Mayonnaise
Banned
Federer was the best at least until Cincinnati ended. If you're gonna be pedantic, Nadal stopped being the best player in the world after US Open 2013 and US Open 2010.
Nadal 3 big titles away from matching Federer
- Thread starter drm025
- Start date
Federer was the best at least until Cincinnati ended. If you're gonna be pedantic, Nadal stopped being the best player in the world after US Open 2013 and US Open 2010.
I already admitted Djokovic took over after USO 2013, so I'm not in disagreement with you.
Mayonnaise
Banned
So, when did Djokovic take over from Federer in 2012?
Well while Fed did beat Djokovic in the Cincy final, if you start counting from Toronto (which started 2 days before Fed's birthday), thats when Djokovic started his 30-3 run while being 12-2 against top ten. If you look at Cincy alone Fed was better (he did rest the week before while Djokovic won Toronto), but looking at the end of the year overall, Djokovic won the more important meeting in the final of the WTFs.
I would say he took over after the olympics. I'm sure you will disagree.
Mayonnaise
Banned
So if you're just gonna do arbitrary cumulative counting, Federer took over as #1 in late 2010 when he won Basel and beat Nadal in the WTF final. Would you agree to that?
Well it's certainly not as clear cut, but I would assume he earned the most points in the indoor season. So, yes he was the best player of the indoor season, but it was one surface, with only one big title, and he didn't go on to become number 1, so that's why I wouldnt call it taking over as number 1.
Mayonnaise
Banned
None of that matters. You said Djokovic took over from the Olympics because he won more points for the rest of the season. Does Federer take over from Nadal because he won more points for the rest of the season since November 2010? And don't mention rankings. The rankings say Federer was #1 at 31. You have already disagreed with them, and now you want to use them again?
No, I said Djokovic took over because he went 30-3 with a 12-2 record against the top ten making a slam final and winning the WTFs and winning the next slam, and this run took him to number 1 for approximately one full year. It was a long-term domination of the field. Winning Basel and the WTFs is not a long-term domination of the field.
I'm sorry but every single situation does not fit into one rule that has no exceptions. You need to use some discernment. Djokovic's play after the 2012 olympics was that of a dominant number 1, backed up by the fact that he held the number 1 ranking for an entire year. Fed's after the USO 2010 was not, backed up by the fact that those results never brought him to number 1.
Mayonnaise
Banned
Why not? Federer actually beat Djokovic and won Cincinnati. How was Djokovic the best player in the world during Cincinnati?
So, again, you use the ranking. Be consistent. Do you value the rankings or not? If you do, Federer was #1 at 31. If you don't, why do you keep bringing it up? Double-standard.
I already admitted that Federer was better during Cincy, but looking at the end of the year overall, Djokovic was the better player. You ignore a lot of things that I say....
I am being completely consistent with the ranking. Being number 1 in the world means you were the best player for the previous 12 months. That is how the ranking system works. That is how the precious ATP decides the number 1. So, by definition the ranking does not determine who is currently the best player in the world, but who was the best player in the world for the past 12 months. Look at the WTA. While the WTA is not the ATP, the ranking system is the exact same principle, and Serena Williams has been the number one ranked player all year. I'm a huge Serena fan, but sorry, she has been nowhere near the best player this year.
Federer being number 1 at 31 was indicative of his performance over the previous 12 months when he was 30 years old. Djokovic being number 1 over the course of 2013 was indicative of his performance during the previous 12 months, including the end of 2012. At no point was Federer ranked number 1 when the previous 12 months included his indoor hard court success in 2010. It was not enough to obtain the number 1 ranking at any time. You could argue differently for Federer's indoor success in 2011, though.
Last edited:
Mayonnaise
Banned
I don't care about the end of the year. I'm saying Federer was the best player in the world until Cincinnati. You haven't refuted that. The rest of the season does not matter.
Federer was #1 on 29/10/2014, which includes over 2 months from after his 31st birthday.
Again, why do you care about the ranking? Federer was #2 in late 2010 and he did much better than Nadal from November to the Australian Open in 2011. Was he the best player in the world, for outperforming Nadal, who was the #1, while he was #2? If he wasn't, neither was Djokovic during Cincinnati 2012.
I'm not interested in whether Fed was the best player of the world until before or after Cincy as it seems rather meaningless. Whether Fed was the best player up until turning 31 or up to one week after doesn't change the fact that his performance at the age of 31 was not number 1 worthy. Djokovic started taking over after the Olympics and enjoyed a long run at number 1 after.
Yes, 2 months from being 31 were included in his ranking, but his play during that time was not keeping him at number 1. It was the previous 10 months that had him there. The 2 months of 31 included 1 masters title only. He was ranked number one before taking Cincy, further demonstrating that it wasn't too significant.
Clearly, Djokovic is not the best player in the world during a tournament he lost (Cincy 2012). His dominant results, though, started in Toronto 2012. Winning 6 titles and making 2 finals in his next 9 events. There is a difference between this and Federer at the end of 2010.
Last edited:
Mayonnaise
Banned
Okay, whatever you like to believe :lol:
Fact is, Federer at 31 was the best player in the world, and ATP agrees with me
Fact is, Federer at 31 was the best player in the world, and ATP agrees with me
Okay, whatever you like to believe :lol:
Fact is, Federer at 31 was the best player in the world, and ATP agrees with me
The ATP agrees that he was the best player in the previous 12 months, yes. The ranking continued for 2 months of him being 31 due to this previous period. He gained points in Cincy, but went on to lose points at the USO, lose points at Basel, lose points at Paris, and lose points at the WTFs. His performance at the end of the year was down over 1000 points from the year prior. He had turned 31... Kudos to him for not losing the consistency to be number 1 until reaching 31 years of age.
Mayonnaise
Banned
So who is the best player in the world right now? Clearly, it's not Djokovic, because he was best player in the world for the past 12 months. Not right now. Right? So who is the #1 right now?
There is no right now, you have to go by a certain previous period, the ATP chooses 12 months. If there is an instantaneous number 1, Stan was number 1 during AO, Djokovic was number 1 during IW and Miami, Stan was number 1 again during MC, Nadal was number 1 during Madrid, Djokovic was number 1 again during Rome, Nadal was number 1 again during RG, and Djokovic was number 1 again during Wimby. Heck, Federer was number 1 during Dubai.
You can't assign a number 1 at any one specific time, it has to include previous results. Looking at these results and adding Djokovic's domination at the end of 2013, he is the deserving number 1-ranked player in the world currently.
Nadal's domination of the US hardcourt summer last year is the reason he is even close right now.
Last edited:
Mayonnaise
Banned
So there is no #1 right now? Give me a straight answer.
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
Talk Tennis Guru
would be nice if Nadal could win one WTF but i doubt it
the only way for me would be to see Djokovic lose earlier (like Nadal at the french 2009) or even WO from the tournament
also I would like Nadal to win 1 more AO and that would be it : and there i think Nadal would have a shot at beating Novak, unlike at the masters cup
the only way for me would be to see Djokovic lose earlier (like Nadal at the french 2009) or even WO from the tournament
also I would like Nadal to win 1 more AO and that would be it : and there i think Nadal would have a shot at beating Novak, unlike at the masters cup
Mayonnaise
Banned
Who are your 3 favorite players?
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
Talk Tennis Guru
tough to say i have too many
alphabetical order: almagro, anderson, berlocq, dolgopolov, ferrer, gasquet, kohlschreiber, nadal, nishikori, youzhny and many others
alphabetical order: almagro, anderson, berlocq, dolgopolov, ferrer, gasquet, kohlschreiber, nadal, nishikori, youzhny and many others
He can if he put his mind to it. If he can beat Nole at the slam then there's no excuse of not beating him there. Also considered Nadal is mentally strong he should have an answer. Nothing is easy, but great champion finds way win.
In case Nadal gives up because he feel it's hopeless, I would be very disappointed in him.
Had Federer gave up on the FO after a disaster results in 2008, I would be disappointed in him too.
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
I guess the best player in the world right now is Bautista-Agut?? He's the most consistent player this year to have won a title last week. I don't know if any of the top guys would be in good enough form at this very moment to beat him in a tennis match, but maybe they would surprise me. By the end of the week, I'd say the winner in Hamburg is probably the best player.
I know that the best player for the past 12 months has been Djokovic, though, no doubt.
Mayonnaise
Banned
So, according to your logic, Federer was the best player in the world during Cincinnati 2012, when he was aged 31
Federer was also the best player in the world for the past 12 months when he was 31.16 years old
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic's baby might help Nadal to win WTFs
good point
i thought about itI know but objectively, after watching closely Nadal play last year indoors, i don't like his game at all in these conditions it's ugly to watch. I am sure he can put this mind to it like he did last year but don't think it would be enough. Actually he would still beat the other players (Federer, Murray, Berdych, Ferrer) but Djoko in these indoors conditions... :-?
So, according to your logic, Federer was the best player in the world during Cincinnati 2012, when he was aged 31
Federer was also the best player in the world for the past 12 months when he was 31.16 years old
How could he not be the best player in the world at a mandatory tournament that he wins?? Isn't that the definition of winning the tournament? This discussion is getting silly.
Again, yes Federer was number at 1 at 31, and yet again it was indicative of his performance while being 30. We're not getting anywhere new here.
Mayonnaise
Banned
My question is, why are you discrediting Federer of being the best player at 31 when you're saying there's no way of knowing who the best player is at any given moment?
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
Talk Tennis Guru
Federer at the end of 2011 until august 2012 had a terrific run. I remember he even beat Nadal at Indian Wells.
And watch his Australian open 2012 he was crushing his opponents (Tomic, Del Potro...) and played a great match against Nadal (lost in 4, this match could have gone to 5 sets).
Then he won Wimbledon and lost to Berdych at the US open.
And watch his Australian open 2012 he was crushing his opponents (Tomic, Del Potro...) and played a great match against Nadal (lost in 4, this match could have gone to 5 sets).
Then he won Wimbledon and lost to Berdych at the US open.
Because it's pretty darn clear that from August 2012 on Djokovic was the best player during the majority of the big tournaments. If we look at Federer's ranking on 8/5/2013, or roughly when he turned 32, he was ranked number 5. Therefore as a 31 year old, he was the fifth best player in the world. I don't know how to make it more clear than that.
Mayonnaise
Banned
Is that why he got bageled by Federer in the Cincinnati final?
I'm not talking about a 32 year-old Federer. I'm talking about a 31 year-old Federer that was ranked #1 and bageled the world #2 in a Masters final.
I said the majority of the tournaments. You are not refuting what I said. How many other tournaments did federer surpass djokovic in?
A 31 year old federer was number 1 due to the performance of the 30 year old federer, a 32 year old federer was number 5 due to the performance of the 31 year old federer. This is very very clear and is how the ATP is set up.
You like to use other people's logic against them, so I guess ill give it a go. In the weeks leading up to wimbledon 2011, Nadal was ranked number 1. Was he the best player in the world at that time. Yes or no?
Mayonnaise
Banned
He surpassed Djokovic in 3 out of 4 tournaments from Wimbledon to Cincinnati.
False. Federer was closer to 31 than 30 for 6 months prior to Cincinnati.
Yes. Djokovic needed to prove himself as the #1 to be the #1. Matches are not won on paper.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Djokovic was the best player of 2012 Mayo. Deal! :lol:
Mayonnaise
Banned
Of course he was. Never denied it. But Federer was the best player in the world when he turned 31. Do you deny that?
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
No I don't. Mind you it was always gonna be hard for Nole to defend all his 2011 points but sometimes a player can be a victim of their own success.
