[Shinoj]

Djoker better get to Year End Number 1. Have a lot of V Cash on that.

[Looner]

Originally Posted by Topspindoctor

The old man with most likely take year end #1

Oh how I miss Nadal teaching some humility to Olderer. Too bad no one is able to step up to the challenge even though the geezer is almost ready to have grandkids

TSD's inner Fedtard is coming out for all to see .

[buzz]

Originally Posted by duong

Not even talking of records, finishing the year at number 1 at 31 years old in a very physical era and with such competitors as Djokovic, Nadal and Murray, even though they're not at their best (although in their prime years ), would be just incredible and would fully achieve the "back to youth" story at an old age which this year looks like for him.

How many prime years does Nadal have? Clay king was already a physical beast at 18/19 years! Nobody would say at that time "He will probably be in his physical prime when he is about 26" His physical prime was more likely to happen at around 20-24 years and it probably did.

[Slasher1985]

Judging by the number of ascensions to the number 1 spot, this is Fed 3.0

That is, if he can keep this position long enough, to end the year as number 1.

Fed 1.0 - 4 YE #1
Fed 2.0 - 1 YE #1
Fed 3.0 - ? YE #1

[duong]

Originally Posted by buzz

How many prime years does Nadal have? Clay king was already a physical beast at 18/19 years! Nobody would say at that time "He will probably be in his physical prime when he is about 26" His physical prime was more likely to happen at around 20-24 years and it probably did.

Nadal is indeed a more peculiar/complex case but his age generally should be a "prime age".

And he did reach the finals of 5 slams in a row until RG this year.

My point was general and I did say that Djoko, Nadal and Murray were not at their best this year.

Anyway, they're still far from 30 years old.

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by duong

Not even talking of records, finishing the year at number 1 at 31 years old in a very physical era and with such competitors as Djokovic, Nadal and Murray, even though they're not at their best (although in their prime years ), would be just incredible and would fully achieve the "back to youth" story at an old age which this year looks like for him.

And if you speak of records, no player has finished the year at number 1 after 30 years old since the creation of the ATP rankings (Agassi was number 1 at 33 years old but for 3 months only, and Connors did not finish the year at number 1 in 1982 : he won 2 slams but McEnroe got more points in other tournaments).

But it would be really meaningful only if he won the US Open (and anyway if Djokovic didn't win the US Open, because if ever Fed managed to achieve the number 1 whereas Djoko won the US Open, I don't think Fed would really feel as the number 1 and people would always contest a lot about that, which is not good for pleasure)

PS : thinking Fed is mostly drawn by records is wrong if you hear him and Paul Annacone correctly, he's mostly driven by the pleasure, the titles and the fans' love. He just says "it's nice" when people talk to him of a new record he's just achieved, it's just part of the pleasure but he's not obsessed about numbers.

I agree. I didn't say he was obsessed with records, merely that he likes them. I believe they are part of his motivation. And the closer you get to one, the more influence it might have on you. Dropping Toronto was an easy choice. Dropping anything post-USO if the race is on will be a little harder.

[duong]

Originally Posted by Litotes

Dropping Toronto was an easy choice. Dropping anything post-USO if the race is on will be a little harder.

yes, although dropping Paris-Bercy looks easier imo because of the schedule Basel-Paris-WTF in 3 weeks.

Shanghai is more complicated to guess, also because last years he said he would come back there for Chinese fans.

[EliSter]

Really dam emberassing Nole, schooled by 31 yo Olderer with reumatisam probably. Year end no.1 will be decided by USO, if old geezer wins it, im sure he will clinch it. Nole repeating his 2009 choke/fail year, whenever Nadal isnt playing or injured he plays horible.

[henke007]

Yeah Nole has had a terrible 2012

[EliSter]

Originally Posted by henke007

Yeah Nole has had a terrible 2012

He played awful. I didnt see good stedy Joker since AO. Compare to 2011 he didnt had 5 matches on that level. He lost every clutch match since AO finals.

[Dextertje]

Originally Posted by EliSter

He played awful. I didnt see good stedy Joker since AO. Compare to 2011 he didnt had 5 matches on that level. He lost every clutch match since AO finals.

2012 is the norm. 2011 was the exception.

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by EliSter

He played awful. I didnt see good stedy Joker since AO. Compare to 2011 he didnt had 5 matches on that level. He lost every clutch match since AO finals.

I see. I'll try to sum up here:

- Djokovic has lost every clutch match since Februay and his play ranges from awful to clearly below his best. Good joker AWOL since AO.
- Federer is 31, has lost a step or two and can't return anymore.
- Nadal has been injured since March, at least, playing through pain until it became too much.

And yet these three has won every meaningful tournament this year bar the Olympics.

Will you remind me again why this is called an especially strong era? Because that is what plenty of Djokovic fans are claiming, isn't it?

[SaFed2005]

Originally Posted by Litotes

I see. I'll try to sum up here:

- Djokovic has lost every clutch match since Februay and his play ranges from awful to clearly below his best. Good joker AWOL since AO.
- Federer is 31, has lost a step or two and can't return anymore.
- Nadal has been injured since March, at least, playing through pain until it became too much.

And yet these three has won every meaningful tournament this year bar the Olympics.

Will you remind me again why this is called an especially strong era? Because that is what plenty of Djokovic fans are claiming, isn't it?

I absolutely agree with this. This is one of the weakest eras I have ever seen. After the top 3 ranking, the drop in level is ridiculous. Even if we say top 4 and include Murray into being a great player (which he is), after that its a bunch of player who just can't win anything. And I honestly don't feel like players outside the top 4 are even an outside threat to win big titles. Some of them may have the game to win but the problem is that all these players are so mentally weak. I have never seen a mentally weaker group of players...

[Looner]

Originally Posted by SaFed2005

I absolutely agree with this. This is one of the weakest eras I have ever seen. After the top 3 ranking, the drop in level is ridiculous. Even if we say top 4 and include Murray into being a great player (which he is), after that its a bunch of player who just can't win anything. And I honestly don't feel like players outside the top 4 are even an outside threat to win big titles. Some of them may have the game to win but the problem is that all these players are so mentally weak. I have never seen a mentally weaker group of players...

If you think the current one is bad, just wait until the Tomics, Harrisons and Dimitrovs of this world emerge. Boy is the ATP in for a "treat".

[EliSter]

Originally Posted by Litotes

I see. I'll try to sum up here:

- Djokovic has lost every clutch match since Februay and his play ranges from awful to clearly below his best. Good joker AWOL since AO.
- Federer is 31, has lost a step or two and can't return anymore.
- Nadal has been injured since March, at least, playing through pain until it became too much.

And yet these three has won every meaningful tournament this year bar the Olympics.

Will you remind me again why this is called an especially strong era? Because that is what plenty of Djokovic fans are claiming, isn't it?

Wrong. First of all:

Federer, Djokovic and Nadal even playing subpar are miles infront of the field. They are legends and even if they dont play their best tennis they will own rest of the players, if not by the game by their name itself. This era is far more stronger then " The Fed era" like 8 years ago, Federer was 1 and only dominate player with only Nadal emerging and having skill and guts to beat him. Exception Safin 2005. Federer was much superior player with average players bar Nadal. Now we have Joker who matured won 5 slams and still to win , we have Nadal with 11 and still to win ( clay GOAT ) and we have Federer who even as 31 yo plays great tennis.

No matter how much u say his movment went worse so far this year i do not see that, he has been moving great this summer, ofc little slumps in few matches but he is moving greatly. His return to be honest always sucked badly. Tho is even worse now. But his serve is much better then before, his BH is reliable lately and his FH deadly as always. So u saying that this era ss weak because some1 as Olderer is first is stupid argument. Even as 31 yo he is fantastic player and looks like he aged really well.

Maybe players from 5th place on ATP list right now are worse then players at same position 6-7 years ago, but u CANNOT compare top 4 players from this era from top 4 few years ago. Those top 4 we have now give us more suspecnfull macthes and excitment who will win GS then, players in FED era. Nobody could chalenge Fed then, now they can.

This era isnt so strong its needed more depth to be better but for sure it has more depth then before generation.