Borg: "That's the best I've seen Federer play for maybe 10 years"

haecceitas

Rookie
(Espn UK)

Bjorn Borg was so taken aback by the quality of Roger Federer's Wimbledon semifinal win against Andy Murray on Friday that the Swede is tipping him to dethrone champion Novak Djokovic and win his 18th Grand Slam title.

After watching both Federer andDjokovic's semi-final victories from the Royal Box on Centre Court, Borg considers Federer to be the heavy favourite for the title match on Sunday, a year after the Serbian beat him in five pulsating sets.

Three years have passed since Federer last won a Grand Slam title, by beating Murray here on the Wimbledon grass. Victory against Djokovic would bring the Swiss a record eighth title at the All England Club, and an 18th major, also a record.

According to Borg, who won five Wimbledon titles, Federer's tennis against Murray was as good as during his peak years in the mid-2000s. And the world No.2's father, Robert, concurred, claiming his son had quietened all those who suggested his son's powers were waning as he approaches his 34th birthday.

"That's the best I've seen him play for many years, the best for maybe 10 years," Borg told ESPN after Federer's 7-5 7-5 6-4 victory over Murray. "He's serving so well. It was great tennis.

"On Sunday, Federer will definitely be the favourite to win. He is playing well, moving well, he was doing everything he was supposed to. He is hitting the ball so cleanly and playing with a lot of confidence.

"It's going to be interesting to see with Novak. I'm really surprised that Roger is playing as well as he is. Andy wasn't playing badly, and it was a great match, but Federer was too good today. This match was an unbelievably good match."
 

Emiliano55

Professional
What's this bandwagoning ? Federer played great, but c'mon... he has played a TON better than this in his prime years. He has given a lot of better tennis master clasess than this one. Honestly I don't understand why famous players and journalists exaggerate Roger's level from today this way.

He played awesome. But to say "its the best i have seen him play in 10 years" is just ridiculous.
 

SLD76

G.O.A.T.
What's this bandwagoning ? Federer played great, but c'mon... he has played a TON better than this in his prime years. He has given a lot of better tennis master clasess than this one. Honestly I don't understand why famous players and journalists exaggerate Roger's level from today this way.

He played awesome. But to say "its the best i have seen him play in 10 years" is just ridiculous.
I think it's been so long that people have seen God Mode Fed that when they get a glimpse of it they get excited
 

D.Nalby12

Legend
I think this is Federer's best Tennis since FO 2011, certainly comparable to 2012 Wimbledon win. Still far away from that Golden form on clay and far far away from his peak standards. Beating player of Murray's potential is nothing for his peak standard on grass.
 

Mac33

Hall of Fame
That's the highest level tennis I've ever seen.

Murray played awesome too.

Best I've seen him play for a few years as well.

Just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

50 odd winners to 11 unforced.

The stats don't lie.
 

Bukmeikara

Legend
What's this bandwagoning ? Federer played great, but c'mon... he has played a TON better than this in his prime years. He has given a lot of better tennis master clasess than this one. Honestly I don't understand why famous players and journalists exaggerate Roger's level from today this way.

He played awesome. But to say "its the best i have seen him play in 10 years" is just ridiculous.
If more than few big tennis names say the same thing than maybe you should ask yourself "Am I right afterall?"
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
What's this bandwagoning ? Federer played great, but c'mon... he has played a TON better than this in his prime years. He has given a lot of better tennis master clasess than this one. Honestly I don't understand why famous players and journalists exaggerate Roger's level from today this way.

He played awesome. But to say "its the best i have seen him play in 10 years" is just ridiculous.
I think it's just the most recent truly great match Fed played on a big stage, I don't think ex-players, journos etc. re-watch/remember older tennis matches as much as your average die-hard tennis fan does (especially when it comes to his/her favourite), it's just overreaction and short term memory.

I can almost guarantee you that whomever wins the final will be proclaimed by many of those same people to be the greatest ever right after, despite the fact that one player is a relatively late-blooming 28 year old with plenty of success ahead of him and the other guy is 33 year old in his (possibly) last hurrah, it's the nature of people (especially TV pundits).

That said, as someone who followed Fed for his whole career, I've never seen him serve as well as he did today against Andy, no ifs and buts. He channeled his inner Pistol Pete out there.
 

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
(Espn UK)



" He is playing well, moving well, he was doing everything he was supposed to. He is hitting the ball so cleanly and playing with a lot of confidence.
Why is Federer suddenly moving so well? Didn't he look really slow in the French Open loss just last month to Wawrinka?
 

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
I've seen Federer have much greater success off the ground, but he's never served so brilliantly. It was a spectacle.
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
Outstanding serving performance. Legendary from Federer.
 

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
Why is Federer suddenly moving so well? Didn't he look really slow in the French Open loss just last month to Wawrinka?
He's naturally a good mover on grass in general, and he had a lot of rest/preparation for the tournament. He's in probably the best shape he can be for it.
 

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
Grass court tennis is defined by returns of serve.

It's easy to look great when your oponnent can't return.

By standing so far on returns, Murray was opening angles, and Fed simply traded power for accuracy on his serves, with devastating, but deceiving results.

People are just fooled by the poor opposition Murray offered.
 

Polaris

Hall of Fame
This is harsh, but TV personalities, sports celebrities and past players, who are too close to the game, lack the perspective that comes from long term memory.

Federer was amazing today, but this is manifestly not the best that he has played. US Open 2004 final, Wimby 2005 final, AO 2007 (Roddick match) come to mind. At his best, Federer reduced his opponents to spectators. Murray was far from being a spectator today.

So, as great as Bjorn and Martina are, they don't have a clue (in this case).
 

Anaconda

Hall of Fame
This is harsh, but TV personalities, sports celebrities and past players, who are too close to the game, lack the perspective that comes from long term memory.

Federer was amazing today, but this is manifestly not the best that he has played. US Open 2004 final, Wimby 2005 final, AO 2007 (Roddick match) come to mind. At his best, Federer reduced his opponents to spectators. Murray was far from being a spectator today.

So, as great as Bjorn and Martina are, they don't have a clue (in this case).

Roddick played crap in both matches, not saying he would have won if he played well, but those net approaches would have seen him lose to Murray of today no doubts. Federer's US Open 06/07 matches over Roddick were clearly better. Especially 07, where Rod's approaches at times were horrible, but only Federer would have beaten him that day. FO 2011 against Djokovic was some of his best work, not to mention his WTF beatdown of Nadal.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Roddick played crap in both matches, not saying he would have won if he played well, but those net approaches would have seen him lose to Murray of today no doubts. Federer's US Open 06/07 matches over Roddick were clearly better. Especially 07, where Rod's approaches at times were horrible, but only Federer would have beaten him that day. FO 2011 against Djokovic was some of his best work, not to mention his WTF beatdown of Nadal.
the fact that roddick was below par in AO 07 and wim 05 doesn't mean federer wasn't at his best in those. He was ...
 

Anaconda

Hall of Fame
the fact that roddick was below par in AO 07 and wim 05 doesn't mean federer wasn't at his best in those. He was ...

Federer was better in the US Open 07 match for sure, because Roddick pushed him to play at that level. Wimbledon 05 was very impressive, although Roddick wasn't at his best, he was still clearly the second best grasscourter at that time, and 6-2 7-6 6-4 is a very impressive socreline. AO 2007 I have mixed feelings, Roddick was that bad that 6-4 6-0 6-2 was a misleading score, it wasn't even that close. I refuse to comment on whether Federer was 'just too good' or Roddick was that bad. I have no idea on how to measure that match, Roddick would have made a lot of players look good that day - Federer needed no invitation.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Federer was better in the US Open 07 match for sure, because Roddick pushed him to play at that level. Wimbledon 05 was very impressive, although Roddick wasn't at his best, he was still clearly the second best grasscourter at that time, and 6-2 7-6 6-4 is a very impressive socreline. AO 2007 I have mixed feelings, Roddick was that bad that 6-4 6-0 6-2 was a misleading score, it wasn't even that close. I refuse to comment on whether Federer was 'just too good' or Roddick was that bad. I have no idea on how to measure that match, Roddick would have made a lot of players look good that day - Federer needed no invitation.
no, the score wasn't misleading at all ....roddick did get off to a good start in that match ...that's why it was 4 all in the first ...then federer turned it on , roddick slipped away and federer ran away with it ...

federer has played a few better matches, though very few , but that doesn't mean wasn't a special performance , to do that vs a player/server of roddick's caliber does take a special performance .....
 

Anaconda

Hall of Fame
no, the score wasn't misleading at all ....roddick did get off to a good start in that match ...that's why it was 4 all in the first ...then federer turned it on , roddick slipped away and federer ran away with it ...

federer has played a few better matches, though very few , but that doesn't mean wasn't a special performance , to do that vs a player/server of roddick's caliber does take a special performance .....
The score was misleading, Roddick hit one winner from the baseline and had little input in the match. In fact, the break of serve he did get was only because ******** showed up briefly and gave him the break. It could have been a worse scoreline for Roddick. It was obviously a great performance, but I think there have been more impressive performances because the opponent played better and he still managed to win convincingly. If you can't uderstand this, then don't reply to this post.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Federer's playing a bit worse than he did in 2012 but better than he did in 2014. He's got a chance, but it won't be easy.

I still expect Federer to beat Djokovic in the final if he's got his game together. If not, Djokovic will win for sure.
 

thejoe

Hall of Fame
What's this bandwagoning ? Federer played great, but c'mon... he has played a TON better than this in his prime years. He has given a lot of better tennis master clasess than this one. Honestly I don't understand why famous players and journalists exaggerate Roger's level from today this way.

He played awesome. But to say "its the best i have seen him play in 10 years" is just ridiculous.
I do think Federer's overall level today is being slightly overhyped. It was certainly one of his best (probably the best) serving day he's ever had, which allowed him to ratchet up the pressure on Murray at the end of each set. The rest of his game was very good, and it was a very clean match, but I think he's played several better matches over the course of his career.
 

JustBob

Hall of Fame
Here's where the confusion comes from:

This was "best" in a different way than 10 years ago was "best". Refer to this statement from Fed from a few years ago:

"I can no longer beat the best players based on shotmaking ability alone."

Therefore, current Fed has to play differently than he did 10 years ago because power and defense from the likes of Nadal, Murray, Djokovic can neutralize shotmaking ability.
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
Here's where the confusion comes from:

This was "best" in a different way than 10 years ago was "best". Refer to this statement from Fed from a few years ago:

"I can no longer beat the best players based on shotmaking ability alone."

Therefore, current Fed has to play differently than he did 10 years ago because power and defense from the likes of Nadal, Murray, Djokovic can neutralize shotmaking ability.
Saw that on several occasions from Murray today. However Fed wisely chose not to make too many suicidal approaches.
 

mistik

Hall of Fame
You know ı never forget how Borg praised Fed before 2008 RG final how this year seems to Rogers year and expect completely a different final compare to previous finals. İt was indeed different tough. One of the biggest demolitions GS finals history ever see. :) 63 61 60. İf Borg praise Fed. Fed fans afraid be every afraid. This final match can leave a bad taste on your mouth.
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
(Espn UK)

Bjorn Borg was so taken aback by the quality of Roger Federer's Wimbledon semifinal win against Andy Murray on Friday that the Swede is tipping him to dethrone champion Novak Djokovic and win his 18th Grand Slam title.

After watching both Federer andDjokovic's semi-final victories from the Royal Box on Centre Court, Borg considers Federer to be the heavy favourite for the title match on Sunday, a year after the Serbian beat him in five pulsating sets.

Three years have passed since Federer last won a Grand Slam title, by beating Murray here on the Wimbledon grass. Victory against Djokovic would bring the Swiss a record eighth title at the All England Club, and an 18th major, also a record.

According to Borg, who won five Wimbledon titles, Federer's tennis against Murray was as good as during his peak years in the mid-2000s. And the world No.2's father, Robert, concurred, claiming his son had quietened all those who suggested his son's powers were waning as he approaches his 34th birthday.

"That's the best I've seen him play for many years, the best for maybe 10 years," Borg told ESPN after Federer's 7-5 7-5 6-4 victory over Murray. "He's serving so well. It was great tennis.

"On Sunday, Federer will definitely be the favourite to win. He is playing well, moving well, he was doing everything he was supposed to. He is hitting the ball so cleanly and playing with a lot of confidence.

"It's going to be interesting to see with Novak. I'm really surprised that Roger is playing as well as he is. Andy wasn't playing badly, and it was a great match, but Federer was too good today. This match was an unbelievably good match."
Did he say this in between his naps ??
 

Sander001

Hall of Fame
Roddick and Henman agree, they couldn't stop the jubilation, they were stunned. The stats back it up too, especially since how good Murray was playing too.
 
Top