Federer - a return to #1?

[BobbyMorri]

plus, everyone else on the ATP are jokes.

His major threat in 2 of the last 3 tournaments he has played has come from a 20 year old german.

but if Nadal gets to number 1, i sure he deserved it and not fed #hatefedhate

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

That's a poor point to raise I think. He skipped the clay season and is only playing his 5 tournament since IW. Can't help that Rafa keeps losing before finals on grass and hard court and Djokovic and Murray have been injured due to their heavy work load the past few years.

Thats the point of being fortunate which is what i raised.

 

[pepsi]

Thats the point of being fortunate which is what i raised.

Was Djokovic also fortunate over the past couple of years when he was dominating, with Federer and Nadal facing injuries?

 

[gaelictiogar]

He has been kissed on the dick once again though just like the past few tournaments. Hasnt played any of the big 4 since he beat rafa @ indian wells. He still has to beat who is put in front of him agreed but everyone knows at his best he will beat most players still on the tour. There is still some doubt however that he can beat djokovic or murray at their best at this stage. I hope zverev can bring this rich vein of form to against him if they meet. Is playing well enough to beat him.

In sport as in life we create our own luck.

The best players create more good luck than the rest.

There is a reason Djokovic and Murray at 30 are crocked. They have inferior skill levels - superb but inferior to Federer - and make up for this with punishingly hard work rate which has taken its toll. Neither will be close to Masters finals when they are 36. Not talented enough.

Haase gave Fed a bit of a work out in the second set but Montreal continues almost as if he had planned it himself.

 

[pepsi]

With Nadal only gaining 180 points this week in Cincinnati, whoever performs better in new York will be number 1 at the end of the tournament.

 

[JackNah_8]

Does anyone know what's going on with Murray's injury? I havent really paid that much attention to Murray lately.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Does anyone know what's going on with Murray's injury? I havent really paid that much attention to Murray lately.

just arrived in New York and preparing.

 

[wce4premiership]

Hope the top seeds are fit and firing for the US Open and the race to season end number 1, although Murray might not have it he can spoil it for others, as can Warwinka.

 

[rog1995]

Fed won't go close to number one, the trajectory is utterly unsustainable for him at this stage of his career.

Incredible how he wins a couple of titles and people get on the hype train. I understand the nostalgia, but the drooling is a bit embarrassing.

You were saying? Feds now won 3 grand slams in the past 12 months and 9 titles (including Hopman Cup) all up. Only 150 points off being number 1. Not bad for someone that missed the entire clay court season.

 

[rog1995]

I am not using the last 12 months as evidence for anything. I am just saying, it is an objective fact that Federer has won 2 titles in the last 12 months. Speculation on what he would have done had he not been injured is irrelevant.

Federer does have a record of clustered good results at major tournaments in recent years. He does not have a record of sustained points accumulation that puts him in contention for #1. You and others are confusing the former for the latter.

Bump. Fact, Fed has won 9 of the last 14 titles he's entered. Including 3 grand slams at age 35/36 in the last 12 months. You were saying?

 

[pepsi]

Bump. Fact, Fed has won 9 of the last 14 titles he's entered. Including 3 grand slams at age 35/36 in the last 12 months. You were saying?

Demosthenes won't admit they were wrong until fed actually gets to Number 1. But clearly Federer has proved the poster wrong.

 

[Demosthenes]

The thread is dead, Federer didn't make it back to number 1 in 2017.

I was polite enough not to come and gloat. Surprised people are still offended about my entirely accurate predictions.

 

[HODGEYROAD]

Be interesting to see if Fed takes a wildcard into Dubai because if he wins that he'd return to the no 1 spot.

 

[gaelictiogar]

Be interesting to see if Fed takes a wildcard into Dubai because if he wins that he'd return to the no 1 spot.

I could be wrong but I doubt it very much. His most revealing post AO comment was about the need to set priorities and goals. Of course he woud like to be back at No.1 but is that his priority? I doubt it.

I can claim no insight but I strongly suspect that he has only 2 priorities with everything else serving to give him the best chance in those....Wimbledon and Flushing Meadows. Masters and 500 events exist only insofar as they serve to help prepare him for London and NYC.

He is playing for the sheer thrill of playing before an adoring public everywhere he goes and also for his legacy and he knows well that when all else is stripped away legacy is basically measured on success in slams.

 

[BobbyMorri]

The thread is dead, Federer didn't make it back to number 1 in 2017.

I was polite enough not to come and gloat. Surprised people are still offended about my entirely accurate predictions.

well then know it all.

will he be number #1 sometime during 2018 then?

 

[Brad Goodman]

I could be wrong but I doubt it very much. His most revealing post AO comment was about the need to set priorities and goals. Of course he woud like to be back at No.1 but is that his priority? I doubt it.

I can claim no insight but I strongly suspect that he has only 2 priorities with everything else serving to give him the best chance in those....Wimbledon and Flushing Meadows. Masters and 500 events exist only insofar as they serve to help prepare him for London and NYC.

He is playing for the sheer thrill of playing before an adoring public everywhere he goes and also for his legacy and he knows well that when all else is stripped away legacy is basically measured on success in slams.

Can't remember where I heard it, or if it's a direct quote, but one of his aims for the remainder of his career is to be the oldest #1.

 

[Pedantic]

The thread is dead, Federer didn't make it back to number 1 in 2017.

I was polite enough not to come and gloat. Surprised people are still offended about my entirely accurate predictions.

The important thing is that when you got called out for making blatantly incorrect declarations such as

It is not in the conversation for anybody who knows anything about how the points system works.

Federer has zero chance of regaining number one. Zero.

You took it with good grace.

 

[pepsi]

The important thing is that when you got called out for making blatantly incorrect declarations such as

You took it with good grace.

I could quote most of his posts in this thread, to prove how incorrect he was. But no no, Demosthenes is never wrong and yes he was correct, Federer did not return to #1 in 2017 (even though it was never stated that we were talking solely about 2017!)

Despite fed only being 150 points shy at one point last year, the same distance he is away this year.

 

[Demosthenes]

(even though it was never stated that we were talking solely about 2017!)

What say you, tennis board, do you think he can make it all the way back to the top this year?

How embarrassing for you.

 

[Demosthenes]

The important thing is that when you got called out for making blatantly incorrect declarations such as

You took it with good grace.

Don't see what's so incorrect about that. It didn't happen, as predicted. And it didn't happen despite the most favourable conditions possible - he overachieved in every tournament he played and every viable competitor fell over with injuries at some point. At the end of the day the bloke simply didn't play enough tennis to accumulate the points needed to be number one. As predicted.

The reason I didn't bother bragging is because it is really not that impressive a prediction. It was obvious to people with the most rudimentary knowledge of tennis that this would be the case.

 

[Underarm]

Fed won't go close to number one, the trajectory is utterly unsustainable for him at this stage of his career.

Incredible how he wins a couple of titles and people get on the hype train. I understand the nostalgia, but the drooling is a bit embarrassing.

A year ago I would have made the similar assesment, but injuries to Djoker and Murray meant that he was in the hunt.

Tennis is an up and down sport. At their best there are 4 players shown to be capable of being no. 1 when the others aren't firing. All it takes is a stumble in the clay season from Nadal, and the title will be his again.

Will need to do it before Wimbledon I think, a fit Djoker and Murray should be closing in by then.

 

[gaelictiogar]

A year ago I would have made the similar assesment, but injuries to Djoker and Murray meant that he was in the hunt.

Tennis is an up and down sport. At their best there are 4 players shown to be capable of being no. 1 when the others aren't firing. All it takes is a stumble in the clay season from Nadal, and the title will be his again.

Will need to do it before Wimbledon I think, a fit Djoker and Murray should be closing in by then.

Why assume that players over 30 returning from long injury lay offs will get back to top 4?

The fact that Fed did it at 35/36 is highly unusual. Personally I doubt if Murray will ever be top 4 again and Novak if no certainty either.

 

[gaelictiogar]

Don't see what's so incorrect about that. It didn't happen, as predicted. And it didn't happen despite the most favourable conditions possible - he overachieved in every tournament he played and every viable competitor fell over with injuries at some point. At the end of the day the bloke simply didn't play enough tennis to accumulate the points needed to be number one. As predicted.

The reason I didn't bother bragging is because it is really not that impressive a prediction. It was obvious to people with the most rudimentary knowledge of tennis that this would be the case.

So he overachieved in every event he played last year. Not one slip. Over achieved in every one and now he has started this year overachieving as well.......What's that? 10 or 12 successive events and not one single event in which he performed to expectation......this guy does a lot of overachieving doesn't he?

 

[rog1995]

So he overachieved in every event he played last year. Not one slip. Over achieved in every one and now he has started this year overachieving as well.......What's that? 10 or 12 successive events and not one single event in which he performed to expectation......this guy does a lot of overachieving doesn't he?

You can also add in the last 4 grand slams he's played he's only lost one match. Remarkable at his age after coming back from 6 months off injured.

 

[rog1995]

Don't see what's so incorrect about that. It didn't happen, as predicted. And it didn't happen despite the most favourable conditions possible - he overachieved in every tournament he played and every viable competitor fell over with injuries at some point. At the end of the day the bloke simply didn't play enough tennis to accumulate the points needed to be number one. As predicted.

The reason I didn't bother bragging is because it is really not that impressive a prediction. It was obvious to people with the most rudimentary knowledge of tennis that this would be the case.

What was favorable about winning the 2017 AO? Arguably the toughest draw anyone has had and he won three five setters including the final against his toughest opponent? Oh and he managed to beat Nadal a further four times in 2017. He didn't drop a set at Wimbledon and had to play against Berdych, Raonic and Cilic to do so.