The 2017 In Between Grand Slam Thread

jr86

For a little context, Federer entered 7 "big" events so far this year

He won 5. The two he lost - he obtained an injury in the Montreal final and this then carried over to the US Open

A fully fit fed would surely have won those 2 also.

Absolutely remarkable season. If he keeps this up only a fully fit Djokovic looks like he can halt another multiple-slam season next year

But a lot can change

Chivito550

What chance does Roger have of getting year end Number 1? Am I right in saying he has 3000 more points he can win (Paris 1000, Swiss Indoors 500, Tour Finals 1500). Even if he won all those would it be enough to catch Nadal?

I think he's been the best player of 2017 but he will miss out on the number one spot because he played fewer tournaments.

jr86

Chivito550 wrote: »

What chance does Roger have of getting year end Number 1? Am I right in saying he has 3000 more points he can win (Paris 1000, Swiss Indoors 500, Tour Finals 1500). Even if he won all those would it be enough to catch Nadal?

I think he's been the best player of 2017 but he will miss out on the number one spot because he played fewer tournaments.

Very little chance I think. Nadal would have to barely win another match all season

Skipping clay and getting injured in the US swing did it for Roger really

Christy42

jr86 wrote: »

Very little chance I think. Nadal would have to barely win another match all season

Skipping clay and getting injured in the US swing did it for Roger really

Skipping clay was whst helped Roger as well. I think the path to number one again was just too difficult given Rafael has also had an excellent year and did it without skipping a surface.

Both have been incredible but really the rest of the field needs to take a look at themselves that they were so far off the pace (injured players accepted obviously).

jr86

Christy42 wrote: »

Skipping clay was whst helped Roger as well. I think the path to number one again was just too difficult given Rafael has also had an excellent year and did it without skipping a surface.

Both have been incredible but really the rest of the field needs to take a look at themselves that they were so far off the pace (injured players accepted obviously).

Oh yeah of course it helped him and he'd have been mad not to skip it, I'm just saying it's why he's a good distance off number 1

yerwanthere123

Bouchard ends her year with a loss to Larsson, although no bagels or breadsticks this time so... progress? :pac: Will enter 2018 on a five match losing streak, hasn't won a match since New Haven in August. A bad Australian swing could put her outside the top 120. Her only highlights from the year were beating Sharapova and Kerber to reach the Madrid QF's (a tournament loss which still ended on a bagel) and reaching the Sydney SF's.

Not surprised Sharapova lost in Moscow, Rybarikova's had a great year. 2018 will tell us a lot about whether Sharapova is still up to playing top level tennis. I can see her continuing to play longer than necessary to try and prove she can still compete without Meldonium. We'll see I guess.

Kinda funny seeing the unanimous praise for Federer and Nadal for continuing to dominate the tour in their 30's whilst the WTA is endlessly criticised when Serena does the exact same thing.

Christy42

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Bouchard ends her year with a loss to Larsson, although no bagels or breadsticks this time so... progress? :pac: Will enter 2018 on a five match losing streak, hasn't won a match since New Haven in August. A bad Australian swing could put her outside the top 120. Her only highlights from the year were beating Sharapova and Kerber to reach the Madrid QF's (a tournament loss which still ended on a bagel) and reaching the Sydney SF's.

Not surprised Sharapova lost in Moscow, Rybarikova's had a great year. 2018 will tell us a lot about whether Sharapova is still up to playing top level tennis. I can see her continuing to play longer than necessary to try and prove she can still compete without Meldonium. We'll see I guess.

Kinda funny seeing the unanimous praise for Federer and Nadal for continuing to dominate the tour in their 30's whilst the WTA is endlessly criticised when Serena does the exact same thing.

It helps cover the gaps a bit when there are two of them. I think people are also willing to accept an off year with so many injuries to the others who were challenging them.

Having said that I have also seen a lot of flak to the atp for having no one step up. Someone pointed out a page or two back that there are no slam winners under 30 in the men's game! I mean the last first time slam winner was what Murray?

That is a pretty dreadful state of affairs which is what I feel has led to this next gen stuff to try and get a new generation after a few (depending on how you define generation in tennis) with no stand out performers.

NoviGlitzko

I can see Federer challenging for the Laureus World sportsman for this year, or at least comeback of the year.

Rob2D

Nadal out. Fed in with a chance at no.1 again right?

Johnmb

Rob2D wrote: »

Nadal out. Fed in with a chance at no.1 again right?

Kind of. Federer is just under 2000 points behind Nadal. If he wins Basel, that'll get him within 1500 points, with 1000 available in Paris and up to 1500 (if he wins all round robin matches) available in London. Depending on how tired he is after Basel, it wouldn't be a shock if he skipped Paris. And even if he plays both events, Nadal isn't defending any points either for the rest of the year, so even if Federer wins three tournaments in a row between now and the end of the year, all Nadal has to do is avoid early loses in Paris and London and he'll cling on.

mickmackey1

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Kinda funny seeing the unanimous praise for Federer and Nadal for continuing to dominate the tour in their 30's whilst the WTA is endlessly criticised when Serena does the exact same thing.

It's because Serena is perceived as having an unfair physical advantage over her opponents, whereas Federer is pure talent. And in Nadal's case it's sheer amazement that the bloke's attritional style has still not worn him down.

yerwanthere123

mickmackey1 wrote: »

It's because Serena is perceived as having an unfair physical advantage over her opponents, whereas Federer is pure talent. And in Nadal's case it's sheer amazement that the bloke's attritional style has still not worn him down.

Because Serena isn't pure talent :rolleyes: Anyone who thinks like that is clearly a moron

mickmackey1

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Because Serena isn't pure talent :rolleyes: Anyone who thinks like that is clearly a moron

Maybe but that's the perception.

Chivito550

Christy42 wrote: »

It helps cover the gaps a bit when there are two of them. I think people are also willing to accept an off year with so many injuries to the others who were challenging them.

Having said that I have also seen a lot of flak to the atp for having no one step up. Someone pointed out a page or two back that there are no slam winners under 30 in the men's game! I mean the last first time slam winner was what Murray?

That is a pretty dreadful state of affairs which is what I feel has led to this next gen stuff to try and get a new generation after a few (depending on how you define generation in tennis) with no stand out performers.

Cilic and Wawrinka won their first slams after Murray won his first. Your point still stands though.

Chivito550

Johnmb wrote: »

Kind of. Federer is just under 2000 points behind Nadal. If he wins Basel, that'll get him within 1500 points, with 1000 available in Paris and up to 1500 (if he wins all round robin matches) available in London. Depending on how tired he is after Basel, it wouldn't be a shock if he skipped Paris. And even if he plays both events, Nadal isn't defending any points either for the rest of the year, so even if Federer wins three tournaments in a row between now and the end of the year, all Nadal has to do is avoid early loses in Paris and London and he'll cling on.

If Federer was to win all 3 tournaments (big if), and say Nadal went out in group stages in London with 1 win from 3 (very possible), scoring 200 points, then Federer wouldn't be able to be caught.

So simply put, if Federer wins all 3, and Nadal doesn't make semi finals in London, then Federer is definitely number 1, no matter what Nadal does in Paris.

Johnmb

Chivito550 wrote: »

If Federer was to win all 3 tournaments (big if), and say Nadal went out in group stages in London with 1 win from 3 (very possible), scoring 200 points, then Federer wouldn't be able to be caught.

So simply put, if Federer wins all 3, and Nadal doesn't make semi finals in London, then Federer is definitely number 1, no matter what Nadal does in Paris.

If Nadal wins Paris, even if Federer is runner up there, Nadal is year end number 1. Basically, if Nadal does better than Federer in either tournament, he's number 1. Even if he doesn't do better than Federer in either, once he says within a match/round of Federer he can't be caught.

Chivito550

Johnmb wrote: »

If Nadal wins Paris, even if Federer is runner up there, Nadal is year end number 1. Basically, if Nadal does better than Federer in either tournament, he's number 1. Even if he doesn't do better than Federer in either, once he says within a match/round of Federer he can't be caught.

Assuming Federer gets 3000 points (big assumption of course), Nadal needs 1045 points to stay ahead of Federer. If he reached the semi finals in both gets him 360 in Paris, and max 600 in London (if he won all 3 group matches and lost in the semi finals).

It's very possible that Nadal could fail to make the final of both. I wouldn't be surprised if this happened. The hard part is Roger winning all three.

Will he even be bothered? 3 tournaments in 4 weeks is a lot to expect from somebody who is managing his schedule and competing sparingly these days.

Johnmb

Chivito550 wrote: »

Will he even be bothered? 3 tournaments in 4 weeks is a lot to expect from somebody who is managing his schedule and competing sparingly these days.

That's the thing. Even in previous years when he wasn't so tight with his schedule, he often skipped Paris. If he wins Basel, he may want a week off to prepare for London. If he doesn't win Basel, he may consider it a lost cause and skip Paris. I think it's probably more likely that he'll skip Paris than play in it to be honest (although I'd love to be wrong and for him to get the year end number 1!)

jr86

I'm not sure this is even a discussion. Federer himself has basically implied the number one is gone and not a priority - the aim for the season was slams.

I'd doubt he'll even play Paris to be honest

yerwanthere123

So Singapore has started.

Red Group

Halep
Svitolina
Wozniacki
Garcia

White Group

Muguruza
Pliskova
Venus
Ostapenko


Results so far:

Pliskova def. Venus 62 62
Muguruza def. Ostapenko 63 64

Halep def. Garcia 64 62
Wozniacki def. Svitolina 62 60

Obviously all the big hitters are in the white group. Who knows who'll win, every single one of them had a chance before the tournament began. I'd like one of Venus, Ostapenko or Muguruza to do it.

mickmackey1

Osty is out Don't really mind who wins now.

lostcat

Djokovic and Stan plan comebacks in Abu Dhabi by the end of the year, the tour missed them (and Murray) it has to be said

Rob2D

So Hingis calls it a day for good now.

3 GS's this year and playing great. I would have thought she'd keep going for a while.

yerwanthere123

So Wozniacki won the WTA finals




Third big final lost for Venus this year, must be tough to take. Halep will finish the year as #1 :pac: Although Muguruza and Wozniacki a very close #2 and #3 right behind her. Venus finishes the year ranked #5 at the age of 37, some going.

Del Potro lost the Basel final to Federer

lostcat

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

So Wozniacki won the WTA finals




Third big final lost for Venus this year, must be tough to take. Halep will finish the year as #1 :pac: Although Muguruza and Wozniacki a very close #2 and #3 right behind her. Venus finishes the year ranked #5 at the age of 37, some going.

Del Potro lost the Basel final to Federer

how can I disable giffs on boards? that thing is seriously freaking me out

Johnmb

With Federer out of Paris, the year end number 1 is pretty much assured. Nadal just has to win one more match this year to put it out of reach...

lostcat

And Nadal takes Year end No1

While the other main contenders either vanished through injury or just didn't play a lot of tournaments for strategic reasons, he had a year that I really did not see as possible this time last year, or the year before, or even the year before that.....sometimes hanging in there is worth it

NoviGlitzko

Nadal was exceptional at Roland Garros as per, but he's been clearly the second best player this year behind Federer. All credit to him for taking advantage though.

jr86

Yeah Nadal hasn't been anything special on Hard Courts but his clay dominance along with Murray/Djokovic/Wawrinka injuries and absences, and the fact Federer skipped more Masters than he actually played in meant it was a fairly clear path

Federer is clearly the best player in the world though

Disappointing year overall. As well as the above you have to factor in injuries to next generation players like Raonic and Nishikori (both previous Slam finalists).

We're now left with the bizarre prospect of having players like Carreno-Busta and Pouille in the World Tour Finals, with Querrey and Anderson in reserve

dominatinMC

jr86 wrote: »

Yeah Nadal hasn't been anything special on Hard Courts but his clay dominance along with Murray/Djokovic/Wawrinka injuries and absences, and the fact Federer skipped more Masters than he actually played in meant it was a fairly clear path

Federer is clearly the best player in the world though

Disappointing year overall. As well as the above you have to factor in injuries to next generation players like Raonic and Nishikori (both previous Slam finalists).

We're now left with the bizarre prospect of having players like Carreno-Busta and Pouille in the World Tour Finals, with Querrey and Anderson in reserve

Your anti-Nadal bias coming to the fore once more. The sense of disappointment at Nadal getting the No.1 is almost palpable.

IMO, Nadal has had a great year on the Hard Courts - winning the USO is proof of this. Yes, the field was diminished, but Nadal got through it whereas Fed didn't. Nadal also made the finals of many Hard Court events (AO, Miami, Shanghai), and fair play to Fed for beating him here, but that's not to say Nadal didn't beat some quality players along the way (matches vs. Zverev and vs. Dimitrov in AO spring to mind). At least Nadal had the courage to play the full season and not cherry-pick events like Fed. Nadal has had a horrible time at SW19 recently but still entered, even at the risk of getting embarrassed by an early exit (which didn't quite transpire this time). Fed, however, skipped the entire clay season. Now I know, Fed is the GOAT, but is that really the sort of message one should be sending out to players? If someone doesn't like a particular surface, they should just skip it? I like both players but it is clear that Nadal is deserving of No.1.