Federer News

TearTheRoofOff

Hall of Fame
Good point!

After Serena lost, then Osaka lost, I was nervous. Tsits lost too, so I was crossing my fingers, please, oh PLEASE, don't add The Oldman to the list of casualties. Phew!

Last year, I said Tsits was lucky bc he out-clutched Fedr, greatest TB player in history, in 2/3 TBs at AO19. Now that you mentioned points, it turns our that Tsits only manage 1 of his 5 wins last year (2 bc of a W/O), while Fedr, only getting ever older, is back to where he was. Like I said, house money ;).
When you look at it from the perspective of him outperforming someone like Tsitsipas, having turned pro when the SEGA Dreamcast came out, it does have its splendid undertones.
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
The problem is that balls travel too slow and it reminds me of the 2012 AO.Imo, conditions in the night session are the slowest since that edition.In this case, even if Fed reaches the SF, it would be almost impossible to hit through Djokovic's defence if the Serb plays well.Novak is the ultimate defender in these circumstances.
 

JoshuaPim

Rookie
The problem is that balls travel too slow and it reminds me of the 2012 AO.Imo, conditions in the night session are the slowest since that edition.In this case, even if Fed reaches the SF, it would be almost impossible to hit through Djokovic's defence if the Serb plays well.Novak is the ultimate defender in these circumstances.
Millman's balls seemed to be travelling plenty fast. And Isner served 32 aces in 3 sets. It's fast enough if you strike it properly.
 

Old Gregg

Rookie
Imagine sitting through the whole effing thing. I was trying sooooo hard not to panic lol. Skipped office. Missed food.
But it was all worth it at the end.
Matches like these are really good lessons for life imo.
I had to adapt to the possibility that he was going to lose and it was going to hurt and when I had accepted all that he won.
Try being in there!
 

fedfan08

Semi-Pro
All true, but if he is on his A game I think he will be fine till SF without any issues. This is all assuming he does not have another off day or feel tired from this match.

But then you have Djoker which this favours tremendously unlike the ATP finals courts.
I hate this slam for slowing down the courts. It’s bad enough the US Open does it even though Canada and Cincy are quite fast. Just no excuse.
 

MeatTornado

Legend
All true, but if he is on his A game I think he will be fine till SF without any issues. This is all assuming he does not have another off day or feel tired from this match.

But then you have Djoker which this favours tremendously unlike the ATP finals courts.
Well I'm glad that's how he sees it, but I don't think the part about his performance was true.

He was incredibly passive by his standards and spraying all kinds of neutral ball errors very long, not just by a little. It wasn't just failing to fight off 135K groundstrokes. Even his slices resulted in an uncharacteristic number of errors straight into the net.
 

fedfan08

Semi-Pro
Can someone explain to me all this not a normal tiebreak whining? If Millman had won nobody would be bringing up the fact it’s a 10 point tie break. And in this case Fed had to win 6 points in a row to take the breaker and win the match. How was that unfair to Millman? Plus it’s not like AO went from a normal tie breaker to a 10 point breaker. They went from no tie break at all. I’m sorry but it’s just sour grapes.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
The reality is that if it were a 7 point breaker the the whole breaker would probably have played out completely differently.

Even the commentators kept saying that people should be aware that the breaker had a long way to go when Milman got a break or two up.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
In case you want to re-watch the magic.

The point at 8-7 was wicked because both of them were going FH to FH and Fed didn't shank it. It just showed that Fed is still game after 5 gruelling sets. A decent prep for the later round. Just worried how much is left in the gas tank.
 
Just watched the match finally. I see a bright spot, but also potentially aa negative.

I sensed in the tiebreaker he decided to play slightly more aggressive at the end. I think he realizes he wont be able to get in these long rallies, especially against guys like Djoker, and even if he thinks he can do it, he wont want to waste energy doing so. Against Djoker, the way he played against Millman would get him crushed in 3.

That is the bad news.

Good news, I think he realized late in that match that he needs to just be ultra aggressive. I hope him and Lub get together and decide to play freely and aggressive. This will mean he will be screwed if he has an off day, but I do think it is his only way to win this thing or even beat Djoker.

I don’t mean power through the court, but aggressive serving, drop shots, angels, And net game. He needs to play with very slim margins. This will be a huge risk, but I think it is the only way to win AO. He can not beat Djoker, and maybe not even his next two matches by getting in rallies or trying to “power” through these guys.
 

Old Gregg

Rookie
Just watched the match finally. I see a bright spot, but also potentially aa negative.

I sensed in the tiebreaker he decided to play slightly more aggressive at the end. I think he realizes he wont be able to get in these long rallies, especially against guys like Djoker, and even if he thinks he can do it, he wont want to waste energy doing so. Against Djoker, the way he played against Millman would get him crushed in 3.

That is the bad news.

Good news, I think he realized late in that match that he needs to just be ultra aggressive. I hope him and Lub get together and decide to play freely and aggressive. This will mean he will be screwed if he has an off day, but I do think it is his only way to win this thing or even beat Djoker.

I don’t mean power through the court, but aggressive serving, drop shots, angels, And net game. He needs to play with very slim margins. This will be a huge risk, but I think it is the only way to win AO. He can not beat Djoker, and maybe not even his next two matches by getting in rallies or trying to “power” through these guys.
Superbly said.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
Just watched the match finally. I see a bright spot, but also potentially aa negative.

I sensed in the tiebreaker he decided to play slightly more aggressive at the end. I think he realizes he wont be able to get in these long rallies, especially against guys like Djoker, and even if he thinks he can do it, he wont want to waste energy doing so. Against Djoker, the way he played against Millman would get him crushed in 3.

That is the bad news.

Good news, I think he realized late in that match that he needs to just be ultra aggressive. I hope him and Lub get together and decide to play freely and aggressive. This will mean he will be screwed if he has an off day, but I do think it is his only way to win this thing or even beat Djoker.

I don’t mean power through the court, but aggressive serving, drop shots, angels, And net game. He needs to play with very slim margins. This will be a huge risk, but I think it is the only way to win AO. He can not beat Djoker, and maybe not even his next two matches by getting in rallies or trying to “power” through these guys.
"Angles" is the keyword. With a really aging footwork that could be a problem.
 

MeatTornado

Legend
Just watched the match finally. I see a bright spot, but also potentially aa negative.

I sensed in the tiebreaker he decided to play slightly more aggressive at the end. I think he realizes he wont be able to get in these long rallies, especially against guys like Djoker, and even if he thinks he can do it, he wont want to waste energy doing so. Against Djoker, the way he played against Millman would get him crushed in 3.

That is the bad news.

Good news, I think he realized late in that match that he needs to just be ultra aggressive. I hope him and Lub get together and decide to play freely and aggressive. This will mean he will be screwed if he has an off day, but I do think it is his only way to win this thing or even beat Djoker.

I don’t mean power through the court, but aggressive serving, drop shots, angels, And net game. He needs to play with very slim margins. This will be a huge risk, but I think it is the only way to win AO. He can not beat Djoker, and maybe not even his next two matches by getting in rallies or trying to “power” through these guys.
I felt he broke out that extra gear in the 2nd set TB too. He was acutely aware that going down 2-0 was not an option and upped the aggression.
 

oldmanfan

Hall of Fame
Can someone explain to me all this not a normal tiebreak whining? If Millman had won nobody would be bringing up the fact it’s a 10 point tie break. And in this case Fed had to win 6 points in a row to take the breaker and win the match. How was that unfair to Millman? Plus it’s not like AO went from a normal tie breaker to a 10 point breaker. They went from no tie break at all. I’m sorry but it’s just sour grapes.
I might be in the minority on this, but I think ALL tiebreaks should be Super-TBs. The difference between winning a normal TB at 7-5 versus a Super-TB at 10-8 is only six points. 6 more points isn't a big deal when you've already completed 12 games to get to the breaker, but that same 6 points allow for BOTH guys many chances for momentum swings to win, or lose, the STB. The Fedr/Millman STB illustrated this perfectly.

A normal TB ends too fast, and usually favors the better server more than a longer STB, and they ALREADY have an advantage by being the better server. Fedr is the better server, but it wasn't the case in this Fedr/Millman match, yet imagine how easily, and often, Isner/Roanic win normal TBs. Of the ones they've won, they'd win less if there were 6 more points played in each.

I don't like any TBs in 5th sets, but if there are TBs anywhere, I'd like them all to be Super-TBs.
 

fedfan08

Semi-Pro
How ironic/amusing seeing journalists like Christopher Clarey point out on social media that Fed wouldn’t face a seed until the QF (and the outraged responses that came). Nadal is playing a seed right now and beating up on the guy like he’s from the challengers. IMO matchups matter a lot more than ranking. If Fed has played Carreno Busta it most likely would have been a 3 set routine win.
 

fedfan08

Semi-Pro
I might be in the minority on this, but I think ALL tiebreaks should be Super-TBs. The difference between winning a normal TB at 7-5 versus a Super-TB at 10-8 is only six points. 6 more points isn't a big deal when you've already completed 12 games to get to the breaker, but that same 6 points allow for BOTH guys many chances for momentum swings to win, or lose, the STB. The Fedr/Millman STB illustrated this perfectly.

A normal TB ends too fast, and usually favors the better server more than a longer STB, and they ALREADY have an advantage by being the better server. Fedr is the better server, but it wasn't the case in this Fedr/Millman match, yet imagine how easily, and often, Isner/Roanic win normal TBs. Of the ones they've won, they'd win less if there were 6 more points played in each.

I don't like any TBs in 5th sets, but if there are TBs anywhere, I'd like them all to be Super-TBs.
I actually agree with Martina Navratilova that the 4 slams should come to an agreement on the 5th set. I’m OK with a super tie-breaker or doing what Wimbledon does. If a match goes down to the wire in a 5th set I don’t think one or two points in a tie break should decide it. With a super tiebreak a player can make a mistake and still have the opportunity to turn it around. 10 points seems fair.
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
Good news, I think he realized late in that match that he needs to just be ultra aggressive. This will mean he will be screwed if he has an off day, but I do think it is his only way to win this thing or even beat Djoker.
He can not beat Djoker, and maybe not even his next two matches by getting in rallies or trying to “power” through these guys.
He played in that style at the 2015 USO and we all know what happened. This court is suited to Novak and an ultra aggressive game plan on RLA means Roger has virtually no margin for error. His first serve percentage would have to be in the high 60's and his return game will have to get dramatically better. His volleying, especially on the FH side, has been poor all tournament and he's not played an all out attacking style against Djokovic since 2015. I'd love to see him try it but still don't expect him to win, Djokovic is simply too good on this court. We'll see if Roger can get past Fucsovics and Fogmeister/Tennys.

The most important thing is, he needs to find his FH and find it fast. It was an atrocity against Millman.
 
He played in that style at the 2015 USO and we all know what happened. This court is suited to Novak and an ultra aggressive game plan on RLA means Roger has virtually no margin for error. His first serve percentage would have to be in the high 60's and his return game will have to get dramatically better. His volleying, especially on the FH side, has been poor all tournament and he's not played an all out attacking style against Djokovic since 2015. I'd love to see him try it but still don't expect him to win, Djokovic is simply too good on this court. We'll see if Roger can get past Fucsovics and Fogmeister/Tennys.

The most important thing is, he needs to find his FH and find it fast. It was an atrocity against Millman.
I agree, which is why his chances are very slim unless Schwartzman can do something. Oddly I sense that to be a close match, even with Schwartzmans poor serve.

But I still think it is his only option.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
I actually agree with Martina Navratilova that the 4 slams should come to an agreement on the 5th set. I’m OK with a super tie-breaker or doing what Wimbledon does. If a match goes down to the wire in a 5th set I don’t think one or two points in a tie break should decide it. With a super tiebreak a player can make a mistake and still have the opportunity to turn it around. 10 points seems fair.
First to 7 after 12-12 just kills the drama at Wimbledon. One lucky net cord point could seal the title. Ewwww.

AO got it right. Wimbledon should go to 12-12.
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
Millman's balls seemed to be travelling plenty fast. And Isner served 32 aces in 3 sets. It's fast enough if you strike it properly.
To me it looked that balls travel slow and Fed was dragged in many long rallies.Isner is a freak anyway and I won't be surprised if he hits as many aces in a BO3 match on clay.
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
No surprise, Fed gets another night match. I wish his team would be more forceful in asking for day matches.
Strongly disagree. If Fed reaches the semis and final, the matches will be played at night. Playing at night means he plays under consistent conditions with no variance. It’s an advantage.

Sure, it would help him to play Djoker in the faster daytime conditions, but that match would be played in the evening.
 

fedfan08

Semi-Pro
Strongly disagree. If Fed reaches the semis and final, the matches will be played at night. Playing at night means he plays under consistent conditions with no variance. It’s an advantage.

Sure, it would help him to play Djoker in the faster daytime conditions, but that match would be played in the evening.
I suppose so but having long grinding matches before the SF is no good either. Hopefully Millman was a one off.
 

oldmanfan

Hall of Fame
I suppose so but having long grinding matches before the SF is no good either. Hopefully Millman was a one off.
Now that I've processed it a bit more, I think Millman is a one off due to many reasons I stated in a previous post. Some of the main reason seems to be a matchup issue, exacerbated by Millman being so consistent, hitting so powerfully, was so clutch, and also caught Fedr on an off day. Fedr should've lost, but he didn't so all is gravy. Having said that, I think Fedr will beat Marton in 3 or 4. I know Marton is pretty good, but his game doesn't cause the same problems as Millman's.
 
Last edited:
Top