Laver Cup, 2018, Chicago

[Moxie]

There is a category in between ATP events that award ranking points and the exhos. Those are ITF events that don't award ranking points. For example, DC ties, Olympics and events such as Hopman cup fall under this category.

Until last year and a couple of years ago, respectively, DC and Olympics were awarded points. Where does that put Hopman Cup and Laver Cup, in terms of prestige?

 

[DarthFed]

It worked out in the sense that he got the #1 back. Then he lost in IW and early in Miami. You can blame it on lack of motivation. Sure, why not? Does it really explain Wimbledon, though? How was he not going to be motivated to win Wimbledon?

We've had this conversation before and it goes nowhere as always. I'm not saying Roger didn't care about Wimbledon but at the end of the day I think that deadly word called "content" found its way to Roger after he won #20 and got back to #1. When push came to shove the losses to nobodies have not hurt much and people who watch them can and should leave with the impression that they wanted it more.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

Until last year and a couple of years ago, respectively, DC and Olympics were awarded points. Where does that put Hopman Cup and Laver Cup, in terms of prestige?

I'd say HC & LC are identical and used to be below DC in term of prestige. But now, when DC is pointless, it is equal to HC, LC. However, I put Olympics in different category because it's so rare, every 4 years. E.g. Sir Andy is so proud to have won it twice. This is unique event, especially if you're proud of your nationality and points are irrelevant to its prestige.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

One aspect of LC that could not happen anywhere else is the incident where the two most famous and arguably the biggest brats of male tennis united their forces (as a coach and a player) to unleash their tirade on an umpire:
https://www.foxsports.com.au/tennis...t/news-story/5b69a779439b37375524cf7edf31ffb8
As funny as interesting. Maccy maybe be less abusive than in his prime time as a player (umpire did not issue a code violation to Team World) but still showing his potential. And don't tell me LC is just an exhibition. If it was, those brats would not be as passionate about their match as to raise it to the abusive level. That incident shows how they care about the actual result of the match and not the show part of it.

 

[Moxie]

We've had this conversation before and it goes nowhere as always. I'm not saying Roger didn't care about Wimbledon but at the end of the day I think that deadly word called "content" found its way to Roger after he won #20 and got back to #1. When push came to shove the losses to nobodies have not hurt much and people who watch them can and should leave with the impression that they wanted it more.

No, we haven't had this conversation. I've held off asking the question. Not that you haven't said endlessly that it is complacency and "content" on Roger's part that has him losing. But let's say you're right, and he's merely gotten "content" with his results, as you say because he got #20 and got back to #1. Isn't, then, getting back to #1 part of the problem? In any case, I think it's hard to determine lack of motivation from a player v. lack of ability to sustain form at 36-37. I find it impossible to believe that Roger wasn't as motivated as by anything this year to win Wimbledon. Is it fire-in-the-belly or form that he lacks? I don't think that's clear.

 

[Carol]

Laver Cup is an exhibition but you can tell that every single player has played to win. I missed the match Roger-Isner so now I’m watching it at TC, in the second set and after an ace by Isner the face and the “fuck” from Roger’s mouth have told me how serious they were playing. By the way I liked a lot how Kyrgios played the doubles, much better than the singles which was ridiculous badly. Anderson is continuing playing well but he surprised me how bad played vs Zverev at the end of the match

 

[mrzz]

Both (fire in the belly and form).

Enviado de meu MotoE2(4G-LTE) usando o Tapatalk

 

[DarthFed]

No, we haven't had this conversation. I've held off asking the question. Not that you haven't said endlessly that it is complacency and "content" on Roger's part that has him losing. But let's say you're right, and he's merely gotten "content" with his results, as you say because he got #20 and got back to #1. Isn't, then, getting back to #1 part of the problem? In any case, I think it's hard to determine lack of motivation from a player v. lack of ability to sustain form at 36-37. I find it impossible to believe that Roger wasn't as motivated as by anything this year to win Wimbledon. Is it fire-in-the-belly or form that he lacks? I don't think that's clear.

Fire in the belly and motivation are one and the same. It can be both but a lack of fire kind of leads to lack of form. If all things are even the guy who needs to win the most will win. I don't think Roger looks like a greedy SOB who needs to win.

 

[Carol]

It’s very obvious that Federer loves to play and of course to win otherwise he would have retired. The day that he can see that can’t win anymore he will retire but meanwhile you can tell he has all the motivation to compite

 

[Moxie]

Fire in the belly and motivation are one and the same. It can be both but a lack of fire kind of leads to lack of form. If all things are even the guy who needs to win the most will win. I don't think Roger looks like a greedy SOB who needs to win.

Yes, I was using "fire in the belly" as a synonym. I thought that was clear. For sure one can lead to the other...i.e., lack of form. Mrzz says it's both.

 

[mrzz]

I think people underestimate how much training Federer (and Nadal, and Djokovic) need when in peak form. They have absurd talent? Sure. But to be able to play at an absurd level day in, day out, for weeks and months, you need to practice like a dog. And to practice like a dog, you really need to want it. Federer never got back to where he got in the first quarter of 2017. I can see him lacking both form and motivation, but obviously I can only guess. That his level of play has dropped immensely is obvious. The occasional glimpses of brilliance will always be there. The consistency, however, is completely missing,

 

[DarthFed]

It’s very obvious that Federer loves to play and of course to win otherwise he would have retired. The day that he can see that can’t win anymore he will retire but meanwhile you can tell he has all the motivation to compite

He will play as long as his body holds up and there are active threats to his career. The only other exception would be if he gets sick of spending time away from the family but Mirka will keep his mind right. At 50% of his former power he still figures to be a top 5-6 player for the foreseeable future. There is a clear lack of depth and quality on tour as of now.

 

[monfed]

Instead of focusing on slams and YE#1, Fred is more interested in this exho.

 

[DarthFed]

Instead of focusing on slams and YE#1, Fred is more interested in this exho.

There are no slams right now and clearly he has no prayer for #1. However, I think he should've taken everything but YEC off to reset for next year. If his dismal form continues AND he doesn't have a long break before 2019 it would look bad for his chances next year.

 

[Mastoor]

Have you ever thought a picture like this was possible?

 

[Moxie]

He will play as long as his body holds up and there are active threats to his career. The only other exception would be if he gets sick of spending time away from the family but Mirka will keep his mind right. At 50% of his former power he still figures to be a top 5-6 player for the foreseeable future. There is a clear lack of depth and quality on tour as of now.

Interesting how convinced you always are that Mirka is more motivated than Roger. I know how she comes off, but she's also the one that must spend more time raising their kids. You never think that she's at least as inclined as he is to quit traveling the world and raise their kids in one place?

 

[DarthFed]

Interesting how convinced you always are that Mirka is more motivated than Roger. I know how she comes off, but she's also the one that must spend more time raising their kids. You never think that she's at least as inclined as he is to quit traveling the world and raise their kids in one place?

She knows not to make Roger retire too early. He still has chances for majors and there is a very active threat to his legacy.

 

[Moxie]

She knows not to make Roger retire too early. He still has chances for majors and there is a very active threat to his legacy.

I know YOU think that. But how are you so sure what she thinks or wants? How do you know that it's not Roger that wants to keep going, and that worried face she puts on when he's losing isn't just her thinking: "this means more time until retirement?" It could be what he lacks in motivation is from her lack of wanting it anymore. It could be that, you know. You don't know what they talk about in terms of their family and their life. You really don't. She's got 4 kids to drag around the world AND him to keep supporting, emotionally, which is surely not a two-way street. They have many millions of dollars. He might not be the only one who doesn't see the whole point of it anymore.

 

[DarthFed]

I know YOU think that. But how are you so sure what she thinks or wants? How do you know that it's not Roger that wants to keep going, and that worried face she puts on when he's losing isn't just her thinking: "this means more time until retirement?" It could be what he lacks in motivation is from her lack of wanting it anymore. It could be that, you know. You don't know what they talk about in terms of their family and their life. You really don't. She's got 4 kids to drag around the world AND him to keep supporting, emotionally, which is surely not a two-way street. They have many millions of dollars. He might not be the only one who doesn't see the whole point of it anymore.

I think you know by now I'm not stating these things as facts, it is all anyone's guess. My thought is that she is a wolf that is invested in the goat chase as much or more than the rest of us. They have the money for probably 10 generations to come, this is about maintaining current glory. If 20 ends up being an inferior total then what? Roger becomes some guy that was #1 for awhile and had a small rivalry with Nadal that he mostly lost. That doesn't sound that much different from how we talk about Chrissy Evert in the woman's game.

 

[Moxie]

I think you know by now I'm not stating these things as facts, it is all anyone's guess. My thought is that she is a wolf that is invested in the goat chase as much or more than the rest of us. They have the money for probably 10 generations to come, this is about maintaining current glory. If 20 ends up being an inferior total then what? Roger becomes some guy that was #1 for awhile and had a small rivalry with Nadal that he mostly lost. That doesn't sound that much different from how we talk about Chrissy Evert in the woman's game.

It's very possible that the person who cares most about his legacy is Roger himself and there's no reason to protect him behind Mirka's skirts. She's been loyal and incredibly stalwart in terms of his business. But I don't believe that even a pushy wife and business faithful can make a person want to win more than they actually do. To me, for what it's worth, I think you should keep your faith in Roger, the player that brought you to the dance.