US Open 2009 Final / Juan Martin Del Potro vs Roger Federer

[Porte87]

That was freaking awesome! Its such a shame that they don't talk about strategies on ESPN... those who don't know about the game miss out on them.

[maddcow12]

I like your analysis, but the misleading title makes me still give this a thumbs down. I understand that you want views, but I've noticed all of your videos mislead people into thinking that your videos are the actual matches/highlights. That's a bitch move man.

[androo526]

Yo Will! When will Del Potro be playing again????

[megavolt67]

What happened is that Fed played better in the first half (by luring Delpo to the net) and Delpo played better in the second (by forcing Roger into baseline rallies). For everyone blaming it on Fed's serve: Delpo's serve was very inconsistent as well. Neither guy had a great day serving, but on the big points (and towards the all-inportant tail end of the match), Delpo is the one who came through. Roger didn't give it to him. Delpo took it.

[Idontfcare]

@megavolt67 perfect evauluation right there.

[Bradin14]

Delpo!

[robbyten100]

I am so happy Federer didn't win! Yay Del Potro!

[maxiskhan]

And i don't think unlike many people that he lost this final becoz he served badly whereas it was the case at Aussie Open '09.

I expected Fed to use more short slices to attract DelPo to the net and then pass him like in AO 09 QF and against Roddick, more slices also in the rallies on DP backhand to avoid power rallies, break the rythm and force him to bend a lot on his knees and more short-angled shots. Along the game, i feel he goes more and more into Delpo's game : that's also why he lost.

[maxiskhan]

I agree about DelPo's mental toughness as the key factor of this match.But i don't agree about the strategy yu display in the first set which is nor a interesting strategy for Fed against Del Po nor even the one he actually employed to win this set.Fed played remarkably in this set using more slices, variations and angles than in the rest of the game. But power rallies with rythm and pace in the center of the court suit perfectly to Del Po's game.Fed is more often running out of time in them.

[MrFretmanic]

federer never served well must have had aback problem look at the doublefaults

[jayhl77]

Vicissitudes. Kudos.

[demondayzzz]

Also it's interesting to note that Federer's return game has been on and off to say the least- for instance he usually breaks Roddick 3 or 4 times a match but at Wimbledon he couldn't get past x-30 in about 34/35 of A-Rod's service games. He usually makes mincemeat out of heavy hitters like blake and gonzalez with his incredible reflexes, and he usually returns 130+ right to the server's feet, but that was all lacking vs DP. His fh/serve/will to fight are as good as ever though.

[demondayzzz]

FYB- good stuff, i'm not sure the math has any relevance :P RF was serving badly, not just %wise, but positioning and pace-wise as well. But DP was very clutch, and from what i could tell the only diff between when he was winning and not was that he just added 10-20 mph on every shot, then Fed wasn't able to direct his own shots as well, slowed them down, then DP could open up on his fh. Fed also picked on the fh early but when DP was on there wasn't much Fed could do except try to hang in there

[mirageDestined]

he does the points won calculation and comes to a conclusion.. this is ridiculous.. it is important when you win points. you my lose a set 0-6 and then win in tiebreakers.. you win the match.. then your points may be lower..

He thinks he is clever, hah.

If Roger could serve as he could normally, then the match was over in 3 sets for sure.

[pifflejammy]

Fair analysis. You're right, it all comes down to the big points. Hell that's how Fed won some of his matches. People discredit him in some matches because he played ugly and just won the big points. But point is, he still won. Same goes for Del Potro, no matter what happened during the match, he stepped it up in the big points and won. :D

[pitoloco]

murray ??? who is murray??? we know nadal, dkokovic, del potro, federer... but murray is nobody

[martiniho12]

Hi FYB, i just wanted to ask you about a wired tennis problem, i was winning one time 5-1 in a set and ended up losing 5-7, also how could i get the best performance when i go out to play, as when i last played my arms where really stiff even after a warm up.

[joojy]

although i was kinda dissapointed that federer couldn't go on with the momentum in the 1st and half sets, i was happy that del porto who had alot of potential had what it takes to win which andy murray didn't. The moral of the story, to be truly great and compete with the best you have to win a slam .

[dtwplaya]

Nice vid.

[valjew]

this guy has a chubby guy's head and a skinny guy's body! its messing with my head!!

[jessy8a10]

Roger lost because he serve bad, That is the reason! and player took the chances Roger gave him

[pitoloco]

roger lost becouse del potro was better... sorry jessy. del potro is the next n.1

[jessy8a10]

I agree i dont know when but he will be number 1, one day. And yes he played better in this match i dont deny it. But u have to agree that roger didnt play his best. His served was terrible.

[mrkidd1]

how do u write on a tennis court

[FYB2007]

Magic. I studied at Hogwarts =)

[Federerfan009]

whos ur fav player?

[FYB2007]

Fed. DelPo is a beast though.

[santa123zzz]

first half of analysis is apt about fed hitting down the middle..

one more thing del po was trying to get fed running side to side so that he gets room to swing when fed hits back to the corner of the court... fed also was not given many chances to come to the net and create steep angles because fed was kept deep in the court by del po...

strategically Del Po won .. thats amazing for a 20 yr old kid

[ludtke337]

you could be an ATP coach

[AzNSammanX26]

its all the challenges fault

[louiejack6]

"Vicissitude"...nice diction Will.

[FYB2007]

Gotta throw in some knowledge =)

[smithcm14]

Federer truly had this game. He had several opportunities to win those tiebreakers. He had several break points which could of wrapped the match in no time. This game really did shock me.

[DexterHol21r]

I really liked your 1st part analysis of Federer keeping DelPo in the centre of the court though.

[DexterHol21r]

Well m8, the whole math thing you did was pretty much useless cause:

a) serving better does not only mean getting more 1st serves in, by serving better you have more 1st serves that are in be an ace or weak returns that can lead to a winner ,so you should have rised the 1st serve points won percentage up too and

b) if he had served better then he should have closed that 2nd set and we would be talking about another fed record here as someone else has already mentioned.

[hurataimad]

fed would hae won if he served better, but  delpotro serve can be better and he could have served better also.

all in all i think the better player in the tournament won.

[majjorly]

NO roger federer didnt win!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?

ahhhhhhhhhhh!!!! this is so disapointing

[xinnianhao]

Even if Federer hit the ball to the middle, Del Po could make Federer run and tire him out. Same thing. Federer didn't want to help Del Po.

[xinnianhao]

What's with the explaining? Federer said himself, "You can't win everything." That's why Federer lost, because he couldn't win.

[scuzzlebutt]

if he served better at 5-4 in the second set, the match would have been history.

[thegreatNEb]

as he said at the end...its all about stepping the game up at the important points.

the whole match was kind of a build up/wind down to and from those crucial games at 5-4 in the second, 5-4 in the 4th, and the two tie breakers...the 5th shouldn't have even happened for Federer, and del potro did so well to stay in there and take it.

Sadly the result was much the same as the AO final (75-36-76-36-62) in reverse. Fed could and should have won both, getting his Grand Slam. but congrats del po

[fivemoreexits]

It made me sick seeing Federer lose that way. He beat himself. Horrible serve percentage and way too many double faults and unforced errors. Fed played one of his worst and Del Potro played some of his best and it still went 5 sets.

[saavedramarcelo]

Delpo didn't play one of his best :

First Grand Slam final and against Federer would get you a little nervous as shown at the first set.

Yes you are right about Federer serve, it would have made me sick if Federer won again with those stats.

Delpo best was for example the match against Nadal, player to whom he is totally adjusted and lost any fear.

It will be interesting the next match between Federer and Delpo, I have no doubt that Federer will bring all his arsenal.

[ductrung3993]

I dont think that Potro'd stand a chance next time :)

[Megadeth6633]

@fivemoreexits you might be right, but let's just see how delpo get's when he has federers age.

[Gipshaw]

@fivemoreexits

Del Po did NOT play his best. Ridiculous number of errors from him.

[thelastchain]

just wanted to make the point that if you change fed's 1st serve % for first 4 sets then look at total points won , it is much more in favour of Fed (due to delpo winning last set 6-2) .So although i agree that the match was won on big points i think fed would have won in 3/4 sets like you predicted if his 1st serve was up because Delpo wouldn't have been able to get fed to the tiebreakers and those 'big points' . great final though and doesn't take too much of the shine off a great year for fed

[drumsfightingandstuf]

Will,

Do you think that federer's return of serve hurt him a lot in this final (and has in the past)? It seems like he is just content to chip the ball over and get it in play. That's great against guys like Roddick and Karlovic, but I feel like he needs to attack those serves when he can.

[GordonGartrell]

I think that Fed losing is analogous to when Tiger loses. When Tiger is on his A game he is unbeatable (eg. his loss at the PGA and his win at the Deutche Bank). All the respect to DelPo bc he found a way to grind out the win but Fed beat himself. When Fed brings the A game he is pretty near impossible to beat......Maybe thats why Gillette has them as spokesmen...LOL

[caloyjp]

wow u r so spot on... the moment fed started throwing the angles del potro came alive. fed should've just pounded the ball in th middle of the court the whole match

[themadman50]

you seem to forget that federer hit more than 10 double faults. in his normal form he hits none or 1 or 2. so thats also 10 points extra lost

[ChaunceyDos]

The serve percentage thing, it depends when he gets those first serves in. Fed squandered a few leads, more first serves at those moments would have helped. And if he wins those games, it would have a psychological impact on the match. My gut tells me it would have made a difference. Fed is usually a clutch server, but in the Del Potro match, he was relatively passive all around. And when he tried to impose his game, it seemed a bit desperate, he didn't hit with his usual precision.

[luv2ly09]

I honestly think Federer didn't think he could loose the match and when Delpo started to feel better with his forehand and believed he could win, that's when everything went downhill for Federer. The truth is Del Potro played better the "big points" and was mentally strong to continue to fight even after things didn't look like they were going his way. I am happy for Del Potro, it was an exciting match and IMO he deserved to win.

[fredjohs]

How many forehand winners did DelPo Hit? Answer - way too many. Won't a more viable strategy of not hitting so many to that side eventually work in Feds favor? Granted, DelPo doesnt have a weak backhand, but come on theres no way I give him the number of chances to tee-off on that forehand. Basic rule of matchplay keep the ball away from your opponents strength.

[saffronace]

Will,Thanks for your analysis.You are adding value to the sport.I might agree with every aspect of your analysis but not about the toughness of a 20yr old.

I beleive Tennis only such sport in the world where career begins at such an early stage and ends at early age.Can you point me to a sport where age 27-28 is considered old?They are considered veterans in Tennis.

Also dont forget the achievements of greats like Boris,Pete,Chang and ofcurse our Nadal(I guess he is 19 when he won French)

[dlightman1978]

I agree with fyb 100%.

del potro won this match fare and square.

Federer didn't win because of his serve letting him down, he lost because of bad breakpoint play and bad tiebreak play

[mustang100002]

The only person that beats Fed is Fed. He beat himself....again.

[soloquierosignearme]

I think that Federer could won the match in 3 sets if he didn't lowered his playing rythm when he was set, and break wining.. that rythm let Del Potro get more confident for the rest of the match... and it's dificult to lead with that forehand..

Also the 1st serve didn't help him

(Sorry but my english it's not so good)

[SamuraiAssain]

I think you are being to mathematical. If you watched the match Federer would have won in three if his serve was at its normal percentage. It was more flow than math. DP was tight and would have folded in three if Federer had his normal serve. I chalk Federers failing up to age - pure and simple. Federer will still win some big ones but he will no longer dominate.

[mustang100002]

Agreed. Fed should have closed it out in straight sets. To me, the only person that beats Fed is Fed. He crumbled mentally in the 5th like he did agaisnt Nadal in the AO 09. The way Fed was serving, any other top player would have capitlized on it and it wouldn't have gone the distance. But Del Po was def nervous and lack of experience on the grand stage. The only reason Fed won any of the sets was because of a nervous, inexperienced Del Po.

[tolendoi123]

Delpo is an opportunist^^ he uses the hawk-eye "very late" when Roger scored an Ace he said he wasn't ready but he already took a half step.... and the umpire was favoring him... it's just annoying though he played "GREAT" but Roger served "POORLY" but it's not an excuse^^

[akin1989]

Am a huge Federer fan, but when Del potro took his championship point, i was applauding. He played a great match.

Last year, when he lost to Murray in the quaters, he shed tears in the post match interview. A year later, he wins! AMAZING. He got my respect when he beat Nadal in the semis, but now, after winning the open, I'll consider myself a fan now.

[TheFedFan]

I would also like to say that the US Open should change it's scheduling. Even without rain the semis would have been played on the saturday and the final on the sunday. There should be a days rest, all the other slams do this. They give too many days rest at the beginning of the open, The first rounds are not the toughest physically, it's the latter ones. And I'm sure the players would appreciate a days rest before the final.

[TheFedFan]

Firstly congrats to del Potro, if anyone deserves it, it him. But I think Federer was not playing his A game. I don't know but I think it may have been one match too many, and lets face it his serve let him down. A few more first serves when he was serving for the second set would have probably have led to a straight sets victory. Also, Federer's break point conversion was poor. If he would have won the first set 6-2, when he was 5-2 0-40 up on delpos serve then it may have changed the outcome.

[sisafokker]

Congrats to Delpo and although I think he played fantastic, I also think Federer let the match slip. He should have continued with the sliced backhand all the way as he did in the first set. Federer´s serve was VERY bad, and it goes beyond the math displayed here. Its all about a matter of confidence, both for the server as for the receiver. I´m very happy cause I´m from Argentina but if RF had served as he uses to, the 6th consecutive US open would be his. Amazing game by DelPo though!

[whatareyoudoinfock]

His reasoning about the tactics to play Delpo is quite contradicting when you look at the video about Delpo - Nadal... so I'm not really sure what to make of this

[FYB2007]

I addressed this question in the other Del Po video. You can check out my full response there.

Basically, Federer could implement that tactic because his ball penetrates the court much more effectively than Rafa's.

Keep in mind that a tactic / strategy might not work when one player tries it but it will work like a charm when another player (with a different style) employs it.

[butterflycaught900]

in the 5th set it seemed like federer shanked every ball he hit. especially when going for winners

[Caribbeer]

very good analysis, one issue i have tho is this... federer serving better wins him the second set without doubt as he was up a break and leading by two sets means he wins the match in at most 4 sets...Del Potro would have lost confidence and may even have gone away mentally leading to a straight sets win for fed...

[drwood04]

Anyone who thought Delpo wasn't mentally tough before the US Open didn't see the Washington final against Roddick -- down a set with it being 120 degrees on court in a completely pro-Roddick setting -- he came back to win in 3 sets. That showed me he had mental toughness.

Also, his 1st round in the Rogers cup -- he was down a set and a break and came back to win despite not playing well. Again, he didn't mentally go away (against Murray, he was gassed -- he didn't tank).

Congrats Delpo!

[nihalb1064]

he did the same thing against CILIC in this yrs USO. he was down a set and a break, then absolutely BLITZED cilic in 4. hardly lost a game.

[MarceloHardoy]

Your analysis is right on the money. Del Po won because he played the crucial points with amazing confidence and composure. He held in when he had to hold, and he broke when he had to break. And he took two TB. His 1st serve percentage was good but average speed was considerably lower than he's shown in other matches. I mean, he's got a great serve but it was the FH the weapon that in the end won the day. Salud campeon!!!!

[boy20022002]

Delpo played well, but Federer got irritated (especialy with the late challenges by Delpo) and started to play badly, and totally lost it by the end.

[iamke55]

I don't agree with the first serve percentage analysis. Putting Federer up another 8 points seems insignificant when looking at 172 vs 180, but consider that Del Potro's points lay heavily on the 4th and 5th sets. If you only look at the first three sets and then analyze points won, you might find the few extra points would've let Federer serve out the second set, so you could ignore the point totals of the 4th and 5th sets as Federer would win in 3.

[djarnexus]

juan martin stinks... he's a good player, but petty.

[pauldonald]

BORRING

[surfjabroni]

ok one more time it is del Potro like the o in "got" not the o in "no". Have some respect for his name please.

[Swissv2]

Everyone says DP's name like the o in "no". You can correct us, but that is rude how you state we have no "respect" for his name.

[butterflycaught900]

that's a matter of accents, not spelling.

[SoftBank47]

What I want to know is why people were hitting such awful shots? I have never seen so many clear misses in my life.

Also, do you think that this win and the resurgence of Robin Soderling will spur a belief that only tall people can play tennis? I fear this because I'm 5'7'' and I'm sick of always being passed over for taller people in other sports (except golf), I don't need one more sport added to that resume.

[kwertyno]

I do not think there is a new trend for taller players. All greatest tennis players in the last 20 years have been between 183-188cm.with almost no exceptions. Delpo is one of them, a man 198 with an arm's speed of a 180. Phenomenal, but quite unique. The other "giants" in the tour look clumsy and slow to me, and not so powerful and talented as him. Questions are: will he get too heavy? (he is heavier, slower than last year). Will he stay injury-free despite his weight? Will he be consistent?

[masmddds]

That Federer-serve / total-points won analysis is stupid. Here's why: it's not about total points won, b/c you can win a match even while having won fewer points than your opponent. It's about the PROBABILITY of being broken (especially at inopportune times). When your first serve percentage is low, it increases your chance of being broken, which is EXACTLY what happened to Federer. This guy in the video is a real dumbass. To say that low 1st serve % didn't affect outcome is plain dumb.

[mustang100002]

I agree, Fed's 1st serve percentage was awful. He barely got any first serves in allowing Del Po to pounce, not to mention the number of double faults from Fed. I think Del Po won the match only because Fed did not have it together

[nihalb1064]

too many doubles, too many UE(shanks), too many first serves into net, too many weak 2nd serves, and mentally weak 5th set(just like with nadal again)

[PhotonDrive]

Talk about trends - it is clearly bigger players with big upper-body development! Seen most clearly in the women players. Helps keep points short by preventing angle returns without injury risk & big energy loss. Nadal's getting it from that direction - hear DelPo "he was too far back". Fed looked like small kid next to DelPo: couldn't pull serve advantage because long reach covered margins - with "shove down throat" constant possibility (back to vids analysis - but serve dir. added).

[bobbyb1978]

Federer looked somewhat stiff in his serve motion. He not only served a low percentage, but had difficulty serving with his usual precision. He finally took something off of his first serve to get a couple more serves in. The usual serve down the middle on the deuce and the patented serve out wide on the ad court was missing from the start. This cost him the match more than anything else.

[triplematchpoint]

tactically speaking, i was very surprised why fed didn't use the slice more. i think that was one of the key factores for him losing the match.

as for the serving, i agree with Will. i doubt that fed serving better might've gotten him the match. delpo was cracking fed's second serves, which explains the copious amounts of faults he had. so even if he had toned down his doubles, i doubt those would've been points won.

[triplematchpoint]

i actually thought before the match that delpo had a great chance to take it. here's why, before djoker, fed really didnt'beat anybody. and even that match against novak, fed's shots seemed a league below delpo's. i felt that if he could get thru the initial jitters of being in his first GS final, he'd be alright. i think that the jitters actually cost him a set and a half, as evidenced by the first and a good part of the second set.

[kwertyno]

Just as an added note, I believe he had some sort of back or shoulder problems on serve. He never talks about his physical problems (unlike Nadull...) but something was not there Monday. He looked very tired in the end, quite unusual. So a slight injury is possible. BTW he retired only once in 827 matches... statistically it's incredible. That means to me that he MUST have disguised his injuries time and again. That's also why he is the GOAT: he's never looking for an excuse when losing.

[bobbyb1978]

Good point, though Federer never retired during a match. Not even once. He only retired during a tournament one time in his career. I think it was last year at one of the masters tournaments.

[HandShattered]

I thought about this possibility throughout the whole match. His calm reaction at the loss would also support this hypothesis - it's as if he knew he couldn't have won the match playing the way he did, for whatever reason.

[kwertyno]

In those calculation you should add that Fed usually has 4 double faults,he had 11 now. That is a huge 7 points difference. The 51% first serve is exactly the same poor display he had with Nadal at the AO09. I believe that if he served well he would have won both matches, even playing so-so as he did. His abilities are such he has a 125-1 record against lower-than-5th-ranked in slams,the 1 being Monday's defeat! Amazing numbers. DelPo is great but Fed also deserved it and should have won it.

[triplematchpoint]

i don't think fed deserved it at all. anybody that cannot play the big points doesn't deserve to win any final. fed just choked.

[kwertyno]

So to deserve a win you just must play the big points well? According to your "theory" DelPo does not deserve victory because he had 2 double faults at the close of third set. What do you say now? That's pure nonsense. What a narrow way to look at tennis.

[triplematchpoint]

he lost both tiebreakers. he got broken second set to go 2-0. he was 5-22 on breakpoints. he just choked there's no other word to describe what fed did.

[kwertyno]

triplematchpoint, look, Nadal lost both tiebreakers in Wimbledon 08. So what? Didn't he deserve the title anyway? Rafa was up 5-2 in one of them: did Nadal"choke"? No. He just lost the tiebreakers. There was another guy playing on the other side of the net, that's the problem. 5-22 on breakpoints? Fed won Wimb09 with 1-7 on breakpoints, even worse, but again, there was Roddick playing great. You keep focusing on episodes ignoring trends, real stats, and missing the whole picture altogether.

[Gipshaw]

DelPo play MORE of the big points well than Federer did, you don't have to play all of them well, just most. You can't win a match against someone who's playing well, unless you play the big points as well as your opponent. It's happened to me. =(

[FYB2007]

Federer and Nadal hit different balls. The strength of Nadal's forehand is that he can pull people off the court. In other words, he can create incredible angles. While Federer can hit some incredible angles, he can't do it as consistently as Nadal.

However, Fed's forehand penetrates the court MUCH more than Nadal's. Thus, he could push Del Po back by hitting down the middle of the court.

Continued below

[FYB2007]

When Nadal hits down the middle of the court -- especially if he hits short, which he has a tendency to do -- the ball sits up. A tall, strong player -- like Del Potro or Soderling -- can attack that ball.

That's exactly what happened in the 4th round of the French Open vs. Soderling and the US Open semis vs. Del Po.

The basic point is that a tactic that may not work for one player WILL work for another. Matchups determine strategy.

[tonestar100]

Dude, I understand your handicapping Del Potro with regard to other tournaments but I think you failed to adequately factor that Del Potro had just beaten Nadal on hardcourt one day before. I feel that was more immediately relevant than past results.

[FYB2007]

Hi tonestar. While it's possible Del Po was more confident because he just beat Nadal, history may suggest otherwise.

Del Po beat Nadal and Roddick back-to-back to make it to the finals of the Rogers Cup a mere 3 weeks ago. Yet he came up short in that match.

Psychology is a hard thing to pin down. What you say may very well be correct but there's no way to know for sure. In the long run I think you end up with a more accurate assessment looking at trends vs. individual performances.

[tonestar100]

I dig what your'e saying. I was just wondering why you didn't mention the Nadal victory at all in your pre-match analysis. I though it was worthy and not necessarily from a psychological standpoint but moer generally in terms of the quality of his game, mechanically and otherwise. I do appreciate your analysis and comments.

[fabi0001]

great video. keep up the good work

[delfador99]

I don't understand. In the Nadal-DelPo preview you mentioned that the key would be whether Nadal would be able to hit near the side line and keep DelPo from the center. Now you say that you actually understand Feds tactics to hit down the middle of the court.

[HodMaster]

Will, you were right in your last video. Del Potro had mental toughness; Federer wasn't there for most of it.

[butterflycaught900]

FYB maybe 1st serves dont change alot overall but cmon, if he had 4 first serves when he served for the 2nd set, he'd have the trophy

[FYB2007]

Hi butterfly. That's probably true. Like I said in the video, doing that math is like "throwing fuel on a fire."

[butterflycaught900]

fair enough. by the way, after montreal JMDP actually said he didn't have the 'energy' to beat murray that day (a comment murray didn't seem too happy about).

[danyjr]

The truth is not only Federer did not get that many 1st serves in, but also his first serves lacked the usual quality you expect from him, even when they landed in.

[RocioLokita]

Miren el cuello que carga el tipo este!!

viste! es casi tan ancho como su cabeza el cuello.

A proposito Grande Delpotro los dejaste calentitos a los Gringos que querian ver a federer que te gane pero jejej le tapaste la boca.

[lautarocura]

Great analysis, congratulations man. I watched the whole match, and felt extremely happy after it. I love Delpo!

[twohanded1]

can you remember the wimbledon final 2008. roger vs rafa. 5th set. rafa served to 0-1. roger serving and it was 15-40, a few hugh serves from roger and roger equalised to 1-1. rafa to 1-2. and again roger and it was 15-40 and roger again outserved it. you can't say that rafa doesnt know how to return. i wan't to say that roger always pulls it out with his serve when it is tight. that 4 points could have decided in the tie break. and also at 5-4 in second set.

[kinr03340]

Del Potro is officially the best Hard court player by a tiny margin

[choyothe]

Well, I`m a Federer fan but for me, it`s pretty useless to say Federer would have won with a higher 1st serve %. This isn`t some predetermined tournament that automatically gives the trophy to the best player around (Federer), even he has to bring his A-game and atleast his B-service game to the final. He didn`t, he had a terrible service day (% was even lower in the first set he dominated), Del Potro took advantage and at this game, was better.

[Gorosu]

I am also a Federer fan but alto like Nadal and Djokovic and i have noticed that Del Potro started to play very well and i think that he will get far . Not like he is going to beat Fed or Rafa every time but he will be a grate player . Last year and at the start of this year Federer could beat him even in his worst day .

[brunojl2]

That is very true. It could be the case that Fed serves at 90 percent but Delpo breaks his serve once and wins a set. That way, Federer can have a lovely percentage but loose nonetheless! Statistics work just okay, what we need to analyze are the big points, it's all about them. Tennis is unlike many other sports, that have a 0 sum of points or goals; that is what makes it so amazing!

[hafYAHA]

If Federer's serve percentage got higher, he would have won his service game more easily like in djokovic's match. This will result in more focused Federer and more nervous Del Potro and the 10th game of the 2nd set will be won by Federer. This will make Federer leads by 2 sets and soon finished the match. THIS IS WHAT I THINK.

[brunojl2]

This is so amazing! Thank you so very much for posting such video! I love tennis, but know I feel like I know so much more about it.

Although, from a math point of view I have to disagree with your assumption in regards to the change in percentage of Federer's serve. IF HE WOULD HAVE CHANGED HIS PERCENTAGE OF 1ST SERVE POINTS, THEN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF POINTS SERVED BY HIM (181) WOULD HAVE, MOST LIKELY CHANGED! The serve percentage is a fixed quantity, while the total number of serves is not!

[nihalb1064]

yeah the guys math is wrong. the no. of serves would have increased. he would have easily won the match with higher % serves/!

[brunojl2]

Actually not. The no. of serves by him would have decreased, since he doesn't have to serve as many times as with a lower 1st serve percentage to win a game. Nonetheless, there are 2nd serve points to take into account; which could increase the number of serves if and only if he has a low percentage on that.

[Huskylonghorn]

Great analysis man! Really good stuff. Keep it up!

[marcelohrodriguez]

I'm sorry but I'll put my comment in spanish

USA no tiene un ganadores del US open hace rato será por eso que no cayó muy simpatico que ganara Delpo.

Eso si, parece que saben mucho porque explican muy bien como ganan los demás. by

[Edmangox]

In my opinion i think federer was just really tired.. he played great match with djokovic he was exausted..and the rain delays and everything was arranged differently. so that effects the players as well

[PhotonDrive]

I think Roger lost his focus because it was too easy - then slipped his strategy back to normal corner to corner back-hand exchanges. When he woke up the tie-break Hawk-eye got him upset & angry, so he bore down in the third, but was using more energy as Delpo's big accurate forehands challenged him. After then losing 4th set tie-break, he faded rapidly because in his tiredness he made unforced errors. But DelPo pressured him steady after first - like analysis here "mental toughness" etc.

[CaptainJackSparrow1]

Credit to Del Potro. He was the better player, and so he deserved it entirely.

But, does anyone 'really' think that on any given day, he can beat Roger Federer when's he's on 'his' game ... or even Rafa, for that matter?

[PhotonDrive]

Don't give us that "any given day" stuff! Grand slams are six grueling 5-setters in a row, and ashe stadium has the biggest stands - and the hardest courts! THAT is what Del Poto won - not some 3-set "Masters" exhibition!

[CaptainJackSparrow1]

What are you saying ...

Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal are experts at your so called 'exhibition' matches?

My question was, "Does anyone really think Del Petro can beat Federer and Nadal if they're playing at their top level?"

[jurivrljicak]

i do, as delpotro didn't reach his top level either. who says so? he is still young and has a long way to go, so, yes, sure

[FYB2007]

I don't but I think the question is somewhat besides the point.

You can't always play your best -- you have to be able to win when you're less than 100% because most days that's the situation. IMO, RF is the GOAT and Nadal is the clay GOAT.

But that doesn't diminish Del Potro's accomplishment -- he played well and played SMART and he took advantage of his opportunities.

Del Po won the match -- Federer didn't lose it.

[SSky06]

I think if Federer served 65%, which was over his tournament average, Delpo would not have won the 2nd set and probably would have been beat in straight sets.

His first serve percentage was damaging his confidence and limiting his ability on his biggest weapon, which is certainly his ability to serve and end points quickly.

It also gave Delpo a lot of confidence winning points from Federer on his serve because off all those 2nd serves.

[SSky06]

Federer was relentlessly serving out wide on his first serve most of the match, and was consistently firing them into the same spot in the net. It was a little irritating as a Fed fan watching him never change his strategy when he was clearly struggling to hit his spots on out wide serves.

He was also hitting a lot of slice and weak replies to Del Potro's Forehand, when he could have easily hit the same weak shots to Delpo's much weaker wing. That was really what cost him a lot of points.

[iIIwiIl01]

dude when u do these.....u should use vids from the match and analyze the points

[robbyperez]

omg... that would be too easy... this guy's is trying to make a nam e for himself by paraphrasing tv analysts... he's just looking for face time and 15 min of fame...

[RobT89]

Dude hes way better, than the likes of Mary Carillo and those annoying commentators. This guy runs the FYB forums, and I think we all respect his opinion hence the perfect rating for the video. On the other hand you are probably someone disrespectful, that is bothered by other's successes.

[JiraiyaSama86]

Deep flat groundstrokes to the Fed backhand - another weakness that was earlier exploited by Safin.

Fed's footwork was a bit terrible in this match IMO. If you watch the parts where the UE were made, you can see beforehand what was going to happen.

Don't really know what happened to Fed, or why he changed the plan. His expression during the match kind of showed a little doubt as to how much he really wanted it, which is natural, since Sampras was a little lost after his 13th Slam.

[disagol]

I personally think delpo was serving poorly too. He didn't hit so many aces as he did in his previous matches.And both players had a +2 differential in aces/df's, so serve was not a factor here.Delpo decreased the pace of his first serve in order to dictate the point and that raised his first serve percentage, smart move.

[asdfuogh]

serving intelligently..

[wind1357]

bottom line federer play stupid and bad

[elemento2323]

Maybe I wrong and please correct me if I am. Even if you are right, +4 for Fed and -4 for Delpo is a big difference when we know that what counts is when you win the points and not how much total points you have. A single point can change a match, like when Delpo won that crucial challenge that Fed wasn't too happy about obviously or when Delpo gave the 3rd set by double faulting. Just giving my 2 cents.

Thanks for all the vids. Please keep up the good work.

[HandShattered]

Great comment. The latter argument is proven for example by the matches Federer lost to Nadal despite having won more points.

[elemento2323]

With respect to your calculations, here's what I think:

I don't think that if you increase Fed's 1st serve % you can still use the same Winning % on his 1st serve, in other words, if you increase from 50% to 65%, you really can't expect Fed to still win 71% of his first serves. He could have hit more aces/unreturned serves. The winning % on the 1st serve is bound to change depending on the 1st serve %. So I don't think you can predict the point swing that way.

[FYB2007]

Hey elemento. Like I said in the video, all that math / speculation can be like "throwing fuel on a flame."

Interesting nonetheless, imo.

[HandShattered]

I think it's good that you approach your own calculations with some reserve, because as both elemento2323 and brunojl2 point out, it's not as simple as that.

Furthermore, you can't ignore the psychological impact on his own game and on Del Potro's game. Just watch the video of the 50 aces vs. Roddick, and watch Roddick's body language.

[elemento2323]

Hi Will. Very good analysis.

Like you said, props to Delpo's mental toughness. He played the big points better, handled his first Slam well, overcame his 0-6 record against Fed and executed well his forehand. If you can beat Nadal AND Roger in the same slam you should be the Champ!

Having said all of that, I think the outcome of the match would have been different if Fed kept his strategy (hitting to the middle of the court) and served better. Game is based on confidence and momentum.

[ZXcannon]

Federer had a great trip to the final and in know way has failed. Del Po' played really well which essentially turned 'off' Federer's game and stifled his skill.

[historian111z]

wow, u made me like math.

[FYB2007]

haha.... i apologize =)

[dalttleguy]

Will, you really should be hired by ESPN to do commentary/analysis of tennis matches. Your commentary/analysis is by far more insightful and far less bullshit than anything that currently comes out of the mouths of current tennis commentators.

[FYB2007]

Thanks, that means a lot. If you have any thoughts / comments on what we could do better I'm all ears.

[jay100291]

I'm really impressed by DelPo's performance. I'm looking forward to seeing him in more GS finals.

If Federer was serving better, things could have turned out a little different. First, that would be a big boost on Fed's confidence (better shots, less errors etc.) , and perhaps DelPo would have crumbled a bit.

But no matter how many "what if's" we say, DelPo is the true champion there. A wonderful match between true great players.

[capoman1]

The kid's focus was unbelievable in this match and the 62 62 62 match against Nadal! I have seen Murray play this way before as well. I think Delpo is still trying to prove how BIG he can hit and play, so he is trying to prove himself some. You can see how Federer plays a much more conservative, smart game. Delpo's focus is really what allowed him to keep hitting so big; usually errors come with this much power.

[gaucharevolucionaria]

OLE, OLE OLE OLE ..DEL PO DEL PO!!!

[juanide]

Del Potro genio!

[hurataimad]

have to disagree about the early tactics, fed needed to play himself into the match, so he hit down the centre. once he felt comfortable he would have looked to the corners.

both players didn't reach top form, though delboy did have points where he was unplayable. both could have served better, though generally fed is more consistently better with his serve then delboy.

[Elohite]

Federer did't serve well. Fed had 11 doubles. Federer averages 0-1 double faults with over 60% first serves.... Congrats to del po though.

Fed came so close to winning the Grand Slam this year

[fbinsulation]

yeah, totally agree with the mental toughness

you almost get the sense that Federer was seeing a taller, lankier Nadal on the other side of the net yesterday...

[Coolguy16161]

IT was an interesting one indeed, at first I expected Federer and saw that he was unstoppable. After that line call in which he pointed at it and looked at in even after 2 points, Fed lost some of his mental edge and temper.

[ShasOJeffrey]

Can't believe Federer lost...oh well, I guess he's been playing too much anyway.

[jayhawkname]

He is the cleanest ball striker I have ever witnessed. His height and movement make for a deadly combination. I also agree with Will on Del Po's mental toughness; I admire his maturity and fighting spirit.

[ryanbeeble]

congratulations to delpo, im happy for him

[SUCKTHAT18KDS]

it was a great match, Del Potro is playing great tennis