Federer draw opportunity

First topic message reminder :

1st round is nothing to worry about, but from here on the book says its Davydenko, Tomic, Raonic, Tsonga, Murray and Djokovic.

If he were to go through that can anyone recall a tougher Slam?

Could be a big opportunity, but he'll need an effective short point strategy on this pudding of a court.

Tomic really struggled with the heat today, but you'd probably expect his match against Fed to be a night match and it won't be as hot as today anyway in all likelihood. The biggest weakness in Tomic's game though is his return of serve, so I'm not sure he'll bother Federer here.

I do think Fed's draw has been blown slightly out of proportion here, yes they're some decent players, but apart from maybe Tsonga if he's hot (and Murray and Djokovic have probably stronger QF opponents anyway) he'll get to the semis, and I don't think he'll expend much energy getting there, so not sure what all the fuss is about TBH. It's not like Raonic is going to constantly engage Fed in 30 shot rallies.

The tough part for Fed was of course drawing Murray rather than Ferrer, but to say that it will take a miracle for Fed to get through this draw is really overstating it.

Agree with MfC - OK, Fed's draw was not easy, but not as hard as some are trying to make out.

I think playing Tomic is actually a positive for Federer, as he's probably the nearest player in the draw to Murray's style of play (if not as effective a returner). I see fed coming through in 3 sets, probably with one break in each.

Raonic - the best big server of the new players, but doesn't yet have the court craft or guile to really challenge the top guys when they are focussed. Maybe Fed will drop a tie break set somewhere along the way, but will come though reasonably comfortably.

Tsonga - well, J-WT is what he is. Capable of beating anyone if he can string his best tennis together for a couple of hours, but he only manages to do this a couple of times a year against the top 4. Does at least have some past history of having done precisely this to Federer in slams. Their H2H suggests half the time it's an easy win for Federer, with the other half being split as close contests either way. Arguably the toughest match up for Fed of the 5-8 seeded players (in the same way that history suggests Berdych would be the toughest for Murray).

Obviously, the semi-final and final are tough, and being drawn in Murray's half is decidedly harder than being drawn to face Ferrer.

Thank yopu MfC and dummy_half my point exactly although some were ridiculously trying to call it the toughest draw ever. No way Pedro as Del Boy in Only Fools And Horses used to say.

From here on in I would be greatly surprised if Tomic takes more than a set off Roger. Why the confidence? Well first up Tomic is not ready to beat Roger in a slam as he lacks the maturity or physical fitness to turn Roger over. Also Tomic was a bit foolish pre-tournament talking about playing Fed and believe that it grated with Roger that he dared look that far ahead. Roger will be looking to put the young pup firmly in his place. In any case Tomic isn't playing well enough to beat Roger in a slam going by today's efforts against a player ranked around 120 in the world where he laboured to a win in four tight sets and it could have went to a fifth.

Raonic is too one-dimensional to beat Roger. His serve is the one real string to his bow as his return is poor. That being the case he won't break Roger's serve and can't see his nerve holding out when we get to the business end of each set. It could be a straight sets win for Roger say 6-4 7-5 6-4.

Tsonga is just too erratic. He'd need to buck the trend of his normal game and not have any dips and hopes Roger isn't quite on song and then there may be a chance in my opinion. After that it is the semis where you have to then expect to face the very best players in the world there on in.

Tricky draw but is it the hardest draw ever as some claim? No way.

No, they didn't Craig. The question was whether anyone could quote a tougher one.

Raonic is not as one-dimensional as often portrayed IMHO. I think he gets wrongly labelled - reminds me of various comments ahead of the Olympics "that JMDP can't move on grass" so will have absolutely "no chance" against Fed. Yeah, right.

Raonic has run Federer close in all 3 meetings, taking the first set in each (and losing out only a TB in the decider in two of the 3). It's not as if he's a rank amateur, it needs only a purple spell from him whilst Federer is perhaps slightly off his best on the day and who knows ............

We already know what Tsonga can do to Federer ......

bogbrush wrote:The question was whether anyone could quote a tougher one.

I just had look through some draws and checked Rafa's 2008 Wimbledon route to the final.

His SF was against the 31 year old, world number 94 Rainer Schuttler! I'd completely forgotten that!

He paid his dues in the final of course but, man, that was a cushy semi!

Rafa beat Andy Murray in Wimbledon 2008.

It Must Be Love wrote:Rafa beat Andy Murray in Wimbledon 2008.

In the QF though. It was Schuttler in the SF.

lags72 wrote:Raonic is not as one-dimensional as often portrayed IMHO. I think he gets wrongly labelled - reminds me of various comments ahead of the Olympics "that JMDP can't move on grass" so will have absolutely "no chance" against Fed. Yeah, right.

Raonic has run Federer close in all 3 meetings, taking the first set in each (and losing out only a TB in the decider in two of the 3). It's not as if he's a rank amateur, it needs only a purple spell from him whilst Federer is perhaps slightly off his best on the day and who knows ............

We already know what Tsonga can do to Federer ......

This is correct. Federer has never had an easy match against Raonic.

Raonic and Tsonga are worthy challengers.

I think Fed beats Tomic comfortably unless he's very rusty from the long lay off.

Tsonga is capable of taking the match off Fed's racket if he hits a purple patch - similar to AUS 08 against Rafa, W against Fed, and almost against Screech at the FO.

Raonic has proven to be a tough opponent for Fed in all of their matches. A guy who can serve like Karlovic but moves much better and is a better all round player is a dangerous opponent for anyone. I remember a couple of years ago he was drawn to face Rafa in the fourth rd of W (before Raonic withdrew due to injury) and many people at the time thought that could be a potential upset. He is obviously a better player now and thus even more dangerous. Any match against a guy that serves that big is a bit of a lottery.

bogbrush wrote:No, they didn't Craig. The question was whether anyone could quote a tougher one.

Of course there are tougher ones. It is late now but the one I posted up earlier I stand up as being tougher in my opinion and that was without even looking deeper. Besides I still fail to see what makes Fed's draw so tough match by match after all:-

Paire was no white knuckle ride.

Davydenko - the 17-2 head-to-head shows that as being a very nice match-up for Roger.

Tomic - yet to beat Federer and yet win a set from him. I find it odd how Bernard has gone from a youngster lacking in areas as seen by comments towards him on the youngsters thread into him being in a position to beating Federer in a slam.

Raonic - much like Tomic. Maligned on the youngsters thread and do believe he is yet to beat Federer. Yes he has a big serve but his returns are weak. Murray tamed him in straight sets in New York and would expect Federer to do something similar.

Tsonga is a great talent but generally Roger has his number if you look at their head-to-heads and Tsonga is renowned for his erratic spells in matches.

From the semis in well you only really expect to meet the very best so there is little to complain about there. Now you need to tell me why you think Fed's draw is the toughest ever without labouring on about age as I have yet to witness any clear signs thst Fed's body is falling apart on court.

Craig, I would argue that it's more how the draw compares to others, relatively speaking. I would break it down in a slightly different way:

Paire - Admittedly not the best opponent, but by no means the worst in the first round.

Davydenko - Good matchup for Fed, but one of the tougher opponents at this stage. He'd just reached the final at Doha and was clearly in decent nick.

Tomic - Plenty of buzz about him at this tournament, and yet another one in decent form. Could well prove the old adage that stats aren't everything. Even so, I agree with you that Federer should take him out easily. Even so, promising youngster with enviable attributes at his home tournament...not exactly easy in the third round. For example, look at Berankis for Murray.

Raonic - Highly ranked and regarded as a danger. Has tested Federer before. Serve's the main weapon of course, but he's not as one-dimensional as people think. Fed's the weakest returner of the big guns by some margin. Still don't think he has a hope against Fed over five sets yet, however!

Tsonga - I agree with you here. Berdych or JMDP would be more difficult tests, though Tsonga has looked good throughout the tournament thus far.

I do agree with you that there have been plenty of tougher draws before, but it's hardly a cakewalk, and certainly more difficult than either Murray's or Djokovic's at this particular tournament. I also think that people are panicking unduly about Federer's age, stamina and lack of match practice - the man himself wouldn't be there if he didn't back himself. Even so, just goes to show that there are two ways to look at everything, and the truth about the draw is probably somewhere in between the two extremes!

Well Silver I haven't said (apart from tongue in cheek) it was a cakewalk draw. Tricky is what I'd call it but certainly not the toughest ever and I agree with your opinions on each opponent.

I would be quite surprised if Tomic beat Federer. I just do not think his game matches well against Fed. How is he going to beat him? Scare him with his variety by showing he can slice the ball? He is not going to blow Fed off the court like Tsonga or Berdych might on a good day. Nor is he going to run everything down, his defense is not that great.

Raonic could be more dangerous. I think he is overrated too, but he does have a monstrous serve and has a passable game all-around, so, with some luck, he might give Fed trouble.

When evaluating Federer's AO draw, we need to compare it to Djokovic' potential path to the final (as they are the #1 and #2 seeds):

R64: Davydenko vs. Harrison
R32: Tomic vs. Stepanek
R16: Raonic vs. Wawrinka/Querrey
QF: Tsonga/Gasquet vs. Berdych
SF: Murray/Del Potro vs. Ferrer/Tipsarevic

The projected QF's are equally difficult IMO (only Tipsy would have been an easy QF opponent), but in all other rounds Federer's likely opponents are much more dangerous.

I see only 6 guys capable of winning this AO: Djokovic, Federer, Murray, Berdych, Del Potro or Tsonga. Only 2 of them are in the top half of the draw.

I am wondering how Federer's draw could have been any tougher.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

bogbrush wrote:No, they didn't Craig. The question was whether anyone could quote a tougher one.

Of course there are tougher ones. It is late now but the one I posted up earlier I stand up as being tougher in my opinion and that was without even looking deeper. Besides I still fail to see what makes Fed's draw so tough match by match after all:-

Paire was no white knuckle ride.

Davydenko - the 17-2 head-to-head shows that as being a very nice match-up for Roger.

Tomic - yet to beat Federer and yet win a set from him. I find it odd how Bernard has gone from a youngster lacking in areas as seen by comments towards him on the youngsters thread into him being in a position to beating Federer in a slam.

Raonic - much like Tomic. Maligned on the youngsters thread and do believe he is yet to beat Federer. Yes he has a big serve but his returns are weak. Murray tamed him in straight sets in New York and would expect Federer to do something similar.

Tsonga is a great talent but generally Roger has his number if you look at their head-to-heads and Tsonga is renowned for his erratic spells in matches.

From the semis in well you only really expect to meet the very best so there is little to complain about there. Now you need to tell me why you think Fed's draw is the toughest ever without labouring on about age as I have yet to witness any clear signs thst Fed's body is falling apart on court.

Well it wouldn't have taken much checking to realise Tomic took a set first time they met, but the real issue with him is form. i doubt Djokovic threw him that bone. As for Raonic, he's given Federer a tough match every time and of course he beat Murray last year didn't he?

prostaff85 wrote:When evaluating Federer's AO draw, we need to compare it to Djokovic' potential path to the final (as they are the #1 and #2 seeds):

R64: Davydenko vs. Harrison
R32: Tomic vs. Stepanek
R16: Raonic vs. Wawrinka/Querrey
QF: Tsonga/Gasquet vs. Berdych
SF: Ferrer/Tipsarevic vs. Murray/Del Potro

The projected QF's are equally difficult IMO (only Tipsy would have been an easy QF opponent), but in all other rounds Federer's likely opponents are much more dangerous.

I see only 6 guys capable of winning this AO: Djokovic, Federer, Murray, Berdych, Del Potro or Tsonga. Only 2 of them are in the top half of the draw.

I am wondering how Federer's draw could have been any tougher.

I thought Murray was in Federer's half?

Not when it matter ( what has been drilled in to me) in slams. he lost in straight sets (Raonic to Murray) so surely Fed deemed an even better player should have no we worries on that front. I really do think Fed fans are sweating needlessly. Raonic is a great server but is return game is not the best so cannot see where he breaks Federer’s serve so he needs to hold his serve and nerve and hope Federer’s nerve goes. This match will have brief rallies so if it goes as I think it will then Fed cpuld be off court in under two hours to keep him fresh.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

prostaff85 wrote:When evaluating Federer's AO draw, we need to compare it to Djokovic' potential path to the final (as they are the #1 and #2 seeds):

R64: Davydenko vs. Harrison
R32: Tomic vs. Stepanek
R16: Raonic vs. Wawrinka/Querrey
QF: Tsonga/Gasquet vs. Berdych
SF: Ferrer/Tipsarevic vs. Murray/Del Potro

The projected QF's are equally difficult IMO (only Tipsy would have been an easy QF opponent), but in all other rounds Federer's likely opponents are much more dangerous.

I see only 6 guys capable of winning this AO: Djokovic, Federer, Murray, Berdych, Del Potro or Tsonga. Only 2 of them are in the top half of the draw.

I am wondering how Federer's draw could have been any tougher.

I thought Murray was in Federer's half?

That confused me too

legendkillarV2 wrote:I thought Murray was in Federer's half?

carrieg4 wrote:That confused me too

He is, sorry my mistake I fixed it!

Still a mean draw to have

I am not doubting it is the toughest draw for the top seeded players - my objection was to it being labelled the toughest ever which really is not true. All slams offer fluctuating draws of varying difficulty for each of the top seeds and as fans we all must grin and bear it as over time it all equals itself out.

I think you've clarified your thoughts there CC and have summed it pretty fairly

(Mind you I'm still not tempted to put any hard cash on him getting through them all and as far as the SF's)

CaledonianCraig wrote:Not when it matter ( what has been drilled in to me) in slams. he lost in straight sets (Raonic to Murray) so surely Fed deemed an even better player should have no we worries on that front. I really do think Fed fans are sweating needlessly. Raonic is a great server but is return game is not the best so cannot see where he breaks Federer’s serve so he needs to hold his serve and nerve and hope Federer’s nerve goes. This match will have brief rallies so if it goes as I think it will then Fed could be off court in under two hours to keep him fresh.

Too dismissive of Raonic; facts is, he's given Federer three incredibly close matches that could have gone either way. Quite how that translates into routine escapes me, unless it's just to brush off the tough draw.

CaledonianCraig wrote:I am not doubting it is the toughest draw for the top seeded players - my objection was to it being labelled the toughest ever which really is not true. All slams offer fluctuating draws of varying difficulty for each of the top seeds and as fans we all must grin and bear it as over time it all equals itself out.

It wasn't, that's twice you've been pulled up for that.

If you were going to make the draw as tough as possible you'd stick Monfils in as the R1 opponent and probably swap Tsonga for Del Potro/Berdych. That would be it. Its a very tough draw but still one Federer should negotiate at least until the QF.

bogbrush wrote:

If he were to go through that can anyone recall a tougher Slam?

So enlighten me to what you meant by that then? Tougher in what way?

banbrotam wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well would love to see your enthusiasm of Murray when he is 32, I hope he would be playing by then even if can't be a contender

Of course this is true. Because you can predict the future

This is not a miracle analysis, simple facts, of course I understand your brain not tuned enough to understand it.

I have edited it CC,so now its clear who its pointed too.

Ic You have quoted the wrong person there. I never said that.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

If he were to go through that can anyone recall a tougher Slam?

So enlighten me to what you meant by that then? Tougher in what way?

tbf Craig, BB is actually inviting anyone to discuss which draw could be considered tougher in recent memory. I think you are being over literal imo.

I do remember thinking that Murray had a horrible draw, out of the three top guys, in this Olympics but it opened up nicely for him when Berdych for one was put out early. That is often the way with draws that look tough, they don't necessarily follow the most obvious route.

It wasn't that Murray couldn't or wouldn't beat all the guys in front of him had the draw at OG not opened up, nor is it the case that Fed can't beat all the guys in front of him here - it is the cumalative (spelling - brain not functioning today!) of several guys that are capable of taking a match to the wire in these cases that can just take the legs off a player.

Yes time please and I did say Federer has the toughest draw of the top seeded players here - no argument there. Just like in the past Roger's had favourable draws whilst Andy or Novak have had tough draws. It happens so no point labouring on about iy as seems to be being done overly much here. It was discussed on the draw thread to great extent in any case. I do find it odd as well how opinions change like the wind. Tomic and Raonic don't get high praise (almost the opposite on the youngsters thread) but now all of a sudden they are potential GOAT beaters. Also this draw cant surely be as tough as BB says as he is an advocate that this is not a golden era and has in the past lauded other eras. That being the case then surely other eras (if stronger) by pure logic are going to have tougher draws are they not?

More wrong stuff.

1. I have never called this a weaker era, just not Golden. Hence a tough draw today is..... tough. Same as in the past.
2. Tomic just beat Djokovic. Raonic has pushed Federer to the brink three times out of three.

Honestly Craig, you seem Hell bent on trying to distort my article.

Actually BB you need reminding how you whole- heartedly agreed with emancipator on the IT Must Be Love thread about youngsters. He was damning on the youngsters coming through calling them 'dire' to which you agreed in the next post and this was a mere four months ago. Jeez then Raonic and Tomic have gone from dire to being tough opponents touted as Fed slayers in such a short space of time. What changed your mind about them so much BB?

I think what BB was saying is that they were 'dire' in relation to becoming the next stars of the future generation- the current top 4 were doing a lot better at a younger age.
However in terms of hardness for a Round 3/Round 4 fixture they are tough (for that situation).

That's my interpretation of what BB is trying to say anyway, he can confirm whether Im correct.

However, 'dire' is a far from complimentary description.

Now I don't know how BB feels about the next two matches and he may just be feeling concerns that fans go through and it is clouded his thought patterns - I know as I have been there before. But just to go over this again Federer is still in decent enough nick whilst Tomic in my opinion is just not ready physically or mentally ready to beat Federer in a slam event. We shall see whether I am right or not in a few hours but if Fed does lose I'd be very surprised. Raonic - okay has caused Federer problems in the past but is yet to beat him even in a best of three sets match so to expect him to do it in a slam is a mighty ask. Raonic is a mighty server but his return game is not the best so where will he get service breaks from and if the sets end up tight then I'd bank on Fed's nerve and experience over Raonic any time. I am not a betting man but I suspect the bookmakers have bigger odds on Fed not reaching the semi than him getting there.

The opponents lining up to play Federer in this years AO would be frightening to most but to Federer? What's Federer got to be scared of? He might lose (so what) but he also might win. The only player that is genuinely scary to Federer isn't playing. Whenever this player is removed from the draw Federer is laughing (at Wimbledon literally. Ha ha!)

I'm impressed that Tomic could beat Djokovic; anyone has to be. He's also talking less stupidly.

I've always championed Raonic, I think he could be the deal.

What is DIRE is the state of under 20's, that's shocking.

I am surprised some still take the stagnant and quite stubborn view that the draw should be no problem for Federer. For a 31 year old I would imagine that recovery times between matches will take longer. Tomic is a pusher and that last type of player you want to be facing in the 3rd round of a Slam. I would be surprised if Tomic took Federer past 3 sets.

As for Raonic I wasn't impressed with his last outing at a Slam. For a guy who should be doing well on HC, struggled at the US Open last year. Kohly I think will cause Raonic problems. I watched Kohly v Isner last year at the US Open and is good on the return against the big serve. He might do Feds a little favour

You just beat me to mentioning Kholi. A good player.

Aye. Kholi v Isner at the US Open was intriguing. Kohli was hitting him off the court until the UE's started to rack up. If can avoid posting a high number of them, I think he can take Raonic out.

I think when judging Federer at the Slams is to look at history. Look at Sampras. He was the percieved GOAT after Wimbledon 2000 and he then started to lose to the young guns. I am not saying he is on par with Federer in the talent department. Just that once Sampras hit 30, the young guns took him out. Look at the players who took him out post 2000 in the Slams bar FO

Safin
Martin
Federer
Hewitt
Safin
Bastl

It shows age catches up with most players. That is why Federer's fortunes in BO5 is met with much optimism.

I am not saying the draw holds no worries for Fed and his fans but the real worries kick in later than the third and fourth rounds. I certainly can't see it happening but if Tomic were to win tonight how ground-breaking would that result be? For me it would be a big shock and would signal the beginning of the end for Federer as far as slam-winning goes. For Tomic it would elevate him from moody, petulant talented youngster into a player people would begin tipping straightbaway to win slams. I can't see it happening. Fed to win in three or four sets.

Would it?

Given the high praise and hype surrounding Tomic by observers, pro's and ex-pro's suggests he is looking to announce himself to the big stage. All that is missing is that big result. Tomic has the game to defeat Federer. His strength lies in his defence. He just lacks the mental discipline and consistency.

But is his defence in the same league as, say Murray and Djokovic and even if it were then his movement certainly isn't. Now Federer has managed to cope very well with Murray and Djokovic so why should Tomic present more of a problem?

No it isn't hence my consistency comment.

Tomic has the tools to improve. What is he 19 I think? He has time on his side. Has Federer coped well against Djokovic/Murray?

The combined H2H is 25-23 in his favour. It is a very close run thing.

Tomic will get fitter, as will other emerging players like Raonic, Harrison, Dimitrov.

Remember Feds was 19 when he took his biggest scalp. The omens could be in place for another. You never know.

No I am not saying in the future he won't develop into a player capable of beating the very best players but in my opinion he is not at that stage of development yet. Well at slams Fed certainly has handled Murray and that is the relevant thing as this is a slam. If memory serves Andy and Novak notched up early successes against Fed outside of slams admittedly when they were at a similar age to Tomic whereas he has yet to beat Fed in three attempts and remember they beat Fed when he was younger as well. All these things (at the moment) point to Tomic not being at the same point of development that Andy and Novak reached at this age.

bogbrush wrote:I'm impressed that Tomic could beat Djokovic; anyone has to be. He's also talking less stupidly.

I've always championed Raonic, I think he could be the deal.

What is DIRE is the state of under 20's, that's shocking.

It is pretty dire - no teenager in the top 250 apparently which is surely unprecedented in the open era? Very different picture on the WTA.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Tomic has the game to defeat Federer. His strength lies in his defence. He just lacks the mental discipline and consistency.

I do not see it that way and cannot see Tomic beating Fed. I would be kind of surprised if he takes even a set off him - unless Fed has a mental lapse. Tomic just does not have the tools to beat Fed. He has neither great firepower nor top-notch defence. He likes to move his opponents around and slice them to death, but I cannot see that giving any trouble whatsoever to Fed.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Ic You have quoted the wrong person there. I never said that.

I understand your frustrations CC, I edited it so its clear who that was directed at

Cheers ic.

Tsonga now looks the solid of 3 [Del Po, Berdych and himself]