Federer,can he do the impossible? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer,can he do the impossible?

Malul
03-03-2007, 08:45 PM
There is one record no man or woman have succeded with and that is of course the big one,winning every tournament you will compete in during the whole year.

Federer have of course the chance this year alone,if you don´t take into account players who only play one tournament and win that one.

It feels like he might miss out again in Roland Garros,his nemesis of all tournaments.But say he win that one this year,not totally unlikely he will take all the four slams.Suppose he will be unbeaten after Wimbledon,this record really should be present in his mind and of course in the media.

So I thought,lets see what you think of this happening with a little poll!And please comment as well!

~Marija~
03-03-2007, 08:50 PM
I think that Roger will win every tournament he plays this year!
I don't know why...but I'm totally sure that he will win Roland Garros this year! :)

World Beater
03-03-2007, 08:52 PM
one should note that a probability of 0% does not mean than an event is impossible. The converse is true however.

Allez
03-03-2007, 08:52 PM
Does Kooyong count ?

ranaldo
03-03-2007, 08:55 PM
one should note that a probability of 0% does not mean than an event is impossible. The converse is true however.


Well actually it does. At least in the mathematical sense in discrete probabilities (yeah I'm boring :rolleyes: ). The probability is 0 means the proba of the converse event is 1 ie sure.

Malul
03-03-2007, 08:55 PM
It feels like this year the bigger challenge the better he plays,Roddick in AusOpen for example.

At the same time,this might be the only year this is possible to achieve.
Rafael out of form,or at least not in the form he was when playing Paris and Wimbledon last year.Ljubicic on his way down,Djokovic not ready this year to challenge Roger but certainly next year,Haas can´t beat him so I personly say that if we are gonna see a groundbreaking record this is the year..

Malul
03-03-2007, 08:57 PM
exhibition doesn´t count of course,then this thread would be a disaster!:)

TenHound
03-03-2007, 08:57 PM
Very doable BUT he'd have to be allowed to officially withdraw, or fake injury, from Cincy/Canda & Miami, so he could win IW then get over to Europe & work out a few wks. on clay, as Tony wants him to do.

I'm rather curious if he can win Grand Slam w/out dropping a set on hc's.

But, be careful what you wish for. The more his place in history is secure, and the more it'll take the youngsters another yr. to beat him, the more probable it is he'll have to invent his own challenges for next yr - which like Tiger, will most probably be fatherhood.

All_Slam_Andre
03-03-2007, 08:57 PM
Federer will not go undefeated throughout the whole year. He is still vunerable on clay and the chances of him not losing once during Monte-Carlo, Rome and the French Open are slim. He can have a bad day at the office like he did against Murray last year (Murray was every bit as tired before that match as Federer as he had played 10 matches in the two weeks before Cincinnati). Sure bad days at the office are rare for Federer (that is why is one of the 5 greatest players of all time) but he could still have one and be caught out. He could be also be vunerable at Halle where he is always mentally and physically exhausted after coming straight from Roland Garros (Rochus had 4 match points against him last year), and Montreal were he is rusty after taking a month off after Wimbledon.

R.Federer
03-03-2007, 09:00 PM
I don't think he will go undefeated the whole year. He might tank a Cincy or something to conserve for the USO.

I hope he goes undefeated where it counts though.

Voo de Mar
03-03-2007, 09:00 PM
I think he'll lose 2 or 3 matches this year. I see only three players who could beat him: Djokovic, Murray & Nalbandian, each of them only once. And I talk about clay & hard court. I suppose on grass & carpet/hard (indoor) FedEx is out of sight this year.

Malul
03-03-2007, 09:02 PM
I think he'll lose 2 or 3 matches this year. I see only three players who could beat him: Djokovic, Murray & Nalbandian, each of them only once. And I talk about clay & hard court. I suppose on grass & carpet/hard (indoor) FedEx is out of sight this year.


you forgot Nadal there I suppose?

i think nalbandian have gotten into the group of players that now no longer see how to beat him anymore,Roddick is the president of that company!

Voo de Mar
03-03-2007, 09:14 PM
you forgot Nadal there I suppose?


No.
I think Federer taught how to play against Nadal and things are going in the "Federer-Hewitt" way. Hewitt was 7-2 against Federer and now is 7-11. Nadal was 6-1, now is 6-3 and this process will be continuing IMO.

Saumon
03-03-2007, 09:17 PM
If you can do something, it means it's not impossible. :)

All_Slam_Andre
03-03-2007, 09:18 PM
Let's not write off Nadal just yet. He is still head and shoulders above everybody (yes that includes Federer) on clay, as highlighted by him having triumphed at the French Open for the last 2 years, won his last 62 matches on the clay, and the fact that he has won all 4 of his matches against Federer (his only serious claycourt rival) on the surface.

NYCtennisfan
03-03-2007, 09:19 PM
Federer will lose some matches this year, but I must admit that at any other time or for any other player, this question would just be ridiculous. It's still a little ridiculous, but Roger's last three years would have seemed an impossibility just a few years ago.

GonzoFed
03-03-2007, 09:24 PM
IMHO this is the scenario right know:

1)Probability of Fed going undefeated this season: 0.3.

2)Probability of Fed winning the Grand Slam: 0.4


Reasons for 1): being realistic he should lose at least one match in the clay season or if that is not the case (hopefully) he would be tired (mentally more than physically) in some MS or MM tournie and an in-form player probably would take him down. I should give him zero chances, but i didn't because this is Roger Federer we are talking about, and the guy has found ways to keep getting better and better, so it is always between the realm of possibilities to go undefeated. Just to discuss the possibility of this to happen without being joking is an scary thought.

Reasons for 2): it all depends of Nadal and his level of confidence going into the clay season basically. I didn't buy "the real number one" media :bs: during last clay season, but also i'm not buying the "Nadal is done" :bs:. For all the talk about his struggles, he hasn't been losing to chumps on Hardcourts, and he is beating all the players he is supposed to beat. In short, he kept his level of hardcourt play from 2005, but he ran into players that are a lousy match up for him. So until proven otherwise he is still the man to beat between april and june, but it should be harder for him since Fed will be more confident due to his improved Top Spin BH (since Toronto last year you could see Roger was working intensively about this) and the fact that Fed roasted him the last couple of times they met. RG is the big hurdle, and if he wins it i don't see anybody beating him at Wimbledon (unless King Oscar decides to get serious and stop searching for booty in challengers) and in the USO it would be the pressure of getting the holy grail of tennis his biggest rival.

jazar
03-03-2007, 09:29 PM
of course its possible if he gets favourable draws, but it is unlikely. however i am rooting for him to do it

Peacemaster
03-03-2007, 09:32 PM
I speak as a fan - very little chance of it happening. But, if there's one player in the history of tennis who has even a calculable chance of doing it - it's Federer. No one else even comes close.

Or Levy
03-03-2007, 09:41 PM
I think there's a chance, the question is whether after getting the French (suppose he gets it, otherwise it's all a moot point) wouldn't have some kind of negetive affect on his game...

It's just that it is all up to him, unless it's on clay. If he has a bad day at the office and the other player has faith - he can lose, though I can't imagine who he would lose to.

I'd love to see it happening, Roger deserve a record that would only be his own.

World Beater
03-03-2007, 09:41 PM
Well actually it does. At least in the mathematical sense in discrete probabilities (yeah I'm boring :rolleyes: ). The probability is 0 means the proba of the converse event is 1 ie sure.

thats correct in discrete probabilities.:)

RonE
03-03-2007, 09:44 PM
Not gonna happen you have to be really delusional or you must be smoking some seriously heavy shit to truly believe it will :lol:

RonE
03-03-2007, 09:46 PM
By the way, welcome back Makkro :wavey:

t0x
03-03-2007, 09:53 PM
I cant see him going the entire year without losing...

I see him losing once on clay, then losing once in a back to back tournament from playing far below par (sort of like Murray last year at cincy)

Jimnik
03-03-2007, 09:58 PM
Monaco, Rome, Hamburg and Roland Garros.

It is very, VERY unlikely that he'll get through those 4 tournaments without a loss. He might beat Nadal once or twice but not all the time.

I wouldn't rule out Andy Murray beating him at a tournament this year.

Voo de Mar
03-03-2007, 10:06 PM
Monaco, Rome, Hamburg and Roland Garros.

It is very, VERY unlikely that he'll get through those 4 tournaments without a loss.

In my opinion Federer will withdraw this year from Hamburg, Toronto and maybe even from Madrid :D

Tom Paulman
03-03-2007, 10:11 PM
Well, I think that Roger will lose about 5 matches this year, including one match where he will lose to a player that nobody would expect... we'll see ;)

Horatio Caine
03-03-2007, 10:13 PM
I'm still wondering where and when he will lose his first match this year...

kobulingam
03-03-2007, 10:19 PM
one should note that a probability of 0% does not mean than an event is impossible. The converse is true however.

:rolleyes: genius. explain more.

kobulingam
03-03-2007, 10:20 PM
In my opinion Federer will withdraw this year from Hamburg, Toronto and maybe even from Madrid :D

Montreal you mean.

MissPovaFan
03-03-2007, 10:21 PM
I think he has the best chance yet especially with his nearest rival fading, at least on hard courts - we shall see on clay.

World Beater
03-03-2007, 10:22 PM
:rolleyes: genius. explain more.

i was wrong. it is not correct for discrete probabilities. but at least according to what i know and what my textbook says, what i said is correct for continuous distributions.

someone already pointed this out to me btw.

Voo de Mar
03-03-2007, 10:25 PM
Montreal you mean.

Exactly.

Bremen
03-03-2007, 10:28 PM
It's funny that no one is saying this is ridiculous...I'd love for this to happen but he's probably going to lose once on clay at least.

Jimnik
03-03-2007, 10:28 PM
In my opinion Federer will withdraw this year from Hamburg, Toronto and maybe even from Madrid :D
He won't withdraw from Hamburg this year. Not with the new format.

bobjoe66
03-03-2007, 10:38 PM
Federer will not go undefeated throughout the whole year. He is still vunerable on clay

besides nadal who else is likely to beat him on clay? admittedly his weakest surface and the surface others stand the best chance to beat him, but i'd hardly say he was vunerable.

Havok
03-03-2007, 10:38 PM
No way in hell anybody in any era present and future, that will win all of his/her matches. Obviously said player would need to play a full schedule, not just show up at like 5 of them, win them all then say goodbye to the tour for the remainder of the year. It's highly likely that Roger will lose no more than 5 times this year, however.

Havok
03-03-2007, 10:40 PM
[QUOTE=All_Slam_Andre;4974298]Federer will not go undefeated throughout the whole year. He is still vunerable on clay [QUOTE]

besides nadal who else is likely to beat him on clay? admittedly his weakest surface and the surface others stand the best chance to beat him, but i'd hardly say he was vunerable.

Gasquet. Others can surprise Federer. Roger was really on the ball on clay last year, and probably played his best clay court tennis period, but I don't expect the same from him year in year out on the claycourts.

Howard
03-03-2007, 10:42 PM
I doubt that anyone who voted a high probability would put serious money on it. But as one of those who voted the lowest probability, I'd bet anyone any amount of money that he won't.

Voo de Mar
03-03-2007, 10:42 PM
He won't withdraw from Hamburg this year. Not with the new format.

We'll see. Federer has never won Rome so if he'll won probably withdraws from Hamburg. The reason: tiredness. It's tough to imagine that Federer is able to win Rome without losing a set. Maybe two three-setter and one four-setter in the final might be enough for him and right before Hamburg he will say "Thank you, maybe next year" :cool: He is mature, experienced and hungry to beat the new records. His targets for this season should be Monte Carlo, Rome, Roland Garros & Paris-Bercy - big events which he has never won. But it is only funny speculating ;)

kobulingam
03-03-2007, 10:54 PM
i was wrong. it is not correct for discrete probabilities. but at least according to what i know and what my textbook says, what i said is correct for continuous distributions.

someone already pointed this out to me btw.

Nice.

I'm still astonished how some people find every opporunity to show off what they've learned on some subject.

Andre'sNo1Fan
03-03-2007, 10:54 PM
Unlikely, even machines/robots do break down at times.

Jimnik
03-03-2007, 11:05 PM
We'll see. Federer has never won Rome so if he'll won probably withdraws from Hamburg. The reason: tiredness. It's tough to imagine that Federer is able to win Rome without losing a set. Maybe two three-setter and one four-setter in the final might be enough for him and right before Hamburg he will say "Thank you, maybe next year" :cool: He is mature, experienced and hungry to beat the new records. His targets for this season should be Monte Carlo, Rome, Roland Garros & Paris-Bercy - big events which he has never won. But it is only funny speculating ;)
Not with the new format.

He only needs 5 matches and a best of 3 sets final to win Rome.

Voo de Mar
03-03-2007, 11:09 PM
Not with the new format.

He only needs 5 matches and a best of 3 sets final to win Rome.

I forgot about of "best of three" finals this year :rolleyes: What a stupid idea to cut off sets in the finals of big events :o

GonzoFed
03-04-2007, 12:37 AM
I forgot about of "best of three" finals this year :rolleyes: What a stupid idea to cut off sets in the finals of big events :o

I completely agree. Why did not the atp try to modify the schedule instead? With that stupid idea the Classic Rome finals of the last couple of years would never happened.

Horatio Caine
03-04-2007, 12:42 AM
Not with the new format.

He only needs 5 matches and a best of 3 sets final to win Rome.

5 matches?

HKz
03-04-2007, 12:45 AM
I believe it is possible for Federer. It seems like every time he goes to a tournament, he is getting better. He first started with barely winning the tournaments, and then now not even dropping a set in Australian Open, a feat last completed by Borg (he only dropped one set @ 2006 Wimbledon >> So close! Damn Nadal for staying in the match). I think Federer has a huge chance @ Rolland Garros and a decent chance for this achievement.

tripb19
03-04-2007, 12:46 AM
Only Rafa, Nalby and Safin (the latter two playing the match of their lives) can beat him this year. Rafa and Nalby are the two with the knack of breaking Federer's serve alot but have average serves themselves, and Safin, well, you should know what he's capable of if you're posting on this forum.

World Beater
03-04-2007, 03:03 AM
Nice.

I'm still astonished how some people find every opporunity to show off what they've learned on some subject.

forgive me for trying to apply what i learned :rolleyes: After all it is through application that we realize whether we understand a concept or not. Oooh! what i said only applies to continuous distributions, I should be killed for that.

i tried to make a connection and professor kobulingam comes to try and flatter himself by correcting me although he was not the first to do so. Now run along to another forum, so you can obtain some more self-gratification. :wavey:

Halba
03-04-2007, 03:27 AM
federer will win all his matches this year

Pfloyd
03-04-2007, 03:29 AM
If it's impossible then Federer can't do it.

kobulingam
03-04-2007, 03:31 AM
forgive me for trying to apply what i learned :rolleyes: After all it is through application that we realize whether we understand a concept or not. Oooh! what i said only applies to continuous distributions, I should be killed for that.

i tried to make a connection and professor kobulingam comes to try and flatter himself by correcting me although he was not the first to do so. Now run along to another forum, so you can obtain some more self-gratification. :wavey:


Hahaha. You're the one who tried to show off and correct people who might have less training than you in whatever you are using, but at least understand the simple concept of propability better than you.

I "HATE" it when people use unrelated knowledge to "INCORRECTLY" correct some simple statement someone is making about some other subject (tennis).

What the hell do continuous distributions have to do with tennis? If I were you I would get a refund on that course you took. Even if you were right about the 0%-impossible statement (for probability theory under its axioms), don't you realize that tennis predictions are SUBJECTIVE PROBABILITIES, in which case it's stupid for us to even talk about "0% vs. impossible."

You are an example of a person who got dumber by learning something about a subject that's clearly over your head. Had you not tried to learn probability theory, you might use some of that little common sense you have to think properly. The theory has robbed you (in that instance) of this opportunity to think, and given you confidence to make an idiot of yourself while trying to show off and make other posters feel dumb/inferior.

For god's sake don't use something technical, unecessary and unrelated to the tennis discussion unless 1) you want to show off and impresss others AND 2) you actually know what you're talking about.

Alonsofz
03-04-2007, 03:33 AM
He will lose against Gonzo in RG final ;)

ChinoRios4Ever
03-04-2007, 03:44 AM
He will lose against Gonzo in RG final ;)

:devil: now Gonzo is a HC player, let's wait for the USO :o

if anybody can do the impossible is Rogelio :p

swissfed
03-04-2007, 04:15 AM
Actually He is doing, He ain't Nobody ....

Merton
03-04-2007, 04:16 AM
To get an idea how hard a task that will be, suppose that he plays 80 matches this year and the probability of losing any of his matches is just 0.01. Then it still turns out that the probability of winning all his matches is 45%.

World Beater
03-04-2007, 05:19 AM
Hahaha. You're the one who tried to show off and correct people who might have less training than you in whatever you are using, but at least understand the simple concept of propability better than you.
I "HATE" it when people use unrelated knowledge to "INCORRECTLY" correct some simple statement someone is making about some other subject (tennis).

What the hell do continuous distributions have to do with tennis? If I were you I would get a refund on that course you took. Even if you were right about the 0%-impossible statement (for probability theory under its axioms), don't you realize that tennis predictions are SUBJECTIVE PROBABILITIES, in which case it's stupid for us to even talk about "0% vs. impossible."

You are an example of a person who got dumber by learning something about a subject that's clearly over your head. Had you not tried to learn probability theory, you might use some of that little common sense you have to think properly. The theory has robbed you (in that instance) of this opportunity to think, and given you confidence to make an idiot of yourself while trying to show off and make other posters feel dumb/inferior.

For god's sake don't use something technical, unecessary and unrelated to the tennis discussion unless 1) you want to show off and impresss others AND 2) you actually know what you're talking about.

wrong. yes i made a mistake and someone corrected me BEFORE YOU DID. Fair enough. There was no reason at all for you to resort to this diatribe unless of course you amused yourself in the process. This is not the first time I have seen you do this. Now i am correct about that. The comment i made was in itself quite harmless until you decided to indulge yourself. you are making a big deal about nothing. In fact, more than anything i appreciated the initial correction(not yours). it is true i am a novice in the field of probability and am beginning to crack the surface of this field. is that not enough for you? Second i dont quite see how you could possibly know my motivations. There are several posters on this board who have a very good knowledge of probability not including yourself. Did you once think that the comment might be for them? of course not. Probability is not unrelated to the subject at hand in this thread. It was my misuse of the theory that was incorrect. I used something that only applied for continuous distributions.

Now, here's my request, stop assuming because you will make an ass out of yourself. I may have made a misinformed post, but some maturity is greatly needed on your part. You could have done what the first poster did. I HATE arrogant individuals who make assumptions and start hurling insults without thinking and make categorical characterizations based on one sample. Do you think its correct for me to think you are an ass#ole for the way you responded or a moron for thinking that you knew my reasons for posting? No. But it is correct for you to think i am an idiot based on one post. nice.

dylan24
03-04-2007, 07:49 AM
federer will lose his next match in 2012

oz_boz
03-04-2007, 10:45 AM
Fed won't go undefeated. He may come close to JMac's 82-3 but not without losses.

stebs
03-04-2007, 10:48 AM
0-10%.

Dancing Hero
03-04-2007, 03:37 PM
I don't think Federer will go unbeaten for the year. He may win Roland Garros though. The Grand Slam could be on.

calvinhobbes
03-04-2007, 05:51 PM
What a big pressure put on poor fedtards! I would ease it somewhat if I say that one year is one year no matter when it begins. The chinese year, for instance, -the year of the pig- is just beginning. Could we put this record in terms of "going undefeated for one year?..." In some years this will sound more or less the same as the challenge proposed by the starter of this thread. And I would cast my vote as 90% positive.:D :D :D

Bobby
03-04-2007, 08:29 PM
He will lose some matches this year. No question about that.

megadeth
03-04-2007, 11:08 PM
i thikn he'll probably lose/ withdraw in hamburg and another one possibly in either canada/ cincy

i'm rooting more for Fed winning all slams this year and also adding the TMS' missing from his resume! - MC, Rome, and Paris!

Federerhingis
03-05-2007, 02:23 AM
I don't think he will go undefeated the whole year. He might tank a Cincy or something to conserve for the USO.

I hope he goes undefeated where it counts though.

Yup even getting the Ind Wlls- Miami triple triple is not such a guarantee. I'l be happy as long as he does well all year round and defends his Wimbledon title. That's really the one tourney that builds up to such expectation. Yes it does not matter how much a big favorite he is every year since he won it. It just wouldn't be the same if he did not win Wimbledon.