2022 and 2025 are different cases. If you really want to play the hypothetical game in 2025, we don't know that Jannik wouldn't have been in top form in Rome and RG rather than rusty, and won both. Meaning, if you are going to play one side of the hypothetical, you should at least acknowledge the other. Pointing out actual stat is not hypothetical.
In 2022, it is a very different hypothetical to imagine that Novak would have easily earned 200 ATP points at the USO and AO if he had been allowed to play. Meaning, two 3R losses gets him tied with Carlos. Now of course it is highly likely that he would have earned far more and been far ahead of Alcaraz. Again, Carlos won by default. He was the third best player in 2022, but finished #1 because of helping factors. It happens.
Bottom line is that the system, which I've heard you say is far better than it used to be, says that you earn the most ATP in the year, you are the YE#1. I know there are other points-evaluating systems that you like, but this is the one we have. And I think win percentage is a slippery slope. Because it wouldn't be used only for the Top 2. Some would also have to be rewarded for only playing a small number of tournaments and winning most of their matches. The ATP is invested in players playing a lot of matches, and it rewards them for it. And lesser players who play a lot of tournaments, but tend to go out early would lose standing. This is not in the interest of the ATP.
There is a lot that was odd about 2022. I think we all realized at the time that Alcaraz was the last man standing. That he was young, and full of promise, and we hoped he'd fulfill it. Which he has. It would have been an asterisk if he'd gotten to number 1 that year, and then fallen off the radar. And I don't really mind if you want an asterisk because the point system was rather broken by Wimbledon. However, just because you don't agree with why Novak didn't play the AO or the USO, doesn't mean that it wasn't his choice. He knew the price of admission to the AO in 2022, and it was to be vaccinated against Covid. He knew admission to the US (which included IW and Miami) depended on his getting vaccinated, and he refused. That was all his choice.
Which is similar to being injured, in terms of absence, though injury isn't a choice. As Kieran rightly complains, and I co-sign, where were you complaining about Novak's hoovering up points when Rafa was not there to face him in a Major, due to injury? Remember their H2H at Majors.
If you're going to point out the difference in win % this year, and just make it about the Top 2, then why not also, or otherwise, make it about the H2H between them this year? Alcaraz is 4-2 this year, and 2-1 in Major finals in the H2H.
I know you say that Carlos deserves it, and he does. You're just positing a win pct. But what about the H2H? See what happens? It can't be just about win percentage that makes a player the best one of the year. There is a lot that goes into it. So, the ATP points are the best we got.
