So Much for Roger's "Comeback"

[Denis]

I never was a fan of the person Roger Federer, though I admire him as a player. But today I have to say it was sad, just sad to see him leave the court in such a broken way. It was actually tough not to feel for him. For the first time ever I almost shed a tear for the guy. He might have all the records in the world, a legacy for the ages and a wonderful family but you could see how much it hurts him that he simply cannot go on to do what he loves and used to do so well. Father time can be brutal.

Way back when I noticed that after three surgeries I simply didn't have the legs anymore to play tennis in my tennis club and had to retire from the sport I loved so much, I was heartbroken. Now imagine how it must have felt for the greatest player to ever play this game leaving Armstrong today in such a broken way. I don't know what it is. You simply don't drop from being the clear #1 in the summer of 2012 to barely being top 20 material within just 12 months. That never happened in the Open Era.

Maybe his back bothers him to such a strong extent but he refuses to make it publicly. Just losing motivation and desire cannot result to such a brutal decline. No way. Whatever it is, I genuinely hope he works on it and comes back 2014 healthy and hungry for one last ride. Going to work now, I'm prepared for death and hell as the mood of my boss often depends on Fed's results...gulp

I had similar feelings. Sad to see him lose against players like Robredo. I think you might be right on the back issue, he seemed weirdly out of focus at times and misfiring. At first I thought he was just not concentrated, but it might very well be that the back is preventing him from that.

 

[Andrew William]

Some may laugh at this and it may indeed be preposterous but give this some thought. Whether Roger would admit this or not I think he wants to be remembered as the GOAT. He realizes Nadal is a threat for that supremacy. He also knows that if it gets close like 17-15 or 16 the H2H discussion really comes into play. Nadal is playing lights out this year and he knows what would've happened if they would've met up in the qtrs.

It's already a ridiculous 10-21 and a loss Wednesday would've made it an even more embarrassing 2-9 in slams, including a loss in every slam if that would've played out.

In Roger's prime, obviously no way. But now a shell of himself and naturally fading with father time, could he be trying to protect his legacy with avoiding Rafa in a slam? I mean three sets to Robredo?!?

This has to be the silliest thing I've ever heard. Laughable indeed! Oh yes, Roger's ego is such that he prefers losing to Robredo of all people rather than tarnish his already lopsided h2h tally with Nadal. This makes perfect sense.

 

[Ricardo]

Some may laugh at this and it may indeed be preposterous but give this some thought. Whether Roger would admit this or not I think he wants to be remembered as the GOAT. He realizes Nadal is a threat for that supremacy. He also knows that if it gets close like 17-15 or 16 the H2H discussion really comes into play. Nadal is playing lights out this year and he knows what would've happened if they would've met up in the qtrs.

It's already a ridiculous 10-21 and a loss Wednesday would've made it an even more embarrassing 2-9 in slams, including a loss in every slam if that would've played out.

In Roger's prime, obviously no way. But now a shell of himself and naturally fading with father time, could he be trying to protect his legacy with avoiding Rafa in a slam? I mean three sets to Robredo?!?

This has to be the silliest thing I've ever heard. Laughable indeed! Oh yes, Roger's ego is such that he prefers losing to Robredo of all people rather than tarnish his already lopsided h2h tally with Nadal. This makes perfect sense.

oh yeah this fedfan is very smart, he can probably tell you that about Wimbledon as well. As soon as Fed saw that Nadal lost his 1st round (also on path to play QF against him) he was very quick to lose his 2nd round - so he lost because Nadal wasn't in the draw, strange isn't it?

the only reasonable explanation for back to back early losses in Wimbledon/USO is simply that, Fed was pretty sh!t and his opponents were better.

either way only idiots would think players tank in a slam so they can avoid someone. What's really sad, is that someone actually would think that way.

 

[Denis]

Oh come on Ricardo, no need to be so obtuse. Let's just say the only thing Federer gets from this is that he actually doesn't make his h2h with Nadal any worse. But yeah, obviously he would have liked to win.

 

[Ricardo]

No need to feel sorry for him. He has dished out a lot more pain than he has received. Using disasters like this could eventually be the motivation to prove he can still play decent tennis. I was hoping that moment would come after the Wimbledon loss but it didn't happen and I don't think Roger will be doing jack the rest of the year except possibly make a bad situation worse.

I agree with almost all of your post, Darth. There's certainly no reason to feel sorry for Rog and go completely tragic on the notion that it's over. He lost to a former world #5. Who had finally figured out a way to beat him...why is that different than a journeyman up-and-comer? Better, I'd say, to be beaten by a wily veteran who knows your game, having a very good day. It's a surprise, because Roger was looking vintage just a round before. But, hey, Robredo played a great match!

Robredo finally figured out a way to beat him? get real! that's why i think of you very 'differently' Moxie if it's not this weak version of Federer, Robredo wouldn't have a prayer whether playing great or not (just look through all those matches before, don't tell me he never had a good match).

If you don't think it's a weak version, then how did he rack up so many bad losses match after match this year? Wimbledon 2nd round against some unknown? in the Master series before? oh yeah, when guys just come and beat Federer, they figured him out..... i bet when 32yo Rafa loses to nobody you will be fair to say 'he got figured out'.

 

[Ricardo]

Oh come on Ricardo, no need to be so obtuse. Let's just say the only thing Federer gets from this is that he actually doesn't make his h2h with Nadal any worse. But yeah, obviously he would have liked to win.

someone did think Fed would tank a slam match to avoid someone (nasty isn't?)..... of course tennis players don't have that mentality, those who do can never accomplish anything.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I still believe he has a few more years relevance.

If you consider a year like this as relevance then maybe. If 2014 keeps going in a bad direction I hope he calls it quits. I don't want to see him become a Lleyton Hewitt.

agreed.. Do you think that if he leaves, his status as the GOAT remains unquestioned but if he stays the chances of his current GOAT status begins to diminished (this might make a good topic for a thread)

It only gets diminished if someone surpasses his accomplishments. Why wouldn't he be the GOAT if he's losing at 32 years of age yet nobody else is winning enough to amass a similar resume?

 

[brokenshoelace]

Some may laugh at this and it may indeed be preposterous but give this some thought. Whether Roger would admit this or not I think he wants to be remembered as the GOAT. He realizes Nadal is a threat for that supremacy. He also knows that if it gets close like 17-15 or 16 the H2H discussion really comes into play. Nadal is playing lights out this year and he knows what would've happened if they would've met up in the qtrs.

It's already a ridiculous 10-21 and a loss Wednesday would've made it an even more embarrassing 2-9 in slams, including a loss in every slam if that would've played out.

In Roger's prime, obviously no way. But now a shell of himself and naturally fading with father time, could he be trying to protect his legacy with avoiding Rafa in a slam? I mean three sets to Robredo?!?

I seriously doubt that. Nadal already dominates the H2H, especially in slams, what's another loss for Roger going to do that hasn't already been done?

 

[tented]

Roger will be fine. Many people forget what he has achieved. I don't understand why people want him to retire if he personally enjoys playing. When he really retires there will be a big void.

Welcome to Tennis Frontier, EmmaMonroe!

Exactly. It will be a black day when Federer puts away his racquets.

I have no idea at this point what he should, or even could, do in order to get out of this funk, but I'm hoping 2014 is better.

 

[the AntiPusher]

I still believe he has a few more years relevance.

If you consider a year like this as relevance then maybe. If 2014 keeps going in a bad direction I hope he calls it quits. I don't want to see him become a Lleyton Hewitt.

agreed.. Do you think that if he leaves, his status as the GOAT remains unquestioned but if he stays the chances of his current GOAT status begins to diminished (this might make a good topic for a thread)

It only gets diminished if someone surpasses his accomplishments. Why wouldn't he be the GOAT if he's losing at 32 years of age yet nobody else is winning enough to amass a similar resume?

BS..Don't be so quick to be dismissive, give a little more thought to it.. Fedfan brings up a very similar point in the first part of his post but I doubt that Fed ever considered avoiding Rafa but just the opposite

 

[tented]

Some may laugh at this and it may indeed be preposterous but give this some thought. Whether Roger would admit this or not I think he wants to be remembered as the GOAT. He realizes Nadal is a threat for that supremacy. He also knows that if it gets close like 17-15 or 16 the H2H discussion really comes into play. Nadal is playing lights out this year and he knows what would've happened if they would've met up in the qtrs.

It's already a ridiculous 10-21 and a loss Wednesday would've made it an even more embarrassing 2-9 in slams, including a loss in every slam if that would've played out.

In Roger's prime, obviously no way. But now a shell of himself and naturally fading with father time, could he be trying to protect his legacy with avoiding Rafa in a slam? I mean three sets to Robredo?!?

I seriously doubt that. Nadal already dominates the H2H, especially in slams, what's another loss for Roger going to do that hasn't already been done?

Complete the Career Losing Slam. :cover

 

[brokenshoelace]

I still believe he has a few more years relevance.

If you consider a year like this as relevance then maybe. If 2014 keeps going in a bad direction I hope he calls it quits. I don't want to see him become a Lleyton Hewitt.

agreed.. Do you think that if he leaves, his status as the GOAT remains unquestioned but if he stays the chances of his current GOAT status begins to diminished (this might make a good topic for a thread)

It only gets diminished if someone surpasses his accomplishments. Why wouldn't he be the GOAT if he's losing at 32 years of age yet nobody else is winning enough to amass a similar resume?

BS..Don't be so quick to be dismissive, give a little more thought to it.. Fedfan brings up a very similar point in the first part of his post but I doubt that Fed ever considered avoiding Rafa but just the opposite

He does bring up a similar point, and one that I disagree with. Anyway, I advanced my argument and it's the following: Fed will remain the GOAT until someone surpasses his accomplishments.

How will he somehow stop being considered the GOAT because of a few losses when he's clearly past his prime? How does that negate everything his accomplished and more importantly, the fact that nobody has come close to doing what he did? So again, my argument is, unless someone surpasses him, how can he stop being considered the GOAT? In other words, if he's not, then who the hell is?

I'm not being dismissive, I'm honestly wondering as to your reasoning.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

probably more than any match before, this one showed how much of the problem resides between the ears. tons of break points, even more 0-30s and 15-30s, and he failed to block 90 mph second serves back into play. not even talking about the horrendous misfires and inexplicably bad decisions that ensued when he Did get to a rally on those points.

 

[the AntiPusher]

If you consider a year like this as relevance then maybe. If 2014 keeps going in a bad direction I hope he calls it quits. I don't want to see him become a Lleyton Hewitt.

agreed.. Do you think that if he leaves, his status as the GOAT remains unquestioned but if he stays the chances of his current GOAT status begins to diminished (this might make a good topic for a thread)

It only gets diminished if someone surpasses his accomplishments. Why wouldn't he be the GOAT if he's losing at 32 years of age yet nobody else is winning enough to amass a similar resume?

BS..Don't be so quick to be dismissive, give a little more thought to it.. Fedfan brings up a very similar point in the first part of his post but I doubt that Fed ever considered avoiding Rafa but just the opposite

He does bring up a similar point, and one that I disagree with. Anyway, I advanced my argument and it's the following: Fed will remain the GOAT until someone surpasses his accomplishments.

How will he somehow stop being considered the GOAT because of a few losses when he's clearly past his prime? How does that negate everything his accomplished and more importantly, the fact that nobody has come close to doing what he did? So again, my argument is, unless someone surpasses him, how can he stop being considered the GOAT? In other words, if he's not, then who the hell is?

I'm not being dismissive, I'm honestly wondering as to your reasoning.

BS..you are looking at 17-12 grand slams your final basis for the GOAT but there are so many other factors, H2H, MS titles, records against the best players of the current generation but this isn't the thread and I will leave it at that since there is obviously more work to be done.

 

[nehmeth]

Not looking good for Roger's future. He just got beaten in straight sets at one of his best tournaments by a similarly-aged player who has never beaten him.

Am I now allowed to suggest that he's winding down for earnest? What a bummer - talk about a quick fall. I'd be really surprised at this point if he makes good on his promise to play "a few more years."

Roger won his 17th slam last year and made his way back to #1 in the world - while on the other side of the mountain top.

Pete Sampras's last years were shaded with greater ignominy than Roger's 2013, yet he came back in 2002 to win it all. No one expected him to do it (other than Kieran), his results over the previous two years gave no indication that it would or could happen.

Maybe Roger's Wimbledon last year was his final slam. Or maybe he too has one left in him. For 'fans' to cry out for his retirement is rather selfish. As long as he loves playing the game, as long as he feels he's got something left, then shut up and support him. Celebrate those windows of brilliance when he has them rather than lament the glory years of days gone by.

 

[brokenshoelace]

agreed.. Do you think that if he leaves, his status as the GOAT remains unquestioned but if he stays the chances of his current GOAT status begins to diminished (this might make a good topic for a thread)

It only gets diminished if someone surpasses his accomplishments. Why wouldn't he be the GOAT if he's losing at 32 years of age yet nobody else is winning enough to amass a similar resume?

BS..Don't be so quick to be dismissive, give a little more thought to it.. Fedfan brings up a very similar point in the first part of his post but I doubt that Fed ever considered avoiding Rafa but just the opposite

He does bring up a similar point, and one that I disagree with. Anyway, I advanced my argument and it's the following: Fed will remain the GOAT until someone surpasses his accomplishments.

How will he somehow stop being considered the GOAT because of a few losses when he's clearly past his prime? How does that negate everything his accomplished and more importantly, the fact that nobody has come close to doing what he did? So again, my argument is, unless someone surpasses him, how can he stop being considered the GOAT? In other words, if he's not, then who the hell is?

I'm not being dismissive, I'm honestly wondering as to your reasoning.

BS..you are looking at 17-12 grand slams your final basis for the GOAT but there are so many other factors, H2H, MS titles, records against the best players of the current generation but this isn't the thread and I will leave it at that since there is obviously more work to be done.

Roger's H2H is great against pretty much everyone but Nadal. He also holds the second most MS titles. His record against the best players of his generation is unlike anything any player has amassed, and his record against the current generation is still very good (Del Potro, Djokovic, even against Murray, he's beaten him in all but one of their slam meetings).

He's spent 4 consecutive years as world number 1, reached 10 slam finals in a row, about 129235 semi finals in a row, has done a career slam.. What more does he really need to do?

Keep in mind, I don't disagree that there are factors other than GS record, but those factors too happen to be in Federer's favor. So the only knock on him is his H2H against Nadal?

 

[DarthFed]

This isn't a thread to hype up Robredo. Fact of the matter is Roger should swat that fly in a 90 minute 3 set match. That he got destroyed by a pure clay courter at the USO is cause for major panic. Tommy didn't figure out a way to beat him, he played the same way as always and just kept the ball in play waiting for Fed to give it to him. Roger has been inconsistent all year, destroying guys like Mannarino and Berlocq means nothing. As soon as he faces a decent player he is likely to lose at this point.

I only congratulated Robredo, as would be reasonable, because he played a very good match. The fact of the matter is that Roger didn't swat that fly. Robredo isn't a pure clay courter and he's beaten Andy Murray on HCs for example. And I think you underestimate his level of play today, if you say all he did was bash it into play and wait for Roger to make an error. That's just not true. Robredo was the more aggressive, and accurate today. I'm not trying to make the whole thing about Tommy Robredo, but hey, who won the match?

Yes you only "congratulated" him. It's not about your Spanish fever at all I'm sure. How in the world was Robredo more aggressive in that match? Roger was in kamikaze mode for most of it. Robredo was more accurate but then Stevie Wonder would have been more accurate than Roger today.

I don't underestimate Robredo's play, I think you underestimate how pathetic Roger was. Robredo is nothing on HC, if you weren't blinded by his nationality I think you'd see this :angel:

 

[DarthFed]

agreed.. Do you think that if he leaves, his status as the GOAT remains unquestioned but if he stays the chances of his current GOAT status begins to diminished (this might make a good topic for a thread)

It only gets diminished if someone surpasses his accomplishments. Why wouldn't he be the GOAT if he's losing at 32 years of age yet nobody else is winning enough to amass a similar resume?

BS..Don't be so quick to be dismissive, give a little more thought to it.. Fedfan brings up a very similar point in the first part of his post but I doubt that Fed ever considered avoiding Rafa but just the opposite

He does bring up a similar point, and one that I disagree with. Anyway, I advanced my argument and it's the following: Fed will remain the GOAT until someone surpasses his accomplishments.

How will he somehow stop being considered the GOAT because of a few losses when he's clearly past his prime? How does that negate everything his accomplished and more importantly, the fact that nobody has come close to doing what he did? So again, my argument is, unless someone surpasses him, how can he stop being considered the GOAT? In other words, if he's not, then who the hell is?

I'm not being dismissive, I'm honestly wondering as to your reasoning.

BS..you are looking at 17-12 grand slams your final basis for the GOAT but there are so many other factors, H2H, MS titles, records against the best players of the current generation but this isn't the thread and I will leave it at that since there is obviously more work to be done.

I guess being #1 and having 6 YEC's isn't a factor either?

 

[the AntiPusher]

It only gets diminished if someone surpasses his accomplishments. Why wouldn't he be the GOAT if he's losing at 32 years of age yet nobody else is winning enough to amass a similar resume?

BS..Don't be so quick to be dismissive, give a little more thought to it.. Fedfan brings up a very similar point in the first part of his post but I doubt that Fed ever considered avoiding Rafa but just the opposite

He does bring up a similar point, and one that I disagree with. Anyway, I advanced my argument and it's the following: Fed will remain the GOAT until someone surpasses his accomplishments.

How will he somehow stop being considered the GOAT because of a few losses when he's clearly past his prime? How does that negate everything his accomplished and more importantly, the fact that nobody has come close to doing what he did? So again, my argument is, unless someone surpasses him, how can he stop being considered the GOAT? In other words, if he's not, then who the hell is?

I'm not being dismissive, I'm honestly wondering as to your reasoning.

BS..you are looking at 17-12 grand slams your final basis for the GOAT but there are so many other factors, H2H, MS titles, records against the best players of the current generation but this isn't the thread and I will leave it at that since there is obviously more work to be done.

I guess being #1 and having 6 YEC's isn't a factor either?

Darth Fed and BS.. Don't get me wrong, Fed is the GOAT.. No dispute on that subject.

 

[britbox]

Not looking good for Roger's future. He just got beaten in straight sets at one of his best tournaments by a similarly-aged player who has never beaten him.

Am I now allowed to suggest that he's winding down for earnest? What a bummer - talk about a quick fall. I'd be really surprised at this point if he makes good on his promise to play "a few more years."

Roger won his 17th slam last year and made his way back to #1 in the world - while on the other side of the mountain top.

Pete Sampras's last years were shaded with greater ignominy than Roger's 2013, yet he came back in 2002 to win it all. No one expected him to do it (other than Kieran), his results over the previous two years gave no indication that it would or could happen.

Maybe Roger's Wimbledon last year was his final slam. Or maybe he too has one left in him. For 'fans' to cry out for his retirement is rather selfish. As long as he loves playing the game, as long as he feels he's got something left, then shut up and support him. Celebrate those windows of brilliance when he has them rather than lament the glory years of days gone by.

Agreed. As long as Roger wants to play then what's the fuss about? What are people expecting? The 23 year old version?

As a Fed fan, he's gone way beyond what any "fan" should "expect". ANYTHING Federer wins here on in, is gravy on an illustrious career.

He doesn't owe fans anything - he's delivered more than any other player in history.

Yeah, by HIS standards, he's had a poor year - but it's only bettered by around 6 or 7 players o the planet.

Personally, I think Federer will have a further peak before he hangs it up. Not a big spike like last year, but he will win another Masters and has a slim outside chance at a major if all the stars aligned in his favour.

I'm beginning to think the latter won't happen, but not ruling it out. It's no big deal anyway - he's delivered everything any reasonable fan could hope to imagine. Just enjoy the few spikes in performance as he winds down and be grateful for the tennis he has delivered over the years.

I'd rather watch those few spikes than have him retire any time soon.