Points Tracker - AO 2013

New	Old	Name	Old	Dropped	Gained	New	Move
1	1	Djokovic	12,920	2,000	2,000	12,920
2	2	Federer	10,265	720	720	10,265
3	3	Murray	8,000	720	1,200	8,480
4	5	Ferrer	6,505	360	720	6,865	Up1
5	4	Nadal	6,600	1,200		5,400	Dn1
6	6	Berdych	4,680	360	360	4,680
7	7	Del Potro	4,480	360	90	4,210
8	8	Tsonga	3,375	180	360	3,555
9	9	Tipsarevic	3,090	90	180	3,180
10	10	Gasquet	2,720	180	180	2,720
11	11	Almagro	2,515	180	360	2,695
12	12	Monaco	2,430	10	10	2,430
13	14	Cilic	2,210		90	2,300	Up1
14	16	Simon	2,145	45	180	2,280	Up2
15	15	Raonic	2,175	90	180	2,265
16	13	Isner	2,215	90		2,125	Dn3

Interestingly enough, the top spot is theoretically in play. Federer can in theory reclaim it, but for that to happen, Federer would have to win and Djokovic would have to lose before SF. Not entirely impossible I suppose, but a long long shot.

While Federer can in theory move up, he is safe in knowledge that he cannot be overtaken here.

Murray also looks pretty secure at #3 spot. Only Ferrer can overtake him and that can only happen if either (a) Ferrer wins and Andy loses before the final, or (b) Ferrer loses in the final and Andy fails to reach the third round.

While spots 1-3 look pretty safe, there will definitely be a change at #4 spot. Nadal, the current holder of #4 ranking is not playing, and, as a result, Ferrer will overtake him no matter what. This will be the first time since Nadal's rise to prominence that he will drop out of top 4. The last time he was outside top 4 was in the rankings of May 23, 2005. In theory, Nadal could be as low as #7 after the AO. However, for that to happen, Del Potro would have to meet and beat Berdych in the final.

Speaking of Delpo and Berdych, they have a nice little fight for what will likely be #6 ranking. Further down, Tsonga and Tipsy are in a relatively close fight for #8 spot and Gasquet should try to do well here if he wants to prove he can challenge the likes of Delpo, Berdych and Tsonga in the rankings. At the bottom of the table, Raonic drops outside top 15 in the provisional pre-tournament rankings.

Note:
Green - player moving up the rankings
Red - player moving down the rankings
Boldface - player still in the tournament

nitb, this is specially for you. These do take a bit of effort and the same thing is done much better and quicker at this site:

http://live-tennis.eu/

Therefore, I suspect I will eventually get out of this business, but will try to keep it up to date for this AO.

You have done it!!!!!!!!

Brilliant and thanks and last but not the least

summerblues wrote:nitb, this is specially for you. These do take a bit of effort and the same thing is done much better and quicker at this site:

http://live-tennis.eu/

Therefore, I suspect I will eventually get out of this business, but will try to keep it up to date for this AO.

oh, that's lovely SB you are a !

How on earth did you work out that:

" In theory, Nadal could be as low as #7 after the AO. However, for that
to happen, Del Potro would have to meet and beat Berdych in the final."

I'll never know....but Nadal definitely makes this whole thing very interesting, especially a he is not playing IW and Miami.
And amazing that he's still number 4 despite not playing since Wimbledon...puts all the rest of top 10 below him in perspective.
Not to mention Nole and his 12000 points. Crazy!

SB you are a a super . Awesome and for your great work.

Ferrer the Spanish number 1!,,,at 31....Who would have thought.



Where is my thread? "Nadal, the slippery slope"...which got me banned from v2?

Tenez wrote:Ferrer the Spanish number 1!,,,at 31....Who would have thought.



Where is my thread? "Nadal, the slippery slope"...which got me banned from v2?

Still an interesting read he,he

http://www.606v2.com/t27277-nadal-s-slippery-slope?highlight=slippery+sloope

Yes I thought his clay season would not be as good as it turned out to be ....but funny that out of the 5400 points Nadal will have after the AO, 5000 are from the clay season!!!

Tenez wrote:Yes I thought his clay season would not be as good as it turned out to be ....but funny that out of the 5400 points Nadal will have after the AO, 5000 are from the clay season!!!

I know. That's an unbelievable figure. The more I think about it the more his "return" looks unhappenable. What is his ranking going to be before the first clay masters, or RG?

If he is allowed to play by then....

Tenez wrote:If he is allowed to play by then....

Fuentes case..something to look forward to after AO, just in time to fill the February tournament void

Ferrer is defending a QF this AO. He is likely to add points here by reaching semis. I haven't done the calculations but Ferrer is in a very good chance to stay with top-4 even till RG.

noleisthebest wrote:

Tenez wrote:Yes I thought his clay season would not be as good as it turned out to be ....but funny that out of the 5400 points Nadal will have after the AO, 5000 are from the clay season!!!

I know. That's an unbelievable figure. The more I think about it the more his "return" looks unhappenable. What is his ranking going to be before the first clay masters, or RG?

As long as he can be ready for the clay season and do there about as well as he normally does, he will likely be ok. He has 4590 points from the clay court season alone. As long as he defends those, he is unlikely to drop below maybe #6-7 at worst. And anything he adds after the clay court season will just bring him closer to the top 3.

More generally, as long as he plays close to how he used to play before, it really does not matter much what ranking he is starting from. Yes, he may end up with a few early round tough matches that may result in a loss here or there, but he would climb back relatively quickly.

In Monaco, we lost the first player from our table, but I do not think we expected much from him anyway, so we will get over this loss easily. It should get more interesting towards the end of this week as players start meeting tougher opponents.

To me, it's amazing how the 45 first round slam points make no difference at the top and all the world further down the ranking.

We now lost Delpo and Cilic from our table, but in general there have been relatively few upsets. 13 out of top 16 seeds made it to the round of 16. In the second quarter, where I was hoping some upsets could be possible, all four top seeded players made it this far.

For all the talk about the youngsters they have so far failed to make any significant inroads. Nishikori and Raonic are the only ones left, but so far they have only played up to their seeding expectations. I would like to see Kei (not Milos ) go at least one step better, but I do not have high hopes.

Well Harrison and Dimi were really disappointing. Berankis of course needed to get more exposure to the big courts but Tomic kind of delivered today...though frankly Federer was 3 points away to win it 63 60 61 with a tiny bit better BP conversion rate.

I have noticed something new and unusual with points tracking with this AO.
Because Nadal is out of the picture, the dynamics has really changed and I am still getting my head around it.
There used to be continual pole positioning battle in the past for 2nd, and 3rd spot, it was very competitive, now it all kind of looks set in the stone and the only real fire goes for number one between Nole and Fed which is such a new concept to me I'm still getting used to it.

You have Murray continually pushed into that conversation, but in that marriage, to paraphrase Lady Di,there is really only room for two at the moment

I know you love Andy, but I have to disappoint you - I think he will have a pretty decent chance to get there later this spring.

summerblues wrote:I know you love Andy, but I have to disappoint you - I think he will have a pretty decent chance to get there later this spring.

Sad will be the day when, with healthy Nole and Federer around, Andy Murray becomes a number one tennis player.
I really can't see it happen. Not in a million years.

Ferrer looks like winning today and hence reaching QF, thereby will certainly overtake Nadal in rankings.

I believe it was on the cards even if Ferrer had lost today. BUt I am not too sure.

Tenez wrote:I believe it was on the cards even if Ferrer had lost today. BUt I am not too sure.

That is correct, it was going to happen even if Ferrer had lost in Rd1.

Nole is one more victory from guaranteeing himself post-AO #1 spot.

Both Fed and Nole have a few points lined up between the AO and teh FO. Fed is not likely to defend many though as he is not entering a few of them.

summerblues wrote:Nole is one more victory from guaranteeing himself post-AO #1 spot.

So long as I see at least one more shirt-ripping, I'll be happy .
We Nole fans operate on a different level from you Fed ones: we live for the moment, not the numbers.....

Yes. We, on the other side, are keen to see Fed wear his thermo shirt so he doesn;t get a cold.

Tenez wrote:Both Fed and Nole have a few points lined up between the AO and teh FO. Fed is not likely to defend many though as he is not entering a few of them.

Actually, Tenez, Fed is entering all the tournaments he has actual points to defend except Miami (early loss). so it should not matter much.

On a (long, sorry) side note, Nole could lose to Berdych in QF. This could happen not because of Nole being that tired, even though he will be more tired physically than Berdych but Nole is also much better physically to start with so it won't be enough to even their physical levels..., but because he showed in this tournament so far that he was not as his best and was beatable. First, vs. Stepanek, for a while it seemed to me that Stepanek was the more talented and better player out there and only the slowness of the court was making the score looking so lopsided to Nole's advantage... Second, vs. Stan the Man, I almost thought he could lose it but somehow figured that, as the match was getting longer and longer and Stan was already cramping etc., Nole would finally prevail and he did. But what Stan showed for a set and a half is that Nole is not - in this tournament - dominant on serve (and we know he can be as he seemed to be or instance for the early round matches) and can be broken if the opponent is aggressive on the the second serve returns and we know Berdych can do that and has the ground stokes to blast anyone off court, even Nole the great... Plus Berdych has shown in this tournament that he is playing well, even better than last year when he gave Nadal a good run for his money... If Nole loses to him, then Fed, if he continues being that dominant on his serve, could well beat everyone on his way to a record breaking 5th AO (AwesOme! ) an own record breaking 18th major, and again, doing so, a record (own, this time) breaking number of weeks at #1 (303 and counting I'd guess) and that is even more awesome!

but because he showed in this tournament so far that he was not as his best and was beatable.

But you could say that of Nole in 2011 and 2012. He always has had those long matches with most players....but he always ends up on the right side of the score. Very much like Nadal's 2008 and 2010. Those are players who tennis wise are not setting a new level tennis/skill wise...but physically they are the ones to bet on as the match extends (And it's also knowing that which adds the pressure on key points early on in the match). I could give multiple examples of Nole struggling and "not at his best" during slams and yet he finds a way to get through....like he did here in the AO a year ago.

I do think that there will be a (fitness) bill to pay eventually but unlike Nadal he has yet to ask for it.

noleisthebest wrote:

summerblues wrote:Nole is one more victory from guaranteeing himself post-AO #1 spot.

So long as I see at least one more shirt-ripping, I'll be happy

Nole is now guaranteed to remain at #1. He can have up to two more shirt-rippings this tourney. Speaking of which, I wonder if he would rip his shirt off after a marathon victory over Federer.

summerblues wrote: Speaking of which, I wonder if he would rip his shirt off after a marathon victory over Federer.

You bet you he will! That will be my very favourite one, of course.

Debating whether I should go to bed early and catch some of Fed or whether I should stay up longer and watch at least a bit of Andy. I do not think I can do both. Mhmmm.

I can barely keep my eyes open watching Serena struggle with injured back, hopefully she wraps the match in straights.

If she does I'll watch a bit of Murray Chardy and definitely Fed Tsonga..I am completely used to the double time-zone life atm.

I was wondering what happened to serena but this Stephen must be quite good still.

Tenez wrote:I was wondering what happened to serena but this Stephen must be quite good still.

Yes, she is pretty good, but poor man's Serena at best. She nearly lost that second set when Serena was almost standing still belting winnere due to back spasming, as she choked about 5 serves into the net, when she was serving for the set as 5:4. Serena broke her but could'n serve her game out because of the pain and that was it. I admire her for continuing to play the third set, she puts all men who retire in a match to shame. I expect Azarenka to beat Stephens now.

Yes...it's going to be a Aza v Sharapova final...

We talk about improving youngsters, about faster conditions at this AO, about attacking players doing better and yet we end up with the top four seeds all making the SF (and 13 of 16 top seeds making the round of 16).

No wonder we are not seeing any big changes in the rankings. These rankings are probably going to stay the way they are. The only way they could change is if Ferrer beats Federer in the final, in which case Murray drops to fourth and Ferrer moves up to third.

summerblues wrote:We talk about improving youngsters, about faster conditions at this AO, about attacking players doing better and yet we end up with the top four seeds all making the SF (and 13 of 16 top seeds making the round of 16).

Despite the ranking trend among the top players at the moment (and that moment has been going on for quite some time now), I think that tennis is in a better place this AO than it was this time last year.
I'm pretty sure the final will be done in under 3 hours.

The key difference is in the recent past, teh top 4 were a kind of "guaranteed" to be in the semi. At this AO, we saw 4 SHBH in the last 16 (25%) - I am not sure when was the last time we saw that but must be at least 5 years - and 2 of then nearly beat the top 4. Clearly there was a lack of confidence and belief from STan and Nicolas that they coudl do it...but this is due essentially by the fact they hardly ever get into such position. Make the courts even faster and they will have the confidence, enough fitness, and experience to beat those guys consistently.

Regarding the youngsters....yes disappointing....but I know it's only a question of months.

No one has benefited from Nadal's absence more than Ferrer. He started reaching the Semis of the Slams by virtue of his 4th Seeding.

Tenez wrote:The key difference is in the recent past, teh top 4 were a kind of "guaranteed" to be in the semi. At this AO, we saw 4 SHBH in the last 16 (25%) - I am not sure when was the last time we saw that but must be at least 5 years - and 2 of then nearly beat the top 4. Clearly there was a lack of confidence and belief from STan and Nicolas that they coudl do it...but this is due essentially by the fact they hardly ever get into such position. Make the courts even faster and they will have the confidence, enough fitness, and experience to beat those guys consistently.

Regarding the youngsters....yes disappointing....but I know it's only a question of months.

Of course, because eventually Fed/Nadal/Djokovic wil retire and then perhaps they will get their chance. I don't know how much interested I'll be in watching tennis once Fed has retired. Anyway I don't want to see someone holding the Slam trophies just because there wasn't anyone else to take those.

Those voids are not easy to fill and I don't see any youngster being good enough to break in. They will all eventually but it will be because the time will be on their side.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Regarding the youngsters....yes disappointing....but I know it's only a question of months.

Of course, because eventually Fed/Nadal/Djokovic wil retire and then perhaps they will get their chance. [/quote]

I think it will come much sooner..by year end. As mentioned we can't quite judge on Rao's performance as he was injured. Fed might retire soon cause of his back....but the other 2 will start to find serious opposition very soon.

I don't know how much interested I'll be in watching tennis once Fed has retired. Anyway I don't want to see someone holding the Slam trophies just because there wasn't anyone else to take those.

I must say, there is very little to get excited about. I am not a fan of JJ, Rao, Harrison, Tomic...but this Berankis is quite interesting. However I doubt he will win much with his short size.


Regarding Stan and other more mature players, they have not been used to winning cause the conds were against them. We can clearly see that their game is great but they were given such slow conds that they were doom from teh word go...and that certainly plays in the mind. I am 100% sure that if we speed the conds a bit, the mental side will follow.

It;s no different than in the 90s. The mentally strong players on clay were the clay specialists...but they were very weak mentally on grass or at teh USO. And vice versa...Pete was weak mentally on clay...but strong on grass. Mental strength has a lot to do with teh weapons.

I agree however that Almagro is a wasted case.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:No one has benefited from Nadal's absence more than Ferrer. He started reaching the Semis of the Slams by virtue of his 4th Seeding.

Yes and no...Ferrer beat Nadal in one of the AO QFs.
The person who benefited most, in my opinion is Murray, followed by Federer.
I don't think Murray would've won USO with Nadal around.
He can also thank Rosol for enabling him a Wimbledon final, too.

Time for him to show what he's made of now that he has to go through Federer and potentially Djokovic in order to win a slam.

noleisthebest wrote:

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:No one has benefited from Nadal's absence more than Ferrer. He started reaching the Semis of the Slams by virtue of his 4th Seeding.

Yes and no...Ferrer beat Nadal in one of the AO QFs.
The person who benefited most, in my opinion is Murray, followed by Federer.
I don't think Murray would've won USO with Nadal around.
He can also thank Rosol for enabling him a Wimbledon final, too.

Why do you think Murray wouldn't have won USopen with Nadal around? Did he not beat Nadal in 2008 USopen semis? He even beat him in AO 2010 QF. Yes he has lost a lot of matches to Nadal, but its nothing so much as to believe that Nadal's presence would certainly have affected Murray slam success.

I said about Ferrer's benefiting from Nadal's absence because he now gets to be seeded 4th and doesn't face a top-4 player(including Nadal) in QFs like all earlier the times. His seeding allows him an easier paths to slams and he easily is reaching Semis though the difference between him and the top-3 is wider than the grand canyon. He isn't even able to stand up to the top-4 ( including Nadal) when facing them. But his seed is benefiting him to reach the semis and making him look better than he is.

Now how did Federer benefited from Nadal's absence?

simple really, nadal hasn't lost to feds in a slam since 07

luvsports! wrote:simple really, nadal hasn't lost to feds in a slam since 07

That's okay. Can I use the same theory to conclude that Fed and Nadal both befitted from Dominik Hrbaty's retirement? Hrbaty has a winning record against both.

Yes, Nadal is a real problem for Federer but still Nadal was never guaranteed to reach the later stages and face Federer. As we saw Fed won 5 slams since 2007 and I woudl not be surprised if Fed still progressed faster than Nadal in the last 5 years. He certainly was able to beat Nadal most convincingly in 2011 and was close to do it on clay even that year. And as expected I thought Nadal woudl be less likely to reach teh later stages as the opposition started to improve. Nadal is a one trick poney and it woudl not take long for some on the tour to dismantle him. And yes Murray would certainly be one I would fancy beating Nadal consistently like Djoko showed in 2011. It;s simple....it requires fitness....and Murray seems to be ready now.

Tenez wrote:The key difference is in the recent past, teh top 4 were a kind of "guaranteed" to be in the semi. At this AO, we saw 4 SHBH in the last 16 (25%) - I am not sure when was the last time we saw that but must be at least 5 years - and 2 of then nearly beat the top 4. Clearly there was a lack of confidence and belief from STan and Nicolas that they coudl do it...but this is due essentially by the fact they hardly ever get into such position. Make the courts even faster and they will have the confidence, enough fitness, and experience to beat those guys consistently.

Regarding the youngsters....yes disappointing....but I know it's only a question of months.

That is a positive way of looking at things; I hope you are right. On the other hand, those four SHBHs in the round of 16 were all seeded to get there; so it is not like iit was a huge breakthrough for SHBH. Anyway, let's hope that your way of looking at it will prove to be correct.

summerblues wrote:Regarding the youngsters....yes disappointing....but I know it's only a question of months.

That is a positive way of looking at things; I hope you are right. On the other hand, those four SHBHs in the round of 16 were all seeded to get there; so it is not like iit was a huge breakthrough for SHBH. Anyway, let's hope that your way of looking at it will prove to be correct.[/quote]
My "way of looking at things" can only tested if they do improve pace on courts.