I'd forgotten how good Henman actually was. His volleying is phenomenal. Definitely one of the best volleyers of all time, right up there with Becker and Edberg.
Before the match, Federer won Sampras in final set. After that, three days incredible match with Ivanisevic and continue to most dramatic final in the Wimbledon history on Monday. I think this year's Wimbledon had so many historical moment and drama. Definitely my favorite Wimbledon!!!!!!!!!!
I remember this match just after Federer beat Sampras in the 4th round and on video it seems as well. Good quality Jamie and as we know from 2003 until the present time only four men have since won the men’s title. Great upload 👌🏾
That was the difference between Tim Henman and Andy Murray at Wimbledon in my opinion. You expected Murray to get to at least the semi finals every year. But you hoped that Tim Henman would. That's why watching Tim Henman at Wimbledon always left me in pieces .
@@farid1406 3 majors during the big 3 era, 45 total titles including 14 masters1000 and an atp finals title. Gimme 20+ players who have a better record taking into account the era they played in.
Henman had incredibly good anticipation and returns, and a good soft touch on the net. Sadly the rest of his game wasn't up to that of the greats, lacking offensive power in anything else.
@@thelaurels13 Are you the 4th best in the world at doing something? Probably not. And therefore you haven't been in that position for 4 years....? Henman was ranked no4 for 4 years.
Tim Henman's best performance. To beat federer, having no powerful forehand or backhand, he had to rely on precision placement and volleys. And for me Henman was one of the best volleyers ever, Henman beat the man who had beaten Sampras in the 4th round Incredible performance, and it's incredible that a small guy with hardly any power was able to compete with powerful players using skill, rather than power.
@@WilliamRobinson-bb6mr and he would have beaten Rafter in the final as hed beat him at W,don before, people don't realise how great hebman was, he was just unlucky to meet each eventual winner in 4 W'don semis, in this vid it highlights how good he was.
@@WilliamRobinson-bb6mr he recently said he was lucky though to be 2-1 up in sets ag iv.....so maybe iv....deserved it in the end especially as hed lost two/three wimb finals in the past and he would have been devastated.
This was a superb match, really high quality from both players. Henman was an excellent player with superb volleys and touch at the net and an underrated all round game. A pity that Henman didn't win a slam. Unlucky against Goran with the rain in the semi finals and he somehow lost to Bjorkman in the 4th round of the Australian open when he was the highest seed left in the draw. Just lacked the mental toughness that Andy Murray had, but great to watch that serve volley game. Could tell watching this that Federer was going to be great. He hit some amazing winners in this match and of course in beating Sampras in the previous round.
He got royally screwed in 2002. Wimbledon changes the grass for god knows what reason and Hewitt just smoked him because he had all day to just beat up on Henman.
@@namtran512 Henman was playing really well in the early part of that semi final and was playing the better tennis, but he was under so much pressure from the media and public to win. Hewitt outplayed Henman after the rain delay and Henman lost momentum and confidence. A great player and was good enough to win a couple of grand slams, just think he was under too much pressure, but always like that for the English.
@@KevinShoreHealthyEating Didn't help that the conditions were heavily favored to Hewitt; for whatever reason Wimbledon thought every final would be Goran v. Sampras so they changed it up.
@@namtran512 the balls were also heavier and the racquet technology also eliminated the serve and volleyers as it was becoming easier to hit winners from 3 feet behind the baseline.
@@namtran512 he bottled it against Goran, yes the rain delays didn't help. I dunno enough about the grass 'change' to comment but tbh I think Hewitt was just a better player on the day, he beat nalbandian in the final did he not? Who was no mug himself at the time. Hewitt was a special player.
I think Henman was good enough to win Wimbledon at least once, especially back in the serve volley days but I think the pressure always got to him too much.
deserved two-three wimbledons if he had had ivan lendl as coach, like andy murray did, he would have done. lendl was probably the most ruthless player , and had direct experience of losing so many grand slam finals before he finally won, and went on to win eight grand slams plus many atp masters events. andy murray went toe to toe with federer and won in four sets. and this federer beats sampras at wimbledon in the same year i think.it's a shame as henman could have achieved three grand slams like andy murray with lendl's influence as coach and mentor. for a man of small statue going up against more athletic six foot odd athletes, it's impressive how henman was so competitive. here, he was so utterly ruthless and razor sharp at the net and served very well. was ruthless at putting away loose returns from federer. and his approach shots were mostly excellent, putting federer under pressure,allowing henman to anticipate the attempted passing shot to hit a volley winner. of course in this netrush era of serve and volley, they were incomplete players with relatively poor backhands compared to todays players. they were over reliant on their serve and forehand. no greater example of this was andy roddick who had a non existent backhand. it is however a risky style of play, and led to henman getting bogged down in too many long five setters before then semi finals, so he was too mentally and physically tired to win.
Thats why he didnt deserve to win cause others players had the talent AND the mind to manage pressure AND win big tournaments, sampras, Agassi, rafter, for example
There were so many great players when Federer was young! Incredble though how Federer became so much better each year and ended up winning so many slams and the others didn't... some of them did beat Federer occasionally but still didn't win slams. I mean Hewitt and Roddick won 1 or 2 but once Federer had his first one and really took off it was over for them.
Logan00710, When did Djokovic beat Federer in his prime years or peak years? Can you tell me please? 2004-2010 or 2017? What was Djokovic’s slam final h2h with Roger. Oh thats right. He didn’t beat him. No, he first beat Federer in a slam final when Federer was older than Djokovic is today while Djokovic himself was in his prime at 26 years old. He beat Federer in slam finals in 2014, 2015, and 2019. Really historic years for Roger huh? Coz everyone always talks about how good Roger was in 2014, 2015 and 2019. 😂😂😂 Get real. Federer won Wimbledon from 2003-2007 then again in 2009. Who tf cares that prime Djokovic beat Federer in his mid to late 30’s three times after 2014?
So bizarre to hear the Wimbledon fans so raucously supporting Fed’s opponent. They’d finally get a British-though not English- champ in Murray 12 years later.
@Daniel Burke Fuck off. He has won three grand slams, two olympic golds, the atp world tour title, and was world no 1. All you have done is sit on your fat ass and act like a troll
Nobody has had more support at Wimbledon than ‘Tiger’ Tim Henman. Henman playing at Wimbledon in the second week was an institution. The perfect combo of a player being just about good enough to win it, but still embodying the plucky English underdog spirit.
nothing bizzare. if murray plays fed the support is equal. but the crowd had a love for tim. not just because england but he had a vulnerability that attracted everyone.
You could see early on the brilliance of Federer's returns, ground strokes and passing winners, and just his grace and ease of presence on the court. You could also see how really very good Henman was in his prime as a serve/ volleyer, and it was an interesting contrast in styles, which was slowly coming to an end at the time as Wimbledon courts started to slow down and favour the predominant baseliners/ rallyers. If it hadn't been for Sampras' dominance at the time, Henman probably would have notched up a Wimbledon title
The speed of the court was super fast !! That day undoubtedly belonged to Henman as Federer's (then teenager) returns were so tuff to handle. Henman played a very smart game that day & Federer was bit unlucky as he was never playing like a rookie but truly like a champion player who hardly gave any chances to win a point so easily.. In my view, both players deserved to win the game.
This was the speed used for over 100 years, 130 years to be precise. All the great champions won on this same speed court. What has happened in the last 15 - 20 years seen the traditional speed slowed down to favour the back court rallies has been horrendous.
Yes, was thinking the same thing myself. This year, when I saw Centre Court (for both finals), it looked as though players never left the baseline. I saw two weeks of highlights with all sorts of slicing and dicing and power tennis; and almost no-one running to the net. While so many were praising these rallies, I could only long for a match like this or dream dreams of Graf v. Novotna. Alas, you hit the mark, and all that's left now is green clay.
@@jeffreybeshears8211 Because he could make a return. All those guys with their crappy return game at those times, plus rackets where you couldn't so easily add top spin made the stupid, boring S&V only choice for play. Thankfully, players skill and technology made it a relic of the past.
@@martydav9475 well, the explanation about a more predictable and higher ball bounce due to better grass quality sounds more convincing than an ad hominem fallacy. Having watched games of wimbledon since 1997, frankly i hadnt observed a slower game in general. Perhaps a higher bounce and more powerfull racquets.
Tim Henman was a joy to watch,although he never won Wimbledon,for me he is one of the best gras players ever,he always gived everything and had the same style of becker abd edberg
He defeated Roger Federer at Wimbledon...!!!☺️ How many people can say that?! He almost certainly would have reached the Final in 2001 but for the rain; they didn't yet have a retractable roof at Wimbledon! Tim was a great tennis player and true gentleman... He's also a very talented golfer...
Wow, this is a match Federer could easily have won. Up 6-3 and 5-2 in both tie-breaks before losing them both. Could very easily have made the final that year. He had a winning record against Ivanisevic... Henman will also rue his semi-final loss... was his best chance to win a major...
Agree, Ivanisevic did not have the game to compete against Federer. Henman's game - especially his serve - was prone to breaking down as it eventually did against Goran in the 5th set. This could have been Henman's year. Great match - old school for the purists.
Maybe stop overhyping your players when they play against better players AND lose big tournaments, maybe youre not that good anymore while other countries improved and took their chances
@@therebel4332 He wasn't a bottler. He just wasn't that good - he was a lower-ranking top-10er. And he always came up against possibly the best grass court player of all time in Sampras.
What a match, had nearly everything although no ultra-long rallies in the vid. Vintage stuff though, almost one generation passing the baton to the next.
There's something so much more manly about this kind of tennis, I really find it more impressive, more entertaining. I'm the biggest Nole fan, but THIS is tennis
Wonder which was more brusque? Federer offering his hand for a split second to Tim here or Rafa almost pushing Kyrgios aside at Acapulco during post match handshake?
Food&drink for Fed in this match up. Tim actually played his best tennis towards the end of his career on clay and Hard courts when Annacone started getting involved.and he became much more aggressive.
Federer could have won 9 straight Wimbledon titles; from 2001 to 2009, had the talent, the game, had everything. Should have won this one, then in 2002 sure he would have defended his title, with the confidence and all what winning Wimbledon brings. Instead the lost in the first round in 2002, only to win it for the first time in 2003.
18 years ago Federer wasnt able to handle the pressure of tie breaks...year 2019 and still the same situation...Novak and Nadal are way better mentally than Roger
They are mentally stronger but that doesn’t make them better players. In Rogers prime, he dominated so much that the match never even got to the close situations
What you say is factually wrong: Federer actually has better stats in tie breaks. Funny that: you say something categorically and then find out the opposite is true....? What I think you are almost right about is Federer in general is worse under pressure than the other two. In the ATP 'under pressure' rankings, against top-10 players, over their careers - he comes significantly behind Novak and Rafa. Interestingly, the player who is WAY ahead at the top of the under pressure rankings is Alcaraz. Scary for a 19-year-old......
@@NamTran-xc2ip Lol you can make a case for second behind Nadal but no way third. A glorified pusher can never be top 2. The peak level of tennis is simply not high enough. Djokovic is consistent with stats and achievements but I can’t see a guy who doesn’t possess offensive, unstoppable tennis at his peak as the best player ever.
Tiger Tim did so well to beat a rampant Roger, who had just knocked out the defending champion, Pistol Pete, in the previous round. You could tell Federer was a future champion in the making.
Can't help thinking this match was crucial for the GOAT race. If Fed had won he had good chances to take W that year, which would have boosted his confidence no end. Surely would have snuck in 2/3 more slams in an alternate timeline before 2003 which is when he got going in our timeline.
Federer could have won 9 straight Wimbledon titles; from 2001 to 2009, had the talent, the game, had everything. Should have won this one, then in 2002 sure he would have defended his title, with the confidence and all what winning Wimbledon brings. Instead he lost in the first round in 2002, only to win it for the first time in 2003.
menos mal no, solo que tuvo que hacerlo porque empezaron a lentear las canchas y con las modernas cuerdas y raquetas todos los jugadores te pasaban en la red; si se hubiese mantenido esta velocidad, Federer muy probablemente tendria 35 Grand Slams, por lo menos.
Este partido lo podía haber ganado Federer perfectamente, si hubiera gestionado mejor los puntos importantes. Algo que siempre le ha ocurrido a lo largo de su carrera
They hace pressire but they hace the support too, AND thats important too, so dont act like poor english tennis players has rough cause its even worse to play while all the crowd wants you to lose in favor of their players
and Pat Cash, a monster of a volleyer, won Wimbledon in 1987 defeating Lendl in the final and Connors in the semis. He also reached the Australian Open final on the fast grass courts in Sidney losing to Edberg in a tight 5 setter in 87 also. In 88 also lost the final to Wilander, in 5 sets, this time and for the first time on the rebound ace surface, which was mantained until 2008. Cash also won 2 Davis Cups for Australia, the hero both times (83 and 86) all on grass, when the Davis Cup was a huge tournament, comparable to winning a major. Patrick Cash peaked at #4 in the world, and reached US Open semis a couple of times also. Had a checkered career due to injuries. A superb volleyer.
All the stuff abt how nice Fed is, great sportsman etc etc. Look at that handshake at the end - that's the real Fed, and I haven't seen anything in the yrs since to make me change my mind.
this is may be the only one time that he can win over Federer he just new but anyway Henman has very very awesome volley nice we all can learn from Henman nice...
@@smftrsddvjiou6443 This year is an exception but even last year there were more aces in Wimbledon than in 2001. In 90's it was worse. But then racket and especially string technology was different so returning was also much harder.
@@perakojot6524 Yeah, maybe not aces, but I guess there were more service winners back then. But the lawn is slown down and so the balls, this is confirmed.
@@smftrsddvjiou6443 Balls are a bit fluffier this year in particular and are lighter in last decade than what they were two decades ago so that certainly has impact. However, grass type and length is the same. I would really love to hear actual explanation that makes sense how are the courts actually slowed down if grass type and length are the same. The only explanation I heard so far is the claim they add sand in soil which is frankly speaking ridiculous. Moreover, even if there is certain court slow down (in addition to lighter fluffier balls) calling it green clay is simply idiotic coz at current state center court is significantly faster than the fastest hard court.
@@TheJohnCooper the Grass courts haven't changed since 2001, the balls have and the consistency of the court. Also the serve and Volley is such boring tennis, no real shot making.
To think Federer used to be this good on grass back in 2001, but still didn't win a grass title till 2003 speaks volumes about just how much grass court tennis has degraded over the years. Grass used to be just as dominant as Clay not so long ago
Bad loss, Federer should never have lost to Henman after beating Sampras. Actually his only fast court win against Henman came at Wimby 2006, and even then, the grass was already slower there by that time. On the other hand, except for that 2001 match, Henman never won a single set outdoors against Federer.
5 semi finals, 4 losing to Sampras. He was like a B version of Sampras. And when Sampras was beaten in the quarters by Federer and Henman beats Federer, he then loses to Ivanisevic in the semis, a great player was Goran also, but Henman blew it really, it was his chance.
@@rebecalinares5393 yeah i remember it, he was going well then the rain delay massively disrupted the match. im sure Agassi beat him too maybe that was a QF?
How Henman failed to win a slam is beyond me. All the talent in the world. His semi against Ivanisevic in this Wimbledon was a travesty. But for the rain delay, he was a lock to make the final.
@@thelaurels13 that has nothing to do with my comment, rather u should look at ur on, Henman won no grand slams but had one of the best H2Hs against fed lolz made urself sound a right muppet.
well 5 years later saw an old and washed Henman. Also on much more slow courts. Here it was the last of his peak years (1996 - 2001) where he had lost to Sampras everytime.
con la vieja escuela de Sampras si pudo, es poco eso? Apenas en 2001 tenia 18 años y de ahi empezo a mejorar hasta que supero a toda la competencia que tenia y venian en sus picos, Nalbandian, Coria, Hewitt, Safin, Ferrero, Roddick, Moya, Haas, Rios, Agassi aun con 33 años era muy solido, fue #1 en 2003 ... Ademas tuvo que lidiar con Kafelnikov, Chang, Rafter, Ivanisevic y Kuerten, todos ellos #1 y #2. Todo eso para ascender al #1 y despues lidiar nada menos que con Djokovic y Nadal. Tuvo una mas dura competencia Federer que la que tuvieron Nadal y Djokovic sin duda, sobretodo porque se jugaba en canchas ultra rapidas, donde toda esa camada de jugadores era mejor. Habia mas competencia en canchas ultra rapidas que en lentas.
Fedrer defeated Sampras in before match, Henmen lost to Goran Ivanisevic in next match eventually Goran Ivanisevic won his First and last grandslam by defeating Patric Rafter in final of wimbeldon
It's clear that if Federer was playing his best game in 90's he never won a grand slam tournament. All those great volley players would have kicked his ass all over the court.
@Daniel Burke For example, Henman was up to 6-1 games against Federer and that 1 loss was because of retirement. Federer's shots are not good for a fast surfaces which was used 80's and 90's and early 2000. Moreover, he's volleys are bad and timing sucks.
@@thebigmonstaandy6644 Once, and that was because he did not meet Sampras at that time. And BTW, Yannic Noah won the French Open playing the volley game.
Now, honestly, tell me everybody. After all hype is gone. What could Federer do with this racquet that Sampras could not do? :-) His young age is considered, dont worry. Just talent and shotmaking-wise. I would like to know. :-)
I'd forgotten how good Henman actually was. His volleying is phenomenal. Definitely one of the best volleyers of all time, right up there with Becker and Edberg.
Henman was below average at best; what did he achieve in his career?
@@maxpowers111 I'd love an explanation on why being ranked top 4 on the atp tour is below average ol
I love Becker, but he’s not in Edberg, Mac, or Rafter’s class when it comes to volleying.
@@karlsalocks He was incredible at net. Kind of like Edberg with his pinpoint precision and athleticism. Dude was hard to pass too.
Too bad they slowed the grass down. It allowed more defensive players like Roger and rafa to win
I wish that one day Wimbledon will play like this again. Its so pleasant to watch
This match was a lot closer than I remember it. The talent of a 19 year old Federer was there for all to see.
My ex friend stu remembers different and he was actually in the crowd lmao
And also his mental weakness. Another of those matches only Federer know how he manage to lose them
Old School tennis. Joy to watch.
Henman was a great volleyer of the ball. He had the best backhand smash I've seen.
That baggy shirt tho and that salty handshake...LOL Fed
Not a gracious loser.
He was young dummy
Now
@John Wick You imply too much. Besides, you can't force people to accept homosexuality.
Didn't seem salty so much as quite abrupt. Didn't want to hang around in there. lol
Before the match, Federer won Sampras in final set.
After that, three days incredible match with Ivanisevic and continue to most dramatic final in the Wimbledon history on Monday.
I think this year's Wimbledon had so many historical moment and drama.
Definitely my favorite Wimbledon!!!!!!!!!!
I remember this match just after Federer beat Sampras in the 4th round and on video it seems as well. Good quality Jamie and as we know from 2003 until the present time only four men have since won the men’s title. Great upload 👌🏾
That was the difference between Tim Henman and Andy Murray at Wimbledon in my opinion. You expected Murray to get to at least the semi finals every year. But you hoped that Tim Henman would. That's why watching Tim Henman at Wimbledon always left me in pieces .
Yeah, I’m Glaswegian and always liked ole’ Tim better than Murray, he was never easy to like but tbf Andy is top 10 greatest players ever.
@@rossl5908 more like top20
@@user-cy6xl3vd3f More like top 30. He only has 3 majors
@@farid1406 3 majors during the big 3 era, 45 total titles including 14 masters1000 and an atp finals title. Gimme 20+ players who have a better record taking into account the era they played in.
Henman had incredibly good anticipation and returns, and a good soft touch on the net. Sadly the rest of his game wasn't up to that of the greats, lacking offensive power in anything else.
staxstix he was bloody useless and so over hyped.
@@thelaurels13 Are you the 4th best in the world at doing something? Probably not. And therefore you haven't been in that position for 4 years....? Henman was ranked no4 for 4 years.
@@garydunn7014 armchair athletes talk the most shit :)
His serve was prone to breaking down at critical moments - as it did against Ivanisevic in the 5th set.
@@Zenoandturtle out of goffin haase basilashvili and edmund who you think has best chance of finding success?
GREAT match from both these guys, props to Henman!
Tim had some of the best hands ever in the business and his lobs are awesome
Had to as he had zero power
Apparently, Tim Henman never won a grass court tournament in his career. Yet the British annually expected him to triumph at Wimbledon. 😮
Tim Henman's best performance. To beat federer, having no powerful forehand or backhand, he had to rely on precision placement and volleys. And for me Henman was one of the best volleyers ever, Henman beat the man who had beaten Sampras in the 4th round Incredible performance, and it's incredible that a small guy with hardly any power was able to compete with powerful players using skill, rather than power.
He had a real chance at the title - just a point here or there against Ivanisevic in the 4th set tiebreak.
@@Zenoandturtle If the rain hadn't come, Henman would have won. Goran said as much.
@@WilliamRobinson-bb6mr and he would have beaten Rafter in the final as hed beat him at W,don before, people don't realise how great hebman was, he was just unlucky to meet each eventual winner in 4 W'don semis, in this vid it highlights how good he was.
@@WilliamRobinson-bb6mr he recently said he was lucky though to be 2-1 up in sets ag iv.....so maybe iv....deserved it in the end especially as hed lost two/three wimb finals in the past and he would have been devastated.
People dont realise how good a player Henman was. punching above his weight at times but he did have a very good record against Federer.
Federer, Sampras, Henman...the volleys were sure pretty back then!
Impressive Henman, good to see
This again
This was a superb match, really high quality from both players. Henman was an excellent player with superb volleys and touch at the net and an underrated all round game. A pity that Henman didn't win a slam. Unlucky against Goran with the rain in the semi finals and he somehow lost to Bjorkman in the 4th round of the Australian open when he was the highest seed left in the draw. Just lacked the mental toughness that Andy Murray had, but great to watch that serve volley game. Could tell watching this that Federer was going to be great. He hit some amazing winners in this match and of course in beating Sampras in the previous round.
He got royally screwed in 2002. Wimbledon changes the grass for god knows what reason and Hewitt just smoked him because he had all day to just beat up on Henman.
@@namtran512 Henman was playing really well in the early part of that semi final and was playing the better tennis, but he was under so much pressure from the media and public to win. Hewitt outplayed Henman after the rain delay and Henman lost momentum and confidence. A great player and was good enough to win a couple of grand slams, just think he was under too much pressure, but always like that for the English.
@@KevinShoreHealthyEating Didn't help that the conditions were heavily favored to Hewitt; for whatever reason Wimbledon thought every final would be Goran v. Sampras so they changed it up.
@@namtran512 the balls were also heavier and the racquet technology also eliminated the serve and volleyers as it was becoming easier to hit winners from 3 feet behind the baseline.
@@namtran512 he bottled it against Goran, yes the rain delays didn't help. I dunno enough about the grass 'change' to comment but tbh I think Hewitt was just a better player on the day, he beat nalbandian in the final did he not? Who was no mug himself at the time. Hewitt was a special player.
I think Henman was good enough to win Wimbledon at least once, especially back in the serve volley days but I think the pressure always got to him too much.
deserved two-three wimbledons if he had had ivan lendl as coach, like andy murray did, he would have done. lendl was probably the most ruthless player , and had direct experience of losing so many grand slam finals before he finally won, and went on to win eight grand slams plus many atp masters events. andy murray went toe to toe with federer and won in four sets. and this federer beats sampras at wimbledon in the same year i think.it's a shame as henman could have achieved three grand slams like andy murray with lendl's influence as coach and mentor.
for a man of small statue going up against more athletic six foot odd athletes, it's impressive how henman was so competitive. here, he was so utterly ruthless and razor sharp at the net and served very well. was ruthless at putting away loose returns from federer. and his approach shots were mostly excellent, putting federer under pressure,allowing henman to anticipate the attempted passing shot to hit a volley winner. of course in this netrush era of serve and volley, they were incomplete players with relatively poor backhands compared to todays players. they were over reliant on their serve and forehand. no greater example of this was andy roddick who had a non existent backhand. it is however a risky style of play, and led to henman getting bogged down in too many long five setters before then semi finals, so he was too mentally and physically tired to win.
Well..... there was a guy called Sampras those days....
He was beaten by better players
Thats why he didnt deserve to win cause others players had the talent AND the mind to manage pressure AND win big tournaments, sampras, Agassi, rafter, for example
Henman was a specialist in failure. A PHD in losing.
Henman was awesome in his Prime... should have won a Major really.
not against federer or djokovic in grass
This was the year he should have won. Federer had done him a favour and knocked out his bogeyman Sampras as well
@@Invinciblez18 Federer had done rafter and Ivanisevic a favour. They deserved to contest one of the all time great finals
@@Logan00710 on the traditional fast court, he would have.
So incredible!!
There were so many great players when Federer was young! Incredble though how Federer became so much better each year and ended up winning so many slams and the others didn't... some of them did beat Federer occasionally but still didn't win slams. I mean Hewitt and Roddick won 1 or 2 but once Federer had his first one and really took off it was over for them.
Who’d have thought this kid would become the GOAT and still be competing in the final 18 years later against the world number 1.
Adrian Troickic, 😂😂😂
@@jimnosnow4484 Djokovic is not here playing man.
Logan00710, 😂😂😂
@@jimnosnow4484 djokovic is 3-1 against federer in wimbledon, i know it´s hurts you. But is it true man
Logan00710, When did Djokovic beat Federer in his prime years or peak years? Can you tell me please? 2004-2010 or 2017? What was Djokovic’s slam final h2h with Roger. Oh thats right. He didn’t beat him. No, he first beat Federer in a slam final when Federer was older than Djokovic is today while Djokovic himself was in his prime at 26 years old. He beat Federer in slam finals in 2014, 2015, and 2019. Really historic years for Roger huh? Coz everyone always talks about how good Roger was in 2014, 2015 and 2019. 😂😂😂 Get real. Federer won Wimbledon from 2003-2007 then again in 2009. Who tf cares that prime Djokovic beat Federer in his mid to late 30’s three times after 2014?
Henman was nice to watch, liked his serve and volley style
So bizarre to hear the Wimbledon fans so raucously supporting Fed’s opponent. They’d finally get a British-though not English- champ in Murray 12 years later.
@Daniel Burke Fuck off. He has won three grand slams, two olympic golds, the atp world tour title, and was world no 1. All you have done is sit on your fat ass and act like a troll
'Fed's opponent?!' That is England's Tim Henman you are talking about! It would be extremely bizarre if they didnt support their own player!
@@npe9483 And a Davis Cup as well
Nobody has had more support at Wimbledon than ‘Tiger’ Tim Henman. Henman playing at Wimbledon in the second week was an institution. The perfect combo of a player being just about good enough to win it, but still embodying the plucky English underdog spirit.
nothing bizzare. if murray plays fed the support is equal. but the crowd had a love for tim. not just because england but he had a vulnerability that attracted everyone.
You could see early on the brilliance of Federer's returns, ground strokes and passing winners, and just his grace and ease of presence on the court. You could also see how really very good Henman was in his prime as a serve/ volleyer, and it was an interesting contrast in styles, which was slowly coming to an end at the time as Wimbledon courts started to slow down and favour the predominant baseliners/ rallyers. If it hadn't been for Sampras' dominance at the time, Henman probably would have notched up a Wimbledon title
I never realized how great Henman was at attacking the net. Hes so awesome.
Divontay Swing I love Tim’s high backhand volleys. He makes it look easy.
The speed of the court was super fast !! That day undoubtedly belonged to Henman as Federer's (then teenager) returns were so tuff to handle. Henman played a very smart game that day & Federer was bit unlucky as he was never playing like a rookie but truly like a champion player who hardly gave any chances to win a point so easily.. In my view, both players deserved to win the game.
This was the speed used for over 100 years, 130 years to be precise. All the great champions won on this same speed court. What has happened in the last 15 - 20 years seen the traditional speed slowed down to favour the back court rallies has been horrendous.
2 of the finest centre court players.
The court and ball is so quick back then. It's a green clay court now.
Yes, was thinking the same thing myself. This year, when I saw Centre Court (for both finals), it looked as though players never left the baseline. I saw two weeks of highlights with all sorts of slicing and dicing and power tennis; and almost no-one running to the net. While so many were praising these rallies, I could only long for a match like this or dream dreams of Graf v. Novotna. Alas, you hit the mark, and all that's left now is green clay.
Remarkable that Agassi won it with a baseline game back when the court was lightning fast suited for only serve and volleyers
@@jeffreybeshears8211 Because he could make a return. All those guys with their crappy return game at those times, plus rackets where you couldn't so easily add top spin made the stupid, boring S&V only choice for play. Thankfully, players skill and technology made it a relic of the past.
No. The grass composition is the same since 2001.
@@martydav9475 well, the explanation about a more predictable and higher ball bounce due to better grass quality sounds more convincing than an ad hominem fallacy. Having watched games of wimbledon since 1997, frankly i hadnt observed a slower game in general. Perhaps a higher bounce and more powerfull racquets.
Man this were tennis!
Henman was a solid volleyer. I remember that it took Federer many tries until finally being able to beat Heman.
Tim Henman was a joy to watch,although he never won Wimbledon,for me he is one of the best gras players ever,he always gived everything and had the same style of becker abd edberg
Henman should have been sponsored by Viagra at the Grand Slams because he could only ever achieve a Semi.
He defeated Roger Federer at Wimbledon...!!!☺️
How many people can say that?!
He almost certainly would have reached the Final in 2001 but for the rain;
they didn't yet have a retractable roof at Wimbledon!
Tim was a great tennis player and true gentleman...
He's also a very talented golfer...
P.S. He plays off scratch,I believe!!😊
@@andrewkennaugh1065 lol so what??? He was only 19 years old (RF) that's why Henman beat him
At that age Federer beat Sampras, so age is not that relevant here. @@djordjenikolic9059
Timeless Tunes - He would have won the Semi v Ivanisevic if it wasn't for the dumb rain delay.
see that confident and consistent back hand winner from Rogi. can that comes down once more to make no. 21 GS?
It is a rare occasion that Federa had been a serve andvolleyer.
Wow, this is a match Federer could easily have won. Up 6-3 and 5-2 in both tie-breaks before losing them both. Could very easily have made the final that year. He had a winning record against Ivanisevic... Henman will also rue his semi-final loss... was his best chance to win a major...
History says otherwise. He lost@Daniel Burke
Agree, Ivanisevic did not have the game to compete against Federer. Henman's game - especially his serve - was prone to breaking down as it eventually did against Goran in the 5th set. This could have been Henman's year. Great match - old school for the purists.
@@Zenoandturtle maybe you’re right but rafter could have destroyed federers confidence for the rest of his career so probs worked out for best
The agony we went through with Murray doesnt compare to the agony we went through with Tim
Henman was the ultimate bottler lol
Maybe stop overhyping your players when they play against better players AND lose big tournaments, maybe youre not that good anymore while other countries improved and took their chances
@@diegosotomiranda4107 They cant help it they do the same with the soccer team
@@therebel4332 He wasn't a bottler. He just wasn't that good - he was a lower-ranking top-10er. And he always came up against possibly the best grass court player of all time in Sampras.
What a match, had nearly everything although no ultra-long rallies in the vid. Vintage stuff though, almost one generation passing the baton to the next.
There's something so much more manly about this kind of tennis, I really find it more impressive, more entertaining. I'm the biggest Nole fan, but THIS is tennis
Wonder which was more brusque? Federer offering his hand for a split second to Tim here or Rafa almost pushing Kyrgios aside at Acapulco during post match handshake?
Food&drink for Fed in this match up. Tim actually played his best tennis towards the end of his career on clay and Hard courts when Annacone started getting involved.and he became much more aggressive.
Federer could have won 9 straight Wimbledon titles; from 2001 to 2009, had the talent, the game, had everything. Should have won this one, then in 2002 sure he would have defended his title, with the confidence and all what winning Wimbledon brings. Instead the lost in the first round in 2002, only to win it for the first time in 2003.
last ball probably touched the line btw. Hawk eye could have changed everything
BMence dude come to think about it, it really looked like it could've touched the line
I was thinking the same.. Was on the line for sure.. But its ok.. Fed could have won that breaker earlier but in those years he was still green
The handshake. Man...Roger was not happy.
Probably thinking that last call was a bit dodgy
18 years ago Federer wasnt able to handle the pressure of tie breaks...year 2019 and still the same situation...Novak and Nadal are way better mentally than Roger
Federer has won 65% of his tie- breaks, Djokovic 64%, Nadal and Sampras 63%. Isner is top at just under 66%.
They are mentally stronger but that doesn’t make them better players. In Rogers prime, he dominated so much that the match never even got to the close situations
What you say is factually wrong: Federer actually has better stats in tie breaks. Funny that: you say something categorically and then find out the opposite is true....?
What I think you are almost right about is Federer in general is worse under pressure than the other two. In the ATP 'under pressure' rankings, against top-10 players, over their careers - he comes significantly behind Novak and Rafa. Interestingly, the player who is WAY ahead at the top of the under pressure rankings is Alcaraz. Scary for a 19-year-old......
@@jimnosnow4484just take an L, he is 3rd
@@NamTran-xc2ip Lol you can make a case for second behind Nadal but no way third. A glorified pusher can never be top 2. The peak level of tennis is simply not high enough. Djokovic is consistent with stats and achievements but I can’t see a guy who doesn’t possess offensive, unstoppable tennis at his peak as the best player ever.
Who's Henman?
When this was the game to be played on grass. When grass was actually a fast surface and not today’s green clay.
Henman was an exceptional volleyer of the ball. He didn’t have a massive serve either which made his volleying even better.
Henman placed his serve extremely well.
that was federers most important tournamant id say. Beating Sampras and losing to Henman a round later, he must have taken so much from that ...
Tiger Tim did so well to beat a rampant Roger, who had just knocked out the defending champion, Pistol Pete, in the previous round. You could tell Federer was a future champion in the making.
Can't help thinking this match was crucial for the GOAT race. If Fed had won he had good chances to take W that year, which would have boosted his confidence no end. Surely would have snuck in 2/3 more slams in an alternate timeline before 2003 which is when he got going in our timeline.
Federer could have won 9 straight Wimbledon titles; from 2001 to 2009, had the talent, the game, had everything. Should have won this one, then in 2002 sure he would have defended his title, with the confidence and all what winning Wimbledon brings. Instead he lost in the first round in 2002, only to win it for the first time in 2003.
When the grass was fast..
last year before change in 2002 the grass is nowdays
Autumn of 2000 the grass was already perennial rye.
Tim was so likeable unfortunately he couldn’t win a grand slam
Jack Reilly Likeable. The basturd was a snob. Ever listen to a Greg Rusedski interview. Likeable my arse.
I had a massive crush on him bit didn't find him very likeable. He came across as quite privileged and snobbish. Bland at best.
hey, if you can beat Federer, even if young, you've really accomplished something!
Last shot looked good...
Yeah thats why Fed had the pissed handshake like how can u let the players reaction dictate the call 👎👎👎
Very annoying before Hawkeye
Federer was not happy at the end was he haha
@trafficlight9199 hahaha I wasn't mocking Federer I was just saying
@trafficlight9199 8 in a top heavy shit era
@@frankmclain3634 2004-2007 era was better then the 2000-2003 era
Because the last shot he hit I thought was in.
@@spywhaleCorrect, Henman shouted out and the line judge followed suit. Federer disagreed but we didn't have the ability to watch the shot again.
Tim Henman MASTER !!!!
It's amazing looking back that Henman never won a major.
Fed really blew this two tiebreak sets..
Qué loco ver a Federer haciendo saque y red todo el tiempo.. menos mal que cambió su manera de jugar.
menos mal no, solo que tuvo que hacerlo porque empezaron a lentear las canchas y con las modernas cuerdas y raquetas todos los jugadores te pasaban en la red; si se hubiese mantenido esta velocidad, Federer muy probablemente tendria 35 Grand Slams, por lo menos.
Este partido lo podía haber ganado Federer perfectamente, si hubiera gestionado mejor los puntos importantes. Algo que siempre le ha ocurrido a lo largo de su carrera
tanta cosa que Federer le gane a Sampras si Tim Henman lo devolvió a su lugar
So weird barely hearing the crowd when Roger wins a set 😂
fed well he was up big in both breakers but maybe a lack of experience compared to tim
Er 1:42 - it was out??
Simon Pires and the last ball look like it could've been in as well. Hawkeye is amazing lol
Roger had had so many chances to win this match...he was not experienced enough on the key points...
I would say the same to Nadal when he faced Federer in 2006 final.
British players have to endure wat more pressure than others. It's like a whole nation on their shoulders.
They hace pressire but they hace the support too, AND thats important too, so dont act like poor english tennis players has rough cause its even worse to play while all the crowd wants you to lose in favor of their players
I always considered Henman as the last of the classic serve and volliers..... ironically, the only major final he played was French Open!!!
he never got to a gs final
Nope, it was a semi at the french open ;).
@@jeremie2020 Sorry, the memory failed me!
@@gaskellr44 Sorry, the memory failed me!
@@sslnsarma No probs, i was a Henman fan so have alot of memories of his play....one year though he got to 3 gs semis in one yr....possibly 2002?
I loved Hemman back then, was so thrilled when fed took out Sampras.
Appreciate those Henman volleys: they are volleys for the tennis purist to drool over. Maybe only Edberg comparable.
and Pat Cash, a monster of a volleyer, won Wimbledon in 1987 defeating Lendl in the final and Connors in the semis.
He also reached the Australian Open final on the fast grass courts in Sidney losing to Edberg in a tight 5 setter in 87 also. In 88 also lost the final to Wilander, in 5 sets, this time and for the first time on the rebound ace surface, which was mantained until 2008.
Cash also won 2 Davis Cups for Australia, the hero both times (83 and 86) all on grass, when the Davis Cup was a huge tournament, comparable to winning a major.
Patrick Cash peaked at #4 in the world, and reached US Open semis a couple of times also. Had a checkered career due to injuries.
A superb volleyer.
All the stuff abt how nice Fed is, great sportsman etc etc. Look at that handshake at the end - that's the real Fed, and I haven't seen anything in the yrs since to make me change my mind.
I was getting on his nerves the whole match, cut him some slack
I think he thought that last ball hit the line and was probably annoyed that Tim didn't correct the call.
Ivanišević year
The first of many matches to come where he lost despite being the better player
Not in the first set he wasnt
this is may be the only one time that he can win over Federer he just new but anyway Henman has very very awesome volley nice we all can learn from Henman nice...
Poor Tim, could beat the likes of Federer but could never win a Grand Slam.
The guy was worthy of at least one in his career.
Lol... the HANDSHAKE
if you could call it that
The GOAT under real Wimbledon condition, not green clay.
Yet fewer aces than today. Fewer aces on faster surface, yeah right.
Pera Kojot Is this so ? More aces today ? Just my gut feeling, during the 90‘s Wimbly was a horrible boring serve game.
@@smftrsddvjiou6443 This year is an exception but even last year there were more aces in Wimbledon than in 2001. In 90's it was worse. But then racket and especially string technology was different so returning was also much harder.
@@perakojot6524 Yeah, maybe not aces, but I guess there were more service winners back then. But the lawn is slown down and so the balls, this is confirmed.
@@smftrsddvjiou6443 Balls are a bit fluffier this year in particular and are lighter in last decade than what they were two decades ago so that certainly has impact. However, grass type and length is the same. I would really love to hear actual explanation that makes sense how are the courts actually slowed down if grass type and length are the same. The only explanation I heard so far is the claim they add sand in soil which is frankly speaking ridiculous.
Moreover, even if there is certain court slow down (in addition to lighter fluffier balls) calling it green clay is simply idiotic coz at current state center court is significantly faster than the fastest hard court.
It was one of the few times the opponent had more fans than Federer. Very enjoyable
Roger wasn't a huge fan favorite early on. Not until he became really dominant, strangely enough. People usually like underdogs.
Timmy was hard as nails
The last time at a slam that a crowd was unanimously in support of Roger's opponent
Pretty sure Agassi got the lions share of support in his meeting with fed in New York that year
Back when Wimbledon courts played like real courts
John Cooper - Art of Social cry me a river.
HeitorD why so offended?
@@TheJohnCooper the Grass courts haven't changed since 2001, the balls have and the consistency of the court.
Also the serve and Volley is such boring tennis, no real shot making.
Blu Avenger consistency of court?
Blu Avenger I preferred the serve volley tennis as it was unique out of all the other grand slams
Timmy has pictures of roger and Sampras on his dart board in his garage!
Goran, more like!! 🤣😁
The year Tim should of won Wimbledon if wasn’t for the rain
Could have & Should have
Yeah but the same thing happened when Henman was losing against Todd Martin and the same thing happened there
No excuses he just wasn't good enough
To think Federer used to be this good on grass back in 2001, but still didn't win a grass title till 2003 speaks volumes about just how much grass court tennis has degraded over the years. Grass used to be just as dominant as Clay not so long ago
Two ties a few points of winning and lost showing the GOAT had a weaker head at that time...
Bad loss, Federer should never have lost to Henman after beating Sampras. Actually his only fast court win against Henman came at Wimby 2006, and even then, the grass was already slower there by that time. On the other hand, except for that 2001 match, Henman never won a single set outdoors against Federer.
the fact Henman never won wimbledon is criminal, how many semi finals did he make?
5 semi finals, 4 losing to Sampras. He was like a B version of Sampras.
And when Sampras was beaten in the quarters by Federer and Henman beats Federer, he then loses to Ivanisevic in the semis, a great player was Goran also, but Henman blew it really, it was his chance.
@@rebecalinares5393 yeah i remember it, he was going well then the rain delay massively disrupted the match. im sure Agassi beat him too maybe that was a QF?
How Henman failed to win a slam is beyond me. All the talent in the world. His semi against Ivanisevic in this Wimbledon was a travesty. But for the rain delay, he was a lock to make the final.
I would compare him to someone like David Ferrer, really solid player but never one of the really top guys.
Always a cold handshake from Federer .😅
Wimbledon played much different back then. There was no such thing as a 30 shot baseline rally.
Herman got under federers skin.... Herman beat him a good few times
seles2506 Remind us again how many grand slams did Henman win again because I can’t remember. Oh that’s right, he won sweet FA!
@@thelaurels13 that has nothing to do with my comment, rather u should look at ur on, Henman won no grand slams but had one of the best H2Hs against fed lolz made urself sound a right muppet.
Fed must look back and think what the fuck was i thinking
Five years later Federer destroyed Henman...
well 5 years later saw an old and washed Henman. Also on much more slow courts. Here it was the last of his peak years (1996 - 2001) where he had lost to Sampras everytime.
everybody was cheering for henman instead of federer!
Fed was an unknown back then and Tim was the great English hope
No sé cómo pueden decir que Federer es el mejor de la historia, si con la vieja escuela nunca pudo
con la vieja escuela de Sampras si pudo, es poco eso?
Apenas en 2001 tenia 18 años y de ahi empezo a mejorar hasta que supero a toda la competencia que tenia y venian en sus picos, Nalbandian, Coria, Hewitt, Safin, Ferrero, Roddick, Moya, Haas, Rios, Agassi aun con 33 años era muy solido, fue #1 en 2003 ...
Ademas tuvo que lidiar con Kafelnikov, Chang, Rafter, Ivanisevic y Kuerten, todos ellos #1 y #2.
Todo eso para ascender al #1 y despues lidiar nada menos que con Djokovic y Nadal. Tuvo una mas dura competencia Federer que la que tuvieron Nadal y Djokovic sin duda, sobretodo porque se jugaba en canchas ultra rapidas, donde toda esa camada de jugadores era mejor. Habia mas competencia en canchas ultra rapidas que en lentas.
No entiendo.. en 2001 gano a sampras.. este partido debe ser del 2000..!!
Fedrer defeated Sampras in before match, Henmen lost to Goran Ivanisevic in next match eventually Goran Ivanisevic won his First and last grandslam by defeating Patric Rafter in final of wimbeldon
That’s not Federer, that’s an imposter!
It's clear that if Federer was playing his best game in 90's he never won a grand slam tournament. All those great volley players would have kicked his ass all over the court.
Lol.Andre won Wimbledon without volleys/serve and forehand.
@Daniel Burke For example, Henman was up to 6-1 games against Federer and that 1 loss was because of retirement. Federer's shots are not good for a fast surfaces which was used 80's and 90's and early 2000. Moreover, he's volleys are bad and timing sucks.
@@thebigmonstaandy6644 Once, and that was because he did not meet Sampras at that time. And BTW, Yannic Noah won the French Open playing the volley game.
@@michaelmoonmoon7298 Henman was up 61 vs fed,only becaurce Federer was like nr.10 to data.
Hewwit was up 2.
percreig we all know that. thats obvious.
Now, honestly, tell me everybody. After all hype is gone. What could Federer do with this racquet that Sampras could not do? :-)
His young age is considered, dont worry. Just talent and shotmaking-wise. I would like to know. :-)
I think this Federer player will be a good one someday