How Many Slams Will Roger Win Next Year? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

How Many Slams Will Roger Win Next Year?

lordmanji
11-17-2006, 01:10 AM
The matches against his opponents are getting tougher and tougher. Obviously the other guys are getting tired of Roger winning and getting hungrier, too. While Roger is motivated to shatter records, I'd say putting food on the plate is a far better motivator. I foresee Roger winning only a couple of slams the next two years.

Bremen
11-17-2006, 01:23 AM
He'll finally win the grand slam and beat nadal at roland garros in the process.

WhirlyballDerek
11-17-2006, 01:38 AM
I dont think overall his matches are getting tougher. He has a hd a couple tough matches at the end of this year but overall he still wins pretty easily. He only droped one set at Wimbledon, 2 at the US open, he played near perfect in Japan, Paris, and Basel. When he is pumped and in his zone no one stands a chance.


Next year will be 3 or 4

Merton
11-17-2006, 01:43 AM
All five answers carry strictly positive probability but zero and four are very unlikely. The funny thing is that the highest probability of winning all four was at the end of 2003, when nobody was talking seriously about the possibility of doing that.

cmurray
11-17-2006, 01:45 AM
None. He's chucking tennis to take up a career in runway modeling in Anna Wintour's private boudoir.

Johnny Groove
11-17-2006, 01:47 AM
He'll finally win the grand slam and beat nadal at roland garros in the process.

Hes never come close to beating Nadal at RG, what makes you think he'll do it next year?

rofe
11-17-2006, 02:12 AM
Wow, there are more people voting for all 4. I would like to think that he will win all 4 but I don't think that is realistic. It will be very difficult to top 2006. Some of the young guns will start playing with consistency and some of the players around Roger's age will pick up their game.

I think starting next year, he will have a Sampras like career, winning 1-2 slams every year for the next three years. I sincerely hope one of them is RG.

selyoink
11-17-2006, 02:15 AM
He will win either 3 or 4. If he wins 3 I think he loses in Australia.

Action Jackson
11-17-2006, 02:17 AM
5 Slams

Johnny Groove
11-17-2006, 02:18 AM
5 Slams

Nadal will take Miami :p

NATAS81
11-17-2006, 02:18 AM
With all the young players improving, the new and improved and STILL improving Roddick, Nalbandian still playing a high level and Kiefer and Joachim Johansson returning for a full year I would be surprised if he won 3. 2 maybe, but no more.

Blake has the confidence to win at high levels so that makes him a threat at AO and USO.

Don't forget, Puerta the clay king will return.

Action Jackson
11-17-2006, 02:20 AM
Nadal will take Miami :p

Is it blue or purple clay?

ChinoRios4Ever
11-17-2006, 02:31 AM
GRAND SLAM TIME BABY :yeah:

DO IT ROGER

Fergie
11-17-2006, 03:42 AM
4 ... He is just too good! :angel:

J. Corwin
11-17-2006, 04:03 AM
Six :banana:

http://newsfromrussia.com/images/newsline/australian_open.JPG
Australian

http://www.tennispro.be/images/rolandgerros.JPG
French

http://www.lovethehoff.com/images/wimbledon%20logo.jpg
Wimbledon

http://www.greatatlantictravel.com/tennis/tenimages/us%20open%20logo1.jpg
U.S.

http://images.quizilla.com/P/panda365/1056938162_CAmandaDennys.jpg
Denny's

http://www.wilson.ch/domains/wilson_ch/data/free_docs/mirka.jpg
and the biggest Slam of them all :drool:

R.Federer
11-17-2006, 04:05 AM
All five answers carry strictly positive probability but zero and four are very unlikely. The funny thing is that the highest probability of winning all four was at the end of 2003, when nobody was talking seriously about the possibility of doing that.
You mean at the end of 2005? He almost pulled it off this year, and in fact he was closer to it this year than in 2004.

R.Federer
11-17-2006, 04:06 AM
and the biggest Slam of them all :drool:

In which way did you mean "Biggest" of them all? :p

J. Corwin
11-17-2006, 04:19 AM
biggest trophy for him to...polish ;)

Merton
11-17-2006, 04:33 AM
You mean at the end of 2005? He almost pulled it off this year, and in fact he was closer to it this year than in 2004.

I do mean at the end of 2003. He went further this year at the French Open reaching the final, but I think he had good chances in the 2004 RG. Imagine if he had Andy's draw. Then he would have gone to the semis to face Coria, a match that would be more difficult in Paris than it was in Hamburg but winnable. Anyway, it is all hypothetical of course but what matters is the ex ante probability of winning the grand slam in 2004 vs. 2006, not what we observed after the fact.

kronus12
11-17-2006, 05:20 AM
i hope he could win 4 but i doubt it, im sure he will defend his wimbledon title again can't see anyone close to beating him on grass yet.
And he'll properly win the USopen too.
AO not too sure i want safin to win that one and RG Nadal of course that's if injuries dosen't effect him.
And if you been watching the master lately is federer's backhand getting better or what. Its becoming a monster of a shot.

Jaffas85
11-17-2006, 05:22 AM
I think he'll prolly win 3 again and hopefully RG is among those three.

So if thats the case then he prolly won't win the Australian Open and someone like Nadal or Safin will win that instead.

El Legenda
11-17-2006, 05:22 AM
6!

landoud
11-17-2006, 05:36 AM
3 including RG

Bremen
11-17-2006, 05:39 AM
Hes never come close to beating Nadal at RG, what makes you think he'll do it next year?

It's just my blind adoration speaking I guess. It could happen...but deep down I have to say it isn't likely. Maybe if he wins a few more matches against nadal his confidence will improve.

BlueSwan
11-17-2006, 05:51 AM
I picked 2. Wimbledon is almost a given and then one of the other three - preferably RG, but realistically the US Open.

jazar
11-17-2006, 06:41 AM
he will win all four. wimbledon is almost guaranteed. he nas nearly found the reight tactic to beat nadal on clay. and he is the master on hard courts.

Joyce_23
11-17-2006, 06:41 AM
I'll say four too, in all honesty I can't see anyone stopping him. although I hope it's only two or three. It would be nice to see someone else holding a trophy for once..:lol: I don't think it's gonna happen in 2007 though, he's still in a league of his own.

lordmanji
11-17-2006, 06:53 AM
Six :banana:

http://www.wilson.ch/domains/wilson_ch/data/free_docs/mirka.jpg
and the biggest Slam of them all :drool:

Slam, not ham.

stebs
11-17-2006, 07:02 AM
I can't believe that most people on thee forums think he'll do the grand slam. :p That's some seriously high expectations.

I guess he'll win 2. Could be 3 but it could be 1. I'd be perfectly happy for him to win 2 if they were Wimbledon and Roland Garros. That would put him right in the mix for GOAT, right now I think he is level with guys like Agassi. RG would take him up to Borg/Laver/Sampras like levels.

atheneglaukopis
11-17-2006, 07:12 AM
You mean at the end of 2005? He almost pulled it off this year, and in fact he was closer to it this year than in 2004.He couldn't have meant 2005: people were talking seriously about it then. :)

Jaffas85
11-17-2006, 07:57 AM
I can't believe that most people on thee forums think he'll do the grand slam. :p That's some seriously high expectations.

I guess he'll win 2. Could be 3 but it could be 1. I'd be perfectly happy for him to win 2 if they were Wimbledon and Roland Garros. That would put him right in the mix for GOAT, right now I think he is level with guys like Agassi. RG would take him up to Borg/Laver/Sampras like levels.

Why is Sampras in a higher league than Federer? He never even made the French Open final and Federer has been at #1 without being toppled longer than what Sampras ever was.

oz_boz
11-17-2006, 08:35 AM
I say he wins 1 or 2, Wimbly plus maybe another. If he wins his 10th GS, he joins Sampras/Borg/Laver IMO, double digit Slams + domination + TMS/TMC wins make up for it.

All 4? No way.

Action Jackson
11-17-2006, 08:58 AM
I can't believe that most people on thee forums think he'll do the grand slam. :p That's some seriously high expectations.

Don't sound so disappointed :p

The Pro
11-17-2006, 09:03 AM
Seems most people think he will either nail it or just grab Wimby and one other.

controlfreak
11-17-2006, 09:17 AM
He could win zero, but only if he slips on a bag of money at home and is out for the whole season.

adee-gee
11-17-2006, 09:22 AM
I'm the only one to vote 0? :awww:

Rogiman
11-17-2006, 09:25 AM
I'm the only one to vote 0? :awww:I think you're confused, this poll's title was not "how many Slams will Nadal win for the rest of his career?" :p

adee-gee
11-17-2006, 09:27 AM
I think you're confused, this poll's title was not "how many Slams will Nadal win for the rest of his career?" :p
Not even you truly believe that ;)

Rogiman
11-17-2006, 09:28 AM
Not even you truly believe that ;)Trust me, I do ;)

The 20 year-old-already-washed-out-grinder will not win another Slam :p

adee-gee
11-17-2006, 09:33 AM
Trust me, I do ;)

The 20 year-old-already-washed-out-grinder will not win another Slam :p
:haha: :haha: :haha:

I'll remember this quote and get back to you :cool:

Rogiman
11-17-2006, 09:34 AM
:haha: :haha: :haha:

I'll remember this quote and get back to you :cool:No probs :cool:

He'll go Slamless for 2007, mark it :cool:

adee-gee
11-17-2006, 09:36 AM
No probs :cool:

He'll go Slamless for 2007, mark it :cool:
As will Federer. Todd Reid wins the Aussie Open, Guillermo Coria wins RG, Oscar Hernandez wins Wimbledon, and Scoville Jenkins wins the US Open :rocker2:

mtw
11-17-2006, 10:42 AM
Maybe all.

Beat
11-17-2006, 01:10 PM
The matches against his opponents are getting tougher and tougher.
are they?


i say 2.

Purple Rainbow
11-17-2006, 01:53 PM
With all the young players improving, the new and improved and STILL improving Roddick, Nalbandian still playing a high level and Kiefer and Joachim Johansson returning for a full year I would be surprised if he won 3. 2 maybe, but no more.

Blake has the confidence to win at high levels so that makes him a threat at AO and USO.

Don't forget, Puerta the clay king will return.

OMG, Kiefer is coming back... Federer should just retire... :scared:

Monteque
11-17-2006, 02:18 PM
3 or 4.

It's become the habit for Roger to play good near perfect if the tourny is GS. And i believe that Roger is in the peak of his performance. For the new season, he'll back with the full gas and fresh.

safinalium
11-17-2006, 03:02 PM
2 - Wimbledon and US Open

GlennMirnyi
11-17-2006, 03:07 PM
Six.

Monteque
11-17-2006, 03:28 PM
I just don't get it. Why some ppl always make a non-sense post. :rolleyes:
It's still far away to end of the world dude!!!

BlackSilver
11-17-2006, 07:21 PM
but I think he had good chances in the 2004 RG. Imagine if he had Andy's draw. Then he would have gone to the semis to face Coria, a match that would be more difficult in Paris than it was in Hamburg but winnable. Anyway, it is all hypothetical of course but what matters is the ex ante probability of winning the grand slam in 2004 vs. 2006, not what we observed after the fact.

You are making a confusion there. He was on Gaudio's side of draw, Coria only in the final. With that in mind, without Guga in the draw, I believe he would reach the QF and then lose to a hot form Nalbandian

Fedex
11-17-2006, 11:21 PM
As will Federer. Todd Reid wins the Aussie Open, Guillermo Coria wins RG, Oscar Hernandez wins Wimbledon, and Scoville Jenkins wins the US Open :rocker2:
:yeah: I coulden't agree with you more.

Jlee
11-17-2006, 11:25 PM
Hes never come close to beating Nadal at RG, what makes you think he'll do it next year?

I'll answer this. Roger came within a point of beating Rafa on clay, even though it wasn't at RG. I think Roger is solid enough to be able to beat Rafa on clay with the right strategy but I'm not sure if he has the "nerve" to do it yet. :lol:

I get the feeling that he's just about figured out Nadal. It happened with players in the past, and it's likely about to happen again. Especially with the way Nadal has been struggling.

Johnny Groove
11-17-2006, 11:29 PM
I'll answer this. Roger came within a point of beating Rafa on clay, even though it wasn't at RG. I think Roger is solid enough to be able to beat Rafa on clay with the right strategy but I'm not sure if he has the "nerve" to do it yet. :lol:

I get the feeling that he's just about figured out Nadal. It happened with players in the past, and it's likely about to happen again. Especially with the way Nadal has been struggling.

true, Rafa's been slumping since Wimbly, but it wasnt on clay. Rome, fed came close, but was unable to seal the deal. RG is differnet than Rome. Thats like saying because Nalbandian came within a point of beating Federer in Cincy, he'll for sure beat him in USO

Jlee
11-17-2006, 11:35 PM
true, Rafa's been slumping since Wimbly, but it wasnt on clay. Rome, fed came close, but was unable to seal the deal. RG is differnet than Rome. Thats like saying because Nalbandian came within a point of beating Federer in Cincy, he'll for sure beat him in USO

Well yes, it wasn't on clay. The Wimbledon result was impressive. That's fair, but he's proved he's capable of beating Rafa, on clay, if he can hold his head together. I don't know, I think it would be more interesting if Nadal could pull out a win at the French and maybe even the Australian next year. Basically, I'm looking forward to 2007 and seeing if this rivalry can continue.

...and I'm still struggling with the comparison of Nalbandian's mental strength, or lack thereof, to Federer's. :lol:

Coop
11-17-2006, 11:37 PM
I have faith and say he will win 3 Grand Slams again!Finger crossed ;)

Johnny Groove
11-17-2006, 11:41 PM
Well yes, it wasn't on clay. The Wimbledon result was impressive. That's fair, but he's proved he's capable of beating Rafa, on clay, if he can hold his head together. I don't know, I think it would be more interesting if Nadal could pull out a win at the French and maybe even the Australian next year. Basically, I'm looking forward to 2007 and seeing if this rivalry can continue.

...and I'm still struggling with the comparison of Nalbandian's mental strength, or lack thereof, to Federer's. :lol:

maybe not the best example :tape: but the comparison was to say that just because a player is good in a clay TMS doesnt mean hes gonna win RG.

Jlee
11-17-2006, 11:46 PM
maybe not the best example :tape: but the comparison was to say that just because a player is good in a clay TMS doesnt mean hes gonna win RG.

I know, I'm with you there of course. ;) I just feel like Roger has the goods to beat Nadal at RG and that it is going to happen eventually, even if it isn't next year. It's my own personal feeling, mostly because of the way Roger is able to pick people's games apart and beat them, even if he's struggled with them in the past. It's all speculation anyway though. :)

I do feel that next year Nadal really needs to do well in Australia and during the summer, otherwise he won't even get to the point in a tournament where he can play and continue to prove himself against Roger. Hopefully he'll pick it up soon, I love the Federer/Nadal matches.

Sheek
11-17-2006, 11:48 PM
4.5

Johnny Groove
11-17-2006, 11:49 PM
I know, I'm with you there of course. ;) I just feel like Roger has the goods to beat Nadal at RG and that it is going to happen eventually, even if it isn't next year. It's my own personal feeling, mostly because of the way Roger is able to pick people's games apart and beat them, even if he's struggled with them in the past. It's all speculation anyway though. :)

I do feel that next year Nadal really needs to do well in Australia and during the summer, otherwise he won't even get to the point in a tournament where he can play and continue to prove himself against Roger. Hopefully he'll pick it up soon, I love the Federer/Nadal matches.

good stuff :yeah:

If Rafa can finish off 06 with a bang in shanghai, then get his shit together in the off-season, come back, win AO, make some noise in IW and Miami, win one or both, going into the clay season, tennis will be in good hands. :yeah:

Jlee
11-17-2006, 11:52 PM
good stuff :yeah:

If Rafa can finish off 06 with a bang in shanghai, then get his shit together in the off-season, come back, win AO, make some noise in IW and Miami, win one or both, going into the clay season, tennis will be in good hands. :yeah:

:yeah: Sounds perfect, I'm looking forward to that :D

...it would help if some of the other players started coming into matches against Roger on even ground mentally, rather than a set down, as well...

Johnny Groove
11-17-2006, 11:55 PM
:yeah: Sounds perfect, I'm looking forward to that :D

...it would help if some of the other players started coming into matches against Roger on even ground mentally, rather than a set down, as well...

Hopefully Andy and James, and the media will stop spewing the "UsA t3nn1s suxxcks0rz1!!11" crap :p

And Nalby, Gasquet, Berdych (even though i cant stand him), Murray, Gonzalez, and most of all: MARAT! :p

Jlee
11-17-2006, 11:59 PM
Hopefully Andy and James, and the media will stop spewing the "UsA t3nn1s suxxcks0rz1!!11" crap :p

And Nalby, Gasquet, Berdych (even though i cant stand him), Murray, Gonzalez, and most of all: MARAT! :p

Ah yes, sounds great. ;) Anything to shut the media up about it...

Woot Marat :yippee:

Merton
11-18-2006, 12:50 AM
You are making a confusion there. He was on Gaudio's side of draw, Coria only in the final. With that in mind, without Guga in the draw, I believe he would reach the QF and then lose to a hot form Nalbandian

I think you missed the sentence "Imagine if he had Andy's draw". It is strictly hypothetical, I am just saying that he had more chances to win RG 2004 than people at the time realized. With the actual draw that he got, even if he went through Guga, he would have Nalbandian next round, Safin, Gaudio in the semis and Coria in the final. A high mountain to climb. On the other hand, if he was on the other half he would have Henman at the quarters, Coria at the semis and Gaudio in the final.

Pfloyd
11-18-2006, 01:57 AM
Wimbledon and US Open, Rafa will win Australia and RG....

guga2120
11-18-2006, 03:16 AM
Wimbledon and US Open, Rafa will win Australia and RG....


considering Nadal stays healthy, which with him is always a question, but that sounds about right.

stebs
11-18-2006, 09:07 AM
I get the feeling that he's just about figured out Nadal. It happened with players in the past, and it's likely about to happen again. Especially with the way Nadal has been struggling.

Maybe to a certain extent you're right. The only problem is over 5 sets on clay it doesn't matter if you have the perfect tactics. To carry it off against Nadal is very tough to do. One thing which has changed though is Federer's confidence against Rafa. If he wins tomorrow that will simply be emphasized. Still, on clay he hasn't shown great confidence against Nadal. Look at their clay matches this year, all three had a tie break in the final set. Roger lost them all.

refero*fervens
11-18-2006, 09:30 AM
Maybe to a certain extent you're right. The only problem is over 5 sets on clay it doesn't matter if you have the perfect tactics. To carry it off against Nadal is very tough to do. One thing which has changed though is Federer's confidence against Rafa. If he wins tomorrow that will simply be emphasized. Still, on clay he hasn't shown great confidence against Nadal. Look at their clay matches this year, all three had a tie break in the final set. Roger lost them all.

Wow, you're right, I hadn't noticed that. That'd be three of the what, 14 or so tiebreaks he's lost this year!

Bilbo
11-18-2006, 09:34 AM
I expect him to win 3

stebs
11-18-2006, 09:39 AM
Wow, you're right, I hadn't noticed that. That'd be three of the what, 14 or so tiebreaks he's lost this year!

5 of the 14 he's lost this year have been to Nadal. 4 of the others came in Halle. Then there are 5 others which he lost in other matches.

shotgun
11-18-2006, 05:42 PM
With the actual draw that he got, even if he went through Guga, he would have Nalbandian next round, Safin, Gaudio in the semis and Coria in the final. A high mountain to climb. On the other hand, if he was on the other half he would have Henman at the quarters, Coria at the semis and Gaudio in the final.

Actually:

R16 - F. Lopez
QF - Nalbandian
SF - Gaudio
F - Coria

Verve
11-18-2006, 08:00 PM
It would surprise me an awful lot if Roger would win all 4 Slams next year... Rafael may be slumping a little right now, but chances are quite high that he'll find his best form again on clay next year, and he's still THE favorite to me for Roland Garros right now, although you never know... I think Roger will win 2 Slams next year, maybe 3, with in order of probability: Wimbledon > US Open > Australian Open > Roland Garros (although I guess everyone thinks that! :)). I would be happy if he'd win 2, and euphoric if he'd win 3! I really think his 2006 season is setting an amazingly high standard. If he wins tomorrow's match, I think this could very possibly be the best season he'll ever play. It will be EXTREMELY hard to get close to this kind of standard, let alone topple it. Although I'd love for him to win all 4 in one season! (or Roland Garros, for that matter ;) )

MarieS
11-18-2006, 08:13 PM
five! :banana: :crazy:

R.Federer
11-18-2006, 08:16 PM
Nadal remains the hot favorite, right now anyway, for Paris. If Roger wants to win that some day, he needs to do it in 2007 or 2008 or I think it will escape from him altogether.
Anyhow, I hope Roger can defend at least Wimbly and Melbourne (want him to start the year on that great note).

Daniel
11-21-2006, 10:56 PM
All of them

Peacemaster
11-21-2006, 11:14 PM
The 9 who voted zero - make your identities and locations be known; so that we may worship facing your abodes rendered alight by the luminescence of your deific wisdom...

GodOfGamblers
11-21-2006, 11:29 PM
The question should not be about how many grand slam title he will win but it should be "Will he be able to win the French Open?".

Federer is on track to break Pete Sampras's record for the most Grand Slam title, but he will never be known as the GREATEST TENNIS player unless he win that French Open on clay court.

The definition for the greatest player should be that he is the best and the best must be able to win on any surface and anywhere and until Federer can do that, that title won't be his.

Jimnik
11-22-2006, 12:24 AM
He'll win the AO and RG but can he beat Roddick at Wimbledon?

;)

UncleZeke
11-22-2006, 12:46 AM
If Fed stays healthy, two seems like a lock, and since he's in his absolute prime, three or all four won't surprise me.

Jaffas85
11-22-2006, 01:35 AM
He will at least win Wimbledon and the U.S. Open.

The Australian Open and French Open are more wide open between him and Nadal *and concerning the Australian Open also perhaps Safin*.

I would be really surprised if the two he won were the Australian Open and French Open and not Wimbledon and the U.S. Open.

Though if Federer were to lose one Grand Slam title again hopefully its the Australian Open, with Nadal winning it, so Federer can finally claim the French Open.

I'm hoping for a great 5 set Australian Open final between Federer and Nadal.

LaTenista
11-22-2006, 03:24 AM
2 or 3 I think :shrug: Still don't see him winning RG.

LCeh
11-22-2006, 03:50 AM
The question should not be about how many grand slam title he will win but it should be "Will he be able to win the French Open?".

Federer is on track to break Pete Sampras's record for the most Grand Slam title, but he will never be known as the GREATEST TENNIS player unless he win that French Open on clay court.

The definition for the greatest player should be that he is the best and the best must be able to win on any surface and anywhere and until Federer can do that, that title won't be his.

From what I have seen thus far, Roger still does not have what it takes to beat Nadal at RG. Until he has a convincing win, showing that he can play at a level that's constantly higher than Rafael's during the course of 2-3 sets, then we can start talking.

What you are seeing now is simply the result when they play more on faster surfaces. The last 2 win for Roger and the 3 consecutive ones on clay for Rafa is not mere coincidence: Roger has the game to beat Nadal on faster courts when he plays well. But Rafa's strength magnifies on clay: balls are slower, so even though he is not that great at returning 1st serves, he will be better at it than on hardcourts; his cc topspin forehand will bounce even higher than the hardcourts, making it harder for Roger's bh to be consistent and effective; his speed on clay can be fully utilized on clay where it takes a couple more shots to get the ball pass him than on hc.

So with all that, the advantage is clearly on Rafa's side. Does Roger have what it takes to beat Rafa? Maybe if he continues to improve that backhand, he can, but I can see Rafa being completely relentless on his backhand when on clay, keeps pressuring and pressuring him until he starts making errors and get himself into a deep hole. Even though Roger has already improved tremendously over even the past few months, I still have my doubts when it comes to clay against Rafa.

oz_boz
11-22-2006, 07:42 AM
The question should not be about how many grand slam title he will win but it should be "Will he be able to win the French Open?".

Federer is on track to break Pete Sampras's record for the most Grand Slam title, but he will never be known as the GREATEST TENNIS player unless he win that French Open on clay court.

The definition for the greatest player should be that he is the best and the best must be able to win on any surface and anywhere and until Federer can do that, that title won't be his.

So how come Sampras and Borg are rated above Agassi by 99% of tennis experts worldwide?

He can still be considered the greatest without winning RG. But his legacy would of course be strengthened by that title.