Who is the best player in 2016 season?

[Federberg]

It's one of those interesting years again. For me, if Andy gets yearend number 1, he deserves it. And while I'm no fan, I'm glad he's ticked this one off his career bucket list at last. It would be ridiculous if he ended his career without mounting the summit. I would say though, that I would rather have Novak's year than Andy's. Winning 2 slams with 4 in a row to boot? Getting to another slam final as well? It's a no brainer

 

[Obsi]

Not to forget that the ITF named Djokovic the World Champion in 2013, even though Nadal had 2 Majors to Djokovic's one

As far as I'm concerned, Nadal was the best player in 2013. It's a no-brainer.

It wasn't the first time ITF embarrassed itself. In 1990 Edberg criticised the ITF's Grand slam and they took their revenge with their award going to Lendl.

 

[Tennis Fan]

As far as I'm concerned, Nadal was the best player in 2013. It's a no-brainer.

It wasn't the first time ITF embarrassed itself. In 1990 Edberg criticised the ITF's Grand slam and they took their revenge with their award going to Lendl.

So true. There are a lot of politics behind the scenes. It only makes sense that if you're going to pull a stunt like that, you're also going to find a way to justify your decision. That's the main reason why I take stats with a grain of salt, you'd have to go through them with a fine-toothed comb, remember the conditions and the health of the players and the surfaces. I'm not willing to waste my time with that. It doesn't matter anyway. People take the fun out of the game.

 

[Tennishub]

Although jokovic is N0 1..Andy seems to has more weight on victory
Tennishub

 

[brokenshoelace]

I think Federberg makes a good point above with his phrasing: "I would rather have Novak's year."

Whenever it boils down to a year like this, where the issue of who had the best year is debatable for some, the best way to go on about it is ask yourself what would the majority of players rather have... In this case, Djokovic's year, or Murray's year?

Now, I don't think Murray himself would exchange his year for Novak's, as I'm sure winning Wimbledon again and an Olympic gold have strong sentimental value for him, and he's unlikely to trade them. But for most players, I'm sure they would simply take the year in which they'd win more slams (and in this case, more Masters events).

That's why I thought it was a no-brainer in 2013, and think it's still clear-cut this year (Murray winning the WTF would make it debatable though I'd still go with Novak).

 

[isabelle]

King Andy of course

 

[DarthFed]

I think Federberg makes a good point above with his phrasing: "I would rather have Novak's year."

Whenever it boils down to a year like this, where the issue of who had the best year is debatable for some, the best way to go on about it is ask yourself what would the majority of players rather have... In this case, Djokovic's year, or Murray's year?

Now, I don't think Murray himself would exchange his year for Novak's, as I'm sure winning Wimbledon again and an Olympic gold have strong sentimental value for him, and he's unlikely to trade them. But for most players, I'm sure they would simply take the year in which they'd win more slams (and in this case, more Masters events).

That's why I thought it was a no-brainer in 2013, and think it's still clear-cut this year (Murray winning the WTF would make it debatable though I'd still go with Novak).

I actually think Murray and everyone would take Novak's year. In Murray's case trading for Nole's year would have an extra slam and also a career slam.

I do agree that players almost certainly would take a year in which they won more slams in comparisons like these. I remember seeing a fan poll during the Federer-Wawrinka YEC semifinal in 2014 on which player had the "better season" and more than 50% went with Federer. I thought that was laughable as Roger would certainly have traded his 2014 and 2015 for Stan's.

 

[Carol]

So true. There are a lot of politics behind the scenes. It only makes sense that if you're going to pull a stunt like that, you're also going to find a way to justify your decision. That's the main reason why I take stats with a grain of salt, you'd have to go through them with a fine-toothed comb, remember the conditions and the health of the players and the surfaces. I'm not willing to waste my time with that. It doesn't matter anyway. People take the fun out of the game.

I agree 100%

 

[Obsi]

So, there we have it. 2016 is the most controversial year since 1977.

 

[britbox]

I'd still take Novak's year overall.

 

[Moxie]

So, there we have it. 2016 is the most controversial year since 1977.

I don't see this year as being controversial. Murray ended the year #1, but everyone seems to agree that the better year, based on hardware and accomplishments, was Djokovic's. It was a year divided almost exactly into 2 halves. Andy got the number 1 ranking on points, as Djokovic had a lot to defend and was off for a good bit of the second half of this year. Now, if you want controversy, let the ITF name Murray the player of the year, which would be payback for when they named Djokovic in 2013. Though it's probably a pointless award.

 

[Ricardo]

Usually it's no brainer that one would take 2 slams over 1, but for Murray to exchange for Novak's he'd have one more slam but miss out Olympics, YEC which means also he doesn't clinch the number one spot (first time in his career, with not much time left). I think it's closer than what it appears on paper, and doubt Murray would certainly like to exchange it.

Fair to say the better overall year goes to Novak, but only slightly considering several factors.

 

[Moxie]

Usually it's no brainer that one would take 2 slams over 1, but for Murray to exchange for Novak's he'd have one more slam but miss out Olympics, YEC which means also he doesn't clinch the number one spot (first time in his career, with not much time left). I think it's closer than what it appears on paper, and doubt Murray would certainly like to exchange it.

Fair to say the better overall year goes to Novak, but only slightly considering several factors.

Olympics is a bit of a sentimental favorite, and, while it's nice to have 2, it doesn't really buff the resume. However, I do agree with you that it's a bit apples to oranges, in terms of the individual and what he feels chuffed to achieve. Finally, for Andy, he gets to #1. And the YEC, where he'd never even made the final. Also, what he's done for British tennis is big: 2 x Wimbledon, Davis Cup, 2 x Olympic Gold, plus the Murray brothers holding concurrent #1 in singles and doubles. He'll feel proud of what he's done, and rightly so. The notion of "trading" the year with another player is forum-logic only. Novak did what he wanted, and Andy will have done a lot of things he wanted to do. A win-win, in many ways. So try not to faint, Ricardo, but I'm agreeing with you.

 

[mrzz]

Murray had more points, has Olympics and YEC to stand for the missing slam, and beat Djokovic in the final match of the year. The question is who is the best player in the season. The answer is Murray.

Now, if you´ll excuse me, I need to puke.

 

[Backhand_DTL]

Yesterday's win confirms Andy as the best player right now and definitely makes him the person rightfully ranked No. 1. As for the best player of the year it ultimately comes down if you value the additional slam and masters+the arguably higher level of play in the dominant period more than wins at the Olympics and World Tour Finals+greater consistency during the whole season and which year is better depends on how much higher one rates slam wins compared to the next biggest titles.

But even though the second half was quite disappointing basically any Djokovic-fan and probably Novak himself as well will still easily prefer the year he had over Andy's or winning any other combination of 2 slams+getting Year End No. 1 and possibly even over another 3 Slam Year with Australian Open, Wimbledon and US Open.

 

[isabelle]

Murray

 

[brokenshoelace]

A lot of intrigue coming into the AO.

It's Novak's territory, and he's dominated the field there, including Murray. Will Novak be re-energized in 2017? Will Murray build on what he's achieved and cement his status as the best in the world? Does Roger still have anything left in the tank? How will Rafa's hair look post-implant? So many questions...

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

defo season of 2 sections..

djoko going berserk inc winning the oh so elusive French open..plus aussie iw-maimi double, record rank points haul.

..then andy going mental with 60-4 w/l from madrid open or something and cleaning up big time inc wimby-og gold-wtf-ye no1

maybe it should be an andy/djoko dead heat like the 1st London marathon in march1981 when two blokes crossed the winning line together (no homo).

 

[DarthFed]

A lot of intrigue coming into the AO.

It's Novak's territory, and he's dominated the field there, including Murray. Will Novak be re-energized in 2017? Will Murray build on what he's achieved and cement his status as the best in the world? Does Roger still have anything left in the tank? How will Rafa's hair look post-implant? So many questions...

Agreed, especially on the Nadal hair implants part!

Yesterday is also notable because that too was Novak's territory. The court in London is like a play pen for him, perfectly suited to his game. The win yesterday is the first time Andy has beaten Nole on a slow/medium hard court in a very long time. It definitely figures to give him confidence if he faces Nole in another AO final in a couple months.

 

[Tennis Fan]

A lot of intrigue coming into the AO.

It's Novak's territory, and he's dominated the field there, including Murray. Will Novak be re-energized in 2017? Will Murray build on what he's achieved and cement his status as the best in the world? Does Roger still have anything left in the tank? How will Rafa's hair look post-implant? So many questions...

LOL, this is the most intriguing question of 2017. LOL, I can't believe you posted this. This was so funny.