moonballs
Hall of Fame
Don’t be too hard on Andy. The big 4 was probably something invented by his mom and propogated by the British media.
Tennisanity
Legend
Wawrinka. He barely lost to Fed in 5 sets and he has previously beaten Nadal in AO final. Nadal barely scraped by Dimitrov. Done and done.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Agree here. I was never one to say he should retire. I always said he should just retire when he liked because he had earned that right. However, it was hard as a fan at that time watching him. 2013 was just no fun at all, and nobody in their wildest dreams saw this coming so it's only in hindsight that we're playing the blame game, and really that's not playing the game right.
Shaolin
Talk Tennis Guru
Most importantly we would have never seen the great Bemelmans beatdown of today.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Do you remember who posted this when he was at 17 majors ?
It all depends on his form upon comeback. His chances are slim, but they are there if he can find form. It's just like Annacone says. It's completely silly to count him out if he's in good form around Wimbledon time, especially if Djokovic does not start playing well again. He might also need Murray to lose, but the big thing is that the next generation is so bad that we're still talking relatively seriously about a guy that will be 36 in August winning a Wimbledon title. He's made 2 finals and a SF at the last 3 Wimbledons so just dismissing him out of hand because "he's old" or whatever, is stupid tbh. Until his results truly go downhill at Wimbledon (which I'm sure is not far away, don't get me wrong) he should always be on the short list of favourites there.
D
Deleted member 742196
Guest
And fans. Plenty of fans gave up on Federer.
I'm quite confident when I believe few fans thought last year against Nadal, in the fifth set, at the AO, he was capable of coming back. The only person/people that probably believed it - had to have believed it - was Federer, and his personal entourage/family.
Basically, if you're going to be great at something don't let anyone that isn't invested get in the way - doubters, haters and fans alike.
It's going to be an uphill struggle; people who are not invested in it as much as you will look for ways out when things get tough.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
I don't know who said that. Was it me by any chance? Or you? In any case, whether it is my post or not, I can't claim that I saw 3 more majors coming. I was just hoping for 18 back then.
abmk
Bionic Poster
was talking about adapting the entire game. Serve would of course be better. How would he handle adapting the fh, bh, return, slice, volleys etc. ?
Fed's fh and slice went down with the bigger racquet for ~2.5 years (2014-mid 2016)
While I do agree the "flukiness" of USO 02 tends to get over-rated at times (esp. given his USO 01 perf.), you're under-rating his struggles even at slams in 01-02 IMO. As I explained in the first half of post #34.
Motivation of course was a big factor. But not just the fact that no one was close to the slam count.But that the grind of the tour had taken its toll on him.
zagor
Bionic Poster
Yeah, don't disagree with anything there.
zagor
Bionic Poster
It was certainly a valid opinion at the time.
Don't think anyone could have predicted not just Fed's success in mid-late 30s but so many other players still hanging around in their 30s as well, it's the oldest tour on average I've ever seen.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Your post
- I was reading the thread about the Annacone article before AO 17 where he said Fed can win another major.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Your post
Yeah, I copied and pasted the quote and found the thread.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Many of those 30+ with career high rankings at one time or another as well. Strange goings on.
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
Agree 100%, but I didn't even think those tournaments would happen back then. If you told me in 2012 that in 2015 Nadal would be a non-factor and Murray would barely be able to take a set off Roger anymore, I'd say "sure! by all means, please keep playing."
I expected the other 3 members of the Big 4 to be running circles around him by that point.
maruzo
Semi-Pro
Haters are useless people who are jealous of other's accomplishments. They have less accomplishments in their lives and they can't stand others who achieve more. Sour grape mentality. Nothing new and nothing worth noting.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
Their favs can’t put their feet up with Federer around because as soon as they do BOOM! 3 GS titles and a possible no. 1 w/o stepping onto clay.
Last edited:
Make that 26 months! He was without any ATP title since Wimbledon 2000 before turning 29. And his last hurrah at the US Open 2002 was his only Slam title apart from Wimbledon after the age of 25 (last before was Australian Open 1997)! Yes, he was almost unbeatable at Wimbledon, but with such overall statistics I always found it weird that so many people thought his Slam record was “unbeatable”.
The funniest thing was that some Federer haters back then even talked about Sampras’ better “longevity” compared to Federer, while in reality Federer had to be almost dead in a sporty sense after 2009 to make that point valid.
I was a big Sampras fan in my childhood, but some Sampras mythologists who still see him as greatest ever need a reality check. In fact they already got it in person of the Big 3, everyone in his own style.
One day to go and Federer will be #1 in the world being over 7 years older than Sampras when he was it the last time. 7 years older than the guy “who won Slams in 3 different decades”.
justasport
Professional
Does anybody else feel like all of this is to good to be true and that he's going to get badly injured sometime real soon? That's all I could think about today, and it made me sick to my stomach!
titoelcolombiano
Legend
I agree with your post 100% as many on here do too. But many of the same posters write Rafa off the second he has a bad loss or an injury. It's the same reason why I won't write Djoker off until he tells us that his career is done through retirement.
D
Deleted member 742196
Guest
I’m with you on this. Practically wrote a Fed love sonnet last night in my giddy euphoria over in the other thread.
It all feels too good to be true.
D
Deleted member 742196
Guest
Or [in response to a decade of Rafa picking on the BH] - OOO...LOOK WHAT YOU MADE ME DO!
zagor
Bionic Poster
Maybe the age gap is getting pushed across sports in general? I don't follow NBA that closely anymore but I know Tim Duncan retired at 40 for example.
Injuries and younger players are what forces veteran players into retirement. You're gonna see them hang around otherwise, why would they want to give it up?
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Obviously medical advancements are a big part of it, but tbh I'm not sure if I've seen the gap getting pushed across other sports the way I've seen it in tennis. Mind you, tennis was always the epitome of a young man's sport until recently. You'd see guys retiring or just done at 30-32 for example while in other sports it is usually anywhere from say 37-40.
I follow the NA sports leagues as much as I can. I've seen Chris Chelios play NHL hockey until he was 46. Gretzky retired in 1999 at 38 years old. Dominink Hasek was over 40 I believe and won a Stanley Cup late in his career.
If Tom Brady keeps to his word he'll play until 45 and he won the NFL MVP at 40. Brett Favre was over 40 when he retired for good and his last season (or second to last I can't remember) was MVP caliber. As you mention, Tim Duncan is an example. Even MJ was approaching 40, so was Kobe. And Derek Jeter of the Yankees retired in 2014 at 40 years old.
Somewhere around 40 is pretty common for the NA team sports. It's just that none of us have seen the level of tennis displayed by a bunch of older guys in tennis. Not in the open era at least.
zagor
Bionic Poster
Fed could be the trailblazer for tennis in that regard (in the graphite era atleast), many things are thought to be impossible until someone goes out and does them. Not that I expect him to hang around until he's 40 but can't say I'd be that shocked at this point either. I don't think Fed's leaving as long as he feels he has a shot at another slam title, he's one of the most stubborn and relentless sportsman I've ever seen.
Feather
Legend
Even I will not be shoocked if he plays till 40, that too as a slam contender at least at Wimbledon
Roger Federer is unique
-NN-
G.O.A.T.
Injury could curtail Federer and that's about it, because father time won't stop him any time soon from being at least an excellent player who can still have aspirations to win Wimbledon at the very least. Providing he's healthy, the decline will continue to be veeeeeeeeeeeeerrry slow. Playing into his 40s is a realistic proposition for Federer.
Feather
Legend
What do you think will be his final count? I am sure you want one more year end number one also very badly
-NN-
G.O.A.T.
What do you think will be his final count? I am sure you want one more year end number one also very badly
More weeks and YE# will be nice. It's good to be the best player of a season, the champion of the year.
Well clearly my outlook changed since Fed won Wimbledon, as before then I still wasn't so hot on him even after his 18th, not predicting much Slam success for him going forward and thinking he was done winning Slams after I heard about his knee surgery before the beginning of 2017, mainly because I didn't believe it was a non-tennis incident and that he'd be meaningfully hampered going forward.
Since Wimbledon I was saying 20-21.
Now, the situation has changed again, as it becomes clearer and clearer that Murray and Stan are a very limited threat and may never return to the heights, and although Federer has their number in most situations, it still opens up the draws. So I do expect some new Slam winners soon, and that Federer will continue to reach Major finals.
It's more likely for him to win 2 more than 0 more.
My concern is when players figure out how to extend Federer past the first few shots more consistently, but it's much easier said than done. Fed is ahead of the curve right now strategically and tactically and there aren't many players positioned to figure that out or challenge Federer.
So i'll amend the prediction from 20-21 to 20-23, and I'll go with 22 for now (and 5 more finals.. yes there will be some tough losses for ageing Rog). But don't be surprised if 20 is it. At this point Federer is a mystery. We're trying to comprehend what hasn't really been seen before.
Last edited:
Feather
Legend
Thanks for the detailed response. I remember you were not convinced after the AO 2017 win. You were expecting him to lose the Miami final. But the way he is playing this year, it is really next level stuff.
I think 20, 21 and 22 any of these numbers are possible. I expect him to be a contender in three majors at least till 2019 end. It will be interesting to see how Novak Djokovic comes back. I expect him to win majors and reach number one again. Anyway, interesting times ahead
-NN-
G.O.A.T.
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...t-slam-finals-tally-for-the-big-three.594387/
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...tally-for-the-big-three.594387/#post-11427286
Some predictions there.
So I've got Djokovic winning 15, Nadal 17 and Federer 21 (as a last official prediction where Fedr gets an extra Slam 'cause Fedr). So now I've got Federer at least reaching more Slam finals. BTW those are 'conservative' estimates.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
AiRFederer
Hall of Fame
Timmy is an exception, Pop has been known to rest his players even when not injured no matter who they face in the regular season. Also like Fed, Tim is a gdamn genius in the court as well, from his early days of athleticism and just dominating everyone to using smarts to still be a top 10 big till he retired.
Signed,
Spurs fan
This tennis era is extremely weird.
There were 3 simultaneous great players playing together, I would say from as early as 2008 (Djokovic was always a threat at the AO and USO) all the way to 2015 (until all Djokovic, Nadal and Federer were simultaneously a threat to win slams).
If at least one of them was absent - moreso Nadal - Fed would have won some 22 slams by 2012 and retired. I truly believe it.
Fed had the foresight to know that 17 slams was not going to cut it. Both Nadal and Djokovic were at the height of their tennis supremacy. In a way, those 2 men pushed Federer to try harder, and here we are, in 2018, with 20 slams.
Even today, 20 is still not a safe number (!!). This is absolutely freaking incredible. This was unimaginable during Sampras's era. I for one had genuinely believed it was next to impossible to take down Sampras's record of 14 slams. Until Federer happened and took the world by storm.
It looks like great tennis players have perfected the concoction of peak physical conditioning, exploiting the modern technology, staying fit, motivated and psychologically upbeat all the time, and not regressing into bad habits. Hence, Fedalokovich are virtually unbeatable at slams. Heck, for a time, they were unbeatable at MS-1000 and WTF combined together. The rest of the ATP was literally playing for MS-500 and below (still are).
If this was like any other regular era, players like Berdych, Tsonga, Ferrer and even past players from Federer's era such as Gonzo, Baghdatis, Davydenko, Haas et. al. would have a slam or 2. That would cut into the Fedalokovich's slam count in a major way, and 17 would have been a new high. But that was not to be.
There were 3 simultaneous great players playing together, I would say from as early as 2008 (Djokovic was always a threat at the AO and USO) all the way to 2015 (until all Djokovic, Nadal and Federer were simultaneously a threat to win slams).
If at least one of them was absent - moreso Nadal - Fed would have won some 22 slams by 2012 and retired. I truly believe it.
Fed had the foresight to know that 17 slams was not going to cut it. Both Nadal and Djokovic were at the height of their tennis supremacy. In a way, those 2 men pushed Federer to try harder, and here we are, in 2018, with 20 slams.
Even today, 20 is still not a safe number (!!). This is absolutely freaking incredible. This was unimaginable during Sampras's era. I for one had genuinely believed it was next to impossible to take down Sampras's record of 14 slams. Until Federer happened and took the world by storm.
It looks like great tennis players have perfected the concoction of peak physical conditioning, exploiting the modern technology, staying fit, motivated and psychologically upbeat all the time, and not regressing into bad habits. Hence, Fedalokovich are virtually unbeatable at slams. Heck, for a time, they were unbeatable at MS-1000 and WTF combined together. The rest of the ATP was literally playing for MS-500 and below (still are).
If this was like any other regular era, players like Berdych, Tsonga, Ferrer and even past players from Federer's era such as Gonzo, Baghdatis, Davydenko, Haas et. al. would have a slam or 2. That would cut into the Fedalokovich's slam count in a major way, and 17 would have been a new high. But that was not to be.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
One match away from ascending to the top of the game....
One match....
One match....
Fedforever
Hall of Fame
It's just incredible to be talking about 20 in this way isn't it?
Fedforever
Hall of Fame
One match away from ascending to the top of the game....
One match....
"It's not really that important in the grand scheme of things" she says, trying to convince herself.......
Similar threads
- Deleted member 77403
- General Pro Player Discussion
