Disgusting article / voting by Eurosport [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Disgusting article / voting by Eurosport

Stefanos13
05-02-2009, 08:52 AM
I was appaled when I saw this on the Eurosport website:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/01052009/58/view-worst-men-s-number.html

The article:

Your view: Worst men's number one
Eurosport - Fri, 01 May 23:15:00 2009
Eurosport Yahoo! readers are struggling to decide between Juan Carlos Ferrero and Marcelo Rios for the title of worst world number one in men's tennis, according to our latest poll.

Rios is the only player in the open era to have held the world number one ranking despite never having won a Grand Slam. The closest the Chilean came was reaching the Australian Open final in 1998, when he was beaten by Czech Petr Korda. Rios took over the top spot in the rankings on March 30 of that year before being deposed just four weeks later, although he did manage another two weeks at number one in August of the same year. Spaniard Ferrero, however, held the world number one ranking for a total of eight weeks shortly after winning his only Grand Slam title, at Roland Garros in 2003, incidentally the site of Rios's final ATP Tour match.


My thoughts:
Is this their way of getting more people to subscribe to their website? If it is, the marketing department must be a bunch of clueless tennis 'specialists'. Or is it simply another small piece of evidence that tennis is not for everyone?

Furious about the article, I had to create a thread

adee-gee
05-02-2009, 08:55 AM
Federer imo.

Nathaliia
05-02-2009, 08:57 AM
The Eurosport suckers would like to have 1% of Rios' charisma.

scoobs
05-02-2009, 09:00 AM
This is appalling...why?

Sunset of Age
05-02-2009, 09:03 AM
I wouldn't call it 'appaling', but surely disrespectful to the mentioned players! :(

scoobs
05-02-2009, 09:08 AM
I wouldn't call it 'appaling', but surely disrespectful to the mentioned players! :(
That much I'll grant you.

However it's no worse than you see on any tennis message board.

There's an op-ed on tennis.com on much the same subject.

Discussing the relative merits of the #1s of the past is hardly a new development.

Bazooka
05-02-2009, 09:10 AM
Quality stuff.

Sometimes I am glad tennis is not a mass sport like soccer, but Fed and Rafa have gained so much attention that we better get used to this kind of shit. This is regular in soccer at least, I really can't watch a match without hitting the mute button.

Ozon
05-02-2009, 10:38 AM
from the website:

Jim Courier: 8 per cent

Juan Carlos Ferrero: 29 per cent

Yevgeny Kafelnikov: 12 per cent

Thomas Munster: 11 per cent :devil:

John Newcombe: 11 per cent

Marcelo Rios: 29 per cent

Nacho
05-02-2009, 10:42 AM
moya was much worse than juanqui, he was number 1 for just 2 weeks :shrug:

JCF won more GS matches than anyone that year, so he totally deserved it

FairWeatherFan
05-02-2009, 10:46 AM
Surprised that Rafter did not make the list Ozon posted. He certainly deserves to be ahead of Courier, Newcombe and (more arguably) Kafelnikov.

Ivanatis
05-02-2009, 10:47 AM
I wouldn't call it disgusting. Yeah, it's a bit disrespectful to the players mentioned, but I'm pretty sure Rios and JCF know they are/were no Laver or Federer and won't care anyway, so...

btw. If you find sth. disgusting, the appropriate reaction is not further distribution, but ignorance.

GlennMirnyi
05-02-2009, 10:49 AM
Nadull, of course.

Why is there even a poll?

GlennMirnyi
05-02-2009, 10:54 AM
Surprised that Rafter did not make the list Ozon posted. He certainly deserves to be ahead of Courier, Newcombe and (more arguably) Kafelnikov.

Are you freaking crazy?

thrust
05-02-2009, 11:02 AM
I agree about Ferrero as the weakest number one but I don't agree about Rios,he was a very talented player .

What good is great talent if it is wasted? Rios was an underachiever, primarily due to his negative personality. It is absurd that Newcombe-with 5 or 6 Slams and Courier-with 4 Slams are even on this list.

FairWeatherFan
05-02-2009, 11:03 AM
Are you freaking crazy?

For me, Rafter is subjectively a better player than Courier and Kafelnikov because he is one of the last true classic tennis players (though not over Newcombe in this regard). However, no doubt, on a purely results-basis these players were superior to him (though more arguable for Kafelnikov). You will not find anyone more biased to Rafter than myself.

rtgy
05-02-2009, 11:23 AM
Your view: Worst men's number one
Eurosport - Fri, 01 May 23:15:00 2009
Eurosport Yahoo! readers are struggling to decide between Juan Carlos Ferrero and Marcelo Rios for the title of worst world number one in men's tennis, according to our latest poll.

Rios is the only player in the open era to have held the world number one ranking despite never having won a Grand Slam. The closest the Chilean came was reaching the Australian Open final in 1998, when he was beaten by Czech Petr Korda. Rios took over the top spot in the rankings on March 30 of that year before being deposed just four weeks later, although he did manage another two weeks at number one in August of the same year. Spaniard Ferrero, however, held the world number one ranking for a total of eight weeks shortly after winning his only Grand Slam title, at Roland Garros in 2003, incidentally the site of Rios's final ATP Tour match.


that's disgusting, outrageous and highly disrespectful..................................... .:mad::o



My thoughts:
Is this their way of getting more people to subscribe to their website? If it is, the marketing department must be a bunch of clueless tennis 'specialists'. Or is it simply another small piece of evidence that tennis is not for everyone?


true!!! ;)

Furious about the article, I had to create a thread

respect mate:worship::worship::worship:


The Eurosport suckers would like to have 1% of Rios' charisma.

:rocker:

Certinfy
05-02-2009, 11:33 AM
Clearly EuroSport are jealous of Juan Carlos Ferrero and Marcelo Rios

CmonAussie
05-02-2009, 11:48 AM
from the website:

Jim Courier: 8 per cent

Juan Carlos Ferrero: 29 per cent

Yevgeny Kafelnikov: 12 per cent

Thomas Munster: 11 per cent :devil:

John Newcombe: 11 per cent

Marcelo Rios: 29 per cent

....
What`s this s..t:eek:
<>
How can people be so ignorant:confused::confused::sad:
~~
Newcombe won 7 slams [3 Wimby, 2 USO, 2 AO], how could anyone say he was a `weak #1`:confused::eek::confused:

Jōris
05-02-2009, 01:38 PM
Didn't think anyone but a nursery student could think the poll is meant to be a knock. Someone is going to be the worst, and that someone is Ferrero (omg imo btw).

bobbynorwich
05-02-2009, 02:22 PM
An elite group, only 24 men have reached the number 1 ranking in the Open Era (since 1973). Better to be the worst in that group than among the thousands who never made it.

:shrug:

asmazif
05-02-2009, 02:27 PM
Surprised that Rafter did not make the list Ozon posted. He certainly deserves to be ahead of Courier, Newcombe and (more arguably) Kafelnikov.

wtf? No way.

BaselineSmash
05-03-2009, 01:54 AM
Surprised that Rafter did not make the list Ozon posted. He certainly deserves to be ahead of Courier, Newcombe and (more arguably) Kafelnikov.

Rafter>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kafelnikov.

For one thing, Rafter could actually hold his own with Sampras, unlike Kafelnikov who other than some distinguished clay wins never even tried to believe he could take out Pete.

andreevforehand
05-03-2009, 05:58 AM
An elite group, only 24 men have reached the number 1 ranking in the Open Era (since 1973). Better to be the worst in that group than among the thousands who never made it.

:shrug:

Exactly, so there's nothing wrong with the idea behind this poll, just some of the selections. So if someone is justly selected as the winner, they really shouldn't be offended, and if they are it doesn't matter, because they're still way richer and more famous than 99% of us.

For accuracy the article at tennis.com is much better. Obviously Moya and maybe Rafter should be on this list and Newcombe and Courier nowhere near it. I wonder if it's purely coincidental that both Moya and Rafter have some of the nicest personalities in the game recently, so maybe that's why they've left them off the list. I personally like both of them, but a list like this isn't about liking someone.

Ferrero Forever
05-03-2009, 06:01 AM
Hahahahaha! Idiots.

Auscon
05-03-2009, 07:31 AM
silly article, not really disgusting...fairly sure that topic of discussion has been given a good run on mtf many a time too

We all know every one of them were great players in their own right, what does it matter?

CescAndyKimi
05-03-2009, 08:14 AM
Quality stuff.

Sometimes I am glad tennis is not a mass sport like soccer, but Fed and Rafa have gained so much attention that we better get used to this kind of shit. This is regular in soccer at least, I really can't watch a match without hitting the mute button.

What the fuck is soccer? It's FOOTBALL you turd.

Stefanos13
05-03-2009, 08:21 AM
Quality stuff.

Sometimes I am glad tennis is not a mass sport like soccer, but Fed and Rafa have gained so much attention that we better get used to this kind of shit. This is regular in soccer at least, I really can't watch a match without hitting the mute button.

You are right; soccer has been attracting that kind of tabloid / trolling journalism to generate interest. And I'm glad the Eurosport/uk article is getting so many complaints. Hopefully its so called tennis writers will get the message.

Certinfy
05-03-2009, 09:23 AM
What the fuck is soccer? It's FOOTBALL you turd.
xD... But i agree it's "Football" not "Soccer"

W!MBLEDON
05-03-2009, 09:27 AM
nadal by far

he is an e. terrible number one

FairWeatherFan
05-03-2009, 10:53 AM
Rafter>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>Kafelnikov.

For one thing, Rafter could actually hold his own with Sampras, unlike Kafelnikov who other than some distinguished clay wins never even tried to believe he could take out Pete.

You exaggerate. They were both Sampras' pigeons though Rafter had a good streak of wins against The Man in 1998. Kafelnikov had more weeks at number 1, a longer period of top-flight play (of course not forgetting Rafter's injuries), more singles titles (though no masters series), Olympic Gold and the Davis Cup. The difference between the two is very tight.

Byrd
05-03-2009, 11:55 AM
Why isn't Bamos on this list?

tangerine_dream
05-03-2009, 03:35 PM
I don't see anything disgusting about the truth. :shrug: Even tennis.com named Rios as the worst number one.

Viewpoint: The Weakest No. 1s in History

http://www.tennis.com/features/general/features.aspx?id=172144

1. Marcelo Rios
2. Carlos Moya
3. Thomas Muster
4. Juan Carlos Ferrero
5. Yevgeny Kafelnikov

Pathetic to see that all the weakest women's number ones came from this generation, shows just how bad women's tennis has gotten. :o

Mauresmo, Clijsters, Ivanovic, Jankovic, Safina.

lurker
05-03-2009, 03:46 PM
I would not call Mauresmo (two slams including Wimbledon!) weak! Nor Clijsters, who was number 1 for many weeks, dominant on hard courts and US Open Champion, less than a year after coming back from outside the top 100 due to injury. The other three are pathetic.

As for the guys, well, Rios does sound a bit weak. But I'd put Moya right in with him, and I like Moya. I guess the polls forgot him cause he was only number one briefly. But any ATP player who made it to number one for however long or short whether winning a GS or not is pretty significant in my book. ATP is a lot tougher than WTA.

Sapeod
05-03-2009, 04:08 PM
Roddick isn't mentioned? :confused: :lol: Well I guess he did reach a lot of grand slam semis and finals :)

tangerine_dream
05-03-2009, 04:10 PM
I would not call Mauresmo (two slams including Wimbledon!) weak!
At the time she ascended number one she hadn't won any slams yet. I think she was the first women's world number one to have that dubious honor.

lurker
05-03-2009, 04:27 PM
At the time she ascended number one she hadn't won any slams yet. I think she was the first women's world number one to have that dubious honor.

Saddly, though, I think it was Clijsters who did that before Mauresmo did. Both both women made good on their ranking eventually.