Federer - is it the mind or the body?

by HM Murdock Thu 26 Jan 2012, 12:53 pm

First topic message reminder :

One or both is not working as it should anymore. Last four slams:

FO. Goes 5-2 up in the first set but loses that set and eventually loses in 4.

W. Goes 2 sets up and loses in 5.

US. Goes 2 sets up and loses in 5 (after two match points on serve).

AO. Wins first set but loses in 4. Fails to hold any break advantage outside of tie break.

His career proves him to be a player of brilliance but he no longer seems capable of holding on to a lead. So what is letting him down now - the mind or the body? Or both?

by **owen10ozzy** Thu 26 Jan 2012, 6:17 pm

No credit to be taken by myself but think this is an excellent post and for me somes up the problem with Federer against Nadal perfectly:

Why picking on Federer's mental strength?
by Chydremion Today at 5:02 pm

.Federer's (lack of?) mental strength is not the main reason he lost the match against Nadal.
All those top players are mental giants, otherwise they wouldn't be so high ranked. But it's the match-up that's killing Federer. It has become even worse than in the past. It's not just TS forehand to 1H backhand anymore. I only saw the last set of the match, but wherever Nadal was firing his pacy, heavy topspin balls, it got Federer into trouble. As soon as he had to run, the point was basically lost. Federer doesn't have the speed or stamina (anymore?) to cope with this physical brand of tennis his rivals are playing. Whether it's age or lack of physical training, I don't know. No wonder he opted for the ultra-agressive approach, which we all know doesn't do the job against Nadal these days on these courts. The better Federer hits his shot, the better they come back. I saw him hit perfect forehands that on faster courts would have been instant winners, only to get owned by the return (like on his breakpoint in the final game). Federer is still playing well, but his game, which worked so well several years ago, is getting hopelesly outdated (at least against his rivals).

So what were people expecting? That Federer would get the belief to beat Nadal out of nowhere, while he had barely beaten him in these conditions his whole career? That he would push a magic button so every shot would find the lines ten times in a row until he had the point? Everyone (except the most ardent Federer fans) knew Nadal was going to win. I knew it, despite having been a big Federer fan in the past, Nadal knew it (read his book), I guess Federer himself knew it. Winning tennis matches is about playing in your comfort zone, which Djokovic and Nadal have been doing extremely well recently. Having to hit 10 'would be' winners in a row to get a point, and repeating this for several hours, is playing extremely out of your comfort zone, even for Federer. So while Federer starts to tire quickly mentally, Nadal knows he just has to hang in till results go his way. No wonder he has a 'mental edge' over Federer. No wonder we saw no belief in Roger's eyes and body language. We don't see the belief in Nadal when he plays djokovic either, despite being a mental giant. Why? Because he has to go out of his comfort zone, becoming ultra-agressive with the forehand (at least) to beat Djokovic, while the Serb simply plays his game. I have to admit, mental strength plays its part. Roger's clueless kamikaze rushes to the net show that he's not mentally 100% against Nadal. But Nadal's missed smashes against Djokovic on keymoments tell the same story. But the mental edge is often merely a by-product of the edge gamewise.

I read people blaming Federer for not having worked Nadal out after all these years. Honestly, Nadal has been worked out. What you need to beat him is great speed and stamina and a doublehanded backhand. You would have to play what Tenez calls 'the physical game'. It would be a huge transformation of Federer's game, I don't think its realistic. Unfortunately I have to agree with what some Nadal fanatics like to say all the time: For the last several years Federer hasn't beaten Nadal (outdoor) when Nadal was fit. He can't. And he won't do it either in the future. He might give his fans a glimp of hope by winning a set or go up a break, eventually the result is as predictable as me playing against Nadal. The result is out of Federer's control.

by Tenez Thu 26 Jan 2012, 6:20 pm

luciusmann wrote:From what Fed's said (I quoted him earlier) and the fact Nadal has a clear plan (as he says in his biography) yes, mental. It doesn't really matter how good Nadal's plan is to be honest, it doesn't even need to be really good but the key is that he executes it superbly and that rattles Federer because he doesn't know how to reply. Hitting better shots will win Federer a few battles during the match, but as we seen today, we know who won the war.

You mean the way he places the ball or teh energy he puts in the ball. Why couldn;t he execute that well in Nov 11? Why do you think then Fed controlled the ball beautifully whereas today the ball was hit too hard and too spinny.

Cannot you see the difference in the "quality" of the ball between then and today? It's absolutely huge. It;s no different than Nadal playing Murray in slams and being kicked and then bagelling Nadal in Tokyo's final. Murray was timing the ball beautifully in Tokyo whereas in the slams Murray could not control hit as well.

Djoko also had that "mental" block v Rafa, never beating Rafa in a slam or even in a final.....a fit Djoko had no problem.

In a sport like tennis one is as strong mentally as he is strong physically.

by Tenez Thu 26 Jan 2012, 6:24 pm

owen10ozzy wrote:Roger's clueless kamikaze rushes to the net show that he's not mentally 100% against Nadal. .

[/quote]

Actually that if anything confirms again that he is not physically prepared to rally with Nadal. It;s not a choice. It's go for broke or die axphysiated.

by reckoner Thu 26 Jan 2012, 6:35 pm

Tenez wrote:
owen10ozzy wrote:Roger's clueless kamikaze rushes to the net show that he's not mentally 100% against Nadal. .

Actually that if anything confirms again that he is not physically prepared to rally with Nadal. It;s not a choice. It's go for broke or die axphysiated.[/quote]

Meh I think Federer could try a couple of things. He almost had those two sets - he just lapsed into old habits when under pressure, and that is something he can work on.

by amritia3ee Thu 26 Jan 2012, 7:53 pm

Tenez wrote:well you right, don't be pedanticl cause law is typically about logic. So evidence is not automatically proof.

Sour grapes from some Fed fans today Sad

Feds still a great player, how about you just take the defeat gracefully just like he did instead of gross speculation and hope for somehow devaluing Nadal.

by **laverfan** Thu 26 Jan 2012, 7:56 pm

Please keep the invective down and stick to the subject. No poster abuse please. Wink

As an observer.

Federer takes the first set. Up a break and is broken at love, the next game. Erm

by Josiah Maiestas Thu 26 Jan 2012, 8:00 pm

amritia3ee wrote:
Tenez wrote:well you right, don't be pedanticl cause law is typically about logic. So evidence is not automatically proof.
Sour grapes from some Fed fans today
Feds still a great player, how about you just take the defeat gracefully just like he did instead of gross speculation and hope for somehow devaluing Nadal.

Because he lost to a far lesser ball striking talent, Fed fans would accept it if he lost to someone good like Nalbandian or Del Potro, who don't rely on slowing down tactics...

by **laverfan** Thu 26 Jan 2012, 8:03 pm

Federer also managed to handle rain delays relatively well, but could not handle the fireworks, losing 11 points in a row.

In his post-match press interview, he remembers playing Hewitt during Australia day at a previous AO.

by reckoner Thu 26 Jan 2012, 8:07 pm

laverfan wrote:Federer also managed to handle rain delays relatively well, but could not handle the fireworks, losing 11 points in a row.

In his post-match press interview, he remembers playing Hewitt during Australia day at a previous AO.

he played terribly IMO. lack of sleep / nerves probably.

by **laverfan** Thu 26 Jan 2012, 8:11 pm

reckoner wrote:

he played terribly IMO. lack of sleep / nerves probably.

Did his daughters keep him awake? Erm

by reckoner Thu 26 Jan 2012, 8:12 pm

laverfan wrote:
reckoner wrote:

he played terribly IMO. lack of sleep / nerves probably.

Did his daughters keep him awake?

more the thought of the impending match I'd imagine!

by Leff Fri 27 Jan 2012, 4:39 am

by socal1976 Fri 27 Jan 2012, 6:16 am

Definetly, fed has a mental problem in big points against Nadal. Even going back to 07 wimby before mono and eventhough he won that match, Federer had a terrible conversion rate for break points in that match and that trend against Nadal has held up ever since. Back in 07 wimby he was pretty much at or very close to his physical peak. Had no illness or injury issues and from the first set of that match on kept wasting break points. He did it again in the 08 wimby and again last night and pretty much in most of his matchups against Nadal. Nadal saves a higher percentage of break points against Fed than he does against the tour at large.

This doesn't mean Fed is mentally weak but it does mean that Nadal does have an edge mentally in their matchup. And this has been apparent from his youth.

Those that say Fed has a matchup problem with his one handed backhand are also correct but there is no denying that Fed tightens up in the big points against Nadal in a way that he doesn't do against anyone else on tour.

by prostaff85 Fri 27 Jan 2012, 7:17 am

Yes it looks like Fed feels intimidated by Nadal, and in fact against Djokovic as well.

Federer has a game that requires full confidence that he can win: he plays high-risk shots but will produce a lot a unforced errors if his timing is not 100% right. Most of the other top players have a much "safer" game.

I'm afraid that Fed will also start losing to Murray once Lendl has trained him to be as tough as Rafa and Novak...

by socal1976 Fri 27 Jan 2012, 7:32 am

Well prostaff, in Fed's heyday there were a lot of players who just conceded to him. Mentally deep down they knew they didn't have a chance and the match was over before it even began. A lot of them lost the match before it began and Roger won a lot of points and matches on intimidation. Nadal with his never say die attitude, his talent, effectively turned the tables on Fed.

I think that Fed still doesn't quite have that same fear factor with Djoko, although Novak is getting there. And of course Fed is ageing but this trend was apparent before he started losing it physically.

by prostaff85 Fri 27 Jan 2012, 7:48 am

You're right he did beat Novak at the French last year, although he almost let it slip away in the 4th set! Had he lost that, he'd be on 4-0 losing streak in Slam matches. On the other hand, in those US Open matches he could not have been closer to winning them!

I just hope he'll pull off one or two more great wins before he hangs up his racket. In the last 8 Slams, he's made the final only once... Can he do something similar to Sampras e.g. at the US Open?

by break_in_the_fifth Fri 27 Jan 2012, 7:52 am

I think maybe he puts too much pressure on himself as the number 3 player and "GOAT". Maybe he'll need to fall as low as Sampras was so no one gives him any chance whatsoever in order for him to win another slam.

by socal1976 Fri 27 Jan 2012, 8:16 am

Break and prostaff, I think Fed may still have one more slam in him. His best shot would be either at wimby or the US open. For Fed to win he needs Nadal not to be in his draw. I honestly don't think he has it in him to beat Nadal in a 5 set match. Nadal is a weaker indoor player and most of feds recent success against Nadal has come in indoor 3 setters and I can't see Fed beating Nadal at this stage in any other setting.

by break_in_the_fifth Fri 27 Jan 2012, 8:40 am

Funnily enough even after yesterday I still live in hope. Aside from my B game idea where he learns a bit of consistent but not amazing tennis to fall back on every now and then, I don't know exactly what he can do. He can seriously work on improving his volleys maybe. It's still watching his runs to the semis, his quarter against Del Potro was masterful.

by Faust Sat 28 Jan 2012, 3:34 pm

Well said!

mthierry wrote:
Tenez wrote:That's the point. Those fans would love to be able to say teh difference was that Nadal is more talented. But that is something they'll never be able to give evidence for, let alone prove.
The amusing thing is you actually think everyone is so bothered about Tenez' twisted opinions about talent and what not. I can't speak for everyone but my irritation with your posts is the sheer insufferable consistency of spamming articles with the same thing. Or your tendency to manipulate and twist every fact to suit your absurd theories. Or the peculiar habit of making things up as you go along while getting strung up in contradictions.

Your emoticon fools no one. I actually felt sorry at your palpable bitterness after this match. Like I told you before, it's just a game. Let this forum breathe, Tenez. Regurgitating the same thing over and over and over ceaselessly for years following a sport like tennis (you'll stand out even in a football forum) isn't healthy. You're really tedious.

[right]

by kemet Sat 28 Jan 2012, 7:57 pm

I think that Roger's issues with Rafa is definitely more psychological than physical. As Tenez said, the stress of having to hit ten winners just to get to 15-0 can wear anyone down. Think back to the decisive match point that Rafa won. Federer goes for an agressive forehand and his shot goes long. That point, along with that annoying one when he had a break point on Rafa's serve sums up the match.

Rafa just, does, not miss. That is what makes him so difficult for Roger. He forces you to rally, especially in conditions such as the Australian Open, which has always played a bit slower compared to other slams, even during Sampras' pomp in the 90's. I think it would have worked out better for Roger if he had entered the tour at the same time as Rafa. He would not have had the baggae of trying to live up to the GOAT tag and would have eventually found a way to neutralize Rafa's game.

Fate, however, has deemed otherwise.

by Tenez Sat 28 Jan 2012, 8:11 pm

Yes but my point is that it's Nadal's physical game that gets to him. When in November Nadal p[lays a more human tennis, not slam fit, then there is no psychological problem for Fed....if anything, it's Nadal who doesn't believe he can win.

So why the difference between then and 2 days ago? Federer is much stringer psychologically than Nadal...but his tennis has much more risk in it, especially when facing someone who retrieve anything and hit a spinny ball that can break Federer'sd timing. Less spin and teh ball is much easier to attack.

by break_in_the_fifth Sat 28 Jan 2012, 8:16 pm

If Fed was weak mentally then he wouldn't be able to school Djokovic. When he played Nadal the other day though, he didn't play well enough for physicality to come into it. Even though he's way stronger mentally IMO, it's still his mental side that lets him down because while Nadal's game might be physically demanding, Fed's is mentally demanding. The strain is even greater when he has to win the point that many times even on his own serve.

by Josiah Maiestas Sat 28 Jan 2012, 8:27 pm

Yea, if it was physical, then he wouldn't destroy Nadal, Ferrer and beating Tsonga both times in London. I think Roger has just got into his head that it's been a while since he won a slam.

by Simple_Analyst Sat 28 Jan 2012, 8:52 pm

break_in_the_fifth wrote:If Fed was weak mentally then he wouldn't be able to school Djokovic. When he played Nadal the other day though, he didn't play well enough for physicality to come into it. Even though he's way stronger mentally IMO, it's still his mental side that lets him down because while Nadal's game might be physically demanding, Fed's is mentally demanding. The strain is even greater when he has to win the point that many times even on his own serve.

Way mentally stronger than who? Triocki?

by kemet Sat 28 Jan 2012, 11:17 pm

Tenez wrote:Yes but my point is that it's Nadal's physical game that gets to him. When in November Nadal p[lays a more human tennis, not slam fit, then there is no psychological problem for Fed....if anything, it's Nadal who doesn't believe he can win.

So why the difference between then and 2 days ago? Federer is much stringer psychologically than Nadal...but his tennis has much more risk in it, especially when facing someone who retrieve anything and hit a spinny ball that can break Federer'sd timing. Less spin and teh ball is much easier to attack.

Yes, Nadal's physical game does come into play, especially now that Roger is aging, but I am still not convinced that physicality accurately represents what ails Roger in the mental sense when he plays Nadal.

I think the main problem, and hindsight is always 20/20, is that Roger's personal ego swelled when the tennis media began to anoint him as the heir apparent to the pantheon of greats in the game. Unfortunately, Roger became swept up in the wave of adulation in the press, and Nadal effectively caught him unawares. Equally as unfortunate is that Roger was too stubborn to make any fundamental adjustments to his style of play against Nadal, because I think that deep down, he did not respect Nadal's game enough. He respects Nadal's game now, but he is too set in his ways and playing style to make any changes. Plus, his body may not necessarily be as cooperative.

As I said before, I believe that things would have been different if Roger and Rafa started to play each other prior to the premature media coronation.

by Sponsored content

Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Righ on mthierry

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?

Re: Federer - is it the mind or the body?