Early AO talk

[GameSetAndMath]

Draw in 48 hours; 10 a.m. local time on Jan 13th (or 8 p.m. EST on Jan 12th).

I don't expect that a Fedal match will be on the cards in R3. The chances of that are
12.5% as Rafa is just one of 8 different projected players Fed could draw in R3.

However, there is a serious chance of Fed drawing Andy or Novak in R4.
The chances that he draws one of them in R4 is 25%

But, there is a very serious chance of Rafa drawing Andy or Novak (or Fed if
Fed defeats one of them in R4) in quarterfinals. The chances that he draws one of
them in QF is 50%.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Depends what we mean by "big stage." I took it to mean Slams and/or Slam finals. But we can define it however we want, depending upon what we seek to accomplish. If you want to define it in a way that makes Rafa look even better, go ahead - but at least call a spade a spade.

Yes, Rafa has the lead in Slam match-ups against those two, but as Front pointed out, there are more than three players in tennis. Roger won four Slams before he faced Rafa at a Slam, and we can't say those weren't big stage, or that his other Slam titles aren't big stage, even if he didn't face Rafa or Novak. We can't fault Roger for having his best years before Rafa and Novak found their highest level.

All that said, Roger clearly had a problem with Novak and especially Rafa. That doesn't take away from the rest of his record, which still remains the best career of the Open Era. Roger is almost five years older than Rafa, almost six older than Novak. The record clearly shows that Roger reached his absolute peak in 2006 then started a slow decline so that by the time Rafa reached his peak in 2010, and Novak in 2011, he was already a diminished player. Most of their matches have been played when Roger was post-peak and the younger two in their prime. The situation is not unlike Sampras and Agassi (Novak and Rafa) vs. Becker and Edberg (Roger) in terms of generations and era, except Roger last much longer than Becker or Edberg. Or maybe Roger is Jimmy Connors, Rafa is Borg, and Novak is McEnroe.

Roger won at least 8 slams after 2006. Agassi , Connors and Lendl won 8 in their entire careers ..you have been saying that at his peak or before his "slow" decline which you say in was in 2006 when Rafa begin to challenge him. At that time Roger won 9 slams already. The fact is Roger was actually a better player afterward 2006 when he won 8 slams against superior talent than in the previous 5-6 years.IMO.

I don't agree with you about Rafa's peak in 2010. Rafa's 2013 was actually better. That was his absolute peak. Rafa returned from an injury.. winning 5 master series that year , French Open, the American hard court swing(Montreal, Cincinnati and the US Open) and making the WTF finals.

 

[El Dude]

Roger won at least 8 slams after 2006. Agassi , Connors and Lendl won 8 in their entire careers ..you have been saying that at his peak or before his "slow" decline which you say in was in 2006 when Rafa begin to challenge him. At that time Roger won 9 slams already. The fact is Roger was actually a better player afterward 2006 when he won 8 slams against superior talent than in the previous 5-6 years.IMO.

I don't agree with you about Rafa's peak in 2010. Rafa's 2013 was actually better. That was his absolute peak. Rafa returned from an injury.. winning 5 master series that year , French Open, the American hard court swing(Montreal, Cincinnati and the US Open) and making the WTF finals.

Rafa had three great years: 2008, 2010, and 2013. The last of the three was certainly the most impressive in that he came back from injury and then was nigh unbeatable for half a year, not to mentioning dominating Novak, who had previously dominated him throughout 2011. But I think you could also argue that 2010 was his best year, largely because of the three Slams. But 2013 was also more impressive in that he had to take the reins back from Novak after Novak had stolen them while Rafa was in his prime.

Rafa is a hard player to pinpoint in terms of a peak because of his injury history; we can say his "broad peak" is 2008-13, with those three years being his absolute peaks. Just as Roger's "broad peak" was 2004-09, with 2006 being the highest point.

I say Roger started a "slow decline" after 2006 because there was nowhere else to go but down. 2007 was still great, but there were signs of slippage beneath the surface--and not just against Rafa, but some losses to lesser players. I think Roger pretty much plateaued in 2008-12, but was clearly a lesser player than he had been in the previous four years.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Roger won at least 8 slams after 2006. Agassi , Connors and Lendl won 8 in their entire careers ..you have been saying that at his peak or before his "slow" decline which you say in was in 2006 when Rafa begin to challenge him. At that time Roger won 9 slams already. The fact is Roger was actually a better player afterward 2006 when he won 8 slams against superior talent than in the previous 5-6 years.IMO.

I don't agree with you about Rafa's peak in 2010. Rafa's 2013 was actually better. That was his absolute peak. Rafa returned from an injury.. winning 5 master series that year , French Open, the American hard court swing(Montreal, Cincinnati and the US Open) and making the WTF finals.

Rafa had three great years: 2008, 2010, and 2013. The last of the three was certainly the most impressive in that he came back from injury and then was nigh unbeatable for half a year, not to mentioning dominating Novak, who had previously dominated him throughout 2011. But I think you could also argue that 2010 was his best year, largely because of the three Slams. But 2013 was also more impressive in that he had to take the reins back from Novak after Novak had stolen them while Rafa was in his prime.

Rafa is a hard player to pinpoint in terms of a peak because of his injury history; we can say his "broad peak" is 2008-13, with those three years being his absolute peaks. Just as Roger's "broad peak" was 2004-09, with 2006 being the highest point.

I say Roger started a "slow decline" after 2006 because there was nowhere else to go but down. 2007 was still great, but there were signs of slippage beneath the surface--and not just against Rafa, but some losses to lesser players. I think Roger pretty much plateaued in 2008-12, but was clearly a lesser player than he had been in the previous four years.

thats why I think it was 2013 for Rafa because he was able to retake back the reins from Novak..there haven't been too many players who was able to take back what Novak had taken from him.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Draw in 48 hours; 10 a.m. local time on Jan 13th (or 8 p.m. EST on Jan 12th).

I don't expect that a Fedal match will be on the cards in R3. The chances of that are
12.5% as Rafa is just one of 8 different projected players Fed could draw in R3.

However, there is a serious chance of Fed drawing Andy or Novak in R4.
The chances that he draws one of them in R4 is 25%

But, there is a very serious chance of Rafa drawing Andy or Novak (or Fed if
Fed defeats one of them in R4) in quarterfinals. The chances that he draws one of
them in QF is 50%.

I would prefer Rafa to take on Andy

 

[El Dude]

Cedrik-Marcel Stebe is currently playing a qualifier against Noah Rubin. He was a bit of a prospect about five or six years ago, part of the ill-fated lost generation (he was born in 1990). He reached as high as #71 in early 2012.

Also in qualifies: Old men Radek Stepanek (won his first match) and Jurgen Melzer. I believe Stepanek is the only player born in the 70s that it still ranked in the top 500.

Young guns Frances Tiafoe and Stefanos Tsitsipas won their first qualie, although Stefan Kozlov lost.

 

[herios]

I believe Stepanek is the only player born in the 70s that it still ranked in the top 500.

No, he is not. Ivo Karlovic also is and so is Ramirez Hidalgo.

 

[rafanoy1992]

Roger won at least 8 slams after 2006. Agassi , Connors and Lendl won 8 in their entire careers ..you have been saying that at his peak or before his "slow" decline which you say in was in 2006 when Rafa begin to challenge him. At that time Roger won 9 slams already. The fact is Roger was actually a better player afterward 2006 when he won 8 slams against superior talent than in the previous 5-6 years.IMO.

I don't agree with you about Rafa's peak in 2010. Rafa's 2013 was actually better. That was his absolute peak. Rafa returned from an injury.. winning 5 master series that year , French Open, the American hard court swing(Montreal, Cincinnati and the US Open) and making the WTF finals.

Rafa had three great years: 2008, 2010, and 2013. The last of the three was certainly the most impressive in that he came back from injury and then was nigh unbeatable for half a year, not to mentioning dominating Novak, who had previously dominated him throughout 2011. But I think you could also argue that 2010 was his best year, largely because of the three Slams. But 2013 was also more impressive in that he had to take the reins back from Novak after Novak had stolen them while Rafa was in his prime.

Rafa is a hard player to pinpoint in terms of a peak because of his injury history; we can say his "broad peak" is 2008-13, with those three years being his absolute peaks. Just as Roger's "broad peak" was 2004-09, with 2006 being the highest point.

I say Roger started a "slow decline" after 2006 because there was nowhere else to go but down. 2007 was still great, but there were signs of slippage beneath the surface--and not just against Rafa, but some losses to lesser players. I think Roger pretty much plateaued in 2008-12, but was clearly a lesser player than he had been in the previous four years.

Actually, I would say that his mid 2008 to 2009 Rome form was his absolute peak in my opinion. His level of play during that span was phenomenal to say the least. He literally was like superhuman the way he played in that span.

 

[El Dude]

I believe Stepanek is the only player born in the 70s that it still ranked in the top 500.

No, he is not. Ivo Karlovic also is and so is Ramirez Hidalgo.

Whoops, forgot - thanks. I might have thinking of my arbitrary generations, with Stepanek born in 1978 and part of the 74-78 crew (along with Tommy Haas). Hidalgo was also born in 78, but hasn't really been on my radar much as he is a lesser player, rarely in the top 100.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Talking of H2H, there are eleven players who have winning record against Rafa.

Novak Djokovic 26–23
Nikolay Davydenko 6–5
Dominik Hrbatý 3–1
Àlex Corretja 2–0
Dustin Brown 2–0
Borna Ćorić 2–1
Chris Guccione 1–0
Damir Dzumhur 1–0
Joachim Johansson 1–0
Olivier Mutis 1–0
Paradorn Srichaphan 1–0

I could find nine players who have winning record against Federer, but am not sure
whether that is complete list. But, I do believe it is complete list.

Novak 23-22
Rafa 23-11
Kafelnikov 4-2
Enqvist 3-1
Corretja 3-2
Ferreira 2-1
Hrbaty 2-1
Kuerten 2-1
Thiem 2-1

 

[Shivashish Sarkar]

This time around we will see an interesting first week as Rafa and Roger are seeded lower.

Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk

 

[Fiero425]

This time around we will see an interesting first week as Rafa and Roger are seeded lower.

Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk

It will only get more interesting as time goes on if there are upsets! :angel: :dodgy: :eyepop

 

[the AntiPusher]

This time around we will see an interesting first week as Rafa and Roger are seeded lower.

Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk

It will only get more interesting as time goes on if there are upsets! :angel: :dodgy: :eyepop

Maybe I am different, I want Roger and Rafa around to be in the later rounds especially the final weekend because I want to see great tennis (including Stan, Djoker, Nishikori, Murray and a few others). Not interested in seeing Jack Sock vs Nicky K. :nono

 

[Front242]

Plus these days you don't get many players admitting they took steroids too strong for horses unknowingly (as if Mac) for 6 years. McEnroe was a f****n' joke. Used love his matches with Borg but his legacy is forever more tainted and utterly destroyed imo.

Front, KSkate has warned you repeatedly about your consistent interjection of your steroidal conspiracies into every damn thread. Damn, enough already

Mr goody two shoes blabbing to mods again. Sigh. This is a fact. Go Google McEnroe steroids and do us all a favour and stop causing unnecessary hassle.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Plus these days you don't get many players admitting they took steroids too strong for horses unknowingly (as if Mac) for 6 years. McEnroe was a f****n' joke. Used love his matches with Borg but his legacy is forever more tainted and utterly destroyed imo.

Front, KSkate has warned you repeatedly about your consistent interjection of your steroidal conspiracies into every damn thread. Damn, enough already

Mr goody two shoes blabbing to mods again. Sigh. This is a fact. Go Google McEnroe steroids and do us all a favour and stop causing unnecessary hassle.

:laydownlaughing..last have a good AO , hopefully our two former number one champions can meet and we can both engage in some more competitive banter.

 

[sid]

This time around we will see an interesting first week as Rafa and Roger are seeded lower.

Sent from my Titanium Octane using Tapatalk

It will only get more interesting as time goes on if there are upsets! :angel: :dodgy: :eyepop

Maybe I am different, I want Roger and Rafa around to be in the later rounds especially the final weekend because I want to see great tennis (including Stan, Djoker, Nishikori, Murray and a few others). Not interested in seeing Jack Sock vs Nicky K. :nono

I've a funny feeling Roger & Rafa will meet 3rd @ AO kind of written in the stars.

 

[Front242]

If they do everyone will say the draw was rigged and it's entirely possible for once given their age, recent absence from the tour, and the greed involved as the authorities know this match will pull more revenue than any other at the whole tournament.

 

[Shivashish Sarkar]

So, today's the big day at Melbourne. Roger facing a big 4 guy early on could give him more chances of winning. Its because he would have lesser fatigue in his body. He would take on the opponent while still fresh. Can't wait for the draw. It's going to be the most bizarre grand slam for the first time.

 

[Kieran]

When is the draw?

EDIT: sorry, just saw this

Draw in 48 hours; 10 a.m. local time on Jan 13th (or 8 p.m. EST on Jan 12th).

So that's actually quite soon!

EDIT #2:

Quite soon, as in, if I could count proper! :laydownlaughing

About 9 hours from now...

 

[Carol]

I hope every players will be healthy and not to see a walkover again like the last USO :nono :cover