PDA

View Full Version : Rank these five players in order from best to worst


tenniswriter
10-24-2012, 12:48 AM
These five players who I think are very similar in terms of results. None of them have won a Grand Slam but have come close and probably never will.
1.)Nikolay Davydenko 2.)David Ferrer 3.) Jo-Wilfried Tsonga 4.)David Nalbandian 5.)Tommy Haas

The Bawss
10-24-2012, 12:53 AM
David Ferrer, Davydenko, Tsonga, Haas and Nalbandian.

Very close though.

davced1
10-24-2012, 01:28 AM
I will rank them based on highest potential.

1. Tommy Haas
2. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
3. David Nalbandian
4. Nikolay Davydenko
5. David Ferrer

Rhino
10-24-2012, 01:52 AM
At their peak

1. Davydenko
2. Nalbandian
3. Haas
4. Tsonga
5. Ferrer

christinamaniac7
10-24-2012, 02:11 AM
1. Nalby
2. Haas
3. JWT
4. Ferrer
5. Davy...

Federer20042006
10-24-2012, 02:14 AM
1. Nalbandian
2. Tsonga
3. Davydenko
4. Haas
5. Ferrer

tusharlovesrafa
10-24-2012, 03:05 AM
1.rafa
2.nadal
3.parera
4.toni
5.nadal

dominikk1985
10-24-2012, 03:06 AM
Highest ranking, career titles, GS QFs, GS SFs, GS F, GS W

Haas: 2, 13, 7, 4, 0, 0

Nalby: 3, 11, 10, 4, 1, 0

Davy: 3, 21, 8, 4, 0, 0

tsonga: 5, 9, 8, 4, 1, 0

Ferrer: 4, 16, 9, 4, 0, 0

According to this Davy is no. 1 of that group. after this it gets tough. outside of the GS ferrer had the best career but he never made a final. tsonga and nalby made a final but did not win a lot outside of the slams. tsonga I would rank last out of that group. but ferrer, nalby and haas are quite close.


does anyone have weeks in the top10 for them?

Candide
10-24-2012, 03:14 AM
At their peak

1. Davydenko
2. Nalbandian
3. Haas
4. Tsonga
5. Ferrer

I agree completely - you are spot on. Davydenko is a firecracker when he's on. I love Ferrer's grit but he's not quite there with the rest of these guys.

Gonzo_style
10-24-2012, 05:12 AM
1. Nalbandian
2. Tsonga
3. Davydenko
4. Haas
5. Ferrer

I would only put Davy on second place, WTF and 3 masters title is better than 1 masters and GS final! And btw Davy should have been in RG final 2005!

rafafan20
10-24-2012, 05:15 AM
Tsonga
Nalbandian
Haas
Davydenko
Ferrer

dominikk1985
10-24-2012, 06:08 AM
Tsonga
Nalbandian
Haas
Davydenko
Ferrer

tsonga? IMO he is the last out of them. davydenko should be one, since he has won most tournaments and was ranked 3rd in the world.

tsonga was ranked the lowest and has won the least tournaments out of that group the one final he made doesn't move him up enough.

haas also was not as consistent. he was ranked second in the world but had the least weeks in the top 10. most of the time he was a to20 player or even out if he was injured.

so I would rank:

1. davy

4.haas
5.tsonga

then it is about nalby vs ferrer. here I would give nalby the nod because of the slam final and more wins against top players.

so my rank is

1. davy
2.nalby
3. ferrer
4. haas
5. tsonga

maybe you could even put haas last if I think again.

フェデラー
10-24-2012, 07:12 AM
Haas would probably top the list had he not missed massive chunks of his career.

abmk
10-24-2012, 07:15 AM
nalby, davy, tsonga, haas, ferrer ...

tennis_pro
10-24-2012, 07:40 AM
So many factors to consider....depends on what you value, really.

I'd go with Nalbandian, Davydenko a close second, then Ferrer, Tsonga and Haas.

rafafan20
10-24-2012, 08:14 AM
tsonga? IMO he is the last out of them. davydenko should be one, since he has won most tournaments and was ranked 3rd in the world.

tsonga was ranked the lowest and has won the least tournaments out of that group the one final he made doesn't move him up enough.

haas also was not as consistent. he was ranked second in the world but had the least weeks in the top 10. most of the time he was a to20 player or even out if he was injured.

so I would rank:

1. davy

4.haas
5.tsonga

then it is about nalby vs ferrer. here I would give nalby the nod because of the slam final and more wins against top players.

so my rank is

1. davy
2.nalby
3. ferrer
4. haas
5. tsonga

maybe you could even put haas last if I think again.

Tsonga would have won a major but for Djoker's ball bouncing getting in his head.

veroniquem
10-24-2012, 09:09 AM
In terms of results:

- Davydenko: 21 titles, 3 masters, 1 WTF (+ 1 WTF final)
- Haas: 13 titles, 1 master (+ 1 master and 1 Olympics final)
- Nalby: 11 titles, 2 masters/ 1 WTF (+ 4 M finals and 1 slam final)
- Ferrer: 16 titles, 0 master (+ 3 Master finals and 1 WTF final)
- Tsonga: 9 titles, 1 master (+ 1 master final, 1 WTF final and 1 slam final)

I'm gonna proritize titles over finals, so that would give:

1- Davydenko (biggest weakness in his resume = no slam final)
2- Nalby (imo more talented than Davy but less consistent, biggest weakness = not many titles overall)
3- Ferrer (mostly minor league leader, biggest weaknesses = no master title + no slam final. I still put him ahead of Tsonga because of big difference in # of titles overall)
4- Tsonga (comes before Haas because of slam final and record vs fab 3)
5- Haas (hasn't done anything special really, a bit like Ferrer, more of a minor league player)

norbac
10-24-2012, 09:21 AM
In terms of results:

- Davydenko: 21 titles, 3 masters, 1 WTF (+ 1 WTF final)
- Haas: 13 titles, 1 master (+ 1 master and 1 Olympics final)
- Nalby: 11 titles, 2 masters/ 1 WTF (+ 4 M finals and 1 slam final)
- Ferrer: 16 titles, 0 master (+ 3 Master finals and 1 WTF final)
- Tsonga: 9 titles, 1 master (+ 2 master finals and 1 slam final)

I'm gonna proritize titles over finals, so that would give:

1- Davydenko (biggest weakness in his resume = no slam final)
2- Nalby (imo more talented than Davy but less consistent, biggest weakness = not many titles overall)
3- Ferrer (mostly minor league leader, biggest weaknesses = no master title + no slam final. I still put him ahead of Tsonga because of big difference in # of titles overall)
4- Tsonga (comes before Haas because of slam final and record vs fab 3)
5- Haas (hasn't done anything special really, a bit like Ferrer, more of a minor league player)

Reached number 2 in the world and won a Masters title. That already puts him ahead of Ferrer for me. Haas always seemed to me a much more dangerous opponent for the top players than Ferrer. Would also put Tsonga ahead of Ferrer, won a Masters title and reached a Slam Final. I weigh the importance of titles a bit more than the overall number of titles.

abmk
10-24-2012, 09:27 AM
In terms of results:

- Davydenko: 21 titles, 3 masters, 1 WTF (+ 1 WTF final)
- Haas: 13 titles, 1 master (+ 1 master and 1 Olympics final)
- Nalby: 11 titles, 2 masters/ 1 WTF (+ 4 M finals and 1 slam final)
- Ferrer: 16 titles, 0 master (+ 3 Master finals and 1 WTF final)
- Tsonga: 9 titles, 1 master (+ 2 master finals and 1 slam final)




just FYI, tsonga made the YEC final in 2011 ......

veroniquem
10-24-2012, 09:29 AM
Reached number 2 in the world and won a Masters title. That already puts him ahead of Ferrer for me. Haas always seemed to me a much more dangerous opponent for the top players than Ferrer. Would also put Tsonga ahead of Ferrer, won a Masters title and reached a Slam Final. I weigh the importance of titles a bit more than the overall number of titles.

I agree about possibly putting Tsonga ahead of Ferrer. If one considers records in tier 1 events ONLY, then sure. But I chose to not ignore # of titles and it also seems to me Ferrer is more consistent than Tsonga on the whole, but yes I can see your point. On the other hand, I don't even see why Haas is in the list (in terms of tier 1 events). It should be Berdych instead who has a slam final on top of a master title. So I would have Berd in the top 5 and Haas only 6th (or even 7th as I suspect Soderling should be before him as well, maybe even others I haven't thought about yet).

veroniquem
10-24-2012, 09:31 AM
just FYI, tsonga made the YEC final in 2011 ...... You're right. I edited it.

Federer20042006
10-24-2012, 10:29 AM
The thing with Tsonga is he's still going and I think has a chance to add to his resume, whereas everybody else on this list is done adding, as far as I can tell. I really don't see Ferrer ever getting that Masters...but I could see Tsonga winning Paris again or something, as well as some more Grand Slam SFs.

norbac
10-24-2012, 10:45 AM
I agree about possibly putting Tsonga ahead of Ferrer. If one considers records in tier 1 events ONLY, then sure. But I chose to not ignore # of titles and it also seems to me Ferrer is more consistent than Tsonga on the whole, but yes I can see your point. On the other hand, I don't even see why Haas is in the list (in terms of tier 1 events). It should be Berdych instead who has a slam final on top of a master title. So I would have Berd in the top 5 and Haas only 6th (or even 7th as I suspect Soderling should be before him as well, maybe even others I haven't thought about yet).

Good call on Soderling, he should definitely be in this conversation.

President
10-24-2012, 10:58 AM
Soderling and Berdych should both be in on this list, both are around Tsonga's level. Ferrer hasn't even won a Masters or made a major final which IMO puts him in last place amongst these. Davydenko should probably be first, though you can make an argument for Nalbandian or even Soderling (for 2 GS Finals made in spectacular fashion)

NadalAgassi
10-24-2012, 11:17 AM
1. Nalbandian
2. Davydenko

The first two you could actually imagine winning a slam unlike the others.

3. Haas. I guess you could imagine him winning a slam but it would always have been a long shot.

4. Tsonga. Talented but way too inconsistent to win a slam. Atleast Davydenko and Nalbandian can play their best tennis for a month or two or for a couple tournaments.

5. Ferrer. No slam final, no Masters titles, no ranking higher than #5 ever, not in the league of the others.

BauerAlmeida
10-24-2012, 11:33 AM
1. Nalbandian
2. Davydenko

The first two you could actually imagine winning a slam unlike the others.

3. Haas. I guess you could imagine him winning a slam but it would always have been a long shot.

4. Tsonga. Talented but way too inconsistent to win a slam. Atleast Davydenko and Nalbandian can play their best tennis for a month or two or for a couple tournaments.

5. Ferrer. No slam final, no Masters titles, no ranking higher than #5 ever, not in the league of the others.

Pretty much this. Although I don't see a big difference between Haas and Davy. But agree on the rest.

Mustard
10-24-2012, 11:36 AM
These five players who I think are very similar in terms of results. None of them have won a Grand Slam but have come close and probably never will.
1.)Nikolay Davydenko 2.)David Ferrer 3.) Jo-Wilfried Tsonga 4.)David Nalbandian 5.)Tommy Haas

1. David Nalbandian
2. Nikolay Davydenko
3. Tommy Haas
4. David Ferrer
5. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga

veroniquem
10-24-2012, 11:36 AM
Pretty much this. Although I don't see a big difference between Haas and Davy. But agree on the rest.

How can you see no difference between Davy and Haas :confused: So now, winning WTF has become irrelevant?? (as well as more titles and more masters?) I'll have to remember that next time we discuss Nadal vs Fed :)

veroniquem
10-24-2012, 11:38 AM
1. David Nalbandian
2. Nikolay Davydenko
3. Tommy Haas
4. David Ferrer
5. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga


What's your rationale for putting Tsonga last and Haas 3rd? Sorry but I don't get the logic here. Once again, what has Haas done that is so impressive? I don't see it.

NadalAgassi
10-24-2012, 11:40 AM
Pretty much this. Although I don't see a big difference between Haas and Davy. But agree on the rest.

Davydenko owns Nadal on hard courts even in Nadal's prime. That is not easy at all to do as Nadal is a way better hard court player than this forum credits him for being, and something I cant envision someone like Haas ever doing, even peak Haas (2001-2002 I guess). Also winning the WTF is a major achievement, especialy beating Federer en route to doing it, also straight setting Del Potro at his career peak in the final. Davydenko was able to mantain being a top 5ish player for about 5 years, Haas never had that kind of longevity as a top player, granted he had alot more injuries than Davydenko too.

NadalAgassi
10-24-2012, 11:41 AM
What's your rationale for putting Tsonga last and Haas 3rd? Sorry but I don't get the logic here. Once again, what has Haas done that is so impressive? I don't see it.

He reached #2 in the World in 2002. His best tennis was late 2001 and early 2002. He won a tournament pre U.S Open beating Sampras, won the Stuttgart Masters beating then #1 Hewitt in the semis, and was a bit unlucky to not win the 2002 Australian Open. Then he had injuries and a motorbike accident to his parents and wasnt the same since. The only reason I rated him over Tsonga is that he did reach World #2. Other than that he doesnt have anything over Tsonga really.

veroniquem
10-24-2012, 11:48 AM
Thanks for explaining! Sampras wasn't that hard to beat around 2000, especially in a smaller event. Haas beat Fed in Halle too but I can't imagine him beating any of the top 4 in a slam. Tsonga beat Fed in a slam and a master, Nadal in a slam and WTF and Djoko a bunch of times, don't remember where.

MarianArg
10-24-2012, 11:49 AM
nalbandian, haas, davydenko, tsonga, ferrer.

norbac
10-24-2012, 11:54 AM
Thanks for explaining! Sampras wasn't that hard to beat around 2000, especially in a smaller event. Haas beat Fed in Halle too but I can't imagine him beating any of the top 4 in a slam. Tsonga beat Fed in a slam and a master, Nadal in a slam and WTF and Djoko a bunch of times, don't remember where.

2002 Australian Open he beat Fed. But then again Haas' prime years were way before the Big 3/4 started to dominate tennis.....

NadalAgassi
10-24-2012, 11:56 AM
Thanks for explaining! Sampras wasn't that hard to beat around 2000, especially in a smaller event. Haas beat Fed in Halle too but I can't imagine him beating any of the top 4 in a slam. Tsonga beat Fed in a slam and a master, Nadal in a slam and WTF and Djoko a bunch of times, don't remember where.

Good points. Tsonga is probably better than Haas. I just gave Haas his due tof his #2 ranking he reached. It does seem Haas was in possible contention to win a major more often than Tsonga. I thought he could have won the 2001 U.S Open, 2002 Australian Open, even maybe the 2002 U.S or 2006 Australian Opens. The only major I thought Tsonga could win was Wimbledon 2008. Maybe that is since Tsonga faced alot more competition though.

veroniquem
10-24-2012, 11:58 AM
2002 Australian Open he beat Fed. But then again Haas' prime years were way before the Big 3/4 started to dominate tennis.....

At the beginning of 2002, Fed wasn't even a top player, ANYONE could beat him, let's be serious. Maybe I should have added that Tsonga beat all those players while they were at the top, not before they broke through but that seemed so obvious to me... Still bummer for Haas all those injuries, he could probably have had a much better career without them.

norbac
10-24-2012, 12:01 PM
At the beginning of 2002, Fed wasn't even a top player, ANYONE could beat him, let's be serious. Maybe I should have added that Tsonga beat all those players while they were at the top, not before they broke through but that seemed so obvious to me... Still bummer for Haas all those injuries, he could probably have had a much better career without them.

Hence the second sentence in my post......

veroniquem
10-24-2012, 12:03 PM
Good points. Tsonga is probably better than Haas. I just gave Haas his due tof his #2 ranking he reached. It does seem Haas was in possible contention to win a major more often than Tsonga. I thought he could have won the 2001 U.S Open, 2002 Australian Open, even maybe the 2002 U.S or 2006 Australian Opens. The only major I thought Tsonga could win was Wimbledon 2008. Maybe that is since Tsonga faced alot more competition though.
Except Haas didn't even make the final of all the slams you listed, so if you look at actual results (rather than just virtual), you have to give it to Tsonga (Tsonga had to beat both Murray and Nadal to get to that AO final in 2008). I agree that Tsonga's problem is consistency, so maybe Haas would score a point there. Then again, for how long was Haas consistent? It seems his career was pretty much ruined by injuries.

papertank
10-24-2012, 12:04 PM
1. Davydenko 2. Nalbandian 3. Haas 4. Tsonga 5. Ferrer

I think Berdych and Soderling would rank above Tsonga and Ferrer though.

BauerAlmeida
10-24-2012, 12:05 PM
How can you see no difference between Davy and Haas :confused: So now, winning WTF has become irrelevant?? (as well as more titles and more masters?) I'll have to remember that next time we discuss Nadal vs Fed :)

As I said, I still put Davy over Haas. But Haas reached N2 and despite being completely destroyed by injuries, he is till playing at the TOP level at 34. Davydenko is a lot younger and his level dropped drastically.

norbac
10-24-2012, 12:13 PM
It is pretty incredible how Tommy has had such a good year. Not only is he 34, but his body has to be beat up from so many injuries.

NadalAgassi
10-24-2012, 12:17 PM
As I said, I still put Davy over Haas. But Haas reached N2 and despite being completely destroyed by injuries, he is till playing at the TOP level at 34. Davydenko is a lot younger and his level dropped drastically.

That is true too . Haas has way more longevity as a good player despite all the injuries he has had.

Gonzo_style
10-24-2012, 02:41 PM
5. Ferrer. No slam final, no Masters titles, no ranking higher than #5 ever, not in the league of the others.

I think Ferrer was #4 after good results at TMC 2007 and AO 2008.

90's Clay
10-24-2012, 03:06 PM
1. Nalbandian. BY FAR in terms of prime-peak play
2. Davydenko
3. Tsonga
4. Haas
5. Ferrer

cc0509
10-24-2012, 06:14 PM
Thanks for explaining! Sampras wasn't that hard to beat around 2000, especially in a smaller event. Haas beat Fed in Halle too but I can't imagine him beating any of the top 4 in a slam. Tsonga beat Fed in a slam and a master, Nadal in a slam and WTF and Djoko a bunch of times, don't remember where.

Haas was better than Tsonga. Haas was number two in the world and he was injured a lot. I think had he not been injured he would have had a much more consistent career with better results. Haas is very talented, how do you explain how he has managed to come back and be ranked number 20 at age 34? He had a lot of bad breaks in his career. His results do not indicate his true talent level imo.

cc0509
10-24-2012, 06:15 PM
Good points. Tsonga is probably better than Haas. I just gave Haas his due tof his #2 ranking he reached. It does seem Haas was in possible contention to win a major more often than Tsonga. I thought he could have won the 2001 U.S Open, 2002 Australian Open, even maybe the 2002 U.S or 2006 Australian Opens. The only major I thought Tsonga could win was Wimbledon 2008. Maybe that is since Tsonga faced alot more competition though.

I don't think so.

veroniquem
10-24-2012, 06:20 PM
Haas was better than Tsonga. Haas was number two in the world and he was injured a lot. I think had he not been injured he would have had a much more consistent career than Tsonga with better results. Haas is very talented, how do you explain how he has managed to come back and be ranked number 20 at age 34? He had a lot of bad breaks in his career. His results do not indicate his true talent level imo.

I was ranking them according to achievements. That's what we have to pass judgements on players. It is possible Haas could have done better but we'll never know. As things are, Tsonga is a threat the the top players in big events much more than Haas. And at 34, Haas still doesn't have a slam final to show in his resume. He had a great season for his age, no doubt but the thread asked to rank the players overall or at least that's how I understood it.

Towser83
10-24-2012, 06:27 PM
Davydenko owns Nadal on hard courts even in Nadal's prime. That is not easy at all to do as Nadal is a way better hard court player than this forum credits him for being, and something I cant envision someone like Haas ever doing, even peak Haas (2001-2002 I guess). Also winning the WTF is a major achievement, especialy beating Federer en route to doing it, also straight setting Del Potro at his career peak in the final. Davydenko was able to mantain being a top 5ish player for about 5 years, Haas never had that kind of longevity as a top player, granted he had alot more injuries than Davydenko too.

That WTF win was huge. Beat Federer, Nadal and DelPotro and none of them could do anything about it, he just beat everyone up apart from Djokovic and even that was a 3 setter right at the start of the tournament

cc0509
10-24-2012, 06:29 PM
I was ranking them according to achievements. That's what we have to pass judgements on players. It is possible Haas could have done better but we'll never know. As things are, Tsonga is a threat the the top players in big events much more than Haas. And at 34, Haas still doesn't have a slam final to show in his resume. He had a great season for his age, no doubt but the thread asked to rank the players overall or at least that's how I understood it.

No, I understand how you did your ranking and it is reasonable, I just think that Haas was more talented and consistent in his prime and for me the fact that he was number two in the world cements it. He really had terrible luck in his career with all of those injuries and incidents, for example his parent's car accident.
For me the biggest different between Haas and Tsonga even today is their will to win. You can see that by Haas' results and desire to get to world number 20 and the age of 34 whereas Tsonga's will to win has been very questionable. Tsonga is a bit of a head case imo. Haas has the stronger will. I am not saying that Haas will overcome Tsonga today because of their age discrepancy but in their primes Haas was the better player imo.

NadalAgassi
10-24-2012, 06:31 PM
In fairness we have to remember when Haas reached #2 was at an extremely weak time for the game. To put it into perspective he reached World #2 briefly in September and October 2002, so near the end of the year. Yet in 2002 Haas had not even won a tournament. His slam results were semis, DNP, 4th round, 4th round. He also missed 2 months. On no planet during any of the time period Tsonga was a top player (2008-2012) would you have gotten to #2 with those results, you wouldnt have even gotten into the top 5 with Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray all around near the top all those years.

NadalAgassi
10-24-2012, 06:39 PM
These are Haas's results which brought him to #2 near the end of the year as you can see. Not his fault of course but to reach #2 with that kind of general performance is a joke:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Ha/T/Tommy-Haas.aspx?t=pa&y=2002&m=s&e=0#

In addition to not winning a tournament in 2002, and mediocre slam results (apart from 1 semi), and missing 2 months including Wimbledon, there are a whole bunch of early round losses on top of that. That year was Hewitt and the 7 dwarfes basically. An old Agassi was pretty good too, definitely considered better than Haas regardless if Haas was briefly ranked higher, but playing a very limited schedule. Even in that weak year I dont think Haas was ever regarded the 2nd best player. Hewitt was clearly the best, but Agassi and Safin were always considered superior at that point too.

veroniquem
10-24-2012, 06:40 PM
Ranking doesn't matter that much to me (except for getting to #1 which is always special). #2 could mean that Haas did fantastic OR that the others were worse. It's extremely relative. That's why I'd rather go by the results, especially the ones in tier 1 events and especially master titles, WTF titles and slams.

cc0509
10-24-2012, 06:42 PM
In fairness we have to remember when Haas reached #2 was at an extremely weak time for the game. To put it into perspective he reached World #2 briefly in September and October 2002, so near the end of the year. Yet in 2002 Haas had not even won a tournament. His slam results were semis, DNP, 4th round, 4th round. He also missed 2 months. On no planet during any of the time period Tsonga was a top player (2008-2012) would you have gotten to #2 with those results, you wouldnt have even gotten into the top 5 with Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray all around near the top all those years.

But the point is Haas was rising to the top in 2002 when his parents had that bad car accident and then Haas had to deal with injuries himself. He was out of the game until 2004. That is two years, a huge amount of time when you are at the peak of your career. Haas is a more talented player imo and Tsonga is an inconsistent head case who is part of a current top ten that is pretty bad below the top four. I mean Tispsarevic, Monaco, Tsonga, etc? Not exactly an all-star top ten if you ask me.

NLBwell
10-24-2012, 08:03 PM
Good question - any ranking could be argued.
I'll go with:
Haas
Ferrer
Nalbandian
Davydenko
Tsonga

As far as which ones I'd like to watch:
Haas
Tsonga
Nalbandian
Davydenko
Ferrer

hersito
10-24-2012, 08:11 PM
History plus technique as of today:

1. Nalbandian
2. Davydenko
3. Ferrer
4. Tsonga
5. Haas

I but I think Tsonga could be better than all of them in the future.

cork_screw
10-24-2012, 08:16 PM
What is the point of this?
Wish we had a QC on threads on TT.

tenniswriter
10-24-2012, 09:04 PM
1. Davydenko 2. Nalbandian 3. Haas 4. Tsonga 5. Ferrer

I think Berdych and Soderling would rank above Tsonga and Ferrer though.

Berdych okay maybe because he made the Wimbledon final but Soderling really? He's just made 2 grand slam finals, hasn't been past the quarters at any of the other slams. Yes, he did beat the world's best claycourt player on clay but what apart from that? Ferrer has been in four Grand Slam semifinals, made the semis of all the slams apart from Wimbledon.

NadalAgassi
10-24-2012, 09:11 PM
In addition to his 2 slam finals vs 0 for Ferrer, Soderling has also won a Masters title. Ferrer never has. Soderling > Ferrer. I value consistency and longevity in a career but Ferrer is a perfect example how consistency and longevity can be overrated at times. For all his years as a top player he hasnt achieved anything that big, while all these guys on the list, despite being slamless, all achieved much bigger things. Soderling in only 2 years as a top player achieved things Ferrer in almost a decade of one could only dream of doing.

tenniswriter
10-24-2012, 09:15 PM
In addition to his 2 slam finals vs 0 for Ferrer, Soderling has also won a Masters title. Ferrer never has. Soderling > Ferrer. I value consistency and longevity in a career but Ferrer is a perfect example how consistency and longevity can be overrated at times. For all his years as a top player he hasnt achieved anything that big, while all these guys on the list, despite being slamless, all achieved much bigger things. Soderling in only 2 years as a top player achieved things Ferrer in almost a decade of one could only dream of doing.

Yes, I see your point. The Masters Series title Soderling won was the 2010 Paris Masters where he beat Roddick, Llodra and Monfils in the QF, SF and final to win. Not taking anything away from him, but if Ferrer didn't have Nadal playing, he could have won a couple of clay court Masters titles by now

NadalAgassi
10-24-2012, 09:55 PM
Yes, I see your point. The Masters Series title Soderling won was the 2010 Paris Masters where he beat Roddick, Llodra and Monfils in the QF, SF and final to win. Not taking anything away from him, but if Ferrer didn't have Nadal playing, he could have won a couple of clay court Masters titles by now

Ferrer has only been in 2 Masters finals and 2 French Open semis. Not that impressive for a so called clay specialist. Would he have won a Masters without Nadal? It is possible but dont bet on it. Ferrer has never even beaten Federer on clay, and Federer would be hungry to try and win any Masters on clay with Nadal absent, and Ferrer certainly would likely never be the one to stop him. Also as his French Open record shows there are many people who can beat him on clay. You mention Monfils, even Monfils is 2-0 vs Ferrer at Roland Garros, not sure exactly what their overall H2H is on clay.

Do you think 4 slam semis is worth more than 2 slam finals? I definitely dont. Especialy when you beat Nadal at Roland Garros and Federer at any slam. I cant imagine Ferrer coming up with wins like that, his biggest wins in a slam ever are Nadal in a couple hard court slams. Since you mention Ferrer having to face Nadal on clay, look who Soderling's quarterfinal (and a few earlier) losses are to:

Wimbledon 2007 3rd round- lost to Nadal in 5 sets. Nadal went on to reach final and even in some ways outplay Federer in a 5 set loss.

Wimbledon 2009 4th round- lost to Federer in 3 sets, 2 tiebreaks, Federer went on to win title.

2009 U.S Open quarters- Federer in 4 sets. Federer went on to straight set semfiinal win, and a 5 set final defeat.

2010 Wimbledon quarters- Nadal in 4 sets. Nadal went on to win title.

Ferrer wouldnt have done any better than this in the same situation, in fact probably much worse as it is unlikely he would make a dent on his Master Federer in any slam, nor in Nadal in any clay or grass court slam.

Duncan Bell
10-24-2012, 11:02 PM
I still think Tsonga could win a Slam at some point in his career. Does anyone agree?

okdude1992
10-24-2012, 11:13 PM
In terms of results:

- Davydenko: 21 titles, 3 masters, 1 WTF (+ 1 WTF final)
- Haas: 13 titles, 1 master (+ 1 master and 1 Olympics final)
- Nalby: 11 titles, 2 masters/ 1 WTF (+ 4 M finals and 1 slam final)
- Ferrer: 16 titles, 0 master (+ 3 Master finals and 1 WTF final)
- Tsonga: 9 titles, 1 master (+ 1 master final, 1 WTF final and 1 slam final)

I'm gonna proritize titles over finals, so that would give:

1- Davydenko (biggest weakness in his resume = no slam final)
2- Nalby (imo more talented than Davy but less consistent, biggest weakness = not many titles overall)
3- Ferrer (mostly minor league leader, biggest weaknesses = no master title + no slam final. I still put him ahead of Tsonga because of big difference in # of titles overall)
4- Tsonga (comes before Haas because of slam final and record vs fab 3)
5- Haas (hasn't done anything special really, a bit like Ferrer, more of a minor league player)

If we are talking about results, I agree completely. Based on peak level:

1.Nalbandian
2.Davydenko
3.Tsonga

4.Haas
5.Ferrer

Flash O'Groove
10-25-2012, 02:08 AM
To rank thoose players I had a look at their carreer prize money. I think it's a quite good way to assess a players'carreer because it take into account all result: Winning a bigger tournament give more money than winning a smaller one, reaching the quarters of a slam give more than reaching the quarter of a 500.

The results are the following.

1) Davydenko with 15 millions
2) Ferrer with 15 millions (but less than Davy)
3) Berdych with 12 millions
4) Nalbandian with 11 millions
5) Haas with 11 millions
6) Soderling with 10 millions
7) Tsonga with 10 millions

Susprisingly, David Ferrer is second, and very close to Davydenko! And Davy has 3 master 1000, 1 wtf, more otherall titles, and they have similar slams result. Howeither, Davy had far less regularity in master 1000 than Ferrer. Davy reached the quarters or more on only 17 occasions, while, Ferrer reached the quarters or more on 26 occasion!
I think that very impressive: I would consider Ferrer the player with the less peak potential of the list, but despite this he is by far the more consistent. With less than the others, he win more often than the others against all thoose third tier players.

I was also surprised to see Berdych in front of Nalby, who has more titles, reached more finals, and has similar result in slams and master 1000. It seems that Berdych is still underrated.

As I personnaly value regularity as high, or even higher, than best result, I'm fine with this ranking.

Steve0904
10-25-2012, 03:07 AM
To rank thoose players I had a look at their carreer prize money. I think it's a quite good way to assess a players'carreer because it take into account all result: Winning a bigger tournament give more money than winning a smaller one, reaching the quarters of a slam give more than reaching the quarter of a 500.

The results are the following.

1) Davydenko with 15 millions
2) Ferrer with 15 millions (but less than Davy)
3) Berdych with 12 millions
4) Nalbandian with 11 millions
5) Haas with 11 millions
6) Soderling with 10 millions
7) Tsonga with 10 millions

Susprisingly, David Ferrer is second, and very close to Davydenko! And Davy has 3 master 1000, 1 wtf, more otherall titles, and they have similar slams result. Howeither, Davy had far less regularity in master 1000 than Ferrer. Davy reached the quarters or more on only 17 occasions, while, Ferrer reached the quarters or more on 26 occasion!
I think that very impressive: I would consider Ferrer the player with the less peak potential of the list, but despite this he is by far the more consistent. With less than the others, he win more often than the others against all thoose third tier players.

I was also surprised to see Berdych in front of Nalby, who has more titles, reached more finals, and has similar result in slams and master 1000. It seems that Berdych is still underrated.

As I personnaly value regularity as high, or even higher, than best result, I'm fine with this ranking.

No offence, but prize money should be the last way you look at. In very recent years prize money has inflated, which is probably why a guy like Ferrer is ranked 2nd in your list.

If I was to rank them in terms of peak level I would say:

Nalbandian
Davydenko
Tsonga
Haas
Ferrer

Jackuar
10-25-2012, 03:45 AM
At their peak, in their best tennis

1. David Nalbandian
2. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
3. Nikolay Davydenko
4. Tommy Haas
5. David Ferrer

tudwell
10-25-2012, 10:04 AM
I would rank their careers as follows:

1. Nikolai Davydenko
2. David Nalbandian
3. Tommy Haas
4. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
5. David Ferrer

Fyrepower
10-25-2012, 01:24 PM
1)Tsonga 2) haas 3) Ferrer 4) Nalbandian 5) Davydenko

Candide
10-25-2012, 02:05 PM
I still think Tsonga could win a Slam at some point in his career. Does anyone agree?

Absolutely. There's some improvement left in the guy and it's mainly mental - this should be the one area certain to get better with age. He's a young 27 in terms of he seems fresh and keen. I'd love to see him take home a big trophy. Of they guys on this list who could do it Ferrer's the only other as he could have a good run at the French with everything going right for him.

MichaelNadal
10-25-2012, 02:15 PM
IMO Davydenko>Nalbandian.

Flash O'Groove
10-26-2012, 02:06 AM
No offence, but prize money should be the last way you look at. In very recent years prize money has inflated, which is probably why a guy like Ferrer is ranked 2nd in your list.

Yes absolutely, but I think it remains an intersting gross indicator. It shows that Ferrer is the player who reached by far the more quarterfinal in more in master 1000 among those guys. I agree totally to your ranking in term of peak level, but Ferrer is up there if talk of average level., which is very important too.

If I was to rank them in terms of peak level I would say:

norbac
11-04-2012, 06:47 AM
Ferrer now has a Masters title......

papertank
11-04-2012, 06:50 AM
I would put Ferrer above Haas now, but not above Nalbandian or Dayvdenko yet. Haas 4th, Tsonga 5th.

Cesc Fabregas
11-04-2012, 06:55 AM
Ferrer is definitely above Haas.

tistrapukcipeht
11-04-2012, 09:27 AM
1-Davydenko clearly
2-Nalbandian clearly
3-Tsonga
4-Ferrer
5-Haas??? (is this a joke??) He does not belong this group, he was just another brick in the wall.

BauerAlmeida
11-04-2012, 09:46 AM
IMO Davydenko>Nalbandian.

I give Nalbandian the edge because of higher peak level, SF at all slams and slam final.

norbac
11-04-2012, 09:49 AM
1-Davydenko clearly
2-Nalbandian clearly
3-Tsonga
4-Ferrer
5-Haas??? (is this a joke??) He does not belong this group, he was just another brick in the wall.

Since when have you been watching tennis? Haas won a Masters title, reached number 2 in the world and reached 4 Grand Slam semifinals.

power level 800
11-04-2012, 10:14 AM
Based on TALENT.

1. Nalbandian
2. Davydenko
3. Haas
4. Tsonga
5. Ferrer

Based on HARDWORK and never giving up on any point whether winning or losing

1. Ferrer
2. Tsonga
3. Haas
4. Davydenko
5. Nalbandian

veroniquem
11-04-2012, 10:26 AM
Ferrer is definitely above Haas.

Yep, I'm glad I ranked Ferrer 3rd (after Davy and Nalby). It seems even more obvious now that he should rank above Tsonga and Haas in terms of overall achievements..