Daniil Medvedev disagrees with Stefanos Tsitsipas on ATP Finals being 'bigger' than a Major

[GoatNo1]

A player being greater and accomplishing a single great feat are not really mutually inclusive.

Rios' entire body of work is greater, but no single achievement of his is.

Anyways, I think we are going around in circles here, I get that it is great for you, and that is fine, heck I immensely value both weeks at number one and year ending number ones myself, as I grew up watching Sampras, but the general consensus will always be that he who has the most slams is the greatest.

Not true. In most international pools fed is still considering to be greater than rafa despite 2 less slams. Nole was goat when he won his second RG. Slams are not everything and everything matters. Nole gets ca 2/3 of votes, fed ca 1/5 and rafa 1/10.

 

[Hitman]

Not true. In most international pools fed is still considering to be greater than rafa despite 2 less slams. Nole was goat when he won his second RG. Slams are not everything and everything matters. Nole gets ca 2/3 of votes, fed ca 1/5 and rafa 1/10.

Yes or no, was Federer considered the consensus GOAT after Wimbledon 2009 despite having less weeks at number one and two less year ending number ones than Sampras?

 

[GoatNo1]

Yes or no, was Federer considered the consensus GOAT after Wimbledon 2009 despite having less weeks at number one and two less year ending number ones than Sampras?

Don't know. But fed had CGS. Several CC masters. Sampras never won anything big on CC. Like I said. Everything matters.

 

[Wander]

slam>WTF>=OG>masters>MM

for me:
YE#1: 100 GOAT points
50 weeks @ #1: 100 GOAT points
slam: 100 goat points
WTF: 40p
M: 20p
(slam final 15p)
MM: 5p

bonuses:
all 4 slams at once: 100p
each CGS: 100p
GS record: 100p
each GM: 100p
weeks @ #1 record: 100p
points record: 100p
Surface GOAT: 100p
ect...

What the heck is MM.

 

[Hitman]

Don't know. But fed had CGS. Several CC masters. Sampras never won anything big on CC. Like I said. Everything matters.

But you said you valued year ending number ones above all, Federer had two less, he is still trailing, so why wasn't the biggest feat given more value by the masses?

I agree with you that everything matters, but somethings carry more weight than others.

 

[mike danny]

Federer got lucky that Sampras and Agassi were too old, he fitted into a vacuum. The context can be used on him also, he didn't contend with ATG players to become the top guy. You are right, we do need to look at it.

Federer accomplished his biggest wins after Sampras was gone. Federer got exposed when Djokodal arrived, you are spot on, context is needed on his numbers also, instead of fanboying his numbers to mean more than they are.

The guy is literally parodying Federer, don't take him seriously.

 

[GoatNo1]

But you said you valued year ending number ones above all, Federer had two less, he is still trailing, so why wasn't the biggest feat given more value by the masses?

I agree with you that everything matters, but somethings carry more weight than others.

If you look at my value points I gave 100 both to ye#1 and a slam.i think that YE#1 >= slam. To be greater of a surface is pretty big deal and to completely lack a success of some surface is a big disadvantage (like Sampras on CC or rafa on HCi except a Madrid master 05).

 

[Wander]

If you look at my value points I gave 100 both to ye#1 and a slam.i think that YE#1 >= slam. To be greater of a surface is pretty big deal and to completely lack a success of some surface is a big disadvantage (like Sampras on CC or rafa on HCi except a Madrid master 05).

But MM?

 

[GoatNo1]

But MM?

Not big tournaments (slams, WTF, O, masters). Small tournaments- Mickley Mouse.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Historically the significance among the players and sport has always been the following

Slams > Weeks at number one > year ending number one > YEC > everything else

I would put weeks and YE1 in the same item since they are the same thing, but yeah, that's the correct order.

 

[Wander]

Not big tournaments (slams, WTF, O, masters). Small tournaments- Mickley Mouse.

Ah, of course, the famous Disney villain tournaments.

 

[Razer]

Good reply from Medvedev.

Nothing beats a Grand Slam, winning it is the ultimate achievement for a Tennis player MALE since it is best of 5.

 

[itrium84]

Historically the significance among the players and sport has always been the following

Slams > Weeks at number one > year ending number one > YEC > everything else

No, it wasn't, even if you consider OE only.
Significance of weeks no1 is relatively new tennis factor that started rising in few decades ago (80s).
YEn1 was highest achievement among ATGs for a long time, untill 70s/80s.
YEC became very important (in all it's modalities) very early in it's infancy.
Slam count became more important than no1 time by the ending of 80s and really catched on during 90s.

This hierarchy of achievements you propose is relatively new concept, just few decades old.

 

[Razer]

I am NOT devaluing the year ending number one, I value it VERY much, it is massive, but history remembers slam winners above all, that is it.

Federer was considered GOAT over Sampras back after Wimbledon 09 despite only having four YE1 at the time, he still never even equalled him, but no one was putting Sampras over Federer anymore.

I checked ATP list, it shows that 74, 77, 82 were the years when the year end 1 did not win even 1 slam. 2 times for connors and 1 time for McEnroe, otherwise every year end 1 has won a slam, in the last 40 years nobody have ended 1 without winning at least 1 slam.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Difference between a slam and an atp final is that Djokovic will not have an easy draw to the final.

The only player who plays effortless tennis on Turin's super-fast conditions is Djokovic, so his draw is pretty immaterial. He may even win it all without dropping a set. Like Boris said last week, "this is the fastest surface by far remaining on the tour. This is like carpet was for us back in the day. Djokovic has proven he can play on glass if necessary, he has the best chance to retain his title here. Fast, slow, medium, he can play on them all. Super fast conditions help him and perhaps Zverev if he serves very well."

It's hard to argue with Becker.

Rune and Sinner may take a set off him, but who else?

 

[CoolCoolCool]

There's nothing to agree or disagree with, Tsitsipas' stance is just idiotic.

 

[GoatNo1]

I would put weeks and YE1 in the same item since they are the same thing, but yeah, that's the correct order.

so, can you 2 name a single media that hasn't called muzza the best player of 2016? anyone who has disputed that he was the best? anyone who thought nole was the best? nole had 2 slams to muzza's 1. both had 3 slams finals. nole had much better h2h. he won finals in AO, RG and madrid while muzza won finals in rome and WTF. nole was no1 almost all year except for single digit weeks at the end when muzza took over. apart from slams muzza won OG, WTF, 3 masters and 3 MM titles while nole won 4 masters and 1 MM title. so what decided who was the best in everyone's eyes that year was YE#1 and if nole finished as YE#1 then (if not) everyone (then at least most) would have seen him as the best player of the season even if everything else was exactly the same.

and as i said before, it is no1 that decides who is the best (apart from such asterisked covid and politically affected rankings) and YE#1 decides who was the best player of the season. and it is always a very big deal in all sports, both team and individual!

 

[Aestheticsaboveallelse]

Well unlike a slam you do have to go thru elite competition every match in atp finals

 

[leodevlin]

BO5 and 2000 points , enough said!

 

[CoolCoolCool]

Well unlike a slam you do have to go thru elite competition every match in atp finals

A BO3 tournament in which you play only 5 matches and can afford to lose vs a BO5, fully knock-out tournament in which you have to win 7 consecutive matches. Not even comparable.