View Full Version : Total Weaks at a certain ranking VS Year end ranking

05-13-2009, 09:19 AM
In your opinion if Nadal And Federer retain ther rankings for the rest of the year and Novak and Andy are fighting for that number 3 spot what is more important to you? Who finished the year at number 3 or who had the most weeks at number 3. I think to much value is placed on how many weeks a player spends at number one. If someone spends 42 weeks at number one in a year and finishes at #2 and someone else finishes at #1 but only spent 10 weeks at that position he still had the better year because he finished at #1.

So, total Weeks at a certain ranking or Year end ranking?

05-13-2009, 09:20 AM
Weeks, not weaks.

05-13-2009, 09:47 AM
Weeks, not weaks.

Thanks, I'l edit it. How do I start a poll?

05-13-2009, 10:39 AM
because it shows overall progresses of 1 calendar year
which means when in one season all tourneys come together - it shows whos the best
for instance moya was 2 weeks world number 1 but he definitely wasnt the best player of 1999, agreed?
he was the best in that one little period
but nothing more (those tourneys that counted for rankings from march1998-march1999) (im using moya as an example and i used to be one of his fans)
and i seriously doubt nadal will surpass feds 4 years as n1

05-13-2009, 06:17 PM
yes years obviously but that wasn't the question.

I'd say year-end, I suppose. even if you spent almost the entire year at #1 but lost it at the end, whoever you lost it to was probably neck and neck with you all year and during the final stage he kicked it up a gear.

odd but interesting question.