PDA

View Full Version : Nadal wants a two-year ranking system to fight fatigue


vtmike
05-15-2009, 06:06 AM
Rafael Nadal says the ATP needs a massive change in the ranking system to keep players from burning out and getting injured, with the No. 1 calling for a two-year cycle to replace the current 12-month grind.

"I've been saying for some time now that for me, it would be better to have a two-year ranking system - it would be better for the players," said the Spaniard, winner of his last three events on clay with a potential fifth straight Roland Garros next on his plate.

"Today it is mandatory to play every week and everywhere you are defending and if you lose you lose lots of points, especially in my case. It affects everyone and not just the high-ranked player but any player in the top 100.

"A two-year ranking would be much more favorable and to give some piece of mind. It would also help extend the career of the tennis players."

Nadal is competing in Madrid this week for his fourth out of the last five with the French Open starting a week from Sunday.

~ Johan Lindahl

http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20090514/Nadal_wants_a_two-year_ranking_system_to_fight_fatigue

theduh
05-15-2009, 06:11 AM
Hmmm.... Free 1 year as number one? I don't think so.

thejoe
05-15-2009, 06:16 AM
You don't notice the other guys burning out so much. I don't think this would help everyone else as much as it would help him.

slice bh compliment
05-15-2009, 06:18 AM
Of course the top guys want this.
And the up&comers? No. What a hill to climb, especially in terms of opportunity and money.
Think of the entry lists.

I'm not in favor of this at all. I mean, this sort of thing is used for incidental rankings/ratings like the Davis Cup Nations rankings. Cool.

But for the ATP Tour?

I can see why *****ovic would whine about this stuff, but Rafa?

Fighting fatigue, huh? Well, the guys could just grow up, play a little less, peak when they need to and not worry about ranking points.

seffina
05-15-2009, 06:21 AM
Rafa, it wouldn't work. It might help you and some players, but it would take so much excitement out of the game. It'll also keep a lot of people from making progress.

52 weeks is just fine. Now if you want to look at the points distribution that the ATP has horribly screwed up, I'm all for it.

theduh
05-15-2009, 06:23 AM
You don't notice the other guys burning out so much. I don't think this would help everyone else as much as it would help him.

True! It's the way Nadal schedule his year. Grinding every single clay court event he can enter + the clay court master series which is only separated by 1 week (two weeks most), FO, one week rest of grass prep plus, rest for another week then Wimby, then off for the NA hardcourt swing prep for USO.

He needs to rethink his schedule for the sake of longevity.

Jim A
05-15-2009, 06:29 AM
Just start it over each year, at the end focus on the Grand Slams and their best "x" masters series with "x" non GS/Masters events

if they choose to play every week fine, but in the end it will be about 20 events needed for a ranking..same conversation for 20 years with people complaining about the season length but making sure to go to UAE for some serious $ before the Australian each year and the rounds after the year end championships...

vtmike
05-15-2009, 06:29 AM
Of course the top guys want this.
And the up&comers? No. What a hill to climb, especially in terms of opportunity and money.
Think of the entry lists.

I'm not in favor of this at all. I mean, this sort of thing is used for incidental rankings/ratings like the Davis Cup Nations rankings. Cool.

But for the ATP Tour?

I can see why *****ovic would whine about this stuff, but Rafa?

Fighting fatigue, huh? Well, the guys could just grow up, play a little less, peak when they need to and not worry about ranking points.

Yup very unfair to the upcoming players!

Tennisfans1
05-15-2009, 08:14 AM
Meh big deal if he wants it its not its gonna change nothing he can do about it

drakulie
05-15-2009, 08:16 AM
How arrogant of him.

bizarre_opinion
05-15-2009, 08:19 AM
thats sounds like a ridiculous idea to me. Maybe rafa needs to change his style of play, so its less taxing on his body?

tacou
05-15-2009, 08:21 AM
I don't even understand what a 2-year ranking is...so if you become #1 you could take the next year off, THEN start defending?

backhander
05-15-2009, 08:21 AM
This sounds like it would hurt up and coming players more than anything, and help the higher ranked players, specifically top 5 or 10.

How about instead of a two year system, the players be more aware of what their body can do and what to enter. I mean if i guy can play week in week out and his body hold up, kudos to him and he deserves the points.

The system shouldn't work to reserve a players ranking, once you reach the top it shouldn't get easier, you need to work hard to also maintain the ranking.

vtmike
05-15-2009, 08:22 AM
How arrogant of him.

Just imagine the reaction if Fed would have said the exact same thing when he was # 1...

http://geology.com/news/images/tungurahua-volcano.jpg

http://drjudywood.co.uk/articles/erin/storm/tornado_and_lighting.jpg

obsessedtennisfandisorder
05-15-2009, 08:23 AM
:)I will start to respect players like nadal's views on the calender system
when they start skipping Dubai to be "fresh" for the slams.:)

JRstriker12
05-15-2009, 08:25 AM
"Today it is mandatory to play every week and everywhere you are defending and if you lose you lose lots of points, especially in my case. It affects everyone and not just the high-ranked player but any player in the top 100.

Did the reporter get this right? Did Nadal miss-speak? Doesn't sound like a champion's mentality. Heck yeah, you better win ALOT if you want to be #1. Winning hasn't seemed to be a problem for Nadal recently.

I can respect player's complaints about the grind. Tennis could benefit from a longer break in the schedule. Maybe lose some stupid events like the year end championship?

vtmike
05-15-2009, 08:27 AM
I don't even understand what a 2-year ranking is...so if you become #1 you could take the next year off, THEN start defending?

But all this time Nadal has been saying that he does NOT care about rankings? :confused: :-?

bizarre_opinion
05-15-2009, 08:32 AM
But all this time Nadal has been saying that he does NOT care about rankings? :confused: :-?

Buhahahaha, he's clearly concerned about something.

seffina
05-15-2009, 08:37 AM
Honestly, he's probably just feeling the pressure of defending the next five titles with Hamburg (points wise), French, Queens, Wimbledon, and Toronto. And that he'll lose the Olympics points that he can't defend. That's 7250 points that he has to defend in the next few months and even if wins them all, he can only defend 6250 points. It's just the pressure of being number one I suppose. :)

KoolBeans
05-15-2009, 08:44 AM
If he wants to extend his career, he would need to change the way he plays, more winners/less grinding etc. Changing the ranking system would probably cause something even worse.

And a two year system definately wouldnt work. How the hell would upandcomers break through?

seffina
05-15-2009, 08:48 AM
If he wants to extend his career, he would need to change the way he plays, more winners/less grinding etc. Changing the ranking system would probably cause something even worse.

And a two year system definately wouldnt work. How the hell would upandcomers break through?

His method of playing has changed. His matches clearly don't last as long. He's having a better year than last year so far. He's not wearing his knee tapes anymore.

Still two year system is silly and won't work. He has a right to his opinion, but I don't think it would help anyone but the top twenty maybe.

KoolBeans
05-15-2009, 08:52 AM
^^^^ i meant ... mooorrrreeeeee, if he wants to play for a reallly long time.

Dutch-Guy
05-15-2009, 08:59 AM
Bad idea.ExFed 'd still be #1 this year.

vtmike
05-15-2009, 09:02 AM
I noticed there have been no comments by any of the hardcore Nadal fans yet...I guess they decided to keep out of this one... :twisted:

drakulie
05-15-2009, 09:08 AM
^^^They don't want to stoop down to nadal's arrogant level. :)

jms007
05-15-2009, 09:10 AM
The system is fine as it is. He should just pipe down and focus on his game. I don't like it when these top players complain about the ranking system, surfaces etc. Why the hell does the ATP or a tournament have to adjust to whoever is at the top at the moment? The current conditions obviously work well enough for them to get there!

veroniquem
05-15-2009, 09:10 AM
I know it would not be practical and I understand why the system is different but I always thought it would be nice to start at 0 at the beginning of the year. It would be more encouraging for the players to add points with every tournament played rather than make it to the final and LOSE points just because you happened to have won that tournament the year before, it must feel like being penalized all the time instead of being rewarded for how far you go.
I also think the official rankings never really reflect the players' current form and level. The race rankings are always more accurate to measure everyone's level of performance, it also enables people to anticipate the ranking changes that are likely to happen but take several more months to materialize on the official rankings.

TennisandMusic
05-15-2009, 09:12 AM
I know it would not be practical and I understand why the system is different but I always thought it would be nice to start at 0 at the beginning of the year. It would be more encouraging for the players to add points with every tournament played rather than make it to the final and LOSE points just because you happened to have won that tournament the year before, it must feel like being penalized all the time instead of being rewarded for how far you go.
I also think the official rankings never really reflect the players' current form and level. The race rankings are always more accurate to measure everyone's level of performance, it also enable people to anticipate the ranking changes that are likely to happen but take several more months to materialize on the official rankings.

And punish the guy who worked his butt off the last year to be number 1? So you do badly at the australian and then youre ranked 50th? The current system works. Maybe a shorter season should be in order, but a 52 week revolving ranking, as it is now, works fine.

luckyboy1300
05-15-2009, 09:14 AM
I know it would not be practical and I understand why the system is different but I always thought it would be nice to start at 0 at the beginning of the year. It would be more encouraging for the players to add points with every tournament played rather than make it to the final and LOSE points just because you happened to have won that tournament the year before, it must feel like being penalized all the time instead of being rewarded for how far you go.
I also think the official rankings never really reflect the players' current form and level. The race rankings are always more accurate to measure everyone's level of performance, it also enable people to anticipate the ranking changes that are likely to happen but take several more months to materialize on the official rankings.

it won't work. imagine a player who goes on to win the YEC, only for him to enjoy his ranking points for only 1 month. now how fair is that?

seffina
05-15-2009, 09:15 AM
And punish the guy who worked his butt off the last year to be number 1? So you do badly at the australian and then youre ranked 50th? The current system works. Maybe a shorter season should be in order, but a 52 week revolving ranking, as it is now, works fine.
Agreed. If say someone who doesn't do well at hardcourts doesn't have his clay court points, he might have to go through the qualies to get into a tourny even if they won it last year! That would be ridiculous. The current 52 weeks system is quite perfect, IMO. And as I've said a million times, they really need to look into the points and money distribution. It's way too skewed towards winning.

vtmike
05-15-2009, 09:18 AM
I know it would not be practical and I understand why the system is different but I always thought it would be nice to start at 0 at the beginning of the year. It would be more encouraging for the players to add points with every tournament played rather than make it to the final and LOSE points just because you happened to have won that tournament the year before, it must feel like being penalized all the time instead of being rewarded for how far you go.
I also think the official rankings never really reflect the players' current form and level. The race rankings are always more accurate to measure everyone's level of performance, it also enable people to anticipate the ranking changes that are likely to happen but take several more months to materialize on the official rankings.

But........

But all this time Nadal has been saying that he does NOT care about rankings? :confused: :-?

veroniquem
05-15-2009, 09:19 AM
I noticed there have been no comments by any of the hardcore Nadal fans yet...I guess they decided to keep out of this one... :twisted:
You're so eager to bash, hum, almost desperate! I don't know why you're so titillated and excited at the notion apparently that Rafa said something truly evil and scandalous when the only thing he did was mention a system change that he would like to happen. So what? Even if it's a bad idea, there's nothing wrong or shocking in expressing it if that's the way he feels. Everybody is free to disagree and ignore the idea but I've never heard before that making a suggestion was something offensive.

TennisandMusic
05-15-2009, 09:19 AM
Agreed. If say someone who doesn't do well at hardcourts doesn't have his clay court points, he might have to go through the qualies to get into a tourny even if they won it last year! That would be ridiculous. The current 52 weeks system is quite perfect, IMO. And as I've said a million times, they really need to look into the points and money distribution. It's way too skewed towards winning.

But this gives incentive for people to work harder and do better. If everything was more evened out, it doesn't reward those who do better. That's just my take on it anyway.

TennisandMusic
05-15-2009, 09:20 AM
I noticed there have been no comments by any of the hardcore Nadal fans yet...I guess they decided to keep out of this one... :twisted:

I would consider myself a pretty hardcore fan. But his opinion is dumb.

vtmike
05-15-2009, 09:21 AM
You're so eager to bash, hum, almost desperate! I don't know why you're so titillated and excited at the notion apparently that Rafa said something truly evil and scandalous when the only thing he did was mention a system change that he would like to happen. So what? Even if it's a bad idea, there's nothing wrong or shocking in expressing it if that's the way he feels. Everybody is free to disagree and ignore the idea but I've never heard before that making a suggestion was something offensive.

ahh the irony...btw in which post did I bash Nadal? care to enlighten me?

When did I say that his suggestion was offensive? :-?

icedevil0289
05-15-2009, 09:23 AM
You're so eager to bash, hum, almost desperate! I don't know why you're so titillated and excited at the notion apparently that Rafa said something truly evil and scandalous when the only thing he did was mention a system change that he would like to happen. So what? Even if it's a bad idea, there's nothing wrong or shocking in expressing it if that's the way he feels. Everybody is free to disagree and ignore the idea but I've never heard before that making a suggestion was something offensive.

HAHAHAHAHA!

veroniquem
05-15-2009, 09:23 AM
And punish the guy who worked his butt off the last year to be number 1? So you do badly at the australian and then youre ranked 50th? The current system works. Maybe a shorter season should be in order, but a 52 week revolving ranking, as it is now, works fine.
I know the idea is not perfect and that's why it's not applied but even if you missed the AO, I still think adding points all year instead of worrying about "defending" would be more positive. As I said in my other post, that system would also have drawbacks (like the one you mentioned) so I understand why it's not applied.

veroniquem
05-15-2009, 09:29 AM
But........
But what? What I stated was my opinion which is visibly different from Rafa's, so it has nothing to do with whatever Rafa said or didn't say.

seffina
05-15-2009, 09:29 AM
But this gives incentive for people to work harder and do better. If everything was more evened out, it doesn't reward those who do better. That's just my take on it anyway.
I didn't say that winning shouldn't pay and be more points, just that not so much. The fact is that it takes a lot of work to get to the final and semis of an event as well. Nobody is asking it to be evened out. Winners should be emphasized, but not to quite the degree that they are. Just my opinion, of course.

vtmike
05-15-2009, 09:31 AM
But what? What I stated was my opinion which is visibly different from Rafa's, so it has nothing to do with whatever Rafa said or didn't say.

My My someones getting angry... :)

My question was "But all this time Nadal has been saying that rankings are not important to him?" Nothing wrong about that question now is it?

TennisandMusic
05-15-2009, 09:32 AM
I know the idea is not perfect and that's why it's not applied but even if you missed the AO, I still think adding points all year instead of worrying about "defending" would be more positive. As I said in my other post, that system would also have drawbacks (like the one you mentioned) so I understand why it's not applied.

Winning is always positive. The ATP tour isn't a self affirmation program, so they don't have to figure out ways to make the players "feel better." I'll tell you what's positive. Putting your nose to the grindstone, working hard, and getting the results. This applies to everything in life really.

Not trying to sound like a "hard @$$" but it's true. If you want something, you have to earn it.

veroniquem
05-15-2009, 09:33 AM
I didn't say that winning shouldn't pay and be more points, just that not so much. The fact is that it takes a lot of work to get to the final and semis of an event as well. Nobody is asking it to be evened out. Winners should be emphasized, but not to quite the degree that they are. Just my opinion, of course.
I agree, I don't understand why they changed the points difference, I thought it was fine the way it was before.

TennisandMusic
05-15-2009, 09:33 AM
I didn't say that winning shouldn't pay and be more points, just that not so much. The fact is that it takes a lot of work to get to the final and semis of an event as well. Nobody is asking it to be evened out. Winners should be emphasized, but not to quite the degree that they are. Just my opinion, of course.

Fair enough. :-) What is that avatar of yours? It looks familiar for whatever reason...

veroniquem
05-15-2009, 09:34 AM
My My someones getting angry... :)

My question was "But all this time Nadal has been saying that rankings are not important to him?" Nothing wrong about that question now is it?
I meant my post has nothing to do with Nadal's quote so there was no reason to compare them.

seffina
05-15-2009, 09:35 AM
Fair enough. :-) What is that avatar of yours? It looks familiar for whatever reason...

It's from the opening credits of the Japanese drama Hotaru no Hikari.

vtmike
05-15-2009, 09:35 AM
I meant my post has nothing to do with Nadal's quote so there was no reason to compare them.

also,

also, in which post did I bash Nadal? &

when did I say that his suggestion was offensive? :-?

veroniquem
05-15-2009, 09:36 AM
Winning is always positive. The ATP tour isn't a self affirmation program, so they don't have to figure out ways to make the players "feel better." I'll tell you what's positive. Putting your nose to the grindstone, working hard, and getting the results. This applies to everything in life really.

Not trying to sound like a "hard @$$" but it's true. If you want something, you have to earn it.
To add is always more satisfying than to subtract, the competition in itself would always be tough and demanding, that would never change no matter what.

scootad.
05-15-2009, 09:37 AM
Why not something in between; instead of a 1 or 2 year ranking, how bout a ranking based on the last 70 weeks (i.e. one and a half years)?

pound cat
05-15-2009, 09:39 AM
Djokovic..."Cruel ranking system"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/feedarticle/8505606

drakulie
05-15-2009, 09:41 AM
apparently that Rafa said something truly evil and scandalous when the only thing he did was mention a system change that he would like to happen. So what? Even if it's a bad idea, there's nothing wrong or shocking in expressing it if that's the way he feels. Everybody is free to disagree and ignore the idea but I've never heard before that making a suggestion was something offensive.


His comment is extremely offensive, arrogant, and selfish. What about all the players it will affect??

To add, I know a guy who works for Rafa, and he told me this is the way Rafa is all the time. He doesn't care about others, just himself, which is why he doesn't spend time with fans autographing, and leaves the courts messy.

bolo
05-15-2009, 09:42 AM
Not a great idea especially when murray gets better on clay in a year or 2 and starts challenging nadal for the no. 1.

But nadal is correct and the tour is currently geared to wearing down the top guys. But the nice thing for nadal is that djokovic and murray look to be no stronger than nadal in the physical fortitude department.

seffina
05-15-2009, 09:42 AM
Why not something in between; instead of a 1 or 2 year ranking, how bout a ranking based on the last 70 weeks (i.e. one and a half years)?

But why? Why should a tournament count twice on a player's résumé? Why should there be two defending champs of the same tourmanent in a sense? Yes, all this defending adds pressure and such, but so what? Half the fun in any sports environment is dealing with the challenges and the pressures of the sport. It's what makes accomplishments sweeter. Rafa's simply feeling a little pressured. I don't blame him. I understand. He is thinking of his future, but it's just not a very good idea for the sport in general. A lot can change in a year. Tennis season is already too long, this will make the season seem two years long. Will we have the race back again to determine the YEC/WTF?

But nadal is correct and the tour is currently geared to wearing down the top guys. But the nice thing for nadal is that djokovic and murray look to be no stronger than nadal in the physical fortitude department.I'll agree with that the tour wears down the top guys who are consistent at all events. They go deep and play a lot of matches. And even if a tourny was optional (like I wished in another thread), they are pressured to compete as they have to defend this and defend that. Let's see how things end up at the end of this year with this new ranking sytem. All of the 250s have become almost worthless and I'm curious to see the changes the new points distribution will bring about.

bluetrain4
05-15-2009, 09:45 AM
Can a player be too much of a nice guy, too honest?

Rafa's contending for every tournament he plays. He plays a grinding style. Of course, he's going to be fatigued.

So many other players would just say "whatever" and skip certain mandatory tournaments, either paying the fine or getting what is essentially a "doctor's note" detailing some nagging injury (and I would imagine it wouldn't be that hard to get).

Rafa's honesty and dedication are great for the fans and for the tournaments, but at what cost to himself?

scootad.
05-15-2009, 09:45 AM
I'm probably being an idiot right now, but how would a ranking that's over the past 1.5 years allow an annual tournament to count twice in the same system? I get it if the system is over 2 years, but 1.5 years?

veroniquem
05-15-2009, 09:48 AM
But why? Why should a tournament count twice on a player's résumé? Why should there be two defending champs of the same tourmanent in a sense? Yes, all this defending adds pressure and such, but so what? Half the fun in any sports environment is dealing with the challenges and the pressures of the sport. It's what makes accomplishments sweeter. Rafa's simply feeling a little pressured. I don't blame him. I understand. He is thinking of his future, but it's just not a very good idea for the sport in general. A lot can change in a year. Tennis season is already too long, this will make the season seem two years long. Will we have the race back again to determine the YEC/WTF?

I'll agree with that the tour wears down the top guys who are consistent at all events. They go deep and play a lot of matches. And even if a tourny was optional (like I wished in another thread), they are pressured to compete as they have to defend this and defend that. Let's see how things end up at the end of this year with this new ranking sytem. All of the 250s have become almost worthless and I'm curious to see the changes the new points distribution will bring about.
I totally agree that this was his reaction to feeling the pressure of defending a lot all the time. It's pretty obvious it won't happen and wouldn't be a satisfying system on the whole (the 2 year system).

seffina
05-15-2009, 09:50 AM
I'm probably being an idiot right now, but how would a ranking that's over the past 1.5 years allow an annual tournament to count twice in the same system? I get it if the system is over 2 years, but 1.5 years?

Because tournaments are held every year, not every year and half. For Rafa, if you were going by the year and half system, you would count all of this year's points, but you would also be counting his Rome 08, Monte Carlo 08, Barcelona 08... basically everything from December 07 to May 09.

Dream_On
05-15-2009, 09:51 AM
What a ******bag

scootad.
05-15-2009, 09:54 AM
Well it's obvious that Nadal has been playing way too many tournaments. He's completely been dominating, but he should not feel the need to enter every tournament in the sun to prove his tennis manhood. Burnout will be imminent.

edberg505
05-15-2009, 09:56 AM
LOL, so if Nadal were to have his way he'd be #1 for like years on end. Especially since his clay court skills are unparalleled. Hell, he could pretty much f*** off for the other events(of course he won't) making it to the quarters at least and he'd still be #1 because there are so many good hard court players. There won't be a clear definitive #1 hard court player winning everything in sight like he does on clay.

bolo
05-15-2009, 10:00 AM
Can a player be too much of a nice guy, too honest?

Rafa's contending for every tournament he plays. He plays a grinding style. Of course, he's going to be fatigued.

So many other players would just say "whatever" and skip certain mandatory tournaments, either paying the fine or getting what is essentially a "doctor's note" detailing some nagging injury (and I would imagine it wouldn't be that hard to get).

Rafa's honesty and dedication are great for the fans and for the tournaments, but at what cost to himself?

Ultimately his problems are that he's not a tanker and he wants to be no. 1.
At some point he will either have to give up the no. 1 and or just stop entering tournaments and take the fines.

In some sense federer was a real exception, whose style and physical robustness meant he could handle the grind generated by the current conditions to hold on to the no. 1. But most guys aren't as physically robust as federer, they are more like sampras, djokovic, murray (physically fragile) or their style isn't as efficient (hewitt, nadal). It would be very silly for the tour to take federer as the standard, they should consider the last 30 years not just the last 10.

jamesblakefan#1
05-15-2009, 10:03 AM
Don't all the people ripping Nadal realize that Federer would still be #1 if this was the system?

JRstriker12
05-15-2009, 10:08 AM
The simple solution to all this whining is to simply WIN MOAR!!!!!!!!

Why should the top players have it any easier than the guys clawing to the top. You want to be #1, you have to prove it every week. Isn't that what it means to be #1?

Fed can be faulted for MANY things - but IIRC - he never whined about having to defend points and win every week when he was winning just about everything in sight.

Also can't believe that Djoker is complaining now that he dropped a bit to Murray. Djoker wasn't playing well for a while - he prob deserved the drop in rankings.

If Djoker wants to increase his ranking - start winning. He wants to be #1 - start winning more. Simple.

bolo
05-15-2009, 10:08 AM
I'll agree with that the tour wears down the top guys who are consistent at all events. They go deep and play a lot of matches. And even if a tourny was optional (like I wished in another thread), they are pressured to compete as they have to defend this and defend that. Let's see how things end up at the end of this year with this new ranking sytem. All of the 250s have become almost worthless and I'm curious to see the changes the new points distribution will bring about.

Exactly. What murray, nadal, djokovic, federer and now seemingly del potro and maybe even verdasco are doing is just really sick. They are consistently going deep in almost every single tournament they play. This is very very different from what used to happen during the 90s or even during 2003-2006 with the other top tenners. There is nothing in the rulebook that says you have to be penalized for winning the last X number of tournaments.

icedevil0289
05-15-2009, 10:08 AM
Don't all the people ripping Nadal realize that Federer would still be #1 if this was the system?

yes and as a fed fan, that would be a problem. By no means does fed still deserve to be no. 1. The rankings are not perfect, but a two year ranking would be ridiculous.

icedevil0289
05-15-2009, 10:10 AM
The simple solution to all this whining is to simply WIN MOAR!!!!!!!!

Why should the top players have it any easier than the guys clawing to the top. You want to be #1, you have to prove it every week. Isn't that what it means to be #1?

Fed can be faulted for MANY things - but IIRC - he never whined about having to defend points and win every week when he was winning just about everything in sight.
Also can't believe that Djoker is complaining now that he dropped a bit to Murray. Djoker wasn't playing well for a while - he prob deserved the drop in rankings.

If Djoker wants to increase his ranking - start winning. He wants to be #1 - start winning more. Simple.

exactly he played a lot of matches during his prime, especially during 2006.

bolo
05-15-2009, 10:11 AM
The simple solution to all this whining is to simply WIN MOAR!!!!!!!!

Why should the top players have it any easier than the guys clawing to the top. You want to be #1, you have to prove it every week. Isn't that what it means to be #1?

Fed can be faulted for MANY things - but IIRC - he never whined about having to defend points and win every week when he was winning just about everything in sight.

Also can't believe that Djoker is complaining now that he dropped a bit to Murray. Djoker wasn't playing well for a while - he prob deserved the drop in rankings.

If Djoker wants to increase his ranking - start winning. He wants to be #1 - start winning more. Simple.

Federer is an exception, special some might say but you don't want to set your standard based on a GOAT candidate. The point isn't that the top players should have it easier, the point is that they shouldn't be penalized in the current tournament because they had the ability to win the last 10 tournaments.

JRstriker12
05-15-2009, 10:25 AM
Federer is an exception, special some might say but you don't want to set your standard based on a GOAT candidate. The point isn't that the top players should have it easier, the point is that they shouldn't be penalized in the current tournament because they had the ability to win the last 10 tournaments.

Why not? To be tops - you have to win ALOT - simple fact.

Why should a top player have it any easier? Don't they already have it easier? - More money? Exposure? Byes and high seeding in tournaments? Wildcards when they want them? Super-high appearance fees for small tournaments?

Why should everyone else be penalized if a top player wins 10 tournaments then drops the next 10? Why should they keep their ranking?

The #1 or even the top 10 should be able to go deep in most tournaments they play. Being able to rest on last year's achievements while tanking in the current year is just lame.

drakulie
05-15-2009, 10:31 AM
^^^I disagree. I beleive if you win even the smallest of tournaments you should be number 1 the rest of your life, and never have to play again. This includes 3.0 league tourneys. :)

bolo
05-15-2009, 10:35 AM
Why not? To be tops - you have to win ALOT - simple fact.

Why should a top player have it any easier? Don't they already have it easier? - More money? Exposure? Byes and high seeding in tournaments? Wildcards when they want them? Super-high appearance fees for small tournaments?

Why should everyone else be penalized if a top player wins 10 tournaments then drops the next 10? Why should they keep their ranking?

The #1 or even the top 10 should be able to go deep in most tournaments they play. Being able to rest on last year's achievements while tanking in the current year is just lame.

I didn't agree with nadal's solution. But that doesn't mean the problem he is suggesting a solution for doesn't exist.

All-rounder
05-15-2009, 10:39 AM
I find it quite strange how people aren't making much of a fuss with nadal's or djokovic's comment on the ranking system had someone like say federer had made such a comment this thread would be on its 15th page by now

JRstriker12
05-15-2009, 10:40 AM
^^^I disagree. I beleive if you win even the smallest of tournaments you should be number 1 the rest of your life, and never have to play again. This includes 3.0 league tourneys. :)

Can I be #1 after my 3.5 tourney win last year?

drakulie
05-15-2009, 10:45 AM
^^I said 3.0. Pay attention.

at the 3.5 level you need to train harder and continue winning if you want to be number 1. :)

veroniquem
05-15-2009, 10:46 AM
I find it quite strange how people aren't making much of a fuss with nadal's or djokovic's comment on the ranking system had someone like say federer had made such a comment this thread would be on its 15th page by now
You're just in denial that Fed sometimes says things that are tactless, harsh toward other players or self aggrandizing. None of that applies to Nadal making a suggestion about the ranking system.

tudwell
05-15-2009, 10:48 AM
"Today it is mandatory to play every week and everywhere you are defending and if you lose you lose lots of points, especially in my case.

I don't even want to think about the backlash there would be if Federer had said this.

icedevil0289
05-15-2009, 10:48 AM
You're just in denial that Fed sometimes says things that are tactless, harsh toward other players or self aggrandizing. None of that applies to Nadal making a suggestion about the ranking system.

What do his comments towards other players have to do with the ranking system?

CyBorg
05-15-2009, 10:49 AM
I wouldn't be against an extended 'offseason' if at least some of the masters finals were best-of-five.

Maintaining the #1 position should be hard work. Players already have it easier today than they did in the past.

veroniquem
05-15-2009, 10:51 AM
What do his comments towards other players have to do with the ranking system?
Exactly, nothing. I was replying to someone who thought Fed would have been more bashed than Nadal for saying the same thing, which I don't think is true.

icedevil0289
05-15-2009, 10:52 AM
Exactly, nothing. I was replying to someone who thought Fed would have been more bashed than Nadal for saying the same thing, which I don't think is true.

lol, I have to agree with him. This thread would have been atleast 10 pages, but maybe not.

All-rounder
05-15-2009, 10:52 AM
You're just in denial that Fed sometimes says things that are tactless, harsh toward other players or self aggrandizing. None of that applies to Nadal making a suggestion about the ranking system.
yes at times federer lets his ego a little loose but if you took this statement and replaced it with federer's name there will be hate all over this thread then people like gji011 and nadal freak will be here picking out all the negative things in the comment

yellowoctopus
05-15-2009, 10:53 AM
As much as I would like to sympathize with the players at the top, it is difficult for me to do so. If you really add up the endorsement and the prize money, they are well compensated for the amount of 'labor'-if you call it that- that they put in.

The fact that the current schedule is forcing players, especially the top ranking ones, to strategically plan out their schedule makes the game that much more exciting. Players are now depending more on a 'team' approach, where team members help them manage their schedules, maintain their fitness level, and prepare them mentally for the long haul.

At the same time, I also believe that the top players should not stop whinning...I mean should not stop voicing out their concerns--it is necessary to keep the ATP tour sponsors in check.

All-rounder
05-15-2009, 10:55 AM
Exactly, nothing. I was replying to someone who thought Fed would have been more bashed than Nadal for saying the same thing, which I don't think is true.
The good thing is that this shows that federer fans aren't delusional as some others think we think with our brains and appreciate other good players including nadal so lets just end it there

vtmike
05-15-2009, 10:55 AM
You're just in denial that Fed sometimes says things that are tactless, harsh toward other players or self aggrandizing. None of that applies to Nadal making a suggestion about the ranking system.

Really so Federer is devil reincarnated and Rafa is the white angel?

drakulie
05-15-2009, 10:57 AM
lol, I have to agree with him. This thread would have been atleast 10 pages, but maybe not.


Fact is, Federer was, is, and always will be more popular than Nadal>>>> hence he is more under the microscope than his colleagues.

All-rounder
05-15-2009, 11:00 AM
Fact is, Federer was, is, and always will be more popular than Nadal>>>> hence he is more under the microscope than his colleagues.
true soon when federer reitres he'll hand it over to nadal then he will be the talk of the town

JRstriker12
05-15-2009, 11:04 AM
^^I said 3.0. Pay attention.

at the 3.5 level you need to train harder and continue winning if you want to be number 1. :)

I want to be #1 - I'm sandbagging next year. ;)

vtmike
05-15-2009, 11:06 AM
You're so eager to bash, hum, almost desperate! I don't know why you're so titillated and excited at the notion apparently that Rafa said something truly evil and scandalous when the only thing he did was mention a system change that he would like to happen. So what? Even if it's a bad idea, there's nothing wrong or shocking in expressing it if that's the way he feels. Everybody is free to disagree and ignore the idea but I've never heard before that making a suggestion was something offensive.

ahh the irony...btw in which post did I bash Nadal? care to enlighten me?

When did I say that Nadal's statements are evil and scandalous?

& when did I say that his suggestion was offensive? :-?

danb
05-15-2009, 11:07 AM
Rafael Nadal says the ATP needs a massive change in the ranking system to keep players from burning out and getting injured, with the No. 1 calling for a two-year cycle to replace the current 12-month grind.

"I've been saying for some time now that for me, it would be better to have a two-year ranking system - it would be better for the players," said the Spaniard, winner of his last three events on clay with a potential fifth straight Roland Garros next on his plate.

"Today it is mandatory to play every week and everywhere you are defending and if you lose you lose lots of points, especially in my case. It affects everyone and not just the high-ranked player but any player in the top 100.

"A two-year ranking would be much more favorable and to give some piece of mind. It would also help extend the career of the tennis players."

Nadal is competing in Madrid this week for his fourth out of the last five with the French Open starting a week from Sunday.

~ Johan Lindahl

http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20090514/Nadal_wants_a_two-year_ranking_system_to_fight_fatigue

How about finishing points sooner - a la Sampras? I bet that is a lot less taxing on the body. Nobody forces him to play defense.

TheNatural
05-15-2009, 11:14 AM
They should get rid of the hard court events after the US Open and replace them with natural surface events.There's no reason to have the hard court events when they're not leading up to any slam.

vtmike
05-15-2009, 11:14 AM
His comment is extremely offensive, arrogant, and selfish. What about all the players it will affect??

To add, I know a guy who works for Rafa, and he told me this is the way Rafa is all the time. He doesn't care about others, just himself, which is why he doesn't spend time with fans autographing, and leaves the courts messy.

Does that guy carry Rafa's bag too? Poor guy being treated like a slave! :(

drakulie
05-15-2009, 11:20 AM
^^^^^Yeah, he goes by the name of, nadal_freak.

tonyg11
05-15-2009, 11:29 AM
easy fix, take your best top 12 results from the year to count towards your ear end ranking. So if you're burnt out you only have to play 12 events, but if you want to try to improve your ranking you can play as many as you want.

vtmike
05-15-2009, 12:10 PM
delete post

tudwell
05-15-2009, 12:39 PM
They should get rid of the hard court events after the US Open and replace them with natural surface events.There's no reason to have the hard court events when they're not leading up to any slam.

They're indoor events leading up to the year-end championships. However, I think they should be on carpet, which I would assume is slightly more forgiving than hard courts.

onehandbh
05-15-2009, 12:40 PM
Staying #1 for multiple years in a row is difficult, no?
While we're at it just extend the ranking system to 10 years.
That way Rafa can just focus on the slams and a few clay
court tournies and then also get to break the record for
consecutive years as #1, no?

deltox
05-15-2009, 01:02 PM
a 2 year term is simply dumb to even think about. 52 weeks which is a calendar year is fine as it is. Loosing points vs rewinning them who cares. its all about the results form the current tourney. restarting each year at 0 is also dumb, what we gona do let everyone go thru qaulifiers at the first tourney they play each year.


the top players will get no sympathy from me. there is only 4 slams and 1k masters events reruired each year. dont play the dumb little ones, LIKE THAILAND if you dont wanna burn out. its really simple, control your schedule and not gain maximum points or go for #1 and burn out. sports are about STAMINA, have then your a champion, if you dont your not a champion. dont try to change sports in general.

as for shortening the current season. the top players in no way play more day or more hours on court than any other pro sport. as i have shown examples of in another thread. federer played 82 days in a 365 day year, how much more of a break do you need?

mandy01
05-15-2009, 01:04 PM
At the risk of sounding bashful...I think Rafa complains a little too much.
Schedule
Surface
doping rules
etc...
Sure the schedule can be tough.But the fact is- many fans come to see the top players and if they start missing tourneys wont it affect the public response? yes,it will.I cannot imagine the amount of decrease in viewership all over the world.
Also,the top players in some way,help to bring the upcoming players in the limelight.When an upcoming player gives a top player a run for his money,even if the crowd is pulling for the top player,and even if the player wins,people leave with a lot of respect for the underdog.
Secondly-I think the schedule now is far better than before.Atleast you got three setters in masters .Not like before.
The ATP has done quite a lot to increase the longevity of players.
Its upto you to manage your schedule better.Its upto you to defend your points.
Many players have dominated for a long time in circumstances certainly not better than now.Also,in tennis,its as much about motivation as it is about health.After a certain point tennis takes a mental toll on you too.Its an individual sport and the whole stress of wins and losses has to be managed by you.When tennis players hit their peak they start winning a lot in a short period of time-whatever level it maybe and after you win too much its very easy to lose your motivation.So its a bit of both.Its not just the schedule or the ranking system that can cause early retirements.
Maybe Rafa meant well,but there are pros and cons to his suggestion too.Just because a system like that works in golf dosent mean it'll work in tennis.

icedevil0289
05-15-2009, 01:05 PM
a 2 year term is simply dumb to even think about. 52 weeks which is a calendar year is fine as it is. Loosing points vs rewinning them who cares. its all about the results form the current tourney. restarting each year at 0 is also dumb, what we gona do let everyone go thru qaulifiers at the first tourney they play each year.


the top players will get no sympathy from me. there is only 4 slams and 1k masters events reruired each year. dont play the dumb little ones, LIKE THAILAND if you dont wanna burn out. its really simple, control your schedule and not gain maximum points or go for #1 and burn out. sports are about STAMINA, have then your a champion, if you dont your not a champion. dont try to change sports in general.

as for shortening the current season. the top players in no way play more day or more hours on court than any other pro sport. as i have shown examples of in another thread. federer played 82 days in a 365 day year, how much more of a break do you need?


well, he's not the one complaining.

deltox
05-15-2009, 01:07 PM
a 2 year term is simply dumb to even think about. 52 weeks which is a calendar year is fine as it is. Loosing points vs rewinning them who cares. its all about the results form the current tourney. restarting each year at 0 is also dumb, what we gona do let everyone go thru qaulifiers at the first tourney they play each year.


the top players will get no sympathy from me. there is only 4 slams and 1k masters events reruired each year. dont play the dumb little ones, LIKE THAILAND if you dont wanna burn out. its really simple, control your schedule and not gain maximum points or go for #1 and burn out. sports are about STAMINA, have then your a champion, if you dont your not a champion. dont try to change sports in general.

as for shortening the current season. the top players in no way play more day or more hours on court than any other pro sport. as i have shown examples of in another thread. federer played 82 days in a 365 day year, how much more of a break do you need?


well, he's not the one complaining.

i was using his play time as a reference example since i had already counted his days played last year, thats all, im sure rafas numbers are very similiar

icedevil0289
05-15-2009, 01:09 PM
[QUOTE=icedevil0289;3423785]

i was using his play time as a reference example since i had already counted his days played last year, thats all, im sure rafas numbers are very similiar

oh okay. I can kind of see where rafa is coming from, but you make some excellent points and so does mandy01.

mandy01
05-15-2009, 01:31 PM
Just imagine the reaction if Fed would have said the exact same thing when he was # 1...

http://geology.com/news/images/tungurahua-volcano.jpg

http://drjudywood.co.uk/articles/erin/storm/tornado_and_lighting.jpg excellent description of what happens everytime Roger utters a word in the press conference :lol: :mrgreen:
I totally agree..had it been Roger saying this,he'd have been shred to pieces by the *******s.Pathetic.

vtmike
05-15-2009, 01:46 PM
Ok delete post :)

mandy01
05-15-2009, 01:53 PM
mike please for sake of God and his archangels, ignore him before we get into another flamewar. :lol:

KoolBeans
05-15-2009, 01:54 PM
Yeah best just ignoring these things, but yeah vt. totally correct.

KB

imalil2gangsta4u
05-15-2009, 02:00 PM
what about starting over at 0 at the beginning of each year?

deltox
05-15-2009, 02:10 PM
what about starting over at 0 at the beginning of each year?

like i said, will everyone have to qualify for their first tourney each year? there has to be soem kinda rankings to start each year for seeding and tournament draws

Uroboros
05-15-2009, 02:22 PM
Uhmmm i really think that Rafa's statement is wrong,but what about a "ELO" type rating? (the one that chess uses, the most fair ever and the only one that allows acurate diferent eras players comparisions)

Maybe im biased, cuz the 3 individual sports that i've played a high level chess, poker and Magic TG (yeah i consider those sports AND games,it depends of how seriously u take it) all 3 have really fair ranking sistems, chess, elo rating, MagicTG, a very similar one(prolly the most apropiate to tennis) and poker... well in poker who win more money is tha best one, nothing is more fair than this :D

So what about a ranking that takes into account not only the victory in a tourney, but the players u faced and the "level" of the tourney itself? For example, get all pro players a 2000 points base, then give each kind of tourney a K value (for example 8 for 250, 16 for 500, 32 for masters 1000 and 50 for GS)then give points for each game, taking into account that K, i mean if u r playing a 8K event, u can win as much as 8 points for game, if u play a GS 50k one, u can win 50 points tops each game. and more important, take into account the ranking of your oponent, if two 2000 players play eachother, the winner takes 4 points and the loser takes 4 points, if a 2200 plays a 1800, if the 2200 wins takes 1 point, but if he loses, loses 8 points... (insert here a fair maths algorithm that im too lazy to make now)

that will reward the players who win more, will reward the hardest draws more than the lousy ones, wont punish so badly early round upsets while benefitting the upsetter and at the end of the year will have a REALLY fair ranking...

What do u guys think?

JRstriker12
05-15-2009, 02:24 PM
what about starting over at 0 at the beginning of each year?

How do you seed for the early tourneys and the AO?

No point in starting at Zero.

Uroboros
05-15-2009, 03:38 PM
well, seems that i have a curse and any thread where i speak, either ends in the limbo of deleted ones, either sinks itself... :( its a good thread guys, worth discussing :(

Jchurch
05-15-2009, 06:44 PM
I agree, I don't understand why they changed the points difference, I thought it was fine the way it was before.

I agree. The points system was fine before. I think they raised the points so they could draw more people in. When people see higher points, they usually associate that with more excitement.

tacou
05-15-2009, 07:27 PM
what about starting over at 0 at the beginning of each year?

they basically do, the points from last year only determine seedings.

that's what the race meant. everyone starts at 0 but by the end of the year it's the same as the rankings, but if everyone started at 0 draws would just be a mess.

vtmike
05-15-2009, 10:29 PM
they basically do, the points from last year only determine seedings.

that's what the race meant. everyone starts at 0 but by the end of the year it's the same as the rankings, but if everyone started at 0 draws would just be a mess.

Oh yeah everyone starting at zero would be a mess! Then the game would turn into a year end championship race like F1...

I honestly think the point system works well for a game like tennis...

slice bh compliment
05-16-2009, 03:44 AM
Uhmmm i really think that Rafa's statement is wrong,but what about a "ELO" type rating? (the one that chess uses, the most fair ever and the only one that allows acurate diferent eras players comparisions)
...What do u guys think?

Awesome. But only serious chess players within tennis would be bright enough to understand its awesomeness.

The current 1 yr system, while not perfect, is a nice compromise between a calendar year race and a 2 yr system.

raiden031
05-16-2009, 04:26 AM
Both Nadal and Djokovic seem to think too much about maintaining their point count, and not the fact that if they outplay their opponents, they WILL stay on top. If you lose points from tournament A by not defending points, you always have the opportunity to gain points at tournaments B, C, and D by performing better than the previous year. Who cares if you had 8200 points in '08 and have 7900 points in '09? As long as you are outplaying the rest of the field, it doesn't matter when you win your points.

For being such a class-act sportsman, Nadal sure does whine alot about the schedule. Not only that, but he whines and then enters both singles and doubles in a tourney!

P_Agony
05-16-2009, 04:44 AM
Just imagine the reaction if Fed would have said the exact same thing when he was # 1...

That's because Federer is arrogant, and Nadal is just perfect.

gj011
05-16-2009, 05:04 AM
I disagree with Nadal here. The current system is much better that the 2 years based one he is proposing.

aphex
05-16-2009, 05:29 AM
what a whiny little b i t c h

aphex
05-16-2009, 05:32 AM
funny how he kept his mouth shut when he was no.2

what an arrogant, self-serving, whiny ******

FreakyJason
05-16-2009, 05:43 AM
Okay, I've been reading this forum for a while, but this topic has me really fired up. You guys are being totally ridiculous toward Rafa's opinion.

A two-year system is used in golf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_World_Golf_Rankings). A tournament's full value is held for 13 weeks and then incrementally loses value over a two-year period. I think this is a much better system.

Anyway, whether you agree or not, Rafa's opinion is a valid one that has been used effectively in another world sport.

seffina
05-16-2009, 05:46 AM
Okay, I've been reading this forum for a while, but this topic has me really fired up. You guys are being totally ridiculous toward Rafa's opinion.

A two-year system is used in golf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_World_Golf_Rankings). A tournament's full value is held for 13 weeks and then incrementally loses value over a two-year period. I think this is a much better system.

Anyway, whether you agree or not, Rafa's opinion is a valid one that has been used effectively in another world sport.

I didn't know that. Thanks a lot. I still like the 52 weeks system better, but now Rafa's suggestion makes a lot more sense. I was scratching my head for a while. But the incremental decrease really would take some of the pressure of defending the title and do what Rafa is trying to get at. As I said, I still like the 52 weeks system and I like the pressure aspect of title defense. Definitely a valid idea and not one that I thought was totally self serving. It is still self serving, but it might be a viable one as well.

So is that how Tiger Woods has managed to stay up really high even when he was out for a long time?

drakulie
05-16-2009, 06:32 AM
funny how he kept his mouth shut when he was no.2

what an arrogant, self-serving, whiny ******


I agree. Total loser. I bet he doesn't even carry his own bag, and when off camera has someone else pick his butt for him.

TheTruth
05-16-2009, 12:32 PM
what a whiny little b i t c h

I do too, but that's based on limited information. There wasn't enough written in the article for me to make an informed decision.

aphex
05-16-2009, 12:47 PM
I agree. Total loser. I bet he doesn't even carry his own bag, and when off camera has someone else pick his butt for him.

he's employed a gerbil to do that

aphex
05-16-2009, 12:50 PM
http://www.planearium2.de/bilder/wallpaper-lemmiwinks-800.jpg

petetheileet
05-17-2009, 07:02 AM
Id agree with it but gee...

when do you apply it??

the top player would benefit hugely!

vive le beau jeu !
05-17-2009, 11:18 AM
Of course the top guys want this.
And the up&comers? No. What a hill to climb, especially in terms of opportunity and money.
Think of the entry lists.

I'm not in favor of this at all. I mean, this sort of thing is used for incidental rankings/ratings like the Davis Cup Nations rankings. Cool.

But for the ATP Tour?

I can see why *****ovic would whine about this stuff, but Rafa?

Fighting fatigue, huh? Well, the guys could just grow up, play a little less, peak when they need to and not worry about ranking points.
amazing that he is asking for this... he also want a free cocktail or massage with that ?
ridiculous... :rolleyes:

vtmike
05-20-2009, 05:03 AM
Murray, who replaced Djokovic as the No. 3 player in the world prior to the Madrid Open, would have none of that. "There always seem to be problems," Murray said of Djokovic, "and now it's obviously the rankings. Until this week I've never heard anyone complain. I think maybe only in the last week it's become a problem for Novak.

"It's great that Novak's done well the last few weeks, but the first three or four months of the year I played a lot better than him," the Scot added. "So I think the rankings reflect very well how the guys are playing."

Interesting comments by Murray...and basically saying the same thing the majority did in this thread...

samster
05-20-2009, 06:17 AM
Rafael Nadal says the ATP needs a massive change in the ranking system to keep players from burning out and getting injured, with the No. 1 calling for a two-year cycle to replace the current 12-month grind.

"I've been saying for some time now that for me, it would be better to have a two-year ranking system - it would be better for the players," said the Spaniard, winner of his last three events on clay with a potential fifth straight Roland Garros next on his plate.

"Today it is mandatory to play every week and everywhere you are defending and if you lose you lose lots of points, especially in my case. It affects everyone and not just the high-ranked player but any player in the top 100.

"A two-year ranking would be much more favorable and to give some piece of mind. It would also help extend the career of the tennis players."

Nadal is competing in Madrid this week for his fourth out of the last five with the French Open starting a week from Sunday.

~ Johan Lindahl

http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20090514/Nadal_wants_a_two-year_ranking_system_to_fight_fatigue

Nadal has been #1 for less than a year and he is already tired? Come on.

nfor304
05-20-2009, 07:30 AM
A 2 year ranking system is just ridiculous. The top pros travel all over the world in first class, play in beautiful venues watched by millions of adoring fans, get paid millions and get to live their childhood fantasies of playing the game they love everyday for a living, and they whine about having to play what, 5 matches in a week? Feeling pressure because of ranking deadlines? Having to train or play just about everyday? Get over it I say.

I'll swap jobs with them right now if they think it sucks so much. Every job has pressure and every job has all their ups and downs, but the ups at the top of tennis outweigh the downs about a billion to one.

drakulie
05-20-2009, 07:32 AM
http://www.planearium2.de/bilder/wallpaper-lemmiwinks-800.jpg


This ^^^^ explains this :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4jUGufaJek

Gorecki
05-20-2009, 07:45 AM
guess what... the usual *******s jump in and say he is asolutely right about this (and one certain djokovic fan perhaps)... and that all the people posting here are just haters!

:-?

fanofed
05-20-2009, 07:50 AM
This is BS, always looking out for nr 1 and dont give a **** about the tour. HE needs to stop moonballing thats all.

rommil
05-20-2009, 07:54 AM
funny how he kept his mouth shut when he was no.2

what an arrogant, self-serving, whiny ******

Well it was either this or his proposed siestas during changeover which the officials said no right away.

sureshs
05-20-2009, 08:01 AM
I agree. Total loser. I bet he doesn't even carry his own bag, and when off camera has someone else pick his butt for him.

How do I apply for that position? Does it require knowledge of Spanish?

vtmike
05-20-2009, 09:24 AM
guess what... the usual *******s jump in and say he is asolutely right about this (and one certain djokovic fan perhaps)... and that all the people posting here are just haters!

:-?

So Andy Murray is a hater too I guess? :-?

Gorecki
05-20-2009, 10:46 AM
So Andy Murray is a hater too I guess? :-?

maybe? who knows?... what i know is that Nadal is way over the top on this demand!

vtmike
05-20-2009, 10:48 AM
maybe? who knows?... what i know is that Nadal is way over the top on this demand!

I think Murray is also a hater...This is what he had to say,

Murray, who replaced Djokovic as the No. 3 player in the world prior to the Madrid Open, would have none of that. "There always seem to be problems," Murray said of Djokovic, "and now it's obviously the rankings. Until this week I've never heard anyone complain. I think maybe only in the last week it's become a problem for Novak.

"It's great that Novak's done well the last few weeks, but the first three or four months of the year I played a lot better than him," the Scot added. "So I think the rankings reflect very well how the guys are playing."

and yes Nadal's demands are way over the top indeed!

maximo
05-20-2009, 10:54 AM
I think Murray is also a hater...This is what he had to say,



and yes Nadal's demands are way over the top indeed!

Yeah, Djokovic said it was "cruel" being overtaken by Murray eventhough he's been playing crap tennis compared to Murray in the last few months. Murray thoughrougly deserves to be # 3 in the world.

I like Djokovic, but his statement was very ignorant...

Cesc Fabregas
05-20-2009, 11:05 AM
Interesting comments by Murray...and basically saying the same thing the majority did in this thread...

Pretty arrogant comments from Murray it must be said.

maximo
05-20-2009, 11:07 AM
Pretty arrogant comments from Murray it must be said.

As if Sampras was modest.

Cesc Fabregas
05-20-2009, 11:07 AM
As if Sampras was modest.

What's this got to do with Sampras:confused:.

maximo
05-20-2009, 11:09 AM
What's this got to do with Sampras:confused:.

You and your hatred is despicable.

OddJack
05-20-2009, 11:12 AM
No, Really? Is this a joke or what?

If true it's a bad sign for him and his fans. He's going down faster than I thought.

TennezSport
05-20-2009, 11:20 AM
Nadal cannot be serious............... ??? I think the pressure is starting to get to him with a request like that. That would take the wind right out of entire tourny structure and really hurt the lower tournys. It would also de-value his claim to #1, as it would clearly state that he cannot do what Fed did for 4.5 years. I cannot believe he asked for that......WoW. :shock:

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

vtmike
05-20-2009, 11:33 AM
Pretty arrogant comments from Murray it must be said.

What was arrogant about Murray's statement?

gj011
05-20-2009, 11:42 AM
guess what... the usual *******s jump in and say he is asolutely right about this (and one certain djokovic fan perhaps)... and that all the people posting here are just haters!

:-?

So what was this Gorecki? This was a joke too?

My comment on this thread:

I disagree with Nadal here. The current system is much better that the 2 years based one he is proposing.

Ripster
05-20-2009, 11:47 AM
I'm surprised Nadal would say something like this, I know in the past he's complained about the scheduling and I do think that his request for more clay court and less hard court tournaments is a fair one - but this request is off-the wall. Tennis is a traditional sport and the ranking system has always been the same and should stay the same. All #1's in the past have had to defend their points the following year so why should Rafa get a break.

A two year system would mean guys at the top would play less tournaments which would hurt tournament revenues and fanfare. It also hurts guys trying to gain ground in the rankings. A definite no-no.

mental midget
05-20-2009, 12:17 PM
my job is also a grind.

shut up, rafa.

Gorecki
05-20-2009, 01:30 PM
So what was this Gorecki? This was a joke too?

My comment on this thread:

me making a mistake and publicly recognizing it...

i must say your reaction is quite unexpected as per you recent bahaviour. i made a bad evaluation. therefore i appologize!

cheers mate!

mandy01
05-20-2009, 01:36 PM
I'm surprised Nadal would say something like this, I know in the past he's complained about the scheduling and I do think that his request for more clay court and less hard court tournaments is a fair one - but this request is off-the wall. Tennis is a traditional sport and the ranking system has always been the same and should stay the same. All #1's in the past have had to defend their points the following year so why should Rafa get a break.

A two year system would mean guys at the top would play less tournaments which would hurt tournament revenues and fanfare. It also hurts guys trying to gain ground in the rankings. A definite no-no. Exactly. I said it too in one of my posts.And players before him have played and dominated in similar or worse conditions and have defended their points like you alluded to.

nadalbestclass
04-22-2011, 09:07 PM
Looks like the brought up this point yet again today.

'We would not have to play ever week as we do now,' he said with some exaggeration after competing during 2010 over 22 weeks that comprised 17 events, including the London Tour final and the four Grand Slams (two weeks each).
'I don't know if it can happen but I will continue to work for it for the benefit of future tennis generations. If it happens we will have a more relaxed life and a longer career.'

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1634690.php/Nadal-calls-for-two-year-ATP-ranking-period

still don't see the point of it. :/

nadalbestclass
04-22-2011, 09:12 PM
Honestly, he's probably just feeling the pressure of defending the next five titles with Hamburg (points wise), French, Queens, Wimbledon, and Toronto. And that he'll lose the Olympics points that he can't defend. That's 7250 points that he has to defend in the next few months and even if wins them all, he can only defend 6250 points. It's just the pressure of being number one I suppose. :)

If funny how this post is perfectly applicable 2 years later. Oh Rafa!

sdont
04-23-2011, 04:10 AM
A thread where gj and maximo posted... how nice :)

Tennisworld
04-23-2011, 04:20 AM
He wants a two year ranking to protect all the players from burning out by playing too much?
Has he considered, that playing on faster courts could also contribute to a longer career? Why does he mention it now, as he is number one?
Nadal is egoistic, a vice president should really care about all the other players too, not only about himself and his interests.

Omega_7000
04-23-2011, 04:22 AM
Just imagine the reaction if Fed would have said the exact same thing when he was # 1...

http://geology.com/news/images/tungurahua-volcano.jpg

http://drjudywood.co.uk/articles/erin/storm/tornado_and_lighting.jpg

True. This thread would have been 20 pages long if these were Fed's comments...

Omega_7000
04-23-2011, 04:24 AM
Wonder why Nadal didn't bring this up when he was # 2???

mandy01
04-23-2011, 05:29 AM
Wonder why Nadal didn't bring this up when he was # 2???I know.So much for all the humility propoganda.The guy is as self-serving as any other player out there.Perhaps more than most.

mandy01
04-23-2011, 05:30 AM
True. This thread would have been 20 pages long if these were Fed's comments...

LOL I miss vtmike's posts :lol:

Omega_7000
04-23-2011, 06:35 AM
I know.So much for all the humility propoganda.The guy is as self-serving as any other player out there.Perhaps more than most.

Humility is only restricted to his press conference. His true character comes out when he is on court & pulls out all the tricks in the bag when he is down/losing.

Marius_Hancu
04-23-2011, 08:52 AM
Nadal invents a new calendar. Fine :-)

namelessone
04-23-2011, 09:02 AM
Nope Rafa, calendar and nr.1 system are fine the way they are. Well, maybe too many HC events and way too few grass but other than that it's fine.

I have to laugh at people who say Nadal can't stay at the top of the game and he is going down. Nadal has been in the top 2 for SIX YEARS. It's logical that he is declining a bit.

bolo
04-23-2011, 09:29 AM
True. This thread would have been 20 pages long if these were Fed's comments...

Highly unlikely. If fed said this, the TT population would be all for it. :) But Fed's too dull to say anything that is likely to be perceived as controversial. Notice that he barely said anything publicly about reducing the schedule until basically it was all said and done. Fed's mostly in it for the tennis and the michael jackson dictator outfits. In this way he's very much like sampras except he likes to be dressed in public by anna wintour. ;)

TennezSport
04-23-2011, 12:00 PM
I cannot believe that Raf is still at this idiotic idea. This is disrespectfull of all of the No1 players who have come before him and defended. This plan would make it doubly hard for upcoming players to gain ground while giving millionare players like him time to site back and relax. If he needs a break because he is always injured, then stop playing all of the exos and doubles and plan your year better. What arrogance! :evil:

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

DjokerIsTheBest
04-23-2011, 12:08 PM
Oh god, Rafa is crying again, what else is new? :rolleyes:

nadalbestclass
04-23-2011, 12:11 PM
I cannot believe that Raf is still at this idiotic idea. This is disrespectfull of all of the No1 players who have come before him and defended. This plan would make it doubly hard for upcoming players to gain ground while giving millionare players like him time to site back and relax. If he needs a break because he is always injured, then stop playing all of the exos and doubles and plan your year better. What arrogance! :evil:

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

I completely agree here. It would make it really hard for people to come up if this happened. Seems like he only feels this way when he gets to the top, and it's quite the selfish statement. Until he strips down his year to a bare minimum, he should not complain.

babbette
04-23-2011, 12:16 PM
I completely agree here. It would make it really hard for people to come up if this happened. Seems like he only feels this way when he gets to the top, and it's quite the selfish statement. Until he strips down his year to a bare minimum, he should not complain.

Where is Nadalbestclass and what have you done with her?:shock: :wink:

DjokerIsTheBest
04-23-2011, 12:33 PM
I completely agree here. It would make it really hard for people to come up if this happened. Seems like he only feels this way when he gets to the top, and it's quite the selfish statement. Until he strips down his year to a bare minimum, he should not complain.

I'm more attracted to you than ever.

nadalbestclass
04-23-2011, 01:01 PM
Where is Nadalbestclass and what have you done with her?:shock: :wink:

I'm more attracted to you than ever.

LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL. Hey hey, I still love Rafa to bits and I still want him to win everything and be #1, it's just I can't bring myself to agree with him on this one. If the 2 year thing had been in place when he was rising through the ranks, he wouldn't have been very happy himself. It also makes him look bad when he's playing all this extra stuff and then making these comments.

Replied to your e-mail babs. It's getting quite interesting :twisted:

aldeayeah
04-23-2011, 01:17 PM
For the record, this would be the current ranking with such a system:

1 Nadal, Rafael (ESP) 19,850
2 Federer, Roger (SUI) 19,240
3 Djokovic, Novak (SRB) 17,030
4 Murray, Andy (GBR) 11,390
5 Soderling, Robin (SWE) 10,015
6 Ferrer, David (ESP) 7,065
7 Roddick, Andy (USA) 7,050
8 Del Potro, Juan Martin (ARG) 6,740
9 Davydenko, Nikolay (RUS) 6,395
10 Berdych, Tomas (CZE) 6,170

Ripster
04-23-2011, 01:24 PM
I completely agree here. It would make it really hard for people to come up if this happened. Seems like he only feels this way when he gets to the top, and it's quite the selfish statement. Until he strips down his year to a bare minimum, he should not complain.

A reasonable Nadal fan, how refreshing.

TennisandMusic
04-23-2011, 01:30 PM
I cannot believe that Raf is still at this idiotic idea. This is disrespectfull of all of the No1 players who have come before him and defended. This plan would make it doubly hard for upcoming players to gain ground while giving millionare players like him time to site back and relax. If he needs a break because he is always injured, then stop playing all of the exos and doubles and plan your year better. What arrogance! :evil:

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

Letting your hatred show again. How is it "arrogant" if he has an opinion? I don't think it's a good idea personally, but geez, I think you're reading into it just a bit too much. You always tear down Nadal any chance you get, if Federer had said this, my guess is you would call it "brilliant". It's not a great idea, but that's about the extent of it.

Out of curiosity, still think Vic Braden can calculate G forces in a person's knees? :rolleyes:

mellowyellow
04-23-2011, 01:53 PM
Maybe he would be better off asking for 2 bye rounds instead of just 1 like the top seeds get, even that system is a joke. Seems to me the only people that should get a bye are the people that played in the finals the prior weekend to a tourney. I will agree the system right now is bs, but I will go in the other direction thank you.

nadalbestclass
04-23-2011, 02:37 PM
For the record, this would be the current ranking with such a system:

1 Nadal, Rafael (ESP) 19,850
2 Federer, Roger (SUI) 19,240
3 Djokovic, Novak (SRB) 17,030
4 Murray, Andy (GBR) 11,390
5 Soderling, Robin (SWE) 10,015
6 Ferrer, David (ESP) 7,065
7 Roddick, Andy (USA) 7,050
8 Del Potro, Juan Martin (ARG) 6,740
9 Davydenko, Nikolay (RUS) 6,395
10 Berdych, Tomas (CZE) 6,170

wow, interesting! Thanks for this. I'm thinking Roger wouldn't mind this very much. :) BUT Rafa would still be in trouble with Roger close behind him. Regardless, it is not the least bit reflective of the current state of things.

Bud
04-23-2011, 02:41 PM
For the record, this would be the current ranking with such a system:

1 Nadal, Rafael (ESP) 19,850
2 Federer, Roger (SUI) 19,240
3 Djokovic, Novak (SRB) 17,030
4 Murray, Andy (GBR) 11,390
5 Soderling, Robin (SWE) 10,015
6 Ferrer, David (ESP) 7,065
7 Roddick, Andy (USA) 7,050
8 Del Potro, Juan Martin (ARG) 6,740
9 Davydenko, Nikolay (RUS) 6,395
10 Berdych, Tomas (CZE) 6,170


Excellent analysis!

So, contrary to all the Nadal haters/bashers on the board, it appears that such a system would not in fact benefit him the most. It appears that those who suffered serious injuries (Davydenko, Del Potro) or performed poorly (Roddick, Federer - by his standards) would have the most to gain under such a system.

It appears that Federer, Roddick, Del Potro and Davydenko would be the current benefactors of such a system.

Perhaps, Nadal has a point :wink:

- - -

Kudos to aldeayeah for looking at this with a cool head, analyzing it and then running the numbers

jamesblakefan#1
04-23-2011, 02:48 PM
wow, interesting! Thanks for this. I'm thinking Roger wouldn't mind this very much. :) BUT Rafa would still be in trouble with Roger close behind him. Regardless, it is not the least bit reflective of the current state of things.

Yeah, that would be a horrible system.

aldeayeah
04-23-2011, 03:12 PM
Please note that I simply added the rankings of this week and the same week last year, but there are many possible ways of calculating 2-year based rankings.

I like the current system better too, but don't find the idea so outlandish.

You can find some truly byzantine systems out there, like the 2.5-year based UEFA coefficient (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_coefficient) that determinates seeding in European football competitions.

Bud
04-23-2011, 03:18 PM
Please note that I simply added the rankings of this week and the same week last year, but there are many possible ways of calculating 2-year based rankings.

I like the current system better too, but don't find the idea so outlandish.

You can find some truly byzantine systems out there, like the 2.5-year based UEFA coefficient (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_coefficient) that determinates seeding in European football competitions.

Your analysis showed that such a ranking system would benefit those who (for one reason or another) underachieve in subsequent years (like Roddick in Miami) and those who sustain an injury that keeps them out for a significant period of time (Davydenko and Delpo). It does not benefit those who continue posting consistent results.

In a nutshell, such a system would simply even out the highs and lows that players experience from year to year while giving every player a chance to recover from a poor tournament performance or serious injury.

MichaelNadal
04-23-2011, 03:26 PM
Your analysis showed that such a ranking system would benefit those who (for one reason or another) underachieve in subsequent years (like Roddick in Miami) and those who sustain an injury that keeps them out for a significant period of time (Davydenko and Delpo). It does not benefit those who continue posting consistent results.

In a nutshell, such a system would simply even out the highs and lows that players experience from year to year while giving every player a chance to recover from a poor tournament performance or serious injury.

It's still not a good idea though, Under that system Nadal probably never would have become number 1. His 2008 results wouldn't have really mattered until his abysmal 2009.

nadalbestclass
04-23-2011, 03:29 PM
Your analysis showed that such a ranking system would benefit those who (for one reason or another) underachieve in subsequent years (like Roddick in Miami) and those who sustain an injury that keeps them out for a significant period of time (Davydenko and Delpo). It does not benefit those who continue posting consistent results year after year.

In a nutshell, such a system would simply even out the highs and lows that players experience from year to year.

Maybe, but being rewarded for current achievements, motivates players more. I don't know the numbers, but I would think if we went back to RG '10 when Rafa finally got #1 back, if it would have actually worked out that way under this system. Also, with players who are trying to climb up the ranks, positive reinforcement is so key, and if the work their *** off and produce great results yet find it tough to get to the top.
I mean I think back to the last year and Davydenko has not done much with his life that should place him in the top 10. Delpo hasn't won a title in what, over a year? It isn't fair for the guys that worked their butts off last year.

aldeayeah
04-23-2011, 03:32 PM
Your analysis showed that such a ranking system would benefit those who (for one reason or another) underachieve in subsequent years (like Roddick in Miami) and those who sustain an injury that keeps them out for a significant period of time (Davydenko and Delpo). It does not benefit those who continue posting consistent results.

In a nutshell, such a system would simply even out the highs and lows that players experience from year to year while giving every player a chance to recover from a poor performance or serious injury.
A 2-yearly ranking could answer better the question "Who are the better players on average", but it would be worse at answering the question "Who are the most in-form players now".

The problem is that draws/seeding have a huge impact in tennis, moreso than other sports, so what you really want is to know who's in good form.

For that reason, I think it's a bad idea to enlarge the window of results used to calculate the rankings.

Bud
04-23-2011, 03:34 PM
Maybe, but being rewarded for current achievements, motivates players more. I don't know the numbers, but I would think if we went back to RG '10 when Rafa finally got #1 back, if it would have actually worked out that way under this system. Also, with players who are trying to climb up the ranks, positive reinforcement is so key, and if the work their *** off and produce great results yet find it tough to get to the top.
I mean I think back to the last year and Davydenko has not done much with his life that should place him in the top 10. Delpo hasn't won a title in what, over a year? It isn't fair for the guys that worked their butts off last year.

Perhaps... However, I also find it amusing that most people responding to this idea simply assumed that Nadal's motivation was selfish... when in fact it was just the opposite. As others have pointed out, this system may have been detrimental to Nadal's ranking. Such a system would benefit under-performers and the injured, not those posting consistent yearly results.

A 2-yearly ranking could answer better the question "Who are the better players on average", but it would be worse at answering the question "Who are the most in-form players now".

The problem is that draws/seeding have a huge impact in tennis, moreso than other sports, so what you really want is to know who's in good form.

For that reason, I think it's a bad idea to enlarge the window of results used to calculate the rankings.

I don't have an opinion on the issue, one way or the other.

What they should do is ask the top 100 players to vote on it. They, more than anybody have the wisdom and insight to decide their own fate.

aldeayeah
04-23-2011, 04:15 PM
duplicate post

aldeayeah
04-23-2011, 04:21 PM
Perhaps... However, I also find it amusing that most people responding to this idea simply assumed that Nadal's motivation was selfish... when in fact it was just the opposite. As others have pointed out, this system may have been detrimental to Nadal's ranking. Such a system would benefit under-performers and the injured, not those posting consistent yearly results.
That's not true. Those who post consistent yearly results are benefitted too, even more so, because their ranking difference over the less consistent players is inflated.

Murray, let's say, could go on and win the next three Slams, and still he'd almost certainly not catch Nadal in that ranking I showed, even if Nadal himself performed poorly. Why? Because Nadal himself would only drop points for his subpar 2009 spring-summer season.

Bud
04-23-2011, 04:30 PM
That's not true. Those who post consistent yearly results are benefitted too, even more so, because their ranking difference over the less consistent players is inflated.

Murray, let's say, could go on and win the next three Slams, and still he'd almost certainly not catch Nadal in that ranking I showed, even if Nadal himself performed poorly. Why? Because Nadal himself would only drop points for his subpar 2009 spring-summer season.

However, the following year... if Murray continued to perform consistently, he'd then overtake Nadal, as Nadal's poor year would then be included in the next two-year cycle, correct?

At some point you have to pay the piper for under-performing, correct?

Nadal's only recourse in your hypothetical would be to make up those lost points by playing an additional tournament, correct?

My point was that the consistent players for the most part retain their positions or move up. It's those who perform poorly or are injured that have a chance to recover valuable lost points before being knocked down to the bottom of the ladder.

As I stated earlier... put it up for a vote to the top 100 players. They know how it affects their ranking more than anybody as they live with the system day in and out.

nadalbestclass
04-23-2011, 05:39 PM
Perhaps... However, I also find it amusing that most people responding to this idea simply assumed that Nadal's motivation was selfish... when in fact it was just the opposite. As others have pointed out, this system may have been detrimental to Nadal's ranking. Such a system would benefit under-performers and the injured, not those posting consistent yearly results.

I don't have an opinion on the issue, one way or the other.

What they should do is ask the top 100 players to vote on it. They, more than anybody have the wisdom and insight to decide their own fate.

O come come Bud. You cannot believe he is selfless. Perhaps selfish was harsh, I was cranky, what ya gonna do :p Biased, is more what I'll say. He isn't doing it for himself only, but I think it's with keeping in mind what's good for people at the top. It's blatantly obvious he is feeling the pressure right now. Funny enough in 2009 he was facing a similar situation.

Thing is, Fed and Sampras managed to stay on top and had long careers(well Fed's not done yet, but he's 29) without having a 2 year system like that. These guys faced the same issue, the pressure is part of the game. Being HCers really helped them, because there are so many HC tourneys, spread across the year, but clay is clumped up together. Right now, the 2 slams that Rafa has a really good chance of winning are almost back to back. Then there is also their playing style, it's no secret he's played a more physical game his entire career.

Last year by the end of the WTF Nadal looked spent. Why did he have to do the exo stuff with Rog? I understand it's for a good cause, but he is 24, he has all his life to give to charity. Why did he insist on continuing playing in Doha, despite his sickness? Why, when he knew that AO would be so damn he important, did he risk his health? Maybe he was being stubborn, maybe he did it for Marc, point is, it was a choice he made. Then, after IW why did he decide to waste 2 days in Columbia horsing around with Nole? He was clearly feeling fatigue in IW, why not use that time to rest up a little? I think his decisions to play in MC and Barca were good, and we'll see how the rest of the clay season pans out. Nadal has made some bad decisions this year, that have ultimately put him in the kind of position he is in now.

So yes, there is pressure at the top, but sometimes he makes life harder for himself. The he comes up with this stuff and it makes me facepalm.

Finally, I hope Novak has a crap clay season and Rafa an amazing one, but if it so happens that Nadal has an average clay season(hopefully not bad!) and Novak excels, he will deserve the #1 spot. Even if this happens, if Nadal is smart he can still pick up points in the later part of the season and finish at #1. Boy won the USO, he's no HC clown. ;)

15_ounce
04-24-2011, 12:41 AM
Honestly, he's such a whinging machine, selfish, greedy and annoying.

DjokerIsTheBest
04-24-2011, 06:09 AM
Nadal is not bad. What's worse than him are his blind worshippers who lack any objectivity whatsoever and will look for excuses to defend all of his behaviours at all costs.


















And of course the followup by the ***** will be, but *******s are even worse! God, grow up. Look in the mirror.

TennezSport
04-24-2011, 09:39 AM
Letting your hatred show again.

I really do not understand the use of the word "HATRED" as used on this board. It proves to me that there is a very low level on comprehension of the word. If it was truely felt and understood it would never be used so loosely.

How is it "arrogant" if he has an opinion? I don't think it's a good idea personally, but geez, I think you're reading into it just a bit too much.

It is not just an opinion when the No1 player is trying to sway people to a very poor decision for his own benifit and condemn lower ranked players in the process. If I have said it once I have said it a hundred times, I do not hate Raf and I am only critical of his style because it is so physically destructive on the body. He knows it and that is why he is whining again.

You always tear down Nadal any chance you get, if Federer had said this, my guess is you would call it "brilliant". It's not a great idea, but that's about the extent of it.

I am in no way tearing Rafa down, but just giving my opinion on a very irresponsible and somewhat selfish statement from a No1 that would do irreparable damage to upcoming players and tourny's. If Fed or Lendl or Mac or anyone else had made this statement, I would have been just as outraged and said the same thing; no player is bigger than the sport, period!

Out of curiosity, still think Vic Braden can calculate G forces in a person's knees? :rolleyes:

This has already been done and confirmed, just as getting PRP treatments to damaged ligaments because you cannot sit for a few hours on a plane due to the pain.

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

GuyClinch
04-24-2011, 09:47 AM
Nadal has hit on a real problem but this is a bad way to fix it.

What should be set is a like a maximum number of point events. So if Nadal enters say half the possible tournaments but wins them all - you can't beat him by entering twice the number of tournaments but placing second..

This will allow the top players and everyone to play lighter schedules and not lose spots to 'hard workers' who aren't particularly good..

captain kirk
04-24-2011, 10:00 AM
Hasn't anyone told Nadal that it's harder to STAY #1 than to become #1?

Even though he's a great guy and tremendous player, no one should be allowed a year off because he's tired from playing a sport that is his job.

It would be like me asking my boss to take a year off and keep my same status (salary, position, benefits etc.) because "it's tough"

jamesblakefan#1
04-24-2011, 10:15 AM
Nadal has hit on a real problem but this is a bad way to fix it.

What should be set is a like a maximum number of point events. So if Nadal enters say half the possible tournaments but wins them all - you can't beat him by entering twice the number of tournaments but placing second..

This will allow the top players and everyone to play lighter schedules and not lose spots to 'hard workers' who aren't particularly good..

There's already a max, the 'best 18'.

Omega_7000
04-24-2011, 10:17 AM
I really do not understand the use of the word "HATRED" as used on this board. It proves to me that there is a very low level on comprehension of the word. If it was truely felt and understood it would never be used so loosely.



It is not just an opinion when the No1 player is trying to sway people to a very poor decision for his own benifit and condemn lower ranked players in the process. If I have said it once I have said it a hundred times, I do not hate Raf and I am only critical of his style because it is so physically destructive on the body. He knows it and that is why he is whining again.



I am in no way tearing Rafa down, but just giving my opinion on a very irresponsible and somewhat selfish statement from a No1 that would do irreparable damage to upcoming players and tourny's. If Fed or Lendl or Mac or anyone else had made this statement, I would have been just as outraged and said the same thing; no player is bigger than the sport, period!



This has already been done and confirmed, just as getting PRP treatments to damaged ligaments because you cannot sit for a few hours on a plane due to the pain.

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

Stop using logic you "hater"! :lol:

TennezSport
04-26-2011, 12:35 PM
Stop using logic you "hater"! :lol:

Sorry, logic is all I have left :wink:

Here is some food for thought. Rafa never proposed this when he was No3 or No2. No other No1 has ever made this proposal, maybe a shorter year but not protection. Is it a coincidence that he asks for it when his No1 position is under threat? No hate, just clinical observation. Now where is that logic stick. :shock:

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

namelessone
04-26-2011, 01:00 PM
This is not the first time Nadal has asked for this system even though I don't agree with him.

http://twocircles.net/node/147773

And this was in May 2009, before Madrid.

Nadal had a pretty big lead at that point and was in the nr.1 position.

jamesblakefan#1
04-26-2011, 01:12 PM
This is not the first time Nadal has asked for this system even though I don't agree with him.

http://twocircles.net/node/147773

And this was in May 2009, before Madrid.

Nadal had a pretty big lead at that point and was in the nr.1 position.

Check the OP. ;)

namelessone
04-26-2011, 01:18 PM
Check the OP. ;)

:oops:

Thought we were talking about Nadal's more recent statements about the supposed two year system,I just stumbled across this old article on the net and thought it would be relevant. Guess not.

nadalbestclass
04-26-2011, 01:20 PM
:oops:

Thought we were talking about Nadal's more recent statements about the supposed two year system,I just stumbled across this old article on the net and thought it would be relevant. Guess not.

We're talking about both actually. I wanted to post the article (new one) in a new thread, but found this on in the search so I figured I'll just post it on here.

TennezSport
04-26-2011, 01:29 PM
This is not the first time Nadal has asked for this system even though I don't agree with him.
http://twocircles.net/node/147773
And this was in May 2009, before Madrid.
Nadal had a pretty big lead at that point and was in the nr.1 position.

Thanks for the reminder, I had forgotten about this one, but it just makes my point again. (Logic Stick on ). This was the year that Rafa almost lost the semi to Djoker and did lose to Fed. He then went on to lose the FO to Soderling in the qtrs. Again in a year that he overplayed in doubles and singles, but says that the grind is too tough. REALLY, I mean REALLY??? Is he really afraid to lose his No1 that bad or is his body sending some unsettling message???

Raf is a proven champion regardless of his style of play, but when he says things like this, it does not show him in the best light and insults the champions that came before him. (Logic Stick off). Thanks again NLO.

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

namelessone
04-26-2011, 01:36 PM
Thanks for the reminder, I had forgotten about this one, but it just makes my point again. (Logic Stick on ). This was the year that Rafa almost lost the semi to Djoker and did lose to Fed. He then went on to lose the FO to Soderling in the qtrs. Again in a year that he overplayed in doubles and singles, but says that the grind is too tough. REALLY, I mean REALLY??? Is he really afraid to lose his No1 that bad or is his body sending some unsettling message???

Raf is a proven champion regardless of his style of play, but when he says things like this, it does not show him in the best light and insults the champions that came before him. (Logic Stick off). Thanks again NLO.

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

Rafa is probably just trying to make tennis more like golf. He likes golf, plays it, Fed is buddies with Tiger, etc. :) Why not the calendar, eh?

I find that tennis gets compared to golf a lot. Something I'm not too proud of :)

IMO the proposed change would be horrible for the future of tennis.

vive le beau jeu !
04-30-2011, 12:37 PM
the nadal is really amazing (http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/04/Other/Nadal-Receives-Award.aspx):

“Djokovic has a good chance of being No. 1 in the next two or three months,” said Nadal, who is the top seed in Madrid, which begins Sunday. “I could lose the No. 1 ranking even if I win nearly everything and this isn’t normal. (...)"

'not normal'...... surprisingly, the same possible outcome, last year, didn't seem to be a problem for him, when roger was in his situation. :rolleyes:
well, let's hope the poor little loses early in all the tournaments so that he doesn't have to complain about the ranking system ! ;)

mandy01
04-30-2011, 12:45 PM
the nadal is really amazing (http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/04/Other/Nadal-Receives-Award.aspx):

“Djokovic has a good chance of being No. 1 in the next two or three months,” said Nadal, who is the top seed in Madrid, which begins Sunday. “I could lose the No. 1 ranking even if I win nearly everything and this isn’t normal. (...)"

'not normal'...... surprisingly, the same possible outcome, last year, didn't seem to be a problem for him, when roger was in his situation. :rolleyes:
well, let's hope the poor little loses early in all the tournaments so that he doesn't have to complain about the ranking system ! ;)

LOOOOOOOOOOOOL :lol:
Well,the thing is if Nadal wins everything,he doesn't need to worry so much about the ranking.And this year,he's gained more points than he's lost.So why is he worried?
I guess now he knows what's it's like to have the pressure of winning everything week -in, week-out.I've said this before and I'll say it again-I don't think Nadal's quite comfortable dealing with the pressure of being a no.1.He wants the ranking just as much as Roger has done even though he isn't always very explicit about it but he doesn't like the amount of expectations that come with it.

Omega_7000
04-30-2011, 12:46 PM
the nadal is really amazing (http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/04/Other/Nadal-Receives-Award.aspx):

“Djokovic has a good chance of being No. 1 in the next two or three months,” said Nadal, who is the top seed in Madrid, which begins Sunday. “I could lose the No. 1 ranking even if I win nearly everything and this isn’t normal. (...)"

'not normal'...... surprisingly, the same possible outcome, last year, didn't seem to be a problem for him, when roger was in his situation. :rolleyes:
well, let's hope the poor little loses early in all the tournaments so that he doesn't have to complain about the ranking system ! ;)

Wait a minute. I thought Nadal did not care about number 1 ranking, no?

"It doesn't matter if I am No. 1 or No. 2 or No. 4. I think about going on court, practising hard every day, trying my best in every moment, and when I am playing matches try to play well."

http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20110330/Nadal_says_it%27s_all_about_the_form,_not_the_rank ing_spot

So what is it? Does he care about being # 1 or not? :oops:

mandy01
04-30-2011, 12:49 PM
Wait a minute. I thought Nadal did not care about number 1 ranking, no?

"It doesn't matter if I am No. 1 or No. 2 or No. 4. I think about going on court, practising hard every day, trying my best in every moment, and when I am playing matches try to play well."

http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20110330/Nadal_says_it%27s_all_about_the_form,_not_the_rank ing_spot

So what is it? Does he care about being # 1 or not? :oops:He just likes to pretend otherwise when it suits him.Gives off a more 'humble' image I suppose.

Sid_Vicious
04-30-2011, 12:49 PM
15-8.

that is all.

lol jk.

mandy01
04-30-2011, 12:50 PM
15-8.

that is all.

lol jk.
16-9

that is all.

lol jk.




:mrgreen:

Omega_7000
04-30-2011, 12:51 PM
He just likes to pretend otherwise when it suits him.Gives off a more 'humble' image I suppose.

Just goes to show how fake everything coming out of his mouth really is...

nadalbestclass
04-30-2011, 01:11 PM
LOOOOOOOOOOOOL :lol:
Well,the thing is if Nadal wins everything,he doesn't need to worry so much about the ranking.And this year,he's gained more points than he's lost.So why is he worried?
I guess now he knows what's it's like to have the pressure of winning everything week -in, week-out.I've said this before and I'll say it again-I don't think Nadal's quite comfortable dealing with the pressure of being a no.1.He wants the ranking just as much as Roger has done even though he isn't always very explicit about it but he doesn't like the amount of expectations that come with it.

Couldn't agree more.

nadalbestclass
04-30-2011, 01:18 PM
Wait a minute. I thought Nadal did not care about number 1 ranking, no?

"It doesn't matter if I am No. 1 or No. 2 or No. 4. I think about going on court, practising hard every day, trying my best in every moment, and when I am playing matches try to play well."

http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20110330/Nadal_says_it%27s_all_about_the_form,_not_the_rank ing_spot

So what is it? Does he care about being # 1 or not? :oops:

Yes, he always contradicts himself on that one. ALWAYS. I just replied to what Mandy said, I think he wants it, but he's very aware that he's not invincible, so no point setting yourself up for disappointment. They interviewed Carlos Costa I think, recently and he said that Rafa's goal is to be the best. Anyone that believes otherwise I think is ignorant.

nikdom
05-28-2011, 07:46 PM
He's been playing for a 100 years (http://tennis.com/articles/templates/news.aspx?articleid=12279&zoneid=25)

Omega_7000
07-05-2011, 07:52 AM
Wonder if Nadal still wants the two year ranking system? :D

aphex
07-05-2011, 08:08 AM
Wonder if Nadal still wants the two year ranking system? :D

Actually he wants a 4 year rolling system now.

So, the no.1 in July of 2008 will remain no.1 until July of 2012.

He says it will help with fatigue...

nikdom
12-29-2011, 11:43 AM
After the shoulder injury shenanigans, does anybody really believe Nadal is actually thinking of others when he proposes a 2-year ranking system?

I think he's the biggest fluke No.1 since Andy Roddick. He got his clock cleaned out by Djokovic this year and I doubt Nadal can ever truly reverse the trend. He may win a title here and there on clay, but I don't see him ever winning a Wimby or USO against Djoko again.

slice bh compliment
12-29-2011, 12:37 PM
He's been playing for a 100 years (http://tennis.com/articles/templates/news.aspx?articleid=12279&zoneid=25)

Not exactly, but yet another parallel to Bjorn Borg, it seems.
Not really Roddick. Very Borg-like in record. Kind of Pat Cash-ish in the way he breaks down physically.

namelessone
12-29-2011, 01:36 PM
After the shoulder injury shenanigans, does anybody really believe Nadal is actually thinking of others when he proposes a 2-year ranking system?

I think he's the biggest fluke No.1 since Andy Roddick. He got his clock cleaned out by Djokovic this year and I doubt Nadal can ever truly reverse the trend. He may win a title here and there on clay, but I don't see him ever winning a Wimby or USO against Djoko again.

A fluke with 10 GS, two year end nr.1 and a total of 102 non consecutive weeks at nr.1, only behind guys like borg,mcenroe,connors,lendl,sampras,federer.

Roddick won 1 GS and spent 13 weeks at nr.1.

So to conclude, weak trolling dude.

Mustard
12-29-2011, 01:37 PM
After the shoulder injury shenanigans, does anybody really believe Nadal is actually thinking of others when he proposes a 2-year ranking system?

I think he's the biggest fluke No.1 since Andy Roddick. He got his clock cleaned out by Djokovic this year and I doubt Nadal can ever truly reverse the trend. He may win a title here and there on clay, but I don't see him ever winning a Wimby or USO against Djoko again.

Stop talking nonsense.

swordtennis
12-29-2011, 05:08 PM
How arrogant of him.

LMAO :)

Only NadFans take injury excuses to heart and pull the straw man out.
Been years and years same thing.
They are cyclic and strategically planned.
He made 10 finals last year.
Ample levels and supplies of Confidence.
He and his team are just fine.
Djokovic beat him at his own game literally and figuratively.
French Open 2012 will be interesting.

nikdom
12-29-2011, 05:10 PM
Stop talking nonsense.

Why is it nonsense? Which other No.1 in recent history has had such a weak grip on No.1?

He was YE No.1 in 2008 then lost it to Roger in 2009. Got it in 2010 and lost it immediately in 2011 after the drubbing from Djokovic all year.

Mustard
12-29-2011, 05:15 PM
Why is it nonsense? Which other No.1 in recent history has had such a weak grip on No.1?

He was YE No.1 in 2008 then lost it to Roger in 2009. Got it in 2010 and lost it immediately in 2011 after the drubbing from Djokovic all year.

Nadal has won 10 majors and a record 19 masters series titles, and you call him a "weak number 1?" LOL.

nikdom
12-29-2011, 05:19 PM
Nadal has won 10 majors and a record 19 masters series titles, and you call him a "weak number 1?" LOL.

Well then, what happened in 2011? Why did he lose the grip so easily?

If it weren't for his extraordinary clay dominance for years, I wonder if he would be even a No.1.

What majors outside of the FO has he defended even once? How many of those 19 masters outside of clay has he defended or even won more than once?

If he was indeed the true top dog of the sport at the end of 2010, how come Djokovic was able to wash him like a dirty rag the very next year? What changed so suddenly?

Mustard
12-29-2011, 05:42 PM
Well then, what happened in 2011? Why did he lose the grip so easily?

Only Djokovic has been a problem for Nadal in 2011. I've detailed why elsewhere in these forums, how the mental situation changed during their matches this year bit by bit. Before 2011, Nadal was always confident that he would beat Djokovic in the fitness, determination etc. stakes, whereas Djokovic would be wondering how he could beat Nadal unless he blew him off the court. Their head-to-head at the end of 2010 shows this, with Nadal having a 16-7 lead, and all 7 of Djokovic's wins were in 2 straight sets on hardcourts. Nadal won any final, any match at a major or any match that was an epic.

In 2011, that changed in their Indian Wells and Miami finals where Djokovic beat Nadal twice from a set down, and was fitter than Nadal late in the third set of the Miami final! Nadal needed to win one of those matches to maintain the previous mental situation, but he failed. Djokovic clearly took huge confidence from this, the fact that he went into the trenches with Nadal and beat him, so he thought why he couldn't do this everytime they met, so he took this attitude into their clay-court matches in Madrid and Rome, and then into their major finals at Wimbledon and the US Open.

At the same time Djokovic was growing in confidence against Nadal, Nadal's mental situation against Djokovic was going in the opposite direction. Whereas Nadal, before 2011, had the edge in their epic matches in terms of fitness, determination etc. he knew that clearly wasn't the case anymore and that Djokovic had now overtaken him in the intangibles.

In 2012, we will probably find out whether the status quo between Nadal and Djokovic will remain or whether Nadal can turn it around in his favour again.

If it weren't for his extraordinary clay dominance for years, I wonder if he would be even a No.1.

Clay is just as legitimate a surface as any other.

What majors outside of the FO has he defended even once?

He won Wimbledon in 2008, and again in 2010 the next time he played in the tournament. I don't see why this emphasis on defence of a title is so important, though, because ultimately it's about how many titles he wins overall, and he has 10 majors.

slice bh compliment
12-29-2011, 05:49 PM
Wow, nikdom is getting ridden pretty hard.

While I agree that Rafa is no fluke, I do see that his star burned brightly, but quickly. I see him retiring soon. I'm sad about it. I remember when Borg left. Similar age. Similar number of slams. (one off of each).

nikdom
12-29-2011, 05:51 PM
Only Djokovic has been a problem for Nadal in 2011. I've detailed why elsewhere in these forums, how the mental situation changed during their matches this year bit by bit. Before 2011, Nadal was always confident that he would beat Djokovic in the fitness, determination etc. stakes, whereas Djokovic would be wondering how he could beat Nadal unless he blew him off the court. Their head-to-head at the end of 2010 shows this, with Nadal having a 16-7 lead, and all 7 of Djokovic's wins were in 2 straight sets on hardcourts. Nadal won any final, any match at a major or any match that was an epic.

In 2011, that changed in their Indian Wells and Miami finals where Djokovic beat Nadal twice from a set down, and was fitter than Nadal late in the third set of the Miami final! Nadal needed to win one of those matches to maintain the previous mental situation, but he failed. Djokovic clearly took huge confidence from this, the fact that he went into the trenches with Nadal and beat him, so he thought why he couldn't do this everytime they met, so he took this attitude into their clay-court matches in Madrid and Rome, and then into their major finals at Wimbledon and the US Open.

At the same time Djokovic was growing in confidence against Nadal, Nadal's mental situation against Djokovic was going in the opposite direction. Whereas Nadal, before 2011, had the edge in their epic matches in terms of fitness, determination etc. he knew that clearly wasn't the case anymore and that Djokovic had now overtaken him in the intangibles.

In 2012, we will probably find out whether the status quo between Nadal and Djokovic will remain or whether Nadal can turn it around in his favour again.



Clay is just as legitimate a surface as any other.



He won Wimbledon in 2008, and again in 2010 the next time he played in the tournament. I don't see why this emphasis on defence of a title is so important, though, because ultimately it's about how many titles he wins overall, and he has 10 majors.

But he was no.2 while getting most of those titles. Does not make his case for a great no.1 any better. If he were indeed the top dog in the sport, he wouldn't have relinquished it after gaining it for the first time in 2008. The best you can say is that the sport went from one guy being the dominant No.1 to a game of musical chairs between the top 3.

No where in this equation has Nadal proven he was a great No.1. That's what I'm questioning, not his 10 gs titles.

Mustard
12-29-2011, 05:59 PM
But he was no.2 while getting most of those titles. Does not make his case for a great no.1 any better.

Tournaments Nadal won when he was ranked #1:

2009 Australian Open
2009 Indian Wells
2009 Monte Carlo
2009 Barcelona
2009 Rome
2010 Wimbledon
2010 US Open
2010 Tokyo
2011 Monte Carlo
2011 Barcelona
2011 French Open

So, while Nadal was ranked number 1, he managed to win 4 majors, 4 masters series, 2 titles in Barcelona and 1 in Tokyo. Oh, and he also played a vital part in the 2008 Davis Cup semi final win over the USA while he was ranked #1, although he missed the final due to injury (Spain upsetting Argentina in Nadal's absence).

If he were indeed the top dog in the sport, he wouldn't have relinquished it after gaining it for the first time in 2008.

The reason he lost it in 2009 was because he had problems at the worst time of the tennis year, crashing out of the French Open in the R16 to Soderling, and then having to miss his Queen's Club and Wimbledon defences. This meant a lot of dropped ranking points. At the same time, Federer finally won the French Open title that he had craved for so long and then won a 6th Wimbledon title. Make no mistake, though, until that shocking Soderling loss that came out of the blue, Nadal had been dominant in 2009.

West Coast Ace
12-29-2011, 06:02 PM
Djokovic beat him at his own game literally and figuratively.
Pretty much sums it up. The look of despair after all the losses was telling. Djokovic's BH stands up to his heavily topspun FH; Djokovic's return of serve is a major advantage; and now that Djokovic has gotten his nutrition and fitness straightened out he is just as strong - or stronger - than Nadal at the end of matches.

nikdom
12-29-2011, 06:02 PM
Tournaments Nadal won when he was ranked #1:

2009 Australian Open
2009 Indian Wells
2009 Monte Carlo
2009 Barcelona
2009 Rome
2010 Wimbledon
2010 US Open
2010 Tokyo
2011 Monte Carlo
2011 Barcelona
2011 French Open

So, while Nadal was ranked number 1, he managed to win 4 majors, 4 masters series, 2 titles in Barcelona and 1 in Tokyo. Oh, and then there's the 2009 Davis Cup triumph. He also played a vital part in the 2008 Davis Cup semi final win over the USA while he was ranked #1.



The reason he lost it in 2009 was because he had problems at the worst time of the tennis year, crashing out of the French Open in the R16 to Soderling, and then having to miss his Queen's Club and Wimbledon defences. This meant a lot of dropped ranking points. At the same time, Federer finally won the French Open title that he had craved for so long and then won a 6th Wimbledon title. Make no mistake, though, until that shocking Soderling loss that came out of the blue, Nadal had been dominant in 2009.


So injury excuses for why he lost 2009. What about after 2010 then. He was dominant in 2010 too.

All you're telling me is why he did not retain his ranking. All I'm saying is, a strong No.1 should be able to defend his No.1 ranking.

If Djokovic doesn't retain YE No.1 in 2012, then his 2011 will be a flash in the pan as well.

Mustard
12-29-2011, 06:04 PM
Pretty much sums it up. The look of despair after all the losses was telling. Djokovic's BH stands up to his heavily topspun FH; Djokovic's return of serve is a major advantage; and now that Djokovic has gotten his nutrition and fitness straightened out he is just as strong - or stronger - than Nadal at the end of matches.

It's right to say that Djokovic "out-Nadalled" Nadal, because he took the things that Nadal previously had over him and used them against Nadal. What a lot of people don't seem to realise though, is that this is not necessarily permanant, and Nadal could regain the edge in the future. What's been done can be undone.

Mustard
12-29-2011, 06:10 PM
So injury excuses for why he lost 2009.

Forget the injury bit, because results and the rankings table don't recognise that. Nadal lost to Soderling in the R16 of the French Open, and didn't play at Queen's Club and Wimbledon. Using today's ranking system, Nadal got 4,250 points from these 3 events in 2008, and just 180 points from the same 3 events in 2009. That's 4,070 points dropped in a month!

At the same time, Federer went from runner-up of the French Open in 2008 to winning it in 2009, so that's 800 points gained. Federer then did exactly the same at Wimbledon, so that's another 800 points gained, so 1,600 points gained in the same period that Nadal lost 4,070 points.

What about after 2010 then. He was dominant in 2010 too.

I've explained the Djokovic situation. He grew in confidence and all the intangibles Nadal had over Djokovic in the past reversed.

All you're telling me is why he did not retain his ranking. All I'm saying is, a strong No.1 should be able to defend his No.1 ranking.

I'm not obsessed with the year-end rankings. The rankings are always the same at any time of the year, with results from the previous 52 weeks taken into account at all times.

nikdom
12-29-2011, 06:22 PM
Forget the injury bit, because results and the rankings table don't recognise that. Nadal lost to Soderling in the R16 of the French Open, and didn't play at Queen's Club and Wimbledon. Using today's ranking system, Nadal got 4,250 points from these 3 events in 2008, and just 180 points from the same 3 events in 2009. That's 4,070 points dropped in a month!

At the same time, Federer went from runner-up of the French Open in 2008 to winning it in 2009, so that's 800 points gained. Federer then did exactly the same at Wimbledon, so that's another 800 points gained, so 1,600 points gained in the same period that Nadal lost 4,070 points.



I've explained the Djokovic situation. He grew in confidence and all the intangibles Nadal had over Djokovic in the past reversed.



I'm not obsessed with the year-end rankings. The rankings are always the same at any time of the year, with results from the previous 52 weeks taken into account at all times.

So in your opinion Nadal was a strong No.1 despite losing it to Roger and Djokovic after short stints at that position?

OddJack
12-29-2011, 06:24 PM
ATP couldnt care less about what Nadal wants.

Actually if they could they would put him in a cage and rent to circuses or local shows during the off season; "Freak of Nature"

Mustard
12-29-2011, 06:25 PM
So in your opinion Nadal was a strong No.1 despite losing it to Roger and Djokovic after short stints at that position?

Yes, he has spent 102 weeks at number 1. And short stints? It was 46 weeks and then 56 weeks! Short compared to Federer, Lendl and Connors maybe.

nikdom
12-29-2011, 06:32 PM
Yes, he has spent 102 weeks at number 1. And short stints? It was 46 weeks and then 56 weeks!

It doesnt matter to me if he could barely hold on to it past 52 weeks. You can disagree, but the inability to play well deep into the season and to retain points means he was not a strong no.1

If Djokovic cant defend his ranking next yr, everyone will reasonably say he was not a strong no.1

Mustard
12-29-2011, 06:38 PM
It doesnt matter to me if he could barely hold on to it past 52 weeks. You can disagree, but the inability to play well deep into the season and to retain points means he was not a strong no.1

If Djokovic cant defend his ranking next yr, everyone will reasonably say he was not a strong no.1

What are your opinions of Muster, Rios, Moya, Rafter, Safin, Ferrero, Kafelnikov? These guys all got to number 1, and all for less than 10 weeks in total, Rafter for just 1 week. And that's before getting to guys like Kuerten and Hewitt, who were number 1 for much longer, yet not dominant in the position.

Who are "strong number 1s" to you? Is it only Federer, Lendl and Connors, who lead the list for the longest consecutive weeks streaks at number 1?

nikdom
12-29-2011, 07:01 PM
What are your opinions of Muster, Rios, Moya, Rafter, Safin, Ferrero, Kafelnikov? These guys all got to number 1, and all for less than 10 weeks in total, Rafter for just 1 week. And that's before getting to guys like Kuerten and Hewitt, who were number 1 for much longer, yet not dominant in the position.

Who are "strong number 1s" to you? Is it only Federer, Lendl and Connors, who lead the list for the longest consecutive weeks streaks at number 1?

Compared to Roger, obviously Nadal is not a strong no.1. Even if you look at consecutive weeks at No.1, (although I think YE is more important. The calendar is what everyone looks at), even Hewitt was No.1 for more weeks (75) than Nadal.

I stand by my assertion that Nadal is the weakest No.1 since Roddick.Time will tell if he can regain it or not.

swordtennis
12-29-2011, 07:05 PM
Pretty much sums it up. The look of despair after all the losses was telling. Djokovic's BH stands up to his heavily topspun FH; Djokovic's return of serve is a major advantage; and now that Djokovic has gotten his nutrition and fitness straightened out he is just as strong - or stronger - than Nadal at the end of matches.

Especially at the USO.
Djokovic beat Nadal down with a weak serve.
Just spinning it in asking for rallies.
Serbia and Spain camps with massive pro athlete development programs.

Agreed Nadal can turn it around again.

Mike Sams
12-29-2011, 11:14 PM
Pretty much sums it up. The look of despair after all the losses was telling. Djokovic's BH stands up to his heavily topspun FH; Djokovic's return of serve is a major advantage; and now that Djokovic has gotten his nutrition and fitness straightened out he is just as strong - or stronger - than Nadal at the end of matches.

Nadal's heavy topspin forehands didn't mean a damn thing to a lot of players out there with strong backhands. He just had more fight and that extra tiny bit usually sealed the deal in the end.

namelessone
12-29-2011, 11:50 PM
It doesnt matter to me if he could barely hold on to it past 52 weeks. You can disagree, but the inability to play well deep into the season and to retain points means he was not a strong no.1.

If Djokovic cant defend his ranking next yr, everyone will reasonably say he was not a strong no.1

Then I guess we only had six "strong" nr.1 players in all of tennis history: Federer,Sampras,Connors,Lendl,Hewitt and McEnroe, since these are the only guys with more consecutive weeks at nr.1 than Nadal.

Quite sad for our sport really that guys like Nadal(46 and 56 weeks),Agassi(52,30 and 12 weeks),Borg(46 and 20 weeks),Kuerten(30,8 and 5 weeks),Nastase(40 weeks) were weak nr.1 according to your dumb theory.

Nadal should have had a 2-3 year run(2008-2010) if he didn't stupidly plan his 2009. He was in good form at the beginning of 2009 and could have finished the year at nr.1 if he entered RG and WB in a reasonably healthy state.

So his best years were 2008-2010, 3 seasons. But oh wait, he didn't match Fed 4 year end nr.1 so it doesn't count.

I would say that you need some trolling lessons from zagor.

namelessone
12-30-2011, 12:23 AM
Actually if they could they would put him in a cage and rent to circuses or local shows during the off season; "Freak of Nature"

I guess it's true that Fed fans show more maturity that other fanbases, the *******s weren't lying.

reversef
12-30-2011, 02:54 AM
Compared to Roger, obviously Nadal is not a strong no.1. Even if you look at consecutive weeks at No.1, (although I think YE is more important. The calendar is what everyone looks at), even Hewitt was No.1 for more weeks (75) than Nadal.

I stand by my assertion that Nadal is the weakest No.1 since Roddick.Time will tell if he can regain it or not.
How many No 1 after Roddick? :p Nadal is the weakest one of a dozen guys at least... :)
Nadal is actually one of the 8 players who spent more than 100 weeks at number one. He's 7th on the list (between Borg and Agassi). If that's what you call a weak number one.....
"The weakest one since Roddick" LOL In your relentless efforts to bash Nadal, you are making a fool of yourself. :lol:

beast of mallorca
12-30-2011, 03:12 AM
Compared to Roger, obviously Nadal is not a strong no.1. Even if you look at consecutive weeks at No.1, (although I think YE is more important. The calendar is what everyone looks at), even Hewitt was No.1 for more weeks (75) than Nadal.

I stand by my assertion that Nadal is the weakest No.1 since Roddick.Time will tell if he can regain it or not.

And I stand by my assertion that your post is stupid, lol

OddJack
12-30-2011, 06:33 AM
I guess it's true that Fed fans show more maturity that other fanbases, the *******s weren't lying.

Freak of Nature is a complement for Nadal. Agassi agrees.:)