What went wrong at 40-15 for Federer?

Julian Houston

Semi-Pro
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.
Dosent help when he will net the drop shot. On the 2nd MP is a perfect opportunity to grind the point but he didn't. The stupid net rush gifting all the Djokovic wins.
 

Julian Houston

Semi-Pro
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:
Its strange he could ace nicely to 40-15 under pressure from 0-15 then choke away remaining points. When the moment comes he always thought he won the match or done enough.

Surely he must know on every time he serve for a match he will face BP.
 

Julian Houston

Semi-Pro
"The moment" is a random point that people like to skim through to show how smart they are. There is no "the moment" without all other "moments", or are we going to pretend that Federer would have been in a position to have those MPs if not for his extreme mental resilience to break back, or that the game where he was broken back wasn't decided on these two points alone etc etc?

Both points were won on a coin toss from both players. This time it went Novak's way. Good for him.

:cool:
Novak didnt do anything special to break back. Its a total choke in the crucial moment thinking the match is over. As much as I like Federer he needs to change this mindset and treat the moment seriously with some safe and deep groundstrokes.
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
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.
Ironically later Federer was in the same situation as Djokovic here again. When it was 11-11 and Federer had his 2nd break point, he had a look on a not that difficult forehand pass as well, but didn’t hit powerful enough and Djokovic guessed right. So he he saved with a great long volley (which I thought would go out for a moment) and finish with the Smash.

To the match points:

1) I think he could have (and should have) made the forehand. Not for a winner, but Djokovic wouldn’t have been in a good position then.
2) I don’t think he could have rached the passing shot. The approach shot was too bad.

I think for once it would have been the right decision to just play rallyes with Djokovic. Very likely he wouldn’t have avoided the error then. Two 20-shot-rallyes and Djokovic having to play the ball 20 times over the net at the match points would have been too much even for Nole I guess. Or at least at some point there would have been a VERY weak shot worthy to attack for Federer.
 

urban

Legend
I think, a crucial pount was also the setpoint in the third set. Fed is a frontrunner, and he would have a substantial lead in the match for the very first time. So, depite his better overall stats, in reality, given the tennis scoring, he was always a bit behind, with the exception of this 8-7 lead in the fifth. Against Nadal he was always in front, despite losing 1-6 in the second. Now, tennis is game of patterns, and it is not new, that Federer has problems to close out a vital match. He lost 21 matches having had mps on his own. It happened against Djokovic before at USO, it happened against Delpo and Anderson last year, against Thiem this year.
On the other hand, Djokovic was far from his best, his serve and return well below par. Despite his mediocre performance he came through on guts and resilience. This should be frightening for his opponents. What will happen on his beloved hard courts, when his is really on form? As dangermen for him i only see hard hitters like Khashanov and Medvedev, or Thiem, who is more a grinder, but has a big forehand and could outlast him.
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
I am not opposed to any of your suggestions, as they would be as good as any, but we have reached the point where the self-j****** has reached the point where people propose that Federer chooses to rally from the baseline with Djokovic and try to wear him down or similar. Have people forgotten how consistent is Djokovic from the baseline?
Just on match point, as a different strategy than he should normally choose! Because as consistent a player can be, how much more difficult is it to hit the court 20 times when you are match point down in a Wimbledon final. And also against someone who COULD attack at any short ball, so that you cannot play only safe. The pressure would have likely been too much, even for Djokovic.
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
How much more difficult is to pull off a single passing shot (assuming that the approach shot is good), than to rally from the baseline (by a player who made a name by doing just that)?

:cool:
Sorry, I don’t agree here. Look at the 2011 US Open. One shot in "close your eyes, hit as hard as possible and just hope" style is easier than having to hit the ball 20 times, always with the fear it could be your last shot of the match. Normal strengths don’t matter that much in such a special situation. In a Wimbledon final on top of that, and in maybe the greatest one of all time.

I’m very sure in one of two chances for such a rallye, Federer would have received the error from Djokovic or a short ball to convert.
 

Rogfan

Professional
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:
Maybe you should go support someone who isn’t such a choker according to you. Be kind to yourself. Roger Federer isn’t going to be the man who will win the most in the next few years.
 

Feather

Legend
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:
Did he also have championship points on serve?
 

Julian Houston

Semi-Pro
Ironically later Federer was in the same situation as Djokovic here again. When it was 11-11 and Federer had his 2nd break point, he had a look on a not that difficult forehand pass as well, but didn’t hit powerful enough and Djokovic guessed right. So he he saved with a great long volley (which I thought would go out for a moment) and finish with the Smash.

To the match points:

1) I think he could have (and should have) made the forehand. Not for a winner, but Djokovic wouldn’t have been in a good position then.
2) I don’t think he could have rached the passing shot. The approach shot was too bad.

I think for once it would have been the right decision to just play rallyes with Djokovic. Very likely he wouldn’t have avoided the error then. Two 20-shot-rallyes and Djokovic having to play the ball 20 times over the net at the match points would have been too much even for Nole I guess. Or at least at some point there would have been a VERY weak shot worthy to attack for Federer.
Bottom line is Fedr went for broke in 2 MP and missed. 1st MP he shouldnt play so risky forehand, can hit to center of court. Keeping the ball in is better. 2nd MP Djokovic will go crosscourt 100% but wont be a deep shot as he is out of confidence, Federer could have loaded up the next forehand instead of net rush.

Fedr just need better training and tactics to solve the Djoker puzzle. Nadal is solved. He cannot try to say his overall game is good enough that he will be beating Djokovic.
 

Xavier G

Hall of Fame
Fed rushed a little on his match points and got caught up in the moment, imo. He took a little more time to compose himself.
He was losing steam on his service by then too, so maybe that's why he served wide. On the second match point, it looked like he wasn't fully committed to the net approach, came in a split second too late and Novak just had that extra little bit more room with the court angle to pass.
Credit to Novak, tough on Roger.
Great effort by both.
 

reaper

Legend
Fed rushed a little on his match points and got caught up in the moment, imo. He took a little more time to compose himself.
He was losing steam on his service by then too, so maybe that's why he served wide. On the second match point, it looked like he wasn't fully committed to the net approach, came in a split second too late and Novak just had that extra little bit more room with the court angle to pass.
Credit to Novak, tough on Roger.
Great effort by both.
He lacked conviction at just about every crucial stage of the match. On his break point in the 1st set he played a beautifully constructed point, then missed a simple mid court passing shot to break that he would make 19 times in 20. In the 1st set tie break he seemed to be changing his mind on his forehands, trying to go inside in rather than his preferred inside out resulting in a slew of errors. He missed an easy shot at 5-3 in that breaker doing that from memory. At break point at 11-11 in the 5th he had a relatively simple forehand pass that he didn't really rip with Djokovic at net, allowing Djokovic to make the volley then shank the smash away for a winner. This was a heartbreaking loss instead of what should have been his greatest victory.
 

reaper

Legend
After the first serve was unsuccessful he had to deal with a very good return, so he a kind of pressed to re-establish his control of the point, which didn't pay off. The second MP wasn't entirely of his choosing: Novak drew him in, so he had the choice to either go for a net rush or try some sort of difficult half-volley. He chose the first but the execution of the approach shot wasn't good enough against someone like Novak.

Bolded: he was losing the sharpness of his whole FH side by then, not only his serve. Many people don't even comment on that, despite of it being obvious. The fatigue definitely caught up with him, so he was looking for shortening the points where he could. One can see how he was willing to risk more for a bigger reward too.

:cool:
I think he held every subsequent service game after he was broken to 15. Yes he was slowing, but no more than his opponent. He was simply crippled by anxiety at the vital moment.
 

Julian Houston

Semi-Pro
After the first serve was unsuccessful he had to deal with a very good return, so he a kind of pressed to re-establish his control of the point, which didn't pay off. The second MP wasn't entirely of his choosing: Novak drew him in, so he had the choice to either go for a net rush or try some sort of difficult half-volley. He chose the first but the execution of the approach shot wasn't good enough against someone like Novak.

Bolded: he was losing the sharpness of his whole FH side by then, not only his serve. Many people don't even comment on that, despite of it being obvious. The fatigue definitely caught up with him, so he was looking for shortening the points where he could. One can see how he was willing to risk more for a bigger reward too.

:cool:
Not agree with this, its a weak return by Djoker. Federer screwed up himself on the 2nd MP by net rushing when he has a bad approach shot.

Djoker don't draw players in, its not his style.
 

reaper

Legend
Not agree with this, its a weak return by Djoker. Federer screwed up himself on the 2nd MP by net rushing when he has a bad approach shot.

Djoker don't draw players in, its not his style.
It was a short ball on his forehand. That is not ordinarily a difficult situation for a player of Federer's quality.
 

reaper

Legend
Don't worry, I have been through the whole charade to know how the things will develop, including every comment from the likes of you. The way you focus on what Federer didn't do at the expense of everything he did tells the whole story. The faulty representation of what really happened topped by expert psychological analysis is entertaining, but at this point the only thing you are doing is to convince yourself on something you already decided. Not a lonely approach by any means.

The truth is that Federer took his chances and Djokovic responded in the best possible way which is why Federer lost. All well within the realms of normal play and tactics. Both MPs which are so hotly debated weren't even that memorable from a tactical point of view. I was especially happy to read that the choice of I/O forehands is a somewhat better tactic than I/I based on preferences, regardless of any analysis of the playing situations themselves, and also that Federer chose to not "rip" his pass at 11-11. Apparently Federer felt charitable that day.

8-B
It seems De Nile isn't just a river in Africa.
 

reaper

Legend
Don't worry, I have been through the whole charade to know how the things will develop, including every comment from the likes of you. The way you focus on what Federer didn't do at the expense of everything he did tells the whole story. The faulty representation of what really happened topped by expert psychological analysis is entertaining, but at this point the only thing you are doing is to convince yourself on something you already decided. Not a lonely approach by any means.

The truth is that Federer took his chances and Djokovic responded in the best possible way which is why Federer lost. All well within the realms of normal play and tactics. Both MPs which are so hotly debated weren't even that memorable from a tactical point of view. I was especially happy to read that the choice of I/O forehands is a somewhat better tactic than I/I based on preferences, regardless of any analysis of the playing situations themselves, and also that Federer chose to not "rip" his pass at 11-11. Apparently Federer felt charitable that day.

8-B
Perhaps the highlight of your post is the start of the second paragraph: "The truth is that Federer took his chances.....". Lol. Ever considered a job at the North Korean ministry of Information?
 

reaper

Legend
Don't worry, you will calm down in the next few days and maybe you will be able to discuss the matter more soberly. For now you are out on a mission to see some reactions. It happens around here.

:cool:
I don't think anyone's ever been able to discuss anything soberly with you on here because of your propensity for willful misrepresentation. Anyway, they're currently showing a replay of the match with Djokovic about to serve at 5-6 in the 1st. I'd like to be looking forward to Federer playing a competent tie breaker. Instead I think I'll see 5 unforced errors off his forehand.
 

S'in-net

Semi-Pro
If Federer's 1st serve at 40-15 doesn't catch the tape, he doesn't record one of the biggest chokes in tennis history. Djokovic was leaning the wrong way and nowhere near it.
What didn't help Federer in this exact moment was someone in the crowd shouting "Go on Roger", literally as the ball was about to leave Federer's hand for that service toss, at 40:15, which ultimately struck the top of the tape; (at 0:23 in the vid):-


That was the mini fluctuation that made the difference, after that Djokovic timed the ball well and hit with authority for the rest of that game
 

Crisp

Professional
If Federer's 1st serve at 40-15 doesn't catch the tape, he doesn't record one of the biggest chokes in tennis history. Djokovic was leaning the wrong way and nowhere near it.
Totally agree with the above statement, had caught him hanging wide dozens of times in 5th set alone. Game of millimeters
 

Thetouch

Professional
Nothing went wrong at 40:15, you can lose a game like that even at MP, it happens. What really went wrong was that he choked on all 3 tie breakers really badly. He should have never lost the first one. The last tie break was probably the result of the other 2 he lost, it affected him badly.
 

HuusHould

Professional
At 40-15 I wouldve lassod the return of the return back x court, the Djokers fh is the wing most likely to breakdown under pressure anyway.
 

HuusHould

Professional
What didn't help Federer in this exact moment was someone in the crowd shouting "Go on Roger", literally as the ball was about to leave Federer's hand for that service toss, at 40:15, which ultimately struck the top of the tape; (at 0:23 in the vid):-


That was the mini fluctuation that made the difference, after that Djokovic timed the ball well and hit with authority for the rest of that game
It was right at the worst possible moment, just after he could've caught the ball. Someone told me Pat Rafter said something along the lines of - he'd be a rich(er) man if he had a dollar for every time someone's called out "c'mon Pat" after he's tossed the ball up for his serve. At the time he probably thought he could live with it, no point getting upset when you have one hand on the trophy......
 

deaner2211

Semi-Pro
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.
Wow when Federer hits a return right at his opponent it is skill but when someone does the same thing to him then it is luck.
 

Raiden

Hall of Fame
You are asking the million dollar question.
A tough one, but I've got the answer!

I am shocked that Fed hasn't learned a most BASIC lesson yet in tennis.
The "Law of Averages".

It's simple. It goes like this. If you have a great serve like Fed has, and you are serving 65%+ (which he was),
THIS is what you do when you get to 40-15, Match Point....


You serve 1, 2, 3, or 4 'FIRST SERVES' if necessary!!!
You forget about second serves!!!


If your first first serve isn't an ace or puts Djoker in trouble, you've got three left! (first serve)
If your next 'first serve' isn't an ace or puts Djoker in trouble, you've got two left! (second serve)
If your next first serve isn't an ace or puts Djoker in trouble, you've got one left! (first serve)
If your next 'first serve' isn't an ace or puts Djoker in trouble, you're still at deuce !!! (second serve)

In other words you've got four (4) shots to put the match away, easily.


So what does Fed do?


Serving at 2-2, 8-7

40-15. 1st serve, hits nets, falls to Fed's side. OK, no sweat! You've still got three (3) more 'first serve' chances!

2nd serve, he throws in a weak serve to Djoker's F.H. Huge, unforgivable mistake.
Djokers pushes Fed back to the baseline easily and Fed hits ball out on the side.

The weak serve was totally inexcusable. You go for a BIG second serve!
This is match point at Wimbledon for crying out loud!


40-30 Fed gets 1st serve in, but not good placement. Djoker can only push ball to mid-court, Fed steps inside baseline, hits to deuce side, comes to net on a wing and a prayer (not a strong/good approach shot), BUT stays on deuce side of court instead of moving to center! Djoker sees a wide open court and hits to open side for winner!

If you are going to move into net, it is totally inexcusable to stay to one side (leaving a gaping opening) instead of coming to the center.
Total brain fart move by Fed.

40-40 ... the rest is history.
At 40-15 it should have been an underarm serve.

Djoker was sufficiently behind to justify it. But it required greater level of creativity and concentration on the big points.
 

jklos

Professional
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.
The 2nd match point he missed his spot. Not much more to it. He needed to be about a foot or two more to the line and about two feet more depth. If that was the case Novak would of maybe missed or at least give Roger a put away at the net. Another option was an angled inside out. Novak maybe would of got it but it would have been a hard pass on the backhand. It's a game of inches. Federer's match point in Aus Open vs Nadal he shanked the forehand crosscourt but hit it on the line. If Roger is hits anything close to that shot on MP #2 he is walking away with the trophy. He just hit it clean and right at him. What can you do. Would have been nice to find a few better serves there as well. Oh well that's tennis. Now all the script writers and tennis fans are talking about the mental strength of Djokovic and the mental lapses of Federer... I don't know. I think it's just the way the ball goes sometimes. No one can put the ball in the exact spot they want in these situations, you just try to come close. Sometimes it hits that spot or even better and sometimes it misses or even worse. In this moment it just didn't happen. The goal is to try to put yourself in these positions. That goal was achieved from both players. Only one hit the right spot though.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
I am a Fed fan, but what about those rasping backhands delivered by Djoker when it really mattered. Fed should have wrapped this up in 4 if he had not played those awful forehands out wide in the 1st set. Let’s give credit where it’s due, this one goes into the “ Djoker didn’t choke and Fed couldn’t convert “. So Djoker should be proud of his effort and Fed shouldn’t be. It’s not a heartbreaking loss. You can gauge that by the rather nonchalant on court interview by Fed. Those were his immediate, genuine emotions.
It certainly was a heartbreaking loss. We must digest it as it was, and go on with our lives.
 

jklos

Professional
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.
True. He knows he can still beat the best of the best.
 

Jonas78

Legend
Strange thing is he got over the mental issues vs Nadal, still he chokes to Djokovic. I dont really get it. Not taking anything away from Djokovic here, but losing 4 straight points on 40-15 is on you.
 

maximus

Semi-Pro
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.
Unfortunately, it seemed that the great RF "rushed" his way into both points. Serves were weak. Returns to Novak's were weaker. I hope to forget this. I had a hard time sleeping. Imagine RF wasting 2 MPs on his serve? Unbelievable.
 
Last edited:

robert.s

Professional
First he didn't hit very good serves. Then the approach shot at 40-30 was mediocre.

But now that a day has passed, he only missed 2 match points against the best returner of all time possibly. It can happen. I think the freebies he gave Djokovic in all 3 tiebreaks is what lost him the match more than those match points missed.

Tiebreaks is the one moment in a match where you don't want to make gifts. Ever. Federer basically gifted Djokovic at least 2 points in each tiebreak. That is the difference between a 4-2 and a 2-4. It is huge.
 

Sephiroth

Hall of Fame
Mirka knew even at 40-15 it wasn't over yet, she had her head down through that game while the crowd were getting over excited.

I didn't realise the noob shouting out during 40-15 with Fed hitting the tape after but looks like it came to bite them very hard. Such slim margins. If that went in it'd be over since Novak was going the wrong way anyway.
 

Mark-Touch

Hall of Fame
At 40-15 it should have been an underarm serve.

Djoker was sufficiently behind to justify it. But it required greater level of creativity and concentration on the big points.
Fed is the ultimate player in skillful shots.
Chances are he could have pulled off that shot.

But with a 65% 1st serve %, and having just made it to 40-15 on two unplayable 1st serves,
why not simply go with a tried and tested serve?

He had four shots, each with a 65% chance of being either unplayable or producing a weak return.
Heck those are better odds than trying to get a head on four head/tail coin tosses.
 

Mark-Touch

Hall of Fame
Flashback, the specific crucial action was Nole making the crowd cheer for him after that insane return at MP down at 40-15.
Had Nole not milked the crowd for that, history may have been different. You could see Fed’s expression of a mix of anger and horror serving the next point at 40-30.
Its effects still linger in Fed’s mind today.
Yes I agree about the effect of Djoker milking the crowd after his serve return had on Fed.
It wasn't enough to counter Fed's muscle memory of good serving.
Fed produced an excellent body serve on the next point.

But he was far too pumped with adrenaline at that stage, so when Djoker's weak mid-court ball came to him
he hit with way too much power, when a simple controlled shot would have been all that was required to
either win the point outright, or set up his next shot as a winner.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
Yes I agree about the effect of Djoker milking the crowd after his serve return had on Fed.
It wasn't enough to counter Fed's muscle memory of good serving.
Fed produced an excellent body serve on the next point.

But he was far too pumped with adrenaline at that stage, so when Djoker's weak mid-court ball came to him
he hit with way too much power, when a simple controlled shot would have been all that was required to
either win the point outright, or set up his next shot as a winner.
8 years after, at his second MP, he shot with not enough power and placement, which facilitated Nole’s passing shot.
 

Mark-Touch

Hall of Fame
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.
You make an EXCELLENT point!
Because going into the match, those were my exact thoughts.
To me, Fed had already sealed the deal.

Any time he can take out Nadal in a slam, it is mission accomplished as far as he is concerned.
Anything after that is pure gravy.

And to go up against Djoker, who has had his number in slams over the past few years and come within
a whisker of actually defeating him is totally mind blowing!
 

Mark-Touch

Hall of Fame
To the match points:

1) I think he could have (and should have) made the forehand. Not for a winner, but Djokovic wouldn’t have been in a good position then.
2) I don’t think he could have rached the passing shot. The approach shot was too bad.

I think for once it would have been the right decision to just play rallyes with Djokovic. Very likely he wouldn’t have avoided the error then. Two 20-shot-rallyes and Djokovic having to play the ball 20 times over the net at the match points would have been too much even for Nole I guess. Or at least at some point there would have been a VERY weak shot worthy to attack for Federer.
Valid points.
But he does this AFTER he goes for four BIG serves (if necessary).
His second serve was a relatively weak one, which pushed Fed back and produced his flying ball that sailed off to the side.

If AFTER going for four BIG serves, Djoker makes a miraculous service return and Fed finds himself in a regular rally with Djoker, then sure,
just continue rallying and see what happens.
 
Top