What's his age again?

TnsGuru

Professional
I doubt Novak or Rafa will be contending for GS's at 37.8 Yrs of age. Maybe Djok if he can stay healthy/motivated but Rafa on the other hand is questionable given that he tends to be more injury prone lately.
 
Last edited:

Your Hero

Professional
Federer has definitely proven those wrong who said he could no longer play on clay. We can now only imagine the possibilities in 2017 and 2018.
Imagine if he'd been using the larger racquet from the beginning.
The mind boggles. Nadal maybe never gets in his head. After that
it's all his. For years. Boring, but still..............
 

MeatTornado

Legend
Federer has definitely proven those wrong who said he could no longer play on clay. We can now only imagine the possibilities in 2017 and 2018.
He's only been slightly better than I thought he would be. But for the most part this is what I expected. I don't think anyone believed he literally couldn't win a match anymore.

But he's clearly laboring to get past guys like Monfils & Coric. Nearly beating Thiem was a pleasant surprise, but there's no reason to believe that it would translate to being able to compete with Novak or Rafa. I can't speak for everyone, but my main argument against clay was that it was too much effort for a very slim chance at an actual title. Making QFs of Masters doesn't really disprove anything.

This also shouldn't change anything for 2017/2018. Rafa was too good in 2017 and Fed was too bad in 2018 for him to do any real damage on the dirt that year. Potential 2017 Rome title, but that's it.
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
He's only been slightly better than I thought he would be. But for the most part this is what I expected. I don't think anyone believed he literally couldn't win a match anymore.

But he's clearly laboring to get past guys like Monfils & Coric. Nearly beating Thiem was a pleasant surprise, but there's no reason to believe that it would translate to being able to compete with Novak or Rafa. I can't speak for everyone, but my main argument against clay was that it was too much effort for a very slim chance at an actual title. Making QFs of Masters doesn't really disprove anything.

This also shouldn't change anything for 2017/2018. Rafa was too good in 2017 and Fed was too bad in 2018 for him to do any real damage on the dirt that year. Potential 2017 Rome title, but that's it.
Totally disagree.
 

Grampa

Semi-Pro
Ah, the benefits of hindsight! Roger could have lost Wimbledon in'17 and fans would have blamed him not playing on clay. The same ones would have applauded if he had won last year, and would lament over him playing clay this year. No one really knows what would have happened. Nevertheless, putting aside my 'holier than thou' view, he was tired after his AO+Sunshine Double exploits, so i think best would have been to just play RG. Last year is a bit more convoluted, no one knows when he injured his hand, as he was lacklustre during march, but still won the mercedes cup. Could have played just RG both years, if not anything else.
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
But do you really believe he would've won any of those titles in 2018?
Yes. Federer played with a lot of pressure on HC and grass, as expectations were high. There would've been no pressure on clay, and with Djokovic still basically a non-factor, I definitely believe he would've won a title or two, and gone far in the tournaments he didn't win.
 

StANDAA

Legend
Yes. Federer played with a lot of pressure on HC and grass, as expectations were high. There would've been no pressure on clay, and with Djokovic still basically a non-factor, I definitely believe he would've won a title or two, and gone far in the tournaments he didn't win.
He’d have to beat Rafa to win everywhere but in Madrid. Would his 2018 form be enough, no neo BH and all? Yeah I thought so.
 

StANDAA

Legend
I don't recall saying he'd sweep the clay season, but you can quote me if I did.
I don’t recall implying that you said he’d sweep the clay season. You said he could have won two titles. I fail to see how, for the reason I listed. Madrid would probably have been his only chance at a title, but he’d have to beat either Thiem or well-playing Zverev or both.

Wouldn’t call this a wasted opportunity really. He’s won a Madrid title before and the chances he wins 2018 Madrid even without Nadal are still so-so.
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
Imagine if he'd been using the larger racquet from the beginning.
The mind boggles. Nadal maybe never gets in his head. After that
it's all his. For years. Boring, but still..............
The alternate reality to that very favourable hypothetical is that he never quite adjusts to the uncontrollable power, or develops a different type of game from the start, and the Federer we know never comes to be.

Imo he started with the correct equipment that suited him for his game style, favourite playing surfaces, and the opposition at the time. But it was also a good idea to change eventually. Credit Federer for being able to make the adjustment, which was a remarkable feat, although it is important to note that the transition covered approximately 2-3 years and he had significant resources to help him do it.

The only criticism is that he may have benefitted from switching slightly earlier than he did. Maybe 2009, when he started to get regularly overpowered using his trusty PS 90 pea shooters.
 
Last edited:

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
I don’t recall implying that you said he’d sweep the clay season. You said he could have won two titles. I fail to see how, for the reason I listed.
Well, I disagree with you. Who knows how Federer would've played against Nadal. The pressure would've been all on Rafa's shoulders, and he no longer handles pressure as he once did. And, his game looked more lethal than it actually was because the competition was so weak against him and hardly ever applied pressure...allowing Rafa to hit freely. Only Zverev pressured him at Rome (and had him looking like a deer-in-headlights until the rain saved him); only the little 5'7" Schwartzman pressured him at Roland Garros (and was the only player to win a set against him).
 

StANDAA

Legend
Well, I disagree with you. Who knows how Federer would've played against Nadal. The pressure would've been all on Rafa's shoulders, and he no longer handles pressure as he once did. And, his game looked more lethal than it actually was because the competition was so weak against him and hardly ever applied pressure...allowing Rafa to hit freely. Only Zverev pressured him at Rome (and had him looking like a deer-in-headlights until the rain saved him); only the little 5'7" Schwartzman pressured him at Roland Garros (and was the only player to win a set against him).
You could have a point, or not. Guess we’ll never know. But maybe because Djoko was still a non factor and Rafa couldn’t make a Wimbledon QF for years before his SF last year, Fed used the same tactic that worked in 2017. I really don’t blame him. It would have been too much of a sacrifice since he was still the biggest favorite for Wimbledon. RG title wasn’t possible anyway, anything else seems insignificant in comparision. But everything’s different this year so he’s playing.
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
Imagine @FedFosterWallace hitting the ‘report’ button with the same generous intensity like the ‘like’ one......

........
Scary thought. :-D
On a more serious note, I actually thought @FedFosterWallace might change his name after the re-examination of the late David Foster-Wallace and the repudiation of his journalistic ethics and professional behaviour.

It doesn't feel right to highlight the F-W suffix or his work the way it used to (imo).
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
But maybe because Djoko was still a non factor and Rafa couldn’t make a Wimbledon QF for years before his SF last year, Fed used the same tactic that worked in 2017. I really don’t blame him. It would have been too much of a sacrifice since he was still the biggest favorite for Wimbledon. RG title wasn’t possible anyway, anything else seems insignificant in comparision.
I don't get the rationale of a healthy player skipping a slam, and I don't get why many Federer fans are so dismissive of what he could have accomplished at RG.
 

junior74

G.O.A.T.
bland?
The guy was pathetic at the end of the tie break no first serves, he had two match points, and he wasted them, not to mention that he was another of the countless players who could not stand the pressure of the people when they cheer incessantly for Federer.
He choked!
Agree. Federer started the tiebreak terribly, and if Coric had had any brains, he would have known that if he kept the ball in play Federer would make more errors. Instead, Coric decided to take business into his own hands. Huge mistake.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
The alternate reality to that very favourable hypothetical is that he never quite adjusts to the uncontrollable power, or develops a different type of game from the start, and the Federer we know never comes to be.

Imo he started with the correct equipment that suited him for his game style, favourite playing surfaces, and the opposition at the time. But it was also a good idea to change eventually. Credit Federer for being able to make the adjustment, which was a remarkable feat, although it is important to note that the transition covered approximately 2-3 years and he had significant resources to help him do it.

The only criticism is that he may have benefitted from switching slightly earlier than he did. Maybe 2009, when he started to get regularly overpowered using his trusty PS 90 pea shooters.
The mind boggles how is it possible to ignore an actual existing evidence that directly disproves the hypothetical: not only Federer was able to adapt to a bigger racquet in his older age when it is arguably more difficult to adapt, but he actually adapted to a racquet change moving to bigger head size twice.

You are directly contradicting yourself in this once by saying that he wouldn't adjust to the "uncontrollable" (sic!) power and then "credit" Federer for adapting to such. The transition took him exactly one year.

What are the "significant resources" that helped him?

:cool:
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
what are the "significant resources" that helped him?

:cool:
When Roger wants to switch frames he has more resources to facilitate this than you and I. Well maybe not you, but certainly me. This would be where the "significant resources" comes in :)

With that said, regardless of the frame you still have to go out there and use it. As I said, credit to Roger there.

But back to S.R.: Mainly the customisation staff he has access to, the wealth to fund those staff, and also the depth of his relationship with Wilson. Both of those networks offered him significant resources to really create the racquet of his dreams. Being able to design a racquet from scratch really, having access to prototypes, being able to give direct feedback to a manufacturer designing a racquet just for him. It really provided a dream opportunity, which he maximised very effectively (imo).

He had the wherewithal to adapt to more powerful racquet technology and a significantly larger hoop earlier in his career, and he should have (imo).
 
Last edited:

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
When Roger wants to switch frames he has more resources to facilitate this than you and I. Well maybe not you, but certainly me. This would be where the "significant resources" comes in :)

With that said, regardless of the frame you still have to go out there and use it. As I said, credit to Roger there.

But back to S.R.: Mainly the customisation staff he has access to, the wealth to fund those staff, and also the depth of his relationship with Wilson. Both of those networks offered him significant resources to really create the racquet of his dreams. Being able to design a racquet from scratch really, having access to prototypes, being able to give direct feedback to a manufacturer designing a racquet just for him. It really provided a dream opportunity, which he maximised very effectively (imo).

He had the wherewithal to do it earlier in his career, and he should have (imo).
I was under the impression that we are comparing elite pro players, not elite pro players with amateurs. If that is the case whatever "resources" Federer had at his disposal are also available for most pros in the elite category, so I think that you listing that as his "advantage" was misleading.

You seem to use the word "dream" for no reason, other than to exacerbate some unknown intangible quality of his racquet.

:cool:
 

dnguyen

Hall of Fame
RF know that young gen ATP players are useless, no wonder they can't beat him. Epic Fail. We will see the next era to restore the holy grail of serve and volley game, demand that all racquet makers reproduce PS85 St Vincent, Head Prestige Pro 600, Puma Winner/Super, etc etc.
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
Federer has definitely proven those wrong who said he could no longer play on clay. We can now only imagine the possibilities in 2017 and 2018.
First of all, you are a great hypocrite, when it comes to Nadal, for example, you say that he is very old and that, I quote your words, he should neither win grand slams at this age nor matches like the of Thiem in the quarterfinals of the US Open.
Your reasoning was that the young players should step up and dethrone the older tennis players.
But when it comes to your idol, not only your excuse is not worth anything, you rejoice in its merits to take forward matches against much younger rivals, nor do you use the term choke when it comes to Federer, something that, on the contrary, if you use it enough with the rivals of Spaniard, to undermine his merits in continuing to achieve important victories and titles.
And if it was not enough with your double standard to qualify as you see fit, now you go with the premise, false by the way, that if your idol had played on the surface more difficult for him, not only talking about his game but also for his physical, he could have won something (another dig for Nadal), the sad reality is, as it has been proven today, his tennis does not give for more in clay in all the aspects of the game: tenistically, physically and mentally speaking.
Federer is irrelevant, at least in RG, since the final of 2011, from there he realized that he was no longer fighting for the title of the French Open and the clay in general was a hindrance to what would happen later in the season.
Talking about what he could have achieved is irrelevant, since to follow your fantasy, we can also speculate that he would have complicated his chances of winning at Wimbledon in 2017.
It is not worth talking about this but for some, only the positive is included, always forgetting the other possibility: defeat.
Just as the Swiss were given merit for winning everything they could from his return in Australia, and it is highlighted more for doing it with more than 35 years of age, it is precisely this feature that is a double-edged sword: the whole experience of the world against body aches.
His advanced age for this sport, it is well known, is his greatest weakness.
Never forget that Time does not forgive anyone, even characters that many call GOAT.
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
First of all, you are a great hypocrite, when it comes to Nadal, for example, you say that he is very old and that, I quote your words, he should neither win grand slams at this age nor matches like the of Thiem in the quarterfinals of the US Open.
Your reasoning was that the young players should step up and dethrone the older tennis players.
But when it comes to your idol, not only your excuse is not worth anything, you rejoice in its merits to take forward matches against much younger rivals, nor do you use the term choke when it comes to Federer, something that, on the contrary, if you use it enough with the rivals of Spaniard, to undermine his merits in continuing to achieve important victories and titles.
And if it was not enough with your double standard to qualify as you see fit, now you go with the premise, false by the way, that if your idol had played on the surface more difficult for him, not only talking about his game but also for his physical, he could have won something (another dig for Nadal), the sad reality is, as it has been proven today, his tennis does not give for more in clay in all the aspects of the game: tenistically, physically and mentally speaking.
Federer is irrelevant, at least in RG, since the final of 2011, from there he realized that he was no longer fighting for the title of the French Open and the clay in general was a hindrance to what would happen later in the season.
Talking about what he could have achieved is irrelevant, since to follow your fantasy, we can also speculate that he would have complicated his chances of winning at Wimbledon in 2017.
It is not worth talking about this but for some, only the positive is included, always forgetting the other possibility: defeat.
Just as the Swiss were given merit for winning everything they could from his return in Australia, and it is highlighted more for doing it with more than 35 years of age, it is precisely this feature that is a double-edged sword: the whole experience of the world against body aches.
His advanced age for this sport, it is well known, is his greatest weakness.
Never forget that Time does not forgive anyone, even characters that many call GOAT.
Okay.
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
Hypocrisy

She is a very bad counselor, very bad friend
very good to make suffer
this is hypocrisy
is the one that grows day by day

The one that hurts the heart
feeds on treason
and he's never right
the one who says your friend
and betrays you for the back
he is the one who has hypocrisy instead of blood

It burns and burns you inside
is the one that manipulates you
as if you were dead
when the hypocrite enters you
you do not care if you're friend or enemy

You hurt yourself by hurting, you suffer by suffering,
you are not happy and you never will be
if you let hypocrisy speak for you
you lose friends trying to win mates
you do not feel good because it is hypocrisy
the one that tells you what to do,
the one that never leaves you in peace
and you have to decide and say
"ENOUGH"
 

onehandbh

Legend
Federer massively improved in the last 4-5 years. He is much better player now. I expect titanic battle against Nadal in the SF.
In some ways I think he has improved.
- approach shots, volleys, bh return of serve.

On the other hand he definitely seems a bit slower and less explosive.
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
Hypocrisy

She is a very bad counselor, very bad friend
very good to make suffer
this is hypocrisy
is the one that grows day by day

The one that hurts the heart
feeds on treason
and he's never right
the one who says your friend
and betrays you for the back
he is the one who has hypocrisy instead of blood

It burns and burns you inside
is the one that manipulates you
as if you were dead
when the hypocrite enters you
you do not care if you're friend or enemy

You hurt yourself by hurting, you suffer by suffering,
you are not happy and you never will be
if you let hypocrisy speak for you
you lose friends trying to win mates
you do not feel good because it is hypocrisy
the one that tells you what to do,
the one that never leaves you in peace
and you have to decide and say
"ENOUGH"
Is this a rap or a song?
 
Top