Federer News

D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
You are contradicting yourself everywhere, either that or we just need to agree to disagree. All I can say is I am a Fed fan for many reasons, and the slam count is not one of them, it is a perk that comes with it.

This all started with Fed playing clay, and all I am saying is that I am glad he did because I got to watch him play clay again. It was fun, and worth it considering I personally, do not think it will make a difference at Wimbledon, and if so, it is only slightly.
Just put this one on ignore, I don't think s/he is wrapped real tight.
I didn't know women could PMS in their 70s and 80s
 
It's going to be an interesting shift as a fan, just as it is for him.

For the last 2 months it's been nothing but house money. All the wins and all the points were merely a bonus, with the overall goal of just staying healthy until the grass season. It was easy to be relaxed with no expectations.

But now the grass is suddenly here and he's expected to perform right away. And in the blink of an eye, the season will be over and we're back to hard courts. The pressure to win now is definitely real.
Yes, and no. Fritz is joking in the tweet below, but I think he was only 'half' joking. I wouldn't be surprised if Fedr beast-moded Halle & Wimbly. The only real threats I can see is a zoning Djokodal, but this needs a subpar Fedr performance (bc the court will be VERY un-grasslike by SF/F). I still stand by my thinking that Fedr's match vs. Albot was the only poor match he played this year, and he still won... even if ugly.

We'll know soon enough.

 

Ann

Hall of Fame
Yes, and no. Fritz is joking in the tweet below, but I think he was only 'half' joking. I wouldn't be surprised if Fedr beast-moded Halle & Wimbly. The only real threats I can see is a zoning Djokodal, but this needs a subpar Fedr performance (bc the court will be VERY un-grasslike by SF/F). I still stand by my thinking that Fedr's match vs. Albot was the only poor match he played this year, and he still won... even if ugly.

We'll know soon enough.

I'm just hoping he gets past Millman.
 
Yes, and no. Fritz is joking in the tweet below, but I think he was only 'half' joking. I wouldn't be surprised if Fedr beast-moded Halle & Wimbly. The only real threats I can see is a zoning Djokodal, but this needs a subpar Fedr performance (bc the court will be VERY un-grasslike by SF/F). I still stand by my thinking that Fedr's match vs. Albot was the only poor match he played this year, and he still won... even if ugly.

We'll know soon enough.

You saved us!

Halle needs to be smooth in my opinion, and I think it will be after a match or two.
 
Yes, and no. Fritz is joking in the tweet below, but I think he was only 'half' joking. I wouldn't be surprised if Fedr beast-moded Halle & Wimbly. The only real threats I can see is a zoning Djokodal, but this needs a subpar Fedr performance (bc the court will be VERY un-grasslike by SF/F). I still stand by my thinking that Fedr's match vs. Albot was the only poor match he played this year, and he still won... even if ugly.

We'll know soon enough.

If I had a nickel for every time Fed showed up at Halle in beast mode only to not win Wimbledon...


And a zoning Djokovic does not require a subpar Fed to win. Nadal? Maybe.
 
You saved us!

Halle needs to be smooth in my opinion, and I think it will be after a match or two.
;)

I mean, the measuring stick used by some for Fedr seems DRASTICALLY different than the ones used for Djokodal (let alone the rest of the tour).

IMO, Big3 'bad' matches of 2019:

Nadl:
1) AO19 finals, destroyed by Djokr
2) Madrid19 vs. The Fog, blown off the court
3) Barca19 vs. L.Mayer, played horrible and should've lost in straights, but Mayer choked.
4) Barca19, played poorly for next couple of matches, but won, then got blown off the court by Thiem in SF.
5) Madrid19, played subpar early rounds, then played poorly against Tstitsipas, but kept it to a close loss.

Djokr:
1) played poorly for 2 matches before RBA, then played pretty poorly against RBA in Doha loss.
2) IW19, Lost to a guy he's owned in Kohli, need I say more?
3) Miami19, ditto and barely better than IW19, loss to a much inferior version of himself in RBA again.
4) Rome19, played pretty well, but threw in a stinker in the F and got bageled and breadsticked by decent-Nadl (I get that Djokr was tired, but still...)
5) RG19 SF, should've lost in straights, snucked out sets 2&4 bc Thiem choked in set 2, and choked BPs in general throughout.

Fedr:
1) Miami19 1R, played terrible against Albot, but still won, then went on to with the whole tournie.
2) that's it.

Of Fedr's 4 losses, he could've won them all except one:
1) AO17, 2/3 TB's went' Tsitsipas's way, or would likely be SS win, 0/12 BPs (almost never happens with 12 or more BP chances).
2) IW19 F, had BP early in set2, so could've been SS win, still had BPs to serve out set3.
3) Madrid19 vs. Thiem, Fedr had MPs.
4) RG19 SF, sandstorm-like conditions, and on clay, so not much of a chance against Nadl, a player who plays with much more margins.

Nadl and Djokr each with 5+ poor performances vs. Fedr's 1-2, yet he's the one in fear of playing badly going forward... o_O:eek::censored:.
 

Ann

Hall of Fame
;)

I mean, the measuring stick used by some for Fedr seems DRASTICALLY different than the ones used for Djokodal (let alone the rest of the tour).

IMO, Big3 'bad' matches of 2019:

Nadl:
1) AO19 finals, destroyed by Djokr
2) Madrid19 vs. The Fog, blown off the court
3) Barca19 vs. L.Mayer, played horrible and should've lost in straights, but Mayer choked.
4) Barca19, played poorly for next couple of matches, but won, then got blown off the court by Thiem in SF.
5) Madrid19, played subpar early rounds, then played poorly against Tstitsipas, but kept it to a close loss.

Djokr:
1) played poorly for 2 matches before RBA, then played pretty poorly against RBA in Doha loss.
2) IW19, Lost to a guy he's owned in Kohli, need I say more?
3) Miami19, ditto and barely better than IW19, loss to a much inferior version of himself in RBA again.
4) Rome19, played pretty well, but threw in a stinker in the F and got bageled and breadsticked by decent-Nadl (I get that Djokr was tired, but still...)
5) RG19 SF, should've lost in straights, snucked out sets 2&4 bc Thiem choked in set 2, and choked BPs in general throughout.

Fedr:
1) Miami19 1R, played terrible against Albot, but still won, then went on to with the whole tournie.
2) that's it.

Of Fedr's 4 losses, he could've won them all except one:
1) AO17, 2/3 TB's went' Tsitsipas's way, or would likely be SS win, 0/12 BPs (almost never happens with 12 or more BP chances).
2) IW19 F, had BP early in set2, so could've been SS win, still had BPs to serve out set3.
3) Madrid19 vs. Thiem, Fedr had MPs.
4) RG19 SF, sandstorm-like conditions, and on clay, so not much of a chance against Nadl, a player who plays with much more margins.

Nadl and Djokr each with 5+ poor performances vs. Fedr's 1-2, yet he's the one in fear of playing badly going forward... o_O:eek::censored:.
It's hard for me to believe there have been that many tournaments so far this year. I avoid clay as much as possible so until grass starts it barely feels like the year has begun.
 
;)

I mean, the measuring stick used by some for Fedr seems DRASTICALLY different than the ones used for Djokodal (let alone the rest of the tour).

IMO, Big3 'bad' matches of 2019:

Nadl:
1) AO19 finals, destroyed by Djokr
2) Madrid19 vs. The Fog, blown off the court
3) Barca19 vs. L.Mayer, played horrible and should've lost in straights, but Mayer choked.
4) Barca19, played poorly for next couple of matches, but won, then got blown off the court by Thiem in SF.
5) Madrid19, played subpar early rounds, then played poorly against Tstitsipas, but kept it to a close loss.

Djokr:
1) played poorly for 2 matches before RBA, then played pretty poorly against RBA in Doha loss.
2) IW19, Lost to a guy he's owned in Kohli, need I say more?
3) Miami19, ditto and barely better than IW19, loss to a much inferior version of himself in RBA again.
4) Rome19, played pretty well, but threw in a stinker in the F and got bageled and breadsticked by decent-Nadl (I get that Djokr was tired, but still...)
5) RG19 SF, should've lost in straights, snucked out sets 2&4 bc Thiem choked in set 2, and choked BPs in general throughout.

Fedr:
1) Miami19 1R, played terrible against Albot, but still won, then went on to with the whole tournie.
2) that's it.

Of Fedr's 4 losses, he could've won them all except one:
1) AO17, 2/3 TB's went' Tsitsipas's way, or would likely be SS win, 0/12 BPs (almost never happens with 12 or more BP chances).
2) IW19 F, had BP early in set2, so could've been SS win, still had BPs to serve out set3.
3) Madrid19 vs. Thiem, Fedr had MPs.
4) RG19 SF, sandstorm-like conditions, and on clay, so not much of a chance against Nadl, a player who plays with much more margins.

Nadl and Djokr each with 5+ poor performances vs. Fedr's 1-2, yet he's the one in fear of playing badly going forward... o_O:eek::censored:.
Well to be fair, I think most Fed fans look at what he will do against Djoker or Rafa in a SF or F. I think his best level currently can not match their best level currently (except Rafa on grass). However, I do think Wimbledon will be a breeze (no 5 setters) until SF and F. At that point anything can happen.
 
I love how you always support your opinions with nice detailed stats. (y)

Minor gripe with this post, small detail really - they have a slam each, Roger has none.
Fair point. But there's still 2 slams to be played. He's 'actually' top3 atm, as opposed to top2-by-points for most of 2018. Who knows? Look on the bright side, he's turning 38 in 2 months, and I honestly think he's 'barely' in worse form than 2017 (about same as 2017's average, but worse than 2017's best). His 2019 form is waaaaaaay better than 2018's form (tbf bc of 2018's hand ailment, with only HC18/AO18/Rotterdam18 being comparable forms to 2019).

And the REAL bonus? Worse things are possible, but seeing how his form has been after his 2018 hand-ailment had healed since January 2019, I don't see his form being much worse, if at all, from now through 2021 (when he turns 40). I had some doubts in 2018, but his 2019 so far convinced me of this. I think he'll still be top10 by the end of 2021. And when he's top10, he'll always be a slam contender.
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Fair point. But there's still 2 slams to be played. He's 'actually' top3 atm, as opposed to top2-by-points for most of 2018. Who knows? Look on the bright side, he's turning 38 in 2 months, and I honestly think he's 'barely' in worse form than 2017 (about same as 2017's average, but worse than 2017's best). His 2019 form is waaaaaaay better than 2018's form (tbf bc of 2018's hand ailment, with only HC18/AO18/Rotterdam18 being comparable forms to 2019).

And the REAL bonus? Worse things are possible, but seeing how his form has been after his 2018 hand-ailment had healed since January 2019, I don't see his form being much worse, if at all, from now through 2021 (when he turns 40). I had some doubts in 2018, but his 2019 so far convinced me of this. I think he'll still be top10 by the end of 2021. And when he's top10, he'll always be a slam contender.

Love your optimism my friend. I need some of it to infect me...

Hopefully after watching a round or two at Halle, I'll be cured of all doubts.

 
Love your optimism my friend. I need some of it to infect me...

Hopefully after watching a round or two at Halle, I'll be cured of all doubts.

;)

There's still 1/2 a can of soda in your .gif.
So, just look at Fedr, even at ~38, that way.

Ask yourself this: Who do you REALLY think can win 5+ matches against Fedr out of 10 matches if they are playing at their current forms, especially on hc/grass?

IMO, the chances of beating Fedr:
1) Djokr, 60-70%
2) Nadal, 55%
3) Thiem, 50%
4) that's it, the rest will have < 50% chances...

Now, what if DjokodalThiem 'are not' in their current good forms when they meet Fedr (as seen by all of their losses this year)? This is assuming they'd meet Fedr at all, bc Fedr is the most consistent on the tour atm with only 4 losses vs. more losses by each of DjokodalThiem.

IMO, cup-half-full > cup-half-empty. ;)
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
;)

There's still 1/2 a can of soda in your .gif.
So, just look at Fedr, even at ~38, that way.

Ask yourself this: Who do you REALLY think can win 5+ matches against Fedr out of 10 matches if they are playing at their current forms, especially on hc/grass?

IMO, the chances of beating Fedr:
1) Djokr, 60-70%
2) Nadal, 55%
3) Thiem, 50%
4) that's it, the rest will have < 50% chances...

Now, what if DjokodalThiem 'are not' in their current good forms when they meet Fedr (as seen by all of their losses this year)? This is assuming they'd meet Fedr at all, bc Fedr is the most consistent on the tour atm with only 4 losses vs. more losses by each of DjokodalThiem.

IMO, cup-half-full > cup-half-empty. ;)
Nice predictions with imaginary percentages!

Wish these could explain past results in just the last year against opponents not named Djokodal -

Rome '19 - (L) Tsitsipas - QF
Madrid '19 - (L) Theim - QF
IW '19 - (L) Theim - F
AO '19 - (L) Tsitsipas - QF
WTF '18 - (L) Zverev - SF
Shanghai '18 - (L) Coric - SF
USO '18 - (L) Millman - R16
Wimby '18 - (L) Anderson - QF
Halle '18 - (L) Coric - F
 
Nice predictions with imaginary percentages!

Wish these could explain past results in just the last year against opponents not named Djokodal -

Rome '19 - (L) Tsitsipas - QF
Madrid '19 - (L) Theim - QF
IW '19 - (L) Theim - F
AO '19 - (L) Tsitsipas - QF
WTF '18 - (L) Zverev - SF
Shanghai '18 - (L) Coric - SF
USO '18 - (L) Millman - R16
Wimby '18 - (L) Anderson - QF
Halle '18 - (L) Coric - F
That is the problem, nobody needs to beat Fed 5 times, just once. Thankfully only one of those was bad from Fed on grass. I think with the form Fed is in now, he would beat Coric and Anderson. Even though Rafa would be nerve wrecking, he should beat him if playing at his top grass level even at 38.

But it only takes one bad day... which at age 38 can happen much more frequently.
 
Nice predictions with imaginary percentages!

Wish these could explain past results in just the last year against opponents not named Djokodal -

Rome - (L) Tsitsipas - QF
Madrid - (L) Theim - QF
IW - (L) Theim - F
AP - (L) Tsitsipas - QF
WTF - (L) Zverev - SF
Shanghai - (L) Coric - SF
USO - (L) Millman - R16
Wimby - (L) Anderson - QF
Halle - (L) Coric - F
That's why I asked you about their chances against 2019-Fedr 'out of 10 matches' (NOT 2018-Fedr). And I said current forms, so all 2018 matches are not included (Fedr had hand ailment in 2018, and he was in worse form than 2019-Fedr).

You didn't answer that scenario for me. Look at everyone's forms in 2019 so far, how many out of the top 100 players do you think will 'realistically' win 5+ matches if they played 2019-Fedr 10 times? Keep in mind, Fedr won't win all of his matches, so anyone with 1%-49% chance of beating him CAN beat him. BUT, beating Fedr 1-2 times out of 10 is VERY different from beating him 5-10 times out of 10 (who I think Djokr/Nadl/Thiem can atm). As a Fedfan, to me, it's more telling and useful if I can 'estimate' who realistically have a >50% of beating him, on average. This tells me of his level overall, so I can dial in my hopes/expectations for him better that way. For instance, he ended Top3 in 2018, but for most of 2018 (from Miami18 to Bercy18), he was NOT the 3rd best player in the world. But in 2019 so far, to me, Fedr is definitely AT LEAST the 3rd best player in the world, full stop.

And THAT is something to be thankful for, as a Fedfan. :giggle:
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
That's why I asked you about their chances against 2019-Fedr 'out of 10 matches' (NOT 2018-Fedr). And I said current forms, so all 2018 matches are not included (Fedr had hand ailment in 2018, and he was in worse form than 2019-Fedr).

You didn't answer that scenario for me. Look at everyone's forms in 2019 so far, how many out of the top 100 players do you think will 'realistically' win 5+ matches if they played 2019-Fedr 10 times? Keep in mind, Fedr won't win all of his matches, so anyone with 1%-49% chance of beating him CAN beat him. BUT, beating Fedr 1-2 times out of 10 is VERY different from beating him 5-10 times out of 10 (who I think Djokr/Nadl/Thiem can atm). As a Fedfan, to me, it's more telling and useful if I can 'estimate' who realistically have a >50% of beating him, on average. This tells me of his level overall, so I can dial in my hopes/expectations for him better that way. For instance, he ended Top3 in 2018, but for most of 2018 (from Miami18 to Bercy18), he was NOT the 3rd best player in the world. But in 2019 so far, to me, Fedr is definitely AT LEAST the 3rd best player in the world, full stop.

And THAT is something to be thankful for, as a Fedfan. :giggle:

How does this fanciful and imaginary scenario reflect reality?

An opponent just has to beat Fed ONCE. It doesn't matter if he is lucky, if Roger is having an off day, if the weather, elements, star, sun, moon and winds have aligned the wrong way...

Again, don't mean to diss your enthusiasm as a Fed fan, but most of your post is just made up numbers and scenarios looking for a justification.
 
How does this fanciful and imaginary scenario reflect reality?

An opponent just has to beat Fed ONCE. It doesn't matter if he is lucky, if Roger is having an off day, if the weather, elements, star, sun, moon and winds have aligned the wrong way...

Again, don't mean to diss your enthusiasm as a Fed fan, but most of your post is just made up numbers and scenarios looking for a justification.
No worries.

Yes, he only has to lose once, just as Nadal/Djokovic/Thiem/other threats. But Fedr will 'lose' eventually right? And Nadal/Djokovic/Thiem/etc too? Since Fedr will lose eventually, even though he has the best record so far of 2019 confirmed by his form, should we be so negative as to think he has no 'real' chance for Wimby19? And as a fan, being optimistic for grass-season as a result is somehow 'off the mark'?

Also, aren't all match scenarios just #s? For instance, pre-Rome, Rafans who are realists probably gave him <50% chance to win RG19. After Rome, his chances 'at minimum' is 50%, no? And his chances only got better as the tournie went along. But is it wrong to say his chances are pretty bleak looking at his forms from MC19-thru-Madrid19?

It's fine if you wanna stay pessimistic of his chances. ;)

For me, until I see multiple dismal performances like his match against Albot, I will like his chances at any tournie he enters. Even more so for Halle19 and WB19 bc they're on grass.
 
Who said that? and why are you quoting it in replying to me?

Did I say that? - all Nadal needs to do is win a couple more...
Even if you believe that the Majors are the main reason to support the player (I personally don't) that wouldn't be true. At 20 Federer will still have the upper hand of dominating more big events than Nadal. Then he will need at least three more, if Federer doesn't win another. And then there will be a conversation of the merits of getting to the top in complete and unprecedented absence of younger ATGs for both those players. Since 2014, when the Djokovic/Nadal generation was on the verge of their 30ies and should have already had such competition, Nadal has won 4, and to eclipse Federer he would need to have won at least 7, and Djokovic has won a whopping 7 and would need to win at least another 5 for a mind-blowing 12 in total. Do you think that that won't matter for anyone knowing what he is talking about?

Whatever rationalization pleases you after Roger is overtaken... I'm upfront in saying he'd rather not and he could have ensured it had he been less stubborn about a bunch of things... (another long post for another day)
Of course any fan would have his player have the upper hand. That doesn't mean that his observation about the way it came to be is a "rationalisation". We all tend to be rational, so explicitly using that word to explain things sounds like one is looking for rational explanations that are not very relevant to the facts, or at least not relevant enough. This is where (I think) you are creating the wrong impression about the reason why you argue a point: you imply that other people have the same mindset and reasons to appreciate Fed's career as yourself. I can honestly say that no matter how many Majors Nadal acquire, it won't change my opinion of who out of them is the better tennis player, seeing how Nadal is nowhere close in achievements in 4 out of the 5 biggest tennis events. Owning clay is not enough to pass the torch from Federer to Nadal. With Djokovic it is more complicated as he would have the better overall career than Federer, if he wins another 5, but, again, the matter of unprecedented lack of competition on the highest level would leave a lot of questions. Of course, that is if one is only focused on the numbers that matter. Then there are other reasons why one supports his player, which are sometimes more important than those numbers: like how one carries himself while winning, and there Federer is absolutely unmatched by either of those players. Then there is what Federer is distinctly recognisable and loved for: his style. None of the others have that. All in all, a pretty strong arguments to consider him above the others without resorting to "rationalisation" as an operative word while reasoning.

Well, why **** with something good if you have a good thing going? Could've easily tanked to Wawa and let him lose to Rafa... could've gotten the clay 'experience' and gotten off without losing the mental advantage.
You don't know Federer if you think that that is how he rolls. He doesn't run from a fight because the odds are stacked up against him, like others do, so that is one of his perks, not weaknesses, and a lot of times he has defeated the odds and logic to emerge triumphant.

Apparently Federer himself doesn't put much stock in that mental edge business, if he can go in and out of his encounters with Nadal like it is nothing.

The bigger point is, why would anyone be afraid of his player losing when that is what the champions are made from: the resolve to pick themselves up and try to be better. Unrelenting resolve to succeed. Determination to improve. I disagree that without Nadal tennis would have been worse, but I agree that the rivalry with Nadal has given Federer reasons to get better, so that is how it goes. Nothing to be ashamed or be afraid of.

:cool:
 
Nice predictions with imaginary percentages!

Wish these could explain past results in just the last year against opponents not named Djokodal -

Rome '19 - (L) Tsitsipas - QF
Madrid '19 - (L) Theim - QF
IW '19 - (L) Theim - F
AO '19 - (L) Tsitsipas - QF
WTF '18 - (L) Zverev - SF
Shanghai '18 - (L) Coric - SF
USO '18 - (L) Millman - R16
Wimby '18 - (L) Anderson - QF
Halle '18 - (L) Coric - F
Make a list for Djokovic and you will see how much the list doesn't matter.
 
I'm just quoting the man.... can't have it both ways!

On one hand there was his quote about how playing clay helps him 'swing better' and keep up with the competition. Now he thinks playing clay has made his transition short and thus increases the pressure.

In any case I think Roger will have to suffer the same fate as Sampras in the history books. Same stubbornness, same result.
What? You can absolutely have it both of those ways.
 
He'll love the game a *lot* after Nadal and Djokovic surpass his slam count within a year or two of his retirement.

I guess a boatload of $$$$$ can drown whatever professional sorrow he'll have to live with the rest of his life. :rolleyes:
You seriously think Federer will feel sorry for himself for the rest of his life if his slam count is surpassed by Nadal and Djoker? You believe this is how Sampras feel everyday? Have you projected how you feel to them?
 
It's going to be an interesting shift as a fan, just as it is for him.

For the last 2 months it's been nothing but house money. All the wins and all the points were merely a bonus, with the overall goal of just staying healthy until the grass season. It was easy to be relaxed with no expectations.

But now the grass is suddenly here and he's expected to perform right away. And in the blink of an eye, the season will be over and we're back to hard courts. The pressure to win now is definitely real.
its so unfortunate clay season was so unbelievably long and grass will be over so quickly, i mean wimbledon is less than 3 weeks away.
 
You seriously think Federer will feel sorry for himself for the rest of his life if his slam count is surpassed by Nadal and Djoker? You believe this is how Sampras feel everyday? Have you projected how you feel to them?
Good post. Fed will cope the same way as we all cope with our disappointments in life, there'll be a sting when you think about it but 99% of the time you get on with your life and think about other things. He'll have two teenage girls to worry about, that'll keep him busy!!

I can't believe people are fretting about the slam count on the News thread.
 
I can't fathom how Fed fans act like his slam record is even in jeopardy, it's sort of insulting. Novak is way too far away and Nadal wins only at RG. Next year he's 34 and the clock keeps a-tickin'.
I don't get why Fed fans are doing it to themselves. Of course Nadal and Novak fans are going to be all over it - it means they get their fun whether the record gets broken or not.

But we ought to be able to escape from that on the News thread.
 
It's going to be an interesting shift as a fan, just as it is for him.

For the last 2 months it's been nothing but house money. All the wins and all the points were merely a bonus, with the overall goal of just staying healthy until the grass season. It was easy to be relaxed with no expectations.

But now the grass is suddenly here and he's expected to perform right away. And in the blink of an eye, the season will be over and we're back to hard courts. The pressure to win now is definitely real.
Shouldn’t it be the other way around? Last two years he didn’t play clay so he came in the grass season expected to really do well. Otherwise his ranking would go down straight away. Last year he was defending Wimbledon as well. This year with the amount of clay points as buffer, and relatively poor performance last Wimby, he should be able to feel less pressure and swing freely
 
Shouldn’t it be the other way around? Last two years he didn’t play clay so he came in the grass season expected to really do well. Otherwise his ranking would go down straight away. Last year he was defending Wimbledon as well. This year with the amount of clay points as buffer, and relatively poor performance last Wimby, he should be able to feel less pressure and swing freely
He's not playing for ranking points anymore. He's still on tour to give himself a shot at the big titles. Ranking points help put him in a better position to do that, but if he doesn't come through and walk away with a trophy, it was all for naught.
 

Ann

Hall of Fame
https://www.gerryweber-open.de/en/schedule/

let the anxiety begin:

Playing Schedule 2019-06-18
Centre Court
12:00 noon
Jan-Lennard Struff (GER)
vs.
Laslo Djere (SRB)

followed by
Borna Coric (CRO/4)
vs.
Jaume Munar (ESP)

followed by
Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (FRA/WC)
vs.
Benoit Paire (FRA)

not before 5:30 pm
Roger Federer (SUI/1)
vs.
John Millman (AUS)


followed by
Kevin Krawietz (GER)
Andreas Mies (GER)
vs.
Dustin Brown (GER/WC)
Tim Pütz (GER/WC)
Court 1
12:00 noon
Peter Gojowczyk (GER/WC)
vs.
Richard Gasquet (FRA)

followed by
Rudolf Molleker (GER/WC)
vs.
Sergiy Stakhovsky (UKR/Q)

followed by
Alexander Zverev (GER/WC)
Mischa Zverev (GER/WC)
vs.
Ben McLachlan (JPN)
Jan-Lennard Struff (GER)

followed by
Nikoloz Basilashvili (GEO/6)
vs.
Matteo Berrettini (ITA)
Court 2
12:00 noon
Guido Pella (ARG/8)
vs.
David Goffin (BEL)

followed by
Taylor Fritz (USA)
vs.
Roberto Bautista Agut (ESP/7)

followed by
Andreas Seppi (ITA/Q)
vs.
Mats Moraing (GER/Q)

followed by
Oliver Marach (AUT)
Jürgen Melzer (AUT)
vs.
Marcelo Demoliner (BRA/Q)
Divij Sharan (IND/Q)
Court 3

1:30 pm
Robin Haase (NED)
Frederik Nielsen (DEN)
vs.
Nikola Mektic (CRO/3)
Franko Skugor (CRO/3)

followed by
Guido Pella (ARG)
Joao Sousa (POR)
vs.
David Goffin (BEL)
Pierre-Hugues Herbert (FRA)
 
Top