Monte Carlo Rolex Masters, Monaco, ATP Masters 1000

[shawnbm]

Federer can go the long distance and have energy and ability--he has done it many times. Only one person has come from two sets down to win more than he has in Open Era history. I agree about RG 2009, as the pressure of expectation could be seen on his face after Soderling beat Nadal. But even in his five set losses, very few have been because he imploded or was unable to fight it out; he just lost--Safin winning in Melbourne in 2005 (after Roger stupidly did a hotdog shot on match point--so young), Rafa getting him in 2008 9-7 at SW19, Fed hitting two match points long and losing 7-6 in the fifth in Rome in 2006 against Nadal, losing 6-4 in Novak at Wimbledon in 2015. I mean, they went toe-to-toe--it is not like he didn't make them earn their major victories--you have to beat him in the fifth. The only odd one out is his losing 6-2 to Delpo in New York--that was a surprising one, but you had to hand to the Argentine, he was swinging for the fences and hitting a lot of deep balls.

 

[britbox]

I don't know mate... I've never subscribed to the theory that Fed "bottles it" because he's in a fifth... I usually assume that a) the opponent is playing well to even take him to a fifth and b) he's being worked hard.... The Safin match... agree, could have gone either way and he didn't lose it because of his engine - I actually think he lost it because he thought he couldn't lose (and underestimated Safin on that day), but I'd say the reverse was true in a few matches with Rafa... particularly the AO 09, a few with Djoker, and a horror show against Tsonga at Wimbledon... he looked like he was running on fumes in a few those.

 

[Moxie]

I also agree about RG 2009, and it's one of the things I've admired about Fed...he knew it was a big opportunity, and it got to him a bit, but he made it happen by talent, but also by dint of will. BB, I do like your comparison of his temperament to that of a middle distance runner. I think you're right...usually when he gets pushed to the limit he's getting out-played. (@shawnbm: I don't think Roger's shot in the Safin match was a hotdog thing...that ball was behind him and he didn't have many choices.)

 

[Rides]

Monfils must be infuriating to follow at times, because it looks like he has so much more to give at time and he demonstrates it sporadically... I think @Rides follows Le Monf, would be interested in her opinion.

Gael is anything but infuriating to follow, the guy is pure entertainment. I've never walked away from a match he's been involved in and felt disappointed win or lose.

He does seem to be a player who is satisfied with QF/SF results - doesn't have the focus or killer instinct the very top players possess. And that is a pity, because he has everything else: athleticism, fitness, personality, all in spades.

I wasn't able to watch the final, only follow the scores. 6-0 in the third is a head scratcher.

 

[DarthFed]

I also agree about RG 2009, and it's one of the things I've admired about Fed...he knew it was a big opportunity, and it got to him a bit, but he made it happen by talent, but also by dint of will. BB, I do like your comparison of his temperament to that of a middle distance runner. I think you're right...usually when he gets pushed to the limit he's getting out-played. (@shawnbm: I don't think Roger's shot in the Safin match was a hotdog thing...that ball was behind him and he didn't have many choices.)

He had plenty of time to hit a defensive lob. But of course he was behind in the point no matter what but if he got a lob deep his odds were better than what he tried.

I've never subscribed to the theory that Roger struggles in 5th sets because he's gassed. Some players are just more clutch in those tight moments where you either win or lose based on a couple points late in the match and he simply isn't. There have been exceptions, notably the Murray match at AO 2013 where he was simply running on fumes after a 5 setter vs. Tsonga, and also maybe the 5 setter vs. DP at USO. I think that was physical and mental fatigue after letting it get to a 5th. One factor is that his game is more of an attacking variety so a little less high percentage than Nole and Rafa. Those two can dig in and keep the ball in play all day, that isn't Roger's mentality.

People can point to matches like YEC 2005, Rome 2006, AO 2005, SW 19 2008, and the USO semis vs. Djokovic and say they were tough 5th sets but the fact of the matter is he lost them all. And all of them were mostly just ugly play at the end, especially the USO. He had chances in all 6 and didn't get it done in any of them, there is no spinning that. Off the top of my head the only comparable one that he won was Wimbledon 2009 vs. Roddick. And there were many other headscratchers too especially AO 2009. Not coincidentally when Roger wins a 5th set he usually gets an early lead and runs away with it. It is obviously different at 1-1 or 2-2 in the 5th set compared to 5-5... Roger IS clutch in other ways though, especially when he is down in a match, and he may still have the best winning % of tiebreaks in history. He is at least up there. And RG 2009 was the epitome of clutch play overall because he had to fight an incredible amount of nerves the last 4 matches once Nadal lost.

 

[Moxie]

I agree that the defensive lob would have been the better choice, and he only had two options. But Safin is 6'4" with a big wingspan. Anyway, I don't think he was hot-dogging as much as he perhaps made a poor selection of shot. Still, it's one point. He could yet have won that set, and he had a 5th to come good, too. I know we're talking about Roger's (relatively) poor record in deciders, but I think he was probably cautious, too, thinking that Marat wouldn't keep it together.

The rest of your explanation of how Fed has fared in some big 5-setters is very informative. I also agree that he doesn't lose on fitness. I would say the fatigue tends to be mental when he's not getting an edge in the 5th of a big match that he can grip onto and run with. The Wimbledon 08 was both, though, for sure. Nadal had been digging at his shoulder for 5 hours, and it gave out.

 

[DarthFed]

^ I agree with you that he wasn't hot-dogging, he isn't Monfils who is about the only player I can think of that might do some crazy hotdog shot in a crucial moment. Clearly the between the legs is a shot he can hit better than most (perhaps all) given on what we've seen. It just was not a good shot selection given the moment and the fact he did have enough time to hit a deep defensive lob.

I don't think he lost Wimbledon 2008 on fitness. He just blinked first, the forehand started misfiring badly when it came time to win or lose. Earlier when it was a matter of survive or lose it was on fire. That goes back to my original point, he tends to blink first in all those situations when it is dead even near the end of the decisive set. Different mentality and you also have to factor in the opposition may be playing it differently in those situations too. I'd imagine all the top players know Roger struggles in certain moments.