FYI, Roddick just pulled out of the US’s next Davis Cup match citing an injured hip flexor. I don’t doubt that he hurt himself more than a little on that slip in the fifth set. No doubt that the adrenaline helped him finish up, he showed a lot in that he kept going and never let on that it might have been a factor. I’m not really a fan of the current game but both of the finalists put on a classy show.
Oh, I totally haven’t forgotten; hope I didn’t give that impression. I remember him winning it quite clearly, actually.
A difference of 12 games and two tournaments. It’s not exactly slacking off, is it. If the difference were more radically pronounced, I might agree, but c’mon, two tournaments’ difference?
For the rest of the post, you seem to be simply showing how the current ranking system leads to the current ranks, something of which I’m perfectly well aware. While totally understanding why the rankings are what they are, it is funny that someone can hold three of the majors at once and not be considered number one by the governing body. In fact she could even have a Grand Slam and still not be number one, which is preposterous. Like you say, Serena doesn’t seem fussed by it, she just laughed about it in a press conference. If you don’t have a problem with that, I don’t see what we disagree about; I was responding to ShadowFacts’s objection to her press conference.
I’d put him above Murray on that display, and he went absolutely toe-to-toe with Federer and missed out by the narrowest of margins. Nadal’s weakest on hard courts, which are the next two majors coming up; he’s never made the US Open final. And of course he’s coming back from injury. Roddick’s right in the mix. Sure, nothing’s a certainty, but still.
Nadal’s not weak on hard courts at all. However, his playing style beats the shit out of him during the year, so by the time the US Open comes around his knees have nothing left to give.
Including Friday’s match, Murray has beaten Roddick six times in their nine matches, and of course Roddick has been in his prime that whole time while Murray is just getting there.
Weakest, not weak. It’s all relative with him :). He only made the semis at the US Open for the first time last year, and has a similar record in Australia, which comes five months after the US Open. Look at his timeline and tell me hard courts are his strength. Obviously he’s still very good on them, but then again so’s Roddick.
And I completely agree about Roddick’s record; I just think he’s massively improved based on this tournament’s evidence, and if he keeps it up he’s back as a very serious contender.
You are so right. World rankings is an attempt to have an objective measurement system to something that is very subjective.
I argue this point on another DB all the time, but in the golf world. Tiger Woods almost lost his #1 ranking this spring and many people were outraged. But they thought the rankings were just fine when his ranking was twice as good as anyone elses.
The rankings should not be changed capriciously just because people don’t like the results.
I didn’t say they were his strength - I just think he’s better objectively on hard courts than on grass.
It’s less than I thought, but a 30 percent difference in how many matches they’ve played this year. Ten more wins means Safina has reached two more finals this year, compared to Serena not only playing less often, but losing early several times when she did play. (Not at slams, but at other events.) That’s a trend that continues back over the previous year.
It’s funny for sure. But the rankings reward consistency as well. If Safina wasn’t consistently going deep in almost every event and Serena’s other results hadn’t been so inconsistent, we wouldn’t have to think about it.
We’ll have to see. Murray did make the finals in New York last year. We’ll see how he plays and how Roddick plays on the U.S. circuit. And Nadal’s health is a huge question mark. The hardcourts can be tough on your body and while he reached the U.S. Open semis last year, we don’t even know when he’s coming back.
(Thanks, Marley23, for posting all the data that I would have had to dig up to respond).
My problem with Serena is not that she thinks she’s the best player in the world right now. I think she probably is. My problem is two-fold: First, she knows the ranking system, having played under it for years, some of them as #1. She chooses to play fewer tournaments and focus on the Slams. This year, she has not done well (as Marley posted) in those few non-major tournaments she did play. So she reaps the fewer points that are the result of that choice. If she had played more tournaments or played better in those she did enter, she’d probably be #1 now.
Second, and far more important, is the unprofessional manner in which she answered the question. A real professional would have said: “Yes, I think I am the best player in the world right now, and should be ranked #1, but I haven’t been consistent outside of the Slams and that’s what happens. If I keep playing well, hopefully I’ll be #1 by the end of the year.” That acknowledges her accomplishments and true feelings about how good she is, but does not denigrate another player. She was ridiculously dismissive of Safina in that press conference. She was not joking around, she was being a self-important jackass. I tried to find the video of it, but I can’t find it. You really need to watch it to see how rude she was.
Sorry, true champions do not bad-mouth other players to make themselves look better.
I read somewhere (Jon Wertheim’s column, I think) that Serena said she’s been consistent this year. She hasn’t - she’d never lost four matches in a row before - so that made her look pretty clueless. She’s better than Safina, but has not been the most consistent player this year. Even so, if you look at the points race for 2009, it’s fairly close.
I have a big problem with these post match interviews.
Roddick plays 77 games over 4 hours plus and gets outlasted by a whisker in a tournament he is burning to win. He’s got nowhere to hide after the match, and furthermore he’s got about 5 minutes to think of something nice and sporting to tell Sue Barker about his defeat. He spoke well under such trying circumstances but he looked like shit. He really must have wanted to go back to the locker room and smash his rackets rather than take part in any presentation ceremony.
Federer on the other hand was as emotionally high as a kite, and his problem is finding something good to say about Roddick without sounding patronising. He unintentionally failed to do this but I can’t blame him. His head must have been all over the place after breaking Sampras’ record, and to expect anyone to speak with any degree of coherence at such a time is optimistic in the extreme.
I can’t think of any other way of handling these occasions but I don’t like them one bit.
I heard it’s because her ass is too big (now I’m going to go vomit. Even if there is some truth to a Wimbledon winner being an ‘underachiever,’ however ludicrous it sounds, this guy needs his press pass and internet privileges revoked).
Thanks for the update, ShibbOleth. It looked painful at the time. Just shows his guts.
Another thing, Roddick’s backhand was outrageous. (Just think what some of us could do with a good coach.) Anyway, a devastatingly consistent backhand is enough to unsettle any opponent, which speaks to Federer’s mental strength.
Textbook showcase match. Nick Bolletierri could hold an entire summer school on this one final.
That was a very uncomfortable fall, but Roddick’s withdrawing because he’s tired, not because he’s badly hurt. I never noticed him favoring that part of his leg even at the end of the match. It’s pretty common for tennis players to withdraw from an event if they’ve gone deep in a tournament immediately before - like Federer’s withdrawal from one of the Wimbledon warmups after he won the French.
Yesterday notwithstanding, Federer is by far the best speaker among sportsmen in my lifetime. He’s not exactly entertaining to listen to, but he nearly always says the right thing. I watch Federer interviews nodding and smiling; I watch most postmatch interviews cringing with my face in my hands.
He puts most native speakers of English in the sports world to shame, frankly.
They could do it like almost every other sport and let them shower and get dressed, cool down and collect their thoughts before going to an interview room. It also gives them an opportunity to charge sponsor for the right to plaster their logos all over the wall behind them.
They don’t do this because there is (now) the tradition of having them address the crowd directly afterward. I think a wave, a kiss and a thank you would be fine. Shake hands all around, hold up the cup, go shower. If you’re an Aussie maybe climb up in the crowd and find someone to hug.
Well here’s one time he couldn’t finish an interview with a straight face.
Yeah, they’re almost invariably excruciating, aren’t they. Sue Barker isn’t so terrible at them, but still, it’s cruel and unusual on the loser. Really well held together by Roddick; not sure I could’ve mustered a joke in his shoes.
I think the worst post-event interviews I’ve ever seen were conducted by Sally Gunnell trackside at athletics. Her speciality seemed to be cornering losing British athletes (of which there is no shortage) and essentially asking them how it felt to have let their country down. Dropping her was probably the biggest single boost to BBC quality since Noel Edmonds quit.
ShadowFacts, we ought to be able to watch the post-match interview here, but it ain’t loading for me right now. I’ll try again later.
I’m sorry, but any supposed “ranking” system that fails to accurately predict head to head results is not doing the correct job. A ranking of players isn’t about who’s achieved the most points. That’s something that might be used to determine an award, or eligibility into a tournament. But a ranking is supposed to be a determination of who is better. Who will beat whom in a head-to-head matchup. That’s why Wimbledon seeded the players according to their rankings.
Safina is not better than Serena Williams. That’s pretty clear. She may be more consistent in tournaments over the year, but she is not better than Serena Williams. So the rankings are wrong, and that’s what drives Serena nuts.