Whassup with Federer?

[airforce1]

But one thing I've learned is that how players play and who they are and their confidence in how they play tend to all be woven together. Sometime I'll tell the story about showing Paul Annacone the video of Pete's backhand and what Annacone told me in that regard.

I've seen bits and pieces of this,
enough to know how true it is.
I look forward to that story when you get around to it.

[John Yandell]

You know I think it's presumptuous for me to give advice to Roger Federer. I did see a couple of hard crosscourt slices get results in last year's final.

For whatever reason Roger hasn't turned that into a regular play. It would be fascinating to be close enough to hear his thoughts on this, if he has them.

But one thing I've learned is that how players play and who they are and their confidence in how they play tend to all be woven together. Sometime I'll tell the story about showing Paul Annacone the video of Pete's backhand and what Annacone told me in that regard.

[airforce1]

At least in Madrid we saw no signs of Fed falling apart, even when getting himself down in several svc games.

On the other hand, he was never down a break either.

[uspta1976603328]

Use of Backhand Slice

John,
I was watching again the Madrid Final between Nadal and Federer when I began to wonder about Federer's use of the slice against Nadal's high bounce to his backhand. While he pulled it out on occasion, he seemed to prefer to either block it high, or attempt a topspin stroke pattern instead.

In your opinion, should Federer use the slice more often to neutralize the heavy topspin ball to his one hand backhand that seems to bother him so much?

[oliensis]

Eagerly awaiting your take as always.
Also, whether you saw things in Fed's game in Madrid that were different than how he was playing in Indian Wells...clearly there were improvements, esp. in shot tolerance and depth of backhand drives...and less forehand errors. But would like to hear what others thought they saw as well.

Best,
ao

[John Yandell]

Anyone can respond, obviously. And yeah you make some good points! There is still one or two I'll reserve for a future article.

[oliensis]

Of course, in my view, anyway.
Best,
AO

Hi,
is it OK to response to your posts
if a post is adressed to John?

[uspta146749877]

Protocol

Hi,
is it OK to response to your posts
if a post is adressed to John?

[oliensis]

Federer 2009 Videos

John,
Great videos of Federer! As per your comments in the email that went out about the new (May) issue, here's what I notice, or think I notice in Fed 2009 vs. earlier video clips:

A) Legs not quite as springy. Still great, but not on the pogo stick quite like he used to be. Maybe "explosiveness" is what looks to be lacking on a relative basis compared to a few years ago.

B) Because of (A) above, there is less explosiveness in racket-head acceleration on forehand. One signpost of this is that his left hand pulls across his body with less acceleration as he moves into hitting zone, so he ends up w/ left hand "catching" the racket on follow-through more in front of the body more often. In prior years that left hand would pull across (almost like a karate punch's counter-balancing off hand) and catch the racket after rotating past a line that is parallel to the baseline.

C) Also, at least in part because of A above, the backhand has less acceleration, seems to be guiding the ball more and thrashing it less. The signpost for this is that the follow-through is shorter, less magestic, & he doesn't follow through as far past maximum extension. (Used to be that the racket would go through max extension after the hit, and end up almost pointing to the back fence, even though he kept his right shoulder nicely down through hitting zone.) This is the backhand side's version of the same issue as in B above.

Is it age, back injury, mono, 10 years on the tour, change in philosophy/psychology, change in competition (even more topspin out there nowadays), or maybe some extra weight (I think he's at least 7 lbs heavier than a few years ago, which could make that 2% difference in movement)...or some combination of all-of-the-above + other things I'm not savvy to?

To be sure, he's still awesome. But to my eye he looks a little bit more like you'd see in a black & white still-photo teaching book circa 1956, and a little bit less like the dominant Federer of '04-'07. Just a bit more earth-bound, a bit less stratospheric.

Thoughts?

[uspta146749877]

Please see a post "Ferderer betrayed by his forehand "

Please see a post "Ferderer betrayed by his forehand " in this forum

[oliensis]

5th set in final against Nadal in Oz
3rd set against against Murray at IW
And now after being up 5-1 in the 1st set against Joker in Miami...

On all 3 occasions Federer's game has suffered meltdowns of truly remarkable proportions. I've never seen anything like this in pro tennis...the decline from a very high level to a mistake-prone-ness that is mind-boggling.

I remember watching Becker in Australia against Moya in the '90s, when Becker got flummoxed to the point where he could not find the court. He just kept bashing away, hitting the net-cord and then the balling dropping on his side...missing the lines by a few inches... UEs piling up like loads of dog s***. I remember thinking, jeeze, why doesn't he roll the ball high and deep and just try to work his way back into playing at a high level again, just try to get some rhythm...but he just kept trying to hit winners from everywhere, and missed all of them.

Granted, the wind was a factor, but I remember F playing in virtual hurricane conditions at the US Open against Agassi, and feeling that as great as Agassi was, that F could compete w/ A in his strengths (baseline bashing), and then had more options (better defense, more variety, better transition game and volleys, and better serve)....that A would stay w/ him, but would ultimately lose for lack of relative variety and options. And that's what happened.

F's shot tolerance seems to have fallen to about 3 strokes. After that it's a question of when the UE will come.

From my lame little perspective, the only time when I remember feeling like it looked like Fed felt against Joker was when I had 2 pulled hamstrings and my back was out, and I had to play a tournament match against a guy that I normally beat about 75% of the time. Everything I tried to put away landed out. I think I lost 3 and 2. Nothing worked. Because everything hurt, and I must've been affected more than I was aware, especially in shot selection and footwork/movement.

Seems to me that F's backswings on both sides are considerably shorter than in his heyday, (less torso & shoulder rotation) and that even when he hits a winner it almost looks like he's muscling the racket-head acceleration, where in the past the acceleration seemed to be a kind of passive unleashing of what had been a loose and supple loading/storing of potential energy.

But, even with that, he's still playing great tennis at times...just absolutely caving mentally as he gets deep into the match.

OK, now I'm going to get a little "psycho-babble-ish."

Fed is 27, about to be 28. I'm no fan of astrology generally, (I think it's mainly BS), but there is an interesting idea in that "art" called Saturn Return. That comes @ 28-30, when whatever issues one had in adolescence that need to be revisited, re-emerge. This can be a very troubling time when old demons rise again. (This phase is understood in psychology as well, but it's powerfully expressed in the argot of astrology.)

From: http://www.newage-directory.com/saturn.html

Growth is often accompanied by trepidation and turmoil. As the old self is pushed aside to make room for the new, you may feel weak and vulnerable. You want to move ahead, yet are frustrated by a fear of doing so, torn between a compelling urge to throw off everything connected with your past and an equally frantic need to cling to the familiar rather than brave the great unknown.

Even if your external world seems to be in order, your internal structure may feel as though it's being assaulted with a battering ram. Nervous conditions, irritability, depression, insomnia, and feelings of insecurity are common. Most people go through some sort of identity crisis.

Even though your Saturn Return may be disturbing, ultimately it reveals what you truly want and sweeps away the clutter that may have been impeding your progress. Your Saturn Return is a personal spring cleaning. No matter how difficult it seems to let go of inappropriate people and things, the first Saturn Return is the time to do it. For if lessons are not learned, the problems will come knocking again during your second Saturn Return at about age fifty-eight, when you are more set in your ways. Once the conflict is confronted, the tension usually subsides. You feel stronger and more capable of moving ahead.

Saturn Return is one of the most crucial turning points you ever experience, when you assume the greatest responsibility of all: responsibility for your own life.

Some of us may remember that a younger Fed was talented, but a bit of a head case. I remember thinking that he had too many options on the court (too many different shots), and that he would never be a real winner because under pressure he would be picking which shot to hit instead of just going w/ his strength. But he proved me wrong for years, during which his shot selection was seamless and immune to pressure.

Now he has returned to a demonically extreme version of his younger self. Because of his back? Maybe. But maybe the back is just one catalyst in a larger phase change.

My hypothesis, submitted for consideration: Maybe Fed has to re-visit the issues that were troublesome to him in the first place (when he was young: temper, the "talented headcase" character vs. the "steady-headed winner" diad) and re-construct his game to interface better with the older human that he is now evolving into.

Agassi is really the only great player I can think of who did manage to re-invent his approach to the game and his game itself after his Saturn Return. He re-invented his fitness, he re-invented his attitude, he re-invented his approach to his opponents' games. McEnroe tried it, but never re-achieved his earlier form. Borg quit at 26. Sampras did adjust as he aged, but less dramatically than Agassi, I think, and less successfully. Courier burned out. Rafter retired at 28-9. Ellsworth Vines retired at 28. Tilden became great as he entered his Saturn Return at 27 (how's that for strange!). I wish I knew more about Rosewall, Laver, Gonzalez, Budge, et al.

Whatever happens, Federer clearly needs to find a way to increase his shot tolerance a LOT. 'Cause trying to bang winners from way out on 178th street is making his play more and more erratic.

[airforce1]

Maybe the game is passing him by?? At least when it comes to dominating the field it has.

After watching the Berdiych match I have to wonder. These young guns are hitting winners so consistently these days. Roger was almost a spectator half the time. His Serve saved his bacon, big time!

Seems he is struggling to find how aggressive to be these days. Last nite he was less aggressive in placement, but got hammered over and over for this approach. When he was more aggressive, he missed too much. So tough to balance when you are pressing.

I think the young guns have decided not to let the short balls he has always gotten away with, go unpunished. Looks like Pete late in his career. To win slams he will need some good breaks and draws will have to open up for him some. I don't see how you could pick him in this Oz Open. On the other hand, often the greats have survived a scare like this in the first week, only to kick butt the rest of the way, and take it home. Pretty exciting!

[bottle]

Christmas Present 2008 to an Unknown Other Aspiring Player

If you have gone to the trouble of teaching yourself a Rogerian forehand, i.e., The Federfore, you may not have deeply enough yet considered two aspects of the unique wrist layback integral to this shot.

It's late-- most of us would agree on that-- also that simultaneously the wrist stretches back to the max as the forearm winds down.

The questions I'm getting at here are (1) how fast/slow should this happen and (2) which end of the stick should you use.

For several years I imagined the strings stopping in midair as the handle moved by and up from them. This may have helped me understand some basic mechanics. It may even have helped development of smoothness since the whole swing seems to move past the racket head this way.

Today, however, I don't do it; instead I make the racket head go back and down from the hand, actively countering the overall swing.

This isn't a new idea. Years ago, before Federer was even on the scene, I watched two teaching pros in Virginia consciously rally with each other to emphasize this basic tennis possibility.

When you watch films of Federer you see this action happening fast.

What if you slowed it down, though, for a slow oncoming ball? And what about the theory that you're slowing/stopping swing so that the springing body can better become the main factor in scraping the ball?

Regardless, if you have time to counter with your racket tip-- and you slow it
way down-- you can be fully confident of where you are going while your opponent has no idea whatsoever-- and that is my present to you.

Theseus' advice surely does apply here since it applies everywhere. From experience, he has learned one thing about lovemaking, he hopefully tells Helen in the novel "The Memoirs of Helen of Troy" by Amanda Elyot.

"However fast you want to go, go ten times slower than that."

[uspta146749877]

How is your Polish today?

Just watched this highlight video on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV5bZyB6Ui4&feature=related

Many many points, esp. in the 3rd set, in which Federer played to Murray's backhand, which is M's stronger side. And it seemed clear to me on numerous occasions that when he got into forehand-to-forehand crosscourt rallies he should have just kept pounding the Murray forehand to break it down (which it does do at times). But nope...he would almost never go more than once to the forehand (occasionally twice) before going the other way and ending up in a backhand-to-backhand rally with Murray, which would be Murray's preferred diagonal.

We've probably been over this before, but it seems clear to me that under pressure Federer wants to play the Southwest to Northeast diagonal (assuming F is on the south side of the court). And that his problems are mainly around opponents whose Northeast side (assuming opponent is on north side of court--forehand for lefty, backhand for righty) are their stronger sides.

Going over Federer's 15 losses this year, I've but a "NE" on the line for each Federer-conquerer whose better side, as far as I know, is the left side of the court (northeast when on the north side). I'm nto sure about Stepanek and Karlovic, but even assuming that they're not in the NE group, Federer had 10 losses against "NE" players and only 5 losses against non-NE players, which is esp. of interest since most players are righties, and most have better forehands than backhands (stronger NW side).


Djokovic
Murray NE
Fish NE
Roddick
Nadal NE
Stepanek
Nadal NE
Nadal NE
Nadal NE
Simon NE
karlovic
Blake
Murray NE
Simon NE
Murray NE

Both Karlovic and Stepanek are serve-volley players (as is Fish). So 2 or 3 of the non-NE losses are to SV players. And there are just 3 losses (Blake, Roddick, Djokovic) to non-NE, non-SV players.

Seems clear to me that when playing a player w/ a stronger NE wing, Federer should try to press the SE-NW diagonal much more (forehand to forehand against righties). And I think the fact that he doesn't is indicative of a) a lack of patience and b)an inclination to impose his game w/ not enough regard for the other player's weaknesses.

Now, granted he's Roger Federer and I'm not, but I don't think that invalidates entirely the thought process here. Just as baseball pitchers have to get smarter as they pass the absolute peaks of their physical powers, it might behoove Federer to impose his game on others' weaknesses more than on their strengths as the next few years go by.

It looks like a commentator of a video quoted by you is a Feder's fan as well

[oliensis]

Federer and who gives him trouble

Just watched this highlight video on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV5bZyB6Ui4&feature=related

Many many points, esp. in the 3rd set, in which Federer played to Murray's backhand, which is M's stronger side. And it seemed clear to me on numerous occasions that when he got into forehand-to-forehand crosscourt rallies he should have just kept pounding the Murray forehand to break it down (which it does do at times). But nope...he would almost never go more than once to the forehand (occasionally twice) before going the other way and ending up in a backhand-to-backhand rally with Murray, which would be Murray's preferred diagonal.

We've probably been over this before, but it seems clear to me that under pressure Federer wants to play the Southwest to Northeast diagonal (assuming F is on the south side of the court). And that his problems are mainly around opponents whose Northeast side (assuming opponent is on north side of court--forehand for lefty, backhand for righty) are their stronger sides.

Going over Federer's 15 losses this year, I've but a "NE" on the line for each Federer-conquerer whose better side, as far as I know, is the left side of the court (northeast when on the north side). I'm nto sure about Stepanek and Karlovic, but even assuming that they're not in the NE group, Federer had 10 losses against "NE" players and only 5 losses against non-NE players, which is esp. of interest since most players are righties, and most have better forehands than backhands (stronger NW side).


Djokovic
Murray NE
Fish NE
Roddick
Nadal NE
Stepanek
Nadal NE
Nadal NE
Nadal NE
Simon NE
karlovic
Blake
Murray NE
Simon NE
Murray NE

Both Karlovic and Stepanek are serve-volley players (as is Fish). So 2 or 3 of the non-NE losses are to SV players. And there are just 3 losses (Blake, Roddick, Djokovic) to non-NE, non-SV players.

Seems clear to me that when playing a player w/ a stronger NE wing, Federer should try to press the SE-NW diagonal much more (forehand to forehand against righties). And I think the fact that he doesn't is indicative of a) a lack of patience and b)an inclination to impose his game w/ not enough regard for the other player's weaknesses.

Now, granted he's Roger Federer and I'm not, but I don't think that invalidates entirely the thought process here. Just as baseball pitchers have to get smarter as they pass the absolute peaks of their physical powers, it might behoove Federer to impose his game on others' weaknesses more than on their strengths as the next few years go by.