What are the Positives?

List your positive thoughts here about this Wimbledon....I need them!

Difficult to think of one for now.

The closest fed was to win that tournament was when Anderson was 2 sets to love up.

The only one I can think of is that Roger's level is still above everyone else bar the git that beat him today!

Other than that......nothing

legendkillar wrote:The only one I can think of is that Roger's level is still above everyone else bar the git that beat him today!

Other than that......nothing

Good point. I actually think he could even have beaten Djoko today, had he not played Murray on Friday...or had he held his serve in that first set!

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:The only one I can think of is that Roger's level is still above everyone else bar the git that beat him today!

Other than that......nothing

Good point. I actually think he could even have beaten Djoko today, had he not played Murray on Friday...or had he held his serve in that first set!

I felt he had a really good chance. Similar to last year, played a faultless semi final and what went missing was the serve in the first set. He got the break and then found one first serve in the next service game. I don't want to say his body is like glass and that it breaks at the sign of a physically tough match.

It's that first set. I think Federer gets it, he would win. 

His serve went missing today in those first 2 sets. So crucial to his game.

Roger has had some nice draws at the last 2 Slams. Hope the US Open is kind to him.

I think he played well in the first set,he created some real chances,he just wasn't able to convert them
from then onwards I think his intensity kept dropping with every game played
well the major positive for me has to be the fact that last year I said that that was his last legitimate chance to win Wimbledon
he clearly proved me wrong

What are the positives...none.
None. None. None.

This is the end for Fed winning slams.

But love is something you can't control. And he loves tennis.

And until he loves tennis we shall dream with him.

Today was cruel.

But there were moments of glorious flight.

It was like watching last moments of a sunset.

Well a GS final loss is better than a GS SF or QF. So that is better. Fed holds on to his last years points. He is #2 player in the world.

But I don't see how can he win a slam now. One has to beat Nadal, Djokovic or Murray to win slams these days. And Fed would struggle against all the 3. Worse if he has to beat more than one of those. So only possibility is his draw opening up. Then too he would need a lot working for him.

The only positive is that it seems I'm not alone in my despondency.

Year, he needs the draw to go for him big time. Someone has to take Djokovic out for him, and he needs no more than one of the big guys to play. And this is at Wimbledon alone, he got all this at the USO last year.

maybe Federer needs to try this gluten free diet..it seems to have done wonders for djokovic

legendkillar wrote:
His serve went missing today in those first 2 sets. So crucial to his game.

Roger has had some nice draws at the last 2 Slams. Hope the US Open is kind to him.

I think having Murray was not really helping. In that respect he has had a much tougher draw than Djoko I feel. I would have like to see Federer play Djoko after the latter had met Murray in the semi.

Veejay wrote:maybe Federer needs to try this gluten free diet..it seems to have done wonders for djokovic

As Roddick said, "...when I played Djoko in the past, he was full of gluten"

bogbrush wrote:The only positive is that it seems I'm not alone in my despondency.

Year, he needs the draw to go for him big time. Someone has to take Djokovic out for him, and he needs no more than one of the big guys to play. And this is at Wimbledon alone, he got all this at the USO last year.

Yes but I still think he has a decent chance at the USO. Not favourite certainly but a good chance. The USO might give him fast balls there to help him.

It's just a shame that I woudl have fancied his chance today against anybody, including Murray again.

It depends on positives relative to what?

Relative to expectations going into the match, it was a huge disappointment.  Not only did Fed fail to come close to his Friday's performance, he looked like the three setter against Murray had totally exhausted him - either emotionally of physically.

Relative to expectations going into his SF, the whole thing still has been ok-ish.  Before the SF I had expected him to struggle against Andy and either losing there or losing then easily in the final.  He beat those expectations.

But yes, today was a letdown.  I was coming back from my vacation rushing from the airport to just barely make the start of the match, and it even looked pretty happy for a moment with a nice break to love for 4:2.  It went massively downhill very quick after that

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:
His serve went missing today in those first 2 sets. So crucial to his game.

Roger has had some nice draws at the last 2 Slams. Hope the US Open is kind to him.

I think having Murray was not really helping. In that respect he has had a much tougher draw than Djoko I feel. I would have like to see Federer play Djoko after the latter had met Murray in the semi.

I don't think it was a hinderence having Murray in his draw. Out of him, Djokovic and Nadal I think Federer has the beating of him. Federers ball striking in that match was majestic.

What I saw today was a lot of what I see when he plays Nadal. A lot of pulled shots. It's pressure knowing he has to be perfect to win a point. The length on his groundies is so similar. Least against Murray he gets more short length balls to attack. 

Djokovic also served a lot of body serves today.

Federer won't win another major. He can't recover quick enough from anything more than an easy 3 set Match. His level is still there fresh, but the legs can't last the pressure on a final like this.

There is a reason no one his age has won a major in modern times.
Still- this runner up only enhances his goat status. Jack Nicklaus often says he is not only proud of his major wins but also all the runner ups. It's says something to be in the title contention so many times.

The positive I take from this is djoko is well on his way to passing nadal in all time great status. Same generation/basic age and he's going to end up as close to nadals Slam number as nadal is to federer's, but added in is more year end #1's, weeks #1, consistency, more Wimbledon,Australian and prob U.S. open titles than nadal, better h2h against nadal if nadal quits ducking him, more masters, on and on. I now predict djoko will be seen as the #2 behind Federer when it's all said and done. Especially with a French win.

summerblues wrote:It depends on positives relative to what?

Relative to expectations going into the match, it was a huge disappointment.  Not only did Fed fail to come close to his Friday's performance, he looked like the three setter against Murray had totally exhausted him - either emotionally of physically.

Relative to expectations going into his SF, the whole thing still has been ok-ish.  Before the SF I had expected him to struggle against Andy and either losing there or losing then easily in the final.  He beat those expectations.

But yes, today was a letdown.  I was coming back from my vacation rushing from the airport to just barely make the start of the match, and it even looked pretty happy for a moment with a nice break to love for 4:2.  It went massively downhill very quick after that

That's why I think it was physically. He started well...and mentally strong....but clearly he cannot line up tough matches now....he coudl not then in 2009 (USO) and therefore even less now.

legendkillar wrote:

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:
His serve went missing today in those first 2 sets. So crucial to his game.

Roger has had some nice draws at the last 2 Slams. Hope the US Open is kind to him.

I think having Murray was not really helping. In that respect he has had a much tougher draw than Djoko I feel. I would have like to see Federer play Djoko after the latter had met Murray in the semi.

I don't think it was a hinderence having Murray in his draw. Out of him, Djokovic and Nadal I think Federer has the beating of him. Federers ball striking in that match was majestic.

What I saw today was a lot of what I see when he plays Nadal. A lot of pulled shots. It's pressure knowing he has to be perfect to win a point. The length on his groundies is so similar. Least against Murray he gets more short length balls to attack. 

Djokovic also served a lot of body serves today.

The key is Murray moves like a tank. he is very quick once he is on the run but much slower on the starting blocks....he compensates by anticipating well. Whereas Djoko doesn;t need to anticipate. He simply is very light on his feet. Long legs, relatively light upper body. It's simply depressing how he is on every ball. Not a great ball striker but because he is on the ball with time to spare, he can pick and choose where to send it back...usually on Fed's BH.

I think Murray woudl have tired Djoko, like Murray did in Paris. Then Fed woudl have had only one tough match...not 2.

I see none atm. 
I'm hurting a lot.
This will take days to recover.
Damn it why am I so emotionally invested in my hero!? I know. OY VEY IT HURTS!

I thought of one!

Had Nole played Murray and Fed Richie, and especially in the time order, we would have had a different match today.

Fed really did drop physically in the second set.
His best flattest FHs were less powerful than Nole's wristy ones and that was sad to see.
Nole felt it and pounded him relentlessly.

But the gusto with which he played, fight to the end were really beautiful.
He gave everything he had.

truffin1 wrote:There is a reason no one his age has won a major in modern times....

Frankly the main reason why Federer did not win a major today is Djoko. I think he woudl have beaten anybody else today..even not at 100%.

luvsports! wrote:I see none atm. 
I'm hurting a lot.
This will take days to recover.
Damn it why am I so emotionally invested in my hero!? I know. OY VEY IT HURTS!

Yes...despite all the effort, I am like you. It pisses me off.

noleisthebest wrote:I thought of one!

Had Nole played Murray and Fed Richie, and especially in the time order, we would have had a different match today.

Fed really did drop physically in the second set.
His best flattest FHs were less powerful than Nole's wristy ones and that was sad to see.
Nole felt it and pounded him relentlessly.

But the gusto with which he played, fight to the end were really beautiful.
He gave everything he had.

Yes...but when one is so quick on his legs....there is not much the opposition can do.

Sad to see a retriever winning 3 Wimbledon!

Look no further! I found the positive:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/33501951

Commiserations to Federer fans, I know it hurts a lot when you big player loses a big match; we've all been through it before.

Djokovic played really well today though and is the deserved champion. His depth on the groundstrokes in particular was very impressive, really kept Fed pinned back.

Tenez wrote:Look no further! I found the positive:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/33501951

My first smile since that final!

Tenez wrote:

luvsports! wrote:I see none atm. 
I'm hurting a lot.
This will take days to recover.
Damn it why am I so emotionally invested in my hero!? I know. OY VEY IT HURTS!

Yes...despite all the effort, I am like you. It pisses me off.

At the end of the day, being partisan on the whole does bring more excitement for fans and will make watching tennis more fun for you Tenez, brings an extra element.

Being a neutral and watching tennis is ok to some extent... but it doesn't bring tennis out to it's fullest potential in your mind, you don't feel every point in the same way.

One positive: Nadal did not ruin Wimbledon this year like he did prior to 2011.

AceofDeath wrote:One positive: Nadal did not ruin Wimbledon this year like he did prior to 2011.

Cheer up

Dustin Brown did that for me I'll take the good with the bad 

Interesting quote from Roddick on BBC:

"Back in the '04 final, we went off for a pretty significant rain delay and it's never easy. I remember walking behind Roger and I was sweating like I had done something very wrong. I looked on the back of Roger's neck and there was not a drop of sweat on there. I may have lost that match right there."

AceofDeath wrote:Dustin Brown did that for me I'll take the good with the bad 

That's the nature of following a player in tennis, sometimes there are good days and sometimes there are bad days. It's the bad days which make the good days more special; in sport nothing is an absolute negative.

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:
His serve went missing today in those first 2 sets. So crucial to his game.

Roger has had some nice draws at the last 2 Slams. Hope the US Open is kind to him.

I think having Murray was not really helping. In that respect he has had a much tougher draw than Djoko I feel. I would have like to see Federer play Djoko after the latter had met Murray in the semi.

I don't think it was a hinderence having Murray in his draw. Out of him, Djokovic and Nadal I think Federer has the beating of him. Federers ball striking in that match was majestic.

What I saw today was a lot of what I see when he plays Nadal. A lot of pulled shots. It's pressure knowing he has to be perfect to win a point. The length on his groundies is so similar. Least against Murray he gets more short length balls to attack. 

Djokovic also served a lot of body serves today.

The key is Murray moves like a tank. he is very quick once he is on the run but much slower on the starting blocks....he compensates by anticipating well. Whereas Djoko doesn;t need to anticipate. He simply is very light on his feet. Long legs, relatively light upper body. It's simply depressing how he is on every ball. Not a great ball striker but because he is on the ball with time to spare, he can pick and choose where to send it back...usually on Fed's BH.

I think Murray woudl have tired Djoko, like Murray did in Paris. Then Fed woudl have had only one tough match...not 2.

Indeed Murray is not known for his mobility, but I think the match Murray played Friday was perfect for Federer in the sense that even the rallying wasn't demanding because of the lack of power in the Murray shots which Federer was able to dispatch winners at aplomb. 

You look at how Djokovic has played Federer since late 2010 and Nadal in 2011 and wonder why against Murray he plays the ultra passive game given he can ramp up the aggression. 

What is so sad today was how just Federer couldn't make anything happen. The first set when Federer got the break of serve, I hoped he would consolidate the break and the first serve deserted him at 4-2. I think anyone else, Federer would've run through that set. Djokovic brings that pressure because of his returning abilities. He had such a read on the Federer serve and Federer wasn't finding the serve up the T like he did against Murray.

Yep..very true LK.

I actually think that Murray hits the ball quite hard v Djoko. I am not sure Fed was bothered by Djoko's ball pace..but more by were to put the ball away from him with his BH. That's really Fed's problem. Fed's BH is not pacy enough to bother Djoko while it kept Murray honest...at least in 40% of cases while his serve was doing most of the damage.

With Djoko's mouvement, Fed's BH is really a liability.

Tenez wrote:

truffin1 wrote:There is a reason no one his age has won a major in modern times....

Frankly the main reason why Federer did not win a major today is Djoko. I think he woudl have beaten anybody else today..even not at 100%.

True, but that's part of the equation of the age-  there is often a great player in his prime in front of the older guy.  Agassi would have probably my won that U.S. Open final at that time if anyone on the tour but an inprime Federer was facing him. As Murray said, very few players if any have played at such a high level as Federer at this age. at same time he and  other greats who played at this age just don't have the recovery abilities to win majors. Even though Feds talent and levels is greatest, he also has the bad luck of having a very consistent djokovic prob at the tail end of any major he gets a sniff at- after having a tough semi.  The recovery problem will be there.

The reality is- as much as the know nothing's talk about weak competition, luck on Feds side,etc-  he might be the unluckiest all time great in history of the game.  What other goat candidate had to deal with not 1 but 2 top 5 all time players in their prime while he was a generation older.  All the while playing in an era of conditions and technology that did not reward the game he learned to play under.   The era was perfect for lavers game, sampras game, nadals game, djokos game.   All players have opponents who are Terrible match ups for them, but what other great happen to have that bad matchup be a younger top five all time player who was there to face him 30+ times instead of the 5 to 10 times that a Sampras or nadal bad matchup opponent faced them?    Fed has been a giant fish in the wrong water for much of his carreer.   It's only his absolute goat talent that was able to overcome all that.

Not that I feel sorry for the guy! He's certainly been rewarded with riches, fame and glory even if his 17 majors prob deserve to be 23 at how far above he is from the rest of the players in talent.

I was thinking on those lines truffin. I thought of the US Open Final in 05 because Federer now is where Agassi was there in terms of Agassi needed that first set to stand any chance of winning and he like Federer was spent after the 2 sets because of the energy needed when playing an opponent more physically superior. Most think Federer can still play with the dominance of yesteryear.

For me the fact he remains the second best player on tour at this point at 34 is obscene. Be a long time before any replicates that consistency at that age.

truffin1 wrote:

Tenez wrote:

truffin1 wrote:There is a reason no one his age has won a major in modern times....

Frankly the main reason why Federer did not win a major today is Djoko. I think he woudl have beaten anybody else today..even not at 100%.

True, but that's part of the equation of the age-  there is often a great player in his prime in front of the older guy.  Agassi would have probably my won that U.S. Open final at that time if anyone on the tour but an inprime Federer was facing him. As Murray said, very few players if any have played at such a high level as Federer at this age. at same time he and  other greats who played at this age just don't have the recovery abilities to win majors. Even though Feds talent and levels is greatest, he also has the bad luck of having a very consistent djokovic prob at the tail end of any major he gets a sniff at- after having a tough semi.  The recovery problem will be there.

The reality is- as much as the know nothing's talk about weak competition, luck on Feds side,etc-  he might be the unluckiest all time great in history of the game.  What other goat candidate had to deal with not 1 but 2 top 5 all time players in their prime while he was a generation older.  All the while playing in an era of conditions and technology that did not reward the game he learned to play under.   The era was perfect for lavers game, sampras game, nadals game, djokos game.   All players have opponents who are Terrible match ups for them, but what other great happen to have that bad matchup be a younger top five all time player who was there to face him 30+ times instead of the 5 to 10 times that a Sampras or nadal bad matchup opponent faced them?    Fed has been a giant fish in the wrong water for much of his carreer.   It's only his absolute goat talent that was able to overcome all that.

Not that I feel sorry for the guy! He's certainly been rewarded with riches, fame and glory even if his 17 majors prob deserve to be 23 at how far above he is from the rest of the players in talent.

But I think at 27 Fed woudl have had even less chance to beat today's Djokovic. He just managed to scrap through 3 close sets at the USO 2007! In fact I doubt Fed's 2007 woudl have passed Murray on Friday.....certainly not as comfortably.

Yes Fed was tired today but I think the reason is that fed might be one of the few players running on "water". As you say he belongs to a different era and this is why he lost ultimately today. McEnroe adopting his larger frame racquet in 83 helped him one more year but his game never caught up with the youngsters who learnt to play with larger racquets.

Federer is simply facing today a player with amazing mouvement.....and that is why he lost. had he learnt to play his BH with 2 hands.....I think he woudl still have won today....even if tired. ..though maybe he woudl have been less tired as Murray and Djoko woudl do most of the running. Plus Fed may have caught up on the "super" diet too.

Tenez wrote:But I think at 27 Fed woudl have had even less chance to beat today's Djokovic. He just managed to scrap through 3 close sets at the USO 2007! In fact I doubt Fed's 2007 woudl have passed Murray on Friday.....certainly not as comfortably.

Yes Fed was tired today but I think the reason is that fed might be one of the few players running on "water". As you say he belongs to a different era and this is why he lost ultimately today. McEnroe adopting his larger frame racquet in 83 helped him one more year but his game never caught up with the youngsters who learnt to play with larger racquets.

Federer is simply facing today a player with amazing mouvement.....and that is why he lost. had he learnt to play his BH with 2 hands.....I think he woudl still have won today....even if tired. ..though maybe he woudl have been less tired as Murray and Djoko woudl do most of the running. Plus Fed may have caught up on the "super" diet too.

You could be right there.
He got tired after one set and spent after two.
And that should be about max with the way they are hitting the ball now.

On the other side, I saw no sign of fatigue from Nole.

legendkillar wrote:I was thinking on those lines truffin. I thought of the US Open Final in 05 because Federer now is where Agassi was there in terms of Agassi needed that first set to stand any chance of winning and he like Federer was spent after the 2 sets because of the energy needed when playing an opponent more physically superior. Most think Federer can still play with the dominance of yesteryear.

For me the fact he remains the second best player on tour at this point at 34 is obscene. Be a long time before any replicates that consistency at that age.

I see a difference here when comparing those 2 matches. First Agassi played his tough match v Ginepri (5 setter the day before) and therefore Agassi certainly was tired in that final. But the reason fed won was simply because he was a superior player. Fed also learnt to play tennis with the same technology as Federer. That's where the difference ends with today's match. Plus we know Agassi had a huge crowd going for him and it made the match very difficult for the Swiss, despite handling it very well.

I have always recognised that past 30 players do not recover as well and that will be federer's problem. But that is the trade off of being young and having less experience and less secure shots than Fed before he tires. I am simply convinced that Fed is a better player now when fresh than at 27..at least on today's conditions facing today's top players. Probem is that he has certainly lost of that recovery ability younger players have.

We will see whether Djoko can recover as well in the furture....whether his diet allows him to keep on going like Ferrer for instance. But it looks like federer has never been great with endurance...and being 34 certainly doesn't help.

noleisthebest wrote:You could be right there.
He got tired after one set and spent after two.
And that should be about max with the way they are hitting the ball now.

On the other side, I saw no sign of fatigue from Nole.

we have to take this into account. Maybe Djoko was clean too but we know he'd use the oxygen egg if need be andtherefore know that those modern athletes have an amazing fitness, their "baseline game" as Djoko says is based on fitness.

Federer's effort over the last few years has been to shorten rallies....for a reason.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/performance-zone/win-loss-index/career/5thset/all/

Federer #122 in the "PERFORMANCE CAREER 5TH SET RECORD" Hall of fame.

Clearly as good as his fitness is, he was never known for wining the long gruelling matches....

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I was thinking on those lines truffin. I thought of the US Open Final in 05 because Federer now is where Agassi was there in terms of Agassi needed that first set to stand any chance of winning and he like Federer was spent after the 2 sets because of the energy needed when playing an opponent more physically superior. Most think Federer can still play with the dominance of yesteryear.

For me the fact he remains the second best player on tour at this point at 34 is obscene. Be a long time before any replicates that consistency at that age.

I see a difference here when comparing those 2 matches. First Agassi played his tough match v Ginepri (5 setter the day before) and therefore Agassi certainly was tired in that final. But the reason fed won was simply because he was a superior player. Fed also learnt to play tennis with the same technology as Federer. That's where the difference ends with today's match. Plus we know Agassi had a huge crowd going for him and it made the match very difficult for the Swiss, despite handling it very well.

I have always recognised that past 30 players do not recover as well and that will be federer's problem. But that is the trade off of being young and having less experience and less secure shots than Fed before he tires. I am simply convinced that Fed is a better player now when fresh than at 27..at least on today's conditions facing today's top players. Probem is that he has certainly lost of that recovery ability younger players have.

We will see whether Djoko can recover as well in the furture....whether his diet allows him to keep on going like Ferrer for instance. But it looks like federer has never been great with endurance...and being 34 certainly doesn't help.

Oh there are technical differences with the matches, but I think the main point remains. Both players needed the first set in the bank. At a push they both could've ran out in 4. Federer was the superior player between him and Agassi, though I think for Agassi Federer was a far cry from Pete who overpowered Agassi. That was the one and only time I ever saw Agassi with a winning desire. He played a 5 setter vs Blake as well which was entertaining to say the least. Federers FH was brutal in that final.

I think today we saw Djokovic be what Nadal was to Federer.

Tenez wrote:http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/performance-zone/win-loss-index/career/5thset/all/

Federer #122 in the "PERFORMANCE CAREER 5TH SET RECORD" Hall of fame.

Clearly as good as his fitness is, he was never known for wining the long gruelling matches....

It has to be stressed over and over, and more than ever before that Federer is playing with ONE hand.
The friend I watched the final with just could not get it.

She kept telling how it's a player's choice not to use a DBH....and where do you start there...

Then we have Andrew Castles educating masses...no wonder nobody cares about the state of tennis.

Today's imbalance was just a consequence of years of neglect.

Giving an occasional time violation is like trying to treat cancer with sticky plaster.

legendkillar wrote:I think today we saw Djokovic be what Nadal was to Federer.

Yes and Nadal beat Federer right during Fed's glorious years! Neither waited for Federer to be 34 to beat him.

Tenez wrote:Look no further! I found the positive:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/33501951

Brilliant!

Tenez wrote:

luvsports! wrote:I see none atm. 
I'm hurting a lot.
This will take days to recover.
Damn it why am I so emotionally invested in my hero!? I know. OY VEY IT HURTS!

Yes...despite all the effort, I am like you. It pisses me off.

Pain is worst the morning after.
The positive thing for me is that he is still playing.
I just hope this loss has not broken the silver cord.

Gutted. Had to go to a funeral this weekend and I must say this match was in a way a fitting conclusion. Totally anticlimatic finish to the tournament with a very predictable winner.

Here is a question:

a bit of an unchartered territory as we never had 34/5 year olds competing in slam finals ESPECIALLY in this physical era/conditions:

Will Federer be able to play the same level Wimbledon next year?

Say, his back keeps and he continues to maintain his fitness?
What kind of deterioration if any can we expect from him?
Because if he is able to produce the same tennis this time next year, all he needs is a bit of luck with the draw.

So maybe the dream is not over...yet!

At this moment I would say all roads point to New York for Federer. What he could hope for is Murray and Djokovic to be drawn in the same half. Lets look below Federer.

Murray - Hit and miss. At this moment physically the only one who can push Djokovic.
Wawrinka - Hit and miss. Can blast anyone off the court, but those moments are patchy.
Nishikori - Question marks on fitness. Again like Wawrinka can his a purple patch and match anyone.
Berdych - Playing with much more confidence, but again vulnerable to walkabouts in matches.
Ferrer - Question marks on form and fitness.
Raonic - As above.
Cilic - Out of form. Had a good run at Wimbledon, can't see him defending his title.
Nadal - Who knows!!??

Federer is rather nicely poised. If he can maintain form and fitness and have a kind draw and someone take out the runners he could make it 18.

Yes..this is the positive about this forthnight. Federer proved he can still gove himself a chance for the title. Maybe he was unlucky to have to play the most physical player at the end.....and not a the beginning.

HAd Stan won that 1/4F v Gasquet maybe it woudl have been different. Same with Anderson being able to close it in 3, an in form Nishi or else.

It's not like Federer was lucky to make that final. He was pretty imperial on his way there.

So I cannot see why he would not have another chance to win a slam...it's getting harder though I agree.

noleisthebest wrote:Here is a question:

a bit of an unchartered territory as we never had 34/5 year olds competing in slam finals ESPECIALLY in this physical era/conditions:

Will Federer be able to play the same level Wimbledon next year?

Say, his back keeps and he continues to maintain his fitness?
What kind of deterioration if any can we expect from him?
Because if he is able to produce the same tennis this time next year, all he needs is a bit of luck with the draw.

So maybe the dream is not over...yet!

I think the difficulty at 35 is the same as 34 but amplified. It would have to be a very lucky draw to play 7 matches without sweating too much in 2016.

Ferrer seems to be able to string those physical matches. Not Federer.