Hi all I found this interesting article on the web...So I share with you:

Dubai: Roger Federer's coach Tony Roche feels his best student has still a long way to go before he nestles comfortably among the tennis greats.

"There is no discounting that Roger is a great player already. But he can still improve on certain aspects of his game," Roche told Gulf News.

The Australian has been coach to some of the best names that have surfaced in the sport, including the likes of Pat Rafter, Ivan Lendl and now Federer.

Though he was on a fulltime basis for Lendl and Rafter, Roche coaches Federer on a sort of a 'hand-shake deal' without a contract. Roche is accompanying Australian Sophie Ferguson at the 8th Al Habtoor Tennis Challenge.

Garros failure

Federer, who has won all the Grand Slams except the French Open, has sought Roche's help to bag that one title which has eluded him in his short yet dominant career.

"But he's getting there fast enough. Last year he lost (to Rafael Nadal) in the semifinals and this year he lost to the same player in the final. So we can see a definite improvement in his game," Roche noted. "Roger has to always try and keep improving on various aspects of his game.

"Obviously , he is a very complete player. But he needs to keep on getting better with each outing," Roche offered.

The coach is pleased with the way his best student has morphed over the past three years winning all of the Grand Slams, but only falling short of the elusive crown at Roland Garros.

Earlier this year after losing to Nadal at the Dubai Duty Free Men's Open, Federer had promised himself enough time to prepare for the clay season, particularly the French Open.

"But he has shown improvement in all departments of his game, and if he continues the way he has done over the past three years, there will be no stopping Roger from being right up there," Roche stated.

Roche was particularly pleased with the respectful rivalry brewing between Federer and Nadal.

"Both hold each other with a lot of respect and that is important in any sport. Nadal is a great player and it is good to have both of them compete against each other all the while," Roche said.

No pressure

Though Nadal has been a nemesis for the Swiss star, Federer has managed to defeat him in the past two meetings. "There is no such thing as Roger wilting under pressure against Nadal," Roche said.

"And the last two occasions have shown that he is right on the top," he shrugged.

"He can win the French Open and even break Sampras' record."

"Roger has to always try and keep improving on various aspects of his game. He needs to keep on getting better with each outing."

reference here

No doubts left this man is really I nice guy :ok: : Now, it seems really that FED is still looking (and it is commited) for further improvements on his game (IMO Tony will ask him for more volley and "classical" on the net attacking) :yikes: ...

Nice to hear and though news for his opponents :rolleyes: ...

What are your comments,reactions?

Ciao

TennisVeritas

Roche raises some interesting points. He's right that Federer's been improving since his fiest Slam - his serve's become more than just a method of getting the ball into play, and is actually one of the best placed serves on the tour right now, with few double faults, and his forehand and defence have both become very consistent.

However (anyone not see that coming?) Roche is also spot on in saying Federer needs to improve certain areas of his game. The primary concern of course being that backhand, which, despite improving somewhat, is still an eyesore. For me, his technique is all wrong - he frequently looks off balance when hitting it, even when he isn't, and he often catches it too late (and overcompensates later by hitting it too early). The backswing can look pretty, but the shot produces too many errors to justify that. Often with technical problems, the best solution is a complete re-modelling of the shot in question, but I believe Federer is talented enough to resolve this just through practice. Some of the backhands he hit against Nadal in the Masters semi suggest this. In my opinion his main aims for this shot should be to tweak the backswing, and get plenty of practice in so it gains consistency.

His volleying is also far from brilliant, but I guess in the current era of baseline scrappers, it doesn't matter.

Is this a critic in disguise from you Wise? Yes his serve has improved a bit but already in 2001, it was close to be on a par with Sampras on gras. At least that is what the stats tell us of their one match. So was Sampras's serve also a "method" of putting the ball in play?

Federer's serve has always been pretty good. It is just a bit better now.

Wise Analyst spent a year writing gratuitous nonsense on the BBC message board, so it is hard to know whether he really means what he says. Poor backhand eh?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKf4h_Chb_s

I'd also suggest you watch the 2005 Wimbledon final.

Federer's backhand slice is also the best on the tour. Would anyone seriously argue otherwise? I'd be happy to read an intelligent discussion of Federer's backhand but I don't think Wise Analyst's "his technique is all wrong" really cuts the mustard. But perhaps he can expand more convincingly. Incidentally, both Laver and Sampras have gone on record saying Federer's backhand was actually the shot that impressed the most.

I agree with Wise_Analyst but what is strange from Roche's comments is that he has not mentioned anything about Federer's volleying. Although Federer has very good defense and incredible foot speed, he is bound to slow down once he gets to 26-27 years old. Unless he learns to get to the net more often and volley, his longitivity may be in question. That's what made Pete Sampras sp great. He could win slams when he was over 30 years old just by S&V. Federer and Roche must start thinking long-term now itself or it'll be too little too late by next year when age catches up with Roger.

Yes indeed. A beautiful BH and pretty efficient despite missing the power of a Safin's.

The problem will always be on clay though where a player like Nadal exploits to the maximum the attributes of a clay court though irregular spins and bounces (not bad bounces but weather conditions which have a big impact on bounces on that surface) and can easily break Fed's BH timing.

But Wise is very well aware that on any other surface, his BH is now a deadly weapon. Fed BH in the Wimbledon 1 set winning point was a gem ranks pretty high in the best BH ever (and must indeed have been eyesoring for Wise and Chet).

Don't you two worry too much about Fed. He'll be fine. Unless you think 2006 was a poor year compared to what he can do....which in a way I would agree with you.

Oh please! That's not even close to "what made Pete Sampras so great." He didn't really have that much "longevity", considering he only won one of his sixty-some titles past the age of 28. OK, it was a slam title, which was great. I loved that US Open, coming down to another Sampras v. Agassi final.

Chep Come on..You are posting this:

OK it is your opinion and I will tend to accept it IF (and only IF) FED was indeed a pure defender :yikes: player...

But come on this is not the case. FED a defender roflmao ...

Most of the time is FED who is searching the winner and he tries to close the point: He has a fantastic "foot speed" (but as well an unbelievable coordination which guarantees him to be very often perfectly balanced) but he has very efficient serve which allows him, very often, to close with a simple additional shot: OK often it is not a volley but still he is (usually) an aggressive forehand so well executed that literally "kills" his opponent defence.

BTW: I mean did you see him, very often, last year being tired at the end of a match? Come on...His game is definitely very efficient and as far as we can see from his matches his game plan does not seem to take out a lot from him, e.g. in terms of stamina who was the best one at the USO final??? Come on be serious..

Well I know it is difficult for you but try at least once :rolleyes:

Hi Nick BTW :P

I commend the anaylsis from Wise,bravo,but I disagree with his backhand technique being wrong.The one thing and I'm being picky here as I'm no coach is that he does roll his wrist,almost a flick to the forward swing through his contact.I believe that leads to the very few times this shot breaks down.

On the other hand due to his talent and extraordinary timing,he finds incredible angles with it.As Tenez says the clay will always,always,give problems to one-hander,unless you play with the extreme grip like Guga,or Muster did.If you do then faster surfaces will give you timing issues.
When the ball almost climbs vertically on you,taking it on the rise is the only option,unless you want to play your backhand from the position of the backcourt line-judge.

If his backhand is a weakness,it's only in relation to the stellar forehand.I find it ridiculous that after 3 years,people still talk about this supposed problem with his backhand.It's so versatile,and much better than it was 3 years ago.

Hi Brakkus if I remember well from the BBC board both Chet and Wise they were expected to become professional players due to the "weak" era roflmao roflmao

:rolleyes: Still waiting for receiving an invitation to their first match as pro :pray:

Well if federers backhand becomes as good as his forehand then the rest of the players are in deep trouble.

Hey TV,keep fighting the fine fight.Your enthusiasm for debate is infectious,you are a credit to the board. :ok:

Don't you mean 'in even deeper trouble than they already are anyway'? roflmao

I wonder, though --- I think in some of his recent matches, his backhand actually looked as good as (if not better than) his forehand. Perhaps this trouble has already arrived? :yikes:

I suppose he's been getting a lot of practice from those people who keep playing to it because they reckon it's a weakness ... free training sessions, if you ask me!

Still, we should wait until the clay season to see how it can hold up there.

About shots being 'technically wrong' - I always thought the Sampras serve (particularly the follow-through) looked kind of funny ... but what d'ya know ... it seemed to work just fine B)

I think I more or less agree with what Tony is saying.
As good as federer is there is still room for improvement(scary).
I don't understand whats the deal with people dissing His Backhand though.I think its pretty good.He hits some pretty good passing shots when he has too.
Its just his forehand is better.

Plus he serves and volleys sometimes if he wants to.
He did so well playing the way he has ...I don't think he needs to drastically change his style and become a serve and volleyer to keep on winning.

Absolutely agree with Tony as well. Federer is an insanely good player, but I've still never had the feeling he was giving it everything he had at the top of his game. His backhand is one of the best on the Tour IMO and it is fantastic to watch, particularly when sliced. His forehand.... well don't even get me started.
I will commend chet and Wise for pointing out certain lacks in the volley area. That is where he must improve (and indeed still can improve) but I just can't see it becoming his match-winning shot when his legs go. Firstly, because he doesn't actually have to move that much during matches, secondly because he is very efficient and I don't think his legs are going anywhere just yet and finally, because I don't think SV is effective in today's game. However, loss of footwork could become a major dent in his game in the future but the way he's doing now, I'm not going to predict a date for that to happen.

Chet actually raised a very valid point. Federer's defensive game is based on foot speed, which is bound to desert him as he gets older. When Pete Sampras's legs started to go, he had his brilliant serve and volley game to fall back on, which won him a few more Slams. What will Federer have? His serve simply isn't lethal enough to give him many free points, nor easy volleys, and I can't see the Swiss dealing with volleys by his ankles anywhere near as well as Pete did. When Federer loses half a yard of pace, I really don't see him being able to win any more Slams. The multi-layered nature of Sampras's game will prove to be what sets him apart from Federer.

Do you really believe this? Or are you just fishing?

Consider this:

1) Federer has the 3rd best record on the Tour for 1st serve points won.

2) Federer has the best record for 2nd serve points won

3) Federer is top for service games won

4) Federer is top for break points saved.

Are you arguing this is due to foot speed?

And the other points, people don't start losing significant speed until they are over 30. For that matter, how much slower was Agassi in 2005 than 1995? I'm not sure he wasn't quicker. And Sampras more multi-layered?? Compare their clay records mate...

Service games only consist of half a match. Those statistics are interesting, because I'm sure no-one who wasn't clinically insane would claim Federer's serve is better than Sampras's, and yet Federer's service statistics are almost on his level. For me this is a very good indication that the standard of returning has dropped significantly. Please, no comments about Roddick, an illiterate person could read his serve.

As for the foot speed, Federer's might last a while as long as he doesn't get an injury. He's been very lucky not to have had any injuries so far (yes, partly down to good preparation), but even so it will decrease before he's 30. Look at Chang.

Ridiculous post from Windbag Wise.

Your points are without substance and are hot air, based on supposition and speculation. Nothing more.

Wise Analyst, you concede that Federer's statistics are almost as good as Sampras's. And I would say his serve is ALMOST as good (i.e not better!) Does that make me clinically insane?

I fail to see what Roddick has to do with the argument.

yorkshire, I've yet to see a decent argument put forward from you on any subject. If you want me to do anything other than laugh at you, please offer me a coherent analysis regarding the issues being discussed.

Nickcica, I'll concede that, in terms of placement, Federer's first serve is almost as good as Sampras's. However, it isn't as fast, and Sampras's second serve was clearly superior. I believe that Federer having such good serving statistics is both down to his serve improving greatly of late, and some very poor returners in the current game. I mentioned Roddick because I thought some people might harp on about the relative success people have had returning his serve.

Still, this isn't really the point of the thread, I just happened to agree with chet, that should Federer's leg speed start to wane, he wouldn't be so able to fall back on a serve and volley game. I believe that his leg speed will start to go within the next couple of years, but that will remain to be seen.

The gaping flaw in that analysis is to suggest that Federer's success is built primarily on foot speed. OK, he's pretty quick, but there are players faster than him. His speed may be an asset, but it's not what sets him so far apart from the competition.

Of course, when he inevitably loses a little speed (as Sampras did), he will no longer be so dominant (again, similar to what happened w/ Sampras).

That said I don't think speed is gonna be a factor for at least the next 2 years.

How old is federer now though hes only 25 i think?

And to compare Chang (one grand slam) to Federer (nine and counting) is what's laughable.

roflmao

I think Wise is just suggesting that Chang started losing his foot speed around age 18, which is the only reason a less-talented Sampras was finally able to start beating him.

:P

Wise Analyst is being rather cheeky demanding that Yorkshire supply coherent analysis while making airy and vague speculations that a truly wise analyst would have backed up with fact. Federer topped the serving statistics in 2004 as well, so clearly his serve hasn't improved that much.

Not in that time maybe, but it's better than it was in 2001. ;)

roflmao

All this talk about foot speed makes me wonder how players like Agassi and Connors kept competing at the top well into their mid-thirties without serve-volleying ?

As much as I dont want to agree with wise analyst and chetanpv, being a federer fan myself, I must admit that sometimes I do worry when I think about his volleying skills. I followed federer closely only over the past couple of years when he was mostly playing baseline tennis. I havent followed him that much when he used to approach to the net a lot in his earlier career. When he approaches net these days (which is not that often) I sometimes feel like he is not that comfortable out there. Is it only me or does everybody feel that way?

I know that his tennis is working great now, but I personally would like to see him use his volleying skills more.

For those who watched him volleying in his early career, could you guys tell me how good of a volleyer he is??

Nick Cica - Excellent argumenting all along. I can rest and go on Holidays knowing I have left Wise and Chet in good hands. ;)

I will add a couple of points. Regarding Fed when he loses a bit of movement speed, we already have an idea of what could happen in considering the 2005 Masters and the AO 06. I though that during those championships he wasn't as light on his feet as he usually is and he did struggled a bit. Yet he did pretty well and was only 2 points away from winning the Masters as well. The Masters loss was more down to lack of preparation, stamina that is, than slowness though. But I expect the competition to give him a harder time in 3 years than they are doing now. Those young players out there have more margin of improvement than Federer I would think and they are already pretty close. However, a combination of his genius and experience in the big points should allow him to grab the odd tournment when he declines like his past peers did. But I agree that with future eras being typically stronger than past ones - contrary to some weird believes - his time at the very top could be shorter than Sampras's or Agassi.

Reagrding his serve, Do we have enough tangible stats to compare it with Sampras? It seems not many are prepared to give Federer the edge in that department but personally, I think it is due to the fact we had the Waoo factor when Sampras first came up with this speed and consistency and the fact that not many could return his serve then but we have argued many times that quite a few players there are serving harder than Sampras (despite those very same people who argue that courts and balls are now slower) and a few players are returning better than 10 years ago. Again, a 28 and 29 yo Sampras had his serve "contained" by the likes of Hewitt and Federer (and others too) so again, what proof have we got that Sampras serves was better than Federer? My only criticism, I will make to Federer which could be related to his serve, is that he tends to concentrate less on his serve when he has just broken his opponent or is serving for a set than during the core of the battle. But this is due to a concentration problem as opposed to serve in my view.

Finally, did I say 2 points?, his volleying is really excellent as well. Let's not forget that returns are coming back much harder from both wings now than they used to (I posted somewhere a Becker/Edberg wimbledon tie break) and you can see the BH returns (though pretty good for the time) are certainly not as hard as today so let's not expect players to have all the easy volleys they used to have. Sampras did shank a few volleys against Fed in 2001 as well and had trouble placing them sharp against Hewitt as well. Even a young Chang was returning Sampras serve pretty well.

So I know it is not easy to substitute our former idols and their shots with the new and coming players as the former ones enjoyed the "novelty" factor but when analysed crudely - computarised images (Hawk eye) will allow us to "measure" clearly the difference - many of us could be up for surprises.

Hi tennisfan78 & all

Let's try to write down the main points in this discussion:

1.In the short-medium (next two years) term I really do not see any problems for FED coming from his "athletic" attitudes, e.g.: I really do not see his famous foot speed dropping so quickly (as well as his awesome coordination and balance)...Moreover, even for the long run (around 30 and over) I fully agree with the remark of Big AL:

So I really do not see the danger coming from there...Moreover as some posters, in particular Nick Cica-great remarks :ok: -, pointed clearly out FED is still developing some part of his game, mainly his serve, that allows him to save more and more energy (by quickly closing these games) on these games so to concentrate (and use this energy) in the return games: a clear and recent example was, for instance, the YEC match against AROD. During the first two sets AROD did not take a lot of energy out of him...And then he paid the price cash during the third and the next day- AROD was still tired against Nalbi. :whistle:

2.tennisfan78, Wise & Chet are a sort of Pete' fanatic who strongly believe that there is only one way to play Tennis when you are at the top, i.e. use the Serve&Volley Technique (But at the same time these two posters are now great fans of Nadal :yikes: ..Fans..Well they are chosing this guy simply because he can beat FEd and they hate FED so.. :whistle: )...

Clearly this is not true and the fact that their favourite player was able to have a long career by using this technique does not imply that everyone should start to follow his example..Each great champion has his own way of playing Tennis and his own evolution: Try to convince the world that there is just one way to reach the Tennis nirvana (i.e. longevity with great successes all along) is just silly: I mean as spotted already by other...How can you then explain the late (around and after the 30) successes of Agassi Lendl... :whistle:

3.Finally, I really guess the only real point for FED for the remaining of his career his the motivation factor. After re-reading Roche considerations and remarks I really believe this was the ultimate message: I have to keep this guy motivated so I will continue to say to him than he has still a lot of work to do and that he can still improve...9 slams at 25 with already two years with 3 slams ( and the last one with all the four major finals)...It is really huge: As John McEnroe is used to say: When you are a trainer you have to keep your job, you cannot tell your guy that everything is perfect and that you are able to win against all the opponents, even if it is true in the case of FED this year... roflmao roflmao

PS tennisfan78 can I suggest you buy the DVD of FED-Sampras at Wimbledon 2001..FED was playing mainly Serve & Volley and he was far from being bad (same in 2003...the semi between him and AROD is just gorgeous)

BTW: Tenez have a nice holidays man.. :rolleyes:

Great point TV. I was going to mention the AO 06 experience as well where though he was probably not moving at his best, his opponents were all running out of steam in the end of their matches due to the pace of his shots and retrieving of his FH. To keep up with him they simply had to play at max gear for too long and Fed had easy wins at the end. I think even Davydenko would have capitulated easily had they played a 5th. The poor guy looked like he had a shower with his cloth on (that was the comment of the Eurosport commentators who had not noticed he was as wet before taking his 3mn break as on his coming back).

Here we are Great man (i.e. Tenez :bow: )...To beat him you need a very "similar" player (i.e. another monster :yikes: )...Here my choice of Gasquet as his first opponent. In Toronto he was able to win the first set without using a lot of his gas and he was well there in the second set: At that stage there was the other element (you already spotted before) which enters into the equation: FED has now reached enough of experience to let the opponent run for a while and then fight back at the right moment :P , in the case of the Toronto final the beginning of the second set...

But definitely: To beat FED a part Nadal who can always find the gas I really believe Gasquet is the man ( and the Toronto final was such a book :yikes: in terms of beautiful shoots coming from both side)

NB: Gasquet is now leaving as well in Switzerland (Neuchatel) ...I guess for fiscal reasons roflmao ...

I actuall think and believe that as long as Federer doest have that French Open title his motivation will remain that high if not higher.Also I do believe that he wont just want to win that slam once but try very hard to defend it or win a second title so he doesnt get labelled as a 1 trick pony at that event!

I cannot agree that this guy will be a challenge in the future.He is prone to to many injuries.But despite that he is also I believe one ofthose players that will linger about and get good results but never really be that great,sorta like a Pioline!

There are very few out there that really are going to transform into the next level.They all are just lacking something extra special.I feel like that whenever I watch the ATP!

A bit of a hard judgment Darky on the 20 yo Gasquet. He was 12th last year at 19 before his injury, slipped to the 70s during his injury time and finished the year to 18 despite having missed the beginning of the year and is now breathing down Murray and Djoko's necks.

I think he is still Federer's choice to succeed him and I agree as well. However, it won't be easy and I cannot see of course a similar dominance as Fed but certainly a few slams hopefully. Certainly not a Pioline, he is much more talented.

Hi all, :P

Here's another nice article on Federer 2006 fantastic season:

FED-SEASON

:ok: This is a nice article because it provides a clear view of the pas season and some insights for the future.

And finally some additional comments by McEnroe (Patrick)- article reference:
Federer tough to beat published by The Associated Press -

MIAMI, - U.S. Davis Cup Captain Patrick McEnroe believes that
conquering the talent and mystique of world No. 1 Roger Federer is a
task likely to fall to some of the newer faces on the ATP tour.

[......And then...]

"You got the greatest player I've ever seen and will arguably go down
as the greatest player ever and you don't appreciate it?" said McEnroe
"I appreciate it. It's a marvel :whistle: to be able to see what he's done in
the last three years.

Ciao :rolleyes:

BTW and definitely...Gasquet is a great talent better than Pioline (for sure)...His problem? Carry out the burden of the French journalists..I simply hope and :pray: for him for a good career with some GS titles..