Federer honest about the mental block against Rafa in interview

[KINGROGER]

Federer should have gone full brad gilbert on that pattern of play long ago. Actually Dimitrov does that better against Nadal than Fed, which is why he (relatively to his level/ranking) has usually played Nadal well (but lost partly because of lack of believe and other stuff).

What does "full brad Gilbert" mean?

Couldn't Fed just step into the court on those slice out wide serves and take them early before they go too wide?

 

[Deleted member 716271]

honest interview from Fed. Pretty cool, I don't buy that he's Nadal's biggest fan though

 

[joekapa]

Lol no.


Nope. Won 2 HC masters and had 2 HC wins over the HC GOAT. Won 11 titles overall in 2005. Entered his prime that year.

Fed fans thinking that Nadal was in his "prime" years at the age of 18.

 

[mandy01]

Ik the stats lol. Winning is winning, does set count matter? It's about the W's and the L's and Djokovic has been giving Federer L's in all the matches that actually matter.

Yes, being SIX years younger and IN HIS DAMNED PRIME he SHOULD be able to give Fed the Ls. Really, some Fed fans on here are actually delusional enough to believe that Fed should be WINNING GS finals against a Novak who was basically cleaning everyone's clocks in 2015. It gets more and more ridiculous with each passing day. Novak is not Nadal. Roger never struggled against Novak in his prime and actually beat him and Murray back to back to win his last major. Really, can't people see that Roger basically cannot defend his FH corner anymore? His defence on his right was exposed way back when he went to five sets against Berdych at the AO. Even if goes all S&V versus Novak, who's an amazing returner he cannot win on these surfaces without a ground-game.
Really, the absurdity of the people on this board is off the charts.

 

[mandy01]

honest interview from Fed. Pretty cool, I don't buy that he's Nadal's biggest fan though

No he's not. If only he'd avoided the clay season in '08 when he had a legit reason to do so we'd be talking of a slightly different rivalry at this point. Roger expects too much out of himself and this has been his undoing versus Nadal all along. There was no need for him to go all out on clay in 2008.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Yes, being SIX years younger and IN HIS DAMNED PRIME he SHOULD be able to give Fed the Ls. Really, some Fed fans on here are actually delusional enough to believe that Fed should be WINNING GS finals against a Novak who was basically cleaning everyone's clocks in 2015. It gets more and more ridiculous with each passing day. Novak is not Nadal. Roger never struggled against Novak in his prime and actually beat him and Murray back to back to win his last major.
Really, the absurdity of the people on this board is off the charts.

Lol you were the one saying yesterday Federer couldn't consider it fortunate to make the final. That was about as absurd as it comes.

 

[mandy01]

Lol you were the one saying yesterday Federer couldn't consider it fortunate to make the final. That was about as absurd as it comes.

Of course it isn't fortunate and he was playing like it. There is NO POINT facing Dull here at this stage of his career. I thought this was evident from his interview.

 

[mandy01]

Post Wimb 2012 - Fed had no business to be on tour. He is doing a charity to ATP/ITF sticking around , as otherwise the tour sucks and is spearheaded by the most boring rivalry ever.

Roger was probably shaking his head internally at Stan for throwing that game away in the fifth set. The match should have been Stan's.

 

[KINGROGER]

Fed fans thinking that Nadal was in his "prime" years at the age of 18.

Nadal was in his prime from 2005 when he won 11 titles, including 2 HC masters, won a grand slam and reached number 2 in the world.

These are irrefutable facts.

 

[mandy01]

And he still hasn't beaten Rafa in Australia . Probably never will unless Rafa breaks his leg or has to go 8 hours with Mugatrov

He doesn't need to. His slam count at the AO would still be double that of Nadal's no matter what happens on Sunday should he make the final.

 

[joekapa]

Nadal was in his prime from 2005 when he won 11 titles, including 2 HC masters, won a grand slam and reached number 2 in the world.

These are irrefutable facts.

You are an irrefutable idiot.

 

[Chadillac]

Maybe I lost the Wimbledon finals in 2008 because of too many clay court matches, because he crushed me at the French Open final. I said that before. I think it affected my first two sets at Wimbledon. Maybe that's why I ended up losing.

Must suck your opponent was allowed to use peds in the french under a tue so they were able to beat you and the rest of the year

 

[joekapa]

honest interview from Fed. Pretty cool, I don't buy that he's Nadal's biggest fan though

This whole "friends" thing is becoming so tedious and fake. I don't buy it either. They both need each other for marketing purposes. Especially Fed.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

This whole "friends" thing is becoming so tedious and fake. I don't buy it either. They both need each other for marketing purposes. Especially Fed.

Why is he the most successful tennis player (even just in terms of cash revenue) if that's the case?

You're just bitter Djokovic is not as marketable as Federer.

 

[Prabhanjan]

He doesn't need to. His slam count at the AO would still be double that of Nadal's no matter what happens on Sunday should he make the final.

The 90's fans and Nadal's fans, I mean the rubbish ones, always point out that Fed lost to Nadal in 09, 12, and 14. Still guess what, Fed's performance in those years is still better than Petes in 1999, 2002, and 2004 and though Nadal's 2017 and 19 is not yet know, Fed is better than them in at least 4 out of 6 such instance of Nadal and Pete. What the hell is their mental fortitude of any use when they almost always deliver less than Fed