RF: "No Need to Panic"/ gets WC for Gstaad

[Front242]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

Thank you herios, much appreciated as always. You really should be awarded the title of 'rankings guru'.

The good news is he cannot meet Berdych

that's not just good news, it's MASSIVE news

Sure is massive news but then again it was all part of his cunning plan to play crap and avoid Berdych

 

[herios]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

Thank you herios, much appreciated as always. You really should be awarded the title of 'rankings guru'.

The good news is he cannot meet Berdych

that's not just good news, it's MASSIVE news

Sure is massive news but then again it was all part of his cunning plan to play crap and avoid Berdych

Actually they could still meet, but not in a QF, potentially in a later stage if both will beat one of the top 4 ranked.

 

[DarthFed]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

As much as I don't want to see Fed play Berdych in a QF I'm not sure it's a good tradeoff that he could play Djokovic, Nadal, or Murray in that round instead

I agree with Didi though, Fed could really have a strong USO and his best on that surface is still THE best on tour. It's just a question of consistency and stamina. I will say one thing though...no chance in hell he loses to anyone before the QF that tournament. Wimbledon might still be the place where he has the best chance vs. the other elite but he is a lot more vulnerable in the early rounds there. Hopefully the draw opens up for Roger again but it sounds greedy as he has had 2 amazing opportunities at RG and Wimbledon.

 

[Front242]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

Thank you herios, much appreciated as always. You really should be awarded the title of 'rankings guru'.

The good news is he cannot meet Berdych

that's not just good news, it's MASSIVE news

Sure is massive news but then again it was all part of his cunning plan to play crap and avoid Berdych

Actually they could still meet, but not in a QF, potentially in a later stage if both will beat one of the top 4 ranked.

Higher probability of Fed beating say Ferrer than any of the other top 4 losing to Berdych so that's pretty ok for now unless Berdych ingests a ton of HGH and mental stimulation enhancers to turn him into a cyborg before August.

 

[herios]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

As much as I don't want to see Fed play Berdych in a QF I'm not sure it's a good tradeoff that he could play Djokovic, Nadal, or Murray in that round instead

From a neutral point of view, in the Rafa vs Roger match-up, I would say, the best chances for Roger to defeat Rafa in a slam I think could be the USO.
It is the fastest surface, where usually Roger does better than Rafa.
Therefore, if he won't get into the Ferrer's quarter of the draw, the second best choice for him, would be Rafa's IMO.

 

[DarthFed]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

As much as I don't want to see Fed play Berdych in a QF I'm not sure it's a good tradeoff that he could play Djokovic, Nadal, or Murray in that round instead

From a neutral point of view, in the Rafa vs Roger match-up, I would say, the best chances for Roger to defeat Rafa in a slam I think could be the USO.
It is the fastest surface, where usually Roger does better than Rafa.
Therefore, if he won't get into the Ferrer's quarter of the draw, the second best choice for him, would be Rafa's IMO.

USO is not faster than Wimbledon or it is at least very comparable speed wise, but the bounce is more to Roger's favor. However, you can still win easier with a good serve at Wimbledon than the USO so I'm not sure if his chances are better vs. Nadal at the USO.

 

[crystalfire]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

It's amazing how fed made the second week of grand slams for 9 years. Of the top 4 he was the most consistent. We would always write him down for quarters if not semis. None of the others even come close. Djoker is now doing it but he's got quite a while to go. With Feds loss everything becomes uncertain. We can't write him down for quarters anymore in any of the slams. Only one we could write down is djoker. Murray and nadal can do it if healthy but that's always a question. Except at French where Rafa can be pretty much put down as winner unless djoker plays out of his skin. I think we're seeing the end of an era. Other players will take heart and know they can win

 

[Mog]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

It's amazing how fed made the second week of grand slams for 9 years. Of the top 4 he was the most consistent. We would always write him down for quarters if not semis. None of the others even come close. Djoker is now doing it but he's got quite a while to go. With Feds loss everything becomes uncertain. We can't write him down for quarters anymore in any of the slams. Only one we could write down is djoker. Murray and nadal can do it if healthy but that's always a question. Except at French where Rafa can be pretty much put down as winner unless djoker plays out of his skin. I think we're seeing the end of an era. Other players will take heart and know they can win

Very well stated crystal fire.
I want to wait and see how Roger's remaining year during hard court season and USO goes. His 2013 is a disappointing one at his standard.
If he does very well from now it will give his fans some comfort. Doesn't matter at what ranking he stands.

 

[crystalfire]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

It's amazing how fed made the second week of grand slams for 9 years. Of the top 4 he was the most consistent. We would always write him down for quarters if not semis. None of the others even come close. Djoker is now doing it but he's got quite a while to go. With Feds loss everything becomes uncertain. We can't write him down for quarters anymore in any of the slams. Only one we could write down is djoker. Murray and nadal can do it if healthy but that's always a question. Except at French where Rafa can be pretty much put down as winner unless djoker plays out of his skin. I think we're seeing the end of an era. Other players will take heart and know they can win

Very well stated crystal fire.
I want to wait and see how Roger's remaining year during hard court season and USO goes. His 2013 is a disappointing one at his standard.
If he does very well from now it will give his fans some comfort. Doesn't matter at what ranking he stands.

i totally agree. im not too worried about his ranking. just want to see how he plays rest of year. and this way he can move up a lot next year if he plays well.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

you could put Federer in the final without caring who else might be in the draw..18 out of 19 major finals..the more you think about it the more unbelievable it seems..

i miss mega-fed already, but hopefully still a few years with some top displays but we got to expect spells of gloomy play....

at one of his 5 u s open wins before the tourney..tiger woods said he wanted to go to the final and Federer told him it was on xyz date and he would see tiger there..clearly expecting himself to reach the final even before the tourney started.

 

[Andrew William]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

I think Federer still has a Slam or two left in him. The draw has to be favorable and Nadal has to probably lose for him to have a chance.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

any Federer news,

wonder if he might play the grass atp250 at Newport. :idea:

 

[crystalfire]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

I think Federer still has a Slam or two left in him. The draw has to be favorable and Nadal has to probably lose for him to have a chance.

it really depends on his ranking at this point. and we will have to wait and see how he plays the rest of the year before we can jump to that conclusion. at this point i feel like the rest of the top 3 have to lose for him to have a chance and even then theres tsonga and berd and delpo. it really all comes down to how hes playing. this year hes been pretty bad

 

[Mog]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

First of all the most important thing is " how well he plays during the rest of the year". If he comes out playing well and with determination , he sure can make a statement. And then he might have a shot at USO and YEC. Looking at his year 2013 I am not sure of anything. Who know we might have " Wimbledon like syndrome" at USO too.
I would like to see him win USO.

 

[nehmeth]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

First of all the most important thing is " how well he plays during the rest of the year". If he comes out playing well and with determination , he sure can make a statement. And then he might have a shot at USO and YEC. Looking at his year 2013 I am not sure of anything. Who know we might have " Wimbledon like syndrome" at USO too.
I would like to see him win USO.

In 2011, while he didn't win the U.S. Open, he had a very nice run in the fall winning the YEC. That set him up for his run to #1 in 2012. Presumption of Fed's demise has always been premature. He may have slowed down some, but that's why he hired Annacone. He plans to exit like Agassi, not like Pete.

 

[lindseywagners]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

you could put Federer in the final without caring who else might be in the draw..18 out of 19 major finals..the more you think about it the more unbelievable it seems..

The thing about it though is that Roger was not necessarily dominating all those matches and winning 6-4, 6-3, 6-2 or whatever. His record in his prime is obviously outstanding, but there were players who put up a fight against him. Agassi at 35 years old gave it to Roger in the 2005 US Open final (and Federer's second, third, and fourth round matches in that tournament weren't walks in the park, either). The match against Andre was leveled at a set a piece and went to a third set breaker, which Roger won before cruising in the fourth set.

My point: The major difference between then and now, I think, is that Roger was winning the BIG points. This year he has not been winning those points.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

you could put Federer in the final without caring who else might be in the draw..18 out of 19 major finals..the more you think about it the more unbelievable it seems..

The thing about it though is that Roger was not necessarily dominating all those matches and winning 6-4, 6-3, 6-2 or whatever. His record in his prime is obviously outstanding, but there were players who put up a fight against him. Agassi at 35 years old gave it to Roger in the 2005 US Open final (and Federer's second, third, and fourth round matches in that tournament weren't walks in the park, either). The match against Andre was leveled at a set a piece and went to a third set breaker, which Roger won before cruising in the fourth set.

My point: The major difference between then and now, I think, is that Roger was winning the BIG points. This year he has not been winning those points.

no, the major difference is his weaker forehand..shankerer backhand, and inferior stamina...including a reluctance to rally from the baseline before baling out, any big points he misses comes as part of the previously mentioned things.

 

[lindseywagners]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

you could put Federer in the final without caring who else might be in the draw..18 out of 19 major finals..the more you think about it the more unbelievable it seems..

The thing about it though is that Roger was not necessarily dominating all those matches and winning 6-4, 6-3, 6-2 or whatever. His record in his prime is obviously outstanding, but there were players who put up a fight against him. Agassi at 35 years old gave it to Roger in the 2005 US Open final (and Federer's second, third, and fourth round matches in that tournament weren't walks in the park, either). The match against Andre was leveled at a set a piece and went to a third set breaker, which Roger won before cruising in the fourth set.

My point: The major difference between then and now, I think, is that Roger was winning the BIG points. This year he has not been winning those points.

no, the major difference is his weaker forehand..shankerer backhand, and inferior stamina...including a reluctance to rally from the baseline before baling out, any big points he misses comes as part of the previously mentioned things.

I can see the point that those parts of his game are not as crisp as they once were, but last year his forehand, backhand, and stamina could not have been much different to this year, can they? What was the difference between this year and last year when he won a lot?

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

you could put Federer in the final without caring who else might be in the draw..18 out of 19 major finals..the more you think about it the more unbelievable it seems..

The thing about it though is that Roger was not necessarily dominating all those matches and winning 6-4, 6-3, 6-2 or whatever. His record in his prime is obviously outstanding, but there were players who put up a fight against him. Agassi at 35 years old gave it to Roger in the 2005 US Open final (and Federer's second, third, and fourth round matches in that tournament weren't walks in the park, either). The match against Andre was leveled at a set a piece and went to a third set breaker, which Roger won before cruising in the fourth set.

My point: The major difference between then and now, I think, is that Roger was winning the BIG points. This year he has not been winning those points.

no, the major difference is his weaker forehand..shankerer backhand, and inferior stamina...including a reluctance to rally from the baseline before baling out, any big points he misses comes as part of the previously mentioned things.

I can see the point that those parts of his game are not as crisp as they once were, but last year his forehand, backhand, and stamina could not have been much different to this year, can they? What was the difference between this year and last year when he won a lot?

:huh: are you having a laugh..whats the diff between fed2012 and fed2013 :s..see above for why he is worse this year, and throw in self delusion (fed thinks a todays version of himself would beat a 2007 version of Federer :laydownlaughing),

also the delusion some folk on here have that faster courts would help fed stay at the top was shattered by his defeat to a S & V Plays like fast grass masterclass at Wimbledon..

I don't think the idea folk had that Federer would himself s&v more to shorten matches or at least avoid draining baseline rallies he used to engage in is going to happen,he just dont want to do it seemingly,

his lack of movement was laid bare in this Wimbledon..so even that option cant help his decline it seems anyway,

Federer looks like having to be content staying top 8 world rank, and then hitting a hot streak for a masters or a major title, and pick up the odd atp250 title on the way,

2012 was seemingly a last hurrah at the summit of tennis..like a lot of folk claim he could win big again, but he often looks like what he is..a near 32 yr old bloke wondering around looking at his future disappear into the past.

,

 

[El Dude]

RE: Federer: "No Need to Panic"

2012 was seemingly a last hurrah at the summit of tennis..like a lot of folk claim he could win big again, but he often looks like what he is..a near 32 yr old bloke wondering around looking at his future disappear into the past.

I think this is true, if a bit tinged with gloom in that while its sad to see him fade, let's put it in the larger context of an amazing career and still some good tennis to be played. But I agree that 2012 was Federer's Indian Summer, and only because he won the Slam and was #1 for a time; he still wasn't the player he was in 2004-07, and wasn't really a better player than the other members of the Big Four. In other words, I agree that it was a "last hurrah at the summit of tennis" In terms of a sustained period of time at the top, but he had fallen from that summit a couple years previously, and still could return for a tournament or two, if probably never again for a sustained period of time.

We also need to remember that from after the 2010 AO to the 2012 Wimbledon Federer was Slam-less for a period of two and a half years. I think the 2010 AO marked then end for Federer as a truly dominant player; from that point on he was obviously very good, and still one of the best in the game, but not truly dominant - not the player to beat. Each year since he has been lapped by another player so that where in 2007 he was still the lone best player in the game, in 2008-09 he was roughly equal to Nadal, in 2010 Nadal was clearly the best, and 2011 both Nadal and Djokovic were better. 2012 broke this "lapping" a bit, but I don't think he was any better than Nadal, Djokovic, or Murray - and this year he's clearly a step behind them, and perhaps even Ferrer too (a match between them would be quite interesting).

I've said this before, but the majority of tennis players follow a clear pattern of decline: a half-step back around the age of 27 (2008 for Federer) and a big step back around the age of 31-32 (2012-13 for Federer). Federer isn't proving to be any different in either respect, it is just that he was so great from 2004-07 that a half-step back left him as still a great player (2008-12). The only thing that remains to be seen is if he can right the ship and have another plateau period of two or three years at his current #5-8 level, or if he's going to spiral down and retire before it gets too ugly.

I think there's no reason Roger can't maintain a top 10 ranking for another two or three years and will be relatively content to continue playing as long as he feels like he has a chance at Slams. But once he slips out of the top 8 and misses the World Tour Finals, I think he'll start seriously questioning whether he wants to continue. But we're not quite there yet. He's still #5 in the world (after Wimbledon) and after Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray, is still probably the biggest threat to win a Slam. Again, as long as he's convinced that he's got a legit shot at winning a Slam, I think he'll continue playing, but if and when he decides there's very little chance he'll win a Slam again, I think he'll call it quits.