Topic: 2012 Rankings Update

[Dallas]

ATP:

Top 10:
Federer (12165)
Djokovic (11270)
Nadal (8715)
Murray (7290)
Ferrer (5375)
Tsonga (4835)
Berdych (4155)
Del Potro (3620)
Tipsarevic (3285)
Isner (2880)

What is interesting to me is - remember last year when Fish became the #1 US Player - and he seemed like he really couldn't "handle" the pressure of being the top American?  Well...he don't have to worry about that now.

Isner is #10
Roddick is #21
and FISH is #24

Brian Baker is now #70 (where as Donald Young is now #80!)

Someone by the name of Jerzy Janowicz (who I have never heard of)...is #87 and Wimbledon slayer Lukas Rosol is #93.


On the WTA side (top 10)

1. Azarenka (9025)
2. Radwanska (8115)
3. Sharapova (7695)
4. S. Williams (7300)
5. Kvitova (6170)
6. Kerber (5715)
7. Stosur (5700)
8. Wozniacki (4605...and dropping)
9. Na Li (4570)
10. Errani (3730)

Other 'notables'

Clijsters is 26th
Sloane Stephens is 46
and Venus is 47 (which means, she won't be seeded at the US Open)

What has happened to Kuzneetsova?  She's now down to 48th in the world.

[mtt]

In defense of Fish :
He did have to deal with some medical issues, but seems to be on his way back.
Don't think he'll stay at #24...

Also, played a bit with the numbers:
Even if Fed has a poor showing at the USO, and Novak defends the title, Fed will remain No.1..

Worst case scenario:
 Fed looses 1st round, looses the 720 points from last year's semifinal appearance : 12165-720 = 11445 pts.
Novak defends title and points, stays at 11270.

After the USO, it becomes a little more intersting :
Neither Novak nor Roger played Shanghai, so no points to defend there...
Question is, will they skip it, or play it, to pick up some more points ?
My guess is, at least Roger will skip it, in order to be rested for Paris and London, where he has 1000, and 1500 points to defend...
Novak has only 180 points to defend from Paris, so he will have a chance to narrow the gap there.

[Dallas]

In defense of Fish :
He did have to deal with some medical issues, but seems to be on his way back.
Don't think he'll stay at #24...

Also, played a bit with the numbers:
Even if Fed has a poor showing at the USO, and Novak defends the title, Fed will remain No.1..

Worst case scenario:
 Fed looses 1st round, looses the 720 points from last year's semifinal appearance : 12165-720 = 11445 pts.
Novak defends title and points, stays at 11270.

After the USO, it becomes a little more intersting :
Neither Novak nor Roger played Shanghai, so no points to defend there...
Question is, will they skip it, or play it, to pick up some more points ?
My guess is, at least Roger will skip it, in order to be rested for Paris and London, where he has 1000, and 1500 points to defend...
Novak has only 180 points to defend from Paris, so he will have a chance to narrow the gap there.

I agree.  But I think no matter what the rankings say.... IF the US Open is won by Roger or Novak...they will be considered the player of the year (with 2 slams), probably regardless of whatever happens the rest of the year.  And yes, I don't think Roger will travel to China this year either because he has played a lot of tennis and he manages his schedule really well.  I doubt that he will take the family on that trip just to come back to Europe to finish out, especially this year with the Olympics and all.  But we will see.

[swish]

No matter how Fed performs at the USO he will retain the #1 spot.
 
 

[Bazcovic]

Federer skipped Shanghai last year. He most likely will not skip it again this year. There is enough time inbetween the USO and Sh.

[hcpoirot]

Whether Roger play Shanghai ATP 1000 depend on US Open results. If he win here, I am sure 95% he will skip Shanghai. But if he did not win and Novak win , he will play Shanghai cause the points will be very close. And he had to defend tons of points at year end events. (3000 points) Playing Shanghai will earn him few points and make him did not had to defend that many points.

Not to mention Novak will play Beijing Open and then Shanghai Open.

The race become the number 1 player at the year end will be very interesting. But it all depend on how much Roger want to stay number 1 the end of the year. Cause with Novak playing Beijing and Shanghai, then usually Basel, paris Open and LOndon. Roger at least had to play Shanghai, Basel, paris and London if he want to retain the rank 1.

[Dallas]

He broke the ranking record - which he wanted.  His whole purpose of his schedule last year was to put him in a position to possibly break the record this year. I'm saying that to say I don't think he will "chase points" just to stay no. 1. He said in an interview that he's at a different part of his career than the other guys. We will see though.

[swish]

He broke the ranking record - which he wanted.  His whole purpose of his schedule last year was to put him in a position to possibly break the record this year. I'm saying that to say I don't think he will "chase points" just to stay no. 1. He said in an interview that he's at a different part of his career than the other guys. We will see though.

Mission accomplished.
 
As for additional weeks, I think Fed will go by his long term schedule and not make any changes just to get additional weeks at #1.
 
 
His attitude should be to do the best he can and just let records take care of themselves.
 
 
 
Donald young should book his flight now, maybe catch a movie while in town.
 
 

[Dallas]

Young will probably really get up for that match (seems like they all want to play their very best against Roger). I just hope Young doesn't give Roger too much trouble!

[Alex]

the winner of the USO will be the true number one (if it comes to Nole and Roger). I'm going to be like Shank and Herc when they are so critical of Nadal. Djokovic was so silly for not playing a one single small 250 or 500 tournament (yeah silly English, but I couldn't help it). It's sport but I lost so much respect for Novak. Fed would have never over taken that number one if djloko didn't give it away and Djokovic doesn't deserve to be number 1 with that sort of attitude. We have a situation where a player who is holding 2 majors, RG final, W semis is ranked lower than another player who won only one major and plenty of small tournaments. I mean, kudos to Federer, but IMHO, Djokovic is just being stupid.

k, I vented 

[Babblelot]

Good for Tipsy! Almagro got close, but it doesn't look like he'll overtake Tipsy at this point as I had predicted.

 

Prediction Games coming 2013!

[Bazcovic]

Whether Roger play Shanghai ATP 1000 depend on US Open results. If he win here, I am sure 95% he will skip Shanghai. But if he did not win and Novak win , he will play Shanghai cause the points will be very close. And he had to defend tons of points at year end events. (3000 points) Playing Shanghai will earn him few points and make him did not had to defend that many points.

Not to mention Novak will play Beijing Open and then Shanghai Open.

The race become the number 1 player at the year end will be very interesting. But it all depend on how much Roger want to stay number 1 the end of the year. Cause with Novak playing Beijing and Shanghai, then usually Basel, paris Open and LOndon. Roger at least had to play Shanghai, Basel, paris and London if he want to retain the rank 1.

Shanghai is listed on the Federer 2012 schedule. Why is it there if he skips it if he plays well at the USO (he plays well there every year)?

[oracle86]

the winner of the USO will be the true number one (if it comes to Nole and Roger). I'm going to be like Shank and Herc when they are so critical of Nadal. Djokovic was so silly for not playing a one single small 250 or 500 tournament (yeah silly English, but I couldn't help it). It's sport but I lost so much respect for Novak. Fed would have never over taken that number one if djloko didn't give it away and Djokovic doesn't deserve to be number 1 with that sort of attitude. We have a situation where a player who is holding 2 majors, RG final, W semis is ranked lower than another player who won only one major and plenty of small tournaments. I mean, kudos to Federer, but IMHO, Djokovic is just being stupid.

k, I vented 

Over the past 12 months, Federer has won 1 Slam, reached semis at other 3 Slams, won the WTF, was a finalist at the Olympics, and won 4 ATP Masters 1000 tournaments [Paris, Indian Wells, Madrid and Cincinnati]. And he won Basel [500], withdrew in the SF at Doha [250], won Rotterdam [500] and Dubai [500] and was a finalist at Halle [250].

I don't think the WTF and the Masters are "small tournaments". 

I agree with your argument though. Djokovic has played only 2 "small tournaments" - Basel and Dubai - since last year's US Open. I have no idea why he hasn't played even a single 250 so far.

"The best six results from all ATP World Tour 500, ATP World Tour 250, ATP Challenger Tour, Futures Series, Olympics and Davis Cup tournaments played in the calendar year" is one of the criteria for points.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATP_Rankings

He has played 2 500s and Olympics so far. So he still needs to play 3 more tournaments before the end of the year. I guess he will play Beijing and Basel for sure. But what will be the 3rd one???

EDIT - Forgot that Monte Carlo is considered as a 500. So he only needs to participate in 2 more 500s.

[Dallas]

A lot of tournaments are on Roger's schedule - but it doesn't mean he will play them.  Toronto was on his schedule as well.  He withdrew from that one.  So...just because Shanghai is on the calendar - doesn't mean he will definitely play it.  I believe it was on his calendar last year and he opted to skip.  So we will see.

[swish]

Fed's done what's required by the rankings.
 
 
For the year he trails by a bit but can make that up by doing well at the USO.
 
If he has the race lead after the USO then he has a good chance of finishing #1 for the year.
 
 

[oracle86]

A lot of tournaments are on Roger's schedule - but it doesn't mean he will play them.  Toronto was on his schedule as well.  He withdrew from that one.  So...just because Shanghai is on the calendar - doesn't mean he will definitely play it.  I believe it was on his calendar last year and he opted to skip.  So we will see.

He'll have to play it because he has already missed 2 Masters this year [Monte Carlo and Toronto].

Players can miss only 1 Masters normally in a calendar year, but I think it has been relaxed to 2 for those veterans who have played more than 600 matches. [There was a lot of talk last year when Roddick withdrew from one of the Masters...] Other than Monte Carlo, the remaining 8 Masters are mandatory.

If a player is eligible to play one of these tournaments, they must play it. If that player fails to do so, they will get a "zero pointer" but they will also recieve a penalty. The penalty is effectively a suspension. It works by giving a player an additional zero-pointer for the next best Masters 1000 that they perform in over the next 12 months. Players can avoid this suspension by doing so promotional work at the event in the first three days. Obviously if a player has a verifiable injury, then they will not be penalised further but the "zero pointer" for that particular tournament will remain.

As regards the requirement to play Masters, it is true that older players do not have to play in all these Masters. However, their ranking will still be affected by a zero-pointer. They simply will not face suspensions or fines for not playing as many.

[alk11]

the winner of the USO will be the true number one (if it comes to Nole and Roger). I'm going to be like Shank and Herc when they are so critical of Nadal. Djokovic was so silly for not playing a one single small 250 or 500 tournament (yeah silly English, but I couldn't help it). It's sport but I lost so much respect for Novak. Fed would have never over taken that number one if djloko didn't give it away and Djokovic doesn't deserve to be number 1 with that sort of attitude. We have a situation where a player who is holding 2 majors, RG final, W semis is ranked lower than another player who won only one major and plenty of small tournaments. I mean, kudos to Federer, but IMHO, Djokovic is just being stupid.

k, I vented 

djoper had one of the best years in modern era and was sure that that would be enough to keep him no1 with fewer tournaments this year.

somehow he got idea that he is in class of Roger and can do what Fed has been doing for years: very small number of events equals No1.

Roger after UO lost last year made schedule that will get him top spot (only two small 250 tournaments - warm ups for W & AO)
but after being pathetic  at AO & RG that plan looked flawed ......but lady luck kicked in: djoper in his part of W draw (djoper on grass against Fed is not even challenge for him) .....,and that was just what he needed: djoper  losing lots of points for not defending W title(not even reaching final)

anyway, Fed does not care about djoper & "his" 1st place he was chasing one of The Best ( for real -the best, not "the best" people are throwing these days) players ever Pete Sampras

one more reason why djoper didnt play small event: he doesn't get money Roger & Rafa are getting for appearance fees (cool $1 million  in Rotterdam for Fed....... djoper was offered nothing )

[Gawdblessya]

the winner of the USO will be the true number one (if it comes to Nole and Roger). I'm going to be like Shank and Herc when they are so critical of Nadal. Djokovic was so silly for not playing a one single small 250 or 500 tournament (yeah silly English, but I couldn't help it). It's sport but I lost so much respect for Novak. Fed would have never over taken that number one if djloko didn't give it away and Djokovic doesn't deserve to be number 1 with that sort of attitude. We have a situation where a player who is holding 2 majors, RG final, W semis is ranked lower than another player who won only one major and plenty of small tournaments. I mean, kudos to Federer, but IMHO, Djokovic is just being stupid.

k, I vented 

This seems nonsensical to me Alex.  Given that Djokovic didn't play extra tournaments, Federer took the number one. Djokovic didn't give it away. Not doing something (not playing a tournament to protect his number 1)  is passive. Giving away something is active, implying Djokovic did something. He didn't.  Instead, Federer beat him en route to the Wimbledon title.

Federer won more points in the context of what has actually been played this year  - he is the "true" number one, until Djokovic overtakes him in points.  This year, Federer is the best player in the world.  The rankings show it. The margins might be tight, but whilst Djokovic has been holding on to his points momentum gained from wins from last year, Federer has won more to get where he is this year.

It isn't the ranking point that bothers me about your attitude.  You negate what Federer has achieved. To call the period of number one between Wimbledon & the USO as something other than the "real" number one is typical of those who would begrudge Federer any achievement.

"If's & but's" count for nothing. The one who did it & got to number one proved that he is number one.  Djokovic will no doubt get the top ranking back very soon, and then he will deserve his spot. 

Until then,  superb stuff from Federer to beat the highest ever number 1 ranking record.  Well done to him. Hip! Hip! Hurrah! 



   

[oracle86]

Federer won more points in the context of what has actually been played this year  - he is the "true" number one, until Djokovic overtakes him in points.  This year, Federer is the best player in the world.  The rankings show it. The margins might be tight, but whilst Djokovic has been holding on to his points momentum gained from wins from last year, Federer has won more to get where he is this year.

That's not true actually. Eventhough Djokovic has played fewer tournaments this calendar year, he won more points than Federer in 2012. You can see that here:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/YTD-Singles.aspx

1] Djokovic, Novak (SRB)   8,710 points from 13 tournaments
2] Federer, Roger (SUI)   8,545 points from 15 tournaments

But Federer is #1 because the rankings are based on the past 52 weeks, not just this year. Especially due to that amazing run he had at the end of 2011. In a month, he won Basel, Paris and the WTF and grabbed 2500 points. 

EDIT: It's 3000 points actually. Messed up the math: 500 +1000 +1500 = 3000 points.

[Gawdblessya]

.................................That's not true actually. Eventhough Djokovic has played fewer tournaments this calendar year, he won more points than Federer in 2012. You can see that here:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/YTD-Singles.aspx

1] Djokovic, Novak (SRB)   8,710 points from 13 tournaments
2] Federer, Roger (SUI)   8,545 points from 15 tournaments

But Federer is #1 because the rankings are based on the past 52 weeks, not just this year. Especially due to that amazing run he had at the end of 2011. In a month, he won Basel, Paris and the WTF and grabbed 2500 points. 

Oracle1 -   Thanks for the information - I stand corrected in relation to the race points this year.  I thought Federer was ahead in this regard too. 
In any event, with so many points to defend for Basel, Paris-Bercy & the WTF,  Federer is likely to lose the singles ranking lead too. 

To those that know these things, what is the likelihood of Federer being able to end the year as number 1? What would he need to do?