Interesting Federer Interview

its in Swiss German but its very well translated, maybe he elaborates more because its in his first language. He talks about how he was thinking of the match point at the US Open against Novak when he served for the match against him at Wimbledon and was trying to play mind games with him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUl9Mz8ZjTw&feature=relmfu

Can't watch that now, but looks like a good find!

Yeah was quite surprised how much detail he goes into, was fascinating really

Nice interview, very intelligent.

The quote that struck me most was: "I'm very realistic, I know what really is still possible."

I would love to know what he thinks he still can do.


"Playing well was never the most important thing, but rather the fact that I'm playing at all."
"No one wants to listen when I say I still want to play and that I'm quite satisfied with myself."
In other interviews he has hinted at going for five olympics.

It's clear that he is still hungry and loves to play tennis, let's hope that his body doesn't betray him.

I took much of this very positively, in terms of him playing a lot longer.

He loves the game.
He plans long term.
We know he wants the girls to really watch him play great tennis.

4 more years? Why not!

he mentions he wasn't a step slow his opponents played great, nothing to do with his age, but no one wants to hear that. You forget how close he's ben in the 2 and a half years without a slam, he never went away

great share CAS, thanks for the link.

CAS wrote:he mentions he wasn't a step slow his opponents played great, nothing to do with his age, but no one wants to hear that.

Because it's false!

However since FO 2011 he has improved mightily.

Still a much better mover than Andy Pandy.

Interesting.
The way he's been competing the past 2-3 years shows he cant have slowed down out there - he wouldnt/couldnt be winning the big titles otherwise. He's obviously putting a lot of hard work in at the gym, etc...the sort of stuff we dont hear about.

He's always worked hard in the gym - what may also be happening is that the work with Annacone is starting to bed down and he's learning more about how to play aggressively and save his energy.

As we have said on another thread, given that he's already played 52 matches, and if the Olympics go Ok for him it's quite possible he'll start August with 58 under his belt (either Final or Bronze play-off), it will be very interesting to see if he can finish this year well having played more matches than any year since 2008.

the guy fascinates me the way he thinks, he is so laid back about life and tennis. His head is screwed on right, his biggest mental strength is actually off the court than on it in my opinion. Could anyone in the history of the game respond to that Novak defeat like Federer did? McEnroe although won the US Open after loss to Lendl at the French, was never really the same.

Nadal has done admirably after his loss to Novak at the Aussie open, but I think although disappointing, he had low expectations for the tournament so he played it with a nothing to lose attitude, Federer desperately was fighting for slams at the US Open

Nice points CAS. I feel like I'm abit of a stuck record today but the thing that stands out about the "flair" guys is that they played the game exactly the way they wanted to...they play unbridled tennis, and love it. Federer loves tennis, and perhaps because of this plays with a freedom that none of the others have. Many of the other players appear and feel more manufactured - and you wonder if they love the game enough to be as successful or have as long a career.

Which makes me wonder how many times does a player come along who really loves the game from being a kid and asked their parents to play rather than being drilled into tennis by a tennis-loving, overly zealous parent. Love of the game can be masked early on as many kids may show talent and so progress through the ranks as expected...but do they truly love the game? After all Agassi hated tennis yet look at his talent - clearly his passion wasnt nurtured properly somehow, I always wonder what he could have done had he found a way to love the game - sometimes I thought Bolletieri was a brake on his career not the accelerator pedal as it instilled him with a more manufactured approach. An approach I wonder if blunted his true potential. Conversely, are the attacking flair players those that really loved the game? (Federer, McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Sampras) Is it the love of tennis that inspires flair, or is it the ability to play with flair that inspires a more lasting love of the game.

Additionally, I wonder if modern coaching is shoe-horning kids into playing a certain way, clipping their creative potential and producing identikit players as a result. And in doing so they may be potentially killing their love of the game and so shortening their career. If we look at current leading manufactured-type players, Djokovic and Nadal, they seem to have hit the wall slightly. Its hard to imagine them playing with the free abandon and passion Federer does at 31. Murray seems similar...and therein lies the issue with him. I truly believe that Murray is a flair player but is instead a more manufactured product of the type of system I've been describing today which blunts juniors and stops them cutting it at top level (for those with less talent than Murray)...the type of system that gets players ralleying endlessly to look for gaps to counterpunch. Murray has more potential than playing the way he does, he can attack excellently but something holds him back. Murray could have reaped much better rewards if he'd played the way he should have done rather than embrace the physical, grinding route. I wonder by the style of tennis he's chosen, or felt he had to chose, just how much he loves the game? I dont get the impression he does. How many other players are the same because of the way they were taught and style of play they chose or had thrust upon them...?

To link to the other thread, I think modern coaching techniques/approaches are creating ways of playing tennis that dont inspire flair play and a love of the game. Federer was nurtured differently and it shines through in the way he passionately talks about and plays the game. The tour has to find ways to encourage and reward flair and passion through their development programs and playing conditions. Otherwise the modern game is creating more and more young players who dont seem to enjoy what they're doing...and is this another reason they arent making it to the top anymore?

I just hope Federer keeps on playing long enough that young players, coaches and the ATP itself thinks about and is inspired by his passion for the game, and the way he plays. And in doing so change their approach and encourage playing conditions that reward and encourage flair play. Let their flair flow...and see how far they can go. It hasnt done Federer any harm in playing exactly the way he wanted to...the 'unplugged way' - surely thats the key rather than playing a rigid manufactured approach to the game based around baseline drills? Oh lord...I need some tennis to watch, lol.

Thanks for this Cas - really interesting interview. He seems to be a man at peace with himself both at work and at rest. It is always fascinating to listen to anyone with a real passion for what they do - the way he said that it really just mattered to him that he was playing.

PS -Brilliant post Lydian - I wish there was a ten star award I could confer on you

Focussing in on the Murray part of lydians post, that's how I see him too.

I know you mean what he learned as a kid, but I think that a few years ago he seemed to play more spontaneously than today, and he was not far off #1 at the time. Seems like he decided, or was told, that winning a Slam would require more of a drilled approach, but it's not paid off (yet).

I'm not saying he didn't need to improve, but adding extra fitness didn't mean he had to then use the fitness as a primary tool to beat people, which I think he often does. Maybe he could persuade McEnroe to team up with Lendl? Yeah, then he could sort Syria.

CAS... wonderful find. Very good interview of 20+ minutes.

At one point someone had pointed out that Borg's style of play was 'not' Tennis and Bergelin had remarked that no one should try and change Borg's style. The was 'flair', IMVHO. Federer and Laver are very similar in this respect.

The loss at RG 2012 vs the win at W 2012 against Djokovic is what Federer's love of Tennis brings out. To take losses in his stride and still continue to play aggressive.

Regarding Annacone, if he has been successful with Federer and Sampras, why was he not as successful at LTA - a question to discuss in another thread, perhaps.

laverfan wrote:

Regarding Annacone, if he has been successful with Federer and Sampras, why was he not as successful at LTA - a question to discuss in another thread, perhaps.

Yea that would be a good topic to debate on LF, may be you can open a topic with it.

Thanks TP!

I'd agree there BB, the 18yo Murray was much nearer the flair player concept, I think alot of the manufacturing came after that point and at the behest of McLagan who turned him into a physical machine. Murray should have been Mecir#2...and people hated playing Mecir, he had them all over the court.

The LTA is an immoveable object LF...British tennis is structured in a way thats very hard to get Annacone's concept of (fast-court) playing incorporated. Annacone's whole approach is a complete anathema to current coaching techniques actually...but the world should listen to him! The way forward is aggressive tennis, not passivity.

Speaking of flair, I actually felt Nadal was almost a flair player because his FH is completely natural and very unmanufactured. His BH and slices are also somewhat quirky. If you read Toni's approach in detail he never drilled Nadal into specific shot technique, etc...contrary to popular belief...he was more focused on overall results and allowed Nadal levity in how he achieved those results. Yes he may have imbued certain oncourt tactics buts thats a little different. For example, Ferrer is a completely different player - there is a guy that was drilled to within an inch of his life.

So it seems that the 7+ slammers (inc. Nadal) tend to be the more creative, flair players...and obviously you have Federer, Sampras and Laver right up there at the top of this. McEnroe too...he should have won more than 7. Wilander I discount...seems his manufactured "drill tennis" burnt him out very quickly and he walked away from the game. Borg is an another oddity...I cant decide if he was a manufactured player or not. His BH technique was highly unusual...kind of a mix of SHBH/DHBH...and his FH was advanced for its day, as was his serve. But he did at times play "drill tennis" and his career wasnt that long...at the end he hated tennis implying the way he played grated on him/wore him down. Nadal seems down at the moment but as described elsewhere I dont think the love of the game due to a manufactured approach is the issue, I think its off-court stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vG3RKKWiUtw

Young, free Murray playing his game. A joy to watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kc9Gj_x21nk&feature=related Ivan Lendl interview, really like how he comes off and his authority. Gilbert seems a little intimidated if you ask me

I like the part where he goes on about giving Novak the same ball to see if he could hit 'the shot' again.