WTF Winner Will Be Player Of The Year???

[Steve0904]

Originally Posted by Steve0904

Reread what I wrote, and you will shut up.

There see. I can do that too

[MaiDee]

One gay has: 3 slam finals (1 won) + Sf 5.120 points
6 master finals (3 won) + Sf + Qf 5.340 points
Tennis is about slams and maybe masters and he has 9 finals 2 Sf and 1 Qf from 13 tournaments.
and only 15 tournaments!!!

Other guys are not near it with 17,18 tournaments. 2-3 more than Nole.
Federer: 17 tournaments 9165 points
Murray 18 tournaments 7510 points
Nole 15 tournaments 11410 points

How much hard work they need, and still no near the champion.
Olympic gold medal could be the reason to proclaim player, sportsman of the year, but in country for which he won the medal. In tennis world, slam final is way bigger than Olympic gold.
1200 points : 750 points.
Any how, between tennis fans, all arguments for player of the year, are valid - age of player, country proud, color of eyes, etc.

[NadalAgassi]

My predictions:

-if Federer wins the WTF he still wont be named Player of the Year.

-if Murray wins the WTF he "might" be named Player of the Year because of haviing won 3 of the 6 biggest events- U.S Open, WTF, and the Olympics, and being a finalist at Wimbledon too, with some partiality to his breakthrough performance. Not sure though as 0 Masters titles is a glaring stat, maybe he can win Paris though.

-if Djokovic wins the WTF he wins the Player of the Year easily and even if he doesnt he probably does.

[90's Clay]

How does winning a tournament with LITTLE value to the players anymore, and has lost just about all of its prestige among players on tour today (at least if you compare it to years past) make one the player of the year?

Hell most of the top players just "shut it down" after the USO anymore


It sucks to say because I have always loved the YEC, it has the importance of almost CRAPOLA anymore.


The only player that seems to actually take the YEC seriously anymore is Federer. He seems to be the only one that has a greater appreciation for the year end championships and its lineage

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

How does winning a tournament with LITTLE value to the players anymore, and has lost just about all of its prestige among players on tour today (at least if you compare it to years past) make one the player of the year?

Hell most of the top players just "shut it down" after the USO anymore


It sucks to say because I have always loved the YEC, it has the importance of almost CRAPOLA anymore.


The only player that seems to actually take the YEC seriously anymore is Federer. He seems to be the only one that has a greater appreciation for the year end championships and its lineage

That's like saying Nadal's the only guy who gives a crapola about the French Open. Claims such as the one you just made have no premise, no drawing point, no sense. They're just something you say to put things down because you know noone can disprove you.

[90's Clay]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

That's like saying Nadal's the only guy who gives a crapola about the French Open. Claims such as the one you just made have no premise, no drawing point, no sense. They're just something you say to put things down because you know noone can disprove you.

Guys still take slams seriously, and everyone can enter those slams. By the end of the year, the top players can only enter the YEC, and by that time many (with already a ton of tennis played under their belt, nursing some injuries and are more battered and bruised) are just looking forward to next year and a bit of a break.

Surely you can't think a tournament at the end of the year means as much as a slam in the beginning of the year?

[TMF]

WTF is the most important/prestigious event outside of the 4 slams. Whoever win deserves the Player of the Year award.

[NatF]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Guys still take slams seriously, and everyone can enter those slams. By the end of the year, the top players can only enter the YEC, and by that time many (with already a ton of tennis played under their belt, nursing some injuries and are more battered and bruised) are just looking forward to next year and a bit of a break.

Surely you can't think a tournament at the end of the year means as much as a slam in the beginning of the year?

Does the Australian Open mean more than the US Open? Guys outside the top keep up the intense playing schedule to gain enough points to qualify for the WTF. Maybe the public don't recognise it as much as they used to (?) but it's still a big deal. Way bigger than a masters atleast.

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

That's like saying Nadal's the only guy who gives a crapola about the French Open. Claims such as the one you just made have no premise, no drawing point, no sense. They're just something you say to put things down because you know noone can disprove you.

The French Open never had 5 of the top 6 withdraw as was the case at the 2005 YEC. Nalbandian the eventual winner was something like the 3rd alternate this year to even play, lol!

[pame]

Dear Heavens! It can't be that difficult to go on the ATP site and read the criteria for determining the Singles (and Doubles) Player(s) of the Year.

Determined by Ranking
ATP World Tour No. 1

The player who ends the year as World No. 1 in the South African Airways ATP Rankings.

[Gonzo_style]

Originally Posted by TMF

WTF is the most important/prestigious event outside of the 4 slams. Whoever win deserves the Player of the Year award.

Maybe for you, but it's the only tournament that you can win even with two losses! As for me, IW and Miami are more important than WTFs

[pame]

Originally Posted by Gonzo_style

Maybe for you, but it's the only tournament that you can win even with two losses! As for me, IW and Miami are more important than WTFs

You forgot to mention that you can win IW & Miami, and any other of the scheduled events except WTF, by playing maybe only one seeded player. You can't get away with that in WTF, you got to play the best of the best every time you step onto the court

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Gonzo_style

Maybe for you, but it's the only tournament that you can win even with two losses! As for me, IW and Miami are more important than WTFs

It doesn't change the fact that it's bigger than any of the MS. Every players would rather have the WTF.

[Gonzo_style]

Originally Posted by pame

You forgot to mention that you can win IW & Miami, and any other of the scheduled events except WTF, by playing maybe only one seeded player. You can't get away with that in WTF, you got to play the best of the best every time you step onto the court

Not true. In your group you can get three players who qualified for their good results on clay, and you can win those matches, easily!

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

The French Open never had 5 of the top 6 withdraw as was the case at the 2005 YEC. Nalbandian the eventual winner was something like the 3rd alternate this year to even play, lol!

That's because the French Open is obviously about five times as big as the WTF. Are you claiming the WTF isn't that important and that players don't care about it?

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by Gonzo_style

Not true. In your group you can get three players who qualified for their good results on clay, and you can win those matches, easily!

If it's that easy, why hasn't Nadal won one yet? And when was the last time 3 claycourt specialists made it into the top 8? Either way, you still need to face 2 absolute top players in the SF and F.

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

That's because the French Open is obviously about five times as big as the WTF. Are you claiming the WTF isn't that important and that players don't care about it?

It is important but has lost value to the 70s and 80s and even 90s. At one point it was considered more important than the Australian and maybe even the French which is obviously far from the case today as you concede "the French Open is obviously about five times as big as the WTF". In 1978 or even 1996 nobody would have said that, in 1996 it would be 2 times more important at most.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

It is important but has lost value to the 70s and 80s and even 90s. At one point it was considered more important than the Australian and maybe even the French which is obviously far from the case today as you concede "the French Open is obviously about five times as big as the WTF". In 1978 or even 1996 nobody would have said that, in 1996 it would be 2 times more important at most.

Would you deny that it's the 5th biggest tournament in a normal Tennis Calendar year? I don't see anybody here suggesting it's half as big as any of the Slams.

[NatF]

Winning a tournament pitting the top 8 players in the world against each other to see who comes out top is an underrated achievement. As for the comment about facing claycourters, Ferrer is predominantly a clay courter but he was a semi-finalist at the US Open. Does that mean Djokovic's runner up spot is less prestigious?

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Guys still take slams seriously, and everyone can enter those slams. By the end of the year, the top players can only enter the YEC, and by that time many (with already a ton of tennis played under their belt, nursing some injuries and are more battered and bruised) are just looking forward to next year and a bit of a break.

Surely you can't think a tournament at the end of the year means as much as a slam in the beginning of the year?

It is all the more special because the entry is far more select. You need to earn your spot in the WTF by being one of the best players for the past year. That makes it special.

And your last line doesn't make much sense to me. Nobody said the WTF is as important as any Slam. But you seem to be suggesting the AO means more than Wimbledon or the US Open just because it's at the start of the year.