[Federer in 2]

Originally Posted by duarte_a

nadal has 6690 points while Ferrer has 6505 points.The difference is 185 points.

Since Ferrer can't add any more 250 tournament results to his countable results in the beginning of the year and andal is only defending 90 points from doha Ferrer can't overtake nadal for the 4th place.

Are my calculations correct?

As for the AO nadal is defending final points and ferrer quarters points. So ferrer has reaching the quarters and nadal losing in the semis or before would be enough for ferrer to rise to #4?

Yes. Nadal is also defending a nice amount before RG. Ferrer having the #4 seed for the French Open would be massive.

[duarte_a]

Originally Posted by Bashkatik

Yes. Nadal is also defending a nice amount before RG. Ferrer having the #4 seed for the French Open would be massive.

nadal in djokovic's quarter.
nadal in Roger's quarter.

[Mountaindewslave]

Originally Posted by Gustavo Kuerten

Which lack of Masters/Grand Slam results do you mean? The two GS QF's and two SF's or his Masters title in Paris?

Without his results in smaller tournaments he would still be world number 5.

the reality is almost every single season David Ferrer's ranking DEPENDS on smaller tournaments. you can't take one season (2012) where he did better than usual at Grand Slams and by winning a masters and suddenly make that the 'norm'. you are mistaken, the majority of his seasons on tour, his ranking would be dramatically dramatically lower without his results outside the big tournaments. there is quite a stagnant difference between QF points in a grand slam vs. a final after all. I love David, but there is a reason he is claimed to be a 'vulture', quite straight forwardly because he does so well and accumlates so many points in small events

[Mountaindewslave]

Originally Posted by duong

it's a legend that Ferrer is the king of consistency and never gets tired or injured, actually in last years he's regularly lost matches against lower ranked players because of that : in those matches he made a lot of unforced errors, that's how you can see it mostly.

And he withdrew from Toronto and Cincy last year.

Even though yes, tiredness and injuries happened less to him last year than previous ones, he's vulnerable to them like everyone.

And he withdrew from the exho with Fed because of a bad shoulder, not because he would be that much clever and less interested in money as Nathaliia suggested

sure he definitely is 'tired' sometimes BUT it's not often people notice it because he is a fighter even on bad days. if you compare the # of matches he plays overall with the number that he APPEARS tired in a season, he still seems pretty kick ass in the energy/effort department compared with a majority of the tour

[guichard]

Originally Posted by Mountaindewslave

the reality is almost every single season David Ferrer's ranking DEPENDS on smaller tournaments. you can't take one season (2012) where he did better than usual at Grand Slams and by winning a masters and suddenly make that the 'norm'. you are mistaken, the majority of his seasons on tour, his ranking would be dramatically dramatically lower without his results outside the big tournaments. there is quite a stagnant difference between QF points in a grand slam vs. a final after all. I love David, but there is a reason he is claimed to be a 'vulture', quite straight forwardly because he does so well and accumlates so many points in small events

But in the last 8 seasons(2005-2012) except in 2009, his ranking is not really affected if we only count Grand Slam & Masters

[timafi]

whatever works for him

[Brick Top]

Vulture's hunger for points never ends.

[duarte_a]

Originally Posted by Brick Top

Vulture's hunger for points never ends.

He is playing 2 tournaments before the AO even though whatever points he wins won't count.

He's clearly hungry for other things than points.

[Brick Top]

Originally Posted by duarte_a

He is playing 2 tournaments before the AO even though whatever points he wins won't count.

He's clearly hungry for other things than points.

Ha? He is playing in Doha just to regain sum of points he will lose in Auckland (if he loses)..hunger never ends!

[Sombrerero loco]

vamossss

[Alex999]

some tennis players simply need to play lots of pro tennis to keep their form on track. Pics is one of those players. I don't think this is about money or points. Ferrer is not as rich as Fed, Nole or Rafa, but he's made tons of money playing tennis, just checked it out, he's made over $17 millions.

[Federer in 2]

Originally Posted by Brick Top

Ha? He is playing in Doha just to regain sum of points he will lose in Auckland (if he loses)..hunger never ends!

He has like 2 or 3 tournaments which he WON in the non-countable section. That means he has an incredible insurance even if he can't defend everything in 2013. It's nearly impossible for him to drop anywhere lower than #5 in the rankings in the next few months, even if he tried really hard.

[duong]

Originally Posted by guichard

But in the last 8 seasons(2005-2012) except in 2009, his ranking is not really affected if we only count Grand Slam & Masters

yes people keep on believing their own prejudice without checking anything

Originally Posted by Mountaindewslave

I love David, but there is a reason he is claimed to be a 'vulture', quite straight forwardly because he does so well and accumlates so many points in small events

no that's not the reason : the real reason is that his style, with little power and making few errors, that he never seemed to "outplay" one of the top-4 players in a big match, is unpleasant for some who tried to popularize that "vulture" concept that his ranking was not a "real one".

Some others believed it because that theory was overall coherent and fitting with how he "looks".

I hear so many times that blablabla that Ferrer makes few errors then is impossible to beat by lower ranked players but can't beat top-players ... which is wrong actually if you look at his whole carreer activity.

Simon's example, who is a nightmare match-up for Federer (and for Berdych), but loses many matches against lower ranked players, doesn't seem to have affected that concept at all

Besides, Mountaindewslave should realize that that "vulture" concept was hardly ever used on this forum a little bit more than one year ago, then if "there's a reason why", why is it only now that that reason appeared true ?

The reason is simple : some guys insisted on that and sheep followed becaue that "theory" was somehow seductive, like many other false theories (including racist ones)