Madrid has shown what a joke #s 3-10 is in the ATP [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Madrid has shown what a joke #s 3-10 is in the ATP

megadeth
10-19-2006, 04:33 PM
don't you think? :devil:

Pigpen Stinks
10-19-2006, 04:38 PM
Well, somebody's got to be ranked in those spots, and I'd rather be #4 than #14, even if I don't come close to comparing to the very top ranked players. I just think it speaks of the depth in men's tennis.

coreyschucky
10-19-2006, 04:41 PM
let me see:

#3 Ljubo - No words really, but Murray has the talent to certainly beat anyone and when on top of his game and believing in himself he can certainly beat the best.

#4 Nalby - Been an enigma all season. Ok results grinds his matches out somehow has a knack coming back when he looks finished. bad year in general for him. Not a good match against benneteau but was in-form and struggling versus an in-form Henman.

#5 Davydenko - Good all year. Nothing wrong with him. He ran into a guy who has an awesome serve. Had two mental lapses in which he got broken and caused his loss. Look at his results. Gets deep in almost every tourney.

#6 Roddick - Playing well and got injured nothing more you can say here. I hope he gets better.

#7 Blake - Hit the wall after playing alot of tourney's. Traditionally he's never done well in Madrid so losing to a player like Vliegen isn't terrible. Vliegen has shown some nice glimpses all year.

#8 Robredo - Been struggling for a bit and ran into Ginepri who's playing well at the moment. I see nothing wrong with his loss.

#9 Baggy - Lost to a hot Safin at the moment. Baggy hasn't been playing well but once again nothing wrong with the loss.

#10 Gonzo - Plays well consistently and he's still alive in the tourney.


**** In general I don't agree with what you're saying. Are #3-10 worse then years past probably but these guys lost to good players and not to journeymen.

supersexynadal
10-19-2006, 04:43 PM
Thats such a stupid reason to sa that theyre all jokes. Last time, people whined and complained abot the draw and possibilities of uncle toni playing around with the draw and now the draw is COMPLETLY fair so of course there will be upsets. Take a look at the second round matches.

At the moment, roger PLEAASSEE!!! :'(

adee-gee
10-19-2006, 04:47 PM
We all knew it already :shrug:

Beat
10-19-2006, 04:49 PM
can we just stop RIGHT NOW:mad:

Purple Rainbow
10-19-2006, 04:52 PM
Either that, or it shows that there is so much quality in the top 50 today that you can't afford a bad day anymore. :shrugs:

rofe
10-19-2006, 04:55 PM
Either that, or it shows that there is so much quality in the top 50 today that you can't afford a bad day anymore. :shrugs:

But the "weak era" theorists will always dismiss that line of reasoning however logical it may be...:rolleyes:

Purple Rainbow
10-19-2006, 05:17 PM
But the "weak era" theorists will always dismiss that line of reasoning however logical it may be...:rolleyes:

It's the last straw the Fed haters have.

BIGMARAT
10-19-2006, 05:18 PM
A joke??

Mens Tennis is so much exciying now as top 30 players can beat anyone at any given match, well except Roger.

ChinoRios4Ever
10-19-2006, 05:30 PM
in the ATP everybody can beat everybody right now

except.... roger and rafa (on clay)

Regenbogen
10-19-2006, 05:35 PM
in the ATP everybody can beat everybody right now

except.... roger and rafa (on clay)

yes, and I like it :D it's much more interesting than all the top players beating the lower ranked ones all the time

NYCtennisfan
10-19-2006, 05:56 PM
So when they lose, they are a joke, but when they win....it's what? Obviously they have won the most to be there in the 3-10 spots.

El Legenda
10-19-2006, 06:01 PM
3-10? well not just 3-10...

its 3-100000000... no one else is good to take over 3-10..

nobama
10-19-2006, 06:27 PM
Amazing, if there were no upsets people would be bitching that it's too boring, the same guys win all the time. Then when there are upsets people whine about the top 10-20 being weak. :rolleyes:

Norrage
10-19-2006, 06:34 PM
Well...I agree that it makes the tour less predictable when the favorites lose etc and actually make it more exciting...But why are the favorites (the top 15 players) always the ones that have early exits in the MAJOR tourneys and also fail to show up there? It just doesnt make sense. Bunch of retards in the top now lol. A top 10 player should not lose in the first round of a major/master...

ufokart
10-19-2006, 06:42 PM
A top 10 player should not lose in the first round of a major/master...

Sampras lost at least twice in the first round of Indian wells (against Mantilla and Ulihrach if i remember correctly).
And i'm not even counting his various loses in the first round of Montecarlo, Paris and Rome.

So, by your logic Sampras shouldn't be top 10.

its.like.that
10-19-2006, 06:45 PM
this a thread for :retard:s

Norrage
10-19-2006, 06:46 PM
Sampras lost at least twice in the first round of Indian wells (against Mantilla and Ulihrach if i remember correctly).
And i'm not even counting his various loses in the first round of Montecarlo, Paris and Rome.

So, by your logic Sampras shouldn't be top 10.

I don't take it as extreme as you are interpreting my post. If a player keeps losing in first rounds and never gets past quarterfinals in grand slams (or masters) he really doesnt belong in top 10 IMO....Sampras did win 14 grand slams to compensate for the few (over the course of his career) 1st round losses....

Sure Fed has lost in 1st rounds too...but he compensates by winning a master the week before his 1st round loss..

ufokart
10-19-2006, 06:49 PM
this a thread for :retard:s

I agree, it's boring to read the same stupid arguments against the top 10 again and again and again.

If a player wins matches then he wins points, if he wins points he goes up in the rankings, if he goes up in the ranking he might be in the top 10, and if you are in the top 10 is because you win matches. That's the way it is.

nobama
10-19-2006, 06:49 PM
I don't take it as extreme as you are interpreting my post. If a player keeps losing in first rounds and never gets past quarterfinals in grand slams (or masters) he really doesnt belong in top 10 IMO....Sampras did win 14 grand slams to compensate for the few (over the course of his career) 1st round losses....

Sure Fed has lost in 1st rounds too...but he compensates by winning a master the week before his 1st round loss..Well you know what, if players like Ljubicic, Blake, ect. keep doing that they will be out of the top 10. This isn't rocket science. Roddick fell to #11 at one point this year but then worked his way back up during the summer hard court season.

its.like.that
10-19-2006, 06:51 PM
don't you think? :devil:

I think you are a joke.

:retard:

ufokart
10-19-2006, 06:54 PM
I don't take it as extreme as you are interpreting my post. If a player keeps losing in first rounds and never gets past quarterfinals in grand slams (or masters) he really doesnt belong in top 10 IMO....Sampras did win 14 grand slams to compensate for the few (over the course of his career) 1st round losses....

Sure Fed has lost in 1st rounds too...but he compensates by winning a master the week before his 1st round loss..

If Federer wins almost everything big and Nadal pick up what's left of the masters and the grand slams then there isn't a lot of big things left for the rest of the field.
But from the hundreds of players not named federer nor Nadal the current top 10 are the ones who won the most and that's why they are in the top 10.
Who would you suggest then? maybe the real top 10 consists of Federer, Nadal, Clement, Popp, Gremelmeyer, Berlocq, Vinciguerra, Guccione, Labadze and Sabau :lol:

Pigpen Stinks
10-19-2006, 07:00 PM
Well...I agree that it makes the tour less predictable when the favorites lose etc and actually make it more exciting...But why are the favorites (the top 15 players) always the ones that have early exits in the MAJOR tourneys and also fail to show up there? It just doesnt make sense. Bunch of retards in the top now lol. A top 10 player should not lose in the first round of a major/master...

By my count, only 4 top 10 players lost in the first round at the majors this year. Gonzo in Australia. Roddick in France (hardly a surprise, plus he was hurt and retired). Davy at Wimbledon (big shock there). And Ljuby in NYC. I don't see the top players [I]always[I] making early exits in the majors.

Frooty_Bazooty
10-19-2006, 07:28 PM
I dont think its a coincidence that all 3 titleists from last week all went out in their first matches. You cant go into a MS unless you're fit and all 3 were obviously tired.

rofe
10-19-2006, 07:42 PM
Well...I agree that it makes the tour less predictable when the favorites lose etc and actually make it more exciting...But why are the favorites (the top 15 players) always the ones that have early exits in the MAJOR tourneys and also fail to show up there? It just doesnt make sense. Bunch of retards in the top now lol. A top 10 player should not lose in the first round of a major/master...

:scratch:

Norrage
10-19-2006, 07:47 PM
nvm then...everybody here seems too stupid to understand my post properly, and I cant be assed to make myself more clear -_-

ufokart
10-19-2006, 08:06 PM
nvm then...everybody here seems too stupid to understand my post properly, and I cant be assed to make myself more clear

Maybe people don't understand you because your argument doesn't make sense.

A top 10 player is not someone who wins slams and masters. A top 10 is someone who won enough in a year and has amassed a quantity of points that makes him be top 10.
If you are dissapointed that the rest of the top 10 don't win slams and masters, then say it, but don't say they don't belong in the top 10 because that's moronic :retard:

GlennMirnyi
10-19-2006, 08:08 PM
You're almost right.
#2 to 10 are jokes.

RickDaStick
10-19-2006, 08:10 PM
It's a joke that the #2 player in the world is a clay court specialist.

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-19-2006, 08:16 PM
It's a joke that the #2 player in the world is a clay court specialist.

He has won two hard court MS titles.

How many has Lluboho won?

RickDaStick
10-19-2006, 08:17 PM
He has won two hard court MS titles.

How many has Lluboho won?


LOL it's always Ljubo with you retards, get some help. Nadal being a clay court specialist has nothing to do with Ljubo.

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-19-2006, 08:23 PM
Go Lluboho the real #2...who has and never will win any tournament which matters (MS or GS)

r2473
10-19-2006, 08:29 PM
You're almost right.
#2 to 10 are jokes.

You're almost right. #1 to 10 are jokes. As are #11 to 537. 538 is not a joke, but it gets bad after that until you reach #943 (damn he is good). #944 to 1016 are all jokes, but there is real promise in #1017. After that, I am a little fuzzy, but I assume they are all jokes.

However, I have seen #27 play good on occasion and 47 is my lucky number, so he is probably good too.

guga2120
10-19-2006, 08:34 PM
yeah that Nadal really sucks.:scratch:

GlennMirnyi
10-19-2006, 08:40 PM
You're almost right. #1 to 10 are jokes. As are #11 to 537. 538 is not a joke, but it gets bad after that until you reach #943 (damn he is good). #944 to 1016 are all jokes, but there is real promise in #1017. After that, I am a little fuzzy, but I assume they are all jokes.

However, I have seen #27 play good on occasion and 47 is my lucky number, so he is probably good too.

HAHA!

No, you're not funny. Try again.

Balerion
10-19-2006, 09:20 PM
Tennis is a zero-sum game. That means that in every match, one player wins and one player loses. In an entire season of ATP and ITF matches, Grand Slams, Masters Series, regular ATPs, Challengers, Futures, Satellites and all the related qualifying tournaments, for every win there is a loss.

Why is it shocking that #3-10 lose? If they didn't, wouldn't they, by definition, be ranked even higher? There's a lot of talent out there and lower-ranked players will win because they really aren't that much worse than their opponents. If #3-10 are a joke, I feel bad for the other 1500 players ranked by the ATP. Boy do they really suck.

GlennMirnyi
10-19-2006, 09:26 PM
People think the ATP is like WTA, where players outside of the top 20 rarely win against the top 10...

DDrago2
10-19-2006, 09:53 PM
I'd say Federer is the only world-class player out there at the moment Some others are good, but not in his league

mongo
10-19-2006, 10:09 PM
let me see:

#3 Ljubo - No words really, but Murray has the talent to certainly beat anyone and when on top of his game and believing in himself he can certainly beat the best.

27 y/o, 6 titles*

#4 Nalby - Been an enigma all season. Ok results grinds his matches out somehow has a knack coming back when he looks finished. bad year in general for him. Not a good match against benneteau but was in-form and struggling versus an in-form Henman.

24 y/o, 5 titles

#5 Davydenko - Good all year. Nothing wrong with him. He ran into a guy who has an awesome serve. Had two mental lapses in which he got broken and caused his loss. Look at his results. Gets deep in almost every tourney.

25 y/o, 9 titles*

#6 Roddick - Playing well and got injured nothing more you can say here. I hope he gets better.

24 y/o, 21 titles, 1 slam

#7 Blake - Hit the wall after playing alot of tourney's. Traditionally he's never done well in Madrid so losing to a player like Vliegen isn't terrible. Vliegen has shown some nice glimpses all year.

26 y/o, 7 titles*

#8 Robredo - Been struggling for a bit and ran into Ginepri who's playing well at the moment. I see nothing wrong with his loss.

24 y/o, 4 titles

#9 Baggy - Lost to a hot Safin at the moment. Baggy hasn't been playing well but once again nothing wrong with the loss.

21 y/o, 1 title

#10 Gonzo - Plays well consistently and he's still alive in the tourney.

26 y/o, 7 titles*

**** In general I don't agree with what you're saying. Are #3-10 worse then years past probably but these guys lost to good players and not to journeymen.

*Improving with age like fine wine, or merely the beneficiaries of the (poor) state of men's tennis?

Roger may be the GOAT, but the fact is his peers will never approach the quality of generations past. Only Roddick's achievements standout, and many (myself included) have been throwing the guy under the bus. The fact that Roger is winning slams at an unprecedented rate in this era comes as no surprise to me.

KaxMisha
10-19-2006, 10:13 PM
You're almost right. #1 to 10 are jokes. As are #11 to 537. 538 is not a joke, but it gets bad after that until you reach #943 (damn he is good). #944 to 1016 are all jokes, but there is real promise in #1017. After that, I am a little fuzzy, but I assume they are all jokes.

However, I have seen #27 play good on occasion and 47 is my lucky number, so he is probably good too.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA! :haha: :haha: :haha:
After all the fighting with my girlfriend today, this really made my day! :D

KaxMisha
10-19-2006, 10:13 PM
HAHA!

No, you're not funny. Try again.

Actually, he was funny. :D

supersexynadal
10-19-2006, 10:26 PM
LOL it's always Ljubo with you retards, get some help. Nadal being a clay court specialist has nothing to do with Ljubo.


Its also a joke how "the clay court specialist" beat the "indoor hard court specialist" last year!!? And its also a joke how ljubo got whooped by nadal at the french semis! h and let me remind of the same run in the paris final:rolleyes:


3-10? well not just 3-10...

its 3-100000000... no one else is good to take over 3-10..

ou know, sometimes i wonder if some people here actually appreciate any players!!!This is the joke!
Its retarted how people try to sound smart and theoretical and analyze every players negative aspects (all of them are nagative of course:o ) when theres no convincing logic behind it.

+alonso
10-19-2006, 10:40 PM
You're almost right. #1 to 10 are jokes. As are #11 to 537. 538 is not a joke, but it gets bad after that until you reach #943 (damn he is good). #944 to 1016 are all jokes, but there is real promise in #1017. After that, I am a little fuzzy, but I assume they are all jokes.

However, I have seen #27 play good on occasion and 47 is my lucky number, so he is probably good too.
:rolls: :yeah: Good one!

General Suburbia
10-19-2006, 11:46 PM
Dumbass. It's either this, or have it just like women's tennis, where the top 15 players skate over everyone else 6-1, 6-0. Don't tell me that's what you really want.

yomike
10-20-2006, 07:50 AM
don't you think? :devil:

Oh Meredith, When God give out intelligence where were you hiding?

oz_boz
10-20-2006, 11:09 AM
let me see:

#3 Ljubo - No words really, but Murray has the talent to certainly beat anyone and when on top of his game and believing in himself he can certainly beat the best.

#4 Nalby - Been an enigma all season. Ok results grinds his matches out somehow has a knack coming back when he looks finished. bad year in general for him. Not a good match against benneteau but was in-form and struggling versus an in-form Henman.

#5 Davydenko - Good all year. Nothing wrong with him. He ran into a guy who has an awesome serve. Had two mental lapses in which he got broken and caused his loss. Look at his results. Gets deep in almost every tourney.

#6 Roddick - Playing well and got injured nothing more you can say here. I hope he gets better.

#7 Blake - Hit the wall after playing alot of tourney's. Traditionally he's never done well in Madrid so losing to a player like Vliegen isn't terrible. Vliegen has shown some nice glimpses all year.

#8 Robredo - Been struggling for a bit and ran into Ginepri who's playing well at the moment. I see nothing wrong with his loss.

#9 Baggy - Lost to a hot Safin at the moment. Baggy hasn't been playing well but once again nothing wrong with the loss.

#10 Gonzo - Plays well consistently and he's still alive in the tourney.


**** In general I don't agree with what you're saying. Are #3-10 worse then years past probably but these guys lost to good players and not to journeymen.

:yeah: