Embarrassment for mens tennis [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Embarrassment for mens tennis

JCF
11-19-2005, 09:40 PM
This tournament has just been a complete joke for mens tennis, i hope the final can provide some entertainment because watching those semi finals were about as good and competitive as a brick wall. I feel sorry for the Shanghai promoters, they wanted a masters event, and they got players like Puerta, Davydenko and worst of Gaudio playing. I know these guys didn't qualify outright, but these are supposed to be some of the top players in the world.

I don't think this so called depth of mens tennis actually exists.

Chloe le Bopper
11-19-2005, 09:41 PM
Erm, Davydenko would have been there anyways.

sigmagirl91
11-19-2005, 09:42 PM
No disrespect to the other players or their fans, but the two finalists are clearly the class of the field.

PaulieM
11-19-2005, 09:44 PM
why do i have a strange sense of deja vu? :scratch:

JCF
11-19-2005, 09:44 PM
Erm, Davydenko would have been there anyways.
Yeah you're right, sorry

Carito_90
11-19-2005, 09:48 PM
Maybe the ATP will realise they have to shorten the season now. :o

enqvistfan
11-19-2005, 09:50 PM
This tournament has just been a complete joke for mens tennis, i hope the final can provide some entertainment because watching those semi finals were about as good and competitive as a brick wall. I feel sorry for the Shanghai promoters, they wanted a masters event, and they got players like Puerta, Davydenko and worst of Gaudio playing. I know these guys didn't qualify outright, but these are supposed to be some of the top players in the world.

I don't think this so called depth of mens tennis actually exists.

Davydenko won his matches in his group. It's just that he lost his semis. For the next years, ATP will change the calendar of the year. Tennis players are human person and not machines. It will be interesting to see if there are any changes in the future.

sigmagirl91
11-19-2005, 09:50 PM
why do i have a strange sense of deja vu? :scratch:

Same here. How many Gaudio-bashing threads do we need in one day? Sheesh....:rolleyes:

enqvistfan
11-19-2005, 09:50 PM
Maybe the ATP will realise they have to shorten the season now. :o

Agree :yeah:

DrJules
11-19-2005, 09:57 PM
No disrespect to the other players or their fans, but the two finalists are clearly the class of the field.

:yeah:

Together with Ivan these were the three best players. A full strength field may have produced a worse final. Roger Federer usually finds David Nalbandian more difficult to beat than the players missing; Roddick, Safin, Agassi and Hewitt. Roger has only beaten David easily in 2 matches out of 9 and has a 4-5 losing record.

Tennis Fool
11-19-2005, 09:59 PM
I don't think it's an embarrassment in the US. We don't even know it's going on since it's not in Houston :o

Scotso
11-19-2005, 10:01 PM
Davydenko is a better player than Ljubicic.

If you want to blame something for the poor quality of matches, blame it on the surface. You have two guys who prefer slower courts versus two guys who like the fast courts... so what did you expect, really?

I don't care if Gaudio got spanked, he earned his spot in the semifinals just like Federer did.

And as for the injuries, they have nothing to do with the length of the season. The players need to take better care of themselves.

rofe
11-19-2005, 10:02 PM
The top players got injured and the next set of players have done better on clay compared to HC. What did you expect? Very few people can play on all surfaces and two of the best (in terms of all surface play) are playing in the finals. I think that is great because it reaffirms what the YEC is all about.

DrJules
11-19-2005, 10:06 PM
The top players got injured and the next set of players have done better on clay compared to HC. What did you expect? Very few people can play on all surfaces and two of the best (in terms of all surface play) are playing in the finals. I think that is great because it reaffirms what the YEC is all about.

Interesting, possibly 2 most complete tennis players reach final. Both have good records in ALL Grand Slams.

PaulieM
11-19-2005, 10:08 PM
Same here. How many Gaudio-bashing threads do we need in one day? Sheesh....:rolleyes:
this is only like the 50th thread about how this tmc has sucked, it's embarassing etc. each thread makes this statement as though it's a novel conclusion. if people just scrolled down gm first maybe we could keep it all in one thread....crazy huh:o

Scotso
11-19-2005, 10:11 PM
I think that is great because it reaffirms what the YEC is all about.
And what is that, exactly? Picking an extreme surface so that people who earned a spot in it from good play on clay and slower surfaces have no chance?

DrJules
11-19-2005, 10:12 PM
this is only like the 50th thread about how this tmc has sucked, it's embarassing etc. each thread makes this statement as though it's a novel conclusion. if people just scrolled down gm first maybe we could keep it all in one thread....crazy huh:o

Many decided it was awful before play even started. Surely we need to wait to the end to determine the success or failure of the event. The womens year end event had many top players missing, but provided some excellent matches, particularly the final.

vincayou
11-19-2005, 10:12 PM
:yeah:

Together with Ivan these were the three best players. A full strength field may have produced a worse final. Roger Federer usually finds David Nalbandian more difficult to beat than the players missing; Roddick, Safin, Agassi and Hewitt. Roger has only beaten David easily in 2 matches out of 9 and has a 4-5 losing record.

But Fed has beaten Nalby 4 times in a row. I mean, what's the difference with Hewitt. He used to lose against these guys and he doesn't anymore. Nadal or Safin, that would have been a real challenge for Roger.

But totally agree on the best 3 players. On this surface.

athie
11-19-2005, 10:15 PM
Maybe the ATP will realise they have to shorten the season now. :o
ARGHH noooo - NEVER! I'm already concerned re: withdrawal symptoms

rofe
11-19-2005, 10:21 PM
And what is that, exactly? Picking an extreme surface so that people who earned a spot in it from good play on clay and slower surfaces have no chance?

No, it provides all surface players the best chance of winning. And that is how it should be. I am actually very happy that it was played on a surface nobody liked (except maybe Ivan). It levelled the playing field as a result.

sigmagirl91
11-19-2005, 10:22 PM
this is only like the 50th thread about how this tmc has sucked, it's embarassing etc. each thread makes this statement as though it's a novel conclusion. if people just scrolled down gm first maybe we could keep it all in one thread....crazy huh:o

Yes...which is why "use the search tool" should be the catch phrase of the day.

Scotso
11-19-2005, 10:25 PM
No, it provides all surface players the best chance of winning. And that is how it should be. I am actually very happy that it was played on a surface nobody liked (except maybe Ivan). It levelled the playing field as a result.

No, dear. If you have players that are good on medium clay and those good on medium carpet.... picking an extremely fast carpet does not level the playing field. Picking a moderate hard court would.

ExpectedWinner
11-19-2005, 10:33 PM
But Federer, Nalbandian, and Davydenko had good results on clay and performed well in Shanghai. It means the "extreme" surface is not a problem, the attitude is.

rexman
11-19-2005, 10:41 PM
Davydenko was just nervous at the start, once he worked through it, the match was competitive.

rofe
11-19-2005, 10:42 PM
No, dear. If you have players that are good on medium clay and those good on medium carpet.... picking an extremely fast carpet does not level the playing field. Picking a moderate hard court would.

Not really "dear". The YEC is about 8 of the best players playing for the championships - players who should have already played on medium hard courts many times during the year. That is no challenge to prove your mettle. An unfamiliar court on the other hand, provides the means by which to assess which of the 8 players has the game to adjust to a new surface in the fastest possible time. The RR concept is also geared towards that because it allows these players some time to get used to the surface without being penalized for losing.

In fact, if a player is really good, he/she should know what works and what doesn't on this surface and adjust his/her gameplan accordingly instead of whining incessantly about it. That is the true test of a good tennis player and the TMC this year has proven my point because two all surface players are in the final.

Scotso
11-20-2005, 01:49 AM
Not really "dear". The YEC is about 8 of the best players playing for the championships - players who should have already played on medium hard courts many times during the year. That is no challenge to prove your mettle. An unfamiliar court on the other hand, provides the means by which to assess which of the 8 players has the game to adjust to a new surface in the fastest possible time. The RR concept is also geared towards that because it allows these players some time to get used to the surface without being penalized for losing.

In fact, if a player is really good, he/she should know what works and what doesn't on this surface and adjust his/her gameplan accordingly instead of whining incessantly about it. That is the true test of a good tennis player and the TMC this year has proven my point because two all surface players are in the final.

Would you be of the same opinion if it was played on a really slow red clay? I doubt it.

YoursTruly
11-20-2005, 01:53 AM
Maybe the ATP will realise they have to shorten the season now. :o


Both tours

rofe
11-20-2005, 02:04 AM
Would you be of the same opinion if it was played on a really slow red clay? I doubt it.

Actually, Fed would own everyone on slow red clay as he has in Hamburg for the past three years. So, you are right, I would not be of the same opinion.

Scotso
11-20-2005, 02:18 AM
Actually, Fed would own everyone on slow red clay as he has in Hamburg for the past three years. So, you are right, I would not be of the same opinion.

I figured you were a fanboy.

If it were on slow red clay, Nadal would not have pulled out, and Federer would have gotten spanked by him in the finals.

Skyward
11-20-2005, 02:23 AM
If it were on slow red clay, Nadal would not have pulled out, and Federer would have gotten spanked by him in the finals.

:confused: What is this supposed to mean? I've heard he was injured.

Flibbertigibbet
11-20-2005, 02:24 AM
I figured you were a fanboy.

If it were on slow red clay, Nadal would not have pulled out, and Federer would have gotten spanked by him in the finals.

As far as I see it - if what you say is true, that makes Nadal look worse than Federer, no matter how hard (hypothetically) Nadal would have spanked Federer.

rofe
11-20-2005, 02:35 AM
I figured you were a fanboy.

If it were on slow red clay, Nadal would not have pulled out, and Federer would have gotten spanked by him in the finals.

I don't think you understood what I was trying to say. Let me spell it out clearly to you. If the TMC had been played on slow red clay, I would have complained because it would have given Fed an unfair advantage over his rivals. Get it?

Scotso
11-20-2005, 02:43 AM
Contrary to popular belief and what Fed says, he is better on faster surfaces than slower ones.

Flibbertigibbet
11-20-2005, 02:49 AM
Which doesn't mean he's not good on the slow courts either. Federer is pretty versatile and an all-surface player, as is recognized by everybody - he can still beat many of the current players on clay, and anyway, I think rofe was assuming Nadal'd be out of the picture (since he is supposed to be injured and whatnot).

Scotso
11-20-2005, 03:00 AM
Federer is good on every surface, yes, but I my point was that this event is much easier for him to win on this surface than on clay. Nalbandian also is in the finals because of the surface. If this were clay, he probably wouldn't be.

My problem with rofe is that he said that this surface was an equalizer, and that's ridiculous to say. This surface made it impossible for the majority of this guys to win this tournament before it even began.

Flibbertigibbet
11-20-2005, 03:07 AM
True, I wouldn't really call it an equalizer as more of a challenge for almost all of the players (except maybe Ljubicic found it okay?), but I guess what he's saying is that the players who rise to the challenge are the ones who deserve to be in this final? I do think an indoor hard surface, slower than this one, would have been a more ideal fit to accomodate more players without losing the feel of the year-ending 'indoor season.'

Scotso
11-20-2005, 03:13 AM
The problem with that is that it is the "YEAR ending championships," not the "indoor season championships." If you want to make it an indoor slam, call it such. But the "YEAR" ending championships should take into account the fact that the tournaments during the year are played on many different surfaces. Players qualify based on their play on all the different surfaces.

Maybe what they should do is have lots of different surfaces, and then flip a coin before each match? :p

Scotso
11-20-2005, 03:16 AM
or maybe each four quadrants could be a different surface... indoor, clay, grass, and hard? :p

Kip
11-20-2005, 04:34 AM
This tournament has just been a complete joke for mens tennis, i hope the final can provide some entertainment because watching those semi finals were about as good and competitive as a brick wall. I feel sorry for the Shanghai promoters, they wanted a masters event, and they got players like Puerta, Davydenko and worst of Gaudio playing. I know these guys didn't qualify outright, but these are supposed to be some of the top players in the world.

I don't think this so called depth of mens tennis actually exists.

How can it exist if players are
injured and/or don't show? :retard:

Gaudio and the guys, they weren't
supposed to be there.

Let's see how great you are when some
didn't even know they'd be playing until
soon before!

Furthermore, this surface didn't bode well for some of
these guys and especially Gaston whom after seeing the match
I felt for even more. His serve was off but he did not tank as
some suggested, he was just outclassed by a guy who was supposed
to be there and a guy whom outclasses everyone!


It's easy for every one hear to talk.

I once her Venus Williams say that she
never won a match from the stands!

These guys did what they could with what
they had. It wasn't what was expected but hey,
you get what you get when the one's who were
supposed to be there don't show up!

My goodness! :rolleyes:

nobama
11-20-2005, 04:47 AM
I figured you were a fanboy.

If it were on slow red clay, Nadal would not have pulled out, and Federer would have gotten spanked by him in the finals.Are you suggesting that Nadal pulled out because he didn't like the surface?

joyk
11-20-2005, 05:31 AM
Relax people,maybe next year it will be better,it`s not like it`s the end of tennis.And I don`t think it`s fair that we bash players when they lose.Everytime a player does well he`s the next no.1 and everytime he`s in a slump he`s nothing.Not so long ago people were calling Nalbandian the most overrated guy in the ATP,now he`s one of the most talented players in the world.I don`t think Gaudio or Puerta are TMC matterial but who do you think would have done better?Maybe next year the top eight players will be in better shape and we`ll have a stronger competition.

mallorn
11-20-2005, 08:09 AM
If it were on slow red clay, Nadal would not have pulled out, and Federer would have gotten spanked by him in the finals.
Are you suggesting that Nadal pulled out because he didn't like the surface?
I think the theory is that the sticky surface contributed to his ankle getting worse and I was hoping we were done with the accusations that he was fit to play but withdrew because he didn't like the court/was scared. :(

Scotso
11-20-2005, 01:48 PM
Are you suggesting that Nadal pulled out because he didn't like the surface?

I thought that was obvious :p

And before Nadal fans start hating on me, too, I love him :shrug: