Saint Roger: What is Missing...?

[Kirijax]

I remember the 1979 US Open women's final between Chris Evert and Tracy Austin. Chris Evert had won the last four USOs and was going for her fifth. But this 16-year old was making the "Ice Princess" look nervous with the way she was jumping all over the court. Austin took the title and I remember the announcers saying she doesn't doesn't realize enough what she's doing to feel nervous. I was about the same age as Austin then so that comment stuck with me. As you get older, everything has more meaning and weight and maybe that creeps into how you approach things. Federer knows that every big match he plays adds to his legacy and records and that has to play a part in the way he plays the game now. It's just natural and you would have to be a robot not to feel that in some way.

 

[Front242]

Speaking of robots, 1 is enough on tour right now.

 

[lob]

^ Excellent point. J-Mac said pretty much the same thing. I dismissed it the first time he said it because, well, it's J-Mac and he often says things for shock value. However, what he said about older players feeling the pressure more in the big moments is definitely playing out with Roger and it seems Rafa as well.

Note: Sorry guys old thread and my posts tend to be long but I hope someone reads them...

Sampras too said something on the lines of nervousness in big matches... never goes away and he always felt it in his later years on the tour. Another case in the point: Did Roger comprehensively outplay Pete in 2001 W (4th rnd?)? I have never been sure of that and honestly I don't recollect much about that match. Irrespective of his year until then, Pete in Wmbdn was, well Pete in Wmbdn....and Pete was about as much a choker as Rafa.... .. when the opponent starts swinging freely, the top guys feel it at least as much...they simply aren't used to it in big matches...

Recent 'big match experience' against the same player overrides career long experience...any day...the one exception I can think of, over a career, is Nadal...he has been quite unique in repeatedly turning around [even outside his best surface] recent tough losses, against a top 10 player who is still playing well.....he did it with Berdych, Tsonga, TMF, Ferrer, Soderling, Murray, Novak (FO - 12, 13, 14, USO 13...wow..i.e. after 2011 and AO12)....

What leaves me confused is how Roger can sustain his level of play to make it to latter stages of a GS for so long and still blow it in the final...one would imagine that it takes a lot of motivation to make a GS SF or F...if he is that motivated, one would think that the the sheer desire will get him through to to a GS win once or twice....

 

[Luxilon Borg]

It's kinda normal, that as players get older, they become more nervous, and shanks creep in to their game. Navratilova said that back in the day. It didn't make sense to me then, because I thought their experience would make them calmer - then I started to get older myself! :snicker

Tell me about it!!!!

 

[Luxilon Borg]

^ Excellent point. J-Mac said pretty much the same thing. I dismissed it the first time he said it because, well, it's J-Mac and he often says things for shock value. However, what he said about older players feeling the pressure more in the big moments is definitely playing out with Roger and it seems Rafa as well.

Note: Sorry guys old thread and my posts tend to be long but I hope someone reads them...

Sampras too said something on the lines of nervousness in big matches... never goes away and he always felt it in his later years on the tour. Another case in the point: Did Roger comprehensively outplay Pete in 2001 W (4th rnd?)? I have never been sure of that and honestly I don't recollect much about that match. Irrespective of his year until then, Pete in Wmbdn was, well Pete in Wmbdn....and Pete was about as much a choker as Rafa.... .. when the opponent starts swinging freely, the top guys feel it at least as much...they simply aren't used to it in big matches...

Recent 'big match experience' against the same player overrides career long experience...any day...the one exception I can think of, over a career, is Nadal...he has been quite unique in repeatedly turning around [even outside his best surface] recent tough losses, against a top 10 player who is still playing well.....he did it with Berdych, Tsonga, TMF, Ferrer, Soderling, Murray, Novak (FO - 12, 13, 14, USO 13...wow..i.e. after 2011 and AO12)....

What leaves me confused is how Roger can sustain his level of play to make it to latter stages of a GS for so long and still blow it in the final...one would imagine that it takes a lot of motivation to make a GS SF or F...if he is that motivated, one would think that the the sheer desire will get him through to to a GS win once or twice....

There is no doubt that Roger's drop in level of play from semis to final, which we have seen already multiple times this year is due to nerves, and one more thing The Wall Of the Joker.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

I remember the 1979 US Open women's final between Chris Evert and Tracy Austin. Chris Evert had won the last four USOs and was going for her fifth. But this 16-year old was making the "Ice Princess" look nervous with the way she was jumping all over the court. Austin took the title and I remember the announcers saying she doesn't doesn't realize enough what she's doing to feel nervous. I was about the same age as Austin then so that comment stuck with me. As you get older, everything has more meaning and weight and maybe that creeps into how you approach things. Federer knows that every big match he plays adds to his legacy and records and that has to play a part in the way he plays the game now. It's just natural and you would have to be a robot not to feel that in some way.

The fact that an older player KNOWS time is running out absolutely adds an enormous amount of pressure.

When they are 22, 24, what ever, they feel they have an eternity to make up for lost opportunities and shore up weaknesses.

 

[Carol]

During the final in London on the German TV Florian Meyer was saying when Roger is not playing tournaments he is hardness training every single day for 4 hours in Dubai or whatever combining with the gym to the exhaustion and that's one of the reason why he is so well fitted at his age.

 

[Haelfix]

I still don't agree that it is mental so much of a game level issue. Federer has to redline his game against certain opponents otherwise he knows he can't win. He has to serve perfectly, hit forehands perfectly, stay consistent from the backhand and he has to pick his spots to come in. That's a lot of 'thinking' that is going on, and as we know when hes against people at the top of the rankings that tends to cause a problem in tight moments.

There is nothing new here. Its been obvious since at least 2011 and probably before that his B 'comfort' game can't quite stretch a great defender like Novak on slower surfaces and that it wouldnt be enough to legitimately win. That's going to cause all sorts of issues for an attacking player who now knows that he has to be better than a B in order to win. Redlining a game does on occassion output a perfect match, but more often than not it gives you a C or a D game, which is what has happened in a number of their latter engagements.

Contrast that with his prime, where his B game was better than everyone else's. He could afford to be comfortable during tight parts of the match, and indeed his 'clutchness' scores were off the charts when he was younger. Agassi used to say that he was the best player he's ever seen in the waning moments of a match, and i'd argue that there again its more of a level thing than anything else (at least statistically).

As for what is missing from his game.. The 2005 forehand. Get that shot back and a lot of the problems he's had against the top 3 or 4 go away and he can break through at majors. But lets be realistic, the shot is gone for a reason.

 

[Haelfix]

Who here actually plays tennis at a pretty good level and is an attacking player? I can tell you there is nothing more frustrating as an attacking player than going up against a good defender who is younger, stronger and faster than you are. The amount of mental anguish and calculating that goes on when you are up against a foe like that is in large part the problem in the first place.

You see, you know the serve isn't opening as much as you normally would like. You know that you can't approach off just anything. You know that you won't win a long grind, and you know that you can't finesse things b/c the other guy is pretty good too. At that point you rush things, start to give up errors and worse the opposing player starts anticipating the redline and is on top of things regardless. It's just a bad way to play, and you see the small advantage the other guy might have originally had is now magnified several times b/c of the overthinking that is going on. But that's the point, its not so much a breakdown in nerves as it is a thought process based on the level of the other player.

Then there is the tendency to do the opposite. Namely to be a little too passive and try to let the game 'come to you'. Of course then you find yourself behind 6-4 and down a break, and panic starts to creep in. Again, the right balance is really hard to find when you are outleveled by a 'consistent' opponent and know the match isnt on your racquet.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

During the final in London on the German TV Florian Meyer was saying when Roger is not playing tournaments he is hardness training every single day for 4 hours in Dubai or whatever combining with the gym to the exhaustion and that's one of the reason why he is so well fitted at his age.

Yes, it is no secret that Roger puts in the hard yards off court. He makes it looks relatively easy but there is a lot of blood, sweat, and tears behind it.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

I still don't agree that it is mental so much of a game level issue. Federer has to redline his game against certain opponents otherwise he knows he can't win. He has to serve perfectly, hit forehands perfectly, stay consistent from the backhand and he has to pick his spots to come in. That's a lot of 'thinking' that is going on, and as we know when hes against people at the top of the rankings that tends to cause a problem in tight moments.

There is nothing new here. Its been obvious since at least 2011 and probably before that his B 'comfort' game can't quite stretch a great defender like Novak on slower surfaces and that it wouldnt be enough to legitimately win. That's going to cause all sorts of issues for an attacking player who now knows that he has to be better than a B in order to win. Redlining a game does on occassion output a perfect match, but more often than not it gives you a C or a D game, which is what has happened in a number of their latter engagements.

Contrast that with his prime, where his B game was better than everyone else's. He could afford to be comfortable during tight parts of the match, and indeed his 'clutchness' scores were off the charts when he was younger. Agassi used to say that he was the best player he's ever seen in the waning moments of a match, and i'd argue that there again its more of a level thing than anything else (at least statistically).

As for what is missing from his game.. The 2005 forehand. Get that shot back and a lot of the problems he's had against the top 3 or 4 go away and he can break through at majors. But lets be realistic, the shot is gone for a reason.

I hear what you are saying. But let us also put into perspective that that are but a handful of players, if that, that expose any of the issues you note above. I would take that after 17 years on tour.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Who here actually plays tennis at a pretty good level and is an attacking player? I can tell you there is nothing more frustrating as an attacking player than going up against a good defender who is younger, stronger and faster than you are. The amount of mental anguish and calculating that goes on when you are up against a foe like that is in large part the problem in the first place.

You see, you know the serve isn't opening as much as you normally would like. You know that you can't approach off just anything. You know that you won't win a long grind, and you know that you can't finesse things b/c the other guy is pretty good too. At that point you rush things, start to give up errors and worse the opposing player starts anticipating the redline and is on top of things regardless. It's just a bad way to play, and you see the small advantage the other guy might have originally had is now magnified several times b/c of the overthinking that is going on. But that's the point, its not so much a breakdown in nerves as it is a thought process based on the level of the other player.

Then there is the tendency to do the opposite. Namely to be a little too passive and try to let the game 'come to you'. Of course then you find yourself behind 6-4 and down a break, and panic starts to creep in. Again, the right balance is really hard to find when you are outleveled by a 'consistent' opponent and know the match isnt on your racquet.

That is an age old paradigm. Just about every attacking player ran into this issue. Navratilova, McEnroe, Laver, Edberg, Becker etc all had their games rendered far less effective by younger legs and lungs.

There is no doubt that these players had to be more cautious and add variety to their plan.

But Federer is really not part of that group in that he was never a pure attacker. He could attack, he could defend, he could scramble, he could even grind when called for.

It is just not that easy when you are facing hungry players with voracious appetites for climbing up the ladder. And Federer knows that a win over him is a reputation maker.

Connors revealed in his book that what kept him motivated not to lose until almost age 40 was the fact he refused to be a famous scalp for some up and comer.

 

[amicitia81]

Career match record of Roger Federer, best in history? Discover it in thetennisbase.com
www.thetennisbase.com/?enlace=playern&player_input_enc=FEDERER%2C+ROGER&player_input=&sub=2#aSubmenu

 

[Front242]

What is missing from Roger? The speed, the focus, the forehand and the consistency against the best. For those who say he's as good as ever, watch this clip. Equally so for those slagging Roddick the past few days, watch this. He was a very good player. Fantastic match this and it shows how horribly slow Shanghai is these days. Almost 10 years ago it was much, much faster as can be seen below.

[video=youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGK3L5dDsq8[/video]

 

[Riotbeard]

What is missing from Roger? The speed, the focus, the forehand and the consistency against the best. For those who say he's as good as ever, watch this clip. Equally so for those slagging Roddick the past few days, watch this. He was a very good player. Fantastic match this and it shows how horribly slow Shanghai is these days. Almost 10 years ago it was much, much faster as can be seen below.

[video=youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGK3L5dDsq8[/video]

Great clip front! It really does remind just how good Andy was (and underappreciated).