If Federer doesn't play again this year, Nadal could take over #1 early next year.... [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

If Federer doesn't play again this year, Nadal could take over #1 early next year....

NYCtennisfan
10-23-2005, 07:39 PM
As it stands right now, Nadal is 1460 entry points behind Federer. Let's say that Federer doesn't play again the rest ot this year. His #1 ranking is safe for the year but in real jeopardy at the beginning of next year.

If Nadal can make the SF in Paris and then win the TMC with say 1 loss, then he gains:

Paris: 45 race points/225 points
TMC: 125 race points/625 points

This would put Nadal at 1123 race points, 122 behind Federer. In entry ranking points, he would only be 610 points behind going into Doha next year.

If Federer doesn't win Doha next year or doesn't play it, his lead going into the Australian Open would be quite slim.

At the Australian Open, Federer would have 450 points to defend and Nadal would have 75 points to defend. If Federer only gets to the SF while Nadal wins it, Nadal could stand to gain 925 points, thereby taking over #1.

That's a lot of ifs but if Federer doesn't play again this year and Nadal finishes strongly, Fed's #1 is in real jeoapardy early next year. Fed has Doha, AO SF, Dubai, Rotterdam, IW, and Miami to defend before the clay season. That's 2250 points to defend.

It should be interesting. I do believe that Federer will play the TMC.

Grinder
10-23-2005, 07:42 PM
I wonder if Federer will play the Masters Cup while being hamprered by injury, he might be vulnerable. If he has torn ligaments in his leg then his movement would be severely hurt and pretty much any player in the field should be able to take advantage.

Fee
10-23-2005, 07:45 PM
Isn't Nadal planning to stop playing until the TMC now? I have doubts that he will play Paris, I really do. He must be exhausted.

adee-gee
10-23-2005, 07:51 PM
Rafa said he spoke to Roger, and he really hopes Roger plays in the TMC because it would be bad for tennis if he didn't. He said they are rivals but they have a great relationship off court. Sweet :D

jenanun
10-23-2005, 07:57 PM
i doubt rafa will play in paris....

oneandonlyhsn
10-23-2005, 08:01 PM
Rafa said he spoke to Roger, and he really hopes Roger plays in the TMC because it would be bad for tennis if he didn't. He said they are rivals but they have a great relationship off court. Sweet :D

:eek: Really, I knew they have loads of respect for each other and like each other but Andy better watch out if he doesnt make a move soon Rafa will bounce on Rogi :D

adee-gee
10-23-2005, 08:05 PM
:eek: Really, I knew they have loads of respect for each other and like each other but Andy better watch out if he doesnt make a move soon Rafa will bounce on Rogi :D
Rafa's only got eyes for F-Lo ;)

ExpectedWinner
10-23-2005, 08:08 PM
Federer should return only if (when) he's fully fit. He should see a big picture. Noone can stay No1 forever. Winnig GS is what prime years of a career for. He'll need his health for that.

NYCtennisfan
10-23-2005, 08:41 PM
^This is really true. This is what Sampras decided and his results turned out pretty well. :) Sampras however didn't have someone like Nadal at his heels who had the ability to dominate the clay season and do well on hardcourts thereby amassing very large point totals.

madmanfool
10-23-2005, 09:08 PM
pfff i don't know, once the gravel season is there it will be Nadal who's defending a lot of points... we'll see

NYCtennisfan
10-23-2005, 09:12 PM
^If Federer is still #1 going into the clay season then he will in all liklihood stay there for the rest of the year.

Kip
10-23-2005, 09:36 PM
Federer should return only if (when) he's fully fit. He should see a big picture. Noone can stay No1 forever. Winnig GS is what prime years of a career for. He'll need his health for that.

I think that goes w/o
saying.

Roger has shown time and time
again to be very wise about his body
and game and IMO will do exactly what
he needs to do whatever that may be.

IMO, he won't be losing his #1 spot,
he just won't.

NYCtennisfan
10-23-2005, 09:38 PM
IMO, he won't be losing his #1 spot,
he just won't.

I don't think he will either but for the first time in a long time, there is actually a possibility of him losing it at next year's AO.

NYCtennisfan
10-23-2005, 10:07 PM
Does anyone know if both Federer and Nadal are signed up for Doha next year? I'm sure that the appearence fees will be quite tasty.

jenanun
10-23-2005, 10:12 PM
nadal will take the no.1 spot from federer, its just a matter of when, could be as early as early next year, towards the end of year, or the year after

afterall, federer couldnt be world no.1 FOREVER....

its incredible how well they both have done this year... 8 TMS between 2 players...

and with nadal's results this year

HE IS THE BEST 2ND RANKED TENNIS PLAYER EVER!!!!

Merton
10-23-2005, 10:13 PM
Does anyone know if both Federer and Nadal are signed up for Doha next year? I'm sure that the appearence fees will be quite tasty.

No, it seems Rafa has committed to Chennay.

NYCtennisfan
10-23-2005, 10:16 PM
^Thank you for that information. :)

megadeth
10-24-2005, 12:03 AM
i kinda hoped that both will play paris :(

it would be a great showdown on who would be the only one to win 5 masters!

they totally didn't leave anything for the other guys! :)

Chloe le Bopper
10-24-2005, 12:17 AM
nadal will take the no.1 spot from federer, its just a matter of when, could be as early as early next year, towards the end of year, or the year after

afterall, federer couldnt be world no.1 FOREVER....

its incredible how well they both have done this year... 8 TMS between 2 players...

and with nadal's results this year

HE IS THE BEST 2ND RANKED TENNIS PLAYER EVER!!!!

I'm sure that if you look back in history you can find a 2nd ranked player with better slam results on their total. He is certainly the "best" 2nd ranked player in quite a while though. Just about any other year and he'd be number 1 easily.

Sjengster
10-24-2005, 12:18 AM
I seem to remember reading that McEnroe was still no. 2 behind Lendl in the rankings for most of 1984 despite his incredible year, until finally the computer agreed with him after the US Open.

star
10-24-2005, 12:37 AM
As I recall, Lendl played a heavy schedule.

jacobhiggins
10-24-2005, 02:17 AM
Nadal might take over the number 1 position sometime in the year like Safin did this year, but I really don't think he will end the year as number 1, Federer wins almost everthing he enters and can win consistantly on every surface out there, King Federer is too good!

lucashg
10-24-2005, 02:41 AM
Nadal might take over the number 1 position sometime in the year like Safin did this year, but I really don't think he will end the year as number 1, Federer wins almost everthing he enters and can win consistantly on every surface out there, King Federer is too good!

Safin never took the #1 away from Federer, but you probably meant in the Race Rankings? Well, that one doesn't really count until the end of the year.

Does anyone know if both Federer and Nadal are signed up for Doha next year? I'm sure that the appearence fees will be quite tasty.

Apparently, Federer will play Doha and Nadal will play Chennai.

I don't think he will either but for the first time in a long time, there is actually a possibility of him losing it at next year's AO.

Well, after RG people were saying Nadal would take over the throne of ATP by the end of the year, and look what happened. He had a real chance doing so, but probably counting of Federer's abscence from the tour, which is what's happening now. I'm not saying he wouldn't win anything :rolleyes: but Federer sure would gather some points himself.

RogiFan88
10-24-2005, 04:09 AM
Rafa is too good too!

Scotso
10-24-2005, 04:21 AM
Vamosssssssssssssss :D

Skyward
10-24-2005, 04:30 AM
Vamosssssssssssssss :D

For what, for whom? :confused: Is this really a cheering thread?

Oriental_Rain
10-24-2005, 04:37 AM
No way jose! Federer knows the importance of #1 ranking

Scotso
10-24-2005, 04:51 AM
For what, for whom? :confused: Is this really a cheering thread?

:bounce:

eddie_hyden
10-24-2005, 05:16 AM
Well, after RG people were saying Nadal would take over the throne of ATP by the end of the year, and look what happened. He had a real chance doing so, but probably counting of Federer's abscence from the tour, which is what's happening now. I'm not saying he wouldn't win anything :rolleyes: but Federer sure would gather some points himself.

well i think more ppl were saying that nadal will be gone from the radar once the clay season is over, compared to him taking over the ATP throne by year end.

NYCtennisfan
10-24-2005, 05:35 AM
I seem to remember reading that McEnroe was still no. 2 behind Lendl in the rankings for most of 1984 despite his incredible year, until finally the computer agreed with him after the US Open.

Nope. McEnroe was #1 for most of that year. Perhaps you are thinking of Lendl in 1985. McEnroe was #1 for most of the year until Lendl's big victory over MAC at the USO shot him up to #1 and he would stay there for three years until Wilander took it over.

jtipson
10-24-2005, 10:04 AM
As it stands right now, Nadal is 1460 entry points behind Federer. Let's say that Federer doesn't play again the rest ot this year. His #1 ranking is safe for the year but in real jeopardy at the beginning of next year.

If Nadal can make the SF in Paris and then win the TMC with say 1 loss, then he gains:

Paris: 45 race points/225 points
TMC: 125 race points/625 points

This would put Nadal at 1123 race points, 122 behind Federer. In entry ranking points, he would only be 610 points behind going into Doha next year.

If Federer doesn't win Doha next year or doesn't play it, his lead going into the Australian Open would be quite slim.

At the Australian Open, Federer would have 450 points to defend and Nadal would have 75 points to defend. If Federer only gets to the SF while Nadal wins it, Nadal could stand to gain 925 points, thereby taking over #1.

That's a lot of ifs but if Federer doesn't play again this year and Nadal finishes strongly, Fed's #1 is in real jeoapardy early next year. Fed has Doha, AO SF, Dubai, Rotterdam, IW, and Miami to defend before the clay season. That's 2250 points to defend.

It should be interesting. I do believe that Federer will play the TMC.

You're quite right that Nadal can be number one early in the New Year.
Let's get the numbers on this. I'm going to use entry points because race points don't really make sense over a year-end (that's if they make much sense at all).

Currently (that's after Madrid) the status is:
1. Federer 6975
2. Nadal 4940

Let's assume Federer doesn't play the rest of the year. He will lose 750 points from the TMC after Paris, giving him 6225.

If Nadal plays and wins everything, he would get 75 from Basel, 325 from Paris (because he drops his sixth optional), and 750 from the TMC if undefeated. That means he would finish the year with 6090, 135 points behind Federer.

In the first two weeks of the year, Nadal is playing Chennai and Sydney , both of which are 175 points (afaik). His 18th result is already 175 points, so he cannot gain before the AO. Federer, however, is defending 250 in Doha, and could lose all of these as he doesn't have a 19th result. This would give Nadal the number one position with 6090 to Federer's 5975. If Nadal had lost to Ljubicic yesterday this loophole would be gone, and Federer would be guaranteed to overtake Sampras in the consecutive-weeks-at-number one-streak list.

At the AO, Federer is defending a semi-final (450), and Nadal a fourth round (150). It's too early to calculate all the possible outcomes, save for saying that Federer needs a lead of 1300 over Nadal going into the AO to be sure of not losing the top spot. That is still possible.

jtipson
10-24-2005, 10:08 AM
I'm sure that if you look back in history you can find a 2nd ranked player with better slam results on their total. He is certainly the "best" 2nd ranked player in quite a while though. Just about any other year and he'd be number 1 easily.

Yep, how about Becker in 1989 with Grand Slam results slightly worse than Federer's this year: won Wimbledon and the US Open, semi at Roland Garros, 4th round at the AO. He wasn't number one at all in 1989 or even 1990, he only finally got it after he'd won the AO in 1991.

pommyNT
10-24-2005, 10:41 AM
i wish roger will be able to do the TMC.
if he can get to the final, this whole things would be gone.
And he would be no.1 till the clay season, which means till the end of next year.

Mrs. B
10-24-2005, 10:52 AM
Roger will play Shanghai. ;)

nobama
10-24-2005, 12:20 PM
Roger will play Shanghai. ;)I hope your right.

Saw this in a news story about Rafa's win yesterday...

http://sport.independent.co.uk/tennis/article321774.ece

After defeating Federer at the French Open, Nadal wanted to practise with Federer at Wimbledon, but was too shy to ask. He approached Vittorio Selmi, the ATP's head of player liaison to make the request on his behalf. Selimi told Nadal to go ahead and ask, but then explained the situation to Federer.

One day, when Nadal was in the players' lounge, Federer walked in and said to Selmi in a loud voice: "Do you know why this guy doesn't want to practise with me?" Nadal blushed.

The pair did not get to hit together, because Nadal lost in the second round, but a bond was established.Rafa was too shy to ask Roger to hit with him.... :awww:

Jogy
10-24-2005, 12:23 PM
I hope he takes #1 from Federer away the soonest as possible!

Galaxystorm
10-24-2005, 12:33 PM
I hope your right.

Saw this in a news story about Rafa's win yesterday...

Rafa was too shy to ask Roger to hit with him.... :awww:

During Wimbly Rafa watched a lot of Roger's practises because he wanted to learn Fed's secrets on grass and Rafa said : " I've realized he hits with topspin on grass , then it isn't necessary to change game and to hit flat ".

nobama
10-24-2005, 12:34 PM
I hope he takes #1 from Federer away the soonest as possible!And why is that? Because Federer is such a horrible person that he needs to be dethroned as soon as possible? :shrug:

bokehlicious
10-24-2005, 12:47 PM
Why do you continue to answer to those brainless basic fed bashers ? They'll get bored if nobody plays their game :rolleyes:

Jim Jones
10-24-2005, 12:49 PM
Naldal has withdrawn form Basel so put your theories to rest :D

jtipson
10-24-2005, 01:19 PM
Ok, so Nadal loses the opportunity to gain 75 points (but more importantly, decides to have a rest). He can still overtake Federer after Doha, but he must win every match in Paris and Shanghai, and Federer musn't win any.

nobama
10-24-2005, 02:11 PM
I love these news stories about how Rafa is closing the gap in the ATP Race. I guess these news writers don't know that it's impossible for him to win the Race even if he does win Paris and TMC.

Exodus
10-24-2005, 02:52 PM
I hope he takes #1 from Federer away the soonest as possible!


In your dreams! Nadal will never be no. 1 as long as Federer is still around and when Federer retires Nadal won't be a threat anymore. Nadal has already reached his peak and it's only going down from here

landoud
10-24-2005, 03:09 PM
nadal will take the no.1 spot from federer, its just a matter of when, could be as early as early next year, towards the end of year, or the year after

afterall, federer couldnt be world no.1 FOREVER....

its incredible how well they both have done this year... 8 TMS between 2 players...

and with nadal's results this year

HE IS THE BEST 2ND RANKED TENNIS PLAYER EVER!!!!
u r totally right

Sjengster
10-24-2005, 03:11 PM
In your dreams! Nadal will never be no. 1 as long as Federer is still around and when Federer retires Nadal won't be a threat anymore. Nadal has already reached his peak and it's only going down from here

Yeeesssss..... look out for the fairies at the bottom of your garden, too.

star
10-24-2005, 03:16 PM
Bob Larson said that if you translated Nadal's points into the WTA, he would be number one. I don't know if he means all the players points being translated into WTA points, or if it would be against the WTA players points. :confused:

jtipson
10-24-2005, 03:20 PM
I guess he must have meant if you took Nadal's points total and put it straight in the WTA list he'd be at the top. But then, with nearly 5000 points it's enough to be number one on the ATP usually.

star
10-24-2005, 03:26 PM
Yes, he mentioned that too. I'll have to get the quote.

Ironic that it really does Nadal no good at all. There have been years when his current results would have made him the ATP's #1; if his results were translated to the WTA, he would currently be #1 over there. But, of course, he remains #2 this year, and cannot move above that ranking. At least he has now clinched the year-end #2; that happened when Andy Roddick lost here. And if Roger Federer's injury is serious enough, Nadal might have a chance at #1 next spring.

So I guess he means against the WTA players. :shrug:

NYCtennisfan
10-24-2005, 04:19 PM
I guess he must have meant if you took Nadal's points total and put it straight in the WTA list he'd be at the top. But then, with nearly 5000 points it's enough to be number one on the ATP usually.

Yep. Not many players have ever won 11 titles in one year including a slam and 4 big TMS events.

Jogy
10-24-2005, 04:23 PM
And why is that? Because Federer is such a horrible person that he needs to be dethroned as soon as possible? :shrug:
I don't like Federer and everyone else having #1 ranking is good for me. The same like other people hate Hewitt, Nadal or Roddick and don't, didn't want them as #1.

lucashg
10-24-2005, 04:38 PM
well i think more ppl were saying that nadal will be gone from the radar once the clay season is over, compared to him taking over the ATP throne by year end.

I guess both ends were filled with wishful thinking, then.

So I guess he means against the WTA players.

I thought he was talking about WTA's ranking system. I don't know if it would mean that, but Nadal would have plenty of quality points.

I love these news stories about how Rafa is closing the gap in the ATP Race. I guess these news writers don't know that it's impossible for him to win the Race even if he does win Paris and TMC.

But he is, and even if it's impossible for him to reach Federer, it still does count in the Entry (which is the important ranking, anyway) thus this whole thread discussing his possibilities for next season.

jtipson
10-24-2005, 04:51 PM
I thought he was talking about WTA's ranking system. I don't know if it would mean that, but Nadal would have plenty of quality points.

Hmm, I think Federer would have a whole load more quality points than Nadal, so the gap would be bigger still.

Thanks for posting the quote, star :)

RogiFan88
10-24-2005, 05:32 PM
Yeeesssss..... look out for the fairies at the bottom of your garden, too.

intriguing flag there, sjengst! ;)

jenanun
10-24-2005, 06:35 PM
Though it maybe true, but i hate to see when people said 'nadal can be no.1 IF FEDERER IS INJURED AND CANNOT PLAY' blah blah blah...

how about nadal has improved alot on the hardcourt that he maybe able to produce better results early next year than federer and take the world no.1 from him? (provided that both of them are not injured...)

hm... well, i havent done the maths so i dont know whether its possible in theroy that nadal takes the no.1 even if federer is playing.. its just seems that to me, federer has more points to defend than nadal before the clay season arrives.....

lucashg
10-24-2005, 09:49 PM
Hmm, I think Federer would have a whole load more quality points than Nadal, so the gap would be bigger still.

Thanks for posting the quote, star :)

Why? I thought you gained quality points based in the rankings of the opponents you beat (and I actually thought it only happened if your ranking is lower than theirs), and Nadal was the one who climbed the rankings this year, as Roger was at his good old #1 for the whole of it.

ExpectedWinner
10-24-2005, 10:04 PM
(and I actually thought it only happened if your ranking is lower than theirs)

This part is wrong. Quality points were assigned to players rankings. For beating a player#X players received a certain amount of points regardless of their own ranking. For example, for beating Roddick Federer would have got the same amount of quality points as Muller, or Karlovic.

Truc
10-24-2005, 10:14 PM
Maybe he means that Nadal would be #1 without this "Best Five Others"-system. On the WTA tour, the points are just added in the Race. If they play 32 tournaments, they add the points earned in the 32 tournaments.

lucashg
10-24-2005, 10:34 PM
This part is wrong. Quality points were assigned to players rankings. For beating a player#X players received a certain amount of points regardless of their own ranking. For example, for beating Roddick Federer would have got the same amount of quality points as Muller, or Karlovic.

Oh, didn't know that, and that is more plausible. I guess then Federer would still have more quality points as I think he has beaten more people in the TOP10 than Nadal this year.

Thanks for explaining :yeah:

Sjengster
10-24-2005, 10:37 PM
intriguing flag there, sjengst! ;)

I was originally from Chad, but it has the exact same flag as Romania - confusion could abound if people fail to realise the unique nature of my location. ;)

adee-gee
10-24-2005, 10:55 PM
I was originally from Chad, but it has the exact same flag as Romania - confusion could abound if people fail to realise the unique nature of my location. ;)
Only an Englishman could talk like you Sjeng ;)

NYCtennisfan
10-24-2005, 11:32 PM
I like the idea of quality points myself. I liked the old ranking system in some ways better than the current one we have.

euroka1
10-24-2005, 11:40 PM
On the whole, I don't think much of the rankings. Not only are they just indicators of past performance (as the mutual funds so often tell us) but they are biased towards particular game styles and the sheer frequency of entering tournaments.

When he plays, Federer is incomparable.

NYCtennisfan
10-24-2005, 11:43 PM
When he plays, Federer is incomparable.

I've been wathcing tennis for a long time and this is pretty much true. As human beings, we have a need for objectivity. Rankings "prove" something to many people along with serving a purpose in seeding players for tournaments.

For example, there were very few people who thought that Muster or Agassi were better overall players than Sampras in 1995-1996 when each one reached #1 temporarily dethroning Sampras from #1.

disturb3d
10-24-2005, 11:48 PM
For example, there were very few people who thought that Muster or Agassi were better overall players than Sampras in 1995-1996 when each one reached #1 temporarily dethroning Sampras from #1.Had one of them sustained the year-end ranking of #1, views would be different.

When Marat and Rafael surpassed Roger in the Indesit Race this year, no one recognized them as the best players in the world. It was a case of "it's only a matter of time until Roger reclaims his position".
Same goes for the 90's.

NYCtennisfan
10-24-2005, 11:51 PM
Had one of them sustained the year-end ranking of #1, views would be different.

Maybe, depending upon how much Sampras played. Let's say Sampras gave up #1 for the year and was not hampered by injuries and lost a few times to these guys, then yes, things might be looked upon differently. I still think people would put Sampras at the top unless he faltered again the ensuing year.

jacobhiggins
10-25-2005, 01:29 AM
I don't think people who truely know the sport would say Nadal is the best if he became number 1 by Federer missing tournaments due to an injury or something else! People need to remember, Federer took almost a month off after Wimby and he might me missing a few tounraments due to his injury and he's STILL going to be number 1 by the end of the year! Nadal is closing the gap when Federer dosen't play, but when Federer is playing, he wins non stop on multiple surfaces, so he is very very difficult to catch up with! I think next year will be a lot like this year with Federer being out of reach to everybody and just out of reach to Nadal!

NYCtennisfan
10-25-2005, 04:34 AM
I don't think people who truely know the sport would say Nadal is the best if he became number 1 by Federer missing tournaments due to an injury or something else! People need to remember, Federer took almost a month off after Wimby and he might me missing a few tounraments due to his injury and he's STILL going to be number 1 by the end of the year! Nadal is closing the gap when Federer dosen't play, but when Federer is playing, he wins non stop on multiple surfaces, so he is very very difficult to catch up with! I think next year will be a lot like this year with Federer being out of reach to everybody and just out of reach to Nadal!

For fans of the sport to recognize Nadal as the true #1 if and when he gets there, he would have to stay #1 throughout most of a season meaning he has the best overall results regardless of surface. Then do it again after that. This is what separates the Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Nastase, Lendl, Samprase, Agassi, and Federer from Rios. Rafter, Muster, Roddick, etc.

lucashg
10-25-2005, 04:46 AM
Had one of them sustained the year-end ranking of #1, views would be different.

It would depend on how it happened.

When Marat and Rafael surpassed Roger in the Indesit Race this year, no one recognized them as the best players in the world. It was a case of "it's only a matter of time until Roger reclaims his position".
Same goes for the 90's.

Except that Nadal never surpassed Roger in the Race. They were tied after RG.

LaTenista
10-25-2005, 04:49 AM
:shrug: Anyone else think there is a noticeable absence of match-ups between the #1 and #2? Just think how many times Sampras and Agassi played each other while Federer and Nadal have played only 3 times - Miami twice and RG. It almost seems like they are avoiding each other - indeed they haven't played any of the same IS/ISG events this year. Fed won IW (Rafa was sick), Hamburg (Rafa injury), Cincinnati (Rafa lost 1st round) while Rafa claimed Monte Carlo (Gasquet dispatched Roger in QFs), Roma (Fed injury), Montreal (again foot injury), and most recently Madrid (yet another injury for Roger).

Of course, as far as rankings are concerned, if Rafa does play the same tournament(s) as Roger it is to his advantage to have Fed lose early since they can only meet in the finals these days.

I know it may sound unbelievable, but not only will Rafa displace Roger's No 1 position, he will be the youngest No 1 ever and possibly the youngest to end the year (2006) at No 1 - these records are currently held by Hewitt :devil:. Nadal is an amazing kid and I can't wait to see these things come true.

NYCtennisfan
10-25-2005, 05:47 AM
Anyone else think there is a noticeable absence of match-ups between the #1 and #2? Just think how many times Sampras and Agassi played each other while Federer and Nadal have played only 3 times - Miami twice and RG. It almost seems like they are avoiding each other - indeed they haven't played any of the same IS/ISG events this year. Fed won IW (Rafa was sick), Hamburg (Rafa injury), Cincinnati (Rafa lost 1st round) while Rafa claimed Monte Carlo (Gasquet dispatched Roger in QFs), Roma (Fed injury), Montreal (again foot injury), and most recently Madrid (yet another injury for Roger).

Of course, as far as rankings are concerned, if Rafa does play the same tournament(s) as Roger it is to his advantage to have Fed lose early since they can only meet in the finals these days.

I know it may sound unbelievable, but not only will Rafa displace Roger's No 1 position, he will be the youngest No 1 ever and possibly the youngest to end the year (2006) at No 1 - these records are currently held by Hewitt . Nadal is an amazing kid and I can't wait to see these things come true.

You have to give it time. Rafa has only been #2 for what? 15-20 weeks? It will happen next year. :)

megadeth
10-25-2005, 07:41 AM
from a race perspective, that's possible. we saw that with safin this year. but on the entry points ranking, i don't think nadal will catch up with fed... yet...

jtipson
10-25-2005, 10:05 AM
Had one of them sustained the year-end ranking of #1, views would be different.

No, I don't think so, year end ranking means squat. It's just being number one at a certain, convenient, tidy-looking week in the year. What shows how dominant a number one is how long you stay there and how big the gap is between you and the rest of the field.

When Marat and Rafael surpassed Roger in the Indesit Race this year, no one recognized them as the best players in the world. It was a case of "it's only a matter of time until Roger reclaims his position".
Same goes for the 90's.

Being number one in the race after the AO takes into account only 4 weeks of results. Being number one in the 1990s was entry number one, the same as today, and meant you had the highest number of points in the last 12 months. So the comparison with Safin is not valid.

Nadal did not overtake Federer in the race at any point, btw. They were level after Roland Garros, but Federer was ahead on required points.

Edit: now I see lucasg's reply too :worship:

jtipson
10-25-2005, 10:09 AM
:shrug: Anyone else think there is a noticeable absence of match-ups between the #1 and #2? Just think how many times Sampras and Agassi played each other while Federer and Nadal have played only 3 times - Miami twice and RG. It almost seems like they are avoiding each other - indeed they haven't played any of the same IS/ISG events this year. Fed won IW (Rafa was sick), Hamburg (Rafa injury), Cincinnati (Rafa lost 1st round) while Rafa claimed Monte Carlo (Gasquet dispatched Roger in QFs), Roma (Fed injury), Montreal (again foot injury), and most recently Madrid (yet another injury for Roger).

Of course, as far as rankings are concerned, if Rafa does play the same tournament(s) as Roger it is to his advantage to have Fed lose early since they can only meet in the finals these days.

I know it may sound unbelievable, but not only will Rafa displace Roger's No 1 position, he will be the youngest No 1 ever and possibly the youngest to end the year (2006) at No 1 - these records are currently held by Hewitt :devil:. Nadal is an amazing kid and I can't wait to see these things come true.

It's not surprising numbers one and two don't play each other that much really, especially if their surface preference is very different. The only chance of them playing is in required tournaments and they both get to the final. I would be surprised if 1 v 2 actually in more than 3 or 4 tournaments per year. With Federer and Nadal it will may happen more often, because they are both extremely consistent, but as you say, they have chosen to skip different TMS events, and that might continue in 2006.

euroka1
10-25-2005, 10:55 AM
No, I don't think so, year end ranking means squat. It's just being number one at a certain, convenient, tidy-looking week in the year. What shows how dominant a number one is how long you stay there and how big the gap is between you and the rest of the field.
:

That's very true. Federer is above them all, whether he plays or not. Nadal has yet to demonstrate staying power. Within the constraints and limitations of their games, Roddick, Hewitt and Safin have done this. As I said a few pages back, the ranking system as a whole does not impress me as a measure of all-court tennis talent but it does serve to put some order and interest into tournaments.

nobama
10-25-2005, 11:44 AM
It's not surprising numbers one and two don't play each other that much really, especially if their surface preference is very different. The only chance of them playing is in required tournaments and they both get to the final. I would be surprised if 1 v 2 actually in more than 3 or 4 tournaments per year. With Federer and Nadal it will may happen more often, because they are both extremely consistent, but as you say, they have chosen to skip different TMS events, and that might continue in 2006.Has Nadal played Roddick or Safin yet this year? He played Hewitt and Agassi only once and Roger twice.

jtipson
10-25-2005, 11:55 AM
Has Nadal played Roddick or Safin yet this year? He played Hewitt and Agassi only once and Roger twice.

No, neither of them. He's not played Safin at all yet, and Roddick twice last year (USO and Davis Cup final). But then they haven't exactly been lighting up the ATP since Nadal has reached the top five.

vincayou
10-25-2005, 11:58 AM
I don't think that Nadal deserves to be number one if he can't put better results in Grand slam. Let's compare their result this year :
Federer : SF, SF, Winner, Winner
Nadal : 1/8, Winner, 2nd round, 3rd round

He got tremendous results in master series but players are primarily judged on what they do in slams. And Federer has won all the masters series he played this year but one (MonteCarlo).

tennisman.
10-25-2005, 11:59 AM
Federer will be number1 as long as he keeps playing.

vincayou
10-25-2005, 12:00 PM
No, neither of them. He's not played Safin at all yet, and Roddick twice last year (USO and Davis Cup final). But then they haven't exactly been lighting up the ATP since Nadal has reached the top five.

Hewitt : SF of Wimbledon and USO
Roddick : final of Wimbledon.

Not that bad in my opinion.

euroka1
10-25-2005, 12:10 PM
Hewitt : SF of Wimbledon and USO
Roddick : final of Wimbledon.

Not that bad in my opinion.

But neither of these compared in intensity with Nadal's recent finals. Roddick was painfully outclassed in the Wimbledon one. His slam-bang game gets him so far (but admittedly quite far) but no further.

With Nadal, we are looking at a new generation and I find it very refreshing.

jtipson
10-25-2005, 12:17 PM
Hewitt : SF of Wimbledon and USO
Roddick : final of Wimbledon.

Not that bad in my opinion.

Ok, but let me clarify that then: they haven't been lighting up the ATP in the tournaments where they were likely to meet Nadal (Hewitt's USO semi the possible exception).

nobama
10-25-2005, 12:21 PM
Let's see what happens next year when Rafa's the favorite, the one with all these points to defend, and expected to go deep in every tournament he enters. What he's accomplished this year is incredible, but I think that will be very hard to duplicate. I'm still amazed that Roger was able to do it this year. This year the tour was pretty much the Roger and Rafa show. Can they do it again next year? I'm not so sure. :shrug:

Castafiore
10-25-2005, 12:27 PM
Let's just see if and when he reaches the number one spot before you start downplaying that accomplishment.


He got tremendous results in master series but players are primarily judged on what they do in slams. And Federer has won all the masters series he played this year but one (MonteCarlo).
Nadal has won all the master series he played this year but one (Miami) plus he has one Slam title at the age of 19.

The very clear and deserving number one at the moment is still Federer. No contest but just put it into perspective, will you?
This year, Nadal has collected 953 points if I'm not mistaken.
Take a look at some previous number ones.
it took Kuerten 839 points to reach the n°1 in 2000.
873 for Hewitt in 2001
897 for Hewitt in 2002
907 for Roddick in 2003

Nadal is unlucky to not be able to reach the number one because of the maestro but I don't understand why some of you feel the need to downplay the things he does.

lucashg
10-25-2005, 12:46 PM
Let's just see if and when he reaches the number one spot before you start downplaying that accomplishment.

Does it matter if he (Nadal) will probably do that once/if it happens? :p

Nadal has won all the master series he played this year but one (Miami) plus he has one Slam title at the age of 19.

But two, he did play Cincinnati.

The very clear and deserving number one at the moment is still Federer. No contest but just put it into perspective, will you?
This year, Nadal has collected 953 points if I'm not mistaken.
Take a look at some previous number ones.
it took Kuerten 839 points to reach the n°1 in 2000.
873 for Hewitt in 2001
897 for Hewitt in 2002
907 for Roddick in 2003

Nadal is unlucky to not be able to reach the number one because of the maestro but I don't understand why some of you feel the need to downplay the things he does.

Quite so, but what is there to do? I'm sure Federer could've lighten up his head before 2003 and start to win matches he should have and start his impact earlier than he did. I guess it's bad luck it only hit him in the head in 2003, but great luck it still did, and I'm not even talking about Safin.

lucashg
10-25-2005, 12:50 PM
Hewitt : SF of Wimbledon and USO
Roddick : final of Wimbledon.

Not that bad in my opinion.

Not that bad indeed. Roddick made the F in Cincinnati too.

But I guess you have to take into account that they've been injured, sick or slumping (Safin/Hewitt, Hewitt and Roddick respectively). And that's since RG, before they were still injured, slumping or having their usual clay seasons (Hewitt/Roddick, Safin and Roddick respectively).

Castafiore
10-25-2005, 01:00 PM
But two, he did play Cincinnati.

oh right, how could I forget that one. That seems to be erased from my memory :o


The thing is, nobody is in doubt that Federer is the clear and deserved number one but I think it's silly all the excuses some people come up to say that Nadal does not deserve to be number one after all he has done and looking back at previous number ones who received less comments for their top spot.
But I willl try to not make too many comments about it before some 'sensitive' people throw the "oh, Nadalfans are too sensitive' reply in my face. :angel:

euroka1
10-25-2005, 01:02 PM
Not that bad indeed. Roddick made the F in Cincinnati too.


Same comment. His game only took him so far. He was lucky that Hewitt was still coming back from illness.

Again, he was quite outclassed in the final.

nobama
10-25-2005, 02:14 PM
Let's just see if and when he reaches the number one spot before you start downplaying that accomplishment.



Nadal has won all the master series he played this year but one (Miami) plus he has one Slam title at the age of 19.

The very clear and deserving number one at the moment is still Federer. No contest but just put it into perspective, will you?
This year, Nadal has collected 953 points if I'm not mistaken.
Take a look at some previous number ones.
it took Kuerten 839 points to reach the n°1 in 2000.
873 for Hewitt in 2001
897 for Hewitt in 2002
907 for Roddick in 2003

Nadal is unlucky to not be able to reach the number one because of the maestro but I don't understand why some of you feel the need to downplay the things he does.I'm certainly not downplaying what he's done, I'm just saying it will be hard to duplicate. And as I said, I'm amazed Roger was able to do it this year. My issue is the thought that Rafa's going to take over #1 right away next year and will continue to win everything in sight. I'm taking a wait and see approach. Same thing with Roger.

nobama
10-25-2005, 02:19 PM
Again, he was quite outclassed in the final.Well I don't know about that, but Roger did play better in the finals than in his previous matches. Thing with Roger is he's proven he can beat just about anyone even when his play is below par (which it certainly was in Cincy).

lucashg
10-25-2005, 02:44 PM
Well I don't know about that, but Roger did play better in the finals than in his previous matches. Thing with Roger is he's proven he can beat just about anyone even when his play is below par (which it certainly was in Cincy).

That was one f. ugly tournament regarding Roger's matches, but he did step up in the finals and played some Roger Federer tennis there. Going back to his H2H against Andy, no wonder he was outclassed.

vincayou
10-25-2005, 03:11 PM
Not that bad indeed. Roddick made the F in Cincinnati too.

But I guess you have to take into account that they've been injured, sick or slumping (Safin/Hewitt, Hewitt and Roddick respectively). And that's since RG, before they were still injured, slumping or having their usual clay seasons (Hewitt/Roddick, Safin and Roddick respectively).

The thing is that Roddick and Hewitt are established top 5 players. So people are ready to downplay what they did because they have had better years in the past. But they are still top 5 and that's still an achievement. Especially when you play so few events (like Hewitt).

But it's true that Nadal will probably bother Federer much more than these two will do in the future.

ExpectedWinner
10-25-2005, 04:23 PM
:shrug: Anyone else think there is a noticeable absence of match-ups between the #1 and #2? .

For that matter there is a a noticeable absence of match-ups between No2 and the guys in top 10, except for Puerta and Coria

vs Roddick- 0 matches in 2005
vs Safin- 0
vs Hewitt- 1
vs Agassi-1
vs Davydenko-0
vs Nalbandian-0

RogiFan88
10-25-2005, 04:41 PM
No, neither of them. He's not played Safin at all yet, and Roddick twice last year (USO and Davis Cup final). But then they haven't exactly been lighting up the ATP since Nadal has reached the top five.

Rafa hasn't played Marat since they didn't play the same tournaments, i.e., Rafa played S Amer tour for one thing and more significantly, Marat just hasn't been there to meet Rafa in the tournaments they both played. In order for them to meet, they w have both had to go fairly deep, if not reach the SF or F.

IMO it's the absence of Safin that has made a big impact on the tour this year. When he does either "show up" or is healthy, that's when he does the most damage. He's the player who s be winning more titles [not just this year, but throughout his career].

As for Pandy and Lleyton, I'm sure Rafa could beat them now [and turn around his 0-3 hth vs. Lleyt]. I can't see either of them improving too much in their game any more... :p [waiting for the barrage of criticism... ;) ]

Galaxystorm
10-25-2005, 04:47 PM
For that matter there is a a noticeable absence of match-ups between No2 and the guys in top 10, except for Puerta and Coria

vs Roddick- 0 matches in 2005
vs Safin- 0
vs Hewitt- 1
vs Agassi-1
vs Davydenko-0
vs Nalbandian-0

This absence of matches is mainly due to those players haven't been able to reach at least the same round that Nadal has reached in the tournaments where both players played together .

*Nadal / Roddick : 6 times he has reached better round than Roddick, and Roddick only 3 times better than Nadal

*Nadal / Safin : Rafa 5 times , Marat 4

*Nadal/ Agassi : Rafa 3 times , Andre 2

* Nadal / Davydenko : 10 times / 3 times

* Nadal / Nalbandian : 6 times / 4 times

* Nadal / Hewitt : 1 time / Hewitt 4 times , Lleyton has been the only player in tha list able to reach more times a better round than Nadal when they played the same tournament

jenanun
10-25-2005, 04:56 PM
This absence of matches is mainly due to those players haven't been able to reach at least the same round that Nadal has reached in the tournaments where both players played together .

*Nadal / Roddick : 6 times he has reached better round than Roddick, and Roddick only 3 times better than Nadal

*Nadal / Safin : Rafa 5 times , Marat 4

*Nadal/ Agassi : Rafa 3 times , Andre 2

* Nadal / Davydenko : 10 times / 3 times

* Nadal / Nalbandian : 6 times / 4 times

* Nadal / Hewitt : 1 time / Hewitt 4 times , Lleyton has been the only player in tha list able to reach more times a better round than Nadal when they played the same tournament


:yeah:

that explains everything!

ExpectedWinner
10-25-2005, 05:00 PM
This absence of matches is mainly due to those players haven't been able to reach at least the same round that Nadal has reached in the tournaments where both players played together .



Funny, the same players were able to reach the same round that Federer has reached in the tournamets where both players played together.

vs Roddick-2 matches in 2005
vs Safin-2
vs Hewitt-3
vs Davydenko-3
vs Nalbandian-1
vs Agassi-4

Actually I just pointed out the fact and did not ask for a reason.

jtipson
10-25-2005, 05:01 PM
As for Pandy and Lleyton, I'm sure Rafa could beat them now [and turn around his 0-3 hth vs. Lleyt]. I can't see either of them improving too much in their game any more... :p [waiting for the barrage of criticism... ;) ]

I think Nadal will turn his h2h around against Lleyton, the last two matches have been pretty close and he is better than he was at the beginning of the year, when they last played. I'm not sure whether he could beat Roddick just yet though (apart from on clay), although given Andy's recent form anything's possible. He'd have little chance against a fit Safin, imo.

Galaxystorm
10-25-2005, 05:11 PM
Funny, the same players were able to reach the same round that Federer has reached in the tournamets where both players played together.

Roddick-2
Safin-2
Hewitt-3
Davydenko-3
Nalbandian-1
Agassi-4

Actually I just pointed out the fact and did not ask for a reason.

I would like to make a note , because maybe my message was a bit confused .

I've only counted the tournaments when both players playing together haven't been able to reach the same round, that is Nadal has reached a better round or the other way round, therefore in my stat i haven't counted when players reached the same round .

NYCtennisfan
10-25-2005, 05:14 PM
Nadal's ability to dominate the clay season will make him a threat to get to #1. Hewitt and Roddick excel on the sam surfaces as Roger so they have little to no chance to get past an injury free Federer. Nadal on the other hand can apply a lot of pressure by hogging say 350-450 race points during the clay season.

yanchr
10-25-2005, 05:14 PM
But I willl try to not make too many comments about it before some 'sensitive' people throw the "oh, Nadalfans are too sensitive' reply in my face. :angel:
Every time you will come up with long-ass posts defending Nadal after some post you think is downplaying Nadal, which actually is not in the least in my eyes. And you seem really try very hard and want to be as objective and fair as possible regarding Nadal and else, but actually it shows your bias even more...

Maybe I'm sensitive, but not many Nadalfans are too sensitive, only YOU...

Sorry, but I'm just so fed up...

jenanun
10-25-2005, 05:24 PM
Nadal's ability to dominate the clay season will make him a threat to get to #1. Hewitt and Roddick excel on the sam surfaces as Roger so they have little to no chance to get past an injury free Federer. Nadal on the other hand can apply a lot of pressure by hogging say 350-450 race points during the clay season.

I thought nadal is not playing in south america next year... so he will play less on clay next season...

to get past federer, apart from doing well on clay, he has to do well on hardcourt as well.....

NYCtennisfan
10-25-2005, 05:32 PM
I thought nadal is not playing in south america next year... so he will play less on clay next season...

to get past federer, apart from doing well on clay, he has to do well on hardcourt as well....

Yes, of course. :) I was commenting on how Nadal has the ability to apply pressure to Roger in ways Hewitt and Roddick can't because he can dominate a partiuclar season and thereby garner many of the points. Those points aren't gathered in South America but in Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Rome, Hamburg, and Paris. 350-450 points in this block is a huge chunk. Then you have some good results on hards, a QF or so at
Wimby and hope that Federer falters.

nobama
10-25-2005, 06:59 PM
Gee, I guess the rest of the tour should just retire and they can give all the trophies to Rafa.

jtipson
10-25-2005, 07:58 PM
Gee, I guess the rest of the tour should just retire and they can give all the trophies to Rafa.

That's not too much of a stretch, actually. Of 66 ATP-level tournaments on the 2005 calendar, Roger and Rafa have won exactly a third between them already.

RogiFan88
10-25-2005, 08:44 PM
A propos of nothing, apparently Rafa has THE best record in FINALS... ever. He is now 12-2... not bad, esp for a 19-year-old. This is just the beginning. [from a Spanish paper]

RonE
10-25-2005, 10:33 PM
A propos of nothing, apparently Rafa has THE best record in FINALS... ever. He is now 12-2... not bad, esp for a 19-year-old. This is just the beginning. [from a Spanish paper]

This in terms of % win-loss?

disturb3d
10-25-2005, 11:00 PM
86%

RonE
10-25-2005, 11:11 PM
86%

Yes I can see that, my question was if by best-ever record RogiFan meant it in terms of winning % but I guess that sort of answered my question :p

NYCtennisfan
10-26-2005, 12:18 AM
His won-loss in finals is really amazing since most talented teens reach finals only to be beaten by more experienced pros.

jacobhiggins
10-26-2005, 04:13 AM
I think Federer has what 23 straight final victories, that's just crazy!

RogiFan88
10-26-2005, 04:33 AM
This in terms of % win-loss?

Yes, in terms of W-L. Rafa has won 12 finals and lost 2. He has won 85,7%.

Rogi has won 80,4%.

Here's the article:

Tenis | MSM
RAFA NADAL ES EL MEJOR FINALISTA DE LA HISTORIA

Un dato explica la explosión de Rafa Nadal, que el domingo ganó su undécimo título de la temporada en el Masters Series de Madrid. Es el jugador que mejor rinde en las finales. Sólo ha perdido dos torneos en el último partido: Miami contra Federer y Auckland frente a Hrbaty.

FUERZA MENTAL Y FÍSICA. Rafa Nadal maneja las finales con la misma maestría que domina la bola.
(REUTERS)
25.10.2005
JESÚS MÍNGUEZ (MADRID)

Rafa Nadal ha batido muchos récords de precocidad esta temporada. El domingo, en el Madrid Arena, levantó su undécimo título de 2005, ganó Roland Garros en su debut, fue el español más joven en meterse entre los diez primeros de la ATP... Pero tras el destello de los trofeos se esconde una clave para sus triunfos. El ganador del Masters Series de Madrid es el mejor finalista de la historia. Un depredador del último set que cuenta con un 85,7% de victorias en finales. Ha jugado 14 y ha perdido dos, una en el Masters Series de Miami este año ante Federer y otra en 2004 en Auckland contra Hrbaty.

El suizo Federer, el número uno del mundo, tiene un porcentaje de triunfos del 80,4%. Pete Sampras (siete Wimbledon, cinco US Open y dos Abiertos de Australia) acabó su carrera con un 72,7%. Detrás de él otro ilustre, John Newcombe (siete grandes en total).

El nuevo fenómeno del tenis, con 19 años, luce la mirada de los que no perdonan una bola y sabe mantenerse estable en los momentos claves. Toni Nadal, su tío y entrenador, deja una frase para explicar su competitividad: "Engancha a la gente por su tipo de juego, que es muy caliente. Nunca da una bola por perdida. Siempre lo da todo sobre la pista".

En Madrid se pudo comprobar su fortaleza mental, ya que tras ir dos sets abajo contra un Ljubicic que metió 32 aces consiguió llevarle a un quinto y ganar el tie-break. "Rafa normalmente está a un alto nivel y siguió luchando pese a que no veía muy claro que podía ganar. Ahí es superior", explica Toni.

Nadal es un caso único en el mundo y, claro está, también en España. Juan Carlos Ferrero tiene un porcentaje de triunfos en finales del 45,8% (11-13); Carlos Moyá, del 48,6 (18-19) y el doble campeón de Roland Garros Sergi Bruguera, del 40% (14-21). Depredador Nadal no perdona en las finales.

5,2 millones de españoles ante la tele
Que Nadal es ya todo un fenómeno mediático lo reflejan las audiencias de televisión. 5.210.000 espectadores vieron por TVE1 la parte final del encuentro contra Ljubicic (45% de share). La media fue de 2.871.000 personas (25%) sin contar las que lo siguieron a través de Digital +. Fue la segunda retransmisión de tenis más seguida del año, tras la final de Roland Garros que ganó Nadal, que tuvo 4.714.000 espectadores de media (41,1% de share).
http://www.as.com/

Oriental_Rain
10-26-2005, 04:34 AM
its amazing how Federer breaks all the records. :worship: Nadal taking over the no.1 spot? thats remain to be seen :rolleyes:

RogiFan88
10-26-2005, 04:36 AM
I think Federer has what 23 straight final victories, that's just crazy!

Actually, he has won 24 consecutive finals.

Rafa has 9 already! :p

NYCtennisfan
10-26-2005, 04:30 PM
9 by Rafa comes close to the old record. 24 by Federer is just staggering.

vincayou
10-26-2005, 06:07 PM
A propos of nothing, apparently Rafa has THE best record in FINALS... ever. He is now 12-2... not bad, esp for a 19-year-old. This is just the beginning. [from a Spanish paper]

:lol: Haehnel has a 100% record. He is better than Nadal.

RogiFan88
10-26-2005, 06:24 PM
Good for Haehnel... there are others with such an illustrious percentage also. ;)

joeb_uk
10-26-2005, 06:59 PM
Rafa said he spoke to Roger, and he really hopes Roger plays in the TMC because it would be bad for tennis if he didn't. He said they are rivals but they have a great relationship off court. Sweet :D
Of course, thats whats tennis is about! Well for the real players, you want to play the very best and kick their ass :D I really hate the pussies, who are the opposite of this!

tangerine_dream
10-26-2005, 10:01 PM
Somewhat related to content in here:

Nadal's lament
Great year has been overshadowed by a certain Swiss

As good as Rafael Nadal has been in 2005, Roger Federer simply has been better.

Posted: Wednesday October 26, 2005
Jon Wertheim's mailbag

I've asked this before, but I thought I'd give it another shot since the timing seems right. How accurate do you think it is to put Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal on equal footing in terms of the years they have had (as many news sources seem to be doing)? How would you assess their respective successes this year? Who impresses more?
-- Ethan Steele, Stanford, Calif.

Many of you have been asking about Nadal's year. Vincent Durrough of Nashville went so far as to write, "If Nadal wins another Masters Series event, and he wins the Masters cup over Federer, shouldn't we be calling him the best player in the world?" I feel for Nadal. In any other year, winning 11 titles would make a player a lock for No. 1. Add in the fact that the guy is still a teenager, he took a Major and four (!) Masters Series events, and he'd be fit for canonization. Regardless of what happens in Shanghai, this is just a banner year.

By unfortunate accident, Nadal is a contemporary of Roger Federer. As sterling as Nadal's season has been, it takes a backseat to Federer's 2005. Federer has, of course, won two Slams (and reached the semis at the other two) and has also taken four Masters events, winning titles on all surfaces. The cold and clinical rankings essentially end the debate. Spectacular as Nadal's year has been, Federer's has been superior -- 292 points superior, to be precise.

Subjectively, though Nadal and Federer split their the head-to-head matches and have won the same number of TMS events (Aside: it's pretty amazing that only two players have won the eight biggest ATP tournaments this year ) I think Federer's play in the Majors tips the scales. These are the money events, and Federer's 24-2 record is just otherworldly. (Federer can thank James Blake -- who, of course, took out Nadal in the first week of the U.S. Open -- for cementing the case.)

But let's forget Federer for a second and give Nadal his due. He's had a tremendous year. He's splintered the "clay-court specialist" label. He's made a lot of promoters happy. And, as an overnight star still in his teens, he's looked awfully comfortable wearing the trappings of celebrity.

NYCtennisfan
10-26-2005, 11:25 PM
An incredible season by Rafa with perhaps a TMC to add. Any other year Rafa, any other year....

NYCtennisfan
10-27-2005, 03:46 AM
With Nadal withdrawing from Bercy, the original scenario changes. EVen if Rafa wins the TMC and goes 5-0 and Roger wins no matches, he would still be dwon 710 going into next year. Federer could theoretically lose 245 points in Doha meaning that he would go into the AO up 465 points, If that was the case, a Nadal finals appearance and a Fed SF appearance would give Nadal #1.