[Jimnik]

Hopefully not.

Problem is he's become the King of MM events. He hasn't lost a 3-set match in 7 months and players have got to #1 before without holding a single slam.

[HKz]

Originally Posted by duong

in the past yes, but now clearly Djokovic is the best one with Nadal, one SF won by Fed in RG doesn't compensate what Djokovic had done in Madrid and Roma

Sure it doesn't, but RG is after all where it is at. So until Djokovic can get past the SF, I would still put Federer right behind Nadal on clay for now.

[Mefes]

Federer cannot beat Nadal on outdoor hard and clay, so answer NO

[BlueSwan]

Originally Posted by sexybeast

This is clearly the preferable situation for Federer, if Murray gets to nr2 Federer is guaranteed to not play Nadal until the RG final. Also he can get Murray in SF and Djokovic in the final, ideal situation to have a shot at RG title, but this is a long shot ofcourse.

Thing is if Federer is nr2 and Murray ends up in Djokovic's half it is not all that good for Federer, he gets to play Nadal in yet another SF and Murray might just beat Djokovic just to lose in straights to Nadal in the final.

Indeed. If Murray can get to #2 and Federer is drawn in Murray's half, then conceivably Federer can beat Murray in the SF (or Murray loses to a mug before the SF) while Djokovic takes out Nadal in an epic 9 hour semifinal leaving Djokovic toast before the finals.

Obviously this is not going to happen, but it's a nice thought.

[duong]

Originally Posted by BlueSwan

Indeed. If Murray can get to #2 and Federer is drawn in Murray's half, then conceivably Federer can beat Murray in the SF (or Murray loses to a mug before the SF) while Djokovic takes out Nadal in an epic 9 hour semifinal leaving Djokovic toast before the finals.

Obviously this is not going to happen, but it's a nice thought.

I think there are more chance for Murray to be number 2 before RG than Federer because we are coming in the slow hardcourt tournaments in Indian Wells and Miami which Murray loves, he's in good form, Nadal we don't know yet, and then Murray played well on clay last year.

And yes it could be a very good case for Federer for Roland-Garros ... even if he doesn't draw Murray, at least he would be sure not to draw Nadal in SF

And even in the long term after RG, it would still be great for Fed to be sure to avoid Nadal before the final if Djokovic and Murray are numbers 1 and 2

COME ON ANDY !!!

[abraxas21]

Originally Posted by Jimnik

Hopefully not.

Problem is he's become the King of MM events. He hasn't lost a 3-set match in 7 months and players have got to #1 before without holding a single slam.

just one actually

[munZe konZa]

Originally Posted by HKz

Sure it doesn't, but RG is after all where it is at. So until Djokovic can get past the SF, I would still put Federer right behind Nadal on clay for now.

Fed would never get to finals at RG let alone win it if he had to play Nadal before the final so try again.
Last year's cheating can hardly be repeated again and I don't see him as a contender to Nole on clay either.

[reery]

Originally Posted by munZe konZa

Fed would never get to finals at RG let alone win it if he had to play Nadal before the final so try again.
Last year's cheating can hardly be repeated again and I don't see him as a contender to Nole on clay either.

Kohlschreiber
Melzer
Federer

None of them were cheating.

[Jimnik]

Originally Posted by abraxas21

just one actually

God bless Marcelo.

[abraxas21]

Originally Posted by Jimnik

God bless Marcelo.

well, on second thought lendl also got to no. 1 without any GS but then of course he won quite a few.

there are probly players who have got to number 1 without holding GS in their countable rankings too, even though they won GS before.

in this era, i don't think that would be possible given that the trend seems to be that one player wins 2/3 GS a season.

[stewietennis]

What would be somewhat unfortunate for Roger would be if Federer does grab the No 2 ranking but Nadal ends up in his half anyway.

[abraxas21]

Originally Posted by stewietennis

What would be somewhat unfortunate for Roger would be if Federer does grab the No 2 ranking but Nadal ends up in his half anyway.

even more unfortunate if he ends up in the opposite half but djokovic loses early in RG

[masterclass]

Originally Posted by duong

in the past yes, but now clearly Djokovic is the best one with Nadal, one SF won by Fed in RG doesn't compensate what Djokovic had done in Madrid and Roma

Here I have to disagree with the context on which your conclusion is based Mr. Duong
If we can't count what's happened in the past and we are judging now, then only someone who has just won is best.
Of course that's a semi-nonsensical thing to say. But arbitrarily limiting the past is also a bit of nonsense as well.
One should take the entire record into account, and then look at recent form (I'll define recent form arbitrarily as the last 2 months, even that may be too long). So if we are talking about recent form on clay, only the players playing in South and Central America possess it, and that probably makes David Ferrer the clay court player with the best recent form.

Since recent form on the surface isn't present regarding the characters mentioned, we should take the entire record as a basis for judgement. Historically speaking, amongst active players, Rafael is the best player on clay and at Roland Garros bar none, and there is no doubt that Mr. Federer is clearly second best at Roland Garros, winning once and losing to Nadal in 4 finals and 1 semi, not to mention winning several other titles on clay in the past. Novak Djokovic has yet to make a final at Roland Garros, being beaten in the SF in 2011 by Federer, 2010 in the QF by Jurgen Melzer, 2009 in the round of 32 by Philipp Kohlschreiber, etc.

Djokovic did manage to win other clay tournaments as you stated in 2011 winning against Nadal in Madrid and Rome, no doubt aided by his winning streak and the confidence he picked up at IW and Miami, while Nadal still won on the slower clay of Monte-Carlo and Barcelona. Other than those 2 tournaments in 2011, Djokovic took 1 more Masters on clay in Rome in 2008. That's it as far as clay titles go, except a couple of minor 250's. I'd hardly call that a record to justify putting him side by side with Nadal on clay unless you arbitrarily isolate history to only count the spring of 2011. Even then, losing to Federer at the biggest clay tournament isn't a plus in his column, no matter his 2 masters wins. We have to ask this question, given a choice, would he have rather beaten Federer to have a chance at beating Nadal in the final at Roland Garros, or be happier with the 2 clay masters?

Respectfully,
masterclass

[Super Djoker]

Only if he beats Nadal regularly again and Djokovic loses a lot I find it unlikely that Nadal will allow that and I am sure Djokovic will be pumped for IW and Miami !

[duong]

Originally Posted by masterclass

Djokovic did manage to win other clay tournaments as you stated in 2011 winning against Nadal in Madrid and Rome, no doubt aided by his winning streak and the confidence he picked up at IW and Miami, while Nadal still won on the slower clay of Monte-Carlo and Barcelona. Other than those 2 tournaments in 2011, Djokovic took 1 more Masters on clay in Rome in 2008. That's it as far as clay titles go, except a couple of minor 250's. I'd hardly call that a record to justify putting him side by side with Nadal on clay unless you arbitrarily isolate history to only count the spring of 2011. Even then, losing to Federer at the biggest clay tournament isn't a plus in his column, no matter his 2 masters wins. We have to ask this question, given a choice, would he have rather beaten Federer to have a chance at beating Nadal in the final at Roland Garros, or be happier with the 2 clay masters?

In that semifinal in RG, Djokovic was very near to Federer playing amazing while Djokovic played great but didn't play great tactically and still made too many unforced errors.

Besides, people keep on repeating about his losses to Kohlschreiber and Melzer at RG while clearly not being in good form, but he also lost 3 times to Nadal in RG, also four times in often great MS finals or semifinals to the same Nadal ...

Besides, I still think Djokovic is very well suited for clay, he was raised on this surface and is more suited to it than Federer.

I'm personally convinced that if he had beaten Federer in that semifinal last year (and he was very near to that, losing two tie-breaks), he would have beaten Nadal in the final. Everything else which happened last year, and the fact that Nadal was not great in RG last year, persuade me for that.