Federer : "Halle has been my best hunting ground"

[abmk]

On images another one has it in the 32.5 range and i think another had it 36.2
and 35.4
They said it is usually Medium-Fast and it is not slow.
Centre Court was 32.5 and 35.4 according to some.
It did not use a day to day breakdown though.

that's their subjective opinion/term.

By CPI it was medium, not medium fast.
Still slower than most of the USOs, we've had in this century.

11,16 and 17 were the slowest USOs , IMO.

 

[abmk]

2004 and 2005 players were not good enough to consistently challenge. He rolled over them a lot more than 2007 opponents. 2007 was the first year of the Big 3 era. Nadal improved off Clay and Djokovic all round they gave Federer tougher matches. I do not think depth always overwhelms the strength at the top. 2011 did have depth IMO.And had streaky opponents like 2004-2006.

They did not bring this form as much as the latter. Players could do this far more often in 2007.

oh yes, they were and they did. Just that Federer was too good.

Apart from the ones I already mentioned.

Hewitt played well enough in 3 sets of both AO 04 and Wim 04 (1,2 and 4 in both). Had BP at 4 all in the 4th set of Wim 04.
Agassi-Fed in IW 04 was a tight 3-setter
Costa upset Fed in Rome 04
Berdych upset Fed at Oly. 04
Safin played well in the YEC 04 semi vs fed, more so in the 2nd set.
Hewitt didn't do anything wrong in the YEC 2004 final, but Fed was near-perfect in that match.

Ferrero ran Fed close in Dubai 05
Agassi didn't do much wrong in Miami 05 either
Gasquet played one of the best matches of his life in Monte Carlo 05 to upset Federer
Safin/Soderling ran Fedrer close at Halle
Ferrero/Hewitt actually played well enough well in Wim 05 vs Fed, but were straight-setted due to Federer playing really well
Nalbandian of course beat him in TMC 2005 final.

11 did have depth, but not as much as 04-05.

yes, FEderer rolled over them morein 2004-06 well, duh because he was better in 2004-06 than in 2007 (level-wise). he was clutch in slams in 2007 though.

 

[abmk]

I meant throughout the year for the most part. Then joined by Federer and Djokovic and Murray in the 2nd half.

Nadal won Tokyo in 2010.

yeah, I know Nadal won Tokyo in 2010. didn't watch, so not commenting on his form there.

was pretty good in Doha, but lost to Davy in the final
some good form vs Murray at AO, but got injured towards end of 2nd set.
Ljubicic beat him at IW
Roddick had him in trouble once he actually being aggressive in the 2nd set and won vs him at Miami...

indications of a very good year only began from clay season onwards.

He played well in the slams&YEC in 2010, but was a tad inconsistent in the other events.

As far as Murray is concerned, played real well in Canada, Shanghai, YEC and well enough in Wimbledon, but was inconsistent : lost to Fish at Queens, Querrey in LA, Fish again in Cincy, Stan at the USO, Ljubicic at Beijing (winning only 5 games !?), Monaco at Valencia, Monfils at Paris....

Berdych blew him off the court. Djokovic still reached the SF though.
Canada and Cincy was not his highest but he was still solid but lost on quick surfaces to Roddick and Federer.

Recovery only started from USO onwards and IMO, no better than 2007-08 level (probably a tad worse)
Possible. He still reached 8 of the last 10 events of the year at least the SF and won DC for Serbia.

that's still not prime level for Djokovic ...
you could make some argument from USO 10 onwards ....that he was somewhere near it. (he was close to 07-08 level from USO onwards)

getting blown off in convincing straight sets by Berdych/Roddick respectively doesn't cut it for me.

 

[Djorau]

Nalbandian of course beat him in TMC 2005 final.

Fed was injured

Berdych upset Fed at Oly. 04

Gasquet played one of the best matches of his life in Monte Carlo 05 to upset Federer

Yeah

Ferrero/Hewitt actually played well enough well in Wim 05 vs Fed, but were straight-setted due to Federer playing really well

The same can be applied to Wimby 2008, AO 2009, USO 2009, USO 2010, Wimby 2011, AO 2012, AO 2013, AO 2014, Wimby 2015, AO 2016.
The difference is that Fed was not straight-setted in all but one of these encounters.

 

[abmk]

It was better on slow courts though.

really ?
because Roddick played clearly better at the AO in 2004 than Murray did in AO 11, IMO. only lost in a 5-set battle to Safin. Won his 1st 4 matches, losing no sets and few games.
not much of a difference in AO b/w Murray's and Hewitt's form.

Roddick also won Miami in 04. (lost to Henman in IW QF)

Murray lost to Donald Young at IW and Bogolmolov Jr. in Miami -- 1st matches at both., LOL.
no way in hell was he better in 2011 than Roddick on slow HC in 2004.

only better on clay, but don't think he was ready enough to win a M1000 on clay at that time.

And in my opinion his Wimbeldon 2011/USO 2011 and Cincy 2011 and Tokyo was on par with their form.

no way in hell was Murray's Wim 11 form on par with Roddick's (esp. if you give importance to the SF of Murray & SF/F of Roddick). Murray blew himself out of the SF after missing 1 FH on a crucial point in the 2nd set.
shot-wise, was probably up there with Hewitt of Wim 04, but not mentally.

at the USO, struggled vs Haase and didn't put up a great perf. vs Nadal in the semi. Roddick was upset in a freak match in USO 04 by Johansson (won a lot more points than Johansson did). IMO, he was better ...at worst, about even.
Hewitt of course made the final , without a losing a set. was below par in the final, but a great part of it was Federer in arguably his best HC match.
Would definitely take Hewitt overall.

Tokyo, of course, Murray was great.

 

[abmk]

Fed was injured

well, duh. doesn't mean Nalbandian didn't play real well in that match.

Yeah

what yeah ?
have no clue about it, do you ?

The same can be applied to Wimby 2008, AO 2009, USO 2009, USO 2010, Wimby 2011, AO 2012, AO 2013, AO 2014, Wimby 2015, AO 2016.
The difference is that Fed was not straight-setted in all but one of these encounters.

Anyone who thinks Fed played well enough in USO 2010, AO 13, AO 14 or AO 16 matches that he lost needs to get themselves checked throughly.

Wim 15 --- level went down after 2 sets.

 

[RS]

that's their subjective opinion/term.

By CPI it was medium, not medium fast.
Still slower than most of the USOs, we've had in this century.
I know it was medium is was just showing how it may be unrealistic due to the differing figures from the organisers. It should be one clear rating not a few on average which they apparently are.
Most courts are medium by CPI. Even the fast courts.
That’s why I don’t trust it as much as you do for instance.

11,16 and 17 were the slowest USOs , IMO.

I thought 2012 and 2017 looked slower. But that’s the bias eye test. I am still not convinced that the court was actually medium taking everything into account.

 

[abmk]

2011 and 2007 are close. The problem was Novak at MC/Rome. He won every other tournament. In-Form Murray at MC and FO SF and Federer at Madrid/RG. In 2007 he did have a peak Federer and tough matches with Hewitt. It is tight.

you mean Novak at Madrid, not Monte Carlo.
and you gotta be kidding if you think nadal's form at RG in 2007/2011 or clay form in general in 07/11 were close.
it wasn't just Djokovic playing well on clay, it was Nadal's BH also going down. same with footspeed. FH wasn't as good as it was in 2007 either on clay.

He straight-setted Federer at Monte Carlo in 2007 easily, crushed everyone else. crushed everyone at Rome except davydenko , who played a great match - significantly better than Murray in MC 11 or RG 11. was dominant at Barcelona as well ...form only dipped in Hamburg SF/F.

Grass is tight too. Nadal problem was Djokovic he may not have found it as difficult against Nadal 2007. I would pick Nadal 2007 to win in 5 but again to me it is close.

My point was Nadal of Wim 07 final (or QF+F) was clearly better than Nadal in Wim 11 QF-F. (and just taking the finals, difference was quite significant)

I agree. But if Nadal 2007 brings his IW/Paris form he can win too.

IW ? yes..possible
Paris ? no, Nadal got absolutely bulldozed by Nalby. He's not winning vs an in-form Djokovic.
If we are talking about Paris 11, he's not winning vs Federer either. Federer crushed Berdych (7 games was actually more than what Berdych could have got, he somehow held)... played well in the final vs Tsonga as well.

 

[abmk]

I wish he was tested before Wimby.

Del Potro on the opposite side of the draw would’ve been interesting.

he was tested at Stuttgart - M.Zverev, Kyrgios and Raonic.

 

[Djorau]

what yeah ?

Trying to put Gasquet and Berdych into 2004-2007

 

[Djorau]

AO 14 or AO 16

He did not play well because Nadal and Djokovic did not allowed him to play well.

 

[abmk]

He did not play well because Nadal and Djokovic did not allowed him to play well.

bullcr*p.

He wasn't playing that great in the 1st set of AO 14 semi, but somehow held onto to force it to a TB.
was cr*p by himself in 2nd and 3rd set...

was cr*p by himself in the 1st 2 sets of AO 16 as well ...

Nadal/Djokovic made him look worse to some extent, but doesn't mean he wasn't playing bad by himself in those stages.

only someone clueless/with an agenda can state otherwise.

its like BSing that nadal did not play well in hamburg 07 final set because federer didn't allow him or in chennai 2008 final because youzhny didn't allow him .or that djokovic did not play well in cincy 2012 final 1st set (when he was bageled) because federer did not allow him to play well.

 

[abmk]

Trying to put Gasquet and Berdych into 2004-2007

I was referring to pretty good performances by them in that period only, not that they were in their primes for those 4 years.
In any case, 2007 was one of Gasquet's good years, with highlight being the WIm 07 QF vs Roddick.

 

[RS]

really ?
because Roddick played clearly better at the AO in 2004 than Murray did in AO 11, IMO. only lost in a 5-set battle to Safin. Won his 1st 4 matches, losing no sets and few games.
not much of a difference in AO b/w Murray's and Hewitt's form.
Again Safin at AO 2004 was probably lesser than Novak in 2011. Djokovic made most look average in his 2011 season. Roddick had a easier but still difficult opppent. Doesn’t mean he beats that Murray.
Rebound Ace is not anywhere near like Miami/IW it plays faster to me.
So even though Roddick looked better dooesnt mean he was.


Roddick also won Miami in 04. (lost to Henman in IW QF)

Murray lost to Donald Young at IW and Bogolmolov Jr. in Miami -- 1st matches at both., LOL.
no way in hell was he better in 2011 than Roddick on slow HC in 2004.

only better on clay, but don't think he was ready enough to win a M1000 on clay at that time.
I was talking when Murray peaked. He didn’t do much in IW/Miami.




no way in hell was Murray's Wim 11 form on par with Roddick's (esp. if you give importance to the SF of Murray & SF/F of Roddick). Murray blew himself out of the SF after missing 1 FH on a crucial point in the 2nd set.
shot-wise, was probably up there with Hewitt of Wim 04, but not mentally.
Murray was worse than Roddick I agree. But maybe not Hewitt.


at the USO, struggled vs Haase and didn't put up a great perf. vs Nadal in the semi. Roddick was upset in a freak match in USO 04 by Johansson (won a lot more points than Johansson did). IMO, he was better ...at worst, about even.
Hewitt of course made the final , without a losing a set. was below par in the final, but a great part of it was Federer in arguably his best HC match.
Would definitely take Hewitt overall.
Murray played Nadal a better oppenent though than Johansson. Nadal was in fire in US 2011 as well. Murray can struggle early both like most WC players he plays good later. If Roddick had to face Nadal of USO 2011 he would have struggled a lot to.
Hewitt didn’t face
Tokyo, of course, Murray was great.

Agree.

you mean Novak at Madrid, not Monte Carlo.
and you gotta be kidding if you think nadal's form at RG in 2007/2011 or clay form in general in 07/11 were close.
it wasn't just Djokovic playing well on clay, it was Nadal's BH also going down. same with footspeed. FH wasn't as good as it was in 2007 either on clay.

He straight-setted Federer at Monte Carlo in 2007 easily, crushed everyone else. crushed everyone at Rome except davydenko , who played a great match - significantly better than Murray in MC 11 or RG 11. was dominant at Barcelona as well ...form only dipped in Hamburg SF/F.



My point was Nadal of Wim 07 final (or QF+F) was clearly better than Nadal in Wim 11 QF-F. (and just taking the finals, difference was quite significant)



IW ? yes..possible
Paris ? no, Nadal got absolutely bulldozed by Nalby. He's not winning vs an in-form Djokovic.
If we are talking about Paris 11, he's not winning vs Federer either. Federer crushed Berdych (7 games was actually more than what Berdych could have got, he somehow held)... played well in the final vs Tsonga as well.

you mean Novak at Madrid, not Monte Carlo.
and you gotta be kidding if you think nadal's form at RG in 2007/2011 or clay form in general in 07/11 were close.
I’m not. They were close. In 2011 he faced 3 oppenents playing amazing. Sorry 4 with Isner too. He struggled to adjust to the faster balls but then for the rest of the tourney he dropped only one set. Same as in 2007. It was close in my opinion.
it wasn't just Djokovic playing well on clay, it was Nadal's BH also going down. same with footspeed. FH wasn't as good as it was in 2007 either on clay.
Slower but he was still beating everybody else. Djokovic was the main reason in my opinion that made him look worse. He may have been mentally shut out by Djokovic. It was close though a lot of Nadal CC seasons have small margins.

He straight-setted Federer at Monte Carlo in 2007 easily, crushed everyone else. crushed everyone at Rome except davydenko , who played a great match - significantly better than Murray in MC 11 or RG 11. was dominant at Barcelona as well ...form only dipped in Hamburg SF/F.
6-4 6-4 isn’t easy. Especially not on the dirt which is slow and very physical.



My point was Nadal of Wim 07 final (or QF+F) was clearly better than Nadal in Wim 11 QF-F. (and just taking the finals, difference was quite significant)
I agree. But if somebody not Djokovic was on the other side then Nadal 2011 plays quite well. 2007 W was a higher level though no doubt.



IW ? yes..possible
Paris ? no, Nadal got absolutely bulldozed by Nalby. He's not winning vs an in-form Djokovic.
If we are talking about Paris 11, he's not winning vs Federer either. Federer crushed Berdych (7 games was actually more than what Berdych could have got, he somehow held)... played well in the final vs Tsonga as well.

Nalby was streaky he beat Federer too. He blew every body out. I wasn’t talking of Djokovic in this point. I think we were talking Nadal 2007 vs Nadal 2011 when we were talking about HC level.

 

[RS]

yeah, I know Nadal won Tokyo in 2010. didn't watch, so not commenting on his form there.

was pretty good in Doha, but lost to Davy in the final
some good form vs Murray at AO, but got injured towards end of 2nd set.
Ljubicic beat him at IW
Roddick had him in trouble once he actually being aggressive in the 2nd set and won vs him at Miami...

indications of a very good year only began from clay season onwards.
He reached the SF in both IW/Miami losing to on form streaky oppenents. Still consistent.I agree with you about the rest.

He played well in the slams&YEC in 2010, but was a tad inconsistent in the other events.
Compared to some other ATG seasons he had like 2008 and 2013 yes.
He still reached SF of IW/Miami/Montreal
F of Doha
SF of Thailand
3 masters 1000s that year
I would say it was consistent with a few blips along the way.

As far as Murray is concerned, played real well in Canada, Shanghai, YEC and well enough in Wimbledon, but was inconsistent : lost to Fish at Queens, Querrey in LA, Fish again in Cincy, Stan at the USO, Ljubicic at Beijing (winning only 5 games !?), Monaco at Valencia, Monfils at Paris....
I agree. But his peaking made it quite difficult when he did. Murray was not at his 2012-13/15-16 level though no doubt to me.



that's still not prime level for Djokovic ...
you could make some argument from USO 10 onwards ....that he was somewhere near it. (he was close to 07-08 level from USO onwards)
Not as good as his 2011-16 form. But still great to me. I was talking about this in relation to 2010 strength.
getting blown off in convincing straight sets by Berdych/Roddick respectively doesn't cut it for me.

I don’t think it was prime level. But reaching 8 of 10 SF shows form.

 

[RS]

oh yes, they were and they did. Just that Federer was too good.

Apart from the ones I already mentioned.

Hewitt played well enough in 3 sets of both AO 04 and Wim 04 (1,2 and 4 in both). Had BP at 4 all in the 4th set of Wim 04.
Agassi-Fed in IW 04 was a tight 3-setter
Costa upset Fed in Rome 04
Berdych upset Fed at Oly. 04
Safin played well in the YEC 04 semi vs fed, more so in the 2nd set.
Hewitt didn't do anything wrong in the YEC 2004 final, but Fed was near-perfect in that match.

Ferrero ran Fed close in Dubai 05
Agassi didn't do much wrong in Miami 05 either
Gasquet played one of the best matches of his life in Monte Carlo 05 to upset Federer
Safin/Soderling ran Fedrer close at Halle
Ferrero/Hewitt actually played well enough well in Wim 05 vs Fed, but were straight-setted due to Federer playing really well
Nalbandian of course beat him in TMC 2005 final.

11 did have depth, but not as much as 04-05.
Maybe. But 2011 had more higher quality matches and stronger players at the top level which is where it matters. 2004-2005 oppenent were very streaky but not as consistent throughout the full year which is what is the most important.

yes, FEderer rolled over them morein 2004-06 well, duh because he was better in 2004-06 than in 2007 (level-wise). he was clutch in slams in 2007 though.

But later on the oppenents got better and beat him.
Nadal did this 4 times in 2006 and teen Murray once . Oppenents in 2006 other than them could not.
They gave tough matches a fair bit but they could not sustain it.
2004-2006 had lesser competition than 2007-2009 in the remainder of his so called peak. That’s why he lost more. Oppenents kept getting better.
That’s why they didn’t keep beating him in his peak like Nadal was doing in the time period and later on.
Nadal lead Federer 6-3 in 2004-06 and that was when Federer was better. How come Roddick and co couldn’t do the same?
Djokovic beat in Federer 2009 which Federer was certainly in his peak 3 times while his generation couldn’t do.
He also double bagled them and breadsticked them a lot as well.
It was difficult but it is clear his oppenents gave more resistance in 2007 and after.

 

[abmk]

Again Safin at AO 2004 was probably lesser than Novak in 2011. Djokovic made most look average in his 2011 season. Roddick had a easier but still difficult opppent. Doesn’t mean he beats that Murray.
Rebound Ace is not anywhere near like Miami/IW it plays faster to me.
So even though Roddick looked better dooesnt mean he was.

he absolutely, certainly 100% was.

Safin from set 2 onwards vs Roddick was no worse than Djoko of AO 11.
and Murray was struggling before the final in AO 11. he was struggling vs dolgo.
went 4 tight sets vs ferrer (winnig 2 TBs). If only Ferrer was a better big point player, he'd have easily taken it to 5 and maybe even won.
Murray was terrible in the final.

in general , Murray is better at the AO, but Roddick of AO 04 -- I'd definitely back him to beat AO 11 Murray.

Murray played Nadal a better oppenent though than Johansson. Nadal was in fire in US 2011 as well. Murray can struggle early both like most WC players he plays good later. If Roddick had to face Nadal of USO 2011 he would have struggled a lot to.

Nadal was good, but wasn't as good in USO 11 as he was in USO 10/13. Him vs Roddick of USO 2004 would've been a big battle. Close 4 sets/5-setter.... closer than a convincing 4-setter for Nadal vs Murray.

Nalby was streaky he beat Federer too. He blew every body out. I wasn’t talking of Djokovic in this point. I think we were talking Nadal 2007 vs Nadal 2011 when we were talking about HC level.

yeah, but both sets vs Fed were close. the Nadal match was a blow out.

and like I said Nadal Paris 2007 loses to Fed of Paris 2011.

 

[abmk]

But later on the oppenents got better and beat him.
Nadal did this 4 times in 2006 as the teen Murray. Oppenents in 2006 other than them could not.
They gave tough matches a fair bit but they could not sustain it.
2004-2006 had lesser competition than 2007-2009 in the remainder of his so called peak. That’s why he lost more. Oppenents kept getting better.
That’s why they didn’t keep beating him in his peak like Nadal was doing in the time period and later on.
Nadal lead Federer 6-3 in 2004-06 and that was when Federer was better. How come Roddick and co couldn’t do the same?
Djokovic beat in Federer 2009 which Federer was certainly in his peak 3 times while his generation couldn’t do.

nope. 2009 was not peak Fed. Just stick to prime will ya ?
If Djoko in 2009-10 was that good/tough, why was he losing to Fed's "pigeon" Roddick so many times in that period and that too convincingly ?
the 3 wins for Djokovic in 09 ... Miami 09 was a horrendous match. djoko played bad, fed worse.
Rome 2009 --- Fed blew that match ...was up a break in the 2nd set, was up 3-0 in the 3rd set.

Basel 2009 was a good win for Djoko in fed's home town (fed didn't play all that well though).
When Fed really stepped it up in Cincy 09, USO 09, he swept 5/5 sets vs Djoko. the only below par set Djoko played in those was the CIncy 09 1st set.

Federer in 08-09 didn't play that well in non-slam events, apart from a select few ones ...his focus was on the slam events and the YEC.....

As far as Nadal in 2004-06 goes ...a) clay b) Miami 04, fed was sick c) tougher matchup

and bringing in teen Murray's win in Cincy 06 is really laughable tbh. Fed had 4 3-setters in Toronto, no bye, flew in straight to Cincy ...was tired ...

was broken 7 times in 11 service games , FFS.
In their 3 other encounters at Cincy , Murray broke him 0 times in 2009, 2 times in 14, 0 times in 15 --- when he was clearly better than he was in 06.
and before you say Murray played a great match, he served at 41% and was broken 5 times himself.
Murray got beat convincingly by Roddick at that Cincy later on.

considerable # of performances in 2006 vs Fed were better than Murray's vs fed in Cincy 06. Just that Murray happened to be in the right place at the right time.
-------

The matches I mentioned were the players sustaining it in 2004-05, not for a set or a bit.
Nadal got better in 08-09 compared to 05/06 (and even 2007), fed's level dipped in 2008 and 2009 .......

in 08 alone, Fed had losses to Fish, Blake, Simon (2x),Karlovic., Stepanek...

in 2004-07, combined, he had 0 losses to these guys (of course Simon only emerged in 2008 tbf)

 

[abmk]

@ReeceSachs :

Re : Murray and AO 11.

This is what I said before the final :

lol, djoker will punish murray's FH and his second serve ... murray better up his level from his previous 2 matches or djoker will take this one realtively easily.

and Murray played even worse in the final than in the QF/SF. No wonder he got crushed.

Djokovic actually let it go a bit towards the end of the 2nd set ....else the 2nd set would've been a bagel.

 

[RS]

nope. 2009 was not peak Fed. Just stick to prime will ya ?

If Djoko in 2009-10 was that good/tough, why was he losing to Fed's "pigeon" Roddick so many times in that period and that too convincingly ?
the 3 wins for Djokovic in 09 ... Miami 09 was a horrendous match. djoko played bad, fed worse.
Djokovic was tough but not as consistent yet. But my point is the not yet at his best he still beat Federer while Roddick and could.
Okay Roddick did own Djokovic in 2009 no doubt. I don’t call Roddick Federer pidgon.
I agree. But the likes of Roddick and co couldn’t capitalise on Federer when he wasn’t playing his best and he still lost.

Rome 2009 --- Fed blew that match ...was up a break in the 2nd set, was up 3-0 in the 3rd set.
Federer has been a set up vs Djokovic often and lost. You could say Djokovic was not as his best too. He still beat Federer in a year Federer was beating other oppenents consistently before facing Novak

Basel 2009 was a good win for Djoko in fed's home town (fed didn't play all that well though).
When Fed really stepped it up in Cincy 09, USO 09, he swept 5/5 sets vs Djoko. the only below par set Djoko played in those was the CIncy 09 1st set.

Federer in 08-09 didn't play that well in non-slam events, apart from a select few ones ...his focus was on the slam events and the YEC.....

As far as Nadal in 2004-06 goes ...a) clay b) Miami 04, fed was sick c) tougher matchup
He had what a flu? That isn’t too serious. Even so still 5-3. Nadal beat Federer at Dubai and was 2 points away from Miami 2005. How come the others couldn’t replicate Nadal success? Clearly because they were not as good as Nadal.

and bringing in teen Murray's win in Cincy 06 is really laughable tbh. Fed had 4 3-setters in Toronto, no bye, flew in straight to Cincy ...was tired ...Federer hit 25 winners and 31 UFs in that tourney. Not his best level but not terrible. He wasn’t at his best though but still impressive for Murray.

was broken 7 times in 11 service games , FFS.
In their 3 other encounters at Cincy , Murray broke him 0 times in 2009, 2 times in 14, 0 times in 15 --- when he was clearly better than he was in 06.
Federer is better at Cincy no doubt. He is the king their. Not saying Federer was at his best but just that his own generation couldn’t beat him at his best or not yet Murray and Nadal could.
and before you say Murray played a great match, he served at 41% and was broken 5 times himself.
Murray got beat convincingly by Roddick at that Cincy later on.

Not peak even though he reached 4 GS finals and nearly won them. He was a set away from winning 4 of 4 slams. 2009 was probably in the Top 2 strongest years of this era I have it just behind 2012. In such a strong year a oppenent nearly winning 4 of 4 slams while not being in his peak.

 

[abmk]

Djokovic was tough but not as consistent yet. But my point is the not yet at his best he still beat Federer while Roddick and could.
Okay Roddick did own Djokovic in 2009 no doubt. I don’t call Roddick Federer pidgon.
I agree. But the likes of Roddick and co couldn’t capitalise on Federer when he wasn’t playing his best and he still lost.

Roddick couldn't capitalize when federer wasn't playing his best ? how many times did he play did he play federer playing that badly ?

He beat Fed in miami 08 when fed wasn't playing that well ...beat him to deny him #1 ranking in Canada 2003. This was after Fed had won Wimby.

And hewitt owned pre-prime fed. was up 7-2.
beat him in DC 2003 from 2 sets to love down.

his problem was federer never let down his gear enough in 2004-05 vs him.

also beat him in Halle 2010 and Brisbane 2014 (though Hewitt himself was past it in those times)

Federer has been a set up vs Djokovic often and lost. You could say Djokovic was not as his best too. He still beat Federer in a year Federer was beating other oppenents consistently before facing Novak

not just about being a set up. he was up a break in both set 2 and set 3. made cr*ppy UEs in both the sets he lost.

He had what a flu? That isn’t too serious. Even so still 5-3. Nadal beat Federer at Dubai and was 2 points away from Miami 2005. How come the others couldn’t replicate Nadal success? Clearly because they were not as good as Nadal.

flu isn't serious as far as tennis player form goes ? are you kidding me !?

like I said : a) Nadalwas already too good on clay b) matchup (along with Nadal actually playing well in those matches vs fed --- he was more inconsistent on HC back then)

If roddick/hewitt were not as good as Nadal, how were they making slam SFs/Fs on HC while Nadal was getting eliminated before the SF every single time in HC slam from 2005-07 ?

He wasn’t at his best though but still impressive for Murray.

was broken 7 times in 11 service games , FFS.

Federer is better at Cincy no doubt. He is the king their. Not saying Federer was at his best but just that his own generation couldn’t beat him at his best or not yet Murray and Nadal could.

just "wasn't at his best" ?

are you kidding ?

getting broken 7 times in 11 service games for federer is downright terrible. He won only <50% of his service points that day.

From 2003 onwards, the only matches in which Fed has won <=50% of service points is :
Cincy 06 vs Murray
MC 2008 vs Nadal
RG 2008 vs Nadal
Rome 2013 vs Nadal

that's how awful on serve Fed was that day at Cincy.

Assuming those W/UE stats from tennisabstract are accurate, it gives federer with 46winners+errors forced to 31 UEs....... only +15 and a ratio lesser than 1.5...... those aren't good stats on a fast HC like cincy.
again, not talking about the W-UE ratio here.

Murray got plain lucky with his timing. any random decent player putting in a good perf. would've beaten fed that day.

 

[KINGROGER]

I've always called it an exhibition. And for the fred fans who say otherwise would fed pull out before a slam final for a sore back? No. Did he in the WTF exho? Yes.

It doesn’t really matter what a troll like you says. 6>0 is the fact.

 

[abmk]

Not peak even though he reached 4 GS finals and nearly won them. He was a set away from winning 4 of 4 slams. 2009 was probably in the Top 2 strongest years of this era I have it just behind 2012. In such a strong year a oppenent nearly winning 4 of 4 slams while not being in his peak.

Like I said, Federer in 08-09 didn't play that well in non-slam events, apart from a select few ones.

Plus he had 2 horrendous serving days in the slam finals he lost - AO 09 and USO 09.
fat chance of that happening in 2004-07 in 1 slam final, let alone 2.

he was 2 sets away from winning all 4 of 4 slams.
but he was also 2 sets away from winning 0 slams.

was down 2 sets to love vs Berdych in AO 09, same vs Haas in FO 09 , nearly lost.
fat chance of all of that happening in 1 year alone in the 2004-07 period.

2009 was definitely prime level because his highest level was scary good and because he was pretty good in slams, but not peak considering the whole year. components of his game had also dipped quite a bit from 2004-07. returning/passing ......

Still definitely his 5th best year.

and I put 2009 ahead of 2012 as far as competition goes. 2012 is #2 IMO.

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

No more vulturing

 

[Sudacafan]

Federer : "Halle has been my best hunting ground"

Federer has jinxed himself.

 

[WeakEraKing]

Vulture is dead

 

[The Fedfather]

Do GOATs even hunt?

 

[RS]

Roddick couldn't capitalize when federer wasn't playing his best ? how many times did he play did he play federer playing that badly ?
Didn’t say bad. Not his best.
He should won Wimbledon 2009 which Federer wasn’t playing as well in the first 2 sets. He usually hit form against a Roddick though.


F
Federer
He beat Fed in miami 08 when fed wasn't playing that well ...beat him to deny him #1 ranking in Canada 2003. This was after Fed had won Wimby.

And hewitt owned pre-prime fed. was up 7-2.
beat him in DC 2003 from 2 sets to love down.
Yeah. But he couldn’t do this to post 2003 Federer when a Federer re figured out how to beat him. 2004-2006 really had more depth and was as strong as many the later years the likes of Hewitt,Safin would have found out how to deal with Roger more. But they couldn’t. Their
his problem was federer never let down his gear enough in 2004-05 vs him.
True. But Federer played in comparable form in many big matches vs Big 4 players and still lost. They were just better later on and pushed Federer to find new ways of winning ie coming to the net more.

also beat him in Halle 2010 and Brisbane 2014 (though Hewitt himself was past it in those times)



not just about being a set up. he was up a break in both set 2 and set 3. made cr*ppy UEs in both the sets he lost.



flu isn't serious as far as tennis player form goes ? are you kidding me !?
It isn’t more serious than what Federer has suffered in matches and still won. Federer reached a SF at AO 2008 with mono. Players have won so many times with injuries in big matches. Nadal had blisters in one of the sets with Federer in AO 2014 and won. Flu doesn’t hinder you but no it isn’t as serious as say back problems.
like I said : a) Nadalwas already too good on clay b) matchup (along with Nadal actually playing well in those matches vs fed --- he was more inconsistent on HC back then)
A. Federer had chances to play to Nadal weaker shots like his serve and use his dominant FH to bully Nadal on the BH side. Matchup problem doesn’t cut it with a dominant number 1 in his peak. Federer had his chances but Nadal did this better.
Nadal was dominant on Clay but Roddick/Hewitt/Safin were not dominant enough to keep beating Federer.
And Nadal did well on HCs still. Even at Dubai and didn’t get double bagelled in a GS final.




If roddick/hewitt were not as good as Nadal, how were they making slam SFs/Fs on HC while Nadal was getting eliminated before the SF every single time in HC slam from 2005-07 ?
This was in response to a Federer was too good for them but my point was if they were as strong as you say they should have found ways to beat him like Nadal did. They were more consistent at GS level than Nadal but Federer found them easier to play.
Nadal would go on to improve and best Federer later as would Djokovic/Murray while his own generation couldn’t.
Nadal was actually doing better overall in 2005-07 he ranked ahead of them all at the end of all 3 years. He won 3 HC masters 1000 titles in that slot matches more than them individually.


just "wasn't at his best" ?

are you kidding ?

getting broken 7 times in 11 service games for federer is downright terrible. He won only <50% of his service points that day.

From 2003 onwards, the only matches in which Fed has won <=50% of service points is :
Cincy 06 vs Murray
MC 2008 vs Nadal
RG 2008 vs Nadal
Rome 2013 vs Nadal

that's how awful on serve Fed was that day at Cincy.

Assuming those W/UE stats from tennisabstract are accurate, it gives federer with 46winners+errors forced to 31 UEs....... only +15 and a ratio lesser than 1.5...... those aren't good stats on a fast HC like cincy.
again, not talking about the W-UE ratio here.
Fair enough. But it was still better than you thought.
Okay Federer was not playing well. B

Murray got plain lucky with his timing. any random decent player putting in a good perf. would've beaten fed that day.

Not really. Federer still took 4 and 5 games in a set a player lesser than Murray still lost. Anyway Murray was certainly tougher for Roger than was his generation.

 

[RS]

Like I said, Federer in 08-09 didn't play that well in non-slam events, apart from a select few ones.

Plus he had 2 horrendous serving days in the slam finals he lost - AO 09 and USO 09.
fat chance of that happening in 2004-07 in 1 slam final, let alone 2.
He struggled at slams in FO 2006 in his best year. His performance was worse than in AO 2009 and US 2009. Still Federer was amazing in AO 2009 barring his serve.
Some of the cleanest I have seen his BH especially against Nadal

he was 2 sets away from winning all 4 of 4 slams.
but he was also 2 sets away from winning 0 slams.
True. But I was cherry picking to show his level.

was down 2 sets to love vs Berdych in AO 09, same vs Haas in FO 09 , nearly lost.
fat chance of all of that happening in 1 year alone in the 2004-07 period.

2009 was definitely prime level because his highest level was scary good and because he was pretty good in slams, but not peak considering the whole year. components of his game had also dipped quite a bit from 2004-07. returning/passing ......
Possibly. But I don’t think it is enough.
I have disagreed with most about peak
If you put 2009 Federer in 2004-2006 I think things would have worked out a lot better for him.

Still definitely his 5th best year.
In my opinion 2012 may have been better. I’m not sure it could go any way to me.
I know he won less slams but ran into Djokdal in form earlier more.

and I put 2009 ahead of 2012 as far as competition goes. 2012 is #2 IMO.

It is very close between those two as well as 2007-2008/2011 and 2013 to me. I give 2012 the edge because of the amount of epics and the fact we had 4 of 4 greats performing to their best level and the fact nobody clearly dominated it. This was the year I enjoyed watching Tennis the most so I am biased here.

 

[AceSalvo]

Federer : "Halle has been my best hunting ground"

Federer has jinxed himself.

No. The Halle center court ground was playing tricks with Fed. Giving bad bounces here and there. Ground was fed up with junkballer Fed.

 

[abmk]

Roddick couldn't capitalize when federer wasn't playing his best ? how many times did he play did he play federer playing that badly ?
Didn’t say bad. Not his best.
He should won Wimbledon 2009 which Federer wasn’t playing as well in the first 2 sets. He usually hit form against a Roddick though.

federer was playing fine in the 1st set until 5 all. missed an easy FH on one BP chance he had...then got broken by Roddick. He also played fine until the TB in the 2nd set. ...level dipp

Yeah. But he couldn’t do this to post 2003 Federer when a Federer re figured out how to beat him. 2004-2006 really had more depth and was as strong as many the later years the likes of Hewitt,Safin would have found out how to deal with Roger more. But they couldn’t.
True. But Federer played in comparable form in many big matches vs Big 4 players and still lost. They were just better later on and pushed Federer to find new ways of winning ie coming to the net more.

only Nadal and to a lesser extent Djokovic.
In any case Nadal was there on clay in 2005-06 and on grass in 06, not a non-entity on HC either in 05-06,

As far as Hewitt/Safin/Roddick is concerned....Safin suffered seriously due to injuries. He barely had prime level tourneys after Halle 05.
Hewitt dropped out of his prime due to injuries+operations after 2005.

Mind you , he did beat federer twice after 2009 - Halle 10 and brisbane 14.

Nalbandian beat Federer in YEC 05, Madrid & Paris 07

As far as Roddick is concerned, he did beat Fed in Miami 08.
Fed was just too clutch in the end in Wim 09 (contrast to the JMDP USO final where he let it slip away)
Even in USO 07, when Roddick played his very best tennis, Federer was ruthless and didn't let up. (unlike vs Djoko in the final, where he was a tad sloppy)

It isn’t more serious than what Federer has suffered in matches and still won. Federer reached a SF at AO 2008 with mono. Players have won so many times with injuries in big matches. Nadal had blisters in one of the sets with Federer in AO 2014 and won. Flu doesn’t hinder you but no it isn’t as serious as say back problems.

Nadal was fine by the time of the semi. The blisters was in the QF vs Dimitrov.

Federer's flu was serious enough for quite a few here to expect a nadal win ...he committed quite a few UEs vs davy in the previous round ...barely won that match....
and no one knew how the fedal matchup was going to turn out in the furure

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...er-wish-nadal-has-a-great-chance-vs-fed.2107/

A. Federer had chances to play to Nadal weaker shots like his serve and use his dominant FH to bully Nadal on the BH side. Matchup problem doesn’t cut it with a dominant number 1 in his peak. Federer had his chances but Nadal did this better.
Nadal was dominant on Clay but Roddick/Hewitt/Safin were not dominant enough to keep beating Federer.
And Nadal did well on HCs still. Even at Dubai and didn’t get double bagelled in a GS final.

This was in response to a Federer was too good for them but my point was if they were as strong as you say they should have found ways to beat him like Nadal did. They were more consistent at GS level than Nadal but Federer found them easier to play.
Nadal would go on to improve and best Federer later as would Djokovic/Murray while his own generation couldn’t.

again, matchup issue....
and yes, matchup also works vs a dominant #1 at his peak.

Okay Federer was not playing well.
Not really. Federer still took 4 and 5 games in a set a player lesser than Murray still lost. Anyway Murray was certainly tougher for Roger than was his generation.

only in non-slam/YEC events. Not in slams/YEC with a fully healthy federer ........

 

[abmk]

He struggled at slams in FO 2006 in his best year. His performance was worse than in AO 2009 and US 2009. Still Federer was amazing in AO 2009 barring his serve.
Some of the cleanest I have seen his BH especially against Nadal

the only struggle before the final in RG 06 was for a set and a bit vs nalby , but he turned it around with some excellent play ...and then Nalby retired towards the closing stages of the 3rd set.

True. But I was cherry picking to show his level.

doesn't make sense. if you are cherry-picking. you are not giving an accurate representation of his level.

If you put 2009 Federer in 2004-2006 I think things would have worked out a lot better for him.

2009 was the most competitive year in this century, IMO. so it would be easier to some extent in 04,05 and more so in 2006. so ?

Still definitely his 5th best year.
In my opinion 2012 may have been better. I’m not sure it could go any way to me.
I know he won less slams but ran into Djokdal in form earlier more.

nope, not even close as far as the slams are concerned.....

2009 AO > 2012 AO (inspite of blip vs Berdych in 4R) --- the QF/SF were too good.. final was pretty good apart from serving and final set crumbling (better than the AO 12 semi)...QF was pretty good in 2012 too, but he could reach higher level and grind more in 2009 than in 2012.

2009 RG >> 2012 RG ...Delpo in RG 2009 semi was clearly better than Djoko in 2012 RG semi....just that Federer was much better vs delpo and survived him. In 2012 RG semi vs djoko, he was cr*p. he could've lost in straight sets to delpo in the 2012 QF if not for delpo getting fatigued(+some sort of injury I think)

2009 Wim > 2012 Wim ...back problems in 3R/4R, was 2 points away from losing to Benneteau multiple times.

2009 USO >>> 2012 USO ...no further explaination is needed I hope...

and I put 2009 ahead of 2012 as far as competition goes. 2012 is #2 IMO.
It is very close between those two as well as 2007-2008/2011 and 2013 to me. I give 2012 the edge because of the amount of epics and the fact we had 4 of 4 greats performing to their best level and the fact nobody clearly dominated it. This was the year I enjoyed watching Tennis the most so I am biased here.

that's fine. ....only we had more epics in 2009 than in 2012.

 

[Rafa24]

The US Open and the AO changed surfaces in the past, so we can't count them in the GOAT debate either, right?

Did they change venues and surfaces every 10 years or so?

 

[deaner2211]

I eat pasta every day for lunch. Well except for Tuesdays when I don't eat lunch.

Can I still say that I eat pasta every day?

No, but you can say every day that I eat, I eat pasta.

 

[Mainad]

Did they change venues and surfaces every 10 years or so?

Until 1987, the AO was played on grass at Kooyong. In 1988 the venue moved to Melbourne Park and has been played there on hardcourt ever since.

The USO has been played on 3 different surfaces. Until 1974 it was played on grass and then from 1975-77 on clay, both at Forest Hills. From 1978 it moved to Flushing Meadows and has been played on hardcourt there ever since.

Wimbledon has always been played on grass and Roland Garros always on clay.

 

[Rafa24]

Until 1987, the AO was played on grass at Kooyong. In 1988 the venue moved to Melbourne Park and has been played there on hardcourt ever since.

The USO has been played on 3 different surfaces. Until 1974 it was played on grass and then from 1975-77 on clay, both at Forest Hills. From 1978 it moved to Flushing Meadows and has been played on hardcourt there ever since.

Wimbledon has always been played on grass and Roland Garros always on clay.

The point is a grand slam is much harder to win than a WTF.

Look who won last year. Dimitrov. Davydenko won in 2009. Nalbandian in 2005. 3x since 2005 a non grand slam winner has won the almighty WTF.

 

[RS]

the only struggle before the final in RG 06 was for a set and a bit vs nalby , but he turned it around with some excellent play ...and then Nalby retired towards the closing stages of the 3rd set.
In the final vs Nadal he hit 37 UFs off the BH side. That isn’t a good display for Federer. He was better in FO 2007 and FO 2011. Nalbandian was leading but his fitnesss wasn’t the best so he had a cramps.






2009 was the most competitive year in this century, IMO. so it would be easier to some extent in 04,05 and more so in 2006. so ?
Yes. That’s what needs to taken into account. A



nope, not even close as far as the slams are concerned.....

2009 AO > 2012 AO (inspite of blip vs Berdych in 4R) --- the QF/SF were too good.. final was pretty good apart from serving and final set crumbling (better than the AO 12 semi)...QF was pretty good in 2012 too, but he could reach higher level and grind more in 2009 than in 2012.


2009 RG >> 2012 RG ...Delpo in RG 2009 semi was clearly better than Djoko in 2012 RG semi....just that Federer was much better vs delpo and survived him. In 2012 RG semi vs djoko, he was cr*p. he could've lost in straight sets to delpo in the 2012 QF if not for delpo getting fatigued(+some sort of injury I think)
Agree.

2009 Wim > 2012 Wim ...back problems in 3R/4R, was 2 points away from losing to Benneteau multiple times.
He peaked later though in Wimby 2012. He beat Murray/Djokovic. More impressive beating them back to back than beating Roddick. He played better in the 2012 F and SF.

2009 USO >>> 2012 USO ...no further explaination is needed I hope...
Agree.
It isn’t only about slams. Federer made more deep runs in 2012 and won a extra masters 1000. Reached more finals.
And ran into Djokovic and Nadal earlier hence went out.
More titles and more matches won.
2009 could get the edge due to the extra slam though.



that's fine. ....only we had more epics in 2009 than in 2012.

So close here. I think 2012 had better matches slightly but it could go any way really.

 

[RS]

federer was playing fine in the 1st set until 5 all. missed an easy FH on one BP chance he had...then got broken by Roddick. He also played fine until the TB in the 2nd set. ...level dipp
Federer dipped a few times in his peak years. His peers couldn’t take advantage.



only Nadal and to a lesser extent Djokovic.
In any case Nadal was there on clay in 2005-06 and on grass in 06, not a non-entity on HC either in 05-06,
I agree. But it wasn’t on Clay than Federer didn’t have a rival that could keep beating him. It was off Clay in 2004-06. It was difficult. Just not as difficult as the 2007-2010 nor 2011-2014 eras with the first half of 2010 being the only difference.
As far as Hewitt/Safin/Roddick is concerned....Safin suffered seriously due to injuries. He barely had prime level tourneys after Halle 05.
Hewitt dropped out of his prime due to injuries+operations after 2005.

Mind you , he did beat federer twice after 2009 - Halle 10 and brisbane 14.
Federer won 16 of 18 matches after 2004. Hewitt beat a peak Federer 0 times.
He beat Federer in smaller tourneys. Doesn’t help the case Hewitt was as tough as what came later considering he got thrashed by a peak Federer many times.
Nalbandian beat Federer in YEC 05, Madrid & Paris 07
Nalbandian was the only one who had a good H2H vs Federer. He didn’t work on his fitness as much and tailed of. He could have been better than Murray imo. He peaked occasionally.

As far as Roddick is concerned, he did beat Fed in Miami 08.
Fed was just too clutch in the end in Wim 09 (contrast to the JMDP USO final where he let it slip away)
Still sloppier at some points line I said. Roddick didn’t take advantage and was shut out by Federer too often.
Roddick
Even in USO 07, when Roddick played his very best tennis, Federer was ruthless and didn't let up. (unlike vs Djoko in the final, where he was a tad sloppy)



Nadal was fine by the time of the semi. The blisters was in the QF vs Dimitrov.
I thought I saw him having something don’t with it and they showed it during one of the sets it looked painful. Nadal has carried injuries in matches vs Federer like vise versa. Federer even when he was ill could have taken care of a pre Prime Nadal like he had done before.

Federer's flu was serious enough for quite a few here to expect a nadal win ...he committed quite a few UEs vs davy in the previous round ...barely won that match....
Davydenko still couldn’t pull it off though. While Nadal could.

and no one knew how the fedal matchup was going to turn out in the furure

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...er-wish-nadal-has-a-great-chance-vs-fed.2107/



again, matchup issue....
and yes, matchup also works vs a dominant #1 at his peak.
Excuse. Still beat Federer. He could have been beaten like Federer best the rest. The matchup thing doesn’t explain why Federer could make his advantages over Nadal like Nadal did. Federer had no problems with other lefties and high topspin hitters most of the time.
Roddick and co were just easier to play and figure out and the players later figured Federer out better.


only in non-slam/YEC events. Not in slams/YEC with a fully healthy federer ........

Shanghai 2006 was close. As was Wimbeldon 2006 apart from set one. Nadal not at his best on HV still wasn’t getting breadsticked as much as Federer Generation.

 

[RS]

Yeah I know Safin was past it after 2005 as was Hewitt. In 2004-05 they did give tough matches but they couldn’t win even then. Roddick was still great in 2006-07 but he still didn’t win. Nor did the uninjured players with Nalbandian doing better.

 

[abmk]

Shanghai 2006 was close. As was Wimbeldon 2006 apart from set one. Nadal not at his best on HV still wasn’t getting breadsticked as much as Federer Generation.

which Shanghai 2006 match are you referring to ? Just to be clear.

Wimbledon 2006 -- 4th set wasn't really close. Federer got up a double break. Was broken back once, but Nadal wasn't close in that set. Federer pulled away after Nadal won set 3.

 

[abmk]

Federer dipped a few times in his peak years. His peers couldn’t take advantage.

nowhere near enough for them to be able to take the match....unlike some of the UE fests he went on in the smaller events in 08-09 or in AO 08 when he had mono (the tipsy and djoko match --- from 5-3 in the 1st set to 1-5 in the set -- losing 9 games out of 10, FFS !)

 

[abmk]

I thought I saw him having something don’t with it and they showed it during one of the sets it looked painful. Nadal has carried injuries in matches vs Federer like vise versa. Federer even when he was ill could have taken care of a pre Prime Nadal like he had done before.

already showed you posts where people thought Nadal would beat Federer in Miami 04 based on him being sick. This was before anyone had an inkling of what would happen in their matchup in particular. You still want to think a sick guy should've taken care of a talented youngster playing a pretty good match, that's upto you.

Nadal played perfectly fine in the AO 14 semi and didn't look affected at all.

 

[abmk]

Still sloppier at some points line I said. Roddick didn’t take advantage and was shut out by Federer too often.

He did take advantage of Federer's miss in the 1st set. He held and then broke him to take the 1st set.

His only fault in the match in terms of opportunities was that botched BH volley at 5-6 off the mishit topspin fh lob by fed in the 2nd TB.

 

[abmk]

He peaked later though in Wimby 2012. He beat Murray/Djokovic. More impressive beating them back to back than beating Roddick. He played better in the 2012 F and SF.

Individually, beating Roddick in Wim 09 was more tough than beating 2012 Murray
beating Roddick in Wim 09 was more tough than beating 2012 Djokovic

because Roddick played at a clearly better level than these either of these guys did.

I don't think Federer played better in the 2012 SF and F.
returning was better in 2012 SF/F, but he was better off the ground in Wim 2009 final than he was in Wim 12 SF and he served better in the Wim 09 final than he did in the Wim 12 final.

Mind you he returned fairly well in Wim 09 before the final and Roddick's stellar serving/clutch play+their history made fed's returning in Wim 09 final look worse than it was.

Plus Federer didn't have the confidence/aura that he had in WIm 09 - after winning RG(&Madrid) ...that made him a tougher opponent to beat in Wim 09 than in Wim 12.

 

[abmk]

It isn’t only about slams. Federer made more deep runs in 2012 and won a extra masters 1000. Reached more finals.
And ran into Djokovic and Nadal earlier hence went out.
More titles and more matches won.
2009 could get the edge due to the extra slam though.

yeah, he was more consistent/better in the non-slam events in 12, but with the slam performances being so much better in 2009 in total than in 2012, clear edge to 2009.

Running earlier into Nadal/Djokovic in 2012 is irrelevant here ....since I focussed mainly on the level of play.
He was clearly better in AO 09 final vs Nadal than in the AO 12 semi
delpo in RG 09 semi was clearly better than djokovic in RG 12 semi - fed beat delpo in RG 09 semi, lost in a mediocre performance to djokovic in RG 2012 semi.

 

[ForumMember]

Hunter got hunted..

 

[EloQuent]

 

[RS]

Individually, beating Roddick in Wim 09 was more impressive than beating 2012 Murray
beating Roddick in Wim 09 was more impressive than beating 2012 Djokovic

because Roddick played at a clearly better level than these either of these guys did.

I don't think Federer played better in the 2012 SF and F.
returning was better in 2012 SF/F, but he was better off the ground in Wim 2009 final than he was in Wim 12 SF and he served better in the Wim 09 final than he did in the Wim 12 final.

Mind you he returned fairly well in Wim 09 before the final and Roddick's stellar serving/clutch play+their history made fed's returning in Wim 09 final look worse than it was.

which Shanghai 2006 match are you referring to ? Just to be clear.
The Federer-Nadal one. It was a close match with Federer winning in straights.

Wimbledon 2006 -- 4th set wasn't really close. Federer got up a double break. Was broken back once, but Nadal wasn't close in that set. Federer pulled away after Nadal won set 3.

True. Also Nadal nearly won set 2. Federer was exactly finding easy with Nadal then. He was doing better against Federer off clay than Roddick was.


Plus Federer didn't have the confidence/aura that he had in WIm 09 - after winning RG(&Madrid) ...that made him a tougher opponent to beat in Wim 09 than in Wim 12.

Individually, beating Roddick in Wim 09 was more tough than beating 2012 Murray
beating Roddick in Wim 09 was more tough than beating 2012 Djokovic
I disagree. Roddick look better but Federer didn’t return as well and wasn’t at his best in stretches of the match. Roddick played as well or better in other Wimbeldons and didn’t go 5 sets.
because Roddick played at a clearly better level than these either of these guys did.


I don't think Federer played better in the 2012 SF and F.
returning was better in 2012 SF/F, but he was better off the ground in Wim 2009 final than he was in Wim 12 SF and he served better in the Wim 09 final than he did in the Wim 12 final.
His BH and FH was better. His serve was keep him great in 2009 Wimbeldon. 50 Aces. Federer hit more BH winners in the Murray match in Wimbledon 2012 in a shorter match.
Djokovic the number 1 that year having less worth than winning the 2009 final? Federer beat 2 ATGs in their primes back to back. Yeah that’s another point. Only broke Roddick once. Federer usually broke the stuffings out of Roddick in big matches.




Mind you he returned fairly well in Wim 09 before the final and Roddick's stellar serving/clutch play+their history made fed's returning in Wim 09 final look worse than it was.
But Roddick served brilliant in other matches but Federer still got more than a break. It was certainly a brilliant match no doubt. Roddick was great but he fell apart in set 2 tiebreak.


Plus Federer didn't have the confidence/aura that he had in WIm 09 - after winning RG(&Madrid) ...that made him a tougher opponent to beat in Wim 09 than in Wim 12.

But he turned it up later in the Wimbledon tourney. With the motivation of knowing number one was at reach like in 2009.

 

[RS]

He did take advantage of Federer's miss in the 1st set. He held and then broke him to take the 1st set.

His only fault in the match in terms of opportunities was that botched BH volley at 5-6 off the mishit topspin fh lob by fed in the 2nd TB.

That could have taken him 2-0 up so it was big. He wasn’t doing things wrong but Federer wasn’t exactly playing as well as a Wimbledon 2007-08 for instance when Nadal the oppenent he found most difficult beat him once.
The point is if Federer switched off or didn’t return as well he was still good enough to find ways to win.
Federer would have not won that match vs Nadal breaking once.

 

[RS]

yeah, he was more consistent/better in the non-slam events in 12, but with the slam performances being so much better in 2009 in total than in 2012, clear edge to 2009. I agree.

Running earlier into Nadal/Djokovic in 2012 is irrelevant here ....since I focussed mainly on the level of play.
If you playing them your level can drop easier though. That was explaining why he couldn’t always make as many deep slam runs.
He was clearly better in AO 09 final vs Nadal than in the AO 12 semi
Agree. But not his serve. Remember it isn’t only about the final. Federer looked more convincing in 2012 AO before facing Nadal. Berdych made it pretty tight.

delpo in RG 09 semi was clearly better than djokovic in RG 12 semi - fed beat
delpo in RG 09 semi, lost in a mediocre performance to djokovic in RG 2012 semi.

I agree with this point.
In my opinion his level wasn’t lower at Wimbledon.