Federer's 2006 Wimbledon Draw

Meles

Bionic Poster
Federer's route to the 2006 Championships seems to have been one through hell. Just take a look at the opponents he had to beat

1R - Gasquet(Beaten him before) rank 66
2R - Henman(Beaten him before at W) rank 62
3R - Mahut(Quality grasscourter) rank 76
4R - Berdych(Beaten him before) rank 14
QF - Ancic(Beaten him before at W) rank 12
SF - Bjorkman(Loser) rank 77
F - Nadal(Nemesis) highest rank player Nadal beat on way to final was 18.

The only bum note seems to have been Bjorkman in the semis. Federer just blitzed his way to the finals without dropping a set. The only set he dropped in the entire tournament was against Nadal, that too in a Tie Break. That's how good Peak Fed was on Grass.
1R - Gasquet(Beaten him before) rank 66
2R - Henman(Beaten him before at W) rank 62
3R - Mahut(Quality grasscourter) rank 76
4R - Berdych(Beaten him before) rank 14
QF - Ancic(Beaten him before at W) rank 12 (won hertenbosch twice on grass)
SF - Bjorkman(Loser) rank 77
F - Nadal(Nemesis) highest rank player Nadal beat on way to final was 18.

Looks can be deceiving.;) Didn't know Ancic, but that looked like a good QF. To be sure these players all were good on grass, but not their best years based on ranking (save Ancic). Most of the 16 seeds did not make it to their seeding in the draw except Stepanek who made QF as 14 seed and lost to Bjorkman.
 
This is how you know this board is mindfcked... 9 likes?

Draw from hell? This draw is ordinary as fck, and downright pathetic when it comes to LEGIT competition before the final, aka the semifinal..
 
F

Fedfan34

Guest
I mean it's no 1997 draw where he doesn't have to play anyone in the top 20 until the final, but Rogi tries.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joseph L. Barrow

Professional
Roddick made it tough by taking his match against Hewitt to 5 sets like Murray in 13 did it against Verdo.
No, Roddick had Berdych (strong former and future top 10 player and and the following year's Wimbledon runner-up) in the Round of 16, Hewitt (resurgent former world #1 and Wimbledon champion) in the quarterfinals, Murray (world #3, future world number one and two-time Wimbledon champion) in the semifinals, and Roger Federer (five-time champion, eventual seven-time champion and most accomplished player in Wimbledon history, as well as greatest player of all time) in the final-- and he still came within the tiniest whisker of taking the title.
 

Dope Reign

Banned
It's funny how when Murray gets Birdman it's part of a cakewalk draw, but when fedr gets him it's part of a tough draw.

When Murray has to beat Kyrgios, Tsonga, Berdych, and Raonic - 4 guys who have all beaten 1 of the much vaunted 3 at wimbledon, and 3 of them the most vaunted of that 3, it's cakewalk city. But when Fedr has to play players that have beaten him and beaten him there it's evidence of a tough draw. ## #bitter #equality

I don't consider Fed's draw here to be tough, but it's certainly not a cakewalk. Ancic had the game to be wimbledon champ, but he was another guy hindered by the slower grass, and then ofc he got sick.

Baby Birdman, Ancic, '06 Nadal makes this a moderate to moderately tough draw.
 

chut

Professional
Underrated draw but not hell'ish.
It's a good draw, Gasquet, Ancic, Henman all are semifinalist at Wimbledon, Mahut is a grass specialist, former Wimbledon junior champ, Berdych made it to the final there. All are potentially dangerous opponents if they start zoning but Federer was miles ahead of all of them at that time.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
It's a good draw, Gasquet, Ancic, Henman all are semifinalist at Wimbledon, Mahut is a grass specialist, former Wimbledon junior champ, Berdych made it to the final there. All are potentially dangerous opponents if they start zoning but Federer was miles ahead of all of them at that time.
Yes, Gasquet and Berdych in early rounds is tough. They took sets off him in Halle as well. If he had a tougher SF'ish it would have been a really strong draw. The likes of Henman weren't really at the level to challenge Federer anymore though, so there were some dangers in there but no one had shown the form to beat Federer.
 
You're right. It's a shame he didn't face Schuettler or Melzer in that SF.
Melzer? Nadal beat everyone and everything at the French for 10 years and didn't lose a set that tourney but its supposed to make a difference who he faces in the SF?

Anyway, fellow Fed fan here metsman on an earlier page made the argument that Federer in '07 may not have faced a tough pre-finals opponent, but he had a tough finals opponent, so who cares? It's the same for '08 Nadal, who by the way also faced Murray before Schüttler, which already renders your assertion useless.

Since this board is crap however, your misleading comment actually received two likes.

Sad.

I also love how you don't mention Baghdatis, who by all measures is weak semifinal opposition, but you don't mention him since it shows Federer's weak '06 AO title and the fact that in '06 he may have not faced a single elite opponent.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Melzer? Nadal beat everyone and everything at the French for 10 years and didn't lose a set that tourney but its supposed to make a difference who he faces in the SF?

Anyway, fellow Fed fan here metsman on an earlier page made the argument that Federer in '07 may not have faced a tough pre-finals opponent, but he had a tough finals opponent, so who cares? It's the same for '08 Nadal, who by the way also faced Murray before Schüttler, which already renders your assertion useless.

Since this board is crap however, your misleading comment actually received two likes.

Sad.

I also love how you don't mention Baghdatis, who by all measures is weak semifinal opposition, but you don't mention him since it shows Federer's weak '06 AO title and the fact that in '06 he may have not faced a single elite opponent.
I forgot about Baghdatis, but good point. He was a weak SF opponent. And not a great finals opponent, although he did play very well overall throughout the event and not much worse than Murray in a couple of AO finals. No agenda from me there, I simply forgot about him.

As for the bolded part, if you are talking about 2006 AO, he faced Davydenko who played very well. Better than anyone Nadal faced at the 2010 FO. If you're talking about the whole 2006 year, then you are completely wrong.

Fed's 2006 AO draw = Nadal's 2010 FO draw. It evens out.

On topic, Fed's 2006 Wimb draw wasn't hard, but it wasn't that weak either. It was decent. The SF was the only match where he didn't have a dangerous player.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Melzer? Nadal beat everyone and everything at the French for 10 years and didn't lose a set that tourney but its supposed to make a difference who he faces in the SF?

Anyway, fellow Fed fan here metsman on an earlier page made the argument that Federer in '07 may not have faced a tough pre-finals opponent, but he had a tough finals opponent, so who cares? It's the same for '08 Nadal, who by the way also faced Murray before Schüttler, which already renders your assertion useless.

Since this board is crap however, your misleading comment actually received two likes.

Sad.

I also love how you don't mention Baghdatis, who by all measures is weak semifinal opposition, but you don't mention him since it shows Federer's weak '06 AO title and the fact that in '06 he may have not faced a single elite opponent.
Baghdatis wasn't weak at 06 AO, hence he took a set off peak Fed who had already beaten two top players (Haas, Davydenko) on route to the final.

So not a weak draw.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Baghdatis wasn't weak at 06 AO, hence he took a set off peak Fed who had already beaten two top players (Haas, Davydenko) on route to the final.

So not a weak draw.
2006 AO was Fed's weakest GS draw admittedly. The draw opened up for him that year by getting Kiefer and Baghdatis in the semis and the final. Had he got Nalbandian in the final instead of Marcos, Fed might not have won the event. It was his second worst form in winning a slam after 2009 FO.

But every player had weak GS draws. Even Rafa.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
2006 AO was Fed's weakest GS draw admittedly. The draw opened up for him that year by getting Kiefer and Baghdatis in the semis and the final. Had he got Nalbandian in the final instead of Marcos, Fed might not have won the event. It was his second worst form in winning a slam after 2009 FO.

But every player had weak GS draws. Even Rafa.
Federer was damn good in the last 2 rounds of the FO in 2009, way better than this years AO. I'd probably put the AO 2006 above #18 in terms of pure level as well. In both cases Federer was up and down but when Federer was up in 2006 it was better.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
1R - Gasquet(Beaten him before) rank 66
2R - Henman(Beaten him before at W) rank 62
3R - Mahut(Quality grasscourter) rank 76
4R - Berdych(Beaten him before) rank 14
QF - Ancic(Beaten him before at W) rank 12 (won hertenbosch twice on grass)
SF - Bjorkman(Loser) rank 77
F - Nadal(Nemesis) highest rank player Nadal beat on way to final was 18.

Looks can be deceiving.;) Didn't know Ancic, but that looked like a good QF. To be sure these players all were good on grass, but not their best years based on ranking (save Ancic). Most of the 16 seeds did not make it to their seeding in the draw except Stepanek who made QF as 14 seed and lost to Bjorkman.
When did you start watching tennis in a more serious capacity?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Federer was damn good in the last 2 rounds of the FO in 2009, way better than this years AO. I'd probably put the AO 2006 above #18 in terms of pure level as well. In both cases Federer was up and down but when Federer was up in 2006 it was better.
I feel like he struggled a bit too much with Delpo for my liking. Was on the back foot for more than 60% of that RG SF match in 2009.

And even before the semis he struggled way too much. Should have gone down 2 sets to 1 in the 3rd round and should have lost to Haas.

You make some strong points regarding AO 2006. His up level was definitely higher then than now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1

NatF

Bionic Poster
I feel like he struggled a bit too much with Delpo for my liking. Was on the back foot for more than 60% of that RG SF match in 2009.

And even before the semis he struggled way too much. Should have gone down 2 sets to 1 in the 3rd round and should have lost to Haas.

You make some strong points regarding AO 2006. His up level was definitely higher then than now.
Because Del Potro was playing crazy well, Federer wasn't playing badly at all. I specified the last 2 rounds. Once he got going Federer was better in 09 than 17 - it's not like Haas is a mug either.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
These are all horiblely stretched on youtube. Paste the links from youtube to this site to get the correct 4:3 aspect ratio:
http://stretch.site/

The squashed images makes Ancic and Federer look like middle aged puds and makes the ball flight look slower. In 4:3 much, much better.;)
Thank goodness. I was ready to hunt down these uploaders and do ungodly things. Now I don't need to.
 

Meles

Bionic Poster
When did you start watching tennis in a more serious capacity?
I've watched tennis for a long, long time. I got very serious when I started posting here Fall of 2015 and watched quite a bit for many years before, but much of 2009, 2010, and 2011 which was limited because of exceptionally busy schedule. Much more of a slam chair watcher and some of the bigger events before big 4 (did not watch much in late 1990s when tour was less interesting).
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
2006 AO was Fed's weakest GS draw admittedly. The draw opened up for him that year by getting Kiefer and Baghdatis in the semis and the final. Had he got Nalbandian in the final instead of Marcos, Fed might not have won the event. It was his second worst form in winning a slam after 2009 FO.

But every player had weak GS draws. Even Rafa.
06 AO draw was stronger than 2010 no doubt.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
I feel like he struggled a bit too much with Delpo for my liking. Was on the back foot for more than 60% of that RG SF match in 2009.

And even before the semis he struggled way too much. Should have gone down 2 sets to 1 in the 3rd round and should have lost to Haas.

You make some strong points regarding AO 2006. His up level was definitely higher then than now.
For all intensive purposes, consider Delpo 09 to be Stan 2015. If Fed had beaten Stan in 5 sets I don't think you'd consider that to be a bad win or something. Yeah he struggled against Acusaso, but that guy was redlining. Haas match wasn't even that bad, he was a little unclutch the first couple sets but it's not like he was spraying errors all over the place, Haas is a high quality player when he's playing well. Once Federer found his full game it was smooth sailing. QF was a masterclass against Monfils who played fairly well, troubled him in the semis in 08. Final was one of Federer's best matches. Soderling was in fine form the last two sets and very dangerous but Federer was impenetrable.

All in all, a very high quality slam win for me.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Federer was damn good in the last 2 rounds of the FO in 2009, way better than this years AO. I'd probably put the AO 2006 above #18 in terms of pure level as well. In both cases Federer was up and down but when Federer was up in 2006 it was better.
federer played pretty well in the QF vs Monfils too.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
For all intensive purposes, consider Delpo 09 to be Stan 2015. If Fed had beaten Stan in 5 sets I don't think you'd consider that to be a bad win or something. Yeah he struggled against Acusaso, but that guy was redlining. Haas match wasn't even that bad, he was a little unclutch the first couple sets but it's not like he was spraying errors all over the place, Haas is a high quality player when he's playing well. Once Federer found his full game it was smooth sailing. QF was a masterclass against Monfils who played fairly well, troubled him in the semis in 08. Final was one of Federer's best matches. Soderling was in fine form the last two sets and very dangerous but Federer was impenetrable.

All in all, a very high quality slam win for me.
fed was spraying with his FH all over the place in the haas match until he hit that FH at BP at 30-40 down in the 3rd set.

If fed was in form, he would have finished haas in 3/4 sets on clay. When he found his top gear, he bagelled Haas.
 
Last edited:

pc1

G.O.A.T.
I feel like he struggled a bit too much with Delpo for my liking. Was on the back foot for more than 60% of that RG SF match in 2009.

And even before the semis he struggled way too much. Should have gone down 2 sets to 1 in the 3rd round and should have lost to Haas.

You make some strong points regarding AO 2006. His up level was definitely higher then than now.
Because Del Potro was playing crazy well, Federer wasn't playing badly at all. I specified the last 2 rounds. Once he got going Federer was better in 09 than 17 - it's not like Haas is a mug either.
I remember del potro was leading but I don't recall how well he was playing. However being on the back foot against delpo isn't that bad if delpo is playing decently. Bottom line is that Federer won.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
I remember del potro was leading but I don't recall how well he was playing. However being on the back foot against delpo isn't that bad if delpo is playing decently. Bottom line is that Federer won.
Del Potro played better than when he actually beat Federer at the USO.
 

90's Clay

Banned
ROFLMAO!!!!!

1R - Gasquet- Sucks. Never has done anything
2R - Henman- Good player but his peak was already gone by that point.
3R - Mahut- no Namer
4R - Berdych- Not Peak Berdych. Decent player. Lots of talent but could never bring it all together
QF - Ancic- Crap
SF - Bjorkman- Crap
F - Nadal- Wasn't this his 4th or 5th grass court tournament ever? Spring chicken.

Subpar draw. Leave it up to Wodgie fans to try and make it menacing however. 2006 was a lousy year.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Are you guys being serious??
Absolutely

for del potro

in RG 2009: 55W, 40 UEs , so +15
in USO 2009 : 57 W, 60 UEs, so -3

in RG 2009, 55 W, forced 67 errors from federer, 40 UEs, so +82 in terms of winners+forced errors-UEs
in USO 2009, 57W, forced 61 errors from federer, 60 UEs, so +58 in terms of winners+forced errors-UEs


http://web.archive.org/web/20090708...rros.com/en_FR/scores/stats/day18/1126ms.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20091003125412/http://www.usopen.org/en_US/scores/stats/day21/1701ms.html

the stats are clearly better at RG ...RG was a bit faster than usual in 09, but still not as fast as the USO.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
ROFLMAO!!!!!

1R - Gasquet- Sucks. Never has done anything
2R - Henman- Good player but his peak was already gone by that point.
3R - Mahut- no Namer
4R - Berdych- Not Peak Berdych. Decent player. Lots of talent but could never bring it all together
QF - Ancic- Crap
SF - Bjorkman- Crap
F - Nadal- Wasn't this his 4th or 5th grass court tournament ever? Spring chicken.

Subpar draw. Leave it up to Wodgie fans to try and make it menacing however. 2006 was a lousy year.
Again with this same silly argument? How many grass court tournaments did Becker play before he won his first Wimb title at 17?
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer's route to the 2006 Championships seems to have been one through hell. Just take a look at the opponents he had to beat

1R - Gasquet(Beaten him before)
2R - Henman(Beaten him before at W)
3R - Mahut(Quality grasscourter)
4R - Berdych(Beaten him before)
QF - Ancic(Beaten him before at W)
SF - Bjorkman(Loser)
F - Nadal(Nemesis)

The only bum note seems to have been Bjorkman in the semis. Federer just blitzed his way to the finals without dropping a set. The only set he dropped in the entire tournament was against Nadal, that too in a Tie Break. That's how good Peak Fed was on Grass.
Federer 2015 wins this tournament aswell.
 

90's Clay

Banned
Again with this same silly argument? How many grass court tournaments did Becker play before he won his first Wimb title at 17?

Becker was a grass prodigy. One of the best ever on the surface.. While Nadal.... Well... Is not.

While Nadal became very solid on grass. He wasn't one of the all time greats to play on it Obviously
 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
Becker was a grass prodigy. One of the best ever on the surface.. While Nadal.... Well... Is not.

While Nadal became very solid on grass. He wasn't one of the all time greats to play on it Obviously
Match-up. And once the grass became green clay, he didn't have to make too many adjustments.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Becker was a grass prodigy. One of the best ever on the surface.. While Nadal.... Well... Is not.
He still has 2 Wimbledon titles and grass was the first surface besides clay he took off on.

90's Clay said:
While Nadal became very solid on grass. He wasn't one of the all time greats to play on it Obviously
And mugs like Pioline & Washington are? Agassi isn't even as good as Nadal on grass and I don't want to hear the bullsh1t argument either.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
fed was spraying with his FH all over the place in the haas match until he hit that FH at BP at 30-40 down in the 3rd set.

If fed was in form, he would have finished haas in 3/4 sets on clay. When he found his top gear, he bagelled Haas.
yeah his FH was bad but in general it's not like he was making 15 UFE a set like he sometimes did around that time. Didn't lose a point on serve the first set.
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
I totally agree on this point.

I think Fed's draws in most of his winning years were stronger!
I think Roddick in 2004 and 2009 was a more formidable opponent in the final than Baby Nadal on grass, and I also think that 2012, 2014, and 2015 were much tougher (the Murrovic combo in the SF/F is very touch, with those guys now owning a combined 5 Wimbledon trophies).
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I think Roddick in 2004 and 2009 was a more formidable opponent in the final than Baby Nadal on grass, and I also think that 2012, 2014, and 2015 were much tougher (the Murrovic combo in the SF/F is very touch, with those guys now owning a combined 5 Wimbledon trophies).
Fed had to beat the world no.1 or no.2 to win 5 of his 7 Wimb titles. He clearly never had it easy.
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
It's not Roger's fault that in 2006 he was FAR and AWAY the best player on hard & grass. It took the field 2 years to catch up.
 
Top