2018 Wimbledon Championships - Men

[Moxie]

Saying today is anything but a choke is crazy. I'm willing to say a match like IW this year may not be a choke but what happened today is the definition of it. Roger basically sank like a dude wearing cement shoes in the Atlantic after not winning the match at 5-4 in the third. That affected him negatively and he was immediately broken and it just kept going from there. All great athletes can choke time to time. I know it's the much hated word but it happens.

Talking about why Nadal fights more and is much more mentally tough in certain situations is subjective. I don't think Fed sucks at putting away matches like this due to arrogance or stubbornness. I've watched the guy enough to feel him getting tight from thousands of miles away. Hell, I can tell this from just following the damn scores of his match. I knew he was toast after the third set, that should tell you something.

I didn't say that Roger didn't "choke." He did. What I've been trying to say, including with the MJ Fernandez quote on the other thread is that to say he "choked" and leave it at that doesn't explore why he choked. MJF says he lost confidence. So, why? Is it that he's older? You (and others) say this has happened to him a few other times, including when he was younger. So not age, then. Could be arrogance or underestimating opponents, or that he doesn't handle being man-handled very well. Whatever. If you're happy with "choked," I won't deny you that pleasure. But it's a denigrating term. It also doesn't explore at all why it happened. It just slags him off and leaves it at that.

 

[DarthFed]

I didn't say that Roger didn't "choke." He did. What I've been trying to say, including with the MJ Fernandez quote on the other thread is that to say he "choked" and leave it at that doesn't explore why he choked. MJF says he lost confidence. So, why? Is it that he's older? You (and others) say this has happened to him a few other times, including when he was younger. So not age, then. Could be arrogance or underestimating opponents, or that he doesn't handle being man-handled very well. Whatever. If you're happy with "choked," I won't deny you that pleasure. But it's a denigrating term. It also doesn't explore at all why it happened. It just slags him off and leaves it at that.

It's happened close to 20 times overall and this is his 4th match he's lost at slams after having MP's. Why did it happen again? Probably because it's happened so many times that it's always in the back of his mind. It's the opposite of arrogance, it's fear and folding under a familiar pressure he hasn't handled well. And manhandled? You really think a dude like KA is capable of manhandling Roger at Wimbledon without serious help from Fed? Ridiculous...

There is a reason I called the match as soon as he punted away the 3rd set. Wouldn't have mattered if he was playing a stiff like KA or my dead grandma, he wasn't winning once he blew it, he never does.

 

[Moxie]

It's happened close to 20 times overall and this is his 4th match he's lost at slams after having MP's. Why did it happen again? Probably because it's happened so many times that it's always in the back of his mind. It's the opposite of arrogance, it's fear and folding under a familiar pressure he hasn't handled well. And manhandled? You really think a dude like KA is capable of manhandling Roger at Wimbledon without serious help from Fed? Ridiculous...

There is a reason I called the match as soon as he punted away the 3rd set. Wouldn't have mattered if he was playing a stiff like KA or my dead grandma, he wasn't winning once he blew it, he never does.

I never said that KA didn't have help from Roger. It's clear that his game was abandoning him. But he did rise to the opportunity. Fed on grass...some would have wilted anyway.

 

[DarthFed]

I never said that KA didn't have help from Roger. It's clear that his game was abandoning him. But he did rise to the opportunity. Fed on grass...some would have wilted anyway.

37 year old Fed who has sucked often at Wimbledon for over a decade. He had a good Wimbledon last year but he's hardly been a force there for many years now. A lot of people would've taken advantage...

 

[Jelenafan]

I never said that KA didn't have help from Roger. It's clear that his game was abandoning him. But he did rise to the opportunity. Fed on grass...some would have wilted anyway.

KA could have wilted on numerous occasions. Giving that break back in the 2nd set, MP down in the 3rd set, the 0-40 triple breakpoint down at 5-6, in the same set, etc.

Not saying that Roger didn’t falter, but there’s been a lot of players who have imploded losing to Roger playing at less than his best (like probably 95 percent of the time...) so KA deserves credit for having the balls to hang tough. Those serves of his were squarely on him, not Roger.

 

[Moxie]

KA could have wilted on numerous occasions. Giving that break back in the 2nd set, MP down in the 3rd set, the 0-40 triple breakpoint down at 5-6, in the same set, etc.

Not saying that Roger didn’t falter, but there’s been a lot of players who have imploded losing to Roger playing at less than his best (like probably 95 percent of the time...) so KA deserves credit for having the balls to hang tough. Those serves of his were squarely on him, not Roger.

I've been trying to be kind and understanding to the pain of Federer fans, but you are right to give Anderson his due, of which he's gotten very little. I do get it. Because when Rafa lost at RG in '09, it did sort of feel like someone had died. (Sports fans can feel that way, and I admit it.) And this is Roger at nearly 37, so it's rough. But the talk of this being the end of the world was we know it, and the worst thing to happen in any sport, the increased slagging off of Nadal is really a bit too much.

 

[DarthFed]

I've been trying to be kind and understanding to the pain of Federer fans, but you are right to give Anderson his due, of which he's gotten very little. I do get it. Because when Rafa lost at RG in '09, it did sort of feel like someone had died. (Sports fans can feel that way, and I admit it.) And this is Roger at nearly 37, so it's rough. But the talk of this being the end of the world was we know it, and the worst thing to happen in any sport, the increased slagging off of Nadal is really a bit too much.

You're trying to pass your own agenda that Roger is arrogant and entitled and that's why he lost. That or his skills are so pathetic that he should lose at a major to Anderson.

Not sure why and it's way off base here. The guy completed one of the biggest chokes in ATP history to a barely above average player in one of the biggest moments of his career. What more is there to say than that? It goes beyond talent, arrogance, age. Sometimes a spade is a spade.

 

[Jelenafan]

I've been trying to be kind and understanding to the pain of Federer fans, but you are right to give Anderson his due, of which he's gotten very little. I do get it. Because when Rafa lost at RG in '09, it did sort of feel like someone had died. (Sports fans can feel that way, and I admit it.) And this is Roger at nearly 37, so it's rough. But the talk of this being the end of the world was we know it, and the worst thing to happen in any sport, the increased slagging off of Nadal is really a bit too much.

Credit also to Anderson for making the USO finals and the Wimbledon SF within a year.

 

[Moxie]

You're trying to pass your own agenda that Roger is arrogant and entitled and that's why he lost. That or his skills are so pathetic that he should lose at a major to Anderson.

Not sure why and it's way off base here. The guy completed one of the biggest chokes in ATP history to a barely above average player in one of the biggest moments of his career. What more is there to say than that? It goes beyond talent, arrogance, age. Sometimes a spade is a spade.

I'm absolutely not trying to pass off my own agenda, and I have been kinder to you than that. Also more respectful to Roger and his massive talent. I've never said less. I'm actually just asking the question of why that happened. You say he's just pathetic. I say he's too talented to be pathetic on a given day, so why did he collapse? He said in his presser that it just wasn't there for him, so maybe that is all. Forgive me for looking for more answers. You don't own the right as to whether or not we ask questions when a major upset happens.

 

[DarthFed]

I'm absolutely not trying to pass off my own agenda, and I have been kinder to you than that. Also more respectful to Roger and his massive talent. I've never said less. I'm actually just asking the question of why that happened. You say he's just pathetic. I say he's too talented to be pathetic on a given day, so why did he collapse? He said in his presser that it just wasn't there for him, so maybe that is all. Forgive me for looking for more answers. You don't own the right as to whether or not we ask questions when a major upset happens.

Well if you're waiting for Federer to admit he choked that's not going to happen. It's very rare an athlete is going to admit the pressure got to him especially right after it happened. As for why it happened I think it's mostly due to it being a very familiar occurrence. After he lost MP and got broken right away he had to be thinking "not again" and his play plummeted from there on out. In 2011 against Djoker did anyone actually think he was going to win after he blew 2 MP's again? I sure didn't. Why? Well again he had to be thinking deja vu and he barely put another ball in play after that.

 

[Moxie]

Well if you're waiting for Federer to admit he choked that's not going to happen. It's very rare an athlete is going to admit the pressure got to him especially right after it happened. As for why it happened I think it's mostly due to it being a very familiar occurrence. After he lost MP and got broken right away he had to be thinking "not again" and his play plummeted from there on out. In 2011 against Djoker did anyone actually think he was going to win after he blew 2 MP's again? I sure didn't. Why? Well again he had to be thinking deja vu and he barely put another ball in play after that.

The deja vu moments against Novak at the USO (that really was a complete repeat) and against Rafa at various times, I get, and you really could see them wash across his face. But I don't see how he was having a deja vu moment v. Anderson, even if this has happened to him all of 4 times in his 20-year career. He had two sets to make it right. And the muscle-memory of plenty of wins at Wimbledon. Of course he's not going to call himself out on a choke. All he can do is be sanguine about it and move forward.

 

[DarthFed]

The deja vu moments against Novak at the USO (that really was a complete repeat) and against Rafa at various times, I get, and you really could see them wash across his face. But I don't see how he was having a deja vu moment v. Anderson, even if this has happened to him all of 4 times in his 20-year career. He had two sets to make it right. And the muscle-memory of plenty of wins at Wimbledon. Of course he's not going to call himself out on a choke. All he can do is be sanguine about it and move forward.

It's happened close to 20 times overall in his career and in this case it doesn't really matter who was across the net or the setting. He lost MP and he has all those similar losses against all odds playing in his mind. You're looking too much at the X's and O's here, this was all about psychology. The past can be our best friend or worst enemy depending on the situation.

 

[Moxie]

It's happened close to 20 times overall in his career and in this case it doesn't really matter who was across the net or the setting. He lost MP and he has all those similar losses against all odds playing in his mind. You're looking too much at the X's and O's here, this was all about psychology. The past can be our best friend or worst enemy depending on the situation.

20 times in his career that he's lost from 2 sets up? Or 20 times that he's had MP and lost? Whichever way, is 20 a lot of losses in a 1200 win career, or whatever it is now? Funny you talking about ignoring the X's and O's, though, since that's all you generally care about.

 

[DarthFed]

20 times in his career that he's lost from 2 sets up? Or 20 times that he's had MP and lost? Whichever way, is 20 a lot of losses in a 1200 win career, or whatever it is now? Funny you talking about ignoring the X's and O's, though, since that's all you generally care about.

Nearly 20 times from MP up. That's a crap ton. I don't know the numbers on Nole and Rafa but I highly doubt either are above 5 and certainly there's aren't quite as shocking as some of the Fed meltdowns. I know Nadal has never lost a major from MP up and for Nole it may have happened once before he was great.

 

[Moxie]

Nearly 20 times from MP up. That's a crap ton. I don't know the numbers on Nole and Rafa but I highly doubt either are above 5 and certainly there's aren't quite as shocking as some of the Fed meltdowns. I know Nadal has never lost a major from MP up and for Nole it may have happened once before he was great.

You know him better than I do. I guess it's just one of his Achille's heels. Even TMF has them.

 

[DarthFed]

Just found this:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.te...novak-djokovic-s-losses-wasting-match-points/

Djoker has 3, none in majors. Fed is now up to 19. Rafa actually has 7 which surprises me. Can't think of a single one aside from maybe Simon in Madrid 2008. Murray with 5

 

[Jelenafan]

According to Wikipedia, Fed has a win loss record in his career of 1161-W /254-L. I dunno, one would think Federer has a lot more muscle memory of winning and pulling out of tough scrapes

Again up to this Wimbledon here are Roger's MP's lost matches...

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2008/jul/06/wimbledon.tennis8

So the Djokovic/Federer 5 sets matches in back to back USO SF's in 2101/11 Novak had MP's in the FIFTH set. The Rafa/Federer Italian Open Roger had MP's in the FIFTH set. The Safin/Federer AO SF in 2005 Federer had MP on Safin in a FOURTH set tiebreaker. ETA: Haas saved MP's in 5th set at 2002 AO.

So isn't this the first time that Federer has lost a 5 set match where he was 2 setsup AND had MP's in the 3rd set? Where is the muscle memory for that precise scenario previously?

Now an interesting stat would be how many matches have the top players won or lost when they had MP's in a single game and then failed to close it out in that particular game but then went on to win the match.

Another stat would be how many 2-0 set leads did Federer go on to win, I would venture to guess a TON. Didn't he have 4 straight set wins over opponents in this Wimbledon alone before the quarters. That's alot of good memories fresh in the noggin.

Another stat would be how many times has Federer been up 2-0, lost the 3rd set and then went on to win in 4 sets?? I'm guessing ALOT of matches...So even losing the 3rd set to KA, he still had 2 sets to close it out as he had done previously.
Where is the muscle memories of all those wins??

Where is the muscle memory of beating Kevin Anderson 4 straight matches and not even losing a set, so he loses a set and suddenly it's preordained he's going to lose because all his previous losses in his career crowd out any other thoughts??

C'mmon. ; )

 

[DarthFed]

Basically nothing you wrote there gives any context. The fact is almost every time he loses MP in a tight match he completely implodes.

In this case the match wasn't tight but he immediately dropped serve afterwards and then it absolutely was different and he clearly never recovered. Against Djokovic in 2010 he lost two MP's, still had deuce on Nole's serve at 5-4 and then barely won another point. Against Nole in 2011, blew 2 MP's, had deuce on his own serve at 5-3 and barely won another point. Safin 05, lost MP in 4th set, missed a million BP opportunities in the 5th and lost it to a mental midget. DP in IW this year, blew 3 MP's but still serving at deuce, loses to a guy who hasn't won anything in 9 years including a final decisive 7-1 TB score.

Roger has a lot of muscle memory winning but he has very little when it comes to missing opportunities to close the match in tight situations and then righting the ship. I'm not talking Roger going up 40-15 at 5-2 and missing a few MP opportunities before closing it out. This match was unique because he was up by so much but he then created the tight match by dropping serve right away. If he holds at 5-5 there he maybe wins the match, the fact he got broken right away and dropped the set made it immediately similar to the ones I just mentioned. Now he had to right the ship and fast and he never came close to doing it. And again I am pointing out that I called the loss immediately after he dropped the 3rd set, Im not doing that to prop myself up either, I knew he was basically toast even at Wimbledon against a 3rd tier guy as I've seen the same show all too many times. Again the word I'm stressing is PSYCHOLOGY. I sense I understand Fed's psychology better than most and that's why I was horrified as soon as he got broken. After the 3rd set Roger wasn't thinking about all the majors he had won and the fact that his opponent shouldn't cause him any trouble, I can guarantee you that.

These guys are human, if you think Roger's enormous amount of failures after blowing MP wasn't on his mind during this meltdown (particularly in sets 4 and 5) then I got a nice bridge to sell you.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Nearly 20 times from MP up. That's a crap ton. I don't know the numbers on Nole and Rafa but I highly doubt either are above 5 and certainly there's aren't quite as shocking as some of the Fed meltdowns. I know Nadal has never lost a major from MP up and for Nole it may have happened once before he was great.

You only look at one side of the coin. Yes, it is true that Fed has lost 20 matches after holding at least one MP in it. However, he has also won 18 matches after saving at least one MP . Most memorable are his wins against Monfils at USO 2014 and against Cilic in Wimby'16. In the grand scheme of things, they all even out. You are unnecessarily bashing my avatar too much. Get over it.

 

[DarthFed]

You only look at one side of the coin. Yes, it is true that Fed has lost 20 matches after holding at least one MP in it. However, he has also won 18 matches after saving at least one MP . Most memorable are his wins against Monfils at USO 2014 and against Cilic in Wimby'16. In the grand scheme of things, they all even out. You are unnecessarily bashing my avatar too much. Get over it.

I never said he wasn't great in making huge comebacks. He's proven to be the best at that. That's part of what I mean about different aspects of mental toughness, for the most part he is tough as nails. I wouldn't say it's evened out though as I can't remember any major he has won after saving MP. He won 2014 USO QF vs Monfils and 2016 Wimbledon QF vs Cilic but he lost the semis after that.