2013 Valencia Open 500 - Who's going to win?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JRAJ1988
  • Start date Start date

Who's going to win in Valencia?

  • Ferrer

    Votes: 5 16.1%

  • Haas

    Votes: 2 6.5%

  • Almagro

    Votes: 2 6.5%

  • Janowicz

    Votes: 5 16.1%

  • Monfils

    Votes: 6 19.4%

  • Simon

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Isner

    Votes: 3 9.7%

  • Verdasco

    Votes: 4 12.9%

  • Gulbis

    Votes: 2 6.5%

  • Someone else

    Votes: 2 6.5%
  • Total voters
    31
  • Poll closed .
J

JRAJ1988

Guest
Ferrer goes into this as the number 1 seed, a pretty talented field and given Ferrer's patchy form I think anyone of those seeds could win it. Gulbis is unseeded and is in great form.

Could this tournament play into Haas' outside chances of reaching a first ATP WTF's? Could Monfils or Tomic upset the odds? Benneteau for a 10th final?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/posting/2013/573/mds.pdf Valencia Draw
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm surprised that for a 500, none of the guys who still could pretend to go to London but Haas went there. Likewise, I wonder why they left Gasquet pick up "easily" a title and 250s points in Moscow, even if I know that there was Basel right after that. Well, we'll see.
 
Normally, I'd say it's a shoo-in for Ferrer. Valencia is his home town, he part owns the tournament and he's won there 3 times in the past 5 years.

That said, he doesn't seem to be on top form at the moment and he doesn't need to gain any points for London as he's already qualified so he may be a bit more vulnerable than usual to a more in-form and points-greedy opponent like Haas.
 
I think since Ferru isn't playing so well - which I definitely wish were not the case; I don't know what's wrong with him - and he's probably going to be tired from Stockholm, that it's anybody's tournament.

I'm not sure what the 2nd poster means, but I'd lay better odds in terms of mindset on those fighting to either get or keep places for London.

Because he had such a great clay season, then such a terrible hardcourt season till he got to Asia, and since he's been doing some training with JCF (who is the tournament director now), I'm looking possibly for Nico Almagro to make a serious effort to try and go deep here ... especially since he retired JCF at their 1R match in last year's tournament.
 
ruerooo said:
I'm not sure what the 2nd poster means, but I'd lay better odds in terms of mindset on those fighting to either get or keep places for London.
Click to expand...
I mean why go struggling in Basel when you can pick up points much more easily in Valencia? Why bother? I'd think that there's a better prize money in Basel maybe, but is some more prize money more important than getting to London (where you can make much more money anyway)?

Look at what Gasquet did. Sure he ain't gonna be in form in Basel. But considering the players being in Basel (even if Nadal forfeited), he was much better off securing 250 points in Moscow than throwing everything he had in Basel. Which he did.

Let's break it down. If logic is respected and he looses to Del Potro in 3rd round, he earns 90pts and 35,850 of prize money. Not to mention the presences of Federer, Wawrinka and Berdych in case he goes further in the tournament. Moscow win with a bunch of scrubs? 250pts and 134,800€ of prize money. In fact, Moscow replaces one of his 250s tournament since he already had his quota. Look at the seeds in Valencia. Besides Ferrer, all are ranked lower than he is (Haas is still a bit problematic). And it's a 500 tournament! I guess you can't pull in/out at will, but still, had I been racing towards London, I wouldn't have put my feet in Switzerland and directly went to Spain.
 
Lukhas said:
I mean why go struggling in Basel when you can pick up points much more easily in Valencia? Why bother? I'd think that there's a better prize money in Basel maybe, but is some more prize money more important than getting to London (where you can make much more money anyway)?

Look at what Gasquet did. Sure he ain't gonna be in form in Basel. But considering the players being in Basel (even if Nadal forfeited), he was much better off securing 250 points in Moscow than throwing everything he had in Basel. Which he did.

Let's break it down. If logic is respected and he looses to Del Potro in 3rd round, he earns 90pts and 35,850 of prize money. Not to mention the presences of Federer, Wawrinka and Berdych in case he goes further in the tournament. Moscow win with a bunch of scrubs? 250pts and 134,800€ of prize money. In fact, Moscow replaces one of his 250s tournament since he already had his quota. Look at the seeds in Valencia. Besides Ferrer, all are ranked lower than he is (Haas is still a bit problematic). And it's a 500 tournament! I guess you can't pull in/out at will, but still, had I been racing towards London, I wouldn't have put my feet in Switzerland and directly went to Spain.
Click to expand...

Faites-moi une faveur, s'il vous plaît. Si vous êtes de France, s'il vous plaît écrivez votre réponse en français, parce que j'avais toujours de la difficulté à comprendre votre réponse dans votre anglais.

(Also, in this context, the word you want is "lose", not "loose".)
 
^Admettons que vous voulez aller à Londres. Vous avez donc besoin de points. Pourquoi aller dans le tournoi compliqué si vous pouvez aller dans le tournoi plus simple?
Autre exemple: un tournoi qui donne pas mal de points mais dans lequel il n'y a aucun adversaire sérieux (Moscou). Il serait intéressant d'y aller. Alors pourquo seul un des prétendants à la course vers Londres y va, même si on peut considérer que se fatiguer avant d'aller à Bâle n'est pas toujours la meilleure option? J'ai relativisé la prise de risque en prenant l'exemple de Gasquet. En obtenant le titre à Moscou, il fait une meilleure opération qu'en allant à Bâle et se faisant éliminer par DelPotro et avec des très sérieux obstacles sur sa route.

Tl, Dr: Half the contenders to the WTF have nothing to do in Basel and should be playing in Valencia if they're seriously trying to go to London. And at least one of them should have stepped before Gasquet instead of letting him grab 250 easy points.
 
Last edited:
ruerooo said:
Faites-moi une faveur, s'il vous plaît. Si vous êtes de France, s'il vous plaît écrivez votre réponse en français, parce que j'avais toujours de la difficulté à comprendre votre réponse dans votre anglais.

(Also, in this context, the word you want is "lose", not "loose".)
Click to expand...

This is an english message board and I have to put in some extra effort to "comprendre" french messages, not to mention that some can't read it at all. I think it's better for everyone if we kept it to English and by the way, there's nothing wrong with what he typed so I don't know what the problem is in the first place.
 
Lukhas said:
^Admettons que vous voulez aller à Londres. Vous avez donc besoin de points. Pourquoi aller dans le tournoi compliqué si vous pouvez aller dans le tournoi plus simple?
Autre exemple: un tournoi qui donne pas mal de points mais dans lequel il n'y a aucun adversaire sérieux (Moscou). Il serait intéressant d'y aller. Alors pourquo seul un des prétendants à la course vers Londres y va, même si on peut considérer que se fatiguer avant d'aller à Bâle n'est pas toujours la meilleure option? J'ai relativisé la prise de risque en prenant l'exemple de Gasquet. En obtenant le titre à Moscou, il fait une meilleure opération qu'en allant à Bâle et se faisant éliminer par DelPotro et avec des très sérieux obstacles sur sa route.

Tl, Dr: Half the contenders to the WTF have nothing to do in Basel and should be playing in Valencia if they're seriously trying to go to London. And at least one of them should have stepped before Gasquet instead of letting him grab 250 easy points.
Click to expand...

I agree that obviously that would have been the better move, but I think other factors also have a lot to do with it. Maybe the have already made up a contract with the tournament organization a long time ago and are receiving a big appearance fee.
 
Lukhas said:
^Admettons que vous voulez aller à Londres. Vous avez donc besoin de points. Pourquoi aller dans le tournoi compliqué si vous pouvez aller dans le tournoi plus simple?
Autre exemple: un tournoi qui donne pas mal de points mais dans lequel il n'y a aucun adversaire sérieux (Moscou). Il serait intéressant d'y aller. Alors pourquo seul un des prétendants à la course vers Londres y va, même si on peut considérer que se fatiguer avant d'aller à Bâle n'est pas toujours la meilleure option? J'ai relativisé la prise de risque en prenant l'exemple de Gasquet. En obtenant le titre à Moscou, il fait une meilleure opération qu'en allant à Bâle et se faisant éliminer par DelPotro et avec des très sérieux obstacles sur sa route.
Click to expand...

Eh bien ... deux choses.

Tout d'abord, je pense que vous faites beaucoup d'hypothèses. Il n'ya aucun moyen Richard aurait su qu'il allait gagner le tournoi de Moscou. Aussi, je ne suis pas sûr combien de temps à l'avance les joueurs doivent déclarer quels tournois ils participeront, mais je ne peux pas imaginer qu'ils seraient autorisés à passer des tournois tout de suite après leurs dernières victoires ... d'autant plus que pour même se retirer d'un tournoi dans lequel on est déjà inscrit, il faut être blessés. (Sans parler de qui, le tournoi de Valence dispose d'un délai d'inscription ainsi.)

Deuxièmement, je ne pense pas que quoi que ce soit dans ce débat appartient à un fil de tournoi sur Valence. Ce fil concerne les joueurs qui sont en train de jouer là-bas.


Lukhas said:
Tl, Dr: Half the contenders to the WTF have nothing to do in Basel and should be playing in Valencia if they're seriously trying to go to London. And at least one of them should have stepped before Gasquet instead of letting him grab 250 easy points.
Click to expand...

Well ... they're not. And ... they didn't.

Moving on.
 
merwy said:
This is an english message board and I have to put in some extra effort to "comprendre" french messages, not to mention that some can't read it at all. I think it's better for everyone if we kept it to English and by the way, there's nothing wrong with what he typed so I don't know what the problem is in the first place.
Click to expand...

There's a fair amount wrong with it in whatever language -- in addition to the English, there are a lot of unsupportable assumptions in there and the logic is a mess, which is why I couldn't figure out if it was just the language that was the problem or something else in addition -- but I was attempting to be courteous to that poster as no one else seemed to be responding and I was trying to figure out what he was saying, so ... as I said to him in my last comment, in English ... moving on.
 
@ruerooo: Well to get over with this, Gasquet was seed #1 and there were a big bunch of scrubs in Moscow. The only "problem" there was in Moscow for Gasquet was when Kukushkin decided to play decent tennis. He was at least going for a final there.
merwy said:
I agree that obviously that would have been the better move, but I think other factors also have a lot to do with it. Maybe the have already made up a contract with the tournament organization a long time ago and are receiving a big appearance fee.
Click to expand...
Maybe they didn't want to tire themselves for this. Would've checked who was going in which tournament months prior if it was possible. Shoulda, coulda, woulda... One thing was sure ever since the beginning: no one in Moscow or Valencia, many players in Basel. A bit sad for the crowd. Now the one(s) who won't qualify will have regrets.
 
Last edited:
Lukhas said:
Maybe they didn't want to tire themselves for this. Would've checked who was going in which tournament months prior if it was possible. Shoulda, coulda, woulda... One thing was sure ever since the beginning: no one in Moscow or Valencia, many players in Basel. A bit sad for the crowd. Now the one(s) who won't qualify will have regrets.
Click to expand...
Your logic is off because Valencia is no Moscow. In Moscow Gasquet had no threats. In Valencia, there's Gulbis, Haas, Ferrer, Isner, Janowicz, Paire, Anderson, Simon, Monfils, Almagro, Kohlschreiber...

Sure it's harder to win Basel outright, but there's no depth at all in Basel. In Basel there's practically a bye for the top players to the quarters/semis, it's far easier to lose first round in Valencia with unseeded players like Gulbis and Monfils.
 
^What I wanted to point out is that there's no one who is fighting for London in Valencia but Haas in Valencia. So for some of these players it would have made sense to at least try. Still laughed at Anderson (or Paire) even if the rest of the list can make sense. Even if I still think that however, if you get through 1st or 2nd round, that list would have cleared a bit since they will eventually get rid of each other. You have a point.
 
Last edited:
ruerooo said:
Tipsarevic retired in the first set 2-1 against Granollers. Wonder what's wrong with him.
Click to expand...

Apart from his desire to collect all retirement badges? Not much.


OT: Tough to call, Ferrer's form is questionable, I don't see Haas winning back to back tournaments at his age and he wasn't that good in Vienna anyway. No idea who'll win in the end. Gulbis has a decent shot, but you never know what you're gonna get from him. I'm rooting for JJ II here.
 
Last edited:
Warmaster said:
Apart from his desire to collect all retirement badges? Not much.


OT: Tough to call, Ferrer's form is questionable, I don't see Haas winning back to back tournaments at his age and he wasn't that good in Vienna anyway. No idea who'll win in the end. Gulbis has a decent shot, but you never know what you're gonna get from him. I'm rooting for JJ II here.
Click to expand...

Agreed, sadly, about Ferru. I just can't get to the bottom of what he seems to be struggling with. World Number Three-itis? It's like he can't get used to holding the ranking.

I didn't see Tommy play, so I don't know what to say about that. I can't imagine he's not a little tired.

Do you know if JJ and Nico Almagro are on the same side of the draw?
 
ruerooo said:
Agreed, sadly, about Ferru. I just can't get to the bottom of what he seems to be struggling with. World Number Three-itis? It's like he can't get used to holding the ranking.

I didn't see Tommy play, so I don't know what to say about that. I can't imagine he's not a little tired.

Do you know if JJ and Nico Almagro are on the same side of the draw?
Click to expand...

A possible SF.

There are a few interesting first rounds by the way.

Ferrer-Monfils. Gulbis-Isner. Kohlschreiber-Haas.
 
Tomic is dominatin Youzhny so far, 4/1 opening set
971974youz.jpg
 
Ferru has to play Monfils, who beat Roger inf Shanghai. Nobody could say as tournament co-owner that Ferru gave himself a cupcake draw.

Anybody watching Nico? How is he doing?
 
ruerooo said:
Ferru has to play Monfils, who beat Roger inf Shanghai. Nobody could say as tournament co-owner that Ferru gave himself a cupcake draw.

Anybody watching Nico? How is he doing?
Click to expand...

didn't watch but well it was Andujar on the other side of the net
Andujar = 10 wins on indoor, 27 losses :eek:
 
Difficult to foretell this tournament, which makes it actually exciting!

Ferrer and Haas, despite their final and win last week, both didn't look that great. Monfils looked great but seems to have a mild injury again. Gulbis is Gulbis, never know. JJ is hard to gauge, not sure how his form is...

In my dreams, Haas wins the tournament and goes deep in Paris to make the WTF....One can dream, right? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
  • Poll Poll
2014 Valencia Open 500 - Who's going to win this?
3 4 5
Replies
240
Views
9K
Mainad
Mainad
Roddick85
2013 Season Thoughts
Replies
15
Views
1K
Murray2012
M
sseemiller
ATP Costa Do Sauipe & Marseille - Tues. Results, News, e
Replies
10
Views
4K
tacou
tacou
Back
Top