Roger Federer reflects on Novak Djokovic's 'exceptional year'

pj80

Hall of Fame
Roger Federer said Novak Djokovic had a "truly exceptional" year, even as the world No. 1 fell short of winning a calendar grand slam at the US Open.

Federer, who is recovering from knee surgery having last played at Wimbledon in July, added that he thinks achieving a calendar grand slam is still a possibility in the men's game.

"I think it is possible that it's going to happen again," he told Eurosport.
"We saw it with Novak, myself and Rafa (Nadal) that we come extremely close, but just doing it, I think you need a bit of luck, you need perseverance, strength, you need everything.
"That's why I think it's going to be hard but it's possible ... What Novak did this year was, of course, truly exceptional."

He said that he's "recovering well" from the surgery and is in the process of undergoing rehab.

"I've had no setbacks, every day's a better day, I'm feeling strong and excited for what's to come," Federer said.

"I experienced it, of course, already a little bit last year, and I was actually surprised how somewhat easy it was for me to go through the rehab process because I know it's not everybody's favorite thing to do, especially as a top athlete.

"But I think maybe, after all these years of traveling, it was also nice to be home, having more time for the family and other things.

"Of course, I wish I could be back on a tennis court as quick as possible, but I have to be patient. Look, it's a slower period right now. I've got to take it step by step and so far so good, so I'm very happy."

Roger Federer reflects on Novak Djokovic's 'exceptional year' (msn.com)
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
He knows it was an insane year, though I don't agree with his statement that he and Nadal were extremely close, both never won the first two slams of the year and dealt with the mental pressure that came with each subsequent slam. Novak is the only one who got close.

Yes Federer especially and Nadal once got very close to a NCYGS, or simply 4 in a row, but even there, Novak has done that.
 
He knows it was an insane year, though I don't agree with his statement that he and Nadal were extremely close, both never won the first two slams of the year and dealt with the mental pressure that came with each subsequent slam. Novak is the only one who got close.

Yes Federer especially and Nadal once got very close to a NCYGS, or simply 4 in a row, but even there, Novak has done that.
I suppose that's semantics - he obv just meant 27/28 matches which is statistically v close after the fact. But as you say, the concept of pressure introduces a nebulous nuance with regards to one's interpretation of proximity to the cheevo. Perhaps Fed is arrogantly propagandizing the former interpretation to prop up the fact he won a set in the match he lost out of sheer desperation in his death throws.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
I suppose that's semantics - he obv just meant 27/28 matches which is statistically v close after the fact. But as you say, the concept of pressure introduces a nebulous nuance with regards to one's interpretation of proximity to the cheevo. Perhaps Fed is arrogantly propagandizing the former interpretation to prop up the fact he won a set in the match he lost out of sheer desperation in his death throws.
I understand what he meant, but lets be honest here, he went into Wimbledon with zero chance of winning the CYGS everytime, as did Nadal. As far as 27/28, Djokovic had done that in 2015 also, the same way Federer did in 2006 and 2007, and his chances were finished after RG too.

Federer had some very very close runs to NCYGS though, that cannot be denied, even Nadal got fairly close in his only attempt to hold four in a row.
 
He knows it was an insane year, though I don't agree with his statement that he and Nadal were extremely close, both never won the first two slams of the year and dealt with the mental pressure that came with each subsequent slam. Novak is the only one who got close.

Yes Federer especially and Nadal once got very close to a NCYGS, or simply 4 in a row, but even there, Novak has done that.
Spot on.
 
I understand what he meant, but lets be honest here, he went into Wimbledon with zero chance of winning the CYGS everytime, as did Nadal. As far as 27/28, Djokovic had done that in 2015 also, the same way Federer did in 2006 and 2007, and his chances were finished after RG too.

Federer had some very very close runs to NCYGS though, that cannot be denied, even Nadal got fairly close in his only attempt to hold four in a row.
That is one way to look at it, yes, but the build up of pressure is to me the only meaningful difference, and it's a nebulous one. Nole did indeed achieve the same in 2015 but he lost to someone playing in their pyjamas, so its inclusion seems disingenuous at best.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
That is one way to look at it, yes, but the build up of pressure is to me the only meaningful difference, and it's a nebulous one. Nole did indeed achieve the same in 2015 but he lost to someone playing in their pyjamas, so its inclusion seems disingenuous at best.
Yes, but the pressure is what makes it such a gigantic task, or we can just say 4 in a row is 4 in a row. The game is played between the ears more than anything else.

And yes pyjamas do take the shine off Djokovic's 2015 run.
 

topher

Hall of Fame
He knows it was an insane year, though I don't agree with his statement that he and Nadal were extremely close, both never won the first two slams of the year and dealt with the mental pressure that came with each subsequent slam. Novak is the only one who got close.

Yes Federer especially and Nadal once got very close to a NCYGS, or simply 4 in a row, but even there, Novak has done that.
Do we really think the mental pressure is what made the difference with Novak though? It seems to me he was just physically exhausted and Med played a perfect match to not let him find his legs/game.

If anything, it was his opponents falling apart mentally (and physically) most of the year under the pressure of playing Novak.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
Do we really think the mental pressure is what made the difference with Novak though? It seems to me he was just physically exhausted and Med played a perfect match to not let him find his legs/game.

If anything, it was his opponents falling apart mentally (and physically) most of the year under the pressure of playing Novak.
There is nothing saying that one has to be exclusive of the other here. But he even mentioned it a few times that he is tired of talking about the CYGS, even cut Patrick McEnroe off on the on court interview. It was clearly weighing on his mind, not denying other factors did not play a part.
 

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
Do we really think the mental pressure is what made the difference with Novak though? It seems to me he was just physically exhausted and Med played a perfect match to not let him find his legs/game.

If anything, it was his opponents falling apart mentally (and physically) most of the year under the pressure of playing Novak.
I think Novak got a bit of luck with a perfect storm of weather and court conditions - favorable to him and unfavorable to his main rival - to help him win AO (vs Med) and FO (vs Nadal).

Wimbledon, he was far enough ahead of the field he didn’t need much luck.

The US Open was different. The only way he gets by Med, who was playing at a much higher level than Djokovic for whole tournament, was with some luck, which he didn’t get.
 

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
He knows it was an insane year, though I don't agree with his statement that he and Nadal were extremely close, both never won the first two slams of the year and dealt with the mental pressure that came with each subsequent slam. Novak is the only one who got close.

Yes Federer especially and Nadal once got very close to a NCYGS, or simply 4 in a row, but even there, Novak has done that.
Same. Yea how can you be extremely close when you never won the 1st two? To me, I think it's hard for him and Nadal to have to give Djokovic full credit for some of the stuff he's done because they would be accepting the realization that he may be better because they didn't do it. It's like earlier this year when someone asked Nadal to comment on Djokovic breaking the weeks record, and his 1st response was "well all 3 of us have records"...etc.. Lol
 

jga111

Hall of Fame
I understand what he meant, but lets be honest here, he went into Wimbledon with zero chance of winning the CYGS everytime, as did Nadal. As far as 27/28, Djokovic had done that in 2015 also, the same way Federer did in 2006 and 2007, and his chances were finished after RG too.

Federer had some very very close runs to NCYGS though, that cannot be denied, even Nadal got fairly close in his only attempt to hold four in a row.
3 out of 4 grand slams is 3 out of 4 whichever way you look at it
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
Same. Yea how can you be extremely close when you never won the 1st two? To me, I think it's hard to him and Nadal to have to give Djokovic full credit for some of the stuff he's done because they would be accepting the realization that he may be better because they didn't do it. It's like earlier this year when someone asked Nadal to comment on Djokovic breaking the weeks record, and his 1st response was "well all 3 of us have records"...etc.. Lol
Yeah, kind of like a defense mechanism. I guess they see each other as equals, hence don't want to give any ground.
 

BauerAlmeida

Professional
earlier this year when someone asked Nadal to comment on Djokovic breaking the weeks record, and his 1st response was "well all 3 of us have records"...etc.. Lol
Did he say that? Didn't he say something like it's another record broken record or something along those lines?
 

Amen786

Semi-Pro
So you agree then that 4 out of 4 grand slams is 4 out of 4, and NCYGs = CYGS.
Ncygs is harder in my opinion.
Not easy to maintain form across seasons.
Especially when nole started to look like a compromised man at Rome 2016.
 
He knows it was an insane year, though I don't agree with his statement that he and Nadal were extremely close, both never won the first two slams of the year and dealt with the mental pressure that came with each subsequent slam. Novak is the only one who got close.

Yes Federer especially and Nadal once got very close to a NCYGS, or simply 4 in a row, but even there, Novak has done that.
It's Federer's choice of copium. Let him drink away the pain.
 

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
Did he say that? Didn't he say something like it's another record broken record or something along those lines?
Yea he said that at the end of it I think. He said something about 3 players doing great things in the last few years, or something along those lines, so it felt like he had to include himself in his response.
 

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
He knows it was an insane year, though I don't agree with his statement that he and Nadal were extremely close, both never won the first two slams of the year and dealt with the mental pressure that came with each subsequent slam. Novak is the only one who got close.

Yes Federer especially and Nadal once got very close to a NCYGS, or simply 4 in a row, but even there, Novak has done that.
yeah, no comparison. once you‘ve lost one of the first two slams you are out of contention for the CYGS. Neither Nadal nor Fed ever came close. Novak won the first 27 slams matches of the year. Neither Nadal nor Fed even reached 14 in any season.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
At the end of the year you will see 3 / 4 and then you will say it was close.

At the US open - I take your point but Fed is talking from the perspective of above.
Nope. Federer was not competing for CYGS whenever he got to Wimbledon. The CYGS talk ended each time at RG.

He had a three slam season, but, his chance to win four was ended half way through the slam season, he never even made it past the half way mark. Federer never played with mental pressure of CYGS whenever he played W or USO.
 

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
At the end of the year you will see 3 / 4 and then you will say it was close.

At the US open - I take your point but Fed is talking from the perspective of above.
Federer was close to winning 4 in a row twice (2006 and 2007 RG) but he was never close to winning the CYGS. That's where the issue lies with what he said.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
yeah, no comparison. once you‘ve lost one of the first two slams you are out of contention for the CYGS. Neither Nadal nor Fed ever came close. Novak won the first 27 slams matches of the year. Neither Nadal nor Fed even reached 14 in any season.
Best Federer did was win the first 13 matches, best Nadal did was win the first 10 matches, best Djokovic did was win the first 27 matches...they all failed, but Djokovic was the only one who got close.
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Because after winning the AO, he always lost at RG. That's a lot of sets short of a CYGS.
Lol im so glad Medvedev cut the Ultronian extension cord. Yall have to result to this kind of logic now :D ill take it any day over what yall have saved in drafts :cool: "But but.... Unbeatable dal' was in may instead of September" :whistle:
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
Federer was close to winning 4 in a row twice (2006 and 2007 RG) but he was never close to winning the CYGS. That's where the issue lies with what he said.
Exactly, if he said he was close to four in a row, he would have been right, but maybe did not want to say it that way, as Novak does have four in a row if you start at any point.
 

jga111

Hall of Fame
Nope. Federer was not competing for CYGS whenever he got to Wimbledon. The CYGS talk ended each time at RG.

He had a three slam season, but, his chance to win four was ended half way through the slam season, he never even made it past the half way mark. Federer never played with mental pressure of CYGS whenever he played W or USO.
You are right - but I’m also suggesting Fed is right from the perspective of looking back. “It was close- if only I had won the French blah..”
 

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
Fed was 1 slam away from CYGS in 2004, 2006 and 2007
That's not the same thing. A CYGS is a progression from one Slam to the next. Once you lose at one of them, the progression is over. You can't just say he was one Slam away because if he had won the one Slam, you don't know if he would have won the other two.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
You are right - but I’m also suggesting Fed is right from the perspective of looking back. “It was close- if only I had won the French blah..”
We don't know for sure how things would have played out, the whole butterfly effect. You change one thing, you cannot say for sure everything else following it stays the same.
 

jga111

Hall of Fame
That's not the same thing. A CYGS is a progression from one Slam to the next. Once you lose at one of them, the progression is over. You can't just say he was one Slam away because if he had won the one Slam, you don't know if he would have won the other two.
Fed was 1 slam away as was Novak. One may have had more pressure that the other but the facts don’t change.
 
Top