You may have a point if the thread is about Fed playing in the 1980s-1990s. However, the thread is about 2000-2020 but on 1990s grass.
How many Wimbledon titles would Federer have won on fast grass?
- Thread starter Bamoos
- Start date
beard
Legend
Yeah, skills against nobodies... Its funny ATP 250 and ATP 500 tournament...
Federer showed his grass skills at Wimbledon against Novak who can't run on grass without slippering...
Bamoos
Semi-Pro
Yeah post prime Fed with his old racket/FH owned peak Djokovic in 4 sets but that isn’t the question, the discussion is about fast grass. Not the medium bouncy Wimbledon grass.
Djokovic fanatic be the last to denigrate lower ATP tournaments after his last 2 “masters” wins.
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Ned ... if you decided to go ice-skating, you wouldn't expect to slip into your roller skates, would you? Likewise, if grass remained fast, players like Djokovic wouldn't be playing the way they do now. You're assuming they would and that in turn means Federer would brush them aside. That's an erroneous assumption.
As for the highlighted point in your post, Federer was the only player capable of playing S/V? First, please justify that claim. On what basis? Second, Nadal/Djokovic aren't just all-time greats. They're GOAT candidates which undoubtedly means they have the talent and capacity to adapt their games as required. They just didn't need to because of slow grass. Doesn't mean they couldn't.
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
Remember, these are guys that claimed Djokovic couldn't win on grass. He now has 5 Wimbledon titles, 3 of them beating Federer in the final. Now that Djokovic has settled that argument, it's how he can't beat Federer on a different type of grass
O
Oceans
Guest
Players with 20+% ace percentage at Wimbledon:
2019 - 5
2018 - 6
2017 - 3
2016 - 5
2015 - 5
2014 - 6
2013 - 7
2012 - 3
2011 - 7
2010 - 6
2009 - 1
2008 - 2
2007 - 3
2006 - 3
2005 - 3
2004 - 5
2003 - 2
2002 - 3
2001 - 1
2000 - 3
1999 - 0
1998 - 0
1997 - 1
1996 - 0
1995 - 0
1994 - 0
1993 - 0
1992 - 1
1991 - 0
It seems Federer thrives on slower grass while Djokovic thrives on faster grass.
2019 - 5
2018 - 6
2017 - 3
2016 - 5
2015 - 5
2014 - 6
2013 - 7
2012 - 3
2011 - 7
2010 - 6
2009 - 1
2008 - 2
2007 - 3
2006 - 3
2005 - 3
2004 - 5
2003 - 2
2002 - 3
2001 - 1
2000 - 3
1999 - 0
1998 - 0
1997 - 1
1996 - 0
1995 - 0
1994 - 0
1993 - 0
1992 - 1
1991 - 0
It seems Federer thrives on slower grass while Djokovic thrives on faster grass.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Players with 20+% ace percentage at Wimbledon:
2019 - 5
2018 - 6
2017 - 3
2016 - 5
2015 - 5
2014 - 6
2013 - 7
2012 - 3
2011 - 7
2010 - 6
2009 - 1
2008 - 2
2007 - 3
2006 - 3
2005 - 3
2004 - 5
2003 - 2
2002 - 3
2001 - 1
2000 - 3
1999 - 0
1998 - 0
1997 - 1
1996 - 0
1995 - 0
1994 - 0
1993 - 0
1992 - 1
1991 - 0
It seems Federer thrives on slower grass while Djokovic thrives on faster grass.
I'm watching the 1992 final at this moment and can't believe how high the ball is bouncing on this grass.
Please, dont hurt Fed fans feelings..Players with 20+% ace percentage at Wimbledon:
2019 - 5
2018 - 6
2017 - 3
2016 - 5
2015 - 5
2014 - 6
2013 - 7
2012 - 3
2011 - 7
2010 - 6
2009 - 1
2008 - 2
2007 - 3
2006 - 3
2005 - 3
2004 - 5
2003 - 2
2002 - 3
2001 - 1
2000 - 3
1999 - 0
1998 - 0
1997 - 1
1996 - 0
1995 - 0
1994 - 0
1993 - 0
1992 - 1
1991 - 0
It seems Federer thrives on slower grass while Djokovic thrives on faster grass.
beard
Legend
mike danny
Bionic Poster
2019 fast with RBA and Pella in the later stages? Yeah right...Players with 20+% ace percentage at Wimbledon:
2019 - 5
2018 - 6
2017 - 3
2016 - 5
2015 - 5
2014 - 6
2013 - 7
2012 - 3
2011 - 7
2010 - 6
2009 - 1
2008 - 2
2007 - 3
2006 - 3
2005 - 3
2004 - 5
2003 - 2
2002 - 3
2001 - 1
2000 - 3
1999 - 0
1998 - 0
1997 - 1
1996 - 0
1995 - 0
1994 - 0
1993 - 0
1992 - 1
1991 - 0
It seems Federer thrives on slower grass while Djokovic thrives on faster grass.
Bamoos
Semi-Pro
Why are you even posting in the topic if you say nothing but meaningless garbage?Ok, you convinced me, Fed can keep his 222 imagined Wimbledon titles....
Looool....
He has the most on medium grass anyway so not sure of your point.
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Ok, you convinced me, Fed can keep his 222 imagined Wimbledon titles....
Looool....
Heh!
You can look at the New Ball Generation players, who were born in early 1980s and thus grew up and spent their junior years before the courts slowed down, almost all but very few played from the baseline, and among those few Federer was the only top talent.
In addition, you don't smack the balls with Western and Semi-western forehands with full swings easily like all do these days on fast grass. Swings and grips also matter, a lot.
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
I'm not denying any of that but you perhaps need to read the first line of my previous post ... you don't wear roller skates to an ice-rink. If grass played fast, the top guys would use a grip suitable for that surface. You assume they'd still be using the grip that they do now. That's a wrong assumption.
And btw, grass was still fast in the early 2000 and serve and volley was still a recipe for success.
BBC overlaid two serves by Roger Federer, one in 2003, the other in 2008, both at 126 MPH on a similar line of flight. The 2008 serve goes 9 mph hour slower, after the bounce, than the 2003 serve, or 20% slower. The ball also bounces perhaps a foot higher.
This is a tremendous advantage for the returner: The ball is slower, arrives later and sits up.
Despite Federer had to adapt to this unfavorable grass condition in the later years, he was still capable of dominating the grass season.
There's no doubt that Federer would have dominated more had the grass continue to play like in 2003.
BBC overlaid two serves by Roger Federer, one in 2003, the other in 2008, both at 126 MPH on a similar line of flight. The 2008 serve goes 9 mph hour slower, after the bounce, than the 2003 serve, or 20% slower. The ball also bounces perhaps a foot higher.
This is a tremendous advantage for the returner: The ball is slower, arrives later and sits up.
Despite Federer had to adapt to this unfavorable grass condition in the later years, he was still capable of dominating the grass season.
There's no doubt that Federer would have dominated more had the grass continue to play like in 2003.
2003 was actually quite fast, although nowhere near 2001. Phillippoussis made final playing S&V on both serves.
In the context of today, 2003 was like lightning. In the context of years gone by, it was not.
My point is they didn't cherry pick a fast year for the comparison.
beard
Legend
After the bounce speed is not that important, it's serve speed in whole that's important, so they stopped showing that useless stat... 9 mph difference won't help you when you have no time to react to the ball flying 210 kph before it touched the ground...And btw, grass was still fast in the early 2000 and serve and volley was still a recipe for success.
BBC overlaid two serves by Roger Federer, one in 2003, the other in 2008, both at 126 MPH on a similar line of flight. The 2008 serve goes 9 mph hour slower, after the bounce, than the 2003 serve, or 20% slower. The ball also bounces perhaps a foot higher.
This is a tremendous advantage for the returner: The ball is slower, arrives later and sits up.
Despite Federer had to adapt to this unfavorable grass condition in the later years, he was still capable of dominating the grass season.
There's no doubt that Federer would have dominated more had the grass continue to play like in 2003.
Again... this type of threads are useless because we can't know what would happen because all players would adjust their game to the conditions... Novak or Rafa or anyone else would change their style of play for sure, successfully or not we can't say for sure...
Maybe Dustin Brown would beat Federer in 10 consecutive Wimbledon finals... Loooool...
SeeingDusk
Hall of Fame
I think fed would’ve only won a few more Wimbledon’s because djokovic would’ve beaten him eventually.
How?
Please don't tell us he'd adapt. Throwing pure baseliners with woooden hands onto a fast grass court doesn't make them adapt to become adept all court players any more than throwing elephants out of aeroplanes makes them adapt to become birds.
A select few (Laver, Borg, Federer) were truly at home on all surfaces, but virtually everyone else is compromised due to upbringing, stroke production and ingrained mindset. For them it's like learning a whole new sport.
Nadal might have gotten close to where Lendl did as a (fast) grass courter, but ******** (despite being the best hard court defender in the world) just has virtually zero natural talent inside the service box. Anyone with eyes can see that.
I'll concede that if everything went his way one year and he got a Nadal type draw, he might jag one .. but that would be unlikely.
Bamoos
Semi-Pro
2003 Federer on grass beats any other top 3 handily. It would take Sampras on fast grass to challenge him.And btw, grass was still fast in the early 2000 and serve and volley was still a recipe for success.
BBC overlaid two serves by Roger Federer, one in 2003, the other in 2008, both at 126 MPH on a similar line of flight. The 2008 serve goes 9 mph hour slower, after the bounce, than the 2003 serve, or 20% slower. The ball also bounces perhaps a foot higher.
This is a tremendous advantage for the returner: The ball is slower, arrives later and sits up.
Despite Federer had to adapt to this unfavorable grass condition in the later years, he was still capable of dominating the grass season.
There's no doubt that Federer would have dominated more had the grass continue to play like in 2003.
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Of course, but certain people want to play "I wish it happened" to bolster the status of a player who is no longer the most dominant of his generation, and has a chance to be passed by two players.
Bamoos
Semi-Pro
??? Last I checked Federer dominated all his generation and most of them are retired.
I disagree. It only needs a fraction of a second that takes your time away, and out of position to return. Also ball stay low is much harder to return unlike chest high.
Federer superior serve definitely helps him on fast grass while Novak and especially Nadal benefits from slow grass where every Federer's strength gets neutralize.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
Federer would have had less of a threat from Nadal and Djokovic on fast grass. But, it would have brought a lot of other big-serving tall players into play with a chance to beat him if they had a great serving day - Isner, Anderson, Quarrey, Karlovoc, Kyrgios, Raonic, Roddick etc.
On slow grass, he comfortably made it to at least the finals often, won 8 times and lost to Nadal/Djokovic four times. On fast grass, it is possible that he would have been upset in earlier rounds more often as it wouldn’t be a cakewalk to the finals every year. It is hard for me to imagine that he would have won it more than the 8 titles he already has.
The reason Wimbledon slowed down grass in the first place is because they thought servebots would dominate with players getting taller and poly helping with more spin which led to faster shots/serves. So, I expect several titles would have been won by servebots on fast grass which has not happened since they slowed down the grass.
On slow grass, he comfortably made it to at least the finals often, won 8 times and lost to Nadal/Djokovic four times. On fast grass, it is possible that he would have been upset in earlier rounds more often as it wouldn’t be a cakewalk to the finals every year. It is hard for me to imagine that he would have won it more than the 8 titles he already has.
The reason Wimbledon slowed down grass in the first place is because they thought servebots would dominate with players getting taller and poly helping with more spin which led to faster shots/serves. So, I expect several titles would have been won by servebots on fast grass which has not happened since they slowed down the grass.
I don't think Fed would have won all of them, but it would have been someone like Henman, Stepanek, Ljubicic or Llodra challenging him.
Didn't see this when I posted. Servebots are just as successful as they always were, what poly and slow courts got rid of is net play.
However it is true that on fast grass, Federer would have done better in the 2000s and 2010s than in the 80s and 90s ... which is the point I think he was making. Deveoping Fed did squeak by washed up Sampras, but prime v prime that matchup would have been amazing, as would Fed v Becker or Krajicek or Edberg.
Bamoos
Semi-Pro
He completely missed the point then, and needs to brush up on his reading comprehension.
beard
Legend
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
What is this obsession with net game? Weird how Lendl's net game was perfectly fine on carpet, since he dominated on that surface, then somehow a liability on grass. No. He just wasn't that good on grass, and grass and carpet aren't exactly the same conditions. He couldn't even win AO when it was played on slower Keeyong grass, getting taken to the woodshed by Wilander in the 1983 final who had a worse Wimbledon record than he did. Lendl was 3-10 on grass against top 10 players, losing to Connors, McEnroe, Becker, Wilander, Edberg and Ivanisevic. With a record that poor, no wonder he never won Wimbledon and he wasn't even among the best grass court players. Djokovic on the other hand mastered Wimbledon in his era and is 13-8 against top 10 players so the fact you are trying to group him with Lendl is beyond a head scratcher, because Djokovic loves the grass and took to it right away at an early age and Lendl never did.
That was a fun fantasy but here's reality...
Last edited:
Perhaps, but it's a far more interesting discussion than a bunch of Chicken Littles running around shouting "Beware the Servebots" while we are completely over-run with Baseline Bots. Or worse still, thinking their baseline botting heroes would adapt and somehow morph into modern day Edbergs and Rafters.
Crazy Finn
Hall of Fame
Lol. No.
Yes.
Not sure about Medvedev, but otherwise, this 100%.
Faster conditions would have given a slight bump to Roddick's serve, sure, but that's not a weakness in his game. It really doesn't need more help. Adding MPH and less bounce to his serve would probably increase his aces somewhat, but frankly, you need more than a serve to succeed at Wimbledon, now on slower grass, or even back in the day on fast grass. It might have added a few percentage points to his hold-serve stat, but that was already pretty high. Adding a few points doesn't make him invincible. Last I checked, Karlovic hasn't won a single Wimbledon despite his serving prowess.
The flip side is faster conditions hurt Roddick everywhere else except his serve. His net game is mediocre at best, approaches are the same or worse. He's not a great mover and he's not a high IQ player who constructs points well. While, I think faster courts help his serve slightly, I think they also expose the deficiencies in his overall game even more than the actual conditions he played in. I wouldn't discount the possibility that he could win one or two with a bit of luck, but faster courts don't make Roddick an automatic multi-plus winner. Frankly, faster courts suit Fed just fine, I don't see the balance of that matchup tilting differently at all on faster conditions.
Yup.
PeoplesChamp
Legend
It's hard to determine like a few here have said already. Personally, I think Fed would have done as well as has has already at 8 titles atleast. Bigger chance for upsets with big servers, but we have to keep in mind that Federer is one of the best returners ever on 1st serves. 2nd serve return definitely lacking. Fed is somewhat of a servebot hinself and would hang tough with anybody. Tiebreaks most likely in his favor with his superior ground game.
Hence, he would have won all of them ...
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Really? How's that majors count going? That's the standard the worst of his fans always used to claim Federer's "superiority" over his rivals. There's no way to count how many times the ">" symbol (in favor of Federer's majors) used to be posted, or any other number, littering thread after thread....until the French Open of 2020, that is.
PeoplesChamp
Legend
You're living in the past before Federer started dominating Nadal thus killing the h2h argument.
The Medvedev part was sarcasm. I know, it doesn't translate well to text.
The things with Roddick is he was the prototypical Serve +1 player. That doesn't work as well on fast grass, where you really need to close and take the ball in the air.
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Your common sense is missed by those with fantasy goggles on. The entire point of this exercise is to claim Federer would have won more majors on a surface he did not truly play or win on, but never let that stop people who are desperate to fantasy-pad his record, hence the reason you also see Djokovic being attacked in here, as if Federer would be the only player to adapt to different conditions.
Ridiculous.
I'm far from a Fed hater, but I agree that he's almost as unproven on fast grass as Nadal and ******** are. Unlike the other two, his potential is sky high though.
Bamoos
Semi-Pro
Since 2003 he has 20 majors, same as Nadal. However he has 8 at the one that matters the most and is clearly superior at HC slams.
Bamoos
Semi-Pro
Federer won 11 titles on fast grass and has the perfect attributes to dominate on the surface in the 00s-10s era. Doesn’t take much thinking to work that one out, but obviously not for a troll like you who can’t think logically.
“as if Federer would be the only player to adapt to different conditions”
True but with his skillset, he’d clean up. Field can’t bridge the gap and he’s always destroyed Nadal/Djokovic on quicker surfaces. Medium has always been close though.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
