Race for #1

[GameSetAndMath]

In my humble opinion, it is plain silly to argue that Andy doesn't deserve the #1. Everyone knows that Novak hasn't been anywhere near the No1e mode since FO. I get the Novak fan's pain. What's that got to do Andy's reaching #1? Unless I am missing something, for quite some time, he has been the greatest player in the open era not to reach #1. He has spent his entire career in the shadows of giants. His career rivals the greats such as Becker, Edberg and Wilander. It is debatable whether his tennis has that special something. But it is hypocritical to argue that he is a retriever/pusher and call it "great defense" for Fedalovic. For a decade it has been impossible to win much unless you are also a great "pusher" among other things. Aesthetically, I find his movement and ball striking quite pleasing. I never noticed oversized arrogance in him. Plays fair, especially in comparison to Nadalovic. Is less selfish and less canny off the court than Fedalovic. Look at what the other talented players such Roddick, Tsonga, Berdych, Soderling, Ferrer, Gasquet, did in the last decade. No one except Stanimal could keep their Mojos. And I am not even going into the unique mental challenges, disappointments and pressures he overcame. Andy Murray 100% deserves his #1 each and every day he can hold on to it.

Sent from my 6045O using Tapatalk

Andy may deserve #1. But, your bolded statement is totally out of line. Andy is not comparable to Becker or Edberg.

 

[Backhand_DTL]

In my humble opinion, it is plain silly to argue that Andy doesn't deserve the #1. Everyone knows that Novak hasn't been anywhere near the No1e mode since FO. I get the Novak fan's pain. What's that got to do Andy's reaching #1?

For me the player who is No. 1 always deserves it as scoring the most points over 12 months is a great achievement regardless of the circumstances and doesn't happen by chance. But after the French Open it was clear that Novak not finishing the year No. 1 would require Novak having a significant drop in form and another player winning almost everything for the rest of the year, so Novak's subpar results were a necessity for the door to the top ranking opening but Andy deserves a lot of credit for making the most of the opportunity with at least regarding the results clearly best seven months stretch of his career.

But in recent history a change of No. 1 was always connected with one or some events that really legitimated the change (2008: Rafa winning Wimbledon over Roger and Olympic gold, 2009: Roger winning Roland Garros and Wimbledon, 2010: Rafa winning RG and Wimbledon, 2011: Novak defeating Rafa in multiple Masters and to win Wimbledon, 2012: Roger winning Wimbledon by defeating Novak and Andy; Novak winning the WTF over Roger, 2013: Rafa winning the US Open against Novak, 2014: Novak defeating Rafa in some Masters and winning Wimbledon against Roger). Because of Andy's failure at the US Open and Novak's inability to go consistently deep after the French Open as well as Rafa's and Roger's absence on the Tour or at least at the latter stages of important events he didn't have such a signature win that really symbols his rise to No. 1 so in my opinion it would be great to have a match between Andy and Novak which decides the Year-End-No. 1 at the semis or final of the WTF.

 

[Kieran]

In my humble opinion, it is plain silly to argue that Andy doesn't deserve the #1. Everyone knows that Novak hasn't been anywhere near the No1e mode since FO. I get the Novak fan's pain. What's that got to do Andy's reaching #1? Unless I am missing something, for quite some time, he has been the greatest player in the open era not to reach #1. He has spent his entire career in the shadows of giants. His career rivals the greats such as Becker, Edberg and Wilander. It is debatable whether his tennis has that special something. But it is hypocritical to argue that he is a retriever/pusher and call it "great defense" for Fedalovic. For a decade it has been impossible to win much unless you are also a great "pusher" among other things. Aesthetically, I find his movement and ball striking quite pleasing. I never noticed oversized arrogance in him. Plays fair, especially in comparison to Nadalovic. Is less selfish and less canny off the court than Fedalovic. Look at what the other talented players such Roddick, Tsonga, Berdych, Soderling, Ferrer, Gasquet, did in the last decade. No one except Stanimal could keep their Mojos. And I am not even going into the unique mental challenges, disappointments and pressures he overcame. Andy Murray 100% deserves his #1 each and every day he can hold on to it.

Sent from my 6045O using Tapatalk

Andy may deserve #1. But, your bolded statement is totally out of line. Andy is not comparable to Becker or Edberg.

Well, there are people who've argued that Andy roddick would have been comparable to those players - but for the existence of Roger federer. Now, obviously arguments in favour of Rodrick in this way are stupid, but in fairness to Andy murray, as the +1 of this era, he's done quite well actually. Comparable to Becker or edberg? Let's wait and see...

 

[10isfan]

After the Paris final, Murray leads Djoke by 405 points.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

In my humble opinion, it is plain silly to argue that Andy doesn't deserve the #1. Everyone knows that Novak hasn't been anywhere near the No1e mode since FO. I get the Novak fan's pain. What's that got to do Andy's reaching #1?

For me the player who is No. 1 always deserves it as scoring the most points over 12 months is a great achievement regardless of the circumstances and doesn't happen by chance. But after the French Open it was clear that Novak not finishing the year No. 1 would require Novak having a significant drop in form and another player winning almost everything for the rest of the year, so Novak's subpar results were a necessity for the door to the top ranking opening but Andy deserves a lot of credit for making the most of the opportunity with at least regarding the results clearly best seven months stretch of his career.

But in recent history a change of No. 1 was always connected with one or some events that really legitimated the change (2008: Rafa winning Wimbledon over Roger and Olympic gold, 2009: Roger winning Roland Garros and Wimbledon, 2010: Rafa winning RG and Wimbledon, 2011: Novak defeating Rafa in multiple Masters and to win Wimbledon, 2012: Roger winning Wimbledon by defeating Novak and Andy; Novak winning the WTF over Roger, 2013: Rafa winning the US Open against Novak, 2014: Novak defeating Rafa in some Masters and winning Wimbledon against Roger). Because of Andy's failure at the US Open and Novak's inability to go consistently deep after the French Open as well as Rafa's and Roger's absence on the Tour or at least at the latter stages of important events he didn't have such a signature win that really symbols his rise to No. 1 so in my opinion it would be great to have a match between Andy and Novak which decides the Year-End-No. 1 at the semis or final of the WTF.

You put it well FG. Technically Andy deserves to be #1 as he got the most points and everyone knows that is how the system works. Anyway, I would any day be happy with Andy becoming #1 in contrast to Jelana Jankovic, Caroline Wozniacki, Dinara Safina (who have not won a slam, not just in that year, but in their whole careers) and a host of others becoming WTA #1.


But, the point here is that Andy has not risen above the rest and seized the #1 ranking. We always knew that he is the best of the rest and is the best in a word of Tsongas and Berdychs. The only reason he became #1 was Roger was suffering from Knee problems, Rafa was suffering from Oldage Problems and Novak was suffering from Women Problems. Of course, it is not Andy's problem that Fedalovic are deluged with other problems. But, Andy did not up his game, fought hard with tenacity and snatched the #1 in a passing of torch. Andy grabbed the torch when the torch was falling as Nole took his eyes off the torch.

 

[Kieran]

Here's the points breakdown for London:

http://www.barclaysatpworldtourfinals.com/en/event/points-and-prize-money

ROUND-ROBIN MATCH WIN 200

SEMI-FINAL WIN 400

FINAL WIN 500

UNDEFEATED CHAMPION 1500

The round robin format really gives this one a lot of permutations to play with. For example, Novak might beat Andy in the final, but not finish above him if he loses a match in the RR.

I might even watch this one... :snicker

 

[Kieran]

In my humble opinion, it is plain silly to argue that Andy doesn't deserve the #1. Everyone knows that Novak hasn't been anywhere near the No1e mode since FO. I get the Novak fan's pain. What's that got to do Andy's reaching #1?

For me the player who is No. 1 always deserves it as scoring the most points over 12 months is a great achievement regardless of the circumstances and doesn't happen by chance. But after the French Open it was clear that Novak not finishing the year No. 1 would require Novak having a significant drop in form and another player winning almost everything for the rest of the year, so Novak's subpar results were a necessity for the door to the top ranking opening but Andy deserves a lot of credit for making the most of the opportunity with at least regarding the results clearly best seven months stretch of his career.

But in recent history a change of No. 1 was always connected with one or some events that really legitimated the change (2008: Rafa winning Wimbledon over Roger and Olympic gold, 2009: Roger winning Roland Garros and Wimbledon, 2010: Rafa winning RG and Wimbledon, 2011: Novak defeating Rafa in multiple Masters and to win Wimbledon, 2012: Roger winning Wimbledon by defeating Novak and Andy; Novak winning the WTF over Roger, 2013: Rafa winning the US Open against Novak, 2014: Novak defeating Rafa in some Masters and winning Wimbledon against Roger). Because of Andy's failure at the US Open and Novak's inability to go consistently deep after the French Open as well as Rafa's and Roger's absence on the Tour or at least at the latter stages of important events he didn't have such a signature win that really symbols his rise to No. 1 so in my opinion it would be great to have a match between Andy and Novak which decides the Year-End-No. 1 at the semis or final of the WTF.

You put it well FG. Technically Andy deserves to be #1 as he got the most points and everyone knows that is how the system works. Anyway, I would any day be happy with Andy becoming #1 in contrast to Jelana Jankovic, Caroline Wozniacki, Dinara Safina (who have not won a slam, not just in that year, but in their whole careers) and a host of others becoming WTA #1.


But, the point here is that Andy has not risen above the rest and seized the #1 ranking. We always knew that he is the best of the rest and is the best in a word of Tsongas and Berdychs. The only reason he became #1 was Roger was suffering from Knee problems, Rafa was suffering from Oldage Problems and Novak was suffering from Women Problems. Of course, it is not Andy's problem that Fedalovic are deluged with other problems. But, Andy did not up his game, fought hard with tenacity and snatched the #1 in a passing of torch. Andy grabbed the torch when the torch was falling as Nole took his eyes off the torch.

This is largely true, but...Andy did up his game. He's been brilliant since Paris, with the USO as an anomaly. The rest of it - as you say - is out of his hands, he can only look after his own results, and he's been brilliant at that since the FO (and not too shoddy before that)...

 

[lob]

In my humble opinion, it is plain silly to argue that Andy doesn't deserve the #1. Everyone knows that Novak hasn't been anywhere near the No1e mode since FO. I get the Novak fan's pain. What's that got to do Andy's reaching #1? Unless I am missing something, for quite some time, he has been the greatest player in the open era not to reach #1. He has spent his entire career in the shadows of giants. His career rivals the greats such as Becker, Edberg and Wilander. It is debatable whether his tennis has that special something. But it is hypocritical to argue that he is a retriever/pusher and call it "great defense" for Fedalovic. For a decade it has been impossible to win much unless you are also a great "pusher" among other things. Aesthetically, I find his movement and ball striking quite pleasing. I never noticed oversized arrogance in him. Plays fair, especially in comparison to Nadalovic. Is less selfish and less canny off the court than Fedalovic. Look at what the other talented players such Roddick, Tsonga, Berdych, Soderling, Ferrer, Gasquet, did in the last decade. No one except Stanimal could keep their Mojos. And I am not even going into the unique mental challenges, disappointments and pressures he overcame. Andy Murray 100% deserves his #1 each and every day he can hold on to it.

Sent from my 6045O using Tapatalk

Andy may deserve #1. But, your bolded statement is totally out of line. Andy is not comparable to Becker or Edberg.

Yes, that was a bit of hyperbole but he is not that far behind..

Sent from my 6045O using Tapatalk

 

[Fiero425]

In my humble opinion, it is plain silly to argue that Andy doesn't deserve the #1. Everyone knows that Novak hasn't been anywhere near the No1e mode since FO. I get the Novak fan's pain. What's that got to do Andy's reaching #1? Unless I am missing something, for quite some time, he has been the greatest player in the open era not to reach #1. He has spent his entire career in the shadows of giants. His career rivals the greats such as Becker, Edberg and Wilander. It is debatable whether his tennis has that special something. But it is hypocritical to argue that he is a retriever/pusher and call it "great defense" for Fedalovic. For a decade it has been impossible to win much unless you are also a great "pusher" among other things. Aesthetically, I find his movement and ball striking quite pleasing. I never noticed oversized arrogance in him. Plays fair, especially in comparison to Nadalovic. Is less selfish and less canny off the court than Fedalovic. Look at what the other talented players such Roddick, Tsonga, Berdych, Soderling, Ferrer, Gasquet, did in the last decade. No one except Stanimal could keep their Mojos. And I am not even going into the unique mental challenges, disappointments and pressures he overcame. Andy Murray 100% deserves his #1 each and every day he can hold on to it.

Sent from my 6045O using Tapatalk

Andy may deserve #1. But, your bolded statement is totally out of line. Andy is not comparable to Becker or Edberg.

Yes, that was a bit of hyperbole but he is not that far behind..

Sent from my 6045O using Tapatalk

Thank Gawd; the medication kicked in! :clap :snicker :laydownlaughing

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Here's the points breakdown for London:

http://www.barclaysatpworldtourfinals.com/en/event/points-and-prize-money

ROUND-ROBIN MATCH WIN 200

SEMI-FINAL WIN 400

FINAL WIN 500

UNDEFEATED CHAMPION 1500

The round robin format really gives this one a lot of permutations to play with. For example, Novak might beat Andy in the final, but not finish above him if he loses a match in the RR.

I might even watch this one... :snicker

Andy and Novak will be in different groups, obviously. As Novak sucks a bit, he might come in second in his group. As Andy is good at beating people who are supposed to beat, Andy might come in as 1st in his group. Then, Andy and Novak will play in a semifinal. Now, Novak might summon his forces and beat Andy. Buoyed by that win, Novak might clinch WTF. This would give Novak 1300 points and Andy 600 points. If this scenario happens, Nole will be YE#1.

Even if Nole does not go on to win the WTF, he will get 800 points and Andy will get 600 points.
So, that will cut Andy's current lead of 405 to 205 and then when the 275 point from the DC finals falls off, Novak will magically clinch the YE#1 right after DC finals, even though Novak is not playing in DC finals.

The key point is that people don't get extra points for reaching the semifinals. They get extra points only for winning the semifinals (and for winning the finals). So, if Andy and Novak meet in SF and Novak beats Andy in the SF, ANdy's chances at YE #1 looks bleak.

p.s. In that situation, may be Andy should consider tanking a match to avoid facing Nole in SF.

 

[Fiero425]

Here's the points breakdown for London:

http://www.barclaysatpworldtourfinals.com/en/event/points-and-prize-money

ROUND-ROBIN MATCH WIN 200

SEMI-FINAL WIN 400

FINAL WIN 500

UNDEFEATED CHAMPION 1500

The round robin format really gives this one a lot of permutations to play with. For example, Novak might beat Andy in the final, but not finish above him if he loses a match in the RR.

I might even watch this one... :snicker

Andy and Novak will be in different groups, obviously. As Novak sucks a bit, he might come in second in his group. As Andy is good at beating people who are supposed to beat, Andy might come in as 1st in his group. Then, Andy and Novak will play in a semifinal. Now, Novak might summon his forces and beat Andy. Buoyed by that win, Novak might clinch WTF. This would give Novak 1300 points and Andy 600 points. If this scenario happens, Nole will be YE#1.

Even if Nole does not go on to win the WTF, he will get 800 points and Andy will get 600 points.
So, that will cut Andy's current lead of 405 to 205 and then when the 275 point from the DC finals falls off, Novak will magically clinch the YE#1 right after DC finals, even though Novak is not playing in DC finals.

The key point is that people don't get extra points for reaching the semifinals. They get extra points only for winning the semifinals (and for winning the finals). So, if Andy and Novak meet in SF and Novak beats Andy in the SF, ANdy's chances at YE #1 looks bleak.

p.s. In that situation, may be Andy should consider tanking a match to avoid facing Nole in SF.

It wouldn't be the first time it happened; going back 35 years to avoid playing Borg in the SF! They've gone through many gyrations trying to come up with a system to prevent such manipulation, but it still does happen! Nice post and well worth keeping for future reference on my blog! Thanks! :nono :angel: :dodgy:

- - http://fiero4251.blogspot.com/2016/10/whats-up-topic-21-entries-1016-on.html#comment-form - -

- - http://fiero4251.blogspot.com/2016/08/fan-page-novak-nole-djokovic.html - -

 

[TennisFanatic7]

In my humble opinion, it is plain silly to argue that Andy doesn't deserve the #1. Everyone knows that Novak hasn't been anywhere near the No1e mode since FO. I get the Novak fan's pain. What's that got to do Andy's reaching #1?

For me the player who is No. 1 always deserves it as scoring the most points over 12 months is a great achievement regardless of the circumstances and doesn't happen by chance. But after the French Open it was clear that Novak not finishing the year No. 1 would require Novak having a significant drop in form and another player winning almost everything for the rest of the year, so Novak's subpar results were a necessity for the door to the top ranking opening but Andy deserves a lot of credit for making the most of the opportunity with at least regarding the results clearly best seven months stretch of his career.

But in recent history a change of No. 1 was always connected with one or some events that really legitimated the change (2008: Rafa winning Wimbledon over Roger and Olympic gold, 2009: Roger winning Roland Garros and Wimbledon, 2010: Rafa winning RG and Wimbledon, 2011: Novak defeating Rafa in multiple Masters and to win Wimbledon, 2012: Roger winning Wimbledon by defeating Novak and Andy; Novak winning the WTF over Roger, 2013: Rafa winning the US Open against Novak, 2014: Novak defeating Rafa in some Masters and winning Wimbledon against Roger). Because of Andy's failure at the US Open and Novak's inability to go consistently deep after the French Open as well as Rafa's and Roger's absence on the Tour or at least at the latter stages of important events he didn't have such a signature win that really symbols his rise to No. 1 so in my opinion it would be great to have a match between Andy and Novak which decides the Year-End-No. 1 at the semis or final of the WTF.

You put it well FG. Technically Andy deserves to be #1 as he got the most points and everyone knows that is how the system works. Anyway, I would any day be happy with Andy becoming #1 in contrast to Jelana Jankovic, Caroline Wozniacki, Dinara Safina (who have not won a slam, not just in that year, but in their whole careers) and a host of others becoming WTA #1.


But, the point here is that Andy has not risen above the rest and seized the #1 ranking. We always knew that he is the best of the rest and is the best in a word of Tsongas and Berdychs. The only reason he became #1 was Roger was suffering from Knee problems, Rafa was suffering from Oldage Problems and Novak was suffering from Women Problems. Of course, it is not Andy's problem that Fedalovic are deluged with other problems. But, Andy did not up his game, fought hard with tenacity and snatched the #1 in a passing of torch. Andy grabbed the torch when the torch was falling as Nole took his eyes off the torch.

"Only" reason? You really want to stick with that?

Nobody's kidding themselves that the fact he's won Queens, Wimbledon, Olympics, Beijing, Shanghai, Vienna and Paris to get to the number one spot wouldn't have happened if he was facing a fully fit Fedalovic, but that's sport.

However, he didn't "only" win because those guys have been AWOL or losing to others, he still had to win over 50 matches in half a year or whatever it is against other professional players including the likes of Raonic and Del Potro who were good enough to beat Fedalovic on their way to those matches. Like it or not, that's what #1s are made of.

I still just don't see why every time Andy Murray achieves anything of note, on this forum it's straight into dissecting all of the reasons why it was somehow easier for him than it ever was for Federer, Nadal or Novak. It's not informative, it just undermines the usual high quality of posting from very intelligent observers of tennis.

Fine if you don't like him, but have some grace and say well done to him. He's scored more points than anyone else over the last 12 months and you can't just get lucky for a 12 month period so maybe he's actually just quite a good tennis player after all?

 

[Kieran]

Even if Nole does not go on to win the WTF, he will get 800 points and Andy will get 600 points.
So, that will cut Andy's current lead of 405 to 205 and then when the 275 point from the DC finals falls off, Novak will magically clinch the YE#1 right after DC finals, even though Novak is not playing in DC finals.

The key point is that people don't get extra points for reaching the semifinals. They get extra points only for winning the semifinals (and for winning the finals). So, if Andy and Novak meet in SF and Novak beats Andy in the SF, ANdy's chances at YE #1 looks bleak.

p.s. In that situation, may be Andy should consider tanking a match to avoid facing Nole in SF.

It's only Novak who tanks, according to some of his fans. That's the only way he loses.

But I forgot about the DC points. So Andy's lead in real terms is only 130 points, making today's victory even more crucial. But...if Novak loses in the RR and faces Andy in the semis, the money has to be on Andy, as the form player. As you say, "Novak sucks a bit", so he might even lose two RR matches...

 

[Rational National]

Andy became #1 due to not having to play other members of big four. In a fitting a way, he achieved the #1 without playing a single ball by means walkover. :cover

Can't argue with the second part, but seeing as the ranking is determined by 12 months results, it is not correct to say he never faced players (and beat) from the top 4/5.

This got me curious. Here is Andy vs. Rafa, Novak, and Roger during 2016:

vs. Novak: 1-3
vs. Roger: 0-0
vs. Rafa: 1-1

So he's 2-4 vs Novak and Rafa, hasn't played Roger. He's lost only 9 matches this year, 3 to Novak, 1 to Rafa, and 5 to others: del Potro, Nishikori, Cilic, Dimitrov, and Delbonis.

Anyhow, not sure what conclusions to draw from this, but that's a pretty good list of players to lose to. Even Delbonis and Dimitrov are "problem players" who are capable of a high level.

 

[sid]

Just to add & v Nishikori was a 5 set match.3 Slam finals & a QF in other Slam aint bad is it in 2016.

 

[Front242]

It's very good alright but to be expected in this very weak era. Not many others out there likely to reach slam finals with Nadal crapola for 2 years and Roger missing 2 slams this year. It is what it is.

 

[El Dude]

I think the bottom line about the WTF is that whoever plays better between Andy and Novak will be the year-end #1. Andy has a 130 point lead, if you factor in his current point edge (405) and subtract the Davis points (275), but given the point structure of the WTF that doesn't factor in. For instance, consider a couple possible scenarios:

One, Andy and Novak meet in the final. Novak wins all three round robin and SF matches, but loses to Andy, garnering 1000 points. Andy loses one RR but wins the SF and the final, winning 1200 points - still enough to take the #1 ranking. In other words, even in the scenario where Andy loses a RR and Novak goes without losing until he final, as long as Andy wins the final then he's #1 by +330 points.

If the reverse happens and Andy gets 1000 points and Novak 1200, Novak will finish the year with +70 over Andy.

So again, if one of them wins the tournament, that player is #1 no matter what configuration.

If both lose, then some interesting combinations are possible. The key to remember is that Andy has a +130 edge, which means whoever wins more matches will be #1. If they tie--say, both win one RR but go out before the SF, then Andy finishes #1. If Andy goes 2-1 in the RR and Novak 3-0, then both lose in the SF then Novak wins. If Andy goes 3-0 in RR and Novak 2-1, but Novak wins the SF then Novak finishes as #1.

So in summary:

*If either Novak or Andy win the tournament, they're the year-end #1
*If they finish with the same amount of points, Andy is #1
*If Novak wins one more match, he is #1
*If Andy wins 3 in RR and Novak 2, but Andy loses in SF and Novak wins, Novak is #1

 

[GameSetAndMath]

For me the player who is No. 1 always deserves it as scoring the most points over 12 months is a great achievement regardless of the circumstances and doesn't happen by chance. But after the French Open it was clear that Novak not finishing the year No. 1 would require Novak having a significant drop in form and another player winning almost everything for the rest of the year, so Novak's subpar results were a necessity for the door to the top ranking opening but Andy deserves a lot of credit for making the most of the opportunity with at least regarding the results clearly best seven months stretch of his career.

But in recent history a change of No. 1 was always connected with one or some events that really legitimated the change (2008: Rafa winning Wimbledon over Roger and Olympic gold, 2009: Roger winning Roland Garros and Wimbledon, 2010: Rafa winning RG and Wimbledon, 2011: Novak defeating Rafa in multiple Masters and to win Wimbledon, 2012: Roger winning Wimbledon by defeating Novak and Andy; Novak winning the WTF over Roger, 2013: Rafa winning the US Open against Novak, 2014: Novak defeating Rafa in some Masters and winning Wimbledon against Roger). Because of Andy's failure at the US Open and Novak's inability to go consistently deep after the French Open as well as Rafa's and Roger's absence on the Tour or at least at the latter stages of important events he didn't have such a signature win that really symbols his rise to No. 1 so in my opinion it would be great to have a match between Andy and Novak which decides the Year-End-No. 1 at the semis or final of the WTF.

You put it well FG. Technically Andy deserves to be #1 as he got the most points and everyone knows that is how the system works. Anyway, I would any day be happy with Andy becoming #1 in contrast to Jelana Jankovic, Caroline Wozniacki, Dinara Safina (who have not won a slam, not just in that year, but in their whole careers) and a host of others becoming WTA #1.


But, the point here is that Andy has not risen above the rest and seized the #1 ranking. We always knew that he is the best of the rest and is the best in a word of Tsongas and Berdychs. The only reason he became #1 was Roger was suffering from Knee problems, Rafa was suffering from Oldage Problems and Novak was suffering from Women Problems. Of course, it is not Andy's problem that Fedalovic are deluged with other problems. But, Andy did not up his game, fought hard with tenacity and snatched the #1 in a passing of torch. Andy grabbed the torch when the torch was falling as Nole took his eyes off the torch.

"Only" reason? You really want to stick with that?

Nobody's kidding themselves that the fact he's won Queens, Wimbledon, Olympics, Beijing, Shanghai, Vienna and Paris to get to the number one spot wouldn't have happened if he was facing a fully fit Fedalovic, but that's sport.

However, he didn't "only" win because those guys have been AWOL or losing to others, he still had to win over 50 matches in half a year or whatever it is against other professional players including the likes of Raonic and Del Potro who were good enough to beat Fedalovic on their way to those matches. Like it or not, that's what #1s are made of.

I still just don't see why every time Andy Murray achieves anything of note, on this forum it's straight into dissecting all of the reasons why it was somehow easier for him than it ever was for Federer, Nadal or Novak. It's not informative, it just undermines the usual high quality of posting from very intelligent observers of tennis.

Fine if you don't like him, but have some grace and say well done to him. He's scored more points than anyone else over the last 12 months and you can't just get lucky for a 12 month period so maybe he's actually just quite a good tennis player after all?

Hey that is exactly what I said in the first paragraph. He deserves #1 as he got more points than others. But, what FG and me are trying to say is that we did not learn anything new about Andy from he becoming #1. He had always been the best of the rest. Now that Fedalovic is out for one reason or other, Andy became #1. So, no news here.

 

[El Dude]

There are many roads to Rome or, in this case, many paths to being #1. Perhaps the fact that Andy has been so consistent this year, hung in there while Novak struggled and persevered, is what makes him deserving of #1.

In fact, the scenario is perfect. He is only getting a couple weeks at #1 before having to defend it at the World Tour Finals. At that point he can earn the year-end #1 by defeating the top dog on tour.

 

[Kieran]

^^ That's a little bit unfair - "Nadalovic" weren't a story when Roger became #1, but there was "news here". Andy isn't being measured against "Fedalovic", he's being measured on his results over the previous 12 months, and although I said above that I still think the best player this year was Djoker, no matter what happens, it's Big news, with Capitals, that Murray has become #1.

He's the first Brit to get there, and the first player to intrude on Fedalovic since 2003. It's quite a big achievement for him on a personal level, and he's playing well enough now that it's very easy to say, "Andy Murray is currently the #1 tennis player in the world..."