Following defeats to Djokovic (again at the Australian semis) and Nadal (Roland Garros & Wimbledon) in 2008 many thought Roger Federer was a goner.
He had suffered a heavy defeat at the hands of Nadal as he tried to win Roland Garros for the first time in his career. But worse yet, his run of five consecutive Wimbledon titles had come to an end, following a 4 hour 48 minute epic, widely thought of as the greatest match of all time.
The following year, Federer once again lost to Nadal in five sets, this time in Melbourne. The tears that ensued seemed to be symbolic to many critics in the media. Federer was done. He would not win another Grandslam.
The response was fairytale-like. After three consecutive final losses at Roland Garros, Federer battled through some tough earlier rounds to the final, where he dismantled Robin Soderling, attaining the career Grandslam.
At that stage, it was hard to find an expert who didn’t consider Federer to be the greatest male singles player of all time. He assured any doubters with a sixth victory in Wimbledon and a fifteenth Grandslam title.
How Federer came back to dominance cannot be fully known. Partly perhaps, because his game was more complete, although that is a hard thing to imagine.
He added the drop-shot to his arsenal, proving a killer blow on the clay. It was his willingness to make necessary changes in his game that saw him rise to power once again. We saw hints of it during the American hard-court swing, but he was still not consistent enough with his strokes.
As his new game became second nature, everyone witnessed the devastating effects.
More recently, challenged with quarter-final losses at Roland Garros and Wimbledon, again Federer faced criticism and predictions of an “imminent fall from the top”.
In New York, at the U.S. Open, having hired new coach Paul Annacone, we saw a different Federer who had been beaten by Thomas Berdych in straight sets on the All-England Club’s lawns.
An attacking, aggressive style which overcame all of his opponents until he reached the semi-finals with two match points. Federer lost, but he was showing signs of great improvement. He was in transition.
Following the U.S. Open, there was no doubt who was the dominant player on tour. Not Rafael Nadal, who had just become the eighth man to complete the Career Grandslam, nor Djokovic, who had played some of his best tennis at Flushing Meadows.
Federer reached the final of all but one of the last five tournaments of the year, winning three titles, including a victory against Nadal at The O2. But despite this great success, Federer found little in the way of challenge, his improved “all-out attack” mentality had proved good enough to overcome nearly every opponent.
A challenge did not arise until the Australian Open, this year. In the second round, he met Gilles Simon, the Frenchman on his return from injury, and whom Federer had failed to beat in their two previous encounters.
With a comfortable two sets to love lead, Federer looked as if he was about to beat Simon for the first time with relative ease. But Simon stepped it up as Federer lulled in the third set, his speed and ability to absorb Federer’s power proved too much to handle, and took the next two sets, with Federer looking in deep trouble. He managed to pick up his game at the right time and take the fifth set.
The real challenge however, arrived in the semi-finals, with Novak Djokovic at the opposite side of the net. For the first time in years, the Serb’s serve was a weapon to be fearful of, and he was coming into this match hot.
He also had the knowledge of having beaten Federer at the very same stage three years earlier. Djokovic was a daunting opponent. He took the match in three close sets, blowing Federer away with a newfound agression.
What proved vital in Djokovic’s win was Federer’s obstinate view on his new game. This was mainly adopted to take on the likes of Nadal, a defensive, almost passive player, not the new and improved Djokovic. His aggression from the back of the court as well as incredible defense was to be admired.
The odds are, even if Federer had been able to change his game effectively, the match would have been almost impossible to call. However, regardless, he was not able to change his game.
Federer was not quite comfortable enough with his new style to implement the necessary changes. But he is getting there; he is in transition. And when he does get there, he will be a very difficult force to contend with.
For the first time in over six years, Roger Federer does not hold an active Grandslam title.
Immediately after his exit from Melbourne, critics once again predicted the demise of Federer, with headlines like “Federer will never win a Major again” reappearing, and a strange feeling of déja vu along with them.
He was “done” in 2009, and went on to claim his first French Open title, and a record number of Grandslams. He was “done” in the middle of 2010, and went on to dominate the second half of the season. He is “done” again. What will he go on to achieve this time?
It is very dangerous, very dangerous indeed, to write off Roger Federer.
More Roger Federer insight: Roger Federer’s tough road to the French Open
A gripping tale: Why Federer vs Nadal at Wimbledon 2008 was the greatest final ever
Rob
Guest
Eat your words doubters. Wimbledon number 7 and now a chance for olympic gold for feds!! Author was right
Ryan
Guest
Who here knows that Federer's mom is South African?
Janell
Guest
Hey there, That they do one day they will learn not to doubt him or nit pick but by then pigs will be flying..
Rain
Guest
Hey janell, Jealous and rude people always try to pick him, later they find that they are failed to do so. He's true gentleman and my champion,too. :)
Janell
Guest
Novak's parents are a disgrace unfortunately they will never change no matter how stupid they sound, that quote your talking about was truly pathetic the same year and event he had mono and was ill she had the nerve to say that? If that was my mother I'd never want to show my face. Same can be said about murrays mother she is not far behind in her rather stupid remarks...she should just concentrate on her of a son and leave fed alone.
Janell
Guest
Very well said indeed! I had my first Roger experience at Wimbledon a few years ago couldn't get over how effortless he's shots were and what a truly nice person he is very down to earth will talk to anyone, My dream came true in London when I watched he's matches during the WTF seeing him lift the trophy and then having my picture with him was amazing I'll never forget he's kindness towards our RF gang, he remembers us from other tournaments which always shocks me..lol It's probably the reason people look for something negative to say because he doesn't give them anything to bite on so to speak, there's many reasons why he's loved for he's grace, sportsmanship, talent, kindness the list is endless...Why the constant picking on him I will never understand.
Rain
Guest
No matter how hard Djoker tries to play as Roger Federer, he will be always Djoker. What do you think?? I don't like this Djoker kinded attitude. Have some great attitude like RF has!!
Rain
Guest
Yes, i agree with that point,too. Many players can't play as they want. Everyone is forced to play POWER based game. This is the reason why Federer could not play those critical points very well. Djokovic was trying push him and played defensive when he felt. This did not allow the real Federer to play. It is embarassing,too. Djokovic was taking too much time to serve and break the opponent's rhythm. I don't think Djoker can win multiple slams on different surfaces. Let's see what happens next??? I am disappointed with Djokovic's mother's argument the real King Federer. She talked so rudely. Federer is not done and i am sure. He will roar again and will complete his quest of 20. Come on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mys
Guest
I got to see Roger play for the first time (3 matches) at the Aus Open, and am kicking myself for leaving it for so long! It felt surreal to have that man a metre from me (and he is even better looking in person :) !) Roger recieved the largest, most heart felt, most spine tingling welcomes onto court of all the players at any of the games that I attended. It was magical. Everyone knew they were witnessing a living sporting legend, and more importantly an extraordinary person, both on and off the court. He is humble, considerate, gifted and never speaks ill of any of his competitors. He is the perfect all round player, and should never be disrespected. He should never be written off. Anyone else (at his age, at his stage in his personal life, at his level of achievements etc) wouldn't bother taking on a new coach, willing to learn more and further improve his beautiful style. Yet HE obviously loves what he does so much that he is prepared to do it and he should only be congratulated and supported for doing so. I couldn't imagine one player that would argue his brilliance and I do not believe there will be anyone that will ever surpass his achievements, as a whole - not just the no. of GS. Obviously there will come a day when he retires, and the tennis world will never be the same, but it is not for the sceptics/doubters to decide when this occurs. He has so much more brilliance to show us. He is true class. There will never be anyone in the league of Roger Federer. In a nutshell, stupid people of the world "stop picking on my Roger" & go waste your time supporting Roger wannabes.
Janell
Guest
There has always just been a few points here and there in their matches unfortunately Roger couldn't win those important points, but it still has a lot to do with the surface at the AO it's so slow at night that it just didn't help him as he said himself, the slice, the kick serve had no effect I'm not trying to make excuses but it didn't help...
vishrut
Guest
djokovic won 119 points against 111 points won by federer in ozzie open 2011.. though the match was over in st sets. federer didnt play critical points well enough. And thats very unlike federer. its very easy to say roger is done. he isnt. He will continue to dominate along with rafa. Just heard, djoker is now carrrying some hsoulder injury as well. It just shows how much it takes to remain in form and win slam, let alone multiple slams in single calendar yr. Hats off to the world top 2. cheers \m/
Janell
Guest
Exactly Rain, As Paul Anacone said "it is still a work in progress" and we have seen this new style working (WTF) with dramatic results, it will take time as any player who is working on new things will tell you even for a great champion like Roger who has most shots in his armour, just needs to define these new tactics then who knows he might well go on a run again.....I just hope it comes together at wimby because he is Mr Wimbledon!
Rain
Guest
I agree with Janell. People talk too much and sometimes even they don't know what is to play tennis at 29 yrs old. I don't think anyone would have done so much at this age. Roger is still winning title, won doha and that fantastic performance at WTF. He is living legend and still setting records no one can ever think to achieve them. He loves tennis and this is why he is still at their top position. I believe in him that he will surely make 20 GS. This is new Roger Federer, so results will be awesome and he took enough time till today. Now he will show who's the real champion?
Janell
Guest
It is part and part of getting older and others catching you up as time goes by it's not the first time and most certainly won't be the last this happens too, all players start to lose their magic if you will but with Roger it is still there but maybe not as constant as it was once which as I said comes with getting older even tho 29 is still young in tennis years it's not when u have much younger guys coming after you, I just wish people would also remember he's human and can't always be at he's best. But he is and always will be the best tennis player I've had the privilege in watching live many times no-one like him and never will be.
TimmyTom
Guest
I am a huge Federer fan and I think he is the best sportsman ever! But, I still think Federer has lost a bit of his magic. He is not the same Federer we have seen all these years. He might win another grandslam but I dont think its going to be any easier for him now. He justt doesnt have his Aura around him anymore while playing against the top 5.
kim
Guest
You only have to listen to what Roger himself says.He finds it frustrating that he gets written off so quickly.He knows hes not past it,i know it but unfortunately a lot of people dont know it.He will prove a lot of people wrong.Just wait and see.Do people forget that the media were writing off Nadal in 2009 because of all his injuries? Look what he came back to do in 2010! Remember Sampras winning the 2002 US open? He had been written off as well and he was past his prime where you can tell by the way Federer is playing is that hes still at peak form.Just because he doesnt win every time doesnt mean he wont win again in the future.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
I don't think any slam winner has ever gotten lucky. Those who suggest that Federer was lucky to win the French simply do not realise how difficult it is to win a slam. While not all GS victories are on the same level, it would be surely be extremely difficult to argue that any player won a slam mostly due to luck (luck is involved to some degree with most sporting triumphs).
amazonfan
Roar Guru
"The writer above conveniently forgets that, when Federer won his French Open, that was because Nadal was injured and could not provide effective opposition by getting to the stage to challenge Federer. Nadal did not defend his Wimbledon crown as well. So, in some ways, luck was involved in the “resurgence” of Federer in 2009, not because he was able to re-engineer his game. Simple. But true." I disagree. I don't think that Federer won the French Open because Nadal 'was injured and could not provide effective opposition by getting to the stage to challenge Federer', but because Federer was the best player at the 2009 French Open, and as such I don't think the writer is conveniently forgetting anything. The fact that Nadal was injured is IMO completely irrelevent. You can only beat your opposition, and if your biggest rival is injured, that is not your responsibility. The same goes for if your biggest rival isn't playing well or was defeated early on. The fact that Nadal missed the French worked in Federer's favour, of course, but it does not render his victory undeserved. He was as deserved a French Open champion as any other champion in the history of the championship. Plus, Nadal was no certainty to win anyway. Many people seem to believe that Nadal is guarenteed victory at the French every year; I don't. I don't believe in gimmees, and I don't believe that Nadal was a certainty to win the French in 2009 even if he was fully fit. It doesn't matter anyway, as he failed to win, and ultimately, why he lost is IMO irrelevent. Furthermore, although Nadal failed to defend his Wimbledon crown, Federer IMO was (and is) still the world's best grasscourter, so I definitely don't think that Federer was 'lucky' that Nadal did not contest the Championships. In 2009, Federer made all four GS finals winning two slams. He is the only player since Laver to have reached four GS finals in a single season, and very few players win multiple slams. Even if you think that some 'luck' was involved (although I would argue that most players need a bit of luck to win a slam), you don't win two slams in a single season unless you're brilliiant. Federer experienced a resurgence in 2009 precisely because he is a genius and had a magnificent 2009 season, and not because of 'luck.'
Janell
Guest
Hang on now let's not say Roger got lucky to win the FO when most of he's matches were 4/5 setters against players that can play very well on clay, nadal in contrast played well in his matches even against Robin but Robin just outplayed him and didn't mentally cave in as most do against him, who's to say Roger wouldn't have beaten nadal if he had gotten through? to say that Roger got lucky is wrong....And did u not see the Wimbledon final? I hardly call that an easy ride.
Janell
Guest
Nice article indeed, I agree it is very dangerous to write of the best player in the world (to me) he has proven a number of times he still has the shots, mentality, heart to win titles. Roger beat the top guys soundly at the WTF last year when most had not given him much of a chance because of what nadal had done. I find it disgusting that so many can forget what he has achieved and still is, to disrespect him in such away to have headlines like "he's done" is beyond me...When nadal didn't win anything for 7/8 months I didn't see any such things written he was and always gets the benefit of the doubt the same can not be said about Roger. Of course there will be a time when he will find it more difficult to win the big events but it's not yet and hopefully not for a while....Cmon Federer!