Should Federer play Paris? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Should Federer play Paris?

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 03:45 PM
Now that he's clinched YE #1, should he skip Paris once again and rest up for TMC? At the moment, he is 1820 points clear of Nadal. However, as we all know, Tio Toni's magic has started to come back and Nadal's Paris draw is rather piss easy, with all the roasters save Youzhny and Gonzo on the other half, and those 2 sucking balls at the moment.

Optimistically, say Nadal wins Paris (shut up people, im just saying in theory, it may or may not happen, remember, hes never lost in Paris :p)

The gap then would be 1320, and then the TMC points would come off, and the gap would be 770 :eek:

Horatio Caine
10-28-2007, 03:47 PM
Personally, I don't think he will. But if he wants to win the title, he will have to improve his level and show more intensity than he did today.

FedFan_2007
10-28-2007, 03:47 PM
Nadal will be roasted in Bercy regardless, probably in the final.

Sunset of Age
10-28-2007, 03:47 PM
I'd be pleasantly surprised if Roger indeed shows up in Paris. :angel:

FedFan_2007
10-28-2007, 03:48 PM
I think with 2 Basel titles now, Fed might skip it next year to go for Bercy.

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 03:49 PM
Nadal will be roasted in Bercy regardless, probably in the final.

If he loses in the final, then gap would be 920 going into Shanghai

elessar
10-28-2007, 03:49 PM
I think with 2 Basel titles now, Fed might skip it next year to go for Bercy.

He's under contract with Basel to show up for at least four more years

Rogieva
10-28-2007, 03:50 PM
I don't think he should.

bokehlicious
10-28-2007, 03:50 PM
I think with 2 Basel titles now, Fed might skip it next year to go for Bercy.

Not likely as he's under contract with Basel for the next years...

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 03:54 PM
It is too close for comfort. He ought to play to keep a cushion, but he's rolling the dice.

Btw, you haven't given the points breakdown for Djokovic to narrow the gap to No.2

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 03:59 PM
It is too close for comfort. He ought to play to keep a cushion, but he's rolling the dice.

Btw, you haven't given the points breakdown for Djokovic to narrow the gap to No.2

Well, if Nole wins, he'll have 4965, and lets say Nadal pulls out, Nadal will have 5185 :eek: Just over 200 points :eek:

So #1 and #2 both have their leads possibly becoming too close for comfort by not playing here. Nadal has no excuse to skip, Federer we dont know

nanoman
10-28-2007, 03:59 PM
I hope he plays, but no, he shouldn't go. He looks like a tired man. He'll probably lose to Karlovic or at best to Nalbandian. He won't gain many points there.

yanchr
10-28-2007, 04:03 PM
He looked to me today extremely quick in movement, no sign of fatigue at all. If his body permits, I hope he shows up in Paris AND with some decent play. The points difference is simply too small to feel comfortable.

rofe
10-28-2007, 04:03 PM
Yeah, if he wants to keep a good buffer between #1 and #2. I get the feeling that he is not concerned about #1 however and he only wants to beat Pete's record.

He may anyway bow out early from Paris if he plays like he played today.

stebs
10-28-2007, 04:06 PM
I hope so. It's not like he's had an energy draining week and the final was less than an hour. Yes the previous week in Madrid has to be factored in as well but he's a pro athlete and it's nearly the seasons end, he has a maximum of 10 matches left to play this year and I think he should stretch himself considerning he hasn't played Paris for years.

That said, I fully expect a withdrawal but if he doesn't it would be good. Problem for him is he has a very tough draw. It's not like he can play a round at 75% and still get through, either Ivo or Nando could punish him for that and then Nalbandian has shown how tough he is.

yana
10-28-2007, 04:07 PM
Now that he's clinched YE #1, should he skip Paris once again and rest up for TMC? At the moment, he is 1820 points clear of Nadal. However, as we all know, Tio Toni's magic has started to come back and Nadal's Paris draw is rather piss easy, with all the roasters save Youzhny and Gonzo on the other half, and those 2 sucking balls at the moment.

Optimistically, say Nadal wins Paris (shut up people, im just saying in theory, it may or may not happen, remember, hes never lost in Paris :p)

The gap then would be 1320, and then the TMC points would come off, and the gap would be 770 :eek:


I like you, Jonathan, but you jinx Nadal big time :p

stebs
10-28-2007, 04:08 PM
Yeah, if he wants to keep a good buffer between #1 and #2. I get the feeling that he is not concerned about #1 however and he only wants to beat Pete's record.

He may anyway bow out early from Paris if he plays like he played today.

I strongly disagree. I think he is VERY concerned with the #1 ranking, he always lists it as pretty much top priority for him. The slam record he is obviousl aware of but he isn't the type of guy who is going to JUST focus on slams, he wants to keep that #1 spot.

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 04:11 PM
Well, if Nole wins, he'll have 4965, and lets say Nadal pulls out, Nadal will have 5185 :eek: Just over 200 points :eek:

So #1 and #2 both have their leads possibly becoming too close for comfort by not playing here. Nadal has no excuse to skip, Federer we dont know

Yikes. Well, Federer is probably taking the chance that by their playing in Paris, they will both have a little less left for Shanghai. I don't know :shrug:
There is also the issue that if he plays here this year, then he'll have to defend those points next year.

Nadal I really don't think would wd so your point differential between 2 and 3 is really the worst case scenario.

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 04:11 PM
I like you, Jonathan, but you jinx Nadal big time :p

I dont believe in jinxes. If discussions on MTF can cause tennistic jinxes and make players lose or win, then we should never talk about anything pertaining to the future on here.

Since i dont believe it, I will say whatever i want :) ;)

rocketassist
10-28-2007, 04:14 PM
He hasn't turned up there since 2003. It would be a disgrace if he just pulled out uninjured.

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 04:14 PM
Yikes. Well, Federer is probably taking the chance that by their playing in Paris, they will both have a little less left for Shanghai. I don't know :shrug:
There is also the issue that if he plays here this year, then he'll have to defend those points next year.

Nadal I really don't think would wd so your point differential is really the worst case scenario.

Nadal at worst i think will make the QFs. he cant possibly lose to Volandri, Melzer, Chela, Wawa or Kiefer, can he?

After than, Gonzalez, Haas (who Nadal beat in his slump last year, twice), and Youzhny are waiting for him. The SF should be easier than the QF though

But regardless, Nadal really needs to play here. Fed not so much, unless he wants to sit at home, eating cheetos with Roddick, fucking Mirka, and watching Djokovic and Nadal romp through the draw :shrug:

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 04:17 PM
Nadal at worst i think will make the QFs. he cant possibly lose to Volandri, Melzer, Chela, Wawa or Kiefer, can he?

After than, Gonzalez, Haas (who Nadal beat in his slump last year, twice), and Youzhny are waiting for him. The SF should be easier than the QF though
I think the draw gives him quite good finalist/winner chances. When is the TMC again? There is enough time to recover. It's hard to know what's going on in Federer's head, but if he withdraws Paris due to "fatigue" I think there is good chance he is being disingenuous.

stebs
10-28-2007, 04:17 PM
There is also the issue that if he plays here this year, then he'll have to defend those points next year.

If you fully understand the ranking system then you should realise that there is no issue here.

kokket
10-28-2007, 04:19 PM
imo he should skip Paris

he looks tired ( mentally - not physically )

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 04:19 PM
I think the draw gives him quite good finalist/winner chances. When is the TMC again? There is enough time to recover. It's hard to know what's going on in Federer's head, but if he withdraws Paris due to "fatigue" I think there is good chance he is being disingenuous.

After Paris, they have a week off, then TMC

If you fully understand the ranking system then you should realise that there is no issue here.

Yeah, there really shouldnt, as Fed should be safe from #1 loss until IW/Miami, but if the top 3 are neck and neck in late 08, Paris points defense might make a big impact

stebs
10-28-2007, 04:20 PM
Nadal at worst i think will make the QFs. he cant possibly lose to Volandri, Melzer, Chela, Wawa or Kiefer, can he?

Volandri - Never
Melzer - Never
Chela - Unlikely but possible, Chela matches up okay with Nadal, problem is he isn't good enough
Wawrinka - Matches up well and at the top of his game yes he has a real shot to beat Nadal, the way he went toe to toe with the Nadal FH in Stuttgart showed why
Kiefer - Not sure really, would have to wait and see but he is in good form

TankingTheSet
10-28-2007, 04:21 PM
I think if Federer would have withdrawn, he would have done so before the official draw was made. His week in Basel hasn't been that tough he looked OK. I think he is playing.

Blue Heart24
10-28-2007, 04:22 PM
No :p

Adler
10-28-2007, 04:23 PM
Wawrinka can defeat Nadal in best-of-3 match on a given day, but I don't tnink it will happen

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 04:23 PM
If you fully understand the ranking system then you should realise that there is no issue here.
Ah yes I forgot there is the rolling 52 week scheme.

stebs
10-28-2007, 04:23 PM
Yeah, there really shouldnt, as Fed should be safe from #1 loss until IW/Miami, but if the top 3 are neck and neck in late 08, Paris points defense might make a big impact

No. If you fully understand the rankings system then you will realise that the defence of points makes ZERO difference. I'll try and further explain:

Scenario A:

Federer plays Paris, wins it, comes back next year and loses points as he crashes out in the QF

Scenario B:

Federer doesn't play Paris, attends next year and gains points for a QF finish.

Resulting situation:

He has the exact same number of points whether he was defending or not. Obviously he would be losing points in scenario A and gaining in B but in the end the defence of points makes no difference because the end result is the same.

I often see people make this mistake when looking at the future in terms of ranking points and no I am not trying to be patronising but it just isn't an issue in any way.

yana
10-28-2007, 04:27 PM
I dont believe in jinxes.

Believe it! There are powerful weapon.
About this thread...I don't think and don't want Federer playing it. Let this tournament be interesting!

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 04:28 PM
Well maybe he realizes the points situation and will play Paris. But maybe he will play at 50%, hope to get through a few rounds, accumulate some points without burning out for Shanghai. Just a guess!

bokehlicious
10-28-2007, 04:29 PM
I don't think and don't want Federer playing it. Let this tournament be interesting!

Fed or not, Nadal won't win there either way :awww: :hug:

Jade Fox
10-28-2007, 04:33 PM
I want him to play, but for purely selfish reasons.:cool:

If he pulls that fatigue bullshit after this hour long final, I'll fly up to Switzerland myself and drag his ass into boot camp. That'll teach him a lesson.:p

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 04:37 PM
What about another possible scenario, he plays Paris this year wins and doesn't play it next year. There is only a pure loss in that case isn't it?
I don't understand why you are saying it makes zero difference under ALL possible scenarios. Surely there are scenarios where it is bad for him?

No. If you fully understand the rankings system then you will realise that the defence of points makes ZERO difference. I'll try and further explain:

Scenario A:

Federer plays Paris, wins it, comes back next year and loses points as he crashes out in the QF

Scenario B:

Federer doesn't play Paris, attends next year and gains points for a QF finish.

Resulting situation:

He has the exact same number of points whether he was defending or not. Obviously he would be losing points in scenario A and gaining in B but in the end the defence of points makes no difference because the end result is the same.

I often see people make this mistake when looking at the future in terms of ranking points and no I am not trying to be patronising but it just isn't an issue in any way.

Apemant
10-28-2007, 04:43 PM
I often see people make this mistake when looking at the future in terms of ranking points and no I am not trying to be patronising but it just isn't an issue in any way.

Precisely... mathematically it makes no difference, in fact, it's even better to have to 'defend' those points because it means you had them for the full 52 weeks before (meaning the difference was greater during those 52 weeks and it was harder to replace you). And AFTER the tournament next year, it just doesn't matter if you were defending it or not, regardless of the score.

But, on the other hand, psychologically it does make a difference. If he should win Paris, for example, the point difference might make him relax a little bit, not trying so hard in some upcoming event, or pulling out of some MM tourney etc. Come Paris next year, all that relaxation is then due for payment. But if he doesn't play it, he'll be forced to think about securing his spot during the entire year, and then those 'extra' 500 points from Paris might come in handy, like I said, purely on psychological basis. I actually believe Blaze meant it this way, too.

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 04:45 PM
No. If you fully understand the rankings system then you will realise that the defence of points makes ZERO difference. I'll try and further explain:

Scenario A:

Federer plays Paris, wins it, comes back next year and loses points as he crashes out in the QF

Scenario B:

Federer doesn't play Paris, attends next year and gains points for a QF finish.

Resulting situation:

He has the exact same number of points whether he was defending or not. Obviously he would be losing points in scenario A and gaining in B but in the end the defence of points makes no difference because the end result is the same.

I often see people make this mistake when looking at the future in terms of ranking points and no I am not trying to be patronising but it just isn't an issue in any way.

I dont think we're seeing eye to eye.

Im saying if he plays and wins this year, and next year it is really close and he wins it, he will not gain anything. But if he skips and plays it next year, he gains 500 points. True, the total is the same, but its more of a mental thing. Looking at the points in October 08 and seeing he has only a 200 point lead on Nadal/Nole, he would want to play, no? But, if he played before, he would be defending the points, but this time, hes only gaining :p

Its just mental, it may be the same, but its just mental. Winning Doha and losing QF of a slam are the same points, but if given the choice, what would you choose?

Apemant
10-28-2007, 04:45 PM
What about another possible scenario, he plays Paris this year wins and doesn't play it next year. There is only a pure loss in that case isn't it?
I don't understand why you are saying it makes zero difference under ALL possible scenarios. Surely there are scenarios where it is bad for him?

Only if some other score is also changed. But if he produces the exact same results the next year, playing Paris this year can't possibly hurt him.

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 04:46 PM
Precisely... mathematically it makes no difference, in fact, it's even better to have to 'defend' those points because it means you had them for the full 52 weeks before (meaning the difference was greater during those 52 weeks and it was harder to replace you). And AFTER the tournament next year, it just doesn't matter if you were defending it or not, regardless of the score.

But, on the other hand, psychologically it does make a difference. If he should win Paris, for example, the point difference might make him relax a little bit, not trying so hard in some upcoming event, or pulling out of some MM tourney etc. Come Paris next year, all that relaxation is then due for payment. But if he doesn't play it, he'll be forced to think about securing his spot during the entire year, and then those 'extra' 500 points from Paris might come in handy, like I said, purely on psychological basis. I actually believe Blaze meant it this way, too.

Exactly. It may be the same amount of points, but mentally it does make a differnece.

yana
10-28-2007, 04:48 PM
Fed or not, Nadal won't win there either way :awww: :hug:

Wow, I'm about to cry... :rolleyes:

Anyway, congrats for your beloved win!

stebs
10-28-2007, 04:56 PM
What about another possible scenario, he plays Paris this year wins and doesn't play it next year. There is only a pure loss in that case isn't it?
I don't understand why you are saying it makes zero difference under ALL possible scenarios. Surely there are scenarios where it is bad for him?

Yes he loses points but it's not like he is actually down on where he would be had he not played the first year anyway. I'll make it more clear again:

Scenario A:

He begins Paris with 0 points, wins it to gain 500 pts, WD's next year.

End result: 0 points.

Scenario B:

He begins with 0 points, WD's Paris this year and again next year.

End result: 0 points

Yes, he has 'lost' points in scenario A but the end result is the same, playing it just means he has more points for the 51 weeks in between the events.

nobama
10-28-2007, 04:57 PM
I'm too lazy to do the math but what's the likelyhood of Djokovic overtaking Nadal for #2 before Fed looses #1?

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 04:59 PM
I'm too lazy to do the math but what's the likelyhood of Djokovic overtaking Nadal for #2 before Fed looses #1?

Not too likely. Djokovic will have to win Paris, Nadal pull out, then Nole has to perform much better than Nadal in TMC to take #2 before the end of the year.

I think the AO will be a big shifting point in all 3 of them

stebs
10-28-2007, 04:59 PM
I dont think we're seeing eye to eye.

I guess not.

Im saying if he plays and wins this year, and next year it is really close and he wins it, he will not gain anything. But if he skips and plays it next year, he gains 500 points. True, the total is the same, but its more of a mental thing. Looking at the points in October 08 and seeing he has only a 200 point lead on Nadal/Nole, he would want to play, no? But, if he played before, he would be defending the points, but this time, hes only gaining :p

Well you can say it is a mental strain but I should think Federer would completely understand the rankings and has proven that those sort of pressures don't really have a big effect on him.

I mean, defending, gaining, you look at it this way sometimes but really it is all gain when you pick up points. It's like the way Judio does the Updated Rankings thread. The week a tourney begins you look at it as if the points you gained last year are gone completely, you are not defending anything, you are just gaining on the fewer amount of points you have.

Its just mental, it may be the same, but its just mental. Winning Doha and losing QF of a slam are the same points, but if given the choice, what would you choose?

Yes, I see that it's mental but no, your example has no relevance to the discussion. They are different issues.

Voo de Mar
10-28-2007, 05:00 PM
He should play in Paris and lose in the 2nd round to Dr Ivo :devil:

stebs
10-28-2007, 05:01 PM
I'm too lazy to do the math but what's the likelyhood of Djokovic overtaking Nadal for #2 before Fed looses #1?

That's really all about opinion and prediction. Maths doesn't really come into it.

calvinhobbes
10-28-2007, 05:04 PM
What about another possible scenario, he plays Paris this year wins and doesn't play it next year. There is only a pure loss in that case isn't it?
I don't understand why you are saying it makes zero difference under ALL possible scenarios. Surely there are scenarios where it is bad for him?

The difference is: If he wins points in Paris NOW, he will have them until Next Paris as a cushion against Nadal. If he doesn´t win them now, this cushion wouldn´t exist and he could lose his No. 1 in these next 52 weeks. So, the difference could be 52 more weeks as No. 1.
As for YE No. 1, there is no difference if he plays Paris now OR next year. As the points in Paris NOW will not add to the points in Paris NEXT year, by the end of 2008 his YE No. 1 will not depend on his choice to play Now or next year.

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 05:04 PM
I guess not.



Well you can say it is a mental strain but I should think Federer would completely understand the rankings and has proven that those sort of pressures don't really have a big effect on him.

I mean, defending, gaining, you look at it this way sometimes but really it is all gain when you pick up points. It's like the way Judio does the Updated Rankings thread. The week a tourney begins you look at it as if the points you gained last year are gone completely, you are not defending anything, you are just gaining on the fewer amount of points you have.



Yes, I see that it's mental but no, your example has no relevance to the discussion. They are different issues.

I see your points. We just have differing views on it :wavey:

From what i hear, the Basel week hasnt taken much out of Fed, so i dont see why he wouldnt play Paris

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 05:04 PM
I guess not.



Well you can say it is a mental strain but I should think Federer would completely understand the rankings and has proven that those sort of pressures don't really have a big effect on him.

I mean, defending, gaining, you look at it this way sometimes but really it is all gain when you pick up points. It's like the way Judio does the Updated Rankings thread. The week a tourney begins you look at it as if the points you gained last year are gone completely, you are not defending anything, you are just gaining on the fewer amount of points you have.



Yes, I see that it's mental but no, your example has no relevance to the discussion. They are different issues.

I see your points. We just have differing views on it :wavey:

From what i hear, the Basel week hasnt taken much out of Fed, so i dont see why he wouldnt play Paris

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 05:08 PM
The difference is: If he wins points in Paris NOW, he will have them until Next Paris as a cushion against Nadal. If he doesn´t win them now, this cushion wouldn´t exist and he could lose his No. 1 in these next 52 weeks. So, the difference could be 52 weeks more as No. 1.
As for YE No. 1, there is no difference if he plays Paris now OR next year. As the points in Paris NOW will not add to the points in Paris NEXT year, by the end of 2008 his YE No. 1 will not depend on his choice to play Now or next year.
Okay so YE points don't come into it, there's no question about that.
About winning Paris now, yes it buys him some additional cushion, but anything in even the next 2-3 tournaments could rob him off that cushion so I don't think it all boils down to Paris.

nobama
10-28-2007, 05:09 PM
Not too likely. Djokovic will have to win Paris, Nadal pull out, then Nole has to perform much better than Nadal in TMC to take #2 before the end of the year.

I think the AO will be a big shifting point in all 3 of themI guess I should have been clearer. I meant early next year.

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 05:17 PM
I'm too lazy to do the math but what's the likelyhood of Djokovic overtaking Nadal for #2 before Fed looses #1?

In likelihood it's about the same for both changes. In both cases it is possible, but needs great performance from one and substandard from the other.

marcRD
10-28-2007, 05:26 PM
In likelihood it's about the same for both changes. In both cases it is possible, but needs great performance from one and substandard from the other.

Actually the likelihood of Djoko overtaking Nadal at AO next year is much greater than Nadal overtaking Federer. It only takes Nadal producing the same result as last year (SF in Shanghai), all it takes for Djoko is a final in Shanghai and winning Paris, or if that doesnt happen, Djoko is very likely to be in a SF or F in AO, while Nadal will prob not get past 4th round or QF. I think the chanses of Djkovic to be nr2 after Australian open is +70%.

marcRD
10-28-2007, 05:37 PM
In likelihood it's about the same for both changes. In both cases it is possible, but needs great performance from one and substandard from the other.

Actually the likelihood of Djoko overtaking Nadal at AO next year is much greater than Nadal overtaking Federer. It only takes Nadal producing the same result as last year (SF in Shanghai), all it takes for Djoko is a final in Shanghai and winning Paris, or if that doesnt happen, Djoko is very likely to be in a SF or F in AO, while Nadal will prob not get past 4th round or QF. I think the chanses of Djkovic to be nr2 after Australian open is +70%.

bokehlicious
10-28-2007, 05:38 PM
Fed said on Swiss TV that he'll be heading tomorrow morning to Paris. He's not that tired. Funny he said he thinks he has a better shot at taking Shanghai than Paris...

Tommy fan
10-28-2007, 05:42 PM
I don't think he should.. But apperently he will..

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 05:43 PM
Actually the likelihood of Djoko overtaking Nadal at AO next year is much greater than Nadal overtaking Federer. It only takes Nadal producing the same result as last year (SF in Shanghai), all it takes for Djoko is a final in Shanghai and winning Paris, or if that doesnt happen, Djoko is very likely to be in a SF or F in AO, while Nadal will prob not get past 4th round or QF. I think the chanses of Djkovic to be nr2 after Australian open is +70%.
Well.... there are many who believe that the AO is a great chance for Nadal to win his first nonclay slam. So it is very subjective as to the odds. I would say both scenarios are possible, so I give them the same odds.

marcRD
10-28-2007, 05:45 PM
In likelihood it's about the same for both changes. In both cases it is possible, but needs great performance from one and substandard from the other.

Actually the likelihood of Djoko overtaking Nadal at AO next year is much greater than Nadal overtaking Federer. It only takes Nadal producing the same result as last year (SF in Shanghai), all it takes for Djoko is a final in Shanghai and winning Paris, or if that doesnt happen, Djoko is very likely to be in a SF or F in AO, while Nadal will prob not get past 4th round or QF. I think the chanses of Djkovic to be nr2 after Australian open is +70%.

Corey Feldman
10-28-2007, 05:50 PM
course he should

he's played 14 tournaments this year - that is a Serena Williams year.

yeah he wins all his matches and is always in finals bla bla bla, but its the indoors (fast quick tennis) and i dont think he would be too drained.


but if he pulls i wouldnt be surprised and i guess he'd be doing it for his best interests in Shanghai so its probably acceptable and it'll stop me having a conflict of interest when he plays Murray in the Semis

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/sehrgrosse/large-smiley-011.gif

Corey Feldman
10-28-2007, 05:52 PM
I think the AO will be a big shifting point in all 3 of them

good stuff Blaze

:lol:

ExpectedWinner
10-28-2007, 05:53 PM
I strongly disagree. I think he is VERY concerned with the #1 ranking, he always lists it as pretty much top priority for him. The slam record he is obviousl aware of but he isn't the type of guy who is going to JUST focus on slams, he wants to keep that #1 spot.

Federer has held the top ranking since February 2004 and hold 11 major titles.

"I have been under pressure for four years. I don't look at the points," he said.

"My goals have changed. Now, I'm more concerned about winning big events, winning Grand Slams. I need to win the big ones now."

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/93692.html

scoobs
10-28-2007, 05:56 PM
I think he should go to Paris and I think he will go to Paris. He owes them one, he's never been as world #1 and has far less excuse to pull out now - he had a bye in Madrid, his run in Basel was easier this year than last, and he has a bye in Paris.

Wolbo
10-28-2007, 05:59 PM
Federer's main priorities are the Slams and his No.1 position and he will base his decisions on that. He's now said he will play in Paris and that makes sense as he wants to put as big a points cushion as possible between him and Nadal (and maybe even Djokivic) to defend his No.1 ranking early next year.

Federer is now 1820 points ahead of Nadals and while that looks a very safe margin it's really not if you consider that he has the TMC, AO and Dubai titles to defend for a total of 2050 points while Nadal only has 600 points to defend (incl. Chennai). A Nadal win at the AO and a small injury for Fed (like Nadal had in 2006) is already enough for a 1750 point swing.

After Dubai Fed is relatively safe because he can gain a lot of points in Indian Wells and Miami and after that the clay season starts where Nadal can only defend his points.

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 06:00 PM
Federer has held the top ranking since February 2004 and hold 11 major titles.

"I have been under pressure for four years. I don't look at the points," he said.

"My goals have changed. Now, I'm more concerned about winning big events, winning Grand Slams. I need to win the big ones now."

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/93692.html


"(Winning the) French Open will definitely be a dream come true but on top of the list there is always Wimbledon and staying number one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/low/tennis/6209009.stm

dylan24
10-28-2007, 06:00 PM
it would be really stupid for him to play
i hope he doesn't just show up and tank.
its better he withdraws

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 06:01 PM
Actually the likelihood of Djoko overtaking Nadal at AO next year is much greater than Nadal overtaking Federer. It only takes Nadal producing the same result as last year (SF in Shanghai), all it takes for Djoko is a final in Shanghai and winning Paris, or if that doesnt happen, Djoko is very likely to be in a SF or F in AO, while Nadal will prob not get past 4th round or QF. I think the chanses of Djkovic to be nr2 after Australian open is +70%.


Idon't know how my response to this post appears before this post .... :confused: but here goes again:

Well.... there are many who believe that the AO is a great chance for Nadal to win his first nonclay slam. So it is very subjective as to the odds. I would say both scenarios are possible, so I give them the same odds.

marcRD
10-28-2007, 06:03 PM
In likelihood it's about the same for both changes. In both cases it is possible, but needs great performance from one and substandard from the other.

Actually the likelihood of Djoko overtaking Nadal at AO next year is much greater than Nadal overtaking Federer. It only takes Nadal producing the same result as last year (SF in Shanghai), all it takes for Djoko is a final in Shanghai and winning Paris, or if that doesnt happen, Djoko is very likely to be in a SF or F in AO, while Nadal will prob not get past 4th round or QF. I think the chanses of Djkovic to be nr2 after Australian open is +70%.

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 06:05 PM
I think he should go to Paris and I think he will go to Paris. He owes them one, he's never been as world #1 and has far less excuse to pull out now - he had a bye in Madrid, his run in Basel was easier this year than last, and he has a bye in Paris.

Well he should not claim fatigue as a reason for not showing, it would be in poor form. But I think it is more likely that he shows up, gives less than 100%, gains some points and gets some cushion, but leaves enough for Shanghai.
The way we talk, it would seem this guy is 90 years old and needs all the time in the world to recover :lol:

Btw, he doesn't "owe" Paris/Pioline anything....

nobama
10-28-2007, 06:05 PM
I think he should go to Paris and I think he will go to Paris. He owes them one, he's never been as world #1 and has far less excuse to pull out now - he had a bye in Madrid, his run in Basel was easier this year than last, and he has a bye in Paris.
What does he owe them? What real excuse did Roddick have for pulling out? I thought players were 'allowed' to pull out of two masters events without penalty. Paris would be Fed's first this year.

jasmin
10-28-2007, 06:08 PM
Well making it to every final this year (I think) takes it's toll on you because you play more than anyone else and you really need to pace yourself. If he feels up to then yeah if he doesn't then I wouldn't be upset about. Just my opinion.

nobama
10-28-2007, 06:08 PM
Well he should not claim fatigue as a reason for not showing, it would be in poor form. But I think it is more likely that he shows up, gives less than 100%, gains some points and gets some cushion, but leaves enough for Shanghai.
The way we talk, it would seem this guy is 90 years old and needs all the time in the world to recover :lol:

Btw, he doesn't "owe" Paris/Pioline anything....I'd rather have him not show up than show up with no intention of contending for the title.

Allure
10-28-2007, 06:14 PM
Believe it! There are powerful weapon.
About this thread...I don't think and don't want Federer playing it. Let this tournament be interesting!

If you want the tournament to be interesting, why are Nadal and Djoke playing? :scratch:

Magus13
10-28-2007, 06:14 PM
Fed announced he's playing in Paris and well he should. He played a very smart schedule, is in great shape and only playing 3 set Finals other than the Slams has kept him well rested. On days like today when he is on the court for about an hour is probably less draining than some of his ptactice sessions. He can go into Paris relaxed knowing he clinched #1 and can pick up some points for next year. I'm very happy he's going.

scoobs
10-28-2007, 06:15 PM
What does he owe them? What real excuse did Roddick have for pulling out? I thought players were 'allowed' to pull out of two masters events without penalty. Paris would be Fed's first this year.
Roddick is injured.

And yes I think he does owe them. He knows that any masters event that doesn't have the world #1 show up constantly is going to be a bit second rated. He's not been since 2003.

And let's be clear here, these are mandatory tournaments. Yes in practice no action is taken if you miss up to 2 of them but they are supposed to be mandatory events. If he must play only 2 out of the 3 weeks in this stretch I would rather he had skipped Madrid and played Basel then Paris. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect him to play this event and I say that as a big fan of his.

I don't think it will be an issue anyway because I think it's likely he will play.

Corey Feldman
10-28-2007, 06:15 PM
Btw, Fed's 750 entry Shanghai 2006 points come off the computer tomorrow anyway

if he won Paris he'd still be -250 for the week

:lol: funny old ranking system.

Nadal will start on -200 for Paris as well.

Corey Feldman
10-28-2007, 06:17 PM
Fed announced he's playing in Paris and well he should. He played a very smart schedule, is in great shape and only playing 3 set Finals other than the Slams has kept him well rested. On days like today when he is on the court for about an hour is probably less draining than some of his ptactice sessions. He can go into Paris relaxed knowing he clinched #1 and can pick up some points for next year. I'm very happy he's going.dont get your hopes up... he's done things like that in the past when he's said he'll play a tournament next week, and next day - WD.

he might have dont it last year infact after winning Basel as well.

ExpectedWinner
10-28-2007, 06:17 PM
"(Winning the) French Open will definitely be a dream come true but on top of the list there is always Wimbledon and staying number one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/low/tennis/6209009.stm

He said it at the end of 2006. The other quote is from the interview in August, 2007.

Merton
10-28-2007, 06:19 PM
In genral he should, but I doubt ranking is a consideration, the TMC is more important so if Roger thinks that a deep run in Paris will affect his readiness for TMC then he will withdraw, otherwise he will play.

I fail to understand the fans' focus on rankings, in my mind Roger's top priority is adding slams to his total, Nadal winning his first non-clay slam and Nole winning his first slam. But what do I know :p

GonzoFed
10-28-2007, 06:20 PM
Pioline must be with anxiety attacks right now.

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 06:22 PM
In genral he should, but I doubt ranking is a consideration, the TMC is more important so if Roger thinks that a deep run in Paris will affect his readiness for TMC then he will withdraw, otherwise he will play.

I fail to understand the fans' focus on rankings, in my mind Roger's top priority is adding slams to his total, Nadal winning his first non-clay slam and Nole winning his first slam. But what do I know :p

We'll worry about that in mid January :p

For right now, its all about ranking drama :)

FedFan_2007
10-28-2007, 06:25 PM
Fed has already stated in a post-match interview that he is NOT going to pull out of Bercy. If he were planning to he would said something like "I'll wait and see how I feel tomorrow...".

scoobs
10-28-2007, 06:33 PM
There's ranking drama?

I'd have thought Federer was fairly secure at #1 for a while yet, unless he has an atrocious early loss in Australia.

It's Nadal who needs to worry about his ranking, it's fairly likely he and Djokovic are going to be in a major tussle for #2 in early 2008

nobama
10-28-2007, 06:34 PM
Roddick is injured. Right....

scoobs
10-28-2007, 06:35 PM
Right....
Well I assume you know better, somehow.

World Beater
10-28-2007, 06:37 PM
Federer doesn't owe anybody anything, let alone paris. His prerogative as a professional is to take care of his body and to play professionally.

As fans, of course we want him to show up. Its the same with roddick, hewitt etc. But I would rather have him show up ready to play 100% than to have injuries.

With that said, i fully expect federer to play paris because I think healthwise he is fine.

nobama
10-28-2007, 06:39 PM
Roddick is injured.

And yes I think he does owe them. He knows that any masters event that doesn't have the world #1 show up constantly is going to be a bit second rated. He's not been since 2003.

And let's be clear here, these are mandatory tournaments. Yes in practice no action is taken if you miss up to 2 of them but they are supposed to be mandatory events. If he must play only 2 out of the 3 weeks in this stretch I would rather he had skipped Madrid and played Basel then Paris. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect him to play this event and I say that as a big fan of his.

I don't think it will be an issue anyway because I think it's likely he will play.Paris will always be second rate because of where it's placed in the schedule. It's stupid to have a top level event like that at the end of the season. The last few weeks of the year should be for players who are still trying to qualify for TMC or players that have a shot to improve their YE ranking and getting a better seed at AO (e.g., Roddick getting back into the top 4).

nobama
10-28-2007, 06:43 PM
Well I assume you know better, somehow.Do I *really* know, of course not. But I have my doubts. He pulled out of Madrid even though he was playing charity exhos the week(s) before.

ChinoRios4Ever
10-28-2007, 06:47 PM
No.

R.Federer
10-28-2007, 06:47 PM
I'd rather have him not show up than show up with no intention of contending for the title.
Well, I guess it might end up being the question of: what doyou want him to try to win more Paris or TMC? It might end up making the difference, I don't know.

kokket
10-28-2007, 06:48 PM
remember that 2008 is an olymic year

I think you can get about 500 points for the gold medal ( like a Master Series title )

Sunset of Age
10-28-2007, 06:51 PM
There's ranking drama?

I'd have thought Federer was fairly secure at #1 for a while yet, unless he has an atrocious early loss in Australia.

It's Nadal who needs to worry about his ranking, it's fairly likely he and Djokovic are going to be in a major tussle for #2 in early 2008

It's no coincidence that this thread is started by Jonathan. ;)

Johnny Groove
10-28-2007, 06:54 PM
It's no coincidence that this thread is started by Jonathan. ;)

Im not worried about Nadal's ranking, even though Nole is within 1000

Sunset of Age
10-28-2007, 06:55 PM
Im not worried about Nadal's ranking, even though Nole is within 1000

:p :hug:

Eden
10-29-2007, 11:37 PM
I think he shows a good attitude towards the tournament. He is aware of his difficult draw, but apparently he feels good after his two weeks in Madrid and Basel and has no worries to risk injury when playing in Paris. As we have seen in the past he doesn't hesitate to cancel a tournament so I trust him that he wouldn't play Paris when he wouldn't feel ok.

Anything can happen, but I doubt that the outcome of Paris will affect Rogers chances in Shanghai. He won't suffer when he would lose early and if he would still be in Paris the next weekend he has another week before Shanghai starts.