Assuming Federer finishes #2 in 2017, he has had a better season than how many year end #1s

[McEnroeisanartist]

Assuming Federer finishes #2 in 2017, how many seasons by year end #1s would you say his season was better than?

I would say:
1973, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978
1982, 1983, 1985, 1989
1990, 1991, 1992, 1996, 1998
2000, 2001, 2002, 2003

 

[NBP]

2009(maybe), 2012, 2014, 2016. If he wins London then his year is better than those I named no question. For now, it's debatable.

 

[mike danny]

2009(maybe), 2012, 2014, 2016. If he wins London then his year is better than those I named no question. For now, it's debatable.

Not necessarily better than 2009. Federer reached all 4 major finals in 2009. Not even close to doing so this year. For that alone, his 2009 was better than his 2017.

 

[every7]

Not necessarily better than 2009. Federer reached all 4 major finals in 2009. Not even close to doing so this year. For that alone, his 2009 was better than his 2017.

Agree. 2009 was definitely better. Career grand slam completed, all four major finals reached, 2 majors won (incl his only F.O.), and really in the other 2 he was impossibly close to winning. It was an amazing year, and he did it all with underpowered equipment. Not sure why people insist on underrating 2009 it's really stupid.

 

[peakin11mugs]

It would be funny if federer becomes a better number 2 than nadal ever was. Lol keeps on breaking records picking up accolades

 

[abmk]

Not necessarily better than 2009. Federer reached all 4 major finals in 2009. Not even close to doing so this year. For that alone, his 2009 was better than his 2017.

Agree. 2009 was definitely better. Career grand slam completed, all four major finals reached, 2 majors won, and really in the other 2 he was impossibly close to winning. It was an amazing year, and he did it all with underpowered equipment. Not sure why people insist on underrating 2009 it's really stupid.

given the vast gulf in competition b/w 09 and 17, I'd consider fed's 17 season equal to 09 only if he had won USO (superior only if he wins the YEC as well)

 

[mike danny]

Agree. 2009 was definitely better. Career grand slam completed, all four major finals reached, 2 majors won (incl his only F.O.), and really in the other 2 he was impossibly close to winning. It was an amazing year, and he did it all with underpowered equipment. Not sure why people insist on underrating 2009 it's really stupid.

Probably because Fed didn't look as dominant in 2009 as his past incarnation. But I wouldn't say he wasn't dominant in results. From Madrid until the end of the USO, Fed won 4 of the 6 tournaments he entered, reached the finals in 5 of those 6 and overall was 32-2 in that period. That's pretty dominant. And he won 2 GS's and 2 masters 1000, reaching the final of the last GS.

 

[TripleATeam]

2009(maybe), 2012, 2014, 2016. If he wins London then his year is better than those I named no question. For now, it's debatable.

What's ironic is that Federer has had a worse season than 2016's #2 but he has had a better season than 2016's #1.

 

[TheAverageFedererFan]

1973, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003

 

[mike danny]

It is certainly a better season than Pete's 1998.

Oh, if only Fed had a guy like Rios to contend with for the no.1 ranking this year...

 

[ZiggyStardust]

In recent years, 2000,2001,2002,2003,2012,2014,2016. All these are 1 slam no. 1 years.

You could argue that Nole's 2016 was better than Fed's 2017, although I suspect that by the end of the season that will no longer be a discussion.

 

[Djokovic2011]

It is certainly a better season than Pete's 1998.

Oh, if only Fed had a guy like Rios to contend with for the no.1 ranking this year...

Now you know how us Nole fans felt in 2013.

 

[User123]

Now you know how us Nole fans felt in 2013.

What? Nadal was the better player for most of the year. Djokovic won a few titles in the end of the year and you think he deserved the number one spot just because of it?

 

[smoledman]

To be fair, it was never realistic to start at #17 and finish #1. Not saying going from #9 to #1 isn't impressive, but that's about what Rafa did in 2013 as well. However #2 becomes #1 all the time in tennis history, so Fed is set up to make his assault on #1 possibly in London this year or sometime in 2018 if he plays smart.

 

[mike danny]

Now you know how us Nole fans felt in 2013.

The thing is though, given Roger's age and reduced schedule, he needed all the help he could get for becoming no.1. Having a guys like Nadal who is also younger didn't help matters.

 

[Bukmeikara]

If aliens kidnap the first 99/100 players. That one who remains, wins the Grand Slam. Is his year going to be best season ever?

When we talk about 2017 - Nishikori, Raonic, Wawrinka, Djokovic, Murray were all out because of injuries and they are the top 5 players from 2016. Add to this picture Goffin - missed RG, Wimbledon because of injury ... I would say even the Us summer alongside it.

 

[Djokovic2011]

What? Nadal was the better player for most of the year. Djokovic won a few titles in the end of the year and you think he deserved the number one spot just because of it?

Oh dear.

 

[User123]

Oh dear.

What?

 

[Noelan]

Now you know how us Nole fans felt in 2013.

Freaking Barcelona and Brasil open made the points difference But righfuly No1 went to Nadal , ranking system works that way.

What? Nadal was the better player for most of the year. Djokovic won a few titles in the end of the year and you think he deserved the number one spot just because of it?

haha one can to not love your bitterness whenever Djokovic name pops up He won Beijing, Paris, Shanghai, WTF , and defeated No1 twice in the process

 

[User123]

Freaking Barcelona and Brasil open made the points difference But righfuly No1 went to Nadal ranking sistem works.

haha one can to not love your bitterness whenever Djokovic name pops up He won Beijing, Paris, Shanghai, WTF , and defeated No1 twice in the process

Nadal that year had more slams, more masters, more titles overall, and won the IMPORTANT head to head matches. I guess you believe that Beijing 500 is a great compensation for losses in RG and USO, but I don't think many people will agree with you.

 

[Noelan]

Nadal that year had more slams, more masters, more titles overall, and won the IMPORTANT head to head matches. I guess you believe that Beijing 500 is a great compensation for losses in RG and USO, but I don't think many people will agree with you.

I'm not believing you silly troll , I said Nadal was rightful No1. Djokovic was rightful World Champion of 2013

 

[BGod]

Obviously every 1-Slam season.
When considering 2 Slam seasons it's hard comparing Bo5 Masters to now and same for WTF. I do think if he wins London with 3 Masters and WTF he eclipses seasons where #1 didn't win the WTF barring 4 Bo5 Masters or 3 Masters and Slam Final

Some examples:
Better than Courier's 92
Better than Sampras 93, below 94 & even with 95.

 

[User123]

I'm not believing you silly troll , I said Nadal was rightful No1. Djokovic was rightful World Champion of 2013

Missed the part when WTF was renamed to World Championship.

 

[Noelan]

Missed the part when WTF was renamed to World Championship.

It's not surprising , trolls actually rarely know much about the game

 

[every7]

It's not surprising , trolls actually rarely know much about the game

Agree. The trolling gets so pathetic. Sometimes the trolls don't even know enough about the game to know what to say to stir people up the most and quite often miss the mark.

 

[duaneeo]

Federer reached all 4 major finals in 2009. Not even close to doing so this year. For that alone, his 2009 was better than his 2017.

I'm not so sure. Outside of the slams, Federer's 2009 looks similar to his 2013.

I think if Federer wins the WTFs, 2017 is without question the better season.

 

[every7]

I'm not so sure. Outside of the slams, Federer's 2009 looks similar to his 2013.

2009 and 2013 don't look similar to me. Even if you do look outside of slams in comparing the seasons (not sure why you would) He won 2 M1000 in 2009.

 

[duaneeo]

Even if you do look outside of slams in comparing the seasons (not sure why you would)...

Because a season consists of more than just 4 slams.

 

[MasturB]

He won Indian Wells without dropping a set.

Won Halle without dropping a set.

Won Wimbledon without dropping a set.

Won Shanghai dropping only one set. Outrageous.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Obviously every 1-Slam season.
When considering 2 Slam seasons it's hard comparing Bo5 Masters to now and same for WTF. I do think if he wins London with 3 Masters and WTF he eclipses seasons where #1 didn't win the WTF barring 4 Bo5 Masters or 3 Masters and Slam Final

Some examples:
Better than Courier's 92
Better than Sampras 93, below 94 & even with 95.

Why obviously? If we're talking about who's had the better season, shouldn't everything be taken into account and not just the four majors?

 

[every7]

Because a season consists of more than just 4 slams.

Well of course, but even the M1000 count was different.

 

[Pyrolysis]

Well it will be better than any single-slam #1 year for sure. And some of the two-slam ones too I'd say, especially if he wins the WTF.
Winning Wimbledon would put it above any two-slam #1 year that didn't include Wimbledon as well.

 

[Pyrolysis]

Why obviously? If we're talking about who's had the better season, shouldn't everything be taken into account and not just the four majors?

Not refuting you entirely here, but considering Federer has done more than well enough in other events too (3 Masters so far with a possibility of another and/or the WTF too), I'd say that in this case it is definitely, absolutely better than any 1-slam season.

Two of his Masters were the IW/Miami double too, which is even better than just any random two Masters wins I'd say.

 

[The_18th_Slam]

I'm not so sure. Outside of the slams, Federer's 2009 looks similar to his 2013.

Huh?

2009:
2 Masters titles
0 Masters runners-up
3 Masters semifinals
1 Masters quarterfinal

2013:
0 Masters titles
1 Masters runner-up
1 Masters semifinal
2 Masters quarterfinals

Federer's 2009 achievements, outside the Slams, look more similar to his 2017 season than to his 2013 season.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Not refuting you entirely here, but considering Federer has done more than well enough in other events too (3 Masters so far with a possibility of another and/or the WTF too), I'd say that in this case it is definitely, absolutely better than any 1-slam season.

Two of his Masters were the IW/Miami double too, which is even better than just any random two Masters wins I'd say.

Fair enough.

 

[abmk]

I'm not so sure. Outside of the slams, Federer's 2009 looks similar to his 2013.

I think if Federer wins the WTFs, 2017 is without question the better season.

Federer won Madrid and Cincy in 2009. (+made 3 masters SFs and was only out in a close match in the YEC 2009 SF)

Only one won Halle in 13. (+was in one masters final - in which he got destroyed,1 masters semi and got dominated in the YEC 2013 SF)

He was 35-10 outside of slams in 2009. (77.8%)
32-13 outside of slams in 2013. (71%)

nope, not close.

 

[vex]

2009(maybe), 2012, 2014, 2016. If he wins London then his year is better than those I named no question. For now, it's debatable.

2012 was hyper competitive,
That year doesn't belong in the list. Those ranks were earned. The number 4 player that year would be Rank 1 in 2017 based on level of play.

 

[duaneeo]

He was 35-10 outside of slams in 2009. (77.8%)
32-13 outside of slams in 2013. (71%)

nope, not close.

You took the post way too literally. The actual comparison is 2009 to 2017. The comparison to 2013 is to emphasize the many losses and few finals Federer had outside of the slams in 2009.

 

[RF-18]

Missed the part when WTF was renamed to World Championship.

He was crowned by the ITF as the best player of 2013. Nothing to do with WTFs.

 

[NBP]

Not necessarily better than 2009. Federer reached all 4 major finals in 2009. Not even close to doing so this year. For that alone, his 2009 was better than his 2017.

Well winning London would mean an extra Masters and YEC title, compared to the extra two slam finals of 2009. He'd also accumulate more points. I'm more one for looking at wins, not just finals (although all 4 slam finals is clearly still great). And Fed's 2009 titles were so compressed. May, June, July, and August. Before and after he won nothing. He didn't even reach other Masters finals or the London final. So yeah winning London and I see it as 2017>2009, just my opinion.

 

[mike danny]

Well winning London would mean an extra Masters and YEC title, compared to the extra two slam finals of 2009. He'd also accumulate more points. I'm more one for looking at wins, not just finals (although all 4 slam finals is clearly still great). And Fed's 2009 titles were so compressed. May, June, July, and August. Before and after he won nothing. He didn't even reach other Masters finals or the London final. So yeah winning London and I see it as 2017>2009, just my opinion.

Yeah, if he wins the WTF this year, I might give it a second thought.

 

[NatF]

I don't think Federer's 2017 will top Borg's 1978...Borg was the real #1 in 1978 make no mistake.

 

[Hawaiian grip]

Better than Jimmy Connors between 1975 and 1978, for sure.

See, this is why I think some of Jimmy's achievements are overrated, especially in seasons like 1977 when Vilas was clearly the superior player. Right, five consecutive YE#1, that's cool and all, but when you take a look at his seasons you realize there have been quite a few YE#2 in other eras with better seasons!

 

[DreddyTennis45]

Not sure but certainly the best player since Baghdatis who tried to be #1

 

[abmk]

You took the post way too literally. The actual comparison is 2009 to 2017. The comparison to 2013 is to emphasize the many losses and few finals Federer had outside of the slams in 2009.

ok, fair enough then.

 

[mavsman149]

To be fair, it was never realistic to start at #17 and finish #1. Not saying going from #9 to #1 isn't impressive, but that's about what Rafa did in 2013 as well. However #2 becomes #1 all the time in tennis history, so Fed is set up to make his assault on #1 possibly in London this year or sometime in 2018 if he plays smart.

If he doesn't get it by the WTF then I doubt he gets it in 2018 unless he tries to play clay. Fed is defending a TON of points early in the season next year, the only places he could add points are at Dubai and Mercedes Cup in the first half of the season assuming he defends everything else.

 

[tennis_pro]

All of Sampras no 1 seasons.

 

[TMF]

All of Sampras no 1 seasons.

Does anyone disagree with this ?

 

[The_18th_Slam]

Does anyone disagree with this ?

Sampras's 1994 would be clearly better. You could also make a case for 1997.

 

[TMF]

Sampras's 1994 would be clearly better. You could also make a case for 1997.

If Federer wins the WTF, I would rate his 2017 better better than Sampras 1997. Sampras 1994 still be better, especially when he won a MS 1000 on clay while Federer has no result on clay.