Federer US bid sabotaged by Fish withdrawal

First topic message reminder :

Federer was building very nicely in this tournament but his hopes have been destroyed because of the bye over Fish.

Clearly he has no chance versus Berdych, who he would otherwise have beaten comfortably.

Curses!

Nore Staat wrote:Bogbrush whether you meant this as a joke it doesn't really matter now, as you were spot on with the result.

Yeah spot on, now that is a pretty funny joke. BB is definetly spot on something but since women and children are present I won't say what that spot is. Haaaaaaa!!!!! I love when you take a giant belly flop in all of your pompousity. I guess irony is never lost when friend BB is around.

Nore Staat wrote:Bogbrush whether you meant this as a joke it doesn't really matter now, as you were spot on with the result.

Yeah spot on, now that is a pretty funny joke. BB is definetly spot on something but since women and children are present I won't say what that spot is. Haaaaaaa!!!!! I love when you take a giant belly flop in all of your pompousity. I guess irony is never lost when friend BB is around.

How can writing an article to laugh at you which causes you to make a complete fool of yourself on the forum be a fail?

Sounds like a result to me. I'm putting this in my file marked "socal ownership threads". It's a thick file.

I can't wait to see a new winner in NYC. Djokovic's boring game will be brutally eaten and spat out by either Delpo, Berd or the Muzz. Will Djoker buy a new egg chamber when he's pushed out of USO?

hmmm....so Djokovic's game is much more boring than the other hard-hitting baseliners of Delpo, Berdych and Murray? That makes sense.
Or perhaps you just dont like the guy. Personally I think Djokovic will come good again.

How is Murray a 'hard hitting baseliner'? Don't think Craig will agree with you on that one, and he watches Murray like a vulture. Anyway, just happy it was a QF loss and not a 2nd round loss like somebody had at Wimbledon.

I think it's now been proven that a withdrawal is a very tough thing to overcome in a slam. So the next time a player A has to play player B who he feels he will lose to, will he withdraw before the match, thus spelling doom for both of them? For eg, if the third ranked player has to play the second ranked player in the semis, and feels he will lose anyway, he can withdraw so that the second ranked player will lose in the final at least for sure and thus lose valuable points.

So you dont think Murray has one of the hardest BHs on tour? Murray can hit as hard as the others but he's smarter with his play, he mixes it up alot more (as Nadal does too). Where I do agree to some degree is that Delpo and Berdy tend to play one speed, hard, and if it doesnt work they tend to come off the rails. Thats why Djoko, Nadal, Murray and Federer with their ability to mix it up more and adapt game plans are way out in front of the others.

I find them all interesting in different ways, tennis was never meant to be played in just one way....interest comes out of the tour as a whole. Except Granollers, just dont make me watch him.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:... like a vulture. ...

These beautiful creatures are on the verge of extinction and are likely to go extinct:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C9n_3diBeA

Josiah Maiestas wrote:How is Murray a 'hard hitting baseliner'? Don't think Craig will agree with you on that one, and he watches Murray like a vulture. Anyway, just happy it was a QF loss and not a 2nd round loss like somebody had at Wimbledon.

how sad you are really.... what are you going to do until 2013 ? You so obviously miss him more than I do.
A LOSS IS A LOSS in any round of a GS especially when you are favourite to win.no amount of trying to draw attention away from it will help one iota.... and especially when you ( your idol) cant give credit to his oponent but only say how badly he played. his arrogance has no bounds . here have .it will help you to swallow the sour grapes

Back from hiding Haddie?

Berdych is an exciting player and makes tennis look easy, unlike that guy with soft knees, who lost to Rosol in 2nd round.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:How is Murray a 'hard hitting baseliner'? Don't think Craig will agree with you on that one, and he watches Murray like a vulture. Anyway, just happy it was a QF loss and not a 2nd round loss like somebody had at Wimbledon.

Like a vulture?? Err no a vulture is a scavenger who feeds of dead carcasses. Granted your remark may have been caused by the imbalance in your mind following Fed's loss last night.

It's funny Craig. You have people on here saying Fed has won a lot of his slams due to his serve, yet his serve was easily blunted by Berdych. Berdych always has troubles with Nadal and Djokovic serve, and yet the serve doesn't help either of them to win, apparently. Double standards much?

Love is in the air, dah dah dah, dah dah dah

That's the great thing about tennis - it brings out the spite, anger, bitterness and jealousy in us all

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Back from hiding Haddie?

Berdych is an exciting player and makes tennis look easy, unlike that guy with soft knees, who lost to Rosol in 2nd round.

Im not in hiding JM just that you troll the same comment around every thread you talk too much and say nothing. you are boring beyond belief.
It would not educate you any more if I actually gave you the medical report on what Rafa actually did in that match it would be wasted on you anyway. But do be patient little boy he will doubtless be back firing on all four cylinders in 2013 and then you can have a field day and you wont be accused of kicking a man when he is down. So as Craig says ..little vulture you´ve picked those particular bones clean. Now get back to your Fed worshipping. In the mean time Ill sit on the side lines watching you make a fool of yourself.

Haddie-nuff wrote:

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Back from hiding Haddie?

Berdych is an exciting player and makes tennis look easy, unlike that guy with soft knees, who lost to Rosol in 2nd round.

Im not in hiding JM just that you troll the same comment around every thread you talk too much and say nothing. you are boring beyond belief.
It would not educate you any more if I actually gave you the medical report on what Rafa actually did in that match it would be wasted on you anyway. But do be patient little boy he will doubtless be back firing on all four cylinders in 2013 and then you can have a field day and you wont be accused of kicking a man when he is down. So as Craig says ..little vulture you´ve picked those particular bones clean. Now get back to your Fed worshipping. In the mean time Ill sit on the side lines watching you make a fool of yourself.

Why do some posters always have to get so personal - to be quite honest too much inappropriate emotional involvement.

Definitely had enuff when the forum descends to this kind of bickering!!

Lukas Rosol is a hero to the game and saved mankind on that fateful day of June 28th 2012.

Definitely had enuff when the forum descends to this kind of bickering!!.
-----------
I agree had enuff when this forum panders to poster who troll the same garbage every thread how long ago was Wimbledon ???? get a life

Haddie-nuff wrote:Definitely had enuff when the forum descends to this kind of bickering!!.
-----------
I agree had enuff when this forum panders to poster who troll the same garbage every thread how long ago was Wimbledon ???? get a life

Who is pandering? Are you suggesting Julius or Laver should censor a poster because he writes comments that rile you? We are all a bit repetitive on here - the subject matter (ie tennis and its players is not huge)

I'd rather that the moderators encouraged posters not to launch unnecessary personal attacks on other posters. I don't think with your posting history about Federer in the last few I have seen, you are in any position to take the moral high ground over Josiah.

There is no point whatsoever in a forum if we can't all disagree sometimes!

“Elsewhere,” according to Federer, didn’t include rust due to the walkover he received in the fourth round from Mardy Fish. Asked if the time off affected his forehand, Federer said, “I have been there before. Once I had six and a half days off and I ended up winning Wimbledon. I don’t think that was the issue tonight.”
nuff sed

There is no point whatsoever in a forum if we can't all disagree sometimes!

------------

EXACTLY so what then is your point. I was disagreeing ..other than that you are defending JM. and adding your halfpenneth to the mix... and Its been my recollection in the past that he is perfectly able to defend himself so who appointed you his bodyguard. OK ??? I was suggesting nothing to nobody so who now is making a personal attack... try looking up the definition of duplicity.

I am sure that you think you have put me in my place HE

My point is that it is perhaps not nice to go around accusing people of being duplicitous - at least it's not where I come from.

LuvSports! wrote:“Elsewhere,” according to Federer, didn’t include rust due to the walkover he received in the fourth round from Mardy Fish. Asked if the time off affected his forehand, Federer said, “I have been there before. Once I had six and a half days off and I ended up winning Wimbledon. I don’t think that was the issue tonight.”
nuff sed

Any chance of a link please?

sure bud its steve tignor's take on it.
quote is a few paragraphs down

http://www.tennis.com/news/2012/09/no-better-moment/39299/#.UEiMxLKPWVo

This quote from Federer seems to give quite the opposite point of view where he says the match against Fish might have given him more confidence. - “I don’t think the schedule was a problem for me,” Federer said. “I should come in here with tons of energy and ready to go. Who knows, you know, if you get that day, that match in with Fish, come through with more confidence, maybe the first three matches didn’t quite give me that. Who knows? I don’t put that down as a negative, really."

Tennisanorak wrote:This quote from Federer seems to give quite the opposite point of view where he says the match against Fish might have given him more confidence. - “I don’t think the schedule was a problem for me,” Federer said. “I should come in here with tons of energy and ready to go. Who knows, you know, if you get that day, that match in with Fish, come through with more confidence, maybe the first three matches didn’t quite give me that. Who knows? I don’t put that down as a negative, really."

I think he was thinking aloud in response to the question about whether the layout affected him, and then concluded "I don’t put that (i.e. the missed match) down as a negative, really"

Tennisanorak wrote:This quote from Federer seems to give quite the opposite point of view where he says the match against Fish might have given him more confidence. ... “... Who knows, you know, if you get that day, that match in with Fish, come through with more confidence, maybe the first three matches didn’t quite give me that. Who knows? ..."

I am not sure how a hammering from the mighty Fish would have helped Federer's confidence

Federer's first serve was in the low 110's, he just wasn't at the races. Also, his forehand was on jet lag, Berdych will never let you get away with serving poorly, will see if Murray can keep a high paced serve against him.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Federer's first serve was in the low 110's, he just wasn't at the races. Also, his forehand was on jet lag, Berdych will never let you get away with serving poorly, will see if Murray can keep a high paced serve against him.

I agree. I watched the first set and went to bed as it was clear Fed was not going to get the win. His serve was poor and be was skying the ball so many times. He missed two makeable volleys at the net I think one at bp and another in the tb. That summed up the match really. Berdych played well and kept the pressure on but I think Federer was below his best and if he was at the level he was at say in Cincy, he would have won. I was not convinced of his performance coming into this match though many reported he was playing well. I thought his game was lackluster to be honest. I did not think he could have gone all the way somehow here.

This leaves the tournament open for Murray I think. Look at his chances now. No Federer in semis (even though he could beat him but its a psychological lift knowing the man who has beaten you in 3 slam finals won't be on the other side of the net), no Nadal either. Djokovic is looking shaky and showing signs he is mentally not as strong (the constant scolding, moaning etc) and no other real threats in the draw left. His best chance is definitely now.

FedsFan wrote:

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Federer's first serve was in the low 110's, he just wasn't at the races. Also, his forehand was on jet lag, Berdych will never let you get away with serving poorly, will see if Murray can keep a high paced serve against him.

I agree. I watched the first set and went to bed as it was clear Fed was not going to get the win. His serve was poor and be was skying the ball so many times. He missed two makeable volleys at the net I think one at bp and another in the tb. That summed up the match really. Berdych played well and kept the pressure on but I think Federer was below his best and if he was at the level he was at say in Cincy, he would have won. I was not convinced of his performance coming into this match though many reported he was playing well. I thought his game was lackluster to be honest. I did not think he could have gone all the way somehow here.

This leaves the tournament open for Murray I think. Look at his chances now. No Federer in semis (even though he could beat him but its a psychological lift knowing the man who has beaten you in 3 slam finals won't be on the other side of the net), no Nadal either. Djokovic is looking shaky and showing signs he is mentally not as strong (the constant scolding, moaning etc) and no other real threats in the draw left. His best chance is definitely now.

Exactly, I wasn't impressed against Verdasco at all yet people were saying "he's cruising". I thought he looked quite sloppy and I sensed this was coming (and said so on the forum).

If there's anything useful from this it's evidence in discussions that Federer is not at the level of yesteryear; he can still do good things (like win Wimbledon and be #1!) but this isn't prime Fed. Personally I think it's reaction time that's suffered, which is why he finds returning so tough now against bigger hitters.

BB,

Glad I was not the only one! I didn't think he was cruising as I watched highlights vs Young and thought he could have done better considering the opponent. Verdasco had his chances too but because it was Verdasco somehow Fed could get away with it not someone like Berdych who has always troubled him. What a time for TB to decide he is going to make up for a poor summer!

I think Fed could benefit with a long break. He has played too much tennis I think for the summer as its been practically non stop since Madrid. Disappointing though to make a QF exit but I think the USO is not a tournament he can conquer now as I think it suits the younger player with flexibility such as Novak.

Looking back on the year it has been great and beyond anything I imagined him to do so lets hope he can keep reaching the latter stages of the next events for the year.

I wonder if you need a sloppy/poor match that you win to help you get through a GS tournament. Fed won in straight sets in his first three matches, but is now out. At the French he struggled against del Po and Goffin but made the semis and he twice had difficult matches at Wimbeldon yet won it.
Djoko was in all sorts of trouble at the French but still made the final and Murray has had his difficulties here but is still standing. Exception to all this seems to be Rafa at the French this year where he had no trouble at all until the rain in the middle of the final.

I think a nice break after this will do him the World of good. He has indeed played an awful lot and while there should be no looking for excuses at all, I agree that a break might help.

Last year he emerged from New York, took time to think and won it all from there on. A repeat dose would do nicely, and why not?

time please wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Definitely had enuff when the forum descends to this kind of bickering!!.
-----------
I agree had enuff when this forum panders to poster who troll the same garbage every thread how long ago was Wimbledon ???? get a life

Who is pandering? Are you suggesting Julius or Laver should censor a poster because he writes comments that rile you? We are all a bit repetitive on here - the subject matter (ie tennis and its players is not huge)

I'd rather that the moderators encouraged posters not to launch unnecessary personal attacks on other posters. I don't think with your posting history about Federer in the last few I have seen, you are in any position to take the moral high ground over Josiah.

There is no point whatsoever in a forum if we can't all disagree sometimes!

The problem is 'time please', it's very difficult to stop yourself getting riled by posters who;-

1) Have shown themselves to have no respect for 3 of the Top 4. Rarely have such posters praised a good one win against their favourite player
2) Due to 1) they then have a set of standards for the other members of the top 4, that they refuse to apply to the other 3; i.e. use tiredness as an excuse for their man, but don't accept this for the others and worse talk in a disparaging manner about Nadal and his fitness issue - even alluding to taking naughty stuff
3) Often get caught out, with their daft double talk - but rather than even jokingly admit they are wrong, they then start insulting the poster

I personally fail to see why such posters bother to comment when all they want to do is be rude about the other players and then the fans of these players

I'm all for disagreeing and have done so many many times, with the likes of Bogbrush and Lydian, but can honestly say they come across a good, rounded individuals, who you wouldn't mind having a pint with

Whilst we can never excuse insults, sometimes certain posters not only ask for it, but desire it to get the reaction that fulfills their rather sad lives

i.e. in life there are some people who delight in making people miserable

banbrotam wrote:I'm all for disagreeing and have done so many many times, with the likes of Bogbrush and Lydian, but can honestly say they come across a good, rounded individuals, who you wouldn't mind having a pint with

I don't drink, but cheers!

I have been known to, cheers!

(BTW, can you imagine if we all met in a pub after all these years of knowing each other online...it would be so weird!)

Totally. I have no doubt we would all be nothing like our mental images of each other.

In my mind you all have even less hair than I do - even the women!

In fact, especially the women.

Tennisanorak wrote:This quote from Federer seems to give quite the opposite point of view where he says the match against Fish might have given him more confidence. - “I don’t think the schedule was a problem for me,” Federer said. “I should come in here with tons of energy and ready to go. Who knows, you know, if you get that day, that match in with Fish, come through with more confidence, maybe the first three matches didn’t quite give me that. Who knows? I don’t put that down as a negative, really."

Ahhhh, attack Federer BB and Josiah he is making a fish effect argument. God I love it when after i kick in you the jimmy your idol lines one up plants it there as well. Thank you for the honest reading TA i don't get a fair shake from many on this site but you are always in that category, federer was in no way equivocal about the layoff impacting him or not. As a player in post match you don't want to generally even bring that up. Djokovic was more certain than federer in 2011, he came out and said in no way did the layoff impact. federer didn't do that in his swiss way he actually implies that no it didn't impact him and yes it might of impacted him all at the same time. I think it did impact him, he was playing lights out tennis he had held 90 of 91 service games and his serve was just mediocre last night by fed's standards, mediocre at best. Who knows but it is a factor that may have played a role, we will never know. My opinion is that it probably played a minor but material role in last nights events. The real factor of course was berdych playing very well although he tried to give it to federer at the start of the match and after he got up a break in the third as well, so it wasn't a match where thomas completely took the racquet out of fed's hands.

What part of "I don't put that down as a negative" got past you? Hell,even his musing wasn't about the break but the desirability of beating up on Fish!

Just when you think socal can't make a bigger fool of himself, he comes right back and surprises us.

Entertainment at its best.

I wouldn't say the walkover made any difference on the result.

Evidence in that was that Roger broke Berdych in the first game of the match so no rust there. More of a issue I reckon was that he went into the match short of a really competitive match in the tournament. Up until last night Fed had had cakewalks. The fact that Berdych hung in there and took the first set to a tie-break showed that mentally he was tuned in and his game was working very nicely with few break points whilst Federer hit some shockers and wracked up unforced errors. Berdych level and consistency remained high and never allowed Federer to get a foothold in the match. In the third set Berdych level dipped slightly whilst Roger's rose and his unforced errors dropped but the key came in the fourth set. Berdych refound the high consistency keeping the pressure on and Roger's game fell apart again and Berdych remained mentally solid to serve the match out.

Yes funny that is not what Roger is saying in the middle part of the statement. Not to mention all the other commentators I can produce dozens of them, well respected ones saying the same thing I said. That it was a factor, despite all your lies I never said Novak would have certainly won if not for Foggy.

Here is the distilled version so you can understand. BB does thread after thread pretending that only a giant moron or wild conspiracy theorist would believe that the layoff could have impacted Novak in that match. Roger plays his worst match in weeks after a 4 day layoff, half the media in the world who commentated on the match and both Mac brothers make the same arguments. This is very amusing indeed like I said you lack any ability to understand how often you are wrong about everything.

Did you notice how little credit Fed gave to Berdych. I think it's only been brought up once so that might be worth going over a bit. Oh and the time off had nothing to do with the loss, he lost at wimbledon playing like crap too, as BB says he's been doing that every so often since the golden era started in 2008. Even if he'd played better Berdych was very good. I don't see why this loss needs to be explained away and even his fans haven't tried to do that. No one wins all the time unless you're Rafa.

Federer never says the break hurt him. He wishes he'd beat up on Fish, but concludes there's no negative about it. Now I don't know about you but citing that as evidence in your favour really is quite funny.

As for running around to find media pundits desperate to fill a few seconds is weak as urine, really it is. I don't know if it's dawned on you but the whole forum finds your position a bit of a laugh really. In England we have an old saying you could take note of; when you find yourself in a deep hole the first thing is to stop digging.

Please ignore it.

break_in_the_fifth wrote:Did you notice how little credit Fed gave to Berdych. I think it's only been brought up once so that might be worth going over a bit. Oh and the time off had nothing to do with the loss, he lost at wimbledon playing like crap too, as BB says he's been doing that every so often since the golden era started in 2008. Even if he'd played better Berdych was very good. I don't see why this loss needs to be explained away and even his fans haven't tried to do that. No one wins all the time unless you're Rafa.

True, though I can't quite get why Federer is worse, as you say, than he was pre-2008 yet still #1 but this era is 'Golden'. Can you explain?

As for Rafa, why on Earth they only rank the guy as #3 when he wins all the time is beyond me. Is there a glitch in the system?

bogbrush wrote:

break_in_the_fifth wrote:Did you notice how little credit Fed gave to Berdych. I think it's only been brought up once so that might be worth going over a bit. Oh and the time off had nothing to do with the loss, he lost at wimbledon playing like crap too, as BB says he's been doing that every so often since the golden era started in 2008. Even if he'd played better Berdych was very good. I don't see why this loss needs to be explained away and even his fans haven't tried to do that. No one wins all the time unless you're Rafa.

True, though I can't quite get why Federer is worse, as you say, than he was pre-2008 yet still #1 but this era is 'Golden'. Can you explain?

As for Rafa, why on Earth they only rank the guy as #3 when he wins all the time is beyond me. Is there a glitch in the system?

Break in the Fifth was being sarcastic BB.

As I hear/read it Federer pointed out the break made no difference as he went six days without a game at Wimbledon a few years ago and still won it that year.

bogbrush wrote:
As for Rafa, why on Earth they only rank the guy as #3 when he wins all the time is beyond me. Is there a glitch in the system?

He doesn't win all the time, no one does
He does however currently have the best W/L ratio out of all active players.