Speaking on his website yesterday, the ex-player and widely respected coach Brad Gilbert spoke of his admiration for Rafael Nadal and his belief that he can claw back Federer's points lead before the end of the season. When praising the young Spaniard, Gilbert seemed to show scant regard for Roger Federer's chances of success this season:

"Rolf is just a beast. The guy is playing like an animal and is on a monster role. I’m going to say it right here and now: Nadal will finish the year with the number one ranking."

http://www.bradgilberttennis.com/asp/bgnation.asp

Bold prediction from Gilbert, but does it stand any chance of coming true? Personally, I see Wimbledon as being key, as it was last season.

Yes, he's playing like an animal in the cc season, but not so much in the hard court season! The same thing happened last season...He's doing well on clay again, no big surprises there.

I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens at SW19, but I'm going to say it right here and now: I'd be surprised if that prediction cam true.

Hi Wise..Tired from the trolling activities on the BBC board...Anyway if this activity makes you happy :( ..

Anyway..Short comments:

Who is Rolf? i.e.

"Rolf is just a beast."

and yes it could be Wimbledon will be the key event this year as last year..But still I do not see FED not reaching at least the final...But might be I am wrong: A Djioko in his side can be really dangerous (as he can in Rafa side for sure)...Anyway, Wimbledon is Wimbledon we will see..

Finally, I do not see the following:

"When praising the young Spaniard, Gilbert seemed to show scant regard for Roger Federer's chances of success this season"

But might be this is so because I did not spend my last three season hoping that the No#1 of the ranking would lose his raking..I mean it was a quite long run for FED and his achievements have been already those of one all time great. So even if he slow down a bit it is not the end of the world...But I know for you, a all time hater of FED this is a great moment.... :cry: :cry:

BTW: the guy should remember that his favorite for the AO title this year was Rafa..And he was Roger at the end with the trophy without droping a set...Borg 1980 last time.. :whistle: :whistle:

:D

Oh yes, good point TV. Gilbert may be as respected coach, but his speculation is nothing more than that at the moment. I really don't see Fed slipping up at SW19...

Same as last year. Everyone say's Nadal will topple Federer then grass/hard season starts up again and Federer comes out on TOP AGAIN!

Heh. Last year Gilbert was still pronouncing Nadal's last name to rhyme with 'fatal.' I see he still can't even get his first name or nickname right, unless he's trying to coin his own questionable alternative.

Frankly I thought one of the best things the LTA ever did was get Gilbert off the airwaves Stateside. He was one of the most banal, uninsightful and dismissive (to echo the thread title) commentators around. He's not as bad as the guy who was telling anyone who would listen that Monfils would be a surprise USO finalist (or was it that he'd take the whole thing?), whom I haven't seen on since incidentally, but he had similar moments of cluelessness. I can't speak to his abilities as a coach though he seems to have done all right by Murray so far (apart from trying to pressure him to play even after it was clear he'd seriously injured himself today).

There's a case to be made for Nadal to potentially dethrone Federer if only for a couple of weeks, and I've been meaning to do the maths for a couple of scenarios in which this could happen. But the reality is that even though the ~2000 point margin separating them is actually much more favourable to the Spaniard considering not so long ago Federer had DOUBLE his tally, it still means that Federer would have to crash out in the first round of RG and SW19 even as Nadal still repeats his title and final at each for it to happen sooner rather than later. The US hard court season will probably be the moment for any such catch-up, with Federer having a good amount to defend and considerable room for improvement by Nadal, but again only if the latter defends his Slam performances before then. But as an actual paradigm shift where Nadal supplants Federer on a decisive, long-term basis? I can't see that happening this year, though obviously Federer has to stop being No 1 sometime. Maybe.

First of all, I'd like to note that there is no more talk of Nadal losing his No. 2 ranking to Roddick (or someone else), which some people were almost predicting at the end of last year, and the beginning of this. I was always of the opinion that there was little chance of that happening, although I'll admit I didn't quite expect Nadal to be even *more* triumphant on clay this year than last.

Yet, the clay season isn't over yet ... some things may still happen. So let's not get ahead of ourselves, and let Brad Gilbert say whatever he wants. At the moment, Roger's 'slump' is by far not as bad as Rafa's looked after last Wimbledon, so I'm not going to start worrying just yet. If Roger does badly at the French and crashes out of Wimbledon, *then* I might be willing to consider that he will lose his iron grip on the #1 ranking sooner rather than later. But I don't see that happening yet. I don't even really care what happens in Hamburg (although I'm hoping for some good results). It's the French that I'm interested in seeing.

I never liked Brad and never respected him as a player. He will be remembered after all for playing hugly...nothing else. He may have been a good coach for Agassi but that's it. Agassi was naturally talented and should have had even more success, so even there I am convinced Agassi could have done something better with another coach. He is simply lucky to have coached good upcoming players and benefited from his players natural talent.

Instead of worrying about Roger, he shoudl worry about Murray who was a talented player but turned him into a retriever who is going to ask too much to his body to succeed the way brad wants him to. Too much muscles too quickly.

I never liked big mouthes and he is one of them!

Most things that Gilbert says can be taken with a huge pinch of salt. This is certainly one of them, and anyone with a modicum of sense would leave him to peddle his usual nonsense..

Just as when Rafa.. (Rolf??) had a bit of a slump last year, there was the old cliche "form is temporary, class is permanent".

Same goes for Roger, of course ;)

But as usual, as soon as any player has 2-3 notable losses, the writing is apparently on the wall, and it's a downward spiral from then on. Trolls have their usual feeding frenzy, can't help themselves really.. yawn.

The Fedster hasn't forgotten how to win. He'll come good.

I actually remember Gilbert saying at Wimbledon a year or so ago when asked how to beat Federer "The guy has no weaknesses. Slip something in his drink?"

So he changes his tune quickly it seems.

Firstly, the title of this thread is over-sensationalist - Gilbert *did not* dismiss Federer.

Secondly, Nadal can become World Number One this year - after French Open title, I would expect this to be one of his big goals for the season. However, even if he does win at Roland Garros, the job is still only half done for Nadal. Whilst I was impressed with Nadal at Wimbledon last year, he is likely to be less lucky with the draw this year - and there a few players who can cause him harm on the grass - Roddick, Ancic, Karlovic, Ljubicic, Hewitt, Djokovic, Joachim Johansson (if he comes back after injury), Blake, to name but a few.

So, he's likely to lose points at Wimbledon, and I think will be reliant on Federer losing early at SW19. Nadal may be looking unbeatable at the moment, but we are still in the thick of the claycourt season - after French Open, we may not see Nadal pick up more than one title during the rest of the year.

So, I think he will continue to reduce the points gap from Federer's number one spot, but Federer will hang on to his top dog position.

Eloquently put Petalp :)

About as quickly as McEnroe finds a contender for the GOAT (I've counted four in as many weeks) ;)

I can see Nadal becomming number 1 some time in 2008. But is the gap between the two points wise too much to make up for this year?

We stiil have to assume Federer will have a better grass court season and a better hardcourt season than Nadal.

Would it be so bad if Fed did lose the no1 spot?
Historically most of the top players-Sampras, Borg, Navratilova, Graf, have had periods in and out of the no1 spot.
It would be interesting to se if Rafa could cope with the pressure of being no 1-the constant expectation to do well in the slams outside the French.
Feds legacy is well laid down, he needs 4 slams to equal Pete and 5 to beat him. I recon he could quite happily nestle behind Nadal, taking tons of pressure of himself and taking a slam or two a year-maybe even the French, once he is less in the running for it.

what's more likely or what's more easily achieved...federer getting the results on clay he needs or nadal evolving into something more than a clay court specialist (basically)...

Well, Fed has repeatedly stated that the #1 ranking is important to him.

That being said, him losing the ranking for a few weeks would hardly be a problem; he already has the longest ever consecutive weeks at #1! However, consistently lying behind Nadal I think would not be a position he would like.

Having said that, I think the discussion is only academic at this point --- I'm not yet holding my breath for Nadal to overtake Federer any time soon. I may change my mind after Wimbledon, or the US hardcourt season.

In any case, we will see.

i agree there's a long way to go before Fed is no2.
It's only a result of his success that expectation is so high, Sampras went through many dry periods but little was made of it, we need to be level headed about Fed, he's great but he's not a god.

Good posts from both :ok:

Also, the problem with dethroning Fed from number one is that, who can do it? Nadal is stealing all the clay points, and Fed is getting a large portion of the hard court points, and then we have players like Roddick, Djokovic, Rafa and Murray splitting the rest between them. You need another dominating player to come along before Fed is dethroned. And I can't see Nadal dominating the entire field week in week out.

Or in the short term you need for Fed to stop winning all the slams and someone else to come along on a hot streak and win a slam and lots of other tournies.

I don't think either will happen this year anyway.

Gilbert you are daft!!!!!

The only difference this year to last is that Federer has suffered a mini-slump.
Nadal always plays like this on clay,and I'm truly staggered that he has repeated his capture of the big titles again.
The acid test for Fed will be Wimbledon.It could signal his quick restoration of confidence or it could weaken his mental resolve further.
Players often talk of mental scarring,and Federer will will prove no exception in the long run as his body breaks down,and when he finally comes back to the field or they catch him.

Personally Federer has been so dominant he only needs one big performance to return to his formwer high level,I know he's the wrong side of 25 now,but his decline won't happen overnight.The number one ranking isn't in danger for me until next year.It will take until summer 2008 for him to overtaken.
Plus I believe it will someone like Novak DJ rather than Nadal.Claycourters no matter how good they are cannot be dominant No 1's.
If he does manage it,it will be short lived.

"I know he's the wrong side of 25 now"

What does this mean? :shrug:

Yeah might as well get him a pair of slippers and a zimmer frame, he's way past it roflmao

Just a big mouthed American losing the connection between brain and mouth i reckon... ;)

Nadal has all the points to lose at Wimbledon - Federer will win it barring injury no question.

roflmao

You are giving Brad too much credit! I doubt there ever was such "connection".

Funnily enough I was actually being serious.On this board I did a bit of research and found that players who had won multiple slams stopped winning slams after the age of 25.5.

This of course is the average age,and there will always be exceptions,but tennis is a short career,and 25 seems to be the zenith from which tennis players lose their physical abilities.

Take Sampras who won slams after the age of 25.He won 9 slams by this point,it took him another 5/6 years to win the other 5.

I love Federer,but he can't fight the ageing process,which in the arena of tennis is very young.
This may be speculation but yesterday I read in the paper that sources within the game say Federer is close to burn-out after the three years of dominance,but this will become clearer by the end of the season,which is the time to really judge whether Federer is on the slide.

It's a strange one - In my opinion, Federer will probably only start to decline when he's around the 28 mark, largely because there are so many options available to him in his game.

Nadal, for me, is possibly going to start to struggle as early as 23/24 - he will not be able to maintain those energy levels for too long i'm sure

Good post Brakky. I used to think that 27 was the age players were reaching their peak but things are moving quickly with technology and new training method. I agree that tennis might be the hardest sport for muscles and joints. There are still a few players that reach their peak at 26/27 but they are not a majority. The best way to find out would be to see what age do players reach their best ranking on average. I am not keen to do it but we could take a sample of 20 players. Athe same time we would need to consider a very short period (last 3 years?) due to the recent change in playing conditions.

what do you think would break down in Fed's game though? there's so much in it!

Like all superb machines, they are very fragile. There is not much margin between a winner down the line and a ball in the net or out or even a shanked ball. Half a step slower and its all over.

Grass is likely to get his raw skills last longer. It is his eye/hand coordination that makes the difference on grass and that can last a good 2/3 more years. Sampras got his most convincing win in wimbledon in 1999 (close to 28yo).

I think Fed has till the end of 2010 (15GS only) to grab 5 GS and overcome pete's record. A tall order. This RG is going to be so key for him and he knows that.

But having said all that, Fed's recent slump in form cannot be attributed to his loss of athletism but rather off the tennis court issues.

To be in the skin of the challenger at the French is not a bad idea. He not only has to convince us but mainly himself that only a gutsy and fight will crown him King of Clay next month...plus luck!

That is the good frame of mind to have for the french.

Tenez, besides the top 2 do you see any other contenders for Roland Garros?

Hi Laurie - Frankly, the way Nadal has been playing recently ,I have difficulty seeing a second contender, let alone a third.

My theory holds though. Under a wet and cloudy day, Nadal shots shorten dramatically and remain vulnerable to good attackers. This will be key to the FO. I expect Gonzo to get closer this time around than last week for instance.

Any takers for fight machines like Davydenko for instance??-though not in much probability I should say..but seeing his resilience against Nadal.....

Davydenko, Nalby, Hewitt could still create a surprise. If Gaudio and Costa can win it, if Verkerk can reach the final it shows anything is possible at the French.

I agree with you Tenez and also with Sam.

I think sometimes it depends on when great players mature into champs.Take your idol,MR BORG.
I picked up his book "My life my game".Great read,it was written in 1980,jt was just before Wimbledon.He talks of how demanding the tour was for him and that from that point he was going to drop smaller events,also bergelin his coach said that bjorn was too accommodating and would play too many exhibitions(sound likes Federer).
One year later,well Borg was done with tennis.

Nadal has been great from an early age,Federer from a later age,but the same thing holds true for tennis.A 3-5 year period of high levels then the fade from greatness.
It seems to me that either mental fatigue occurs,fading movement or someone comes along who is better.

I personally think Federer has this season and next,before it becomes difficult as he has played and won so many more matches than the others around him.

I would also say that in that 2 year period Federer will get the slams he needs to overhaul Sampras,but as for the FRENCH,I'm just not sure anymore.I mean I really can see Nadal and Federer fading at the same time and some other clay great taking it from both of them in the future.

If he exceeds 14 he is the best for me,but winning RG would seal it beyond all doubt.

But what about Borg's impeccable feat of winning the RG and the Wimby 3 times consecutively?Think any one can match that?

I think that ones safe. ;)

Fed did Wimbledon and the USO double 3 times in a row, which is a special feat as well. Without Nadal, I am sure the Wimby/FO double woud have been well in his sight. Unfortunately he is facing the toughest clay specialist ever.

It's good for us though.

true,
yet the transition from clay to grass and that too in those days when the grass was not this slow adds to the fact that this feat of Borg's would be the one that would be difficult to emulate,not taking away any credit from federer's double victories 3 times in a row.-yet not many regard borg in the same league as Laver,Sampras and Federer!