Most Dominant Years based on Number of Big Titles?

[drm025]

If we consider the big tournaments to be the Grand Slams, Masters(for men) and Premier Mandatory/Premier 5/Tier I(for women), and YECs, that gives you 14 big tournaments for both the men and women. Looking back over the past 20 years or so, the highest number of big tournaments won by one player in a single year was 8. And this happened 3 times:

1. 2006 - Roger Federer (92-5) - 8 big titles, 3 other finals
Australian Open, Indian Wells, Miami, Wimbledon, Toronto, US Open, Madrid, ATP Finals
Runner-Up: Monte Carlo, Rome, French Open (losses to Nadal)

2. 2011 - Novak Djokovic (70-6) - 8 big titles, 1 other final
Australian Open, Indian Wells, Miami, Madrid, Rome, Wimbledon, Montreal, US Open
Runner-Up: Cincinnati (loss to Murray)

3. 2013 - Serena Williams (78-4) - 8 big titles, 2 other finals
Miami, Madrid, Rome, French Open, Toronto, US Open, Beijing, WTA Finals
Runner-Up: Doha, Cincinnati (losses to Azarenka)

This has not been accomplished by Nadal, Sampras, or Agassi. It's hard to compare to players before the 90s since tournaments were ranked pretty differently before then, though Graf did not accomplish this during the 90s.

I would have to give the edge to Federer as the best season (3 slams and ATP finals), followed by Djokovic (3 slams), then Serena (2 slams and WTA finals). Djokovic was the only one who won titles on all surfaces, though.

Do you think this is a good criteria to use when selecting the most dominant seasons since 1990?

 

[drm025]

I also posted this in the ATP section:

If we consider the big tournaments to be the Grand Slams, Masters(for men) and Premier Mandatory/Premier 5/Tier I(for women), and YECs, that gives you 14 big tournaments for both the men and women. Looking back over the past 20 years or so, the highest number of big tournaments won by one player in a single year was 8. And this happened 3 times:

1. 2006 - Roger Federer (92-5) - 8 big titles, 3 other finals
Australian Open, Indian Wells, Miami, Wimbledon, Toronto, US Open, Madrid, ATP Finals
Runner-Up: Monte Carlo, Rome, French Open (losses to Nadal)

2. 2011 - Novak Djokovic (70-6) - 8 big titles, 1 other final
Australian Open, Indian Wells, Miami, Madrid, Rome, Wimbledon, Montreal, US Open
Runner-Up: Cincinnati (loss to Murray)

3. 2013 - Serena Williams (78-4) - 8 big titles, 2 other finals
Miami, Madrid, Rome, French Open, Toronto, US Open, Beijing, WTA Finals
Runner-Up: Doha, Cincinnati (losses to Azarenka)

This has not been accomplished by Nadal, Sampras, or Agassi. It's hard to compare to players before the 90s since tournaments were ranked pretty differently before then, though Graf did not accomplish this during the 90s.

I would have to give the edge to Federer as the best season (3 slams and ATP finals), followed by Djokovic (3 slams), then Serena (2 slams and WTA finals). Djokovic was the only one who won titles on all surfaces, though.

Do you think this is a good criteria to use when selecting the most dominant seasons since 1990?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Don't compare Men and Women together when you are talking about big tournaments.
This is because the 8 mandatory ATP 1000s are tournaments in which all top players
are required to play and usually play (althogh there are some exceptions here and there).

However, on the women's side there are only 4 mandatory big tournaments
where all the top players are required to participate (IW, Miami, China and Madrid)
and Venus and Serena usually do not play IW. It is not a requirement that top
players have to play all the premier 5 tournaments; in fact i believe it is enough
if they play in 2 of them. This scatters the filed in the premier 5 tournaments
and so they cannot be called big tournaments.

 

[drm025]

Don't compare Men and Women together when you are talking about big tournaments.
This is because the 8 mandatory ATP 1000s are tournaments in which all top players
are required to play and usually play (althogh there are some exceptions here and there).

However, on the women's side there are only 4 mandatory big tournaments
where all the top players are required to participate (IW, Miami, China and Madrid)
and Venus and Serena usually do not play IW. It is not a requirement that top
players have to play all the premier 5 tournaments; in fact i believe it is enough
if they play in 2 of them. This scatters the filed in the premier 5 tournaments
and so they cannot be called big tournaments.

I see your point, although in this particular case, I would argue that the top players all planned to be at Rome and Toronto, the premier 5's that Serena won. Only Kerber was missing from Rome due to injury, and unfortunately Azarenka and Sharapova were both missing from Toronto for the same reason. Unless you think their injuries weren't serious enough that they would have played in a mandatory event, then I don't see the difference.

Also, I'm pretty sure top ten players have to play in at least 4 of them. So they are almost all required anyway.

Finally, if we remove the Premier 5's then Serena won 6 of 9 big tournaments, which is a higher percentage than 8 out of 14.

 

[my sherona]

2004 to 2008 Maria 1st Era of Domination..also covered the destruction at wimbledon fields finals of 2004.

 

[drm025]

2004 to 2008 Maria 1st Era of Domination..also covered the destruction at wimbledon fields finals of 2004.

Your posts about Sharapova on this forum are border-line if not outright trolling, but I will respond, anyway.

Yes, those were Sharapova's best years with 10 big titles (3 of them majors). Serena during that time, clearly her weakest years, won 7 big titles (3 of them majors), so Serena's worst isn't far from Maria's best. They were 1-1 in GS finals including the 2004 Wimbledon final and the 2007 Australian Open final. I'll let you decide which one was more of a "destruction", haha.

 

[sk310]

@Drm025 that first sentence was priceless.

My Sherona it's like you live in a fantasy world when you're talking about Sharapova. She has NEVER dominated. That's one of the story lines of her career.

 

[my sherona]

2004 to 2008 Maria 1st Era of Domination..also covered the destruction at wimbledon fields finals of 2004.

Your posts about Sharapova on this forum are border-line if not outright trolling, but I will respond, anyway.

Yes, those were Sharapova's best years with 10 big titles (3 of them majors). Serena during that time, clearly her weakest years, won 7 big titles (3 of them majors), so Serena's worst isn't far from Maria's best. They were 1-1 in GS finals including the 2004 Wimbledon final and the 2007 Australian Open final. I'll let you decide which one was more of a "destruction", haha.

to be destroyed in the most important..the center of tennis w/c is the Wimbledon carry more weight

 

[drm025]

2004 to 2008 Maria 1st Era of Domination..also covered the destruction at wimbledon fields finals of 2004.

Your posts about Sharapova on this forum are border-line if not outright trolling, but I will respond, anyway.

Yes, those were Sharapova's best years with 10 big titles (3 of them majors). Serena during that time, clearly her weakest years, won 7 big titles (3 of them majors), so Serena's worst isn't far from Maria's best. They were 1-1 in GS finals including the 2004 Wimbledon final and the 2007 Australian Open final. I'll let you decide which one was more of a "destruction", haha.

to be destroyed in the most important..the center of tennis w/c is the Wimbledon carry more weight

What about when Sharapova was destroyed on the same court during the olympics? Was that important? What was that score? 6-0 6-1?

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

I also posted this in the ATP section:

...

Do you think this is a good criteria to use when selecting the most dominant seasons since 1990?

I think you hit it on the head!
The slams and the 1000 point tournys along with couple of 900 pointers are all the big ones, they matter most.

78-4 is awesome but 92-5 is really hard to believe.

Here are some other hard to believe numbers...
Martina was 90-3 in 1986 with 14 titles, she was also 90-3 in 1982 with 15 titles but then she has an 86-1 record in 1983 with 16 titles! she played 17 events that year.

 

[my sherona]

2004 to 2008 Maria 1st Era of Domination..also covered the destruction at wimbledon fields finals of 2004.

Your posts about Sharapova on this forum are border-line if not outright trolling, but I will respond, anyway.

Yes, those were Sharapova's best years with 10 big titles (3 of them majors). Serena during that time, clearly her weakest years, won 7 big titles (3 of them majors), so Serena's worst isn't far from Maria's best. They were 1-1 in GS finals including the 2004 Wimbledon final and the 2007 Australian Open final. I'll let you decide which one was more of a "destruction", haha.

to be destroyed in the most important..the center of tennis w/c is the Wimbledon carry more weight

What about when Sharapova was destroyed on the same court during the olympics? Was that important? What was that score? 6-0 6-1?

Olympics not a GS event.. its an over hyped exhibition for commercial purposes.

 

[Fiero425]

2004 to 2008 Maria 1st Era of Domination..also covered the destruction at wimbledon fields finals of 2004.

Your posts about Sharapova on this forum are border-line if not outright trolling, but I will respond, anyway.

Yes, those were Sharapova's best years with 10 big titles (3 of them majors). Serena during that time, clearly her weakest years, won 7 big titles (3 of them majors), so Serena's worst isn't far from Maria's best. They were 1-1 in GS finals including the 2004 Wimbledon final and the 2007 Australian Open final. I'll let you decide which one was more of a "destruction", haha.

to be destroyed in the most important..the center of tennis w/c is the Wimbledon carry more weight

What about when Sharapova was destroyed on the same court during the olympics? Was that important? What was that score? 6-0 6-1?

Olympics not a GS event.. its an over hyped exhibition for commercial purposes.

I glanced at the thread and wondered 2 things; lack of representation of the greatest years in women's tennis with Martina Navratilova, Steffi Graf, & Margaret Court and the fact that Sharapova was included in here at all? The only thing Maria dominated was press coverage! That's a colossal joke in comparing her to Graf's "GOLDEN SLAM" year in '88! It took almost 10 years for Maria to acquire her 4 majors while Steffi and Margaret did it all in '88 & '70 respectively! Honorable mention of BJK as well!

OTH, Martina lost 6 matches in 3 years; '82-'84 (86-1 in '83), winning 8 of the 12 majors, 6 in a row from '83 Wimbledon to '84 USO (no one's won 6 majors in a row), a 74 match winning streak in '84, and took '83 & '84 WTA Chp (8 overall and twice in '86)! Maybe I should read back! There's got to be a reason none of this was covered! - Update: OIC now; restricted to last 20 years or so! OK!

 

[Kieran]

I agree with you, Fiero, Martina's greatness was something that almost shook the earth. In some senses, Serena's physicality is as brutal and imposing - but Serena is beating girls who's lower lip quivers when they have to hit a second serve. Women's tennis nowadays is rubbish and if Serena had a major rival, it would be interesting.

But here's a clarification, if one is needed: Sharapova is not that rival! :Lolz:

 

[Calvy]

I agree with you, Fiero, Martina's greatness was something that almost shook the earth. In some senses, Serena's physicality is as brutal and imposing - but Serena is beating girls who's lower lip quivers when they have to hit a second serve. Women's tennis nowadays is rubbish and if Serena had a major rival, it would be interesting.

But here's a clarification, if one is needed: Sharapova is not that rival! :Lolz:

All due respect, what Martina accomplished is awe-inspiring, but, let's not pretend she or Graf had the stiffest competitions either.

With the huge exception of Evert, Martina was competing against head cases like Mandlikova, and Jaeger. Shiver and Sukova were good for consistency, but, not day to day challenge. Who do u then, Jo Durie, Wendy Turnbull and Claudia Khode-Kilsch?

With Graf, u had a aging Evert, Martina was injured a bit, the same Shriver, Sukova and Mandlikova, all whom were not as good as they were years before.

What I am trying to convey is, let's not pretend, only Serena had players whom didn't stack up. Fact is, I'd take Vika and Maria over over Pam, Hana, Helena, Conchita, and Gabriela.

 

[Fiero425]

I agree with you, Fiero, Martina's greatness was something that almost shook the earth. In some senses, Serena's physicality is as brutal and imposing - but Serena is beating girls who's lower lip quivers when they have to hit a second serve. Women's tennis nowadays is rubbish and if Serena had a major rival, it would be interesting.

But here's a clarification, if one is needed: Sharapova is not that rival! :Lolz:

All due respect, what Martina accomplished is awe-inspiring, but, let's not pretend she or Graf had the stiffest competitions either.

With the huge exception of Evert, Martina was competing against head cases like Mandlikova, and Jaeger. Shiver and Sukova were good for consistency, but, not day to day challenge. Who do u then, Jo Durie, Wendy Turnbull and Claudia Khode-Kilsch?

With Graf, u had a aging Evert, Martina was injured a bit, the same Shriver, Sukova and Mandlikova, all whom were not as good as they were years before.

What I am trying to convey is, let's not pretend, only Serena had players whom didn't stack up. Fact is, I'd take Vika and Maria over over Pam, Hana, Helena, Conchita, and Gabriela.

...and Serena doesn't have head-cases to play against and "own?" Vika and Maria are at the top of the list in this generation! They get into battles with players you don't even know, going to the full 3 sets and 3 hours! You can only play who's on the other side of the net! People probably said the same about Margaret and BJK way back when!

 

[Kieran]

I agree with you, Fiero, Martina's greatness was something that almost shook the earth. In some senses, Serena's physicality is as brutal and imposing - but Serena is beating girls who's lower lip quivers when they have to hit a second serve. Women's tennis nowadays is rubbish and if Serena had a major rival, it would be interesting.

But here's a clarification, if one is needed: Sharapova is not that rival! :Lolz:

All due respect, what Martina accomplished is awe-inspiring, but, let's not pretend she or Graf had the stiffest competitions either.

With the huge exception of Evert, Martina was competing against head cases like Mandlikova, and Jaeger. Shiver and Sukova were good for consistency, but, not day to day challenge. Who do u then, Jo Durie, Wendy Turnbull and Claudia Khode-Kilsch?

With Graf, u had a aging Evert, Martina was injured a bit, the same Shriver, Sukova and Mandlikova, all whom were not as good as they were years before.

What I am trying to convey is, let's not pretend, only Serena had players whom didn't stack up. Fact is, I'd take Vika and Maria over over Pam, Hana, Helena, Conchita, and Gabriela.

Eh? Martina had also Billie Jean at the start of her career and Steffi towards the rear end of it.

And 18 slam Chrissy.

Serena has Nervous Ninnie and Minnie Mouse. Oh, and I forgot Safina and JJ and Maria and Ivanaovic and...

 

[Fiero425]

I agree with you, Fiero, Martina's greatness was something that almost shook the earth. In some senses, Serena's physicality is as brutal and imposing - but Serena is beating girls who's lower lip quivers when they have to hit a second serve. Women's tennis nowadays is rubbish and if Serena had a major rival, it would be interesting.

But here's a clarification, if one is needed: Sharapova is not that rival! :Lolz:

All due respect, what Martina accomplished is awe-inspiring, but, let's not pretend she or Graf had the stiffest competitions either.

With the huge exception of Evert, Martina was competing against head cases like Mandlikova, and Jaeger. Shiver and Sukova were good for consistency, but, not day to day challenge. Who do u then, Jo Durie, Wendy Turnbull and Claudia Khode-Kilsch?

With Graf, u had a aging Evert, Martina was injured a bit, the same Shriver, Sukova and Mandlikova, all whom were not as good as they were years before.

What I am trying to convey is, let's not pretend, only Serena had players whom didn't stack up. Fact is, I'd take Vika and Maria over over Pam, Hana, Helena, Conchita, and Gabriela.

Eh? Martina had also Billie Jean at the start of her career and Steffi towards the rear end of it.

And 18 slam Chrissy.

Serena has Nervous Ninnie and Minnie Mouse. Oh, and I forgot Safina and JJ and Maria and Ivanaovic and...

Don't forget the older burnouts like Svetlana Kuznetsova; even though I love her! SK truly under-achieved with so much athleticism to only have 2 majors! HOF'r though! - As to Martina's rivals, how soon we forget Goolagong & Wade early on, then Tracy Austin, Seles & Sanchez-Vicario at the end, and a host of other ladies, but major event winners nonetheless!

 

[shawnbm]

Christie and Martina had many rivalries over the years with many great players. I can't say either one had it tougher than the other. There was an awful lot of overlap, but the game more physically dandi g across the board after Navratilova did what she did in 1982-1983.

 

[RJD11]

I agree with you, Fiero, Martina's greatness was something that almost shook the earth. In some senses, Serena's physicality is as brutal and imposing - but Serena is beating girls who's lower lip quivers when they have to hit a second serve. Women's tennis nowadays is rubbish and if Serena had a major rival, it would be interesting.

But here's a clarification, if one is needed: Sharapova is not that rival! :Lolz:

All due respect, what Martina accomplished is awe-inspiring, but, let's not pretend she or Graf had the stiffest competitions either.

With the huge exception of Evert, Martina was competing against head cases like Mandlikova, and Jaeger. Shiver and Sukova were good for consistency, but, not day to day challenge. Who do u then, Jo Durie, Wendy Turnbull and Claudia Khode-Kilsch?

With Graf, u had a aging Evert, Martina was injured a bit, the same Shriver, Sukova and Mandlikova, all whom were not as good as they were years before.

What I am trying to convey is, let's not pretend, only Serena had players whom didn't stack up. Fact is, I'd take Vika and Maria over over Pam, Hana, Helena, Conchita, and Gabriela.

Eh? Martina had also Billie Jean at the start of her career and Steffi towards the rear end of it.

And 18 slam Chrissy.

Serena has Nervous Ninnie and Minnie Mouse. Oh, and I forgot Safina and JJ and Maria and Ivanaovic and...

Don't forget the older burnouts like Svetlana Kuznetsova; even though I love her! SK truly under-achieved with so much athleticism to only have 2 majors! HOF'r though! - As to Martina's rivals, how soon we forget Goolagong & Wade early on, then Tracy Austin, Seles & Sanchez-Vicario at the end, and a host of other ladies, but major event winners nonetheless!

'Fiero, Considering those players like Svetlana, Safina, JJ etal.

They might have majors or more majors, were it not for Serena

who beat them in finals.

 

[Fiero425]

I agree with you, Fiero, Martina's greatness was something that almost shook the earth. In some senses, Serena's physicality is as brutal and imposing - but Serena is beating girls who's lower lip quivers when they have to hit a second serve. Women's tennis nowadays is rubbish and if Serena had a major rival, it would be interesting.

But here's a clarification, if one is needed: Sharapova is not that rival! :Lolz:

All due respect, what Martina accomplished is awe-inspiring, but, let's not pretend she or Graf had the stiffest competitions either.

With the huge exception of Evert, Martina was competing against head cases like Mandlikova, and Jaeger. Shiver and Sukova were good for consistency, but, not day to day challenge. Who do u then, Jo Durie, Wendy Turnbull and Claudia Khode-Kilsch?

With Graf, u had a aging Evert, Martina was injured a bit, the same Shriver, Sukova and Mandlikova, all whom were not as good as they were years before.

What I am trying to convey is, let's not pretend, only Serena had players whom didn't stack up. Fact is, I'd take Vika and Maria over over Pam, Hana, Helena, Conchita, and Gabriela.

Eh? Martina had also Billie Jean at the start of her career and Steffi towards the rear end of it.

And 18 slam Chrissy.

Serena has Nervous Ninnie and Minnie Mouse. Oh, and I forgot Safina and JJ and Maria and Ivanaovic and...

Don't forget the older burnouts like Svetlana Kuznetsova; even though I love her! SK truly under-achieved with so much athleticism to only have 2 majors! HOF'r though! - As to Martina's rivals, how soon we forget Goolagong & Wade early on, then Tracy Austin, Seles & Sanchez-Vicario at the end, and a host of other ladies, but major event winners nonetheless!

'Fiero, Considering those players like Svetlana, Safina, JJ etal.

They might have majors or more majors, were it not for Serena

who beat them in finals.

Outside of the Williams, Henin while semi-retired, and injuries to other top players, how soon we forget who held #1 ranking for well over a year without a major; Caroline Woz! OMG; what a joke on the WTA! That has never happened before! Just shows how things have fallen out with JJ, Safina, and Woz holding onto the top ranking without a sniff of a major! Ridiculous! :nono :laydownlaughing