Roger's stellar season (ESPN)

[mrzz]

Given the suggestion by the ITF -- that the award goes to the guy with more points in ITF events, there is no discussion here. I agree that Federer earned that "feel" of best player of the year, but the fact that Nadal got to three finals should be taken in to account (BTW there are no points for DC anymore, I don't know how they would weigh that in if it was the case).

But Shawnbm's idea is a great one: it would seal the link on their legacies, and given that both seem to really like each other I guess no one would feel bad about it.

 

[Ricardo]

Given the suggestion by the ITF -- that the award goes to the guy with more points in ITF events, there is no discussion here. I agree that Federer earned that "feel" of best player of the year, but the fact that Nadal got to three finals should be taken in to account (BTW there are no points for DC anymore, I don't know how they would weigh that in if it was the case).

But Shawnbm's idea is a great one: it would seal the link on their legacies, and given that both seem to really like each other I guess no one would feel bad about it.

oh no they don't like each other, what gave you that idea? the phony ads?

 

[mrzz]

^Up until Laver cup I thought they shared mutual respect and were civil to each other, while playing a bit with a media created friendship. But some scenes from that competition actually changed my mind. Anyway my phrasing was indeed probably exaggerated and "seem to be good colleagues" would be better.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Yes, it is a stellar year. But, it has been kind of disappointing at the same time due to the following three near misses.

1. Failed to win USO. Note to Nadalites and others. I am not saying that he would have won USO if he has
skipped Montreal. But, it is very clear that he was not in right physical condition right from the beginning of
the tourney and thus it was a clear failure in making sure that he is fit for big events.

2. Missed YE#1 fairly narrowly and primarily as a result of 1 above.

3. I can partially understand and forgive 1 saying he tried to get more points in Montreal for #1.
I can forgive 2 above saying it is a byproduct of 1 above. But, the real big disappointment is
not delivering at WTF. Goffin, Sock and Grigor made it to SF along with Federer. Fed's
collective H2H vs. the other three put together is 16-0 (6-0 vs. Goffin and Grigor and 4-0 vs. Sock).
But, he came out flat in SF, thus missing an easy chance at winning another WTF title. Now,
Novak will surely win at least one more WTF and thus at least tie Fed. Winning this year,
would have put a clear distance. Further, this is even more troubling as this is not due to
any scheduling fiasco. Fed skipped Bercy wisely and thus had two weeks rest between Basel and
WTF. This loss probably means his body is not holding up much more than he likes to admit.

Fed last finished YE #1 in 2009. Fed last won WTF in 2011. Both of them so long ago.
It would have been much nicer if he was able to achieve both this year.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I truly don't care about "player of the year" but I'd say Roger has been the best player this year. However, his winning percentage on a match-to-match basis is definitely helped by not playing in the clay season. I'm not talking about the titles he won, since not participating obviously makes it harder to win titles (shocking, I know), I'm talking about his match winning ratio.

 

[DarthFed]

Even if he played 3 tournaments on clay and did crappy like 10-3 we are still talking a much better win % than Nadal. I can also point out that Rafa only played Wimbledon, if he played the 1 or 2 grass warmups we know he'd have gotten abused early by a no name.

 

[Ricardo]

It would have been much nicer if he was able to achieve both this year.

Ironic, nobody saw it coming with his amazing form in the first few months of the year. Then when everyone expected him to perform and wrap it up at the tail end with the weakest draws EVER (arguably) at USO and WTF, he folded. This indicates that he maybe is much closer to retirement than we know.

 

[shawnbm]

Folded is a little strong, no? I’m sure he felt he could win both, although I think Montreal hurt him more than he would admit. Delpo is a quality player and played well. Goffin played the best match of his life to win. He deserved it.

 

[Ricardo]

Folded is a little strong, no? I’m sure he felt he could win both, although I think Montreal hurt him more than he would admit. Delpo is a quality player and played well. Goffin played the best match of his life to win. He deserved it.

Stick to the facts, he was fav in both matches. He has owned Goffin outright and has been on a winning streak against Delpo. Which part did i say that's not right? i don't care if you think Goffin played whatever, Federer is by default a few levels better than him indoors. Even combining all surfaces, David has won 2 sets EVER in all previous 6 matches. Sorry he hasn't got a prayer if Fed is even close to being on game. Folded is correct, unless you want to make something out of nothing.

 

[El Dude]

Remember what happened to Novak, after he won the French Open in 2016. He nearly collapsed - at least relative to his previous form. I remember some speculating that he just didn't have the desire anymore - he had that great year in 2015, then completed the "Novak Slam," then...well, I think one of the unspoken aspects of decline is a reduction in motivation.

In that regard, it will be interesting to see how Roger and Rafa both do in 2018. Rafa also had a surprising year, perhaps the most surprising part being YE1. Will his desire to catch Roger in Slam titles be enough to keep him going? What about Roger? That epic AO and then his eighth Wimbledon...how much does he want more? I'm guessing not as much as he wanted #18 and #19/#8.

This is why I predicted that Novak would finish YE1: It is usually more inspiring to try to get back on top then it is to maintain it. Novak has something to prove while Roger and Rafa don't. A year ago, Novak was right there with Rafa in terms of career accomplishments. Yes, two fewer Slams but a somewhat better record in almost every other way. Now Rafa has pulled ahead again. Maybe Novak doesn't care, but I imagine he does.

Another thought: these guys might keep going as long as at least one of the other two does. They are intimately connected. I have also predicted that Roger and Rafa will retire within a year of each other. Who knows, but I still think that very possible.

 

[Moxie]

Stick to the facts, he was fav in both matches. He has owned Goffin outright and has been on a winning streak against Delpo. Which part did i say that's not right? i don't care if you think Goffin played whatever, Federer is by default a few levels better than him indoors. Even combining all surfaces, David has won 2 sets EVER in all previous 6 matches. Sorry he hasn't got a prayer if Fed is even close to being on game. Folded is correct, unless you want to make something out of nothing.

I have to agree with you here, Ricky. Both of those losses were surprising, given his year, and the h2hs. I know a lot of Feddies say that Roger blew his back and his USO chances in Montreal, which may well be true. And the back still seemed to feature later in the season. The Goffin loss was particularly shocking, given the carrot in front of him. I think you're right that the back and his age are showing. He's not a player to miss an excellent opportunity, unless he can't. Not to take away from Goffin, but let's be real.

 

[Moxie]

Remember what happened to Novak, after he won the French Open in 2016. He nearly collapsed - at least relative to his previous form. I remember some speculating that he just didn't have the desire anymore - he had that great year in 2015, then completed the "Novak Slam," then...well, I think one of the unspoken aspects of decline is a reduction in motivation.

In that regard, it will be interesting to see how Roger and Rafa both do in 2018. Rafa also had a surprising year, perhaps the most surprising part being YE1. Will his desire to catch Roger in Slam titles be enough to keep him going? What about Roger? That epic AO and then his eighth Wimbledon...how much does he want more? I'm guessing not as much as he wanted #18 and #19/#8.

This is why I predicted that Novak would finish YE1: It is usually more inspiring to try to get back on top then it is to maintain it. Novak has something to prove while Roger and Rafa don't. A year ago, Novak was right there with Rafa in terms of career accomplishments. Yes, two fewer Slams but a somewhat better record in almost every other way. Now Rafa has pulled ahead again. Maybe Novak doesn't care, but I imagine he does.

Another thought: these guys might keep going as long as at least one of the other two does. They are intimately connected. I have also predicted that Roger and Rafa will retire within a year of each other. Who knows, but I still think that very possible.

At the risk of partisanship, I still don't think that Djokovic is mentally the equivalent of Roger and Rafa. The post-RG sink has been surprising. And no one believes that it's 100% about injury. Both Federer and Nadal have demonstrated bounce-back potential over the course of their careers that we have yet to see from Novak. Basically, Djokovic rose to the heights, and hasn't really had to deal with set-back, until now. Roger and Rafa both still seem very motivated, and have each other as touch-stones. In terms of motivation, I doubt that this year would cool them off, but rather incentivize them. It's going to be age and health that would put them off. Roger's the old man left at the top, and he's got an excellent resume. If anyone should lose motivation, it would be Fed, though by everyone's account, he loves tennis and wants to keep playing. Rafa would be more motivated to catch him, and to stay ahead of Novak, if the body holds out, he's only 31. Novak is the wildcard. I get why you pick him for YE#1 next year: who else? Fedal have a lot to defend, and hopefully they're going to be judicious as to when they play.

As to your last, I think you could be right to say that when Roger hangs them up, Rafa might not be far behind. That will most likely depend on his knees, and how much Djokovic is breathing down his neck. But, hey, if they're still winning Majors, or close to it...

 

[mrzz]

In the end of the day Goffin beat Nadal and Federer at the same tournament, a pretty big one, in a Fedal year. That's for a very few, period. Then he goes on and wins his two matches against good opponents in the Davis Cup final in dominant fashion. What else the guy needs to do? He is not winning majors, right, but, well, who else is?

You simply do not beat a lot of good, powerful players in a row by coincidence.

 

[DarthFed]

The loss to DP was only a surprise due to DP having to go a brutal 5 the match before and still possibly being sick. Regardless of the back or anything else the fact of the matter is Roger sucked at Montreal and USO. He then had a good Fall until the real shocking debacle that was the YEC semi. I agree with Ricardo that Fed losing to Goffin shouldn't have even been a realistic possibility. He was absolutely putrid. That said I wouldn't read too much into it. And I doubt he's losing motivation. 19 is great now but it's jack shit if a certain tw*t hits 20. Roger wasted a lot of years in his 30's doing diddly squat. He needs to continue to make up for lost time.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

In the end of the day Goffin beat Nadal and Federer at the same tournament, a pretty big one, in a Fedal year.

Problem is that it was not just the end of the day; It was also end of the year (when both were fatigued and/or injured).

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The loss to DP was only a surprise due to DP having to go a brutal 5 the match before and still possibly being sick. Regardless of the back or anything else the fact of the matter is Roger sucked at Montreal and USO. He then had a good Fall until the real shocking debacle that was the YEC semi. I agree with Ricardo that Fed losing to Goffin shouldn't have even been a realistic possibility. He was absolutely putrid. That said I wouldn't read too much into it. And I doubt he's losing motivation. 19 is great now but it's jack shit if a certain tw*t hits 20. Roger wasted a lot of years in his 30's doing diddly squat. He needs to continue to make up for lost time.

I disagree with Dude that Fed is losing motivation. I don't think motivation is an issue for Fed even at this time. I guess Fed has more injury/age/fatigue issues than he lets other people know about. I can forgive Montreal and USO losses and write them off as being caused by bad scheduling plus playing in a tourney without proper prep.

But, he did regain form as evidenced by his wins in Shanghai and Basel. He made a wise move of skipping Bercy. So, he actually had
two weeks off (the week of Bercy and the week of nextgen WTF) before playing in London. He made it to SF unscathed. He had three
people left in the draw who have never beat him. He had a day of rest before SF wheras the other group folks had to play the very next day. So, the Gofffin loss is extremely surprising. In fact that day, I was even planning to skip the match thinking that it will be a routine win and is not worth the time.

Hope my suspicions of something serious is wrong and he can maintain his vigor.

 

[Moxie]

Problem is that it was not just the end of the day; It was also end of the year (when both were fatigued and/or injured).

And the end of their careers. You're the guy the put up the list of those who had done it, right? It's his own particular achievement. And likely the last who will do it, in any way that will mean anything.

 

[Moxie]

Roger wasted a lot of years in his 30's doing diddly squat. He needs to continue to make up for lost time.

I guess most of his '30s had nothing to do with Nadal, Djokovic and Murray? Yeah, what a fecking slacker, eh?

 

[El Dude]

I'm with Moxie on this one. Roger had to deal with two truly great and one kind of great player peaking when he was in his 30s...and consider that he's still won as many or more Slams (3) in his 30s than all but 17 players have won in their entire Open Era careers.

Hey Game, I don't think he's necessarily lost motivation, I just wouldn't be surprised if there's some let-down after the remarkably unexpected 2017 season - for him and Nadal.

 

[DarthFed]

I guess most of his '30s had nothing to do with Nadal, Djokovic and Murray? Yeah, what a fecking slacker, eh?

Well let's see, he is 1-6 at slams vs Nole since he turned 30 and only one of those at AO, and 1 at RG. He should've clearly done better at Wimbledon and the USO matches, one of which he choked away. And then we have 2 ugly losses to Nadal at AO, a place where he beat him in 2017. One weak loss to Murray in 2013, otherwise he owns him like he should.

But obviously there have been missed opportunities outside of that including Berdych at 2012 USO, Cilic at 2014 USO, and Raonic at 2016 Wimbledon. Other losses include Tsonga at 2013 RG, Stakhovsky at 2013 Wimbledon, Robredo at 2013 USO, Gulbis at 2014 RG, Seppi at 2015 AO, Stan at 2015 RG.

I'm not saying Roger was a scrub once he turned 30 but clearly his results were disappointing until this year. People saying otherwise simply were grading him as though he is your normal top 5 player.