SO true!! except for fed at oz, and nadal on clay, they've all been pretty ****e.
Federer might lose No 1 at Wimbledon
- Thread starter Sherlock
- Start date
SO true!! except for fed at oz, and nadal on clay, they've all been pretty ****e.
Nadal played better than Fed at IW and Miami. Nadal is best player of 2010.
T
TennisFan008
Guest
Nadal has been nothing but a mug-mauler the past 52 weeks, losing to every top player to stand in his way. His ranking is a joke.
At least he didn't lose to Berdych, Baghdatis or Montanes.
Well, at the moment of course Federer is the true and rightious number 1, winning 3 of the last 4 Slams and making 1 final. That might change come Wimbledon, because to make it change Nadal will have to win the French and if he wins the French, he'll probably beat some good players along the way.
Every player deserves his ranking. I have no idea if Rafa will ever be number one again, but if he's now number 3 is because he deserves it.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Sorry but the 2 he won (he won 2 in 2009, not 3) are the 2 where Nadal would have made an impact if he hadn't been injured. (Nadal beat Fed in the one slam that happened before the knee injury).
S
Serendipitous
Guest
kournacopia
Banned
Yeah but the only time Nadal ever won more than one slam in a year is when Fed had mono. Coincidence? I think not.
abmk
Bionic Poster
nadal got ripped by soderling at the FO. All these injury excuses popped up only AFTER the loss . The only slam he missed was wimbledon.
abmk
Bionic Poster
lol, paying back the queen of injury excuses with the same coin !!
Who said he won 3? :???:
S
Serendipitous
Guest
This is depressing. 
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Rafa's injuries are not the reason why Roger won Wimbledon last year. Some people are assuming, and I guess they are entitled to that Rafa would have been in that final, and likely would have pushed and beaten Roger like 08.
Does anyone even recall what Rafa's draw looked like? It was about as bad as it could be. He had Hewitt in the second round, who is one of the best grass courters of his generation. Hewitt was on a tear last year at that event. And Hewitt mentally was as solid as a rock.
Then, if he got past him, he would have met a white hot Roddick in the quarters, who was burning his way through the draw. If he managed to get past him as well, and Roddick was mentally at his best there also, he would face Murray.
Granted he beat him the year before, but this Murray had grown as a player, had beaten Rafa in a Slam Semi before, had won Queens, and had all the momentum on his side.
If he had beaten all three of then, THEN he would have played Roger, who had already won the French and was looking to break that record. And with his serve clicking, was in rock solid form.
So anyone saying Roger got that title because Rafa was not there is being extremely disrespectful to the players above mentioned who brought there grass game to Wimbledon last year. No disrespect to Rafa, but I don't see him beating ALL four of them, in the form they were in to win Wimby last year, imho. He would have been mentally and physically spent by the time he played Roger.
Does anyone even recall what Rafa's draw looked like? It was about as bad as it could be. He had Hewitt in the second round, who is one of the best grass courters of his generation. Hewitt was on a tear last year at that event. And Hewitt mentally was as solid as a rock.
Then, if he got past him, he would have met a white hot Roddick in the quarters, who was burning his way through the draw. If he managed to get past him as well, and Roddick was mentally at his best there also, he would face Murray.
Granted he beat him the year before, but this Murray had grown as a player, had beaten Rafa in a Slam Semi before, had won Queens, and had all the momentum on his side.
If he had beaten all three of then, THEN he would have played Roger, who had already won the French and was looking to break that record. And with his serve clicking, was in rock solid form.
So anyone saying Roger got that title because Rafa was not there is being extremely disrespectful to the players above mentioned who brought there grass game to Wimbledon last year. No disrespect to Rafa, but I don't see him beating ALL four of them, in the form they were in to win Wimby last year, imho. He would have been mentally and physically spent by the time he played Roger.
statto
Professional
We will never know really, but hypotheticals mean nothing.
What we do know is that Nadal has next to no points to defend between now and the clay season next year, whereas Federer is defending a load of points. I'd be very surprised if Federer was the year ending #1 this year.
What we do know is that Nadal has next to no points to defend between now and the clay season next year, whereas Federer is defending a load of points. I'd be very surprised if Federer was the year ending #1 this year.
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
Worst thread ever. People are reading way too much into Fed's lackluster play. He's picking it up in Madrid, right on schedule. He may lose the finals in Madrid and RG to Rafa, still won't matter. And it's hard to see Fed not at least making the final - and probably winning - Wimbledon. The record is getting broken. Sorry Sampras jock sniffers - the truth really hurts.
newmark401
Professional
Nadal is also playing at Queen's Club in London, just after the French Open. He couldn't play there last year because he was injured, so won't have any points to defend at Queen's Club.
Federer didn't play at Halle last year, just before Wimbledon, so he could pick up some points if he was to play there this year.
It's all much of a muchness at the moment, but Nadal could well be number one again by the end of Wimbledon, although Federer won't give up his titles without a fight. Federer probably values his titles more than the number one ranking.
Federer didn't play at Halle last year, just before Wimbledon, so he could pick up some points if he was to play there this year.
It's all much of a muchness at the moment, but Nadal could well be number one again by the end of Wimbledon, although Federer won't give up his titles without a fight. Federer probably values his titles more than the number one ranking.
mandy01
G.O.A.T.
This is depressing.
Not more depressig than your avatar.:evil:
If Federer wins 2 out of the next big three (Madrid, FO, Wimby) he should stay number 1 regardless of Nadal's performance (unless Nadal wins 130 points more at Queens than Fed does at Halle)
If Nadal wins Madrid and the French, he only needs to reach the semis at Wimby to overtake Federer, even if Federer has reached the finals in both Madrid and Paris.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
The crazy thing is at this point next year theres A LOT of points Rog can get from these last few tournaments where he lost early.
statto
Professional
This is going to be key for Federer. If he loses the #1 before he passes Sampras 286 weeks at #1 then there's a good possibility he doesn't pass it at all. Wimbledon would give Nadal a nice buffer zone regardless of what happens up to the clay season next year.
Sherlock
Rookie
Well, the original intention of the thread was just to point out that even though Nadal is currently 3000 points behind Federer, he could very easily pass him up for #1 at Wimbledon. I know you can say this about any player (picking up 3000 points on someone in 1 month), but the difference is Nadal only has to do what he should do (winning two clay court tournaments) to have that chance. This has nothing to do with how Federer has been playing, and everything to do with the ranking system and probably outcomes in the next month or so.
It's not my fault people chose to start attacking the grand slam titles of one player or the other.
We could say practically the same about Nadal this year.
clayman2000
Hall of Fame
Ya, but he also would have to defend a lot of slams. As good as he is, the tour in general has been in a slump since like USO 09
283rd week starts Monday 17th May.
valiant
Hall of Fame
Thanxxxxxxxxx
robin7
Hall of Fame
(1) Federer can even lose his top spot IF he fails to reach SF @ RG AND Nadal regains his title.
Federer: 10030-2000+720(SF)=8750
Nadal: 6880-180+2000(W)=8700
(2) Nadal wins RG AND Federer wins Wimby
Suppose Federer reach the finals @ RG AND Nadal wins it.
Federer: 10030-2000+1200(SF)=9230
Nadal: 6880-180+2000(W)=8700
AND
Federer wins Wimby AND Nadal reaches SF.
Federer: 9230
Nadal: 8700-0+720(SF)=9420
Federer: 10030-2000+720(SF)=8750
Nadal: 6880-180+2000(W)=8700
(2) Nadal wins RG AND Federer wins Wimby
Suppose Federer reach the finals @ RG AND Nadal wins it.
Federer: 10030-2000+1200(SF)=9230
Nadal: 6880-180+2000(W)=8700
AND
Federer wins Wimby AND Nadal reaches SF.
Federer: 9230
Nadal: 8700-0+720(SF)=9420
Last edited:
Similar threads
