[ApproachShot]

Originally Posted by nadal_slam_king

Federer would be relying on Rafa to lose before the QFs in slams in order to really help Federer. Plus Rafa can gain points at Australian Open, Queens, Toronto, Cincy. And Rafa's lead is massive, so he can afford some slip-ups.

This. Moreover, if Nadal can have a strong finish in the remaining tournaments this season then as far as rankings are concerned, the ball will (excuse the pun) be in Nadal's court. Roger would have to rely on Rafa slipping up early in a few of the big tournaments as it's unrealistic to assume that he will be able to accumulate enough points just by winning his own matches.

Yes, Rafa does have a lot to defend, but he could realistically gain points in the early hard court season. In addition, it's difficult to see him not winning the French Open. What about the grass court tournaments? Well, he will probably be the favourite for Wimbledon too.

[nadal_slam_king]

Originally Posted by ApproachShot

This. Moreover, if Nadal can have a strong finish in the remaining tournaments this season then as far as rankings are concerned, the ball will (excuse the pun) be in Nadal's court. Roger would have to rely on Rafa slipping up early in a few of the big tournaments as it's unrealistic to assume that he will be able to accumulate enough points just by winning his own matches.

Yes, Rafa does have a lot to defend, but he could realistically gain points in the early hard court season. In addition, it's difficult to see him not winning the French Open. What about the grass court tournaments? Well, he will probably be the favourite for Wimbledon too.

Yeah, if Rafa wins Roland Garros it's very difficult for him to lose early at Wimbledon because you know he's in great ball-striking form from the clay and you know he adapts very easily to grass. And yes he can also gain some points at Indian Wells as he's very good on that surface. His future is very well set-up to have a long reign at number one. And even if he gets tendonitis its not big deal, he had tendonitis twice this year and had one knee treated just before the clay season and it fixed it 100% and then the other knee fixed after Wimbledon. It's only a 3-4 day process of blood-spinning treatment. Whereas the 2009 treatment didn't work at all, and wasn't applied by the same doctor. That's no longer an issue

[Sapeod]

Originally Posted by flyboy

All of you Nadal tards are absolutely idiotic complete wastes of posts.

Fixed.

[heartbroken]

Originally Posted by ApproachShot

I think there's something quite powerful about Federer being one week short of Sampras in the total weeks at #1. If only he had converted from any of the following scenarios: being 2 points away from beating Del Potro at the USO, 2 points away beating Davydenko at the WTF, 1 point away beating Baghdatis and Berdych at Indian Wells and Miami, not having to withdraw from Dubai due to a lung infection, not deciding to play Monte Carlo...then the situation could have been so different.

Just goes to show that the margins in tennis can be very thin at times.

The thing about records is there are often elements of good fortune/bad fortune that come into play to twist the numbers. Sometimes they twist your way, sometimes not.

Take Sampras, for example. Were there weeks during his career that he might have lost the number 1 ranking, but maybe got a little lucky? Sure, but there were also times where he wasn't so lucky, and it cost him weeks at the top.

I thought Sampras was playing some of the best tennis of his career during the pre USO swing in 1999, but a back issue forced him to withdraw from the USO. My opinion is that without that back problem, Sampras would have won the USO that year, and finished the year number 1 for a seventh consecutive year.

However, that's not what happened, and I don't grant Sampras an exception for being hurt when I look at various records. It's just the way it is. One player doesn't always get the benefit of everything going their way. There were times that Sampras was lucky. There were times when Sampras was unlucky. That's life. More power to anyone that can always manage to be on the lucky side in life!

It's a great thing to be lucky, IMO. Is there anyone here who is thinking to themselves that they wished they weren't so lucky in life? I kinda doubt it. And yet, some folks will really protest if you ever try to suggest that a certain player was ever lucky during their career. I believe that at various times, players like Fed, Sampras, and Nadal each got lucky. And at times, each were unlucky. That is what I wouild expect from life...

[Filo V.]

Originally Posted by Word Life

Fixed.

Thanks, but that wasn't necessary, I wrote what I meant to write

As far as this thread, can Roger become #1 again? Yes. But it will be extremely difficult, as he hasn't had the same intensity and results outside of majors he did prior to 2007, and that is what it's going to take for him to get to #1. Really, his priority seems to be on his family, and on getting majors. So therefore, it's going to take amazing GS results to get #1, and a dip in results from Rafa. It's a lot to ask. But you can never say never with Federer.

[abraxas21]

I don't know if he can do it at this point.

[Mungo]

No, he won't. Sampras' record is safe atm.

[Johnny Groove]

Fed needs to win Wimbledon and/or USO to have anything resembling a chance. Getting his act together in Miami and on clay wont hurt either.

[Pirata.]

"Roger is on the other side of the float, I don't think he'll ever play as well as he did three or four years ago—that's not to say he can't still win a slam, but it's difficult to see him climbing back to No. 1," Navratilova said. "Nadal is dominating and Djokovic's confidence is off the chart. Roger has lost three matches (this season) to Djokovic and lost to him at U.S. Open last year as well, it will get under his skin."

Roger was asked about it in his presser

"You'd rather hear other things, you know. Maybe she missed the London World Tour Finals. I don't know. Maybe she was somewhere else climbing Kilimanjaro. I don't know. I love her."

[Blackbriar]

another love affair in tennis. Navratilova is a man. and an ugly one.

[FlameOn]

No, unless Nadal and Djoker are out for months with injuries.

[Vida]

cool answer there.

[duong]

Originally Posted by abraxas21

I don't know if he can do it at this point.

mathematically he can, if he wins Wimbledon and plays well in next months : he just needs to get a little bit more points than Djokovic by Wimbledon and not to lose too many points to Nadal.

Now it's only mathematical

[abraxas21]

Originally Posted by Slumpdasco

Roger was asked about it in his presser

good to see federer putting navratilova in her place. can you give me the source please?

[duong]

Navratilova's opinion is good (more accurate than Borg's in 2008 who said that Fed was only Wimbledon's 3rd favorite behind Nadal and Nole ),

but Fed's answer is funny : he's a funny guy to me (at least to me because I know for others he has no humour or personality at all he's the most boring or devilish person depending on the people)