Federer as a Junior

[hound 109]

The media & the Tennis Channel is mostly interested in his Slams, his wardrobe & his wife/kids. I'm just as interested in how he became the tennis player that he is.

From my recollection & from the internets:

- Multi-sport athelete prior to age 12, switched to Tennis only at age 12.

- Trained at a club near his home.
(What was the nature of his training? Who was his coach (coaches)? Anything special happen?)

- Moved to the Swiss Training Center at age 14 (after being the #1 Swiss Junior).
(Did he change coaches? How often did he train (or go to school)? Anything special that he or they did?)

- Played European & International Junior Tournaments from age 15 - 18. Lost alot before he started winning alot.

Anyone want to add info what Fed did between ages 8 - 18....or what he or his parents did that resulted in Fed becoming the player that he is?


(I know i can read the biography (& i know Fed & Nadal are freaks of nature, so that explains alot)....i browsed thru the book a couple of years ago....but i'm also interested in opinions as to what Fed did & how it helped.)

Fed as a Junior....the perfect training plan....or what would you have done differently with him?

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

I can add a little of what I have heard through the years and have seen on Wikipedia.

When he was a little boy around 4 he saw Becker play on TV and fell for the sport. His parents say from that day on he watched tennis for hours and hours and devoured all the tennis he could on TV.

He trained with local boys and they were always playing squash, tennis, table tennis and soccer. He and his best buddy started playing tournies at 8.

At 10 he got his real tennis coaching, first in a group, then private when his talent showed. His coach said what took other talented boys 3-4 weeks to learn, Roger learned in minutes.

By 14 he was national champ of all age groups in his country.

What do I take from this?

1. It was he who fell in love with tennis, zero parental involvement. Watching tennis on his own for hours is very, very unusual for a little kid.

2. He was active in a variety of sports developing his athletic base until age 10. He did not specialize in tennis yet.

3. In a group of talented boys he still stood out something fierce. It was obvious he could do things way better than others his age, even when all of them worked equally hard.

4. By 14 he was dominating every boy he could find age 14-19.

Some lessons in there for that other thread I think.

 

[LeftyServe]

A few tidbits of the under 14 Federer:

-Cried and cursed a lot on the court and had a bad temper (which he attributes to an immature perfectionist attitude)
-Goofed around in practice, and most often lost practice matches
-Aggressive player, but not a particular early standout among his peers
-Lost first serious tournament match at age 8 by the score of 6-0, 6-0
-Was an early pigeon for Patty Schnyder's brother, who won 8 of their first 9 meetings
-Won first national tournament at 11 years, 9 months
-Ballboy for Basel Girls' championship match between Schnyder and Martina Hingis
-Development proceeded exponentially after enrolling in Swiss National program at 13 1/2

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

A few tidbits of the under 14 Federer:

-Cried and cursed a lot on the court and had a bad temper (which he attributes to an immature perfectionist attitude)
-Goofed around in practice, and most often lost practice matches
-Aggressive player, but not a particular early standout among his peers
-Lost first serious tournament match at age 8 by the score of 6-0, 6-0
-Was an early pigeon for Patty Schnyder's brother, who won 8 of their first 9 meetings
-Won first national tournament at 11 years, 9 months
-Ballboy for Basel Girls' championship match between Schnyder and Martina Hingis
-Development proceeded exponentially after enrolling in Swiss National program at 13 1/2

His first coach has said in many interviews that Fed stood out as a talent among his peers. Perhaps he messed around like an AI did in practice and early tournies, because he was so much better. But his talent did indeed jump out from day 1.

 

[mike53]

Myself, I am really quite interested in exactly how Roger overcame his temper. He had quite the rep for extraordinarily bad behavior for a long while and he was able to turn that around so that now his temperament is one of his biggest assets. This to me, is almost as amazing as his win/loss record.

 

[klu375]

A few tidbits of the under 14 Federer:

-Development proceeded exponentially after enrolling in Swiss National program at 13 1/2

And even now he works closely with Swiss Federation coaches.

TCF, how dare they (Swiss) have a high performance program? The money should be spent on grinding those Alps and building more courts.

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

And even now he works closely with Swiss Federation coaches.

TCF, how dare they (Swiss) have a high performance program? The money should be spent on grinding those Alps and building more courts.

Ha,....but it is apples and oranges. And you prove my point by your post....name all the other top pros the Swiss developed? The only other guy from there is Wawrinka who learned from his mom and dad who were tennis pros.

1. The Swiss Federation spends a much higher % on junior tennis than the USTA. They do not spend the millions per kid the USTA does.

2. There are no IMG Bradentons or Saddlebrook academies already there that have results like the ones in America have. We already had the academy infrastructure in place, no need for a separate national high performance program.

3. The Swiss put out a great player from their system, at least they can claim success....how many top 10 players has the USTA put out, with millions more per kid spent and a much bigger budget and way more kids to choose from? Zero.

4. Federer would have improved at IMG or with Nadal's uncle or with 1000 other coaches. He is a rare talent.

So I suppose we should wait for the next 20 top 100 players the Swiss federation develops?? Or did they get plain lucky??

I will answer for you, they got lucky and could go the next 20 years and spend millions and never produce another top 10 mens player from their high performance program.

 

[BMC9670]

Myself, I am really quite interested in exactly how Roger overcame his temper. He had quite the rep for extraordinarily bad behavior for a long while and he was able to turn that around so that now his temperament is one of his biggest assets. This to me, is almost as amazing as his win/loss record.

Good point. This would be an amazing case study. Many players struggle with this from Rec to Pro and many to their own demise. I wonder if someone like Safin would have been better if he was able to check his emotions. Then again, some thrive on it. Either way, it would be fascinating to find out how he made that leap.

 

[Larrysümmers]

Good point. This would be an amazing case study. Many players struggle with this from Rec to Pro and many to their own demise. I wonder if someone like Safin would have been better if he was able to check his emotions. Then again, some thrive on it. Either way, it would be fascinating to find out how he made that leap.

i heard some story that after he had a fit on court er something that his dad threw him in the snow and told him if he ever did anything like that he would never play again...i think thats what i read, it has been a while

 

[klu375]

Ha,....but it is apples and oranges. And you prove my point by your post....name all the other top pros the Swiss developed? The only other guy from there is Wawrinka who learned from his mom and dad who were tennis pros.

1. The Swiss Federation spends a much higher % on junior tennis than the USTA. They do not spend the millions per kid the USTA does.

2. There are no IMG Bradentons or Saddlebrook academies already there that have results like the ones in America have. We already had the academy infrastructure in place, no need for a separate national high performance program.

3. The Swiss put out a great player from their system, at least they can claim success....how many top 10 players has the USTA put out, with millions more per kid spent and a much bigger budget and way more kids to choose from? Zero.

4. Federer would have improved at IMG or with Nadal's uncle or with 1000 other coaches. He is a rare talent.

So I suppose we should wait for the next 20 top 100 players the Swiss federation develops?? Or did they get plain lucky??

I will answer for you, they got lucky and could go the next 20 years and spend millions and never produce another top 10 mens player from their high performance program.

Really do not want to start this discussion again and hijack unrelated thread - just could not resist this opportunity:?
But there is a chance that Federed would not become a professional tennis player if he did not have access to high performance program close to home. USTA is trying to create opportunities around the country and they may get lucky as well.

 

[mcutilize]

i heard some story that after he had a fit on court er something that his dad threw him in the snow and told him if he ever did anything like that he would never play again...i think thats what i read, it has been a while

err thats one of the instances, the one that made him change completely was when his coach died when roger paid for him to go on a vacation

 

[mike53]

err thats one of the instances, the one that made him change completely was when his coach died when roger paid for him to go on a vacation

That's pretty heavy duty. I guess no one can really plan to have an experience similar to that

 

[Number1Coach]

Fed said that his dad once after a tournament ran his head into a snowbank and bloodied his nose for disrespecting him at a tournament, his dad told him to keep his racket in is hand and his dad was told "mind your own business" Fed learned the cold way.

Isn't it neat to see all the different ways champions are groomed? Would we consider this positive?

 

[onehandbh]

Fed said that his dad once after a tournament ran his head into a snowbank and bloodied his nose for disrespecting him at a tournament, his dad told him to keep his racket in is hand and his dad was told "mind your own business" Fed learned the cold way.

Isn't it neat to see all the different ways champions are groomed? Would we consider this positive?

That's nothing compared to the tactics that Odai (Saddam's son) used to
to "motivate" and discipline the Iraqi soccer team.

 

[flat]

By 14 he was national champ of all age groups in his country.

4. By 14 he was dominating every boy he could find age 14-19.

Anyone know how to compare the above statements to the US? i.e., is being the Swiss junior champ at 14 equivalent to:
a) Winning your B18 Sectional (or whatever it's called, the biggest tournament of your section)? SoCal/Florida or a weaker section?
b) Winning one of the B18 National events?
c) Winning B18 Kalamazoo?

 

[hound 109]

Lots of great comments & lots of good info. Thanks for keeping this on Fed the Junior player.

At 10 he got his real tennis coaching, first in a group, then private when his talent showed. His coach said what took other talented boys 3-4 weeks to learn, Roger learned in minutes.

I would think that this is a common trait for those who take the game to a high level....wouldn't you coaches agree?

-Cried and cursed a lot on the court and had a bad temper (which he attributes to an immature perfectionist attitude)

I wonder how many "gifted" kids go thru this? I know every once in a while that I wish that I had a snowbank nearby so i could shove my kid's head into it.

-Lost first serious tournament match at age 8 by the score of 6-0, 6-0

I was thinking it was age 10 (or later). So.....if he was drilling or playing tournaments at age 8, how could he do so without SOME parental involvement. (& didn't both his parents play some league tennis?)

-Won first national tournament at 11 years, 9 months

I'm guessing this was a Swiss Natl. 12s tournament?

-Ballboy for Basel Girls' championship match between Schnyder and Martina Hingis

I wonder if he & Hingis ever trained together. She was a year older than Fed. Can you imagine an 11 y/o Hingis (with her hands & point construction)...schooling a 10 y/o Fed trying to find his way. Jeez no wonder he was screaming & his dad was plunging his head in the snow.

-Development proceeded exponentially after enrolling in Swiss National program at 13 1/2

Since he already had won a national title at that point......I wonder what developed (exponentially) next?

What was his footwork like at age 12? Was he already a defensive whiz at that point?

What came first.....was he Big Banger who then got consistent? ...or an athletic backboard (consistent & getting everything back) who developed a serve & offensive weapons at the Swiss Training Center?

Myself, I am really quite interested in exactly how Roger overcame his temper. He had quite the rep for extraordinarily bad behavior for a long while and he was able to turn that around so that now his temperament is one of his biggest assets. This to me, is almost as amazing as his win/loss record.

Me too. Was he screaming out or tossing raquets as a young pro? or had he matured by the time he played in the Junior Grand Slam events....or by the time he turned pro.

I do remember he beat the cr*p out of a raquet a couple of years ago at a tournament (i think in Miami). It was wild....like watching the pope cussing or kicking a dog.

 

[hound 109]

Anyone know how to compare the above statements to the US? i.e., is being the Swiss junior champ at 14 equivalent to:
a) Winning your B18 Sectional (or whatever it's called, the biggest tournament of your section)? SoCal/Florida or a weaker section?
b) Winning one of the B18 National events?
c) Winning B18 Kalamazoo?

Good question. Switzerland has 8 million people. (much less than SoCal, FL or even Texas)

I'd say it would be comparable to him dominating the MO Valley Section. (like Sock has). Even though he was just a big fish in a little pond, he obviously was a very special fish.

 

[LeftyServe]

Good question. Switzerland has 8 million people. (much less than SoCal, FL or even Texas)

I'd say it would be comparable to him dominating the MO Valley Section. (like Sock has). Even though he was just a big fish in a little pond, he obviously was a very special fish.

You're right, which raises the question of the advantages of being dominant in a "little pond." Dominant juniors in countries like Switzerland and Sweden (which each have total populations slightly larger than the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex and slightly smaller than Greater Chicago) have an easier time gaining entry to international junior tournaments than do similarly skilled players in larger countries like the U.S. Through this exposure to international competition, they can then improve their skills more rapidly, which leads to higher international competition and so on...

 

[accidental]

He was lazy as a young man apparently. I have an article from a tennis magazine profiling him and his coach Peter Carter from january 1999 when Federer was 18 years old.

His coach was talking about how Federer always showed immeadiate improvement in his results from only short periods of hard work, and then Federer would relax and think it was all coming so easy and slack off in his training. Carter interestingly also talks about having to take away Fed's playstation because he was spending so much time playing it at the hotels and he thought it was too much of a distraction.

In the article Federer talks about how he hates the 'professional' aspect of playing tennis, says he hates doing running drills everyday and hates it when he is made to long runs because they 'just kill his legs'. Federer also talks about Hewitt being his big motivation, being the same age as him but alreayd having so much success, and how he wants to be the 'Hewitt of Europe'.

 

[Number1Coach]

He saw a question "who would break more rackets in their careers Fed or Safin?" It was on a big screen at a tournament and he said that was not what he wanted to be known for.

 

[BMC9670]

He was lazy as a young man apparently. I have an article from a tennis magazine profiling him and his coach Peter Carter from january 1999 when Federer was 18 years old.

His coach was talking about how Federer always showed immeadiate improvement in his results from only short periods of hard work, and then Federer would relax and think it was all coming so easy and slack off in his training. Carter interestingly also talks about having to take away Fed's playstation because he was spending so much time playing it at the hotels and he thought it was too much of a distraction.

In the article Federer talks about how he hates the 'professional' aspect of playing tennis, says he hates doing running drills everyday and hates it when he is made to long runs because they 'just kill his legs'. Federer also talks about Hewitt being his big motivation, being the same age as him but alreayd having so much success, and how he wants to be the 'Hewitt of Europe'.

Sounds like a guy with extraordinary talent, a fast learner, and was a good athlete that was simply immature. He went far in juniors with talent alone. But once he matured, look what happened!

I have heard that others on tour get frustrated and jealous because they think they work harder, practice longer, etc than Fed. He seems to be a master of efficiency in training as well. This goes with the fast learner trait. He probably doesn't like to waste time - gets done what he needs to with his insane abilities, and then he's off to film a Rolex commercial. He makes it all look so easy.

 

[spiderman123]

He was lazy as a young man apparently. I have an article from a tennis magazine profiling him and his coach Peter Carter from january 1999 when Federer was 18 years old.

Possible to post a scan of the article? I would love to read the article in its entirety. It seems very interesting and thanks for the excerpt.

 

[hound 109]

Quote: - Development proceeded exponentially after enrolling in Swiss National program at 13 1/2

Since he already had won a national title at that point......I wonder what developed (exponentially) next?


What was his footwork like at age 12? Was he already a defensive whiz at that point?


What came first.....was he Big Banger who then got consistent? ...or an athletic backboard first (consistent & getting everything back) who developed a serve & offensive weapons at the Swiss Training Center?


Asking again because I'm curious about Fed from Age 12 - Age 15. Thanks.

 

[BMC9670]

Asking again because I'm curious about Fed from Age 12 - Age 15. Thanks.

Yeah, it's amazing how little is out there about him as a junior. These days so much is documented on YouTube and other web sources that we're used to being able to find just about anything. There has to be video footage of him at that age somewhere, from some tournament, practice, etc. I'm surprised someone hasn't converted and posted something by now.

 

[LeftyServe]

Since he already had won a national title at that point......I wonder what developed (exponentially) next?


What was his footwork like at age 12? Was he already a defensive whiz at that point?


What came first.....was he Big Banger who then got consistent? ...or an athletic backboard first (consistent & getting everything back) who developed a serve & offensive weapons at the Swiss Training Center?


Asking again because I'm curious about Fed from Age 12 - Age 15. Thanks.

From reading interviews of those who saw Fed as a young junior, one thing that seems apparent is that he was always an attacking player. Reaching adolescence was probably helpful to him in that he was able to finish points much easier than he was at ages 10-12. Couldn't find any source that specifically commented on his footwork or defensive skills at age 12.

 

[hound 109]

Thanks Lefty.

 

[flat]

From reading interviews of those who saw Fed as a young junior, one thing that seems apparent is that he was always an attacking player. Reaching adolescence was probably helpful to him in that he was able to finish points much easier than he was at ages 10-12. Couldn't find any source that specifically commented on his footwork or defensive skills at age 12.

Federer's forehand & serve are his two biggest weapons. It would be good to understand when/how he developed them, and how effective were they in different stages. His footwork/defensive skills/mental stability are all great, but think they are all supporting/secondary reasons.

I always struggle with what to tell my son. On one hand, I obviously wants him to win, but on the other, I keep thinking if he doesn't practice hitting that down-the-line forehand winner on full run, how is he ever going to get good at them?

I know he needs to learn to hit high % shots in general. But on the major weapons that he is trying to develop (forehand) I'm much more tolerant of him going for low % shots.

I still remember watching Federer play about 3-4 years ago, when his forehand was absolutely terrifying. When he gets an opportunity to hit that forehand, from anywhere in the court, in any position, it felt like 80 to 90% of the time he was able to hit an aggressive attacking shot that puts the opponent on the defensive.

 

[flat]

You're right, which raises the question of the advantages of being dominant in a "little pond." Dominant juniors in countries like Switzerland and Sweden (which each have total populations slightly larger than the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex and slightly smaller than Greater Chicago) have an easier time gaining entry to international junior tournaments than do similarly skilled players in larger countries like the U.S. Through this exposure to international competition, they can then improve their skills more rapidly, which leads to higher international competition and so on...

In Switzerland are there separate junior divisions, every 2 years apart, like here in the US?

I ask because I met this Indonesian player. He tells me because there are not a lot of tennis players in general, they simply don't have divisions. Everyone shows up, and it's "open" tournaments all the time. Compare that with the US, where there are too many players, so we have to figure out how to have tournaments that finish in 1 or 2 weekends, so we bin according to age & skillset.

Binning by age is not a bad strategy. But I am starting to think that maybe it really doesn't help either. Playing all players of different ages, and various skillsets, could be more effective in many ways. Certainly it would take away the pressure of trying to win tournaments early?

 

[hound 109]

Federer's forehand & serve are his two biggest weapons. It would be good to understand when/how he developed them, and how effective were they in different stages. His footwork/defensive skills/mental stability are all great, but think they are all supporting/secondary reasons.......

Flat, i agree that his serve & his forehand (when it's on) are his two biggest weapons.....but without his top 3 in the world footwork, IMO...his forehand wouldn't be the weapon it is.

This was kind of where i was going with this when i first posted the OP. If he (or any Junior) always had the superlative footwork, it would have been easier for him to be successful as he began to take it earlier/higher & inside out as an 11 y/o - 14 y/o. (also might be a reason why he was such a "quick learner"....it's easier to "learn" when you have perfect balance on all shots).

In other words.....if the footwork isn't there, does it make sense to encourage ripping it from the baseline or hitting inside out offensive shots with the 9 - 12 y/o?


Oh....& I very much think that w/o their "best in the world" defensive play that Fed & Nadal (& Novak & Murray) wouldn't have accomplished what they have. To win 5-7 matches in a row in Grand Slams requires solid defense. Offense comes & goes....but the defense is always there. (Same goes for the ladies....Wozi, Serina & Kim have offense, but defense gets them thru the draws).

Flat....like you i think it would be interesting to know when he (or any Pro) added layers to his game and at what ages.