Someone PLEASE get this message to Mr. Federer

[SublimeTennis]

First, I understand, I can't criticize, who are you, you can't talk unless you've won 17 Grand Slams. Heard the non-sense before and will again from those who can't defend their position, but can only criticize personally.

WILL SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO ROGER FEDERER SO I CAN STOP SCREAMING AT THE TELEVISION?

His aggressive net game is great, I love it. It brings life back into Tennis and wreaks havoc on his opponents. However as successful as he is, he can be much more if he would follow the simply rule of coming to the net;

ONLY COME FORWARD WHEN YOUR OPPONENT IS OUT OF POSITION!! To some they will not understand, but for us who served and volleyed during the 90's, you NEVER COME FORWARD, ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS, UNLESS YOUR OPPONENT IS IN A BAD POSITION.

If you go on YouTube right now, watch the highlights of the Federer/ Djokovich Semi's, every single time Fed got Djokovich out of position and came forward Fed got the point. Then comes the frustrating part, Fed hits directly to Djokoviches forehand or backhand while Djokovich is in good position, Fed foolishly comes forward and what happens? Fed gets passed, EVERY TIME.

We serve and volleyers know this, the highlights prove it, so please;

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO FEDERER! If he would have followed that basic rule he would have won much easier.

Someone on this forum once said that Federer was a super talented front runner and wasn't the best at strategy, I think this may be true.

 

[easywin]

Dear Fed, why don't you just dominate every rally ?

It's way easier to win this way.

 

[Russeljones]

First, I understand, I can't criticize, who are you, you can't talk unless you've won 17 Grand Slams. Heard the non-sense before and will again from those who can't defend their position, but can only criticize personally.

WILL SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO ROGER FEDERER SO I CAN STOP SCREAMING AT THE TELEVISION?

His aggressive net game is great, I love it. It brings life back into Tennis and wreaks havoc on his opponents. However as successful as he is, he can be much more if he would follow the simply rule of coming to the net;

ONLY COME FORWARD WHEN YOUR OPPONENT IS OUT OF POSITION!! To some they will not understand, but for us who served and volleyed during the 90's, you NEVER COME FORWARD, ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS, UNLESS YOUR OPPONENT IS IN A BAD POSITION.

If you go on YouTube right now, watch the highlights of the Federer/ Djokovich Semi's, every single time Fed got Djokovich out of position and came forward Fed got the point. Then comes the frustrating part, Fed hits directly to Djokoviches forehand or backhand while Djokovich is in good position, Fed foolishly comes forward and what happens? Fed gets passed, EVERY TIME.

We serve and volleyers know this, the highlights prove it, so please;

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO FEDERER! If he would have followed that basic rule he would have won much easier.

Someone on this forum once said that Federer was a super talented front runner and wasn't the best at strategy, I think this may be true.

You don't have a clue. Is this message clear enough?

 

[SublimeTennis]

You don't have a clue. Is this message clear enough?

I knew it, personal and no substance, I get the fools this way.

Before saying another word, tell me where I am wrong about approaching the net??? Hum? I'm waiting.

 

[sbengte]

His aggressive net game is great, I love it. It brings life back into Tennis and wreaks havoc on his opponents. However as successful as he is, he can be much more if he would follow the simply rule of coming to the net;

ONLY COME FORWARD WHEN YOUR OPPONENT IS OUT OF POSITION!! To some they will not understand, but for us who served and volleyed during the 90's, you NEVER COME FORWARD, ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS, UNLESS YOUR OPPONENT IS IN A BAD POSITION.

If you go on YouTube right now, watch the highlights of the Federer/ Djokovich Semi's, every single time Fed got Djokovich out of position and came forward Fed got the point. Then comes the frustrating part, Fed hits directly to Djokoviches forehand or backhand while Djokovich is in good position, Fed foolishly comes forward and what happens? Fed gets passed, EVERY TIME.

We serve and volleyers know this, the highlights prove it, so please;

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO FEDERER! If he would have followed that basic rule he would have won much easier.

Someone on this forum once said that Federer was a super talented front runner and wasn't the best at strategy, I think this may be true.

OP, I hear you. Fed's new found love for rushing to the net blindly and the resultant clumsy/awkward volleying at times which is like offering a nice and easy gift to the opponent to hit a passing shot winner is frustrating to watch. My take on this is that he is still getting used to S&Ving as a tactic after over a decade of primarily playing from the baseline and it is going to take a while and more practice to make more judicious calls on when exactly to approach the net. Not easy to break the habit formed over years to suddenly S&V so his goal for a while now I guess is just try and S&V as much as he can to get used to it in matches.

My 2 cents on the topic.

 

[Aretium]

First, I understand, I can't criticize, who are you, you can't talk unless you've won 17 Grand Slams. Heard the non-sense before and will again from those who can't defend their position, but can only criticize personally.

WILL SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO ROGER FEDERER SO I CAN STOP SCREAMING AT THE TELEVISION?

His aggressive net game is great, I love it. It brings life back into Tennis and wreaks havoc on his opponents. However as successful as he is, he can be much more if he would follow the simply rule of coming to the net;

ONLY COME FORWARD WHEN YOUR OPPONENT IS OUT OF POSITION!! To some they will not understand, but for us who served and volleyed during the 90's, you NEVER COME FORWARD, ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS, UNLESS YOUR OPPONENT IS IN A BAD POSITION.

If you go on YouTube right now, watch the highlights of the Federer/ Djokovich Semi's, every single time Fed got Djokovich out of position and came forward Fed got the point. Then comes the frustrating part, Fed hits directly to Djokoviches forehand or backhand while Djokovich is in good position, Fed foolishly comes forward and what happens? Fed gets passed, EVERY TIME.

We serve and volleyers know this, the highlights prove it, so please;

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO FEDERER! If he would have followed that basic rule he would have won much easier.

Someone on this forum once said that Federer was a super talented front runner and wasn't the best at strategy, I think this may be true.

No1. The quality of passes these days are crazy, compared to the poor returns of the 90s.
No2. How do you get Djokovic out of position? Oh yes you have to RALLY him out of position
No3. Fed did not get passed EVERY TIME
No4. The only thing Fed needs to improve is his break point conversion
No5. Djokovic

 

[smalahove]

I knew it, personal and no substance, I get the fools this way.

Before saying another word, tell me where I am wrong about approaching the net??? Hum? I'm waiting.

From http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=514934

One of the best S&V in a long time...also due to the quality of the returner. Although Fed did S&V quite a lot in the past, he has been much more intelligent about it since Edberg joined. He seems to be better with the angles and cutting off the court for half volleys. Also, all the old S&V players will tell you the real benefit of this tactic comes later in the match when players start overhitting and playing the wrong angles because they are worried about you rushing the net. You could see Djokovich starting to overhit in the second set. You could also see he started taking something off his first serve to raise his percentage. Both were a direct result of Federer relentless aggressiveness early on.

S&V is a high risk, high reward game, where points are short, and has an aspect of the game of chicken. The interesting aspect here is that you force the same high risk / high reward on your opponent, by making them play harder shots.

This means the attacking player has to incorporate into his strategy that fact that he will get passed a lot.

You should read the whole thread though.

 

[Algo]

58% success in net against Djokovic... Djokovic.
69% against Simon, who also can produce good passing shots (as most in the tour)
You're right, and wrong... but mostly wrong.

 

[Russeljones]

I knew it, personal and no substance, I get the fools this way.

Before saying another word, tell me where I am wrong about approaching the net??? Hum? I'm waiting.

Rushing the net is not about winning every point. To talk about the opponent's position is redundant when the whole point is to make him play out of his comfort zone. Long baseline rallies are the green pastures Djokovic has grown fat on. By forcing Novak to play shots he rarely plays (yes, in today's game passing shots are a rarity), under pressure, Federer can psyche him out and induce that extra bit of unpredictability he needs to bridge the gap in terms of raw athleticism. On a good day. On a bad day, he wouldn't have the sharpness to make the volleys stick or to position himself at the T's borders.

This is not personal against you, I am just tired of all the TW "experts" talking about approach shots in the modern game. They can never be the approach shots we had in the 90's and before. With the small exceptions on grass at Queens and Halle. The approach shots and net play today are only a mind game within the tennis match. Anyone who thinks otherwise, is like the guy saying wrestling is fake. When you figure out something's function, you know if it's doing the intended job or not. Lacking that, one runs the risk of barking up the wrong tree, to use the mildest expression known to man.

 

[Sysyphus]

According to Craig O'Shannessy "Interestingly, Federer had more success approaching closer to the middle of the court, giving up less of an angle for Djokovic’s backhand passing shot. Djokovic had five backhand passing shot winners with the most coming from out wide near the tramline".

It seems that you're not quite right in your OP then.

 

[Flint]

I knew it, personal and no substance, I get the fools this way.

Before saying another word, tell me where I am wrong about approaching the net??? Hum? I'm waiting.

Unfortunately there is a lot of immaturity around on this forum (amongst the very good posters, I'm not bashing everyone here).

I think its a symptom of the anonymity of internet forums. You ask a genuine reasonable question and you receive a mere insult that in no way answers the question and only displays immaturity and a lack of knowledge. Likely because the insulter does not know how to answer the question and they certainly wouldn't talk to you like this face to face.

Personally I think it sounds like a good point you raise but I guess Federer knows better than me so I will leave the answers to others.

 

[torpantennis]

First, I understand, I can't criticize, who are you, you can't talk unless you've won 17 Grand Slams. Heard the non-sense before and will again from those who can't defend their position, but can only criticize personally.

WILL SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO ROGER FEDERER SO I CAN STOP SCREAMING AT THE TELEVISION?

His aggressive net game is great, I love it. It brings life back into Tennis and wreaks havoc on his opponents. However as successful as he is, he can be much more if he would follow the simply rule of coming to the net;

ONLY COME FORWARD WHEN YOUR OPPONENT IS OUT OF POSITION!! To some they will not understand, but for us who served and volleyed during the 90's, you NEVER COME FORWARD, ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS, UNLESS YOUR OPPONENT IS IN A BAD POSITION.

If you go on YouTube right now, watch the highlights of the Federer/ Djokovich Semi's, every single time Fed got Djokovich out of position and came forward Fed got the point. Then comes the frustrating part, Fed hits directly to Djokoviches forehand or backhand while Djokovich is in good position, Fed foolishly comes forward and what happens? Fed gets passed, EVERY TIME.

We serve and volleyers know this, the highlights prove it, so please;

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO FEDERER! If he would have followed that basic rule he would have won much easier.

Someone on this forum once said that Federer was a super talented front runner and wasn't the best at strategy, I think this may be true.

I disagree 100% with your argument. If you approach the net only when you see that the opponent is out of position, it's already TOO LATE TO GET CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE NET TO CUT OFF THE ANGLES. Unfortunately, a player has to decide before hitting the possible approach shot, whether he'll approach the net or not, because the footwork is different on a approach shot compared to a baseline groundstroke. All this what you're saying is ONLY down to the poor quality of the approach shot, NOTHING ELSE. Had the approach shot been more accurate and with flatter trajectory, the opponent would have been out of position!

It's easy to judge the quality of approach shots from TV, but much harder down low at court level. AND, if you hesitate on approaching and don't fully commit to the net rush, the opponent will ALWAYS pass you! So, if you plan to approach the net after a shot, then fully commit to it and if the approach shot is of low quality that time, then execute better the next time! ALSO, if you hesitate on approaching and then choose to not rush the net, you'll be in the no-mans-land, and the opponent will get you in trouble on his next shot. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT HIM TO DO? :lol:

 

[Russeljones]

Unfortunately there is a lot of immaturity around on this forum (amongst the very good posters, I'm not bashing everyone here).

I think its a symptom of the anonymity of internet forums. You ask a genuine reasonable question and you receive a mere insult that in no way answers the question and only displays immaturity and a lack of knowledge. Likely because the insulter does not know how to answer the question and they certainly wouldn't talk to you like this face to face.

Personally I think it sounds like a good point you raise but I guess Federer knows better than me so I will leave the answers to others.

Genuinely reasonable question emphasized in CAPS and directed at a pro player on the internet? Too many contradictions to get into.

 

[coloskier]

Rushing the net is not about winning every point. To talk about the opponent's position is redundant when the whole point is to make him play out of his comfort zone. Long baseline rallies are the green pastures Djokovic has grown fat on. By forcing Novak to play shots he rarely plays (yes, in today's game passing shots are a rarity), under pressure, Federer can psyche him out and induce that extra bit of unpredictability he needs to bridge the gap in terms of raw athleticism. On a good day. On a bad day, he wouldn't have the sharpness to make the volleys stick or to position himself at the T's borders.

This is not personal against you, I am just tired of all the TW "experts" talking about approach shots in the modern game. They can never be the approach shots we had in the 90's and before. With the small exceptions on grass at Queens and Halle. The approach shots and net play today are only a mind game within the tennis match. Anyone who thinks otherwise, is like the guy saying wrestling is fake. When you figure out something's function, you know if it's doing the intended job or not. Lacking that, one runs the risk of barking up the wrong tree, to use the mildest expression known to man.

Exactly... You could see how frustrated Djoker was getting. Not because he was missing shots, but because he didn't know what to do once Fed figured out the Djoker couldn't (or wouldn't even try) to hit a DTL passing shot on the BH side.

 

[Federator]

Disagree with the OP to an extent. I think you have the mindset incorrect. It's not like, "ok I hit to Djokovic's FH a good shot, so let me come in and win the volley". No, the decision to come in was made before he hit the FH and the intent of the FH was probably to catch Djokovic off guard, but Djoker happen to guess right and was in position and by then Fed had already committed to come in. It's a pretty fast game you know.

Don't think the problem with Fed is coming in when the opponent is in position, but more so how he muffs some of the simplest volleys - he just loses focus,

 

[rommil]

So Roger got the letter, nodded and sent it to 3 players:

Djokovic said he will practice better passing shots.

Murray winced and grabbed his left thigh for no reason.

Nadal sent an inquiry to ATP/ITF, "Is coming to net legal,no?"

 

[tennisaddict]

Rushing the net is not about winning every point. To talk about the opponent's position is redundant when the whole point is to make him play out of his comfort zone. Long baseline rallies are the green pastures Djokovic has grown fat on. By forcing Novak to play shots he rarely plays (yes, in today's game passing shots are a rarity), under pressure, Federer can psyche him out and induce that extra bit of unpredictability he needs to bridge the gap in terms of raw athleticism. On a good day. On a bad day, he wouldn't have the sharpness to make the volleys stick or to position himself at the T's borders.

This is not personal against you, I am just tired of all the TW "experts" talking about approach shots in the modern game. They can never be the approach shots we had in the 90's and before. With the small exceptions on grass at Queens and Halle. The approach shots and net play today are only a mind game within the tennis match. Anyone who thinks otherwise, is like the guy saying wrestling is fake. When you figure out something's function, you know if it's doing the intended job or not. Lacking that, one runs the risk of barking up the wrong tree, to use the mildest expression known to man.

Great post.

Fed knows himself that he is not going to win every point he comes to the net. As long as he wins the most, he is happy .

His strategy to win is based on keeping points shorts, getting the opponents play in a mode not comfortable to them and dictating the course of the match.

He is not winning a baseline duel consistently, even though stats for his last 2 matches showed he was a winner there as well.

Why do we think we know better than Edberg and Federer ?

 

[Mainad]

Lol...I'm sure Mr. Federer appreciates all the advice but after 16 years on the tour, 17 Grand Slams, 6 WTFs, 23 Masters and 35 other titles, I imagine he reckons he can figure out what he needs to do on a tennis court by now! :wink:

 

[tennisenthusiast]

Djokovic and NOT Djokovich~

 

[tenniskid567]

I share a similar frustration with some of those approaches, but for me the problem is the approach shot, not the decision to approach. The decision and commitment to come to the net usually takes place before you hit the shot. So even though the approach shots floated sometimes, it was less deciding to approach on a bad shot and more he was already committed to coming to the net, he just floated it more than he probably wanted to.

I like that he stays committed to his decision, even if its a bad shot. As soon as you start second guessing, you'll start waiting until after you hit the shot to see how good it is before you approach, and by doing so you'll lose a step and even though you may have put them in a bad position, you yourself did not get into a good enough position, and you get burned. You can't hesitate once you hit that approach, because you're not gonna make it back in time if you bail, and you won't make it up in time if you hesitate.

So I like the commitment on coming forward, even if the approach wasn't good. Had he decided to try and get back, he would have been most likely burned anyways, and coming to the net at least forces the opponent to make a shot (which Djoker did very well at), and it may have started a pattern of second guessing following approach shots.

My 2cents

 

[yellowoctopus]

OP, I hear you. Fed's new found love for rushing to the net blindly and the resultant clumsy/awkward volleying at times which is like offering a nice and easy gift to the opponent to hit a passing shot winner is frustrating to watch. My take on this is that he is still getting used to S&Ving as a tactic after over a decade of primarily playing from the baseline and it is going to take a while and more practice to make more judicious calls on when exactly to approach the net. Not easy to break the habit formed over years to suddenly S&V so his goal for a while now I guess is just try and S&V as much as he can to get used to it in matches.

My 2 cents on the topic.

Would like to throw in my 2 shillings on this response, thanks sbengte.

 

[sureshs]

Let him try it against Nadal and then we can continue this thread.

 

[LazyNinja19]

We serve and volleyers know this, the highlights prove it, so please;

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO FEDERER! If he would have followed that basic rule he would have won much easier.

 

[President]

His net game was great in Shanghai and the second half of this year in general, bit of a strange time to make this thread.

 

[henryshli]

Don't agree with the OP on this at all.

 

[Chanwan]

I share a similar frustration with some of those approaches, but for me the problem is the approach shot, not the decision to approach. The decision and commitment to come to the net usually takes place before you hit the shot. So even though the approach shots floated sometimes, it was less deciding to approach on a bad shot and more he was already committed to coming to the net, he just floated it more than he probably wanted to.

I like that he stays committed to his decision, even if its a bad shot. As soon as you start second guessing, you'll start waiting until after you hit the shot to see how good it is before you approach, and by doing so you'll lose a step and even though you may have put them in a bad position, you yourself did not get into a good enough position, and you get burned. You can't hesitate once you hit that approach, because you're not gonna make it back in time if you bail, and you won't make it up in time if you hesitate.

So I like the commitment on coming forward, even if the approach wasn't good. Had he decided to try and get back, he would have been most likely burned anyways, and coming to the net at least forces the opponent to make a shot (which Djoker did very well at), and it may have started a pattern of second guessing following approach shots.

My 2cents

Pretty much agree. Coming to the net on not so great points serves a purpose in terms of keeping Djoko guessing and not giving him rhythm. But some of the approaches were indeed floaters.
My 2 cents from the match thread:

That's partly a win-win yeah. But a fair number of the times Fed goes to the net is at a time, when he's ahead in the rally or going in behind a serve. In that context, those are points he should win the majority of (say 70 % or more).
Some of the points he went in behind, he gave Djoko absolute sitters that Djoko was happy to pass him on as I wrote in my initial post below.
Overall, even those shots may still have served their purpose though in terns of throwing Djoko off his baseline rhythm.

Nevertheless, I still consider his approaches the weakest part of his game yesterday:

I honestly think that the one thing that wasn't clicking today for Fed were his approaches and chip-and-charges.
20 for 35 at the net is not a great stat, yet he did excellent most of the time if he got a racquet on it. But many of the chip-and-charges would sit up completely for Novak to have plenty of time to hit a (for him) very makeable pass. Which he did again and again and again. Also, 3-4 times or so in the first set, Fed would approach on a top-spun forehand with no pace that again would be right in Djoko's striking zone and Djoko would, surprise, surprise, make a pass out of the reach of Fed.

Obviously, he still made quite a few good ones and the bad ones did serve a purpose in terms of keeping Djoko guessing, breaking his baseline-rhythm etc., but he lost a fair amount of points by giving Djoko too much time and a too good position to make his passing shots (which are pretty great even when stretched).

Fed was actually winning the majority of baseline rallies in the 2nd, a stat showed, but I agree that that was partly caused by not giving Djoko rhythm.

Anyway, this guy is a better tennis analyst than I am:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2014/10/41/Shanghai-Sunday-Brain-Game-Federer-Simon.aspx

 

[Goosehead]

Don't agree with the OP on this at all.

lol. its a laugh isn't it.. I mean fed reaching a major final, wins 2 masters and returns to world no2 rank with a chance to be YE NO1..

..but what Federer and Edberg really need is strategic advice from a poaster on here. :shock::twisted::neutral:

 

[Gary Duane]

Pretty much agree. Coming to the net on not so great points serves a purpose in terms of keeping Djoko guessing and not giving him rhythm. But some of the approaches were indeed floaters.

I think that it's all about mental dominance. Even a reasonably easy-looking passing shot can be missed when things get tight.

In addition, even the great players don't always know exactly what a shot will do when they are making a decision to come in.

For example, how many times do we see these guys hit a slice just a little bit low, but it still clears the net and ends up at about the service box with a little bit more angle than planned, and then it dies. That would be a great shot to come in on. Except they don't KNOW that it's going to be that good when they hit it.

We tend to think they always know exactly what they are going to produce, but since they have to go on INTENT instead of sure knowledge of what is going to happen, it's always a guessing game to charge.

 

[torpantennis]

lol. its a laugh isn't it.. I mean fed reaching a major final, wins 2 masters and returns to world no2 rank with a chance to be YE NO1..

..but what Federer and Edberg really need is strategic advice from a poaster on here. :shock::twisted::neutral:

I guess if he/she were Federer's coach, Fed wouldn't have ANY CONFIDENCE left to come in, behind ANY SHOT! The style of concentrating on what NOT TO DO is not how you build confidence, and win in sports!

 

[sundaypunch]

First, I understand, I can't criticize, who are you, you can't talk unless you've won 17 Grand Slams. Heard the non-sense before and will again from those who can't defend their position, but can only criticize personally.

WILL SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO ROGER FEDERER SO I CAN STOP SCREAMING AT THE TELEVISION?

His aggressive net game is great, I love it. It brings life back into Tennis and wreaks havoc on his opponents. However as successful as he is, he can be much more if he would follow the simply rule of coming to the net;

ONLY COME FORWARD WHEN YOUR OPPONENT IS OUT OF POSITION!! To some they will not understand, but for us who served and volleyed during the 90's, you NEVER COME FORWARD, ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS, UNLESS YOUR OPPONENT IS IN A BAD POSITION.

If you go on YouTube right now, watch the highlights of the Federer/ Djokovich Semi's, every single time Fed got Djokovich out of position and came forward Fed got the point. Then comes the frustrating part, Fed hits directly to Djokoviches forehand or backhand while Djokovich is in good position, Fed foolishly comes forward and what happens? Fed gets passed, EVERY TIME.

We serve and volleyers know this, the highlights prove it, so please;

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO FEDERER! If he would have followed that basic rule he would have won much easier.

Someone on this forum once said that Federer was a super talented front runner and wasn't the best at strategy, I think this may be true.

Just get Djokovic way out of position, approach the net and pick off an easy volley. It couldn't be simpler. Why hasn't anyone else thought of that?

 

[Bobby Jr]

I knew it, personal and no substance, I get the fools this way.

Before saying another word, tell me where I am wrong about approaching the net??? Hum? I'm waiting.

Where you are wrong is in thinking that Federer intentionally rushes the net on non-ideal approach shots. Of course he doesn't intend to hit shots that easy to track down and give his opponent so many options.

He comes in of those balls because he has already committed to the move before he can see how good the approach shot has been. As with the Djokovic match when he chipped those returns (on the deuce court) and rushed in only to be passed it's easy to criticise how poor they looked... but then again, he miscued most of those shots so they sat up or were too short etc. The few which were successful won him key points and even the ones that weren't denied Djokovic rhythm and made him reconsider his own serving placement/pace which, generally, is a net-win situation versus most opponents. The same goes with in-rally approach shots - they add more and more uncertainty to the opponent's thinking which, at crucial moments, can be the difference between panicking or not.

The proof, really, is in the result. The tactic worked - be beat Djokovic in straight sets. It's a bit hard for a couch-expert to say "look at all those crap approaches where you got passed..." - Djokovic has amongst the best passes of anyone on tour off both wings and Federer was still in the positive by employing that tactic.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

The public's opinion won't matter to Federer, he's still winning.

 

[SublimeTennis]

I disagree 100% with your argument. If you approach the net only when you see that the opponent is out of position, it's already TOO LATE TO GET CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE NET TO CUT OFF THE ANGLES. Unfortunately, a player has to decide before hitting the possible approach shot, whether he'll approach the net or not, because the footwork is different on a approach shot compared to a baseline groundstroke. All this what you're saying is ONLY down to the poor quality of the approach shot, NOTHING ELSE. Had the approach shot been more accurate and with flatter trajectory, the opponent would have been out of position!

It's easy to judge the quality of approach shots from TV, but much harder down low at court level. AND, if you hesitate on approaching and don't fully commit to the net rush, the opponent will ALWAYS pass you! So, if you plan to approach the net after a shot, then fully commit to it and if the approach shot is of low quality that time, then execute better the next time! ALSO, if you hesitate on approaching and then choose to not rush the net, you'll be in the no-mans-land, and the opponent will get you in trouble on his next shot. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT HIM TO DO? :lol:

Well I certainly appreciate your opinion, don't agree totally with what you are saying, but it is at least thought out well

Let me try to be very specific, perhaps I didn't make it clear. We are in a baseline rally, I hit directly to your forehand while you are in good position and rush the net, you are going to pass me, even lob me because you have TIME and you are in perfect position to hit.

What I am saying is this, I move you to the left, then hard to the right, I can predict you will barely make it, I go in!! I know even before I move you to the right the best you can do is get barely return, I'll eat you up at the net, easy easy easy.

So my message to Fed, PLEASE someone get this message to Fed, "When your opponent is in perfect position, don't hit to his forehand or backhand or YOU WILL MOST LIKELY BE PASSED".

Again, I encourage everyone, take 8-15 minutes and watch the highlights, you'll see EXACTLY what I mean.

 

[SublimeTennis]

Where you are wrong is in thinking that Federer intentionally rushes the net on non-ideal approach shots. Of course he doesn't intend to hit shots that easy to track down and give his opponent so many options.

He comes in of those balls because he has already committed to the move before he can see how good the approach shot has been. As with the Djokovic match when he chipped those returns (on the deuce court) and rushed in only to be passed it's easy to criticise how poor they looked... but then again, he miscued most of those shots so they sat up or were too short etc. The few which were successful won him key points and even the ones that weren't denied Djokovic rhythm and made him reconsider his own serving placement/pace which, generally, is a net-win situation versus most opponents. The same goes with in-rally approach shots - they add more and more uncertainty to the opponent's thinking which, at crucial moments, can be the difference between panicking or not.

The proof, really, is in the result. The tactic worked - be beat Djokovic in straight sets. It's a bit hard for a couch-expert to say "look at all those crap approaches where you got passed..." - Djokovic has amongst the best passes of anyone on tour off both wings and Federer was still in the positive by employing that tactic.

Yea he won but that doesn't mean it's impossible to do better. He could have lost easy in the finals.

If Fed can keep up his approach game, and remember Djokovich has been playing Fed since when, '07, and said "This is the most perfect Federer has ever played", if he can as one poster on here said "Get better at his approach game after a decade of baselining", we could see another 2004-2007 run. Ok I'm dreaming, but wouldn't it be great to see a number one player mixing it up?

To your point, indeed very true, I tell my son the same thing, todays players are so un-schooled in net play that just the threat of coming forward throws them off, gives doubt as to when, in short messes up their game.

All I'm saying is you don't give a slow high pitch to a home run king, and you don't rush the net when your opponent is in perfect position and has time, given time I DON'T CARE IF DJOKOVICH IS IN MID COURT, he'll pass Fed!

 

[Gary Duane]

So my message to Fed, PLEASE someone get this message to Fed, "When your opponent is in perfect position, don't hit to his forehand or backhand or YOU WILL MOST LIKELY BE PASSED".

Do you realize people are thinking that LITERALLY you want this message to go to Fed, from you?

I think you are saying that he can improve his choices of when to go in. I imagine Edberg is telling him the same thing. Just remember that even when you are as talented as Fed, it's not easy to learn new skills over the age of 30.

I'm amazed that he has already improved as much as he has.

 

[wangs78]

It's not always about being out of position. Sometimes you hit a low slice as an approach shot and the opponent will have to hit a rising shot that will be easy to put away (unless he hits a perfect passing shot which is hard to do even when you are in position). Coming in more often also keeps the opponent on his heels a bit.

Granted I have seen Fed come in on poor approaches but you take the good with the bad when it comes to sticking to a strategy.

 

[Supertegwyn]

Federer why don't you serve at 400km/h?

 

[Chanwan]

I think that it's all about mental dominance. Even a reasonably easy-looking passing shot can be missed when things get tight.

In addition, even the great players don't always know exactly what a shot will do when they are making a decision to come in.

For example, how many times do we see these guys hit a slice just a little bit low, but it still clears the net and ends up at about the service box with a little bit more angle than planned, and then it dies. That would be a great shot to come in on. Except they don't KNOW that it's going to be that good when they hit it.

We tend to think they always know exactly what they are going to produce, but since they have to go on INTENT instead of sure knowledge of what is going to happen, it's always a guessing game to charge.

All good points. I still maintain that Djoko hardly missed one of the floaters though - but the floaters (as well as the net-play in general) kept Fed as the dictator (of the match and the points).

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

So Roger got the letter, nodded and sent it to 3 players:

Djokovic said he will practice better passing shots.

Murray winced and grabbed his left thigh for no reason.

Nadal sent an inquiry to ATP/ITF, "Is coming to net legal,no?"

wasn't it toni's handwriting ?...

 

[bee7]

You can come to the net even if it is just a bluff. If you are up 40-0 for example, that is a good time to come in and surprise your opponent.

I think Fed came to the net so often to increase his chances and to put pressure more to the opponents and disrupt their rhythm especially against Djokovic. He would stay back more often against Simon.

 

[TennisCJC]

Yea, I have never lost a point when watching on TV or from the sidelines. But, it is a bit more difficult when you are the one on the court.

OP has a point in that some of Federer's approach shots where not good enough but I am sure Federer like us commits to coming in before he hits the approach. In many cases, you simply cannot stop and retreat.

My only beef is Federer need to target the slice approach return of serve better. Watch an old Laver or Rosewall match and you will see that they typically hit the shot in a corner and within 3' of the baseline. You could paint the a 3' square in the corner and the old guys would hit the square 9 out of 10 times. Federer occasionally leaves this shot a bit short and a bit in the center. It might work if he left it short and low but medium deep and medium wide is not good enough.

 

[abmk]

So Roger got the letter, nodded and sent it to 3 players:

Djokovic said he will practice better passing shots.

Murray winced and grabbed his left thigh for no reason.

Nadal sent an inquiry to ATP/ITF, "Is coming to net legal,no?"

:lol:

10 chars ...

 

[TJfederer16]

First, I understand, I can't criticize, who are you, you can't talk unless you've won 17 Grand Slams. Heard the non-sense before and will again from those who can't defend their position, but can only criticize personally.

WILL SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO ROGER FEDERER SO I CAN STOP SCREAMING AT THE TELEVISION?

His aggressive net game is great, I love it. It brings life back into Tennis and wreaks havoc on his opponents. However as successful as he is, he can be much more if he would follow the simply rule of coming to the net;

ONLY COME FORWARD WHEN YOUR OPPONENT IS OUT OF POSITION!! To some they will not understand, but for us who served and volleyed during the 90's, you NEVER COME FORWARD, ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS, UNLESS YOUR OPPONENT IS IN A BAD POSITION.

If you go on YouTube right now, watch the highlights of the Federer/ Djokovich Semi's, every single time Fed got Djokovich out of position and came forward Fed got the point. Then comes the frustrating part, Fed hits directly to Djokoviches forehand or backhand while Djokovich is in good position, Fed foolishly comes forward and what happens? Fed gets passed, EVERY TIME.

We serve and volleyers know this, the highlights prove it, so please;

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO FEDERER! If he would have followed that basic rule he would have won much easier.

Someone on this forum once said that Federer was a super talented front runner and wasn't the best at strategy, I think this may be true.

This is the most inappropriate time to post something like this when he's just won a tournament and pretty much dominated Novak from start to finish with these exact tactics which were executed to perfection. It was certainly one of the best displays of serve and volley tennis i've seen in the last 5-10 years.

 

[torpantennis]

This is the most inappropriate time to post something like this when he's just won a tournament and pretty much dominated Novak from start to finish with these exact tactics which were executed to perfection. It was certainly one of the best displays of serve and volley tennis i've seen in the last 5-10 years.

Actually, I think he dominated Djokovic, because his forehand was on fire! Had the FH been as weak as in Wimby, Djokovic would've passed the net approaching Fed more often, like in Wimby!

TBH, it has been many years since I've seen Federer been as good with his FH! I guess he's finally got used to the new bigger racquet. TBH, there's a potential for another dominant stint for Federer if his FH will stay as explosive as in Shanghai!

 

[SublimeTennis]

lol. its a laugh isn't it.. I mean fed reaching a major final, wins 2 masters and returns to world no2 rank with a chance to be YE NO1..

..but what Federer and Edberg really need is strategic advice from a poaster on here. :shock::twisted::neutral:

That's right, Federer and Edberg know EVERYTHING. It's absolutely impossible for them to learn anything!

Funny, and I knew this would happen, those who are great at tennis, understand serve and volley, agree. Those who don't have a clue criticize but with no substance, they criticize the poster but have no counterpoint.

I really appreciate those good players who DO perhaps disagree but EXPLAIN WHY. People like this, who criticize the poster instead of what the poster said are ignored by any rational person.

 

[SublimeTennis]

Do you realize people are thinking that LITERALLY you want this message to go to Fed, from you?

I think you are saying that he can improve his choices of when to go in. I imagine Edberg is telling him the same thing. Just remember that even when you are as talented as Fed, it's not easy to learn new skills over the age of 30.

I'm amazed that he has already improved as much as he has.

YES, YES my friend, I want this message to get DIRECTLY TO FEDERER!! I'm sure there are some on here who tweet Fed, are able to get a message up where he can see it. I've read almost all pro's read this forum from time to time, so yes, I would LOVE to have Fed read it, I'll bet money he'll agree.

 

[coolschreiber]

Federer usually hits a very heavy approach shot. Even if you are a little out of position there isn't much one can do with it. But again Djokovic can do a lot even with impossible balls hit at him.

 

[70後]

Even for lala land, this can't be serious, right?

 

[InvisibleSoul]

ONLY COME FORWARD WHEN YOUR OPPONENT IS OUT OF POSITION!! To some they will not understand, but for us who served and volleyed during the 90's, you NEVER COME FORWARD, ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS, UNLESS YOUR OPPONENT IS IN A BAD POSITION.

So essentially you're telling Federer to never come to the net against Djokovic. As others have said, the player usually decides to come forward BEFORE he hits the approach shot. Yes, there are times where after hitting a shot, you realize your opponent is going to be out of position and you come to the net after, but against Djokovic, how often do you think that will happen? Not very.

 

[jelle v]

First, I understand, I can't criticize, who are you, you can't talk unless you've won 17 Grand Slams. Heard the non-sense before and will again from those who can't defend their position, but can only criticize personally.

WILL SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO ROGER FEDERER SO I CAN STOP SCREAMING AT THE TELEVISION?

His aggressive net game is great, I love it. It brings life back into Tennis and wreaks havoc on his opponents. However as successful as he is, he can be much more if he would follow the simply rule of coming to the net;

ONLY COME FORWARD WHEN YOUR OPPONENT IS OUT OF POSITION!! To some they will not understand, but for us who served and volleyed during the 90's, you NEVER COME FORWARD, ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS, UNLESS YOUR OPPONENT IS IN A BAD POSITION.

If you go on YouTube right now, watch the highlights of the Federer/ Djokovich Semi's, every single time Fed got Djokovich out of position and came forward Fed got the point. Then comes the frustrating part, Fed hits directly to Djokoviches forehand or backhand while Djokovich is in good position, Fed foolishly comes forward and what happens? Fed gets passed, EVERY TIME.

We serve and volleyers know this, the highlights prove it, so please;

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO FEDERER! If he would have followed that basic rule he would have won much easier.

Someone on this forum once said that Federer was a super talented front runner and wasn't the best at strategy, I think this may be true.

I disagee.. you cannot compare 90's volleying to 10's volleying. Games differ way to much.

If Federer would only come to the net when his opponent is out of position the whole element of surprise would disappear, which -in today's game- is a very important factor in coming to the net because of the brilliant passing shots. Plus his attacks even when his opponent is still in position, keep the pressure on, the cannot relax.

So that's why I disagree with you..