Nadal clinches year-end no. 1 for second time [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Nadal clinches year-end no. 1 for second time

Mario Sharapov
09-16-2010, 05:25 PM
http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2010/09/Other/Nadal-ATP-World-Tour-Champion.aspx

r2473
09-16-2010, 05:27 PM
So he's finally reached Hewitt's level.

But Hewitt did it in back to back years, so that is clearly more impressive.

I think if Nadal continues to work hard and improve, he might be able to actually reach Hewitt's level, but he has a long way to go.

Topspindoctor
09-16-2010, 05:30 PM
So he's finally reached Hewitt's level.

:spit: :haha:

Tennisman82
09-16-2010, 05:34 PM
So he's finally reached Hewitt's level.

But Hewitt did it in back to back years, so that is clearly more impressive.

I think if Nadal continues to work hard and improve, he might be able to actually reach Hewitt's level, but he has a long way to go.

Hewitt's two consecutive years at no.1 is about the only thing he has over Nadal. In terms of achievements and ability he was outclassed by Nadal a few years ago...

Tennisman82.

CCBH
09-16-2010, 05:36 PM
So he's finally reached Hewitt's level.

No, not yet. He is yet to lose in the first round of a major as defending champion, a record that is enjoyed by fewer players than the career Slam :worship:

r2473
09-16-2010, 05:41 PM
Don't get me wrong, Nadal still has an outside chance to match Hewitt. He just has to show that he is willing to work hard to improve his game.

He could do it.

Ivanatis
09-16-2010, 05:44 PM
year end no°1 :zzz:

Sapeod
09-16-2010, 05:52 PM
:spit: :haha:
Hewitt = 2 years as year end no.1.
In fact he did his consecutively.

Topspindoctor
09-16-2010, 05:56 PM
Hewitt = 2 years as year end no.1.
In fact he did his in a row.

I was laughing at the guy comparing him to Nadal. Hewitt couldn't serve, couldn't play on clay and had an obnoxious attitude on and off court. One of the few times I cheered for Federer is when he was putting this clown back in his place.

careergrandslam
09-16-2010, 05:57 PM
congrats rafa.

i think this might be the earliest to clinch the year end number 1, roger also clinched it in september in 2006.'
can someone find this out.

delpiero7
09-16-2010, 05:59 PM
Hewitt was no. 1 for a total of 80 weeks. Nadal has been no. 1 for 61 weeks, and with 15 weeks left to go this year he'll only be 4 weeks behind Hewitt at the start of next year. Even if Nadal gets KO'd in R1 of Doha and the AO and Nole manages to win both, Nadal would probably still be number 1 for the first 4 weeks of next year, meaning he'll at least equal 80 weeks at no. 1. By that point I think the extra 7 slams that Rafa has won would probably just about outweigh the fact that Hewitt had back to back year end no. 1 finishes.

r2473
09-16-2010, 06:40 PM
Hewitt was no. 1 for a total of 80 weeks. Nadal has been no. 1 for 61 weeks

As I said, he COULD reach Hewitt's level.

http://www.nicholsoncartoons.com.au/cartoons/new/2005-02-02%20Lleyton%20Hewitt%20Bec%20Cartwright%20engaged %20450.JPG

Sapeod
09-16-2010, 06:43 PM
As I said, he COULD reach Hewitt's level.

http://www.nicholsoncartoons.com.au/cartoons/new/2005-02-02%20Lleyton%20Hewitt%20Bec%20Cartwright%20engaged %20450.JPG
:rolls:

delpiero7
09-16-2010, 06:47 PM
As I said, he COULD reach Hewitt's level.


By sealing the YE no 1, Nadal is GUARANTEED at least another 15 weeks as no. 1, taking him to 76 weeks total. I'm not even sure whether it is mathematically possible for anyone to overtake him within the first 5 weeks of next year (highly unlikely as Nadal will still have 3 slams + at least 3 AMS to his name).

So I'll put my neck out and say Nadal will have beaten Hewitt's weeks at no. 1 before he next falls down the rankings.

pica_pica
09-16-2010, 06:48 PM
I hereby offer my sincere congrats :) :hatoff:

star
09-16-2010, 06:52 PM
So he's finally reached Hewitt's level.

But Hewitt did it in back to back years, so that is clearly more impressive.

I think if Nadal continues to work hard and improve, he might be able to actually reach Hewitt's level, but he has a long way to go.

:lol: :lol:

:hug: You really are a funny guy.

r2473
09-16-2010, 06:52 PM
By sealing the YE no 1, Nadal is GUARANTEED at least another 15 weeks as no. 1, taking him to 76 weeks total. I'm not even sure whether it is mathematically possible for anyone to overtake him within the first 5 weeks of next year (highly unlikely as Nadal will still have 3 slams + at least 3 AMS to his name).

So I'll put my neck out and say Nadal will have beaten Hewitt's weeks at no. 1 before he next falls down the rankings.



Well, until it happens............

Infinity
09-16-2010, 07:03 PM
congrats rafa.

i think this might be the earliest to clinch the year end number 1, roger also clinched it in september in 2006.'
can someone find this out.

and in 2004 too.

born_on_clay
09-16-2010, 07:12 PM
congrats champ :hatoff:

FormerRafaFan
09-16-2010, 07:15 PM
Hewitt was no. 1 for a total of 80 weeks. Nadal has been no. 1 for 61 weeks, and with 15 weeks left to go this year he'll only be 4 weeks behind Hewitt at the start of next year. Even if Nadal gets KO'd in R1 of Doha and the AO and Nole manages to win both, Nadal would probably still be number 1 for the first 4 weeks of next year, meaning he'll at least equal 80 weeks at no. 1. By that point I think the extra 7 slams that Rafa has won would probably just about outweigh the fact that Hewitt had back to back year end no. 1 finishes.

I agree with this :)

Persimmon
09-16-2010, 07:17 PM
So he's finally reached Hewitt's level.


:awww:

Matt01
09-16-2010, 07:43 PM
ETA: Congrats to the #1 :bowdown:


I was laughing at the guy comparing him to Nadal. Hewitt couldn't serve, couldn't play on clay and had an obnoxious attitude on and off court.


And what exactly does this have to do with his achievements in tennis? :scratch:

Apophis
09-16-2010, 08:01 PM
The ATP needed this long to figure this out? But, awesome achievement. No way he'll lose this ranking until Wimbledon.

r2473
09-16-2010, 08:49 PM
No way he'll lose this ranking until Wimbledon.

Who's taking over after Wimbledon?

.....or do you mean it will happen just before Wimbledon?

Black Adam
09-16-2010, 08:54 PM
The ATP needed this long to figure this out? But, awesome achievement. No way he'll lose this ranking until Wimbledon.
False God!!!

Pirata.
09-16-2010, 08:57 PM
http://www.nicholsoncartoons.com.au/cartoons/new/2005-02-02%20Lleyton%20Hewitt%20Bec%20Cartwright%20engaged %20450.JPG

:spit::haha:

No way he'll lose this ranking until Wimbledon.

Although I don't see anyone doing it, he could definitely drop points if he loses early in the clay season. He has quarterfinal at AO, two semifinals at IW/Miami and the entire winning period from Monte Carlo to Wimbledon to defend. It's not impossible for him to defend it all, but it's certainly not out of the question for him not to :shrug:

The Magician
09-16-2010, 09:01 PM
Hewitt was no. 1 for a total of 80 weeks. Nadal has been no. 1 for 61 weeks, and with 15 weeks left to go this year he'll only be 4 weeks behind Hewitt at the start of next year. Even if Nadal gets KO'd in R1 of Doha and the AO and Nole manages to win both, Nadal would probably still be number 1 for the first 4 weeks of next year, meaning he'll at least equal 80 weeks at no. 1. By that point I think the extra 7 slams that Rafa has won would probably just about outweigh the fact that Hewitt had back to back year end no. 1 finishes.

They're different records. Nadull's record shows he plays well in big matches and is great at collecting GS, while Hewitt's record shows he had longevity at the top and consistency throughout the year. I don't think anyone would argue Hewitt has a better record at the Grand Slams, but arguing Nadull has the consistency at #1 or Hewitt is just as foolish.

Hewitt is very underrated on here, but he was a great champion who had the misfortune of running into peak Fed and having a game that matched up poorly :sad:

Swiss Mountain
09-16-2010, 09:06 PM
Nadal generation is terrible: Nadal didn't beat any N°1 other than Roger.

Roger? beat Sampras, Agassi, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin.
His generation was great, better and a lot of diversity in the game. So Fed walked on three generations.
It's been 5 years aprox. that nadal, Murray and Djokovic are on tour, And Roger was always n°1, and probably going to be again next year :)

Chair Umpire
09-16-2010, 09:14 PM
Sampras, Agassi: They were thirty aged already by then so you got to be kidding me. Nadal got Federer's number in his peak, Federer beat Sampras and Agassi when they were two old farts already.

Hewitt, Roddick, Safin: Good joke. :rolleyes:

Nice try though.

A_Skywalker
09-16-2010, 09:15 PM
Nadal generation is terrible: Nadal didn't beat any N°1 other than Roger.

Roger? beat Sampras, Agassi, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin.
His generation was great, better and a lot of diversity in the game. So Fed walked on three generations.
It's been 5 years aprox. that nadal, Murray and Djokovic are on tour, And Roger was always n°1, and probably going to be again next year :)

Samprass and Agassi were old men, Roddick, how can you even put him as challenge. Safin was drunk russian, he could produce great tennis, but most of the times he loses. THe only peaked player Federer beat was Nadal at Wimbledon.

Swiss Mountain
09-16-2010, 10:15 PM
Sampras, Agassi: They were thirty aged already by then so you got to be kidding me. Nadal got Federer's number in his peak, Federer beat Sampras and Agassi when they were two old farts already.

Hewitt, Roddick, Safin: Good joke. :rolleyes:

Nice try though.



Nadal only beat prime Fed on clay, when Fed was sick and already on decline (started in 2007) then he beat him on clay; but mostly, Fed lost. Like you say he is an old fart now! exept that he is far better than Sampras and Agassi combined.
And Safin would own Djoko and Murray and Nadal at the same age. Taller,two handed backhand, everything Nadal hates.

But anyway, Roger beat them all in slam final: nadal+murray+djoko, always looking up to the FedExpress. And that will never go away buddy, it's part of History now

Swiss Mountain
09-16-2010, 10:18 PM
Samprass and Agassi were old men, Roddick, how can you even put him as challenge. Safin was drunk russian, he could produce great tennis, but most of the times he loses. THe only peaked player Federer beat was Nadal at Wimbledon.



Jesus, you don't listen!
They were Roger('s age today, and even less for Agassi.
The peaked players Fed beat is Hewitt, he has been a longer n°1 than nadal for the moment, but Fedterror came.

Nadal is just lucky Roger isn't from his generation, because he would only grab french open trophy today, like those 2005/2006/2007 year.

You will understand when Rafa will find his younger nemesis maybe.

Matt01
09-16-2010, 10:42 PM
They're different records. Nadull's record shows he plays well in big matches and is great at collecting GS, while Hewitt's record shows he had longevity at the top and consistency throughout the year.


Hewitt? Longevity at the top? :scratch:

FormerRafaFan
09-16-2010, 10:43 PM
This is well deserved. No doubt that Nadal is currently the best tennis player in the world. He deserves to be the year-end #1 :)

careergrandslam
09-16-2010, 10:51 PM
Jesus, you don't listen!
They were Roger('s age today, and even less for Agassi.
The peaked players Fed beat is Hewitt, he has been a longer n°1 than nadal for the moment, but Fedterror came.

Nadal is just lucky Roger isn't from his generation, because he would only grab french open trophy today, like those 2005/2006/2007 year.

You will understand when Rafa will find his younger nemesis maybe.

federer is lucky he didnt have to face 2008/early 2009/2010 rafa, during federer's peak in 2004-2007.
federer would be lucky to have 3 slams.

Chair Umpire
09-16-2010, 10:52 PM
Swiss Mountain, keep lying to yourself but don't expect the rest of the world to agree with your nonsense.

Sapeod
09-16-2010, 10:54 PM
federer is lucky he didnt have to face 2008/early 2009/2010 rafa, during federer's peak in 2004-2007.
federer would be lucky to have 3 slams.
Peak Federer >>>>> Peak Nadal, by far.

Sapeod
09-16-2010, 10:55 PM
Jesus, you don't listen!
They were Roger('s age today, and even less for Agassi.
The peaked players Fed beat is Hewitt, he has been a longer n°1 than nadal for the moment, but Fedterror came.

Nadal is just lucky Roger isn't from his generation, because he would only grab french open trophy today, like those 2005/2006/2007 year.

You will understand when Rafa will find his younger nemesis maybe.
+1

Billups85
09-16-2010, 10:58 PM
Peak Federer >>>>> Peak Nadal, by far.

Wrong.

Nadal ended Federer's peak.

Chair Umpire
09-16-2010, 11:05 PM
Sampras and Agassi are 10 years older than Fed, and they were +30 years old when Fed defeated them. Fed is 5 years older than Rafa and he still hasn't reached the 30s. And it's not like Rafa has started to own him just today either. :rolleyes:

The Magician
09-16-2010, 11:05 PM
Samprass and Agassi were old men, Roddick, how can you even put him as challenge. Safin was drunk russian, he could produce great tennis, but most of the times he loses. THe only peaked player Federer beat was Nadal at Wimbledon.

Agassi peaked as an "old man", he won the majority of his slams late in his career which you would admit if you were at all honest about Federer's generation. Also, Safin had x100 times the talent Nadull has and suffered from real debilitating injuries :mad: I feel bad for the few sane Nadull fans out there, the representation they get in GM is scraping the bottom of the barrel :rolleyes:

The Magician
09-16-2010, 11:10 PM
Hewitt? Longevity at the top? :scratch:

Before Federer broke the record by an insane amount, Hewitt's consecutive weeks at #1 was considered a great accomplishment. Even after the Federer era began, Hewitt remained in the top 10 and consistently challenged for slams on all surfaces, and this was because of variety in his game (Hewitt is one of the best volleyers on tour) and not because of the changing surfaces like today.

I don't know why I bother though, Nadulltards have no interest in tennis before 2005 and will stop having interest when he retires, explains in part why the dire state of tennis right now doesn't bother them :(

r2473
09-16-2010, 11:14 PM
federer is lucky he didnt have to face 2008/early 2009/2010 rafa, during federer's peak in 2004-2007.
federer would be lucky to have 3 slams.

Federer was just a transitional champion.

We've all been saying that out here for the past 7 years or so.

delpiero7
09-17-2010, 03:55 AM
Why all the loving for Hewitt all of a sudden? All I seem to remember reading here the majority of the time is that he was a transitional champion.

Also, people seem to be making far too much of his 2 YE No. 1 finishes. The only reason that Hewitt had any chance of taking the number 1 spot in the first place is because Guga flopped badly following the 2001 US Open, going 1-8! Hewitt still only managed to take the top spot right at the end of the year by winning the TMC. Nadal finished year end number 1 despite skipping the TMC in 2008, and he could do so again and still be streets ahead of everyone else.

Also, let's not forget that in his first tournament as no. 1 he lost to Alberto Martin (a guy who lost twice as many matches as he won on hard on the tour) in R1 of AO 2002. He then followed that up the next year by losing in R1 of Wimbledon as defending champion. Now let's say that Nadal manages to lose in R1 of next year's AO (say to someone like Nalbandian or Gulbis) the haters wouldn't be able to contain their delight, and would claim that Nadal isn't worthy of being the top player in the game.

Don't get me wrong, I am not disrespecting Hewitt achievements. Reaching no. 1 at any time in history is a phenomenal effort by any player (unless they are called Nadal of course :o). Winning 2 slams and back to back TMCs is also an achievement not to be sniffed at. Also, Federer used to be Hewitt's bitch back then.

But to be serious, only mentally underdeveloped people would ever think of saying that Hewitt was anywhere near as good as Nadal is now. His accomplishments in the game are often not appreciated, but a lot of people in this thread also seem to be giving him overly generous amounts of credit.

Matt01
09-17-2010, 08:28 PM
Before Federer broke the record by an insane amount, Hewitt's consecutive weeks at #1 was considered a great accomplishment. Even after the Federer era began, Hewitt remained in the top 10 and consistently challenged for slams on all surfaces, and this was because of variety in his game (Hewitt is one of the best volleyers on tour) and not because of the changing surfaces like today.

I don't know why I bother though, Nadulltards have no interest in tennis before 2005 and will stop having interest when he retires, explains in part why the dire state of tennis right now doesn't bother them :(


No need to comment on the retarded 2nd paragraph. :retard:

As for the 1st one: Hewitt started playing on the tour in 1998 and is still playing. In all those years, he finshed the year in the Top 5 only 4 times (1 more time in Top 10). The 2 more Top 20 finishes were not exactly a big succes for him, either. Maybe it's just me but I fail to see the "longevity at the top" here :lol: And no, he didn't stay in the Top 10 for long after he dropped from the #1 ranking.
And "consistantly challenged for Slams on all surfaces"? At RG, where he never made it past the QF and even to that only twice? Yeah, right. :rolleyes:

Of course I won't dispute that his weeks at #1 are an impressive stat.

selyoink
09-17-2010, 09:12 PM
Wrong.

Nadal ended Federer's peak.

Wrong. Federer's peak ended because of age, not because of anything Nadull did. Federer won 3/4 slams in 2004, 2006 and 2007. And the one year Nadull won 3/4 slams he had a joke draw in all three slams. Only the most delusional Nadulltard could possibly argue that peak Nadull is greater than peak Federer.

Matt01
09-17-2010, 10:30 PM
Wrong. Federer's peak ended because of age, not because of anything Nadull did. Federer won 3/4 slams in a second season in 2004, 2006 and 2007. And the one year Nadull won 3/4 slams he had a joke draw in all three slams. Only the most delusional Nadulltard could possibly argue that peak Nadull is greater than peak Federer.


You're wrong.