Relative Rankings

OK, so here are my alternative rankings for 2014, as a twist instead of an absolute ranking it's relative to how we might have expected their performance to be. Also, as a bonus extra, I am throwing in teacher's report card (again, relative to expectation). And ranking change (year end 13 to year end 14) is the number at the end in brackets. The criteria for inclusion is to be top 10 at the end of either this year or last, I made an exception to this rule and excluded Del Potro, as he has hardly played this year.

1 Warwinka A+ (8-4)
Stan is the man - Davis cup with 2 wins in the final, a slam and Monte Carlo. Big mediocre patch in the middle or second half of the year easily forgotten. And quite a nice story in that he achieved all his best success while back with his partner. Yes, Rafa wasn't at his best in the AO final, but it was still a great win over Djokovic.

2 Cilic A (37-9)
Didn't just win a slam but won QF, SF and F in straight sets with dominant attacking tennis. I really can't remember much about what he did in the rest of the year, but who cares? He is a slam champion. Actually he won Zagreb, Delray Beach and Moscow, so 4 titles in a year.

3 Nishikori A- (17-5)
This year, he has gone to the top of the group of young prospects (if he isn't too old already for such a label) on the basis that he really can challenge the top players. Impressive win over Djokovic at the US Open, although slight alarm bell in that real greats and legends of the sport tend to win their first slam final, if it is not against a fellow great.

4. Federer B (6-2)
At his age, Cincinatti, Shanghai and Davis Cup and world no 2 makes a good year, especially after last year. Still, it could have been a truly amazing year after coming close at Wimbledon (as well as Indian Wells and Monte Carlo).

5 Djokovic B (2-1)
Interesting to note that he got more ranking points last year. And going into Wimbledon was looking at 1.5 years without a slam and questions about his game. He hasn't really improved this year, it's that Murray and Nadal haven't been the same to challenge him. Still, with a Wimbledon title, 4 masters 1000 and the way he finished the year, it's still a good year.

6 Raonic C (11-8) Good win against Federer recently, but still doesn't get many wins against top players. Can he really push on next year, or is he in danger of almost reaching a plateau?

7 Berdych C (7-7)
More rankings points this year, and won Rotterdam and Stockholm, but a missed opportunity at the US Open.

8 Tsonga C (10-12)
Does beating an in-form Federer to win a masters count as a successful year, even though he did nothing the rest of the year?

9 Nadal C- (1-3)
Difficult to rate his year because of injury/fitness, but he has gone from clearly 1 to clearly 3, and did not even dominate the clay court season like most other years. Still, he won a slam which is more than Federer or Murray did.

10 Ferrer C- (3-10)
Won in Argentina and reached a masters final, but the rest of the year not great. Falling from 3 to 10 looks bad. But when he was 3 he was miles behind 2 and just at the top of the chasing pack. As 10, he just happens to sit slightly behind some other players.

11 Murray D (4-6)
Looks way off the pace at times against the top players. Did nothing at the slams, and had surprising defeats. A great run of tournament wins around October (Shenzhen, Vienna and Valencia) stopped the year from being a complete disaster. However, highlight of 2013: won Wimbledon. Highlight of 2014: saving match points against Tommy Robredo.

12 Gasquet D (9-26)
By 2013, he'd established himself as a solid top tenner. It hasn't really happened this year, though. Not sure if there have been physical issues or anything else, but the only thing that sticks in my mind this year is him losing a 2-set lead and 9 match points against Kyrgios at Wimbledon.

Honorable mentions:
Gulbis improved from 24 to 13 in the rankings.
Kyrgios - this was not a one off result, he is definately one to watch for 2015 and 2016.

Interesting article HB  
Not sure about the order...for me top 5 is:

Stan (relatively great agreed and not just AO...)
Djokovic (slam, WTF, RG final, 4 Masters, YE #1...still bloody marvelllous)
Fed (good year actually...even got his own racquet launched lol)
Nishikori ( better year than Cilic on balance...remember vs Nadal at Madrid too?)
Cilic (one slam wonder?)

Honourable mention: Goffin!!

HB. Some nice analysis. Am prepared to forecast that Nishi will push on in 2015 but that Cilic wont. That Tsonga will be in the top 10 again (although his DC performance was not too great. injured?). That Rafa will be back. That Murray will have a good year. That Fed will do OK but not win as anything like as many matches as in 2014. Dimi? Who knows ? Like to see him doing well, but not sure he's going to get into top four.

Very good post, HB interesting take. I think I would give Federer at least B+ because while he didn't win a slam he certainly did finish in the top 2 and did well in the Masters events while being 33 years old. I would give Nish and Cilic both As because they made the big break through. In regards to Djokovic I think I would give his year a better mark as well although he did lose some big matches a year which you win a slam, WTF, loads of Masters and finish number has to get you at least A- despite the high expectations for him coming into the year.

Interesting analysis HB. I'd also give Novak a better mark; although he didn't have a multi-slam year, he was clearly the man to beat and garnered the most titles, YE#1, won some big tournaments. Federer perhaps could be higher if judged relative to how we expected him to do this year! And maybe Kei above Cilic.

But they're your rankings - and a good read. Cheers.

Very good post. I enjoyed reading it.

If it's based on expectations at the start of the year, I'd say Federer is worthy of an A. I never expected him to play as well as this for as long as this.

B is probably about right for Novak based on expectations at the start of the year. Based on my expectations after Australia, Dubai and a struggle through the early rounds of IW though, I'd give him an A+! I really feared the worst at that point.

Agree with Nishikori to do better than Cilic next year. Cilic it's a fair bet that when his US Open points drop off, he will be at a lower ranking than now. Nishikori looks like the real deal and you see him maintaining his ranking points and position perhaps, even after the US Open points fall off.

Could we argue that we are now in the Djokovic era? I'll use that word, as I know you all love it.
Federer era (2004-2007)
Nadal era (2008-2010)
Djokovic era (2011-2014)
?

A few holes in the plan, Federer being number one in 2009, but Rafa's injury was a factor.
Federer being no 1 in 2012 we can probably ignore, especially as Djokovic had it back by the year end. Nadal's 2013 doesn't fit in with my Djokovic era though does it?

What would you Djokovic fans settle for next year? Here's a couple of questions to get you going?

Would you settle for RG to complete career slam, even if he did little else and finished the year outside the top 2?
Would you settle for a 1-slam year, or should he be only happy with a multi -slam year?

Djokovic has won 1 out of the last 7 Slams, wouldn't be too quick to label the last few years a 'Djokovic era'.

From 2012-2014, in these 3 years, Nadal has won more slams than Djokovic. 2011 of course Djokovic had a great year.
So yeah, let's not call it a Djokovic era just yet.

As for the OP, agree with a lot of it.
I think Djokovic should be down at B-, he really should have won more than Wimbledon this year. However I feel Djokovic next year will show his true potential and level, and pick up atleast 2 slams.
Nadal did well in the circumstances, but not a good year for him on the whole.
Federer had a fantastic year compared to expectations, and was very consistent; but his record in finals and Grand Slams were surprisingly poor given how good his overall level was.

Wawrinka had a great start, didn't do that much apart form his Australian Open win and Monte Carlo win though. In the WTF he was actually not that great (got hammered by Djokovic and lost a tight match against an injured below par Federer), and in Davis Cup he beat a Tsonga struggling with injury in straight sets. Obviously compared to expectations Wawrinka's year was amazing, but he didn't push on really after his early success.

Cilic had a really good year, and actually showed more consistency than people think. I still think he's a streaky on/off player who is very dangerous on his day in Slams, but could also lose early.
Nishikori showed great potential, but the question over him is his physical fitness. Seemed to be nursing a few injuries at once in the WTF.
Raonic and Dimitrov were ok, not great; while Murray and Ferrer disappointed. Gasquet was really poor.

On the whole not actually a great year for any of the 'Big 4'. Wawrinka's year and Cilic's year were great compared to expectations but if they were already legends of the game we wouldn't be calling the years that they had great.

Henman Bill wrote:Agree with Nishikori to do better than Cilic next year. Cilic it's a fair bet that when his US Open points drop off, he will be at a lower ranking than now. Nishikori looks like the real deal and you see him maintaining his ranking points and position perhaps, even after the US Open points fall off.

Could we argue that we are now in the Djokovic era? I'll use that word, as I know you all love it.
Federer era (2004-2007)
Nadal era (2008-2010)
Djokovic era (2011-2014)
?

A few holes in the plan, Federer being number one in 2009, but Rafa's injury was a factor.
Federer being no 1 in 2012 we can probably ignore, especially as Djokovic had it back by the year end. Nadal's 2013 doesn't fit in with my Djokovic era though does it?

What would you Djokovic fans settle for next year? Here's a couple of questions to get you going?

Would  you settle for RG to complete career slam, even if he did little else and finished the year outside the top 2?
Would you settle for a 1-slam year, or should he be only happy with a multi -slam year?

I think I would settle for RG while not finishing in the top 2 but that to me is unlikely that Djokovic wins a slam and doesn't with how well he plays across the surfaces get in the top 2. Frankly, I think he really should win 2 to 3 slams next year because Murray has looked in indifferent form for some time and continually has these niggling injuries, Federer is 33, and Nadal plays half a season. The rest of the guys have lifted their level but he is still way above the rest of them.

Of course, it's possible to argue that anyone in the top 10 had a good season last year. Professional tennis is brutal. You put your ranking and therefore your livelihood on the line every time you step on to the court.
  Unless you're first scheduled match you never know when, or sometimes if, you're going to play. You might have to turn out close to midnight or in front of an empty stadium at 11am.
  If you're injured you plummet down the rankings. If you do well you have to defend your points the following year. You can't just coast. You can't sit on the bench and earn your money if you're not playing like the footballers can.
  And if you're good enough and fortunate enough to get to the very top there's always some whippersnapper waiting to knock your block off.
  Let's give the players their due. OK, they earn big bucks. But more often than not, they deserve them.

Henman Bill wrote:What would you Djokovic fans settle for next year? Here's a couple of questions to get you going?

Would  you settle for RG to complete career slam, even if he did little else and finished the year outside the top 2?
Would you settle for a 1-slam year, or should he be only happy with a multi -slam year?

For Djokovic now, it's all about slam wins. This is what will define his final standing in the game.

RG would be nice but the total is more important. Two more in Australia is better than one in Roland Garros, in my opinion.

I think any expecation of a multi-slam year from Djokovic is a bit fanciful. Outside of 2011, he has no record of achieving this. I've thought for some time that Djokovic would finish his career on 7 to 9 slams and this still seems the most likely outcome for me. Symbolically, getting to 8 would be nice. He'd then be level with Lendl, Agassi and Connors and that feels to me like a fair reflection of his standing in the game.

In answer to the questions, yes, I'd be happy with RG and little else next year.

And I don't think Djokovic has been dominant enough for this to be the 'Djokovic Era'. I'd say he has been the best player overall since he made his breakthrough in 2011 but that's not quite the same thing as an 'era' to me.

I'd also argue that there hasn't been a Nadal era either. It was only 2010 that he really dominated. 2013 was excellent too but it's not like he was massively ahead of Djokovic in the final standings.

[quote="socal1976"]

Henman Bill wrote:
I think I would settle for RG while not finishing in the top 2 but that to me is unlikely that Djokovic wins a slam and doesn't with how well he plays across the surfaces get in the top 2. Frankly, I think he really should win 2 to 3 slams next year because Murray has looked in indifferent form for some time and continually has these niggling injuries, Federer is 33, and Nadal plays half a season. The rest of the guys have lifted their level but he is still way above the rest of them.

Agree, I would be surprised if Djokovic doesn't get at least 2 slams.

When Rafa took over the number one spot from Fed in 2008 I thought the Spaniard would be top for absolutely ages. Fed had just done 237 weeks in succession at the top and I reckoned Rafa would top that. Doubt now whether either Djoko or Rafa can reach the Fed 300 mark.

Nadal spends more time nursing injuries than at number 1

It Must Be Love wrote:Agree, I would be surprised if Djokovic doesn't get at least 2 slams.

Highly optimistic.

Every year since 2011 he could, and perhaps should, have won 2 or more slams.

But he always find a way to blow it. The number of slam finals where he has either come out of the blocks painfully slowly or fades away at the end is ridiculous. Five of the last seven slam finals lost, at a time when he is at his peak as a player. Not to mention non-final matches like Rafa at RG13 and Nishikori at USO where he finds himself in a great position in the match or the draw and fails to take the opportunity.

I love the guy and a I love following his career but his conversion rate is dreadful.

Yes HM, your analysis is clearly correct. That's why he's only won 1 out of the last 7 slams, Fed/Nadal have better conversion ratios.

But next year I think things will change, I can't see another year where he only wins one slam.

I can but hope, IMBL!

Until then I go with a variation of the old 'insanity' adage:

"Insanity is seeing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results"

HMM, you want 2 slams or just the RG for Next year?

Jahu wrote:HMM, you want 2 slams or just the RG for Next year?

2 slams.

But if I can only have one slam, I'd like it to be RG.

I'd be happy with any slam whatsoever though. I agree with Tiger Woods: "I think winning one major championship automatically means you had a great year"

Yeah, the RG would be his final Crown.

Nadal becoming a Cyborg, let's see how much Djoko can fight the bio-tech

There are really only three slams available each year for non-Nadal players due to Rafa's RG prowess.
Djoko has an excellent record at the AO and I would expect him to win it in 2015.
Incidentally, whoever wins at Melbourne may not necessarily go on to have a stellar year if past campaigns are anything to go by.
Djoko won the AO in 2011 and went on to win two more slams that year.
But in every other year since 2007, the AO victor has failed to win another slam that year and in a number of years has failed to even reach another slam final.
The winners were:
2008 - Djoko
2009 - Nadal
2010 - Fed
2012 - Djoko
2013 - Djoko
2014 - Stan the Man
So it seems the AO does not really give us a glimpse of what will happen the rest of the year.

sirfredperry wrote:There are really only three slams available each year for non-Nadal players due to Rafa's RG prowess.

Djokovic is going to win FO 2015

All right Merlin

23/06/13 - 07/07/13: The Murray era.

It Must Be Love wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:There are really only three slams available each year for non-Nadal players due to Rafa's RG prowess.

Djokovic is going to win FO 2015

Only if Rafa is not playing.

sirfredperry wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:There are really only three slams available each year for non-Nadal players due to Rafa's RG prowess.

Djokovic is going to win FO 2015

Only if Rafa is not playing.

Just because Rafa won many times before, doesn't mean he'll win again. Djokovic had dominated Aus Open, but lost to Stan this year.
Firstly as you say Nadal may not play/ may not play fully fit in which case he'll struggle.
But even if he is, I don't see him getting through the draw so easily.
His biggest challenge is likely to be Djokovic. I was watching French Open 2013 highlights yesterday, and was amazed at Djokovic's high level (apart from set 3). Djokovic played a phenomenal match, and it's only because Nadal played a ridiculous joke of a set 5 (hitting 20+ winners in that set on a slow court) that he managed to sneak through.
I see Djokovic keeping up that sort of level, but aged 29, which is how old Nadal will be for the FO, I don't see him keeping upto that sort of level.

IMBL
Every year, no matter what state he's been in previously, Rafa manages to get himself up for the French. OK, he got beaten in 09. We may never know what his fitness level was like in the Soderling match but he was bad enough to pull out of Wimbledon.
  The one year I think Rafa might have been challenged was 2011 when Nole seemed to have his measure on clay but Federer and the Fognini factor put paid to the big two meeting that year.
  Rafa's whole year is geared round the French. I wouldn't bet against him.

2013 and 2014 were the years that Novak arguably should have won RG.

In 2013, he wasn't the better player but chances against Rafa at RG don't get much better than being 4-2 up in the 5th.

In 2014 he was 1-0 up against Rafa, who was playing well but not great, but he (Novak) just faded away. Rafa was spent at the end of the 4th. If Novak could have forced a 5th, I think Rafa would have struggled.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. He had to take these opportunities because there is no guarantee they will present themselves again.

If you look at it from the other direction, those were two years where Rafa had a real chance of getting beaten. But he found a way to win. That's what makes him a tier 1 great.

HM Murdoch wrote:
If you look at it from the other direction, those were two years where Rafa had a real chance of getting beaten. But he found a way to win. That's what makes him a tier 1 great.

HM, when you word it like that, you don't motivate me to argue with you

But there's no guarantee Nadal will be able bring himself to the level to fight it out. He will turn 29 for the French Open, and considering he started his pro career 2 years earlier than most and plays a physical style you do wonder if he will be able to still manage it. I don't personally think so.
I also have another untested theory about Nadal's level on clay vs outdoor hard since 2009, but I'm still slightly unsure of it, if it's convincing enough I'll write a thread and we can debate that separately.

In a chicken and egg world, I wonder which came first. Does Rafa do well on clay cos he has big breaks in other parts of the season, or does he need the big breaks cos he wears himself out on clay ?

sirfredperry wrote:In a chicken and egg world, I wonder which came first. Does Rafa do well on clay cos he has big breaks in other parts of the season, or does he need the big breaks cos he wears himself out on clay ?

I suppose a combination of both ?

HM Murdoch wrote:In 2013, he wasn't the better player but chances against Rafa at RG don't get much better than being 4-2 up in the 5th.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. He had to take these opportunities because there is no guarantee they will present themselves again.

If you look at it from the other direction, those were two years where Rafa had a real chance of getting beaten. But he found a way to win. That's what makes him a tier 1 great.

I do agree with this, but IMBL is also right - Nadal's 5th set in 2013 was just disgustingly good. Although Novak has choked a few matches away before - or at least failed to serve them out first time - I'm not convinced that was one of them. He was so unlucky not to have the chance to win it in 2011 as well, the title was his if he'd made the final.

For what it's worth, I consider Novak to be a tier 1 great already. I know that the stats doesn't bear it out yet, but in terms of level of play he is just phenomenal. A wonderful player to watch, I hope that he stays near the top of the game for many years to come. I do hope that he wins RG - it would be a grave injustice if he didn't (Federer's situation was much the same before his win).

Silver wrote:IMBL is also right - Nadal's 5th set in 2013 was just disgustingly good. Although Novak has choked a few matches away before - or at least failed to serve them out first time - I'm not convinced that was one of them.

I agree. Even at the time, I could tell that Novak was hanging on to that early break by his fingertips.

It was like a watching a boat that is gradually sinking with the harbour coming into view. The closer he got, the harder progress was becoming and the question was if he could stay afloat long enough to make it in.

Djokovic was actually really close to going up a double break, but Nadal managed to pull of a ridiculous cross court backhand winner from metres outside the tramlines at deuce to manage to keep Djokovic's lead to just a break.

Silver wrote:
For what it's worth, I consider Novak to be a tier 1 great already. I know that the stats doesn't bear it out yet, but in terms of level of play he is just phenomenal. A wonderful player to watch, I hope that he stays near the top of the game for many years to come. I do hope that he wins RG - it would be a grave injustice if he didn't (Federer's situation was much the same before his win).

This may be for a separate thread- but I also highly rate Djokovic.
He still has a lot of time to add titles to his career, but if he retired today I would have him as a tier 2 great. As me and HM were discussing earlier, he has bizarrely found a way to not win slams sometimes. I think that will stop in 2015 , but let's see.

HM Murdoch wrote:

Silver wrote:IMBL is also right - Nadal's 5th set in 2013 was just disgustingly good. Although Novak has choked a few matches away before - or at least failed to serve them out first time - I'm not convinced that was one of them.

I agree. Even at the time, I could tell that Novak was hanging on to that early break by his fingertips.

It was like a watching a boat that is gradually sinking with the harbour coming into view. The closer he got, the harder progress was becoming and the question was if he could stay afloat long enough to make it in.

That's a fantastic image, and depressingly accurate