Who was truly the best player and the #1 player in 2017: Federer or Nadal ?

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Their stats in 2017 comparison are in favor of Federer, his performance/result proof that he was the real #1 and the best player.

Federer: 7 titles
Nadal: 6 titles
Federer also holds the edge with 3 MS1000 to 2 for Nadal

Federer: Winning percentage 95.1%
Nadal: Winning percentage 85.0%

H2H Federer dominate Nadal 4-0

Who had a better year? The Swiss Maestro
 

jl809

Hall of Fame
Nadal wins 2 slams and reaches a 3rd slam final, wins 2 M1000s and reaches 2 M1000 finals, wins 2 500 tournaments and reached another 500 final

Federer wins 2 slams, wins 3 M1000s and reaches 1 M1000 final, and wins 2 500s. Plus he skips an entire surface to be fresh for grass, preserving his win %s and H2H

It’s Nadal.
 

Backspin1183

Talk Tennis Guru
What Federer did in 2017 was phenomenal considering his age at the time. But the point system is fair and he lost out to Nadal who had gained more points than him to end the year at #1. Nadal won 2 Slams. Nadal is always year end #1 when he wins 2 Slams or more.
 
Federer was more impressive that year, IMO, however, he missed the entire clay season while Nadal was posting results on all surfaces. Cumulatively Rafa's results put him ahead of Roger fair and square.
 

dapchai

Legend
It was their last shot so it hurts more
Nadal was never the best player in any season he has ever played, and Federer is always the best player in any season even if he doesn't play. So yes Federer was the best player of 2017 by a thousand country miles. He's also the best player of 2027.
 

Ray Mercer

Hall of Fame
What Federer did in 2017 was phenomenal considering his age at the time. But the point system is fair and he lost out to Nadal who had gained more points than him to end the year at #1. Nadal won 2 Slams. Nadal is always year end #1 when he wins 2 Slams or more.

True but I’d we’re talking level of play it’s Federer. He made a 30 year Nadal like a high school player multiple times that year. Indian Wells was absolutely sickening. One of the highest levels you will ever see. Nadal was absolutely shocked and looked like he was contemplating retirement after that sick backhand return match point.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
I'm not sure TMF wants to play the H2H game

Pretty sure the VB will gladly trade away 2017 to take the high ground on their entire careers.
Over a decade many VB consider H2H against his rival is one of the most important metric. I include the H2H for them because they have no choice but to apply the principle.

For me, winning percentage against the field is the meaningful metric and Federer has the edge over Nadal in 2017
 

vanioMan

Legend
Their stats in 2017 comparison are in favor of Federer, his performance/result proof that he was the real #1 and the best player.

Federer: 7 titles
Nadal: 6 titles
Federer also holds the edge with 3 MS1000 to 2 for Nadal

Federer: Winning percentage 95.1%
Nadal: Winning percentage 85.0%

H2H Federer dominate Nadal 4-0

Who had a better year? The Swiss Maestro

Keep living in the past ;)

rafael-nadal-rafa.gif
 

TripleATeam

G.O.A.T.
Federer was mostly the best for the part he actually played. Nadal played more of the season, and was undisputedly best during the part Federer skipped.

You don't get to say you're the best player in a year if you win one tournament and skip the rest. Logically speaking, the same applies here. Federer was on average better when he did play, but if he doesn't play to rack up points, that's tough luck. If he wanted to be called #1, he should've tried harder for it.

Nadal deserved the #1.
 

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
Two different things.

I think Federer was the best player that year, but Nadal deserved the #1 ranking.

Kind of like Agassi vs Sampras in 1999 for another example. Sampras best player, Agassi deserved #1.

Those cases are fairly rare, but those are two examples.
 

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
Federer was mostly the best for the part he actually played. Nadal played more of the season, and was undisputedly best during the part Federer skipped.

You don't get to say you're the best player in a year if you win one tournament and skip the rest. Logically speaking, the same applies here. Federer was on average better when he did play, but if he doesn't play to rack up points, that's tough luck. If he wanted to be called #1, he should've tried harder for it.

Nadal deserved the #1.

If you are referring to Federer skipping most of the clay season, Nadal would almost guaranteed have been the best in that part regardless. So that is a moot point anyhow.
 

Nadal_King

Hall of Fame
Federer was better although Nadal deserved number 1 ranking due to more consistent appearance

Similarly Nadal is greater/better than Federer in overall career (21>20 ,better h2h) although Federer deserved number 1 ranking more due to more consistent displays and appearance
;) :)
 
D

Deleted member 780630

Guest
Nadal only had 1000 more points despite playing six more tournaments. Fed averaged 800 points per tournament, Nadal only around 600. If we do a "pound for pound" adjustment, Federer was the better player on average.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TMF

TripleATeam

G.O.A.T.
Nadal only had 1000 more points despite playing six more tournaments. Fed averaged 800 points per tournament, Nadal only around 600. If we do a "pound for pound" adjustment, Federer was the better player on average.
If Federer had just quit the season after AO, he would've had a 2000 point average. Would've been miles better than Nadal then.
 

TripleATeam

G.O.A.T.
If you are referring to Federer skipping most of the clay season, Nadal would almost guaranteed have been the best in that part regardless. So that is a moot point anyhow.
My point was Nadal got #1 by playing tournaments, not by skipping them. No matter how well Fed did when he played, he didn't play enough to get #1.

If you're referring to when I said "Federer was mostly the best for the part he actually played", I wasn't suggesting if Federer played clay he'd still have been the best, simply that he'd have gotten points. Getting 2 M1000 QFs and the RG SF would've given Federer YE#1, but he didn't play and therefore didn't have the chance to get those points.
 

The_Order

G.O.A.T.
Fed didn't play clay season. This set him up for Wimbledon.

Had he played clay season, he could've been too burnt out for grass season and not had the results he did.

So those saying Fed was clearly the best player despite skipping an entire surface are complete mugs.

Federer fans would love for clay to not exist or count but unfortunately for them, that's not how tennis works.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Unfortunately Fraud failed to win Dubai so I must give it to Rolfe despite Federer's 5-0 edge in big tournaments as Nadal racked up quite a bit in the smaller venues like RG, Monte Carlo, Rome, USO, etc. With Dubai, the case would have been quite clear, but alas, where were those russian bans when it mattered...
 

AgassiSuperSlam11

Professional
100 different threads with redundancy about the "Big 3" can get recycled with compete impunity and yet some original threads with any controversial topics receive scorn. :unsure:
 

Gt86

Professional
Their stats in 2017 comparison are in favor of Federer, his performance/result proof that he was the real #1 and the best player.

Federer: 7 titles
Nadal: 6 titles
Federer also holds the edge with 3 MS1000 to 2 for Nadal

Federer: Winning percentage 95.1%
Nadal: Winning percentage 85.0%

H2H Federer dominate Nadal 4-0

Who had a better year? The Swiss Maestro
So rankings dont matter after all. Many Nadal fans have said so for years in all fairness so presumably this thread is backing up that sentiment?
 
Top