Would rankings lose credability like in WTA if Fed won U.S Open but ended year #2?

anointedone

anointedone

Banned
I just thought of a funny scenario. What if Federer wins the U.S Open, but Nadal still ends the year #1. You would have a 3-time Slam winner ranked #2 behind a 1-time Slam winner. Wouldnt that make the rankings look like a joke in the end if that scenario occured. It could become like the WTA were people dont even follow rankings anymore, but laugh at them mostly.
 
if fed wins us open hes not gonna end up ranked #2. Not even if nadal wins all of the remaining tournaments.
 
Could possibly happen this year, If fed has an early exit from Montreal or Cincinnatti, and Nadal wins one of those tournaments. They are each worth 100 race points, usopen is worth 200, Runnerup gets 140.

Nadal currently has 135 point lead over fed.
Nadal has played 13 tournaments, and fed has played 9, out of a total of 18 that can be used in the race.
Fed needs to make up some points this hard court season if he wants to remain number one.
 
pj80 said:
if fed wins us open hes not gonna end up ranked #2. Not even if nadal wins all of the remaining tournaments.
Click to expand...

Not so, Usopen is only worth 200 points, masters series and year end masters together are worth 350.
 
Of course if Rafa wins the U.S Open we wont even have to wonder. :) Even if neither win the U.S Open, then 2 slams to 1 wouldnt be as bad if the guy with 1 ended #1, as 3 slams to 1.

How much value should be attached to slams is open to debate. Some people are of the believe a player with 2 slams should always be #1, or is the real #1 over a player with 1. Me, not neccessarily, however the scenario of 3 slams to 1, definitely so.
 
Well the U.S Open is coming up. It will be interesting now to see what happens. With Federer and Nadal almost close to tied now, it is more likely Federer could not somehow not end the year #1 if he won the U.S Open.

If neither do Nadal might still have a chance, but less of a chance still then before, and even if Nadal ended the year #1 without either winning the U.S Open that wouldnt be as illegitimate. I can personally see it as reasonable for a player with 1 slam to end a year ranked #1 over a player with 2 slams, depending on the rest of their record. Never a player with 3 slams to another player with 1.

Of course if Nadal wins the U.S Open he would have an even better shot, and they would be 2 and 2 in slams, and Nadal would extend his current 11 point lead. It still then would be no sure thing though, especialy if Federer makes the semis or finals. Federer also has the option of playing more smaller events, but with only 10 weeks after the U.S Open, I dont know if he would be willing to do that, plus the 2 Masters and Masters Cup, which are top priority. That would be mean playing some back to back weeks, to play more then 2 of those, and instead play 3 or 4 to take advantage of 4 open spaces for points, assuming he played the 3 main events I refered to.
 
The ranking system works well so in answer to the OP NO. If that happens it means Nadal has performed better over the entire 12 months prior not just in 'big' events
 
Winning two Masters is actually WAY more difficult than winning a slam.

In a Masters you'll face difficult high ranked opponents already in the early rounds
 
Well.. the Champions Race actually is not important.. the entry ranking is what I find to be important. It simply is possible to win 3 Grand Slams and end the year #2 in the race.. that's the system, but it is only important for playing the Masters tournament at the end of the year.
 
1 Federer , R. 7605
2 Nadal , R. 5485
3 Djokovic , N. 3670
4 Davydenko , N. 3415
5 Roddick , A. 2990
6 Blake , J. 2310
7 Gonzalez , F. 2255
8 Robredo , T. 1950
9 Berdych , T. 1925
10 Haas , T. 1880

I don't think that he will lose his #1 ranking. Not even close. Nadal will need to prove himself on those very fast indoor Masters series event after the USO. I don't think that will happen.
 
Stick with you on this one. CAn someone analyse what a miracle has to happen in order for fed to pick up another USO and nadal to finish at nr1 ? Especailly now, hard court competition is getting better, tennis is a fun sport now compared to record breaking, boaring but yet must watch federer 2006 display of dominance.
 
daddy said:
Stick with you on this one. CAn someone analyse what a miracle has to happen in order for fed to pick up another USO and nadal to finish at nr1 ? Especailly now, hard court competition is getting better, tennis is a fun sport now compared to record breaking, boaring but yet must watch federer 2006 display of dominance.
Click to expand...

Easy enough. This is Federer's current points break down:

Masters Cup
13-Nov-06 Tennis Masters Cup China W 750

Slams
25-Jun-07 Wimbledon Great Britain W 1000
15-Jan-07 Australian Open Australia W 1000
28-Aug-06 US Open NY, U.S.A. W 1000
28-May-07 Roland Garros France F 700

Masters
13-Aug-07 ATP Masters Series Cincinnati OH, U.S.A. W 500
14-May-07 ATP Masters Series Hamburg Germany W 500
16-Oct-06 ATP Masters Series Madrid Spain W 500
5-Aug-07 ATP Masters Series Canada Montreal, Canada F 350
15-Apr-07 ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo Monaco F 350
7-May-07 ATP Masters Series Rome Italy R16 75
19-Mar-07 ATP Masters Series Miami FL, U.S.A. R16 75
5-Mar-07 ATP Masters Series Indian Wells CA, U.S.A. R64 5
30-Oct-06 ATP Masters Series Paris France - 0


Best Five others:
26-Feb-07 Dubai U.A.E. W 300
23-Oct-06 Basel Switzerland W 250
2-Oct-06 Tokyo Japan W 250

Total: 7605

So assume that Federer wins the US Open but does not participate or loses the first round of any further events he enters, he'll have 5700 (slams) + 1855 (masters) + 300 (other) = 7855

-------------
Now Nadal's current points:

Masters Cup
13-Nov-06 Tennis Masters Cup China S 200

Slams
28-May-07 Roland Garros France W 1000
25-Jun-07 Wimbledon Great Britain F 700
15-Jan-07 Australian Open Australia Q 250
28-Aug-06 US Open NY, U.S.A. Q 250

Masters
7-May-07 ATP Masters Series Rome Italy W 500
15-Apr-07 ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo Monaco W 500
5-Mar-07 ATP Masters Series Indian Wells CA, U.S.A. W 500
14-May-07 ATP Masters Series Hamburg Germany F 350
5-Aug-07 ATP Masters Series Canada Montreal, Canada S 225
19-Mar-07 ATP Masters Series Miami FL, U.S.A. Q 125
16-Oct-06 ATP Masters Series Madrid Spain Q 125
13-Aug-07 ATP Masters Series Cincinnati OH, U.S.A. R32 5
30-Oct-06 ATP Masters Series Paris France - 0

Best Five Other
23-Apr-07 Barcelona Spain W 300
16-Jul-07 Stuttgart Germany W 250
26-Feb-07 Dubai U.A.E. Q 75
1-Jan-07 Chennai India S 75
11-Jun-07 London / Queen's Club Great Britain Q 55

Total: 5485

So his current points not counting what he has to defend: 4910

Now let's add 700 for a final showing in US Open, 1000 for wins in Madrid and Paris and 750 for the Master's Cup. Now in his best five let's substitute Dubai, Chennia and London with wins in say, Moscow, St. Petersburg and Basel for 250 each (750 total).

Final totals in our hypothetical:
Federer: 7855
Nadal: 7905

Basically, it's possible but EXTREMELY unlikely to happen. Nadal will literally have to win two masters, the masters cup and three top tier events and Federer would have to not play after winning the US Open. What are the odds?
 
So assume that Federer wins the US Open but does not participate or loses the first round of any further events he enters, he'll have 5700 (slams) + 1855 (masters) + 300 (other) = 7855

-------------
Now Nadal's current points:

Masters Cup
13-Nov-06 Tennis Masters Cup China S 200

Slams
28-May-07 Roland Garros France W 1000
25-Jun-07 Wimbledon Great Britain F 700
15-Jan-07 Australian Open Australia Q 250
28-Aug-06 US Open NY, U.S.A. Q 250

Masters
7-May-07 ATP Masters Series Rome Italy W 500
15-Apr-07 ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo Monaco W 500
5-Mar-07 ATP Masters Series Indian Wells CA, U.S.A. W 500
14-May-07 ATP Masters Series Hamburg Germany F 350
5-Aug-07 ATP Masters Series Canada Montreal, Canada S 225
19-Mar-07 ATP Masters Series Miami FL, U.S.A. Q 125
16-Oct-06 ATP Masters Series Madrid Spain Q 125
13-Aug-07 ATP Masters Series Cincinnati OH, U.S.A. R32 5
30-Oct-06 ATP Masters Series Paris France - 0

Best Five Other
23-Apr-07 Barcelona Spain W 300
16-Jul-07 Stuttgart Germany W 250
26-Feb-07 Dubai U.A.E. Q 75
1-Jan-07 Chennai India S 75
11-Jun-07 London / Queen's Club Great Britain Q 55

Total: 5485

So his current points not counting what he has to defend: 4910

Now let's add 700 for a final showing in US Open, 1000 for wins in Madrid and Paris and 750 for the Master's Cup. Now in his best five let's substitute Dubai, Chennia and London with wins in say, Moscow, St. Petersburg and Basel for 250 each (750 total).

Final totals in our hypothetical:
Federer: 7855
Nadal: 7905

Basically, it's possible but EXTREMELY unlikely to happen. Nadal will literally have to win two masters, the masters cup and three top tier events and Federer would have to not play after winning the US Open. What are the odds?[/QUOTE]

Why are you counting things twice?
 
So assume that Federer wins the US Open but does not participate or loses the first round of any further events he enters, he'll have 5700 (slams) + 1855 (masters) + 300 (other) = 7855

-------------
Now Nadal's current points:

Masters Cup
13-Nov-06 Tennis Masters Cup China S 200

Slams
28-May-07 Roland Garros France W 1000
25-Jun-07 Wimbledon Great Britain F 700
15-Jan-07 Australian Open Australia Q 250
28-Aug-06 US Open NY, U.S.A. Q 250

Masters
7-May-07 ATP Masters Series Rome Italy W 500
15-Apr-07 ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo Monaco W 500
5-Mar-07 ATP Masters Series Indian Wells CA, U.S.A. W 500
14-May-07 ATP Masters Series Hamburg Germany F 350
5-Aug-07 ATP Masters Series Canada Montreal, Canada S 225
19-Mar-07 ATP Masters Series Miami FL, U.S.A. Q 125
16-Oct-06 ATP Masters Series Madrid Spain Q 125
13-Aug-07 ATP Masters Series Cincinnati OH, U.S.A. R32 5
30-Oct-06 ATP Masters Series Paris France - 0

Best Five Other
23-Apr-07 Barcelona Spain W 300
16-Jul-07 Stuttgart Germany W 250
26-Feb-07 Dubai U.A.E. Q 75
1-Jan-07 Chennai India S 75
11-Jun-07 London / Queen's Club Great Britain Q 55

Total: 5485

So his current points not counting what he has to defend: 4910

Now let's add 700 for a final showing in US Open, 1000 for wins in Madrid and Paris and 750 for the Master's Cup. Now in his best five let's substitute Dubai, Chennia and London with wins in say, Moscow, St. Petersburg and Basel for 250 each (750 total).

Final totals in our hypothetical:
Federer: 7855
Nadal: 7905

Basically, it's possible but EXTREMELY unlikely to happen. Nadal will literally have to win two masters, the masters cup and three top tier events and Federer would have to not play after winning the US Open. What are the odds?
Click to expand...

Why are you counting things twice?
 
To Alexandros :

If he is to win MAdrid, Paris, 3 more events you said, plus if he is to win masters cup at the end and reach the finals of the us open, now I guess in this case he would really DESERVE to be the nr1 player in the world.

Because in this case he is winning eevrything he enters apart from USO where he is runner up, and Federer is losing first round everywhere except at USO. Now - than if you agree with me he should be nr 1 and federer should drop to nr 12 not nr 2 by playing like that.

Agree ?
 
If this happens there will be a heated debate about the importance of the Slams versus other events. Last year there was a debate along these lines on the women''s tour. Henin finished the year at No.1. She won only one Slam but reached the finals in the other three. Nevertheless, some groups named Mauresmo the (women's) player of the year because she won two Slams and was ranked No.1 for much of the year.

I think that Henin deserved the nod because she was far more consistently successful. It's much more difficult to see how one could deny the No.1 ranking to Federer if he wins three Slams and reaches the finals in the fourth.
 
daddy said:
To Alexandros :

If he is to win MAdrid, Paris, 3 more events you said, plus if he is to win masters cup at the end and reach the finals of the us open, now I guess in this case he would really DESERVE to be the nr1 player in the world.

Because in this case he is winning eevrything he enters apart from USO where he is runner up, and Federer is losing first round everywhere except at USO. Now - than if you agree with me he should be nr 1 and federer should drop to nr 12 not nr 2 by playing like that.

Agree ?
Click to expand...

I agree...if Fed loses first round of everything other then the Open (which Nadal finals) and Nadal wins everything else and the points work out in Nadals favor...he deserves it. He'd have had a hell of a year with 3 slam finals (won another) all the clay titles and all the year end titles, and if Fed tanks at the end thats the title. It's a numbers game...it's like saying Emmit Smith doesn't deserve the rushing record because he never had a 2,000 yard season...Henin was consistent last year making the finals and taking the tourney...the ranking system works...the person with more consistant results is ranked higher...
 
Steve132 said:
If this happens there will be a heated debate about the importance of the Slams versus other events. Last year there was a debate along these lines on the women''s tour. Henin finished the year at No.1. She won only one Slam but reached the finals in the other three. Nevertheless, some groups named Mauresmo the (women's) player of the year because she won two Slams and was ranked No.1 for much of the year.

I think that Henin deserved the nod because she was far more consistently successful. It's much more difficult to see how one could deny the No.1 ranking to Federer if he wins three Slams and reaches the finals in the fourth.
Click to expand...


Well there you said it yourself. Mauresmo on 2 slams, henin on one slam and mauresmo was out by third round in FO. So whos the better player - is it henin who reached all 4 finals or mauresmo, having a best of the best years of her life, never to happen again ? Henin is here, and winning slams this year all over and being a major contender and will be by the looks of things for a few more years.. Right ? So lets just say few things about this :

1 - drop the issue, federer will most likely win all remaining 7 important tournaments ( okay okay, 4 or 5 at least ) so its not going to happen.

2 - if he is to win uso and lose everywhere else in first round, do YOU think he deserves the nr1 spot ?
 
goforgold99 said:
The ranking in the race at the end of the year will ALWAYS be the same as the ranikng in the entry system at the end of the year ;)
Click to expand...
Actually no. If a player playes challenger and futures too, he'll have different ranking points. A Challenger win earns Entry points, but not Race points.

Though, the difference between points can be very small, but sometimes, big enough to change one or two spots around the Top30 ;)
 
Andres Guazzelli said:
Actually no. If a player playes challenger and futures too, he'll have different ranking points. A Challenger win earns Entry points, but not Race points.

Though, the difference between points can be very small, but sometimes, big enough to change one or two spots around the Top30 ;)
Click to expand...
i think the highest perturbations we had between both ranking systems since there is the race were goran in 2001 and puerta in 2005 : they were ranked #12 at the year-end entry system while #13 at the race.

it's the race that is taken into account for the masters qualifications but one day this could lead to a confusing situation ! ;)
 
Goran was really out of his shoes then, I dont think anyone caused such a major upset in tennis ever. Though in his prime, Id say besides LEndl, he is the best grass court player ever not to win until 01. Then again, its only Lendl now, but it should be so. He said grass is not for tennis but for cows so why should he need trophy from a grasscourt tournament .. ;)

Life is funny when you look at it like this ..
 
Alexandros said:
Total: 7605

So assume that Federer wins the US Open but does not participate or loses the first round of any further events he enters, he'll have 5700 (slams) + 1855 (masters) + 300 (other) = 7855
Click to expand...

I do not understand this part. If Fed wins US, but lose everything after that,

7605 - 1750 = 5855

Or

3700(slams) + 1855 + 300 = 5855.


Nadal's current 5485.

Current points he has to defend : 200(masters)+250(us open)+125(madrid)= 575 points.
 
Last edited:
Hi,

NOT ONLY can Federer keep all his Grand Slam hardware, BUT ALSO his Masters Series and Masters Cup shields, and he can STILL lose the top spot:

The scenario is:

-Federer wins the US Open, Madrid Masters, Masters Cup (like last year).
-but he can't take part in Tokyo (250 pts) nor Basel(250 pts) due to fatigue, for instance.
----->7605 (today) - 250 - 250 = 7105

-Nadal reaches the USO final (+500 pts compared to last year), the Madrid Masters final (+225), the Paris Masters final (+350), the Masters Cup final (+300), and wins the Tokyo tournament (Fed being absent)


------>5485 + 500 + 225 + 350 + 300 + 250 = 7110


Conclusion: by winning nothing else than a 'small' event, and consistently losing to Fed, Nadal can easily get the #1 spot from Federer, winner of 3 Slams, 3 MS and the Masters Cup.
This scenario is not very likely, but it doesn't seem impossible, does it?

Where does all this come from? The ATP ranking is handy to calculate the seeds but must not be taken too seriously. It works on bizarre assumptions such as: 2 Slam SF = 900, 1 Slam victory =1000, only 10% more, does it seem fair ??
The rankings did not have absurd consequences in the recent past, but let's all remember it did happen (see 1982, 1989, etc.), and could happen again. If the scenario I thought of happened, all tennis experts would consider Federer the true #1, just as they did for Connors in '82, Ashe in '75, etc...

Jon
 
The fact is you don't need a ranking to know that Federer is #1, Nadal is #2 and then come the rest.

Rankings are an instrument, but don't necessarially tell who's the best player, at least not always. We all know who's the best player overall, no matter if he loses his #1 spot.
 
Man that is alot of if's. I don't think your scenario will happen. I don't think Nadal will even get to the semi's of the US Open. There is now way he will take the top spot. No way.
 
SgtJohn said:
Hi,

NOT ONLY can Federer keep all his Grand Slam hardware, BUT ALSO his Masters Series and Masters Cup shields, and he can STILL lose the top spot:

The scenario is:

-Federer wins the US Open, Madrid Masters, Masters Cup (like last year).
-but he can't take part in Tokyo (250 pts) nor Basel(250 pts) due to fatigue, for instance.
----->7605 (today) - 250 - 250 = 7105

-Nadal reaches the USO final (+500 pts compared to last year), the Madrid Masters final (+225), the Paris Masters final (+350), the Masters Cup final (+300), and wins the Tokyo tournament (Fed being absent)


------>5485 + 500 + 225 + 350 + 300 + 250 = 7110
Click to expand...

Federer is planing to play Paris, so where did that mysteriously dissapear to? If you think if his #1 ranking was in danger he would only play Madrid, skip both Paris and Basel, and not play for another 3 full weeks from the end of Madrid to the Masters Cup final you are crazy. Also the idea he would withdraw from Tokyo makes no sense, Tokyo is plenty of time before even Madrid.
 
daddy said:
Well there you said it yourself. Mauresmo on 2 slams, henin on one slam and mauresmo was out by third round in FO. So whos the better player - is it henin who reached all 4 finals or mauresmo, having a best of the best years of her life, never to happen again ? Henin is here, and winning slams this year all over and being a major contender and will be by the looks of things for a few more years.. Right ? So lets just say few things about this :

1 - drop the issue, federer will most likely win all remaining 7 important tournaments ( okay okay, 4 or 5 at least ) so its not going to happen.

2 - if he is to win uso and lose everywhere else in first round, do YOU think he deserves the nr1 spot ?
Click to expand...

My vote would go to a player who wins 3 Slams and reaches the final of the fourth, especially as his rival did not reach the final of the Australian Open. On the other hand, I think that this is an issue on which reasonable people may well disagree.

Sgt. John has even identiifed a scenario in which Federer wins the Open, the Masters Cup and the Madrid Masters and STILL finishes at No.2. The moral of this is that no ranking system can be guaranteed to produce perfect results under all conditions.
 
Sgt. John's example was based on Federer choosing to play only 2 events in 10 weeks with his #1 ranking still in jeapordy. That would never happen. Also I dont know why he didnt even give an explanation for why Paris is mysteriously missing. He didnt play Paris last year since the #1 ranking was already sewn up, and the year before that he was injured. He is scheduled to play Paris and is just as likely to play it as Nadal, and if his #1 ranking were in jeapordy he would definitely play it.

Also to think he would pull out of Tokyo when he has only used 2 of his smaller tournaments, and it is far enough ahead of Madrid, and after the U.S Open is already done anyway, makes no sense either.
 
Nadal winning indoor events? Only time that happened was against Ljubicic the Great Choker. If he runs into Blake, Youzhny, Berdych, or any of the other big flat hitters in an indoor event, he gets destroyed. Too many of those floating around for him to get past quarters.
 
Steve132 said:
My vote would go to a player who wins 3 Slams and reaches the final of the fourth, especially as his rival did not reach the final of the Australian Open. On the other hand, I think that this is an issue on which reasonable people may well disagree.

Sgt. John has even identiifed a scenario in which Federer wins the Open, the Masters Cup and the Madrid Masters and STILL finishes at No.2. The moral of this is that no ranking system can be guaranteed to produce perfect results under all conditions.
Click to expand...

Hey - It can surely happen but it is as likely to happen as for example in any other sports. If you take football for example, a team can go thru the group stage during world cup with 3 draws, and win world cup after that by reaching until the end on penalties, not winning ONE match and becomeing world champions. Theory says it can happen.

Now will that ever happen ? I dont think so ! In that case another team can win 6 out of 7 matches, draw in final and lose on penalties and be 2nd in the world. Should the rules change beacuse there is a possibility that this can happen ?

I am sure there are many other examples, but this is a BIG BIG IF !!! > many odd things have to occur in order for this scenario becoming reality.
 
I think you misunderstood me: I did not want to describe a likely scenario. I personally am confident that Federer will easily stay n°1 with 2000 pts more than Nadal or so.
My point was just to ANSWER to the question that is the title of this thread: would the rankings lose credibility IF Fed ended #2? Then I described an IMAGINARY scenario to show how much credibility the rankings could lose would such an extreme case happen.
 
SgtJohn said:
I think you misunderstood me: I did not want to describe a likely scenario. I personally am confident that Federer will easily stay n°1 with 2000 pts more than Nadal or so.
My point was just to ANSWER to the question that is the title of this thread: would the rankings lose credibility IF Fed ended #2? Then I described an IMAGINARY scenario to show how much credibility the rankings could lose would such an extreme case happen.
Click to expand...

They would lose credibility for sure but they will not because its not going to happen and its not going to happen because the rankings are made in such way that in order to be nr1 you have to be the best so to make a long story short, hypoteticly yes but never gonna happen.
 
Last edited:
federerfanatic said:
Also to think he would pull out of Tokyo when he has only used 2 of his smaller tournaments, and it is far enough ahead of Madrid, and after the U.S Open is already done anyway, makes no sense either.
Click to expand...
He's not pulling out of Tokyo, unless he's injured. He truly likes playing there - and Nike, working hard to grow their Asian presence, likes him playing there...

Dilettante said:
Rankings are an instrument, but don't necessarially tell who's the best player, at least not always. We all know who's the best player overall, no matter if he loses his #1 spot.
Click to expand...
Well said. So the OP's statement of 'losing credibility' is an overstatement. Might lead to some tweaking of the system to give the Slams and Masters Series events more weight. But it's not like Nadal didn't perform pretty well there either. If it happens it will just show how big the loses to Canas at Indian Wells and Key Biscayne were. And make Sampras happy because he won't have to worry about Fed breaking one of his records. :-)
 
goforgold99 said:
Winning two Masters is actually WAY more difficult than winning a slam.

In a Masters you'll face difficult high ranked opponents already in the early rounds
Click to expand...

thats true about facing higher ranked opponents in earlier rounds but grand slams are what tennis is all about....7 best of 5 matches to win the title

nadal lost a round earlier than he did last year so he lost points while federer maintained his points.....

the race rankings dont really matter though because it doesnt determine your seedings for the rest of the tournaments this year....the entry rankings do

in any case federer is ending 2007 as #1...

how mind-boggling is it though that the last 11 slams have been won by either federer or nadal
 
psamp14 said:
thats true about facing higher ranked opponents in earlier rounds but grand slams are what tennis is all about....7 best of 5 matches to win the title

nadal lost a round earlier than he did last year so he lost points while federer maintained his points.....

the race rankings dont really matter though because it doesnt determine your seedings for the rest of the tournaments this year....the entry rankings do

in any case federer is ending 2007 as #1...

how mind-boggling is it though that the last 11 slams have been won by either federer or nadal
Click to expand...

the race determines who's gonna be No1 at the end of the year. After the TMC the Race Ranking will be exactly the same as the Entry ranking.

And Nadal does have a chance taking the No1 ranking from Fed in the remaining Tournaments of the year. It might not be realistic, but certainly possible.
 
goforgold99 said:
And Nadal does have a chance taking the No1 ranking from Fed in the remaining Tournaments of the year. It might not be realistic, but certainly possible.
Click to expand...

It would be an embarassment if it happened though. He would be the most ridiculed #1 in history as a 1-time Slam winner vs a 3-time Slam winner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

marc45
WTA Rankings Change?
2
Replies
50
Views
2K
Tennis_Hands
T
M
Novak Wins U.S. Open, but Federer finishes #1 for Year
Replies
25
Views
3K
Nathaniel_Near
N
J
How important is winning the U.S open to Henin's year?
Replies
4
Views
568
lambielspins
lambielspins
V
projected year-end rankings for 2009
Replies
8
Views
2K
veritech
veritech
thalivest
Kim vs Lindsay and Capriati if she wins 3rd U.S Open this year
2
Replies
56
Views
3K
THUNDERVOLLEY
THUNDERVOLLEY
Back
Top