RF Tennis News 2018

Another nice article in ESPN

When did 20-time grand slam champion Roger Federer discover his dominance?





Roger Federer has emerged victorious in 82 percent of his matches -- a ridiculous 93 percent from 2004 to 2007 -- while winning 29 percent of all tournaments he has entered. Martin Schoeller

http://www.espn.in/tennis/story/_/id/22869310/the-dominant-20-did-20-grand-slam-champion-roger-federer-discover-dominance
Michael Steinberger (seems to be a new hire at ESPN).

This goes way back when... 2004!    I was wondering where the "athlete No. 5" came from? This explains it:

ESPN The Magazine 20 Years

Woods Nabs the Top Spot and the Cover

Industry-leading ESPN The Magazine will celebrate its 20th anniversary this week by highlighting the 20 most dominant athletes of the past two decades. As announced on Sunday’s E:60 on ESPN, Tiger Woods clinched the No. 1 spot, as well as the cover of the Dominant 20 issue.

Senior writer Peter Keating developed a statistical methodology to determine the list of 20 dominant athletes: superstars who have proved to be the best at what they do over the past 20 years. The list is available in The Mag, on newsstands Friday, and on ESPN.com via a unique digital experience. There will be an accompanying piece for each athlete on the list as well as another ranking: the top 20 most dominant single-season teams of the last 20 years.

Read more here.

A daring plea by Jon Wertheim! ... But I think he may be on something!

Dear @RogerFederer,
Play the clay...#Unstrung pic.twitter.com/JYsRv9CSfv

— Tennis Channel (@TennisChannel) March 23, 2018

Dear @RogerFederer,
Play the clay...#Unstrung pic.twitter.com/JYsRv9CSfv

— Tennis Channel (@TennisChannel) March 23, 2018

Roger to skip the entire clay season

During his post-match press conference at the Miami Open 2018, following his second round loss to Kokkinakis, Roger confirmed that, as last year, he will not play any clay tournament this season, and that include the French Open: "Yes, clay is the French as well", he said!  

So now we know...

No clay for @RogerFederer in 2018#MiamiOpen pic.twitter.com/kT5i4KVdqb

— Tennis TV (@TennisTV) March 24, 2018

I really liked this article from Marianne Bevis- so kind and understanding.

https://www.thesportreview.com/2018/03/roger-federer-news-clay-season/


Roger Federer: Variety is the spice of life, even if it means missing out on clay’s glamorous swing

Almost two days on, and Twitter was still a-twitter, headlines revolved, Google Alerts were full to bursting.

In case it had gone unnoticed in Miami, they proclaimed, Roger Federer “will skip the clay court season and French Open”, “renounces French Open and clay season”, “is stunned at Miami, to lose No1 ranking”. And on they went..........

"why the ATP needs Novak Djokovic back at full strength."

That's a good one.
Maybe the ATP needs it, but for me, it's a Thanks, but no, thanks.

A few comments/replies from Wertheim's Mailbag this week.  Full disclosure: (I'm "Michelle" below).

I imagine many Roger Federer fans are pressing the panic button again. But seeing Federer lose the Indian Wells final and his first match in Miami the way he did reminded me of something. I believe it was J-Mac who was commenting once on the fact that Federer didn’t have a great record in five-set matches (I think it was under 500 then). He said that Federer rarely played five-setters because he normally won easier than that and if he was stuck in a five-set battle, it was probably because he didn’t have his A-game.  
 
Federer never found his A-game in Indian Wells. He was lucky to escape the semifinals, honestly. So, I can’t say I’m that surprised Federer came out even worse in Miami. And yet it still came down to a final set tiebreak.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I’d rather see Federer lose like that than a 6-1, 6-1 score line. Plus I’m not going to panic. He had a couple of “what the F?” losses last year too (Donskoy and Haas) and look how that year turned out? He'll be back. Although I'm slightly sad to see him skip the clay season. I doubt he'll ever play clay again.
—Michelle

• A lot to digest here. A) Sadly, I agree that if Federer isn't playing the clay this year—when, I submit, he has/had a real chance of stealing a French Open—it’s hard to see him setting foot on the dirt ever again. One of those accommodations made to a 36-year-old trying to make the strategic moves to prolong a career; but a pity nonetheless. B) Yes, two straight losses for Federer ought to be a disappointment, but not cause for alarm.
Your other point is well taken. If you are pushing Federer into a fifth set, odds are good that he is playing poorly and you are playing at a ferociously high level.

And on a related note: Here’s Paul Haskins of Wilmington, N.C., concerning this comment from last week’s Mailbag:

“As a Federer fanatic, it saddens me that after yesterday, he is now 1-8 in finals with a deciding set tiebreak. His lone win was against his coach, Ivan Ljubicic, in the 2005 Rotterdam final.”

• Right. This is a ground rule in statistics and probability: the greater the sample size, the great the accuracy. Regression to the mean and all that. Flip a coin 10 times and you might get nine heads and one tail. Flip a coin 1,000 times and you are far less likely to get 900 heads and 100 tails. Give each player one shot and some Joe off the street might beat Steph Curry in a shooting contest. Give them 100 and Curry will win.”

I’d be more bent about this comment if science and engineering professionals didn’t make the same mistake all the time, but no, that 1-8 stat is not statistical noise. Two points here, first if you flip a coin ten times and get nine heads, the coin is probably not fair. Seven and three, sure. Nine and one (one way or the other), less than 0.3% of the time, not very likely. The other point is that a tiebreak is not like giving each player one shot because each point in a tiebreak is a shot. To win the tiebreak, you need to outshoot your competition repeatedly. First to seven, win by two and Curry is not losing very often to some Joe off the street unless Joe is on fire and I think that is where the Federer stat comes in. The typical pro does not get the Fed to a third set tiebreak. If you are in a deciding tiebreak with Roger Federer, you are playing out of your mind.  The reality is that the Fed is losing those tiebreaks because his opponents are completely in the zone or Federer is having a rare, less than awesome day.  The fact that Federer has only had nine of those over his entire career speaks to how rare that is.
—Paul Haskins of Wilmington, N.C.

Well said, Michelle!  

This exchange shows that statistics cannot just be taken at face value and must be analyzed and put in contest.

The quote from Paul Haskins: "The fact that Federer has only had nine of those over his entire career speaks to how rare that is." is something for all fans to cheer about!

Another optimistic point of view to be excited about!  

Cromar wrote:Well said, Michelle!  

This exchange shows that statistics cannot just be taken at face value and must be analyzed and put in contest.

The quote from Paul Haskins: "The fact that Federer has only had nine of those over his entire career speaks to how rare that is." is something for all fans to cheer about!

I loved it.

Márcia wrote:

Cromar wrote:Well said, Michelle!  

This exchange shows that statistics cannot just be taken at face value and must be analyzed and put in contest.

The quote from Paul Haskins: "The fact that Federer has only had nine of those over his entire career speaks to how rare that is." is something for all fans to cheer about!

I loved it.

"Michelle" is actually my middle name but I use it when I write to things like Jon's Mailbag and such. I also tone down my Fed love a little too. And even though I pretty much agree with Roger's team about not playing the clay, I knew how Jon felt about it, so I added that to my comment. But I admit, I did have a pipe dream that Roger would play Nadal one more time at RG and win. But there is no chance of that now.

Cromar wrote:This goes way back when... 2004!    I was wondering where the "athlete No. 5" came from? This explains it:

ESPN The Magazine 20 Years

Woods Nabs the Top Spot and the Cover

Industry-leading ESPN The Magazine will celebrate its 20th anniversary this week by highlighting the 20 most dominant athletes of the past two decades. As announced on Sunday’s E:60 on ESPN, Tiger Woods clinched the No. 1 spot, as well as the cover of the Dominant 20 issue.

Senior writer Peter Keating developed a statistical methodology to determine the list of 20 dominant athletes: superstars who have proved to be the best at what they do over the past 20 years. The list is available in The Mag, on newsstands Friday, and on ESPN.com via a unique digital experience. There will be an accompanying piece for each athlete on the list as well as another ranking: the top 20 most dominant single-season teams of the last 20 years.

Read more here.

I just saw this. No big surprise that Roger is 5th (I guess he's lucky to even have made it as #5) after 4 Americans (one whom I had never even heard of - LOL). ESPN will always put Americans first. Just as Sports Illustrated almost always chooses an American as their Sportsperson of the Year (the fact that Roger has never won this is a travesty). And Barry Bonds (#17 on the list) was a doper. I take it all with a grain of salt.

^^^  Yeah, the fact that Roger is #5 is pretty good for being a non-American.  Just shows how much Roger has done to be recognized in the US and in a sport that isn't one of the 'big ones' here.  

I think I posted this before, but the below article is about how Roger NOT being picked as the SI Sportsman of the Year in 2006 is by far the most controversial pick they ever had.  Most folks at SI were very upset that Roger did not get it:

https://www.si.com/sports-illustrated/2016/12/01/dwyane-wade-roger-federer-sportsperson-year-2006

http://www.insidetennis.com/2017/04/crackling-goodness-federer/

In these Federerless days I went on a hunt to look for references to Roger as a ballet dancer and I came across this article written after IW 2017. I don't remember reading it before and I don't think it has been posted- apologies if it has.



THE MOST BEAUTIFUL SHOT IN TENNIS: It’s sublime. It flows. It’s the essence of athletic grace. Along with Steph Curry‘s sweet-release three-point jumper and golfer Phil Mickelson‘s high-arcing flop shot, it’s the most beautiful shot in sports. It’s Roger Federer‘s backhand. It’s not his most powerful shot. But, enamored with its grace, thousands succumbed to the giddy effects of the epidemic that’s sweeping tennis – “Roger Awe.”

Time and again in Indian Wells, Roger leaned in. He pounced. He attacked. “Roger’s backhand,” noted The Tennis Channel, “which had been his Achilles heel against Nadal, is now his strength.”

Roger’s backhand is far from the best in tennis – Djokovic and Murray can make that claim. He doesn’t even have the best one-handed backhand in Switzerland. Sorry, Dominic Thiem, Grigor Dimitrov and Richard Gasquet, Stan Wawrinka has the best one-handed backhand in tennis. But Roger’s is plenty good, and much improved in just a year. Forget Sugarpova, it’s tennis candy. It’s luscious. Fans love all his strokes – but they adore his backhand.

Roger hits the ball high. Roger goes crosscourt. And even one of the great movers in tennis history, Rafa Nadal, stumbles and seems awkward.

Federer’s ball kisses the line. Thousands sigh, “Ahhh,” while admiring whistles cascade down from macho fans sounding like workers on a New York construction site. The Tennis Channel couldn’t help itself, saying Roger’s “backhand is insane…That was serious intent…Did that feel like 20 backhand winners in one game?” Mary Carillo said his backhand was “crackling with goodness.”

Roger noted that with his new Wilson racket, and its bigger head size, he’s “definitely having an easier time coming over [on] the return…and staying aggressive… because the racket has more power.” After all his off-season practice he had “gained confidence stepping in…You have to take it on the rise, and for that you need good footwork, because if it is not right, you won’t be on top of the ball…All my coaches…have told me to go more for the backhand, but I used to shank [it]…Maybe deep down I didn’t always believe that I had it, in the most important moments. But I think that’s changing.”

HEADLINES:

CHOCOLATE WAR BREAKS OUT IN CALIFORNIA (after Switzerland’s two best players reached the Indian Wells final)

THE CORE HAPPINESS OF ROGER FEDERER, THE MAN WHO MAKES PEOPLE HAPPY

THOUSANDS IN DESERT SUCCUMB TO ‘ROGER AWE’

DONSKOY BEATS THE GOAT (after No. 116 Evgeny Donskoy beat Roger Federer)

AHEAD OF SCHEDULE: Federer said his goal for this year’s Aussie Open was to reach the quarterfinals. He won. His goal for the year was to be in the top eight after Wimbledon. He’s now No. 6 and rising.

PUTTING IT ALL IN PERSPECTIVE: When asked about winning different Grand Slams, Federer said that maybe none of the others beats the first one, because “it was a dream come true.” He added that his recent Australian Open win was the biggest surprise of his Slam wins, and was in the top five of his Slam victories. He also noted that it felt unbelievable to win the French Open after chasing it for so long, and that it was special to beat Andre Agassi at the 2005 US Open, because of the pressure, the New York atmosphere and the fact that everyone was saying that if Andre won he would retire.

FIVE MORE YEARS? In a hilarious interview with a class of adorable second-graders, Roger joked that he hoped to be playing until he was 90, and then said, “To play for five more years – that would be an absolute dream. Can you imagine? Forty years [old].”

He revealed that, like his two sons, he started playing tennis at three, and hit balls against cupboards and garage doors. As a kid he’d had three cats, including Flatty and Ginger, and three rabbits including Blitz and Blacky. The father of four ended the session by doing ten push-ups with the elated kids.

SOME BOOK: Roger Federer’s father, Robert, told IT that the family is putting together a fat book of Roger’s clippings.

THE PERILS OF SIGNING AUTOGRAPHS: Stephanie Myles reported that Federer‘s autograph session at the BNP Paribas Open drew hundreds. There was a two-hour wait, some frayed tempers and even an f-bomb or two.

SAY IT ISN’T SO: Federer won his 90th tournament at Indian Wells. He says he isn’t planning on playing until he wins his 100th. Jimmy Connors has the record for most  tournaments won, 109…Before losing to No. 116 Evgeny Donskoy, Federer had three match points in the second set and was up 5-1 in the final-set tiebreak. His coaches said the loss would be good for him in the long run.

ESCAPING THE GRASP OF THE DRAW OF DEATH: En route to winning Indian Wells, Roger became the oldest man to win a Masters, had to beat his fiercest rival, Rafa Nadal, and survived what was described as the “Draw of Death.”

THE CORE HAPPINESS OF ROGER FEDERER: After the famous and wealthy Federer said he was “extremely happy with very little,” we asked him to explain. He answered, “I’m just happy being surrounded by family and friends. That’s good enough for me. Not lying – winning helps to be happy, because losing ain’t fun when you travel around the world and you play a shocker match and you’re, like, “Now what?” Then you have to sit there…[and] wait until you get your next shot.

“But other than that, I’m just really happy with very little…It could be anything. Could be dinner with friends…seeing someone again, reading a book to my boys and girls…the most simple little thing.

“I guess [we have] an urge for normality… We try to create [that] wherever we go because we live in this funky bubble: the tennis world, hotels and all that. It’s not the norm…We try to go out and about and discover stuff. It makes me happy when I get away from it all.”

A NEW CAREER? When joking about his light-hearted music video with Tommy Haas and Grigor Dimitrov, Federer claimed he was now going to have to balance his singing and tennis careers. He added that Stan Wawrinka was welcome to join his group, the One-Handed Backhand Boys, but those with two-handers (think Murray and Djokovic) would be vetted.

TWO KEY THINGS: Roger said he doesn’t think about his knee any more – his health and his fire are the key things to him.

JUST WONDERING: Has Federer evolved more than any other player since Agassi?

QUOTEBOOK

•  “For me the dream run continues.”

– Roger after winning Indian Wells

• “He’s laughing – he’s an asshole.”

– A tearful Stan Wawrinka on Roger during the Indian Wells award ceremony

• “It should be a celebration of tennis.”

– Federer on September’s Laver Cup in Prague, which sold out in just hours

ROGERMANIA: Was the most frenzy at the BNP Paribas Open at the line to get into Spago or at the height of a feisty comeback on Stadium 1? No. It came when about 2,500 giddy fans were scrutinizing every twist and turn of a Roger Federer practice.

Watching from the stands, from roofs, or from assorted perches, craning their necks, they chanted their mantra at the top of their lungs, “Raw-gerr! Raw-gerr!”

“There’re more fans here than people who come out for [Steph] Curry’s practices,” claimed one observer. “This is “Beatles-esque,” noted another. One couple had come from Seattle just to see Roger practice. His practice drew more fans than 90 percent of pro matches – and the fans were far more invested.

When Roger finally put down his racket, the throng bellowed, “This way, Roger!” Kids were packed behind an iron fence – sardines have it better off. A voice in the crowd warned, “Someone’s gonna get crushed.”

The ecstatic kids couldn’t have cared less. They stretched out their caps, magazine covers, visors –anything for the hero to sign. And he did.

Never mind the sweltering 94° heat. Roger, calm and present, patiently signed scores of autographs before he sauntered away. Then, before ducking into the player garden, he paused one last time. A security guard wanted an autograph. And why not? Rogermania is relentless.

THE MAN WHO BENDS TIME: Mary Carillo said, “I’ve never seen anybody make a difficult sport look so beautiful…He’s such an artist. He thinks in artistic ways. He knows how luminous he looks – he’s aware.

“He knows how much he’s pleasing people with the way he designs his game. He loves being Roger Federer. He knows how many gifts he’s got, and knows how to share them. He knows how to protect them. He bends time – not just on court, but off court, too. He never seems rushed.

“He can give an interview in three or four languages. He’s patient. He’s heard the same questions over and over again, yet he doesn’t act dismissively. And there’s the way he is with people – wandering through crowds with his children. He’s a time-shifter. I’ve never seen that either.

“I’d love to know what kind of trip [he went on] to become himself, because I think it would be hard to cultivate a person who walks so lightly on this earth and with such grace.”

ROGER AS MARTIAL ARTS MASTER: Deep-think coach Steve Stefanki suggests that, “Federer plays off of the energy of the opponent. He has all the skills, but he’s not going to impose.

“In the martial arts there’s a phrase, ‘He who commits first is lost.’ Federer has to be behind the beat, not ahead of it. People that are ahead of the beat are imposing their will. But the really good fighters or dancers move away or deflect that energy. That’s what aikido is. The great martial artists are not trying to kill you. They’re letting you throw your sword and blocking it until finally you’re so far out of position they decide to put you away.

“You have to train so deeply so that your body knows exactly what to do. It’s coming out of you.

“Federer could be a great dancer because when you’re [ballroom] dancing there’s your expression, there’s the music, and you’re moving and you’re avoiding everybody. Federer’s juggling. He can do three or four things easily at the same time. He knows where the opponent is – and his intent. At the same time, the ball’s in motion – but in a certain sense, it’s in a fixed spot. Then – at the last minute, after the person has committed his intent – Roger decides to hit the ball to someplace opposite.

“He has to be so skilled in relaxation, position and balance…It’s a higher consciousness. [Like Baryshnikov or Fred Astaire], he’s not fighting…They have the same balance points. They understand their bodies so well. They’re not tightening. They’re extending, getting on point, on balance. They’re moving. Their center of gravity is all over, but they always land with stillness. The highest level would be a tai chi master who’s being attacked from five different sides. He’s in the middle of turmoil and chaos, but he’s totally still. Everyone is flying around, and he’s left standing. To do that you have to have a certain still point, a sense of non-panic, of being able to not see things in a linear-type time. It’s a different consciousness…It takes a long time to study, like the martial arts people do with their meditation, quietness and stillness…Those cultures revere a deep level of inner consciousness. Our society is clueless.”

ph∞be, thank you. So good reading!