Roger Done?

[Didi]

EL Dude, I think you got me wrong a bit. I am fully aware of Roger's age and mileage and I certainly won't argue against your points since you back them up very well and you have the entire statistical history of the Open Era behind you. Fair enough. But keep in mind that we are talking about Federer here who time and time again proved every statistical trend of the Open Era and many people wrong. If there is ever going to be another anomaly, surely it must be him?

My opinion is that Fed was bound to have a year like this, all the greats are. He has 1100+ matches under his belt as an all-court player who stretched his body to the limits and was competitive from clay to indoors all year, every single year, playing against 4-5 different generations of players since about 2000. This is ridiculous (on a positive note) when you think about it.

I think it would be just fair to let him have this season as a total write-off and start judging him in 2014 when his raquet change and other factors (his back) may very well start to fit and click well together. If he does not improve over the course of 2014-2015, then let's start to seriously think about retirement, but certainly not now.

 

[Srini]

He can still play good tennis, if he is inspired to do so. After Wimbledon last year, he lost some drive definitely. He is clearly not as quick and sharp these days but this prolonged drought has more to do with his drive,,,or his back,,but not so much to do with his game as such.

Also somehow I feel Rafa playing well inspires Fed to carry on, to protect his grand slam count. These days when Rafa is out with injuries or loses early, Fed doesnt seem to have any incentive to play his best. He says he loves tennis but like everyone I guess just love is not enough - a little bit of pressure with some incentive will get the best out of him. That said, I think he is not hanging up his racquet this year. If 2014 is similar to this year - the R should be come out soon after that.

 

[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.

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

For sure I agree a back issue is one that affects a lot of things in your game. Arching your back when serving, bending for low balls anywhere on the court and at the net obviously, stretching out wide for running down FHs and BHs. Likewise with Nadal the sore knee makes it difficult to plant the knee when hitting his 2 handed backhand and I made it clear I don't label them an excuse for either guy as almost everyone experiences some body pains in life and professional sports players and athletes just have to learn to live with them and work around them as they usually don't completely go away for any long period of time.

 

[El Dude]

I agree with the idea that Roger probably won't think seriously about retiring until (and if) 2014 is similar or worse. I really hope that his relatively poor performance this year is due to factors that can be solved, but I wonder - especially given his age. I certainly think he has the capacity to remain a factor for at least another year or two - at the very least be a lower end top ten player. But top four again? I don't know. I do think that A) there are legitimate reasons to be concerned, and B) As Didi said, if someone is going to buck the trend of Open Era history, why not Roger?

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

honestly, i'm surpsied this has gone to three pages. with all due respect, i don't see Any respect to expect this Now, of all times. for me, the racquet change was a pretty clear indication that he'll hang around a bit more. i mean, he can't be so silly as to expect that it magically fixes everything And he knows that he'll need time to adjust to it. there's No reason to take that risk and take that time if he's going to retire anytime soon.

as to what he'll be able to do in the remaining time? no clue. a slam, no slam, a couple of 250s, i honestly have no idea. of course, it'll always be interesting how he copes with it. but given that he came straight back instead of stay home sulking after Wimby says something, imo.

also telling, one quote i always wanted to point out in regards to Hamburg and the new racquet: after the win over Brands, explaining the racquet change and coming to Hamburg, he explained how quickly they decided to go to Hamburg and Gstaad, how he'd been trying around a couple of racquets after Wimbledon, and then added "so it was even better (/even nicer) that it worked out with the first* round" (his first round, of course it was the 2nd). while a bit of hyperbole surely, i think this is really more than the usual courtesy - i think it's the realistic approach that in his situation, he can't come to Hamburg and expect to win the thing.

 

[Haelfix]

To be honest: I didnt think roger played that poorly either. His opponent was really solid, he was playing on his worst surface with a new racquet and nursing a bad back and I don't really think winning was the point here.

I actually saw a lot of good things in his baseline game, which is important bc that's the place where he's lost the most relative to his peak years.

His bh has looked better than anything that he's shown since Wimbledon 2012 and maybe as far back as the AO2010

 

[ClayDeath]

lets see what happens in gstaad. and then also in montreal and cincy.


gstaad title will do his confidence some good.

 

[BalaryKar]

Returning after long time to the forum, and hence don't know it its been posted earlier. Guyz, guess what, it is the curse of 13, 2013

I don't think that to end his career either this year or even the next year he would have taken the trouble of a new racket. I believe that he is really looking up to 2016 olympics. And yes, Johnsteinbeck is right. This thread should have gone to three pages in event of a breadstick or bagel.

 

[Front242]

Returning after long time to the forum, and hence don't know it its been posted earlier. Guyz, guess what, it is the curse of 13, 2013

I don't think that to end his career either this year or even the next year he would have taken the trouble of a new racket. I believe that he is really looking up to 2016 olympics. And yes, Johnsteinbeck is right. This thread should have gone to three pages in event of a breadstick or bagel.

Welcome back, BalaryKar. Hope you're right and the curse is gone next year
His last losses have had many tiebreaks, against Stakhovsky and Delbonis also yesterday, so at least, as you say, he's not losing dismally and is barely losing extremely close matches to guys playing fantastic tennis. Still sucks but I guess it sucks a little bit less

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Here is the way I see it. When Roger was in his prime, he lost to three types of player: First category, a guy who has game and is just extremely hot on the day where Roger was kinda off. It did not happen a lot because Roger usually found a way to deal with it. Second, guys like Murray and Nole, who have great game, but also they defended so well that they always gave you one more shot and some days, you just could not keep on hitting winners and made the error. Third, Rafa, for many reasons that has been discussed here many times. He did not have problems with anyone else, like big servers, heavy hitters, serve and volleyers.
But a new category emerged after 2009 ish, and that is the heavy hitters that can manage to take time away from Roger. That's the direct result of Roger slowing down a tiny bit and not being able to turn defense into offense like he used to without breaking a sweat. If you are not there to hit a shot right on time, you don't have your body behind it and you are just arming it. It ends up being a weak shot and even if you make it, you are still on the defensive. That has been happening more and more these days...In Wimby, Stak just took Roger's time away from him for 4 hours, never gave him any rhythm. He won. Delponis kept hitting big, going for it the whole match. He had a great day too, which helped. He won. Berdych has been doing it now for 3-4 years, just going for it, keep Roger on his heels.
You could not do that to Roger in his prime. He found a way somewhere in the rally to turn it around and get on the offensive.
The issue for him now is , what can he do to make up for the lost tiny bit of a step? Play even more offensive? Can someone just attack everything? I don't know.
That's what I see from Roger these days.

 

[Mastoor]

Even though vampires have only that many lives, I am sure Fed is not done.

As soon as he manages to get to No1e he will find his inspiration of the years past, he will get his youth back. Mc Fang may do too, he is another one who makes Fed inspired.

 

[El Dude]

Excellent analysis Murat.

 

[ClayDeath]

lets wait until next Wimbledon. it will give us the information we seek.

that remains his best surface and his best chance for one more slam.

I cant see him leaving the sport anytime soon.

 

[herios]

Roger doesn't hang up his racquet and he'll be still a contender here there.
Slams? Slim chances. Less than 10% at this point. He won one of the last 12, that would be about 8%.

What has been finished is the BIG 4
. Finito, It's run it's course.
( I know some will argue with me, but facts are, Roger fell out of it and not just for a month or so, but rather 6 and that is a long time).

 

[isabelle]

OK, I'm writing this right after he lost to Delbonis in the SF at Hamburg. But let's be honest here - this isn't even the diminished Roger of 2010-11, certainly not the resurgent Roger of 2012. His last two losses have been to players outside of the top 50 - actually, both were ranked outside of the top 100 before the tournament began.

Things aren't looking good. He can't return even a halfway decent serve. His overall arsenal seems there at times but he's just too inconsistent.

If this continues through the North American tour I wouldn't be surprised to see him hang up the racquet.

What do you think?

He has been done for a while but his fans refused to see it
When I talked about it everybody said "Oh you know how Isabelle is when it comes to Federer just ignore her" as if it was as simple as that
I don't like Federer but he gave too many signs of declin himself to say I'm only a biaised non fan
Maybe I saw the truth before because I'm not a fan, it's always easier to be blind when you like someone

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

^ you saw the truth before because you'd been seeing something for years, way before it actually happened - simple as that. finally, reality and time are catching up with your bias.

 

[isabelle]

^ you saw the truth before because you'd been seeing something for years, way before it actually happened - simple as that. finally, reality and time are catching up with your bias.

I'm a kind of visionnaire...

 

[El Dude]

To put a bit more clarity and nuance into this discussion, by "done" I think we can mean a few different things:

1) Done as a 1st tier, elite player ("no more Big Four")
2) Done as a 2nd tier, serious contender for serious titles - Slams/ATP 1000s/WTF
3) Done as a 3rd tier, very good player - top 20, contender for ATP 500/250
4) Retirement

As for the last we just don't know. At this point I wouldn't be surprised with anything, except retirement before the WTF this year. I also agree that he'll give 2014 a shot, but I could also see him getting frustrated if he goes out early in another Slam and continues to struggle. On the other hand, I could also see him stabilizing as a second tier player for a few more years and then retiring after the 2016 Olympics. I hope the latter, and I think he'll at least see how things go in 2014 before hanging up his (larger) racquet.

As for 1-3, obviously #3 is not true - a the very, very least Roger is--and will remain for some time--a very good player, in the top 20. On the other hand, I think its become clear that he's no longer in the elite, or at least he's the "1" in "3+1" - and even then I don't see him as being a better player than Ferrer, Del Potro, Tsonga, and Berdych. Of those players, he's only defeated Ferrer in their last matchup - the other three have all beaten Federer in their last match or two.

So I wonder if and when his slipping out of the elite will effect his retirement ETA. I mean I think he's got a shot at another run to at least a Slam final or two, but if he goes out early in another Slam or two I could see him getting frustrated enough to quit. Let's hope for a strong US Open!

 

[britbox]

^ you saw the truth before because you'd been seeing something for years, way before it actually happened - simple as that. finally, reality and time are catching up with your bias.

I'm a kind of visionnaire...

Feds won about 5 majors since you started citing Nostradamus.

 

[ClayDeath]

most excellent thread folks. keep them coming.