How did Federer win the hearts of the masses?

Aesthetically pleasing. Form over Substance. Its why rich goobers elites maintain control of the population.. Humans are very shallow today. Why are cheap reality shows full of idiots, and crappy, computer generated movies the most popular thing on a TV screen now? Because we are Brain dead
 
D

Deleted member 771911

Guest
It helped he didn’t actually usurp Pete. Didn’t step on anyone’s toes. Tennis needed a likeable and all rounded champ after the more...one dimensional, surface limited, erratic (cough) and, er, vociferous offerings post Sampras. Federer came along and everyone jumped on his style and charm. The game just about but his arm off and he kept his part of the bargain. The rest is history.
 

ffw2

Professional
Aesthetically pleasing. Form over Substance. Its why rich goobers elites maintain control of the population.. Humans are very shallow today. Why are cheap reality shows full of idiots, and crappy, computer generated movies the most popular thing on a TV screen now? Because we are Brain dead
Okay, folks today are largely a desensitized lot of pawns. You won't get much of an argument out of me on that one.

I guess I'm really wondering why the love for Federer is guaranteed never to be surpassed for as long as humanity exists.
 
Okay, folks today are largely a desensitized lot of pawns. You won't get much of an argument out of me on that one.

I guess I'm really wondering why the love for Federer is guaranteed never to be surpassed for as long as humanity exists.

Im sure other pretty aesthetically players will come along under conditions that suit their game and Fed will be forgotten about... If you made all conditions slow way back in 2003 when Fed started his climb, his game wouldn't look so pleasing
 

ffw2

Professional
Im sure other pretty aesthetically players will come along under conditions that suit their game and Fed will be forgotten about... If you made all conditions slow way back in 2003 when Fed started his climb, his game wouldn't look so pleasing
Artistry will never die, I'll wager.

But remember: future oil painters are going to need to marry their art with savagery.

They're gonna have to light up the competition, and hand-craft the opposition.

Do you believe they are up to the task?
 

Bubcay

Hall of Fame
It helped he didn’t actually usurp Pete. Didn’t step on anyone’s toes. Tennis needed a likeable and all rounded champ after the more...one dimensional, surface limited, erratic (cough) and, er, vociferous offerings post Sampras. Federer came along and everyone jumped on his style and charm. The game just about but his arm off and he kept his part of the bargain. The rest is history.
This ^^^^ plus a great marketing machine... People generally need someone to idolise, so why not...
 

ffw2

Professional
This ^^^^ plus a great marketing machine... People generally need someone to idolise, so why not...
And where will they turn next?

Won't it be weird for the idolized to be in another dude's shadow?

"They love me, sure. But they loved another more."
 

EllieK

Hall of Fame
Pretty game, winning a lot when he was young, beating Sampras at Wimby. Those are 3 things that started me following him. Everyone likes a winner who seems humble, even if he isn’t. There were the post match interviews where he seemed approachable and humorous. He wasn’t afraid to cry in public. He wore his heart on his sleeve. He was easy to get behind. For the most part he was a gentleman. He has certainly had his cringeworthy moments. (2009 I’m looking at you) I think even his fans would admit to that, but overall he got a lot of people interested in tennis that were not before he came along. I started with Laver so I’m from way before Roger’s era but yeah I found him very appealing
 

ffw2

Professional
In the week that Novak secured another year end #1 ranking, threads like this seem pathetically desperate, pointlessly suggesting yet again that Federer is in some way loved rather than simply admired for a fine career that's currently being eclipsed by that of another.
I guess the most comforting thing of it all from your perspective has to be the sense of security that Roger grants you.

For, with the perennial changing of the seasons—and despite the turmoil raging on the planet—the sun does still rise in the east.

As the planet completes yet another revolution on its axis... your chemical bond with NaCl grows ever stronger.

And that... is just the power of the GOAT. :notworthy:
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
I guess the most comforting thing of it all from your perspective has to be the sense of security that Roger grants you.

For, with the perennial changing of the seasons—and despite the turmoil raging on the planet—the sun does still rise in the east.

As the planet completes yet another revolution on its axis... your chemical bond with NaCl grows ever stronger.

And that... is just the power of the GOAT. :notworthy:
Lol that's a good one man :laughing:
 

NonP

Hall of Fame
Half the world probably haven't even heard of Federer but you jokers somehow seem to think he's beloved by "the masses." Tennis junkies may well be the most out-of-touch fanbase on the planet.

One more thing:

In the week that Novak secured another year end #1 ranking, threads like this seem pathetically desperate, pointlessly suggesting yet again that Federer is in some way loved rather than simply admired for a fine career that's currently being eclipsed by that of another.
He secured it when he won Wimbledon, no matter what the #s say. But yeah, grown-ass adults should find better things to do than obsessing over the popularity of their favorite celebs.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
Not eternity, we don't what will happen in 20 years time, letalone eternity, unless the sport of tennis is ended in very very near future.

However, Federer will go down as the most beloved tennis icon of his time, and that is really all that matters as far as this is concerned.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
Pretty game, winning a lot when he was young, beating Sampras at Wimby. Those are 3 things that started me following him. Everyone likes a winner who seems humble, even if he isn’t. There were the post match interviews where he seemed approachable and humorous. He wasn’t afraid to cry in public. He wore his heart on his sleeve. He was easy to get behind. For the most part he was a gentleman. He has certainly had his cringeworthy moments. (2009 I’m looking at you) I think even his fans would admit to that, but overall he got a lot of people interested in tennis that were not before he came along. I started with Laver so I’m from way before Roger’s era but yeah I found him very appealing
 
What was it that secured his position for eternity as the most beloved figure in tennis? :unsure:



I knew I could count on me.
Because he plays beautiful tennis and is generally likable and uncontroversial. Not to mention he owned the sport for the better part of a decade. Nadal and Djokovic showed up after him, so their success to some extent will always be defined - in the popular imagination - by how they matched up to him.
 
He's just extremely marketable and he is an absolute champion.

When you hear someone refered to as PeRFection, FedEx, His majesty (in latin america ESPN calls him that), Swiss perfection, and you liken his very fluid and pleasant playing style to Rolex and make his name synonym of 'class', even non tennis players or knowledgable people will gravitate towards people like that.

I gravitated more towards Nadal's physical and brute force style of tennis because I started playing and following around 2005. But as I grew up and matured I appreciate Fed game and image and 'got it'.

His personality is also pretty pleasant to listen to in interviews too. Imagine federer with that game and Kyrgios' mouth and you'd end up with Djokovic. An undisputable GOAT contender that nobody likes.
 

socallefty

Legend
Has he won the heart of everyone posting on this thread? He never made me a fan even though I enjoy watching him play and I am always puzzled by the level of emotion and hyperbole he evokes in some people. I want him to win when he plays better than his opponents which he usually does, but I usually want him to lose if I feel like his opponent is playing better which happens only when he plays Djokovic or maybe Nadal on clay. That’s typically my attitude with every tennis match I watch though as I want the player I think is playing better to win in the end. Also, aesthetically I don’t think he is so much better to watch than Djokovic who is perfect technically and I am always amazed by how the media hypes him up to be doing ballet while everyone else is doing street dancing on the court. I’ve never felt that way after watching him play for almost 20 years at Indian Wells.

Only in a few epic matches is it unclear who is playing better and those are the nailbiters that stay etched in the memory for a long time where I didn‘t support anyone till the end - finals of 2008W, 2009AO, 2009USO, 2012AO, 2017AO, 2019W and semis of 2013FO, 2018W, 2020FO come to mind.

It seems like Federer did a great job of getting the media in North America and Western Europe on his bandwagon by winning a lot during his peak while behaving well on court and being good in the interview room along with having a great PR team. Very few of his fans have seen him play in person and the way they perceive his play style is heavily influenced by the way the commentators talk about him on TV and the tone of articles written by his fans in the media.
 
Last edited:

Rosstour

Legend
"Humble" is the wrong word

He said a lot of things that would have sounded arrogant as hell coming from other people, but he was frank and not condescending about them

"it's not what you say, it's how you say it"

He also never took shots at the reporters or treated them like they were worthless idiots. That goes a long way. He always had the patience to be respectful to everyone.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
I want him to win when he plays better than his opponents which he usually does, but I usually want him to lose if I feel like his opponent is playing better which happens only when he plays Djokovic or maybe Nadal on clay.
That makes no sense. All top players have auras, and for that reason their opponents often fall victim to that aura, but Djokovic and Nadal have won just as frequently when their opponents self-destructed because of facing those ATGs on the other side of the net.

Your making this unique to Fed is your bias.
 

socallefty

Legend
That makes no sense. All top players have auras, and for that reason their opponents often fall victim to that aura, but Djokovic and Nadal have won just as frequently when their opponents self-destructed because of facing those ATGs on the other side of the net.

Your making this unique to Fed is your bias.
I am talking about how I feel while I am in the middle of watching the match. After a set or two, I start feeling like one player is better and I start wanting that player to win just because I think the better player deserves to win. Incidentally, that’s how I am when I watch most sports except when I root for local Los Angeles teams or local players like Sampras, Nakashima, Fritz etc.

Since 2011, the feeling that Federer is the better player has happened against Djokovic only at fast courts like Cinci and WTF where I felt like he deserved to win and also at 2019 Wimbledon. Nadal on clay is a beast who always looks better than everyone else except his two losses to Djokovic at the FO. Before a match starts, I am not a big enough fan of any tennis player (since Sampras) where I root for them to win from the start of a match. I think Djokovic is the GOAT, but I like him the least as a person amongst the Big 3 - but, his tennis is a textbook delight for me to watch. I am a fan of the sport and not of any player plus I don’t feel any special affiliation to anyone who is not a local Southern Californian.
 
Last edited:

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
I am talking about how I feel while I am in the middle of watching the match. After a set or two, I start feeling like one player is better and I start wanting that player to win just because I think the better player deserves to win. Incidentally, that’s how I am when I watch most sports except when I root for local Los Angeles teams or local players like Sampras, Nakashima, Fritz etc.

Since 2011, it has happened with Federer against Djokovic only at fast courts like Cinci and WTF. Nadal on clay is a beast who always looks better than everyone else. Before a match starts, I am not a fan of any player since Sampras where I root for them to win. I think Djokovic is the GOAT, but like him the least as a person amongst the Big 3 - but, his tennis is a textbook delight for me to watch.
You don't seem to me to have a bias based on fandom, so I respect that. But I have to say that I've seen many matches over the years end up won by an ATG who frankly was playing quite a bit below his top level. If you see a top guy not playing his best, and the challenger ends up folding because of the aura, I think it's always disappointing.

It's kind of like the whole "in the zone thing". I think we've all experienced that on some level, a day when everything works just because for the moment we believe it will. You absolutely can't tell me Djokovic's record this year is just because he's such a great player. It's more than that. Look how his opponents have faded in big moments. That's the aura. An ATG keeps that aura until he stops winning big matches, then it flips fast. There is just a bit of slippage, and the challengers start to smell blood. It's going to happen to Joker soon. I just don't know when.

I can think of two matches off the top of my head where I think the better player lost. One was the whole 40-15 thing. I believe Fed was the better player that day, but Joker got in his head. The reverse happened at RG when the old net incident happened. I think Djokovic was the better player that day. By a hair. But Nadal had the clay aura.

But it's not fair to forget that players earn those auras.
 

One

Rookie
Marketing and success. Everyone wants to be as successesfull as him. Its not just about sport. Besides, during his rise, what were other suppose to be goats in other sport? Maybe only Kobe and Tiger. There was a void which he filled. Not to say how much sport evolved in the last 20 years in the world. His case is the best exsample how capitalism is filling every part of our life, and more.
 

socallefty

Legend
I can think of two matches off the top of my head where I think the better player lost. One was the whole 40-15 thing. I believe Fed was the better player that day, but Joker got in his head. The reverse happened at RG when the old net incident happened. I think Djokovic was the better player that day. By a hair. But Nadal had the clay aura.

But it's not fair to forget that players earn those auras.
I was rooting for Federer to win by the fifth set of 2019W and Djokovic slightly late in the 2013FO semi because I did think they were playing better particularly because they were also more offensive. But, the aura of superiority that Djokovic had established over Federer by then and Nadal had in 2013 over Djokovic at the FO definitely helped carry them over the finish line. Many times I have supported the underdog in matches where they played better than the favorite for most of the match, but they end up losing and disappointing me because they can’t make that critical shot on a big point when it matters like on a break point or match point. Nadal at critical points in the 5th set of the 2012AO/2017AO, earlier in the 2018W semi, 2020FO semi; Federer in the 2018W final; Djokovic in the 2012FO final/2013 FO semi; Thiem in the 2020AO final all came up short at crucial points.

One of the reasons I’ve believed that Djokovic is the BOAT/GOAT over Federer (apart from a better BH) and Nadal (apart from playing more aggressively closer to the baseline) is because except against Nadal at the FO in 2012-14, Djokovic seemed to be the more confident player in most of their matches since 2011 even though his level wasn’t that much higher than them. Nadal and Federer always made the crucial errors late in matches when victory was in their grasp whereas Djokovic was usually soundly beaten when he lost and rarely lost close matches. Federer ceded that mental edge against Nadal even when he was in his prime because of Nadal pounding his BH with heavy topspin which seemed to drain his self-confidence.

Yes, the mental aura is real and that’s why it is tough for younger players to unseat ATG-level champions unless they are helped by technology change - grass to more hard/carpet surfaces, wood to metal/graphite/bigger racquets, gut to poly strings etc.
 
Last edited:
Top