Fed has won 5 Wimbledon's in a row (and x4 at Halle in that time), and it is a relatively conventional view that he is the grass court master.

However, he has also won 7 hard court GS (4 US, 3 Aus) and Nadal has probably pushed him further at Wimbledon than anyone else in the other two slams.

I wonder whether posters think grass or hard is his best surface, and whether there is a difference between slower or quicker hard court surfaces for him.

To me it seems that he is a great all-round player and that the speed of the hard surface doesn't seem to make much difference - I'd say Hard - all.

The thing is we should consider the surfaces and the balls played on as well. To me grass would be by far his best surface had Wimbledon kept slighly smaller balls they used to have 5 to 10 years ago. His 4th Wimbledon was Fed at his most dominant form despite losing one tie-break set. With the current setting, the USO hard and Wilson balls are likely to be his best slam now and above all one of the few players who can keep on playing on hard without, it seems, injuring himself. :pray:

I voted fast hardcourt.His performance on these surfaces is sublime.his stroke production is effortless.He is a maestro.Two masterful performances,2004 US OPEN FINAL AND 2006 US OPEN FINAL!

and mine is a switch.



:coat:

Ooof - counting chickens, he's only got 3 USO's so far as y'all know.

Looking at the stats you could say grass is his best surface; on his way to 5 Wimbledon titles he dropped only a handful of sets and that’s about as dominant as one can get. But personally I believe on grass there are much less of serious challengers for Fed. So those grass stats are a bit misleading.
Roger’s basically a shotmaker –the most complete of all time- who shines best by collecting winners by hitting as early as possible in fast paced rallies. The surface which suits that best is HC (preferbably a fast or indoor one). Of course one of his many talents is to adapt to different circumstances but once the balls gets a fair bounce it’s easier for Fed to feel free to do what he does best.

Fast hardcourt. His game and talent is perfect for it .Certainly against his main overall rival Nadal he should have a clear advantage.
But as Greasepipe says he actually has fewest rivals on grass , his main one being again Nadal who isnt a 'natural' grass court player.

I went for fast-hardcourt.I believe it would have been grass,if this poll was over five years ago.All the players now say the USO is the fastest court and really it should be a grass court.
If it was then Federer would play even better.I think slower surfaces just take some of the sting off his game.
Can't argue with his record on grass,but the truer bounce and pace of the Hard surfaces really does enhance Federer's gifts.It's the way he can take the ball earlier because of the pace,it really adds 20% extra to me compared to slower surfaces.

I vote hard fast (which includes in my view as well the fast indoor surface of Shanghai)..It is the best suited for his game..

The opponents are obliged to play at his rhythm to accept a "direct" approach against him (there are no escape on this surface IMO) on this surface even more than on grass (even if arguably during his best Wimbledon so far, i.e. 2006; he was really imposing and his wills and rhythm so strongly )..

But ok: fast Hard court is my first choice but still several of his most amazing shots (as greasepipe :bow: pointed out FED is , basically, the best ever shot maker we saw in our sport ) have been done on grass..So it is close..

On the other side, as I said, grass is a surface in which (at least nowadays in which she becomes a little bit slower) very talented-defensive-players a la Nadal can definitely "cut" or "destroy"" part of the FED's shot making:

On fast hard court as an opponent you have to accept his rhythm, you have to be able to face this shot making "machine", his pace and if you are able to beat him you definitely are either a great player or a very talented young gun, e.g. Djoko this year, Rafa, in the recent past as well as Murray.. :rolleyes:

You all make very good points - I was thinking about the Aus Open this year, a slow surface, but perhaps his most dominant ever GS win?

One point that really chimes with me is that his fast & early game requires precision, and hence confidence on his part in the trueness of a bounce. That would be as true on slow hard courts as on fast ones. Agassi was another early hitter who did his best on the slow hardcourts of Miami and Aus Open - 10 wins in total - although his nemesis on the fast hardcourts was invariably Sampras, something that Fed does not have.

I am glad to see the majority of us still recognise grass as being his best surface. ;)

Though i agree Fed is a great shot maker, I believe what really separate him from the rest are simply his raw skills: eye sight, reflexes and anticipation. And in that respect grass is the surface that highlights most those very skills.

The thing is this year he did not play very well at SW19. Was he tired? Was he overwhelmed by what was at stake? Was he going through a confidence crisis or was he simply slower/injured? I don’t know but judging on this year alone would not be fair in my view.
By considering surfaces we assume also that the balls are the same everywhere and that is certainly not the case. I am convinced that with smaller/faster balls, his dominance on grass would have been even more striking.

Let’s take the USO for instance, I am quite certain many people play also very well on this surface, hence the difference between his shot making capabilities and let’s say Davydenko, Roddick, Djoko might not be that superior while on grass his raw skills are still above the rest. I am convinced that if asked where he’d prefer to play Davydenko or Djoko, grass would be his choice.

So yes his run this year on grass was not all smooth but it does not mean that next year it will be tougher. Look at Sampras he won 3 lost 1 and then won 4 more!!! And a very last point, the player I find the closer in “raw skills” to Fed when on form is Gasquet….and where does Richard play best?

Completely agree with this; grass highlights all of Federers raw skills and also complements his guile and tactics. He likes to finish his points early, rather than endless baseline rallying - and I think grass also helps with that.

I

And agree here, also. I can see Djoko winning a USO - maybe even this one, but his abilities seem more 'blunt' when on a grass court.

This is solely my opinion, but I've always felt grass only permits the truly excellent to shine?

Federer's game is tailor made for fast surfaces.

Why? Because he is an excellent instinctive player, with the technique to adjust shots to back that up.

If a surface has an uneven bounce then that is something that falls into this category. I know that a few people have mentioned the trueness of the bounce, but to be honest, many more players are uncomfortable with uneven bounce than him, so increases his advantage.

If the bounce is generally low, then that suits his game too. He is best when attacking and taking time away from his opponent, and a high bounce can give players a chance to stay in the rally and counterattack. Taking time away from Federer is less of an issue as it brings out his instinctive play.

So.. the ideal for him is a fast court where the bounce of the ball is low and can be a little uneven (the latter is peripheral - a true bounce will still be fine for him, but am talking about other players' relative discomfort).

Which surface? Well, it ought to be grass. I thought that the bounce of the balls sat up higher at Wimbledon this year, at his disadvantage, and was also a little slower. Uneven bounce still in his favour though.

Fast hardcourts? Well, fast, low bounce, and a true bounce. I'd go for that one. Had it been the Wimbledon courts of, say 5-6 years ago or more, then I would have said grass every time. In fact i'd rather say grass, but I have to say that I was a little disappointed with the courts at SW19 this year. They were almost like Reverse Ace, in the way that the balls sat up that little bit more.

I suppose it boils down to what your definition of 'best surface' is.
Is it the one on which his game is best suited to , or the one where it matches up best against his rival(s) ? There could be a subtle difference.
For example on grass Nadal is a bigger threat to Federer that Djokovic to date but the latter clearly is one of the favourites for the US Open now .He does look a little 'blunt' on grass though where Federer is silky smooth .
But if we were talking about the grass of ten years ago there'd be no question it would be Fed's best surface . As it is its debatable .
Put it this way : Which is Federer the bigger favourite for , Wimbledon or the US Open ?

Currently both I think!

Ill not argue with that if he's in-form !

:D


And maybe the AO, too?! ;)

This time next year he'll have beaten Sampras's record ! :D

;) Maybe before that if he wins the French!

Now thats a bit too optimistic . He's still got to win this US Open first ;)

I could say the same for you bud!

Im just taking it one match at a time (sorry cliche)

did someone say c-l-a-y? lol.

Dios mio, Juan Carlos! I missed your sarcasm and Lols. Lol.