PDA

View Full Version : how did novak djokovic become 4th ranked


dj's fan3
05-13-2009, 09:42 AM
how did that happend i went to sleep last night and i must have missed something?:confused::confused::confused::confused: :

seffina
05-13-2009, 09:44 AM
He didn't defend any of the tournys that he won last year.

MajinX
05-13-2009, 09:45 AM
he did well but not good enough compared to last year while murray did alot better than he did before.

gj011
05-13-2009, 09:46 AM
Too many of these threads. Go and learn how ranking works or read one of many earlier threads where this is discussed.

woodrow1029
05-13-2009, 09:49 AM
Too many of these threads. Go and learn how ranking works or read one of many earlier threads where this is discussed.
However, if the thread was "How did Federer become 2nd ranked," you would be all over it with a response.

Telepatic
05-13-2009, 09:49 AM
Thats how it works, when someone wakes up,ATP rankings change.

gj011
05-13-2009, 09:50 AM
However, if the thread was "How did Federer become 2nd ranked," you would be all over it with a response.

If it was 15th thread with that same topic, than no.

maximo
05-13-2009, 10:21 AM
Because is Murray playing better tennis than Djokovic?

batz
05-13-2009, 10:23 AM
Because Murray playing better tennis than Djokovic?

'Better' is too subjective. Murray overtook Novak because he has won more points these last 52 weeks - seemples.

maximo
05-13-2009, 10:24 AM
'Better' is too subjective. Murray overtook Novak because he has won more points these last 52 weeks - seemples.

But he is playing better tennis tho.

batz
05-13-2009, 10:28 AM
But he is playing tennis tho.

In your view Max, and maybe mine too - but it's only our opinion; others are entitled to disagree with us. What they can't disagree with is the fact that Andy has won more points than Novak these last 12 months.

maximo
05-13-2009, 10:47 AM
In your view Max, and maybe mine too - but it's only our opinion; others are entitled to disagree with us. What they can't disagree with is the fact that Andy has won more points than Novak these last 12 months.

I thought ive seen you somewhere. ;)

http://www.andymurray.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2490

batz
05-13-2009, 11:52 AM
I thought ive seen you somewhere. ;)

http://www.andymurray.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2490

I noticed you over there the other night too mate.

ty slothrop
05-13-2009, 01:19 PM
Being ranked/seeded 3 vs. 4 is irrelevant. You have an equal chance of landing in the 1 seed's half of the bracket. Likewise, there is absolutely no material difference being ranked 5, 6, 7, or 8, since the quarter in which those players wind up is completely random.

Yet another reason for the ATP to start doing true seeding (1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 in the semis, 1 vs. 8 and 2 vs. 7 etc. in the quarters, 1 vs. 16 and 2 vs. 15 etc. in the round of 16)...

seffina
05-13-2009, 01:22 PM
Yet another reason for the ATP to start doing true seeding (1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 in the semis, 1 vs. 8 and 2 vs. 7 etc. in the quarters, 1 vs. 16 and 2 vs. 15 etc. in the round of 16)...They used to have that but found that it became incredibly dull to have the exact same match up all the time. I like it this way a lot more. There is order, but still some variety.

gj011
05-13-2009, 01:26 PM
Being ranked/seeded 3 vs. 4 is irrelevant. You have an equal chance of landing in the 1 seed's half of the bracket. Likewise, there is absolutely no material difference being ranked 5, 6, 7, or 8, since the quarter in which those players wind up is completely random.

Yet another reason for the ATP to start doing true seeding (1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 in the semis, 1 vs. 8 and 2 vs. 7 etc. in the quarters, 1 vs. 16 and 2 vs. 15 etc. in the round of 16)...

Random is much better. Seffina gave you one reason. Another problem with fixed seeding would be that players might tank a smaller tournament to lose a spot and avoid bad matchup in the bigger tournament. For example if Nadal is still #2 (think last year), either Murray or Novak could tank Madrid to make sure they are #4 and avoid Nadal in the RG SF. Or #5 player cold tank Madrid to drop to #6 and basically pick and choose to play #3 Murray in RG QF instead #4 Novak.
It is much better as is.

ty slothrop
05-13-2009, 01:46 PM
Random is much better. Seffina gave you one reason. Another problem with fixed seeding would be that players might tank a smaller tournament to lose a spot and avoid bad matchup in the bigger tournament. For example if Nadal is still #2 (think last year), either Murray or Novak could tank Madrid to make sure they are #4 and avoid Nadal in the RG SF. Or #5 player cold tank Madrid to drop to #6 and basically pick and choose to play #3 Murray in RG QF instead #4 Novak.
It is much better as is.

highly, highly, highly unlikely that anyone in the top 10 would tank a match for that reason.

as for the the theory of random draws creating variety, for me the idea should be to keep the integrity of the sport intact. take aussie 08 for example -- why should federer have to play novak in the semis? In that case the #1 ranking (NUMBER ONE RANKING!) was meaningless. Say Del Potro steps up his game another couple notches -- how fair would it be for Rafa to draw him in the freaking quarters?

gj011
05-13-2009, 01:50 PM
highly, highly, highly unlikely that anyone in the top 10 would tank a match for that reason.

as for the the theory of random draws creating variety, for me the idea should be to keep the integrity of the sport intact. take aussie 08 for example -- why should federer have to play novak in the semis? In that case the #1 ranking (NUMBER ONE RANKING!) was meaningless. Say Del Potro steps up his game another couple notches -- how fair would it be for Rafa to draw him in the freaking quarters?

I don't think it is that unlikely. Anyway I still like it the way it is much much better.

Clydey2times
05-13-2009, 01:55 PM
I noticed you over there the other night too mate.

Batz, you should check out Murraysworld.com

You can actually be yourself on there and be critical of Murray without being reprimanded.

batz
05-13-2009, 02:12 PM
Batz, you should check out Murraysworld.com

You can actually be yourself on there and be critical of Murray without being reprimanded.

I might just do that Clydey - cheers.

clayman2000
05-13-2009, 03:58 PM
They used to have that but found that it became incredibly dull to have the exact same match up all the time. I like it this way a lot more. There is order, but still some variety.

ya but the problems with that is that sometimes the difference in the rankings can be very steep. For example, when the top 4 was Fed, Nadal, Djoker and Davy, it was tough when he got in Feds half of the draw cause he was clearly superior to Davy.

An example of how these can play out was in 07 when Roddick fell to 5 in the world after lossing to Djokovic in Canada. Becuase of this, he was put in Darth Federers quarter of the draw despite playing farly well.