What went wrong at 40-15 for Federer?

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
Very true. Hindsight 20/20.

If he had served an ace, we would not have been discussing now.

If Fed had lost 6-3 final set, may be some here may not have felt so bad. But Fed has done far beyond imagination for 38 year old. He is a trendsetter.
Fed should have lost easily in straight sets, and all Fed fans here would still be happy with the victory against Nadal, which kept him from getting closer, up to only one slam difference.
Happiness is all about expectations.
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
it was my fault you guys, my dad and sister were watching downstairs while i was upstairs on my laptop, previously they weren't watching but turned it on at around 6-7 ish, then watched the next few games and including when federr broke and was up 40-15, for some god forsaken reason i was too tense and told them to turn it off because i couldn't handle their ohhhh oh noooo ****, and well they turned it off and the rest is history.
 

vex

Hall of Fame
MP #1:

Federer kicks a second serve out wide, which Djokovic manages to return straight at him. He then stabs a FH out wide. I think this was just a matter of luck with Djok’s return going so close to him. And even if the next shot went to plan and hit the line, it was anyone’s point if that ball dropped in as Djok was already covering that side. Can’t complain too much with that one.

MP #2:

The serve was pretty lousy. Did nerves play a part? It was a couple of feet inside the T and a very comfortable return for Djokovic on his FH side. Federer goes straight in for the kill on his second shot and sends a forehand up the line and approaches the net but again he goes nowhere near the line with the shot and leaves Djokovic in a comfortable position with options for the passing shot from the baseline.

I think the serve selection was wrong here. Djokovic was in front of the royal box where the sun was still only covering 2 thirds where the serve out wide would have put him into the shade and on his backhand. We’ll never know but there’s every chance that ball doesn’t come back if he goes out wide. Djokovic was standing in the sun and there’s every chance that getting him in and out of the sun would have upset his shot making there - trying to use every advantage you have.

And finally on that match point. Maybe I’m on my own with this one? With Djokovic’s passing shot to save the 2nd MP, does it look like Federer thinks it’s going wide? Could he have got to that? I really think there’s a chance if he reacts a half a second quicker that he cushions that in for a relatively easy winner. Maybe not even if he’s quicker, but if he just decides to go for it at all. Maybe I’m being too critical there.

What should Fed have done differently on either of these serves in your opinion?

Also something amusing I noticed:

The point and shot that saved the second match point for Djokovic? Almost the exact same point reversed (the last 2 shots anyway) that won the break for Federer in the previous game.
Fed didn’t account for FU mode Djokovic. Helps that Fed can’t summon an ace on MP to save his life
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Fed should have lost easily in straight sets, and all Fed fans here would still be happy with the victory against Nadal, which kept him from getting closer, up to only one slam difference.
Happiness is all about expectations.
If Fed lost in straights, it does not do well for his confidence , given his age. It would raise questions whether he can win back to back big matches.

It hurts badly in the short term, but if Fed is thinking long terms (3+ more years), he can take positives from here and hope to continue to do well in majors.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
If Fed lost in straights, it does not do well for his confidence , given his age. It would raise questions whether he can win back to back big matches.

It hurts badly in the short term, but if Fed is thinking long terms (3+ more years), he can take positives from here and hope to continue to do well in majors.
Let me think about it.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
If Fed lost in straights, it does not do well for his confidence , given his age. It would raise questions whether he can win back to back big matches.

It hurts badly in the short term, but if Fed is thinking long terms (3+ more years), he can take positives from here and hope to continue to do well in majors.
Let me think about it.
Just gave it a thought and maybe not.
Fed would only continue competing on tour just to win slams, keep his records, and beat Djokdal.
He is not playing just to be a top five player in the rankings. He’s still at it for his legacy.
His bets are very high, and I don’t know how this letdown can play on his already damaged psyche.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Just gave it a thought and maybe not.
Fed would only continue competing on tour just to win slams, keep his records, and beat Djokdal.
He is not playing just to be a top five player in the rankings. He’s still at it for his legacy.
His bets are very high, and I don’t know how this letdown can play on his already damaged psyche.
When i said do well , i meant win majors or reach finals.

At this point, Halle , Basel and Cincinnati does not matter anymore.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
A straight set loss for Fed would have had you feeling satisfied. So why all the fuss for this 40-15 thingy?

Fed lost the match when he lost the firs set TB. Everything after than was just popcorn stuff. Nothing stopping Fed from making another final, if he really wants to.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
A 3 set loss for Fed would have had you feeling satisfied. So why all the fuss for this 40-15 thingy?

Fed lost the match when he lost the firs set TB.
I thought that exactly when he lost the first set TB.
It’s like we don’t trust him much as of late, and against Nole.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
A straight set loss for Fed would have had you feeling satisfied. So why all the fuss for this 40-15 thingy?

Fed lost the match when he lost the firs set TB. Everything after than was just popcorn stuff. Nothing stopping Fed from making another final, if he really wants to.
It’s all about expectations. Simple as that.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
He choked. Thought he could get away with pushing in a weak 2nd serve on his first MP and rushed in on a bad approach on his second MP. Plain and simple.
Yes, simple as that. We should take that once and for all and stop whining.
It’s 11+ hours already that the match ended, 01:30 AM here where I live, and I think I should do something else. In my case, go to bed and try to sleep.
 

Service Ace

Hall of Fame
This and similar comments are odd when they refer to the game of tennis. These days if a player loses two points on his serve it is considered chocking, regardless of the fact that that happens multiple times in a match. I guess everyone is a "choker" all the time.

:cool:
Only 2 men in the Open Era have lost Slam finals after having Championship Points and one of them, Coria, is overwhelmingly viewed as the greatest choker in the history of our sport. The other is Federer...

But sure, all points are created equal :rolleyes:
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
I wonder how many of those others played against a 4 times Wimbledon champion and one of the greatest returners/defenders at the age of 38.

:cool:
I already digested Federer is a choker, an immensely talented choker, at the same time I am his fan. Also, he is the player I enjoy watching play the most.
But I can’t defend what’s indefendible.
 

Cortana

Hall of Fame
Losing is losing. You're either a hero or a zero. However losing so close might give Roger false confidence he can beat Djoker @US Open in 10 weeks time.
And why shouldn't be able to do that? He almost beat Nadal and Djokovic in the same tournament?

This match only proves one thing: Federer is still the best player out there. Maybe not in the most important points, but overall.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
If we assume that Federer is the same player in win and defeat, it looks like the concept of choking is bound to whether the player wins or loses. A rather flimsy definition then, considering that Federer has won most than any player in the OE.

:cool:
Maybe you can’t have it all together, but a not choking-prone Federer would have been the undisputed tennis GOAT, what he isn’t.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
I mostly don't bother to make that remark, as people here are sold on the concept anyway, but the GOAT moniker is such a non-entity it is not even funny.

Also, I am not sure what you are saying here, but basically the gist of what you imply is that, if Federer won every time, he would be whatever abstract idealisation there is for the perfect tennis player. Well, duh, but that player doesn't exist.

:cool:
Where did I say “if Fed won every time”. You can lose without choking, and that’s fine.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
Sure. I vastly prefer to know that I already have the level to beat someone and I need to improve whatever I think needs improving, than to be crushed and fulfill the duty of a punching bag, wondering what I am doing on the court at all.

:cool:
Djokovic was breadsticked today, and he won the match. He seemed to be a punching ball in the second set?
 

Cortana

Hall of Fame
Come on! Have you never lost squandering match points? Hope you haven’t. It feels worse than being bageled or breadsticked.
I just watched Federers press conference and someone asked him if it's harder to lose like that.

He said no, a loss is a loss.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
You are the second person today that I am talking to on that matter, but why people believe that bringing a match to a critical point and losing it there is more of a "choke" than losing it convincingly? If the match was strongly contested one would think that the opponent has as many ways to influence the outcome as the player we are talking about himself, so it is not like the "choker" is supposed to be rolling over his opponent in a crucial moment.

:cool:
I am just analyzing what he did at each of the MPs today. He did not play them well. Strange after having hit two aces in the two prior points.
Same situation happening already twice before against the same player in consecutive US Opens 2010 and 2011 semis.
I can obviously make an exception with the insane return of serve of 2011 USO at 40-15. That one wasn’t a choke. It was a Nole lucky shot on which he built momentum for ever after against Fed.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
It is not strange at all. Is Federer supposed to be nailing ace after ace to win service games? Two aces in one game is already an extraordinary high number.



It shows that Djokovic is great enough to win points at the slightest opening. Who would have thought or expected that from an ATG with 16 Majors to his name?

:cool:
OK, I got what you said. You believe Fed did not choke today, where choking means he could not manage presssure well, which is a common trait in many of his matches against Djokovic, which also happened against Nadal in the past, but it seems he has solved lately.
 
Federer's biggest issue is he over thinks at times ; he has this lousy habit of playing the man on opposite side of the net as against hitting the ball on merit ; firstly he should have SV'd when at 40-15 he was passive and then tried to be aggressive not out of choice but out of desperation . When Djokovic was facing break points each and every time he continued to go for his shots , I saw Federer hitting a nice deep ball and then take a step into the court to follow it up at the net only to retreat back to base line and restart the rallies as he hesitated far too many times . He failed to heed his own advice to Halep i.e. to play with a winner's mentality , the match was on Federer's racket as Djokovic was also under pressure difference is Djokovic plays well running side to side as it comes natural to him , Federer starts becoming tight in long exchanges . Federer also made another tactical error he never rushed at the net when returning had he done that quite a few times he would have had much better confidence trying to serve and volley , at 40-15 it . would have helped him great deal as Novak was chip returning for most of the later half of 5th set .
 

lud

Hall of Fame
1st MP: Fed had open court. But he was lazy and nervous as hell. Nerves get him here.

2nd MP: In my opinion, he definitively should try drop shot. Novak was far from net.

Or, he should try under arm serve. Imagine that, winning WIM with underarm serve against Djokovic and retire at speach. That would be epic.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
1st MP: Fed had open court. But he was lazy and nervous as hell. Nerves get him here.

2nd MP: In my opinion, he definitively should try drop shot. Novak was far from net.

Or, he should try under arm serve. Imagine that, winning WIM with underarm serve against Djokovic and retire at speach. That would be epic.
You were going fine, but derailed in the last paragraph.
 
Top