What makes Federer top 3?

joeri888

G.O.A.T.
Serious question. I think gamewise, guys like Stan, murray, berdych, raonic, tsonga and Dimitrov could feel so ashamed about Rogers success. Rogers forehand is not a real weapon anymore though pretty consistent on shorter balls. He moves worse than most. His serve is def. Less than raonic. I love Roger but what makes him still so good?
 
He's just more complete than the rest, and has a historically great serve and regularly win his serve games (great tiebreak player too)
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
* Stan and Tsonga are very inconsistent.
* Murray is coming back from injury.
* Dimitrov is a fraud.
* Raonic needs to work on his ground game.
* Berdych has been terrible, I don't know why.
 

winstonplum

Hall of Fame
Wrong, wrong, and wrong. If you watch Federer for three minutes, you can still see the talent oozing off of him. Still probably has one of the top five forehands in the game, still has the best backhand slice in the game bar none--whoever is second is a distant second.

Still has one of the top five serves in the game. Speed has nothing to do with it. It's always been an awesome serve and still is. And our of the top guys contending for slams, he's still the best pure volleyer.

Where Fed has changed is that he doesn't move as well or defend as well as he used to. But he's lost a step--that's it. He's not lumbering around the court. He's still an above average mover. Nadal has lost a step too.

Whenever I see Federer playing against anyone besides Nole and Rafa, I'm shocked all over again how much between his is than his opponent. Age is just a number.
 

tipsa...don'tlikehim!

Talk Tennis Guru
Talent,
Serve,
and also the fact that most of the other guys (exceptions, Nishikori, Berdych...) sh*t in their pants when they step into the court to play him
 

WhiskeyEE

Legend
Talent,
Serve,
and also the fact that most of the other guys (exceptions, Nishikori, Berdych...) sh*t in their pants when they step into the court to play him
Yeah. I actually noticed that, since Wimbledon, Fed is getting his aura back.

No one has been scared of him since FO last year. But that's changing and is helping him.
 

Zoid

Professional
Saving this for future reference.
so am i. Dimitrov fanboys will come in droves - give it 3 years.

Fed is top 3 because he has the best one -two in tennis. Serve and then a forehand on the rise. Plays the percentages very well now and still has the x-factor.
 

coloskier

Legend
As much as anything, what makes him better is that he very rarely loses to anyone underneath him. Even when he is playing bad, he is still better than 95% of his opponents.There are still only two players that are more consistent or have more weapons than Fed, and even one of those is debatable (Djoker). Djoker, when he does beat Fed (2-2 this year), wins because of his mobility compared to Fed, not the rest of his game. The only things that Djoker does better than Fed are mobility and his DTL BH. Serve goes to Fed. Forehand goes to Fed (even nowadays). Volleys go to Fed. Return of serve goes to Djoker. Backhand consistency goes to Djoker. Foot speed Djoker. Consistent winners Fed. When Fed cuts down his UE's, Djoker loses. When Fed becomes Fed error, Djoker wins. Pretty simple really.
 
Last edited:

winstonplum

Hall of Fame
Has anyone seen Fed's slice lately? It's frickin' sick. I mean it's a cold-blooded, no joke, incredible shot--better than many players' drive backhands.

I forgot to add that Federer has the best out wide, stretched squash forehand in the history of the game. Most players rarely his that shot once in a match--Federer gets that puppy out every 3 or 4 games to re-set the point to neutral.

Also, with the exception of Nadal, the greatest overhead in the game. Maybe it's a draw with Nadal. And the best backhand overhead flick, by far. Federer still has about ten more bows in his quiver than just about any other player on court. Like I said, the only difference now is that he's lost a step and he's prone to fatigue and nerves late in matches, i.e. IW TB loss to Nole, and serving at 4-5 W 5th set.

I've realized 2013 was a humungous anomaly due to his back.
 

Zoid

Professional
Has anyone seen Fed's slice lately? It's frickin' sick. I mean it's a cold-blooded, no joke, incredible shot--better than many players' drive backhands.

I forgot to add that Federer has the best out wide, stretched squash forehand in the history of the game. Most players rarely his that shot once in a match--Federer gets that puppy out every 3 or 4 games to re-set the point to neutral.

Also, with the exception of Nadal, the greatest overhead in the game. Maybe it's a draw with Nadal. And the best backhand overhead flick, by far. Federer still has about ten more bows in his quiver than just about any other player on court. Like I said, the only difference now is that he's lost a step and he's prone to fatigue and nerves late in matches, i.e. IW TB loss to Nole, and serving at 4-5 W 5th set.

I've realized 2013 was a humungous anomaly due to his back.
agree on a lot of these points.
 

ultradr

Legend
One of his million strengths is the he is always injury-free, more or less.

Del Potro, Nadal out. Murray and Tsonga making a come-back after injury/surgery.
 

Candide

Hall of Fame
Most people have picked out the shot-making and court craft aspects of his game already. It's beyond comical when the weekend hackers around here start dissing Federer's shots, "weak forehand," "pathetic movement" and all that. You guys should really ditch the adjectives. They make it seem like you know less about tennis, not more.

I find the comments about aura and players pooping themselves interesting. As if this is something Federer hasn't earned. It is not easy to establish an intimidating aura and export it across the court to your opponent. Even at club level you can see this aspect of the game being exploited far better by some than by others. Nadal is great at it, as is Djokovic and other players more sporadically. I loved Rosol's "psycho" in the zone stare when he took down Nadal. He came out like he was going to kill someone.

I think we've got to credit players for this and Federer is just about the master in this respect. For his opponents it must feel like you're playing a walk on part in a movie staring him. He controls the tempo and the mood like no one else since Agassi. Nadal does it by stalling and mooching around which is not as admirable but just as effective. It takes an instinctive sense of psychology, an iron will and a hell of a poker face to be able to sap your opponents self belief in the way Federer consistently does. He should get a lot more credit for it. He nearly got Djokovic to blink at Wimbledon even though the Joker was playing out of his mind and hitting the lines for fun. Respect to Djokovic for recommitting to the cause and doubling down to take the match.

Why is Federer number three? Because tennis is more than a list of shots and - it is also a psychological battle.
 

Zoid

Professional
Most people have picked out the shot-making and court craft aspects of his game already. It's beyond comical when the weekend hackers around here start dissing Federer's shots, "weak forehand," "pathetic movement" and all that. You guys should really ditch the adjectives. They make it seem like you know less about tennis, not more.

I find the comments about aura and players pooping themselves interesting. As if this is something Federer hasn't earned. It is not easy to establish an intimidating aura and export it across the court to your opponent. Even at club level you can see this aspect of the game being exploited far better by some than by others. Nadal is great at it, as is Djokovic and other players more sporadically. I loved Rosol's "psycho" in the zone stare when he took down Nadal. He came out like he was going to kill someone.

I think we've got to credit players for this and Federer is just about the master in this respect. For his opponents it must feel like you're playing a walk on part in a movie staring him. He controls the tempo and the mood like no one else since Agassi. Nadal does it by stalling and mooching around which is not as admirable but just as effective. It takes an instinctive sense of psychology, an iron will and a hell of a poker face to be able to sap your opponents self belief in the way Federer consistently does. He should get a lot more credit for it. He nearly got Djokovic to blink at Wimbledon even though the Joker was playing out of his mind and hitting the lines for fun. Respect to Djokovic for recommitting to the cause and doubling down to take the match.

Why is Federer number three? Because tennis is more than a list of shots and - it is also a psychological battle.
great stuff!
 

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
Most people have picked out the shot-making and court craft aspects of his game already. It's beyond comical when the weekend hackers around here start dissing Federer's shots, "weak forehand," "pathetic movement" and all that. You guys should really ditch the adjectives. They make it seem like you know less about tennis, not more.

I find the comments about aura and players pooping themselves interesting. As if this is something Federer hasn't earned. It is not easy to establish an intimidating aura and export it across the court to your opponent. Even at club level you can see this aspect of the game being exploited far better by some than by others. Nadal is great at it, as is Djokovic and other players more sporadically. I loved Rosol's "psycho" in the zone stare when he took down Nadal. He came out like he was going to kill someone.

I think we've got to credit players for this and Federer is just about the master in this respect. For his opponents it must feel like you're playing a walk on part in a movie staring him. He controls the tempo and the mood like no one else since Agassi. Nadal does it by stalling and mooching around which is not as admirable but just as effective. It takes an instinctive sense of psychology, an iron will and a hell of a poker face to be able to sap your opponents self belief in the way Federer consistently does. He should get a lot more credit for it. He nearly got Djokovic to blink at Wimbledon even though the Joker was playing out of his mind and hitting the lines for fun. Respect to Djokovic for recommitting to the cause and doubling down to take the match.

Why is Federer number three? Because tennis is more than a list of shots and - it is also a psychological battle.
Perfect explanation. In a lot of ways, he's the rock star of the sport. I like the way you identified this.
 

Goosehead

Legend
I agree with folk on what makes fedster top3..also..

DIMITROV IS NOT A FRAUD..the sooner people accept that he will win big tourneys the sooner they become less bitter people. :)
 

President

Legend
Great serve and a still better than average return (certainly for someone with his serving ability, most good servers absolutely suck on the return). The exquisite volleying ability and ability to take the ball on rise even at this point doesn't hurt.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
I agree with folk on what makes fedster top3..also..

DIMITROV IS NOT A FRAUD..the sooner people accept that he will win big tourneys the sooner they become less bitter people. :)
I will believe it when I see it. How long do we have to keep listening to the hype re Dimitrov?
 

West Coast Ace

G.O.A.T.
i'd be surprised if he beats fed too this year, but give him 12 months and i think he will take his game to a new level.
I agree. IF he sticks with Rasheed and his hard training.

4 tournament wins in less than a year (+ SF at W and won a set off Djokovic) = Fraud. Sure, kid. Thanks for the laugh.

Not sure why people are so wrapped up by age. Fed started cutting his schedule back years ago and has been a workout fiend. Tennis is about winning points. Fed still knows how to play and has the weapons to make his opponents very uncomfortable.
 

Goosehead

Legend
I will believe it when I see it. How long do we have to keep listening to the hype re Dimitrov?
not long..he is rank world no 8..i think from now on dimitrov's in the frame to be in sf/f/winning masters n majors.

I dunno why the hate :confused:..his work ethic is strong, court positioning good, interesting to watch (no pusher)..ohbh :)..fh improving slice/chip variety etc..

jump aboard the dimitrov funbus. :)
 

Zoid

Professional
I agree. IF he sticks with Rasheed and his hard training.

4 tournament wins in less than a year (+ SF at W and won a set off Djokovic) = Fraud. Sure, kid. Thanks for the laugh.

Not sure why people are so wrapped up by age. Fed started cutting his schedule back years ago and has been a workout fiend. Tennis is about winning points. Fed still knows how to play and has the weapons to make his opponents very uncomfortable.
yea rasheed has been instrumental in his conditioning. He is my pick of the bunch of young guys coming through.
 
Federer's slice has been horrible this year. Sits up waiting to be hit. Bothers only a handful of players at this point.

But the fact that he can still defend as well as he does is a key. Federer is a scrapper with a clever, accurate serve - both first and second. And as of late his volleying has really helped him. He can play like garbage from the back and hang in there, and perhaps that lowers his opponent's level and then as long as it's even on the scoreboard, he can scrap together one break of serve.

Federer has been playing as a pusher/S&V mix since clay season began, though. Perhaps that also throws opponents off. He's either really aggressive or really passive (yet his court positioning is aggressive), and they don't know how to play him.
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
Federer's slice has been horrible this year. Sits up waiting to be hit. Bothers only a handful of players at this point.

But the fact that he can still defend as well as he does is a key. Federer is a scrapper with a clever, accurate serve - both first and second. And as of late his volleying has really helped him. He can play like garbage from the back and hang in there, and perhaps that lowers his opponent's level and then as long as it's even on the scoreboard, he can scrap together one break of serve.

Federer has been playing as a pusher/S&V mix since clay season began, though. Perhaps that also throws opponents off. He's either really aggressive or really passive (yet his court positioning is aggressive), and they don't know how to play him.
Federer and Pusher. 2 words I've never thought I'd hear.
 

jhhachamp

Hall of Fame
Still has one of the top five serves in the game.
He has a great serve but it's never been one of the top 5 serves in the game. Right now Karlovic, Isner, Raonic, and Groth all clearly have much better serves than Federer, and I'd also put Anderson, Querrey, Cilic, and a few others ahead of him as well. I would agree that he has a borderline top 10 serve right now.
 

mtommer

Hall of Fame
...I find the comments about aura and players pooping themselves interesting. As if this is something Federer hasn't earned. It is not easy to establish an intimidating aura and export it across the court to your opponent...
I happen to think this is one of the things American players are missing right now, that expectation of winning. Sampras mentioned it in his book, that moment when he decided he wasn't going to lose anymore. Just having returned from the Nats a week and a half ago and having the opportunity to hit and play with some of the kids, the cockiness can be there but not the arrogant ego that is almost requisite for any star.
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
A few things...

Talent
Serve
Movement
Slice
Good Netplay
Forehand and Backhand declined but still rather solid
Possibly a bit of that 'aura' has come back
Newcomers aren't doing anything (or not there yet, I should say), and Murray still not back to his best after coming back from injury
 

helloworld

Hall of Fame
Because it's a weak era filled with Frauds. In the Sampy era, Fraud would be lucky to be top 50.
Dude, Federer is not exactly my favorite player, but he is definitely not that bad. Fed would still win multiple slams in the 90s. He's more than capable of playing in the fast conditions.
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
He has a great serve but it's never been one of the top 5 serves in the game. Right now Karlovic, Isner, Raonic, and Groth all clearly have much better serves than Federer, and I'd also put Anderson, Querrey, Cilic, and a few others ahead of him as well. I would agree that he has a borderline top 10 serve right now.
The key for Fed is that his serve is effective because most guys have trouble returning it, also he's a great returner. He doesn't have to have a top 3 shot in any category, he's a great all-arounder.
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
Dude, Federer is not exactly my favorite player, but he is definitely not that bad. Fed would still win multiple slams in the 90s. He's more than capable of playing in the fast conditions.
Maybe young Fed(22-25) might have won 2-3 slams but that's it. The 1990s never would have allowed ******* a single slam.
 

Candide

Hall of Fame
Maybe young Fed(22-25) might have won 2-3 slams but that's it. The 1990s never would have allowed ******* a single slam.
Wow, that's preternaturally specific. I love your conviction and the boldness of your claims. This is, no doubt, all because you know exactly what it's like to face players across eras with different equipment and styles and on different surfaces at the very highest level. Right? Because otherwise this kind of stuff has the air of hero worship and wishing. It seems a little unworldly and romantic. That's a sweet thing I suppose but not very convincing.
 

kOaMaster

Hall of Fame
Wrong, wrong, and wrong. If you watch Federer for three minutes, you can still see the talent oozing off of him. Still probably has one of the top five forehands in the game, still has the best backhand slice in the game bar none--whoever is second is a distant second.

Still has one of the top five serves in the game. Speed has nothing to do with it. It's always been an awesome serve and still is. And our of the top guys contending for slams, he's still the best pure volleyer.

Where Fed has changed is that he doesn't move as well or defend as well as he used to. But he's lost a step--that's it. He's not lumbering around the court. He's still an above average mover. Nadal has lost a step too.

Whenever I see Federer playing against anyone besides Nole and Rafa, I'm shocked all over again how much between his is than his opponent. Age is just a number.
Has anyone seen Fed's slice lately? It's frickin' sick. I mean it's a cold-blooded, no joke, incredible shot--better than many players' drive backhands.

I forgot to add that Federer has the best out wide, stretched squash forehand in the history of the game. Most players rarely his that shot once in a match--Federer gets that puppy out every 3 or 4 games to re-set the point to neutral.

Also, with the exception of Nadal, the greatest overhead in the game. Maybe it's a draw with Nadal. And the best backhand overhead flick, by far. Federer still has about ten more bows in his quiver than just about any other player on court. Like I said, the only difference now is that he's lost a step and he's prone to fatigue and nerves late in matches, i.e. IW TB loss to Nole, and serving at 4-5 W 5th set.

I've realized 2013 was a humungous anomaly due to his back.
Most people have picked out the shot-making and court craft aspects of his game already. It's beyond comical when the weekend hackers around here start dissing Federer's shots, "weak forehand," "pathetic movement" and all that. You guys should really ditch the adjectives. They make it seem like you know less about tennis, not more.

I find the comments about aura and players pooping themselves interesting. As if this is something Federer hasn't earned. It is not easy to establish an intimidating aura and export it across the court to your opponent. Even at club level you can see this aspect of the game being exploited far better by some than by others. Nadal is great at it, as is Djokovic and other players more sporadically. I loved Rosol's "psycho" in the zone stare when he took down Nadal. He came out like he was going to kill someone.

I think we've got to credit players for this and Federer is just about the master in this respect. For his opponents it must feel like you're playing a walk on part in a movie staring him. He controls the tempo and the mood like no one else since Agassi. Nadal does it by stalling and mooching around which is not as admirable but just as effective. It takes an instinctive sense of psychology, an iron will and a hell of a poker face to be able to sap your opponents self belief in the way Federer consistently does. He should get a lot more credit for it. He nearly got Djokovic to blink at Wimbledon even though the Joker was playing out of his mind and hitting the lines for fun. Respect to Djokovic for recommitting to the cause and doubling down to take the match.

Why is Federer number three? Because tennis is more than a list of shots and - it is also a psychological battle.
thanks for those comments, I mostly agree.
 

jg153040

G.O.A.T.
Serious question. I think gamewise, guys like Stan, murray, berdych, raonic, tsonga and Dimitrov could feel so ashamed about Rogers success. Rogers forehand is not a real weapon anymore though pretty consistent on shorter balls. He moves worse than most. His serve is def. Less than raonic. I love Roger but what makes him still so good?
Yes, but his B game is still above those guys A game.

His weapons even in diminished state are still higher than all those guys you mentioned.
 

THE FIGHTER

Hall of Fame
* Stan and Tsonga are very inconsistent.
* Murray is coming back from injury.
* Dimitrov is a fraud.
* Raonic needs to work on his ground game.
* Berdych has been terrible, I don't know why.
Dimitrov will do better in the slams next season than Murray and perhaps federer, I predict. Mostly because I feel that either Fred or Andrew, or both, will go slamless next year.

His growth as a complete player has been steady.

That said, as of now, federer is just more consistent than everyone in the top 10. 1 and 2 included. Consistency helps the ranking
 

aer0pr0

Rookie
why is federer top3??

the same reason he is the best ever, the question should be, how can federer be top3 at age 33 and still make a run for the most important titles

cause hes the most complete player out there, he hasnt got isner serve, but hes got a really top serve, he doesnt have djoko backhhand or nadal consistent forehand spinned ball, but he has one of the best forehands out there and an amazing backhand, let alone the other aspects of the game, like movement, hes a master of movement

to be honest i think he only cannot be number 1 again because i always feel something lacks on him in respects of mentality, he got used to be so much better than most on tour that he didnt evolve in him trough the years that "animal" mentality like djokovic developed or nadal "inner super tough mentality" have to bypass tough situations.

he doesnt care anymore losing to nadal, and even to djokovic.. he simply would not run that extra mile, and i dont know why, but he never did.Thats a reason he didnt win nadal much more often, mentality problem, lack of belief, or else he could definetly still be number 1, i mean, you just need to see him play to understand thats a different kind of music youre "listening" to
 
Last edited:

Mr.Snrub

Banned
Federer has 2 things going for him this year:

1) He's really consistent and hasn't suffered many bad losses (Rome and Brisbane are the only that come to mind and even then you can kind of excuse them...new racquet/new babies)
2) He's gotten better at scrambling and pushing matches to the brink when he's being dominated. (Wimbledon, Indian Wells, even though he won Dubai I thought he pulled that one out of his butt and should've lost to Berdych).

In terms of where his game is at, I would fully expect him to lose to the following people if they went up against each other playing their best:

Tsonga, Berdych, Gulbis, Nadal, Djokovic, Wawrinka

He's fortunate there is a lack of consistency in the dangerous players and that a few top guys are currently injured.
 
Serious question. I think gamewise, guys like Stan, murray, berdych, raonic, tsonga and Dimitrov could feel so ashamed about Rogers success. Rogers forehand is not a real weapon anymore though pretty consistent on shorter balls. He moves worse than most. His serve is def. Less than raonic. I love Roger but what makes him still so good?
I think that is a myth. he is not able to pull the trigger in as many situations (he used to be able to rip winners even on the run 7 feet behind the Baseline because his footwork was so good) anymore because his footwork has declined but he is still hitting A TON of FH winners, probably still the most on the ATP tour.

also his serve is still extremely good, maybe even better than it was in 2007 (his hold percentage is a whopping 91% this year which is higher than it was in each year from 05-07 but slightly lower than in 04).

I think what has declined is his return game but his hold game is still as good as it was 5 or 6 years ago.

even with his declined return ability there are simply not many players being able to break his serve so it is hard to beat him.

also of course the field behind him is rather weak in 2014 which is helping him (slumping murray, nadal injured or out of shape all the time) and the young guys still not stepping up all the way.
 
Top