If Federer declined in later years, how to explain his improved H2H against Nadal and Murray when he was older?

ABCD

Hall of Fame
I enjoy discussions on TTW as many people visiting this site are clever. I would like to read TTW take on this issue: "If Federer declined in later years, how to explain his improved H2H against Nadal and Murray when he was older?". I look forward to your comments and contributions.
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
You don't think Nadal declined off clay as well as he aged? Fed was 7-1 in his last 8 matches against Rafa, his only loss coming at RG when Fed was 38. Fed overcame his mental demons against Nadal as an old man, he had obviously declined significantly from his 2004-2007 peak, but Nadal had gone down too. Watch their 2019 Wimbledon semi, it shows how much Nadal's movement, anticipation and explosiveness had deteriorated. Fed even more so since he was almost 38 years old. Once Fed changed rackets in 2014, he completely flipped the trajectory of his H2H versus Nadal.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
With Nadal, it was to do with Nadal's change of style to be more aggressive, ends points quicker and limit the time to when he moves a lot. This change by Nadal was a positive against the field as he was older, but it was a negative against Federer. Nadal's old style is more effective against Federer, i.e. a lot of movement, high intensity, high topspin balls to Federer's backhand. Of course, had Nadal won the 2017 Australian Open final (it was very close), perhaps even new Nadal continues the stronghold, but Federer winning released the demons by his own admission.

With Murray, his last win over Federer was at the 2013 Australian Open. Murray never beat Federer after having back surgery in late September 2013.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
You don't think Nadal declined off clay as well as he aged? Fed was 7-1 in his last 8 matches against Rafa, his only loss coming at RG when Fed was 38. Fed overcame his mental demons against Nadal as an old man, he had obviously declined significantly from his 2004-2007 peak, but Nadal had gone down too. Watch their 2019 Wimbledon semi, it shows how much Nadal's movement, anticipation and explosiveness had deteriorated. Fed even more so since he was almost 38 years old. Once Fed changed rackets in 2014, he completely flipped the trajectory of his H2H versus Nadal.
6-1 in his last 7 matches. 23-10 became 24-16.
 

Jonesy

Legend
Inconvenient truths.

Fed fans said Djokovic would decline when he reaches the age as their idol, but since the Goat keep on goating they needed to shift the agenda to "its because the competition is the weakest ever".

The coping mechanism is a reality. All the squirming is just pathetic. In 2019 i said to a certain cat Fed fan that the suffering will continue for at least 10 years, so the fun is only beginning.
 

initialize

Hall of Fame
Inconvenient truths.

Fed fans said Djokovic would decline when he reaches the age as their idol, but since the Goat keep on goating they needed to shift the agenda to "its because the competition is the weakest ever".

The coping mechanism is a reality. All the squirming is just pathetic. In 2019 i said to a certain cat Fed fan that the suffering will continue for at least 10 years, so the fun is only beginning.
I mean literally everyone knows we're in the weakest era of all time. It's why we even have pros such as Verdasco and Davydenko (who know more about tennis than you do) saying the exact same thing
 

ChrisRF

Legend
Because he did SOME things better that made him better suited for the certain matchup with Nadal. Tennis is a sport of matchups.

With Murray it's a different thing. Most of his losses were from 2008 and early 2009, when he was in really bad form. And then there was the totally random loss in 2006, his only bad loss for the whole year. I think it's sufficient to say he was at the wrong place at the wrong time against Murray early on. Then later the matchup tuned into normality.
 

fedfan24

Hall of Fame
I mean literally everyone knows we're in the weakest era of all time. It's why we even have pros such as Verdasco and Davydenko (who know more about tennis than you do) saying the exact same thing
plus you know these guys have no agenda. it’s useless listening to anyone involved in tennis when they discuss the present eras, they have a vested interest to big up the game.
 

Pheasant

Legend
Once Fed’s speed declined, he lost the ability to run around that forehand. This made Federer much more vulnerable to younger guys that could somewhat expose him. So he added the 97 inch racket in 2014. This allowed him to reverse the head-to-head vs most players. Unfortunately for him, Djokovic was mostly unphased by the racket switch. As for the rest of the field, Federer gained back some of that lost ground that was caused by his slower wheels.

Let’s look at Fed’s prime from 2004-2009 vs decline period with 90 inch stick(2010-13) vs first 4 years with the 97 inch racket:

Time frame……..record……………..vs top 5…………..vs top 10
2014-17……………208-34, .860……21-10,.677……….47-17, .734
2010-13…………..248-55, .818…….23-25, .479……..46-34, .575
2004-09……………442-51, .897…….44-23, .657……..91-30, .752
 
Once Fed’s speed declined, he lost the ability to run around that forehand. This made Federer much more vulnerable to younger guys that could somewhat expose him. So he added the 97 inch racket in 2014. This allowed him to reverse the head-to-head vs most players. Unfortunately for him, Djokovic was mostly unphased by the racket switch. As for the rest of the field, Federer gained back some of that lost ground that was caused by his slower wheels.

Let’s look at Fed’s prime from 2004-2009 vs decline period with 90 inch stick(2010-13) vs first 4 years with the 97 inch racket:

Time frame……..record……………..vs top 5…………..vs top 10
2014-17……………208-34, .860……21-10,.677……….47-17, .734
2010-13…………..248-55, .818…….23-25, .479……..46-34, .575
2004-09……………442-51, .897…….44-23, .657……..91-30, .752
Had absolutely nothing to do with racket change
2008 82%
2009 84%
2010 83%
2011 84%
2012 86%
2013(injured) 73%
2014(97) 86%
2015 85%
2016 75%
2017 91%
2018 83%
2019 84%
Rogers problem with nadal was on clay not HC and after 97 the result on clay was a beat down.
 

junior74

Talk Tennis Guru
I mean literally everyone knows we're in the weakest era of all time. It's why we even have pros such as Verdasco and Davydenko (who know more about tennis than you do) saying the exact same thing

plus you know these guys have no agenda. it’s useless listening to anyone involved in tennis when they discuss the present eras, they have a vested interest to big up the game.

Becker, Lendl, McEnroe were very unimpressed with the new generations' mentalities and mindsets back in 2019.

They know nothing about tennis, though. That must be said.
 

RelentlessAttack

Hall of Fame
I enjoy discussions on TTW as many people visiting this site are clever. I would like to read TTW take on this issue: "If Federer declined in later years, how to explain his improved H2H against Nadal and Murray when he was older?". I look forward to your comments and contributions.

I sometimes wonder if posters here actually watched the matches or just argue about the results here

Nadal was not the same player after 2013 that made him dangerous against Fedovic. He adapted his game under Moya to have a late career resurgence with some changes that made him better against the field on HC. But the weapons that made him dangerous against the other top guys, the foot speed and endless stamina, were long gone. The tactical changes he was forced to make just made him a more conventional opponent for Fedovic, and Federer in particular
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
I sometimes wonder if posters here actually watched the matches or just argue about the results here

Nadal was not the same player after 2013 that made him dangerous against Fedovic. He adapted his game under Moya to have a late career resurgence with some changes that made him better against the field on HC. But the weapons that made him dangerous against the other top guys, the foot speed and endless stamina, were long gone. The tactical changes he was forced to make just made him a more conventional opponent for Fedovic, and Federer in particular
And for those who don't know, Nadal had 3 big injuries in 2014. The first was the back injury at the 2014 Australian Open final, the effects of which still hadn't totally disappeared by the 2014 French Open final later that year. Then came the wrist injury in late July 2014, and then came appendicitis and surgery to remove his appendix. When Nadal was playing in 2015, he was playing the same sort of style that he had been playing many years earlier, yet now it was no longer suited to him, and he didn't know exactly what his body could take in terms of physical stresses and movement, so lacked confidence there. In elite sports, that's all it can take for you to go from top 1-3 to a lower top 10 player or worse.
 

RelentlessAttack

Hall of Fame
With Nadal, it was to do with Nadal's change of style to be more aggressive, ends points quicker and limit the time to when he moves a lot. This change by Nadal was a positive against the field as he was older, but it was a negative against Federer. Nadal's old style is more effective against Federer, i.e. a lot of movement, high intensity, high topspin balls to Federer's backhand. Of course, had Nadal won the 2017 Australian Open final (it was very close), perhaps even new Nadal continues the stronghold, but Federer winning released the demons by his own admission.

With Murray, his last win over Federer was at the 2013 Australian Open. Murray never beat Federer after having back surgery in late September 2013.

Defenders of 2014-present and particularly 2015-16 forget that Murray was never the same after back surgery. He got to #1 in 2016 because of Novak’s struggles, not because he was better than in 2012-13
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
Defenders of 2014-present and particularly 2015-16 forget that Murray was never the same after back surgery. He got to #1 in 2016 because of Novak’s struggles, not because he was better than in 2012-13
I do think 2016 Murray was a really excellent player, and certainly a better clay player, but I agree that he wasn't quite as good peakwise as the 2012-13 Murray on non-clay surfaces. Murray spent 2014 in particular trying to get back to his pre-surgery level, which continued on into 2015 and 2016.
 

RelentlessAttack

Hall of Fame
I do think 2016 Murray was a really excellent player, and certainly a better clay player, but I agree that he wasn't quite as good peakwise as the 2012-13 Murray on non-clay surfaces. Murray spent 2014 in particular trying to get back to his pre-surgery level, which continued on into 2015 and 2016.

No doubt he was excellent but the same player doesn’t reach #1 if not faced with the void left by all of the big 3 having down stretches at once. I’m happy for him though that he held long enough before his major hip problems to get an opportunity to reach the top.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
No doubt he was excellent but the same player doesn’t reach #1 if not faced with the void left by all of the big 3 having down stretches at once. I’m happy for him though that he held long enough before his major hip problems to get an opportunity to reach the top.
Remember that Murray had to beat Djokovic in the 2016 YEC final in London to keep the number 1 ranking at the year's end. Murray won 6-3, 6-4.
 
Last edited:

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
The larger frame was an important part of the equation. RF switched from 90 to 97 sq" frame in 2014. By the 2015 season he had become comfortable with it and was able to neutralize Rafa's heavy TS Fh shots to his own Bh more easily.
 

thrust

Legend
I enjoy discussions on TTW as many people visiting this site are clever. I would like to read TTW take on this issue: "If Federer declined in later years, how to explain his improved H2H against Nadal and Murray when he was older?". I look forward to your comments and contributions.
Nadal was always injured whenever he lost to anyone- LOL! Seriously, I suppose his larger racket helped Roger, especially his return of Rafa's serve.
 

toth

Hall of Fame
Federer played only one time against Nadal on clay in these late years...
Federer won all big match against Murray except Olimpic Final - it was already 2012...
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Pretty simple. Nadal himself had declined a bit by then and wasn't in his prime, while Murray was never really an issue.

Fed was pretty much giving older Djokovic hell as well after the latter had exited his prime.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Because he did SOME things better that made him better suited for the certain matchup with Nadal. Tennis is a sport of matchups.

With Murray it's a different thing. Most of his losses were from 2008 and early 2009, when he was in really bad form. And then there was the totally random loss in 2006, his only bad loss for the whole year. I think it's sufficient to say he was at the wrong place at the wrong time against Murray early on. Then later the matchup tuned into normality.
I'd say the correct answer is that Fed faced prime Djokovic and that's why he had issues. Nadal was no longer in his prime when Fed turned the match-up around.

Fed was giving lots of hell to Djokovic after the latter exited his prime too. They just played very few times and Fed didn't get any prior wins to get over the mental block.
 
Top