next »

[Philip]

Following on from Torin's comparison,  the link below shows that Federer won his first GS after playing 17 times.  Andy is on his 15th GS so it is anytime imminently.  Either at the USO this year or the AO next year.  This is exciting stuff .

Murray targets number one ranking

Andy and Fed have been neck and neck the whole way up the rankings in terms of 'youngest to be ranked x' terms; Fed was slightly ahead until they hit the top 25, then Murray was slightly ahead until they hit the top 3.

I think that if Andy wins today, then wins next week, then wins the US Open then he's guaranteed to hit number 1 on 14/09/2009, which would be 41 days younger than Fed was? (Assuming Fed doesn't enter New Haven, which he won't.) (And obviously that's a big if.)

   Federer   Murray
1   22.45   
2   21.99   22.26
3   21.87   21.99
4   21.55   21.32
5   21.43   21.32
6   21.22   21.22
7   21.16   21.22
8   20.76   20.09
9   20.76   20.07
10   20.76   19.92
11   20.61   19.88
12   20.05   19.84
13   19.99   19.73
14   19.80   19.71
15   19.80   19.65
16   19.80   19.33
17   19.80   19.33
18   19.73   19.33
19   19.69   19.27
20   19.53   19.27
21   19.53   19.25
22   19.48   19.25
23   19.48   19.25
24   19.23   19.25
25   19.21   19.25
26   19.21   19.25
27   19.21   19.25
28   19.21   19.25
29   19.21   19.25
30   19.11   19.25
31   19.11   19.23
32   19.11   19.23
33   19.11   19.23
34   19.11   19.23
35   18.84   19.17
36   18.84   19.15
37   18.84   19.15
38   18.81   19.15
39   18.81   19.15
40   18.81   19.15
41   18.81   18.85
42   18.81   18.79
43   18.81   18.79
44   18.81   18.79
45   18.81   18.79
46   18.81   18.79
47   18.81   18.77
48   18.65   18.77
49   18.56   18.77
50   18.56   18.77
51   18.56   18.77
52   18.56   18.77
53   18.56   18.77
54   18.50   18.77
55   18.50   18.77
56   18.50   18.77
57   18.21   18.77
58   18.21   18.77
59   18.21   18.77
60   18.21   18.71
61   18.21   18.71
62   18.21   18.66
63   18.21   18.56
64   18.21   18.54
65   18.21   18.52
66   18.19   18.48
67   18.17   18.46
68   18.17   18.46
69   18.17   18.46
70   18.17   18.44
71   18.17   18.43
72   18.17   18.39
73   18.17   18.39
74   18.17   18.39
75   18.17   18.39
76   18.17   18.39
77   18.17   18.39
78   18.17   18.39
79   18.17   18.39
80   18.17   18.39
81   18.17   18.39
82   18.17   18.39
83   18.17   18.39
84   18.17   18.39
85   18.17   18.39
86   18.17   18.39
87   18.17   18.39
88   18.17   18.39
89   18.17   18.39
90   18.17   18.39
91   18.17   18.39
92   18.17   18.39
93   18.15   18.39
94   18.15   18.39
95   18.10   18.39
96   18.10   18.39
97   18.10   18.39
98   18.10   18.39
99   18.10   18.39
100   18.10   18.39

[mackym]

If Murray beats Fed in the semi and goes on to win Cincy, what will their respective pts totals be?

[Yamor]

Good post. By the way, the totals you give for when you remove last years US Open points are adding ten points for a first round loss this year, which isn't guaranteed if one is injured! But it doesn't make the slightest difference...

[Yamor]

There actually is clarification about the four 500 events needed. Federer and Blake who have only played one such event have received a zero-pointer already because there are only two more weeks they could play 500 events this year.
My only real question remaining is whether the necessity to play a 500 event after the US Open means that has to count towards players' totals even at the expense of a higher result from earlier in the year.
In other words, is the requirement just to play one 500 event from after the USO, or also to count a 500 event from after the USO.

[Yamor]

Yes, that does seem to be the case, and I believe that's what will happen. However if you look in the ATP rulebook in the section about this rule, it seems to say that it does have to be counted. (Although it is technically possible to explain the wording either way.)

[Yamor]

I actually do agree with you that it's just a requirement to play it, however the wording of the rulebook strongly suggests the opposite.


I don't think Nadal's points are proof, since the requirement to play four 500's and the requirement to play one after the US Open are unrelated, so at this moment when the second requirement has not come into force yet, you can certainly count four 500's.

It could also be that even if you do have to count the post-USO 500, Davis Cup points could be an exception, for two reasons:
1) like it doesn't count towards the requirement to play four 500's, and yet can still count as a 500 result, maybe it can also count instead of the post-USO 500.
2) there is a round of the Davis Cup played after the US Open, so it may be allowed to take the place of the post-USO 500 in the rankings.

[Philip]

Thanks for the info.  I am just focusing on Andy at the moment.

My understanding is that Andy has got 3 events that can be counted towards his "500" which is Monte Carlo + 2 "500" events.  I assume this means that Andy only needs to play 1 more 500 event (e.g. Basel?) to complete his set of 4 ?

[Neil]

Or possibly Tokyo as well?