Actually you won't. If you don't have enough delta V you will crash and burn back on earth, if you have just a little extra, you will be in orbit around the sun for eternity, and if you actually had a lot to break out of the sun's sphere of influence, you will be long dead before you reach...
Why? You seem like a bitter ******* from your post.
But anyway, Federer could use some extra rest time, so some good can come out of him not qualifying to the WTF, but there is no way gasquet will qualify over Fed.
The guy can still play. When he is playing his game well, he still has the ability to beat anyone on tour. Its just that he doesn't seem able to string together 5-6-7 good matches in a row like used to be able to do.
Laver was good, but I can't picture him beating Sampras or Fed on grass and hard court, and Nadal borg on Clay.
He just wouldn't have enough ranking points to be in the top 4 if he played at the same time as Sampras, Nadal, Fed and Borg
We always discuss the current top 4, but who would be the top 4 in the open era?
In no specific order my choice for top 4:
Would have made for some delicious semi final and finals matches.
Nah, if they are competitive, they should keep on playing. People like Nadal and Federer are big names. They will sell tickets and TV rights, even if they are way past their primes. If they enjoy the game, they should stick around
Ok, how about moving to a 2 year ranking system, but removing seeds at tournaments?
No seeds whatsoever, #1 could play #2 in the first round. Rankings are calculated over 2 years, but top 4 don't just get free rides into the Semi every time.