If Davydenko beats Ancic... [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

If Davydenko beats Ancic...

Johnny Groove
11-03-2006, 01:19 AM
he'll be #3 in the world :devil:

NicoFan
11-03-2006, 01:21 AM
I'm going for Davydenko.

I watched him a lot this summer, and have a lot of respect for his work ethic. I wish more players were like him.

And he's cute in a different kind of way. :lol:

revolution
11-03-2006, 01:22 AM
He is a talented player, and he can hit winners down the line and cross court which other players get lauded for as being flashy but he doesn't get this kind of praise.

Pea
11-03-2006, 01:26 AM
No, Mario must qualify for Shanghai!!!!!!:p

Johnny Groove
11-03-2006, 01:28 AM
Correction: Semifinal. I forgot the Shanghai points come off this week :p

mangoes
11-03-2006, 01:58 AM
I think Davydenko has earned it. I also think it's really nice to see that he made the top 10 again. We all thought last year was a fluke. Sadly, I don't think he is given enough credit.

Five
11-03-2006, 04:02 AM
Ancic will have to fight his ass off to save his life. No more choke this time Kolya :)

Blue Heart24
11-03-2006, 09:16 AM
Davydenko will win.

General Suburbia
11-03-2006, 09:20 AM
Yeah. And Davydenko hasn't won a match against Ancic this year. Let's see how this goes. Hoping for the balding one to win though.

aussie_fan
11-03-2006, 09:23 AM
I would rather Blake than Ancic at TMC so i'll be going for roberdo.

DrJules
11-03-2006, 01:34 PM
he'll be #3 in the world :devil:

He has been ranked 7 or better since June 2005.

MarieS
11-03-2006, 01:47 PM
clown era. :rocker2:

*Ljubica*
11-03-2006, 01:50 PM
he'll be #3 in the world :devil:

Good :) He's a nice guy, he works hard, he has got much more talent than many people here give him credit for - good luck to him!

alfonsojose
11-03-2006, 01:55 PM
He is a talented player, and he can hit winners down the line and cross court which other players get lauded for as being flashy but he doesn't get this kind of praise.

You have to wear Prada, capris or long hair to be something in MTF :rolleyes:

Kolya rocks :yeah:

stuey87
11-03-2006, 04:30 PM
Even if he beats Ancic he won't be #3 if Robredo wins the tournament.

mrserenawilliams
11-03-2006, 04:32 PM
good for him :bounce:

Fergie
11-03-2006, 05:07 PM
Kolya deserves it! :yeah:

Voo de Mar
11-03-2006, 05:13 PM
What a crazy week - Robredo or Davydenko No. 3 in the world :confused: :shrug:

lunahielo
11-03-2006, 05:17 PM
I like his work ethic............Gooooooooooo, Davydenko :bounce:

mangoes
11-03-2006, 05:17 PM
What a crazy week - Robredo or Davydenko No. 3 in the world :confused: :shrug:

I think Davydenko is very deserving of the ranking if he gets it. However, Robredo:tape: Davydenko's performances, this week, have stood out reminding us that he is the top seed left in this tournament. He has proved to us that his ranking isn't a fluke.........as we all claimed it to be last year.

LaTenista
11-03-2006, 05:25 PM
I think it's more scary Robredo will be 6 in the world at least even if he loses in the SFs.

Voo de Mar
11-03-2006, 05:27 PM
I think Davydenko is very deserving of the ranking if he gets it. However, Robredo:tape: Davydenko's performances, this week, have stood out reminding us that he is the top seed left in this tournament. He has proved to us that his ranking isn't a fluke.........as we all claimed it to be last year.

You're right but I don't like both... I don't like their styles of play... I don't like baseliners...

r2473
11-03-2006, 05:30 PM
You're right but I don't like both... I don't like their styles of play... I don't like baseliners...

You don't like baseliners? Does that mean that you do not like any players post Sampras and Rafter, or are you a strict Henman man?

Ernham
11-03-2006, 05:31 PM
I don't mind Robredo so much where he's at. Ancic, on the other hand, is one of the most one-dimensional players in the top ten, even worse than Roddick. This guy is a big first serve and that's it. Wow, speaking of serves, I think davy just got close to 140 MPH.

Deboogle!.
11-03-2006, 05:37 PM
I really don't understand how people can say Robredo deserves his spot in the ranking any less than Davydenko. He took his opportunities, won Hamburg, battled through matches all year long, had some excellent wins, good results in required events (especially on faster surfaces like this week, Cincy, etc.), etc. He has a pretty big weapon in his FH and his BH is a lot improved over a couple years ago. I'm really not understanding the Robredo hate at all :shrug:

alfonsojose
11-03-2006, 05:41 PM
You're right but I don't like both... I don't like their styles of play... I don't like baseliners...

And Gaudio, Blake and Ancic are on your signature :confused:

Voo de Mar
11-03-2006, 05:44 PM
You don't like baseliners? Does that mean that you do not like any players post Sampras and Rafter, or are you a strict Henman man?

In my opinion there are two kind of baseline players:
1) with a big serve and a huge forehand (Roddick, J.Johansson etc.)
2) with a speed legs and similar strenght of play from both sides (Davydenko, Robredo etc.)

I like the first type. I like serve-and-volleyers as well like Sampras, Rafter or Henman...

tangerine_dream
11-03-2006, 05:44 PM
I really don't understand how people can say Robredo deserves his spot in the ranking any less than Davydenko. He took his opportunities, won Hamburg, battled through matches all year long, had some excellent wins, good results in required events (especially on faster surfaces like this week, Cincy, etc.), etc. He has a pretty big weapon in his FH and his BH is a lot improved over a couple years ago. I'm really not understanding the Robredo hate at all :shrug:
I like the ones who say Robredo is a joke but have Mariano Puerta in their sigs.

MarieS
11-03-2006, 05:44 PM
I don't hate either Robredo or Davydenko; in fact I admire Kolya's consistency and work ethic and Robredo's certainly had some nice looking results throughout the year. But the fact that players like Davydenko and Robredo can be anywhere near top 3 is just mind-boggling. I know ranking is relative and that they are simply the best of the bunch right now, but when you look at their respective games, they are at best top 30 players.

Voo de Mar
11-03-2006, 05:46 PM
And Gaudio, Blake and Ancic are on your signature :confused:

Gaudio has a beautiful backhand, Blake powerful forehand, Ancic is a half-way serve-and-volley player. Therefore I like them all :)

LaTenista
11-03-2006, 05:51 PM
I really don't understand how people can say Robredo deserves his spot in the ranking any less than Davydenko. He took his opportunities, won Hamburg, battled through matches all year long, had some excellent wins, good results in required events (especially on faster surfaces like this week, Cincy, etc.), etc. He has a pretty big weapon in his FH and his BH is a lot improved over a couple years ago. I'm really not understanding the Robredo hate at all :shrug:

I don't hate anyone, but in particular no matter how many times I watch a Robredo match - whether in person or on TV all I do :yawn: - I have tried so hard to like him - I adore just about every other Spaniard in at least one aspect but just can't seem to find anything to like :shrug: For someone in the Top 10 he seems very inconsistent and he didn't have to beat top players to win his titles. At least Davydenko has beaten other guys in the Top 10.

Deboogle!.
11-03-2006, 05:53 PM
I know ranking is relative and that they are simply the best of the bunch right now, but when you look at their respective games, they are at best top 30 players.well all the more power and props to them for putting together consistent results and taking advantage of the fact that a lot of the guys who had been in the top 5-10 and who have historically owned those guys have not had good years! :)I don't hate anyone, but in particular no matter how many times I watch a Robredo match - whether in person or on TV all I do :yawn: - I have tried so hard to like him - I adore just about every other Spaniard in at least one aspect but just can't seem to find anything to like :shrug: For someone in the Top 10 he seems very inconsistent and he didn't have to beat top players to win his titles. At least Davydenko has beaten other guys in the Top 10.Well thinking someone's boring isn't the same as thinking someone doesn't deserve their ranking. I don't like to watch many of the top 10 but I don't deny they deserve to be there right now. Many other top 10 players are inconsistent too, look at James, and Andy has had an awful year in terms of consistency, and he hasn't had a top 10 win this year either, does he not deserve his ranking (I know many people think he doesn't but whatever)? Plus, Tommy did beat at least Ljubicic this year didn't he?

edit: He's beaten Nalbandian, Davydenko, and Ljubicic :shrug:

Ernham
11-03-2006, 05:53 PM
I know ranking is relative and that they are simply the best of the bunch right now, but when you look at their respective games, they are at best top 30 players.

I suggest you get your house checked for Radon, your water for heavy metals, and your insulation for asbestos. That, or throw away your clueless couch potato pundintry.

alfonsojose
11-03-2006, 05:54 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/photo?slug=getty-tennis-fra-atp--davydenko-ancic_12_39_52_pm&prov=getty
:devil: :lick:

A_Skywalker
11-03-2006, 05:56 PM
Go Nikolay

mangoes
11-03-2006, 05:58 PM
I really don't understand how people can say Robredo deserves his spot in the ranking any less than Davydenko. He took his opportunities, won Hamburg, battled through matches all year long, had some excellent wins, good results in required events (especially on faster surfaces like this week, Cincy, etc.), etc. He has a pretty big weapon in his FH and his BH is a lot improved over a couple years ago. I'm really not understanding the Robredo hate at all :shrug:

I don't hate Robredo. But, I also don't think he is top 10 material. I think he is top 20 material. Quite frankly, I consider him 2006's top 10 "fluke". And, I'd be plum shocked if he won 1 match in Shanghai because I think the other 7 on Shanghai's list are a step above Tommy.............even Blake whose entry on the list was compliments of Davydenko. I think that on a very good day, all 7 can take their game to another level. A level that I don't think is had by Tommy.........Just my opinion.

Deboogle!.
11-03-2006, 06:00 PM
Maybe it was a fluke but I just don't see how he doesn't deserve his position. He's won a ton of matches on different surfaces, more than one title, one of them being a Masters title, etc. Maybe he won't be in the top 10 next year but as of right now, he has done what he needed to get there.

Ernham
11-03-2006, 06:00 PM
I don't hate Robredo. But, I also don't think he is top 10 material. I think he is top 20 material. Quite frankly, I consider him 2006's top 10 "fluke". And, I'd be plum shocked if he won 1 match in Shanghai because I think the other 7 on Shanghai's list are a step above Tommy.............even Blake whose entry on the list was compliments of Davydenko.

Who says Blake is going? haas can still win the whole thing.

Jimnik
11-03-2006, 06:01 PM
I've watched this guy practise and there is trully no-one who has earned his ranking as much as he has. Nobody could possibly begrudge him any of his achievements.

Hopefully, he'll take his first TMS title this weekend.

MarieS
11-03-2006, 06:02 PM
I suggest you get your house checked for Radon, your water for heavy metals, and your insulation for asbestos. That, or throw away your clueless couch potato pundintry.

:scratch:
Awesome, let's resort to personal insults. :rolleyes:
What I'm saying is that top 3 is just not a numeric distinction, it clearly has other connotations to it. For example, when evaluating an up-and-coming player, you'll usually hear analysts say oh so-and-so has top 10 talent, or top 30 potential or whatever. Ideally, rankings reflect how good you really are; in this situation I think they just show how bad the rest of the competition is.
whatever, i don't believe davy and robredo should be top 5, you can choose to believe whatever you want to believe in. :wavey:

Ernham
11-03-2006, 06:06 PM
Ideally, rankings reflect how good you really are; in this situation I think they just show how bad the rest of the competition is.


That's actually the same thing. :wavey: logic is so confusing, huh? :confused: I bet lots of things are confusing for you.

mangoes
11-03-2006, 06:08 PM
Maybe it was a fluke but I just don't see how he doesn't deserve his position. He's won a ton of matches on different surfaces, more than one title, one of them being a Masters title, etc. Maybe he won't be in the top 10 next year but as of right now, he has done what he needed to get there.

I'm not saying to strip him of his ranking. I also know that he earned the position. I just don't think his level of play is top 10 material :shrug: But, I can't deny that he earned his spot in Shanghai........he certainly did and should be commended for holding his nerves together to cross that Shanghai line.

MarieS
11-03-2006, 06:12 PM
That's actually the same thing. :wavey: logic is so confusing, huh? :confused: I bet lots of things are confusing for you.

No they are not the same thing. Historically, being a top 5 player is a numerical as well as a qualitative distinction. If you think that qualitatively, robredo and davydenko are top 5 material, good for you. Again, you don't have to agree with me.

And, wow, you know me so well. :worship:

LaTenista
11-03-2006, 06:12 PM
well all the more power and props to them for putting together consistent results and taking advantage of the fact that a lot of the guys who had been in the top 5-10 and who have historically owned those guys have not had good years! :)Well thinking someone's boring isn't the same as thinking someone doesn't deserve their ranking. I don't like to watch many of the top 10 but I don't deny they deserve to be there right now. Many other top 10 players are inconsistent too, look at James, and Andy has had an awful year in terms of consistency, and he hasn't had a top 10 win this year either, does he not deserve his ranking (I know many people think he doesn't but whatever)? Plus, Tommy did beat at least Ljubicic this year didn't he?

edit: He's beaten Nalbandian, Davydenko, and Ljubicic :shrug:

I'm not saying anyone doesn't deserve to be there, but I just find Robredo's getting a TMC spot the most shocking. Or is that not a PC opinion? :rolleyes:

No doubt part of what of determines who qualifies are the draws - someone like for example Tim Henman would have been a lot higher ranked if he hadn't kept getting "unlucky" draws.

BTW Andy was very consistent from post Wimbledon through the US Open and James has won more tournaments this year than Tommy and Andy combined this year.

mrserenawilliams
11-03-2006, 06:18 PM
he's had a GREAT year, the kind of year people DREAM about. Let's not knock him for being the MODEL of consistency

Ernham
11-03-2006, 06:23 PM
Again, you don't have to agree with me.


And I don't. Your top 30 comment gets my pick for :retard: MTF comment of the day.

Naranoc
11-03-2006, 06:26 PM
No more arguing about the 'real' number 3 :D

DrJules
11-03-2006, 06:31 PM
What a crazy week - Robredo or Davydenko No. 3 in the world :confused: :shrug:

There is a massive difference between Robredo and Davydenko. While Davydenko plays near to the baseline, takes the ball early and hits cleanly through the ball Robredo often stand much further back, takes the ball late and does not hit a clean ball. Davydenko with improved volley skills could easily turn into an outstanding all court player. Davydenko is very comfortable on clay, hard courts and carpet while Robredo is really only comfortable on Clay. Comparing them is really unfair on Davydenko.

DrJules
11-03-2006, 06:38 PM
I really don't understand how people can say Robredo deserves his spot in the ranking any less than Davydenko. He took his opportunities, won Hamburg, battled through matches all year long, had some excellent wins, good results in required events (especially on faster surfaces like this week, Cincy, etc.), etc. He has a pretty big weapon in his FH and his BH is a lot improved over a couple years ago. I'm really not understanding the Robredo hate at all :shrug:

If he plays Roddick in the year end masters the reason why so many are "hostile" will become evident. It will turn into Roddick's 8 successive demolition of Robredo; 8 matches to 0 and 16 sets to 0. It mostly relates to the feeling that he will just make up the numbers without winning any matches and possibly not even winning sets. I think he has around a 21% success rate (from another thread) against other top 10 players compared to say Blake with around 48%. Even Davydenko is around 31%.

Voo de Mar
11-03-2006, 06:42 PM
DrJules: unfortunately I can't agree with you. Davydenko has an awful backhand volley... For me he is a titanium of work. And that's the reason his high position.
Both Kolya and Tommy play very similar (Tommy has more talent) but there is only a subjective point of view. Everyone see something else and this is creative ;)

DrJules
11-03-2006, 06:45 PM
DrJules: unfortunately I can't agree with you. Davydenko has an awful backhand volley... For me he is a titanium of work. And that's the reason his high position.
Both Kolya and Tommy play very similar (Tommy has more talent) but there is only a subjective point of view. Everyone see something else and this is creative ;)

Although they both play from the back of the court their ball striking is very different in terms of racket grip, stroke and where they stand.

*Ljubica*
11-03-2006, 07:04 PM
I really don't understand how people can say Robredo deserves his spot in the ranking any less than Davydenko. He took his opportunities, won Hamburg, battled through matches all year long, had some excellent wins, good results in required events (especially on faster surfaces like this week, Cincy, etc.), etc. He has a pretty big weapon in his FH and his BH is a lot improved over a couple years ago. I'm really not understanding the Robredo hate at all :shrug:


As a Robredo fan I say thanks for your brilliant post :hug: But sadly you won't change the minds of the Robredo haters here, who seem to be multipying by the second since he qualified for Shanghai - I think hating Robredo is the latest MTF "bandwagon" :rolleyes: I just ignore it all- but thanks for the reasoned and supportive words anyway.

Ernham
11-03-2006, 07:13 PM
DrJules: unfortunately I can't agree with you. Davydenko has an awful backhand volley... For me he is a titanium of work. And that's the reason his high position.
Both Kolya and Tommy play very similar (Tommy has more talent) but there is only a subjective point of view.

Are you vying for the :retard: award with Marie? Davy does everything Robredo does better, except looking like he hasn't taken a bath in a year. Robredo has that one down to a science.

LK_22
11-03-2006, 08:04 PM
Good for Davydenko :yeah: He will make a better No.3 than Ljubicic...

MarieS
11-03-2006, 08:07 PM
And I don't. Your top 30 comment gets my pick for :retard: MTF comment of the day.

thanks, i feel honored.

Voo de Mar
11-03-2006, 08:39 PM
thanks, i feel honored.

Me too :yeah:

LaTenista
11-03-2006, 10:38 PM
I wasn't claiming Robredo had easy draws :shrug: I'm simply suggesting that the very nature of how one gets a ranking is perhaps flawed or at least biased. It's not like all players have to play every other player on tour. Some players like Henman had to play Murray and Federer more than 3 times each this year alone and while there are plenty he didn't play at all.

scoobs
11-03-2006, 11:04 PM
I've never been very impressed with Robredo - until this year.

He finally seems to have pulled his game together and more importantly, strapped on a pair of balls that keeps him focused and doing his job when the pressure is on.

We saw what happened in Hamburg this year - okay, so Federer and Nadal weren't there. There were still strong players in that draw who saw their chance and then completely blew it. Robredo was the one who kept it together and grasped it with both hands when the moment presented itself.

This week he's been under enormous pressure to hold his berth for Shanghai - and most of us expected he wouldn't after bad results on the indoor swing and no sign of developing any affinity for it.

Instead, when the pressure was at its height, he pulled off one of the most sensational comebacks of the year to win his match against Grosjean and take his slot - and is now in the SFs to boot.

So I say Well Done Tommy Robredo for, on two occasions this year, taking your opportunity when your competition, having the same opportunity, mentally ran for the hills.

I think he deserves to be there.

LaTenista
11-03-2006, 11:23 PM
:scratch: I'm beginning to think that having seeding at tournaments at all is biased toward the top players - if the RR system truly illiminates that aspect - if for instance hypothetically Federer and Nadal could be in the same RR group of a tournament - maybe that would be more fair. Cause basically once you get a very high ranking you benefit from not having to draw someone ranked around yours until the Round of 16 or the QFs, therefore you can maintain your ranking more easily, because in the early rounds you are playing players who are usually ranked much lower than you.

I'll be the first to admit Ferrer giftwrapped the QF match in Hamburg to Robredo, in essence handing him the title but the after effects are much greater: because of that Robredo's ranking significantly rose and then he benefited more from the seeded draws. It's like it's more important to win certain matches, rather than say being consistent or being able to beat opponents around your own ranking. :awww:

But of course the thing about RR is how the race & entry ranking points would be distributed. :confused:

LaTenista
11-04-2006, 01:59 AM
Now that you mention it I do remember you saying this quite a few times before, and I'm curious as to how Ferrer losing a quarterfinal with a 12-10 tiebreak in the first set and a difference of one break in the second set is "gift-wrapping the match," much less "handing him the title." (And yes, seeding benefits top players, but they weren't top players to begin with, and they managed to rise through the ranks of already seeded players to be where they are now.)

Also, maybe I'm not smart about how seeding works, but I'm not sure how much the higher ranking has benefited Tommy's draws in the past six months, considering that a jump from #12 to #7 or #8 in the rankings means that he will be more likely to meet a top player in the quarterfinal stages instead of in the round of 16. :shrug: And considering seeded players are still likely to meet former Top 10 players like Henman/Safin/Hewitt/Haas who have fallen well below their "appropriate" rankings yet can be massively dangerous when they're on form, I think the benefits are nebulous at best.

I haven't watched the match recently, but I recall Ferrer having no fewer than 5 SPs in the first set, he "choked" or mentally crumbled as it were playing against his good friend Robredo. IMHO if he'd converted one of the SPs he'd have won the match and I think he'd have won the title.

I think a jump from below the Top 10 to inside the Top 8 is a big deal. Being seeded is important, otherwise players would not have goals like "being seeded for the Australian Open". I don't doubt it's possible to draw Henman/Safin/Hewitt/Haas (well the last one is high enough ranked now to be seeded in just about every tournament) in the first round, it's also more than likely they won't - for a 32 draw, there are 8 seeds so 8 1st round matches (16 slots) without a seed and only 8 slots to fill against one. The system favors the seeds because they can't meet another one until the 3rd round (of a slam) earliest - most tournaments Round of 16 or QFs. Have you ever noticed mainly the only way a high (Top 20) player's ranking falls significantly is if he's not playing for months (due to ban, injury, illness, etc.)? With one terrific result - like winning an IS title or reaching the SFs of a Masters event - the player improves their ranking quite a bit usually and then from the week after this new ranking gets them seeded in that week's tournament. Of course seeding and ranking is all relative to what the other players' points are and which ones are entered into the same tournament. But I'm saying it's easier to maintain whatever current ranking you have as a player by being seeded at every tournament than it is when your ranking is too low to never or rarely be seeded.

And being a Top 8 seed at a grand slam is better than being a Top 16 seed or even a Top 32 seed because the player doesn't have to face anyone inside the Top 8 until the QFs of that slam. A Top 16 seed has to face a Top 8 seed in the Round of 16 (4th Round). The amount of points awarded for a Round of 16 result compared to a QF result is a significant difference. Especially when you consider that all grand slam and TMS results are a part of every player's ranking, there is no 'drop the worst result'. This seeding system could very well be partially what is allowing Federer to retain his No 1 ranking - his biggest rival is No 2 in the world and therefore can only challenge him in the final of a tournament. Also since the seeds are more likely to face opponents ranked quite a bit lower than them they have the ability to "play their way" into the tournament - they can be far from their best - rusty or what have you - but still beat their 1st round 'lowly ranked' opponent, allowing them time to improve their form for subsequently "more difficult" matches as the tournament progresses. An unseeded player on the other hand more than likely faces a tougher 1st round match - a player could be ranked much higher or about the same but even if they do draw a local WC their 2nd round is much harder because they will have to face a seed (who is usually ranked inside the Top 40). Those are the benefits as I see them.

One could argue that seeds at tournaments are doing what Mr. Disney thinks the RR format will do - ensure better attendance throughout a tournament because the 2 highest ranked players cannot meet until the final. I'd personally think at this point in tennis history abolishing the seed system could really make things interesting - I mean, chances are Federer and Nadal would play each other more often because they wouldn't have to meet in the final.

ufokart
11-04-2006, 02:34 AM
I don't see what's wrong with the system :shrug:
Yeah, seeds get easier draws but it's the advantage you get by winning matches and getting to the top. Players need some sort of motivation, if they work hard, get to the top but they have to face Federer in the first round like they are some wildcard, then why bother?

Also, all the current top players were ranked outside the top 100 before and even with hard draws they won enough to put them were they are.

hitchhiker
11-04-2006, 03:49 AM
and i thought it couldnt get more entertaining then Gaudio in Shanghai. At least Gaudio has managed to win sets of top players. Can Robredo top Gaudios 0-6 0-6 by not winning a single point the whole match?