View Single Post
Old 12-02-2012, 06:32 PM   #53
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,324
Default Masters 1000's shouldn't be part of GOAT assessment - Really?

Originally Posted by helloworld View Post
1000 tournaments should not be in consideration when talking about GOAT, really. They're just warm-up tournaments for players to prepare for slams.
They are not AS important as Slams -that is true...but that is why they only get 1/2 the points that a Slam produces. However, they are still important wins on a Resume. Why do the top players work so hard to win them then? How does Nadal feel about Monte Carlo? If a player does well in the Slams but another plays incredibly well in the Masters 1000's then the latter player can still score the number 1 ranking. The players know that vital ranking points are on the line for these tournaments. Hence, the players wins at these tournament reflect concerted efforts in dominance. If Pete Sampras had won more Masters 1000's maybe there would be less gaps in his number 1 ranking periods during 1993 to 2000.

Last edited by timnz; 12-02-2012 at 06:41 PM.
timnz is offline   Reply With Quote