Boris Becker has his say on SABR

'It's almost disrespecting the other guy's serve. Everybody talks about that's his new strategy - he comes in. It's within the rules,' Becker told Sky. 'If he would have played a [John] McEnroe, [Jimmy] Connors, [Ivan] Lendl or even me, we would have said 'Roger, in all honesty I like you very much [but] I'll go straight at you. In my generation guys would not have accepted as it is now.'

Needless to say the Daily Mail headline builds this up as Boris saying that Federer is direspectful and that they would not have accepted it in his day....

All he's saying is that anyone who sees Fed do it should smack the ball at him - which is fair enough, although whether that would work is another story.

Is this just Boris being Boris, now he's a bit long in the tooth his indiscretions are are more verbal than of the broom cupboard type, or is he trying to fire a shot across the Federer bows on behalf of his charge?

Good old Daily mail, whats giving us cancer this time?

hes literally just saying its not showing any repct to the guys serve and they should go at him with the weaker approach

tbh, people dont go to the body of Roger at the net enough, just a couple of times would reduce his reaction time side to side (as hes looking for it). Guys nowadays dont pass very intelligently, for example where did Agassis old one to punch approach, low shot at the toes or body then finish off the second one, go?

Becker tweeted that he was misquoted, said his words were twisted or something.

McEnroe said something similar last night--- went on and on about how he loves seeing Federer do it, insane talent to do it facing the type of serves on mens tour today, but that the server should take it as an insult and go after Fed. Said the server should be thinking "you think my serve is that bad that you can do this to me? I won't let you get away with that" McEnroe also said Federer has more ways to hurt you than anyone else, and he frankly thought the Sabr wasn't Fed's best option anyway.

What I got out of it was they love seeing Fed do it, but have more criticisim towards the server for not reacting like they think he should. I'm sure Becker will have Djoko primed to react a certain way if that is the final matchup.

It is a bit disrepectful for the server because you are saying you have a weak serve. Bet plenty of club players in the UK would not like you doing it to them.

I think standing on the serving line to receive serve is more taking the p1ss. When you actually charge in on the tennis that's less disrespectful.

I am not sure it's working, either. Last few times I saw it he lost the point. Where is the stat of % points won and lost when he tried it.

Hitting at him isn't an option because (i) he doesn't stand in the box, you'll most likely miss him & double fault, (ii) you're messing up your serve, which is part of what he wants, (iii) you don't know he's there because he doesn't move until the ball is up in the air.

It's a variety play, that's all. It's not there to clean up or he'd do it every point. From what I saw at Cincinatti he won >50% of the points, easily, and that's a great ratio on 2nd serve.

He obviously wouldn't do it to someone who serves like himself because the 2nd serve is too disguised and placed so he'd be aced all the time. It works if the guy doesn't have the greatest placement or extreme pace. I like it against Djokovic because he's such an incredible rallyer that anything to get the point out of that mode is good. Could be useful to take time from Stan too. Any way to be ultra-attacking on Murray's 2nd is good. Not recommended for Isner.

I really don't get this 'disrespect' thing; I mean, is it 'disrespecting' someone's fitness to run the legs off them, or their passing shots to play at the net? What's this nonsense all about, is there now some code where everyone has to show respect to others shots? This is a microcosm of society where 'not giving offence' is considered illegal. Screw it, giving offence is perfectly acceptable, just be prepared to get some back - just like disrespecting shots.

I want some players either to develop counter-attacks or emulate it, or invent their own play. This is great, it's creative and different. Or do we just want to talk about topspin groundstrokes all day?

Maybe I've been listening to Becker too much over the last 18 months but I didn't take those comments to mean disrespectful in the sense of it shouldn't be done because it's rude.

I think he was talking more in a kind of alpha male, top dog kind of way whereby if somebody is taunting you, you stop them.

It's a spillover from the mindset of that generation. For him, Mac, Lendl and Connors, tennis was warfare by other means.

In his recent book, he spoke of how before the final at Wimbledon last year, he, Novak and the team entered the locker room to start preparing and saw Federer and Edberg were already there. After a few minutes, Fed and Edberg left and went elsewhere. Boris said he saw that and thought "15 love".

Personally I think both statements are nonsense; Fed and Edberg probably just wanted some quiet, and the advice about the serve wouldn't work for the reasons BB describes above.

Nevertheless, I do kind of like the mindset. I hope Federer's opponents do take the return as a slight on their abilities and do what they can to snuff it out.

(Not because I don't want to see the return anymore, which I love, but because I want to see some thrust and counter-thrust in players' tactics)

letting the server dictate the point is respect? I think it's cowardly. Bravo to the pensioner for trying something different. most of the top 10 just play 'rinse and repear'

HM Murdock wrote:Maybe I've been listening to Becker too much over the last 18 months but I didn't take those comments to mean disrespectful in the sense of it shouldn't be done because it's rude.

I think he was talking more in a kind of alpha male, top dog kind of way whereby if somebody is taunting you, you stop them.

It's a spillover from the mindset of that generation. For him, Mac, Lendl and Connors, tennis was warfare by other means.

In his recent book, he spoke of how before the final at Wimbledon last year, he, Novak and the team entered the locker room to start preparing and saw Federer and Edberg were already there. After a few minutes, Fed and Edberg left and went elsewhere. Boris said he saw that and thought "15 love".

Personally I think both statements are nonsense; Fed and Edberg probably just wanted some quiet, and the advice about the serve wouldn't work for the reasons BB describes above.

Nevertheless, I do kind of like the mindset. I hope Federer's opponents do take the return as a slight on their abilities and do what they can to snuff it out.

(Not because I don't want to see the return anymore, which I love, but because I want to see some thrust and counter-thrust in players' tactics)

I think when Boris played there were a few left of a "what are you looking at sonny" generation of tennis players and there was plenty of needle between some of the top players, so I agree with this comment.  Interesting that both Edberg and Wilander played at the same time and they were not like that at all.

I think its meant to hit him at the net after the return, something people dont try anymore

It doesn't work all the time but it just makes the serve think he might do it, which affects his play.

I agree, how can they serve right at him if they don't know know when he's coming? He doesn't start in the service line, leaves it too late

Listening to that, I know see why Novak hired the Boz, hes a real wiley competitor, and pretty ruthless.

No doubt hell be telling Novak to not worry bout Sabre (grr!!).
Let him do it, then smash the pass right at him off the weaker approach. I dont think Sabres gonna have the serve destroying effect on Novak we perhaps think it will

I don't think I've seen anyone say that this is some sort of magic potion to destroy anyone's serve. It's a variation to be thrown in, a bit like Novak will serve & volley once or twice (a tournament, arf!) to mix things up.

I might go get his book. Thats pretty clever
Go in the same place as Feds camp, ge them to leave for privacy and then tell Novak "see that? They cant look at you"

It matters not if its rubbish, its getting Novak in the perfect mindset.
By publicly declaring an easy way to stop Sabre (grr!) hes de-legitimising it to people, especially to Novak, who cares if hes right, hes making Novak think its no big deal.

And if he thinks its no big deal, then its useless. Thats clever.

I remember Shane Warne once did a show where he showed off every type of delivery he could bowl and how he did it. But he never did any of them, just a straight one and a leg break, but he put it in peoples minds, that probably got him another 100 wickets.

They'd have to be simple to be open to such manipulation.

There's nowt as queer as Daily Mail readers.

Sneak attach by Roger?  It won't be a sneak attack if the opponent keeps his eyes open.

I think with Becker, he just seems to be a good match for Djokovic.

If Becker gave the same sort of advice to Federer, I think Roger would laugh at him.

In the Wimbledon rain break, Novak said Boris told him to "keep on punching". If he'd said that in the commentary booth (actually, that's exactly the kind of thing he did say in the commentary booth!), we'd all say how trite and simplistic it was.

But it seemed to resonate with Novak.

I suspect it's a bit like Murray and Lendl; it's not so much what is being said as who is saying it.

Its not that its being a simple person, its just putting you in the right frame of mind. All good sportsmen can do that. Openers in cricket for example are very good at ignoring a ball that just passes the bat and starting again.

Fact is, if you treat Sabr, and talk about sabr as though its a gimmick ans give it no respect it loses most of its power.

bogbrush wrote:They'd have to be simple to be open to such manipulation.

Cricketers have been known to stick their bats on roofs in the hope of getting more runs. For a private school sport, the combatants aren't particularly bright

BB, HMM, well-argued.  

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/09/07/sports/tennis/federer-attack.html?_r=0
Attack or die. 

Matchpoint wrote:BB, HMM, well-argued.  

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/09/07/sports/tennis/federer-attack.html?_r=0
Attack or die. 

I'm going to have to save that animated GIF! Brilliant.

temporary21 wrote:Its not that its being a simple person, its just putting you in the right frame of mind. All good sportsmen can do that. Openers in cricket for example are very good at ignoring a ball that just passes the bat and starting again.

Fact is, if you treat Sabr, and talk about sabr as though its a gimmick ans give it no respect it loses most of its power.

I think you're making too much of it, it's just a tricky variation. It's not meant to have "power", it's meant to be an interesting change up and something for the server to think about. End of.

temporary21 wrote:I think its meant to hit him at the net after the return, something people dont try anymore

That's how I read it. Especially if he comes in down the middle, it'll be low, especially if you are playing the shot from standing inside the baseline. It's hard to pass or lob from there. Yeah straight at him.

I take your point BB about Djokovic, cut out the rallies. The problem is Djokovic can deliver so well on the passing shot as well so either way you're in trouble against a player like him. I'd like to see him use it only once against Djokovic, and give up the strategy if he loses the point the first time. Never mind the disrespectful or not argument, the more important argument is how effective it is. I don't want to see him trying it 4-5 times against Djokovic and losing the point.

It might be something for Federer to try at 0-40, 40-15 or 40-0 in order to save on fitness by keeping points short. He could also try it after a marathon point where Djokovic can have the advantage on the next point.

He may not play Djokovic in the US Open this year of course. If he plays Cilic I think the strategy could work. Cilic could have some trouble with getting down to the awkward low ball under pressure. Stan - not sure but perhaps Stan will go right at him. If so all cameras on Mirka.

I think it's all cool, hit it at him, or whatever. It's all tennis.

The shots not been invented yet that wins points for sure, but it's been shown that putting uncertainty into the other guy surely wins points.

We just saw why it's effective. Rattled Stan, he went straight after fed and dumped it into the net. Fed then took a couple returns early and broke Stan.

Exactly. I still doubt that in the long-run it will be a viable play, but it is easier said than done to try to hit Fed there.

Still not convinced novak will fall for this.

He definitely "fell for it" in Cincy. But I agree, the more Fed plays it, the more they will get used to it and eventually he will probably have to abandon it.

Fall for what?

If a guys volleys win points did you 'fall' for it?

In any case, it was deployed with effect in the Cincy final.

For all its seeming effectiveness.  He was a centimetre away from being smashed in the face. Novak doesn't lose concentration like that

You can keep on saying its inefficient but it keeps on doing what he aims: changes play & introduces doubt.

It's certainly efficient... It has barely any movement...

http://espn.go.com/tennis/usopen15/story/_/id/13634493/tennis-said-roger-federer-justifies-sneak-attack

It's a tactic that unsettles the server, and shouts 'I don't think your second serve is very good'. And Federer should be applauded for implementing such a successful tactic. The guy has won 28 sets in a row!

Nothing wrong with it. Maximise what you've got, minimise your weaknesses, maximise and exploit his weaknesses. It's no different to people trying to get the ball to bounce high to Federer's backhand for the last 10 years.

If he did it to me I'd go straight at him off the return. Don't care if I hit him. I'd want him to try to create some doubt in his mind whether it's wise to do it again. But it's brilliant stuff from Fed.

It's final test comes Sunday though. Will it work when it matters most?

bogbrush wrote:http://espn.go.com/tennis/usopen15/story/_/id/13634493/tennis-said-roger-federer-justifies-sneak-attack

Fun read.

Love the line about signing a petition .......  

I think even some of the very best ex-players can sometimes forget just how much Federer has himself seen & experienced over the years. This is not Nick Kyrgios or some rookie needing to grab headlines that we're talking about ......!

Becker is right the opponent needs to mix in a few more kick-slice body serves than just kick it to FEd's backhand. The kick-slice comes in harder and faster than the traditional kick and still has the some spin and action to control the second. Tactically, it is a genius move by Federer. Because most players just want to get a short reply by hitting a big slow kick to Fed's backhand. By using this technique he throws off their timing and gives them a new look on return. Also if he can get his opponents to hit more kick-slice serves as opposed to standard kick serves than that is a plus for him because it serves two functions. 1. The kick is easier to control and direct and has more net clearance so as a server it is your most reliable serve 2. At times his opponent will attempt the body serve and Fed will not be using the SABRE, that centrally located kick-slice serve is a great serve to run around and whack if you are standing around the baseline. It is in the middle of the box and while it has spin will break from a right handed server towards your forehand. So if you take one quick step to your left it is a hittable return right in your wheel house on the forehand.

Becker is the absolute pits of coaching, when he open his mouth and utters tripe like this. He needs to find his closet/cupboard and go hide.

SABR has been done in the 60s/70s by a man called Pancho Gonzalez. The Tennis body even made a rule to try and stop it, saying he was too quick for others and tried to delay his court movement.

I find it hilarious that we are now going to ban FHs, BHs, CC, Topspin and put every player in the wheelchair competition.

Utter horsecrap from Becker!  

Go LF! Go go go! As yazooo would say: "Crush him!"

temporary21 wrote:Fact is, if you treat Sabr, and talk about sabr as though its a gimmick ans give it no respect it loses most of its power.

The stark difference between the first four games of Federer v Wawrinka and the rest of the match is evidence of what SABR does to the psyche of players across the net. If the other players have the cojones, let them try it.

i think its cheating. moving too much and distracting

Zzzzz

From what I saw. It worked once. Wawrinka then had 0-40. Fed won that maych based on the rest of his good play. He'll need better tomorroe

Fair enough. I won't have a go at you for your opinion,  though I don't entirely agree.

I am with LF.

The press and Becker can blow it out their ass!

temporary21 wrote:From what I saw. It worked once. Wawrinka then had 0-40. Fed won that maych based on the rest of his good play. He'll need better tomorroe

Yes, Federer will need much more tomorrow, and he has clearly indicated it in his post-match on-court interview. It promises to be a good match. It is history in the making, I hope it is a good contest.

BTW, Federer is the oldest #2, and can be the oldest #1, if he wins tomorrow - https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/sport/tennis/federer-poised-to-become-world-s-oldest-number-one-6119613.

We can leave the GOAT part to the sticky.

laverfan wrote:

temporary21 wrote:From what I saw. It worked once. Wawrinka then had 0-40. Fed won that maych based on the rest of his good play. He'll need better tomorroe

Yes, Federer will need much more tomorrow, and he has clearly indicated it in his post-match on-court interview. It promises to be a good match. It is history in the making, I hope it is a good contest.

BTW, Federer is the oldest #2, and can be the oldest #1, if he wins tomorrow - https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/sport/tennis/federer-poised-to-become-world-s-oldest-number-one-6119613.

We can leave the GOAT part to the sticky.

Think you are wrong there.

Aside from the fact that Djokovic is streets ahead in the race and the rankings, it is an old article from, I think, 2014.

Yeah I wondered how on earth the ranking could change hands too...

If Federer wins the 3,000 points from Cincinatti and US Open does give him a window of opportunity to have another go at #1. After the French Open, Wimbledon, or Canada would be the best opportunity but maybe still a long shot.

If Djokovic wins he should have #1 solidly locked up until next year's Wimbledon at least.

To add a Federer loss today probably pretty much rules out #1 for the rest of his career. That's probably a more realistic way of looking at it.