Top 5 have all won slams,except the new #2
- Thread starter Dutch-Guy
- Start date
All-rounder
Legend
being number 2 with no slam is better than being a number 1 without one.
I know that but it's still kinda weird.Anyhow congrats to Murray but he has so much points to defend until the end of the year. Nadal will have a shot at the #2 spot at the end of the year.
theroleoftheunderdog
Professional
yep the atp rankings are decided on how many slams you have won in your career
akv89
Hall of Fame
There's many other players less deserving of the #2 ranking in the past. Murray deserves it for all his success in Masters series.
I feel for Djokovic though. He was expected to break up the Federer/Nadal domination and came amazingly close on numerous occasions. His resume looked better than Murray's when he was in his prime (2008 ) but was still stuck at #3. He had a win, a final, and two SF's in four majors and 3 MS victories. That's enough to be #1 in some eras.
I feel for Djokovic though. He was expected to break up the Federer/Nadal domination and came amazingly close on numerous occasions. His resume looked better than Murray's when he was in his prime (2008 ) but was still stuck at #3. He had a win, a final, and two SF's in four majors and 3 MS victories. That's enough to be #1 in some eras.
All-rounder
Legend
He is 22 yrs old how is he past his prime :-?
akv89
Hall of Fame
Perhaps prime was not he best choice of words considering that his career is still young. But I was referring to the brief period in 2007-2008 when he was at his best.
Co-sign.
Had he won last year Hamburg(if i'm not mistaken) he 'd have been #2.
Murray did in less than 4 months what Djokovic failed to do in 2 years(he became # in 2007).
Big props to Murray who now has made 5/6 hardcourt Masters finals.
Carsomyr
Legend
As he said, prime isn't the best choice of words, but 2008 was certainly a better season for him than 2009.
joe sch
Legend
You cant be serious ?
Who would not want to get to number #1 in the world.
Sure winning a slam is a lifetime achievement but so is reaching #1 in the world.
'd you chose Safina/Jankovic over Kuzzy?
All-rounder
Legend
I am not looking at it from a players perspective. I am looking at it as the way us fans and media see it. Just think for a second, would safina be blasted for being number 1 without a slam if she was number 2 instead. There would be questions but there won't be a big fuss about it
kimbahpnam
Hall of Fame
how about safina?
batz
G.O.A.T.
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
The slams define tennis careers. Being #1 means nothing if you cannot repeatedly prove your superiority over the field at any one or all of the slams.
No one ever places that ranking above the ultimate prize.
joe sch
Legend
Its all a matter of opinion but in tennis history considerations, both reaching #1, especially if for a year, and winning a slam, are both very important considerations. I dont think you can claim "No one ever places a #1 ranking abover a slam championship. Personally, Id rather have a slam but being #1 is also something that puts a player in a very special category.
Im not sure how the Tennis Hall of Fame (TOF) uses this criteria in considering applicants ? Anybody know what the priorities are ? Are they published ?
Last edited:
T. H. Park
Professional
Well, to be fair, having just 1 GS isn't that big a gap for Murray to overcome - who may win one eventually. Compared to Rafa and Federer, it's a bit different ... doubt that Murray will overtake Rafa never mind Federer in GSs.
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
I think he'd fancy his chances against Federer at the US Open, he didn't play great last year but it was his first time in a final and 2 rounds further than he had ever been in a major before. Let's not forget that it was only at Wimbledon last year that he properly broke through.
If they were to meet in the final again this year i'd think Murray would back himself.
Mick
Legend
not that i under-estimate murray but federer has proven many times that he has the ability to raise his level of play if the situation requires it (in a grandslam final) but i realize anything is possible in sports.
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Absolutely, Federer in the final of a major can be unplayable. I'd like to think the match would be alot closer this year if they were to meet though.
Similar threads
