Jaziri to get a career-crowning victory aka Dubai 2013 Federer v Jaziri.

Federror with too many mistakes. Complete lack of interest.

Goodbye Goldenera?

unforced errors all over the place

legendkillarV2 wrote:Goodbye Goldenera?

Don't be silly. Fed's going to come back in May and win the remaining Slams, Masters and the usual O2

Big shock to see Fed had lost first set to a wild card. But Fed only dropped two games in the last two sets. What was that all about ? Was he fairly dreadful early on?

Just looked at the actual result!!

I see tales of Rogers 'death' are greatly exaggerated

Laverfan - it's not like you to judge after one set (I assume). Are you turning into Grinning Greg?

laverfan. Do I detect a slight hint of glee when Fedal fail or even nearly fail? Surely you don't want the golden era to end.

It is so wonderful that you have all finally accepted the existence of said golden era when it may be in jeopardy, glad you didn't miss out. Fed will be fine, slumps happen in sports especially in these tournaments he really doesn't care or focus on that much. As I said I think fed must have to fight to keep his hunger and focus at a lot of these lesser events.

The last several instances (upto 2002) where Federer lost a set to someone ranked outside 100 (Jaziri is #128 currently) were

RG 2012 - R16 David Goffin (BEL) 109 W 5-7, 7-5, 6-2, 6-4
W 2010 - R64 Ilija Bozoljac (SRB) 152 W 6-3, 6-7(4), 6-4, 7-6(5)
US 2007 - R32 John Isner (USA) 184 W 6-7(4), 6-2, 6-4, 6-2
Tokyo 2006 - Q Takao Suzuki (JPN) 1,078 W 4-6, 7-5, 7-6(3)
MC 2005 - Q Richard Gasquet (FRA) 101 L 7-6(1), 2-6, 6-7(8)
Dubai 2005 - R32 Ivo Minar (CZE) 119 W 6-7(5), 6-3, 7-6(5)
US 2004 - R64 Marcos Baghdatis (CYP) 240 W 6-2, 6-7(4), 6-3, 6-1
Cincinnati 2003 - R64 Scott Draper (AUS) 114 W 4-6, 6-3, 7-6(10)
Gstaad 2003 - R32 Marc Lopez (ESP) 190 W 6-3, 6-7(4), 6-3
Doha 2002 - R32 Andrei Stoliarov (RUS) 139 W 6-2, 6-7(4), 6-4
US 2002 - R128 Jiri Vanek (CZE) 157 W 6-1, 6-3, 4-6, 7-5
Gstaad 2002 - R16 Radek Stepanek (CZE) 110 L 6-3, 3-6, 2-6
W 2002 - R128 Mario Ancic (CRO) 154 L 3-6, 6-7(2), 3-6
Halle 2002 - R32 Hendrik Dreekmann (GER) N/A W 6-7(5), 6-3, 6-4

E&OE.

hawkeye wrote:laverfan. Do I detect a slight hint of glee when Fedal fail or even nearly fail? Surely you don't want the golden era to end.

No glee, HE. Just the way he was playing and got broken to throw away the first set with UEs. Was he trying to impress Drewett/Tahlak, or just make the local boy happy?

banbrotam wrote:Laverfan - it's not like you to judge after one set (I assume). Are you turning into Grinning Greg?

No, I am not. This was a facetious comment on Golden Era in Overend-esque tone.

laverfan wrote:No, I am not. This was a facetious comment on Golden Era in Overend-esque tone.

Oh dear! Almost as bad

You return to form with your excellent and relevant stats - it just shows how ruthless Roger used to be

banbrotam wrote:

laverfan wrote:No, I am not. This was a facetious comment on Golden Era in Overend-esque tone.

Oh dear! Almost as bad

I will take my 20 lashes now, Your Majesty!

banbrotam wrote:You return to form with your excellent and relevant stats - it just shows how ruthless Roger used to be

You have given me an idea to look at the current Top 4 and see what the statistics say about the remainder of the Top 4.

I think on fast courts upsets are much more likely, Federer said himself he was thrown because of the speed of the court Jarziri was going all out on the return, and he couldn't get into points. Credit to him to working it out

If Takao Suzuki had won that tie-breaker, would that have been the greatest upset in the history of sport?

I don't know, surely the upset can only be "great" if it's not in a "weak era" and there were another 3 or so other good upsets around at the same time as it?

ryan86 wrote:If Takao Suzuki had won that tie-breaker, would that have been the greatest upset in the history of sport?

This is the best I can find on UTube - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg3zNX7YJUk (You can see the remaining parts 9.x as well).

@BanBro... to complete my research...

Djokovic (Losing a set to players ranked higher than 100...)

London 2012 Olympics - R16 Lleyton Hewitt (AUS) 159 W 4-6, 7-5, 6-1
Madrid 2012 - R32 Daniel Gimeno-Traver (ESP) 137 W 6-2, 2-6, 6-3
AO 2012 - R16 Lleyton Hewitt (AUS) 181 W 6-1, 6-3, 4-6, 6-3
W 2011 - Q Bernard Tomic (AUS) 158 W 6-2, 3-6, 6-3, 7-5
Belgrade 2010 - Q Filip Krajinovic (SRB) 319 L 4-6 RET
IW 2010 - R64 Mardy Fish (USA) 106 W 6-1, 0-6, 6-2
US 2009 - R32 Jesse Witten (USA) 276 W 6-7(2), 6-3, 7-6(2), 6-4
AO 2009 - R32 Amer Delic (BIH) 127 W 6-2, 4-6, 6-3, 7-6(4)
Miami 2008 - R64 Kevin Anderson (RSA) 122 L 6-7(1), 6-3, 4-6
W 2007 - R32 Nicolas Kiefer (GER) N/A W 7-6(4), 6-7(6), 6-2, 7-6(5) (Kiefer was #404 on 28.05.2007).
RG 2007 - R64 Laurent Recouderc (FRA) 306 W 6-3, 3-6, 6-3, 6-1
RG 2007 - R32 Olivier Patience (FRA) 129 W 7-6(2), 2-6, 3-6, 7-6(4), 6-3
Estoril 2007 - R32 Igor Andreev (RUS) 177 W 6-2, 4-6, 7-6(5)
Rotterdam 2007 - R16 Andrei Pavel (ROU) 120 W 6-7(8), 6-1, 6-3
AO 2007 - R32 Danai Udomchoke (THA) 102 W 6-3, 6-4, 5-7, 6-1
Adelaide 2007 - W Chris Guccione (AUS) 153 W 6-3, 6-7(6), 6-4
US 2006 - R128 Donald Young (USA) 577 W 4-6, 6-3, 6-0, 6-1
Den Bosch 2006 - R16 Jan Hernych (CZE) 128 L 2-6, 4-6
Barcelona 2006 - R64 Daniel Gimeno-Traver (ESP) 178 L 4-6, 6-3, 3-6

Will continue with Nadal and Murray.

Murray (continued...)

Brisbane 2012 - R16 John Millman (AUS) 199 W 6-1, 5-7, 6-3
Dubai 2012 - R32 Michael Berrer (GER) 116 W 6-3, 4-6, 6-4
Miami 2011 - R64 Alex Bogomolov Jr. (RUS) 118 L 1-6, 5-7
IW 2011 - R64 Donald Young (USA) 143 L 6-7(4), 3-6
LA 2010 - R16 Tim Smyczek (USA) 192 W 6-1, 4-6, 6-2
Miami 2010 - R64 Mardy Fish (USA) 101 L 4-6, 4-6
RG 2009 - R64 Potito Starace (ITA) 104 W 6-3, 2-6, 7-5, 6-4
RG 2008 - R128 Jonathan Eysseric (FRA) 390 W 6-2, 1-6, 4-6, 6-0, 6-2
DC 2007 - RR Marin Cilic (CRO) 108 W 3-6, 6-4, 6-2, 4-6, 6-3
Tokyo 2006 - R32 Jiri Novak (CZE) 130 L 3-6, 6-7(1)
US 2006 - R128 Robert Kendrick (USA) 143 W 6-2, 1-6, 6-3, 6-3
DC 2006 - RR Andy Ram (ISR) 662 W 2-6, 4-6, 7-5, 6-2, 6-3
Newport 2006 - R32 Ricardo Mello (BRA) 139 W 6-1, 1-6, 7-6(5)
Newport 2006 - S Justin Gimelstob (USA) 111 L 1-6, 6-7(4)
Queens 2006 - R64 Janko Tipsarevic (SRB) 114 L 6-7(3), 6-3, 2-6
Barcelona 2006 - R64 Marcel Granollers (ESP) 291 W 4-6, 6-4, 6-2
MC 2006 - R64 Jean-Rene Lisnard (MON) 154 L 6-4, 6-7(5), 5-7
Memphis 2006 - R16 Rik De Voest (RSA) 149 W 7-6(4), 3-6, 7-5
Adelaide 2006 - R32 Paolo Lorenzi (ITA) 252 W 3-6, 6-0, 6-2

Interesting stats.

Both Murray and Djoko appear to have dropped a good few more sets than Federer, and yet both have played far fewer tour matches than the Swiss one......

Nadal (continued - I expect to find very few in here...)

Brazil 2013 - S Martin Alund (ARG) 111 W 6-3, 6-7(2), 6-1
W 2012 - R64 Lukas Rosol (CZE) 100 L 7-6(9), 4-6, 4-6, 6-2, 4-6
Rome 2011 - R32 Paolo Lorenzi (ITA) 148 W 6-7(5), 6-4, 6-0
IW 2011 - Q Ivo Karlovic (CRO) 239 W 5-7, 6-1, 7-6(7)
W 2010 - R64 Robin Haase (NED) 151 W 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3
Miami 2010 - R32 David Nalbandian (ARG) 161 W 6-7(8), 6-2, 6-2
US 2009 - R64 Nicolas Kiefer (GER) 129 W 6-0, 3-6, 6-3, 6-4
Rotterdam 2009 - R16 Grigor Dimitrov (BUL) 478 W 7-5, 3-6, 6-2
Queens 2008 - R16 Kei Nishikori (JPN) 113 W 6-4, 3-6, 6-3
US 2007 - R128 Alun Jones (AUS) 123 W 7-5, 3-6, 6-4, 6-1
Queens 2007 - Q Nicolas Mahut (FRA) 106 L 5-7, 6-7(0)
Dubai 2007 - R16 Igor Andreev (RUS) 139 W 6-2, 3-6, 7-6(2)
Sydney 2007 - R32 Chris Guccione (AUS) 107 L 5-6 RET (This should not be included ?)
Stockholm 2006 - R16 Joachim Johansson (SWE) 690 L 4-6, 6-7(4)
Cincinnati 2006 - R64 Sam Querrey (USA) 178 W 6-7(5), 6-2, 6-3
W 2006 - R64 Robert Kendrick (USA) 237 W 6-7(4), 3-6, 7-6(2), 7-5, 6-4
Halle 2005 - R32 Alexander Waske (GER) 147 L 6-4, 5-7, 3-6
MC 2005 - S Richard Gasquet (FRA) 101 W 6-7(6), 6-4, 6-3
Palermo 2004 - R16 Olivier Mutis (FRA) 113 L 3-6, 3-6
US 2004 - R128 Ivo Heuberger (SUI) 139 W 6-0, 6-3, 4-6, 2-6, 6-3
Bastad 2004 - R32 Jiri Vanek (CZE) 147 W 4-6, 6-4, 6-3
Milan 2004 - R16 Mario Ancic (CRO) 107 L 5-7, 2-6
Chennai 2004 - R32 Thierry Ascione (FRA) 102 L 6-7(5), 4-6
Madrid 2003 - R64 Alex Corretja (ESP) 127 L 2-6, 6-3, 4-6


By my count we have Federer (14), Djokovic (19), Murray (19) and Nadal (24).

(Surprised with Nadal's count).

laverfan. Would it be too much trouble to put the specific rankings of the players? I presume you have this from your research?

Whoops sorry I have just seen that they are included

lags72 wrote:Interesting stats.

Both Murray and Djoko appear to have dropped a good few more sets than Federer, and yet both have played far fewer tour matches than the Swiss one......

Agreed, very interesting. Very few others may find these interesting.

And Rafa's count is highest of the lot .....

hawkeye - the rankings are in fact already shown from what I can see, or am I misunderstanding you ....?

Is it fair to only go back as far as 2002 for Federer when he was 21 and yet go back to 2003 with Nadal when he was just 17?

lags72. I corrected my post at first it wasn't clear (to me) that the rankings where included.

He - yep, you did .... our posts crossed

The only losses Federer has had to players outside the top 100 since turning 21 are:

Gasquet (101) Monte Carlo in 2005
Stephanek (110) Gstaad in 2002
Ancic (154) Wimbledon in 2002

The only losses Nadal has had to players outside the top 100 since turning 21 are:

Rosol (100) Wimbledon in 2012
Mahut (106) Queens in 2007

Of course Nadal is younger and so may catch up...

hawkeye wrote:The only losses Federer has had to players outside the top 100 since turning 21 are:

Gasquet (101) Monte Carlo in 2005
Stephanek (110) Gstaad in 2002
Ancic (154) Wimbledon in 2002

The only losses Nadal has had to players outside the top 100 since turning 21 are:

Rosol (100) Wimbledon in 2012
Mahut (106) Queens in 2007

Of course Nadal is younger and so may catch up...

If he carries on playing ( ) to the ripe old age that Fed is, I'd say you could put money on it. Lots of money in fact ...

hawkeye wrote:Is it fair to only go back as far as 2002 for Federer when he was 21 and yet go back to 2003 with Nadal when he was just 17?

Let me add Federer (prior to Halle 2002...)

RG 2001 - R64 Sargis Sargsian (ARM) 115 W 4-6, 3-6, 6-2, 6-4, 9-7
Milan 2001 - R16 Cyril Saulnier (FRA) 120 W 2-6, 6-3, 6-4
Stockholm 2000 - R32 Mikhail Youzhny (RUS) 110 W 5-7, 6-4, 6-3
Indianapolis 2000 - R64 James Sekulov (AUS) 191 L 4-6, 5-7
RG 2000 - R128 Wayne Arthurs (AUS) 106 W 7-6(4), 6-3, 1-6, 6-3
RG 2000 - R32 Michel Kratochvil (SUI) 120 W 7-6(5), 6-4, 2-6, 6-7(4), 8-6
Barcelona 2000 - R64 Sergi Bruguera (ESP) 249 L 1-6, 1-6
Copenhagen 2000 - R32 Filip Dewulf (BEL) 234 W 6-4, 4-6, 6-3

(Brest Oct 1999 is a Challenger tourney, as is St. Jean de Luz 2003 for Nadal). Remember Nadal turned pro in 2001, while Federer did so in 1998.


@HE... you should not consider this a negative on any specific player. I can count the sets lost, with this data, if you so desire.

Federer has played 1085 matches and lost just 3 to players outside the top 100. Nadal has played 713 matches and lost just two. Losing to a player ranked outside the top hundred is a freaky rare occurrence when you look at these stats. But you don't have to look at the stats to know this. Rosol has become a legend because of this.

I do know that some of these matches were played before both player reached 21 but that hardly alters the picture.

laverfan. I just wanted to compare like with like. I would say losses suffered when Federer and Nadal were young are less relevant. But it is of course interesting to see all the data too.

hawkeye wrote:Federer has played 1085 matches and lost just 3 to players outside the top 100. Nadal has played 713 matches and lost just two. Losing to a player ranked outside the top hundred is a freaky rare occurrence when you look at these stats. But you don't have to look at the stats to know this. Rosol has become a legend because of this.

I do know that some of these matches were played before both player reached 21 but that hardly alters the picture.

I am not trying to downplay Fedal achievements in any way.

hawkeye wrote:laverfan. I just wanted to compare like with like. I would say losses suffered when Federer and Nadal were young are less relevant. But it is of course interesting to see all the data too.

It is part of the experience and learning from it. I am sure Tomic, Del Potro, Raonic, Dimitrov all will learn from their matches.

hawkeye wrote:The only losses Federer has had to players outside the top 100 since turning 21 are:

Gasquet (101) Monte Carlo in 2005
Stephanek (110) Gstaad in 2002
Ancic (154) Wimbledon in 2002

The only losses Nadal has had to players outside the top 100 since turning 21 are:

Rosol (100) Wimbledon in 2012
Mahut (106) Queens in 2007

Of course Nadal is younger and so may catch up...

Technically those losses to stepanek and ancic were when he was 20 as his bday is in august.

Technically all those losses are to players much better than their at time >100 ranking too. It's not like Henman who would lose to someone you'd never heard of outside the top 250.

hawkeye wrote:The only losses Federer has had to players outside the top 100 since turning 21 are:

Gasquet (101) Monte Carlo in 2005
Stephanek (110) Gstaad in 2002
Ancic (154) Wimbledon in 2002

The only losses Nadal has had to players outside the top 100 since turning 21 are:

Rosol (100) Wimbledon in 2012
Mahut (106) Queens in 2007

Of course Nadal is younger and so may catch up...

How is the #100 deemed outside the top 100?

Good spot bb

In fact, I see the bogeyman Rosol is already up to 61.

And in other news, it just so happens that Gasquet and Cilic are at 10 and 11 respectively .....

lags72 wrote:Good spot bb

In fact, I see the bogeyman Rosol is already up to 61.

And in other news, it just so happens that Gasquet and Cilic are at 10 and 11 respectively .....

But Cilic and Ancic aren't the same person.......

Oh dear ... my bad.

That'll teach me to try & be smart ....!!

Interesting to note Roger losing more sets to players outside the top 100 in his alleged "peak" years of 2004 to 2007 and almost none from 2009 to 2012. Supporting the idea that the Federer decline, in an absolute sense, is a myth, and that he does less well now simply because the current top 4 is stronger.

There are too many articles starting half way through a match saying things like "so and so playing badly/well". If anything these articles are good at jinxing and causing the opposite outcome! Better to just start a tournament thread for this kind of comment?

Henman Bill wrote:Interesting to note Roger losing more sets to players outside the top 100 in his alleged "peak" years of 2004 to 2007 and almost none from 2009 to 2012. Supporting the idea that the Federer decline, in an absolute sense, is a myth, and that he does less well now simply because the current top 4 is stronger.

This shows that there are virtually no players coming up and that the current era has a serious lack of depth.

Henman Bill wrote:There are too many articles starting half way through a match saying things like "so and so playing badly/well". If anything these articles are good at jinxing and causing the opposite outcome! Better to just start a tournament thread for this kind of comment?

My bad, HB. I should have put up a Tourney thread.