On the relevance of finals and semifinals

[Sport]

How important are finals (F) and semifinals (SF)? Let's discuss the relevance of F and SF with the following hypothetical example:

Player A:

10 Grand Slams titles (including a Career Grand Slam) + 0 Grand Slams F lost + 0 Grand Slams SF lost = 20000 ATP points

Player B:

2 Grand Slams titles + 5 Grand Slams F lost + 14 Grand Slam SF lost = 20680 ATP points


Who would you rank higher?

I'm specially interested in the opinion of @Pheasant and @chut. Would you say player B is greater than player A?

 

[EloQuent]

Nadal > Lendl

 

[Sport]

Nadal > Lendl

Not the topic of the thread

 

[Deleted member 756514]

Player B is a proven choker on the big stage. My vote goes to player A.

 

[DismalFuture]

10>2

 

[Deleted member 756514]

@chut

@chut are you from India? Because your username is funny.

 

[K-H]

Obviously player A.
But I’m more curious in what the secret agenda underlying this thread is...

 

[JMR]

In general, ATP points are of little relevance to long-term legacy debates, especially at the GOAT level. The allocation of points to smaller events, which is necessary for week-to-week ranking and seeding purposes, vastly overstates the importance of sub-slam tournaments to players' legacies. To the extent that anything other than the slams and the YECs are relevant, the ATP points get rolled into overall rankings, and the rankings earn "credit" for the players.

That said, slam semifinals and especially slam finals are highly meritorious achievements, worthy of remembering and sometimes even celebrating, but of course they pale in comparison to slam titles. A player who's much more consistent in reaching the last few rounds of the majors still can't be deemed on the same level as someone with 5x the slam titles. If the ATP points say otherwise, that's because the points are dumb.

 

[ibbi]

They're important, they're not as important as 8 major titles Would it matter how many consecutive semis Federer made if he had lost them all?

 

[Tennisanity]

You could also ask who is greater.

Player A - 50 slams on grass

Player B - 48 slams (12 each at every slam).

 

[chut]

@chut are you from India? Because your username is funny.

Nope, from France. It means hush. What does it mean in India?

 

[Deleted member 756514]

Nope, from France. It means hush. What does it mean in India?

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chut

 

[Deon Sanders]

The greatest statistics in world sporting history are

36 consecutive QFs and 23 consecutive SFs

 

[chut]

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chut

haha, i didn't know that ! I understand it can look strange to you

 

[Rafa24]

Player B is a proven choker on the big stage. My vote goes to player A.

By player B you mean Fed?

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Depends on the fan I think. I personally am a title or bust kind of guy. Always have been. Whether it be an individual sport or a team sport.

It has to be one hell of a moral victory for me to be okay with any sort of loss.

 

[Krish872007]

By player B you mean Fed?

Considering Player A has 10 Slams and Player B has 2 Slams, Fred should be "Player A x Player B". But I think the question is more of a hypothetical.

Shame he had to spend so much of his Wimbledon career avoiding Berdych though.

 

[Deleted member 756514]

By player B you mean Fed?

Not really. Atleast Fed has 20 slams to his credit.
I don't know who resembles player B the most. Murray may be. But that is not the point. I would rather be player A's team than player B.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Not really. Atleast Fed has 20 slams to his credit.
I don't know who resembles player B the most. Murray may be. But that is not the point. I would rather be player A's team than player B.

Cilic by the end of his career, probably.

 

[-NN-]

You could also ask who is greater.

Player A - 50 slams on grass

Player B - 48 slams (12 each at every slam).

Who would you say is greater though?

Let's assume tennis continues with 1 grass Slam a year... Player A would possibly be winning Wimbledon into his 70s. Sports will have never seen anything remotely close to this level of longevity at the highest level.

Imagine that - Rod Laver winning Wimbledon right now.




Wow.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Who would you say is greater though?

Let's assume tennis continues with 1 grass Slam a year... Player A would possibly be winning Wimbledon into his 70s. Sports will have never seen anything remotely close to this level of longevity at the highest level.

Imagine that - Rod Laver winning Wimbledon right now.




Wow.

Rod Laver would win Wimbledon right now, but he is a gracious King who often drops crumbs to the peasants.

 

[texasleaguer]

who would be greater? the one with the most money.