Roger Federer Stunned By Sergiy Stakhovksy In Second Round At Wimbledon Wednesday
by Staff | June 26th, 2013, 3:57 pm
  • 110 Comments

On a jaw-dropping Day Three at Wimbledon, seven former No. 1s were sent out of the tournament culminating with Roger Federer’s shock loss to Sergiy Stakhosky. The 27-year-old Stakhovsky who entered the match ranked No. 116 and with an 0-20 career record vs Top 10 players held his nerves together to beat the Swiss 6-7, 7-6, 7-5, 7-6 in the second round at Wimbledon today.

“It’s always a disappointment losing any match,” the 7-time Wimbledon champion Federer said.

“I struggled on the big points maybe, this time again, like I have all season,” Federer said. “It was tricky but credit to him for closing it out.”

The ITF put the historic loss with these statistics:

1) It is Federer’s earliest defeat at Wimbledon since losing in the 1st round in 2002

2) It is Federer’s earliest defeat at a Slam since losing in the 1st round at 2003 Roland Garros

3) The result ends Federer’s run of 36 consecutive Grand Slam quarterfinal appearances (starting at 2004 Wimbledon)

4) It is Federer’s worst defeat at a Grand Slam (or any event) since losing to No. 154 Mario Ancic in the 1st round at 2002 Wimbledon

5) It is Federer’s first defeat by a player ranked outside the Top 100 since losing to No. 101 Richard Gasquet in the quarterfinals at 2005 Monte Carlo

6) It is the earliest defeat for a Wimbledon defending champion since 2002 champion Lleyton Hewitt lost to Ivo Karlovic in the 1st round in 2003


Also Check Out:
Sergiy Stakhovsky: I Can Tell My Grandkids, I Kicked The Butt Of Roger Federer
ATP Player Council’s Stakhovsky, Simon Ready to Take Down WTA Women’s Tennis
Nadal, Verdasco Open Play in Bangkok; Davydenko Stunned in KL
Roger Federer: I Won’t Panic, I’ll Just Go Back To Work And Come Back Stronger
Roger Federer: I Need To Win Matches, I Need To Build My Confidence (Does He Have A New Racquet?)

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get Tennis-X news FREE in your inbox every day

110 Comments for Roger Federer Stunned By Sergiy Stakhovksy In Second Round At Wimbledon Wednesday

Humble Rafa Says:

Time to check into a retirement home.


1328941 Says:

Federer is done this time.
I can’t see him come back from that.
Real question is will he retire at the end of 2014?


1328941 Says:

@Humble Rafa

It’d be nice if they could coordinate their retirement.


madmax Says:

Still has the best record ever on grass, so let’s see what happened shall we?

Stakhovsky of Ukraine used classic serve-and-volley tennis to beat the defending champion from Switzerland, 6-7 (5-7), 7-6 (7-5), 7-5, 7-6 (7-5) on Centre Court at the All England Club in southwest London.

.“I’m still in disbelief that it happened,” Stakhovsky said in an interview with the British Broadcasting Corp. “I was playing my best tennis ever and it was almost not enough to beat Federer.”

Stakovsky is ranked 116th on the ATP World Tour, making this Federer’s worst defeat by ranking in any event since he lost to No. 154-rated Mario Ancic in the first round at Wimbledon in 2002, according to the International Tennis Federation.

It’s also the earliest defeat for a defending Wimbledon champion since Ivo Karlovic beat Lleyton Hewitt in the first round in 2003.

“When you play Roger Federer at Wimbledon, it’s like playing two people,” Stakhovsky said. “You play him the player and him the ego. It’s like playing two against one. I was hoping that he wouldn’t get too far ahead of me, and I hung in there.”

Federer, the No. 3 seed, hadn’t lost at Wimbledon before the quarterfinals since he was beaten in 2002 by Ancic of Croatia. The 31-year-old right-hander has since won a men’s record seven singles titles, including a record-extending 17th major championship last year by beating Britain’s Andy Murray in the final.

The loss also ended Federer’s record run of 36 consecutive Grand Slam quarterfinal appearances, which started at Wimbledon nine years ago.

Federer’s defeat, his earliest in a major since the 2003 French Open, comes two days after two-time champion Rafael Nadal of Spain lost in the first round to Belgium’s Steve Darcis, ranked 135th on the men’s ATP World Tour. Federer and the fifth-seeded Nadal had been on schedule to play each other in the quarterfinals, with the winner of that match due to play Murray in the semifinals.

Stakhovsky took a two-set lead as he served 14 aces and kept rushing to the net. In the fourth set, Stakhovsky broke serve early, and Federer broke back for 3-3 for the first time in the match after 2 1/2 hours of play. Federer evened for 4-4 with a 96 mile-per-hour passing shot that forced his opponent to duck at the net.

Serving to stay in the fourth set at 5-6, Stakhovsky fell as he chased down a shot in his forehand corner. A return aimed straight at his feet set up a set point for Federer, which the Ukrainian saved with a backhand volley. He forced another tie-break with an ace and a serve-and-volley combination.

Stakhovsky got a 3-1 lead in the final tiebreak with a backhand passing shot. Federer saved one match point with a forehand passing shot, before handing Stakhovsky the match with a backhand that sailed wide.

“Magic,” Stakhovsky said. “I couldn’t play any better today. Every important point, I needed to serve out, I did.”

Stakhovksy produced 72 winners, including 17 aces, while Federer had 57 winners, including 16 aces. Federer made 13 unforced errors, four less than his opponent. Stakhovsky won 162 points in total, one more than Federer. The Ukrainian went to the net 96 times, compared with 54 for Federer.

Federer had entered Wimbledon having ended a 10-month championship drought in Halle, Germany, last week before. With 13 grass-court titles — seven at Wimbledon and six in Halle —

*************he has the best grass-court winning record of all time, with 122-18.***************


andrea Says:

the amazing volleys from stakhosky were unreal in that match. very consistent. sorry rog! :(


VVx Says:

He so wants to be like Pete Sampras he even copied his George Bastl moment.

Maybe, just like Pete, we have seen the last of Federer at Wimbledon?


1328941 Says:

Do you think there wille be another upset for either Murray or Djokovic?


Brando Says:

It’s sad to see great champions lose. First Rafa and now Fed. Real bummer. The field just ain’t the same without these 2, especially Wimby. Bad times.


RZ Says:

I said this on the other thread, but I’m mourning the end of Fed’s amazing quarterfinal streak. Such a shame to see it end.

But all credit to Staks for playing so well.


Nina Says:

Please don’t start the ‘Fed is done’ absurd debate all over again. Thanks.


VVx Says:

Quarter final streak?

People try to make records out of any old rubbish these days.


James Says:

“Do you think there wille be another upset for either Murray or Djokovic?”

First week is tricky. Another thing, the top guys aren’t playing a few levels above the pack this year. We have seen some upsets in earlier tournaments. The lower ranked players with nothing to lose are giving their best, and that can be tricky for the top guys. Suddenly the lower ranked players don’t seem to be too intimidated by the big boys. Murray and Djokovic need to stay focussed and play their best to avoid an upset.


Pitchaboy Says:

Would be nice if one of the young big servers take it


the DA Says:

I remember posting a bold prediction around the time of IW where
Ben and I were discussing if any of the next gens were going to break through this year. I said I didn’t think anyone was necessarily going to break through but sensed we might be in for some shock defeats from the top guys. I never imagined to what extent that would happen.


Brando Says:

Fed in decline? Of course he is. Why? Decline is usually linked to one not meeting prior levels of achievement, that standard, that level. A quick look at even Fed in 2012 to this year, recognition of the fact that at age 32 ( in August) NO PLAYER realistically is expected to be a force at the big stage then all becomes very apparent. The fact is: Fed has ONLY 1 top 10 win this year. Should he not win in Canada then in a entire year he would have ONLY 1 title win: a mere 250 point title. And even then: he was pushed by Youzhny in the final! It’s NOT a damning of him as a player: but rather a recognition of his REALITY. IMO it’s sad to see, but anyone who is arguing that he isn’t in decline, quite frankly speaking: they are kidding themselves!


volley Says:

from the nyt tennis correspondent:-

“I can tell my grandsons I kicked Roger Federer’s butt.” -Sergiy Stakhovsky

that won’t endear you to many tennis fans mr. stakhovsky.


Brando Says:

LOL Sergio, that’s not nice!


Colin Says:

Well, goodness gracious me!
I can only repeat what I said about the exit of Nadal, that it’s sad to see a great player lose, but amusing to contemplate the discomfiture of his fanatical fans.
After the endless and rather tiresome to-and-fro between the fans of Fed and Rafa, it’s quite refreshing to see both lots quietened, if only for a while.

I shall be surprised now if the final is not between Andy and Nole. The Serb is playing rather the better of the two at the moment, but Andy generally ups his game in the later rounds.

Interesting that neither have had heavy falls so far, unless I’ve missed it. A commentator said many players, when they run to reach a ball, take over-long first strides, so that if they slip, they are likely to do the splits and get hurt. He said Andy takes short strides and is safer. Of course Nole can do a scary splits without injury, but it’s an interesting point.


James Says:

Fed on end of era?

“No I have plans to play for many more years. You [media] hyped it so much I would play Rafa, disrespectful to others in draw.”


1328941 Says:

@madmax

This is a huge loss for many reasons and things will be different from here on.
Total determinism doesn’t always apply in sports: you can’t predict much based on past stats otherwise you would have rightly concluded Borg would win the FO and Wimbledon until the mid-1980s based on mid-1970s stats.


RZ Says:

VVx, you hadn’t heard about the quarterfinal streak before? They’ve been talking about it for years now.

You may not find it impressive, but I’d say for any player to get to the quarter finals of a grand slam tournament for 9 straight years shows some high consistency and ability to keep winning matches in the early rounds (until today, of course). No one else is close to that kind of long-term consistency.


madmax Says:

132, all I can say is that it had to happen at some stage. The guy is 31, (dont care about age), has 7 wimby titles, 1000 plus matches in his legs, 77 titles, etc, how much longer can we expect him to play at the top level? For me, I can say, I think he will still win a slam or two. I just do. Dont ask me why. Blind belief perhaps, but I dont care. Just love watching Roger play. So lucky to have seen him play at wimbledon for the last 4 years, on centre court too. He was brilliant. What a difference a year can make, hey?

As long as he is happy playing, then I am happy watching him play.


Lou_tennisfan Says:

Stunned and speechless at Federer’s loss. People have already started asking whether this is an end of an era. I guess this shows that even Federer is susceptible to falls. I still believe that this loss will fuel Federer even more to show to the world that he is still capable of winning more GS. because for people who are the bravest, they fall down seven time and get up eight times. And so will he.

Roger Federer loss in Wimbledon: Is this an end of an Era? http://tinyurl.com/o7xommd


scineram Says:

Of course it’s an end of an era. Question is what his place in the next one will be.


RZ Says:

I think it is the end of an era. I don’t think Roger’s done (he’ll still contend for slams, might even win one) but I think from now on, most slams and Masters titles off-clay (which is still ruled by Nadal) will have Djokovic-Murray finals.


madmax Says:

by Kate Battersby
Wednesday 26 June 2013
Stop all the clocks. For the first time in 37 Grand Slam events – nine years – the quarter-final stage will take place without Roger Federer’s name among the participants. In fact, never mind the last eight – at Wimbledon 2013 the seven-time champion did not get as far as the last 32. Sergiy Stakhovsky, ranked 116, won through to the third round for the first time in his career by confounding the Swiss with an energetic display of serve-volley tennis. In front of an increasingly disbelieving Centre Court crowd, the 27-year-old journeyman won 6-7(5), 7-6(5), 7-5, 7-6(5). After everything else on the third day of Wimbledon 2013, no wonder John McEnroe called it “one of the all-time craziest days in Wimbledon history”.

“I’m still in disbelief that actually happened,” said Stakhovsky. “Magic. Beating Roger on his court where he is a legend is special. He’s the greatest player, the biggest name, and a decent man everyone admires. I couldn’t play any better. I played my best tennis and still it was almost not enough to beat Roger Federer. When you play him at Wimbledon, you play two people – you play Roger Federer, and then you also play his ego and his Centre Court history. I just hoped he wouldn’t get too far ahead of me so I would have a chance to stay in the match and that’s what happened. I got a little tight in the fourth set but I did everything I needed to and wanted to. I’m incredibly happy.”

How quaint to recall that at the start of the match the biggest crisis facing Federer was his choice of footwear. The orange-soled shoes the No.3 seed wore for his first round match on Monday were deemed to break Wimbledon’s predominantly white rule. Perhaps the orange shoes were to Federer as hair was to Samson, such was his apparent confusion in the face of Stakhovsky’s game.

There is an air of cheerful chaos about the Ukrainian. Richard Gasquet described him as “one of the funniest guys on the Tour” after his first round win over Stakhovsky at Roland Garros last month, where Stakhovsky took such issue with a line call that he used his mobile phone to photograph the mark on the clay court, and tweeted a picture to his 10,000 followers.

Perhaps this air of playfulness contributed to the feeling throughout the match against Federer that he must surely run out of mental steam at any moment. But he never quite did. True, he is one of the few players with a grass court title to his name, having won ’s-Hertogenbosch three years ago. But it pales somewhat next to Federer’s 13 titles on the green stuff, and his seven Wimbledons. Prior to this match, the highest-ranked player Stakhovsky had ever beaten was Marcos Baghdatis in 2010, when the Cypriot was No.18.

The first set was met with polite delight. The idea that Stakhovsky was giving Federer a good match was charming entertainment given that it turned out as form dictated, with Federer edging the breaker. But in the second he continued taking the fight to the Swiss, producing classic serve-volley stuff. His second serve was particularly prosperous, in marked contrast to Federer’s. It was 5-5 in the second before the Swiss could earn his first break point of the match but good serving got Stakhovsky out of trouble. Into the breaker and this time a Federer mishit gave his opponent set point. Stakhovsky volleyed the match level.

Despite the fact that it was their beloved Federer on court, the crowd were warming to Stakhovsky’s energetic style, particularly as it meant the tennis was rattling along at an extraordinary lick. Three times in the third set he fended off break point, until at 5-5 a backhand shank from Federer handed over the break. It was enough.

Far from tiring, Stakhovsky was more energised than ever. He forced a mistake from Federer at the net to break for 2-1, and produced great defence to fend off two break points from the Swiss. Then, with an extraordinary victory looming large on the horizon, it was as if Stakhovsky caught sight of his own reflection and was momentarily thrown – at 3-2 he netted tamely and at the seventh attempt, Federer converted a break point, to get it back on serve. At 6-5 Federer held set point to level the match, but Stakhovsky rebutted it in style to head into the tiebreak. When Federer could not persuade his backhand over the net, it gave Stakhovsky two match points. A superb passing shot saved the first, but on the second Federer’s backhand drifted wide, taking his hopes of an unprecedented eighth title here with it. Stakhovsky fell to the turf, then tipped an invisible hat to all four corners of the crowd. Four rip-roaring sets had lasted three hours dead, and Federer was out.

“The 24-hour rule applies,” said the vanquished. “Don’t panic at this point. Go back to work and come back stronger. Usually I do turnarounds pretty good. This is clearly not what I was hoping for here. He was uncomfortable to play against, but I expected serve-and-volley because he often does it. Credit to him for closing it out under enormous pressure. I’m very disappointed I couldn’t find a way to win. I had opportunities, a foot in the door, but I couldn’t do it. I wish [the 36 quarter-finals] were not going to end here but I have no choice other than to accept it and move on. It doesn’t feel like the end of an era for me because I still have plans to play for many more years to come. Some finals haven’t hurt this much. At least having lost I didn’t have to go through a trophy ceremony with this one.”


Ben Pronin Says:

“Brad Gilbert ‏@bgtennisnation 1m
When the draw wad made the bottom half was the group of death after the carnage today the top half is 10x times tougher now ”

For now..


El Flaco Says:

Sean was dead on when he said “Quarter of death”. At least Rafa and Fed fans can relax and enjoy the tournament now.


Seth Says:

It had to end sometime. Fed’s by no means done, as many are foolishly saying and will say, but it is the clearest writing on the wall yet that he’s in decline. All I can say is tip of the hat to the greatest. I seriously doubt anyone will ever challenge his record 36 straight quarterfinals, much less 23 straight semis. That kind of consistency is simply hard to fathom.


grendel Says:

I find it odd that, after the carnage of the last two days – of men and women – it is calmly assumed that Murray and Djokovic will contest the final.

Agreed, this is the most likely eventuality. But come on, it’s hardly certain… There’s a number of guys out there who have powerful games who will have noted the strange goings on. They will be keen to add to them.


Ben Pronin Says:

I hope this day is forever called Wild Wimbledon Wednesday. Honestly, it’s an epic day. Not for the losers, obviously, but for the fans. After hearing about the monogamy of the surfaces for soooooo long we finally got a serious shake up at the biggest event in the world. Are you not entertained?


jane Says:

@ Ben 5:35 pm – Brad Gilbert said that in the ESPN booth, too. Just goes to show that you never know. People were calling Nole’s draw lucky but honestly who could’ve predicted this turn of events!? In addition to Fed going out – after Rafa – Isner, Hewitt and Tsonga all went out too. On the women’s side, Sharapova, Azarenka, Ivanovic and Wozniacki. Crazy day. I wonder if it’s over or if there’ll be more upsets tomorrow? It seems like a virus!


the DA Says:

Very weird tweet from Berdy a few minutes ago. I might be misreading it but he seems to be suggesting that there is a god:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BNt2EZ6CMAA_GSG.jpg:large

Why? Because of what happened today? Strange, or perhaps I don’t get Czech humor.


RZ Says:

From Greg Garber’s article on ESPN.com:

Federer was asked if he was thinking about the end of his quarterfinal streak.

“I guess it’s a great number,” Federer said. “I wish it wasn’t going to end here today. I don’t think fans are going to mourn it, or myself. I’ve just got to move on from here.”

——
Well, I guess I better stop mourning the end of the streak. LOL.


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Expect the unexpected,take nothing for granted when it comes to Wimbledon this year.


grendel Says:

Puzzled, Ben. All the experts have been telling us you cannot do S&V on modern day grass. Seems they got it badly wrong. Will other players now take note of the heroics of Stakhovsky and Brown? I did notice, b.t.w. that Janowicz did a bit of serve and volley against Stepanek.


jane Says:

DA – yeah, I don’t get it. I guess that’s what he means?


grendel Says:

So God has a fave at Wimby, eh? Or perhaps he’s a troll and is just snickering at the great names receiving their comeuppance. “I choose who is to win”, he is maybe hinting, “nobody else. Me.”


Ben Pronin Says:

“I think there was a time where some players didn’t believe they could beat the top guys,” Federer said. “So maybe there’s a little bit of a thing happening at the moment. I’m happy about that, that players believe they can beat the best on the biggest courts in the biggest matches. I think it’s very important, that belief. We’re missing the teenagers overall, so it’s up to other guys to do it like we’ve seen this week, at other places as well.”

Right in line with what Federer said last year about Nadal’s loss to Rosol. Even after his own loss he can see look at the bigger picture for tennis.


Gordon Says:

The classic fans in here!

Fed loses – he should retire.

Nadal loses – his poor knee; otherwise he’d never lose.

People have to realize that once in a blue moon a player can play so far above his head that the improbable can occur. That is what happened today, and anyone who saw the match can attest to that. Fed had a total of 13 unforced errors in 4 sets, so he was not having an off day; he simply lost to a guy who probably would have beaten anyone the way he was playing.

It was exactly what happened when Soderling handed Nadal his sole loss at Roland Garros.

Oh, sorry, no – Soderling only won because Nadal’s knee was not right.

- sigh -


jane Says:

Didn’t Staks say some cheeky things about a year ago? It seems to me I remember him being quite open about his views.


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Gordon Soderling beat Nadal because he was the better player,Staks beat Fed because he was the better player,pure and simple the winner wins and the loser loses,no BS or excuses needed.


jane Says:

Yes, here’s the thread on Staks’ “open mic” moment…

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2012-04-10/9291.php


the DA Says:

@Jane – you remember correctly. Was it this?

“(Roger’s) a good person, but too neutral for my taste. He’s too Swiss. He wants to keep out of any bad stories too much. When players want to change something, he looks at it too passively, because it can harm his image.”

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2012-04-10/9291.php

OTOH he does praise his “God-given talent”.


the DA Says:

*snap*


jane Says:

^ DA: I remembered all his comments about pay increases and so forth; he was very candid and at the time there was quite a bit of talk about it.


Pitchaboy Says:

Federer will not win another slam and he will come to the conclusion when he reflects on this defeat after the dust settles. He lost today because he was not sure of his step on the grass, a sign of aging reflexes, the death blow for athletes.


the DA Says:

@Jane – Here’s another freaky stat. One of these players will be in the SF from the decimated Rafa/Fed quarters:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BNtZQ31CcAAEN46.jpg

hehe


RZ Says:

Nah, it was the shoes.


jane Says:

the DA – CRAZY! So whom? That’s what I am curious about. I am going to pick Janowicz I think. I guess Almagro is now the highest seed. [p.s. glad I didn't get round to filling out my bracket after all, lol!]


Steve 27 Says:

Masterlass Sergei!. Outplaying the putative GOAT through serve volleying at Wimbledon? Magic!


Gordon Says:

Tennis x hippy chic – my point exactly; try explaining this to the ones in here asking Fed to hang up his racquet.


the DA Says:

Jane – My head says it has to be Janowicz with his game but Almagro could surprise. After today I feel like I don’t know anything. hehe


grendel Says:

From Serena’s interview, her reaction to Nadal’s loss:
“Well, I’m a huge Nadal fan, as we all know. I’m probably his biggest fan. But I obviously was really sad. But in a way I was happy, too, because I felt like he’ll have time to rest up and get ready for the hard court season.”

Serena on her prospective visit to Sweden after Wimbledon:
“I’ve never been to Bastad. I’m looking forward to it. I’m looking forward to getting back on the clay. I can’t wait. Well, I can wait. Let’s make that clear.”

Question:”Your game is renowned for its power. Today your opponent won a number of her points with mixing it with slice and some dropshots. If you’re still seeking to improve your own game, do you contemplate embracing that kind of variation or do you think that would diminish your game?”

Serena says:” I think if you only have power and you only hit hard balls, you’re definitely not going to last in tennis for very long. I don’t only play hard tennis. Maybe if you want to get out there I can show you like how I mix things up. I hit a lob today. I’m hitting slices and dropshots, especially more recently in my game. ”

Good old Serena.


Pitchaboy Says:

As someone said once, “Retire when people ask why and not why not”


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Gordon im a Rafa fan BTW,but i dont dislike Roger,and he has said he has no intention of retiring as he loves the game too much,he has said its the most boring question that he ever gets asked,so reading between the lines i dont think hes going anywhere for the foreseeable future.


jane Says:

I know DA; it feels like “anyone can beat anyone” is the new motto at Wimbledon. My initial reaction is that this is a golden chance for Andy, and one would think it is, but it also feels like a “who knows?” moment. There are still a couple of big hitters around, and on Nole’s side, there’s still Berd, Delpo, Ferrer, Raonic and others. At this point, I wouldn’t be surprised if we see entirely new people in the final this Sunday. But nor would I be surprised if it’s Nole vs. Andy for the 3rd final out of the last 5 slams.


Steve 27 Says:

The difference this time, is Stakhovsky believed in himself. beat the swiss and his ego.
Simply memorable!.


the DA Says:

Jane, let’s hope for the scenario in your last sentence.


grendel Says:

Ferrer? Come on jane, even in your scaredy-cat vein, you can’t possibly imagine Ferrer can beat Djkovic on grass.

Karlovic tweets: “Finally the grass seems fast and im not there”

Tsonga says: “I have a little problem with my tendon on my knee…I had this like five, six days ago. Was not really a good sign because I had already some problem with this tendon. I know when it’s going worse and worse like this that it’s not really good for me to play on because I know I will do more damage.”

Kind of story of Tsonga’s life. Was ever such a talented athlete so bedevilled by the frailties of the human body?


jane Says:

Well it’d be a good one for the tournament I should think.(but shhhhhh, I don’t know what to say aloud; as you opined earlier, superstitions now kicked into high gear, am hoping Sean doesn’t make a new pick).


jane Says:

grendel, Ferrer could cause an upset though. That’s my point. He pushed even Andy on grass last year, and didn’t he beat Roddick. I don’t know for sure.


grendel Says:

No, in my opinion Ferrer cannot cause an upset. He just can’t handle the top 4 (including Federer in this). Everyone else, but not them. And least of all Djokovic imo – but that’s just opinion.


jane Says:

Ferrer vs Andy last year: 6-7, 7-6, 6-4, 7-6 in the quarterfinals. Before that he beat Delpo 6-3, 6-2, 6-3.
Before that he beat Roddick 2-6, 7-6, 6-4, 6-3.

No,I am not saying he’d beat Nole,as Ferrer often pushes the top four but he doesn’t beat them all that often.

I’d imagine Haas is a scarier prospect for most Nole fans right now,


jane Says:

grendel, he could beat Delpo though, don’t you think?


grendel Says:

Absolutely he could beat delPo. You know, I don’t think delPo has ever quite come back to pre-injury form. There must be some doubt he ever will.


jane Says:

That sucks really about Delpo, but the doubt is there. Ferrer is just underrated to me, in some ways, so I think of him as a “potential” threat. Certainly someone who can challenge. But in other ways, the reality is that he rarely beats a top 4 player at a big event. Will he ever? I am not saying the word “never”, not today.


jane Says:

Ferrer’s record versus the top guys shows that Fedal are definitely more of a problem for him than Nole or ANdy:

Against Rafa he is 4-20
Against Fed he is 0-14
Against Nole he is 5-10
Against Andy he is 5-7


grendel Says:

Has Ferrer ever beaten a top 4 player at a slam – if you discount Nadal at the US, when Nadal was obviously injured and in considerable pain? It’s awkward talking about Ferrer beating a top4-er, since he is now in the top 4 himself, possibly even top 3 shortly. Bizarre!


grendel Says:

Yes, but none of Ferrer’s victories against Djkovic were in a slam, and none against Murray in a slam except at RG. Well, that’s to be expected, Ferrer is certainly a superior claycourter to Murray.


jane Says:

Bizarre indeed grendel. But yes, Ferrer has beaten Rafa twice at slams, once at the USO as you note, and once at the AO. And he beat Andy at the FO last year. He’s also beaten both Nadal and Nole at WTF events.


jane Says:

So who could cause an upset on the other side of the draw, do you think, grendel?


Tennis Vagabond Says:

BEDLAM. MADNESS. Saw a tweet that said, ‘Wimbledon, go home, you’re drunk.”

This is insanity, and I’ve been waiting for this dyke burst for two years.

Groundless speculation: Novak and Andy have never had the intimidation factor Fed and Nadal had. Fed and Nadal had a much more quick journey to domination than those two, to their peers Fed and Rafa became invincible. Novak and Andy served long apprenticeships as 3-4, during which they were very vincible.
I think that the revelation of limits to Fed and Rafa the last two years, first from Novak and Andy, and then, for Fed, from Berdych and Tsonga, has emboldened the field. The princes Novak and Andy usurped the throne, and all the petty chiefs wonder why not them?
There is blood in the water.


Simon Says Says:

Quarterfinal streak my ass! What’s next 2nd round streak?


grendel Says:

Yes, Ferrer straightsetted Nadal at the AO – what happened, that seems so unlikely?

By other side, you mean Murray’s side? You can’t rule out Gulbis/Verdasco (doesn’t he look different with that new haircut?) and then there’s Janowicz. Of course, Almagro could certainly beat Janowicz, and Almagro cannot beat a confident Murray. Slight chance Janowicz could – he has the belief, the sense of urgency, and one day will also have the game, maybe not this year.

Funny how we’re all assuming Stakhovsky’s a one shot wonder.


jane Says:

I meant other side of the draw from today – so the top side. Who could come through there? Who could upset Nole? Or Berd?

Yes, it crossed my mind, too – why are we ruling out Staks? I myself didn’t really think he could keep it up.


jane Says:

Bodo called it a “bad day for grass” – he’s got a list of injuries/casualties here:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/06/bad-day-grass/48098/#.Uct9PZhQ0VQ


grendel Says:

The romantic in me wants to say Haas can threaten Djokovic. But in a 5 setter? I don’t really think so. Love old Haas to bits.

And then that romantic fellow who keeps sticking his snout in the air would like to think Gasquet can take Berdych down. Well, Monfils did, but I think on grass, Berdych will be just a little too powerful for Gasquet.

del Potro is such an unknown force on grass – Hewitt took him down at Queens, didn’t he, but Hewitt pointed out delPo played astounding tennis in the 2nd set – so he is a threat. One of those threats that probably won’t materialise, but possibly could all the same. Whereas Dimitrov and Nishikori, enjoyable though their games are, are not threats.

Even Tomic, you know – I do believe there is a huge victory lurking in him somewhere, but maybe not yet.

If Djokovic is slightly off, and Berdych plays a blinder, he could pull off a shock result. Still, overwhelmingly, you have to think it’s Djkovic for the final.


jane Says:

Delpo is a threat on any given day, but sometimes he plays flat so he’s tough to predict. When Tomic beat Querrey I thought to myself, I wonder?Tennis Vagabond, your post made me think of that un-PC saying “the natives are restless”. Haas should get past Wang (don’t know him?) and then he’ll face the winner of Mathieu/F-lo. I assume it’ll be F-Lo. That could be a good match.


jane Says:

Oops – bizarre – meant to tag on that bit to Tennis Vagabond below my response to your post grendel. Sorry for the confusing syntax there, ha ha.


Brando Says:

@TV: great post. Fed hits his 30′s, Rafa a dead end on the fitness front. Of course Novak and Andy were going to rise then, if not when on earth then? When Fedal both retire? LOL. A Fed in his mid 20′s and a Rafa with stronger, healthier knees of former years and then it would change the present picture completely. But sadly all good things come to an end I guess. Still: Fedal have created a legacy that the rest still live in the shadow of. A real reflection of their impact. Here’s hoping they can make a strong return!


jane Says:

Gordon Says:
The classic fans in here!

Fed loses – he should retire.

Nadal loses – his poor knee; otherwise he’d never lose.

People have to realize that once in a blue moon a player can play so far above his head that the improbable can occur. That is what happened today, and anyone who saw the match can attest to that. Fed had a total of 13 unforced errors in 4 sets, so he was not having an off day; he simply lost to a guy who probably would have beaten anyone the way he was playing.

It was exactly what happened when Soderling handed Nadal his sole loss at Roland Garros.

Oh, sorry, no – Soderling only won because Nadal’s knee was not right.

- sigh -

——————

Gordon, did you used to go by Gordo?

I thought there was a Fed fan here who used to go by Gordo and your post made me think of him.


Legend Says:

Gordon Says:
Tennis x hippy chic – my point exactly; try explaining this to the ones in here asking Fed to hang up his racquet.

Who was asking Fed to retire ?
I didnt see any Rafa fan asking for it.
Infront of Rafa, he is just a harmless little goat. As a Rafa fan I would like to see Federer play for many more years and get his usual spankingh from Rafa.
I would like to see 20-10 become 30-12 or something.


WTF Says:

Looks like Djoker vs Murray is a lock for the final now. And Djoker clearly has a mental edge in GS matches at the moment.

This has pretty much been handed to the Djoker on a plate. It’s his to lose now.


WTF Says:

“4) It is Federer’s worst defeat at a Grand Slam (or any event) since losing to No. 154 Mario Ancic in the 1st round at 2002 Wimbledon”

Define “worst” defeat? He got destroyed by Nadal at the French Open 2008 winning only 4 games.

Did you mean “earliest” defeat? We’d already established that point.


Jazzcomedian Says:

I’m a Federer fan. To me he’s the greatest tennis player that I’ve ever seen from an aesthetically pleasing point of view, and I’ve seen ‘em all. Hoad, Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales, Ashe, Connors, etc. Hoad was truly something to see. With today’s equipment he’d be a monster. All you need to know about him is that Laver modeled his game after Hoad’s. And for those of you who never saw him Adrianno Panatta was an absolutely gorgeous, and fluid stroker of the ball.

The bird of time waits for no man, and it’s gotten every number one tennis player that’s ever played. Connors, Agassi, McEnroe, Becker, Lendl, Edberg–they’ve all retired with much lower ranking. Sampras for example was ranked #17 when he retired. When Agassi retired he was no longer a grand slam threat. But people were still sad to see him go. Athletes ascend, plateau, and descend. It’s inevitable. That’s just the cycle of life and sport, and I don’t see that as necessarily sad. All you can do is slow the rate of descent. And I think Federer is doing a masterful job of that. As is Tommy Haas. I hope Federer continues to play as long as he loves it. I’ll never tire of seeing him and am actually curious to see how he’ll be playing at an age of 35. I’m certainly getting a kick out of seeing the tennis that Haas is playing.

I’m also an admirer of Djokovic and Nadal for their amazing defensive capabilities, guts, and competitive drive. They’re amazing, but for the sheer beauty of the game, for me it’s Federer. I’ve never seen it played better than when he was at his peak. And he’s still beautiful notwithstanding the recent erratic results.

Federer’s loss joins a list of notable early round upsets of Wimbledon champions.

1. 1976 – Defending Champion Ashe upset by Gerulaitis in first round.

2. 1987 – Defending Champion Becker defeated by Peter Doohan.

3. 1994 – Graf upset by Lori McNeil.

4. 2002 – Defending Champion Hewitt upset by Karlovic in first round, and Sampras defeated by George Bastl

5. 2012 – Nadal upset by Rosol.

6. 2013 – Nadal defeated by Steve Darcis

7. 2013 – Federer defeated by Sergei Stakhovsky

8. 2013 – Hewitt defeated by Dustin Brown

9. 2013 Sharapova defeated by Michelle De Brito

In each of these matches the victors played by their own admission the “match of their lives” to defeat their more famous opponents.

To me, even though Federer lost, the ability of an underdog to rise to the occasion when all the experts least expect it, is what I love most about sport.


M Says:

@grendel et al – Ferru straight-setted Rafa at the AO when Rafa was playing with a hamstring tear. He was only fully-fit the first eleven minutes of that match.

Now OTOH, Ferru was beating Novak rather handily at the USO 2012 semis (I was there) when the officials stopped the match because of bad weather warnings. But IMO had the officials put their match on Armstrong in the first place, instead of waiting what felt like a century for Muzz to finish Berdych off on Ashe, Ferru would have won that match, because Novak hates to play in the wind (to the point where he has said so), and Ferru can play in any weather.

“Kind of story of Tsonga’s life. Was ever such a talented athlete so bedevilled by the frailties of the human body?”

Juan Carlos Ferrero.

*another sigh*


skeezer Says:

“Legend Says:
As a Rafa fan I would like to see Federer play for many more years and get his usual spankingh from Rafa.
I would like to see 20-10 become 30-12 or something.”

Please Post on his Facebook page that he must first win a first round match. This is priority #1.

#weenieless


skeezer Says:

@Jazzcomedian

Great post with intellect. Thanks for contributing ;)


TennisZod Says:

Fedal fans should get used to seeing their heroes go out in 1st/2nd round in Slams. It Nole’s world now. Accept truth. Nole beat Nadal and Federer now in everywhere. Maybe Nadal still good in clay but Nole beat him there next year for 1st French Open. Then Fedal have no Slam in hand. Ajde Nole!


Nirmal Kumar Says:

It would be a pity if the media and fans would like Roger to retire. his game is still there. we saw glimse of it at WTF, when he beat Murray and came very close against Novak.

Roger at his best can still beat every tennis player out there except Nadal. I believe Roger would come back very strongly either in the HC season or next year.

For me he is mentally fizzed out after achieving what, for me one of the greatest achievements in the open era last year, getting back to No 1 and winning wimbledon.

He just needs a little break to tune up. I’m sure he would be back and play at high level for atleast next 2-3 years.


skeezer Says:

“He just needs a little break to tune up. I’m sure he would be back and play at high level for atleast next 2-3 years.”

Little break and tune up? WTF?

His schedule has him playing less and less. He had a break between AO and Clay, which he went out fairly early there,, had a break, then played a warmy and then Wimby. He has had plenty of time for breaks and tune ups. Don’t patronize the dude. He has only won a 250 the whole year. He knows his success this year sucks big time. Especially here, where his draw opened up bigtime and he couldn’t navigate through a player who has no BH. Pathetic.

He doesn’t need an excuse, he doesn’t have one except age, and its an insult to the fans to say otherwise.


Nirmal Kumar Says:

skeezer, i’m not sure if Roger needs a break mentally, but surely you need one. looks like you can’t get the context of what i meant.


metan Says:

@Jazzcomedian

Hi, are you Dave???. Soooo happy to have your post.


Ben Pronin Says:

Nirmal, I agree. I keep wondering if Federer would benefit from a lengthy absence like Nadal had. But I just don’t think Federer is the type. He’ll keep slugging away as long as his body lets him (so will Nadal and anyone else, for that matter). And his body hasn’t really let him down in a big way, yet, so he’ll keep going.

I don’t know why everyone wants him to retire just because he’s playing bad. I remember in 2007 when Federer went 4 straight tournaments without a title and everyone was up in arms about it because it was the first time that had happened since he became number 1. And then in 2008 he struggled until winning the US Open. 2009 it looked like he was done until winning the French. 2010 was rough for him but he ended up dominating at WTF. 2011 he didn’t win a slam but went undefeated after the US Open and finally capped that run off with Wimbledon and a return to number 1.

My point is, Federer’s slumps are getting longer and more serious as he ages, but history tells us that they’re slumps until further notice. Federer plans on playing several more years regardless of this loss. I see no reason to write him off now and assume he’s finished until the day when he says he’s finished.


Brando Says:

Fed’s 32 in August. Yep: 32. What use will a break serve him? Not much IMO. Should he not win this year’s USO, then in the last 4 tennis seasons (10′,11′,12′,13′) Fed would have won 2 slams. That’s it. Slams are the yardstick he defines himself and going forward it’s not looking good IMO. He’ll be world no.5 now due to this. That could mean facing one of Novak, Andy or Rafa at QF stages in event (upset permitting of course). That ain’t going to help his cause much either. IMHO: Fed should take stock of his situation at the end of the season. Be harshly honest with himself. Should he wish to compete still then give it his all for 2014 also. However should things look bleaker than they are now, then he should call it time at the end of 2014 age 33. This years WTF is a good yardstick. Should Fed not make it there then I think it’s a telling sign as any.


Nirmal Kumar Says:

Ben, Still i don’t see Roger’s problem is physical. He can’t do down physically so bad suddenly, when 6 months back, he was giving Novak a run for his money on his best surface.

I think Roger is too bogged by his achievement last year, and may be the desire has come down slightly. Y’day, it was just a matter of 3-4 FH’s going in. The match could have completely turned around in those 3-4 shots. Roger when he had utmost desire was making those shots consistently, but now he is missing them. I’m sure he will have one last glorious season still.


Nirmal Kumar Says:

Brando,

You don’t seem to get my point. When I mean a break, he has 4 weeks break before the HC season. It’s a ideal time for him to reflect back what went wrong and put more on his training block.

Ofcourse, I’m not advocating roger to take a 6 month break.

He did not have any momentum going to clay season, which continually piled up into bad results.

Next 4 months are basically the time he plays his best tennis historically. I’m hoping he would come back stronger in the HC season.


Ben Pronin Says:

I agree, if Federer doesn’t make it to WTF then that is quite telling. But just because he’s slipping doesn’t mean he wants to stop. It’s not up to us to determine when he should retire. So it doesn’t matter. I’d rather he keep playing and playing. Even if he’s struggling, he’s bound to show off some magic here and there.

He’s 32. Haas is 35. Everyone goes on and on about how he has fresh legs because he missed so much time. So maybe if Federer took off 6 months or whatever amount of time, it could help freshen him up and extend his longevity as a top player.


Ben Pronin Says:

Q. A tough question, but can you in any way compare the emotions and feelings you have after dropping a tough final in a competitive situation to today where it’s an early‑round shock?

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I mean, I guess. It’s nicer to be able to leave the court quicker than go through the trophy ceremony. That’s the nice thing about today. I still have to do the press conference. That’s never going to go away (smiling).
But other than that, yes, I’m very disappointed. You know, losing at Wimbledon always has been that way, will never change. So just got to get over this one. Some haven’t hurt this much, that’s for sure.


Brando Says:

Yep, can understand Fed being real hurt by this loss. He must have felt good after winning Halle, his opening round performance was A plus, and he even played well yesterday too. So this must be a real downer. Going forward: I think Cincy is a key one for him. I think it’s his best MS event (he is record winner there right?) it’s the fastest outdoor HC event on tour, and one that should suit his game well. I hope he puts in a confidence boosting performance there.


Ben Pronin Says:

I think that quote says a lot. He’s relieved he can leave right away and not lose in a final. But this loss kills him. Reading his interview, he says it’s a disappointment in almost every response.

Nirmal, it’s so hard to tell, to be honest. Jon Wertheim said Federer would make a great Ray Allen if he was playing basketball. Unfortunately, tennis doesn’t work that way. But seeing great veterans strive for the biggest titles is evident even in other sports. Duncan comes to mind. 37 years, 6 years removed from last finals appearance, and all he talks about is how much it means to him, and you saw him fight every game. I don’t see why Federer couldn’t do the same.


hawkeye Says:

Gulbis is a smart guy, no? Not rocket science. From his post-match presser yesterday…

Q. You’re talking about mental recovery. Like for example, Nadal playing the French seven matches in a row and winning all seven but long matches, and the two week turnaround you think is not enough to get ready for another Grand Slam event?
ERNESTS GULBIS: To get ready for a Grand Slam you need play a tournament before it on the same surface.
I’m not 100% sure, but I think every year he played Queen’s. He played a tournament before. This year he decided not to play. For sure he was extra tired and decided not to play.
That was the key why he lost in the first round. He didn’t have the opportunity to prepare as, let’s say, we did. I went to Halle. I didn’t play great there, but at least I had two matches on grass.

Q. What’s the solution then?
ERNESTS GULBIS: I don’t know what’s the solution then. I didn’t think about it right now. You have to make the season shorter overall. In this period of time, I need to think about it a little bit.

Q. There has been a bunch of talk about possibly having men switch to because of the physical nature of the game best of three for slams at least maybe for the first week of slams. How would you…
ERNESTS GULBIS: I wouldn’t like it, because this is the difference. This is difference of the top players. You have to be physically fit. Grand Slam is Grand Slam. You don’t need easy way to win it.
If you can’t make it, you can’t make it. Sorry. Stay at home and do something else. Grand Slam should be five sets, blood, fight five sets all the way until the end, until somebody is dead.


Polo Says:

Federer will go home. His twins will run up to him and give him a hug. Then all will be well again in his world. That’s what family and children do to people when they suffer a setback.


Bada Bing Says:

Sorry to all Roger fans for his early loss. He’s not finished yet. Don’t worry.


Bada Bing Says:

Jane, is it true that JK Rowling was in Nole’s box the other day?

I have high hopes for Novak. Yesterday Jmac said if he brings his A game he will win it. It will have to be an off day for someone to beat him.


jane Says:

Bada Bing, fingers crossed for Nole. She was in the Royal Box during his match, as per this article.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/tennis/4983901/Novak-Djokovic-beats-Florian-Mayer-in-Wimbledon-first-round.html


Nirmal Kumar Says:

Pretty much what I have been saying from y’day about Roger. Roger seems to have similar view.

Q. Not just tonight, but looking back over the past six to eight months, how would you assess where you are right now?
ROGER FEDERER: Right now, you know, this is a setback, a disappointment, whatever you want to call it. But then overall I think I played great eight months ago at the World Tour Finals, I played great at the Australian Open. You know, if things would have gone my way, maybe I could have done a bit more.
I didn’t play so much as of late. At the same time that gives me more flexibility with my schedule moving forward and next year as well. Particularly an early loss like this gives me extra days to rest. I have more options now than I did have one year ago when I was running around trying to chase down every possible tournament and every point to get back to world No. 1.
Maybe that also, with the Olympics last year, took its toll. I don’t know. But overall I think I’ve been playing actually not so bad, like some have portrayed it. Season’s not over here. Only just in the middle. Still have a lot of tennis left. That’s what I try to use for a good end to the season.


Bada Bing Says:

Good match for Novak. He brought the A game when needed.
I really like Novak’s new haircut. It’s longer on top and in the front and shorter on the sides. The Wimbledon barber did a great job. I heard Novak gets two haircuts at Wimbledon.
Love me some Novak!

Top story: Roger Federer Wins The Davis Cup Title For Switzerland, Here's Video Of Match Point And The Celebration
  • Recent Comments
Rankings
ATP - Nov 17 WTA - Nov 17
1 Novak Djokovic1 Serena Williams
2 Roger Federer2 Maria Sharapova
3 Rafael Nadal3 Simona Halep
4 Stan Wawrinka4 Petra Kvitova
5 Kei Nishikori5 Ana Ivanovic
6 Andy Murray6 Agnieszka Radwanska
7 Tomas Berdych7 Eugenie Bouchard
8 Milos Raonic8 Caroline Wozniacki
9 Marin Cilic9 Angelique Kerber
10 David Ferrer10 Dominika Cibulkova
More: Tennis T-Shirts | Tennis Shop | Live Tennis Scores | Headlines

Copyright © 2003-2014 Tennis-X.com. All rights reserved.
This website is an independently operated source of news and information and is not affiliated with any professional organizations.