Poll: Who Had The Better 2016 Season, Andy Murray Or Novak Djokovic?
by Staff | December 3rd, 2016, 10:49 am
  • 109 Comments

In some parts of the tennis world, the debate rages, who had the better 2016, Andy Murray or Novak Djokovic. Murray finished the season with more wins, more titles and more ranking points which earned him the No. 1 ranking.

But Djokovic fans will argue their guy had more Grand Slam titles, more Masters titles, more Top 10 and Top 5 wins and had the better record against Murray.

Murray did win the Olympics and the ATP Finals, so in terms of “meaningful” titles (Slams, Masters, Olympics, ATP Finals), one could argue it’s dead even 6-6.

So the difference? Overall match wins and titles, and that goes to Murray for putting together a complete season, first half and second half.

ANDY MURRAY VS NOVAK DJOKOVIC 2016 BREAKDOWN

Andy Murray Novak Djokovic Advatange
Ranking Points 12,410 11,780 Murray
Titles 9 7 Murray
Finals 13 10 Murray
Grand Slam Titles 1 2 Djokovic
Masters Titles 3 4 Djokovic
ATP Finals Titles 1 0 Murray
Olympic Golds 1 0 Murray
Win-Loss 78-9 65-9 Murray
Slam Win-Loss 23-3 21-2 Djokovic
Masters Win-Loss 27-5 31-4 Djokovic
v Top 10 Rec 16-5 21-4 Djokovic
v Top 5 Rec 7-4 9-3 Djokovic
v The Other 2-3 3-2 Djokovic
Prize Money $16,327,821 $14,130,464 Murray
WINNER: 
MURRAY

 


You Might Like:
Poll: Novak Djokovic Or Andy Murray, Who’ll Win The 2016 French Open Men’s Final?
Poll: Who’s Your Early 2016 Australian Open Favorite? Can Anyone Beat Novak Djokovic?
Poll: Who’ll Win The Wimbledon Men’s Final Between Andy Murray and Milos Raonic?
Poll: Andy Murray v Novak Djokovic At The ATP Finals For No. 1, Who’ll Win?
Poll: Who’s Your Early Favorite To Win Wimbledon?

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

109 Comments for Poll: Who Had The Better 2016 Season, Andy Murray Or Novak Djokovic?

jane Says:

andy is #1. that’s it. he earned it.

it was a tight race to the end, which was pretty cool; first time ever the WTF final was played to determine YE#1.

as a novak fan, obviously i am thrilled with his season.

he won the french and **held/won all four slams in a row** not done since laver!! (something andy and federer have spoken more highly of than the press)

plus he added 2 slams to his slam count to make it 12. so while his second half (which still featured a masters title, a slam final and the WTF final) wasn’t great, his season overall was still excellent for me.


BETSYX Says:

The question is not who is #1. It is who had a better year. Andy’s amazing year cannot beat Novak’s historical feat of finishing holding all 4 GS trophies in a row, not to mention the other ways in which he bettered Andy this year,including winning 2 GS this year (beating Andy in two of them), 4 masters and having a better record vs the top players. And I am a huge Andy fan and do not really care for Novak (although I respect what he has accomplished).


Ngentot Says:

As Federer’s fans would say: “In the end, SLAMS are all that really matter”. So Novak’s two salams trump Andy’s one any time. PERIOD.


AndyMira Says:

Novak is THE KING for the 1st half and Andy is THE KING in 2nd half…


Cristina Says:

You didn’t consider the X factor: Novak having the Non-calendar Grand Slam as the unparalleled achievement. Murray would die to have that in his resume, Djokovic already has 3 year end #1. Another aspect: Novak had the most weeks at #1 in the year, that should count for something.


Willow Says:

Well said AM true that, overall i would say Novak as he won two GS and completed the career GS, and the none calendar GS, was only delighted Andy won the WTFs and W again, and got the number 1 ranking, got fed up with mens tennis which had become a one man show, players seem to be now stepping up to the challenge hope it continues ….


Cristina Says:

4 YE#1, sorry for the typo.


Willow Says:

If you go by some peoples logic, those who say its not only the GS that matter, Andy won 9 titles to Novaks 7 …..


lakie Says:

A non calendar year slam is just a career slam and not in the same class as a calendar slam which has to be achieved in one season. Obviously Djok fans would like to big up his achievement…


Cristina Says:

non calendar slam is NOT just a career slam, it’s holding all 4 at once, it’s something that nobody managed to do other than Bulge and Laver, none of the other legends. Really.


Truth Says:

Precious, attention seeking liar Fed and his sycophantic greedy jealous Roddick must have been a pleasure to watch.
Reviled and fake rivalry propaganda.

Tennis forums hated Roddick and only condescending clowns supported Roddick at the 2009 Wimbledon final.
I would have liked to see Novak elbow Roddick in the face in 2008.
What a putrid warrior that Fed turkey was!
By 2006, anyone with logic was so sick of that abusive, money grubbing trophy wife picking nitwit! Fed loved that idiot. No surprise there!


AndyMira Says:

@Willow 12:04 pm…Yeah sis,for the life of me,i can’t separate the two of them..Novak and Andy created their own greatness this year..it is sooooo unfair to both of them if i named who’s the greatest and who’s not.Both deserves to be recognized as the greatest players this year..


sinha71 Says:

Djokovic’s year completing the first Grand Slam since Laver was the most significant achievement in tennis not just this year but any year in tennis.

Murray had an amazing year also, but Djokovic’s was the more outstanding.


Willow Says:

Lakie i agree with you, although four in a row is still four in a row, and still a fantastic achievement, i would say it still comes second marginally to four in a calendar year, as you have a shorter window to achieve it, after winning the USO players have chance to regroup and more rest to get ready for the AO, where with say RG and W there isnt that luxury, when Rafa was trying to do the same thing in 2011 at the AO, even Laver himself said its not the true GS ….


jane Says:

Lakie was saying career slam and non-calendar slam are the same. They aren’t. Holding all 4 slams at once – aka the Serena slam – is not the same as winning each of them at some point over the course of your career. Holding all 4 at once is very rare – Novak is first to do it in the Open Era on the men’s tour. Novak fans are not trying to “big up” what he achieved but it was monumentous!! Just listen to Andy’s FO speech and hear his words and what he thought about it. Very gracious speech that acknowledged how huge this feat was. Novak fans are just proud of him.


jane Says:

Plus he didn’t just hold all 4 slams at once; he held the WTF and several masters as well. I think a letdown (and injury) is almost expected after all that


sinha71 Says:

A non-calendar grand slam is a grand slam. No qualifier necessary.

A grand slam within the same calendar year requires the qualifier.

Arguably more difficult to stay that consistently dominant over a longer 11 month period of time than just 9 months for a “calendar” slam.


Willow Says:

Im not saying Novak fans were trying to big it up, im merely saying four in a year is harder, rather than four over the course of two, as you have a smaller window, its not about me having a go at Novak, he will probably go on to be the greatest ever as ive always said myself even as a Nadal fan thats had a pretty dismal couple of years, Laver himself said him and Federer were on par, just wondering how much more some of the Novak want people to say, when will it be enough ? ….


Yolita Says:

There are 14 elite titles in the ATP tennis season: 4 Grand Slams, World Tour Finals, 9 Masters 1000 events.

In June this year Novak had, on his mantelpiece, 10 of those: all 4 GS, the WTFs and 5 masters. Leaving 4 masters to be divided among the rest of the field. It was a culmination of the most dominating 20 months we have ever witnessed in men’s tennis.

99.99% of tennis fans had never seen a man holding all 4 slam titles, and will probabñly never see it again.

As a Novak fan, I wouldn’t change those moments for anything.

After that Novak dropped the ball and Andy went on a tear. So Andy had his best season ever, got the #1 ranking and I’m sure Andy’s fans wouldn’t change his season for anything.

So we’re all happy. :D


lakie Says:

No matter how much Djok fans try to big up the four in a row, it is not the equivalent of a calendar slam and no one has done it since Laver. Federer has been close to it twice but he was unlucky to come up against the greatest clay courter of all time in his prime. Since 2011, Fedal have been in decline, Fed because of age, Nadal because of injuries. Djok could not win even 2 slams in the period 2008-2010.


Willow Says:

I Think some fans are borderline obsessive with the amount of credit they want their favorites to receive, no matter what its simply never enough, over the top fan worship ….


lakie Says:

It is ok for fans to big up their fan’s achievements but many of them are trying to discount Fedal, especially Fed who in my opinion is the closest to a GOAT. It is really pathetic how they claim Fed padded his stats between 2003-2007 whereas Fed was dominating because he brought a new level of talent and dedication and was the First God. Subsequently Nadal and then Djok and Andy joined him at that stratospheric level. The real weak era is from 2012 especially 2015 when Djok could pad his stats not because he brought in a higher level but because the other 3 “Gods” were reduced to mere mortals because of age or injuries.


lakie Says:

…to big up their fave’s achievements…


Margot Says:

@Yolita
More than happy- ECBLOODYSTATIC!


jane Says:

here is a brilliant article written by an author who doesn’t even write about tennis usually but writes about sports for NBC – anyhow he wondered why novak’s 4 in a row got so little in the way of accolades:

“When Tiger Woods won four major golf championships in a row, we called it the Tiger Slam and celebrated. When Serena Williams won four in a row, we called it the Serena Slam and celebrated. When Djokovic finished off Murray, well, his four consecutive grand slam victories barely seemed to register in the larger sports world. Nobody is talking about the Novak Slam. Even inside tennis, most focused on how this gave him the CAREER grand slam — he now has a French Open title to go with his three Wimbledons, two U.S. Opens and six Australian Opens. The career grand slam is great, but that’s been done in recent times. Andre Agassi did it. Roger Federer did it. Rafael Nadal did it.

However, none of them won four slams in a row.”

indeed.

novak’s fans just want him to get credit from the tennis establishment, as it should be. i have theories as to why he hasn’t received due for “the djoker slam”, but it doesn’t matter. history has the final word.

the full article is here, for nole’s fans; it’s a nice one:

http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/the-djoker-slam/


Skeezer Says:

@lakie
👍🎾


eric Says:

At this level its all about grand slams. 2 beats 1. However it is a big deal that Murray reached number 1 for the first time. Murray did win the Gold medal but again slams is what they will be remembered for and 2 beats 1.


chrisford1 Says:

Ngentot Says:
As Federer’s fans would say: “In the end, SLAMS are all that really matter”

And that is why they are called ‘Tards.

2016 was Djokovic building in the 1st half of 2016 added on his monster 2015 season to reach huge performance marks – most points ever, the Gland Slam. But achievements only partially created in 2016.
Andy had the best year.
Most points, even with him getting 0 points for arguably the rarest and 2nd most important trophy in pro tennis – the Olympic gold medal.
Most money.
Most titles.

And timing. Novak faded, Andy rose, Novak could not stop him at the end of season events.


RZ Says:

If looking objectively at 2016 stats/achievement only – i.e., without taking into account the implications on overall career – I think the list provided above gives a slight edge to Andy. But if looking at what their 2016 achievements mean for their overall careers, then I would have to go with Novak due to the career slam and 4 slams in a row.


lakie Says:

ITF recognizes only Grand Slam which is all 4 slams won in one season. Temporarily, ( just once), it recognized 4 consecutive slams as the Grand Slam but went back to original definition. Calendar slam and non calendar slam are terms used by media and fans. In men’s tennis, no one has done it since Laver. In women’s tennis, I think Margaret Court and Steffi Graf achieved it after Laver. Grand Slam is obviously more difficult than 4 consecutive slams in any order.


Humble Rafa Says:

One good thing right now Skeeze’s cats are getting well fed while goating in GOAT glory. Good for them. Reality will hit the cats when the Arrogant One starts playing again. Poor kitties.


lakie Says:

Obviously winning all 4 in one season is tougher than winning 4 consecutive over 2 seasons. Also the fact that 4 consecutive can be done in 4 ways of which only one is the Grand Slam proves that any 4 consecutive is definitely not in the same league as the Grand Slam. Djok’s feat cannot be compared with Laver’s.


BBB Says:

Sigh. More gerrymandering of stats to support whomever you revere, for whatever reason you revere him.

Career slam – hard, but attainble over decades.

Wrapaound slam – harder than a career slam because it’s 4 at the same time.

Calendar slam – harder than a wraparoundlam because of the narrower strictures around which it can be attained.

I agree that Nole has not gotten enough credit for achieving the wraparound slam. Even Federer couldn’t do it.

There are many measures of greatness, and it’s a smallness of mind that requires one measure above all others. The number of majors is a recent obsession. It may be a valid metric, but it’s deceitful to pretend that’s always been the exclusive benchmark. There isn’t even consensus as to what constitutes, historically, the majors. Because the game evolves.


Laver Rules Says:

In the race to be remembered and loved, Djokovic will always be an also ran and forgotten way before even Murray. Tennis history remembers either the very best or the very unique and 12 or even 15 slams will just cut it anymore, however, Nadal with his highly unique forehand does have a chance to withstand the tides of history.

But I could be entirely wrong; specially with this whole biological passport thingie, who knows what may show up 5 years from now, and certain players could become immortalized ….!!!!! :)


Wolverine1996 Says:

Tennis is all about the majors. All other titles and distinctions are garnish. As such, 2016 belongs to Djokovic.


Wolverine1996 Says:

Let me put it another way. Ask Murray which 2016 season he would rather have had, Djokovic’s or his own.


Okiegal Says:

I say Andy had the best season……


Okiegal Says:

I just now read the entire article above……and Andy made the most money so I am right…..he had the best year….yep, money talks! Lol


Thomas Says:

It is so damn obvious, that Djokovic had the better season. What Novak achieved is unique in tennis. What Murray did, is unique for his career and forBritish tennis. Simple as that.
P.S. I am a Federer fan.


Colin Says:

Laver Rules, will you kindly refrain from using the phrase “very unique”, which is meaningless. Either something is unique or it isn’t. There are no degrees of uniqueness.


Margot Says:

Ooh this is a fun game….I’m gonna play yoo….Let me put it this way, if we asked Nole if he’d rather have had the year he’s had, or won an Olympic Gold, why I know exactly what he would’ve said because ….I can read his mind.
See how easy it is.


Willow Says:

LOL Margot ;-)) ….


Ronn Says:

It all comes down to…1) Is 1 SLAM and an Olympic Gold Medal better than 2 SLAMS? And…2) Are 4 MASTERS better than 3 MASTERS and winning the WTFs?

All and all I’d clearly say this was Murray’s year because of the way he finished the year so strongly and snatched the #1 ranking away from Djoko at the last match of the year.


skeezer Says:

@Margot,
Rack that post of yours in the tennis x archives, marked “classic”!
😀👍


Willow Says:

Skeezer i thought you liked Novak, correct me if im wrong, but sounds like youve gone off him lately ? ….


Willow Says:

I Thought the thread was about whom had the best year Andy or Novak, although it spiraled into a debate about a GS and calendar GS, ce la vie ….


lakie Says:

skeezer is a loyal Fed fan. He was never a Djok fan…He liked Djok only for strategic reasons ( see, I can read his mind!)…I appreciate loyalty and dislike people who change faves to follow the new rising star.. I respect skeezer for his loyalty and love his posts….he is knowledgeable and witty..and fair…


Willow Says:

Lakie cheers lol, personally i never changed players to follow a new rising star, Murray always was my second favorite after Nadal anyway, what i dislike is sideways compliments with a hidden snark, and also these people that are nice about a favorites rival simply because they dont view them as a threat ….


lakie Says:

Willow,my thoughts exactly. I like honest people even if they hold completely divergent views. But cannot stand hypocrites.


AndyMira Says:

@Willow…”Personally i never changed players to follow a new rising star,Murray always was 2nd favourite after Nadal anyway”…AGREEEEE!!

Willow…sadly people will gonna keep saying that to us [you,me,okie at least] support Andy because Rafa is in his twilight days..that means no glory for us anymore,[doesn't matter that our chest is already full with a lot of celebrations all this time===14 slams,28 masters and countless ATP 500 as well]…To them,we’ve become Andy supporter because we want to live in the spotlight forever,in glory,in winning circle etc etc….Doesn’t matter that we already support Andy eons ago,doesn’t matter the fact that from all the big 4,Andy is the most unfortunate compared to the others..and this fact alone will garnered a notion in us to give Andy a genuine support,to see him have success like other big 3,to taste a heaven like the other big 3 already experienced it long before he did.. BUT what our critics don’t realize is that…we’re going to be there with Andy till the end..If Andy’s form and consistency start to fall more and more in the future,start losing again…we’re still going to be there alongside him..we’re still going to post a comment with a bunch of supportive words to him on TX..and we’re going to do that until he retire..Just like we’re gonna do with Rafa..If i’m still alive at that time,that’s my promise at least….


Danica Says:

Didn’t read the previous posts, will do later, but my two cents – I liked Andy’s season more. No big oscillations, great consistency, more titles, YE#1.


Thomas Says:

“It all comes down to…1) Is 1 SLAM and an Olympic Gold Medal better than 2 SLAMS? And…2)”

Ronnie, the importance of the golden medal, when it comes to tennis, is so overrated…
Who gives a sh*t about medals when it comes to soccer? World Championships, European Championships, Champions league are the real deal. Same in tennis: Grand Slams are ‘the pinnacle’.


Ngentot Says:

@Willow.

“Skeezer i thought you liked Novak, correct me if im wrong, but sounds like youve gone off him lately ? ”

Good question Willow. I still remember when someone tried to attack Skeezer for being a FAKE Nole fan, he insisted that he had always been a fan of Novak’s. But of course the real Novak’s fans always know that Skeezer and some other Fed’s fans became Novak’s “FANS” for one reason : At that time Novak seemed to be the only guy they can rely on stopping Nadal of overtaking the GOAT status from their GOD Federer.


Colin Says:

Thomas, for your benefit I’ll repeat what I said on another thread – wait for, let’s say, 20 years, and see what is said in articles about the legendary Federer. I am unlikely to be here to comment, but if you are, I think you’ll find the articles will mention the fact that Roger never won Olympic Gold, just as pieces about Pete Sampras usually mention that he didn’t win the French Open.

Talking of legends, there has been much mention of Rod Laver and his great feat of winning all four slams in one year (the real original meaning of “Grand Slam”). But nobody mentions that he did so without having to beat, on a regular basis, some of the greatest players in the pro ranks, notably Pancho Gonzales and Ken Rosewall, who were a good deal older than he by the time he did meet them.


Margot Says:

Cheers Skeeze :)
#myfan
AM and Willow: Don’t bother about what virtual people think, just be true to yourselves.


Willow Says:

Margot i always do anyway, such damn shame when your personally attacked because you happen to have a difference of opinion, i used to let it get to me, but i realize this is exactly what people want, so i dont anymore, CHEERS ;-)) ….


Willow Says:

Agree about the GS been the pinacle of tennis, but its Funny how the goal posts tend to shift, fans were so sure Novak would win the gold medal this year, and when he didnt all of a sudden its not considered important anymore ….


Willow Says:

Tina Turner for Margot and the Murray fans

Tina Turner for Margot and the Murray fans


Willow Says:

Tina Turner for Margot and the Murray fans


Willow Says:

Sorry trying to post a link ….


AndyMira Says:

That’s alright willow..keep on trying girl!VAMOS!!

@M…TQ for the supportive words..Sending Clark[Clarissa's other half] to give you biggg hugs and kisses from a faraway land….


Willow Says:

AM Trying to post a link for Margot and the Murray fans, Tina Turner


Willow Says:

For Margot and the Murray fans

You Tube Tina Turner


AndyMira Says:

I know Willow..keep on trying okay?Still not working…


Willow Says:

I Give up AM im really p*ssed off now ….


sinha71 Says:

The difference between Andy and Djoko basically comes down to the three 500 tournaments Andy won. Djoko did virtually nothing at that level.

First grand slam since Laver trumps all.

For Willow…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNU3aIJs88g


lakie Says:

Djoko’s achievement isn’t a grand slam and is not in the same league as Laver’s achievement. I think you are hoping that repeating this fake claim over and over again will make it true but ITF’s definition of grand slam is very clear. Sorry!!!


AndyMira Says:

That’s okay willow..hey,i’ve got an idea..why don’t u practice it on my FB[PM that is]..do it until it works..how’s that?


sinha71 Says:

Apology accepted as ITF has no such definition I’m afraid.

The fact that no player has done grand slam since Laver shows that any difference between a grand slam and a calendar grand slam is quite negligible.


jalep Says:

What Tina Turner are you trying to post Willow?🤓


Willow Says:

Jalep Simply the best, i dont know where im going wrong this time, i put one up on Tenngrand for you, Amy and NNY, it was Coldplay song, i also did a picture on the Serena / Roger ITPL thread, did you see it ? ….


Willow Says:

Sinha71 It was a song for Margot and the Murray fans, it wasnt for me (sigh)….


Willow Says:

And Sinha71 you missed the point, i know other people are do links ad nauseum, its just i wanted to put up the link to prove i can now do it ….


Willow Says:

https//www.you tube.com/watch?V=mNu3ajjs88g

See if this comes up


jalep Says:

Keep practicing Willow. Looks like you got it. Except this link isn’t working. https//www.you tube.com/watch?V=mNu3ajjs88g

Have to take my neighbor to a doctor’s appointment right now. Will check back later :)


Willow Says:

https//www.you tube.com/watch?V=mV3ajjs88g

Tina Turner


sinha71 Says:

Willow, I thought that my point was that I could guess what you were trying to post.

Oh dear. I am very sorry now.


sinha71 Says:

Willow, your link will work if you just delete the space between you and tube.


Willow Says:

Its all right Sinha, im just frustated that i cant do something, that i could the other day, now i cant, and everyone else finds so easy, i gave up in the end, as the moderators will probably lose patience with me ….


SG1 Says:

Okay…let’s get something straight. Winning 4 majors in a row is NOT and grand slam. I don’t know who made up the definition, but a grand slam involves winning all 4 majors in a calendar year. We all know it (…whether we like it or not).

Winning 4 consecutive majors is an astounding feat. Particularly given the era it was achieved in. I don’t know people can’t appreciate the accomplishment on its own. Why the need to call it a grand slam when it’s not.

A grand slam is the ultimate tennis achievement. Calling Novak’s 4 in a row equal to Laver’s and Budge’s takes credit away from the latter. Winning a grand slam is more difficult because:

1) There is added constraint of having to each majors at a specific time.
2) You can’t start winning majors when it works out for you. You have to win the AO and you have to win the USO (and everything in between). Novak started his 4 in a row by winning Wimbledon because that’s when he got hot. In grand slam, it just doesn’t work that way. The schedule determines when you have to be hot.


Willow Says:

https//ww.youtube.com/watch?V=mNu3ajjs88g


Willow Says:

SG1 Great post, and nobody heres having a go at Novak, and its a great achievement no doubt, and Novak shouldve got more credit for pulling it off than he did, but as many have already said, the true GS is all 4 in a calendar year, even Laver himself said it when Rafa was trying to win the AO in 2011, 4 in a row is one thing, 4 in a year completely different, agree that its a bit disrespectful to Laver and Budge whom did do it in one year ….


sinha71 Says:

The ITF by the way has no such definition of Grand Slam as is claimed by one poster.

The degree of difficulty (other than the calendar restriction – which has little or nothing to do with the technical), is subjective at best.

What Djokovic achieved was technically more difficult than Laver’s slams as they included hard court.

So what is more difficult is purely strategically speculative, and correlated quite obviously to one’s favourite player as has been intimated here already. The vitriol is telling.

Again, the fact that neither had been done in so long since Laver (likely due to the addition of a third surface) supports this view.


Truth Says:

Novak beat their darling Fed for Slams.

Fed claimed that Roddick was a truly great guy and amazing player in Slams.
I didn’t really that harassing many people, pushing the GOAT Novak onto the locker, choking badly and losing 2nd & 3rd rounds made Roddick great.
Obviously, Fed either lies to put himself on a higher level of tennis competition in 2002-2006 or he’s really delusional.
Novak willed himself to lose in 2016 because he put his brother’s mental health above his own life.
Novak’s stubborn that way because he has cash to give to anyone that desires his assistance.
Otherwise, he would’ve angrily fought against the age excuses that Fed used all the time for himself.

Besides the overrated opponent/Nadal-turkey Fed, Nadal won Slam finals against the old Ferrer, and the self-defeatist players that had awful coaching and hadn’t reached their physical peak.
Fed lost 5 setters when weakling Hewitt and clown Safin were around and he prayed for mercy vs. the weakest returner and phony predictable washed up player, Roddick. Agassi required drugs to go on court, yet Fed needed to be let off the hook at the 2005 U.S. Open


skeezer Says:

@SG1
Re: A Grand Slam. Sanity arrives again.
👍


John Bullock Says:

I think it’s Murray, without a doubt. Djokovic’s achievements in the first half of the season only serve to highlight just how much of an achievement Murray’s number one ranking was.

Add to that the fact that Murray was right there with Djokovic in the first half of the season. Djokovic was winning, obviously, but it was consistently Murray that he was having to beat whereas Djokovic was nowhere to be seen while Murray was winning everything in the second half.

And, as many in the comments have pointed out, Murray is #1 at the end of the year.

And he won a gold medal.


chrisford1 Says:

SG-1 and Willow – facts can be such vexing things!

SG-1 putting out incorrect info that only 4 in one year count as a true “Grand Slam” – according to rule bodies. Ignoring the same rule bodies Do have names one is called a non-calendar year GRAND SLAM, the other a calendar year GRAND SLAM.
And Willow calls the misapplication of the facts by SG-1 a situation “where sanity reigns again.”

Sinha71 is actually the correct, sane one here…

Now in any sport you can put dumb arbitrary qualifiers in place and claim you just made the task even harder to do thus more “prestigious”. For example, if you declare that any major league hitting streak must start against a left-hander in a night game, you add things that have nothing to do with the task, just a means of weeding our claimant that did have a monster hitting streak. In tennis, side stuff like arbitary starting dates.

In 1968, it was not known if the AO was going to be played in December of January until the powerful teachers unions decided holiday plans of teachers were best suited to a January AO in a close vote -back in October 1968. Lucky Laver. The teacher’s unions helped the “purists” Rod had to play the indescribably tougher path to 4 in a row starting in January vs. December????
Also note that Navratilova was raped out of a calendar Grand Slam by the AO falling in December…but she was a lesbian from Commie-Land, so the huge diss given her was ignored. Steffi’s Grand Slam a few years later was as big as the establishment’s revered Margaret Court’s feats.


Willow Says:

Err yeah if you say so ….


skeezer Says:

@CF1
Since you want to be THE authority of what the definition of a Grand Slam is you should ( attempt ) to change it in the Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Slam_(tennis)
You are attempting to modify the original tradition, which is in fact inaccurate. Adding “non-calendar”, or “career”, as an example is not the original meaning of The Grand Slam. What novak did was win 4 in a row, a great feat, but it is not The Grand Slam. Get over it, and take the weak era with you ;)


Truth Says:

I can’t post. Maybe I should put Tina Turner links in here.


sinha71 Says:

The wikipedia site gives three references, non of which define the grand slam as exclusively within a calendar year.

So, as with all Wikipedia information that draws inaccurate conclusions , is bound to be challenged and corrected in time.

chrisford1 well done sir!


skeezer Says:

For those who don’t understand, from the link;

“The term Grand Slam also, and originally, refers to the achievement of winning all four major championships in a single calendar year within one of the five events: men’s and women’s singles; men’s, women’s, and mixed doubles. In doubles, one team may accomplish a Grand Slam playing together or one player may achieve it with different partners. The term “Grand Slam” without qualification refers to winning the four majors in a single calendar year.[2][3][4]“


KJB Says:

To add to SG1′s post, The Djokoslam was done over a 11 month and change time span. Whereas a GrandSlam would be done over a 8.5 month time span. Much more difficult, less rest time etc. etc.


sinha71 Says:

Staying so dominant over 11 months is arguably much more difficult than a shorter 8.5 month period of time quite obviously.

It’s the [2][3][4] references that do not support the author’s limiting of the grand slam to a calendar year.


lakie Says:

sinha71, chrisford and other Djok fans:
ITF definition of Grand Slam: Here’s the link: see page 59
http://www.itftennis.com/media/221225/221225.pdf
The Djok fans are trying to force others to accept their “truth”. Shades of “1984″..
sinha71 owes me an apology.


SG1 Says:

Cf1

I never claimed to be the inventor of the definition of Grand Slam. I only claim to know what it is. If you and sinha71 can manage to take your fan boy glasses for a little u might see it as clearly as the rest of us. Just saying….


sinha71 Says:

That is but a draft document and has not been released officially. It is titled ”
Microsoft Word – DRAFT Constitution 2016 English (Clean)”

Apology accepted. No worries.

Not to mention that Djoko did it on three surfaces four slams in a row, something no other player has ever done in the history of tennis.

I have the utmost respect for what he has achieved. It is simply incredible what he did.


sinha71 Says:

I also notice that the date on this DRAFT document is 2016 no doubt after Djoko completed his grand slam as some scramble to rewrite what Djoko has achieved.

Sad.

We can only hope that this document is never officially released.


Thomas Says:

Even if I am annoyed by some Djoko fans, they are right, he achieved the non calender GS, so it is a GS after all. It is unique, because it was done on 3 different surfaces.


lakie Says:

sinha71, you can look at itf constitution 2015 or 2014. The point is, this definition is the official definition and has been around for ages.
It is really sad that you keep insisting I should apologize. You have really brought 1984 to life with your attempts to subvert truth and attack “sane” posters.
I have nothing further to say on this subject. I made my point and definition of grand slam is known to the well informed. You seem to be paranoid thinking ITF has changed the definition just to rob Djok of glory. What a laugh!


skeezer Says:

This is as bad as the weak failed attempt of the Djoker fan based imaginary weak era argument. You can’t keep creating your own set of criteria.


Thomas Says:

Am only amused about the fact that Joker’s obsession was not about the Grand Slam, but about French Open….if he had beaten Stan last year, we would not talk now about the GS and Roger would have won Wimby or US Open in 2015…


Thomas Says:

To Colin,

As a Roger fan, I really do not suffer, because he missed the golden medal. I prefer 17 slams to 3 slams an 2 golden medals, honestly…


JimmytheFan Says:

Hi everybody, this my first comment ever.
To answer this question simply ask yourself what a season you would wish for your favourite player for 2017. Being Novak’s fan I would prefer another year with 2 Slams and 2nd place in ranking.
But before next Olimpics I would choose Andy’s year. Thank you.


Willow Says:

Funny how some fans think its only their own personal favorites achievements that actually count ….


Daniel Says:

Also the mental aspect of it all. If you start the year winning the AO the hype starts as if that particular player will be able to win the Grand Slam. If you miss the AO and winning another Slam and start the streak from that point is way different.
This mental aspect play huge, as we saw with Novak last year.

It affects the mind set. Antbody who wins AO and is #1 or multiple Slam winner will know in the back of their mind what it represents in terms of Grand Slam.

It’s different, they can spin it anyway they won but a non Clandear Grand Slam is one thing, that is why they all say: Serena Slam, Tiger slam, and Djoko Slam. Tou don’t see nobody ever say: “Laver Slam”. Because as he win all 4 in a Calender year, there is just no need to add any other labe. Everybody knows wht that was: The Grand Slam.

But what Novak did may not be reproduced again in modern tennis, it was huge! I am glad I was able to watch it unfolds.


jalep Says:

A Calendar Slam begins with AO and ends with US Open – it’s a basic Gregorian Western Calandar Slam. Four in a row is any combination of consecutive GS wins regardless of whether it begins with AO or not.
https://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/gregorian-calendar.html

Agree with Daniel about the difficulty and mental aspect of starting with the AO, season start, and the hype.

Either way, the accomplishment is huge, but four in a row is not technically defined as a “Calendar Slam”

Year-end #1 is a unique achievement as well. It’s another achievement marked by a new calendar/ tennis season beginning and season ending. Andy Murray was the most consistent over the entire Calendar Season of 2016 – beginning to end – but it was close. It could have gone either way, right down to the last match.

Because it was so close, which one had the better year is/can be subjective. I’d pick winning FO, under the circumstances, as the weightier achievement. But Andy earned more points by 630 = more consistent. For me, Andy clearly won the 2016 #1 race. What Novak did by winning FO holds a special degree of difficulty that no one since Rod Laver has achieved – but I don’t call it or need to call it a Calendar Slam, which it wasn’t.


Willow Says:

Hi Jalep nice to see you here ;-)) ….


sinha71 Says:

Agree with everything jalep says here!

Especially the part about Novak not completing the calendar slam.

Well spoken!

Top story: Federer, Djokovic Lead Heavily Favored European Team Laver Cup This Weekend