So Rafa to win and Blake to beat Fed is Rafa's last shot at #1 here, right? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

So Rafa to win and Blake to beat Fed is Rafa's last shot at #1 here, right?

Ackms421
01-21-2008, 05:22 PM
Winning the entire championship would put him above 6500 which, at this point, would be enough to pass Fed *if* Fed loses to Blake. If Fed makes it any further, even if Rafa wins, he still doesn't get it this week, right?

FitDave
01-21-2008, 05:29 PM
He'll get it in Dubai when Fed faces Murray in the 2nd round

DwyaneWade
01-21-2008, 05:31 PM
Winning the entire championship would put him above 6500 which, at this point, would be enough to pass Fed *if* Fed loses to Blake. If Fed makes it any further, even if Rafa wins, he still doesn't get it this week, right?

I think that's right. But this is all a little premature, let Rafa make a GS semi on hard first!

And relying on Blake to beat Fed :tape:

Ackms421
01-21-2008, 05:38 PM
Yes, I certainly am not saying that either of these events are the most-likely things to happen. I was just curious how far Fed could make it into the tournament with Rafa still having the mathematical shot at #1. Boy, that 10-8 in the fifth third-rounder sure did seem to be the one that would give Rafa #1. But, it wasn't to be, I guess...

BTW, Blake to beat Fed is certainly more unlikely than Rafa to win, although if Blake ever had a chance it is here. I haven't seen Fed look this vulnerable *ever*. And, if Rafa can get past Youzhny, he's got a 50/50 shot against whomever he sees across the net from him in the final. So, not the likeliest turn of events, but not impossible.

the answer
01-21-2008, 06:07 PM
At this point Nadal doesn't deserve to be n°1. It would be a farce if he managed to do it.

hra87
01-21-2008, 06:12 PM
At this point Nadal doesn't deserve to be n°1. It would be a farce if he managed to do it.

2 slams + 1 final + 4 masters + 2 masters finals...

Are you out of your mind?


If Fed gets knocked out in the semis and Nadal wins, He might be able to take it by winning Rotterdam if Fed doesn't play anything I think. I'd have to re-calculate.

DwyaneWade
01-21-2008, 06:16 PM
2 slams + 1 final + 4 masters + 3 masters finals...

Are you out of your mind?

This is all assuming he wins, no? ;)

It's irrelevant anyways, Rafa won't reach no. 1 here, Fed isn't losing to Blake and either Fed or Nole will take the title here. Rafa should be content with SF or F pts.

BTW, where did you get 3 master finals??? Hamburg and Paris, yes, but what else?

hra87
01-21-2008, 06:19 PM
This is all assuming he wins, no? ;)

It's irrelevant anyways, Rafa won't reach no. 1 here, Fed isn't losing to Blake and either Fed or Nole will take the title here. Rafa should be content with SF or F pts.

BTW, where did you get 3 master finals??? Hamburg and Paris, yes, but what else?

It was a typo, I changed it. Yes, that's assuming he wins (I have no doubt that he will not), but the person I was quoting implied that he wouldn't deserve it if he did win, which is just absurd.

jcadam2003
01-21-2008, 06:22 PM
I think that novak beating fed would be a more likely scenario if fed would to lose before the final. As I am not the expert in the rankings, if Nadal wins the tournament and Fed loses in either the finals or semifinals what result for Rafa in Rotterdam (finals, winner?) would be necessary for Rafa to take over the number one ranking in February?

Foxy
01-21-2008, 06:22 PM
If you strip all Nadal's clay points he will be NO3 in the world surpassed only by Nole. Isn't that impressive?

sawan66278
01-21-2008, 06:51 PM
If you strip all Nadal's clay points he will be NO3 in the world surpassed only by Nole. Isn't that impressive?

You're right. Clay court tennis is the surface equivalent of the WTA tour: inconsequential.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

By the way, if Rafa makes the semis and loses, what has to happen in the next few weeks for him to take the top spot?

hra87
01-21-2008, 06:54 PM
I think that novak beating fed would be a more likely scenario if fed would to lose before the final. As I am not the expert in the rankings, if Nadal wins the tournament and Fed loses in either the finals or semifinals what result for Rafa in Rotterdam (finals, winner?) would be necessary for Rafa to take over the number one ranking in February?

If Fed's out in the semis and Rafa wins, a final in rotterdam would give him #1 by a whopping 20 points.

If Fed's out in the finals and Rafa wins, a win in rotterdam and a win over fed in dubai would give him #1. I think.

jasmin
01-21-2008, 06:57 PM
Why Nadal is that close in points to Fed is beyond me. Fed won 3 slams, the ending tournament and did better overall imo and they are that close that one slam would make that much of a difference. Weird point system.

DwyaneWade
01-21-2008, 06:57 PM
If Fed's out in the semis and Rafa wins, a final in rotterdam would give him #1 by a whopping 20 points.

If Fed's out in the finals and Rafa wins, a win in rotterdam and a win over fed in dubai would give him #1. I think.

Anyways I highly doubt Rafa is worrying about this, in the end all that matters are the slams and I am sure Rafa would much rather have an AO title forever than world no. 1 for all of a whopping 2 weeks.

FluffyYellowBall
01-21-2008, 07:03 PM
what i saw on ESPN was...

rafa can only be number 1 after the AO if:

Federer loses 1st or 2nd round and rafa reaches the final
Federer loses anytime until the quarters and Rafa WINS the final.

I dont know how they calculated it but it seems to be that way.

DwyaneWade
01-21-2008, 07:07 PM
Why Nadal is that close in points to Fed is beyond me. Fed won 3 slams, the ending tournament and did better overall imo and they are that close that one slam would make that much of a difference. Weird point system.

Rafa is not actually that close. If he loses in the QF and Fed wins again (identical to last year) then Fed has a comfortable cushion. If he wins however, and Fed loses in the SF let's say, look at how their numbers match up:

Fed: 2 Slams, 1 Slam Final, 1 Slam Semi 2 Master Series, TMC, Optional titles at Dubai, Basel
Nadal: 2 Slams, 1 Slam Final, 1 Slam 4R, 3 Master Series, TMC SF, Optional titles at Stutgart, Barcelona, final at Chennai.

Geniey2g
01-21-2008, 07:35 PM
Rafa is not actually that close. If he loses in the QF and Fed wins again (identical to last year) then Fed has a comfortable cushion. If he wins however, and Fed loses in the SF let's say, look at how their numbers match up:

Fed: 2 Slams, 1 Slam Final, 1 Slam Semi 2 Master Series, TMC, Optional titles at Dubai, Basel
Nadal: 2 Slams, 1 Slam Final, 1 Slam 4R, 3 Master Series, TMC SF, Optional titles at Stutgart, Barcelona, final at Chennai.
Right. I heard that if Roger loses in the semis, and Rafa wins the AO, Rafa will become number 1.
Interesting thread :yeah:

hra87
01-21-2008, 07:41 PM
Right. I heard that if Roger loses in the semis, and Rafa wins the AO, Rafa will become number 1.
Interesting thread :yeah:

no, fed would be number 1 by 100 points.

DwyaneWade
01-21-2008, 10:29 PM
no, fed would be number 1 by 100 points.

Correct but with points to defend in Dubai for Fed, Rafa could potentially make up the gap at Rotterdam/Dubai

ReturnWinner
01-21-2008, 10:31 PM
Correct but with points to defend in Dubai for Fed, Rafa could potentially make up the gap at Rotterdam/Dubai

but after that Federer had not points to defend in both miami and indian wells other than just an eighth of final whereas Nadal has to defend a title and a quarter of final

calvinhobbes
01-21-2008, 10:43 PM
If Fed's out in the semis and Rafa wins, a final in rotterdam would give him #1 by a whopping 20 points.

If Fed's out in the finals and Rafa wins, a win in rotterdam and a win over fed in dubai would give him #1. I think.

If Roger wants to extend his No. 1 record, he must forget somewhat his laziness, and take an additional tournament. This additional is what maintains Nadal so close to Fed. Nadal´s hunger for No.1 position could leave him to take even MM tournaments especially during clay season. As Roger has few points to defend, his taking part in any tournament would give him sustancial points. Well. . . . . if he bothers to try.:eek::eek::eek:

DwyaneWade
01-21-2008, 10:46 PM
but after that Federer had not points to defend in both miami and indian wells other than just an eighth of final whereas Nadal has to defend a title and a quarter of final

Right so Federer will take it back regardless. It would be a very temporary stop at the stop.

Del_Toro
01-21-2008, 11:53 PM
Nadal won't reach the #1 in this tournament because I don't see how on earth Blake could beat Roger and because Nadal could make the final but I don't see him beating either Federer or Djokovic.
Even Blake or Ferrer would have a good shot against Nadal.

Anyway as some of you have pointed out, Nadal could take the #1 after the AO but it will be only for a very few weeks because from Indian Wells to Wimbledon Nadal have tons of points to defend and Roger not so many.

Anyway, it all depends on Roger will to retain the número 1. If he wants to, he needs only to win Dubai again, right? then Next chance for Nadal to overcome Roger would be only in the USO, or after Wimbledon "IF" Roger has a mediocre performance in RG and Wimbledon and Nadal repeats what he did last year(unlikely).

DwyaneWade
01-22-2008, 12:01 AM
Nadal won't reach the #1 in this tournament because I don't see how on earth Blake could beat Roger and because Nadal could make the final but I don't see him beating either Federer or Djokovic.
Even Blake or Ferrer would have a good shot against Nadal.

Anyway as some of you have pointed out, Nadal could take the #1 after the AO but it will be only for a very few weeks because from Indian Wells to Wimbledon Nadal have tons of points to defend and Roger not so many.

Anyway, it all depends on Roger will to retain the número 1. If he wants to, he needs only to win Dubai again, right? then Next chance for Nadal to overcome Roger would be only in the USO, or after Wimbledon "IF" Roger has a mediocre performance in RG and Wimbledon and Nadal repeats what he did last year(unlikely).

Actually, Roger winning Dubai doesn't really help him if Nadal wins Rotterdam and reaches final in Dubai.

Plus, what makes you think Federer doing poorly at the French is any less probable than Rafa doing poorly at Wimbledon?

Del_Toro
01-22-2008, 12:10 AM
Actually, Roger winning Dubai doesn't really help him if Nadal wins Rotterdam and reaches final in Dubai.

Plus, what makes you think Federer doing poorly at the French is any less probable than Rafa doing poorly at Wimbledon?

OK then Roger would need to play one MM tournament to clinch his #1. The question is if he really bothers.

I do think that Roger is a serious candidate to win RG, IMO just Nadal is better than him on clay.
Everybody knows who is the best on grass.

In the other hand Nadal has to win RG and to make again the finals in Wimbledon. Sorry but I don't see that happening, the "dream draws" aren't gonna last forever.

Besides that Roger not necessarily needs to win RG or Wimbledon in order to retain #1 because as I've said before, Nadal has tons of points to defend between Indian Wells and Wimbledon.

Being brief: Nadal chances to reach the #1 are quit slight, the best scenario for him: To reach it after the AO, and to hold it for a month or so until Roger claims it again (probably in Miami).

DwyaneWade
01-22-2008, 12:15 AM
OK then Roger would need to play one MM tournament to clinch his #1. The question is if he really bothers.

I do think that Roger is a serious candidate to win RG, IMO just Nadal is better than him om clay.
Everybody kknows who is the best on grass.

In the other hand Nadal has to win RG and to make again the finals in Wimbledon. Sorry but I don't see that happening, the "dream draws" aren't gonna last forever.

Besides that Roger not necessarily needs to win RG or Wimbledon in order to retain #1 because as I've said before, Nadal has tons of points to defend between Indian Wells and Wimbledon.

Being brief: Nadal chances to reach the #1 are quit slight, the best scenario for him: To reach it after the AO and to hold it for a month or so until Roger claims it again (probably in Miami).

I am not arguing about Nadal reaching no. 1. Federer is far and away the best player in the world and the rankings show that and will continue to show that.

But Roger and Rafa have reached exactly the same number of RG/Wimbledon finals in a row: 2. And Rafa's draw last year was not a "dream draw" although 2006 surely was. And in 2006 Federer had that Nalbandian match so this is all moot.

My point is just like you can't expect Nadal to keep making Wimbledon finals you cannot expect Federer to continue winning at the rate he has at the French; it is clearly his worst surface and if he draws a strong claycourter early (even though there are not many left) he can be troubled just like Nadal can be troubled by a big hitter at Wimbledon.

Del_Toro
01-22-2008, 12:26 AM
My point is just like you can't expect Nadal to keep making Wimbledon finals you cannot expect Federer to continue winning at the rate he has at the French; it is clearly his worst surface and if he draws a strong claycourter early (even though there are not many left) he can be troubled just like Nadal can be troubled by a big hitter at Wimbledon.
IMO is more likely to see Roger again in RG finals than to see Nadal making Wimbledon final once again.

Besides that, I hate to repeat it but, if Nadal doesn't have a spectacular clay season, like last year's, then Roger could retain the #1 by only reaching semis in RG and Wimby.

But I don't think Roger prefers to be #1 than to be #2 but with a couple of GS more in his bag.

That's my point, Does Roger is enough interested on retaining #1 to the point of changing his schedule?

I don't think so.
Nadal might take borrowed the #1 after Dubai, but just for a few weeks. The best of the scenarios for him.

Johnny Groove
01-22-2008, 01:00 AM
Why Nadal is that close in points to Fed is beyond me. Fed won 3 slams, the ending tournament and did better overall imo and they are that close that one slam would make that much of a difference. Weird point system.

Maybe because Fed treated the Masters events like shit tourneys while Nadal didn't :shrug:

DwyaneWade
01-22-2008, 01:45 AM
IMO is more likely to see Roger again in RG finals than to see Nadal making Wimbledon final once again.

Besides that, I hate to repeat it but, if Nadal doesn't have a spectacular clay season, like last year's, then Roger could retain the #1 by only reaching semis in RG and Wimby.

But I don't think Roger prefers to be #1 than to be #2 but with a couple of GS more in his bag.

That's my point, Does Roger is enough interested on retaining #1 to the point of changing his schedule?

I don't think so.
Nadal might take borrowed the #1 after Dubai, but just for a few weeks. The best of the scenarios for him.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I don't think either will happen.

Corey Feldman
01-22-2008, 01:53 AM
lol some of the Nadal fans need to stop the early drooling, be patient.

Corey Feldman
01-22-2008, 01:55 AM
Why Nadal is that close in points to Fed is beyond me. Fed won 3 slams, the ending tournament and did better overall imo and they are that close that one slam would make that much of a difference. Weird point system.At the end of the day, the ranking is just a number...

If someone else is no1 but Fed holds 3 slams and the TMC, we all still know who the best in the world is.

missvarsha
01-22-2008, 02:58 AM
Why Nadal is that close in points to Fed is beyond me. Fed won 3 slams, the ending tournament and did better overall imo and they are that close that one slam would make that much of a difference. Weird point system.

Stop overreacting. Nadal isn't close to Federer in points, he is trailing by more than a 1,000.
Nadal will be close to Federer's point total in the hypothetical case of him winning the Australian Open, in which case again, the rankings will be an accurate reflection of the results. Really, just because Federer won three slams doesn't mean Nadal rolled over and died in those tournaments.

(Hypothetical Case) : Nadal wins AO.
Then the rankings will reflect :

Grand Slams :
Federer 2 Wins, 1 RU, 1 RU/SF/QF (depends on where he loses)
Nadal 2 Wins, 1 RU, 1 R16.
So the difference is 250-150 = 100 at best, and 700-150 points = 550 at worst. Advantage Federer.

YEC :
Federer won, but he was 2-1 in RR. As was Nadal, who reached the SF. So again, advantage Federer, but not as much as you think.

Masters Events : Like it or not, all 9 go on to your points total, and considering that barring injury the top players play at least 7, and usually all 9, I dont think its an unfair system either.

Federer : 2 W, 3 RU, 4 early losses. (He played all 9, so no one "cheated" and collected more points than him).
Nadal : 3 W, 2 RU, 1 SF, 1 QF, 1 early loss. Here, Nadal clearly outperformed Federer and gains a few hundered points.

Optionals : People tend to clutch their pearls and accuse players like Davydenko of padding their ranking by overplaying. Um considering that you can ONLY count five events, its hardly much of a padding. And consider that winning 5 optionals will give you 1250 points (give or take) which is slightly more than winning a GS. Sounds totally fine to me. Winning a GS is worth a lot, but c'mon winnning FIVE tournaments shouldnt be small potatos.

Federer : 2 W. Only two played. Theoretically Federer has three big 0s on his ranking that he can pad by as much as 750 points if he
gives a damn. He clearly didn't last year, lets see what he does if things get tighter.
Nadal : 2 W, 2 RU, 1 QF. So he went deep in all events, and played (more than) his five allowed optionals.
Advantage Nadal, by a few hundered.

So overall, Federer and Nadal performed almost equally in the slams, Federer did better at the YEC, and Nadal (unlike your claim) did much better at the regular tour level. If the rankings have Nadal trailing by a few points, how are they wierd ? In fact you could make a solid case that Nadal should already be #1.

Of course this is all moot. If Federer defends his AO crown, he will retain his ~1000 pt lead and again, all will be right.


Seriously people, for years and years and years the entire top 10 were within 500 points of each other. Its only Federer and Nadal outperforming the rest so completely that has made people lose their sense of perspective, and you get the "ZOMG Federers lead is less than 500 ????!? The RANKING SYSTEM SUCKS." reaction.
Get a grip.

FedFan_2007
01-22-2008, 04:10 AM
Yeah people seem to forget 1 year ago Federer had a 3800 point lead. Unfuckingbelievable. However, he more the out-performed Nadal in the slams.

Fed: 3W, 1RU
Nadal: W, RU, QF, 4R

In 2006, Fed won 8370 out of a possible 10,500 points.

missvarsha
01-22-2008, 04:17 AM
However, he more the out-performed Nadal in the slams.

I agree of course, but I was pointing out that it wasn't by as much as people think. And anyway Nadal will be close in points only if he wins the AO. If he doesn't, Federer will retain a sizeable lead.

bokehlicious
01-22-2008, 07:44 AM
Maybe because Fed treated the Masters events like shit tourneys while Nadal didn't :shrug:

You said you were 18 by now? Gosh... still a long time to reach maturity... :zzz: :zzz: