Federer subtly admits he's past his best but still thinks he can be Number 1

http://sports.ndtv.com/tennis/news/item/204101-i-can-become-number-one-again-says-roger-federer

Interesting read

Gosh! This place is beginning to look exactly like somewhere else...

Great interview from the Rog. Doesn't say much I disagree with, it is interesting the fed is dead crowd (mostly his fans) have been talking about his demise since 09 and I have been one of those saying they are making much ado about nothing. I remember reading back in 09 how Roger's best was behind him and he is a shell of the player he was. And in 2011, 2010, 2012 we heard all the same stuff after every federer loss. The man has lost a bit, but has gained in some areas of the game as well, and he points to another factor as well; the loss of a bit of hunger. He pointed to the kids and the desire for more time off and to really massage and take care of his body and mind. Has he lost a half step, yes he has but he is one of the healthiest athletes I have ever seen at this age in terms of how his body copes and holds up. And he feels like he still play great tennis and that he wants to go as long as he can.

Fed said "Your prime is 23 to 27 or 28" which for Fed takes him more or less to the end of 2009. So all those who have been talking about him no longer being in his prime since 2009....seem to have Fed's agreement.

All those who have been saying "he is a shell of the player he was" are....er, actually no-one was saying that.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Fed said "Your prime is 23 to 27 or 28" which for Fed takes him more or less to the end of 2009. So all those who have been talking about him no longer being in his prime since 2009....seem to have Fed's agreement.

All those who have been saying "he is a shell of the player he was" are....er, actually no-one was saying that.

Actually people do threads on "how easy it is to beat Roger", in not so many words that is what they are saying on a lot of the post fed loss threads.

socal1976 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:Fed said "Your prime is 23 to 27 or 28" which for Fed takes him more or less to the end of 2009. So all those who have been talking about him no longer being in his prime since 2009....seem to have Fed's agreement.

All those who have been saying "he is a shell of the player he was" are....er, actually no-one was saying that.

Actually people do threads on "how easy it is to beat Roger", in not so many words that is what they are saying on a lot of the post fed loss threads.

Yes, I remember Josiah calling Federer to retire early last year.

Thought you were were talking about 2010 onwards, not just this month

There was no general consensus from anyone that Fed was or even is "shell of the player he was". Feel free to address that small minority that may have suggeested that, as long as it's noted that it was only one or two posters.

When did I say general consensus, I said some federer fans, quite few have been talking about how degraded federer is after each and every bad loss for quite a number of years. Julius must you argue with me about the obvious. What next are you going to tell me the chinese don't like rice and horse sheet smells like perfume.

hawkeye wrote:Gosh! This place is beginning to look exactly like somewhere else...

Is this an admission of the guilt associated with partaking of another place? . It is all right to talk about one's goals in life.

socal1976 wrote:Actually people do threads on "how easy it is to beat Roger", in not so many words that is what they are saying on a lot of the post fed loss threads.

Tennis is not an end-all, be-all. There is more to life. Knowing and acknowledging your limitations are inherent marks of wisdom. To improve upon those, is the mark of greatness, which many do not get a chance at.

In a sense, we should be grateful to Robert and Lynette as we are to Dijana and Srdjan or Willie and Judy, or Sebastian and Ana.

socal1976 wrote:When did I say general consensus,

You didn't. When did I say you did? I was stating it for the benefit of others. Do you have to argue with me about everything? You'll be saying it never rains in Southern California next.

It does rain here, about 20 or 25 days a year.

Socal - it's really not about what his fans say (or should I say people who you might perceive to be his fans ....)

On the question of whether Federer is past his best, the facts tell a very clear story as regards an obvious - albeit sadly inevitable - decline :

Last 10 Slams played, he has won one and made one other Final .........
Previous 10 Slams played : he won four, and made another four Finals

Federer will win 2 slams this year.

Announced with the same conviction (and trustworthiness) as your recent "Berlocq has just beaten Nadal" post ........

Only joking there IMBL. Couldn't resist

Although ...... I personally don't believe for one moment he will do so.

And if by some highly remote chance he does ....... It would be more illustrative of the powers of his far younger peers than telling us anything new about Federer.

It Must Be Love wrote:Federer will win 2 slams this year.

The RG-SW19 double!

It Must Be Love wrote:Federer will win 2 slams this year.

In the words of Bjorn Bjorg, "he has no chance for sure". Unless Novak and murray get hurt I can't see that happening.

It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Roger could win 2 of the remaing slams. I don't think he will, but at his best he can still beat Novak and Andy. Against Rafa at his best possibly not as he has has the high BH problem, but Rafa is the one that nobody knows how good he'll get back to this year.

I think it's great he's reducing his tournaments. As a tennis fan he's a pleasure to watch and because of a reduced schedule he is likely to be around for longer. Plus the events he does play will feel more box office.

"Which Slam do I favour - does Wimbledon over-weigh the rest? Maybe, but looking back there have been amazing moments with each Slam....."
Where is Bogbrush? He would love to see Federer coming out in support of his slam weighting theory!

"Your prime is 23 to 27 or 28". He would love this too. Although he has also said that in recent years that he feels a better player later in his career, so somewhat borderline contradictory comments.

Federer subtly admits he's past his best

That is not such a controversial admission now, is it? I think the part about becoming world #1 again is more questionable but I suppose if everything worked out just perfect he could somehow sneak the #1 spot again - at least in theory. I would be quite surprised if he did though and his scheduling does not look like he is really thinking about it either.

A nice thing for him is that he has already built an immense record with little left to prove, yet he is still playing well enough to trouble the top guys - in fact to even still be one of the top guys. Losses against the younger ones are no shame at this stage and any wins are just a bonus, so not a bad position to be in to enjoy whatever is left in his career.

socal1976 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:Federer will win 2 slams this year.

In the words of Bjorn Bjorg, "he has no chance for sure". Unless Novak and murray get hurt I can't see that happening.

Socal, don't you get it? IMBL wants to Nadal to win as much as possible and Federer to not win slams or beat Rafa. So IMBL predicts Rafa to do unrealistically badly and Federer to do unrealistically well all the time, as a form of reverse psychology/expectation management, (or even wumming, although I don't think it's that). When IMBL says "Rafa is 8th favourite for the French Open" doesn't really mean that either. Of course he thinks Rafa can win it and just wants to downplay the expectation.

Has been doing it for ages. It's transparently obvious. Sorry, IMBL but it's true. Your Federer/Nadal predictions should be ignored or at best need some sort of plus/minus factor applied to them.

Henman Bill wrote:Sorry, IMBL but it's true.

Hehe, IMBL just cannot help it can he? I do not think you need to apologize to him. I think he is a good enough sport about it; he himself gently pokes fun at himself on occasion.

I totally deny these ludicrous allegations.

Anyway, have to go now, just need to put a £100 bet on Federer winning Miami. I used to try my luck at the lottery, but figured I have a much better chance to win money by picking players to win a tournament in which they're not even entering.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/21568958
I'm becoming really popular at my local bookies for some reason. After I put a £100 accumulative on Federer winning both Miami and Monte Carlo, they offered me some coffee.
How nice of them.

If I was the tournament director of Miami I would be praying for a Federer R1 or R2 defeat at Indian Wells and then quickly get on the phone to him! It's a blow to Miami, the supposed "5th slam" not so long ago, to have one of the "big 4" just deciding to play about 7 other masters instead.! Oops.

summerblues : I think it was you yourself who referred rather neatly to some of IMBL's recent assertions as "pre-emptive jinxing" (perhaps a derivative of that infamous condition commonly known as premature speculation....)

I agree that is (mostly) done by IMBL in a good-humoured rather than wumming manner ; but there is always the inherent danger that if used too frequently it will ultimately damage the credibility of an otherwise good poster.

Lags:

HB, both Fed and Nadal may not enter Miami. Djokovic has a great chance their now. How Murray plays will be interesting.

You can peak at an advanced age...You are only as old as you feel...runner Fauja Singh, aged 101, retired today after finishing his last competitive race stating after finishing the the Hong Kong 10km (6.25 mile) event in one hour, 32 minutes and 28 seconds. He commented "I am happy that I am retiring at the top of the game".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21564489

To be fair, aged 101, Federer will probably still be able to win Basle or at least make the semis.

Nadal not entering Miami? Is this from your mysterious source? To be honest, I still have no clue if Nadal is skipping the hard and going from Acapulco to Monte Carlo or if he is playing one of both of the US 1000s in March. Fitness wise if I was him I would be tempted to skip both and play a clay challenger and a couple of exhibition matches in Europe that month.

socal1976 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:Fed said "Your prime is 23 to 27 or 28" which for Fed takes him more or less to the end of 2009. So all those who have been talking about him no longer being in his prime since 2009....seem to have Fed's agreement.

All those who have been saying "he is a shell of the player he was" are....er, actually no-one was saying that.

Actually people do threads on "how easy it is to beat Roger", in not so many words that is what they are saying on a lot of the post fed loss threads.

It just takes a little bit of brain to understand such threads , it is way easier to beat Fed right now than it was say 5-6 yrs back. No idea how different that logic is to "Fed past his prime". Only God can help those souls, I give up.

socal1976 wrote:When did I say general consensus, I said some federer fans, quite few have been talking about how degraded federer is after each and every bad loss for quite a number of years. Julius must you argue with me about the obvious. What next are you going to tell me the chinese don't like rice and horse sheet smells like perfume.

He is not the one who is saying it, its indeed you making complete illogical statements.

To let you know one more I am not even a Fed fan, I am DP fan thats kinda well known in this forum and previous 606. Its like saying you are a Nadal fan coz you supported some of IMBL's statement.

Do I like Federer? Yes
Am I a fan girl/die hard fan boy to Fed [Like how you are to Djoko? No

It Must Be Love wrote:Federer will win 2 slams this year.

Just like how Nadal is 9th favourite for French Open

invisiblecoolers wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:Federer will win 2 slams this year.

Just like how Nadal is 9th favourite for French Open

Don't be ludicrous. I would never claim such a thing.

8th actually.

It Must Be Love wrote:I totally deny these ludicrous allegations.

Anyway, have to go now, just need to put a £100 bet on Federer winning Miami. I used to try my luck at the lottery, but figured I have a much better chance to win money by picking players to win a tournament in which they're not even entering.

Believe me I have made huge fortunes in betting at Tennis, I guarantee you will lose the 100 pound bet, why not hand it to me , I will give the exact same odds + 10 pounds if Fed win the Tournament in Miami. JHM and LF can help us in this aspect I guess.

It Must Be Love wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:Federer will win 2 slams this year.

Just like how Nadal is 9th favourite for French Open

Don't be ludicrous. I would never claim such a thing.

8th actually.

You said provided Almagro doesn't get into form, go check your statements.

invisiblecoolers wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:Federer will win 2 slams this year.

Just like how Nadal is 9th favourite for French Open

Don't be ludicrous. I would never claim such a thing.

8th actually.

You said provided Almagro doesn't get into form, go check your statements.

Correct, and Almagro hasn't yet got into form.

Henman Bill wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:Federer will win 2 slams this year.

In the words of Bjorn Bjorg, "he has no chance for sure". Unless Novak and murray get hurt I can't see that happening.

Socal, don't you get it? IMBL wants to Nadal to win as much as possible and Federer to not win slams or beat Rafa. So IMBL predicts Rafa to do unrealistically badly and Federer to do unrealistically well all the time, as a form of reverse psychology/expectation management, (or even wumming, although I don't think it's that). When IMBL says "Rafa is 8th favourite for the French Open" doesn't really mean that either. Of course he thinks Rafa can win it and just wants to downplay the expectation.

Has been doing it for ages. It's transparently obvious. Sorry, IMBL but it's true. Your Federer/Nadal predictions should be ignored or at best need some sort of plus/minus factor applied to them.

Yes I know HB excellent expectation management, just like how fed fans have been telling us Roger is a shell of himself in 08,09,10,11,12, and 13. Now everyone time he wins a tournament or beats a younger player it makes it all the more impressive when the shell of Roger wins wimbeldon lets say.

invisiblecoolers wrote:

socal1976 wrote:When did I say general consensus, I said some federer fans, quite few have been talking about how degraded federer is after each and every bad loss for quite a number of years. Julius must you argue with me about the obvious. What next are you going to tell me the chinese don't like rice and horse sheet smells like perfume.

He is not the one who is saying it, its indeed you making complete illogical statements.

To let you know one more I am not even a Fed fan, I am DP fan thats kinda well known in this forum and previous 606. Its like saying you are a Nadal fan coz you supported some of IMBL's statement.

Do I like Federer? Yes
Am I a fan girl/die hard fan boy to Fed [Like how you are to Djoko? No

No I am not what I take exception with is the terminology of how "easy" it is to beat Roger. It isn't that easy because he is the world #2 player and not the 22 or 212 ranked player. I have never argued that he is just as good or better than 2006 but find this talk about how Roger has been a shell of himself for the last 5 years and how easy he is to beat silly when he is ranked #2 and just lost to murray in a 5 set match in a slam semis. Even someone like you with as limited a knowledge of tennis as you possess should be able to tell that it isn't easy to beat the world #2 or he wouldn't be ranked #2.

socal1976 wrote:
Even someone like you with as limited a knowledge of tennis as you possess should be able to tell that it isn't easy to beat the world #2 or he wouldn't be ranked #2.

Its not the first time your theorems are proven wrong and this is not the first time you come and cry over here arguing vaguely.
Yes if Fed at 32 beats prime Djoko its an incredible achievement on the contemporary if prime Djoko beats an age old Fed its not a big achievement, to explain this better, Sampras found wining in 2012 much difficult yet he rated those as his best years coz he have to over come the challenges of aging, same is for Federer and same will be for Djoko, if Djoko manage to win a slam when he is 32 he will surely rate that higher than the current one coz its so difficult to win at 32 than now.

But unfortunately you're so biased to towards your hero you will never understand, you are not the first of this breed, we have seen impartial lions, tetra tigers and co, who had similar amount of that SOCALLED Tennis knowledge you mentioned.
I know you are trying to hard to join that legacy, good luck.

Henman Bill wrote:"Which Slam do I favour - does Wimbledon over-weigh the rest? Maybe, but looking back there have been amazing moments with each Slam....."
Where is Bogbrush? He would love to see Federer coming out in support of his slam weighting theory!

"Your prime is 23 to 27 or 28". He would love this too. Although he has also said that in recent years that he feels a better player later in his career, so somewhat borderline contradictory comments.

Roger consults me before this sort of announcement. I cleared the "feeling better" comments as they all "feel" they are better late on in their careers as it's impossible to appreciate the losses until hindsight lends perspective.

Oh God, I'm sounding like the Spaghetti-Hans Multiple Personality Disorder Collective............

It Must Be Love wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/21568958
I'm becoming really popular at my local bookies for some reason. After I put a £100 accumulative on Federer winning both Miami and Monte Carlo, they offered me some coffee.
How nice of them.

With your record at predictions I imagine you're always welcome at your local bookmakers.

What are you talking about invisible, keep telling us it easy to beat the world #2 7 months or so removed from his last slam. Your terminology was and is inaccurate and not objective. Something you claim that I lack. Just like your silly Djokovic is not as good baseliner as Chang or brugera comments. At times you might actually learn something about tennis if you check your hostility towards me at the door.

socal1976 wrote:What are you talking about invisible, keep telling us it easy to beat the world #2 7 months or so removed from his last slam. Your terminology was and is inaccurate and not objective. Something you claim that I lack. Just like your silly Djokovic is not as good baseliner as Chang or brugera comments. At times you might actually learn something about tennis if you check your hostility towards me at the door.

I am never a self praising fool, somebody have to appreciate that a person got knowledge not self acclaim it every where. Fed's match against Jazri was just another proof how easy to beat him these days compared to his prime years, Jazri was so poor that inspite of Fed being at his worst he let the match go, anyways your little brain never understands the game and never will understand the game, so keep barking.

Can you relax invisible, your tone is so aggressive and insulting constantly. I am just tired of it. I am going to go back to ignoring you, because you have nothing to say that is worth listening to.

just been reading a lot of Federer articles and I have come across a few interesting things, that Roger has been suffering with his back again. Annacone has said he didn't practice in Rotterdam and was struggling with it against Tsonga and Murray at the Australian Open where he was wearing more than one shirt. Reminds me more and more of Andre Agassi

Hmm...

If it's back trouble again, then he must be concerned

Could perhaps explain why he has decided to schedule a long break to allow for a holiday + home time with kids, and then some clay practise. He will apparently not play after Indian Wells until Madrid - at both he has maximum points to defend as part of his "race to London" qualification.

His own comments here ......

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/tennis-federer-plans-extended-break-ahead-clay-court-161755313.html

Even without a reduced schedule the getting back to #1 is a bit too ambitious IMO! As long as he can stay in the top 4 so he avoids Djokovic/Murray/Nadal until semis at the Slams, he has a shot at another big trophy.

By the way it is quite likely that Federer's and Nadal's rankings will be #3 and #5 by the time the French Open starts! With such rankings we could get Djokovic, Federer, Nadal and Del Potro all in the top half at Roland Garros (!).

Which would sure make life easier for the bottom half .......

Wrt to the Number One talk ...... I doubt even he believes it is a serious proposition at all. Suspect it was said in response to a direct question, where the alternative of "oh no it's absolutely impossible" is just not part of the mindset of any top athlete .....