If all current players were at the peak of their powers

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by joeri888, Mar 14, 2012.

  1. joeri888

    joeri888 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    13,120
    And also played to the best of their abilities
    What would the top 10 look like?

    Mine:
    1. Federer
    2. Djokovic
    3. Nadal
    4. Hewitt
    5. Nalbandian
    6. Roddick
    7. Murray
    8. Davydenko
    9. Del Potro
    10. Ferrero
     
    #1
  2. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Good list:

    Here's mine:
    1. Federer
    2. Djokovic
    3. Nadal
    4. Hewitt
    5. Del Potro
    6. Nalbandian
    7. Roddick
    8. Murray
    9. Tsonga
    10. Davydenko
     
    #2
  3. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    1. Federer
    2. Nadal
    3. Djokovic
    4. Del Potro
    5. Hewitt
    6. Muzz
    7. Nalbandian
    8. A Rod
    9. Denkp
    10. Tsonga or Birdclown but I tend to Jo

    The order could change from the second spot to the 10th.
    Fed is obviously at #1.
    I don't see any other players but these in the Top10.
     
    #3
  4. Dark Victory

    Dark Victory Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Messages:
    249
    For sure, it'd be a strong list.

    TBH, guys like Fish, Ferrer and Wawrinka just don't really strike me as Top 10 material players.
     
    #4
  5. Andres

    Andres G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    12,541
    Location:
    Mar del Plata, Argentina
    Let's see

    2004 Federer
    2010 Nadal
    2012 Djokovic
    2007 Nalbandian
    2011-Current? Murray
    2001-2002 Hewitt
    2009 Del Potro
    2003-2004 Roddick
    2007 Davydenko
    2003 Ferrero.

    So my ranking would be something like:

    1. Federer (2004)
    2. Nadal (2008 / 2010)
    3. Djokovic (2011)
    4/5. Hewitt (2001-2002)
    5/4. Nalbandian (2007)
    6. Roddick (2003-2004)
    7. Del Potro(2009)
    8. Murray (Current)
    9. Ferrero (2003)
    10. Davydenko (2007)

    Honorable mention to Ljubicic (2006)
     
    #5
  6. Mainad

    Mainad G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    13,289
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    If they were all playing at their absolute peak and were all doing so consistently, day in and day out, I think:

    1. Nadal
    2. Federer
    3. Djokovic
    4. Murray
    5. Del Potro
    6. Nalbandian
    7. Roddick
    8. Hewitt
    9. Tsonga
    10. Davydenko

    Still see the current top 4 there although I put Nadal as no.1 because he was still leading the H2H with Federer even in the latter's peak years (2004-7). Djokovic is down to no.3 because I still think he would be edged even now by peak Nadal and peak Federer. I'm guessing Murray stays at no.4 because he was beating the likes of Del Potro when the latter was at his peak (2009) and was beating Hewitt and Roddick when they were both not too far from their peak years (2006 or so).

    Just my twopennyworth.
     
    #6
  7. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    H2H was skewed during Fed's peak years by clay. If Fed tanked clay surface to make it look like he was bad as Pete on clay, the H2H would be close to even and your list changes.
     
    #7
  8. brettsticker86

    brettsticker86 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    Messages:
    186
    Location:
    USA
    1-nadal
    2-federer
    3-djokovic
    4-roddick
    5-del potro
    6-murray
    7-hewitt
    9-tsonga
    10-this one i couldn't decide between soderling or berdych...i think they both have loads of talent, just not together mentally.
     
    #8
  9. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    You can't say that dude.
    I say the H2H was skewed by HC in favor of Fed.
    How bout that?
     
    #9
  10. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    #1 ranking means you have to be better than the whole field.
     
    #10
  11. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Well let's compromise and say that they meet 10 times. 5 times on indoor hard and 5 times on clay. What would you predict the H2H will be then?
     
    #11
  12. Wilander Fan

    Wilander Fan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,555
    2011 Nadal was better than 2010 Nadal's IMO. He made the finals of just about everything but just kept running into Novak. If not for Novak, Nadal probably has a 75% shot at the GS. Nadal almost definitely beats Tsonga at WB and Fed at AO...the only question would have been Fed at USO. Nadal probably also has a clay court sweep and 2 more HC1000s. In short, Nadal would have had the greatest single season ever.

    For that reason, you dont have to speculate about prime Novak and prime Nadal. Novak is clearly better at his peak on all surfaces.
     
    #12
  13. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Quoted for truth.
     
    #13
  14. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    Honestly I would rate Nadal's chances on beating Fed on indoor HC higher than Fed beating Nadal on clay.

    I would rate the whole thing at 5-5 though.
     
    #14
  15. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Well maybe Fed would have a better chance of beating Fed on indoor, notwithstanding the actual data showing instances of Fed beating Nadal on clay, but no instances of Nadal beating Fed on indoor HC.

    But let's not even consider that. In any case you agree that the H2H would be 5-5 if their meetings were more evenly distributed on their best surfaces. Which was not the case in 2004-2007. Hence the skew.
     
    #15
  16. Mainad

    Mainad G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    13,289
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    It's difficult to compare. In 2004-7, Fed's peak years, he was dominant over Nadal on 2 of the 3 surfaces. But in Nadal's peak years which were a bit later, 2007-10 or thereabouts, he gets better on HC and grass and starts to dominate on those surfaces as well. So peak Nadal (2007-10) would probably still have the upper hand over peak Federer (2004-7) IMO.
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2012
    #16
  17. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Well really it comes down to comparing these two:

    pre prime Nadal to peak Fed
    post prime Fed to peak Nadal.

    The data indicate that preprime Nadal was closer to his peak in terms of stats than postprime Fed is to his peak stats. So really you cannot mix the two.

    In any case, the point of this thread is ranking, where one must dominate the entire field, not just one player. On that basis alone, it seems to me Fed far exceeds Nadal. Just compare their peak year losses to the field.
     
    #17
  18. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Gosh this is too tough to call but if I really had to stick my neck out I'd put Fed at the top of the pile. Not sure about the rest.
     
    #18
  19. Andres

    Andres G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    12,541
    Location:
    Mar del Plata, Argentina
    Tanking the clay season wouldn't make Fed a better player. Yes, he'd have a better H2H with Nadal, but he would lose 3,000 points a season for not reaching the usual Monte Carlo, Rome and/or Hamburg finals, and the French Open.

    Without those points, Fed wouldn't be #1. Logical phallacy.
     
    #19
  20. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Well he could reach the semis for all clay events, does that equate to a loss of 3000 points? Even so, wouldn't winning the other 3 slams all of those years still give him the #1 ranking?
     
    #20
  21. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Actually, Fed could've just tanked after reaching the semis of all clay events, he'd still make enough points to keep his number 1 ranking provided he dominated the other events so its not a logical fallacy.
     
    #21
  22. Mainad

    Mainad G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    13,289
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    As I understand it, the OP is asking us to compare them as if both were still playing at their respective peaks (whenever that happened to be). Its all very hypothetical and guessy of course, but IMO peak Nadal would edge peak Federer on ALL surfaces.

    Fair point. I don't have the stats to hand to compare. Did Nadal lose to more players than Federer did in their peak years? I still think that the peak no.1 should be able to dominate the peak no.2 though. It looks a bit odd to me if he can't. But that's just my take.
     
    #22
  23. Biscuitmcgriddleson

    Biscuitmcgriddleson Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,098
    How so? Nadal has never come close to beating Federer on indoor hard. Federer has beaten Nadal on clay.
     
    #23
  24. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    The H2H ain't scewd. Fed's best surface is HARDCOURT, you can't say let's compare the on clay and INDOOR HC.

    As I said even with the IHC-CC stuff i would give Nadal the edge over 10 meetings.
    Fed beat Nadal how many times in 18 occasions or so, they didn't play as much on IHC.
     
    #24
  25. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    Read above post.

    How many times did they play on CC and how many times did they play on IHC??
     
    #25
  26. djokovicgonzalez2010

    djokovicgonzalez2010 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    11,865
    Location:
    SW Virginia, USA
    Best year's play?
    1 Federer
    2 Djokovic
    3 Nadal
    4 Hewitt
    5 Roddick
    6 Davydenko
    7 Murray
    8 Nalbandian
    9 del Potro
    10 Soderling

    If they are all constantly in god mode
    1 Federer
    2 Davydenko
    3 Nalbandian
    4 Murray
    5 Wawrinka
    6 Tipsarevic
    7 Djokovic
    8 Nadal
    9 Soderling
    10 Tsonga
     
    #26
  27. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    Hell no. Only on clay and that's include his immense matchup advantage.

    Oh, you totally forgot he's winless against Fed on indoor, which is why Fed has 6 WTF to Nadal 0 !
     
    #27
  28. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Fair enough. But in his peak you could say Fed's best surface was grass, not HC. What was the distributions of their meetings on grass vs clay during those years?
     
    #28
  29. FlashFlare11

    FlashFlare11 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2011
    Messages:
    2,328
    Location:
    Philadelphia, United States
    I don't know if Wawrinka should be listed so highly in your "God mode" list, but the rest of them can beat anyone on tour when they get hot!
     
    #29
  30. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Well as far as I remember there is not one year that Nadal has less than double digit losses. Whereas Federer in his best years had 6, 4 and 5 losses. So of course you can believe Nadal may edge Fed on all surfaces, but dominating the field it what secures the #1 ranking, not just 1 player.
     
    #30
  31. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    #2 Nalbandian
     
    #31
  32. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    We saw what Nadal was able to do when he matured as a player.
    i.e Wimbledon 2007 he was well able to beat Fed who was at his peak.
     
    #32
  33. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Federer was also well able to beat Nadal on clay in 2006. In any case, the point is the # of meetings. on various surfaces. You say HC is Fed's best surface, well how many times did they meet on HC from 2004-2007? Compare that with clay and you will see a skew.
     
    #33
  34. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    Everytime you post the more i question your tennis knowledge.
     
    #34
  35. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    2004-2007 Nadal wasn't at his prime.
    There is no skew man, the H2H just is how it is.

    You like to do that prime, not prime stuff, with some Player1.0, Player 1.5, Player2.0 stuff which is nonsense to me.
     
    #35
  36. Biscuitmcgriddleson

    Biscuitmcgriddleson Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,098
    No but what you can compare is the fact over 50% of their meetings have been on clay despite it being about 1/3 of the tournaments on the ATP tour.

    Keep digging though. The more you say that Nadal would have a better chance of beating Federer on indoor hard just keeps reinforcing the fact that if a surface doesn't take Nadal's spin well he is vulnerable.
     
    #36
  37. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    You gotta be kidding me. 2007 Nadal has already won 3 slams by Wimby time, reaches the final, almost beats Fed, and he's not prime? What a joke. And you know it.
     
    #37
  38. kragster

    kragster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,671
    Against the field no question, peak Fed is a lot better than peak Rafa. In fact post peak Fed still dismantles any one outside the top 4.

    Against each other peak Rafa wins the majority. Although the H2H is skewed because of the predominance of clay meetings, an even surface distribution is illogical because the tour is not designed evenly. A logical surface meetings distribution would follow the year schedule. Basically something like 40% meetings on slow HC, 20% on fast HC, 30% on clay and 10% on grass.

    Slow HC Rafa 3- Fed 1
    Fast HC Fed 2, Rafa 0
    Clay Rafa 3- Fed 0
    Grass Fed 1 - Rafa 0

    Overall 6-4 in favor of Rafa. Repeat this over about 30 meetings and the normalized H2H should be something like 18-12. So instead of 2:1 (current) it should be more like 1.5:1. That diversion aside I think the intent of this topic was performance against the field. And its really no contest there, Fed is just too good against the field.
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2012
    #38
  39. PCXL-Fan

    PCXL-Fan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    2,872
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    he's right you know Nalbandian could EASILY be in the top 2-3 if only he had better coaching and wasn't sidelined by injuries
     
    #39
  40. Biscuitmcgriddleson

    Biscuitmcgriddleson Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,098
    So Nadal beat Federer in 2007 at Wimbledon? Oh wait he didn't.
     
    #40
  41. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Wait,what? Fed wasn't at his peak in Wimby 07. Prime? Sure.
    And Nadal lost quite convincingly in the 5th set,6-2 in that final.
     
    #41
  42. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    This is actually the definitive proof that it's simply a matchup advantage in the Fed vs Nadal case. The tards always counter with why Fed has no problem with any other lefties, and the data indicate, take away the awesome spin from Nadal and he becomes useless against Fed. Keep that awesome spin for Nadal and make him right handed and he becomes useless against Fed. Only with the combination of awesome spin and lefty does he have a chance against Fed, and all of that could only be realized on clay for the most part.
     
    #42
  43. Devilito

    Devilito Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,263
    Fixed.......
     
    #43
  44. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    This is a very fair and unbiased assessment from a *********. I pretty much agree with this except that I think slow HC would be tied or maybe 3-2 for Nadal. Don't think Fed can ever lead the H2H against Nadal because of the matchup, but there is no doubt with anyone with half a brain that the H2H is indeed skewed as it stands.
     
    #44
  45. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    Nadal was at his prime in freakin 2007??
    Sweet lord he had yet to reach a HC Semifinal and you think he was in his prime??
    Holy fckin cow, this is ridiculous.
     
    #45
  46. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Dude, any 3 slam winner in his prime no matter how you slice it.
     
    #46
  47. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    Nope, I think you know very well that you got caught on that point.
     
    #47
  48. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    How so? Please explain.
     
    #48
  49. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,226
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    oh my... Kuerten never peaked...
     
    #49
  50. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    You know it, you rascal ;)
     
    #50

Share This Page