Roger's Pursuit of #110: How many titles for him in 2020?

[junior74]

5 this year?

Marrakech, Stuttgart, Mallorca, Stockholm.

Duck Djokovic in Eastbourne and Wimbledon and try and go for Newport.

 

[KINGROGER]

Before the start of 2008, Federer won 12/20 Slams. Nadal was only a top opponent for maybe one of those (2007 W final, and even then he was at an age disadvantage) and Djokovic for maybe one of those (2007 US Open final and even then he was not only at an age disadvantage but was also playing in his first major final).

So Fed has 10 strong slams

more than 7 for djokovic and how many for nadal, 5?

 

[Red Rick]

103 titles in one year is a bit much no?

I'd say 2/3.

 

[gjm127]

Fed chances of winning at RG are "low" and I put him behind Thiem in 4th place. But then again, he had 2 MPs against him in Madrid. The number of matches he's lost with multiple MPs seems to have grown over the past 2-3 years meaning he is rather losing on the mental side but his physicality is still able to take him far.

What if he only has to beat 1/3? All he would need is for Thiem to take Nadal out before their eventual paths meet.

I believe winning RG instead of Wimbledon would contribute more to his GOAT status than another Wimbledon.

I do question his lack of pre-RG clay tournaments.

 

[Breakpointerer]

I'd say 3/4. Hopefully he can get an M1000 somewhere.

 

[Hitman]

103 titles in one year is a bit much no?

I'd say 2/3.

LOL - You have a point.

 

[DSH]

His body is breaking down and it will get worse as the months go by.
His expiration date expired, at least in regard of the Majors Tournaments.

 

[UnforcedTerror]

Oh man I'm idiot for not making the poll public.

4 already think Fed's not winning a single title this season

 

[Hitman]

His body is breaking down and it will get worse as the months go by.
His expiration date expired, at least in regard of the Majors Tournaments.

He was one point away from winning W, that is a lot better than what Medvedev and Thiem did in the other slam finals. The guy is still a contender at Wimbledon.

 

[DSH]

He was one point away from winning W, that is a lot better than what Medvedev and Thiem did in the other slam finals. The guy is still a contender at Wimbledon.

Yes, I remember that!

 

[Hitman]

Yes, I remember that!

Then kindly put down the fanboy wish list. Because if being one point away means you have expired, then everyone else barring Djokodal should just go home.

 

[DSH]

Then kindly put down the fanboy wish list. Because if being one point away means you have expired, then everyone else barring Djokodal should just go home.

You didn't understand the joke, I'm sorry!

 

[Hitman]

You didn't understand the joke, I'm sorry!

Oh, I understand your jokes very much.

 

[helterskelter]

So Fed has 10 strong slams

more than 7 for djokovic and how many for nadal, 5?

Alas, you don't get to discount events where you don't think the competition is strong, especially as your account of strong competition was pretty generous to your favorite (which is, of course, one of the major problems with discounting - it always favors a fan's favorite). You included in Federer's tally 2007 WI and 2007 UO, which I said kind of count. I don't think it's fair to say that Djokovic was a tough opponent at the 2007 UO in his first Slam final aged 20 but Federer was a weak opponent in the 2014 WI final where he was 32 or the 2015 final when he was 33. I know you believe Djokovic was stronger, but if you are honest with yourself, you will admit that part of the reason you believe it is because it benefits Federer's "legacy" for you to believe it.

And much as I dislike Nadal, the number of times he beat Federer and/or Djokovic en route to the title at Roland Garros alone is pretty high.

 

[helterskelter]

103 titles in one year is a bit much no?

I'd say 2/3.

2/3rds of a title is a bit unlikely, no?

 

[KINGROGER]

Alas, you don't get to discount events where you don't think the competition is strong.

And much as I dislike Nadal, the number of times he beat Federer and/or Djokovic en route to the title at Roland Garros alone is pretty high.

Those guys aren’t strong opponents at RG though. Federer especially.

 

[helterskelter]

Those guys aren’t strong opponents at RG though. Federer especially.

I edited my previous reply. I think it's interesting how much your love of Federer leads you to exaggerate or misdescribe his weaknesses. It's not that he's not a strong opponent on clay, it's that he has a matchup disadvantage against Nadal on clay. It's an odd form of fandom that leads so many of his fans to talk about how hopeless he is on clay or how hopeless he was overall from about the age of 26.

 

[KINGROGER]

I edited my previous reply. I think it's interesting how much your love of Federer leads you to exaggerate or misdescribe his weaknesses. It's not that he's not a strong opponent on clay, it's that he has a matchup disadvantage against Nadal on clay. It's an odd form of fandom that leads so many of his fans to talk about how hopeless he is on clay or how hopeless he was overall from about the age of 26.

All Rafa had to do vs Federer was keep spamming topspin FHs to his BH. Such a strong win.

 

[helterskelter]

All Rafa had to do vs Federer was keep spamming topspin FHs to his BH. Such a strong win.

As I said before, Nadal definitely had a matchup advantage against Federer on clay or slow surfaces. But in addition to the oddness of Federer fans emphasizing how bad he is in certain circumstances so as to enhance his claims to greatness overall, it's also not the case that a matchup advantage over someone makes the opponent weak. Wawrinka may have a matchup advantage over Djokovic (may), but that doesn't mean that his major wins over Djokovic aren't impressive wins.

 

[chjtennis]

Very difficult to predict, but I think he can win 3-6 titles this year. He just is so unpredictable at this stage. He looked brilliant in R1 & 2 of AO20 but looked crap for the rest of the tourney, for example.