FIRST!!!!!!!!!

SECOND!!!!!!

THIRD!!!!!

FOURTH!!!

OLYMPIC GOLD!!!! YAYA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think this suggestion is good... on paper.

If Roger wins either a gold medal and the USO - he'll do everything within his power to get the number 1 ranking before the end of the year, and he'll have a chance to do it - he won't give it up.

If he loses, especially the open - skipping the entire indoor season but Basel and the TMC would cause such a 'retirement' frenzy around him, I doubt he'd have any peace.

I think he should end the year on his own terms, which means playing it out and hopefully getting good wins and confidence along the way, and recover in the off season. If he loses in those tournaments early, he'll have time for a breather anyway.

In response to "if.."

yes.

Answer to if question: No, to the vacation after the USO but play only the Masters tournaments, Basel, and the YEC. 4 total tournaments. In addition, cancel those exhibition matches after the season is over even though it is a healthy payday. But, Roger has all the money that he ever will need in his lifetime so he needs to shut it down after YEC and take his vacation and get back to his off season routine. I think playing exos in 2007 hurt his 2008 preparation along with catching mono.

cibulkova looks so cute in that photo.

wouldnt that two handle racket be considered cheating??

Woah~! Dinara looks absolutely enormous in that picture. How tall is she??

Good post Ed. I am of 2 minds on this. On the one hand the battering that Roger is now taking regarding his results since the Wimby loss must be taking its toll on him. On the other hand, if he decides to take time off it will do one of 2 things: make the rest of the ATP think that they really do have his number and 2 he will start thinking too much about when he returns to the tour. Right now I think Roger is in a no win situation. Damned if he sits out the rest of the season and damned if he decides to stick to his schedule. I really dont think there are any easy solutions to Roger's conundrum. On a selfish personal note, I would prefer he plays because I just love to watch him play. On a more logical note and as a committed fan I think he should take the time off.

Year-end #1 is what counts so I agree with Or. If he comes back roaring at the USO then he should give it a shot.

If...interesting idea and I like it. The guy needs the rest he didn't take with his mono, and I think the mono is still affecting him. I can't see Roger skipping the indoors however.

Your comment that you will hold off on bold statements about Safina until she plays a Williams at night in Ashe was absolutely perfect. Safina is the talk of the tour right now. But the Williams and Sharapova are hurt enough that they aren't playing, and Ivanovic and Jankovic are hurt but playing. I think Safina belongs in the mix with those players but she still has to prove it when/if they are healthy.

It is probably good to have the mental break, if he needs it. The physical break might not be good. He might gain weight, lose match fitness and instincts. Basel is an easy tournament for him.

Nice letter to Roger, Ed. :)

I'm not ready to answer the "If..." question. I'm in denial...possibly joined by Fed on this. :)

I agree with Or. While it seems a logical plan, taking a break would do nothing for his confidence. I'm reminded of the beginning of the season, when folks were convinced he needed to take some time off to fully recover from mono. He thought otherwise - believed that he needed to play through the recovery process and get more matches under his belt. Ostensibly, it worked. Had he not done so, we might not have seen him in all of those finals (including at RG and Wimbles).

"The score was also emblematic of how close their games resemble one another's."

Huh? You should look closer. Murray plays nothing like Djokovic does. Just because two players both have good groundstrokes and like to play the drop shot doesn't mean their games are similar. Murray's court-craft and variety of shot, especially with regard to the change of pace, is far superior to what Djokovic possesses. On the flip side, Djokovic has a better serve and has more powerful groundstrokes, esp. on the forehand wing.

Still, lovely letter, Ed.

"Danish darling destroy Dushivena" I love it. I'm very proud that someone from my part of the world is starting to make waves in the WTA. She's going to make a huge dent in the Russian domination. In regards to Roger, I think he should be given a break, he's far from over and will make a great come back.

I don't see a whole lot of similarity between Djoko and Murray. I think Nole clearly has more power, a vastly superior forehand (although Andy's has improved immeasurably in the last year) that he can hit and a more consistant game which is less likely to break down, whereas Andy has better touch, tactical awareness and a much larger variety of shots. His main problem so far has been that he's probably had too many shots in his repertoir and it has taken him a long time to get the handle on which to use and when to use them.

I think that is what is so exciting about the top 4 (I know Andy's not there yet, but it's a matter of time) is that they aren't clones of each other.

In regards to Safina, I think there are still some question marks until she wins a slam and with all the players out, she might have a chance. I think she will be ranked in the top 5, butn't #1 but good luck to her. I disagree about Roger taking a rest, I think he has to just keep on fighting and never quit.

if i were roger federer, ed, my answer to your question would be

YES

excellent suggestion.

congratulations to my two favourite players, rafa and jelena, for becoming the new world #1's.

re: nole

part of me does not want the old nole to come back. when you were yourself, people hated you for it. now you're more reserved, they wonder where you went. as your fan, i say, stay away. i had the pleasure of enjoying you at the peak of your winning and winsome ways. whatever you do, people will find something to say. stay away and keep yourself safe. i hope your tennis finds a way to be a natural fit to whatever you choose to show on court.

thanks for this post, ed. for some reason, i'm aching a bit for nole today.

I forgot, Congrats to Rafa on being the #1, well earned. I'm not going to comment on the WTA, I'll just leave it at that.

As promised, I'm posting this link in the MNP as well, hoping everyone will benefit from the knowledge therein, and acquire better ways of side-stepping the insidious ways-and-means of the bridge dwellers.

This is a link to a NYT article, and may shed some light on the inner afflictions of those who proclaim themselves Ticktock men:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/magazine/03trolls-t.html?ref=technology

ks

Samantha Elin:

Your misery won't last long becase supposedly JJ will only be number 1 for a week. Once her Toronto points drop off Ivanovic should take it back over, I think.

Thanks Afwu, that does make me feel better, you have a great day.

Ed,

I submitted a nearly identical "prescription for success" on Pete's blog a week ago or so. Yes, Roger could really use some time off to get away from the pressures, to reflect on what he has accomplished, and to regroup and find his passion again. Because without the joy and the passion, he may well not win another Slam.

I think he can overcome the obstacles facing him if he lets go of the quest for #1, reduces his schedule by 5 or 6 events, and focuses his energies on the three Slams. I agree that he does not need Paris Indoors or Stockholm, but it would be great if he'd take Basel and go into the YEC in Shanghai with new-found confidence and a well-healed body and mind.

We talk about surfaces and who the favorites are for the upcoming GS and Olympics. I personally think Federer still should be the favorite for the Olympics and the US Open with Nadal and Djokovic right behind him. I know everyone is convinced that Nadal can't play on hard courts, despite his win in Toronto. I think he can and I don't think either RF or ND are heavy favorites over him for the rest of the summer. But, that is just my opinion.

Odds makers (oddschecker.com) have an interesting take.

RF is favored at the Olympics, then, RN and then, ND.
RN is favored at the US Open, then, RF, and finally ND.
This is interesting. I would've thought whoever was favored at one would be at the other. Also, to have RN favored at the US Open is surprising.

For Australia, it is RF, ND and then RN (funny since the Australian Open is a slower surface than both the Olympics and the US Open and Nadal is supposed to be a better slow court player).
RN is a heavy, heavy favorite at the French, followed by ND and then RF (ND over Rf also surprises me; I know Novak played Nadal tigher than Fed did, but Fed still beat Novak in their only clay court appearance and still is more consistent on clay; ND won in Rome, but that was an abberration in my mind).

And at Wimbledon, it is RN, RF an then ND (again, surprising). I thnk Fed should still be favored.

aH....
I am suppose to be working, but couln't resist reaing your post and now I have to write this:

Ed, that's a very nice letter. The first positive response I have seen to the ranking change. That's how it should be, reminding everyone of Federer's achievements and passing the torch ( since everything has an end), not bashing Fed for his losses and predicting his demise. It is pretty amazing that the last change in the No 1, came 4-5 years ago. Along this road he collected 12 GS titles, 14 MS titkes and broke many recors. Can anyone get even close?

I don't think a vacation is good for Roger. I think Roger needs to know that he is appreciated by the fans and he still has their respect. He needs to know that a bad year was bound to come some day and that will not erase any of his achievements. We don't remember Borg or McEnroe or Lendl for their losses. The same goes for Federer.

A long vacation means a rusty Fed and more bad results. He needs to stay in the competition, focusing on GSs and MS titles , with a complete understanding of his status and what he has done, regardless of the ranking. I want to see a few more RAfa-Fed finals.

seeya next week!

Afwu,
Yea, 300 pts Jelena will lose playing Justine in the finals at Toronto. They took over 2 - 2.5 hrs to play 2 tight sets. After that match, I turned to the Roger/James final in Cincy and Roger already won set 1 and it was a matter of time before he won his 50th career tournament.

if roger wins olympic gold and USO, i guess its better to continue and get back the #1
if he doesn't win US0, i guess rest is a good idea till masters cup..

Though, there are examples of players taking a break and come back and have back "new" and have a great season. So it could be good.

I agree with Cheshire Cat. Murray and Djokovic have different styles, movement, athleticism. Also, Murray's game seems to have adaptibility to it more at this point, Novak's has to impose his steady, good technique to overwhelm by heftiness and force and speed, and consistency.

You know Ed, while I appreciate the thought, I would have waited until the ranking actually exchanged hands to post the obbituary ;-)

Ed: I agree only to the exrent that Roger should drop Stockholm (like a cold potato) and any Davis Cup or exhibition matches he may be scheduled for. But he should definitely play the other 3. Basel goes without saying. But the 2 Masters events are very important, both for his confidence going into Shanghai and for points. Not playing Madris and Paris would seem like an abdication.

And at least keeping #2 (if not regaining #1) is vitally important. Practically, the draw system makes the difference between #2 and #3 far greater than the distance between #1 and #2, since the top 2 players are on opposite sides of the Draw and the placing of #3 is random. Roger does not want to get in the unenviable #3 position (presently Nole's dilemma) of always having to play #1 and #2 back to back (at least on form if they don't lose early) in the SF's and Finals.

A month's rest and recuperation after the USO should be quite sufficient for Roger. Especially if he wins, which I still consider probable. That's true despite the yammerings of the multitudes of rats who've recently been jumping off the S.S. Federer in droves (doubtless they'll be clamoring back on when he wins USO and Shanghai and retakes #1).

Also, if I am Roger Federer then I still want to win everything on earth so my answer is an emphatic, resounding: NO.

He needs to care about Olympics and the US Open and the Masters Cup, and more or less play "well" the rest of the time or he will not be able to finish this year thinking that he did what he could and THAT is going to be a lot more detrimental to someone like Roger -- i.e. a perfectionist -- than a few bad results at Masters Series ever could be. The confidence for the top men comes as much from within as from without, from knowing inside how much effort you've put in and what results you desire/expect from yourself. If he were to substitute that internal confidence with external, based on results and media opinion, he'd be finished soon.

Obviously, I can't know what's really in his head and heart, but that's the way I read his character.

I just don't see the plus-side of Federer taking a break; if his results in Toronto & Cincy betoken some mental breakdown, and this leads to poorer-than-desired results at the Olympics & the USO, shouldn't he keep playing through the rest of the season to work through whatever's ailing him? And if the Masters tournies did betoken that kind of breakdown, but he reverses course at the Olympics & the USO, shouldn't he try to capitalize on his success and end the year on a high note?

And if they don't indicate any such thing - if those losses were just the losses that will happen to every player, however great, now & again - why should he alter his usual schedule?

Or, I like your post at 10:32, particularly the way you get to the crux of the matter with Federer's supposed rest:

>I doubt he'd have any peace.

Exactly. While he's resting, the media will be so busy burrying him that he might come back to a world he doesn't recognize. Not to mention the seeding, and all the other things he loses if he rests. That wouldn't help him in the long run.

I just checked and RN and RF are now even for the Olympics. Other big changes are posted below. I would've thought after his loss he would've dropped and ND would become a favorite.

US Open: RN, RF, ND, AM and Roddick(??)

AO: RN, RF, ND, AM and Tsongas (Nadal moves up even after he loses to Djokovic -- I guess they are factoring in that RN was tired and ND was not and still lost to Murray).

FO: RN, ND, RF, Nalbandian, Davydenko

Wimbledon: RN, RF, ND, AM, Roddick

Finally, Nadal is the favorite to finish #1 and then, ND is slightly favored to finish #1 over RF. I find this last part odd and unlikely, but that is where the money is . . .

Also, odds are against RF to beat Sampras' GS record, but in favor of him winning one more Wimbledon.

Does anyone know where the olympic tennis will be shown on tv?? Will atp tv have it on the computer??

I agree with sv and Cheshire Cat (great moniker, BTW) about the differences between Murray and Djokovic's games.

I was wondering what everyone thought regarding the improvements in Murray's game (i.e. where has he improved the most - mentally, physically?). One thing I noticed in his last two matches is that his transition game has improved, and he appears to be volleying quite well.

Ed, Nice letter! My answer to the "if..." question:

I'm not Roger Federer. But I wish I knew what it was to play at least one shot (in my entire life) like him.

Roger's at a point in his career where "vacations" are only going to do so much for him. His aura is diminished, he's starting to question himself emotionally, there's really no where he can go from this point except down. Not to say he won't win another major, he will, but the aura of invincibility is gone forever.

The one thing about tennis greats, when they lose it, they lose it quickly. It's not a gradual descent. More like dropping off a cliff. He still has the game, but the mind for the game has been affected.

I predicted this last year after he beat Rafa at Wimbledon, I said 07 would be his last year of dominance, and I'm looking pretty much like a prophet at this point. He still might even win the Open if the draw falls his way, but Rafa will always be thought of as the man in 08, no matter how the year ends.

Ed, thanks for your beautiful letter to RF;

I don't think he'll take time off though. And, I'm not sure that would help his confidence, which appears to be low. In TO and Cinci, he seemed indecisive. A win at the USO would change everything for him. Watching the final yesterday, I did not see anything that should threaten Federer—his chances should be as good as ever in New York. If he goes out early again, his confidence will be shaken to the core, and maybe then he should take a vacation as well as train—but I cannot imagine him doing that.

Olympic tennis schedules on TV:

Go here:
http://www.nbcolympics.com/

Click on TV & Online listings. Fill in your local area information. When you've done that, choose by date, sport, and channel and you should find what comes on where in your area. I get first round singles and doubles on Aug. 10 live at midnight-2AM on CNBC.

Here for the USTA Olympic Event schedule:
http://tinyurl.com/6zzzyt

Ed: Very nice letter to Roger. As for the answer to the "if" question, I agree with Slice-n-Dice's thoughts.

Ed: I like your letter.

Sam,
Are you saying that Roger needs to play only the Slams and the Masters events which would be 13 and 14 for the YEC?

Answer to the if... question-No.
Of course, nobody knows how Roger Federer feels or what's in his head, maybe he really is tired, doesn't have confidence or whatnot and would benefit from taking a break, but I doubt it. I didn't see his loss to Simon, but he seemed OK to me against Ivo, fired up and playing well and that defeat doesn't ring alarm bell to me. I think there's a lot of over dramatizing when it comes to Fed's form and career, he probably won't dominate the way he did again, but that's not the end of the world and he seems aware of that.

Count me surprised when it comes to Andy-Nole comparison. Aside from DS and strong BH, I don't see any other similarity. Having sad that, they're both spectacular players and I think it's precisely that difference in styles of play that is gonna make that rivalry interesting one to watch.

As for Dinara, I'm afraid she might be peaking to early and I don't think she'll win US Open even with top players struggling with health. She lost in 3 rd (?) in Wimby after playing RG and S'Hertogenbosch finals and I think similar thing might happen again.

Christin: Thanks. I've found it.

Hmm...

Play the Olympics, play the USO, play Madrid, play Basel, play Paris (and Stockholm) ONLY IF it can help him get YE #1, play TMC, ditch the exhibitions. I can't shake the feeling that the downfall started here, and all that traveling after a long hard season might have contributed to Federer's immune system being more vulnerable to something like mono.

Master Ace: Those plus Basel as Slice-n-Dice suggested.

creig bryan - fascinating article - thanks for the link.

"As for Dinara, I'm afraid she might be peaking to early and I don't think she'll win US Open even with top players struggling with health. She lost in 3 rd (?) in Wimby after playing RG and S'Hertogenbosch finals and I think similar thing might happen again."

Lira Vega,
Her situation is reminding me of David Ferrer during the clay season where he won Valcenia and lost to Rafael at Monte Carlo(QF) and Barcelona(F) but after Barcelona, schedule caught up with him.

Oops, my post at 12:43 PM

Count me in the "don't see AM and ND as being similar players" crowd...ND and AM both have strong backhands, an overused drop shot, and move well but the similarities end there. They have a different approach to the game--ND's groundies are much better as his game is mostly based on pushing the opponent deeper and deeper behind the baseline until he can strike, while AM is more about giving the opponent different spins and paces and ball placements, so his game comes off as more 'defensive' in a way. ND had more winners yesterday and more UFE than AM, and I think that stat was telling.

[Sitting back and letting Sam take the ball]

Actually, while I usually am a firm believer in playing oneself into good form, it clearly has not been working so far for Federer. He jumps out of the blocks, only to get beaten (Simon), then gets a few sneaky wins (Ginepri) only to lose to a nightmare opponent (Karlovic) whom he should never lose to.

It's pretty clear, IMO, that he has lost some of the joy that is a necessary element in any champion's toolbox. There's only one way to get that back -- take a break, re-examine one's priorities and goals, take a look at one's current and futre commitments, and see what makes sense.

Here's a no-brainer: no more after-shave commercials with Tiger Woods (or whatever the hail those were). The four Rs work here: Rest. Recuperate. Regroup. Retool. Noting else will help him rediscover his mojo.

And Omar makes a good point. Federer will never be the same dominating player he was. But that doesn't mean he has to throw in the towel.

Crazyone: I like your analysis of ND/AM.

i don't think the Unisex tourneys make much sense, the guys are going to always beat the girls. Even if you're very strong and tall I still think a little guy like the Rochus can take you. I hope Roger can win the Olympic off of Rafa, it would be great for his confidence.

Great suggestion Ed.

I am also in the ND/AM not similar players crowd, btw, but my reasons have all already been stated upthread :)

If answer...

Yes

and he should take Darren Cahill with him.

I don't have a huge problem with what Dinara is doing. This is her breakthrough year and she doesn't have to win a slam straight away. Winning few Tier I tournaments and scoring few victories over top players is certainly nothing to sneer at. Next year logical thing to do would be to shift her focus to slams.
Who would've guesses 6 months ago that Safina would be considered serious slam contender?

I am coming back (I took an afternoon nap, yesterday was my last day of my internship, YEY!) with additional thoughts as to why a vacation (skipping Madrid and Paris) isn't such a hot idea.

It would almost ensure Roger finishes the year as number 3, and should Nole perform well there (unlike last year), and especially should Rafa perform well there - it would make it VERY difficult for Roger to take back number 1 (or even number 2) until at least Wimbledon next year.

Roger needs to be there to stop Rafa from gaining additional points, otherwise he's doing to be in the position Rafa usually is - the top guy having a cushion of points from the end of the year, which keeps the challanging player who is (maybe, hopefully) ahead in the race from getting to number 1 on the ATP ranking.

Dinara's 08 campaign is reminiscent of Ana's 07 campaign. Winner of Berlin, RG runner-up, LA champion. She's now tacked on yet another title at Montreal. I agree, Dinara should keep playing to build her confidence but I don't see a slam this year. She'll win 2-3 more titles though. If she gets some rest before the YECs, I could see her making a definite run to the semis there, though a healthy Serena or Ana could stop her in her tracks.

Yes, take a vacation and work on a new racket, with a bigger head (see Stick Shift article).
Why not get some free technology points? They're right there waiting to be used.

Lendl switched from his beloved Kneisl (is that right) at the end of his career for the big W but it was too late. Connors said he should have switched years earlier. Sampras now says he should have. Hey, seems like a no brainer, lot to win, little to lose.

So come back "bigger" and better. A rested Fed, with less shanks in the bag. Sounds good to me.

Cheshirecat, I agree with you too on the differences in Djokovic and Murray's games. I think Andy Murray may be the reincarnated version of Fabrice Santoro, plus power and wingspan! I think his more aggressive play, along with him mentally maturing before our eyes is making him a new force in tennis to be reckoned with. I think his taste in the sun from his beating of Gasquet at Wimbledon gave him the needed kick start.

As for Federer, how about a compromise if he fares pretty well at the Olympics and USO? Skip Madrid for some rest but come back refreshed to play Paris and to get ready for Shanghai.

Hi everyone *smiles and waves*

Once again congratulations to AndyM, Caroline, and Dinara for excellent performances.

WRT Andy and Novak having similar games, I think AndyM is more of a defensive player than Novak as the Winners/UE stats show.

I can't say much about Dinara having a great run at the US Opne although she has a chance. However she has played more tournaments than most of the top ten at present (even more than Jelena) and she is playing singles and doubles at the Olympics as well, so there may be chances of a burnout at the USO.

WRT Roger taking a break after the USO, I would that depends on what his goal is for the rest of the year which will depend on the Olympics and USO results of both himself and Rafa. If the results are such that both gain points at the Olympics and Rafa gains some points (goes beyond the fourth rnd at the USO)then even if Roger wins the USO, Rafa still remains no. 1 at that point but at least he would have GS 13. So if his short-term goal for the rest of the year is to finish at no. 1, he will have to continue playing and gain points form where he did not do well last year to achieve this goal. Unfortunately this will also largely depend on Rafa faltering all the way. However if the case is such that he and Rafa meet which will imply finals, then chances of finishing at no. 1 is slim. So what next? He will have to determine if it is worth it to chase ending this year as no. 1 and continuing to play or take the break, retool, reorder priority and prepare to tie and break Pete's GS count by say Wimbly next year at the latest with or without no. 1.

The bigger racket idea is an interesting one, as a similar shift helped Fed earlier in his career. At the same time, switching to a 95 or 98 in. head might mean fewer shanks, but it also means less control. The question is, does Fed lose more points to the odd shank or to simply hitting the FH long or wide? If it's the latter, maybe a bigger stick is not what he needs. I do, however, think he should definitely experiment during his off-season practice sessions.

Like Sampras, he's stubborn. But he also hates to lose and he must know that Sampras thinks he himself should have made the switch late in his career. Hey Fed, if you want to hit with my Prince Original Graphite, just say the word. I'll let you borrow it (though I think he should actually go for a 95' frame and nothing bigger).

C-Note: all things being equal - i.e., rested and healthy; it's far from a sure thing that Ana or, even Serena would "stop Safina in her tracks." Ana played a physically and emotionally exhausted Safina in the French final. Safina is as powerful as Ana, and while not a great mover, is better than Ana, especially side to side. While Serena can be erratic.

Or, I am hoping that Rafa finishes year-end #1 and have a cushion of points to help him stay there past the AO. Realistically, that might be hard because the hardcourt season is long and Novak and Roger are better on hardcout. Also Murray is in the mix.

As others are saying, #1 and #2 are equal draw-wise, but #3 is not. The #2 position in the Race is being jousted between him and Novak, as we speak. It is not good to leave the race, unless he is injured.

Good point about the control, but with today's technology they can pretty darn near do anything. I'm sure if he said "Wilson, make me a racket that has the same everything as this one but with more sweet spot in a bigger head" they'd jump to.

Wouldn't hurt to try, but that's where the stubborn part comes in.

C Note,
I've read your take on the Steve's piece on WTA at forty deuce and loved it. Props for that, I couldn't even bother reading it and I normally enjoy Steve's blog very much.

I've also seen that story about Ana not going to Olympics there, but you indeed, probably shouldn't pay attention to it considering the source (whenever you see Press or Kurir-ignore). I've checked other more respectable sources and they're all saying she will be playing in Beijing

Syd -- I'm not saying it's a sure thing. But Serena, Ana, and a healthy Maria, are the only people I can see stopping Dinara (other than herself). They have the shots to move her around and keep her on the run. You can't get into long rallies with Dinara and expect to win (see, JJ, Domi, Schnyder, etc.). You have to play smart, first strike tennis. And The Big Three are the only ones who have the tools and the shots to do it.

Lira Vega -- I JUST updated that Ana post. The president of the Serbian tennis federation said she's playing, which is what I figured anyway. No way she doesn't go to play, even if just for the opportunity to walk in the ceremonies, live in the village for a few days, and get the Olympic experience. Maybe the thumb will allow her to take the pressure off.

Syd @ 1.41 pm - You are spot on on those statements but again by the time Safina gets to the USO she may be tired (probably more tired than Ana because she is playing both singles and doubles) so if she and Ana meet, it may be a more tired Safina again. Safina can also be erratic just like Serena which is why she has some of those three set matches like the one with Kuzzie who in herself is another headcase. I think all these will factor in at the USO and probably winning the USO for any of the top women who are all heading to the Olympics will depend on sheer grit and will power. I give Serena and Venus especially Venus a slightly better chance since Venus has pulled it off before in 2000 picking up the gold singles an doubles and coming back to win the USO that same year and the Olympics was in far away Sidney as well. I say Venus because she seems to have the GSs she can win as her priorities at present and seems to save her best for those moments. Again it's just a slight better chance though. Otherwise this may just be another 2004 kind of US Open.

Oops sorry wrong info: Venus did not win the USO in 2000.

avid sports fan, yes she did! She did the USO-Wimbly double twice, in '00 and '01, and won the Olympics in '00 (and the doubles with Serena!)

Ooops again ;-) she did but the Olympics was after the USO that year

C-Note: right. I'm not saying that they couldn't beat her either, I was just reacting to them 'stopping her in her tracks.' Also, Venus should never be counted out at Wimbledon.

crazyone - LOL. I'm mixing up everything now ;-)

Absolutely, C Note. She must be terribly exciting about it:)

Avid: Thanks. I agree with everything you've said in your post.

When I first read talk of Murray studying 'patterns' and bikram yoga, I thought it was a bunch of hot air. After he beat Fed in Dubai, I thought his game was based on drawing errors rather than creating anything himself. Fed clearly thought so and said as much. This must have been the best critique for Murray. He's since become much more assertive in his shot selection, and when he resorts to 'contra tennis,' it's the right tactic at that time - such as occasionally rushing the net against Karlovic. Right now, I enjoy watching Murray more than the others, some of his rhythm breaking tactics against Nadal and Djokovic had laughing-out-loud, they were so on point. I'm sure both opponents noticed how clearly he knew what they didn't like out there.

She's very disappointed with her thumb. But she's very exciting about the Olympics!

Don't you get the sense that those are really the only two emotions Ana feels? Either disappointment or excitement. Must be nice.

I think Roger's decision might end up being about at least maintaining the number two spot, since in many practical ways, when it comes to draws, it's similar to occupying the number one spot (though, the top half of the draw usually plays its matches before the bottom half in big tournaments like a Slam).

Currently he has the following points to defend before year-end:
US Open 1000 (W)
Madrid 350 (F)
Paris 75 (R16)
Basel 250 (W)
TMC 650 (W - in practice the points drop off before the TMC)

Total = 2325

Nole has the following to defend:
US Open 700 (F)
Vienna 250 (W)
Madrid 225 (S)
Paris 5 (R32)
TMC 0

Total = 1180

Thus, Federer has almost twice as many points to defend as Djokovic.

Now, Federer is currently on 6680 points to Djokovic's 5390, but the gap will narrow (excluding the results of the Olympics) by August 18th. On that day, Nadal will be number one, Federer will be number 2 with 5830 points plus whatever he gains at the Olympics (can't be more than 400), and Djokovic will be at 4885 plus his Olympic points.

Leaving Nadal out of it for the moment (he has less points to defend than either Federer or Djokovic for the rest of the season, and goes into the US Open looking strong, and with serious points to be gained if he lives up to expectations), that means that Federer is possibly in the position of having a gap of less than 1000 points between himself and Djokovic after the Olympics (or close), with many more points to defend, and the certainty that his 650 TMC points will drop off before Shanghai starts. Djokovic surely knows that the number two ranking is within his grasp.

If Federer drops a tournament, it should probably be Paris and/or Stockholm.

It looks as though he could be playing four weeks straight in October - Stockholm-Madrid-Basel-Paris, then a week off before the TMC. Djoker will have a week off during that stretch (assuming he is defending Vienna). Nadal, as far as I know, only plans to play Madrid and Paris.

In fact, as well as the US Open this year, the TMC is fraught with all kinds of possibilities, and one thing that Federer surely wishes to do is head into that week match-sharp, but not exhausted. He has a lot to do in the coming few months, to ensure that he isn't passed by Djokovic.

Only Federer is in a position to know whether his current situation would benefit from rest, additional fitness work, etc, enough that he is prepared to give ground in the short term in the rankings race, and possibly enter next year's AO as the third seed. Because he certainly risks doing that, if he can't or won't defend points in the coming weeks.

For info, Nadal has the following points to defend before year-end:

US Open 150 (R16)
Madrid 125 (QF)
Paris 350 (F)
TMC 200

Total = 825

Thanks C-note, I'm glad to see Ana is playing, I want her to do well and get a lot of points. She's a really sweet girl, and a great champion, like her alot.

although i have oscillated between the two sides of this theory (roger to take time off), after seeing whats happening to him in the HC season so far, a month after playing fantastic tennis at wimby, I now think, taking time off is NOT a good idea.
Taking time off, I think, is akin to postponing the problem and has a greater chance that he will prematurely retire, if and when he comes back, if results are not forthcoming, then what? the case for him to be gone will be even bigger in his own mind and the tennis world wont mind it bcos they would have just gone thru several months without RF on the scene.
An emphatic NO, both as RF and as his fan.

Will Nadal get the #1 seed for the US Open? How do they decide the seedings?

Since I probably wouldn't be able to express myself better in English, I shouldn't be laughing at her, but I'm telling you, it's sooo hard. Though, on a second thought I'm not sure it has anything to do with English, she likes to "keep it simple" in Serbian, too. Or I'm just bitter JJ fan, you choose

ebh, Nadal will be top seed at the Open. All Slams except Wimby use rankings as they are - in this case they will use the latest ones available, which will be the ones from August 18.

Ana's a simple girl. I was watching some old interviews with her though and her English has improved dramatically. When she has time to think about her answer she can actually be very articulate. I think it's when she's embarrassed or doesn't know what to say, then she gets kinda cliche.

Incidentally, Andy Murray has the following to defend before year-end:
US Open 75 (R32)
Madrid 75 (R16)
St Petersburg 250 (W)
Paris 125 (Q)

Total = 525

He was still coming back from injury during last year's US Open.

For the life of me, looking at Andy's points total total, I cannot work out why he has 2135 points, with Indianapolis, with 0 points, being among his "best of other countable tournaments" , but Marseille, which he won in February 08, worth 200 points, being excluded from the total. That is blatantly wrong - he should be on 2335 points.

On Aug 18th, after the 40 points from last year's Cincy and Canada drop off, he should be on 2490 points, plus his Olympics result.

He is in a good position to compete with Ferrer for at least that number five spot - I just don't see Ferrer in the USO SF again, and Ferrer has Tokyo (250 points) to defend as well as the 450 points from the USO -and 500 points from the TMC.

Fascinating thread on the if question... I was ambivalent when I read the question. But as I have read all the posts here, I think the case is very well made for him to NOT take a break. Seems like very little would be gained by altering schedules at this point (except a minor change like dropping Stockholm maybe). Wish Roger would read this thread - anyone have his email address?! :-)

Hallelujah, indeed. Murray's strategic play against Djokovic was just brilliant. The mixing up of pace, the slices deep to Djokovic's backhand, the less than frequent use of the drop shot out of respect for his opponent's speed. But most of all, the serving. I think this is the part of his game that's most helped to unskew the H2H. Murray's 2nd serve is supposed to be a gimme, but Djokovic won a lower percentage of 2nd serve points than Murray did. Murray employed a mirror-image version of the strategy opponents use with Nadal. First serves were almost exclusively to the Djokovic forehand, the kick serves on 2nd serve were to Djokovic's backhand. Djokovic likes pace on the backhand side, he has a compact swing and is great at redirecting the ball. And on his forehand side, he likes a bit more time. The fact that Murray was holding serve so comfortably must have thrown Djokovic off, and made him feel more pressured on his own service games. Of course Murray's returning was brilliant, as usual.

Rosangel, I too was wondering about Indy 0 in Murray's points! Strange are the ATP's ways... like I found the whole issue about double counting Canada and Cincy strange just to adhere to their 52-week rule. If for some weird reason, they had to move Wimby up by 2 weeks, would they count those results twice also??!! I wonder.

Rosangel - Thanks for the stats. I could not lay my hads on them when I wrote my earlier post and it confirms that Roger having to decide what his goal will be and what he needs to achieve that goal will be what should determine his choices. I also thought his chances of defending year end no. 1 are slim but I just did not know how slim until I saw the number of points he has to defend.

Rosangel, another thought, which you already must know well. At this point of the year, I always find just looking at the ATP current-year race to be the easiest way to see how year-end #1 and other rankings will shake out. As in easier than looking at points getting dropped etc. (coz obviously at the end of the year, the race and ranking positions are identical).

Using that benchmark, Nadal is soooo far ahead with 1100 points compared to Novak's 744 and Roger's 701. Also means that if Novak does as well as Roger the rest of the year, he will be #2.

As for Murray, I think he will be #4 by year-end. For this year, he is already #5 with 380 points and trails Davy (387 points) by only 7 points. Ferrer is 6th at 322 points. So if Murray does slightly better than Davy and Ferrer does not have a blow-out remainder of the year (by his R16-QFshowing standards), Murray should easily be #4.

hpnyc,

You raise a great point about "What if the Grand Slams were move up", what would happen there? great point. I think they would take it off the table and not surfer that embarrassment.

Rosangel, if I recall correctly the 0 for Indy is counted in Murray's total because Indy was the second International Series tournament he pulled out of without an acceptable excuse, according to ITF (I think, could be ATP) rules. He pulled out of Valencia earlier, and players are only allowed one withdrawal from an optional event without a 'valid' excuse before being punished for it. I can pull up the rule if you like, but I'd have to go digging for it. Anyway, the 0 for Indy will remain for the normal 52 weeks.