i don't think I'm underrating Fed to say he might only be favorite for Wimbledon (and only then if Djoko/Murrary are not in form). He's a great champion, but he's going to be 37 years old with a back that's a ticking time bomb. He's capable of winning every slam (except maybe the French), but I just wouldn't think it smart to label him the outright favorite at almost any of them.
Pat Cash: Roger Federer will be the man to beat in 2018
- Thread starter MatsPhilander
- Start date
i don't think I'm underrating Fed to say he might only be favorite for Wimbledon (and only then if Djoko/Murrary are not in form). He's a great champion, but he's going to be 37 years old with a back that's a ticking time bomb. He's capable of winning every slam (except maybe the French), but I just wouldn't think it smart to label him the outright favorite at almost any of them.
deacsyoga
Banned
Federer always makes more errors than Nadal when he plays. It is pretty much compulsory with their games. If he wasnt playing the kind of tennis he was making more errors than Nadal he would lose everytime.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Then nobody is the favorite for Australia. Why should Nadal be? USO is his only non RG slam in the last 4 years.
Fed881981
Hall of Fame
Love you, Patty
Fed winning the AO, W and USO and Nadal winning the FO? Sounds like a good deal to me.
deacsyoga
Banned
I agree on that. There isnt a clear favorite for Australia. Unless Djokovic looks in great form at the warm ups, then he automaticaly becomes IMO.
ScentOfDefeat
G.O.A.T.
This is like discussing why Wimbledon is more prestigious than other Slams.
It just is. And so is the classic Grand Slam compared to other records.
It doesn't matter what these tournaments happen to be played on, and it's not about winning 4 in a row when you want.
It's about winning all 4 in one season.
That's it. The holy grail of tennis has always been the Grand Slam.
I remember my grandfather and his friends talking about Laver, and they always mentioned the fact that he won the "Grand Slam". It was not about how many tournaments he won, how many finals or semifinals in a row he managed to reach, how much time he spent at number 1, etc. Tennis has gone the way of other sports and what matters now is the statistics of quantity: how many/how much/how many times. But the Grand Slam was the big thing then and is still a (herculean) possibility now (there is continuity in this), people just don't talk about it so much because no one has managed to achieve it. It's the tennis version of the 12 Labours of Hercules, and that is why Laver transcends tennis as a myth (not just as a "star" or a "celebrity", with their quantifiable fans and "likes").
But if you tell me "well, things have changed, now it's all about Slam count", then I'll have to reply "very well, but then don't talk about GOATs, because if goals and the relative importance of achievements changes from one era to another, there is no solid basis to determine a greatest player of all time".
Last edited:
augustobt
Legend
Had federer EVER won a tournament from ATP500 lever onwards without facing a single top 25?
NothingButNet
Semi-Pro
First it was the SABR and the Big Bubba Wilson
Then came the Edberg S&V and rapid points
Later the supercharged, Ljubed-up topspin-backhand
In 2018, Cashy's got the inside word that Fed's going to transition to a hyper-RPM moonballin' grindrr
- "Champions never go away, they just evolve"
Then came the Edberg S&V and rapid points
Later the supercharged, Ljubed-up topspin-backhand
In 2018, Cashy's got the inside word that Fed's going to transition to a hyper-RPM moonballin' grindrr
- "Champions never go away, they just evolve"
If Federer had the advantage, he wouldn't have to end up facing 4 top ten players to win the AO. The last player to duplicate this feat was Wilander in 1982 FO. Frankly, Federer at 35 had it real tough at the AO. OTOH Nadal had it easy at the USO. The court was so slow, and top players - Nole, Murray, Wawrinka(defending champion), Raonic were absent. With such depleted draw, Nadal never had to face a top 10 players. In fact, the highest rank player was 25.
Colossal difference.
Edit: I forgot to include Nishikori who also skip the USO due to injury.
Last edited:
BlueClayGOAT
Semi-Pro
Pat Cash needs to calm down a bit. That said,
Factors which will decide if Fed maintains his 2017 performance next year:
1. The back. If it's ok, he can still do well and be in contention for the big titles, but I don't think he'll repeat the ridiculous how-to-win-the-AO-and-Sunshine-Double-at-age-35 magic trick again, no matter what. But a Masters title or two isn't out of the question, especially on the faster surfaces.
2. How well Nole and Murray come back: if Nole is back to his best immediately in 2018 (unlikely, but possible), then all bets are off. Roger can usually handle Murray at the majors, but a fit Murray is more than capable of beating 36-year old Roger anywhere. There is Stan too, but he has never beaten Roger off clay, so that is less of a factor.
3. Whether Zverev, Kyrgios and Co. can finally bring it at the majors. Zverev will probably win one of the hardcourt majors in 2018. Shapovalov would be interesting to watch, but he won't be ready for major success for another couple of years.
4. The draw Fed gets at Wimbledon: If the draw isn't overly tough, and if his back is ok, Fed is perfectly capable of winning SW19 again. He cut through some very good players at 2017 SW19 without ever getting out of third gear. His grasscourt nous and variety is still unmatched by anyone else- in my opinion only Nole at his very best will be capable of stopping Fed if he's anywhere close to good fitness and form. But a lot of things can change from now to June 2018.
In summary- the 2 hardcourt majors and IW/Miami will probably go to Zverev, Murray, or Nole in some combination.
Rafa will run through RG and the clay season again, unless Nole/Thiem really step it up.
Fed, if he maintains fitness and form, will have a shot at Wimby and some of the indoor tournaments and Cincy.
Factors which will decide if Fed maintains his 2017 performance next year:
1. The back. If it's ok, he can still do well and be in contention for the big titles, but I don't think he'll repeat the ridiculous how-to-win-the-AO-and-Sunshine-Double-at-age-35 magic trick again, no matter what. But a Masters title or two isn't out of the question, especially on the faster surfaces.
2. How well Nole and Murray come back: if Nole is back to his best immediately in 2018 (unlikely, but possible), then all bets are off. Roger can usually handle Murray at the majors, but a fit Murray is more than capable of beating 36-year old Roger anywhere. There is Stan too, but he has never beaten Roger off clay, so that is less of a factor.
3. Whether Zverev, Kyrgios and Co. can finally bring it at the majors. Zverev will probably win one of the hardcourt majors in 2018. Shapovalov would be interesting to watch, but he won't be ready for major success for another couple of years.
4. The draw Fed gets at Wimbledon: If the draw isn't overly tough, and if his back is ok, Fed is perfectly capable of winning SW19 again. He cut through some very good players at 2017 SW19 without ever getting out of third gear. His grasscourt nous and variety is still unmatched by anyone else- in my opinion only Nole at his very best will be capable of stopping Fed if he's anywhere close to good fitness and form. But a lot of things can change from now to June 2018.
In summary- the 2 hardcourt majors and IW/Miami will probably go to Zverev, Murray, or Nole in some combination.
Rafa will run through RG and the clay season again, unless Nole/Thiem really step it up.
Fed, if he maintains fitness and form, will have a shot at Wimby and some of the indoor tournaments and Cincy.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
So if Fed had won this year’s USO you would have said the same thing?
BlueClayGOAT
Semi-Pro
Same as Fed what? Do you even check facts?
augustobt
Legend
IF
IF I had ****ed scarlet johanson yesterday, I wouldn't be wasting my time here. There's no ifs, just what happened. I'll repeat my question: Had Federer ever won any title above ATP500 without facing no top25?
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
You are right, Fed couldn’t even win against that same draw as Nadal and that somehow reflects badly on Nadal. Got it.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Do you? Fed also didn’t face anyone ranked higher than 25 and would also have faced Anderson in the finals.
VolleyHelena
Semi-Pro
Lol,it was not the same draw.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
The argument was that Nadal did not face anyone ranked higher than 25. Fed didn’t face anyone ranked higher than 25.
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
Might be the cynic in me speaking here... but, um, what is Pat Cash selling?
He's been a pretty consistent RF detractor, no? Didn't he also call him a cheater recently?
He's been a pretty consistent RF detractor, no? Didn't he also call him a cheater recently?
VolleyHelena
Semi-Pro
But Fed didn't win.
If he won I would agree this was a weak draw(weakest since @ LONY time).Nadal fans aren't accepting that.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
So Fed faces a draw with no one ranked above 25 and loses. Nadal faces a draw with no one ranked above 25 and wins. And that reflects badly on Nadal??
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
May I know why is the VB feeling so nervous ?
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
It reflects badly on the draw.
VolleyHelena
Semi-Pro
You're twisting this into RF is worse so RN is better thing.
RF was bad due to his back/lack of form/whatever but RN took advantage of an extremely weak draw which is factually true
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
So now RF is excused because of his back?
The argument was that winning without facing anyone ranked over 25 reflects poorly on Nadal. If that´s true what does it say of RF who also faced a “no one above 25” draw and yet lost?
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
The draw is what it is. Nadal didn’t face anyone higher than 25 because they lost before they could meet him.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Nadal is not winning anymore non clay majors.
These kind of non top 25 draws happen once in a blue moon. Credit to Rafa he took advantage.
He may add 1-2 RG. That is about it .
Given the next gen and precarious condition of Novak, Murray, Stan, Rao and Nishikori , Cash is 100 % right that Fed is the man to beat in 2018
These kind of non top 25 draws happen once in a blue moon. Credit to Rafa he took advantage.
He may add 1-2 RG. That is about it .
Given the next gen and precarious condition of Novak, Murray, Stan, Rao and Nishikori , Cash is 100 % right that Fed is the man to beat in 2018
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Draws can be tough or easy or **** poor . It needs no explaining what USO 17 is.
It doesn't matter who the winner is
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Yes, it would have been tougher for Nadal if Nole was around playing well. Same for Fed in the AO and Wimbledon.
VolleyHelena
Semi-Pro
I mentioned lack of form and whatever also
It reflects poorly on RF as well but the weak draw is a weak draw no matter how you twist it.
VolleyHelena
Semi-Pro
Dont forget RG.Someone got straight setter there
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
And Fed won Wimbledon and AO without Nole playing well. You can only beat the guy in front of you.I mentioned lack of form and whatever also
It reflects poorly on RF as well but the weak draw is a weak draw no matter how you twist it.
VolleyHelena
Semi-Pro
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
I’m trying to forget it!
VolleyHelena
Semi-Pro
If you believe Anderson/Rublev/Dolgopolov are better than Raonic/Berdych/Cilic then there's no point in arguing
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
All true. Yet if Fed has won somehow I suspect Fed fans would not be mentioning the weak draw.Not to mention most top 10 were out due to injuries unlike Wimbledon or AO
VolleyHelena
Semi-Pro
2015
VolleyHelena
Semi-Pro
************* won't let us hear the end of it though.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
That´s why you have to be a Nole fan. We are always gracious and magnanimous!
VolleyHelena
Semi-Pro
MatsPhilander
Legend
A fit Stan is the favourite for the Aussie & US.
BlueClayGOAT
Semi-Pro
Yes, but the point was if Fed had actually won any major having had as easy a path as this.
BlueClayGOAT
Semi-Pro
A fit Stan isn't the favorite for anything. He shows up, or he doesn't give a crap.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Wait, so Fed losing with such an easy path is somehow better than Nadal winning with the same path?
BlueClayGOAT
Semi-Pro
No, it is a knock on Fed as well. The point is that Rafa has had a very easy route to his 2017 USO win than Federer ever had for any of his Slam wins. Rafa has lost multiple times in non-clay majors to no-hopers, much more than Fed ever has.
The nub of the discussion is that Rafa had the easiest route to a Slam win in over a generation. Fed, for all the 'weak era' talk, has never had such a cakewalk to any of his 19 major titles.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
Nope, but you sure do since you obviously have no concept of a calendar (never mind tennis). You erroneously claimed, "Fed's level already markedly declining from earlier in the year." That denotes January-March, NOT mid-July when he won Wimbledon. That's only 9 weeks ago.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Are you for real? Is that what you are left with, quibbling about “earlier in the year”? Earlier in the year can mean yesterday if I so choose to define it. I made clear in my posts that Fed´s level declined post Wimbledon.Nope, but you sure do since you obviously have no concept of a calendar (never mind tennis). You erroneously claimed, "Fed's level already markedly declining from earlier in the year." That denotes January-March, NOT mid-July when he won Wimbledon. That's only 9 weeks ago.
I see that Nadal winning more slams when according to you that wasn´t possible is beginning to affect your judgement.
Similar threads
