Hewitt vs Federer Highlights | ATP Finals 2002 Semi-Final | TennisTV Highlights

Suspenseful up-and-down match. Good play interspersed with serious chokery. Peak Federer would have routined this Hewitt really. (Acknowleding this wasn't his best unlike 2001, still.)
 

Kralingen

Legend
Fed played pretty well here, some all court magic to save BPs late in the match especially. Noticeably very aggressive approaching the net.

00-02 Hewitt has this incredible on court energy and confidence. 'Stage presence' if you will. That's the most visible difference between this and his '04/05 self, the intensity and confidence. Mentality is a huge factor..
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Fed played pretty well here, some all court magic to save BPs late in the match especially. Noticeably very aggressive approaching the net.

00-02 Hewitt has this incredible on court energy and confidence. 'Stage presence' if you will. That's the most visible difference between this and his '04/05 self, the intensity and confidence. Mentality is a huge factor..
Difference in this match was mostly mental. Hewitt was pretty close to burning out, which is what happened in 2003, impressive that he could summon the big plays when he needed them still.

I think the confidence factor is definitely key, you look at some of the big points in his slam matches with Fed - particularly in 2004 - and he makes mistakes he probably wouldn't have a couple of years prior.
 
Difference in this match was mostly mental. Hewitt was pretty close to burning out, which is what happened in 2003, impressive that he could summon the big plays when he needed them still.

I think the confidence factor is definitely key, you look at some of the big points in his slam matches with Fed - particularly in 2004 - and he makes mistakes he probably wouldn't have a couple of years prior.
Think Fred had more to do with it. :p I would say Hewitt approached the first two matches (AO and Hamburg) with proper confidence but Federer was very intent on kicking his ass and then Hewitt's belief naturally waned as he felt like needing to play above himself to compete.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Think Fred had more to do with it. :p I would say Hewitt approached the first two matches (AO and Hamburg) with proper confidence but Federer was very intent on kicking his ass and then Hewitt's belief naturally waned as he felt like needing to play above himself to compete.
Obviously Fed had to be good enough to put that pressure, I'm mainly thinking about the indecision with the serving and the DF's. Of course Fed playing like a God placed extra burden on the second delivery but it was something like four straight DF's in break games from Wimby to the USO IIRC. I would expect better.

The AO match was coming off the Davis Cup win, Hewitt was still giving him the whole "Too good mate" compliments then lol.
 
Obviously Fed had to be good enough to put that pressure, I'm mainly thinking about the indecision with the serving and the DF's. Of course Fed playing like a God placed extra burden on the second delivery but it was something like four straight DF's in break games from Wimby to the USO IIRC. I would expect better.

The AO match was coming off the Davis Cup win, Hewitt was still giving him the whole "Too good mate" compliments then lol.
The Wimbledon match broke Hewitt's confidence for a while yes. In total, he lost 11 straight games (WB 3 + USO 8) with 4 consecutive DFs on BP indeed. Sounds like a nice weak era argument when you put it like that, what sort of competitor DFs to lose four straight breaks ROFLMAO etc. Good thing Hewitt wasn't Fed's best opponent in either tournament. Actually it's probably telling something that Hewitt was frequently Fed's second best opponent in a given tournament at the time but never the best (AO 04 - Nalbandian, WB 04 - Roddick, USO 04 - Agassi, YEC 04 - Safin, USO 05 - Agassi), other than I guess WB 05, which rather reflects negatively on the strength of the draw with Hewitt and Roddick being meh (but Rog was so good it doesn't matter for evaluation).
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
The Wimbledon match broke Hewitt's confidence for a while yes. In total, he lost 11 straight games (WB 3 + USO 8) with 4 consecutive DFs on BP indeed. Sounds like a nice weak era argument when you put it like that, what sort of competitor DFs to lose four straight breaks ROFLMAO etc. Good thing Hewitt wasn't Fed's best opponent in either tournament. Actually it's probably telling something that Hewitt was frequently Fed's second best opponent in a given tournament at the time but never the best (AO 04 - Nalbandian, WB 04 - Roddick, USO 04 - Agassi, YEC 04 - Safin, USO 05 - Agassi), other than I guess WB 05, which rather reflects negatively on the strength of the draw with Hewitt and Roddick being meh (but Rog was so good it doesn't matter for evaluation).
Well it was seperate matches no? So not quite four consecutive considering he faced other break points etc...in-between. It's just an interesting mini-saga in their rivalry, which Hewitt righted afterwards IMO. I would say Hewitt was Fed's best competitor at the USO in 2005 BTW. IMO a lot of other players wouldn't have necessarily been a break up on Fed in the fourth at Wimbledon in 2004 in the first place, so it can't be all bad. The USO final was just the perfect from Fed, that first set from him was basically perfection and Hewitt sadly wilted until the pressure of serving to the BOAT. What frustrates me about that match is that there were about four or five points that Hewitt constructed beautifully that he couldn't quite finish - intensity just not quite there in the important moments.
 
Well it was seperate matches no? So not quite four consecutive considering he faced other break points etc...in-between. It's just an interesting mini-saga in their rivalry, which Hewitt righted afterwards IMO. I would say Hewitt was Fed's best competitor at the USO in 2005 BTW. IMO a lot of other players wouldn't have necessarily been a break up on Fed in the fourth at Wimbledon in 2004 in the first place, so it can't be all bad. The USO final was just the perfect from Fed, that first set from him was basically perfection and Hewitt sadly wilted until the pressure of serving to the BOAT. What frustrates me about that match is that there were about four or five points that Hewitt constructed beautifully that he couldn't quite finish - intensity just not quite there in the important moments.
Meh, Agassi actually dominated Federer for a stretch in the '05 final. Hewitt came close to evening the match at one set all and that's it. Playing a more close, but still not close, fourth set hardly alleviates this.

04 WB was a good match for Hewitt of course, but Roddick's was better, even if he wasn't up a break in the fourth set.

Hewitt being kinda murrayish, this is par of the course eh. At least he had the higher YEC peak.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Meh, Agassi actually dominated Federer for a stretch in the '05 final. Hewitt came close to evening the match at one set all and that's it. Playing a more close, but still not close, fourth set hardly alleviates this.

04 WB was a good match for Hewitt of course, but Roddick's was better, even if he wasn't up a break in the fourth set.

Hewitt being kinda murrayish, this is par of the course eh. At least he had the higher YEC peak.
Fed was also better in the QF than the F 8-B But yes Roddick was better. Re. USO 2005 I think Fed was better in the SF than the F by a bit, particularly in set 2 when he raised his level at every important moment nearly.
 
Fed was also better in the QF than the F 8-B But yes Roddick was better. Re. USO 2005 I think Fed was better in the SF than the F by a bit, particularly in set 2 when he raised his level at every important moment nearly.
I think Agassi's attacking play, particularly returning, made Federer uncomfortable the way Hewitt couldn't. In those blessed times, you had to hit through Federer to have a chance. Hewitt, good as he was, was obviously less equipped for that than Fed's other rivals.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
I think Agassi's attacking play, particularly returning, made Federer uncomfortable the way Hewitt couldn't. In those blessed times, you had to hit through Federer to have a chance. Hewitt, good as he was, was obviously less equipped for that than Fed's other rivals.
Well Hewitt did hit significantly more winners than Agassi though, a lot more of those came at the net but would have been set-up by strong play from the ground - he also had more groundstroke winners anyway. I think Federer actually lost more of the baseline points versus Hewitt than Agassi as well, coming up short in anything over three shots.
 
Well Hewitt did hit significantly more winners than Agassi though, a lot more of those came at the net but would have been set-up by strong play from the ground - he also had more groundstroke winners anyway. I think Federer actually lost more of the baseline points versus Hewitt than Agassi as well, coming up short in anything over three shots.
Don't play around, bro. If you take the total stats the Hewitt match was technically closer but Agassi obviously achieved a much more advantageous position at one point. That's called peaking at the right time. He was returning both serves hard for a set (that with Federer serving 71% for the set and 75% total, much better than vs Hewitt) and hitting good serves under pressure. No surprise Hewitt would do better in extended rallies with his movement, but you have to beat Federer in short points too. Agassi did that for a while though Federer restored superiority in the end.

Disappointing to have to defend/validate myself here, have the last word if you want.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Don't play around, bro. If you take the total stats the Hewitt match was technically closer but Agassi obviously achieved a much more advantageous position at one point. That's called peaking at the right time. He was returning both serves hard for a set (that with Federer serving 71% for the set and 75% total, much better than vs Hewitt) and hitting good serves under pressure. No surprise Hewitt would do better in extended rallies with his movement, but you have to beat Federer in short points too. Agassi did that for a while though Federer restored superiority in the end.

Disappointing to have to defend/validate myself here, have the last word if you want.
Disappointing that this is your reaction to what I thought was a fine discussion, but whatever.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
The Wimbledon match broke Hewitt's confidence for a while yes. In total, he lost 11 straight games (WB 3 + USO 8) with 4 consecutive DFs on BP indeed. Sounds like a nice weak era argument when you put it like that, what sort of competitor DFs to lose four straight breaks ROFLMAO etc. Good thing Hewitt wasn't Fed's best opponent in either tournament. Actually it's probably telling something that Hewitt was frequently Fed's second best opponent in a given tournament at the time but never the best (AO 04 - Nalbandian, WB 04 - Roddick, USO 04 - Agassi, YEC 04 - Safin, USO 05 - Agassi), other than I guess WB 05, which rather reflects negatively on the strength of the draw with Hewitt and Roddick being meh (but Rog was so good it doesn't matter for evaluation).
I think Hewitt was actually the tougher opponent at 2005 USO, not Agassi.

And that was a great performance from Hewitt compared to other slam matches that he played vs Fed.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
What's impressive about this is that Fed was already a poly user here as far as I recall and Hewitt won their last 3 matches still: Paris 2002, this one and Davis Cup 2003.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Now this is a topic I need expert input on. What the hell makes a fine discussion besides throwing opinions past each other?
Thought we were being friendly, I don't know? You made a comment on the run of play, I stated that I thought Fed was better in the SF, you commented on the match-up dynamics to wit I pointed out Hewitt approached that match very offensively etc...

Don't know why it annoyed you.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Nice to see some HQ highlights of this one. Hewitt won the SF and F of this event with sheer force of will.

What's impressive about this is that Fed was already a poly user here as far as I recall and Hewitt won their last 3 matches still: Paris 2002, this one and Davis Cup 2003.

Even won the first set against Fed in their 2004 AO match.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
What's impressive about this is that Fed was already a poly user here as far as I recall and Hewitt won their last 3 matches still: Paris 2002, this one and Davis Cup 2003.

Even won the first set against Fed in their 2004 AO match.
wait didn’t you just say this?
 
Thought we were being friendly, I don't know? You made a comment on the run of play, I stated that I thought Fed was better in the SF, you commented on the match-up dynamics to wit I pointed out Hewitt approached that match very offensively etc...

Don't know why it annoyed you.
It shouldn't be controversial to point out Hewitt couldn't oppress Federer aggressively like Agassi did in his purple patch, which is not a slight on Hewitt as very few ever could. Felt like you tried to deflect it and yes it roused me. Maybe you could refresh that set in your memory... I am always stunned by Agassi's ballstriking, sublime display to defy age and physical wear.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
It shouldn't be controversial to point out Hewitt couldn't oppress Federer aggressively like Agassi did in his purple patch, which is not a slight on Hewitt as very few ever could. Felt like you tried to deflect it and yes it roused me. Maybe you could refresh that set in your memory... I am always stunned by Agassi's ballstriking, sublime display to defy age and physical wear.
why should it? we're not talking anything super absurd like saying Fed peaked in 2015
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
It shouldn't be controversial to point out Hewitt couldn't oppress Federer aggressively like Agassi did in his purple patch, which is not a slight on Hewitt as very few ever could. Felt like you tried to deflect it and yes it roused me. Maybe you could refresh that set in your memory... I am always stunned by Agassi's ballstriking, sublime display to defy age and physical wear.
I'm surprised that match gets as disparaged as it does. Agassi played as well as he could for his limitations then.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
It shouldn't be controversial to point out Hewitt couldn't oppress Federer aggressively like Agassi did in his purple patch, which is not a slight on Hewitt as very few ever could. Felt like you tried to deflect it and yes it roused me. Maybe you could refresh that set in your memory... I am always stunned by Agassi's ballstriking, sublime display to defy age and physical wear.
Agassi found 100% intensity there, something I don't think he ever managed against PETE at the Open. Superb hitting, ballstriking alone was 10/10. I still think Federer's intensity was higher at the same stage in the SF though and not just because Agassi was hitting the ball harder in the F.

I don't need a refresh, I revist both the match anyway the highlights often. I definitely think Agassi played the better second set but not as much as the scoreline differential suggests and I think Hewitt was better in the third overall.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Agassi found 100% intensity there, something I don't think he ever managed against PETE at the Open. Superb hitting, ballstriking alone was 10/10. I still think Federer's intensity was higher at the same stage in the SF though and not just because Agassi was hitting the ball harder in the F.

I don't need a refresh, I revist both the match anyway the highlights often. I definitely think Agassi played the better second set but not as much as the scoreline differential suggests and I think Hewitt was better in the third overall.
Agassi played with nothing to lose. He knew that was his last slam final and in front of his home crowd so he tried to give it his all one last time and the crowd cheering him on definitely helped.

A shame he ran out of gas in the 4th. The match was shaping up nicely.
 
Agassi found 100% intensity there, something I don't think he ever managed against PETE at the Open. Superb hitting, ballstriking alone was 10/10. I still think Federer's intensity was higher at the same stage in the SF though and not just because Agassi was hitting the ball harder in the F.

I don't need a refresh, I revist both the match anyway the highlights often. I definitely think Agassi played the better second set but not as much as the scoreline differential suggests and I think Hewitt was better in the third overall.
It can easily be argued Hewitt was better than Agassi in 3/4 sets and he has better total match stats but that second set alone swings the impression in Agassi's favour as he'd have taken it against the slightly better SF Federer either and would have still been a set apiece, which is better than Hewitt's position at any time in the match however close he was. That 1st serve return was key, the only way not to let Federer play his game freely.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
It can easily be argued Hewitt was better than Agassi in 3/4 sets and he has better total match stats but that second set alone swings the impression in Agassi's favour as he'd have taken it against the slightly better SF Federer either and would have still been a set apiece, which is better than Hewitt's position at any time in the match however close he was. That 1st serve return was key, the only way not to let Federer play his game freely.
Sure but...Hewitt wins sets 2&3 of the F :cool:
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
The Wimbledon match broke Hewitt's confidence for a while yes. In total, he lost 11 straight games (WB 3 + USO 8) with 4 consecutive DFs on BP indeed. Sounds like a nice weak era argument when you put it like that, what sort of competitor DFs to lose four straight breaks ROFLMAO etc. Good thing Hewitt wasn't Fed's best opponent in either tournament. Actually it's probably telling something that Hewitt was frequently Fed's second best opponent in a given tournament at the time but never the best (AO 04 - Nalbandian, WB 04 - Roddick, USO 04 - Agassi, YEC 04 - Safin, USO 05 - Agassi), other than I guess WB 05, which rather reflects negatively on the strength of the draw with Hewitt and Roddick being meh (but Rog was so good it doesn't matter for evaluation).
Hewitt was probably tougher in USO 05 due to physical reasons, even if Agassi on paper did better in 2nd/3rd sets, Federer knew Agassi had little chance of really making it a tough match when he tightened up his play a bit, and indeed 1st, 2nd half of 3rd, and 4th were completely one sided in terms of the play, forgetting about the score (which was also one sided). Obviously helps to have confidence that Agassi has little chance to physically compete in a 5th set (obviously he looked done even in the 4th set). Agassi did win 10 of 14 games but Federer had a few decent chances to break back in the 2nd before Agassi GOATed some returns in the last game to make it a double break and then Fed mixed in a mug game in the 3rd to get broken (but then immediately got it back with several great shots) but before that it seemed fairly even and momentum wasn't with either guy. In the first set, even though break also came at 2-2, even before that felt Federer was moving and hitting way too well for him and Federer had a 0-40 to make it a 6-2 set as well. Of course Hewitt mugged the 4th set break with 2 DFs so that takes away from this argument a bit. 04 AO Hewitt I'd say was actually good for 3 of the 4 sets with no obvious giveaways, but Fed was just absurdly good in the 4th set to make it seem routine.

05 Wimby Hewitt could have played a cleaner first set (2nd set was wayyyy too good) and third set he pressed a bit in the TB. Still, if Federer had a dip or two in that match (he actually had one in the final) Hewitt was good enough to have snagged a set, definitely better performance than Roddick imo who just felt like a sitting duck even if Federer gave him the break to try to take the 2nd. Even 06 USO Roddick was good enough to take advantage of such a dip and make it tight.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
Hewitt was probably tougher in USO 05 due to physical reasons, even if Agassi on paper did better in 2nd/3rd sets, Federer knew Agassi had little chance of really making it a tough match when he tightened up his play a bit, and indeed 1st, 2nd half of 3rd, and 4th were completely one sided in terms of the play, forgetting about the score (which was also one sided). Obviously helps to have confidence that Agassi has little chance to physically compete in a 5th set (obviously he looked done even in the 4th set). Agassi did win 10 of 14 games but Federer had a few decent chances to break back in the 2nd before Agassi GOATed some returns in the last game to make it a double break and then Fed mixed in a mug game in the 3rd to get broken but before that was even. In the first set, even though break also came at 2-2, even before that felt Federer was moving and hitting way too well for him and Federer had a 0-40 to make it a 6-2 set as well. Of course Hewitt mugged the 4th set break with 2 DFs so that takes away from it a bit. 04 AO Hewitt I'd say was actually good for 3 of the 4 sets with no obvious giveaways, but Fed was just absurdly good in the 4th set to make it seem routine.
How would you compared Hewitt of the USO 05 SF to Djokovic of the USO 15 F level wise?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
How would you compared Hewitt of the USO 05 SF to Djokovic of the USO 15 F level wise?
I know it's a bait post, but I'll humor you.

Obviously Djokovic was better, but surprisingly fired less winners than Hewitt against a worse Federer too.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
We're referencing peak Djokovic here, not 2013 or 2014 Djokovic LOL.
If you think 2005 Fed > 2015 Djok at the USO then you might think Hewitt would take Djokovic 5.

Also some people don't think the USO 15 F was a very high level from Djokovic.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
If you think 2005 Fed > 2015 Djok at the USO then you might think Hewitt could take Djokovic 5.

Also some people don't think the USO 15 F was a very high level from Djokovic.
I certainly don't consider 2015 Djokovic better than 2005 Fed at the USO.
 
Top