The Student Room Group

TSR Tennis Society IV

Scroll to see replies

Original post by The_K1NG
He should have won it in 2009 and 2014. 2011 was also a decent chance. It was probably the last time where he could physically compete and maybe beat Nadal in slams.


I hope we have a first encounter between them this year, would be great


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by ThatMadClown
I hope we have a first encounter between them this year, would be great


Posted from TSR Mobile


Yeah that would be great and given how bad Nadal is this year, Federer can beat him. But of course Federer will choke like he usually does against Nadal.
Original post by The_K1NG
Yeah that would be great and given how bad Nadal is this year, Federer can beat him. But of course Federer will choke like he usually does against Nadal.


Maybe not, he's new technique near the net would cause problems for nadal.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by The_K1NG
Yeah that would be great and given how bad Nadal is this year, Federer can beat him. But of course Federer will choke like he usually does against Nadal.


Don't think Fed would beat Nadal tbh. Nadal's matchup will always cause him problems, even if Fed is in better form than Nadal.
Original post by Krish4791
I agree with this, he had decent chances to win in 2009, 2011 and 2014 (imo he blew the 2009 final - could have been 6 in a row)

Djokovic, as it stands now, is the heavy favourite. We will see how things stand after Montreal and Cincinnati.
yeah he should definitely have won 2 more us opens. i agree 2009 and 2014 were great chances that he squandered. 2010 and 2011 were excellent chances to get to the final, but he would have lost to nadal anyway had he got to those finals.


Original post by Chief Wiggum
Don't think Fed would beat Nadal tbh. Nadal's matchup will always cause him problems, even if Fed is in better form than Nadal.
i agree nadal always causes federer problems. nadal plays a game of attrition from the baseline, hitting looping topspin forehands to federer's backhand until federer makes an unforced error. federer gets owned hard by that style of play, whether nadal is in form or not.

Original post by ThatMadClown
He had a chance last year as well...it was just his luck that he came across GOATing cilic in the semi finals...he enjoys the us open, and if by luck he gets a good draw he should reach the finals, I don't understand why people keep writing the guy off, he just made the Wimbledon finals and for a guy who's almost 34 that's pretty damn good. I don't normally predict the winner of tournaments, but if federer is playing well, and has a good draw don't bet against him.


Posted from TSR Mobile
i'm not saying he isn't good and i'm sure he'll make it far in the tournament. but he won't win it. at least not if he has to play djokovic or nadal. and like we saw the last 3 years, even if he doesn't have to play djokovic or nadal, he'll probably still lose.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by snowman77
yeah he should definitely have won 2 more us opens. i agree 2009 and 2014 were great chances that he squandered. 2010 and 2011 were excellent chances to get to the final, but he would have lost to nadal anyway had he got to those finals.


i agree nadal always causes federer problems. nadal plays a game of attrition from the baseline, hitting looping topspin forehands to federer's backhand until federer makes an unforced error. federer gets owned hard by that style of play, whether nadal is in form or not.

i'm not saying he isn't good and i'm sure he'll make it far in the tournament. but he won't win it. at least not if he has to play djokovic or nadal. and like we saw the last 3 years, even if he doesn't have to play djokovic or nadal, he'll probably still lose.


That's the thing with federer these days, all he needs a good two weeks with a good draw, we'll see how it pans out though :smile:


Posted from TSR Mobile
Federer's got a shot, but the US Open is one of the most level playing fields out of the slams because there are so many excellent hard court players around these days. In other words, it's not just Djokovic that can cause him problems, no matter how brilliant a hard court player he is. Stan, Nishikori, Berdych and Cilic (I guess) can cause and have caused upsets in the past because they hit heavy and are rewarded on the fastest slam surface.

Rafa is playing Hamburg next week. On clay, but I guess he could do with practice, on any surface.
Original post by The_K1NG
A bit late but very disappointed with Federer losing another Wimbledon final. He was great in the first two sets but had nothing left in the tank after that. Looks like he needs to avoid Djokovic to win another slam. That loss against Cilic at the US Open last year is looking more and more idiotic now.

Which way would you look at it, see it that cilic played the match of his life and that whole tournament no one could've touched him.
No you're wrong fed has and still can beat nolè at any slam it literally is a few key points in it. Even this year the last 2 sets were actually close if you rethink of the tight games and points.
If Fed plays like the cincy final 2012 where he bagled nolè he can do anything once again.
I find it strange that Murray vs Djokovic are tight games but federer destroys Murray.
Original post by ThatMadClown
He had a chance last year as well...it was just his luck that he came across GOATing cilic in the semi finals...he enjoys the us open, and if by luck he gets a good draw he should reach the finals, I don't understand why people keep writing the guy off, he just made the Wimbledon finals and for a guy who's almost 34 that's pretty damn good. I don't normally predict the winner of tournaments, but if federer is playing well, and has a good draw don't bet against him.


Posted from TSR Mobile

That would be hilarious if he had like karlovic in the 3rd round then nadal in 4th then berdych in quarters followed by Stan in semis than nolé in finals...
That would be one hell of a draw hey?
Original post by Rkai01
That would be hilarious if he had like karlovic in the 3rd round then nadal in 4th then berdych in quarters followed by Stan in semis than nolé in finals...
That would be one hell of a draw hey?


One can only hope that won't happen :P


Posted from TSR Mobile
I still think Djok and Murray are the best matchups for Fed. He can just about match Djok in terms of playing, its his stamina and athleticism that he can't match and Nadal relies on that more than any other player.
Original post by Rakas21
I still think Djok and Murray are the best matchups for Fed. He can just about match Djok in terms of playing, its his stamina and athleticism that he can't match and Nadal relies on that more than any other player.


Thing is federer isn't 28 anymore, he can't keep up in longer rallies...


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Krish4791
I agree with this, he had decent chances to win in 2009, 2011 and 2014 (imo he blew the 2009 final - could have been 6 in a row)

Djokovic, as it stands now, is the heavy favourite. We will see how things stand after Montreal and Cincinnati.

Everyone thought Murray and nolé were the favourites back in 2013 and what happened?
The answer was a certain spaniard sweeped the whole us series.
Original post by ThatMadClown
One can only hope that won't happen :P


Posted from TSR Mobile

I hope it does.
Because if fed manages to clean them up everyone will shut up about him bein a weak era gs winner.
Original post by Rkai01
Everyone thought Murray and nolé were the favourites back in 2013 and what happened?
The answer was a certain spaniard sweeped the whole us series.


Nah, Nadal was co-favourite (along with Djokovic) in most people's eyes after his impressive hard court Masters performances back then. He also won IW, Madrid, Rome and RG so was riding a big streak, like Djokovic is this year. I agree that the favourite tag doesn't mean much though, you have to actually deliver.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Rkai01
I hope it does.
Because if fed manages to clean them up everyone will shut up about him bein a weak era gs winner.


I thought he did a good job of silencing them in 2012 itself.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Rkai01
I hope it does.
Because if fed manages to clean them up everyone will shut up about him bein a weak era gs winner.


I don't agree with this era talk, let's face it federer now being almost 34 is number 2 in the world...that argument is illogical.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by ThatMadClown
I don't agree with this era talk, let's face it federer now being almost 34 is number 2 in the world...that argument is illogical.


Posted from TSR Mobile
When people talk about the weak era, they're referring more in terms of grand slams won, not ranking.

Once 2008 came and Nadal had reached an age where he could compete on all surfaces, Federer won far fewer grand slams. Many believe he would have never won US Open 2008, French Open 2009, Wimbledon 2009 and Australian Open 2010 if he had to face Nadal. There is a strong argument that Federer would never have won close to 17 grand slams had Nadal and Djokovic been born a few years earlier.
Original post by snowman77
When people talk about the weak era, they're referring more in terms of grand slams won, not ranking.

Once 2008 came and Nadal had reached an age where he could compete on all surfaces, Federer won far fewer grand slams. Many believe he would have never won US Open 2008, French Open 2009, Wimbledon 2009 and Australian Open 2010 if he had to face Nadal. There is a strong argument that Federer would never have won close to 17 grand slams had Nadal and Djokovic been born a few years earlier.


Pretty crap argument. There would be a strong argument that Sampras would never have won 14 slams, had Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Laver, Borg, and McEnroe all competed in the same era as him.
Original post by snowman77
When people talk about the weak era, they're referring more in terms of grand slams won, not ranking.

Once 2008 came and Nadal had reached an age where he could compete on all surfaces, Federer won far fewer grand slams. Many believe he would have never won US Open 2008, French Open 2009, Wimbledon 2009 and Australian Open 2010 if he had to face Nadal. There is a strong argument that Federer would never have won close to 17 grand slams had Nadal and Djokovic been born a few years earlier.


Are you sure that isn't just to do with matchups? Federer has always had problems with nadal.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Quick Reply