Fed's 2017 - 20 slams? No1? CYGS?

Let's be bold and aim high.  How about these goals for Fed and his new BH for this year:

1.  Get to 20 slams.  Hard but not totally unrealistic.  I suspect it would likely have to be Wimbledon and the USO.  If he continues to play like he has been playing so far this year, then I would make him a favorite for both tourneys.  However, not odds-on favorite - maybe somewhere at 25-30% to win each, so maybe a bit under 10% to win them both.  Not likely, but not impossible.  If he cannot keep his form - through injury or otherwise, then it of course all goes out the window.

2.  Reach No1.  Similar, i.e., hard but not impossible.  It would probably require him to do very well in slams because I do not see him winning tournament after tournament week after week.  He knows better than to waste his energy on trying.

3.  CYGS.  Admittedly, this is a stretch.  I do not see him winning RG and if - by some miracle - he did, he would find it all but impossible to regroup for Wimbledon on a short notice.  Still, if anyone is going to do CYGS this year, it will only be him

What are everyone else's thoughts - what would be dream-come-true scenarios for Fed's 2017 season for you?

1. Very likely not happening.

2. Very likely not happening.  But there is a small chance.

3. Not happening. As in, I will bet anyone here $1000 that it won't.

If it was just down to Federer's tennis, all of the above would not be a dream but a realistic expectation.

But since there is the age related farigue involved then the best case scenario for me would be another slam, preferably Wimbledon.

YE number one would be a dream, but I don't know how many tournaments he'd need to win...it's not all in his hands.

He wants to play for a few more years and that means he needs to guard himself and this fresh mind & free mode.

He can't flog himself any more. That is definitely out of the question.

He ground his second set against a relatively average player (Sock) last night.

I actually think he should skip Miami.

But he'll probably go there because of fans and play a few rounds with no pressure.

And because there's the prospect of another points haul free if the distraction of Murray and (probably) Djokovic.

Turning to the challenges:

1. 2 more Slams gets him to 20. It's possible but he needs stars to align. In some ways AO '17 was an example of that not happening - three 5 setters seems not the way he needs - but it's possible.

2. No, he simply must not play the number of events required.

3.

In all honesty the mission for the season was accomplished in late January so he can relax all year with what he's done

Although another win against Nadal or against Djokovic at another slam would be the icing on the cake to this season.

I just hope he'll cherry-pick his way through 2017 and not get tempted to chase the no. 1 spot. All focus should be on staying fit for Wimbledon.
Winning another slam this year would more than bizar, so i can't look further than that.

All three are unlikely with the third option of course being least likely.

I think reaching number one is probably the easiest out of all of those to achieve simply because his rivals for the spot appear to be slumping and he may get there by default as long as his results continue to be at least semi's and finals.

The slams are going to be tough. Fed had to fight tooth and nail and only just won in OZ - his first slam in 4.5 yrs - and now people are expecting 3 in a year? Possible but a long shot and requires a lot of stars to align.

Additionally, he's gonna be 36 this year; even a slight injury or illness can derail him.

Yes I agree that reaching number 1 looks "easiest" of the three (but for how long?). Though winning Wimby could be easier to some respect.

Anyway,when it comes to Federer,  looks like the best happens when we expect it least.

And this match tonight will tell us more about his ability to string matches together which is to me still the big question mark. He says it himself after every match.

I agree stringing matches together is his biggest challenge and the recovery in between. On his day, if he's fresh and fit he can still blow anyone off the court but putting together 7 best of 5 matches at his age is a tall order. In OZ the effort nearly broke him.

Well with this great start, and the #1 & #2 both missing Miami, and with shedliads to defend after it, there are possibilities.

He probably needs the top two to really fall off a cliff. Something that a few rising stars coming through could make happen by springing more surprises.

He has all of 1260 points to defend for the rest of the year. Djokovic has about 9400, Murray over 11,000.

Daniel wrote:3. Not happening. As in, I will bet anyone here $1000 that it won't.

Of course not, this post was not meant to be taken too seriously. Nobody thinks Fed will be winning CYGS this year.

On a more serious note, how do you guys think Fed should schedule himself from here through RG?

My take:
1. He should play Miami and do his best there.
2. Play almost nothing on clay.  I would even go as far as to say that he should only play RG - and take that one easy too.

He is not likely to do too well on clay and it will drain him before Wimbledon, where he will otherwise have his best chance to potentially score another slam this year.  On the other hand, playing Miami should be ok as that can still leave him with a long gap to rest - especially if he were only to play RG on clay.

he should play miami cause with djokovic and murray not playing is another huge opportunity to win the title and then the next tournament he should play is madrid as a warm up for RG
if not he should should just play RG

Why not win the MC? If the other 3 stay as crappy as they are, not a bad chance.

summerblues wrote:On a more serious note, how do you guys think Fed should schedule himself from here through RG?

My take:
1. He should play Miami and do his best there.
2. Play almost nothing on clay.  I would even go as far as to say that he should only play RG - and take that one easy too.

He is not likely to do too well on clay and it will drain him before Wimbledon, where he will otherwise have his best chance to potentially score another slam this year.  On the other hand, playing Miami should be ok as that can still leave him with a long gap to rest - especially if he were only to play RG on clay.

I think you're right. RG only will do.
But it's contradictory. In his hayday (whatever that means..) it was the hard work on clay which gave him the solid base to win about everything after RG. Like Emmanuel Agassi told his son: "if you hit 1.000.000 balls a year, you'll be number one".
Still,  these days Fed will benefit more from a total body reset. Playing a lot of matches is important to gain confidence and mental toughness. Well, there's not much to improve on those parts

Personally i prefer him to skip RG too (and play 2 warm up events on grass), but he just has to play RG: he received some spectacular support there over the years.

NB: Miami is out of the question. He'll play

summerblues wrote:On a more serious note, how do you guys think Fed should schedule himself from here through RG?

My take:
1. He should play Miami and do his best there.
2. Play almost nothing on clay.  I would even go as far as to say that he should only play RG - and take that one easy too.

He is not likely to do too well on clay and it will drain him before Wimbledon, where he will otherwise have his best chance to potentially score another slam this year.  On the other hand, playing Miami should be ok as that can still leave him with a long gap to rest - especially if he were only to play RG on clay.

I am not convinced. First I don;t think playing on HC while tired will be a good thing for Federer. It's bad for his back and joins. Sure he might play not to let the TD down but according to his last interviews, he will only play where he sees fit....so I am not sure he will play MIami and very much doubt if he does, that he will go far cause as he says again in his interview, he is not after the ranking now and wants to save energy.

On the other hand clay is better on your body and he has had lots of success there in the past, probably would have had the best record ever if it was not for many of those matches lost relatively closely to Nadal (bar that 08 final of course). So I am actually quite curious to see what he can do on this surface now that he has power from both wings a la Soderling. In a way it could be his best surface. He has the game to do a McEnroe 84 or an Edberg 89.....and why not go one further. Plus he has more time between RG and Wimby nowadays.

So I woudl like to see him play one TM!1000 on clay and the FO. If balls get also faster on grass he might even have an easier task on WImby. I woudl want him to sacrify RG for Wimby if it came to that but not sure it has too.

I don't think his "2017 extreme early hitting style"  will hold on clay..And once he's pushed back a bit, everything changes

But stepping back a bit allows to swing freer with more power.

Bets on!

I don't believe he will step back. He'll take the loss rather than go there.

He really shouldn't be tired after Indian Wells. A bye and everything in straights, and even the toughest sets weren't killers; Sock was all wham-bam, and Stan wasn't killer rallies. He has a good few days before the seeds have to join in. Given the opportunity I'd like to see him give it a shot.

After that, well perhaps Monte Carlo & Rome before RG at the most. Maybe skip one, but don't ask me which.

If he's going to skip events now I'm starting to feel like the 250 / 500's would be better, for obvious reasons.

And from the man himself:


“What I don’t want to do, is overplay and just get tired of traveling and tired of just playing tournaments.
I want to play, if people see me, that they see the real me and a guy who is excited that he’s there. So that’s a promise I made to myself that if I play tournaments that’s how my mindset has to be and will be.”

bogbrush wrote:

He really shouldn't be tired after Indian Wells. A bye and everything in straights, and even the toughest sets weren't killers; Sock was all wham-bam, and Stan wasn't killer rallies. He has a good few days before the seeds have to join in. Given the opportunity I'd like to see him give it a shot.

they are killers rallies. They were tired after the first set. Was obvious. UEs really crept in in that 2nd set. Same against Sock.

Rallies are exhausting cause it is very fast running on both directions. Federer himself says this surface is very hard for his body cause you can "turn on a dime". Muscles are more at risk of little tears through fast running than longer slower rallies...and at 35 those heart a lot more. Long distance runners extend their career by extending the length of their races while dimishing the average speed. Did not Gebreselassi finish his career with marathons...and even World Record at 35. He is playing full on. He has no choice and that explains his ups and down during matches.

Tenez wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

He really shouldn't be tired after Indian Wells. A bye and everything in straights, and even the toughest sets weren't killers; Sock was all wham-bam, and Stan wasn't killer rallies. He has a good few days before the seeds have to join in. Given the opportunity I'd like to see him give it a shot.

they are killers rallies. They were tired after the first set. Was obvious. UEs really crept in in that 2nd set. Same against Sock.

Rallies are exhausting cause it is very fast running on both directions. Federer himself says this surface is very hard for his body cause you can "turn on a dime". Muscles are more at risk of little tears through fast running than longer slower rallies...and at 35 those heart a lot more. Long distance runners extend their career by extending the length of their races while dimishing the average speed. Did not Gebreselassi finish his career with marathons...and even World Record at 35. He is playing full on. He has no choice and that explains his ups and down during matches.

Yes, the "full on" or "flow" is the key word here.

He seems he can only sustain a set of it.
Happened in Dubai against Paire, Donskoy, here vs Sock and Stan.

That is the free "real Fed" tennis he loves to play and lives to play for.

Interestingly yesterday, that tennis allowed him to hold serve easily but not to break easily. Stan held safely though not as easily as Fed.

So Stan from playing from far back could contain best of Fed.

The last game of the first set in which Fed broke Stan was so interesting, as Stan finally cracked and could not hold his composure under Fed's fast play.

Stan then didn't want the repeat of the same so he played riskier in the second set but with the gain came the gamble - more pressure and UEs.

Some of Stan's shots were hit so hard and cleanly he nearly busted the strings.

Yet, Fed stood firm, because unlike Stan he played the whole match within himself.

I agree, it's tough, but I'm just making the point that compared to your normal Masters 1000 title this one was one with far fewer sets played and attritional rallies. Guys like Steve Johnson and Jack Sock weren't going to drag it out. He did well to avoid Nishikori and to whallop Nadal as he did.

So from all the matches in 2017, we can again confirm that Stan is the second best player as he gave Fed most opposition.

He is much more physical for Fed than Nadal now. Esp in the best of 5.

bogbrush wrote:I agree, it's tough, but I'm just making the point that compared to your normal Masters 1000 title this one was one with far fewer sets played and attritional rallies. Guys like Steve Johnson and Jack Sock weren't going to drag it out. He did well to avoid Nishikori and to whallop Nadal as he did.

Oh yeah....but 35 is a big number and explains why he uses the word fatigue after every match in his interviews.

I would put my house at stake that he won't play Miami seriously.

bogbrush wrote:I agree, it's tough, but I'm just making the point that compared to your normal Masters 1000 title this one was one with far fewer sets played and attritional rallies. Guys like Steve Johnson and Jack Sock weren't going to drag it out. He did well to avoid Nishikori and to whallop Nadal as he did.

I think we are going to see fewer and fewer of those.

Nole tried one on Kyrgios and lost it with an UE!

Attacking tennis is on the rise as everyone can keep the ball in play these days, margins are very small.

It's not a coincidence Murray and Nole are losing early.

Panic time for both!

I'd love too but it is a bit early to really be certain about it.

Murray still won Dubai (fast surface) defending. Him and the other RRunners are not going to give up teh fight. It's all down to whether the balls are going to change or not...otherwise those guys are going to be there for another year or so.

Jahu wrote:Why not win the MC? If the other 3 stay as crappy as they are, not a bad chance.

i think that he will lose to nadal at MC but i reckon he could definitely beat him in madrid

Will it be blue clay again?

Tenez wrote:But stepping back a bit allows to swing freer with more power.

Bets on!

I think on balance clay will be worse for his BH.  With his old BH, Fed was unable to cause damage from that side.  His new BH allows him to do so, but it is still as much because of his early hitting and variety as it is because of the power.  On raw power, Stan's BH (and many others) are stronger than Fed's, and on clay that raw power will come to the forefront more, while Fed's early hitting will be hampered.

Anyway, we will see in the next few weeks how it works out in practice.

Jahu wrote:Will it be blue clay again?

No. Blue clay is gone for good.

summerblues wrote:

Tenez wrote:But stepping back a bit allows to swing freer with more power.

Bets on!

I think on balance clay will be worse for his BH.  With his old BH, Fed was unable to cause damage from that side.  His new BH allows him to do so, but it is still as much because of his early hitting and variety as it is because of the power.  On raw power, Stan's BH (and many others) are stronger than Fed's, and on clay that raw power will come to the forefront more, while Fed's early hitting will be hampered.

Anyway, we will see in the next few weeks how it works out in practice.

I'd be horrified if Federer takes a step back from that baseline. That way lies 30 stroke rallies and the end of the season.

He must play right up and early whatever the consequences for results. Anyway, he's shown it's the only way he can befuddle his opponents, it's become his USP.

I think all players adapt to different surfaces. Steping back on clay for Fed will still be very early compared to others. We should not worry about that.

My point is all his shots will be more powerful than in the past thanks to that new racquet hence I am curious to see how he will do on that surface this year.

bogbrush wrote:

summerblues wrote:

Tenez wrote:But stepping back a bit allows to swing freer with more power.

Bets on!

I think on balance clay will be worse for his BH.  With his old BH, Fed was unable to cause damage from that side.  His new BH allows him to do so, but it is still as much because of his early hitting and variety as it is because of the power.  On raw power, Stan's BH (and many others) are stronger than Fed's, and on clay that raw power will come to the forefront more, while Fed's early hitting will be hampered.

Anyway, we will see in the next few weeks how it works out in practice.

I'd be horrified if Federer takes a step back from that baseline. That way lies 30 stroke rallies and the end of the season.

He must play right up and early whatever the consequences for results. Anyway, he's shown it's the only way he can befuddle his opponents, it's become his USP.

Except playing up on the baseline on clay is virtually unheard of. The uneven bounce makes taking the ball early extremely difficult. He'll end of getting pushed back especially if up agains the Nadal topspin.

TMF wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

summerblues wrote:

Tenez wrote:But stepping back a bit allows to swing freer with more power.

Bets on!

I think on balance clay will be worse for his BH.  With his old BH, Fed was unable to cause damage from that side.  His new BH allows him to do so, but it is still as much because of his early hitting and variety as it is because of the power.  On raw power, Stan's BH (and many others) are stronger than Fed's, and on clay that raw power will come to the forefront more, while Fed's early hitting will be hampered.

Anyway, we will see in the next few weeks how it works out in practice.

I'd be horrified if Federer takes a step back from that baseline. That way lies 30 stroke rallies and the end of the season.

He must play right up and early whatever the consequences for results. Anyway, he's shown it's the only way he can befuddle his opponents, it's become his USP.

Except playing up on the baseline on clay is virtually unheard of. The uneven bounce makes taking the ball early extremely difficult. He'll end of getting pushed back especially if up agains the Nadal topspin.

Not really.
That's how Nole played Nadal.

Soaked up all his moonballs and spin no problem on all surfaces.

TMF is right. I think some of you are letting Fed's recent godlike ability to defy age cripple your minds. It's like suddenly anything is possible.  Hit real street.  Federer is very unlikely to turn it on for clay - esp Roland Garros. The issue is 2 fold.  As mentioned, Federer's shot making is far less effective on slow high bounce clay - and, secondly, clay is about endurance and physique more than shot making ability / skill. It's always been his worst surface for a reason.

Can he win a Masters 1000?  Yes, but not great odds. Can he win RG?  Magic beans are more attainable. And there is some time yet before it - and the other slams - begin.

David Laws is a knowledgeable man

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2017/03/21/tennis-podcastroger-federer-will-finish-2017-world-no-1/

roger federer 3-1 odds on becoming world no1 by the end of 2017 season on bettingpro.com

Daniel wrote:TMF is right. I think some of you are letting Fed's recent godlike ability to defy age cripple your minds. It's like suddenly anything is possible.  Hit real street.  Federer is very unlikely to turn it on for clay - esp Roland Garros. The issue is 2 fold.  As mentioned, Federer's shot making is far less effective on slow high bounce clay - and, secondly, clay is about endurance and physique more than shot making ability / skill. It's always been his worst surface for a reason.

Can he win a Masters 1000?  Yes, but not great odds. Can he win RG?  Magic beans are more attainable. And there is some time yet before it - and the other slams - begin.

No, I think you don't understand what people are saying.

I am saying he must not go back from the baseline regardless. That's it.

bogbrush wrote:David Laws is a knowledgeable man

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2017/03/21/tennis-podcastroger-federer-will-finish-2017-world-no-1/

bettingpro.com has roger federer 3-1 to finish 2017 as world no1

Not a bet I would take. No chance.  Anything can happen from here to the end of the year when you are 35 - not to mention Murray is way ahead. I think Fed will finish 2nd or 3rd if he remains healthy.

@bogbrush, you're letting fanboyism cloud your judgement. You are up there posting articles that Federer will be N1 for a start.  It's not at all likely.  Again, hit real street.

Don't think Murray will be all year sick.

Same for Djoko, with all his problems, no chance he won't wake up and get some good results.

Jahu wrote:Don't think Murray will be all year sick.

Same for Djoko, with all his problems, no chance he won't wake up and get some good results.

Bit of a  cheap self-pleasure going on here 

Daniel wrote:Not a bet I would take. No chance.  Anything can happen from here to the end of the year when you are 35 - not to mention Murray is way ahead. I think Fed will finish 2nd or 3rd if he remains healthy.

@bogbrush, you're letting fanboyism cloud your judgement. You are up there posting articles that Federer will be N1 for a start.  It's not at all likely.  Again, hit real street.

I suggest you calm down and learn to read. Making a bit of a fool of yourself at the moment.

bogbrush wrote:David Laws is a knowledgeable man

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2017/03/21/tennis-podcastroger-federer-will-finish-2017-world-no-1/

Well, can you explain what you mean by that?

You seem to want it both ways, and mind-reading isn't one of my strong suits.

So, which is it?  You think he will be YE N1... or you don't?  

Does it matter whether BB or else think Fed will finish up at number 1? It's not as stupid as saying in December 16 " he ll win the first slam and first TMS1000 and lead the race by a mile".....is it?

Maybe even less stupid than saying Djoko and Murray will heal and get better and win everything from here. Especially considering that according to you they can only get worse.

I have not read that article but just the title doesn't look fanboyish but certainly a possibility. If Fed wins Wimbledon.....not impossible...then anything is possible.

Daniel wrote:

bogbrush wrote:David Laws is a knowledgeable man

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2017/03/21/tennis-podcastroger-federer-will-finish-2017-world-no-1/

Well, can you explain what you mean by that?

You seem to want it both ways, and mind-reading isn't one of my strong suits.

So, which is it?  You think he will be YE N1... or you don't?  

Oooh now, what did I mean when I said David Law is a knowledgeable man?

I think I meant...... he is a knowledgeable man! And he held an interesting opinion!! In case this escapes you it doesn't follow that I share his opinion. I might or might not. It's interesting enough in itself.

His opinion, by the way, wasn't that Federer would be no 1.

Daniel wrote:

bogbrush wrote:David Laws is a knowledgeable man

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2017/03/21/tennis-podcastroger-federer-will-finish-2017-world-no-1/

Well, can you explain what you mean by that?

You seem to want it both ways, and mind-reading isn't one of my strong suits.

So, which is it?  You think he will be YE N1... or you don't?  

And what difference would that make?

Would you feel clever if you "won" and Federer was not number one at the end of 2017?

Or would it be more important for you that some of us who think he may would as a result look stupid?


And as a result of that then everything you say should be considered clever and all we say - stupid...

Aren't you able to relax and enjoy the moment and dream a little?

Aren't you happy Federer is back playing phenomenal tennis?

Isn't is great his BH is soo good now he is thrashing Nadal who buillt his whole career in order to crush it?

And finally, isn't is just fantastic that if he keeps healthy and his easily tiring body holds he may even be number one once more?