2437 replies to this topic

[desperate for housewives]

Stvarno je tesko reci ko je i da li iko tu zasluzuje da bude No1. Sve zavisi od kriterijuma, eto ako gledamo rezultate u proteklih godinu dana ispade da je to Dinara, ako gledamo znacaj osvojenih titula onda je Serena, ako gledamo konstantnost mozda Vera i Elena do pre mesec, dva. Luda kuca je ta WTA.

[Uma]

Da čestitam i ja

[Bad_Beat]

Postoji neki poseban razlog sto su teniserke: Vera, Dinara, Elena...a teniseri: Federer, Nadal, Murray???

(ne vrednujem, samo primjetih)

[tamara15]

Postoji neki poseban razlog sto su teniserke: Vera, Dinara, Elena...a teniseri: Federer, Nadal, Murray???

(ne vrednujem, samo primjetih)

Ne postoji, sve zavisi od toga sta nam je lakse/krace/simpaticnije da napisemo (Vera je uglavnom Zvoncica, Marija Sharapova je gotovo po pravilu Sharapova, sestre W moramo da imenujemo da znamo o kojoj se govori). Nadal je cesto i Rafa, Federer je cesto Fed, Rodja, NJKV, exFedex... , a Marija vrlo retko zovemo po prezimenu, najcesce ime ili nadimak.

Edited by tamara15, 20 April 2009 - 17:38.

[desperate for housewives]

Vecina Ruskinja ima predugacka prezimena, lakse je samo ime napisati.

[mlatko]

 Atp_race.jpg   122.26KB   31 downloads

sviđa mi se ovaj startni lining up (sa atpworldtour.com)
mislim da nema sumnje ni ko bi pobedio na 100m...

[tamara15]

Evo jedan dobar komentar u vezi citave price oko "nezasluzenog" #1, loseg sistema bodovanja kod WTA koji rezultira da #1 bude neko bez GS titule i ostalih gluposti koje se cuju ili su se mogle cuti u poslednje vreme (ukljucijuci i Serenin komentar kako je eto "nepravda" da ona sa 2 GS i jednim finalom GS ne moze da bude #1):

For those who think the ATP system is better than the WTA. It's not. The only diferrence the male players at the top play more during the regular season (The must play at (formerly) the nine masters (now) the 8 masters and seem to care more about ranking and who is #1. I think the problem, if you can even call it that in the WTA is that the WS don't care all that much about being number 1 - not enough at least to play enough in WTA tour events to gain and maintain the top positions. When Henin was #1 she was so far ahead of the pack that a few early round loses would not have affected her ranking position and then she retired with 7,000 points in her bank. She still has 120 points in her bank. In addition to the 4 slams, the ATP counts 13 ATP events in its total, the WTA did the same until this year when they dropped that to 12. Further, the Year end event in the ATP event is in addition to the 4 slams and the 13 events, unlike the WTA when it is only counted if it is one of your highest non-mandatory WTA point totals. So in the WTA the year end event may or may not be counted. In the ATP it is extra points. Rafa did not play the year end event and is still so far ahead that it did not matter - that is due to the fact that he has 3 of 4 slams. The one slam that he does not have he got to the finals - he did not go out in the 3rd round as Serena did at RG last year. He won won 3 MS events, got tho the SF and QF of just about every other one, won the olympics and queens club and barcelona. Rafa won just about every event. Djokovic won the YE event and has 1,300 points in addition to his total for the slams and the master series. If he did not have these points he would not be #3 right now, slamless Murray would be. So to claim that the ATP system is better than the WTA system shows lack of understanding of the system. If the WTA had the ATP system, Safina would have been #1 sooner than this week and would hold it much longer as Venus and Serena don't play enough events.

Further, the Master Series are mandatory events in the ATP - all the top players must play them or take a zero in their ranking total. Therefore, they play them. Unlike the WTA until this year only had one mandatory event - Miami. However, starting this year there are 4 mandatory events, IW, Miami, Madrid and Beijing. Still less than the ATP but more than in the past.

Further, if Serena had played IW and done relatively well she probably would not have lost the #1 spot.

So don't think the ATP system is better. Just think that the player at the top and former player are and were so dominant that it is not an issue. Further, they want and covet the #1 ranking. Further, they are forced to play more and at the biggest events and care to win them. That is the difference, not the system.

If Serena is out for an extended period of time then Safina will be #1 for a while and we might even see Dementieva rise to #1 sometime during the clay season. If Serena comes back healthy, than she will be #1 again soon, at the latest after RG. Further, if Venus does better on the red clay than on the green she is very likely to be #1 by RG. However, after her performance at Charleston, I don't have much faith in her chances on the red clay.

Don't blame the system. Safina earned her points fair and square and she, JJ or Dementieva may soon have a slam under their belt.

[McLeod]

Uopste nije problem u sistemu. Ja cak mislim da je mnogo gore kada smo prosle godine imali omalovazavanje JJ a dizanje u nebesa Serone, zato sto je zaboga ona visestruka GS sampionka. Dok se Jelena pekla i igrali sve zive turnire, ona se 'ladila, i bukvalno igra samo te GS, pa naravno da ako je fit uz svoje fizicke predispozicije da ce dominirati u zavrsnici nad grogi protivnicima. Prema tome, ona najmanje zasluzuje da bude broj 1. Safini svaka cast, cekamo Jecu da se vrne na to mesto uskoro...

[tamara15]

Uopste nije problem u sistemu. Ja cak mislim da je mnogo gore kada smo prosle godine imali omalovazavanje JJ a dizanje u nebesa Serone, zato sto je zaboga ona visestruka GS sampionka. Dok se Jelena pekla i igrali sve zive turnire, ona se 'ladila, i bukvalno igra samo te GS, pa naravno da ako je fit uz svoje fizicke predispozicije da ce dominirati u zavrsnici nad grogi protivnicima. Prema tome, ona najmanje zasluzuje da bude broj 1. Safini svaka cast, cekamo Jecu da se vrne na to mesto uskoro...

Ovo je bio komentar na tekst Petera Bodoa na ESPN gde on tvrdi da je sistem bodovanja na WTA pogresan, a i iz komentara drugih se da zakljuciti da je nesto "pogresno" kod bodovanja kada neko ko nema osvojen GS moze da bude #1. Ovaj tip je to onako malo detaljnije prodiskutovao, a mene mrzelo da prepricavam, pa sam kopirala ceo komentar jer je po mom misljenju dobar. Odnosno, Nadalu nije bilo dovoljno da samo osvajanjem GS titula dodje na prvo mesto vec je morao da igra i jos neke turnire (masterse i ostalo), tako da da je Serena igrala nesto drugo i postizala dobre rezultate i na drugim turnirima bila bi prva, ovako... Pravila su ista za sve, pa ko voli nek izvoli!

Edited by tamara15, 21 April 2009 - 23:01.

[blesica]

TRENUTNA PROCENA ATP LISTE ZA 27. APRIL
Na ovoj listi ispadaju poeni za Monte Carlo 2008.
1. Nadal 14390 (jos igra)
2. Federer 10060 (konacan broj poena)
3. NOVAK DJOKOVIC 9160 (konacan broj poena)
4. A.Murray 9050 (konacan broj poena)

[*ja...]

zato sto su se sad tek obrisali poeni iz monte karla... to i jeste bilo ocekivano... manje-vise sve zavisi od rima, ali meni se cini da ce do wimbldona, marej sigurno biti treci...

[blesica]

Znam, ali sam i dalje

Bojim se da će se smena sigurno dogoditi koliko već posle Rima, jer Nole i ako odbrani titulu ne dobija ništa (jel' tako?), a Marej će sigurno proći 3 rundice koliko mu je potrebno da ga pretekne. Bzvz...

[*ja...]

mislim da cak i gubi neke poene zbog promene sistema bodovanja, ali nisam sigurna, neko ce me vec ispraviti...

[djordja]

Evo jedne zanimljive analize sa mtf-a:

[enamat]

ATP Tour - Your view: Djokovic to re-take Murray

Eurosport - Thu, 07 May 17:51:00 2009

Andy Murray will officially take over as the world number three on Monday - but most Eurosport-Yahoo! readers believe that Serbia's Novak Djokovic will finish 2009 ranked higher than the Scot.
The switch will make Murray the first British player to make it to the top-three of the men's game since the rankings were introduced in 1973.

Yet a slender majority of you believe that it is Novak Djokovic who will finish the year the higher-ranked of the pair.

Your comments were the usual mix of interesting, well-balanced analysis - with elgris22 being top of the class this week - and utter, raving nonsense.

Several considered the vagaries of the occasionally controversial ATP rankings system; others paid tribute to the contribution that Murray has already made to British - and Scottish - tennis; while a regrettably sizeable group decided that merely shouting their beliefs would substitute for explaining them.

Particular congratulations for comical myopia go to reader vojislavpejic for using no fewer than 49 exclamation marks to explain precisely why "DjOKOVIC IS BETTER PLAYER THAN MURRAY".

We were unconvinced by his (or her) argument after a dozen exclamation marks; then we began to waver after 30 or so; but having got through the full 49 of 'em, suddenly the beautiful simplicity of the argument fell in to place.

So thanks for that.

------

WE ASKED: Who will be ranked higher at the end of 2009?

Novak Djokovic: 58%, 2582 votes

Andy Murray: 42%, 1888 votes