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

[Poisoned Slice]

The Swiss, of course.

 

[zagor]

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

The guy who ended #1 had a better season.

 

[RS]

Who cares

 

[Biotic]

2017 was a season with the highest vulturing coefficient known to man.

Here we have Ned and Fred face to face enjoying a lovely day back in 2017 hunting, or should I say vulturing season:

Here, one of many episodes of Fred pestering Ned with that neo backclaw:

Finally, we have Ned securing the YE#1 while Fred looks away in disgust:

 

[RS]

In Federer's corner is winning the only legitimate slam in about a two year stretch

It was painful to watch.

 

[NatF]

It was painful to watch.

The AO was epic no?

 

[RS]

The AO was epic no?

No because the result was wrong.

 

[NatF]

No because the result was wrong.

I was a broken man when Fed got broken in the fifth, in the end he was the better player.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

Federer had 0% W/L record on clay.

This.
Nadal was more consistent

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

Are we seriously discussing this vulture year?

So everything is labelled vulturing by his fans if Djokovic isn't in form.

 

[RS]

I was a broken man when Fed got broken in the fifth, in the end he was the better player.

9/10 Fed to 8.5/10 Nadal but seeing Nadal has the slam record I can let it go.

 

[Jonesy]

So now Fed fans are not satisfied enough with Fed being the hypothetical winner of everything but also want to take the moral winner status from Nadal too?

 

[NatF]

9/10 Fed to 8.5/10 Nadal but seeing Nadal has the slam record I can let it go.

The real wrong result.

 

[Dead Mosquito]

Federer had 0% W/L record on clay.

not dare to play

 

[martinezownsclay]

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.

Yes that is true. Very good results on clay (not winning ones) would have given Federer the YE#1 that year. Assuming all else remained roughly the same.

 

[martinezownsclay]

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.

That is true as well. Federer's grass season may have benefited from freshness. Particularly considering he was already 35 by then, the turnaround is never easy for a player that age. He knew that so simply skipped the season he wasn't going to win anything big at that stage of his career, to better his chances at the season he had a big shot at winning, and could be hurt from some fatigue by a good clay season.

 

[TTMR]

If there was a real grass season, Fed would have been numero uno, as Nadal would say. Grass should be at least as long as the clay season.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

So everything is labelled vulturing by his fans if Djokovic isn't in form.

Yes, it is.

Djokovic dominates 2015 and 2016, then gets injured then dominates 2018, 2019...

Kinda simple math.

Fact is we can't talk about 2017 without acknowledging that Nadal and Federer were lucky to have a free reign to collect more big titles. Much more easily.

 

[octobrina10]

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

Rafa was the best ATP player in 2017, no matter how much Fed devotees are hyping their beloved player.

 

[octobrina10]

If there was a real grass season, Fed would have been numero uno, as Nadal would say. Grass should be at least as long as the clay season.

I think that the ATP grass season should be eliminated, because it's unfair competition. Only very few kids/players have an opportunity to play on grass courts in their home countries because grass courts don't exist. Grass-courts have (almost) died out in Australia & America. In Europe, only a few countries have grass courts. Grass has become a niche surface in tennis.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

Yes, it is.

Djokovic dominates 2015 and 2016, then gets injured then dominates 2018, 2019...

Kinda simple math.

Fact is we can't talk about 2017 without acknowledging that Nadal and Federer were lucky to have a free reign to collect more big titles. Much more easily.

No it is not. Likewise we can produce a counter argument that Djokovic got scared by new levels of Fedal & faked his decline.
And lol about Djokovic dominating 2019, he had to rely upon a massive choke to win 2nd slam unlike Nadal who won more slams, titles & made ye#1.

No player can go on a tear forever, everyone is bound to decline; big3 all had dips.

Fact is also that we can't talk about 2015-16 & 2021 without acknowledging that Djokovic was lucky to bave a free reign to collect more titles, more easily due to decline of Nadal & absence of Federer, kinda easy math.

Sir, Djokovic fans should be the absolutely last people to complain about anything, their guy has built more than half of his achievements in a vacuum.

 

[TMF]

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.

Nadal played more but achieved less. If he's the best player, he should have achieved more than Federer, especially when given himself more opportunity. And given the fact that he lost all 4 matches against Federer.

 

[TMF]

Rafa was the best ATP player in 2017, no matter how much Fed devotees are hyping their beloved player.

But results- titles, winning percentage, H2H all in favors of Roger.

Don't cheat

 

[octobrina10]

But results- titles, winning percentage, H2H all in favors of Roger.

Don't cheat

It's the fact that Rafa was crowned the ATP 2017 Year-End World No.1:

You are trying to cheat readers by denying the fact.

 

[NatF]

That is true as well. Federer's grass season may have benefited from freshness. Particularly considering he was already 35 by then, the turnaround is never easy for a player that age. He knew that so simply skipped the season he wasn't going to win anything big at that stage of his career, to better his chances at the season he had a big shot at winning, and could be hurt from some fatigue by a good clay season.

Fed played the clay season in 2019 and still nearly beat Djokodal back to back at Wimbledon, don't think he was being stopped that year unless he injured himself early.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

No it is not. Likewise we can produce a counter argument that Djokovic got scared by new levels of Fedal & faked his decline.
And lol about Djokovic dominating 2019, he had to rely upon a massive choke to win 2nd slam unlike Nadal who won more slams, titles & made ye#1.

No player can go on a tear forever, everyone is bound to decline; big3 all had dips.

Fact is also that we can't talk about 2015-16 & 2021 without acknowledging that Djokovic was lucky to bave a free reign to collect more titles, more easily due to decline of Nadal & absence of Federer, kinda easy math.

Sir, Djokovic fans should be the absolutely last people to complain about anything, their guy has built more than half of his achievements in a vacuum.

I am not a Djokovic fan, however.

I am merely being objective. He has been the dominant force from the Big 3 in the last 10-11 years. He has a great H2H vs both in this period. Hence a fit Djokovic in 2017 would have won probably 2 slams, for sure. Most likely this would have hurt Federer because the two tend to do really well at AO and W.

Of course, if you want to believe that Djokovoc chickened in 2017, that is your choice. You have the right to Disneyland as anyone does.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

I am not a Djokovic fan, however.

Wrong.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Wrong.

That's your reply?

Intellectual and stimulating, as always.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

That's your reply?

Intellectual and stimulating, as always.

Yes.

Thanks.

 

[TMF]

It's the fact that Rafa was crowned the ATP 2017 Year-End World No.1:

You are trying to cheat readers by denying the fact.

Titles: 7>6
Winning @: 95.1 > 85
H2H: 4>0

If you disagree with facts then you're the one who's cheating

 

[Aabye5]

Yes, it is.

Djokovic dominates 2015 and 2016, then gets injured then dominates 2018, 2019...

Kinda simple math.

Fact is we can't talk about 2017 without acknowledging that Nadal and Federer were lucky to have a free reign to collect more big titles. Much more easily.

Are you suggesting that you can have weak years within a weak era...Fascinating.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Are you suggesting that you can have weak years within a weak era...Fascinating.

If every era is weak (according to almost everyone here) then the tour itself must be very weak.

 

[Aabye5]

If every era is weak (according to almost everyone here) then the tour itself must be very weak.

I don't believe every era is weak.

 

[octobrina10]

Titles: 7>6
Winning @: 95.1 > 85
H2H: 4>0

If you disagree with facts then you're the one who's cheating

The fact is: