PDA

View Full Version : Can Fed be No.1 again?


Fedchamp
08-31-2011, 09:46 PM
My heart says "yes", but my brain says "probably not".
The reason appears to be that he hasn't made any visible improvements to his game as Nadal and Djokovic (legal or not) appear to have. It seems that he is satisfied by his early career game and feels that is good enough to keep winning. Nadal's improved serve ,and Djokovic's overall game and fitness improvements are well documented. Any other thoughts?

TennisandMusic
08-31-2011, 09:53 PM
It's going to be tough. He's basically going to have to be the best player in the world at age 31 and I don't think that's possible with his style and the current crop of players.

rafan
08-31-2011, 10:05 PM
It's going to be tough. He's basically going to have to be the best player in the world at age 31 and I don't think that's possible with his style and the current crop of players.

Yes even to a non Fed fan it is sad because there is not anyone really on the horizon that can come up to the big four

gregor.b
08-31-2011, 10:08 PM
My heart says "yes", but my brain says "probably not".
The reason appears to be that he hasn't made any visible improvements to his game as Nadal and Djokovic (legal or not) appear to have. It seems that he is satisfied by his early career game and feels that is good enough to keep winning. Nadal's improved serve ,and Djokovic's overall game and fitness improvements are well documented. Any other thoughts?

That appears to be a fairly accurate analysis of the situation.I would agree that the Djoko and Rafa have made improvements but Roger does not appear to have made the necessary adjustments to consistently counter the improvements in their games.I really believe he needs to beef up his backhand and hit the shot flatter because while he hits with a good deal of spin he does not have the penetration through the court and this in turn allows the opposition to hit a higher quality stroke to his backhand instead of him getting around on his f/h and being offensive.Just my 2 cents.

OrangePower
08-31-2011, 10:23 PM
I don't think Fed is going to be able to raise his game to overtake Rafa and Novak. But... it's possible (although not likely) that Novak and Rafa will both suffer a decline (injuries for example), in which case Fed still has enough to take advantage of the situation and get back to #1.

Fedchamp
08-31-2011, 10:23 PM
That appears to be a fairly accurate analysis of the situation.I would agree that the Djoko and Rafa have made improvements but Roger does not appear to have made the necessary adjustments to consistently counter the improvements in their games.I really believe he needs to beef up his backhand and hit the shot flatter because while he hits with a good deal of spin he does not have the penetration through the court and this in turn allows the opposition to hit a higher quality stroke to his backhand instead of him getting around on his f/h and being offensive.Just my 2 cents.

I agree. The high backhand is a weakness, especially against Nadal. Ironically I think he hits his forehand a little too flat all the time. He needs to put more spin on the ball especially when he's run out of position. He remains the best offensive player in the world, but defensively he lacks a "stay in the point" shot.

Cosmic_Colin
08-31-2011, 10:25 PM
I'd rate Fed's chances as:

Winning another slam - 40-60% (depending on when he retires)
Retaining world #1 ranking - 10%

Fedchamp
08-31-2011, 10:37 PM
I'd rate Fed's chances as:

Winning another slam - 40-60% (depending on when he retires)
Retaining world #1 ranking - 10%

I feel his next slam will most likely be the US. These days the US appears to have the fastest court surfaces of any slam, including Wimbledon. This is the one slam where he the court surface really appears to be fast enough to suit his game.
IMO there's no more spectacular a sight in tennis as Federer at full flight at the US Open...anyone remember his between the legs passing shot against Djokovic?
Incidentely I feel Wimbledon is now a HUGE borefest because of the slow courts and balls.

adventure
08-31-2011, 10:38 PM
Djoko is going to be a cool no. 1. His sense of humor is great for the game.

Nada is just weird. One arm is gigantic, the other is shriveled and atrophied. He also would be advised to keep his thumb and forefinger out of his ******* while in public.

Fedchamp
08-31-2011, 10:43 PM
Djoko is going to be a cool no. 1. His sense of humor is great for the game.

Nada is just weird. One arm is gigantic, the other is shriveled and atrophied. He also would be advised to keep his thumb and forefinger out of his ******* while in public.

Yeah but is he cheating? I find his incredible turnaround quite hard to believe without some sort of illegal enhancement.

Agassifan
08-31-2011, 10:47 PM
I'd rate Fed's chances as:

Winning another slam - 40-60% (depending on when he retires)
Retaining world #1 ranking - 10%

Sounds about right

AhmedD
08-31-2011, 10:55 PM
We all know Federer was better than this, he set the bar so high that we expect almost too much of him. People need to start understanding that it's just because the all around crop of players has improved but because that Federer is unable to consistently use his tools like before. He use to handle pace as if it was nothing, he would take many balls on the rise. Remember how he was just returning Safins strongest shots as if they were child's play. The main reason Federer is getting beaten by others now is because he has lost that ability and he's being more passive in order to preserve his body longer. I really can't believe Federer has gotten that slow when barely a year and a half ago he was gliding at the AO 2010 and looking near invincible. He's being more passive in his play because he's trying to care of his body because he knows he is going to become more injury prone.

Did anybody see how fast he was on Monday, was this the Federer you saw in Cincy and Montreal. I think not. Yes he made a ton of errors, but he was moving really well and ripping the ball better than I expected.

I remember how people kept starting threads about how Federer has lost so much speed, and according to some he has also lost "firepower" on his shots. He has gotten a bit slower, but not that much. He still has enough firepower to give even the big hitters a lot of trouble. The problem however was that his average rally shot has become somewhat weaker. If you look back at his peak form it looked as if he was constantly ripping the ball on most of his strokes and on such a consistent basis it was scary. However since the AO 2010 all I've seen is hitting with more topspin and not flattening out the shot when he has the chance. It's only during the second half of 2010 till this beginning of 2011 that he started applying some of his old playing style.

Federer's recent failures aren't because he has stuck to his old ways, it's because he abandoned them. Good to see him return to his old ways, I believe it's the right approach.

Fedchamp
08-31-2011, 11:03 PM
On the subject of court conditions and how they've been deliberately slowed down- I feel Federer possibly could have won maybe 3-5 more slams by now if playing conditions (ie ball and court speed) were the same as they were in the 80's and 90's. Even Hewitt, Roddick and Safin may have won 1 or 2 more as well.

Fedchamp
08-31-2011, 11:07 PM
We all know Federer was better than this, he set the bar so high that we expect almost too much of him. People need to start understanding that it's just because the all around crop of players has improved but because that Federer is unable to consistently use his tools like before. He use to handle pace as if it was nothing, he would take many balls on the rise. Remember how he was just returning Safins strongest shots as if they were child's play. The main reason Federer is getting beaten by others now is because he has lost that ability and he's being more passive in order to preserve his body longer. I really can't believe Federer has gotten that slow when barely a year and a half ago he was gliding at the AO 2010 and looking near invincible. He's being more passive in his play because he's trying to care of his body because he knows he is going to become more injury prone.

Did anybody see how fast he was on Monday, was this the Federer you saw in Cincy and Montreal. I think not. Yes he made a ton of errors, but he was moving really well and ripping the ball better than I expected.

I remember how people kept starting threads about how Federer has lost so much speed, and according to some he has also lost "firepower" on his shots. He has gotten a bit slower, but not that much. He still has enough firepower to give even the big hitters a lot of trouble. The problem however was that his average rally shot has become somewhat weaker. If you look back at his peak form it looked as if he was constantly ripping the ball on most of his strokes and on such a consistent basis it was scary. However since the AO 2010 all I've seen is hitting with more topspin and not flattening out the shot when he has the chance. It's only during the second half of 2010 till this beginning of 2011 that he started applying some of his old playing style.

Federer's recent failures aren't because he has stuck to his old ways, it's because he abandoned them. Good to see him return to his old ways, I believe it's the right approach.

You know, I think players (especially the top 4) are hitting with more pace & spin than previously. This means the ball is coming at Federer faster & higher than previous players. Yes safin could hit with great pace, but it was a relatively lower, flatter ball, which was right in Fed's hitting zone. Federer was able to flail at these shots at will. Now he has to temper his shots (especially the high backhand) otherwise he'll constantly be missing.

Fedchamp
08-31-2011, 11:13 PM
Personally I don't really care if he makes no.1 again. He's proven himself here already. It's the no. of slams that a player's career is eventually judged by. I feel he still has the ability to win a few more. Will his no. of titles ever be beaten?

RF_fan
08-31-2011, 11:36 PM
I'd rate Fed's chances as:

Winning another slam - 40-60% (depending on when he retires)
Retaining world #1 ranking - 10%
I would give him 70-90% of winning at least 1 more slam. I think he's capable of playing on the same level as 2010 AO and 2010 ATP finals again, and in that case he's unbeatable. He even played pretty good at this year AO, except Djokovic was unbeatable.
And I guess 20-30% of regaining #1. He can easily overtake Rafa for #2 with a few wins, and then who knows what happens to Djokovic next year. He could get distracted and not train as hard since he's achieved what he wanted.

zagor
08-31-2011, 11:40 PM
No, Fed won't be ranked #1 again but winning another slam(or even two) is a possibility.

adventure
08-31-2011, 11:43 PM
Yeah but is he cheating? I find his incredible turnaround quite hard to believe without some sort of illegal enhancement.

I tend to believe that Nadal is the one on PED's. The commentators were openly speculating about Nadal's significantly improved speed of serve. They asked him directly, as a matter of fact.

I tend to believe that Djoko's rise to no. 1 was more or less inevitable. I considered him to be the most talented player since 2009. He didn't have the confidence or experience to get past Roger and Nadal at that point, however.

Djoko's breakthrough win was against Federer at last year's USO. Djoko looked both stunned (I finally did it!) and in disbelief (I finally did it?).

Roger is at an age 29/30 where great men's tennis players begin to "decline." It's all relative though; he's just as good as he was a year or two ago, but Djoko is simply much better.

RF_fan
08-31-2011, 11:55 PM
I tend to believe that Nadal is the one on PED's. The commentators were openly speculating about Nadal's significantly improved speed of serve. They asked him directly, as a matter of fact.
Serve speed was different last year, and if he only changed the grip - then why not use the same grip again?
I also noticed his left bicep looked bigger during last year's US Open. Even at this year's French I think it looked bigger than it is now.

Evan77
09-01-2011, 12:05 AM
Fed doesn't need to prove anything to anybody. I don't think he'll get to #1 again but who knows? It is possible.

Bud
09-01-2011, 12:06 AM
Not a chance in hell :)

He'll be fortunate if he finishes 2011 in the top 3 as Murray is breathing down his neck. If Murray outperforms Fed at the Open, he's pretty much toast and will finish the year at #4

Fedchamp
09-01-2011, 12:07 AM
I tend to believe that Djoko's rise to no. 1 was more or less inevitable. I considered him to be the most talented player since 2009.

This is a BIG call. IMO Roger is the most talented of all time and continues to be. As for Djokovic's current form, well I find it dubious to say the least that a player who pulled out of every 3-5 tournaments because of "illness" could have such a monumental change of form. I also find it difficult to believe that (in my memory anyway) only a few high profile players have been caught using PED's. Petr Korda was one. What kind of tests are they using?

CMM
09-01-2011, 12:09 AM
Serve speed was different last year, and if he only changed the grip - then why not use the same grip again?
I also noticed his left bicep looked bigger during last year's US Open. Even at this year's French I think it looked bigger than it is now.

No. ..............

Fedchamp
09-01-2011, 12:10 AM
Not a chance in hell :)

He'll be fortunate if he finishes 2011 in the top 3 as Murray is breathing down his neck. If Murray outperforms Fed at the Open, he's pretty much toast and will finish the year at #4

I think Murray is a joke. I just hope everytime he plays he loses simply because he's such a tosser. In any event Murray will NEVER make no.1, and (arguably) will never win a slam a la Henman. Just my opinion anyway.

Bud
09-01-2011, 12:11 AM
I think Murray is a joke. I just hope everytime he plays he loses simply because he's such a tosser. In any event Murray will NEVER make no.1, and (arguably) will never win a slam a la Henman. Just my opinion anyway.

IMO, you will see Murray holding a GS trophy and the #1 position at some point in the future ;)

Fedchamp
09-01-2011, 12:16 AM
IMO, you will see Murray holding a GS trophy and the #1 position at some point in the future ;)

Well, for this to happen- Federer will have to be retired, Djokovic will need to be injured and the same for Nadal. Likely? By that time more young guns will be there to challenge as well - Tomic anyone?

RF_fan
09-01-2011, 12:17 AM
I think Murray is a joke. I just hope everytime he plays he loses simply because he's such a tosser. In any event Murray will NEVER make no.1, and (arguably) will never win a slam a la Henman. Just my opinion anyway.

I think Murray is more talented than both Nadal and Djokovic. With a bit of luck he should win a few slams.

Bud
09-01-2011, 12:23 AM
Well, for this to happen- Federer will have to be retired, Djokovic will need to be injured and the same for Nadal. Likely? By that time more young guns will be there to challenge as well - Tomic anyone?

Murray has what it takes to beat all of the top 3 in a slam or slam final.

Caesar
09-01-2011, 12:23 AM
I don't think so.

I'd be interested if he can get to number 2 though. That will give him a great chance of winning Slams, because it would potentially put Nadal and Djokovic on the same side of the draw. That scenario favours Federer's match-up advantage, since he loves playing the Serb and hates playing the Spaniard.

Bit of a catch 22 though, because it's hard to see Federer passing Nadal in the rankings without winning a Slam or two first. Probably more likely that he'd drop to #5 first. :p

Fedchamp
09-01-2011, 12:35 AM
Just an observation- Federer has lost so many matches in the last few years that he's declined, after winning the first comfortably. He kind of coasts through the first and then starts to miss-hit balls and lose confidence and points. If he can string together consecutive sets of consistent play, consistently, then he can be a force again.

Bjorn99
09-01-2011, 03:38 AM
Murray could easily go on a Djokovic streak. Federer, likely not.

veroniquem
09-01-2011, 04:46 AM
This is a BIG call. IMO Roger is the most talented of all time and continues to be. As for Djokovic's current form, well I find it dubious to say the least that a player who pulled out of every 3-5 tournaments because of "illness" could have such a monumental change of form. I also find it difficult to believe that (in my memory anyway) only a few high profile players have been caught using PED's. Petr Korda was one. What kind of tests are they using?



That is the kind of hate post that is truly irritating. Every player is moderately good before breaking through and being better than that. Djoko won masters and slam (and WTF + olympic medal) before 2011. He was consistently in top 3 for years. He beat Fed and Nadal several times before 2011. It's not like we're talking about a mediocre player, breaking through out of nowhere. Toni always said Djoko would become Rafa's main rival. Read Rafa's book: he says they knew Djoko would be the next big thing. By your logic, Fed was simply a top 8 player when suddenly, for no discernable reason, he started winning everything (non clay) in his 23rd year (2004). Suspicious, no? Guess what? One is not born #1, one becomes it. That means before becoming it, they're ranked something else. Man, convoluted logic if there was ever one! Who else has more talent other than Fed and Rafa? Who was more likely to challenge them?
Health problems as well as tennis difficulties (serve motion) or confidence issues can be fixed or fluctuate over time. So what? That's what always happens in tennis. There was never a time when we didn't know Djoko had a lot of talent/potential.

Caesar
09-01-2011, 04:50 AM
Health problems as well as tennis difficulties (serve motion) or confidence issues can be fixed or fluctuate over time. So what? That's what always happens in tennis.
That's because players are always juicing.

veroniquem
09-01-2011, 04:56 AM
That's because players are always juicing.

Lol. I really wouldn't know but in that case, there is no reason to single out Djoko anyway.
Personally, I disagree. If it was juicing, people would be amazing right away. It takes time to fix losing to certain people, becoming more competitive, accumulating confidence. It doesn't happen overnight. It is clear it's always (or most of the time) a painstaking process.

Amelie Mauresmo
09-01-2011, 04:59 AM
No Roger Federer will never become number one again but I think he can win ONE or possible TWO more grand slam singles titles. Federer is too inconsistent now. But he proved at the French Open he can string it together he is dangerous.

Fedchamp
09-01-2011, 05:12 AM
That is the kind of hate post that is truly irritating. Every player is moderately good before breaking through and being better than that. Djoko won masters and slam (and WTF + olympic medal) before 2011. He was consistently in top 3 for years. He beat Fed and Nadal several times before 2011. It's not like we're talking about a mediocre player, breaking through out of nowhere. Toni always said Djoko would become Rafa's main rival. Read Rafa's book: he says they knew Djoko would be the next big thing. By your logic, Fed was simply a top 8 player when suddenly, for no discernable reason, he started winning everything (non clay) in his 23rd year (2004). Suspicious, no? Guess what? One is not born #1, one becomes it. That means before becoming it, they're ranked something else. Man, convoluted logic if there was ever one! Who else has more talent other than Fed and Rafa? Who was more likely to challenge them?
Health problems as well as tennis difficulties (serve motion) or confidence issues can be fixed or fluctuate over time. So what? That's what always happens in tennis. There was never a time when we didn't know Djoko had a lot of talent/potential.

As I said, it is my opinion.

celoft
09-01-2011, 05:41 AM
Don't see it.

cknobman
09-01-2011, 06:12 AM
Not a chance in hell :)

He'll be fortunate if he finishes 2011 in the top 3 as Murray is breathing down his neck. If Murray outperforms Fed at the Open, he's pretty much toast and will finish the year at #4

First, no I dont think Fed can get back to #1. He has shown he just cant hold it together long enough anymore. He will be like a older Pete or Andre and be able to hold it together for a tournament and win but not enough throughout an entire season to get a #1 ranking.

As for Andy Murray, breathing down Rogers neck??? Really?? Is is close to 2000 points behind Roger in the rankings right now. I dont think that is breathing down anyones neck right now.

CmonHewitt
09-01-2011, 06:28 AM
Never write off a champion... though Nadal and Djokovic seem to have his measure these days.

TenTan
09-01-2011, 06:30 AM
I doubt it. Unless Djokovic and Nadal get some serious injuries i cant really see Federer beating them.

Clarky21
09-01-2011, 06:34 AM
As I said, it is my opinion.

I share your opinion,too.

tennis_pro
09-01-2011, 06:35 AM
Not a chance in hell :)

He'll be fortunate if he finishes 2011 in the top 3 as Murray is breathing down his neck. If Murray outperforms Fed at the Open, he's pretty much toast and will finish the year at #4

:):)

By the looks of it Nadal won't get to no 1 again as well :)

pizikylin
09-01-2011, 06:38 AM
I don't think he could be No.1 again. But maybe he can won 1 or 2 more grand slam titles.
But I really hope he could be No.1 again. Return of the King.

sureshs
09-01-2011, 06:41 AM
Fed can be #1 again on the Champions Tour which he can play after remaining retired for 5 years.

KHSOLO
09-01-2011, 06:45 AM
My heart says "yes", but my brain says "probably not".
The reason appears to be that he hasn't made any visible improvements to his game as Nadal and Djokovic (legal or not) appear to have. It seems that he is satisfied by his early career game and feels that is good enough to keep winning. Nadal's improved serve ,and Djokovic's overall game and fitness improvements are well documented. Any other thoughts?

Not a chance, he would be lucky if he reaches the quarters in the US Open

veroniquem
09-01-2011, 08:25 AM
As I said, it is my opinion.


An opinion motivated only by irrational hatred and not substantiated by any fact.
Pulling out of tournaments all the time? Really? He's played every single slam since 2005 and the only master I can think of he "pulled out of" was Madrid 2010. Never pulled out of WTF either AFAIK.

sadowsk2
09-01-2011, 08:31 AM
People on this board really need to quit lathering up in the Fed butter... reading all this "Fed will win the French Open", or "Flight of the Golden Eagle to Victory" are waaay over the top for this has-been... He won't even have a glimmer of hope at winning another slam unless Nadal, Tsonga, Djoker all get hurt.. And he gets an incredibly fortunate draw, and even then I don't think he'll do it... Move on from this old dog.

celoft
09-01-2011, 08:35 AM
People on this board really need to quit lathering up in the Fed butter... reading all this "Fed will win the French Open", or "Flight of the Golden Eagle to Victory" are waaay over the top for this has-been... He won't even have a glimmer of hope at winning another slam unless Nadal, Tsonga, Djoker all get hurt.. And he gets an incredibly fortunate draw, and even then I don't think he'll do it... Move on from this old dog.

You think he will retire with 16 slams?

Magnetite
09-01-2011, 09:00 AM
If you look at videos of Fed on youtube right before he plays a much now, you can totally see how is footspeed has declined. It may only be 1/2 a step, but a 1/2 step at such a high level can be huge.

He also, doesn't seem to have the focus that he used to, and the drive that he used to. It's understandable because he's already won so much and now has children.

I highly doubt he can ever regain the #1 ranking unless, Djoker and/or Nadal get injured. He just doesn't seem to be able to (or want to) play every tournament at the highest level.

I think he'll just focus on the major's and try to keep his ranking reasonably high so he gets a good spot in the draw.

He may prove everyone wrong however, but it's not looking that way.

jackson vile
09-01-2011, 10:08 AM
If he can play like he did at the WTF and FO, then yes.

Bud
09-01-2011, 10:19 AM
:):)

By the looks of it Nadal won't get to no 1 again as well :)

Nadal attaining number 1 again wouldn't surprise me, as he's not 30 ;)

If Djokovic's form drops even slightly in 2012 (which it will), Nadal will be there breathing down his neck.

DjokovicForTheWin
09-01-2011, 10:34 AM
There's no way Nadal can be #1 again, he's simply not as good as Djoker. We saw what happens when both play their best. Wouldn't surprise me if Murray soon overtakes Nadal for #2 spot.

Clarky21
09-01-2011, 10:39 AM
Federer has a great chance to take the number 2 spot by the end of the year. I don't really think anyone is getting the number 1 spot away from Djokovic for the next few years at least,and even then I am not so sure.

Ico
09-01-2011, 10:42 AM
Nadal attaining number 1 again wouldn't surprise me, as he's not 30 ;)

If Djokovic's form drops even slightly in 2012 (which it will), Nadal will be there breathing down his neck.
Because there's no way Nadal's level will drop too, right? Soon Nadal and Federer will have to settle with #3 and #4.

goran_ace
09-01-2011, 10:46 AM
Djokovic is going to have a ton of points to defend in 2012 and there's no way he can replicate his first half of 2011. That said, looking only at the GS tournaments, because he didn't win the French, he can still pick up points there if he doesn't win the Aussie and with Nadal coming off the clay season the #1 ranking may come down to who wins Wimbledon. Federer theoretically could get to #1 again but I wouldn't bet on it. Without being seeded 1 or 2 at majors he is going to have to a tougher road and more than likely his role is going to be that of spoiler to Nadal or Djokovic.

jackson vile
09-01-2011, 10:47 AM
Djokovic is going to have a ton of points to defend in 2012 and there's no way he can replicate his first half of 2011. That said, looking only at the GS tournaments, because he didn't win the French, he can still pick up points there if he doesn't win the Aussie and with Nadal coming off the clay season the #1 ranking may come down to who wins Wimbledon. Federer theoretically could get to #1 again but I wouldn't bet on it. Without being seeded 1 or 2 at majors he is going to have to a tougher road and more than likely his role is going to be that of spoiler to Nadal or Djokovic.

I agree, he can do even better in 2012 than 2011. Heck, the olympics will be waiting for him also.

goran_ace
09-01-2011, 10:49 AM
Wouldn't surprise me if Murray soon overtakes Nadal for #2 spot.

Murray??? Seriously???

Rank Name & Nationality Points
1 Djokovic, Novak (SRB) 13,920
2 Nadal, Rafael (ESP) 11,420
3 Federer, Roger (SUI) 8,380
4 Murray, Andy (GBR) 6,535

Bud
09-01-2011, 10:49 AM
Because there's no way Nadal's level will drop too, right? Soon Nadal and Federer will have to settle with #3 and #4.

There's no indication Nadal's level is dropping, long-term. He won 3 GS titles in 2010, 1 in 2011 and was a finalist in 2011. He also made a ton of MS1000 finals in 2011. Compare that to Federer ;)

Nadal still has a couple of years to move back and forth between #1 and #2

Clarky21
09-01-2011, 11:11 AM
There's no indication Nadal's level is dropping, long-term. He won 3 GS titles in 2010, 1 in 2011 and was a finalist in 2011. He also made a ton of MS1000 finals in 2011. Compare that to Federer ;)

Nadal still has a couple of years to move back and forth between #1 and #2

I disagree. His level has dropped tremendously since just last year. It's only going to get worse as the years go on.

DjokovicForTheWin
09-01-2011, 12:22 PM
Nadal's level hasn't dropped at all, at least not according to the actual facts. It has if you believe in fantasy. In actuality, others have simply stepped it up.

KHSOLO
09-01-2011, 12:30 PM
Murray??? Seriously???

Rank Name & Nationality Points
1 Djokovic, Novak (SRB) 13,920
2 Nadal, Rafael (ESP) 11,420
3 Federer, Roger (SUI) 8,380
4 Murray, Andy (GBR) 6,535

Amazing how Roger can have those many points and only one title this year

jackson vile
09-01-2011, 12:30 PM
I disagree. His level has dropped tremendously since just last year. It's only going to get worse as the years go on.

I don't know about tremendously, however Nadal is not giving it his all like the previous years. He is starting to look sloppy at times, and letting things simply go, he just does not seem as focused. At Wim. Novak had a lot to do with that, at other tournaments though it had nothing to do with Novak.

I think the previous year took a lot out of him, and he needs to mentally recharge. We will see what happens next year and USO is not over yet.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
09-01-2011, 12:42 PM
I dont think so- He doesnt have to.

He will go down as the greatest player who ever walked the earth anyway

Bud
09-01-2011, 01:07 PM
Murray??? Seriously???

Rank Name & Nationality Points
1 Djokovic, Novak (SRB) 13,920
2 Nadal, Rafael (ESP) 11,420
3 Federer, Roger (SUI) 8,380
4 Murray, Andy (GBR) 6,535

Amazing how Roger can have those many points and only one title this year

He doesn't have nearly as many as it appears as many are coming off before the WTF (including the 1,500 for winning).

Here is the players' current ATP Race totals for 2011: http://live-tennis.eu/race

He's about 300 points behind Murray and in 4th

veroniquem
09-01-2011, 01:35 PM
Amazing how Roger can have those many points and only one title this year



Especially since his 1 title was a 250.

adventure
09-01-2011, 06:28 PM
I've seen Sampras, Roger and Djoko play, all at or near their primes.

I believe Djoko is the best out of the three.

In today's game, he's faster than Nadal, and stronger than Federer. As he gains more experience, he'll become even better. My assessment back in '09 was: "the sky's the limit."

This is a BIG call. IMO Roger is the most talented of all time and continues to be. As for Djokovic's current form, well I find it dubious to say the least that a player who pulled out of every 3-5 tournaments because of "illness" could have such a monumental change of form. I also find it difficult to believe that (in my memory anyway) only a few high profile players have been caught using PED's. Petr Korda was one. What kind of tests are they using?

NadalAgassi
09-01-2011, 06:30 PM
I dont think so- He doesnt have to.

He will go down as the greatest player who ever walked the earth anyway

Yeah since Federer is the guy who won the Grand Slam twice.

FEDERERNADAL13
09-01-2011, 06:33 PM
Yeah since Federer is the guy who won the Grand Slam twice.

With three GS on grass in one year ;) Imagine the Fed Prime victories from 03-07!!! I wouldn't comment, except for the "Nadal" in your name :)

NadalAgassi
09-01-2011, 06:36 PM
With three GS on grass in one year ;) Imagine the Fed Prime victories from 03-07!!! I wouldn't comment, except for the "Nadal" in your name :)

Federer would have never won a Grand Slam even if 3 of the 4 majors were on grass. He failed to win a French Open for years, a requirement to winning the Grand Slam even with 3 of the 4 majors on grass, and something the superior Laver managed to do twice on route to the Grand Slam, the second one by dismantling that eras Nadal on clay, Ken Rosewall, in the FO final. The only year Federer managed to win the French was 2009, and the idea of Federer winning all 4 slams by that point with his complete non dominance of the game by then, even with 3 majors on grass, is laughable. I wouldn't comment, except for the "Federer" in your name. Your last comment is stupid since I didnt even mention Nadal in my post, or say anything that implied him. Neither Federer or Nadal are in Laver's league, even as a Nadal fan I am not blind to the truth unlike Federer fanboys.

FEDERERNADAL13
09-01-2011, 06:44 PM
Nadal would have never won a Grand Slam even if 3 of the 4 majors were on grass. He failed to win a French Open for years, a requirement to winning the Grand Slam even with 3 of the 4 majors on grass, and something the superior Laver managed to do twice on route to the Grand Slam. The only year Federer managed to win the French was 2009, and the idea of Federer winning all 4 slams by that point, even with 3 majors on grass, is laughable so I wouldn't comment, except for the "Federer" in your name. Your last comment is stupid since I didnt even mention Nadal in my post, or say anything that implied him. Neither Federer or Nadal are in Laver's league, even as a Nadal fan I am not blind to the truth unlike ****s.

Man, if Fed won every grass slam from 2003-2007, that's 15 slams! I doub;t he'd win em all, but he'd be the heavy favourite at each. Mix in 2008 USO, Wimby and FO 2009, 2010 AO, and you've got 19 slams, plus 5 years of 3 slams. Plus he's have 5+ slams at 3 different slams. That's pretty cool! Assuming he is as good at grass as Wimby makes him look.

NadalAgassi
09-01-2011, 06:51 PM
Man, if Fed won every grass slam from 2003-2007, that's 15 slams! I doub;t he'd win em all, but he'd be the heavy favourite at each. Mix in 2008 USO, Wimby and FO 2009, 2010 AO, and you've got 19 slams, plus 5 years of 3 slams. Plus he's have 5+ slams at 3 different slams. That's pretty cool! Assuming he is as good at grass as Wimby makes him look.

Sure, but would he have won the GRAND SLAM, the greatest achievement in tennis? No. Let alone doing it twice, something nobody even in the much less competitive WTA has ever done, and the second time at 31 years old after being banned from playing the slams for 5 years. So even with 19 slams, Laver > Federer.

Also if we want to go into what ifs, Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales, possibly Tilden and Budge would all have over 20 slams if people played all 4 slams, all the time, until they retired from tennis completely. Sampras and Federer would have never held the record. Someone like Connors would even be up with Sampras in slam wins, rather than tied with Agassi.

FEDERERNADAL13
09-01-2011, 06:54 PM
Sure, but would he have won the GRAND SLAM, the greatest achievement in tennis? No. Let alone doing it twice, something nobody even in the much less competitive WTA has ever done, and the second time at 31 years old after being banned from playing the slams for 5 years. So even with 19 slams, Laver > Federer.

Also if we want to go into what ifs, Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales, possibly Tilden and Budge would all have over 20 slams if people played all 4 slams, all the time, until they retired from tennis completely. Sampras and Federer would have never held the record. Someone like Connors would even be up with Sampras in slam wins, rather than tied with Agassi.

I don't want to get into a GOAT debate, but 237 and 23 are nice stats, probably some of the most impressive stats ever!

NadalAgassi
09-01-2011, 06:55 PM
I don't want to get into a GOAT debate, but 237 and 23 are nice stats, probably some of the most impressive stats ever!

True. Federer is worthy of being considered a top 5 player all time, atleast for now.

FEDERERNADAL13
09-01-2011, 06:55 PM
True. Federer is worthy of being considered a top 5 player all time, atleast for now.

I think we should speak in eras, since they are all so different ;)

drakulie
09-01-2011, 06:56 PM
Yeah since Federer is the guy who won the Grand Slam twice.

as other have noted, Laver won 3/4 of his slams on grass in 62 and 69.

Further, in 1962, he played against amateurs as most of the best players in the world were playing in the pro circuit.

I'm quite certain if federer was playing challenger-type players, he would most likely have won the calendar grand slam 5 years in a row if not more.

FEDERERNADAL13
09-01-2011, 06:58 PM
as other have noted, Laver won 3/4 of his slams on grass in 62 and 69.

Further, in 1962, he played against amateurs.

I'm quite certain if federer was playing challenger-type players, he would most likely have won the calendar grand slam 5 years in a row if not more.

Hey Drak, I have a random question. Have you ever strung for Roger or Rafa? Possibly before Fed was with P1?? I've wondered for a while :)

OddJack
09-01-2011, 06:58 PM
Sure baby,

Djoker will come back to earth, and Nadal aleady declining.

Sooooo....who else?

TopFH
09-01-2011, 06:58 PM
True. Federer is worthy of being considered a top 5 player all time, atleast for now.

Definitely true if Fed was at the top.

flyinghippos101
09-01-2011, 06:59 PM
It seems unlikely but seeing how remarkably fast Nadal has been slipping in recent months and considering how Djokovic has a LOT to defend next year, then there's still that very small but possible window of opportunity for Rog.

But as I mentioned already ,it's very unlikely. A major Nadal collapse in the next year is definitely less likely than a few costly slip ups by Djokovic. And if Djokovic isn't #1, then I wholly suspect Rafa will be there ready to move in.

drakulie
09-01-2011, 07:03 PM
Hey Drak, I have a random question. Have you ever strung for Roger or Rafa? Possibly before Fed was with P1?? I've wondered for a while :)

Nope, haven't had the plesure. The guy I string with, Craig Brotman has strung for both. There is a possibility I may be stringing for Sampras in a few weeks.

NadalAgassi
09-01-2011, 07:04 PM
as other have noted, Laver won 3/4 of his slams on grass in 62 and 69.

Further, in 1962, he played against amateurs as most of the best players in the world were playing in the pro circuit.

I'm quite certain if federer was playing challenger-type players, he would most likely have won the calendar grand slam 5 years in a row if not more.

If Laver played the 4 Grand Slams every year against only amateurs every year he could have won the Calendar Grand Slam 10 years in a row.

The what ifs could go on forever. However Laver's 69 Grand Slam where he beat an Open field of only professionals (the very best) and where he beat the 60s Nadal equivalent on clay in straight sets to win the French Open en route, far exceeds any achievement of Federer.

As already explained Federer would not have won the Grand Slam even with 3 of 4 slams on grass. The only year he won the French was 2009, by then far past his period of dominance and clearly unable to win 4 slams in a year. Laver had only a couple attempts at it against a field of "professionals" since he was banned from Slam tennis for most of his 20s, and pros werent even allowed to compete in slams until he was 30. He still pulled off the Grand Slam, which Federer even with 3 of 4 slams on grass would have been unable to do, let alone at 31.

drakulie
09-01-2011, 07:05 PM
If Laver played the 4 Grand Slams every year against only amateurs every year he could have won the Calendar Grand Slam 10 years in a row.



He DID play against only amateurs for SEVERAL YEARS, and guess what???? He only did it once.

Now go to the corner and behave. you are punished for the rest of the day.

NadalAgassi
09-01-2011, 07:08 PM
He DID play against only amateurs for SEVERAL YEARS, and guess what???? He only did it once.


Because he was BANNED from playing the slams for 5 years straight after winning the Grand Slam as an amateur, before being allowed to play them again against other pros and winning the Grand Slam at 31 (an age Federer will have about as much chance of winning even one major as Victor Trociki). You ****s are funny with your delusions and lack of simple comprehension of anything.

FEDERERNADAL13
09-01-2011, 07:14 PM
Nope, haven't had the plesure. The guy I string with, Craig Brotman has strung for both. There is a possibility I may be stringing for Sampras in a few weeks.

That's awesome man! I wonder what racket it'll be :)

drakulie
09-01-2011, 07:16 PM
Because he was BANNED from playing the slams for 5 years straight after winning the Grand Slam as an amateur,


Quiet!!!!! He wasn't banned from anything. He decided to turn PRO, therefore was not eligible to play against amatuers.

He turned pro AFTER winning his first Grand Slam in 1962. He had several years before that to win more calendar slams against other amatuers and failed to do it.

Go to the corner and behave yourself.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_5EXj-OigQW0/TKlM_s34g-I/AAAAAAAABD4/Lu_JmkfKEEc/s320/BusinessDunce.jpg

drakulie
09-01-2011, 07:17 PM
That's awesome man! I wonder what racket it'll be :)

I'm looking forward to it, but have to wait and see if it will happen.

juanparty
09-01-2011, 07:20 PM
yeah!! Maybe at Seniors tour.

RF_fan
09-02-2011, 12:26 AM
Lol. I really wouldn't know but in that case, there is no reason to single out Djoko anyway.
Personally, I disagree. If it was juicing, people would be amazing right away. It takes time to fix losing to certain people, becoming more competitive, accumulating confidence. It doesn't happen overnight. It is clear it's always (or most of the time) a painstaking process.

It kinda did happen overnight, or over Christmas. You have Djokovic losing to Fed in Basel, Shanghai, then losing to Rafa and Fed in WTF and then all of a sudden a big improvement in just a month? It makes sense if you believe in miracles.

sadowsk2
09-02-2011, 03:28 AM
You think he will retire with 16 slams?

Yep. No doubt