Table of Contents
US Open Day 6: Federer and Murray Advance in Straight Sets
Federer Drops Serve Twice in Kohlschreiber Match
- Elsewhere in the Draw
- Update
“My generation would have hit him on first serve. If he would have played McEnroe, Lendl or Connors or even me, we would have said, Roger, in all honesty, I like you very much, one more time, I go straight at you. In my generation, guys wouldn’t have accepted as it is now. For sure.”Becker just stating the obvious and there have already been Fedfans on Men’s Tennis Forums who twisted his words, saying Becker ‘slagged Roger off’, that he said Roger was taking ‘cheap shots’ at his opponents and that the ‘whole locker room was talking about it’. I guess they are getting pretty desperate. I watched tennis back in those days and there is no way this tactic would just have been accepted by opponents without them doing something similar in return.
- Highlights
is in your court. Posted in Grand Slams, US Open.
15 Comments
- The SABR is a gimmick and holds little consequence in his game. The point of that move (the bigger picture) is that he’s playing more aggressively, and has players thinking about the unpredictability of his game. People focusing on SABR should go watch the Kardashians. Roger will have little trouble with Isner.
[Reply]
- If Becker’s saying that, then I think Djoker would certainly have been told what to do in preparation for his next meeting with Federer and how to “solve” this 2nd serve approach. Aiming at the body would be difficult to execute if Federer’s block return is particularly deep but it’s worth trying. “SABR” was a term coined by Severin Luthi and seems to have now been adopted by tennis fans to describe the tactic. Probably got something to do with Edberg as he used to use this a lot back in the day.
[Reply]
Ru-an Reply: September 6th, 2015 at 10:39 pm Yes, I actually just read about Luthi on Twitter. I’m glad you said something about it because I’d like to hear my readers’ views about it. And yes, if the return is deep it would be harder to drill the ball into his chest, but if it drops short once and you aim right for the groin area it would put doubts into Federer mind about doing it again. He’d have the extra pressure of knowing it must be perfect or he may not be able to have more children.
[Reply]
Jiten Reply: September 7th, 2015 at 5:26 am He already has two pairs. He will be least worried about that. Probably that is THE reason he has been so brave about the SABR, while others have to rethink before committing themselves to the net.
In my opinion tall players like Isner, Anderson etc should be more worried about imposing SABJ, SABK themselves as the probability would a little bit more for these players. 
[Reply]
[Reply]
Joe Reply: September 8th, 2015 at 5:12 pm He has two pairs of children?
[Reply]
[Reply]
Charlie Reply: September 7th, 2015 at 6:59 am Yeah it is being overhyped way too much. Is it some kind of ‘magic’ weapon? Of course not. But is it a useful tactic to bring in as a surprise, but you are right that eventually players will find a response. It’s not some game-changing shot like some people seem to think it is.
[Reply]
[Reply]
- I agree with this, in the old days they would probably just aim a first serve (on the 2nd serve) at him , risking the double fault. Federer is confident enough he can duck out of the way I guess…I would reserve it for late moments in sets when there is pressure. Yes this whole thing is being overhyped by media types who want it to fit in their ‘Federer as genius’ narrative. Actually I think it is a smart move by him just to mix things up. AFter all it’s better than chipping a backhand midcourt and watching Djokovic or Murray blast it into the corner. The whole purpose is to rattle the server and get him thinking about something else. I agree Federer’s form was not great in the Kohlschreiber match. He had some dips and got broken to love which is strange . Kohlschreiber hit some good shots too though, just can’t keep it together. I think Federer, as he often does, will come back more focussed today. Even in his peak, he had low quality matches, it’s not like he would laugh his way to the semis back then, surely
Still, in the form Djokovic is in now, I cannot see Federer winning this. Djokovic is not showing signs of the frustration he had in Cincy and Montreal and looks more relaxed. He realy lucked out in the draw getting Nishikori and neither Murray or Wawrinka. Whoever survives that side of the draw will be exhausted come Sunday…[Reply]
[Reply]
- The evolution of this blog has been really fascinating. From being a realist federer blog to a fanboy Djoker blog. It has been quite a journey. The way you pick up small small things and turn them as a point against federer’s current form against his legacy so as just to prove that your current favourite is better is really great. The skepticism with which u treat everyone else and the quickness with which u defend Djoker really goes on to show that this is no longer a realist\unbiased blog. I hate to say it but your bias for Djoker now i guess is even more than it was towards federer earlier. I would have kept reading this blog if it was a unbiased tennis blog from a Djoker fan. But now it is just a Djoker fan blog which is trying to hide itself as a general tennis blog. You seem to wanna show that even though this is a tennis blog but Djoker is so great, so right in everything he does that you are forced to side with him. Sorry but this no longer interests me.
[Reply]
[Reply]
[Reply]