Rank the following individual (ATP) achievements

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by TMF

And she had MS above WTF. I'm surprise she didn't throw in Davis Cup.

LOL

Or Barcelona!

[NadalAgassi]

1. French, Wimbledon, U.S Open
2. Australian Open
3. ATP year end #1 ranking
4. Olympic Gold, Davis/Federation Cup, WTF/YEC
5. Masters/Premier Mandatory/Tier 1
6. ATP 500/Premier non Mandory/Tier 2
7. All other regular ATP or WTA events
8. Challengers and Satellites
9. WTA year end #1 ranking

[veroniquem]

Originally Posted by cc0509

LOL, what a joke. You only feel this way because your hero Nadal has yet to win it. If he is as good as people say on all surfaces, he should be able to win it at least once, no? There are enough clay events for him to win, let him win an indoor event that is the most important event next to slams (at least according to points allotted.) Truth is Nadal will probably never win this event. Djokovic and Murray are now better players in indoor HC events than Nadal is.

I'm stating my opinion, that's all (I'm not trying to impose it on anyone btw, it's just how I would rank the events). If Nadal was my agenda, it's obvious I would have put Olympic Gold above WTF. My opinion is not motivated by any specific player. It's how I see tennis events and how I feel about them, nothing more, nothing less. It is true that the ATP allots a lot of points for WTF but this thread asks for one's personal way of ranking events. That's what I did. All the slams are worth the same amount of points but some people placed Wimbledon over the other slams. So, it is implied that no one has any obligation to strictly follow the points system for their personal ranking. + if someone won as few as 2 masters in a season, they would have won more points than with WTF, so it makes perfect sense to me to prioritize the masters, even in terms of points.

[NadalAgassi]

Sorry didnt notice the ATP only part.

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by veroniquem

I'm stating my opinion, that's all (I'm not trying to impose it on anyone btw, it's just how I would rank the events). If Nadal was my agenda, it's obvious I would have put Olympic Gold above WTF. My opinion is not motivated by any specific player. It's how I see tennis events and how I feel about them, nothing more, nothing less. It is true that the ATP allots a lot of points for WTF but this thread asks for one's personal way of ranking events. That's what I did. All the slams are worth the same amount of points but some people placed Wimbledon over the other slams. So, it is implied that no one has any obligation to strictly follow the points system for their personal ranking. + if someone won as few as 2 masters in a season, they would have won more points than with WTF, so it makes perfect sense to me to prioritize the masters, even in terms of points.

Not sure I believe you here but if you say so!

[NadalAgassi]

I think veroniquem does genuinely believe that as funny as it might be. I believe even having the Olympics below a Masters is funny, no player would rather a mere Masters than an Olympic Gold. That said standards change over time. The ATP and WTA Year end Championships are still prestigious but not as prestigious as they were in the late 70s and 80s when they were regarded more highly than the Australian and maybe the French which is definitely not true now. Likewise the Australian while still probably a bit below the other 3 in prestige is much more valued than it was then (and the French much more than the 70s when many players volunteerinly skipped it for big money exhibitions too).

[SQA333]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

Why do you rank Masters over the WTF?

Because Nadal hasn't won a WTF while Federer has 6.

[SQA333]

Originally Posted by veroniquem

I'm stating my opinion, that's all (I'm not trying to impose it on anyone btw, it's just how I would rank the events). If Nadal was my agenda, it's obvious I would have put Olympic Gold above WTF. My opinion is not motivated by any specific player. It's how I see tennis events and how I feel about them, nothing more, nothing less. It is true that the ATP allots a lot of points for WTF but this thread asks for one's personal way of ranking events. That's what I did. All the slams are worth the same amount of points but some people placed Wimbledon over the other slams. So, it is implied that no one has any obligation to strictly follow the points system for their personal ranking. + if someone won as few as 2 masters in a season, they would have won more points than with WTF, so it makes perfect sense to me to prioritize the masters, even in terms of points.

But winning the WTF > winning 1 masters event.

By this token, Grand Slams are worth less than Masters events, since if someone won as few as 2 masters, and made a first round exit in another, they would've won more points than by winning 1 Slam.

Stupid ******* logic.

#Federer300