Big3 average year end ranking

[Lew II]

Big3 average year end ranking (geometric mean):

2003 - 40.5
2004 - 21.2
2005 - 5.4
2006 - 3.2
2007 - 1.8
2008 - 1.8
2009 - 1.8
2010 - 1.8
2011 - 1.8
2012 - 2.0
2013 - 2.3
2014 - 1.8
2015 - 2.5
2016 - 6.6
2017 - 2.9
2018 - 1.8
2019 - 1.8
2020 - 2.2

Slams won in years Big3 had <2.5 average ranking (2007-15 and 2018-20):

Nadal 16
Djokovic 15
Federer 9

Year end #1:

Djokovic 6
Nadal 4
Federer 2

 

[blablavla]

Garbage thread.

 

[blablavla]

Mods, stop this.

 

[blablavla]

cherrypicked stats - the only way Djokovic fans find comfort

 

[aldeayeah]

Slams won in years Big3 had <2.5 average ranking (2007-15 and 2018-20):

Why not 2.4?

ah, 2015, I see

 

[RS]

Big3 average year end ranking (geometric mean):

2003 - 40.5
2004 - 21.2
2005 - 5.4
2006 - 3.2
2007 - 1.8
2008 - 1.8
2009 - 1.8
2010 - 1.8
2011 - 1.8
2012 - 2.0
2013 - 2.3
2014 - 1.8
2015 - 2.5
2016 - 6.6
2017 - 2.9
2018 - 1.8
2019 - 1.8
2020 - 2.2

Slams won in years Big3 had <2.5 average ranking (2007-15 and 2018-20):

Nadal 16
Djokovic 15
Federer 9

Year end #1:

Djokovic 6
Nadal 4
Federer 2

If 2011-16 Djokovic was in 2004-09 with no Federer his many slams do you see him winning?

 

[aditya123]

Big3 average year end ranking (geometric mean):

2003 - 40.5
2004 - 21.2
2005 - 5.4
2006 - 3.2
2007 - 1.8
2008 - 1.8
2009 - 1.8
2010 - 1.8
2011 - 1.8
2012 - 2.0
2013 - 2.3
2014 - 1.8
2015 - 2.5
2016 - 6.6
2017 - 2.9
2018 - 1.8
2019 - 1.8
2020 - 2.2

Slams won in years Big3 had <2.5 average ranking (2007-15 and 2018-20):

Nadal 16
Djokovic 15
Federer 9

Year end #1:

Djokovic 6
Nadal 4
Federer 2

Ok this Favours Nadal a bit but still this is silly... Including Djokovic & Nadal in 2004 says this is a great mess.

 

[Lew II]

Average position of Nadal and Djokovic in years Federer ended #1 --> 8.4
Average position of Djokovic and Federer in years Nadal ended #1 --> 3.0
Average position of Nadal and Federer in years Djokovic ended #1 --> 2.8

Federer enjoyed the easy start when other Big3 were not top players.

 

[blablavla]

Ok this Favours Nadal a bit but still this is silly... Including Djokovic & Nadal in 2004 says this is a great mess in someone's head

fixed it for ya

 

[PilotPete]

I wonder if the OP understands that Federer is 5/6 years older than Djokodal, does he understand the concept of time?

 

[Lew II]

I wonder if the OP understand that Federer is 5/6 years older than Djokodal, does he understand time?

That's why he had it easier. He enjoyed an easy start when other Big3 were very young and had not reached the top yet (Nadal in 2003-04 and Djokovic in 2003-06).

 

[blablavla]

I wonder if the OP understands that Federer is 5/6 years older than Djokodal, does he understand the concept of time?

age is just a number

 

[PilotPete]

That's why he had it easier. He enjoyed an easy start when other Big3 were very young and had not reached the top yet (Nadal in 2003-04 and Djokovic in 2003-06).

You're assuming Djokodal would have beaten Fed's competitors in the early years.

 

[blablavla]

That's why he had it easier. He enjoyed an easy start when other Big3 were very young and had not reached the top yet (Nadal in 2003-04 and Djokovic in 2003-06).

in which way he had it easier?

Option 1.
Before Djokodal, the #1 spot in ranking was literally empty, waiting for Fed to show up and take it
The ranking at those dark times started with #2

Option 2.
Before Djokodal, the spots #2 and #3 in ranking were literally empty
it was:
#1 Fed
#2 N/A
#3 N/A
#4 some weak era mug

Option 3.
Age is just a number

Option #4.
all of the above + weak era

 

[Robert F]

Similar to rankings, I was looking at year end ATP points for the big 3 over the years. I was hoping to see who had the best average annual ATP points over their careers. Unfortunately, I think the point system has changed a few times since Federer entered the rankings. I think in the early 2000's he held the #1 spot with 6000ish points. For the past several years the points have been between 9-16K for the top three (usually Djoker/Fed/Nadal). Djoker obviously getting the most point in a year at one point.

Has anyone seen any analysis of total ATP points in a career or average over their career that is based on current point scoring system?
I was wondering if ATP points earned could be another GOAT metric.

 

[Deleted member 748597]

Poetry? Here you go:

Lew posts his stats, some call them lies
Yet many can't avert their eyes
Some praise, some come to criticize
And this should come as no surprise
The truth is there before our eyes
We're merely tennis girls and guys
Who glimpse the truth through its disguise
The endless stats, the muffled cries.

Analysis is mostly lacking
Lew's stats support the guy he's backing
He'll post again and prompt attacking
Sometimes he takes a good shellacking.

But Lew will post all day and night
To our dismay, to our delight
Some call it truth, some call it fiction
But it's all part of our addiction.

We glimpse the truth through its disguise
We are but tennis girls and guys
With little sleep and swollen eyes
All to support our favorite guys
We come to praise and criticize.

 

[aldeayeah]

That's why he had it easier. He enjoyed an easy start when other Big3 were very young and had not reached the top yet (Nadal in 2003-04 and Djokovic in 2003-06).

he did not just start losing to djokodal

he started losing more to EVERYONE

to say "he stopped winning only because Djokodal emerged" is simplistic, as is the opposite "he stopped winning only because he got old"

it's a bit of both

You can also turn the omelette around and say stuff like "matured Djokovic never had to face Fed at his most unplayable 2005-2006 self", but it's completely pointless. Don't let that stop you though.

 

[aldeayeah]

Similar to rankings, I was looking at year end ATP points for the big 3 over the years. I was hoping to see who had the best average annual ATP points over their careers. Unfortunately, I think the point system has changed a few times since Federer entered the rankings. I think in the early 2000's he held the #1 spot with 6000ish points. For the past several years the points have been between 9-16K for the top three (usually Djoker/Fed/Nadal). Djoker obviously getting the most point in a year at one point.

Has anyone seen any analysis of total ATP points in a career or average over their career that is based on current point scoring system?
I was wondering if ATP points earned could be another GOAT metric.

If you just multiply by 2 the pre-2009 points you'll get a good estimate for the 2000-2008 period.

If you want the dirty details,

ATP Ranking Systems

The points system has changed enough times to be totally useless to compare between eras.

 

[Sunny014]

Average position of Nadal and Djokovic in years Federer ended #1 --> 8.4
Average position of Djokovic and Federer in years Nadal ended #1 --> 3.0
Average position of Nadal and Federer in years Djokovic ended #1 --> 2.8

Federer enjoyed the easy start when other Big3 were not top players.

Nd what about all the slams that Federer missed from 2010 because he was 30+ ? It is a double edged sword, there are no advantages.

Mother Nature sent 2 all time greats 5-6 years younger below him who constantly got better with age while Federer was at a disadvantage.

If he was born in 1987 or 1988 he would be having a 30-12 H2H over Novak and a 35-25 H2H vs Nadal ( 25 = 18 defeats on clay + 7 defeats early in his career to Teenage Nadal ) ...

 

[MeatTornado]

(geometric mean):

 

[Robert F]

If you just multiply by 2 the pre-2009 points you'll get a good estimate for the 2000-2008 period.

If you want the dirty details,

ATP Ranking Systems

The points system has changed enough times to be totally useless to compare between eras.

Thanks and very helpful. Wonder why they tinkered with it so many times.

Ideally if the point system was consistent since Fed entered the field, could you argue the Annual Average ATP points earned to be a good metric of GOAT. If you barely scrap to be number 1 with only 8,000 points, you are good but you aren't tons better than the competition. If you are #1 with 16,000 points and the next guy has 5,000, you dominated the field. Plus it can be a relative measure of longevity.

Djoker has really been a point hog when he is number 1.

 

[blablavla]

@Lew II please wake me up when Novak will top this list

Highest paid athletes in the last year:

1) Roger Federer, 39 years old
2) Cristiano Ronaldo, 35
3) Lionel Messi, 33
4) Neymar, 28
5) Lebron James, 36
6) Stephen curry, 32
7) Kevin Durant, 32
8) Tiger Woods, 45
9) Kirk Cousins, 32
10) Carson Wentz, 28
11) Tyson Fury, 32
12) Russell Westbrook, 32
13) Lewis Hamilton, 35
14) Rory Mcllroy, 31
15) Jared Goff, 26
16) Conor McGregor, 32
17) James Harden, 31
18) Giannis Antetokounmpo, 26
19) Anthony Joshua 31
20) Deontay Wilder 35

 

[Winner]

This thread is basically designed to make Novak look good on behalf of Fedal's greatness, the argument is "Nole won when Fedal were good whereas Fedal won when Nole was bad". Yeah not Fedals problem Nole was bad for a significant amount of time in his career.

 

[Sport]

he did not just start losing to djokodal

he started losing more to EVERYONE

Federer basically only lost to Nadal in Slams in 2008-early 2009, rather than to "everyone". No one stopped Federer at RG 2008, WB 2008 or the AO 2009 bar Nadal, and no one stopped Federer at the USO 2008. Federer's % percentage in Slam finals was the same in 2006 and 2007: 75%. Why was it 25% in 2008? Maybe you can blame mono for AO 2008, not for WB 2008 which was 6 months later when Federer was fully recovered from the adverse effects of mono, he had received medical clearance to play normally since February 2008 and reached the finals of Halle and WB 2008 without losing a set. And at the AO 2009 Federer was merely 27, he was at the peak of his powers, Nadal was just better. Thiem is now 27 and at his peak. Nadal aged 27 was at his peak in 2013 when he won Cincinnati, Montreal and the USO in a row (something neither Federer nor Djokovic have ever done) and Djokovic was also at his peak aged 28 in his famous 2015 season. If Nadal and Djokovic with a more physical style are at their peak aged 27, Federer with his less physically demanding style was obviously also at his peak aged 27.

to say "he stopped winning only because Djokodal emerged" is simplistic, as is the opposite "he stopped winning only because he got old"

it's a bit of both

Not necessarily. It can be only one of those. It is dogmatic to assume that it must be both. It is also perfectly valid and logical to lose because of one reason. Look at Roddick. The man did not stop winning Slams because "he got old" but because one single cause: Federer. Analogoulsy, Federer did not stop winning Slams because of age at the beginning, but because of Nadal first and Djokovic later. Obviously, current Federer in his late 30s is affected by age, but not a Federer merely aged 26-27 when he lost to Nadal. Federer lost because Nadal has a higher peak level than the Swiss, just like Roddick lost because Federer has a higher peak level than the American.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

 

[nov]

he did not just start losing to djokodal

he started losing more to EVERYONE

to say "he stopped winning only because Djokodal emerged" is simplistic, as is the opposite "he stopped winning only because he got old"

it's a bit of both

You can also turn the omelette around and say stuff like "matured Djokovic never had to face Fed at his most unplayable 2005-2006 self", but it's completely pointless. Don't let that stop you though.

So you want to say that after weak era fest, two guys came and starting beat the **** out of you, it wouldnt affect your confidence?Of course he started losing more to everyone, his aura of being the best was gone.

 

[Lew II]

So you want to say that after weak era fest, two guys came and starting beat the **** out of you, it wouldnt affect your confidence?Of course he started losing more to everyone, his aura of being the best was gone.

Confidence is one of the main factors in tennis.

Federer in Cincinnati 2015:

“I think I’m a better player now than when I was at 24 because I’ve practised for another 10 years and I’ve got 10 years more experience,” Federer said. “Maybe I don’t have the confidence level that I had at 24 when I was winning 40 matches in a row, but I feel like I hit a bigger serve, my backhand is better, my forehand is still as good as it’s ever been, I volley better than I have in the past. I think I’ve had to adapt to a new generation of players again.”

 

[blablavla]

So you want to say that after weak era fest, two guys came and starting beat the **** out of you, it wouldnt affect your confidence?Of course he started losing more to everyone, his aura of being the best was gone.

how do you compare 2016 - onward vs 2003 - 2007?
in relative strength

when answering, please keep in mind that a weak era mug champion, managed to win some GS titles post 2016, get back to #1, manages to run deep at slams (SF/F) and overall is still leading the field, while being 15 years older

 

[aldeayeah]

So you want to say that after weak era fest, two guys came and starting beat the **** out of you, it wouldnt affect your confidence?Of course he started losing more to everyone, his aura of being the best was gone.

Sometimes I wonder if you guys from the Weak Era Army Corps (W.E.A.C.) saw peak Federer play, like, at all.

 

[mike danny]

So you want to say that after weak era fest, two guys came and starting beat the **** out of you, it wouldnt affect your confidence?Of course he started losing more to everyone, his aura of being the best was gone.

Sure, dude, I guess Fed started losing to everyone when his confidence should have been sky high for sh*ts and giggles.

 

[Lew II]

Sure, dude, I guess Fed started losing to everyone when his confidence should have been sky high for sh*ts and giggles.

In the 2007 Wimbledon final post match interview, Federer said Nadal was improving a lot and soon would have beaten him everywhere. He knew what was coming for him.

 

[blablavla]

In the 2007 Wimbledon final post match interview, Federer said Nadal was improving a lot and soon would have beaten him everywhere. He knew what was coming for him.

he also said that he is now better than the 24 years old himself?
while uncle Toni said that the reason why Big 3 dominate is because the youngers are weak

both are experts? aren't they?
so how do we actually figure out who is talking the truth and who is simply being nice to the opposition?

 

[nov]

Sometimes I wonder if you guys from the Weak Era Army Corps (W.E.A.C.) saw peak Federer play, like, at all.

OK no weak era, it was strong era and Djokovic with Nadal are mugs. But you claim that Federer started losing to anyone. So you want to say that after such dominance in 2003-2007 and then 2 rivals arrived and started beating him, doesnt affect his confidence?

 

[mike danny]

OK no weak era, it was strong era and Djokovic with Nadal are mugs. But you claim that Federer started losing to anyone. So you want to say that after such dominance in 2003-2007 and then 2 rivals arrived and started beating him, doesnt affect his confidence?

Sure, dude, I guess Fed started losing to everyone when his confidence should have been sky high for sh*ts and giggles.

 

[wang07]

If Nadal and Djokovic with a more physical style are at their peak aged 27, Federer with his less physically demanding style was obviously also at his peak aged 27.

What a ridiculous claim. Next thing you're going to say is Nadal is better than his rivals because he was a slam winner at 19, and Fedovic weren't?

It just doesn't work that way, you can make general claims like a given player is supposed to peak in his mid 20s because it's mostly true, but when you discard or ignore specific factors affecting a players career dynamics, it's nothing short of blatant ignorance. If you truly believe that Federer's 2008 season wasn't severely affected by mono then you're ignorant.

 

[NoleIsBoat]

These stats show clearly Federer had a nice head start from 2003-2006/2007 before big 3 fully matured.

Meanwhile Djokovic had high ranked (strong) big 3 to contend with his entire career... yet only 3 slams behind having played 5 seasons less and being ahead in every other stat