Federer 2015 v Federer 2005 at Wimbledon and the US open - how do you think it goes?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 778933
  • Start date

mike danny

Bionic Poster
2015 Federer had a better BH topspin drive, better BH returns, better serve accuracy and more experience with strategy/tactics. 2005 Federer had a better FH, faster serve, quicker footwork which allowed him to run around and hit many inside-FHs along with a more devastating BH-slice.

I honestly cannot tell by the eye-test which version was better especially as his competition was tougher in 2015 with only a BOAT-level Djokovic standing between him and the USO/Wimbledon titles. Federer pretty much slaughtered all other competition in both years.
Uhhh, remove Djokovic and Fed has an easier path to his 2015 slam titles than 2005 does. Doesn't sound like tougher competition to me.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
2015 Federer had a better BH topspin drive, better BH returns, better serve accuracy and more experience with strategy/tactics. 2005 Federer had a better FH, faster serve, quicker footwork which allowed him to run around and hit many inside-FHs along with a more devastating BH-slice.

I honestly cannot tell by the eye-test which version was better especially as his competition was tougher in 2015 with only a BOAT-level Djokovic standing between him and the USO/Wimbledon titles. Federer pretty much slaughtered all other competition in both years.

2015 fed did not have better bh return or any kind of return conpared to 2005. 2005 fed was clearly better returning wise, not even close.
every aspect of fed's game was better in 05 save the serve&net play - forehand, backhand, return, movement.

Also LULZ at 2015 USO Djokovic being BOAT level.

if you cannot tell by eye test which version of fed was better, you actually need an eye test. :-D :-D
if you cannot tell 15 fed was done sharpness wise/stamina wise in Wim 15 final after 2 sets and a bit ....
 
Last edited:

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
My serious answer:

Wimby: 2005 Fed in straights, first two sets are competitive but the third is a blowout (6-2 I'd say). 2015 Fed was nice for a few sets but not enough to take one from Fed playing one of his best grass court matches. Only way I could see it being a four-setter is if Old-erer brings peak botting form (i.e. what he did in the SF) and steals a tiebreak. If it's the finals forms, not a chance.

USO: 2005 Fed in four sets, both players are worse here than they were at Wimby. 2005 Fed is probably patchy enough to drop the second set but he does well otherwise. 2015 Fed doesn't have any standout moments like the Agassi second set but his botting will keep most of the sets reasonably close. Plus, the fourth set should be less lopsided here than in the 2005 final.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
As we know, Federer's prime/peak has been the subject of much discussion on this forum. He certainly won the most slams from 03-07, although per his own testimony, considered himself a better player in 2015 than ever before:

“I think I’m a better player now than when I was at 24 because I’ve practised for another 10 years and I’ve got 10 years more experience,” Federer said. “Maybe I don’t have the confidence level that I had at 24 when I was winning 40 matches in a row, but I feel like I hit a bigger serve, my backhand is better, my forehand is still as good as it’s ever been, I volley better than I have in the past. I think I’ve had to adapt to a new generation of players again.”

I think this is a potentially interesting matchup, since many consider Federer to have shown some of his most imperious, offensive form in 2005, something which his 2015 form was also noted for.

So, 2015 Federer meets 2005 Federer in the finals of Wimbledon. Then again in the finals of the Open.

Who wins, and what's the scoreline?
Who do you think wins?
 
D

Deleted member 778933

Guest
Djokovic also said that Federer in 2015 was playing some of his best tennis.

Must be both wrong about their own game, while the TTW unbiased Fed fanbase must be right.
*TFW (Talk Fed Warehouse) fanbase
And yes. Lord Fedr is the most charismatic, deific being in the history of the Universe. He who always dazzles with his forehand, who always solar flares a pretty backhand...
 
D

Deleted member 778933

Guest
My serious answer:

Wimby: 2005 Fed in straights, first two sets are competitive but the third is a blowout (6-2 I'd say). 2015 Fed was nice for a few sets but not enough to take one from Fed playing one of his best grass court matches. Only way I could see it being a four-setter is if Old-erer brings peak botting form (i.e. what he did in the SF) and steals a tiebreak. If it's the finals forms, not a chance.

USO: 2005 Fed in four sets, both players are worse here than they were at Wimby. 2005 Fed is probably patchy enough to drop the second set but he does well otherwise. 2015 Fed doesn't have any standout moments like the Agassi second set but his botting will keep most of the sets reasonably close. Plus, the fourth set should be less lopsided here than in the 2005 final.
You consider 2005 Wimbledon Final to be one of Rog's best grass matches? Roddick was literally in danger of touching the net at times in that final.
 

Hitman

Bionic Poster
Federer 2015 would be a better server, the clutch serving would certainly be a good weapon to use. His biggest weakness though is the clear lack of movement to his forehand side which started to become more apparent around 2010, this is what Federer 2005 will exploit time and time again. Deep, heaving cross court forehands into the corner, wait for the short ball and then bludgeon the inside out forehand.

Federer 2015 would need to use the forehand dropshot more, Federer of 2009 onward became better with the forehand dropshot, this would be a nice tactic to try to break up the pace, and stop the baseline powerplay by 2005 Federer. Overall this match will be played from the back of the court, 2005 will look to bully and impose his game, and since the racket change, the 2015 version doesn't have as much penetration and effortless power on the forehand wing, which was the reason why he was so reluctant to swap rackets in the first place. 2005 wins both, but in 4 sets.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Fed's serve was playing insanely well on those courts in Cincy, that was the key difference. Djokovic was a bit more solid from the baseline in USO too although of course he gave plenty of chances to Federer.

true, but it didn't look like Djokovic had a counter plan at Cincy. He did at the USO and executed it - helped by the relatively slower courts.
specifically speaking about the SABR tactics. not the other aspects.
 

Hitman

Bionic Poster
true, but it didn't look like Djokovic had a counter plan at Cincy. He did at the USO and executed it - helped by the relatively slower courts.
specifically speaking about the SABR tactics. not the other aspects.

Federer revealed his hand too soon, and Djokovic made him pay for it as far as the SABR was concerned.
 

metsman

Talk Tennis Guru
My serious answer:

Wimby: 2005 Fed in straights, first two sets are competitive but the third is a blowout (6-2 I'd say). 2015 Fed was nice for a few sets but not enough to take one from Fed playing one of his best grass court matches. Only way I could see it being a four-setter is if Old-erer brings peak botting form (i.e. what he did in the SF) and steals a tiebreak. If it's the finals forms, not a chance.

USO: 2005 Fed in four sets, both players are worse here than they were at Wimby. 2005 Fed is probably patchy enough to drop the second set but he does well otherwise. 2015 Fed doesn't have any standout moments like the Agassi second set but his botting will keep most of the sets reasonably close. Plus, the fourth set should be less lopsided here than in the 2005 final.
there was no botting at the USO for 2015 Federer. He held in 71% of his service games.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Federer revealed his hand too soon, and Djokovic made him pay for it as far as the SABR was concerned.

djokovic did neutralize it to an extent. But fed did win close to half of the SABR points in the USO final I think.
But its easier to say in hindsight. fed had to also test it out before using it in a GS?
I suppose the other argument is that he could have tested it out in the earlier rounds of USO only, not required to test it at Cincy.
 

Hitman

Bionic Poster
djokovic did neutralize it to an extent. But fed did win close to half of the SABR points in the USO final I think.
But its easier to say in hindsight. fed had to also test it out before using it in a GS?
I suppose the other argument is that he could have tested it out in the earlier rounds of USO only, not required to test it at Cincy.

Yes, he won about half, but I have to say that Djokovic's retaliation also acted as a deterent to the shot being used enough to bambozzle Djokovic. The fact Novak had seen the shot before, knew it was coming, especially on key moments, helped him a lot. Had Federer brought it in the final, who knows how Novak would have coped. Novak was lost at sea in the Cincy final due to the way Fed executed it, but then like a champion, Novak prepared well for it, and got a feel also for when it was coming and exactly where to lob the ball to...
 

metsman

Talk Tennis Guru
Second set though. Faced no BPs, if he were less of a mug converting BPs he'd have broken earlier, I fancy peak Fedr could have taken a double break lel.
Fed executed a lot of blitz type plays behind his serve and Djokovic was a bit flat, but his serve itself wasn't getting that many free points.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
The SABR business is entirely overrated. It was always a fancy gimmick designed to confuse the opponent, not a viable long-term strategy. The difference in court speed and form/clutch between Cincinnati and USO is what matters here.

The bold part is correct. (that's what matters the most)
I was merely pointing out Djokovic did well to counter it.
If he hadn't, they'd have gone 5 for sure.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
The bold part is correct. (that's what matters the most)
I was merely pointing out Djokovic did well to counter it.
If he hadn't, they'd have gone 5 for sure.

Fred won 4/8 points sabring iirc. Didn't use it much in the first place. I don't think it had any real significance. An actual hidden culprit was the rain that delayed the start of the match by several hours, resulting in a slower nighttime court + too much time to reflect mentally. Maybe if there's no rain and they start on time Fed would do better.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Fred won 4/8 points sabring iirc. Didn't use it much in the first place. I don't think it had any real significance. An actual hidden culprit was the rain that delayed the start of the match by several hours, resulting in a slower nighttime court + too much time to reflect mentally. Maybe if there's no rain and they start on time Fed would do better.
Hindsight.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Fred won 4/8 points sabring iirc. Didn't use it much in the first place. I don't think it had any real significance. An actual hidden culprit was the rain that delayed the start of the match by several hours, resulting in a slower nighttime court + too much time to reflect mentally. Maybe if there's no rain and they start on time Fed would do better.

I think there were more points with SABR than that. Its not just the number though, its the pyschological pressure on 2nd serve.
Agreed on the rain aspect - more so with respect to slower court though. Can't say for sure about time to reflect mentally.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
I think there were more points with SABR than that. Its not just the number though, its the pyschological pressure on 2nd serve.
Agreed on the rain aspect - more so with respect to slower court though. Can't say for sure about time to reflect mentally.

Well our psychoanalysis here is always going to be conjecturous, eh? But I would say that Federer's career shows quite clearly he plays best when he doesn't think too much, and in particular doesn't fret about winning or losing. Fred is best when he's ahead and free-flowing, OR when he's behind to the point when the match is probably done and he can just play for fun or dignity ("let him put me away in style at least"). Prior to the 15 USO final, Federer would know Djokovic was the favourite but he had a good chance based on mighty form shown thus far - a perfect ground for anxiety to breed. Can't see having extra hours to wait and prepare for the match not helping this foster.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Well our psychoanalysis here is always going to be conjecturous, eh? But I would say that Federer's career shows quite clearly he plays best when he doesn't think too much, and in particular doesn't fret about winning or losing. Fred is best when he's ahead and free-flowing, OR when he's behind to the point when the match is probably done and he can just play for fun or dignity ("let him put me away in style at least"). Prior to the 15 USO final, Federer would know Djokovic was the favourite but he had a good chance based on mighty form shown thus far - a perfect ground for anxiety to breed. Can't see having extra hours to wait and prepare for the match not helping this foster.

Oh, I'm not disagreeing with you that its a possibility. I just don't have a way to say that for sure in this case.
 
Top