mike danny
Bionic Poster
So 2005 wins. We all knew that.It would be decided by which version has the better day, as simple as that.
So 2005 wins. We all knew that.It would be decided by which version has the better day, as simple as that.
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.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 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.
Such has been the state of the competition since 2015. People are actually debating which version of Fed is superior.2005 Fed in 4 at USO, in straights at Wimby.
Now you have made this jibe at me you raterate out of 10
I believe I already have in another thread.Now you have made this jibe at me you rate![]()
This is a meme at this point but good job.I believe I already have in another thread.
2005: 9.5/10
2015: 8/10
2005: 9/10
2015: 7.5/10
Something to this extent.
Who do you think wins?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?
The point is to hear what you all think. I know what I think already.Who do you think wins?
*TFW (Talk Fed Warehouse) fanbaseDjokovic 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.
Scoreline?Federer 2015 killed Federer 2005 with improved skills and experience.
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.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.
3-1Scoreline?
Both finals? And how about full scores e.g. 6-2, 3-6 etc.
2 close sets, 2 easy sets.Both finals? And how about full scores e.g. 6-2, 3-6 etc.
Would a close set include a breaker, and an easy set a pastry product?2 close sets, 2 easy sets.
They couldWould a close set include a breaker, and an easy set a pastry product?
I really just wanted to say "Bagelerer"They could
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.tbf, Djoko adopted to the SABR tactics rather well after what happened at Cincy.
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.
there was no botting at the USO for 2015 Federer. He held in 71% of his service games.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.
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.
there was no botting at the USO for 2015 Federer. He held in 71% of his service games.
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.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.
and B03 vs B05.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 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.
Hindsight.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.
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.
No I have heard it before in another discussion I was just pointing it out to slightly dig.no, actually many were pointing it out before the match started.
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.