Federer : "Halle has been my best hunting ground"

[RS]

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 !)

Yeah because they were not as good as the Big 4 overall. Federer played some better matches and still lost.
Yes Federer was below his best in those matches.
You will make more UEs if you oppenent pushes it on you.
Federer was less consistent but he also had it tougher in 2008-2009.

 

[RS]

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.
Federer nearly beat Nalbandian despite being injured even though Nalbandian was apparently coming back from one too. With a serious injury which sidelined him and had him with ligament damage. Flu is minor compared to what injuries players bring in matches and still win.
That was a few predictions but not most people right?



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

I checked up you were right.

 

[abmk]

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.

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.

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.

completely ignoring that Federer wasn't at his best in stretches of the Wim 12 semi and Wim 12 final ...

Fed's ground game was only better in the last 2 sets off the Wim 12 final compared to the Wim 09 final. But his serve was nowhere as good as it was in the 2009 final. Federer fell behind in FH winners compared to Murray big time in the 1st 2 sets of the Wim 12 final.

Federer's semi was servebotting+good baseline game --- somewhat similar to Wim 09 final, in fact, baseline game was better in Wim 09 final (though not by much) --- not peak-like on grass (2003-07 at Wim)


and FFS, Murray is not an ATG... I'll start calling Hewitt, Roddick & Safin as ATGs if you continue calling Murray as an ATG

and considering Roddick played considerably better in the Wim 09 final, yes, that was a better win than Wim 12 semi vs Djokovic. (though not by that much)

The only other Wimbledon Roddick "possibly" played better was Wim 04.... that was a fierce 4-setter vs a clearly better and peak Federer. That's the difference b/w peak level Fed and prime level Fed.

You blame Roddick for not taking it to Federer more and when he did, you start downgrading Federer's performance more than you should.... !

P.S : As far as the 2009 2nd set TB goes, federer saved 3 of those 4 SPs : ace, unreturnable, amazing BH half-volley ...Roddick only botched up that BH volley. It was a mishit FH from federer and that was what caused the hesitation from Roddick (whether or not it was going out) ...he had played excellent to get into that winning position in the TB in the 1st place.

 

[abmk]

Federer nearly beat Nalbandian despite being injured even though Nalbandian was apparently coming back from one too. With a serious injury which sidelined him and had him with ligament damage. Flu is minor compared to what injuries players bring in matches and still win.
That was a few predictions but not most people right?

Federer's injury started acting up at the end of set 2. He took a MTO at the end of set 2. He lost 16 of 19 games after that. lost sets 3 & 4 , 2-6, 1-6 and went down 0-4 in the 5th set.

only found 2nd set wind at that time+nalby's level dipped ...hence the match got close in the 5th set...

Re : Miami 04, slightly more than half the people in the thread were saying Nadal would/could win. peak Federer vs a 17 year old guy ...the only way that happens is if Federer looked clearly off....

 

[KINGROGER]

Yeah because they were not as good as the Big 4 overall. Federer played some better matches and still lost.
Yes Federer was below his best in those matches.
You will make more UEs if you oppenent pushes it on you.
Federer was less consistent but he also had it tougher in 2008-2009.

So you’re saying Roddick, Fish, Karlovic, Simon, Blake etc all peaked in 2008? And Federer was playing as well as ever?

 

[abmk]

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.

Federer in Wim 07 final > Federer of Wim 08 final ~ Federer of Wim 09 final.
Not much of a difference b/w Fed of Wim 08 final and Fed of Wim 09 final. He only broke once in the Wim 08 final. was 1/13 on BPs. blew quite a few BPs, including dumping several 2nd serves into the net.

 

[abmk]

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.

eh, not really. He had erased the talk/remnants of the Berdych 4R match with that absolute demolition of delpo in the QF and the convincing win over Roddick in the semi.
Also Federer didn't play anyone playing close to the level that Berdych did in their AO 2009 4R match in AO 12.

In my opinion his level wasn’t lower at Wimbledon.

see my previous posts....I don't think Wim 09 final was any lower than Wim 12 semi/final.
And before the final, Wim 09 obviously > Wim 12.
(he came within 2 points of losing in Wim 12 vs Benneteau)

 

[abmk]

Yeah because they were not as good as the Big 4 overall. Federer played some better matches and still lost.
Yes Federer was below his best in those matches.
You will make more UEs if you oppenent pushes it on you.
Federer was less consistent but he also had it tougher in 2008-2009.

yeah, I'm curious to know the list of those better matches (esp. vs Djokovic/Murray)
Federer was losing to all sorts of guys in 2008 - Fish, Blake, Simon(2x), Stepanek. ...not just Murray/Djokovic/Nadal.

even in 2009, he was below par in many of the non-slam events.

 

[abmk]

The Federer-Nadal one. It was a close match with Federer winning in straights.

a match in which Nadal was never even close to winning either of the sets.
a good, competitive match, but Federer was clearly better.

At 5-3 in the 1st set, Federer completely blew the game all by himself :
a FH UE in a rally in which Nadal didn't do anything that good, a DF, missing such an easy overhead, a FH UE from fed trying to hit an inside in forehand.

That's why the 1st set became close.

Just in case, a reminder is needed, Roddick played Federer much closer in their RR match.

Don't get me wrong : I loved the rallies/movement in the YEC 2006 semi b/w Fed-Nadal and I think its a clearly under-rated match, but just stating what happened.

 

[KINGROGER]

Federer in Wim 07 final > Federer of Wim 08 final ~ Federer of Wim 09 final.
Not much of a difference b/w Fed of Wim 08 final and Fed of Wim 09 final. He only broke once in the Wim 08 final. was 1/13 on BPs. blew quite a few BPs, including dumping several 2nd serves into the net.

I’d say Fed served better in 2009 vs 2008 but in 2008 his FH was working better and more penetrating. Still, his returning was shocking. Like you said, bottled it on so many 2nd serves.

How do you think 2012 Wimbledon Fed would have fared vs 2008 Rafa? With the improved mentality/tactics but diminished speed/movement.

 

[Deleted member 756486]

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.

And yet Nadal has somehow never won it.

Sad.

 

[abmk]

I’d say Fed served better in 2009 vs 2008 but in 2008 his FH was working better and more penetrating. Still, his returning was shocking. Like you said, bottled it on so many 2nd serves.

How do you think 2012 Wimbledon Fed would have fared vs 2008 Rafa? With the improved mentality/tactics but diminished speed/movement.

agree.

I think 2008 Nadal would've prevailed over 2012 Wim fed in the end ...4 tight sets or in 5 sets.

 

[RS]

So you’re saying Roddick, Fish, Karlovic, Simon, Blake etc all peaked in 2008? And Federer was playing as well as ever?

Federer was less consistent and consider his back problems at the end of the season and mono at the beginning when he wasn’t at his best. He was very consistent from MC 2008 to Madrid 2008. He reached the Finals of 2 CC masters and lost tight matches to Nadal. He lost some of those matches Federer was playing relatively poor for his standards but oppenents were also playing better against him.
I didn’t say Federer was playing as well as ever but I do think he was in his Prime.
Would you not say 2007-2009 was stronger then 2004-06?
We were talking why Roddick and so where not providing the trouble the later oppenents were.

 

[abmk]

Federer was less consistent and consider his back problems at the end of the season and mono at the beginning when he wasn’t at his best. He was very consistent from MC 2008 to Madrid 2008. He reached the Finals of 2 CC masters and lost tight matches to Nadal. He lost some of those matches Federer was playing relatively poor for his standards but oppenents were also playing better against him.
I didn’t say Federer was playing as well as ever but I do think he was in his Prime.

Federer lost in Canada 08 to Simon, Cincy 08 to Karlovic and Oly. 08 to Blake.
committed sh*tload of UEs vs Blake and Simon.
was hardly consistent b/w Wimbledon and USO.

After Madrid, he actually won Basel --- which was a pretty good perf.

 

[RS]

a match in which Nadal was never even close to winning either of the sets.
a good, competitive match, but Federer was clearly better.
Agree. But I was showing how tight a Nadal was making it for Federer even his prr-Prime years.
The Roddick match was tighter but Federer beat Roddick no matter close or not.
If Roddick was as tough and was providing Federer with as much resistance as the later competition he could have got the better of a Federer in close matches but he didn’t.

At 5-3 in the 1st set, Federer completely blew the game all by himself :
a FH UE in a rally in which Nadal didn't do anything that good, a DF, missing such an easy overhead, a FH UE from fed trying to hit an inside in forehand.
Agree he missed his chance. The same can be said about Nadal in Wimbeldon 2008 which he led the Set 4 breaker while 5-2 up he could have won in 4. Still tight.


That's why the 1st set became close.

Just in case, a reminder is needed, Roddick played Federer much closer in their RR match.[/Q

yeah, I'm curious to know the list of those better matches (esp. vs Djokovic/Murray)
Federer was losing to all sorts of guys in 2008 - Fish, Blake, Simon(2x), Stepanek. ...not just Murray/Djokovic/Nadal.

even in 2009, he was below par in many of the non-slam events.

Federer reached the SF or better in 4 of the 5 masters 1000 winning 2. His problem was Djokovic who he lost to 3 times. He was not bad at WTF 2009 he just lost to the player who ended the season the best. His results were lower than 2004-07.
But playing higher level oppenents play on you mind and make you play worse.
You said 2009 was the strongest year so you could be open to the fact oppenents played him better.

 

[KINGROGER]

Federer was less consistent and consider his back problems at the end of the season and mono at the beginning when he wasn’t at his best. He was very consistent from MC 2008 to Madrid 2008. He reached the Finals of 2 CC masters and lost tight matches to Nadal. He lost some of those matches Federer was playing relatively poor for his standards but oppenents were also playing better against him.
I didn’t say Federer was playing as well as ever but I do think he was in his Prime.
Would you not say 2007-2009 was stronger then 2004-06?
We were talking why Roddick and so where not providing the trouble the later oppenents were.

Which opponents and more specifically? I’ll give you Nadal 2009 AO better than anyone Federer faced in his 04,06,07 winning runs but then again Fed didn’t serve at his best that tournament and he blew several leads/BP chances.

 

[RS]

Federer lost in Canada 08 to Simon, Cincy 08 to Karlovic and Oly. 08 to Blake.
committed sh*tload of UEs vs Blake and Simon.
was hardly consistent b/w Wimbledon and USO.
Wimbeldon reached the F without dropping a single set. His problem was Nadsl excellent form. USO was amazing especially his form in the last 2 matches.
Simon and Blake was a struggle for Federer. He was still impressive when in form before back problems and after mono. Nadal might have ruined his confidence he might have been broken after Wimbledon 2008. Again the damage oppenents can do if they mentally get in your hea. Without Nadal Federer likely had a much better performance because he would have done with the winning Wimbledon confidence.
After Madrid, he actually won Basel --- which was a pretty good perf.

Oh yeah I thought that came before. Don’t forgot his 4 our of 5 Finals in the CC swing.

 

[abmk]

Agree. But I was showing how tight a Nadal was making it for Federer even his prr-Prime years.
The Roddick match was tighter but Federer beat Roddick no matter close or not.
If Roddick was as tough and was providing Federer with as much resistance as the later competition he could have got the better of a Federer in close matches but he didn’t.

it wasn't competitive, but not that tight.Nadal didn't get close to winning a set. there have been plenty and I repeat plenty of matches tighter than the YEC 06 semi.

Federer reached the SF or better in 4 of the 5 masters 1000 winning 2. His problem was Djokovic who he lost to 3 times. He was not bad at WTF 2009 he just lost to the player who ended the season the best. His results were lower than 2004-07.
But playing higher level oppenents play on you mind and make you play worse.
You said 2009 was the strongest year so you could be open to the fact oppenents played him better.

he lost to Djoko twice in masters and once in Basel actually.
and if Djoko actually played well in Miami 09, I'd say so. but he was mediocre. only federer was worse. had nothing to do with djokovic being tough competition ..

the rome 09 match was better, but still federer blew leads in both sets 2 and 3 after leading in them ... djoko held on well, but fed was nowhere near clutch, nor could he stem the flow of UEs.

As far as the YEC 09 is concerned, yes, Federer was good, but Davy played better to edge him out. No doubt about that.

 

[KINGROGER]

09 Miami was a crap match from Fed, Djoker wasn’t much better just not as bad as Federer. Djokovic was better in 07, Fed was better in 05-06... either version would easily beat the 09 version.
Rome 2009 I put down to a choke from
Fed who’s never been great there apart from that 1 run in 2006. Blew several leads.

Any version of Fed from 03,04,06,07 would’ve won 2009 YEC easily, no matter how well Davydenko played imo. Same for 2010 Fed actually.

 

[RS]

Which opponents and more specifically? I’ll give you Nadal 2009 AO better than anyone Federer faced in his 04,06,07 winning runs but then again Fed didn’t serve at his best that tournament and he blew several leads/BP chances.

Federer serve did let him down. But then again that can’t explain him losing other big matches in 2007 and after which he was serving well and making final after final at slam level.

We were talking to why the oppenents in 2004-06 couldn’t push as hard as the 2007 oppenents and etc. I was saying that IMO that Federer looked way worse but had it tougher late on.
We were not just talking over one tourney but generally.

 

[RS]

it wasn't competitive, but not that tight.Nadal didn't get close to winning a set. there have been plenty and I repeat plenty of matches tighter than the YEC 06 semi.
He didn’t come close to winning. But it doesn’t take close to winning to make tight great and good matches


he lost to Djoko twice in masters and once in Basel actually.
and if Djoko actually played well in Miami 09, I'd say so. but he was mediocre. only federer was worse. had nothing to do with djokovic being tough competition ..
Really. How many others can say they best Federer in form in a year which he reached all 4 Slam Finals.
I know Federer wasn’t at his best in all. But not was he in 2006 in some matches that he won. And the later oppenents would have had a better chance of taking advantage of this.

the rome 09 match was better, but still federer blew leads in both sets 2 and 3 after leading in them ... djoko held on well, but fed was nowhere near clutch, nor could he stem the flow of UEs.
True. But Federer was beating every body else most of the time in that swing. Would his generation barring Nadal done this consistently 3 times in a form year barring Nadsl.
As far as the YEC 09 is concerned, yes, Federer was good, but Davy played better to edge him out. No doubt about that.

Agree.

 

[abmk]

Agree he missed his chance. The same can be said about Nadal in Wimbeldon 2008 which he led the Set 4 breaker while 5-2 up he could have won in 4. Still tight.

yes, a DF and a BH UE.
but federer himself had blown a 4-1 lead in the 2nd set.

also federer had to hit an ace to save one MP and an excellent BH DTL pass under pressure to save the other MP.
Nadal didn't have to do much to break in the 1st set in YEC 2006 semi.

its not a like for like comparision at all.

 

[KINGROGER]

Federer serve did let him down. But then again that can’t explain him losing other big matches in 2007 and after which he was serving well and making final after final at slam level.

We were talking to why the oppenents in 2004-06 couldn’t push as hard as the 2007 oppenents and etc. I was saying that IMO that Federer looked way worse but had it tougher late on.
We were not just talking over one tourney but generally.

Federer played better and higher more consistent level in 2004-2006. Only 3 real bad losses I can think of (Hrbty?, Berdych at olympics and Murray at Cincy where he was gassed)

In 2007 alone I can think of Canas x2, Volandri to equal 3 years worth of them. Also 2 losses to Nalbandian who he’d mostly figured out in 2004-2006 and actually beat at the same event in 2006 Madrid indoors. Djokovic at 2007 Montreal was a good tight good match. Djokovic was definitely prime on HCs in 2007 and played a good aggressive style.

 

[abmk]

He didn’t come close to winning. But it doesn’t take close to winning to make tight great and good matches

I was talking about coming close to winning a set, not the match. Nadal wasn't close to winning either of the sets.

Really. How many others can say they best Federer in form in a year which he reached all 4 Slam Finals.

umm, a certain Canas says hi.
(Nalby also beat Federer 2x in 07)

True. But Federer was beating every body else most of the time in that swing. Would his generation barring Nadal done this consistently 3 times in a form year barring Nadsl.

was he ? he lost to Stan in Monte Carlo 09 , choked horrendously vs Tsonga in Montreal 09, was upset by Benneteau in Paris 09.

 

[abmk]

oh and @ReeceSachs :

Nadal's hardly played that much better indoors than in the Federer match in TMC 06 -- only 10/13 were better and not by that much.

 

[Mainad]

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.

Since the YEC Championships began in 1970, there have been just 4 champions who never won a Slam: Corretja (1998), Nalbandian (2005), Davydenko (2009) and (so far) Dimitrov (2017). That's a very small and select number amongst the vast majority and actually does great credit to them for achieving it.

 

[abmk]

Wimbeldon reached the F without dropping a single set. His problem was Nadsl excellent form. USO was amazing especially his form in the last 2 matches.
Simon and Blake was a struggle for Federer. He was still impressive when in form before back problems and after mono. Nadal might have ruined his confidence he might have been broken after Wimbledon 2008. Again the damage oppenents can do if they mentally get in your hea. Without Nadal Federer likely had a much better performance because he would have done with the winning Wimbledon confidence.

Oh yeah I thought that came before. Don’t forgot his 4 our of 5 Finals in the CC swing.

was talking about the non-slam events in 2008. And I said between Wimbledon and USO - that excludes Wimbledon and USO ....He was pretty good in Wim 08 and USO 08 , of course.

yes , Canada, Cincy, Oly. were post Wim08 final loss blues. But he'd have had a clearly better shot at Wim 08 if he was in 03-07 Wimbleden form (03-06 Wim even more so). Also would've probably recovered form/confidence sooner in 2004-07 form instead of losing early in all 3 - especially Olympics.

 

[RS]

oh and @ReeceSachs :

Nadal's hardly played that much better indoors than in the Federer match in TMC 06 -- only 10/13 were better and not by that much.

2015 was brilliant indoors as well for Nadal. After a disappointing season he played well post USO.

 

[RS]

I was talking about coming close to winning a set, not the match. Nadal wasn't close to winning either of the sets.
Fair enough. I was talking of Nadal not being trashed as much of Hewitt on co to Federer off clay. And holding his own.



umm, a certain Canas says hi.
(Nalby also beat Federer 2x in 07)
Yeah that was in 2007. Which is when the competition stepped up and the Big 3 era began. Nalbandian streaked in that 2007 Indoor swing I mentioned he was the only one who had a solid H2H vs Federer and when he peaked he gave Federer trouble even in the 2006 CC and the 2005 Indoor swing.



was he ? he lost to Stan in Monte Carlo 09 , choked horrendously vs Tsonga in Montreal 09, was upset by Benneteau in Paris 09.

Talking the Clay swing. He lost to one non Djokovic oppenent. Impressive.

 

[RS]

Federer played better and higher more consistent level in 2004-2006. Only 3 real bad losses I can think of (Hrbty?, Berdych at olympics and Murray at Cincy where he was gassed)
Those were the most dominant years arugrbably in OE. 2005 was highest of those IMO.
But in my opinion 2007-2012/2014 made Federer in stronger fields look worse. Playing a Peak BIg 4 will make you look weaker. Nadal was on that on the dirt but not so much all round. That was more like 2007-2013.

In 2007 alone I can think of Canas x2, Volandri to equal 3 years worth of them. Also 2 losses to Nalbandian who he’d mostly figured out in 2004-2006 and actually beat at the same event in 2006 Madrid indoors. Djokovic at 2007 Montreal was a good tight good match. Djokovic was definitely prime on HCs in 2007 and played a good aggressive style.

They became more confident playing Federer
Sure it was higher by a margin against who he was playing. Nalbandian played better in the Indoor swing when he beat Nadal and Federer than he was in the years before. Djokovic was not in his Prime overall but he like Federer in his later years could reach this level when he peaked. The consistency didn’t come for Nole until late 2010/2011 time.

 

[RS]

was talking about the non-slam events in 2008. And I said between Wimbledon and USO - that excludes Wimbledon and USO ....He was pretty good in Wim 08 and USO 08 , of course.
Okay.

yes , Canada, Cincy, Oly. were post Wim08 final loss blues. But he'd have had a clearly better shot at Wim 08 if he was in 03-07 Wimbleden form (03-06 Wim even more so). Also would've probably recovered form/confidence sooner in 2004-07 form instead of losing early in all 3 - especially Olympics.

Problem is he wasn’t in the situation. Losing to Nadal at Wimbledon might have changed him mentally. Federer reached the F without dropping a set. He would have the edge at Wimbledon if he brang his 2006 form over Nadal but I can see Nadal taking it 5. Federer actually lost Olympicd in 2004. It brings the best out of lower ranked players. And that was after his 3rd or 2nd most dominant season when his lost to Berdych in 2004.

 

[abmk]

Problem is he wasn’t in the situation. Losing to Nadal at Wimbledon might have changed him mentally. Federer reached the F without dropping a set. He would have the edge at Wimbledon if he brang his 2006 form over Nadal but I can see Nadal taking it 5. Federer actually lost Olympicd in 2004. It brings the best out of lower ranked players. And that was after his 3rd or 2nd most dominant season when his lost to Berdych in 2004.

yeah, but in b/w Wimbledon and USO in 2004, he won Gstaad and Canada.

In 2008, he had no good outings in b/w those 2. That's what I was mentioning.
At the peak of his powers, he'd have less trouble shurgging off a possible Wim loss than in a season which was already affected by mono.

Talking the Clay swing. He lost to one non Djokovic oppenent. Impressive.

except Djokovic is no Nadal on clay, nor was he playing at some special level in Rome 09 SF. So makes no-sense to call it non-Djokovic opponent.
He had 2 losses and 2 wins in the 4 clay tournaments he played.

 

[KINGROGER]

They became more confident playing Federer
Sure it was higher by a margin against who he was playing. Nalbandian played better in the Indoor swing when he beat Nadal and Federer than he was in the years before. Djokovic was not in his Prime overall but he like Federer in his later years could reach this level when he peaked. The consistency didn’t come for Nole until late 2010/2011 time.

No they didn’t. Federer’s level dropped big time which left him more susceptible losing to lesser players. Players he previously dispatched with ease because every aspect of his game was clicking. This was before he turned into an UFE machine.

Nalbandian is the only one I’d agree too, but 2006 Fed would’ve won the Madrid match. Who knows with the Paris one since peak Fed only played there once in 2007.

 

[RS]

yeah, but in b/w Wimbledon and USO in 2004, he won Gstaad and Canada.
Was Oly after Gstaad and Canada or before?

In 2008, he had no good outings in b/w those 2. That's what I was mentioning.
At the peak of his powers, he'd have less trouble shurgging off a possible Wim loss than in a season which was already affected by mono.
Federer mono was cleared by March. He wasn’t still having mono when he lost to Nadal. Nothing was physically wrong with him from March until October with back issues. Federer of 2006 might have still taken time even though I think he does get back eventually.




except Djokovic is no Nadal on clay, nor was he playing at some special level in Rome 09 SF. So makes no-sense to call it non-Djokovic opponent.
He had 2 losses and 2 wins in the 4 clay tournaments he played.

Djokovic was the 2nd player at that swing until RG. So it doesn’t make sense. His record was amazing. He didn’t face Nadal until Madrid and Nadal wasn’t the same after the epic with Nole. Took a lot out of him.
Nadal said that triggered his decision to take a break after RG.

 

[RS]

No they didn’t. Federer’s level dropped big time which left him more susceptible losing to lesser players. Players he previously dispatched with ease because every aspect of his game was clicking. This was before he turned into an UFE machine.
It is hard to keep that level for ever.But dropping level doesn’t mean end of peak. Djokovic dropped a little in 2012-14 from DC 2010 to US 2011 but does that mean not peak.
If a oppenent gets into your head and forces you to play a certain way you will make UEs more often.

Nalbandian is the only one I’d agree too, but 2006 Fed would’ve won the Madrid match. Who knows with the Paris one since peak Fed only played there once in 2007.

Nalbandian may not have shown the same form. But if he did Federer May have still lost. Nalbandian showed in 2006 CC and nearly beat Federer in Rome. And Nalbandian is better indoors when he peaks.

 

[abmk]

yeah, but in b/w Wimbledon and USO in 2004, he won Gstaad and Canada.
Was Oly after Gstaad and Canada or before?

Gstaad, Canada, Cincy, Oly.
You know a simple check on the ATP site would give you this ?
And how is it relevant to what I stated?

Federer mono was cleared by March. He wasn’t still having mono when he lost to Nadal. Nothing was physically wrong with him from March until October with back issues. Federer of 2006 might have still taken time even though I think he does get back eventually.

yeah, but by then his season was already damaged to an extent - no warmup before AO, AO loss in semi, dubai loss, IW loss, Miami loss. The Fish IW match was an awful one -- wasn't moving well, lost to Fish who was serving at 34% (IIRC) in straight sets, winning 5 games total.
If not, his season would be better (especially with a win at the AO) and his confidence would be higher.

Djokovic was the 2nd player at that swing until RG. So it doesn’t make sense. His record was amazing. He didn’t face Nadal until Madrid and Nadal wasn’t the same after the epic with Nole. Took a lot out of him.
Nadal said that triggered his decision to take a break after RG.

Nadal was already struggling to an extent at Madrid - Verdasco match, Djokovic match and then the federer match.
And yes, though Djokovic was the 2nd best clay court player before RG, he didn't play that great in the Rome 2009 semi match.

 

[RS]

Gstaad, Canada, Cincy, Oly.
You know a simple check on the ATP site would give you this ?
And how is it relevant to what I stated?
Because we were talking how would Fed bounce back if he lost Wimbeldon . You mentioned Federer winning the above. If he lost Wimbeldon how do we know he would have ended the season so well. Maybe if it was another oppenent.
Losing to Nadal in 2006-07 may have damaged him mentally for a while.




yeah, but by then his season was already damaged to an extent - no warmup before AO, AO loss in semi, dubai loss, IW loss, Miami loss. The Fish IW match was an awful one -- wasn't moving well, lost to Fish who was serving at 34% (IIRC) in straight sets, winning 5 games total.
If not, his season would be better (especially with a win at the AO) and his confidence would be higher.
I agree he would have probably won AO and had a better early season.
Federer didn’t play well in the Fish match.
Federer bounced back with a amazing GS and CC season though. Then he had gained his confidence back but he lost to Nadal 4 times out of 4.




Nadal was already struggling to an extent at Madrid - Verdasco match, Djokovic match and then the federer match.
And yes, though Djokovic was the 2nd best clay court player before RG, he didn't play that great in the Rome 2009 semi match.

Fair enough. But Federer could have still won a match if someone else was on the other side of the net. He has done so before despite struggling. He could have pulled through but it shows that Djokovic can win if both are not at their best while others most of the time are not able to.
Nadal wasn’t as good at Madrid before but he may have bounced back on time for RG. Speculation I guess from me. Doherty Verdasco match was at least a straight sets win.