Is Djokovic now in the tier with Becker, Wilander, Edberg?

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by 5555, Jan 29, 2012.

  1. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,913
    I like Vilas quite a bit(& own copies of his AO finals), but saying those AO wins are even in the same ballpark as any of Djokovic's slam wins is a stretch, to say the least.

    A lot of posters here like to point out that Borg, Mac, Connors etc didn't play the AO back then. But that doesn't even begin to explain just how poorly attended the AOs Vilas won were.

    1979 AO - Vilas was the only player in the top 20 entered.
    There were only 8 other players in the top 50 entered.
    And only 13 other players in the top 100 entered.
    So it was a 64 player draw & 42 of the players entered weren't even in the top 100.

    I'm not sure what you could compare these events to today, certainly not masters series. maybe a 250?

    I would be more impressed if Vilas made a SF at Wimbledon or a final at Queens at some point in his career, you can't really draw any conclusions about how good a grasscourt player he was based on these results.
     
    #51
  2. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,459
    The best result of Vilas' career on grass was at the 1974 Masters in my opinion in which he beat Newcombe, Borg, Nastase among others to win the tournament. I can't think of a grass tournament he won that had a really strong field outside of that one.
     
    #52
  3. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    The ATP picked Borg as their Player of the Year so obviously not "everyone knows that". The computer #1 was Connors, the Player of the Year according to the ATP was Borg. Vilas was owned by Borg throughout the year, like every year, so hard to say he was the best player. Also the 3 biggest tournaments that year were Wimbledon, U.S Open, and the Masters. Connors, Vilas, and Borg each won 1, and Connors was in the finals of all 3.

    Lets say you still want to insist he was the best or the one who really deserved #1 that year though. He still was never a #1 anything like Djokovic was last year, where he dominated the game, owned all his main rivals, and was the slam dunk no argument best, along with having one of the best years of the Open Era which nobody has said Vilas's 1977 was. Nor was Vilas an undisputed top 3 player for 5 years in a row like the 24 year old Djokovic already has been.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 4, 2012
    #53
  4. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    This is the mistake : the problem is notn to say who was the "better player", but to say who was the man who do the best season. Borg was maybe the better player, he beated Vilas 3 times this year, but had not the results of Vilas.
     
    #54
  5. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    Can you find a reliable source which claims that Vilas was undisputed No. 1 in 1977? If you can't, you lost the argument.
     
    #55
  6. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    #56
  7. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    #57
  8. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,765
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    #58
  9. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    It's reputable, but that source (World Tennis) does not claim that Vilas was undisputed No. 1 in 1977.
     
    #59
  10. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Here is a source and it seems to indicate favoring Borg over or atleast on par with Vilas:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World-number-one_male_tennis-player_rankings


    While it listed each as the co-World Champion of the year, far more sources seem to side with Borg than Vilas by that list as well. Add to that Connors was the computer #1, and the idea Vilas was "undisputed #1" of 1977 is laughable. He was just one of three men with an argument is all.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 5, 2012
    #60
  11. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    So Vilas cant be considered as "best player" (even according to you) in his one and only year you call him top player, where he wasnt even officialy ranked #1 either? So in Vilas's year as supposed top player (arguably) he was neither best player or #1 ranked, which 2 different other men held? That already confirms even more how he can never come close to comparing to Novak at this point. After all Novak has already had a year he was best player, top player, and #1 ranked all by a mile coming and going, and Federer (even at 29) and Nadal are not weaker competition than Borg and Connors by any stretch.
     
    #61
  12. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788

    "Best player" means nothing. During several years, Federer was the n°1, considered like the world champion, the best player, even if he lost many times against Nadal during the same year !
    I don't know if Vilas was the "best player", or the "world champion", or other thing, in 1977, but it is sure he was the n°1, because he was the guy who won the more tournaments (14), played the more Grand Slams finals (3), won the more Grand Slams (2), and had a record which is always a record today (46 matches won consecutively). It is one of the best (the best ?) season of history, and the ATP ranking saying Connors is n°1 was really a joke.
     
    #62
  13. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Federer was undisputably considered the best player in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007, even with his losses to Nadal so your point is meaningless. In 2009 Nadal was so bad after his loss at the French and missing of Wimbledon, Federer ended the year as being considered best player as well.

    What in the heck is this "best player" is meaningless, this is an argument about which players is Djokovic at the same level as.

    No Connors was the #1 ranked, that is a fact, just like Wozniacki being #1 ranked for 2010 and 2011 is a fact whether one agrees with it or not. The fact Vilas was not #1, nor best player, nor World Champion or Player of the Year to most, shows he has no real claim on being King of 1977.
     
    #63
  14. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    You have not provided a reliable source which claims that Vilas was undisputed No. 1 in 1977. World Tennis just claims that in its opinion Vilas was No. 1. in that season.

    Therefore, it can be concluded that you lost the argument.
     
    #64
  15. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    The undisputed #1 or Player of the Year despite the rankings would be Kvitova for the women last year, or Connors for the men in 1982. Vilas in 1977 does not qualify.
     
    #65
  16. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    For you, what is a reliable source ? If it's only ATP Ranking, OK, Vilas was never n°1, and Connors was the n°1 in 1977, without winning a Grand Slam.
     
    #66
  17. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    World Tennis is a reliable source. Does it claim that Vilas was undisputed No. 1 in 1977? No, it does not.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2012
    #67
  18. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    What means "undisputed" ? All can be discussed. I can say for example that Rios is better than Vilas because he was n°1. It's totally absurd but I can say that if I want.
    For conclusion, I think that a big majority of tennis fans and specialists consider that Vilas is the n°1 in 1977. And personnally, I think that a player who wins more tournaments + Grand Slams + matches in a year than anyone else is obviously the n°1.
     
    #68
  19. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    KIKI+results... isn´t it enough for you?
     
    #69
  20. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Very good post.But don´t try to convince a ************ teenager that he is not right...
     
    #70
  21. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Connors lost at the FO qf to Higueras and didn´t win neither the Masters or the WCT ; he didn´t attend Australia...as much as I consider him be the best player in 1982, his case for this nomination is not stronger than Vilas in 77.Both were the best players in the world in those respective years.If Borg didn´t play 1977 FO or was injuried in the 1977 USO doesn´t influence one single bit...same thing for 1982, when Borg didn´t play Connors at Wimbledon or the USO ( in spite of beating him at those events the former year...)
     
    #71
  22. Nadal_Power

    Nadal_Power Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2010
    Messages:
    506
    Maybe some of you can tell us how the ranking worked back than.. it is really crazy to have Jimbo at Year end number 1 for 1977.
     
    #72
  23. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    The link I posted which accounts for all the valid voices on the subject seems to indicate otherwise:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World-number-one_male_tennis-player_rankings



    It seems clear from this nobody questioned that Connors was the true #1 of 1982, contrary to the computer rankings. The ATP which at one point hated Connors with a passion even awarded him Player of the Year. McEnroe was not even runner up (granted neither was computer #1 Connors in 1977).

    Whereas Vilas is ranked behind Borg by most sources.

    It is ok if you wish to believe Vilas was the clear #1 player of 1977, but others dont have to accept this viewpoint as it is clear most reputable sources dont even feel that way, in addition that he wasnt the computer #1 either.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 5, 2012
    #73
  24. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    I didnt notice this post before. Are you saing Vilas and Courier are better than Becker, Edberg, and even MCENROE. Seriously!?!?!
     
    #74
  25. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Djokovic has already surpassed Laver,Newcombe,Vilas,Kriek,Lendl,Becker,Couirer and Edberg, all of them with 2 AO.Vilas won a third title on Australian grass, but it was not the AO but the 1974 Masters Cup, held in Melbourne.

    He is on equal terms with Wilander, who won the Ao on 2 surfaces ( Djokovic only one surface).he has to look now to catch up Rosewall´s 4 titles and Emerson´s 6.Good look.
     
    #75
  26. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562
    I’ve always thought that the 1977 controversy wouldn’t exist at all if the roles had been exactly reversed (I mean if Borg had Vila's record, and Vilas had Borg's record that year). In that case, Vila’s absence from RG and the USO would not have been cause for suspicions and speculations that he might have won them if he had played them, and few people would have dismissed the 1977 French Open as seriously depleted, with players like Gottfried, Dibbs, Ramirez, Nastase, Barazzutti, Fibak, Solomon, Fillol, Panatta etc all being there. The head to head would have been ignored as supremely irrelevant for measuring achievments, and the 14 titles with 2 majors plus a 46 match winning streak would have been properly recognized as quite remarkable and amply sufficient to give him the number one title for the year (or "player of the year" or whatever). In other words, everything would have been more or less as it should be and Borg would be the sole number one that year. But since Vilas wasn't Borg, and Borg wasn't Vilas, we have bit of a mess.
     
    #76
  27. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    Undisputed means generally agreed upon.
    Considering that you did not prove that Vilas was undisputed No. 1 in 1977, it can be concluded that you lost the argument.
     
    #77
  28. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    OK for the definition of "undisputed". And it's clear that it's generally agreed that Vilas is n°1 in 1977.
     
    #78
  29. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    Can you provide a reliable source which says that "it's generally agreed that Vilas is n°1 in 1977"? Yes or no?
     
    #79
  30. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    Who is n°1 in 1977 ? This question exists since 35 years !! Everybody is OK to say that it's not Connors, even if he's n°1 in ATP ranking. So, Borg or Vilas ? For me, it's an absurd question, because I think it's obviously Vilas. But some people think it's Borg. I think the only way to close the debate is to send a request, a sort of petition at the ATP, asking for an official declaration : what is today the official position of the ATP ? Who's number one in 1977 ?
     
    #80
  31. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    Do you admit that no player was undisputed No. 1 in 1977? Yes or no?
     
    #81
  32. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    No, I don't admit. Almost everyone is OK to say Vilas is the n°1. I don't even understand how it's possible to say something else, when we look at Vilas's results this year. But, to convince the few who think that it's Borg, it would be good that ATP say officialy : it's Vilas.
     
    #82
  33. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    #83
  34. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,563
    Location:
    Weak era
    Vilas on the same level(or even better ROFL) than Novak?!? You gotta love the internets sometimes.
     
    #84
  35. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    Can you provide a reliable source which says that Vilas was undisputed No. 1 in 1977? Yes or no?
    That source does not claim that it's generally agreed that Vilas was No. 1 in 1977.
     
    #85
  36. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    Very good post. But don't try to convince irrational teenager kiki that he is not right...
     
    #86
  37. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    You keep saying that even after I have already proved MOST experts and governing bodies declared Borg as Player of the Year for 1977. Just bcause you believe something doesnt mean everyone agrees, as much as you want to imagine so. You have yet to show one shread of evidence everyone felt Vilas ws the #1 in 1977. You have just shown one reputable source that felt he was #1 for the year, which was included in my link that showed most others who decided such things chose Borg.
     
    #87
  38. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    I wish to be a teen like you¡¡¡ I think you missed your pick, I wasn´t being so radical in defending Vilas or somebody else.It´s Jean Pierre, the radical Vilas supporter.And I think he is completely right.Vilas was n1 in 77.C´mon, Borg was nº 1 for so many years, he shouldn´t be so disgusted...
     
    #88
  39. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,643
    Lendl

    lendl did win a major in 1989 - the australian open.
     
    #89
  40. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Completely right.And reached the US Open Finals were he bowed to Becker, who played a terrific match, as I recall.
     
    #90
  41. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,643
    If Lendl had won that match he would have been undisputed number 1 for the year. Outside of the Grand Slams he had a far superior record to Becker. I believe he could be the only player in the open era to only lose all year to players who won the tournaments he was in. (In other words he had no bad wins - the only players he ever lost to were the form players of the tournament).

    But I agree - Beckers WImbledon and US Open secure him the number 1 for the year.
     
    #91
  42. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    Of course. A player who wins 2 Grand Slam in the same year is always considered like the number one of the year (if the 2 other Grand Slam are won by 2 other players). It's always like that. But for a few people, I don't know why, there is an exception in tennis history : Vilas in 1977. He won 2 Grand Slam. He did one of the best season of history. But for a few people, no, there is an exception, he's not the number one. Mysterious.
     
    #92
  43. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,643
    1977 summarised

    The best summary of 1977 that i have read is that there is a difference between the deserved number 1 of that year vs wheo was the best player. On any one day borg was the better player. However vilas was the deserved number one because he achieved more than borg in 1977. And rankingo should always be based on achievement - not who is thought to be the better player. It wasnt vilas fault that borg played wtt instead of the french open. Same deal with 1964. People were used to thonking of rosewall as number 1 and at the time hadnt got their head around the fact that actually laver achieved more that year.
     
    #93
  44. Steve132

    Steve132 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    842
    Timnz: Excellent post. While there is and was at the time general agreement that Borg was a greater player, Vilas undoubtedly achieved more in 1977. As such, he should be considered the No. 1 player for the year.
     
    #94
  45. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    I am an 44 years old.
    You are irrational if you think he is completely right.
    You can repeat it millions times, but you can't hide the fact that you have yet to show one shread of evidence there is general agreement Vilas was No. 1 in 1977.
    The best summary of 1977 is that it's controversial who was the No. 1. No undisputed #1 that year.
     
    #95
  46. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    OK, I'm tired, you're right, Vilas is not the N°1. He played 3 Grand Slam finals (Borg 1), won 2 (Borg 1), won 14 tournaments (Borg 10), but he's not the N°1. Borg is the n°1 because he won Wimbledon. Krajicek and Stich were the n°1 too the year he won Wimbledon.
     
    #96
  47. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562
    That's a good summary. It’s only the identity of the players that allows this artificial controversy to exist. If Borg had had Vilas’ record, and viceversa, there would have never been any arguments about who achieved more that year. The slippery notion of “the better player” is spuriously allowed to come into play only because of their identities and the preconceived weight they carry.
     
    #97
  48. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562
    Your case might look a bit better if you tried to offer any actual arguments of your own, instead of repetitive appeals to a lack of “general agreement”, which is a lower form of argument than even appeal to authority or appeal to popular belief. In the US there appears to be no “general agreement” on whether the Earth is older than 6,000 years, as can be easily derived from the fact that a substantial portion of the population (up to 40-50% according to some polls) don't think it is, and to support their position they point to a venerable Book that still has a lot of weight. In arguing for or against any notion, pointing to a lack of consensus is the least convincing of methods, even if you mention it a million times. In fact, the more you mention it, the emptier it becomes as an argument.
     
    #98
  49. krosero

    krosero Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5,639
    One source could not claim that, because the sources are on record as disagreeing with each other: some went with Vilas, some with Borg.

    Bud Collins summarized it this way in his record book of tennis: "But even though World Tennis magazine declared him No. 1 for the year, most other authorities disagreed and bestowed that mythical honor on Borg.”
     
    #99
  50. krosero

    krosero Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5,639
    It is not always like that. In 1973 Newcombe won 2 Slams (AO, USO) and Nastase just 1 (French), but everyone picked Nastase as having the best year. As far as I know no one disputed it.
     

Share This Page