Djokovic is basically guaranteed to end 2020 as #1

Cortana

Hall of Fame
Who cares, this is like 100 times less important than the slam record.
Says who? For Djokovic it's equally important. I guess a 17 slam winner has a better idea of what starts are important in tennis than a random forum guy?
 

NADALalot

Hall of Fame
Too bad he's crap at slams.
Still languishing down there at 17....
So Nadal has won 2 more slams than Djokovic, and he's also won more French Opens and more US Opens....
 

USO

Banned
Says who? For Djokovic it's equally important. I guess a 17 slam winner has a better idea of what starts are important in tennis than a random forum guy?
Yeah it’s important now because all of a sudden he’s very close. :-D Notice how he also said “and win as many slams as possible” instead of “get the slam record”. It’s because he knows that it’s going to be very hard to win 4 more to get #21 ahead of Federer, and also with Nadal ahead and with the FO coming up. So he’s trying to overhype the weeks at no.1 now because it’s almost garanteed, but everyone knows that for all of his career the goal was always the slam record. :laughing:
 

Sephiroth

Hall of Fame
Never thought I'd see Fed's weeks at #1 being threatened to this nature that record felt even more safer than slams record.

Fed missed a trick somewhere here, Nadal gained LOADS of weeks at #1 before Djokovic's return and Fed and Nadal were both winning the same number of slams across 17-18 and Masters (? can't remember)

Fed only gained 8 weeks

 

TheAssassin

Legend
Never thought I'd see Fed's weeks at #1 being threatened to this nature that record felt even more safer than slams record.

Fed missed a trick somewhere here, Nadal gained LOADS of weeks at #1 before Djokovic's return and Fed and Nadal were both winning the same number of slams across 17-18 and Masters (? can't remember)

Fed only gained 8 weeks

Nadal was a more consistent player in those years while Federer also skipped clay. He also missed out on at least another couple of months at number 1 just by losing to Del Potro in Indian Wells.
 

Sephiroth

Hall of Fame
Nadal was a more consistent player in those years while Federer also skipped clay. He also missed out on at least another couple of months at number 1 just by losing to Del Potro in Indian Wells.
I was shocked he only got 6 weeks after winning AO 18...that's months before RG 18 thought he'd keep it until May 18 at least
 

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
Yeah, because of the ATP protecting his points from 2019, he's basically a lock to end 2020 as #1, even if he loses in the first round at RG and Thiem wins the whole thing. Thiem would then be #2 at best--maybe even #3--with win-win-final that he wasn't far from winning at the only three slams contested this year, which would be hilarious (in a very bad way, of course).

But hey, the most important thing is to make the record chase thrilling, isn't? Who cares about anyone winning and being #1 if they're not part of the 'Big 3'? :rolleyes:
 
Yeah, because of the ATP protecting his points from 2019, he's basically a lock to end 2020 as #1, even if he loses in the first round at RG and Thiem wins the whole thing. Thiem would then be #2 at best--maybe even #3--with win-win-final that he wasn't far from winning at the only three slams contested this year, which would be hilarious (in a very bad way, of course).

But hey, the most important thing is to make the record chase thrilling, isn't? Who cares about anyone winning and being #1 if they're not part of the 'Big 3'? :rolleyes:
I heard Djokovic fights for the lower ranked players.

Just maybe not when his own interests are in question.

If Thiem is in the final of RG and Djokovic is not there, or if Thiem wins RG by beating Djokovic, Thiem would have made all Majors finals this year, and depending on the scenarios would have won one or two of them, and still won't be able to overtake Djokovic thanks to "the system".

:cool:
 

Tennisfan339

Semi-Pro
With this new system, shouldn't Djokovic skip Bercy and play Vienna, for instance? If he needs 1 indoors tournament before the WTF, maybe it'd be smarter. Bercy will bring him 0 pt even if he wins the title, and the best players will be there. Playing Vienna is practically 500 easy points in the pocket.

But yeah, with these 400 points in Roma he is almost certain to end the year 1. If he wants to beat Federer's record (310) nothing is certain though. He has 650 points to defend at the ATP cup and 2000 for the AO. If he ends the year with less than 1000 pts more than Nadal or Thiem, he will be practically obligated to win the AO if he wants to stay #1 until the double sunshine in March.... Every point will count
 

beard

Legend
With this new system, shouldn't Djokovic skip Bercy and play Vienna, for instance? If he needs 1 indoors tournament before the WTF, maybe it'd be smarter. Bercy will bring him 0 pt even if he wins the title, and the best players will be there. Playing Vienna is practically 500 easy points in the pocket.

But yeah, with these 400 points in Roma he is almost certain to end the year 1. If he wants to beat Federer's record (310) nothing is certain though. He has 650 points to defend at the ATP cup and 2000 for the AO. If he ends the year with less than 1000 pts more than Nadal or Thiem, he will be practically obligated to win the AO if he wants to stay #1 until the double sunshine in March.... Every point will count
Yes, he will have to be good at AO to be sure for record in March, but if he fails Rafa or Thiem would must win themselves, which could not happen too... Anyway, there is double sunshine to gain massive amount of points... Practically Novak should have middle 2016 like drop to lose one.
 

TripleATeam

G.O.A.T.
Yeah, because of the ATP protecting his points from 2019, he's basically a lock to end 2020 as #1, even if he loses in the first round at RG and Thiem wins the whole thing. Thiem would then be #2 at best--maybe even #3--with win-win-final that he wasn't far from winning at the only three slams contested this year, which would be hilarious (in a very bad way, of course).

But hey, the most important thing is to make the record chase thrilling, isn't? Who cares about anyone winning and being #1 if they're not part of the 'Big 3'? :rolleyes:
But Djokovic would have won both of the Masters played this year so far and the AO. Thiem would have won 2 slams. Djokovic is also the only person to have had a 25+ match win streak this year so saying his YE#1 is undeserved is disingenuous at best and outright lying at the worst.

Moreover, Djokovic didn't win any weeks from the COVID break. You want to claim the ATP is biased in his favor when they could have easily gone the other way? No system was going to be perfect. This system benefited anyone who went far at ATP events, which is mostly already high-ranked players. Lower-ranked players have less mobility due to the current system, #200 can't be #100 as easily and #3 can't be #1 as easily.
 

Mike Sams

G.O.A.T.
Who cares? The weeks at #1 record will be broken again some years down the line when a new player emerges and dominates a weak field.
 
But Djokovic would have won both of the Masters played this year so far and the AO. Thiem would have won 2 slams. Djokovic is also the only person to have had a 25+ match win streak this year so saying his YE#1 is undeserved is disingenuous at best and outright lying at the worst.

Moreover, Djokovic didn't win any weeks from the COVID break. You want to claim the ATP is biased in his favor when they could have easily gone the other way? No system was going to be perfect. This system benefited anyone who went far at ATP events, which is mostly already high-ranked players. Lower-ranked players have less mobility due to the current system, #200 can't be #100 as easily and #3 can't be #1 as easily.
Bolded: so now 2 M1000 and a Major are better than 2 Majors and a Major final?

Your "streak" argument is already counted in his tournament wins, so you are double counting.

Stating that "no system is perfect" is a blanket statement to cover for who benefits the most, which is entirely based on previous year's results, and that is hindsight on which the things are already predetermined (that Djokovic stands to benefit the most).

:cool:
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
2020 is a short season due to COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns. Tennis in the "bubble" with no spectators and depleted field is never the same.

It doesn't make any sense to hand out the YE #1 at the end of this year.
 

Cortana

Hall of Fame
2020 is a short season due to COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns. Tennis in the "bubble" with no spectators and depleted field is never the same.

It doesn't make any sense to hand out the YE #1 at the end of this year.
Why? We missed only 1 slam?
 
Bolded: so now 2 M1000 and a Major are better than 2 Majors and a Major final?

Your "streak" argument is already counted in his tournament wins, so you are double counting.

Stating that "no system is perfect" is a blanket statement to cover for who benefits the most, which is entirely based on previous year's results, and that is hindsight on which the things are already predetermined (that Djokovic stands to benefit the most).

:cool:
Djokovic won 2 slams and an additional final + 4 masters in 2016, who was the YE#1 that year?

You wouldn't have complained that time you troll :-D
 

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
Djokovic won 2 slams and an additional final + 4 masters in 2016, who was the YE#1 that year?

You wouldn't have complained that time you troll :-D
Dunno--did Murray end up #1 in 2016 mainly because of the points he scored in 2015? My memory is a bit hazy on that score. Could you please help me remember? :unsure:
 
Dunno--did Murray end up #1 in 2016 mainly because of the points he scored in 2015? My memory is a bit hazy on that score. Could you please help me remember? :unsure:
It was a culmination of 2 things

1) Murray having a poor 2nd half in 2015. Djokovic having almost an impeccable 2nd half in 2015
2) Djokovic going off the rails post French Open, and Murray going on a rampage in the second half of 2016

Djokovic couldn't defend his large volume of previous year points added to Murray having a near flawless second half sealed the deal
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Why? We missed only 1 slam?
COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns started way back in March. A lot of tournaments were canceled besides the big fat Wimbledon. Even when the tour re-open, many players opt out not to play in fear of the disease.

No way 2020 season is equal to any of the previous years.
 

TripleATeam

G.O.A.T.
Bolded: so now 2 M1000 and a Major are better than 2 Majors and a Major final?

Your "streak" argument is already counted in his tournament wins, so you are double counting.

Stating that "no system is perfect" is a blanket statement to cover for who benefits the most, which is entirely based on previous year's results, and that is hindsight on which the things are already predetermined (that Djokovic stands to benefit the most).

:cool:
Not saying that. I'm saying they're close. Would you have rather crowned a #1 based off half a year of results? We don't know who would have won Wimbledon last year or would have won the USO had Nadal decided to play. It's best to count the results from the previous year so we get some inkling as to who could have won Wimbledon, and don't punish players for deciding to withdraw for their health.

Imagine if we didn't have the 2nd half of this year. Your argument would be "Djokovic won AO and ATP Cup, so he deserves a full YE#1". This would be untrue, that's not a year of accomplishments. At least with the current system we're counting over 12 months worth of accomplishments.
 

Zebrev

Hall of Fame
Until he reaches 21 slams Novaks claim to GOAThood will forever be a tenuous one.

"But, he has the most masters 1000's titles" won't mean anything in 50 years, sorry.
 

ZYW

Rookie
It's a great achievement for Novak. Apart from slam record, I really want him to pass Fed's 308 weeks and 5 YE No.1.

Obviously, some Fed fans are in panic mode.
 
It was a culmination of 2 things

1) Murray having a poor 2nd half in 2015. Djokovic having almost an impeccable 2nd half in 2015
2) Djokovic going off the rails post French Open, and Murray going on a rampage in the second half of 2016

Djokovic couldn't defend his large volume of previous year points added to Murray having a near flawless second half sealed the deal
But it did come basically to Murray winning three 500 tournaments after RG while Djokovic 0. Novak not participating in anything bellow Masters level after the RG, and Murray playing pretty much everything, was the Novak #YE1 killer that year.
 
Top