tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 02 Feb 2009 00:30:47
From: Shakes
Subject: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
kick in fed's guts and he needed it.

He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
coach.

Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
of play, and use it as a fuel.

I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.




 
Date: 03 Feb 2009 02:12:48
From: xamigax@gmail.com
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On 2 f=E9v, 20:44, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 2, 11:02 am, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's =
a
> > > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of hi=
s
> > > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> > > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > > coach.
>
> > > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> > > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> > > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> > I'd agree with you on general principle, but in that case, how was
> > Wimby 08 not the wake-up call/catharsis that he needed?
>
> I agree that it should have been. But there he didn't play as scared
> as he did here. IMO, it seems a drawn out process. The fear slowly
> building up and finally, yesterday, spilling over. A very crude and
> disgusting example would be like a vomit. Once it comes out, you feel
> better than you did before, even though you took a number of
> medications to prevent the vomit. :-)

Yep,
raw but clear example!

That's very close to what I am thinking of the whole Federer mind
process.
That fifth set was the unskipable result of his strange 2008 season.
He felt low (from his own common ground) until Wimb, for sure.
Maybe the grass worked on him as some placebo.
Got so close to win six wimby titles in a row...
Then won the USO, beating with ease the "hot guy" of the moment....
He didn't sorted out what the tennis season had been, not only for
him; but as well for the other "top players".
2008, no matter the lower Fed, was a fantastic year for Nadal.
Clearly THE year that allows him to look ahead to the very highest
records in tennis.

Federer should have considered more the confidence one get from such
year.
He wasn't prepared for a real fight in the fifth (or was maybe fearing
a loss similar to wimb08).
He didn't play much in that final set.
Having watched again that match, it's also possible that he didn't
"forget/forgive himself" for not having won the first set, and even
more the third one.
This match should never have went into fifth... Even more than the
Wimb08, wich was very unlikely to go to a fifth as well, Federer
should have won this one in four sets.

I believe that he couldn't escape that feeling during the match, felt
helpless.

Share & Enjoy,
Manolo


 
Date: 03 Feb 2009 01:57:26
From: xamigax@gmail.com
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On 2 f=E9v, 20:02, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com >
wrote:
> On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
> > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
> > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > coach.
>
> > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> I'd agree with you on general principle, but in that case, how was
> Wimby 08 not the wake-up call/catharsis that he needed?

I am now considering more what whiskey said in some post.
Yes, he can says clever things, maybe not of his own, but
anyway... :-)
I think that Federer didn't take that Wimb08 as a defeat.
He might have considered this as somewhat of a "tie", with Nadal
picked up as the one who was to receive the trophy.
I mean, Wimb08 was so much more a fantastic match than AO09 is...
He can hardly blame himself on that one. He came back from two sets
down, kept playing amazing points until the end.
The fifth set was brilliant, sparkling tennis (and even more under
such low light!).
He had no technical issues (I mean: no technical troubles because of
mind issues playing Nadal), was serving good.
This is far from what he did last sunday.

Maybe Federer was just disgusted that the play wasn't interrupt
because of darkness.
I feel he was telling the true when saying that it had been diffcult
for him to see the ball in the end.
I need to rewatch that Wimby final, but for what i remember, the speed
during rallies didn't dropped as much as the light, meaning that Nadal
had less problems seeing the ball (or, if he had, Nadal not "agreeing"
to slow down the ball... wich is what "naturally" happen when you
play: both players are allowing themselves a slower pace).

Share & Enjoy,
Manolo


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 12:34:40
From: wkhedr
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 2:53=A0pm, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 2, 3:17 am, MBDunc <micha...@mail.suomi.net> wrote:
>
> > Iceberg kirjoitti:
>
> > > why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it=
's not
> > > like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he =
also
> > > claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any=
point
> > > in him hiring a coach.
>
> > Fed's strategy and focus needs some supervising. Shots and
> > tennisskills are fine.
>
> > .mikko
>
> He also needs to spend 30% of his whole training time on boosting his
> serve (or add an extra 30%), until he has the confidence that he can
> hold his serve without playing too many rallies.
>
> Sampras, fed should realize, was not born with the serve or born with
> the confidence on his serve. He worked at it, very hard. Hundreds of
> serves every day. That's what fed needs to do. His technique on the
> serve is very good and he just needs to bolster it a little bit more.
>
> I still believe that if he can add a little more muscle to his serve,
> he can hold his games more easily. And that is the key against Nadal
> or any such player.
>
> Further, Sampras also mentioned in his bio, the adjustments he used to
> make when playing a lefty. On the ad-court, sampras used to stand 2-3
> feet to his left (closer to the doubles alley) when standing to
> receive serve, letting his opponent know that he is covering that
> angle. That way he used to force Goran or some such server to go to
> his FH more often. He claimed that his first coach, Gullikson, pointed
> that out to him.

I pointed to this many times in the last two years, I can't believe he
is refusing to do that.
Nadal served 100% to his bh in the FO (in the 2nd serve I think).

This was the last time I mentioned that:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.tennis/browse_frm/thread/4b1dbf7c5=
9021cc6/131360dd391f8f0e?#131360dd391f8f0e


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 11:53:04
From: Shakes
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 3:17 am, MBDunc <micha...@mail.suomi.net > wrote:
> Iceberg kirjoitti:
>
> > why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it's not
> > like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he also
> > claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any point
> > in him hiring a coach.
>
> Fed's strategy and focus needs some supervising. Shots and
> tennisskills are fine.
>
> .mikko

He also needs to spend 30% of his whole training time on boosting his
serve (or add an extra 30%), until he has the confidence that he can
hold his serve without playing too many rallies.

Sampras, fed should realize, was not born with the serve or born with
the confidence on his serve. He worked at it, very hard. Hundreds of
serves every day. That's what fed needs to do. His technique on the
serve is very good and he just needs to bolster it a little bit more.

I still believe that if he can add a little more muscle to his serve,
he can hold his games more easily. And that is the key against Nadal
or any such player.

Further, Sampras also mentioned in his bio, the adjustments he used to
make when playing a lefty. On the ad-court, sampras used to stand 2-3
feet to his left (closer to the doubles alley) when standing to
receive serve, letting his opponent know that he is covering that
angle. That way he used to force Goran or some such server to go to
his FH more often. He claimed that his first coach, Gullikson, pointed
that out to him.


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 11:44:42
From: Shakes
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 11:02 am, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com >
wrote:
> On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
> > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
> > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > coach.
>
> > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> I'd agree with you on general principle, but in that case, how was
> Wimby 08 not the wake-up call/catharsis that he needed?

I agree that it should have been. But there he didn't play as scared
as he did here. IMO, it seems a drawn out process. The fear slowly
building up and finally, yesterday, spilling over. A very crude and
disgusting example would be like a vomit. Once it comes out, you feel
better than you did before, even though you took a number of
medications to prevent the vomit. :-)


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 11:02:16
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
> kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
> game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> coach.
>
> Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.

I'd agree with you on general principle, but in that case, how was
Wimby 08 not the wake-up call/catharsis that he needed?


  
Date: 02 Feb 2009 19:37:33
From: jdeluise
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat

On 2-Feb-2009, "andrew.reys@gmail.com" <andrew.reys@gmail.com > wrote:

> On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
> > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
> >
> > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
> > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > coach.
> >
> > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> > of play, and use it as a fuel.
> >
> > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> I'd agree with you on general principle, but in that case, how was
> Wimby 08 not the wake-up call/catharsis that he needed?

Put simply, I think he was in denial at that point. Maybe he blamed lack of
preparation or something. Winning USO 08 probably didn't help.


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 10:52:07
From: moosekak
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
remember what patrick mcenroe said: he needs to make some *simple*
tactical adjustments
like taking advantage of the fact that nadal served almost 100% to his
bh from the deuce court...make him
serve to his fh by taking risks....a coach like stefanski would pick
that up easily....

i wonder if he actually talks to anybody about a gameplan b4 facing
nadal or just wings it


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 09:59:03
From: Lax
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 10:14=A0am, Voice of Reason <sasidha...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 2, 6:17=A0am, MBDunc <micha...@mail.suomi.net> wrote:
>
> > Iceberg kirjoitti:
>
> > > why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it=
's not
> > > like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he =
also
> > > claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any=
point
> > > in him hiring a coach.
>
> > Fed's strategy and focus needs some supervising. Shots and
> > tennisskills are fine.
>
> > .mikko
>
> What Federer needs is a sports psychiatrist...

Agreed.


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 08:21:09
From: number_six
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 5:41=A0am, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com > wrote:
> On Feb 2, 6:58=A0am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 2, 10:52=A0am, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay> wrote:
>
> > > "The MAN" <drsmith...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:4ff0f6d3-f7cc-43d4-bc72-8c08e8421f30@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com=
...
> > > On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > > > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > > > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It'=
s a
> > > > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > > > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > > > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > > > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of =
his
> > > > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > > > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lo=
t
> > > > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > > > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > > > coach.
>
> > > > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO wil=
l
> > > > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his mann=
er
> > > > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > > > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> > > > =A0 =A0 =A0Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
> > > >but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
> > > >gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....
>
> > > why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it=
's not
> > > like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he =
also
> > > claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any=
point
> > > in him hiring a coach.
>
> > This is part of the problem - Federer sees these defeats as
> > unfortunate but not really that he needs to make some changes to his
> > game. His attitude is that with a bit of luck next time he should win,
> > and for example yesterday that if he had served well he would have
> > won. I strongly doubt that Federer will go back and watch this match
> > with a view to picking up some things that he could do differently -
> > this is part of his stubbornness which is both a strength and in this
> > case a weakness.
>
> > His game is stuck in a rut somewhat, with him still playing the same
> > way as for the last few years. It's still good enough to beat nearly
> > everyone, but Nadal and also Murray are a different proposition.
>
> > Federer experiments with the odd tactical change, like SV plays and
> > chipping-and-charging, but when it comes to the big matches these go
> > out the window and he reverts to his standard game. For example, in
> > the final Nadal was struggling with the wide serve to his backhand.
> > Federer came in a couple of times on this serve and put away the easy
> > volley. But it didn't seem to be part of a plan as to how to win. Also
> > he has been chipping and charging a lot on second serves lately and
> > this might have been a good tactic to use sometimes against Nadal, but
> > he didn't do it once. What's the point of experimenting in these warm-
> > up events if you're not going to use these tactics in the big events?
>
> > What exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? On a
> > tactical level, nothing really - Federer *can* do it, but I don't
> > think he *will* do it. He needs someone to come in and make him
> > realise that there are things he should change, and force him to go
> > about doing it.
>
> > The other area where a coach can help is with confidence - Federer's
> > game just seems tight and nervy when he comes up against Nadal (and
> > maybe Murray). A good coach can build up his confidence and get him
> > into a relaxed state for the big games. Annacone was very good at
> > doing this when Sampras was struggling later in his career.- Hide quote=
d text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> How can you serve and volley against a guy like Nadal that is too fast
> and can pass you from 10 ft behind the baseline?
>
> In Federer's interview he mentioned something very interesting and
> this is probably is the reason behind Federer's poor conversion ratio
> on break points against Nadal. He said Nadal being a lefty makes it
> very difficult when he is serving from the adv-court.
> If you look at players that trouble Nadal, most of them are two-
> handed, which enables them to return Nadal's serves very well. This is
> what Federer lacks. If Federer could hit a descent return on Nadal's
> serve, he would have beaten him almost every time.
>
> Now I'm wondering and please don't laugh, why it's not possible for
> Federer to use a two-handed backhand at least for the return of serve?
>
> It won't take him more than a month to learn it and I don't think it
> will ruin the other parts of his game in anyway, it's just another
> dimension for him to achieve.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Not laughing; here is the "Federer two-handed backhand heresy" thread
from last Sept...I agree it would help him in the ad court.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.tennis/browse_thread/thread/ef4b15=
0f1a5521cb/a19fd2291e80b4de?#a19fd2291e80b4de


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 07:50:28
From:
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 10:41=A0am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 2, 10:07=A0am, bg <ecy0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 2, 1:30=A0pm, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > In fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as hi=
s
> > > coach.
>
> > Thats a refreshing thought. Maybe not Peter Lungdren, but someone
> > close to the Connors mould. But yes, he does need a coach very badly
> > and can no more rest on the shoulders of Mirka for solace.
>
> > And in case he doesnt get a coach, it would be much better for the
> > tennis world, if he were to lose in the semis of RG, rather than get
> > humiliated again.
> > bg
>
> Yes - there's no point in Federer making another FO final v Nadal,
> unless he is going to come out and try something completely
> different.
>
> Monfils would probably have got more games in the final last year.

Roger can blame the rest of the tour for his defeat yesterday. No one
challenges him the way Nadal does.

He lost because he capitulates against Nadal practically 100% of the
time. Uncle Toni has created a monster and won't admit it. :)



  
Date: 02 Feb 2009 17:55:06
From: TT
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
blueskates1111@aol.com wrote:
> On Feb 2, 10:41 am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Feb 2, 10:07 am, bg <ecy0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 2, 1:30 pm, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> In fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
>>>> coach.
>>> Thats a refreshing thought. Maybe not Peter Lungdren, but someone
>>> close to the Connors mould. But yes, he does need a coach very badly
>>> and can no more rest on the shoulders of Mirka for solace.
>>> And in case he doesnt get a coach, it would be much better for the
>>> tennis world, if he were to lose in the semis of RG, rather than get
>>> humiliated again.
>>> bg
>> Yes - there's no point in Federer making another FO final v Nadal,
>> unless he is going to come out and try something completely
>> different.
>>
>> Monfils would probably have got more games in the final last year.
>
> Roger can blame the rest of the tour for his defeat yesterday. No one
> challenges him the way Nadal does.
>
> He lost because he capitulates against Nadal practically 100% of the
> time. Uncle Toni has created a monster and won't admit it. :)
>

word

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 07:41:24
From:
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 10:07=A0am, bg <ecy0...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 2, 1:30=A0pm, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > coach.
>
> Thats a refreshing thought. Maybe not Peter Lungdren, but someone
> close to the Connors mould. But yes, he does need a coach very badly
> and can no more rest on the shoulders of Mirka for solace.
>
> And in case he doesnt get a coach, it would be much better for the
> tennis world, if he were to lose in the semis of RG, rather than get
> humiliated again.
> bg

Yes - there's no point in Federer making another FO final v Nadal,
unless he is going to come out and try something completely
different.

Monfils would probably have got more games in the final last year.





 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 07:24:39
From: wkhedr
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 9:51=A0am, "john" <jli...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9e46f309-2f8f-4a8f-9d5e-d12652c352a7@17g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 2, 6:58 am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 2, 10:52 am, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay> wrote:
>
> > > "The MAN" <drsmith...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:4ff0f6d3-f7cc-43d4-bc72-8c08e8421f30@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com=
...
> > > On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > > > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > > > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It'=
s a
> > > > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > > > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > > > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > > > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of =
his
> > > > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > > > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lo=
t
> > > > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > > > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > > > coach.
>
> > > > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO wil=
l
> > > > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his mann=
er
> > > > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > > > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> > > > Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
> > > >but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
> > > >gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....
>
> > > why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it=
's
> > > not
> > > like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he
> > > also
> > > claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any
> > > point
> > > in him hiring a coach.
>
> > This is part of the problem - Federer sees these defeats as
> > unfortunate but not really that he needs to make some changes to his
> > game. His attitude is that with a bit of luck next time he should win,
> > and for example yesterday that if he had served well he would have
> > won. I strongly doubt that Federer will go back and watch this match
> > with a view to picking up some things that he could do differently -
> > this is part of his stubbornness which is both a strength and in this
> > case a weakness.
>
> > His game is stuck in a rut somewhat, with him still playing the same
> > way as for the last few years. It's still good enough to beat nearly
> > everyone, but Nadal and also Murray are a different proposition.
>
> > Federer experiments with the odd tactical change, like SV plays and
> > chipping-and-charging, but when it comes to the big matches these go
> > out the window and he reverts to his standard game. For example, in
> > the final Nadal was struggling with the wide serve to his backhand.
> > Federer came in a couple of times on this serve and put away the easy
> > volley. But it didn't seem to be part of a plan as to how to win. Also
> > he has been chipping and charging a lot on second serves lately and
> > this might have been a good tactic to use sometimes against Nadal, but
> > he didn't do it once. What's the point of experimenting in these warm-
> > up events if you're not going to use these tactics in the big events?
>
> > What exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? On a
> > tactical level, nothing really - Federer *can* do it, but I don't
> > think he *will* do it. He needs someone to come in and make him
> > realise that there are things he should change, and force him to go
> > about doing it.
>
> > The other area where a coach can help is with confidence - Federer's
> > game just seems tight and nervy when he comes up against Nadal (and
> > maybe Murray). A good coach can build up his confidence and get him
> > into a relaxed state for the big games. Annacone was very good at
> > doing this when Sampras was struggling later in his career.- Hide quote=
d
> > text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> How can you serve and volley against a guy like Nadal that is too fast
> and can pass you from 10 ft behind the baseline?
>
> In Federer's interview he mentioned something very interesting and
> this is probably is the reason behind Federer's poor conversion ratio
> on break points against Nadal. He said Nadal being a lefty makes it
> very difficult when he is serving from the adv-court.
> If you look at players that trouble Nadal, most of them are two-
> handed, which enables them to return Nadal's serves very well. This is
> what Federer lacks. If Federer could hit a descent return on Nadal's
> serve, he would have beaten him almost every time.
>
> Now I'm wondering and please don't laugh, why it's not possible for
> Federer to use a two-handed backhand at least for the return of serve?
>
> It won't take him more than a month to learn it and I don't think it
> will ruin the other parts of his game in anyway, it's just another
> dimension for him to achieve.
>
> Serve and volley is not necessarily a tactic that Federer needs to use ev=
ery
> time
> on every serve when he play Nadal, =A0it can be a strategy that he use
> selectively.
> SV does not mean blindly follow every serve into the net for volley. =A0 =
I
> don't
> think Federer need to change his single handed backhand to two handed
> backhand,
> what he needs to do is to use more of his variety on his return clearly t=
hat
> top spin
> backhand return is not a consistant weapon, why is Federer not using his
> slice backhand
> in his returns and he can even chip and charge the net behind some of
> Nadal's second
> serve. =A0By returning with standard top spin backhand Federer is providi=
ng
> Nadal with
> returns of similar length and bounce every time and this allow Nadal to p=
lay
> with
> a serving pattern he really enjoys playing.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hitting a topspin backhand return one-handed is not easy to time, make
a clean contact with and direct specially with the lefty wide-spin.
Two-handed backhand gives good margin, grip, angle, and ability to
direct a good return and flatten it as well.



 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 07:14:23
From: Voice of Reason
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 6:17=A0am, MBDunc <micha...@mail.suomi.net > wrote:
> Iceberg kirjoitti:
>
> > why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it's=
not
> > like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he al=
so
> > claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any p=
oint
> > in him hiring a coach.
>
> Fed's strategy and focus needs some supervising. Shots and
> tennisskills are fine.
>
> .mikko

What Federer needs is a sports psychiatrist...


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 06:44:17
From: wkhedr
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 9:38=A0am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 2, 2:33=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 2, 9:24=A0am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 2, 1:41=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > LOL - so it was you on that other forum?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > No, I post only here, not sure what other forums you mean.
> > Look, for me, I'm ready to do anything drastic (as long it's legal) if
> > it will help me to achieve a big milestone in my career. I don't like
> > to fail, and of course I don't like to keep losing like Federer, so
> > I'd be ready to do anything.
> > Hitting backhand return with two-hands from stationary position, is
> > not a big deal, once he is back to the rally, he can play his game
> > with one-hand backhand.
>
> I think you seriously underestimate the extent of trying to make a
> change like this at age 27 when ranked #2 in the world. Starting from
> scratch to get a two-handed backhand return capable of causing
> problems to the current world #1 ...
>
> There are other more reasonable options for Federer on this shot.

No, I don't underestimate it. These are athletes professional players
that got nothing to do except practicing and training.

He hits them form time to time, look: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DHqNR=
0KWzLMw&feature=3Drelated

I don't want him to use two-handed backhand in normal play, I want him
to use it only to return serves.


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 06:38:00
From:
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 2:33=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com > wrote:
> On Feb 2, 9:24=A0am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Feb 2, 1:41=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > LOL - so it was you on that other forum?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> No, I post only here, not sure what other forums you mean.
> Look, for me, I'm ready to do anything drastic (as long it's legal) if
> it will help me to achieve a big milestone in my career. I don't like
> to fail, and of course I don't like to keep losing like Federer, so
> I'd be ready to do anything.
> Hitting backhand return with two-hands from stationary position, is
> not a big deal, once he is back to the rally, he can play his game
> with one-hand backhand.

I think you seriously underestimate the extent of trying to make a
change like this at age 27 when ranked #2 in the world. Starting from
scratch to get a two-handed backhand return capable of causing
problems to the current world #1 ...

There are other more reasonable options for Federer on this shot.





 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 06:33:08
From: wkhedr
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 9:24=A0am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 2, 1:41=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:

> LOL - so it was you on that other forum?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

No, I post only here, not sure what other forums you mean.
Look, for me, I'm ready to do anything drastic (as long it's legal) if
it will help me to achieve a big milestone in my career. I don't like
to fail, and of course I don't like to keep losing like Federer, so
I'd be ready to do anything.
Hitting backhand return with two-hands from stationary position, is
not a big deal, once he is back to the rally, he can play his game
with one-hand backhand.


  
Date: 04 Feb 2009 00:03:57
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
wkhedr wrote:
> On Feb 2, 9:24 am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Feb 2, 1:41 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> LOL - so it was you on that other forum?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> No, I post only here, not sure what other forums you mean.
> Look, for me, I'm ready to do anything drastic (as long it's legal) if
> it will help me to achieve a big milestone in my career. I don't like
> to fail, and of course I don't like to keep losing like Federer, so
> I'd be ready to do anything.
> Hitting backhand return with two-hands from stationary position, is
> not a big deal, once he is back to the rally, he can play his game
> with one-hand backhand.


Oh fuck - you are serious.



 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 06:24:10
From:
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 1:41=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com > wrote:
> On Feb 2, 6:58=A0am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 2, 10:52=A0am, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay> wrote:
>
> > > "The MAN" <drsmith...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:4ff0f6d3-f7cc-43d4-bc72-8c08e8421f30@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com=
...
> > > On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > > > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > > > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It'=
s a
> > > > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > > > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > > > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > > > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of =
his
> > > > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > > > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lo=
t
> > > > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > > > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > > > coach.
>
> > > > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO wil=
l
> > > > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his mann=
er
> > > > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > > > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> > > > =A0 =A0 =A0Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
> > > >but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
> > > >gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....
>
> > > why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it=
's not
> > > like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he =
also
> > > claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any=
point
> > > in him hiring a coach.
>
> > This is part of the problem - Federer sees these defeats as
> > unfortunate but not really that he needs to make some changes to his
> > game. His attitude is that with a bit of luck next time he should win,
> > and for example yesterday that if he had served well he would have
> > won. I strongly doubt that Federer will go back and watch this match
> > with a view to picking up some things that he could do differently -
> > this is part of his stubbornness which is both a strength and in this
> > case a weakness.
>
> > His game is stuck in a rut somewhat, with him still playing the same
> > way as for the last few years. It's still good enough to beat nearly
> > everyone, but Nadal and also Murray are a different proposition.
>
> > Federer experiments with the odd tactical change, like SV plays and
> > chipping-and-charging, but when it comes to the big matches these go
> > out the window and he reverts to his standard game. For example, in
> > the final Nadal was struggling with the wide serve to his backhand.
> > Federer came in a couple of times on this serve and put away the easy
> > volley. But it didn't seem to be part of a plan as to how to win. Also
> > he has been chipping and charging a lot on second serves lately and
> > this might have been a good tactic to use sometimes against Nadal, but
> > he didn't do it once. What's the point of experimenting in these warm-
> > up events if you're not going to use these tactics in the big events?
>
> > What exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? On a
> > tactical level, nothing really - Federer *can* do it, but I don't
> > think he *will* do it. He needs someone to come in and make him
> > realise that there are things he should change, and force him to go
> > about doing it.
>
> > The other area where a coach can help is with confidence - Federer's
> > game just seems tight and nervy when he comes up against Nadal (and
> > maybe Murray). A good coach can build up his confidence and get him
> > into a relaxed state for the big games. Annacone was very good at
> > doing this when Sampras was struggling later in his career.- Hide quote=
d text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> How can you serve and volley against a guy like Nadal that is too fast
> and can pass you from 10 ft behind the baseline?

You have to serve well, obviously ...

>
> In Federer's interview he mentioned something very interesting and
> this is probably is the reason behind Federer's poor conversion ratio
> on break points against Nadal. He said Nadal being a lefty makes it
> very difficult when he is serving from the adv-court.
> If you look at players that trouble Nadal, most of them are two-
> handed, which enables them to return Nadal's serves very well. This is
> what Federer lacks. If Federer could hit a descent return on Nadal's
> serve, he would have beaten him almost every time.
>

Hardly earth-shattering news ...

> Now I'm wondering and please don't laugh, why it's not possible for
> Federer to use a two-handed backhand at least for the return of serve?
>
> It won't take him more than a month to learn it and I don't think it
> will ruin the other parts of his game in anyway, it's just another
> dimension for him to achieve.

LOL - so it was you on that other forum?



 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 05:41:59
From: wkhedr
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 6:58=A0am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 2, 10:52=A0am, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "The MAN" <drsmith...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:4ff0f6d3-f7cc-43d4-bc72-8c08e8421f30@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com..=
.
> > On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's =
a
> > > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of hi=
s
> > > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> > > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > > coach.
>
> > > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> > > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> > > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> > > =A0 =A0 =A0Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
> > >but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
> > >gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....
>
> > why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it's=
not
> > like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he al=
so
> > claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any p=
oint
> > in him hiring a coach.
>
> This is part of the problem - Federer sees these defeats as
> unfortunate but not really that he needs to make some changes to his
> game. His attitude is that with a bit of luck next time he should win,
> and for example yesterday that if he had served well he would have
> won. I strongly doubt that Federer will go back and watch this match
> with a view to picking up some things that he could do differently -
> this is part of his stubbornness which is both a strength and in this
> case a weakness.
>
> His game is stuck in a rut somewhat, with him still playing the same
> way as for the last few years. It's still good enough to beat nearly
> everyone, but Nadal and also Murray are a different proposition.
>
> Federer experiments with the odd tactical change, like SV plays and
> chipping-and-charging, but when it comes to the big matches these go
> out the window and he reverts to his standard game. For example, in
> the final Nadal was struggling with the wide serve to his backhand.
> Federer came in a couple of times on this serve and put away the easy
> volley. But it didn't seem to be part of a plan as to how to win. Also
> he has been chipping and charging a lot on second serves lately and
> this might have been a good tactic to use sometimes against Nadal, but
> he didn't do it once. What's the point of experimenting in these warm-
> up events if you're not going to use these tactics in the big events?
>
> What exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? On a
> tactical level, nothing really - Federer *can* do it, but I don't
> think he *will* do it. He needs someone to come in and make him
> realise that there are things he should change, and force him to go
> about doing it.
>
> The other area where a coach can help is with confidence - Federer's
> game just seems tight and nervy when he comes up against Nadal (and
> maybe Murray). A good coach can build up his confidence and get him
> into a relaxed state for the big games. Annacone was very good at
> doing this when Sampras was struggling later in his career.- Hide quoted =
text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

How can you serve and volley against a guy like Nadal that is too fast
and can pass you from 10 ft behind the baseline?

In Federer's interview he mentioned something very interesting and
this is probably is the reason behind Federer's poor conversion ratio
on break points against Nadal. He said Nadal being a lefty makes it
very difficult when he is serving from the adv-court.
If you look at players that trouble Nadal, most of them are two-
handed, which enables them to return Nadal's serves very well. This is
what Federer lacks. If Federer could hit a descent return on Nadal's
serve, he would have beaten him almost every time.

Now I'm wondering and please don't laugh, why it's not possible for
Federer to use a two-handed backhand at least for the return of serve?

It won't take him more than a month to learn it and I don't think it
will ruin the other parts of his game in anyway, it's just another
dimension for him to achieve.



  
Date: 03 Feb 2009 23:41:46
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
wkhedr wrote:
> On Feb 2, 6:58 am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Feb 2, 10:52 am, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> "The MAN" <drsmith...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4ff0f6d3-f7cc-43d4-bc72-8c08e8421f30@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
>>>> you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
>>>> games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
>>>> kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>>>> He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
>>>> wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
>>>> dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
>>>> game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
>>>> stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
>>>> more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
>>>> fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
>>>> coach.
>>>> Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
>>>> happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
>>>> of play, and use it as a fuel.
>>>> I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>>>> Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
>>>> but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
>>>> gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....
>>> why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it's not
>>> like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he also
>>> claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any point
>>> in him hiring a coach.
>> This is part of the problem - Federer sees these defeats as
>> unfortunate but not really that he needs to make some changes to his
>> game. His attitude is that with a bit of luck next time he should win,
>> and for example yesterday that if he had served well he would have
>> won. I strongly doubt that Federer will go back and watch this match
>> with a view to picking up some things that he could do differently -
>> this is part of his stubbornness which is both a strength and in this
>> case a weakness.
>>
>> His game is stuck in a rut somewhat, with him still playing the same
>> way as for the last few years. It's still good enough to beat nearly
>> everyone, but Nadal and also Murray are a different proposition.
>>
>> Federer experiments with the odd tactical change, like SV plays and
>> chipping-and-charging, but when it comes to the big matches these go
>> out the window and he reverts to his standard game. For example, in
>> the final Nadal was struggling with the wide serve to his backhand.
>> Federer came in a couple of times on this serve and put away the easy
>> volley. But it didn't seem to be part of a plan as to how to win. Also
>> he has been chipping and charging a lot on second serves lately and
>> this might have been a good tactic to use sometimes against Nadal, but
>> he didn't do it once. What's the point of experimenting in these warm-
>> up events if you're not going to use these tactics in the big events?
>>
>> What exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? On a
>> tactical level, nothing really - Federer *can* do it, but I don't
>> think he *will* do it. He needs someone to come in and make him
>> realise that there are things he should change, and force him to go
>> about doing it.
>>
>> The other area where a coach can help is with confidence - Federer's
>> game just seems tight and nervy when he comes up against Nadal (and
>> maybe Murray). A good coach can build up his confidence and get him
>> into a relaxed state for the big games. Annacone was very good at
>> doing this when Sampras was struggling later in his career.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> How can you serve and volley against a guy like Nadal that is too fast
> and can pass you from 10 ft behind the baseline?
>
> In Federer's interview he mentioned something very interesting and
> this is probably is the reason behind Federer's poor conversion ratio
> on break points against Nadal. He said Nadal being a lefty makes it
> very difficult when he is serving from the adv-court.
> If you look at players that trouble Nadal, most of them are two-
> handed, which enables them to return Nadal's serves very well. This is
> what Federer lacks. If Federer could hit a descent return on Nadal's
> serve, he would have beaten him almost every time.
>
> Now I'm wondering and please don't laugh, why it's not possible for
> Federer to use a two-handed backhand at least for the return of serve?
>
> It won't take him more than a month to learn it and I don't think it
> will ruin the other parts of his game in anyway, it's just another
> dimension for him to achieve.
>



You expect anyone not to laugh at that?



  
Date: 03 Feb 2009 01:51:59
From: john
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat

"wkhedr" <wkhedr@my-deja.com > wrote in message
news:9e46f309-2f8f-4a8f-9d5e-d12652c352a7@17g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 2, 6:58 am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 2, 10:52 am, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "The MAN" <drsmith...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:4ff0f6d3-f7cc-43d4-bc72-8c08e8421f30@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> > On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
> > > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
> > > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> > > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > > coach.
>
> > > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> > > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> > > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> > > Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
> > >but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
> > >gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....
>
> > why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it's
> > not
> > like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he
> > also
> > claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any
> > point
> > in him hiring a coach.
>
> This is part of the problem - Federer sees these defeats as
> unfortunate but not really that he needs to make some changes to his
> game. His attitude is that with a bit of luck next time he should win,
> and for example yesterday that if he had served well he would have
> won. I strongly doubt that Federer will go back and watch this match
> with a view to picking up some things that he could do differently -
> this is part of his stubbornness which is both a strength and in this
> case a weakness.
>
> His game is stuck in a rut somewhat, with him still playing the same
> way as for the last few years. It's still good enough to beat nearly
> everyone, but Nadal and also Murray are a different proposition.
>
> Federer experiments with the odd tactical change, like SV plays and
> chipping-and-charging, but when it comes to the big matches these go
> out the window and he reverts to his standard game. For example, in
> the final Nadal was struggling with the wide serve to his backhand.
> Federer came in a couple of times on this serve and put away the easy
> volley. But it didn't seem to be part of a plan as to how to win. Also
> he has been chipping and charging a lot on second serves lately and
> this might have been a good tactic to use sometimes against Nadal, but
> he didn't do it once. What's the point of experimenting in these warm-
> up events if you're not going to use these tactics in the big events?
>
> What exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? On a
> tactical level, nothing really - Federer *can* do it, but I don't
> think he *will* do it. He needs someone to come in and make him
> realise that there are things he should change, and force him to go
> about doing it.
>
> The other area where a coach can help is with confidence - Federer's
> game just seems tight and nervy when he comes up against Nadal (and
> maybe Murray). A good coach can build up his confidence and get him
> into a relaxed state for the big games. Annacone was very good at
> doing this when Sampras was struggling later in his career.- Hide quoted
> text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

How can you serve and volley against a guy like Nadal that is too fast
and can pass you from 10 ft behind the baseline?

In Federer's interview he mentioned something very interesting and
this is probably is the reason behind Federer's poor conversion ratio
on break points against Nadal. He said Nadal being a lefty makes it
very difficult when he is serving from the adv-court.
If you look at players that trouble Nadal, most of them are two-
handed, which enables them to return Nadal's serves very well. This is
what Federer lacks. If Federer could hit a descent return on Nadal's
serve, he would have beaten him almost every time.

Now I'm wondering and please don't laugh, why it's not possible for
Federer to use a two-handed backhand at least for the return of serve?

It won't take him more than a month to learn it and I don't think it
will ruin the other parts of his game in anyway, it's just another
dimension for him to achieve.

Serve and volley is not necessarily a tactic that Federer needs to use every
time
on every serve when he play Nadal, it can be a strategy that he use
selectively.
SV does not mean blindly follow every serve into the net for volley. I
don't
think Federer need to change his single handed backhand to two handed
backhand,
what he needs to do is to use more of his variety on his return clearly that
top spin
backhand return is not a consistant weapon, why is Federer not using his
slice backhand
in his returns and he can even chip and charge the net behind some of
Nadal's second
serve. By returning with standard top spin backhand Federer is providing
Nadal with
returns of similar length and bounce every time and this allow Nadal to play
with
a serving pattern he really enjoys playing.




 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 04:11:19
From: ahonkan
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 4:58=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 2, 10:52=A0am, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "The MAN" <drsmith...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:4ff0f6d3-f7cc-43d4-bc72-8c08e8421f30@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com..=
.
> > On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's =
a
> > > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of hi=
s
> > > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> > > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > > coach.
>
> > > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> > > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> > > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> > > =A0 =A0 =A0Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
> > >but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
> > >gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....
>
> > why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it's=
not
> > like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he al=
so
> > claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any p=
oint
> > in him hiring a coach.
>
> This is part of the problem - Federer sees these defeats as
> unfortunate but not really that he needs to make some changes to his
> game. His attitude is that with a bit of luck next time he should win,
> and for example yesterday that if he had served well he would have
> won. I strongly doubt that Federer will go back and watch this match
> with a view to picking up some things that he could do differently -
> this is part of his stubbornness which is both a strength and in this
> case a weakness.
>
> His game is stuck in a rut somewhat, with him still playing the same
> way as for the last few years. It's still good enough to beat nearly
> everyone, but Nadal and also Murray are a different proposition.
>
> Federer experiments with the odd tactical change, like SV plays and
> chipping-and-charging, but when it comes to the big matches these go
> out the window and he reverts to his standard game. For example, in
> the final Nadal was struggling with the wide serve to his backhand.
> Federer came in a couple of times on this serve and put away the easy
> volley. But it didn't seem to be part of a plan as to how to win. Also
> he has been chipping and charging a lot on second serves lately and
> this might have been a good tactic to use sometimes against Nadal, but
> he didn't do it once. What's the point of experimenting in these warm-
> up events if you're not going to use these tactics in the big events?
>
> What exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? On a
> tactical level, nothing really - Federer *can* do it, but I don't
> think he *will* do it. He needs someone to come in and make him
> realise that there are things he should change, and force him to go
> about doing it.
>
> The other area where a coach can help is with confidence - Federer's
> game just seems tight and nervy when he comes up against Nadal (and
> maybe Murray). A good coach can build up his confidence and get him
> into a relaxed state for the big games. Annacone was very good at
> doing this when Sampras was struggling later in his career.

First, it's nice to see a thread that is devoid of hero-worship or
villain-hatred. What wonders can the absence of certain posters do
the quality of discussion!
Yes, Fed needs a coach, pronto. He must realize that he is unable
to think up answers to Rafa's game any more. Apart from his serve
deserting him pretty much throughout the match, you could see
that Fed was more content trading baseline rallies, hoping for a
rare
Nadal error or a chance to hit a winner off a rare Nadal half-
paced or
short ball. He didn't have a killer shot.
OTOH, Rafa's inside-out FH was a rally-killer pretty much every
time
he unleashed it. Fed was under tremendous pressure throughout
the match and esp in the sets when Rafa served first (3rd, 5th).
Like it or not, Roger has a mental block facing Rafa, a bit like
what
most players have facing both of them. I won't be surprised if he
has started developing a similar one against Murray (& Simon?).
He absolutely needs a coach. NOW.


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 03:58:00
From:
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 10:52=A0am, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay > wrote:
> "The MAN" <drsmith...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4ff0f6d3-f7cc-43d4-bc72-8c08e8421f30@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
> > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
> > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > coach.
>
> > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> > =A0 =A0 =A0Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
> >but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
> >gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....
>
> why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it's n=
ot
> like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he also
> claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any poi=
nt
> in him hiring a coach.

This is part of the problem - Federer sees these defeats as
unfortunate but not really that he needs to make some changes to his
game. His attitude is that with a bit of luck next time he should win,
and for example yesterday that if he had served well he would have
won. I strongly doubt that Federer will go back and watch this match
with a view to picking up some things that he could do differently -
this is part of his stubbornness which is both a strength and in this
case a weakness.

His game is stuck in a rut somewhat, with him still playing the same
way as for the last few years. It's still good enough to beat nearly
everyone, but Nadal and also Murray are a different proposition.

Federer experiments with the odd tactical change, like SV plays and
chipping-and-charging, but when it comes to the big matches these go
out the window and he reverts to his standard game. For example, in
the final Nadal was struggling with the wide serve to his backhand.
Federer came in a couple of times on this serve and put away the easy
volley. But it didn't seem to be part of a plan as to how to win. Also
he has been chipping and charging a lot on second serves lately and
this might have been a good tactic to use sometimes against Nadal, but
he didn't do it once. What's the point of experimenting in these warm-
up events if you're not going to use these tactics in the big events?

What exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? On a
tactical level, nothing really - Federer *can* do it, but I don't
think he *will* do it. He needs someone to come in and make him
realise that there are things he should change, and force him to go
about doing it.

The other area where a coach can help is with confidence - Federer's
game just seems tight and nervy when he comes up against Nadal (and
maybe Murray). A good coach can build up his confidence and get him
into a relaxed state for the big games. Annacone was very good at
doing this when Sampras was struggling later in his career.



 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 03:42:29
From: xamigax@gmail.com
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On 2 f=E9v, 09:30, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
> kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
> game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> coach.
>
> Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.

Excellent post.
He did few dropshots, won most of them...
But mainly to settle a score that was allready in his favor during the
fourth set IIRC.
He didn't try such variations in the fifth.
Federer needs so much few peoples (I agree he needs a coach) to talk
to about his game.
It might even be better for him to have "few good men" a la Sampras /
Laver / Roche / Connors / Borg than only one dedicated coach.

Appart from Sampras (for the serve, okay that was a bit unfair to
Federer's last show), none will teach him anythnig technical. He has
got the technique, even if it's volley can improved.
What he needs is more related to the psychological aspect.
He didn't miss shots because he has gone worse technically, this year
Federer fitness looks excellent.
He is missing shots because he possibly have no more gameplan, versus
Nadal (so far the only player owning Federer in slam).
Maybe was hoping Nadal to fade out in the fifth, having the Verdasco
battle working against him.
Federer wasn't playing much in the fifth, not that he seemed tired;
more looking like "out of ideas".

Maybe even a "Bolletieri brainwash" might work :-)

Share & Enjoy,
Manolo


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 03:34:38
From:
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 5:52=A0am, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay > wrote:
> "The MAN" <drsmith...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4ff0f6d3-f7cc-43d4-bc72-8c08e8421f30@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> > you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> > games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
> > kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> > He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> > wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> > dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
> > game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> > stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> > more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> > fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> > coach.
>
> > Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> > happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> > of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> > I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
> > =A0 =A0 =A0Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
> >but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
> >gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....
>
> why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it's n=
ot
> like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he also
> claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any poi=
nt
> in him hiring a coach.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

It's true that Fed didn't serve well, but Rafa also looked a bit weary
out there at times after his brutal semi so I don't see how that can
be much comfort for Fed.

It seems to me that on every surface now Fed needs to be firing on all
cylinders with every part of his game to beat Rafa. If one thing's
off, especially the serve or forehand, he's in trouble. That's a
really bad feeling for a guy who is accustomed to things being the
other way around in his matches.


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 03:17:14
From: MBDunc
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat


Iceberg kirjoitti:
> why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it's not
> like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he also
> claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any point
> in him hiring a coach.

Fed's strategy and focus needs some supervising. Shots and
tennisskills are fine.

.mikko


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 02:07:56
From: bg
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 1:30=A0pm, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com > wrote:

> In fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> coach.

Thats a refreshing thought. Maybe not Peter Lungdren, but someone
close to the Connors mould. But yes, he does need a coach very badly
and can no more rest on the shoulders of Mirka for solace.

And in case he doesnt get a coach, it would be much better for the
tennis world, if he were to lose in the semis of RG, rather than get
humiliated again.
bg




 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 00:44:53
From: The MAN
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
On Feb 2, 12:30=A0am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
> kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
> game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> coach.
>
> Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.


Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....


  
Date: 02 Feb 2009 10:52:24
From: Iceberg
Subject: Re: In retrospect, I think Fed needed this defeat
"The MAN" <drsmith004@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:4ff0f6d3-f7cc-43d4-bc72-8c08e8421f30@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 2, 12:30 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I think it will work as some sort of catharsis, a detoxification if
> you will. I hope the manner in which he played the key points and
> games will eat his guts to the extent that anger replaces fear. It's a
> kick in fed's guts and he needed it.
>
> He was resting on his basic game for too long, not adding any new
> wrinkles to it. Nadal has added wrinkles to his game (improving
> dramatically his serve and his BH) without sacrificing the core of his
> game. Fed hasn't done that. Fed's game, since 2004, has essentially
> stayed the same or perhaps regressed (he used to go to the net a lot
> more back then). He needs to pull his socks up and go to work. In
> fact, I think he should also go back and hire Peter Lundgren as his
> coach.
>
> Further, I hope that what happened to Sampras after the '92 USO will
> happen to fed. He should be rightfully cursing himself for his manner
> of play, and use it as a fuel.
>
> I feel that he will come back a little more wiser and angrier.
>
>
> Well, he should have gotten a coach after Wimbly,
>but he didn't.....cos he's too stubborn......i don't think he's
>gonna change....and he will continue to lose to Nadal....

why? what exactly is a coach going to do that he can't do himself? it's not
like he's a bad player, he won the USO and got to the final here, he also
claims he only lost because his serve wasn't working. I can't see any point
in him hiring a coach.