ATP No. 1 for the next few weeks.

The basic assessment is simple, if Fed equals or does better than Djoko at the Olympics he's almost certainly going to stay at No. 1 for the following week, and probably to at least 07.10.12 (day after China Open) meaning that a better performance at the Olympics coupled with matching his 2011 August-Sept would give Fed another 10 weeks and put him on 298 weeks overall at No. 1, namely just short of the 300 week barrier.

However, I'm far from sure and find the parameters complicated and there is not one place which gathers all this together.

1. The current lead is 75 points;

2. The Olympic point distribution is this

W: 750, Silver: 450, Bronze: 340, 4th: 270, QF: 135, R16: 70, R32: 35, R64: 5

3. When Toronto and Cincinnati from 2011 come off Fed has a big built-in advantage (910 and then 420 - total of 1,330) as the live ranking predictor shows http://live-tennis.eu/forecast_atp_ranking

4. For me there are three complicating factors which may have an effect on the result:

a. When Olympic 2012 points come on - I imagine it must be 06.08.12, the day after the Olympic Tournament ends

b. When 2011 Toronto points come off - the live ranking guys seem to be saying that the 2011 Toronto points come off in two weeks time (i.e. 06.08.12). If that were the case any gain by Djoko over Fed at the Olympics would probably be irrelevant given the big 910 counter from Toronto; but the ATP website says it's 13.08.12, which would be the day after Toronto finishes meaning that Djoko could get the No. 1 back for a week after the Olympics but almost certainly lose it back after Canada 2012 unless there is the same disparity of outcome in Canada 2012 as in Toronto 2011 (unlikely, surely?).

c. The fact that Fed has 90 points in his 'best of 6 other countable' from Doha with the "0" from Tokyo 2011 not yet to drop off probably means that if he gets more than 90 points at the Olympics his 90 points from Doha 2012 have to come off with the result that his maximum marginal gain from the Olympics will be his Olympic points tally less 90 points http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Roger-Federer.aspx?t=rb. Djoko does not have the same position with his best countable others.

5. Applying the points I make in 4 to the Olympics:

a. If Djoko and Fed both lose in R16 or earlier Fed stays No. 1;

b. If Djoko and Fed both get to the QF Djoko goes to No. 1 if he goes further than Fed or they both lose in the QF. In the latter case Djoko gains 135 but Fed gains 135-90 = 45 so Djoko's marginal gain of 90 rubs out the current 75 lead by 15 points and he goes No. 1 for a week and needs to get 910 more points than Fed at Canada to stay there for the next week;

c. If Djoko and Fed both get beyond the QF whoever goes further is the no. 1 at the end of the week. The tightest outcome is if they face one another in the bronze play-off and Fed wins. Then Fed gains 340-90 = 250 points to Djoko's 270 points and so stays No. 1 for a week by 55 points.

6. After the Olympics before the China Open (same week as Tokyo, and the week before Shanghai) Djoko defends 1,000 + 600 + 2,000 = 3,600 points to Fed's 90 + 180 + 720 = 990 points.

Phew - I'd be grateful for any comments or corrections.

Nice article barry :ale:

Great research barry. It's very exciting, potentially, to have the No 1 at stake as well as the title in the forthcoming tournaments.

If you look further to the y/e No. 1 after the Olympics:

1. Fed defends 990 + 500 (Basel) + 1,000 (Paris) + 1,500 (WTF) = 3,990

2. Djoko defends 3,600 + 2x180 (Basel and Paris) + 200 (WTF) = 4,160

Talk of defending points sometimes misses the point, because the y/e no. 1 is decided on 2012 points not what happened in 2011. So if your focus is on that all-important week in November all this stuff is pretty much the same as pointing out that in the current race to the y/e Fed has 7,095 points and Djoko and Nadal have 6,840 points each with the result that of the three, whoever gets the most points in 2012 from now on will win the y/e No. 1 except Fed has a very small (probably negligible) cushion.

Whoever wins the USO will probably be y/e No. 1 with the most likely exceeption being if Nadal wins it with one herculean effort which he is unable to repaeat elsewhere.

The y/e number one is a long shot IMO, Fed did go on a tear after the USO last year and that will be very tricky for him to repeat...

reckoner wrote:The y/e number one is a long shot IMO, Fed did go on a tear after the USO last year and that will be very tricky for him to repeat...

I agree that y/e No. 1 is a longshot for Fed, especially given how much he's played already and I doubt it's a priority - I'll bet he'd love to have 300 weeks in total under his belt and be apart in that way.

However, my point is that Fed does not need to repeat the same concentrated 3-tournament tear if he can pick up decent points between now and the end of the USO.

I'd expect Shanghai to be a higher priority for him and other No. 1 contenders than Paris this year because the latter is the week before the WTF and both he and Djoko have amends to make up to Shanghai having missed it last year.

I'd think that Canada will see a patchy performance, possibly even no-shows, from either (or both) of Fed or Djoko who goes far at the Olympics.

Great article for me and I'm sure other Federer fans!

The last 3 tournaments (Basel, Paris & WTF) are important for Fed but I think more crucial is how Canada & Cinnci play out for him because I think most of us are in agreement that Fed isn't likely to repeat last year's late season clean sweep. So easy opportunities to gain points like @ Canada, Cinnci & Shanghai then becomes important. However, I think there's a strong chance Fed will hold onto Basel (home crowd factor plus 5 titles already & 8 finals) and do well in the WTF so that leaves Paris needing to be decent (probably a semi or final would be good).

I'm not sure I'd agree that Fed is a long shot, that relies on a lot of premature speculation that Fed can't repeat his end of season run. While I agree that Fed holding onto Paris might be tricky, there's every chance he may hold onto Basel and the WTF, in fact in the case of the latter, he has more titles there than @ Basel (which has 3 times as many points)! Remember, Fed is one of the best indoor hard court players around, so conditions favour him. While I'm not saying he won't make a clean sweep, he probably needs to gain points in the next 3 months @ Canada, Cinnci & Shanghai to insure against probably losing points @ Paris but to say he's a long shot is a bit premature, at the moment it looks 50/50. The unknown is how Djokovic comes out and so far this year, it's not been that good. The only World Tour Masters 1000 title he defended successfully was Miami and out of the two slams he held, he defended only the Aussie Open successfully and only then by the skin of his teeth!

What does this suggest for his 1, 600 points for Canada & Cinnci? Djokovic had 4, 000 points in the Masters 1000 tournaments upto this point last year and this year it's down to 2, 740 so he's lost 1, 260. Fed had 1, 305 last year whereas this year it's 2, 405 so up 1, 100. So the main conclusion is that Djokovic must hold onto his good performances last year @ Canada & Cinnci just to keep in range with Fed but if Fed just does a bit better then it doesn't matter what Djokovic does. The difference is that Djokovic must win titles outright, Fed doesn't. So really, it comes down to how Djokovic does in Canada & Cinnci: if he loses around 500 points, which is what we would expect going on the average points drop so far this year and Fed goes up by a similar margin or a bit less, the gap becomes 1, 000 hence why I don't think Fed is a long shot @ all. As I said, 50/50.

Last year's end of season performance wasn't that different from other years, the main difference being he won Paris. However Fed has typically been winning Basel & the WTF (typically together) for years, only 2009 (and 2008 for WTF) was out of kilter and even then he made the final of Basel and SF of the WTF. Why so many think he won't repeat a similar performance to last year seems a tad foolish, he's typically been winning the Basel & WTF titles fairly regularly. Paris, I concede may not be the title he will win, but Basel & the WTF are 2/3 of the points (out of Basel, Paris & WTF) if he holds them, which he typically does.

Luciusman - I think your logic is difficult to challenge, but the factors I look at are mileage and age.

Fed has played 52 matches so far this year (46-6). There are, according to his schedule, 8 tournaments left for him - Olympics (6r), Canada (5r), Cincinatti (5r), USO (7r), Shanghai (5r), Basel (5r), Paris (5r), WTF (5r).

He has not played as many as 80 matches in a year since 2008, he's not getting any younger, he had that nasty back interlude at Wimbledon this year, and the remaining tournaments are not well spread out: there are two instances of 3 weeks of tennis in a row from the Olympics to Cincinatti and from Basel to WTF.

It's worth remembering also that he'd play the full 6 matches at the Olympics if he reached but lost the SF because of the Bronze play-off.

I don't see Fed going all out for 3 weeks in a row at any stage, particularly if he wants to go to Shanghai in between USO and the beginning of Basel (unlike last year, but like 2010).

Unless he has a really bad Olympics that would suggest at least two Masters Tournaments are going to be no-shows and/or early-round tanks (I think probably Canada and Paris). Furthermore, I think the USO is far more difficult for him to win than winning Wimbledon woudl suggest now that it is not noticeably quicker as it used to be - and you need to chuck in the risk of Super Saturday being against the 31-yr-old and Nadal being in his side of the draw (he's always my favourite to lose a 5-setter against Nadal).

I really have Djoko as the favourite - but which Djoko are we going to see, and Murray may score heavily from now on as he usually does.

I agree Barry. The key will be the form of Djokovic in the US. He has a third of his total points to defend in those three events (!) and don't rule out a draw effect like Raonic getting him in the 4th round.

very good article BB

The upcoming weeks, Olympics, Canada and Cincy will say the real story, and I don't think so Y/E No.1 is out of reach for Fed, if he win the title in one of the remaning masters or an USO title he very likely will be the Y/E no.1

Interesting times ahead, btw Murray gonna win the USO beating Djoko in the finals and hence helping Fed retain the no.1.

Thank you, but it's Barry's article.

Nice article to echo others
Good further analysis too luciusmann.

Its a good time for Fed to get #1 in terms of not many events for a few weeks after Wimby so he gets more weeks without having to play too much.

The key without doubt is USO and indoors. I just wonder if Fed can do it as he must start to feel the miles post USO you'd have thought!

How far does he need to go to crack 300 weeks? End of October?

If he can play 80+ matches in a year with 80%+ W:L at 31 years old then I take my hat off to the guy...

barrystar wrote:Luciusman - I think your logic is difficult to challenge, but the factors I look at are mileage and age.

Fed has played 52 matches so far this year (46-6). There are, according to his schedule, 8 tournaments left for him - Olympics (6r), Canada (5r), Cincinatti (5r), USO (7r), Shanghai (5r), Basel (5r), Paris (5r), WTF (5r).

He has not played as many as 80 matches in a year since 2008, he's not getting any younger, he had that nasty back interlude at Wimbledon this year, and the remaining tournaments are not well spread out: there are two instances of 3 weeks of tennis in a row from the Olympics to Cincinatti and from Basel to WTF.

It's worth remembering also that he'd play the full 6 matches at the Olympics if he reached but lost the SF because of the Bronze play-off.

I don't see Fed going all out for 3 weeks in a row at any stage, particularly if he wants to go to Shanghai in between USO and the beginning of Basel (unlike last year, but like 2010).

Unless he has a really bad Olympics that would suggest at least two Masters Tournaments are going to be no-shows and/or early-round tanks (I think probably Canada and Paris). Furthermore, I think the USO is far more difficult for him to win than winning Wimbledon woudl suggest now that it is not noticeably quicker as it used to be - and you need to chuck in the risk of Super Saturday being against the 31-yr-old and Nadal being in his side of the draw (he's always my favourite to lose a 5-setter against Nadal).

I really have Djoko as the favourite - but which Djoko are we going to see, and Murray may score heavily from now on as he usually does.

Haven't they scrapped stupid saturday?

I thought they made the decision to move to a permanent monday final? Hence a rest day for the men on sunday.



emancipator

No, still going. Anyway I want one more, when Fed gets to go first, wins, and watches Nadal & Djokovic play until 3am. I know it's naughty but it'd be fiendish fun.

Really? Man I hate that crap.

I thought they'd gotten rid of it.

I thought Fed had a decent shot at the the title, joint first with Novak. Now I think he's fourth favourite. There's no way a 31 yr old will be able to recover as quickly as rivals 5-6 years younger.

Americans are so dumb. Only they could of come up with such a moronic concept. Super saturday dude, woohoo

emancipator wrote:I thought Fed had a decent shot at the the title, joint first with Novak. Now I think he's fourth favourite.

Agree, Sat/Sun combo makes it hard for Roger. Unless BB gets his wish in which case he may have a chance.

bogbrush wrote:No, still going. Anyway I want one more, when Fed gets to go first, wins, and watches Nadal & Djokovic play until 3am. I know it's naughty but it'd be fiendish fun.

It would be super fun indeed, and one of these enter finals to be bageled by Federer

Super saturday is indeed live and well for 2012 and probably 2013 as well.

It's difficult to find out, but prior to 2000 there was a relatively even w/l of the 1st/2nd semi-finalist.

More recently, I think that since 2000 the 2nd SF winners have fared thus:

2000 Sampras loses (Safin)
2001 Sampras loses (Hewitt)
2002 Agassi loses (Sampras)
2003 Roddick wins (Ferrero)
2004 Federer wins (Hewitt)
2005 Federer wins (Agassi)
2006 Roddick loses (Federer)
2007 Federer wins (Djokovic)
2008 Murray loses (Federer)
2009 Federer loses (Del Potro)
2010 Djokovic loses (Nadal)
2011 Nadal loses (Djokovic)

Mind you, in recent years super saturday has been followed by soggy sunday and madcap monday.

Even so, it's pretty obvious to me that with today's more attritional game the advantage given to the 1st Semi-finalist in a tournament with a best-of-five set format can be decisive and that's a shame.

Any corrections please!!

It is a ridiculous advantage and I will be very, very glad to see the back of a Sunday final after 'Super Saturday'.

It is just plain wrong that one of the four major titles has a lottery like element to deciding the champion of tournament.

(Can I just indulge in a bit of fedworshipping though and say playing the second semi 3 times during his consecutive 5 titles run and emerging the winner on each occasion.)

carry on!