The dark horses of the US Open [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

The dark horses of the US Open

BackhandMissile
08-01-2008, 08:18 PM
Who would you tip off as the dark horses of the US Open? The guys we wouldn't have expected to be in the SF's, but they get there somehow (like Wimbledon this year!).

I've got a feeling about Marat. He looked in good form at Wimbledon and it might have brought some confidence and motivation for him to go for another US Open Slam after all these years.

Roddickominator
08-01-2008, 08:23 PM
Gael Monfils, Donald Young, and James Blake. I think calling them horses could certainly be interpreted as racist though. So my answer is....Batman.

Karolina_Sprem
08-01-2008, 08:30 PM
Marin Cilic and I would say Ernes Gulbis but I'm a little bit scared when I have to say his name in a positive context because you never know with that guy :D
Tipsarevic as well... almost forgot him....

Nikigreat
08-01-2008, 08:32 PM
Murray has good chances

Mateya
08-01-2008, 08:47 PM
Tipsarevic as well... almost forgot him....

Tipsarevic has a horrible USopen record. I hope he improves it...

What do we know, any top 50 player is a potencial dark horse and this year is crazy anyway. Maybe some Stakhovsky? :haha:

Karolina :wavey: :D

Acer
08-01-2008, 08:48 PM
Roger Federer : /

PiggyGotRoasted
08-01-2008, 09:07 PM
Oscar Hernandez

Havok
08-01-2008, 09:09 PM
Murray has good chances
You can't be a dark horse for a Slam and be one of the top 8 seeds.:retard:

Havok
08-01-2008, 09:10 PM
Roger Federer : /
:yeah:!

Karolina_Sprem
08-01-2008, 09:11 PM
Tipsarevic has a horrible USopen record. I hope he improves it...

What do we know, any top 50 player is a potencial dark horse and this year is crazy anyway. Maybe some Stakhovsky? :haha:

Karolina :wavey: :D

True, and he didn't play well in Canada so... but you know Tipsarevic...very unpredictable player...with him anything is possible... :D
:wavey::wavey:

Winnipeg
08-01-2008, 09:13 PM
Soderling

Sunset of Age
08-01-2008, 09:13 PM
Roger Federer : /

I was waiting for this fellow to be mentioned here. :angel:

jonny84
08-01-2008, 09:18 PM
Hopefully Marin and Tipsy can have a good tournie.

And if he can transfer some of his claycourt form from a few weeks ago here - Del Potro!

Andi-M
08-01-2008, 09:56 PM
You can't be a dark horse for a Slam and be one of the top 8 seeds.:retard:

:lol:

PiggyGotRoasted
08-01-2008, 09:58 PM
Davydenko is always one

finishingmove
08-01-2008, 10:01 PM
berdych through fire and flames

finishingmove
08-01-2008, 10:01 PM
Davydenko is always one

donkey != horse

tangerine_dream
08-01-2008, 10:49 PM
donkey != horse
donkey! = ass!

leng jai
08-01-2008, 11:29 PM
The MTF jinx.

JimmyV
08-01-2008, 11:46 PM
Can someone explain to me why Tipsarevic's name is mentioned so often on this forum? The dude has never made an ATP final or even been ranked higher than the 30's, yet everytime a slam rolls around he's a favorite to make a "deep run".

jpatatsos
08-01-2008, 11:58 PM
gulbis

leng jai
08-02-2008, 12:06 AM
Can someone explain to me why Tipsarevic's name is mentioned so often on this forum? The dude has never made an ATP final or even been ranked higher than the 30's, yet everytime a slam rolls around he's a favorite to make a "deep run".

The spectacles give him the X-factor.

JimmyV
08-02-2008, 12:19 AM
The spectacles give him the X-factor.

Agh, that explains it.

Bernard Black
08-02-2008, 12:48 AM
Sadly, the slams are staying with the top 3 for now. Too much mug tennis being played by the rest.

Stensland
08-02-2008, 01:24 AM
safin, gulbis, nalbandian, murray (if you will), kiefer, soderling.

ASP0315
08-02-2008, 01:31 AM
john isner

ASP0315
08-02-2008, 01:32 AM
nico lapenti and rainer schuettler as well

Mario000
08-02-2008, 01:33 AM
Federer

Grenouille
08-02-2008, 05:48 AM
gilles simon

marcelwks
08-02-2008, 05:50 AM
one of the qualifiers but I don't know the name yet :p

JimmyV
08-02-2008, 06:27 AM
It will be an Isner - Young final.

groundstroke
08-02-2008, 09:10 AM
Roger Federer is the darkest horse of all. If he even comes close to showing up, I don't think anyone will beat him.

Sebby
08-02-2008, 09:19 AM
Gulbis, Stepanek.

Allez
08-02-2008, 09:19 AM
I suppose Roger has to be considered a dark horse. He will be the 2nd seed, but in all honesty he is playing like the 32nd seed.

Basic Boy
08-02-2008, 09:54 AM
There Will Be Tsonga?

Junkyard Racket
08-02-2008, 10:23 AM
Del Potro has won 14 of his last 16 matches and he's due for a good run at a major.

Ivanatis
08-02-2008, 10:38 AM
Safin for sure

hopefully a fit and healthy Nishikori as well

Kiefer, Simon and maybe Haas should be able to cause some upset, too

Karolina_Sprem
08-02-2008, 10:46 AM
Del Potro has won 14 of his last 16 matches and he's due for a good run at a major.

He hasn't played on the hard surface since March... Only played 3 tournaments this year on the hard surface and record is 2-3... He's game is typical clay court at the moment...very young so he's got time to improve his game on the hard surface but at the moment can't see him as a "dark horse" for the US Open....

Halba
08-02-2008, 11:20 AM
not dark horses, but annoyances for the top seeds-

del potro
karlovic
gilles simon
gael monfils
gulbis
cilic
kiefer
marat
haas
gonzo
berdych
blake
ginepri.

if i was a top seeded player, i wouldn't want to be facing these guys

Truc
08-02-2008, 11:29 AM
There Will Be Tsonga?He doesn't know yet, he hopes the docs will finally allow him to resume the training next week because it's the last chance to be ready in time for the USO according to his coach.

Ivanatis
08-02-2008, 11:31 AM
after this long break, everything > 2nd round would really surprise me from Tsonga

Exodus
08-02-2008, 11:32 AM
marat safin and gulbis

Queens.
08-02-2008, 03:06 PM
Cilic, Karlovic, Gulbis, Del Potro and Gonzalez :)

StevoTG
08-02-2008, 03:07 PM
IMO Murray, Gulbis, Stepanek, Davydenko and to a lesser extent Haas, Safin and Kiefer. I'm also hoping Del Potro has a good run.

Action Jackson
08-02-2008, 03:12 PM
Got to love the intelligentsia, the majority here wouldn't know dark horse, if it was horse and it happened to be black and it kicked them.

Dark horses are unseeded players.

So no Simon, Blake, Kiefer, Karlovic, Gonzalez.

Federer is because he is such a clown at the moment. For those who don't know the last statement was indeed in jest.

ReturnWinner
08-02-2008, 03:19 PM
Gulbis,Haas and Soderling.

StevoTG
08-02-2008, 03:39 PM
Dark horses are unseeded players.

A dark horse is a player not among among the favourites who could go deep or win. All 32 seeds can't be among the favourites for the tournament.

Action Jackson
08-02-2008, 03:41 PM
A dark horse is a player not among among the favourites who could go deep or win. All 32 seeds can't be among the favourites for the tournament.

Well they are seeded for what reason? Because they are better looking than everyone else?

If they are among the top 32, then they are the highest favourites.

Tsonga - AO finalist
Monfils - RG semi finalist
Schuettler and Safin - Wimbledon semi finalists.

Those 4 names above at the time were floaters or dark horses and none of them were seeded.

Ays25
08-02-2008, 03:58 PM
Marsel ilhan

Rafalover15
08-02-2008, 10:37 PM
Monfils

Andi-M
08-02-2008, 10:45 PM
Well they are seeded for what reason? Because they are better looking than everyone else?

If they are among the top 32, then they are the highest favourites.

Tsonga - AO finalist
Monfils - RG semi finalist
Schuettler and Safin - Wimbledon semi finalists.

Those 4 names above at the time were floaters or dark horses and none of them were seeded.

True but Gulbis atm is non seeded and Niemenen is. If Niemenen were to make the semi's I'd be far more shocked than I would if Gulbis did.

Albop
08-02-2008, 10:47 PM
Gael Monfils, Donald Young, and James Blake. I think calling them horses could certainly be interpreted as racist though. So my answer is....Batman.

Dickominator :worship:

Svetlana.
08-02-2008, 11:06 PM
Safin (very unlikely to win, but he would be my pick)

Gulbis

and maybe Simon

JustJames
08-02-2008, 11:52 PM
Somdev Devvarman :angel:

Tbh I think it's usually pretty pointless trying to guess which of the unseeded pack will come through and produce some surprising results as often it occurs with little or no preemption and therefore, at this stage, anyone could be the 'dark horse' come the US Open.

platinum
08-03-2008, 02:38 AM
Safin

A German player.

Truc
08-03-2008, 06:27 AM
He doesn't know yet, he hopes the docs will finally allow him to resume the training next week because it's the last chance to be ready in time for the USO according to his coach.It's a bit OT, but I just read that Tsonga has resumed the training and should play the USO:
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?p=7445185#post7445185
I doubt he will be at full force with such a light training though.

StevoTG
08-03-2008, 10:26 AM
Well they are seeded for what reason? Because they are better looking than everyone else?

If they are among the top 32, then they are the highest favourites.

Tsonga - AO finalist
Monfils - RG semi finalist
Schuettler and Safin - Wimbledon semi finalists.

Those 4 names above at the time were floaters or dark horses and none of them were seeded.

I know the seeds are there on merit but there is no way are there 32 favourites to win the event though.

Baghdatis (11) and Gonzalez (10) were two dark horses in 06 and 07 AO's.

True but Gulbis atm is non seeded and Niemenen is. If Niemenen were to make the semi's I'd be far more shocked than I would if Gulbis did. And this is also true.

guille&tati4life
08-03-2008, 12:33 PM
Kiefer.

MILOS
08-03-2008, 03:33 PM
Isner,Haas,Hewitt,Kohlschreiber...

Action Jackson
08-03-2008, 03:40 PM
I know the seeds are there on merit but there is no way are there 32 favourites to win the event though.

Baghdatis (11) and Gonzalez (10) were two dark horses in 06 and 07 AO's.

And this is also true.

Doesn't matter if a player is among the top 32 seeds, then they aren't a darkhorse, the fact they are seeded eliminates that. Those 32 have more chance of winning than the other 96 players haven't they?

Gulbis will probably be seeded by the time the US Open.

I've already given clear examples of dark horse with the GS results this year and every Slam this year has had it.

cocrcici
08-03-2008, 03:44 PM
Horna

Manon
08-03-2008, 03:46 PM
I was waiting for this fellow to be mentioned here. :angel:

And maybe Karlovic.

Sexysova
08-03-2008, 04:18 PM
Gulbis, Cilic, Haas, Murray, Simon..

Masta_Rue
08-03-2008, 04:27 PM
Haas, Kiefer, Simon..

StevoTG
08-03-2008, 04:29 PM
Doesn't matter if a player is among the top 32 seeds, then they aren't a darkhorse, the fact they are seeded eliminates that.

I still disagree, as does the oxford dictionary which describes a dark horse as `` a competitor or candidate who has little chance of winning, or who wins against expectations`` - would you not agree that there are plenty of players among the 32 seeds who have little chance of winning when compared to the top 3?

Sexysova
08-03-2008, 07:09 PM
yes.. I forgot Kiefer, he's playing well :)

finishingmove
08-24-2008, 03:33 PM
Nishikori is playing Monaco, then the winner of Karanusic - Sweeting.

he could win some matches here...

i hope Troicki can make an impact as well...

Stefanos13
08-24-2008, 04:19 PM
Black Beauty

RagingLamb
08-24-2008, 04:26 PM
Black Beauty

a dark horse indeed

Rafa = Fed Killa
08-24-2008, 04:26 PM
I still disagree, as does the oxford dictionary which describes a dark horse as `` a competitor or candidate who has little chance of winning, or who wins against expectations`` - would you not agree that there are plenty of players among the 32 seeds who have little chance of winning when compared to the top 3?

Great logical answer.

PMK is Innocent (ie. "Nadal sucks on clay") has lost this argument.

The Freak
08-24-2008, 04:59 PM
Ryan Sweeting could win a few matches

The_Nadal_effect
08-24-2008, 05:02 PM
Somdev Devvarman :angel:

Tbh I think it's usually pretty pointless trying to guess which of the unseeded pack will come through and produce some surprising results as often it occurs with little or no preemption and therefore, at this stage, anyone could be the 'dark horse' come the US Open.

Yeah, but there is always some speculation anyways, at least based on form.

Back to topic, surprising how many feel that Murray is a dark horse. Seeded or unseeded, he is a favorite for the title, a shining Scottish stallion!:D

The dark horses are:

Gulbis, Safin, Simon, Del Potro...but I conjecture this purely based on form.

...OMG Forgot to add Nalbandian.

MacTheKnife
08-24-2008, 05:35 PM
I'll cover both bases. D-Pot seeded, Safin-Unseeded.

Machiavelli
08-24-2008, 05:37 PM
I would like to say Cilic, but he has a tough draw, first the french mug Bennetau and the a possible 3rd round clash against the Joker, would be a cracker....

I have high hopes for Murray, and Marat and JuanMartin also up there...

nastoff
08-24-2008, 05:40 PM
How does the choker Paul Henri Mathieu for the quarters or semis sound? for some bizarre reason I can't rule him out.
Blake and Nalbandian are in the way though.

Jaap
08-24-2008, 05:43 PM
Mugfils, Gulbis, Kiefer, Stepanek.........all could cause some damage.

The_Nadal_effect
08-24-2008, 05:49 PM
I forgot to add Nalbandian :bounce:

He's a horse, a stuffed horse...but horse nevertheless.

guille&tati4life
08-24-2008, 05:55 PM
Got to love the intelligentsia, the majority here wouldn't know dark horse, if it was horse and it happened to be black and it kicked them.

Dark horses are unseeded players.

So no Simon, Blake, Kiefer, Karlovic, Gonzalez.

Federer is because he is such a clown at the moment. For those who don't know the last statement was indeed in jest.

Dark horses are people who aren't at all expected to do something but do it. It's perfectly reasonable to call the players you name as dark horses for the title.

Tommy_Vercetti
08-24-2008, 05:58 PM
Dark horses don't win the U.S. Open. And that's a good thing. Unlike say golf, where they regularly have some unknown win a major and it kind of takes away from the sport. Like when Johansson or Korda won the Aussie or Gaudio and Costa at the French. I'd include Krajicek and Ivanisevic too. I'd rather see the best players win the Slams.

Machiavelli
08-24-2008, 06:19 PM
Like when Johansson or Korda won the Aussie or Gaudio and Costa at the French. I'd include Krajicek and Ivanisevic too. I'd rather see the best players win the Slams.

I disagree, the unexpected is something that makes this sportt great; gaudios run at the French was amazing, and Goran winning it out of nothing in such a style, that is true tennis...

oranges
08-24-2008, 06:23 PM
Dark horses don't win the U.S. Open. And that's a good thing. Unlike say golf, where they regularly have some unknown win a major and it kind of takes away from the sport. Like when Johansson or Korda won the Aussie or Gaudio and Costa at the French. I'd include Krajicek and Ivanisevic too. I'd rather see the best players win the Slams.

Marat winning in 2000 was expected?
If by the best man you mean the one with overall best results at the time, I certainly don't think it's good for the sport for them to win all the time. It's boring as hell and its preferable to have a number of players capable of stepping up on occasion and taking the title.

Tommy_Vercetti
08-24-2008, 06:25 PM
I disagree completely. Having people come out of nowhere to win the Slams takes away from the prestige in my eyes. I'd rather see the top players fighting it out in the finals. Let people like Gaudio win Vina del Mar.

Safin was playing incredible in 2000 at the time. He was in the top 10. Certainly, he wasn't expected to win, the same Kuerten wasn't in 1997, but they all proved that it wasn't a fluke like those I mentioned. Now if someone unexpected wins and then proves his worth, it's a good thing.

Machiavelli
08-24-2008, 06:30 PM
but they all proved that it wasn't a fluke like those I mentioned.

Goran was a fluke, a Top ten player for years, no.2 in the era of Pistole Pete, he should have won a couple of Wimbledon titles, but unfortunately after that horrifying loss against Agassi in his first final he did not, the way he won it 2001. will be rememberd by all true tennis fans forever.........

Gaudio was also a very nice story...

Tommy_Vercetti
08-24-2008, 06:37 PM
Yes, it was a fluke. Goran certainly earned it, but he wasn't a top player and won it because he had one good tournament at the time.

And I'm glad that Gaudio beat The Serpent, but it's still not good for tennis in my eyes.

Lleyt2Berate
08-24-2008, 06:44 PM
Dark horses don't win the U.S. Open. And that's a good thing. Unlike say golf, where they regularly have some unknown win a major and it kind of takes away from the sport. Like when Johansson or Korda won the Aussie or Gaudio and Costa at the French. I'd include Krajicek and Ivanisevic too. I'd rather see the best players win the Slams.

Dude, there's no way you can include Ivanisevic's run with those other clowns, and I'm not even an Ivanisevic fan (I was pulling for Rafter that day). One slam wonder is far too harsh an assessment for someone who had to put up with Sampras all those years. I mean, he's a three time Wimbledon finalist and for him to finally win it after being given a WC in what was likely his last time to even attempt is in no way bad for the sport. If anything, he proved his worth long before finally winning. Would you argue that if someone like Nalbandian was to buckle down and finally win the AO or the USO that it was a fluke?

Tommy_Vercetti
08-24-2008, 06:48 PM
Ivanisevic should have won a slam years before he did. Saying that because Pete was the man is no excuse. How many Wimbledon's would Roddick have without Roger?

He won it at the end of his career when he was no longer a top player. Since Wimbledon is supposed to be the most prestigious event in tennis, yes I think it's bad for the sport when an over the hill player wins it. I always liked Ivanisevic, he was one of the few players with some real personality, but I don't think his win was anything but a fluke and I'd rather have seen Rafter win.

~*BGT*~
08-24-2008, 06:48 PM
Ryan Sweeting could win a few matches

:rocker2:

Seeded: I'd say Gasquet. No one is talking about him all. He's been off for like 3 weeks and has had more rest and preparation that any of the seeded players. If he gets past Haas 1st round, I think he can go far.

Unseeded: I never count Llodra out on a fast surface.

Dark horses don't win the U.S. Open. And that's a good thing. Unlike say golf, where they regularly have some unknown win a major and it kind of takes away from the sport. Like when Johansson or Korda won the Aussie or Gaudio and Costa at the French. I'd include Krajicek and Ivanisevic too. I'd rather see the best players win the Slams.

You win the slam if you are the best player for those 2 weeks. :)

Jaap
08-24-2008, 06:49 PM
Federer might cause a shock and win a few matches.

finishingmove
08-24-2008, 06:56 PM
Federer might cause a shock and win a few matches.

ditto. up until stepanek

-Evita-
08-24-2008, 07:02 PM
Gulbis reached the 4th round here last year. I think this year he can go a step or two further.

seljanin
08-24-2008, 07:15 PM
Hmm.. not sure, whom to pick from the unseeded players. Took a quick glance over the draw, and don't think that any of them could make QF.

Gulbis reached the 4th round here last year. I think this year he can go a step or two further.

You're optimistic :yeah:

Dunno.. I kinda think that he won't defend his last year's points here.

shotgun
08-24-2008, 08:42 PM
From my understanding, there's a difference between a dark horse and a dangerous floater.

Dark horse = someone not among the top favourites that has a chance to win the whole thing.

Dangerous floater = an unseeded player with a good potential to reach the second week.

Geo
08-24-2008, 08:53 PM
I know it's already been mentioned, but I think Gublis has a great shot at knocking off Roddick and reaching week 2.

EnriqueIG8
08-25-2008, 02:11 AM
Cilic,Ginepri and Troicki.

Gulbis won't make if far because he is going to get knocked out by Ducky.

Snoo Foo
08-25-2008, 02:20 AM
Pablo Cuevas

flower14
08-25-2008, 03:29 AM
My dark horse Marat will come and rescue me of my years of misery of seeing him not win a single title in 4 years. :)

Action Jackson
08-25-2008, 03:34 AM
Ivanisevic should have won a slam years before he did. Saying that because Pete was the man is no excuse. How many Wimbledon's would Roddick have without Roger?

He won it at the end of his career when he was no longer a top player. Since Wimbledon is supposed to be the most prestigious event in tennis, yes I think it's bad for the sport when an over the hill player wins it. I always liked Ivanisevic, he was one of the few players with some real personality, but I don't think his win was anything but a fluke and I'd rather have seen Rafter win.

It's simple, the best player of the 2 weeks of that respective Slams deserves it, irrespective of what time of their career it is.

FiBeR
08-25-2008, 03:42 AM
You can't be a dark horse for a Slam and be one of the top 8 seeds.:retard:

unless you re talking about a Robredo for e.g. :p

helgagonzalez
08-25-2008, 04:38 AM
i'd say marat safin.
he is absolutely great on hard court.
he is in shape and has been playing really well.
Go Marat!!! :D

SheepleBuster
08-25-2008, 05:10 AM
My Dark Horse Is Federer. Nobody expects him to win or even reach the semis. I think if he gets on a run and Nadal loses, he can do it. Beating Djokovic is possible but after that Wimbledon-Frech KO, I don't think Roger can beat Rafa on any surface.

The_Nadal_effect
08-25-2008, 05:10 AM
Dude, there's no way you can include Ivanisevic's run with those other clowns, and I'm not even an Ivanisevic fan (I was pulling for Rafter that day). One slam wonder is far too harsh an assessment for someone who had to put up with Sampras all those years. I mean, he's a three time Wimbledon finalist and for him to finally win it after being given a WC in what was likely his last time to even attempt is in no way bad for the sport. If anything, he proved his worth long before finally winning. Would you argue that if someone like Nalbandian was to buckle down and finally win the AO or the USO that it was a fluke?

Well said. :worship:

crude oil
08-25-2008, 06:41 AM
i dont think there are any dark horses in this game today.

i mean murray is the one with an outside chance of winning it all but he is good enough to be considered one of the top contenders if the draw works out for him.

if berdman was in slightly better form, he could be considered esp since fed is not in great form. There are a lot of players who could become real factors in the draw because fed isn't in great form. Guys who would be bitch slapped by federer - roddick, blake, youzhny etc have good chances to go far. But as far as winning it all, you have to look at the big 3. This will be sure a super fascinating slam.

i dunno...maybe nalbandian. the guy is always a dark horse because of his talent.

marcelwks
09-13-2008, 09:51 AM
one of the qualifiers but I don't know the name yet :p

Gilles Muller was his name :D