Review of the Year; a Federer fans perspective

First topic message reminder :

So it's all done and what do I think about 2012? How do I mark it?

Well it has to get 9/10 against a "par" score of 5. I fancied he might recapture the #1, maybe, but I didn't dream he'd have it done by Wimbledon. My idea was that maybe by the US Open he could have got it back; instead he went into that tournament already assured of exiting it as the top player. To get past the 300 weeks mark was even better; there's a reason why cricketers raise their bats at the one extra run that clicks over another set of three figures, and it applies here too.

He also secured his 17th Slam, and 7th Wimbledon. There's no question that this was the one he'd have most wanted - it brought him level with Pete Sampras as the most successful Wimbledon champion ever. The manner of victory would be just as satisfying, taking out his two in-prime challengers in the semi and final. Wonderful stuff.

Anyway, how did the year pan out?

He started with a depressingly familiar loss to Nadal at the Australian. While not what he'd wanted, the AO is a far cry from the fast surface it was until 2007 and nobody was too shocked at that. At least no ranking points were lost.

The first sign of things to come came at Rotterdam where he was slipping to defeat against Davydenko until pulling out the first good turnaround of the season; something that became a feature of the year. In Dubai he got the better of Andy Murray in the final and then headed to Indian Wells to make a hat-trick of tournament wins. There we got a real look at his level when he defeated Nadal en route to the win. An early loss to Roddick in Miami (Andy thereby securing bragging rights as the winner of their final professional match!) wasn't so smart, and then he skipped Monte Carlo in favour of an abbreviated clay campaign. This was hugely successful as his superior adaptability allowed him to win on the slippy blue clay of Madrid, followed by semi appearances in Rome and Roland Garros.

Onto grass where he experienced his only defeat against a 30+ year old player in a zillion years, to Tommy Haas in Halle. The sound clay effort, combined with Djokovic losing three times to Nadal on clay in a big turnaround from their 2011 form meant that he could get the #1 position by winning Wimbledon, so long as Djokovic fell before the final. The draw made these two birds hittable by one stone, by putting them in the same half. The omens weren't good as Federer was striken with back problems in barely scraping past Benneteau from two sets down, then literally limped past Malisse in the next round. However he recovered with a beat-down on perrenial punching bag Youzhny before a semi-final appointment with Djokovic, who had looked dominant through the event until then. Their semi-final simmered for two sets but then Federer was able to sprint awat from 4-4 in the 3rd set. The final followed and the records were set to tumble.

The Olympics may, in retrospect, have been a bridge too far; certainly the Del Potro semi-final can't have helped, but Murray gave him a bit of a pasting in the final, and he pulled out of Toronto (which was more or less a walkover for Djokovic sans top 4 rivals) missing out on another chance to extend his lead at the top of the rankings.

Cincinnatti saw a return to resurgence and he set a remarkable new record; the first Masters Trophy won without dropping serve throughout the tournament (and not many break points either), including a bagel set over Djokovic in the final. In hindsight this was the last high point of the season as a disappointing US Open was ended in the quarters by Berdych, followed by poor showings in Shanghai and Basel. He pulled out of Paris to muster resources for a 7th year-end event but came up short by the narrowest of margins.

So he ends the year with not much left to go for in terms of records; an 8th Wimbledon is probably the only realistic mark left. He does end the year looking a bit knackered, but that's understandable after the big push for #1; 2013 should see a less extravagent schedule, including no Olympics to mess things up, and a few key events skipped.

2012 was a great year for the 31 year old, coming back after Djokovic's dominant 2011 to head the rankings for a while and get a share of the Slam pie plus three more masters events. It could have been even better, but not by much. I think 2013 could still be worth turning up for.

B S & IC

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it, as I am mine.

If you think that was "normal" Djokovic in that US final then I'm amazed. The nervous energy he expended in frustration at fighting the wind meant he was knackered by set 3...since when does Novak get tired these days? The way you put it, it was like the whole match was on Murray's racquet. Amazed you cant see the match was destroyed by the wind, and the semi's too.

For sure will have a better year than Novak in 2013? We'll see about that...he'll be a force for sure but beating guys like Novak and Nadal consistently at slams in normal conditions is another matter entirely.

lydian wrote:That's your opinion and you're entitled to it, as I am mine.

If you think that was "normal" Djokovic in that US final then I'm amazed. The nervous energy he expended in frustration at fighting the wind meant he was knackered by set 3...since when does Novak get tired these days? The way you put it, it was like the whole match was on Murray's racquet. Amazed you cant see the match was destroyed by the wind, and the semi's too.

For sure will have a better year than Novak in 2013? We'll see about that...he'll be a force for sure but beating guys like Novak and Nadal consistently at slams in normal conditions is another matter entirely.

Was that the set Djokovic won 6-2 ? before going 3-1 up in set 4 which he won 6-3. He certainly didn't look tired then to me. Novak frequently has spells during a match when he looks tired but then re-energises (AO semi and Final are two good examples of this). So I think this is a bit of a red herring. Remember also there were two players playing under the same conditions. Why did Murray not get tired. The fifth set which was played in 'normal' conditions was dominated by Murray playing at a high level.

I've seen Murray play under windy conditions before and spend a lot of energy moaning about the wind and how difficult it was making it to play. The difference here was that in both the semi and the final he did not get upset about it but just got on with finding a way to master it.

*Set 3 was won by a "knackered" Novak, which by that time Andy was the one who was knackered Lol

*That's when the wind dropped from around 20mph NOT 40mph!

Similar thing happened a couple of years ago, Miami final? Rafa v Andy where Rafa dominated the match.

Andy just couldn't play in the windy conditions (However since then and having been able to get access to The Williams F1 wind tunnel for practice, his game in these conditions has improved dramatically.)

Who needs an Egg Chamber!!

That Miami final was a completely different thing. Nadal's H2H with Murray shows that wind or no wind Nadal was the more likely winner.

Murray is probably the fittest player on the tour. He has the ability to outlast players he would have great difficulty outplaying including Djokovic and Nadal. But unless Nadal is injured he doesn't give Murray a chance to outlast him... Ha ha! Where is Tenez?

hawkeye wrote:That Miami final was a completely different thing. Nadal's H2H with Murray shows that wind or no wind Nadal was the more likely winner.

Murray is probably the fittest player on the tour. He has the ability to outlast players he would have great difficulty outplaying including Djokovic and Nadal. But unless Nadal is injured he doesn't give Murray a chance to outlast him... Ha ha! Where is Tenez?

Doesnt Murray have a 5-2 H2H against Rafa on hard court since the 2008 US Open if we exclude that match? Hard to call Nadal the likely winner - more like at best a 50:50 shot.

Born Slippy wrote:

hawkeye wrote:That Miami final was a completely different thing. Nadal's H2H with Murray shows that wind or no wind Nadal was the more likely winner.

Murray is probably the fittest player on the tour. He has the ability to outlast players he would have great difficulty outplaying including Djokovic and Nadal. But unless Nadal is injured he doesn't give Murray a chance to outlast him... Ha ha! Where is Tenez?

Doesnt Murray have a 5-2 H2H against Rafa on hard court since the 2008 US Open if we exclude that match? Hard to call Nadal the likely winner - more like at best a 50:50 shot.

Ha ha! If you discount all 13 0f Nadal's wins over Murray and include all Murray's wins over Nadal even when he was injured or retired Murray does indeed have a positive H2H over Nadal.

JuliusHMarx wrote:
As lags said - "Ultimately it's all mere speculation, supposition and conjecture". Let's not try to pretend that it isn't.

So you would say that to a Federer fan who claims Federer is better than Sampras

Or does this rule only apply to certain fans.

lydian wrote:That's your opinion and you're entitled to it, as I am mine.

If you think that was "normal" Djokovic in that US final then I'm amazed. The nervous energy he expended in frustration at fighting the wind meant he was knackered by set 3...since when does Novak get tired these days? The way you put it, it was like the whole match was on Murray's racquet. Amazed you cant see the match was destroyed by the wind, and the semi's too.

For sure will have a better year than Novak in 2013? We'll see about that...he'll be a force for sure but beating guys like Novak and Nadal consistently at slams in normal conditions is another matter entirely.

He will beat Novak, but not sure about Rafa, first of all I am not sure which version of Rafa gonna turn up in 2013, if the best version of Rafa turn up Murray will always struggle against him on slow courts.

Regarding Normal /abnormal Djokovic is all myth, Murray was clearly the better player and rightly the deserved winner, AO 2012 semi's was so close the Shanghai finals was so close, WTF round robin match was so close, so its way too clear Murray's game on the right track of improvement, and it doesn't matter what version of Djokovic turn up if Murray comes up with his A-game he will have chance to win every match against Djoko in 2013.

It Must Be Love wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:
As lags said - "Ultimately it's all mere speculation, supposition and conjecture". Let's not try to pretend that it isn't.

So you would say that to a Federer fan who claims Federer is better than Sampras

Or does this rule only apply to certain fans.

Federer is without a doubt better than Sampras,

By stats , Fed wins
By h2h , Fed wins
by GS, Fed wins
by Variety , Fed wins
by Consistency, Fed wins
By Style of play , Fed wins

I cannot see one full proof way to say Sampras is better than Fed.

hawkeye wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:

hawkeye wrote:That Miami final was a completely different thing. Nadal's H2H with Murray shows that wind or no wind Nadal was the more likely winner.

Murray is probably the fittest player on the tour. He has the ability to outlast players he would have great difficulty outplaying including Djokovic and Nadal. But unless Nadal is injured he doesn't give Murray a chance to outlast him... Ha ha! Where is Tenez?

Doesnt Murray have a 5-2 H2H against Rafa on hard court since the 2008 US Open if we exclude that match? Hard to call Nadal the likely winner - more like at best a 50:50 shot.

Ha ha! If you discount all 13 0f Nadal's wins over Murray and include all Murray's wins over Nadal even when he was injured or retired Murray does indeed have a positive H2H over Nadal.

But I'm not discounting Nadal's wins. On clay or grass your point would be correct. However, there is clearly a difference though depending on surface. Let me use an example you may understand, Nadal has a big h2h lead over Federer but would he be a big favourite in a match at the O2?

It Must Be Love wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:
As lags said - "Ultimately it's all mere speculation, supposition and conjecture". Let's not try to pretend that it isn't.

So you would say that to a Federer fan who claims Federer is better than Sampras

Or does this rule only apply to certain fans.

Yes I would say that. I've never claimed Fed as GOAT over Sampras or vice versa. Fed seems to be better on clay, but what if Sampras had today's technology?

wrt to IC's points :-
By stats , Fed wins - stats never tell the whole story
By h2h , Fed wins - 1-0 in a 5-setter hardly gives a total picture
by GS, Fed wins - yes
by Variety , Fed wins - perhaps, but conditions, technology etc have changed and players have been forced to change their game. Perhaps in this day an age Sampras would show more variety.
by Consistency, Fed wins - Sampras has 6 consectutive YE No 1s - a record
By Style of play , Fed wins - entirely subjective.

JHM I wrote that comment only for those who think Fed a GOAT is myth, certainly not for u