Federer's Best Year Ever!

[Limpinhitter]

. . . ESPN’s Brad Gilbert even ventured to say that certain stretches of the year represented the best tennis Federer has ever played. . . .

Chalk It All Up to His Injuries
So what was Federer’s secret? What accounts for his dramatic rejuvenation? The simplest explanation: he upgraded his one-handed backhand. He turned what was once his chief weakness—the best strategy against Federer has long been to pound away on that wing with heavy top-spin forehands, forcing him to play defensively—into something much closer to a strength.

According to The New York Times Magazine, Federer’s breakthrough was the product of countless practice reps over the course of his injury layoff. Far removed from competitive action, he felt free to swing away on the backhand side “with very little regard for where (the shots) landed.” It eventually produced confidence and the mentality that he could take returns earlier and play a more attacking style with his backhand. Also, Federer had grown more accustomed to the larger racket that he’d switched to several years prior, which gave him more power. Thus was the “NEO backhand” born.​

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/22/roger-federers-injuries-developed-best-year-ever/

 

[TheAssassin]

I think his tennis at Indian Wells and Shanghai at times was up there with the best he's produced but overall still not as stunning as before.

2017 might be the most enjoyable season for Federer and his fans considering his age, Slam drought and the injury he had right before. But he used to have better performances and results in the past.

 

[Phoenix1983]

Highest level since 2009.

Some way below his peak of 2004-2007, which is possibly the highest peak of all time.

 

[Jaitock1991]

I think his tennis at Indian Wells and Shanghai at times was up there with the best he's produced but overall still not as stunning as before.

2017 might be the most enjoyable season for Federer and his fans considering his age, Slam drought and the injury he had right before. But he used to have better performances and results in the past.

This. Imo most of the amazing results he's had this year has been largely a product of a weakened field. I've never been a believer of "weak era" nonsense and prefer to believe that the general level of tennis gets better and better each year. But I must admit that this year has had me wonder if that really is the case.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Spring HC and grass were prime level stuff (bar rubbish losses in Dubai & Stuttgart). Post-Wimbledon was old age play, besides Shanghai when Fed's serve was peaking.

 

[Limpinhitter]

I don't think his movement or reaction time is what it was. His serve doesn't seem as well disguised as it was. But, of most interest to me is that it is acknowledged that his backhand was a point of weakness, a point I've been making for years to the universal consternation and ridicule of this board. And, like Tilden 80 years earlier, he made a concerted effort to improve his backhand during a time off.

 

[TMF]

@Limpinhitter

"Federer's Best Year Ever!"

The title of this thread is wrong. Federer had a great year, but no way it's his best year. His best tennis in 2004, 05, 06, 07 and 09 were better.

 

[KINGROGER]

Not better than his 2011-2012 level imo. His best this year (AO, IW, Halle, Wimbledon) I’d put above anything from 2013-2016 apart from 2014 Shanghai, 2015 Cincy, 14/15 Dubai.

 

[mike danny]

2006 was his best year in terms of results and level of play.

2005 his second best. That guy IMO seemed more unbeatable in 2005 than 2015 Djokovic.

 

[Devin]

. . . ESPN’s Brad Gilbert even ventured to say that certain stretches of the year represented the best tennis Federer has ever played. . . .

Chalk It All Up to His Injuries
So what was Federer’s secret? What accounts for his dramatic rejuvenation? The simplest explanation: he upgraded his one-handed backhand. He turned what was once his chief weakness—the best strategy against Federer has long been to pound away on that wing with heavy top-spin forehands, forcing him to play defensively—into something much closer to a strength.

According to The New York Times Magazine, Federer’s breakthrough was the product of countless practice reps over the course of his injury layoff. Far removed from competitive action, he felt free to swing away on the backhand side “with very little regard for where (the shots) landed.” It eventually produced confidence and the mentality that he could take returns earlier and play a more attacking style with his backhand. Also, Federer had grown more accustomed to the larger racket that he’d switched to several years prior, which gave him more power. Thus was the “NEO backhand” born.​

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/22/roger-federers-injuries-developed-best-year-ever/

C'mon, it's Brad Gilbert saying that... Federer's backhand was never a "chief weakness" against the field in his prime. It was only a weakness against Nadal on clay. It's a shame we never got to see Nadal from 2009 AO or 2010 USO meet 2004-2007 Federer in those slams. Federer's backhand wouldn't be such a weakness...

2017 is his most memorable season, but is it his best? No.

2006 was his best year in terms of results and level of play.

2005 his second best. That guy IMO seemed more unbeatable in 2005 than 2015 Djokovic.

Don't forget about 2004. He was a monster on hard courts/grass that year, and 18-0 against top 10 players speaks for itself.

 

[mike danny]

C'mon, it's Brad Gilbert saying that... Federer's backhand was never a "chief weakness" against the field in his prime. It was only a weakness against Nadal on clay. It's a shame we never got to see Nadal from 2009 AO or 2010 USO meet 2004-2007 Federer in those slams. Federer's backhand wouldn't be such a weakness...

2017 is his most memorable season, but is it his best? No.



Don't forget about 2004. He was a monster on hard courts/grass that year, and 18-0 against top 10 players speaks for itself.

Fed's 2004 is the best statistically in terms of performance in big matches and top opponents. The 18-0 wasn't the only memorable stat. 11-0 in finals as well.

Undefeated in finals and against top 10 players are stats that haven't been replicated since. I don't even think it was done before Federer.

 

[Charlemagne]

Highest level since 2009.

Some way below his peak of 2004-2007, which is possibly the highest peak of all time.

Exactly

 

[mike danny]

Highest level since 2009.

Some way below his peak of 2004-2007, which is possibly the highest peak of all time.

I would actually say highest level since 2012, not 2009.

 

[Bobby Jr]

The reasons for arguing this was his best year ever aren't about the amount of titles he won - but how he had such a great year so late in his career after coming back from injury and a couple of years where it looked like his days were numbered. Moreso, that he ruled Nadal - a guy who had given him so much trouble across the last decade. Each successive match against Nadal this year there was a feeling of "it wont last.." but he pummeled Nadal each time. You could see how much it meant to Nadal too - seeing Federer press ahead out of his league in the debate of tennis legends and now there is no little argument Federer isn't in the Michael Jordan realm of sporting greats.

That is why this year was so good, even if in earlier years he achieved more titles/overall wins.

 

[mike danny]

The reasons for arguing this was his best year ever aren't about the amount of titles he won - but how he had such a great year so late in his career after coming back from injury and a couple of years where it looked like his days were numbered. Moreso, that he ruled Nadal - a guy who had given him so much trouble across the last decade. Each successive match against Nadal this year there was a feeling of "it wont last.." but he pummeled Nadal each time. You could see how much it meant to Nadal too - seeing Federer press ahead out of his league in the debate of tennis legends and now there is no little argument Federer isn't in the Michael Jordan realm of sporting greats.

That is why this year was so good, even if in earlier years he achieved more titles/overall wins.

Seriously, there shouldn't be any doubters left. 2017 has put to bed the idea that Fed is overrated and a weak era benefactor. Anyone still questioning Fed's dominance still has issues.

 

[fedtennisphan]

Seriously, there shouldn't be any doubters left. 2017 has put to bed the idea that Fed is overrated and a weak era benefactor. Anyone still questioning Fed's dominance still has issues.

Or in denial because they want their fav to be GOAT or dislike Federer for stealing their fav’s glory.

 

[Bobby Jr]

Seriously, there shouldn't be any doubters left. 2017 has put to bed the idea that Fed is overrated and a weak era benefactor. Anyone still questioning Fed's dominance still has issues.

Yep, but most of those remaining sad people who were before 2017 debating it have now been made to look even more silly.

 

[Phoenix1983]

I consider Federer the GOAT, but if one wants to argue for Laver, it's at least plausible due to the incomparibility of eras.

However, those arguing for other modern players as greater than Federer are deluded indeed.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

I consider Federer the GOAT, but if one wants to argue for Laver, it's at least plausible due to the incomparibility of eras.

However, those arguing for other modern players as greater than Federer are deluded indeed.

I suppose as it is a Limpinhitter thread it is polite for someone to make reference to Laver in the GOAT debate.

Though please don’t expect the rest of us to take this stuff seriously.

 

[nocturnal]

Seriously, there shouldn't be any doubters left. 2017 has put to bed the idea that Fed is overrated and a weak era benefactor. Anyone still questioning Fed's dominance still has issues.

2017 didn't even need to happen for the overrated idea to be dismissed as it is ridiculous to begin with. But I wouldn't say it put to bed the "weak era" argument, it is very much still alive unfortunately

 

[Tennis_Hands]

I don't think his movement or reaction time is what it was. His serve doesn't seem as well disguised as it was. But, of most interest to me is that it is acknowledged that his backhand was a point of weakness, a point I've been making for years to the universal consternation and ridicule of this board. And, like Tilden 80 years earlier, he made a concerted effort to improve his backhand during a time off.

Yeah, man.

Noone on this board saw the tactic Nadal used for years.

Just you.

 

[marc45]

Dr. Federer

Michal Samulski‏ @MichalSamulski 40s40 seconds ago
The University of Basel (Faculty of Medicine) awarded its honorary doctorate to Roger Federer for increasing the international reputation of Basel and Switzerland. https://www.unibas.ch/en/News-Events/News/Uni-Info/Dies-Academicus-2017-Roger-Federer-New-Honorary-Doctor.html …

 

[mike danny]

2017 didn't even need to happen for the overrated idea to be dismissed as it is ridiculous to begin with. But I wouldn't say 2017 put to bed the "weak era" argument, it is very much still alive unfortunately

35-36 year old weak era benefactors don't win 2 slams and dominate the YE#1.

 

[RF-18]

 

[Phoenix1983]

I suppose as it is a Limpinhitter thread it is polite for someone to make reference to Laver in the GOAT debate.

Though please don’t expect the rest of us to take this stuff seriously.

You do realise that people will say the same thing about Federer in comparison to the dominator of the men's game in 50 years' time?

 

[nocturnal]

35-36 year old weak era benefactors don't win 2 slams and dominate the YE#1.

So you think the fact so many top players have underperformed/got injured is irrelevant and the discussion should be sealed solely based on the season Federer has had?

 

[tennis_pro]

Brad, I'm bored now.

 

[mike danny]

So you think the fact so many top players have underperformed/got injured is irrelevant and the discussion should be sealed solely based on the season Federer has had?

Nadal had the exact same circumstances, but it was still the weak era benefactor who won more titles and still defeated his only competitor left.

 

[Sport]

I think his tennis at Indian Wells and Shanghai at times was up there with the best he's produced but overall still not as stunning as before.

2017 might be the most enjoyable season for Federer and his fans considering his age, Slam drought and the injury he had right before. But he used to have better performances and results in the past.

In Shanghai Roger didn't have competence, difficult to detect his real level. Nadal was injured, he couldn't rest and bend his knee properly due to pain (look at his bandage):

Nadal also skipped Basel after Shanghai, according to his doctors he had an "overstressing of the knee" injury. Source:
https://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/nadal-withdraws-from-basel-with-knee-soreness

 

[mike danny]

In Shanghai Roger didn't have competence, difficult to detect his real level. Nadal was injured, he couldn't rest and bend his knee properly due to pain (look at his bandage):

Nadal also skipped Basel after Shanghai, according to his doctors he had an "overstressing of the knee" injury:
https://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/nadal-withdraws-from-basel-with-knee-soreness

Like Nadal would have beaten Roger on that fast court in those conditions anyway

 

[BeatlesFan]

I think his tennis at Indian Wells and Shanghai at times was up there with the best he's produced but overall still not as stunning as before.

And nobody seems to mention that in his peak years, he played at the IW and Shanghai levels but then didn't break down and skip chunks of the season to recover. In 2004-2007, he would have played IW, Miami... then the clay season. At 35/36, he can play beautiful tennis for brief periods, then he has to rest and recover. So 2017 is NOT peak Fed. Not even close.

 

[BeatlesFan]

In Shanghai Roger didn't have competence, difficult to detect his real level. Nadal was injured, he couldn't rest and bend his knee properly due to pain (look at his bandage)

Old news. We already learned from the VB for the past 12 years that Rafa never loses unless he's injured.

 

[mike danny]

And nobody seems to mention that in his peak years, he played at the IW and Shanghai levels but then didn't break down and skip chunks of the season to recover. In 2004-2007, he would have played IW, Miami... then the clay season. At 35/36, he can play beautiful tennis for brief periods, then he has to rest and recover. So 2017 is NOT peak Fed. Not even close.

Interestingly enough, 2005 was Fed's most injury prone season in his prime. He skipped 4 masters events due to injuries.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

You do realise that people will say the same thing about Federer in comparison to the dominator of the men's game in 50 years' time?

Yes, 50 years is a long time and it is indeed very conceivable that the game will have evolved considerably.

It is also conceivable that the rate of technological change, professionalism and training regimes will slow dramatically from the prior 50 years and so the gains in performance might almost be marginal from this point on.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Yeah, man.

Noone on this board saw the tactic Nadal used for years.

Just you.

Not the point. For years, Federer fans on this board have declaimed that Fed had the greatest one handed backhand of all time, and were incredulous when I told them that he did not. But, he did move up the ladder a little bit this year.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Not the point. For years, Federer fans on this board have declaimed that Fed had the greatest one handed backhand of all time, and were incredulous when I told them that he did not. But, he did move up the ladder a little bit this year.

I make a point of arguing with, but not taking too seriously people that refuse to be reasonable in their position.

Most reasonable Federer fans around here will make a point that for example Wawa's BH is better in some conditions than Federer's.

Of course, it goes both ways and it should be said that equipment plays a very important role in how a BH is perceived, as it was demonstrated this year in isolation in the Federer Nadal rivalry.

It is not only the player, as some may be tempted to speculate.

This year Federer just reap the fruits of adjusting, but I would say that he revealed another facet of his talent, without bearing direct comparison with his previous way of playing/executing this shot.

 

[Limpinhitter]

I make a point of arguing with, but not taking too seriously people that refuse to be reasonable in their position.

Most reasonable Federer fans around here will make a point that for example Wawa's BH is better in some conditions than Federer's.

Of course, it goes both ways and it should be said that equipment plays a very important role in how a BH is perceived, as it was demonstrated this year in isolation in the Federer Nadal rivalry.

It is not only the player, as some may be tempted to speculate.

This year Federer just reap the fruits of adjusting, but I would say that he revealed another facet of his talent, without bearing direct comparison with his previous way of playing/executing this shot.

You didn't read the article.

 

[TheAssassin]

In Shanghai Roger didn't have competence, difficult to detect his real level. Nadal was injured, he couldn't rest and bend his knee properly due to pain (look at his bandage):

Nadal also skipped Basel after Shanghai, according to his doctors he had an "overstressing of the knee" injury. Source:
https://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/nadal-withdraws-from-basel-with-knee-soreness

Well even if we ignore the final completely, which wouldn't be fair to Fed who displayed a masterclass, he also beat Del Potro in the semifinal, very good battle.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

You didn't read the article.

Sigh.

Yes, I did.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Sigh.

Yes, I did.

Then you are ignoring what was written.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Then you are ignoring what was written.

It is just an opinion written like a sermon.

 

[Limpinhitter]

It is just an opinion written like a sermon.

You didn't read the article or you are ignoring it.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

You didn't read the article or you are ignoring it.

This is getting tedious.

I read the article.

It is a crap piece of adulation.

It doesn't represent the views of "most Federer fans", nor is it in itself representative of any sort of balanced and knowledgeable position.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

2006 was his best year in terms of results and level of play.

2005 his second best. That guy IMO seemed more unbeatable in 2005 than 2015 Djokovic.

I think in terms of pure level 2004 ranks the highest. It was just more raw and inconsistent than 2005 or 2006, but his highs were higher in my opinion.

You'd have to include the 2003 Masters Cup though as that's where that insane level began.

 

[nocturnal]

Nadal had the exact same circumstances, but it was still the weak era benefactor who won more titles and still defeated his only competitor left.

You're mixing it up. It's not Federer vs. Nadal, It's whether or not slightly weaker competition helped boost Federer's career in terms of the numbers (particularly from 04 to 07). Now I don't dare question Federer's greatness, I just think the numbers wouldn't be as great if he were to switch prime years with Nadal. But that's just me.

 

[Backspin1183]

It's about injury free, free swinging 2017 Federer and not 2015-2016 Federer, so your job isn't quite done yet, you know.

 

[mike danny]

You're mixing it up. It's not Federer vs. Nadal, It's whether or not slightly weaker competition helped boost Federer's career in terms of the numbers (particularly from 04 to 07). Now I don't dare question Federer's greatness, I just think the numbers wouldn't be as great if he were to switch prime years with Nadal. But that's just me.

His numbers would be a bit less, but he would make up for what he lost in his post prime years.

The only thing Fed would definitely have less is AO titles due to Djokovic. At Wimb-USO he would still win a significant amount.

 

[Limpinhitter]

This is getting tedious.

I read the article.

It is a crap piece of adulation.

It doesn't represent the views of "most Federer fans", nor is it in itself representative of any sort of balanced and knowledgeable position.

You are getting tedious. You either didn't read the article, are ignoring what the article says or have reading comprehension deficits.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

You are getting tedious. You either didn't read the article, are ignoring what the article says or have reading comprehension deficits.

......

 

[Limpinhitter]

I consider Federer the GOAT, but if one wants to argue for Laver, it's at least plausible due to the incomparibility of eras.

However, those arguing for other modern players as greater than Federer are deluded indeed.

Laver himself said that he thought Djokovic had equaled Federer's Federer's greatness in 2016. But, Laver couldn't have anticipated Djokovic's sudden decline mid year.