Montage of Agassi/Federer Duels
Printable View
http://federermagic.blogspot.com/200...rod-laver.html
Roger Federer vs. Rod Laver
Laver and Federer were both born in August 43 years apart. Federer's birthday is August 08, 1981, while Laver's is August 09, 1938. It makes comparing them straightforward as the grand slams make up this way too. For example, Federer won his second Wimbledon in 2004 at the age of 22, while Laver won his first Wimbledon 1961, at the same age of 22. And so on.. get the drift?
Green shaded boxes represent Rod Laver playing in Pre-open Era amateur division. Blue boxes represent Rod Laver playing in Pre-open Era under Pro division, whose 3 Grand slam equivalents were French Pro, Wembley and US Pro. These divisions were eliminated in 1968 French Open with the beginning of the Open Era, represented in White boxes.
Note: RF/RR age is the age of both Roger Federer and Rod Laver when the tennis season starts (Jan 1). By the time they play US Open, they would have had their birthday and older by one year. (Like Federer won his first US Open at age 23, though he was 22 when the tennis season started).
http://federermagic.blogspot.com/200...jorn-borg.html
Similar to Roger Federer vs. Pete Sampras summary, here's an attempt to match the Swedish ice-man, Björn Borg's achievements against Roger.
Federer's birthday is August 08, 1981, while Borg's is June 6, 1956. So, they are 25 years apart, which makes it convenient to compare them. Some similarities include Borg is 0/9 at US Open where Roger has won four straight times, like Federer is 0/9 at French Open where Borg has won six including four straight. Borg and Federer were known to be brats during junior days and then developed an ice-cool demeanor later on. Also, both Borg and Federer has won Wimbledon five straight times, an all-time record and both are junior Wimbledon champions as well.
Also, during the era when Borg played, Australian was not considered a serious slam and most of the pros never played them, at least not consistently like modern pros do.
Note: RF/BB age is the age of both Roger Federer and Bjorn Borg when the tennis season starts (Jan 1). By the time Borg played Wimbledon and Federer play US Open, they would have had their birthday and older by one year. (Like Federer won his first US Open at age 23, though he was 22 when the tennis season started).
http://federermagic.blogspot.com/200...e-sampras.html
I am not a big believer of stats. That said, there are several interesting coincidences about the careers of Pete and Roger. And unsurprising it is. Though they have vastly different approach to tennis as well as slams, here is an attempt to celebrate the coincidences rather than as a comparison between them.
Sampras and Federer were both born in August ten year apart. Federer's birthday is August 08, 1981, while Sampras's is August 12, 1971. So, at the time of writing, Sampras is 33, while Federer is 23. And the grand slams make up this way too. For example, Federer won Wimbledon 2005 at the age of 23, while Sampras won Wimbledon 1995, at the same age of 23. And so on.. get the drift?
Sampras won his half of his 14 slams (7), at his mid point, at his 8th year as a pro (of his 15 year career).
Note: RF/PS age is the age of both Roger Federer and Pete Sampras when the tennis season starts (Jan 1). By the time they play US Open, they would have had their birthday and older by one year. (Like Sampras won his last US Open at age 31, though he was 30 when the tennis season started).
Sampras vs Federer on Wimbledon 2001:
Some stats about the historic match in the Round of 16. It was the only time they both met and since Sampras has retired, Federer holds a 1-0 lifetime head to head against him. Going into the match,
* Pete had never lost a 5-set match at Wimbledon before he lost to Federer 7-6, 5-7, 6-4, 6-7, 7- 5.
* He had a streak of 31 straight wins at Wimbledon, tying him with Rod Laver.
* Pete had won the seven of the last 8 Wimbledons going into the 2001 Wimby.
* Pete was looking for his 100th win at Wimbledon when he met Federer. He got his 100th win at Wimbledon with his 3-set win over Martin Lee in R128 the next year. It was also his last win at Wimbledon.
For the record, you can get the 2-disc DVD of the match from Adrian. He sells it for US $7.50 [See more]. It is nice to Roger that young and playing a heck of a great match.
http://federermagic.blogspot.com/200...-analyzed.html
1. When preparing to serve, first visualize the delivery you wish to hit. (Federer already knows which serve he'll use as he steps to the line.) His weight is off the front foot, and he has a slightly open stance for a serve. His front toe is angled to ease his hip and shoulder rotation. But this is more a matter of style, not fundamentals.
2. Federer keeps his weight on his back foot as his tossing arm goes out to the side of his body, facilitating shoulder and hip rotation. For his serve, it's imperative that he not let the toss get behind his body. Your toss can often determine the success of your serve. Federer's weight begins to move forward as his arms goes up. His racquet and palm are facing downward, which keeps his shoulder muscles relaxed and enables him to achieve a whip-like motion.
3. This is Federer's power position. His tossing arm is fully extended and his body is prepared to explode into the serve. His shoulders are tilted, and he's leaning forward. Notice, too, how the hitting elbow is in line with his shoulders. This will give Federer excellent throwing action. His flexed knee and hip and shoulder rotation make his serve extremely difficult to read. From this same service position and toss Federer can hit his flat, kick and slice serve to any area of the box.
4. To push off into the serve, Federer has his weight completely on his front leg. As his legs thrust upward, the racquet drops down behind his back with the face perpendicular to the ground and away from his shoulders. This will help him generate power. His non-hitting arm also drops down for the racquet to come through. And Federer's balance is perfect. Recreational players tend to break the sequence at this point by losing their balance.
5. Federer makes contact with the ball slightly to his left. Any inconsistency he has with his serve is due to letting the toss drop too far. Here, all his power has propelled him off the ground as he gets full vertical extension into the court. Good extension and natural forearm pronation are both crucial. Federer doesn't pull his head down prematurely, which is another common mistake. His tossing arm tucks in, slowing down his torso, which creates a whipping action at the top of the motion.
6. After Federer makes contact with the ball, the momentum of his swing carries him into the court. His eyes are looking forward, and his head is up for balance. His hitting arm has fully pronated while his other arm continues the stabilization process. This allows his shoulders to face his opponent head on so he can react quickly for the return. Federer, like all big servers today, lands on his front foot, which lets him either follow the serve to net or get set for a ground stroke.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/8...s-strange-days
What a year—2008 was singular in its drama and painful in its resolution as the year bore on like an awl through metal, scraping nerves raw and torturing psyches unendingly in anticipation of the next bitter blow to be dealt the chosen one...Roger Federer...or so it seemed to Federer fans.
You can bet that every tennis pundit worth his or her salt is pacing unmercifully, measuring, trying to identify that final piece of the puzzle—the one unique, sharply articulated and perfectly angled piece detailing 2008’s biggest story of the year in men’s tennis...
Subtle shades of interpretation need assimilation into your argument when it comes to presenting your particular point of view—that is, if you wish to convince people that your opinion—and yours alone—is spot on.
The year began with an explosion of the unexpected in Aussie land and as reporters descended we must consider—what was more stunning—Novak Djokovic winning the Australian Open or Roger Federer not winning it? Subtle shades of difference abound depending where you stand and how you interpret the results.
There were many, many firsts this year that received heavy press coverage including Andy Murray’s first round dismissal of Roger Federer in Dubai...the real beginning of Roger’s strange days...
Take that one step further down the calendar and consider the 2008 French Open Final—what was more significant, Rafael Nadal winning the French Open for the fourth consecutive time or Roger Federer losing it in straight sets with barely a whimper of resistance?
It was a stunner from all aspects. In fact many articulate sportscasters were left speechless—at a loss to explain the strange final.
The piece de resistance could very well be the regal restructure that culminated at Wimbledon—what was more astonishing – Rafael Nadal winning his first major NOT on clay or Roger Federer losing on the sacred grounds of Wimbledon as he tried to capture his sixth consecutive crown and overtake the Iceman, Bjorn Borg?
It gets progressively more difficult to decide which focus and what event merits that ultimate designation as best of the year.
As we move forward, we cannot overlook the 2008 Summer Olympics—the grand stage for all major athletic competition on display in Beijing.
What event captured the headlines and the imagination of athletes and fans alike—Rafael Nadal winning the Olympic Gold in singles or Roger Federer and fellow countryman Stanislav Wawrinka coming back from defeat in singles to win the Gold Medal in doubles for Switzerland?
The unrestrained joy of the Swiss duo seemed to reign supreme but Nadal fans felt equally blessed and equally vindicated by his win.
On to the US Open and New York—what was more remarkable—that Roger Federer captured his fifth consecutive U.S. Open Championship in New York by defeating Andy Murray in straight sets or that Andy Murray made it to his first grand slam final?
Overall, what struck the press as more significant—the fact that Roger Federer did not win a Master’s Series Shield in 2008—the first time since 2003 he has not won at least one or that Rafael Nadal won three—as did Novak Djokovic, including the year-end championship with Murray winning two and Nikolay Davydenko and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga each winning one.
This is a fait accompli—the young guys are no longer content watching from the play pen as the big guy demonstrates his special brand of ball...they want in on the action and they plan to win.
Patently obvious in this litany of high points during the 2008 season—is the constant presence of Roger Federer...no matter what story you select, he remains solidly a part of it.
Finally, we arrive at the particular point in time where the season was defined. What made reporters scramble to their laptops faster—to announce to the world that after 237 weeks at No. 1, Roger Federer lost his vaunted top ranking? Or that after three years of chasing it, Rafael Nadal finally achieved the number one spot?
The No. 1 story is this seismic shift at the top of the men’s tennis as Federer’s game faltered and failed at inopportune times—staggering the mighty man and his legion of fans. His detractors are loath to revisit the illness that plagued him all year...but it remains a factor—a piece of the puzzle.
The rise of Nadal is extraordinary because he overcame Federer to get to the top.
Federer never had to mount such a campaign or wrestle such an opponent to reach the apex of the men’s game. Nadal fought Federer, for many the best to ever play the game, for three long years...
The battle waged between the two during the clay and grass seasons was epic in proportion and spectral in consequence. When Federer was able to re-embody his game, he fought ferociously to retain the keys to his kingdom...
Nadal was not only fighting to gain the No. 1 ranking, he also had to fend off a charge by Djokovic for the No. 2 spot. That he was able to hold on and advance was the true mark of a champion.
So whether you choose to side with Federer fans who see the loss of the number ranking only from Federer’s perspective or whether you choose to see Nadal’s ascension to the top of the men’s game as Nadal and his fans see it…the event was the focal point of 2008 and its final resolution turned the season around—as Nadal began to fade and Federer found enough game to win his 13th grand slam in New York.
Will 2009 be equally as compelling? It can’t fall far behind. There is much to settle in 2009. Will Nadal retain his ranking or will Federer regain it? Or will Djokovic or Murray step into the slot? Will Federer win No. 14 and tie Pete Sampras? If he does, when and where?
Ah, there is much ahead tennis fans...rest up, take a deep breath and get ready to be dazzled because it all starts again in a month!
Roger Federer Pure Class
Listen with loud volume - :notworthy:
Roger Federer's Five US Open Titles
Its extremely funny for me to see him fall down on the ground whenever he wins a title :lol: