Andy Murray given Cincinnati wild card [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Andy Murray given Cincinnati wild card

Raquel
08-12-2005, 05:05 PM
I'm happy for Andy he is playing in a Master Series event. Don't get me wrong - I am a fan of Andy and I hope he continues his rise through the rest of the year - but why are American tournaments throwing wild cards at him? He's had WC's in Newport and Indianapolis but now an American Masters Series event giving a WC to Andy? He did well at Wimbledon for his ranking and maybe created a bit of buzz, but I'm surprised that in America he is getting these WC's. Considering Masters Series have a lot of depth and a few well known names are qualifying it's a surprising decision. Are there no good young Americans to give one to? Or does "US Open Junior Champion" carry *that* much sway?

Nimomunz
08-12-2005, 05:07 PM
i thought all the WC had already been given out so who has them!!

Raquel
08-12-2005, 05:10 PM
i thought all the WC had already been given out so who has them!!
I don't know but during the Mathieu v Beck match on TV now, a caption came on screen with breaking news that Andy got a WC.

Action Jackson
08-12-2005, 05:11 PM
Fish withdrew, so Murray got his WC instead.

Regenbogen
08-12-2005, 05:13 PM
Fish withdrew, so Murray got his WC instead.
ah i see, that makes more sense now

too bad about fish, but good for murray :D

Experimentee
08-12-2005, 05:15 PM
I dont think he should be getting this many WCs. He isnt the only good young player around, and he's been struggling in the US hardcourt challengers. Getting WCs at home is all right, but this is too much.

Raquel
08-12-2005, 05:16 PM
Fish withdrew, so Murray got his WC instead.
Thanks GWH. I guess that makes a bit more sense than getting one outright. He seems to be high on the list for WCs in America. Good for him. I'd love him to play a top 5/top 10 in the first round. He probably wouldn't win against most of the draw at this stage so he'd be as well playing Roger/Lleyton/Rafa/Andre and just enjoying it.

LaTenista
08-12-2005, 05:18 PM
So who's getting the qualie WC Murray doesn't need now?

1sun
08-12-2005, 05:20 PM
be good to c how he copes with proper pros. we shall c if wimbledon was a one off.

Raquel
08-12-2005, 05:20 PM
I dont think he should be getting this many WCs. He isnt the only good young player around, and he's been struggling in the US hardcourt challengers. Getting WCs at home is all right, but this is too much.
Well he's played 4 Challengers. He's won one and QF of 2 and plays in the QF in Binghampton later today so he's done reasonably well. I think better than struggling, at least. But I am still a bit surprised he's had 2 main draw WC's and was the first on the list when a WC withdrew in Cincinnati.

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 05:23 PM
YEAHHHHH:):):):):):):) :bounce:

Aleksa's Laydee
08-12-2005, 05:35 PM
Mardy :sobbing: :hug:

kundalini
08-12-2005, 05:41 PM
I think it was just a slightly weird combination of events. Murray is still playing in Binghampton so there is a chance he would have had to pull out of qualifying.

Some of the other players that might otherwise have got it are playing the Bronx Challenger and I suspect the rules may not allow them to switch at this late stage if they are down on the main entry list.

So the list of candidates was not as long as it might have been.

Personally I don't think he deserved it but I'm not in the least surprised he got it.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 05:43 PM
Good management. Comes from the right country.

I feel like I say this daily, but it's still not registering.

Experimentee
08-12-2005, 05:46 PM
Well he's played 4 Challengers. He's won one and QF of 2 and plays in the QF in Binghampton later today so he's done reasonably well. I think better than struggling, at least. But I am still a bit surprised he's had 2 main draw WC's and was the first on the list when a WC withdrew in Cincinnati.

I was thinking that if he only reached the quarters, struggling to beat players like Mankad and Mamiit, he wouldnt have a chance in a Masters Series event.

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 05:52 PM
Challengers are "boring" for him, he want's to play big events...

SLICK
08-12-2005, 05:54 PM
This is great news for Andy. Shows that if he can do well in Cincinnati ie take a set off a top 10 player or beat someone ranked below that 1st round, then he will be in pole position for a WC into the US Open.

Raquel
08-12-2005, 05:55 PM
I was thinking that if he only reached the quarters, struggling to beat players like Mankad and Mamiit, he wouldnt have a chance in a Masters Series event.
He'll do very well to win a match. Masters Series is not just one level above where he is at right now experience wise, it's 2 or 3 levels. He'd be as well to get a top 5 player and just enjoy the experience for what it is.

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 05:56 PM
he would need a QF to get into top100, I don't expect it but I hope it.

Aleksa's Laydee
08-12-2005, 06:02 PM
I was thinking that if he only reached the quarters, struggling to beat players like Mankad and Mamiit, he wouldnt have a chance in a Masters Series event.
its all about the experience at this stage of his career...look what the experience at Wimbledon did for him...he won a title a few weeks later!

Raquel
08-12-2005, 06:06 PM
Good management. Comes from the right country.

I feel like I say this daily, but it's still not registering.
Good management might get you a WC here and there, but I'm just surprised it's got him 3 in the space of 6 weeks in American events.

Nimomunz
08-12-2005, 06:06 PM
But Djokovic and Del Potro have a big problem, they didn't born in a " Anglo-Saxon " country , tennis-nationalism just sucks .

If you was born in an anglo-saxon country or in France you know you will receive a lot of wild cards to climb the rankings when you are young and a promise , but if you was born in a country as for example Serbia, Argentina or Spain you know this player won't receive wild cards..

Remember and compare Gasquet-Monfils-Young in comparison with Nadal's case .. How many wild cards received Richard in 2002, 2003 and are now receiving Monfils and Young .... and how many received Nadal ??

The key factor to receive a WC, unluckily isn't the talent, is your birthplace.



:rolleyes:

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 06:10 PM
Murray is only a good young player but i think he's overestimated . I know he won US Open in juniors but for me it isn't enough to talk about a future star.

In my opinion he has no the talent of a future top 10 . Surely there are another young players in the circuit who deserved more this WC....Examples : 1) Djokovic ( who is better ranked than Murray and there's a big difference between both , Djokovic is climbing the rankings only thanks for his effort , not receiving help , and on the other hand Murray is receiving several wild cards ) , 2) and the up-coming Del Potro ( a player with an innate talent that Murray hasn't ) etc .

But Djokovic and Del Potro have a big problem, they didn't born in a " Anglo-Saxon " country , tennis-nationalism just sucks .

If you was born in an anglo-saxon country or in France you know you will receive a lot of wild cards to climb the rankings when you are young and a promise , but if you was born in a country as for example Serbia, Argentina or Spain you know this player won't receive wild cards..

Remember and compare Gasquet-Monfils-Young in comparison with Nadal's case .. How many wild cards received Richard in 2002, 2003 and are now receiving Monfils and Young .... and how many received Nadal ??

The key factor to receive a WC, unluckily isn't the talent, is your birthplace.

PD: At least this time Donald Young didn't receive a WC , because it's a bit scandalous to give these cards to a player who shows match after match he isn't ready to the ATP circuit yet .

I think it's not a question who's more talented, tennis player=tennis player. Only Federer is more talented than anyone else. Oh well, it matters where you were born, to get support with WC? :rolleyes:

pesto
08-12-2005, 06:13 PM
Yeah, despite being British, and quite enthusiastic about Andy's prospects, I think it would be better to give it to Djokovic, as he's really received very few, considering how far he's come on talent alone. He's the same age as Andy, and quite a bit higher up the rankings, without the help of WCs.

The top players born in '85 and ' 86 are already at the point that they don't need WCs (I know Monfils has one, but he's in the top 50 now, so it's likely to be his last), while the top 3 from '87 and '88 are Djokovic, Murray and Del Potro.

I think you could argue that Del Potro might not be experienced enough to benefit fully from a main draw masters WC, and that he'd be better getting one into a lower ATP tourney first, but the case for Djokovic is very strong.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:17 PM
I am beside myself over the fact that some of you are denying the importance of birthplace in the WC game.

Birthplace. Management. Wildcards.

Yes, talent is a factor. If you can't get your ass into the top 500 you're probably not going to get too many. Unless you're Donald Young. But it's not THE factor. Without the other two elements you're doing it on your own. Right, Djokovic?

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:18 PM
¿¿ Do you honestly think Murray is the young player in the circuit who deserved more this WC??
WC are rarely about "deserving". If they were, every tournament would have WC playoffs the weeks leading up to the event. Or they would jsut go by the rankings.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:20 PM
I don't remember Nadal getting too many nonSpanish WCs, btw, but he jumped into the top 50 awfully quickly so it's a little hard to guage that. Also, Spain has about 5 trillion tournaments at the ATP and futures/challengers level. Thus, it wasn't a big deal if he didn't get much else. Nadal was born in the right country ;)

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 06:21 PM
¿¿ Do you honestly think Murray is the young player in the circuit who deserved more this WC??

no, I don't think he's the youngest Now, It's like that. Forget it. Could he choose where he wanted to get born? :o

Lee
08-12-2005, 06:25 PM
I am beside myself over the fact that some of you are denying the importance of birthplace in the WC game.

Birthplace. Management. Wildcards.

Yes, talent is a factor. If you can't get your ass into the top 500 you're probably not going to get too many. Unless you're Donald Young. But it's not THE factor. Without the other two elements you're doing it on your own. Right, Djokovic?

And when you have a name that the tournament director can't pronounce, it's a lot harder to get a WC ;)

How to pronounce Djokovic, btw? :angel:

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:26 PM
Honestly, the WC fighting is dumb. It's not dumb to discuss the matter, even though the reasons for why some players get WCs and others don't have been beat absolutely to death, but it's dumb to fight about it and get pissy that Murray or whoever else get WCs over Djokovic or some random American who may have liked a walk into the Cincy main draw. I too find it a bit surprising that the US tournaments don't use every opportunity to throw a bone to their lower ranked boys, but why they haven't has been beat. to. death.

I feel for the young and not so young Americans who got passed up for a likely future star in Gael Monfils and maybe less likely but possibly Andy Murray. Nobody ever said the WC game was FAIR. Mind you, if it was, Monfils should have one anyways :)

I'm just sorry Canada didn't give both of them WCs.

Players like Djokovic or Baghdatis who didn't get the WC treatment will make it "on their own" when the time is right. I'm sure they don't spend their days sobbing that they didn't get that WC into Cincy.

Raquel
08-12-2005, 06:27 PM
I know that birth place definitely helps Andy. The way I see it if they offer you them, you take them. Some people have to do it all the hard way and some people get the WCs but no one is going to turn them down if offered. He should take every one he can get his hands on. I would have just thought that having being British might get him one or two but then it was decided he'd had his chances. I guess there's not enough young Americans considered worthy of one.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:27 PM
And when you have a name that the tournament director can't pronounce, it's a lot harder to get a WC ;)

How to pronounce Djokovic, btw? :angel:
I was told it was something like Jo-kovic, or Jah-kovic, they were fighting about it in the Novak thread. I just gave up and accepted that I would never pronounce it correctly.

Fee
08-12-2005, 06:29 PM
I think you are all missing the obvious reason Murray got that wildcard. Here in the states, its all about 'the buzz.' Murray can be marketed in the next few days, based solely on his recent Wimbledon performance. The 'tv tennis fans' who only pay attention to 3 tournaments per year (Wimbledon, USO, and perhaps whatever other tournament is closest to home) probably have a vague idea of who Murray is or will once they are reminded of it by a radio, tv, or newspaper advert (then they will repeat that info to each other at the tournament and think that makes them knowledgeable tennis fans). These are the types of people that tournaments sell tickets to, and they look for the most marketable players to help them do it. I hate this aspect of tennis, but I saw it at work in San Jose and all I could do was just shake my head and roll my eyes. Once the Murray buzz dies down, the WC's will stop and we'll be talking about the next 'flavor of the month.'

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:33 PM
There is also that, Fee. Good post :)

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 06:35 PM
I think it's djoko-vitsh

alfonsojose
08-12-2005, 06:41 PM
He'll play JesusFed ;)

jtipson
08-12-2005, 06:45 PM
I think it's djoko-vitsh

I think it's the dj combo that English-only speakers are going to have problems with ;)

jtipson
08-12-2005, 06:46 PM
Baghdatis is an example of that kind of players who are junior wolrd champion thanks for their age and not for their amazing talent , i mean players who are in their last year being junior and a lot of times they're facing players 2 or 3 years younger.

If Baghdatis doesn't receive WC is because his talent doesn't deserve them.

Absolute twaddle.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:48 PM
Baghdatis is an example of that kind of players who are junior wolrd champion thanks for their age and not for their amazing talent , i mean players who are in their last year being junior and a lot of times they're facing players 2 or 3 years younger.

If Baghdatis doesn't receive WC is because his talent doesn't deserve them.

Roddick was a good junior when he was 18. I guess he was just like, lucky that other guys were younger than him. Same with Monfils, who will probably be very good.

Baghdatis has been injured a lot, but I find it odd somebody would deny his talent.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:48 PM
Absolute twaddle.
:yeah:

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:49 PM
I think it's the dj combo that English-only speakers are going to have problems with ;)
Writing "dj" when trying to explain the pronunciation to English speakers is confusing, because then they want to make the sound "d' as in "dad", which is certainly wrong.

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 06:51 PM
Just another hyped up player who won't deliver. I'd not be surprised if Wimbledon was a fluke. Winning poor US Challengers won't change that.

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 06:52 PM
ok another Diiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiio-kovitsh

delsa
08-12-2005, 06:52 PM
Well, Gasquet and Monfils were both reigning World Junior Champions. Gasquet for a time was the younger player to win a match in a MS at 15 because of one of those WC. And after that period of WC galore, he came back climbing up the rankings the hard way through lots of wins in Challengers and through quallies. I believe he could have reached his first MS final in Monte-Carlo 05 had he not played three more difficult matches than his opponent because of his quallies matches.
As i said in the Cincy Entry list thread:

Monfils being black certainly does make him more markettable, tennis-wise. However, it doesn't do much in regards to winning him titles and matches. That he does all on his own, and he's been doing a damn good job of it for his first year on tour

Exactly! And what helps is that he's very "crowd friendly" too... That makes him even more markettable. The "race" (there are no races inside the human race...) is irrelevent since he won't be on tv etc...and even if it was it is not the case here since his very good results only can justificate for him getting WCs. Why are North-American obsessed with "race", it seems? This has almost no importance whatsoever...
I agree he had a damn lot of WC into big tournaments but he honored them by winning matches after (defeating players like Gaudio, Malisse, Enqvist etc...giving a hard time to Hewitt...). And it's quite normal and logical.
He would have entered direcly in the main draw if it would have been made later with his new ranking. He just won a title for his first year on tour. He is the reigning Junior World Champion. HC is his favorite surface. Despite all the WC, he's already showed he can make it through quallies. He won almost all the Challennger tournaments he entered this season or made it to the final...So he had his time in the Challenger but now he's "too good" for that at least for now he may come back to it later but now he's excited about testing himself among the big guys and that's quite understandable. Why wouldn't he do that if he has the potential? If he can have WC, he won't refuse them. He's not crazy. He's just taking his chances and have a very good agent... If someone is to blame for all these WC, it's the tournaments organisators...
Please silence those "haters"/"whinners", Gaël!

The fact that both Gaël and Richard are from France is a coincidence. The WC they got were deserved and logical for most of them. The facts are there. Djokovik definitely deserved one too because of the facts again too. Murray being British has nothing to do with this. I'm one of those who think he has a lot of potential and i think his WC can be considered deserved too.
Even if it's naïve to say the reasons what WC are given are always fair and based on a player's performance etc... in Monfils and Gasquet's cases. You can't say the contrary without lying, being aware of their respective situations and results when that happened,: that was deserved.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:52 PM
Just another hyped up player who won't deliver. I'd not be surprised if Wimbledon was a fluke. Winning poor US Challengers won't change that.
Prove the HATAS wrong, Andy!

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 06:53 PM
Gasquet only ever loses to Nadal because he's tired. Otherwise he would win all their matches 0 and 0 :)

alfonsojose
08-12-2005, 06:56 PM
Just another hyped up player who won't deliver. I'd not be surprised if Wimbledon was a fluke. Winning poor US Challengers won't change that.
It's just "Wild Cards for the hot guys", the new ATP reality series. Next comes Marco Chiudinelli :drool: :drool: ;)

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 06:56 PM
Just another hyped up player who won't deliver. I'd not be surprised if Wimbledon was a fluke. Winning poor US Challengers won't change that.
lol :eek:

madmanfool
08-12-2005, 06:57 PM
sure Djokovic would have deserved that WC just as much as Murray, but the reason is simple:

Murray is much better known than Djokovic
publicity wise he's the better option

Anyway, I rather see a player like Murray getting a WC than some American guy I don't know (I know Fish btw ;) )

For Del Potro the step would be to big, it's definitely too early for him to get a WC in such a big tournament

I like Murray alright, I can live with it


CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 06:58 PM
lol :eek:

He doesn't have consistency or stamina. His claycourt results are a joke. He's being taken to three sets continuously on fast surfaces.

Raquel
08-12-2005, 06:58 PM
Just another hyped up player who won't deliver. I'd wait another 4/5 years before stating he won't/hasn't delivered. Unless you can see into the future, and if so give me tonight's Euromillions numbers :p

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 06:58 PM
Ii's just "Wild Cards for hot guys", the new ATP reality series. Next comes Marco Chiudinelli :drool: :drool: ;)
:devil: :o

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 06:59 PM
sure Djokovic would have deserved that WC just as much as Murray, but the reason is simple:

Murray is much better known than Djokovic
publicity wise he's the better option

Anyway, I rather see a player like Murray getting a WC than some American guy I don't know (I know Fish btw ;) )

For Del Potro the step would be to big, it's definitely too early for him to get a WC in such a big tournament

I like Murray alright, I can live with it



Giving a WC to a young, foreign player can't possibly be based on getting publicity. If the Canadian crowds are anything like the Dutch crowds, 90% of the crowd won't know either Djokovic or Murray.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 07:00 PM
I was talking about Bagdhatis and Muller cases for example, not Roddick .

Muller has shown improvement as of late, not that I see him making the jump to the top ten.

You know , there are players that in juniors you see they won't be top 10 players , although those players were junior champions.

I know what you're saying, I just think that you're off base about Baghdatis, who I happen to think is an incredible talent :shrug:

And about Monfils, he will reach the top 10, but he hasn't the conditions to be a Nadal or a Gasquet .

Does Gasquet have the "conditions' to be a Nadal? :shrug: Given what Gasquet has done so far, I would say that Monfils will do that.

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 07:00 PM
my friend, he has only played a few matches on ATP tour level. Everything will come. He needs time...

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 07:01 PM
It's just "Wild Cards for the hot guys", the new ATP reality series. Next comes Marco Chiudinelli :drool: :drool: ;)

:lol:

delsa
08-12-2005, 07:02 PM
Gasquet only ever loses to Nadal because he's tired. Otherwise he would win all their matches 0 and 0 :)
No. Nadal is better than him especially on clay. But during this "dream weak" he was on fire as Mathieu is this weak for exemple. And i believe (it's only my HO) that, since this loss was mostly due to his tiredness in front of Nadal fantastic physical shape, he could have won. It's not as if he had been ripped apart. He was up a set, and a break in the second playing beautiful tennis, supported by the crowd etc... You remember? I think my opinion makes sense. It was not the case at all in the other encounters between them. But we'll never know. So that's all i can say. And that's all that can be said about this. It's an opinion. It's not worth a lot. ;)

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 07:02 PM
It's just "Wild Cards for the hot guys", the new ATP reality series. Next comes Marco Chiudinelli :drool: :drool: ;)

No point in giving wild cards to injured players, unfortunately.

alfonsojose
08-12-2005, 07:04 PM
And hopefully Del Potro will live up to his name :drool: :drool: Potro means baby horse in spanish :secret:

alfonsojose
08-12-2005, 07:05 PM
No point in giving wild cards to injured players, unfortunately.
:eek: :awww: :hug:

madmanfool
08-12-2005, 07:06 PM
If it helps there's a limit to how many WC a player can get
but not sure how many, and wether it's on a yearly basis or once in a lifetime

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 07:06 PM
And hopefully Del Potro will live up to his name :drool: :drool: Potro means baby horse in spanish :secret:
:rolleyes: :devil:

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 07:08 PM
my friend, he has only played a few matches on ATP tour level. Everything will come. He needs time...

Yes. That is why he should not be given WCs into events such as this. It's best for him to work his way up.

You can see what you want about the WTA Tour, but one of the great things they offer, is WCs for the winners of ITF events. These so-called feed-up spots provide players who are excelling on Challenger level with WCs into certain smaller WTA-level events or into qualifying draws if the ITF events are small.

That is the best way for the system to work. Hyping players is not good at all for the players. Look at Gasquet, who was all hyped up a few years ago after a few good results, pretty much sucked consistently and now worked his way up and is better than ever. Donald Young needs to do the same. And so does Murray, however talented he may be.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 07:09 PM
If it helps there's a limit to how many WC a player can get
but not sure how many, and wether it's on a yearly basis or once in a lifetime
Are you sure? Must be a pretty high limit, seeing as Gael has had something like 9 this season. The WTA has a limit, I believe, but I was not aware the ATP did. But I also never looked it up :)

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 07:10 PM
:eek: :awww: :hug:

See, he was given a WC into Gstaad, a tournament which he of course would have won hands down, but his injury forced him to give the title to some no-hoper.

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 07:11 PM
Are you sure? Must be a pretty high limit, seeing as Gael has had something like 9 this season. The WTA has a limit, I believe, but I was not aware the ATP did. But I also never looked it up :)

There is a limit.

Gael has been given quite a few WCs, but I think two or three times he got lucky because players pulled out, and he was in the main draw without the WC. So he looks like he's been given more WCs than he in fact received.

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 07:12 PM
Yes. That is why he should not be given WCs into events such as this. It's best for him to work his way up.

You can see what you want about the WTA Tour, but one of the great things they offer, is WCs for the winners of ITF events. These so-called feed-up spots provide players who are excelling on Challenger level with WCs into certain smaller WTA-level events or into qualifying draws if the ITF events are small.

That is the best way for the system to work. Hyping players is not good at all for the players. Look at Gasquet, who was all hyped up a few years ago after a few good results, pretty much sucked consistently and now worked his way up and is better than ever. Donald Young needs to do the same. And so does Murray, however talented he may be.

sure, but you can't say the same will happen to Murray :p

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 07:13 PM
This thread seems to be very popular...:confused:

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 07:15 PM
sure, but you can't say the same will happen to Murray :p

No, but in my opinion this is the ultimate way to prepare a player for the real Tour and it will make the players better and more complete in the end.

In general, it is my view that giving WCs to young prospects is often a short-term threat to their career. And my view is based on and supported by numerous cases throughout the last decade or longer.

Nimomunz
08-12-2005, 07:16 PM
its andy baby he's very popular

silverwhite
08-12-2005, 07:18 PM
No. Nadal is better than him especially on clay. But during this "dream weak" he was on fire as Mathieu is this weak for exemple. And i believe (it's only my HO) that, since this loss was mostly due to his tiredness in front of Nadal fantastic physical shape, he could have won. It's not as if he had been ripped apart. He was up a set, and a break in the second playing beautiful tennis, supported by the crowd etc... You remember? I think my opinion makes sense. It was not the case at all in the other encounters between them. But we'll never know. So that's all i can say. And that's all that can be said about this. It's an opinion. It's not worth a lot. ;)

Mine too. :yeah:

madmanfool
08-12-2005, 07:19 PM
WC can always be discussed because they're decided on someone's opinion about several players, who they think is the right choise, it's subjective

It's not like you have to achieve a certain something to get a WC

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 07:25 PM
For me the word talent isn't only the technical conditions, or how many amazing shots has the player , in my opinion the talent is the " whole " player, also physical and psychological conditions .

If you see players as Hewitt and Nadal , you could think, why those players are in the top of the rankings if they haven't shots to make winner after winner ?? . The answer is that a player is something more than only a powerful forehand, backhand or serve ..

The " whole " Bagdhatis haven't showed to be able to do great things so far in the ATP and it's the time he begins to show the ( talent = results ) some people thinks he has .

So far, indeed. We cannot expect certain players to reach great heights when they are the same age as Nadal this year. Every player peaks at a different time and players all evolve differently and in their own pace.

Take for instance Patrick Rafter. Rafter as a teenager was not doing well at all, but he is for sure one of the greatest players of the last two decades.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 07:26 PM
No. Nadal is better than him especially on clay. But during this "dream weak" he was on fire as Mathieu is this weak for exemple. And i believe (it's only my HO) that, since this loss was mostly due to his tiredness in front of Nadal fantastic physical shape, he could have won. It's not as if he had been ripped apart. He was up a set, and a break in the second playing beautiful tennis, supported by the crowd etc... You remember? I think my opinion makes sense. It was not the case at all in the other encounters between them. But we'll never know. So that's all i can say. And that's all that can be said about this. It's an opinion. It's not worth a lot. ;)
There seems to be an elaborate reason for all of Gasquet's losses to Nadal, that's all.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 07:28 PM
For me the word talent isn't only the technical conditions, or how many amazing shots has the player , in my opinion the talent is the " whole " player, also physical and psychological conditions .

If you see players as Hewitt and Nadal , you could think, why those players are in the top of the rankings if they haven't shots to make winner after winner ?? . The answer is that a player is something more than only a powerful forehand, backhand or serve ..

The " whole " Bagdhatis haven't showed to be able to do great things so far in the ATP and it's the time he begins to show the ( talent = results ) some people thinks he has .
Not getting injured every other week would certainly help. But I forget that Baghdatis is 35 and his career is almost over.

delsa
08-12-2005, 07:30 PM
There seems to be an elaborate reason for all of Gasquet's losses to Nadal, that's all.
Yes: Nadal's superior to him. That's the reason for 2 of them. But i think that on this particular day, it was not why he lost because, on this particular day, i believe it was not the case. That's all. ;) I'm not saying Rafa didn't deserve to win.

madmanfool
08-12-2005, 07:31 PM
qoute:Take for instance Patrick Rafter. Rafter as a teenager was not doing
well at all, but he is for sure one of the greatest players of the last two decades.

Amen to that

silverwhite
08-12-2005, 07:33 PM
There seems to be an elaborate reason for all of Gasquet's losses to Nadal, that's all.

He was outplayed at RG. In Monte-Carlo, he deserved to lose the match because he had not worked hard enough on his fitness. We're saying that fitness was a deciding factor in the match (he was up a break in the second and third sets after all), not that he deserved to win it.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 07:34 PM
Ok, but there are players that wait a lot to show their " supposed " talent , for example Muller , who after serveral years in the ATP is when he begins to show some decent results .
Juniors like Roddick and Monfils who rip into the top 50 on their first year on tour are the exception, not the norm. Expecting other junior champs to do the same and using them as the bar is therefore awfully silly.

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 07:35 PM
He was outplayed at RG. In Monte-Carlo, he deserved to lose the match because he had not worked hard enough on his fitness. We're saying that fitness was a deciding factor in the match (he was up a break in the second and third sets after all), not that he deserved to win it.
Yeah, what if. Remind me what Nadal led in the first set before Gasquet won it? ;)

silverwhite
08-12-2005, 07:38 PM
Yeah, what if. Remind me what Nadal led in the first set before Gasquet won it? ;)

What if is related in this case. Delsa was asking, "What if Richard had been given a WC at MC?", so we were just following that line of thought.

delsa
08-12-2005, 07:41 PM
Yeah, what if. Remind me what Nadal led in the first set before Gasquet won it? ;)
You also have to look at the way they were both playing. For a moment, Richard played better before running out of gas. Then it was the contrary. And the player who had played the best for more time won the match in the end. That's logical. ;)

delsa
08-12-2005, 07:42 PM
What if is related in this case. Delsa was asking, "What if Richard had been given a WC at MC?", so we were just following that line of thought.
Exactly! I'd rather have seen him getting this Wc than one of those he had in 2002...That would have been worth it.

Aleksa's Laydee
08-12-2005, 07:46 PM
Just another hyped up player who won't deliver. I'd not be surprised if Wimbledon was a fluke. Winning poor US Challengers won't change that.
How do you know he wont deliever...you got a crystal ball or something :rolleyes:

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 07:47 PM
Ok, but there are players that wait a lot to show their " supposed " talent , for example Muller , who after serveral years in the ATP is when he begins to show some decent results .

I don't think it's justifiable to call Gilles Muller a "talent". He leans on his serve and just fights hard. I think natural talent is different from what he has.

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 07:48 PM
How do you know he wont deliever...you got a crystal ball or something :rolleyes:

Just to make clear, I was talking about the short-term. I think Murray definitely has the game and potential to be very good in the future, but not in the near future.

So in these tournaments he will not deliver.

CooCooCachoo
08-12-2005, 07:52 PM
He's only 18 and new to the ATP circuit which is certainly alot harder than the junior circuit so give him a break and stop being so negative!

If you would have read better, you would have also read I said that it would be better for him to make it to the Challenger Tour rather than by going from juniors to ATP level events.

This is a process that usually takes at least one or two years, but that helps shape a player. The competition on Challenger level is incredibly tough and if you can make it through that, you not only gained a lot of self-confidence and experience, but you also filled the gap between Junior and ATP Tour, rather than take a big jump over the gap.

Aleksa's Laydee
08-12-2005, 07:53 PM
Just to make clear, I was talking about the short-term. I think Murray definitely has the game and potential to be very good in the future, but not in the near future.

So in these tournaments he will not deliver.

Ok nice to know :)

Nimomunz
08-12-2005, 07:55 PM
i have faith in andy and look monfils has all the WC and then he wins at sopot, maybe its fate!

smucav
08-12-2005, 08:33 PM
Are you sure? Must be a pretty high limit, seeing as Gael has had something like 9 this season. The WTA has a limit, I believe, but I was not aware the ATP did. But I also never looked it up :)There is an ATP rule limiting wild cards per year, but it only applies if a player would have gotten in directly based on his ranking, didn't enter, & ended up accepting a wild card later. (For example: in 2004 Hewitt could have gotten into Long Island directly, but didn't enter. He later changed his mind about playing & accepted a wild card. This wild card counted toward his annual limit.) This rule is to prevent top players from snatching up wild cards at the last minute from lower ranked players when they would not have needed them if they had entered by the deadline.

2005 ATP Official Rulebook:B. Limitation
1) Singles. Players may accept up to five (5) main draw singles wild cards into ATP tournaments during any ATP Circuit Year. Wild cards shall only count toward the annual limit if the player would have been a direct acceptance on the original acceptance list.
Additional exceptions are outlined below.
a) Players who cannot participate in ATP Tournaments for six (6) months because of a physical injury may petition the ATP for one additional wild card.
b) In the event that a player’s position in the INDESIT ATP Entry Ranking (Singles) is insufficient to make him a Direct Acceptance on the forty-two (42) day Acceptance List, then he shall be released from his commitment to that Tournament, unless offered a wild card to the Contract Tournament within twenty-four (24) hours of the entry deadline. Such wild card accepted by a player shall not count in the player's annual limitation of five (5) wild cards in singles.
c) Any player who becomes thirty-five (35) years of age by December 31 of an ATP Circuit Year shall be exempt from the wild card limitation if he is:
i) A former singles Champion of a Grand Slam; or
ii) A former singles Champion of the ATP World Championship or Tennis Masters Cup; or
iii) A former No.1-ranked player in the INDESIT ATP Rankings (Singles) prior to
January 2000; or
iv) A former No.1 player in the year-end INDESIT ATP Race.
d) Players may petition the ATP for exceptions to these limitations
2) Doubles. There shall be no limitations of doubles wild cards for players.Monfils has received 9 main draw wild cards in 2005 (including Cincinnati), but none of them have counted toward his annual limit:
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showpost.php?p=2129151&postcount=47

Chloe le Bopper
08-12-2005, 08:40 PM
Thanks, Smucov.

joeb_uk
08-12-2005, 08:40 PM
I hate murray, but at least they arent wasting wildcards on no hopers like donald duck! This guy wastes wildcards left right and center. At least murray is capable of winning matches, and has done so in the past. Duck just gets creamed every time.

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 10:41 PM
:rolleyes:

YoursTruly
08-12-2005, 10:41 PM
oh great, not him again

Papakori
08-12-2005, 10:44 PM
well done Andy on your wildcard

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 10:49 PM
smucav, how many WC counted for Murray?

Papakori
08-12-2005, 10:52 PM
Murray vs Dent rematch in round one

ClaycourtaZzZz.
08-12-2005, 11:15 PM
awwwwww..... amazing:)

SLICK
08-13-2005, 12:09 AM
If he repeats his victory over Dent that he had at Queens, he could face Safin in round 2. OMG! Possible QF with Agassi. The decision to grant Andy a WC will be totally vindicated. You'll see.

Pea
08-13-2005, 12:26 AM
2005 ATP Official Rulebook:Monfils has received 9 main draw wild cards in 2005 (including Cincinnati), but none of them have counted toward his annual limit:
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showpost.php?p=2129151&postcount=47

That's just sad.

*Viva Chile*
08-13-2005, 01:06 AM
I'm happy for Andy he is playing in a Master Series event. Don't get me wrong - I am a fan of Andy and I hope he continues his rise through the rest of the year - but why are American tournaments throwing wild cards at him? He's had WC's in Newport and Indianapolis but now an American Masters Series event giving a WC to Andy? He did well at Wimbledon for his ranking and maybe created a bit of buzz, but I'm surprised that in America he is getting these WC's. Considering Masters Series have a lot of depth and a few well known names are qualifying it's a surprising decision. Are there no good young Americans to give one to? Or does "US Open Junior Champion" carry *that* much sway?

I think the USTA must many favors to the british tennis association, because many WC's have been given to american players in the last years (example: James Blake at Wimbledon). For this, I'm not surprised at all.

smucav
08-13-2005, 01:07 AM
smucav, how many WC counted for Murray?http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/playerprofiles/playeractivity/default.asp?player=MC10

Murray has received 6 main draw wild cards this year (including Cincinnati), but none of them have counted toward his annual limit since he was well below the cut-off in all of the tournaments.

I can't recall any top player who has received more than one wild card this year that will count toward his annual limit. (Agassi received two, but ended up not using one of them & he's exempt from the rule anyway.)

Scotso
08-13-2005, 02:24 AM
Go Andrew!

Nimomunz
08-13-2005, 03:54 PM
If he repeats his victory over Dent that he had at Queens, he could face Safin in round 2. OMG! Possible QF with Agassi. The decision to grant Andy a WC will be totally vindicated. You'll see.
i'm dying for a match of andy vs safin.

Experimentee
08-13-2005, 06:18 PM
And when you have a name that the tournament director can't pronounce, it's a lot harder to get a WC ;)

How to pronounce Djokovic, btw? :angel:

'yoc-ko-vich'

Chloe le Bopper
08-13-2005, 06:22 PM
Everybody gives a different way of saying it :o

CooCooCachoo
08-13-2005, 08:24 PM
well done Andy on your wildcard

Well done?

Oh my.

Experimentee
08-15-2005, 03:22 AM
When Monfils got WCs they were mostly in France, when the French had an exchange or where he was the junior champion. Murray is getting US WCs for no reason :o

smucav
08-15-2005, 04:12 AM
When Monfils got WCs they were mostly in France, when the French had an exchange or where he was the junior champion. Murray is getting US WCs for no reason :oIn 2005, Monfils & Murray have received an equal percentage of wild cards from their home countries v. other countries/continents.

Three of Monfils's nine ATP wild cards this year (1/3) were from French (or reciprocal) tournaments [Australian Open, Marseille, & French Open]. The other six were from Middle Eastern, other European, or American tournaments.

Two of Murray's six ATP wild cards this year (1/3) were from British tournaments [Queen's Club, Wimbledon]. The other four were from other European or American tournaments.

Experimentee
08-15-2005, 05:14 AM
In 2005, Monfils & Murray have received an equal percentage of wild cards from their home countries v. other countries/continents.

Three of Monfils's nine ATP wild cards this year (1/3) were from French (or reciprocal) tournaments [Australian Open, Marseille, & French Open]. The other six were from Middle Eastern, other European, or American tournaments.

Two of Murray's six ATP wild cards this year (1/3) were from British tournaments [Queen's Club, Wimbledon]. The other four were from other European or American tournaments.

I think Monte Carlo can be counted as one of those, as French players always get WCs there since the two countries are very close. The Middle Eastern tournaments always give WCs to good juniors too, since they dont have any players of their own. American tournaments dont usually give WCs for no reason though. Now Murray's percentage seems low, but I bet it will increase as he keeps getting more WCs overseas.

Tennis_Mad
08-15-2005, 07:43 AM
When Monfils got WCs they were mostly in France, when the French had an exchange or where he was the junior champion. Murray is getting US WCs for no reason :o

erm...Didn't Murray win the US Open Juniors title?

Nimomunz
08-15-2005, 01:21 PM
no if he won that he would have completed the junior grand slam
edit : this is completely false :lol:

skel1983
08-15-2005, 01:25 PM
he did win the us open junior title, monfils won the other three.