Wimbledon '09. The poll.

[fedfan]

I'm pretty sure he won't be able to make it to No.1 even if he wins as he has QF points to defend first.

He could edge No.2 though, but then it will be time for him to start defending a lot of points on the hardcourt swing.

[Mike Rotchtickles]

Well it looks like on current form Murray will definately break into the top two. The thing is that Nadal will not only lose the points from Wimbledon, but at a later date also the 800 pts from last years Olympic Games. Murray lost in the 1st round there so he does not take a points hit.

[Vieira151]

well, nadal goes down 2000 points 12735 to 10735, cause he isnt entering...

Then if fed wins he goes from 10620 to 11420 cause he gains 800 points from becoming runner up to winner(if he wins it ).

Then, if murray wins it, he gains 1640 points cause he only got to QF last year. 360 for QF to 2000 points for winning. so he would move from 9230 to 10870, so he would move number 1 if he wins it

SO if Murray Wins it against Fed in the Final, the ranking would stand as:
1. Murray - 10870 points
2. Nadal - 10735 points
3. Federer- 10620 points (cause Fed isnt getting any more/less points from finishing at the same point)




This is the points you get for each round here...


W - 2,000
F - 1,200
SF - 720
QF - 360
R16 - 180
R32 - 90
R64 - 45
R128 - 10

[Moralspain]

I also think that along Murray and Roddick, the hated Djokovic will do a great tournament.

[Q. Reese]

Thanks Nimfrodil. That makes sense; because, to think of it, Murray does not have precedence to set forth. Also, Roddick does not either. He can be a huge point-gainer too at Wimbledon.

I think Murray is better able to defend his points than Roddick though. That is why Roddick stays at number 6, and I'm thinking that this guy has it figured out. Win some and lose some; stay top 10 for six years or so (sounds good). LOL.

[Ir0kuM4t4]

Murray couldn't reach the nr. 1. Here's an explanation of the fight for the nr. 1:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2009/06/Shark-Bites-Battle-For-No-1.aspx

[Q. Reese]

Nimfrodil!! Your explanation?!

[pfnerch]

Please not Murray he isnt the real Nr. 1. Federer and Nadal is much better. We all know

[jayl0ve]

Even if Murray did somehow manage to get the #1 spot, I couldn't really see him ever holding onto it for very long. He's a great player but I think he's just plain not on the Federer/Nadal level and never really will be. I could end up being wrong in a few years or something, but I doubt it.

[NARCOSIS2009]

Yeah i think Murrays really crap, I mean he got to a grand slam final, everyone can do that. Hes also beating Nadal and Federer regularly. Hes also probably the smartest tennis player at the moment. But yup hes shit

[jayl0ve]

Um...ok?

[NARCOSIS2009]

Here we go again,

If Murray keeps beating everyone Federer/nadal etc, then how come his game isnt at the same level to theirs?
For someone who claims to like murray, u sound like a mutant hater.
And yeah his game might not have the same flare as a federer, but its really effective.

[jayl0ve]

[NARCOSIS2009]

Ahhhh so that explains why ure such a dickhead at the moment.

[Samael]

Yeah i think Murrays really crap, I mean he got to a grand slam final, everyone can do that. Hes also beating Nadal and Federer regularly. Hes also probably the smartest tennis player at the moment. But yup hes ****

Just look at this: http://tennis.enetpulse.com/mdets.php?id=63592.
Where do you see from there than Murray is constantly beating Nadal??? Well, Abu Dhabi and Rotterdam are top class tournaments...