Fight for #1

Nah, Federer won't grind, he'll either fly or crash.

Five sets of Fed2017 tennis isn't that arduous. It's probably easier than three sets of what he was doing in 2008. 

This more than anything was why he managed to finish the AO final playing well after what on paper looks like a marathon tournament. Sure he was tired but he was still functioning at a high level - high enough to take 5 straight games off Nadal! Don't forget he also outlasted Stan.

bogbrush wrote:Nah, Federer won't grind, he'll either fly or crash.

Five sets of Fed2017 tennis isn't that arduous. It's probably easier than three sets of what he was doing in 2008. 

This more than anything was why he managed to finish the AO final playing well after what on paper looks like a marathon tournament. Sure he was tired but he was still functioning at a high level - high enough to take 5 straight games off Nadal! Don't forget he also outlasted Stan.

I disagree and think the opposite.

It's very draining to fly, however easy it may look.

To continually time all shots incl the bh requires perfect focus and footwork.

But in a way it's maybe less stressful compared to the grinders as playing instincitve tennis is like having wind in your back...though being at the net and hitting 2-3 volleys is super draining.

Adrenaline....

What? 1 - 4 shot rallies? Matches done in 90 minutes?  Returns hit over the backhand that close the rally quickly?

He doesn't hit 2 or 3 volleys at the net, it's usually 1. Nothing to do with adrenaline. Everything to do with taking time away from the opponent and running less.

I find volleying (real ones not the putaways) thrilling and very draining.
It doesn't get crazier than hitting a volley, you deal with fastest balls in the air.

It's tough to do in current conditions...if it wasn't, everyone would be doing it.

Hitting 2-3 volleys is not draining at all. The reason the top guys don't volley is because it is never a focus for juniors - since the 90s it's all been about baseline hitting.  Given that, these guys aren't going to start getting to the top and turning into Edberg. They stick with what they know.

That's probably because, like most amateurs, you're not that good at it and it involves throwing no yourself around. I was similar!

There's no way what Fed does now burns anything like the calories per match he used to, not even close. 

His recent interview was to tell the young kids to get to it, that they can do it they just need to train the style and shots in.

I don't throw myself around.

It's about taming the ball in the least possible time.

Compare hitting the ball at the net and 4m behind the baseline like Nadal.

... wrote:I don't throw myself around.

It's about taming the ball in the least possible time.

Compare hitting the ball at the net and 4m behind the baseline like Nadal.

Yeah, net play is easy.

No big backswing, guaranteed short rally, use opponents pace, little or no running.

It may be easy in your club, but it's not that easy with players like Nadal or Murray able to pass you almost at will.

The pressure he plays with is not the same as our jolly in the club.

One or two wrong adventures at the net and you can kiss the match goodbye.

So you ignore the fact that almost all the most incredibly fit guys have always been baseliners while some successful volleyers can be well below that? McEnroe couldn't run with Lendl but he could volley him out of a match.

Seriously nitb, you're onto a massive loser here if you're going to hang on to this idea that primarily baseline play is less energetic than primarily volleying.

My point was (before you started telling us what a great s&v-er you are) that Fed's 5 setter IS arduous and very draining.

What do you all think of this special white "8" racquet
Fed got from Wilson?

A lot of symbolism in it:

... wrote:My point was (before you started telling us what a great s&v-er you are) that Fed's 5 setter IS arduous and very draining.

I was a crap s & ver. a baseline king with a very big serve and a crunching SHBH. I was also the fittest guy in the club and could run the legs off anyone. I beat better players than me partly by running them to death (though I was no tactical RRunner, my biggest weakness was too many unforced errors because I loved hitting killer backhands from anywhere. I was Dolgopolov not Murray, with a similar success!

No, Fed2017 5 setters are bearable though it depends against whom. I wouldn't recommend he goes long against Murray, Djokovic or Nadal in sequence.

Nice racquet. Just please no more suits.

The cardigan was ok, I liked that.

Slippy wrote:Hitting 2-3 volleys is not draining at all. The reason the top guys don't volley is because it is never a focus for juniors - since the 90s it's all been about baseline hitting.  Given that, these guys aren't going to start getting to the top and turning into Edberg. They stick with what they know.

There is truth in that, coaches do focus on groundstrokes mostly these days, amd teach DBH.
Slow conditions are partly to blame,

I am not crazy about exclusive S&V a la Sampras, but an all court game like Federer or Simon.

Serve Volleying is extremely exhaustive as it is a very short burst but intense energy to bring the body from teh baseline to the net. many say Squash or Badmington are the most exhausting sports.

Just watch any clip from McEnroe from instance BB and you will see the time he takes to recover between points.

whether it is more exhausting than a baseliner I am not sure. I'd think that a 400m and 10k runners have given everything they have at the end of their respective race.

McEnroe was never a highly conditioned player even for his time.

In any case, we're really examining Federers game which isn't serve volley. He plays a game to shorten rallies and use net play to pressurise others and close out points.

... wrote:I am not crazy about exclusive S&V a la Sampras, but an all court game like Federer or Simon.

Sampras was not exclusively S&V outside Wimbledon. McEnroe was S&V. I loved it.

Baseline game is far more draining than S&V.  That is why most of the old players who are still high in the rankings are S&Vers, or at least attacking players.  Muller just reached his career high ranking at 34.

Thanks, thought I was going mad.

bogbrush wrote:

In any case, we're really examining Federers game which isn't serve volley. He plays a game to shorten rallies and use net play to pressurise others and close out points.

Yep, you're right.
Not just going to the net when opponent is on the back foot (S&V from time to time), but also taking the returns on more to force the issue. It hasn't just helped Federer save energy, but meant he's harder to dominate and dictate.

Federer is on the race!

Nothint too revealing there except when he talks about 3, MAYBE 4 guys who will be in the race.
He mentions Nadal and Murray, so even he doesn't know the state of Nole's injury, and Murray's one seems not to be that serious obviously.
Interesting.

"It would mean a lot to me"

I like!

He should not even think about until after the USO. After the USO, take stock of where things are and decide then.

Just 40 points behind in the race now, with the final to come tomorrow.

I think it is going to be a very close race as Nadal also wants it desperately and he is fitter.

Federer will need help from the others. As it stands in fact only Zverev can save federer as he is the only who can beat Nadal atm.

Nadals form has been some what indifferent. I think we are in danger in really heightening his chances.

Think if Federer holds the course, he'll get it again.

Tenez wrote:I think it is going to be a very close race as Nadal also wants it desperately and he is fitter.

Federer will need help from the others. As it stands in fact only Zverev can save federer as he is the only who can beat Nadal atm.

Zverev, is that the left handed blonde lad with the Hewitt cap?

bogbrush wrote:

Tenez wrote:I think it is going to be a very close race as Nadal also wants it desperately and he is fitter.

Federer will need help from the others. As it stands in fact only Zverev can save federer as he is the only who can beat Nadal atm.

Zverev, is that the left handed blonde lad with the Hewitt cap?

Or the ageing left hander with a huge serve? A man of many faces this Zverev!

Must be a Time Lord. We've had #1 played by Alexander, # 2 by Mischa, #3 by Sacha, #4 by Muller and now #5 by Shapavalov.

bogbrush wrote:Must be a Time Lord. We've had #1 played by Alexander, # 2 by Mischa, #3 by Sacha, #4 by Muller and now #5 by Shapavalov.

???

... wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Must be a Time Lord. We've had #1 played by Alexander, # 2 by Mischa, #3 by Sacha, #4 by Muller and now #5 by Shapavalov.

???

Never heard of Doctor Who?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Lord

It's going to come down to Cinc and the tournaments after anyway - and Nadal is unlikely to go too far there.  If Fed reaches the final at Cinc but loses v Zverev today, he'll be 5 short of Murray.

Murray loses 600 though Daniel.

Yeah, Murray loses it after Cincy even Federer & Nadal skipped it.

Ah yes, good point.  Well that makes things easier for Fed.  He just has to do well at Cinc (F)  with Nadal not reaching QF  I think.  He's now 5 points behind Murray already technically.

Where are we with this?

Even if federer says he will play full schedule I doubt he will and pretty sure he won't have the fitness too.

There is roughfly 1900 separating Nadal from Federer and I am not sure how he will be able to make that gap. A real shame as had he been fitter, he probably woudl have won Montreal....and at least got to the semi of teh USO. giving him about 750 extra points. With 1100 deficit I woudl have had good hope but 1900 to make up in his state, it is asking way too much.

What's left:

Shanghai 1000
basel 500
Paris 1000
WTF 1500

4000 pts in total.

Impossible task I feel.

yeah I find it would be difficult for roger, but hey, he is roger, anything is possible


I think he would need 3000 points to make nadal have to really fight for it, and even in that case nadal would just need some regularity reaching quarters and some semi to defend the number 1

Yeah, that's gone now. As you say it was all about the back in Montreal; Hell, even if he'd still lost but been fit it would only have taken a bit in Cincinnatti to get there (or at least be #2 going to the USO.

Those 5 points by which he trailed Murray may well prove critical.

Anything can happen in tennis (Nadal injury is one of em ).  There's around 4000 pts up for grabs.  But his chances are slim.

Though Fed has little chance to catch up Nadal for end of year number 1, it woudl help if Delpo was staying in Europe till the end. If Nadal has no opposition bar Federer, then reaching finals will guarantee him the number 1 spot. Having Delpo around might increase Fed's chances even if it diminishes Fed's chances to win tournaments. Having Delpo in Nadal's half can seriously reduce Nadal's points potential and increase Fed's chances to finish number 1. Delpo on Fed's draw woudl of course reduce fed's chances but it is better to have half a chance than none at all as I cannot see anyone bar Delpo (and Fed) stoppoing Nadal atm.

after usopen it looked good for nadal

after asian tour, and despite shanghai final, nadal has gained 1100 points and federer 1000

Basel will se fed winning 500 more points, but I have a feeling he wont play paris

and probably, nor will rafa

Ok, so Fed lost it. 
Is he going to take it back sometime this year? Of course much depends on Nadal but i wouldn't be surprised we've seen Fed's last moments as number one tonight. Not that it's that important but still..

gallery play wrote:Ok, so Fed lost it. 
Is he going to take it back sometime this year? Of course much depends on Nadal but i wouldn't be surprised we've seen Fed's last moments as number one tonight. Not that it's that important but still..

Should have retired after Rotterdam.

Hands up anyone here who doesn't give a shit about the N1?  Fed has the record... A record that is unlikely to be beat in decades. Extending it a few more weeks isn't going to do anything for his legacy. It's important for him to maintain his schedule and challenge for a while longer in slams.  Anything is a bonus at 36/37.

Mostly, though will the alternative being Nadal I’d rather he be there.

Anyway, unless Nadal runs through clay again Federer will be back there from the beach.

Federer is playing Stuttgart, so he will probably regain his number 1 even if nadal wins everything on clay

nadal will lose it in mid may or in mid jun, so only 4 weeks are at stake.

seing this, playing all tournaments is really suicide for nadal, whose only priority should be roland garros

Seriously though, the rankings are mental. I mean, Kevin Anderson is #8 and Isner #9.

Tennis has reverted to the Federer & Nadal show. It’s 2018. It’s unbelievable.

If Anderson beats Thiem tomorrow, both he and Isner will reach their new career high rankings on Monday.