La Finale inattendue!!!! Here we go again!

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:
1. Not a single player, coach or any tennis expert would share your 'getting tired in the first set against Nadal' theory. 

It is common knowledge that it's not the length of the match which tires but being able to pull winners (thin margins) at the end of a 10 or 20 shot rallies. This is why Nole wins v Nadal cause he can keep running with Nadal. in those long rallies and even forces nadal to pull the winner early. I have heard many commentators mentioning it. If you play sharp shots, you want short rallies. This is exactly what Federer or old Zverev try to do when playing the roadrunners. You just need running right and left a few times to start shanking. If you were to play tennis, you woudl know that.
This is probably best demonstrated with this rally: Look at the score before this rally and guess who won after that rally? But of course this is an extreme case. But one rally was enough to kill beneteau.

2. You say Nadal's confidence and fearless tennis playing top opponents even when he was an inexperienced young 18-19 yo was just due his muscles and fitness. 

I am stunned by that. Everybody was talking about Nadal amazing fitness since very young but for some reasons you did not hear it? Inexperienced also means no fear. You can see now that he has experienced a few bad losses since he is 19 and his confidence is not that of someone who has not known defeat yet.

3. You think Fed has no  game-wise match-up disadvantage when playing Nadal, it was juts due to Fed's smaller racquet and now since Fed has moved to a bigger frame, he can easily beat Nadal.

Well...I have just seen that twice. In fact fed had a cold and an injury....yet he still beat your man. ....and frankly could have done it in 3....at 35. Did you miss something there?

Oh and finally every commentator agrees that players need more time to mature nowadays. So Rafa raised the bar....but if he were to come back as a 19yo, he woudl be suffering like everybody else nowadays.

luvsports! wrote:courier is good

I do like his AO on court interviews.
Funny how the Ozzies got him and not the USO.

If it was down to me, I wouldn't have any commentators, they talk too much.

Jahu wrote:https://flipboard.com/@flipboard/flip.it%2FYvb6DT-kelly-roger-federer-may-never-stop-bein/f-1dc4c3bea7%2Ftheglobeandmail.com

Morning guys and girls, how was your night?

I celebrated last night with some tennis fans

Long live FED!!!!!

Finally got to reading the article, very nice.

Fresh, and in tune with Fed's new era lightness.

Of course he will play for ever!

Yeah, let's see perhaps a Wimbledon in 2021 so people can look back on AU 17 and smile wryly at how some thought it was the last hurrah.

You can dream.

He does have a chance of adding another. I guess anything is possible after that.

Tenez wrote:It is common knowledge that it's not the length of the match which tires but being able to pull winners (thin margins) at the end of a 10 or 20 shot rallies. This is why Nole wins v Nadal cause he can keep running with Nadal. in those long rallies and even forces nadal to pull the winner early. I have heard many commentators mentioning it. If you play sharp shots, you want short rallies. This is exactly what Federer or old Zverev try to do when playing the roadrunners. You just need running right and left a few times to start shanking. If you were to play tennis, you woudl know that. 
This is probably best demonstrated with this rally: Look at the score before this rally and guess who won after that rally? But of course this is an extreme case. But one rally was enough to kill beneteau. 

Again your usual beating around bush, but not to the point. Even the video you posted wasn't of the 1st set. Bring a video where any commentator or anyone talks about Fed's losing the first set against Nadal due to being tired. Nothing else.

Tenez wrote:I am stunned by that. Everybody was talking about Nadal amazing fitness since very young but for some reasons you did not hear it? Inexperienced also means no fear. You can see now that he has experienced a few bad losses since he is 19 and his confidence is not that of someone who has not known defeat yet. 

If inexperience and not facing defeat was such an advantage for young Nadal how come no teens who all have that advantage since then hasn't been able to do it? Its 12 yrs since Nadal started to dominate from 2005 on clay started to beat top rankers day in and day out. Other than an odd win if at all, no 'inexperienced-no-defeat-no-fear' teen is able do it. Even prior to Nadal which teen was able to beat top guys regularly. Becker in 85-86. See how long it takes for such teens to appear. 

Everyone only started to talk about Nadal's fitness after he started to win in Big matches defeating top guys. Bring me any mention of Nadal's super fitness prior to his 2005 MC win. Perhaps you may not even find anything until he won RG. 

Tenez wrote:Well...I have just seen that twice. In fact fed had a cold and an injury....yet he still beat your man. ....and frankly could have done it in 3....at 35. Did you miss something there?

Let's not talk about could-have-should-have-would-have . Nadal and Fed have been playing since 2004. Met 35 times... Bring me any quote/video to support your theory of no-game-match up against Nadal. There are 1000s including Fed who say about this match-up being a very important reason of Nadal's superior h2h. 

Now you bring someone who says its not.


I've only brought out 3 point to show you are alone in a lot of tennis theories that you bring. There is nothing wrong in it, I'm only saying it.

If you do not (want to) recognise the fact that Nadal's fitness played an essential role in his early success prior to his first slam (and I already quoted Coria but could find 10 more if I was not that busy), means there is no point carrying on this discussion. And by the way I don;t see this point as "my" point as it was knowledge from all in teh tennis world.....bar you it seems.

Regarding fed nadal match up, Fed said it also that people/players underestimated the physical side of his game (I believe it was after another close match v Gaudio).

If you think nadal woudl have been as successful without this mucle coat, then clearly, I cannot really help.

But one day I will retireve this post where I highlight the huge percentage of matches where Fed was either a break up in the first set or won that first set. I can tell you it is not 12/23 like their H2H.

bogbrush wrote:

legendkillar wrote:5:19 that FH was ridiculous.

Just like the one against Andy Murray in 2012 that Judy Murray applauded.

But that point though. When everything pointed to Nadal winning the point as it went on and at 30-30. It was like roles reversed in the sense Nadal over the years done that to many a player and then Roger pulls that.

Tenez wrote:

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:
1. Not a single player, coach or any tennis expert would share your 'getting tired in the first set against Nadal' theory. 

It is common knowledge that it's not the length of the match which tires but being able to pull winners (thin margins) at the end of a 10 or 20 shot rallies. This is why Nole wins v Nadal cause he can keep running with Nadal. in those long rallies and even forces nadal to pull the winner early. I have heard many commentators mentioning it. If you play sharp shots, you want short rallies. This is exactly what Federer or old Zverev try to do when playing the roadrunners. You just need running right and left a few times to start shanking. If you were to play tennis, you woudl know that.
This is probably best demonstrated with this rally: Look at the score before this rally and guess who won after that rally? But of course this is an extreme case. But one rally was enough to kill beneteau.

Wow, that is an amazing clip, and really proves your point esp with the scoreline up to that moment.

"The killer long rally"

I once had that experience...totally lost my legs, couldn't wait to finish, comolete jelly...it's hard to understand any other way.

yes you can see Murray takes absolutely no risk...just makes sure the ball comes back soft in the middle of the court (and this is our World number 1 ) so benetteau cannot even use the pace. Benetteau doesn't take much risk either because he doesn't want to give Murray an easy UE. He still tries to attack....and of course it;s benetteau that got tired despite Murray covering more ground.

From that point Murray wins 12 games.....Benetteau 2!
46 63 61

But in a way this is exactly how Djoko does it too....just forces a bit more running. He does it especially at the beginning of TBs. Making sure he will collect easier points further down the TB.

It's an observable tactic which in itslef proves the point.

Tenez wrote:From that point Murray wins 12 games.....Benetteau 2!
46 63 61

But in a way this is exactly how Djoko does it too....just forces a bit more running. He does it especially at the beginning of TBs. Making sure he will collect easier points further down the TB.

It's an observable tactic which in itslef proves the point.

I know he does. Not a fan of it at all. Esp against Federer.

His style is actually much more physical, aggressive, the tempo is relentless, yet safe.
Winning formula - yes, but not to admire or inspire.

I am a bit late with catching up...just saw that Cash said Federer was cheating with his MTO....

I cannot believe it.

He surely chooses his time to make a fool of himself.

Tenez wrote:If you do not (want to) recognise the fact that Nadal's fitness played an essential role in his early success prior to his first slam (and I already quoted Coria but could find 10 more if I was not that busy), means there is no point carrying on this discussion. And by the way I don;t see this point as "my" point as it was knowledge from all in teh tennis world.....bar you it seems.

Regarding fed nadal match up, Fed said it also that people/players underestimated the physical side of his game (I believe it was after another close match v Gaudio).

If you think nadal woudl have been as successful without this mucle coat, then clearly, I cannot really help.

But one day I will retireve this post where I highlight the huge percentage of matches where Fed was either a break up in the first set or won that first set. I can tell you  it is not 12/23 like their H2H.

Oh dear.. come on now. You've lost the case so accept it. Lets see the summary.

 The case started with me telling you are alone in a lot of your tennis theories views and no tennis player, coach, commentator, sport journalist or any authentic source will share it. I gave 3 examples from many of our previous debates to put my claim. 

You had to bring out evidence to support yourself. You brought none whatsoever. So you have lost. I have no indent to demean you or any of your opinion. I just stated its not what other tennis experts share. That's all. 

All opinions are welcome here, I don't have to tell this. And this is what makes our tennis fourm interesting. 


So if you want to know what the players, coaches and other tennis experts think on the 3 points, we can look at those.

So you are always right? Yes very much like Daniel....it's called power of the mind...or sheer denial. Just a point of view.

I have seen it before when you tried to deny Laver greatness. There was not much "evidence" you would take on to change your view.

Tenez wrote:So you are always right? Yes very much like Daniel....it's called power of the mind...or sheer denial. Just a point of view.

Nope. I've been wrong many times, I've learnt lot of things from you, and many others on this forum. OTF has changed me more than tennis alone, and in a good way. 

I'm relatively new to tennis compared to some others here, only started watching tennis late 90s.

Tenez wrote:I have seen it before when you tried to deny Laver greatness. There was not much "evidence" you would take on to change your view.

That debate has been rested for a long time now. Lets bring it back if you want to. And I didn't try to deny his greatness, I only said its not as high as its often stated which is mostly attributed to his calendar-slam.

Anyway Rotla..let's agree to disagree here.

It does not matter. After all...Fed is the best!

I think Serena dinosaur is better, numbers talk!!! 

Jahu wrote:I think Serena dinosaur is better, numbers talk!!! 

Wait till Veejay sees this!

Oh yes, was he after her I think?

Maybe he can have her before she marries on Hens night, with 999 handy on the phone to call them, in case she totally squashes him

Jahu wrote:Oh yes, was he after her I think?

Maybe he can have her before she marries on Hens night, with 999 handy on the phone to call them, in case she totally squashes him

It'd take a brave man. At the very least you'd need a panic button.

Exactly, and that mommy boy that she found to marry, looks totally incapable of taming that booty.

NITB wrote:

Jahu wrote:I think Serena dinosaur is better, numbers talk!!! 

Wait till Veejay sees this!

dinosaurs dont have asses that big!!
did everyone see the clip where serena completely ignored her fiance after winning the AO?
woah i felt sorry for him,he definitely doesnt have what it takes to tame that booty 

Veejay wrote:

NITB wrote:

Jahu wrote:I think Serena dinosaur is better, numbers talk!!! 

Wait till Veejay sees this!

dinosaurs dont have asses that big!!
did everyone see the clip where serena completely ignored her fiance after winning the AO?
woah i felt sorry for him,he definitely doesnt have what it takes to tame that booty 

Yes, Vee, call it like it is...arse!

I read about how she ignored her fiance.

Now here's a bit of history!
When I joined my tennis club, the same induction evening, there was this black woman from Nigeria...and it turned out she was a poster from the old
BBC 606!!!

Guess what Tenez, the first person she remebered was you!

She gave me a lot of insights how black girls view "white" guys...more like a trophy than the real thing.
She was very relaxed with me ...none of that politically correct palaver there!
She went on and on about Sasa Bajin, Serena's hitting partner at the time,  but I really couldn't quite understand where she was coming from.

NITB wrote:

Veejay wrote:

NITB wrote:

Jahu wrote:I think Serena dinosaur is better, numbers talk!!! 

Wait till Veejay sees this!

dinosaurs dont have asses that big!!
did everyone see the clip where serena completely ignored her fiance after winning the AO?
woah i felt sorry for him,he definitely doesnt have what it takes to tame that booty 

Yes, Vee, call it like it is...arse!

I read about how she ignored her fiance.

Now here's a bit of history!
When I joined my tennis club, the same induction evening, there was this black woman from Nigeria...and it turned out she was a poster from the old
BBC 606!!!

Guess what Tenez, the first person she remebered was you!

She gave me a lot of insights how black girls view "white" guys...more like a trophy than the real thing.
She was very relaxed with me ...none of that politically correct palaver there!
She went on and on about Sasa Bajin, Serena's hitting partner at the time,  but I really couldn't quite understand where she was coming from.

dont you think its bizzare how serena is called serena but she is everything but serene   
i think its the same with black guys going white girls...sort of a trophy..
they are such an odd couple..i always thought that serena would marry a black guy..i guess opposites really do attract

So what did she say? Once you go black, you never go back?

Jahu wrote:So what did she say? Once you go black, you never go back?

Veejay.. wrote:they are such an odd couple..i always thought that serena would marry a black guy..i guess opposites really do attract

She is a traitor then...

I would not marry a lady who told the line judge “If I could, I would take this … ball and shove it down your … throat and kill you,” Williams said.


I'd wake at night scared of either being killed or her choking me to death with her fat.

Now who turned this thread into colour sex fest? This should be at the section where Trump lives, thanks to Vee 

Classic Yazooo!

Hey Luv, how are you Mr. Writer 

Still buzzing off my tits from Feds' win  your good self?

hahah nice one, keep buzzing papi 

All good here, Fed has made this 2017 a great start, so looking good

NITB wrote:

Veejay wrote:

NITB wrote:

Jahu wrote:I think Serena dinosaur is better, numbers talk!!! 

Wait till Veejay sees this!

dinosaurs dont have asses that big!!
did everyone see the clip where serena completely ignored her fiance after winning the AO?
woah i felt sorry for him,he definitely doesnt have what it takes to tame that booty 

Yes, Vee, call it like it is...arse!

I read about how she ignored her fiance.

Now here's a bit of history!
When I joined my tennis club, the same induction evening, there was this black woman from Nigeria...and it turned out she was a poster from the old
BBC 606!!!

Guess what Tenez, the first person she remebered was you!

She gave me a lot of insights how black girls view "white" guys...more like a trophy than the real thing.
She was very relaxed with me ...none of that politically correct palaver there!
She went on and on about Sasa Bajin, Serena's hitting partner at the time,  but I really couldn't quite understand where she was coming from.

That's funny. I meet a lot of tennis fans in different clubs around London but I never dare to mention forum I never meet a posters. The only poster I met was the guy I argued a lot about the Pete Roger rivalry.....can;t remember his name.

I also met a very nicelady who went up to join another forum cause she sold me some debenture tickets.

I think we coudl have an OTF meeting one day at the Alexandra pub in Wimbledon!

Tenez wrote:So you are always right? Yes very much like Daniel....it's called power of the mind...or sheer denial. Just a point of view.

I have seen it before when you tried to deny Laver greatness. There was not much "evidence" you would take on to change your view.

I think you are projecting. I don;t ever recall you admitting you are wrong here ever. Got a mirror handy?

Toni acknowledges that Federer's improved BH and fast conditions won him the final against Nadal, and comments on Nadal's current position.

It's interesting he says Nadal is injury free, yet he withdrew from Rotterdam citing need for rest.

Does this mean he is cycling up for clay season?


"It must not be forgotten that arriving at Roland Garros [in 2016], Rafa had excellent sensations. There was just this physical issue ... For the first time in a long while, Rafael has no physical problems to manage ... Since he has been playing with no pain, he has regained a high level."

............


"[Federer] played with extreme speed and resisting his game was very difficult,” he said. “It's also the case [that] his backhand was incredible towards the finish of the tournament. First, he had an inspired week--he made fewer errors than usual and stayed firm with his decision to hit the ball more flat.
"Then, I don't know if the courts had more speed, as many have said, but I think playing at night favored Federer because the ball does not bounce as high and he can anticipate more easily. The extreme topspin was simply not possible."

Reading this comment from Toni brings a similar feeling of the impossible happening under the nose of those who thought they had the win in the bag: Brexit, Trump's win, Federer's 18th slam beating Nadal.

I can't believe any of the three happened, yet they did!

Then, I don't know if the courts had more speed, as many have said, but I think playing at night favored Federer because the ball does not bounce as high and he can anticipate more easily. The extreme topspin was simply not possible."

yep. The one-trick pony is defined best by his creator. Again how long I have been saying that it's not so much the match up LH top spin FH to Fed's BH that was teh issue....but the energy of that ball. Asap Nadal's energy level drops so sightly or conds are fast enough, Fed can handle that match up fine, even bagelling him a few times. .

NITB wrote:Toni acknowledges that Federer's improved BH and fast conditions won him the final against Nadal, and comments on Nadal's current position.

It's interesting he says Nadal is injury free, yet he withdrew from Rotterdam citing need for rest.

Does this mean he is cycling up for clay season?


"It must not be forgotten that arriving at Roland Garros [in 2016], Rafa had excellent sensations. There was just this physical issue ... For the first time in a long while, Rafael has no physical problems to manage ... Since he has been playing with no pain, he has regained a high level."

............


"[Federer] played with extreme speed and resisting his game was very difficult,” he said. “It's also the case [that] his backhand was incredible towards the finish of the tournament. First, he had an inspired week--he made fewer errors than usual and stayed firm with his decision to hit the ball more flat.
"Then, I don't know if the courts had more speed, as many have said, but I think playing at night favored Federer because the ball does not bounce as high and he can anticipate more easily. The extreme topspin was simply not possible."

interesting comments from uncle tony...
but was federers fairy tale 18th major a little too good to be true?
many people over on THASP seem to think so
in fairness,had it been nadal who came back from 6 months off tour due to "injury" and went on to win the tournament having played 3 5 setters to get the title,most of us would have thought that it was a complete farce and would have claimed that he cheated his way to the title via PED's
now everyone knows that i am a massive federer fan,so i would like to believe that he won playing about as clean as clean can be,but federer is certainly not beyond reproach when it comes to suspicion and speculation
im curious to know everyone else thoughts

Tenez wrote:

Then, I don't know if the courts had more speed, as many have said, but I think playing at night favored Federer because the ball does not bounce as high and he can anticipate more easily. The extreme topspin was simply not possible."

yep. The one-trick pony is defined best by his creator. Again how long I have been saying that it's not so much the match up LH top spin FH to Fed's BH that was teh issue....but the energy of that ball. Asap Nadal's energy level drops so sightly or conds are fast enough, Fed can handle that match up fine, even bagelling him a few times. .  

Yes, he gave it all away....


I hate high bouncing balls (and courts).They kill  tennis. They really do.

The problem they have in THASP is that they are blind to tennis skills.

They can't quite see teh difference between winning with an ace or flat BH and scrapping right and left while trying to transfer as much energy on the ball as possible.

When Fed beat Nadal 63 60 in an hour in WTF 10 (or 11) they again questioned it while Federer simply won with minimum energy spent.

In any case Fed only managed to win cause he had 2 days rest before the final....and despite that he had sets where he looked exhausted.

Veejay wrote:
many people over on THASP seem to think so
in fairness,had it been nadal who came back from 6 months off tour due to "injury" and went on to win the tournament having played 3 5 setters to get the title,most of us would have thought that it was a complete farce and would have claimed that he cheated his way to the title via PED's
now everyone knows that i am a massive federer fan,so i would like to believe that he won playing about as clean as clean can be,but federer is certainly not beyond reproach when it comes to suspicion and speculation
im curious to know everyone else thoughts

What in Federer's  tennis makes you think he dopes?

Even Toni  admits he is hitting the ball cleaner and earlier than ever...and that means he is using minimum energy.
1 shot from Federer = 3-4 from Nadal energy wise.

The fast balls in AO won him the slam. And his out of this world talent of course...but without those balls, he would not have won.

He would have been dead after 5th round max.

NITB wrote:

Tenez wrote:

Then, I don't know if the courts had more speed, as many have said, but I think playing at night favored Federer because the ball does not bounce as high and he can anticipate more easily. The extreme topspin was simply not possible."

yep. The one-trick pony is defined best by his creator. Again how long I have been saying that it's not so much the match up LH top spin FH to Fed's BH that was teh issue....but the energy of that ball. Asap Nadal's energy level drops so sightly or conds are fast enough, Fed can handle that match up fine, even bagelling him a few times. .  

Yes, he gave it all away....


I hate high bouncing balls (and courts).They kill  tennis. They really do.

It kills tennis and brings the game into a marathon. It's a simple tactic. Tony was lucky that those new strings and slower conditions allowed that kind of game back cause in teh 90s there was no room for it....Maybe at the FO....from time to time.

NITB wrote:

Veejay wrote:
many people over on THASP seem to think so
in fairness,had it been nadal who came back from 6 months off tour due to "injury" and went on to win the tournament having played 3 5 setters to get the title,most of us would have thought that it was a complete farce and would have claimed that he cheated his way to the title via PED's
now everyone knows that i am a massive federer fan,so i would like to believe that he won playing about as clean as clean can be,but federer is certainly not beyond reproach when it comes to suspicion and speculation
im curious to know everyone else thoughts

What in Federer's  tennis makes you think he dopes?

Even Toni  admits he is hitting the ball cleaner and earlier than ever...and that means he is using minimum energy.
1 shot from Federer = 3-4 from Nadal energy wise.

The fast balls in AO won him the slam. And his out of this world talent of course...but without those balls, he would not have won.

He would have been dead after 5th round max.

not much really
i am just asking a question and wondering what everyones opinion on his 18th major is
some people find it as suspicious as when nadal returns from an injury and wins a major
the only thing that i can go by is his age vs competing at that level

Tenez wrote:

Then, I don't know if the courts had more speed, as many have said, but I think playing at night favored Federer because the ball does not bounce as high and he can anticipate more easily. The extreme topspin was simply not possible."

yep. The one-trick pony is defined best by his creator. Again how long I have been saying that it's not so much the match up LH top spin FH to Fed's BH that was teh issue....but the energy of that ball. Asap Nadal's energy level drops so sightly or conds are fast enough, Fed can handle that match up fine, even bagelling him a few times. .  

How many times I've heard that's an outrageous slur to suggest Nadal needs to run the single strategy of banging it high to the backhand to beat Federer. Nice to hear it confirmed by his lifetime coach.

Veejay wrote:

NITB wrote:Toni acknowledges that Federer's improved BH and fast conditions won him the final against Nadal, and comments on Nadal's current position.

It's interesting he says Nadal is injury free, yet he withdrew from Rotterdam citing need for rest.

Does this mean he is cycling up for clay season?


"It must not be forgotten that arriving at Roland Garros [in 2016], Rafa had excellent sensations. There was just this physical issue ... For the first time in a long while, Rafael has no physical problems to manage ... Since he has been playing with no pain, he has regained a high level."

............


"[Federer] played with extreme speed and resisting his game was very difficult,” he said. “It's also the case [that] his backhand was incredible towards the finish of the tournament. First, he had an inspired week--he made fewer errors than usual and stayed firm with his decision to hit the ball more flat.
"Then, I don't know if the courts had more speed, as many have said, but I think playing at night favored Federer because the ball does not bounce as high and he can anticipate more easily. The extreme topspin was simply not possible."

interesting comments from uncle tony...
but was federers fairy tale 18th major a little too good to be true?
many people over on THASP seem to think so
in fairness,had it been nadal who came back from 6 months off tour due to "injury" and went on to win the tournament having played 3 5 setters to get the title,most of us would have thought that it was a complete farce and would have claimed that he cheated his way to the title via PED's
now everyone knows that i am a massive federer fan,so i would like to believe that he won playing about as clean as clean can be,but federer is certainly not beyond reproach when it comes to suspicion and speculation
im curious to know everyone else thoughts

lol.  Please quit it.  It's getting so embarrassing to see you bring up doping to explain every single result you personally find odd or unlikely. If we follow your demented logic, Rosewall is the ultimate doper. Borg is a serial doper. Sampras is a doper.  You have no evidence, just mindless conspiracy theories.

Daniel,

there is nothing wrong in questioning...

Imagine if we all sat like zombies waiting to be served "truths" and "proofs".

Daniel wrote:

Veejay wrote:

NITB wrote:Toni acknowledges that Federer's improved BH and fast conditions won him the final against Nadal, and comments on Nadal's current position.

It's interesting he says Nadal is injury free, yet he withdrew from Rotterdam citing need for rest.

Does this mean he is cycling up for clay season?


"It must not be forgotten that arriving at Roland Garros [in 2016], Rafa had excellent sensations. There was just this physical issue ... For the first time in a long while, Rafael has no physical problems to manage ... Since he has been playing with no pain, he has regained a high level."

............


"[Federer] played with extreme speed and resisting his game was very difficult,” he said. “It's also the case [that] his backhand was incredible towards the finish of the tournament. First, he had an inspired week--he made fewer errors than usual and stayed firm with his decision to hit the ball more flat.
"Then, I don't know if the courts had more speed, as many have said, but I think playing at night favored Federer because the ball does not bounce as high and he can anticipate more easily. The extreme topspin was simply not possible."

interesting comments from uncle tony...
but was federers fairy tale 18th major a little too good to be true?
many people over on THASP seem to think so
in fairness,had it been nadal who came back from 6 months off tour due to "injury" and went on to win the tournament having played 3 5 setters to get the title,most of us would have thought that it was a complete farce and would have claimed that he cheated his way to the title via PED's
now everyone knows that i am a massive federer fan,so i would like to believe that he won playing about as clean as clean can be,but federer is certainly not beyond reproach when it comes to suspicion and speculation
im curious to know everyone else thoughts

lol.  Please quit it.  It's getting so embarrassing to see you bring up doping to explain every single result you personally find odd or unlikely. If we follow your demented logic, Rosewall is the ultimate doper. Borg is a serial doper. Sampras is a doper.  You have no evidence, just mindless conspiracy theories.

i dont need to quit anything daniel,least of all when you tell me to
i will ask whatever questions i want and if you dont like it-tough luck
you have the option to ignore the discussion if you dont like the subject
its a fair question cause if this situation were reversed and it was nadal who came back from 6 months off tour due to injury and went on to win the major,speculation on this forum would have been rife 
we have to be fair when it comes to this subject,youve admitted your suspicion of nadal and williams so if youre open to the possibility that they could have doped their way to titles,you have to be open to the possibility that federer could have done the same thing
im not trying to prove anything or take anything away from federer,im just asking what peoples opinions on the subject is

OK then, carry on.  But you're embarrassing yourself.

Daniel wrote:OK then, carry on.  But you're embarrassing yourself.

no im not embarrassing myself cause all i did was ask for peoples opinions
i havent made any accusations or tried to take anything away from federer
if i had asked the same thing of nadal i am sure i would have gotten far  more responses,i think that says a lot about people and their opinion on  the subject