Would Federer Have Reclaimed No. 1 if not for the Blue Clay?

[PrinceMoron]

Federer showed he can stand up, walk, run, turn and not moan on the few occasions he slipped at Madrid. The benefits at WO were there for all to see. Don't tell me it was all down to the shoes.

The only people it reflects badly on are those who run like a bull in a china shop. For others whose game depends on running down everything and/or playing as long a rally as possible, then it just comes with the territory.

There are always going to be disadvantages to every style of play. RF's backhand slice did for Murray, but matches up badly with Nadal.

I am just happy to see different surfaces, styles of play, winners.

[zagor]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

i repeat.. Has Fed won any big titles the last few years on slower surfaces?? I saw nothing from Fed the past few years that makes me think Fed would have reclaimed Number 1 if they didn't screw with the clay in madrid or put the roof on Wimbledon.. He wouldn't have won Madrid most likely and surely wouldn't have gotten through Nole and Nadal (who I think would have no doubt been in the finals if they didn't add the roof and up the surface speed of wimbledon). Heck I don't even think he would have gotten by Nole in the semis if they didn't close the roof.

Fed's main big tournaments wins has come under faster conditions (Madrid, Wimbledon with the roof closed and those YEC titles)

And a few big tourneys rewarding aggressive tennis (for a change in this mud slow era) is a problem why exactly? If anything the roof at Wimbledon counterbalances the fact that they slowed down the grass (and messed with the balls) in the first place, for crying out loud Wimbledon should
reward aggressive first strike tennis not be a baseline basher's paradise.

Heck they even slowed USO two times that we know of (in 2001 and 2003) and I wouldn't be surprised if they slowed it down further since, some balance between slower and faster surfaces is desperatily needed.

[SLD76]

Originally Posted by zagor

And a few big tourneys rewarding aggressive tennis (for a change in this mud slow era) is a problem why exactly? If anything the roof at Wimbledon counterbalances the fact that they slowed down the grass (and messed with the balls) in the first place, for crying out loud Wimbledon should
reward aggressive first strike tennis not be a baseline basher's paradise.

Heck they even slowed USO two times that we know of (in 2001 and 2003) and I wouldn't be surprised if they slowed it down further since, some balance between slower and faster surfaces is desperatily needed.

wait..didnt fed win hamburg a few times when it was a clay master?
didnt he beat nadal in the final of madrid in 09? on clay?
hasnt he won miami and iw which are slow hardcourts?
wasnt fed the one who ended rafa's clay match streak?

this 90's tennis fan is a liar..he hasnt watched tennis in the 90'
s, 2000's or now as he obviously doesnt know what he is talking
about.


as per bolded, agreed. I remember during dubai, murray was praising the fact that the court played fast( for a change)

[Raging Buddha]

Originally Posted by ctoth666

Yeah Federer's number one, but because of some pretty exceptional circumstances and I'd argue that he doesn't truly deserve it.

Yes, the fact that Federer has won eight tournaments in total over the last year while Djokovic has won four outdoor hard courts and Nadal has won four clay titles definitely show he doesn't deserve the ranking.

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

i repeat.. Has Fed won any big titles the last few years on slower surfaces??)

Yes, he has.

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

I saw nothing from Fed the past few years that makes me think Fed would have reclaimed Number 1 if they didn't screw with the clay in madrid or put the roof on Wimbledon.

Fed has won in Madrid. Guess against which player and on what surface? Hint: Not in 2012 and 2006. And what year?

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

He wouldn't have won Madrid most likely and surely wouldn't have gotten through Nole and Nadal (who I think would have no doubt been in the finals if they didn't add the roof and up the surface speed of wimbledon).

But but but. What happened to "Nadal is good on all surfaces now. Look, he even won the US Open".

And, it is not "most likely". Oh, and by the way, as seen by my analysis of the statistics from the FR, the roof influence is blown out of proportion. Sorry to disappoint you.

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Heck I don't even think he would have gotten by Nole in the semis if they didn't close the roof.

You mean like at RG 2011 SF? Oh, wait ......

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Fed's main big tournaments wins has come under faster conditions (Madrid, Wimbledon with the roof closed and those YEC titles)

He has won in all conditions. Including this year. You fail.