blake with 5 titles might not even qualify for shanghai [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

blake with 5 titles might not even qualify for shanghai

megadeth
11-02-2006, 08:45 PM
from an outisder's point of view, it may seem weird. here's a man who's tied to the world no.2 in # of titles for the year and is only second to roger who has 11 titles. yet, his chances to shanghai are in trouble if ancic gets to to the semis or haas wins the title.

just a thought...

RaVeR
11-02-2006, 08:46 PM
he won mickey mouse tournaments..he dont deserve!

Deboogle!.
11-02-2006, 08:46 PM
Well, look at his results in required events and you'll see the explanation.

Jlee
11-02-2006, 08:47 PM
It's because he doesn't perform well when under pressure. ie: at events that really matter.

Katastrophe
11-02-2006, 08:48 PM
Unfortunate really, and I like James a lot. He had to be proactive and win, assuring his own destiny though. Having to rely on outside circumstances and/other players losing will get you burned. I hoped to see him in Shanghai, but now his chances are not looking so good...

croat123
11-02-2006, 08:49 PM
and has five 0s in his ranking and still has a chance to overtake blake
just shows the differerence in quality of results

jayjay
11-02-2006, 08:51 PM
from an outisder's point of view, it may seem weird. here's a man who's tied to the world no.2 in # of titles for the year and is only second to roger who has 11 titles. yet, his chances to shanghai are in trouble if ancic gets to to the semis or haas wins the title.

just a thought...

It's all very well saying he won 5 titles...it would be better to clarify what those titles were. None were slams, none were Masters events.

His performance in the 4 slams and 9 masters events were nothing to shout about. A QF at the USO. And a F at IW. Other than that he's done alot of nothing, if Ancic wins tomorrow he overtakes him, and this despite the fact Ancic missed a Slam and 2 Masters through injury.

The Champions Race doesn't lie, if you are in the top 8 by the end, you deserve to be. If you're not (bar injury) then you don't have a case. Simple as that.

tennisgal_001
11-02-2006, 08:55 PM
Just goes to show you it's the big ones that really matter.
James coud get knocked off by Ancic who skipped the entire US hard-court season and the USO', and won 2 titles only.

Jlee
11-02-2006, 08:57 PM
It's especially sad for James that Roddick has had the worst year ever and Blake his best, but this is where they stand at the end. Anyone who's willing to say that Blake is better has only to look at this year's results...

Adler
11-02-2006, 09:00 PM
He doesn't do well in big tournaments. Look at MS events : Indian Wells final and...? At the US Open he played terrible in early rounds, but he had a good draw. No matter if he qualifies or not, Blake's story proves that MM tournaments won't give you much; it's just a nice cherry on top of the cake

croat123
11-02-2006, 09:01 PM
It's especially sad for James that Roddick has had the worst year ever and Blake his best, but this is where they stand at the end. Anyone who's willing to say that Blake is better has only to look at this year's results...
blake has actually beaten top10 players this year

tennisgal_001
11-02-2006, 09:01 PM
It's especially sad for James that Roddick has had the worst year ever and Blake his best, but this is where they stand at the end. Anyone who's willing to say that Blake is better has only to look at this year's results...

I agree. It's rather pathetic. Roddick hasn't done much this year, while Blake's been consistent throughout. And who gets the prize?

Jlee
11-02-2006, 09:03 PM
blake has actually beaten top10 players this year

But does it matter? Look at the way the points are falling...it's easy to see who is the better player. And I'm not talking about talent only, I'm talking about heart. Doesn't matter if James is 10 times more talented than Roddick if he doesn't have the heart.

Adler
11-02-2006, 09:04 PM
It's especially sad for James that Roddick has had the worst year ever and Blake his best, but this is where they stand at the end. Anyone who's willing to say that Blake is better has only to look at this year's results...
Maybe you just caught the difference between a good player and a very good player? (I don't want to start the "if" discussion)

Rafa = Fed Killa
11-02-2006, 09:08 PM
5 crappy titles mean nothing.

Ask Luboho, he has a lot of crap but nothing important.

lorenz
11-02-2006, 09:09 PM
Last year Gaston Gaudio won 5 or 6 dummies tournaments, and he didn't qualify. He entered de TMS because everybody was injured.
remember

Wannabeknowitall
11-02-2006, 09:10 PM
I agree. It's rather pathetic. Roddick hasn't done much this year, while Blake's been consistent throughout. And who gets the prize?

Andy. Andy made the final of the US Open. Andy won a Masters Series tournament this year.
Blake has done neither.
Blake's hiccup in the two Master Series tournis in the summer and him not defending New Haven really might cost him.
He's not as consistent as you believe him to be.

Jlee
11-02-2006, 09:15 PM
Andy. Andy made the final of the US Open. Andy won a Masters Series tournament this year.
Blake has done neither.
Blake's hiccup in the two Master Series tournis in the summer and him not defending New Haven really might cost him.
He's not as consistent as you believe him to be.

Yes, Andy's results during his resurgance were better than Blake's during that time, but you can't say that Blake has had a less consistent year than Roddick. This just proves the point that Roddick is better, having played well for a short amount of time and beating Blake who had a whole year of overall consistency.

Maybe you just caught the difference between a good player and a very good player? (I don't want to start the "if" discussion)

Yes, I believe so.

Deboogle!.
11-02-2006, 09:22 PM
But does it matter? Look at the way the points are falling...it's easy to see who is the better player. And I'm not talking about talent only, I'm talking about heart. Doesn't matter if James is 10 times more talented than Roddick if he doesn't have the heart.I for one am sick of the talent discussion. Because "talent" in terms of actual ability to hit the ball is only about half the battle. Look at Roger. He always had the talent, but not until he put his head together did he do great things. The head and the heart and the fighting spirit is a much bigger aspect of this game than people seem to realize. They just say "oh so and so doesn't deserve this because they have no talent" but really, the head and heart and fighting spirit and all those things must be taken into account. James may have all the talent in the world, but you're right, he has very little heart (see: Wimbledon 2006, AO 2006, etc. etc. etc.). Or look at Mardy Fish, probably the most talented active American player, but he has the worst head of them all and so he'll probably always be a journeyman.

5 years ago, if you had told me James was gonna be a top 10 player, I probably would've laughed. Maybe he has reached his pinnacle and he's just not meant to win those big titles or whatever. Who knows, those esoteric type things are hard to discuss. But saying James is "so talented" is egregiously ignoring the fact that he's maybe not talented in those mental aspects. I don't understand why being mentally strong and being a big fighter and having great heart are not also considered talents. After all a person is either like that or they're not, it's an innate and instinctive quality and I think it's just as much a talent as someone who can serve hard or hit a great dropshot or whatever. :shrug:

Jlee
11-02-2006, 09:25 PM
I for one am sick of the talent discussion. Because "talent" in terms of actual ability to hit the ball is only about half the battle. Look at Roger. He always had the talent, but not until he put his head together did he do great things. The head and the heart and the fighting spirit is a much bigger aspect of this game than people seem to realize. They just say "oh so and so doesn't deserve this because they have no talent" but really, the head and heart and fighting spirit and all those things must be taken into account. James may have all the talent in the world, but you're right, he has very little heart (see: Wimbledon 2006, AO 2006, etc. etc. etc.). Or look at Mardy Fish, probably the most talented active American player, but he has the worst head of them all and so he'll probably always be a journeyman.

5 years ago, if you had told me James was gonna be a top 10 player, I probably would've laughed. Maybe he has reached his pinnacle and he's just not meant to win those big titles or whatever. Who knows, those esoteric type things are hard to discuss. But saying James is ignoring the fact that he's maybe not talented in those mental aspects. I don't understand why being mentally strong and being a big fighter and having great heart are not also considered talents. After all a person is either like that or they're not, it's an innate and instinctive quality and I think it's just as much a talent as someone who can serve hard or hit a great dropshot or whatever. :shrug:

Thank you, that's what I was trying to say. :)

"The seeds of greatness germinate in the head and the heart, and technique and talent are their light and water, not their soil."
:p

DrJules
11-02-2006, 09:26 PM
Last year Gaston Gaudio won 5 or 6 dummies tournaments, and he didn't qualify. He entered de TMS because everybody was injured.
remember

And his presence in Shanghai last year is better forgotten and he would probably like to forget he was ever in the event himself. He was very unfortunate to qualify.

That tennis kid
11-02-2006, 09:27 PM
Blake progress further than Roddick in only one slam - Roland Garros - and even there it was only by one round.

Ancic won two titles and made three finals so he also picked up a lot from optionals. Should Ancic fail to make Shanghai it will be down to his injury. Should Blake fail to make Shanghai it will be down to his inability to consistently perform well in bigger tournaments this year.

Deboogle!.
11-02-2006, 09:27 PM
Thank you, that's what I was trying to say. :)

"The seeds of greatness germinate in the head and the heart, and technique and talent are their light and water, not their soil."
:pohhhh great quote :)

ExcaliburII
11-02-2006, 09:31 PM
the same as ljubicic, the only difference is that he made Qf and Sf at two Gs

Wannabeknowitall
11-02-2006, 09:37 PM
Thank you, that's what I was trying to say. :)

"The seeds of greatness germinate in the head and the heart, and technique and talent are their light and water, not their soil."
:p

As Pam Shriver said this year at Wimbledon, "Federer, Safin, Venus, Serena, Justine, these are the real fighters on tour. Blake is not one of them."

That tennis kid
11-02-2006, 09:45 PM
As Pam Shriver said this year at Wimbledon, "Federer, Safin, Venus, Serena, Justine, these are the real fighters on tour. Blake is not one of them."

Safin is a questionable example from Shriver. Far too prone to imploding, becoming disinterested or tanking.
Blake's 0-9 fifth set record isn't the sign of someone possessing great mental strength or fighting qualities.

jayjay
11-02-2006, 09:49 PM
And his presence in Shanghai last year is better forgotten and he would probably like to forget he was ever in the event himself. He was very unfortunate to qualify.

Why's that? He won 2 matches (inc. a good match v Gonzalez) to make the SF's. It's not his problem that others pulled out, and being thrashed by Federer is something many of the top 20 have had to experience.

jayjay
11-02-2006, 09:51 PM
Blake progress further than Roddick in only one slam - Roland Garros - and even there it was only by one round.

Ancic won two titles and made three finals so he also picked up a lot from optionals. Should Ancic fail to make Shanghai it will be down to his injury. Should Blake fail to make Shanghai it will be down to his inability to consistently perform well in bigger tournaments this year.

Exactly.

tangerine_dream
11-02-2006, 09:51 PM
I for one am sick of the talent discussion. Because "talent" in terms of actual ability to hit the ball is only about half the battle. Look at Roger. He always had the talent, but not until he put his head together did he do great things. The head and the heart and the fighting spirit is a much bigger aspect of this game than people seem to realize. They just say "oh so and so doesn't deserve this because they have no talent" but really, the head and heart and fighting spirit and all those things must be taken into account. James may have all the talent in the world, but you're right, he has very little heart (see: Wimbledon 2006, AO 2006, etc. etc. etc.). Or look at Mardy Fish, probably the most talented active American player, but he has the worst head of them all and so he'll probably always be a journeyman.

5 years ago, if you had told me James was gonna be a top 10 player, I probably would've laughed. Maybe he has reached his pinnacle and he's just not meant to win those big titles or whatever. Who knows, those esoteric type things are hard to discuss. But saying James is "so talented" is egregiously ignoring the fact that he's maybe not talented in those mental aspects. I don't understand why being mentally strong and being a big fighter and having great heart are not also considered talents. After all a person is either like that or they're not, it's an innate and instinctive quality and I think it's just as much a talent as someone who can serve hard or hit a great dropshot or whatever. :shrug:
I already good-repped you. Here's an imaginary one. :kiss:

Wannabeknowitall
11-02-2006, 09:51 PM
Safin is a questionable example from Shriver. Far too prone to imploding, becoming disinterested or tanking.
Blake's 0-9 fifth set record isn't the sign of someone possessing great mental strength or fighting qualities.

Serena seems for the most part disinterested but it didn't stop her from winning the Australian Open in 2005 overweight.
Safin does seem disinterested at times as well but he was down a match point to Federer.
That's enough fight in most people's books.

That tennis kid
11-02-2006, 09:56 PM
Serena seems for the most part disinterested but it didn't stop her from winning the Australian Open in 2005 overweight.
Safin does seem disinterested at times as well but he was down a match point to Federer.
That's enough fight in most people's books.

I think he was once fined for tanking at match at the Australian Open. Though, to his credit, his record in fifth sets is impressive.

Rogiman
11-02-2006, 10:15 PM
Why's that? He won 2 matches (inc. a good match v Gonzalez) to make the SF's. It's not his problem that others pulled out, and being thrashed by Federer is something many of the top 20 have had to experience.No. He lost a match 6-0 6-0, that's an altogether different story from losing, say, 6-3 6-2.

The guy disgraced the TMC, a tournament in which every match is supposed to be like a SF or a final of a Slam, he got double-bageled in no time, and any excuse about either the opponent or the surface is just unacceptable.

TennisAgenda
11-02-2006, 10:37 PM
As expected James Blake lost when he needed to win the most. But given Blake's poor record in European Masters events the final result should of been no surprise. I don't get how Blake fans can call a man a factor when he's never advanced beyond the quaterfinals of a grand slam. And he's never ever reached the semifinals or finals of a European Masters Event. And he's only reached the quaters of a European Masters event once. Blake just crumbles under the pressure and this is why Davydenko and Robredo are in the Masters Cup and he's not. Some may say Blake is a better player then those two but Davydenko and Robredo are more consistent and they play better and get the big results in the Masters Events.

Deboogle!.
11-02-2006, 10:41 PM
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=89720

TennisAgenda
11-02-2006, 10:41 PM
If you look at Blake's record the five titles are an illusion they are all smaller events. Blake has done horrible in the Masters events in EUROPE. And Blake has a horrible record in grand slams he's always finding a way to lose in the third round. Blake has only been past the third round outside of America at the Australian Open. Blake has failed to deliver in crunch times just like he did against Kristoff Vligien in Madrid. Blake served for the match and choked and crumbled as usual. At the Hamburg Masters Blake served for the match against Mario Ancic TWICE. Blake had a big lead in the second set couldn't close it out. In the third set Blake served for the match again and he FAILED. So Blake has no one to blame but himself. I've said it before I don't like Blake's serve he serves with a Locked WRIST. He's not accelerating when he hits the serve and that robs him of more power.

gogogirl
11-02-2006, 11:43 PM
All,

If James doesn't qualify - then it was not meant to be. It really is that simple. It's not the end of the road or world for him - or any of the others that didn't qualify.

The bottom line is - he is still improving. Yes - he has messed up during some matches - but that is why they play the game - to improve and start achieving more than they had before - and to play better in pressure situations than ever before. And for all of the times he messed up when losing 23 times - he won like 56. Not so bad for a complete inept tennis player. His record is better than most. He just has to plan on achieving some things next year that he wasn't able to this one.

How many years was it before Roger started improving? Every player improves at said player's own pace/rate. I am not even worried about James because he improved on some things this year - and hopefully - he will continue. Players might as well quit the game if they don't feel they can improve.

And there is no way Blake's five titles are an illusion. What in the treetops? He beat some good players to win them and he got paid doing it. He was the last one standing five times, so he deserves whatever reward came with the achievement, and it matters not how small they were. Plus - he almost made $1.5m this year. Wow! Isn't that one of the reasons they play - to win money? He is eigth on the money list. Better than last year - indeed.

TennisAgenda
11-03-2006, 12:07 AM
I never said Blake had no talent just saying he's not as good as the American media and tennis fans are lead to believe. Tommy Robredo and Nicholy Davydenko are better then Blake yet they are ignored because they are not black and they are not attractive. Part of Blake's appeal is because he's African American. The ATP marketing department and the USTA make sure they use Blake in publicity because he's supposed to be the symbol of diversity. But Blake is no Arhur Ashe and people need to realize this. Blake is just not good enough. He's good but he's not special he doesn't have that superstar talent or quality. He' superstar and he'll never be in the same league as even Safin. Blake's issues are more complex then results. For starters even when Blake was the no.1 American this year he still said that Roddick was the no.1 American. I mean talk about someone with low self esteem and confidence.

gogogirl
11-03-2006, 12:18 AM
All,

James' record against the toppers below. Federer is the only one that he hasn't beaten that used to have his number. I luv it when a player finally beats a player they never had before. I was happy for Tommy today - because over all - he deserved his win.

3-1 Robredo
4-0 Davydenko
0-5 Federer
2-0 Nadal
0-0 Nalbandian
1-2 Ancic
2-6 Roddick
3-1 Haas
1-4 Ljubicic

So truly it is only a matter of personal preference when one says - who would make the Masters Cup a snooze. And let's not forget that while being consistent is a key - not everyone can be consistent all of the time - because if they were - it would mean that by doing so - they would win their every match - and we know that'll never happen.

So what is the reason a consistent player loses? Didn't Davy - Blake and Lubi lose first round in Madrid? What had happened? So much for consistency. Sometimes it's about a player being on like Tommy was today - and it was all working for him.

Anyhoops - we shall see said the know it alls.

Corey Feldman
11-03-2006, 12:23 AM
Oh.. i forget Blake was a Rafa=Killa.

cmon James son! Qualify!!!

Ernham
11-03-2006, 01:04 AM
Blake is weak versus big, consistent servers. Good foot speed but slow reflexes.

CmonAussie
11-03-2006, 01:58 AM
Andy. Andy made the final of the US Open. Andy won a Masters Series tournament this year.
Blake has done neither.
Blake's hiccup in the two Master Series tournis in the summer and him not defending New Haven really might cost him.
He's not as consistent as you believe him to be.
:wavey:
:eek: ~~ Sorry but you are another one who has failed to understand the ranking system;) ...

Blake won 5-tournaments that were unrequired events [aka MM titles]

Blake also made the final at another unrequired event [Queens]~>> since only five result outside of required events count towards his ranking then those points he won at Queens meant nothing:p

If he had won New Haven [unrequired event] then his current points total would be exactly the same;) ...WHY~>> because again only 5-non optional events count:cool: ... When Blake won Stockholm his points total didn`t change much at all ~>> since his finalist points from Queens dropped off & were replaced with the winners points from Stockholm.. The finalist from Queens gets 160-points, while the winner from Stockholm gets 175-points --== a difference of just 15-points;) !! In terms of what it did for Blake`s ranking the Stockholm win probably cost him points~~ since he was tired when he got to Madrid>> if he had won one match at Madrid TMS then he would have effectively got more points than that which he gained for winning Stockholm:p


PS, I can see why your name is WANNABEKNOWITALL ~>> since you clearly don`t.. How about the name DONTKNOWHOWTHERANKINGSWORKATALL..??

Merton
11-03-2006, 03:00 AM
One could very well make the case that James over-achieved this year, his game has the least margin for error among the top players, yet he won 5 titles and did very well in the spring AMS tournaments. For example, he will almost always go for return winners regardless of how the opponent is serving. He will finish the year in the top-10, if he makes it to the TMC then he desrves it, if not then he was not good enough.

I for one am sick of the talent discussion. Because "talent" in terms of actual ability to hit the ball is only about half the battle. Look at Roger. He always had the talent, but not until he put his head together did he do great things. The head and the heart and the fighting spirit is a much bigger aspect of this game than people seem to realize. They just say "oh so and so doesn't deserve this because they have no talent" but really, the head and heart and fighting spirit and all those things must be taken into account. James may have all the talent in the world, but you're right, he has very little heart (see: Wimbledon 2006, AO 2006, etc. etc. etc.). Or look at Mardy Fish, probably the most talented active American player, but he has the worst head of them all and so he'll probably always be a journeyman.

5 years ago, if you had told me James was gonna be a top 10 player, I probably would've laughed. Maybe he has reached his pinnacle and he's just not meant to win those big titles or whatever. Who knows, those esoteric type things are hard to discuss. But saying James is "so talented" is egregiously ignoring the fact that he's maybe not talented in those mental aspects. I don't understand why being mentally strong and being a big fighter and having great heart are not also considered talents. After all a person is either like that or they're not, it's an innate and instinctive quality and I think it's just as much a talent as someone who can serve hard or hit a great dropshot or whatever. :shrug:

Great post Milady.:worship:

Deboogle!.
11-03-2006, 03:26 AM
For example, he will almost always go for return winners regardless OMG, I KNOW. This is the one thing about him that bothers me the most......arrrrrgggggggghhhhh :banghead:Great post Milady.:worship:why thank you, kind sir!:hatoff::D

Experimentee
11-03-2006, 04:38 AM
I think Blake would have progressed further at the US Open if he hadnt had to play Roger so early. It could well have been Roddick who had to play Roger in the QF, then we might be having this discussion about Roddick possibly not qualifying.
5 titles is a good achievement no matter what titles they are. No one except Roger and Rafa have really been able to win Slams and TMS titles these last couple of years anyway.

atheneglaukopis
11-03-2006, 04:57 AM
I think he was once fined for tanking at match at the Australian Open. Though, to his credit, his record in fifth sets is impressive.Yeah, he was. His GS record in 2000 began with a fine for tanking the first round and ended with a straight-sets beatdown of Pete Sampras in the final. This guy is just plain crazy, he's a nut. :lol:

Deboogle!.
11-03-2006, 04:58 AM
I think Blake would have progressed further at the US Open if he hadnt had to play Roger so early. It could well have been Roddick who had to play Roger in the QF, then we might be having this discussion about Roddick possibly not qualifying. Maybe so, but that's kind of irrelevant. What about the Wimbledon loss to Mirnyi, the Ancic loss in Hamburg, the other opportunities he had like today, the AO, and Cincy, etc., where he came out just flat and playing poorly and lost meekly? I mean you can't blame one or two draws for all the opportunities James let himself miss out on :shrug:

TennisAgenda
11-03-2006, 05:03 AM
It is about the mind and the body. Look at Davydenko people don't think he's tallented he makes the most out of his abilities. He such a tenacious fighter he's 5'10 which is considered smaller on the ATP tour yet he fights like a lion and never ever gives up. At the US OPEN I believe he came from two sets down to beat Haas. The previous round he beat Murray. Roberdo is defiinitely a stronger fighter then Blake. Yeah Tommy isn't the most talented but he's very mentally strong he really hangs in there and doesn't give up. I think people are upset at James because he is naturally a taller guy he's a bigger stronger and more powerful player then both Davydenko and Robredo he has winning records against both those guys. But what James doesn't got is that killer instinct and that belief to never ever give up. James has matches where you can see in his eyes he's lost belief. If he's down two sets to love or down a set he may fold. I think the mental aspect is why James is 0-9 in five set matches. The American media and commentators were furious at him after his horrendous loss to Miryni he just gave up after losing the fourth set and folded in the fifth 6-0. Blake says all the right things in the media but deep inside I still think he believes he's not good enough. According to what I have read and heard some people actually say Blake could be a champion based on his abilities. But its the mental process that is lacking.

Deboogle!.
11-03-2006, 05:10 AM
Blake says all the right things in the media ...Actually, I don't think he does. I think what he says to the media shows to me that he's in denial about it. I remember after Wimbledon...

Q. What do you think your fifth set problem is, James?

JAMES BLAKE: I don't know, Bud. I lose 'em. That's the problem. I don't know what it is. Today he played unbelievable and I missed first serves. Against Fernando González, it was he played great. Against Lleyton Hewitt, I was cramping. I can't pinpoint one thing. Against Wawrinka, I was cramping a little bit, as well.

Nowadays, I feel like I'm in great shape. I'm not worried about cramping. I'm not worried about anything else. I just didn't win today. I don't know what my problem is. I generally don't think about it on the court. It doesn't keep me up at night. I haven't worried too much about it. I know my time will come. Against Andre, it was he played an unbelievable two points from 6-All in the breaker. There's no one thing that I'm doing wrong in fifth sets, I don't think. But if anyone can figure out one thing, I'd love to hear it.

I dunno :shrug: very selective memory...

nobama
11-03-2006, 05:47 AM
His performance in the 4 slams and 9 masters events were nothing to shout about. A QF at the USO. And a F at IW. Other than that he's done alot of nothing, if Ancic wins tomorrow he overtakes him, and this despite the fact Ancic missed a Slam and 2 Masters through injury. Well he did lose to Federer in IW, Miami and US Open. No shame in that I say, just unlucky. But yeah, his other performances at slams/ms events were pretty crap.