Federer on his current level of tennis

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 716271
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
Relevant excerpt:

"Is it the best I've ever played?" Federer said. "For me, it's hard to say yes to that question. ... Maybe on the offensive side, overall, I think I'm doing definitely a few things better than I ever have. I do feel that I have improved. The game has evolved, I had to adjust, but overall I do believe I'm probably a better player than I was 10 years ago."

Full article:

http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/...two-tie-breaks-reach-quarterfinals-miami-open
 
It is amazing how much Fed has reinvented his game in his late career. Adjusted accordingly. He was never this consistently offensive match in, match out, during his best years. Obviously because he didn't need to be, due to his movement back in the day, transitioning from defense to offense, etc etc.

It would be a cool hypothetical match to see, Fed of 2005 vs Fed of 2017 for sure...
 
2006 God Fedr defeats Bautista Agut 6-1, 6-1 today.

2017 Lord Fedr probably does not beat Peak Rafa at Indian Wells but maybe converts more break points and thus keep the score close.

Just a matter of match ups I guess.

2006 God Fedr defeats Nole at all slam finals in 2014-2015.
 
Not to sound rude but when asked questions like that, he'll definitely not say that he is winning everything due to lack of depth in field at the moment with no youngsters consistent enough to take advantage. He is definitely trying to gain back the mental advantage against the field (the "aura") and confidence when he says stuffs like this.

Inb4 Nadal also says he is also playing his best tennis ever :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MasturB said:
2006 God Fedr defeats Bautista Agut 6-1, 6-1 today.

2017 Lord Fedr probably does not beat Peak Rafa at Indian Wells but maybe converts more break points and thus keep the score close.

Just a matter of match ups I guess.

2006 God Fedr defeats Nole at all slam finals in 2014-2015.
Click to expand...
I think Nole gets at least AO.
 
the always relevant 0lderer meme

B6d7Kxo.jpg
 
The Green Mile said:
It is amazing how much Fed has reinvented his game in his late career. Adjusted accordingly. He was never this consistently offensive match in, match out, during his best years. Obviously because he didn't need to be, due to his movement back in the day, transitioning from defense to offense, etc etc.

It would be a cool hypothetical match to see, Fed of 2005 vs Fed of 2017 for sure...
Click to expand...

Federer taking the ball so early he's not even waiting for it to land anymore :eek::D

giphy.gif
 
MasturB said:
Rebound Ace or Plex? We never got to see Peak Fed play on Plex. But he's won it twice since then. So I still think he edges Nole.
Click to expand...
Fair, but we never saw Peak Nole on Rebound. All we see is him on Plexicushion- which he did win 2008-2017 (10 years) 6 times. I think given that each player is in their peak in this scenario, despite Fed's attacking tennis, he doesn't get past Nole on Plex or even on Rebound Ace. It is still slow enough to favor his playstyle, even with as much attacking as Fed would do. Keep in mind, another defensive player did tend to give him trouble in those years. I do think it's 65/35 in USO and 80/20 in Wimbledon for Fed in the other 2/3 majors. I think 60/40 Novak AO.
 
MasturB said:
2006 God Fedr defeats Bautista Agut 6-1, 6-1 today.

2017 Lord Fedr probably does not beat Peak Rafa at Indian Wells but maybe converts more break points and thus keep the score close.

Just a matter of match ups I guess.

2006 God Fedr defeats Nole at all slam finals in 2014-2015.
Click to expand...
@Meles
@krosero

Let's test that theory:

23‑Oct‑2006 Basel Carpet SF 1 54 Federer d. Paradorn Srichaphan [THA] 6-4 3-6 7-6(5)

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/paradorn-srichaphan/s675/rankings-history

Fed won by zero games. Looks like God had some off days in 2006.

You guys remind me of my grandparents, always talking about the "good old days". ;)
 
Gary Duane said:
@Meles
@krosero

Let's test that theory:

23‑Oct‑2006 Basel Carpet SF 1 54 Federer d. Paradorn Srichaphan [THA] 6-4 3-6 7-6(5)

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/paradorn-srichaphan/s675/rankings-history

Fed won by zero games. Looks like God had some off days in 2006.

You guys remind me of my grandparents, always talking about the "good old days". ;)
Click to expand...

that match was a sizzling display of shotmaking ...paradorn was at his very best, federer played well , though not quite his best....

not an off day for federer by any means.
 
metsman said:
no, just watch the damn match.

He did beat Nadal in Nadal's first GS.
Click to expand...
abmk said:
that match was a sizzling display of shotmaking ...paradorn was at his very best, federer played well , though not quite his best....

not an off day for federer by any means.
Click to expand...

It's just embarrassing that this guy comments on matches he's never seen...like he can judge the level of play from just the score.
 
metsman said:
no, just watch the damn match.

He did beat Nadal in Nadal's first GS.
Click to expand...
Thanks @Gary Duane :rolleyes: More Federer homework.:mad:

wow. That's almost as great as this:oops:

Its funny how most of the Federer losing points are missing.;) Nice, but I don't know what to say except that Paradon's game would be shredded today.;)
 
NatF said:
It's just embarrassing that this guy comments on matches he's never seen...like he can judge the level of play from just the score.
Click to expand...

yeah, but it isn't just that ...its blatantly obvious he hasn't even seen much tennis before 2015 ...
someone who has wouldn't be crowing about murray on clay or say that the present field is strong on clay ...
 
I also saw a quote of him in a recent espn article where he opinioned that professional players are in their best period between 23-28.

But about this, what do people expect him to say 'nah I'm half the player I once was everyone else is just worse'. It's clear he is a glas half full guy. It is true he has improved certain aspects of his game. His serve got a bit better, he plays more tactical, his returning this year has gotten more forcefull, he goes to the net more often, takes almost everything on the rise (he used to do that in the past to but not almost everytime. Overall he attacks more completly. Sadly like any human being he also declined in other aspects. His explosivity, speed, forehand, slice, recovery period, more mental lapses.
 
Meles said:
Thanks @Gary Duane :rolleyes: More Federer homework.:mad:

Its funny how most of the Federer losing points are missing.;) Nice, but I don't know what to say except that Paradon's game would be shredded today.;)
Click to expand...

do you live in some alternate world ? seriously ?

the highlights reel has more of Srichapan winning points, not federer ...that's easily observable ( I've watched it atleast 3-4 times before this ) ...this time I actually counted - it has Srichapan winning 25 points, federer winning 18 points - in an even match.
 
125downthemiddle said:
Relevant excerpt:

"Is it the best I've ever played?" Federer said. "For me, it's hard to say yes to that question. ... Maybe on the offensive side, overall, I think I'm doing definitely a few things better than I ever have. I do feel that I have improved. The game has evolved, I had to adjust, but overall I do believe I'm probably a better player than I was 10 years ago."

Full article:

http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/...two-tie-breaks-reach-quarterfinals-miami-open
Click to expand...

40 year old Michael Jordan playing for the Washington Wizards thought he was the best he's ever been.
He said the same thing during the 1997 title run as a 34 year old. He kept insisting that he was better then than he'd ever been despite every statistics across the board being down and his shooting percentage horrific.

Athletes (the great ones) are delusional. That's why they're as great as they are. You need a special case of narcissism to dominate the globe at a sport they way they do. Their view is myopic and they need outsiders (neutral observers) to point out slippage to them or else they'd never leave.

Jordan fell out with all his friends and peers including Charles Barkley and Scottie Pippen for telling him that he wasn't the same, to leave the memories alone and retire. He openly bashed them and said that they didn't have a clue what they were talking about ans that he was a better player then than he'd ever been because "I am smarter now. More mature. I developed." The rest of the world could see that he was a shell of himself and he retired shortly after.
 
Mr Feeny said:
40 year old Michael Jordan playing for the Washington Wizards thought he was the best he's ever been.
He said the same thing during the 1997 title run as a 34 year old. He kept insisting that he was better then than he'd ever been despite every statistics across the board being down and his shooting percentage horrific.

Athletes (the great ones) are delusional. That's why they're as great as they are. You need a special case of narcissism to dominate the globe at a sport they way they do. Their view is myopic and they need outsiders (neutral observers) to point out slippage to them or else they'd never leave.

Jordan fell out with all his friends and peers including Charles Barkley and Scottie Pippen for telling him that he wasn't the same, to leave the memories alone and retire. He openly bashed them and said that they didn't have a clue what they were talking about ans that he was a better player then than he'd ever been because "I am smarter now. More mature. I developed." The rest of the world could see that he was a shell of himself and he retired shortly after.
Click to expand...

True, I don't think Federer is as good as he was in 2006, but I also don't think the difference is as much as others think when Federer is clicking now. That's a testament to him.

Jordan was best in either the 90-91 season or 91-92, when he was 28/29
 
MasturB said:
2006 God Fedr defeats Bautista Agut 6-1, 6-1 today.
Click to expand...

I think it has nothing to do with which year's Federer plays against Bautista Agut. It is also possible in 2017, but Federer just wasn't really good on this particular day. But he had these days in 2006 as well, for example three-setters against Rochus and Clement in Indian Wells and Miami or then even had to save match points against the same Rochus in Halle.

Every version of Roger had good and bad days obviously. However 2006 and 2017 have in common that he wins his matches no matter how he plays for his standards, because he is head and shoulders above the field. And that is not only because of the field being weak, but definitely due to Federer's own contributions to his game.
 
Federer-Srichapan Basel match is one of the most entertaining matches I've ever seen, Paradorn's shotmaking and athleticism were amazing to watch.

Staring at stats is and always will be a very poor substitute for following tennis closely in a specific period.
 
Mr Feeny said:
40 year old Michael Jordan playing for the Washington Wizards thought he was the best he's ever been.
He said the same thing during the 1997 title run as a 34 year old. He kept insisting that he was better then than he'd ever been despite every statistics across the board being down and his shooting percentage horrific.

Athletes (the great ones) are delusional. That's why they're as great as they are. You need a special case of narcissism to dominate the globe at a sport they way they do. Their view is myopic and they need outsiders (neutral observers) to point out slippage to them or else they'd never leave.

Jordan fell out with all his friends and peers including Charles Barkley and Scottie Pippen for telling him that he wasn't the same, to leave the memories alone and retire. He openly bashed them and said that they didn't have a clue what they were talking about ans that he was a better player then than he'd ever been because "I am smarter now. More mature. I developed." The rest of the world could see that he was a shell of himself and he retired shortly after.
Click to expand...
True. Older players can still have great matches, but they are less consistent. People seem to forget, but still no player has finished YE#1 after turning 30y. That might change this year though, but the only reason for that is a historically weak 89-92 generation.
 
ChrisRF said:
I think it has nothing to do with which year's Federer plays against Bautista Agut. It is also possible in 2017, but Federer just wasn't really good on this particular day. But he had these days in 2006 as well, for example three-setters against Rochus and Clement in Indian Wells and Miami or then even had to save match points against the same Rochus in Halle.

Every version of Roger had good and bad days obviously. However 2006 and 2017 have in common that he wins his matches no matter how he plays for his standards, because he is head and shoulders above the field. And that is not only because of the field being weak, but definitely due to Federer's own contributions to his game.
Click to expand...
You're correct but as you age the days you have "bad" or "off" days increase significantly and that has been the thing atleast in Fed's career.
 
Jonas78 said:
True. Older players can still have great matches, but they are less consistent. People seem to forget, but still no player has finished YE#1 after turning 30y. That might change this year though, but the only reason for that is a historically weak 89-92 generation.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't say weak 89-82 genereation is the only reason old farts (not just Fed, Stan is a defending USO champ, Murray is #1 and Nadal is second in the race) are still enjoying so much success. There are other factors in play such as slower homogenized surfaces on the whole that reward point construction, grinding and fitness (harder for a young gun to have a great week or two and just blast through opposition), 32 seeding system that has allowed top stars to more or less sleepwalk through early rounds (reduces wear and tear) and advances in medicine that allow for much better post-surgery recovery than it was the case before (where it usually signaled the end of a career more or less).
 
The reason I posted stats on that match is to remind everyone that even the greatest players who have ever lived get challenged at some point even in their best years, and you never know when it's going to happen, or who is going to do it.

I had not watched Fed's match today when I posted. I had a crappy day, had to leave home well before the match to work, and I was so frustrated that I peaked at the final score. I didn't want to watch the match if Fed got taken out. The day was too irritating.

So I did my usual "post mortem".

Matches are different when you watch them without emotion and without worrying about who is going to win.

In the very first game Fed was about to break but a ball struck the net and bounced right over his racket.

To me it looked like he was annoyed at the day and just wanted to get on and off court.

Who knows what is going on in his family. He has four kids. Sometimes you have trouble leaving everything at home to get your work done, and when your "work" is winning another match against a guy you are expected to kill, I suppose things can get frustrating. ;)

He hit a bunch of shots that were just barely out, and at one point he was 14/14 on winners and UEs. That's actually not bad.

I'm looking for both Nadal and Fed to cruise through their next matches.

All the people who keep saying how well Fed is playing can't all be stupid, or ignorant, or fanboys. If anything tennis looks more competitive to me than it has looked in many MANY years, and I don't know how people can be unhappy with young guys finally stepping up and challenging!
 
zagor said:
Wouldn't say weak 89-82 genereation is the only reason old farts (not just Fed, Stan is a defending USO champ, Murray is #1 and Nadal is second in the race) are still enjoying so much success. There are other factors in play such as slower homogenized surfaces on the whole that reward point construction, grinding and fitness (harder for a young gun to have a great week or two and just blast through opposition), 32 seeding system that has allowed top stars to more or less sleepwalk through early rounds (reduces wear and tear) and advances in medicine that allow for much better post-surgery recovery than it was the case before (where it usually signaled the end of a career more or less).
Click to expand...
I agree players can be competitive at an older age because of many factors. Still, there is no reason why Dimitrov, Raonic and Nishikori shouldnt be competitive in slams/masters (im exaggerating a little:)). Djokovic was only 23/24 in his incredible 2011 season. Even with Djokovic/Murray/Rafa in heavy decline/injuries, the young guys cant take advantage.
 
125downthemiddle said:
True, I don't think Federer is as good as he was in 2006, but I also don't think the difference is as much as others think when Federer is clicking now. That's a testament to him.

Jordan was best in either the 90-91 season or 91-92, when he was 28/29
Click to expand...

I think the margins in tennis are smaller than most realise or admit. Federer had plenty of off days in 2006, sometimes within a match he would be incredible one set and error prone the next. I think Federer so far this year has been turning in performances that wouldn't be out of place in his best years. On average level of play he's not much worse than his best years probably, maybe he's better? Hard to say, the year is young. I think Federer these days is a bit more ruthless, he plays with more focus in the early rounds generally- he goes for every return game etc...I suspect he knows he can't recover as well and that it is an extra motivator. But he doesn't have as high a ceiling, in that sense peak Federer was definitely better. He could afford to be a bit carless at times because he had the recovery and the extra gear to shut out pretty much any player, no matter how well they were playing. These day if an opponent is hitting a purple match Federer struggles a bit more due to being a step slower. Against a player with elite ground strokes or movement Federer looks more rushed than he used to IMO. He can be stretched when moving to the forehand corner much more easily.

But Federer is clearly playing at a very very high level. No doubt about that.

Gary Duane said:
The reason I posted stats on that match is to remind everyone that even the greatest players who have ever lived get challenged at some point even in their best years, and you never know when it's going to happen, or who is going to do it.

I had not watched Fed's match today when I posted. I had a crappy day, had to leave home well before the match to work, and I was so frustrated that I peaked at the final score. I didn't want to watch the match if Fed got taken out. The day was too irritating.

So I did my usual "post mortem".

Matches are different when you watch them without emotion and without worrying about who is going to win.

In the very first game Fed was about to break but a ball struck the net and bounced right over his racket.

To me it looked like he was annoyed at the day and just wanted to get on and off court.

Who knows what is going on in his family. He has four kids. Sometimes you have trouble leaving everything at home to get your work done, and when your "work" is winning another match against a guy you are expected to kill, I suppose things can get frustrating. ;)

He hit a bunch of shots that were just barely out, and at one point he was 14/14 on winners and UEs. That's actually not bad.

I'm looking for both Nadal and Fed to cruise through their next matches.

All the people who keep saying how well Fed is playing can't all be stupid, or ignorant, or fanboys. If anything tennis looks more competitive to me than it has looked in many MANY years, and I don't know how people can be unhappy with young guys finally stepping up and challenging!
Click to expand...

I understand your point but you picked a poor match to show it. Maybe next time pick a match where Federer wasn't playing well against an inspired opponent.
 
6-3 6-0 said:
You're correct but as you age the days you have "bad" or "off" days increase significantly and that has been the thing atleast in Fed's career.
Click to expand...
That is also correct and we could see it during the last years. But now Federer seems to have changed his game in a way that allows him a second period of dominance even at 35. All of a sudden his bad days are good enough to win the matches again. That is HIS accomplishment, because there is no way EVERY other player just became worse during the past few months.
 
Federer was no god in 2006 and around those years.

Read what fed says. Nough said. Also look how he is playing so far. Anyone dismissing that compared to his younger years are way off
 
uliks said:
Talking about abmk or Meles here. :D This post is quite ironic i have to say. :D
Click to expand...

Where is the irony? What matches do I talk about without watching? The amount of matches I've seen from 01-06 makes me uniquely qualified compared to most I'd say :D

Not to mention I watch pretty much every match I can these days and have done for many years.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Hype vs actual analysis of fed's current level of tennis
Replies
10
Views
724
Amalhotra
Amalhotra
ffw2
Is Alcaraz's creativity on a level that approaches Federer's?
2 3 4
Replies
169
Views
5K
ffw2
ffw2
F
  • Poll Poll
If Federer wins Tennis Masters Cup is he the top hard court player of 2009?
Replies
30
Views
3K
GOATPARERA
GOATPARERA
D
Federer wasn't "off his game", Tipsarevic was on his
2
Replies
83
Views
5K
BreakPoint
BreakPoint
D
The "New" Level of Tennis "Evolution"
Replies
0
Views
422
dh003i
D
Back
Top