Discussion in 'Pro Match Results and Discussion' started by Federer20042006, Sep 4, 2014.
Hey, let's play a drop shot on the fastest player in tennis! Great idea.
He was becoming annoyed with himself and got a little petulant with shot selection, so it was a product of a bad psychological state he was in at the moment.
Something similar happens when he challenges balls clearly in. It is a weakness.
He also has a tendency to hit right back at player instead of open court. Hurt him many many times throughout his career.
It's baffling that you don't know that dropshots are not always intended to produce outright winners. Sometimes they are intended to simply interrupt the baseline play rhythm of the opponent. More often then not, they serve to set up a winner or definitive shift in the initiative.
To make a thread about this, however, well, 'baffling' is too mild a word for it.
The problem is that when you're playing the fastest player in tennis, not only is he going to get there, but he's going to have a big advantage. Playing drop shots on critical points against a player who moves the way Monfils does is ill-advised.
Federer likes to hit behind people. With people smart enough to anticipate it he sometimes gets burned (like against Nadal). He also gets burned sometimes when his opponent gives up and doesn't try to sprint to the open court only to find that Federer hit the ball right at them.
Even after I patiently explained, you still don't get it. Someone else can try now.
Gee, I thought he won tonight.
Cause and Effect:
He hits these drop shots at bad times when he is not confident in his forehand.
The drop shots should work much better against Cilic, though.
That's what happens when you have as many shots as Federer...you can overthink plays on crucial points and end up blowing it.
True. I think if federer can control points and use all of his shots, he will be fine
No, actually, YOU are the one who doesn't get it.
It's a stupid shot, you fu(king moron. It doesn't just "change the pace of play," it puts Federer in a horrible situation in which he has almost no chance to win the point. You don't purposely choose shots that give you virtually no chance to win the point...ESPECIALLY on big points, as he did.
Yeah let's forget how he used the dropshot to perfection in the 2009 French Open. So he had a ****** day with the dropshot, so what.
funny he is willing to risk points with dropshots but getting him to the net is like pulling teeth. not sure where that thought process is coming from. its not edberg thats for sure. I dont think I have ever seen Stephen hit a drop shot before in a rally. maybe he was trying to get molfis to guard against it and move closer to the baseline. Good luck with that though. french players are tricky...you have to lull them and get them bored. If you turn the match into a show off contest they can hurt you. simon is the exception obviously does not fit this french mindset. he is like the french version of feliciano Lopez.
Umm.. Net points won in this match against Monfils: 53/74 (72 %)
He came in SEVENTY-FOUR times. Did you want him to serve from the net too?:?
What really shocked me was that forehand down the line on match point. That took serious balls to go for a shot like that in that scenario. Talk about having total FAITH in himself to GO for it.
Edberg has to be feeling very gratified to see Fed forcing himself to the net in big matches(Wimbledon final, here). It's one thing to do it in best-of-3 events and early slam rounds. But to keep at it at the business end of slams is showing a real dedication and respect IMHO. What has Becker done for Djokovic other than root him on?
hey thats not bad for fed. how many points were played the entire match?
You don't play tennis, I get it. Aren't you late for school already?
Sometimes the open court isn't the highest percentage shot. Sometimes you just have to hit right back at them and wait for the opportunity. It might not look flashy like his older self but Federer appears to be playing a higher percentage style of tennis.
To criticize the shot-making of a current pro of his caliber from our standpoint just seems a bit ridiculous doesn't it?
Explain to me how playing a drop shot that virtually guarantees you are going to lose the point because Monfils will get there and put it away is a smart tactic. Explain to me how this is a good thing to do when you're facing BREAK POINT.
Nobody plays a point to lose it. Disparaging someone for not executing a shot well enough is one thing. Going over the top and creating a thread about the shot selection of one of the most tactically astute players the game has ever seen, well, that's truly bafflingly stupid, to use your words.
Federer can win a point outright from a drop shot or call the opponent to the net, where he can be passed, lobbed or otherwise vanquished. I called you out on your tantrum/forced incredulity; please stop addressing me as if I am the outrageous one (questioning the shot selection of someone with over 1000 ATP matches).
He can hit whatever he wants to hit. He got frustrated in first two sets. He tried everything to change up. He end up winning in 5sets. Boom. End of story.
Federer CAN'T win the point outright from the drop shot NOR can he win the point once Monfils gets to it because it's the equivalent to leaving an easy putaway when you're dealing with someone with his speed on hardcourt. Doing that against Monfils, he may as well just gently tap it back into the middle of the court and let him have the point.
It was dumb shot selection. Federer frequently makes dumb decisions. It cost him a US Open title against Del Potro in 2009 when he played a stupid drop shot up 30-15, serving for the 2nd set, and in perfect position to whack a forehand winner. Or don't you remember?
Wow, the Fedfanboys are now flaming the other Fedfanboys with obscenities?!!!! This is hillarious!!! Fed with a great win... and they're still bed-wetting!!! LMAO!!!
And yet later in the match those drop-shots won him some key points. Had he not practised them earlier on he may have missed them.
Got to remember those happened after baby boys bed time so he missed them. :twisted:
He hadn't used the drop shot this whole tournament. Was saving it for the fastest guy :twisted:
Worked pretty well in the 5th set, once the wind died.
I still haven't figured out if this is a forum for pre-teenagers, teenagers, adults or all of the above?
Exactly. The dropshot actually did work in the 5th.
It would be easier to criticize the shot selection of a pro tennis player whose achievements don't outstrip all others in history.
That guy is a Rafa fan, but is such a loser in life that he needs to create an account based on Federer's name and spew some hate. Some people's lives are so screwed up.
I'm a huge Federer fan. But even I recognize that the way he played Monfils for first two sets was a product of stubbornness and possibly some arrogance. I mean, come on, he's Roger Federer. He shouldn't have to hit good shots to beat a punk like Monfils, right? Wrong.
And by the time Fed decided to swallow his pride and play smart tennis, Monfils had a two set lead and all the confidence in the world. And it nearly cost him the match. Probably should have.
Again, I'm thrilled Fed won. And I really, really want him to get #18 this weekend. But, it's not going to happen if he does what he did last night.
He knows, he thinks he's being clever.
He was just trying it out on Monfils to try and ascertain if it's a viable tool against Djokovic.
OK, I'll explain it, not sure if you'll get it though.
This tactic is used to get into someone's head as in, "He might drop shot me at any moment", this in turn puts uncertainty in your opponents mind when they select their shots to use. It also has the added benefit of running your opponents legs to death, which in turn will start to show up later on in the match.
So think of it as a mental and physical investment into the match.
Ever hear of the strategy of taking the legs of your opponent away? I think Rogi has!
I agree 100%!!!!!
I think you mistake a game plan not working and then deciding - based on desperation and a thousand matches collective experience - to go all-out attack on some crucial key points was necessarily an indication he started playing "smart tennis." Had he played like that from the get-go he would likely have been unsuccessful with it as Monfils was fresher. And then you would be here saying Federer was a fool for playing so risky.
Monfils played amazing tennis for long periods of this match - as he did vs Dimitrov also. He manages to do enough to goad opponents into overhitting and, crucially, he is actually ridiculously consistent when he is in normal playing mode - something few people give him credit for. That plus his speed and serve make him a very hard opponent to just beat.
Federer even played well for much of the second set and just slipped up in crunch time. That's it. It doesn't require some essay-length dissection of how crap he played. He would have known that Monfils almost certainly would not keep up his form and he only needed a 2 or 3% swing in his favour to win the next set and derail Monfils. Monfils did amazing to get to match point in the 4th I thought.
I think Federer's 2004-2007 GOATspree, when he could basically f*** around and win every match, did not give him any incentive to learn smart shot selection, adjustments, and strategy. Annacone and Edberg have helped him with that though.
Separate names with a comma.