DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**trowUrillioth** · 04-08-2008, 05:50 PM

As you say, logically it should be there, but I simply do not see it. I know JJ is getting to number 1 without even being to a GS final, but I can only recall Marcelo Rios and Ivan Lendl becoming number 1 without winning a GS (Lendl of course did it afterwards).
With today's ranking system and depth in the men's tour, I think it would be impossible to reach number 1 without winning slams.

Actually, with his consistency in slams, it's quite likely he'll go deep at all four over and over. So, if someone is to believe he'll never win another slam, it's possible to also think he reaches several finals a year and wins enough other tournaments to be number 1. For example, if Djokovic and Nadal crash out of the USO early this year and don't win TMC and Fed loses the final to someone else, he'll only have to do marginally better than last year in the fall to end the year number 1.

04-08-2008, 05:50 PM	#7
trowUrillioth Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 671 Senior Member	As you say, logically it should be there, but I simply do not see it. I know JJ is getting to number 1 without even being to a GS final, but I can only recall Marcelo Rios and Ivan Lendl becoming number 1 without winning a GS (Lendl of course did it afterwards). With today's ranking system and depth in the men's tour, I think it would be impossible to reach number 1 without winning slams. Actually, with his consistency in slams, it's quite likely he'll go deep at all four over and over. So, if someone is to believe he'll never win another slam, it's possible to also think he reaches several finals a year and wins enough other tournaments to be number 1. For example, if Djokovic and Nadal crash out of the USO early this year and don't win TMC and Fed loses the final to someone else, he'll only have to do marginally better than last year in the fall to end the year number 1.
	Quote