What does Roger need to stay #1 ? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

What does Roger need to stay #1 ?

Pages : [1] 2

PamV
08-14-2005, 10:36 PM
Well ok, I will move this discussion from out of that Cincy thread. This was mentioned as a side point in that thread and it's something I am interested in. Someone said that Rafa has no chance of overtaking Roger this year....but looking at the Entry points I don't think that's true. Could someone illustrate how it's impossible for Roger to lose the #1 ranking this year?

It seems just on the surface to me that if Rafa were to win the USOpen and one more MS tournament he might do it. A lot can happen between now and the end of the year in that either guy could get injured. Roger has points to defend at the USOpen, while Rafa doesn't. What do you guys think?

Shy
08-14-2005, 10:38 PM
I think that if he wins the USopen, he is guarantied the no 1 spot to at least next year since he can gain a lots of point during the fall. It is going to be hard for Nadal to take over Roger this year unless Roger fail to defend 3/4 of his points. However, if Nadal doers way better than Roger during the rest of the year, he would put himself in good position to overtake Roger next year.

nobama
08-14-2005, 10:58 PM
You're not worried are you? Because you know that's what all the Rafa groupies want - a bunch of Roger fans all worried that he might lose #1. Next week all the big boys are back in action. And Roger's record in Cincy isn horrible. We all know he's going to want to correct that. Look after he lost at the FO - then he wins in Halle and Wimbledon and the limelight is back on him again. I don't think he's going to let Nadal hog the limelight to long. :devil:

Shy
08-14-2005, 11:01 PM
. I don't think he's going to let Nadal hog the limelight to long. :devil:
I rather be Roger than Andy, Lleyton and Marat.Nobody talks about them anymore. The media talks only about Rafa and Roger.

PamV
08-14-2005, 11:05 PM
I think that if he wins the USopen, he is guarantied the no 1 spot to at least next year since he can gain a lots of point during the fall. It is going to be hard for Nadal to take over Roger this year unless Roger fail to defend 3/4 of his points. However, if Nadal doers way better than Roger during the rest of the year, he would put himself in good position to overtake Roger next year.

If Roger wins the USOpen, I think he would clinch the #1 ranking for the year....but what happens if he doens't win it and Nadal were to win it instead? Right now it seems to me that both Roger and Rafa will have to try to outdo the other for the remaining tournaments.

I love Roger, but I am just looking at this realistically and wondering. I think a factor to consider is that everything isn't even determined by how they match up to each other. A big factor can be how well Hewitt, Roddick, and Safin are playing. Usually in a major or MS to get to a final a player has to have a couple of hard matches against some other top 5 guys. So far I don't think Nadal has never faced back to back top 5 opponents that give him a battle. He lucked out in Miami and Montreal both times. If Safin and Hewitt were on their game they could bother Nadal a lot.

jtipson
08-14-2005, 11:06 PM
Don't get too worried, but it's not at all impossible for Roger to lose the top ranking this year; Nadal can take it from him as early as the end of the US Open.

At the moment Roger is still 2000+ points ahead, but that can change very quickly, especially as he has a grand slam title to defend shortly. For him to lose it, Rafa would probably have to win both Cincy and the USO, and Roger would have to get less than 300-500 points in these events. It depends partly on whether Nadal plays at New Haven as well, as he could pick up points there.

ExpectedWinner
08-14-2005, 11:08 PM
Posted by PamV



The Entry rank is what determines who is the year ending #1 so isn't that more important? Sampras was #1 for six years in the Entry ranking system and that's one record that Roger wanted to match. I don't know if Sampras held that spot consecutively for 6 years or if he ever lost the spot within a year and then got it back by year's end.




No, the entry ranking includes points from last year which will be off by the end of the year. The race includes only points earned this year

In Sampras' time the race did not exist.

I've never heard that he wants any of Sampras' records. In fact in his interview to The Russian magazine " Prosport" he says " It's nice to have them (records), but it's not the reason why I'm playing."

Sampras did lose his number one ranking in the middle of the season a few times but always finished no1 at the end of the year, and it counts the most.

Nadal has a very good chance to finish this year No1. In fact, if he wins the USO, he 'll be no 1 in the mind of many people, no matter how points will play out at the end of the year. Because he''ll be the holder of 2 GS titles. The same applies to Roger if he wins the USO. Um.., if Safin wins the USO, will people consider him No1? :lol:

PamV
08-14-2005, 11:09 PM
You're not worried are you? Because you know that's what all the Rafa groupies want - a bunch of Roger fans all worried that he might lose #1. Next week all the big boys are back in action. And Roger's record in Cincy isn horrible. We all know he's going to want to correct that. Look after he lost at the FO - then he wins in Halle and Wimbledon and the limelight is back on him again. I don't think he's going to let Nadal hog the limelight to long. :devil:

Mirkaland....I am not even bothering to read what the Nadal fans post. I have been wondering about how secure Roger's #1 spot is all by myself for a long time. I am a Roger fan all the way....but I just like to talk realistically about what is going on. I don't we think should hide our thoughts for fear that the Nadal zealouts will read this. I don't let myself be controlled by them one way or another.

jtipson
08-14-2005, 11:12 PM
Yes, Sampras was number one for six years at the end of the year. Being number one at the end of the year is just "neat"; with a twelve month rolling system, no week is more important than another. He only ever had 102 weeks consecutively at number one - both Connors and Lendl had more than a year longer than that. (Year-end number one is an overrated statistic imo.)

PamV
08-14-2005, 11:13 PM
No, the entry ranking includes points from last year which will be off by the end of the year. The race includes includes only points earned this year



Of course entry rank points get replaced by the current year's results. What I am saying is that the Entry Rank system is what determines who is the true #1, and the year ending #1. The Entry Rank is always what is used for seeding in tournaments. It's really what the players care about MORE than the ATP Race.

The ATP race is soley for the purpose of determining who plays in the year end Masters Cup.

PamV
08-14-2005, 11:15 PM
Yes, Sampras was number one for six years at the end of the year. Being number one at the end of the year is just "neat"; with a twelve month rolling system, no week is more important than another. He only ever had 102 weeks consecutively at number one - both Connors and Lendl had more than a year longer than that. (Year-end number one is an overrated statistic imo.)

I was wondering about that. How many consecutive weeks has Roger had as Entry Rank #1? Those things are always talked about in the debate over who is better between Federer and Sampras.

ExpectedWinner
08-14-2005, 11:16 PM
Of course entry rank points get replaced by the current year's results. What I am saying is that the Entry Ranks system is what determines who is the true #1, and the year ending #1.

The ATP race is soley for the purpose of determining who plays in the year end Masters Cup.

But at the end of the year entry ranking is a mirror reflection of the race. Only amount of points is calculated differently. Players who are No1, 51, 101 in the race at the end of the year will be number 1, 51, 101 in the entry ranking.

nobama
08-14-2005, 11:17 PM
Of course entry rank points get replaced by the current year's results. What I am saying is that the Entry Rank system is what determines who is the true #1, and the year ending #1. The Entry Rank is always what is used for seeding in tournaments. It's really what the players care about MORE than the ATP Race.

The ATP race is soley for the purpose of determining who plays in the year end Masters Cup.Yeah but I think at the end of the year whoever is #1 in the Race will also be #1 in the Entry Rankings. At least someone here who knows better than me said so.

jtipson
08-14-2005, 11:18 PM
Roger has had 80 consecutive weeks at number one so far. Nobody can overtake him before he gets to 84 weeks.

nobama
08-14-2005, 11:22 PM
Mirkaland....I am not even bothering to read what the Nadal fans post. I have been wondering about how secure Roger's #1 spot is all by myself for a long time. I am a Roger fan all the way....but I just like to talk realistically about what is going on. I don't we think should hide our thoughts for fear that the Nadal zealouts will read this. I don't let myself be controlled by them one way or another.I understand. It's just that's what their waiting to pounce on. Any hint of worry by Roger fans. Already there's posts in GM with all the supposed excuses (I'm guessing by Fed fans) for why Rafa won today - even though no one is downlplaying his win at all.

I don't worry about what I can't control. And I think Roger should just worry about himself and not care about Rafa (not saying you think he should). In fact in Cincy I hope he just focuses on the match in front of him and doesn't think about a potential final with Rafa.

PamV
08-14-2005, 11:23 PM
Posted by PamV

I've never heard that he wants any of Sampras' records. In fact in his interview to The Russian magazine " Prosport" he says " It's nice to have them (records), but it's not the reason why I'm playing."



He might not admit that he cares, but I think it's obvious he does . He has said one of his goals this year it to end the year as #1. Why would he care about that unless he wants to try to get close to Sampras record of 6 years in a row? Roger cares about all the records that show him to be one of the greats.....such as the first to win 3 majors in a year since Wilander, the first since Borg to win on 3 different surfaces in back to back to back tourneys, or the string of 20 some final wins. I think he also holds the record for wins over top 10 opponents.

Roger is definitely not in this for the money....he wants records and titles.

PamV
08-14-2005, 11:28 PM
But at the end of the year entry ranking is a mirror reflection of the race. Only amount of points is calculated differently. Players who are No1, 51, 101 in the race at the end of the year will be number 1, 51, 101 in the entry ranking.

By the end of the year the #1 player will be the same in both. However, technically they look at the results of the Entry Rank to determine who is year end #1. The Entry Rank is the most important thing too because in the coming year it determines who is the #1 seed in tournaments.

Through out the entire year the Entry Rank is what is used to determine the true #1 because otherwise at the start of the year the first player to win a tournament would be the #1 player in the ATP Race....however, that doesn't carry much weight because we know that everyone starts from scratch and it will fluctuate.

ExpectedWinner
08-14-2005, 11:38 PM
However, technically they look at the results of the Entry Rank to determine who is year end #1.


:confused: No, they don't. Somebody with better English than mine should explain you this.

" The Entry Rank is the most important thing too because in the coming year it determines who is the #1 seed in tournaments. "

This is true. But the entry ranking can confuse you in terms who has the best chances to become No1 at the end of the year because it can be inflated with points from last year. Example- Hewitt.

ExpectedWinner
08-14-2005, 11:45 PM
He might not admit that he cares, but I think it's obvious he does . He has said one of his goals this year it to end the year as #1. Why would he care about that unless he wants to try to get close to Sampras record of 6 years in a row?


Because he finished No 1 only once. Sampras' records are not beatable. I really hope that he's not thinking about them.

bavaria100
08-14-2005, 11:49 PM
Roger could lose the no. 1 ranking if Nadal wins the Champions Race this year. Itīs that simple. Right now, the gap between Roger and Nadal is 73 points in the CR. Roger is leading by 2145 points in the Entry Ranking right now. Both Nadal and Roger have lost early in Cincy last year and can gain points. The worst case would be if Roger loses in the first round of Cincy and at the US Open (he would lose 1000 points) and Nadal wins both tourneys (he would gain 1460). So Roger would still have a decent gap. Roger didnīt play the indoor season last year and Nadal didnīt have any decent results during that part of the year, so both can earn lots of points. The big difference is the Masters Cup. Roger won it while Nadal didnīt qualify for it. Letīs say Nadal wins it without losing any match and Roger loses all of his rr-matches. Roger would lose 750 points and Nadal would gain 750 points. So if we go by the ER, I just canīt see Roger losing the number 1 spot this year. But if we go by the CR, Nadal could be the new number 1 after the masters cup.

PamV
08-14-2005, 11:49 PM
:confused: Somebody with better English than mine should explain you this.

" The Entry Rank is the most important thing too because in the coming year it determines who is the #1 seed in tournaments. "

This is true. But the entry ranking can confuse you in terms who has the best chances to become No1 at the end of the year because it can be inflated with points from last year. Example- Hewitt.

True....it's not easy to figure out Entry Rank chances. That's why I started this thread. Someone had posted that Nadal has no chance of overtaking Roger in the Entry Rank system ( for true #1), but I didn't think that was correct. I wanted to hear what others thought who can tabulate out the points based on this year/last year bla, bla, bla, bla. You know what I mean? LOL

nobama
08-14-2005, 11:49 PM
Because he finished No 1 only once. Sampras' records are not beatable. I really hope that he's not thinking about them.Except by Nadal of course. ;)

PamV
08-14-2005, 11:51 PM
The big difference is the Masters Cup. Roger won it while Nadal didnīt qualify for it. Letīs say Nadal wins it without losing any match and Roger loses all of his rr-matches. Roger would lose 750 points and Nadal would gain 750 points. So if we go by the ER, I just canīt see Roger losing the number 1 spot this year. But if we go by the CR, Nadal could be the new number 1 after the masters cup.

Wait a minute. I didn't think that the Master's Cup gave out any points at all toward the Entry Ranking. What's this about?

Saumon
08-14-2005, 11:52 PM
hmmm luck?? :scratch: ;)

1sun
08-14-2005, 11:56 PM
hmmm luck?? :scratch: ;)
piss of back to nadals form please.

ExpectedWinner
08-14-2005, 11:57 PM
Except by Nadal of course. ;)

No. Tennis players get smarter after 20-21, but they don't run faster.

nobama
08-15-2005, 12:01 AM
If Roger does this, this, and that, if Rafa does this, this and that then....good grief. :unsure: I think it's safe to say there are to many unknowns right now which makes it way to confusing.

PamV
08-15-2005, 12:01 AM
Because he finished No 1 only once. Sampras' records are not beatable. I really hope that he's not thinking about them.

Well....he gets asked continually about whether he thinks he could attain Sampras' record of 14 majors. Just by watching Roger's reactions in all of his interviews, I feel sure that he would like to make all the records he could. Even Sampras said that Roger is playing against the record books....just like Sampras himself did.

But I agree with you. I hope that Roger doesn't get caught up or nervous when faced with winning or losing a certain record. It would be easy for that to happen with the way the media bugs him about the records.

ExpectedWinner
08-15-2005, 12:03 AM
True....it's not easy to figure out Entry Rank chances. That's why I started this thread. Someone had posted that Nadal has no chance of overtaking Roger in the Entry Rank system ( for true #1), but I didn't think that was correct. I wanted to hear what others thought who can tabulate out the points based on this year/last year bla, bla, bla, bla. You know what I mean? LOL

Ok, the short answer is- Nadal has chances to become No1 both in the entry ranking system and the race.

PamV
08-15-2005, 12:05 AM
piss of back to nadals form please.

Yeah! I might start a thread on whether or not Nadal looks like a big fat ham.

bavaria100
08-15-2005, 12:06 AM
Wait a minute. I didn't think that the Master's Cup gave out any points at all toward the Entry Ranking. What's this about?


Yes it does. Hereīs the calculation.

Winner: 750 points if undefeated (3 RR-wins + semifinal win and final win)

RR-win: 100 points for each round robin match win (max. 300 points)

Semifinal win: 200 points

Final win: 250 points

PamV
08-15-2005, 12:06 AM
Ok, the short answer is- Nadal has chances to become No1 both in the entry ranking system and the race.

Yeah that's the short answer, but I am also fascinated by the in's and out's and drama. In other words if you really get into this stuff you understand whether Roger will be able to afford to miss some tournaments or if he has to try to play them all.

PamV
08-15-2005, 12:08 AM
Yes it does. Hereīs the calculation.

Winner: 750 points if undefeated (3 RR-wins + semifinal win and final win)

RR-win: 100 points for each round robin match win (max. 300 points)

Semifinal win: 200 points

Final win: 250 points

Interesting. I sort of hope that Agassi could make it to the TMC instead of Gaudio. Gaudio was rather boring to put it kindly in last year's TMC.

ExpectedWinner
08-15-2005, 12:11 AM
Yeah that's the short answer, but I am also fascinated by the in's and out's and drama. In other words if you really get into this stuff you understand whether Roger will be able to afford to miss some tournaments or if he has to try to play them all.

It's not possible to answer at least until after the USO. As of today, the race is really tight.

oneandonlyhsn
08-15-2005, 12:19 AM
hmmm luck?? :scratch: ;)

As expected this thread was taken to Rafas site :rolleyes:

PamV
08-15-2005, 12:25 AM
As expected this thread was taken to Rafas site :rolleyes:

Do you want me to start a thread about whether Nadal looks like a big fat ham in those pedal pushers, just to teach them a lesson? The plan would be to then ask why they are being so defensive as it really doesn't matter.

nobama
08-15-2005, 12:49 AM
As expected this thread was taken to Rafas site :rolleyes:See this is exactly what Rafa fans want...the thought that Fed fans might be concerned about Rogi's #1 ranking. But this has been a civilized and thoughtful discussion so there's no reason it should've ended up in Rafa's forum. I could start a thread why are Rafa fans so damn sensitive and paranoid, and why do they care what people discuss in Rogi's forum. :rolleyes:

PamV
08-15-2005, 01:09 AM
See this is exactly what Rafa fans want...the thought that Fed fans might be concerned about Rogi's #1 ranking. But this has been a civilized and thoughtful discussion so there's no reason it should've ended up in Rafa's forum. I could start a thread why are Rafa fans so damn sensitive and paranoid, and why do they care what people discuss in Rogi's forum. :rolleyes:

Let's roll Mirkaland! LOL! They need us to help them think of topics.

1) Parnanoid Rafa Fans?
2) Depression over next year's work load?
3) Confussion over fat vs. firm?
4) Jealousy over Roger's command of 5 languages?
5) Who won the Sports Laureus Award again? I forgot?

nobama
08-15-2005, 01:17 AM
Nah, let's not stoop to their level. But I have no problem pointing out when they're being ridiculous and petty with their comments. And constantly going on about everything being "the new clay" or a slow court is getting ver old.

PamV
08-15-2005, 01:21 AM
And constantly going on about everything being "the new clay" or a slow court is getting ver old.

Yeah, old indeed. Any way, I am just trying to have a little fun and point out that I could bait them too if they want to get pushy.

1sun
08-15-2005, 01:37 AM
Yeah! I might start a thread on whether or not Nadal looks like a big fat ham.
lol. that would be a laugh. off topic. this may sound funny but whenever you post,i instantly think of mirkaland and vice versa. i dont know why but it always happens! are you sisters!?! :lol:

oneandonlyhsn
08-15-2005, 01:41 AM
Interesting. I sort of hope that Agassi could make it to the TMC instead of Gaudio. Gaudio was rather boring to put it kindly in last year's TMC.

I love Gaudio but he can be such a mental case, but he seems to have more confidence this year than end of last year. I love his BH :hearts: and he is more of a stylish player, so I wouldnt mind seeing him over Andre, I just hope he doesnt give up

yanchr
08-15-2005, 03:30 AM
Yeah! I might start a thread on whether or not Nadal looks like a big fat ham.
Why? No thread? Then I'll answer you here, YES :devil: :devil:

Seriously, PamV, you are getting too worried at the moment. There is possibility that Roger will lose his No.1 ranking to Nadal this year, but for me, the possibility is rather slim. I'm not an expert in calculating the points, but if Nadal does better than Roger in the rest of the year, he will have the chance. Is it a big IF? I think yes. Anyway, all this happens suddenly when Roger not to say other big names on hard courts didn't appear in action. Of course Roger might turn up losing early in Cincy and US Open, but it's more likely that he will do well in both.

As long as Roger stays healthy and comes out to play, my focus will be always on him, not sb who doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same league as Roger (at least for me).

I hope Roger doesn't have those points and rankings and Nadal so in mind. He should fully concentrate on his own stuff, eg, keep fit as well as he can and doesn't play like shit. At the moment, it's still his position to lose. He should know better than us that if he does normally well in the rest of the year, his position being No.1 is still very safe.

Everything will be back to normal after Cincy begins ;)

nobama
08-15-2005, 03:38 AM
I seriously think some of his fans are more worried about Nadal and points and the ranking than he is. But you're right he needs to worry about himself and not be thinking about other players or the race, ect. He needs to focus on one match at a time. Rafa's been playing well, but I still don't think it's a given that he'll go far in Cincy or the US Open. Hopefuly Roddick and Hewitt play well this week. I'd love to see how he fares against them when they're in top form. In Montreal He faced one good player (Moya) and one great player (Agassi) and they both took a set off him. I don't think his Cincy draw is as favorable as Montreal was.

Daniel
08-15-2005, 03:50 AM
Roger needs to win US Open :D

lucashg
08-15-2005, 03:56 AM
I honestly don't think Roger nor we should worry too much about Entry Ranking, ATP Race and Nadal. I think everything's under control. Nadal's definitely the kind of player that would take advantage if something happens to Federer, just like he did in Montreal. But if Roger plays his full schedule, it does seem a bit hard to take the #1 away from him.

He should focused on his own game and draw, and let things flow. I doubt Nadal will constantly be in finals against him on hardcourts. I was rather surprised he lost sets to Moya and Agassi, to be honest - even though I wanted both to beat him. I'd like to see how he matches up against other players to know the real stuff.

Rogi didn't play Madrid AMS, Basel and Paris AMS last year, so he has tons of points to gain in those tournaments, and they're all played on Nadal's worst surface (other than grass) = hard indoors and carpet indoors. Roger playing all these tournaments, I'm sure he'd do better than Nadal in most of them, enough to be #1. And at the Masters Cup, they'll likely be in separate groups and depending on his group, Nadal might not even get through his RR matches, but could also end up meeting Roger in the SFs. It's gonna be interesting, I guess.

lsy
08-15-2005, 04:46 AM
He should focused on his own game and draw, and let things flow.

This is exactly what Rogi needs to do really.

PamV
08-15-2005, 10:36 AM
I honestly don't think Roger nor we should worry too much about Entry Ranking, ATP Race and Nadal.

He should focused on his own game and draw, and let things flow. I doubt Nadal will constantly be in finals against him on hardcourts. I was rather surprised he lost sets to Moya and Agassi, to be honest - even though I wanted both to beat him. I'd like to see how he matches up against other players to know the real stuff.

Rogi didn't play Madrid AMS, Basel and Paris AMS last year, so he has tons of points to gain in those tournaments, and they're all played on Nadal's worst surface (other than grass) = hard indoors and carpet indoors.

OH of course, I wouldn't want Roger to get distracted by all this, I just am the type to ponder all the possiblities. I would like to see Nadal have to play more of the other top guys also. Nadal hasn't been pushed that much yet meeting the top 5, as far as I am concerned. I'd like to see him have to play Agassi, Safin, Federer back to back or Roddick, Hewitt then Federer.....which we might end up seeing in Cincy. Think of all the tests Roger has had. Remember that Agassi wind match QF in the USOpen 2004? Remember the Safin tie TMC tie break?

SUKTUEN
08-15-2005, 10:57 AM
Beat Nadal easily

nobama
08-15-2005, 12:34 PM
I agree, I'd like to see Nadal face Hewitt, Safin, Roddick on a regular basis to really get a feel for how he'll be on HC. Of course Montreal proved he can play on the surface and will be a threat, but I still don't think he was really tested there, and he smartly took advantage of weaker draw. Again, I'm not trying to downplay his win. But lets see how he fares in Cincy where I think his draw is tougher. Berdych is his R1 opponent, he's a youngster who shows promise - beat Fed in the Olympics. Also has Stepanek in his quarter, and could end up playing Roddick in the quarters.

RogiFan88
08-15-2005, 12:57 PM
win Cincy to make up lost pts at Montreal, win USO, win Basel or Madrid and TMC Shanghai... oh, and hope that someone out there can stop Nadal in the process! ;) that's all!

PamV
08-15-2005, 01:38 PM
I agree, I'd like to see Nadal face Hewitt, Safin, Roddick on a regular basis to really get a feel for how he'll be on HC. Of course Montreal proved he can play on the surface and will be a threat, but I still don't think he was really tested there, and he smartly took advantage of weaker draw. Again, I'm not trying to downplay his win. But lets see how he fares in Cincy where I think his draw is tougher. Berdych is his R1 opponent, he's a youngster who shows promise - beat Fed in the Olympics. Also has Stepanek in his quarter, and could end up playing Roddick in the quarters.

On paper the draw is definitely tougher in Cincy. We still have to see what kind of form the top guys have. If Roddick loses to Melzer or if Hewitt loses to Andreev in the 1st round then that half becomes weaker and would again give Nadal a lucky break. I feel like I don't know at all what to expect. If Safin is playing like he was in AO then that wouldn't be fair to Roger. LOL!

Yes, you are right about Stepanek and Berdych. As I remember Stepanek was tough for Nadal in the first set but then he'd run out of gas after that. Maybe on hardcourt it would be different.

PamV
08-15-2005, 01:41 PM
win Cincy to make up lost pts at Montreal, win USO, win Basel or Madrid and TMC Shanghai... oh, and hope that someone out there can stop Nadal in the process! ;) that's all!

Oh is that all? Well then....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v229/PJ2004/Tennis/Roger_Swiss_Flag.jpg

World Beater
08-15-2005, 03:13 PM
On paper the draw is definitely tougher in Cincy. We still have to see what kind of form the top guys have. If Roddick loses to Melzer or if Hewitt loses to Andreev in the 1st round then that half becomes weaker and would again give Nadal a lucky break. I feel like I don't know at all what to expect. If Safin is playing like he was in AO then that wouldn't be fair to Roger. LOL!

Yes, you are right about Stepanek and Berdych. As I remember Stepanek was tough for Nadal in the first set but then he'd run out of gas after that. Maybe on hardcourt it would be different.

Roddick should be fine. He is playing his punching bag in melzer and henman is in bad form. He should play nadal pretty soon

RogiFan88
08-15-2005, 04:13 PM
Yep, that's all, Pam... ;)

Skyward
08-15-2005, 05:38 PM
Roddick should be fine. He is playing his punching bag in melzer and henman is in bad form. He should play nadal pretty soon

Henman b Massu 6-2, 6-1

PamV
08-16-2005, 12:12 AM
Roger has reached 81 weeks at #1, surpasing Hewitt:

http://www.atptennis.com/en/newsandscores/news/2005/federer_reign.asp

oneandonlyhsn
08-16-2005, 07:06 AM
Roger has reached 81 weeks at #1, surpasing Hewitt:

http://www.atptennis.com/en/newsandscores/news/2005/federer_reign.asp

Rogi http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/party/party0033.gif http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/party/party0048.gifhttp://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/party/party0048.gifhttp://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/party/party0048.gif

Puschkin
08-16-2005, 09:40 AM
A brief answer to the question without any tricky calculations: Roger has to do better in the big tourneys than Nadal;)

RonE
08-16-2005, 05:37 PM
OK, to clarify a few things:

First of all, who gives a flying f**k what the piggy fans think about this thread. This is a valid discussion and it shouldn't be hindered just because some people are worried about what they might think/say. The players will do the talking with their racquets at the end of the day.

Second, as to the ranking issue. At the end of the year the entry ranking system merges with the race insofar as whoever finished in a certain position in the race will have that same position in the entry ranking. In fact, at the end of the year for every player: race points x 5 = entry points.

Third, to answer the question posed in the title of the thread- he needs to defend his U.S. Open as that is the remaining event that is most "points heavy" in terms of what he needs to defend and he needs reasonable results in the remaining TMS and of course TMC events.

More than a matter of staying ahead in terms of ranking points he needs to win the Open so that in people's minds he will remain a legitimate #1- even if he finishes the year ranked #1 but Nadal ends the year having won the French and U.S. Opens while Federer only won Wimbledon, people will not feel Roger is the deserved year end #1 and in this case they would be right. Same thing goes if the situation is reversed and Roger wins Wimbledon and the U.S. Open and Nadal finishes #1 having won only the French.

In terms of numbers, Nadal can overtake the top spot even if Roger does win the U.S. Open. The gap between the two players now stands at 2,145 entry ranking points- Roger has 6,500 points and Piggy has 4,355 (I go by the entry points as they are a better reflection of the ranking IMHO). I will try to ballpark the amount of points lost/gained in the following scenario. Suppose Roger loses his next match in Cincinnati and Piggy wins the event- Roger will have gained a few points by advancing one round further than last year but those points are insignificant. Piggy lost in R1 last year so a win would earn him 500 points. So that is around a 500 point bridge in the current gap. The gap would then stand at 1,645 points going into the U.S. Open.

Suppose then Roger were to win the U.S. Open by beating piggy in the final he would not lose any points but would not gain any either. Piggy, on the other hand, having lost in the second round in 04 and making the final in 05 would gain around 700 points. So another 700 points will be deducted from that gap after the Open leaving Roger's lead around 945 entry points.

Now, assuming Roger again does not play in the two fall TMS events or loses early in them he will not have lost any points but not gained any either, or maybe a paultry sum at best. Assuming Nadal does win both having lost early in one and not played in the other winning 2 TMS would earn him 1,000 and that would close the gap and make Nadal #1 by a slim margin. That would in effect clinch the year end #1 spot for him since Federer cannot gain anymore points from the TMC (defending champ having won all of his round robin matches last year) and Nadal will not lose any points even if he does not win a match.

Now, continuing that line of though, were Roger to lose all his TMC matches and Nadal to win all his matches there and the event with it, Federer will have lost 750 points, Nadal will have gained 750 points so Nadal will have finished the year ranked #1 by a margin of around 1,500 entry points. This would be the worst case scenario for Roger excluding his U.S. Open title defense.

However, this outlined scenario is completely extreme and highly unrealistical but it does indeed show that if Roger wins the U.S. Open and the TMC that he would have more or less clinched the year end #1. Therefore, those two events will likely be the key in determining wether or not he finishes the year ranked #1.

Sorry for my long winded post, kudos to those of you who had the patience to read it :p but I hope it did help clarify a few things.

oneandonlyhsn
08-16-2005, 06:03 PM
Thank you RonE :worship: :worship: :worship: it makes more sense now.

SUKTUEN
08-16-2005, 06:18 PM
RonE You are so Smart~~!!!

PamV
08-17-2005, 01:01 AM
OK, to clarify a few things:

First of all, who gives a flying f**k what the piggy fans think about this thread. This is a valid discussion and it shouldn't be hindered just because some people are worried about what they might think/say. The players will do the talking with their racquets at the end of the day.



Right on. It seems so strange to me how Roger over achieved last year and even at the start of this year.....but he's at more of a disadvantage because he can't gain points from the US Open. Think about how long Roddick held the #2 rank with only winning Miami, Queens and a couple of small US tourneys in 2004. That doesn't seem fair.

Next year it will be more balanced because both Roger and Rafa will have many points to defend.

Oriental_Rain
08-17-2005, 06:39 AM
:DCONVICTION and the WILL to SUCCEED!:D



*but Safin and Nadal scares the shit out of me...
and for most of his fans.:scared:

jtipson
08-17-2005, 06:55 AM
What does Roger need to do to stay number one?

For the moment, nothing. Nadal just did it for him ;)
Roger is guaranteed number one after the US Open now. Nadal might still catch him after that, but he's ok for a few more weeks.

Puschkin
08-17-2005, 07:24 AM
Suppose Roger loses his next match in Cincinnati and Piggy wins the event

That was a short-lived scenario. :eek: I stick with my simpler theory, Roger has to do better than Nadal at the big events :p

Seriously: Your explanations were of course clear, precise and correct, RonE at his best. :wavey: Can we expect match reports from you?

Puschkin
08-17-2005, 07:25 AM
but he's at more of a disadvantage because he can't gain points from the US Open.


Quite the contrary: Roger did not play TMS Madrid and Paris-Bercy last year, due to injury, so he can get points this year. :)

oneandonlyhsn
08-17-2005, 07:38 AM
Quite the contrary: Roger did not play TMS Madrid and Paris-Bercy last year, due to injury, so he can get points this year. :)

Exactly he missed out on quite a few tournaments due to the thigh injury on surfaces which he is pretty good at. So hopefully he will pick up more points

RonE
08-17-2005, 12:52 PM
Can we expect match reports from you?

If ESPN would be so kind as to do me the service of showing me his matches, then yes.

TheMightyFed
08-17-2005, 01:11 PM
If ESPN would be so kind as to do me the service of showing me his matches, then yes.
If you have a broadband you can watch his matches on streaming, you have to download PPLIVE software (Chinese) and then go to http://www.pplive.it/
There you can watch StarSports Asia that airs Cincy...

nobama
08-17-2005, 01:33 PM
If you have a broadband you can watch his matches on streaming, you have to download PPLIVE software (Chinese) and then go to http://www.pplive.it/
There you can watch StarSports Asia that airs Cincy...And the commentators there are quite good (I think), apart from saying Rogi and Rafa would have to meet each other in the final to determine who was the better hc player. :retard: Other than that they seem to know what they're talking about.

PamV
08-17-2005, 01:45 PM
Quite the contrary: Roger did not play TMS Madrid and Paris-Bercy last year, due to injury, so he can get points this year. :)
I know that. However, I am looking at the year as a whole. Roger won a lot of tourneys at the start, got to the SF of RG, and won Wimbledon....yet now he's forced to keep on trying to win everything. I am sure he'd rather not feel like he has to win every remaining tournament. Any way my point is just that if any player wins so many tournaments one year.....it makes maintaining the level next year a little harder. When one has nothing to defend everything is a gain and there's no pressure.

PamV
08-17-2005, 01:48 PM
And the commentators there are quite good (I think), apart from saying Rogi and Rafa would have to meet each other in the final to determine who was the better hc player. :retard: Other than that they seem to know what they're talking about.

What I like is that the Sports Stars Commentators do stick to talking about what is going on in the match. On ESPN they will be reading off the scores from 10 other matches and discussing other players and then repeat old stories that they've told a million times all during an on going match.

Puschkin
08-17-2005, 02:06 PM
I am sure he'd rather not feel like he has to win every remaining tournament. Any way my point is just that if any player wins so many tournaments one year.....it makes maintaining the level next year a little harder. When one has nothing to defend everything is a gain and there's no pressure.

That is the challenge if you are the number 1 ;) You can't have it both ways and if they were a choice (which there isn't) I am rather convinced that Roger would prefer to be number 1, compared to number 30 something with nothing to defend and a lot to gain, but overall still being considered as an underachiever.

I agree, however, that defending is harder than gaining and that's why I personally appreciate Roger's 2005 much more than his 2004, even if he won't win three grandslam tourneys ;) .

RonE
08-17-2005, 02:25 PM
If you have a broadband you can watch his matches on streaming, you have to download PPLIVE software (Chinese) and then go to http://www.pplive.it/
There you can watch StarSports Asia that airs Cincy...

Great thanks :D

ESPN here don't usually show the night sessions in the earlier rounds so I couldn't see Federer-Blake (not that I missed much from what I've heard) but I will definitely be able to see his match today if my dinner plans don't get in the way of it.

calimero
08-17-2005, 03:58 PM
What I've already said is: I don't care the Champions Race.
Nadal may take that #1 spot...
It's about the entry ranking!
and, rogi will stay # 1....
The difference is so big!!!
And Rogi can do the things he achieved last year, again...
if there aren't injury's!
and he missed last year Paris and Basel..., so he can win points there...
and if it comes down to roger and rafael in final, rogi will take it!
I'm not concerned about losing the # 1 spot in Entry!!

SUKTUEN
08-17-2005, 04:09 PM
This year he need Us Open and TMS shanghai Champion~

TheMightyFed
08-17-2005, 04:29 PM
What I've already said is: I don't care the Champions Race.
Nadal may take that #1 spot...
It's about the entry ranking!
and, rogi will stay # 1....
The difference is so big!!!
And Rogi can do the things he achieved last year, again...
if there aren't injury's!
and he missed last year Paris and Basel..., so he can win points there...
and if it comes down to roger and rafael in final, rogi will take it!
I'm not concerned about losing the # 1 spot in Entry!!
OK but the race becomes a good indicator at the end of the year because after TMC, all the entry points won in 2004 will be lost, which means: Race=Entry. So if Nadal gets closer and closer, it's not a good sign for both rankings. But it sounds Ok for Roger as he has 2 Master-Series where he can get some points, with a favourable surface compared to Nadal..

lunahielo
08-17-2005, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by RonE
First of all, who gives a flying f**k what the piggy fans think about this thread.
Ron !!! :hug:
Man, I like the way you think/write! No BS~~~just stating the obvious.
:yeah:

luna

SUKTUEN
08-17-2005, 04:32 PM
where RonE go?

RogiFan88
08-17-2005, 04:41 PM
Rogi also missed Madrid, which he will play this year [and you can be sure that Rafa will want to win that title in Spain].

SUKTUEN
08-17-2005, 04:45 PM
Madrid, Roger go to semi in 2003

RogiFan88
08-17-2005, 04:52 PM
That is the challenge if you are the number 1 ;) You can't have it both ways and if they were a choice (which there isn't) I am rather convinced that Roger would prefer to be number 1, compared to number 30 something with nothing to defend and a lot to gain, but overall still being considered as an underachiever.

I agree, however, that defending is harder than gaining and that's why I personally appreciate Roger's 2005 much more than his 2004, even if he won't win three grandslam tourneys ;) .

You're so right! And yes I agree Rogi w prefer to be #1. It is much harder to defend titles -- it's always interesting to see who can do just that: who of the Rogi generation defend their slams? How about TMSes even? Only Hewitt defended IWells and Juanqui defended MCarlo. Pandy won all those h/c titles in 2003 and only defended Indy. He didn't defend Indy this year -- he got beaten by Ginepri of all people who won it.

Rogi has defended what in his career: Wimby 3x, Halle 3x, Hamburg, IWells, Dubai 3x, TMC, Vienna... not bad for a guy who had barely reached his 24th birthday. :angel:

So Rogi has only one slam this year... Pandy w kill for one and his fave USO is coming up during his best time of year. You can be sure now that Rafa is out, Pandy will be liking his chances; Marat also despite his wonky knee.

But I shall cheer for ROGI as I missed him terribly in Montreal... :sad:

RogiFan88
08-17-2005, 04:55 PM
Madrid, Roger go to semi in 2003

Yes, one of THE best matches I've seen betw two of the best -- Juanqui was fantastic and Rogi played quite well too -- nice and competitive! So Rogi lost... Juanqui won that title, which he dearly wanted and he deserved it.

;)

SUKTUEN
08-17-2005, 04:56 PM
I like all Roger vs Andy matches :devil:

lsy
08-17-2005, 05:14 PM
where RonE go?

Gone dinner having roast pig :tape: :tape:


Yes, one of THE best matches I've seen betw two of the best -- Juanqui was fantastic and Rogi played quite well too -- nice and competitive! So Rogi lost... Juanqui won that title, which he dearly wanted and he deserved it.

Didn't watch Rogi/Ferrero in Madrid that year but did watch Ferrero/Ferreira, and that was the match which changed my mind about Ferrero :o

Puschkin
08-17-2005, 05:29 PM
Didn't watch Rogi/Ferrero in Madrid that year but did watch Ferrero/Ferreira, and that was the match which changed my mind about Ferrero :o

:topic: Positively or negatively?

Skyward
08-17-2005, 05:32 PM
What I've already said is: I don't care the Champions Race.


On the other hand, you don't wan't to see anyone in front of Roger in this race because it's hard to make up the gap with not so many big tournaments left after the USO. Like it or not, the most important thing is to finish the year NO1. I don't want to see someone to steal this position from Roger by a handful of points like Roddick did in 2003.

lsy
08-17-2005, 05:35 PM
:topic: Positively or negatively?

continued :topic:...you couldn't figure out from my smilie in that sentence? ;)

SUKTUEN
08-17-2005, 06:01 PM
I hope can watch Roger Vs Andy again~!

jtipson
10-26-2005, 11:51 PM
Update:

With the announcement that Nadal has pulled out of Paris Bercy, Roger now cannot lose his number one ranking before the end of the Australian Open 2006.

This means that he should be number one for 104 consecutive weeks, and overtakes Sampras (102 weeks) for third place in the list of longest streaks at number one. Still some way to go before he gets to Lendl (157) and Connors (160) at the top, but a fantastic achievement!

TenHound
10-27-2005, 02:41 AM
Jtipson, does he achieve the 104 weeks after AO in Jan?

NYCtennisfan
10-27-2005, 03:35 AM
Jtipson, does he achieve the 104 weeks after AO in Jan?

Yes, because he will be at 100 weeks at the conclusion of this calendar year.

Also, with Nadal withdrawing from Paris, Federer will have at least a 142 point margin in the points race even if Nadal goes 5-0 in the TMC. That means he would head into next year with at least a 710 point lead.

Oriental_Rain
10-27-2005, 05:09 AM
play and win tournaments

SUKTUEN
10-27-2005, 07:30 AM
keep Healthy~!

RonE
10-27-2005, 01:24 PM
Yes, because he will be at 100 weeks at the conclusion of this calendar year.

Also, with Nadal withdrawing from Paris, Federer will have at least a 142 point margin in the points race even if Nadal goes 5-0 in the TMC. That means he would head into next year with at least a 710 point lead.

Nicely done :worship:

With a little help of course ;) :p

Nathy
10-27-2005, 02:32 PM
:worship: Roger

SUKTUEN
10-28-2005, 03:41 AM
Healthy is most important~!

the_natural
11-06-2005, 03:09 AM
Answer to the topic question: Play tennis :rolleyes: Duh

SUKTUEN
11-06-2005, 10:17 AM
Answer to the topic question: Play tennis :rolleyes: Duh
:haha: :haha: :haha:

NYCtennisfan
11-15-2005, 04:51 PM
With his win against Ivan, Roger has secured the #1 spot THROUGH the Australian Open.

He if loses his next two matches, he will go into next year up by 1660 points.

He could lose 250 points if he doesn't play Doha which would leave him 1410 points ahead.

If he doesn't play the AO, he would lose another 450 points which would leave him 960 points ahead.

Nadal if he wins the AO can gain 925 points which would still leave him 35 points short.

jtipson
11-15-2005, 05:00 PM
He actually had it already when Nadal withdrew. Nadal can't gain before the AO and he is defending 150 there (lost fourth round).

Now the earliest he can lose it is after Rotterdam, I believe.

LCeh
11-15-2005, 05:01 PM
Great news. Thanks a lot NYCfan, glad to see that Roger is slowly getting closer and closer to keeping that no. 1 spot until the clay season. ;)

EDIT: Even better. Thanks a lot jtipson. :D

makro120
11-15-2005, 06:20 PM
I dont think Nadal has any chanse to take the nr1 spot before wimbledon and USopen next year. Nadal has between Miami and Roland garros alot of points to defend. Before Miami I dont think Nadal can get the nr1 spot. I find it very unlikely that Federer will lose his australian open points, I think he probably has greater chanse to gain more points than lose points. Also indian wells is Federers tournament and I think he will win atleast doha and dubai easily, I cant remember the alst time Federer at all lost in a small tournament (rotterdam 2003?). Also it looks like he will have 6975 points when this season is over which gives him a 2210 points lead. I dont see any reason to be worried, he will have much to win when clay season start.

RonE
11-15-2005, 09:31 PM
:haha: love your siggy Makro!

pesto
11-16-2005, 07:21 PM
He must also overtake Agassi on total weeks at #1 (102, 6th all-time) and be closing fast on Borg (109, 5th all-time), no? Still a way to catch up with McEnroe (170, 3rd), though.

NYCtennisfan
11-16-2005, 10:04 PM
He actually had it already when Nadal withdrew. Nadal can't gain before the AO and he is defending 150 there (lost fourth round).

Now the earliest he can lose it is after Rotterdam, I believe.

Yes, for some reason Iw as thinking that Nadal had lost in the 3rd round at the AO instead of the 4th round.

If Federer can keep a 300+ point lead after Miami is completed, I don't see him losing the #1 ranking until maybe the summer and that's if Nadal has a great Wimby and Fed falters. He is heading into epic numbers here.

LCeh
11-16-2005, 10:29 PM
Hmm, so what about the other players in the top 5? What changes can there be in the near future? ie what does Davydenko have to do to crack the top 4, what does the other top 5 players have to do to get to the #2 spot, etc. just general changes that can happen within the top 5.

Thanks a lot for your info. :)

Dirk
11-17-2005, 03:42 AM
Roger wins oz next year he gets 550 Entry ranking points. That will keep him number one. A win at RG won't hurt either.

Dirk
11-17-2005, 03:44 AM
Yes, for some reason Iw as thinking that Nadal had lost in the 3rd round at the AO instead of the 4th round.

If Federer can keep a 300+ point lead after Miami is completed, I don't see him losing the #1 ranking until maybe the summer and that's if Nadal has a great Wimby and Fed falters. He is heading into epic numbers here.

Not if Roger wins Oz, Roger will increase his lead and Nadal will lose some points from his South American trip this year. Roger will likely not defend both IW and Miami but he can gain points from Rome. I don't see Roger playing Carlo because DC is right before it. :fiery: You are right about Roger being safe after Wimbly if he keeps it.

SUKTUEN
11-17-2005, 06:21 AM
Keep Healthy Roger~!

SUKTUEN
11-17-2005, 06:21 AM
:devil: Keep Healthy Roger~!

TennisGrandSlam
11-29-2005, 03:25 AM
How long will Federer stay #1 (ATP Entry Ranking) if he successfully defends Doha titles and re-captures Australian Open championship in Early 2006?

jtipson
11-29-2005, 11:23 AM
How long will Federer stay #1 (ATP Entry Ranking) if he successfully defends Doha titles and re-captures Australian Open championship in Early 2006?

It depends on how well Nadal does. Neither can gain before the AO. If Federer does win Doha and the AO, and beats Nadal in the final, then the gap will be exactly the same as it is now - 1960 points. If Nadal only makes the semi-final in Melbourne, then the gap would be 2210 points.

So if we take the worst case scenario after the AO, Nadal could gain 500 in IW and 150 in Miami: total 650. (Nadal is only playing Rotterdam as an optional afaik, and he can only gain 75 temporarily because he'll lose it when Acapulco falls off anyway.) If Fed doesn't play after AO, he would lose 250 in Rotterdam, 300 in Dubai, 500 in IW and 500 in Miami: total 1550. That's a change of 2200, theoretically just enough for Nadal to overtake him in Miami, but only if he managed to reached the AO final.

So the upshot of all that is that even if he wins the AO, Roger still needs a bit more to ensure he's number one until the clay season, unless Rafa has lost early in the AO.

nobama
11-29-2005, 11:46 AM
It depends on how well Nadal does. Neither can gain before the AO. If Federer does win Doha and the AO, and beats Nadal in the final, then the gap will be exactly the same as it is now - 1960 points. If Nadal only makes the semi-final in Melbourne, then the gap would be 2210 points.

So if we take the worst case scenario after the AO, Nadal could gain 500 in IW and 150 in Miami: total 650. (Nadal is only playing Rotterdam as an optional afaik, and he can only gain 75 temporarily because he'll lose it when Acapulco falls off anyway.) If Fed doesn't play after AO, he would lose 250 in Rotterdam, 300 in Dubai, 500 in IW and 500 in Miami: total 1550. That's a change of 2200, theoretically just enough for Nadal to overtake him in Miami, but only if he managed to reached the AO final.

So the upshot of all that is that even if he wins the AO, Roger still needs a bit more to ensure he's number one until the clay season, unless Rafa has lost early in the AO.Boy that's a lot of variables. And a lot of it depends on what Rafa does. I think many are expecting him to do well in Oz, but he's been out for quite a while and who knows what his health/fitness status will be. A week or so ago I saw conflicting stories about whether he could even play in Oz. And does anyone know if he'll play in IW next year?

Roger's got a lot of points to defend early next year, but that's what comes with winning most tournaments he plays in. :) I don't think his schedule has come out yet, but do people here expect it to be about the same as last year?

SUKTUEN
11-29-2005, 02:49 PM
Roger will stay in NO. 1 6-7 year :devil:

LCeh
11-30-2005, 12:14 AM
I don't think Roger will be making any major changes to his schedule. He isn't playing that many tournaments anyhow, this year he played 14-15, which is very few. If he can keep his level up though, maybe he should take out 1-2 optionals and try to compete in all the TMSes instead. This year he played 5 optionals but missed 4 TMSes.

TennisGrandSlam
11-30-2005, 01:37 AM
Boy that's a lot of variables. And a lot of it depends on what Rafa does. I think many are expecting him to do well in Oz, but he's been out for quite a while and who knows what his health/fitness status will be. A week or so ago I saw conflicting stories about whether he could even play in Oz. And does anyone know if he'll play in IW next year?

Roger's got a lot of points to defend early next year, but that's what comes with winning most tournaments he plays in. :) I don't think his schedule has come out yet, but do people here expect it to be about the same as last year?


I think if Roger wins AO, he will discard one of later tournaments - either Rotterdam or Dubai (most probably Rotterdam).

SUKTUEN
12-03-2005, 09:31 AM
I think Roge is not good to play Doha, He play to much before AO~! :scratch:

Come to HK is better~! :devil: :devil: :devil:

nobama
12-03-2005, 01:45 PM
I don't think Roger will be making any major changes to his schedule. He isn't playing that many tournaments anyhow, this year he played 14-15, which is very few. If he can keep his level up though, maybe he should take out 1-2 optionals and try to compete in all the TMSes instead. This year he played 5 optionals but missed 4 TMSes.How many optionals are you required to play? I thought it was 6? :confused:

nobama
12-03-2005, 01:46 PM
I think if Roger wins AO, he will discard one of later tournaments - either Rotterdam or Dubai (most probably Rotterdam).I can't see him skipping Dubai as he seems to be in love with the place. And someone in GM said Agassi is getting $500K to play there so Roger's probably getting something similar.

SUKTUEN
12-04-2005, 10:20 AM
I really miss him in HK time~

Nocko
12-04-2005, 03:10 PM
Stay healthy. ;)
Stay healthy. :)
Stay healthy. :D
Stay healthy. :angel:
Stay healthy. :bounce:
Stay healthy. :woohoo:
Please just stay healty~~ :worship: :worship: :worship:

SUKTUEN
12-05-2005, 03:00 PM
Nocko VERY intertesting words~! :devil: :devil:

BlueSwan
06-14-2006, 10:41 AM
Does anybody know how long he's ensured to stay #1 now?

nobama
06-14-2006, 11:27 AM
Does anybody know how long he's ensured to stay #1 now?Until Cincinatti, I think.

BlueSwan
06-14-2006, 11:55 AM
I was thinking, that unless Nadal has suddenly figured out how to play on Grass, then anything above 6000 ranking points ought to keep Federer at #1. Unless Nadal scores a solid amount of points on grass, I don't see him going over 6000 points. Anyone agree with this? Of course, staying above 6000 points isn't exactly easy.

BlueSwan
06-14-2006, 12:23 PM
Rogers points scored in 2006:

Doha: 250
Australian Open: 1000
Dubai: 210
Indian Wells: 500
Miami: 500
Monte Carlo: 350
Rome: 350
Roland Garros: 700

Total so far: 3860
(by comparison Nadal has accumulated 2920 points so far)

----

Points to defend for the remainder of 2006:

Wimbledon: 1000
Cincinatti: 500
US Open: 1000
Bangkok: 175
Tennis Masters Cup: 500

This means that Roger only has points to defend from a mere 5 tournaments for the rest of the year. Granted, those are BIG tournaments, but if he can stay healthy he can gain points from no less than THREE Masters series events he skipped last year.

So no reason not to be very optimistic about the prospects of Roger setting a new record for most consecutive weeks at #1.

stebs
06-14-2006, 12:27 PM
Rogers points scored in 2006:

Doha: 250
Australian Open: 1000
Dubai: 210
Indian Wells: 500
Miami: 500
Monte Carlo: 350
Rome: 350
Roland Garros: 700

Total so far: 3860
(by comparison Nadal has accumulated 2920 points so far)

----

Points to defend for the remainder of 2006:

Wimbledon: 1000
Cincinatti: 500
US Open: 1000
Bangkok: 175
Tennis Masters Cup: 500

This means that Roger only has points to defend from a mere 5 tournaments for the rest of the year. Granted, those are BIG tournaments, but if he can stay healthy he can gain points from no less than THREE Masters series events he skipped last year.

So no reason not to be very optimistic about the prospects of Roger setting a new record for most consecutive weeks at #1.


Thanks for that :worship:

What is the record?

rofe
06-14-2006, 04:42 PM
Thanks for that :worship:

What is the record?

Lendl 186? I don't remember the exact number.

SUKTUEN
06-14-2006, 05:04 PM
thanks for the detail.

soonha
06-14-2006, 06:26 PM
Thanks for that :worship:

What is the record?
Connors 160 weeks Lendle 157 weeks

How many weeks for Roger at the moment? 130?

RogiFan88
06-14-2006, 06:45 PM
124 weeks

Federerhingis
06-14-2006, 08:40 PM
He's almost a sure bet to get to 129 through cinci tournie wait when is it scheduled? Actually it's in august so probably 131 weeks. :worship:

SUKTUEN
06-15-2006, 04:29 AM
Roger must make himself do not make to many UE

BlueSwan
06-15-2006, 05:00 PM
Rogers points scored in 2006:

Doha: 250
Australian Open: 1000
Dubai: 210
Indian Wells: 500
Miami: 500
Monte Carlo: 350
Rome: 350
Roland Garros: 700

Total so far: 3860
(by comparison Nadal has accumulated 2920 points so far)

----

Points to defend for the remainder of 2006:

Wimbledon: 1000
Cincinatti: 500
US Open: 1000
Bangkok: 175
Tennis Masters Cup: 500

This means that Roger only has points to defend from a mere 5 tournaments for the rest of the year. Granted, those are BIG tournaments, but if he can stay healthy he can gain points from no less than THREE Masters series events he skipped last year.

So no reason not to be very optimistic about the prospects of Roger setting a new record for most consecutive weeks at #1.
I should probably mention that the reason why Halle isn't on this list, is that the points fell off at the same time that Roger scored this years Roland Garros points - so the points earned in Halle are a "free" bonus to add to the numbers above.

ExpectedWinner
06-15-2006, 06:04 PM
Stop losing to Nadal in finals.

RogiFan88
06-15-2006, 07:02 PM
Stop losing to Nadal in finals.


that w certainly be a step in the right direction! :lol:

[wish it was a laughing matter... :sad: ]

SUKTUEN
06-16-2006, 04:32 PM
Stop losing to Nadal in finals.
he will do it in the future.

BlueSwan
06-21-2006, 09:43 AM
Updated after the Halle win:

Rogers points scored in 2006:
Doha (hard) WINNER: 250
Australian Open (hard) WINNER: 1000
Dubai (hard) FINALIST: 210
TMS Indian Wells (hard) WINNER: 500
TMS Miami (hard) WINNER: 500
TMS Monte Carlo (clay) FINALIST: 350
TMS Rome (clay) FINALIST: 350
Roland Garros (clay) FINALIST: 700
Halle (grass) WINNER: 225
Rogi's total for 2006: 4085

----

Points to defend for the remainder of 2006:

Wimbledon (grass) WINNER: 1000
TMS Cincinatti (hard) WINNER: 500
US Open (hard) WINNER: 1000
Bangkok (indoor) WINNER: 175
Tennis Masters Cup (indoor) FINALIST: 500

Total points to defend: 3175
Points needed to reach the 6000 target to remain at #1: 1915

SUKTUEN
06-21-2006, 03:44 PM
Thanks for the update,

Roger, you are amazing~!!

Lady Natalia
06-21-2006, 04:14 PM
This helpful info...If Roger can defend points then he has a great chance on breaking the consecutive weeks at #1.

SUKTUEN
06-21-2006, 04:30 PM
what is the world record?

Longshot
06-21-2006, 05:42 PM
See post #132 :)

Connors 160 weeks, Lendl 157 weeks

merce
06-21-2006, 06:05 PM
That'a a big reason to stay at #1.
Besides the obvious fact that he's the best tennis player around.

nobama
06-22-2006, 02:01 PM
The ATP website now has a cool feature where you can compare YTD stats of two players when looking at their h2h. For some reason I was expecting Nadal's stats to be a lot better than Roger's but for the most part they are even, although Roger's played more games so far this year. Of course the one glaringly awful stat from Roger is break point conversion %. I was suprised that Nadal's conversion % wasn't much better.

http://images1.snapfish.com/3473%3B%3B687%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D323%3A%3E%3B3%3A%3E94 6%3EWSNRCG%3D323386678963%3Anu0mrj

Longshot
06-22-2006, 02:11 PM
I think people have a too high expectation of break point conversions. All things being equal, we should expect a player to win break points as often as they win any other return point. That is what Roger is doing. He wins 42% of points when returning, and wins 41% of those points when they are break points. Considering an opponent may 'try harder' on a break point, that Roger wins 41% of them is pretty good. What is amazing is how many break points he earns. 517 in 673 return games. So on average, he gets more than 3 break points in every 4 return games he plays. Nadal's numbers are similar.

nobama
06-22-2006, 03:08 PM
I think people have a too high expectation of break point conversions. All things being equal, we should expect a player to win break points as often as they win any other return point. That is what Roger is doing. He wins 42% of points when returning, and wins 41% of those points when they are break points. Considering an opponent may 'try harder' on a break point, that Roger wins 41% of them is pretty good. What is amazing is how many break points he earns. 517 in 673 return games. So on average, he gets more than 3 break points in every 4 return games he plays. Nadal's numbers are similar.That's probably why people have such high expecations, because he faces break opportunities so often. :lol: But still I'd like to see him improve that stat and get more 1st serves in. It will be interesting to see what his stats are after Wimbledon. These stats include Halle.

SUKTUEN
06-22-2006, 03:55 PM
I hope Roger can be No.1 as least 6 years.

BlueSwan
07-09-2006, 06:27 PM
Updated after the Wimbledon win. Here's an edit with Rogers tour schedule for the rest of the season and points to defend:

Rogers points scored in 2006:
Doha (hard) WINNER: 250
Australian Open (hard) WINNER: 1000
Dubai (hard) FINALIST: 210
TMS Indian Wells (hard) WINNER: 500
TMS Miami (hard) WINNER: 500
TMS Monte Carlo (clay) FINALIST: 350
TMS Rome (clay) FINALIST: 350
Roland Garros (clay) FINALIST: 700
Halle (grass) WINNER: 225
Wimbledon (grass) WINNER: 1000


Rogi's total for 2006: 5085
Nadals total for 2006: 3620 points
Rogers lead over Rafa: 1465 points

----

Rogers prilimenary schedule for the remainder of 2006 and points to defend. Schedule will no doubt change:

TMS Toronto (hard) DIDN'T PLAY: 0
TMS Cincinatti (hard) WINNER: 500
US Open (hard) WINNER: 1000
Tokyo (indoor hard) DIDN'T PLAY: 0
TMS Madrid (indoor carpet) DIDN'T PLAY: 0
Basel (indoor hard) DIDN'T PLAY: 0
TMS Paris (indoor carpet): 0
Tennis Masters Cup (indoor hard) FINALIST: 500

Roger is NOT scheduled to defend his title at Bangkok (indoor hard), which means he'll lose 175 points there.

Total points to defend: 2175

Ranking points in total after Wimbledon:
Federer: 7260
Nadal: 5210
Federers lead over Nadal: 1050

soonha
07-09-2006, 06:29 PM
Thanks for updating. :hug:

BlueSwan
07-09-2006, 06:32 PM
Thanks for undating. :hug:
No problem. I'll probably continue to do this as long as Roger remains at #1.

soonha
07-09-2006, 08:56 PM
Do you guys know Roger's ATP Race ranking point is already 917? :eek: BTW, Nadal, 670. I'm sure if not for Roger, Nadal would be an undisputable no.1 this year.

BlueSwan
07-09-2006, 09:15 PM
Do you guys know Roger's ATP Race ranking point is already 917? :eek: BTW, Nadal, 670. I'm sure if not for Roger, Nadal would be an undisputable no.1 this year.
No doubt. That sucks for Nadal actually. Last year he would usually have been no.1. with a GS and 4 TMS titles as well. But these are not usual times - these are Fed-times!

NYCtennisfan
07-09-2006, 11:25 PM
No doubt. That sucks for Nadal actually. Last year he would usually have been no.1. with a GS and 4 TMS titles as well. But these are not usual times - these are Fed-times!


Yep. There aren't too many players who have had 670 race points by the end of Wimbledon or 5200 entry ranking points.

jtipson
07-09-2006, 11:39 PM
Do you guys know Roger's ATP Race ranking point is already 917? :eek: BTW, Nadal, 670. I'm sure if not for Roger, Nadal would be an undisputable no.1 this year.


Roger's is actually even better than that - 1017 :)
and Rafa's too - 735 I think.

lunahielo
07-10-2006, 12:21 AM
Why are we continuing to talk about Nadal????????????????????

So he's doing very well..I agree.
But, Roger is still doing better and this is HIS forum!!

Sorry, but every (well almost every) post has something about Nadal in it and it is making me sick. Just my opinion.

:hug: to all who don't feel it to be necessary to write the #2's name in almost every post here in Roger's forum.

SUKTUEN
07-10-2006, 11:18 AM
Thanks for updating~

GO Roger~!

You are the NO.1 Always~! :bounce: :bounce: :bigclap: :yeah: :yeah:

WF4EVER
07-10-2006, 04:56 PM
I think people have a too high expectation of break point conversions. All things being equal, we should expect a player to win break points as often as they win any other return point. That is what Roger is doing. He wins 42% of points when returning, and wins 41% of those points when they are break points. Considering an opponent may 'try harder' on a break point, that Roger wins 41% of them is pretty good. What is amazing is how many break points he earns. 517 in 673 return games. So on average, he gets more than 3 break points in every 4 return games he plays. Nadal's numbers are similar.

I've always found this breakpoint conversion stat to be very misleading. The fact is you only need one break point to get a break, by that I mean, in each return game you can only convert once. Yet you can have tons of opportunities (break points).

If you were 40-0 on your opponent's serve, you are counted as having 3 break points. If you break at the first opportunity you end up with a stat of 1/3 bp's converted, converting 33%. God forbid if the game went to say, 5 deuces and 5 Adv bp, and you broke then; the stat would be 1/8. That is very misleading because you can not convert 3 or 8 times in the same return game, can you? So the stat is quite inflated.

In fact I consider it quite a feat to actually create that many break points. It means you are giving yourself many opportunities to break, but when you list a stat like 1/8 bps converted it looks like the player could have won 8 games on the opponent's serve.

I'd rather see in how many games there are breakpoints with the number of breaks listed as 1/4 (with the total no. of opportunities in parenthesis) rather than how many bps were available because you can break only once in a game yet have tons and tons of opportunities. So, a stat listed as 1/4 (24) would actually mean the player was broken once in the 4 games where he faced bps; the total no. of bp opportunities, tho, would be 24.

I think it's a very unfair stat the way it's done and it really doesn't allow for a proper assessment.

nobama
07-10-2006, 05:16 PM
Yeah I agree the way they show BP stats is very misleading. I think in the US Open final Roger's stats were 6 of 18 or sth like that. Of course there was one game where I swear he had 8 or 9 chances and didn't convert.

What's interesting is the YTD stats between Roger and Nadal. Roger has played 177 more service games than Nadal. He's won 90% of his service games, compared to 86% for Nadal. He's had fewer df's, fewer break points faced and a lot more aces. He's also slightly ahead in 1st and 2nd serve points won and break points saved. And on the return stats they're almost equal, Nadal has a slight edge in bp conversions (44% to Rogers 43%).

SUKTUEN
07-10-2006, 05:32 PM
Roger's serve is wonderful in the final~

BlueSwan
07-10-2006, 08:18 PM
I've always found this breakpoint conversion stat to be very misleading. The fact is you only need one break point to get a break, by that I mean, in each return game you can only convert once. Yet you can have tons of opportunities (break points).

If you were 40-0 on your opponent's serve, you are counted as having 3 break points. If you break at the first opportunity you end up with a stat of 1/3 bp's converted, converting 33%. God forbid if the game went to say, 5 deuces and 5 Adv bp, and you broke then; the stat would be 1/8. That is very misleading because you can not convert 3 or 8 times in the same return game, can you? So the stat is quite inflated.

In fact I consider it quite a feat to actually create that many break points. It means you are giving yourself many opportunities to break, but when you list a stat like 1/8 bps converted it looks like the player could have won 8 games on the opponent's serve.

I'd rather see in how many games there are breakpoints with the number of breaks listed as 1/4 (with the total no. of opportunities in parenthesis) rather than how many bps were available because you can break only once in a game yet have tons and tons of opportunities. So, a stat listed as 1/4 (24) would actually mean the player was broken once in the 4 games where he faced bps; the total no. of bp opportunities, tho, would be 24.

I think it's a very unfair stat the way it's done and it really doesn't allow for a proper assessment.
Are you sure that's true? If it is then the BP stats are indeed highly misleading. I would think that if you break the first game of a match break to love, you'd be credited with a 1/1 BP ratio.

WF4EVER
07-10-2006, 08:40 PM
Are you sure that's true? If it is then the BP stats are indeed highly misleading. I would think that if you break the first game of a match break to love, you'd be credited with a 1/1 BP ratio.

I'm not convinced of this based on the very low conversion percentages that you see, but I'm sure someone who is absolutely sure about this will settle it for us.

Mechlan
07-10-2006, 09:12 PM
I'm pretty sure that if you break at 0-40, you are credited with 1/1 BP, not 1/3.

Mechlan
07-10-2006, 09:15 PM
Anyone have info about the number of points Nadal has to defend till the end of this year? (Sorry luna, he just happens to be the major threat right now. ;))

WF4EVER
07-10-2006, 10:59 PM
I'm pretty sure that if you break at 0-40, you are credited with 1/1 BP, not 1/3.

And what's it counted as if you're up 40-0 on the opp. serve and break at 30/40?

Where's NYC and others who are more informed. Please help.

Rogiman
07-10-2006, 11:05 PM
Well, since this thread is about the things Roger needs to do in order to stay at #1, and since it's become apparent it's their (Roger and Chancho's that is) matches that'll determine that eventually, I feel the need to share my (utterly meaningless) thoughts about their match-up re-sunday's final:

* If it weren't clear before, it is now obvious their matches have little to do with the surface.
Sure, Fed will always stand a better chance on grass, as will Nadal on clay, but the matches will always be close and each player will have his chances.
Roger was close to beating El Chancho on clay, and lost on HC, and it's just as possible he'll get to him on clay, or lose to him on grass.

*For the better part of two sets on sunday El Chancho was dominating the points (at least when he could return Roger's serve) and hit the ball with power never before I have seen in tennis off both wings.
This is inevitable, and all Roger can do when that happens is what he did on sunday: hang in there, do his best to stay in the match, and wait until El Chancho runs out of power.
No one can sustain that kind of intensity for a whole match, El Chancho played out of his mind to win the 3rd, but melted down in the 4th.

*For the 1st time I felt like Roger can read his serves very well - I know that kind of serve is different from any other in the game, but it had always seemed weird to me that the guy who could read Roddick's and Flip's thunders so easily struggled badly with that fluffy lefty serve - funny enough, now that El Chancho has a more powerful serve, it seems it's become more of a normal serve, thus readable...
On the other hand, Roger's serve gives El Chancho more trouble than anyone else's.
Hopefully Roger's superior serve and return aren't restricted to grass.

Rogiman
07-10-2006, 11:13 PM
And what's it counted as if you're up 40-0 on the opp. serve and break at 30/40?

Where's NYC and others who are more informed. Please help.
In that case it's 1:3.

BP convertion is indeed misleading, in the end what matters is whether you broke in the game or not.
It often takes Roger a bunch of attempts to break serve in a given game, but usually when he gains bp's he eventually breaks.

The worst case scenario is missing bp's on different games, for instance:
If you are up 40:00 on your opponent's serve and end up losing the game, or if you are up 40:30 on three different games and end up losing all of them, it'll show 0:3 in bp's convertion in both, but the latter is the worse by far.

RogiFan88
07-10-2006, 11:13 PM
TVK has no regard for surface = it doesn't matter what surface he plays on, he always enters the court, any court, to win.

I think TVK will, after Wimby, now say that grass is his fave surface because he did well and probably felt that he did better than he expected he would. His serve is bigger and better, his "volleys" are much improved and he can still run around like a snorting bull like crazy on the grass. And he doesn't spend as much time on court as he does on clay -- calculate the # of hrs he spent winning RG vs. Wimby. Sure, he still spends more time than Rogi, that goes without saying. But notice how much longer any match w Rafa takes as he extends his serving time by several seconds [x each serve in a match].

I think Rogi may have learned a lot by playing Rafa on grass -- and to his benefit! ;)

stebs
07-10-2006, 11:29 PM
My (just as worthless) response to you Rogiman. :)

* If it weren't clear before, it is now obvious their matches have little to do with the surface.
Sure, Fed will always stand a better chance on grass, as will Nadal on clay, but the matches will always be close and each player will have his chances.
Roger was close to beating El Chancho on clay, and lost on HC, and it's just as possible he'll get to him on clay, or lose to him on grass.

Yes that's true. I think we did see how much difference a surface makes though on Sunday. The match (their first on grass) was eerily similar to the first match on clay this year between the pair. Two tight tie break sets, one won for each man, and two sets dominated by the player who is better on the surface. The main difference is that due to the serve being a bigger factor I think Federer has a chance to take Nadal apart for maybe a set at a time on clay as we saw in RG but Nadal will never do that to fed on grass due to the good serve.

*For the better part of two sets on sunday El Chancho was dominating the points (at least when he could return Roger's serve) and hit the ball with power never before I have seen in tennis off both wings.
This is inevitable, and all Roger can do when that happens is what he did on sunday: hang in there, do his best to stay in the match, and wait until El Chancho runs out of power.
No one can sustain that kind of intensity for a whole match, El Chancho played out of his mind to win the 3rd, but melted down in the 4th.

I agree partially here. In the third set Nadal was easily the better player and completely dominated Federer. As a tennis fan I can admit it wouldn't have been an accurate reflection of play if Federer had won the breaker to win in straights. In the second set however Nadal did not outplay Federer. He dictated many of the points but Federer won more points in that set even discounting the tie break. Nadal still should've had the set and would've done but for an uncharacteristic game at 5-4. After Nadal broke in the first game of the set though I think it was even with Federer holding slightly more easily.

*For the 1st time I felt like Roger can read his serves very well - I know that kind of serve is different from any other in the game, but it had always seemed weird to me that the guy who could read Roddick's and Flip's thunders so easily struggled badly with that fluffy lefty serve - funny enough, now that El Chancho has a more powerful serve, it seems it's become more of a normal serve, thus readable...
On the other hand, Roger's serve gives El Chancho more trouble than anyone else's.
Hopefully Roger's superior serve and return aren't restricted to grass.

I agree and I'm very happy about it. In each match somehting like this happens which makes me think Roger is getting closer and closer to being totally at ease with Nadal. He will never dominate him because Nadal is fantastic but right now he is still not totally comfortable playing him. Each match we see a new classic trait of Federer creeping in. In Rome we saw Federer turn ninja in a breaker, in Dubai we saw Federer dominate Nadal for a set, in RG we saw Federer play well at a vital time (breaking Nadal in the fourth). At Wimbledon we saw Federer hit about three of his classicly brilliant returns. By these I means where he totally reads the serve and runs round it to a huge extent before giving it an almighty thump. The other thing we saw Roger do was even more satisfactory. Anyone for a bagel :devil:

Rogiman
07-10-2006, 11:46 PM
I agree partially here. In the third set Nadal was easily the better player and completely dominated Federer. As a tennis fan I can admit it wouldn't have been an accurate reflection of play if Federer had won the breaker to win in straights. In the second set however Nadal did not outplay Federer. He dictated many of the points but Federer won more points in that set even discounting the tie break. Nadal still should've had the set and would've done but for an uncharacteristic game at 5-4. After Nadal broke in the first game of the set though I think it was even with Federer holding slightly more easily.
Yeah I agree on both accounts, I guess my main point was that even though El Chancho was playing brutal tennis Fed could still hold his own in the match (granted, due to superior serving) and make his opponent try his absolute best to earn a set, a level that could not be sustained for long.

I'm also glad he lost that 3rd set, believe it or not, I thought winning that 4th set so convincingly left a much better impression than winning two tb's.

soonha
07-10-2006, 11:47 PM
Well, since this thread is about the things Roger needs to do in order to stay at #1, and since it's become apparent it's their (Roger and Chancho's that is) matches that'll determine that eventually, I feel the need to share my (utterly meaningless) thoughts about their match-up re-sunday's final:

* If it weren't clear before, it is now obvious their matches have little to do with the surface.
Sure, Fed will always stand a better chance on grass, as will Nadal on clay, but the matches will always be close and each player will have his chances.
Roger was close to beating El Chancho on clay, and lost on HC, and it's just as possible he'll get to him on clay, or lose to him on grass.

*For the better part of two sets on sunday El Chancho was dominating the points (at least when he could return Roger's serve) and hit the ball with power never before I have seen in tennis off both wings.
This is inevitable, and all Roger can do when that happens is what he did on sunday: hang in there, do his best to stay in the match, and wait until El Chancho runs out of power.
No one can sustain that kind of intensity for a whole match, El Chancho played out of his mind to win the 3rd, but melted down in the 4th.

*For the 1st time I felt like Roger can read his serves very well - I know that kind of serve is different from any other in the game, but it had always seemed weird to me that the guy who could read Roddick's and Flip's thunders so easily struggled badly with that fluffy lefty serve - funny enough, now that El Chancho has a more powerful serve, it seems it's become more of a normal serve, thus readable...
On the other hand, Roger's serve gives El Chancho more trouble than anyone else's.
Hopefully Roger's superior serve and return aren't restricted to grass.
All are valid points. As for Nadal's serve, I think that players(including Roger) have had a problem with it because it's a lefty serve with extreme spin, though it's not that powerful. It gives him an advantage to serve the down-the-line to the opponent's backhand side on the ad court. Even though their rackets reach the ball, they hardly send the ball over the net due to spin. Esp. on clay, when he meets Roger, he intentionally serves a high kicking one to his backhand side time and time again, which makes Roger frustrated. Now, as you said, he put up more speed on his serve but it seems to become more "flat" with less spin. Is it a good sign for Roger or not?

LCeh
07-10-2006, 11:58 PM
* If it weren't clear before, it is now obvious their matches have little to do with the surface.
Sure, Fed will always stand a better chance on grass, as will Nadal on clay, but the matches will always be close and each player will have his chances.
Roger was close to beating El Chancho on clay, and lost on HC, and it's just as possible he'll get to him on clay, or lose to him on grass.

I agree to some degree. At the end of the day, the player that had better form will win the match, but surface still plays a huge role. The grass makes returning easier for Roger and more difficult for Nadal, while clay makes Nadal's forehand and movement that much harder to overcome.

I wonder why Roger doesn't run around his backhand more often when returning 2nd serves though. I don't know what the stats is, but I would say about 90+% of Nadal's second serve went to the left side, so why not take the chance more often, since you will be right more often than not? He only started doing that in the fourth set for some reason, which already got him two breaks.

Rogiman
07-10-2006, 11:59 PM
Now, as you said, he put up more speed on his serve but it seems to become more "flat" with less spin. Is it a good sign for Roger or not?
During sunday's final I found myself, time and again, wondering what the match would be like if it had been played on asphalt.

To be honest, I have no idea...
Some say on HC the bounces would be higher, benefiting Nadal's game, others say with the conditions at Wimbly right now it might actually play faster at the USO, supposedly favoring Roger, and so on...

It seems to me the grass plays rather slowly (relatively speaking) nowadays, or we wouldn't be seeing all these 108 strokes rallies and a volley would be hit every now and then :rolleyes: but some elements of grass court tennis were evidently in Roger's favor, most notably the slice, which would never have anything close to that effect on a HC.

My take: Roger's serve will be at least as effective in NY, but he'll need to be a lot more initiative (a la Blake) in order to beat Nadal there, and take the ball even earlier, because the bounce will be more brutal, and that's the key.

I should add "if they are to meet", but seeing how shamelessly pathetic the others are at the moment that seems redundant...

PamV
07-11-2006, 01:33 AM
During sunday's final I found myself, time and again, wondering what the match would be like if it had been played on asphalt.

My take: Roger's serve will be at least as effective in NY, but he'll need to be a lot more initiative (a la Blake) in order to beat Nadal there, and take the ball even earlier, because the bounce will be more brutal, and that's the key.

...

I'd like to see a balanced draw at the USOpen. If it is lopsided with Nadal playing a bunch of qualies and guys who haven't ever gotten beyond round 1 at a major......then it doesn't really show us a true dynamic going on with how they both face a variety of top players. I don't think Blake is the only guy who might beat Nadal. Everyone just thinks of Blake....but I think they've only played twice.....that doesn't make him a nemesis.

It all depends on the draw, and who's playing well at the time.

PamV
07-11-2006, 01:38 AM
Yeah I agree on both accounts, I guess my main point was that even though El Chancho was playing brutal tennis Fed could still hold his own in the match (granted, due to superior serving) and make his opponent try his absolute best to earn a set, a level that could not be sustained for long.

I'm also glad he lost that 3rd set, believe it or not, I thought winning that 4th set so convincingly left a much better impression than winning two tb's.

I really think Nadal would have been troubled by Safin in his prime and in the future he could be bothered by other tall big servers with two handed back hands. It will be interesting to see as time goes on what other players beat him. As it is after having won some 4 big clay tournaments it makes him seem invincible.....people forget about hard courts.

Even at Wimby Nadal wasn't doing well the first week when the grass was intact at the baseline. Kendrick almost beat him and he was ranked 237 and had never won a match at a major.

Billabong
07-11-2006, 03:52 AM
I don't think Roger was "completely dominated" in the third set. Nadal was slightly better, yes, and deserved to win it, but he had to work damn hard for it, whereas when Roger was playing his best, he had no trouble to win those sets (the first and the fourth).

NYCtennisfan
07-11-2006, 04:31 AM
Break points are counted only when the point is completed so if I have 0-40 and I break on my first opportunity, I am 1/1.

As Rogiman says, the only thing that matters is if you wind up breaking in the game or not. For example, in Monte Carlo, Fed was 4/18 on break points, but only had opportunities in 5 or 6 games so he broke in 4 of the 6 games where he had a chance. That's not that bad. I think he had 8 chances in one game before he finally broke. If he had 18 break opportunities in say 11 games and only broke in 4 games, that would turn out to be the biggest reason why he lost.

RogiFan88
07-11-2006, 04:47 AM
I was thinking that TVK had perhaps his best chance to win Wimby this year, what w the lopsided draw and the fact that Rogi was also in the final, considering their hth. And they talked about how this yr was Rogi's best or only chance to win RG, which I completely disagree w.

NYCtennisfan
07-11-2006, 04:57 AM
Some things about the finals:

-Federer believed that he could win the match by staying at the back of the court. I thought he could do so on grass because of the availability of the slice and the skidding factor off of the FH with Nadal behind the baseline, but Nadal held his own for most of the match. If Federer had been hitting freely and loosely which he may never do against Nadal, he can really dominate him from the baseline, but Nadal may improve.

-For those of you looking to see Fed hit freely against Nadal, take a look at the beginning of the 2nd set in their Miami match where Fed hits freely and shoves Nadal from side to side like he does to Hewitt.

-Fed certainly didn't hit aggressively with his FH because he was not looking to hit near anywhere near the lines for most of the match. The only times he got aggressive with the FH was when he got a short or midcourt ball. All the other times, he was content to rally with Nadal, waiting for the skid to catch Nadal off-guard thereby getting a short reply which he could attack.

When he was aggressive with the FH, he could get a shot response when he hit the ball inside-out CC to the Nadal FH or get a weak BH to the middle of the court when hitting an aggressive CC FH to the Nadal BH finishing the point with a volley. For the most part, FEd didn't push things.

-Fed's BH drive was the poorest it was during the entire 2 weeks where he only pushed the issue with it on 5 or 6 points. He had been pushing just about everyone all over the place with the BH during this past two weeks.

-Fed's serve was extraordinarily well placed throughout the entire match and he never let up. Most of the time, I can pretty much predict where a player will serve, but I had no idea where Federer was going to put the ball. He put the ball in all parts of the box on both the AD and Deuce courts with the same ball toss.

Nadal does not do all that well with reaction returning like Fed, but is getting harder and harder to ace.

-Fed's second serve was tremendous. I lost count of how many 100 mph + serves he put on the lines or within 8 inches of the service box time and time again.

-Nadal's serve is predictable but gives FEd fits. On the AD side, he spins it out wide pulling Fed off of the court on about 80% of the first serves. Fed has to slice the ball back relatively deep to the Nadal FH or DTL (difficult return) to say in the point. If he chips back to the middle of the court, an inside-out FH is awaiting him. Nadal every once in a while hits the big serve down the middle to keep the opponent honest and aced Fed twice with it.

-On the Deuce court, Nadal serves 80% of the time down the tee with the slice serve spinning away from Fed. This serve almost always draws at least one error from during a service game. Fed got better at returning it as the match went on and also in the 1st set when Nadal wasn't placing it very well.

On this serve return, Fed has to either hit the BH return down the middle deep or into the deuce corner (Nadal's BH) relatively deep. He had a horrible time on clay with this serve and had a very difficult time during most of the match yesterday with this serve. It is always about 115 mph, but right on the line and very rarely does he miss the serve. By the end of the match, he was at least 8 to 12 inches further to his left than normal awaiting this serve. Nadal has a very difficult time hitting the big serve out wide on the AD side, but if he develops it, he could be very difficult to break.

-Nadal's second serve is weak and very attackable. Fed ran around the BH return several times and hit some good returns. They weren't Blake like aggressive, but good returns. The proble is that Nadal maybe gives you 1 second serve a service game. When Fed broke for 3-1 in the 4th set, Nadal missed several 1st serves. Fed has to continue to show this aggressiveness on the 2nd because that will put some more pressure on Nadal's 1st serve which is definitely the case when Nadal plays against Blake.

-Because of Fed's lack of aggressiveness, Fed ran on the court from side to side more than I have ever seen him on grass since probably...ever. In the early days, he served and volleyed or came to net on the first ball available so he wasn't running from side to side. He ran a lot against Gonzo last year as well. Nadal controlled the points on many of the rallies.

-Nadal hit some wicked BH's. He cannot hit them consistently, but when he did hit them, they looked like Safin's BH :eek:

-Fed simply needs to do more attacking of the net because that is the one big advantage if you have a one handed BH.

-The USO's surface is fast, but the ball sits up more there which would be to Nadal's advantage if Fed is not aggressive. This is why Blake is so good on hardcourts: the ball sits up exactly where he likes to hit it. He doesn't like the low bouncing balls which was evident in his matches on grass at Wimby.

It's hard to tell on TV, but the ball was skidding yesterday which was to Fed's advantage big time. It just doesn't skid the way it used to.

-I definitely think you will see Fed do more net attacks and be more aggressive with the groundstrokes when the play on hardcourts. I think Fed got an eyeful of how Nadal can hit even on grass and doesn't want to get involved with that next time. Fed was extraordinarily successful with the CC FH pulling Nadal off of the court and then coming into net.

The setup was like this on the return: on the AD side, slice return to the Nadal FH, Nadal with a CC FH, FEderer with a slice or drive BH to the Nadal BH, Nadal CC BH to the Fed FH, Fed hits DTL FH or CC FH, Nadal with a BH midcourt, Fed with the inside-out FH which draws another midcourt response, CC FH angling NAdal off of the court, BH or FH volley put away. He had about 5 or 6 sequences in the match like that where he won the point. The key was that Nadal wasn't looking to be aggressive right away, the return was reasonably deep, and then Fed was aggressive with the first FH he got. This sequence will be key when they meet on hardcourts later this summer.

LCeh
07-11-2006, 05:29 AM
Was the only one surprised by the inability for Nadal to attack Roger's block returns? Many times, on the deuce side, Nadal would slice it on the T, and Roger would simply block it back, but Nadal can't seem to hurt him off the second stroke, which was very surprising to me. I kept thinking Nadal would eat those returns up, but he didn't.

lunahielo
07-11-2006, 09:46 AM
Originally posted by mechlan

(Sorry luna, he just happens to be the major threat right now. )

No need to apologize....................... :) :)
(I was just venting, I guess)

SUKTUEN
07-11-2006, 04:50 PM
if he can beaat Nadal more easily in next time, I think Roger will stay in NO.1 very very long time~~

WF4EVER
07-11-2006, 08:53 PM
Was the only one surprised by the inability for Nadal to attack Roger's block returns? Many times, on the deuce side, Nadal would slice it on the T, and Roger would simply block it back, but Nadal can't seem to hurt him off the second stroke, which was very surprising to me. I kept thinking Nadal would eat those returns up, but he didn't.

That's part of the reason why I'm convinced Rafa is nowhere near Fed's league on grass. If Fed has just kept his shit together he'd have given him a lesson like he's never known before.

That first set was not just Nadal's nerves; it was also him not knowing what to do on grass against Fed's game and confidence in that set. I saw Nadal hitting some really strange shots which suggested to me that against someone of Rogi's grasscourt prowess he was at a severe disadvantage. A disadvantage which, sadly, was not fully capitalized upon.

SUKTUEN
07-12-2006, 03:51 AM
yes ,Roger have more confidence after the final for beat Nadal~

nobama
07-12-2006, 04:24 AM
Roger's YTD stats after Wimbledon:

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a377/jsnash/stats.jpg

SUKTUEN
07-12-2006, 04:31 AM
thanks for the data~~

soonha
07-12-2006, 05:14 AM
Roger's YTD stats after Wimbledon:
Thanks for stat, mirkaland.

Wow, Roger's stats are really :eek: :eek: :eek: esp. the 2nd serve point won % and # of DF.

nobama
07-12-2006, 05:18 AM
Thanks for stat, mirkaland.

Wow, Roger's stats are really :eek: :eek: :eek: esp. the 2nd serve point won % and # of DF.I liked the # of service games won 90%! And also when you compare Roger and Nadal - he equals or beats Nadal in every stat except BP conversions where Nadal is a percentage point better. I think sometimes the TV commentators should brush up on these stats before they go spouting things off. I remember during week 1 of Wimbledon Brad Gilbert said something about James Blake having the best return game in the business, and then when he checked the stats Blake came in at #10. :lol:

LCeh
07-12-2006, 05:36 AM
I am most impressed with his 2nd server return point % won. I remember a few years ago, he was never that good at it, but I think this year, he has put himself at the top in that category as well.

His serving stats were a little worse than last year's, or 2 years' ago I think, but not by any significant margin.

SUKTUEN
07-12-2006, 05:40 AM
Roger Good Luck in next fight with Nadal~!

soonha
07-12-2006, 05:41 AM
I liked the # of service games won 90%! And also when you compare Roger and Nadal - he equals or beats Nadal in every stat except BP conversions where Nadal is a percentage point better.
I like it, too. :) Basically the stats show us that Roger's return game is as good as Nadal's while his service game is far superior. I found all stats of his service game much improved after Wimbledon, comparing to before, though it'd be nothing surprising considering the surface factor. His serve was really impressive during the whole tournament, esp. in the final. :angel:

SUKTUEN
07-12-2006, 05:41 AM
Roger 's serve looks like most good in Wimby, why?

soonha
07-12-2006, 05:52 AM
Having seen mirkaland's stats table, I visited ATP website. According to RICOH ATP matchfacts, Roger is in the top 10 in every category except 1st serve% and BP conversion: #5 in no. of aces, #4 in 1st serve pts won, #1 in 2nd serve pt won, #2 in service games won, #3 in BP saved, #1 in pt won returning 1st serve, #9 in pt won returning 2nd serve, and #7 in return games won. :eek:

Mechlan
07-12-2006, 07:59 AM
Have to add some impressions of mine about the final.

First, I did see a few promising things from Roger. His serve was fantastic throughout the match. That first set of serving was simply phenomenal, and his second serve was also unbelievable all match long. Such variety on this stroke - it's a weapon and he's fully capable of it being a weapon on other surfaces as well.

The fourth set was great to watch in terms of his return game. He actually started running around the backhand which, more than anything else, shows confidence. He might get aced a few times because he's looking to run around the bh, but it's completely worth it if it means going on the offensive on most of Nadal's second serves. It was key to breaking both times in the fourth. Helped him get on the offensive and he never looked back. I really hope he doesn't forget this. At least Rochey mentioned it later as well, so there's hope he'll continue doing it.

It was great to see his slice backhand be so effective. I actually thought Nadal handled his slice remarkably well because the ball was clearly skidding, and you could almost see Nadal make the adjustment mid-match and take that extra bit of care when hitting those low sliding balls later in the match. But there's no denying that this is where grass really favors Roger. On clay, Rafa was murdering Roger's short return slices, but here he missed at least half a dozen of them cause the slice skidded off the grass and he caught it late.

There were nerves from both players. The mental battle between these two is far from over. Neither really has the edge yet (or is completely relaxed when playing) but that's kind of expected. Nadal is simply phenomenal in his never-say-die attitude. I honestly thought that after Roger won the second set, he would run away with it in the third. Didn't happen, and not because Roger played poorly either. Those first couple of games of the third set were the best I've seen Rafa play on grass, and that's saying something because Roger was playing well himself. It takes tremendous mental fortitude to come back from such a disappointing situation when your opponent has all the momentum, and credit to him for hanging in there.

When it comes down to it, I think there are two things that really hurt Roger. One, he respects Nadal's speed so much that he either goes for too much or doesn't go for enough. Sounds weird, but that's the way it is. The short balls from Nadal are the same as short balls from anyone else, and Roger is the king of putting away short balls. That he doesn't do this effectively against Nadal is all mental, and I hope he can improve upon this.

And of course, Nadal is a physical beast. He has a simply awesome combination of power and speed. We've seen it so many times when he hits those ridiculous shots from impossible places on the court. He gives Roger problems because he's capable of hitting winners against him. It's much harder to hit the shots you want to hit when you have to deal with tons of power and are scrambling about retrieving shots yourself. In those second and (especially) third sets, Nadal hits the ball with incredible depth and power. This gives Roger so many problems, especially on the backhand side which Nadal continually picks on. This is really why it's so important for Roger to be aggressive against Nadal. If he isn't aggressive enough, it really allows Nadal to get into a groove on his groundstrokes, and he isn't afraid to blast the ball and hit winners. It's not often that Federer loses points once he starts ripping the ball, but Nadal was rifling those CC BHs during the match and really hurting Roger. If Nadal plays this aggressively on other surfaces, Roger's just got to go out there and hit the winner before Nadal does.

Still think that Roger has uber amounts of talent and should beat Nadal if he plays his best, but I admit that it's not going to be as easy as I once thought. The good news is I don't think Roger came close to his best in the final. But on the flip side, it's also the surface that favors him the most, so everywhere else will be tougher. Have the feeling they'll meet on more than a couple of occasions through the rest of the year, so it'll be interesting to see what adjustments they both make. I think right now it's pretty clear that Roger needs to be more aggressive. Serve and volleying isn't the answer, but when he gets pinned behind the baseline scrambling after Rafa's shots - ugh. Needs to find that happy medium where he can come in and put away those short balls while not paying too much respect to Nadal's speed.

Oh yes, the mental letdowns. Roger simply cannot afford to let down for even a second against Rafa. I think it's damn near impossible to keep up the kind of physical and mental game Rafa has over five sets. This is why I've always felt that Roger has the edge against power players and why I'm confident he will eventually figure out Rafa as well. But to do that, he just can't let down his guard at all. That's what cost him in Dubai and almost cost him this final. I'm still really concerned about this part of Roger's game. He was just coasting through that second set without even really pressuring Nadal until that 4-5 game (in which Nadal thankfully self-destructed). He's really going to have to realize that these lapses that he gets away with against lesser players just won't cut it against Rafa. Because he certainly can't count on winning the first set in all of their matches with such ease. I think one thing's for sure - playing Nadal certainly will force Roger to take his game to new heights. I hope he capitalizes on it.

nobama
07-12-2006, 12:24 PM
In 2004 Roger received a Golden Bagel Award as the player that served up the most bagels in the year - 12. He's got eleven already this year. :lol: I'm guessing that's the most on tour. Does anyone know for sure?

NYCtennisfan
07-12-2006, 04:41 PM
Federer's combination of return stats and serve stats are the greatest such combo on ATP history. Nobody has held so well and broken so much.

SUKTUEN
07-12-2006, 04:57 PM
Hope Roger can win over 15 Grand Slam in his tennis life. :bounce:

stebs
07-12-2006, 07:12 PM
Interesting that both Davydenko and Nalbandian win a higher percentage of return games than Roger or Rafa.

soonha
07-13-2006, 03:28 AM
Anyone have info about the number of points Nadal has to defend till the end of this year?
Nadal 1505(/current 5125)=2 AMS+1 ISG+1 IS+3R GS. He will lose 250 pts because of the withdrawal from Stuttgart(ISG).

Roger 2175(/7260)=1 GS+1 AMS+1 IS+F TMC.

NYCtennisfan
07-13-2006, 04:29 AM
I don't think it's official that he is out of Stuttgart as I think he might still play it.

soonha
07-13-2006, 04:44 AM
I don't think it's official that he is out of Stuttgart as I think he might still play it.
I read in a paper that he said before the Wimbledon final that he would pull out. I'm not sure if it's announced officially.

SUKTUEN
07-13-2006, 05:18 AM
thanks for the data

victory1
07-13-2006, 07:12 PM
Roger will be 1465 points ahead of him with all the points taken of for 2006 that Roger (2175) & Nadal (1505) have to defend. In order for Nadal to be #1 at the end of the year, he would have to earn 1465 points more then Federer. Basically if Federer gains 1500 for the rest of 2006, Nadal has to gain 2965 in order to be year end #1. If Federer can increase his lead by 535 points by the end of the year, he will will at least have 2000 points (2 slam lead) going into 2007 and he will at least be able to breath a little better.

RogiFan88
07-13-2006, 07:18 PM
I read in a paper that he said before the Wimbledon final that he would pull out. I'm not sure if it's announced officially.

No, you're thinking about Bastad, which is this week.

Some Spanish paper said the Nadal family wants everyone to leave Rafa in peace until Monday apparently.

mangoes
07-13-2006, 08:24 PM
I don't think it's official that he is out of Stuttgart as I think he might still play it.

It's on ESPN.com.............so, I'm assuming, that's set in stone.

mangoes
07-13-2006, 08:26 PM
I was just over at GM and the Rafa fans are calculating what Nadal needs to do to become no. 1 by the end of the year. But, as they calculate, not one of them has remembered that Roger didn't play the indoor season...........

RogiFan88
07-13-2006, 08:33 PM
I was just over at GM and the Rafa fans are calculating what Nadal needs to do to become no. 1 by the end of the year. But, as they calculate, not one of them has remembered that Roger didn't play the indoor season...........

:p

soonha
07-13-2006, 09:15 PM
I was just over at GM and the Rafa fans are calculating what Nadal needs to do to become no. 1 by the end of the year. But, as they calculate, not one of them has remembered that Roger didn't play the indoor season...........
Let them dream on. :ras: :p

NYCtennisfan
07-13-2006, 10:24 PM
Let's see here:

Fed is up by 2135 points right now. IF Nadal withdraws from Stuttgart, Fed will be up 2385 points going into TMS Canada. At the very worst, he will leave Canada up 2410 points up since he will get 5 points just for playing and Nadal cannot gain anything since he won last year. Barring a double win by Rafa, a decent results should have Fed in the clear for the USO as far as his #1 ranking is concerned. If Fed picks up 90 race points or 450 ranking points, during the two TMS events and even if Rafa wins both Cicny and Canada, Federer would remain #1 after the USO even if he lost in the 1st rund and Nadal won the whole thing.

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 10:40 PM
I was just over at GM and the Rafa fans are calculating what Nadal needs to do to become no. 1 by the end of the year. But, as they calculate, not one of them has remembered that Roger didn't play the indoor season...........
I always find it funny how people struggle to understand the ranking system...

At this time of the season, officially the entry ranking decides who's #1, but the right thing to look at is the Champions Race, because after the TMC the two races agree, therefore it's more logical to check where #1 and #2 stand with respect to THIS season.
My main point is: it doesn't matter right now how the two defend or gain to their last year's points, what does matter is how much they add on their total race points, therefore if Rafa, for instance, defends his TMS Madrid title, for instance, he supposedly doesn't gain any points whereas in fact he adds to his total 100 pure race points - worthy of 500 ranking points when the year is over.

Right now Roger has a nearly 300 points lead (282, to be precise, theequivalent of 1410 ranking points), which, given he'll be playing and winning enough matches should suffice to end the year at the top, BUT IF - and that's a big if - Nadal wins Toronto and Cincy back to back, for instance, and the USO, and one of the indoor Masters, and TMC, then Roger must make it to at least the finals of all these events to secure his position, and even then Rafa will be considered the real #1, but that's besides the point...

Keep in mind that if Roger finishes the year less than 260 points clear of Rafa, there's a good chance the latter will surpass him right after the AO.

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 10:44 PM
Let's see here:

Fed is up by 2135 points right now. IF Nadal withdraws from Stuttgart, Fed will be up 2385 points going into TMS Canada. At the very worst, he will leave Canada up 2410 points up since he will get 5 points just for playing and Nadal cannot gain anything since he won last year. Barring a double win by Rafa, a decent results should have Fed in the clear for the USO as far as his #1 ranking is concerned. If Fed picks up 90 race points or 450 ranking points, during the two TMS events and even if Rafa wins both Cicny and Canada, Federer would remain #1 after the USO even if he lost in the 1st rund and Nadal won the whole thing.

Who cares about being #1 after the USO...? :lol:

LCeh
07-13-2006, 10:48 PM
So I guess, what we can say is that Roger should be safe after USO at the very least even if Rafa wins everything in sight. So realistically, when can his ranking be in danger? During TMC when Roger has points to defend and Nadal has none?

NYCtennisfan
07-13-2006, 10:49 PM
I always find it funny how people struggle to understand the ranking system...

At this time of the season, officially the entry ranking decides who's #1, but the right thing to look at is the Champions Race, because after the TMC the two races agree, therefore it's more logical to check where #1 and #2 stand with respect to THIS season.
My main point is: it doesn't matter right now how the two defend or gain to their last year's points, what does matter is how much they add on their total race points, therefore if Rafa, for instance, defends his TMS Madrid title, for instance, he supposedly doesn't gain any points whereas in fact he adds to his total 100 pure race points - worthy of 500 ranking points when the year is over.

Right now Roger has a nearly 300 points lead (282, to be precise, theequivalent of 1410 ranking points), which, given he'll be playing and winning enough matches should suffice to end the year at the top, BUT IF - and that's a big if - Nadal wins Toronto and Cincy back to back, for instance, and the USO, and one of the indoor Masters, and TMC, then Roger must make it to at least the finals of all these events to secure his position, and even then Rafa will be considered the real #1, but that's besides the point...

Keep in mind that if Roger finishes the year less than 260 points clear of Rafa, there's a good chance the latter will surpass him right after the AO.

Exactly. Federer has such a huge lead right now, the entry rankings are not going to come into play. Nadal is going to have more points this season to have any shot of overtaking FEd. THere is almost no possibility short of Federer losing in the 1st round 6 times in a row and Nadal winning everything for Nadal to catch up in the entry rankings before this year especially since Fed will carry the 1000 entry ranking points from the TMC until they drop off.

To be perfectly safe, Fed should go into next season ahead by 2200+ points. This would assure Fed the number 1 ranking after AO meaning he will beat Jimmy's record of consecutive weeks at #1. It is highly unlikely that Fed is going to be that far above. I can see him being 1500-1600 points ahead at best going into the AO. That's not bad, but for the first in a long time, his #1 ranking will be officially on the line.

LCeh
07-13-2006, 10:51 PM
That's not bad, but for the first in a long time, his #1 ranking will be officially on the line.

And that's actually quite a scary thought, because this has never even come close to happening since he overtook the number 1 ranking, basically.

NYCtennisfan
07-13-2006, 10:52 PM
So I guess, what we can say is that Roger should be safe after USO at the very least even if Rafa wins everything in sight. So realistically, when can his ranking be in danger? During TMC when Roger has points to defend and Nadal has none?

Theoretically, Fed could lose the #1 ranking at USO's end.

He's going to be up 2385 at the start of TMS Canada.

He loses 1st round and wins up 2410 ahead.

He loses 1st round of Cincy and Nadal wins it so he is now 1420 ahead.

He loses 1st round of the USO and is 420 points ahead. Nadal making the finals would give him the #1 ranking.

Realistically, Fed could only lose the number 1 ranking at the end of the year at the TMC.

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 10:54 PM
Don't give too much credit to the TMC, it's just 500 points Roger has to defend :cool:

NYCtennisfan
07-13-2006, 10:55 PM
And that's actually quite a scary thought, because this has never even come close to happening since he overtook the number 1 ranking, basically.

Yup. Fed could've lost the #1 ranking to Roddick at the 2004 Wimbledon if he lost in the QF's and Roddick won the title or any other 985+ point swing.

LCeh
07-13-2006, 10:57 PM
Yup. Fed could've lost the #1 ranking to Roddick at the 2004 Wimbledon if he lost in the QF's and Roddick won the title.

Oh wow, didn't know that. That was pretty likely to happen if Roger did lose in the QF, since Roddick was playing so well that year and would have beaten anyone other than Roger in the final. :eek:

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 11:02 PM
People talk about how crucial sunday's final was in terms of Fed's career, and for a very good reason, but some of has forget his 2004 final with Roddick was at least as important.
Many people had predicted a Roddick victory (sounds familiar...?) and the match, IMO, was much more complicated.
Had Roger lost that match I doubt he would have become the legend he is.

After that match, just like this week, more people were talking about how close Roddick had gotten to Federer rather than about Roger's win, it got to the point where Roddick came as a big favourite to their Toronto final...
The result: Roger ruins poor Duckboy's career...

Feels like a deja-vu...?
I hope history will repeat itself :)

soonha
07-13-2006, 11:07 PM
Oh wow, didn't know that. That was pretty likely to happen if Roger did lose in the QF, since Roddick was playing so well that year and would have beaten anyone other than Roger in the final. :eek:
Besides Roger's QF opponent was in-form Hewitt. Scary, huh? ;)

NYCtennisfan
07-13-2006, 11:08 PM
Oh wow, didn't know that. That was pretty likely to happen if Roger did lose in the QF, since Roddick was playing so well that year and would have beaten anyone other than Roger in the final. :eek:


That was pretty much the last time that it was even a possibility. At any slam, there can be at most a 2000 point swing and that is if one player doesn't enter and they had won the year before, and another player wins the tournament not having entered at all the previous year.

At the 2004 USO, Fed was up 1400 points and Roddick had 1000 points to defend. So even if Roddick won and Fed lost in the 1st round, Fed would still have been up by 250 points.

At the 2005 AO, Fed was up by 3000 points on both Roddick and Hewitt so nothing could happen there.

At 2005 RG, Fed was up 2700 so nothing doing there.

AT 2005 Wimby, Fed was up 3300 :eek: so nothing doing there.

At 2005 USO, Fed was up 2500 on Rafa.

AT 2006 AO, Fed was up 1960, but Rafa wasn't playing so nothing coudl happen there.

At 2006 RG, Fed was up 2400 plus and Rafa was the defending champion so nothing could happen there.

At this year's Wimby, Fed was up 2600 and there could've been a big siwn but there wasn't.

It's amazing to see that for basically three years, Fed has been up by 2000+ points on everybody going into the slams. This is just insane. If he plays well in Canada, he will again go into a Slam more than 2000 points up.

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 11:10 PM
Besides Roger's QF opponent was in-form Hewitt. Scary, huh? ;)
It was when poor Hewitt ate his 3rd bagel of the season right off Fed's racket, and received a breadstick for being a good boy :)

soonha
07-13-2006, 11:13 PM
People talk about how crucial sunday's final was in terms of Fed's career, and for a very good reason, but some of has forget his 2004 final with Roddick was at least as important.
Many people had predicted a Roddick victory (sounds familiar...?) and the match, IMO, was much more complicated.
Had Roger lost that match I doubt he would have become the legend he is.

After that match, just like this week, more people were talking about how close Roddick had gotten to Federer rather than about Roger's win, it got to the point where Roddick came as a big favourite to their Toronto final...
The result: Roger ruins poor Duckboy's career...

Feels like a deja-vu...?
I hope history will repeat itself :)
Now I clearly remember what people was then saying before the Toronto final. Even how the commentators was cheering for Roddick to the face in the final. Wow, deja-vu, indeed. :eek:

NYCtennisfan
07-13-2006, 11:14 PM
People talk about how crucial sunday's final was in terms of Fed's career, and for a very good reason, but some of has forget his 2004 final with Roddick was at least as important.
Many people had predicted a Roddick victory (sounds familiar...?) and the match, IMO, was much more complicated.
Had Roger lost that match I doubt he would have become the legend he is.

After that match, just like this week, more people were talking about how close Roddick had gotten to Federer rather than about Roger's win, it got to the point where Roddick came as a big favourite to their Toronto final...
The result: Roger ruins poor Duckboy's career...

Feels like a deja-vu...?
I hope history will repeat itself :)

I remember how Roddick was the favorite in Canada because he had played Roger so closely at SW19, he had beaten him in Canada the year before, he was seen as invincible on American hardcourts having won Indy already I believe and then Federer swatted him aside in a brilliant match. ThenRoddick was considered the co-favorite for the 2004 USO, but couldn't beat Tojo although he won a higher % of points in defeat than another other player I have ever seen Then it was over. Roger was king.

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 11:14 PM
Now I clearly remember what people was then saying before the Toronto final. Even how the commentators was cheering for Roddick to the face in the final. Wow, deja-vu, indeed. :eek:
Yeah, it makes me feel better when I realise the good almost always prevails :)

NYCtennisfan
07-13-2006, 11:16 PM
I remember Feds hitting 3 or 4 aces in a row to swat away the only BP's Roddick had in the entire match. Then there was that beautifully struck BH to win the match, an Agassi-like timed BH but with a one-hander :eek:

soonha
07-13-2006, 11:20 PM
It was when poor Hewitt ate his 3rd bagel of the season right off Fed's racket, and received a breadstick for being a good boy :)
:lol: Yeah, I know. But in the QF, Hewitt was playing well. Even Boris Becker commentated on BBC, like "this is a Hewitt's best match I've recently seen." And acutally he took a set and broke a Roger's serve, which nobody there had done before in the tournament. Just "a little" short, wasn't it? ;)

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 11:20 PM
I remember Feds hitting 3 or 4 aces in a row to swat away the only BP's Roddick had in the entire match. Then there was that beautifully struck BH to win the match, an Agassi-like timed BH but with a one-hander :eek:
In my mind that is still one of his best matches ever on HC :) kinda like 2003 Wimbly SF.

Roddick played the best tennis of his life, hit the crap out of the ball, served high % of 1st serves and made very few UE's, and ended up losing in straights and being outaced :D

That was Roger's first tourney after he first got rid of the pony tail, btw...

soonha
07-13-2006, 11:22 PM
I remember Feds hitting 3 or 4 aces in a row to swat away the only BP's Roddick had in the entire match. Then there was that beautifully struck BH to win the match, an Agassi-like timed BH but with a one-hander :eek:
I too remember the moment when he struck the BH passing shot. Surreal. :angel:

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 11:24 PM
I too remember the moment when he struck the BH passing shot. Surreal. :angel:
I remember the ESPN broadcaster after that shot: "Wow! Roger Federer!" :lol:

LCeh
07-13-2006, 11:25 PM
In my mind that is still one of his best matches ever on HC :) kinda like 2003 Wimbly SF.

Roddick played the best tennis of his life, hit the crap out of the ball, served high % of 1st serves and made very few UE's, and ended up losing in straights and being outaced :D

That was Roger's first tourney after he first got rid of the pony tail, btw...

Mmm, not quite. In Toronto he still had his pony tail. I remember because I was there watching him live. He even put hair pins to keep his hair in place. ;) I think the first tournament he got rid of the pony tail was in USO.

EDIT: Actually, he still had the pony tail in USO. Take a look at my avatar. ;)

soonha
07-13-2006, 11:27 PM
Mmm, not quite. In Toronto he still had his pony tail. I remember because I was there watching him live. He even put hair pins to keep his hair in place. ;) I think the first tournament he got rid of the pony tail was in USO.

EDIT: Actually, he still had the pony tail in USO. Take a look at my avatar. ;)
It was the Hoston TMC for the first time he got rid of the pony tail. :)

NYCtennisfan
07-13-2006, 11:28 PM
I believe it was Houston or the beginning of the 2005 season when he got rid of the ponytail.

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 11:29 PM
Mmm, not quite. In Toronto he still had his pony tail. I remember because I was there watching him live. He even put hair pins to keep his hair in place. ;) I think the first tournament he got rid of the pony tail was in USO.

EDIT: Actually, he still had the pony tail in USO. Take a look at my avatar. ;)
Yeah, now I can see it clearly :o

Actually it was 2004 TMC where he first featured his new haircut, having been injured for a month before that tourney.

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 11:35 PM
Speaking of that match, do you think Roger actually killed Roddick's career?

I'd like to think he did, seeing as Roddick could have been a 3 times Wimbledon champ, plus have 2 more TMS titles, possibly a TMC title...

It's only now with Nadal that I fully understand how frustrating one player can be in terms of another's career...
Think about it (not that I suspect you didn't...) - what effect could Nadal have had on Roger's career had he won sunday's final...?

nobama
07-13-2006, 11:39 PM
Think about it (not that I suspect you didn't...) - what effect could Nadal have had on Roger's career had he won sunday's final...?God that's all I thought about the night before. And that's why I didn't care how he won the match as long as he won. That totally could have changed his career in a bad way.

LCeh
07-13-2006, 11:42 PM
Think about it (not that I suspect you didn't...) - what effect could Nadal have had on Roger's career had he won sunday's final...?

I felt it was the biggest match of his life. RG, it was only a bonus, it was something that was nice to have; Wimbledon, it's where it all started, where his dominance began, where he became the king. Like many others have said, if he lost, we seriously need to start considering a new world's no 1 when a player on his worst surface can beat you on your best.

Luckily that never happened. :o

soonha
07-13-2006, 11:46 PM
Speaking of that match, do you think Roger actually killed Roddick's career?
In a way, yes. But I think the loss to Pim Pim was a more serious blow to Roddick. He could bear the defeats by Roger because he is the best, but Pim Pim was almost nobody then, besides it was in the USO. That loss and the Davis Cup in the end of the year affected more his mentality. After then the loss in the 2005 Wimbledon final nailed him, I think.

Rogiman
07-13-2006, 11:50 PM
In a way, yes. But I think the loss to Pim Pim was a more serious blow to Roddick. He could bear the defeats by Roger because he is the best, but Pim Pim was almost nobody then, besides it was in the USO. That loss and the Davis Cup in the end of the year affected more his mentality. After then the loss in the 2005 Wimbledon final nailed him, I think.
I actually think he's never gotten over that 2004 Wimbly final loss, that to him is like that year's RG final to Coria (granted, he was never as close to victory as Coria was, and didn't face Gaudio, with all due respect...).

soonha
07-13-2006, 11:54 PM
Think about it (not that I suspect you didn't...) - what effect could Nadal have had on Roger's career had he won sunday's final...?
Even now I fear to think about it. :unsure: I never thought Roger would lose Nadal in Wimbledon. But after Nadal won the 3rd set I thought for the first time Roger could get to lose the match. Then I got so nervous that I couldn't even watch the TV. :scared:

PamV
07-14-2006, 01:17 AM
Let's not forget that Nadal also has to defend Madrid and Toronto this year. He could lose points there. I think A LOT depends on what opponents he draws in these tournaments and who acctually shows up there. Remember that in Madrid Ljubicic was dominating and had match points and basically choked again and let Nadal win. At any of these MS tournaments if we see Blake, Hewitt, Roddick, Ancic, Berdych all there and playing well .....Nadal might not defend.

It will be very interesting to see the USOpen draw and whether it will look like they give Roger a very tough quarter and Nadal an easy one with no Blake or any big servers.....such as Ancic, Berdych, or Murray.

Also at the TMC...... I hope that Nalbandian is in Nadal's section!!! For so many tournaments they keep putting Nalbandian in Roger's draw. Nadal has never played him.

Here's who Nadal beat at Montreal 2005:

R64 Moya, Carlos (ESP) 32 6-3 6-7 6-3
R32 Mello, Ricardo (BRA) 56 6-1 6-2
R16 Grosjean, Sebastien (FRA) 34 6-4 6-4
Q Puerta, Mariano (ARG) 11 6-3 6-1
S Mathieu, Paul-Henri (FRA) 63 6-4 7-5
W Agassi, Andre (USA) 7 6-3 4-6 6-2



Here's who Nadal beat at Madrid 2005:

R64 Bye, () N/A Stats
R32 Hanescu, Victor (ROM) 42 7-6(5) 6-3
R16 Robredo, Tommy (ESP) 17 6-2 6-4
Q Stepanek, Radek (CZE) 14 7-6(11) 6-4
S Ginepri, Robby (USA) 21 7-5 7-6(1)
W Ljubicic, Ivan (CRO) 12 3-6 2-6 6-3 6-4 7-6(3)

PamV
07-14-2006, 01:24 AM
Speaking of that match, do you think Roger actually killed Roddick's career?

I'd like to think he did, seeing as Roddick could have been a 3 times Wimbledon champ, plus have 2 more TMS titles, possibly a TMC title...

It's only now with Nadal that I fully understand how frustrating one player can be in terms of another's career...
Think about it (not that I suspect you didn't...) - what effect could Nadal have had on Roger's career had he won sunday's final...?

Roddick could have worked on staying fit and improving his ground game. It's amazing to think how he handled so many players before without hardly having to rally at all. I still can't see how that has changed because he still has the big serve. If returning it is so easy then why weren't people doing that before???

Hopefully Roger will never crash and burn. He should never feel that bad because he has 8 majors under his belt. Even if he loses the #1 rank at some point, he can take heart that Sampras lost the #1 spot off and on in his career. It's always possible to get it back.

I so hope Roger gets Nadal's # and turns around the H2H so that nerves don't play into it for Roger. Once he gets used to Nadals intimidation tactics he should stop letting that get to him.

Skyward
07-14-2006, 03:28 AM
Once upon a time two GS titles, a couple of TMS wins, and decent results in other tournaments were enough for the No1 ranking. Sigh... (thinking about the lack of competititon)

RogiFan88
07-14-2006, 03:44 AM
Yeah, now I can see it clearly :o

Actually it was 2004 TMC where he first featured his new haircut, having been injured for a month before that tourney.

No, betw the TO04 SF and F, Rogi went to the hairdresser and had his hair cut -- I distinctly remember it because it seemed to be flopping in his eyes throughout the final and I thought, why didn't he wait until AFTER the final? :p Didn't matter in the end, tho, did it? ;)

RogiFan88
07-14-2006, 03:49 AM
Speaking of that match, do you think Roger actually killed Roddick's career?

I'd like to think he did, seeing as Roddick could have been a 3 times Wimbledon champ, plus have 2 more TMS titles, possibly a TMC title...

It's only now with Nadal that I fully understand how frustrating one player can be in terms of another's career...
Think about it (not that I suspect you didn't...) - what effect could Nadal have had on Roger's career had he won sunday's final...?

I don't think Rogi killed Pandy's career, but he sure killed his confidence. Also I think that Pandy has a pretty one-note game, mostly big serve and FH. When the serve breaks down, so does his game. I also believe that many players are no longer intimidated by that serve and have figured him out, so to speak. Pandy, as well as Lleyt have possibly already reached their peak. And if that's so, it's sad that guys so young can be heading downwards in their career when they were once slam winners and No 1 players.

rofe
07-14-2006, 03:51 AM
I don't think Rogi killed Pandy's career, but he sure killed his confidence. Also I think that Pandy has a pretty one-note game, mostly big serve and FH. When the serve breaks down, so does his game. I also believe that many players are no longer intimidated by that serve and have figured him out, so to speak. Pandy, as well as Lleyt have possibly already reached their peak.

Unfortunately, his opponents are even beginning to read his first serve.

NYCtennisfan
07-14-2006, 04:00 AM
As for Roddick, the game evolves and players are better able to read and return serves now because they see more of the big ones. When juat about every other player is hitting big serves over 130, you get used to them, and you even get used to the monster bombs that Roddick drops. Players also move better now than they EVER have which allows them to stay in rallies.

For Roddick, he still holds serve most of the time, but now that extra serve returned there, that one bunted back there allows the opponent to play a few points, and pin Roddick on the BH side which keeps Roddick from getting into advantageous positions on the court because he can't penetrate with the BH. Roddick gets down 15-30 maybe, which means it's harder to get that 1st serve in. An error here or there and he is broken. In his heyday, he would almost always come up with big serves on BP's but not anymore. Take a look at the 2003 USO. He served an ace or service winner or had a big serve/FH winner combo on just about every break point he faced.

Now you combine this with the fact that he doesn't hit the FH like he used to anymore for whatever reason. Watch the 2004 Wimby final or the 2004 TMS Canada finals or the 2003 TMS Canada SF. Roddick ripped any FH opportunites he got. Federer avoids the Roddick FH at all costs unless he is going to hit a good angle or a penetrating shot. Compare that with the 2005 Wimby final. Federer was still pinning Roddick to the BH, but it was more about pinning him to the BH than about avoiding the FH. He hit medium balls to the Roddick FH and Roddick didn't do anything with it.

rofe
07-14-2006, 04:06 AM
Roddick has been indirectly affected by Fed's dominance over him. After seeing Roger block back returns and dominate from the back of the court many players (Murray being a prime example) have realized that all they need to do is block back returns (it need not even be deep) and take advantage of Roddick's lack of a penetrating ground game.

His flat as a pancake forehand is now very loopy and that provides his opponents enough time to get to it and turn defence to offense. On a related note, his movement has gone down considerably.

mangoes
07-14-2006, 05:10 AM
Of the Fabulous 4...............I think, officially, sweetie pie Andy is the first to bite the dirt.