Mcsqueegy And of course, he's right. I wasn't sure so I watch it in slow motion and it is clear that it bounced twice . I'm 100% sure. So Federer was right!!! Berdych is playing unfair!!!! It's awful. Firstly I thought that maybe Roger wasn't right , but I watched it in speed: 0,25 so veeery slow, and of course I see perfectly it bounced twice!!!!!
@huzzzer and what does that make of you and your presumption that the different reactions were all the same people? You painted a picture of fickle "cowards" and you labeled the crowd as a single entity. Generalizing sides only spoils you and the reality of the moment
"I agree, it was close, but the result was obvious that he didn't hit it the right way." You spend enough time on the internet and examples of disagreeing respectfully become few and far in between. This was a breath of fresh air.
Jesus, Federer is respectful. Not even arguing, just gives his explanation, listens to the Ump, and respects the call even though he knows he's right. That's some class.
I agree he was very respectful in this clip as he has been lately, but if you’re interested, check out “Federer raging moments” and you’ll see he hasnt always been this way lol
@@sarahg6551 The fact that you immediately made this into a gender thing when its not tells me you're not worth debating with. Any gender/race that did what Serena did is equally childish.
Despite the physics degree, the explanation from the commentators is not correct. Federer's intuition that it bounced is correct, but you can get topspin on it before it bounces if the racquet it moving upwards (especially if it hits that part of the frame), or get slice on it after it bounces. The difference is that the ball has far more *speed* if it bounces than if it only hits the racquet. Berdych didn't swing the racquet so there is no way the ball could come at Federer that fast if it didn't bounce. With that shot it likely wouldn't even make it over the net, especially if it had topspin.
@@AGAU1022 One commentator is right the other one doesn't seem to understand. The ball didn't bounce twice, it's on the return that the ball bounces off the wrong side of the court. 0:55 he's right.
EXPLANATION FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW WHATS GOING ON: Federer received the last ball in a "top spin" motion. That means the ball is spinning towards federer (from up to down). This move is amazing for making the ball accelerate on the court. The problem is that, in order to do this, the racket must hit the top of the ball to make it spin, so it cannot make the ball move upwards (↑) . If you do this without having vertical force from down, the ball will hit the net. The fact that the ball went across the net in a top spin motion while hitting near the floor means that i had vertical force from elsewhere. Yes, that vertical force is the "bounce" from hitting the floor of the court. Thus the ball DID BOUNCE before or after the hit. It's amazing, however, that Federerer managed to analyze all this in a couple of seconds in a so secure way that he dared to tell to the referee :)
Shows how dedicated and professional the man is. He is not just playing tennis on the basis of talent and hard work, he is also fully informed on the technical ins & outs
Guys, this is not ONLY about the top spin. It's 50% about the way Berdych hit the ball with the racket. Berdych could create top spin hitting the ball from the underside, but in order to do that he would've needed to "hit it the right way", as Federer said. Federer could clearly see that the way Berdych hit the ball wouldn't have caused that result. This is why he immediately knew the ball had hit the floor afterwards.
See how respectful he was? He knew he was right and the ref made a mistake, yet he was still polite and reasonable and dignified. That is what class looks like.
Reminds me of a documentary I saw a long time ago where they showed how normal people could barely even react to the serves professional make due to the speed. Normal folks only track the ball which, by the time you can react, is already past you. Pros on the the other hand, look at body position, racket angle, jump etc so that they're moving in the right direction/position even before ball leaves the racket. And that's how those crazy fast serves are successfully returned.
old post - but Ill add on that its the same in baseball. A fast ball thats travelling 95mph can get from pitchers mound to home in 0.4 seconds. Human reaction speed varies - but its a .25 seconds. Meaning you need to make a decision in less than .15 second AND act on it in the same time frame.. batters do that all the time. Don't forget too your actual perception is in the past as well, so your brain also tries to predict where the ball "should" be too. Its why sometimes you think you hit something, but you actually barely missed it.
But what the heck is the announcer saying by not a double bounce the ball was hit into the ground 1st that is not what we see on slow Mo even though the other commentator just goes along with his craziness
In tennis you have to observe how the ball behaves in different scenarios. Like if the ball is hit in a certain way or at a certain angle at a certain force, etc. These players can predict where the ball is going if they can know certain variables, having played tennis all their lives. The camera might not have captured it really well but Federer is clearly right on this one. He knows that if his life counted on it he can bet on it.
@Enowki Is not even close Federer is way better, there is no way of play more perfectly than that. The only player that is built for beat Federer is Nadal, but is not a better player I general just best fit against him. Left handed, his high bounce on his hits...
Like when I used the word “inventory” over here in Holland during English class and my Dutch born English teacher crossed it out with a red pen in a test saying “that word doesn’t exist. You made that up”. lol. Pathetic
Right Uppercut bruh I remember this one time I was in year 8 and my teacher asked a question and I answered it right but the teacher said it was wrong 😑
My man calmly, respectfully, and very intelligently argued his point. When the ref said it seemed as if his opponent barely caught it with the racket, he agreed it was close and so that was understandable but stood his ground. What a king, we love good sportsmanship.
He himself played a double bounce vs Murray in 2014 AO. He surely must have known it was double bounce , when he knows all that. Yet he didn’t concede the point
Now thats how you lose gracefully. Federer stated his argument and took the L without any attitude even tho he was right. Class is a rare thing these days but luckily we have Federer representing - a class act. Scored many points with me in that instance. Keep rockin it steady Roger.
For those that are wondering, Federer made a comeback and eventually won the match with 3-6 7-5 7-5. Edit: Yes, I finally changed game to match, my bad 🤭
Rewatching the point live it’s pretty cool to see 0:12 Berdychs return obviously went right to left meaning there is topspin on the ball. He caught the ball before the double bounce but after it hit his racket the ball hit the ground on his side of the court then went over the net creating the topspin. It makes sense Federer casually hit the ball back over the net thinking he clearly won the point despite Berdych smashing the volley winner. From our spectator angle as Fed says “result was obvious”
Aldozzy people did complain about it, especially nadal and novak. It's not about the color, some kind of salt that was specifically put on the blue clay make it slippery. Nadal, who i think is a very defensive player, obviously, didnt like that.
@@budgiebreder it is a clay court that's only been used once, but it wasn't made/looked after well. It hasn't been used again after its first appe at the tournament. there's a vid about it
Pay attention their feet and ull see how slippery blue clay is. Clay isnt supposed to be slippery its supposed to help a player to come to stop quickly
Man was spitting hot fax and realised that putting to much care into it would ruin his gameplay so he just spat the fax and went back to playing. Amazing mentality.
That was one of the classiest moments in sports. You know you've been cheated, there are a hundred cameras proving you've been cheated, but you play on without making a scene or having a tantrum.
I had to slow it down. I knew what he was saying and my eyes confirmed that but to actually see it I had to slow it down. He caught it top speed as it happened in the middle of top level competition. Insane.
Fun fact : Federer used to have a terrible attitude when he was younger, breaking rackets and throwing tantrums. I'm so glad that he made an 180 and is now one of the most respected tennis players.
Reminds me of a Kobe Bryant story....he comes out for warmups, eyes the rim from about 50ft away, walks over, takes one jumper from midrange, walks over to the court maintenance guys, says "The rim's about an inch low".....rim was like 9'10&3/4". These guys are ELITE athletes, sure, but they are dialed in to within 2-3 planck lengths. Their perception levels are resting 11.
It just shows how knowledgeable a professional is at their sport. Took me a minute to realise what he was on about after watching it twice. He knew straight away in a split second that there was something wrong. Science
@@GholaTleilaxu That isn't what he was telling the umpire. He was pointing out the way the ball was spinning (and moving in general) was inconsistent with a ball that was weakly popped up just an inch from the ground, but was very consistent with one that was shorthopped just after it hit the ground. He may be the only one to explain it that way, but literally every single player on the tour (and most in colleges and even high schools...as long as they have been playing for most of their lives) would know it as well. The difference is night and day.
Every one who's been playing tennis (or any ball sport) for more than 15 days is an expert in tennis ball motion dynamics ... If you're not a complete moron. It's not rocket science, just watch what's going on. If your first instinctive reaction just now was : "Well, *I* am not an expert in tennis ball motion dynamics!" (implying that no one can be one) you know you fall in the moron category.
Sahm A Roger was totally right on that one. I slowed down the replay at 0:49 , it hit the ground and Berdych knew that but of course he's going to be a douche and not say anything.
yes you can. Experienced referees have a much bigger responsibility then "any human"...plus, if they reviewed it in replay it should have been taken back.
For myself, the tough part wasn't seeing the double bounce. It was seeing whether it 1) hit the ground twice and then 2) hit the racket, OR 1)it hit the racket first and then 2) hit the ground and 3) then hit the racket again. I believe it was the latter.
Its more knowledge around the subject than science. He's experienced this many times and knows how a ball was hit depending on the spin and angle, it's more maths, too.
RU-vid algorithm has always intrigued me.. never googled about tennis, hardly ever talk about tennis, but I’m here watching about how Federer explains about balls bouncing twice. And... I’m glad I watched....
It shows you disposable stuff, mostly crap and TV shows, and buries things that are actually the product of effort, talent or real value. Just for one bit of info, a guy literally invented a working invisibility shield, no BS, and started posting about it last year. His videos have less than a thousand views and the algorithm won't show it. Look up "hyperstealth invisibility."
this happens often when an asian student comes to america, then the math teacher suddenly makes every question harder, and the asian student still thinks its easy and points out every mistake the math teacher did lmao
If you play the replay at 0.25x you would clearly see how the ball bounced first before it went over the need back to Federer. Federer’s real time understanding of this game’s physics just blows my mind away.
Bloody hell, I had to watch it on 0.25 speed twice before I could clearly see that the ball bounced twice and Federer knew from the spin of the return- the man’s a genius
He didn't know it from seeing it bounce twice. He knew it from the way the ball was spinning. It really isn't that hard to notice because there is a HUGE difference in popping it up weakly just before it hits the ground, and shorthopping it over. Most people who have played tennis even semi-regularly would see this.
I play Racquetball, and it's got very similar physics, when the ball hits the wall and ground at the same time, or when someone scoops it and claims they got it, it is good to know stuff like he does, so that you can explain why it is what you say it is
@@joshbarrow8928 you say you have a life but not only did you reply to a youtube comment, you replied to a youtube comment within an hour of them commenting it. Some life you have there
Jay Chung The whole Federer early prime was beating chumps and bums, right up until Nadal came and whipped his ass so bad he had to cry (look up it up there's evidence). Then came Djokovic who started beating them while they were BOTH still in their prime. Please...
Harry Templeman-Wright That's not true, of course prime Federer was beating the Djoker when he just arrived on tour with no expereience. Also he was weak and had breathing problems and in poor health. As soon as he fixed that, Federer was still in his prime and couldn't beat him. Stop it. Plus in 2011 and 2015 he had the most dominant years in the open era, not to mention he did it in an era with 2 of the top 5 players of all time in Federer and Nadal. Did I forget that he was the first player to hold all 4 grand slam titles since Rod Laver in the late 1960's.
If I hit the ball while it's bouncing of the floor, L might think I'm Kira, because I'm desperate. If I don't, he will deduct that I'm overcalculating, which means I'm Kira...
@@qiiBlackThunderiip let's just say that things look different from the chair than they do from the court. Is that too hard to understand? Players always have an inflated sense of their ability to officiate. It's a completely different skill set than playing.
Magyar19 This doesn't make him a genius and this isn't why he's the best. he's the best because of how he plays tennis. a lot of people would have picked up on this, particularly pro tennis players.
Federer keeps his cool because as tempting as losing it is, he knows that getting emotional will screw up his later plays. He's totally mastered the mental game, and it shows.
@@tyroneloki5131 I heard you can’t review footage until after the call is made and refs rarely ever reverse a call even when it’s the wrong one that’s just how it is
@@JonYen69 because it slows down the game in a sport where 2+ hours are the norm and even then is not free from gross error. VAR in football is the biggest example. Regularly consumes about 5 mins of a 90 min game.
*Absolutely true.* Roger played a drop shot with an underspin the only way you can return an underspin is if you hit the ball with either topspin or underspin but berdych visibly just pushed the ball flat with his racket but still the ball made it across and suprisingly with top spin. That would only be possible if the ball is already dead meaning the ball bounced twice making whatever spin on the ball gone.
thanks for clarifying, yet the part where u say the only way to return an underspin is either another underspin (which I can picture happening) or a topspin, which is counter intuitive for a layman such as myself, can u explain? Wouldn't a topspin add more underspin making the ball go down?
The slow motion 0.25x seems to show Berdych’s racquet touch the ball into the ground and then on the follow-through racquet hits ball again with topspin.
You don't need to see it to understand it. It's simply conservation of rotationary motion if you play any ball sport. Federer clearly sliced the ball. That's a fuck ton of spin. Bed bare reached it and was unable to generate power to counter the spin. The question is where did the rotationary momemtum of the ball go? The only explanation in that situation is the ground. Federer didn't "see" that. The umpire was even closer to the action. It's just Federer had a better understanding of rotational motion than the umpire
It was impossible for the umpire to see. The umpire is not a physicist with knowledge of ball spin, energy transference, etc. Berdych likely did not know the ball bounced twice.
I shall agree with Heather, I don't think Berdych was sure about the double bounce... though maybe he should've been after hearing Roger's logic (which is mindblowingly accurate and borderline impossible to discuss).
Or maybe he knew that a judgement overuling what you saw vs what physics tell you "what probably happened" afterwards is a bad judgement...then again im no regular tennis watcher
He realises arguing with the ref will do his game mentality and focus no good so he tries to keep it to a minimum even though he knows he’s right. Waste no energy on what you can’t change.
None of the people are correct here. The ball was NOT hit into the ground coming off his racket and it was also NOT a double bounce. It is insanely close to being a double bounce and Federer logic for why it has topspin was sound but it was actually a double hit. The ball was framed initially and then it rolled up and off the racket causing the topspin. Which as long as it is in a continuous motion is legal. I pulled the footage and went frame by frame.
You can see it technically does hit the ground and net at the same frame, but you are correct about the spin, Federer was wrong in his explanation, and probably didn't understand because it hit the plastic part of the racket.
Tennis crowds are fucking annoying Djokovic winning: silence His opponent wins a point: goes mental and won't shut up shouting his name so they can't continue
