Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,987 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Player X wins RG and USO, but doesn't play at AO due to injury and gets eliminated in Wimbledon 1st round.

Player Y wins AO, and has 3 SF in the other majors and wins the Olympics singles (gold).

Player Z is the finalist in all 4 majors and Olympics singles (silver), and is on the winning Davis Cup team.

Who would be World Champion of the Year and why?

Respectfully,
masterclass
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,789 Posts
Not sure as far as points go but subjectively definitely not player Z since they only have 1 big title while the others have 2 each. Between X and Y I’d probably go with the player who won the WTF; if neither did I’d use Masters titles as the tiebreaker.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,987 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Not sure as far as points go but subjectively definitely not player Z since they only have 1 big title while the others have 2 each. Between X and Y I’d probably go with the player who won the WTF; if neither did I’d use Masters titles as the tiebreaker.
I'm not sure how much ITF takes non-ITF tournaments into account when choosing World Champion.
I've noticed that ITF does give consistency in going deep in the majors a high value even if there is no title won..

Respectfully,
masterclass
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,761 Posts
Let’s see, Rafa wins 2 more GS and Djokovic 1 and Gold in your theory , last player seems unreasonable whomever it is supposed to be!

2 GS titles trumps all here ! No one cares about SF’s and Olympic Gold is quickly forgotten in stats, but GS titles live on forever !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
792 Posts
I guess one can argue in slightly different ways, but here are my two cents:

Player X has the edge with two majors, to the extent everything of significance has been mentioned. However, if Y comes out ahead in most of the tournaments that have not been mentioned (let's say a win at the WTF and/or significantly better results at the masters) he also has a shot at the title. Player Z without any slams has no chance, though.

But given that not all big tournaments have been handed out to someone, maybe there could be a chance for a fourth guy W in this scenario? Let's say the same player W wins Wimbledon, the WTF, makes decent results at the other slams and also wins a few masters, enough to be on top at the year-end ranking? What when? I would guess we're supposed to exclude such a possibility, though, and instead assume that whoever wins Wimbledon doesn't make good results elsewhere, so please ignore this idea.

My argument for picking X at the top is basically that slams victories are really important. Being one slam behind one can still make up for it, but it takes quite a lot. If you're two slams behind, the rest won't matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,987 Posts
Discussion Starter #6 (Edited)
Curiously, purely in terms of ITF tournament points:

player X = 4000 points in ITF tourneys wth 2 majors won
player Y = 4160 points with 1 major won + 3 major SF + Olympics Gold (0 points),
player Z = 4800 points with 4 major finals + Davis Cup (0 points).

So does player Y's consistency in majors + Olympics Gold trump player Z's leading points + Davis Cup win, and player X's lead in major wins?
I think it would be a pretty tough decision for ITF.

Respectfully,
masterclass
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fedjokodal

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,789 Posts
Hard to see Mr runner up existing, makes 4 GS finals on all surfaces but loses all of them ?
I could see that happening to Murray during the Big Four era, especially 2011-12. And he could have entered the '16 USO having lost all three previous slam finals had Federer gone through to the WB final injury-free that year (not saying Federer would have beaten him for sure but he would have been a tougher opponent than Raonic).
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,761 Posts
I could see that happening to Murray during the Big Four era, especially 2011-12. And he could have entered the '16 USO having lost all three previous slam finals had Federer gone through to the WB final injury-free that year (not saying Federer would have beaten him for sure but he would have been a tougher opponent than Raonic).
Yes I agree Murray kind of filled that position, I was thinking currently, I can't see anyone possibly being good enough to make 4 GS Finals outside of Rafa/Novak and even that is quite a stretch, plus either make all 4, not coming home with 4 Runner Up trophies.

I suppose there is a tiny possibility of Roger/Daniil/Dominic , but the odds are pretty low!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,987 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
It's interesting that a Runner-up Slam has never been accomplished in all of tennis history. Probably the closest one to doing it in the Open Era would have been Jimmy Connors in 1975. He was runner-up at AO, Wimbledon and the USO. He was blocked from playing at Roland Garros in 1974 and in response boycotted the French Open for the next four years, including 1975.

Roy Emerson and Fred Stolle also were runners-up 3 times during a season, Stolle losiing in the 4th Round at 1964 Roland Garros, and Emerson in 1962 retiring in the 4th round to the eventual finalist Mulligan. Emerson lost to Laver in the other 3 in Laver's first Grand Slam year.

Prior to that, in the Pro-am Era, John H. (Jack) Crawford made 7 straight finals between 1933 and 1934, winning the Australian, French, and Wimbledon, and was a few breaths away from winning the first Grand Slam in History but faded badly to Fred Perry in a 5 set Final at the US championships after being ahead 2 sets to 1. 3–6, 13–11, 6–4, 0–6, 1–6. He was a known asthmatic and it was extremely muggy at Forest Hills that day. He rarely played in the humid summer in New York, but made a valiant effort to win the first Grand Slam (later done by Don Budge in 1938). In 1934, he made 3 consecutive finals in Australia, Paris, and Wimbledon, but did not play at Forest Hills. So Jack Crawford is the only player in the history of tennis to have the Non-Calendar year Runner-up Slam.

So, yes, it is extremely difficult to get the Runner-Up Slam. Maybe player Z would deserve World Champion after all. ;)

Respectfully,
masterclass
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,523 Posts
Player of the year would obviously and objectively be the most popular player, because popularity is the new most important criteria for establishing players' success.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,761 Posts
federer is certainly Capable of doing that including wasting championship points in at least 2 of them
I'm skeptical , after making 1 GS Final in 2019, I don't see why he makes 4 in 2020.

He did have a great year though, hard to see it going on much longer, I would expect his schedule to shrink more and more, but to hang around as long as possible for the endorsement deals :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,528 Posts
Points should only be used to tiebreak if they have the same number of GS titles. DC (not even an individual achievement) and Olympics shouldn't be considered at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,987 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
I'm sure most MTF Experts know that in 2013, RAFA won 2 majors (RG+USO) beating Novak twice. Novak won 1 (AO), and Murray won 1 (WC).
But 2 time slam winner RAFA was absent at the AO and lost in the 1st round of Wimbledon in straight sets to Steve Darcis.
Novak on the other hand won the AO, made two finals (WC, USO) and lost in the semis of RG to Nadal, and was in the Davis Cup finals, winning 7 out of 7 singles rubbers.

Novak was ITF World Champion in 2013.

Respectfully,
masterclass
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fedjokodal

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,029 Posts
I'm sure most MTF Experts know that in 2013, RAFA won 2 majors (RG+USO) beating Novak twice. Novak won 1 (AO), and Murray won 1 (WC).
But 2 time slam winner RAFA was absent at the AO and lost in the 1st round of Wimbledon in straight sets to Steve Darcis.
Novak on the other hand won the AO, made two finals (WC, USO) and lost in the semis of RG to Nadal, and was in the Davis Cup finals, winning 7 out of 7 singles rubbers.

Novak was ITF World Champion in 2013.

Respectfully,
masterclass
Yes, I immediately noticed that Player X was basically Nadal in 2013. The ITF works in mysterious ways, and I think they'd have a very tough time deciding the champion in this case. It's hard to justify picking player X, because then how would that explain them choosing Djokovic over Nadal in 2013? At the same time, if they pick Y, how do they explain it given that Z has far more consistency? And can they really choose Z when he hasn't won anything (other than a team competition)?

It'd be tough - my guess is they'd pick Player Y, as a compromise between success and consistency, but it wouldn't be very convincing.
 

·
Your visions will happen
Joined
·
48,513 Posts
The guy who actually fucking won, Player X

It's interesting that a Runner-up Slam has never been accomplished in all of tennis history. Probably the closest one to doing it in the Open Era would have been Jimmy Connors in 1975. He was runner-up at AO, Wimbledon and the USO. He was blocked from playing at Roland Garros in 1974 and in response boycotted the French Open for the next four years, including 1975.

Roy Emerson and Fred Stolle also were runners-up 3 times during a season, Stolle losiing in the 4th Round at 1964 Roland Garros, and Emerson in 1962 retiring in the 4th round to the eventual finalist Mulligan. Emerson lost to Laver in the other 3 in Laver's first Grand Slam year.

Prior to that, in the Pro-am Era, John H. (Jack) Crawford made 7 straight finals between 1933 and 1934, winning the Australian, French, and Wimbledon, and was a few breaths away from winning the first Grand Slam in History but faded badly to Fred Perry in a 5 set Final at the US championships after being ahead 2 sets to 1. 3–6, 13–11, 6–4, 0–6, 1–6. He was a known asthmatic and it was extremely muggy at Forest Hills that day. He rarely played in the humid summer in New York, but made a valiant effort to win the first Grand Slam (later done by Don Budge in 1938). In 1934, he made 3 consecutive finals in Australia, Paris, and Wimbledon, but did not play at Forest Hills. So Jack Crawford is the only player in the history of tennis to have the Non-Calendar year Runner-up Slam.

So, yes, it is extremely difficult to get the Runner-Up Slam. Maybe player Z would deserve World Champion after all. ;)

Respectfully,
masterclass
Crawford sipped too much brandy after that third set, but let them say it was muggy and he had asthma, yeah bullshit

I'm sure most MTF Experts know that in 2013, RAFA won 2 majors (RG+USO) beating Novak twice. Novak won 1 (AO), and Murray won 1 (WC).
But 2 time slam winner RAFA was absent at the AO and lost in the 1st round of Wimbledon in straight sets to Steve Darcis.
Novak on the other hand won the AO, made two finals (WC, USO) and lost in the semis of RG to Nadal, and was in the Davis Cup finals, winning 7 out of 7 singles rubbers.

Novak was ITF World Champion in 2013.

Respectfully,
masterclass
No one gives a fuck what ITF thinks old friend. Everyone knows Rafa was #1 in 2013 no matter how many non slam events Nole won, Rafa won the ones that counted
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top