Top 10 players by decade. 70s-2010s

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
70s
1) Borg
2)Connors
3)Newcombe
4)Vilas
5)Rosewall
6) Kodes
7)Nastase
8)Ashe
9)Smith

10??? gerulaitis? panatta? Orantes? Gimeno?

80s

1) Lendl
2) Wilander
3) Mcenroe
4) Becker
5) Connors
6) Borg
7) Edberg
8 )Kriek
9) Noah
10) Chang

90's

1) Sampras
2) Agassi
3) Courier
4) Edberg
5) Becker
6) Kafelnikov
7) Bruguera
8 ) Rafter

9-10? Lendl, Muster, Stich, kuerten, moya?

Chang didnt win a slam in the 90's so he didnt make up the list.

00s

1) Federer
2) Nadal
3) Agassi
4) Hewitt
5) Sampras
6) Kuerten
7) Safin
8 ) Roddick
9) Ferrero
10) Djokovic

2010s

1) Nadal
2) Djokovic
3) Federer
4) Murray
5) Wawrinka
6) Cilic
7) Ferrer
8 ) Tsonga
9) Berdych
10) Roddick?

To take in consideration:

1st parameter .... Slams..
2nd parameter ...YEC-Olimpics-m1000-total titles
3rd parameter ...ranking/YE1/weeks at 1
4th parameter.. streaks,number of wins, winning %
 
Last edited:

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
This is my 2010s

1) Djokovic
2) Nadal
3) Federer
4) Murray
5) Wawrinka
6) Ferrer
7) Berdych
8 Cilic
9)Del Potro
10)Tsonga
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
Parameter 1: Slams

Nadal Leads Djokovic 8-6 in slams

Nadal has 5 Rg in a row, 2 USO and 1 Wimbledon.
Djokovic has 3 AO, 2 Wimbledon and 1 USO

I'd probably put Nadal ahead of Djokovic right now given he's two slams in front but if Novak wins AO later this month, he'd be number 1 imo.
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
I'd probably put Nadal ahead of Djokovic right now given he's two slams in front but if Novak wins AO later this month, he'd be number 1 imo.

The different is there favourite slams. Nadal has won RG every year in the 2010s. Djokovic has not won AO every year in the 2010s unfortunetely
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
Lol I didn't even read that. But if I were to do it my way. That's what my list would be. Slams aren't EVERYTHING IMO

Slams are 90% of legacy that why BOrg was king of 70's, Lendl king of 80's, Sampras king of 90's and Federer king of 00's, because they won the most Grand Slams. For example Borg didnt even dominate the YE1 ranking yet he is usually recognized as the best of the whole decade

Nadal has 5 RG in a row in this decade, and 2/5 USO, 1 Wimbledon. Djokovic dominant slam is nowhere close with 3 AO.

You will see I put Wilander ahead of mcenroe in the 80's ...it was a hard choice to do.. and wilander only won 1 slam more than Mcenroe in the 80's
 
Last edited:

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
Slams are 90% of legacy that why BOrg was king of 70's, Lendl king of 80's, Sampras king of 90's and Federer king of 00's, because they won the most Grand Slams. For example Borg didnt even dominate the YE1 ranking yet he is usually recognized as the best of the whole decade

do you know how many masters titles nadal has won in the 2010s by any chance?
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
Slams are 90% of legacy that why BOrg was king of 70's, Lendl king of 80's, Sampras king of 90's and Federer king of 00's, because they won the most Grand Slams. For example Borg didnt even dominate the YE1 ranking yet he is usually recognized as the best of the whole decade

Exactly, meaning they're not everything. If Djokovic wins AO this month he'll be just one major behind Nadal so far this decade but seeing as he's also won more WTFs, Masters 1000s, YE#1s, spent more weeks at #1 and has been more consistent in general than Nadal has, that all makes up for the one slam deficit in my view.
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
do you know how many masters titles nadal has won in the 2010s by any chance?

Nadal has won 12 m1000 compared to 15 m1000 of djokovic.

8 slams (2 multislam years), 12m1000, 2YE1

6 slams (1 multislam year), 15m1000, 3 yec, 3 YE1

I still take the former if you ask me. 2 slams is a huge differnce imo. Safin without his 2 slams he wouldnt be remembered as the same player, ditto for hewitt. Who would be Murray slamless now?
 
Last edited:

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
Exactly, meaning they're not everything. If Djokovic wins AO this month he'll be just one major behind Nadal so far this decade but seeing as he's also won more WTFs, Masters 1000s, YE#1s, spent more weeks at #1 and has been more consistent in general than Nadal has, that all makes up for the one slam deficit in my view.

And if he wins another one, then djokovic is clearly the best player of this decade.
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
Nadal has won 12 m1000 compare to 15 m1000 of djokovic.

Exactly. so he has won more of everything besides the slams. So if he can equal nadal in the number of slams won in this decade then djokovic is clearly the best. But I don't mind you putting nadal ahead of djokovic at the moment
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
Exactly, meaning they're not everything. If Djokovic wins AO this month he'll be just one major behind Nadal so far this decade but seeing as he's also won more WTFs, Masters 1000s, YE#1s, spent more weeks at #1 and has been more consistent in general than Nadal has, that all makes up for the one slam deficit in my view.

If he wins AO I'd consider them quite at the same level, because you have to consider nadal has won 5 RG in a row, which isnt something that happens everyday.. also 2 multislam years and he had the best m1000 year ever (2013).
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
Exactly. so he has won more of everything besides the slams. So if he can equal nadal in the number of slams won in this decade then djokovic is clearly the best. But I don't mind you putting nadal ahead of djokovic at the moment

If they both had 8 Slams I obviously would put djokovic ahead. With 7 slams there is an argument for djokovic, but I'd see it as quite even.
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
If he wins AO I'd consider them quite at the same level, because you have to consider nadal has won 5 RG in a row, which isnt something that happens everyday.. also 2 multislam years and he had the best m1000 year ever (2013).

I don't really think the amount of multi-slam seasons is that big a deal. And it's debatable that Nadal's 2013 was better than Nole's 2011 in the Masters 1000s.
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
I don't really think the amount of multi-slam seasons is that big a deal. And it's debatable that Nadal's 2013 was better than Nole's 2011 in the Masters 1000s.

Its not debatable, nadal in 2013 won 5 titles played 6 finals and 8/9 SF. (skipped 1)

Djokovic in 2011 won 5 titles played 6 finals but made QF in 1 m1000 and skipped 2.

Its a big deal, makes you stand out among your peers, Its not the same being YE1 , being 1 of the 4 different names that won a grand slam, than seeing your name repeated twice, or 3 times among the 4 GS winners.

For example:

We are already in 2030 and you wanna check the slam winners back in 2014... You will see Wawrinka-Nadal-Djokovic-Cilic, It doesnt look like a year where someone really dominated, I'm not trying to bring djokovic down, he earned the YE1, but Its just not the same than when you have a multislam year, for example in 2013, Djokovic-Nadal-Murray-Nadal, people from 2013 will see it and they wont need to check anything else to understand that 2013 was dominated by the player whose name is repeated, because like it or not Slams make everything else look small, not only because of tradiction, but due to their whole magnitude, attendance, multiple courts/centre courts, 5 setter format and 2 weeks lenght (which gives them a whole aura of epicness).
 
Last edited:

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
Lets see it

Nadal in 2013:

5W, 1F, 2SF, 1A (reached 8/9 SF)

Djokovic in 2011

5W, 1F, 1 QF, 2A

Djokovics is still more impressive. beat nadal in 4 finals.

while nadal beat djokovic once and it wasn't even a final. Nadal in 2013 beat del potro, wawrinka, Federer, isner, raonic.

Beating nadal 4 times in a row in masters final is more impressive IMO.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
90's

1) Sampras
2) Agassi
3) Courier
4) Edberg
5) Becker
6) Bruguera
7) Rafter
8 ) Kuerten
9) Muster
10) Kafelnikov

(No way Kafelnikov is that high up with his 2 fluke slams).


00s

1) Federer
2) Nadal
3) Agassi
4) Hewitt
5) Kuerten
6) Safin
7) Sampras
8 ) Roddick
9) Ferrero
10) Gaudio

2010s

1) Nadal
2) Djokovic
3) Federer
4) Murray
5) Wawrinka
6) Roddick
7) Tsonga
8 ) Ferrer
9) Berdych
10) Cilic

Seems about right now..
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
90's

1) Sampras
2) Agassi
3) Courier
4) Edberg
5) Becker
6) Bruguera
7) Rafter
8 ) Kuerten
9) Muster
10) Kafelnikov

(No way Kafelnikov is that high up with his 2 fluke slams).


00s

1) Federer
2) Nadal
3) Agassi
4) Hewitt
5) Kuerten
6) Safin
7) Sampras
8 ) Roddick
9) Ferrero
10) Gaudio

2010s

1) Nadal
2) Djokovic
3) Federer
4) Murray
5) Wawrinka
6) Roddick
7) Tsonga
8 ) Ferrer
9) Berdych
10) Cilic

Seems about right now..

I agree with most of it. But why did you put Roddick in the 2010s. That's the only part of your list that bothers me.
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
Djokovics is still more impressive. beat nadal in 4 finals.

while nadal beat djokovic once and it wasn't even a final. Nadal in 2013 beat del potro, wawrinka, Federer, isner, raonic.

Beating nadal 4 times in a row in masters final is more impressive IMO.

Yes Its more impressive, but still the history books have nadal year as better one (strictly speaking about m1000 tournaments), because he reached SF in every year, plus the tour didnt change much between 2011 and 2013.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
I agree with most of it. But why did you put Roddick in the 2010s. That's the only part of your list that bothers me.
In my opinion, he deserves to be there. He won a Masters title and was a firm member of the top 10 for nearly all of 2010. I might put Tsonga above him, but I wouldn't put Ferrer or Berdych ahead.
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
90's

1) Sampras
2) Agassi
3) Courier
4) Edberg
5) Becker
6) Bruguera
7) Rafter
8 ) Kuerten
9) Muster
10) Kafelnikov

(No way Kafelnikov is that high up with his 2 fluke slams).


00s

1) Federer
2) Nadal
3) Agassi
4) Hewitt
5) Kuerten
6) Safin
7) Sampras
8 ) Roddick
9) Ferrero
10) Gaudio

2010s

1) Nadal
2) Djokovic
3) Federer
4) Murray
5) Wawrinka
6) Roddick
7) Tsonga
8 ) Ferrer
9) Berdych
10) Cilic

Seems about right now..

Whats the problem with kafelnikov?

why is ferrer lower than tsonga?

Cilic won a slam, that much better than anything Tsonga, Ferrer, Berdych, Roddick did in the 2010's ... heck tsonga and roddick didnt even reach a grand slam final in that era.
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
In my opinion, he deserves to be there. He won a Masters title and was a firm member of the top 10 for nearly all of 2010. I might put Tsonga above him, but I wouldn't put Ferrer or Berdych ahead.

Ferrer was ranked #3 in the world being 30 years old, how he isnt ahead of Roddick? he also won a master in the 2010's and even played a slam final (RG 2013). Imo ferrer is the best non-slam winner of the 2010's
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
In my opinion, he deserves to be there. He won a Masters title and was a firm member of the top 10 for nearly all of 2010. I might put Tsonga above him, but I wouldn't put Ferrer or Berdych ahead.

He hasn't been in this decade for the most part. Im not sure you can keep him in that list for much longer....
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
Yes Its more impressive, but still the history books have nadal year as better one (strictly speaking about m1000 tournaments), because he reached SF in every year, plus the tour didnt change much between 2011 and 2013.

But I thought with you Nadal fans it was all about the level of competition you had to get through? :?
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
But I thought with you Nadal fans it was all about the level of competition you had to get through? :?

The level in both years is about the same.. the tour hasn changed that much between 2011-2013..

Imo the biggest change was between 2007-2010 because many names who were important in the early-mid 00's became totally irrelevant or even retired..

We are talking about Nalbandian, Gonzalez, Safin, Hewitt,Ferrero, Roddick (although he had a late run in Wimbledon 2009), Ljubicic, and Davydenko (although he declined a little later than the rest).
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
Also why doesn't djokovic make the 00s list?

Djokovic is 10's imo, you could even argue about him being 9..

Its all up what you set up as more important

Juan Carlos Ferrero Won a slam (reached 3 finals), 1 WTF final, 4 m1000.
Djokovic Won a slam (reached 2 finals), won 1 WTF and 5 m1000.

Djokovic edges ferrero in titles, but Ferrero Was N1 of the world (8 weeks), although djokovic was more consistently ranked high (lot of weeks at #3)
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Also why doesn't djokovic make the 00s list?
Because I believe Gaudio deserves a place on the list for his upset win at the French in '04. Novak would be #11 of the '00 list though for sure.
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
Beating Nadal 4 times >>>> beating Del Potro, Wawrinka, Ferrer, Brokeback Federer and Raonic.

My point is, they both were competing against the same tour, which doesnt make much of a difference who you did play. If Nadal played Wawrinka, Ferrer, Federer and Raonic instead of playing Djokovic or Federer in all those 4 finals it means because Raonic, Ferrer and Wawrinka were playing better than the other two.

As long as I know Djokovic wasnt suffering a career threatening injury or something.

Now if you would put as an argument some winning streak of nadal in 2005 when djokovic was barely playing and Federer was out injured then your argument would be valid.

Its like people blaming nadal for beating berdych in the wimbledon final in 2010, but the same berdych beat Federer and djokovic back to back, (straight setted djokovic at SF, and beat federer in 4 with a breadstick included in QF)
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Ferrer was ranked #3 in the world being 30 years old, how he isnt ahead of Roddick? he also won a master in the 2010's and even played a slam final (RG 2013). Imo ferrer is the best non-slam winner of the 2010's
In my opinion he isn't. You could even put players like Del Potro, Soderling and the like above Ferrer..

I believe Roddick is the better player.. That is why I placed him above Ferrer (Roddick made a slam final in '09 which is bordering on 2010 and he pushed prime Federer on his best surface way harder than Ferrer pushed Nadal on his).
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
I wouldn't put him on the list for one upset? Novak was better though? Theres nothing to it really
That's you.. I would put him on the list for his big win at the French. Considering he was unseeded and he ended up winning the whole thing, his road was a lot harder than Novak's (since he was seeded highly in both of his slam final runs). For sure he is the better player (Novak) even in the 00s, but I wanted to give praise to Gaudio.. I thought he deserved a mention.
 

Noleberic123

G.O.A.T.
That's you.. I would put him on the list for his big win at the French. Considering he was unseeded and he ended up winning the whole thing, his road was a lot harder than Novak's (since he was seeded highly in both of his slam final runs). For sure he is the better player (Novak) even in the 00s, but I wanted to give praise to Gaudio.. I thought he deserved a mention.

Fine :mad::)
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
In my opinion he isn't. You could even put players like Del Potro, Soderling and the like above Ferrer..

I believe Roddick is the better player.. That is why I placed him above Ferrer (Roddick made a slam final in '09 which is bordering on 2010 and he pushed prime Federer on his best surface way harder than Ferrer pushed Nadal on his).

For peak level of play? Soderling for sure above ferrer.

But here we are disscusing something else, and wether you like ferrer gamestyle or not, he deserves a bit more of recognition.. the guy up to his 30's still consistently ranked #3 in the world, and rarely lost to anybody other than the BIG 4, you cannot say the same for the likes of Tsonga, Berdych, Delpotro or even Wawrinka (although a slam winner).
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
That's you.. I would put him on the list for his big win at the French. Considering he was unseeded and he ended up winning the whole thing, his road was a lot harder than Novak's (since he was seeded highly in both of his slam final runs). For sure he is the better player (Novak) even in the 00s, but I wanted to give praise to Gaudio.. I thought he deserved a mention.

Anyone else buying this piece of crap or is it just me?
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
For peak level of play? Soderling for sure above ferrer.

But here we are disscusing something else, and wether you like ferrer gamestyle or not, he deserves a bit more of recognition.. the guy up to his 30's still consistently ranked #3 in the world, and rarely lost to anybody other than the BIG 4, you cannot say the same for the likes of Tsonga, Berdych, Delpotro or even Wawrinka (although a slam winner).
If Soderling/Del Potro played/peaked in 2013, they'd have the #3 spot over Ferrer.

Ferrer also only has 1 more week at #3 than Wawrinka does..
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
If Soderling/Del Potro played/peaked in 2013, they'd have the #3 spot over Ferrer.

Ferrer also only has 1 more week at #3 than Wawrinka does..

But they didnt, and thats what really matters.

We are arguing the facts not the ifs/what/could/maybes


Thats why Wawrinka is ranked above ferrer, didnt you see the first post? wawrinka is ranked 5th, Ferrer is 7th.

And again we are not talking only about peak, but achievements and also consistence. Ferrer is by far the most consistent non-big4 , he is always reaching QF/SF and rarely lost to mugs on his heyday.. he got more often dominated by the Big4 though (although not much by andy murray)
 

Topspin_80

Hall of Fame
Yes Its more impressive, but still the history books have nadal year as better one (strictly speaking about m1000 tournaments), because he reached SF in every year, plus the tour didnt change much between 2011 and 2013.

I think it should be mentioned that Nadal in 2010 won 3 slams on 3 different surfaces. A feat that has not been equaled yet.
 
Top