Why Federer will win RG.... [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Why Federer will win RG....

makro120
05-21-2005, 11:49 PM
I will not give you a long article or any reasons at all, just these facts:

2003:Federer wins wimbledon, having only been to qf before on the tournament. Many people said he would never win any grand slam at all and that he is a waste of talent before this.

2004:Federer wins both AO and Usopen having never won a hardcourt master series or been to a semifinal in a hardcore grand slam before. Many people said Roddick was the king on hardcourt and that Federer's tennis style only worked very good on grass.

2005:Federer has already won 3 master series on clay actualy but people are saying he can only play good in hamburg and that he will probably never win in RG and definetly not this year.

2003:Federer overcomes his weak results on grass.
2004:Federer overcome his weak results on hardcourt.
2005:Federer overcomes his weak results on clay?


This is not a good reason in itself actualy, but it is a good reminder to people who thinks Federer is 28 years old and desperately trying to do good on the surface he never overcame in his career. Federer is actualy only 23 years old and constantly developing and also overcoming his difficulties on different surfaces and against players (Hewitt, NAlbandian, Henman, Agassi, Ferrero) all the time. He is 41-2 this year, there is no reason why one can't belive he will overcome former difficulties in RG. Since the time he won his 1st grandslam he has only tried one time and failed against Guga and people are saying he is like Sampras? Or just slightly better? :eek:

Is that wishful thinking from people, or what?

El Legenda
05-21-2005, 11:54 PM
No.

makro120
05-21-2005, 11:56 PM
It is ok you don't think Federer will win RG, but some think he never will and they are overconfident about it, even arrogant I would say. I am also so tired having Federer and Sampras in the same sentence, I should erase this sentence aswell...

Rogiman
05-22-2005, 12:00 AM
Whenever a player, no matter how accomplished, enters a 128 players draw odds are naturaly against him, let alone on his (traditionally) worst surface and with other (arguably) better players on the surface than him.

Let's just say even in my biased opinion he is not the first, second or even third favourite to grab the title, and even at Wimbledon I will not consider him an overwhelming favourite when his a-priori chances are 1 to 128.

All in all, a semifinal run will make me more than happy, but his 2nd round match terrifies me.

trulliscorpion
05-22-2005, 12:02 AM
I loved to read that writing, and it actually seemed logical to me.

El Legenda
05-22-2005, 12:03 AM
It is ok you don't think Federer will win RG,...
Yes. Its an opinion.You have your.I have mine.

makro120
05-22-2005, 12:03 AM
Rogiman, I understand. But still, I have seen threads where people have been saying he will never win RG and that this year he simply WON'T WIN. That is crazy.

Corey Feldman
05-22-2005, 12:04 AM
i hope your right Makro..
i cant see any problems playing Almagro, this guy has lost to Haas, F.Lo and stepanek on clay in the last month..
even this week he could only beat Karlovic 7-6 7-6 on clay :o
Gonzo in 3r... thats where it might get tough.

makro120
05-22-2005, 12:07 AM
Whenever a player, no matter how accomplished, enters a 128 players draw odds are naturaly against him, let alone on his (traditionally) worst surface and with other (arguably) better players on the surface than him.

Let's just say even in my biased opinion he is not the first, second or even third favourite to grab the title, and even at Wimbledon I will not consider him an overwhelming favourite when his a-priori chances are 1 to 128.

All in all, a semifinal run will make me more than happy, but his 2nd round match terrifies me.

Also, Federer is 41-2 this year. When a player have these statistics maybe odds simply are not against him when he enters grand slams. Ok, this is so far his weak surface, but for how long will it stay like this I am asking you? And most important how can some people be so sure this will forever stay as his weakness when he has in the past overcome praticaly all his weaknesses except this? Could he not overcome another past of weak results on a surface, a tournament or a player?

Rogiman
05-22-2005, 12:09 AM
Rogiman, I understand. But still, I have seen threads where people have been saying he will never win RG and that this year he simply WON'T WIN. That is crazy.

Dismissing Federer is silly, but saying he will never win RG is (probabilty-wise) a pretty safe bet, and even though he's still pretty young we all know his best chances to take it all lay in the next 2-3 years, after that it will only make sense for him to focus more on the other majors where his chances are better, like Sampras (yes, him again :p) did.

robinhood
05-22-2005, 12:13 AM
i hope your right Makro..
i cant see any problems playing Almagro, this guy has lost to Haas, F.Lo and stepanek on clay in the last month..
even this week he could only beat Karlovic 7-6 7-6 on clay :o
Gonzo in 3r... thats where it might get tough.

My opinion, too. Gonzo match could be tricky. Roger didn't beat him convincingly at Monte Carlo this year, and if Gonzo as usual plays like a crazy man, he might make it tougher than expected for Roger.

I've seen some people saying that it is way too early in Roger's career to achieve the career grand slam, but I wish he would get it over with NOW.

Skyward
05-22-2005, 12:15 AM
One day he'll be blessed with the draw Coria and certain USTA guys enjoy. :p

robinhood
05-22-2005, 12:16 AM
And also Roger had better win it this year, so Makro doesn't have to leave the board!

makro120
05-22-2005, 12:16 AM
Gonzales could be tricky, but Gonzales could just go crazy and loose in the 1st round aswell. He is not even sure as a 3rd round oponent.

makro120
05-22-2005, 12:17 AM
And also Roger had better win it this year, so Makro doesn't have to leave the board!

Wow, thanx! :yeah:

trulliscorpion
05-22-2005, 12:27 AM
Fernando Gonzalez plays a high top-tenner if he is on a good day.

NYCtennisfan
05-22-2005, 01:39 AM
Whenever a player, no matter how accomplished, enters a 128 players draw odds are naturaly against him, let alone on his (traditionally) worst surface and with other (arguably) better players on the surface than him.

So true. This is only occasionally not true as in Sampras at Wimbledon, Federer at Wimbledon now, McEnroe at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open in the early 80's, Lendl at the French and U.S. Open in the mid-80's, Borg at the French and Wimbledon in the late 70's. I wouldn't bet against them winning against the entire field. But for the most part, betting against one player winning the title is a pretty safe bet. Federer's greatness is the only thing that gives these types of discussions any type of life.

mitalidas
05-22-2005, 01:56 AM
Whenever a player, no matter how accomplished, enters a 128 players draw odds are naturaly against him, let alone on his (traditionally) worst surface and with other (arguably) better players on the surface than him.

Regardless of the thread title and what Roger's chances are, this type of statistic is way off.
There are 128 people in the draw, but any given player has better than 1/128 odds because they must win only 7 matches against only 7 players to hoist the cup, not beat 128 people

IF all players were equal then Roger would have 1/7 odds of winning at Round 1, 1/6 after Round 2, etc. Until the final when again, IF all players were equal, his odds would be 1/2.
(But surely if its Agassi on the other side on that Sunday, the odds would improve to 1.00) ;)

alexito
05-22-2005, 02:03 AM
federer will win RG because have draw easy.

NYCtennisfan
05-22-2005, 04:16 AM
federer will win RG because have draw easy.

Keep telling yourself that alexito36.

Roger The Great
05-22-2005, 04:59 AM
Regardless of the thread title and what Roger's chances are, this type of statistic is way off.
There are 128 people in the draw, but any given player has better than 1/128 odds because they must win only 7 matches against only 7 players to hoist the cup, not beat 128 people

I completely agree, Matalidas. This isn't the lottery where you have a 1/128 chance of having your number drawn and have no control at all over the situation. While impossible to accurately label a player's odds of winning, you can't seriously say that both Federer's and Ivo Karlovic's chances of winning Roland Garros are the same. Federer (or any player) simply needs to be better than his opponent seven times over a two week period.

DHfan
05-22-2005, 06:58 AM
we'll see!

NYCtennisfan
05-22-2005, 07:01 AM
I don't think Rogiman is saying that Roger has the same chances as anyone else in the draw. He's saying that a very high % of the time, odds are against picking any one player to win against the field--you almost always expect the rest of the field to win. There are exceptions as I pointed out earlier but the betting man would take the field against Roger.

safdem
05-22-2005, 08:13 AM
i dont think so..
but he'll definetely do better than last yr though :)

kartveteran
05-22-2005, 10:18 AM
Regardless of the thread title and what Roger's chances are, this type of statistic is way off.
There are 128 people in the draw, but any given player has better than 1/128 odds because they must win only 7 matches against only 7 players to hoist the cup, not beat 128 people

IF all players were equal then Roger would have 1/7 odds of winning at Round 1, 1/6 after Round 2, etc. Until the final when again, IF all players were equal, his odds would be 1/2.
(But surely if its Agassi on the other side on that Sunday, the odds would improve to 1.00) ;)


That's some wrong maths.
If all players were equal then Roger would have 1/2 chance (=1/1 odds) to win his 1st round. If he wins he'd have 1/2 chance to win his 2nd round again. Then so on until the final when if all players were equal his chance would be 1/2 again.
To win the tournament he has to beat the 1/2 chance 7 times in a row. So at round 1 his chances to win are:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/128 (= 1/127 odds)
After reaching round 2 his chances are:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/64 (= 1/63 odds)
Round 3:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/32 (= 1/31 odds)
Round 4:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/16 (= 1/15 odds)
QF:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/8 (= 1/7 odds)
SF:
1/2 x 1/2 = 1/4 (= 1/3 odds)
Final:
1/2 (= 1/1 odds)

Rogiman
05-22-2005, 10:18 AM
IF all players were equal then Roger would have 1/7 odds of winning at Round 1, 1/6 after Round 2, etc. Until the final when again, IF all players were equal, his odds would be 1/2.
(But surely if its Agassi on the other side on that Sunday, the odds would improve to 1.00) ;)

I'm having a hard time figuring this one out...

Assuming all players were equal you get the same 1/128 probability for victory in both approaches:
Either you have a 0.5 winning chance for each round and you want to win seven in a row (a sequence of 7 Bernouli tests) so you've got (1/2)^7=1/128, or you assume the winning chances distribute uniformly, thus each of the 128 players has the same 1/128 chance to win :shrug:

Rogiman
05-22-2005, 10:22 AM
Of course I'm not suggesting all players are equal, but for Federer to win RG he needs everything to work out perfectly for him, and the chances for that to happen are pretty slight, too ;)

Few will be happier than me if I'm wrong, though.

Ferrero Forever
05-22-2005, 11:36 AM
I always considered myself good at maths, but right now I'm totally confused.

mitalidas
05-22-2005, 02:11 PM
No, what I say above is at Round 1, his odds of winning the cup (not winning round 1) are 1/7
At Round 2, his odds of winning the Cup (not of winning Round 2) are 1/6
And so on, until at the Final, his odds of winning the cup are 1/2

This is assuming that all players are equal


That's some wrong maths.
If all players were equal then Roger would have 1/2 chance (=1/1 odds) to win his 1st round. If he wins he'd have 1/2 chance to win his 2nd round again. Then so on until the final when if all players were equal his chance would be 1/2 again.
To win the tournament he has to beat the 1/2 chance 7 times in a row. So at round 1 his chances to win are:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/128 (= 1/127 odds)
After reaching round 2 his chances are:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/64 (= 1/63 odds)
Round 3:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/32 (= 1/31 odds)
Round 4:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/16 (= 1/15 odds)
QF:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/8 (= 1/7 odds)
SF:
1/2 x 1/2 = 1/4 (= 1/3 odds)
Final:
1/2 (= 1/1 odds)

Bonaventure
05-22-2005, 02:14 PM
I dont understand how at the beginning of the tournament he can have a 1/7 chance of winning it?

I agree with Rogiman, rule of probability. If there are 128 possibilities, then surely he has a 1/128 chance of winning it :confused:

doublebackhand
05-22-2005, 05:24 PM
i think Roger will RG this year too.
and for anyone to win a GS, everything has to work out perfectly, not just for Roger.
dont know why people are discounting him so much, saying he cant win on clay. anyone else who has his record on clay would be considered good on the surface, except Roger. Quite an outrageous double standard here.

kartveteran
05-22-2005, 05:32 PM
No, what I say above is at Round 1, his odds of winning the cup (not winning round 1) are 1/7
At Round 2, his odds of winning the Cup (not of winning Round 2) are 1/6
And so on, until at the Final, his odds of winning the cup are 1/2

This is assuming that all players are equal

Well, that's exactly what's wrong in your post. As I explained in my post, his chance of winning the cup at round 1 is 1/128, not 1/7.

With a 50% chance for each of the 7 rounds he has to win, his chance to win the cup at round 1 becomes:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/128 chance, and not 1/7.

And at round 2, when he has 6 matches to win, his chance to win the cup it:
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/64, and not 1/6.

If you still say i'm wrong you should get yourself a maths textbook and try to find me a formula that supports your calculation instead of mine.

Rogiman
05-22-2005, 05:33 PM
I dont understand how at the beginning of the tournament he can have a 1/7 chance of winning it?

I agree with Rogiman, rule of probability. If there are 128 possibilities, then surely he has a 1/128 chance of winning it :confused:

Stick with that ;)

Bonaventure
05-22-2005, 06:20 PM
Stick with that ;)

Looks the easiest, so that'll do for me :D

soonha
05-22-2005, 09:18 PM
Quite entertaining to read some intellectual posts, BUT...

Rogiman, I think it's self-contradictory for you to say that Roger cannot be considered the favorite for RG or even Wimbledon because his chance is 1/128(same as other players). If followed your logic, nobody'd be the favorite and in other words, he had some decent chances of winning to the same extent as Nadal or Coria--? Is it what you meant? ;)

On the other hand, should it be the favorite or the best player on the surface to win the GS? Have all the previous winners been the favorite or the best on clay? Remember what happened in Paris last year? In addition, we're talking about a guy who would be the best tennis player ever. He's not that bad even on his worst surface. Actually, far from it. :angel:

PS. As for the math, Kartveteran is completely right, mitalidas.
But again, how on the earth can all the different players' chances be equal esp. in such a competetive sport like tennis? Nonsense :o

robinhood
05-23-2005, 03:38 AM
Ah, enough with the stats and probabilities.
Let's get on with the actual matches!
It's almost time....

ServeAlready81
05-23-2005, 05:42 AM
I don't think you can ever rule our Federer in ANY tournament regardless of the surface. He's like the male Serena. Serena sucks on clay...but managed to win Rome and the French Open in 2002, even when people said she'd never win a title on clay.

robinhood
05-23-2005, 05:46 AM
Please, do NOT compare Roger to Serena for any reason.
Male Serena??
NOOOOOO!!!!

Lucas Arg
05-23-2005, 05:49 AM
He is the BIG favorite to win the title, but Roland Garros is always a surprise, He has tough opponents like Nadal, Coria and other hotties on red clay, it s 5 sets to fight and has a tough draw.

I give him 50% of chances to take the French, he is too good in tennis and I admire him a lot. :hatoff:

I want in my heart that Guillermo Coria takes it finally this year, he was so close so many times, he deserves it. ;)

acdbx
05-23-2005, 05:59 AM
I don't think you can ever rule our Federer in ANY tournament regardless of the surface. He's like the male Serena. Serena sucks on clay...but managed to win Rome and the French Open in 2002, even when people said she'd never win a title on clay.


isn't serena herself just as good as a male serena?

tennischick
05-23-2005, 06:04 AM
if Rogi's feet hold up, he will win. if the plantar whatever is worse that we expect, he won't. :sad:

Dirk
05-23-2005, 06:07 AM
i think Roger's feet are fine. i don't see the clay bothering them too much. TC we get to see our Ninja in a few hours. :)

LefandePatty
05-23-2005, 06:07 AM
... because he's the best :worship: :worship: :worship:

tennischick
05-23-2005, 06:18 AM
i think Roger's feet are fine. i don't see the clay bothering them too much. TC we get to see our Ninja in a few hours. :)
and having seen them (on TV), i think you're minimizing the serious of his injury.

that said, i hope they hold up.

Dirk
05-23-2005, 06:23 AM
He said they weren't bothering him. He has every other day off and I don't think he made them worse in practice. I am just being positive. :)

robinhood
05-23-2005, 06:23 AM
and having seen them (on TV), i think you're minimizing the serious of his injury.

that said, i hope they hold up.

Huh? Are his feet still bothering him??
Gosh. I've almost forgot about them.
He hasn't really mentioned them much recently, and the media haven't either.
I hope he is feeling absolutely 100%.

tennischick
05-23-2005, 06:37 AM
Huh? Are his feet still bothering him??
Gosh. I've almost forgot about them.
He hasn't really mentioned them much recently, and the media haven't either.
I hope he is feeling absolutely 100%.
so do i. but they looked all battered with lots of broken skin. i don't care what he says in his interviews, i can't put that image out of my head.

speaking of images, i bought a copy of Deuce today. KingFed looks awesome on the cover :inlove: :inlove:

Dirk
05-23-2005, 06:45 AM
I need to order that magazine. Tennis mag while good lack some more aspects of the pro tour.

robinhood
05-23-2005, 06:49 AM
so do i. but they looked all battered with lots of broken skin. i don't care what he says in his interviews, i can't put that image out of my head.

Ugh... :awww: Hopefully all he needs is some moisturizer.


speaking of images, i bought a copy of Deuce today. KingFed looks awesome on the cover :inlove: :inlove:

Enjoy~ :D

ServeAlready81
05-23-2005, 07:55 AM
Please, do NOT compare Roger to Serena for any reason.
Male Serena??
NOOOOOO!!!!

I didn't mean it like that. Just saying that you can't rule either one of them out of any tournment regardless of the surface it's being played on. That's all. :wavey:

robinhood
05-23-2005, 08:08 AM
I didn't mean it like that. Just saying that you can't rule either one of them out of any tournment regardless of the surface it's being played on. That's all. :wavey:

Sorry. I got a little crazy there at the thought of Roger wearing a catsuit.
Yeah, I know what you mean.
It's just that Serena has turned herself into a cartoonish character so much that her image does not go with Roger's in any level.
It's hard to think of her only in terms of her tennis skills any more.

ServeAlready81
05-23-2005, 08:23 AM
Sorry. I got a little crazy there at the thought of Roger wearing a catsuit.
Yeah, I know what you mean.
It's just that Serena has turned herself into a cartoonish character so much that her image does not go with Roger's in any level.
It's hard to think of her only in terms of her tennis skills any more.

LOL@the catsuit. I loved that outfit...she seemed to be invincible while playing in it. No one could touch her at the 2002 US Open. Not even Venus.

But I get what you mean, seems like these days her tennis outfits are more important to her than her 1st serve percentage.

RagingLamb
02-10-2009, 10:11 PM
You knew in 2005 that he wouldn't win it though, right?

Anyhow, you may want to wait till he's retired to bump threads like this.

habibko
02-10-2009, 10:23 PM
are you :drink: TD?

kyleskywalker007
02-11-2009, 01:43 AM
Just hope he wins it so someone can re bump this thread sometimes in the future, haha

jenanun
02-11-2009, 08:07 AM
Just hope he wins it so someone can re bump this thread sometimes in the future, haha

well.....thread is only bumped when prediction is wrong... like this one...

or like rafa will never win wimbledon, rafa will never be no.1 or rafa will never win a slam outside clay etc.....

leng jai
02-11-2009, 08:23 AM
Another fucking clownish bump. Typical Tangy shenanigans.

Foxy
02-11-2009, 10:29 AM
Now there should be a new challenge ahead of Federesians.
Why Fed will reach RG final again? :haha:

ORGASMATRON
02-11-2009, 10:35 AM
Winning the french will be hard for Roger but it will do his legacy the world of good. And i wouldnt mind if he doesnt beat Rafa to win it.

Commander Data
02-11-2009, 10:58 AM
Feds chances for RG seem weak at the moment. But there is still hope. The majority agrees that Federer has the game to win RG if he could bring his very best to the table when it counts. it is never impossible that a mircale happens and a mental "new" Fed wins the title. (Although I don't see anything that would nurish such a hope at the moment but one can always dream, right?!).

(In theory) Fed chances to win RG are still there for about the next 4 years if he stays healthy.

Yves.
02-11-2009, 11:09 AM
Federer is 28 years old
Fed's 27.

Foxy
02-11-2009, 11:52 AM
Fed's 27.

27y 6m 3d.

jenanun
02-11-2009, 06:42 PM
Feds chances for RG seem weak at the moment. But there is still hope. The majority agrees that Federer has the game to win RG if he could bring his very best to the table when it counts. it is never impossible that a mircale happens and a mental "new" Fed wins the title. (Although I don't see anything that would nurish such a hope at the moment but one can always dream, right?!).

(In theory) Fed chances to win RG are still there for about the next 4 years if he stays healthy.

the chance of roger to win RG is not whether he stays healthy or not, its whether rafa stays healthy or not....

Commander Data
02-11-2009, 07:16 PM
the chance of roger to win RG is not whether he stays healthy or not, its whether rafa stays healthy or not....


It is really strange what you understand from my post. I said that Rogers has chances if he stays healthy. What could be wrong about that?! IF he is injured or dead his chances are not there.Nowhere did I claim that Roger being healthy is the only necessary condition from him to win. you can add other conditions like "Rafa being injured" if you like but it has no relevance for my point

Foxy
02-11-2009, 09:57 PM
It is really strange what you understand from my post. I said that Rogers has chances if he stays healthy. What could be wrong about that?! IF he is injured or dead his chances are not there.Nowhere did I claim that Roger being healthy is the only necessary condition from him to win. you can add other conditions like "Rafa being injured" if you like but it has no relevance for my point

Yeap, another condition - reach the final, Rog!

FedFan_2007
02-11-2009, 10:14 PM
Fed's 27.

I always hate it when the haters lie about his age. When ever MugDULL's age is lied about they get into a hissy about it! :mad::mad:

FedFan_2007
02-11-2009, 10:15 PM
Yeap, another condition - reach the final, Rog!

As we know, Roger is not good at reaching French Open finals.

fred perry
02-11-2009, 10:51 PM
gosh you have access to the Best Stuff....:wavey:

jpatatsos
02-11-2009, 10:53 PM
as long as rafa is alive, roger will never win RG

HattonWBA
02-11-2009, 11:10 PM
he wont win it no matter what he does , simple

FedFan_2007
02-11-2009, 11:21 PM
I think it's instructive to look at Rog's 3 semis(2006-2008):

2006 Semi - split first 2 sets with Nalby and then a walkover into the final
2007 Semi - 3 hard fought tie-break sets over Davydenko
2008 Semi - shaky 4-set win over Monfils

He's not once gone into a RG final with a dominant semifinal win, that is the ticket for him.