2012 Shanghai Masters General Discussion thread

2012 Shanghai champ:

  • Federer

    Votes: 29 38.7%
  • Djokovic

    Votes: 17 22.7%
  • Murray

    Votes: 23 30.7%
  • Ferrer

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • Berdych

    Votes: 2 2.7%
  • Tsonga

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fyrstenberg

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Matkowski

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • Fyrstenberg/Matkowski

    Votes: 2 2.7%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    75

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Finally something big on the horizon. The only big names missing are Nadal and Del Potro. This tournament could pretty much decide who ends the year at no 1. Who's your pick?
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
I heard Ferrer also announced he won't be in Shanghai.

Ferrer is currently playing in Beijing. Shanghai is a Masters and therefore not optional for him. He will incur penalties if he decides to skip it.
 

batz

G.O.A.T.
Ferrer is currently playing in Beijing. Shanghai is a Masters and therefore not optional for him. He will incur penalties if he decides to skip it.

Not any more he's not - just pulled out against Lu in the 1st set
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Not any more he's not - just pulled out against Lu in the 1st set

Presumably with an injury hence not fit to play Shanghai. Well, you can't begrudge him really, the amount of tennis tournaments the guy has played this season. Something was bound to give sooner or later.

Hope it's not serious enough to keep him out for the rest of the season!
 

The Bawss

Banned
I voted Murray because, let's face it, he's going to win this one. What I would really like though is Tsonga or Berdych to win it but that doesn't seem likely right now.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Federer will tank long before the final. Gotta keep the Murray h2h in check and stay fresh for Basel.

How much rest does he need? He's been out for a month and then has another 2 weeks off after Shanghai.

I understand the "play the big tournaments only" policy but let's not get riddiculous here.
 
Not sure if this is the right place to ask this question but why would Federer skip Masters 1000 tournaments but never miss Basel? I know it's his hometown and all but it doesn't seem like a wise choice, ranking and scheduling wise.
 

Zarfot Z

Professional
Federer leading the poll, despite the fact that he is probably not going to win.

Classic TW stuff.
 

kishnabe

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer leading the poll, despite the fact that he is probably not going to win.

Classic TW stuff.

He wasn't supposed to win in Madrid...and he did. TT learned from their doubts at Wimbledon too.

Federer will win every tournament he enters......though most likely he will win 60 percent of them!
 

syc23

Professional
Same old TW voting policy. Federer to win it all....CYGS...Olympic Gold....Beat Nadal in a slam....Murray never winning a slam....Berdych to beat Murray.... FAIL.
 

6-1 6-3 6-0

Banned
Yep, that's Talk Tennis. Just like AO 2012 SF, when Federer was predicted by voters to win in 4 sets, when the outcome was always going to be Nadal in 3 or 4.
 

bjk

Hall of Fame
Not sure if this is the right place to ask this question but why would Federer skip Masters 1000 tournaments but never miss Basel? I know it's his hometown and all but it doesn't seem like a wise choice, ranking and scheduling wise.

He has to play at least 4 500 tournies. He'll play Dubai, Basel, Rotterdam plus Olies, so that's 4. I don't know if there's a requirement for 250s, but he's played Halle and Doha as well.
 

bjk

Hall of Fame
He plays Doha for the money and Halle for the warmup, so I bet those aren't required tournaments. It would be strange if the top players were required to play the 250s, because nobody expects them too.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Yep, that's Talk Tennis. Just like AO 2012 SF, when Federer was predicted by voters to win in 4 sets, when the outcome was always going to be Nadal in 3 or 4.

Nadal would never straight set Federer in a hard court slam, he barely scraped through the 2009 AO final and they never played at the US Open which is by far Federer's best slam and Nadal's worst.
 

bjk

Hall of Fame
Commitment players (top 30 in 2011 year-end ranking) can count their best six (6) results from ATP World Tour 500, ATP World Tour 250 and other events (Challengers, Futures, Davis Cup, Olympics) toward their ranking. To count their best six (6), players must have fulfilled their commitment to 500 events - 4 total per year (at least 1 after the US Open).
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Nadal would never straight set Federer in a hard court slam, he barely scraped through the 2009 AO final and they never played at the US Open which is by far Federer's best slam and Nadal's worst.

Most successful Slams:

Federer:
1. Wimbledon (8 finals: 7 wins, 1 loss).
2. US Open ((6 finals: 5 wins, 1 loss).
3. Australian Open (4 finals: 4 wins).
4. French Open ( 5 finals: 1 win, 4 losses).

Nadal:
1. French Open (7 finals: 7 wins).
2. Wimbledon (5 finals: 2 wins, 3 losses).
Joint 3. Australian Open (2 finals: 1win, 1 loss).
Joint 3. United States Open (2 finals: 1win, 1 loss).
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
Murray is the most dominant athlete in the world today in Shanghai. It's impossible for him to lose there, in fact, he'll win the tournament without dropping a set.


Actually no, I'll go for Djokovic.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Most successful Slams:

Federer:
1. Wimbledon (8 finals: 7 wins, 1 loss).
2. US Open ((6 finals: 5 wins, 1 loss).
3. Australian Open (4 finals: 4 wins).
4. French Open ( 5 finals: 1 win, 4 losses).

Nadal:
1. French Open (7 finals: 7 wins).
2. Wimbledon (5 finals: 2 wins, 3 losses).
Joint 3. Australian Open (2 finals: 1win, 1 loss).
Joint 3. United States Open (2 finals: 1win, 1 loss).

From a technical point of view, yes. I still think that Federer was more dominant at the US Open than Wimbledon, just because he had the same results but that much more competition.

Surely the Us Open is Federer's best chance to beat Nadal these days, though.
 
681b3e23jw1dxlbq0r4sij.jpg
 

kaku

Professional
That upper right section is very interesting, I'm hoping for a Djokovic-Raonic SF
 

Starfury

Hall of Fame
What happens if he doesn't?

As bjk wrote, a committment player can count 6 sub-1000 tournaments, up to four of them 500s.
If he doesn't play enough 500s, he doesn't get any points from that "slot" - meaning even if he won three 250s, he'd only get to count two of them
 
Last edited:

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
The draw looks decent for Federer to the semis, no real big threats. Then there's Murray in the semis and Djokovic in the finals.

See, that no 1 rank is worthless if he's getting the no 3 seed every single freaking time instead of the no 4.
 

Big_Dangerous

Talk Tennis Guru
He wasn't supposed to win in Madrid...and he did. TT learned from their doubts at Wimbledon too.

Federer will win every tournament he enters......though most likely he will win 60 percent of them!

60 percent of the time, it works every time!

:lol:
 

Hawkeye7

Professional
The draw looks decent for Federer to the semis, no real big threats. Then there's Murray in the semis and Djokovic in the finals.

See, that no 1 rank is worthless if he's getting the no 3 seed every single freaking time instead of the no 4.

Well, considering Berdych is the 4th seed here, I'm not so sure Fed would prefer that. ;)
 

Def

Semi-Pro
Most successful Slams:

Federer:
1. Wimbledon (8 finals: 7 wins, 1 loss).
2. US Open ((6 finals: 5 wins, 1 loss).
3. Australian Open (4 finals: 4 wins).
4. French Open ( 5 finals: 1 win, 4 losses).

Nadal:
1. French Open (7 finals: 7 wins).
2. Wimbledon (5 finals: 2 wins, 3 losses).
Joint 3. Australian Open (2 finals: 1win, 1 loss).
Joint 3. United States Open (2 finals: 1win, 1 loss).

Federer lost the AO '09 final to nadal, so 5 finals, 4 wins
 

Duncan Bell

Hall of Fame
Looks like Dimitrov made pretty light work of Andujar in two sets to set up a meeting with Nole.

Should be a near-enough walkover for the Bulgarian.
 
Top