Was Federer better in 2006? (Poll added)

First topic message reminder :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOQp62NI2_I

I don't think so! His today's shots are actually better, more agressive, including his FH. It might be that it seemed windy that day and he tried to keep the ball in court so used a lot of spin. But in general I find his shots today smoother, his BH slice for instance is more elegant. His shot selection is also better now. You can tell he has learnt to play Nadal...over the last few years. The problem is that Nadal got even stronger.

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:Best thread ever

Thanks NITB.

I agree it was quite interesting.

I even learnt some things myself.
Real Fed fans don't want to consider that Fed's tennis might be overtaken/overpowered.
Djoko and Nadal fans are very keen to support the idea that their men are beating a peak Federer.
Others have considered the idea that Federer is playing at a higher level now than then, even if more erratic or more precisely, more selective about his commitment on the tour.
I even found Lydian a supporter of my observation.

Thanks to all anyway for participating.

What? You mean the discussion is closed? The fun has just begun, Tenez...
This "Djoko" fan has actually cemented the position that has so succinctly been summed up in my nickname
I can't wait for the Was Djoko 2017 better than Djoko 2011

Nole is the Best - the discussion is now closed.

Seeing as everyones making closing statements, I'll just say that even though I don't think you're entirely correct tenez I've shifted my viewpoint a lot more towards where you're coming from. I guess I never adequately took into account the evolution of the game. When Fed first brought that style, he displayed amazing possibilities in shotmaking. He was a pioneer. Once it is seen however, you expect the rest of the tour to eventually catch on; I even remember seeing Roddick hitting one of Feds trademark shots in one of his matches. The shotmaking bar does get raised as well as the physical I suppose.

I wouldn't agree that his best performances now are better in every way than they were back then in that he loses focus too often but perhaps you're on to something in saying that his shots are better than they ever were. Only when he's focussed though.

I guess what ultimately distinguishes him from the other pioneers is that he's still competing with the next generation in these new conditions and has a lot left to give at this stage.

As for the difficulty of a Fed fan admitting that Novak and Rafa are beating a peak Fed playing at his absolute best, well I've been ready to accept Rafa as the better player if the time comes. It's not of that much consequence though as I can still be happy that my favourite player had so much success playing his way without the need to tag 'greatest ever' on to him.

break_in_the_fifth wrote:As for the difficulty of a Fed fan admitting that Novak and Rafa are beating a peak Fed playing at his absolute best, well I've been ready to accept Rafa as the better player if the time comes.

You see you are more converted than I am. I still think the best of Fed is better than anyone out there across all surfaces. His best however is not something he can produce everyday on demand though. That's the problem and this is why he is more erratic. In 2006 his off days were better than anybody out there. Nowadays an off day can be punished by a handful of players. Whereas his top 3 opponents are much more consistant cause they base their form on their superior phyisique and not sharp talent as they have more margins in their shots than Federer.

I suppose that's what drew me to his game; he walks such a fine line between genius and mediocrity. In the long run though other approaches may prove to be better in terms of pure winning. I see where you're coming from when you say his best is still the best as whenever I watch him play and he's losing I always get the feeling that he wouldn't be if he'd just play 'properly'.

From Nadal's biography....

"Next, I lay down on a massage table and Holly Wilaboobieín wrapped a couple of straps of bandage around my legs, just below the knees. I’d had aches there too, and the straps helped prevent soreness, or eased the pain if it came.

Playing sports is a good thing for ordinary people; sport played at the professional level is not good for your health.

It pushes your body to limits that human beings are not naturally equipped to handle. That’s why just about every top professional athlete has been laid low by injury, sometimes a career-ending injury. There was a moment in my career when I seriously wondered whether I’d be able to continue competing at the top level. I play through pain much of the time, but I think all elite sports people do.

All except Federer, at any rate. I’ve had to push and mold my body to adapt it to cope with the repetitive muscular stress that tennis forces on you, but he just seems to have been born to play the game. His physique—his DNA—seems perfectly adapted to tennis, rendering him immune to the injuries the rest of us are doomed to put up with. They tell me he doesn’t train as hard as I do. I don’t know if it’s true, but it would figure. You get these blessed freaks of nature in other sports, too.

The rest of us just have to learn to live with pain, and long breaks from the game, because a foot, a shoulder, or a leg has sent a cry for help to the brain, asking it to stop. That’s why I need to have so much bandaging done before a match; that’s why it’s such a critical part of my preparations.

Very interesting stuff there from Rafa. Not least that contrast he draws between amateur and professional sport as regards its effects on one's health

(btw .... is that Holly Wilaboobiein the same one who appears as captain of one of the teams in Celebrity Juice ....?? )

bitf - And we see he can win sets and matches v Djoko on all surfaces and he can even win sets v Nadal on clay. On clay he essentially fails over the distance v Nadal. In 2006, he won the first sets convincingly, in 2007, he loses the first set despite creating 10 BPs!!! yet can't convert a single one, in 2011, he is largely ahead in that first set and gets SP even.

However he is under such pressure to grab those key points in early sets to avoid rallying for 5 set with a certain loss at the end that he doesn;t make the most of them. No different than Djoko before Djoko coudl rally with Nadal.

So no doubt Djoko and Rafa are more consitent over Federer, especially over 5 sets, but on a form day, I'd still pick Federer over those 2 on any surface.

laverfan wrote:

Playing sports is a good thing for ordinary people; sport played at the professional level is not good for your health.

This is what GP was saying a few weeks ago.

Tenez wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Playing sports is a good thing for ordinary people; sport played at the professional level is not good for your health.

This is what GP was saying a few weeks ago.

There is something to be said about Professional vs Amateur days, but when one is required to practice 8-10 hours a day, how does one consider it 'play' and not a 'job'? Also the question of earning a livelihood always looms large, even for the top elite of any sport.

"I think I have played my best tennis this season," said the 29-year-old Spaniard at The O2 on Saturday. "It is tricky to say how I have become more consistent, but I think I am more experienced. I am improving my tennis each day and I feel fitter."

Ferrer, you "don't make sense"!

If today's Federer was better than 2006, then he has been the luckiest sportsperson of all time winning as much as he did! But Tenez would want us to believe that it is indeed so!

He played such a tentative and low energy match against Tsonga that it was a mini-miracle to see him win...

PLease stop posting here each time Federer has a bad day. It's a bit ridiculous considering he had plenty of those matches already in 2006 and not against Tsonga but Rochus (twice), Suzuki, Clement, 19yo Djoko, Roddick, Blake, Giquel, Shishrapan, Ginepri and others!!!

Please bring valuable arguments and we are not going find any this week as Federer has to deal with the best players of 2011.

I don't know about the others, but Schrichapan was phenomenal in that match in 2006 against Federer. Try watching the replay on Youtube.

Chazfazzer wrote:I don't know about the others, but Schrichapan was phenomenal in that match in 2006 against Federer. Try watching the replay on Youtube.

They were all good in their own way and they were the best of that time (well at least Roddick and Blake). But none had Tsonga's serve, speed on court and could pull 170kmh FHs (all that in one player).

If this threads closing down I'd say for my part that his very best now is his best ever (mainly driven by improved serve and bh) but he turns in so very little best these days that overall he's a worse player than 2006, by quite some distance.

Those off days as you say were still looking good for the time in 2006 cause not many coudl take advantage of those and despite an off day, a good BH and FH were enough to keep us happy and impressed. Now we expect much more and so are his opponents.

Back then you would not have heard the number 1, or any number one saying he might retire at 26 cause it's physically too tough out there.

No, his off days now are worse than anything I would watch back then. His 2011 off days are frankly awful.

Tenez wrote:PLease stop posting here each time Federer has a bad day. It's a bit ridiculous considering he had plenty of those matches already in 2006 and not against Tsonga but Rochus (twice), Suzuki, Clement, 19yo Djoko, Roddick, Blake, Giquel, Shishrapan, Ginepri and others!!!

Please bring valuable arguments and we are not going find any this week as Federer has to deal with the best players of 2011.

If only you promise not to use any good day Fed has now to compare with his days in 2006!
I respect your views a lot, I really do but if you or anyone had seen that match yesterday, you would be able to fully feel the flaws in your arguments in this thread.

Frankly, Tsonga was awful in the first set, played well in the second in which he beat Fed easily and then again, melted down in towards the third set. It was not as if Tsonga was overpowering Fed with his serves or FHs, Fed was simply no match till Tsonga decided to gift Fed a win.

The original point to this post was to ask if Federer is better now than in 2006 was it not?

Well I've given my answer already - no he is not. What am I basing this on? A few things that have bothered me with Fed's performances this year and end results that just were not there in 2006 and ones that those that think Fed is better now can't answer.

Why, when it has never happened before in his career has he lost two matches (in slams which are/were his strengths) from two sets up in key matches on surfaces he owned in the past?

Why have the slam wins dried up over the last two years (now) completely? I mean if he is better now he'd be achieving what he was in 2006. After all, even if the competition has improved then (as the OP is suggesting) so has Fed so it should be status quo ie Fed winning handfuls of slams per year but he isn't. Why?

Fedex_the_best wrote:

Tenez wrote:PLease stop posting here each time Federer has a bad day. It's a bit ridiculous considering he had plenty of those matches already in 2006 and not against Tsonga but Rochus (twice), Suzuki, Clement, 19yo Djoko, Roddick, Blake, Giquel, Shishrapan, Ginepri and others!!!

Please bring valuable arguments and we are not going find any this week as Federer has to deal with the best players of 2011.

If only you promise not to use any good day Fed has now to compare with his days in 2006!
I respect your views a lot, I really do but if you or anyone had seen that match yesterday, you would be able to fully feel the flaws in your arguments in this thread.

Frankly, Tsonga was awful in the first set, played well in the second in which he beat Fed easily and then again, melted down in towards the third set. It was not as if Tsonga was overpowering Fed with his serves or FHs, Fed was simply no match till Tsonga decided to gift Fed a win.

But Fedex could not you see that all players were playing awful yesterday? Could not you see that on atrocious conditions, playing on sandpaper with an uncontrollable spin, all players were struggling to time the ball? And despite that could not you see who displayed the best performance out of the four? Your man again, at 30! despite the conds favouring the big hitters!

despite the conds favouring the big hitters!

Federer is/should be a big hitter himself; he's always had one of the most powerful forehands on tour - it's sad to see him getting bullied around by a player like Tsonga. The hitting Federer produced in the US Open final in 2004, for instance, was some of the biggest I've ever seen.

Federer is a big hitter on fast condistions. His technique creates more pace when there is pace. But the heavy hitters like Berdych, Tsonga and Soderling can hit through slow courts like Federer cannot. So either Federer deals with a soft ball or an uncotrollable one. I thought you woudl know that Chazz.

And you keep going about " a player like Tsonga". Tsonga is an excellent player when he finds his range. I think everybody knows that. He just lacks a slam but he is not the only who can balst anybody off court on the day. He has had consistent results this year, he is number 6 in the world and he is more likely going up than down!

And yes he is much more mobile than Safin and can generate pace from any position.

The game has been littered with huge hitters down the years who havent won slams but caused the big names trouble, e.g. Thomas Enqvist for one. But its not the core defining feature for winning the big events. What separates the top guys is movement, consistent execution, mental strength at crunch moments, and stamina. Looking at 2 big hitters - Tsonga is still a little wooden at times for me...once he's planted then yes he can crack the ball but invariably the top 4 move him around too much and then becomes error strewn. For Berdy, movement isnt so much the problem although I think he;s not amongst the best movers, his problem is whats upstairs and consistency. So big flat hitting is very effective but how often are these types of guys winning slams? (and re: flat-hitters winning slams, please dont include Djokovic given his extreme western forehand...)

Lydian... take a look at this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=00ITUo1hsio

Great tennis LF...have always said how underappreciated Lendl is in the history books. One of the alltime best given the differing excellent competition he had to fight against through the 80s into early 90s.

Lendl could really flatten the ball, when he chose.

Er, on the evidence of tonight Federer has never been better.

yeah it's looking good for tenez's argument. I think I was already persuaded that Fed's best was better than before but I guess today confirmed it.

Thanks guys. I'll concede that consistency is not as good as then (but I never said so). However the fact today is that drop of forms from Federer are exploited by a fitter opposition whereas in 2006 he could get away even on a bad day cause back then he was still H&S above the rest.

But what we coudl see tonight is that his footwork is not slower, or certainly not as obvious as some want us to believe.

Nadal didn't put much pressure on Federer though, even a retired Henman would've made it more of a match.

Yeah Federer was awesome, but Nadal was really poor I thought; he'd just given up by the end. So much for his fighting spirit that the commentators always go on about! It's such a turnaround from earlier on in the year when Nadal handed Federer a beating by a similarly easy scoreline (well, maybe not quite as easy!); it shows that just small changes in form can have such drastic effects on the outcome of a match.

I don;t thnk Nadal was poor at all. SOme clearly keep moving the goal post ...no more than Nadal is always poor when his opponent executes to perefection. Any drop of level from Federer and Nadal woudl have been all over him....you coudl have said the same of FO 2011....the difference today is that Federer kept improving with the set in the bag.

Nadal 2006 was much poorer in fact.

The winners that Nadal hit were well placed. It wasn't as if Nadal was hitting UEs all over the place so its hard to reason that he was off based on anything other than the ease of the victory.

Nadal 2006 was much poorer in fact.

Just to be clear here - Federer was absolutely brilliant today; best I've seen him play since...well the Australian Open 07 springs to mind.

Generally I would agree that Nadal has got better since 2006, but today he just seemed underpowered and bereft of ideas. His serving was really poor; he barely went above 115mph in the whole match, and his shots lacked any sort of power. Federer put him away comfortably, but I have no doubt the 06/07 version would have done so too. Having said that, your argument certainly gained more credence today!

break_in_the_fifth wrote:It wasn't as if Nadal was hitting UEs all over the place so its hard to reason that he was off based on anything other than the ease of the victory.

Winners/UEs - Federer 28/8, Nadal 4/7. Total points won Federer 54/81, Nadal 27/81. Nadal did not seem to have recovered from his tribulations on Monday.

I stand by what I said LF, apart from Nadal's appearance and demeanour, you could say he looked subdued or ill or whatever, your stats are fairly typical. 7 UEs is not big for one match and the 4 winners, well last year Fed had hit 10 before Nadal hit 1.

Oh I dont know BITF, Nadal was very subpar tonight...he just looked impotent...no power, serve was weak, all hits shots were midcourt, no penetration and he also looked lack-lustre. Thats not to take it away from fed who played out of his skin but lets not kid ourselves this was vintage Nadal...I agree with LF, he looked blown out from Sunday plus he's still rusty from the 5 weeks lay-off. That's not really a good combination and then to meet Fed in that kind of form was always going to be a disaster waiting to happen in hindsight.

A lot of defeatism before this match by the fed fans on this forum - and a lot of triumphalism after. Both of which only pay tribute to Rafa and how he's got into the head of Federer's fans more than the man himself. Nadal is a wonderful player, almost as effective on a tennis court as Federer, but is in a bad moment and no surprise he was well beaten by the in-form champ.

lydian, I didn't think that was Nadal anywhere near his best that Fed beat tonight. I guess what I was trying to say is he didn't give the match away through UEs but like you pointed out about the depth of his shots, there's other ways to make it easier for your opponent.

Nadal was just Nadal. In fact much better than 2 days ago and much better than last year in that O2 final where he was clearly exhausted.

The fact is Nadal was already for Federer to drop form. As he says himself, against Fed, you just have to be patient.....except that tonight he is still waiting for Federer to drop form.

Frankly when was the last time Nadal played well? FO 2008 final? That's cause Federer was certainly under par. Beside what people say, Nadal never convinced me in 2010 either. He played inexperienced players in finals and struggled in a few of his previous matches.

Nadal plays well when he wins, and that never looks easy and effortless. I thought Tonight Nadal was ready. The problem is that he had no ball to hit!

Tenez wrote:Nadal was just Nadal. In fact much better than 2 days ago and much better than last year in that O2 final where he was clearly exhausted.

The fact is Nadal was already for Federer to drop form. As he says himself, against Fed, you just have to be patient.....except that tonight he is still waiting for Federer to drop form.

Frankly when was the last time Nadal played well? FO 2008 final? That's cause Federer was certainly under par. Beside what people say, Nadal never convinced me in 2010 either. He played inexperienced players in finals and struggled in a few of his previous matches.

Nadal plays well when he wins, and that never looks easy and effortless. I thought Tonight Nadal was ready. The problem is that he had no ball to hit!

The indoor conditions also seem to favour Roger's game. Nadal's tactic of going to Fed's backhand ended up with Roger using the backhand to take control of points (I recall one instance where he pushed Nadal off the court with one of his backhand shots), and even to hit winners. That was extremely decisive. Also, this is not clay. At RG 2011, I knew Roger was up against it when he was serving at 5-2 in the first set, because clay is tailor made for Rafa's game, his impressive on other surfaces notwithstanding. At 5-3, Roger did not even give Rafa a glimpse.

If Roger can keep up this sort of form next year, he will be very difficult to beat.

That will depend on his motivation of course.

kemet wrote:The indoor conditions also seem to favour Roger's game. Nadal's tactic of going to Fed's backhand ended up with Roger using the backhand to take control of points (I recall one instance where he pushed Nadal off the court with one of his backhand shots), and even to hit winners. That was extremely decisive. Also, this is not clay. At RG 2011, I knew Roger was up against it when he was serving at 5-2 in the first set, because clay is tailor made for Rafa's game, his impressive on other surfaces notwithstanding. At 5-3, Roger did not even give Rafa a glimpse.

If Roger can keep up this sort of form next year, he will be very difficult to beat.

That will depend on his motivation of course.

He also got to set point in the FO. That's why I don't want to say Rafa was under par yesterday cause the difference between FO and O2 is how Fed played that BP (maybe subject of a new thread thanks to greasepipe). Afterwards Fed simply played like someone who had a set in the bag as opposed to somone who had just lost another tight set v Nadal. Had he won that SP in the FO, I am pretty convinced he would have played better onwards and probably have won that title.

It's not clay the issue, it's the fact that wind, bad bounces etc.. can certainly affect his rhythm and more importantly, sharpness, forcing him to play with more saftey in mind, allowing Nadal to get on all the balls and play longer rallies that will kill Federer over the distance.

And I have no doubt about his motivation but we cannot expect him to produce this kind of tennis on demand. He is relying more than any other opponent on his form of the day, not on his lungs.

Tenez, you might not want to say that Rafa was under par yesterday. But he simply was. He's not on form, his tennis balls are landing mid-court, his confidence looks shot to pieces thanks to all those final defeats and it's the end of season where he's always poor anyway.

When I've beaten someone I sometimes like to say to my opponenent, if they're a good friend that is, that I thought that it was the best they've ever played against me. It's a joke - as is the idea that Rafa was playing anything like his best tennis last night.

I have no problem saying Nadal is under par when he is. I keep saying that he is under par 6 months out of 12. But yesterday he was perfectly fine. His mouvement was excellent and his ball striking was pretty good...when he was given a ball.

He was in much better form than in last year's final for instance where there he was clearly tired. And a 100 times better than just 2 days ago.

Are you saying that Nadal is past his peak again...at 25?

Jarvik wrote:A lot of defeatism before this match by the fed fans on this forum - and a lot of triumphalism after. Both of which only pay tribute to Rafa and how he's got into the head of Federer's fans more than the man himself. Nadal is a wonderful player, almost as effective on a tennis court as Federer, but is in a bad moment and no surprise he was well beaten by the in-form champ.

I think you'll find plenty of pessimism from Fed fans before most matches these days, mainly because they've become used to inconsistency.

Still, it's worth it for the mastercalsss last night.

Nadal was fit as a fiddle last night. But his shot-making was poorer than usual. If you are presenting your opponent with shoulder height balls to his backhand then you'd better make sure you are hitting the corners - and Rafa wasn't. doing that They were landing mid-court and Federer's backhand wasn't put under any real pressure. Indeed, by the end the Fed BH was totally in the zone and it was embarrassingly one-sided.

I think you have to distinguish between form and fitness. Rafa looks physically fine but his hitting in this match, as it was on Sunday, wasn't enough to trouble RF.

Past his peak at 25? No, he can be great next year, he's still a young man. His late twenties will likely not bring the success of his early twenties but that's a different debating point. However, last night was about a man out of form and out of confidence.

Jarvik wrote:Tenez, you might not want to say that Rafa was under par yesterday. But he simply was. He's not on form, his tennis balls are landing mid-court, his confidence looks shot to pieces thanks to all those final defeats and it's the end of season where he's always poor anyway.

When I've beaten someone I sometimes like to say to my opponenent, if they're a good friend that is, that I thought that it was the best they've ever played against me. It's a joke - as is the idea that Rafa was playing anything like his best tennis last night.

Jarvik, I understand what you are saying. I am a big blind Fed fan but I could still see that Nadal was not at his best. He was not chasing balls that he normally does and neither was he trying all his ugly tactics aka mindless moon-balling, hustling for each and every ball to retreive etc etc. May be he realised that this is not GS final, may be because he knew this is indoors and Fed is playing good so there is no use punishing himself in a RR format when he can relax and try and win against Tsonga. Whatever it is, Nadal was not at his ugly best. Dont mistake me, he could still have lost easily but he was clearly not playing the best, imho!

And to someone else's comments on Nadal's view of Fed's tennis - yes, I have read Nadal's biography and he mentions that there are times when Fed plays well (he says that in effect to Fed's awesome start to the 2nd set of Wimby 2008) and there is nothing which an opponent can do but wait. And this comment was very different to the one posted by another poster on Nadal's comparison of Fed and Nole. On a similar note, Fed said things to the same effect for Davydenko in AO 2010 that when Davy has such brilliant streaks, he just waits for it to come down.

Jarvik wrote:A lot of defeatism before this match by the fed fans on this forum - and a lot of triumphalism after. Both of which only pay tribute to Rafa and how he's got into the head of Federer's fans more than the man himself.

That's fair enough - he certainly puts me behind the sofa as a Federer fan, and when Fed beats him its absolutely fantastic. It is a tribute to Nadal for sure. It's also fair to point out that Federer is clearly not mentally weak as some unfairly say he is - he keeps on going for it and each of them know they have to be at their absolute best when they play the other or its curtains.