SHANGHAI ROLEX MASTERS - ATP-1000 - OCT. 6 to 13, 2013.

[DarthFed]

But its refreshing to see Federer fight for sets (not just matches....sets) on such a regular basis. I prefer this type of Federer over all other versions of him. Hopefully we get to see a few more years of it.

Yes, it is refreshing for you to see Roger become a scrub. I will enjoy it when it happens to your beloved Whafa too, and it will happen. No one beats Father Time.

 

[Kieran]

Yes, it is refreshing for you to see Roger become a scrub. I will enjoy it when it happens to your beloved Whafa too, and it will happen. No one beats Father Time.

Exactly. Comes to them all eventually. One of the reasons I was glad Pete was able to go out on a high, after so many disappointments. I wouldn't bet against Roger doing the same...

 

[DarthFed]

Yes, it is refreshing for you to see Roger become a scrub. I will enjoy it when it happens to your beloved Whafa too, and it will happen. No one beats Father Time.

Exactly. Comes to them all eventually. One of the reasons I was glad Pete was able to go out on a high, after so many disappointments. I wouldn't bet against Roger doing the same...

I would bet against it if we are talking about going out on a similar high (the only real high someone like Roger could go out on), but he has proven me wrong before. Roger won't be this bad in 2014 I am sure of that, but will he be relevant? That is the question.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

Nobody beats Father Time. But some have the presence of mind to retire with a huge win, Sampras-style. I called Federer's retirement to be Wimbledon 2012 with the trophy. He missed his opportunity (his ego took it), but hopefully he'll keep searching for another slam title and give us a few years of strugglerer.....because now I see how fun it is to watch Federer fight for every set. I never understand people who like seeing lopsided uneventful matches. Now almost every match Federer plays is an epic battle. That's what sport is all about. I will enjoy it when Nadal has regular 5-setters at Roland Garros. The 5-setter he played at this year's Roland Garros and the 5-setter he played at 2011 Roland Garros (vs Isner) were extremely fun battles. Bring it on!

 

[kskate2]

But its refreshing to see Federer fight for sets (not just matches....sets) on such a regular basis. I prefer this type of Federer over all other versions of him. Hopefully we get to see a few more years of it.

Refreshing! You are a poor representative for Nadal's fans showing such disregard for one of his main rivals. :nono Next time Nadal suffers a loss, I don't want to hear any crap about he didn't give much effort or he was tired and blah, blah, blah. Save your whining.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

But its refreshing to see Federer fight for sets (not just matches....sets) on such a regular basis. I prefer this type of Federer over all other versions of him. Hopefully we get to see a few more years of it.

Refreshing! You are a poor representative for Nadal's fans showing such disregard for one of his main rivals. :nono Next time Nadal suffers a loss, I don't want to hear any crap about he didn't give much effort or he was tired and blah, blah, blah. Save your whining.

Ah....you are whining, not me.....

And I'm pretty sure most Nadal fans prefer tight battles over cruises. I've always enjoyed Nadal's 5-setters about a hundred times more than most of his other matches. If I listed my 10 favorite Nadal matches I think most of them would be 5-setters (the only non-5-setter in my top 10 would be the 2013 US Open final probably). So it should be no surprise to you that my favorite Federer matches are those where he's stretched to the limit too. Now we are lucky enough to get regular tight Federer matches, even vs Monfils. Its ideal, so I hope Federer hangs in and keeps it coming.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

Federer is a t1t who is too thick or stubborn or both to change his wand..

He won a major and got back to #1 with that wand last year. I don't think that's the root of his problems for a minute.

his wand is only part of the problem but its something he can control/alter, its not the only reason obviously, I didn't think I had to give a blow by blow account about federers decline..obviously he is low on confidence, age 32+ bit slower, not as crisp in shotmaking etc,,blahblahblah

and all that "he won a major and got to no 1" routine won't wash because that was a long time ago now..things change quickly in top level sport esp at his age in tennis.

Agree things change quickly, but the point was I don't think changing the racquet is going to be a magic fix. I think you nailed it with the point on confidence.

As Viper said to Maverick in Top Gun: "Right now, you have a confidence problem".

lolz :snigger right now Federer really does have a confidence problem..i bet he will not play shanghai again..see his big wave to the fanz..its v humid and I suppose still hot out there, not ideal weather late in the season if you are a 32yr old tennis pro..

still, semi'fast indoor hc in comfy Europe..better days ahead hopefully.

and Federer has taken a WC for an atp250 tourney in Moscow..according to the fan chatter under fedmonfeils match review on tennis.com,

is that a potential 4 weeks in a row of tennis if he make wtf ??? (Moscow-basel-paris-london)

 

[El Dude]

Exactly. Comes to them all eventually. One of the reasons I was glad Pete was able to go out on a high, after so many disappointments. I wouldn't bet against Roger doing the same...

Except Pete didn't have Novak, Rafa, and Andy to get past to win that US Open. He did beat Andre Agassi in the Final, and a young Tommy Haas and Andy Roddick, and a declined Greg Rusedski, but the point is that he won a Slam at a time when there wasn't the same elite talent as there is now.

I would bet against it if we are talking about going out on a similar high (the only real high someone like Roger could go out on), but he has proven me wrong before. Roger won't be this bad in 2014 I am sure of that, but will he be relevant? That is the question.

Agreed. I think he'll be better in 2014 than he was this year, but I fear it may be closer to a dead cat bounce than an actual revival.

 

[DarthFed]

Nobody beats Father Time. But some have the presence of mind to retire with a huge win, Sampras-style. I called Federer's retirement to be Wimbledon 2012 with the trophy. He missed his opportunity (his ego took it), but hopefully he'll keep searching for another slam title and give us a few years of strugglerer.....because now I see how fun it is to watch Federer fight for every set. I never understand people who like seeing lopsided uneventful matches. Now almost every match Federer plays is an epic battle. That's what sport is all about. I will enjoy it when Nadal has regular 5-setters at Roland Garros. The 5-setter he played at this year's Roland Garros and the 5-setter he played at 2011 Roland Garros (vs Isner) were extremely fun battles. Bring it on!

Why in the world would he retire after that Wimbledon win. He was still top 3 for 9 years running and just became #1 again. No one would picture him becoming this bad so quickly. I've said before that he is playing at a level I'd have expected 36 year old Federer to play at, not the 32 year old version. Roger retiring after Wimbledon last year would be way different than Pete at 2002 USO as that was the first title he had won in 2 years and he was barely ranked in the top 15.

Most of Roger's matches this year have not been epic struggles. He had a loose 5 set match with Murray where he was easily outplayed throughout, a pretty ugly one vs. Simon at RG and that's been it. Aside from that he has been getting beat easily by nobodies. I get why you're all excited but don't try to fool those who are smarter than you :nono

 

[kskate2]

But its refreshing to see Federer fight for sets (not just matches....sets) on such a regular basis. I prefer this type of Federer over all other versions of him. Hopefully we get to see a few more years of it.

Refreshing! You are a poor representative for Nadal's fans showing such disregard for one of his main rivals. :nono Next time Nadal suffers a loss, I don't want to hear any crap about he didn't give much effort or he was tired and blah, blah, blah. Save your whining.

Ah....you are whining, not me.....

And I'm pretty sure most Nadal fans prefer tight battles over cruises. I've always enjoyed Nadal's 5-setters about a hundred times more than most of his other matches. If I listed my 10 favorite Nadal matches I think most of them would be 5-setters (the only non-5-setter in my top 10 would be the 2013 US Open final probably). So it should be no surprise to you that my favorite Federer matches are those where he's stretched to the limit too. Now we are lucky enough to get regular tight Federer matches, even vs Monfils. Its ideal, so I hope Federer hangs in and keeps it coming.

This is what I'm referring to below. When he loses, I don't want to hear any excuses or crying about it. Take it on the chin like a man.

This is probably the smallest amount of energy Nadal has ever expended in a final and also the smallest energy expended in a combined semi and final. Now that's what I call smart. The smart way to reclaim #1. Thank you China, and very happy to bring on Shanghai and that picture perfect draw! There's a smart way to lose a final? :lolz:

I called it, and I called it correctly (see my earlier posts regarding the then upcoming final). One man had everything to play for, the other man had less to play for. You could see it in Nadal's facial expressions early in the match (if you knew what to look for). So now you're a plastic surgeon who specializes in facial expressions. :laydownlaughing

My personal favorite in all of this nonsense:
Before a ball was struck, Nadal's expression confirmed my pre-match ideas. It was a smartly played match (the shortest match of their rivalry perhaps) and Nadal now has an excellent opportunity to win Shanghai. No unnecessary fatigue. The perfect week. A perfect week that ends in a finals loss, hmm. :cover

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

Except Pete didn't have Novak, Rafa, and Andy to get past to win that US Open. He did beat Andre Agassi in the Final, and a young Tommy Haas and Andy Roddick, and a declined Greg Rusedski, but the point is that he won a Slam at a time when there wasn't the same elite talent as there is now.

The Weak Competition argument is always valid - except when applied to Roger's first few, eh?

Who knows how a slam might be won: things can fall a chaps way, they did before for Roger.

Personally, I think he must be very happy with his career and he has nothing to prove to anyone, but in the spirit of the conversation, I also see no impediment to him having a run at a major next year. The caveat is the same as the previous six years: No Rafa! But even there, it's not impossible...

yes weak competition..thats what nadal was at Wimbledon in 06, 07.

then nadal could only beat postprime post mono weak fed at 08 wimb.poor old weak fed, .next year in 09 nadal was so weak he didn't even turn up.

 

[Kieran]

Exactly. Comes to them all eventually. One of the reasons I was glad Pete was able to go out on a high, after so many disappointments. I wouldn't bet against Roger doing the same...

Except Pete didn't have Novak, Rafa, and Andy to get past to win that US Open. He did beat Andre Agassi in the Final, and a young Tommy Haas and Andy Roddick, and a declined Greg Rusedski, but the point is that he won a Slam at a time when there wasn't the same elite talent as there is now.

I know, if only had the same opponents he had back when he won his first few slams, it would be so much better for him. But who knows how a slam might be won: things can fall a chaps way: they did before for Roger.

Personally, I think he must be very happy with his career and he has nothing to prove to anyone, but in the spirit of the conversation, I also see no impediment to him having a run at a major next year. The caveat is the same as the previous six years: No Rafa! But even there, it's not impossible...

 

[Kieran]

Except Pete didn't have Novak, Rafa, and Andy to get past to win that US Open. He did beat Andre Agassi in the Final, and a young Tommy Haas and Andy Roddick, and a declined Greg Rusedski, but the point is that he won a Slam at a time when there wasn't the same elite talent as there is now.

The Weak Competition argument is always valid - except when applied to Roger's first few, eh?

Who knows how a slam might be won: things can fall a chaps way, they did before for Roger.

Personally, I think he must be very happy with his career and he has nothing to prove to anyone, but in the spirit of the conversation, I also see no impediment to him having a run at a major next year. The caveat is the same as the previous six years: No Rafa! But even there, it's not impossible...

yes weak competition..thats what nadal was at Wimbledon in 06, 07.

then nadal could only beat postprime post mono weak fed at 08 wimb.poor old weak fed, .next year in 09 nadal was so weak he didn't even turn up.

:lolz: I edited it! Boo for you! :clap

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

Except Pete didn't have Novak, Rafa, and Andy to get past to win that US Open. He did beat Andre Agassi in the Final, and a young Tommy Haas and Andy Roddick, and a declined Greg Rusedski, but the point is that he won a Slam at a time when there wasn't the same elite talent as there is now.

The Weak Competition argument is always valid - except when applied to Roger's first few, eh?

Who knows how a slam might be won: things can fall a chaps way, they did before for Roger.

Personally, I think he must be very happy with his career and he has nothing to prove to anyone, but in the spirit of the conversation, I also see no impediment to him having a run at a major next year. The caveat is the same as the previous six years: No Rafa! But even there, it's not impossible...

yes weak competition..thats what nadal was at Wimbledon in 06, 07.

then nadal could only beat postprime post mono weak fed at 08 wimb.poor old weak fed, .next year in 09 nadal was so weak he didn't even turn up.

:lolz: I edited it! Boo for you! :clap

edited what ?,

 

[Kieran]

Except Pete didn't have Novak, Rafa, and Andy to get past to win that US Open. He did beat Andre Agassi in the Final, and a young Tommy Haas and Andy Roddick, and a declined Greg Rusedski, but the point is that he won a Slam at a time when there wasn't the same elite talent as there is now.

The Weak Competition argument is always valid - except when applied to Roger's first few, eh?

Who knows how a slam might be won: things can fall a chaps way, they did before for Roger.

Personally, I think he must be very happy with his career and he has nothing to prove to anyone, but in the spirit of the conversation, I also see no impediment to him having a run at a major next year. The caveat is the same as the previous six years: No Rafa! But even there, it's not impossible...

yes weak competition..thats what nadal was at Wimbledon in 06, 07.

then nadal could only beat postprime post mono weak fed at 08 wimb.poor old weak fed, .next year in 09 nadal was so weak he didn't even turn up.

:lolz: I edited it! Boo for you! :clap

edited what ?,

My post. I thought I'd be quicker than the reply, but how and ever.

Anyhow, my point being, don't write off Federer! He may yet catch a favourable wind...

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

The Weak Competition argument is always valid - except when applied to Roger's first few, eh?

Who knows how a slam might be won: things can fall a chaps way, they did before for Roger.

Personally, I think he must be very happy with his career and he has nothing to prove to anyone, but in the spirit of the conversation, I also see no impediment to him having a run at a major next year. The caveat is the same as the previous six years: No Rafa! But even there, it's not impossible...

yes weak competition..thats what nadal was at Wimbledon in 06, 07.

then nadal could only beat postprime post mono weak fed at 08 wimb.poor old weak fed, .next year in 09 nadal was so weak he didn't even turn up.

:lolz: I edited it! Boo for you! :clap

edited what ?,

My post. I thought I'd be quicker than the reply, but how and ever.

Anyhow, my point being, don't write off Federer! He may yet catch a favourable wind...

ok

 

[Kieran]

Ah, you were meant to punch the air in fury and scream, dagnabit!

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

Ah, you were meant to punch the air in fury and scream, dagnabit!

I don't wanna scream..i've got a headache.

but instead we can have this :emperor: the grim reaper having a garden sprinkler p1ss.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Federer/Monfils are both great talents, but despite being horrendously injured Monfils showed more grit which got him over the line. Once again Federer falls one round short of facing a top tier player.

Did you watch the match? If so , have you ever seen such horrendous calls on service lines. When Fed was serving at 1-4 15-40, Fed serve was about 8 inch out, he almost stop play and Monfils slowed up also but was thinking that the idiot umpire was going to over rule but that clown never did.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

News Flash: With Federer's loss today and Wawrinka's win, Wawrinka has
surpassed Federer in ATP race by 5 points. Fed is now #8. He can afford to
fall only one more spot and there are three more weeks left.

Vienna has announced more than a month ago that they will keep
a wild card open for Fed until the last minute, just in case he needs it.
However, I doubt whether Fed will take it as it would mean he would
have to play five weeks in a row if he makes it to WTF.

An alternative strategy might be to actually take the wild card,
beat all the no names in vienna and get 250 points, play Basel
and assuming qualification is known by that time, skip Paris.
But, this won't work out well as it would be difficult to
guarantee the spot mathematically as there are 1000 points
in play in Paris and it is going to be a close shave between the
contenders.

Oh, what a tangled web fed weaves!