Are you only a worthy YE#1 if you win than one Slam?

Djokovic2011 · Nov 15, 2014

Are you only a worthy YE#1 if you win more than one Slam?

I really felt compelled to make this thread as quite frankly I'm taken aback by how many posters on here seem to think that you have to "dominate" a season to be classed as a worthy YE#1, i.e by winning at least 2 Slams, and anything less is somehow a hollow achievement.

It seems that just because 2 of Djokovic's 3 YE#1 were one Slam seasons, that he wasn't deserving of being on top at the very end which just seems crazy to me. As I've said on here a million times before, yes Slams are the most important tournaments but they're not the only ones that feature on the ATP calendar. If you finish the year with "only" one major but you also win the WTF, the next most prestigious tournament, as well as 3-4 Masters 1000 titles(you know, tier 1 events) why shouldn't this also be regarded as a great year?

Perhaps I'd understand it more had Novak won the 1 Slam and then crashed out early in the other 3 but during the last four years this has obviously not been the case and he's been reaching at least one other final as well, the model of consistency. Personally I'd take a season with 1 Slam, the WTF and 3-4 Masters 1000 over a 2 Slam season with no other titles won.

So what do you guys think? As the title says, are you only a worthy YE#1 if you win more than one Slam that year? Poll is up so please let me know your thoughts.

Deleted member 688153 · Nov 15, 2014

You are the deserved YE #1 if you get the YE #1.

This is the case whether you get 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 GS in the year.

It is that simple.

If Player A wins the CYGS + OG + WTF, but player B has more points (which is possible), player B deserves the YE #1.

Of course Player A has had the better year, but #1 and YE #1 is ONLY about points.

torpantennis · Nov 15, 2014

YE#1 is fully deserving to be later heavily pointed out to IMO if he wins at least two of the big five, i.e slams and WTF.

Deleted member 688153 · Nov 15, 2014

Djokovic has earned every accolade he has fair and square, just like every other player.

irishnadalfan1983 · Nov 15, 2014

Yes definitely deserves YE 1.

I think people just mean he hasn't being a dominate number 1 like in previous year but no doubt he deserves it.

irishnadalfan1983 · Nov 15, 2014

torpantennis said:
YE#1 is fully deserving to be later heavily pointed out to IMO if he wins at least two of the big five, i.e slams and WTF.

LOL - i think this week has highlighted what a crap tournament the WTF is and how players feel about it.

Djokovic2011 · Nov 15, 2014

OK, I pressed the wrong button. Anyone know how you add a poll or is it too late?

Deleted member 688153 · Nov 15, 2014

Djokovic2011 said:
OK, I pressed the wrong button. Anyone know how you add a poll or is it too late?

Thread tools > poll

torpantennis · Nov 15, 2014

irishnadalfan1983 said:
[/B]

LOL - i think this week has highlighted what a crap tournament the WTF is and how players feel about it.

LOL - I know this week has highlighted what a crap top ten the ATP tour has in 2014, and how weak an era this really is.

Deleted member 688153 · Nov 15, 2014

irishnadalfan1983 said:
[/B]

LOL - i think this week has highlighted what a crap tournament the WTF is and how players feel about it.

No.

_______________

Djokovic2011 · Nov 15, 2014

Firstservingman said:
Thread tools > poll

Thanks, poll is up!

irishnadalfan1983 · Nov 15, 2014

Lets stay on topic!

Djoko deserves YE 1 - does anyone doubt this?

torpantennis · Nov 15, 2014

irishnadalfan1983 said:
Lets stay on topic!

Djoko deserves YE 1 - does anyone doubt this?

Of course anybody, even Wozniacki on WTA, always "deserves" YE#1 if they get it. But should this year be labeled as "Nole's year" is highly questionable if Fed ends up winning WTF.

Deleted member 688153 · Nov 15, 2014

I personally consider the Wimbledon champion to have "won" the year.
I don't pretend that this is necessarily objective or fair, but that's how I personally see it, which is my right.

As Wimbledon is the holy sacred Mecca of tennis, the All England Men's Singles Champion of the World is the best player of the year.

As a Fed fan, I don't pretend to be happy that Novak beat Federer there this year (and I will admit that I am more than a little bitter about it in fact - that was Roger's moment dammit :twisted

, but it is what it is.

Djoker won Wimby, thus he "won" the year in my personal view.

He will in all likelihood be named the ITF World Champion again too, so WIM + YE #1 + ITF WC seals it for me.

Well done Novak, but please lose to Fed at Wimbledon next year.

Bendex · Nov 15, 2014

Nobody else won more than one slam, either. Should the number 1 spot be left vacant or something?

MichaelNadal · Nov 15, 2014

irishnadalfan1983 said:
Yes definitely deserves YE 1.

I think people just mean he hasn't being a dominate number 1 like in previous year but no doubt he deserves it.

This, nothing more, nothing less. Whoever earns #1 deserves it.

LazyNinja19 · Nov 15, 2014

Djokovic deserves the YEN1 this year. But he won only 1 Slam in 2 out of 3 years where he has been YEN1. That is not convincing at all.
Say whatever you want, but the 4 Slams are the biggest and the most important titles in Tennis.

Look at the YEN1's held by Federer and Nadal. Everytime they won more than 1 Slam in those years, and compare that to Djokovic. He's still worthy because he accumulated the most points, but he's not nearly as convincing a #1, as they were in their years.

No need to shed tears here because other posters share a different opinion, as seen in many posts of some of the fanatical Djoko fans. Just sayin.

eldanger25 · Nov 15, 2014

Of course not - many "worthy" YE #1s (or Players of the Year, if you prefer) won just a single slam that season. Winning two or more slams in a season does confer greater glory, but that doesn't diminish 1x slam PoY seasons in any way.

Although I remain surprised that Djokovic didn't win the Open this year, he's had a great, worthy season (with or without the YEC). Wimbledon, the IW-Miami slow hard double, that grand old Italian Open, and the indoor circus at Paris (Bercy) is a heck of a season for anybody.

vernonbc · Nov 15, 2014

LazyNinja19 said:
Djokovic deserves the YEN1 this year. But he won only 1 Slam in 2 out of 3 years where he has been YEN1. That is not convincing at all.
He's still worthy because he accumulated the most points, but he's not nearly as convincing a #1, as they were in their years.

Also, in 2 out of the 3 years he was y.e.#1, his main competitor only played for half the year. Makes it a lot easier to accumulate points when the best/second best player isn't on the tour.

Chico · Nov 15, 2014

Novak is the best and the most dominant player in the world since 2011.

All there is to say here.

Cesc Fabregas · Nov 15, 2014

Chico said:
Novak is the best and the most dominant player in the world since 2011.

All there is to say here.

And yet he can't win more than 1 slam in a year.

BringBackSV · Nov 15, 2014

Cesc Fabregas said:
And yet he can't win more than 1 slam in a year.

Novak is the best at winning smaller tournaments but even with Rafa missing 3 GS events since then, he still has won more than Novak after 11.

Flint · Nov 15, 2014

If you score the most points in a year then you are a worthy year end number 1.

Towser83 · Nov 15, 2014

Of course he's a worthy number 1. No other players have more than one slam and he's won more masters than those other 3 slam winners. It's just it's not as dominant as his 2011 season or other seasons when players have won multiple slams If Federer had won that 5th set at Wimbledon he'd be the desrving number one where as you can say in 2011 had Djokovic lost to fed in the us open Nole would still have been number one by some way.

The thing you have to remember is since 2004 to 2012 everytime a player finished as number one they had more than one slam. In that time to even be number one at any time in the year you needed more than one slam except when nadal got to number one in 2010 after winning RG and just before he also won Wimbledon. Federer then also managed this in 2012. Nole could have done it in 2011 if he'd lost the Wimbledon final. So that's how rare it was but of course the more rivals you have the less one of them has to do to overtake because points are divided up into between more people. Now for the past 3 years the only player to hold 2 slams at the same time has been Nadal.

So people are just used to the number one winning multiple slams. It doesn't make it any less worthy, you could argue there is stronger competition. I think 2012 was a strong year, I do feel this year has possibly either been weaker or guys like stan and cilic just peaked at the right time while not playing a great season overall. I do feel Nole has blown the chance to have multi slam seasons though.

Netspirit · Nov 15, 2014

This is like asking "do you deserve #1 if you don't hit a 150 mph serve".

ATP #1 means "most ATP ranking points". Read it again: there is a sorted list of points, and #1 means being on top of that list.

#1 does not mean "the best", and it does not mean "dominant".

You "slam" guys are ridiculous.

BringBackSV · Nov 15, 2014

Netspirit said:
This is like asking "do you deserve #1 if you don't hit a 150 mph serve".

ATP #1 means "most ATP ranking points". Read it again: there is a sorted list of points, and #1 means being on top of that list.

#1 does not mean "the best", and it does not mean "dominant".

You "slam" guys are ridiculous.

I disagree with the analogy.

Roger Federer disagrees with your overall point though. I'd rather have a condition on the award that one can not win it without winning a GS. Of course they would never do that as the whole point is to get guys to play as many events as possible.

Goosehead · Nov 15, 2014

is op trolling or just a bit thick ?, durr..tennis has rank charts and points awarded ? what's all that about then. durr ?.

NatF · Nov 15, 2014

You're the #1 player if you have the best year out of all the other players. Your achievements don't matter in that respect, they only matter relative to the competition. Djokovic is worthy because he played the best this year.

stiggytennis · Nov 15, 2014

I think being YE no1 is like winning a major,albeit one for consistency.

Netspirit · Nov 15, 2014

BringBackSV said:
I disagree with the analogy.

Roger Federer disagrees with your overall point though. I'd rather have a condition on the award that one can not win it without winning a GS. Of course they would never do that as the whole point is to get guys to play as many events as possible.

The ATP disagrees, so it is you vs. the ATP. Guess whose opinion matters.

tennisaddict · Nov 15, 2014

LazyNinja19 said:
Djokovic deserves the YEN1 this year. But he won only 1 Slam in 2 out of 3 years where he has been YEN1. That is not convincing at all.
Say whatever you want, but the 4 Slams are the biggest and the most important titles in Tennis.

Look at the YEN1's held by Federer and Nadal. Everytime they won more than 1 Slam in those years, and compare that to Djokovic. He's still worthy because he accumulated the most points, but he's not nearly as convincing a #1, as they were in their years.

No need to shed tears here because other posters share a different opinion, as seen in many posts of some of the fanatical Djoko fans. Just sayin.

Good post.

If one is saying 0 majors does not deserve no 1 as much as 1 major winner, then by the same reasoning a multi major winner is more dominant and a different number 1.

TMF · Nov 15, 2014

Chico said:
Novak is the best and the most dominant player in the world since 2011.

All there is to say here.

But who was the most dominant player since 2010, which is the starting year for this decade ?

TMF · Nov 15, 2014

Firstservingman said:
Djokovic has earned every accolade he has fair and square, just like every other player.

All YE #1 players are well deserved. BUT, not all YE #1 are equally impressive each one aren't equally achieved. Nole 2011 YE #1 is much more impressive than this year.

Not all Year End #1 are equally impressive

Djokovic2011 · Nov 15, 2014

BringBackSV said:
Novak is the best at winning smaller tournaments but even with Rafa missing 3 GS events since then, he still has won more than Novak after 11.

Nadal hasn't won more Slams than Djokovic since 2011.

Djokovic2011 · Nov 15, 2014

Goosehead said:
is op trolling or just a bit thick ?, durr..tennis has rank charts and points awarded ? what's all that about then. durr ?.

Nope, I'm not thick in the slightest but I think you may be. Read the OP properly then get back to me.

torpantennis · Nov 15, 2014

Chico said:
Novak is the best and the most dominant player in the world since 2011.

All there is to say here.

Nadal has two dominant years in the last five seasons. Nole has dominated just one year in Rafole era 2010->.

90's Clay · Nov 15, 2014

I don't know.. But a Ye#1 with no slam is pretty lame

FanOfLu · Nov 15, 2014

Chico said:
Novak is the best and the most dominant player in the world since 2011.

All there is to say here.

OK. By this logic Laver is the best and the most dominant player in the world since 1962.:twisted: Now, this is more impressive than Djokovic with a mere 7 majors. LMAO.

Djokovic2011 · Nov 15, 2014

torpantennis said:
Nadal has two dominant years in the last five seasons. Nole has dominated just one year in Rafole era 2010->.

Dominance + consistency >> dominance + early exits/DNP.

Goosehead · Nov 15, 2014

Djokovic2011 said:
Nope, I'm not thick in the slightest but I think you may be. Read the OP properly then get back to me.

oh lol..I think I got my feathers in a twist. soz. that'll teach me to skim through and not read properly.

MichaelNadal · Nov 15, 2014

FanOfLu said:
OK. By this logic Laver is the best and the most dominant player in the world since 1962.:twisted: Now, this is more impressive than Djokovic with a mere 7 majors. LMAO.

Easy to pick a year isn't it? 2011 is the only year they can pick for Djokovic to be ahead :lol:

Djokovic2011 · Nov 15, 2014

MichaelNadal said:
Easy to pick a year isn't it? 2011 is the only year they can pick for Djokovic to be ahead :lol:

Actually there are other years that Djokovic has been ahead of Nadal, not just 2011. 2012 and this year are among them.

The Green Mile · Nov 15, 2014

Djokovic2011 said:
Actually there are other years that Djokovic has been ahead of Nadal, not just 2011. 2012 and this year are among them.

He is not talking about a single calender year. He means taking into consideration, everything from 2011 to the present time. I thought it quite obvious from FanOfLu's original post which was quoting Chico.

Mainad · Nov 15, 2014

Of course Djokovic is a worthy YE #1! Somebody has to finish the season as world #1 and which player would be worthier than Djokovic?

Of course, a multiple Slam winner would very likely be the dominant player and therefore the most worthy. But given that there have been no multiple Slam winners this season, the single Slam winner who has won the most second tier tournaments is the obvious choice for the position and so that means obviously Djokovic!

End of.

veroniquem · Nov 15, 2014

MichaelNadal said:
Easy to pick a year isn't it? 2011 is the only year they can pick for Djokovic to be ahead :lol:

Sure but OTOH 2011 was the 2nd most dominant season in open era (after Fed's 2006, since onset of super 9 in 1970), so not something negligible either.

eldanger25 · Nov 15, 2014

veroniquem said:
Sure but OTOH 2011 was the 2nd most dominant season in open era (after Fed's 2006, since onset of super 9 in 1970), so not something negligible either.

Don't forget Mac's 1984 - he along with Fed 2006 truly dominated the tour for the full 12 months.

I agree with your overall point though - Djokovic's 2011 is more impressive than any of Nadal's three YE #1 seasons. However, all three of Nadal's YE #1 seasons are clearly more impressive than either of Djokovic's 2012 or 2014, in large part due to winning 2 or 3 slams in each.

veroniquem · Nov 15, 2014

People are a bit insane here. There are plenty of tennis seasons when the #1 finished with 1 slam title. If Djoko wins WTF tomorrow, he will finish 2014 with 6 tier 1 titles to his name. That would actually be a pretty high count.
Year end #1 players:
1973: Nastase with 1 slam title + 2 masters + WTF (4)
1975: Connors with 0 slam title, master, zip!! (0)
1976: Connors: 1 slam + 5 masters (6)
1977: Connors: 0 slam + 1 master + WTF (2)
1978: Connors: 1 slam + 1 master (2)
1982: McEnroe: 0 slam + 3 masters (3)
1983: McEnroe: 1 slam + 3 masters + WTF (5)
1985: Lendl: 1 slam + 3 masters + WTF (5)
1989: Lendl: 1 slam + 4 masters (5)
1990: Edberg: 1 slam + 3 masters (4)
1991: Edberg: 1 slam that's it (1)
1996: Sampras: 1 slam + WTF (2)
1998: Sampras: 1 slam + 0 (1)
2000: Kuerten: 1 slam + 1 master + WTF (3)
2001: Hewitt: 1 slam + WTF (2)
2002: Hewitt: 1 slam + 1 master + WTF (3)
2003: Roddick: 1 slam + 2 masters (3)

Of course, Fed was a slam maniac, so it never happened to him but other than that, I would say Djoko is an extremely worthy #1 compared to lots of other seasons

ETA: # in parenthesis = # of tier 1 events won by #1 player during season

Netspirit · Nov 15, 2014

eldanger25 said:
I agree with your overall point though - Djokovic's 2011 is more impressive than any of Nadal's three YE #1 seasons. However, all three of Nadal's YE #1 seasons are clearly more impressive than either of Djokovic's 2012 or 2014, in large part due to winning 2 or 3 slams in each.

...and it only means that Federer > Nadal > Djokovic in terms of greatness, which we all knew all along. )

Chanwan · Nov 15, 2014

vernonbc said:
Also, in 2 out of the 3 years he was y.e.#1, his main competitor only played for half the year. Makes it a lot easier to accumulate points when the best/second best player isn't on the tour.

I think you'll enjoy my thread:
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=517967

veroniquem · Nov 15, 2014

eldanger25 said:
Don't forget Mac's 1984 - he along with Fed 2006 truly dominated the tour for the full 12 months.

I agree with your overall point though - Djokovic's 2011 is more impressive than any of Nadal's three YE #1 seasons. However, all three of Nadal's YE #1 seasons are clearly more impressive than either of Djokovic's 2012 or 2014, in large part due to winning 2 or 3 slams in each.

Oh sure but I mean just posting the 2nd best season overall is something that matters.

Are you only a worthy YE#1 if you win than one Slam?

Are you only a worthy YE#1 by winning more than one Slam?

Yes, Slams are everything

No, there are other tournaments to be taken into account

Bionic Poster

Deleted member 688153

Guest

Legend

Deleted member 688153

Guest

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Deleted member 688153

Guest

Legend

Deleted member 688153

Guest

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Legend

Deleted member 688153

Guest

Professional

Bionic Poster

Banned

Hall of Fame

Legend

Banned

Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Legend

Bionic Poster

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Talk Tennis Guru

Talk Tennis Guru

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Legend

Banned

Professional

Bionic Poster

Legend

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

Similar threads