[Filo V.]

Thank you everyone who has said this is a good thread idea, it's fun to discuss things outside of the top 4 once in a while.

Anyone have any other players to throw out there?

[Navratil]

30-year-old Frenchman Eric Prodan broke into the top 100 this year without playing any ATP tournaments.

He only tried to qualify for Miami but failed and qualified for the French Open where he lost in the first round.

But Prodan won 4 challenger titles and is # 86 in the rankings right now.

He only beat one Top 100 player (world # 92 Zeballos) on the way to these titles.

In fact he only beat 2 Top 100 players the last 2 years and is now a Top 100 player himself.

Last year he got his ranking from # 300 up by winning 6 Futures titles.

All credit to climbing up the rankings the hard way

BUT: Are the lower tournaments overrated?

Is it ok to have players in the top 100 that don't even compete on ATP level?

Btw: It will change automatically 2012 since Prodan will make the cut for the Slams and some ATP tournaments.

Then he gotta prove if he belongs to that level of tournaments.

[TennisOnWood]

Challenger's can bring nice points.. Charli Berlocq for sure knows that

[StoGas]

There are a lot of players that most points come from challengers, like Mahut, Sela, Dimitrov.

[Filo V.]

It's a fine way to make the top 100, that's what the challengers are for. Prodon has always been near the top 100 for most his career but this season he finally cracked it. Players that consistently show they're above the challenger level are rewarded for that with a promotion of sorts to the ATP tour.

It's how they handle that promotion that counts. Some make it, and most don't.

[Filo V.]

At the same time, some challenger wins carry the same amount of points as ATP 250 F results. Making the third round of a major is the same as winning a 50 K event. Win 3 of those and do well in a couple others and you'll be in the top 100. Some guys are expert at taking advantage of this, it's why Berlocq has made the top 100 each time he's been dropped from the ATP tour after struggling. Eventually players have to prove they can hang at the top level or they wont last, so I don't think it's that big a deal.

[Nathaliia]

We will always have guys ranked between 70 to 120 who will always present more or less the same level (just names that change), no matter how many points challengers provide.

ATP draws have limited capacity. Players have to perform somewhere.

You can have only one player as #1, only 10 in top10. Only 10 guys at one time are good enough to fit in there, the rest is worse. It's the same about top 50. It's not like guys 70-120 can't play a good match; they don't have enough health and consistency, maybe have a limited tennis capability as well, but it's still good enough to be ranked so high in the world and keep it for several years at time. I don't think this is a reason to be upset for most of them, and like I said, some must fill these places in, as not everyone can be in top 50, and for all the time.

[Freak3yman84]

So Mr. Handsome (a.k.a Paolo Lorenzi) was getting criticized for vulturing all of his points from the Challenger circuit. It's obvious that he's a bit too good for CH's, but he isn't nearly good enough for ATP level tournaments so what is the logical way out of this? If he continues to play Challengers than pusher for life will deem him "Master Vulture" and if he plays ATP level tournaments he'll drop to Futures levels and will forever be considered by Topspindoctor as a "mug". And I'm not only talking about Mr. Handsome, a lot of players fall into this category.


P.S. This is one of my few serious threads, so embrace it.

[Tag]

take epo/peds

on a serious note, it is what it is. he does not have the game to compete at a higher level, and will not magically develop one

[Freak3yman84]

I figured there was a thread about this...

[Filo V.]

There is little a player can do except continue to perform in challengers and hope to develop their games enough with experience on the ATP tour and eventually become competent ATP players.

[Freak3yman84]

Originally Posted by Filo V.

There is little a player can do except continue to perform in challengers and hope to develop their games enough with experience on the ATP tour and eventually become competent ATP players.

That's not happening for Mr. Handsome!

[Filo V.]

No, it isn't. Lorenzi gets exposed in ATP tournaments but he beats anyone who isn't consistent. Guys with his play style can make a career because he fights and won't beat himself. He makes his opponents beat him. Guys out of the top 50 generally aren't good enough to consistently be offensive without making errors unless they're at the top of their game.

[Action Jackson]

Classic example of the above Filo statement is when Lorenzi beat Paire in Vienna.

[Filo V.]

There needs to be more money in challengers and more points in ATP Q matches, and ATP R1 slams. And maybe select 10-12 big challengers per season that reward 120 points, and the rest keep at 60. Because the same problems that were happening when I made this thread are still happening. Some of those Asian challengers reward 125 points yet have cutoffs in the 300s.