Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

CarlThe94Pathfinder t1_jasuue3 wrote

How is it a meaningless record? If anything, it makes it that much more meaningful

2

hi-Im-gosu t1_jathk9t wrote

Beacuse nobody cares about top 10, they care about top 1.

Who is the best player? Who was the highest ranked for the longest? This is what people debate.

Do we praise or care about a Nascar driver for finishing top 10 in bunch of races, do we praise or care about golfers for finishing top 10 in tournaments, do we praise an NBA team for finishing top 10 at the end of the season?

You're actually delusional if you think this accomplishment means anything significant.

−4

AmbassadorParking392 t1_jatmxtc wrote

>“Who was the highest ranked for the longest?”

This is literally what we’re debating. Nadal is the highest ranked for the longest. He is top 1 for longest time spent ranked in the top 10.

Many factors come into play in determining the greatest player in any sport, and longevity is certainly one of those factors.

1

hi-Im-gosu t1_jauwnuk wrote

Top 10 isn’t shit in tennis, people only care about number 1 just like every other sport.

your pathetic attempt at word play doesn’t change that fact. Weeks at number 1 is the most important metric when determining dominance because it means you were consistently the best player in the world for the longest time.

nobody cares if you were top 10, why couldn’t you get number 1?

if you care about longevity, total titles is a better stat to represent that but even then it pales in comparison to weeks at number 1 because not all tennis tournaments are equal, some are far easier than others.

it seems you don’t understand the true objective goal of professional tennis which is why you can’t comprehend my argument

the sole goal of professional tennis is to earn as many ATP points as possible, the number 1 player does this making them the best.

1