Federer winning it has less chances than someone like thiem, Medvedev so don't count him to have as much chances as nadal or djokovic. Regarding your question nadal, djokovic won't be having it as easy as last 3 years as I expect some new gen guy to challenge them for top spot.
nadal, djokovic won't be having it as easy as last 3 years as I expect some new gen guy to challenge them for top spot.
Regarding OPs question, judging by 3 previous seasons, Nadal has the best chances as he’s the most consistent Slam performer, also entering 2020 perfectly healthy and with high confidence. Djokovic is right after him, he can still afford a more taxing schedule than Nadal, just couldn’t capitalize on it this year.
Rest of the field has major vulnerabilities during the season that in my opinion wouldn’t allow them to contend for YE#1.
Anything anyone says about Nick Kyrgios is a hot take, to be quite honest.Here's another hot take: Nick Kyrgios isn't near as talented as people make him out to be. He's pretty talented, big server with good net skills, but other than that, he just hits unnecessary tweeners that most players could pull off in practice if they weren't serious. Dimitrov, Shapo, Tsitsipas, even Zverev are all more talented than Kyrgios.
I don’t see Rafa doing any worst on clay, in fact I see him doing better. What young guy is doing good on clay? Thiem? He has never done really well except RG. Zverev? Doubt it.It will definitely be more interesting this year, as I don't see the full year Masters/slams domination happening anymore.
Nadals grip of winning most of the clay tournaments is in doubt, and Djokovic gave up a fair chunk of his HC Masters and indoor domination.
I still think they take at least 3 of the slams ( The big 3 ). But the Masters etc will be shared around younger, hungrier lions.
so you're saying like sock or the dudes around mid 20's to early 30's????Nadal and Djokovic have much bigger chances than Fed. But I truly hope it’s none of them but some younger player: Thiem, Tsitsipas or Medvedev
I don’t see Rafa doing any worst on clay, in fact I see him doing better. What young guy is doing good on clay? Thiem? He has never done really well except RG. Zverev? Doubt it.
I see Rafa having a better year on clay and a similar HC year. I think he or Djoker finish number 1. Rafa has really grown into one of the best HC players on tour. I see him doing things that will put many Fed fans (myself) into depression. Well, I like Rafa, but I do see Rafa having a stellar year much like this year.
He is going in with a lot of confidence and a renewed strength in all surfaces I have not seen from him in a while.
Federer simply has no chance.Nadal and Djokovic have much bigger chances than Fed. But I truly hope it’s none of them but some younger player: Thiem, Tsitsipas or Medvedev
None of them achieved it in the Open Era though.Imho, 2020 and 2021 will be huge years for one particular reason.
Djokovic and Nadal will both have huge opportunities to join Emerson and Laver and achieve a Dual Career Grand Slam.
YE #1 really doesn't matter all that much.
Who racks up the most weeks at #1 throughout the season will mean more.
YE #1 is equally relevant than weeks as #1.YE #1 really doesn't matter all that much.
Who racks up the most weeks at #1 throughout the season will mean more.
None of them achieved it in the Open Era though.
YE #1 really doesn't matter all that much.
Who racks up the most weeks at #1 throughout the season will mean more.
Disagree. It matters a lot. Year end 1 shows who is the best of the best that season. Has always mattered.
#6 would mean more to Nadal given his deficit in weeks at 1.
Care to elaborate? What's different about 95 & 19?I think 2019, like 1995, is a great example of why years at #1 >>> weeks at #1.
Care to elaborate? What's different about 95 & 19?
Nadal is also getting older, and Thiem is getting better. Who would have predicted last year that Thiem would make the WTF final and beat Federer, Djokovic, and Zverev on his way?People have been believing Thiem would defeat Nadal at RG since 2017, and each time they were wrong.
YE #1 really doesn't matter all that much.
Who racks up the most weeks at #1 throughout the season will mean more.
I see a lot of people still think of tennis as a seasonal sport; this is not football or NBA. Players try to win tournaments, not finish the season 1st. The no. 1 spot is rolling, and effectively denotes the best player in the last 12 months. It is impossible to claim a YE 1 is in any way a bigger achievement than any other week at no. 1.
This is because any week at no. 1 means you had to be the best or most consistent player in the last 12 months prior to that week. Which means this time period includes results from all the same tournaments as Year End no. 1. Why would a tournament win at Cincinnati 2018 have less value than a win there in 2019?
Also, no tennis player strives to be the YE 1 like football teams try to win the league by finishing 1st on last matchday or NBA teams trying to win the very last game of the finals. Tennis players try to peak for slams. Therefore, more weeks at no. 1 means more time as the best player in the world. YE 1 just means you were best at the end of that particular year, and might give you bragging rights for the season, but is a much less accurate indicator of time spent as the best player in the world.
It might depend on how 2020 goes. If Nadal keeps #1 all the way through, say, the 2021 French Open, he'd be right there w/Djokovic at weeks at #1 in addition to having the 6 years at #1. But if the #1 ranking is more like a hot potato in 2020, Nadal could get a 6th year-end #1 while having a significant deficit in weeks at #1.
There's really very little way for Nadal to both claim a 6th YE1 next year and lose weeks to Djokovic in weeks at 1.
I don't think it's especially likely, but, for instance, Djokovic could win the Australian Open while Nadal loses in the QF, and then Djokovic could win Indian Wells or Miami to take #1 and hold it for a good chunk of the year before Nadal re-takes it and finishes year-end #1.
Nadal has a ton of points to makeup in clay season relative to his usual output. The scenario you describe is highly unlikely.
this is completely false.I see a lot of people still think of tennis as a seasonal sport; this is not football or NBA. Players try to win tournaments, not finish the season 1st. The no. 1 spot is rolling, and effectively denotes the best player in the last 12 months. It is impossible to claim a YE 1 is in any way a bigger achievement than any other week at no. 1.
I can smell Ultron Djokovic in the air. He's pissed. And when Nole is pissed, you know what happens.
In 2019, Djokovic will have been #1 for, what, 43 weeks vs. 9 weeks for Nadal, but Nadal will finish year-end #1. I prefer Nadal's year-end #1 ranking.
The question was about how this impacts the Big 3's legacy in particular. Right now there is a race for Fed's overall time at #1 record.Does the best player of the year mean nothing to you?
Who was the best of the 2017 season, Murray who was the one who accumulated more weeks in the number 1 that year thanks to what he did the previous season or Nadal who was, in fact, the player who accumulated more points for what he did that same season and ended up as the best player of the year (before mentioning Federer, don't do it, by not participating the Swiss in the clay season, he was perfectly disqualified from being)?
Why wasn’t he more pissed after his disaster USO?I can smell Ultron Djokovic in the air. He's pissed. And when Nole is pissed, you know what happens.
Think I read that this year N1 he had gotten less clay points than any other year N1 of his.Nadal has a ton of points to makeup in clay season relative to his usual output. The scenario you describe is highly unlikely.