This shows how Federer should have always played against Nadal and Djokovic in the tie breakers. When he backs himself is when he gets the best results. I wish he would have won one of tb in Wim 2019.
Remeber i was so nervous by the time of the second set tie breaker @RG final in 09. I thought "I hope he hits an ace on every serve he strike" and he did, It was surreal. When the match ended I cryed full of emotion! Hell of a carreer, and a massive Gift to all of the ones who had the privillege of watch tennis on the big three era...
@@smoulito He was playing great, but Djokovic was too solid in the final. His brand of tennis will beat Fed's brand more times than not if both players are playing well. Higher percentage tennis
@@tommycrowley8668 for me it's above all the clutch moments that made the differences, he had so many break points in this match. He delivered pure masterclasses against great players in Wimb and US semies to lose in 4 in the final...it's so frustrating
@@smoulito Also very true, his break point percentage in that match was ridiculously low. Also played very impatient at times, played serve and volley when he really shouldn’t have. Very mentally weak. Really weird for probably the most talented player ever, it’s like he didn’t trust himself on the big points
He should have played perfectly at least one of the three tie-breaks he played and lost at Wimbledon 2019, a final he should have won as he was very superior to Djokovic that day.
Federer really deserved that Rome final..that last set..of this was a GS it would be competing with Wimbledon 2008 Federer would never win Rome Who would've thought? Even djokovics exploits on clay are not better than Federer...beating prime Nadal on clay was tough ...really tough especially when he was attacked relentlessly on the 1HB by nadal
This is all fine and dandy though he lost the other 2 tiebreakers in the last one, but what about the 1-9 tiebreaker record in Finals that went to a deciding tiebreaker, how about that compilation.
This was a pretty annoying video because you basically said it was 7-0 in the thumbnail and then only showed one example. I thought this was going to be one of those videos where you found something we hadn't seen before. Shame
roger had lots of success with B players but when it came novak/nadal he failed horribly only winning 33% of their GS matches and 4 of 14 in GS finals over his career. Fed couldn't even beat Nadal once at french and lossed to Djoki 3 times in a row at wimbledon finals on his supposed best surface and even had the crwods on his side shows fed was very weak mentally along with his weak backhand,, 50% of feds titles were on B circuit 250/500
Djokovic beated federer in wimbledon finals when federer was 33,34 and 38 years old. How many times they have faced in wimbledon finals when the age difference could be an advantage for the swiss? 0. I'm not saying federer is better than djokovic but you have to report things in the right way, otherwise i could say that djokovic won 14 out of 21 majors from 2014 ( federer was already 33) and in the last years beated a super weak generation ( at least safin,hewitt, nalbandian,ferrero,roddick lost to a prime federer while tsitsipas, rublev, zverev,medvedev,berrettini cannot beat a 33,34,35years old djokovic, a very good djokovic but a different djokovic if you consider the 2014,15 nole). Don't forget also that nadal was a beast on clay since 2005 and had his best years on grass from 2006 until 2011, so you can't say federer had no rivals when won the majority of his grand slam titles because is not true.
@@anniballinicola You forgot the moon and stars were aligned differently for Federer too!! Who cares Fed lost no matter how u spin it and no one cares all those excuses.. You should go on tom brady's page and say u won because ur opponents are too young..tiger you won because u only had one good knee and ur oppoents were too young too..Fed won 10 less masters titles than djoki because u have to be even more consistent to win best of 3..Fed did sell more running shoes and watches than Djoki..Fed only beat nadal twice on clay and never at french and Djoki beat nadal 8 times on clay and 2 times at french
@@canski5646 excuses? It is a fact that ( talking about wimbledon finals) djokovic had a huge advantage considering the age difference . Talking about master 1000 , 6 out of nine are on hard courts... this is also a fact . You can say federer beated young djokovic and i agree with you but federer (during his prime) had faced djokovic in grand slam finals only once ( us open 07) while djokovic beated a 33/38 years old federer 4 times in grand slam finals ... you can't deny it was a huge handicap for federer.
@@anniballinicola so desperate like I said WHO CARES WITH UR STATS...OVerall fed failed horribly agaisnt his 2 rivals novak/nadal in GS and will go down as a choker and cringing cry baby when he retired!! He was wailing like the world was ending it is JUST TENNIS... His sqaush game, weak mental strength, weak backhand and was marketed to the armchair tennis players who gobbled it up !!
