Another Look at Most Dominant Player

[DarthFed]

Show me to a post where I said Rafa was not the best and therefore most dominant player of 2013.

 

[Moxie]

Then pick at your mind, Nadal was the dominant in 2013 or not?

He already he said he was. If you poke at him, he'll retract it.

 

[Carol]

I already said he was clearly the best player that year. But GSM's point that Nole was also a dominant player that season is not without merit. And it was the part about 3 MS wins and 1 YEC being better than 5 MS wins that you took offense to. But then you are easily riled, kind of entertaining, you do make a good puppet at times.

Not more a good puppet at times as you. Nobody has said that Novak wasn't play well in 2013, he did but Rafa was 7 months off, he started very irregular playing (by logic) but later was brilliant most of the year winning in clay and HC

 

[DarthFed]

He already he said he was. If you poke at him, he'll retract it.

Haha, tempting as it may be...

 

[GameSetAndMath]

OK. I finally did the calculations.

Roger had a dominant stretch from 2003 Wimbledon to 2010 AO, a period spanning 27 slams. Of these, he won 16, reached the finals of another 6, reached the semifinals of 3, had a 4th round exit once and a 3rd round exit once. He accumulated a total of 41,630 points (converted to today's scale based on results) out of a maximum possible of 54,000. His dominance coefficient is 0.7709 (the ratio 41,630/54000). His greatness figure is 27* .7709 = 20.815.

Novak had a dominant stretch from 2010 USO to 2016 USO, a period spanning 25 slams. Of these, he won 11, reached the finals of another 8, reached the semifinals of four more and had a QF exit once and a 3R exit once. He accumulated a total of 34,930 points out of a maximum possible 50,000. His dominance coefficient is 0.6986 (the ratio of 34,930/50,000). His greatness figure is 25*0.6986 = 17.465.

So, actually Roger had a longer dominant stretch than Novak (27 to 25). Also, Roger had greater dominance than Novak (0.7709 to 0.6986)
So, obviously Roger has a larger "greatness figure" compared to Novak (20.815 to 17.465).

p.s. If you go strictly by the definition in the blog, Roger's dominant stretch begins only from 2015 Wimbledon as he did not win or reach the finals of 2015 AO and RG. But, it is counterintuitive to leave 2004 as part of Roger's dominant stretch. Besides, even in 2015 AO and RG, Roger made it to SF and so he was indeed relevant. I would like to change the definition of dominant stretch in the blog to a sequence of slams in which a player does not flame out before SF twice in a row.

 

[Carol]

Show me to a post where I said Rafa was not the best and therefore most dominant player of 2013.

You have said that to win 3 MS and the YEC is better than 5 MS events but you forgot to say that 5 MS and two GS is more important than 3 MS and one YEC. You are the typical poster who likes to say "oh yeah, he won BUT....." of course always when is something about Nadal, funny, really funny

 

[Carol]

He already he said he was. If you poke at him, he'll retract it.

Yeah....he says but he doesn't...:mail:

 

[Moxie]

Yeah....he says but he doesn't...:mail:

No, he specifically said it.

 

[Shivashish Sarkar]

In 2008 Nadal dominated and there is no question about that. He was both YE #1 and player of the year in 2008.

Similarly, in 2009 Fed dominated and there is no question about that. He was both YE #1 and player of the year in 2009.

But, 2013 was not comparable to 2008 and 2009 where there is a consensus on who is the most dominant player.
Very rarely is the player of the year award given in an year to a different player other than the one who finished YE#1.
2013 is one such year; Rafa finished #1 and Novak won player of the year award. That itself is good enough to
show that there is not much consensus about that year.

I would not bother to talk about 2011, where contrary to your claim Nadal was not looming large at all by any means.

Rafa should have been given the player of the year award that year I guess. The only reason he was deprived of that that I can think of is that he lost very early at Wimbly and did not play AO. 2 GS and 5 masters. Novak mostly reached finals compared to Nadal's record. Perhaps, this award gives importance to the overall consistency of players in a year. Nadal played well in patches and they did not like it.

 

[Carol]

No, he specifically said it.

Whatever......

 

[Moxie]

Novak had a dominant stretch from 2010 USO to 2016 USO, a period spanning 25 slams.

I hate to be nitpicking, but no one puts Novak's dominant stretch from the 2010 USO. That would be the 2011 AO. Doesn't change anything, but remember your history, man!

 

[Moxie]

Whatever......

That's all you got? "Whatever," indeed.

 

[Carol]

That's all you got? "Whatever," indeed.

Yep, whatever you and Darth say, that's all I got

 

[Moxie]

Yep, whatever you and Darth say, that's all I got

#faltadeeducación

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I hate to be nitpicking, but no one puts Novak's dominant stretch from the 2010 USO. That would be the 2011 AO. Doesn't change anything, but remember your history, man!

It is not due to an error and it is intentional. In 2010 USO, Novak reached the finals and so it is included as part of his dominant stretch. Remember, the dominant stretch is a period where a player is mostly dominant and never irrelevant. Also, you might want to check the definition in the blog.

 

[Moxie]

It is not due to an error and it is intentional. In 2010 USO, Novak reached the finals and so it is included as part of his dominant stretch. Remember, the dominant stretch is a period where a player is mostly dominant and never irrelevant. Also, you might want to check the definition in the blog.

However you define it, I don't think it matches historically. Even though Novak's streak began in Nov., I think, of 2010, I find it retroactive and revisionist to see him as "dominant" before AO 2011. I believe we were all watching tennis at that period, and no one would have called Djokovic dominant, then. "Ascending" would be more accurate.

 

[Carol]

#faltadeeducación

Ninguna falta de educación, simplemente no tengo ganas de discutir, hasta luego

 

[Moxie]

Ninguna falta de educación, simplemente no tengo ganas de discutir, hasta luego

Uno puede admitir que se equivocó. You have no hesitancy about debating...just demure when you get called out. Porfa!

 

[GameSetAndMath]

OK. I finally did the calculations.

Roger had a dominant stretch from 2003 Wimbledon to 2010 AO, a period spanning 27 slams. Of these, he won 16, reached the finals of another 6, reached the semifinals of 3, had a 4th round exit once and a 3rd round exit once. He accumulated a total of 41,630 points (converted to today's scale based on results) out of a maximum possible of 54,000. His dominance coefficient is 0.7709 (the ratio 41,630/54000). His greatness figure is 27* .7709 = 20.815.

Novak had a dominant stretch from 2010 USO to 2016 USO, a period spanning 25 slams. Of these, he won 11, reached the finals of another 8, reached the semifinals of four more and had a QF exit once and a 3R exit once. He accumulated a total of 34,930 points out of a maximum possible 50,000. His dominance coefficient is 0.6986 (the ratio of 34,930/50,000). His greatness figure is 25*0.6986 = 17.465.

So, actually Roger had a longer dominant stretch than Novak (27 to 25). Also, Roger had greater dominance than Novak (0.7709 to 0.6986)
So, obviously Roger has a larger "greatness figure" compared to Novak (20.815 to 17.465).

p.s. If you go strictly by the definition in the blog, Roger's dominant stretch begins only from 2015 Wimbledon as he did not win or reach the finals of 2015 AO and RG. But, it is counterintuitive to leave 2004 as part of Roger's dominant stretch. Besides, even in 2015 AO and RG, Roger made it to SF and so he was indeed relevant. I would like to change the definition of dominant stretch in the blog to a sequence of slams in which a player does not flame out before SF twice in a row.

For the sake of completeness, I looked at Rafa's dominant stretch alos. It starts with 2007 RG and ends with 2014 RG. That is a period spanning 26 slams (calendar wise 29, but Rafa did not play in three of them). He won 12 of them, reached finals in another 5, SF in 4, QF in 2, 4R once, 2R once and 1R once. His total point accumulation is 33,835 out of a possible 52,000. His dominance coefficient is 0.6506 (the ratio of 33,835/52,000). His greatness figure is 26 * 0.6506 = 16.9175

1. Federer: Stretch 27 Slams (2003 W to 2010 AO), dominance coefficient 0.7709 Greatness figure = 20.815
2. Novak: Stretch 26 Slams (2010 W to 2016 USO), dominance coefficient 0.6855 Greatness figure= 17.825
3. Rafa: Stretch 26 Slams (2007 RG to 2014 RG), dominance coefficient 0.6506 Greatness figure = 16.9175

Interestingly, Roger has higher dominance coefficient despite having longer stretch (actually, you would expect that if a player is dominant for a shorter stretch, they would probably have higher dominance coefficient).

The moral of the story is that Rafa may have more Slams than Novak, but Novak is a more dominant player than Rafa.

p.s. I adjusted Novak's stretch to start from 2010 W instead of 2010 USO to be consistent among the three players. My definition of dominant stretch is a period in which player does not exit before SF twice in a row. Both the beginning and the end point of the stretch must be SF/F/W.

 

[Carol]

Uno puede admitir que se equivocó. You have no hesitancy about debating...just demure when you get called out. Porfa!

Hey, no me he equivocado, sé exactamente lo que digo, no tengo ganas de discutir , this thread has become BORING between the "dominant" and Wimbledon 2008. Nothing to discuss because we know who was the dominant and who won Wimbledon, the best player .
No hay debate because it's like to talk to the wall, a completely waste of time of course depending to whom.