2017 Australian Open Final: FEDAL XXXV

[mightyjeditribble]

Everyone, calm down.

Carol - if you don't like people complaining about Nadal's MTOs, then don't now do the same to Federer. Two wrongs don't make a right.

But no, people shouldn't be complaining about any of Rafa's timeouts either. I am a Federer fan and can take absolutely no issue with Rafa's professionalism and integrity as they have been on display over the years. Players take MTOs when they feel they need them.

When he was younger (before his rise to the top), Djokovic did overuse them, to the point where Federer made a comment about it at some point (think it was after a Davis Cup match). But since then, he also has matured, cut them out, and conduts himself as the champion he is.

Of course, disliking the rule for MTOs is a valid position to have. But don't complain about them only when your favourites' opponents take them ... at least unless there is clear evidence of a pattern (which there really isn't with Fed & Nadal).

 

[Front242]

Problem is you stated players use them when they feel they need to. This includes when losing to break the opponent's rhythm and dig themselves out of a hole. They most definitely are not all legit.

 

[Kieran]

Problem is you stated players use them when they feel they need to. This includes when losing to break the opponent's rhythm and dig themselves out of a hole. They most definitely are not all legit.

This is easy to say in theory, but to prove it is difficult. Were Federer's MTO's because he couldn't play on without them - or were they to regroup mentally? Well, he said so himself:

Q. You said on the court you never take the timeouts. That's kind of a new turn for you. Did it help to give you a chance to clear your head before the fifth set?

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I mean, I think these injury timeouts, I think they're more mental than anything else. Okay, normally you would have to do it on court. If you do groin or something like that, or a tape way up there, you have to go off court.

For the first time maybe during a match you can actually talk to someone, even if it's just a physio. We know him well. It maybe relaxed Stan, you know, just to be able to talk about I don't know what. The same thing for me, as well. You start chatting about it, how good or bad the leg is, how you hope it's going to turn around. That can leave a positive effect on you when you come back.

Again and again and again, I have no problem with this - It's just that from now on I don't hear any bitter Fedfans getting righteous about their beatific star, and feeling free to slag off his opponents. And not only regarding MTO's, but other bigger stuff, as I mentioned before...

 

[mightyjeditribble]

Problem is you stated players use them when they feel they need to. This includes when losing to break the opponent's rhythm and dig themselves out of a hole. They most definitely are not all legit.

I'm sure some players do, but I see no evidence of this with the top players. Certainly not of truly fraudulent use where nothing is actually ailing the player and they take a time-out for purely tactical reasons.

Now, I am sure that it is true that the leg that is bothering you probably feels worse when you are being battered than when you are playing well, so it wouldn't surprise me if data showed that players took them more often when in trouble.

Anyway, my point isn't about whether MTO are good/bad (I personally think the alternative is worse, as it would lead to more retirements or players aggravating an injury as they keep playing). Just be fair rather than playing favourites.

 

[Kieran]

Welcome to the forum, mightyjeditribble, I read your posts while I was away, and I hope to enjoy reading many more!

 

[mightyjeditribble]

Problem is you stated players use them when they feel they need to. This includes when losing to break the opponent's rhythm and dig themselves out of a hole. They most definitely are not all legit.

This is easy to say in theory, but to prove it is difficult. Were Federer's MTO's because he couldn't play on without them - or were they to regroup mentally? Well, he said so himself:

Q. You said on the court you never take the timeouts. That's kind of a new turn for you. Did it help to give you a chance to clear your head before the fifth set?

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I mean, I think these injury timeouts, I think they're more mental than anything else. Okay, normally you would have to do it on court. If you do groin or something like that, or a tape way up there, you have to go off court.

For the first time maybe during a match you can actually talk to someone, even if it's just a physio. We know him well. It maybe relaxed Stan, you know, just to be able to talk about I don't know what. The same thing for me, as well. You start chatting about it, how good or bad the leg is, how you hope it's going to turn around. That can leave a positive effect on you when you come back.

Again and again and again, I have no problem with this - It's just that from now on I don't hear any bitter Fedfans getting righteous about their beatific star, and feeling free to slag off his opponents. And not only regarding MTO's, but other bigger stuff, as I mentioned before...

Agreed on your last point, as I already said. I've never slagged off Nadal on MTOs; actually, I think he is exemplary in his attitude to the game.

However, I do think there is some danger of misinterpreting what Fed said. I understood him to say that he took the timeout because he had an issue with his leg. He didn't think it really helped physically, but is acknowledging that it can have a mental effect. In fact, this may explain why he doesn't usually like to take them.

Now, he does have to look after his body, so I don't mind if he takes some more MTOs as time goes on. But I do hope it's not for psychological reasons, and I don't believe that it would be.

 

[mightyjeditribble]

Welcome to the forum, mightyjeditribble, I read your posts while I was away, and I hope to enjoy reading many more!

Thanks - it'll probably be on and off again as life intervenes, but it's nice to have found a friendly board again, after discovering the one I used to post on occasionally had gone on to the great big server in the sky ...

 

[Kieran]

Problem is you stated players use them when they feel they need to. This includes when losing to break the opponent's rhythm and dig themselves out of a hole. They most definitely are not all legit.

This is easy to say in theory, but to prove it is difficult. Were Federer's MTO's because he couldn't play on without them - or were they to regroup mentally? Well, he said so himself:

Q. You said on the court you never take the timeouts. That's kind of a new turn for you. Did it help to give you a chance to clear your head before the fifth set?

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I mean, I think these injury timeouts, I think they're more mental than anything else. Okay, normally you would have to do it on court. If you do groin or something like that, or a tape way up there, you have to go off court.

For the first time maybe during a match you can actually talk to someone, even if it's just a physio. We know him well. It maybe relaxed Stan, you know, just to be able to talk about I don't know what. The same thing for me, as well. You start chatting about it, how good or bad the leg is, how you hope it's going to turn around. That can leave a positive effect on you when you come back.

Again and again and again, I have no problem with this - It's just that from now on I don't hear any bitter Fedfans getting righteous about their beatific star, and feeling free to slag off his opponents. And not only regarding MTO's, but other bigger stuff, as I mentioned before...

Agreed on your last point, as I already said. I've never slagged off Nadal on MTOs; actually, I think he is exemplary in his attitude to the game.

However, I do think there is some danger of misinterpreting what Fed said. I understood him to say that he took the timeout because he had an issue with his leg. He didn't think it really helped physically, but is acknowledging that it can have a mental effect. In fact, this may explain why he doesn't usually like to take them.

Now, he does have to look after his body, so I don't mind if he takes some more MTOs as time goes on. But I do hope it's not for psychological reasons, and I don't believe that it would be.

Well, he says, "I think these injury timeouts, I think they're more mental than anything else." It helped him mentally just to chat with the physio. Federer is no greenhorn. He took the MTO because it helped him gain time to settle. And again, I don't complain about it, never have. Totally agree with you about Rafa, too...

 

[Kieran]

Welcome to the forum, mightyjeditribble, I read your posts while I was away, and I hope to enjoy reading many more!

Thanks - it'll probably be on and off again as life intervenes, but it's nice to have found a friendly board again, after discovering the one I used to post on occasionally had gone on to the great big server in the sky ...

Yeah, a lot of us here are exiles from the old tennis.com forum. The forums change, but the fight goes on and on... :snicker

 

[mightyjeditribble]

This is easy to say in theory, but to prove it is difficult. Were Federer's MTO's because he couldn't play on without them - or were they to regroup mentally? Well, he said so himself:


Again and again and again, I have no problem with this - It's just that from now on I don't hear any bitter Fedfans getting righteous about their beatific star, and feeling free to slag off his opponents. And not only regarding MTO's, but other bigger stuff, as I mentioned before...

Agreed on your last point, as I already said. I've never slagged off Nadal on MTOs; actually, I think he is exemplary in his attitude to the game.

However, I do think there is some danger of misinterpreting what Fed said. I understood him to say that he took the timeout because he had an issue with his leg. He didn't think it really helped physically, but is acknowledging that it can have a mental effect. In fact, this may explain why he doesn't usually like to take them.

Now, he does have to look after his body, so I don't mind if he takes some more MTOs as time goes on. But I do hope it's not for psychological reasons, and I don't believe that it would be.

Well, he says, "I think these injury timeouts, I think they're more mental than anything else." It helped him mentally just to chat with the physio. Federer is no greenhorn. He took the MTO because it helped him gain time to settle. And again, I don't complain about it, never have. Totally agree with you about Rafa, too...

But it was in response to a question about how he doesn't usually take them. I don't think that there is a question that there was a genuine injury there, and in that case, he *should* maybe take them more often.

Also, I think it's a bit dangerous to read too much into the exact words the players use after a match, particularly a five-set battle ... Also, Roger probably had an interest in talking down the seriousness of the injury ahead of the final. Let's hope he's gone and he's fit and ready for Dubai, with no MTOs.

 

[Kieran]

Agreed on your last point, as I already said. I've never slagged off Nadal on MTOs; actually, I think he is exemplary in his attitude to the game.

However, I do think there is some danger of misinterpreting what Fed said. I understood him to say that he took the timeout because he had an issue with his leg. He didn't think it really helped physically, but is acknowledging that it can have a mental effect. In fact, this may explain why he doesn't usually like to take them.

Now, he does have to look after his body, so I don't mind if he takes some more MTOs as time goes on. But I do hope it's not for psychological reasons, and I don't believe that it would be.

Well, he says, "I think these injury timeouts, I think they're more mental than anything else." It helped him mentally just to chat with the physio. Federer is no greenhorn. He took the MTO because it helped him gain time to settle. And again, I don't complain about it, never have. Totally agree with you about Rafa, too...

But it was in response to a question about how he doesn't usually take them. I don't think that there is a question that there was a genuine injury there, and in that case, he *should* maybe take them more often.

Also, I think it's a bit dangerous to read too much into the exact words the players use after a match, particularly a five-set battle ... Also, Roger probably had an interest in talking down the seriousness of the injury ahead of the final. Let's hope he's gone and he's fit and ready for Dubai, with no MTOs.

This is all fair enough but bear in mind, we only know he has an injury because he told us so. In the murky world of chat forums, that means he's telling the truth - and it also means he's a cheating liar - depending on who your favourite player is. Truth is unimportant, the important thing is, is he your favourite player, or a player you both hate, and mistrust?

My whole point all along is that if his name was "Nadal" and he won the tournament taking MTO's and talking about how nice it was to get a cuddle and a few giggles with the physio (you know what I mean), there would be sixteen pages of bile from certain Fedfans here accusing him of tricks. As you and I have both said, let's be consistent, it isn't a shameful episode in life to apply the criteria of criticism we use on players we hate, to our favourite players, also...

 

[mightyjeditribble]

This is all fair enough but bear in mind, we only know he has an injury because he told us so. In the murky world of chat forums, that means he's telling the truth - and it also means he's a cheating liar - depending on who your favourite player is. Truth is unimportant, the important thing is, is he your favourite player, or a player you both hate, and mistrust?

My whole point all along is that if his name was "Nadal" and he won the tournament taking MTO's and talking about how nice it was to get a cuddle and a few giggles with the physio (you know what I mean), there would be sixteen pages of bile from certain Fedfans here accusing him of tricks. As you and I have both said, let's be consistent, it isn't a shameful episode in life to apply the criteria of criticism we use on players we hate, to our favourite players, also...

Tbh, I've seen as much of this levelled at Federer from Nadal/Djokovic/Murray/Sampras "fans" as vice versa. Maybe there are more Fed fans on this board so that it feels more noticeable? Guess I haven't been here long enough ...

In general I think we should just pity those who have to look for ways to knock down their favourites' rivals, and otherwise ignore them. Root for your players, not against the others. And I'll even include Kyrgios in this, as much as I really don't like his attitude ...

 

[Kieran]

No, I'll always root against certain players too :laydownlaughing

 

[mightyjeditribble]

Lol fair enough I suppose, if you hold them to the same standard as your favourites. I'd still rather cheer for people than against though.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Problem is you stated players use them when they feel they need to. This includes when losing to break the opponent's rhythm and dig themselves out of a hole. They most definitely are not all legit.

This is easy to say in theory, but to prove it is difficult. Were Federer's MTO's because he couldn't play on without them - or were they to regroup mentally? Well, he said so himself:

Q. You said on the court you never take the timeouts. That's kind of a new turn for you. Did it help to give you a chance to clear your head before the fifth set?

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I mean, I think these injury timeouts, I think they're more mental than anything else. Okay, normally you would have to do it on court. If you do groin or something like that, or a tape way up there, you have to go off court.

For the first time maybe during a match you can actually talk to someone, even if it's just a physio. We know him well. It maybe relaxed Stan, you know, just to be able to talk about I don't know what. The same thing for me, as well. You start chatting about it, how good or bad the leg is, how you hope it's going to turn around. That can leave a positive effect on you when you come back.

Again and again and again, I have no problem with this - It's just that from now on I don't hear any bitter Fedfans getting righteous about their beatific star, and feeling free to slag off his opponents. And not only regarding MTO's, but other bigger stuff, as I mentioned before...

Look, I had even said one of Fed's bathroom breaks was in poor taste in an earlier thread. I am not the one who overlooks something just because my favorite does it. The trouble with MTOs and also with bathroom breaks is that nobody can prove that one is taking it deliberately. How can anyone claim that somebody has no need to go to pottie at a particular time? As a consequence, they do get misused sometimes. But, players, especially top players, are concerned not only with winning, but in protecting their legacy also. Hence, they most often do not violate the rules blatantly (even when it is undetectable), but may be sometimes they do it in the gray area.

If you like, I can pull up the old thread (sun shade disappearing stuff).

 

[Front242]

Very interested to watch the next installment of Roger v Rafa as Rafa will have to come up with a plan b (if he even has one) to beat Roger next time as that old boring forehand to backhand crap is no longer gonna cut the mustard as Roger's backhand is so much better now. Better than his erratic forehand even. On the other hand, Roger can play much better than he did as he won't hopefully make so many nervous silly errors next time round now that he's on a 2 match winning spree against his nemesis.

 

[mightyjeditribble]

Look, I had even said one of Fed's bathroom breaks was in poor taste in an earlier thread. I am not the one who overlooks something just because my favorite does it. The trouble with MTOs and also with bathroom breaks is that nobody can prove that one is taking it deliberately. How can anyone claim that somebody has no need to go to pottie at a particular time?

Easy - if there isn't a number two or a sufficient amount of wee in the loo afterwards, they forfeit a game! :laydownlaughing

Referees all over the world - who will be tasked with enforcing this - will be grateful to us for this suggestion. :laydownlaughing

As a consequence, they do get misused sometimes. But, players, especially top players, are concerned not only with winning, but in protecting their legacy also. Hence, they most often do not violate the rules blatantly (even when it is undetectable), but may be sometimes they do it in the gray area.

You're absolutely right of course. But if the alternative is players wetting themselves / retiring more / risking more serious injury, it might just be a small price to pay. As you say, if someone does it blatantly, it will reflect badly on them, and people (including other players) will speak up about it eventually.

 

[mrzz]

^The forehand was particularly erratic in the final, mostly on sets 2 and 4, and one bad miss on the start of the fifth. Yes, in that match the bh was steady all the way, but when the forehand went back to "normal" he won five games in a row, and the title.

It would be nice if he meets Nadal in Dubai or IW, that would be a good chance to make it three. In Miami it would be a whole other story, but he would still have a shot.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Very interested to watch the next installment of Roger v Rafa as Rafa will have to come up with a plan b (if he even has one) to beat Roger next time as that old boring forehand to backhand crap is no longer gonna cut the mustard as Roger's backhand is so much better now. Better than his erratic forehand even. On the other hand, Roger can play much better than he did as he won't hopefully make so many nervous silly errors next time round now that he's on a 2 match winning spree against his nemesis.

Even though Roger played fairly aggressively in that match, it was still mostly a baseline game. Most of the winners were groundstrokes from the baseline.

Roger can come to the net more often than he did so, especially on fast courts. Further, I did not see any SABR move also in that match. So, there is still more potential to make his game more aggressive.

 

[crystalfire]

anyone think adding Ljubicic to his crew helped fed improve his backhand?