After Sunday's Open Final, Federer told reporters that since Tiger was there watching him, he felt a little pressure to perform. I think by seeing Tiger, he got an extra dose of confidence and belief in himself knowing that he is the player who dominates tennis.
So it occured to me, that before, Federer had no one to look at to get motivation and reassurance from. Whereas Nadal has his uncle, Roddick has Connors, etc. Is the absence of someone who inspires Federer's weakness?
2006-09-15 02:18:18 · 9 answers · asked by eprometheus 2 in Sports ➔ Tennis
I don't agree with your argument when you say : 'I think by seeing Tiger, he got an extra dose of confidence and belief in himself' and 'Is the absence of someone who inspires Federer's weakness? ' are you implying that if there is no one inspiring Federer he would struggle? that hasn't been the case. he has won plenty of tournaments without special inspiration from anyone. The absence of someone to inspire him is not Federer's weakness.
2006-09-15 05:40:29 · answer #1 · answered by Lumas 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think this has done too much to hurt Federer. He has won the majority of his majors without a full-time coach. I think Federer's only weakness is a lack of consistent competition. Whereas Sampras had Agassi, Becker had Edberg, and McEnroe had Connors, Federer doesn't really have that kind of rival. No-one is really stepping up to really challenge him. Even Nadal, good head-to-head record aside is not up there with Federer away from the clay. Even if he remains the best player out there, there should be someone else who is also a cut above the rest. If you look at the majors he's won, his most frequent opponent has been Andy Roddick who just does not stack up well against him. In any sport, the greats need rivals. They are who the legends are measured against. Anytime Sampras met Agassi the stakes were high, ditto For McEnroe and Connors. It's what makes their victories so much more memorable. Federer doesn't have that kind of rival. It's really the only thing that's missing. It would be a great loss for the sport, and even Federer himself, if a true rival does not emerge. His play is nothing short of phenomenal, but the lack of a key rival will ultimately tarnish his legacy. Even if he breaks Sampras' record at the Slams, he will be seen as having done so in a much less competitive era, which would be a great shame.
2006-09-16 23:22:41 · answer #2 · answered by rammsteinfan-1 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that the ex-coach of Federer (Peter) who is now the coach of Marat played an important role in his confidence. Remember Peter was Marat's coach at the Australia Open when the latter won over Roger. Roger played magically well but he lost the match may be because surely he was feeling that Peter was his coach for years and he was at this moment "against" him.
Anyway, Roger is a great player and surely thatn anyone else. See how tennis has eveloved for the past years. For instance, almost all players can serve about 210 km/h and besides they can return it; and Roger Federer is playin these kind of players and he is beating them and now for more than three years.
I do think also that Roger'weakness is "himself". His superiority and he has too much "tools" to kick off a player that he does not know which one to use.
2006-09-16 00:32:56 · answer #3 · answered by Li 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
if tiger woods was watching you work, wouldn't you be nervous? federer just won 3 of the 4 grand slams, i think its obvious that he does just fine without anybody in his box. federer does have a part time coach though, he just doesn't show up to every tournament. His coach is tony roach, one of the greatest players of all time. when he is not at a tournament, they call each other on the phone. i don't see this as a weakness, but more of a strength.
2006-09-15 11:33:03 · answer #4 · answered by ACE25 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I guess so, you know you make a really good point. i cant believe i did not think of that. But you are so right! Yeah he kind of models himself on Tiger coz Tiger is like the don of golf so by him being there it kinda reminded him that indeed he was the king of men's tennis and that made him play better. It is his weakness or the fact that he needs a constant reminder that he is the best.
2006-09-15 09:31:14 · answer #5 · answered by Jolie 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Federer's only very slight weakness is his forehand slice return of serve. He did not hit it well against Roddick's big serve at the US Open.
Even so, we'd all still like to have a forehand slice return of serve as bad as Federer's.
2006-09-18 21:38:09 · answer #6 · answered by jeff spin 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't think so, results show differently. Maybe the fact that he's "out here on his own" is one of his strengths?
2006-09-15 09:21:04 · answer #7 · answered by DrJunk 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree with the first guy!
2006-09-16 23:01:12 · answer #8 · answered by Tennis lova 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
clay courts!
2006-09-17 06:52:36 · answer #9 · answered by aadith l 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋