The 2012 ATP Player of the year on the line?

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by tennis_pro

You don't care because your logic applied to it wouldn't put the then year-end-no-1 (Wozniacki) as the WTA player of the year, she didn't even reach a major final that year and twice lost before the 4th round yet she ended the year ranked 1st.

As for the h2h against Federer-Djokovic (as you said "rich for a Fed fan") I'd use it only because they would be so close to each other in the rankings. For example Nadal had a 4-2 lead over Federer in 2006 but Federer had like double the ranking points so it wasn't the case.

I don't care because I don't care. Have you ever seen me discuss Women's Tennis here, except for Graf's time? No. Why? Because I don't care.

And I never said Slams are the only things that matter. The WTF, the Olympics, and the Masters 1000 tournaments matter too. So do the Masters 500 tournaments. But 2 Grand Slam finals is a big deficit. Bigger than a WTF title and a Masters 1000 title.

[kishnabe]

THEY ALREADY AWARDED NOVAK DJOKOVIC WITH THE PLAYER OF THE YEAR AWARD ALONG WITH THE ARTHUR ASHE HUMANITARIAN AWARD.

GO TO ATP YOUTUBE........KAY!
/thread end fishished destroyed

[Towser83]

Originally Posted by veroniquem

Fed's. 2 wins > 0 win. You only start comparing finals if the # of wins are equal. This year though that is not what happened. They both had 1 win but Djoko made semi in all slams and has 2 finals on top.
I agree that WTF would be the cherry on Fed's cake. It would make his season exceptional particularly in view of his age BUT # 1 + better perf in slams (1 title + 2 finals) to me overtakes #2 + WTF. It would put them close though, almost equal.

Well Djokovic being number one player is because he was more consistant in slams, so it's kind of the same point. But I'd say if Federer wins the WTF, Djokovic would be the more consistant player and deserving number one, but Federer would have won more big titles, and be the better winner.

Originally Posted by veroniquem

Doubt? Lol. 6 master finals + 3 slam finals + WTF final doesn't cast any doubt. The only thing a Fed WTF win would tell is that Fed is a better indoor player than Djoko. Big deal. That's something we already know from the stats anyway. That is not more important than slam stats. And Djoko beat Fed at AO and USO the last 4 times they met.

Don't get the point of bringing up Djokovic winning the last 4 times at USO and AO combined? Federer beat Djokovic at Wimbledon and RG 1 out of 2 times, might as well just say Djokovic won 5 out of the last 7, but even this has nothing to do with this year in which they are 1-1 at slams, both in titles and H2H. And better indoor player + better grass player + in terms of WINNING titles, better clay thanks to madrid. Point is in terms of winning titles, they've all had the chance across every surface, if Federer has managed to equal Djokovic without Indoor and then better him with it, it proves he's been better at winning titles.

[veroniquem]

Except WTF doesn't equal a slam, not even remotely. Once again, I'm sorry but 6 master finals + 3 slam finals supercedes 3 master finals + 1 slam final any time (even with WTF on top). The second part was just a reply as to Fed beating Djoko at WTF throwing DOUBTS on Djoko's season. It doesn't. I quoted the slams on hard because 4 consecutive wins in slams is definitely better than a win at WTF (on that surface) no matter how you look at it. And once again WTF doesn't equal a slam.

[monfed]

If Fed wins the WTF,then he's POTY for me. At 31,he's still hanging with these guys in an era of slow surfaces and grinding, are you kidding me?

[veroniquem]

From that angle sure + it would put Fed as title leader for the year with 7 titles (tie with Ferrer ) I think they should both get POTY. The year of the veterans. 2013 will be Connors big come back the way things are going...

[Towser83]

Originally Posted by veroniquem

Except WTF doesn't equal a slam, not even remotely. Once again, I'm sorry but 6 master finals + 3 slam finals supercedes 3 master finals + 1 slam final any time (even with WTF on top). The second part was just a reply as to Fed beating Djoko at WTF throwing DOUBTS on Djoko's season. It doesn't. I quoted the slams on hard because 4 consecutive wins in slams is definitely better than a win at WTF (on that surface) no matter how you look at it. And once again WTF doesn't equal a slam.

I'm not saying a wtf comes close to a slam, but it does top a slam final. I mean a slam final is great but it's still being a loser, where as a wtf title is winning in a field of top 8 players. I sure think Djokovic's 2008 TMC title was better than Federer's RG final In fact that year Federer made 3 slams finals winning 1, 2 masters finals, Djokovic won 1 slam no other finals 2 masters and a wtf. I'd say even without his masters win just the WTF and slam beats slam and 2 slam finals.

But again, the last 4 hardcourt slam wins over Federer takes in to account 2011 and even 2008!... that is not relevant to this season. I mean if we're going to go right back to 2008 then we have to add in 5 slams for Federer, 2 WTF titles, several masters..

In fact since 2008 Fed has won all 4 majors. Like Djokovic's last 4 HC slam meeting victories, it has no bearing on this season though.

[papertank]

I think the rankings are as good of an indicator of the player of the year as anything. The only thing that conflicts with it is the Olympics because it isn't worth much points but is very prestigious, but if that is to be considered heavily then Murray needs to be brought into the conversation. Anyways, I'd say no matter what happens tomorrow Djokovic is clearly the winner of this year. That is not to take anything away from the amazing year Fed has had though.

[veroniquem]

Murray cannot be brought into the conversation with only 3 titles total (one of them a 250).

[sbengte]

Fed was asked this question (slightly differently) before the tournament began and he said NO :

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=84792

Q. It's been a tough season. You, Novak and Andy are very close. Do you think winning the Masters can decide the real No.1 of the season?

ROGER FEDERER: I mean, the real No.1, we know who that is. It's going to be Novak. I don't think there should be any debate around that.
I think No. 1, you don't get there by chance. The rankings is something that shows you how you've played over a 365‑day period. Okay, it might all change again in two months at the Australian Open, there's no doubt about that. But right now, it's clear.
I don't think whatever happens should take anything away from anybody. This is a bonus for the top eight players to face off against each other, try their very best, and hopefully finish the season in good style. Obviously it's exciting to see.

/thread

[Feather]

Novak Djokovic is the best player of 2012. I consider him that irrespective of what happens at WTF. I guess the only thing that matters should be ranking points. They are for a reason

Has anyone noticed one thing Novak played all nine masters while Roger skipped three. Playing more 500 or 250 than Novak won't help in points for skipping three masters. That has played a huge part. I don't think Roger would have skipped Paris if it was not held continuosly. The Olympics forced him to skip Canada also. The scheduling also didn't help Roger as he was defending 1000 at Paris..

[joeri888]

Classy as always..

It's close this season, with both winning 1 slam, and that's nice. But Novak still has the edge, even though Roger won more important things.

Wimbledon > AO
Olympic silver> olympic fourth
WTF > WTF finalist
IW, Madrid, Cincy=Miami, Canada, Shanghai

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by joeri888

Classy as always..

It's close this season, with both winning 1 slam, and that's nice. But Novak still has the edge, even though Roger won more important things.

Wimbledon > AO
Olympic silver> olympic fourth
WTF > WTF finalist
IW, Madrid, Cincy=Miami, Canada, Shanghai

But Federer hasn't won the WTF yet.

[joeri888]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

But Federer hasn't won the WTF yet.

No, of course he hasn't. This thread was about if it was on the line, so that means in the hypothetical situation Fed wins tomorrow, will it be close or in Fed's favor then. I think it would be close, but Djokovic still edges it. Rankings in men's tennis usually are very fair.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by joeri888

No, of course he hasn't. This thread was about if it was on the line, so that means in the hypothetical situation Fed wins tomorrow, will it be close or in Fed's favor then. I think it would be close, but Djokovic still edges it. Rankings in men's tennis usually are very fair.

Agreed.

10djokoslamkings

[kragster]

I think it's funny how SOME fed fans were denouncing the Olympics as a glorified exhibition just a year ago. Now suddenly even a silver is an achievement better than a slam final!please note the use of the word some, this is directed at a few posters ( you know who you are)


IMO, if Fed wins the WTF, I personally would factor in his age to consider the year a more special achievement than what Nole has done. I consider Nole the better player of the year based on ranking points but in comparing what achievement is more special you have to factor in age/stage of career.

[kOaMaster]

the ranking gap would still be too large I think. the ranking doesn't lie that much and lets be honest - 3 grand slam finals (of which he won one) is still pretty amazing. if it wasn't for federer, he would've had 4 grand slam finals (as well as last year).
it would just show that the gap isn't too big and federer still has enough class not only to compete but also win vs everyone.

but why don't we continue the discussion after the match? perhaps it's not even an issue after.

by the way: when someone is looking for the "best player of the year" it usually doesn't matter whether he's 17 or 31. otherwise the award would be "best achievement" or something like that.

ps: were there any not-year-end-#1-players awarded with "best player"?

[veroniquem]

Maybe, they should both get it: Fed would have 2 more titles but Djoko more finals, more consistency and the #1. I'm sure they could give it as a tie if they wanted to or just give 2 slightly different awards. They simply cannot ignore completely a player who has reached year-end #1 on consecutive seasons for the first time in his career. That would be every kind of wrong.
But as you say, all those discussions may be moot by tonight anyway.

[merlinpinpin]

First of all, they've already awarded it to Djokovic, so this is more of a rhetorical question. But to me, should Federer win tonight, he would have deserved it (note that this is different from the #1 ranking, which Djokovic clearly deserves--numbers don't lie, and they favour Djokovic... but facts don't either, and to me, they favour Federer).

A win tonight would put Federer ahead, seven tournaments to five, with an extra ATP500 and the extra WTF, which is pretty big (make that huge if you're not totally slam-centric). Also, he won tournaments on all four surfaces/conditions, while Djokovic only won on one out of four (outdoor HC). Djokovic is basically ahead because:
- He reached many more finals (which could also be seen in a negative light, as playing second fiddle to others--Nadal on clay, Federer on grass, Murray and Federer on HC, and yet again Federer indoor should he lose tonight)
- The only surface on which he's won this year (so far) is the most played-upon by far in a tennis season, which is a huge advantage over grass or indoor, for example
- The schedule helped him big time because of the age difference, Federer having to pull out of Toronto and Bercy--this was of course the same for everyone, no so excuse, but the packed schedule of the Olympic year clearly worked in the younger man's favour, as it should

When you factor in the 300+ weeks at #1 at age 31, yes, it would have been thoroughly deserved as far as I'm concerned (even if it is also deserved for Djokovic, of course).

[Ico]

Discussion over.