Does Nadal deserve the YE#1?

[D.Nalby12]

I don't think so. Uso draw was the weakest we have seen in decades. Add to that Federer' unfortunate injury and bad scheduling choices. He got pretty lucky. Not first time of course. But he was clearly best player when he finished #1 before (that is 2008/10/13). This year he has lost all four matches to #2 including Slam final. So he is more like just Paper #1 than anything more.

 

[D.Nalby12]

I don't think so. Uso draw was the weakest we have seen in decades. Add to that Federer' unfortunate injury and bad scheduling choices. He got pretty lucky. Not first time of course. But he was clearly best player when he finished #1 before (that is 2008/10/13). This year he has lost all four matches to #2 including Slam final.

 

[Phoenix1983]

Should Federer win the WTF, he shall be the true #1 of 2017.

Agreed upon by all objective tennis observers.

 

[mike danny]

It's funny seeing Naddal fans use consistency in their arguments now when they used to completely disregard it when Federer was on top in that category.

 

[Krish872007]

OP - as a Nadal fan, this thread is not doing you any favours.

 

[Federev]

LOL at this whole thread, Federer and Nadal fans going at it full throttle.

Time for Djokovic to return and set the record straight for both of them.

Hitman is Novak your fave?

 

[73west]

Sad I have to ask such a question, but it is reality. Sorry, but 6 titles, 0-4 head to head against main rival, losing on a consistent basis to the likes of Querrey and Goffin-it just looks too bad. I started to watch tennis in 2008, and this is the first time I think a year end world number one is undeserved. In 2008, 2010, 2013 Nadal was the best player in the world, no question about that-Federer and Djokovic fans can complain as much as they want, it doesn't change. In 2016 Djokovic was the best player of the year, and yet Murray gave it all in the end and really fought to take it. However, in 2017 the best player (and it's not even close) is Federer. He dominates the tour and has just 4 loses, just 2 in important tournaments. Nadal had a good clay season, but on other surfaces he only played a good USO. Federer fans can say as much as they want that it is peak Nadal and Federer is a hero that he is beating him. But it's not true. Nadal's season can be called good only compared to 2015-2016. Compared to his prime it is a terrible season. And that loss to Goffin didn't surprise at all. I just feel like even he understands his world number one spot does not look good with the way he plays. What do you think?

Yes, he deserves #1. The rules are fair, nothing controversial happened and he earned #1.

It's not a strong resume for #1. It's at least the weakest since 2012 Djokovic or 2009 Federer. IOW, it's not unheard of for a #1, but it's not one of the better years a #1 has had recently.

But I think "earned & deserves #1" is a different discussion than whether he was the best player on tour this year. That's where I think as of right now, I and many fans would say Federer has probably been better this year, and if Federer wins the WTF it's almost indisputable.

What I think is interesting is how the shape of the season affects the narrative.
What we got was
Fed jumped out to a lead in the spring HC season
Fed sat out clay while Nadal dominated, giving Nadal a healthy lead
Fed spent the grass court and fall HC season chasing Nadal and coming up just short

What if clay came first? What if Fed sat out a spring clay season claiming he wasn't ready, then spent 8 months chipping away consistently? Would people "forgive" the late start?
What if clay came last? What if Fed raced out to a healthy lead for #1, but then had to skip the last 2-3 months of the season and watched Nadal slowly chip away at it while he as off the tour? How would people view that #1 chase?

 

[thrust]

Lol, like Goffin, Dimitrov and Thiem are playing like real top-8 players. What a joke of a comment. Nadal can't win it because it is played indoors.

On an indoor Hard Court. IMO, Nadal's WTF failures are mostly due to the time of year, not the indoor hard court. By year's end, Nadal is usually either physically hurt or exhausted which is why he probably will never win the WTF,

 

[thrust]

Lol, like Goffin, Dimitrov and Thiem are playing like real top-8 players. What a joke of a comment. Nadal can't win it because it is played indoors.

On an indoor Hard Court. IMO, Nadal's WTF failures are mostly due to the time of year, not the indoor hard court. By year's end, Nadal is usually either physically hurt or exhausted which is why

Fed's being kind.

No doubt Federer is the Player of the Year, even though Nadal won more ranking points by playing more tournaments.

 

[octobrina10]

On an indoor Hard Court. IMO, Nadal's WTF failures are mostly due to the time of year, not the indoor hard court. By year's end, Nadal is usually either physically hurt or exhausted which is why

No doubt Federer is the Player of the Year, even though Nadal won more ranking points by playing more tournaments.

It doesn't matter in the real world (pro tennis circuit) who is Fedfans' "Player of the Year" on TTW.

 

[PMChambers]

Nadal YE1 ~ hard to argue that
POY ~ Nadal based mainly on Majors. Federer 0pt FO and QF at AO don't look great. Fed gets Masters but not by a lot. WTF isn't enough. Needed RU at USO or QF at FO. Something. Playing better at 1 Major, scraping in by smallest margins at 1 Major then signifigantly worse at 1 Major and worse at another ain't making it obvious Point Issue. It's a bit last man standing but wars over after USO.

Federer is most dangerous player year, except clay there's no doubt Federer is potentially more dangerous when healthy. But got to bring it more.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Hitman is Novak your fave?

Yes. The Earth's Mightiest Warrior.

 

[ChaelAZ]

Yes. Fully deserved.
Based on the rules of math and how the tour has been setup for years, he is number one.
No matter what moral, subjective victory anyone wants to try and claim for anyone else.

 

[buscemi]

I only see a case for possibly disrupting the rankings if the player who didn't finish #1 performed better at the Majors. Djokovic vs. Murray in 2016. Becker vs. Lendl in 1989. Connors vs. McEnroe in 1982. Borg vs. Connors in 1978. Vilas vs. Connors in 1977. Newcombe vs. Nastase in 1973. I'm not saying that I would disrupt the rankings those years, but I could.

But that's clearly not the case this year. Nadal will finish #1, and he has better results at Majors: F/W/4R/W (5,380 points) vs. W/DNP/W/QF (4,360 points). That's a 1,000+ point lead at the Majors for Nadal. So, sure, Federer will have the H2H, an extra Masters title, and possibly WTF. But Nadal has the points lead and the better performance at Majors. For me, that's case closed.

 

[Spencer Gore]

Nadal is #1 in a poor field. Just as Federer's #1 rankings were mainly during extremely weak periods in the game.

 

[octobrina10]

Should Federer win the WTF, he shall be the true #1 of 2017.

Agreed upon by all objective tennis observers.

It doesn't matter who is Fedfans' (aka "objective" tennis observers) true #1 of 2017, they are just whistling in the wind.

Rafa is the 2017 Year-End ATP World Tour No. 1:

Vamos!

 

[Tennisanity]

Sometimes the best player does not end up being #1.

 

[Tennisgods]

It's been an odd year.

Assuming Fed wins the WTF, it will look like this:

Player one:
Overall titles: 8
Grand Slams: 2
World Tour Finals: 1
Masters 1000: 3
ATP 500: 2

Player two:
Overall titles: 6
Grand slams: 2
World Tour Finals: 0
Masters 1000: 2
ATP 500: 2

H2H: Player one leads Player two 4-0

And yet, player two clinches world number one!!

Sums up the season perfectly.

Roger best player, Rafa collected most points. I've no problem with Nadal being the point based ranking system year end number one.

 

[merlinpinpin]

I only see a case for possibly disrupting the rankings if the player who didn't finish #1 performed better at the Majors. Djokovic vs. Murray in 2016. Becker vs. Lendl in 1989. Connors vs. McEnroe in 1982. Borg vs. Connors in 1978. Vilas vs. Connors in 1977. Newcombe vs. Nastase in 1973. I'm not saying that I would disrupt the rankings those years, but I could.

But that's clearly not the case this year. Nadal will finish #1, and he has better results at Majors: F/W/4R/W (5,380 points) vs. W/DNP/W/QF (4,360 points). That's a 1,000+ point lead at the Majors for Nadal. So, sure, Federer will have the H2H, an extra Masters title, and possibly WTF. But Nadal has the points lead and the better performance at Majors. For me, that's case closed.

When you write *majors*, I suspect you mean *slams*, which is quite different. Because the last major of the year is currently underway, and Nadal's total won't change. Federer's still could, mind you.

 

[buscemi]

When you write *majors*, I suspect you mean *slams*, which is quite different. Because the last major of the year is currently underway, and Nadal's total won't change. Federer's still could, mind you.

There are four Majors: the Australian Open, the French Open, Wimbledon, and the U.S. Open. Given that winning all four is called the Grand Slam, sometimes people refer to these four tournaments as the four Slams. I'm fine with either nomenclature, but WTF is neither a Major nor a Slam.

 

[Johnnypeacock]

Oh and lol at you saying nadal did it in a harder field when he has just become no 1 and got 2slams in one of the weakest fields of all time and now that he has around 10 weak slams by your own definition. We know nadal wouldn’t get extra slams in an era even if he had to face ferrer in all 4 slam finals and in every single round because 2017 is the proof. He can’t even get 4 slam finals in this era he isn’t winning more in any era lol

lol at you pointing out weird obscure things like an Olympic gold as to why nadal is better despite 20 less titles, less slams etc but similtanelusly saying nadal has to be best player of 2017 years as he has most points (you don’t say most titles as you can’t even though you want to as fed has more titles) by your own logic Fed is better player no questions asked by being more successful.

If I've got a choice between your analysis and Andre Agassi, I'm going to trust Agassis judgment and he clearly stated who is GOAT. One day it may be Djokovic. Seems a two horse race between Djokovic and Nadal as Agassi will be sharing the views of many others, Graf amongst them one assumes.

 

[TMF]

It doesn't matter in who is Fedfans' (aka "objective" tennis observers) true #1 of 2017, they are just whistling in the wind.

Rafa is the 2017 Year-End ATP World Tour No. 1:

Nadal is the YE #1, but Federer is the best player in 2017. The stats don't lie.


Winning percentage
Federer 50-4(93%)
Nadal 67-11(86%)

Single titles
Federer 7(8 if he wins the WTF)
Nadal 6

Record against top 10
Federer 12-1(92%)
Nadal 11-6(65%)

H2H
Federer 4
Nadal 0

 

[RF-18]

Thats how the ranking works. Nadal gained the most points out of anybody.

Questionable is if he has been the BEST, and I'm not ready to give him that title. He deserves the ye#1 title though. He has played the whole season while fed skipped the entire clay season.

I think Federer has been the best player this season especially if he also wins the WTFs. But that is another discussion.

 

[TennisLBC]

@TMF Nadal played 24 more matches that Federer. And we don't know what Federer record would be if he played the Clay Court season.

And let's not play the H2H game, because it does not favor Federer in the long run.

Nadal is world number 1 now; why try to make it less than it is?

 

[RF-18]

Also you cannot say Federer deserves YE#1. It doesnt sound right to me. If he had played the clay season then it is a safe bet he'd take the ye#1, and therefore would deserve it. But he didn't. And in regards to how the ranking works thus he does not deserve the title. Nadal does. You cannot change how the atp ranking works.

 

[TMF]

@TMF Nadal played 24 more matches that Federer. And we don't know what Federer record would be if he played the Clay Court season.

And let's not play the H2H game, because it does not favor Federer in the long run.

Nadal is world number 1 now; why try to make it less than it is?

Federer played less matches, but he has more titles. Why would that goes against him?

Frankly, I really don't care about the H2H, but why not use this argument against Nadal since the VB have been clinging on it for many years. Also, even if the H2H is important, it's a valid tie-breaker argument for this year because both players are VERY close in achievements. In contrast to the past, Nadal had the better H2H but Federer achieved way more(i.e 3 slam titles to 1).

I've already said Nadal is the YE #1, but one can argue Federer is the best player when taking into context, especially if he wins the WTF.

 

[peakin11mugs]

If I've got a choice between your analysis and Andre Agassi, I'm going to trust Agassis judgment and he clearly stated who is GOAT. One day it may be Djokovic. Seems a two horse race between Djokovic and Nadal as Agassi will be sharing the views of many others, Graf amongst them one assumes.

LMAO he didn’t say nadal was GOAT thats hilarious. Take you’re blinkers off. By all your own silly contradictary arguments for nadal it actually puts Djokovic ahead of nadal even with less slams

Nadal is not a top 10 titles at AO, WIMB, US, WTF, ALL masters bar 3. And indoors he isn’t just relatively poor he is actually just poor full stop. Even Murray hasn’t got such a glaring weakness. A guy who is top 1 on one slam and three associated masters and not even top 10 in remaining slams, WTF and masters is in absolutely in no way ever a tennis GOAT. All his claims are on one surface so make GOAT claims on that surface. Tennis as a whole forget it. And remember nadal is actually rubbish indoors. Not just relatively bad he is bad. Non of his peers are that bad on one surface. It’s like saying fed is GOAT aid he had 8 Wimbledon’s and basically was not even top 10 any other tournament

 

[TennisLBC]

Federer played less matches, but he has more titles. Why would that goes against him?

Frankly, I really don't care about the H2H, but why not use this argument against Nadal since the VB have been clinging on it for many years. Also, even if the H2H is important, it's a valid tie-breaker argument for this year because both players are VERY close in achievements. In contrast to the past, Nadal had the better H2H but Federer achieved way more(i.e 3 slam titles to 1).

I've already said Nadal is the YE #1, but one can argue Federer is the best player when taking into context, especially if he wins the WTF.

Federer may have had a better season, but he didn't play a full season. That has be to knowledge.
I don't fault Fed for picking his spots; he has that right. But Gandhi's quote at about Christ and Christians comes to mind when talking Federer and some of his fans.

 

[merlinpinpin]

There are four Majors: the Australian Open, the French Open, Wimbledon, and the U.S. Open. Given that winning all four is called the Grand Slam, sometimes people refer to these four tournaments as the four Slams. I'm fine with either nomenclature, but WTF is neither a Major nor a Slam.

It's not a slam, but it's definitely a major, though (it's about the only way you can reasonably 'count' the Pro Slams when counting the achievements of the pros of old, as their format was much closer to the Masters than to a slam--and 'punishing' them for not playing the amateur slams would be akin to heresy). Interestingly enough, some tournaments now recognize this 'officially', so it's not just a fad of mine (the last time Federer played at RG, the speaker announced him as 'winner of 23 major tournaments', for example).

By this count, Laver's got 19 majors counting his pro and amateur slams, just like Sampras counting his slams and Masters. Lendl has 16, etc. Federer currently has 25, Nadal 17 (I also count the Olympics as a major, although that is debatable), and Djokovic 17 also. Slam totals are different, of course.

To sum it up, slams are the four tournaments of the Grand Slam, while majors are the biggest tournaments at the time (which means the Pro Slams (+ amateur slams, depending how you're counting) when the Tour was split, the slams + Masters at the moment, and several other tournaments along the way--such as Dallas WCT finals (of which Lendl got two, hence his total), although AO could also be demoted when it wasn't worth squat in the 70's).

 

[Slightly D1]

I mean its pretty simple that he deserves to be the YE #1 since he accumulated the most points this year... I am not sure what there is to debate about that.

 

[merlinpinpin]

I've already said Nadal is the YE #1, but one can argue Federer is the best player when taking into context, especially if he wins the WTF.

There is no argument, actually. Nadal *is* rightfully YE #1, as he accumulated the most points according to ATP rules. And Federer *is* the best player of the year, both assertions are totally compatible.

 

[cknobman]

Rafa is #1 because he has the most points this year.

Federer gave up #1 when he skipped the French Open.

Statistically Federer had a better year.

 

[merlinpinpin]

The question you need to ask to find you who had the better year is actually quite obvious: if you got to choose, which year would you rather have? Nadal's or Federer's?

I'd be very surprised if any professional player (or anyone with a basic knowledge of tennis and at least half a brain, actually) chose Nadal's...

 

[BHud]

There is no "deserve" young padawan, only "earned"...

 

[TMF]

The question you need to ask to find you who had the better year is actually quite obvious: if you got to choose, which year would you rather have? Nadal's or Federer's?

I'd be very surprised if any professional player (or anyone with a basic knowledge of tennis and at least half a brain, actually) chose Nadal's...

Whether Federer wins the WTF or not, a likely thread plus a poll will be created at the end of the season.

 

[merlinpinpin]

Whether Federer wins the WTF or not, a likely thread plus a poll will be created at the end of the season.

Forget the poll, if Federer wins the Masters, it's not even close.

- Won the biggest tournament of the year
- Won another one of the slams
- Won the 6th and 7th biggest tournaments of the year back-to-back
- Won the most tournaments this year
- Undefeated vs top 10 players except for the Montreal final where he injured his back

If he adds "Won the 5th biggest tournament of the year", he'll have won *five* out of the biggest seven tournaments of the year, including the biggest of all (and even if he doesn't, he'll have won four). Add to that his other achievements this year, and no-one in their right mind turns down that kind of year.

 

[Neurosis]

As a Fed fan, I'd say, yes.

 

[Zetty]

Federer dominated but only in waves, he skipped the entire clay season and hardly did anything in the NA HC season which is the part of the year he usually enjoys. Nadal played more and went far at a lot of events, including outside of clay. On hard courts he got a Slam, a Slam final, two Masters finals and a minor trophy and final. Combined with his usual bossing of the clay season, it's been an excellent 2017 for Rafa. We can talk about those evaporated draws all day long, and that USO draw of his will forever be legendary, but he deserved the YE #1.

He enjoys every part of the year except the one where there's this red substance.

 

[Gary Duane]

Rafa is #1 because he has the most points this year.

Federer gave up #1 when he skipped the French Open.

Statistically Federer had a better year.

Nadal has had a better year for points, and on that basis he earned his ranking. But in the future this year not be looked upon as clearly Nadal's year.

 

[Towser83]

Thats how the ranking works. Nadal gained the most points out of anybody.

Questionable is if he has been the BEST, and I'm not ready to give him that title. He deserves the ye#1 title though. He has played the whole season while fed skipped the entire clay season.

I think Federer has been the best player this season especially if he also wins the WTFs. But that is another discussion.

Basically this sums up the arguments and gives a reasonable answer