Big Congrats to Andy!!!
He played a really phenomenal match and has deserved this win for so long!! Things are really falling into place for him personally and professionally and it’s about time!
Let’s hope this win will give him more confidence for the rest of the year and more wins over Darth Federer — Wimbledon anyone?!?!
WAY TO GO A-ROD!!!

this counts as journalism? whatever happened to balanced coverage? would any self-respecting commentator ever be caught dead writing a sentence like “And no, Tiger Woods does not have the answer, stop texting him. He’s busy winning titles while you are losing to Americans. And stop worrying about your outfit and Wimbledon ensemble and spend some more time on the practice court, assuming you are healthy.”

does anyone know of a real site that covers tennis (without getting all this personal rubbish attacks)?

What the heck, I’ve written this on two threads already - YAY ANDY! You did it and you deserved EVERY BIT OF IT! Congrats to his fans - Von, a virtual glass of wine for you!

Well, there is clearly a problem with Fed’s health situation, but the story keeps changing. First it was food poisoning, then it was mono that was not diagnosed right away, now it’s mono that was first diagnosed in 2006? Roger should have announced he had it and taken a break or kept quiet about it if he was going to keep playing. Let’s hope he’s getting the proper medical advice - he looked slower than he ever has against the Roddick serve, rare for him to be out aced by Andy.

Jeez, ged–take a breath……..commentary doesn’t have to be straight up–it can be tongue-in-cheek. That seems to be a recurring problem for Fed AND his fans—-get a sense of humor (and for that matter, perspective!)

Congrats to Andy and his team…I think Brooklyn is doing wonders for him. I vote for a quick engagement (honeymoon at Wimbledon)!

Health? No. It’s confidence. And Federer is lacking in it. He needs a coach. Badly. It’s gotten to the point where he’s making tactical errors. This guy is called a genius but he hasn’t been showing it lately. Cmon, Rog, step it up, show us what makes you the GOAT.

Getting tired of all of this. Accept that Federer lost; Elvis has left the building; the other lads are catching up. Every champion in the past has had this happen. Now there are two choices for Roger - roll over and play dead or get up and run toward the sound of gunfire.

This amounts to double celebration: first, Roddick won; second, Fed got beaten miserably despite bringing out out all the magic he possessed. I am replaying the 3rd set right now to prolong my joy!

I made a promise to myself that I won’t get angry at any negativity thrown Roddick’s way, because I anticipated that there will be plenty. But I didn’t really think you anti-Roddick people would go so far. You’re quite a bunch.

In Othello, it was aptly stated: “The robbed that smiles steals something from the thief”. Ponder this for a while.

Congratulations to all Andy fans. Von, where are you? did you see my message on the other thread?

It was not health or confidence. Federer played great. Some of those shots were just out of this world. I thought if this is the recovering Fed, then the “recovered” version will be just unimaginable.

What made the difference was Andy. He stayed composed and played and served great. The look on his face after winning the match was just priceless. Equally, it was hard for me ( even as a non-Fed fan) to see federer’s head down like that.

Alltogether, it was a great match and no losers. Just one winner, Andy Roddick. Congratulations.!

I am watching it on TSN at 10:00 tomorrow morning and can hardly wait to share / see Roddick’s joy!

Fed is well, Fed lost. “That’s it,” as Rafa would say.

Really? Federer’s best got beaten by Roddick’s best? Doubt it. But still it’s not like Federer played like… he did against Fish. He did get outplayed, no excuses can be made. But that’s an absolute joke if you are seriously saying Roddick can ever beat Federer at his absolute best.

The problem is that it seems like Federer is just rolling over. Like “Oh it’s just a loss no big deal.” Yeah one loss every 4 tournaments isn’t a big deal but 4 losses in 4 tournaments is very very bad. God Federer’s pissing me off.

Shital
***Fed got beaten miserably despite bringing out out all the magic he possessed***

I don’t think he was beaten miserably. It wasn’t like he was bagled . He lost just one game during the whole match. I am actually now worried that he will come up with more magic in the clay season!

footnote to my previous post:

Be good sports and swallow the egg. The ship has left the port. It’s sailin’ and sailin’ and driftin’ farrrrrrr, farrrrrrr out to sea.

I hope Andy beats Davy and moves up in the rankings; he should be at least number 4 shouldn’t he? He’s beaten Djokovic, Nadal and now Federer all in the last few weeks.

KUDOS!

Zola,
Looking at the score board, you could say that. But if you replay the 3rd set, it was pretty miserable to watch Fed after 2-2.

I’m so confused. By magic are you talking about his greatness?

sensationalsafin,
I owe you an explanation. I will do it tomorrow. Will that be ok with you?

sensationalsafin,
by magic I meant some of his shots. If he is playing like this when he is recovering, I don’t want to imagine how he will play when is fully recovered. The second set reminded me of his match with Nadal in Shanghai. some great stuff.

Shital
I didn’t watch the third set in whole. Just some and Fed was doing fine. That game at 3-4, he lost concentration.Just like the first set tiebreak when he shanked forehands.

I know people say Federer’s forehand is one of the best ever, but it does seem to let him down sometimes. It was erratic against Djokovic both in Montreal and Australia and now again here. Maybe it’s the other players forcing the errors or maybe Fed’s lack of confidence in some matches or feelings of pressure.

Jane,
It’s like Rafa’s forehand. He needs time to set it up and when people attack it, sometimes it is hardly a weapon.
The other factor is that Fed was not used to people coming in trying to beat him ( except for Rafa). Now he has to be more careful. So nerves can be a factor too.

Still, I think he played a great match, even not being 100%

Thank Zola - seems about right.

Zola,
Watch again the 8th of the 3rd set in particular. And judge yourself how miserable that is!

Jane,
The expression on A-Rod’s face: He did not go crazy or frivolous. He did not jump or lie flat or kneel on the court, or any of the usual rituals of victory. It was a deep, meaningful, and light smile of relief until he shook hands with Fed. Then, he gifted a ball to the audience, dropped his racket with all humility on the side of the court, walked a few yards, returned to sit on the bench, and covered his face with white towel. It was classic and meditative, looked like envisioning a journey ahead, successes long denied by a ghostly presence of Fed in his psyche, and finally overcoming it with a can-do-it-from-now-on feelings. It was beautiful to watch !

Right, right. Well. That’s a shame. Seems like Federer is becoming like Blake: moments of brilliance but overall unconcentrated play. I think it’s good that Roddick won, not just good, but great. The only downside is that Roddick is now gonna get overhyped and that might hurt him and Federer is gonna get so much negative media that he could literally drown in it.

I just don’t see this as a bad thing from Federer. Sean’s theory has been that Federer plays great for six sets then starts spiralling down. Federer still played a great match with occassional sloppy play that cost him. For this reason he needs a coach. He needs someone to keep him focused because right now it doesn’t look like anything’s helping. So it is fair to say this is a recovering Federer. But how good can the clay season possibly go for him at this point? He’s got plenty of points to defend and he needs to step up his game in order to do that because if he’s this vulnerable, err, beatable on hardcourts, imagine how bad he will be on clay.

I want to see them that happy in wimby . .

this is the stupidest commentary I’ve ever read on a tennis site. Get Real! Retire? Oh, right. sure.

Zola,
I meant “8th game of the 3rd set.” Fed’s balls were flying high and off the court. And in the 9th game, he should have been able to get back. He just could not pull one point to deuce it and win that game when there were plenty of opportunities(it was 30-40 on Roddick’s serve). Well, the crowd was just going crazy with maddening roars, and he could not concentrate under pressure. He just threw the last ball in the net.

Shital Green,

” It was classic and meditative, looked like envisioning a journey ahead, successes long denied by a ghostly presence of Fed in his psyche, and finally overcoming it with a can-do-it-from-now-on feelings. It was beautiful to watch !”

This is beautifully described Shital; thanks for sharing and I can’t wait to watch the entire match tomorrow; I’ve read everything I possibly can but I know it can’t compare to seeing it.

Roddick should have the funk, three times if he wins this tournament.

1 - For beating Fed
2 - For Winning Miami
3 - For Brooklyn Decker

“Just like the first set tiebreak when he shanked forehands.”

It would be fascinating to see Federer’s numbers for forehand errors comparing a year or two ago to the last few tournaments. One would want to adjust it for how many “unforced” forehands he hit in a match, so it would be “errors per unforced forehand.” One could also look at his history of “winners per forehand.” Has there been a big change?

Yes, I am a nerdy scientist type. No, I’m not ambitious enough to do this analysis myself!

Your comments are very harsh and show your ignorance. Remember that even Jordan had slumps. The guy is still only 26 and its not like he has all of a sudden forgotten how to hit a forehand. His confidence might be lower right now and also mono can still be with you for several months and have lingering effects on your stamina. I just hate it when Rog loses a few matches and all of a sudden everyone wants to burn him at the stake. His movement has not been the same this year and I think he is either ill or possibly having some emotion strain right now. Anyway, GET OFF HIS BACK!

Shital,
I watched the match online. So I don’t exactly remember, but I see what you mean. Still, to me some of Fed’s shots were amazing. I thought this was not a random loss. It was a decent match and Roddick just played better and stayed more concentrated in the last set.

Sean,
see, you found the gold mine! Get engahed to a model. maybe that’s what Fish said to Roddick after his win in IW and made Roddick propose just before Miami.!

But I think you are hard on Fed. he is stil No 1 and he played great tonight. Yes, he lost a few matches, but he has been dominant for 4 years. You can’t expect that go forever. I think Fed is now concentrating on more slams and records.

Federer’s seriously fooling himself if he can shrug off these losses & act like everything’s fine. The more matches he loses (seems he will continue to do so in the clay court season), the more his confidence will take a beating. He needs to swallow his foolish pride & get a coach.

But Sean saying he should retire (and not fight back, is completely crazy!! Sean seems to be simply be an anti-Federer guy who was frustatingly waiting for an oppurtunity in the last 4 years, & is now spewing venom now that he has one!!

C’mon Sean, have a little respect for Federer & all he has achieved so far!

Roddick credits his serve in the postmatch interview, but he also says this:

Q. Do you feel that tonight you were stronger mentally than of the both players?
ANDY RODDICK: I don’t know. I don’t know if I was stronger. I know it was it was a good match mentally for me. It was probably the best part of it for me.
You know, even when I got beaten at 4 All and felt like the tides were turned and all, I felt like I was able to hang on, maybe 1 All I had a tough game in the third set and stuck to it after I missed a pretty easy ball. That was probably a big difference for me tonight.

———————-

I’ve said this before but I do think it stands true and was a factor in Andy’s win tonight. Too many players in past matches against Fed, and perhaps even at this tournament (Soderling Acuaso), have lost their focus once Federer had won one or even two sets against them. By contrast, the players who have stayed with him, and who’ve stayed mentally focused on *each point*, have put pressure on Federer. Sometimes this meant they came out with the “W” - think of Canas for instance, and Rafa from the very beginning of their rivalry; he’s almost never let up.

Players need to not “overplay” against Roger; they need to stay mentally “in it” until the end; and it won’t hurt if they serve like Andy did tonight!

Roger’s far from being “done” (he’s still number 1!!!!) but I think that his complete and utter dominance is now over.

People - Sean (the author) is very often ironic. Can’t you see the humor here? Or do you think he truly believes that the way to beat Roger is to be “engaged-to-a-model”? LOL.

omg am I dreaming?? I still can’t believe it Andy really did beat Federer!!! This could not be any better dream!

Congratulations to all of Andy’s long suffering fans!!

I wont be able to get any work done tomorrow that’s for sure!

I’m not one for predictions, speculations and post mortems. My belief is that all of this is a waste of time, and time will tell, because nothing more or less pans out the way we predict it to happen. No crystal ball here. However, I’m going against my beliefs and will do a post mortem on the Fed/Andy match, due to some of the rather twisted comments I have read thus far.

Andy won for the following reasons:
♦ He was calm, composed and focused;
♦ He played a smarter and somewhat flawless match match tha Fed did;
♦ He changed up his serve pattern, e.g.,
ball toss and positioning, hence, Fed was
unable to read Andy’s serve as he did in the
past, and Andy’s serve became more penetrating
and effective; which put Fed at a 50 percent
deficit from the very first game;
♦ Andy hit the ball deep into the court, thus
taking away the advantage Fed previously had of
being able to hit those “moon balls”; and
♦ Andy came up to the net on his terms rather
than being baited by Fed.

As a result of the foregoing, Andy outplayed and outsmarted Fed. He also demonstrated he believed in himself and his confidence kept him in the match. He never gave up.

In the first set Fed’s serve was under pressure, similarly to that in the AO against Djokovic. And throughout the match his balls were flying high in the air. His errant forehand became a huge liability. It was uncontrollable.

There was nothing great, magical or awesome about Fed’s match play. But, then again, I have never been one who ever saw the brilliance in him of which others were in awe. I have been accused of being blind in this respect, but it’s a matter of perception.

As usual Federer was his ever gracious, ebullient self, in his post match comments; nearly always deficient in praise for his opponent’s win, as per the following excerpt from his post match presser:

“I think I did well to hang in there. Maybe this is one of the matches I should have won against him because he’s had some other ones where I think he was supposed to win, but this time around it went his way.”

Absolutely, and emphatically, gracious. Fed, get with the program, you lost, no need to be so sore. On 15 occasions you came out the victor, for once be gracious in defeat, but I suppose that’s just not you.

“Your comments are very harsh and show your ignorance.”

Wow. Not sure if this was meant for me in particular. I too find it disappointing that a few of the earlier posts seem to express happiness at Federer’s losses, as if he deserves them somehow. He seems like a decent guy, so there’s no need for negativity, in my opinion. Nothing wrong with being happy for Roddick of course.

To clarify, my post was just posing an impartial question: “Is Roger Federer’s forehand–a shot we tennis fans have talked about a lot over the last few years–less effective right now?” We would all have some idea of the answer already if the tennis media gave statistics for groundstrokes with the same level of sophistication they do for serves, i.e., percentage put into play, percentage unreturnable, etc., instead of the simple one-match counts of winners and unforced errors, which can depend as much on the duration of a match as on level of play.

By the way, my name actually is Andy–I like Roddick and Federer about equally.

I’m not one for predictions, speculations and post mortems. My belief is that all of this is a waste of time, and time will tell, because nothing more or less, pans out the way we predict it to happen. No crystal ball here. However, I’m going against my beliefs and will do a post mortem on the Fed/Andy match, due to some of the rather twisted comments I have read thus far.

Andy won for the following reasons:

♦ He was calm, composed and focused;
♦ He played a smarter and a somewhat flawless
match in comparison to Fed;
♦ He changed up his serve pattern, e.g.,
ball toss and positioning, hence, Fed was
unable to read and block Andy’s serve as he
did in the past, and Andy’s serve became more
penetrating and effective; which put Fed at a
50 percent deficit from the inception of the
match;
♦ Andy hit the ball deep and flat into the
court, thus taking away the advantage Fed
previously had of being able to hit
those “moon balls” that stayed up high;
♦ On the few occasions Andy came up to the net,
he did so on his terms rather than being
baited by Fed, and,
♦ He kept the ball in play and patiently stayed
in the long rallies.

As a result of the foregoing, Andy outplayed and outsmarted Fed. He also demonstrated he believed in himself, which showed in his body language, and his heightened confidence kept him buoyed throughout the match. He never gave up.

In the first set Fed’s serve was under pressure, similarly to that in the AO against Djokovic. And throughout the match his balls were flying high in the air. His errant forehand became a huge liability as the match wore on — and midway of the 3rd set it became uncontrollable.

There was nothing great, magical or awesome about Fed’s match play. But, then again, I have never been one who ever saw the brilliance in him of which others spoke or are in awe. I have been accused of being blind in this respect, but it’s a matter of perception.

As usual Federer was his ever gracious, ebullient self, in his post match comments; nearly always deficient in praise for his opponent’s win, as per the following excerpt from his post match presser:

“I think I did well to hang in there. Maybe this is one of the matches I should have won against him because he’s had some other ones where I think he was supposed to win, but this time around it went his way.”

Fed, I would have liked to hear, just once, that Andy played a very good match and deserved to win instead of “but this time around it went his way.”

Absolutely, and emphatically, gracious. Fed, get with the program, you lost, no need to be so sore. On 15 occasions you came out the victor, for once be gracious in defeat, but I suppose that’s just not you and is asking too much, from one who has a perpetual halo surrounding his head as a mark of unequivocal brilliance.

Please disregard post at 12:25 a.m, don’t know what happened, a computer/site problem. SORRY.

Von,

Don’t know if you saw my earlier congrats & virtual wine (or tea if you prefer) - a wonderful win for Andy. I followed the scores/stats but can’t watch it until tomorrow, but I’ll keep in mind your summation as I watch - esp. interested to see how Andy modifies that serve of his.

Tam,

Sweet Dreams…

“I think I did well to hang in there. Maybe this is one of the matches I should have won against him because he’s had some other ones where I think he was supposed to win, but this time around it went his way.”

Bearing in mind that English is not Federer’s first language and that Federer has paid Roddick many compliments in the past, I read this quote as Federer saying that Roddick had chances to win some of their previous encounters (”other ones where I think he was supposed to win”), and that the bad luck or whatever that prevented Roddick from winning those matches didn’t happen this time (”this time around it went his way”) so Roddick got the win he deserved. The “…I should have won…” part sounds like a confusing attempt at ironic humor–not a real “I should have won” claim.

jane:

I read some posts earlier on this evening and didn’t like what I read. So, I took a break from posting. Also, I got so messed up by FSN. They were supposed to show the match at 7:00 p.m., live, but did not do so until 10:00 p.m., delayed. I looked at the live scores which seemed like an eternity — the suspense was too much. Finally, at 10:00 p.m., I was able to look at the match on TV and it was well worth the wait.

I am somewhat dismayed, from the comments I have read thus far, that most of the Fed fans could not be gracious enough to be happy for Andy, considering he lost to Fed 15 times. On those occasions that Andy lost, the unkind comments were painful to read, and now that he has won, it’s the same. What gives?

Thanks for the virtual wine, but he needs to get past Davydenko and the final, and then I’ll take you up on the wine. I hope he can stay buoyed in confidence and focused for the balance of the tournament.

jane; Enjoy the match on TV - it was great to see a focused, lmost worry-free Andy.

TD: Get a grip, you have two (2) more days to go.

Wow. With another loss of mighty Fed, finally some excitement on tour. Am really, REALLY happy Andy won.
Congrats!

Man, do I feel bad now…

Just as if you believe in God, and a few years later you see he’s only human. Maybe I’m wrong, but seems to me the reason why Fed is so vulnerable today is that he dropped his brand-game, much more than the others raised their levels.
He just lost his “extra strike” he used throughout the years to break his opponents in crucial moments (Roddick was a paradigm to this, beaten and frustrated how many… 14? times in a row).

I hope Fed will be back. I don’t agree tennis will gain in popularity with “anyone can beat anyone”. There’s only one King.

Finally watched (most of) the match on tape. FSN has done a really crappy job of covering these two Masters Series tourneys. At 4-3 in the third set they went to commercial break and returned with a FISHING SHOW!!!!!! F@#$!!!!!

Von,
As a Federer fan I can say Roddick deserved his win (the object of the game is to best your opponent), hanging with Fed throughout the sets (not getting reeled into ”no man’s land”) and maintaining an over-all better level of play tonight, producing a breakthrough. Seeing Fed’s disarray again was certainly dissappointing (I will continue rooting for him), but it’s really a wonderful moment for Roddick. This win alone was what he’s been working toward for a loooong time (in tennis years). Like you, I’m not one for predictions, but this does seem like a transitional period in the careers of both players. Fed might be gearing up to focus on specific areas of the tennis season (who knows but him?), while Roddick might become a serious title contender once again.

I said I’d buy you dinner, but I decided to cook you dinner (whatever goes well with red) because Jane brought over a bottle of wine. I believe it’s Chilean.
A sincere congrats to you …and don’t hate me if I keep supporting Federer, for I have my reasons.

johnnhoj:

Absolutely gracious post, and thank you for your good wishes.

Roddick played within himself, and that’s what is important for all of the players to understand. In the past Roddick’s coaches, after AR lost to Fed for a few times began tinkering with his game, wanting him to play more like Fed, and that is what completely messed up Andy. I think he has finally figured out what he needs to do. Thank God for that — better late than never. You could see that playing his game his way (AR) there wasn’t any tension, and he took it to Fed. Let’s hope he sticks to this formula, and can win some more titles.

Fed will bounce back, but I doubt think that he’ll be as dominant as he was previously, which is good for tennis. A different winner at each tournament is a lot more fun than the same player winning all of the time. We’ll let him win a few.

I won’t dislike you for your undying support to Fed. On the contrary, I admire people who are loyal, roll with the punches, stay true through the good and the bad. It’s called character, and you seem to have that necessary ingredient. I dislike the ones who vacillate — today, you’re my guy, tomorrow, I think you’re the pits, and back and forth. Generally, in my life I stay away from that type of person. Can’t trust them. That said, you’re on the right track.

So what are you going to cook for me? But, first I should ask how good a cook are you? What goes with Red Chilean wine? Steak, maybe, filet mignon, chauteau briand, or hamburgers and sausages. Whatever, piques your appetite. I’m not too picky, so whatever you choose will do just fine. I suppose you need to have the invitations printed and/or place cards made up. It should be a lot of fun.

Well, 3 more days of tennis and that will be it for a couple of weeks. Except for Andy and the US Davis Cup team who will be playing in 10 days. I hope they win their tie against France. The Bryans have been titleless this year, and Blake has been struggling with his knees since the AO. He’s had to pull out of 2 tournaments. If he’s not Ok and the Bryans are iffy, it means Andy will have to win 2 live rubbers, which is not an easy task. Anyway, we’ll just have to hope for the best and leave it in God’s hands.

Maybe Roger needs to do something about engaging a ‘model’?????

I’m truely believe you’re missing the point.
Yes. Federer lost.
Usually when he loses I want to bury myself in send! But not yesterday.

About the match. It seems to me most people here are clouded by the “Oooo Federer this” and “Yeaa Roddick that”.
Roddick played amazingly. simple as that. He is a good player on a great season (for him) and on a serving day like that he could’ve beaten everyone.
Federer lacked coaching. He couldn’t break Roddick’s phenomenal serve and didn’t change the returning strategy.
That being said, he played (Federer) just great.
If Federer hadn’t lost focus on the last two games he could’ve won the match.

On a different note.
Federer’s game was solid and motivated. Beautiful shots, intuitive returns, and great approach both mentally and physically. For me - this is more important than winning the title.

I believe that Roger is on the right track. And he’s going to take some titles in the near future (Yes. clay titles)

To Von:You quoted “There was nothing great, magical or awesome about Fed’s match play. But, then again, I have never been one who ever saw the brilliance in him of which others spoke or are in awe. I have been accused of being blind in this respect, but it’s a matter of perception”
So do you mean to say that fed won 12 slams with a mediocre game….thats crazy!!!His game is brilliant.He is a much better player than roddick will ever be, win or lose.I could say that my game is the best in the world and argue that its a matter of perception but that doesnt make any sense.Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder but nobody will say that albert einstein was not brilliant.

The match was very close and if not for Federer’s lapse in the third set, he could’ve won. He gave Roddick plenty of credit but he HAS to be bummed out by his losses because accepting them all the time is just stupid.

I still believe Federer will get through this and start winning consistently again. Maybe not as dominant but several titles no doubt. He’s like a pheonix. His flame has died for a bit but he will rise once again. I still say Djokovic will end number 1. But if I’m wrong, and Federer stays number 1, it wouldn’t surprise me even a little.

After losing to Roddick, I’m sure he’s super motivated now and will be looking to reclaim his throne.

Von,
perhaps you didn’t see my earlier comments too. Congratulations! Great job by Andy!

Haven’t got the time to read all the posts here.. but congrats to Andy - he stayed with Fed all the way - his serve never wavered and unlike some past matches between them, he didn’t lose hope in the 3rd set. That said, how can anyone say that Fed didn’t have a mental meltdown in the 8th game of the 3rd set? Maybe he was waiting for A-Rod to “go away”, and on realising he wasn’t, had a crisis of confidence, causing him to shank his shots all over the place. That told me more about Fed’s lack of confidence at the moment than anything I’ve seen so far. His trainer telling him he was only at 95% fitness couldn’t have helped either. He needs to win a title to get it back .. but the more the losses rack up, the harder it will be - even at 100% fitness. You have to wonder where Fed would be if he hadn’t been struck with mono … that is the great unknowable as far as I’m concerned. But all credit to A-Rod - never seen him play better against Fed - he knew this was his best chance to gain a win … and he took it.

Von said: “He changed up his serve pattern, e.g.,
ball toss and positioning, hence, Fed was
unable to read and block Andy’s serve as he
did in the past, and Andy’s serve became more
penetrating and effective; which put Fed at a
50 percent deficit from the inception of the
match”

Could be true. When you look at the ace department, you’ll see that A-Rod OUTACED (yes, OUTACED!) Fed 17 to 7 - something close to imaginable in their last 10 or so meetings. Also, if you’ve noticed, most of A-Rod’s serves were directed to Fed’s forehand, which, even though normally Fed’s signature shot, seems to be a rather weaker side when it comes to returning A-Rod’s serves. If you have the match recorded, try to review that all-important point in the 3rd set at 3 games all (where Fed was leading 30-0 on A-Rod’s serve). Andy maybe put a solid but certainly not unreturnable serve into play (directed wide to Fed’s forehand), but the Swiss just wasn’t able to react in time…

I don’t understand it!!! A player is supposed to get worse results after getting together publicly with beautiful women. Look what happened to Safin, Hewitt, Haas and Srichaphan. Is Federer cheating on Mirka with some supermodel?

Two quick points:
1) What’s up with Andy’s shirt? It’s like 2 sizes too big and he’s constantly tugging on it. Federer’s shirt appears tailored and is always perfectly in place, not covered in sweat, and you never see Roger adjusting any of his clothes.
2) Is Andy’s model fiancee attractive? sure. Are there 500,000 girls just a pretty or more so in every major metropolitan area? YES.

In the tie-break Fed made 3 unforced forehand errors that cost him the set. Throughout the match, he flubbed many returns trying to come over the ball - he had far more success just chipping it back. Also, he was forcing his topspin backhand in the 3rd set, especially when he was broken.

Andy also gave Fed enough rope to hang himself - he floated a few shots to his backhand which Fed tried to run around and made unforced errors.

Finally, even Gimelstob (not exactly a bastion of tactical know-how) said that tactically Fed can no longer dominate from the back, and he needs to approach the net more consistently. It’s very hard to hit good passing shots all day, but even the best volleyers get passed sometimes.

Fed just can’t win from the back any more and he won’t win much of anything until he really makes this adjustment, even if he’s passed from time to time.

I suppose I’m the opposite of a great deal of folks in my take on Federer’s recent slump, but I must say it . . .

Tennis is officially boring now that Federer is no longer dominating. He’s the entire reason I became interested in the sport again after 8 years of being tuned out to pro tennis. No one else’s game is half as compelling to watch (when he’s in good form, that is). Now that he’s struggling mightily and losing to the likes of Andy “One-Dimensional” Roddick, men’s tennis has lost its allure for me.

Andy said: “To clarify, my post was just posing an impartial question: “Is Roger Federer’s forehand–a shot we tennis fans have talked about a lot over the last few years–less effective right now?” We would all have some idea of the answer already if the tennis media gave statistics for groundstrokes with the same level of sophistication they do for serves, i.e., percentage put into play, percentage unreturnable, etc., instead of the simple one-match counts of winners and unforced errors, which can depend as much on the duration of a match as on level of play.”

———————————————————

If you’ve followed Fed closely, you should have noticed that his forehand ISN’T THE SAME already since Dubai 2007. Prior to this tournament, it was his signature shot - a shot, that would alone beat at least 80 % players on the Tour… Frankly, (apart from Sampras’ serve, maybe) I’ve never seen such a formidable stroke as was (well, unfortunately WAS) Fed’s forehand… If you look back to 2005 or 2006, if any of Fed’s opponents (except maybe Nadal) back then had played even one short or mid-short ball to Fed’s forehand, in 99 % of the cases it would be GAME OVER for him. Those were simply merciless shots calculated to land literally within milimeters from the lines! But now, instead of hitting a winner from his once mighty forehand, he’s producing some mighty sh.tty errors, with most of those forehands flying even 2-3 m wide… If you had that yesterday’s match taped, just notice that very first point of the 1st set breaker, and you’ll see for yourself… Those were points which Fed would normally win even blindly, but now he’s firing “homeruns” in such situations… Well, and there you go! Another 2 missed forehands - and that was it for Roger as far as that 1st set breaker is concerned…

****ferix Says:
I don’t understand it!!! A player is supposed to get worse results after getting together publicly with beautiful women. Look what happened to Safin, Hewitt, Haas and Srichaphan. Is Federer cheating on Mirka with some supermodel? ****

ferix,
the recipe works only in North America. It was found first by Mardy Fish !

People,

Before saying Fed will have a bad Clay season we have to remind that in the last two years, (leaving that Volandri match aside), only Nadal beat Fed on Clay, in finals! Hardcourts can be trick sometimes, especially when facing a sensational server like Roddick, with high confidence. It’s easier to loose there with just a bad game, as it happens. On clay, the match is long and the mental game is different. That’s when Nadal and Fed, rises.

But, we have to wait and see. Not getting in one hardcourt final till now is surreal for Fed, but again, last year he reaches 8 consecutive finals after Rome.

So, as much as some of you are excited, just be careful with some statements. This is tennis, and changes happen all the time.
Who would guess Pete will win another Grand Slam after almost 2 years without winning a single “small” tournament?!

Skorocel, you may be onto something: his strokes are no longer as technically superior to those of his opponents, so he either needs to improve them (hard to do at this stage in his career) or employ different tactics. Even Gimelstob said he thought he has to attack more and take some pressure of his groundies…for once I agree with this boob.

I also think he may need to consider playing a fuller schedule. He’s added Estoril to his claycourt season, which is good, but he again eschews Indianapolis before heading off to Toronto for a Masters Series event - not so good.

There’s no substitute for match play to get over a case of the nerves, and he definitely shrank at the occassion in the tie-break and his last service game. He’s got to get tougher in the clutch.

good post, Daniel. Roger has won hamburg 4 times. so to claim that he will enter wimbledon without a title and without a #1 ranking is bit of a stretch.

The kind of year-around dominance Roger showed in 2004/5/6 was over last year itself. Yet he managed to rise up on occassions to win 3 slams. I think he will follow same pattern over next few years (not win 3 slams a year..but 1 a year is realistic). He did loose to Gonzo in shanghai and then rolled over others. Even during his ‘peak’ years, he had bad to avarage days, but he managed to battle out these wins. Its going to be harder now, as his opponents are getting better and are no longer intimidated at the prospect of beating Roger.

and getting a coach is not going to do any magic. any short term panick button moves can produce smaller titles to shut up some critics, but may seriously hurt his long term career goals.

Von said: “As usual Federer was his ever gracious, ebullient self, in his post match comments; nearly always deficient in praise for his opponent’s win, as per the following excerpt from his post match presser:

“I think I did well to hang in there. Maybe this is one of the matches I should have won against him because he’s had some other ones where I think he was supposed to win, but this time around it went his way.”

What’s wrong with this one, Von? He said MAYBE. Surely, it’s not like he has blown a 6-0, 5-0 lead, but leading 30-0 at 3 all in the 3rd (with A-Rod serving) isn’t that far from winning a match either, or is it? Every single tennis fan (including you or me) has to admit that some of their matches (especially that TMC 2006 RR one or that Wimby 2004 final) could’ve gone either way… The same about yesterday’s match - it was a toss-up, but this time, it was A-Rod who played the important points better!

Anyway, hats off to A-Rod! The guy’s already beaten all the Top 3 ranked players on the tour this year - and that’s NOT a fluke! Yesterday, he not only showed one helluva good serving performance, but also added some shots which you normally wouldn’t see him playing vs Fed… Just think of that superb forehand return which he hit in that 1st set breaker, or that one dropshot (yes, a DROPSHOT!), which Fed could only watch landing just behind the net - really top-class in my opinion!

The other thing is, when I compare yesterday’s match with that IW semi vs Fish (where Fed was not only awful as far as his shots are concerned, but moreover slow and disinterested like NEVER before), yesterday, his movement was much better and he didn’t play a bad match at all… I don’t know what was his W/UE ratio (since those cr.ppy ATP stats only show numbers related to serve & return), but I bet it must’ve been at least a positive one… Some of those stop-volleys or passing shots which he produced were absolutely stunning in my opinion… Huh, even those first 2 MPs which he saved were a treat to watch, isn’t it?

But the fact is, A-Rod just didn’t give him a look on his serve, and one sloppy game at 3-4 in the 3rd (plus 3 easy forehand misses in the 1st set breaker) simply cost him the match… Now does that mean A-Rod doesn’t deserve the win? Of course he DOES! When you look at that USO 2007 match, where Fed won those tiebreaks - that too could’ve gone either way, but Fed simply played BETTER IN THE IMPORTANT POINTS… The point is, many of these rallies ended with an UE from A-Rod - just like yesterday Fed messed up that 8th game in the 3rd… What I want to say is that in many of those important points, A-Rod’s helped Fed with an occasional UE here and there, but still, it was a W for the Swiss.

If you remember, at the post-match presser, Fed said something like he’s actually surprised he’s won so many matches against A-Rod, considering the American’s huge serve (which could be very hard to break)… Therefore, it was not surprising to see that yesterday’s 1st set being decided in a tie-break, but this time, A-Rod simply played those points BETTER. The same can be said about that critical situation in the 3rd (where at 3 all, Andy was trailing 0-30 on his serve) - he simply played those points BETTER. And finally, the same goes for that subsequent game where he broke Fed - unforced errors or not, he played these points BETTER, period!

Sorry for the long post but it’s mainly to do with commentators and the press (not TV coverage; that’s another issue!):
It’s not that I don’t like Federer even though he’s not one of my favorites, nor that I can’t acknowledge his talent.
BUT. The hyperbole that has been lavished on him by the press and tennis commentators since 2005 is, in part, what has created “the bubble” surrounding him that he is invincible. Maybe they created the monster, not Fed. The fact of the matter is this: he’s not and never has been “invincible”. Yes, he won and won and won. BUT. Especially after his dominant years in 05-06, when all that us followers of the sport heard was “Fed this”, “Fed that”, which is presumably all his opponents heard as well (imagine being Roddick and hearing McEnroe and Aggassi gushing about Fed all the time), Fed’s opponents often went on the court having already conceded the match, thinking “I’ll play my best,” “give it my best shot,” or whatever.
They gave up before they began.
Not so Nadal, who came along as early as 2004 and began to establish a winning record against Fed (mostly on clay but on hardcourts, twice). Why? Because Rafa never gives up until the last ball has been struck, he kept pressure on Roger, and guess what? He won. Then in 2006 Novak comes along and begins spouting off - and to match the talk he walked the walk a year later. He won too.
The fact of the matter is that Federer was, is, and ever shall be beatable. His forehand can & does fail him when players put pressure on it, as can his backhand, particularly on clay. He’s generally one of the most focused players in tennis today, and his mental toughness has done him well, but if his opponents do not relent, his concentration can be thrown off, just like any other player’s.
Last night is a classic example of this: Andy kept the pressure on Roger (Andy didn’t fade as he did after losing 2 tight sets to him in the USO last year) and Roger fumbled. This is what Roger often had done/does to his opponents. Clearly, they can do it to him too.
That players finally realize this is thanks, in part, to a couple of young upstarts who are number 2 & 3 now.
So: will the commentators realize it? Or do we still have to listen to the silly GOAT argument, which is illogical anyhow because you can’t reasonably compare players from different eras, with different technologies, and so on. The game is always evolving. Roger is ONE of a number of the best players in the sport, for sure, but he not THE “best player to ever pick up a racquet” which has become a cliché saying anyhow. He may, however, be the most hyped player in the history of tennis.
That hype has had both good and bad repercussions for tennis: Good, in that it’s brought new fans to tennis, but bad, in that it had a psychological and wearing effect on Roger’s opponents.
And what does the fickle press do when Roger starts losing a few matches? For the most part, they dump on him.

Less hype, less woe & more balanced commentary on the tennis; that’d be nice.

I’m thinking Fed will be shifting his focus to specific tournaments from this point on, which is a very good idea when considering longevity. He may continue a successful run in places, but after a season like ‘06 there was nowhere else to go but down, and elsewhere, until he feels perhaps that he can make a somewhat similar run again. That means focusing on certain tournaments while including new ones for the sake of a steady ranking. There’s no wisdom in winning every Masters Series tournament during the season when one considers the need to defend points year after year - everybody’s gonna lose. One must look at this realistically and consider all the logistics involved in maintaining a highly fruitful tennis career lasting several years. Seems pretty daunting. Of course Fed will lose more matches, but it won’t be really horrible. I’m picturing breakthrough victories for him down the road, once he’s back to playing Fed-level tennis, which he will as long as he’s willing to work his way through slumps. All he needs to do is work on his game and stay in the mix until he’s re-charged.

What can I say about Roddick? I really need to see how he fares against the rest of the field over the course of several months.

Jane you raised great point about press. They are too quick to call you the greatest and even quicker to dismiss. But its not entirely their fault also. some fans do want to hear about it, too. If Pmac talks endlessly about technique/stroke production etc, some people will find that boring too. The true greats don’t get too caught up in what others are saying and their best response is on the court.

“men’s tennis has lost its allure for me.”

I am sorry to say that you’re not a tennis fan then just another fair weather fanboy.

buh-BYE!!

Was that supposed to be an insult?

Hard to say, Seth. Another post-er who needs a prescription from the doctor.

Sports is always like this with superstars rising and falling. There have been few athletes in any sport who can maintain intensity year in and out. Think of where Roger has come from and where he is now. Kid to icon and probably richer than any Swiss neighbor.

Never mind mono, women, etc. After riding the high he has been on, perhaps it is not so surprising that he has fallen from the pinnacle fans have raised him to. Also, let us give credit to the other top players. No matter how great one’s shot making is, other super athletes will adjust. Some have.

If Federer takes all of this as a wake up call and runs toward the sound of the gunfire, we will continue to have on fabulous tennis year.

Fed boosted his ranking points in Miami this year.
2007: R16
2008: QF

A small nudge forward, but right now it counts for alot.

johnnhoj,

Sorry to spoil small victories, but i believe Rafa’s now increased his as well, and he’s still rolling, and with clay around the bend, well, you get my drift….

Rog better start hitting some over-the-shoulder-backhands real soon.

That’s true, Jane, but the pressure will be on Rafa to defend points, no? It’s a must-hold-the-fort scenario for him. Fed can improve upon his previous results for the most part. I ain’t holdin’ my breath, but I’ll be interested in seeing if either of these two decides to up the ante on the clay. This is gonna be awesome, or it’s gonna be excruciating. I’ll be ready to accept things either way. My favorite time of the season: European clay and grass.
Time flies!