A shot which Federer could really try to improve?

[mrzz]

It is more a situation than a shot, in fact. I've been noticing it for a long time, and let me check with you all if you have the same impression.

The situation is when Federer has a "sitter" shot close to net, and he waits as long as he can trying to see if the opponent guesses one side. In a lot of these cases he either hits in the direction of the opponent or the opponent guesses right, and Federer ends up loosing a point which seemed to be already his.

This happened in this tournament against Berdych (I guess twice), against Raonic and against Djokovic (and I just saw the first two sets, even missed some games).

As I said before, I have noticed that long before this weekend. It is just a curiosity, but it puzzles me nevertheless.

 

[Puppet Master]

I think I know what you are talking about, but just to be sure, could you link a video of it in the match against Djokovic?

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Mrzz, I know exactly what you are talking about, but I do not see it as a shot that needs improving as much as a shot "selection" issue. He has brain cramps in those situation here and there. I am not sure if he will change the way he approaches those moments.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

I know that shot too, but all players makes loads of errors every match, if not they'd win 6-0, 6-0. and zero points conceded.

fedster missed that shot twice v skeletor birdy ?..so what ?..still wasted him in straights. he'll miss it again and win. another match he'll hit winners with it everytime and lose.

 

[Haelfix]

Funny, I think thats one of his best shots. He's won oodles of points off of that shot over the years and it was quite idiosyncratic and caused problems for much of the tour for a very long time.

Of course when a guy as studied as Federer is on tour for nearly 20 years, many shots that used to work won't anymore as people start anticipating the point patterns. That's just the nature of success.

 

[Front242]

Roger has been infuriating me for a long time now when he has a sitter of an easy put away and instead of hitting to the open court in the opposite direction he goes full retard and hits the ball right back to his opponent. Baffling and he does it a lot.

 

[mrzz]

Sorry, Puppet Master, checking on the highlights I could not find it, even if the points that start at around 3:05 and 7:10 (in Pavlik's highlights) have similar situations, but are not exactly the case. On this particular match, I would guess it was on the start of the second set, but I really don't have the time now the watch the whole match searching for it (even if I should, given that I opened the thread). From the other two mentioned matches, I'm pretty sure the shots are on the highlights.

Murat got it right, it is a shot selection issue. But I always have the impression that he waits as long as he can, and then loses the options as the ball starts to get to low.

Anyway I'm still laughing at the "goes full retard" part.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I know what you're talking about. It's when he delays hitting the forehand until he sees his opponent commit to one side, right? Of course, as a result, it means he just "guides" the forehand as opposed to letting it rip. It used to work often, but I think people are wising up to it now so sometimes it might be better to just take the 50/50, pick a side, and let rip.

 

[Federberg]

I do know the shot you mean, but I think part of the problem for us watchers is that we have selection bias. We see the one or two that fail, but the zillion of those put aways that work we don't even consider

 

[mrzz]

It used to work often, but I think people are wising up to it now so sometimes it might be better to just take the 50/50, pick a side, and let rip.

But it should not be even 50/50, as he has almost the full court at his disposal. It seems, sometimes at least, that he wants to wrong foot the opponent.

I do know the shot you mean, but I think part of the problem for us watchers is that we have selection bias. We see the one or two that fail, but the zillion of those put aways that work we don't even consider Smile

It is always good to bring up selection bias, which explains a lot of perceptions out there, but having worked with statistics one way or another for most of life, I swear I am aware of that. In fact, apart from execution errors, which should happen one time or another, this is the kind of situation were you should have virtually 100% success. I've been trying to notice it somebody else does that too, but so far I could not find anyone. But good to know that people have, one way or another, noticed that too.

I still like Front's explanation: he goes full retard for a split second.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Mrzz, this reminds me of another shot that Roger has that pretty much nobody else tries and when it succeeds (most of the time) looks brilliant but when it fails, he looks like a horses ass for trying it.
It is the one where he has the ball on the forehand side and he changes to a slice grip and opens the racket face very clearly to show the opponent that a drop shot is coming his way. The opponent reacts immediately and starts his move forward, but Roger hits the slice forehand deep to a side of his choosing and the opponent looks silly watching the ball go by....OR, every now and then the opponent does not move forward and has an easy slice to deal with, in which case Roger looks silly...

Either way, I do not mind him trying the shot . It is interesting, different. The guy is the most creative player I have ever seen so I would rather him try these things and fail every now and then as opposed to never trying them . He cannot help himself anyways . He is Roger Federer.

 

[DarthFed]

The way I look at it is that Roger comes to net so much that there are bound to be some bad approaches, bound to be times where he has an open court but hits it right back to his opponent, etc. Roger can live with that because he is getting to net a lot and usually is pretty successful there. I think his net game has improved the past couple years. For a few years a lot of his approach shots were just awful and even average opponents were eating them up.

One thing I would change is that I think he doesn't adjust his strategy based on his opponent/surface. If Roger comes to net a lot in a match vs. Rafa and Nole on slow courts he will not be successful. I know the school of thought that he "needs" to come to net to try to shorten points and end them as quickly as possible but for the most part he is going to turn points that are in his favor into passing shots they can hit in their sleep. The top guys pass too well and it's hard to get anything past them on a slow surface.

The fact of the matter is Roger is the underdog in matches like Sunday, and it will take a very very good day to win. That means high 1st serve % and a dominant day with his forehand. The net game often hurts him in matches like Sunday.

 

[Federberg]

There's an argument to say that it's a bit harsh to criticise him too much for the tactic going back to where the opponent is. The problem, particularly with Novak, Andy and Rafa is that they are so quick that if you hit the ball into open court they often run it down. And the last thing you want to do is to allow them to get one of those shots back because they often go on a roll after that type of winner. The most effective thing is to go back behind them. So for my money, it's not so much that he hits it back to them that's the problem. It's the fact that the tactic is sometimes not executed well enough to kill the point

 

[mrzz]

Mrzz, this reminds me of another shot that Roger has that pretty much nobody else tries and when it succeeds (most of the time) looks brilliant but when it fails, he looks like a horses ass for trying it.
It is the one where he has the ball on the forehand side and he changes to a slice grip and opens the racket face very clearly to show the opponent that a drop shot is coming his way. The opponent reacts immediately and starts his move forward, but Roger hits the slice forehand deep to a side of his choosing and the opponent looks silly watching the ball go by....OR, every now and then the opponent does not move forward and has an easy slice to deal with, in which case Roger looks silly...

Either way, I do not mind him trying the shot . It is interesting, different. The guy is the most creative player I have ever seen so I would rather him try these things and fail every now and then as opposed to never trying them . He cannot help himself anyways . He is Roger Federer.

That is a great shot to my eyes. Anyway, when he tries it, the point is not in his hands, it is generally still on a 50/50 situation, 70/30 to say the least, and he surely wins it like 90/10 when he tries it.

And, replying a bit to Darth's point, the particular case I brought up in general is not related to a tipical approach, as he is not following one of his own shots but rather (in general) coming after a short ball which is floating before the service line, a situation in which the average tour player would win the point 99% of the time, and it seems to me (selection bias taken in to account) that Federer's rate is way bellow that.

But I got Federberg's point, maybe it is the lession learned about not giving a good angle to guys like Nadal, Djokovic and Murray, even if I think it is an over reaction (and why the hell he does it to Raonic?).

 

[Haelfix]

That shot used to be completely automatic and was one of the best on tour. There is a match where Roddick actually yells at himself on court telling himself not to move so early.

All that happened is that other players on tour got used to it, so instead of committing to a side they just freeze at the midpoint cutoff and dare Roger to beat them.

That's what happens when you play for a long time and others get used to things you do. Its just like when Rafa comes to net. Other players are already sprinting for the net anticipating the guaranteed drop volley.