Federer Betterer Than Everer

[scoop]

Roger Federer annihilated Alexander Zverev in the Hall final yesterday 61 63 and played a quality of tennis which arguably could be his very best level.

The soon-to-be 36 year old blitzed Zverev with everything, including baseline superiority, pinpoint serving, serve and volley, lethal shot placements and particularly the drop shot. Federer stung the rising #NEXTGEN star repeatedly with damaging drop shots including one backhand finesse drop – off a deep Zverev drive – from behind the baseline. Zverev didn’t even make a move for the ball.

So far this year Federer has dominated, winning the Australian Open, Indian Wells, Miami and now his ninth title in Halle.

I think it’s possible that Roger Federer is at his very best right now. Ten years ago Federer was of course a great player and his records of those year speak for themselves but now he has ten years of more experience and ten years worth of epic battles with the likes of Rafa, Andy and Djokovic under his belt. All those years of challenges have developed Federer into an even greater player with more weapons and more ideas and greater capacity to change a match and disrupt an opponent’s rhythm.

Federer has remained completely focused on his tennis and fitness and luckily his body has sustained top health and fitness. He’s moving as well as ever and his ball striking appears to be just as good if not better now.

Roger Federer is at his best right now. And for as long as his body is willing to hold up and continue to play, I believe he will actually continue to get better.

 

[Ricardo]

every great player before declined when they were in their 30s, and Federer is the only exception ever? i can see some aspects may have got better but overall? i don't think he could sustain the W-L results over a long period, like he used to say 10 years ago, and that by definition means he is not as good as he used to be.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Duke Carnoustie writes:

I'll say again what I said in my earlier post. They should rename the sport Federer after what he did to that poor Zverev. The touch was devastating, did anybody see the point where Zverev crashed into the net? That showed how helpless he was and at Fed's mercy. Fed simply toyed with a player who may win future majors. He beat him like he was a club pro; this was an absolute destruction and a master class of greatness. Anybody who beats Fed at SW19 will have pulled off a major upset. Fed is in excellent shape and his point construction is more masterful than it has ever been. He is rested and reloaded and I can't imagine him not getting No. 19 at SW19. It's Fed's world - the rest of us are just present.

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Ricardo; Agassi was arguably a better player in his 30s. Fed said earlier this year in Miami he's not sure if he's better now or a decade ago. If you scan our archives from late March in Miami you will find the article of Fed discussing if he's greater now or then. The more he wins now the more he tilts the favor to now.

 

[Ricardo]

I suppose it's true that nobody could've thrashed Sasha like Fed did today on grass, and it was master class. People just say Sasha played bad, but he himself said that he wasn't allowed to play his best tennis. I guess you can't play your best when half the shots flew you by, with little unforced errors.

 

[Ricardo]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Ricardo; Agassi was arguably a better player in his 30s. Fed said earlier this year in Miami he's not sure if he's better now or a decade ago. If you scan our archives from late March in Miami you will find the article of Fed discussing if he's greater now or then. The more he wins now the more he tilts the favor to now.

yes it does. as it stands it's nowhere near the wins he had back in the day.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Jimmy the Gent writes:

IMO - fed IS playing his best tennis ever however he's not the fittest he's ever been as he's not & can't play a full schedule (which stems from performance optimization and more plainly - just older but wiser....not older and stronger)

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Ricardo; Because he's playing a far smaller schedule now than he was when he was younger.

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

JG;; Fed could play a full schedule but it would shorten his career. There are only so many tournaments left in his body and he must be wise and shrewd to carefully pick which ones to play and which ones to bypass. He's doing just that with the intent to extend his career for as long as his physically possible.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Henk writes:

Absolutely sublime tennis by the master and his reactions to winning become more and more charming. How could anyone not want Roger to keep on winning! What. A. Match! Despite the lobsided result, not a boring moment.

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Masterpieces can never be boring Henk, only to the boring minded Watching Federer dismantle Zverev yesterday was like watching a matador dominate a raging bull or a proficient boxer dissecting a heavy fisted slugger or Sherlock Holmes solving a case. Or Da Vinci putting oils on canvas.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Duke Carnoustie writes:

Scoop, I'll see your Da Vinci comment and raise with Pavarotti working on scales at La Scala!

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

To me it came full circle: Rafas,Noles and Murrays of this world had to increase their levels of play very much due to the bar Roger set and now Roger had to increase his level because those guys have taken it to the next level. Roger is not a guy to sit on his ass and live with past glories...he loves the game and the competition too much so he adjusted. So all credit to him for improving at this stage of his career. He is one of a kind really.

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Ok Duke two can play at this game, I will raise you with a three way dance off between Fred Astaire, Michael Jackson and Baryshnikov

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Henk writes:

Scoop, too true... but as I have a huge problem with cowards that call themselves matadors and bull 'fighting', one of the most despicable forms of animal torture, plus the fact that there's no such thing as a natural 'raging' bull (except for an unchained Rafa ) as they're actually really peaceful animals, I cannot relate to that particular comparison. However, I can fully relate to your artistry remarks for someone who will be considered a Grand Master in the art of tennis after he hangs up his utensils.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Duke Carnoustie writes:

Scoop you win, I guess? Sad that what Fed is doing is getting so little recognition State-side. We hear about Kevin Durant, Tom Brady, etc. Not comparing sports but this man is toying with his competitors and looking more unstoppable than ever.

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Fed is huge in the US I see RF hats always but NBA and NFL sell more copies of newspapers and magazines here,

 

[DarthFed]

This has been an on-again off-again discussion going back to 2012 when he had a great season up through Wimbledon. Then it fell off in 2013 as he struggled badly, then it was back again by the middle of 2014 when he had a good summer, then it fell off again until Wimbledon 2015, then it fell off again after AO 2016 when he was battling injury.

See the pattern here... that alone shows it's kind of silly because consistency is a big part of greatness especially the enormous level that Roger was at consistently in his prime. There really was no bad patch of play, at least at the biggest events.

Now with that said there are certain things he has done better since 2014 than he did in his prime. From 2014 on I'd say his net game has only gotten better, his 2nd serve is better than his peak play as well. In 2014 and 2015 when this discussion really started heating up it was kind of silly because obviously many things have gone downhill with age: movement, defense, stamina, forehand, and ROS (until this season). Those things more than outweighed the improvements and it made him vulnerable against players he simply was not vulnerable against in his prime.

This year so far there is at least a discussion to be had. He is clearly hitting the backhand better than ever, and his new, very aggressive approach on the return has paid dividends after struggling badly with that shot for many years now.

All around Roger is a different player than before, he is much more aggressive, trying to avoid the long points at all costs because that is going to usually be a losing formula vs. the other top guys. He is still not ever going to be as consistent as before because he could beat guys in more ways back then if he was struggling with aspects of his game.

As to whether he is a better player right now than he was at his peak, ask yourself this: Are you more confident in Roger's chances at this Wimbledon and the USO than you would be if you had a time machine and brought Roger of 2004-2007 to the present day? To me it's a resounding no. Put Fed of 2006 at Wimbledon this year and you can pencil him in for the title like we did with Rafa at this FO.

 

[Shivashish Sarkar]

This has been an on-again off-again discussion going back to 2012 when he had a great season up through Wimbledon. Then it fell off in 2013 as he struggled badly, then it was back again by the middle of 2014 when he had a good summer, then it fell off again until Wimbledon 2015, then it fell off again after AO 2016 when he was battling injury.

See the pattern here... that alone shows it's kind of silly because consistency is a big part of greatness especially the enormous level that Roger was at consistently in his prime. There really was no bad patch of play, at least at the biggest events.

Now with that said there are certain things he has done better since 2014 than he did in his prime. From 2014 on I'd say his net game has only gotten better, his 2nd serve is better than his peak play as well. In 2014 and 2015 when this discussion really started heating up it was kind of silly because obviously many things have gone downhill with age: movement, defense, stamina, forehand, and ROS (until this season). Those things more than outweighed the improvements and it made him vulnerable against players he simply was not vulnerable against in his prime.

This year so far there is at least a discussion to be had. He is clearly hitting the backhand better than ever, and his new, very aggressive approach on the return has paid dividends after struggling badly with that shot for many years now.

All around Roger is a different player than before, he is much more aggressive, trying to avoid the long points at all costs because that is going to usually be a losing formula vs. the other top guys. He is still not ever going to be as consistent as before because he could beat guys in more ways back then if he was struggling with aspects of his game.

As to whether he is a better player right now than he was at his peak, ask yourself this: Are you more confident in Roger's chances at this Wimbledon and the USO than you would be if you had a time machine and brought Roger of 2004-2007 to the present day? To me it's a resounding no. Put Fed of 2006 at Wimbledon this year and you can pencil him in for the title like we did with Rafa at this FO.

Good one.

 

[Shivashish Sarkar]

What we can say is Roger is in best of form since 2007.