Davydenko in his prime or Ferrer?

vive le beau jeu ! said:
i think too much importance is given to the 'masters 1000' events... but that's another debate ! ;)
Click to expand...

What's to debate about? Masters 1000s are what they say they are. They confer 1,000 ranking points on the winner, more than any other tournament bar the Slams and the WTF. All the top players are required to play them (with one current exception) and they usually do. They have undoubtedly more prestige than anything outside the Slams and arguably the WTF and so any non-Slam winner who has won one or more is automatically superior to a non-Slam winner who hasn't won any!
 
Last edited:
veroniquem said:
Davydenko on hard court. I mean in slams, granted, he hasn't done much but he's won 3 master titles + WTF. That's definitely better than Ferrer. On clay though I would probably pick Ferrer. OK, he cannot beat Rafa but neither can Davy on that surface and Ferrer has been more consistent in the big clay events.
Click to expand...

What upsets me is that Davy lost to Puerta in that 05 FO semis. A nadal-davydenko final at the french would have been great. Unlucky for Davy as not long after that Puerta was found to be doping again... I think Davy would have had a much, much better chance against Nadal than Puerta.
 
Davydenko has never beaten Nadal on clay, has only once had a competitive match, and in 2005 wasnt the player he was in future years yet. I think the final with Puerta was a much better final than the Nadal-Davydenko final would have been that year to be honest.

Davydenko also blew the 2007 French semis with Federer. Was up in all 3 sets and gifted them away with unforced errors, not anything Federer did. Maybe that year he would have had a closer FO final with Nadal, atleast compared to 2005.


Anyway regarding this thread Davydenko is way better on hard courts and indoors which is their mutual best surfaces. They are similar level on clay, Davydenko in his prime actually had better FO results IIRC. Grass Ferrer is better but both are useless anyway. Easy answer is Davydenko. He has Masters titles and even a WTF, which Ferrer wasnt good enough to win any of. He also had enough game to win a major or two if he wasnt such a choker, Ferrer never had the game to win a major.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Obviously Kolya, far more dangerous against top players then Ferrer.

YEC, 3 MS-1000 titles. Ferrer won none of these.

And it's not like Kolya is a giant, he's only 5'11".
 
This comparison isn't so bad actually. Both were/are solid #4/5 players, very consistent, practically identical slam results.

But: Davydenko has 3 MS 1000 wins, and 1 YEC win. Ferrer has 3 MS 1000 finals, and 1 YEC final. This pretty much spells it out, both couldn't' take out the top guys in slams, but Davydenko had more weapons, and more ability to upset the big boys when he was hot. Therefore he was able to bag some big titles and take some big scalp. Ferrer meanwhile can't seem to breakthrough at all vs the big 3, because he just doesn't quite have the game.
 
Last edited:
With how early he took the ball and the angles he created, Davy was an incredible player to watch when on his game.
 
Good comparison. Both are capable of playing consistent ground strokes. Both are perennial rank 4-5. Comparable age. Ferrer is a grinder, Davydenko is an aggressive baseliner.

Though they have strengths, Davydenko wins this racquets down. I didn't see anyone picking Ferrer, I'm glad.



1. Game-wise:

Peak Game - Davydenko
All-Courter - Ferrer
Consistency - Ferrer

Davydenko when on, he can beat anyone. Has big wins against Federer, Nadal. Ferrer is whipping boy of top players. Ferrer has consistency/longevity over the years, as well as have shown better all court abilities. Davydenko was a complete non-show on grass.



2. Achievement wise:

Major
Davydenko - SF of 2 Majors, QF of 3 Majors, 4R of all Majors
Ferrer - 1 RU, SF of 3 Majors, QF of all Majors

Finals
Davydenko - 1 W, 1 RU
Ferrer - 1 RU

Masters
Davydenko - 3 W
Ferrer - 1 W, 6 RU

While Davydenko has the edge in Finals and Masters, Ferrer has the definite edge in Majors.

Win % in Majors during peak period:
Davydenko (2005-09) - 58/77 = 75.3%
Ferrer (2010-14) - 70/90 = 77.8%

Win % in Majors, Finals, Masters, Davis Cups, Olympics, during peak period:
Davydenko (2005-09) - 152/224 = 67.9%
Ferrer (2010-14) - 169/237 = 71.3%



I pick Davydenko purely based on his peak game, shows in his better title wins.
 
Davydenko >>>>>>>> Ferrer.

Ferrer's only advantage is a slam final and we all know that is is only due to uneven draws and that Djokovic-Nadal SF was de facto final. So it is really worthless and can't be used as an argument against Davydenko.
 
I cannot believe someone would actually agree to put these two players in the same bracket. Davydenko of course, for a myriad of reasons - it's not even close.
 
Mainad said:
What's to debate about? Masters 1000s are what they say they are. They confer 1,000 ranking points on the winner, more than any other tournament bar the Slams and the WTF. All the top players are required to play them (with one current exception) and they usually do. They have undoubtedly more prestige than anything outside the Slams and arguably the WTF and so any non-Slam winner who has won one or more is automatically superior to a non-Slam winner who hasn't won any!
Click to expand...

arguably the WTF ?

WTF !? :)

WTF >> any master series event ......
 
TheMusicLover said:
I cannot believe someone would actually agree to put these two players in the same bracket. Davydenko of course, for a myriad of reasons - it's not even close.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's very close you dumbshit.

22 to 21 ATP wins, 3 Masters to 1, 1 Slam final to 0, 1 YEC final to 1 YEC win.

They are parallel, and they are HOF players, so quit letting ******** bias and Ferrer hate get in the way of logic.
 
jakemcclain32 said:
Yes, it's very close you dumbshit.

22 to 21 ATP wins, 3 Masters to 1, 1 Slam final to 0, 1 YEC final to 1 YEC win.

They are parallel, and they are HOF players, so quit letting ******** bias and Ferrer hate get in the way of logic.
Click to expand...

Take it easy, kid. :lol:
 
jakemcclain32 said:
Yes, it's very close you dumbshit.

22 to 21 ATP wins, 3 Masters to 1, 1 Slam final to 0, 1 YEC final to 1 YEC win.

They are parallel, and they are HOF players, so quit letting ******** bias and Ferrer hate get in the way of logic.
Click to expand...

Davydenko has a final and a win at the YEC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
List of Fed's QF> at slams
Replies
2
Views
497
Rago
Rago
bjk
Better Career, Malivai Washington or James Blake?
Replies
17
Views
2K
BGod
BGod
S
Some Statistics
Replies
17
Views
894
Tarkovsky
Tarkovsky
M
Federer has as many 5 Set Losses in Grand Slam QF and Beyond as Sampras/Nadal/Djokovic
Replies
9
Views
654
timnz
T
M
How Federer has done in tournament before a Grand Slam he won
Replies
19
Views
805
Im(moral) Winner
Im(moral) Winner
Back
Top