Who will win the most slams this year?

What do you guys think?

Will Andy break his duck or is it the year of Djokovic? Could Soderling be the next big thing or will the old guard beat them all.....again!

Thoughts?

Andy will break his duck,Nadal will still be tops and Novak might, just might pick up another slam.

Roger will draw a blank as will Soderling.

But I am useless at predicting so .......

Heart says Rafa and Novak are going to share them this year but that's writing off Fed which is never a good idea plus you never can tell from one week to the next who's going to be on form, sadly injuries happen, or you get a rank outsider having a great run (although admittedly at slams they tend to fall at the last hurdle).

But, I'll stick with shared between Rafa and Novak, barring injuries (prays hard).

sportslover wrote:Andy will break his duck,Nadal will still be tops and Novak might, just might pick up another slam.

Roger will draw a blank as will Soderling.

But I am useless at predicting so .......

Yes so am I ... tend to let my heart rule my head .. I think Rafa for FO. and maybe Wimby.
Djoko... USO Andy possibly AO.. Soderling .. no way ´José

Many seem to think that Nadal will win RG and Wimbledon, and Novak will win USO - which would make it 2-2, so I was wondering who they vote for...

just for poops and giggles wouldn't it be hilarious if andy murray won wimbledon the time he turned up playing the worst in his career.

Again, ive gone for Djokovic.
I think this will be his year and will be the one that the 'regulars' most fear.

Although he irritates me, this is Djokovic's year to vault to the number one seed. Looking at his current form, he will cause a lot of trouble this year in the remaining slams. Nadal's injuries will resurface, and Fed may capture Wimbledon or the US Open if he can stay consistent.
Djokovic-Australia + maybe USO
Nadal-French
Federer-Wimbledon or USO
Djokovic-end of year ATP championship

Personally I think Nadal win win RG and Wimby and Nole will take both of the hardcourt slams. So the correct answer to the poll is Nole and Nadal.

kaeru wrote:Although he irritates me, this is Djokovic's year to vault to the number one seed. Looking at his current form, he will cause a lot of trouble this year in the remaining slams. Nadal's injuries will resurface, and Fed may capture Wimbledon or the US Open if he can stay consistent.
Djokovic-Australia + maybe USO
Nadal-French
Federer-Wimbledon or USO
Djokovic-end of year ATP championship

I hope you are not wishing that for Rafa... thats the last thing most tennis fans would want to see

AO: Nole (we know that already).

FO: Nadal

Wimbledon: Nadal

USO: Federer

Well, this is a bit of fun so trying to repel the power of the jinx, obviously Novak has the AO, I would have Rafa with the French and Wimbledon and as for the USO? Well, I think the Fates collided last year and Rafa won it, but to be honest, I'm not sure we'll see him do it again. I'll go for JMDP.

Federer won't win a slam this year....just a feeling and no more than that.

Soderling won't progress any further than he has already, and could well slip down the rankings.

Rafa for FO and Wimbledon...possibly USO, but more like Nole or JMDP if he continues to improve.

Andy Murray has too many issues at the moment to cope with, and I can't see him having a realistic tilt at anything.....except possibly the USO, but it's a long shot.

Of course all this depends if they all stay fully fit!

Hi Joel.........welcome to 606v2

Solerina

I've voted for Djokovic......I think he'll win Wimbledon, to add to his AO title.

Rafa will very likely win the French Open.

Murray, I think, will win the US Open

Solerina

The "None will win a grandslam this year" option is not applicable as Novak Djokovic has already won a grandslam this year. Perhaps you could replace it with Berdych or "It will be a tie".

Nore Staat wrote:The "None will win a grandslam this year" option is not applicable as Novak Djokovic has already won a grandslam this year. Perhaps you could replace it with Berdych or "It will be a tie".

Well if you look at the title it's actually 'who will win the most slams this year', so saying 'none' would mean 'no-one will win the most slams this year'.... it's a sensible option.

I actually think it'll probably be Nadal, with Wimbledon and the French, and with Federer winning the US Open. Wouldn't put it past Djokovic (US Open) or Soderling (French Open) to get one though.

Any of the good clay courtiers could beat Soderling I dont see him getting beyond the quarters in the FO

Think Rafa will win Wimbledon and the French Open.

Think it will be Murray at the US Open.

I don't like to write off Federer, but him and Del Potro will be dark horses for Wimbledon and the US Open.

Haddie-nuff wrote:Any of the good clay courtiers could beat Soderling I dont see him getting beyond the quarters in the FO

You mean like Ferrer, who failed to stop him in Roland Garros two years ago? Have Verdasco, Ferrer or Almagro even made a Roland Garros final, let alone 2 on the trot, and in addition to that who else has stopped Nadal in the clay slam?

Come on. Dislike Soderling if you must, but to deny he isn't a class above on clay where it counts is looking increasingly daft. If Nadal doesn't show up in Paris, then the Sod's the only guy I can see taking advantage.

Ferrer has upped his game since then... and what has Soderling done since.?? then:doh:
Verdasco´s first surface is not clay at any rate. Andy Murray is quite capable of taking out the Sod as is JDP
I dont care how increasingly daft you think my opinion is IT IS MY opinion.
You have yours did I call it daft ??? I have not asked you to like my opinion or agree with it. just remember this is not 606 everyone´s opinion gets treated with respect here.

Haddie-nuff wrote:Ferrer has upped his game since then... and what has Soderling done since.?? then:doh:
Verdasco´s first surface is not clay at any rate. Andy Murray is quite capable of taking out the Sod as is JDP
I dont care how increasingly daft you think my opinion is IT IS MY opinion.
You have yours did I call it daft ??? I have not asked you to like my opinion or agree with it. just remember this is not 606 everyone´s opinion gets treated with respect here.

Since 2009 you mean? Soderling made another slam final, Ferrer, er.... won Acapulco, I guess.

The point I wholeheartedly refuse to accept is that Soderling is poor on clay, which is what you imply, when his slam record simply destroys the 'other' good claycourters. If you think Ferrer will really make much improvement at RG, then OK, but to dismiss Soderling when his record against the best at this particular slam is far superior to anyone else in the Top 10 bar of course Nadal and Federer is I think, daft.

I don't understand the whole del Potro thing; he made the semis once and was put to bed by Federer, albeit after a close match. We'll see how he gets on this year, and I'm sure he'll do well, but at the minute people seem to be basing his 'greatness' off a match he lost.

As for Murray, if Soderling turns up, it's as good as game over unless Murray plays the match of his life. The two aren't even comparable on the stuff!

You don't have to think Soderling will win; whilst Nadal's here it's unlikely in the extreme, but show the guy some respect, huh?

Im not sure who you think you are -- it seems that you can have a dismissive opinion of any player without believing you are showing disrespect. I call that double standards....Write JDP off at your peril.
1) WHERE have I said I disliked Soderling 2) IT IS MY OPINION TO WHICH I AM ENTITLED TO BELIEVE HE WILL NOT WIN R.G. now or ever.
You are dismissive of Almagro who has beaten the Sod each time during their last three meetings on clay ONCE ON THE SOD´S home turf.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=A479&oId=SA49
But it is hypothetical at any rate he still has to get past Djokovic, Federer and then Nadal
so its all a pointless argument

But finally
I am not here to defend my opinions to the likes of you so lets make that clear.You dont have to agree with them but thats your perogative but that does not make them or me daft OK??
I stand by what I said and thats my last word on the subject.
Put your money on The Sod by all means.. William Hill will welcome you with open arms. :

Now i'm going to assume the last comment was made in anger, because half of it is mostly irrelevant response. However, for the sake of clarification, I shall respond to the irrelevant parts of the last comment, and also obviously debate those that are relevant to the argument:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Im not sure who you think you are -- it seems that you can have a dismissive opinion of any player without believing you are showing disrespect. I call that double standards....Write JDP off at your peril.

I suppose we've ignored that bit where I said "I think he'll do well" then? And you have failed to throw in any basis to del Potro being a great claycourter. No player gets to a slam semi-final by being poor on a surface, but it is well within reason to claim a player is not 'great' on a surface if his only result of note is one semi-final. Put it this way; do we consider Verdasco a major threat at AO and the US Open for being an AO semi-finalist? No we don't. So why does del Potro suddenly become the next Nadal after one good result? Soderling on the other hand has A) Surpassed del Potro's result in the same slam. B) He's done it twice. C) He beat the greatest clay-courter of all time his one and only defeat at said slam, and beat the man who was without doubt the 2nd best clay-courter in his generation the following year. There is a line between 'realism' and 'glorifiying' and i'm sticking to realism, given the facts. That's not disrespectful, especially considering that I've already said I think he'll do well this year on the clay.

Haddie-nuff wrote:1) WHERE have I said I disliked Soderling

Excellent question. May I answer that with one of my own? "Where have I said you don't like Soderling?"

I said I thought you were disrespectful of Soderlings record, which comments like "I think any of the good claycourters can beat Soderling" are, I feel. 'Any of the good claycourters'? Soderling IS one of the good claycourters, there is little to no argument there. That is my quarrel.

Haddie-nuff wrote: 2) IT IS MY OPINION TO WHICH I AM ENTITLED TO BELIEVE HE WILL NOT WIN R.G. now or ever.

Irrelevant again. You appear to have entirely missed my above comment saying "You don't have to think Soderling will win". In fact I even elaborated and said I don't think Soderling will win either.

Haddie-nuff wrote:You are dismissive of Almagro who has beaten the Sod each time during their last three meetings on clay ONCE ON THE SOD´S home turf.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=A479&oId=SA49
But it is hypothetical at any rate he still has to get past Djokovic, Federer and then Nadal
so its all a pointless argument

This is more like it. I was already aware of Almagro's record over Soderling, I checked it prior to my previous post. On other threads I have always said I felt Almagro is a dark horse for these tournaments, but personally I value what a player brings to slam over what tournaments they win at other levels. I argue this because Almagro's record at the slams belies his utterly ruthless capabilities on clay in ATP250 and ATP500s, but then tends to fall flat in Paris. Soderling obviously peaks in time for Paris, at the expense of a poorer record outside slams. I can appreciate that you think Almagro will wind up the better player though; if he translates anything like his South Amercian clay form to Paris he'll be a major threat to anyone in the draw. As far as Djokovic, Federer and Nadal are concerned, that's an unusual thing to say. I mean technically, by that logic Nadal still has everyone in his future draws to get past, that doesn't stop us from being pretty certain he'll win most of the clay tournaments, does it?

Haddie-nuff wrote:But finally
I am not here to defend my opinions to the likes of you so lets make that clear.You dont have to agree with them but thats your perogative but that does not make them or me daft OK??
I stand by what I said and thats my last word on the subject.
Put your money on The Sod by all means.. William Hill will welcome you with open arms. :

It seems you've taken offense to the use of the word 'daft'. Now really I'm struggling to see how you can be so up in arms over that one word. Daft in my book means 'silly', which is hardly a highly offensive remark. I disagreed with your initial dismissal of Soderling at Paris, as I felt that to say that 'any of the good claycourters could beat him' as though Soderling isn't a good claycourter is a silly thing to say. If you honestly, truly believe he is not a good claycourter, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, then OK, but I'm afraid that to then say 'Well yeah, I can see where your coming from' would be a complete lie. I'd rather put my opinion across in a truthful and to be honest, minimal on offense manner than lie.

Finally, you say you are not here to defend your opinion. Well take a look at the top corner of the screen and you'll see the motto 'Create. Comment. Debate.' Allow me to welcome you to 'debate'. It's not a world where we all agree with each other, you do sometimes have to defend your opinions from people who will disagree, and quite often for good or at least equally valid reasons to those that you use to defend your opinion. Look at the Almagro point you made above and my response. That's debate. You defended your opinion, and defended it well without banging on about 'the likes of YOU!' and so on and so forth. The response was civilised and hey, I even agreed to an extent, so you made some ground. That's the whole point of this forum; debate.

Stealth Maestro Agro Love wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Any of the good clay courtiers could beat Soderling I dont see him getting beyond the quarters in the FO

You mean like Ferrer, who failed to stop him in Roland Garros two years ago? Have Verdasco, Ferrer or Almagro even made a Roland Garros final, let alone 2 on the trot, and in addition to that who else has stopped Nadal in the clay slam?

Come on. Dislike Soderling if you must, but to deny he isn't a class above on clay where it counts is looking increasingly daft. If Nadal doesn't show up in Paris, then the Sod's the only guy I can see taking advantage.

You obviously do not read your own posts.

There is no point in continuing this debate. You have at least conceded on some points. But however silly you think my or anyone elses opinion may be it does not help your argument by voicing it. Yes I was somewhat miffed.
Where tennis is concerned it is my opinion that anything can happen.. nothing is set in concrete (let alone clay) !!! The competion is extremely keen and there are no guarantees that any of those we THINK will win do. Seldom do I ever predict... such is the nature of the sport.

Just a point about Delpo... he still has a long way back.. buy Soderling has not beaten him since 2007.albeit they have not met on clay.. Delpo can perform well on clay.. I think he might surprise you.

Haddie-nuff wrote:

Stealth Maestro Agro Love wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Any of the good clay courtiers could beat Soderling I dont see him getting beyond the quarters in the FO

You mean like Ferrer, who failed to stop him in Roland Garros two years ago? Have Verdasco, Ferrer or Almagro even made a Roland Garros final, let alone 2 on the trot, and in addition to that who else has stopped Nadal in the clay slam?

Come on. Dislike Soderling if you must, but to deny he isn't a class above on clay where it counts is looking increasingly daft. If Nadal doesn't show up in Paris, then the Sod's the only guy I can see taking advantage.

You obviously do not read your own posts.

I have no idea what your point is there. I stated a few facts and then laid down the opinion that Soderling is quite clearly one of the 'good claycourters'.

But like you said, this thread is based pretty much on predictions, and my prediction is that Nadal will likely win the majority of the slams.

O
<BLOCKQUOTE>Haddie-nuff wrote:1) WHERE have I said I disliked Soderling
</BLOCKQUOTE>

Excellent question. May I answer that with one of my own? "Where have I said you don't like Soderling?"



THIS IS WHAT YOU WROTE


Come on. Dislike Soderling if you must, but to deny he isn't a class above on clay where it counts is looking increasingly daft. If Nadal doesn't show up in Paris, then the Sod's the only guy I can see taking advantage.

Hence I said you obviously do not read your own post.

Can we call it a day now.

Haddie-nuff wrote:

Can we call it a day now.

Well said Haddie.......thank you : )

Solerina

Well I personally think:

AO- Novak (Well, duh!)
French- Nadal
Wimbledon- Murray/Novak
US: Federer.

I am awesome i think Fed's best chance it at wimby. If he serves at a high percentage from start to finnish in the tournament and has the draw open up for him, I still think he is the most natural grass court player on tour. He can use his net game, his slice backand to good effect. I think the difficulty for Fed at the US open is that too many players are really good on the hardcourts; Murray, Djoko, Del Po, Soderling, Nadal, and Berdych. Anyone of these guys on his day could put him out of the US open.

There's a sneaky possibility that Del Boy might be the dark horse at the FO, where is he ATM ?

Jubbahey wrote:There's a sneaky possibility that Del Boy might be the dark horse at the FO, where is he ATM ?

46th, hasn't played since Miami. Will be at Madrid though, as his protected ranking puts him in the main draw. No reports of him being injured; I think he's just taking it easy after the year out. Very sensible thinking! D

socal1976 wrote:I am awesome i think Fed's best chance it at wimby. If he serves at a high percentage from start to finnish in the tournament and has the draw open up for him, I still think he is the most natural grass court player on tour. He can use his net game, his slice backand to good effect. I think the difficulty for Fed at the US open is that too many players are really good on the hardcourts; Murray, Djoko, Del Po, Soderling, Nadal, and Berdych. Anyone of these guys on his day could put him out of the US open.

Hmmmm.... true, apparently he only lost to Berdych last year because he had some sort of back injury, but I'm not too sure on that. The reason however why I think he has got a bigger chance for the US open is because it's the fastest of all the courts and at this age the Fedexpress needs the faster courts to hit through opponents and finish off points more quickly. However you raise some good points on how he could win Wimbledon. Especially his net game, if used to good effect can win him wimby.

The Us Open is very fast, however the one problem you get with US open is that Fed would have to play the semi on Saturday and then come back and play the final on Sunday. He will be 30 years when the US open comes around and maybe it would be tough to comeback and play back to back 5 setters especially if he is the late semifinal on Saturday. But Pete did manage the trick for his last run at the US open. I still think wimby is just as fast I think the players hit more aces there then they do at the US open, and he needs to serve lights out from start to finish in the tournament.

socal1976 wrote:The Us Open is very fast, however the one problem you get with US open is that Fed would have to play the semi on Saturday and then come back and play the final on Sunday. He will be 30 years when the US open comes around and maybe it would be tough to comeback and play back to back 5 setters especially if he is the late semifinal on Saturday. But Pete did manage the trick for his last run at the US open. I still think wimby is just as fast I think the players hit more aces there then they do at the US open, and he needs to serve lights out from start to finish in the tournament.

I find it amazing how 30 for tennis is old, but in other sports 30 is when you really come into your prime. Sad, but true. I still think though that Federer is in prime condition, physically and can handle back to back 5 setters.

Awesome, tennis is a little different because it is an individual sport that realies a great deal on movement, ability to see the ball, and ligthening quick reactions. These all favor the 20 somethings and not the 30 plus guys. Plus with the grind of the tour and travel you need the energy and the ability to recover quickly. Roger in my mind is still showing his class by being in the top 3 at nearly 30 years old. But tennis isn't a team game, it isn't like football when a guy turns thirty you can change his position or his role within a team structure. Even a small degradation in eyesight, reaction time, foot speed, and fitness will show up in big matches.