Is there a chance Federer's game will become more one dimensional...?

Warriorroger

Warriorroger

Hall of Fame
I have always been a huge fan of Steffi Graf (but I can talk about shortcomings and her game in an objective way!) and therefore I know her game and style very, very well. One thing I noticed that in her begin period, 1986-1987, she played very versatile tennis, hitting many topspinbackhands, and coming to the net whenever she had the chance. Then she became so dominant and mentally overpowered the whole field, that her game turned into one - dimensional hitting in the 88 till 93, when she was outplayed by Monica Seles. She later improved, but the mixture of shots was gone.

My question is more to 30+ fans, because many of the younger tennis fans might not know her well. I've seen Steffi's flat backhand disappear and she totally dominated with the serve, forehand, the slice backhand and that amazing footwork, she didn't need the netgame and/or the flat backhand.

I saw Roger Federer yesterday and it seems to me he is still on top with the same ingredients Graf used. His game was more versatile a short period ago? (IMO) Could the same thing happen to him. I know he has more shots, but she had more shots in the past than she was using in her heydays. Just curious.
 
Warriorroger said:
I have always been a huge fan of Steffi Graf (but I can talk about shortcomings and her game in an objective way!) and therefore I know her game and style very, very well. One thing I noticed that in her begin period, 1986-1987, she played very versatile tennis, hitting many topspinbackhands, and coming to the net whenever she had the chance. Then she became so dominant and mentally overpowered the whole field, that her game turned into one - dimensional hitting in the 88 till 93, when she was outplayed by Monica Seles. She later improved, but the mixture of shots was gone.

My question is more to 30+ fans, because many of the younger tennis fans might not know her well. I've seen Steffi's flat backhand disappear and she totally dominated with the serve, forehand, the slice backhand and that amazing footwork, she didn't need the netgame and/or the flat backhand.

I saw Roger Federer yesterday and it seems to me he is still on top with the same ingredients Graf used. His game was more versatile a short period ago? (IMO) Could the same thing happen to him. I know he has more shots, but she had more shots in the past than she was using in her heydays. Just curious.
Click to expand...

Graf had all the shots?? she couldn't volley, she couldn't hit a topspin backhand (she didn't have much topspin on forehand either), couldn't hit a DTL backhand other than slice, she wasn't very good at changing speeds on her forehand, she didn't use chip returns, she didn't hit wicked angles on both sides, she couldn't hit a kick serve. Her opposition was so weak in her hey day that she didn't need to, she lacked the tactics/strategy to adapt to pure power players like Seles and was prone to being overpowered, she made her career on raping useless consistent type players like Sabatini, Evert, Sukova types.
 
Will Federer's game become more one dimensional?

Hmm....this is like asking:

Will Roddick ever learn to properly volley?
 
you cant really ask this question about federer becoming a more one dimensional player...he does whatever is best for him, and whatever makes him win the most matches. Federer has the ability to be a serve and volleyer, agressive baseliner, or even play like roddick with a gigantic serve and a gigantic forehand to win points. Federer is too good to be classified as becoming a one-dimensional player.
 
I'd like to see Federer serve and volley exclusively for a match, I think he's capable of winning matches like that in the same dominant fashion.
 
Originally Posted by Warriorroger

My question is more to 30+ fans, because many of the younger tennis fans might not know her well. I've seen Steffi's flat backhand disappear and she totally dominated with the serve, forehand, the slice backhand and that amazing footwork, she didn't need the netgame and/or the flat backhand.

I saw Roger Federer yesterday and it seems to me he is still on top with the same ingredients Graf used. His game was more versatile a short period ago? (IMO) Could the same thing happen to him. I know he has more shots, but she had more shots in the past than she was using in her heydays. Just curious.
Click to expand...
one dimensional???
so how many dimensions that roger plays nowadays, my god.

i tell you, federer plays more effective and doesn't make many useless movement, that's what you called one dimensional, my god.

Everybody has own permanent style except you're teens like nadal or gasquet, they still looking for the most suitable style for themself. while you're growing up, automatically, you'll filtered out any movements that you think unnecessary, my god.
 
I should have omitted the word in more in the thread'title, never meant that his game was one-dimensional, but you guys are not able to read properly, so there's no use.
 
I only think Roger mixes it up against tough opponents.

Otherwise, it's:

Serve/return, setup shot, winner. Rinse and repeat.
 
Federer is awesome because I actually think he can compete relatively well in one dimensional battles with one dimensional players. I couldn't say that for anyone in the past. Say for example he has a baseline war with agassi, or a serve and forehand contest with roddick, or a game of net cat and mouse with tim henman. That's different than someone who was simply "naturally selected" to be successful because his/her style fits the game in some way: nadal on a clay court, or karlovic with only a belly high net, or sharapova and venus with one-dimesional girls who only competes from the baseline seeing who can hit harder from side to side. So sure he can become more one-dimesional. But it will only be because the game, racquet technology or some other thing forces him to choose a more one dimesional style to win. The dinosaurs died out because they couldn't adapt. Roger is no dinosaur.
 
lucky leprechaun said:
Federer is awesome because I actually think he can compete relatively well in one dimensional battles with one dimensional players. I couldn't say that for anyone in the past. Say for example he has a baseline war with agassi, or a serve and forehand contest with roddick, or a game of net cat and mouse with tim henman. That's different than someone who was simply "naturally selected" to be successful because his/her style fits the game in some way: nadal on a clay court, or karlovic with only a belly high net, or sharapova and venus with one-dimesional girls who only competes from the baseline seeing who can hit harder from side to side. So sure he can become more one-dimesional. But it will only be because the game, racquet technology or some other thing forces him to choose a more one dimesional style to win. The dinosaurs died out because they couldn't adapt. Roger is no dinosaur.
Click to expand...

Thanks for a well-thought reply
 
I actually think Roger occasionally gets a little stubborn, and insists on winning the hard way. Sometimes (when he does not get a good start) he wants to outhit solid baseliners from the baseline, rather than mix it up.

He usually successfully grinds out these matches, but I feel he could have made it easier sometimes.
 
roger is playing with about 8 dimensions right now. as he gets older he'll probably stick more to his bread and butter shots, and finish points at the net more. personally, i really didn't notice steffi becoming more or less dimensional. she was always fraulein forehand, although earlier in her career she was trying to work on her net game, and topspin backhand. but, later in her career she stuck with what she did best, and that was good enough.
 
wildbill88AA said:
roger is playing with about 8 dimensions right now. as he gets older he'll probably stick more to his bread and butter shots, and finish points at the net more. personally, i really didn't notice steffi becoming more or less dimensional. she was always fraulein forehand, although earlier in her career she was trying to work on her net game, and topspin backhand. but, later in her career she stuck with what she did best, and that was good enough.
Click to expand...

And I feel that the same thing might happen to Roger, his bread and butter game will be good enough, he is also know for the big forehand and footwork.

I have a lot of the 1987 matches and I saw a different Graf, with a lot more variaty in her game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jelle v
Who has/had more talent?
Replies
8
Views
1K
princess bossass
princess bossass
V
If Federer only sliced his backhand???
Replies
17
Views
2K
VictorS.
V
L
Is Kournikova more talented than Sharapova?
2 3
Replies
123
Views
13K
anointedone
anointedone
C
Wozniacki should fire his dad... and then she will win a GS
Replies
18
Views
3K
Mick
Mick
F
Is Serena's game really that much better than the others?
Replies
29
Views
6K
THUNDERVOLLEY
THUNDERVOLLEY
Back
Top