tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 07 Feb 2009 13:53:02
From: RahimAsif
Subject: How many times
does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
pretty late in the set?

Since last year:
MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2nd
set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
break lead.
Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.

Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
serve late in the set....




 
Date: 08 Feb 2009 19:14:47
From: RahimAsif
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 3:53=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com > wrote:
> MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5

make that up 4-0 in the 2nd set to lose it 7-5. Amazing...


 
Date: 08 Feb 2009 18:06:06
From: RahimAsif
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 8, 7:31=A0pm, "*skriptis" <skrip...@post.t-com.hr > wrote:
> He also had 5-2 and two serves in the 4th set tiebreak in AO SF against
> Safin.
>
> So it's not like his level, focus is dropping now against Rafa, it's that
> been ever since, as long the oponenet doesn't fold.

He can get away with it against most other players, but not against
Rafa on any surface. But the positive for him is that he is getting
into winning positions in sets and matches, thats the only silver
lining...


 
Date: 08 Feb 2009 06:09:37
From:
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 5:02=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 7, 9:53=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
> > pretty late in the set?
>
> > Since last year:
> > MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
> > Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2nd
> > set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
> > break lead.
> > Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
> > AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>
> > Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
> > around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
> > serve late in the set....
>
> Not just Nadal either.
>
> v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
> v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
> v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5

Fed is getting old.


 
Date: 07 Feb 2009 20:07:31
From:
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 7:13=A0pm, Superdave <the.big.rst.kah...@gmail.com > wrote:
>
> he wants to play the game until he is 40 so he has to preserve his
> machine.
>
> Fed will still be playing in 2020 !!!
>
> Yippee !!!


Lay off the crackpipe. weirdo.


 
Date: 07 Feb 2009 18:09:36
From: undecided
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 6:49=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 7, 10:46=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 7, 5:02=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 7, 9:53=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
> > > > pretty late in the set?
>
> > > > Since last year:
> > > > MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
> > > > Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). =
2nd
> > > > set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another doub=
le
> > > > break lead.
> > > > Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
> > > > AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>
> > > > Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
> > > > around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of hi=
s
> > > > serve late in the set....
>
> > > Not just Nadal either.
>
> > > v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
> > > v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
> > > v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5
>
> > You guys have raised a good point. The point is if Federer's level of
> > play decline becuase he get broken frequently, then his ability to
> > break opponents' serve should decline as well, which it didn't. So why
> > does he get broken when he leading? I have no clue.
> > The one thing I noticed is that he never goes for a big serve except
> > he is in trouble like down 0-30 or down a break point. I don't know
> > why he doesn't go for an ace on every point.
>
> He's never done that - doesn't like to hurt his arm by going for big
> serves all the time. Actually this sounds ridiculous when you put it
> like that - maybe he should build up his arm a bit more with weights?
>
> Anyway, I would contend that Federer should start to think about going
> for more big serves. He is capable of doing it and it would =A0ease the
> pressure on the rest of his game which at the moment is not able to
> compensate for the erratic serving performances.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

He did do it. Wimby 07 Final. Would have lost it had it not been for
his big serving that day.


 
Date: 07 Feb 2009 16:19:28
From: PeteWasLucky
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 7:13=A0pm, Superdave <the.big.rst.kah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Feb 2009 14:46:42 -0800 (PST), wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Feb 7, 5:02=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> On Feb 7, 9:53=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
> >> > pretty late in the set?
>
> >> > Since last year:
> >> > MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
> >> > Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2=
nd
> >> > set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another doubl=
e
> >> > break lead.
> >> > Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
> >> > AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>
> >> > Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
> >> > around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
> >> > serve late in the set....
>
> >> Not just Nadal either.
>
> >> v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
> >> v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
> >> v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5
>
> >You guys have raised a good point. The point is if Federer's level of
> >play decline becuase he get broken frequently, then his ability to
> >break opponents' serve should decline as well, which it didn't. So why
> >does he get broken when he leading? I have no clue.
> >The one thing I noticed is that he never goes for a big serve except
> >he is in trouble like down 0-30 or down a break point. I don't know
> >why he doesn't go for an ace on every point.
>
> he wants to play the game until he is 40 so he has to preserve his
> machine.
>
> Fed will still be playing in 2020 !!!
>
> Yippee !!!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Even I'm not convinced, but he may prove us all wrong when he is still
winning slams in his thirties.
No one really knows.


 
Date: 07 Feb 2009 15:49:40
From:
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 10:46=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com > wrote:
> On Feb 7, 5:02=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 7, 9:53=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
> > > pretty late in the set?
>
> > > Since last year:
> > > MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
> > > Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2n=
d
> > > set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
> > > break lead.
> > > Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
> > > AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>
> > > Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
> > > around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
> > > serve late in the set....
>
> > Not just Nadal either.
>
> > v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
> > v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
> > v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5
>
> You guys have raised a good point. The point is if Federer's level of
> play decline becuase he get broken frequently, then his ability to
> break opponents' serve should decline as well, which it didn't. So why
> does he get broken when he leading? I have no clue.
> The one thing I noticed is that he never goes for a big serve except
> he is in trouble like down 0-30 or down a break point. I don't know
> why he doesn't go for an ace on every point.

He's never done that - doesn't like to hurt his arm by going for big
serves all the time. Actually this sounds ridiculous when you put it
like that - maybe he should build up his arm a bit more with weights?

Anyway, I would contend that Federer should start to think about going
for more big serves. He is capable of doing it and it would ease the
pressure on the rest of his game which at the moment is not able to
compensate for the erratic serving performances.



 
Date: 07 Feb 2009 15:28:41
From: Lax
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 5:46=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com > wrote:
> On Feb 7, 5:02=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 7, 9:53=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
> > > pretty late in the set?
>
> > > Since last year:
> > > MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
> > > Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2n=
d
> > > set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
> > > break lead.
> > > Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
> > > AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>
> > > Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
> > > around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
> > > serve late in the set....
>
> > Not just Nadal either.
>
> > v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
> > v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
> > v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5
>
> You guys have raised a good point. The point is if Federer's level of
> play decline becuase he get broken frequently, then his ability to
> break opponents' serve should decline as well, which it didn't. So why
> does he get broken when he leading? I have no clue.
> The one thing I noticed is that he never goes for a big serve except
> he is in trouble like down 0-30 or down a break point. I don't know
> why he doesn't go for an ace on every point.
>

Because unlike Nadal, Fed doesn't concentrate 100% through a match.
He doesn't like to and can not do that.


 
Date: 07 Feb 2009 14:46:42
From: wkhedr
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 5:02=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 7, 9:53=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
> > pretty late in the set?
>
> > Since last year:
> > MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
> > Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2nd
> > set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
> > break lead.
> > Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
> > AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>
> > Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
> > around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
> > serve late in the set....
>
> Not just Nadal either.
>
> v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
> v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
> v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5

You guys have raised a good point. The point is if Federer's level of
play decline becuase he get broken frequently, then his ability to
break opponents' serve should decline as well, which it didn't. So why
does he get broken when he leading? I have no clue.
The one thing I noticed is that he never goes for a big serve except
he is in trouble like down 0-30 or down a break point. I don't know
why he doesn't go for an ace on every point.


  
Date: 08 Feb 2009 00:13:02
From: Superdave
Subject: Re: How many times
On Sat, 7 Feb 2009 14:46:42 -0800 (PST), wkhedr <wkhedr@my-deja.com >
wrote:

>On Feb 7, 5:02 pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Feb 7, 9:53 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
>> > pretty late in the set?
>>
>> > Since last year:
>> > MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
>> > Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2nd
>> > set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
>> > break lead.
>> > Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
>> > AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>>
>> > Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
>> > around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
>> > serve late in the set....
>>
>> Not just Nadal either.
>>
>> v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
>> v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
>> v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5
>
>You guys have raised a good point. The point is if Federer's level of
>play decline becuase he get broken frequently, then his ability to
>break opponents' serve should decline as well, which it didn't. So why
>does he get broken when he leading? I have no clue.
>The one thing I noticed is that he never goes for a big serve except
>he is in trouble like down 0-30 or down a break point. I don't know
>why he doesn't go for an ace on every point.


he wants to play the game until he is 40 so he has to preserve his
machine.

Fed will still be playing in 2020 !!!

Yippee !!!


 
Date: 07 Feb 2009 14:33:09
From:
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 10:11=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 7, 4:02=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 7, 9:53=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
> > > pretty late in the set?
>
> > > Since last year:
> > > MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
> > > Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2n=
d
> > > set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
> > > break lead.
> > > Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
> > > AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>
> > > Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
> > > around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
> > > serve late in the set....
>
> > Not just Nadal either.
>
> > v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
> > v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
> > v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5
>
> It has hurt him most in slams against Nadal, but you are right, Fed
> has had this problem against other players as well. I think he has a
> tendency to mentally relax once he secures a break, and it bites him
> back big time. Remember in Wim 2004 he was up 4-0 in the 2nd set and
> managed to almost squander that lead - against Roddick on grass...

There's no reason for him to relax since he doesn't have a massive
serve which means that he holds nearly all the time. He could of
course serve bigger if he decided to do so and spent time practicing
developing it as a big consistent weapon ...




 
Date: 07 Feb 2009 14:11:13
From: RahimAsif
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 4:02=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 7, 9:53=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
> > pretty late in the set?
>
> > Since last year:
> > MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
> > Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2nd
> > set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
> > break lead.
> > Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
> > AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>
> > Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
> > around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
> > serve late in the set....
>
> Not just Nadal either.
>
> v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
> v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
> v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5

It has hurt him most in slams against Nadal, but you are right, Fed
has had this problem against other players as well. I think he has a
tendency to mentally relax once he secures a break, and it bites him
back big time. Remember in Wim 2004 he was up 4-0 in the 2nd set and
managed to almost squander that lead - against Roddick on grass...


  
Date: 08 Feb 2009 18:04:40
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: How many times
RahimAsif wrote:
> On Feb 7, 4:02 pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Feb 7, 9:53 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
>>> pretty late in the set?
>>> Since last year:
>>> MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
>>> Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2nd
>>> set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
>>> break lead.
>>> Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
>>> AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>>> Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
>>> around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
>>> serve late in the set....
>> Not just Nadal either.
>>
>> v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
>> v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
>> v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5
>
> It has hurt him most in slams against Nadal, but you are right, Fed
> has had this problem against other players as well. I think he has a
> tendency to mentally relax once he secures a break, and it bites him
> back big time. Remember in Wim 2004 he was up 4-0 in the 2nd set and
> managed to almost squander that lead - against Roddick on grass...


Sampras taught him to relax when he achieved the break - didn't warn the
sucker he didn't have his serve.



 
Date: 07 Feb 2009 14:02:41
From:
Subject: Re: How many times
On Feb 7, 9:53=A0pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com > wrote:
> does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
> pretty late in the set?
>
> Since last year:
> MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
> Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2nd
> set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
> break lead.
> Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
> AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>
> Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
> around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
> serve late in the set....

Not just Nadal either.

v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5



  
Date: 08 Feb 2009 21:57:58
From: Javier Gonzalez
Subject: Re: How many times
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 7, 9:53 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
>> pretty late in the set?
>>
>> Since last year:
>> MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
>> Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!). 2nd
>> set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another double
>> break lead.
>> Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
>> AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>>
>> Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
>> around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
>> serve late in the set....
>
> Not just Nadal either.
>
> v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
> v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
> v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5
>

vs Nalbandian in YEC 05 too, served for the match in the fifth only to be
broken and then lose in the TB - although he was injured so I cut him some
slack for that one.


   
Date: 09 Feb 2009 02:31:57
From: *skriptis
Subject: Re: How many times
Javier Gonzalez wrote:
> gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Feb 7, 9:53 pm, RahimAsif <RahimA...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> does Fed end up losing the set against Nadal after being up a break
>>> pretty late in the set?
>>>
>>> Since last year:
>>> MC - up a break (4-3) in both set. Ends up losing both 7-5
>>> Hamburg - 1st set, lost 7-5 after being up a double break (5-1!!).
>>> 2nd set, managed to eke out the tiebreak after squandering another
>>> double break lead.
>>> Wimbledon - 2nd set, up 4-2, end up losing the set 6-4
>>> AO - 1st set, up 4-2, ends up losing the set 7-5.
>>>
>>> Of all the changes that Fed could have done to turn this rivarly
>>> around, perhaps the simplest would have been just taking care of his
>>> serve late in the set....
>>
>> Not just Nadal either.
>>
>> v Simon in Toronto - final set up 3-1, lost 6-4
>> v Simon in TMC - final set break up 4-3, lost 6-4
>> v Murray in TMC - final set break up 4-3 (40-15), lost 7-5
>>
>
> vs Nalbandian in YEC 05 too, served for the match in the fifth only
> to be broken and then lose in the TB - although he was injured so I
> cut him some slack for that one.


He also had 5-2 and two serves in the 4th set tiebreak in AO SF against
Safin.

So it's not like his level, focus is dropping now against Rafa, it's that
been ever since, as long the oponenet doesn't fold.