What hurts Federer more?

What hurts Federer more?

  • 0-5 against Nadal at French Open

    Votes: 45 61.6%

  • 0-2 Djokovic in Wimbledon finals

    Votes: 28 38.4%
  • Total voters
    73
HetTheGreaterer said:
He could surely have if not for that sick mentality...
With all those tactics and mentality he played with throughout the tournament, he was zoning and playing perhaps his best clay court tennis....
Fed with his 2017 mentality takes that match 6-2 6-3 7-6
Click to expand...

If Fed had won the 1st set in 2011, Nadal would have just grinded him down in 5 instead of 4...

Anyways about the slam count, I think despite the fact Nadal had made no ground up in many years, it's looking up for him just because Fed is nearing the end and Nadal is still managing to be a threat at slams. There was a point where he wasn't ('15/'16) . So it's an odd situation where despite time ticking, he looks like he'll have a shot for say 2 years to make up the gap after Federer is done. That didn't seem like a possibility 2 years ago. The aging curve we thought was possible has changed significantly too.

It doesn't look as good as it did say going into 2014 AO final for Nadal but it looks a lot better than in any time from early 2015 thru the AO 17 loss is how I would describe it.

I don't expect Nadal to be winning slams at 35/36 like Federer did and think Federer has been significantly more impressive the last couple years due to his age. However, Nadal would only need maybe 2 or 3 years of slam contention to reach 20.

OTOH, Djokovic is now the favorite over Nadal anywhere but RG, but with Nads a point away from winning Wimbledon (at least in effect), I don't think he will lose too much heart. There will also be a massive psychological boost once it becomes clear Federer is done for good, which may or may not happen in 2019.

On a personal level, I hope Nadal does not surpass Federer, in part because it would take slams away from Novak.

On a realistic level, I think he's gonna get there...
 
125downthemiddle said:
If Fed had won the 1st set in 2011, Nadal would have just grinded him down in 5 instead of 4...

Anyways about the slam count, I think despite the fact Nadal had made no ground up in many years, it's looking up for him just because Fed is nearing the end and Nadal is still managing to be a threat at slams. There was a point where he wasn't ('15/'16) . So it's an odd situation where despite time ticking, he looks like he'll have a shot for say 2 years to make up the gap after Federer is done. That didn't seem like a possibility 2 years ago. The aging curve we thought was possible has changed significantly too.

It doesn't look as good as it did say going into 2014 AO final for Nadal but it looks a lot better than in any time from early 2015 thru the AO 17 loss is how I would describe it.

I don't expect Nadal to be winning slams at 35/36 like Federer did and think Federer has been significantly more impressive the last couple years due to his age. However, Nadal would only need maybe 2 or 3 years of slam contention to reach 20.

OTOH, Djokovic is now the favorite over Nadal anywhere but RG, but with Nads a point away from winning Wimbledon (at least in effect), I don't think he will lose too much heart. There will also be a massive psychological boost once it becomes clear Federer is done for good, which may or may not happen in 2019.

On a personal level, I hope Nadal does not surpass Federer, in part because it would take slams away from Novak.

On a realistic level, I think he's gonna get there...
Click to expand...

Come on man, nadal can't even handle big hitters (count chokers like cillic and thiem) on slowasfvck hard courts... This year he was extremely lucky in following situations... Believe it or not, but after monte carlo and barcelona, he had achieved everything luckily for sure....

1) Rome triumph :- Thiem's choke against fognini and rain halting zverev's momentum
2) RG :- again, Rain halting Schwartzman's momentum. Remember, diego was really outplaying nadal and was a set and break up 3-2 in 2nd set, could have taken that set 6-4 to hold at 2 sets to love
3) Wimby :- again, luckily lr riggdely no big hitter in the 1st week when there is enough grass on ourts.
4) Canada :- again, heavily choking from cilic after ugly smash at 4-5 40-15 in 2nd set, was totally outplaying nadal. Also, nadal could lost to wawrinka too. Got an exhausted 19 year kid in final.....
5) USO :- luckily Khachanov had thrown away break in 2nd set. Thiem produced what was the biggest choke of all time. A supposedly 6-0 6-4 6-3 win resulted into 5 set loss....

Unlike 2017, nadal is not head and shoulders above the field and winning by totally outplaying his opponents
 
Fed's now won 8 Wimbledon championships, more than anyone else, and beat Novak in the 2012 semi-final, so losing a couple of finals at 32, 33 to a younger ATG in his prime, including a five setter in 2014 which went to 6-4 in the final set, doesn't really hurt his career.
Federer won it since those last two finals anyway.

I think going 0-5 to Nadal at Roland Garros without getting to five sets in a meeting is a little worse, though of course, Roger still has his French championship in '09.
 
HetTheGreaterer said:
Come on man, nadal can't even handle big hitters (count chokers like cillic and thiem) on slowasfvck hard courts... This year he was extremely lucky in following situations... Believe it or not, but after monte carlo and barcelona, he had achieved everything luckily for sure....

1) Rome triumph :- Thiem's choke against fognini and rain halting zverev's momentum
2) RG :- again, Rain halting Schwartzman's momentum. Remember, diego was really outplaying nadal and was a set and break up 3-2 in 2nd set, could have taken that set 6-4 to hold at 2 sets to love
3) Wimby :- again, luckily lr riggdely no big hitter in the 1st week when there is enough grass on ourts.
4) Canada :- again, heavily choking from cilic after ugly smash at 4-5 40-15 in 2nd set, was totally outplaying nadal. Also, nadal could lost to wawrinka too. Got an exhausted 19 year kid in final.....
5) USO :- luckily Khachanov had thrown away break in 2nd set. Thiem produced what was the biggest choke of all time. A supposedly 6-0 6-4 6-3 win resulted into 5 set loss....

Unlike 2017, nadal is not head and shoulders above the field and winning by totally outplaying his opponents
Click to expand...

You think he was just lucky in all those instances and it's unlikely to happen again? He played well at Wimby lol come on, sure he was a bit lucky with no big hitter early on but that could certainly happen again.

He can win RG 2 more years maybe with a dece shot for an underdog at the other slams. Im not saying hes the favorite at the other slams obviously.

When he's making the finals or semifinals of 3 slams a year for the past 2 years, you can't say he isn't a threat.
 
“There’s not even a comparison,” he said. “This is a disaster. Paris was nothing in comparison.” - Federer, after Wimbledon 2008

I find these "what was more painful" debates quite pointless, but that quote should give you an idea - at least about what Wimbledon means to Fed.
 
The Wimbledon finals are held against him less because of his age, even though they were actually more winnable. That's why they hurt more as a fan, but the RG finals hurt his legacy more.
 
Losing to Nadal is no big deal

But losing to a player who slips and falls on grass and who is generally uncouth there and plays on grass no different than HC - plain hurts . Even though Fed was 34 and 35 then .
 
125downthemiddle said:
You think he was just lucky in all those instances and it's unlikely to happen again? He played well at Wimby lol come on, sure he was a bit lucky with no big hitter early on but that could certainly happen again.

He can win RG 2 more years maybe with a dece shot for an underdog at the other slams. Im not saying hes the favorite at the other slams obviously.

When he's making the finals or semifinals of 3 slams a year for the past 2 years, you can't say he isn't a threat.
Click to expand...

He made one fricking non clay final and 2 sfs this year, and highly unlikely to make till season end....
In 2017, made more than these in just first 4 months..
Also on clay, he looked totally invincible in 2017, that level has declined a lot too in 2018....
He did win nothing based on luck in 2017, it was hard earned success; and only 36 year old Roger Federer stood in his way from making 2017 the best rafa year.....
Whereas the 2018 is completely different story
 
HetTheGreaterer said:
He made one fricking non clay final and 2 sfs this year, and highly unlikely to make till season end....
In 2017, made more than these in just first 4 months..
Also on clay, he looked totally invincible in 2017, that level has declined a lot too in 2018....
He did win nothing based on luck in 2017, it was hard earned success; and only 36 year old Roger Federer stood in his way from making 2017 the best rafa year.....
Whereas the 2018 is completely different story
Click to expand...

you sound emotional, dude
 
Hitman said:
Too much gets made out of that 2011 first set drop shot...

Federer was not winning that match. Federer had enough in him to fight hard for three sets only, he was completely exhausted by the time the fourth set started, and he had the momentum heading into that fourth set. And there is no way Federer straight sets Nadal at RG, Nadal would have won at worst one of those first three sets and then grinded Federer down in the final two. Federer was done after he won that third set...he was not winning RG 2011.
Click to expand...

Federer had 3 BPs at the start of the 4th set. Nadal saved those with great play.
That finally exhausted Fed's mental reservoirs.

If Fed was up 2 sets to 1, he surely would have had more adrenaline to give it his all in the 4th set.

He didn't have to win it in 3 sets.

But yeah, I doubt Fed would have been able to take it if it had gone to a 5th set.
 
tennisaddict said:
Djoker is a very successful grass player and there is no denying that. After Wimb 19, he may tie Borg but we all know that this reflects his success as a "modern" grass court player but not true fast grass.
Click to expand...

True but Federer has won most of his Wimbledons on the modern grass as well
 
Legacy wise I'd say not winning one of the RG Finals against Nadal, even though the 2 Wimbledons were more winnable, especially 2014.

That said, I'm not a big fan of these debates simply because Federer actually has the slam lead, and there are other matches that we'll look back on that will "hurt" more if he loses the slam lead. Matches like the AO 2005 SF and the USO 2009 Final will hurt more than losing to the greatest ever on clay or the 2nd most successful grass courter in this era at 32-33.
 
Djokovic is a 4-time Wimbledon champion because a Roger Federer suffering from slamidous and LostGens were his competition. Nole at his peak level would win no Wimbledon titles had he played from 2003 - 2010.
 
duaneeo said:
Djokovic is a 4-time Wimbledon champion because a Roger Federer suffering from slamidous and LostGens were his competition. Nole at his peak level would win no Wimbledon titles had he played from 2003 - 2010.
Click to expand...

This is ridiculous and quite a bit beneath you. For one, he could have beat Nadal in 2010 at "peak level".
 
mike danny said:
Djokovic never found a solution against a well-playing Nadal at RG either. Fed would have beaten 2015 Nadal at RG too, but never got the chance of playing such a poor Nadal.

Djokovic found solutions against Nadal in masters. At RG he was just as useless as Fed.
Click to expand...

Can't disagree with that.
Djokovic couldn't close out Nadal in 2012-2013-2014 despite having the gameplan to do so unlike Federer.
 
TennisFan97068 said:
Can't disagree with that.
Djokovic couldn't close out Nadal in 2012-2013-2014 despite having the gameplan to do so unlike Federer.
Click to expand...

Been looking for an excuse to post this excellent article.

https://www.eurosport.com/tennis/fr...-boy-king-to-la-decima_sto6178160/story.shtml

He [Djokovic] tamed Nadal in Monte Carlo, Madrid and Rome – but in Paris the Mallorcan always had the final word. Was the five-set format a factor? Not for {Patrick] Mouratoglou. “There’s no logic in that. Novak is ultra-strong in five sets, he’s one of the toughest players. It’s an anomaly that he didn’t beat Rafa sooner at Roland-Garros, but he had a mental block – simple as that.”
 
Why Federer fans would not put a letter together and ask Roger Federer this question on behalf of all TTW Federer fans. I am sure that he would respond.
 
abmk said:
Federer had 3 BPs at the start of the 4th set. Nadal saved those with great play.
That finally exhausted Fed's mental reservoirs.

If Fed was up 2 sets to 1, he surely would have had more adrenaline to give it his all in the 4th set.

He didn't have to win it in 3 sets.

But yeah, I doubt Fed would have been able to take it if it had gone to a 5th set.
Click to expand...

And that is why I knew he wasn't winning in four, his legs looked like they were getting filled with lead in that fourth. Nadal was still looking super fresh, this is where the age factor came into full play. And I am not even mentioning the lack of belief Federer had against Nadal at that point. That issue didn't get cleared up until AO 2017.
 
Fedforever said:
Been looking for an excuse to post this excellent article.

https://www.eurosport.com/tennis/fr...-boy-king-to-la-decima_sto6178160/story.shtml

He [Djokovic] tamed Nadal in Monte Carlo, Madrid and Rome – but in Paris the Mallorcan always had the final word. Was the five-set format a factor? Not for {Patrick] Mouratoglou. “There’s no logic in that. Novak is ultra-strong in five sets, he’s one of the toughest players. It’s an anomaly that he didn’t beat Rafa sooner at Roland-Garros, but he had a mental block – simple as that.”
Click to expand...

Thank you for the article. In addition to that (which I largely agree not in a sense that he choked, but that he was not superhuman enough for such venture), I believe that Phillippe Chatrier is the most suitable court (particularly dimensions) for Nadal's game in the world.
 
The Nadal thing. But I don't like that kind of discussions. Fed has nothing to regret about his career. So do Djokovic and Nadal BTW.
 
Cowardice hurts legacies more than trying. Just as Lendl came to be seen as an incomplete champion for avoiding grass slams (Wimby and AO at that time) in I believe 1983, Federer avoiding clay as he now does hurts more than a couple of losses at Wimby because it's his own recognition that he doesn't feel he can compete for a slam in Paris.
 
125downthemiddle said:
This is ridiculous and quite a bit beneath you. For one, he could have beat Nadal in 2010 at "peak level".
Click to expand...
That's putting it mildly.

Djokovic has had a tough draw for his Wimbledon winning runs more than once. He's gone deep at the tournament 10/12 times since becoming a top player. He has one of the most reliable serve+return combos, and as one of the more aggressive baseliners with way overly criticized but actually good net game would have more than a decent shot at winning Wimbledon any time at his best.

But I am sure that some Federer guy not being a nervous mug for whatever BS reason and a presence of some decent youngster would have turned four (I repeat, FOUR) Wimbledon titles into zero. :D
 
9 wins and 21 losses in slam finals/semis and YEC finals against his two main rivals.
 
Hitman said:
And that is why I knew he wasn't winning in four, his legs looked like they were getting filled with lead in that fourth. Nadal was still looking super fresh, this is where the age factor came into full play. And I am not even mentioning the lack of belief Federer had against Nadal at that point. That issue didn't get cleared up until AO 2017.
Click to expand...

but that's because Nadal had once again thrwarted his chance at a break and that Federer still had a long way to go. (after having taken the blows of losing 2 close sets and then putting in an excellent effort to take the 3rd set)

Let say "if" Fed was up 2 sets to one, he'd have more adrenaline and belief in a hypothetical 4th set in that case. (since the target was nearer)

Of course there is a good chance Nadal grinds him down in 5 sets even in that case, but wouldn't rule a Fed win out.
 
ollinger said:
Cowardice hurts legacies more than trying. Just as Lendl came to be seen as an incomplete champion for avoiding grass slams (Wimby and AO at that time) in I believe 1983, Federer avoiding clay as he now does hurts more than a couple of losses at Wimby because it's his own recognition that he doesn't feel he can compete for a slam in Paris.
Click to expand...
A recent quiz show on UK TV revealed that over 50% of randomly selected people could not name the Swiss player who lost to Nadal in 2008. The idea that anyone is going to care in the future that a 35/36 year old didn't play a particular slam is for the birds.
 
pmh1983 said:
A) 0-5 against Nadal at French Open (0-4 in finals)?

B) 0-2 against Djokovic in Wimbledon finals?

As a Federer fan, I wish neither of these were hanging over him. If Nadal had made the FO final in 2009 and/or had Fed converted his break point in the 5th set of the 2014 Wimbo final this possibly wouldn't even be a discussion. However for me going 0-2 against Djokovic in finals in his own backyard hurts him more than 0-5 (0-4 in finals) against Nadal at the French Open. Federer IS Wimbledon and losing finals 2 straight years to Djokovic was a real kick in the teeth for me, so thats my vote.

Discuss.
Click to expand...
What hurts him most is not getting credit for being 5-6 years younger than these ATGs and still being fairly competitive with them over the last few years, well well past his 04-07 prime.
 
abmk said:
but that's because Nadal had once again thrwarted his chance at a break and that Federer still had a long way to go. (after having taken the blows of losing 2 close sets and then putting in an excellent effort to take the 3rd set)

Let say "if" Fed was up 2 sets to one, he'd have more adrenaline and belief in a hypothetical 4th set in that case. (since the target was nearer)

Of course there is a good chance Nadal grinds him down in 5 sets even in that case, but wouldn't rule a Fed win out.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is not that easy. You need to understand adrenal fatigue here also. Federer had pumped out an incredible amount of adrenaline in that semi final match to stop a rampaging Djokovic and if I remember correctly, his groin was in pain at the conclusion of RG and he needed to take time off to recover, so he skipped Halle I believe that year. Correct me if I am wrong on that, but I remember him saying his movement walking was bad due to a groin pull. The belief bit also, that is the big thing...Federer's belief simply wasn't there during that time, his game was fine, but along with a body that was no longer at its peak and his mental demons, the belief bit is not something I would put money on, on THAT Federer. So again, we need to disagree on this one, Federer wasn't winning that match for me, which is why I simply disagree with comments that said had Federer won that drop shot point he would have won...Federer has raced out to early set leads before, only to shake, question his own conviction and let Nadal back in.

Now, had Federer from 06-07 played 11 Nadal, then the younger, fitter Federer probably could have done it with a higher probability, but not this one.
 
mike danny said:
Not Federer's fault Djokovic never played him at Wimb before Roger was 30.

Losing those 2 finals was no shame. Djokovic was at his peak/prime, while Fed was old and way past his.
Click to expand...
Tbh mike, this argument would've made more sense had Federer ended up retiring in 2016. The fact that he went on to win Wimbledon again and reclaim the number 1 ranking reduces some of its weight.
 
TheAssassin said:
Djokovic is comfortably the player of Wimbledon in this decade, no shame in losing to him. Considering Fed was no longer as amazing as before and since Novak was in fantastic form, Fed did well to extend both finals as long as he did.

Nadal at the French Open obviously doesn't need any more introduction...
Click to expand...
Djokovic isn't embarrassing at all. It'd be like Agassi being embarrassed to lose to Federer in 2004 or 2005. No way.

Even the Nadal losses aren't what I'd call embarrassing. Nobody has taken out Nadal in a French Open final. Not one player since 2005 when he first won the trophy. So how could it be embarrassing?

Good post.
 
pmh1983 said:
A) 0-5 against Nadal at French Open (0-4 in finals)?

B) 0-2 against Djokovic in Wimbledon finals?

As a Federer fan, I wish neither of these were hanging over him. If Nadal had made the FO final in 2009 and/or had Fed converted his break point in the 5th set of the 2014 Wimbo final this possibly wouldn't even be a discussion. However for me going 0-2 against Djokovic in finals in his own backyard hurts him more than 0-5 (0-4 in finals) against Nadal at the French Open. Federer IS Wimbledon and losing finals 2 straight years to Djokovic was a real kick in the teeth for me, so thats my vote.

Discuss.
Click to expand...

No idea what the people above are blabbering about, this and that being likely, not possible, improbable etc. The usual hair splitting tsk tsk.

I like the question.

What hurts more?
What damages his legacy?

As his fan, which one sticks in my craw most?

The losses to Nadal at the French.

Not just for the French but the way they sort of spilled over and were intwined with Wimbledon and that historic AO2009.

You think Fed doesn’t break down at the podium were it not for the recent scars of Wimbledon 2008?

All this was set in motion at the French which Nadal, that goddammed pirate, themed his mutiny around during Fed’s best years. Uncle Toni no doubt drawing up the blueprint, young Nadal executing it.

Fed was always just a bit too complacent on Nadal, like much of the tennis world was, like many of us fans were. Good thing Fed eventually embraced the idea of Nadal being a true rival or we might not have had 2017.

Those Djokovic losses sting, like all losses are supposed to sting, but they don’t suck the soul out of you and rewrite careers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hitman said:
Yeah, it is not that easy. You need to understand adrenal fatigue here also. Federer had pumped out an incredible amount of adrenaline in that semi final match to stop a rampaging Djokovic and if I remember correctly, his groin was in pain at the conclusion of RG and he needed to take time off to recover, so he skipped Halle I believe that year. Correct me if I am wrong on that, but I remember him saying his movement walking was bad due to a groin pull. The belief bit also, that is the big thing...Federer's belief simply wasn't there during that time, his game was fine, but along with a body that was no longer at its peak and his mental demons, the belief bit is not something I would put money on, on THAT Federer. So again, we need to disagree on this one, Federer wasn't winning that match for me, which is why I simply disagree with comments that said had Federer won that drop shot point he would have won...Federer has raced out to early set leads before, only to shake, question his own conviction and let Nadal back in.

Now, had Federer from 06-07 played 11 Nadal, then the younger, fitter Federer probably could have done it with a higher probability, but not this one.
Click to expand...

Federer said he wanted to rest his groin and skipped Halle. Not sure that his movement walking was bad.

the bold part is fine. there was still 2 more sets to win if he had got that drop shot in. Just that it'd have increased Federer's chances of taking it.

Not saying you should money on 2011 RG fed. Just that there was a chance he could pull it off in 4 sets. didn't have to pull it off in 3 sets either.

Putting your money on someone and acknowledging he'd have a shot are 2 different things.
If you are saying Federer had nearly no shot, strongly disagree on that.
 
ABCD said:
He seems to consider a number of GS to be his main legacy and he knows that Nadal is getting over 20 and that this target could have been 25 (at the moment). At the time he thought that he was very successful, but now he probably thinks that he could have done better.
Click to expand...
You are stating a possible future as accomplished fact. Let's wait to see how things turn out.
 
abmk said:
Federer said he wanted to rest his groin and skipped Halle. Not sure that his movement walking was bad.

the bold part is fine. there was still 2 more sets to win if he had got that drop shot in. Just that it'd have increased Federer's chances of taking it.

Not saying you should money on 2011 RG fed. Just that there was a chance he could pull it off in 4 sets. didn't have to pull it off in 3 sets either.

Putting your money on someone and acknowledging he'd have a shot are 2 different things.
If you are saying Federer had nearly no shot, strongly disagree on that.
Click to expand...

When I talk about not having a shot, I am talking about putting money on it, I would not put any money on Fed winning that match even if he won that first set, otherwise in theory everyone has a shot in every match and why upsets happen.
 
Fedforever said:
Tut, tut, precision in language matters!

If you're going to build a case for something being "probable" then you need to show why it is much more likely than not.
Click to expand...

Pffft precision. So much trouble.

Some late nights, as I amble over to the fridge in search of whatever is in there, the last thing I want is for my eyes to be assaulted with these newfangled LED lights - happier feeling my way towards whatever it is that satisfies the urge with my eyes closed.

img_4587-e1400370555857.jpg


Why does Samsung insist we need to know the exact humidex of the banana container at 2 am anyway?

What case are we building here? Sounds fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Most Consecutive Big Finals Won By Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic
Replies
9
Views
2K
Boom-Boom
Boom-Boom
M
Nadal - Since 2010 US Open. Djokovic since 2012 Australian Open.
Replies
48
Views
5K
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
BigThreeForever
  • Poll Poll
Which streak was more impressive?
Replies
30
Views
1K
Biotic
Biotic
M
Comparing Fed, Nadal, and Djokovic -Undefeated Record by Round at One Grand Slam
Replies
2
Views
510
DSH
DSH
tennis_pro
What Federer has done since September 2011
Replies
3
Views
878
VPhuc tennis fan
V
Back
Top