This week I'm discussing the 2006 season, and looking forward to 2007, with ex-pro and expert analyst Hank Moravec (also known as Dunlop Maxply here and at Tennis World).
Steve,
I could go off on a pretty long tangent about what its like to continue to play tennis after a relatively serious junior and college career, but I'll restrain myself. For a long time it was actually difficult to find a socially appropriate game. You're in a spot where its no longer "on" to be playing guys who are practicing four hours a day, yet, believe it or not, sometimes recreational players actually get upset when you take it easy in a game with them. I've basically solved the problem by getting old and crappy.
As for your list, without TTC I can't say I've watched all of these guys enough to lob in an informed opinion, but I'll go at it from another angle.
A fact which is easily lost when fans try to discuss who is "up and coming" is how hard it is to "arrive."
I'll define, for purposes of tonight's discussion, a player as having "arrived" when you get to say you have been a member of the top 10 in the ATP rankings for more than a year consecutively. Remember, that under the points ranking system, you keep your results for a year. Accordingly, Baghdatis has a boatload of points (700) to defend at the upcoming Aussie Open, and if he doesn't defend them he basically is at risk of not being in the top 16 seeds for all the TMS and Slam events for the rest of the year.
Its not enough to get them, you have to defend them. So, here we go:
Roger Federer -- Arrived -- May 2002
Andy Roddick -- Arrived -- August 2002
David Nalbandian - Arrived -- January 2003
Rafael Nadal -- Arrived -- April 2005
Nikolay Davydenko -- Arrived -- June 2005
Ivan Ljubicic -- Arrived -- October 2005
James Blake -- Up and Coming -- March 2006
Tommy Robredo -- Up and Coming -- May 2006
Mario Ancic - Up and Coming -- June 2006
Fernando Gonzalez, is clearly up and coming, he has really only been in the top ten for 16 weeks so far.
Do Baghdatis, Berdych, Djokovic, Gasquet, and Murray have what it takes? It seem so based upon talent, but basically any one of them would need to have a year basically twice as good, points wise, as the year they had in 2006 to crack the top 10. Of the eight guys not named Federer or Nadal, well, it doesn't seem as if all of those guys are getting ready to retire soon, does it? Other than Roddick and Nalbandian, they all pretty much just got there.
If we actually have a bunch of new arrivals, who, in 2006, officially started the trip to retirement lane, other than Agassi?
I see the following former top-10-ers still around: Safin, Hewitt, Moya, Henman, Gaudio, Ferrero, Haas, Gaudio. If I were a betting man I'd only put money on Safin to be back.
I would say that this little statistical analysis shows, perhaps, that maybe Andy Roddick is not getting enough love on these boards? Wouldn't you say? Compared to his record the rest of these guys have about three or four more years of solid tennis to even get to where he is now.
But for me, Roddick is not the man to watch in 2007, its down to Blake and Ljubicic and Davydenko. For rivalries to form its not enough to have the occasional hot match, as Berdych did to take out Nadal. You need familiar faces in the quarterfinals of the Slams and right now we have, officially, about three of such faces, plus Nalbandian. Except that next to Roddick, he may be the Rodney Dangerfield of the tour in terms of getting the least respect.
I would predict that since there is no way that all of Baghdatis, Gasquet, Murray, and Djokovic are all going to be in the top 10 at the end of 2007, so which one, or maybe two, will it be? I say Gasquet. I worry about Baghdatis defending all of those points.
There.
I'll bet plenty of people will disagree with some or all of that!
Hank