Why Tennis Players FEARED Playing Roger Federer!

No tennis player will ever be greater than Roger Federer. Okay, that's probably not true, but if you watched tennis at all between 2004 and 2007, you might have felt that way because Roger Federer in his prime was unreal. From his stranglehold at the top and setting unimaginable records, to the beauty of his game, global impact, and rivalries, here is why prime Roger Federer never feared anyone. 2003 was a strange season in tennis. The great Pete Sampras had already called it quits, and with the exception of Andre Agassi, the tour was dominated by young players mostly between 20 and 23 years old. We had Leighton Hewitt, Andy Roddick, Juan Carlos Ferrero, Marat Safin, Nalbandian, and of course, Roger Federer. Four different players won the four Grand Slam tournaments, and that season saw four different world number ones. But by 2004, Roger Federer started to impose his dominance. It was the beginning of magical things to come. The Swiss maestro beat four of his biggest rivals en route to his second major title at the Australian Open and became the world number one. He won three out of four slams and had a 74-6 season record. It got even better the following year when he only lost four matches out of 85, won two majors, and 11 titles overall. And just when you thought it couldn't get any better, 2006 came around and that year was the best of the bunch. A ridiculous 92-5 record, three majors, and 12 titles overall. Federer remarkably reached 16 finals in the 17 tournaments he entered during that season. What in the world? Federer won yet another three majors for the third time in his career in 2007 and showed no signs of slowing down. In those four years, Federer won a staggering 315 matches and lost only 24. He won five straight Wimbledon titles as well as five consecutive U.S. Open titles. He held the top spot throughout those years and simply dominated everyone. Well, except for Rafael Nadal who consistently ran over him on play. But how about we take a look at Federer's game and see the three biggest reasons why he never feared anyone. Prime Federer was an all-court, all-around player and his exceptional shot-making and fluid style of play left everyone in awe. In one word, it was perfection. A lot of Roger's appeal came from his graceful one-handed backhand, which also had flicks, slices, smashes, and seemed to show no weakness at the time. His forehand was devastating while managing to remain smooth and effortless. John McEnroe referred to it as the greatest shot in our sport. Federer's awareness, positioning, and movement were deceptively effortless and he seemed to float around the court. Federer was also capable of serving accurately at 135 miles per hour. His half-volley flick passing shots, his razor-sharp reflex putaways, his angles that seemed to defy the laws of geometry, and of course, he disguised his drop shots that confounded opponents. From being a server and volleyer who upset Pete Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001, Federer transformed his game to an ultra-aggressive all-court style and he had the physicality to back up his game. Knowing that he had a superior game meant there was absolutely no reason to be scared, but there was something else that was a little less obvious. Federer stayed ahead of the physical curve during his prime and I still think that the physical part of his game is somewhat underrated. He didn't have the bulging biceps of Rafael Nadal or the chiseled body of players like Martin Vucevic, but Federer knew that he could rely on his fitness to overcome his rivals. According to Federer himself, 1999 was the last time he had cramps and it happened just once in his career in a Davis Cup match. In his 24 years as a professional, Federer claimed that his losses barely had much to do with his fitness and it's probably why he never retired during matches. More so, in his prime, Federer had machine level efficiency. His level of play didn't seem to take a significant hit even under the most stressful conditions. How did he do it? Federer's diet was not as strict as what we've seen from some players and his physical training wasn't the most sophisticated either. So did he win the genetic lottery or did you think there was another factor at play? Well, I think so. And if you want to be successful, you got to put in the work. There's just no way around it. Perhaps one of the biggest reasons why Federer was so dominant in his prime was because of his mentality. Federer always knew that being talented wasn't enough and that he needed to put in the work. Apart from his elegant game and tennis artistry, Federer just had this aura that always said, I'm the boss. It was this mentality that helped him stay calm and confident in tough situations and ultimately win a lot of matches. But believe it or not, Federer used to be a racket smasher. You see, as a teenager, Roger had a bad temper and it got so bad that his parents were sometimes ashamed of his behavior on the court. But with the help of a sports psychologist, Christian Marcoli, who worked with Roger from when he was 18 to 20, Federer saw a change in his mentality. Peter Carter, who was the first and most influential coach of Federer, also played a huge role in Federer's mentality change. But it wasn't until after Carter's death from a car crash in 2002 that Federer fully understood the values that his coach taught him, which we actually go over more in this video we made a while ago. On rare occasions when Federer's game was not at his usual standard, he could rely on his mentality to dig deep to win a match. He had the belief that as long as he was dialed in, no player could beat him in his prime. 22 times in his career, Federer saved match points and won the match. When asked how he managed to stay strong mentally, here's what Federer said. I think I had a long process of getting my mental strength, you know, going. Took me, I'd say, almost three years, a good three years, to figure myself out on a court, you know? How am I happy? I always call it the fire and ice situation, you know? The fire, wanting to win, being excited after a good point, and the ice coolness of accepting losses, accepting bad shots, accepting the crowd, the tough circumstances. And I think I found the right balance after three years on tour, and I looked in the long term. I hoped to play for 15, 20 years, and I just decided that I was going to act that way and behave that way on a tennis court, so I would never lose matches because of my mental strength. By developing a complete and more superior game, improving his physical conditioning, and developing a winning mentality, Federer never feared his rivals at his peak because he knew just what to do to overcome them. But who were these rivals? Let's quickly look at some of the significant rivalries from Federer's peak years. Federer beat Andy Roddick 21 out of the 24 times they faced and won all four Grand Slam finals. Roddick tried to be competitive in some of those finals and came very close in the 2009 Wimbledon final, but he simply couldn't do enough to overturn the one-sided rivalry. Who do we have next? Federer and Leighton Hewitt met 27 times, with Federer leading 18-9 in the head-to-head. Early in their careers, Hewitt dominated Federer and won seven of their first nine meetings, but everything changed from 2004 onwards and Federer went on to win the next 16 of the next 18 meetings. Hewitt always fought like heck during these matches, but he was always outclassed by Federer's touch, pace, and angles, but it was more of a rivalry with Nelbandian. They played 19 times, with Federer leading 11-8. Nelbandian dominated the rivalry early on, winning the first five matches between 2002 and 2003. But starting from the 2003 Masters Cup, Federer went on to win 11 of their last 14 encounters. Nelbandian was super talented, but his conditioning just wasn't there, and this, I think, caused him to underachieve. But what do you guys think? Federer also met Agassi a couple of times and beat him in three majors. But I don't really consider this a rivalry because Agassi was already on his way to retirement. Federer played Safin 12 times, and apart from the 2005 Australian Open semifinals, where Safin beat Federer, Federer dominated Safin, winning 10 out of their 12 meetings. He never really saw Safin as a threat. Federer didn't really meet Cilic in his prime. Still, he managed to beat him 10 out of the 11 times they played. Not much to talk about in this rivalry since Federer won 23 out of the 26 times they met. Some matches were close, though. Just like Cilic, Sanga didn't really face prime Federer, and most of his wins came from 2011 onwards, but Federer still managed to beat Sanga 12 out of the 18 times they faced each other. Federer played Tomas Berdych 26 times, winning 20 of those matches. Almost all of Berdych's wins came on hard courts, and Federer won 8 consecutive meetings between 2004 and 2010. Berdych then won 5 of their next 8 meetings, until Federer won the last 9 meetings. Federer played Del Potro 25 times and won 18 of those matches. In 2009, after Federer survived a 5-setter against Del Potro on his way to his only French Open title, Del Potro upset the 5-time defending champion in 5 sets at the U.S. Open later that year. Interestingly, Andy Murray won 8 of their first 13 meetings between 2005 and 2010, but none of those wins came at Grand Slams. Federer leads the rivalry 14-11 here. We already know that Nadal leads the rivalry 24-16. It seemed like during his peak, Nadal was the only kryptonite that he had. Between 2004 and 2010, Nadal beat Federer 14 times and it wasn't all on clay. Nadal also beat Federer on hard courts and grass. Many of their matches were close, but Nadal seemed to have the edge more often than not by attacking Federer's backhand. Federer won their first 4 meetings, but Nole got a couple of wins here and there on the Australian Open semis in 2008, the 2010 U.S. Open semis, and in a couple of Masters 1000s events. But it wasn't until 2011 that Djokovic effectively overturned the rivalry. For the rest of the tour, they didn't get that many wins against Federer. In fact, Federer dominated everyone so much that his peak period became known as the weak era. Federer spent 237 consecutive weeks at the top between February 2004 and August 2008, also winning a record 65 matches in a row on grass between June 2003 and July 2008. But here's where things get interesting. 2008 came and Federer got sick with mono at the start of the year. It was the beginning of his problems. He lost to Novak at the Australian Open semis and saw his run of 10 consecutive finals come to an end. Rafa cracked the code on grass and got a W over Federer at the Wimbledon final. It was one of the greatest matches ever played. The irresistible force of nature in Nadal successfully dethroned the five-time defending champion after four hours and 48 minutes of grueling but brilliant tennis. Nadal ended up seizing the top spot from the Swiss, and from then on, we weren't quite sure what prime Federer was. You see, at the beginning of the video, I initially said that Federer's prime was from 2004 to 2007. It just seems to be the general narrative because of his accomplishments during that time. I don't completely agree with it because best results don't completely translate to prime. There's some element of timing and luck. For instance, Michael Chang won his only Grand Slam at 17. Was he in his prime at that age? I don't necessarily think so because he did manage to get a lot better over the course of his career, but he never did quite manage to win another Grand Slam title. Why? Competition, maybe. Back to Federer, he won two majors in 2009 at the age of 28, which I honestly don't consider a ripe old age. Also, I didn't really see a significant decline in his game relating to loss of racket head speed, reduced velocity on the serve, poor forehand quality, or really anything else of the sort. So for those of you saying that peak Federer might have extended through 2009, I'd say you have a point. After being world number one for almost five years, it's only normal that the younger generation would have studied your game along the way and find a way to compete better. The level of play got higher with Andy Murray, Djokovic, Nadal, and Juan Martin Del Potro in the picture, but Federer was still the man to beat heading into the 2010s. As we approach the 2010s, Federer faced stiff competition from the new boys in town. After winning the 2010 Australian Open, Federer only won one Grand Slam title in the next 27 majors. Djokovic won 11 of them, Nadal won eight, while Andy Murray and Stan Wawrinka won three each. Many people thought Federer was all washed up. You see, in 2016, he tore his left meniscus and had to undergo knee surgery, the first in his career. Coupled with an aching back, he only played six tournaments and dropped to world number 17, which was his lowest ranking in 14 years. It was the beginning of the end, or so we thought, but Federer reinvented himself one last time and 2017 was the year that he showed us all that he still had some juice left. We saw a much improved backhand as Federer fought back to beat Nadal at the 2017 Australian Open final in five sets. He then followed that up with Indian Wells and Miami title wins, completing the sunshine double for the third time in his career. After winning the Halle Open, Wimbledon, Shanghai Masters, Basel Open, he closed in on the world number one spot, which he finally reclaimed in early 2018. Federer said he felt like he was in his prime in 2017. He added more drop shots, more serving and volleying, and the Sabre sneak attack by Roger Root, but the most important reticence came from his mental approach more than the tactics. With the need to make significant adjustments in his game after suffering declines, Federer reminded everyone that he was still the man. 2017 Federer is often underrated because he balanced out his schedule and just didn't play as much. But his net play in 2017 was some of the best I'd seen from him in his career. Federer once joked about winning 20 major titles and playing until he was 40 years old. Suddenly, those two scenarios played out. Federer also had a solid team behind him to help out. His coach, physiotherapist, orthopedic surgeon, fitness trainer, and agent all had important roles to play in his resurgence and longevity. Federer would end up playing 1,526 matches throughout a superlative career that many heralded as the golden era in tennis. He won 1,251 of those matches, which is about 82% and never retired in any match. 310 weeks at the top, 103 ATP titles, six ATP finals titles, 28 Masters 1000s. We could go on and on with the achievements, but there's one last question to ask. When talking about the greatest seasons in men's tennis, a lot of names come to mind. Novak Djokovic in 2015 or 2011, Nadal in 2010, McEnroe in 1984, Yvonne Lendl in 1986 and 87, Sampras in 94, Rod Laver in 1969. If you were to choose the player who had the highest peak, who would it be? A difficult one, I suppose. The truth is, I haven't seen anyone as dominant as Roger Federer was in his prime. And on top of that, his game was one of the most beautiful elements to grace the sport in its history. Federer utterly dismantled the rest of the tour in his prime, and his 237 consecutive weeks at the top might never be broken. He won 24 consecutive matches against top 10 players, five consecutive Wimbledon titles, and five consecutive US Open titles in his prime, meaning that Federer was the first man to win five consecutive titles in two different majors. Between 2003 and 2005, Federer won 24 consecutive tour-level singles final. Between 2004 and 2010, Federer reached 23 consecutive Grand Slam semifinals. We could go on and on about the records, but you already get the gist. So how can I best explain Federer's magic? In his 24 years as a player, the kinetic beauty of his game, his passion and charisma endeared him to many of us. No one could really stop him in his prime because he had a complete skill set, was physically up to speed, and had the mentality of a champion. Adding everything up, it's easy to see why Federer is so loved. Showing off incredible shot making, making difficult games look easy without being disrespectful, and reading his opponents like an open book, man, you can't get better than that. Federer had every shot in the book and just made everything look so simple even under high levels of pressure. If you were to describe Roger Federer in one word, what would it be? Graceful? Classy? To many, if not most, tennis fans, Federer is a reference point. He set the pace for everyone after him. He was talented and hardworking, a champion's champion. Federer brought joy to tennis, and above all the titles, records, rivalries, and talks about who the greatest ever is, we can only appreciate his legacy. But where are the other players of Roger Federer's generation these days? Find out in this next video right here.