Federer becoming Nightmare

Federer games becoming Nightmare for punters, he loses games which we expect him to win at midnight sleep and wins games which we see as no chance.

Lets discuss some unpredicted games this season

1]Fed - Nadal -> Indian wells, Fed wins in st.sets, a pleasant shocker
2]Fed - Roddick -> Miami , Fed loses to his bunny Roddick coming back from masters win, completely unexpected.
3]Fed - Berdych -> Madrid, conditions favoured the big bird massively yet Fed produced a win.
4]Fed - Haas -> Halle finals -> Haas win was pitched at 8 times the odd by most betting sites before the match, and I invested 100 dollars on Fed to lose them all.

Foolishly by accident I bet Haas to win in st.sets which yielded me 75 dollars to reduce my loss by 25.

Really Fed games are proving very difficult to predict and it shows very inconsistency from him these days, its understandable he is closing 31 and we don't expect from him, like BB said Fed is becoming difficult to watch these days.

Congrats to Haas for a brilliant tournament but it did come with horrible performance by Fed.

Haven't seen the complete set of match stats and analysis for the Final, but I imagine Federer's overall figures, esp. UE's, will be his worst of the week, surely ; and conversely those for Haas will be his best ....?

lags72 wrote:Haven't seen the complete set of match stats and analysis for the Final, but I imagine Federer's overall figures, esp. UE's, will be his worst of the week, surely ; and conversely those for Haas will be his best ....?

Fed didnt make that many errors thou, Haas indeed played good, its just Fed brought his C game today, and didnt produce that many winners we expect from him, to add further Haas punished him on all critical big points.

I never expected Federer to win Halle this week... he never comes back well after going down in straight sets at a grandslam. I would not make it a hobby to bet in ATP 250's if I were you.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:I never expected Federer to win Halle this week... he never comes back well after going down in straight sets at a grandslam. I would not make it a hobby to bet in ATP 250's if I were you.

Certainly I would not anymore, learned some valuable lessons today, Fed schooled me

That is why I have maintained despite my friend Lucius' adamance that i don't think Fed is going to be number 1 this year, he might do it has the potential and it would be surprising as his game and position in the rankings has been favorable. But he is just vulnerable and inconsistent on more and more days. His game is still very strong he could still get another slam. But to get to number, especially for any period of appreciable time you can't have too many of these type of losses. Or the straight set defeats to Djoko at RG either.

Yes he might, conceivably, make it to Number One again - but I think even those who feel it is possible recognise that he would be unlikely to hang on to the top spot for any length of time (but then again, just one week is all that's needed to tie Sampras, or two to overtake him.....).

And speaking of Sampras you only to have to look at how Pete's overall performance declined when he was Fed's exact same age, as an illustration of just how quickly the years and the grind of spending so long at the top eventually caught up with him, in fact much more dramatically than any decline we have yet seen from Federer ; with the notable exception of Pete's very last USO triumph of course. And Federer will be hoping for something similar by way of a swansong. But as socal says, he is much more prone to inconsistency and occasional surprise losses these days. I personally doubt he will get another Wimbledon, where almost four long decades have passed since we last saw a champion as old as Federer is now. But ...... not too long a wait to find out - for this year at least.

He beat Raonic and Youzhny. If his timing is off, it is a bad day, if it is working, the player across net has very little chance.

When he's playing well, is difficult to find solutions.

From Nadal's 2010 WTF interview.

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=67863

Lags72 view is pretty much close to my own view. It's easy to get hung up on Fed's loss today however, he's closed the gap by another 100 points on Nadal today and it's the consistency at bigger tournaments such as the grand slams and Masters 1000 series that matters in determining the No.1 (and the Olympics too this year). Those extra points help, as Tesco (the biggest supermarket retailer in the UK) says, every little helps.

That consistency starts with Wimbledon because it's the next 3-4 months that he stands his best chance of taking No.1 and Wimbledon has been consistently his weakest slam over the last 2 years. Unless he wins a slam, I don't think there's any chance he'll hold onto the No.1 spot for any length of time, and that's because he needs around 11, 000 points to get to No.1 (more to stay there).

Now he can get there, but to hold onto there securely, he needs above that and given he's 1, 550 points adrift of that total magical number right now, winning Wimbledon would give him an extra 1, 640 or the USO would give him an extra 1, 280. Getting to both finals would help but it's the extra 800 points the winner gets over the runner up that gives the extra cushion to hold onto No.1. Winning either of them means that a good performance @ any other tournament gives him good chance of holding onto it longer but even I realistically think that's unlikely. Hence socal, I think he can get it and very well may do so but without a slam, it won't be longer than 3 or 4 weeks (depending on when the next big tournament swings by). Ideally, taking it after the USO is the best time for him, because he'll get it for at least a month and if he takes part in Shanghai, perhaps 2 months. M path for him getting to No.1 doesn't require him to win a slam, but it does require consistency in the big tournaments, something he's shown for most of the past 9 months.

In theory it all seems possible for Federer to get there but it will have to be the route without winning a slam.

The reasons are Nadal and Djokovic! Lets not forget any other player in the top ten who if they put in a good performance on a bad day Federer is having could easily despatch him.

He needs to win a tournament to get there and it looks increasingly unlikely now. Nadal has found the recipe to beat Djokovic now and I think he is ready to take Wimbledon back from ND. That means greater distance between Federer and the No 2 spot.

Federer seems to do well post-USO. He has two MS titles this year. Canada, Cincinnati, Paris and WTF are a possibility, similar to IW/Madrid. If not for slams, perhaps he can accumulate enough MSes to get back to #1.

PS: ... like Wozniacki... (bit unfair for me to compare the two though)...

laverfan wrote:Federer seems to do well post-USO. He has two MS titles this year. Canada, Cincinnati, Paris and WTF are a possibility, similar to IW/Madrid. If not for slams, perhaps he can accumulate enough MSes to get back to #1.

PS: ... like Wozniacki... (bit unfair for me to compare the two though)...

Have you been enjoying a glass or two, laverfan..?

a 'bit unfair' ..... ???

You might well qualify for the Understatement of the Decade award !!! Not surprised you did a runner after that there post ....

It is not a nightmare at all. He is Thirty. When is that gonna sink in? Haas played a great tournament and deserved to win. Federer lost a set he shouldn't have and that was the difference in the match. 2 excellent talented players contested a grass final, as opposed to baseline bores.

It is not the end of the world. Anybody who shoves money on Federer to romp home these days at his age, is an idiot. He is doing things even now that most players can only dream of. And at 30, most players are long gone.

Faster court tennis, like it always did, can throw up more surprises than slow court tennis.

Yesterday it throw up a surprise...next week there'll be no doubt a few more. But Federer is older and movement on faster courts can actually be exposed more than on slower courts IMO.

lags72 wrote:

laverfan wrote:Federer seems to do well post-USO. He has two MS titles this year. Canada, Cincinnati, Paris and WTF are a possibility, similar to IW/Madrid. If not for slams, perhaps he can accumulate enough MSes to get back to #1.

PS: ... like Wozniacki... (bit unfair for me to compare the two though)...

Have you been enjoying a glass or two, laverfan..?

a 'bit unfair' ..... ???

You might well qualify for the Understatement of the Decade award !!! Not surprised you did a runner after that there post ....

Lags. The differences in their respective careers are rather stark. . In case of Woz, has a 'career' passed her by, unlike MaSha? Off-topic.

lydian wrote:But Federer is older and movement on faster courts can actually be exposed more than on slower courts IMO.

He did well against sheer power of Raonic, but Haas did very well with the placement of the shots. Glad for Haas. W may bring out a different animal.

Yes but LF, that doesnt really answer my point...against a guy like Raonic its russian roulette. Against 'normal' players you get more ralleys and on fast surfaces you have to be able to move ultra-quickly because you have very little time to get into position for the shot before the ball has gone. I think it places more demands on explosvie speed than clay which seems idiosyncratic but nonetheless I think its true.

IIRC, during the Raonic match, there was a a 'reaction time' box, that I will need to find.

Federer's movement has looked very ginger throughout the matches at Halle.

LF lets be practical comparision of Woz and Fed is way too much

laverfan wrote:IIRC, during the Raonic match, there was a a 'reaction time' box, that I will need to find.

Federer's movement has looked very ginger throughout the matches at Halle.

Yea his movement usually coincides with his stubborn backhand slices. It won't be easy for him to get into the semi finals, even the quarter finals might be difficult for him unless he plays a clay specialist. Predicting that if he doesn't atleast make the final this time, he will retire at the end of the USO.

On the 4 matches concerned:

1) A surprising win: however, the circumstances less so, if Fed is going to beat the top 2 it must be in straight sets or for BO5 in 3 or 4 sets.

2) It was shocking when I found out about this one, but less so when I looked at the details, Fed actually won more games in the match but it was the loss of the tie breaker in the first set that did the damage.

3) Berdych, I thought Fed stood a good chance but after losing the first set, I thought it was over for Fed but he found a way to come back.

4) Haas's victory was strange but the home crowd factor may have helped Haas and I don't think Fed was all that keen to go all out for a relatively unimportant tournament at this age just a week away from Wimbledon.

Out of the 4, the only strange one seems Halle but given it's right between the two most important tennis tournaments in Europe, Fed not going all out isn't surprising. So 2 of 4 were Fed wins & 1 was a narrow loss. So mostly, a consistent pattern, the other can be put down to other reasons. I don't think we can expect Fed to be getting into every tournament deep let alone win all the finals he reaches (as he had this year until he lost @ Halle).

It's interesting, out of the slams, Wimbledon has proved his most inconsistent compared to the other slams in the last few years, so will be interesting to see if he becomes more consistent here (like at the other slams) or less.

iC... there was no attempt to belittle Federer, but to big up Woz in that comparison.

JM... The first week at W is grass, but becomes clay in the second week.

Lucius he might still get the number 1 without winning a slam but look out I got a feel novak has a bit of summer run in him like last year. People can say i am crazy but Roger and Rafa didn't look that convincing on grass and Djokovic did just make the final in the last 4 straight slams.

It was impressive how Djoko managed 7 straight finals prior to the French Open semi final loss last year but apart from that blip, he subsequently made another 4 straight finals, winning 3 of them (2 of them slams: Wimbledon & USO). It's that remarkable run that makes me feel confident that he will carry on losing points until the USO, after which I think he stands a good chance of gaining points.

Put it this way, he gained 5, 600 points from Masters 1000 tournaments during that stretch, add in the 4 slams and Serbia and he had a total of 12, 570. As he built up the vast majority of his lead from January to Sept, the the later tournaments such as Shanghai, Basel, Paris & WTF weren't going to change his firm hold on No.1. However, 3 out of those 4 went to one of his rivals (Federer) giving him a boost of 3, 000 points, add in his further boosts this year and he's standing a decent chance of getting to No.1. I agree, that Djokovic holding onto both Wimbledon & the USO makes that a tad tricky, however consider this: Fed makes the Wimbledon semis, puts in a decent Olympics performance and wins Cinci and does well in Canada. Now he's seeded #2 for the USO. For a change, Djokovic is drawn to meet Nadal in the semis rather than Fed who he's met in the semis for the last 4 year (since 2008). Fed makes the final, and gains an extra 480 points in the process, Djokovic may very well win. however unlike Fed, he won't gain any points. Fed doesn't need to win the USO, but I'm sure your aware that many Fed fans are excited about Fed getting the #2 seed spot from Nadal meaning he stands a good chance of avoiding Djokovic and Nadal in the semis @ the USO. In that situation, Fed stands a great chance of snatching the No.1 spot for a month or two and that's without winning the USO. Let's not forget, between these two, at the USO, things are finely balanced, I don't think we could assume Djokovic would win such an encounter.

Anyway, I'm not getting ahead of myself here. First he needs to get to the Wimbledon semi and we need to see how he does over the summer but if he continues with the success he's had over less important tournaments this year, he stands a good chance of getting to No.1 if he can get himself seeded #2 for the USO. Then he needs a bit of luck and then who knows. All I know about Djokovic's chances is that he not only must hold onto Wimbledon and the USO but also hold onto Cinci. Losing Cinci puts him in the danger zone of being over taken by Nadal or Federer (if either win it) unless he compensates with another win somewhere else (Olympics or Canada). If he was reliant on just winning Wimbledon or the USO, I'd feel more confident of his chances.

Well lucius you see for my money fed is going to have to consistently beat his two rivals that are younger than him on a consistent basis. Now he might get a few weeks at number one which would partially be a function of the back injury Novak suffered at the end of last year. But Novak is a good indoor player. If he is healthy he will have ample opportunities in the indoor season to turn the tables on his rivals. In that critical home stretch he won't be defending any points and Fed will be defending a massive amount of points.

Though you are right about one thing fed certainly does have a chance to grab the number 1 ranking for a short spell. That is a credit to how well he has played at this age. But I don't see the current level that he is playing at to be sufficient to hold on to the number 1 ranking for any extended period of time. Now from the perspective of a fed fan getting the all time weeks at number 1 the last remaining major record fed doesn't hold at age 31 would be a great accomplishment.

Couldnt care less whether Federer gets the all time number 1 weeks record, we all know he would've crushed Sampras on hard courts and clay anyways. Sampras benefitted from poor challengers to hold that record, only Agassi was a decent rival and he was often injured.

Reckon that Fed, if asked, would prefer another Slam to getting to number one, although one thing could lead to the other anyway.
As Socal said, at least Fed is still right up there and challenging the best. As long as that is the case, he'll probably carry on. I think it would take some consistently poor results for him to contemplate retirement.

Let Pete keep this solitary record I say, sirfred, a player who dominated like that deserves to have a few records to fall back on. Sampras, Federer and Laver, 3 untouchable players of all time.

Yes, it's a tremendous record that Sampras has. Interestingly, I thought when Rafa got to number one for the first time that he would put in a really long stint at the top and could even challenge Fed's mark of 237 consecutive weeks.
But he's "only" chalked up around 100 weeks so far although I think he'll be number one again soon, as I think Djoko will not be able to defend all of the 6,000 points he has from the next three Slams.

If one clicks on the 'Number of Weeks' and sorts it in descending order,

Federer 237
Connors 167
Lendl 157
Sampras 102

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ATP_number_1_ranked_singles_players

Borg is at 109 weeks (but he walked away). Nadal currently has a very similar number to Borg (102). It would be nice for Federer to get the record, but in his collection of records, this may not be the highest priority.

Rosewall's longevity would be something Federer can achieve, which, IMVHO, would be a fantastic achievement.