David Ferrer is better than Berdych, Tsonga and Del Potro

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by tennispro492

Most of you so far seem to have missed one vital fact- as i posted in my first post, ferrer has leading head to heads against all of those guys, thus he is better than them.

Roddick has a leading H2H with Djokovic. Thus he is better than him. Nadal has a 5-2 H2H with Federer on outdoor hard courts. Thus he is a better outdoor hard court player than Federer. Murray has a leading H2H with Federer and did only from day 1. Thus he is better than him. Doesnt just work like that.

[President]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

Nothing Ferrer has achieved equals the value of a slam final IMO. If he had 3 Masters titles as opposed to 1 I would probably give it to him. However he only has 1, and it took him alot longer than Berdych and Tsonga winning theirs to even win that one. A career with a slam final and 1 Masters title > a career with no slam finals and 1 Masters title. Berdych and Tsonga also have more and bigger wins in majors. Ferrer only has 2 really, beating Nadal twice in a hard court slam (beating Murray at the French is no big win). Berdych has beaten Federer twice in fast court majors, and beaten Federer and Djokovic back to back at Wimbledon to make his final appearance there. Tsonga has taken out all of Federer, Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal in a major, and his run of wins to reach his Australian Open final was extremely impressive.

Sorry I just don't think 1 major final cancels out 5 more major SF appearances, a WTF final appearance, many more titles, way more prize money, and a consistently higher ranking. Berdych in particular has little to no case, he has only beaten Federer once legitimately IMO in a slam (Federer was injured in Wimbledon 2010, that was evident from round 1).

A slam final is definitely not THAT much greater of an accomplishment than a slam SF, and when you take into account that Ferrer has 6 its a no brainer IMO.

This isn't the WTA, consistency means something on the ATP.

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by President

Sorry I just don't think 1 major final cancels out 5 more major SF appearances, a WTF final appearance, many more titles, way more prize money, and a consistently higher ranking. Berdych in particular has little to no case, he has only beaten Federer once legitimately IMO in a slam (Federer was injured in Wimbledon 2010, that was evident from round 1).

A slam final is definitely not THAT much greater of an accomplishment than a slam SF, and when you take into account that Ferrer has 6 its a no brainer IMO.

So we are discounting wins through injury. In that case Ferrers win at the 2011 Australian Open doesnt count either as that was clearly via injury, and one could even argue the 2007 U.S Open as well. Which leaves Ferrer with no big wins in slams left. Either way both Tsonga and Berdych have a more impressive collection of big wins in slams than Ferrer does without question, in addition to making a slam final while he didnt.

I see your point but I dont think years from now anyone will care about slam semis unless it is a record streak like Federer or Evert (and even then seemingly nobody cares about Everts streak, and might not Federers either when he retires). However for reaching a slam final you are atleast somewhat remembered. I actually do think a final is quite a bit greater than a semi, it means you are playing on the final day for a possible title vs not doing so. I would still probably go with Ferrer if Berdych didnt even reach another slam semi, but he has been in 2 other semis in addition to his slam final.

[spinovic]

Ferrer is more consistent. And, I suppose you can debate either way if he's better than those guys are not.

The difference, IMO, and the point most people zero in on is that Ferrer is not capable of beating the Big 4. Those others guys are.

Everybody knows Ferrer is probably going to win all of his matches until he faces one of the top 4 guys. In that past, that mean QF's...with Rafa injured and his ranking up, he can make it to SF's now, and should he be lucky enough for one of them to get upset, he may even make a final. But, sooner or later, he'll have to play one of them, and he'll lose.

With the other guys, they may get upset, they'll probably get beat by Ferrer, but in a matchup against the Big 4...they might win. Probably won't, but they might. That puts them in unique company on the tour, because there few players who realistically have a chance to do that in a major, regardless of how bad the chance might be.

[tennispro492]

Do you think Ferrer could beat Federer, Nadal or Djokovich on clay?

[Chanwan]

Originally Posted by President

I can agree with you on Tsonga, he is a fantastic mover when he is playing well as well as a big hitter. But no, I don't think Del Potro playing his best would beat an on-fire Ferrer on any surface except maybe clay (ironically). I have watched every single Del Potro-Ferrer matchup, and it's obvious to me that Del Potro just doesn't have the footwork or speed to match Ferrer. It doesn't matter how hard he hits the ball because he is always going to be out of position anyway because Ferrer takes the ball so early and places it amazingly with his forehand. Watch Del Potro vs Ferrer at Wimbledon or Miami last year, they were really tutorials on how to beat a clumsy big hitter.

And I thought we were talking about playing at their best, I don't think Federer was playing well at all in the 2009 USO (well, after the first set and a half at least) for example.

And Berd?
I cannot pretend that I have watched every Ferrer-Delpo match (and off the top of my head, I honestly don't remember watching any, but I think I must have seen at least one), but I'll take your word for it. Even though I don't get why Ferrer would be able to do something to him that the Big Four aren't doing

I didn't say Delpo beat Fed at his very best (Fed chose a pretty stupid tactic to say the least), but as Spinovic just pointed out:

As a fan of any of the Big Four, you're somewhere between mildly and very afraid when your fav. meets Delpo, Tsonga or Berd (minus Djoko and Nadal fans), but never really afraid when they meet Ferrer. That means something.

[President]

Originally Posted by Chanwan

And Berd?
I cannot pretend that I have watched every Ferrer-Delpo match (and off the top of my head, I honestly don't remember watching any, but I think I must have seen at least one), but I'll take your word for it. Even though I don't get why Ferrer would be able to do something to him that the Big Four aren't doing

I didn't say Delpo beat Fed at his very best (Fed chose a pretty stupid tactic to say the least), but as Spinovic just pointed out:

As a fan of any of the Big Four, you're somewhere between mildly and very afraid when your fav. meets Delpo, Tsonga or Berd (minus Djoko and Nadal fans), but never really afraid when they meet Ferrer. That means something.

The big 4 are able to do this to Del Potro as well, thats why all of them have dominating H2H's against him. I think that even if Del Potro were playing his best, he would fall against the big 4 every time if they were on-fire as well. Yeah he can get some wins against them when they aren't playing well, but he also gets wins against Ferrer in the same way. Del Potro is not really a hot and cold player like Tsonga and Berdych, its not like he loses to Ferrer when he is playing badly. He just gets outplayed, plain and simple.

And I already agreed with you that the 3 ball bashers are a bigger threat to the top 4, but I think its a matchup issue that Ferrer has rather than the other guys being better players. For example, if Andy Roddick were still a top player (to use an example of a highly ranked guy without exceptional movement) I think Ferrer would have just as good a chance of upsetting him (if not better) as Del Potro or Tsonga. Ferrer struggles against players with exceptional movement (top 4+Monfils and Davydenko), just as Del Potro struggles with great ball strikers who take the ball early (Davydenko, Djokovic, Ferrer) , just as Berdych struggles with heavy topspin, etc etc..

[spinovic]

Originally Posted by Chanwan

And Berd?
I cannot pretend that I have watched every Ferrer-Delpo match (and off the top of my head, I honestly don't remember watching any, but I think I must have seen at least one), but I'll take your word for it. Even though I don't get why Ferrer would be able to do something to him that the Big Four aren't doing

I didn't say Delpo beat Fed at his very best (Fed chose a pretty stupid tactic to say the least), but as Spinovic just pointed out:

As a fan of any of the Big Four, you're somewhere between mildly and very afraid when your fav. meets Delpo, Tsonga or Berd (minus Djoko and Nadal fans), but never really afraid when they meet Ferrer. That means something.

Ferrer is as good as a bye for the Big 4. He pretty much admitted in an interview during this year's Aussie Open that he doesn't believe he can beat them. As mentally strong as he is vs. everyone else, he's the total opposite against those guys. He's beat before he even gets on the court.

And, you nailed it with that last statement. The trio of Tsonga, Berdych and Delpo are dangerous opponents for any of the Big 4.

Take the 2013 Australian Open for instance...how many people, when they saw the draw, thought Berdych was a more dangerous opponent for Djokovic in the QF's than Ferrer would be in the SF's? I know I did.

To be clear, I'm not arguing whether Ferrer is or isn't better than those other guys. He's certainly more consistent, and consistency does matter (as was stated). My point is that tennis right now is all about the Big 4 and who can challenge them. Ferrer cannot. He'll probably win until he plays one of them, but not only will he not beat them, he most likely won't even challenge them.

[spinovic]

Interestingly, there isn't a drastic difference in the overall winning percentages of Ferrer, Berdych, Tsonga and Delpo vs. the Big 4. Even more interesting is Delpo, the one with the worst percentage, is the one guy who has won a slam, beating Nadal and Federer to do so.

Ferrer is 14-46 overall. (Against Djokovic, Federer and Murray on anything but clay, he is 3-25. He's a combined 7-0 vs. Djoker and Murray on clay.) He's 3-9 in slams and 3-21 in Masters 1000 tournaments.

Tsonga - 12-32 overall, 4-9 in slams (with one win against each of the Big 4), 4-12 in Masters 1000

Berdych - 13-39 overall, 4-10 in slams (hasn't beat Nadal), 7-14 in Masters 1000

Delpo - 10-32 overall, 2-11 in slams (back-to-back wins in the 2011 US Open, Nadal SF and Federer F), 3-13 in Masters 1000

FWIW

[Gonzo_style]

GS title is GS title

[Carsomyr]

Originally Posted by Andres

Del Potro won the USO.
Berdych was runner up at Wimbledon, beating Federer.
Tsonga was runner up at the Australian Open, beating Nadal, and has also beaten Federer at Wimbledon.

Is he more consistent than those guys? Yes. Better? Dont think so.

This exactly.

I agree that Ferrer often doesn't get his due, but the other guys, while lacking Ferrer's consistency, have the weapons to not only challenge, but defeat Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic on good days.

[mellowyellow]

One thing to point out, Ferrer is in his 30's, his juicer career is almost over, and is a complete carrer being compared to incomplete careers. To compare to younger guys like delpo and tsonga who have had some serious injuries that clearly affected performance
is just stupid. Also would count any final like berdy had as a semi too. It didnt stop their but it was a semi appearance....

[Andres]

Originally Posted by spinovic

Interestingly, there isn't a drastic difference in the overall winning percentages of Ferrer, Berdych, Tsonga and Delpo vs. the Big 4. Even more interesting is Delpo, the one with the worst percentage, is the one guy who has won a slam, beating Nadal and Federer to do so.

Ferrer is 14-46 overall. (Against Djokovic, Federer and Murray on anything but clay, he is 3-25. He's a combined 7-0 vs. Djoker and Murray on clay.) He's 3-9 in slams and 3-21 in Masters 1000 tournaments.

Tsonga - 12-32 overall, 4-9 in slams (with one win against each of the Big 4), 4-12 in Masters 1000

Berdych - 13-39 overall, 4-10 in slams (hasn't beat Nadal), 7-14 in Masters 1000

Delpo - 10-32 overall, 2-11 in slams (back-to-back wins in the 2011 US Open, Nadal SF and Federer F), 3-13 in Masters 1000

FWIW

Delpo's 10-32 (.238 ) is better than Ferrer's 14-46 (.233)

[kiki]

Ferrer is the best at moonballing.I don´t know if he plays tennis or badmington.

[Valdez737]

Ferrer always been one of my fav player. He is definitely better then them he just cant bwat the top 4.

[Steve0904]

I might get into an analysis later, but yes I also believe Ferrer is better than these 3.

[Walenty]

Soderling was better than all of them anyway

[tennispro492]

Originally Posted by Carsomyr

This exactly.

I agree that Ferrer often doesn't get his due, but the other guys, while lacking Ferrer's consistency, have the weapons to not only challenge, but defeat Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic on good days.

So if the other guys can challenge and defeat fed, nadal and djoker why cant they beat david?

[veroniquem]

Not true. He may have more overall titles and a higher ranking but slams are the most prestigious events in current tennis and what keeps Ferrer down is that he's never made a slam final in his career (unlike Berd and Tsonga) or won a slam title (unlike Delpo). A bit like Davydenko, who had some nice success in best of 3 but never managed to break through in best of 5 (But Davy at least managed to win WTF and more than 1 master, which Ferrer still hasn't been able to do. Ferrer's claim to fame is still minor league domination at this point.)

[dominikk1985]

Originally Posted by Andres

Del Potro won the USO.
Berdych was runner up at Wimbledon, beating Federer.
Tsonga was runner up at the Australian Open, beating Nadal, and has also beaten Federer at Wimbledon.

Is he more consistent than those guys? Yes. Better? Dont think so.

yes but they also loose more often to inferior players than david does. ferrer almost exclusively loses to the top4 (but always) while tsonga, berdych and DP sometimes also lose to inferior players.

they have more upside than ferrer but they are also more inconsistent and prone to upsets. overall ferrer has been better over the last 2 seasons.

world ranking:

ferrer 4th
berdych 6th
DP 7th
tsonga 8th

but while ferrer was the better player over that time the other 3 still have more upside than he does.