When will Roger retake Number 1?

First topic message reminder :

With an expected victory tonight, Roger will be over 2,500 points clear of Andy year to date. He should also clean up Miami in the absence of Murray and probable absence of Novak, extending the gap to 3,500 points over Murray and 4,000 points over Novak. It's then likely to be only a matter of time before he gets back to Number 1.

It's unlikely to happen by RG. He'd basically need to win everything on the clay and Andy do poorly. However, Wimbledon is a possibility. I can see a scenario whereby Andy loses in the SF and Fed takes the title to get back to Number 1. If not, the US Open is an option but it's a near certainty to happen in the autumn season, when Andy defends every point going and Fed defends 0 points.

I just have a feeling he will take it back at the US Open, winning his third slam of the year in the process. What do others think?

THat's true @sfp, quite the run. But we see the cost now I guess...

sirfredperry wrote:

reckoner wrote:It's the influence of the roadrunners, right? If you're not naturally predisposed it can take quite some time before being able to play that way. I remember Djokovic howling with frustration at being unable to keep up with Nadal - possibly at Miami? - it took him years of going "gluten free" until he started being able to outlast him.

Well the outlasting was truly stupendous, resulting in that barely-believable run of 43 unbeaten matches in 2011. All the rest of the Big Four were fit and playing regularly then. So it could be argued that this was the most remarkable streak of results in the Open Era. They say you can only beat what's in front of you. Well, Djoko managed to consistently beat everyone for week after week, including tremendous wins over Rafa on Rafa's favourite surface.

Djokovic in early 2011 was the highest consistent level of tennis there has ever been, in my opinion.

Most consistent <> highest IMO. FOr me it's not that fun to watch Nole - not that much invention in his game.

Djoko's run during early 2011 slow HCs were really impressive, winning AO dropping only one set; serving out bagels and breadsticks at IW/Miami; only Fedal were able to take a set from him in their matches. It's at Dubai, a quick HC, that Djoko was being pushed to three sets in a match or two.

On clay, he was pushed to three sets by Ferrer, Bellucii and Murray before reaching the finals and beat Rafa there at Madrid and Rome; he then lost to Fed at FO. I don't find his run to the Wimbledon title all that impressive; and his dominance on court was waning during the US HC swing and the USO. Fed had him on the rope at the USO, was leading by two sets to nil before losing it in the fifth set from a winning position. He had to fight tooth and nail with Rafa in the final, and that third set took a lot out of both, and Djoko after winning that title, had to take injury break and missed the Asian swing.

Murray's weeks at number one are likely to be nearing an end, with Rafa poised to take over and possibly Rog reaching the top again.
   Andy will have chalked up at least 40 weeks which puts him reasonably high up the overall list. If Fed does take over at the top again it makes it even harder for anyone to catch his total-weeks record. Djoko is the nearest but has no hope of reaching number one for some time.
   A good run at the top by Rafa will take his total-weeks record to something more reflective of his overall career achievements. It was only Rog's incredible record in 05, 06 and 07 which stopped Rafa getting to the top before he did. Thereafter, injuries played a part in restricting the Spaniard's spells at numero uno.

sirfredperry wrote:Murray's weeks at number one are likely to be nearing an end, with Rafa poised to take over and possibly Rog reaching the top again.
   Andy will have chalked up at least 40 weeks which puts him reasonably high up the overall list. If Fed does take over at the top again it makes it even harder for anyone to catch his total-weeks record. Djoko is the nearest but has no hope of reaching number one for some time.
   A good run at the top by Rafa will take his total-weeks record to something more reflective of his overall career achievements. It was only Rog's incredible record in 05, 06 and 07 which stopped Rafa getting to the top before he did. Thereafter, injuries played a part in restricting the Spaniard's spells at numero uno.

In other words, Rafa didn't get to #1 because he wasn't the best player on tour...

Andy currently has a lead over Rafa of just under 300 points and about 1200 ahead of Roger. Fed didn't play after Wimbledon last year, so can only add to his total, while Rafa has low points totals from Cinci, USO, Beijing and Shanghai - total of 370 to defend from now to year end (270 from Cinci and USO), and appears to be in better form this year.

Andy has 960 points to defend between now and the USO, so could maintain (or lose and regain) the #1 if he strings together 3 good tournaments (say a win and 2 finals), but he hasn't shown much evidence of being able to do that this year. Gets much harder after the USO, as Andy went on such a streak at the end of last year - unless he wins the USO, chances are he gets passed by both Nadal and Fed.

I have a feeling that we might see Rafa take over #1 before the USO and Roger passing him afterwards. I agree though that Rafa's position as 7th in the list for time at #1 is probably not reflective of his career - pretty sure though he holds the record for longest at #2.

What odds on Federer being end of year #1 and matching Sampras's record of 6?

There's every chance that Rog and Rafa will occupy the top two spots by the year's end. Rafa traditionally slows down somewhat come the end of the season so that Sampras record could well be equalled by Fed.

Very slim odds for Fed to finish as no.1 because he's not going to have the energy to play in and wins so many events to get to YE no.1.

I'm surprised he's playing at Montreal so he's planning to play three events in four weeks! It's different from playing at AO and then with a one month's break before playing two events (IW/Miami) in four weeks. He won't gather enough points if he has to skip some events.

Belovedluckyboy wrote:Very slim odds for Fed to finish as no.1 because he's not going to have the energy to play in and wins so many events to get to YE no.1.

I'm surprised he's playing at Montreal so he's planning to play three events in four weeks!  It's different from playing at AO and then with a one month's break before playing two events (IW/Miami) in four weeks.  He won't gather enough points if he has to skip some events.

Surely Fed will skip Montreal?

If Fed wins Cincy, US Open and WTF then he's got a good shot at it. All depends on what Rafa does though, as he will very likely play a lot more events than Fed.

Well, Rafa didn't really slow down in 2013 after winning Canada/Cincy/
USO; reached final at Beijing and WTF and SF of Shanghai and Paris. The two years when Rafa won USO, he did quite well after that at Beijing/Tokyo and WTF. If Rafa does well at the USO and the warmup events, I'll bet that he'll end this season as YE no.1

Nadal is almost a certainty to get No. 1 for at least a while in the next few weeks or months unless Murray unbottles something that's not been there all year, which I do not expect him to do.  

Federer has accepted at the Rogers Cup next week, so it looks as though he'll play there and Cincinnati.  He has a chance to take #1 with two good tournaments, especially if he backs that up with a deep run at USO, but I'd be surprised if he pushed to go deep at both Masters since 8-10 matches in a fortnight might not be the best preparation for his 36-year old body with the USO starting a week later - and he must feel he has a real chance there.  I can't get into his mind, but were he given the choice I'd think that winning #8 at Cincinnati is a slightly higher priority than Canada - although that's pure speculation on my part.

Fed has started to engage with questions about No. 1 in interviews, even talking about whether he'd like just to have it quickly to have been No. 1 if only for a week or two once more at his advanced age, or go for a longer time and even y/e No. 1.

Unless injuries take a toll, I think that each of Fedal will now spend some time at No. 1 before the year is up and, extraordinarily (at least if one looks back to 12 months ago), the most likely candidate for year-end No. 1 is one of them.  It will be absolutely fascinating to see: (a) if Federer can keep his amazing 2017 form up - I would expect him to continue to hope on excelling in a carefully rationed schedule rather than chase points; (b) if Nadal can do something he hasn't done for ages, and play great tennis in the early HC season, the Clay season, and the Autumn HC season. I'd expect him to schedule more tournaments than Federer (by the by - it would seem that Nadal no longer backs himself on grass).

It is sort of within Federer's grasp to break the age record for getting to No 1 in the ATP rankings.  I am sure he would prefer doing it by winning the US Open and the end of year ATP tournament, while doing well in a few masters.  While he is still capable of winning slams, he should probably concentrate on those first - but I think he is really keen on taking that age record away from Agassi.

Wonder what Fed will do if he goes deep at Montreal. Will he then miss Cinci? Reckon he'll only play both if he loses early in Canada.
   No news, yet, of Andy is there? Likely he won't rush back, to give himself best chance of being fit enough for the USO.

sirfredperry wrote:Wonder what Fed will do if he goes deep at Montreal. Will he then miss Cinci? Reckon he'll only play both if he loses early in Canada.
   No news, yet, of Andy is there? Likely he won't rush back, to give himself best chance of being fit enough for the USO.

Last time I looked, both tournaments are suggesting on their websites that both Murray and Federer have committed to play, along with Nadal and Wawrinka.

Federer very rarely scratches a tournament without being able to cite some physical problem, if he is schedule managing he prefers to commit to play at the last minute rather than scratch a pre-existing slot.

The following is relevant to 30 something's Nadal, Federer, Djokovic and Murray.

Usain Bolt aged 30, and heading to 31 in three weeks time, is retiring mainly for physical reasons.  He says, although he has never had a serious injury (e.g. a snapped hamstring) his training has been hampered for several years because of small injuries, back strains, shoulder strains, and he feels it is too much of a physical struggle to continue, never being able to get back to that youthful body he once had.  On top of that he has had a long long career - becoming the youngest junior world champion aged 15 (he was already 6 foot 5 inches at that age) and has achieved so much in the sport that he feels it is the right time to retire.

So what this interview provides is an insight in the struggle of keeping a late twenty to early thirty something year old body physically going in elite sport (after a long career in the sport).  The physical peak of Nadal, Federer, Djokovic and Murray was back in their late teens to early twenties, then it is downhill from there.  Of course tennis is also about skill sets, reading the game and tactics - and those attributes improve with age - resulting in peak tennis years generally being in the early twenties to mid-twenties and very slightly beyond.


Here is a clip of the interview and Usain Bolt talks about why he is retiring towards the end of the clip.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/40763242

When Tim Henman retired after the US Open 2007 he said he didn't want to sit around for 9 months waiting for the next Wimbledon. Usain Bolt doesn't want to sit around waiting 3 years for the next Olympics. Roger Federer might have hung up his racket after Wimbledon 2012 if there wasn't another grand slam scheduled for 3 years. Must be pretty lonely as an ahtlete at times when you've got to wait so long for a meaningful event just doing gruelling physical training. I don't follow athletics very closely but it feels like a good decision.

Well should Andy play Montreal (and at present there is nothing to suggest otherwise though his withdrawal may be a late one) then he will go into the tournament defending no points from last year as he skipped that tournament. Of course if he were to win in Montreal it would protect his No 1 spot but I'd settle for him coming through the tournament with better movement and hip injury behind him.

Just been announced that Murray won't play Montreal. No news yet about his participation at Cinci. Aim presumably is to be as fit as possible for the USO. Next week will now probably be his last at number one, at least for now.

sirfredperry wrote:Just been announced that Murray won't play Montreal. No news yet about his participation at Cinci. Aim presumably is to be as fit as possible for the USO. Next week will now probably be his last at number one, at least for now.

Without some sort of surgery - medical intervention Murray will never recover fully from his hip injury, which is a chronic injury.  He is hoping that rest will enable him to continue playing - but that is a short term fix and he will never get back full hip movement without pain or weakness without some sort of medical intervention.   It is very unlikely Murray will ever get back to a number one ATP ranking.   He has had this hip issue for some time, and it is gradually getting worse, and the short term fixes are becoming less effective.

With Nadal's chronic injuries he did have medical interventions (platelet rich plasma injections into knee tendons and cartilage) during his down-periods and this was a longer term fix.

No name Bertie wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:Just been announced that Murray won't play Montreal. No news yet about his participation at Cinci. Aim presumably is to be as fit as possible for the USO. Next week will now probably be his last at number one, at least for now.

Without some sort of surgery - medical intervention Murray will never recover fully from his hip injury, which is a chronic injury.  He is hoping that rest will enable him to continue playing - but that is a short term fix and he will never get back full hip movement without pain or weakness without some sort of medical intervention.   It is very unlikely Murray will ever get back to a number one ATP ranking.   He has had this hip issue for some time, and it is gradually getting worse, and the short term fixes are becoming less effective.

With Nadal's chronic injuries he did have medical interventions (platelet rich plasma injections into knee tendons and cartilage) during his down-periods and this was a longer term fix.

You know I never realised you have examined Andy's hip and consulted with him. Amazing.

So what does Rafa have to do in Montreal to go number one? Make the semis? 

Later: Yeah, according to the ATP website, a semi appearance will get the job done. More than three years since Rafa was top.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

No name Bertie wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:Just been announced that Murray won't play Montreal. No news yet about his participation at Cinci. Aim presumably is to be as fit as possible for the USO. Next week will now probably be his last at number one, at least for now.

Without some sort of surgery - medical intervention Murray will never recover fully from his hip injury, which is a chronic injury.  He is hoping that rest will enable him to continue playing - but that is a short term fix and he will never get back full hip movement without pain or weakness without some sort of medical intervention.   It is very unlikely Murray will ever get back to a number one ATP ranking.   He has had this hip issue for some time, and it is gradually getting worse, and the short term fixes are becoming less effective.

With Nadal's chronic injuries he did have medical interventions (platelet rich plasma injections into knee tendons and cartilage) during his down-periods and this was a longer term fix.

You know I never realised you have examined Andy's hip and consulted with him. Amazing.

Apart from trying to close down all debate on your evidently heroic tennis player - Andy Murray - is there anything else you contribute to this tennis forum?  In your recent responses to my comments you have brought zero information content or discussion points - just whiney sarcasm inferring we can't comment because we are not Andy Murray's personal physician.  This is a "discussion" forum not a socialist mind control experiment.  It seems that if you are not in control of the Andy Murray narrative on this forum you get upset.  I have not been rude or demeaning to Andy Murray nor insulting to fans of Andy Murray.  I am just raising evident medical issues, that you yourself feel unable to critique - so you aim to close that discussion down by inferring if we are not Andy Murray's personal physician we should all stfu.  It didn't happen with Nadal's knees, nor with Federer's mononucleosis.

No name Bertie wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

No name Bertie wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:Just been announced that Murray won't play Montreal. No news yet about his participation at Cinci. Aim presumably is to be as fit as possible for the USO. Next week will now probably be his last at number one, at least for now.

Without some sort of surgery - medical intervention Murray will never recover fully from his hip injury, which is a chronic injury.  He is hoping that rest will enable him to continue playing - but that is a short term fix and he will never get back full hip movement without pain or weakness without some sort of medical intervention.   It is very unlikely Murray will ever get back to a number one ATP ranking.   He has had this hip issue for some time, and it is gradually getting worse, and the short term fixes are becoming less effective.

With Nadal's chronic injuries he did have medical interventions (platelet rich plasma injections into knee tendons and cartilage) during his down-periods and this was a longer term fix.

You know I never realised you have examined Andy's hip and consulted with him. Amazing.

Apart from trying to close down all debate on your evidently heroic tennis player - Andy Murray - is there anything else you contribute to this tennis forum?  In your recent responses to my comments you have brought zero information content or discussion points - just whiney sarcasm inferring we can't comment because we are not Andy Murray's personal physician.  This is a "discussion" forum not a socialist mind control experiment.  It seems that if you are not in control of the Andy Murray narrative on this forum you get upset.  I have not been rude or demeaning to Andy Murray nor insulting to fans of Andy Murray.  I am just raising evident medical issues, that you yourself feel unable to critique - so you aim to close that discussion down by inferring if we are not Andy Murray's personal physician we should all stfu.  It didn't happen with Nadal's knees, nor with Federer's mononucleosis.

I suggest you re-read your previous post with regards to Murray's injury and re-think your wording of it. Anyone reading that would take it that you have looked at the medical notes regarding the injury or consulted personally with Murray. You have not and are indulging in sheer speculation as to how serious or not the injury is and on the back of that speculating the direction Murray's career will take.

The truth is that nobody here knows and that is why I haven't commented that much on the injury as I, like you, know too little about it.

Well, one injury we do know about is that of Stan the Man. Just announced that Stan is having/had surgery on a knee and will miss the rest of the season. Djoko and Stan were in the top eight year-so-far points scorers, but, of course, won't now be playing at the O2 in November.

Sad for tennis that both Djokovic and Wawrinka will miss the end of the season.

I've got tickets for the WTF so disappointed not to see them. No guarantee that Murray will qualify either...

NNB,

The PRP treatment wasn't a permanent fix for Rafa's knees; he said it himself, that his knees were still giving him problems even during 2013, one of his best years, after a six months break (Fed wasn't the first player to take six months off and came back to win slams and masters, Rafa had already done that in 2013, and swept through the field and the season to became no. 1 again)!

Rafa's knees are OK now (at least he isn't bothered by them so far this season and the last two seasons) all thanks to stem cell treatments, which are more advanced treatments than the PRP treatments.

So far, Rafa has managed not to have any surgery, but chooses to either take injury breaks to let his knees rest and let the tendons regenerate (his is/was more of tendinitis issue), but his 2012 knee injury was a more serious one (inflammation of the fat pads at back of his knees) that without surgery he had to take six months for them to heal to an acceptable level, but still not ideal. It's thanks to stem cell technology that Rafa's knees are in better conditions now without having surgery. I think he had done that to his back too.

I do not know about Stan's issues but I think Stan may want to have his knees fixed quickly so he opted for surgery. I'm not sure for Murray, is surgery for his hips necessary.

These 30 something players, one by one they're starting to break down physically; tough life out there! Rafa taking injury breaks now and then has ironically helped to prolong his career and who would have thought he's still standing tall, leading the race, playing a full schedule at 31, avoiding surgery whilst other 30 something guys who are less injury prone are now falling like flies and physically breaking down as mileage catching up with them.

Fed with his careful scheduling, skipped some tournaments and despite his recurring back issues, still managed not to take long injury breaks all these years. The knee injury and surgery last season was unfortunate but his subsequent six months break had helped him more so than disrupting him, turning his misfortune into his fortune.

Guest82 wrote:Sad for tennis that both Djokovic and Wawrinka will miss the end of the season.

I've got tickets for the WTF so disappointed not to see them. No guarantee that Murray will qualify either...

Well, Murray is now up to 6th with Stan and Novak out so at least has a good chance of making the top eight.

Belovedluckyboy wrote:... all thanks to stem cell treatments, which are more advanced treatments than the PRP treatments.

So far, Rafa has managed not to have any surgery, but chooses to either take injury breaks to let his knees rest and let the tendons regenerate (his is/was more of tendinitis issue), but his 2012 knee injury was a more serious one (inflammation of the fat pads at back of his knees) that without surgery he had to take six months for them to heal to an acceptable level, but still not ideal. It's thanks to stem cell technology that Rafa's knees are in better conditions now without having surgery.  I think he had done that to his back too. ...

Thanks for that information - so it was stem cell treatment that was the greatest help to Nadal. Wawrinka referred to himself having a "medical intervention" rather than surgery - so it seems like he has had a similar treatment. I am all for elite sportspeople trialling these leading edge medically treatments for tendons and joint issues - the wear and tear they go through prematurely ages their joints.

Draw now out for Montreal so Rafa can see what he has to do to reach the semis. Will have to face del Potty/Isner and possibly Raonic. Fed, at the other end of the draw, could face Sock and possibly Nishi. Thiem in Fed's half and A Zverev in Nadal's half.
   Someone living on Mars for the last 10 years would have returned to see Rafa and Rog at the top and bottom of draws and think nothing has changed.

sirfredperry wrote:Draw now out for Montreal so Rafa can see what he has to do to reach the semis. Will have to face del Potty/Isner and possibly Raonic. Fed, at the other end of the draw, could face Sock and possibly Nishi. Thiem in Fed's half and A Zverev in Nadal's half.
   Someone living on Mars for the last 10 years would have returned to see Rafa and Rog at the top and bottom of draws and think nothing has changed.

So true, it is really astonishing!

No name Bertie wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:Just been announced that Murray won't play Montreal. No news yet about his participation at Cinci. Aim presumably is to be as fit as possible for the USO. Next week will now probably be his last at number one, at least for now.

Without some sort of surgery - medical intervention Murray will never recover fully from his hip injury, which is a chronic injury.  He is hoping that rest will enable him to continue playing - but that is a short term fix and he will never get back full hip movement without pain or weakness without some sort of medical intervention.  

By the way you do realize he saw a specialist three weeks ago in Switzerland and given that he has not had surgery it would suggest the specialist felt it was not needed so blows your theory out of the water in any case that Murray is finished without surgery.

I'd also add that if surgery had been recommended to him I am certain he would have had it done. He has taken heed of such advice before when he underwent surgery on his back that kept him out for a few months.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

No name Bertie wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:Just been announced that Murray won't play Montreal. No news yet about his participation at Cinci. Aim presumably is to be as fit as possible for the USO. Next week will now probably be his last at number one, at least for now.

Without some sort of surgery - medical intervention Murray will never recover fully from his hip injury, which is a chronic injury.  He is hoping that rest will enable him to continue playing - but that is a short term fix and he will never get back full hip movement without pain or weakness without some sort of medical intervention.  

By the way you do realize he saw a specialist three weeks ago in Switzerland and given that he has not had surgery it would suggest the specialist felt it was not needed so blows your theory out of the water in any case that Murray is finished without surgery.

I'd also add that if surgery had been recommended to him I am certain he would have had it done. He has taken heed of such advice before when he underwent surgery on his back that kept him out for a few months.

I was just wanting to push the discussion forward.  You seem to think I have a lot invested in this "theory" - with your "blows your theory out of the water" piece of rhetorical nonsense.  Presumably Andy Murray also received specialist advice leading up to Wimbledon.  Clearly beyond round two Murray was struggling (following set one of the third round) and managed to wing it to the quarterfinal.  And people more knowledgeable than you or I, identified the problem from round one.  Maybe you are keyboard warrior?  I think we can keep this going for some time.  Let's keep it civil?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2017/07/03/andy-murray-vsalexander-bublik-wimbledon-2017-live-score-updates/

It isn't me throwing around the insults. I deal in facts not speculation. The facts are that he saw a specialist in Switzerland about his hip injury as Wimbledon drew to a close. That was three weeks ago now and safe to say that had the specialist told him he needed surgery that would have already taken place by now but instead we are getting reports that Murray still hopes to make the US Open. That says surgery is NOT needed. He has pulled out of Montreal and that would say that specialist recommended rest. Hopefully, the rest will do the trick and time will tell.

But it is not speculation is it?  It is based on observational facts.  We know and everyone else knows that Murray has a hip issue and has had it for some time ... and it got worse for all to see as he played through the rounds at Wimbledon.  And everyone knows he is trying to rest up and protect his hip in the lead up to the US Open. His hip issue is one of the biggest issues he is currently having to deal with. As I have said before, it doesn't really matter what Murray does from here on - he has already achieved far more than many had hoped for.  But he has a hip issue and it will be interesting to see how it pans out over the next few months and possibly years.

It is a fact he has a hip injury. It is speculation (by you in your earlier post) that it is a chronic hip injury that without surgical intervention his career is finished (which you as good as said). Way over the top speculation. Fact is he has seen a specialist who quite obviously has not ordered surgery or else he'd already had undergone surgery so it is speculation on your behalf without knowing the facts.

I agree with your summisation that if Andy doesn't win another tournament in his career it will have still been a great one with much for him to be proud about. However, lets wait and see what the future brings first.

Hi Craig, I speak about it because I think it is a worthy item for discussion. It might stimulate discussion in which we all get to learn something about these types of injuries. In life there are always elements of speculation in the sense that rarely do we have 100% knowledge. A doctor examining a patient doesn't have 100% knowledge from the examination - he/she has to make a judgement call. The body behaves idiosyncratically. Physicians have to recognise the difference between averages and an aggregate of individuals. More generally knowledge is never 100%. Humans overcome this by discussion (and science). Through discussion humans expand their perspective and knowledge. There are some systems of society that try to close down discussion to create echo chambers. When an echo chamber is created then the learning process stops and polarisation can occur. Now often in order to stimulate discussion one needs to put forward firmly a point of view that is at least reasonable and plausible. That is what I have been doing. As this is a tennis forum I use tennis players as case studies for discussion. I accept I can be wrong - but we all can be wrong, specialists can be wrong, Andy Murray can be wrong. But without discussing these issues then we will never get to learn, and we then simply become unreasoning spectators reduced to perhaps fan boys and fan girls or vegetables.

Idle speculation is fine but when it is worded to sounded like fact as you did it does no favours. Nadal had injuries but I never once dared to suggest his career was over as nobody knew. That is how I prefer to handle things and not speculate by trying to make it sound factual.

sirfredperry wrote:Draw now out for Montreal so Rafa can see what he has to do to reach the semis. Will have to face del Potty/Isner and possibly Raonic. Fed, at the other end of the draw, could face Sock and possibly Nishi. Thiem in Fed's half and A Zverev in Nadal's half.
   Someone living on Mars for the last 10 years would have returned to see Rafa and Rog at the top and bottom of draws and think nothing has changed.

Yes, we do seem to be in something of a time warp where the ATP tour is concerned.

Does the Montreal draw allow for a potential Federer v Tsonga meeting ...?
I ask because in their H2H (11-6), I was intrigued to see that three of those six Tsonga victories have come at the Rogers Cup ..... bit of a quirky statistic.

No name Bertie wrote: Through discussion humans expand their perspective and knowledge.  There are some systems of society that try to close down discussion to create echo chambers.  When an echo chamber is created then the learning process stops and polarisation can occur.  Now often in order to stimulate discussion one needs to put forward firmly a point of view that is at least reasonable and plausible.  That is what I have been doing.  As this is a tennis forum I use tennis players as case studies for discussion.  I accept I can be wrong - but we all can be wrong, specialists can be wrong, Andy Murray can be wrong. But without discussing these issues then we will never get to learn, and we then simply become unreasoning spectators reduced to perhaps fan boys and fan girls or vegetables.    

The irony (and hypocrisy) of these words don't escape me; from a poster who, within 6 posts of my registering on the board, managed to label me a whining child and a troll, and who along with Temporary21 told me that I would be better off posting somewhere else. My crime? that I raised the issue of why I was banned publicy when that was the only recourse I had, given I hadn't even reached enough posts to be able send private messages, and in any case was only just learning to navigate the forum. But then it doesn't really surprise me. Slowly but surely you've revealed yourself as the 'whining child'; one which believes that the actions of a 17 yr old unintentionally smacking a tennis ball onto the face of a person is morally equivalent to accidentally shooting someone, and then went on to whine about the perfectly reasonably outraged statements of other posters.

You would do better to just admit that you were wrong in your initial surmising of Murray and his condition and that your speculation was premature, rather than writing multiple long winded obfuscating posts.

If my post seems rude to you - it's because you deserve it. The way you treated me was disgraceful.

Nadalnation wrote:

No name Bertie wrote: Through discussion humans expand their perspective and knowledge.  There are some systems of society that try to close down discussion to create echo chambers.  When an echo chamber is created then the learning process stops and polarisation can occur.  Now often in order to stimulate discussion one needs to put forward firmly a point of view that is at least reasonable and plausible.  That is what I have been doing.  As this is a tennis forum I use tennis players as case studies for discussion.  I accept I can be wrong - but we all can be wrong, specialists can be wrong, Andy Murray can be wrong. But without discussing these issues then we will never get to learn, and we then simply become unreasoning spectators reduced to perhaps fan boys and fan girls or vegetables.    

The irony (and hypocrisy) of these words don't escape me; from a poster who, within 6 posts of my registering on the board, managed to label me a whining child and a troll, and who along with Temporary21 told me that I would be better off posting somewhere else. My crime? that I raised the issue of why I was banned publicy when that was the only recourse I had, given I hadn't even reached enough posts to be able send private messages, and in any case was only just learning to navigate the forum. But then it doesn't really surprise me. Slowly but surely you've revealed yourself as the 'whining child'; one which believes that the actions of a 17 yr old unintentionally smacking a tennis ball onto the face of a person is morally equivalent to accidentally shooting someone, and then went on to whine about the perfectly reasonably outraged statements of other posters.

You would do better to just admit that you were wrong in your initial surmising of Murray and his condition and that your speculation was premature, rather than writing multiple long winded obfuscating posts.

If my post seems rude to you - it's because you deserve it. The way you treated me was disgraceful.

Hi nadalnation - this has been done to death with - you were called out by haddie-nuff and temporary21, you irritated one commentator even after he/she revealed they had a long history of depression and then you aimed to provoke using ill-thought out sarcasm.  Now you are jumping on Caledonian Craig's fan-boyism to re-open your own personal grievances.  You can never learn - trapped in your own egoism - which was something I was able to diagnose from you in your original posts.  This is boring and childish.  This tennis forum has a handful of commentators left - and it will soon die a death - where you can take your self-egoism elsewhere to disturb someone else.

Anyway I think I am wasting my time here.

Fan boyism? Really? Do me a favour eh?

I couldn't count the posts where I have criticised Murray on various aspects of his game. I even wrote an epitaph on his career three years ago here long before you became a member here. Your words are in reaction because you were called out for making false presumptions and speculating about Murray's career path with no facts whatsoever to back it up. This situation wouldn't have arisen if you had been man enough to admit you were indulging in wild speculation and didn't know what the future held for Murray.

Wow we seem to have drifted off topic a bit here chaps.

Murray chalks up his 40th week at number one today but it could well be his last few days at the top, with Rafa needing to reach the semis in Montreal to reclaim top spot. 
   It should then be a Rafa-Rog fight to get year-end number one, unless Murray can go on an autumn 2016-like run. Even then he would only be defending the massive points haul from the end of last year. More realistic for him to aim for a top eight finish to qualify for the O2.
   As for who will come out on top between Rog and Rafa. I would say that Rog is slight favourite.

@sfp That seems fair - this part of the season tends to be better for Federer than Nadal.

sirfredperry wrote:Murray chalks up his 40th week at number one today but it could well be his last few days at the top, .........................................
................................................
   As for who will come out on top between Rog and Rafa. I would say that Rog is slight favourite.

It would obviously be a historic achievement if a 36 year-old could make it back to the top spot - but personally I very much doubt that Roger will pick up enough points.

If it DID happen, then Fed will of course be fully deserving. But ...... there's also a part of me that would worry a little about the overall health of a sport (at least in the short term) where the Number One ranking is held by the oldest member - bar just one, AFAIK - of the Top 100

Roger is less than 1000 points behind Rafa. Rafa last won a title off clay (at any level) in January 2014. It would be a colossal shock if he doesn't outscore Rafa by more than 1,000 points over the remainder of the season. I suspect Federer will end up YE1 by at least 3,000 points.

Well you seem extremely confident there BS - especially with that prediction of a 3,000 points cushion. And you may be proven correct !

I myself am more of a believer in the sheer uncertainty of sport. In reality all manner of things can happen in these remaining months of the season.

As a football TV pundit once said - when asked to predict the scoreline for a big international match between two closely-matched teams : "I really don't know. That's why they play the game"

Outscore Rafa by 3,000 points? That means Fed has to play a full schedule and winning most of them! I doubt it's possible. Also, Rafa is playing better on the HCs this season, why would we have to look at his past history on the HCs? Do bear in mind too Rafa had also won the USO twice and won Canada/
Cincy/USO back to back, if we want to talk about his history on the HCs.

Fed had not won at Shanghai plus Basel plus Paris plus WTF ever, so to expect him to win all those and outscore Rafa by 3,000 now is close to impossible, not forgetting that's to be done at end of season after playing all those matches at age 36!.

Rafa isn't hopeless after USO, even in his worst year of 2015, he reached final at Beijing (lost to Djoko but Djoko not playing there this year), SF at Shanghai, final at Basel, QF at Paris and SF at WTF (won all his RR matches).

Hmm...... Given what you say Blb, that 3,000 points out-scoring does look to be a near-impossibility.

Think Rafa is quite heavy favourite for YE#1 myself. If Fed plays a full schedule then I would expect him to get it, but I don't think he will.

Guess he will play Canada/Cincy/USO/Basel and one of Paris/Shanghai plus WTF.

Rafa already has the lead and will play more tournaments.

Fed has been the best player so far this season though, doesn't matter what the race says.