How would you rank 2008-2012 Federer?

BauerAlmeida

BauerAlmeida

Legend
It's widely agreed that Federer played his best tennis from 2004 to 2007.

However, from 2008 to 2012 he was still winning slams (except 2011) and going deep, it was only in 2013 that for the first time he was never really in contention for the big titles.

It could be considered that that period was still his "prime" even if he was not playing at his peak level anymore.

So how do those 5 seasons rank in terms of level (not achievements)?

Can some of the seasons at the latter stage of his career be considered at the same level (mainly 2015 and 2017)?

I'm thinking something like:

2008
2011
2009
2012
2010
 
2017 was clearly the best year after 2007 (with 2 Slams and 3 Masters). It was a combination of 2 factors:
1) Great new coach Ljubicic bringing back his all-court game (after the one-sided net-rushing approach by Edberg and especially Annacone), so that he finally used the new racquet to his full advantage.
2) Being fully motivated in every tournament after half a year off.

In 2008 he had mono, and this essentially ended his "winning everything" approach. Then in 2009 he was great again at the Slams, but seemingly didn't care much for everything else. Really, all the time from 2008-2013 he won very few tournaments by his standards, especially outside the Slams (only exception was 2012).

2011 was actually a horrible season. Between Doha right at the beginning and the late indoor season he won exactly NOTHING, not even a 250 tournament. A great showing at RG doesn't change too much here to be honest.

In 2014 he had the new racquet and seemed to care for smaller tournaments again. Likely he was happy being back to win anything after 2013 at first. Then in 2015 he was in great form and was mainly only stopped by peak Djokovic.
 
ChrisRF said:
2017 was clearly the best year after 2007 (with 2 Slams and 3 Masters). It was a combination of 2 factors:
1) Great new coach Ljubicic bringing back his all-court game (after the one-sided net-rushing approach by Edberg and especially Annacone), so that he finally used the new racquet to his full advantage.
2) Being fully motivated in every tournament after half a year off.

In 2008 he had mono, and this essentially ended his "winning everything" approach. Then in 2009 he was great again at the Slams, but seemingly didn't care much for everything else. Really, all the time from 2008-2013 he won very few tournaments by his standards, especially outside the Slams (only exception was 2012).

2011 was actually a horrible season. Between Doha right at the beginning and the late indoor season he won exactly NOTHING, not even a 250 tournament. A great showing at RG doesn't change too much here to be honest.

In 2014 he had the new racquet and seemed to care for smaller tournaments again. Likely he was happy being back to win anything after 2013 at first. Then in 2015 he was in great form and was mainly only stopped by peak Djokovic.
Click to expand...
What if 2017 Federer goes slameless in 2008-2012?
 
Ah good ol results based analysis.

2009 (took a step back in bo3 but whatever, 4 slam finals)
2008
2011
2010/2012

those last two are difficult to rate, he was awesome at AO 10 and indoor 2010 but crap from March-September, then in 2012 thought he was quite good until Cincy but fell off heavily, I’d give tie breaker to 2012 I suppose.
 
RS said:
What if 2017 Federer goes slameless in 2008-2012?
Click to expand...
Why should that be the case? That's the same as if you would ask what if 2021 Djokovic actually won nothing in another year.

I can only say he may would have won more in those earlier years it he already had the new racquet and was more motivated for any tournament. But that's totally hypothetical.

IMO 2017 Federer would have won Wimbledon in any year except MAYBE 2008 and 2011. But maybe the new racquet would have won it for him anyway. Too bad he couldn't play a good version of Djokovic in 2017. I think he would've had good chances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
Kralingen said:
Ah good ol results based analysis.

2009 (took a step back in bo3 but whatever, 4 slam finals)
2008
2011
2010/2012

those last two are difficult to rate, he was awesome at AO 10 and indoor 2010 but crap from March-September, then in 2012 thought he was quite good until Cincy but fell off heavily, I’d give tie breaker to 2012 I suppose.
Click to expand...
He was better at RG and USO in 2010 though. That's 3/4 Slams and YEC.
He was better in IW, Wimb in 2012 and perhaps Cincy, though he won the title in both years and that's about it.
 
Kralingen said:
Ah good ol results based analysis.

2009 (took a step back in bo3 but whatever, 4 slam finals)
2008
2011
2010/2012

those last two are difficult to rate, he was awesome at AO 10 and indoor 2010 but crap from March-September, then in 2012 thought he was quite good until Cincy but fell off heavily, I’d give tie breaker to 2012 I suppose.
Click to expand...

Yup got the same ranking here and same justification. With you on this! (y)
 
ChrisRF said:
Why should that be the case? That's the same as if you would ask what if 2021 Djokovic actually won nothing in another year.

I can only say he may would have won more in those earlier years it he already had the new racquet and was more motivated for any tournament. But that's totally hypothetical.

IMO 2017 Federer would have won Wimbledon in any year except MAYBE 2008 and 2011. But maybe the new racquet would have won it for him anyway. Too bad he couldn't play a good version of Djokovic in 2017. I think he would've had good chances.
Click to expand...
How many do you think he wins in each year?
 
ChrisRF said:
2017 was clearly the best year after 2007 (with 2 Slams and 3 Masters). It was a combination of 2 factors:
1) Great new coach Ljubicic bringing back his all-court game (after the one-sided net-rushing approach by Edberg and especially Annacone), so that he finally used the new racquet to his full advantage.
2) Being fully motivated in every tournament after half a year off.

In 2008 he had mono, and this essentially ended his "winning everything" approach. Then in 2009 he was great again at the Slams, but seemingly didn't care much for everything else. Really, all the time from 2008-2013 he won very few tournaments by his standards, especially outside the Slams (only exception was 2012).

2011 was actually a horrible season. Between Doha right at the beginning and the late indoor season he won exactly NOTHING, not even a 250 tournament. A great showing at RG doesn't change too much here to be honest.

In 2014 he had the new racquet and seemed to care for smaller tournaments again. Likely he was happy being back to win anything after 2013 at first. Then in 2015 he was in great form and was mainly only stopped by peak Djokovic.
Click to expand...

The case of mono definitely knocked him out of that crazy zone he was in...not that it wrecked his career but that's a big what if for me, might he have kept up that pace for, say, another year at least?
 
Federer fell off of a cliff from 2008-2012. I honestly don't think that he ever fully-recovered from mono in 2008.

Let's take a look here.

2004-2007 stats:
315-24, .929 overall
34-9, .791 vs top 5
69-10, .873 vs top 10
43-2, .956 vs players ranked 11th-20th

2008-12 stats:
327-64, .836 overall
31-31, .500 vs top 5
64-44, .593 vs top 10
38-9, .808 vs players ranked 11-20th

Federer's winning pct vs the top 5 and top 10 dropped by nearly 300 points. Even if we exclude the top 10, his winning pct dropped by a massive 148 points vs players ranked 11-20th.

Federer got much worse, no matter which groups that we look at. And this is what has costed him in the race. He has nobody to blame but himself. He should have rested up during the offseason instead of playing squash and going skiing(squash his a brutal sport). But he burned the candle at both ends and it costed him.

As far as ranking each year from 2008-2012, I'd go with the following:
2009: 4 slam finals is sick, not matter how you look at this. It was a bummer losing to Davydenko in the semis of the WTF.
2010: This year is underrated. He won the AO, played well at the USO, played well at the FO(zoning Soderling can beat anybody), slipped a little at WI. However, Federer, was 16-6 vs the top 10 that year. He also was incredibly impressive at the WTF by slaughtering Soderling, Djokovic, Murray, and Ferrer in straight set, then beating an in-form Nadal in the final.
2008: 2 slam finals and a slam title make this a good year, despite the massive drop. Federer was only 7-10 vs the top 10 this year. He even lost to Roddick
2012: lackluster AO and USO hurt here. Also, he was slaughtered at the FO. Wimbledon was a nice surprise.
2011: 10-9 vs top 10 isn't great at all, although it's better than 2008. However, his performance in slams wasn't great. Wimbledon and the AO were massive letdowns. He was very good at the FO. But serving at 40-15 for the match in the USO semi killed this slam year. This one falls in last place.
 
Last edited:
Federer had a bit of a mental break after his victory in Australia in 2010, as he himself revealed in an interview. Between the major record being broken, and the twins, he had other things to worry about.
 
Kralingen said:
Ah good ol results based analysis.

2009 (took a step back in bo3 but whatever, 4 slam finals)
2008
2011
2010/2012

those last two are difficult to rate, he was awesome at AO 10 and indoor 2010 but crap from March-September, then in 2012 thought he was quite good until Cincy but fell off heavily, I’d give tie breaker to 2012 I suppose.
Click to expand...
tbh it wasn’t even that heavy of a drop-off in 2012.

He still reached the WTF final and made it deep in every tournament he played after the US Open. Certainly never reached the lows of mid-2010.
 
Third Serve said:
It’d be crazy to put 2008 over 2009 honestly.
Click to expand...

2009 he made all four finals, so there's a case for being first. But looking more closely at it:


- Narrowly escapes Haas and del Potro in RG. Especially Haas, he was one point away from virtually losing.
- Is outplayed by Roddick in Wimbledon, should have been 2-0 down and couldn't break serve until the last game. Roddick outplaying him from the baseline is not something that happens often, if ever.

And at Bo3 he wasn't very impressive.

In 2011 he didn't win any slams, but lost to Djokovic at the AO when he was playing like crazy. Lost to Nadal at RG, I think he played better RG 2011 than 2009 for sure. Lost at the USO to Djokovic playing great again, probably better than 2009. The weak spot was Wimbledon but Tsonga played like crazy, his Wimbledon 2009 self probably loses that match too. Main difference is Nadal and Djokovic being stronger that year, especially Djokovic.

2008 he could have won Wimbledon if he converts that BP in the fifth. He definitely can win Wimbledon in 2008 and lose in 2009, both matches can go either way but Nadal is better than Roddick. At the USO he was brilliant vs Djokovic and Murray in the SF and F.

You really can make a case for either. Results-wise 2009 is the best, level of tennis not sure.
 
Sampras-Bruguera 1993 said:
After 2009 he wasn’t very good. He only won more slams because from 2010-on the tour was rotten
Click to expand...

Was he much better in 2008/2009 than 2011/2012?

2011 he loses to Djokovic having MPs at the USO, beats him at RG and does decent vs Nadal at RG. He also lost to Djokovic at the AO although quite convincingly. 2012 he loses to Nadal at the AO, wins Wimbledon beating Djokorray b2b, loses to Djokovic at RG. I think the main difference was Djokodal were overall stronger in the latter period.
 
BauerAlmeida said:
2009 he made all four finals, so there's a case for being first. But looking more closely at it:


- Narrowly escapes Haas and del Potro in RG. Especially Haas, he was one point away from virtually losing.
- Is outplayed by Roddick in Wimbledon, should have been 2-0 down and couldn't break serve until the last game. Roddick outplaying him from the baseline is not something that happens often, if ever.

And at Bo3 he wasn't very impressive.

In 2011 he didn't win any slams, but lost to Djokovic at the AO when he was playing like crazy. Lost to Nadal at RG, I think he played better RG 2011 than 2009 for sure. Lost at the USO to Djokovic playing great again, probably better than 2009. The weak spot was Wimbledon but Tsonga played like crazy, his Wimbledon 2009 self probably loses that match too. Main difference is Nadal and Djokovic being stronger that year, especially Djokovic.

2008 he could have won Wimbledon if he converts that BP in the fifth. He definitely can win Wimbledon in 2008 and lose in 2009, both matches can go either way but Nadal is better than Roddick. At the USO he was brilliant vs Djokovic and Murray in the SF and F.

You really can make a case for either. Results-wise 2009 is the best, level of tennis not sure.
Click to expand...
It’s a myth that Roddick was outplaying Federer at Wimbledon 2009. Rather, Roddick was extremely clutch to make that match as close as it was because he was lagging well behind Federer in virtually every department. Roddick outplaying Federer from the baseline is also a myth that needs to die out sooner rather than later. Fed’s FH was the best groundstroke of the match and his BH actually held up okay. Roddick’s FH was good but nothing too special and his BH was the clear weak link on show (except for a few select instances, once again a demonstration of Roddick being clutch).

I’ll give you the Haas RG match but Delpo was playing great tennis in that semifinal and it’s not a guarantee 2008 Fed makes it out of that one. Truthfully, 2008 Fed didn’t look that good even before the infamous final but he had a very cushy draw while 2009 Fed faced stronger competition on the whole.

If 2009 Fed’s Bo3 isn’t that impressive what would you call 2008 Fed’s Bo3? He didn’t win a single Masters and bombed out of the WTF RR for the ONLY time in his whole career while 2009 Fed at least won two Masters and made it much deeper in most other events. In 2008 Fed was losing to players he would never have lost to in most other seasons like Blake, Roddick, and even frigging Karlovic at a Masters event.

The way I see it, 2008 Fed outperforms 2009 Fed at maybe Wimbledon and definitely the US Open. 2009 Fed outperforms 2008 Fed basically everywhere else (including the AO where he has by far the hugest advantage in level, which you neglected to mention).
 
Last edited:
What makes USO 08 Fed better than 2009 and 2011?

I see 2009 and 2011 Fed still beating Djokovic 08 and Murray 08 B2B with a loss of a set.
 
Grade: A

5-5 in Slam finals, but four of those losses were to Nadal. So, I would give Nadal an A+. Nadal was 8-3 with all 3 losses to Djokovic in 2011-12.
 
ChrisRF said:
2017 was clearly the best year after 2007 (with 2 Slams and 3 Masters). It was a combination of 2 factors:
1) Great new coach Ljubicic bringing back his all-court game (after the one-sided net-rushing approach by Edberg and especially Annacone), so that he finally used the new racquet to his full advantage.
2) Being fully motivated in every tournament after half a year off.

In 2008 he had mono, and this essentially ended his "winning everything" approach. Then in 2009 he was great again at the Slams, but seemingly didn't care much for everything else. Really, all the time from 2008-2013 he won very few tournaments by his standards, especially outside the Slams (only exception was 2012).

2011 was actually a horrible season. Between Doha right at the beginning and the late indoor season he won exactly NOTHING, not even a 250 tournament. A great showing at RG doesn't change too much here to be honest.

In 2014 he had the new racquet and seemed to care for smaller tournaments again. Likely he was happy being back to win anything after 2013 at first. Then in 2015 he was in great form and was mainly only stopped by peak Djokovic.
Click to expand...
2011 Fed was literally a serve away from going 2-1 against peak Djokovic in slams.
He was very disappointing at Wimbledon though.
Agree on 2017 Fed being a bad###. Saw him in person annihilate Nadal at IW…
 
RS said:
What makes USO 08 Fed better than 2009 and 2011?

I see 2009 and 2011 Fed still beating Djokovic 08 and Murray 08 B2B with a loss of a set.
Click to expand...
USO 08 Fed obviously was locked and in and desperate to win the tournament, and doesn't lose to Delpo, likely beats 11 Djoko as well, pretty cut and dry.

09 is obviously above 08 overall though, only the biggest mugs will claim otherwise.
 
BauerAlmeida said:
Was he much better in 2008/2009 than 2011/2012?

2011 he loses to Djokovic having MPs at the USO, beats him at RG and does decent vs Nadal at RG. He also lost to Djokovic at the AO although quite convincingly. 2012 he loses to Nadal at the AO, wins Wimbledon beating Djokorray b2b, loses to Djokovic at RG. I think the main difference was Djokodal were overall stronger in the latter period.
Click to expand...

Fed's only real impressive wins post 2009 IMO was Wimbledon 2012 (Though the roof closed helps, not sure he would have won it if it wasn't indoor grass, and the AO 2017 when he beat Nadal). The rest of them were kind of weakling draws consisting of bums like Cilic
 
Sampras-Bruguera 1993 said:
Fed's only real impressive wins post 2009 IMO was Wimbledon 2012 (Though the roof closed helps, not sure he would have won it if it wasn't indoor grass, and the AO 2017 when he beat Nadal). The rest of them were kind of weakling draws consisting of bums like Cilic
Click to expand...

Maybe, but it's not like 2009 had some super impressive draws either. 2008 at least did have Murray and Djokovic at the USO as well.
 
Third Serve said:
It’d be crazy to put 2008 over 2009 honestly.
Click to expand...

It's not that crazy. I'd put 2009 above but...

Overall, I'd say 2009 he was better at AO and RG

2008 he was better at WIM and US

2009 he went 61-12
2008 he went 66-15

Both years he won 4 titles.

But the players he lost to in some of the 2008 non slam events were worse than the ones he lost to in 2009.
 
The_Order said:
It's not that crazy. I'd put 2009 above but...

Overall, I'd say 2009 he was better at AO and RG

2008 he was better at WIM and US

2009 he went 61-12
2008 he went 66-15

Both years he won 4 titles.

But the players he lost to in some of the 2008 non slam events were worse than the ones he lost to in 2009.
Click to expand...
It's not that 2009 is leagues beyond 2008 but the edge is clear enough that I can't conceive of an argument 2008 would have in its favor.

2009 was also a little better at the Slams as a whole, even if both versions of Fed get two Slams each, and that's because the extent to which 2008 was superior to 2009 at Wimbledon and the US Open isn't quite as great as 2009's advantage at the AO and RG. There are even very reasonable arguments that Fed was about the same level in 2008 and 2009 Wimbledon.
 
Third Serve said:
It's not that 2009 is leagues beyond 2008 but the edge is clear enough that I can't conceive of an argument 2008 would have in its favor.

2009 was also a little better at the Slams as a whole, even if both versions of Fed get two Slams each, and that's because the extent to which 2008 was superior to 2009 at Wimbledon and the US Open isn't quite as great as 2009's advantage at the AO and RG. There are even very reasonable arguments that Fed was about the same level in 2008 and 2009 Wimbledon.
Click to expand...

Yes of course one is not leagues above the other...

I agree that his 09 AO+RG is a greater level of difference than his WIM+US compared to 08. But come on mate, about the same level at Wimbledon? Which tournament did you watch? Clear as daylight he was better at WIM08 than 09... not saying by a massive amount but it was obvious enough.
 
Third Serve said:
It’s a myth that Roddick was outplaying Federer at Wimbledon 2009. Rather, Roddick was extremely clutch to make that match as close as it was because he was lagging well behind Federer in virtually every department. Roddick outplaying Federer from the baseline is also a myth that needs to die out sooner rather than later. Fed’s FH was the best groundstroke of the match and his BH actually held up okay. Roddick’s FH was good but nothing too special and his BH was the clear weak link on show (except for a few select instances, once again a demonstration of Roddick being clutch).

I’ll give you the Haas RG match but Delpo was playing great tennis in that semifinal and it’s not a guarantee 2008 Fed makes it out of that one. Truthfully, 2008 Fed didn’t look that good even before the infamous final but he had a very cushy draw while 2009 Fed faced stronger competition on the whole.

If 2009 Fed’s Bo3 isn’t that impressive what would you call 2008 Fed’s Bo3? He didn’t win a single Masters and bombed out of the WTF RR for the ONLY time in his whole career while 2009 Fed at least won two Masters and made it much deeper in most other events. In 2008 Fed was losing to players he would never have lost to in most other seasons like Blake, Roddick, and even frigging Karlovic at a Masters event.

The way I see it, 2008 Fed outperforms 2009 Fed at maybe Wimbledon and definitely the US Open. 2009 Fed outperforms 2008 Fed basically everywhere else (including the AO where he has by far the hugest advantage in level, which you neglected to mention).
Click to expand...


Federer won more free points on serve and Roddick still had many points to go 2-0 up. Federer also was broken in the first and fourth sets while he only could break in the last game when Roddick was dead tired. And this is with the huge mental advantage in the matchup. I mean, both 2009 and 2008 finals went to the distance, once with a favorable matchup, one with a disfavorable matchup. I think definitely he was better at Wimbledon 2008. USO 2008 too, was definitely better than USO 2009. RG 2008 is close with RG 2009. He wouldn't win 2009 with Nadal on the other side of the net. He probably wins 2008 against anyone else bar Djokovic who did decently against Nadal in the SF. They're even I guess. AO yeah, better in 2009 but not by that much. He had a scare in both tournaments, Tipsa 2008 and Berdych 2009, other than that he won convincingly in both (even against Berdych himself in 2008). Lost to Djokovic far more convincingly than against Nadal, but well, Djokovic is better than Nadal at the AO. I agree he was better in 2009 but not by that huge of a difference. In Bo3 he was poor both years by his standards. It's true he won two M1000 in 2009 and none in 2008, but he faced an exhausted Nadal in Madrid 2009 after the longest Bo3 ATP match ever the previous day. In 2008 he put up a good fight in two clay M1000 against Nadal but fell short, I don't think there's much of a difference there. He did play a great Cinci tournament in 2009, so advantage there in that department. Overall it's close. But I think in USO 2008 we saw him play at his peak level and I didn't feel that at any point in 2009. But there's a case to be made for both.
 
Federer fans in good faith need to make the case Fed 09 SF is as good as 03-06 and 09 Federer beats 08 Nadal but Roddick was just treeing on serve to effect the return in order to defend him.

:D
 
Last edited:
BauerAlmeida said:
It's widely agreed that Federer played his best tennis from 2004 to 2007.
Click to expand...
He played great tennis in 2008 and 2009 as well. Just because he lost to Nadal across multiple majors doesn't mean Federer wasn't playing his best. It was more so a tactical issue and a difficult style for him to deal with at the time. Meanwhile he was blowing through everyone else on the tour with ease for the most part.
 
People forgets that there is clear difference between pre mono (2003 - 2007 = 12 GS) & post mono (2008 - 2022 = 8 GS) Fed.

This is not an excuse but a fact

Also nothing last forever
 
1mbC5Zp.png
 
Mike Sams said:
He played great tennis in 2008 and 2009 as well. Just because he lost to Nadal across multiple majors doesn't mean Federer wasn't playing his best. It was more so a tactical issue and a difficult style for him to deal with at the time. Meanwhile he was blowing through everyone else on the tour with ease for the most part.
Click to expand...

Yeah that’s not entirely true. Fed played well in ‘08 but not up to the standard set from ‘04-‘07

‘08 Fed lost to Fish, Blake, Karlovic, Roddick (not a bad loss in a vacuum) and Stepanek…three of them were older, with the collective sporting a 2-36 H2H coming into the year (with neither of the two losses occurring from ‘04-‘07).

Additionally he escaped two five-setters against Tipsa and Andreev at his pet slams. The only times he was taken to 5 on HC from ‘04-‘07: against Agassi at the ‘04 USO (win, classic match), Safin ‘05 AO (loss, classic match), Haas ‘06 AO (the worst match of the lot, but Fed was ahead the whole time and played a dominant 5th).

He also lost to Simon twice, and underperformed against Murray.

The competition took a step up, but Fed also got worse.
 
Last edited:
Only Djokodal fanboys would claim 2008 Fed was better than 2009 Fed :-D:-D

They’ll do anything to make it look like their idols could legitimately beat peak healthy Fed (other than Nadal on clay)
 
Who wins these matchups?

1. Djokovic RG 08 SF vs Soderling RG 10 SF
2. Djokovic RG 08 SF vs Wawrinka RG 13 4R
3. Roddick Wim 07 vs Nadal Wim 19
4. Federer Wim 08 final vs Federer Wim 09 final
5. Ancic Wim 06 QF vs Djokovic Wim 13 final
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hitman
Fedovic - Rank the slam H2H matches
Replies
25
Views
1K
Hitman
Hitman
M
What order would you rank the 15 seasons of the Big 4 - 2004-2018>?
Replies
40
Views
2K
UnderratedSlam
UnderratedSlam
M
How did Federer maintain consistency from 2012-2015 as 2008-2011?
Replies
5
Views
484
helterskelter
H
SABRvolley
Ranking Nadal’s seasons on all surfaces (and overall)
Replies
44
Views
3K
messiahrobins
messiahrobins
T
Hypothetical Peak Federer vs Hypothetical Peak Djokovic slam count
Replies
22
Views
2K
Mazz Retic
Mazz Retic
Back
Top