Match Stats/Report - Safin vs Federer, Australian Open semi-final, 2005

abmk

Bionic Poster
The Weak Era triggers plenty of amusement.

Even now, many years later, much amusement, because Fedfans still refuse 21-20-20 as a reality.

All the premature declarations of GOAT, the hype, the lies ---------- all crushed like lambs years later. Theories that time killed.

oh look someone is triggered by the reality pointed fed beat 3 slam champs each in AO 04, Wim 04 and USO 04 and his era weak era delusions about fed's prime have been questioned. :)
also triggered that I pointed out Djokodal vulturing in the inflation era by far the most - 10 slams and 7 slams respectively. couldn't even reply to that. :)
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
better informed than what I have now.
error% is just one of the factors in match quality. there are multiple others.

I don't see how error percentage is a reliable factor at all. It is affected by too many variables (including the charter's approach).
 

UnderratedSlam

G.O.A.T.
oh look someone is triggered by the reality pointed fed beat 3 slam champs each in AO 04, Wim 04 and USO 04 and his era weak era delusions about fed's prime have been questioned. :)
also triggered that I pointed out Djokodal vulturing in the inflation era by far the most - 10 slams and 7 slams respectively. couldn't even reply to that. :)
I only properly reply to intelligent posts.

Disappointed?
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I don't see how error percentage is a reliable factor at all. It is affected by too many variables (including the charter's approach).

that's why I prefer it within a certain range of UFEs
it can be used to get a general idea, that's it. not to compare when things are close enough.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I only properly reply to intelligent posts.

Disappointed?

dude, you wouldn't know what an intelligent post is if it danced in front of you wearing Dobby's tea-cozy. :-D
Anyways, I thought I should give you a 2nd chance and took if you off ignore, but back to ignore you go, delusionally ignorant fella.
 

Kralingen

Talk Tennis Guru
The best part of this match is the cuts to Safin’s pony tailed coach, wearing an identifical kit and appearing to be 6 inches shorter and 25kgs heavier than Marat.

How can you find fault in this match really?
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
that's why I prefer it within a certain range of UFEs
it can be used to get a general idea, that's it. not to compare when things are close enough.

That still naturally implies than the middle range is kind of a happy medium, which may not be true.

Having a lot more shots marked as UEs doesn't necessarily mean a worse match still. Style and conditions decide a lot. Stats are supposed to aid visual analysis, not supplant it. If anything, a more detailed breakdown helps categorise what happened on court in more precise terms.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
That still naturally implies than the middle range is kind of a happy medium, which may not be true.

Having a lot more shots marked as UEs doesn't necessarily mean a worse match still. Style and conditions decide a lot. Stats are supposed to aid visual analysis, not supplant it. If anything, a more detailed breakdown helps categorise what happened on court in more precise terms.

yeah. I've watched the AO 05 semi match multiple times (obviously).

based on that, I do think the TA charter is a bit lenient and UFEs count from official is closer to the mark.
Just that charting while watching is a slightly different experience. it'd help me know if the above line is correct. (on a double check IMO)
 

UnderratedSlam

G.O.A.T.
dude, you wouldn't know what an intelligent post is if it danced in front of you wearing Dobby's tea-cozy. :-D
Anyways, I thought I should give you a 2nd chance and took if you off ignore, but back to ignore you go, delusionally ignorant fella.
Dude?

Please use "bro" next time, too... Preferably in the same sentence. That always impresses me.

I hope this doesn't mean you're gonna try dancing instead of posting another brilliant reply...

Still, it can't hurt. Dancing raises the mood for most people. You might dance better than you reply?

But to get back to the Weak Era...

... Yeah... don't where to begin. Books have been written about how lucky Federer got by being born 5-6 years earlier.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Yeah, AO 12 probably had more UE than the others. It would be impossible given how the rallies were played and the court speed
Is it though? Nadal can surely limit the UFE more than he did in that match (part of it is because he had to play more aggressive than he'd like which is not his natural game, same with 09 F), and Verdasco/Federer were not as UFE prone in 2009 against a faster Nadal, albeit the court was a bit quicker.

If anything rally types like Fed/Safin should produce the most UFE since the players have the least time and it's more demanding in terms of footwork and timing. Obviously they have bigger serves, but would be interesting to see the rally UFE frequency of these big matches. A similar low margin hitting match in the 04 SF produced similar rally UFE frequency to the more classic offense/defense or grinding matches of 09 and 12. 05 AO is quite a bit lower though which is remarkable.

05 AO only seems to have to have more UFE than 09 AO SF simply because Federer made more errors in return points, especially early in return points, than Nadal. While maybe a few of those are mug missed returns, most of it's just due to the different gamestyles (for example if you look at the third point of that 6-5 game discussed above). It's unlikely Ned could have gotten away playing so conservatively against a Safin or peak Federer. He even knew that which is why he played far more aggressively in the finals, and lo and behold the errors were there and quite a bit higher than what Safin produced in 05 AO against a quicker Federer.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
The best part of this match is the cuts to Safin’s pony tailed coach, wearing an identifical kit and appearing to be 6 inches shorter and 25kgs heavier than Marat.

How can you find fault in this match really?
That, I believe, is actually Peter Lundgren who coached Fed during his early years on the tour, including at Wimbledon 2003.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
yeah. I've watched the AO 05 semi match multiple times (obviously).

based on that, I do think the TA charter is a bit lenient and UFEs count from official is closer to the mark.
Just that charting while watching is a slightly different experience. it'd help me know if the above line is correct. (on a double check IMO)

The mark doesn't really exist though, does it? There are different ways to count this, because it's a sliding scale rather than a discrete dichotomy we use for convenience. It would be better to talk about quality shot by shot than simply judge how the point ends.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Scud played much better than the Wim 03 final. Quite mobile for a bigger guy both him and Safin.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
The mark doesn't really exist though, does it? There are different ways to count this, because it's a sliding scale rather than a discrete dichotomy we use for convenience. It would be better to talk about quality shot by shot than simply judge how the point ends.

closer to the mark from my point of view.
better to talk about quality shot by shot.
but that'd take a MUCH longer time and harder to convince.
 
If anything rally types like Fed/Safin should produce the most UFE since the players have the least time and it's more demanding in terms of footwork and timing.
How often does that happen in real life matches though? Most "old-school" all-court attacking tennis or baseline attacking tennis matches have really high winners/FE counts.

Also Nadal can limit his UE mostly against inconsistent, attacking players, not grinders that go toe to toe with him.
 

Mivic

Hall of Fame
He even knew that which is why he played far more aggressively in the finals, and lo and behold the errors were there and quite a bit higher than what Safin produced in 05 AO against a quicker Federer.
Yep, I'm quite sure this has everything to do with Nadal quaking in his boots at the prospect of facing his pigeon and nothing to do with him being a clear half a step slower and being forced to lower his intensity on several occasions throughout the final due to the residual effects of his marathon second semi.
 

Mivic

Hall of Fame
The ability of ballerina boys to draw the most tenuous conclusions based on the statistical evidence in order to preserve the perceived superiority of their male idol is honestly highly impressive to me. High levels of creative thought on display in some of these threads. Just a shame these abilities are not put to better use.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Yep, I'm quite sure this has everything to do with Nadal quaking in his boots at the prospect of facing his pigeon and nothing to do with him being a clear half a step slower and being forced to lower his intensity on several occasions throughout the final due to the residual effects of his marathon second semi.
Unfortunate that years of seeing Djokovic show up like a zombie to major finals and play with nonexistent or inconsistent intensity, sometimes after a tough semi that was 100% his own doing to begin with (or was he tired there as well), has predisposed you to think this would happen to others as well.
 

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
well well well, weak era mudslinging has already found its way into this match report thread I see
giphy-downsized-large.gif
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
How often does that happen in real life matches though? Most "old-school" all-court attacking tennis or baseline attacking tennis matches have really high winners/FE counts.

Also Nadal can limit his UE mostly against inconsistent, attacking players, not grinders that go toe to toe with him.
Really? Name me another predominantly baseline attacking match at this level. There are extremely few to begin with on HC. I already gave 04 AO SF which was not low in UFE. 04 TMC SF by the same guys, definitely more error prone. 04 USO QF first 3 probably a similar error rate (low winners but more forced errors due to Agassi's movement and Fed's weaker backhanding, neither of which are the case in this match), but of course 05 AO went to a next level of cleanness in the last 2 sets. 13 AO was not on this level, but still lots of UFE. 04 AO QF featured a good number of UFEs from Fed at least. On HC, you'd probably have to bring up matches like 05 USO F (where Federer played extremely short points on serve with Agassi's movement and Fed's BH same dynamic as 04 but even more extreme), and 08/09 USO SF (which is nice but simply not at this level of baseline play, and the rallies were probably a bit more error prone anyways).

Matches with lots of serve/volley and net play have high winners/FE counts and low UFE counts.
 

BauerAlmeida

Hall of Fame
Very little Nalby can do against an in form Safin

Not sure. They didn't play much peak vs peak. When Safin was already established he used to beat Nalbandian quite comfortably, when Nalbandian started to become a better player and score more victories Safin was struggling with movement and injuries. Safin beat Nalbandian quite comfortably in Madrid 2004 which was the best peak vs peak example we have, but it's too small of a sample to judge. Nalbandian's demolition of Safin in the Davis Cup final in Russia makes me think that he can beat a peak Safin, even if that wasn't one. But yeah, overall I give Safin the edge in the matchup. Nalbandian did say Safin was one of his toughest players to face. And Safin said that Federer and Nalbandian were the only players that made him feel like he couldn't do anything on the court and he mentioned that Davis Cup final match as the reason: https://www.puntodebreak.com/2020/07/08/safin-federer-nalbandian-son-unicos-jugadores-senti-no-podia.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
The ability of ballerina boys to draw the most tenuous conclusions based on the statistical evidence in order to preserve the perceived superiority of their male idol is honestly highly impressive to me. High levels of creative thought on display in some of these threads. Just a shame these abilities are not put to better use.

True enough, the stat manipulation and narrative construction skills of esteemed federites are second to none on this board. No one bothers wondering whether their way of looking at things correctly captures reality in its foundations. We're all in the same boat regarding that though. You too have a narrative that takes the stat padding of recent years as direct evidence of the djokoboatness. This board is not one to promote objectivity and an appetite for truth-seeking, that's for certain.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
That's because we actually know enough about the game to credibly construct such arguments. Most others make only first order reddit tier arguments (in terms of narrative and stats). It's pretentious to say but it's true.

Sure, you and you alone possess such sacred knowledge indeed. No Djokodal fans do, or did, or will ever come close, since true connoisseurs of the game naturally realise Federer's superiority. Like those folks from Former Pro who think their understanding is unparalleled. Well, you will join them in a few years.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Sure, you and you alone possess such sacred knowledge indeed. No Djokodal fans do, or did, or will ever come close, since true connoisseurs of the game naturally realise Federer's superiority. Like those folks from Former Pro who think their understanding is unparalleled. Well, you will join them in a few years.
The main point is that tennis has morphed over the last 20 years to become much more a sport for general public consumption, to compete with soccer, basketball, UFC (which is shockingly popular among the youth) etc. What does this mean, it means a lesser emphasis on more classical and traditional styles, less appreciation of skill/fundamentals, and more encouragement and manufacturing of over dramatized narratives and gladiatorial play to provide easy entertainment. No one watches soccer or basketball to appreciate minute details, they watch it because it's a good show with lots of easy stimuli. A similar thing is happening in baseball as well, commonly said to be a boring sport unless people are hitting 500 foot home runs and flipping the bat to the moon. Old school romanticization of the game has fallen by the wayside in favor of easy stimulus and eye popping highlights to attract a younger crowd. The new school does not want to watch a pitcher carve people up for 8 innings conserving his stuff and hitting his spots, instead they'd watch him throw as hard as he can for 5 innings before handing it off to 6 different relievers who do the same. They dress this up as "analytics".

The only problem is that doing so takes away the very thing that made tennis great in the first place and it will never ever be able to compete with those sports for mass public appeal anyways. Part of the reason we're in this predicament today. Sure it's entirely possible that tennis was going to the dogs anyways since it could never compete with other sports for popularity among youth in a rapidly changing cultural climate. But it wouldn't be so unbearable if the young players today at least were class players with solid fundamentals, even if they were not great athletes. Instead they're all trench warfare specialists, and it's one thing to watch Djokodal do that, but any less than that and it's a total disaster.

The battle between Fed fans (the actual ones, not the ones wearing RF hats at the stadium) and Djokodal (not all, but most enjoy this gladiatorial style) is basically this clash between old and new school.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Yep, I'm quite sure this has everything to do with Nadal quaking in his boots at the prospect of facing his pigeon and nothing to do with him being a clear half a step slower and being forced to lower his intensity on several occasions throughout the final due to the residual effects of his marathon second semi.
Sorry man it’s ttw. Nobody agrees.
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
The battle between Fed fans (the actual ones, not the ones wearing RF hats at the stadium) and Djokodal (not all, but most enjoy this gladiatorial style) is basically this clash between old and new school.
Perfectly summed it up. That's what I loved about tennis. The contrast between the old and new styles with Fedalovic. Empire vs Rebels.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
The new school does not want to watch a pitcher carve people up for 8 innings conserving his stuff and hitting his spots, instead they'd watch him throw as hard as he can for 5 innings before handing it off to 6 different relievers who do the same. They dress this up as "analytics".

Wut?

it’s not merely dressed up as analytics, it IS the analytically sound approach. Bullpens are damn-nigh unhittable nowadays.

Baseball, if anything, is less fan-friendly than it’s been in a long time with the emphasis on analytics and the shift towards the “three true outcomes” (home runs, walks, strikeouts) becoming so prevalent. Very little has been done to counteract what many feel is a dying game, and if anything the youth outreach has been quite lacklustre.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
It's not really about superiority, it's about what kind of sport you'd rather follow, and whether sports should all treat global market share and $$$ as the one and only objective. Is sports a form of artistic expression or just another product to be commoditized? Certainly some sports have natural global appeal (and all this basically means is appeal to the lower classes as this is what comprises 90+% of world population), but should all sports contort themselves into a knot to try to compete?

Tennis will never have widespread appeal on the level of other sports, and without its artistic component and the awe that singularly skilled and gifted players inspire, what remains? Maybe the latter was inevitable no matter what, but it's a tragedy that the art and beauty got taken completely out of the game even if it would have been lesser players producing it.

Are you saying the average #20/30/50/100 player plays in a way that meaningfully lacks 'art and beauty' compared to the similarly-ranked players of yore? I can't say that. There may be less variety but still the game utilises all shots. You can go to challengers and the game is fundamentally the same, just worse. Hasn't it always been that way? Tennis is an art on its own, lesser quality tennis is just that, lesser. The problem is the lack of new quality at the top, for various reasons tied to the modern game and lifestyle of course. You rather look at this like a grumbling old-timer, declaring that Alcaraz isn't worth watching because he can't even approach Ferrer. You have this conception whereby modern tennis has gone essentially soulless or something. I can't say that's reasonable. Less quality is the problem, if there were consistent decent quality it would be just fine, not like before when GOAT peaksters roamed the courts, but still entirely fine.

The air of superiority is consistently there as you snub anyone who doesn't accept whatever analysis you come up with as fully correct and hitting the nail of it.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Wut?

it’s not merely dressed up as analytics, it IS the analytically sound approach. Bullpens are damn-nigh unhittable nowadays.

Baseball, if anything, is less fan-friendly than it’s been in a long time with the emphasis on analytics and the shift towards the “three true outcomes” (home runs, walks, strikeouts) becoming so prevalent. Very little has been done to counteract what many feel is a dying game, and if anything the youth outreach has been quite lacklustre.
Three true outcomes make the game more "exciting" as it produces tons of short highlights you can share on social media, etc. Younger people with no attention span don't want to watch a pitcher perfectly locate his spots and induce a bunch of weak contact and put up a 8ip, 2er, 1bb, 5K line. When people say baseball is boring, that's what they refer to. And baseball television audience is quite old but other forms of media are not, there's significant youtube/social media/podcast, etc. presence. So in a way it's worked.

I understand it's the analytically sound approach, but stealing your opponents' signs is as well. Ultimately a line has to be drawn somewhere. Obviously I'm in the small minority who preferred it when pitchers were horses who went deep into games and carried their teams. Which is why Burnes somehow won the CY over Wheeler last year, absolutely absurd. Much more interesting and glorious than watching 10 guys who all throw the same pitches. The playoffs are just not the same without that one horse trying to will his team through whether it was Schilling, Beckett, Verlander, Bumgarner, etc. The average playoff game now is a bullpen game, it's utterly ridiculous.

I understand baseball analytics extremely well, but yet most of its on-field applications have destroyed the game for me whether that's fielder positioning, bullpen usage, pitch selection, etc. Completely removes the human element, players barely have to think out there anymore.
 
Last edited:
Top