PDA

View Full Version : Verdasco- was he the worst top 10 player ever?


NadalAgassi
06-13-2011, 11:36 PM
Now that Verdasco has dropped well out of the top 10 for good would you honor him as being the worst player in history to spend a decent chunk of time in the top 10 or not. I personally would vote yes. He was every top players pigeon, he could lose to anyone, he was a bigtime choker, he has no mental strength at all. He also embarassed himself with his boasting of what he would do and failed to live up to, and his poorly thought out sour graped remarks after some of his losses. Oh yeah and he actually prayed on his knees after winning points in a Masters final.

PSNELKE
06-14-2011, 12:01 AM
Almugro and Mugzer.
Verdasco was a Top10 member for years, though he is a mug.

Troicki will take the cake whenever he manages to make the Top10.

ledwix
06-14-2011, 12:17 AM
No...I'd say Monfils, Cilic, and Simon are worse.

Troicki is a Round of 16 player. He seems to always get to the R16 and then lose. So he should be in the top 16, but top 10 would be too much.

tusharlovesrafa
06-14-2011, 12:29 AM
I don't know weather you know or not but he suffers Frm A.D.H.D...

PSNELKE
06-14-2011, 12:36 AM
No...I'd say Monfils, Cilic, and Simon are worse.

Troicki is a Round of 16 player. He seems to always get to the R16 and then lose. So he should be in the top 16, but top 10 would be too much.

I disagree with Monclown and Simon, however I agree with Cilic.

In majors Troicki reached only 1 R16 which was at RG. He surely doesnt even deserve to be in Top20.

PCXL-Fan
06-14-2011, 12:38 AM
He's won two 500 series event and 3 250 series events.
And he's made the semis once of a grandslam, a number of qtrs, and numerous rnd of 16s.

While career wise he certainly pales in comparison to perennial top 10ers, he's a decent player in comparison to perennial top 15-20ers.

Over the course of the entire open era, suggesting he's the worse is way way way way off. Even during the current past 2 years he's not the worst.

Jurgen Melzer only has three 250 titles. Notable GS performances have only been 1 semi and 3 rnd of 16.

Big_Dangerous
06-14-2011, 12:38 AM
No...I'd say Monfils, Cilic, and Simon are worse.

Troicki is a Round of 16 player. He seems to always get to the R16 and then lose. So he should be in the top 16, but top 10 would be too much.

Nope because both players have managed to beat Federer at least.


Cilic, yes.

Verdasco, yes.

Almagro, yes.

Melzer, no.

Nextman916
06-14-2011, 12:47 AM
Robredo wasn't anything special, I mean the guy had CLEAR weakness on his BH wing. I feel top 10's should really be more "complete players". That weaker era sure did work in his favor.

sdont
06-14-2011, 02:56 AM
The worst ever, no. But he might be the one who made the greatest number of double faults while in the top 10.

Netzroller
06-14-2011, 02:58 AM
He also embarassed himself with his boasting of what he would do and failed to live up to, and his poorly thought out sour graped remarks after some of his losses. Oh yeah and he actually prayed on his knees after winning points in a Masters final.

As stupid as that may be, it doesn't make him a worse player...


And I think the answer is no. He has accomplished more than some other top 10 players, which disqualifies him for being the worst. Secondly, I think he has more talent and better shots than some of them.

Gorecki
06-14-2011, 03:42 AM
if he his the worst top 10 ever, what does that say about Nadal who needed a gargantuan 5 setter semi with him to get to his first hard court final?

just asking????

tusharlovesrafa
06-14-2011, 04:29 AM
if he his the worst top 10 ever, what does that say about Nadal who needed a gargantuan 5 setter semi with him to get to his first hard court final?

just asking????
hence proven Nadal is worst number 1...:)

PSNELKE
06-14-2011, 05:00 AM
if he his the worst top 10 ever, what does that say about Nadal who needed a gargantuan 5 setter semi with him to get to his first hard court final?

just asking????

Yeah screw that mug and his 10 majors.

Gorecki
06-14-2011, 05:14 AM
Yeah screw that mug and his 10 majors.

not really my point Nelke...

Tammo
06-14-2011, 05:17 AM
Did Simon ever get to a Grand Slam semi?

Comet Buster
06-14-2011, 05:23 AM
From a technical standpoint: Definate no.
From a results standpoint: Could be. But I'm positive Monfils in 2009 made the top 10 winning only one tournament and that was a low event in 2005?

NadalAgassi
06-14-2011, 11:44 AM
if he his the worst top 10 ever, what does that say about Nadal who needed a gargantuan 5 setter semi with him to get to his first hard court final?

just asking????

Verdasco has a 0-11 record vs Nadal, which is his record vs most top players, 0-something. In their last match and biggest final ever not only ate a bagel and breadstick but prayed on the ground after every point he won. At the entire 2009 Australian Open he played out of his skin, 3 times better than he has ever played in any other tournament at any other point in his career, and still couldnt beat Nadal on his worst surface. Verdasco's performances vs Nadal only cement what a weak top 10 player he is.

And some of you seem to be citing people who barely spent anytime in the top 10. I am talking about of players that actually stayed in the top 10 long enough to be some semblance of a regular, in Verdasco's case over 2 years. Is there really any player in history that spent that long in the top 10 that is weaker. I am not talking about the Almagro's or Melzer's of the World who spend mere weeks there.

Gorecki
06-14-2011, 11:47 AM
Verdasco has a 0-11 record vs Nadal, which is his record vs most top players, 0-something. In their last match and biggest final ever not only ate a bagel and breadstick but prayed on the ground after every point he won. At the entire 2009 Australian Open he played out of his skin, 3 times better than he has ever played in any other tournament at any other point in his career, and still couldnt beat Nadal on his worst surface. Verdasco's performances vs Nadal only cement what a weak top 10 player he is.

still does not adress my point. which coming from you is not a surprise...:oops:

NadalAgassi
06-14-2011, 11:48 AM
Actually it did address your point. If you cant see that then I cant help your stupidity. Verdasco is Nadal's lapdog of lapdogs, to use the matchup vs Nadal as a way to inflate Verdasco is truly comical.

Buckethead
06-14-2011, 11:53 AM
Maybe Almagro would be the worst, since He is only a clay court player and makes his money only on clay. Besides him, I don't see anybody in recent years worse than Verdasco.

Cilic has beaten Nadal which Fiasco hasn't herefore Cilic can't be any worse than Verdasco, and He has a semi final at the AO beating great players.

Simon has beaten Federer and Nadal, which Fiasco hasn't, so He can't be any worse than Fiasco neither.

Gorecki
06-14-2011, 11:53 AM
Actually it did address your point. If you cant see that then I cant help your stupidity. Verdasco is Nadal's lapdog of lapdogs, to use the matchup vs Nadal as a way to inflate Verdasco is truly comical.

thanks for the uncalled insult

Search: Key Word(s): stupid ; Posts Made By: NadalAgassi
Showing results 1 to 25 of 49
Search took 0.31 seconds.

Search: Key Word(s): idiot ; Posts Made By: NadalAgassi
Showing results 1 to 25 of 35 Search took 0.12 seconds.

Search: Key Word(s): dumb ; Posts Made By: NadalAgassi
Showing results 1 to 25 of 26 Search took 0.11 seconds.

Moose Malloy
06-14-2011, 11:56 AM
[]QUOTEAnd some of you seem to be citing people who barely spent anytime in the top 10. I am talking about of players that actually stayed in the top 10 long enough to be some semblance of a regular, in Verdasco's case over 2 years. Is there really any player in history that spent that long in the top 10 that is weaker[/QUOTE]

what did you think of Robredo, Ljubicic, & Blake? they spent a while in the top 10, didn't they? And Blake & Robredo never reached a major SF.

NadalAgassi
06-14-2011, 12:05 PM
what did you think of Robredo, Ljubicic, & Blake? they spent a while in the top 10, didn't they? And Blake & Robredo never reached a major SF.

Blake's head to head record vs Nadal and ability to beat all the top players already makes him better than Verdasco. He has also made the finals of the WTF, a bigger final than Verdasco has ever reached. He has 10 career titles, double that of Verdasco. The only edge Verdasco has is one slam semifinal, but if Verdasco played Federer and Agassi in all his slam quarterfinals as Blake did you can bet money he wouldnt have one either.

Ljubicic has won a Masters and reached many Masters finals. He has beaten all the games top players except for Federer. He also single handedly won Davis Cup for Croatia, including beating both Agassi and Roddick and being part of the winning doubles. And he has 10 career titles, double that of Verdasco. He reached a high of #3 in the World. He is in a whole other league from Verdasco really.

Robredo has won a Masters as well. He has 10 career titles, double that of Verdasco. He doesnt have a slam semi (blew a 2 sets to 0 lead vs Costa in the 2003 FO quarters unfortunately) but has 5 slam quarterfinals and is overall probably a better slam performer than Verdasco too. Robredo of recent semi regular top 10 players is the one Verdasco would come closest to probably though. Like Verdasco he is pretty much useless vs top players, but atleast he fights like a dog and doesnt pray after winning points.

bluetrain4
06-14-2011, 12:12 PM
I never understood TWs obsession with Verdasco.

Nadalfan89
06-14-2011, 12:26 PM
Youzhny was the worst top 10 player ever.

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 12:31 PM
Well if Verdasco is the worst top 10 player ever, that puts to rest the "toughest era ever"theory. Nadal would never let such an average player reach the top 10!

NadalAgassi
06-14-2011, 12:36 PM
Well if Verdasco is the worst top 10 player ever, that puts to rest the "toughest era ever"theory. Nadal would never let such an average player reach the top 10!

Who ever said this was the toughest era ever. Whoever did is crazy. The grass and clay fields have both been amongst the worst ever for many years now.

BeHappy
06-14-2011, 01:27 PM
NadalAgassi has only been watching tennis for a few months. He knows nothing about the game except what he reads on wikipedia or sees on youtube.

Andres
06-14-2011, 01:40 PM
thanks for the uncalled insult

Search: Key Word(s): stupid ; Posts Made By: NadalAgassi
Showing results 1 to 25 of 49
Search took 0.31 seconds.

Search: Key Word(s): idiot ; Posts Made By: NadalAgassi
Showing results 1 to 25 of 35 Search took 0.12 seconds.

Search: Key Word(s): dumb ; Posts Made By: NadalAgassi
Showing results 1 to 25 of 26 Search took 0.11 seconds.
Win! :cool:

Nadalfan89
06-14-2011, 01:44 PM
thanks for the uncalled insult

Search: Key Word(s): stupid ; Posts Made By: NadalAgassi
Showing results 1 to 25 of 49
Search took 0.31 seconds.

Search: Key Word(s): idiot ; Posts Made By: NadalAgassi
Showing results 1 to 25 of 35 Search took 0.12 seconds.

Search: Key Word(s): dumb ; Posts Made By: NadalAgassi
Showing results 1 to 25 of 26 Search took 0.11 seconds.

Are you kidding me? You're the most condescending, hypocritical person on this forum and you're calling someone out for using insults?

djokovicgonzalez2010
06-14-2011, 01:49 PM
Verdasco has never won ANYTHING of note. Granted, neither have Almagro, Fish, or Melzer, but they weren't there for long and are streaky

timnz
06-14-2011, 01:50 PM
Verdasco has a 0-11 record vs Nadal, which is his record vs most top players, 0-something. In their last match and biggest final ever not only ate a bagel and breadstick but prayed on the ground after every point he won. At the entire 2009 Australian Open he played out of his skin, 3 times better than he has ever played in any other tournament at any other point in his career, and still couldnt beat Nadal on his worst surface. Verdasco's performances vs Nadal only cement what a weak top 10 player he is.

And some of you seem to be citing people who barely spent anytime in the top 10. I am talking about of players that actually stayed in the top 10 long enough to be some semblance of a regular, in Verdasco's case over 2 years. Is there really any player in history that spent that long in the top 10 that is weaker. I am not talking about the Almagro's or Melzer's of the World who spend mere weeks there.

Hard court is not nadals worst surface - it's one of his best. Indoor is nadals worst.

dominikk1985
06-14-2011, 01:56 PM
if he his the worst top 10 ever, what does that say about Nadal who needed a gargantuan 5 setter semi with him to get to his first hard court final?

just asking????

what does it say about federer that he needed 5 sets to beat a 31 yo tommy haas in the only tournament he won at RG?:D

Mikael
06-14-2011, 02:04 PM
Verdasco is easy to make fun of, but worst top 10 ever? Maybe worst top 10 player of the last 2 years and even then there are other strong candidates (Fish, Melzer...)

Going back only 10 years, how about Massu, Lapentti, Srichaphan... There must be way more, it only took me about 5mns to come up with those.

callmethedoctor
06-14-2011, 07:09 PM
Absolutely not, Verdasco isn't even the worst in the past 2 years. Cilic by a mile and a half.
Verdasco actually had good strokes, I don't know if you recall watching him win. And him winning was a lot more common than Cilic.

droliver
06-14-2011, 07:23 PM
Some not so memorable top 10 players of years past:
Martin Jaite (ARG)
Jay Berger (USA)
Jonas Svensson (SWE)
Karel Novacek(CZE)
Magnus Gustafsson (SWE)

KyomasaNTH
06-14-2011, 07:54 PM
Almagro, or Melzer. HORRIBLE!!!!!

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 08:00 PM
Absolutely not, Verdasco isn't even the worst in the past 2 years. Cilic by a mile and a half.
Verdasco actually had good strokes, I don't know if you recall watching him win. And him winning was a lot more common than Cilic.

Cilic did have some results in the period he was ranked 10, he reached a QF at the US open in 2009 (blew Murray off the court, lost to Del Potro after being up a set and a break), an Australian Open SF in 2010 (beat Roddick and Del Potro in consecutive matches, was a set and a break up against Murray in the SF before he ran out of gas), owned Nadal in 2009 Beijing 6-1 6-3 or something, won 2 consecutive tournaments in Chennai and Zagreb, actually I expected (and still expect but to a lesser degree) more from him. It's a pity he can't reproduce his best results nowadays. Definately NOT a weak top 10 player when he was performing in 2009-2010.

Polaris
06-14-2011, 08:03 PM
Are you kidding me? You're the most condescending, hypocritical person on this forum and you're calling someone out for using insults?

A dude who has had more than a dozen usernames, some idolizing a player and others hating the very same player, calls another poster hypocritical.

A dude who has been publicly outed multiple times for using simultaneously active usernames calls another poster hypocritical.

Nice.:neutral:

Bhagi Katbamna
06-14-2011, 08:06 PM
I wouldn't call Almagro the worst top ten: he won every clay court tournament in South America and reached the final of the one he didn't win this year(or was that last year).

JeMar
06-14-2011, 08:10 PM
All crappy top tenners that have come and gone are simply warming up the throne before Troicki rightfully claims it for himself after a 4th round finish at Wimbledon after he beats a qualifier, gets a W/O, and a retirement after being down a set and two breaks.

Take it to the bank.

Bobby Jr
06-14-2011, 09:23 PM
Who ever said this was the toughest era ever. Whoever did is crazy. The grass and clay fields have both been amongst the worst ever for many years now.
So we can put an asterisk beside Nadal's 6 French Open wins in case he gets up to Pete's level?

NadalAgassi
06-14-2011, 10:50 PM
So we can put an asterisk beside Nadal's 6 French Open wins in case he gets up to Pete's level?

Sure, as long as you are willing to do the same for Roger's Wimbledons. I have often said Nadal needs 8 or 9 French Opens to be clearly above Borg on clay. And Federer would need 8 or 9 Wimbledons before I would ever consider him better than Sampras on grass.

When you win as much as Federer and Nadal do on natural surfaces though you are great, no matter what the field is like. It doesnt change the fact the field on those surfaces has sucked for awhile compared to past ones though. Nearly everyone is a hard court specialist these days.

BreakPoint
06-15-2011, 12:03 AM
Why is everyone only discussing current players on the tour when the OP specifically indicated "EVER" in his question? :confused:

You mean no one thinks there were any bad players in the Top 10 in the history of pro tennis? :???:

How about:

Karol Kucera?
Jiri Novak?
Brad Gilbert?
Harold Solomon?
Eddie Dibbs?
Bill Scanlon?
Henrik Sundstrom?
Anders Jarryd?
Wojtek Fibak?
Corrado Barrazzutti?
Jakob Hlasek?
Gene Mayer?
Aaron Krickstein?

Gorecki
06-15-2011, 01:44 AM
what does it say about federer that he needed 5 sets to beat a 31 yo tommy haas in the only tournament he won at RG?:D

and what do i care about Federer in this thread? i dont even like him!!! that was major failure!!!

btw... your post just proves me right!

Devilito
06-15-2011, 08:23 AM
Fernando Verdasco
RIP
January 30th, 2009 to January 30th, 2009
http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu188/tonyg11/tobasco.jpg

Semi-Pro
06-15-2011, 08:26 AM
^^^^^^^^^^

Never gets old. Love that pic haha

BeHappy
06-15-2011, 12:32 PM
Sure, as long as you are willing to do the same for Roger's Wimbledons. I have often said Nadal needs 8 or 9 French Opens to be clearly above Borg on clay. And Federer would need 8 or 9 Wimbledons before I would ever consider him better than Sampras on grass.

When you win as much as Federer and Nadal do on natural surfaces though you are great, no matter what the field is like. It doesnt change the fact the field on those surfaces has sucked for awhile compared to past ones though. Nearly everyone is a hard court specialist these days.

What do you know about Borg apart from what you've read on Wikipedia or seen on Youtube?

Answer: Nothing.

jrachiever
06-15-2011, 02:01 PM
He wouldn't qualify from an overall career perspective, but from August 1990 through March of 1991, Andres Gomez went 1-16 in ATP matches while maintaining a top 10 ranking the entire time. It's hard to imagine there being a worse top 10 player in history than Gomez during that period.

NadalAgassi
06-15-2011, 04:12 PM
He wouldn't qualify from an overall career perspective, but from August 1990 through March of 1991, Andres Gomez went 1-16 in ATP matches while maintaining a top 10 ranking the entire time. It's hard to imagine there being a worse top 10 player in history than Gomez during that period.

He had the French Open title on his resume from the previous 12 (in fact previous 9) months. That already disqualifies him from being the worst. Reigning holder of a slam >>>>>> Verdasco's whole career (and many of the others mentioned in this thread).

tacou
06-15-2011, 05:27 PM
He had the French Open title on his resume from the previous 12 (in fact previous 9) months. That already disqualifies him from being the worst. Reigning holder of a slam >>>>>> Verdasco's whole career (and many of the others mentioned in this thread).

obviously a slam winner is superior to nando but 1-16 streak is pretty impressive to stay in top10

Almagro is worse right off the bat..and I feel like whenever Gael Monfils is in the 10 Its been months since he's done anything

Kobble
06-15-2011, 05:33 PM
Robredo wasn't anything special, I mean the guy had CLEAR weakness on his BH wing. I feel top 10's should really be more "complete players". That weaker era sure did work in his favor.I agree. Robredo was just consistent. I cringed whenever he played Federer. That was a weak era, and Federer beat the tar out of them. Federer saved great tennis during that time.

kishnabe
06-15-2011, 06:14 PM
Why is everyone only discussing current players on the tour when the OP specifically indicated "EVER" in his question? :confused:

You mean no one thinks there were any bad players in the Top 10 in the history of pro tennis? :???:

How about:

Karol Kucera? Real good clay courter....had a good run in a slam
Jiri Novak? I have seen his name a lot....an allright player
Brad Gilbert? Remember his match against McEnroe and Lendl at WTF
Harold Solomon? French Open Final
Eddie Dibbs? Heard his name somewhere
Bill Scanlon?
Henrik Sundstrom?
Anders Jarryd?
Wojtek Fibak?
Corrado Barrazzutti?
Jakob Hlasek?
Gene Mayer?
Aaron Krickstein? Real good player


All the guys bolded are better top tenners than Daco!

Netzroller
06-15-2011, 06:34 PM
Hard court is not nadals worst surface - it's one of his best. Indoor is nadals worst.
'Indoor' is a surface?

BreakPoint
06-15-2011, 07:48 PM
All the guys bolded are better top tenners than Daco!
Did any of those guys win a Slam?

Have you ever seen Harold Solomon play? He only got the the FO final by moonballing every single shot.

And Brad Gilbert was 0-16 versus Lendl and 1-13 versus McEnroe.

Aaron Krickstein is better known for losing to Jimmy Connors at the '91 US Open than for anything else he accomplished.

Sneezy
06-15-2011, 08:07 PM
Whoever started this thread must not like Hot Sauce very much.

SStrikerR
06-15-2011, 08:11 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZBE0-EJxBc&feature=related

Seriously, that sums up Verdasco.

JeMar
06-15-2011, 08:13 PM
Did any of those guys win a Slam?

Have you ever seen Harold Solomon play? He only got the the FO final by moonballing every single shot.

And Brad Gilbert was 0-16 versus Lendl and 1-13 versus McEnroe.

Aaron Krickstein is better known for losing to Jimmy Connors at the '91 US Open than for anything else he accomplished.

I never saw Solomon play, so I won't comment on him.

Brad Gilbert has more tennis brains in a hair follicle than Verdasco has in that entire head of his.

Krickstein was more than a decent player. The guy beat great players that were playing great tennis, like Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Stich, Wilander, Sampras, and Agassi. He also had a crazy good record in five-set matches... something like .800. Verdasco's five-set record is much lower and trust me, they're not over good players. I think the best five-set win he has is over Novak Djokovic back when Novak was still hooking up to a breathing machine on changeovers.

Sneezy
06-15-2011, 08:19 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZBE0-EJxBc&feature=related

Seriously, that sums up Verdasco.

Everyone has had those moments :).

Proset
06-15-2011, 08:54 PM
It's hard to remember bad top 10 players because, well, they weren't memorable. But, Verdasco is definitely not the worst, not even in his time (Melzer and Cilic have done worse). How about Mariano Puerta? Besides the French Open final he has only reached once past the second round at a Grand Slam (lost in the 3rd Round to Ferrero in 2000 at French). Notable 2nd round losses have happened against such behemoths as Galo Blanco, Hicham Arazi, and Bohdan Ulihrach (at French) as well as Jan Kroslak at the Australian Open

dominikk1985
06-16-2011, 10:42 AM
and what do i care about Federer in this thread? i dont even like him!!! that was major failure!!!

btw... your post just proves me right!

I'm no fed hater either:D. I just think that both guys (roger and rafa) were helped by playing in a weak era.

Fedal are amazing and would win in any era but the tennis from 2003-2011 was basically a joke apart from the top dogs.

sampras and also agassi just had to face a lot harder opponents.

fed_rulz
06-16-2011, 11:06 AM
I'm no fed hater either:D. I just think that both guys (roger and rafa) were helped by playing in a weak era.

Fedal are amazing and would win in any era but the tennis from 2003-2011 was basically a joke apart from the top dogs.

sampras and also agassi just had to face a lot harder opponents.

the only thing that's a joke is your post.
how are the opponents "harder" for Sampras or Agassi if Sampras/Agassi still ended up winning? I don't get it...

PCXL-Fan
06-16-2011, 11:40 AM
Verdasco has never won ANYTHING of note. Granted, neither have Almagro, Fish, or Melzer, but they weren't there for long and are streaky

Lets put Verdasco's career achievements in comparison with some players who've reached higher then career high #7. Verdasco's honestly not bad compared to others with his ranking high.

There are probably alot of players who reach career highs of top 7-9 that never win a Master Series event. Here are just some random ppl.

James Blake - career high #4 - Never won a Masters series event.
Won 10 titles mostly 250 series events*.

Tim Henman - career high #4
Has 1 Master Series title, won during the one of the weakest era of mens tennis - 2003.

Rainer Schuettler - career high #5
0 MS titles, 4 titles of lower tier caliber *

Radek Stephanek - career high #8
0 MS titles, 1 500 lvl event, 3 250 events

Tommy Haas - career high #4
1 MS title, 4 500 lvl events, 7 250 events

* generalizing by calling old MS500, 300, 250, 175, 150 etc as MS1000, 500, and 250 events

*ps you owe me one Rovex :)

Andres
06-16-2011, 12:06 PM
Lets put Verdasco's career achievements in comparison with some players who've reached higher then career high #7. Verdasco's honestly not bad compared to others with his ranking high.

There are probably alot of players who reach career highs of top 7-9 that never win a Master Series event. Here are just some random ppl.

James Blake - career high #4 - Never won a Masters series event.
Won 10 titles mostly 250 series events*.

Tim Henman - career high #4
Has 1 Master Series title, won during the one of the weakest era of mens tennis - 2003.

Rainer Schuettler - career high #5
0 MS titles, 4 titles of lower tier caliber *

Radek Stephanek - career high #8
0 MS titles, 1 500 lvl event, 3 250 events

Tommy Haas - career high #4
1 MS title, 4 500 lvl events, 7 250 events

* generalizing by calling old MS500, 300, 250, 175, 150 etc as MS1000, 500, and 250 events

*ps you owe me one Rovex :)
To be fair with the truth, Henman has 11 ATP titles, and 6 GS SFs.

BreakPoint
06-16-2011, 12:16 PM
Lets put Verdasco's career achievements in comparison with some players who've reached higher then career high #7. Verdasco's honestly not bad compared to others with his ranking high.

There are probably alot of players who reach career highs of top 7-9 that never win a Master Series event. Here are just some random ppl.

James Blake - career high #4 - Never won a Masters series event.
Won 10 titles mostly 250 series events*.

Tim Henman - career high #4
Has 1 Master Series title, won during the one of the weakest era of mens tennis - 2003.

Rainer Schuettler - career high #5
0 MS titles, 4 titles of lower tier caliber *

Radek Stephanek - career high #8
0 MS titles, 1 500 lvl event, 3 250 events

Tommy Haas - career high #4
1 MS title, 4 500 lvl events, 7 250 events

* generalizing by calling old MS500, 300, 250, 175, 150 etc as MS1000, 500, and 250 events

*ps you owe me one Rovex :)
Tommy Haas's career high was #2.

He also has a pretty good career win-loss record of 462-257.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Tommy-Haas.aspx

Tommy Haas is certainly not a "bad" Top 10 player. He's a guy that belongs in the Top 10 and probably would have been Top 5 for most of his career if not for a long series of injuries and freak accidents. Heck, he's taken Federer to 5 sets multiple times at Slams, and has beaten Federer a couple of times. He's a very talented player and has one of the best one-handed backhands on tour.

Mikael
06-16-2011, 12:28 PM
It's amazing that Schuettler reached #5 just on the back of his AO final where he got demolished by Agassi.

Talking of Germans, how about Kiefer reaching #4 I think back around 1999 or 2000... Another candidate for weak top 10, let alone top 5!

PCXL-Fan
06-16-2011, 01:41 PM
Tommy Haas's career high was #2.

He also has a pretty good career win-loss record of 462-257.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Tommy-Haas.aspx

Tommy Haas is certainly not a "bad" Top 10 player. He's a guy that belongs in the Top 10 and probably would have been Top 5 for most of his career if not for a long series of injuries and freak accidents. Heck, he's taken Federer to 5 sets multiple times at Slams, and has beaten Federer a couple of times. He's a very talented player and has one of the best one-handed backhands on tour.

Hmm not sure how i messed that up. Yeah good point Tommy Haas was defintely a player deserving the title of good solid top 10er despite his injuries. There is usually a definative achievement gap between those that reach top 1-4 and those who get 7-9. Some big consistent results to rack up the points or some big tournament wins.


To be fair with the truth, Henman has 11 ATP titles, and 6 GS SFs.

I had forgotten he was that in consistant Grandslams.

nikdom
06-16-2011, 01:51 PM
Yes, whatever you see is the best or worst of 'all-time'.

jrachiever
06-17-2011, 02:38 PM
It's amazing that Schuettler reached #5 just on the back of his AO final where he got demolished by Agassi.

Talking of Germans, how about Kiefer reaching #4 I think back around 1999 or 2000... Another candidate for weak top 10, let alone top 5!

Actually Schuettler reached #5 in April of 2004 despite having lost in the 1st RD of the AO that year following his finals appearance in 2003. He got to #5 on the back of having a very solid results in the Masters Series events and all the slams in 2003. Overall though, he's played forever and never had anything close to that 2003 season. He has a career losing record. From a career perspective, he's a good candidate worst top 10 player ever, although in 2003, he was absolutely one of the best 6-7 players all year long.

Rock Strongo
06-17-2011, 02:56 PM
Had Martin Verkerk reached the top 10 he would hands down be the worst.

My dear point to break serve, Järryd wasn't that bad of a singles player.

Even though I've only seen him live on one occasion (Swedish league match, the only thing that stuck with me (I was around 10 at the time) was that he played with a Fischer and had the worlds oddest service motion.) he still reached cinco in the world and actually had quite good results in singles, although it was rather overshadowed by his excellent doubles career.

gregor.b
06-17-2011, 03:07 PM
What about Phillipousis?You did say ever.