Top seasons of the Open Era

[britbox]

TennisNow listing:

5th 1984: McEnroe
4th 2015: Novak Djokovic
3rd 1974: Jimmy Connors
2nd 2006: Roger Federer
1st 1969: Rod Laver

as the best of the best.

Any different thoughts?

 

[shawnbm]

Well, I would have to put it as follows:

5th--Nadal in 2010
4th--Novak in 2011
3rd--Connors in 1974
2nd--McEnroe in 1984
co-1st--Federer in 2006 and Novak in 2015

Laver winning in 1969 all four is too tied in with the pre-Open era--all the same players, same racquets and three of the four on grass--such that I view it as outside the equation (nobody ever talks about 1962, they always mention 1969 since it was the second year of the Open era). I never thought I would see the kind of dominance across all surfaces and all players like Mac 32 years ago, but Novak and Roger did it. Granted, the AO was one skipped by many back then, but those two years are at least equal to McEnroe and seem tied to me for all intents and purposes

 

[shawnbm]

I still say that McEnroe's destruction of Connors in the Wimbledon final of 1984 is probably the apex of the sport in terms of seeing pure genius at the highest level against the best returner of that epoch. It was a stunning display.

 

[Mastoor]

In any such discussion from Novak on they should take into account the player's opposition and that was for Novak a lot harder than for Federer let alone the others. So, to be any objective, the list has to start with both Novak's 2011 and 2015 in whatever order.

For those who don't remember what I once wrote about and documented here, Federer in his golden years didn't play top opponents nearly as often as Nole did.

 

[brokenshoelace]

In any such discussion from Novak on they should take into account the player's opposition and that was for Novak a lot harder than for Federer let alone the others. So, to be any objective, the list has to start with both Novak's 2011 and 2015 in whatever order.

For those who don't remember what I once wrote about and documented here, Federer in his golden years didn't play top opponents nearly as often as Nole did.

You think Novak's opposition in 2015 was that great?

2011, no doubt (though despite the level of opposition, it's hard to claim it was better than Roger's ridiculous 2006). Regardless, it was an absolutely brutal field. But 2015? Please.

 

[Federberg]

Well, I would have to put it as follows:

5th--Nadal in 2010
4th--Novak in 2011
3rd--Connors in 1974
2nd--McEnroe in 1984
co-1st--Federer in 2006 and Novak in 2015

Laver winning in 1969 all four is too tied in with the pre-Open era--all the same players, same racquets and three of the four on grass--such that I view it as outside the equation (nobody ever talks about 1962, they always mention 1969 since it was the second year of the Open era). I never thought I would see the kind of dominance across all surfaces and all players like Mac 32 years ago, but Novak and Roger did it. Granted, the AO was one skipped by many back then, but those two years are at least equal to McEnroe and seem tied to me for all intents and purposes

Can't argue with any of this. I would also add that the first 2 sets that Edberg played in the last Edberg-Becker Wimbledon final is as good as serve and volley has ever been. Absolutely stunning. The fact that Boris was able to win the next 2 sets just shows how good he was. Stefan won the final set with an awesome backhand lob getting him the break. Amazing match

 

[Federberg]

You think Novak's opposition in 2015 was that great?

2011, no doubt (though despite the level of opposition, it's hard to claim it was better than Roger's ridiculous 2006). Regardless, it was an absolutely brutal field. But 2015? Please.

I second this. It never ceases to amuse me how Federer as the opposition is often used to support another players excellence, but then his achievements are downgraded because of his opposition. Either he really was that good or he wasn't. We can't have our cake and eat it! Also, how a player several years removed from his prime can burnish another's reputation has always confused me

 

[Billie]

I think you two are a bit unfair to Mastoor. He didn't compare the two competitions but the rankings of the players that both Federer and Nole had to beat to win those titles. Number of top 20, 10 and 5 wins. We had this conversation before. I think that is because Nole rarely plays lower level tournaments, where you might face lower ranked players. He did win 2 more Masters 1000 events last year, but to each their own, everybody has a right to put the seasons as they please.

 

[Mastoor]

@brokenshoelace @Federberg read this:

Who was Federer's field in 2006? Apart from underaged Nadal who was 19/20 at the time it was Roddick, Blake, Gonzales, Ljubicic, Davydenko, Nalbandian, Ferrer with combined lifetime achievement of 1 GS (Roddick's)

Who was Novak's opposition in 2011 and 2015? First of all 2 players considered the best players ever which was much tougher than what Federer had in 2006. He also had other slam winners among rivals such as Del Potro, Cilic, Murray, Wawrinka.


In 2006, Federer in a field poorer than the ones from 2011 and 2015, had "only" 19 top 10 wins, losing 4 out of 6 matches to his principal and then UNDERAGED rival.

In 2011, Novak won 21 top 10 matches and of those, 6 times he beat Nadal who wasn't underaged anymore but already considered one of 2 the best players ever and he also beat Federer 4 times. Just by realising that Nole was 10-1 in 2011 against 2 best players ever like it was considered back then, you can say it was the year not matched by anyone.


In 2015, Novak had 31 top 10 wins which is some 63% more than Federer in 2006. Of those he beat Federer 5 times (5-3 that year), Nadal 4 times including RG and MC (4-0), Murray 6 times (6-1), Wawrinka 3 times (3-1), Cilic 3 times (3-0). That is against 5 GS winners, Nole had 21-5 combined score in 2015. So, right there Fed's 2006 can't compare to Novak's 2015. In addition Novak's 2015 was continued into the Grand Slam on 3 different surfaces something that has never been achieved by anyone before.

 

[Mastoor]

I think you two are a bit unfair to Mastoor. He didn't compare the two competitions but the rankings of the players that both Federer and Nole had to beat to win those titles. Number of top 20, 10 and 5 wins. We had this conversation before. I think that is because Nole rarely plays lower level tournaments, where you might face lower ranked players. He did win 2 more Masters 1000 events last year, but to each their own, everybody has a right to put the seasons as they please.

I did that but I also know that competitions were different in those years because I don't have only impression like two them I looked at data many times, so I know that Novak's competition in each 2011 and 2015 was much stronger than Federer's in 2006.Most reasons are listed in the post above.

 

[Federberg]

I don't have much sympathy with that argument. By that logic we might as well discount Laver's grand slams. Where do you draw the line?

 

[Mastoor]

I don't have much sympathy with that argument. By that logic we might as well discount Laver's grand slams. Where do you draw the line?

With what argument?

Laver's slam is story on its own. It isn't as good as the Djoker's one for secveral reasons. I only talked above about 3 recent years that can compare to each other because they are in sort of the same era. They are in this order:

1. 2015, 3 slams, WTF, 6 Masters
2. 2011, 3 slams, WTF, 5 masters
3. 2006, 3 slams, WTF, 4 masters

on the top of the reasons stated above.

if Mac won 1984 RG final, I'd put his year to #3, but he won only 2 slams. Laver's AO and RG didn't have 7 rounds and competition was spread, so each slam was played by different set of people, so it can't be better than 3 recent ones. Connors 1974 again played AO with only 6 rounds

 

[Federberg]

With what argument?

Laver's slam is story on its own. It isn't as good as the Djoker's one for secveral reasons. I only talked above about 3 recent years that can compare to each other because they are in sort of the same era. They are in this order:

1. 2015, 3 slams, WTF, 6 Masters
2. 2011, 3 slams, WTF, 5 masters
3. 2006, 3 slams, WTF, 4 masters

on the top of the reasons stated above.

if Mac won 1984 RG final, I'd put his year to #3, but he won only 2 slams. Laver's AO and RG didn't have 7 rounds and competition was spread, so each slam was played by different set of people, so it can't be better than 3 recent ones. Connors 1974 again played AO with only 6 rounds

We're dealing with opinions here. Clearly we're not going to agree. I can see the case you're putting forward, but I don't agree with it. For what it's worth, I'm one of the few non-Serbians who places a higher premium on Novak's slam than on any that Laver achieved Personally I don't care that it wasn't a calendar slam, to me that's just an artifact. Where I disagree with you is (1) the way you elevate 2015, I just don't think the competition was that impressive (2) your suggesting that 2011 was superior to 2006. I think 2011 and 2006 are the two best seasons in the open era, with Mac's 1984 close behind. I would place 2015 lower down the list. I'm probably a bit different to most others here, but total number of wins and losses is a big deal to me. Federer wasn't playing micky mouse events in 2006 but he had the strength, stamina and mental fortitude to continue on all the way through the year. The only loss of his that was weak in my opinion was the loss to Murray (in Canada I think). Other than that he had to face a certain clay monster. In no way was that achievement inferior to 2011 (as I said before I'm not even willing to contemplate 2015 being a part of the discussion). That's my view

 

[Backhand_DTL]

With what argument?

Laver's slam is story on its own. It isn't as good as the Djoker's one for secveral reasons. I only talked above about 3 recent years that can compare to each other because they are in sort of the same era. They are in this order:

1. 2015, 3 slams, WTF, 6 Masters
2. 2011, 3 slams, WTF, 5 masters
3. 2006, 3 slams, WTF, 4 masters

on the top of the reasons stated above.

2011 didn't include the WTF and Novak just being something like 6:4 after the US Open is a stain when assessing the season as a whole whereas 2006 and 2015 were dominant seasons from start to finish. So just comparing results I would rate 2015 slightly ahead of 2006 because of the two additional masters with 2011 behind.

But in 2006 and 2015 it was the already best player going into the season having a great year while 2011 had the X-factor of the No. 3 player at the beginning reaching new heights and clearly surpassing the two players, that seemed to be simply better than him until that point while those were still playing quite well. So regarding impressiveness for me 2011 is noticeably ahead of 2006 and 2015 which makes it quite close overall and reasonably allows to put any of those years on top depending on how much weight one puts on pure results compared to the circumstances that influence the subjective assessment.

 

[brokenshoelace]

@brokenshoelace @Federberg read this:

Who was Federer's field in 2006? Apart from underaged Nadal who was 19/20 at the time it was Roddick, Blake, Gonzales, Ljubicic, Davydenko, Nalbandian, Ferrer with combined lifetime achievement of 1 GS (Roddick's)

Who was Novak's opposition in 2011 and 2015? First of all 2 players considered the best players ever which was much tougher than what Federer had in 2006. He also had other slam winners among rivals such as Del Potro, Cilic, Murray, Wawrinka.


In 2006, Federer in a field poorer than the ones from 2011 and 2015, had "only" 19 top 10 wins, losing 4 out of 6 matches to his principal and then UNDERAGED rival.

In 2011, Novak won 21 top 10 matches and of those, 6 times he beat Nadal who wasn't underaged anymore but already considered one of 2 the best players ever and he also beat Federer 4 times. Just by realising that Nole was 10-1 in 2011 against 2 best players ever like it was considered back then, you can say it was the year not matched by anyone.


In 2015, Novak had 31 top 10 wins which is some 63% more than Federer in 2006. Of those he beat Federer 5 times (5-3 that year), Nadal 4 times including RG and MC (4-0), Murray 6 times (6-1), Wawrinka 3 times (3-1), Cilic 3 times (3-0). That is against 5 GS winners, Nole had 21-5 combined score in 2015. So, right there Fed's 2006 can't compare to Novak's 2015. In addition Novak's 2015 was continued into the Grand Slam on 3 different surfaces something that has never been achieved by anyone before.

I've already agreed that the field in 2011 was brutal (as in really good). The top 4 were all going strong and making virtually every semi final. That alone makes it a great field.

But in 2015, I'm not buying it. How can you put so many qualifiers on Fed's opposition in 2006 while somehow not doing the same for Novak's 2015 opposition? You bring up Nadal while ignoring that he was literally a part timer that year, injured all the time, and had what at that point, was by far his worst season ever. Sorry, but Rafa was a non factor in 2015. Novak beating him at RG is more of a big deal because of Rafa's history there, rather than Rafa's form at the time. Not to mention, Novak didn't end up winning RG anyway.

Additionally, Novak didn't play Murray that year at any major after the AO. And Federer was 34 years old (if you're going to mention under-aged Rafa in 2006, I think we should mention over-aged Fed).

Which leaves us with hot and cold Wawrinka and nobody else.

 

[britbox]

@brokenshoelace @Federberg read this:

Who was Federer's field in 2006? Apart from underaged Nadal who was 19/20 at the time it was Roddick, Blake, Gonzales, Ljubicic, Davydenko, Nalbandian, Ferrer with combined lifetime achievement of 1 GS (Roddick's)

Who was Novak's opposition in 2011 and 2015? First of all 2 players considered the best players ever which was much tougher than what Federer had in 2006. He also had other slam winners among rivals such as Del Potro, Cilic, Murray, Wawrinka.

Nice narrative Mastoor. Clever to leave out major winners like Hewitt, Safin and insert the likes of Del Potro who hardly hit a ball.

 

[Ricardo]

With what argument?

Laver's slam is story on its own. It isn't as good as the Djoker's one for secveral reasons. I only talked above about 3 recent years that can compare to each other because they are in sort of the same era. They are in this order:

1. 2015, 3 slams, WTF, 6 Masters
2. 2011, 3 slams, WTF, 5 masters
3. 2006, 3 slams, WTF, 4 masters

on the top of the reasons stated above.

if Mac won 1984 RG final, I'd put his year to #3, but he won only 2 slams. Laver's AO and RG didn't have 7 rounds and competition was spread, so each slam was played by different set of people, so it can't be better than 3 recent ones. Connors 1974 again played AO with only 6 rounds

Again let me remind you, that being a fan doesn't mean you need to start inventing numbers. Novak didn't win WTF 2011, you should know better than anyone since you are his fan. Why resort to that?

In any case it's nothing but opinions, you keep saying he beat Fedal then and there......you never mentioned that Fed was past his prime yet when it came to Fed, you repeated 'underaged' Nadal several times. If you want make a case, stop making up numbers and be fair with your comparison.

 

[Ricardo]

Nice narrative Mastoor. Clever to leave out major winners like Hewitt, Safin and insert the likes of Del Potro who hardly hit a ball.

that narrative includes, Fed is better than ever in 2015 when Novak played him. Oh Hewitt and Safin who are they? Del Potro of course was an important opponent for Novak, since he never missed a tournament and always went deep.

Facts don't seem to matter.

 

[Ricardo]

Also how come Agassi wasn't Feds competition if one includes Federer for Novak in 2015? both around mid 30s and one is conveniently forgotten. Mastoor can play this game all day long.

 

[Ricardo]

Its also interesting that in 2006 Novak was 5 years before his peak year (2011) and he played Fed. In 2011 Fed was 5 years after his peak year (2006) when he was Novak's competition. Same criteria says Novak was Fed's competition too....... oh i get it, when it comes to Fed his opponents are either too young (underaged Nadal) or too old (like Agassi). But for Novak, it doesn't matter his opponent (Fed) is well into his 30s in 2015.

Anything goes as long as it looks good for Novak.