Federer more mentally tough than given credit?

[smoledman]

There are a # of GS he won where it was either an earlier round or final where the other guy clearly was outplaying him, but he somehow turned it around. 2017 AO final was even until the 5th, but Nadal had 3-1 lead so I'm including that.

2004 Wimbledon(Roddick, Final)
2006 AO(Baghdatis, Final)
2007 US Open(Djokovic, Final)
2008 US Open(Andreev, R16)
2009 FO(Haas, R16)
2010 AO(Davydenko, QF)
2012 Wimbledon(Benneteau, R32)
2017 AO(Nadal, Final)

At any point here had Federer lost one of these matches it would have seriously derailed his 'legendary career'.

Three really stand out to me.

2009 FO vs Haas. Fed down 2 sets to love. 3rd set, *30-40, make a gutsy I/O forehand winner
and never looks back.

2010 AO vs Davydenko. Davy is dominating the match 6-2, 3-1. Fed serving *1-3, 30-40, Davy about to go up double break and it's OVER. Somehow Fed saves it and rolls off 13 straight games and it's OVER.

2017 AO vs Rafa. Down 3-1 in the 5th, ANYONE would have to go with Rafa to close the deal here. For Roger to roll off 5 straight games to take the title is something he never did previously in his career in such a situation and really marks him down as GOAT.

But the scariest one of all was def 2009 FO vs Haas because if he misses that forehand, any last chance of a FO title flushed down the toilet. As we could see later, it was his ONLY shot at a French Open and he found a way to get it. Probably his most important win.

 

[Mazz Retic]

There are some other matches too. Del potro from the same RG as Haas and Agassi in the quarters at USO 04.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Back in the day it took a monumental effort to even take a set from the man, especially in the later stages of Grand Slams.

 

[smoledman]

I was tempted to include Del Potro@FO, but Fed basically controlled the match in the 4th & 5th sets w/o much difficulty. True it did seem after 3 sets he was in serious danger with how HUGE DelPo was hitting.

 

[smoledman]

Also an underrated performance was in a slam Fed didn't win - Igor Andreev vs Federer 2011 AO R128. Andreev took the first set and was seriously threatening to win the 3rd set. Fed thwarted it and bageled Andreev in the 4th.

 

[smoledman]

Here's how the media described the 2008 US Open vs Andreev:

NEW YORK -- A long, stirring slog of a match that wore on through the Tuesday dinner hour came garnished with a most unusual soundtrack.

It featured the repeated, guttural yells of one Roger Federer, the Swiss maestro long given to silent dominance and dominant silence. It had Federer as a sort of mini-Connors impersonating a jackhammer and vibrating his body in a double fist pump after a pivotal break of service in a fifth set. And it had the reminder through Federer's primal screams that among all tennis majors, the U.S. Open most often strays from tennis toward something more akin to wrestling.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

There are some other matches too. Del potro from the same RG as Haas and Agassi in the quarters at USO 04.

That US Open match was a true dogfight. Agassi was hungry as Hell after failing to win a major that year - and struggling with his bad back.

Federer believed in himself enough to win -- but I believe his success in 2004 which already netted him the Australian Open and Wimbledon played a part.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I don't think Federer in 2003 had the belief he could win the biggest matches yet, even after he won Wimbledon. It was that sense of him being "untouchable" that allowed him a better mentality initially, because he didn't have that in 2002 or even 2003 - although he had the talent to get the results needed of a typical top ten player.

 

[merlinpinpin]

I don't think he's mentally tougher than serious people think, it's just that people who are dismissing that aspect of his game are probably (1) just trolling for kicks, (2) not that knowledgeable about tennis, (3) not that knowledgeable about human nature, or (4) all of the above.

Federer is a mental giant, that has never really been put into question since 2003/2004. His mental toughness just expresses itself differently from Nadal of Djokovic, for example (ie they're traditionnally better than him at hanging in whatever happens (there are counter-examples, too, ofc), although he's no slouch in that department either, but he's stronger for dealing with tough losses and putting them behind him; also, look how long he's stayed at the top and fresh mentally despite the wear and tear or the Tour). They're just different, is all.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Every thing here gets conflated into another argument. There is no doubt Federer is mentally tough, yes we get you have to be to win 19 slams, be the best player ever etc. And also yeah we get that there are different kinds of mental strength (pressure of being 1, Fed's a great front runner, blew more people out than anyone else etc. etc . etc.)

If one means the traditional definition, then while mentally strong, Fed is not (at least IMO) as tough of a big match player mentally as Djokovic or Nadal.

 

[Julian Houston]

19 GS winner can't be mentally weak. Both Nadal and him thrive on mental strength, when its down both are defeated mentally. It goes both ways but most of the time they are mentally confident.

 

[smoledman]

No I'm talking about BIG matches that he was trailing in and found a way to turn it around against a peaking player. That takes mental toughness to not allow himself to go away in those matches, like Rafa has done so many times.

 

[ghostofMecir]

Being the greatest TB player cements him as being extremely mentally tough.

I would also like to add that he can brush off devastating defeats and soldier on no persevere like no other.

• He hits 29-30 years of age, isn't winning slams like he used to, loses TWO straight USO SFs to Djokovic while holding match points, bounces back to become world #1 in 2012
• Loses his hold on Wimby and world #1 in 2008, loses early in the Olympics, comes back to win the USO.
• Loses the David Cup SF vs. Australia in 2003 after leading Hewitt 2-0 in sets and then comes back to finally excoricze many demons at the 2003 TMC by beating Agassi twice and nemesis Nalbandian. Then goes to Australia and beats Hewitt in Australia, finally beats Nalbandian in a slam, beats JCF and Safin to finally reach #1.
• Loses very tough 2009 AO to Nadal who now has stranglehold on #1 and comes back to wins RG for the first time, the Channel Slam, and retake #1.

 

[ChrisRF]

Back in the day it took a monumental effort to even take a set from the man, especially in the later stages of Grand Slams.

While nowadays a monumental effort isn't even enough to do so...

 

[Deleted member 307496]

While nowadays a monumental effort isn't even enough to do so...

Imagine Raonic against Fed in 04 though. He'd probably eat a bagel.

 

[Mazz Retic]

Imagine Raonic against Fed in 04 though. He'd probably eat a bagel.

Roddick looks damn good now compared to some muppets.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Roddick looks damn good now compared to some muppets.

I think how good Roddick was is a little undersold. I'd actually like his chances if he were playing in his best form today.

Federer looks unbeatable because nobody is testing him.

 

[HowsItGoin]

.

But the scariest one of all was def 2009 FO vs Haas because if he misses that forehand, any last chance of a FO title flushed down the toilet. As we could see later, it was his ONLY shot at a French Open and he found a way to get it. Probably his most important win.

You can't really say that though, things might have been a little different had he not won FO09. It might have meant him not winning other slams but I'm sure he'd have gone all out for it many more times.

 

[Fedberg20]

Every thing here gets conflated into another argument. There is no doubt Federer is mentally tough, yes we get you have to be to win 19 slams, be the best player ever etc. And also yeah we get that there are different kinds of mental strength (pressure of being 1, Fed's a great front runner, blew more people out than anyone else etc. etc . etc.)

If one means the traditional definition, then while mentally strong, Fed is not (at least IMO) as tough of a big match player mentally as Djokovic or Nadal.

I've always find this a very strange view. Big matches are mostly GS finals, and Nole has a 12-9 record while Roger has a 19-10 record. Aged 30, where Nole is now, he had a 16-7 record. Even looking at their overall title haul Roger has a 93-48 finals record (66%) and Nole has 68-30 (69,4%), which is really a tiny difference or no difference at all considering their age and how many more Roger has played. So where does this Nole is more of a big match player come from?

I could somehow understand Nadal, although to be fair, just like his whole career his resume is very much clay skewed. But I would still say Rafa is probably the best out of all three in a big match.

 

[metsman]

Also an underrated performance was in a slam Fed didn't win - Igor Andreev vs Federer 2011 AO R128. Andreev took the first set and was seriously threatening to win the 3rd set. Fed thwarted it and bageled Andreev in the 4th.

2010

 

[Deleted member 716271]

I've always find this a very strange view. Big matches are mostly GS finals, and Nole has a 12-9 record while Roger has a 19-10 record. Aged 30, where Nole is now, he had a 16-7 record. Even looking at their overall title haul Roger has a 93-48 finals record (66%) and Nole has 68-30 (69,4%), which is really a tiny difference or no difference at all considering their age and how many more Roger has played. So where does this Nole is more of a big match player come from?

I could somehow understand Nadal, although to be fair, just like his whole career his resume is very much clay skewed. But I would still say Rafa is probably the best out of all three in a big match.

Because roger is better overall. Im talking about close matches, tight spots etc.

 

[merlinpinpin]

I could somehow understand Nadal, although to be fair, just like his whole career his resume is very much clay skewed. But I would still say Rafa is probably the best out of all three in a big match.

And even that is subject to caution. Nadal is 4/7 in 5-set match since 2012 (as in won four, lost seven, not won four out of seven), and he may well end up with a worse win/loss % than Federer in this category when all is said and done. Just like the physical, the game, etc., mental strength is something that fluctuates (sometimes wildly) over the course of a career, or even over the course of a single year.

 

[abmk]

Because roger is better overall. Im talking about close matches, tight spots etc.

Djokovic has hit higher highs as far as mental strength goes, esp. 2011 and 2015.
but he's also had lower lows than Federer.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Lets just say Djokovic has hit higher highs as far as mental strength goes, esp 2011 and 2015.
but he's also had lower lows than Federer.

true but look at 5 set record that could be a tiebreaker. I dont think the "well roger finished people in 3 sets" is a good counter argument against that. Also Djokovic not only has best 5 set record ever, but best 3 set in a b03 (deciding set records)

 

[Fedberg20]

Because roger is better overall. Im talking about close matches, tight spots etc.

Well, OK, fair enough but that's just the intangibles or your feeling and I simply don't agree with that. I saw Nole losing lots of matches he shouldn't lose, especially finals, and don't find him that clutch to be honest.

And even that is subject to caution. Nadal is 4/7 in 5-set match since 2012 (as in won four, lost seven, not won four out of seven), and he may well end up with a worse win/loss % than Federer in this category when all is said and done. Just like the physical, the game, etc., mental strength is something that fluctuates (sometimes wildly) over the course of a career, or even over the course of a single year.

This is pretty much what I think. Nole was on a run in 2011 and 2015 and he simply couldn't lose a tight match, especially not a big match. That is when the mental giant talk started. But in between those years and before he was losing more often than not. The mental toughness is closely connected to your performance and confidence. It runs out, you can't sustain it your whole career and you simply can't put such numbers in if you are not mentally tough.

true but look at 5 set record that could be a tiebreaker. I dont think the "well roger finished people in 3 sets" is a good counter argument against that. Also Djokovic not only has best 5 set record ever, but best 3 set in a b03 (deciding set records)

I don't think that proves much, to be honest. It's always much better to finish people off before the decider. It can be argued, if you lead in the match, that playing the final set is a sign of mental weakness as you let people back in instead of finishing them off. In my view, the GS finals record is the ultimate demonstration of mental toughness as these are the biggest matches you play, and Nole hasn't excelled in that category.

 

[underground]

Where's 2016 Wimbledon against Cilic on that list??

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Well, OK, fair enough but that's just the intangibles or your feeling and I simply don't agree with that. I saw Nole losing lots of matches he shouldn't lose, especially finals, and don't find him that clutch to be honest.



This is pretty much what I think. Nole was on a run in 2011 and 2015 and he simply couldn't lose a tight match, especially not a big match. That is when the mental giant talk started. But in between those years and before he was losing more often than not. The mental toughness is closely connected to your performance and confidence. It runs out, you can't sustain it your whole career and you simply can't put such numbers in if you are not mentally tough.



I don't think that proves much, to be honest. It's always much better to finish people off before the decider. It can be argued, if you lead in the match, that playing the final set is a sign of mental weakness as you let people back in instead of finishing them off. In my view, the GS finals record is the ultimate demonstration of mental toughness as these are the biggest matches you play, and Nole hasn't excelled in that category.

I think this is a bit disengenuous. Sure, there are examples where Novak let people back in to a 5th set he shouldn't have before winning (AO 12). Also, you could say Federer did well to make 08 a 5 setter and shouldn't be punished for that. Okay.

But overall, the deciding set record does show some level of clutchness/tight match level of play. It just does IMO despite how one can deconstruct the metric.

It is true Djokovic has had some lows mentally and blown some slam finals. Maybe he and Federer are roughly equal as an aggregate. I think Rafa is the best.

 

[abmk]

true but look at 5 set record that could be a tiebreaker. I dont think the "well roger finished people in 3 sets" is a good counter argument against that. Also Djokovic not only has best 5 set record ever, but best 3 set in a b03 (deciding set records)

Djokovic's 5-set record is certainly great. But it could possibly go down and not remain the best 5-set record ever. Borg might hold that by the time Djokovic is done. He just lost a 5-setter this year to Istomin, no ?
Certainly a point in Djokovic's favour.

as far as best 3rd set in Bo3 goes, that's certainly a point in Djokovic's favour.

But being able to finish off players early is partly physical, partly mental. That is a decent argument.

As far as tight spots go, tie-breaks are another instance of that. Where federer is clearly better than Djokovic (more so in grand slams I think)

Some of the TBs he won really stand out where he came back from the brink.

The 2008 4th set TB vs Nadal at wimbledon
The 2009 2nd set vs Roddick at wimbledon( 3 SPs saved by federer and 1 that Roddick blew)
the 2015 2nd set breaker vs Djokovic at wimbledon ( saved 6 SPs IIRC)

then TBs where he closed the door :

2009 RG soderling - 4 serves, 4 aces
2011 RG 4th set vs djokovic - finished off with an ace.

also, IIRC he was something ridiculous like 20-2 in wimbledon semis and finals combined from 2003-09 in TBs.

Edit : just checked , it was 16-1 in TBs in wimbledon semis and finals from 2003-09. (lone TB set lost to nadal in wim 06)

 

[abmk]

I think this is a bit disengenuous. Sure, there are examples where Novak let people back in to a 5th set he shouldn't have before winning (AO 12). Also, you could say Federer did well to make 08 a 5 setter and shouldn't be punished for that. Okay.

But overall, the deciding set record does show some level of clutchness/tight match level of play. It just does IMO despite how one can deconstruct the metric.

It is true Djokovic has had some lows mentally and blown some slam finals. Maybe he and Federer are roughly equal as an aggregate. I think Rafa is the best.

That's what I think. atleast among the 3.
Borg was possibly even tougher than Rafa mentally, but its close.

 

[metsman]

there's no appreciable difference between rafa, djoker, fed mentally. It's all bs narratives for the most part and poorly interpreted 'stats'. All three have shown moments of weakness and strength in mostly equal parts.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

He has a better record of coming back from 0-2 sets down than his main rivals.

Also outstanding tiebreak and BP saving records

 

[Bender]

Federer was never a mental midget.

The only exception was when he played against Rafa but it appears that he's gotten over that.

Federer's ability to get over big losses and win following tournaments is an aspect of his mental strength that is not talked about often enough imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 716271]

That's what I think. atleast among the 3.
Borg was possibly even tougher than Rafa mentally, but its close.

what about Connors

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Djokovic's 5-set record is certainly great. But it could possibly go down and not remain the best 5-set record ever. Borg might hold that by the time Djokovic is done. He just lost a 5-setter this year to Istomin, no ?
Certainly a point in Djokovic's favour.

as far as best 3rd set in Bo3 goes, that's certainly a point in Djokovic's favour.

But being able to finish off players early is partly physical, partly mental. That is a decent argument.

As far as tight spots go, tie-breaks are another instance of that. Where federer is clearly better than Djokovic (more so in grand slams I think)

Some of the TBs he won really stand out where he came back from the brink.

The 2008 4th set TB vs Nadal at wimbledon
The 2009 2nd set vs Roddick at wimbledon( 3 SPs saved by federer and 1 that Roddick blew)
the 2015 2nd set breaker vs Djokovic at wimbledon ( saved 6 SPs IIRC)

then TBs where he closed the door :

2009 RG soderling - 4 serves, 4 aces
2011 RG 4th set vs djokovic - finished off with an ace.

also, IIRC he was something ridiculous like 20-2 in wimbledon semis and finals combined from 2003-09 in TBs.

Edit : just checked , it was 16-1 in TBs in wimbledon semis and finals from 2003-09. (lone TB set lost to nadal in wim 06)

Federer's tiebreak record is better yeah. I guess it's settled we think Fed=Novak.

 

[abmk]

what about Connors

He's up there, but definitely behind Borg in his own time. His mental strength gets over-rated at times.
Possibly the toughest fighter among all.
But not so much as far as playing the big points go.

 

[merlinpinpin]

true but look at 5 set record that could be a tiebreaker. I dont think the "well roger finished people in 3 sets" is a good counter argument against that. Also Djokovic not only has best 5 set record ever, but best 3 set in a b03 (deciding set records)

My take os that this is all trivia in the end. I mean, you don't get brownie points for allowing your opponent to get into the match and push you to the brink before winning in five if you could have done so in straigths. The goal in tennis is to win titles, not to get back from two sets down (yet another trivia record that, interestingly, Federer shares with Krickstein and Becker, not Djokovic or Nadal).

So, to recap, although he isn't the best in five-set matches, Federer is the best in tiebreaks and in coming back from two sets down. Also, he's brushed off some very tough losses in the past and bounced back, and he did so not once, but many times. This doesn't scream mental midget at all to me.

 

[metsman]

Sampras was the only one to me who never had a serious mental letdown in his prime but he also didn't do well enough on his worst surface for us to know for sure, not all of that was his fault though. He also probably showed the most ability to fight through serious emotional and physical obstacles.

 

[abmk]

Federer's tiebreak record is better yeah. I guess it's settled we think Fed=Novak.

yeah.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

My take os that this is all trivia in the end. I mean, you don't get brownie points for allowing your opponent to get into the match and push you to the brink before winning in five if you could have done so in straigths. The goal in tennis is to win titles, not to get back from two sets down (yet another trivia record that, interestingly, Federer shares with Krickstein and Becker, not Djokovic or Nadal).

So, to recap, although he isn't the best in five-set matches, Federer is the best in tiebreaks and in coming back from two sets down. Also, he's brushed off some very tough losses in the past and bounced back, and he did that not once, but many times. This doesn't scream mental midget at all to me.

That's just 1 example of how the stat could be misleading, but OVERALL I think it means something, just like I agree Federer's superior tiebreak means something. And no one said it's not about winning titles. Mental strength doesnt= best overall.

I concede Novak and Fed are roughly equal on average, but I do think Nadal is a step above.

 

[Fedfan34]

his mental game gets a bad wrap because of a few matches where he lost against Nadal and seemed to collapse faster than a house of cards in tight moments. In general, I've always thought he was mentally tough. A different breed of competitor than Sampras with different motivations but not a push over by any means

 

[merlinpinpin]

but I do think Nadal is a step above.

I'm not so sure about that. I would say he *was*, but he's now losing more 5-setters than he wins, so he's clearly declined in that respect. Just look at these two figures:
- Nadal in five-setters up till 2011: 15/3
- Nadal in five-setters since 2012: 4/7

Slight change here, don't you think? It's almost tempting to think that this is not the same player at all, mentally speaking. Now, when the going gets tough, the tough gets going... and Nadal folds more often than not, even vs journeymen.

 

[abmk]

@125downthemiddle

Having said all that, from the 90s onwards, if I had to choose 1 player for 1 year in terms of mental strength, it would be Novak 2011.

Clutch as hell and had the "you have to walk over my dead body to beat me" look.

You had to servebot to win crucial points, because it just seemed like he would win the critical points when the rally started.(and he did win the majority of them, even vs fedal and Murray)

 

[Fedberg20]

That's just 1 example of how the stat could be misleading, but OVERALL I think it means something, just like I agree Federer's superior tiebreak means something. And no one said it's not about winning titles. Mental strength doesnt= best overall.

I concede Novak and Fed are roughly equal on average, but I do think Nadal is a step above.

That is/was also my feeling, but I saw some stats in the Melbourne 2017 final that made me think I might be wrong there. Can't really remember them clearly at this point, but one of them had to do with Nadal winning very few matches when 2-1 down in GS's.

I'm not so sure about that. I would say he *was*, but he's now losing more 5-setters than he wins, so he's clearly declined in that aspect. Just look at these two figures:
- Nadal in five-setters up till 2011: 15/3
- Nadal in five-setters since 2012: 4/7

Slight change here, don't you think? It's almost tempting to think that this is not the same player at all, mentally speaking. Now, when the going gets tough, the tough gets going... and Nadal folds more often than not, even vs journeymen.

Yeah, this one is pretty bad. You also bring a great point in how mentally tough can Rafa be when he is obviously losing the most to journeyman, as in matches he should absolutely win. There is also the inability to defend anything off clay his whole career, string a two year dominant season or win the WTF (regardless of the surface), so I am left with much more doubts about his mental strength. If I think about it now, I'd say (again, going on feeling) that Rafa, when on, is the top dog when it comes to mental strength. Simply doesn't let down for a single point. However, much like his career, he can't keep it up and folds significantly more times than the other two.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

@125downthemiddle

Having said all that, from the 90s onwards, if I had to choose 1 player for 1 year in terms of mental strength, it would be Novak 2011.

Clutch as hell and had the "you have to walk over my dead body to beat me" look.

You had to servebot to win crucial points, because it just seemed like he would win the critical points when the rally started.(and he did win the majority of them, even vs fedal and Murray)

True I agree. That form disappeared after early 2012. That's why I said he seemed most invincible in that stretch. He got out of trouble a LOT (vs Roger 10,11, vs Murray in Rome 2011, vs AM and RN in AO 12) If you restrict it to just 2011, it was still the most strongest mental year I've seen. He might have felt he had that edge from going gluten free and finally becoming #1 that give him a 1 up on the rest of the tour, before they could respond. Federer played him so well that year almost winning at US and beating him at RG. Also credit to Rafa to eventually turn the rivalry around, at least somewhat (in slams)

 

[Deleted member 716271]

I'm not so sure about that. I would say he *was*, but he's now losing more 5-setters than he wins, so he's clearly declined in that aspect. Just look at these two figures:
- Nadal in five-setters up till 2011: 15/3
- Nadal in five-setters since 2012: 4/7

Slight change here, don't you think? It's almost tempting to think that this is not the same player at all, mentally speaking. Now, when the going gets tough, the tough gets going... and Nadal folds more often than not, even vs journeymen.

that's true Nadal's famed mental strength has taken a hit, starting with the 7 final losses to Novak back in 2011

 

[Newcomer]

Most of the time Federer is mentally tough. But some of his chokes were pathetic. Especially USO 2011 semifinal. And don't even mention Djokovic's return winner. It was just the first matchpoint, after that Federer gifted him everything with unforced errors.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

That is/was also my feeling, but I saw some stats in the Melbourne 2017 final that made me think I might be wrong there. Can't really remember them clearly at this point, but one of them had to do with Nadal winning very few matches when 2-1 down in GS's.



Yeah, this one is pretty bad. You also bring a great point in how mentally tough can Rafa be when he is obviously losing the most to journeyman, as in matches he should absolutely win. There is also the inability to defend anything off clay his whole career, string a two year dominant season or win the WTF (regardless of the surface), so I am left with much more doubts about his mental strength. If I think about it now, I'd say (again, going on feeling) that Rafa, when on, is the top dog when it comes to mental strength. Simply doesn't let down for a single point. However, much like his career, he can't keep it up and folds significantly more times than the other two.

That's why I say he's the strongest, but there are good points against his mental strength too as you noted. I guess I weight the bolded a bit more than the rest.

 

[Luckydog]

Of course underrated.
A man without great mental toughness cannot survive in a GS title drought as long as 5 years since 2012-2017.

 

[Noelan]

OP troll needed to be mentally strong to switch from glory hunting Nadal , to Federer ever since he won AO17 against Nadal. That must be testament of Fed strong mentality too.

 

[Mazz Retic]

People criticizing novak during 2012-14. True he had weak moments however in similar vein to Federer he battled back from adversity. Wimbledon 2014 is up there for me in terms of Novak's mental strength.