Andy's Year End #1

[Rational National]

Its interesting reading all of this - Many people come at it with their fan hats on and many are subjectively and quite rationally analysing the facts - ultimately the numbers don't lie, but how you interpret them is obviously at the heart of the debate.

What I find most interesting, however, (coming at this as a Murray fan) is that almost all of the posts on this subject talk about how long Murray will hold the no. 1 before Novak reclaims. Now I am not in anyway saying this won't happen, but it seems there is very little consideration of the possibility that Murray actually goes further ahead of Novak and it is he who is the dominant force.

All the talk is off 'defending' points, whereas I think Murrays mindset must now be to attack tournaments with the view of winning them all - i.e. Having the Novak mindset of the past few years. If he is truly the no.1 you can't be looking over your shoulder - instead he should be thinking about winning multiple masters and multiple slams this year (and beating Novak in the process) but doing this by focusing on match by match, tournament by tournament - do that and the points take care of themselves but perhaps more importantly he solidifies his place as an all time great of the game and that ultimately is what he should be aiming for now.

 

[vjmtz]

Not sure what you mean by this, as the #1 player is based upon computer rankings. What I think you mean by "real" is your.

Anyhow, let us remember that the #1 ranking is the player who had the best prior calendar year. This means that, overall, Andy had the best results--based upon ATP ranking points--over the course of 2016. And the numbers don't lie.

Now if you only look at Slam results then sure, but Slam results only account for a portion of rankings - not even half in most cases. For instance, compare Andy's and Novak's total ATP points with their Slam-derived ATP points, and the percentage thereof.

ANDY: 12,140 total; 4,760 from Slams (39%)
NOVAK: 11,780 total; 5,290 from Slams (45%)

Now if you think that Slams are everything, then Novak should have been #1. But that's not the way the rules of the game work, and you can't change the rules after the fact. We can also give credit to Andy for managing his schedule really well. Novak also earned more points from Masters (5,150 to 4,650). The difference in their total points is largely because of ATP 500s: Andy earning 1,500 from three wins, while Novak only got 90 points from one tournament. And of course Andy finished the deal by winning the World Tour Finals.

So I think Andy earned it and is the "real" #1.

Djokovic is the real #1 because he achieved what matters the most. 2 > 1 and 2-0 at slams. I bet Murray would swap his season with Novak's.

I don't think so Djokovic was in tears when he lost @ the Olympics,i think we all saw what it ment to him.

It meant to him because he was representing his country. That doesn't mean that OG are nearly as important as slams and that would Djokovic trade 1 slam for OG. Especially because he completed Djokovic slam.

 

[El Dude]

vjmtz, you seem to be making a basic fallacy in that you are confusing career accomplishments with ATP points in 2016. For instance, completing the "Djokovic Slam" is a nice career accomplishment but occurred over two years. To say that because he completed the DS in 2016 means he should be #1 is conflating two separate things.

Similarly with him winning two Slams. The YE1--whether you like it or not--is determined by which player had the overall better year, according to their point structure, not just Slam wins.

And don't forget that Andy was YE1 because he defeated Novak in the World Tour Finals. If Novak had won, he'd be YE1 - so it isn't like Andy didn't earn it.

 

[El Dude]

Its interesting reading all of this - Many people come at it with their fan hats on and many are subjectively and quite rationally analysing the facts - ultimately the numbers don't lie, but how you interpret them is obviously at the heart of the debate.

What I find most interesting, however, (coming at this as a Murray fan) is that almost all of the posts on this subject talk about how long Murray will hold the no. 1 before Novak reclaims. Now I am not in anyway saying this won't happen, but it seems there is very little consideration of the possibility that Murray actually goes further ahead of Novak and it is he who is the dominant force.

All the talk is off 'defending' points, whereas I think Murrays mindset must now be to attack tournaments with the view of winning them all - i.e. Having the Novak mindset of the past few years. If he is truly the no.1 you can't be looking over your shoulder - instead he should be thinking about winning multiple masters and multiple slams this year (and beating Novak in the process) but doing this by focusing on match by match, tournament by tournament - do that and the points take care of themselves but perhaps more importantly he solidifies his place as an all time great of the game and that ultimately is what he should be aiming for now.

I don't necessarily think that Novak is going to regain his throne as the sole dominant player in the sport - those days are over, in my opinion. But I do think there is a good chance he'll take back #1 at some point in 2017, at least for a time.

As I said before, Andy's got the momentum and is playing better right now, so considering the points they both have to defend should be able to hold onto the #1 ranking at least through Roland Garros. After that Novak will have an opportunity to catch up. But this assumes that A) Andy can maintain his current level, and B) Novak can regain at least his 2012-14 level. But who knows how it will actually turn out.

But I agree with you about mind-set. A #1 can't think in terms of merely defending points.

 

[Shivashish Sarkar]

Andy might as well win a couple slams next year. That's near the high-end of the expectations I have for him. But, as far as 2016 goes, it was hard luck for Djokovic to have to lose the world no. 1 ranking after being 2-0 against the year-end #1 in slams this year.

 

[sid]

Year end Djokovic would have been expected to win by many,he had a cake walk of a draw compared to Murray.Looking forward to the first Final with these guys in 2017,but the one that matters is Australian Open if both guys make it.

 

[Fiero425]

Year end Djokovic would have been expected to win by many,he had a cake walk of a draw compared to Murray.Looking forward to the first Final with these guys in 2017,but the one that matters is Australian Open if both guys make it.

Cakewalks only seem to get Nole to the final! That USO was a tourney for the ages with defaults, retirements, and apathetic play from his opponents! Stan has become Nole's Kryptonite; taking him out of AO in 2014 winning over Nadal and '15 FO & '16 USO finals! Even though I can't stand Murray's game, at least he beat the best to take those titles last season; snatching the #1 on the last day! I'll soften my stance on AM if he can beat Nole tomorrow!

 

[El Dude]

Fiero, AM has had so many big matches that he's won, I don't know why 2017 AO would be the tipping point for you. You consider Novak a true all-time great, right? Well, consider that of Andy's four biggest titles, he had to beat Novak in the final of three of them (2016, WTF, 2013 Wimbledon, 2012 US Open). He's also beaten Novak in five Masters and Roger in two.

Andy is no slouch. He's not Roger, Novak, or Rafa, but he's better than everyone else over the last 10+ years.

 

[sid]

On Andy's year end after Doha that's 150pts more than Novak now on to AO.