The Problem for Roger Federer

[Murat Baslamisli]

As a Fed fan I do understand that he is older and his consistency is not like it was before. However, it is difficult to accept, having seen the kind of tennis he played between 2003 and 2008. Because of that, I still imagine watching the old Roger. It can be said I am (we are) in denial. Like other Fed fans, I still think that if he reaches a final he has to win it. I still think he deserves more for the kind of talent he possesses, even at 33. I mean he is Roger!!

Is he though? I have accepted the fact the Roger of old is gone. He is and will always be my GOAT, but right now, the weaknesses are just too obvious...

 

[El Dude]

It is a crazy thought, but he's become the Best of the Rest - like Andy was a few years ago before he won the 2012 US Open. On one hand that's impressive, considering his age and the players ranked behind him. On the other it is hard to swallow.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

It is a crazy thought, but he's become the Best of the Rest - like Andy was a few years ago before he won the 2012 US Open. On one hand that's impressive, considering his age and the players ranked behind him. On the other it is hard to swallow.

But the difference is the curve of the career and where Roger is coming from. He was good, he become great, became the best, stayed the best, came down to earth, still good but not great, etc. Murray was never the best. He was just the best of the rest.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

If he does not win Cincy, it will be full 2 years since he last won a Masters title (2012 Cincy).
That is indeed a drought of long length considering Roger was just 31 when the drought started.

 

[El Dude]

I did some research and here are some interesting stats on Federer. First compare his last three years:

2012: 71-12 (86%)
2013: 45-17 (73%)
2014: 44-9 (83%)

Now how did he fare against different ranked players? This is where it gets interesting.

Vs. Top 10 Players
2012: 16-9 (64%)
2013: 4-10 (29%)
2014: 9-4 (69%)

Vs. #11-100 Players
2012: 49-3 (94%)
2013: 33-5 (87%)
2014: 28-5 (85%)

Vs. #101+ Players
2012: 6-0 (100%)
2013: 8-2 (80%)
2014: 7-0 (100%)

So here we can see the big differences in the three seasons. In 2013 Federer was terrible against top 10 opponents, winning only 29% of his matches, while 2012 and 2014 are very similar. We can also see that in 2013 Roger did something he didn't do in either of the other two years, lose not one but two matches to players outside of the top 100.

Why was 2012 better than 2014 so far? It is less significant than we might think. He has had similar results so far against top 10 players and the same against players outside of the top 100, but the main difference is the players ranked #11-100 - Roger was solidly more effective against them in 2012 than he has been in 2014. In 2012 he lost to only three players in that range: #17 John Isner, #34 Andy Roddick, and #87 Tommy Haas. In 2014 he's lost to five players in that range: #15 Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, #17 Ernests Gulbis, #21 Kei Nishikori, #47 Jeremy Chardy, and #60 Lleyton Hewitt.

One could argue that Tsonga is really a top 10 player, so the numbers would change a bit.

Anyhow, the main take-away for me is that his biggest problem in 2013 is that he was more prone to really bad upsets (Stakhovsky and Delbonis in particular), and not nearly as competitive against top 10 players. 2014 is almost as good as 2012, but he is still prone to be occasionally upset, just be superior players. The lowest ranked player Roger has lost to in 2014 is #60 Lleyton Hewitt. After that it is #47 Jeremy Chardy, then his other seven losses are all #21 or better.

His record in 2012 was even more remarkably consistent: He lost only twice to players ranked lower than #17, that being #34 Andy Roddick and #87 Tommy Haas - two players whose highest level is much greater than their rank at the time.

It is also worth noting that in 2012, Roger was 6-6 against Djokovic, Nadal and Murray--2-3 against Novak, 1-1 against Rafa, and 3-2 against Andy. In 2013 he was 0-7 against them (although only faced Novak and Rafa), while in 2014 he is 3-3 against them (2-2 against Novak, 0-1 against Rafa, 1-0 against Andy).

The other big difference, of course, is his record in Finals. In 2012 he was 6-4, in 2013 1-2, and in 2014 he is 2-5.

So despite my initial post, Roger is holding his own against the other elite players. In terms of overall record, he (83%) isn't quite on the level of Novak (88%) but he's just a hair below Rafa (85%)--and was tied with him until his loss to Tsonga today--and quite a better better than Andy (71%).

 

[Front242]

Roger doesn't even need to play anywhere near his best to beat Tsonga or Wawrinka. He lost closely 7-5 7-6 to Tsonga when his FH mostly and also BH made an absolute ton of errors, he served poorly and got very few aces. Just a small increase in quality or relative decrease in overall crapness there and more FHs making it over the net or not missing by miles and he'd have at least won a set. Him beating those two doesn't take a whole lot imo. Jo played well but not amazing by any means. I mean that one very long game in set 2 I believe where Roger finally held for 5-5...if Tsonga was truly playing that well he would've broken there because Roger made a ton of errors but still held.

Seriously, not even winning a set against Tsonga was taking the p1$$. I also don't agree for one second that Roger has nothing left to prove. He very much wants to prove not only to himself but to people around the world that he can still win these tournaments. The day he feels he has nothing left to prove, he'll retire. He came close to winning Wimbledon and had a very good shot of winning Indian Wells, Monte Carlo and now Toronto too. He failed to win any of them and some people may feel he has nothing left to prove but I guarantee you in his mind he sure as hell believes he does. To not feel he does is not a 17 slam champion's mentality. These guys are greedy and with that comes to desire to win and he keeps on playing trying to win. What's the point in playing a tournament, reaching the final and not winning it? Of course he has much more left to prove.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I did some research and here are some interesting stats on Federer. First compare his last three years:

2012: 71-12 (86%)
2013: 45-17 (73%)
2014: 44-9 (83%)

Now how did he fare against different ranked players? This is where it gets interesting.

Vs. Top 10 Players
2012: 24-10 (71%)
2013: 4-10 (29%)
2014: 14-6 (70%)

Vs. #11-100 Players
2012: 49-3 (94%)
2013: 33-5 (87%)
2014: 28-5 (85%)

Vs. #101+ Players
2012: 6-0 (100%)
2013: 8-2 (80%)
2014: 7-0 (100%)

So here we can see the big differences in the three seasons. In 2013 Federer was terrible against top 10 opponents, winning only 29% of his matches, while 2012 and 2014 are very similar. We can also see that in 2013 Roger did something he didn't do in either of the other two years, lose not one but two matches to players outside of the top 100.

Why was 2012 better than 2014 so far? It is less significant than we might think. He has had similar results so far against top 10 players and the same against players outside of the top 100, but the main difference is the players ranked #11-100 - Roger was solidly more effective against them in 2012 than he has been in 2014. In 2012 he lost to only three players in that range: #17 John Isner, #34 Andy Roddick, and #87 Tommy Haas. In 2014 he's lost to five players in that range: #15 Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, #17 Ernests Gulbis, #21 Kei Nishikori, #47 Jeremy Chardy, and #60 Lleyton Hewitt.

One could argue that Tsonga is really a top 10 player, so the numbers would change a bit.

Anyhow, the main take-away for me is that his biggest problem in 2013 is that he was more prone to really bad upsets (Stakhovsky and Delbonis in particular), and not nearly as competitive against top 10 players. 2014 is almost as good as 2012, but he is still prone to be occasionally upset, just be superior players. The lowest ranked player Roger has lost to in 2014 is #60 Lleyton Hewitt. After that it is #47 Jeremy Chardy, then his other seven losses are all #21 or better.

His record in 2012 was even more remarkably consistent: He lost only twice to players ranked lower than #17, that being #34 Andy Roddick and #87 Tommy Haas - two players whose highest level is much greater than their rank at the time.

It is also worth noting that in 2012, Roger was 6-6 against Djokovic, Nadal and Murray--2-3 against Novak, 1-1 against Rafa, and 3-2 against Andy. In 2013 he was 0-7 against them (although only faced Novak and Rafa), while in 2014 he is 3-3 against them (2-2 against Novak, 0-1 against Rafa, 1-0 against Andy).

The other big difference, of course, is his record in Finals. In 2012 he was 6-4, in 2013 1-2, and in 2014 he is 2-5.

So despite my initial post, Roger is holding his own against the other elite players. In terms of overall record, he (83%) isn't quite on the level of Novak (88%) but he's just a hair below Rafa (85%)--and was tied with him until his loss to Tsonga today--and quite a better better than Andy (71%).

In 2012 he won Wimbledon and so it was better than 2014 so far, period. We don't need
so much data to conclude that.

 

[Haelfix]

I definitely agree with the first post. Federers ceiling is lower than Nadal/Djokovic/Murray and probably a few others at this stage in his career (and arguably has been that way since at least 2010).

Yes we all remember when he had the highest ceiling of any player not named Nadal on clay, but these days the game is won on the baseline and you can see that he is a step late, a bit of consistency short, and a bit of power lacking.

This result didn't surprise me in the least, as I thought that Jo looked like he was playing at a significantly higher level than Roger all tourney long. It showed more or less from start to finish. There is a sort of inevitability to so much of tennis these days, and its still a bit strange to see (I remember in the 90s when there was a lot more unpredictable results)

Of course, a player like Tsonga actually arguably has amongst the highest ceilings on tour. Anyone that has that type of easy power and serve can take it to anybody, but still what was worrying was the lack of options Federer had. He couldn't out-wile Tsonga, his net forays kept him in it but weren't going to win the match for him and he was overpowered on every corner. The score made it seem like it was closer than it was..

 

[herios]

El Dude, your numbers do not add up. When you break down Roger total for a year, among the top 10, 11-100 and over 100, the sum is different than the number you posted for his total for a year win or lose (I found minimum 3 totals wrong). I guess the breakdown is incorrect.

 

[El Dude]

El Dude, your numbers do not add up. When you break down Roger total for a year, among the top 10, 11-100 and over 100, the sum is different than the number you posted for his total for a year win or lose (I found minimum 3 totals wrong). I guess the breakdown is incorrect.

Thanks. I figured out what was wrong - I had the 11-20 results in two places, as I had originally calculated the top 20 together. It should be fixed now.

Interestingly, Roger's results against top 10 opponents is better this year than in 2012.

 

[El Dude]

In 2012 he won Wimbledon and so it was better than 2014 so far, period. We don't need
so much data to conclude that.

Uh yeah, of course - but I'm trying to look a bit deeper than that.The point of all that data is to look at how he's faring against different segments of the rankings. I think they tell a lot.

 

[Federberg]

I think it was a big problem for him today that he played all of his previous matches at night and after finishing his semi final match at 10:00pm last night and then having to come back and play a final at 3:00pm under very different conditions than he was used to, didn't help him at all. It is a hot day today as well, Tsonga was used to it and Federer wasn't.

This. Basic common sense. No need to panic, or talk about the end. He remains capable of winning the biggest tournaments. Where obstacles weren't an issue in the past, they have to be be serious considerations going forward. No big deal, this is life. Given the right conditions he remains a huge threat to win a big one. He continues to create the opportunities for titles. When that's not happening anymore, then we can talk. A bit boring the constant extrapolation after every result (I appreciate that's what forums are for uzzled). Just watch and enjoy I say...

 

[Front242]

^ He had no condition change issues at Monte Carlo and just played poorly and played a heap of $h1t 3rd set TB against Novak at Indian Wells so I think it's more a problem with focus and hitting less sloppy errors more than anything personally.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

^ He had no condition change issues at Monte Carlo and just played poorly and played a heap of $h1t 3rd set TB against Novak at Indian Wells so I think it's more a problem with focus and hitting less sloppy errors more than anything personally.

Therein lies the biggest issue: Why is he hitting those sloppy errors? I don't think it is because of his hands. He does not all of a sudden forget how to hit a forehand properly. In my opinion, it is the feet. More and more he is late to position himself to hit good shots, or just his usual shots. And towards the end of tournaments, it becomes even more apparent. Look at the Wimby final. How many good forehands did he hit? Again yesterday, how many times he tried to run around the backhand to hit a forehand and totally screwed it up? I lost count.

Running around a backhand to hit an inside out or inside in forehand to Roger was like breathing to you and me. It is not anymore. It is the feet.

 

[El Dude]

Front242, you and others keep saying--seemingly after every Federer loss these days--"he played like crap today." The problem is that he's now 0-6 in his last big tournament finals, going back to the 2012 World Tour Finals:

2012 WTF
2013 Rome
2014 Indian Wells
2014 Monte Carlo
2014 Wimbledon
2014 Toronto

Interestingly enough, he was 7-0 in his previous seven big tournament finals:

2010 World Tour Finals
2011 Paris Masters
2011 World Tour Finals
2012 Indian Wells
2012 Madrid
2012 Wimbledon
2012 Cincinnati

But six losses in a row--in big tournament finals--is more than just small sample size at this point, especially when we're talking about a player at age 31-33.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

I still have 2012 roger over 2014 roger..while still enjoying 2014 roger.the stats may be similar apart from the most important one of winning trophies..2012 he won a major and 3 masters titles, sofar in 2014 he has won zero majors n zero masters.

and Federer was hitting sloppy errors because he was a bit jaded after playing the previous 3 days, plus the 18hrs turnaround for the final and it was his only daytime sunshine match.

that's it. accept it or folk really are in denial.

 

[atttomole]

^ He had no condition change issues at Monte Carlo and just played poorly and played a heap of $h1t 3rd set TB against Novak at Indian Wells so I think it's more a problem with focus and hitting less sloppy errors more than anything personally.

Therein lies the biggest issue: Why is he hitting those sloppy errors? I don't think it is because of his hands. He does not all of a sudden forget how to hit a forehand properly. In my opinion, it is the feet. More and more he is late to position himself to hit good shots, or just his usual shots. And towards the end of tournaments, it becomes even more apparent. Look at the Wimby final. How many good forehands did he hit? Again yesterday, how many times he tried to run around the backhand to hit a forehand and totally screwed it up? I lost count.

Running around a backhand to hit an inside out or inside in forehand to Roger was like breathing to you and me. It is not anymore. It is the feet.

I also agree with this. His movement has worsened, especially laterally. I am noticing that when he is rushed to the forehand side, he is missing regularly, and the other players do not seem to fear going to his forehand anymore. To add to that he can not hit the down the line backhand anymore. Put together, this may mean that his whole game is falling apart.

 

[Front242]

Front242, you and others keep saying--seemingly after every Federer loss these days--"he played like crap today." The problem is that he's now 0-6 in his last big tournament finals, going back to the 2012 World Tour Finals:

2012 WTF
2013 Rome
2014 Indian Wells
2014 Monte Carlo
2014 Wimbledon
2014 Toronto

Interestingly enough, he was 7-0 in his previous seven big tournament finals:

2010 World Tour Finals
2011 Paris Masters
2011 World Tour Finals
2012 Indian Wells
2012 Madrid
2012 Wimbledon
2012 Cincinnati

But six losses in a row--in big tournament finals--is more than just small sample size at this point, especially when we're talking about a player at age 31-33.

I agree with all that but equally he still played crap I mean the few decent points he played you could count on one hand seriously, 2 at the absolute best. Tsomga was solid but also not great, he had 36% first serves in during set 1 at one stage. Luckily for him, he served the big ones and aces when needed but it takes Tsonga playing pretty good (that was from from his best level, especially the serving) to beat a really poor Federer so while it was a very good tournament for Tsonga, Federer really played badly, Djokovic was completely out of sorts and Murray wasn't great either.

Back to Federer though, how could you possibly say he played anything but crap? A handful of decent volleys offset by a bucket load of FH errors that often hit the bottom of the net?! Finished on yet another lame BH error, hardly any aces. Even at 33 he should be a lot better than this.

 

[Front242]

^ He had no condition change issues at Monte Carlo and just played poorly and played a heap of $h1t 3rd set TB against Novak at Indian Wells so I think it's more a problem with focus and hitting less sloppy errors more than anything personally.

Therein lies the biggest issue: Why is he hitting those sloppy errors? I don't think it is because of his hands. He does not all of a sudden forget how to hit a forehand properly. In my opinion, it is the feet. More and more he is late to position himself to hit good shots, or just his usual shots. And towards the end of tournaments, it becomes even more apparent. Look at the Wimby final. How many good forehands did he hit? Again yesterday, how many times he tried to run around the backhand to hit a forehand and totally screwed it up? I lost count.

Running around a backhand to hit an inside out or inside in forehand to Roger was like breathing to you and me. It is not anymore. It is the feet.

I also agree with this. His movement has worsened, especially laterally. I am noticing that when he is rushed to the forehand side, he is missing regularly, and the other players do not seem to fear going to his forehand anymore. To add to that he can not hit the down the line backhand anymore. Put together, this may mean that his whole game is falling apart.

Yeah, running to his FH side has been an issue for quite some time alright. Even being there a fraction of a second late affects the timing but still, he's missing even routine shots when not on the run now also. It's sad to see

 

[Front242]

^ He had no condition change issues at Monte Carlo and just played poorly and played a heap of $h1t 3rd set TB against Novak at Indian Wells so I think it's more a problem with focus and hitting less sloppy errors more than anything personally.

Therein lies the biggest issue: Why is he hitting those sloppy errors? I don't think it is because of his hands. He does not all of a sudden forget how to hit a forehand properly. In my opinion, it is the feet. More and more he is late to position himself to hit good shots, or just his usual shots. And towards the end of tournaments, it becomes even more apparent. Look at the Wimby final. How many good forehands did he hit? Again yesterday, how many times he tried to run around the backhand to hit a forehand and totally screwed it up? I lost count.

Running around a backhand to hit an inside out or inside in forehand to Roger was like breathing to you and me. It is not anymore. It is the feet.

I think you've nailed it. Timing is off because his footwork isn't what it once was. It's sad to see and unless he pays David Ferrer's doctor a visit it's not gonna change.