Who will end up with the Masters 1000 titles record?

[LazyNinja19]

Rafa is currently stuck at 27. Fed got 2 titles this year to reach 23. But the biggest threat is Djokovic, who is reeling in the Masters titles like anything, with 4 wins this year.

Currently:

Rafa - 27
Federer - 23
Djokovic - 20


Who will end up with the most Masters, from this generation of Champions?

 

[tennis_commentator]

I think Nadal will reach 30 in 2015, and 32 or 33 in 2016.

 

[NatF]

Nadal will end up with the record, Djokovic in second place.

 

[SpinToWin]

Nadal will have the record, his dominance at the clay Masters 1000s really helps in this regard.

 

[TMF]

Nadal will have the record, his dominance at the clay Masters 1000s really helps in this regard.

There are 3 MS on clay but unfortunately there's none on grass.

 

[LazyNinja19]

There are 3 MS on clay but unfortunately there's none on grass.

and 6 on Hard courts, fanboy.

 

[SpinToWin]

and 6 on Hard courts, fanboy.

bahahahaha I love your sig :lol:

 

[TMF]

Be fair fanboy

and 6 on Hard courts, fanboy.

If there's 3 on clay then there should be 3 on grass.

 

[RFGOAT1992]

and 6 on Hard courts, fanboy.

yea and none on grass as is the point

 

[TMF]

yea and none on grass as is the point

Some people only see what they wanted to see.

 

[cc0509]

If there's 3 on clay then there should be 3 on grass.

But as he said there are six on hc and Federer is a greater hc player than Nadal is so why doesn't Federer have more Masters 1000 titles? It is a relevant question.

 

[LazyNinja19]

If there's 3 on clay then there should be 3 on grass.

If there's 3 on clay, and 3 on grass, then there should be 3 on hard courts. But there are 6. So suck it up, mister. Or write a letter to ATP.

bahahahaha I love your sig :lol:

Too bad, the "" emoticon is not visible in the sig. It's visible on the Apple devices though.

But as he said there are six on hc and Federer is a greater hc player than Nadal is so why doesn't Federer have more Masters 1000 titles? It is a relevant question.

Bingo!
Anyways, this thread is not about the distribution of tourneys on various surfaces. It 's a simple question.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

That's a tough, tough question.

Federer will be in third place when all is said and done. Maybe this will be Djokovic's glory. He certainly deserves a record or two of his own.

 

[yoloiamtheman]

Nadal probably but Nole could catch up. He can win 4-5 masters in 2015 and close the gap .

 

[TMF]

But as he said there are six on hc and Federer is a greater hc player than Nadal is so why doesn't Federer have more Masters 1000 titles? It is a relevant question.

Hard court isn't the same as they are use to. They are slow and high bounce so the conditions so people should understand that it doesn't favor Roger anymore.

The point is there's 3 MS on Nadal's best surface but none on Federer's best surface.

 

[TMF]

If there's 3 on clay, and 3 on grass, then there should be 3 on hard courts. But there are 6. So suck it up, mister. Or write a letter to ATP.

But heavy condition like IW or Canada suits Nadal more than Federer.

Don't tell us that MC, Rome or Madrid favors Federer over Nadal.

 

[cc0509]

Hard court isn't the same as they are use to. They are slow and high bounce so the conditions so people should understand that it doesn't favor Roger anymore.

The point is there's 3 MS on Nadal's best surface but none on Federer's best surface.

But grass is no longer the same as it was before either and I am not sure Federer is currently the best grass court player in the world. If there were 3 Masters 1000s on grass I don't think Federer would be a lock to win them all NOW. Certainly younger players like Djokovic, Murray and even Nadal who is a threat to Federer on every surface could challenge him. We are not talking about a prime Federer here. I think you just need to accept Nadal's superior Masters 1000 record here. Djokovic is fast catching up as well and may overtake both Federer and Nadal.

 

[Chico]

I would like to say Novak, but it will be difficult.

 

[SpinToWin]

But heavy condition like IW or Canada suits Nadal more than Federer.

Don't tell us that MC, Rome or Madrid favors Federer over Nadal.

TMF, you have a point, but we've had this discussion so often I feel like I'm listening to a broken record whenever it is mentioned. Let's just stop it here…

 

[LazyNinja19]

But heavy condition like IW or Canada suits Nadal more than Federer.

Don't tell us that MC, Rome or Madrid favors Federer over Nadal.

Please take away your biased opinion, troll. So now it's not about the surface, but it's about "conditions"?! Whine all you want.

Fact is, there are 6 Masters on HC (on which Fed is probably the surface GOAT), and he can't handle a bit of variable "conditions"?
Federer doesn't whine like this, because he's a champ. But fanboys like you do.

Also there are 2 Slams on Hard courts. Won't you call anyone a troll, who brings up 1 Clay Slam v/s 2 on HC, in a thread about Slam record?

I repeat, this thread is NOT about your subjective opinion on surface distribution. If you want, write to the ATP, but spare us from your fanboy logic.

 

[Blitzball]

Hard court isn't the same as they are use to. They are slow and high bounce so the conditions so people should understand that it doesn't favor Roger anymore.

The point is there's 3 MS on Nadal's best surface but none on Federer's best surface.

Yeah, why aren't there any grass masters?

 

[Chico]

Yeah, why aren't there any grass masters?

Two simple reasons:
1. Not enough time between RG and Wimbledon.
2. There is no tournament on grass able to come up with sponsors and money to organize Masters on grass.

 

[Pocalypse]

I don't see Novak surpassing Nadal's master records. 7 is still a big gap no matter what way you look at it...plus Nadal is much more dominant on his preferred surface than Novak's preferred surface so Nadal has a better advantage.

Though Nadal is more prone to crashing out of Masters way too early against some random players these days compared to Djokovic so that can be Djokovic's advantage.

 

[cc0509]

Hard court isn't the same as they are use to. They are slow and high bounce so the conditions so people should understand that it doesn't favor Roger anymore.

The point is there's 3 MS on Nadal's best surface but none on Federer's best surface.

But as I said above having 3 Masters 1000 events on grass these days is not insurance for Roger when he is playing players five years younger who are all competent on grass. These days I do not get the sense that Roger would consistently beat Djokovic, Murray and Nadal even on grass.

The main point is Federer is the hc GOAT and there are six hc Masters 1000 events compared to three on clay. You can't use the argument that Federer is the greatest hc player of all time on one hand and then say the conditions at the hc Masters 1000 tournaments no longer favor Roger.

On this point you have lost the argument IMO. You need to accept that Nadal's record at the Masters 1000 tournaments is better than Roger's currently and not come up with crazy fanboy excuses.

 

[TMF]

But grass is no longer the same as it was before either and I am not sure Federer is currently the best grass court player in the world. If there were 3 Masters 1000s on grass I don't think Federer would be a lock to win them all NOW. Certainly younger players like Djokovic, Murray and even Nadal who is a threat to Federer on every surface could challenge him. We are not talking about a prime Federer here. I think you just need to accept Nadal's superior Masters 1000 record here. Djokovic is fast catching up as well and may overtake both Federer and Nadal.

But as I said above having 3 Masters 1000 events on grass these days is not insurance for Roger when he is playing players five years younger who are all competent on grass. These days I do not get the sense that Roger would consistently beat Djokovic, Murray and Nadal even on grass.

The main point is Federer is the hc GOAT and there are six hc Masters 1000 events compared to three on clay. You can't use the argument that Federer is the greatest hc player of all time on one hand and then say the conditions at the hc Masters 1000 tournaments no longer favor Roger.

On this point you have lost the argument IMO. You need to accept that Nadal's record at the Masters 1000 tournaments is better than Roger's currently and not come up with crazy fanboy excuses.

Of course at this stage of his career, adding 3 MS on grass is too late since he's at the tail end of his career. But had there were grass MS since his the day he became a pro, he would have won many more than 23 MS, and that isn't even a question.

And you know I don't support the Sampras fans, but there's no doubt that he would have won more than 11 MS had there were MS on grass too.

 

[tennisaddict]

The masters are glorified ATP 500.

The real deal are the majors and WTF and how long you are number 1.

 

[Bukmeikara]

Novak needs another Monte Carlo, Madrid, Us Open and DC title +2 from the French and Cincinnti to say that he won at least two of every big tournament in his time including Dubai and Beijing. Monte Carlo, Us Open and Cincinnati seems likely but in my eyes he would have problems in Madrid, DC and probably in the second French Open.

 

[TMF]

Ok I'll stop here

TMF, you have a point, but we've had this discussion so often I feel like I'm listening to a broken record whenever it is mentioned. Let's just stop it here…

At least I got my point across and hopefully people realize that certain players have their best and worst surface.

 

[Chanwan]

Nadal will end up with the record, Djokovic in second place.

Most likely, but Djoko could take it if his level remains high and Rafa's drop off sooner

 

[Deleted member 733170]

The masters are glorified ATP 500.

The real deal are the majors and WTF and how long you are number 1.

Tennisaddict, my friend, occasionally we have to throw a dog a bone...

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Most likely, but Djoko could take it if his level remains high and Rafa's drop off sooner

That's my suspicion, when Nadal starts to decline, it will be a steeper downward curve than for either Djokovic and Federer. That may open the window on the Masters triumph for the Djoker.

 

[Chanwan]

That's my suspicion, when Nadal starts to decline, it will be a steeper downward curve than for either Djokovic and Federer. That may open the window on the Masters triumph for the Djoker.

the thing is, Rafa will remain able to win clay Masters for the years to come if he continues to play for a lot of years. Novak will be easier to upset on HC, when he drops off imo. I say 75-80 % for Rafa, 20-25 % for Novak.

 

[tennisaddict]

Tennisaddict, my friend, occasionally we have to throw a dog a bone...

Rafa and Novak can and should be proud of this. But not too much to read about this record

 

[Deleted member 733170]

the thing is, Rafa will remain able to win clay Masters for the years to come if he continues to play for a lot of years. Novak will be easier to upset on HC, when he drops off imo. I say 75-80 % for Rafa, 20-25 % for Novak.

Who knows at the end of the day. But credit to Djokovic he looked formidable in Paris this week. I think he'll be pushing pretty hard to get Nadal's number on the clay season next year as groundwork for RG.

I'll be amazed if Nadal is still a match for the Djoker in 2016.

 

[NatF]

Most likely, but Djoko could take it if his level remains high and Rafa's drop off sooner

I think Djokovic will be winning masters more frequently than Nadal for the next few years - especially as there are more on HC than clay. It really depends on how many Nadal wins next year and how many Djokovic gets. If he doesn't close the gap considerably next year I don't think he ever will.

 

[Phonco]

Probably Nadal. Even though there are more hard court masters, I think Nadals proficiency on clay is greater than Djokovics so he'll be consistent in winning masters titles.

Although...Nadals injuries are becoming more frequent. Maybe the claims of injury taking him down are coming to fruition.

 

[clayqueen]

Rafa's fitness is the only thing standing in his way of topping the list.

 

[Pocalypse]

Rafa's fitness is the only thing standing in his way of topping the list.

He's already topping the list and has been for a while.

7 tournaments is a big gap still.

 

[LazyNinja19]

The masters are glorified ATP 500.

The real deal are the majors and WTF and how long you are number 1.

Lol. If anything, WTF is a glorified masters event.

But how can anyone expect a logical post from a fanboy who believes in things like:

Federer is God. You don't question him, you worship him.

Tennisaddict, my friend, occasionally we have to throw a dog a bone...

And Federer was thrown 2 bones this year. Correct? And he still would have been a deserving YEN1 in the eyes of his fanboys, no? :lol:

 

[Pocalypse]

Wouldn't say the WTF is glorified, it's a 1500 point tournament where the top 8 players of the world are all pitted against each other. It's much harder than a Masters where you start of with players ranked from random numbers and work your way up...

 

[tennisaddict]

Lol. If anything, WTF is a glorified masters event.

But how can anyone expect a logical post from a fanboy who believes in things like:







And Federer was thrown 2 bones this year. Correct? And he still would have been a deserving YEN1 in the eyes of his fanboys, no? :lol:

Can I ask you a simple question ?

Do you come here to discuss tennis or about forum posters ?

All your posts are about other fan bases or about posters.

Grow up please.

 

[tennisaddict]

Wouldn't say the WTF is glorified, it's a 1500 point tournament where the top 8 players of the world are all pitted against each other. It's much harder than a Masters where you start of with players ranked from random numbers and work your way up...

Exactly. There are no easy matches at WTF.

It is only the brain dead that can compare WTF with masters.

 

[LazyNinja19]

Can I ask you a simple question ?

Do you come here to discuss tennis or about forum posters ?

All your posts are about other fan bases or about posters.

Grow up please.

Can you even comprehend basic English? Not only was your post ignorant, but it was OFF-TOPIC as well.
Either post in accordance with the thread, or you're very welcome to run away to other threads, where you carry on your Fed worship in peace.

Thanks!

 

[timnz]

I am working on something

I am working on an adjusted Masters 1000 list for the great players of the 70s/80s/90s. They were only made compulsory is 2000. When I noticed that Lendl, for instance, only competed in 2 out of 9 Masters 1000's in 1990 (and only 4 per year in 1991/1992) - then I thought that there needs to be another way to determine equivalents. It is taking a lot of research, but I will be posting on this in a couple of weeks.

Sneak preview

Sampras' total goes from 11 to 15

Becker ads 3 extra from 1990 alone.

Lendl gets another 4 or 5 from 1990-1993 alone (80's to come)

 

[ibbi]

Rafa isn't really guaranteed two/three a year in the way that he used to be. Look what happened to him this year. He only got 1 because Nishikori got hurt. Novak could certainly overtake him, but I think people are looking past the fact that he'll be 28 next year too.

After 25 or so it just gets harder and harder to keep performing at that level every year, and we've seen signs in 2014 wayyyyyyy more than any other year in probably almost a decade that a new generation of players is ready to take the step up. Next year could be their time.

 

[LazyNinja19]

I am working on an adjusted Masters 1000 list for players of the 70s/80s/90s. They were only made compulsory is 2000. When I noticed that Lendl, for instance, only competed in 2 out of 9 Master 1000's in 1990 - then I thought that there needs to be another way to determine equivalents. It is taking a lot of research, but I will be posting on this in a couple of weeks.

Sneak preview

Sampras' total goes from 11 to 15

Becker ads 3 extra from 1990 alone.

That would be interesting. But i noticed some time ago, that Wiki's page on Masters record states Lendl to have won 22 Masters titles (or equivalent).
Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_Masters_Series_records_and_statistics

 

[tennisaddict]

Can you even comprehend basic English? Not only was your post ignorant, but it was OFF-TOPIC as well.
Either post in accordance with the thread, or you're very welcome to run away to other threads, where you carry on your Fed worship in peace.

Thanks!

The point was ATP master titles are nothing compared to majors / WTF and deserves to be celebrated lesser accordingly.

Please do me a favor. Dont quote me again.

 

[ScottleeSV]

Not taking away Nadal's glory here but if there were three MS events at Halle, Queens, and Nottingham, Federer would be out of sight. He would have done for many years what Nadal did in the clay season.

But like I said; not taking anything away. Nadal has done brilliantly with the schedule that is on offer.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Lol. If anything, WTF is a glorified masters event.

But how can anyone expect a logical post from a fanboy who believes in things like:







And Federer was thrown 2 bones this year. Correct? And he still would have been a deserving YEN1 in the eyes of his fanboys, no? :lol:

Granted, having been accustomed to a diet of steak, bones are a poor substitute. Though better than being carted off to the doghouse I dare say. Still, it is not this old dog's fault that the puppies refuse to grow up.

 

[timnz]

That would be interesting. But i noticed some time ago, that Wiki's page on Masters record states Lendl to have won 22 Masters titles (or equivalent).
Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_Masters_Series_records_and_statistics

Yes. But when you analyse the fact that Lendl only competed in 10 of the 27 Masters 1000's from 1990, 1991, 1992 - the fact that it was not compulsory then and there were other tournaments of similar prize money and points which players like Lendl elected to compete in instead - then we have to rethink equivalents. These events of equal standing to some of the Masters 1000's will be the subject of my post coming shortly.