Top 5 most difficult Fed losses

First topic message reminder :

Just want to see what people's opinions on this are and how they compares to mine. I suppose the title might sound negative but many of these were good matches, especially if you were a fan of the other player. (I would have included Fed vs Nadal Rome 2006 somewhere around 3 or 4 as Fed had match points and this match, it has been said, set the tone for their rivalry but I didn't see the match so I couldn't really be gutted.) Anyway here goes:

#5 Wimbledon 2008 Final to Nadal
This match was probably the most historic match up in their career with Fed going for a record 6 in a row to surpass Borg. I remember Fed getting broken in the first game of the match and losing the set on a backhand error (might have been the second though). In the second set he managed to throw away a 4-1 lead. Not only was his backhand misfiring like crazy but his forehand was missing at a lot of the crucial times. Nadal's level was also higher than I was expecting and he was hitting some great shots and his backhand was better than I've ever seen. The rain delay helped Fed and when he levelled to 2-2 sets, I felt there was hope. He managed to come within two points of winning the match but couldn't string enough points together. As a fan it felt like he only showed up on championship points. The match gave the impression at the end that it could have gone either way but Nadal looked the stronger player that day. In the end it was Nadal that made history that day and it was a great achievement for him. I kind of figured once Federer returned order would be resumed so maybe it wasn't such a big deal.

#4 USO 2012 Quarters to Berdych
After Feds amazing performances at Wimbledon, the Olympics and Cincinatti (won without dropping serve and bagelled Djokovic in the final) I hoped he would reach the finals or at least the semis of this tournament. The match itself was on late where I was so after catching a few points and seeing which Fed had shown up, I confidently predicted he would lose and got some sleep. Past experience and better judgement would have suggested that this shouldn't have been so surprising but it's always tempting to believe he's back to his old level permanently especially after a good run at 3 tournaments. What makes this even worse is that Fed losing to Berdych is a bit like Nadal losing to Soderling.

#3 AO 2009 Final to Nadal
On paper this match should have been Feds pretty easily as Nadal was "no good on hardcourts". Indeed Nadal had a long semi as well leading into this match. Feds level was higher than at Wimbledon; he actually won a set serving at something like 33%. In the end I think that's what let him down as even with his groundstrokes, he wasn't going to be hitting through Nadal enough without his serve on his side as well. I think Nadal was more aggressive in his Wimbledon match than in this one and a lot of his highlights I remember were him retrieving Feds winners into an open court. This match was very winnable for Fed, his final set collapse was almost inexplicable and his reaction after the match left a lot to be desired. A good win for Nadal. That was probably Feds last chance to beat him in a slam.

#2 FO 2011 Final to Nadal
Fed had just ended Djokovic's amazing streak in an equally amazing match. He was visibly emotional about it at the end. It still meant so much to him. The match began great for him and it looked like there was hope as he had set point at 5-2. Instead of blasting his backhand crosscourt which had been working for him the whole set, he went for a crazy dropshot which he missed by about a millimeter. And with that in the same typical fashion as so many times before, the set was gone as he failed to serve it out and went on to lose 5 games in a row. What was remarkable about this match though is how high Fed's level was throughout. He was hitting the great shots I recognised him for and his backhand was holding up. He was playing so well that I would have given him about a 40% chance of winning that match especially as he managed to take the 3rd set after being to sets to love down and each of the first 3 sets was close. I dared to believe that would be the day, others have mentioned about worthier slams and although I don't subscribe to that theory, this would have been a very satisfying win to say the least. Anyhow it wasn't to be and Nadal pulled off a great win to equal Borg.

#1 USO 2009 Final to Del Potro
This match is only really the most difficult in hindsight. Again Fed was at the stage where he was always playing for history, this time again 6 in a row. The match itself until the end of the second set looked like what should have been a routine win for Fed. The level he brought was great, everything about his game was working and Del Potro perhaps started slow as he was lucky not to have lost the first set 6-2. As has been mentioned before something made Fed angry and he changed his tactics but somehow lost precision at the same time. Del Potro at the same time managed to gain momentum and started hitting some of those rocket forehands everyones still waiting to see. But still, going by his record against Del Potro past and future, it's hard to believe he lost this match. Afterwards Del Potro was really happy about his first slam and you couldn't help but feel happy for him too. Even Fed, it seemed, had learned to lose with a bit more elegance and was happy for Del Potro.

It's more what happened in the next slam that makes this the most difficult loss. Fed won the AO so convincingly and, had he come through that match against Del Potro, would have achieved what only Nadal had stopped him doing on several occasions. Whereas Nadal had always caused Fed difficulties, Del Potro poses much less of a matchup issue conversely any matchup issue actually favours Fed. Here I think he missed the best opportunity any player has had for doing the GS.

lags72 wrote:Lots of excellent material on this thread, and it all makes for a very interesting read.

As a (now fairweather) golf fan, the debate for me sparks fond memories of the discussions that once revolved around the glittering career of Jack Nicklaus, regarded by many of course as the best in his sport.

Once fans - and indeed professional writers/pundits too - had exhausted their analysis of each and every one of Jack's stellar triumphs in the 'Majors' (18 in all, and 73 titles on the main Tour) their attention turned to the staggering number of top three (or invariably at worst top ten) finishes achieved in those Majors where, by his own mercurial standards, he fell just short.

By way of an aside, it is perhaps significant that each of the Federer defeats profiled by the OP came at an age that Rafa, Novak and Andy have all yet to reach. It's a fair bet that they have some pain to face in the years ahead, although I'm also pretty sure that as battle-hardened professionals, this point is not lost on them ......

Brilliant observation.

Henman Bill wrote:He had a similar look on his face when Roger brought up two match points on his own serve at the US Open, as if to say, fair enough, this is kind of cool atmosphere, I am enjoying this. I think that kind of attitude helped him to save those match points and win that match and tournament.

That Rafa loss at the FO though, a bit different, racket smashing and all that. Strange from Djokovic that he couldn't play a better match. Something wasn't right with him at the time I feel, even earlier in the tournament. I think there were some family issues in the background wasn't there?

Good observation, HB. The commentators at the time called it "smiling at adversity".

And you're right about the French, in fact the whole spring and summer really. Lots of bad temper, lots of racquet smashing. I think things just got on top him. Off court, his grandfather died during MC and his father was ill. I think he also felt the pressure of going for all 4 slams, the pressure of being number 1, the pressure of defending so many points. The results were still pretty good but he wasn't himself.

bogbrush wrote:Surely one of the hardest ones for Novak must be the 2007 US Open final, where he stood in the first set at 6-5, 40-0 and lost it. Dr_Sincere even announced the set had gone to him in his immortal public episode of Premature Speculation.

If I recall, he had more chances later on.

I did consider that but I hadn't committed to Novak fandom yet in 07, so I was more of a neutral observer for that one!

In retrospect though, even if he had got the first set, I still wouldn't rate his chances of taking the match. It's more of an embarrassing choke than a painful loss.

The 606 wums (AIR, Dr_Sincere, Wise_Alalyst, Impartial_Lion, mouse, etc.) were hailing him as the newest member of Team Nemesis up to then but switched to calling him "Chokovic" after he let them down.

I wonder did Enforcer ever see that place in full flow?

On the subject of past wummery I was most amused when Jewell of the East suddenly popped up here just ahead of Wimbledon 2012, only to depart just as quickly.

Personally I had seen very little of JoE in his 'heyday' because I was a relatively late joiner to the original 606. But I very soon got a flavour of his style when he penned an article claiming that for Federer to "remain relevant" he would absolutely have to win another Slam, whilst making it clear that he considered this not even a remote possibility. When the Fed did then actually claim a seventh Wimbledon - and of course regain Number One in the process - it was undoubtedly all too painful for Jewell ...

Sorry OP ...... I digress.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:For me it has to be
4) Toronto 2006 v Murray

lmao...

Can not be serious.

I take it you didn't see the Fed reaction?

Arhhh...the good old 606 days...They're old for sure, good though? Sometimes. AIR used to crack me up with all the Basel Bungler stuff. That was "proper wumming" - wumming that actually took ability. Its a weak era for wumming now.

Oh no, I said "weak era"....cue klaxons, flashing lights....hang on, there's a knock on my front door. I've been rumbled by the Era Police!

You can relax lydian.

Given that 'eras' are all part of tennis mythology rather than real world events, any custodial sentences handed down to those who accidentally make mention of them are - you will be pleased to hear - entirely mythical too

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Josiah Maiestas wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:For me it has to be
4) Toronto 2006 v Murray

lmao...

Can not be serious.

I take it you didn't see the Fed reaction?

As bad as Fed has played out of the slams I don't believe he ever lost to Cilic and Wawrinka in slams lol

I can't believe that his Olympics loss isn't up there

Or are we just talking slams

Josiah Maiestas wrote:As bad as Fed has played out of the slams I don't believe he ever lost to Cilic and Wawrinka in slams lol

No. But he lost in the first round of the French in 2003

Olympic loss didn't bother me greatly, it was on the back of winning his 7th Wimbledon and reclaiming Number 1 against the guy he was playing, he was clearly struggling physically after the DelPo match. You can't have it all

Fair comment CAS

Either way, the Olympics has a long long way to go before it can ever attain the enduring status of a Slam title ; in fact it quite possibly never will.

Mind you ... best not tell that to Marc Rosset or Nicolas Massu ......

nadal's could be every single loss he faced in that winless streak against novak

lydian wrote:Arhhh...the good old 606 days...They're old for sure, good though? Sometimes. AIR used to crack me up with all the Basel Bungler stuff. That was "proper wumming" - wumming that actually took ability. Its a weak era for wumming now.

Oh no, I said "weak era"....cue klaxons, flashing lights....hang on, there's a knock on my front door. I've been rumbled by the Era Police!

Were you arrested by Commissioner Gordon and Chief O'Era?

Toni Nadal, the uncle and coach of Rafael Nadal, says that in his opinion Roger Federer was not seriously injured when he lost to his nephew in straight sets in the quarterfinals of Indian Wells last week. Federer had a back injury.

“Federer has beaten us more than once with Rafael having significantly more pain than [Roger] was in at Indian Wells,” Toni Nadal told Puntodebreak.com. “I'm clear that the situation of Federer [at Indian Wells] was no worse than that Rafael has had on many other occasions.”

If he was not injured last weeks loss is definitely up there

banbrotam wrote:I can't believe that his Olympics loss isn't up there

Or are we just talking slams

Given he had a big grin and had just won Wimbledon I really don't think it would make the top 20 of bad losses.

As a fan of Fed I honestly wasn't fussed; given a choice of W or O, it was W every day and twice on Sunday.

CAS wrote:Toni Nadal, the uncle and coach of Rafael Nadal, says that in his opinion Roger Federer was not seriously injured when he lost to his nephew in straight sets in the quarterfinals of Indian Wells last week. Federer had a back injury.

“Federer has beaten us more than once with Rafael having significantly more pain than [Roger] was in at Indian Wells,” Toni Nadal told Puntodebreak.com. “I'm clear that the situation of Federer [at Indian Wells] was no worse than that Rafael has had on many other occasions.”

If he was not injured last weeks loss is definitely up there

Toni Nadal - . Imagine anyone talking about another players fitness in a way to denigrate them? Complete embarrassment to Rafa.

No way can a Masters quarter at the age of 31 matter under any circumstance. We're talking about a career of >1000 matches and 24 Slam finals.

bogbrush wrote:

CAS wrote:Toni Nadal, the uncle and coach of Rafael Nadal, says that in his opinion Roger Federer was not seriously injured when he lost to his nephew in straight sets in the quarterfinals of Indian Wells last week. Federer had a back injury.

“Federer has beaten us more than once with Rafael having significantly more pain than [Roger] was in at Indian Wells,” Toni Nadal told Puntodebreak.com. “I'm clear that the situation of Federer [at Indian Wells] was no worse than that Rafael has had on many other occasions.”

If he was not injured last weeks loss is definitely up there

Toni Nadal - . Imagine anyone talking about another players fitness in a way to denigrate them? Complete embarrassment to Rafa.

No way can a Masters quarter at the age of 31 matter under any circumstance. We're talking about a career of >1000 matches and 24 Slam finals.

Indeed, I said that very tongue in cheek

Oops!

its true that most of Federer's painful losses have only really happened in the last few years, Djokovic and Nadal's losses are still yet to come. They may soon realise what an incredible feat it was for Roger to hang with them when a few years down the line they struggle to do so against the new breed. Saying that, can't see where they are coming from, hopefully they burst on the scene

banbrotam wrote:I can't believe that his Olympics loss isn't up there

Or are we just talking slams

Rome 2006 was mentioned.

For some reason his other Olympic losses, Berdych (2004), Blake (2008) do not get much mention either. Doubles with Stan the Man was a wonderful consolation.

The Bronze Medal loss to Pasquale @Sydney 2000, was a medal missed. If he plays in Rio 2016, he would have participated in five consecutive Olympics a la Redgrave.

Let's do Murray. I'll start.

#1 For me his worst loss is losing to straight sets to Djokovic at the AO final, I believe in 2011. Suddenly the gap between the two looked bigger than ever, the Murray will never win a slam argument reached its peak, and it was a crushing defeat that Murray took months to recover from, struggling to win a match in February and March.

#2 Second slam loss to Federer at Australian Open - cried.

#3 Losing that Wimbledon semi to Rafa Nadal when he looked in control and then just hit one shot long and his game collapsed.

#4 Cilic at the US Open. He has a few losses around R3 to R4 to players that blasted him off the court, this one being perhaps the most notable?

#5 I guess when you've never won a slam those final defeats have to be pretty annoying, so I'll put his first loss to Federer at the US Open in the list although not sure how gutting it really was at the time, more of an experience.

I'd say Wimbledon 2008 and Australian Open 2009 must have been so very hard for him to lose.

However, the one thing in that match v Del Potro at US Open 2009, was the incredibly important role played by Hawkeye. There were two crucial times, in different cames, break points, when Federer came in on a cross court forehand to Del Potro's forehand. Both times Del Potro ripped a huge forehand up the line - BOTH times the ball was called OUT, however Del Potro challenged, and on both occasions, the ball was in by millimetres. Federer didn't win that match, and really shouldn't have based on the two calls, because the ball WAS out. BUT had it not been for Hawkeye, that match wouldn't have gone Del Potro's way, no wonder the buy hates Hawkeye. It's one of the things that I will always remember from that match, aside from Del Potro's amazing tenacity to hang in there and believe he could do it. If he finds that belief again, there'll be some surprising results and I think another Major title for him, along the way.

I have to say though there are not any Federer losses I look back fondly on, the only one I think I could have accepted was 09 Wimbledon. Roddick never ever gave up, despite losing to Federer over and over, A-Rod deserves to be a Wimbledon champion. He's a Wimbledon legend though, in my opinion.

Yes, the only Slam that I feel Federer really didn't deserve.

The best about that year was that just before Wimbledon Roddick had been on Jonathan Ross's best programme - his Radio 2 Saturday morning show, far better than any of his TV. During it Ross was giving him coaching tips (based on his view that he was qualified to do so because, while reflecting on Federer being his favourite, he said "we play so similarly!"). They agreed that if Andy won Wimbledon he would credit Jonathan to Sue Barker with providing him with the key tips.

Would have been funny to see if he'd followed through.

yloponom - you're certainly right to identify those hawkeye reviews as key moments, although I would add that the protracted delay in Delpo deciding that he actually wanted to challenge (if not on those points, then certainly on others during the match, can't quite remember right now...) was another factor within the mix.

Some people here on the forum (well, one really ..... )have been quick to castigate Federer for his verbal tussle with the umpire, but there is no doubt that Delpo was pushing things to the limit that day in terms of timing. Another umpire on another day might not have been so flexible with Delpo.

All that said, I too would be happy to see Delpo win another Slam but even despite his continuing improvement from late 2012 onwards, I am yet to be convinced that he can produce the goods again in seven Bo5 matches. I feel there was something almost magical about his performance for those two weeks back in 2009, and the number of times he painted the lines in that Final was close to incredible. Only time will tell but it's possible that the stars may never align for him in quite the same way.

dont forget he almost won 2009 French Open that year though, Im certain he would have beaten Soderling. Thats what makes the US Open match easier to take, if he had to lose one I wouldn't swap them.

CAS wrote:Toni Nadal, the uncle and coach of Rafael Nadal, says that in his opinion Roger Federer was not seriously injured when he lost to his nephew in straight sets in the quarterfinals of Indian Wells last week. Federer had a back injury.

“Federer has beaten us more than once with Rafael having significantly more pain than [Roger] was in at Indian Wells,” Toni Nadal told Puntodebreak.com. “I'm clear that the situation of Federer [at Indian Wells] was no worse than that Rafael has had on many other occasions.”

If he was not injured last weeks loss is definitely up there

As H-n says, UT can and does talk too much.

CAS wrote:dont forget he almost won 2009 French Open that year though, Im certain he would have beaten Soderling. Thats what makes the US Open match easier to take, if he had to lose one I wouldn't swap them.

Indeed.

Getting past Del Po that year was through sheer force of will, he looked frightening in that semi-final.

That after the Tommy Haas terror-fest too meant I only really believed when Soderlings final return went into the net. I didn't like that the tide was turning in that final towards the end.

Haas had good chance to win that match, remember watching it...weren't we all. He was up 2 sets, was 3-4 on Fed's serve and he had BP at 30-40...all he had to do was break and serve it out.

But Federer played a majestic inside-out FH that saved the point.

HERE IT IS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU6HzEw-E6I

What a precise shot - Federer was 2 inches from probably going out of the tournament in the year he knew he had to win it with Rafa out...this is what is so amazing about tennis, the knife-edges created by the scoring system and court dimensions.

Anyway, it took the wind out of Haas' sails - that's always been the problem with Haas, too mentally brittle.

Afterwards a resigned Haas said "You've just got to tip your hat and say, "That's why he's Roger Federer" ".

Given the Delpo match, the bizarre Nadal loss, the Haas match...2009 was just meant to be for Federer, no other way of seeing it. To be fair it would have been very cruel on a 5-time FO finalist never to have won one.

Agreed lydian, in hindsight it really does look like it was meant to be. The five-set tussle with Haas in particular, wasn't that the day after Nadal went out? A bit of a fairytale run, really.

Thanks to HM and HB for the contributions on other players. For Murray, I'd rank the 2010 AO defeat as his worst - I remember watching him, and wondering what was going through his mind. He really looked like he felt that he'd played his best, and significantly improved since his 2008 final, but still come up miles short. It seemed like he was wondering whether he'd ever be able to beat Federer; he genuinely looked deflated, defeated. It's to his enormous credit that he retained his belief and kept on improving.

Wimbledon 2012 must've been really difficult as well, judging by his interview on court. No Nadal to face, through two tough matches against Ferrer and Tsonga, Federer seemingly vulnerable, and he gets blown away after pretty much dominating for two sets. Ouch. His AO 2012 defeat to Djokovic seemed to really hurt him on court immediately afterwards, but with Lendl newly in his corner he seemed more philosophical about that particular defeat than he had been about others.

The match with Acasuso prior to Haas and Del Po was interesting as well. Two TB sets, so he had destiny on his side perhaps, while his racquet was finding tough opposition.

PS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JrcLtC5EUU

The Olympic loss may not have meant much to members of this forum / fans of Roger - but it sure meant a lot to maestro, given that it was all he would talk about all year

I think we forget that means he's not achieved the same as Nadal and no matter what the arguments (last year was the first time The Olympics was taken seriously by all the top players) that will bother Roger

Hence, it has to be one of the five.

How can the Berdy QF a month later be a harder loss than the Olympic final?

Henman Bill wrote:Let's do Murray. I'll start.

#1 For me his worst loss is losing to straight sets to Djokovic at the AO final, I believe in 2011. Suddenly the gap between the two looked bigger than ever, the Murray will never win a slam argument reached its peak, and it was a crushing defeat that Murray took months to recover from, struggling to win a match in February and March.

#2 Second slam loss to Federer at Australian Open - cried.

#3 Losing that Wimbledon semi to Rafa Nadal when he looked in control and then just hit one shot long and his game collapsed.

#4 Cilic at the US Open. He has a few losses around R3 to R4 to players that blasted him off the court, this one being perhaps the most notable?

#5 I guess when you've never won a slam those final defeats have to be pretty annoying, so I'll put his first loss to Federer at the US Open in the list although not sure how gutting it really was at the time, more of an experience.

I agree with the first two, but the Cilic loss was almost certainly down to the wrist injury that none of us knew he had until later. Iwould have these as the next;-

#3 Nadal SF defeat at the US Open in 2011 - Andy basically didn't turn up and he seemed even more lost than normal after the match. It also triggered the new harder hitting spell, which Rafa got a taste of a month later

#4 Roddick loss at Wimbledon. Big opportunity missed, as I think Roger's game was still in RG following his memorable win

#5 Verdasco loss at RG in 2009. One of the best hard hitting performance I'd seen and Murray looked as outclassed as he'd been at any of of his previoous or subsequent defeats. I also think it was responsible for his obvious lack of confidence on clay (which I now think he will overcome)

Murray has never lost to Verdasco at the French. 2009 I think he lost to Gonzalez but that would be nowhere near the top 5 defeats for me.

I'd go with:

1. Djokovic Oz 11
2. Nadal Wim 11
3. Nadal US 11
4. Wawrinka US 10
5. Roddick Wim 09

Forgot the Wawrinka one - good shout!!

However, I do think the Gonzo one freaked Murray out, as it made him even less confidence on Clay

It's OK losing to his 3 rivals or players like Berdy, but not 'hot and colders' like Gonzo

Born Slippy wrote:Murray has never lost to Verdasco at the French. 2009 I think he lost to Gonzalez but that would be nowhere near the top 5 defeats for me.

I'd go with:

1. Djokovic Oz 11
2. Nadal Wim 11
3. Nadal US 11
4. Wawrinka US 10
5. Roddick Wim 09

I will place Roddick Wim 09 at the very top, people already believed Murray was ready for the title and Murray was playing super good in that tournament, but Roddick is one of those under-estimated guy came and delivered the goods on his favorite surface, it was an awesome match. That would have hurt Murray much for sure, coz they were already thinking of the finals and the title completely forgetting the semi-final opponent, it would have been a shocker for beeb for sure.

banbrotam wrote:

How can the Berdy QF a month later be a harder loss than the Olympic final?

I don't think so Fed even thought about this match during the match let alone now, yes Olympics would have surely hurt him a lot without a doubt, its not about upstaging Rafa, its about winning an Olympics Gold in singles for his country, but after the semi-final marathon we all knew it was formality in the finals, Fed really had to do some miracle to beat the Murray with that energy level, unfortunately no miracle and the loss.

Have just seen this.

Have to agree that the US Open loss to Del Potro was huge and with time it looks even bigger. Pfft!

I know Federer cried after the 2009 AO and Wimbledon 2008 must have been emotional too. Any 5th set slam final loss must hurt but in hindsite to be part of these amazing matches must be a balm. Playing so well and losing to Rafa who was also playing so well is far from disgrace. What is the Rafa quote from lydian's thread about losing in such circumstances? Basically it doesn't hurt as much.

I don't know about Federer but as a fan there have been a few losses to Djokovic that have hurt. A couple at the US Open and a couple at the AO. I still have nightmares about "that shot" that prevented a much anticipated Fedal final. sigh... I refuse to watch the repeats that are shown at every possible opportunity. Ha ha! Also didn't Federer throw his raquet during a three set clay loss to Djokovic? I think it was Rome? So he must have been unusually upset about that...

HE, this one? https://www.youtube.com/watch?nomobile=1&v=vyTH-mDcuMQ

invisiblecoolers wrote:

banbrotam wrote:

How can the Berdy QF a month later be a harder loss than the Olympic final?

I don't think so Fed even thought about this match during the match let alone now, yes Olympics would have surely hurt him a lot without a doubt, its not about upstaging Rafa, its about winning an Olympics Gold in singles for his country, but after the semi-final marathon we all knew it was formality in the finals, Fed really had to do some miracle to beat the Murray with that energy level, unfortunately no miracle and the loss.

It doesn't matter how Roger felt coming into the final. Fact is, he talked about winning The Olympics more than any other, simply because he knew it was would stop, once and for all, any talk about his GOAT status

It's amazing his desire has been conveniently forgotten in a classic case of selective amnesia


Fortunately, there are always documented recordings available to remind those with short memories ;

http://metro.co.uk/2011/07/28/london-2012-roger-federer-keen-to-feel-that-gold-medal-rush-94852/

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1283647-roger-federer-how-never-winning-olympic-singles-gold-affects-goat-legacy

http://blogs.bettor.com/Roger-Federer-wants-to-experience-something-special-at-Olympics-Tennis-News-a173891

He wanted the gold alright, but that match vs Delpo killed him of really. Murray played a good match though.

bantrobam's assertion that Federer definitely 'wanted' the Olympics is well-made, I don't think it would make sense to deny that. Fed will no doubt forever regret that (whether due to fatigue or not) one of the most abject performances of his career on his most favoured surface just happened to come when he was one match away from a cherished gold medal. Full credit to Murray for putting him to the sword so ruthlessly as to nip in the bud any potential comeback.

All that said, I feel it was significant that the loss - painful though it no doubt was within the Federer household - appeared to affect him far far less than any of his Slam final defeats. Indeed, very early into the second set he seemed almost quietly resigned to having to settle for silver. No sign at all of any tears here, a la Aussie Open.

Perhaps having captured his seventh Wimbledon just a few weeks earlier he could come to terms with an Olympic defeat much more easily than might otherwise have been the case. Either way, history will be kind to him on this and I personally don't foresee any serious damage to his ultimate legacy. It's hard to get overly-excited about an event that was completely absent from the tennis calendar for more than sixty years and which therefore has never even featured in debates about other greats of the game such as Laver, Borg, McEnroe et al.....

lydian. Stop it!

I always thought Federer was fine with the Olympics loss. With that ridiculous semi and that ridiculous crowd he didn't have much of a chance. Just imagine if he had lost to Djokovic though... Phew!

I bet he only wanted it in the first place because Rafa had one...,

laverfan wrote:The match with Acasuso prior to Haas and Del Po was interesting as well. Two TB sets, so he had destiny on his side perhaps, while his racquet was finding tough opposition.

PS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JrcLtC5EUU

Mm. Interesting, never saw that match. Fed won 3-1 but had to save several set points in set 1 and come back from a break down before winning it, lost set 2, in set 3 was 4-0 and 5-1 down and had to save a set point to win it on a tiebreak, before winning set 4 easily.

Gonzo at the French was not a match where Murray would have been huge favourite and expect to win. Knowledgable pundits and forum posters did actually tip Gonzo for this one, he was in good form and the surface suited him better. Unlike the Warwinka/Cilic losses which were surprise defeats at more winnable slams.

As for Federer, too much talk about this US Open for match against Del Potro. What would have been special would have been a 6th consecutive US Open, but other than that, it wasn't such a big match in itself.

Earlier that year he had had

Australian Open final - the match that decided who the no 1 player really was. Massive.

French Open final - equalled slam record and won calendar year grand slam.

Wimbledon - held slam record outright and returned to no 1.

At the US Open 2009, the slam record was no longer at stake, the no 1 ranking was already his for the year and not in play, and, because of his AO defeat, the calendar year grand slam was not in play either.

Forgetting how the match itself went, there was just less at stake for him. It was a bigger match for Del Potro.

Olympic gold is big for me. This year all the players were talking it up more than ever.

Funny because in 2004 its status was about on a par with a masters.

In 2008 it was talked up much more and was clear water above a masters but still below a slam.

In 2012 if we take the literally the big 4's comments they put it in a par with a slam.

For me it is a bit of a mystery how Federer played in 2004 at the Olympics, so poorly shortly before reaching peak form at the US Open. In 2004 the final was Massu and Fish, that could have been his chance.

I do think Federer was unfortunate that there was no Olympics between Autumn 2004 and Autumn 2007 because that was when he was at his dominating best and would have probably won any Olympics held at this time, assuming it hadn't been on clay of course.

Henman Bill. Yes but he could maybe should have won that US Open against Del Potro. The others that you mentioned would have been sweet but the opposition was just a bit tougher (cough)... But wow didn't Federer put up a fight! On reflection he should be proud of these matches.

Nadal won the Olympics in 2008. I wonder if it would have been considered quite so big if Gonzalez had won?