Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by batz, Mar 31, 2013.
Was the last time that neither of Roger & Rafa were in the top 2. That's a long time ago.
the bawss and the butthurt
It took a 32-year old (playing way below average in the last 6 months) Federer and Nadal not playing tennis at all for the last 7 months for that to happen. Don't worry, while Federer is getting older and cares less about the rankings Nadal will show Murray the door soon.
Congrats Andy!!! 9 masters and a huge possibility to surpass Pete's 11 this year. Clearly the 2nd best player in the world today.
Federer is 31 not 32..stop adding on years.
murray playing below his best has gone past Federer in the rankings :shock:
Let's be real, it was a crap match.
it's crazy just to think about their consistency over the years
Come FO, Order will be restored. Murray will be where he belongs - second rung - along with Ferrer and Delpo.
Federer was no1 / no2 rank for what he did between nov 2011 - aug 2012..
Murray has got to world no2 rank for what he did between june 2012 - and now,
same rules for everyone, same points up for grabs..Murray deserves no2 world rank.
To be fair that comparison is a little ridiculous! they were not masters when Pete played but super 9's and never truly carried the same weight as they did now. Had they done so Pete would have had closer to 20 and focused more on the masters he used them as tune up events and skipped a bunch of them!
yes they did...Sampras's attitude stank away from the majors.."its all about the slams, maan"..he just couldn't be bothered.
it is but masters were no where near as important as they are now.
sure they were. relative point values were the same.
Yeah and yet Pete still finished number 1 6 years ranking! Not talking about points but how they were perceived among players and fans! It's only since they have been rebranded as Masters 1000's and before that the Masters series were they viewed in a more prestigious way.
You're right. Almost ten years.
Well, it was inevitably going to happen considering the decline of someone and the injury of someone.
Murray benefits from the downfall of others
Nadal's injury --> Wins Olympic Gold and USO
Federer having played a 5 setter quarters with Tsonga --> beats Fed in 5 sets (Fed's 1st serve was gone by then) in AO semis 2013 - first major win against fed.
lol. you think the Italian Open only acquired prestige because of an ATP marketing campaign?
You are naming one event :/ there are 9 masters collectively in the 90's the super 9s as they were then were not viewed in the same light as they are today Pete just chilled and used a lot of them as practise and a tune up to ensure he peaked for the slams!
The ATP dates records in Masters tournaments from 1990 even if they were not called 'Masters' at that time.
According to Wiki:
"The series was introduced in 1990 with the inception of the ATP Tour by bringing together the nine most prestigious tournaments of the Grand Prix Tour Championship Series (1970–1989). The events were originally known as the ATP Championship Series, Single Week for the first three years. From 1993 through 1999, the series was known as the Mercedes-Benz Super 9. In 2000, the name was changed to the Tennis Masters Series and then changed to ATP Masters Series in 2004. The present name took effect in 2009."
As for Sampras, he has gone on record as saying that he sometimes found them harder to win than Slams as you often had to play back to back matches against top players often without a day's rest unlike in the Slams.
I am aware of the history of this series! My the fact it had to be rebranded so many times in itself speaks of how it lacked prestige and value with fans and players alike! Only since the Masters Series and now Masters 1000's have these events been held in the highest regard!
Sampras also said he believed in peaking for the majors! And he did! He lost to Paes once at Cincinnati! Says it all about how much Pete valued that tournament!
A Federer fan downplaying Murray's accomplishments by virtue of them being achieved due to the avoidance of Nadal. Fascinating.
please don't dribble, its embarrassing.
face it, Sampras was a no-show..thats the truth.
14 Grand Slam titles, 7 Wimbledons and 6 years in a row at world number 1 is a no show, no wonder you thought today's shambles of a match was riveting :lol:
Then I guess we better not mention Fed's 2009 FO win, which enabled him to achieve the career Grand Slam!
no, the 'no show' was what you were trying to defend..when you were wittering on about Sampras not winning more masters..just suck it up, murray will win more masters events in the end than pete, i cant believe you are so butthurt :cry: when sampas has 14 majors.
I don't think either guy cares about rankings any more.
Separate names with a comma.