Murray on the Ranking System

First topic message reminder :

Murray has added his voice to criticisms of the ATP ranking, saying that it should copy golf's two-year system and pointing out that Nadal's ranking at #5 is proof of the deficiencies of the current system. He considers that it should be possible to be injured for 5 months as a top player and retain your ranking.

I agree that the result of Nadal being seeded #5 at Wimbledon may be a very nasty QF surprise for him or, perhaps more likely, for one of the current #1-#3 (which may be Murray's real beef), but it seems to me that in a game like tennis which is based so much on fitness, in which players have shorter careers, and which operates knock-out contests is suited to a shorter ranking base than golf in which careers are usually longer, form is far more fleeting, and the stroke-play competition format enables anyone to emerge from the pack and win one week without having to 'beat' their opponents 1-on-1 (let alone do that at all consistently) and fall back into the pack the next week. It is far more necessary to 'smooth' results over a period in order to identify the best golfer than with tennis - the best tennis player starts winning or going deep week-in, week-out and he soon shoots up the rankings deservedly so. Also, the details of golf rankings are far less important - their cut-offs that matter are top 40, 50, 60 and so on for entry into the more exclusive contests, there's no real significance between being #1 and #10 - and if there was we'd quickly notice the 'absurdity' of seedings which would put X above Y despite the fact that X had done nothing for 12-18 months.

Anyway - this utterance puts one of the board members in a nasty dilemma - Murray's utterances are scanned and parsed with great care to identify the downside - what will said board member say about this interjection, which supports the position of the messiah?

Red wrote:

CAS wrote:I know there are some people who think that Federer has only truly beaten Nadal once as well. Wimbledon 2007, all the other wins Rafa was tired, injured or "very young and nervous" after his Wimbledon '06 win

Who thinks that lol

 I've heard it quite a few times over the years, crazy I know

CAS wrote:

Red wrote:

CAS wrote:I know there are some people who think that Federer has only truly beaten Nadal once as well. Wimbledon 2007, all the other wins Rafa was tired, injured or "very young and nervous" after his Wimbledon '06 win

Who thinks that lol

 I've heard it quite a few times over the years, crazy I know

Yeah, this stuff really is bewildering.

Wimby 2007 should definitely be asterisked too.

Red wrote:

CAS wrote:

Red wrote:

CAS wrote:I know there are some people who think that Federer has only truly beaten Nadal once as well. Wimbledon 2007, all the other wins Rafa was tired, injured or "very young and nervous" after his Wimbledon '06 win

Who thinks that lol

 I've heard it quite a few times over the years, crazy I know

Yeah, this stuff really is bewildering.

Wimby 2007 should definitely be asterisked too.

oh yeah he choked that one didn't he? Sorry my bad.

Back on topic.
Some on here need to get a grip.

Why not just listen to what Murray actually said on this issue in the interview with Sue Barker at Queens last Monday the 10th June? His words were re-hashed in the press; and now on this ridiculous thread.
Many topics were raised in the c14 min interview - this issue is at c10:52 [youtube Kx2kGsxKY3Y]

Hardly the stuff for apoplexy.

Tennisfan wrote:Back on topic.
Some on here need to get a grip.

Why not just listen to what Murray actually said on this issue in the interview with Sue Barker at Queens last Monday the 10th June? His words were re-hashed in the press; and now on this ridiculous thread.
Many topics were raised in the c14 min interview - this issue is at c10:52 [youtube Kx2kGsxKY3Y]

Hardly the stuff for apoplexy.

Much like I said in my only post on this topic. People trying to make a mountain out of something rather less than a molehill.

You don't have to have read many of my posts to know that I've got nothing against Murray - as a Brit I want to see him do well, and I think he's OK as a player and a person as well.
 
I may well have missed the emphasis on what he said along with the papers, but my tone was hardly one of attacking Murray, he (and perhaps more so the newspaper headlines) was really a 'clothes horse' for two things: (a) a serious point about the ranking system and the apparent support in some quarters for changing it in a way I think would favour the top players vs. the lesser players to the detriment of the wider game; (b) a gentle tweak of the toes of a certain poster, who swirled round the bait for a couple of days before working out the precise angle of attack and moved in to criticize Murray in the time-honoured fashion.
 
The thread's character has developed from those posting after the OP, which is what happens on a board.  Anyone who doesn't like it doesn't need to comment.  The silly arguments on this board are as much down to the self-importance and thin skins of some as they are to the bumptiousness and quasi wummery of others.

barrystar so that you don't misunderstand my comment wasn't aimed at you. It was at the press and those on this thread trying to make more out of the comment than there actially was. Apologies if you misunderstood.

CaledonianCraig wrote:barrystar so that you don't misunderstand my comment wasn't aimed at you. It was at the press and those on this thread trying to make more out of the comment than there actially was. Apologies if you misunderstood.

Fair enough - none needed.

Not your fault Barrystar. The difference between what I read in the papers and what you hear in the interview highlighted by TennisFan show how his actual words have been manipulated. I would definitely disagree with him if he were pushing for the two year ranking. However even that would be his opinion which could be debated (don't think he would get much support) and would not need the over the top reaction seen from some on this thread.

Hehe

Good post Barry.

For my part I will say this.

And listen carefully oh minions and four minionettes, for I am the emancipator, and with that name comes all that comes with it. It is not for the emancipator to pander to the the whims and human feelings of the minions, however grand or insignificant said minions may be in the world of minions. Indeed, the minions were created rash - they are like little children in the sight of one such as I; their squabbles are merely a transient source of amusement, the end of which has no bearing on what was or what will be.

So squabble oh minions, nay, ye may even fight and cast each other down, but do not transgress and dabble in semantics and pointless wikepediaring - for the truth lies not in electronic pages. Take from those amongst you who have been granted a measure of wisdom such as Barry, Bogbrush, Laver, Lags, Julius, Haddie, Murdoch and many others - indeed too many to enumerate - and stay away from those who have erred; in particular those saplings who are yet to complete their schooling, for they pose the gravest of perils to the world of the minions.

Ye may know them through their ignorance - an ignorance so dark and oppressive that it hangs like a cloud above their sanctimonious heads. They know not of the true world but speak only through pointless semantics and number crunching. Their essence is tainted by one who's evil and cunning is unrivalled.

Yes, oh minions, it is true, for the shadow of BOO has risen again - beware of him. These are my words to you. I seek no worldly gain, it has no meaning in my ephemeral existence. Take what has been offered and do not despair.



emancipator - united nations ambassador to earth

I would admit to overreacting were it not for the first paragraph of this thread which is what I was "overreacting" to.

hawkeye wrote:Murray is hardly being altruistic by talking about Nadal possibly being seeded 5th at Wimbledon. He is just thinking about himself

Andy Murray has hit out at the rankings system which could see him need to beat Rafa Nadal, Roger Federer AND Novak Djokovic to win Wimbledon next month.
Despite winning the French Open for the eighth time, the Spanish superstar Nadal slipped down to No.5 in the rankings on Monday - behind David Ferrer, the man he beat in straight sets in the Paris final the day before.
Nadal’s ranking has suffered because he missed seven months with a knee injury after losing in the second round at Wimbledon last year.
It means world No.2 Murray faces the nightmare possibility of playing the Mallorcan, then seven-time champion Federer in the semis and No 1 Djokovic in the final if he is to triumph in his home Grand Slam.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon-andy-murray-faces-nightmare-1944624

I wonder if his squeals will make any difference? When do the rankings come out?

When I have a need to consult The Mirror for Tennis insight, then it will be that day I've got tubes attached to me and attentive nurses worrying about my mutterings

Can you tell me how you've come to the conclusion that Murray "is just thinking about himself"?
 
I know it's enormously frustrating for you, that your man who reached six successive finals, will only be seeded five. Add on the fact, he's a 50/50 chance of playing the two current best grass court players and your mood won't be great. Add on the fact that Murray (of all players) is actually going to be seeded two sections higher than Rafa and I'm sure you're ready for murder

I think you need to get over it

Murray has been mis-quoted ? had his words construed in manner not of his making ? has had words put in his mouth and then mis-quoted again ?

Really ? all this from the PAParazzi ? well I never, I must try not to read so much into what they report, as it looks like 90% of it is gonad fodder.

If I believed half of what I read, I'd have to read twice as much to believe I'd read the other half.

I have been surprised by how many took this article as 'gospel'

Not having a go at 'barrystar' who always writes in a measured manner, but  I think we always need a link so we can see exactly what the players say

We've all done it, jumped to conclusions when presented with mis-quotes, so no finger pointing from me