Losing to Federer was good [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Losing to Federer was good

Grinder
11-16-2005, 07:41 PM
Think about it, for both Nalbandian and Ljubicic, losing to Federer could be a blessing in disguise. Now the winner of this match faces Davydenko in the semis, giving both of them a great chance of getting into the final. If they had finished first in their groups, then they would most likely face Gonzo (assuming he beats Gaudio) and that can be dangerous an any surface. Gonzo has beaten Nalbandian on hard court recently (as well as lost to him) and he nearly beat Ljubicic indoors at Madrid.

DrJules
11-16-2005, 07:46 PM
Considering ranking points are awarded for all wins it is probably beneficial to win all matches if possible. In reality the 3 best players at the event are; Roger, David and Ivan and the top 2 from this group should reach the final if they play to their abilities.

R.Federer
11-16-2005, 07:56 PM
Think about it, for both Nalbandian and Ljubicic, losing to Federer could be a blessing in disguise. Now the winner of this match faces Davydenko in the semis, giving both of them a great chance of getting into the final. If they had finished first in their groups, then they would most likely face Gonzo (assuming he beats Gaudio) and that can be dangerous an any surface. Gonzo has beaten Nalbandian on hard court recently (as well as lost to him) and he nearly beat Ljubicic indoors at Madrid.

Yes, maybe for the winner of the DN/IL match
But losing to Roge in the Round Robin meant that they are not even guaranteed to get to the semi, and one of them ends their T.M.C tomorrow

(ANd I would not discount nikolai either- I think he has great chance to make it to the final)

alfonsojose
11-16-2005, 07:59 PM
I'm pretty sure the'd have love to say "i cruxified JesusFed" ;)

El Legenda
11-16-2005, 08:01 PM
I'm pretty sure the'd have love to say "i cruxified JesusFed" ;)

Ivan has gotten him to the cross 3 or 4 times this year, just cant find the nails ;)

Grinder
11-16-2005, 08:01 PM
Yes, maybe for the winner of the DN/IL match
But losing to Roge in the Round Robin meant that they are not even guaranteed to get to the semi, and one of them ends their T.M.C tomorrow

(ANd I would not discount nikolai either- I think he has great chance to make it to the final)

Ok, maybe my original wording was unclear. I meant it was a good opportunity for the winner of that match, since on of them is guaranteed to make it to the semi. I don't think there is much Davydenko can do against Ljubicic, maybe against Nalbandian because their games are somewhat similar.

As for the points, if Federer beats Coria and loses to Gonzo in the semis, he would end up with 300 points. If Ljubicic/Nalbandian defeats Davydenko in the semis, they would have at least 450 points.

amierin
11-16-2005, 08:03 PM
Ivan has gotten him to the cross 3 or 4 times this year, just cant find the nails ;)


:worship:

Corey Feldman
11-16-2005, 08:05 PM
Ivan has gotten him to the cross 3 or 4 times this year, just cant find the nails ;)
:bs: :bs: :bs: and more :bs:

alfonsojose
11-16-2005, 08:07 PM
Ivan has gotten him to the cross 3 or 4 times this year, just cant find the nails ;)
Mirka Magdalena always helps :mad: ;)

prima donna
11-16-2005, 08:36 PM
Mirka Magdalena always helps :mad: ;)
:clap2:

disturb3d
11-16-2005, 09:32 PM
Think about it, for both Nalbandian and Ljubicic, losing to Federer could be a blessing in disguise. Now the winner of this match faces Davydenko in the semis, giving both of them a great chance of getting into the final. If they had finished first in their groups, then they would most likely face Gonzo (assuming he beats Gaudio) and that can be dangerous an any surface. Gonzo has beaten Nalbandian on hard court recently (as well as lost to him) and he nearly beat Ljubicic indoors at Madrid.Thats the stupidest theory of the week. Gonzo is trash.

Cervantes
11-16-2005, 09:48 PM
Mirka Magdalena always helps :mad: ;)
:haha:


Back to the topic, you're right Davydenko is probably a better draw than Gonzalez. Still I think both would rather have won their match against Federer to have a better chance to reach the semis.

Can't beat Davydenko if you're not playing against him.

Doris Loeffel
11-16-2005, 09:51 PM
Hmmm I wouldn't count Davidenko out he may as well reach the final no matter who he'll play in the semis..

Dollars & Cents
11-16-2005, 09:53 PM
Hmmm I wouldn't count Davidenko out he may as well reach the final no matter who he'll play in the semis..

Especially if he keeps escaping from 0-40 :eek:

Grinder
11-16-2005, 10:03 PM
Thats the stupidest theory of the week. Gonzo is trash.

Funny guy. :lol:

Yeah, a guy that's won three titles (on hard, clay and indoor, nonetheless) is trash...

shotgun
11-17-2005, 12:27 AM
Right. A player beats Federer and then starts to worry about Gonzalez. This doesn't make sense at all.

Of course, since both Ljubo and Nalba couldn't beat Fed, they have reasons to fear Feña. They're all on the same level, the level of players that can't beat Federer, until they prove the opposite.

Grinder
11-17-2005, 12:38 AM
Right. A player beats Federer and then starts to worry about Gonzalez. This doesn't make sense at all.

Of course, since both Ljubo and Nalba couldn't beat Fed, they have reasons to fear Feña. They're all on the same level, the level of players that can't beat Federer, until they prove the opposite.

Nadal beat Federer 6-3 6-3 in Miami last year and lost to Gonzalez.

shotgun
11-17-2005, 12:48 AM
Nadal beat Federer 6-3 6-3 in Miami last year and lost to Gonzalez.

The transitive property doesn't really work in tennis.

As Jon Wertheim wrote once, if Roddick lost to Gilles Muller, who lost to Thomas Zib, who lost to Oliver Marach, isn't it fair to say that Roddick doesn't deserve to be in the top 200?

Grinder
11-17-2005, 12:58 AM
The transitive property doesn't really work in tennis.

As Jon Wertheim wrote once, if Roddick lost to Gilles Muller, who lost to Thomas Zib, who lost to Oliver Marach, isn't it fair to say that Roddick doesn't deserve to be in the top 200?

As you said, the transitive property doesn't work in tennis, transitive thinking doesn't either. I don't think a player will think that Gonzalez will be an easy match after upsetting Federer. I'm pretty sure Guga was worried about playing Nalbandian after upsetting Federer a few rounds earlier.

EDIT: By the way, I meant "Nadal beat Federer 6-3 6-3 in Miami and then lost to Gonzo in the next round."

nkhera1
11-17-2005, 02:49 AM
Ivan has gotten him to the cross 3 or 4 times this year, just cant find the nails ;)

Even James Black and Nicholas Keifer gave Fed a tough time when he came back from a long layoff and this was worse for Fed because he was injured. Lets see what Ljubicic can do in the final against Fed before we start proclaiming anything.

nkhera1
11-17-2005, 02:51 AM
Funny guy. :lol:

Yeah, a guy that's won three titles (on hard, clay and indoor, nonetheless) is trash...



Hey Roddick won titles on every major surface and look at his repuation on GM. Its hard to please such a qualified bunch of individuals as the ones we have posting on MTF.

hitchhiker
11-17-2005, 02:54 AM
So beating federer would gurantee qualification yet losing to federer is good because if you qualify you will get a slightly easier match? what logic lol

Grinder
11-17-2005, 03:02 AM
So beating federer would gurantee qualification yet losing to federer is good because if you qualify you will get a slightly easier match? what logic lol

Beating Federer wouldn't guarantee qualification.
Hypothetically:
Let's say Ljubicic beat Federer, Coria (three sets) and lost to Nalbandian. (two sets)
That would make him 2-1 (4-4)
Nalbandian beats Ljubicic and Coria (two sets), but loses to Federer (two sets)
That would make him 2-1 (4-2)
Federer beats Coria and Nalbandian in straight sets, but loses to Ljubicic in three
That would make him 2-1 (5-2)

Ljubicic beat Federer and still didn't qualify due to sets lost.

idolwatcher1
11-17-2005, 03:12 AM
Mirka Magdalena always helps :mad: ;)

:lol: she's very supportive, that Mirka... ;)

shotgun
11-17-2005, 10:41 AM
As you said, the transitive property doesn't work in tennis, transitive thinking doesn't either. I don't think a player will think that Gonzalez will be an easy match after upsetting Federer. I'm pretty sure Guga was worried about playing Nalbandian after upsetting Federer a few rounds earlier.

EDIT: By the way, I meant "Nadal beat Federer 6-3 6-3 in Miami and then lost to Gonzo in the next round."

It's totally different when we're talking about a TMC. To reach this level a player has to be among the best 8 of the season (well, the best 13 in this case). We're not talking about big upsets here, like the ones you mentioned. Nadal wasn't an example of consistency back in 2004, he definitely was a kid with a great potential, so as Berdych is. Then Guga's issues in RG 2004 were much more physical than mental. His hip would barely stand a 5-setter, and he knew that.

On the other hand, a player who reaches the TMC has necessarily achieved a reasonable level of consistency, and if he has the potential to beat Federer, he's got confidence enough to think that he can beat Gonzalez. Add to this the fact that Gonzalez's difference to Davydenko in fast courts, in terms of level, is minimal. Don't forget that Davydenko reached quarter-finals in Paris, while Gonzalez fell on the first round.