.

Beyond that, maybe if you actually were a good ball striker and used modern technique, you could handle a 350sw. For someone who claims to be such a big advocate of smaller frames I'd imagine you could handle a 6% increase in inertia over a 330sw.

Rogers old specs just provide for a ton of stability, and the swing weight really isn't even that crazy.

 

[BreakPoint]

Breakpoint is gonna feel a world of factual pain when i show these stats

Federer 2006

SERVICE RECORD
Aces 656
Double Faults 118
#PhraseItemNotFound# 63%
1st Serve Points Won 77%
2nd Serve Points Won 59%
Break Points Faced 399
Break Points Saved 70%
Service Games Played 1,229
Service Games Won 90%
Total Service Points Won 70%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 35%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 54%
Break Points Opportunities 875
Break Points Converted 43%
Return Games Played 1,190
Return Games Won 32%
Return Points Won 42%
Total Points Won 56%



Federer 2012

SERVICE RECORD
Aces 665
Double Faults 120
#PhraseItemNotFound# 63%
1st Serve Points Won 78%
2nd Serve Points Won 60%
Break Points Faced 299
Break Points Saved 69%
Service Games Played 1,042
Service Games Won 91%
Total Service Points Won 71%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 31%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 51%
Break Points Opportunities 630
Break Points Converted 42%
Return Games Played 1,020
Return Games Won 26%
Return Points Won 39%
Total Points Won 54%



Federer 2015


SERVICE RECORD
Aces 597
Double Faults 125
#PhraseItemNotFound# 64%
1st Serve Points Won 80%
2nd Serve Points Won 57%
Break Points Faced 228
Break Points Saved 68%
Service Games Played 890
Service Games Won 92%
Total Service Points Won 72%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 33%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 50%
Break Points Opportunities 585
Break Points Converted 41%
Return Games Played 875
Return Games Won 27%
Return Points Won 40%
Total Points Won 55%




Fed had a higher % of first serve points won than in 2006 or 2012 in 2015. with less aces than in both those years.
Fed won a higher % of his service points and games than in 2006 or 2012 in 2015

also with an average of 6 more doubles faults than in 2006 or 2012

Fed had lower first serve return points won in 2015 than in 2006 but higher than in 2012 and lower second serve return points won than in both those years

Fed had lower win % in return games won in 2015 than 2006 with 1% more than in 2012

Fed had lower % in return points won in 2015 than in 2006 but higher than 2012

Fed won less total points in 2015 than in 2006 but more than in 2012



here i am comparing peak federer to 2012 federer and 2015 federer

almost all stats are lower in 2012 than in the other two years which show that federer declined from 2006 to 2012

the rise in stats from 2012 to 2015 show federer is a better player in 2015 than in 2012 and is better at serving now than in his prime(less aces but higher winning percentages)


with this data we can conclude that federer's new racket did bring his level up. the decrease in stats 2006 to 2012 also shows a decline in ability(age related)

We can conclude that federer would in fact be better off with a 97 than a 90 today.

1. Thanks for pointing out that Federer is serving worse with the RF97A with fewer aces and more double faults and with a lower percentage of 2nd serves won. As the old saying goes - "You're only as good as your second serve". And we know from earlier analysis that his average 1st and 2nd serve speeds are also lower with the 97.

2. He also played with back pain in 2012. If you recall his back injury during 2012 Wimbledon which forced him to wear a black compression T-shirt underneath his white polo shirt. Despite the bad back, he still beat both Djokovic and Murray and won Wimbledon with the Tour 90. With a pain free back, he has been unable to win even a single Slam over two years with the RF97A.

3. How many Slams and Masters did he win in 2015 versus in 2012 and 2006? Because that's ALL that matters. All these other stats are irrelevant. The ONLY stat that matters are Slams and Masters titles won. Stats are NOT results.

4. So what are his stats for 2014 and 2015 using the Tour 90? Oh, you don't have them? Because that's the ONLY way to say "for sure" how he would have played with the Tour 90 vs. the RF97A over the past two years. Again, everything else is PURE SPECULATION. Way too many other variables.

 

[RanchDressing]

1. Thanks for pointing out that Federer is serving worse with the RF97A with fewer aces and more double faults and with a lower percentage of 2nd serves won. As the old saying goes - "You're only as good as your second serve". And we know from earlier analysis that his average 1st and 2nd serve speeds are also lower with the 97.

2. He also played with back pain in 2012. If you recall his back injury during 2012 Wimbledon which forced him to wear a black compression T-shirt underneath his white polo shirt. Despite the bad back, he still beat both Djokovic and Murray and won Wimbledon with the Tour 90. With a pain free back, he has been unable to win even a single Slam over two years with the RF97A.

3. How many Slams and Masters did he win in 2015 versus in 2012 and 2006? Because that's ALL that matters. All these other stats are irrelevant. The ONLY stat that matters are Slams and Masters titles won. Stats are NOT results.

4. So what are his stats for 2014 and 2015 using the Tour 90? Oh, you don't have them? Because that's the ONLY way to say "for sure" how he would have played with the Tour 90 vs. the RF97A over the past two years. Again, everything else is PURE SPECULATION. Way too many other variables.

3. 2015 he made it to two slam finals, 2012 he made it to one

2. You should go back to 2012 and stay there.

1. To use your own logic against you, What are Fed's serve speeds with the 90 in 2015? "Oh, you don't have them? ...PURE SPECULATION. Way too many other variables."

The amazing thing about you, is the whole world could tell you you're wrong, and in your mind you'd twist it around into something else.

 

[BreakPoint]

The re-occuring theme of you bypassing the point that someone else makes, to make some useless/unrelated point, in an attempt to shout over them remains constant in all of your posts.

My point was that wilson uses this as a marketing tactic, when in reality the frame is not what roger uses. It's important for people to realize that.

Beyond that, maybe if you actually were a good ball striker and used modern technique, you could handle a 350sw. For someone who claims to be such a big advocate of smaller frames I'd imagine you could handle a 6% increase in inertia over a 330sw.

Rogers old specs just provide for a ton of stability, and the swing weight really isn't even that crazy.

Yes, Federer's old spec does provide for a ton of stability, mostly because the Tour 90 is one of the most stable racquets ever.

And, yes, Federer does indeed use a retail RF97A (which is then customized by P1 to his preference). This has been confirmed by numerous people. Wilson even made a point of going out of its way to verify it to avoid future lawsuits.

“We want to be clear this is his actual racket, not a ‘signature racket’ or ‘racket of choice,’ ” said John Lyons, Wilson’s global product director, referring to the many rackets sponsored by top players with vague phrases like the one put forth by the tennis company Head: “Andy Murray’s racket of choice.”

Federer said the racket coming to stores in October was “the one I’m playing with.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/25/sports/tennis/stars-rackets-not-just-like-ours.html?_r=1

 

[RanchDressing]

Yes, Federer's old spec does provide for a ton of stability, mostly because the Tour 90 is one of the most stable racquets ever.

And, yes, Federer does indeed use a retail RF97A (which is then customized by P1 to his preference). This has been confirmed by numerous people. Wilson even made a point of going out of its way to verify it to avoid future lawsuits.

“We want to be clear this is his actual racket, not a ‘signature racket’ or ‘racket of choice,’ ” said John Lyons, Wilson’s global product director, referring to the many rackets sponsored by top players with vague phrases like the one put forth by the tennis company Head: “Andy Murray’s racket of choice.”

Federer said the racket coming to stores in October was “the one I’m playing with.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/25/sports/tennis/stars-rackets-not-just-like-ours.html?_r=1

Weight specifications can vary from one frame to another, from pure production standpoint by 5% as many members have attested. They can make this claim as long as they want, doesn't make it true that the "matched spec" you get at the store, is anything close to the stock setup he starts with. Even if the mould/layup is identical. The weight distribution decides how the racquet plays 100x more than how much 'basalt' or if the frame is a "St. Vincent" as you seem to think matters.

As for the tour 90, it has a recoil weight of 160 kg/cm^2. You don't even know what that is, but it's the measure of inertia about the balance point of the frame, and is the physics measurement of stability. The rf97a in "matched spec" measures 170 kg/cm^2. In short, the RF97a alone is loads more stable.


Break point, you really don't know much about racquets, and it's pretty cute to see you make all sorts of claims. Sometimes I come on TT just to read your posts. One time I squirted water out my nose I laughed so hard. If you're still going to make claims that physics has no support of, it would be nice if you send me a new water proof keyboard.

 

[Ihatetennis]

1. Thanks for pointing out that Federer is serving worse with the RF97A with fewer aces and more double faults and with a lower percentage of 2nd serves won. As the old saying goes - "You're only as good as your second serve". And we know from earlier analysis that his average 1st and 2nd serve speeds are also lower with the 97.

2. He also played with back pain in 2012. If you recall his back injury during 2012 Wimbledon which forced him to wear a black compression T-shirt underneath his white polo shirt. Despite the bad back, he still beat both Djokovic and Murray and won Wimbledon with the Tour 90. With a pain free back, he has been unable to win even a single Slam over two years with the RF97A.

3. How many Slams and Masters did he win in 2015 versus in 2012 and 2006? Because that's ALL that matters. All these other stats are irrelevant. The ONLY stat that matters are Slams and Masters titles won. Stats are NOT results.

4. So what are his stats for 2014 and 2015 using the Tour 90? Oh, you don't have them? Because that's the ONLY way to say "for sure" how he would have played with the Tour 90 vs. the RF97A over the past two years. Again, everything else is PURE SPECULATION. Way too many other variables.

he is winning 92% of his service games, which means even if he is serving worse he is better off the baseline with the racket, in 2006 at his peak he won only 90% of his games

this stat is full proof regardless of his second serve stat, point is he is winning more 1st serve points with the new racket and winning more games


look at his returning, it has gotten worse, but even then he is winning just 1% less total games than in 2006.


also i used 2012 as his last 90 year because you only complain that we cant use stats from 2013 and 2014 was a transition year for him with the new racket


if you want i can compare 2015 fed to 2000 fed?

where do you want the stats from? fed is winning more service games than in 2006.


give me a valid argument to why fed should use a 90 when he won more service games with the 97. and keep in mind there will be a decade between this year and peak fed.

 

[Bobby Jr]

.... How many Slams and Masters did he win in 2015 versus in 2012 and 2006? Because that's ALL that matters. All these other stats are irrelevant. The ONLY stat that matters are Slams and Masters titles won. Stats are NOT results.

Basically, you're arguing for every other top player aside from Nadal, Djokovic and Murray to use a smaller head size because they all did worse than Federer in 2015 and 2012.

 

[BreakPoint]

3. 2015 he made it to two slam finals, 2012 he made it to one

2. You should go back to 2012 and stay there.

1. To use your own logic against you, What are Fed's serve speeds with the 90 in 2015? "Oh, you don't have them? ...PURE SPECULATION. Way too many other variables."

The amazing thing about you, is the whole world could tell you you're wrong, and in your mind you'd twist it around into something else.

1. Does Federer care more about getting to Slam finals or winning Slams? Do you think Federer would trade 3 Slam finals for 1 Slam title? Are Slam finalists remembered as well as the winners?

2. I see you have nothing to refute what I've said so you're just writing gibberish.

3. Exactly! We don't know how he would have done with the Tour 90 over the past two years because he didn't play with one. THAT'S BEEN MY WHOLE POINT THIS ENTIRE THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!! I never claimed he would have had better results with the Tour 90 over the past two years than with the RF97A because I DON"T KNOW. Nobody does! But to claim he WOULD HAVE had worse results with the Tour 90 is pure speculation and thus preposterous. There are no results to compare it with because he didn't use the Tour 90, so any effort to do so is pure fabrication and fantasy. All I know is, since he didn't win any Slams with the RF97A, he couldn't possibly have done any worse with the Tour 90 since you can't win fewer than zero Slams! And that's what he mostly cares about.

 

[Bobby Jr]

...“We want to be clear this is his actual racket, not a ‘signature racket’ or ‘racket of choice,’ ” said John Lyons, Wilson’s global product director, referring to the many rackets sponsored by top players with vague phrases like the one put forth by the tennis company Head: “Andy Murray’s racket of choice.”

For the benefit of others and to translate what Breakmuppet means here: When a quote suits him he will use it. When it doesn't he will pretend it's a lie or point at something unrelated and say "look, a baby wolf" etc.

 

[BreakPoint]

Basically, you're arguing for every other top player aside from Nadal, Djokovic and Murray to use a smaller head size because they all did worse than Federer in 2015 and 2012.

Um..no. Where in the world did you get that idea? How many other current top players used an 85 and 90 for over 20 years and then switched to a 97? Please name them.

Have you EVER seen me suggest that Ferrer or Nadal, or anyone else for that matter, switch to a 90?

You do realize that stroke mechanics get ingrained into your muscle memory over 20 years? I'm surprised I even have to convince you of that seeing how you've been unsuccessfully trying to switch away from the 85 for years. Ever wonder why? There's a reason for the old saying - "You can't teach an old dog new tricks". Federer has spent millions of hours of his life hitting a tennis ball with a smaller racquet. Changing what's already been ingrained into his muscle memory over decades is no easy task. He might as well start playing left-handed and using a two-handed backhand. LOL

 

[BreakPoint]

For the benefit of others and to translate what Breakmuppet means here: When a quote suits him he will use it. When it doesn't he will pretend it's a lie or point at something unrelated and say "look, a baby wolf" etc.

Facts suit me well. Yes, a foreign concept to you.

You just can't stand the fact that Federer uses a retail RF97A because it proves you to be wrong. As if Wilson wants to be inundated with further lawsuits by making sure they make that point as clear as possible in no uncertain terms and as publicly as possible in The New York Times!

 

[BreakPoint]

he is winning 92% of his service games, which means even if he is serving worse he is better off the baseline with the racket, in 2006 at his peak he won only 90% of his games

this stat is full proof regardless of his second serve stat, point is he is winning more 1st serve points with the new racket and winning more games


look at his returning, it has gotten worse, but even then he is winning just 1% less total games than in 2006.


also i used 2012 as his last 90 year because you only complain that we cant use stats from 2013 and 2014 was a transition year for him with the new racket


if you want i can compare 2015 fed to 2000 fed?

where do you want the stats from? fed is winning more service games than in 2006.


give me a valid argument to why fed should use a 90 when he won more service games with the 97. and keep in mind there will be a decade between this year and peak fed.

Do you think Federer cares more about service games won or Slam titles won? Slam titles is the ONLY stat that matters! None of these other stats matter if they don't produce results! Slams and Masters titles are results! Service points won is not a result.

 

[Ihatetennis]

Roger Federer 2015 Clay stats


SERVICE RECORD
Aces 110
Double Faults 15
#PhraseItemNotFound# 63%
1st Serve Points Won 77%
2nd Serve Points Won 58%
Break Points Faced 61
Break Points Saved 61%
Service Games Played 214
Service Games Won 89%
Total Service Points Won 70%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 32%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 50%
Break Points Opportunities 130
Break Points Converted 41%
Return Games Played 210
Return Games Won 25%
Return Points Won 39%
Total Points Won 54%

Roger Federer 2006 Clay stats

SERVICE RECORD
Aces 90
Double Faults 21
#PhraseItemNotFound# 60%
1st Serve Points Won 74%
2nd Serve Points Won 57%
Break Points Faced 117
Break Points Saved 68%
Service Games Played 260
Service Games Won 85%
Total Service Points Won 67%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 37%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 55%
Break Points Opportunities 215
Break Points Converted 39%
Return Games Played 255
Return Games Won 33%
Return Points Won 42%
Total Points Won 54%


@BreakPoint federer serves better with the new racket. more aces less and less doubles faults(playing less games. higher first serve points won and higher second serve points won

as well as facing half the breakpoints (winning 61% which is lower, but 61% of 61 is better than 68% of 117)

federer is playing better now with the new racket than in 2006. the issue is he is less athletic and novak is too athletic

 

[BreakPoint]

Roger Federer 2015 Clay stats


SERVICE RECORD
Aces 110
Double Faults 15
#PhraseItemNotFound# 63%
1st Serve Points Won 77%
2nd Serve Points Won 58%
Break Points Faced 61
Break Points Saved 61%
Service Games Played 214
Service Games Won 89%
Total Service Points Won 70%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 32%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 50%
Break Points Opportunities 130
Break Points Converted 41%
Return Games Played 210
Return Games Won 25%
Return Points Won 39%
Total Points Won 54%

Roger Federer 2006 Clay stats

SERVICE RECORD
Aces 90
Double Faults 21
#PhraseItemNotFound# 60%
1st Serve Points Won 74%
2nd Serve Points Won 57%
Break Points Faced 117
Break Points Saved 68%
Service Games Played 260
Service Games Won 85%
Total Service Points Won 67%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 37%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 55%
Break Points Opportunities 215
Break Points Converted 39%
Return Games Played 255
Return Games Won 33%
Return Points Won 42%
Total Points Won 54%


@BreakPoint federer serves better with the new racket. more aces less and less doubles faults(playing less games. higher first serve points won and higher second serve points won

as well as facing half the breakpoints (winning 61% which is lower, but 61% of 61 is better than 68% of 117)

federer is playing better now with the new racket than in 2006. the issue is he is less athletic and novak is too athletic

So you had to isolate it to only clay court matches to get your numbers to look better? LOL Oh, and he had more double-faults in 2006 because he served way more games (260 vs. 214).

Again, where are your stats for number of Slams and Masters won in 2006 versus 2015? That's the ONLY "stat" that matters! Everything else is irrelevant as they are not results. Stats are NOT results.

Karolvic has the best serving stats in tennis. Do you think he would trade his service stats for a Wimbledon title? You bet he would! LOL

 

[tribesmen]

With all respects to top players in "2000", but Fed won all those slams with 90, cause competition was a level or two lower than later with appearance of Nadal, Djoko... Who was the highest competition to Fed when he strung up slams - Safin, Roddick, etc. I strongly believe he switched to 97 as he and his team found out his path would go down faster without changes and one of the changes should be more modern racquet to complete against more modern strikers. Nadal and Djoko are Fed worst nightmare for sure

 

[Ihatetennis]

So you had to isolate it to only clay court matches to get your numbers to look better? LOL Oh, and he had more double-faults in 2006 because he served way more games (260 vs. 214).

Again, where are your stats for number of Slams and Masters won in 2006 versus 2015? That's the ONLY "stat" that matters! Everything else is irrelevant as they are not results. Stats are NOT results.

Karolvic has the best serving stats in tennis. Do you think he would trade his service stats for a Wimbledon title? You bet he would! LOL

he played less games in 2015 and had more aces. fact

wawrinka and novak are better competition than 10 years ago as well as federer not being in the same shape

I Isolated it to clay because it is his worst surface and the easiest to return on. it highlights the stats that he is serving better

 

[BreakPoint]

he played less games in 2015 and had more aces. fact

wawrinka and novak are better competition than 10 years ago as well as federer not being in the same shape

I Isolated it to clay because it is his worst surface and the easiest to return on. it highlights the stats that he is serving better

So where's his French Open title in 2015? Stats mean nothing without titles.

Karlovic serves way more aces than Federer. He would switch to a smaller racquet in a heartbeat if it meant winning a Slam. If the number of aces determined who the better player is, Karlovic would be the best player of all time. LOL Thus, there is no correlation between aces and titles.

 

[BreakPoint]

With all respects to top players in "2000", but Fed won all those slams with 90, cause competition was a level or two lower than later with appearance of Nadal, Djoko... Who was the highest competition to Fed when he strung up slams - Safin, Roddick, etc. I strongly believe he switched to 97 as he and his team found out his path would go down faster without changes and one of the changes should be more modern racquet to complete against more modern strikers. Nadal and Djoko are Fed worst nightmare for sure

Switching to a modern racquet does not give you a modern game. (Not that a modern game is any better.)

 

[Ihatetennis]

So where's his French Open title in 2015? Stats mean nothing without titles.

Karlovic serves way more aces than Federer. He would switch to a smaller racquet in a heartbeat if it meant winning a Slam. If the number of aces determined who the better player is, Karlovic would be the best player of all time. LOL Thus, there is no correlation between aces and titles.

federer didnt win because his body isnt the same anymore

but these stats show that he is doing better in the only part of the game that you have control over

he can only dictate so much while returning, he isnt the same as 10 years ago and he was returning worse in 2012 than in 2015

 

[BreakPoint]

federer didnt win because his body isnt the same anymore

but these stats show that he is doing better in the only part of the game that you have control over

he can only dictate so much while returning, he isnt the same as 10 years ago and he was returning worse in 2012 than in 2015

Wait, so his body prevented him from winning but the same body gave him better stats? LOL

You don't know how he would have served nor returned with the Tour 90 in 2014 & 2015 without back pain because he didn't use it. I do know he used to get a lot more kick on his 2nd serves with the 90.

 

[Ihatetennis]

Wait, so his body prevented him from winning but the same body gave him better stats? LOL

You don't know how he would have served nor returned with the Tour 90 in 2014 & 2015 without back pain because he didn't use it. I do know he used to get a lot more kick on his 2nd serves with the 90.

These stats were from healthy slam winning 2006

 

[Ihatetennis]

Wait, so his body prevented him from winning but the same body gave him better stats? LOL

You don't know how he would have served nor returned with the Tour 90 in 2014 & 2015 without back pain because he didn't use it. I do know he used to get a lot more kick on his 2nd serves with the 90.

Your body's ability is more seen in return games than service games

Plus he is playing against djokovic the best returner of all time and strongest player this decade

 

[BreakPoint]

These stats were from healthy slam winning 2006

But you said he had better stats in 2015?

 

[Ihatetennis]

But you said he had better stats in 2015?

He did

Which means the racket is better

 

[BreakPoint]

Um... from most of your ******** rhetoric over the course of a 5 year period.


And? Nothing that can't be changed with dedication and certainly not which are so fine-tuned as to be incapable of minor changes in equipment.


Wrong ********. I haven't even bothered to try for 99% of the time I've been playing again. Had I put in the time/effort I no doubt could have found something - but I haven't


You prove this saying perfectly - an dld dog incapable of learning anything or considering any viewpoint that wasn't your own.


And yet he was perfectly capable of doing it when he changed racquets a couple of times in a few years in the early 2000s... and then again every clay court season when he gets used to dropping his string tension.. and then each time he goes from Penn to Babolat to Dunlop to Wilson balls - each with such clearly different characteristics whole thread get created about whose game they helped or hindered and whether is was a ploy by the tournaments to favour certain styles/players.

But no. All that is irrelevant inside the fantasy world that exists in your cranium purely because it would serve mostly to show what an unmitigated, closed-minded idiot you are.

You obviously have not even played with a RF97A. The difference between a PS 6.0 85 and a Tour 90 is minor compared to the MASSIVE difference between a Tour 90 and the RF97A. I can switch back and forth between a PS 6.0 85 and a Tour 90 in the middle of a match without any problems at all. No way in heck could I do that with a RF97A without blasting the ball out all over the place.

Oh, and you think changing your string tension by a couple of pounds in a Tour 90 is the same as switching frames from the Tour 90 to the RF97A? LOL Thanks for verifying your inexperience in playing tennis.

Heck, you own a BLX90 but you haven't even been able to switch to that from the PS 6.0 85 despite being so similar compared to the monumental difference between a Tour 90 and the RF97A. Oh, and you haven't put in the time to switch from the PS 6.0 85 because you play perfectly fine with it and are satisfied enough with it not to bother putting in the time. If you really sucked that badly with it, believe me, you would put in the time to switch away from it. That is, of course, unless you're a masochist who enjoys getting your butt kicked every time you play tennis. Or maybe you're just a better player than Federer? So that you're good enough to play with the PS 6.0 85 but Federer isn't? LOL

 

[BreakPoint]

He did

Which means the racket is better

Because the racquet is the only thing that affects stats in tennis? LOL

Again, stats are not results. Federer would be more than willing to have the worst stats in tennis if it meant winning 3 more Slams.

 

[BreakPoint]

For the benefit of others and to translate what Breakmuppet means here: When a quote suits him he will use it. When it doesn't he will pretend it's a lie or point at something unrelated and say "look, a baby wolf" etc.

You mean like how YOU pretended that all the evidence that Federer is using a retail RF97A are all "lies"?

And how some mysterious e-mail from Wilson regarding Kevlar in the Tour 90s suited you well so you used it despite zero evidence that said e-mail ever existed?

 

[Ihatetennis]

Because the racquet is the only thing that affects stats in tennis? LOL

Again, stats are not results. Federer would be more than willing to have the worst stats in tennis if it meant winning 3 more Slams.

Stats are facts, federer is winning more points and more games serving than before. he is also serving more aces on clay and facing far fewer break points


do you want to know the issue? 12 of the breakpoints are easily what cost him grand slam titles and it is because he is not as good as djokovic

federer is too old and out of his prime to be the top player, thats a fact and all stats lead to it.

 

[BreakPoint]

Stats are facts, federer is winning more points and more games serving than before. he is also serving more aces on clay and facing far fewer break points


do you want to know the issue? 12 of the breakpoints are easily what cost him grand slam titles and it is because he is not as good as djokovic

federer is too old and out of his prime to be the top player, thats a fact and all stats lead to it.

Could that be because under the coaching of Stefan Edberg, he's been backing up his serves better by liberally mixing in lots of serving and volleying? Nah...

 

[Ihatetennis]

Could that be because under the coaching of Stefan Edberg, he's been backing up his serves better by liberally mixing in lots of serving and volleying? Nah...

you can compare to 2002 when he was almost completely serve and volley, better on clay in 2015 than in 2002 and 2003 as well

 

[BreakPoint]

you can compare to 2002 when he was almost completely serve and volley, better on clay in 2015 than in 2002 and 2003 as well

I think you're grasping at straws comparing a young, immature, unrefined, inexperienced Federer from 13 years ago with the Federer of today.

 

[Ihatetennis]

I think you're grasping at straws comparing a young, immature, unrefined, inexperienced Federer from 13 years ago with the Federer of today.

compare him to 2003-2007 federer. he is better onclay, thats a fact.

the issue is that he is better than so many more players and is better now than before in terms of tactics and using this new racket to the full potential. but djokovic is just in the way.

 

[Ihatetennis]

I think you're grasping at straws comparing a young, immature, unrefined, inexperienced Federer from 13 years ago with the Federer of today.

look at the guys that beat fed this year in grand slams

seppi, tough guy for fed to play, he was too stubborn and the loss was between the ears not in his game

french lost to wawrinka, he won the tourna,ment

wimbledon lost the final because of 3 games to djokovic

us open lost to djokovic again


his losses were 75% to the eventual champiom


stats show the truth about how he is playing better service games now than ever. the sad truth is hes not good enough to compete against the top player, novak, in grand slams.

 

[BreakPoint]

look at the guys that beat fed this year in grand slams

seppi, tough guy for fed to play, he was too stubborn and the loss was between the ears not in his game

french lost to wawrinka, he won the tourna,ment

wimbledon lost the final because of 3 games to djokovic

us open lost to djokovic again


his losses were 75% to the eventual champiom


stats show the truth about how he is playing better service games now than ever. the sad truth is hes not good enough to compete against the top player, novak, in grand slams.

And how do you know any of this was due to the racquet and not due to a healthy back and/or change in tactics?

The guy got to the 4th round of the French Open at age 18 and to the QF at age 19, both using an even smaller 85 sq. in. racquet. Exact same results as the past two years using the 97.

 

[Ihatetennis]

And how do you know any of this was due to the racquet and not due to a healthy back and/or change in tactics?

The guy got to the 4th round of the French Open at age 18 and to the QF at age 19, both using an even smaller 85 sq. in. racquet. Exact same results as the past two years using the 97.

how can you continue to negate all facts with the issue that he hurt his back

hes had a back injury at 16 and at 34, he is not suddenly 100%, especially not after 1000 matches


edit, he served and volleyed more in his early years than today.

 

[BreakPoint]

how can you continue to negate all facts with the issue that he hurt his back

hes had a back injury at 16 and at 34, he is not suddenly 100%, especially not after 1000 matches


edit, he served and volleyed more in his early years than today.

Exactly! Unless you can compare how he played using the RF97A and using the Tour 90 in ALL THE SAME EXACT MATCHES in 2014 &2015 side-by-side, you cannot draw any definitive conclusions because there are way too many other variables involved other than his racquet, including the health of his back.

In addition, unlike with the Tour 90, he has not won a single Slam nor Masters on clay using the RF97A, so I don't see how you can claim he's better on clay with the 97.

 

[Eichiro]

So if there are so many variables involved, why do you continue to argue about the superiority of the tour 90?

 

[Ihatetennis]

Exactly! Unless you can compare how he played using the RF97A and using the Tour 90 in ALL THE SAME EXACT MATCHES in 2014 &2015 side-by-side, you cannot draw any definitive conclusions because there are way too many other variables involved other than his racquet, including the health of his back.

In addition, unlike with the Tour 90, he has not won a single Slam nor Masters on clay using the RF97A, so I don't see how you can claim he's better on clay with the 97.

i give you stats from 2015 which are at 34 and with a relatively healthy back. i give you stats from 2006 and 2012 which he won a slam. 2006 being his peak

how can you argue evidence like this? 2012 was his last healthy year with the 90, that is a fact. 2006 was his prime. notice all his stats fell from 2006-2012

that means his age was hurting his game, then look at how his stats increased from 2012 to now. the issue with that is that you only need to lose 4 matches to not win a slam, and 3/4 were to eventual champions. novak is also considerably better than in 2012

 

[Ihatetennis]

federer won wimbledon in 2012 and lost in 2015 even tho stats show him being a better player.

you think that stats dont show how good he is, they show how good he is, but they dont show how good his opponents are.

in his dominant years he had the best stats overall. now he has the second best stats which are still better than his previous stats, which holds the racket responsible as he had a decline from 2006(95-5 year) to 2012.

novak 2015 grass season

SERVICE RECORD
Aces 77
Double Faults 11
#PhraseItemNotFound# 70%
1st Serve Points Won 77%
2nd Serve Points Won 64%
Break Points Faced 32
Break Points Saved 81%
Service Games Played 122
Service Games Won 95%
Total Service Points Won 73%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 29%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 52%
Break Points Opportunities 70
Break Points Converted 41%
Return Games Played 120
Return Games Won 24%
Return Points Won 38%
Total Points Won 55%



Novak 2012 grass season

Aces 111
Double Faults 17
#PhraseItemNotFound# 68%
1st Serve Points Won 78%
2nd Serve Points Won 57%
Break Points Faced 63
Break Points Saved 76%
Service Games Played 160
Service Games Won 91%
Total Service Points Won 71%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 34%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 51%
Break Points Opportunities 98
Break Points Converted 45%
Return Games Played 155
Return Games Won 28%
Return Points Won 41%
Total Points Won 55%



Fed won wimbledon in 2012, novak won wimbledon 2015

novak won 95% of his service games while winning 28% of his returning games, which means that for every 200 games played (50 serving/50returning) he would only lose 77 games out of 200

or he would win 61.5% of all games

he wins 6.15 games for every 4.85 his opponent wins.

If i did my math right, he would only lose 3.6 matches for every 100 played

so lets round it up to 4 and give his opponents a benefit.

he would win 24/25 matches or 3 wimbledons before losing in the 4th round.

so if we simulated the tournament over and over again. the odds of him losing the tournament are 25%

 

[Eichiro]

Mr. Breakpoint unless you've won a grandslam, I highly doubt that your impression of a racquet has anything to do with how Federer feels about this racquet

 

[BreakPoint]

federer won wimbledon in 2012 and lost in 2015 even tho stats show him being a better player.

you think that stats dont show how good he is, they show how good he is, but they dont show how good his opponents are.

in his dominant years he had the best stats overall. now he has the second best stats which are still better than his previous stats, which holds the racket responsible as he had a decline from 2006(95-5 year) to 2012.

novak 2015 grass season

SERVICE RECORD
Aces 77
Double Faults 11
#PhraseItemNotFound# 70%
1st Serve Points Won 77%
2nd Serve Points Won 64%
Break Points Faced 32
Break Points Saved 81%
Service Games Played 122
Service Games Won 95%
Total Service Points Won 73%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 29%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 52%
Break Points Opportunities 70
Break Points Converted 41%
Return Games Played 120
Return Games Won 24%
Return Points Won 38%
Total Points Won 55%



Novak 2012 grass season

Aces 111
Double Faults 17
#PhraseItemNotFound# 68%
1st Serve Points Won 78%
2nd Serve Points Won 57%
Break Points Faced 63
Break Points Saved 76%
Service Games Played 160
Service Games Won 91%
Total Service Points Won 71%
RETURN RECORD
1st Serve Return Points Won 34%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 51%
Break Points Opportunities 98
Break Points Converted 45%
Return Games Played 155
Return Games Won 28%
Return Points Won 41%
Total Points Won 55%



Fed won wimbledon in 2012, novak won wimbledon 2015

novak won 95% of his service games while winning 28% of his returning games, which means that for every 200 games played (50 serving/50returning) he would only lose 77 games out of 200

or he would win 61.5% of all games

he wins 6.15 games for every 4.85 his opponent wins.

If i did my math right, he would only lose 3.6 matches for every 100 played

so lets round it up to 4 and give his opponents a benefit.

he would win 24/25 matches or 3 wimbledons before losing in the 4th round.

so if we simulated the tournament over and over again. the odds of him losing the tournament are 25%

Stats don't make you a better player, winning does.

Is Federer considered the GOAT because of his 17 Slams and other wins or for his on-court stats?

 

[BreakPoint]

Mr. Breakpoint unless you've won a grandslam, I highly doubt that your impression of a racquet has anything to do with how Federer feels about this racquet

I agree.

But I'm sure Federer would agree that he prefers to win Slams and Masters than not win them.

 

[BreakPoint]

So if there are so many variables involved, why do you continue to argue about the superiority of the tour 90?

Because of the success he's had with the Tour 90.

Besides, I'm NOT arguing that his results would have been better with the Tour 90 over the past two years. I'm arguing that no one can be so certain as to claim that his results would have definitely been worse "for sure" with the Tour 90 over the past two years, as some here have asserted. In fact, his results couldn't possibly have been worse with the Tour 90 since he didn't win any Slams with the RF97A, so you can't get any worse than zero. And Slams are what he cares most about. BTW, "not worse" does not mean "better".

 

[BreakPoint]

i give you stats from 2015 which are at 34 and with a relatively healthy back. i give you stats from 2006 and 2012 which he won a slam. 2006 being his peak

how can you argue evidence like this? 2012 was his last healthy year with the 90, that is a fact. 2006 was his prime. notice all his stats fell from 2006-2012

that means his age was hurting his game, then look at how his stats increased from 2012 to now. the issue with that is that you only need to lose 4 matches to not win a slam, and 3/4 were to eventual champions. novak is also considerably better than in 2012

Actually, Federer did have a bad back in 2012. That's why he had to call MTO's during 2012 Wimbledon and had to wear that black compression T-shirt underneath his white polo shirt. Despite that, he beat both Djokovic and Murray with the Tour 90 to win the Wimbledon title and become #1 in the world. Compare that to 2014 and 2015 Wimbledons in which he could not beat Djokovic with the RF97A despite having a pain-free back. He also hasn't come close to being #1 even with a healthy back.