Tennis Thread - Official

[Jimmy?]

Come on Andy!! I'm looking forward to this one 

[Gnrfan]

Come on Andy!! I'm looking forward to this one 

Thats what i like.

I'm really hoping he wins. Especially coz Ignatius will shame me if he doesn't. Personally i think Federer in 4 or 5 but Andy has got to win the first to win i think.

[Gnrfan]

Man i'm really looking forward to this Murray vs Federer match.

Britain hasn't had a Grand Slam winner for like 70 years... so we are due. I just hope Murray plays close to how he played against Nadal. coz he'll have a chance if he does.

I really feel like i can't lose tonight. I'm a huge Federer fan and would really like him to go past Sampras in Grand Slam titles and hopefully win the french at some point (if Nadal feels like playing like a mortal on clay one year) and go down as the best ever. So i'd be happy to see Federer's doubters put to rest.

And then there is Murray and i think he really deserves to be in the final and these chances won't come along every year for him, so i'd like him to get a grand slam under his belt so he doesn't have the type of pressure that Henman had all his career.

However at the start of the year Federer was looking to beat Nadal in the French and Retain his Australian title and maintain his two strong holds of Wimbledon & US Open. He lost his Australian crown to Djokovic, failed to beat Nadal again at the French and even lost his strong hold on Wimbledon to Nadal so the US Open is the last thing he has left so if he loses to Murray after losing to Djokovic and Nadal then i think Federer will start to worry that there are 3 other guys around him who can beat him.

I hope we see a great match.

[Jimmy?]

Fed breaks Murray, dang! Fed's gonna take this first set now 

[Gnrfan]

Jesus. Where are all these Federer mis-hits i've been hearing about.

Fed is playing brilliant. Murray has gotta get his serve going. or its gonna be all over quickly. Federer looks frsh from his days off.

[Jimmy?]

Jesus. Where are all these Federer mis-hits i've been hearing about.

Fed is playing brilliant. Murray has gotta get his serve going. or its gonna be all over quickly. Federer looks frsh from his days off.

Agreed. Fed looks a class apart tbh.

[Gnrfan]

Fed got lucky in that game. Murray should of challenged coz he would have had the break.

He's played better this set so far.... Maybe coz Federer isn't serving as well this set

[Gnrfan]

Just shows you how important line peoples jobs are and the challenge system. If he had challenged that call at 2-2 it would be one set each right now.

Its gonna be hard from here

[Jimmy?]

Match over tbh, Fed won't let this slip now.......

[Gnrfan]

Match over tbh, Fed won't let this slip now.......

No its gonna extremley tough now.

The only solace i have is aside from 4 games in the middle of the 2nd set Federer has been awesome. Its great to see him coming back to some of his best form.

[Gnrfan]

Oh well, Murray had a brilliant two weeks underlining how good he can be. Finally beating Nadal in his most impressive display of his career

Its a shame he didn't play as well in the final as he did in the Semi but i think credit has to go to Federer who was just awesome. Murray fought hard to the end. Anyone else sense a comeback when he made it 5-2 in the last haha. He just never gives up. He just didn't serve well enough to have a chance today. and i'm not sure how good he knee is by the end... but thats not why he lost.

Hopefully he'll get another chance at some point next year. But i think Nadal might find an onslaught of pressure from Federer now. Coz i think anyone would have had been beaten by Federer today.

And all of a sudden a poor season from Federer turns into a pretty impressive one.... 1 grand slam, two grand slam final apperences, one semi final and lets not forget a Gold Medal.

I feel bad for Murray coz thats the best Federer has played this year (well thats what they are saying on TV) and not many players can live with that type of form.

Form is temporary, Class is permenant - The King Is Back

[A Private Eye]

Federer was just too good today, Murray will get other opportunities, I think this is just the beginning for him really. I think Federer had a point to prove and nobody was going to stop him, he wants to be the no.1 again and on that display, he is.

[Gnrfan]

Federer was just too good today, Murray will get other opportunities, I think this is just the beginning for him really. I think Federer had a point to prove and nobody was going to stop him, he wants to be the no.1 again and on that display, he is.

Only Nadal could possibly live with Federer in that form.... and on hard court i don't think even he could.

Federer was brilliant. And i hope you're right, and Murray gets more chances. Grand Slams chances don't come along too often. Unless your name is Roger Federer

[Ignatius]

I agree Nadal is the best player in the world. I'm just saying that sometimes he plays well and loses. Nadal played like crap in the first two sets but i refuse to believe that he played crap yesterday.

Again, I don't think he played brilliant. None of his strokes seemed to hurt Murray at all...not even the forehand, nothing. Nadal doesnt have the strokes FedEx has but man, if you see Nadal at RG or Wimbly he looked like a totally different player.

No i do understand.

i'm sure it affects him, But i'm saying its not an excuse for last nights tennis. Are you telling me that Rafa Nadal is sooooo tired he can't manage 1 and a half sets after 24 hours rest?

and you're right its One of the reasons he lost.

Well, we don't seem to agree on this one...fitness for me it's a crucial factor when you are playing tennis at this level, Nadal just doesnt have it now. Even if he had played the semis tomorrow instead of sunday, he would've been tired. He just needs some time off to get that fitness back.

Well you do the same with Nadal. I'm saying if they play 100% Nadal will win 9 out of 10 times... But what i'm also saying is that Nadal only has to be at 90% on Hard Courts for Murray to be able to beat him. None of this 60% rubbish. Thats like saying Murray can only beat Nadal if Nadal is half the player. and i think thats taking away from how good Murray was.

I'm not saying that, but you make it sound like Murray is almost at the same level as Nadal is now in Hard Courts and I believe is still too early to make such a statement. It seems like you are the one taking away credit from Nadal's accomplishments in Hard Courts. Murray has had a good few months winning a big tournament and reaching the later rounds in another two. But it's too early to say Murray is on the same level than Rafa, Roger or Novak. I'd love to see Murray battling with these three next year so we could have the most exciting season of all time, but I think it's not there yet. The big three are still a long way from the rest of the pack.,

I have never said that Murray is as good as Nadal... Not once. In Fact i have said several time that Nadal is the best player in the world. But he is now at the stage in his career that on Hard Courts he can beat Nadal, Djokovic & Federer. You have to remember that Nadal has a 4 year head start on Murray in terms of his Pro career and i believe it was only this year that Nadal won any major aside from the french and some might say that as well as Nadal has played, Federer has played worse.

Murray will never acheive what Nadal has IMO and i have never said he will. But tournament wins are wins when you play the quality type of player that Murray has.

True, but he's  won 7 major Hard court tournaments (Olympics included and 4 Master Series), reached the Wimbledon final three times (winning one)  at the young age of 22. 2/3 of his 31 titles have come on clay, but Nadal keeps proving he's not just the king of clay. This year don't forget he was the king of Grass too and prior to the US open, he was also the king of hard courts.

Please dont get aggressive with comments like "Get Your facts right" if yours are not. its a conversation. I enjoy talking about Tennis with you on here coz you are passionate about it like me. But i wont bother if you get aggressive. i'm allowed my own opinion like you are. I don't need the hassle. Just getting that straight.

And you are so very right here. I apologise. I do get carried away a bit... I do also enjoy talking to you about tennis...I thought I was the only one here who liked the game! It's great to discuss tennis with another GNRfan   

Yeah if you compare him to Murray... a guy who has only become a big threat this year. Right now Nadal is the king of Clay, Federer is the best grass player and you'd have to say that Federer is the best Hard court player. i think thats undeniable. Nadal has made huge strides on Grass and improved alot on Hard courts but you couldn't say he was the best on anything other than clay! I mean if you're talking Hard Court Grand Slams he hasn't won anything more than Murray. Maybe its just due to his 2nd half of season tiredness but Grand Slams are Grand Slams.

I can say this year Nadal is the king of all surfaces. He's got the best results (with the exception of the US open) in all surfaces. Clay, Grass and Hard Courts. He didnt win the US open, but he won the Olympics, Toronto, reached a MS final in Miami and four other Semi finals (AO, US, Indian Wells and Cincy)



-----------

And about the final...well, FedEX was too good. I hadnt seen him playing this level since sets 3 and 4 in the Wimbledon final. Forehand was too fast, solid backhand, effective slice, serve..he had it all.

I do believe Muray's game plan was maybe a little off. With Nadal he really went for it, he was taking the ball early and being agressive from the start. Against Federer he showed a more conservative plan. I remember in Dubai this year, when Andy beat FedEX, there was a bit of controversy in the press conference cause Roger said Andy had not evolved and still was a moonballer and a conservative player. Maybe, Murray tried the same game plan or maybe FedEx was just too good to even let Andy have a game plan. Either way, Roger was just brilliant.

There was a few games in the second set in which Murray was playing better, but it didnt last long. That "call" gnrfan refers too it was not really decissive in the match. He was talking to Bernad?s about it wondering why it wasnt overuled. He could've stopped the point and get the electronic assistance if he was so sure that ball was out...and he didnt.

We have exciting months coming up for tennis. Nadal is up by 1000 points in the rankings. He doesnt have too many points to defend, so all he can do is add some more eventhough I dont think he'll play many tournaments. Fedex has the Master Cup and Basilea title to defend, also a runner up show in Madrid last year. It'll be very difficult for Nadal to lose the number one spot, but we'll see.

[Gnrfan]

True, but he's  won 7 major Hard court tournaments (Olympics included and 4 Master Series), reached the Wimbledon final three times (winning one)  at the young age of 22. 2/3 of his 31 titles have come on clay, but Nadal keeps proving he's not just the king of clay. This year don't forget he was the king of Grass too and prior to the US open, he was also the king of hard courts.

I can say this year Nadal is the king of all surfaces. He's got the best results (with the exception of the US open) in all surfaces. Clay, Grass and Hard Courts. He didnt win the US open, but he won the Olympics, Toronto, reached a MS final in Miami and four other Semi finals (AO, US, Indian Wells and Cincy)

Nadal has been the best player on tour this year by far and has earned that No1 position he has. But when i call someone King Of Clay... i do so with a "Live Forever" attitude. If i'm right (and i'm no expert here) But only Borg has more French Open wins than Nadal, but i think we all expect at least another 4 or 5 years of Nadal dominence on Clay whuch would mean he would be out on his own. I believe he has only lost 1 match on clay since winning the first french and that was to Federer (again i could be wrong) and has never lost at Roland Garos, which is simply amazing and he will go down as undoubtably the greatest Clay court player of all time. Thats why he is "King Of Clay" its not to say he isn't good on Grass or Hard Courts but his Slam records don't put him up there with others.

To be "King Of Grass" i think you have to have a spell of dominance like Borg, Sampras & Federer have had. I mean if Federer beat Nadal in the French next year... he'd hardly be "King Of Clay" would he? I Mean Sampras won i think 7 Wimbledons in 8 years and Borg and Federer won 5 in a row. Now to Win Wimbledon is a fantastic feat and Nadal was better than Federer this year but i think he has to do a little more to be up there with those other 3 guys in the "King Of Grass" category.

And the same goes for Hard Courts, Nadal has had a standout year on all surfaces, and i'm not saying its finished either with Shanghai coming up. But despite all his Masters events won he hasn't won that Hard Court Slam yet. He has made great improvments getting to two Semi-Finals, losing to Tsonga and Murray, and who knows maybe next year will be like this year for grass and he'll break that duck (it does only seem a matter of time). But Federer has just won his 5th straight US Open and he has won 3 out of the last 5 Oz Opens, so its hard not to put Federer in that Category with the likes of Connors, Agassi & Sampras. Being the "King Of A Surface" to me isn't about one year its about 4 or 5 years of dominance.

I understand why you think "King Of Clay" is disrespectful, you think it makes him look like a one-trick pony.... which we all knwo he is not. But its hard for me to agree that he is the "King Of Every Surface" when he didn't win a Hard Court Slam and only took ot his 1st Wimbledon.

And you are so very right here. I apologise. I do get carried away a bit... I do also enjoy talking to you about tennis...I thought I was the only one here who liked the game! It's great to discuss tennis with another GNRfan   

I do too. So not to worry. Its better than not caring.

And about the final...well, FedEX was too good. I hadnt seen him playing this level since sets 3 and 4 in the Wimbledon final. Forehand was too fast, solid backhand, effective slice, serve..he had it all.

Agreed. He just moved Murray too well. And that serve was just awesome.

I do believe Muray's game plan was maybe a little off. With Nadal he really went for it, he was taking the ball early and being agressive from the start. Against Federer he showed a more conservative plan. I remember in Dubai this year, when Andy beat FedEX, there was a bit of controversy in the press conference cause Roger said Andy had not evolved and still was a moonballer and a conservative player. Maybe, Murray tried the same game plan or maybe FedEx was just too good to even let Andy have a game plan. Either way, Roger was just brilliant.

To be honest i think Andy was suprised at how well Federer played him from the Baseline. I think he thought once the rallies get going from the baseline he would win as many as he lost. But that wasn't the case and i think he was going for shots but found his serve under more pressure than the match against Nadal especially 2nd serve. Plus his service % was down. For him to have beaten Federer he was going to have to match Federer in the serve and Federer was too good on serve.

I think it was the first time i've seen Murray dominated this year on Hard courts. I mean people have beaten him but not like that.

Also i think Federer net play was great. I remember earlier in the tournamnet that Llodra did well against Murray by coming in to net alot. and i think with Federer's net game Murray found it extremely hard to pass him. In fact i can only remember 3 passes in the entire match. He couldn't get his lob going like he has this tournament and Federer punished him.

But i still maintain that if he had of challenged that call at 2-2 in the 2nd he would of made it one set each. But for some reason didn't challenge when it was 15-40 on Federer's serve.

There was a few games in the second set in which Murray was playing better, but it didnt last long. That "call" gnrfan refers too it was not really decissive in the match. He was talking to Bernad?s about it wondering why it wasnt overuled. He could've stopped the point and get the electronic assistance if he was so sure that ball was out...and he didnt.

I know. its his own fault. But i think it was decisive as far as that set went. He took out his next 3 service games easily. To be honest i think that period in the middle was more Federer hitting some unforced errors, than Murray playing better. I don't think he played badly, i just think Federer looked fresher and made Murray play his game.

We have exciting months coming up for tennis. Nadal is up by 1000 points in the rankings. He doesnt have too many points to defend, so all he can do is add some more eventhough I dont think he'll play many tournaments. Fedex has the Master Cup and Basilea title to defend, also a runner up show in Madrid last year. It'll be very difficult for Nadal to lose the number one spot, but we'll see.

No he won't lose it this year barring a nightmare, but i think Federer will be closer than many expected by the end of the year. I think Tennis is just golden right now. Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Roddick, Ferrer, DavyDenko, Blake, Nalbandian & Del Potro... so much talent around, which shows just how good Nadal and Federer have been this year.

Murray is up to 4th now. Along way behind the top 3 but i'm hoping that he has 2 or 3 years of staying 4th to 6th in the Rankings and doesn't get consumed by breaking that top 3 coz thats gonna be hard.

I dont really understand how the rankings work but i'm pretty sure that Nadal will be No1 at the end of the year.... but i'm really looking forward to seeing Murray in the Masters Cup this year. I just feel its where he belongs... up there with the big guns of the game.

[Ignatius]

I understand why you think "King Of Clay" is disrespectful, you think it makes him look like a one-trick pony.... which we all knwo he is not. But its hard for me to agree that he is the "King Of Every Surface" when he didn't win a Hard Court Slam and only took ot his 1st Wimbledon.

I didnt say he was the king of grass or Hard courts in general, I said he's the king of GRASS, Hard Courts and Clay this year. It'd be dumb for me to put Nadal on the same level as Sampras, FedEX or Borg on grass. Nadal has just won one Wimbly, that's why the "This year" is so important.

To be honest i think Andy was suprised at how well Federer played him from the Baseline. I think he thought once the rallies get going from the baseline he would win as many as he lost. But that wasn't the case and i think he was going for shots but found his serve under more pressure than the match against Nadal especially 2nd serve. Plus his service % was down. For him to have beaten Federer he was going to have to match Federer in the serve and Federer was too good on serve.

I think it was the first time i've seen Murray dominated this year on Hard courts. I mean people have beaten him but not like that.

Also i think Federer net play was great. I remember earlier in the tournamnet that Llodra did well against Murray by coming in to net alot. and i think with Federer's net game Murray found it extremely hard to pass him. In fact i can only remember 3 passes in the entire match. He couldn't get his lob going like he has this tournament and Federer punished him.

I really believe Murray didnt have the same plan against Federer than he did agains Rafa. With Rafa, he had a head to head of 0-5... with Roger it was 2-1. He was certain he needed to step up his game with Rafa and maybe change his strategy if he wanted to win, with Roger he may have felt he could've won playing the same tennis he did 6 months ago in Dubai against him. It'd make perfect sense if that crossed his mind.

Then again, I don't really know. Andy didnt serve as good as he did against Rafa and it looked like he wasnt really going for the shots either with Fedex, but that's an impression of mine.

I don't think Federer was so great at the net. He was good, but not flawless, he missed not a few number of what appeared to be easy volleys. Volleys he didnt miss 2 years ago.

But i still maintain that if he had of challenged that call at 2-2 in the 2nd he would of made it one set each. But for some reason didn't challenge when it was 15-40 on Federer's serve.

That's pure speculation and you know it..it's like saying if Murray had won the first set he would've gotten his chance. There's always an IF this would've happened...

Also, we dont really know if that call was really in or out. How can you be so certain it was out? Did I miss an unofficial replay?? I remember I want to the bathroom for a few mins, did they show it? If they didnt, it's really impossible to know if that call was in or out... to me it hit the line, but I couldnt really put my money on it. if Andy was so certain, he could've stopped the point and use the challenge, he would've lost the point though if the ball had been in though.

Maybe he thought the ball is still on play it'd risky to challenge since it was not a clear winner by Roger.

See, you cant have it both ways and Andy knew it. If you think it's out, challenge it. Otherwise don't complain once the game is over...this is why they have now have the Electronic aid, to avoid possible mistakes line judges could possibly make. However, we still dont really know if that ball was in or not.

I know. its his own fault. But i think it was decisive as far as that set went. He took out his next 3 service games easily. To be honest i think that period in the middle was more Federer hitting some unforced errors, than Murray playing better. I don't think he played badly, i just think Federer looked fresher and made Murray play his game.

Yeah, but that doesnt prove anything. Those three games could've a totally different outcome if Murray had won that game (when they were 2-2). Future doesnt always bring the same result if you change the past. That's speculation and it's not based on anything substancial. I understand what you are trying to say, but I do not agree simply because tennis is not 2+2=4.

No he won't lose it this year barring a nightmare, but i think Federer will be closer than many expected by the end of the year. I think Tennis is just golden right now. Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Roddick, Ferrer, DavyDenko, Blake, Nalbandian & Del Potro... so much talent around, which shows just how good Nadal and Federer have been this year.

Amazing talent. It's really a shame that "El gordo" Nalbandian doesnt really have the mind for this game. He's just as talented as Federer but doesnt really have the discipline, commitment, compromise and right mind set for this. Last year he destroyed the big three twice in Madrid and Paris walking away with both titles without losing a set...but this year, he does nothing (AGAIN).

I dont really understand how the rankings work but i'm pretty sure that Nadal will be No1 at the end of the year.... but i'm really looking forward to seeing Murray in the Masters Cup this year. I just feel its where he belongs... up there with the big guns of the game.

I do. It's kind complicated..but basically, if you win let's say Wimbledon, you get 1000 points. The year after, you can only lose points and not gain any since you are the title holder. If you win again, you don't lose any points but you don't add any either. Federer lost this year the number one spot cause he lost more than 300 points in Wimbledon, and a total of 900 points combined in Toronto and Cincy. He doesnt get any points from the US open cause he won it las year.

Next year Nadal will face a very difficult time to hold the number one spot. Look at the amount of points he must defend in order to retain it.


About the Master Cup I really cant wait either. We have the big three + Murray and dont forget Roddick, Davidenko and possibly Del Potro. It'll be a hell of a tournamente for sure.

I'll definitely be in London for the 2009 Masters Cup.

[Gnrfan]

Also, we dont really know if that call was really in or out. How can you be so certain it was out? Did I miss an unofficial replay?? I remember I want to the bathroom for a few mins, did they show it?

No they didn't but the English commentry team saw it on playback and told the viewers that it was out

I do. It's kind complicated..but basically, if you win let's say Wimbledon, you get 1000 points. The year after, you can only lose points and not gain any since you are the title holder. If you win again, you don't lose any points but you don't add any either. Federer lost this year the number one spot cause he lost more than 300 points in Wimbledon, and a total of 900 points combined in Toronto and Cincy. He doesnt get any points from the US open cause he won it las year.

Next year Nadal will face a very difficult time to hold the number one spot. Look at the amount of points he must defend in order to retain it.


About the Master Cup I really cant wait either. We have the big three + Murray and dont forget Roddick, Davidenko and possibly Del Potro. It'll be a hell of a tournamente for sure.

I'll definitely be in London for the 2009 Masters Cup.

Oh right so if you have a good year... then you have to be even better the next year really. Jesus that makes hanging on to No1 extremly hard. and makes Federer's run pretty incredible

So what happens to the points at the end of the year? Does it just carry over? Or does it start again?

[Ignatius]

No they didn't but the English commentry team saw it on playback and told the viewers that it was out

Not the most objective commentry team...or is it? 

There has not been an British GS winner in God knows how long...the english are a bit biased with their tennis players. It's understandable though, now it seems like Andy can really go far in GS's and has a much solid chance than Rusedsky or Henman ever did. But the english commentators go a little bit too far when it comes to their players.

I was actually in London the day Nadal played Murray in the Wimbledon quaters this year and the expectations were unreal. They were hyped up cause andy had come back from a 2 set to love deficit against Gasquet (awesome match) and thought Nadal could've been next. Even when Nadal was winning one set to love and a break in the second, still the english commentators broadcasted the match like Murray was right there in the money. Thanx God Jhonny Mac was there to put some comon sense back 

Oh right so if you have a good year... then you have to be even better the next year really. Jesus that makes hanging on to No1 extremly hard. and makes Federer's run pretty incredible

So what happens to the points at the end of the year? Does it just carry over? Or does it start again?

Basically, yeah. Not only you must have an outstanding year to reach the number 1 spot but the follow up (year) has to be at least just as good to retain the throne. The points carry over year after year. If the year ended today, Nadal would have 7000 points, Fedex 6000, The Djoker 5100... Starting next year, the players HAVE to defend the points they've earned in 2008 so they dont lose points. I give you an example, Djokivc won the AO in 2008, so he has to defend in 2009 1000 points. If he wins the title, he will not add nor lose any points, but if he doesnt win, he'll lose some points. How many? well, it depends on which round does he fall. If he makes it to the final but gets defeated, he'll lose aprx 350 points (as a final in a GS tournament is worth 680 points). If he loses in the semis, he'll lose 600 points, if he loses in the quaters, he'll lose 750 points...

This applies also to Nadal, Federer all players. That's why Nadal has a tough year ahead in 2009 to defend the points he gained in 2008. Fortunately, the first quarter of 2009 he wont have to defend many points cause he didnt win that many. From April 2009 until sept 2009, Nadal will have to defend at least 4000 points.

Federe's run was simply unreal from 2005-2007. He lost the throne in 2008 cause he lost a lot of points in Wimbly, Hamburg, Toronto and Cincy.

Oh..I forgot to mention. You know there are two rankings. First is the entry system, which is the one that COUNTS for the ATP and all the seeds in every tournament are set using the entry system. Nadal is first with 7000 points, Federer is second,..

Then you have the RACE rankings. All players start from zero each and every year and doesnt take into consideration the points you gained the previous year. This ranking is the one  ATP uses to determine who'll play the Master CUP in November. The top 8 players from this ranking, will go to the Master CUP.- Nadal tops this ranking too with 1275 points, Federer has 920 and Djoker has 875. Murray is 4th 520.

Normally both rankings would be VERY much alike, however, some players are on the ATP rankings - Nalbandian - on the top 10, but they are not in the RACE ranking cause this year they have not done crap. Nalbandian is on the top 10 because he won the last two master series tournaments last year, but he will fall off the top 20 again when the year is over.

[Gnrfan]

No they didn't but the English commentry team saw it on playback and told the viewers that it was out

Not the most objective commentry team...or is it? 

No but all commentry teams have access to the playback (i.e. Hawkeye) for all points.

Oh right so if you have a good year... then you have to be even better the next year really. Jesus that makes hanging on to No1 extremly hard. and makes Federer's run pretty incredible

So what happens to the points at the end of the year? Does it just carry over? Or does it start again?

Basically, yeah. Not only you must have an outstanding year to reach the number 1 spot but the follow up (year) has to be at least just as good to retain the throne. The points carry over year after year. If the year ended today, Nadal would have 7000 points, Fedex 6000, The Djoker 5100... Starting next year, the players HAVE to defend the points they've earned in 2008 so they dont lose points. I give you an example, Djokivc won the AO in 2008, so he has to defend in 2009 1000 points. If he wins the title, he will not add nor lose any points, but if he doesnt win, he'll lose some points. How many? well, it depends on which round does he fall. If he makes it to the final but gets defeated, he'll lose aprx 350 points (as a final in a GS tournament is worth 680 points). If he loses in the semis, he'll lose 600 points, if he loses in the quaters, he'll lose 750 points...

This applies also to Nadal, Federer all players. That's why Nadal has a tough year ahead in 2009 to defend the points he gained in 2008. Fortunately, the first quarter of 2009 he wont have to defend many points cause he didnt win that many. From April 2009 until sept 2009, Nadal will have to defend at least 4000 points.

Federe's run was simply unreal from 2005-2007. He lost the throne in 2008 cause he lost a lot of points in Wimbly, Hamburg, Toronto and Cincy.

Oh..I forgot to mention. You know there are two rankings. First is the entry system, which is the one that COUNTS for the ATP and all the seeds in every tournament are set using the entry system. Nadal is first with 7000 points, Federer is second,..

Then you have the RACE rankings. All players start from zero each and every year and doesnt take into consideration the points you gained the previous year. This ranking is the one  ATP uses to determine who'll play the Master CUP in November. The top 8 players from this ranking, will go to the Master CUP.- Nadal tops this ranking too with 1275 points, Federer has 920 and Djoker has 875. Murray is 4th 520.

Normally both rankings would be VERY much alike, however, some players are on the ATP rankings - Nalbandian - on the top 10, but they are not in the RACE ranking cause this year they have not done crap. Nalbandian is on the top 10 because he won the last two master series tournaments last year, but he will fall off the top 20 again when the year is over.

Oh right i get it. thanks for that. i understand the race but didn't the rankings. cheers

[estebanf]

Argentina and Spain reached Davis Cup final. It will be played in Argentina from 21 to 23 of november.

Argentina is a VERY strong team in clay, but guess what, Spain is undefeatable on that surface.

So, we will have to make a huge decision: betraying our roots, putting an extremely fast surface like indoor-carpet (a surface we DO NOT like, IN A FINAL) or trying to defeat Spain in clay, which is like trying to beat Reggie Miller on a 3 point contest at the Conseco Fieldhouse.

I think the proper decision would be the indoor-carpet. Nalbandian is a very strong player at ultra-fast surfaces, and Del Potro plays exactly the same in every surface. He can make his serve do the talking. Even though Ferrer and Nadal are extraordinary players, I think Argentina's gonna have the adventage in that surface, and with the incentive of playing at home.

None of these countries have strong doubles. It will be a very tough series. I think we will win 3-2 

Nalbandian no est? gordo, Ignatius. Est? muy repleto de talento!