Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
So it's possible that Lendl could still be the leader in most Masters titles/equivalents won? Interesting, I look forward to your thread!
Who will end up with the Masters 1000 titles record?
- Thread starter LazyNinja19
- Start date
So it's possible that Lendl could still be the leader in most Masters titles/equivalents won? Interesting, I look forward to your thread!
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Lendl is so under rated when it comes to hard courts. That guy was a legend. To me, the only players who surpass him are Fed and Sampras.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
You don't say? (read my sig)
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
Only caught a couple of sets of Djoko this week, but he's been playing extremely well ever since the US Open. Pretty big favorite for the WTF by now.
And yeah, he'll most certainly try and get Rafa's number, but based on history, Rafa comes back stronger, when he's had time off. Could be pretty close between the two of them next year.
I tend to think the same, but I wouldn't count Rafa out just yet. Also, both are at the age, where one could see them dial down a bit for the Masters and try and peak more exclusively for the slams. Judging by their results, Rafa has been better at that the last couple of years.
7 titles is a big gap. Novak needs to close it by another 2-3 next year alone to make it close/overtake him imo.
Not really, much more competition on HC than clay.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
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:
Is that why players like Murray, Ferrer and Nishikori were breaking their arses travelling around the world to Mickey Mouse tournaments in order to qualify for the WTF?
It is not a glorified Masters event. It is the most important event next to the slams where you have to play the very best players in the world and the ranking points tell us that. Of course it is not as relevant as a slam but it is more relevant than a Masters 1000 title. Only crazed Nadal fanboys claim it is not a relevant event since that is the only important event left Nadal is missing from his resume.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
That is true but the fact remains that there are still double the amount of hc Masters 1000 events out there than there are clay events and if you are going to claim Federer is the hc GOAT who won hc titles on all types of hc conditions (which he did), you can't then claim that the conditions of the Masters 1000 hc events do not suit Federer on the other hand like the poster I was responding to did.
I guess I hate excuses by ANY fanboy contingent.
LazyNinja19
Banned
^ It was a response to "Masters are glorified 500". What did you expect?!
What i meant was, that I consider Masters closer to WTF, than WTF being closer to Slams. So by "glorified", I meant the pinnacle of Masters category events.
But of course, WTF is the biggest event after Slams. I've never diminished the importance of WTF.
What i meant was, that I consider Masters closer to WTF, than WTF being closer to Slams. So by "glorified", I meant the pinnacle of Masters category events.
But of course, WTF is the biggest event after Slams. I've never diminished the importance of WTF.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
The Green Mile
Bionic Poster
Nadal most probably. Then Djokovic, then Federer.
1990's adjusted with Defacto Masters 1000's
Here is the 1990's:
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=516777
So it's possible that Lendl could still be the leader in most Masters titles/equivalents won? Interesting, I look forward to your thread!
Here is the 1990's:
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=516777
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
It's going to be close between Novak and Nadal. I say Novak...
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
I actually see this as a race between the tortoise and the hare, with Djokovic being the tortoise, and Nadal being the hare....
Well your question was why doesn't Federer have more Masters than Nadal. I'm saying the fact that there is vastly more competition on HC more than compensates for the greater number of HC masters. On top of this, for 5 years the only real competition Nadal had on clay was peak Federer over whom he has a huge matchup advantage. Moreover, Nadal skips the second half of the season and totally revs up to gather up all of the clay Masters each and every season. Add all of these things together and a better question to ask is, why doesn't Nadal lead the Masters race by even more!
Last edited:
tennis_commentator
Hall of Fame
^ It doesn't matter who you put in today's clay masters, Muster, Guga, Bruguera, Moya, Ferrero, Costa, Agassi......Nadal will still dominate them. Heck, even Federer or Djokovic would beat those guys. Ferrer would beat most ex-champions too. Nadal is in the toughest clay era ever. He's just the greatest of all-time.
In my opinion unless Nadal retired tomorrow then there's no chance of Fed catching him...in fact even if Nadal did retire tomorrow then I seriously can't see Fed catching & overtaking him. I know he's only 4 behind & Fed winning 2 next year is not beyond the realms of possibility...it's only going to get harder for him though.
Djokovic is the interesting one...if you said he'll win 4-5 next year I don't think too many people would deny that provided he stays fit it's achievable. To chase down Nadal would be a massive effort & I don't actually think he'll do it as I believe Nadal still has quite a few in him. Whilst he hasn't totally dominated the 3 clay 1000's as much over last 2 years you'd have to favor him winning at least 1 of the three each year for next few years & picking up another 1 or 2 a year is in no way beyond him, thus making the chase pretty tough for Novak whilst he's at his peak.
Djokovic is the interesting one...if you said he'll win 4-5 next year I don't think too many people would deny that provided he stays fit it's achievable. To chase down Nadal would be a massive effort & I don't actually think he'll do it as I believe Nadal still has quite a few in him. Whilst he hasn't totally dominated the 3 clay 1000's as much over last 2 years you'd have to favor him winning at least 1 of the three each year for next few years & picking up another 1 or 2 a year is in no way beyond him, thus making the chase pretty tough for Novak whilst he's at his peak.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
Grass is nowhere as big as clay, People in South american and southern europe learn to play tennis and play mostly in tennis courts until their challenger levels.
Where is tennis the main surface? freaking britain , who else?
Its not unfair considering even the grasscourt "goats" grew up playing in HC. How many challengers, atp 250, atp 500,etc are in grass? compare that to claycourts that are present everywhere.
Nadal has a healthy year and he is able to pack 5 m1000 just like 2013.
Nadal, at least until someone else comes along in the future and reels off Masters at an even faster rate. He's ahead of Federer by four, and he's also younger. He's only a year older than Djokovic but leads him by seven. Seem pretty clear-cut, unless Djokovic can keep up his current pace (averaging almost 4 per year from 2011 on) for another several years. Even then, Nadal has ample opportunity to add to his total, making him even harder to catch. Federer will probably win a few more in his career, but not enough to get close to Nadal.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Similar threads
- Poll
