why is federe was so bad in 2008 ???

King No1e

Legend
i am don t understand why fedrere was so much bad in 2008 than 2007 .
in 2007 and in before years FEDERER was best in the world except for nadal. he was won 3 grand slamm and only loss to murray and nadal i 2006.
i remeber federer was unbeyable in 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ,what happened in 2008? ?
i think fedore was big decline in 2008 because court surface were slowed drasticly. which is why Nadal and Djokovic suddenly did better and Nadal bacame #1. what explenation other is there for that !!!
only because blue court surface at australian open was big slow is why Djokovic won ,and frderer is not good on slow courts ,so his performance was hurt by it.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ???
 

Sport

Legend
Federer was only affected by the adverse effects of mononucleosis the first 2-3 months of 2008. Apart from that, he was equally good the rest of 2008 and 2009 than in 2004-2007. In fact, only in 2009 did Federer win RG. According to this New York Times' article doctors said Federer was recovered from the adverse effects of mononucleosis as soon as late February. He received medical clearance to play normally the 27th of February 2008. Reference: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/sports/07iht-arena.3.10811374.html?pagewanted=all

Federer arrived to the Wimbledon final in July (more than 4 months after the medical clearance). Federer was moving perfectly in Wimbledon 2008, and he arrived to the final without losing any set. He was 26 and didn't look less fast than in 2007. So he was at his peak. Even the 2007 final was kinda close, Nadal had 4 break points in the 5th set. 26 years old Roger was 100% healthy and at his peak in the 2008 Wimbledon final.
 
Last edited:

The Blond Blur

Hall of Fame
i am don t understand why fedrere was so much bad in 2008 than 2007 .
in 2007 and in before years FEDERER was best in the world except for nadal. he was won 3 grand slamm and only loss to murray and nadal i 2006.
i remeber federer was unbeyable in 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ,what happened in 2008? ?
i think fedore was big decline in 2008 because court surface were slowed drasticly. which is why Nadal and Djokovic suddenly did better and Nadal bacame #1. what explenation other is there for that !!!
only because blue court surface at australian open was big slow is why Djokovic won ,and frderer is not good on slow courts ,so his performance was hurt by it.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ???
 

ThiemPlayer

New User
Practice blocks were lost in 2008 which dramatically affected his game. Same happened to Nadal at the beginning of 2019, and we saw how Djokovic absolutely destroyed him at the AO19 final. Nadal even said after that he wasn't prepared defensively. In 2008, the lack of practice and the beatdown at FO08 causing lack of confidence affected his W08 performance. When both are at their best it would most often go to 4 tight sets at Wimbledon. So yes, the mono was gone after a few weeks, but it had many side effects later in the year.
 

MeatTornado

Legend
Federer was only affected by the adverse effects of mononucleosis the first 2-3 months of 2008. Apart from that, he was equally good the rest of 2008 and 2009 than in 2004-2007. In fact, only in 2009 did Federer win RG. According to this New York Times' article doctors said Federer was recovered from the adverse effects of mononucleosis as soon as late February. He received medical clearance to play normally the 27th of February 2008. Reference: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/sports/07iht-arena.3.10811374.html?pagewanted=all

Federer arrived to the Wimbledon final in July (more than 4 months after the medical clearance). Federer was moving perfectly in Wimbledon 2008, and he arrived to the final without losing any set. He was 26 and didn't look less fast than in 2007. So he was at his peak. Even the 2007 final was kinda close, Nadal had 4 break points in the 5th set. 26 years old Roger was 100% healthy and at his peak in the 2008 Wimbledon final.
He said it took him 6 to 9 months before he felt completely back to normal.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
As a Federer and Nadal fan, I feel it has been a privilege to watch these two play. I cannot agree that Federer was so bad in 2008 when they have produced the greatest match of all time at Wimbledon 2008. Federer was at his very best in 2008 it shows Nadal's strengths the fact that he was able to push Prime Federer to 5 sets the year before at Wimbledon 2007 and then beat him in 2008.
 

King No1e

Legend
As a Federer and Nadal fan, I feel it has been a privilege to watch these two play. I cannot agree that Federer was so bad in 2008 when they have produced the greatest match of all time at Wimbledon 2008. Federer was at his very best in 2008 it shows Nadal's strengths the fact that he was able to push Prime Federer to 5 sets the year before at Wimbledon 2007 and then beat him in 2008.
ROFLMAO you think the weak era king who had CRAPOLA competition in 2004-07 was even CLOSE to Nadal? He can only beat MUGS.
 

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
He said it took him 6 to 9 months before he felt completely back to normal.
Fed dovotee, you are cheating TTW readers!!! Your beloved one admits that he was perfectly healthy within six weeks of contracting the illness.

“‘The doctors said I must have had it for at least six weeks, which went all the way back to December,’ Federer said in a telephone interview from Dubai, explaining that he had now been medically cleared to compete.”


Fed dovotee (and your comrade who liked your post), you are imagining things, not seeing them. What's more, your post (quoted) reminded me that Fed's parents worked for a Swiss pharmaceutical company...

/s
 

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
Fed played the best tennis of his career in 2008. I'm dead serious and I have proof.

Examples:

Fed managed to win 5 games in a 6-3, 6-2 loss to world #98 Mardy Fish at IW. Fed was awesome by winning 33% of the points against Fish's 2nd serve and 11% against Fish's 1st serve. Fed's 0.60 dominance ratio against the vastly superior Fish was encouraging. 2005 Fed would have easily been double-bageled against this version of Fish. Fish managed to get 34% of his first serves in, which is awesome.

Fed lost to Roddick in Miami that year: Roddick was known to own peak Fed badly by destroying him in straight sets. But this was peakerer Fed, who lost a close match. Earlier versions of Fed would have been completely shut out against this version of Roddick.

Fed lost to Karlovic in a very tight match in Cinci. Fed has been destroyed by Karlovic every other time. But this match was close.

Simon beat Fed in Canada. But Fed pushed Simon hard that match, showing how peak he was.

Blake beat at the Olympics in straight sets. However, Fed won some games. There's no way any other version of Fed takes a game.

Master's Cup: Simon beats Fed again. However, it was close. Although 2008 Peakerer Fed was 0-2 vs Simon, he did win 2 sets total in those two losses. After his 2nd loss to Simon in 2008, Fed said, "I definitely played the best tennis of my life against Simon at the Masters Cup. There's no way that the 2004 version of me could have won a game against him. But I won a set and kept it close against that superior player. I'm extremely happy with how much better I am than ever before."
 
Last edited:

Sport

Legend
Fed dovotee, you are cheating TTW readers!!! Your beloved one admits that he was perfectly healthy within six weeks of contracting the illness.

“‘The doctors said I must have had it for at least six weeks, which went all the way back to December,’ Federer said in a telephone interview from Dubai, explaining that he had now been medically cleared to compete.”


Fed dovotee (and your comrade who liked your post), you are imagining things, not seeing them. What's more, your post (quoted) reminded me that Fed's parents worked for a Swiss pharmaceutical company...

/s
Seems like Federer himself confirmed from Dubai in late February 2008 that he was medically cleared to compete.

Mmmm... by the way your post reminds that Federer's parents worked in a pharmaceutical company.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Fed dovotee, you are cheating TTW readers!!! Your beloved one admits that he was perfectly healthy within six weeks of contracting the illness.

“‘The doctors said I must have had it for at least six weeks, which went all the way back to December,’ Federer said in a telephone interview from Dubai, explaining that he had now been medically cleared to compete.”


Fed dovotee (and your comrade who liked your post), you are imagining things, not seeing them. What's more, your post (quoted) reminded me that Fed's parents worked for a Swiss pharmaceutical company...

/s
Cleared to complete means the same as "unaffected" very interesting no?
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer was only affected by the adverse effects of mononucleosis the first 2-3 months of 2008. Apart from that, he was equally good the rest of 2008 and 2009 than in 2004-2007.
Really? If what you're saying is remotely true, then explain the complete collapse of his stats in 2008 and 2009. We're waiting with baited breath. Refute the proof below and remember, you're claiming (hilariously) that 2008 and 2009 Federer was "equally good" as 2004-2007:

Federer 2004: 74–6 (92.50%) 11 titles, 3 majors YE #1

Fed 2005: 81-4 (95.29%) 11 titles, 2 majors YE #1

Fed 2006: 92-5 (94.84%) 12 titles, 3 majors YE #1

Fed 2007: 68–9 (88.3%), 8 titles, 3 majors YE #1

Fed 2008: 66–15 (81.5%), 4 titles, 1 major YE #2

Fed 2009: 61-12 (83.6%), 4 titles, 2 majors, YE #1

It's really tiresome to listen to people who never even watched Fed play during these years spout off whatever they feel like with no concept of truth telling or reality. The reality is listed above and is irrefutable.
 

Sport

Legend
Fed played the best tennis of his career in 2008. I'm dead serious and I have proof.

Examples:

Fed managed to win 5 games in a 6-3, 6-2 loss to world #98 Mardy Fish at IW. Fed was awesome by winning 33% of the points against Fish's 2nd serve and 11% against Fish's 1st serve. Fed's 0.60 dominance ratio against the vastly superior Fed was encouraging. 2005 Fed would have easily been double-bageled against this version of Fish. Fish managed to get 34% of his first serves in, which is awesome.

Fed lost to Roddick in Miami that year: Roddick was known to own peak Fed badly by destroying him in straight sets. But this was peakerer Fed, who lost a close match. Earlier versions of Fed would have been completely shut out against this version of Roddick.

Fed lost to Karlovic in a very tight match in Cinci. Fed has been destroyed by Karlovic every other time. But this match was close.

Simon beat Fed in Canada. But Fed pushed Simon hard that match, showing how peak he was.

Blake beat at the Olympics in straight sets. However, Fed won some games. There's no way any other version of Fed takes a game.

Master's Cup: Simon beats Fed again. However, it was close. Although 2008 Peakerer Fed was 0-2 vs Simon, he did win 2 sets total in those two losses. After his 2nd loss to Simon in 2008, Fed said, "I definitely played the best tennis of my life against Simon at the Masters Cup. There's no way that the 2004 version of me could have won a game against him. But I won a set and kept it close against that superior player. I'm extremely happy with how much better I am than ever before."
Those losses at IW and Miami do not count, as even Nadal fans admit Federer was not at his best the first 2-3 months of 2008.

Let us analyze his 2008 losses to Karlovic, Simon and Blake. Let's start with Blake. In 2004, Federer lost to Berydch at the Olympics and in 2008 he lost to Blake at the Olympics. Blake, like Berdych, has 0 Slam titles. It only proves that peak Federer loses to non-Slam winners in Olympic games.

His 2008 loses to Karlovic and Simon: in 2007 Federer lost to Cañas in Miami and IW, and against Volandri in Rome, and against Gonzalez in the Masters Cup. So it seems obvious that even in his peak years Federer loses to non-Slam winners. No one is unbeatable, peak or not peak.
.
 
Last edited:

Sport

Legend
Really? If what you're saying is remotely true, then explain the complete collapse of his stats in 2008 and 2009. We're waiting with baited breath. Refute the proof below and remember, you're claiming (hilariously) that 2008 and 2009 Federer was "equally good" as 2004-2007:

Federer 2004: 74–6 (92.50%) 11 titles, 3 majors YE #1

Fed 2005: 81-4 (95.29%) 11 titles, 2 majors YE #1

Fed 2006: 92-5 (94.84%) 12 titles, 3 majors YE #1

Fed 2007: 68–9 (88.3%), 8 titles, 3 majors YE #1

Fed 2008: 66–15 (81.5%), 4 titles, 1 major YE #2

Fed 2009: 61-12 (83.6%), 4 titles, 2 majors, YE #1

It's really tiresome to listen to people who never even watched Fed play during these years spout off whatever they feel like with no concept of truth telling or reality. The reality is listed above and is irrefutable.
Yes, because it is the same facing nobodies in 2004-2005, than facing improved versions of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray... Competence does not affect the winning percentage :rolleyes:
 

Sudacafan

G.O.A.T.
i am don t understand why fedrere was so much bad in 2008 than 2007 .
in 2007 and in before years FEDERER was best in the world except for nadal. he was won 3 grand slamm and only loss to murray and nadal i 2006.
i remeber federer was unbeyable in 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ,what happened in 2008? ?
i think fedore was big decline in 2008 because court surface were slowed drasticly. which is why Nadal and Djokovic suddenly did better and Nadal bacame #1. what explenation other is there for that !!!
only because blue court surface at australian open was big slow is why Djokovic won ,and frderer is not good on slow courts ,so his performance was hurt by it.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ???
Thanks fro bringing this up.
I thinks Nada was best than Fedère in 20-08.
But remembers he won in the Us Opens that year, biting Andrew Murray in the finals.
So not bad the year.
Fed was horribel in RG 20o8 ,with terribel score. what does you think?
But Noles Jokovic won only one (ONLY ONE!) slams in 2008.
 

King No1e

Legend
Thanks fro bringing this up.
I thinks Nada was best than Fedère in 20-08.
But remembers he won in the Us Opens that year, biting Andrew Murray in the finals.
So not bad the year.
Fed was horribel in RG 20o8 ,with terribel score. what does you think?
But Noles Jokovic won only one (ONLY ONE!) slams in 2008.
Frèdèrè
 

Sudacafan

G.O.A.T.
Fédère should of be retired himself in Dezember of 2007s. His play style thereafter was SuBPAR.
The mono helped, but .. what is it happens in the Rolangarrose final in 2008?
He should have take sabbatical and returns in 2017, and then very rested, he go and wins 3 CYGS after letting Rafa Nole tire out killing themselves reciprocally for 8 years.
That I THINK Fédère would of donne.
What do you thinks?
 

Lew II

Legend
<6 feet tall players in the top10:

2003 - 5
2004 - 5
2005 - 6
2006 - 3
2007 - 4
2008 - 1
2009 - 1
2010 - 1

A stronger era was starting.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
i am don t understand why fedrere was so much bad in 2008 than 2007 .
in 2007 and in before years FEDERER was best in the world except for nadal. he was won 3 grand slamm and only loss to murray and nadal i 2006.
i remeber federer was unbeyable in 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ,what happened in 2008? ?
i think fedore was big decline in 2008 because court surface were slowed drasticly. which is why Nadal and Djokovic suddenly did better and Nadal bacame #1. what explenation other is there for that !!!
only because blue court surface at australian open was big slow is why Djokovic won ,and frderer is not good on slow courts ,so his performance was hurt by it.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ???
For some of Djoker fans just started watching tennis in 2010, Federer in in early 2008 contracted mononucleosis. It's an infection caused by the Epstein-Barr virus that produce excessive sweating, flu-like symptoms and extreme, lingering fatigue.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic and nadal matured. Losses to those guys affected Fed’s confidence and made him lose to guys like fish, Blake, Karlovic, Roddick.
 

Sudacafan

G.O.A.T.
i am don t understand why fedrere was so much bad in 2008 than 2007 .
in 2007 and in before years FEDERER was best in the world except for nadal. he was won 3 grand slamm and only loss to murray and nadal i 2006.
i remeber federer was unbeyable in 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ,what happened in 2008? ?
i think fedore was big decline in 2008 because court surface were slowed drasticly. which is why Nadal and Djokovic suddenly did better and Nadal bacame #1. what explenation other is there for that !!!
only because blue court surface at australian open was big slow is why Djokovic won ,and frderer is not good on slow courts ,so his performance was hurt by it.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ???
I think that there are a lot of sarcasm detectors out of order among this thread participants.
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
For some of Djoker fans just started watching tennis in 2010, Federer in in early 2008 contracted mononucleosis. It's an infection caused by the Epstein-Barr virus that produce excessive sweating, flu-like symptoms and extreme, lingering fatigue.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Even if we assume he had completely recovered from the illness, which is doubtful, he still has the long process of recovering the form and match fitness that he had lost.

Federer was only affected by the adverse effects of mononucleosis the first 2-3 months of 2008. Apart from that, he was equally good the rest of 2008 and 2009 than in 2004-2007. In fact, only in 2009 did Federer win RG. According to this New York Times' article doctors said Federer was recovered from the adverse effects of mononucleosis as soon as late February. He received medical clearance to play normally the 27th of February 2008. Reference: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/sports/07iht-arena.3.10811374.html?pagewanted=all

Federer arrived to the Wimbledon final in July (more than 4 months after the medical clearance). Federer was moving perfectly in Wimbledon 2008, and he arrived to the final without losing any set. He was 26 and didn't look less fast than in 2007. So he was at his peak. Even the 2007 final was kinda close, Nadal had 4 break points in the 5th set. 26 years old Roger was 100% healthy and at his peak in the 2008 Wimbledon final.
 
Federer was only affected by the adverse effects of mononucleosis the first 2-3 months of 2008. Apart from that, he was equally good the rest of 2008 and 2009 than in 2004-2007. In fact, only in 2009 did Federer win RG. According to this New York Times' article doctors said Federer was recovered from the adverse effects of mononucleosis as soon as late February. He received medical clearance to play normally the 27th of February 2008. Reference: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/sports/07iht-arena.3.10811374.html?pagewanted=all

Federer arrived to the Wimbledon final in July (more than 4 months after the medical clearance). Federer was moving perfectly in Wimbledon 2008, and he arrived to the final without losing any set. He was 26 and didn't look less fast than in 2007. So he was at his peak. Even the 2007 final was kinda close, Nadal had 4 break points in the 5th set. 26 years old Roger was 100% healthy and at his peak in the 2008 Wimbledon final.
Mentally he wasn’t the same. Just as Djokovic 2017 wasn’t mentally what current Djokovic is. Fed was definitely fighting demons in his head. Doubt had crept into his mind for first time maybe since beginning of his run in 2003.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Given that people are quoting a reported medical clearance as evidence of Federer's physical recovery, where exactly does 'mental weakness' fit into this scheme when there is no evidence whatsoever?
 
Top