Fed USO 05' God Mode

TJfederer16

Hall of Fame
Found this gem of a vid, of the match against Nalbandian in the QF's of the USO in 2005, have been looking for this match for ages on utube and have finally found some decent highlights, just thought i'd share this as it seems to be a pretty rare match to find highlights of and certainly one to cherish, when i think of prime Fed i think of this match, everything is just unbelievable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM0Aiq2ISN4&feature=related
 

westside

Hall of Fame
A little off topic, but a channel here in Aus was playing the 2005 Fed v Safin semi at 2am this morning. Found myself staying up til 5am to watch it.

Made me miss the Fed of 04-06
 

swordtennis

Legend
good call...
Wow I remember this Federer.
Have not seen Federer 2005-2006 in a long time.
Serve had some pop.
tight movement.
He def was the GOAT back then.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
That's the reason why he end 81-4 that year, despite suffering from a sprained ankle during indoor season.
 

texasdoc

Rookie
he was amazing. so much better than everyone else. his level has dropped and he is 30 and he is still top3 - just shows how much better he was than everyone at his peak.
 
good call...
Wow I remember this Federer.
Have not seen Federer 2005-2006 in a long time.
Serve had some pop.
tight movement.
He def was the GOAT back then.
His may have even improved since then. I remember McEnroe saying that he thought Federer's serve is better than it used to be.
 

wy2sl0

Hall of Fame
Never understood these threads. It is the same guy we are watching now. He is actually a better player technically now then he was then, especially his serve.

What has he lost? A quarter step and his nerve.

If you want to see a difference watch the AO match between Roddick and Safin on the vault. Now there is someone who has declined immensely.
 
Last edited:

tudwell

Legend
To be honest, that match doesn't look that spectacular. His groundstrokes were better by a mile in the 2009 Australian Open final even though he lost that match. His backhand in particular looked feeble in this match. He got very little angle on the ball and mostly just hit it back deep and with heavy topspin to the center of the court - hard to attack, sure, but not terribly impressive. But that's just what I gleaned from those highlights.
 
Surely Djokovic 2.0 would still destroy him no?
Nope. Given what post-prime Fed did to Djoker in 2011, I would say 2005 Fed would beat anyone at any time except maybe peak Nadal on clay. Before some **** says it was 4-1, we all know only slams count. Djoker won AO11. Fed won FO11. USO11 was pretty much a draw considering what happened. And that's all with peak Djoker (at least given what we know so far) and post prime Fed. You do the math. Nadal definitely couldn't handle peak Djoker that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
To be honest, that match doesn't look that spectacular. His groundstrokes were better by a mile in the 2009 Australian Open final even though he lost that match. His backhand in particular looked feeble in this match. He got very little angle on the ball and mostly just hit it back deep and with heavy topspin to the center of the court - hard to attack, sure, but not terribly impressive. But that's just what I gleaned from those highlights.
Backhand looked feeble??? Wow, what match were you watching.
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
Impressive hitting, especially on the forehand, and moved like water. He defends effortlessly, hits with depth so easily on the forehand compared to today and has an answer for more or less everything; very impressive. His backhand generated slightly less consistent depth in general and it's the only part of his game that looks marginally weaker here but as a shotmaking weapon his bh used to be far superior than today. it's gained some depth but is only of equal consistency and is a considerably less potent attacking weapon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
M

monfed

Guest
Just look at Fed's movement. I truly believe Fed of 05 was tennis from another planet. Just magical stuff.
 

mattennis

Hall of Fame
He played much better in the Australian Open of that year 2005. Highlights are not going to show you the whole story. You have to watch the entire matches to see what happened.

In the US OPEN'2005, that QF match against Nalbandian was the best match he played that tournament. But the rest of the matches he was OK (but not amazingly good).

In the 2nd round he suffered a lot against Santoro. You have to watch the match to see it, to see Federer's face of tension and suffering along that match. He won 7-5 7-5 7-6 whereas in the AusOpen'05 he defeated the same Santoro 6-1 6-1 6-2 (that actually was an incredible level of Federer).

In the AusOpen'05 he crushed all rivals until the SF against Safin (even defeating Agassi easily 6-3 6-3 6-4 in the QF), whereas in the US OPEN'05 he not only suffered against Santoro. He defeated Kiefer in four sets in R16 (all sets being close, only one late break of difference).

In the QF against Nalbandian he played his best match, as I said, but in the SF against Hewitt he suffered a lot again. Highlights won't show you this, you have to watch the entire match. He won the first set 6-3, but was 1-4 and 2-5 down in the second set, and if you actually watch the match, Hewitt was destroying Federer's backhand all that second set, Federer running like crazy from side to side defending great. He recovered the break and they went to a tie-break that Federer did play amazingly well (won it 7-0 ).

In the third set more of the same, Hewitt dominating the rallies from the back court and Federer running like crazy trying to defend (in fact, in this SF match and the Final Federer showed how amazingly good his fitness was, because he run many many kilometerers in those two matches and he showed, at least to me, that he had probably the best defending game in tennis along with Nadal, i.e. when he had to defend, he was the best in the world, along with Nadal, doing it). Hewitt won that third set 6-4.

In the fourth set, Federer uppered his level (and they called something like 10 foot faults to Hewitt) and at the end Roger won 6-3.

In the Final, against a 35 years old Agassi (who had played 3 consecutive 5 set matches in R16, QF and SF ) more of the same. Federer showed amazing wheels, running all the time like crazy, extremely quick, from side to side, but Agassi's shots were too good. Until 6-3 2-6 2-4 0-30 Agassi was dominating the match, abusing Federer's backhand merciless, and Federer kept the match interesting because of his amazing defending abilities.

But he uppered his level enough to get the fourth set to a tie-break when, this time, he played amazingly good (winning it 7-1 ), and after that he run to the victory, Agassi demoralised (and felt his previous 3 consecutive five-set matches) and Roger won 6-1 the last set.

So Federer was not playing his best tennis that tournament (in my opinion). He played much better in the AusOpen of that year.
 

Mike Sams

Legend
If elite Federer of 2005 was having that much trouble against a shot near-retired Agassi, it's interesting to think what prime Agassi would've done against Federer.
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
What i am noticing is roger is taking the ball really early on the rise most of the time. I have not seen this from roger last year as much. Maybe that is why he is no longer dominating in "God Mode"
 

sunny_cali

Semi-Pro
He played much better in the Australian Open of that year 2005. Highlights are not going to show you the whole story. You have to watch the entire matches to see what happened.

In the US OPEN'2005, that QF match against Nalbandian was the best match he played that tournament. But the rest of the matches he was OK (but not amazingly good).

In the 2nd round he suffered a lot against Santoro. You have to watch the match to see it, to see Federer's face of tension and suffering along that match. He won 7-5 7-5 7-6 whereas in the AusOpen'05 he defeated the same Santoro 6-1 6-1 6-2 (that actually was an incredible level of Federer).

In the AusOpen'05 he crushed all rivals until the SF against Safin (even defeating Agassi easily 6-3 6-3 6-4 in the QF), whereas in the US OPEN'05 he not only suffered against Santoro. He defeated Kiefer in four sets in R16 (all sets being close, only one late break of difference).

In the QF against Nalbandian he played his best match, as I said, but in the SF against Hewitt he suffered a lot again. Highlights won't show you this, you have to watch the entire match. He won the first set 6-3, but was 1-4 and 2-5 down in the second set, and if you actually watch the match, Hewitt was destroying Federer's backhand all that second set, Federer running like crazy from side to side defending great. He recovered the break and they went to a tie-break that Federer did play amazingly well (won it 7-0 ).

In the third set more of the same, Hewitt dominating the rallies from the back court and Federer running like crazy trying to defend (in fact, in this SF match and the Final Federer showed how amazingly good his fitness was, because he run many many kilometerers in those two matches and he showed, at least to me, that he had probably the best defending game in tennis along with Nadal, i.e. when he had to defend, he was the best in the world, along with Nadal, doing it). Hewitt won that third set 6-4.

In the fourth set, Federer uppered his level (and they called something like 10 foot faults to Hewitt) and at the end Roger won 6-3.

In the Final, against a 35 years old Agassi (who had played 3 consecutive 5 set matches in R16, QF and SF ) more of the same. Federer showed amazing wheels, running all the time like crazy, extremely quick, from side to side, but Agassi's shots were too good. Until 6-3 2-6 2-4 0-30 Agassi was dominating the match, abusing Federer's backhand merciless, and Federer kept the match interesting because of his amazing defending abilities.

But he uppered his level enough to get the fourth set to a tie-break when, this time, he played amazingly good (winning it 7-1 ), and after that he run to the victory, Agassi demoralised (and felt his previous 3 consecutive five-set matches) and Roger won 6-1 the last set.

So Federer was not playing his best tennis that tournament (in my opinion). He played much better in the AusOpen of that year.
Fed won the *third* set in the tie-break 7-1, and the 4th 6-1. The match against Agassi the previous year was a lot tighter. I do agree that overall Fed was better AO2005 than US2005.
 

KHSOLO

Semi-Pro
Found this gem of a vid, of the match against Nalbandian in the QF's of the USO in 2005, have been looking for this match for ages on utube and have finally found some decent highlights, just thought i'd share this as it seems to be a pretty rare match to find highlights of and certainly one to cherish, when i think of prime Fed i think of this match, everything is just unbelievable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM0Aiq2ISN4&feature=related
Nice to see Feds bh working flawlessly
 

Fate Archer

Hall of Fame
Impressive hitting, especially on the forehand, and moved like water. He defends effortlessly, hits with depth so easily on the forehand compared to today and has an answer for more or less everything; very impressive. His backhand generated slightly less consistent depth in general and it's the only part of his game that looks marginally weaker here but as a shotmaking weapon his bh used to be far superior than today. it's gained some depth but is only of equal consistency and is a considerably less potent attacking weapon.
Perfectly summed up. His racket head speed back in 2005 was impressive, one of the loosest arms in tennis history.

As for the serve, I've heard before some people who think Fed's serve nowaday is better, seems like McEnroe thinks his way too.

Don't quite agree, Fed's serve certainly changed over the years, but not necessarily for the better. I don't think Fed is nearly as clutch on his serve as he was in the past, today he almost can't buy a serve to save his life once he's on the ropes.

Fed used to be a great server in pressure times, and that element alone is of adamant advantage to vintage Fed as opposed to the Federer of the last few years.

He may have served more aces in the last couple of years, but one thing is to serve aces on very unimportant moments like he usually does now. Another is to summon all these aces and this serving capability in the moment where he most needs it.

Look how many times Fed's serve came to the rescue on important moments in the past:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJc_lQ0LP50

www.youtube.com/watch?v=kad5tG3q2Rs#t=1m26s

www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfb2PDlIc3o#t=4m53s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTvGt07DXfQ

Look at the caliber of most of these returners and the importance of the moment where he is pulling all those aces...

It's unfortunate but I don't recall Fed doing this nearly as much in the last couple of years.


Oh, in addition, Fed's return game was MUCH better around that time. If we look at the statistics post-2008, we see that what has fallen the most was his return game. If we watch the clips, the difference in footspeed, footwork and movement is clear, but pay attention to the kinds of returns Fed was making in the past.

Really underrated returner in the game.
 
Last edited:
M

monfed

Guest
Perfectly summed up. His racket head speed back in 2005 was impressive, one of the loosest arms in tennis history.

As for the serve, I've heard before some people who think Fed's serve nowaday is better, seems like McEnroe thinks his way too.

Don't quite agree, Fed's serve certainly changed over the years, but not necessarily for the better. I don't think Fed is nearly as clutch on his serve as he was in the past, today he almost can't buy a serve to save his life once he's on the ropes.

Fed used to be a great server in pressure times, and that element alone is of adamant advantage to vintage Fed as opposed to the Federer of the last few years.

He may have served more aces in the last couple of years, but one thing is to serve aces on very unimportant moments like he usually does now. Another is to summon all these aces and this serving capability in the moment where he most needs it.

Look how many times Fed's serve came to the rescue on important moments in the past:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJc_lQ0LP50

www.youtube.com/watch?v=kad5tG3q2Rs#t=1m26s

www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfb2PDlIc3o#t=4m53s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTvGt07DXfQ

Look at the caliber of most of these returners and the importance of the moment where he is pulling all those aces...

It's unfortunate but I don't recall Fed doing this nearly as much in the last couple of years.


Oh, in addition, Fed's return game was MUCH better around that time. If we look at the statistics post-2008, we see that what has fallen the most was his return game. If we watch the clips, the difference in footspeed, footwork and movement is clear, but pay attention to the kinds of returns Fed was making in the past.

Really underrated returner in the game.
Great post as usual.
 
He's not a Djokovic fan,he pretends to be his fan just because he is beating Nadal.
That's not true. I am a Djokovic fan. Please don't tell me who I am a fan of. It is possible to be more than one player's fan. Just because I say Fed 05 is better than Djoker now does not mean I am not a Djoker fan. It doesn't even mean I'm a Fed fan, it just means I know the facts. Just like I know that no version of Nadal on any surface would beat Djoker 2.0. Case closed.
 

TJfederer16

Hall of Fame
If elite Federer of 2005 was having that much trouble against a shot near-retired Agassi, it's interesting to think what prime Agassi would've done against Federer.
Agassi played a lot better in the latter part of his career than the early part, he played one of the best matches ive ever seen him play against Fed at the USO in 2004 and still lost.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Agassi played a lot better in the latter part of his career than the early part, he played one of the best matches ive ever seen him play against Fed at the USO in 2004 and still lost.
Some of these newbies are not aware that it's been mentioned many times in the past that Agassi in his 2nd half of his career was a much better player than before. With the exception to his movement, he was a better ball striker, better serve, better volley, and had more power.
 

mattennis

Hall of Fame
Some of these newbies are not aware that it's been mentioned many times in the past that Agassi in his 2nd half of his career was a much better player than before. With the exception to his movement, he was a better ball striker, better serve, better volley, and had more power.
That is opinable. For me, from US OPEN'94 to US OPEN'95 was Agassi's peak. In that period the hit much harder, made much more winners (shorter points, much more aggresive) was much much quicker in his movement.

He won 11 tournaments ( 2 GS, 5 M-1000, and 4 more tournaments) in that 13 months period of time (something he never did before, or after).

He played great as well from RolandGarros'99 to Australian Open'00 (winning 3 GS, 1 M-1000 and one other tournament) but not as good as the previous case (in my opinion).

After that, he was much much slower, he learned to play more intelligent, more safe, less aggresive, and still made some good results here and there, but he was never as good as he was in those two time periods, specially the period from US OPEN'94 to US OPEN'95.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
I don't know how this Fed would have done against current competition (that's all speculation anyway and still doesn't change anything) but one thing is sure, he was heck of a lot more fun to watch then, his 2005 USO may have not been his cleanest performance but boy did he have confidence to go for it off the FH side, was really hitting some huge FHs that year. Nalbo did get his revenge at TMC final (Fed beat him in RR) later that year though .

As for Agassi, while obviously he was nearing his end in 2005 USO final(his last hurrah) it's not easy to define his prime at all, if he even had one. I'd say his 1995 level of play was the highest but this is the guy who won the bulk of his slams after the age of 29, not your usual "normal" career by any means.

I'd also say that the reason he could play so well into his 30s was because his game relied less on movement (than say Fed or Nadal's) and he was such a terrific ballstriker and took the ball so early that the majority of times it was the other guy doing the running.

Of course a younger Agassi (any version of Agassi that was dedicated to the game and healthy) would have been a tough opponent for Fed but I would have thought that even if Fed straight setted him in 2005 USO final.
 

mattennis

Hall of Fame
I don't know how this Fed would have done against current competition (that's all speculation anyway and still doesn't change anything) but one thing is sure, he was heck of a lot more fun to watch then, his 2005 USO may have not been his cleanest performance but boy did he have confidence to go for it off the FH side, was really hitting some huge FHs that year. Nalbo did get his revenge at TMC final (Fed beat him in RR) later that year though .

As for Agassi, while obviously he was nearing his end in 2005 USO final(his last hurrah) it's not easy to define his prime at all, if he even had one. I'd say his 1995 level of play was the highest but this is the guy who won the bulk of his slams after the age of 29, not your usual "normal" career by any means.

I'd also say that the reason he could play so well into his 30s was because his game relied less on movement (than say Fed or Nadal's) and he was such a terrific ballstriker and took the ball so early that the majority of times it was the other guy doing the running.

Of course a younger Agassi (any version of Agassi that was dedicated to the game and healthy) would have been a tough opponent for Fed but I would have thought that even if Fed straight setted him in 2005 USO final.
You know what? The more matches I watch from that (and previous) eras the more I realize how much more fun to watch tennis was.

In fact I am starting to believe this time ( the present ) is ( for me ) the least fun to watch tennis ever.

I don't know what exactly is (probably the lack of different styles and courts speed and balls) but any time I put a match from 5, 10, 15, 20 years ago I surprise myself with how much more funny tennis was.
 

FlashFlare11

Hall of Fame
I don't know how this Fed would have done against current competition (that's all speculation anyway and still doesn't change anything) but one thing is sure, he was heck of a lot more fun to watch then, his 2005 USO may have not been his cleanest performance but boy did he have confidence to go for it off the FH side, was really hitting some huge FHs that year. Nalbo did get his revenge at TMC final (Fed beat him in RR) later that year though .

As for Agassi, while obviously he was nearing his end in 2005 USO final(his last hurrah) it's not easy to define his prime at all, if he even had one. I'd say his 1995 level of play was the highest but this is the guy who won the bulk of his slams after the age of 29, not your usual "normal" career by any means.

I'd also say that the reason he could play so well into his 30s was because his game relied less on movement (than say Fed or Nadal's) and he was such a terrific ballstriker and took the ball so early that the majority of times it was the other guy doing the running.

Of course a younger Agassi (any version of Agassi that was dedicated to the game and healthy) would have been a tough opponent for Fed but I would have thought that even if Fed straight setted him in 2005 USO final.
I don't know how I feel about this. Federer, although loses more frequently, goes for his shots a lot now. He is, by far, the most aggressive player on tour. His forehand and backhand have lost quite a bit of sting, but seeing him going for broke on nearly every point is every bit as enjoyable (to me) as he was when he player a more baseline-oriented game.
 

LetsGoRoddick

Professional
It's a miracle Nalbandian even broke Federer's serve in this match. He must have been playing pretty well too. But once again Federer was just too good.
 
Top