Sean,

Roger will not lose the estoril 175 because he has only estoril, halle and basel. Dubai he has zero, so it does not matter. Effectively, he will add toronto and cincy this year without losing any of his “best 5″ becuase he has only 4 tournaments thus far in the non-GS, non-MS category.

I think you made a mistake, but I’m not sure though….

I believe that the points from the Four Slams and those of ATP Masters Series events always count. There is always “room” for them. After that, you get to count your best 5 tounaments that aren’t majors or AMS’s.

Ergo, Fed will still keep his points from Dubai, Estoril, Halle + Majors + AMS’s.

Thanks FedEx, great catch on the “Five”. Let me revise!

Now Updated.

Kimo, it is my understanding that you need to “make room” for additional Master Series events, so your five will become four then three as these additional events in Canada and Cincy are added.

Tomorrow, the new ATP top will be like this:
Federer = 6600 - 350 (Montreal last year) + 5 (Toronto this year) = 6255 p ATP
Nadal = 5830 - 225(Montreal last year) + 500(Toronto this year) = 6105 p

Yes, after Fedex comments, now Sean has put the right numbers.

I’ve read (in a Spanish forum) Nadal will skip Cincy (which is a mistake in my opinion), so he won’t be nº1 before August 18.

Anyway, if you look at the 2008-Race:

Nadal: 1055
Federer: 686
Djokovic: 674

So Federer is 369 Race-points (=1845 Entry-points) behind Nadal. That’s too much, so Nadal will almost sure end the Year as nº1.

Matt, thanks. Federer can make up the 369 and pass Nadalby running the table from here on out, that is winning Cincy (100) + Beijing (80) + US Open (200).

Of course that’s if in fact Rafa skips Cincy, Beijing and US Open. (Haha)

But it does show that Roger’s not completely out of it for the year-end No. 1. Of course that might change come September 8th.

tiberiu, you’re wrong.

It is just as Noel and I said yesterday and now Sean has shown above.

In 2004 it happened the same and they (the ATP) did just what Noel, Sean and myself have been saying.

I also do not think Rafa will skip on Cincinnati. Unless he’s seriously injured or extremely exhausted it just doesn’t make sense being so close to No. 1 now.

Matt, I prefer to wait for tomorrow to see the official ATP top. Meanwhile, on Eurosport site writes that Nadal must reach the Cincy semifinal to be no 1. And Federer doesn’t count in this equation.

Tiberiu:

The new atp rankings tomorrow will be - 6605 for Fed and 6305 for nadal.

If atp could have avoided this confusion it would have been as you told.

Talking of confusion, what is atp’s rationale for awarding Indianapolis 70 race/350 ranking points. Simon leads the open series (ahead of Rafa) because he has 115 points - 70 from Indy and 45 from toronto.

Are la, washington and new haven giving 70 points each too? If yes, fed/nadal can just play those 3 and pick up a truck load of points! they can even skip the US open to get some rest!

If davydenko decides to play all those 3 and wins, he might get within touching distance of the no.2 in the Race.

Speaking of the race - as of tomorrow, Rafa will be 370 race points ahead of Federer! That is - ahem, Federer-like!

I can’t understand (skipping Cincy) neither.

Perhaps it was just a rumor circulating in that forum.

And yes, you’re right. It is not impossible to make up those 369 points, but to do so it is Nadal who must fail severely from now to the end of year.(Not only Federer winning a lot).

Fedex,

Indianapolis gives 35 Race-Points (=175 Entry-Points). You can check it here: http://www.atptennis.com/en/tournaments/profile/419.asp

I think there is a change this year. I remember Gilbert and Cahill talk something about that today. Unfortunately I was on one of those pay per minute phone calls and couldn’t get the whole info.

Tell me how does Simon have 115 points in the us open series?

Simon got 70 from Indy W + 45 for Canada SF.

The US Open Series points are not the same as the ATP Race points across the board as I understand it.

Sean,

Wasn’t Roger supposed to defend 350 points at Toronto? Out of which he gets only 5 points. So, his total should be 6600 - 345 = 6255 after Toronto.

Not 6605.

lady, as I wrote, by rule points stay on for 52 weeks, so Canada points from 2007 will fall off on August 11, 52 weeks after they went on last year.

Sean,

That makes sense. The USTA wants to give additional weightage to non-Masters to attract money-thirsty players like davydenko. You can delete my earlier post to save people the confusion.

Atp ranking, Atp race and now USopen series points! Looks like the Tennis heads are bent on selling the sport to the GEEKS of the world!

Wow! Everyone’s been saying Nadal was catching up but I didn’t realize it was almost mathematically inevitable. Perhaps someone can share some tennis history here with naive readers like myself…. When was the last time a player who had been a dominant No. 1 was overtaken? How did the ousted No. 1 respond?

Andy

I like the idea of Nadal skipping Cincinnati. He only has 5 Ranking Points to defend, going out in a 2nd Round Retirement last year. Federer has 500 Points to defend for winning last year, and given how Federer’s been struggling this year he’s no cinch to win there again. Nadal is smart to skip it and save the wear & tear on his body for the one that really matters: the US Open, where it’s Best of Five Sets for two weeks. And Nadal only has to get past the 4th Round there to match his Ranking Total from last year. Another loss by Federer in Cincinnati (which is possible) and Nadal could possibly become #1 by sitting home for a week. And if Federer does well there, he still has to win the US Open to keep his pace ahead of Nadal. The court in Cincinnati is like glass, the fastest hard court in the US according to Messrs. Cahill & Gilbert, so it suits nadal less. Given all of that, Nadal has really nothing to gain by playing there. He will become #1 this year at some point, so I say he should manage his schedule in a way to keep him at optimum for the ones that really count. And besides, after the US Open he has the Davis Cup Semi-Final to play too. He should skip Cincinnati.

I got it. Thanks.

It all makes sense now!

The US open series points were upped this year from 35 for the smaller tournaments to 70. If a player wins the slam and the US Open series points he gets an additional $1 milion added to his prize money. Last year Federer won the US Open Series points and the USO, and received an additional $1 million, grossing a total of $2.2 million in total prize money.

“Since we are on 52-week rolling ranking system, points accumulated in Canada and in Cincinnati in 2007 will not be removed this year until August 11 (Canada) and August 18 (Cincy), respectively. Both events were played a few weeks later last year than this year.”

I’ve heard conflicting reports about this. Some say the computer won’t be updated at all until the right time, others say points will be added but not subtracted. The ATP has contradicted itself at least once.

“Roger Federer, who lost in the second round received 5 ranking points from Canada. Because he received a bye in the first round he will not pick up the allotted 35 points given to second round losers. By rule, the addition of those 5 points into Roger’s “Best 18” means something has to go to make room, and Roger’s only has four events so he has room with which to work.”

Okay, this part is what I was missing, assuming you are correct. I didn’t think Toronto would be counted as one of the 5 “Other” results, since it is an AMS, and all AMS are counted. Are you certain of this? If one of the Canada AMS (07 or 08) has to be relegated to “Other” status, how do they decide which one?

I trust your math, I just hope you got the rules right.

“By my math if Rafa wins Cincy he will jump to 6730. But if Roger reaches the quarterfinals he will also have 6730 (6605+125) resulting in a tie! And would you believe according to the ATP rules I’ve read such a tie would be broken by total Grand Slam/Masters/Masters Cup points which Roger leads Rafa in for the last 52 weeks by my count of 5955 to 5585. So Roger will remain No. 1 by reaching the quarterfinals in Cincinnati if all my math calcs and interpretation of the rules are correct.”

That’s very interesting, but a stupid way to do things. That would mean that if Fed lost his rank after the US Open but regained a tie in Madrid, he might be ranked #2 this time.

If I were deciding it, I’d put both players listed as Ranked #1, but Federer will be Seeded 1 because he’s held the ranking longer. Not that it really matters who is seeded 1 since they will always be on opposite sides of the draw and everything else is drawn out of a hat.

Anyway, good work Sean!

Voicemale1

You make a good case for Rafa skipping Cincinnati. I would add to that this support - I believe he is planning to play both doubles (with Robredo) and singles during the Olympics, so a break now, with virtually no points to defend, will have him well-rested for the Olympics and the USO.

But he is on the draw, so why do people think he’s skipping Cincy; has he announced that somewhere and I’ve missed it?

Hey, Nadal will be #1 when he gets #1…You guys are wracking your brains trying to ‘figure it out’! With the season he has, relax…it will happen.

And Andy, before Roger took over #1 in 2004, there were several #1 players who had the ranking, lost it, took it back, etc. Roger broke the consecutive week record for holding #1. People always remember Pete’s 6-year run for #1, but they forget that he did not keep it for every week during those years. Roger has kept it for every week. That’s the difference.

Sure, I’ll be sad when Roger loses his #1 ranking, but if anyone deserves it - it’s Nadal. In any normal situation in tennis he would have been #1 already with the total points he has in previous years. That should tell you how dominant Roger has been as a #1 player.

When Nadal get’s the ‘official’ ranking as #1, I will come and congratulate all his fans. But until then, I’m going to enjoy these last weeks of Roger’s consecutive record run! *wink*

Jane:

Thanks. And Matt said he’d read on some Spanish Blog from Mallorca that people who allegedly are “in the know” about Nadal’s comings & goings claim there that he’ll be skipping the event. But no official word yet.

FedEx, I really pay zero attention to the US Open Series standings. I’m not sure anyone really does for that matter until late in the US Open.

JCF, it’s my understanding per the rules - and i could be wrong on this - that you can only have 18 events count, and a 19th if and only if it’s the Masters Cup.

That said, all Masters Series/Slams must also count within that 18. So this season because of the Olympics some AMS events - Canada and Cincy - will actually be reflected twice within the rankings. As such, the five “other” tournaments will have to be decreased accordingly to make room for the extra AMS events as they get added. Hope that helps.

Sean,
Ref: “But to make room for any Cincinnati points Rafa will lose 75 points from Dubai while Roger loses a zero from Dubai. That means Roger will effectively start Cincinnati at 6605 (6605 – 0 from Dubai) while Rafa’s adjusted total is 6230 (6305 – 75). So in real numbers entering Cincy we have:
Federer: 6605
Nadal: 6230
Roger’s real lead is thus 375 ranking points this week.”

We discussed this yesterday all day and already finalized it. You don’t take Rafa’s 75 points before the outcome of Cincy, just like his 25 points were not taken off Rotterdam before Toronto. Only on August 4, you take off Rafa’s 75 points from Dubai.
————————————————-

There are two calculations: (1) 150 points and (2)300 points difference between the 2 players entering Cincy. Former is pragmatic (because it will not count the same MS twice) but will not show up on ATP; and latter is technical (52 weeks + adding twice the same 2 MS, etc.) and will show up on ATP board on Aug. 11.

According to the pragmatic math, if Fed wins Cincy and Nadal makes it to semi, Nadal will be No. 1 (Nadal 6325; Fed 6255).

According to the ATP’s technical math (which is based on 52 weeks, etc.), Rafa will have to reach Final at Cincy, and Fed will have to bow out early, to take the No. 1 position BEFORE Aug. 18.
You can accept it or ignore it whatever suits you.

When the ATP Ranking is officially recalibrated on Aug 18, removing all the confusions, we are back to the outcome of the pragmatic math plus Olympic points. In which case, granted Federer wins Cincy, Rafa just needs 150 points out of Cincy + at least equal to Roger’s points at Olympic, to take No. 1 position officially.
This is THE FINAL math.

JCF,
ATP ranking after today’s Final has already been updated. Go visit the site.

A match/game involving the defending champion should always be broken by the contender Overtaking the current champion. Since the No.1 “game” will always involve the “defending champion” - a tie should mean no.1 does not change hands.

I guess the atp method makes sense too. GS and MS are the most important after-all!

Shital thanks, but you’ve lost me!

Taking your scenario - Federer wins Cincy, Rafa reaches the SF, this is how the rankings would look per my numbers on August 4th:

Federer 7105 (6605+500)
Nadal 6455 (6603+225-75 Estoril)

So how would Rafa be No. 1?

“That said, all Masters Series/Slams must also count within that 18. So this season because of the Olympics some AMS events - Canada and Cincy - will actually be reflected twice within the rankings. As such, the five “other” tournaments will have to be decreased accordingly to make room for the extra AMS events as they get added. Hope that helps.”

Theoretically, if your 5 “other” events each got you more points than your spare Toronto (e.g. 5 pts), will one of your better results then have to make way for the 5 pts? That would suck.

Oh well… in a few weeks, none of this will matter. The discussion is only about 2 weeks worth of temporary ranking points.

Rafa knows he will get it sooner or later and isn’t fussed. He’d rather focus on winning the US Open than worry about getting #1 a few weeks earlier. Fed is the one sweating it out not him, so I think it’s a good idea to skip Cincy.

Shital, thanks for the final math. That helped. The pragmatic math isn’t official, but it’s the only one that will matter on Aug 18.

“A match/game involving the defending champion should always be broken by the contender Overtaking the current champion. Since the No.1 “game” will always involve the “defending champion” - a tie should mean no.1 does not change hands.”

That’s the way I see it too. The challenger is second place. But if Fed’s points drop and he ties it again, Fed will be the challenger, and thus #2.

This is awfully complicated… it would be crazy if Federer could come out on top at the end of the year…terribly unfair though..

http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/players/playerprofiles/pointsbreakdown.asp?player=N409

If you check Nadal’s ranking breakdown, you will see Rotterdam pushed to “non-countable” tournaments. So Sean is spot on with the analysis.

JCF:

Two no.1s seems a cop-out to me. Tennis rankings is not rocket-science to let things remain open ended. While the ATP method may not be the most likeable solution it is way better than a shoot-out that happens in football finals all the time. Now that is a place where you could use 2 winners. Though I always feel they should play until golden goal!

Fedex,

Normally when there’s a tie for some other stat, you’d have two #1s, no #2, then a #3. For a ranking, anything else is controversial.

You already get less points for non-MS or GS, so you would have to do better for those points to be equivalent. The way the ATP does things is by saying “these events are better than those”. They can already make that statement by issuing more total points for those tournaments than smaller ones, and counting fewer small tournaments. Why the need to prioritize points?

my head is spinning with all these numbers.

i think i will check in after the olympics and see who is #1 and #2!

i have a feeling roger won’t be out in the second round of cincinnati.

[…] from Tennis-x.com […]

The no.1 ranking is not any other stat. It could very well be the holy grail of our sport. (Apart from Wimbledon, not too many contenders can make a justifiable case). The World Cup of our sport. Given that, you need to find ONE and only ONE no.1

As to the need for priorotizing points, one of the main issues with the no.1 ranking as the atp does it is that quantity may outweigh quality. To me 6000 points with 17 tournaments is slightly better than 6000 points with 18 tournaments. Hence it makes sense to use the 13 MANDATORY tournaments as a tie-breaker.

Sean,
it is also interesting to look at the race numbers. I think eventally when all the Olympic etc is gone and the ATP calendar is on time, this will reflect on the real ranking as well:

ATP RaCE
First: Nadal, R. 1055

2nd Federer, R. 686

3rd Djokovic, N. 674

The gap between Rafa and Roger is about 300 points. That’s 3 master series or 1 GS and 1 MS that Fed has to win and Rafa has to exit in the first round just for Fed to catch up!

So, to me, Rafa just needs to play his tennis and rest his body and don’t even think about the rankings. They will come eventually!

FoT:

That consecutive year end no.1s is one of the toughest records to break. As a fan of Pete before Roger stepped in, I would be fine if Roger allows Pete to keep that 1 record. Roger has pretty much ripped up most of Pete’s legacy.

That said Roger still has a little bit of work to beat sampras’ 7wimbledons 286 weeks at no.1 and the 14slams. Borg and Sampras might be the biggest beneficiaries of Roger and Rafa’s careers overlapping. Both would have been consigned to the dust by now if Rafa came a few years later than he has. Roger and Rafa’s career overlap means a few of Borg/Sampras’ records will survive.

Sean- “What a surprise, Rafael Nadal wins again, beating Nicolas Kiefer 6-3, 6-2 to claim the Toronto Masters.”

Tennis-X’s bias is showing again. Admit it Sean that you would never say such a thing had it been Federer to dismantle Kiefer in a one sided final (yawn).

Domination by one player doesn’t look good to you Federer fans anymore? What a surprise.

TD, care to elaborate? Bias?? Federer???

Zola, yup. If Rafa keeps doing what he’s been doing the ranking will catch up. He’s doesn’t even need to win titles really, just go deep and keep pace with Roger and he’ll be on his way…

JCF, correct. If one of your “other five” is better than an AMS, then yes you are screwed.

Also,

I want to add that when Federer finished 2003 about 15 or 25 racepoints behind Roddick, I wondered if that would comeback to haunt Federer if ever he is in pursuit of the 6yr end No.1 record. (This record more than any other record requires the player to be at the right place (No.1) at the right time (end of year!).

If Fed had achieved the no.1 that year, this year’s no.1 ranking would mean even more to him. All said and done, at this point Fed has achieved enough to carve out a niche for himself in the tennis firmament. Everything from now on is about what he wants from his life. Does he want to enjoy the game or does he want as many laurels as he can reap. If it is the latter, a lot of personal things will have to be put on hold.

I donot know if there are people who achieved the best they could, simultaneously, on both the career and personal front.

FedEx, I believe it was around this very time five years ago if my memory hasn’t failed me that Federer had matchpoints on Roddick in Canada. Had he converted he would have become No. 1 following the event and quite possibly have held it through the remainder of the year.

Fedex
***Borg and Sampras might be the biggest beneficiaries of Roger and Rafa’s careers overlapping. Both would have been consigned to the dust by now if Rafa came a few years later than he has. Roger and Rafa’s career overlap means a few of Borg/Sampras’ records will survive.***

so true. But then we would have missed the magnificent rivalry and great matches between these two. I think they both helped the other one become a better tennis player. I think tennis needed them both at the same time.

FoT
I agree completely. Rafa will be No 1, when the rankings say he is. The important thing is that he is playing great. The hype right now shows how difficult it is to surpass Fed, even in a year that he is not playing his best. Just unbelievable.

Sean,

Yes, it was in 03 Montreal where Fed let his chance slip by. Ofcourse Nalbandian beat him at Cincinnati and the USopen later on and Henman at Bercy. At the Masters by the time Fed went into the phone booth and came out as superman, Roddick did enough in his group to be the no.1.

In a very ironic way, that may not prove to be significant unless he pulls this year’s No.1 out of the proverbial hat. Unfortunately, that hat has not yielded much this year. Time to get a new hat, maybe?

TD:

Even the most fanatic Rafa fans know that the tougher ordeals were done the day before yesterday and yesterday. Atleast Simon had form on his side - Kiefer had zero chances after he spent almost 3hrs in the semi-final.

I am sure Rafa and his fans are just fine without your “concern” for Rafa getting a fair deal. We all know what your beef with Federer is. Rafa and his fans are more mature than you, so you are barking up the wrong tree. Try the Djokovic fans. They can relate to you Andy fans. (In all fairness Djokovic has a much better head to head against Nadal than Roddick ever had against Federer)

Zola:

True, we might have missed all the wonderful matches these 2 dished out over the last 3years. I hope they can keep up with their physical conditioning (nadal) and mental conditioning (federer) to give us a few more years of lights-out tennis.

Imagine the 2006 Fed against the 2008 Nadal over an entire calendar year. Put another way, the 2008 wimbledon final - quality tennis through out the year from those two (ofcourse with random results to keep the “Roddick/Djokovic” fans interested and not complaining about a single player dominating everything - although something tells me that those fans will be just fine if Rafa keeps winning all the time!

Here’s to either Federer/Nadal dominating the next few years

Just by looking at the semifinals I feel like, since Federer has lost his groove, Djokovic doesnt look like the same as last year, and every tournament having new guys show up on the top spots only to not be seen or heard from anymore, the overall quality of tennis has decreased …. watching Nadal win his matches with ugly tennis is making me sick… and I just hope we find someone that is ready to beat him with awesome strokes from the baseline before he becomes the most dominant player for a long period of time.

There will be others besides Rafa NachoF - though I disagree that his tennis is ugly.

I agree that Djokovic didn’t look his best at Wimbledon, for sure, or in Canada, but he’ll be back. And then there is Murray, who is showing he’s got the stuff to beat even Rafa on hardcourts. That was a close semi - even the second set was closer than the scoreline suggested. Plus, if Gasquet can ever get it together - look out.

There’s no doubt Rafa’s the best right now, but there are a lot of other exciting players to hope for! And it’s not like Roger has disappeared or anything either.

In fact, I have to disagree with this statement that ” the overall quality of tennis has decreased”.

Right now, with the fantastic four - Rafa, Djoko, Murray, Gasquet - that we saw in Canada this weekend, I’d say the quality is excellent.

NachoF,

“watching Nadal win his matches with ugly tennis is making me sick… and I just hope we find someone that is ready to beat him with awesome strokes from the baseline before he becomes the most dominant player for a long period of time.”

If players are going for beauty before effectiveness, and losing, then I’d say they have their priorities wrong. James Blake would be an example of one of those showmen. He is more interested in putting on a good show than winning the match. That’s a losing strategy.

Fedex
I don’t know the story between you and Roddick/Djoko fans, but I would like to keep Rafa out of it!

Even the greatest players, Sampras, Borg and one day NAdal will end their dominance. I don’t know if this is the year for Fed or not, but I think if the media tried to celebrate Fed’s achievements instead of mourning and predicting doom for Federer, things could have been a bit different.

About the semis, RAfa too, had a very tough match with Murray and then another tough one with Gasquet. So his was no paty either. Remember that Kiefer’s match ended earlier than Rafa. So RAfa had at least 2-3 hours less rest than kiefer.

I don’t know how far RAfa can go ( I hope very far), but certainly the standard set by Fed is very high. Just keeping these points for the next year will be a great challenge. As Sean said, I hope Rafa can go deep in tournaments and can keep this up. VAmos to both Rafa and Federer.

sorry
obviously this sentence is wrong:

***had a very tough match with Murray and then another tough one with Gasquet.***

It should be:

**had a very tough match with Gasquetand then another tough one with Murray.**

Nacho F

I find Nadal’s game very beautiful. I love his movement on the court and his many magnificrnt shots. His backhand slice is a beauty, his double handed backhand, the way he pushes the opponent off the court with his fore hand inch by inch, the drop shot, the athletic overheads, …not to mention the energy and the intensity he brings to the court, …just beautiful and I love them.

Im not sure players are going for beauty before effectiveness, its just that the style of play can be elegant or not (I know its a matter of opinion anyway)… I personally loved how Federer was able to win matches without having to run much, and just delivering incredible power shots from side to side… it is evident that now thats over and the best player wins his matches by running like crazy, sweating like crazy, showing his fist like crazy and there doesnt seem to be anyone able to put a stop to him…..

NachoF

Federer moves great. I love to watch his slow motion ground strokes. That doesn’t mean anyone who doesn’t play like him plays “ugly”. Rafa plays an open stance style with extreme top spin. You don’t like it, it’s allright. But you don’t need to disrespect Rafa the same way you don’t want anyone disrespect Federer.

“Federer moves great. I love to watch his slow motion ground strokes. That doesn’t mean anyone who doesn’t play like him plays “ugly”. Rafa plays an open stance style with extreme top spin. You don’t like it, it’s allright. But you don’t need to disrespect Rafa the same way you don’t want anyone disrespect Federer”

Fair enough, it wasn’t my intention to do that… notice I did call him “the best player”

NachoF
Thanks. I know Fed will bounce back and you can enjoy his tennis for a long time.

NachoF - It seems to me if you admire Fed, and he’s still technically number 1, so definitely “around”, you’d like Gasquet too? They do have some similarities in their styles of play. Maybe Reeshard will get it all together and you’ll have a player who you enjoy watching, and likely one who can beat Rafa here and there. I think if that first set tiebreak hadn’t gone to 20-20 or whatever, then Gasquet could’ve given Rafa and run in the 2nd set.

Anyhow, on to Cincy. Anyone hear if Rafa is playing there or not?

NachoF, what do you think of the Williams sisters?

I know, Gasquet is awesome how he plays… if only it could transform into actual good results and not just flashes of sporadic brilliance….
anyways, about Cincinnati, what exactly do they do with players that decide not to play days before the tournament… if Nadal is not gonna play, it doesnt make sense for him to be second seeded in the draw dont you think??

Jane
Rafa said in his presser that he will go to Cincy tomorrow. He has never done well there. I think the humidity bothers him. Besides he muct be tired form playing all week in Toronto. I don’t expect him to go very deep there.

Gasquet and Murray played excellent. Gasquet for one set and Murray for two. But still not enough to stop Rafa.

Gasquet plays great. He needs fitness and some belief. After seeing him play RAfa I agree with those who call him “baby Federer”. Murray was more like “baby Nadal”. He didn’t use top spin like RAfa, but his court covereage, defense and touch looked a lot like Rafa!

“NachoF, what do you think of the Williams sisters?”

haha, thats a tough one…I know their style of play would fit what I have said I enjoyed watching… but part of my preference is that a player project elegance in tennis, cause its supposed to be an elegant sport in my opinion, and thats why Federer’s style of play, added to him being very quiet and respectful (most of the times), trying to dress classy, etc. is why I always admired his tennis…. the Williams sisters might have the kind of play I enjoy watching, but all the yelling and moaning and crying along with the fashion madness that goes on the WTA has lead me to not follow it much anymore

Look I wouldn’t care what you are ranked I’d rather be No. 2 in the world (like Nadals case) and win more tournaments then be No. 1 (like Federers case this year) and not win any apart from making more finals then No. 2. So if I won a lot of tournaments I wouldn’t give a shit what ranking i was in the world as long as you win though being seeded helps in big tourney’s! But go Nadal I’ve been a Nadal fan from the get go and to see finally a new freakin number 1 in the world would be magic especially Nadal a CHAMPION!

Fedex

“Borg and Sampras might be the biggest beneficiaries of Roger and Rafa’s careers overlapping.”

That statement makes no sense, whatsoever. Both had formidable opponents to contend with on their own so its not like they were given a free ride. Rafa and Fed’s overlapping careers mean absolutely nothing, its just the natural order of things. I mean it must be pretty damn improbable that a single guy never finds an equal during the course of his career so all this ‘if he hadn’t been’ talk is a bit frivolous.

——————-
zola

“I don’t know if this is the year for Fed or not, but I think if the media tried to celebrate Fed’s achievements instead of mourning and predicting doom for Federer, things could have been a bit different.”

The time for celebrating his achievements is when he Finishes his career, as with all great players. This is precisely the time to predict his doom, speculate or mourn or whatever. He’s been enough of a media darling for years so I don’t see why he should be complaining.

Kroll
Fed has been a media darling because he has won more than anybody else.

It is true for many athletes. As soon as they are down, the media jumps at them. I have read too many aticles criticizing Rafa or predicting his doom when he lost on hard courts, even at the beginning of this year. I don’t like it for Rafa and I don’t like it for Fed.

I will criticize Fed when he is at his best. Kicking him when he has lost one match after a great final is too harsh and unfair. They have to give the players some breathing room.

It might seem that Rafa could just opt out of Cincy this year,but I truly believe that the whole race to the #1 Ranking is a spectacle that the media and the tennis world are more focussed on than rafa personally is. His media sessions indicate his natural desire to be No. 1 but he really does not demonstrate an all-out desperation to snatch it as fast as possible cause he really focusses on playing his best tennis on a match-to-match basis and if he wakes up the next morning and realize he’s done enough to eran the coveted spot, then that’ll be awesome but I seriously doubt it’s something that he plans his daily schedule around. There is every possibility that even if is has decided to withdraw from Cincy,it could be due to his body just asking for some rest or him wanting a little extra time to better prepeare for the Olympics. It’s actually quite unlikely he’s spent a load of time with analysts going over scenario analysiswith different permutations and then decided that Cincy’s out. Rafa’s just not made in that mould he’s much too basic to think along those lines..

zola

“I have read too many aticles criticizing Rafa or predicting his doom when he lost on hard courts, even at the beginning of this year.”

The criticism aimed at Rafa and Fed are of a different nature so let me separate the two. Before this year Rafa was good on hardcourts but hardly stellar. He got bushwacked twice by much lesser ranked(but superb )players in two of of grand slams and often appeared unconvincing. So there was always good reason to doubt his ability to reach the highest level on hardcourts. I always questioned his commitment on hardcourts before this year (he played stuttgart last year after wimby and made his knee worse there…why?)
IMO he hasnt yet proved himself on hardcourts though I now believe he will. But the point here is that praise has to be earned. You like to believe in him because you are a fan but People dont need to…

Fed on the other hand has already earned his respect and nobody’s denying that. When you are winning and on an upslope, the media praises you, but the respect you earned Stays. When he is not winning its natural to speculate on his future. And besides you are trivializing this as just some loss but in reality its a pattern. He set super high playing standards and he’s way off that this year. So its natural to wonder if its the start of a slide. You can be as nice as you want, but im saying that to do what the media (and many others including me) are saying is natural. We Know he is one of the greatest of players, but does he have the character to bounce back? Sampras did but I am far from convinced that Fed does too. You can believe that he will but I or anyone else Dont have to.

Everyone is wrong apart from WADE!
His the only one that states about who gives a crap what ya ranked as long as you win freaking tourney’s. I’d rather be number 2 in the world that won more tournaments then the number 1 in the world who made more finals just like it is now between Nadal and Federer. Spot on Wade and Go Nadal US Open is yours my friend.

Yer i suppose Wade is right aslong as you just win!

Merci for information, I wasn’t informed about this change in ATP ranking.
Anyway, if Nadal will become no 1 in Cincy, Federer will have the time to digest this, like a presidential change.

Nadal actually has a better chance of becoming #1 the week of Aug 11 rather than Aug 4. Don’t really wanna go into the math cos it can get really confusing, but the upshot is that Nadal needs to make up 375 points in Cincinnati to catch Federer on Aug 4, but only 175 points to be #1 on Aug 11.

As long as he makes the SF or better this week and Federer loses two rounds earlier, eg. a win vs. SF or final vs. quarterfinal showing, he’ll get there. Looking good for Rafa…

Nadal now is 369 race pts ahead Federer. Sooner or later he will be no.1. Could Federer take back his No.1? We could see the imporvement at Nadal’s game this year, even Fed could have his top form as 2006 and 2007 back, it is 50/50 game. Really Fed needs some break through match to pick his confidence again. Even if Fed bounce back, I think it will be the next Wim when he could have chance to get close to Nadal.

Kevin
very true. It is all catch up and uphill for Fed and it is a new and unpleasent territory for him. I don’t care if Rafa is No 1 this week or a month from now. I hope he can stay healthy . I know the results will come.

Kroll,

You make a lot of sense, as usual.

zola,

Thanks for the update on Rafa & Cincy; I hope he cinches number 1 soon. All this math is making nauseous.

Now I demand an apology from Mr. Guerry Smith who posted an absolutely ridiculous article about Nadal not being Number 1 on this site few months ago.

One point about Rafa and hardcourts, though - we know he’s won titles on the stuff - even against Roger -so there’s no doubting his capabilities. (He’s clearly been working on court-positioning so that’s good.) But he’s never won a major on hard, so that’s, I think, what many of us want to see if he can do it or when.

zola - I’d say Murray’s style is more like Djoko’s than Rafa’s - Murray hits deep, flat shots, and both he and Djoko move well. But Murray has better touch at net, like Rafa. Djoko could work on that. Both Murray and Djoko have improved 2nd serves, but they need more consistent 1st serves.

Jane,
I think it has a lot to do with the fact that Rafa started his career from clay. That’s the uphill. The calendar as Federer purposefully emphasized: “has nine months of hard courts”. It has made for a harc courter to be No 1, not for a clay courter. But at the same time the curse holds for those hard courters who are unable to adapt their game to clay.

With a very tight clay court schedule, it was always hard for Rafa to regroup at the second half of the year. Last two years there was also the disappointment of losing at Wimbledon. That took a lot out of Rafa last year, sililar to what Fed is going through this year.

This year Rafa has changed his game a bit and is more motivated. He may or may not win a major on hard this year, but he will some time. He has done the hard part. Won clay and grass back to back. He has titles on hard courts against Federer when he was at his prime and Rafa was playing his clay court game. Now with the improvements and confidence, I don’t see why he can’t.

I wrote this long ago in RM.com, when Rafa was losing on hard courts. At that time he was talking about changing his game. I wrote that once he has done that we will see what dominance means. We had a glimpse of that in Toronto during his wins over Gasquet and Murray who both played the match of their life for a set or two. I have no doubt Rafa will improve further and will be very dominant and forceful even on hard courts. Now he has to work on a schedule that can keep him injury-free.

Murray’s game against Djoko reminded me constantly of Rafa. The way he defended and reached to each ball. The top-spin forehand. Maybe he is a mix of both. I think him and Gasquet will have great results this year.I see Murray more of a danger than GAsquet for the top players, just because Gasquet is too fragile in his mind. But both are a pleasure to watch.

oops, many typos! among them it should be rn.com, not rm.com!

Jane ,
as far as the math is concerned, I prefer to wait till Aug 18 till the points come off.
I also look at the RACE points. Rafa is 1055 points and Fed is 685 or something like that. about 300 points apart and that’s a lot!

As a newcommer to TennisX, please excuse me for responding late. However two prior comments have promted me to engage.
A) To Kroll: on one hand you preface your comments about Rafa’s hardcourt playing with ‘before this year…’ then later write that he has ‘yet to prove himself on hard court’. ‘Yet’? Post Toronto (you know,just last week)… Why the ‘yet’?
To NachoF: Why use an incendiary adjective - ugly - to describe Nadal’s tennis? It is fine to have a preference in style (though tennis is not the ballet) but couldn’t you try ‘less elegant’ or the like?
My God, I just had to defend Federer from a detractor that citicized his ’skinny arms’ and ‘facial expression that makes him look like he is smelling a rotten fish’.
I find these all to be odd and irrelevant priorities.

“To NachoF: Why use an incendiary adjective - ugly - to describe Nadal’s tennis? It is fine to have a preference in style (though tennis is not the ballet) but couldn’t you try ‘less elegant’ or the like?”
True, true.I guess I went a little overboard there… give me a break, english isn’t my first language.

Rsutherland Says:

“A) To Kroll: on one hand you preface your comments about Rafa’s hardcourt playing with ‘before this year…’ then later write that he has ‘yet to prove himself on hard court’. ‘Yet’? Post Toronto (you know,just last week)… Why the ‘yet’?”

Because winning one masters title is not a leap for him, he has already done that in the past. The point I was making was with reference to a)consistency through the season and/or b) winning one of the two hardcourt majors. So we ll find out now wont we?