PDA

View Full Version : Best season for an individual in the past decade?


Zarfot Z
09-29-2012, 10:39 PM
Novak Djokovic 2011 Season

Tournaments Won: 10
Grand Slams: Australian Open, Wimbledon, US Open [3]
Masters 1000: Toronto, Rome, Madrid, Miami, Indian Wells [5]
ATP 500: Dubai [1]
ATP 250: Belgrade [1]

Grand Slam Performance
Australian Open: W
Roland Garros: SF
Wimbledon: W
US Open: W

Other
Calendar prize money: $12,619,803
Season W/L record: 70–6 (92,1%)

Rafael Nadal 2010 Season

Tournaments Won: 7
Grand Slams: Roland Garros, Wimbledon, US Open [3]
Masters 1000: Madrid, Rome, Monte Carlo [3]
ATP 500: Tokyo [1]
ATP 250: [0]

Grand Slam Performance
Australian Open: QF
Roland Garros: W
Wimbledon: W
US Open: W

Other
Calendar prize money: $10,062,983
Season W/L record: 71-10 (87,6%)

Roger Federer 2006 Season

Tournaments Won: 12
Grand Slams: Australian Open, Wimbledon, US Open [3]
World Tour Finals: Shanghai [1]
Masters 1000: Madrid, Canada, Miami, Indian Wells [4]
ATP 500: Tokyo [1]
ATP 250: Doha, Halle, Basel [3]

Grand Slam Performance
Australian Open: W
Roland Garros: F
Wimbledon: W
US Open: W

Other
Calendar prize money: $8,343,885
Season W/L record: 92–5 (94,8%)

Def
09-30-2012, 06:16 AM
Federer 2006 had a better W-L, did better in the slams, won more titles. So if i had to rank, it would be.

1. Federer 2006
2. Djokovic 2011
3. Nadal 2010

jaggy
09-30-2012, 06:17 AM
Djoke for the dominance for most of the year

Sim
09-30-2012, 06:22 AM
Fed '06 for the whole season.
For first half of the season, Djokovic '11.

Apun94
09-30-2012, 07:35 AM
Overall, Fed 2006. But the level of Nole '11 and Rafa '10 (in patches) was higher. Nole was unlucky to get injured otherwise he wouldve had a better year than Fed '06. His last 4 losses of the season were ALL because of injury...

NadalDramaQueen
09-30-2012, 07:40 AM
This is an easy question. Both the stats and the "level of play" point towards Federer's 2006 season. A close second would be Djokovic's 2011 season with Nadal's 2010 season well behind. Djokovic gets a lot of credit for having an incredible start.

The only thing the latter two seasons have going for them is that a lot of posters started watching tennis in 2008, and just regurgitate junk they have heard from other posters who also didn't watch tennis before that time.

Nathaniel_Near
09-30-2012, 07:45 AM
Overall, Fed 2006. But the level of Nole '11 and Rafa '10 (in patches) was higher. Nole was unlucky to get injured otherwise he wouldve had a better year than Fed '06. His last 4 losses of the season were ALL because of injury...

Stated as though it were fact. A scandalous (though amusing) post, though lacking in flavour and with an irksome texture. Unfortunate.

Tammo
09-30-2012, 08:01 AM
Obviously it is Nadal's 10' season.

Fed didn't have and Tsonga's, Delpo's, Berdych's, Isner's etc. then so of course he would win everything bar the FO because Nadal will always win that no matter who he is playing in the finals. The only reason Fed won the other 3 slams was because he didn't face a Rafa that was comfortable on those surfaces then even though he did get to the W final.

Djokovic's season was obviously better than Fed's but he didn't play a prime Rafa in any of their finals so that would be what I call a "hollow" season.

Nadal's season is when everyone saw that he was the very best and that his tennis was the highest anyone has ever seen. After his tourney Monte Carlo, he went on a tear and destroyed everyone.

So correct order is

Nadal




Djokovic







Federer

AnotherTennisProdigy
09-30-2012, 08:08 AM
Obviously it is Nadal's 10' season.

Fed didn't have and Tsonga's, Delpo's, Berdych's, Isner's etc. then so of course he would win everything bar the FO because Nadal will always win that no matter who he is playing in the finals. The only reason Fed won the other 3 slams was because he didn't face a Rafa that was comfortable on those surfaces then even though he did get to the W final.

Djokovic's season was obviously better than Fed's but he didn't play a prime Rafa in any of their finals so that would be what I call a "hollow" season.

Nadal's season is when everyone saw that he was the very best and that his tennis was the highest anyone has ever seen. After his tourney Monte Carlo, he went on a tear and destroyed everyone.

So correct order is

Nadal




Djokovic







Federer

?????

I thought we were talking about best seasons, why do the opponents affect the result? The numbers clearly point towards Federer but because of your subjective thinking he somehow comes out last.

beast of mallorca
09-30-2012, 08:13 AM
?????

I thought we were talking about best seasons, why do the opponents affect the result? The numbers clearly point towards Federer but because of your subjective thinking he somehow comes out last.

Simple answer, Fed fans think he's first.
Nadal fans think he's first.........for whatever reason! Case close. :)

Nathaniel_Near
09-30-2012, 08:17 AM
I don't rate Nadal's 2010 season as being particularly close to Federer 06 or Nole 11. I actually prefer Nadal's 2008 season for sheer excellence of play and he won more titles in a 2-3 month stretch than he did for the whole of 2010. 2008 was spectacular, much like Federer's 2005 was utterly fantastic, but he also only won 2 Majors in the year.

Cup8489
09-30-2012, 08:34 AM
For me it's like this: both Djokovic and Federer won 3 majors... Djokovic won one more Masters event than Federer BUT Federer won the WTF. The WTF, to me, is worth more than a masters, and so I give the edge to Fed.

90's Clay
09-30-2012, 08:53 AM
Djokovic considering how many times he took a prime Nadal out to win all those titles, including beating Fed at the USO as well.


While Fed's opposition in 2006 was one giant ROFL outside of Nadal at the French who was still was just a greenhorn.


Though just the fact that Nadal did something in 2010 that has never been done before you could certainly argue for him. 3 slams on 3 different surfaces in one year

TJfederer16
09-30-2012, 09:05 AM
Fed's 06' level was unreal throughout the year, he would have smashed 2011' Novak considering Roger pushed him all the way in there slam encounters in 2011, obviously we know the matchup problem with Nadal so would have struggled as usual but Rafa's statistics of his 2010 don't match up to Fed's 06 or Novak's 2011, in general Roger's 06' level was the highest level i have ever seen from a tennis player, in pretty much all of his matches he was just ridiculous that year, bar Rafa it wouldn't have matter'd the opposition he had back then he would have dominated no matter who was playing by just looking at the level of tennis he was playing.

90's Clay
09-30-2012, 09:11 AM
Fed's 06' level was unreal throughout the year, he would have smashed 2011' Novak considering Roger pushed him all the way in there slam encounters in 2011, obviously we know the matchup problem with Nadal so would have struggled as usual but Rafa's statistics of his 2010 don't match up to Fed's 06 or Novak's 2011, in general Roger's 06' level was the highest level i have ever seen from a tennis player, in pretty much all of his matches he was just ridiculous that year, bar Rafa it wouldn't have matter'd the opposition he had back then he would have dominated no matter who was playing by just looking at the level of tennis he was playing.

Fed's 2006 level of opposition one could argue made him look so dang good as well.. Outside of a baby greenhorn Nadal, that year was AWFUL in terms of opposition. Roddick was having a down year.. Hewitt's run was over. And that you had guys like Kiefer, Ljubicic, or Davydenko around.

2011 Djoker had to take out Nadal at almost every tournament there was to win all those titles he got and had to take out Fed and Nadal back to back to win the Open. Fed didn't have to worry about anything other then a young Nadal on clay who had yet to become as complete a player as he would later become by 2008-2009.

Nathaniel_Near
09-30-2012, 09:15 AM
Fed's 06' level was unreal throughout the year, he would have smashed 2011' Novak considering Roger pushed him all the way in there slam encounters in 2011, obviously we know the matchup problem with Nadal so would have struggled as usual but Rafa's statistics of his 2010 don't match up to Fed's 06 or Novak's 2011, in general Roger's 06' level was the highest level i have ever seen from a tennis player, in pretty much all of his matches he was just ridiculous that year, bar Rafa it wouldn't have matter'd the opposition he had back then he would have dominated no matter who was playing by just looking at the level of tennis he was playing.

I'm re-watching the 2004 US Open Final and Fed's confidence of play and forehand brutality is utterly devastating. It's interesting to see his evolution from his famous fantastic victory over Sampras in 2001 up to the splendid and stylish brutality which he was able to offer up in the 2004 US Open Final.

TMF
09-30-2012, 09:27 AM
Simple answer, Fed fans think he's first.
Nadal fans think he's first.........for whatever reason! Case close. :)

Fed fans think 2006 was the best because they have facts to back up, but Nadal fans(and Sampras fans) are in denial.

Russeljones
09-30-2012, 09:54 AM
Overall, Fed 2006. But the level of Nole '11 and Rafa '10 (in patches) was higher. Nole was unlucky to get injured otherwise he wouldve had a better year than Fed '06. His last 4 losses of the season were ALL because of injury...

LOL ooooooooooooookay..

BauerAlmeida
09-30-2012, 10:26 AM
Fed '06 for the whole season.
For first half of the season, Djokovic '11.

Overall, Fed 2006. But the level of Nole '11 was higher. Nole was unlucky to get injured otherwise he wouldve had a better year than Fed '06. His last 4 losses of the season were ALL because of injury...

This

10this

DM07
09-30-2012, 10:30 AM
The numbers say Federer. The numbers don't lie.

ktid
09-30-2012, 10:49 AM
Definitely Federer but if Djokovic kept up his level after the US open it would've been him, if I'm not wrong he only lost 2 matches (Federer RG SF, Murray Cinci F(retired)). But yeah all 4 GS finals and 12 titles Federer was better

Biscuitmcgriddleson
09-30-2012, 11:01 AM
Djokovic considering how many times he took a prime Nadal out to win all those titles, including beating Fed at the USO as well.


While Fed's opposition in 2006 was one giant ROFL outside of Nadal at the French who was still was just a greenhorn.


Though just the fact that Nadal did something in 2010 that has never been done before you could certainly argue for him. 3 slams on 3 different surfaces in one year

Federer in 2011 nearly beat 2011 Nole at the USO. Therefore using your Samprasian logic, Federer is the choice.

NadalAgassi
09-30-2012, 11:42 AM
Nadal in 2010 since he won majors on all surfaces, which the other two werent good enough to manage. The same reason I regard Serena's 2002 as greater than Seles's 1991 or 1992 for example.

smoledman
09-30-2012, 03:58 PM
Djokovic 2011 was the same as Fed's 2006 through US Open. It's just that Federer won 4 indoor titles to 0 for Djokovic.

ledwix
09-30-2012, 04:28 PM
Nadal in 2010 since he won majors on all surfaces, which the other two werent good enough to manage. The same reason I regard Serena's 2002 as greater than Seles's 1991 or 1992 for example.

But he also had a much lower winning percentage and only four other titles, three of which were masters, but still fewer masters than the others, easily making up for any value difference between the AO and RG, which I believe is none anyway these days. Federer also won WTF, something Nadal almost did, but not quite.

TMF
09-30-2012, 10:07 PM
Nadal in 2010 since he won majors on all surfaces, which the other two werent good enough to manage. The same reason I regard Serena's 2002 as greater than Seles's 1991 or 1992 for example.

He won only 7 titles(no WTF), and winning % is below 90.

ruerooo
09-30-2012, 11:39 PM
Why is no one counting in Rafa's 2008 season? Indian Wells, Rogers Cup, Monte Carlo, Rome, Barcelona, Wimbledon, Roland Garros, Olympic gold, Prince of Asturias Award ...?

smoledman
09-30-2012, 11:54 PM
Yes Rafa's 2008 is top 5.

1. Laver 1969
2. Federer 2006
3. Nadal 2010
4. Djokovic 2011
5. DNadal 2008

Gizo
10-01-2012, 12:23 PM
As far as achievements go, I do think that Nadal's RG-Wimbledon-US Open treble in 2010 was hugely underrated.

Winning the 3 most prestigious tournaments in the sport on 3 different surfaces within a compressed 16 week period was amazing.

Since the US Open switched to hard courts in 1978, many great players have come to accomplishing that treble but fallen just short, winning 2 out of the 3 events and finishing as the runner-up in the other one: Borg in 1978 and 1980, McEnroe in 1984, Lendl in 1986 and 1987, Agassi in 1999 and Federer in 2006, 2007 and 2009.

In my opinion that is the closest that an active player has come to looking unbeatable at the majors across all surfaces. Federer in his prime always had the 'Nadal at RG' problem, while with Djokovic last year, I actually thought he was going to topple Federer and Nadal back to back to win RG, but that he wouldn't be able to win Wimbledon, so I was wrong on both counts there.

Federer's hard court domination during his prime, and Sampras's longevity (i.e. winning majors as a teenager, in his 20s and in his 30s) are also underrated achievements in my opinion.

Povl Carstensen
10-01-2012, 01:33 PM
Federer 3 years in a row +90 winning %.
Edit: Checking if I was right I came across this stat: Federer either won or lost to the eventual champion or runner up in a record 28 consecutive Grand Slam tournaments (2004 Wimbledon – 2011 French Open). Sorry for derailing.