Weird rankings

juanparty

juanparty

Hall of Fame
1.(.1) Novak Djokovic (SRB) 13.155 pts.
2.(.2) RAFA NADAL (ESP) 11.270.
3.(.3) Roger Federer (SUI) 9.530.
4.(.4) Andy Murray (GBR) 6.855.
5.(.5) Robin Soderling (SUE) 4.325.
6.(.6) DAVID FERRER (ESP) 4.210.
7.(.7) Gael Monfils (FRA) 2.695.
8.(.8) Tomas Berdych (RCH) 2.470.
9.(.9) Mardy Fish (USA) 2.435.
10.(14) NICOLÁS ALMAGRO (ESP) 2.156.
11.(18) Gilles Simon (FRA) 2.155.
12.(10) Andy Roddick (USA) 2.110.
13.(11) Richard Gasquet (FRA) 2.105.
14.(17) Mikhail Youzhny (RUS) 1.990.
15.(13) Viktor Troicki (SRB) 1.970.
16.(15) Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (FRA) 1.945.
17.(16) Stanislas Wawrinka (SUI) 1.935.
18.(12) Jurgen Melzer (AUT) 1.875.
19.(19) Juan Martín del Potro (ARG) 1.665.
20.(22) FERNANDO VERDASCO (ESP) 1.600.

diferences between:
#1 and #10 (Djoker-Almagro) 10.999 points
#10 and # 20 (Almagro-Asco) 556 points.

isn't weird?
 
Probably because nobody has done jack every season except the top 4. Well, more specifically, none of the masters and slams were won by anyone not named Djokovic or Nadal.
 
Del Potro is going to be top 10 by the end of the year. I can't see any reason he wouldn't be unless he gets injured.
 
Think of it this way. There are 41 tournaments that are in the 250s, 11 in the 500s, and 9 in the 1000s.

The ones from 10 to 30 do a lot of 250s. If you get to the finals and lose, you get 150 points. You get to the quarters, you get a cool 20 points. Anything under and you get nothing.

To move up, you basically have to be in AT LEAST the semis of every event. Very few players get that far in every event, so things pretty much stay the same.
 
Clay lover said:
Probably because nobody has done jack every season except the top 4. Well, more specifically, none of the masters and slams were won by anyone not named Djokovic or Nadal.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's pretty crazy how far ahead they are from everyone. Slaughtering those clowns lol.
 
Allows for a lot of speedy climbing, and any rankings system which has room for Gilles in the top 10 is sound with me (assuming he's headed back there shortly).

But Almagro at 10 seems off. Losing record on all surfaces but clay, and of all active players who've broached the top 10 he's got the least wins against the top guys. That said, Cilic would own the latter distinction if only Almagro had taken one of those three consecutive match points against Nadal in Paris...
 
jakemcclain32 said:
Think of it this way. There are 41 tournaments that are in the 250s, 11 in the 500s, and 9 in the 1000s.

The ones from 10 to 30 do a lot of 250s. If you get to the finals and lose, you get 150 points. You get to the quarters, you get a cool 20 points. Anything under and you get nothing.

To move up, you basically have to be in AT LEAST the semis of every event. Very few players get that far in every event, so things pretty much stay the same.
Click to expand...

QF actually gets you 45, R16 gets you 20, then generally 5, 10 or nada
 
Players ranked in the top 5-20 are mugs, damn you could even put Murray in the mix since he's such a headcase, let's be fair the only reason he's getting deep in Slams is because he's facing other mugs only to get pwned by the top 3 in the semis/finals. Just think - Andy Murray reaches the French Open semis with an injury which occured mid-tournament. Is this a joke? Is there not one single freaking player who can take him out?

Sampras at this stage of his career more or less 10 years ago was balancing around 8-15 in the rankings while Federer is safe at no 3 and no way in hell drops out of the top 4 anytime soon.

You're asking why is there such a difference between 1-10 or 10-20. The reason is simple. Someone mentioned it earlier, the top 4 is head and shoulders above everyone else and there are virtually 2 contenders for Slams at this stage. I pray to Lord Del Potro comes back fast. Then, instead of duopoly we'll have triopoly.
 
It just shows how much better the top 3 are compared to everybody else. Everybody else has some fatal flaw that prevents them from being so consistent and getting points.
 
tennis_pro said:
Players ranked in the top 5-20 are mugs, damn you could even put Murray in the mix since he's such a headcase, let's be fair the only reason he's getting deep in Slams is because he's facing other mugs only to get pwned by the top 3 in the semis/finals. Just think - Andy Murray reaches the French Open semis with an injury which occured mid-tournament. Is this a joke? Is there not one single freaking player who can take him out?
Click to expand...

Apparently not.Even injured,Murray is still head and shoulders above most of them. Besides,don't the top 3 usually play 'mugs' too until they come across each other at the semis? What are Wawrinka and Troicki to Federer and Djokovic but king-size mugs whenever they come across each other as each did in this year's Slams (Wawrinka v Fed on two occasions).

tennis_pro said:
I pray to Lord Del Potro comes back fast. Then, instead of duopoly we'll have triopoly.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? Even at the height of his form back in 2009, with the sole exception of his USO win, Del Potro was usually owned by Federer,Djokovic and Murray and he's not yet significantly better than he was back then although he's getting there. The 2009 USO may yet just prove to be a fortunate one-off!
 
Poor A-rod. He needs to be playing more 250s and 500s now. Hes dropped out of the main players on tour and should start playing more smaller tourneys, he needs all points he can get now.
 
got spin? said:
Poor A-rod. He needs to be playing more 250s and 500s now. Hes dropped out of the main players on tour and should start playing more smaller tourneys, he needs all points he can get now.
Click to expand...

Poor A-rod?
Please, it's not like some force outside of his control has beset him and prevented him from playing his best tennis. He's just not that good, he is the most painful player to watch outside of Bartoli.
 
tennis_pro said:
Players ranked in the top 5-20 are mugs, damn you could even put Murray in the mix since he's such a headcase, let's be fair the only reason he's getting deep in Slams is because he's facing other mugs only to get pwned by the top 3 in the semis/finals. Just think - Andy Murray reaches the French Open semis with an injury which occured mid-tournament. Is this a joke? Is there not one single freaking player who can take him out?

Sampras at this stage of his career more or less 10 years ago was balancing around 8-15 in the rankings while Federer is safe at no 3 and no way in hell drops out of the top 4 anytime soon.

You're asking why is there such a difference between 1-10 or 10-20. The reason is simple. Someone mentioned it earlier, the top 4 is head and shoulders above everyone else and there are virtually 2 contenders for Slams at this stage. I pray to Lord Del Potro comes back fast. Then, instead of duopoly we'll have triopoly.
Click to expand...

Are you saying: Sampras had a much deeper and tougher field to deal with compared to Federer (and I guess Nadal for that matter)?

Should we factor this in when comparing the two (or three)?
 
Mainad said:
Apparently not.Even injured,Murray is still head and shoulders above most of them. Besides,don't the top 3 usually play 'mugs' too until they come across each other at the semis? What are Wawrinka and Troicki to Federer and Djokovic but king-size mugs whenever they come across each other as each did in this year's Slams (Wawrinka v Fed on two occasions).
Click to expand...

I'm sceptical about the what-happens-twice-is-not-a-fluke concept but I'm starting to think Murray's wins over Nadal have been fluky and Nadal wasn't at his best both times. Just think other than the 08 US/10 AO where Nadal was either exhausted ('08 ) or in a slump ('10), he's been pwned by him in every other Slam meeting occured (most of them in straights), moreover Murray has been pwned by a late-20's-Federer twice in straight sets (he got absolutely hammered in the 08's US final) and this year by Djokovic, also in straight sets.

If Federer, Djokovic and Nadal are the top trio and the rest are mugs, then Murray is a mug+, then.

I liked the guy and hoped for him to get at least 1 GS title but after the Nadal semi at Wimbledon this year in which he led 7-5 2-1, had an easy putaway to go 2 bp's up, missed it and completely dissapeared for the next 2 hours I'm 100 % sure, he will never win a major. I really can't think of any other "top player" who's been this consistantly outplayed by other top players (and even journeymen at times) when it matters. I'm starting to think it would be a sad story if such a mental midget won a major, seriously. It would open the the gate for other mental midgets winning majors and that's the last thing I want in men's tennis.
 
DRII said:
Are you saying: Sampras had a much deeper and tougher field to deal with compared to Federer (and I guess Nadal for that matter)?

Should we factor this in when comparing the two (or three)?
Click to expand...

Sampras' competition during his prime years 1993-1997 was more or less the same level compared to Fed's competition in his best years. The super tough opposition during Sampras' time is a myth since the Golden era of tennis ended around 1993 (1988-1993 have been the toughest years to win a slam IMO - we had Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Wilander, Courier all in their primes, Agassi, Sampras were coming up, McEnroe and other oldies still around).

What I'm worried about is the 5-20 NOWADAYS not 5 years ago. In 2005 we had the Safins, Ferreros, Hewitts, Agassis, Henmans, Grosjeans, Moyas, Roddicks, Nadals, Davydenkos, Blakes, Corias, Nalbandians, Gonzalezs etc.

Even in early 2010 the top 20 looked way better.

1 Federer, Roger (SUI)
2 Djokovic, Novak (SRB)
3 Murray, Andy (GBR)
4 Nadal, Rafael (ESP)
5 Del Potro, Juan Martin (ARG)
6 Davydenko, Nikolay (RUS)
7 Roddick, Andy (USA)
8 Soderling, Robin (SWE)
9 Tsonga, Jo-Wilfried (FRA)
10 Cilic, Marin (CRO)

Now look at July 2011. Wtf is Monfils doing at no 7, wtf are Fish and Almagro doing in the top 10??? Melzer has been top 10 this year as well, Verdasco was as high as 8 I think just a couple of months ago. Troicki who has a decent shot at the "biggest choker of the all time" title was no 12 just weeks ago with only 1 single 4th round major appearence in his career. Berdych has won less than 50 % of his matches in the recent months is still at no 8.
 
Last edited:
This just shows how much of a gap the top 4 have made compared to the rest of the field. It's no wonder why you consistently see them in at least QF/SF of most slams now. The points Djokovic has amassed already is absolutely astonishing. He's going to be hard pressed next year to maintain that lead due to that 41 match win streak he had going on.

The top 3 (or 4 if you want to throw in Murray) are in a league of their own in terms of consistency.
 
tennis_pro said:
I'm sceptical about the what-happens-twice-is-not-a-fluke concept but I'm starting to think Murray's wins over Nadal have been fluky and Nadal wasn't at his best both times. Just think other than the 08 US/10 AO where Nadal was either exhausted ('08 ) or in a slump ('10), he's been pwned by him in every other Slam meeting occured (most of them in straights), moreover Murray has been pwned by a late-20's-Federer twice in straight sets (he got absolutely hammered in the 08's US final) and this year by Djokovic, also in straight sets.
Click to expand...

I think Murray's two Slam wins over Nadal were entirely respectable. The 2008 USA semi was a marathon played over two days. Nadal wasn't too tired to come back the next day and take it to 4 sets. Murray fought hard and played well to bring off the win. It was a pity that he then had to play Federer in the final the very next day when HE was tired after his 2 days exertion and Federer was (as usual) well rested after a 2 day break.In the AO 2010 Qtrs,Murray played even better. He beat Rafa in straights although Rafa,of course,had to pull out after going down 0-3 in the third claiming injury so that the shine would be taken off Murray's victory. Have you ever noticed that Nadal never suffers an injury serious enough to pull out when he's UP against an opponent? That said, Murray hasn't been able to repeat those successes in their next 3 Slam meetings and this year's Wimby one was especially disappointing given the great start he made. Although he's stated that Nadal is the best player ever etc. I think he's beginning to give Rafa a little bit TOO much respect and has started to feel a little intimidated against him which is a bit surprising given that Djokovic has been owning him all year. Methinks Murray would do well to remember 2008 and 2010 a bit more often.

tennis_pro said:
I liked the guy and hoped for him to get at least 1 GS title but after the Nadal semi at Wimbledon this year in which he led 7-5 2-1, had an easy putaway to go 2 bp's up, missed it and completely dissapeared for the next 2 hours I'm 100 % sure, he will never win a major. I really can't think of any other "top player" who's been this consistantly outplayed by other top players (and even journeymen at times) when it matters. I'm starting to think it would be a sad story if such a mental midget won a major, seriously. It would open the the gate for other mental midgets winning majors and that's the last thing I want in men's tennis.
Click to expand...

I think that's a bit of a contradiction in terms. In actual fact if Murray is ever to win a major then he must STOP being a mental midget.I don't think its possible to win a Slam at all if you're mentally suspect especially against the likes of the current top 3! So if Murray ever does manage to get that Slam monkey off his back it will be because he's finally proved he's mentally strong enough to do it and therefore will have earned it and that can only be a positive example to any other players aspiring to take on the Big Three and beat them at their own game.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top