Was Federer clutcher, less nervous, in the 2004-2009 period ?

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
We know that he has never been the best under pressure, but I always thought that he was more confident back then.Somehow his mistakes, his inability to cross the finish line in tight matches got more and more prevalent from 2010 onwards.The matches at the USO in 2010 & 2011 vs Novak, the match vs Tsonga at Wimbledon, in 2011, the IW match vs Delpo in 2018, the notorious final of Wimbledon 2019, you name it.Let me know what you think on the subject.
 

Eren

Professional
Back in the day, he was more confident. As you stated, he was never the best in those moments. He did lose the 06 Rome final which was the first original 15-40 lol.

After that, I don't remember him losing an important match in his 04-09 after having MPs. I know he lost against Safin in 05 AO SF.

But from 2010, he almost got a patent lmao.

Djokovic: 10,11 USO and 19 Wimbledon
DelPo: IW 18 (important since he could have held on to #1 ranking for much and much longer)
Anderson: Wimbledon 2018, had MP
Thiem: Madrid QF (???)
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
Yeah, he did get less clutch with age. People have the wrong impression thinking he's always been like this.

Same way other people have the wrong impression that Djokovic was always as clutch as he is now.
Yeah, their career's paths in this regard have been different.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
He usually looked confident when he faced bums like Roddick, Bagdhatis, Hewitt, Philippousis, Kiefer who rolled over when they saw him opposite side of net.

When he faced considerable resistance? Same story as his entire career. 05 Safin was a mini break up in tiebreak blew it and lost after MPs. Nearly lost miami 05. Lost 05 RG sf 4th set from break up. Blew 2 MPs in 06 Rome final on east FHs. 2-1 0-40 3rd set of RG 06 and loses in 4. 5-1 up first set Hamburg 08 loses 7-6 :laughing:

more often than not he folded when he played someone on his level. Flat track bully.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Back in the day, he was more confident. As you stated, he was never the best in those moments. He did lose the 06 Rome final which was the first original 15-40 lol.

After that, I don't remember him losing an important match in his 04-09 after having MPs. I know he lost against Safin in 05 AO SF.

But from 2010, he almost got a patent lmao.

Djokovic: 10,11 USO and 19 Wimbledon
DelPo: IW 18 (important since he could have held on to #1 ranking for much and much longer)
Anderson: Wimbledon 2018, had MP
Thiem: Madrid QF (???)
Fed out of nowhere was incredibly clutch in 2017. After that he returned to the mean.
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
The thing with Fed is that he is also a more offensive player by nature, so the margins in close matches for him are way slimmer than for Nadal and Djokovic who have more defensive games and thus makes it easier for them to be clutch.
This is actually a very good point.Due to the nature of his game, he is more prone to errors in critical moments.
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
He usually looked confident when he faced bums like Roddick, Bagdhatis, Hewitt, Philippousis, Kiefer who rolled over when they saw him opposite side of net.

When he faced considerable resistance? Same story as his entire career. 05 Safin was a mini break up in tiebreak blew it and lost after MPs. Nearly lost miami 05. Lost 05 RG sf 4th set from break up. Blew 2 MPs in 06 Rome final on east FHs. 2-1 0-40 3rd set of RG 06 and loses in 4. 5-1 up first set Hamburg 08 loses 7-6 :laughing:

more often than not he folded when he played someone on his level. Flat track bully.
Always the dissing no ?
 

SonnyT

Hall of Fame
In golf, they say putting is the first to go with age.

In tennis, an even better example is Nadal. When young, he was as clutch as they came. Now he falls apart even when leading 2-0 in sets!

But you got to credit the rare players who become more clutch with experience: Tom Brady, and Novak Djokovic!
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
04 was peak clutch (except lolympix ROFLMAO). 05-07 next. Since then, Fred's clutch declined gradually along with his physique, although the brief clutch peak in early 2017 was nice.
You consider 2005 as being less clutch compared to 2004 due to the loss to the Russian gigolo in the AO semifinal ? :D
 

Musterrific

Semi-Pro
Back in the day, he was more confident. As you stated, he was never the best in those moments. He did lose the 06 Rome final which was the first original 15-40 lol.

After that, I don't remember him losing an important match in his 04-09 after having MPs. I know he lost against Safin in 05 AO SF.

But from 2010, he almost got a patent lmao.

Djokovic: 10,11 USO and 19 Wimbledon
DelPo: IW 18 (important since he could have held on to #1 ranking for much and much longer)
Anderson: Wimbledon 2018, had MP
Thiem: Madrid QF (???)
Thiem: IW 2019
 

Sephiroth

Hall of Fame
Wimb 2018 is one no one looks at but imo it could've been a crucial point in the Fed/Djokovic rivalry

Fed was in slam winning form more than Novak. He had the momentum. If he went past Anderson I would've fancied him to win since it was Novak's first high level tournament and don't think he would've beaten Nadal and Fed back to back in his first slam return, Fed could've struck an early blow like he did with Nadal in 2017 which set him up full of confidence for future matches vs Nadal

by the time Djokovic won Wimb 18 he was back and confident

long shot but that's how I see it
 

BGod

Legend
The reality is he was never clutch. He is the greatest choker in men's tennis. I say that as a fan since his 2001 Sampras match but it became abundantly clear after 2015. Novak beat him soundly in the Wimbledon and USO finals but it was less Roger being old and Novak being at his best and more on Roger absolutely choking on every opportunity (break points). His form leading up to Novak matches was on par with his 2009-2010 days but he was playing with a larger frame which greatly reduced his shanked shots. And speaking of 2009, his matches against Haas and del Potro at the French, his Wimbledon final against Andy and his USO loss against del Potro were showcases that even still in his physical prime he was a choking dog. Excuse me if I'm being harsh. This is all well before his 2019 Wimbledon match and infamous 40-15 on serve. I am not entirely on board with it being the biggest chokejob of the men's Open Era but it's damn high up there. Of course the excuse again was his age against Novak. But that excuse has been pummeled into the dirt considering the time span between his 2010 and 2011 USO choke fests (the last being my pick for worst choke of OE for men).

Roger Federer is the absolute quintessential front-runner. That was always his edge going back to his early years. He is a fighter and thus seldom gets obliterated but in the end he rarely, RARELY wins playing from behind or at even odds. He has one of the worst track records at even odds and best of five set matches when down 1-2 in the history of the men's game. But the popular examples on
display are of course the Slams and WTF:

4-4 in 5th set of Slam Finals (0-3 when down 1-2 and 1-3 when betting underdog)
2-5 in 5th set of Slam Semis (1-4 up 2-1)

Most matches lost with MP in hand.

It's unfortunate his 2017 Australian Open run got him back a lot of ground by winning a 5 set SF match, a 5 set Final match and that final was the first he won as a betting underdog but all that was equaled by his 2019 Wimbledon chokejob. Even more were his losses in some leading and favoured positions such as losing 2009 USO up 2-1, 2010 up 2-1, 2011 not favoured but up 2-0, up 2-1 in 2005 AO SF, 2016 WMB SF, favoured to win 2013 AO SF. He also allowed the 2017 AO SF up 2-0 to go 5, heavily favoured in 2009 WMB and 2018 AO going 5.

Some additional fun facts, 2 of his 3 Slam losses up 2-0 came at his most successful Slam (Wimbledon) and against Anderson and Tsonga. His 0-2 comebacks, of which he has a shared record of 10 with Boris Becker and Aaron Krickstein have come against the following men:

Cilic
Monfils
Benneteau
del Potro
Falla
Haas
Berdych
Nadal
Sargsian
Wessels

All of whom he was seeded higher and in some cases substantially so and heavily favoured. But perhaps it is playing during Djokovic's reign who is regarded as one of the most clutch players of all time given his statistics and losing to him that elevates his inability to make comebacks against favoured or even players and constantly losing when favoured or statistically likely to finish.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
The reality is he was never clutch. He is the greatest choker in men's tennis. I say that as a fan since his 2001 Sampras match but it became abundantly clear after 2015. Novak beat him soundly in the Wimbledon and USO finals but it was less Roger being old and Novak being at his best and more on Roger absolutely choking on every opportunity (break points). His form leading up to Novak matches was on par with his 2009-2010 days but he was playing with a larger frame which greatly reduced his shanked shots. And speaking of 2009, his matches against Haas and del Potro at the French, his Wimbledon final against Andy and his USO loss against del Potro were showcases that even still in his physical prime he was a choking dog. Excuse me if I'm being harsh. This is all well before his 2019 Wimbledon match and infamous 40-15 on serve. I am not entirely on board with it being the biggest chokejob of the men's Open Era but it's damn high up there. Of course the excuse again was his age against Novak. But that excuse has been pummeled into the dirt considering the time span between his 2010 and 2011 USO choke fests (the last being my pick for worst choke of OE for men).

Roger Federer is the absolute quintessential front-runner. That was always his edge going back to his early years. He is a fighter and thus seldom gets obliterated but in the end he rarely, RARELY wins playing from behind or at even odds. He has one of the worst track records at even odds and best of five set matches when down 1-2 in the history of the men's game. But the popular examples on
display are of course the Slams and WTF:

4-4 in 5th set of Slam Finals (0-3 when down 1-2 and 1-3 when betting underdog)
2-5 in 5th set of Slam Semis (1-4 up 2-1)

Most matches lost with MP in hand.

It's unfortunate his 2017 Australian Open run got him back a lot of ground by winning a 5 set SF match, a 5 set Final match and that final was the first he won as a betting underdog but all that was equaled by his 2019 Wimbledon chokejob. Even more were his losses in some leading and favoured positions such as losing 2009 USO up 2-1, 2010 up 2-1, 2011 not favoured but up 2-0, up 2-1 in 2005 AO SF, 2016 WMB SF, favoured to win 2013 AO SF. He also allowed the 2017 AO SF up 2-0 to go 5, heavily favoured in 2009 WMB and 2018 AO going 5.

Some additional fun facts, 2 of his 3 Slam losses up 2-0 came at his most successful Slam (Wimbledon) and against Anderson and Tsonga. His 0-2 comebacks, of which he has a shared record of 10 with Boris Becker and Aaron Krickstein have come against the following men:

Cilic
Monfils
Benneteau
del Potro
Falla
Haas
Berdych
Nadal
Sargsian
Wessels

All of whom he was seeded higher and in some cases substantially so and heavily favoured. But perhaps it is playing during Djokovic's reign who is regarded as one of the most clutch players of all time given his statistics and losing to him that elevates his inability to make comebacks against favoured or even players and constantly losing when favoured or statistically likely to finish.
Let's see Novak in his mid 30's up against a younger guy his own level and see if he'll still be as clutch.

We'll never know unfortunately.
 

BGod

Legend
Let's see Novak in his mid 30's up against a younger guy his own level and see if he'll still be as clutch.

We'll never know unfortunately.
Okay but then judge Federer based on 2003-2010. Nothing clutch there really unless you count winning 16-14 in the 5th set at Wimbledon after his opponent chokes away quadruple set point in the 2nd. Oh and that opponent being his career pigeon. Or would you prefer giving him oodles of credit coming back 0-2 against an unseeded player in the 4th round of the French or coming back down 1-2 in that same tournament against a 20 year old 5th seed making his first run past the 2nd round at that particular tournament? But 2005 Miami AMIRIGHT?
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
Okay but then judge Federer based on 2003-2010. Nothing clutch there really unless you count winning 16-14 in the 5th set at Wimbledon after his opponent chokes away quadruple set point in the 2nd. Oh and that opponent being his career pigeon. Or would you prefer giving him oodles of credit coming back 0-2 against an unseeded player in the 4th round of the French or coming back down 1-2 in that same tournament against a 20 year old 5th seed making his first run past the 2nd round at that particular tournament? But 2005 Miami AMIRIGHT?
2007 Wimby fifth set, BPs
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Okay but then judge Federer based on 2003-2010. Nothing clutch there really unless you count winning 16-14 in the 5th set at Wimbledon after his opponent chokes away quadruple set point in the 2nd. Oh and that opponent being his career pigeon. Or would you prefer giving him oodles of credit coming back 0-2 against an unseeded player in the 4th round of the French or coming back down 1-2 in that same tournament against a 20 year old 5th seed making his first run past the 2nd round at that particular tournament? But 2005 Miami AMIRIGHT?
Miami 05
Wimbledon 07
RG 09

I rate as great clutch performances.

AO 05
MC 05
RG 05
Rome 06
RG 06
RG 07
AO 09
Canada 09
USO 09

the opposite :-D :whistle:
 

ND-13

Professional
I think it is a combination of
- not being as clutch as Novak
- always taking matches to 4 and 5 sets even when not playing well
- facing an ATG in those matches

If you take out the Novak losses from MP, how many chokes does he have at majors ? Hardly anything and nothing out of the ordinary for someone who has played 20+ years.
 
P

PETEhammer

Guest
He usually looked confident when he faced bums like Roddick, Bagdhatis, Hewitt, Philippousis, Kiefer who rolled over when they saw him opposite side of net.

When he faced considerable resistance? Same story as his entire career. 05 Safin was a mini break up in tiebreak blew it and lost after MPs. Nearly lost miami 05. Lost 05 RG sf 4th set from break up. Blew 2 MPs in 06 Rome final on east FHs. 2-1 0-40 3rd set of RG 06 and loses in 4. 5-1 up first set Hamburg 08 loses 7-6 :laughing:

more often than not he folded when he played someone on his level. Flat track bully.
This is actually the truth. Federer has NEVER been clutch.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Okay but then judge Federer based on 2003-2010. Nothing clutch there really unless you count winning 16-14 in the 5th set at Wimbledon after his opponent chokes away quadruple set point in the 2nd. Oh and that opponent being his career pigeon. Or would you prefer giving him oodles of credit coming back 0-2 against an unseeded player in the 4th round of the French or coming back down 1-2 in that same tournament against a 20 year old 5th seed making his first run past the 2nd round at that particular tournament? But 2005 Miami AMIRIGHT?
I mean, if you go down that route, what was so special about Novak's 2019 Wimb win since Federer lost it more than Djoko won it? What was so special about several of his comebacks too against lesser players?

But anyway, Fed won several close matches in 2003-2010 that he could have lost otherwise: Wimb 2004 F, USO 2004 QF, Miami 2005 F, AO 2006 QF, Wimb 2007 F, RG 2009 SF and Wimb 2009 F.

Then, there's also 2011 FO SF where Federer won by being clutch, even though he was slightly past his own prime.

RG 2009 SF was no joke. Delpo was a rising youngster who had his career best season in 2009. Past performances in that case for him are irrelevant.
 
D

Deleted member 744633

Guest
The reality is he was never clutch. He is the greatest choker in men's tennis. I say that as a fan since his 2001 Sampras match but it became abundantly clear after 2015. Novak beat him soundly in the Wimbledon and USO finals but it was less Roger being old and Novak being at his best and more on Roger absolutely choking on every opportunity (break points). His form leading up to Novak matches was on par with his 2009-2010 days but he was playing with a larger frame which greatly reduced his shanked shots. And speaking of 2009, his matches against Haas and del Potro at the French, his Wimbledon final against Andy and his USO loss against del Potro were showcases that even still in his physical prime he was a choking dog. Excuse me if I'm being harsh. This is all well before his 2019 Wimbledon match and infamous 40-15 on serve. I am not entirely on board with it being the biggest chokejob of the men's Open Era but it's damn high up there. Of course the excuse again was his age against Novak. But that excuse has been pummeled into the dirt considering the time span between his 2010 and 2011 USO choke fests (the last being my pick for worst choke of OE for men).

Roger Federer is the absolute quintessential front-runner. That was always his edge going back to his early years. He is a fighter and thus seldom gets obliterated but in the end he rarely, RARELY wins playing from behind or at even odds. He has one of the worst track records at even odds and best of five set matches when down 1-2 in the history of the men's game. But the popular examples on
display are of course the Slams and WTF:

4-4 in 5th set of Slam Finals (0-3 when down 1-2 and 1-3 when betting underdog)
2-5 in 5th set of Slam Semis (1-4 up 2-1)

Most matches lost with MP in hand.

It's unfortunate his 2017 Australian Open run got him back a lot of ground by winning a 5 set SF match, a 5 set Final match and that final was the first he won as a betting underdog but all that was equaled by his 2019 Wimbledon chokejob. Even more were his losses in some leading and favoured positions such as losing 2009 USO up 2-1, 2010 up 2-1, 2011 not favoured but up 2-0, up 2-1 in 2005 AO SF, 2016 WMB SF, favoured to win 2013 AO SF. He also allowed the 2017 AO SF up 2-0 to go 5, heavily favoured in 2009 WMB and 2018 AO going 5.

Some additional fun facts, 2 of his 3 Slam losses up 2-0 came at his most successful Slam (Wimbledon) and against Anderson and Tsonga. His 0-2 comebacks, of which he has a shared record of 10 with Boris Becker and Aaron Krickstein have come against the following men:

Cilic
Monfils
Benneteau
del Potro
Falla
Haas
Berdych
Nadal
Sargsian
Wessels

All of whom he was seeded higher and in some cases substantially so and heavily favoured. But perhaps it is playing during Djokovic's reign who is regarded as one of the most clutch players of all time given his statistics and losing to him that elevates his inability to make comebacks against favoured or even players and constantly losing when favoured or statistically likely to finish.

Superb post Machan! (y)
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
This is actually the truth. Federer has NEVER been clutch.
Same story as always, looks amazing vs midgets but soon as someone hits a few passing shots or return winners his head goes and he loses it mentally.

One time in his career he showed balls was 17 AO final. Incredible performance. I think he showed a lot of fight in the 19 W final too. Younger Fed would’ve lost 10-8 but at least he got to a tiebreak...
 
P

PETEhammer

Guest
Same story as always, looks amazing vs midgets but soon as someone hits a few passing shots or return winners his head goes and he loses it mentally.

One time in his career he showed balls was 17 AO final. Incredible performance. I think he showed a lot of fight in the 19 W final too. Younger Fed would’ve lost 10-8 but at least he got to a tiebreak...
Agreed completely. I think W 07 and AO 17 finals are his best wins of his career. But yeah, he only has "the aura" around Smurfs. His peers don't fear him at all.
 

SonnyT

Hall of Fame
What's Federer's most clutch match? Hands down, '17 AO F against Nadal. Nadal was up 4-2 final set, and never won another game. And it was sublime tennis from both, in the final few games!

It would've been supplanted by the '19 Wim F against Djokovic, if Federer had been able to convert double MP's.
 

ADuck

Hall of Fame
The thing with Fed is that he is also a more offensive player by nature, so the margins in close matches for him are way slimmer than for Nadal and Djokovic who have more defensive games and thus makes it easier for them to be clutch.
If it's just a naturally occuring feature of his game, then perhaps the narrative that he is intrinsically a "better player" than both Djokovic/Nadal and would have far more slams than both if he wasn't unclutch on BP's should be put to rest then.

Pressure moments are part of playing after all.
 
Top