Federer hoping to drop his ranking soon

Obviously what Roger wants through the RG & Wimbledon phase will be to be immune to playing Nadal before a final.

With Rafa highly likely to recover enough points to push David Ferrer out of #4, the absolute best thing for Fed is to get down there to #3 - something that's a cast-iron certainty soon.

He can then eye the RG draw hoping to be placed with Andy Murray and have legitimate hopes of making a move in a final against Djokovic or Nadal immediately after some absurdly ridiculous marathon.


I love it when a plan comes together.

*strokes white cat*

hehe

At RG, if Federer is not #1/#2, and ends up in Djokovic's half, SoCal would have a cow?

Should the draw be rigged to have Fognini play Djokovic in the first round?

Highly unlikely Rafa will make it above Ferrer by RG or Wimbledon i would say. Just too many points to defend.

I would gladly back Federer in this devilish plan. How can I help?

Born Slippy wrote:Highly unlikely Rafa will make it above Ferrer by RG or Wimbledon i would say. Just too many points to defend.

this is a good point actually, Rafa has a huge amount of points to defend upto RG due to cleaning up last year on clay, so really needs Ferrer to drop some points as well as him defending them to overtake Ferrer. I'm not sure how many points exactly Ferrer has to defend upto then but don't think he made any finals in the Masters so it's unlikely to be a huge total.

hes got to defend a final at barca, quarter i think at madrid, semi at rome, quarter miami, not much at IW, not much at all at MC, so it will be tough for rafa

Yeah very true. If Murray grabs the number 2 before RG, not certain as this is notoriously a bad time of year for Murray, then I guess both Rafa and Roger will be praying to be in his half.

That's assuming he gets there of course. He's only reached the semis once and the players ranked 5-8 will be desperate to be in his quarter.

Murray is a bit of a sitting duck on clay... And yet I love watching his matches on this surface. I think because there is a genuine threat that he can lose against a lot of players. Makes it a bit more exciting.

EDIT: Ferrer has if I can count slightly over 1000 points to defend until RG (1075 by my account but anyway). At the moment there's a gap of 560 points between him and Rafa.

I think it's safe to assume Ferrer will at least roughly defend his points from last year (five MS, he'd need roughly one SF and three QFs to get there, plus I assume he's playing Barcelona which is a 500 event). In fact I'd probably expect Ferrer to add to his point tally if anything (though not by much). This leaves Rafa needing an extra 500+ points from the two HC masters, so about 1300 points (two semis last year). That would require him winning one and not crashing out early in the other (QF/SF at least) or reaching both finals (though that leaves him a little short obviously). On top of that he'd have to defend all his clay court titles (including Barcelona, not sure if he's playing there?). It's a tall ask, a very tall ask for someone who's only just come back from a long lay-off.

Yes it might actually be better for Fed to be 3 at slams if Nadal is 4 that is actually a very good point. I don't think he tanked the last couple of tournaments to execute any master plan despite the Blofeld imagery, but it could be a good side effect that works to fed's favor.

Would a nice graph help to illustrate the gap between Nadal and Ferrer?

http://www.pointsspy.info/winddown.php?show=4.5

Nadal will likely be #5 going into Wimbledon so it doesn't matter what ranking Federer is. Nice try BB

MfC - its a little easier than that for Rafa. He can gain significant points in Madrid which he didn't win last year. However, I'd agree Ferrer is likely to add points if anything. He didn't have one of his best clay court seasons last year.

Disagree; Nadal can easily go on a normal clay tear and gain plenty.

Federer needs to be throwing this IW quarter for sure.

The only place Nadal can gain points during the clay court season is at madrid, he won pretty much every other big tournament last year, so unless he goes on a clay court tear of epic proportion the gap will grow during the clay court season barring Ferrer falling off tremendously.

I admire your optimism, bogbrush, but I actually think it's more likely Nadal will be ranked 6, than 4, by the French Open.

Even if he goes on a "clay tear", he's got titles to defend in Monte Carlo, Rome and Barcelona. So the only place he can gain any points is Madrid (where he did not seem to like the blue clay last year!). And before that, he's got to defend semi-finals in Indian Wells and and Miami, and after a few easy clay court warm-ups, we have no idea what his form will be like on hard courts right now.

Berdych, on the other hand, is playing well right now (beat Federer in Dubai)... and he only has 90pts to defend in IW, and then only 45 in Miami! If he has a couple of decent tournaments he could be hot on Nadal's heels by the time the clay court campaign kicks off.

laverfan wrote:At RG, if Federer is not #1/#2, and ends up in Djokovic's half, SoCal would have a cow?

Should the draw be rigged to have Fognini play Djokovic in the first round?

I would relish the opportunity for Djoko 3.0 to play federer on clay, I don't think things would go well for the maestro. The only guy I really want to avoid in a quarters or semi is Nadal on clay.

Personally I would like it if none of last years winners defend their titles between now and RG. That would really really set the cat among the pigeons for the the French Open and Wimbledon.

Madness to think it I grant you but am I alone in thinking there is about to be significant movement in the rankings for the first time in many years?

Agree Cogen and socal, Nadal has too many points to defend, never mind grow on top of - inc. RG itself. He's still going to be at best #5 for me by Wimb, maybe lower.

Born Slippy wrote:MfC - its a little easier than that for Rafa. He can gain significant points in Madrid which he didn't win last year. However, I'd agree Ferrer is likely to add points if anything. He didn't have one of his best clay court seasons last year.

forgot Rafa didn't win Madrid

it would still need him to pretty much win every clay court tournament (including Barcelona) more or less for him to overtake Ferrer IMO (well he could conceivably do it while losing in the final of one of the clay Masters I guess). I just can't help but feel it's asking a lot of a guy who's only just back from a very long lay-off to suddenly start beating Federer and Djokovic regularly, even on clay.

Rafa 'cleaning up on clay' is hardly a difficult idea to get one's head around is it?

He's already got two and a final in his bag. The come back from a long lay off is not too relevant anymore. Clearly he is 'back' only question is will his leg, knee, foot, underwear, stand up to the demands the tour places upon all players?

Is he commited to playing Madrid? I though he and everyone who lost there last year swore never to return to the dreaded blue clay.

I thought Tiriac, was going to change the surface back, has stated unequivocally that he will be playing on blue clay? Not only is he back quietplease but I think that his serve and backhand look better than ever. Still I don't think winning clay court events in latin america is the same thing as winning them with Djoko and fed in the field as well. I think Nadal is the favorite over Djokovic on clay but I don't think by that much where you would think he would do a clean sweep again this year.

Not 'would' but 'could' social.

Save for one year the man has had no peers on red* dirt.

*I guess we need to specify the colour as he may turn out to be as useless on blue clay Roddick was on red

QP, are you the same QP as on MTL?

Yes I am

Yes but even if Nadal runs the table and Ferrer does a tiny bit better than he did last year Nadal doesn't gain anything, he ran the table but for Madrid last year. The only way he can rise up is if Ferrer fails to defend his points at some dramatic rate.

quietplease wrote:Yes I am

Good to see you on here, I enjoy your posts on MTL

thanks Red!

You can call me Amritia

I think it's safe to say that Federer's ranking will be dropping pretty soon anyway - whether by design or not !

Last year Federer was very impressive in taking a total of six titles - same number as Djokovic ; although Novak's were, overall, of slightly higher quality.

Of all players on the main tour only David Ferrer managed to go home with more trophies ; making it, ironically the most productive year of his long career, so something of a late bloomer if ever there was one.... (even if the tournies involved, Paris excepted, were mostly low-key stuff)

Already Federer has put up a fairly weak defence for two of those 2012 titles and it's my considered view that he will fail to hold on to any of the other four. That's a lot of dropped points and I'd say once he falls below two in the rankings he's very unlikely to get back there again.

As far as the here & now in IW is concerned ...... if Fed were somehow to go out to the even more ancient Hewitt (assuming they meet) then that would be as clear a sign as any that it's perhaps time to be thinking about the retirement party .......

ps amritia : how many MORE user-name changes ....???!!

lags72 wrote:
ps amritia

In 2 years of using this forum, I've changed my username 2 times.

In my defence, in this time period the Conservatives have U-turned on their policies on health and education far more many times. So then it's ok, right?

red/amritia. Role models should be chosen with care.

hawkeye wrote:red/amritia. Role models should be chosen with care.

Are you saying Mr.U-turning Gove isn't a good role model

Red/amritia/IMBL .....

Not sure quite what the connection could possibly be between your annual change of username and the running of the UK's state health and education services

Either way, best keep your personal politics out of it I'd say.....

It's a tennis forum.

lags72 wrote:
Either way, best keep your personal politics out of it I'd say.....

It's a tennis forum.

I think you can't understand when I'm being slightly facetious Lags, but I'll say it's my fault for not making myself clear enough.

Fair enough.

Why the change of name anyway?

lydian wrote:Why the change of name anyway?

Check your inbox

What I find so funny is that the GOAT has been so terrorized by Nadal in slams that his fans would actually admit to the possibilty albeit tongue and cheek that Federer is losing on purpose so he can avoid Nadal at slams. To me that is a very negative if not realistic outlook. It is almost an admission that Roger has little chance in a five set match against Nadal at this stage or really for many years now.

Not a huge fan of name changes to be honest.

Another forum I won't name is bad for that.

I won't say the name but it is similar to My Dennis Lounge.

Socal - you so often tend to use exaggerated language in an effort to prove a point, and yet ironically it so often has the opposite effect. Perhaps it stems from your habit of grabbing any possible opportunity to denigrate one player in favour of another...... Too hard to resist ...?

We are all familiar with Nadal's very positive h2h v Federer in Slams. However, in his prime years of 2004-07, Federer was 2-3 in Slams and that hardly equates in objective analysis to being "terrorised." There has been one notable drubbing of course at RG 2008 but as recently as their last clash at this year's AO semi, Federer put in an excellent performance whilst showing no sign of being "terrorized" (or perhaps you were watching a different match ....)

Henman Bill wrote:
I won't say the name but it is similar to My Dennis Lounge.

My Dennis Gounge?

lags72 wrote:Socal - you so often tend to use exaggerated language in an effort to prove a point, and yet ironically it so often has the opposite effect. Perhaps it stems from your habit of grabbing any possible opportunity to denigrate one player in favour of another...... Too hard to resist ...?

We are all familiar with Nadal's very positive h2h v Federer in Slams. However, in his prime years of 2004-07, Federer was 2-3 in Slams and that hardly equates in objective analysis to being "terrorised." There has been one notable drubbing of course at RG 2008 but as recently as their last clash at this year's AO semi, Federer put in an excellent performance whilst showing no sign of being "terrorized" (or perhaps you were watching a different match ....)

With the H2H in slams and the streak of consecutive grandslam wins by Nadal dating back to I believe 2008 if I am not mistaken I would be terrorized of playing him in slams. It is not an exaggeration a thread was done by a fed fan stating that fed was trying to lose on purpose to avoid Nadal in slams. To me that wouldn't be a bad idea if fed could manage it, the fact that this humorous theory was put forward and sounds like a somewhat believable course of events shows that for years now fed hasn't had a chance against Nadal at slams. Now quibble about the diplomacy of my language if you like, I don't work for state department, I just call it like I see it. And it isn't denigrating of federer, I am not the one that did a thread saying fed was purposely tanking to avoid Nadal at slams. That is more denigrating to fed than anything I could be accused of saying.

If you feel you would be "terrorised" by the mere thought of meeting of an opponent socal, then I guess (with all due respect) that's one reason (amongst many....!) why Roger Federer earns his living from playing on the ATP tour and you don't.

I believe the h2h in Slams is 6-2, with two of those encounters being by common consent close enough to very easily have gone either way. So quite possibly could have been 4-4. Not quite the stuff of terror methinks .......

Two legendary tennis players have a 80-63 h2h (I will let posters guess who they are) and it is considered the friendliest rivalry to date, IMVHO.

They were not terrorised by each other either.

lags72 wrote:
I believe the h2h in Slams is 6-2,

Incorrect.

It actually lies at 8-2

I don't think it can be 4-4... (or 5-5)

Come on it is been almost 6 years since Roger has beaten Nadal in a slam and his two wins came on grass what back in 07? If Roger had a chance would people do a thread about him losing on purpose to avoid Nadal.

A 80 percent win percentage is a pretty dominant number in a rivalry last time I checked. And whether I play on tour or not is irrelevant. Sure the H2H isn't as bad as Roger v. Andy Roddick, but pretty dominant nonethless. I mean if there wasn't a grain of truth to the rationale why would anyone do a thread that Roger is tanking to avoid Nadal at slams?

If you think about it if Roger had won all the matches that Nadal won against him in slams, and Nadal won all the matches Roger had won against him in slams; it would be a commanding convincing 8-2 lead in slam matches to Federer.
That hugely one sided figure I think would be seen as a slight embarrassment to Nadal, and rightly so.

Slight being the operative word