ATP Fall Guide: Where The Big Boyz – Nadal, Djokovic, Federer – Will Be Playing
by Sean Randall | September 26th, 2013, 10:29 am

As we come down the homestretch in this 2013 season, here’s your guide to where your favorite top players will be.

After a few weeks off post US Open, things heat up next week in Beijing with the return of defending champion Novak Djokovic along with Rafa Nadal. The two then head to Shanghai where they’ll be joined by Roger Federer and Juan Martin Del Potro.

From the there the tour winds through Europe and its ultimate conclusion at the ATP Finals in London which is less than six weeks away. Yes, it’s a quick sprint to the finish.

With the No. 1 race all but wrapped up for Rafa – Nadal leads by 3K over Novak right now – and Andy Murray on the sidelines, the only drama this last month will be which Frenchman will get that last spot in London, Richard Gasquet of JW Tsonga? Milos Raonic and Tommy Haas has longshot chances, but they’ll have to get to finals to put themselves in position.

What stands out the most? Nadal, who missed the first month of the year, is playing a heavy 5-tournament schedule, really pressing those knees on those damaging hardcourts. The US Open champ will be a busy man, so will his knees. Might the elusive ATP Finals be the desired target?

As for the current No. 1 Djokovic, he’ll likely lose that top spot by mid-October (once Shanghai comes off), and with little chance of returning there – he’ll need a Nadal collapse – what’s the motivation this last month? He’ll want to fresh for Davis Cup, but before then?

After a disappointing year, let’s see if Federer can recapture that magic like he usually does when he plays indoors. But the fields, specially Basel with Nadal, will be tough.

And with the tour going inside, big servers like Milos Raonic, Tsonga and Isner should shine, but will they?

The schedules:
Nadal (5): Sep 30 – Beijing, Oct 6 – Shanghai, Oct 21 – Basel, Oct 28 – Paris, Nov 4 – London
Federer (4): Oct 6 – Shanghai, Oct 21 – Basel, Oct 28 – Paris, Nov 4 – London(?)
Djokovic (5): Sep 30 – Beijing, Oct 6 – Shanghai, Oct 28 – Paris, Nov 4 – London, Nov 15 – Davis Cup Final
Del Potro (5): Sep 30 – Tokyo, Oct 6 – Shanghai, Oct 21 – Basel, Oct 28 – Paris, Nov 4 – London
Ferrer (5): Sep 30 – Beijing, Oct 6 – Shanghai, Oct 21 – Valencia, Oct 28 – Paris, Nov 4 – London

By week:
SEP 30 (Beijing, Tokyo)
BEIJING: Djokovic, Nadal, Ferrer, Gasquet, Berdych, Wawrinka
TOKYO: Del Potro, Tsonga, Raonic, Nishikori, Almagro

OCT 6 (Shanghai)
SHANGHAI: Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Ferrer, Del Potro, Berdych, Tsonga, Gasquet

Oct 14 (Stockholm, Moscow, Vienna)
MOSCOW: Gasquet, Wawrinka
VIENNA: Tsonga, Monfils

Oct 21 (Basel, Valencia)
BASEL: Federer, Nadal, Del Potro, Berdcyh, Raonic, Gasquet
VALENCIA: Ferrer, Monfils, Haas, Almagro

Oct 28 (Paris)
PARIS: Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Del Potro

Nov 4 (London)
LONDON: Djokovic, Nadal, Murray(???)

NOV 15 (Davis Cup Final)
CZE at SRB: Djokovic, Berdych

You Might Like:
Marquee Fall Schedules: Where Will Federer, Djokovic And Murray Be Playing
2014 Fall Preview: With No. 1 At Stake, Where Will Federer, Nadal, Djokovic Be These Last Few Months
In A New Book, Novak Djokovic Will Remake Your Body And Life In 14 Days
Nalbandian Without a Coach, Gilbert Without $20
2015 Marquee Fall Schedules: Find Out Where Djokovic, Federer, Nadal And Murray Will Be Playing

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

77 Comments for ATP Fall Guide: Where The Big Boyz – Nadal, Djokovic, Federer – Will Be Playing

Joydeep Mitra Says:

You missed Federer in Shanghai (by week).

Sean Randall Says:

Thanks, I’ve updated.

Giles Says:

I really hope Gasquet can make it to London this year. He has worked quite hard and deserves to be there.

John Says:

I’m not expecting Nadal and Djoko to play all five tournaments they’re scheduled. I’m anticipating Nadal to drop either Basel or Paris and Novak to drop Paris if he does well in Shanghai.

Giles Says:

Don’t know about joker but I expect Rafa to drop out of Paris.

yourFan Says:

Wow, thanks for compiling this. you’re the best!

rafaeli Says:

Federer has still not qualified for the WTF. I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before he does with Murray out, or is he still in?

roy Says:

nadal should drop basel and just concentrate on trying to win shanghai, paris, wtf. he’s made the finals of every masters event i believe and i think needs miami,shanghai,paris and wtf to get the collection.
if he could pick up a few of those this year he might be able to collect all by next year.
if he does that he will officially be the best one- dimensional-no talent-pusher ever.

Perfect fan Says:

Well…jus stumbled upon this interesting prospect that may happen this season….certainly of interest for fedal fans.

Rafa has a chance this year to break one of fed’s good enough record of claiming 12 titles in one season (2006)….currently rafa is with 10 and is due to play maybe 4-5 events….very-very possible to reach 13.

Fed though won 3 majors plus wtf that year.

The record holder is Vilas with 16 in 1977….as a matter of fact.

SG1 Says:

Being a Canadian, I’ve been a little tough on Milos but he has improved a lot in the 2nd half of the year. Even though he lost to Gasquet in NY, he looked more complete and aggressive than at any time before. I hope the fast indoor surfaces give him a chance to get a spot at the tour finals.

Tennis X Hippy Chic Says:

Would love for Rafa to win one of the titles he has never won before like Shanghai,Paris or especially a WTF,i think he stands a good chance,after all this was the 1st time he won Cincy so why not?also Miami next year to complete the full set,time is on his side so he stands a good chance,Novak only needs Cincy to complete the set.

hawkeye Says:

Milos has got to find a way to improve ROS and reduce UEs. Mostly a mental problem. He has the tools.

He was 1 for 17 on BPs converted today. The one he converted against Matosevic was on match point.

Would love to see him at least finish Top 10 this year as no Canadian has ever done that before.

Perfect fan Says:

Look what i got….awww! this is a BIGGIE….was going thru some incredible tennis records….and my eyes fell on this……….

“Top Ten Single Season Winning Percentages On The ATP Tour”

….and roger has 3 (in fact the only one to have 3):

– 95.3% (81-4) in 2005
– 94.8% (92-5) in 2006
– 92.5% (74-6) in 2004

….no active player in this list btw.

Phew….these are inhumanly figures….”All-hail the king FED”!!

Record holder is McEnroe with 96.5% (82-3) in 1984.

Teeg Says:

I know the season isn’t over but Rafa currently has a 60-3 record (95.2%)

Rafa also has the best winning % in history (83.7%)

Perfect fan Says:

@ Teeg:

the top ten list I was mentioning above doesn’t include any active player apart from roger….

no. 10 is borg with 90.6% in 1977.

but as rightly said by you….rafa has a great chance this year to book his place in this all time great list, by end of the season. :)

James Says:

@Teeg, Rafa is currently 61-3 this year after playing one DC singles match.
And you’re right, career winning is 83.75%

James Says:

PF, check Novak’s 2011 season win %, I believe it’s around 91 or 92%

Perfect fan Says:

yeah james….thanx for the update….i think i referred an old un-updated file….no.10 is not borg with 90.6%, rather lendl with 92.17% in ’82.

but still i’m afraid….nole is not in the list….as he misses out with jus a whisker with 92.10% (70-6) record in ’11.

mirko Says:

I think Nadal will miss one of the HC by the end of the year, he will overtake Novak anyway , so he has no needto overtax his body..

Thangs Says:

Nadal wants to play all fall season tournaments to gain points so next year he won’t loose No.1 sooner which is a good move…he learnt this from fed who got his No.1 by having good indoor season as a build-up…This is something Murray has to follow if he wants No.1

holdserve Says:

Besides let’s not forget 2004, 2005 and 2006 were were era years with no rival for Fed.

skeezer Says:

^u can’t choose your rivals in tennis. You have to just play the player who you draw, and keep winning in the tournament. You’re in the wrong sport. Become a fan of Boxing. Your repetitive comments on “rivals” will do well there.

Brando Says:

@Holdserve: Wasn’t Fed running scared from Olivier Rochus back then? A formidable rival of his.

Patson Says:


True. On the other hand, when people do talk about the weak era, nobody really says it’s Fed’s fault. How can it be Fed’s fault ? However, people do have the right to judge the rivals though. Nobody is judging Federer. They are judging Federer’s competition. This is the same sort of argument people use against Margaret Court and many people do rate Steffi or Navratilova ahead of Margaret, because of this very reason. It’s also used against Roy Emerson who won more majors than Laver.

Tt is something that is commonly done when past greats are compared. I personally think that Federer faced some very talented players who SHOULD have won more grandslams. Nalbandian, Safin, Hewitt were worthy competitors at their heights. Now, one could argue that they didn’t live upto their potential because Federer was just too damn good at that time or one could argue that they weren’t too good to begin with.

I personally think the above three would’ve won more majors at the height of their powers if Federer hadn’t been there. They were strong rivals. Were they stronger than or as strong as Djokovic, Nadal and Murray in their primes ? Talent wise, may be. Mentally, definitely not. That’s what I think. You are free to disagree with me.

Patson Says:

Nole hasn’t lost ever in the China open. He’s like 14-0 over there. What better way to beat Rafa in the final and turn things around ? Hoping for a momentum change.

Skeezer Says:

Besides Rafa, who else? Share we compare Feds rivals then vs now? Go for it.

Tater Says:

Good luck with that prayer

Teeg Says:

Novak may have never lost the China Open but he did lose to Rafa there when they played the Olympics.

Perfect fan Says:

@ to those who are saying 2005-’07 was a weak era:

The fact is that fed during that period was playing so sublime tennis, near perfect tennis that the field of talented players seemed weak….the players his age were so unlucky to say the least to have fed in their era…..he was a lock to all the tourney finals. ……many retired by now but fed still competing….still in top 5.

It says volumes about the man’s talent that why he was so dominating like no one else….and why still at age 32, he is one of the top players.

Patson Says:

@Teeg: True

@Skeezer: Nole. He has improved his mental game tremendously. He could’ve wilted away like Safin but he didn’t. He was ambitious enough to work harder and rose up to the challenge. Nole and Rafa have stronger heads than the Safin, Hewitt and others. Not Fed’s fault again. It’s not Fed’s fault that those guys didn’t have strong heads or the ambition.

Even in the last 3 years, who has Federer lost to when he did make the semi-finals or the finals ?
AO 2008 SF Nole, FO 2008 Nadal, Wim 2008 Nadal, AO 2009 F Nadal, US Open 2009 F Del po, US Open 2010 SF Nole, AO 2011 SF Nole, FO 2011 Nadal, AO 2012 Nadal.

Most of his losses when he got to the semis or the finals in the past 4-5 years are happening against 2 players (and Andy being the third one off-late). They are stronger in the head.

holdserve Says:

2003 to 2007 is called the weak era not because Fed was winning everything but because there was no true rival. A true rival is one who is also better than the field and so would have been the other finalist most times and even assuming Fed was better than him, he, the other guy would have been no. 2. Was there anybody of Fed’s generation who satisfied this ? No.
Fed being so much better than the others accounts for his winning everything but there being no consistent other finalist proves there was no great rival who was better than the field.
Contrast it with today. There are 4 guys who are better than the field and they are generally the semifinalists and finalists. A super strong era.
Each of the greats has 3 great rivals!!! Fed had none between 2003 and 2007.

holdserve Says:

I want to clarify. No one is saying Fed is weak. He is a tennis genius. But winning slams depends not just on you but also your rivals. A slam is not an absolute measure like say your timing for a race.

Fed was lucky not to have genius rivals in his age group so he could enjoy 5 years of dominance before the other tennis genuises came of age and offered him true rivalry for every slam.

Patson Says:


I disagree slightly. In Safin and Nalbandian, Federer did have a rivalry. Nalbandian was a very talented player. It’s a pity he wasn’t mentally that strong and Safin wasn’t ambitious enough. Both Nadal and Djokovic have a superior game to these two because of their improved fitness and stronger mental game. Of-course Nadal’s top-spin is unique which others don’t have.

Not Fed’s fault that Safin and Nalbandian didn’t improve as they could have.

Perfect fan Says:

@ holdserve:

as simple as that….none of these guys wat u r talking of are as dominating as fed was at those times….if u have any doubt then ask them to go back to the so-called weak era in their prime and prove it….until then accept wat the truth is….simply declaring that era was weak tells so much about yourself….that how much ignorant u r and how much u r in pain with the thought that fed has 3 seasons with 3 majors….a record which will never be repeated or broken (which is the tomb of his dominance and consistency)….

See, as “rafaisthebest” told u rightly so….cherish your fav’s accompolishments but also learn to respect other greats too who gave their lifetime promoting and glorifying this sport….delete fed’s career from tennis history and you will find that tennis popularity itself goes downn by huge %…..

lotsa people jus watch tennis coz of federer and his sublime play of tennis….to remind you, he was honoured with the 2nd most respected and trusted man after nelson mandela….a sports personality in 2nd rank among all is a huge accompolishment to say the least…..

puhleeeze holdserve, nadal is one of the greats and hatsoff to him if he surpasses 17 majors of fed…even i’ll declare here that he is GOAT…..but don’t post such loose and unethical comments like “weak era” or so….i still feel and i am sure for now that u hate fed from the core of your heart coz u know urself that fed is better than rafa.

Even rafa reading this will be embarassed by your comments and probably wud give u a personal call to say “Grow-Up” !!

Patson Says:

@Perfect fan:

There is nothing ‘unethical’ about calling an era weak. To call someone a doper without proof can be considered ‘unethical’.

Nobody hates Federer. It’s an opinion many people hold, just like many Federer fans say that Nole or Murray or Nadal are grinders or pushers. It’s an opinion just like the way Pat Cash thinks that Nole vs Djokovic match is boring. Nobody is questioning Federer’s integrity.

So let’s have a civil discussion and not let emotions get the better of us. Relax.

Patson Says:

I meant Rafa vs Djokovic.

SG1 Says:

Agree with Patson. The “weak era” theory (which I happen to agree with) is not an unethical statement. It is merely an opinion that can be argued for and against with no discernible winner.

Tennis for Life Says:

Why there is such a huge inconsistency in federers overall career ?
He won ZERO slams till 22 and not even a consistent top 5 player.
He suddenly won 12 slams between 22 to 26.
Next 6 yrs he wins only 5.
Why is it so ?
The reason could be peds or weak era.
Could there be any other reason ?

btf Says:

@Tennis for Life

Federer has had a continued back problem for over a decade, this is perhaps one of the reasons why he never scored a Grand Slam in his late teens/early 20s.

ALso, Pete Sampras, the best of his time, retired after winning the 2002 US Open, giving Federer his chance to make a huge impact on the tennis scene.

Nadal and Djokovic blew up in 2008, winning 3 Grand Slams between the two of them in that year, which has hindered Federer’s ability to take down Grand Slams in the last 6 years.

pogi Says:

@Tennis for Life
“Why there is such a huge inconsistency in federers overall career ?”

WTF are talking about? He’s the most consistent player ever.

“The reason could be peds or weak era.
Could there be any other reason ?”

Are you sure you’re talking here about Fed? or is it your idull?

Tennis for Life Says:

Go back and read my post again.
Federer is consistent in making QFs and SFs but NOT in winning slams. He won too many slams in 4 years, but too little to none in the other years.
Why is it so ?
Compared to other greats his GS wins are not evenly spread out.
Reduce your anger and respond objectively.

Tennis for Life Says:

Is there any fed fan who can give a fair reason for this without insulting players or posters

holdserve Says:

To be a tennis genius or genius in any field, you need talent and immense dedicated hard work. As per scientific studies on geniuses in any field they found that while talent may have been the trigger, it was unrelenting consistent practice which made a talent become genius. In fact genius is 99% perspiration, 1% inspiration ( Edison).
Safin despite his talent did not put in the hard work/dedication so he was not a genius. Nor was Nalbandian a genius.
It is not Fed’s fault but he was lucky that he reached his prime in the gap between the fading of Sampras and Agassi and the rise of the three geniuses Rafa, Nole and Muzz.
Though Safin and Nalbandian were talented they were not consistently beating the field and meeting each other or Federer in finals nor were they consistently in the top 2 or 3. They fail the definition of tennis great who has to be consistently above the field and usually lose only to another great.
Compare it with the current era where usually it is the top 4 in the semis and two of them in the finals. In the few cases when somebody other than these 4 did make a final, not only was the other finalist one of the top 4 but this interloper could reach the final only after beating one of the top 4.

Tennis for Life Says:

Strong era does not necessarily mean slams are shared by many top players. In a strong era one guy can still win all slams just like fed did, but there should be strong number 2 & 3 players who can get to finals aand semis to challenge (need not win) the dominant player.

Unlike Nole or Rafa he was not beating number 2,3,4, etc players to win his slams.

Thats the weak era.

Perfect fan Says:

# holdserve:

I am really sorry for my comments on you posted at 11:38 pm…that was really bad on my part to do that.

TBH, I m not someone who gets carried away easily….but dunno wat went wrong….probably was upset for missing my break-fast today.

But I have no differences with you bro’ and I admire you for your ardent love and support for rafa….even I too like him btw.

Accept my appologies… u mate. :)


hawkeye Says:

Holdserve, brilliant! Love your definition of the weak era.

From 2003-2007, Fed’s wins in slam finals came against:
Roddick (3X)
Agassi (35 yrs old in a slam final, telling)
Djokovic (20 yrs.)
Nadal (2X @ 20-21 yrs old)

No one could consistently make it to the final in the other half because, other than Fed, no one else rose above the pack.


holdserve Says:

Thanks Patson. No hard feelings!
tennis for life and hawkeye, thanks. You guys expressed better what I was trying to say.

Rumble Says:

People just ignore age and its effects.

Once again, to remind everyone – Fed is 5 years older than Nadal, and 6 years older than Djoke and Murray. Until about 27 years of age, Fed dominated EVERYONE (except Nadal on clay). Its only after that that he started losing some matches. He still held on pretty well till he hit 31 (remember, he was No. 1 just about a year ago??). Now, of course, at 32+, its a lost cause.

Fed lasted much longer than Sampras, that’s for sure.

Only when Fed became 27+, did Nadal and Djoke start winning stuff, since they were younger and stronger at 21/22, with 3-4 years already on the tour (so enough experience).

Tennis players hit their prime, usually, around 23-24 years of age.

You need to remember that before you make any judgments.

skeezer Says:

Right on Rumble, you tell em!

Giles Says:

Revel in the nostalgia, fed fans!

hawkeye Says:

Rumble Says:
Fed dominated EVERYONE (except Nadal on clay).

Yes, you tell em there Rumble!

Sigh, here we go again. Fed never dominated Rafa OFF clay either even before he turned 25. They were 2-2.
(Rafa was 2-1 on hard court and 0-1 on grass).

Sorry federazzi for letting google facts get in the way of some good ol’ revisionism LMAO.


hawkeye Says:

Fed dominated everyone else before he was 25+ because Rafa was <20 and Muzza was <19 and he was playing in the dreaded Weak Era.

Whooops, the name we shall not speak!

hawkeye Says:

Fed was just 2-6 vs Muzza while Muzza was 18-21 years old in a period when Fed was in his prime from 23-27.

So much for the age factor and dominating everyone but Rafa-On-Clay. Too funny!

Who ya gonna call?? Myth Busters!

Rumble Says:


At the end of 2007, Fed was 6-8 against Nadal, overall, which included 5-2 outside of clay and 1-6 on clay. How can you say Fed did not dominate Nadal outside of Clay if he was 5-2 on him, at the end of 2007? The two losses were Miami 2004 and Dubai 2006.

You are entitled to your opinion, but not to your facts. Facts are facts.

The age disadvantage is huge. and it becomes more and more significant as a tennis player inches closer to 30, and then past 30.

hawkeye Says:

Ah, for some reason I read 25+. You’ve cherry picked yourself a better spot there.

Yeah, you are right I suppose. he barely dominated Nadal 5-2 on other surfaces before Rafa turned 22 and was still just a puppy. I say barely because a difference of just one match would be 4-3.

But again, you are basically saying that Fed could more often than not beat Rafa:
1. at Fed’s best peak years
2. on surfaces other than clay
3. when Rafa was still maturing.
Quite a few qualifiers there.

My mistake. I’ll try to read more closely next time.

That said, Fed never dominated Muzza at any time in his career even when Fed had the age advantage.

Fed dominated a weak era.

Steve 27 Says:

so. according to rumble, in 2008, fed with only 26 was past his prime, no? and according to him 27 is a elder age, no?. So Rafa at this point of his career is past his prime, no?

skeezer Says:

“You are entitled to your opinion, but not to your facts. Facts are facts.”
Reach it Rumble. Glad you seeing through the BS. There. Trying desperately to justify GOAT and rewrite tennis history with a supposed “weak erea” argument and h2h. They repeat it so much so they assume its the qualying criteria. Such a crock of bs.

hawkeye Says:

Yeah I thought it funny you cut your oh so “objective” analysis at the end of 2007 when Fed was still just 26.

Extend it further out to 2009 when Fed was still in his prime at 28 and low and behold we can add Rafa’s two little non-clay wins against Fed at Wimbledon and the Australian open brining the non-clay h2h to just 5-4 when Rafa was still just 22.

5-4 hardly dominating.

Facts is facts.

Get the feeling I’m not the only one using that newfangled interwebs google thingy. Cherry pick much?

At least you have your cheerleader Rumble but in her own terms, I just reached it LMAO.

You’re very welcome.


hawkeye Says:

It’s KILLING me!!!!!

hawkeye Says:

Actually Fed was still just 27.

So when The-Mighty-Federer-Maestro-Shhh…Genius-at-Work-Greatest-of-All-Time was in his prime, he amassed a dominant 5-4 record over a Nadal who hadn’t yet turned 23.


Keep wavin’ those pom poms cheerleader unless you actually have anything substantive to say.

It’s KILLING me!!!!

Hawkeye Says:

Even if we use your end of 2007 date, Fed was 8-8 vs Nalbandian.

So much for that claim. You are entitled to your opinion but facts are facts. One for your Cheerleader to grow on. Too funny!

skeezer Says:

“Genius-at-Work-Greatest-of-All-Time was in his prime, he amassed a dominant…….”
A dominant……. 17 all time best Grand Slam Titles, no matter who the competition was, which he didn’t choose….he just played who he had to play. Yes, he will go down as the dominate tennis player of the era, no doubt. 17 says it all.

And this GOAT never lost to one top player 7 consectutive finals in a row. An all time historical record of “astericks” to his career. How can he ever be called a GOAT with the debacleto one man in the year 2011? Can’t.

Fed is GOAT Says:

Hawk eye, hold serve and other Rafa fans,
There is no point in dragging this further.
Give it a rest. You are never going to win a GOAT debate against the fed fans. Fed fans are very much experienced in this and are winning the GOAT debate against many fan groups since 2005 even though fed became the GOAT only in 2009.
The only consolation for you guys is that Rafa is winning the GOAT race against everyone including the mighty Federer.

Fed is GOAT Says:

GOAThood in not decided in the internet forums. if that is the case Rafa has ZERO chance.
The actual race in happening in the tennis court and being recognized by former greats who are moving towards Rafa.

skeezer Says:

Fed is GOAT,
“You are never going to win a GOAT debate…”
Oh, they may, Rafa may get 100 Slams and 1000 weeks at #1.
But his CURRENT records don’t match up against the GOAT, no matter how much they twist the facts. Even Rafa himself admits of such.
Until then, respect to Roger Federer, he is the current King of Tennis records.

Fed is GOAT Says:

7-0 would have have been an asterisk against Rafa if his career had ended after AO 2012. But that asterisk is erased byRafa with his own 6-1 run against Djokovic and in that period he has won 3 slams to Djokovic’s 1. But in case of Federer he could never overcome the losing trend against Rafa. Former greats who give a lot weight age to the fedal H2H don’t care about Nole’s 7-0 run which was just a flash in the pan.

courbon Says:

17 days and GOAT debate is still going….(can Blog debate can come to Guiness Book of Records for length? )

Fed is GOAT Says:

” But his CURRENT records don’t match up against the GOAT”
Its the other way around. Even during the last weeks both Sampras and Agassi mentioned Rafa has won everything giving importance to the H2H, Davis cup and Olympics.

As I said before I am not interested in these GOAT debates. Aggressive and desperate people like you will always bully the fair fans. So please leave me alone. I am backing off. Have fun with Rafa fans.

skeezer Says:

“But that asterisk is erased byRafa with his own 6-1 run”
Are u insinuating that is the same? C’mon man, Novaks run was HISTORICAL. No one player has achieved such a goat accomplishment.

metan Says:

So true. Pretty much boring.

Nole played fantastic yesterday. I watched live.

I will watch Rafa later. VAMOS RAFA.

skeezer Says:

“As I said before I am not interested in these GOAT debates. ”
Ahh.. But you are…your posting an interest about that very thing. Don’t claim that which u are not.

courbon Says:

@ metan; Hi! Well, all I want is Novak to play good.Rafa will be number 1 very soon and rightly so.But if Novak can start winning some tournaments that’s all I care at the moment.
GOAt debate?What GOAT debate? I din’t notice…

courbon Says:

Talking about the GOATS…I just had my neighbours goats come to my land.Fascinating animals.I give the some vegetables, have a monolog with them (while the watched me ) and we parted our ways….

metan Says:

Courbon 12.42 LOL.

courbon Says:

@ metan: But its true! Anyway, I’m going to work now-have a nice day and I’ll speak to you later.Ciao.

skeezer Says:

metan, courban….
Thanks for the relief..
much needed ;).
Keep postin

hawkeye Says:

Humble picks end of 2007 when Fed was still only 26 and Rafa was a young pup just only 21 to look at Fed’s h2h(Fed fans are consumed by Fed’s poor h2h vs Rafa and are obsessed with excuses).

Why end of 2007? end of 2007…end of 2007…

Ah yes, now I remember, the end of the WEAK era!!!

The past and current tennis greats know Rafa is GOAT.

Makes peRFect sense now.

Top story: ATP Won't Strip Ranking Points From UK Tournaments; Greenlights Future Bans