Who will win the 2014 French at RG?

First topic message reminder :

Forecasts and thoughts on the French are already beginning on the Rome 2014 topic so thought it would be OK to get the ball rolling on predictions for RG on this new topic.
  Consensus so far seems to be that yes, Rafa is still probably favourite, and yes, a title match between the top two is likely. BUT, it's probably more open than for some years and some of the young guns can smell blood in the water. Murray gave Rafa a terrific match in Rome and Fed, IMHO, is well capable of another semi final appearance.
  Please keep your thoughts coming, especially as to how the next few weeks could see a change - and perhaps another quick change after that - at the very top of the rankings..

I dont mean djokovic hasnt adge nadal at some points, but to be honest the closest he has been are those two matches (2012, 2013) and in my opinion rafa was in charge in both matches for most of the time. its true though that after getting to that 5th set in 2013 (to that point it was felt that nadal should have won in 4) nole looked like he was going to win... but he didnt.
I would like to see the stats of that match

naxroy wrote:I dont mean djokovic hasnt adge nadal at some points, but to be honest the closest he has been are those two matches (2012, 2013) and in my opinion rafa was in charge in both matches for most of the time. its true though that after getting to that 5th set in 2013 (to that point it was felt that nadal should have won in 4) nole looked like he was going to win... but he didnt.
I would like to see the stats of that match

Don't know if you want a set-by-set breakdown, but the overall stats can be found here:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Share/Match-Facts-Pop-Up.aspx?t=520&y=2013&r=6&p=N409

naxroy wrote:excuse me, when has nole been better than rafa in a match at roland garros?

last years semifinal had been for rafa all the match, just with that early break in the 5th it looked like nole was in charge, but during the rest of the match rafa had looked better

in 2012´s final,the same, rafa looked better for most of the match, just during a set and possibly due to heavy ball cos of the rain (same rain that gave him a needed break) did nole look on top

I agree completely on this.

Last years Rafa v Novak RG SF has a reputation far in excess of the quality of the match.

Novak was poor for a lot of that game. In the third set, he was dire, Rafa totally mauled him. Rafa too was below his best and really let Novak off the hook at the end of the 4th.

The fact it went to 9-7 in the 5th and looked for a spell like Novak would win has made it seem like an epic barnburner. I felt as I watched it though that Rafa was in control for most of it. But for a mad 20 minutes at the end of the 4th and start of the 5th, it would have seemed like a fairly routine 4 set win for Rafa.

The 2012 final was much the same. Novak reeling off those 8 games in a row gave it a bit of gloss but Rafa was well on top in that match.

Should they meet this year though, I expect it to be much closer.

A couple of years ago, the ATP website had broken down statistics on the run-up events on clay prior to The French Open. One of the more interesting stats was this: in the years 1990-2004 (prior to Nadal's Ownership of Roland Garros), only two men managed to win The French Open who has less than 15 matches on clay prior to The French Open in the years they won it: Courier and Agassi. All of the others had at least 15 matches on clay prior to entering Roland Garros. So I assume that's why we have so many clay events leading up to The French Open.

15 sounds like a lot.

a normal calendar for a top player would be montecarlo, madrid, rome. so to reach 15 matches on clay prior to roland garros, one would have to play at least all those three finals

I dont think I understood correctly

In 1995, Muster won Estoril (d. Costa - 5 matches), Barcelona (d. Larsson - 6 matches), Monte Carlo/Monaco (d. Becker - 6 matches), Rome (d. Bruguera - 6 matches) before winning RG 95 (7 matches). That is 23 matches prior to RG.

To top it, he won St.Poelten (Austria) beating Ulihrach (5 matches). He lost to Corretja in Gstaad, but then went to win Stuttgart (d. Appell - 5 matches), but lost Amsterdam R2 (l. Fillipini - 1 match), lost Kitzbuhel (l. Costa - 5 matches/1 bye), won San Marino (d. Gaudenzi - 5 matches), won Umag (d. Carlos Costa - 5 matches).

23 (before RG) + 7 RG + 27 (after RG) = 57 Clay matches in 1995. Absolutely crazy man. (I will check Vilas, who is even crazier playing doubles and singles).

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Mu/T/Thomas-Muster.aspx?t=pa&y=1995&m=s&e=0#

PS: Muster's 1995 W/L is 86-18 (104 matches) and 12 titles.

naxroy wrote:15 sounds like a lot.

a normal calendar for a top player would be montecarlo, madrid, rome. so to reach 15 matches on clay prior to roland garros, one would have to play at least all those three finals

I dont think I understood correctly

Madrid was not a clay event in the spring until 2009. Before that it was an Indoor Carpet event in the fall. There were a lot of other clay events taking place all over Europe at the time, plus a few in South America too back in those days. The 15 was a number the ATP statistical department chose. The point they were making is that the clay surface is one where you need to use your body differently than on hard courts (sliding, for example), so normally you need a lot of matches to make that transition. The calendar of those days looks nothing like the calendar today. If you go back and look at how many matches each of the players who won RG (excepting the two I mentioned), you will find that they had at least that many matches on clay heading into it. It's not a matter of debate - it's factual  

A Federer win today would give him at least 60 wins at each of the four slams. Some achievement. He's the only guy in the Open era to chalk up at least 50 at the four Slams.
Who else could get to 50 or 60 at all four? Well, obviously Rafa and Nole are well placed, although Nole has some way to go in the French. The stats for Rog say as much about his fitness and durability as anything. He's also setting the bar high for the number of consecutive Slam appearances.

Yes it is, as you say, some achievement .........

And specifically where Roland Garros is concerned, Federer's impressive record is so often overlooked because it tends to be characterised more by his Final losses to king of clay Rafa, than by his overall W/L ratio.

Despite the fact that it has, over the years, been the 'weakest' of his Slams, he sits at number two in the league table of career match wins at RG, with just one win less than Rafa's current tally of 60. Fed has - perhaps surprisingly - won more matches at RG than many all-time clay greats including Vilas, Wilander, Kuerten and even Borg.

When it comes to total matches won at all Slams combined, Federer could possibly be caught at some stage by either Rafa and/or Novak. But he is the only active player with well in excess of 200 match wins (comfortably the highest of the Open era of course), and even if he were to retire tomorrow they would each need approximately 100 more match wins to equal him in that department.

sirfredperry wrote:A Federer win today would give him at least 60 wins at each of the four slams. Some achievement. He's the only guy in the Open era to chalk up at least 50 at the four Slams.
  Who else could get to 50 or 60 at all four? Well, obviously Rafa and Nole are well placed, although Nole has some way to go in the French. The stats for Rog say as much about his fitness and durability as anything. He's also setting the bar high for the number of consecutive Slam appearances.

It is truly remarkable. That's why all this GOAT talk - to the extent it has any merit at all, which is dubious at best - cannot be isolated to simply how many Majors a player has won. So much more goes into it, such as a statistic like this one you cite above. My favorite Federer statistic ever is this one: he has played the Title Match in every Major at least five times!! This is astounding. Roger Federer has been in more French Open Finals than Mats Vilander, Gustavo Kuerten, Sergi Brugera, and Jim Courier - all of whom won The French open more than once. Were it not for Rafael Nadal, we'd likely be looking at Roger Federer as a multiple Calendar Grand Slam holder, since his opponent in the 2006 Final would have been Ljubicic (who lost to Nadal in the SF); in 2007 it would have been Djokovic (loser to Nadal in the SF). And further for Federer, he's been in 24 Major Finals, an won 17 of them. In his 7 Major Final losses, six of them have been to Nadal - (4 RG Finals, 1 Wimbledon, 1 Australian). His only other loss was the 2009 US Open Final to Del Potro. To reach each Major Final at least 5 times is something that has no equal in the Open Era. At present, only Nadal is remotely close: 8 RG Finals, 5 Wimbledon Finals, 3 Australian Finals, and 3 US Open Finals. Whether he can make it to two more Finals each in Australia and the US is debatable. Djokovic is still too far behind to ever get close to this. He's reached 4 Australian Finals (and won them all), 5 US Open Finals (1-4 record there), 2 Wimbledon Finals and 1 French Open Final. At age 27, his chance to equal Federer is even more remote than Nadal's.

antonico wrote:

naxroy wrote:15 sounds like a lot.

a normal calendar for a top player would be montecarlo, madrid, rome. so to reach 15 matches on clay prior to roland garros, one would have to play at least all those three finals

I dont think I understood correctly

Madrid was not a clay event in the spring until 2009. Before that it was an Indoor Carpet event in the fall.....

yea well, there was hamburg instead

I wasnt doubting the info, I understand its factual. I was just amazed by the figures