Federer beats Nieminen and locks #1 til the end of the year 2005 [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer beats Nieminen and locks #1 til the end of the year 2005

Nathy
09-30-2005, 01:38 PM
Roger Federer def. Jarkko Nieminen in Bangok and runs as number 1 'til the end of the year.

#1 from the 2nd February 2004 'til 31st December 2005 and counting

:worship: Federer :worship:

PaulieM
09-30-2005, 01:41 PM
:D

Fergie
09-30-2005, 01:42 PM
Rogi!!! :worship: :worship: :worship:

yanchr
09-30-2005, 01:44 PM
Big Congratulations Roger! I'd love to see you stay there for as long as you can :banana:

TheMightyFed
09-30-2005, 01:47 PM
I think he will clinch the 30 matches streak now... congrats Rog, so professionnal...

TheMightyFed
09-30-2005, 01:47 PM
Federer is on 1225
Nadal has 853
If he wins Vienna (+15) Basel (+15) Madrid (+100) Paris (+100)
and goes undefeated in TMC(+150)

He has to call Canas doctor to do that...

Exodus
09-30-2005, 01:48 PM
Roger reigns supreme!

onewoman74
09-30-2005, 01:49 PM
He has to call Canas doctor to do that...

ya think? ;)

Pea
09-30-2005, 01:50 PM
One more match.:D

Nathy
09-30-2005, 02:14 PM
Done...

Dirk
09-30-2005, 02:16 PM
Nadal is what 2,600 entry points behind Roger? Roger was a lock after the USO.

Xmanfan
09-30-2005, 02:24 PM
murray's got a good chance - although he'll have all the fans against him. Gotta get to final and be the one to break Roger in the final!

Nathy
09-30-2005, 02:24 PM
I read yesterday that Roger would lock it by beating Müller and now that done some people say it is still not done :confused:

Nathy
09-30-2005, 02:24 PM
murray's got a good chance - although he'll have all the fans against him. Gotta get to final and be the one to break Roger in the final!

And why post this in this thread :confused:

R.Federer
09-30-2005, 02:25 PM
Roger was in principel a "lock" after USO but not theoretically. nadal could catch him by winning 2 T.M.S plus T.M.C. That was very unlikely but possible in probability.

After tomorrow it is with probability zero that Roge can be overtaken for the year. Allez Roge!

Drimal
09-30-2005, 02:49 PM
Gilles :sad: :hug:

mangoes
09-30-2005, 03:35 PM
Congratulations Roger.

TennisGrandSlam
09-30-2005, 03:42 PM
Federer is on 1225
Nadal has 853
If he wins Vienna (+15) Basel (+15) Madrid (+100) Paris (+100)
and goes undefeated in TMC(+150)
and Federer gets no more points than he can get 1233 Points

So Roger needs to win one more match on Saturday to GUARANTEE the
Year End


Nadal run out of quota of the best 5 other (minor) games' result
(His title in China Open is the 6th other game title! No ATP race point increase, ATP only count the best 5 result for the tournament other than Grand Slam, TMS and TMC)



For ATP Race Points only, Nadal has atmost 350 points to be added if he will win the last 2 TMS and Masters Cup!

Even though Federer don't play the rest games, Nadal can't catch up Federer!

:cool:

RonE
09-30-2005, 03:51 PM
This is it! Go for the kill tomorrow Rogi!!! :bounce:

nobama
09-30-2005, 05:40 PM
Nadal run out of quota of the best 5 other (minor) games' result
(His title in China Open is the 6th other game title! No ATP race point increase, ATP only count the best 5 result for the tournament other than Grand Slam, TMS and TMC)



For ATP Race Points only, Nadal has atmost 350 points to be added if he will win the last 2 TMS and Masters Cup!

Even though Federer don't play the rest games, Nadal can't catch up Federer!

:cool:So is it a "lock" right now then or not unless he wins tomorrow? :confused:

1sun
09-30-2005, 05:42 PM
its not officaly locked right now, a win tomorrow and it will be mathematicaly impossible for nadal to catch roger.

1sun
09-30-2005, 05:43 PM
So is it a "lock" right now then or not unless he wins tomorrow? :confused:
its not locked right now, will be if he wins tomorrow

naiwen
09-30-2005, 05:57 PM
Nadal run out of quota of the best 5 other (minor) games' result
(His title in China Open is the 6th other game title! No ATP race point increase, ATP only count the best 5 result for the tournament other than Grand Slam, TMS and TMC)



For ATP Race Points only, Nadal has atmost 350 points to be added if he will win the last 2 TMS and Masters Cup!

Even though Federer don't play the rest games, Nadal can't catch up Federer!

:cool:

Not quite. Look at Nadal's best 5 results, 2 of them are just 35 points. This means he has a chance to get 350 (madrid+paris+shanghai) + 2 * (50-35) (to win two more titles with 50 points) = 380 points. So for Roger to seal year-end No.1 *theoretically* is simply earn (380-357)+1 = 24 more points after USO. That's why Roger will clinch No.1 if he makes the final.

landoud
09-30-2005, 05:58 PM
that's great .... he deserves it anyway

I♥PsY@Mus!c
09-30-2005, 06:05 PM
Gilles I still love you. :sobbing:

ys
09-30-2005, 07:15 PM
At this point he is about 94% of a guarantee to end year as #1..

Adman
09-30-2005, 07:37 PM
Roger Federer the best tennis player in the world, he will never surrender the number 1 spot for a long while yet.

ys
09-30-2005, 07:41 PM
Roger Federer the best tennis player in the world, he will never surrender the number 1 spot for a long while yet.

Never say never. He is only human.. People get injured, sick, obsessed, lazy.. Anything can happen. Faster than you'd ever think.

Art&Soul
10-01-2005, 12:35 AM
Yay ROGI, #1 spot is on your hand :banana: :bounce: :banana:

cecilija
10-01-2005, 12:43 AM
:worship:
i am sure he will get injured in any point of his career
(that is not a wish , so trolls do not get angry with me)
Never say never. He is only human.. People get injured, sick, obsessed, lazy.. Anything can happen. Faster than you'd ever think.

lunahielo
10-01-2005, 01:18 AM
Keep on rolling, Ninja~~~ :)

Billabong
10-01-2005, 01:29 AM
YEAH Cmon FED secure that #1 spot:yeah: GOOOO FEDDDDDD:banana:!!!

Leo
10-01-2005, 04:14 AM
Going through the entire year without dropping the #1 ranking for a single week is certainly commendable. :worship:

MissMoJo
10-01-2005, 04:34 AM
Yay Rogi! :D

yanchr
10-01-2005, 09:18 AM
Nathy, time to change the title :bounce::bounce:

Congratulations Roger for successfully claiming your 2nd consecutive year-end No1!!!

RonE
10-01-2005, 09:54 AM
Going through the entire year without dropping the #1 ranking for a single week is certainly commendable. :worship:

:yeah: he now joins Hewitt, Sampras and Lendl as the last players to have accomplished this feat. Brilliant :worship:

Nathy
10-01-2005, 11:41 AM
Nathy, time to change the title :bounce::bounce:

Congratulations Roger for successfully claiming your 2nd consecutive year-end No1!!!

Done :woohoo:

Corey Feldman
10-01-2005, 11:45 AM
his legend grows all the time :worship:

nobama
10-01-2005, 11:46 AM
What's the earliest someone secured #1 for the year?

uNIVERSE mAN
10-01-2005, 12:11 PM
Roger's bad day is 1000 times better than Sampras's, hence he wins more.

nobama
10-01-2005, 12:58 PM
Roger came awfully close to ending 2003 as #1 as well. Look how close Andy and Roger were in 2003. Just think if Roger had beaten Andy in the semis in Canada and went on to win that TMS....

Roddick
6 Wins
2 Finals
12 Semis
1 Grand Slam
2 Masters Series
72-19 W/L (.791)
907 ATP Race Points
4535 YE ATP Ranking Points

Federer
7 Wins
2 Finals
11 Semis
1 Grand Slam
1 Masters Cup
78-17 W/L (.821)
875 ATP Race Points
4375 YE ATP Ranking Points

Sjengster
10-01-2005, 01:01 PM
Or if he had managed not to play a stinker against Mantilla in the Rome final, he would have closed the gap to 10 ranking points, and just 2 in the Race. It would have been interesting for sure if he had beaten Roddick in the semis in Montreal, because he would then have lost his first ever final as world no. 1 (something he hasn't done yet).

In retrospect it's a good thing he didn't make it, he wasn't even the second best player of 2003, let alone the best.

TennisGrandSlam
10-01-2005, 01:12 PM
murray's got a good chance - although he'll have all the fans against him. Gotta get to final and be the one to break Roger in the final!


No way, Federder will win the final! :rolleyes:

R.Federer
10-01-2005, 01:35 PM
Fantastique!!!!

To poster who asked: I am sure he locked No.1 earlier last year because of his 3 slams but also because there was no second great consistent player like nadal this year who could catch him

RonE
10-01-2005, 01:39 PM
Fantastique!!!!

To poster who asked: I am sure he locked No.1 earlier last year because of his 3 slams but also because there was no second great consistent player like nadal this year who could catch him

He locked #1 for the year last year after beating Hewitt in the U.S. Open final- incidentally, that's the earliest stage in a season any player has guaranteed the #1 spot for the end of the year EVER.

nobama
10-01-2005, 01:40 PM
Or if he had managed not to play a stinker against Mantilla in the Rome final, he would have closed the gap to 10 ranking points, and just 2 in the Race. It would have been interesting for sure if he had beaten Roddick in the semis in Montreal, because he would then have lost his first ever final as world no. 1 (something he hasn't done yet).

In retrospect it's a good thing he didn't make it, he wasn't even the second best player of 2003, let alone the best.How do you know he would've lost the final in Montreal? And if you don't think Roger was even 2nd best in 2003, do you think Roddick was the best in 2003?

nobama
10-01-2005, 01:44 PM
He locked #1 for the year last year after beating Hewitt in the U.S. Open final- incidentally, that's the earliest stage in a season any player has guaranteed the #1 spot for the end of the year EVER.What's probably most amazing to me (though there are so many with Rog) is that he managed to retain his #1 ranking even while another player was able to rack up 10 titles (so far) including a grand slam. How often has that happened? So far there are only two titles Roger didn't defend from last year - AO and Canada. But he replaced the lost points from Canada by winning Cincy where he went out R1 last year.

Timariot
10-01-2005, 01:45 PM
He locked #1 for the year last year after beating Hewitt in the U.S. Open final- incidentally, that's the earliest stage in a season any player has guaranteed the #1 spot for the end of the year EVER.

He has actually gathered more points this year, but Nadal has also had awesome year which has kept some uncertainity about year-end #1, whilst last year there were no credible challengers. Almost any other year, Nadal would have been #1 by a mile.

RonE
10-01-2005, 01:46 PM
How do you know he would've lost the final in Montreal?

Because he would have played a certain Mr. Nalbandian there who proceeded to dump him out of Cincinnati and the U.S. Open successively right afterwards.

Actually it could have been a dubios record to hold- losing to the same player in all 3 required North American summer hardcourt events in succession.

Timariot
10-01-2005, 01:47 PM
What's probably most amazing to me (though there are so many with Rog) is that he managed to retain his #1 ranking even while another player was able to rack up 10 titles (so far) including a grand slam. How often has that happened?

Muster won 11 titles in 1995, including a Slam, and ended up #3 if memory serves. He did spend some time as #1 during the year, though.

RonE
10-01-2005, 01:52 PM
Muster won 11 titles in 1995, including a Slam, and ended up #3 if memory serves. He did spend some time as #1 during the year, though.

It was 12 titles and not 11.

He never reached #1 in 1995- he got to #1 in February of 1996. The big outcry at the time was that he did it by accumulating many optional events on clay that allegedly "supeficially" boosted his points total. This was one of the main things that eventually led to the change in the ranking system whereby only the 5 best results in optional events would be counted for ranking points.

Timariot
10-01-2005, 02:04 PM
It was 12 titles and not 11.

He never reached #1 in 1995- he got to #1 in February of 1996. The big outcry at the time was that he did it by accumulating many optional events on clay that allegedly "supeficially" boosted his points total. This was one of the main things that eventually led to the change in the ranking system whereby only the 5 best results in optional events would be counted for ranking points.

Yes, you are correct. Another 'milestone' in this regard was Berasategui's qualifying for YEC 1994, when he played 35 (!) events, winning 7 titles and grand total of 2 (two) matches outside of clay. In YEC, he was promptly crushed by hardcourt players (admittably, YEC used to have lightning-fast surface back then, so that even big servers were complaining). This was actually much worse than Muster's run, because he at least won one indoors title, whilst Berasategui in 1994 wasn't a slightest threat outside of clay.

Sjengster
10-01-2005, 02:31 PM
How do you know he would've lost the final in Montreal? And if you don't think Roger was even 2nd best in 2003, do you think Roddick was the best in 2003?

Nope, Ferrero was the best, but he was arguably the victim of his own success the previous year - the finalist points from Shanghai dropped off before the TMC, and he couldn't replace them. Without such a poor showing in Houston he could have been contending for the top spot right till the end with Roddick.

The "Three Kings" in 2003:

Ferrero: 4 titles, 1 Slam, 2 Slam finals, 2 TMS titles
Roddick: 6 titles, 1 Slam, 3 Slam semi-finals, 2 TMS titles
Federer: 7 titles, 1 Slam, 0 TMS titles, 1 TMC title

This is the classic case of quality over quantity. Federer was title leader for the year, but he was also the optional king of 2003 with five victories in small events. He didn't win a single TMS event or reach even one Slam QF outside Wimbledon - in fact, if Agassi had played more you could make a better case for him as the third best player in the world, considering that his Slam results were superior and he won a TMS. Only the victory in Houston at the end of the year made him worthy to end the year no. 2 (and indeed, made it mathematically possible for him to do so).

nobama
10-01-2005, 03:28 PM
Nope, Ferrero was the best, but he was arguably the victim of his own success the previous year - the finalist points from Shanghai dropped off before the TMC, and he couldn't replace them. Without such a poor showing in Houston he could have been contending for the top spot right till the end with Roddick.

The "Three Kings" in 2003:

Ferrero: 4 titles, 1 Slam, 2 Slam finals, 2 TMS titles
Roddick: 6 titles, 1 Slam, 3 Slam semi-finals, 2 TMS titles
Federer: 7 titles, 1 Slam, 0 TMS titles, 1 TMC title

This is the classic case of quality over quantity. Federer was title leader for the year, but he was also the optional king of 2003 with five victories in small events. He didn't win a single TMS event or reach even one Slam QF outside Wimbledon - in fact, if Agassi had played more you could make a better case for him as the third best player in the world, considering that his Slam results were superior and he won a TMS. Only the victory in Houston at the end of the year made him worthy to end the year no. 2 (and indeed, made it mathematically possible for him to do so).We could go through every year and 're-adjust' the top 10 based on "quality" wins (however one would define "quality" exactly). But the numbers are what they are the point difference between Roddick and Federer was 160 pts. So he came damn close to ending the year at #1. Now whether that would've been a true reflection of the "best" that year player is another argument.

Sjengster
10-01-2005, 03:42 PM
My quality over quantity argument is based on the titles won - Federer won the most, but Ferrero and Roddick won more required events and while Ferrero had the fewest overall, he had the best Slam results.

And yes, Federer could well have ended the year no. 1, but he wouldn't have been the best player that year (I mean, Roddick wasn't quite either IMO, but he got the top spot).

ClaycourtaZzZz.
10-01-2005, 03:48 PM
So now he can let Murray win it.:)

TheMightyFed
10-01-2005, 03:49 PM
Now my avatar makes sense... ;)

ClaycourtaZzZz.
10-01-2005, 03:52 PM
:ras:

landoud
10-01-2005, 03:52 PM
was expected no big surprise

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-01-2005, 09:05 PM
I have to wait till next year. :(

Oh well, #2 isn't bad for 19. Vamos Rafa!! :worship:

Corey Feldman
10-02-2005, 12:17 AM
I have to wait till next year. :(

you'll be waiting longer than that.

cecilija
10-02-2005, 12:22 AM
He will wait forever :)
you'll be waiting longer than that.

Corey Feldman
10-02-2005, 12:24 AM
:yeah:

Art&Soul
10-02-2005, 01:09 AM
He will wait forever :)

:cool: :D :cool:

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-02-2005, 02:49 AM
2 yrs at most then Nadal will be beating him AO, Miami, RG. :D
Fed will still have wimbledon. ;)