I’m so pleased that you posted a more positive post Ru-an! I’d just finished posting a comment and I popped back to your blog and I was happy to see an already morte positive outlook. Your views also seem to agree with what I was saying. Roger has 2 weeks now to work on his issues with Paul. He hasn’t really been working hard since Aussie open- he admitted that he went on holiday and then trained for a week only before the tournament. Come on Roger!

[Reply]

We don’t have to be miserable right now. Fed-era is not over yet. People should not write him off. Anyway, I know it’s too early but here’s my estimation-prediction on the slams:

RG 2011 – Berdych or Federer

WIMBLEDON 2011 – Federer or Nadal

US OPEN 2011 – Murray or Federer

Waiting to see yours

[Reply]

Yes, it was a “very bad loss.” It’s hard to say who showed up dressed like Roger Federer today. What I saw–and was dismayed by–was his lack of energy and a plan. His dismal showing was shocking. Something was wrong, besides Novak’s will to win and game to back that up with. Though there were plenty of examples of his new, untrustworthy game in the previous matches, I expected that for the final–the point of this whole exercise (the point of being Roger Federer)–Roger would amp up his game or, at the very least, come to play. It wasn’t a matter of weather or the height of the bounce or Annacone’s not being around (and I’ve not bought into any of those “reasons,” for Roger’s a pro’s pro as others on this blog have said). What I saw was a…lethargy, a tentativeness, an inability to improvise a way out. What I saw dwarfs the whole issue of points and who is #1–at best a sidebar to Roger’s performance. Roger was outplayed and, for me the most shocking turnabout, dismissed by Novak in exactly the same way we’ve gotten used to Roger dismissing just about everybody else.

[Reply]

I like George’s predictions for Wimbledon and US open. I also like to think that the slams this year will be split 4 ways with AO already going to Djokovic, FO – Nadal / Soderling. WImbledon – Federer. US Open – Murray.

This could be the year when the the numbers 1-5 are really neck and neck to share the spoils. It could be the most competitive era we’ve seen in decades.

Good post too, Ru-an. Our champ is no.2 in the world. We all know what he is capable of. Hence we should back him to the hilt.

[Reply]

How can you change so quickly? Really I´m confused, I just comment on the other post.Nothing to say, may be I need a whisky to understand…Hard life!

[Reply]

Ru-an Reply:
February 27th, 2011 at 12:06 pm

Would you rather i stay negative? Ok then.

Current score: 0

[Reply]

ines Reply:
February 27th, 2011 at 3:32 pm

No but in my opinion the real post is the first, you can change all of a sudden,of course I prefer you to stay positive it´s not an easy moment for a Fedfan, that´s all.

Current score: 4

[Reply]

Ru-an Reply:
February 27th, 2011 at 5:30 pm

I wasnt changing all of a sudden. I just realized certain things. Next time ill remember to stay negative to please you. Not.

Current score: 0

[Reply]

Oh dear! Here we go again… this roller coaster ride with our champ is getting very hard, I could add very painful to take, isn’t it? However when I watched him play so well in the semis, I was somewhat apprehensive as the pattern seems to have been: play magnificently today/play terrible the next day. I’m glad I came here to read some positive thoughts as it hurts to read comments from the press once again announcing Fed’s ‘demise’… and yet I keep hoping as I guess many of us still do. Annacone has made such a difference…

[Reply]

I suggest the following is a measure of where we are now with Roger: if he lost a final in the way he just has four or five years ago we would think he was injured or sick. But he isn’t. So what are we to conclude?

[Reply]

Look at this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQAeYItD0tU&feature=related

It’s hard to believe that the fed in the dubai final is the same person as the fed in the video. He was virtually invincible from baseline and was known not only for his offense but also his immaculate defense…well he was virtually invincible from any part of the court really. It’s hard to believe that he can’t even rally consistently now and loses most of the longer rallies.

My theory is that decline in form is more dramatic and observable for consistently great athletes like fed. The fact that these people are so great consistently means that they are extremely consistent in what they are doing, otherwise they won’t be such winners. That’s why when their form declines, it declines very consistently as well because they are still playing the same way, except something is off with their game. Which may be why he’s shanking all these shots now yet we can’t believe it because of his GOAT status. And as much as I hope he can win more slams, it seems the prognosis is that unless he changes his game altogether, he will not win many more tournaments because he has lost the drive, stamina, and agility which allowed him to play his GOAT game, and will not be getting them back with age

[Reply]

Bragi Reply:
February 27th, 2011 at 1:17 pm

Hi Arthur, thanks for sharing that link. It was good to see Roger playing with such fluency and certainty. The difference between this game and the finals with djokovic (also played on the same surface)is that Roger played the finals from within the baseline.. In the match with Davydenko you can see he was a foot and a half behind the baseline and it gave him more time to set up his shots and play them consistently. Again it was what Wilander had observed in the AO, he was trying to play attacking tennis by staying close to the baseline and within, but when compelled to defend, he continued to stick to the baseline instead of moving behind it, thus playing defensive tennis from an attacking position.

I also noticed an interesting comment on the link about Roger’s forehand swing being more compact back then. In the dubai finals, he was hitting it with a looser swing.

Current score: 2

[Reply]

Andrew Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 1:56 pm

Great video!

Current score: 0

[Reply]

Coming on here is always enjoyable, but most recently, our guy is getting so close, and then the big let down. The last time we felt really, really good about his tennis was the year end tournament against the top 8 players in the world. HE WAS EXTREMELY MOTIVATED!!! He was on fire! I believe that motivation, ebbs and flows. 2 weeks off, first tournament, he makes the finals, and has to play a very motivated Djokovic. Most likely, not going to happen, and didn’t. He has more work to do, and can’t, and shouldn’t, take too much time off. I know this from my own experience. At his age, if he wants to be the best, he is going to have to work even harder. Drive is a big thing in this, and the more he loses, I say the more he’ll want to work harder to get back. Let’ hope so. G

[Reply]

Spot on about the motivation, Gary. Roger’s a hard worker anyway,which is why he’s stayed at the top 2 since 2003 – an unheard of achievement by any standards! I’d think it’s more of a mind thing with him these days.

[Reply]

Much is being said about Roger’s dramatic loss of form of late – particularly since he appeared to be really solidifying parts of his game in the latter stages of last year, culminating in his very convincing display at the WTF last December. That’s what makes his AO and Dubai efforts so baffling.

However, when I survey his opponents on the other side of the court I am almost as perplexed at their meteoric improvement that matches – and contrasts with – Roger’s deterioration over the same period. Since Djokovic’s first ascent to the dais of grand slam winner 3 years ago in Australia, and then again this year, he has appeared in only one other grand slam final in 13 attempts. That was the USO last year, when he was convincingly dispatched by Nadal on what was supposed to be the Spaniard’s weakest surface. Djokovic then subsequently lost twice to Federer, the last being at the WTF, when he was not even in contention in the match. The best I can say about Djokovic over that 3-year period is that he looked to be an outside chance at a major title but no more; his game was solid but not overwhelming, he frequently struggled in early round matches against much lower-ranked opponents, and when his back was against the wall the white flag was soon in appearance with yet another of his many psychosomatic maladies. In the grandslams he was not in the class of Federer or Nadal, who divided the titles up between them (with the exception of an intrusion by Del Potro at the USO in 2009.)

But from the beginning of this year he has been transformed – even from December last year. His game has become much more powerful all round, his court coverage and defensive play is now phenomenal and been compared with Nadal – it never used to be that good – and he is clearly another player altogether from the USO finalist last year that Indian doubles-pro Mahesh Bhupathi tweeted had ‘no chance’ against the Spanish grinder in the final.

Federer’s game may be declining, as I and others reluctantly observe, but his decline is also relative and made more striking by the extraordinary improvement in his rivals like Djokovic, whom he had generally outclassed even till recently. What is to be made of that? I fear the Serb may have drawn from the same well as the Spaniard (and perhaps so many other players today) in discovering how to lift his game – sometimes overnight – from the excellent (but not good enough) to the virtually superhuman. Not much Federer can do about that.

[Reply]

Totally agree, once he gain his no1# spot he will have more confidence in his game and take more risk. Right now he is back to his old hole trying to out hit ppl from the baseline.

[Reply]

I can’t reply via my mobil so I can only comment lower down the stream. This is to Ines. Basically- shut up! Ru-an is allowed to post what he wants- it’s his blog. He obviously was very disappointed with the loss as we all were but then when looking at the current situation logically there are lots of reasons to be positive. Roger is still playing tennis- he is still highliy motivated and him losing in a final of an ATP 500 event when he’s having a bad day is no big deal. Losing to Nadal in 5 sets at Wimbledon and then Aussie Open is gutting. Losing to Del Potro when he should have won the 2nd set at US Open in 2009 is upsetting. But this latest loss is one of those things.
Something else which is annoying me already is that whenever Roger loses his own fanatics start complaining about him. Do we support Roger because he wins or because he’s Roger? If you’re only interested in someone who wins titles then I suggest you switch to supporting Nadal. He can moan, grind, run, have injury time outs, etc to another 30 titles and then you’ll be happy. I follow Roger because of his elegance, graceful play, honesty when he loses, drive even at 29 years old, determination to improve despite already being a multi multi millionaire and the GOAT. Us fans have to support him during wins and loses. If you turn on Roger too quickly then you’re not a fan. You’re a glory hunter!

[Reply]

Andrew the only person who can tell me “shut up” is Ru-an.Please read my comment in the previous post.It´s obvious you don´t know what I think about Roger and Nadal.I don´t need your master class to be a Fedfanatic
and everybody knows this, Ru-an included.

[Reply]

Ru-an Reply:
February 27th, 2011 at 7:40 pm

Ines, you were out of line telling me that i was changing all of a sudden. That was not the case. I really just realized that things werent as negative as i thought and wanted to make a more positive post. So in a way Andrew was right in what he said. On the other hand he doesnt know you and know that you have been a reader of my blog for a long time. You cant blame him for that either. He was just appreciating the fact that i made a more positive post, which in turn i appreciate. Dont be too fanatical about being a Fedfan. You gotta allow other to also feel disappointed when Roger lose as well.

Current score: 1

[Reply]

ines Reply:
February 27th, 2011 at 8:56 pm

Look Ru-an you know I love yur blog and I love Roger too.As it happens…I have just read your post and this new appears
I apologized if you feel I wrote something wrong, in a way I did need a whisky, didn´t you? I´m disappointed too but sometimes I see the bar too high for Roger.Look it made it to the final.Would a Rafa or a Murray fan be happy if they make to a final? Sure!I feel with Roger nothing is good enough.
Is 14-2 for the year and 14-0 for against players other than Nole.
Roger may not be happy with the way he played but he will remain hopeful about his tennis and that´s good.
Loving if you are positive!

Current score: 8

[Reply]

Sorry for being rude to you Ines. I shouldn’t have been so direct and you can of course say whatever you want. Plus I couldn’t ever stay annoyed with a true Fed fan Sticking together and supporting Roger even through the bad times is the message that I was trying to get acros but I was too direct in what I said to you.
I also thought today that discussing Roger’s highs and lows (especially the lows!) is what this blog is all about! Ru-an started it after Roger slumped at Wimbledon 08 and that is just so amazing. He didn’t start the blog during the peak of Roger’s powers. He could have. He could have written every week about how Roger played and in some years Roger only lost 5 times in a whole year! Ru-an created this unique play for us to discuss things carefully. It isn’t like Roger’s homepage where the fans post messages to Roger himself expressing their love for him (when he’s winning) and their anger when he loses. It isn’t Yahoo Sport where there is a constant war going on between Fed fans and Nadal fans (a very bitter war!) It’s something special. Just imagine if Ru-an hadn’t created this blog- where would we be able to discuss things properly? On ‘open’ forums if you mention you like Federer everyone starts to say horrible things.
So sorry again for trying to censor you Ines. Hopefully Roger will win both American titles next month. As usual I feel more positive having read his post match interview.

[Reply]

ines Reply:
February 27th, 2011 at 11:59 pm

In a way it was funny you saying I wasn´t a Fedfanatic and Ru-an saying I was too Fedfanatic.Yes I love Roger win
or lose,he´s still the best ever.Can´t take that away.Now you know what I think
As for ever-long live king Rog.
That´s all.

Current score: 6

[Reply]

Thanks for your optimism, Ru-an. It’s nice to have an antidote to the predictable rubbish the pundits are putting out.

I continue to believe that he is in transition. He gets a lot of flak for being slow to change his game in 2008-09, but the reality is that change takes time. If you try to significantly change your game, you will suffer losses as you adjust mentally to playing a different way. If you’re at the top and winning everything, you will naturally be more hesitant to change your game, because you stand to lose more than you gain.

The rise of the dopers has seduced commentators and fans into believing that change is easy and painless: that top athletes can instantaneously make dramatic improvements to their game in a matter of a couple months, without having to suffer tough losses.

When we see a “grip change” producing a Sampras-like serve in under a week, we are almost surely not seeing reality, but rather a movie or a video game, an illusion that has been created by technology.

A player on PEDs doesn’t need to make a lot of subtle adjustments in his game; since he can retrieve more balls and hit more powerful shots, he can pretty much immediately start winning big matches and titles without having to go through a learning curve.

In reality, if you don’t use PEDs, change is messy and difficult, and requires a lot of time, and will occasionally result in ugly-looking losses like we saw against Djokovic.

I find Bragi’s assessment of the match to be spot-on. Federer was caught between his natural instincts to attack, attack, attack, and the speed of the court, which doesn’t reward such play.

He is trying to play fast-court tennis on slower surfaces. This is resulting in shanks and mishits because his opponents have more time to prepare for their shots and use their power to overwhelm him, and because he’s so close to the baseline, he doesn’t have time to defend. Also he is going for it whenever he has a half-chance, instead of waiting for an opportunity to make a high-percentage shot, thus making lots more unforced errors.

On fast courts the percentages clearly favor such extreme aggression–his comprehensive victory at WTF demonstrated that. On these surfaces the percentages fall the other way and he has to alter his tactics.

After spending so much of last fall concentrating on playing a first-strike, ultra-aggressive style, he’ll have some trouble adjusting his game. He can’t just instantly switch over into another mode like a machine.

If that high-risk, quick-fire style he worked on last fall were the only way Federer could play, I would agree he would probably only dominate again on fast hard courts and grass, as was true of Sampras in his later career.

But he has many other weapons in his arsenal, and can play in many different styles. Even on slow surfaces, he can surely find ways to control the match and prevent his opponents from overpowering him, so he can attack on his own terms instead of trying to force the issue all the time.

He has a while to work out his new strategies, during the spring hard-court Masters tournaments and then during clay season. I’m sure he will do it.

I think it will be a two-major year for Federer. At least.

Aside from Wimbledon, which is always all-important, my hope is to see him win the French Open this year.

[Reply]

Ru-an Reply:
February 27th, 2011 at 11:58 pm

Wow, very optimistic post Steve. If he wins one major id be very happy. I find it hard to believe he can win more.

Current score: 1

[Reply]

I’m sure you’ve seen that Del Potro has won today Ru-an? Good to see him back even if he is a rival of Roger’s. His game matches up well against Nadal’s- especially on hardcourts. Nadal also came out in the press today saying that his era of dominance is over. But then Nadal always says things like that as he loves being the underdog (even when he is 4,000 points ahead at the top of the rankings!!)

[Reply]

In modern times there are very few players who have won a grand slam past the age of 30. Agassi was the oldest and was nearly 33 when he won the AO in 2003, while Sampras was 31 when he won the USO in 2002, his last title. Before then, Pete had gone without a title since he won Wimbledon in 2000. So 30 seems to signal the beginning of the end for great players. Now knocking 30, Roger too may be running out of time. If there is still a slam possible for him he has probably got to do it this year or the next at the latest. In the meantime, we – and he – may have to get used to quite a few big losses until he finds slam-winning form once more. But of course in sports there are no guarantees.

[Reply]

Can anyone help me make sense of the rankings system!? I thought Roger would gain 300 points for getting to the final in Dubai but it seems to have gone into his ‘Non-countable’ column…..
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Roger-Federer.aspx?t=rb
……
Non-Countable Tournaments
Date Tournament Round Points Drop Date
21.02.2011 Dubai F 300 27.02.2012
07.06.2010 Halle F 150 13.06.2011
03.05.2010 Estoril S 90 09.05.2011
……
Can anyone tell me why he hasn’t got the points now?

[Reply]

TD Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 2:20 pm

From the ATP website:
“In 2011, any player who finished in the 2010 year-end Top 30 will be required to compete in four Grand Slam tournaments and eight ATP World Tour Masters 1000 tournaments. In addition, the Best 4 ATP World Tour 500 and Best 2 other events (ATP World Tour 250 and Challengers) will be counted towards a player’s ranking.”

Federer played only one WT500 event in 2010 (Basel) but he was supposed to play 3 more (Tokyo, Washington, Hamburg). That means that from the other 3 he has no points to defend. So the points from Dubai will count only after the 1st event of the 4 is played this year. This is the Hamburg event which ends on 24.07.2011.

Current score: 0

[Reply]

TD Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 2:26 pm

Unfortunately, this doesn’t help Federer’s effort to keep the #2 ranking for the FO and Wimbledon…

Current score: 0

[Reply]

Andrew Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 4:41 pm

Thanks for that TD. I think it’s stupid that the best players are also supposed to play in the ATP 500 events. What’s the point!? They’re not going to do it.

So it doesn’t help now but it will be a nice boost post Wimbledon though Does it really matter if Roger isn’t number 1 or 2 for Wimbledon? He’ll still be one of the top 4 seeds for sure. Also don’t forget that at Wimbledon they seed the players themselves. So they could/ should seed Federer over DJ anyway as he’s won the tournament a couple of times I seem to recall

Current score: 1

[Reply]

TD Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 6:58 pm

Good point on the Wimbledon seeding! And in a 2nd thought, let’s say he finds himself in Nadal’s half in the FO… I’m not sure it’s that bad. Maybe it’ll be easier and with less pressure.
However, even if he’s ranked 3rd, I don’t believe that they will put him in Nadal’s half and miss a dream final. I guess it depends on Federer’s level in the next months…

Current score: 1

[Reply]

TD, after the one-sided Djokovic match I am not sure we should consider Federer meeting Nadal a ‘dream final’ at this stage.

[Reply]

Ru-an Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 9:22 am

A dream final is certainly possible if Roger get some of his WTF form back. Plus Djokovic is not that great on grass.

Current score: 0

[Reply]

In general you are right, however, if you were to organize a tournament and you had influence on the draw, would you prefer to have Fedal final or Nadal-Djokovic final? I still think that the Fedal rivalry sells more tickets even today with Federer’s current form. At least until Federer stops reaching finals with his entertaining artistic style and Djokovic shows he can play that good consistently. I hope we are not there yet because we are going to get very boring finals…

[Reply]

TD, I don’t think a draw should have anything to do with what would constitute a more ‘entertaining’ or crowd-pleasing match. It should be based, as it always has been, solely on rankings. Furthermore, a Federer who is playing badly hardly displays what I would describe as ‘entertaining’ tennis. (Mind you, I don’t find Nadal’s brand of match-winning tennis entertaining either, but that is for quite different reasons, which are chiefly of style.)

However, if Federer plays in the haphazard and unconvincing fashion he has of late then the question of who he might meet in a future grand slam final is academic; Federer is unlikely to be there. I am reaching the point when I prefer to remember him as the great player he used to be – when debates about tactics, surfaces and confidence – even opponents – were irrelevant to his genius.

True, without him the game is given over to the relentless grinders; but he won’t be able to save us – or himself for that matter – from them indefinitely.

[Reply]