Roger's Five Set Matches

[Kieran]

Roger is collectively 2-7 (22.22 %) against other members of big four, with
all his wins coming against Nadal.

He is 2-3 against Nadal, 0-3 against Novak and 0-1 against Murray.

This is the main thing, against the great players he simply loses the 5th set no questions asked and in some of those matches he had a mountain of momentum going into the 5th.

In fairness, it's hardly "no questions asked." Of the 7 defeats, he held match point in 3 of them. He went to 7-9 in the fifth against Rafa in another of them.

His defeat against Murray came in Oz, when he was justifiably gassed after playing a long 5 setter against Tsonga two days before. He was 31 years old at the time.

His other defeat to Novak was this year at Wimbledon, 6-4 in the fifth. He is 32, and it went down to a single break at the end.

Seriously, brother, you need to watch the negative hyperbole. I don't know whether you actually believe it, or if you're just loose with words...

 

[Federberg]

Interesting stuff. How do we square Federer's success in tie breaks with his 5th set record. The tie break stats surely contradict his lack of nerve (or heart... or however we want to label it). Could it be down to fitness? I know he's often been accused, by tennis insiders, of arrogance and laziness. Is he getting punished because he's skating by on pure talent alone? Just asking...

 

[DarthFed]

Roger is collectively 2-7 (22.22 %) against other members of big four, with
all his wins coming against Nadal.

He is 2-3 against Nadal, 0-3 against Novak and 0-1 against Murray.

This is the main thing, against the great players he simply loses the 5th set no questions asked and in some of those matches he had a mountain of momentum going into the 5th.

In fairness, it's hardly "no questions asked." Of the 7 defeats, he held match point in 3 of them. He went to 7-9 in the fifth against Rafa in another of them.

His defeat against Murray came in Oz, when he was justifiably gassed after playing a long 5 setter against Tsonga two days before. He was 31 years old at the time.

His other defeat to Novak was this year at Wimbledon, 6-4 in the fifth. He is 32, and it went down to a single break at the end.

Seriously, brother, you need to watch the negative hyperbole. I don't know whether you actually believe it, or if you're just loose with words...

So close counts in tennis now? Good to know. The bottom line is when it gets to 5 the other players have to be feeling incredibly good about their chances against Roger regardless of what had happened up to that point.

 

[Kieran]

You're moving the goalposts: losing a match 9-7 in the fifth, or after having match points, or 6-4 in the fifth when you're 32 and playing a 27 year old, is hardly "no questions asked."

You make it sound like the guy rolls over and hands it to them... :nono

 

[DarthFed]

6-4 is hardly some long and competitive set especially on grass. As soon as Roger had to serve to stay in the match he committed 4 unforced errors to lose it.

Whether it's blowout 5ths like AO 09, 13 and USO 09 or blown match points where he then folded immediately (both Nole matches) or matches where he just blinks at the end (Wimby 08) the narrative is the same. In 5th sets he has lost a disgusting amount of times in the big matches. It is no coincidence.

 

[Kieran]

6-4 is hardly some long and competitive set especially on grass. As soon as Roger had to serve to stay in the match he committed 4 unforced errors to lose it.

He served to stay in it twice in the fourth set...

 

[Front242]

6-4 is hardly some long and competitive set especially on grass. As soon as Roger had to serve to stay in the match he committed 4 unforced errors to lose it.

He served to stay in it twice in the fourth set...

He did and I admired the hell out the heart he showed in set 4 but that last game ruined it all. I saw him dumping the last game a mile off. That Novak didn't need to win a single point in the last game to win the match nullified all the good before it. 4 straight lame errors to lose the match. That's why the article and people claiming it as "the greatest match Federer played at Wimbledon" are on cloud cuckoo land. It's insulting to Roger to even consider it his greatest given the lame way it ended and because he lost.

 

[DarthFed]

6-4 is hardly some long and competitive set especially on grass. As soon as Roger had to serve to stay in the match he committed 4 unforced errors to lose it.

He served to stay in it twice in the fourth set...

When the possibility of winning wasn't present... This thread isn't about why Roger sucks in 4th sets (he doesn't).

 

[GameSetAndMath]

6-4 is hardly some long and competitive set especially on grass. As soon as Roger had to serve to stay in the match he committed 4 unforced errors to lose it.

He served to stay in it twice in the fourth set...

He did and I admired the hell out the heart he showed in set 4 but that last game ruined it all. I saw him dumping the last game a mile off. That Novak didn't need to win a single point in the last game to win the match nullified all the good before it. 4 straight lame errors to lose the match. That's why the article and people claiming it as "the greatest match Federer played at Wimbledon" are on cloud cuckoo land. It's insulting to Roger to even consider it his greatest given the lame way it ended and because he lost.

Agree with it 100%. I don't even mind Roger losing the wimby final. But, he did not
make Novak earn it in the fifth set. ALL FOUR POINTS that were won by Novak were
due to UFE by Roger. Although the total UFE for Roger in the match is quite acceptable,
it is very difficult to accept the way he lost the match.

 

[Kieran]

Well, leaving aside Novak's aggression in the final game, and his incredible return on the first point, plus Roger may have shanked at least one backhand with the sun in his eyes - and our usual difficulty in telling why shots are missed - was it pressure, fatigue, laziness, loss of concentration, wimpiness - what's your opinion, GSM, on Federer's fifth set record?

Do you have any particular reason you see, that causes him to lose more than he should?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Do you have any particular reason you see, that causes him to lose more than he should?

No, just trying to figure out.

 

[shawnbm]

Some folks forget Fed had a break point at 3-3 against Nole, who served and played great to get out of it. They played each other tough all the way through that fifth set. In the end one was going to lose and it was Roger--he played a loose game when he could not afford to do so. It happens and it happens to him more so than Nadal or Djokovic in those tight moments. Why? I don't know, but imagine he does not handle that pressure against those two as well as he does some others.

 

[DarthFed]

Some folks forget Fed had a break point at 3-3 against Nole, who served and played great to get out of it. They played each other tough all the way through that fifth set. In the end one was going to lose and it was Roger--he played a loose game when he could not afford to do so. It happens and it happens to him more so than Nadal or Djokovic in those tight moments. Why? I don't know, but imagine he does not handle that pressure against those two as well as he does some others.

Fair post. The problem I have with it is people seem to think it is OK to just play close in the 5th, like it's a respectable result for him to lose a set 9-7 on grass, or to the likes of mental midget Safin (think it was 7-5) or to Djokovic on grass 6-4. This is Federer and he just won 5 straight games to steal the 4th set. Roger then did next to nothing in the 5th to make Djokovic feel the pressure, just weak returning and passive play. It made life easy for Djokovic even before Roger donated the final game. Roger played a better 5th overall in 2008 but again, awful returning and did next to nothing to make Rafa remember that he had almost won the match an hour ago. And it's a consistent problem with Roger in the 5th. If he isn't going down easy then he will eventually choke or blink first in the end.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

For those of you who are unaware, by winning the match against Cilic, Fed has now come back from a 2 set deficit and won a match ten different times. This actually ties the record for the maximum number with Boris Becker and Aaron Kirkstein.

I thought this would be a good time to bump this thread.

p.s. The OP was made in July 2014 after Fed's five set loss to Novak at Wimby. Since then Fed was won two five set matches, one against Monfils and one against Cilic (in both coming back from 0-2 deficit). Further, he has not lost any match that went to five sets since July 2014. So, Roger's five set record now is 24-19 and is almost 56%. That puts him at rank 121 in this category (an improvement from rank 155 at the time of OP)sitting between Jim Courier and Ramanathan Krishnan.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Roger loses one more 5 set match. It is 24 - 20 now for a pathetic 54.55%

The 5 set matches following the OP are

42. Fed defeats Monfils 4-6, 3-6, 6-4, 7-5, 6-2.
43. Fed defeats Cilic 6-7(4), 4-6, 6-3, 7-6(9), 6-3
44. Milos defeats Fed 6-3, 6-7(3), 4-6, 7-5, 6-3.

 

[Kieran]

If they stick it up to him, he doesn't like it. Fortunately he was able to gather 90% of his big wins against small fry who lacked big trousers...

 

[DarthFed]

Milos is a small fry too. Roger has lost a lot of 5 sets to similar weaklings. Now 3-9 in 5 set matches in GS semis and finals. It's that horrifying stat that he will regret if Nole or Wafa pass him in slams. If anything 17 is an underachievement for him and yes I know how ridiculous that statement sounds. But it points to this, when he wins he wins fairly easily and when he loses its usually a war and if it becomes a war he goes down no questions asked. It's bizarre but there it is.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Roger loses one more 5 set match. It is 24 - 20 now for a pathetic 54.55%

The 5 set matches following the OP are

42. Fed defeats Monfils 4-6, 3-6, 6-4, 7-5, 6-2.
43. Fed defeats Cilic 6-7(4), 4-6, 6-3, 7-6(9), 6-3
44. Milos defeats Fed 6-3, 6-7(3), 4-6, 7-5, 6-3.

Continuing the update, Roger's 5 set record now stands at 27-20, leading to 57.45%.

45. Fed defeats Kei 6-7(4), 6-4, 6-1, 4-6, 6-3
46. Fed defeats Stan 7-5, 6-3, 1-6, 4-6, 6-3.
47. Fed defats Rafa 6-4, 3-6, 6-1, 3-6, 6-3

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Continuing the update, Roger's 5 set record now stands at 27-20, leading to 57.45%.

45. Fed defeats Kei 6-7(4), 6-4, 6-1, 4-6, 6-3
46. Fed defeats Stan 7-5, 6-3, 1-6, 4-6, 6-3.
47. Fed defats Rafa 6-4, 3-6, 6-1, 3-6, 6-3

Continuing the update, Roger's 5 set record now stands at 30-20, leading to 60%, a very respectable figure now.

48. Fed defeats Tiafoe 4-6,6-2,6-1,1-6,6-4
49. Fed defeats Youzhny 6-1, 6-7(3), 4-6, 6-4, 6-2
50. Fed defeats Cilic 6-2, 6-7(5), 6-3, 3-6, 6-1

p.s. I am updating in new posts as OP is uneditable.

 

[britbox]

When was the last time Roger lost a 5 set match?