Agree or disagree: Federer is the most talented player of all time, but not the smartest?

Question

He has every shot in the book, but he doesn't know anything about tactics. Nadal is less talented but knows the right tactics to employ against him.

Agree or disagree?

Answer 1

I don't agree that Federer is the most talented, but I do agree that he does take a very smart approach against Nadal.  He has so far lost 2/3 of all the matches they played, yet before the Wimbledon final he said he knows what to do and doesn't feel the need to study recordings of Nadal's matches.  He also made a similar statement before the French Open.  In my opinion when you already have a losing record against a player, it is not very smart to assume that you know how to play him.

Answer 2

I agree with you. Nadal seems to construct the points better than Federer.

*For example, at Wimbledon this year Nadal served 90% of the balls to Federer's backhand. Federer had room to move over, and he was missing a lot of returns. He doesn't seem to change his game plan like Nadal does most of the time.

Answer 3

To say Federer knows nothing about tactics is to say johnny Mac was just OK .... wow ... I am continually amazed at peoples perspectives ....

Federer made alot of great adjustments against Nadal ... did u not watch the match?

Did you look at the score line ... it was so close ....

He was down 2-0 ... remember that ... so did Nadal just let him catch up???? LOL

Amazing ... Nadal hit some just out of this universe shots ... he is hot right now ... we will see if he continues to be ...

What I was most impressed about Nadal is his resolve and cool ... he made some really bonehead decisions in the match that cost him .... he should have been off the court earlier ...

To say Federer is the most talented of all time is for the eye of the beholder ....

Thanks for your question though ... its very provocative to say the least ....

Answer 4

Absolutely, agree !!

Answer 5

Agree. i've been watching tennis since 2005 so i can't really compare federer to others but for me he is really talented but the way he plays is like he's just going with the flow and that was enough in the past. he knows what he wants to do at the start of a point but when the rally starts to get longer, he just doesn't know what to do next. he just goes with the flow.

luckily for him, his shots are really good and its enough for him just to hit the ball back since his opponents can't chase it all down, except for nadal. i think federer doubts himself when playing nadal and when the rally starts to get longer and its time to choose his shots, which he has a lot to choose from, he just starts to doubt himself because he knows nadal can return it and confused and start making errors or lousy selection of shots.

i can also say that nadal is less talented, but still talented. nadal's game, i think, is mostly because of his hard work on the court while federer is mostly talent. its like nadal knows what to do in every situation because of all those hard work and those hard work builds up like muscle memory while federer's shots are more impromptu...

Answer 6

what are you talking about? Nadal has only one tactic that is put the ball back in the court and pray the other guy misses. in tennis when you miss, your opponent scores not like when you miss a jumpshot in basketball, you don't care, you can stop them in the next play. that's why their match was boooooooring.

Answer 7

I can't say he is the most talented player of all time. It's simply too hard to compare eras.

As far as his smarts, it's all relative. You look smart when you are playing well, and dumb when you don't.

I can't agree or diagree.

Answer 8

You're right. Federer has a great forehand, a decent backhand, an amazing serve, one of the best net games around, great reflexes on the half volleys and such, but little sense on when to use those at times.

His mistake at Wimbledon was trying to beat Nadal at a groundstroke rally. You cannot beat that man from the baseline. You could make him run from side to side, returning hard flat shots all the time, and Nadal wouldn't even break a sweat. He's an animal.

To beat him, Federer needed more net play. He did a lot better this match against Nadal (Last years French Open he did not go to the net even close to as much as he needed to). Federer displayed two things at Wimbledon: 1. He can drive Nadal off the court easily with his forehand. 2. He won't follow the shot in.

Now, I don't think that Federer is more talented than Nadal; at their level, I think it really all comes down to whoever is working the hardest. Federer has not been playing as much as he has in the past, and he isn't improving at all as far as I can tell. Nadal, on the other hand, is putting his body to the limit and improving rapidly

Answer 9

Totally agree. No other logical answer for him loosing to Nadal who is a good player but not a Federer. His shots are good and his speed is great. But still if Roger thought more and better he wouldn't be loosing as much and as badly.

Rather than getting into long baseline rallies against Rafa "the wall" Nadal he should have just served & volleyed the entire match. He has the ability and accuracy to pick off the lines ...both sides so use it on the serve and then simply follow the ball into the net rather than just approaching to the centre.

Answer 10

Well no hes not the smartest, does Karlovic have like a law degree or something. Or is it someone else?

Tactics... yeah Fed knows nothing about tactics. Nothing. Zilch. 12 grand slams all acheived by poor shot making decisions and a sincere lack of tactics.

I think Nadals coach has very good tactics, I am not sure of Nadals own personal intelligence levels. Sweet guy tho.

I think tactics come down to coach, so whos got the smartest coach of all time?? Its kind of ridiclous to ask isn't it.

Personally I think Roger must be a very smart player to not have a coach, I think Nadal's coach or Nadal himself - who knows- employs excellent strategys, and i think Novak is a smart player also.

But I think its near impossible to pick the most tactical player of all time.

I guess I agree... in a way

Answer 11

"all time"?

I generally don't like absolutes.

How do you gage players playing in different eras? Who are their main rivals and competition?

Tennis like many other sports involves a variety of skills, mental and physical.

It's all very subjective when you get down to rating players.

Federer and Nadal are both very talented players.

They are both smart players as well. I wouldn't say Federer "doesn't know anything about tactics". It's true we could all be armchair quarterbacks and say he should be doing something different. In hindsight, any loser of a match can say they could or should have employed a different tactic.

But if Federer converted just a couple more of the break points he had, and won the match, would this subject even come up?

Answer 12

Federer is one of the most strategic players. He constructed the shots far more precisely than Nadal. Problem was that he made too many last minute changes in his decisions, and hit a ton of unforceds, so anyone would look dumb doing that. Nadal was also able to simply reply to any maneuvering Federer put him through.

I have to agree that he has all the right shots, but at Wimby he beat himself to a degree.

Answer 13

Nadal is Smart player and he has observed the other players nicely, Federer was just another player for him and he knoes only one thing use tactics which will weaken the opponent.

Answer 14

Disagree.

Talent is useless if you're not smart about your tennis - which Federer is.

The problem is that he has too many weapons to choose from, unlike Nadal.  

As for Nadal's tactics, all he basically does is attack Federer's backhand.  Doesn't take a lot of brains to do that again and again and again.  

To say Roger Federer "doesn't know anything about tactics" is a huge insult to him and his achievements.  As good as he is by himself, I guess Roger just needs a coach to help him 'handle' all the types of shots he has.

Answer 15

100% agreed. I've thought the same thing for a while and the Wimbledon final highlighted it. He has every shot in the book... and then some but sometimes, for some reason, he chooses to throw in the most boneheaded shot that just leaves you scratching your head, wondering "why in the h**l did he do that?" His volleying in the final was shaky anyway but some of the stuff he was coming in off was questionable at best. He really showcases the difference between shot variety and shot selection: his variety? Fantastic. Selection? Not always so good. He often seems to win on pure talent alone, without assessing the strengths and weaknesses: Engaging Nadal in repeated long baseline rallies is not an exceptionally smart move... especially on grass. Nadal, on the other hand, never seems to pick the wrong shot. Even when he loses points, it is rarely because he has picked the wrong shot. Nadal knows his strengths and, almost without exception, plays to them. Federer could stand to take a leaf out of the world #2's book. With #' s 2 and 3 snapping at his heels, now more than ever before, strategy and tactical acumen would be very valuable assets for Federer to add to his god given talent.

Answer 16

Federer has great tennis instincts.  But Federer needs to listen to Johnny Mac and maybe practice with him.  

Nadal is just as athletic and stronger as Federer.  His repertiore is not as large as Federer, but his shot, with their spins, are deadly.  

But Nadal also holds the advantage of being a southpaw.  Federer rarely plays lefties, but Nadal plays righties every day.  Nadal's serve kicks up high on Federer's backhand, which is Federer's big weakness.  Federer also seems to misjudge the 'break' of Nadal's serve.  A lot of baseball players have trouble with a lefty pitcher and a lefty will do better than a similarly talented right hander.

Nadal has risen to be Federer's equal -- or at least really close.  I'm looking forward to seeing how this plays out.

Answer 17

i agree, nadal exploited federer's weaknesses in the match and won it because of his better tactics

Answer 18

I disagree..federer is the best talentwise and tactic wise...its just  tht he's relying too much on himself...he needs a coach...a coach who will help him to sort himself out a bit when he's in tight situations..he cant go on without a coach forever.

Answer 19

Most likely, Federer will be considered the greatest of all time. There are still about 10 years ahead of him, and much can happen. Roger wil hopefully continue to astound us. He hit some incredible shots and set up some incredible strategic plays. Didn't you see the game??!!  One of Roger's strengths is his strategy. His errors killed his game at Wimbledon and a few decisions he made were bad at the most crucial points. A few times he tried to hit winners, when a simpler shot would have been better.

I always admire Agassi who made it to the USO against Federer, and he was 34 or 35.  That's huge!

Answer 20

both are good, but the  timing, and presence of mind, swiftness , accuracy, concentration and all many more like scientific temper,age physical fitness are many factors that contribute to succeess..

it is the ultimate effort of 100% you display at the time of the match is more imp.