I finally managed to have a close look to some of the last performances of my fav (by far) player, i.e. the candidate of GOAT status Mr. FED [I have considered: FED at the AO then the match with Andy, the IW SF and before and Miami till his match with AROD] . And, by taking also into account his last performance yesterday at MC, my conclusion is formal:

FED is definitely in the same spiral than Borg.

By saying that I mean:

Too much jetting around and living out of a suitcase. Too much pressure to be perfect for too many years is taking its toll.

I don't think Feds gives a shit anymore. His body language says it all. He doesn't have much respect for most of his opponents and he'd
just as soon be somewhere else than playing tennis.

The only difference between Borg and Federer at similar stages of their careers is that Federer is saying and doing the right things
whereas Borg made it clear that he was done. In other words: FED is keep trying to come back and find some sort of motivation Borg was just bored and quit.

Results will be the same IMO unless Federer can find his mental edge and his drive to play the game again. The mono was definitely a bad accident that did create a lot of additional pressure on him by destroying his preparation plans: still his real problem was between his ears and this already at the end of last season. Now, I am really quite sure: His head's just not in it anymore and he needs to find some source of xtra gear to try to come back mentally: If not IMO he will be basically over.

Please discuss.. :rolleyes:

BTW: I hope that I am wrong :P but I am following FED from his junior's days and it is really the first time I saw some negative body language -"attitudes" from him. :cry:

Hi TV - Nice comparison. But I think the dynamics between those 2 players at the same age are fundamentally different.

Borg liked tennis but above all loved to win. Federer likes to win but above all loves tennis. That is the huge difference. When Borg realised he will have to lose more often, his motivation dropped, he simply coudl not cope with it. Borg was ahead of the pack essentially due to his physical preparation, Federer was ahead of his because he is simply too talented and therefore it cost him less to be ahead for those 4 years.

I disagree with the motivation bit. If anything Fed puts himself on excessive pressure cause he still wants to do well. He knows he can but for that he needs his magic, this beautiful timing that stayed with him for 4 years. If this goes, he is human again, and will have to struggle like everybody else. Confidence will get worse and the spiral you mentioned will certainly be a reality. If he manages to get his confidence and timing back, then I can see another 2 years of glory. Finding the winning ways is all it takes and he may have to struggle like he did yesterday for that. Winning while 5 1 down in the 3rd shows that he is far from being demotivated! When Borg played and lost at MC he was serving with 2 balls in his hand....that's the difference!

Hi Mr.T thanks for teh comments: Very interesting.. ;) ;)

I agree that the parallel is not perfect but I am pretty sure that FED has a motivation problem at the moment. Take this part of his post match interview of yesterday:

"I felt a little bit slow today, but my opponent played so bad in the first set he sort of faked me out. All of a sudden after the first game of the second set, which was average from his part as well, he managed to win it anyway because I didn't play so well. Then I struggled and was really unhappy with my game. But in the end it was fine."

He started to play badly because the level of his opponent was too poor: This means that he is just tired to go through all these steps, playing day in day out against also useless players to conquer the right to play the matches he want to play, i.e. against valid players..

This is why I am telling you that the motivation is an issue: The man is no more 100% focus and this is due to the fact that he start being annoyed by "small" players and opponents: On that side, his love for tennis could then be diminished by this factor (unfortunately) IMO :yikes:

I see your point but why woudl he then fight hard to come back from 1/5 down? The interview bit you hilighted tells me he thought it was in the bag and therefore dropped his guard. This drop of guard is not a motivation issue, it's a well known trait of Federer we have seen time and time again even when he was at the top but now with his confidence issue, it takes amazing proportion. If he had not respected Ramirez (or be demotivated), his first set could have been closer.

Let's see how he reacts today but if Fed was coonfident, his game woudl flow and winning in itself would feed his motivation back. I actually thought he fought bravely yesterday when his back was against the wall. That shows his motivation. It's just his old magic that's missing.

My 2 cents opinion (as you like to say) ;)

Let's hope you are right and I am wrong..We will see starting from today..

BTW Gael Monfils was able to win some money thanks to FED:

"Divertente, ho visto dal ristorante e ho vinto tanti buoni pasto ai colleghi perché ero convinto che Ramirez sarebbe entrato in tensione e Roger avrebbe sbagliato meno, perché ha incredibili risorse mentali e, sulla terra, perde solo con Nadal"

This was his reaction you can find in today's Gazetta dello Sport edition roflmao ..I do not translate because I am sure you are able to read Italian right Mr. T. ;)

Well, that was a good guess from Gael. I am sure he would have loved to play ramirez instead though.

anyone fancy doing a quick translation for those of us who don't happen to speak Italian? :blush:

Something about Gaels winning some food money?!?!? Because he knew that Roger had fantastic mental ability and wouldnt lose to anyone else on clay than Nadal...


A bit patchy, but I once did a short course in Italian.

And regarding the question of Fed doing a Borg. Well, I personally believe this is just a slump and whether its still the after effects of the mono, a self confidence issue or his game falling apart at the moment I believe he will come through it and win at SW19 this year and go on in the coming years to get 15+ slams.

Roger is a true champion with that champions mentallity, even though we may not see it at the moment, and has it in him to come back when those around him, and those in the media, question his talent.

I don’t think he’s in the Borg mode yet, but he definitely will once he loses consistently against players he doesn’t like (Djoko, Murray or players outside the top 100 pulling off shots between the legs :doh: ). .
Nevertheless; I’ve watched a replay of yesterdays match and you have to give him credit for his self control; the only spark of emotion came when he broke back in the third. To play that bad and still wait patiently for a positive thing to happen is admirable. The sad thing for him and the fans is he can’t make that to happen at will nowadays, he needs –like he said himself in the post match interview- a bit of luck to re-settle in a match like yesterday. If he spends the coming months a lot of hours on court, both practice and competitive matches, he’ll be fine. If he can’t sacrifice and focus like he could the past 5 years; sad times are ahead of us..

En sha'a Allah!

Excuse me DJ ( I was quite busy this morning)..Here the translation of Gael Monfils' remark:

"Funny, I saw from the restaurant and I won so many good meal with my colleagues because I was convinced that Ramirez would enter into tension and Roger would do no more mistakes at the end, because FED has incredible mental resources and, on clay, lost only with Nadal"
:) :)

thanks TV :hug: it sounds sexier in Italian :P

I don't think we can tell if Fed is in Borg mode just yet, and if he is we will soon find out becuase he'll just do a Borg and retire early. :lol:

Hi scomments about his opponent fakign him out or whatever did concerne me though, I can see that he seems to be developing a feeling of bitterness towards other opponents which i guess is like what Borg got with Mac.

R. FEDERER/R. Ramirez Hidalgo
6-1, 3-6, 7-6

THE MODERATOR: Questions, please.

Q. How did you get out of that one?
ROGER FEDERER: Uhm, I don't know. A bit of a grind, I guess, you know. It's always hard, you know, serving it out. It was tough on him, I guess.
But I was just hoping, you know, for a better spell where I was wasn't making maybe so many mistakes, finding my attacking game was working a little bit better.
It all came together, you know, at the right times. I'm happy I got through this match.

Q. Was there a bit of fatigue after last week, or why do you think it wasn't such a good day for you today?
ROGER FEDERER: Look, I don't know. I felt a little bit slow out there today. I think, you know, my opponent played so bad in the first set that he sort of almost faked me out. You know, he couldn't serve. He was making many mistakes from the baseline. All of a sudden, you know, after the first game, which I thought was average from his part as well, but he managed to win it anyway because I didn't play so well. Didn't miss any more. Started to serve better. And then after that I really struggled, you know. So I was really unhappy with my game.
But in the end at least it was fine, you know. But for one and a half sets, you know, I was quite disappointed.

Q. When you went down 5-1 in the third, you thought it was almost over or you still had hope?
ROGER FEDERER: Well, I guess you have a little bit of hope. But more on the side of, you know, packing your bags and leaving, you know, that's for sure.
You know, rarely am I in a situation like this, 5-1 down in the third, and I still manage to come back. Usually it's much more even, you know, 3-All, 4-All, whatever. But, no, you know, I was disappointed with the way I played.

Q. Do you remember if you ever won a time after 1-5 in your career?
ROGER FEDERER: Don't know. Your job (smiling).

Q. What does that tell you about what you have to do tomorrow?
ROGER FEDERER: No, look, I mean, it wasn't all bad. You know, it was fine in the first set. It was fine in the end. Just in the middle, you know, it wasn't good, you know. So for tomorrow, a new match, new day, new opponent. Everything's gonna change.
So I hope I'm just gonna play better, you know, in all.

Q. Do you have the feeling that if you had in front of you a player more consistent than Ramirez Hidalgo today you would have lost or not?
ROGER FEDERER: Maybe at 5-1 down, yes. But first the guy's got to get me to 5-1 down in the third.
His credit. I think he played really well, you know, in the second and third set. Didn't miss much. You know, he played aggressive. Played far back in the court, you know. I didn't serve very well, so I gave him a lot of opportunities, as well.
So your question's irrelevant.

Q. What made you more worried about your own game? What wasn't working as well as you would have liked?
ROGER FEDERER: Well, you know, I mean, I'm coming in late this year whereas, you know, maybe the last few years I always had four, five days. You know, maybe once I think I even had six days. So this year maybe that's just a bit of a difference.
You know, I had some adjustments. I definitely had the feeling, you know, the ball's flying more here than still in Estoril. Conditions over there were very windy; tough conditions to play in. Come here, all of a sudden conditions are better, you know, but the ball's still flying.
I just think it needs a little bit of an adjustment. Maybe that was one of the reasons I struggled today, I don't know.

Q. And in terms of confidence, is there anything different this year compared to last year because of all these reasons you mentioned or not?
ROGER FEDERER: No. I'm feeling fine, you know. Six matches on clay, six wins. So I'm not complaining (smiling).

Q. Then you win three awards, as well.
ROGER FEDERER: On top of that, isn't it great? It's a great day (smiling).
Couldn't be more happy.

Q. You won Fans' Favorite and Humanitarian of the Year.
ROGER FEDERER: Did I? Humanitarian was last year.

Q. What were the three today?
ROGER FEDERER: Sportsmanship, the Fans and the Player of the Year.

Q. Happy with those three?
ROGER FEDERER: Sure. I mean, I think they're very nice. You know, especially, you know, I think Fans' Favorite is always nice. You know, I mean, I guess I'm so well-liked all over the world today that people vote for me, which is a nice thing.
Sportsmanship is just really a privilege. You know, that's being voted by the other players, you know. I beat them so often and they still vote for me, so it sort of works (smiling).
But it's just nice, you know, being recognized by the other fellow players. I try to play in a good way and, you know, be also sort of an idol, you know, to kids, you know, the way they should behave. It's nice that other players vote for me.
And the Player of the Year is the obvious thing, you know, finishing No. 1 at the end of the year. In a way that means the most or the less (sic), depending on how you look at it.

Q. We just had a British player who lost 54 matches in a row. Had he lost 55 matches in a row, he would have set a world record for defeats.
ROGER FEDERER: You guys are rough, huh (smiling)?

Q. What would you say to someone who is in that kind of situation, losing matches week after week after week? Would you say, Keep going?
ROGER FEDERER: I would rather lose 55 in a row. At least that's going to be mentioned more. But you're going to mention him even though it's 54.

Q. We have already.
ROGER FEDERER: You have already (smiling).

Q. Do you give him credit for carrying on?
ROGER FEDERER: I mean, Vince Spadea had an issue at one stage. I think he lost 21 in a row, I remember. What are you going to do? I mean, all you can do is work hard, hopefully it's going to turn in your favor, and it's not going to happen again. You know, I mean, that is some streak to have against you.

You see TV - One bad match won is what it takes for a player to regain some form.

I don't think we can draw too much from todays match as Monfils gave the match away again. But Roger was certainly ready to rally. My concern is still this BH which on clay lacks power and depth and is so easily attackable. Considering that the FH is not what it used to be, Federer is walking on thin clay!

I've also made comparisons with Borg but for perhaps slightly different reasons than others, because I still "hear" the words of a psychologist who was asked to pick a player as a "case study" during Wimbledon some years ago. She picked 2 - one of them was Roger which caused some surprise to the interviewer (and me). When asked the reason why, she said that from watching him she felt that his on-court behaviour was not natural for him, that he internalised too much emotion and risked "burn out" in his mid-20's.

But then I remember that Roger has been suffering from ill health which is totally different from burn out. And an illness which has lingering physical and mental after effects so its not surprising that he is struggling to regain confidence, fitness and consistency in his game. I believe he'll get there - in the end - but we may still have to wait a while. The big question is that now his air of invincibility has gone, he may well find it much tougher going.

Still, when I want to cheer myself up I rewatch those last 3 matches in Shanghai ... as well as I've ever seen him play. It was a joy to watch. I'm sure Fed, like all his fans, thought that he'd carry this form over to the AO 2008 - there was no reason not to think this. Fate dealt him a rather cruel blow to those hopes.

Cheer up TV ... whatever happens in the future - we have had 4 of the most amazing years I've ever seen from a tennis player.

One think Borg and Fed have in comon though is the footwork. Both superb without having the need to develop today's big muscly thights!

:ok: Indeed. The way Fed moves around has always reminded me of Bjorn. And of course the more cool temprament on court, whether forced or not form Fed.

Borg was a great match player, I think he won a lot fo long matches in his time. Fed has had less competition in the last few years than he has now, so his matches have bene short, but I would really like to see him have to fight through more close 5 setters the way Borg did. I think he has i tin him, he has just not been tested enough. Mayeb these more testing times for Fed will cement him as an even greater champ than he already is.

I dont think Fed moves half as well as Borg does. In terms of speed, Borg is streets ahead. Fed's movement is almost an illusion due to his anticipation, much like Hingis because he knows usually where the ball is going it looks like he's very fast. He is fast but i think Borg is uncomparable in that department, even more so than Nadal.

I disagree there dl04. Borg may look quicker to you cause they were playing with wooden racket and a slower game. I have looked at the way the feet floats in the air and they are very similar. If Borg was faster, why couldn't he retrieve Mac's wooden racket's volley then? Most if not all players now are faster than Borg but few had his footwork skills. Fed certainly has.

To be fair Mcenroe's volleys were awesome ;)

I just think speed transcends technology and i still believe that's the one edge Borg has over everybody if anything else :shrug:

Yeah Mac's volleys were just :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow:

A lot fo people don't seem to realise that. Also that a lot fo Mac's volleys were totally feel and skill, natural nto text book taught. Genius in other words. Nowadays they get excited by a Sharapova smash volley roflmao

People seem to get excited by Sharapova nowadays if she opens her eyes :rolleyes: roflmao

He had such good clutch volleys Mac, if he was playing against someone like Agassi or Becker he could just repel their power with such delicacy. His stop volleys were insane :bow:

He should've played doubles with Nav :lol:

I'm not sure about that. As great as his stop volleys were McEnroe only rarely managed to handle Becker's power as can be seen by their H2H. In fact it was power players like Becker that stopped Mac from adding to his GS collection.

P.S. Your Sig Picture looks like Venus farted and took off midway through a shot. :D :D

If onyl dl, dream doubles team or what. :bow: Oh yes, those stop volleys! :D Btw a few years back he was going to play Wimby with Steffi after she'd retired - was really looking forward to that - but she pulled out. :(

Yeah a lot fo folks don't seem to appreciate that. The reason I rate him at the top, or among the top, is because of that sheer genius and skill. There may be other greats but I don't think anyone had what he had. And by the looks of tennis today they never will.

In fact talking about this is making that Ferrer v Nadal borefest even more depressing :lol:

well - Yes Jess Owens might be the most talented sprinter of all time but he is not the fastest recorded. Same applies to Borg. His speed was amazing for his time, but in terms of sheer speed, he has been taken over by a few.

Former greats have the benefit of the hero icon, in whatever they were good at (Borg/ footwork, Mc/touch, Sampras/serve, Lendl FH, Edberg/BH and so on). It is in that respect, extremely unfair on the succeeding generations. I honestly do not see differences in footwork skills between Borg and Fed.

Exactly and this perfectly illustrates what I was saying above. Having amazing touch or playing half volleys when the game is (relatively) slow is one thing, playing McEnore's game in today's conditions woudl simply be suicidal. There are plenty of guys trying I am sure but they are nowhere to be seen in the top 200 nowadays.

Well Sharapova and Djokovic in your sig look deranged :P roflmao

That's the general idea!

I agree. Technology has pushed most slow touch tennis aside.

But just to pick up on a point SB made. I think a lot of people still appreciate the way Mac once played, he is certainly one of my favourites. He played a game that could dominate the early 80's. But later than that and his game was unfortunately found wanting. A bit like how Becker was found wanting later on in his career when players like Agassi could read his game and return his power with interest and Sampras could play Boris's game but just with more power and creativity.

'internalised too much emotion' that's Psychobabble for controlling his emotions-which most players, and the rest of do, and should do-most of the time.
I always think of that episode of the Simpson's where the con-man shrink comes to Springfield advocating that Bart along with everyone else should express there every emotion and act in accordance with their feeling-naturally chaos ensued.


I think the comparison with Borg is ultimately wrong, Borg's hyper intensive fitness regime coupled with his ruthless desire for victory made him a very different player to Fed.
Fed is phenomenally gifted and enjoys the game for it's own sake-of course he loves to win, but he loves to play too.
While players like Djokovic clearly can challenge Fed, they aren't the whirlwind of talent and superstardom that McEnroe was.
Fed's difficulties are ultimately mental ones, to use technical jargon, his confidence has taken a knock, but i doubt they have much to do with the internalisation of emotion.

The downfall of Mc is easy to explain. As you said it was power v touch. Mc domination was doomed the day they increased the size of racket frame and arrival of graphite rackets. Learning playing tennis with a wooden racket is very different from learning the game with a large graphite frame. On one side you have craftmanship, on the other percentage tennis. Craftmanship was no use once the power increased.

Becker's fall a bit different and essentially down to his rather slow moving at a time players started to retrieve agressive shots moved him around. This is why he never won a tourny on clay despite his great shot making ability.

I agree BT but it was funny to see Fed being a tad more expressive on the court today with a good show of confidence.

It is certainly true that control of emotion is extremely important. We have too many cases of wasted talents who could not control their emotions and never delivered in proportion of their talent for that very reason. (Safin, Goran, come to mind but even McEnroe shoudl have a much better record had he been able to concentrate on the game rather than waste his energy away on a camera's noise).

It's good to see that Fed seems to be back to winning tight matches, i.e. playing well at the important points. I haven't been able to watch him this week, but he obviously found the motivation to come back against Ramirez Hidalgo, and beat Nalby coming from behind in the match - a very tough match-up for him.

To me the problem recently was that he no longer won the tight matches, played the big points better. A few matches are too small a sample size, but I am hoping that he has actually turned a corner here. A semifinal against an in-form Djokovic will tell us more. However, even if he did lose tomorrow, he has done well - and I am more hopeful for the claycourt season.

Come on, Roger - show them who's king!

PS. All the top four in the semi-finals - now that Davydenko has found some real form again, they really make a formidable set there at the top. Do some of the other players have what it takes to make inroads on those four guys? Can Roddick get back to the big time? Can Gasquet or Murray (or Nalbandian) make the extra step necessary to go and play consistently at the highest level? It's pretty exciting at the moment in my opinion! And Nadal, being back on the clay, seems to be immediately invigorated, Fed may be getting over his slump, Djoko playing well on clay ... I never got bored of Fed's dominance because he is just so wonderful to watch, but it is good to see the other players catching up with him, because that represents evolution in the game! :ok:

Good post MJT! :ok:

I agree particularly with your p.s.!

I never got tired of Fed's dominance purely because I enjoy watching him play when his timing is 'on', as it were.

One thing that was encouraging about the Fed v Nalby match was the conversion of break points by Fed. His bp conversion has been woeful for some time now, and it's good to see him improve markedly on that.

To me Nalby is the one that could certainly trouble those 4. I felt that for the first set today he was certainly as good as anyone on clay. He kind of lost the momentum helped by Roger making him run right to left, a situation he is not used to, and that was detrimental is making him lose his edge. Against the other 3, he woudl have had a better command of the rallies, making the other run. Fed certainly made most of the running today but he also imposed a tough rhythm that the other 3 woudl have had difficulty to impose on Nalby.

Absolutely, i guess it's about channelling the emotion.

I think (and i'm obviously making a subjective judgement) that when Fed plays his best tennis, he actually isn't thinking about it-he's just doing it!
Now that might be a statement of the bleedin obvious-but apparently being in 'the zone' is about doing what you do instinctively-rather than worrying about the pressure or consequences etc, easier to say than do i suspect.
People talk about timing and anticipation, but you can't consciously will those things to happen -they're a result of a highly technically competent player being focussed on the play, rather than the point or the situation etc.
A switch clearly clicked in Feds head today with Nalby, and basically that's all it took to turn Feds game around.

My two cents: I never watched Borg play-I was too little to know what was going on. However I was watching some match on tv & he was in the audience. naturally the camera showed a few shots of him, and what struck me right away was his intense gaze. I'm sure that in his day he scared and "hypnotized" many opponents, commentators, and spectators :D

Well, if Fed lets his emotions out as he did today, then he's clearly not internalising too much. And you may say its psychobabble .. but I've just had a friend who did the same thing and is suffering a nervous breakdown atm. Its been an alarming couple of days trying to get him help to stop him committing suicide.