PDA

View Full Version : Theory for why top 10 is so bad since 2009


Ledigs
03-29-2010, 02:10 PM
They all had to stop taking HGH and other steroids because of the stricter rules and testing requirements.

abraxas21
03-29-2010, 02:57 PM
HGH is still pretty much undetectable and I wouldn't be surprised if most players in the top 100 are high on it.

that said, the top 10 isn't bad just because murray and djokovic are hitting a bad patch, imo

djokovicgonzalez2010
03-29-2010, 03:02 PM
And Federer, and Nadal, and Del Poto, and Davydenko, and Cilic, and Tsonga

JennyS
03-29-2010, 03:06 PM
Federer's results in 2009 were better than 2008:

2 Grand Slam titles in 2009
1 Grand Slam in 2008

4 Grand Slam finals in 2009
3 Grand Slam finals in 2008

2 Masters titles in 2009
0 Masters in 2008

5 out of 8 Masters Semis made in 2009
4 out of 9 Masters Series semis made in 2008

sennoc
03-30-2010, 07:07 AM
Federer's results in 2009 were better than 2008:

2 Grand Slam titles in 2009
1 Grand Slam in 2008

4 Grand Slam finals in 2009
3 Grand Slam finals in 2008

2 Masters titles in 2009
0 Masters in 2008

5 out of 8 Masters Semis made in 2009
4 out of 9 Masters Series semis made in 2008

Waiting for similar statistics for Nadal...

aldeayeah
03-30-2010, 08:12 AM
Okay, I'll bite.

Actually, if we don't take into account Wimbledon when he was injured, Nadal's results were pretty much the same in 2009 than in 2008.

1 Grand Slam title in 2009
1 Grand Slam title in 2008

1 Grand Slam final in 2009
1 Grand Slam final in 2008

3 Masters titles in 2009
3 Masters titles in 2008

7 out of 9 Masters semis made in 2009
7 out of 9 Masters semis made in 2008

Waiting for similar statistics for sennoc...

TennisFan008
03-30-2010, 08:18 AM
The ITF signing on to the whereabouts thingy is a paper tiger cos there's still laughably few OOC-tests, unless national anti-doping agencys have stepped up majorly.

Why would they stop taking HGH when they are only blood tested at the slams?

dropshot winner
03-30-2010, 08:26 AM
Okay, I'll bite.

Actually, if we don't take into account Wimbledon when he was injured, Nadal's results were pretty much the same in 2009 than in 2008.

1 Grand Slam title in 2009
1 Grand Slam title in 2008

1 Grand Slam final in 2009
1 Grand Slam final in 2008

3 Masters titles in 2009
3 Masters titles in 2008

7 out of 9 Masters semis made in 2009
7 out of 9 Masters semis made in 2008

Waiting for similar statistics for sennoc...
2008 was the only year in Nadal's career where he won more than one slam. It makes no sense to leave the slam he treasures most out.

Ocean Drive
03-30-2010, 08:32 AM
Okay, I'll bite.

Actually, if we don't take into account Wimbledon when he was injured, Nadal's results were pretty much the same in 2009 than in 2008.

1 Grand Slam title in 2009
1 Grand Slam title in 2008

1 Grand Slam final in 2009
1 Grand Slam final in 2008

3 Masters titles in 2009
3 Masters titles in 2008

7 out of 9 Masters semis made in 2009
7 out of 9 Masters semis made in 2008

Waiting for similar statistics for sennoc...

What? Nadal won 2 slams in 2008.

swissmiss
03-30-2010, 08:55 AM
I don't think the top 10 was so bad in 2009.

All the slams were won by top 10 players. Only top 10 players were in slam finals except for Soderling. All Masters were won by top 10 players (2 Fed, 3 Nadal, 2 Murray, 1 Davy, 1 Joker). Slam semis I think were almost all top 10 except for Verdasco, Soderling and Haas (unless Gonzalez was ranked lower at FO)? SO I think it's been pretty consistent at the top. The top 10 were out in force at the AO as well, it's really just been IW where the top guys ran into trouble, and then here for Murray and Djokovic, although 12 of the top 16 seeds are still in, so it's really not all bad.

Ledigs
03-30-2010, 09:18 AM
I know, was kinda joking :)

Anaconda
03-30-2010, 09:48 AM
2005 still had the best top 10. Prime Federer, Nadal, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick. Nowadays we have guys like Soderling, Tsonga and Davydenko competing for slams.

sennoc
03-30-2010, 12:37 PM
Okay, I'll bite.

Actually, if we don't take into account Wimbledon when he was injured, Nadal's results were pretty much the same in 2009 than in 2008.

1 Grand Slam title in 2009
1 Grand Slam title in 2008

1 Grand Slam final in 2009
1 Grand Slam final in 2008

3 Masters titles in 2009
3 Masters titles in 2008

7 out of 9 Masters semis made in 2009
7 out of 9 Masters semis made in 2008

...and he did not even play half of 2009.

Looks like 2009 was much better for Nadal than 2008.

Rofl.

Waiting for similar statistics for sennoc...

If you want to make my own forum, why not? Here we talk about ATP, so please hide your stupid comments somewhere else.

The Edberg
03-30-2010, 01:27 PM
Nadal's hot start in 09 is the only thing that makes up for it. He spent more than half of 09, either injured constantly and/or not playing. Overrall 08 was the better year. HE won 2 slams. Better than 1 slams and spending the rest of the year inactive or injured

zagor
03-30-2010, 01:28 PM
2005 still had the best top 10. Prime Federer, Nadal, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick. Nowadays we have guys like Soderling, Tsonga and Davydenko competing for slams.

That's quite an an uncommon view,atleast in this forum.I kinda agree though,I think 2005 was a great year.

The Edberg
03-30-2010, 01:30 PM
On paper the top 10 doesnt look bad. But most are underachieving or injured.

Morrissey
03-30-2010, 02:11 PM
When does Drak come into this thread? Just wondering.