Roger Done?

[britbox]

She made her comments before he won Wimbledon and reclaimed the World #1 last year. He already answered that bell.

So why is Front bringing it up now? What's it got to do with how he's playing at the moment?

Front can speak for himself, but I'm guessing the premise was that Roger's been written off before and come back and proved the naysayers wrong.

 

[Front242]

She made her comments before he won Wimbledon and reclaimed the World #1 last year. He already answered that bell.

So why is Front bringing it up now? What's it got to do with how he's playing at the moment?

Front can speak for himself, but I'm guessing the premise was that Roger's been written off before and come back and proved the naysayers wrong.

Yup Britbox. That's it exactly.

 

[Kieran]

That's a long one, isn't it? The statute of limitations has past!

I think the way the game is, you couldn't write Roger off, but if the makeweights start to smell blood, it'll get harder for him. Next few months will tell. In 2011, he really committed to the sport after the US Open. I hope he still has that commitment for another couple years, at least...

 

[Front242]

Reading comments on tennis.com people are saying Roger's lower back was heavily taped. Hadn't noticed as I was doing stuff around the house for a bit during the match but that's not good.

 

[Kieran]

Reading comments on tennis.com

Never heard of it, d'ya have a link?

 

[lacatch]

I was also wondering about his back. I read that comment as well, but even though I didn't see the tape, he was differently moving a bit stiffly.

 

[Front242]

I was also wondering about his back. I read that comment as well, but even though I didn't see the tape, he was differently moving a bit stiffly.

It's gonna be amplified playing the top players who'll make him run even more so I hope it's not going to get much worse or he's in trouble.

 

[El Dude]

I don't understand this, trying to draw conclusions from a single tournament. I recall that after Rafa's FIRST tournament back, we had people saying his movement was off, he looks this and that, being generally ridiculous in their efforts to judge how he was doing.

Roger is trying out a new racket. And he lost a match using it. Let's keep it brief. He's not done and you write him off at your peril...

It isn't just a single tournament, Kieran - it is almost all year. I'm not saying he's truly done as a good tennis player, but that it sure looks like here's no longer elite. But can he have a resurgence? I thinks its possible.

Actually, over the last year or so we see a microcosmic incremental decline that is similar to his career as a whole:

Last Year+ : Total career
Paris 2011 through Cincinnati 2012 : 2004-07
2012 after Cincinnati through AO 2013 : 2008-2012
Rotterdam, 2013 to present : 2013

Now we can hope that the above actually isn't right, that is more like this:

Paris 2011 through Cincinnati 2012 : 2004-07 (Career peak)
2012 after Cincinnati through AO 2013 : 2008-09 (Still great, but half a step down)
Rotterdam 2013 to present : 2010-11 (Still very good, but not the best)
North American tour to WTF?: 2012 (career resurgence)

In other words, on the microcosmic level we would hopefully be where Roger was at macrocosmically at the end of 2011, when he seemed to be winding down, and then surged to a level similar to 2008-09.

I hope its the latter!

 

[Didi]

No need to push the panic button. I thought that DelBonis played incredibly well and to me Fed looked a bit off pace but not so much wrong with him as some want you to believe. One could say he should not be losing to the Stakhovskys and DelBonis of this world but then again, they stepped up big time and rose to the occasion. Is that not exactly what the tennis world has been crying for? New faces stepping up? So on one hand we want more upsets, more uncertainty and more players believing they can beat the elite. But on the other hand it seems to me that many are not yet ready to accept it, to concede it once it happens. One cannot have it both ways.

Another point, let me ask you this - why is it that every single time Fed loses, people overreact saying he is done and almost never give his opponents any credit? I do not mean anyone in particular, just in general. I am annoyed by it.
Could it be, just maybe, just once, that it was down to his opponent? I mean everytime Nadal loses, according to the majority it is because he was badly outplayed, he was at his best and there was just nothing he could have done to avoid the defeat and they never accept any excuses. When Fed loses, good lord, he is done, he should retire, he is a grandpa, just a shadow of himself, shankerer, shankosaur, you name it.

Yes, he is having a bad year, even the worst of his career (let us say since 2000) if you want, but he is human afterall and not every single match is on his raquet. It it not that black and white. Even when the greatest ever is off the pace, the Stakhovskys and Delbonis of this world still needed to play near perfection to beat him, which they did. This is a credit to both, to Fed and his oppos, may they be world number 114 or 456, it does not matter to me.

 

[El Dude]

I agree with what you're saying, Didi, but the problem is that you're not taking account something vital: his age. What we need to do is look at the whole picture, and that includes the context of age and relevant historical precedents (you could say something similar about Nadal with regards to his knees). This isn't to put down Delbonis or Stakhovsky, both of whom played excellent matches, but let's be honest - no way they beat Federer in 2012, certainly not in 2004-09, especially on the big stage at Wimbledon.

The simple fact of the matter is that Federer is at an age - almost 32 - when most players have retired. Remember that Andre Agassi (in 2003) is the only player since Arthur Ashe (in 1975) to win a Grand Slam event during or after the year he turned 32. Other than Agassi and Ashe, only Ken Rosewall did it during the Open Era. No one else - not Rod Laver, Jimmy Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Sampras, etc. Sampras, Laver, Connors, and Newcombe were all in their age 31 season during their last Slam wins, Lendl was in his age 30 season, Becker 29, Vilas 27, Edberg 26, Borg and McEnroe 25, and Wilander 24.

I'm not saying that Roger can't do it. Actually, for some reason the number "18" sticks in my head, and has for about a year, with regards to his final Slam count. Whether its the US Open this year or Wimbledon next year, I have a feeling he has one more push in him. I really hope so, at least. But I think its pretty clear that he's having a hard time finding his best game and that he's been, at least since the Australian Open, if not late last year, a greatly diminished player.

 

[Riotbeard]

I think if he doesn't make a gs final or win a masters or two by the end of 2014, we might start talking about retirement, but not this year.

 

[huntingyou]

are we going to keep getting stupid threads like this every time Roger farts? I mean, we already have at least 10 threads that discussed the very same issue this thread address.

 

[El Dude]

are we going to keep getting stupid threads like this every time Roger farts? I mean, we already have at least 10 threads that discussed the very same issue this thread address.

Thanks for posting this, huntingyou. The world is a better place because of your snarkiness.

 

[shawnbm]

Roger Federer is not done. He has more titles in store and some great matches to be a part of. Will he ever return to number one again? Unlikely, but he will hanging around being a danger to win for the next year or so. I like what didi wrote--fed's last two losses, though unexpected, were in large part due to the high level of play throughout by his opponents. We should not take anything away from them, just like we don't darcis with nadal or other losses by fedal.

 

[Front242]

I'd agree in point that a loss in 2 tiebreaks (first one very close) isn't bad on paper. But watching the match when you see Fed hitting a shot well wide to go down 4-5 inexplicably in the 2nd tiebreak and then hit 2 more errors to just lose the match in pretty pathetic style it really is a crying shame for both him and his fans. Errors happen to them all and I wouldn't mind a forced error from a crazy rally against one of the top players, but a netted loose FH to lose the match and 2 loose errors before that is just plain poor to see. Same against Stakhovsky. He made an error to go down a mini break in the 4th set TB and that killed him. Otherwise it would've been 5-5 in the TB and pressure on both of them. Instead he gave the match point away and then played a pusher rally with an eventual BH shank that sailed miles wide. So far away from what he was even a year ago. Cut out that slop and he may have forced a 5th set. Likewise today. 3 crap errors that really were inexplicable and we may have seen a 3rd set. Very disappointing. I'd like to be optimistic about the hardcourt season but it's pretty hard given what we've seen the last year really. Another 1,000 points will likely be lost in Cincy. And he was plain brilliant there last year, bagelling Djokovic in set 1. Fat chance of that this year.

At least Mardy Fish might take some scalps this hardcourt season. Not counting on Fed to do so this year but if he does I'll gladly munch a plate of crow. With mustard. And maybe wedges.

 

[ClayDeath]

roger is going to be a factor in the sport folks.


he is far from done. he is not even close to being done.

---

he took too much time off after indian wells.

it might be time to reconsider such a strategy. maybe he needs to play more events.

what do you think?


I think he will be fine. they all go through various rough patches.

he just needs to step up the training and engage in more match play.

 

[Front242]

He took time off not for strategy to save himself for the majors but because of a lingering back issue. His movement has looked rigid and stiff at times lately and apparently he had his lower back heavily taped today. Not so sure playing more is a good idea. 2 months off obviously didn't help it. I took time off lifting weights to heal some pains here and there but they really don't go away so it's much the same with Fed. Just has to learn to live with them as with Nadal's knee. Neither guy can blame losses on it as almost everyone experiences body pains of some sort in life but playing more definitely isn't a solution imo. He just needs to play better! And hopefully he can.

 

[Moxie]

Another point, let me ask you this - why is it that every single time Fed loses, people overreact saying he is done and almost never give his opponents any credit? I do not mean anyone in particular, just in general. I am annoyed by it.
Could it be, just maybe, just once, that it was down to his opponent? I mean everytime Nadal loses, according to the majority it is because he was badly outplayed, he was at his best and there was just nothing he could have done to avoid the defeat and they never accept any excuses. When Fed loses, good lord, he is done, he should retire, he is a grandpa, just a shadow of himself, shankerer, shankosaur, you name it.

Fair point that things don't always get argued from the same perspective. The young Delbonis has played with some confidence and assuredness in the last couple of rounds, and well may be someone to keep an eye on.

Some have mentioned Roger's back. Maybe it is bothering him. I'm sure people would call that potentially a "factor," not an "excuse." Just to remind that there is a distinction.

 

[ClayDeath]

it can be any number of things but one thing is certain.


he has a brand new racquet and he has not played that much after indian wells.


that has to have some effect.

 

[the AntiPusher]

He took time off not for strategy to save himself for the majors but because of a lingering back issue. His movement has looked rigid and stiff at times lately and apparently he had his lower back heavily taped today. Not so sure playing more is a good idea. 2 months off obviously didn't help it. I took time off lifting weights to heal some pains here and there but they really don't go away so it's much the same with Fed. Just has to learn to live with them as with Nadal's knee. Neither guy can blame losses on it as almost everyone experiences body pains of some sort in life but playing more definitely isn't a solution imo. He just needs to play better! And hopefully he can.

the back issues is not an excuse but its paramount to his game.. if Fed doesn't have his flexibility. he can do the majestic things with the racket that we are accustomed to seeing.. Tennis is the one sport that requires you to use all your muscles.. I would rather have a ankle injury instead of back, shoulder or neck injury trying to play this game.. its very physical for those who play at a high level