Can we please define "vulture"?? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Can we please define "vulture"??

Thunderfish8
07-31-2012, 11:34 PM
I think we have a problem. Some people are under the impression that any player who plays in smaller tournaments than they are capable of is a vulture.

Others think that a vulture is only applicable to a player who not only plays those smaller tournaments but fails to win them.

Ferrer and Monaco are usually the biggest targets of this term and seeing as they perform extremely well against other top players, I cannot find a reason why they are receiving so much hate.

Would anybody like to enlighten me??? :rolleyes:

Jimnik
07-31-2012, 11:40 PM
1. A large bird of prey (order Accipitriformes) with the head and neck more or less bare of feathers, feeding chiefly on carrion.
2. A contemptible person who preys on or exploits others.

http://www.photo-dictionary.com/photofiles/list/574/968vulture.jpg

The Prince
07-31-2012, 11:43 PM
It's a ridiculous, irrationalal and cruel term that some trolls use. Take no notice of them thunder.

redshift36188
07-31-2012, 11:44 PM
Just let us have some fun, Thunderfish.



*Monaco is actually one of my 3rd tier faves.

Orka_n
07-31-2012, 11:47 PM
Sure.

"A player Mug Lenders doesn't like."

Mark Lenders
07-31-2012, 11:53 PM
Vulture - player who chooses non-mandatory events with weak fields in order to artificially boost his ranking.

Let me know if you also need a definition of weak field.

tommyg6
07-31-2012, 11:59 PM
Any player from either the top 10 or 20 that enters in a tournament where he knows noone else will come close to beating him in the event.

Examples,
-Fernand Verdasco, ranked 17, entering a challenger in Czech Republic where everyone else was ranked outside the top 100.
-Feliciano Lopez, ranked 16 at the time, entering a challenger in Colombia where everyone else was ranked outside the top 100.
-David Ferrer, ranked 5, enters ATP 250 events where everyone else is ranked outside the top 30 and is just easy pickings for him.

Also, these guys do it on a constant basis.

Orka_n
07-31-2012, 11:59 PM
Vulture - player who chooses non-mandatory events with weak fields in order to artificially boost his ranking.

Let me know if you also need a definition of weak field.Ferrer is the player with the best slam results this year outside the top 4. Ergo, by your definition he is not a vulture.

The Prince
08-01-2012, 12:01 AM
Any player from either the top 10 or 20 that enters in a tournament where he knows noone will come close to beating him.

Examples,
-Fernand Verdasco, ranked 17, entering a challenger in Czech Republic where everyone else was ranked outside the top 100.
-Feliciano Lopez, ranked 16 at the time, entering a challenger in Colombia where everyone else was ranked outside the top 100.
-David Ferrer, ranked 5, enters ATP 250 events where everyone else is ranked outside the top 30 and is just easy pickings for him.

Also, these guys do it on a constant basis.

:lol:

The Prince
08-01-2012, 12:02 AM
Can you guys piss off with your 'vulture' nonsense. The majority does not want to hear it.

Backhand_Maestro
08-01-2012, 12:02 AM
Let me know if you also need a definition of weak field.

2003 - 2008, right ?

http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/12500000/federer-long-hair-roger-federer-12512080-350-439.jpg?1343786273923

Sunset of Age
08-01-2012, 12:05 AM
Hilarious. What the hell is wrong with any player signing up to tournaments in which he knows he has a good chance of winning them, and racking up his ATP-counts?

It's not the 'vultures' (:rolleyes:)'s fault if a lot of the Top Dogs don't mind playing these kind of tournaments. Even more, I see the same kind of posters accusing certain players of 'vulturing', accusing Top Players for playing certain minor tournaments just the same. Or Not playing them, whatever rocks their boats. Hello there, Double Standards! :wavey:

David Ferrer has truly earned his spot on the rankings by being the most hard-working, most consistent, most dedicated player out there of the non-top-4, taking his chances wherever he gets them and making the best out of them.
That attitude deserves KUDOS, not mockery.

Mark Lenders
08-01-2012, 12:10 AM
Ferrer is the player with the best slam results this year outside the top 4. Ergo, by your definition he is not a vulture.

Of course he is. Those results were made possible due to draws he gets as a result of his vultured ranking, and not the other way round - this is the first year where he's showing some consistency at Slam level. For years, he has kept a high ranking by playing tons of 250 and 500s with no top 10 (sometimes no top 30) players in the draw - the last time he defeated a top player in a non mandatory was Soderling back in 2010 Valencia.

This year is the first time where his Slam results are actually matching his ranking - and still, he has failed to make any impression when facing the current dominating trio in those tournament, losing in very one-sided fashion every time.

redshift36188
08-01-2012, 12:10 AM
Ferrer is the player with the best slam results this year outside the top 4. Ergo, by your definition he is not a vulture.
Funny, because he achieved exactly that by vulturing an injured Murray on clay. :haha:


I have nothing but respect for his achievements though, given his limited talent. He's probably the greatest overachiever of all time, alongside Wozniacki but Caroline is a mug, Ferrer is actually decent.

leng jai
08-01-2012, 12:10 AM
The point most people miss is that Ferrer is most definitely "vulturing" when it comes to his non-mandatory tournaments. Just look at the 5 titles he has picked up this year and it is glaringly obvious. IMO there's nothing wrong with that but I can see why it would annoy people. The fact he has the slam results to back up his ranking means the haters don't really have a leg to stand on especially when they imply that somehow winning 250s can get you to top 5 in the rankings.

Sunset of Age
08-01-2012, 12:13 AM
The point most people miss is that Ferrer is most definitely "vulturing" when it comes to his non-mandatory tournaments. Just look at the 5 titles he has picked up this year and it is glaringly obvious. IMO there's nothing wrong with that but I can see why it would annoy people. The fact he has the slam results to back up his ranking means the haters don't really have a leg to stand on especially when they imply that somehow winning 250s can get you to top 5 in the rankings.

:yeah:
If it's so 'easy and despicable to so-call vulture', as some over here suggest, I just wonder why certain other players close to Ferrer's ranking spot aren't capable of doing the same. ;)
David Ferrer backs up his 'vulture'-results by making at least the QF or even semifinal in about every GS tournament he enters.

Where's a Berdych, for this matter, just to name one player?

Mark Lenders
08-01-2012, 12:14 AM
The point most people miss is that Ferrer is most definitely "vulturing" when it comes to his non-mandatory tournaments. Just look at the 5 titles he has picked up this year and it is glaringly obvious. IMO there's nothing wrong with that but I can see why it would annoy people. The fact he has the slam results to back up his ranking means the haters don't really have a leg to stand on especially when they imply that somehow winning 250s can get you to top 5 in the rankings.

This is a good point. This year, despite vulturing, his Slam results are backing up his ranking.

But how did he get those results? By benefitting from very kind draws due to his previously inflated ranking. Let's not pretend 2012 is not the first time where Ferrer has shown consistency at big tournaments.

The Prince
08-01-2012, 12:14 AM
The point most people miss is that Ferrer is most definitely "vulturing" when it comes to his non-mandatory tournaments. Just look at the 5 titles he has picked up this year and it is glaringly obvious. IMO there's nothing wrong with that but I can see why it would annoy people. The fact he has the slam results to back up his ranking means the haters don't really have a leg to stand on especially when they imply that somehow winning 250s can get you to top 5 in the rankings.

What's wrong with winning non-mandatory tournaments?

He should be praised for winning, not criticised because his opponents are weak.

The Prince
08-01-2012, 12:15 AM
I'd like to know why Del Potro isn't a 'vulture'?

Orange Wombat
08-01-2012, 12:17 AM
David Ferrer is a SuperVulture who wears a sombrero and is awesome. Monaco is his sidekick.

http://s7.directupload.net/images/120727/q3c3et3t.png

:worship:


Definition of vulture by the way: "A person who uses their great skills not only to get every opportunity out of their lives, but also to mock Mug Lenders."

Federer in 2
08-01-2012, 12:23 AM
Vulture = A term created by clueless fangirls of ballbashers in the top 10, such as Tsonga, Berdych and Del Potro. Talking about "vultures" and "vulturing" is an easy way for them to make excuses about the fact that David Ferrer is consistently ranked higher than those players. By calling Ferrer (along with some others, of course) a "vulture" they are actually trying to say that he is undeservedly considered the best player in the world outside the top 4, and that his real place is actually much lower. In other words, this is a way of living in denial.

Hope this helps.

The Prince
08-01-2012, 12:23 AM
OK I've just done the maths via some approximations, and Ferrer counts 33% of his points from '500' level and below (non mandatory events. Del Potro counts nearly 50% of his points from non mandatory events.

It's funny though, because I've never heard you call him a vulture, Manuel, when going by your definition, he's 50% more vulture-ish than Ferrer.

Mark Lenders
08-01-2012, 12:27 AM
I'd like to know why Del Potro isn't a 'vulture'?

Because his non-mandatory tournaments are:

Rotterdam with Federer and Berdych

Marseille with Tsonga and Tipsy (and Fish who was top 10 at the time)

Dubai with eight top 10 players

Estoril with an average field but still better than most if not all of Ferrer's.


He enters non mandatory tournaments with very strong fields, that is why he's not a vulture. Del Potro has a 37-0 record against players ranked lower than himself, and outside of grass (and even on grass for most part) is almost impossible to beat by low ranked players, he could easily collect several titles if he decided to vulture events with no top players.

The Prince
08-01-2012, 12:29 AM
Because his non-mandatory tournaments are:

Rotterdam with Federer and Berdych

Marseille with Tsonga and Tipsy (and Fish who was top 10 at the time)

Dubai with eight top 10 players

Estoril with an average field but still better than most if not all of Ferrer's.


He enters non mandatory tournaments with very strong fields, that is why he's not a vulture. Del Potro has a 37-0 record against players ranked lower than himself, and outside of grass (and even on grass for most part) is almost impossible to beat by low ranked players, he could easily collect several titles if he decided to vulture events with no top players.

How convenient! That just sounds like you are in denial.

Anyway, JMDP is the biggest flat track bully on tour. Perfect record against lower ranked players, against higher ranked opposition he flops. Isn't that what a vulture is supposed to do?

n8
08-01-2012, 12:30 AM
Ferrer's pre-Australian Open and pre-Wimbledon choices are unusual for someone of his rank. Almost all the top players choose to have a week off before the Major.

Ferrer plays Auckland and s-Hertogenbosch but the absence of a week off doesn't seem to hurt him. This year he won both those events and still made the quarters of the following Slam. Playing the week before works for him, so why change to Doha and Halle? Sure, it would reduce being called a vulture, but I think Ferrer would rather the title + Slam quarter.

Mark Lenders
08-01-2012, 12:34 AM
How convenient! That just sounds like you are in denial.

Anyway, JMDP is the biggest flat track bully on tour. Perfect record against lower ranked players, against higher ranked opposition he flops. Isn't that what a vulture is supposed to do?

No, I'm not in denial. This is not complicated at all; Del Potro enters non mandatory tournaments with several of the best players in the world, a vulture would avoid tournaments with those players and select those with weak fields to collect points.

And that's not exactly breaking news. Before winning his Slam, JMDP was famous as the Mickey Mouse king because of his ability to dispose of guys ranked lower than himself while losing to the top players. What you call vulturing, I call amazing consistency. Even while injured, he can win those matches because the low ranked guys can't cope with his power and consistency.

If JMDP was a vulture, he'd take advantage of that to wins tons of titles with weak fields; but his aim is to win another Slam at some point and for that he needs to compete with the best players to eventually make a breakthrough.

leng jai
08-01-2012, 12:36 AM
Vulture = Tommy Haas choosing Washington over the Olympics.

The Prince
08-01-2012, 12:40 AM
No, I'm not in denial. This is not complicated at all; Del Potro enters non mandatory tournaments with several of the best players in the world, a vulture would avoid tournaments with those players and select those with weak fields to collect points.

And that's not exactly breaking news. Before winning his Slam, JMDP was famous as the Mickey Mouse king because of his ability to dispose of guys ranked lower than himself while losing to the top players. What you call vulturing, I call amazing consistency. Even while injured, he can win those matches because the low ranked guys can't cope with his power and consistency.

If JMDP was a vulture, he'd take advantage of that to wins tons of titles with weak fields; but his aim is to win another Slam at some point and for that he needs to compete with the best players to eventually make a breakthrough.

I don't think Juan is a vulture, I think he's a top bloke, and a great player. I think you show a bit of inconsistency in that you fail to call him a vulture.

Ferrer has a better W/L ratio against top 10 players this year, and is obviously the more consistent player. He hasn't got the gears to find that Juan has though.

Manuel, I and many others would appreciate it of you and everyone else who uses it would cease to use the derogatory label 'vulture'. It's unnecessary. I'm not asking you to like Ferrer, but using an unnecessary term is a bit over the top, no?

I appreciate your sense of humour, and you post some good stuff most of the time, but you ought to not ruin it for yourself.

Mark Lenders
08-01-2012, 12:47 AM
Vulture = Tommy Haas choosing Washington over the Olympics.

No player who goes through Berdych, Kohli and Federer just to win a 250 should ever be called a vulture. He can enter all the mug tournaments he wants from here on in after doing that and still not be accused of vulturing.

I don't think Juan is a vulture, I think he's a top bloke, and a great player. I think you show a bit of inconsistency in that you fail to call him a vulture.

Ferrer has a better W/L ratio against top 10 players this year, and is obviously the more consistent player. He hasn't got the gears to find that Juan has though.

Manuel, I and many others would appreciate it of you and everyone else who uses it would cease to use the derogatory label 'vulture'. It's unnecessary. I'm not asking you to like Ferrer, but using an unnecessary term is a bit over the top, no?

I appreciate your sense of humour, and you post some good stuff most of the time, but you ought to not ruin it for yourself.

No inconsistency at all. I call Ferrer and not Juan Martin, because Ferrer enters lots of non mandatory tournaments with weak fields, Juan doesn't. Juan actually makes it hard for himself to win tournaments by seemingly following his bete noire Federer around :o

Beating guys ranked below #10 (or #7) all the time doesn't make you a vulture; if that were the case, Djokovic and Del Potro would be the biggest vultures since they're the only ones with a perfect record against non-top10/7 since AO. But that's just illogical, you can't be a vulture just because you win matches you're supposed to win in strong tournaments before facing the top guys.

FedGOAT
08-01-2012, 12:52 AM
i dont like that "vulture" word but you gotta afmit that ferrer is one

stewietennis
08-01-2012, 12:56 AM
How about commending these players for travelling to the outer areas and giving those fans a chance to watch a player with skill

Nole Rules
08-01-2012, 12:56 AM
i dont like that "vulture" word but you gotta afmit that ferrer is one

Sensible poster here. Good to see.

sexybeast
08-01-2012, 01:02 AM
Jimmy Connors won up to 15 titles every year in tournaments way too small to fit a player of his caliber to consistently rob Borg of his well deserved nr1 ranking, he was 2-14 down against Borg after 77 but still ended up robbing Borg's nr1 spot in 77-78.

So, a world class player can also be a vulture.

Snowwy
08-01-2012, 01:04 AM
Because his non-mandatory tournaments are:

Rotterdam with Federer and Berdych

Marseille with Tsonga and Tipsy (and Fish who was top 10 at the time)

Dubai with eight top 10 players

Estoril with an average field but still better than most if not all of Ferrer's.


He enters non mandatory tournaments with very strong fields, that is why he's not a vulture. Del Potro has a 37-0 record against players ranked lower than himself, and outside of grass (and even on grass for most part) is almost impossible to beat by low ranked players, he could easily collect several titles if he decided to vulture events with no top players.


What about 2009?

Del Potro
Auckland - Ferrer, Soderling, Querrey
San Jose - Roddick, Blake, Fish
Memphis - Roddick, Blake, Soderling
Dusseldorf - Seppi, Andreev
Washington - Roddick, Tsonga, Gonzalez
Tokyo - Tsonga, Monfils, Simon

Ferrer
Auckland - Ferrer, Soderling, Querrey
Rotterdam - Nadal, Murray, Davydenko
Dubai - Djokovic, Murray, Simon
Barcelona - Nadal, Veradsco, Davydenko
Estoril - Simon, Blake, Davydenko
s'Hertos.. - Verdasco, Robredo
Hamburg - Simon, Davydenko, Soderling
Beijing - Nadal, Djokovic, Roddick, Davydenko
Valencia - Murray, Davydenko, Tsonga

So really, it seems that Del Potro only got his ranking up to win the US Open by vulturing (according to your definition and example). Does that change how it feels for him? I mean to vulture to win a GS, that must be pretty bad according to you, no?

Johnny Groove
08-01-2012, 01:04 AM
Davydenko played like 35 events a year when he was in the top 5 for a few years. Ultimate Vulture, makes Ferrer look like a much less imposing bird of prey.

Julián Santiago
08-01-2012, 01:05 AM
Vulture - player who chooses non-mandatory events with weak fields in order to artificially boost his ranking.

Let me know if you also need a definition of weak field.

:zzz:

Sure.

"A player Mug Lenders doesn't like."

:haha:

sexybeast
08-01-2012, 01:09 AM
Davydenko played like 35 events a year when he was in the top 5 for a few years. Ultimate Vulture, makes Ferrer look like a much less imposing bird of prey.

Yes, but how much was truly vulturing and how much was fixing ordered by russian mafia?

Mark Lenders
08-01-2012, 01:09 AM
What about 2009?

Del Potro
Auckland - Ferrer, Soderling, Querrey
San Jose - Roddick, Blake, Fish
Memphis - Roddick, Blake, Soderling
Dusseldorf - Seppi, Andreev
Washington - Roddick, Tsonga, Gonzalez
Tokyo - Tsonga, Monfils, Simon

Ferrer
Auckland - Ferrer, Soderling, Querrey
Rotterdam - Nadal, Murray, Davydenko
Dubai - Djokovic, Murray, Simon
Barcelona - Nadal, Veradsco, Davydenko
Estoril - Simon, Blake, Davydenko
s'Hertos.. - Verdasco, Robredo
Hamburg - Simon, Davydenko, Soderling
Beijing - Nadal, Djokovic, Roddick, Davydenko
Valencia - Murray, Davydenko, Tsonga

So really, it seems that Del Potro only got his ranking up to win the US Open by vulturing (according to your definition and example). Does that change how it feels for him? I mean to vulture to win a GS, that must be pretty bad according to you, no?

There must be some hidden point I'm missing here. Juan entered 6 non mandatories, all with top players in the draw bar Dusseldof, same with Roddick who was a solid #5/6 for most of the year and almost won a Slam.

How exactly did he vulture again? He filled the minimum quota of six non mandatories all with decent/good fields.

Julián Santiago
08-01-2012, 01:17 AM
No, I'm not in denial. This is not complicated at all; Del Potro enters non mandatory tournaments with several of the best players in the world, a vulture would avoid tournaments with those players and select those with weak fields to collect points.

And that's not exactly breaking news. Before winning his Slam, JMDP was famous as the Mickey Mouse king because of his ability to dispose of guys ranked lower than himself while losing to the top players. What you call vulturing, I call amazing consistency. Even while injured, he can win those matches because the low ranked guys can't cope with his power and consistency.

If JMDP was a vulture, he'd take advantage of that to wins tons of titles with weak fields; but his aim is to win another Slam at some point and for that he needs to compete with the best players to eventually make a breakthrough.

Del Potro enters those tournamentes because he wanted to play in his best surface, Ferrer chose clay.

What a Mug you are... By God.

It`s not Ferrer fault`s that in the top en the majority of players are hard courts players...

And also Del Potro played in Sydney, a "mug" event, and the lst year he played in indoors when he was actually top 20. And he lost to Bagdhatis in Sydney, don`t forget that. But you don´t call him a vulture or a mug. The compelte top 100 outside top 10 are vultures in your opinion. And if the majority of players weree claycourtes, you called those who played better in HC vultures by your stupid definition...

And actually, you ae wrong, as usual, because you are a mug. Uno portugués, pese a que tiene la bandera de Japón (?)

Ferer has been top 20 since 27.07.2009, and top 10 since Octobrer 2010, so your arguments about his rankings are only crap.

What a hater mug you are.

:smash:

mark73
08-01-2012, 01:20 AM
Oh my god. I'm actually reading this crap about vultures. I need to get a life. :rolleyes:

Mark Lenders
08-01-2012, 01:28 AM
Del Potro enters those tournamentes because he wanted to play in his best surface, Ferrer chose clay.

What a Mug you are... By God.

It`s not Ferrer fault`s that in the top en the majority of players are hard courts players...

And also Del Potro played in Sydney, a "mug" event, and the lst year he played in indoors when he was actually top 20. And he lost to Bagdhatis in Sydney, don`t forget that. But you don´t call him a vulture or a mug. The compelte top 100 outside top 10 are vultures in your opinion. And if the majority of players weree claycourtes, you called those who played better in HC vultures by your stupid definition...

And actually, you ae wrong, as usual, because you are a mug. Uno portugués, pese a que tiene la bandera de Japón (?)

Ferer has been top 20 since 27.07.2009, and top 10 since Octobrer 2010, so your arguments about his rankings are only crap.

What a hater mug you are.

:smash:

Yo supongo que tu ya lo sabes, pero muchos membros no tienen la bandera de su pays en este forum. My Spanish is a bit rusty, but I believe you understand :p

As for the rest, Del Potro has grown up playing on clay and plays some of his best tennis there, so I don't see how that point is valid.

MuzzahLovah
08-01-2012, 01:30 AM
A vulture is someone who ferrers tournaments.

Thunderfish8
08-01-2012, 01:34 AM
If Mark Lenders is reading this I would like to say listen the fuck up.

As somebody who claims to know everything about tennis you must know 2 very important things.

1. Players can't win without confidence and players can't gain confidence without winning. It's one of the most well-known facts in tennis. The players you call "vultures" are simply keeping their confidence high. Its the only reason why Ferrer has not lost to a player ranked lower than him all year except Bellucci, but the top four have all had their stumbles (Federer-Roddick / Nadal-Rosol / Djokovic-Isner / Murray-Raonic).
Playing the lower level tournaments help these players remain confident and in effect it helps them prevent upsets as much as possible.

2. You must know the ranking system of the ATP. The ranking is based on 18 tournaments barring the WTF and Olympics. the 4 majors, the 9 masters, and 6 other tournaments. The 6 other tournaments part is used in order to prevent vulturing.

So shut the fuck up. Ferrer and Monaco are certainly not doing anything wrong and you should be so ashamed with "push for life" for completely disrespecting two players who deserve the utmost respect.

Even Verdasco and Lopez do not deserve to be scolded for playing smaller tournaments. What they should be scolded for is playing those tournaments and then losing to players ranked outside the top 100. But that's off topic.

You have really become a disgrace in my eyes. :rolleyes:

All players have their smaller tournaments. Djokovic played Belgrade every year except this one. Isner plays in tournaments like Newport, and Nadal plays in Barcelona where except for this year, his only competition is Ferrer who he owns.

Del Potro plays Estoril...

I seem to remember a certain Marat Safin entering St. Petersburg in 2004 where no other player in the draw was ranked higher than 14. AND he didn't even win.

So maybe now would be an appropriate time to fuck off.

The Prince
08-01-2012, 01:37 AM
If Mark Lenders is reading this I would like to say listen the fuck up.

As somebody who claims to know everything about tennis you must know 2 very important things.

1. Players can't win without confidence and players can't gain confidence without winning. It's one of the most well-known facts in tennis. The players you call "vultures" are simply keeping their confidence high. Its the only reason why Ferrer has not lost to a player ranked lower than him all year except Bellucci, but the top four have all had their stumbles (Federer-Roddick / Nadal-Rosol / Djokovic-Isner / Murray-Raonic).
Playing the lower level tournaments help these players remain confident and in effect it helps them prevent upsets as much as possible.

2. You must know the ranking system of the ATP. The ranking is based on 18 tournaments barring the WTF and Olympics. the 4 majors, the 9 masters, and 6 other tournaments. The 6 other tournaments part is used in order to prevent vulturing.

So shut the fuck up. Ferrer and Monaco are certainly not doing anything wrong and you should be so ashamed with "push for life" for completely disrespecting two players who deserve the utmost respect.

Even Verdasco and Lopez do not deserve to be scolded for playing smaller tournaments. What they should be scolded for is playing those tournaments and then losing to players ranked outside the top 100. But that's off topic.

You have really become a disgrace in my eyes. :rolleyes:

All players have their smaller tournaments. Djokovic played Belgrade every year except this one. Isner plays in tournaments like Newport, and Nadal plays in Barcelona where except for this year, his only competition is Ferrer who he owns.

Del Potro plays Estoril...

I seem to remember a certain Marat Safin entering St. Petersburg in 2004 where no other player in the draw was ranked higher than 14. AND he didn't even win.

So maybe now would be an appropriate time to fuck off.

Vicious, honest and true. :yeah:

Mark Lenders
08-01-2012, 01:47 AM
If Mark Lenders is reading this I would like to say listen the fuck up.

As somebody who claims to know everything about tennis you must know 2 very important things.

1. Players can't win without confidence and players can't gain confidence without winning. It's one of the most well-known facts in tennis. The players you call "vultures" are simply keeping their confidence high. Its the only reason why Ferrer has not lost to a player ranked lower than him all year except Bellucci, but the top four have all had their stumbles (Federer-Roddick / Nadal-Rosol / Djokovic-Isner / Murray-Raonic).
Playing the lower level tournaments help these players remain confident and in effect it helps them prevent upsets as much as possible.

2. You must know the ranking system of the ATP. The ranking is based on 18 tournaments barring the WTF and Olympics. the 4 majors, the 9 masters, and 6 other tournaments. The 6 other tournaments part is used in order to prevent vulturing.

So shut the fuck up. Ferrer and Monaco are certainly not doing anything wrong and you should be so ashamed with "push for life" for completely disrespecting two players who deserve the utmost respect.

Even Verdasco and Lopez do not deserve to be scolded for playing smaller tournaments. What they should be scolded for is playing those tournaments and then losing to players ranked outside the top 100. But that's off topic.

You have really become a disgrace in my eyes. :rolleyes:

All players have their smaller tournaments. Djokovic played Belgrade every year except this one. Isner plays in tournaments like Newport, and Nadal plays in Barcelona where except for this year, his only competition is Ferrer who he owns.

Del Potro plays Estoril...

I seem to remember a certain Marat Safin entering St. Petersburg in 2004 where no other player in the draw was ranked higher than 14. AND he didn't even win.

So maybe now would be an appropriate time to fuck off.

A few points:

1-Istomin is ranked below Ferrer and Ferrer lost to him at Indian Wells.

2-Those six tournaments allow for a lot of vulturing. Winning six tournaments with mug fields will give you far more points than six good performances in tournaments with strong fields but no titles. Players who are competitive and want to challenge themselves are punished and vultures prosper.

3-Playing one weak tournament on a rare occasion isn't a problem, it's only a problem when certain players systematically do it, thus abusing the ranking system to no end.

sera$un
08-01-2012, 01:48 AM
http://s7.directupload.net/images/120801/4wr8vhdc.png

The Prince
08-01-2012, 01:49 AM
So a smart scheduler is a vulture and a dumb scheduler is a hero. Interesting logic…

Kat_YYZ
08-01-2012, 01:50 AM
Ferrer would play Acapulco even if Federer announced he is going there next year. :rolleyes: He goes to Barcelona year after year like a lamb to the slaughter at Nadal's hands. He's not avoiding top players; he's just playing the tournaments he likes (like everyone else).

Also when you're ranked 5 or 6 you are a top player; it's hard to find that many above you ;)

Johnny Groove
08-01-2012, 01:58 AM
I'm telling you, Davydenko was a king vulture.

2005:

Plays Doha, Sydney, Marseille, Rotterdam, Dubai, Valencia, Barcelona, Munich, St. Poelten, Gstaad, Stuttgart, Kitbuhel, New Haven, Metz, Moscow, St. Petersburg, along with all 4 slams, 3 rounds of DC, the YEC, and all 9 Masters. 16 Vulture tournaments.

2006 he had 18 vulture tournaments, 17 vulture events in 2007!

Mark Lenders
08-01-2012, 02:04 AM
I'm telling you, Davydenko was a king vulture.

2005:

Plays Doha, Sydney, Marseille, Rotterdam, Dubai, Valencia, Barcelona, Munich, St. Poelten, Gstaad, Stuttgart, Kitbuhel, New Haven, Metz, Moscow, St. Petersburg, along with all 4 slams, 3 rounds of DC, the YEC, and all 9 Masters. 16 Vulture tournaments.

2006 he had 18 vulture tournaments, 17 vulture events in 2007!

Davydenko was indeed a huge vulture, although admittedly for money and not ranking points. That said, he was one of the best ball strikers of the past decade, amazing player. Shame he never played a Slam final, but I suspect his vulture schedule had a lot to do with it. At least he won WTF, a player of his talent deserved at least one big title.

If Ferrer striked the ball like Kolya, I wouldn't mind his vulturing. I'd even encourage since it'd mean I'd get to watch his tennis a lot. But it ain't the case so :p

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
08-01-2012, 02:04 AM
a)artificially boosts rankings by playing many MM events with joke draws

b)comes up short at big events

c) lacks talent- makes up for it by playing alot

connors fits criteria a)
but not criteria B) which is the biggie

current vultures are roddick and monaco

i think ferrer is borderline but he's talented...ish

Nole Rules
08-01-2012, 02:11 AM
http://s7.directupload.net/images/120801/4wr8vhdc.png

:haha:

Snowwy
08-01-2012, 02:12 AM
There must be some hidden point I'm missing here. Juan entered 6 non mandatories, all with top players in the draw bar Dusseldof, same with Roddick who was a solid #5/6 for most of the year and almost won a Slam.

How exactly did he vulture again? He filled the minimum quota of six non mandatories all with decent/good fields.

The fields in which Ferrer did were much stronger. In 09, Roddick was alright, but the other players in the draws then were quite low for top seeds.

NYMIKE
08-01-2012, 02:16 AM
Roddick is a dying predator, the kind of animal vultures feed upon though they would never mess with him in the prime.

Mechlan
08-01-2012, 02:17 AM
Not sure why this discussion centers around Ferrer. He's neither the biggest vulture nor a player that doesn't back up his results for the most part. If we're talking vultures, why is Tipsarevic not in the conversation?

Personally, I much prefer players that bring their best to the events that really matter. But ultimately I don't think it's that easy to game the system, especially if you're near the top of the rankings. If you'd rather play too much and try to hoard rankings points, go right ahead. It'll probably come back to bite you in the big events.

FiBeR
08-01-2012, 02:44 AM
For all of those calling Monaco a vulture, I would like to point out for you this week there is an ATP 500 event in Washington with Mardy Fish (#15) playing there rather than in London, whereas Monaco and Ferrer are there doing it for their nations.

That is being a vulture to me.. picking free points over country duty. Monaco and Ferrer earned their points rightfully. If you disagree, what would you call Fish then?

dencod16
08-01-2012, 03:39 AM
Mark Lenders definition of vulturing, players who faces weak opponents because the seeds they were suppose to face was not good enough to reach that round.

dencod16
08-01-2012, 03:42 AM
Davydenko was indeed a huge vulture, although admittedly for money and not ranking points. That said, he was one of the best ball strikers of the past decade, amazing player. Shame he never played a Slam final, but I suspect his vulture schedule had a lot to do with it. At least he won WTF, a player of his talent deserved at least one big title.

If Ferrer striked the ball like Kolya, I wouldn't mind his vulturing. I'd even encourage since it'd mean I'd get to watch his tennis a lot. But it ain't the case so :p

This shows a lot about you. I bet Ferrer is being paid huge bucks to appear on those small events, he enters the event even before the deadline, like the upcoming malaysian open.

Lazyking
08-01-2012, 03:46 AM
I really find it funny this so called vulturing. Why don't we just have i don't know 25 tournys mandatory for everyone that way their won't be any so called vulturing and we can have 50 or so guys on Tour! Yippie!

How bout instead of calling them vultures we call top players who play small tournments what they really are? Players who love to play the game of tennis and make money. Ranking points is cool but that prize money gets you that brand new house on the beaches of monte carlo yo.

dencod16
08-01-2012, 03:50 AM
Aren't people here noticing a trend on the topic of discussion, it's clay courter and americans that fit in to the vulturing topic. There is a reason for that because the top players are neither clay courter or Americans. If the likes of Tsonga, Berdych and del Potro are clay courter they will more like play Acapulco, and as far as i know dubai plays a ton of appearance fee for anyone to appear in their events, Acapulco doesn't have that luxury. And if they were American they will likely enter the hardcourt events which the likrs of Raonic, Fish, Isner, and Roddick plays.

Pea
08-01-2012, 04:00 AM
Aren't most tourneys required to have a top ten player?

dencod16
08-01-2012, 04:04 AM
For Ferrer counting only 9 Masters, Slams and Year-end.
seeding for Aussie Open ranking of jan. 9, 2012 ferrer had 3500, which would have placed him to be the 7th seed still with rome and canada as 0 pointers
seeding for french open ranking as of may 21, 2012 ferrer had 2945, which would have been placed him as the 8th seed with canada as 0 pointers
seeding for wimbledon ranking as of june 18, 2012 ferrer had 3485, which would have been placed him as the 7th seed ignoring wimble seeding rules and with canada as 0 pointers

sexybeast
08-01-2012, 05:30 AM
It needs to be said that Ferrer actually got great h2hs against players outside the top 4, he doesnt fear the big 4 powerplayers and usually defeats them on any kind of surface.

Ferrer plays Barcelona every year with the knowledge that he certanly will be defeated in the final against Nadal. Ferrer simply seems to play alot of tournaments and would still be top 5-6 every year even taking away some mickey mouse tournaments from his resume, the thing I notice is that Ferrer got no great advantage in the rankings from playing in smaller venues. He would either h<ve to aim for top 4 to avoid top 3 before SF or get out of top 8 to have a big impact on his draws but he has always been far away from reaching either scenario.

Monaco, Almagro, Fish and company is another story altogether ofcourse.

Whiznot
08-01-2012, 05:46 AM
I don't want to start a thread but please define Mug. I guessed that NID is Never In Doubt. I always thought Mug was my coffee cup.

Evitman
08-01-2012, 06:16 AM
I don't want to start a thread but please define Mug. I guessed that NID is Never In Doubt. I always thought Mug was my coffee cup.

Judging by the way this term is widely use here, I guess MUG is an abbreviation for Most Useless Guy

leng jai
08-01-2012, 06:25 AM
Mug is actually just a generic term for a professional tennis player.

BroTree123
08-01-2012, 06:31 AM
Exactly, because then it wouldn't be right calling Wozniacki a useless guy would it?

Nole Rules
08-01-2012, 07:11 AM
The hate is strong with your sig.

Let the blind hate flow freely.

AnnaK_4ever
08-01-2012, 07:33 AM
I'd like to duplicate my post from the other "Vulture" thread.

Top-10 wins per title run (all)

Player Titles Top-10 wins Av.Top-10 win
during title runs per title run

R Federer 75 112 1.493
N Djokovic 30 40 1.333
R Nadal 50 64 1.280
D Nalbandian 11 14 1.273
A Murray 22 24 1.091
L Hewitt 28 25 0.893
T Haas 13 11 0.846
R Soderling 10 8 0.800
N Davydenko 21 13 0.619
JM Del Potro 11 6 0.545
JC Ferrero 16 8 0.500
J Blake 10 4 0.400
N Almagro 12 4 0.333
A Roddick 32 9 0.281
T Robredo 10 2 0.200
D Ferrer 16 3 0.188
G Simon 10 1 0.100


Top-10 wins per title run (excluding YEC)

Player Titles Top-10 wins Av.Top-10 win
during title runs per title run

R Nadal 50 64 1.280
N Djokovic 29 36 1.241
R Federer 69 83 1.203
A Murray 22 24 1.091
D Nalbandian 10 10 1.000
T Haas 13 11 0.846
R Soderling 10 8 0.800
L Hewitt 26 17 0.654
JM Del Potro 11 6 0.545
JC Ferrero 16 8 0.500
N Davydenko 20 9 0.450
J Blake 10 4 0.400
N Almagro 12 4 0.333
A Roddick 32 9 0.281
T Robredo 10 2 0.200
D Ferrer 16 3 0.188
G Simon 10 1 0.100

Note: active players with 10+ titles listed.

BackhandDTL
08-01-2012, 08:09 AM
a)artificially boosts rankings by playing many MM events with joke draws

b)comes up short at big events

c) lacks talent- makes up for it by playing alot

connors fits criteria a)
but not criteria B) which is the biggie

current vultures are roddick and monaco

i think ferrer is borderline but he's talented...ish

Umm, no. Roddick is far from the player he once was, and this might very well be his last year of professional tennis. The difference between him and these other guys are nearly a decade in the top ten with a Major and five or six Masters to his name. He can do whatever the hell he wants these days.

Besides, he entered Atlanta ranked in the low 20's and beat a top 11 guy on the way to his victory. Taking his form for what it is these days, rather than what it was, that's actually a good result.

dencod16
08-01-2012, 11:09 AM
I'd like to duplicate my post from the other "Vulture" thread.

Top-10 wins per title run (all)

Player Titles Top-10 wins Av.Top-10 win
during title runs per title run

R Federer 75 112 1.493
N Djokovic 30 40 1.333
R Nadal 50 64 1.280
D Nalbandian 11 14 1.273
A Murray 22 24 1.091
L Hewitt 28 25 0.893
T Haas 13 11 0.846
R Soderling 10 8 0.800
N Davydenko 21 13 0.619
JM Del Potro 11 6 0.545
JC Ferrero 16 8 0.500
J Blake 10 4 0.400
N Almagro 12 4 0.333
A Roddick 32 9 0.281
T Robredo 10 2 0.200
D Ferrer 16 3 0.188
G Simon 10 1 0.100


Top-10 wins per title run (excluding YEC)

Player Titles Top-10 wins Av.Top-10 win
during title runs per title run

R Nadal 50 64 1.280
N Djokovic 29 36 1.241
R Federer 69 83 1.203
A Murray 22 24 1.091
D Nalbandian 10 10 1.000
T Haas 13 11 0.846
R Soderling 10 8 0.800
L Hewitt 26 17 0.654
JM Del Potro 11 6 0.545
JC Ferrero 16 8 0.500
N Davydenko 20 9 0.450
J Blake 10 4 0.400
N Almagro 12 4 0.333
A Roddick 32 9 0.281
T Robredo 10 2 0.200
D Ferrer 16 3 0.188
G Simon 10 1 0.100

Note: active players with 10+ titles listed.

this doesn't prove anything, cause it's about their opponents and not the field
Ferrer wins.
Titles won ranked outside the top 10
2002 Bucharest ranked 86
2006 Stuttgart ranked 18
2007 Auckland ranked 13
2007 Bastad ranked 15
2010 Acapulco ranked 19

tours with top 10
Auckland 2007 7 Tommy Robredo (Finalist)
9 Mario Ančić (Second Round)
Bastad 2007 7 Tommy Robredo (First round)
Netherland 2008 10 Richard Gasquet (Second Round)
Valencia 2010 4 Andy Murray (Second Round)
5 Robin Söderling (Semifinals)
7 Fernando Verdasco (Second Round)
Acapulco 2011 9 Fernando Verdasco (First Round)
Auckland 2012 10 Nicolás Almagro (Quarterfinals)

Burrow
08-01-2012, 11:18 AM
this doesn't prove anything, cause it's about their opponents and not the field
Ferrer wins.
Titles won ranked outside the top 10
2002 Bucharest ranked 86
2006 Stuttgart ranked 18
2007 Auckland ranked 13
2007 Bastad ranked 15
2008 's-Hertogenbosch ranked 23
2010 Acapulco ranked 19

tours with top 10
Auckland 2007 7 Tommy Robredo (Finalist)
9 Mario Ančić (Second Round)
Bastad 2007 7 Tommy Robredo (First round)
Netherland 2008 10 Richard Gasquet (Second Round)
Valencia 2010 4 Andy Murray (Second Round)
5 Robin Söderling (Semifinals)
7 Fernando Verdasco (Second Round)
Acapulco 2011 9 Fernando Verdasco (First Round)
Auckland 2012 10 Nicolás Almagro (Quarterfinals)

Where are you getting these numbers from? They're incorrect.

G4.
08-01-2012, 11:27 AM
I don't want to start a thread but please define Mug. I guessed that NID is Never In Doubt. I always thought Mug was my coffee cup.

british slang for idiot or something like this. It's always been used on betfairs forums by the gamblers. Whenever a gmabler loses a bet on say Fed Murray etc the player is an instant mug.

TBkeeper
08-01-2012, 11:32 AM
Listen once and for all ........
A vulture: Is NOT A GUY WHO fails at slams and then plays weak tournaments (cause it seems that he can't beat good players it's normal to play in weaker field !!!)
IT's a player that IS GOOD AT SLAMS (Ferrer) and STILL plays WEAK fields ! (cause he knows he can win them .....) and if you fail at winning weak tournament (it isn't vulturing) cause it just means that they are not good enough ergo WEAK player thus logically plays weak fields (easy to understand)
AND TO Those sick fucks that don't understand it or pretend that don't understand it cause of knowing that they are wrong ... i'm sorry for them :sad:

thegreendestiny
08-01-2012, 11:37 AM
This is a WTA term. :o

(Queen) Vulture = Radwanska

dencod16
08-01-2012, 11:51 AM
Where are you getting these numbers from? They're incorrect.

Those are the ranked a week before the torunaments starts or the date of the seedings.

Burrow
08-01-2012, 11:57 AM
Those are the ranked a week before the torunaments starts or the date of the seedings.

Ranked 23 a week before 's-Hertogenbosch? He was ranked Number 5 and the number 1 seed.

dencod16
08-01-2012, 12:04 PM
Ranked 23 a week before 's-Hertogenbosch? He was ranked Number 5 and the number 1 seed.

edited was looking at 2009. sorry.

Julián Santiago
08-01-2012, 12:30 PM
Yo supongo que tu ya lo sabes, pero muchos membros no tienen la bandera de su pays en este forum. My Spanish is a bit rusty, but I believe you understand :p

As for the rest, Del Potro has grown up playing on clay and plays some of his best tennis there, so I don't see how that point is valid.

Ok, I don´t know the first part. SO I retired the objection. Your spanish is good, the people of Portugal and Brazil understand and speak in a real incredible way our language. And, in any case your spanish is superior to my englsih, which is very bad, because I never went to any english education center to learnt it.

:D

I agree about Del Potro and I think he is a fantastic player, I also like those players you like. And you are a good poster in other topics, but you have to recapacitate, because you are irritating the whole forum with you attitude, which is not fundamented.

I understand you don´t like Ferrer, I don´t like TIpsarevic and Mónaco and i think, it shouldn`t be allowed to pass the 20 position, but they deserve the position the get, that`s the reality, and I don´t think they should be blamed for that, because they did it with sacrifice and by the legal system. They are good planificators and in the case of Monaco for example, you can`t call him "vulture", because, excepto for this year, he always loses early in the majority of the tournaments he played, excepto for a few over the years...

A lot of things that you said are tru. Ferrer takes advantage of his ranking among lower ranked players, yes, and he plays in smaller tournaments, yes. But there´s nothing wrong with that, he played in Auckland because it´s crucial for him to take confidence, also the surface is slower that Doha (where the tops only goes because of the money, because is more logicall preparing the AO by playing in Brisbane,Sydney or Brisbane, or by playing exhibitions like the Kooyong classics). Acapulco is a 500 points tournament in his best surface, it will be silly going to Dubai... Think if Tsonga or Berdych were claycourters, Are you really saying that they shoould go to Dubai or on the contrary, they must be called vultures?

Don Bosch is the same logic than Auckland, is slower than the others, and you can gain confidence in a surface which is not your best. Why going to Halle? To buy food and watch a Federer match? :haha:

And Bastad, well he played Bastad for a lot of years, it´s the last chance for the claycourters to get good points before going to the decoturf and indoord season, and Bastad is a prestigious tournament with great champions.

You know all this already, and a lot of people refutate your opinions about how these tournaments detterminate Ferrer`s ranking, It`s only that you hate him a lot, and we don´t know why.

Because you are a respected poster you can do a lot of damage and a lot of people, including myself, are bother four your obssesion with Ferrer, which i actually don´t like really, you must recapactitate.

Your crusade is a failure, and you know that. In fact, a lot of people are joking and not taking in a serious way the "vulture isue", so relax man, and stop with that silly attitude. It will be better for MTF in my opinion.

:wavey:

Burrow
08-01-2012, 12:51 PM
edited was looking at 2009. sorry.

Oh, I was totally bamboozled. I thought it was more likely that I was missing the point :) :wavey:

Whiznot
08-01-2012, 04:13 PM
mug 2 (mg)
n.
1. Informal
a. The human face.
b. The area of the human mouth, chin, and jaw.
c. A grimace.
d. A mug shot.
2. A thug; a hoodlum.
3. Chiefly British Slang A victim or dupe.
v. mugged, mug·ging, mugs
v.tr.
1. Informal To photograph (a person's face) for police files.
2. To threaten or assault (a person) with the intent to rob: arrested the thief who mugged the tourists.
v.intr.
To make exaggerated facial expressions, especially for humorous effect: The partygoers mugged for the camera.

Now I know that a mug is a victim or a dupe.

Paylu2007
08-01-2012, 05:06 PM
Any player from either the top 10 or 20 that enters in a tournament where he knows noone else will come close to beating him in the event.

Examples,
-Fernand Verdasco, ranked 17, entering a challenger in Czech Republic where everyone else was ranked outside the top 100.
-Feliciano Lopez, ranked 16 at the time, entering a challenger in Colombia where everyone else was ranked outside the top 100.
-David Ferrer, ranked 5, enters ATP 250 events where everyone else is ranked outside the top 30 and is just easy pickings for him.

Also, these guys do it on a constant basis.

3 spaniards there! :eek:

Hian-GOAT
08-01-2012, 06:33 PM
http://greenobles.com/data_images/agnieszka-radwanska/agnieszka-radwanska-01.jpg

+

http://www.wtatennis.com/namedImage/12781/player_100153.jpg

+

http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Marion+Bartoli+Moorilla+Hobart+International+V-6v4VxpIi1l.jpg

+

http://www.collegetennisonline.com/Uploads/519/Images/CohenJulia09_0_ctofeatured.jpg

+

http://www.ginadonewsmagazine.it/notizie/David-Ferrer.jpg

+

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5221/5654020120_a08b01afc7.jpg

+

http://www.officinadeltennis.it/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/lorenzi.jpg

+

http://www.tennis.com/players/images/atp/flopez.jpg

Federer in 2
08-01-2012, 06:35 PM
http://greenobles.com/data_images/agnieszka-radwanska/agnieszka-radwanska-01.jpg

+

http://www.wtatennis.com/namedImage/12781/player_100153.jpg

+

http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Marion+Bartoli+Moorilla+Hobart+International+V-6v4VxpIi1l.jpg

+

http://www.collegetennisonline.com/Uploads/519/Images/CohenJulia09_0_ctofeatured.jpg

+

http://www.ginadonewsmagazine.it/notizie/David-Ferrer.jpg

+

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5221/5654020120_a08b01afc7.jpg

+

http://www.officinadeltennis.it/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/lorenzi.jpg

+

http://www.tennis.com/players/images/atp/flopez.jpg

Leave Radwanska out of this :o

Satasonic
08-01-2012, 06:37 PM
http://www.officinadeltennis.it/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/lorenzi.jpg






:haha:


He does look like a rat too!

Hian-GOAT
08-01-2012, 08:11 PM
Rat-tata :cool:

motorhead
08-01-2012, 08:13 PM
Mark Lenders opened an epic thread on this subject just a few days ago. don't know what's the need for a new one.

finishingmove
08-05-2012, 06:52 PM
I think I finally got it...

A vulture is a player who, most of the time, beats players ranked below him. Right?

Aloevera
08-05-2012, 07:01 PM
A player that regularly enters certain tournaments with intention to take advantage of relatively weak competition for his/her rankings/standard.

dencod16
08-05-2012, 08:24 PM
A player that regularly enters certain tournaments with intention to take advantage of relatively weak competition for his/her rankings/standard.

That's not Mark Lenders definition sorry, for him it's about who they face rather than what the field is really like.

jrm
08-06-2012, 12:08 AM
in dictionary:

volture = Radwanska

Johnny Groove
08-06-2012, 01:07 AM
In Russia, tournament vultures you.

buddyholly
08-06-2012, 01:20 AM
As Federer might say, "Better a vulture than a dodo.''