Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,615 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
besides obviously Rafa, Fed, and Nole (well I guess not obvious for some), I say Murray and Nalbandian.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,866 Posts
The five guys who win enough matches and earn the points necessary to be there. Players are in the top five based on their results, not their potential for results.

Who I would like to see in the top five is a different question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,530 Posts
The players with more points than the guy in 6th.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,907 Posts
The five guys who win enough matches and earn the points necessary to be there. Players are in the top five based on their results, not their potential for results.

Who I would like to see in the top five is a different question.
Well said. Nothing more to add.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
Nalbandian & Ferrer
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,598 Posts
The five guys who win enough matches and earn the points necessary to be there. Players are in the top five based on their results, not their potential for results.

Who I would like to see in the top five is a different question.
I accept what you are saying, but events in womens tennis have shown how ranking can be deceptive. Both Williams sisters have almost permanently been outside the top 5 for the last 4 years, but have accumulated a number of grand slams. I am certainly no fan, but would see both as top 5.

I would confidently say Nalbandian is a better player than Davydenko regardless of ranking and certainly is a top 5 player. I assume you would be delighted if your favourite players draws Nalbandian rather than Davydenko at the Australian Open. After all Davydenko "belongs" in the top 5 because he is better than Nalbandian and if ranking has nothing to do with "better than" does it have any purpose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,615 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I meant who belongs in the top 5 based on talent, skill, and potential.
 

·
1,000 Baby!
Joined
·
19,909 Posts
I accept what you are saying, but events in womens tennis have shown how ranking can be deceptive. Both Williams sisters have almost permanently been outside the top 5 for the last 4 years, but have accumulated a number of grand slams. I am certainly no fan, but would see both as top 5.

I would confidently say Nalbandian is a better player than Davydenko regardless of ranking and certainly is a top 5 player. I assume you would be delighted if your favourite players draws Nalbandian rather than Davydenko at the Australian Open. After all Davydenko "belongs" in the top 5 because he is better than Nalbandian and if ranking has nothing to do with "better than" does it have any purpose.
Perhaps the question should have been who is more talented? Nalbandian may be more talented than a lot of guys but if he can't back it up with results then he doesn't deserve squat. But if he continues to perform like he did at the end of this year he will be top 5 and deservedly so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,598 Posts
Perhaps the question should have been who is more talented? Nalbandian may be more talented than a lot of guys but if he can't back it up with results then he doesn't deserve squat. But if he continues to perform like he did at the end of this year he will be top 5 and deservedly so.
Actually with 2 master series wins he did perform. 2 top 5 players did not win a master series or higher event. You can actually perform consistently all year winning nothing more than minor events and rank in the top 5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,615 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Sorry but you forgot the most important one: results.
I know, but that's not the point. There'd be no point in asking who deserves to be in the top 5 based on results, that's what the actual rankings are there for.
 

·
1,000 Baby!
Joined
·
19,909 Posts
I know, but that's not the point. There'd be no point in asking who deserves to be in the top 5 based on results, that's what the actual rankings are there for.
Then maybe you should rephrase the OP title. When you say top 5, top 5 what? Top 5 most talented? Most gifted? IMO just because someone is more talented or has more 'potential' but is inconsistent doesn't mean they "belong" in the top 5. At the end of the day you still gotta back all that talent up with results.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top