Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 55 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
10,277 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Would he go higher up in the All Time Greats List?
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
6,247 Posts

·
~♥ Magnus Norman ♥~
Joined
·
3,328 Posts
Putting "Golden" in the name of the Masters achievement is stupid, I think. It's always going to imply Olympics. Just saying "Career Masters" would be fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,116 Posts
It would certainly be a great achievement but he's made 4 finals here already. Even if he never wins it to win 8/9 is still a great accomplishment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,627 Posts
it would be a nice stat but very much overshadowed by the Career Slam

I don't think it would change his spot or rank in terms of relation next to other great players though. tournaments change so much over time and obviously there are fewer surface/tournament specialists than there were in, say, the 90s, so it's sort of hard to give it tons of relevance when comparing players accomplishments in the big scheme of things

it definitely will prove that he was a very well rounded player (but that of course is something we all already know)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,116 Posts
I thought Ivan already did do it.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,063 Posts
It is a very good accomplishment, and most importantly at least something he could boast about that Nadal and Federer (his fellow Big Three members) hasn't been able to do. It might not be part of the All-Time Greats debate, but it would be something just unique to him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,630 Posts
it would be a nice stat but very much overshadowed by the Career Slam

I don't think it would change his spot or rank in terms of relation next to other great players though. tournaments change so much over time and obviously there are fewer surface/tournament specialists than there were in, say, the 90s, so it's sort of hard to give it tons of relevance when comparing players accomplishments in the big scheme of things

it definitely will prove that he was a very well rounded player (but that of course is something we all already know)
An argument could be made that it's actually harder to achieve than the Career Slam. I think it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,950 Posts
It'll tickle my funny bone to no end hearing Fed's "congratulatory" doublespeak when it finally does happen, considering this feat has eluded Gracerer. Most people here won't even pick up on it though :lol:

Or, he could let us all down and just call it "amazing."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57,596 Posts
Well the ATP have given it a name ; The Career Golden Masters

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2014/08/33/Cincinnati-Tuesday-Djokovic-Simon.aspx

But no, he goes no higher other than getting closer to McEnroe in status in the 7 Slam club - who is still a fair way ahead on other scores.
Status is still determined by Number of Majors won, then other criteria like weeks at Number 1 and other career titles accumulated.
What a stupid name, golden implies a gold medal
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,063 Posts
There could be arguments it is harder:

1. All of them are BO3. Players are not guaranteed to win even when two Sets to love up in Slams, or when 2 Sets to 1 up, but in Masters the 3rd Set is a quick draw. It also has a TB at the deciding Set in which Slams (except for USO) has not. Sometimes you could just bank on your consistency and fitness on BO5 marathons, but winning tournaments that are BO3 with deciding TB while also being consistent shows that you just can't be moved even in more random conditions.

2. They are played in one week. Slams are played within two weeks, and have rest days. Of course the reason is that they have 5-Setters, but sometimes early rounds on Slams are easier than say QFs of Masters IMO. Masters practically only usually have 1 rest day (where Monday-Tuesday have 1st Round matches and Tuesday some 2nd Round ones) so it means they would have to recover quickly in a quick match.

3. There are 9 of them, which means more tournaments you need to win. Seeding is also more vulnerable, with a 16-seed system than the usual 32-seed system. Also some of them are back-to-back -- so like Slams, some are virtually two-weekers but with no rest (probably a total of 2 days rest only).

So while the Slams are the most important ones winning all Masters which are usually more random than Slams is still a very good accomplishment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,644 Posts
It would be a big deal. It hasn't be done in almost 25 years. Some of you need to realize that there is tennis/life outside of majors.

Now, how the ATP calls this achievement is irrelevant. Golden ... whatever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,179 Posts
It would be an exceptional achievement, and worthy of mention along-side his slams, and would push him up in terms of 'tennis greatness', but anyone who calls it a 'career golden masters' goes down in my estimation for using that stupid, and nonsensical term. The ATP keep trying to make it work, but thankfully, no-one else seems to be falling for it.

It would be nice for him to have something Fedal don't have, but he doesn't have a gold medal, so ATP risks everyone ignoring it if they use a plainly wrong name.
 
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
Top