Roger actually said in one of his early round post-match press conferences that he didn't see what the big deal was and the surface was fine and no slipperier than red clay. The "guys" who whined only whined because they lost early. See: Rafa & Novak. They both declared if the tournament was on blue clay again that they weren't coming back and that's why Tiriac changed it back to red clay.

@@jollymolly2521 -- I wrote nothing about players "whining." I wrote that they appeared to be moving gingerly. Both Federer and Ferrer appeared, to my eyes, to be adjusting their styles of play to suit this material-- they were playing differently than I'd witnessed them playing on red clay surfaces. Federer, over his career, was exceptional at making rapid fire adjustments when required and, since he won that tournament, he was evidently more successful at doing so on the blue clay while others were not. If you'd like to discuss the "whining" of some players, I invite you to do so with someone else.

@@eme.261agree

It is no surprise Federer did not mind the blue clay so much as his footwork has always been light an superior. But I agree both players were also IMO careful and letting balls go they’d normally try for.

@@InfinityX2 -- I agree. Federer had always moved like a feline or a ballerino. If there was going to be any player who could have adjusted enough to succeed on the surface, it would have been The Maestro. While watching this match, I found myself constantly holding my breath, hoping the players didn't injure myself. I eventually realized my system was taking its cues from the body language of the players, who were much tenser and hesitant than usual. If it had only been one of them, then I would have overlooked the issue, but with both of them behaving similarly, it was obviously an issue with the environment they were playing in.

A lot or top players underperformed on this blue clay. That year, Nadal lost against Verdasco and Djokovic lost against Tipsarevic.

@@pizzatime3775 because it was fast surface. Fast surfaces always separate the ball pushers from the technical players. Nadal and Djoker are percentage players. you take their time and they are out. They would never have won anything during the 90s era of fast surfaces and fast balls, except the clay court tournaments.

⁠@@markoragnos6757they definitely would have won a lot simply because they were just so good at the baseline compared to everyone else. and because both novak and rafa are outstanding returners

@@Snow-mz7cj there is difference to be an "outstanding" returner as you have called on slow surface with a slow ball where you haev time to react and hit the ball then on adn fast surface with fast balls. Massive difference. Tennis from the 90s and tennis today are two different spots. There is no way they woudl be able to touch the ball on say Taraflex where Paris Bercy was was played or Greenest on which hannover ATP was played. Nadal would be Thomas Muster type player and Djokovic wouldn't win a thing as his game is just to push ball one last time. It's great when you have time to push it and bounce is slow, but on low bouncing surfaces when you have fraction of time and everything happens super fast with quick points at the net he woudl have zero chance. He wouldnt even pass 3rd round at majors.

Gotta be the worst tennis take of all time

20 years ago he had the best footwork . Alcaraz is 5 times qucker than roger.

Speed ≠ footwork

And it was amazing

@@jasongoestohell5609 😂 I like Alcaraz but come on 5x times

The blue clay was much better for Federer than for his opponents, so it makes sense that he would complain less about it.

​@@balsamicvinegar4454Well even if it were bad for him, he wouldn't have complained much. He didn't complain about the abolition of Carpet and he was good at it. On the contrary, he was at the helm of that effort

@@sakshamsanwaria7486 This is fair. However, don't lets pretend that Federer has never complained about play conditions. He just tends to be more diplomatic about it.

Their head to head record says otherwise

Ferrer was a bunny for Roger. His game wasn't suited to tame Roger

@@sakshamsanwaria7486 Exactly, From my perspective, No one in tennis today brings the same game to Tennis the way that RF did..!!

What more can he do ??

Come on this is so unnecessary

Womp womp

Goat of soccer

@@josep9599lmao are you kidding me??? Not even in his absolute prime (early Manchester United and beginning in Real Madrid) he would be top 5, let alone overall 😂😂😂😂

@@Luchon20082010 please get yourself at least a bit of ball knowledge and come back later (maybe!) 😉

I smell an obsessed Djokonut??

Actually no. These aren't official highlights. Roger even if he doesn't play that great, his game comes through. He completes his serve too quickly. As for Federer, he is 23-0 against Ferrer

@@sakshamsanwaria7486 I know, I spent 10 years watching Federer play, but it's just a bit weird having a video with title refering to his 'magic' and almost all points, nice or not, are won by his oponent.

Yootoob syndrome possibly. Partly is also federer vs ferrer. The opening service game troubles aside ferrer was a top player and he still played pretty well. The impression I got was federer just completely rolled through his service games, so naturally most of the highlights would be shown on ferrer's service games. Video could have maybe been a bit longer to include some more federer points, maybe. Highlights syndrome is real after all.

Don't know but definitely better than weak era (2018-23) stat padder Novak Djokovic

@@AaravYadav-em5tj cry more Weak 2017-2018

That's a great achievement too. Though I love Federer for his elegance. He has been number 2nd for quite some time now

@@sakshamsanwaria7486 nice

Egyptian mate

To paraphrase John McEnroe , "You cannot be Serious"! 😂

Wrong footed players are generally quicker as they try to make up for their inability to find their center between the points. Ferrer was one of the quickest players and had beaten Nole and Rafa 5 times and 8 times respectively. He never once beat Roger. It's 17-0

Quicker not the completer