Tennis Forum banner
21 - 40 of 109 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,121 Posts
Strong ATP image being much more consistent compared to WTA is solely a result of having 3 GOAT contenders (the so called BIG3) for the last 15-20 years. But this era is just coming to its end. In 2-3 years from now it's very likely ATP will be as "random" or as "consistent" as WTA and there's a good chance in the next wave it's WTA that becomes more predictable.
You're clueless as usual.
Medvedev: F Australia, Q French, 4r Wimbledon, W US Open
Zverev: Q Australia, S French, 4r Wimbledon, S US Open
Tsitsipas: S Australia, F French, 1r Wimbledon, 3r US Open
Berrettini: 4r Australia, Q French, F Wimbledon, Q US Open

Even if we exclude the Big 3, the current top men are much more consistent and reliable than the top women by a huge margin. Had Djokovic not been around, we would have had Medvedev winning Australia and the US Open, Tsitsipas winning the French and Berrettini winning Wimbledon. Definitely not a qualifier or a 25-year-old doubles specialist who had barely won any matches in their careers.
Also, without overanalyzing things, simply take a look at the current Indian Wells tournament and compare the men's draw with the women's. There's no need to look any further to have a clear picture.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,263 Posts
If people don't like the WTA anymore, they can find another hobby.
We love WTA because of all the drama and sillyness and inconsistency
Its never boring

Buts lets not pretend what happend here is good for any sport

We will never see in oure beloved speedskating so much inconsistency as we see in WTA

In speedskating its impossible that a nobody ranked out of top 100 become world champion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 · (Edited)
You're clueless as usual.
Medvedev: F Australia, Q French, 4r Wimbledon, W US Open
Zverev: Q Australia, S French, 4r Wimbledon, S US Open
Tsitsipas: S Australia, F French, 1r Wimbledon, 3r US Open
Berrettini: 4r Australia, Q French, F Wimbledon, Q US Open

Even if we exclude the Big 3, the current top men are much more consistent and reliable than the top women by a huge margin. Had Djokovic not been around, we would have had Medvedev winning Australia and the US Open, Tsitsipas winning the French and Berrettini winning Wimbledon. Definitely not a qualifier or a 25-year-old doubles specialist who had barely won any matches in their careers.
Also, without overanalyzing things, simply take a look at the current Indian Wells tournament and compare the men's draw with the women's. There's no need to look any further than that to have a clear picture.
I don't think you or others are making enough allowance for the effect of Covid. It has affected the women's game much more than the men. They have lost more tournaments, so it has been harder for the 17/18/19-year-olds to make the big moves they typically make at that age. So their rankings are not truly reflecting where they are with their game. Raducanu might well have been closer to Iga's ranking when she won RG if she had had more opportunities, and Iga herself had shown promising results in the Rogers Cup 2019 and AO 2020 before everything shut down. She could well have been ranked a lot higher at RG 2020 if the shutdown had not happened. We have Tauson now who looks promising enough to make a move, but doesn't have the opportunities (or the WCs) to show where she is. She could well be the next one to appear to come out of nowhere.

I would not question the phrase 'typical of the WTA right now' or something like that, but to suggest that WTA has always been more random than the ATP, I don't think is borne out by the number of one-time slam champions over the years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,518 Posts
People forgot how ATP looked like before big3 era, that's why. People just think more about current state of both tours. Even if we exclude big3 then ATP top players are still much more consistent.
MUCH MUCH MUCH more consistent.

Like the top 10 and 20 look like real top 10s and 20s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,518 Posts
I don't think you or others are making enough allowance for the effect of Covid. It has affected the women's game much more than the men. They have lost more tournaments, so it has been harder for the 17/18/19-year-olds to make the big moves they typically make at that age. So their rankings are not truly reflecting where they are with their game. Raducanu might well have been closer to Iga's ranking when she won RG if she had had more opportunities, and Iga herself had shown promising results in the Rogers Cup 2019 and AO 2020 before everything shut down. She could well have been ranked a lot higher at RG 2020 if the shutdown had not happened. We have Tauson now who looks promising enough to make a move, but doesn't have the opportunities (or the WCs) to show where she is. She could well be the next one to appear to come out of nowhere.

I would not question the phrase 'typical of the WTA right now' or something like that, but to suggest that WTA has always been more random than the ATP, I don't think is bore out by the number of one-time slam champions over the years.
It hasn't ALWAYS been more random than ATP but it has been for the last 20 years minus Serena.

And COVID is the same for everyone.
 

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
1,948 Posts
IW is a WTA1000 event, but no player develops their game for these slow HC conditions, its not that important.

Players peak for slams and develop a game for either fast hard court (USO and AO), low bounce grass or slow clay. Thats how they are remembered, called a champion and where all the money and sponsorship is.

This IW is out of place this year, but its not even in a build up to anything, players are winding down end of year and then preparing for fast AO open in the heat.

I dont know how players are supposed to be consistent in IW as its like a slow clay court at end of the HC swiing ?
The US Open was not fast on Ashe. Rest of the courts were, but not Ashe. IW is much more similar to Ashe than people seem to want to say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,289 Posts
I don't know, obviously winners like Raducanu, Giorgi or Krejcikova are impossible to imagine on the ATP side at the moment (though Krejcikova actually played a very consistent season, comparable to let's say Berrettini who was praised in an earlier post).

But then people also bizarrely hold them to different standards. Like Rublev is now seen as an established top player (two ATP 1000 finals, Miami SF, AO QF) and Pliskova is constantly mocked by the same people (Wimbledon F, Rome F, Canada F, Cincy SF, USO QF).

People praise the next gen of ATP players like FAA, Hurkacz, Sinner, Shapovalov, Ruud and yet none of them is outperforming Pegula, Sakkari, Jabeur or Badosa when it comes to consistent deep runs in bigger tournaments.

Zverev, Medvedev, Tsitsipas indeed stepped it up. But Barty was performing on a similar level too.

In one category the ATP players are clearly stomping on the WTA though and that is taking smaller tournaments seriously and collecting these trophies (maybe it's the bigger prize money?).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,518 Posts
you cannot tell me you wouldn’t want your faves to be more consistent. The stories in sport are
I don't know, obviously winners like Raducanu, Giorgi or Krejcikova are impossible to imagine on the ATP side at the moment (though Krejcikova actually played a very consistent season, comparable to let's say Berrettini who was praised in an earlier post).

But then people also bizarrely hold them to different standards. Like Rublev is now seen as an established top player (two ATP 1000 finals, Miami SF, AO QF) and Pliskova is constantly mocked by the same people (Wimbledon F, Rome F, Canada F, Cincy SF, USO QF).

People praise the next gen of ATP players like FAA, Hurkacz, Sinner, Shapovalov, Ruud and yet none of them is outperforming Pegula, Sakkari, Jabeur or Badosa when it comes to consistent deep runs in bigger tournaments.

Zverev, Medvedev, Tsitsipas indeed stepped it up. But Barty was performing on a similar level too.

In one category the ATP players are clearly stomping on the WTA though and that is taking smaller tournaments seriously and collecting these trophies (maybe it's the bigger prize money?).
I don't have enough time this morning to go through everyone you mentioned...

but Pliskova was literally 15-12 in her first 12 tournaments of the year. LOL.

Over her LONG career, she has made some great results but she is usually a freaking mess who bows out super early at many many many tournaments yet still maintains a high ranking.

Rublev has reached the fourth round or better in 6 of his last 8 grand slams and is 47-17 this year and he won 80% of his matches last year in an era where 3 of the best players of all time played. like no comparison at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,289 Posts
Rublev has reached the fourth round or better in 6 of his last 8 grand slams and is 47-17 this year and he won 80% of his matches last year in an era where 3 of the best players of all time played. like no comparison at all.
And how often did he actually run into these 3 great players of all time lol? His last three slam losses were to Struff, Fucsovics and Tiafoe. This week he lost to Tommy Paul so let's not pretend he's out of reach for WTA players in terms of consistency, especially compared to someone like Pliskova who did have a shitty start into the season (and still managed to get several strong results lately) and yet reached plenty of QFs/SFs in the past few years. A lot of people are clearly biased.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
257 Posts
We love WTA because of all the drama and sillyness and inconsistency
Its never boring

Buts lets not pretend what happend here is good for any sport

We will never see in oure beloved speedskating so much inconsistency as we see in WTA

In speedskating its impossible that a nobody ranked out of top 100 become world champion
Bad comparison. Steven Bradbury would like a word 😂

"Doing a Bradbury" is part of aussie language now. If you think about it, it's what happens frequently in WTA tournaments. All the favoured top seeds get knocked out and the last woman standing is some unexpected random. Not their fault the alleged top seeds can't play to their ranking
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,497 Posts
I don't know, obviously winners like Raducanu, Giorgi or Krejcikova are impossible to imagine on the ATP side at the moment (though Krejcikova actually played a very consistent season, comparable to let's say Berrettini who was praised in an earlier post).

But then people also bizarrely hold them to different standards. Like Rublev is now seen as an established top player (two ATP 1000 finals, Miami SF, AO QF) and Pliskova is constantly mocked by the same people (Wimbledon F, Rome F, Canada F, Cincy SF, USO QF).

People praise the next gen of ATP players like FAA, Hurkacz, Sinner, Shapovalov, Ruud and yet none of them is outperforming Pegula, Sakkari, Jabeur or Badosa when it comes to consistent deep runs in bigger tournaments.

Zverev, Medvedev, Tsitsipas indeed stepped it up. But Barty was performing on a similar level too.

In one category the ATP players are clearly stomping on the WTA though and that is taking smaller tournaments seriously and collecting these trophies (maybe it's the bigger prize money?).
These ladies you mentioned are much older, they aren't really next gen, more like millenials, Pegula, Sakkari, Jabeur, Badosa, Bara, Pliskova aren't they in the 23 to 30 age group?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,263 Posts
Bad comparison. Steven Bradbury would like a word 😂

"Doing a Bradbury" is part of aussie language now. If you think about it, it's what happens frequently in WTA tournaments. All the favoured top seeds get knocked out and the last woman standing is some unexpected random. Not their fault the alleged top seeds can't play to their ranking

Yes that was also epic , everyone went down so Bradbury could win but he never win again
See the parellel with 1 slam winners

But shorttrack is not the same as oure national sport (long track ) speedskating , there you would never seen this nonsens

In shorttrack its always much spectable , everyone can fall and the last men standing can win

The same is WTA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,047 Posts
The whole the men would be more consistent even without the Big 3 is nothing more than guessing. It doesn't take into account how they would react to the pressure of actually being favourites, of people expecting them to win. The only non big 3 Slam winner in recent times is Thiem, and he had a lot of problems since. Maybe they would be very consistent, maybe not, but it doesn't really matter and comparisons are futile honestly and pointless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,121 Posts
The whole the men would be more consistent even without the Big 3 is nothing more than guessing. It doesn't take into account how they would react to the pressure of actually being favourites, of people expecting them to win. The only non big 3 Slam winner in recent times is Thiem, and he had a lot of problems since. Maybe they would be very consistent, maybe not, but it doesn't really matter and comparisons are futile honestly and pointless.
Medvedev just won the US Open and certainly wasn't schooled by a journeyman in the first round at Indian Wells like the US Open women's champion... LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,127 Posts
Medvedev just won the US Open and certainly wasn't schooled by a journeyman in the first round at Indian Wells like the US Open women's champion... LOL
He who I am not allowed to mention here is also world champion. Not comparable with Emma;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,047 Posts
Medvedev just won the US Open and certainly wasn't schooled by a journeyman in the first round at Indian Wells like the US Open women's champion... LOL
If you wanna base all your worldview in one cherry picked case
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,651 Posts
Not true that COVID was same for both tours, many more WTA tournaments have been cancelled including WTA finals and on the lower ITF level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Snowwy

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,679 Posts
After decades of being told that depth was the biggest attraction in tennis is it now supposed to be consistency? Players who hang around the top of the rankings for years without doing anything to write themselves into the sport's history books. Some of those single slam winners were very consistent (e.g. Woz) but winning that one slam is what they will be remembered for, not how many weeks they were in the top 10 (or at number 1 in Woz's case).
 
21 - 40 of 109 Posts
Top