Demystifying the 2005/06 season

zakopinjo

Professional
We often hear that 2005 and 2006 was the golden years of tennis and that there was strong competition in tennis then. I decided to convert the points of the players who were 3th at the end of the 2005/06 season and to compare it with the years 2009-2023, when the new scoring system is valid. I counted 19 tournaments, 12 mandatory (slams and 8 masters) and 7 others with the best result, and the 20th tournament for Davydenko (ATP Finals , which Roddick did not play in 2005).

Roddick
2006 3085points

2009-2014 5150 points
2015-2023 5400 points


Davydenko
2006 2825 points

2009-2014 4565 points
2015-2023 4565 points


Let's see where Roddick and Davydenko would be ranked at the end of the year in the seasons 2009-2023 (I did not count covid 2020, but I did include 2021 and 2022 even though there was no Chinese tour and no points from Wimbledon 2022)

Roddick
2009: 6th place
2010: 6th place
2011: 5th place
2012: 6th place
2013: 6th place
2014: 5th place
2015: 5th place
2016: 4th place
2017: 3th place
2018: 5th place
2019: 6th place
2021: 5th place
2022: 7th place
2023: 5th place

Roddick from 2005 would finish 6 times as the 5th tennis player in the world, 5 times as the 6th tennis player in the world. The worst ranking would be in 2022, 7th place, and the best in 2017, 3rd place, where he would also repeat his result from 2005.

Davydenko
2009: 7th place
2010: 6th place
2011: 6th place
2012: 7th place
2013: 6th place
2014: 8th place
2015: 7th place
2016: 6th place
2017: 5th place
2018: 7th place
2019: 7th place
2021: 7th place
2022: 6th place
2023: 6th place

Davydenko would finish in 6th and 7th place 6 times. His worst ranking would be 2014, 8th place, and his best 2017, 5th place.


Conclusion: there is no strong competition, but there is a hole and a lack of 2-3 players filled by Davydenko and Roddick (and other players). The 2005 and 2006 seasons remain as unique years when it was easiest to reach 3 places at the end of the year.

It is also interesting to compare two identical seasons, 2006 and 2015 seasons, when Federer (16,125) and Novak (16,685) scored the two highest points. Davydenko would have been in 7th place in 2015, while in 2006 he was 3rd.
 
Last edited:
No one ever says 2006 was golden. 2006 was mud.

2005 was good because we had more than two competitors - Agassi was still around, Nalbandian was a threat, Safin was good until he got injured. After US Open 2005 things took a turn for the worst. It was clear Agassi wasn't losing it technically - but he was losing stamina. Safin was gone even before Wimbledon 2005 (and I mean gone). Nalbandian was dunking for donuts. Roddick was donut and Hewitt was ok but he was up against players who moved just as well as he did but had waaaay more firepower. Obviously you had Nadal on clay. Nadal on clay doesn't get a pass either - his main competition should have been Coria and gaudio but it ended up being choker Fed

then you had players like haas, pim-pim who could have been contenders but just had bad luck in their careers. A promising young talent called monfils also came along, but decided to be a stage performer and ended up having complex self identity issues on court.
 

jl809

Legend
We often hear that 2005/06 was the golden year of tennis and that there was strong competition in tennis then.

giphy.gif
 

zakopinjo

Professional
Roddick 2005

Australian Open 450/720
San Jose 175/250
Memphis 110/180
Indian Wells 225/360
Miami 5/10
Houston 175/250
Rome 75/90
Hamburg 5/10
Roland Garros 35/45
Queens 225/250/500
Wimbledon 700/1200
Indianapolis 50/45
Washington 200/500
Canadian Open 5/10
Cincinnati 350/600
US Open 5/10
Madrid 5/10
Lyon 225/250
Paris 225/360

Points from Memphis and Indianapolis did not count for Roddick in 2005, but they have since 2009.

3085-5150-5400



Davydenko 2006

Doha
Sydney
Australian Open 250/360
Marseille
Rotterdam 110/180
Dubai
Indian Wells 35/45
Miami 75/90

Valencia
Monte Carlo 5/10
Barcelona
Estoril 140/150
Rome 75/90
Hamburg 125/180
Portschach 175/250
Roland Garros 250/360

Queens
Hertogenbosch
Wimbledon 5/10
Bastad 120/150

Kitzbuhel
Sopot 175/250
Canadian Open 5/10
Cincinnati 5/10
New Haven 200/250
US Open 450/720

Beijing
Moscow 250/250
Madrid 5/10

St.Petersburg
Paris 500/1000
ATP Finals 100/200


Bold tournaments were counted for Davydenko since 2009. In 2006, Rotterdam and Bastad were not counted, but Monte Carlo counted.

2825-4565
 
Last edited:

zakopinjo

Professional
No one ever says 2006 was golden. 2006 was mud.

2005 was good because we had more than two competitors - Agassi was still around, Nalbandian was a threat, Safin was good until he got injured. After US Open 2005 things took a turn for the worst. It was clear Agassi wasn't losing it technically - but he was losing stamina. Safin was gone even before Wimbledon 2005 (and I mean gone). Nalbandian was dunking for donuts. Roddick was donut and Hewitt was ok but he was up against players who moved just as well as he did but had waaaay more firepower. Obviously you had Nadal on clay. Nadal on clay doesn't get a pass either - his main competition should have been Coria and gaudio but it ended up being choker Fed

then you had players like haas, pim-pim who could have been contenders but just had bad luck in their careers. A promising young talent called monfils also came along, but decided to be a stage performer and ended up having complex self identity issues on court.
In 2005, Hewitt had an almost identical year to Novak in 2024.

Hewitt finished 4th and Djokovic 7th.
 
In 2005, Hewitt had an almost identical year to Novak in 2024.

Hewitt finished 4th and Djokovic 7th.

Nah, Hewitt was a non factor on clay. Djokovic had a better season winning the OG. Djokovic's slam results were stronger as well imo.

I'm not saying hewitt in 2005 was good, people never read my posts. I'm saying Hewitt was a filler in 2005. the fillers today are rune and some other nobody
 

zakopinjo

Professional
Nah, Hewitt was a non factor on clay. Djokovic had a better season winning the OG. Djokovic's slam results were stronger as well imo.

I'm not saying hewitt in 2005 was good, people never read my posts. I'm saying Hewitt was a filler in 2005. the fillers today are rune and some other nobody
Of course, I'm just comparing how much the results from 2005 and 2006 were valued in other seasons and today.

Hewitt05 and Novak24 had identical seasons. Hewitt was awarded with 4th position, Novak with 7th.

That's what it's all about, that the competition is simply much stronger, and that everything changes from 2007 until today.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Points are not won in a vaccuum, comparing point totals for players who competed in vastly different conditions against vastly different competition is meaningless. The number 10 player in 2005 (Gaudio) had the same number of points as the number 6 player in 2008 (Tsonga), but that doesn't mean 2005 was a stronger year...

Basically no one calls 2006 a strong year anyway, not even Fedfans.
 
2006 had some criticism, actually, for the top 10 being weaker. 2005 was seen as high standard.

robredo, davydenko, ljubicic and blake all were fighting for top 3-6 spaces, they had won 1 masters title between them and zero slam finals between them. holy ****
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
Roddick is pretty overrated outside of grass.

It's fine. Don't give too much importance to him , he got a slam before fed took over and even became number 1.

Slam + number 1 demands high respect.

Plus on grass he is pretty good player.
 

zakopinjo

Professional
The number 10 player in 2005 (Gaudio) had the same number of points as the number 6 player in 2008 (Tsonga), but that doesn't mean 2005 was a stronger year...
From 2009 to 2023, Gaudio would most often be in 9th place (6 times) and 8th place (4 times).

This first of all shows that the players who are between 3-10 places in 2005/06 are primarily competitors among themselves (that's why the points are so tight between them) and that Federer has no competitors at all on the tour.
 
Roddick is pretty overrated outside of grass.

It's fine. Don't give too much importance to him , he got a slam before fed took over and even became number 1.

Slam + number 1 demands high respect.

Plus on grass he is pretty good player.

see i think roddick is better on hardcourts, i was never convinced by Roddick on grass. Good on HC but if he's the best after Federer that's bad.

Roddick probably was the 2nd best HC player that year and he was MIA for 8 months of the tour. lol
 

metsman

Talk Tennis Guru
but that doesn't mean 2005 was a stronger year...
But clearly it was! Clearly stronger at all majors besides Wimby (where I would still take 05 as it has better players in all slots besides #2). YEC - Djokovic was probably a bit better than Fed or Nalbandian but both years fell off quickly after that. In a B03, 05 Fed may very well have beaten 08 Djokovic. Obviously 2005 kind of fell apart after the USO, but we still got some memorable matches. 2005 clearly better on aggregate at the masters, for whatever that matters, granted it helps to have B05.

2005 has the strongest aggregate winning level at majors in history, no other year can say all 4 majors were won by GOAT level players at the specific events at or near their peaks, and had some decent (to put it lightly) complementary players, so it's going to take a really special year, if any, to topple it. Would probably need to go back to the 80/81 days, even then I'd take 05 at the majors.
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Points are not won in a vaccuum, comparing point totals for players who competed in vastly different conditions against vastly different competition is meaningless. The number 10 player in 2005 (Gaudio) had the same number of points as the number 6 player in 2008 (Tsonga), but that doesn't mean 2005 was a stronger year...

Basically no one calls 2006 a strong year anyway, not even Fedfans.
It’s strong enough for me bc you can stick anyone there and they’d lose
 

RS

Bionic Poster
You have to include 2007 and 2004 which was also part of the strongest era in tennis history. Even 2011 and 2012 weren't as good as 2004-2007. Slow courts and a lack of depth.
 

zakopinjo

Professional
It’s strong enough for me bc you can stick anyone there and they’d lose
2006 probably enters in the narrow circle of the weakest seasons ever. If Blake and Ljubicic are the main rivals in that season, that automatically qualifies her as one of the weakest.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
Blake was a bad matchup for Nadal. Blake had a way of hitting Nadal off court with hard, flat shots, and of disrupting Nadal's rhythm. Blake won their first 3 matches in 2005-2006, winning 7 out of 8 sets played. Nadal won their last 4 matches in 2008-2009, but it was 2-1 in sets all 4 times. That means that Nadal won the head-to-head against Blake 4-3, but Blake won more sets 11-9. All 7 of their matches were on hardcourt, though.
 

Galvermegs

Professional
2006 even had washed up bjorkman in a wimbledon semi. And hewitt definitely fell off by the end of season... Luckily 2007 saw nole and rafa come through (in rafas case he was getting better on other surfaces than clay).
 

zakopinjo

Professional
2006 even had washed up bjorkman in a wimbledon semi.
True, a season full of anomalies.

The best player of the season is owned by a teenager,
Totally average players (without any relevant tennis success in their career) finish in 4th and 5th place,
The weakest number 3 in recent tennis history.
 

Galvermegs

Professional
True, a season full of anomalies.

The best player of the season is owned by a teenager,
Totally average players (without any relevant tennis success in their career) finish in 4th and 5th place,
The weakest number 3 in recent tennis history.
Ljubicic actually had quite a nice game to watch and did well for croatia in davis cup. But like ferrer, no 3 is too high. But he deserves credit for playing smart tennis when on, despite very lacking mobility. I wouldnt mind paying to watch him for a set.
 
Top