Red Rick
Bionic Poster
Massu is definitely the greatest YE#18 ever.Yeh, and so we bow before Goats Massu and Rosset!
Has Federer had best seasons ever by Year End #1, Year End #2, and Year End #1
- Thread starter McEnroeisanartist
- Start date
mike danny
Bionic Poster
No way it's 1995 Agassi, who won just 1 major that year.
kishnabe
Talk Tennis Guru
Federer 2006 due to competition. 2013+ is weak era.
Fedal beating up scrubs 2017. 15-16 Djokray beating up scrubs.
Federer was Djokovic biggest rival in 2015...just lol. Grandpa scored some wins too.
If Djokovic had any completion that Federer had in 2006. Djokovic won't have as good as season he had.
Same with Fedal 2017.
Fedal beating up scrubs 2017. 15-16 Djokray beating up scrubs.
Federer was Djokovic biggest rival in 2015...just lol. Grandpa scored some wins too.
If Djokovic had any completion that Federer had in 2006. Djokovic won't have as good as season he had.
Same with Fedal 2017.
Zetty
Hall of Fame
He won more matches and made the finals of every tournament he entered, hence he was more consistent, like Fed of 2004-2007, how in the blue hell could he be more impressive, so wtf are you goin' on about bro?
Zetty
Hall of Fame
That's a big plus, competition in Master 1000s is greater than competition in 500s.
Druss
Hall of Fame
In 1995 Agassi was clearly the best player despite narrowly losing the YE%1 to Sampras. He won more ATP titles which included 3 Masters and the AO and was unfortunate at RG losing to his pigeon Kafelnikov in the QF due to injury, were his closest rival lost in R1 lol. His season’s win/loss % was far better than anyone else’s at 78-9 (89%), compared to Sampras’ 72-16 (82%).
Going into the USO he was No1 IIRC, the winner between him and Pete would pretty much seal the YE#1. He had a brutal SF match against Becker in which he got injured and surely affected his performance in the final, which I’m sure Sampras was grateful for, otherwise it would have resulted in another beat down like their AO final earlier in the year. That loss shattered him and was part reason of his downfall in ‘96
He also missed the WTF because of injury...all he needed was to win 1 measly RR match and be guaranteed YE%1.....it can’t get any closer than that.
Reasons why AA 1995 should be considered:
- best win/loss %
- 7 titles
- 3 Masters
- consistency at slams W/QF/SF/F
- dominated the field
- clearly the best player of the year
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Good dull(t)ard impression there from you. AO suited Agassi more than USO (and suited Sampras less), yet Sampras nearly clutched his way to a two sets to one lead - Agassi had to come up with a perfect return winner off Pete's 1st serve to avoid that.
Now that's truly sad. Well, we knew Mugpras had YE#1 giftwrapped in '96 and '98, now it turns out '95 was a gift too, what else shall we learn about Fraudpras in the future?
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Nothing like 2011 or 15, but in 2013 he had a solid season, much better than his recent form unfortunately. He snapped Nadal's Monte-Carlo streak (a feat that seems to be forgotten by tennis fans unfortunately) and then finished the season on a tear, straight-setting the No. 1 at the World Championship finals.Djokovic fan admits Djokovic was good in 2013? Wow, first time I see that.
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
His 2006 is inferior to Novak's 2015, his 2017 is inferior to Novak's 2016 if he doesn't win WTF and his 2015 is inferior to Murray's 2012. Still the GOAT though.
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Federer's 2006 form-wise was superior to Djokovic's 2015, but inferior to 2011. Stat-wise Djokovic did better in 2015 but his form was nothing compared to 2011. Djokovic's 2015 is more comparable to Federer's 2009, where the player was in the late stages of his prime but not yet in decline (where he is the most established and imposing), and is expected to win whatever he enters.
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
‘06 v. ‘15... wow, what’s your argument? Pretty much a slam dunk for 2006. You have an ace up your sleeve or something?
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
Record number of Masters, top 10 wins, winning titles on every surface, no losing record to any of the rivals, no early losses. Feel free to rate 2006 higher but either way there is no slam dunk.
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
Federer 92-5 v. 82-6 Djoker. 10 more wins.
Four of Fed's losses were to Nadal (three of which were on clay), with one to Murray. Djoker took L's to Karlovic, Stan, Murray, and... guess who else? If you guessed 34-year-old Federer, you'd be right. Game, set, and match.
But there's more. One of the aforementioned losses to Fed actually came in the YEC, in straight sets. Fed was the undefeated YEC champion in '06.
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
I don't know what’s with all the obsession with all match wins. He played 9 more matches and Mickey Mouse events and got those additional 10 match wins, big deal. Look at how often both played and won against top 10 guys and if anything it will make you appreciate more the insane consistency Djokovic needed to display and did so to even get to his 82.
One of the losses coming in his ground Dubai against teen Nadal who I thought was always a clay one trick pony. And losing at the Real Slam to little Andy isn't really great either. Losing occasionally but still winning more often than not against older Fed mostly in some of his favorite places doesn't sound that bad now does it. I'd take a 5-3 over 2-4 against the main rival if the most important achievements are similar.
Thank Andy Virus for Fed winning YEC undefeated in 2006.
While his run without a loss is a plus, I'd say the extra two Masters beats that nicely. Again, I am not saying you have to change your vote at all, I am award that 2006 will always have a case, but the truth is when we analyze so deeply, both have some tiny little flaws so neither one is comfortably ahead. I mean these are easily the top 2 seasons we had in nearly half a century damn it.
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
Yes, it's a bit of hair-splitting at this level of greatness, but it goes with the territory. 10 more match wins is not insignificant. Especially when you consider that Fed was by and large facing young stallions. For all of Djoker's wins over "top" players, the field was fairly decimated in '15, with the upper echelon populated by broken-downs and has-beens. Say what you will about the competition, but recency bias for more "famous" names doesn't make it tougher.I don't know what’s with all the obsession with all match wins. He played 9 more matches and Mickey Mouse events and got those additional 10 match wins, big deal. Look at how often both played and won against top 10 guys and if anything it will make you appreciate more the insane consistency Djokovic needed to display and did so to even get to his 82.
One of the losses coming in his ground Dubai against teen Nadal who I thought was always a clay one trick pony. And losing at the Real Slam to little Andy isn't really great either. Losing occasionally but still winning more often than not against older Fed mostly in some of his favorite places doesn't sound that bad now does it. I'd take a 5-3 over 2-4 against the main rival if the most important achievements are similar.
Thank Andy Virus for Fed winning YEC undefeated in 2006.
Again, I am not saying you have to change your vote at all, but the truth is when we analyze so deeply, both have some tiny little flaws so neither one is comfortably ahead. I mean these are easily the top 2 seasons we had in nearly half a century damn it.
In a dedicated thread to the topic, someone posted the matches for both in their respective majors from like the QF-onward. Failed to include the early rounders. Some pretty random dreck in there.
If we even needed to go to tiebreakers, Fed lost the RG final to claybeastforever, Nadal (who didn't?). Djoker was upended by Wawrinka...
P.S. The little DC straight-setting of Djoker by Fed is a nice footnote.
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
Young stallion doesn't necessarily mean great competitor. Back then Nadal was great but nobody else besides him. Now it's even worse, no insane youngster on the horizon. Just like a grandpa doesn't necessarily mean bad competitor. Some are retired already while others still compete well like a certain GOAT.Yes, it's a bit of hair-splitting at this level of greatness, but it goes with the territory. 10 more match wins is not insignificant. Especially when you consider that Fed was by and large facing young stallions. For all of Djoker's wins over "top" players, the field was fairly decimated in '15, with the upper echelon populated by broken-downs and has-beens. Say what you will about the competition, but recency bias for more "famous" names doesn't make it tougher.
In a dedicated thread to the topic, someone posted the matches for both in their respective majors from like the QF-onward. Failed to include the early rounders. Some pretty random dreck in there.
If we even needed to go to tiebreakers, Fed lost the RG final to claybeastforever, Nadal (who didn't?). Djoker was upended by Wawrinka...
P.S. The little DC straight-setting of Djoker by Fed is a nice footnote.
Though it helps that his usual standards are higher than any other. Fair enough about the rest I guess...Ps: Not as nice as Novak's wins over Fed in most big 2015 finals.
 Don't kill me, just fooling around.
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
Fiero425
Legend
Funny, I had never heard of this guy until I saw him as an Olympic Gold winner! Same happened to the ladies this past comp. with Puig winning in '16!
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Connors in 1982 would have a pretty good case for best YE #2. Won Wimbledon (beating McEnroe in the final) and the U.S. Open (beating Lendl in the final). Won a total of 7 titles on the year (including beating McEnroe in the Queen's Club final) and finished with a 78-10 record.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
I'd take Mac's 1984 over his 1979 any day of the week and the month.
Fiero425
Legend
Memories! Those were my prime tennis years; '75-85! We saw history being made w/ Navratilova & Borg; honorable mentions to Evert, Connors, & McEnroe!
No doubt that Mac's 1984 is one of the best YE #1 seasons ever and better than his 1979 season. But I'm saying that his 1979 season, where he finished YE #3, is one of the best YE #3 seasons ever.
Fiero425
Legend
He was a definitive #3 who was much too young and inexperienced to usurp the stature of Borg or Connors, but a nice effort winning his 1st USO over Gerulaitus! The only person "more so" is Djokovic with Fedal blocking his path to greatness! He has everything else; 12 majors, 30 Masters, multiple YE #1's, seasonal majesty ('11 & '15), & of course something unattainable in my opinion with the next crop of players, his Nole-Slam ('15 Wbl-'16 FO)! Just rambling; sorry!
He was a definitive #3 who was much too young and inexperienced to usurp the stature of Borg or Connors, but a nice effort winning his 1st USO over Gerulaitus! The only person "more so" is Djokovic with Fedal blocking his path to greatness! He has everything else; 12 majors, 30 Masters, multiple YE #1's, seasonal majesty ('11 & '15), & of course something unattainable in my opinion with the next crop of players, his Nole-Slam ('15 Wbl-'16 FO)! Just rambling; sorry!
I'm not sure that I'd say he was a definitive #3. Borg was no doubt #1 that year. Connors, however, was #2 with a 79-12 record and 8 titles, making the SF of the French Open, Wimbledon, U.S. Open, and Masters. McEnroe was #3 with a 91-14 record and 10 titles, including the U.S. Open and WCT Finals. McEnroe-Connors H2H was 2-2 that year, with McEnroe straight setting Connors in B05 matches at the SF of the U.S. Open and WCT Finals and Connors straight setting Mac in B03 matches at the SF of Las Vegas and the Pepsi Grand Slam.
I think Mac had a pretty good case for #2 that year.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Regardless of the rankings Borg was probably no worse than #2 in 1977.
Fiero425
Legend
The rankings were a bit of a joke back then! Vilas won 2 majors in '77 and was barely #2, some thinking #3 behind Connors & Borg! Vilas hurt himself IMO by playing the B Tour; esp. that summer before the USO winning smaller clay events in Orange, Louisville, & Columbus! Those were the Monday night finals he won over players like Brian Gottfried, Eddie Dibbs, & Roscoe Tanner! He had the longest winning streak (53), winning 7 straight titles, finishing the season 130-15! Hard to forget numbers like that, but Vilas is little more than a footnote since Borg owned him! Vilas' fans probably still protesting after all these years of '77 slight!
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
You've got such a good memory Fiero!The rankings were a bit of a joke back then! Vilas won 2 majors in '77 and was barely #2, some thinking #3 behind Connors & Borg! Vilas hurt himself IMO by playing the B Tour; esp. that summer before the USO winning smaller clay events in Orange, Louisville, & Columbus! Those were the Monday night finals he won over players like Brian Gottfried, Eddie Dibbs, & Roscoe Tanner! He had the longest winning streak (53), winning 7 straight titles, finishing the season 130-15! Hard to forget numbers like that, but Vilas is little more than a footnote since Borg owned him! Vilas' fans probably still protesting after all these years of '77 slight!
abmk
Bionic Poster
yeah, 1 and 2 is b/w Borg and Vilas for 77. Connors is a clear #3 (though not far behind either of them)
abmk
Bionic Poster
disagree. Sampras was playing better than him at that USO.
Agassi peaked a bit early in that summer HC season.
He also went down 2 sets to one vs Corretja in R2.
Sampras timed it better.
As far as AO 95 final is concerned, the only part of it that was a beatdown was the 2nd set, where Agassi broke Sampras 3 times.
Sampras broke agassi once to take the 1st set.
3rd set went to a breaker, where Agassi had to save 2 SPs (one of which he did with a great fh return winner). Agassi could easily have been down 2 sets to one.
4th set, Sampras was serving really well, Agassi did well to break him once to take the set.
And AO surface was quite a bit slower than USO surface that year. Plus Agassi was beating everyone down badly before the final.
At the USO, he went to 5 sets vs Corretja and lost a set badly 1-6 to Korda.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
95 Agassi wins at least 2 majors this year though.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
That's rich coming from you.You mean tennis existed before 2004?!
Fiero425
Legend
Three major wins used to be tough in the Open era for men! We had Connors in '74, Wilander in '88, then a flurry of winners in the last decade with Federer 3 times, Djokovic twice, & Nadal once! Having 2 major wins has almost become passe with Nole dropping to #2 last season with 2 plus being in the final of a 3rd! What a joke! Now we've "time warped" back 10 years and there's Fedal dominating again; 2 with 2! Wow!
Druss
Hall of Fame
Corretja though a clay specialist, was a decent player on HC, no shame going 5 sets there. Didn’t Nadal go 5 sets against Isner at RG ‘13? Even Federer has had some ‘bad’ sets on the way to some of his major wins. So if Agassi has a couple ‘bad’ sets against the likes of Korda or Corretja, does that make him not-worthy of winning a slam?
Tell me honestly....who was the best player in 1995?
Druss
Hall of Fame
Thanks for bringing that up. Yes ‘82 Connors certainly has a case. Looking at his stats that year is similar to ‘95 Agassi, difference is, Connors went on to win the USO, but not sure if he was clearly the best player that year.
abmk
Bionic Poster
no shame in that or doesn't make him not worthy of winning it.
Just pointing out those as indicators that he wasn't in the greatest of form at that USO, certainly not near his AO form.
And Sampras himself was in better form at the USO than at the AO that year.
This statment of yours :
"He had a brutal SF match against Becker in which he got injured and surely affected his performance in the final, which I’m sure Sampras was grateful for, otherwise it would have resulted in another beat down like their AO final earlier in the year. "
is not based on reality at all.
consistently, Agassi, but when it came to peaking for the big ones, Sampras.
I'll take Sampras by a small margin for getting that USO win and the YE#1
Last edited:
hoodjem
G.O.A.T.
Naderer.War is over.
#FedalUnited
N01E
Hall of Fame
Djokovic 2015 best YE#1
Reached finals in every tournament he played after Doha, 8 masters finals and 6 won beats Federer's 4 easily, can't say anything about Laver's '69 since I wasn't around during that time and wouldn't get a clear picture
Djokovic 2016 best YE#2
3 slam finals, 2 won vs Rogers 2 slams, 4 masters 1000 titles vs 3, both lost a single final (Rome, Montreal) + Djokovic had more slam+master1000+wtf points than Murray, lost only because of the atp500s. Will wtf triumph make up for one more slam final, one more 1000 and wtf runner up? Hard to say, but it's been an extremely weird season with YE#1 losing all of his matches to one guy so I think that may also help Federers case.
Murray 2012 best YE#3
Although he failed to defend 2 of his masters 1000 trophies, he reached semis in all slams, got to 2 finals and won 1. Plus Olympics gold.
Reached finals in every tournament he played after Doha, 8 masters finals and 6 won beats Federer's 4 easily, can't say anything about Laver's '69 since I wasn't around during that time and wouldn't get a clear picture
Djokovic 2016 best YE#2
3 slam finals, 2 won vs Rogers 2 slams, 4 masters 1000 titles vs 3, both lost a single final (Rome, Montreal) + Djokovic had more slam+master1000+wtf points than Murray, lost only because of the atp500s. Will wtf triumph make up for one more slam final, one more 1000 and wtf runner up? Hard to say, but it's been an extremely weird season with YE#1 losing all of his matches to one guy so I think that may also help Federers case.
Murray 2012 best YE#3
Although he failed to defend 2 of his masters 1000 trophies, he reached semis in all slams, got to 2 finals and won 1. Plus Olympics gold.
Similar threads
