What Next for Federer? 2017 in Review, and a look ahead

[El Dude]

Its also worth considering what they've already played this year:

Roger: 7 tournaments, 33 matches (4.7 matches per tournament)
Rafa: 11 tournaments, 53 matches (4.8 matches per tournament)

According to that chart, Roger will finish with 12-14 tournaments, Rafa with as many as 19. He played 23 tournaments 2015, but was going out a lot early in most. Chances are he plays more like 17-18.

Depending upon how they plays, Roger will finish the year with somewhere in the 50-65ish match range, and Rafa with 75-90ish. Rafa's only played 90+ once, when he played 93 back in 2008. He's played 81 as recently as 2015, and 80+ in 2005, 2007-11, 2013, and 2015.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

OK folks, here's a chart to help us visualize this. Obviously red is Roger, orange is Rafa. I probably should have used colors that were more different,but I usually use those in my various charts. Anyhow, dark is "probable," light is "maybe." For Roger probably is Cincy, USO, Shanghai, Basel, WTF, with Canada and Paris as maybes. For Rafa, probable is pretty much everything, although it is unclear whether he'll actually play all that he's signed up for. I also wasn't sure about Basel, as I found conflicting info. Oh yeah, the tournaments with black background are big ones.

The reason I made this chart is that I wanted to compare their paths, including possible points, and also see how many weeks off Roger will have, depending upon what he plays. The fact that he's got a week between Cincy and the USO--coupled with the possibility that if he doesn't play Canada or Paris, Rafa could have as many as 2,5000 more possible points--makes me think that he should just go for Canada.

At the very least, I think Roger should and will play one of Canada and Paris, which would give him 7,000 possible points. Chances are Rafa won't play all of those tournaments, but if he does--and with his current 500ish point lead--it means Roger still has to out-play him by as many as 2,000 points. If he doesn't play either of Can/Paris, then it could be as many as 3,000.

I agree with the chart and the nice visual description. But, your conclusion is probably wrong.

You cannot be merely looking at the situation numerically. After playing in IW nicely, Fed was kind of lucky to win in Miami with
difficult matches against Kyrgios and Berdych. So, he was getting tired (either physically or in terms of ability to maintain focus).
IW & Miami while being back to back tourneys are actually much better as they both are spread over 12 days or so. But, Canada and
Cincy are back to back tourneys which happen in just a week. So, he might actually be even more tired.

More importantly, you need to take into account that tiredness may cost him at USO, the single tourney with the largest points at stake (not to mention it will add to his GS count). So, it is better to skip Canada.

1. If the Gamble pays off and he wins USO, then he is almost a shoe in for #1 and do not need to play tourneys that he is not interested in even after USO.

2. If the Gamble fails and Rafa goes on a tear just like in 2013 winning Montreal, Cincy and USO (or for that matter just USO and Montreal), the YE#1 will become out of reach and there will be no point in overloading the schedule after USO. Just give it up.

3. If the spoils were split between different players (say Rafa takes Montreal, Fed takes Cincy and an outsider wins USO for example),
Roger would still be in the running for #1. If this be the case, he can decide to play Paris. Moreover, he can even throw in Tokyo 500 for good measure if things are really tight.

So, the best advice seems to be the following.

a. Skip Montreal.
b. Simply focus on winning Cincy and USO at the moment.
c. Worry neither about #1 ranking nor about YE #1 at this time.
d. Reassess the situation after USO and prepare a post-uso schedule based on how the race for #1 looks at that time

 

[El Dude]

Good stuff, Game - hard to disagree with all that.

I think your "c" is unnecessary. The focus is always on the tournament at hand, whether that is Wimbledon or Basel. But on the other hand, I'm sure he's got #1 in mind and would love to get it back. I mean, in a way a 35-year old #1 is far more impressive than a 35-year old Grand Slam winner, because the latter only means that player played great for seven matches in two weeks, while the former implied he played better than anyone else for a whole year. In other words, #1 ranking is harder than a Grand Slam title (which is one of the reasons that Marcelo Rios is greater than numerous one-Slam wonders).

But yeah, I agree now: skip Canada, focus on Cincy and USO. Regardless of what happens there and where he is relative to #1, he will definitely play Basel and WTF, probably Shanghai. The "maybe" is Paris. He plays it only if either 1) He just wants to, 2) he wants another Masters, 3) #1 is in question and he needs the points.

 

[Federberg]

I posted in the other thread (Fed Fan's talk) Fed's statements about his schedule in the post-finals presser. Roger has confirmed that he will be playing in Cinci, USO, Laver Cup, Shanghai and the Indoor Season (he did not get into the details of which tourneys in the indoor season). He specifically said he will not skip any particular swing completely (the remaining swings are: NA hard court swing, Asian hard court swing, Indoor Swing). He said his team will sit and discuss whether it is a good idea to play in Montreal and make a decision tomorrow. Even though he used the word "tomorrow", I don't expect them to make a decision on it for two more weeks (as there is no hurry for them to make a decision on it).

The question of whether it is a good idea for Roger to play in Montreal is a good one. There can be arguments given for both and against doing so. YE #1 is definitely a priority. But, it is not important that Roger get to #1 ranking quickly; it can wait for few more weeks if needed. Hence, It looks like it may be a good idea to skip Montreal.

If the gamble pays off and he wins USO as a result of being fresh again, he will be way ahead in the race for YE #1 that he can achieve it without altering the schedule for the rest of the year much.

On the other hand, if he did not win USO, it is not the end of the story for YE #1. He can always throw in Paris (in addition to Basel and WTF) on the indoor season part. Further, he can even throw in Tokyo 500 (to compensate for the China 500 that Rafa will be playing in).

There is no question YE #1 is important. Fed has had it only five times whereas Pete was YE #1 six times. If Fed can get to YE #1 again, he would tie that record of Pete.

Personally I think he should only start worrying about #1 after the US Open. Win that one, then he can take on more tournaments in the Asian and Indoor swings. He should definitely skip Canada. Let Rafa run himself into the ground. Winning slams has to be more important than #1. Frankly if Pete continues to hold the YE #1 record it's going to look pretty irrelevant in comparison to being 6 slams behind Roger

 

[mrzz]

After playing in IW nicely, Fed was kind of lucky to win in Miami with
difficult matches against Kyrgios and Berdych. So, he was getting tired (either physically or in terms of ability to maintain focus).
IW & Miami while being back to back tourneys are actually much better as they both are spread over 12 days or so. But, Canada and
Cincy are back to back tourneys which happen in just a week. So, he might actually be even more tired.

That´s a really important point -- one which I instantly agreed with when I read it the first time, and the one I think is the best argument for not playing Canada. But then I remembered that, yes, the Berdych match was Federer´s worst, but the Kyrgios match was designed to be difficult. Kyrgios served like hell, and from the baseline he puts everything back into play (yes, from the baseline he is 99% of the times a pusher, and an efficient one). Anyway my point is that on the Miami final Federer produced one his best displays of tennis of the year, against the other top player of the year (who would go on and win his next 243987439543 matches), on a slow surface, in quite tough conditions -- by the way, as far as 2017 goes, that was the one match I would say you see both players in peak form (to connect with a topic we are discussing in the "25 years body" thread), as the AO final hardly had both guys playing great at the same time.

So, yes, he was lucky to win Miami -- but most of his luck was on the Berdych match (and he got lucky against Berdych on Wimbledon too, at least lucky to win in straights). Against Kyrgios it was the typical tough match against a big server, and in the final, where he was supposed to be the most tired, it was pure effort and merit.

So, again, I would say play Canada, and depending on the outcome (not only the result, but the effort), skip or not Cincinatti.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

There are also other considerations. If he skips Montreal, he gets 4 weeks of continuous rest. On the other hand, if he plays Montreal he gets only 3 weeks of continuous rest. That is another reason to play in Cincy only, if he is going to play only one of them (the main reason being he has been immensely successful in Cincy and has never won Montreal).

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Oh, finally the Montreal tourney starts on Aug. 7th and Fed's birthday is Aug. 8th. Another reason to skip it and celebrate at home.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Montreal draw ceremony is scheduled for 4 p.m. on Friday, the 4th of August. If Fed plans to drop out, I am sure he will do so before the draw ceremony to avoid the hassles of rebalancing the draw etc for the organizers. Actually, I expect an announcement coming Monday. Sometimes the tournament organizers request top players to delay the public announcement (of dropping out) to ensure ticket sales (even though the player has already decided and communicated it behind the scenes to the tourney organizers).

At this time, Montreal scenario looks as follows w.r.t. big four.

1. Novak - Definite No
2. Rafa - Definite Yes
3. Fed - Leaning No
4. Andy - Leaning Yes

 

[Busted]

OK folks, here's a chart to help us visualize this. Obviously red is Roger, orange is Rafa. I probably should have used colors that were more different,but I usually use those in my various charts. Anyhow, dark is "probable," light is "maybe." For Roger probably is Cincy, USO, Shanghai, Basel, WTF, with Canada and Paris as maybes. For Rafa, probable is pretty much everything, although it is unclear whether he'll actually play all that he's signed up for. I also wasn't sure about Basel, as I found conflicting info. Oh yeah, the tournaments with black background are big ones.

The reason I made this chart is that I wanted to compare their paths, including possible points, and also see how many weeks off Roger will have, depending upon what he plays. The fact that he's got a week between Cincy and the USO--coupled with the possibility that if he doesn't play Canada or Paris, Rafa could have as many as 2,5000 more possible points--makes me think that he should just go for Canada.

At the very least, I think Roger should and will play one of Canada and Paris, which would give him 7,000 possible points. Chances are Rafa won't play all of those tournaments, but if he does--and with his current 500ish point lead--it means Roger still has to out-play him by as many as 2,000 points. If he doesn't play either of Can/Paris, then it could be as many as 3,000.

So if Roger plays less, then the pressure is on to run the table, ie, win the tournaments, rather than just make the semis or finals. The good news is it's all hard courts from here on in - not exactly Nadal's strong suit. What's his record - 16 wins in 40 hard court finals? That's 40%. About what Roger's rate is on clay due to losing so many clay finals to Nadal.

Question - how badly does Nadal want to win the Tour Finals? A major blemish on his career record - he's NEVER won it. Roger has 6, Djokovic has 5...and even Murray has 1.

 

[Busted]

There are also other considerations. If he skips Montreal, he gets 4 weeks of continuous rest. On the other hand, if he plays Montreal he gets only 3 weeks of continuous rest. That is another reason to play in Cincy only, if he is going to play only one of them (the main reason being he has been immensely successful in Cincy and has never won Montreal).

I'm all for Roger skipping Montreal - but conversely he risks another Stuttgart/Dubai loss at Cinci and then would not have another tournament to play before the US Open. But, if he plays Toronto and loses early, then he's still got Cinci as a tune up.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Roger should play Canada. I am sure he is rested enough, what with not having lost a set in Wimby, on a surface where points end quicker. Just get in there, win a couple matches or not, get the hardcourt legs going, aim for a good showing in Cincy. Rest is great but momentum is good also, no? The worst case scenario is he wins both Canada and Cincy and is really tired for the Open but how bad is that really?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I'm all for Roger skipping Montreal - but conversely he risks another Stuttgart/Dubai loss at Cinci and then would not have another tournament to play before the US Open. But, if he plays Toronto and loses early, then he's still got Cinci as a tune up.

He would be fine for USO, even if he loses early in Cincy. GSs always offer couple of weak opponents and you can play yourself into form. The danger of exhaustion due to going deep both in Montreal and Cincy is far greater risk. Look what happened in 2014. He was clearly tired at USO, after going deep in both tourneys. Had a five setter with a clown and then lost out to Cilic.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Roger should play Canada. I am sure he is rested enough, what with not having lost a set in Wimby, on a surface where points end quicker. Just get in there, win a couple matches or not, get the hardcourt legs going, aim for a good showing in Cincy. Rest is great but momentum is good also, no? The worst case scenario is he wins both Canada and Cincy and is really tired for the Open but how bad is that really?

You probably have vested interests living in Canada.

Rest of us prefer he gets #20 right now when things are hot, than he winning Montreal.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

You probably have vested interests living in Canada.

Rest of us prefer he gets #20 right now when things are hot, than he winning Montreal.

Of course I do! I would love to see the guy here again! Not many chance left you know

But, I would also like him to close the gap on Masters titles. Even though I believe it is hugely skewed because there isn't even one grass masters, I would like him to grab a couple more of those while grabbing is still happening

 

[Moxie]

Of course I do! I would love to see the guy here again! Not many chance left you know

But, I would also like him to close the gap on Masters titles. Even though I believe it is hugely skewed because there isn't even one grass masters, I would like him to grab a couple more of those while grabbing is still happening

You're right to want him to play in Canada, if you get to see him. Fair enough. I get the arguments against him playing it, though. As to MS and his title count, I don't think you should worry about that. He's got loads of other resume buffers. I think to say "hugely skewed" because there isn't a grass MS1000 is a bit exaggerated. 6 of the 9 are on HC and 1 is on indoor HC, great surfaces for Roger. You can't say he's been under-served in opportunity. Nadal and Djokovic are currently tied at 30 each. Given that some folks like to call Rafa a glorified clay-courter, I'd say he's over-achieved in the MS. I think Roger's legacy will survive if he has under-achieved there.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

You're right to want him to play in Canada, if you get to see him. Fair enough. I get the arguments against him playing it, though. As to MS and his title count, I don't think you should worry about that. He's got loads of other resume buffers. I think to say "hugely skewed" because there isn't a grass MS1000 is a bit exaggerated. 6 of the 9 are on HC and 1 is on indoor HC, great surfaces for Roger. You can't say he's been under-served in opportunity. Nadal and Djokovic are currently tied at 30 each. Given that some folks like to call Rafa a glorified clay-courter, I'd say he's over-achieved in the MS. I think Roger's legacy will survive if he has under-achieved there.

Let me put it this way, Roger does not have a Masters 1000 tournament on his best surface. Everyone else does. Rafa has his beloved clay, Nole has his beloved slow hards. Roger is pretty good on every surface , don't get me wrong, but you tell me how many more masters titles would Roger have if there was just ONE grass masters. A VERY conservative estimate from me would be 4.

 

[mrzz]

^^Not so fast! I for one also think he should play Canada. Said why while ago so won´t bore you guys with repetition.

Oh, and in fairness I think Cincy counts as masters on Federer´s best surface...

 

[Moxie]

^^Not so fast! I for one also think he should play Canada. Said why while ago so won´t bore you guys with repetition.

Oh, and in fairness I think Cincy counts as masters on Federer´s best surface...

As does Paris. Shocking how long it took him to win it. That's his "fault," if you like.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

^^Not so fast! I for one also think he should play Canada. Said why while ago so won´t bore you guys with repetition.

Oh, and in fairness I think Cincy counts as masters on Federer´s best surface...

I agree, for the current Masters. But if Halle was a Masters, would you not rank it above Cincy?

 

[Moxie]

Let me put it this way, Roger does not have a Masters 1000 tournament on his best surface. Everyone else does. Rafa has his beloved clay, Nole has his beloved slow hards. Roger is pretty good on every surface , don't get me wrong, but you tell me how many more masters titles would Roger have if there was just ONE grass masters. A VERY conservative estimate from me would be 4.

No, I don't think you get to play that game. Giving Roger a MS on grass just because. As I pointed out above, Indoor HC is probably his second-favorite, and it took him ages to win Paris-Bercy. No guarantees for the grass one. And I'm sorry, but I don't have a pity party for him that he hasn't won more MS on HC. He's won 10 Majors on HC. It's not like he's weak there. He just didn't win more. I'll make my point again...the impressive one is Nadal, who only has 3 MS/year on his favorite surface. And yet he is tied for most. What does this tell us?