Yenga adhellam summa adikadi tennis threadskkellam vaanga.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bala (Karthik)
Printable View
Yenga adhellam summa adikadi tennis threadskkellam vaanga.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bala (Karthik)
1 set all Plum :P. 2nd set tie-break to Bozoljac.
News & Photos:
Articles
Federer blames defeat on back and leg injuries
Wednesday, 30 June 2010Roger Federer© AELTC/Pro Sport
Federer heartbreak
© AELTC/T Lovelock
For once, the press room came to bury Caesar, not to praise him. Six-time champion Roger Federer had slipped to a 6‑4, 3‑6, 6‑1, 6‑4 defeat at the hands of Tomas Berdych, failing to make the final here at Wimbledon for the first time since 2003. What followed was an autopsy - of an injured body and a technique against big-hitters that has suddenly become brittle.
"I couldn't play the way I wanted to play," said the No.1 seed ruefully. "I'm struggling with a little bit of a back and a leg issue that just doesn't quite allow me to play the way I would like to play, so it's frustrating, to say the least. When you're hurting, you just don't feel as comfortable. You can't concentrate on each and every point because you do feel the pain sometimes, then you tend to play differently than the way you want to play. You don't for example try to hit a running passing shot because you think you won't be able to pull it off. Under the circumstances I think I played a decent match, but I've been feeling bad for the last two, three matches now. It's just not good and healthy to play under these kind of conditions.
""The leg came in the finals of Halle, and that kind of never really quite got away from me. It came back a little bit after the first‑round match, and then went away again and just kept creeping back sometimes during the matches. The back's been feeling stiff the last five days, six days really badly, and also in the finals of Halle. It's just something that's been lingering on the grass. It's normal that the back tends to get stiff in the grass court season because you have to go for many more lower shots. I've had that for many years and I think many players have it, but it's just not nice when it doesn't go away and you can't play freely. Your back really hurts on defensive shots and that really hacks you off! And then after that you can't attack. That's what I was missing today. It's frustrating."
Federer's loss was the second in a row against Berdych and his second consecutive defeat in the quarter-finals of a Grand Slam after setting an unbelievable record of 23 straight semi-finals or better in majors. It also continued a worrying tendency of defeats against big-hitters: Berdych, Robin Soderling at the French Open, Ernests Gulbis in Rome and stretching back to Juan Martin del Potro at the 2009 US Open. Federer however was adamant that it was merely a temporary blip.
"If I'm healthy I can handle those guys. Obviously it's a pity that Del Potro is not around (due to a wrist injury), because I think he would have a run at world No. 1 or a run at another Grand Slam. It's unfortunate for him. These guys do play very well, but I've played these guys 10 times and they're not going to reinvent themselves in a year. I've got the keys to beat them. Soderling and Berdych have got more consistent and they can be more relaxed now when they play but I had the keys to win today. I just made some shocking decisions. That forehand in the final game where I was up for a break - totally the wrong decision."
What now for the deposed champion? For the first time in eight years, he finds himself with an empty calendar for the first weekend in July. "If there's anything good about this, it's that I'm gonna get some rest, that's for sure," said Federer. "I don't think (I'll watch the final on Sunday). Two weeks' vacation. The injuries will calm down after three, four, five days off. Losing here at Wimbledon will no doubt hurt more, but it's good to stop playing. It's what I need at the moment."
Federer will be best advised to avoid all media during his holidays. Not only will someone else brandish his Wimbledon crown, but on Monday he is scheduled to drop outside the top 2 in the ATP rankings for the first time since November 2003. The bigger they are, the harder they fall, and in recent years there has been none bigger than Federer. He proved in 2009 than he can bounce back from adversity, and now he has to do it all over again.
by Drew Lilley
http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/news/...916541006.html
ஆப்டர் ரெண்டாயிரத்தி மூணு நவம்பர்
Roger federer is in the 3rd rank.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Singles.aspx
hmmmm will he be at top again?Quote:
Originally Posted by ajithfederer
ATP Tennis rankings is all about defending the titles. Federer did not defend any of the titles he won last year. Only Cincinnati is pending. OTOH, Nadal won all the titles which he did not win last year, along with defending his clay titles...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanjeevi
The great competitor to challenge Nadal next year is Juan Martin Del Potro as he is not having any points to defend.
Nadal has two Grand Slams, 3 Masters which he should defend next year. Also he has so many SF appearances in Masters. He has to defend all this from next February. Till that time it's impossible to displace Nadal.
Now this should show how difficult and masterly for Federer to keep his No.1 ranking for 237 consecutive weeks. Till Nadal or any other has this record beaten, no one can call them as the greatest. IMO...
Link - http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/column...5875-22396349/Quote:
No wonder Roger's feeling so Fed up
By Derek Mcgovern 8/07/2010
Roger Federer is the most single-minded man in tennis, although from time to time he does play doubles too.
People have been writing him off because of his premature Wimbledon exit but I reckon it's far too early for that. Instead I'm waiting until later this afternoon.
Things are so bad that Fed is not even No.2 in the world these days. That title goes to Novak Djokovic who has risen that high without, as far as I can remember, ever winning a title apart from young impressionist of the year.
But that's not the signal for Fed to call it quits. That day will arrive if ever Andy Murray climbs above him. Many women J even have thrown in the towel after that.
Unbelievably, Murray and Fed are the same price (3-1) to win next year's Wimbledon. I'm not saying Federer is a fantastic bet at those odds, what I'm saying is that at those odds Murray is the worst bet in the world.
Federer was No.1 for 285 weeks, one short of Pete Sampras and 722 short of Everything I Do I Do It For You. He's a very tasty 7-2 with Hills not to have won another Major by the end of 2012.
Wimbledon champion Rafa Nadal, world No.1 by a mile, is only second-favourite at 3-1 (behind 5-2 Federer) for next month's US Open.
The Spaniard is desperate for the one Grand Slam trophy to have eluded him to fill his trophy cabinet. He will spend the next three weeks at home in Majorca to fill his boots.
Us Open (Hills): 5-2 R Federer, 3-1 R Nadal, 7-2 A Murray. Wimbledon 2011: 15-8 Nadal, 3-1 Murray, Federer.
Link - http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3...greatness-pt-1Quote:
Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal: Two Different Paths to Greatness, Part I
By TIM RUFFIN (Featured Columnist) on March 24, 2010
Some of you may have already formed an opinion about this piece without having made it all the way though this sentence. So be it. You have already made up your mind, and I really don't care enough to try to change it.
For the rest of my fellow Bleacher Reporters, hear me out.
It's true, I seem to have developed a bit of a reputation as a "Federer hater," as a few of Roger's devout followers have tagged me during a few heated exchanges. It's a pretty entertaining notion to me. Strike that, it's very funny.
How can I hate someone that I don't know personally? I can't.
A few comments about my not caring much for Federer's personality have been blown out of proportion. Allow me to clear up any lingering questions before we dive into this article.
First, I don't hate the man. I think that he's a phenomenal tennis player. He's helped carry the sport in the post Agassi/Sampras years, a time when tennis could have really fallen off the map.
Roger has been a great ambassador for the sport. I don't have to be his personal cheerleader in order to recognize that. Greatness transcends likeability.
For my own personal taste, he's a little too smug for me to be a die-hard follower. But that's an issue of personal taste.
From a tennis standpoint, he's one of the best players ever. That's about high a praise as any tennis player can get.
Now that we've gotten that out of the way, let's talk tennis.
We are obviously entering one of the most important stretches of the tennis season. Indian Wells is in the rear view mirror as we pull into the next stop, Miami.
This season has really been about two men. You can guess who.
As has been the case since mid-2005, the biggest stories in tennis are Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. I'm tired of saying these two names, reading these two names, seeing slide shows about these two names. Let's not even mention the words "head-to-head."
We've had enough of that fruitless debate. But honestly, you’re not talking men's tennis today if you're not talking Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal.
What I want to touch on is the paths these two legends have taken (it feels weird to call Nadal a legend before his 24th birthday; Federer's been doing his thing long enough that it seems to suit him). Legends they are, about this there can be no argument. But there has been a lot of interesting conversation and debate.
We all know that Federer started out 2010 in style, washing the taste of a disappointing 2009 from his mouth. Many people jumped the Federer ship from mid-2008 until mid-2009. Surprisingly enough, many of the jumpers were Roger's own fans.
Grasping for a reason why, he was only winning one major in a year, as opposed to three. We were looking for answers as to how he could possibly surrender his beloved Wimbledon title to a "clay court specialist."
Finally, wondering why the man called "the Maestro" (one of the all time great sports nicknames, second only to the "Federer Express"), could no longer seem to beat his rival in an important match.
We heard the mono argument, the back problems, and the "old" age argument. But by May 2009, Federer went from a clear cut second fiddle to Nadal, back to No. 1 with a bullet by the time the American summer hard-court swing came around.
What a year.
The time for partisan behavior and ideological rants is over. We now have a much clearer picture of the Federer situation. The honest truth is that, at his very best, the Maestro is virtually unbeatable.
Scratch that, the man is unbeatable. He hasn't lost a single step; his backhand is better than it's ever been; and he remains one of the fittest players on tour. He's under 30, and has two to three more years to contend for the No. 1 ranking.
Federer will be a serious challenger to win any major he enters, regardless of the surface or field. He's earned the right to be taken seriously until the day he decides to hang up his white Wimbledon blazer and Wilson racquets for good—even if he's 35 or 36 at the time.
All that being said, Federer is no longer the threat for 90-match win streak that he once was. He is no longer an oppressively dominant World No. 1. In my opinion, he's no longer a serious threat to win the calendar Grand Slam.
Stay with me. This next point is going to sound like a contradiction, but it isn't.
Federer has continued to make marginal improvements to his game each year, and is arguably a better player than he was in 2006 or 2007; he's easier to beat now than ever.
Mentally, tennis takes its toll. Anyone who's a halfway decent player will tell you this. The focus, the concentration it takes to be a professional is something that most of us will never be able to grasp.
It's the reason Pete Sampras or Steffi Graf can simply walk away from the sport and never really look back.
It's the reason Mats Wilander won three majors in 1988 and then basically fell off of the radar.
It's the reason a player like James Blake, who was at one point in his career three spots off from the No. 1 ranking, can fall into the 50's and lose matches to Nicholas Almagro.
It takes so much focus to play on the tour week in and week out, let alone win week in and week out, and fend off the challenges of the hungry up and comers. Only Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras have dealt the advances of the ensuing generation of tennis players as well as Federer.
While Federer has crushed the hopes and dreams of most of the youngsters he's faced (Djokovic, Murray, Baghdatis, the list goes on), the constant pressure of having to hold onto the top spot takes its toll.
I believe that we are beginning to see the wear and tear on Federer, not physically but mentally.
Federer is showing signs of mental fatigue for sure. Who could blame him? He's gone through a historic stretch from 2003 until the present: The majors, the weeks spent at number one, the Grand Slam semifinals, and let’s not forget the four years prior spent grinding on the back courts of the ATP Tour getting his game ready to dominate.
In 2008, I didn't feel that Federer's tennis was poor, or his body beaten up excessively. I think that Nadal was vastly improved, and as stated in Federer's own words, Nadal was simply better than everybody that year.
However, if there is one pass we'll give Federer in 2008, it's in Australia.
I watched his game that entire year; I knew something was wrong physically in Australia. He was slower and really looked out of it at times. But by March and April, I could see that the problem wasn't physical any longer. Mentally, there seemed to be a glitch in Federer's thinking.
I once told my students that Roger Federer had the highest tennis IQ of anyone who ever played. Whereas guys like Pete Sampras, or Andre Agassi won by simply imposing their game on an opponent, Federer actually could breakdown an opponent's game and render him mentally defeated after a few games.
This was reminiscent of Jimmy Connors, but Federer could also probe a player and dissect him the way Mats Wilander could at the height of his powers. But then, Federer had the natural ability of a John McEnroe, and the vision of an Andre Agassi.
From 2004-2007, he was virtually untouchable—outside of a young Nadal. Nadal's game was still evolving and not nearly as polished as it would later become. Outside of the clay, Federer was really operating in his own zip code. The peerless Federer slice backhand was the undoing of many a good player. Through his dominant stretch, men's tennis was becoming predictable.
But from late 2008 and into 2009, Federer changed. For reasons ultimately known only him, the trademark probing and dissecting of players gradually gave way to his new "shock and awe" brand of tennis.
It started with the forehand, hitting five to seven miles per hour harder than usual. Federer began to look to bust points open with crushing down the line forehands, instead of the whipping, cross-court winners he used to employ.
The main difference being that this new trademark forehand was riskier. He made more errors than he had been making. The cross-court whip was usually a product of four or five well-placed shots, which set him up perfectly for the easy put away shot.
The newer incarnation of Federer seems to be a lot less patient, especially on big points. When feeling his game, he is still utterly dismissive of the competition (see 2010 Australian Open final) but he seems to be "feeling it" a lot less frequently in matches than he used to.
The new Federer goes through more mental lapses, unexplained error-filled patches, and voices his frustration more openly than ever before. Ultimately he usually gets himself back on track, but these are early signs of mental burnout.
The 2009 U.S. Open final confirmed my hunch more than ever.
Federer has never been bothered by power. In fact he welcomes pace, especially flat pace such as that which comes off the racquet of one Juan Martin del Potro. Marat Safin, Andy Roddick, and James Blake can all testify to this.
Federer was literally cruising, but left the door ajar for a young kid to have the gumption to believe that he should not only be in the match with Federer, but win it. Halfway through the match, Federer stopped probing and started slugging. A curious tactic change to say the least.
I mean, what was he thinking? He was going to win a pace war with a man five inches taller and at least 20 pounds heavier?
At one point I called it "arrogance," thinking that Federer wanted to prove that he could beat anyone at their own game. But in hindsight, I think I was wrong. He gave del Potro a level of comfort, one that he never would have afforded him four years ago.
Federer won the bulk of his majors because he was able to mentally breakdown almost everyone on tour. The variety, the probing slice backhand which pulled so many top-10 players out of position and left them virtually helpless as Federer flicked an easy winner right by them, caused the player to become demoralized very early on in the match.
It's a common misconception that Federer is miles above the rest of the field in terms of talent. Yes, he is a supremely gifted player with more variety than anyone. But talent alone doesn’t always win the day.
Federer was great at keeping players out of a groove, keeping them nervous and uneasy as to where the ball was going to land that they could never get their own game on track.
I don't care how talented a player is, if he's playing a huge hitter (like a del Potro) who has a dominant one-track game, if the big hitter gets into a serious groove it’s all over. Ask Pete Sampras, he wasn't nearly the point constructor, tactician or ball striker that Andre Agassi was, yet when he connected with one fell swing of the racquet, the dynamic changed quickly.
Federer had a knack for knowing how to keep the dangerous players completely off balance at all times. He knew how to raise his own game by bring his opponent's level down. It was truly brilliant, by keeping guys like Safin and Roddick on their toes and taking away their ability to anticipate he caused them to get to the ball late, thus preventing them from hitting the ball with full authority and getting into a power rhythm.
In a recent loss to the talented Cypriot Marcos Baghdatis, the same lack of patience and subtle point construction seemed to be on display once again. The brilliant winners Federer went after looked magical and intimidating...when they dropped inside the line.
The problem was that they didn't drop in quite often enough. The result was an early exit against a steadier, more patient opponent. The telling sound bite came after the match when Federer expressed he wasn't aggressive enough. One would think that given the number of bad errors, at bad points in the match he would have articulated the opposite.
But Federer seems bent on going for even more. It’s as though he's grown weary of rallying. Perhaps he's trying to save his body and prolong his illustrious career a bit longer at the back end by reducing the mileage on his body. But man with a tennis IQ as off the charts as Roger Federer must know that he isn't Pete Sampras.
His game has never been based on power serving, two-shot rallies, and basically bludgeoning opponents into submission. Exactly the opposite: Federer has achieved greatness by grooving himself into a deep rhythm, knowing where the ball is going to be, working the point until his genius seeps out with a seemingly routine winner.
Sampras won a lot of matches in his own way, by expending as little energy as possible and cruising to 6-4, 7-6 victories that bored many a tennis fan and made matches appear to be much closer than they really ever were. For his part, Federer of old won matches 6-1, 6-2, setting up his winners with precision and dazzling shot-making.
It's a flashier, genius brand of tennis.
It's endeared him to a lot of fans, but it also takes more of a mental toll.
If Sampras was Beethoven, then Federer is Mozart.
Federer has been both on and off in 2010. To his credit, he's looked excellent in the most important matches. But with his new style of play, comes a hoard of hungry ATP players,
Players who no longer fear Federer the way guys did a few years ago. They know that they have a shot against him. They look at matches against him as an opportunity, rather than a sentence. They know that he could possibly beat himself, which is something that hasn't been true in a while.
Federer can lose a match now; this brings renewed hope to everyone on tour when you consider that player pretty much knew they had no chance at all against the Maestro.
To be continued...
Part 2 continued here - http://forumhub.mayyam.com/hub/viewt...184384#2184384
Link - http://bleacherreport.com/articles/4...injury-defenseQuote:
Nick Bollettieri Unconvincing in Roger Federer 'Injury' Defense
By Sam Haddad (Contributor) on July 19, 2010
The renowned tennis coach and guru, Nick Bollettieri, is certainly a fan of Federer, which explains his recent willingness to refute what, it seems, has already been done and dusted over the previous two weeks.
Roger Federer indeed unleashed the dreaded "injury excuse" at a news conference after losing to Tomas Berdych, without being specifically asked by the interviewer (that is in answering the second question of the interview, directly related to his opponent), and without showing the normal signs (to me at least) of a player in some physical discomfort.
Federer's physical issues are not of the extent as to warrant blaming his Wimbledon loss to Berdych on them, as the player himself and some of his fans were doing, among them Bollettieri.
Call me old fashioned, but after years of following this game I always thought a tennis player exhibited certain mannerisms on court that showed injury was a factor: tell-tale signs such as a grimace, a stretch here or there after a demanding rally, or, heaven forbid, the call for the trainer. I can understand the reluctance of the latter for some, so as not to show weakness, but Federer displayed none of the above mentioned idiosyncrasies of the injured.
In fact, the only deviation from his now trademark calm exterior were several piercing COME ONS, the last of which occurring when Federer hit a scintillating backhand passing shot at 15-all in the final game.
He moved with his usual gazelle-like smoothness, albeit the diminished smoothness of a gazelle who has run from one too many lions in his lifetime. Federer may have been half a step slower that day, but that is due to the competition putting greater pressure on him than ever before...not to an injury-related weakened capacity, as some are claiming.
To go back to the third paragraph, Federer has struggled with some sort of back problem since the beginning of his career, but has also won a record 16 Grand Slams and countless other titles while playing on and off, with it.
Federer's sudden use of this affliction to explain his quarterfinal loss, which was not used by him to explain other major losses, was criticised by many over the world since that sunny Wednesday. And then came Mr. Bollettieri.
The prominent tennis coach, mentor, and founder of the Bollettieri Tennis Academy, was right on some points in his comments made to an Indian newspaper while on a visit to New Delhi. He mentioned Federer's back problem, which as earlier noted, has been almost a permanent fixture of this player from the beginning.
However, Bollettieri was wrong in stating that it was hampering him on that fateful day in late June, as it did, for instance, during his match with Andy Murray at the 2008 Masters Cup in Shanghai when Federer actually did call a trainer to have work done on that area.
Bollettieri was also right in noting that it will be tougher now for Federer to win at the majors because "players no longer fear playing him," amply proved by Berdych's fantastic and gutsy performance against the Swiss.
Again, the American coach missed the mark when stating that "Federer doesn't make excuses." Let me see if I can refute that.
Ok, here are a couple of examples: after losing to Novak Djokovic at the Miami Masters event in 2009, Federer blamed the wind for his loss, and after a tough loss to Nadal at Wimbledon two years ago, he said that fading light aided in his defeat, knowing full well that this factor was the same for both players.
I have written before about Federer's lack of shyness when looking to pin his loss on certain factors.
When Federer himself does not lay blame for his loss on a physical issue, sometimes a newspaper or its writer probably influenced by admiration for the player, obliges in this regard.
A case in point is the 2009 US Open. In the semifinals, Federer beat the dangerous Novak Djokovic in straight sets, playing an outlandish between-the-legs shot (a tweener to some) for an outright winner. A shot that, for most, is merely a defensive maneuver, but not for RF.
The next day, he came across the towering Argentine, Juan Martin Del Potro, and basically ran into a Sherman Tank. Del Potro was intent on winning that match and his missiles from both wings did not betray.
Federer admitted during the victory ceremony that Del Potro was "the best", and later praised the Argentine's efforts in achieving that monumental win at the post-match news conference.
But alas, soon afterwards a Swiss newspaper felt it necessary to state that its countryman was affected by a stiff back during the match, even though Federer himself made no mention of any physical struggles during the official news conference.
Aches and pains, especially towards the end of the season, are a normal occurrence among players. But even if this "stiffness" was of such acuity that it affected Federer's performance in that match, like the recent Berdych encounter, the Swiss showed no signs of it, unless his tirade at the umpire in the third set was caused by extreme pain!
Federer is still the same sublime player he was when he burst onto the scene in 2003 with his first Wimbledon win. However, the combination of his age (he will be 29 soon) and the recent ability of some of the younger players to figure out his game, has meant that his powers have somewhat subsided.
His single-handed backhand, beautiful to watch, is becoming a liability against certain players who are now capable of consistently exploiting it with heavy inside-out forehands, and eventually drawing out the error. For lefty Nadal, attacking that wing is as natural for him as a walk in the park, cross-court being the easiest way for him to hit his heavily-torqued forehand.
Also, some of the young guns are even able to go mano a mano with Federer off the forehand wing and still fancy their chances, a tactic that used to be akin to attempted suicide!
These players have the strength to really clobber the ball, hitting through the court at a greater pace than their predecessors.
After years on top, it is natural for Federer to begin a slight decline. His fans should not cry "injury" every time he loses a big match, because that would be unfair to the opponent who played well to beat him, and also to the man himself, who I'm sure really wants to enjoy this latter stage of his career.
Federer needs to get back to the drawing board, as it were, and carefully assess his current place in today's game.
Federer to work with Paul Annacone on trial basis
MIAMI (AP)—With his ranking on the decline, Roger Federer is working with coach Paul Annacone on a trial basis.
Annacone, an American, is the former coach of Pete Sampras. He also coached Marat Safin and Tim Henman, and is now the head coach of men’s tennis for Britain’s Lawn Tennis Association.
“I’ve been looking to add someone to my team, and I’ve decided to spend some days with Paul Annacone,” Federer said on his website Monday. “As Paul winds down his responsibilities working for the Lawn Tennis Association, we will explore our relationship through this test period. Paul will work alongside my existing team, and I am excited to learn from his experiences.”
In the past two months Federer has slipped to No. 3 in the ATP rankings, the first time since November 2003 he’s been that low. He trails No. 1 Rafael Nadal and No. 2 Novak Djokovic.
Federer has worked with coaches Darren Cahill, Jose Higueras and Tony Roche, but has also gone without a coach for extended stretches.
He’s scheduled to play his first tournament since Wimbledon beginning Aug. 9 in Toronto. He plans to play in Cincinnati the following week before heading to the U.S. Open, and may be accompanied by Annacone.
“They will take the necessary time to see if the relationship can work,” Federer’s agent, Tony Godsick, said in an e-mail. “I would assume that Paul, if he can work it in with his remaining responsibilities and schedule with the LTA, will join Roger for some of his upcoming summer hard court events in North America.”
Federer’s most recent title came in January at the Australian Open, his 16th Grand Slam championship. His record streak of reaching the semifinals at 23 consecutive major tournaments ended when he lost in the quarterfinals at the French Open.
At Wimbledon, he also lost in the quarterfinals following seven consecutive appearances in the final.
Federer topped the rankings earlier this year but was overtaken by Nadal after the French Open. That left Federer one week shy of tying Sampras’ career record of 286 total weeks at No. 1.
http://www.tennis.com/articles/templ...=6725&zoneid=4