MensTennisForums.com - Reply to Topic
Thread: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1? Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
10-07-2012 10:05 AM
Litotes
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPower View Post
There aren't that many players in MEN's tennis that has been #1 without winning at least 1 slam.

Many more that has won slams or been in slam finals without ever being close to #1 aren't there?


#1 is actually a better "quality" guarantee. Harder to fluke #1 as the system works, than to fluke slams like the infamous one slam wonders who sometimes haven't even been in the top3 even


So I guess even in GOAT debate #1 should be seen as more difficult. Got a harder time seeing someone passing Federers weeks at nr1 than passing federers 17 slams.

slams you only need to be awesome for 4 tournaments a year. To hold #1 you need to be awesome all season. So in theory #1 has more prestige to it
The only #1 who didn't win a slam since the dawn of computer rankings in 1973 is Rios.

You think Federer's 299 and counting weeks are a better record than 17 slams? I don't. I think someone else will reach 299 weeks as #1 before someone else wins 17 slams (regardless of any later Fed improvements). After all, Sampras and Lendl are not that far back - ca. 4,5% for Sampras and 10% for Lendl. The difference %-wise to #2 an #3 in slam wins are much greater - 17,5% to Sampras and 35% to Borg/Laver/Nadal. Nadal is exceptional in having so many slams for so "few" weeks as #1 (Borg has similar numbers, but as we know he was cheated by the system and should have had more). I don't think the next double-digit slam winner will have been stuck at #2 for four years.
10-07-2012 07:54 AM
Slasher1985
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

Quote:
Originally Posted by atennisfan View Post
Rafter of course.
He has 2 slams and #1 ranking.
I changed that question in a later post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slasher1985 View Post
EDIT: Yeah, you're right. Rafter has 2 GS. So, the way you said is the better questions.

Everyone: Chang vs. Rios. Which one was better ?
So, it's Chang vs Rios now
10-07-2012 07:49 AM
SerialKillerToBe
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

Definitely slams.
10-07-2012 06:35 AM
MaxPower
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

There aren't that many players in MEN's tennis that has been #1 without winning at least 1 slam.

Many more that has won slams or been in slam finals without ever being close to #1 aren't there?


#1 is actually a better "quality" guarantee. Harder to fluke #1 as the system works, than to fluke slams like the infamous one slam wonders who sometimes haven't even been in the top3 even


So I guess even in GOAT debate #1 should be seen as more difficult. Got a harder time seeing someone passing Federers weeks at nr1 than passing federers 17 slams.

slams you only need to be awesome for 4 tournaments a year. To hold #1 you need to be awesome all season. So in theory #1 has more prestige to it
10-07-2012 04:06 AM
156mphserve
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

The most important stat when refeing to GOAT is the most tard fans on MTF
10-07-2012 04:00 AM
atennisfan
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slasher1985 View Post

Who would you say was better: Chang with 1 Slam or Rafter with 1 week as No.1 ? Answer this question and the OQ is also answered.
Rafter of course.
He has 2 slams and #1 ranking.
10-07-2012 02:35 AM
uxyzapenje
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

Slams. But I voted for weeks at #1 bcs I don't think is THAT big of a difference as the poll shows it. I think the question would be like 1 Slam > 1 full year as #1 or 1 Slam < 1 full year as #1... Or if Ferrer or Delpo (or any non current top4 player) would (or was since now there's no chance for that to happen) somehow be ranked no1 at the end of this year, with Novak, Rafa, Roger and Andy winning 1 Slam each, who would be the best player of the year?
10-07-2012 02:25 AM
Federer in 2
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

"Oh well what's the point of this poll?! MTF is full of Fedtards anyway so they are gonna vote for Slams cause Fed has the most. Oh wait..."
10-07-2012 01:59 AM
Tag
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

chang also had several other slam finals, plus masters. only thing he didn't have was weeks at no 1, peaked at no 2

chang over rios, easily

anyway, the most important thing for a GOAT candidate is their wins over the muggiest players to ever mug it up at the top of the game
10-06-2012 10:10 PM
Sanya
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPower View Post
don't see how this ended up discussing stuff like Bjorkman. But you see Bjorman won 9 slams and was nr1..........in doubles! He was quite the player.



For the topic: In men's tennis it usually goes hand in hand anyway. Federer, Sampras both spent a huge amount of weeks as nr1 as they collected slams.

A 14-15 slam winner that hasn't spent 200+ weeks as nr would feel very wrong. Maybe Nadal can become one as he spent so much time as nr2. But Nadal's resume has bigger holes than that so probably nothing that keeps Rafito awake at night.

Slams is what media and casuals focus most on so guess it's most important. Only the true tennis fans really care about time spent at #1. Many casual fans don't even understand the ranking system in the first place and the concept of defending points and so forth.
Vice versa. Fans can not know about prestigious of some tournaments, but all realize what it means to be #1.

#1 is the same thing for any branch in life, it`s easier to understand and estimate.
10-06-2012 10:07 PM
JediFed
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

Quote:
Chang vs. Rios. Which one was better ?
Chang had over 100 GS wins. Rios? Hell no. Chang >>> Rios.
10-06-2012 09:52 PM
Freak3yman84
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPower View Post
don't see how this ended up discussing stuff like Bjorkman.
Neither do I
10-06-2012 09:51 PM
MaxPower
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

don't see how this ended up discussing stuff like Bjorkman. But you see Bjorman won 9 slams and was nr1..........in doubles! He was quite the player.



For the topic: In men's tennis it usually goes hand in hand anyway. Federer, Sampras both spent a huge amount of weeks as nr1 as they collected slams.

A 14-15 slam winner that hasn't spent 200+ weeks as nr would feel very wrong. Maybe Nadal can become one as he spent so much time as nr2. But Nadal's resume has bigger holes than that so probably nothing that keeps Rafito awake at night.

Slams is what media and casuals focus most on so guess it's most important. Only the true tennis fans really care about time spent at #1. Many casual fans don't even understand the ranking system in the first place and the concept of defending points and so forth.
10-06-2012 09:16 PM
Freak3yman84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanya View Post
Bjorkman will play in Wimbledon semi in 4 years after that tournament, he was still decent player. And it only shows what a great grass court player Lleyton was.

He got a very generous draw that time, and got demolished once he met a decent player. Plus, why focus on that? Look at the rest of Lleyton's draw...
10-06-2012 09:12 PM
Sanya
Re: More important for one's GOAT resume: Slams or Time Spent at #1?

Bjorkman will play in Wimbledon semi in 4 years after that tournament, he was still decent player. And it only shows what a great grass court player Lleyton was.
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome