Why Federer won?

Why Federer won?

  • Poor game by Nadal.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Federer did not care to lose to Nadal any more

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • New racquet finally payed off

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    6

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,324
Reactions
6,090
Points
113
OK, good argument, Federberg, and it's hard to disagree with what you say. I admit that I could be wrong about this. But again, I didn't say Roger was "mentally frail" - that is a total exaggeration. I just said he isn't, overall, as strong mentally as Rafa is, at least in the big moments - or at least against Rafa. I've just never seen a player who is able to muster that amazing shot or comeback like Rafa does.
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,639
Reactions
5,729
Points
113
OK, good argument, Federberg, and it's hard to disagree with what you say. I admit that I could be wrong about this. But again, I didn't say Roger was "mentally frail" - that is a total exaggeration. I just said he isn't, overall, as strong mentally as Rafa is, at least in the big moments - or at least against Rafa. I've just never seen a player who is able to muster that amazing shot or comeback like Rafa does.

That's fair enough and I wasn't necessarily saying that you did. I get the impression that a lot of people feel that way though. It would be interesting to see how often each of the top guys has come back from one set down and two sets down. I agree it feels like Rafa has done it more than most but it would be good to know empirically
 

atttomole

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
3,370
Reactions
1,152
Points
113
That's because you tend to look at things quantitatively which I have nothing against in general, but there is a qualitative aspect to mental strength that you and others often miss. Put simply there are different types of mental strength. In certain situations a player like Rafa is able to shut out his opponent because they don't present him with match up issues that take him outside of his comfort zone. Does this make Rafa mentally stronger than another player who is not taken out of his comfort zone? Not really in my view. That's not to say that Rafa doesn't have tremendous mental strength, of course he does, but to an extent it's possible that we exaggerate it. He is incredibly resilient and doesn't give up. How many times has he come back from impossible situations? How many times has Roger? And Novak and Andy? They all have. The point I'm trying to make is that the advantages that certain players have over others is sometimes credited to mental strength when there are better explanations. When you look at these top players at their peaks and their ability to go on streaks the numbers are incredible, but there are differences. Novak and Roger have been able to really stamp their feet on the necks of the rest of the tour in a way that Rafa rarely has, in part I think, because they have a belief in their dominance that perhaps Rafa never has. He has always seemed more comfortable with being the hunter not the hunted. But as dominant as Novak has been, he hasn't had it to the same extent as Roger. Just look at how people give Novak a pass on his most dominant year when he fell away at the end while Roger went on and crushed the field right the way to the ATP finals. Similarly with Murray, the British press are giving him a pass in this recent slam because of the tear he was on at the end of last season. Need I remind everyone that Federer went 3 years virtually unbeaten against anyone not named Nadal? Anyone thinking that he was always in peak condition is kidding themselves, I'm not sure we'll ever see that kind of mental application again. But I often get the impression that some think that Novak is mentally stronger than Roger when a far simpler explanation is match stamina. Anyway my larger point is that there are many facets to mental strength: concentration; belief; never say die, never give up etc. In some Rafa is clearly superior, but in others it's not so clear to me that he is.

You make the point about Roger's performance in the Wimbledon final against Novak. I'm a little disappointed at that. I find that extremely simplistic to put that down to mental frailty. It's become so easy to lay that charge at Federer's door and I think it's largely media generated. Go back and watch that match again and you'll see that the biggest problem that Roger faced was Novak's return of serve. He simply had no answer for it and wasn't able to adjust. That's not a mental issue. Novak did what he had to do to take Roger out of his comfort zone and he won, credit to him. Sometimes it happens. That wasn't a choke job at all

I agree with this. Often the mental side of the game is overrated. I have always thought that Nadal 's advantage over Federer was more tactical than mental. We know that advantage, and Federer, more often than not, has had no answers to it. I agree that the mental side does count too, but it comes together with the technical/tactical/physical side. I remember last year when Nadal was struggling at grand slams, and people were saying his only problem was a lack confidence, which I thought was a contradiction, given that he is generally considered to be mentally the strongest tennis player ever.


Sent from my iPhone using New Forum mobile app
 
  • Like
Reactions: Federberg

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,324
Reactions
6,090
Points
113
Carol, you realize that Rafa broke Roger right after the MTO, right?
 

Carol

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
9,225
Reactions
1,833
Points
113
Carol, you realize that Rafa broke Roger right after the MTO, right?
Yes, I did but look what happened later, he was running and playing better than ever, what a coincidence!
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,324
Reactions
6,090
Points
113
Sounds like a bit of denial there, Carol. Why not just accept that your boy was out-played? It happens.
 

mrzz

Hater
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
6,331
Reactions
3,253
Points
113
That's because you tend to look at things quantitatively which I have nothing against in general, but there is a qualitative aspect to mental strength that you and others often miss. Put simply there are different types of mental strength. In certain situations a player like Rafa is able to shut out his opponent because they don't present him with match up issues that take him outside of his comfort zone. Does this make Rafa mentally stronger than another player who is not taken out of his comfort zone? Not really in my view. That's not to say that Rafa doesn't have tremendous mental strength, of course he does, but to an extent it's possible that we exaggerate it. He is incredibly resilient and doesn't give up. How many times has he come back from impossible situations? How many times has Roger? And Novak and Andy? They all have. The point I'm trying to make is that the advantages that certain players have over others is sometimes credited to mental strength when there are better explanations. When you look at these top players at their peaks and their ability to go on streaks the numbers are incredible, but there are differences. Novak and Roger have been able to really stamp their feet on the necks of the rest of the tour in a way that Rafa rarely has, in part I think, because they have a belief in their dominance that perhaps Rafa never has. He has always seemed more comfortable with being the hunter not the hunted. But as dominant as Novak has been, he hasn't had it to the same extent as Roger. Just look at how people give Novak a pass on his most dominant year when he fell away at the end while Roger went on and crushed the field right the way to the ATP finals. Similarly with Murray, the British press are giving him a pass in this recent slam because of the tear he was on at the end of last season. Need I remind everyone that Federer went 3 years virtually unbeaten against anyone not named Nadal? Anyone thinking that he was always in peak condition is kidding themselves, I'm not sure we'll ever see that kind of mental application again. But I often get the impression that some think that Novak is mentally stronger than Roger when a far simpler explanation is match stamina. Anyway my larger point is that there are many facets to mental strength: concentration; belief; never say die, never give up etc. In some Rafa is clearly superior, but in others it's not so clear to me that he is.

You make the point about Roger's performance in the Wimbledon final against Novak. I'm a little disappointed at that. I find that extremely simplistic to put that down to mental frailty. It's become so easy to lay that charge at Federer's door and I think it's largely media generated. Go back and watch that match again and you'll see that the biggest problem that Roger faced was Novak's return of serve. He simply had no answer for it and wasn't able to adjust. That's not a mental issue. Novak did what he had to do to take Roger out of his comfort zone and he won, credit to him. Sometimes it happens. That wasn't a choke job at all

I think that this is a great analysis, even if I still agree with the general notion that Nadal is "mentally stronger" than Federer, at least when they play each other. But your post is important because:

a) It puts "mental strength" into context (confort zones, strategical aspects, etc), and;
b) Analyzes different aspects of "mental strenght"

I was looking at it in a more simplistic way, that is, the ability to raise your level in important moments (which, by the way, was exactly what Federer did this time), and, on the opposite side, the ability to not fold at critical times, something which I believe Nadal is in a league of his own. People keep saying that he lost his self-confidence and etc, and, yes, maybe lately he could not raise his level at times, but I simply never saw a match were he self-destructed and gave it away. Of course he made important errors here and there, but when players self-destruct, and we see this a lot, they hand full games and sets on a plate (and generally the match). He will never give you anything for free. I guess that is the main reason why people regard Nadal as the "strongest mind" out there. As @attomole pointed, there is also the tactical side: Nadal always find the exact moment to raise his intensity. It surely "looks" like mental strength.

That´s why this final was completely insane, and if you will, an evidence against everything I said above: In the business end of the most important final in tennis history, Federer raised his level of play to an immense hight. Honestly, I have a theory of why this happened, but if you want to use this as evidence for this mental fortitude, there is not much one can argue about it.
 

Carol

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
9,225
Reactions
1,833
Points
113
Sounds like a bit of denial there, Carol. Why not just accept that your boy was out-played? It happens.
I've never said that Roger in the fifth set didn't play better than Rafa, he did and more aggressive, running very well while Rafa wasn't move so well and his serve was not working well, very easy win by Roger, happy?
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reactions
14,997
Points
113
I agree with this. Often the mental side of the game is overrated. I have always thought that Nadal 's advantage over Federer was more tactical than mental. We know that advantage, and Federer, more often than not, has had no answers to it. I agree that the mental side does count too, but it comes together with the technical/tactical/physical side. I remember last year when Nadal was struggling at grand slams, and people were saying his only problem was a lack confidence, which I thought was a contradiction, given that he is generally considered to be mentally the strongest tennis player ever.
Sent from my iPhone using New Forum mobile app
I think it's fair to say that Rafa's advantage was primarily tactical, though it became mental, on Roger's side. However, I don't think you can say that the mental side of the game is overrated, in general. I suspect you're thinking of the Big 4, but they are all pretty mentally tough, combined with superior physical skills and conditioning. But as I mentioned earlier, the mental aspect has been the difference between perfectly serviceable but not fabulous careers by some otherwise very very physically gifted players. An interesting example here: Ferrer v. Verdasco's careers. Verdasco has the bigger weapons, but the very tough and discipled Ferrer has had the better career...by far.

I think it was clear that Nadal's problems in the last few years had a lot to do with loss of confidence, and I don't see that as a contradiction. He was having injury issues, so he wasn't trusting his body, and it made him begin to lose faith in his game, his ability to come back. Plenty here have said that winning the 5-setters against Zverev and Dimitrov worked in Rafa's favor for his confidence. I think that's true. Obviously, worked against him, ultimately in this final, but I think he'll be taking a lot more confidence forward, which helps him to hit his shots. Djokovic 2.0 came into being in large part by a new-found confidence, after beating Roger in the final at the 2010 USO SF, and winning Davis Cup for Serbia. Confidence, mental toughness, belief: These are things that can make the difference at the very top of the game, and I don't think they can be overrated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shawnbm

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reactions
14,997
Points
113
I think that this is a great analysis, even if I still agree with the general notion that Nadal is "mentally stronger" than Federer, at least when they play each other. But your post is important because:

a) It puts "mental strength" into context (confort zones, strategical aspects, etc), and;
b) Analyzes different aspects of "mental strenght"

I was looking at it in a more simplistic way, that is, the ability to raise your level in important moments (which, by the way, was exactly what Federer did this time), and, on the opposite side, the ability to not fold at critical times, something which I believe Nadal is in a league of his own. People keep saying that he lost his self-confidence and etc, and, yes, maybe lately he could not raise his level at times, but I simply never saw a match were he self-destructed and gave it away. Of course he made important errors here and there, but when players self-destruct, and we see this a lot, they hand full games and sets on a plate (and generally the match). He will never give you anything for free. I guess that is the main reason why people regard Nadal as the "strongest mind" out there. As @attomole pointed, there is also the tactical side: Nadal always find the exact moment to raise his intensity. It surely "looks" like mental strength.

That´s why this final was completely insane, and if you will, an evidence against everything I said above: In the business end of the most important final in tennis history, Federer raised his level of play to an immense hight. Honestly, I have a theory of why this happened, but if you want to use this as evidence for this mental fortitude, there is not much one can argue about it.
As to bolded, I would point to the match with Fognini at the USO 2015, as one example. He doesn't self-destruct like obvious head-cases, but that was a complete collapse by Rafa's standards. There are others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Federberg

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reactions
14,997
Points
113
I've never said that Roger in the fifth set didn't play better than Rafa, he did and more aggressive, running very well while Rafa wasn't move so well and his serve was not working well, very easy win by Roger, happy?
Carol, I know you are a committed fan, but you watch all of his matches through Nadal-tinted goggles. And I don't think your insistence that he played better during much of the match actually helps the cause. I would say, and most have agreed, that Rafa looked flat much of the match. He didn't find a lot of winners. He played Roger tough, and got ahead when he found his advantages, because Roger was uneven, as well. But, at 30, the effects of the Dimitrov match clearly affected him. If he'd played his best, I think he very well might have beaten Roger. But he didn't play his best, for barely any moment in the match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MargaretMcAleer

mrzz

Hater
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
6,331
Reactions
3,253
Points
113
As to bolded, I would point to the match with Fognini at the USO 2015, as one example. He doesn't self-destruct like obvious head-cases, but that was a complete collapse by Rafa's standards. There are others.

You said it all, by Nadal standards. And you have to consider yet the physical part, which was a factor then, I guess. And (I hate to admit it), Fognini played well (argh, I cannot stand the guy). Believe me I was rooting for Nadal on that one (maybe this is why he lost).
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reactions
14,997
Points
113
You said it all, by Nadal standards. And you have to consider yet the physical part, which was a factor then, I guess. And (I hate to admit it), Fognini played well (argh, I cannot stand the guy). Believe me I was rooting for Nadal on that one (maybe this is why he lost).
Yes, but Rafa let him in, and gave him hope. Yes, Fabio stepped up and played great, at the end. But it's a little like, IMO, why Novak lost RG in 2015. He had a lead over Stan, and pulled back, as he was so nervous to lose. He counted on Stan not really being able to redline his game for 3 sets, but the more he gave Stan fuel, the more Stan fed on it. I'm not saying Wawrinka didn't play a great match...he did. But Djokovic's hesitancy helped feed the fire. These are intangibles, but, when you're watching the match, you see them in real time.
 

Carol

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
9,225
Reactions
1,833
Points
113
Carol, I know you are a committed fan, but you watch all of his matches through Nadal-tinted goggles. And I don't think your insistence that he played better during much of the match actually helps the cause. I would say, and most have agreed, that Rafa looked flat much of the match. He didn't find a lot of winners. He played Roger tough, and got ahead when he found his advantages, because Roger was uneven, as well. But, at 30, the effects of the Dimitrov match clearly affected him. If he'd played his best, I think he very well might have beaten Roger. But he didn't play his best, for barely any moment in the match.
I have not any idea why you say that I see his matches with " tinted goggles". When I have said that Rafa played very good in the final? he didn't play bad but not too good. To me both players didn't play well , too much up and down, sometimes better sometimes worse until the fifth set where after 8 or 10 minutes Roger started to play better than ever and running like a possessed while Rafa on the contrary looked more tired and his serve not so good. I don't know what you have seen
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reactions
14,997
Points
113
I have not any idea why you say that I see his matches with " tinted goggles". When I have said that Rafa played very good in the final? he didn't play bad but not too good. To me both players didn't play well , too much up and down, sometimes better sometimes worse until the fifth set where after 8 or 10 minutes Roger started to play better than ever and running like a possessed while Rafa on the contrary looked more tired and his serve not so good. I don't know what you have seen
And I guess I don't know what you saw. If you think Rafa played well, I don't know how you're a fan. He'd brought a much better level the whole tournament. He never got to a level of "fresh" for that match, and yes, Roger was fresher, so he was able to outlast Rafa in the 5th.
 

Carol

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
9,225
Reactions
1,833
Points
113
And I guess I don't know what you saw. If you think Rafa played well, I don't know how you're a fan. He'd brought a much better level the whole tournament. He never got to a level of "fresh" for that match, and yes, Roger was fresher, so he was able to outlast Rafa in the 5th.
Moxie, again, when I have said that Rafa played well, I mean really well? obviously the previous match (he played much better IMO) and only one day to rest didn't help him too much.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reactions
14,997
Points
113
Moxie, again, when I have said that Rafa played well, I mean really well? obviously the previous match (he played much better IMO) and only one day to rest didn't help him too much.
OK, agreed. Is it too much a further step to say that Roger played better? He did win.
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,324
Reactions
6,090
Points
113
I've never said that Roger in the fifth set didn't play better than Rafa, he did and more aggressive, running very well while Rafa wasn't move so well and his serve was not working well, very easy win by Roger, happy?

Not really. Actually, I feel kind of bad now. I apologize for goading you - I know it is painful to see your guy lose. Believe me, I know! Be hopeful, because Rafa looks the best I've seen him since 2014...I'll give you, that you were always hopeful and look to be right when I and many others were wrong about him!
 
  • Like
Reactions: shawnbm and Moxie

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,639
Reactions
5,729
Points
113
Talking about mental toughness. It's going to be interesting to see if Roger gets new found belief after his victory over Rafa. It's going to be even more interesting to see if that loss has an effect on Rafa. Losing from a breakdown in a 5th set is a real stinger. This is the sort of adversity that confirms the legend of the greats