Why do people think Federer will win another Major?

[IvanisevicServe]

And why is everyone acting like Nadal and Djoker are the only ones who present a threat to Federer?

How about the other players who, you know, also play slams? How about Tsonga, JMDP, Berdych and Soderling, who have all beaten Fed. in slams?

I'd say Murray has a much better chance of winning a slam than Fed.

Soderling isn't healthy and may never play again, plus he has a 1-15 or so record against Federer in his career. Federer generally licks his chops if he sees Soderling on the other side of the net.

JMDP...Federer is a terrible matchup for him. Have you been paying attention to their last 4, 5 matches?

Tsonga...Federer's won 4 in a row against him and JWT doesn't look so convincing this year.

Berdych...Federer doesn't like playing him, but he's too inconsistent to really factor into the equation that much.

There are really only 3 players who seriously factor into the equation. If Federer keeps giving himself chances, eventually he could come through.

 

[jm1980]

I don't think people think per se that Fed will win another slam. They just want him to win and so the lines between feeling and thinking can blur. But by the same token, one can just as easily ask why people think Nadal will win another Major? Same thing. The only difference is Nadal is at peak why Fed is post-prime. But that is negated by the fact that Djoker owns Nadal's asss.

I like Nadal's chances better because he only has to pray for someone to take out Djokovic.

Federer on the other hand has to worry about all other three guys.

 

[timnz]

2011 US Open

He had two match points against Djokovic. He would have won against Nadal in the final (yes he would have). The surface suits him more than in Australian Open and Nadal wasn't in the form he was in 2010.

When you are that close - of course you are a contender.

 

[DjokovicForTheWin]

I like Nadal's chances better because he only has to pray for someone to take out Djokovic.

Federer on the other hand has to worry about all other three guys.

Well if Nadal or Fed had to face Djoker, I like Fed's chances better than Nadal's. But true, Nadal only needs Djoker out of the way. But then it would just be an empty slam anyways, like his USO10.

 

[Murrayfan31]

They are idiots. That's why. Fed is done.

 

[IvanisevicServe]

Am I the only one who thinks Federer has a better chance of winning the FO than Wimbledon?

I thinks his days of being a brilliant grass court player are over, especially with the way the courts behave these days. His ground strokes just sit up there, waiting to be punished, and he doesn't return nearly as well as he used to, so the big servers give him nightmares on that surface.

At the French Open, sure, he's screwed if he plays Nadal, but against anyone else, he has a very good chance. He's got plenty of time, and his forehand penetrates clay like nobody else's.

Plus, the competition there isn't what it is elsewhere. Ferrer doesn't show up at the FO, despite his clay court prowess. Tsonga isn't really a clay court player. Mardy Fish isn't really a clay court player. Berdych isn't crazy about clay.

Youngsters like Tomic and Dolgopolov don't seem to have games really suited towards clay.

Moreso than at any other slam, Federer's chances really come down to Nadal and Djokovic, and to a lesser extent, Murray.

 

[thejoe]

Am I the only one who thinks Federer has a better chance of winning the FO than Wimbledon?

I thinks his days of being a brilliant grass court player are over, especially with the way the courts behave these days. His ground strokes just sit up there, waiting to be punished, and he doesn't return nearly as well as he used to, so the big servers give him nightmares on that surface.

At the French Open, sure, he's screwed if he plays Nadal, but against anyone else, he has a very good chance. He's got plenty of time, and his forehand penetrates clay like nobody else's.

Plus, the competition there isn't what it is elsewhere. Ferrer doesn't show up at the FO, despite his clay court prowess. Tsonga isn't really a clay court player. Mardy Fish isn't really a clay court player. Berdych isn't crazy about clay.

Youngsters like Tomic and Dolgopolov don't seem to have games really suited towards clay.

Moreso than at any other slam, Federer's chances really come down to Nadal and Djokovic, and to a lesser extent, Murray.

I thought this watching last year's FO highlights. It seems as if he's got way more time on his shots, and he seemed to be covering his forehand side better. He can still get the ball through the court, but perhaps has more time to set up a bigger swing.

 

[celoft]

Sampras won another major after an 8-slam losing streak.

Federer right now has an 8-slam losing streak.

MOTWYW.

 

[dh003i]

There were up and comers and someone like Murray

It isn't quite cleary what you are saying here. Are you saying Murray is one of the up-and-comers? Murray is now 24 years old now. He certainly still has chances, but he has already been in several GS Finals and has lost them all.

The other possibility is that you meant "and someone like Murray" to be taken separately of "up-and-comers". Well, Murray may be a good player, but he just doesn't have a game that translates very well into winning Majors, as we've seen. Murray is hardly a major concern for Federer at Majors, nor for anyone not named Nadal (for some reason, he plays Nadal better in Majors).

 

[FearOfTheDark]

Right. By your own admission, he's not as good as Djokovic right now. Then there's Nadal, who owns him 8-2 in Slams. When was the last time Fed beat Nadal in a slam? 2007 Wimbledon. That's right. It's been FIVE YEARS.

Yes that is correct. However it is possible that Djokovic and Nadal could have bad days and lose to an opponent like Isner for example. Then Fed could have a chance at winning the title. It happened at IW this year and although it is not a slam, there are those possibilities.

I hear what you're saying though. There isn't a guarantee that Federer will win another slam, but it would be nice

 

[FearOfTheDark]

The other possibility is that you meant "and someone like Murray" to be taken separately of "up-and-comers". Well, Murray may be a good player, but he just doesn't have a game that translates very well into winning Majors, as we've seen. Murray is hardly a major concern for Federer at Majors, nor for anyone not named Nadal (for some reason, he plays Nadal better in Majors).

Hahah get it?

 

[OrangePower]

How on Earth is going to win another major?

What I think Fed's chances of winning a slam are:

2012 RG: 0.1%
2012 W: 5%
2012 USO: 9%

2013 AO: 5%
2013 RG: 0.01%
2013 W: 2%
2013 USO: 4%

Here's the funny thing: Even using your own absurdly laughable numbers above (Fed has only a 1 in 1000 chance of winning 2012 RG?!?), you yourself are saying that Fed has a 23% chance of winning at least one of the next 7 majors. That is not an insignificant chance. (I'd be happy to explain the math to you if you don't follow.)

 

[rommil]

They are idiots. That's why. Fed is done.

So is Murray.

 

[RogerRacket111]

Murray's last 2 Wimbledons: 2 SF (vs. 2 QFs for Fed.)
Murray's last 2 AO's: 1 F and 1 SF (vs. 2 SFs for Fed.)

He's been closer than Fed in these two slams.[/QUOTE]

He has won 0 sets in Grand Slam Finals thats the definition of not even close. Roger has 16 Grand Slams and is in the end of his glorious career

 

[Towser83]

Right. By your own admission, he's not as good as Djokovic right now. Then there's Nadal, who owns him 8-2 in Slams. When was the last time Fed beat Nadal in a slam? 2007 Wimbledon. That's right. It's been FIVE YEARS. Finally, we have an improved Murray who happens to also have a winning record against Fed. So these are three guys he, more likely than not, will lose to in a slam.

And there's the rest of the tour, who also can beat him. And he's not getting any younger. The only logical conclusion that follows from all this is that his chances are very, very slim.
It might be rash to completely write him off, but it's even more absurd to think he'll win 2 out of the next 3 slams or all of them, like some people think:

Murray has a 8-7 H2H, whoop de doo! Yeah that'sa real big lead. And again in slams he's 0-2. So your logic is flawed. Murray was once 6-2 up in H2H and still lost their next slam meeting at the AO. Not saying he can't beat Federer, but he's lost 5 out of the last 7 matches, so not only is an 8-7 a poor basis for saying Fed is likely to lose, but Federer has had the upper hand most recently.

2 out of the next 3 slams is fantasy time though, I agree.

 

[Cosmic_Colin]

Since turning 30 Fed is 3-2 against the top three.

2-1 against Nadal, 1-0 against Murray, 0-1 against Djoker.

He was the one who performed best against Djokovic throughout 2011.

Fed has been much more consistent in the past 6 months and that shows in his ranking points.

 

[monfed]

- If Ralph goes out early in any slam(granted it's unlikely given the clown draws he gets), Federer's chance of winning goes up exponentially.
- An early exit for Ralph in Wimby/USO is not out of the question if he gets a tough draw.
- Gamewise, his best chance will be at USO.

Also, Murray isn't doing his job of taking out Ralph in the semis. This is hurting Roger.

 

[ledwix]

Sampras won another major after an 8-slam losing streak.

Federer right now has an 8-slam losing streak.

MOTWYW.

And Sampras not only failed to win a major in that time but also failed to win a single tournament in general before his final US Open victory! So that is something worth noting. Obviously Federer with his wins in 1000 and 1500 level events has proven he still has a chance and is one of the top 3 favorites of any major. But of course he still might never win another one if Djokodal are solid for the rest of his career and he never gets that opening like in 2009.

 

[monfed]

Sampras won another major after an 8-slam losing streak.

Federer right now has an 8-slam losing streak.

MOTWYW.

Interesting observation. Looks like RG is Federer's!

 

[larlarbd]

I'm goin to answer thr OP with a clear answer :

He will win another major because he has the best chance in the top two out of three ( Top being Djoko,Nadal,Fed ).

It is inevitable.

He keeps making Semi's and Finals of majors - as shown by your own stats , all he needs is just push one or two match further , as someone else pointed out - he just needs to get hot for maybe 1-match,that's it.

Personally, I think Djoko is Fed's lapdog , Roger will beat faker any Major at any stage ( No Doubt in my mind ) , the USO2011 loss was a one-off where Fed just reacted very badly to a lucky shot & never recovered in time. That's not gonna happen everytime , as shown in the 2011RG - Fed can outplay Djoko ANYTIME , ANYWhere & be cool about it.

His biggest prob = Rafa is injured & is on the decline ( at least for this year so far - I beleive Rafa will come back stronger but maybe not in time to stop GodFed in RG/Wimby) & even if he did come back I don't see him beating Fed in USO.

He will win a major this year unless something extra-ordinary happens ( like injuring himself out of the game ). He will win two - THIS YEAR - if being a long-time observer of Fed has taught me anything ( hats off to most of my comrades on the board - I have seen some VERY LOYAL Fed fans over the years , I never claimed to be his biggest Fan , but I always enjoy wathing him do well) . I can feel it.

 

[jm1980]

Personally, I think Djoko is Fed's lapdog , Roger will beat faker any Major at any stage ( No Doubt in my mind ) , the USO2011 loss was a one-off where Fed just reacted very badly to a lucky shot & never recovered in time. That's not gonna happen everytime , as shown in the 2011RG - Fed can outplay Djoko ANYTIME , ANYWhere & be cool about it.

Federer leads Djokovic 5-4 in Majors, with most of his wins coming against baby Djokovic. That doesn't make Djoker his lapdog by any stretch of the imagination.

2007 AO 4R: Federer
2007 USO F: Federer
2008 AO SF: Djokovic
2008 USO SF: Federer
2009 USO SF: Federer
2010 USO SF: Djokovic
2011 AO SF: Djokovic
2011 RG SF: Federer
2011 USO SF: Djokovic

Also Djokovic won 3 of their last 4 matches in majors. The one-off loss wasn't Federer's USO loss, but Djoker's loss in RG.

It's funny how people act like Federer dominated Djoker last year. He actually went 4-1 against Fed, with two wins in majors to boot.

He will win a major this year unless something extra-ordinary happens ( like injuring himself out of the game ). He will win two - THIS YEAR - ... . I can feel it.

We'll see

 

[jokinla]

Chalk up another troll.

 

[DjokovicForTheWin]

It takes one to know one, right?

Ummm, no, whatever made you think that platitude makes any sense whatsoever?

 

[agentaviles]

It's funny how people act like Federer dominated Djoker last year. He actually went 4-1 against Fed, with two wins in majors to boot.

Yes, it's definitely an absurd comment to make considering Djokovic won 4 out of 5 matches against Fed last year. However, Federer really wasn't in great form last year until after the US Open, where Novak just either stopped caring or ran out of gas. I'm looking forward to them playing this year, and seeing how it turns out.

 

[jackson vile]

But let's get back on topic. Folks here give too much credit to Fed.

How many slams will Roger Federer win in 2011?

125 people out of 158 thought Federer would win at least one slam in 2011.



But then reality came crashing down

Your point is 100% correct and valid. One thing to consider is that there are only two people that can consistently defeat Federer. If not for those two players he would be racking up the slams and there would be no talk about being out of his prime what so ever. Actually his latest performances have proven that he is anything except past his prime.

 

[cknobman]

Is it really absurd to "think" Fed could win another major?

I mean Sampras won a grand slam to end is career and Agassi won several over the age of 30.

Roger is the all time GS leader and still has enough game to win another major. Sure he could go the next 5 slams and not break through but just like Pete did at the USO 2002 Roger could catch fire for two weeks of magic and make it happen.

 

[merlinpinpin]

The guy is either trolling or is a complete '****, so it would be a waste of time to dignify that ridiculous accusation with a proper response.
The word troll is way overused on TT. Just because my opinion reflects a truth that hurts you doesn't mean I am a troll.

I thought Federer wouldn't win another slam after he lost to the 2010 Wimbledon QF to Berdych in embarrassing fashion. I have been proven right six times in a row now.
The evidence for my argument is right in front of you, Fed fans: 8 slam defeats in a row. Where's yours?

Well, since no slam has been played since you started this thread, there's a good chance the situation hasn't changed since then. However, the evidence is clear for all to see: Federer has currently won 16 GS titles, so we may safely infer that he knows what it takes. Also, although he failed to win one in the last couple of years, his results have been fairly consistent and he's still giving himself a chance in any major.

So, basically, as soon as he wins one (and I think he will), you end up with egg on your face, and as long as he doesn't but keeps playing and going deep in these tournaments, people will tell you that there's always the next one (and they'll be right, too).

So, all things considered, it was a pretty risky thread to start with. Kind of stating stuff like "How on earth is Nadal going to win another tournament?" (don't ask, you'll only find Clarky here who will be willing to go along with this one...)

 

[kiki]

His last 8 slam results are really good. They don't compare to his form from 2004-2007 (or even his consistency in 08 and 09), but then nobody else's form ever has.

He was one point away from 2 finals last year as well.

He's certainly declined but he's still so consistent it would be mad to write him off.

Maybe when he's losing in the 2nd round or thereabouts on a regular basis.

He can´t match Laver´s one slam...let aside 2.

 

[kiki]

We shall salutate Federer as an all time great and the dominant player of a tennis era ( and let´s put aside it was a transiction, weak era).

I hope that, being such a great player, one of the most talented ever ( at least open era), he´s never won a GS, much less 2.

I hope that will help look at Laver´s huge achievement the way ot should be looked, and, of course, praised.

 

[tank_job]

Why do people think Djokovic will never win another major during 2010?

Look what happened!

Federer is only outclassed in the slams by Murray, Djokovic, and Nadal the last two years.

He is still doing well.....there has to be a chance when he wins a major. One guy could upset Nadal, Djokovic loses early. Murray chokes in the final....why not?

2009 RG, 2009 WB, 2010 AO are later examples of when Nadal and Djokovic failed to get to Federer.

I'll bump this thread when Federer wins a slam......but by then you would not man up to your failed thoughts.

Do you realize how remote the possibility of one of these events occuring in a slam is, let alone both in the same slam?

 

[Seany]

I'll be sure to bump this when he wins his next one, the OP is even stupid enough to highlight the evidence against his argument in his own post, anybody who keeps reaching QF's and SF's at every single major he plays, and who's level of play is on the up, is going to win eventually. Even more so with the decline of Nadal, and the fact that he is probably the only player on the tour right now who walks on the court knowing he can beat djokovic.

 

[DjokovicForTheWin]

The guy is either trolling or is a complete '****, so it would be a waste of time to dignify that ridiculous accusation with a proper response.
The word troll is way overused on TT. Just because my opinion reflects a truth that hurts you doesn't mean I am a troll.

I thought Federer wouldn't win another slam after he lost the 2010 Wimbledon QF to Berdych in embarrassing fashion. I have been proven right six times in a row now.
The evidence for my argument is right in front of you, Fed fans: 8 slam defeats in a row. Where's yours?

I agree, troll is way overused. I don't think you're trolling per se, your just giving your opinion. However, that you think your opinion reflects truth is itself an opinion. But hey I agree, without the data, you are correct.

 

[zagor]

There's this thread asking people to predict the next slam winners and there're still people picking Federer to win majors. Really?

In the last 8 slams he's reached 1 Final, 4 SF, 3 QF. Not even close to winning any of them:

2010 French Open: QF, lost to Soderling (6-3 3-6 5-7 4-6)
2010 Wimbledon: QF, lost to Berdych (4-6 6-3 1-6 4-6)
2010 US Open: SF, lost to Djokovic (7-5 1-6 7-5 2-6 5-7)
2011 Australian Open: SF, lost to Djokovic (6-7 5-7 4-6)
2011 French Open: F, lost to Nadal (5-7 6-7 7-5 1-6)
2011 Wimbledon: QF, lost to Tsonga (6-3 7-6 4-6 4-6 4-6)
2011 US Open: SF, lost to Djokovic (7-6 6-4 3-6 2-6 5-7)
2012 Australian Open: SF, lost to Nadal (7-6 2-6 6-7 4-6)

Realistically, he'll never win the French as long as Nadal plays. With Djokovic at #1 and Nadal at #2, he can't even hope Djoker takes out Nadal. Not going to happen. People say he'll win Wimby, but failed to reach the semis in the last two. And with Djokovic 2.0 and an improved Murray, I don't see him winning the AO or USO.

The man is getting old, that's a fact. And last year he lost twice in majors after winning the first two sets (Wimbledon and USO), something that's never happened before.
How on Earth is going to win another major?

Because he's Fed. As long as he goes reasonably deep in slams (QF/SF) people are still gonna consider him a contender because of his past accomplishments. Can't exactly see why this surprises you that much? When did you start following the game?

I personally think there's a reasonable chance he'll bag one more a la Pete's 2002 USO but I also wouldn't be surprised if 2010 AO turns out to be his last slam title.

 

[Djokodal Fan]

The guy is either trolling or is a complete '****, so it would be a waste of time to dignify that ridiculous accusation with a proper response.
The word troll is way overused on TT. Just because my opinion reflects a truth that hurts you doesn't mean I am a troll.

I thought Federer wouldn't win another slam after he lost the 2010 Wimbledon QF to Berdych in embarrassing fashion. I have been proven right six times in a row now.
The evidence for my argument is right in front of you, Fed fans: 8 slam defeats in a row. Where's yours?

How dare you argue against Fed in this board? You are deemed to be banned soon! Take it!!

 

[Sentinel]

I think the only person who believes Fed will win another is sureshs :O

if Nadal pulls out, that is.

 

[Povl Carstensen]

You mean laughable in the sense that they are too high?

You're right, it is 23%. I guess they are too optimistic indeed.

Good with a positive outlook on things.

 

[Povl Carstensen]

Your point is 100% correct and valid. One thing to consider is that there are only two people that can consistently defeat Federer. If not for those two players he would be racking up the slams and there would be no talk about being out of his prime what so ever. Actually his latest performances have proven that he is anything except past his prime.

Yawn.......

 

[Deleted member 21996]

Your point is 100% correct and valid. One thing to consider is that there are only two people that can consistently defeat Federer. If not for those two players he would be racking up the slams and there would be no talk about being out of his prime what so ever. Actually his latest performances have proven that he is anything except past his prime.

therefore one must conclude that Nadal is at his Peakest o f Peak.

 

[FedererDropShot]

He might win another, he might not.

We just have to wait and see the magician go at it.

He has the most hope for Wimbledon and US Open.

I have always enjoyed watching him play and I will continue to do so even if he never wins another major when he retires.

As for Nadal, he still has the ability to continually defend his French Open throne as long as he avoids Djokovic.

I want this trivalry to continue (FedNadDjok) for a very long time. Hopefully, Murray can step in and the big 4 rivalry will be even more intense.

 

[jm1980]

9 in a row now.

4-6 5-7 3-6

 

[Federererer]

I think Fed is done for majors.

 

[bluetrain4]

I don't think it's that difficult. Fed is still losing to bascially only a couple of palyers. He's not consistently going out in the 3rd or 4th round, which would really suggest that maybe he should hang it up.

In many of his losses he plays very well for stretches, has leads, wins sets. He is generally very competitive with Nadal and Djoker.

I don't think it's that much a stretch to believe that maybe (just maybe) on one occasion, he'll maintain his great play for a longer period and/or his opponent (Nadal or Novak) simply won't come charging back, will be more off than usual and Fed could potentially pick up another Slam.

I'm not betting on it, but I don't think it's entirely out of the question.

 

[jokinla]

We've heard this song and dance before, at the end of Sampras' career, he should retire, the press was laughing at him.

 

[The Dark Knight]

He might win another, he might not.

We just have to wait and see the magician go at it.

He has the most hope for Wimbledon and US Open.

I have always enjoyed watching him play and I will continue to do so even if he never wins another major when he retires.

As for Nadal, he still has the ability to continually defend his French Open throne as long as he avoids Djokovic.

I want this trivalry to continue (FedNadDjok) for a very long time. Hopefully, Murray can step in and the big 4 rivalry will be even more intense.

Bravo !!

Clap clap clap.

 

[The Dark Knight]

We've heard this song and dance before, at the end of Sampras' career, he should retire, the press was laughing at him.

The difference is fed is #3 and playing great.

I think it's hard to admit but it seems as though Nadal and Joker are just better than Federer.

 

[single_handed_champion]

Peak level as good as ever. Average level's dipped significantly. If he can turn on the afterburners in the final weekend of a Slam successfully, he is a threat to anyone.

 

[FlashFlare11]

The difference is fed is #3 and playing great.

I think it's hard to admit but it seems as though Nadal and Joker are just better than Federer.

Federer at his best would not have played like he did today. Another reason why it's very obvious you have only recently started watching tennis.

 

[jokinla]

The difference is fed is #3 and playing great.

I think it's hard to admit but it seems as though Nadal and Joker are just better than Federer.

Exactly, only two guys ahead of him, not 10+ like in Sampras' situation, and unlike Sampras, he is right there at the end of every slam, if one or both of those guys aren't there, who wins, Fed. Sampras was losing in the early rounds of majors, and then got hot, Fed is there every time, and still playing great as you said.

 

[iriraz]

Federer`s biggest chances to win nr.17 was never going to be at the French.Even with a win today,nothing really would have changed.
At Wimbledon he has the biggest chances to win but on the other hand he can be upset by a big hitter as well.
In a tournament,where the margins are small it all comes down to a couple of points and Federer will always have his chances.He could win like 10-8 in the fifth set in the final but also lose 7-6 7-6 7-6 against a big hitter,who played a great match in the quarters.

 

[Pushmaster]

I think he"ll win 1 more. Sooner or later he'll get hot, and Djokovic and Nadal will get cold, or they may get upset in earlier rounds. However, i don't see Fed beating BOTH those guys in the same Slam. Also, I don't really see anybody else other than those two guys as a real threat to Federer in Slams for the next few years. So I think he has a good chance to win 1 more Slam, but 2 more would be unlikely.