r/TennisNerds

In this series of posts, I've been attempting to rank the top 3 tennis players of every year in the 21st century - with this last post being about the 2020s. You can also check out the post about the 2000s and the 2010s.

The rankings are based on things like stats, year-end rankings/points, titles and H2H matchups. I tried leaning towards the players who I thought were actually playing the best that year - not necessarily who had the best season - but ultimately it's a combination of the two. If that makes sense.

Durability has also been a factor. If a player has played too few matches in a season, they will not be considered, no matter how good they were.

My rankings for the 2020s are:

2020

1. Novak Djokovic

2. Rafael Nadal

3. Dominic Thiem

Djokovic gets an easy #1 here in a weird covid year. He won 41 out of 46 games though, winning a grand slam and 2 Masters titles in the process.

 

2021

1. Novak Djokovic

2. Daniil Medvedev

3. Alexander Zverev

Novak with another easy #1 as he won 3 grand slams, and reached the final in the US Open. Zverev won both the ATP Finals and the Olympics, but I have Medvedev over him as he beat Novak in the US Open final, had a higher winning percentage, and won 3 out of 4 of the matches they played against each other this year.

 

2022

1. Rafael Nadal

2. Carlos Alcaraz

3. Novak Djokovic

Yet another weird covid year, but Nadal takes the #1 here as he wins 2 grand slams with a 22-1 record. Novak would probably have been #1 had he played more tournaments. Alcaraz also makes his first appearance in the top 3 with an impressive US Open win, 2 Masters titles and finishing as the year-end no. 1.

 

2023

1. Novak Djokovic

2. Carlos Alcaraz

3. Daniil Medvedev

Another easy #1 for Djoker as he wins 3 grand slams (27-1 record), 2 Masters titles (14-2 record), and the ATP Finals.

 

2024

1. Jannik Sinner

2. Carlos Alcaraz

3. Alexander Zverev

Sinner gets his first #1 spot after winning 92,4% of his games, winning 2 grand slams, 3 Masters titles and the ATP Finals. He was more consistent than Alcaraz throughout the year, which is why he gets it after losing all three matches they played against each other. I can’t really argue against someone giving it to Alcaraz based off of those H2H matches though (plus the silver medal at the Olympics).

 

2025

1. Carlos Alcaraz

2. Jannik Sinner

3. Novak Djokovic

Alcaraz’s fourth year in the top 3, and his first #1 spot for me. It’s a fairly close one again though, and would probably be even closer if it hadn’t been for Sinner’s 3-month ban. But as this year is still really fresh in my mind, I will say that I thought Alcaraz’s highs were higher than Sinner’s, even though Sinner might have been a bit more consistent – Alcaraz gets it for me.

I've added an overview here of how all the different players did in my rankings of the 21st century, sorted in order of most finishes in the top 3:

https://preview.redd.it/j7pmiligqr0h1.png?width=1424&format=png&auto=webp&s=f2465b7230fdc97e6d1dd3bae2466a33c01d24db

In this series of posts, I'm attempting to rank the top 3 tennis players of every year since the year 2000 - with this post being about the 2010s. Check out the post about the 2000s here.

The rankings are based on things like stats, year-end rankings/points, titles and H2H matchups. I tried leaning towards the players who I thought were actually playing the best that year - not necessarily who had the best season - but ultimately it's a combination of the two. If that makes sense.

Durability has also been a factor. If a player has played too few matches in a season, they will not be considered, no matter how good they were.

My rankings for the 2010s are:

2010

1. Rafael Nadal

2. Roger Federer

3. Novak Djokovic

This is an easy #1 for Nadal as he dominated this year with the highest winning percentage (87,7%), 3 grand slams, 3 Masters titles and ended up as year-end no. 1.

 

2011

1. Novak Djokovic

2. Rafael Nadal

3. Roger Federer

Another easy #1 as Djokovic has one of his best years ever, winning 3 grand slams, 5 Masters titles and a winning percentage of 92,1%.  

2012

1. Novak Djokovic

2. Roger Federer

3. Andy Murray

Djokovic takes the #1 again in a year where he beat Nadal in one of the greatest grand slam finals ever, won 3 Masters titles, won the ATP Finals and was only knocked out of major competitions (grand slams and Olympics) by either Nadal, Federer or Murray. Also ended up as the year-end no. 1.

Murray comes in at #3 after winning the US Open and beating both Federer and Djokovic to win gold at the Olympics. There's a good case that Nadal would have been above him this year though if he didn't get injured. He was playing at a very high level before his injury, and even had the highest winning percentage with 87,5% (although from a smaller sample size than the other candidates).

 

2013

1. Rafael Nadal

2. Novak Djokovic

3. Andy Murray

Nadal reclaims the #1 spot in a very impressive year despite missing the AO. He won 2 grand slams (14-1 record) and 5 Masters titles (35-3 record), and was the year-end no. 1. He also had the highest winning percentage with 91,5%.

2014

1. Novak Djokovic

2. Roger Federer

3. Rafael Nadal

Novak takes the #1 in a year where he had the highest winning percentage (88,4%), best grand slam record (22-3), most Masters titles (4), won the ATP finals, and was the year-end no. 1.

 

2015

1. Novak Djokovic

2. Roger Federer

3. Andy Murray

Novak had maybe his best year ever in 2015. He had a winning percentage of 93,2%, won 3 grand slams (reached the final in the remaining one), won 6 Masters titles (39-2 record), and won the ATP finals. He absolutely dominated and gets one of the easiest #1 spots yet.

 

2016

1. Andy Murray

2. Novak Djokovic

3. Milos Raonic

I'm very conflicted on this one, and it's basically 50/50 for me between Murray and Djokovic. I'm gonna try and make the case for Murray here though, and maybe someone else can make the case for Novak in the comments.

Murray played 13 more games than Djokovic and still had a higher winning percentage. He won Wimbledon and reached two other grand slam finals (losing to Novak though), won the ATP finals (beating Novak in the final), had more total titles than Novak (9 against 7), and finished as the year-end no.1. In a normal year I would have maybe have given it to Novak, but this was an Olympic year, and Murray won gold while Novak lost in straight sets in the first round to Del Potro. The olympic gold makes me lean towards Murray for now, but could definitely be convinced to give it to Djokovic.

2017

1. Roger Federer

2. Rafael Nadal

3. Grigor Dimitrov

Federer gets his first and only #1 spot in the 2010s in a year where he won 91,5% of his games, won 2 out of 3 grand slams he participated in, and won 3 Masters titles (20-1 record). He finished behind Nadal in the year-end rankings, but won all 4 H2H matches between the two this year.

2018

1. Rafael Nadal

2. Novak Djokovic

3. Roger Federer

This is a tough one between Nadal and Djokovic. Nadal only played 49 games this year, but he also only lost 4 of them. He won 1 grand slam, reached 1 final and had to retire in a QF and SF in the two remaining. He also won 2 Masters titles with a 17-1 record. When he played, he was incredible. I definitely see a case for Djokovic this year though.

 

2019

1. Rafael Nadal

2. Novak Djokovic

3. Roger Federer

Nadal takes the #1 spot again after having the highest winning percentage (89,2%), best grand slam record (24-2), best Masters record (22-2), and finishing as the year-end no. 1.

Does anybody here play tennis? I am a beginner who is learning tennis and would like to play with someone who would not be irritated if I miss a few balls.
Is anyone up for a game in any court near sec-57 in ggn?

I started playing four years ago with zero athletic background.
Here’s what I know now that i wish someone had told me when I started:

1- Your non- dominant had controls your backhand.

2- Footwork is so important to learn and practice!!!

3- I will plateau many times, but keep working! Don’t give up.

Would love to build a list from this thread 😄🎾

He’s playing outstanding tennis right now and is definitely a young player to watch.

What do you think he can achieve?

Can he compete with Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner in the coming years?

Please discuss who is the men's tennis GOAT. Try and prove your point with some stats/data, this is a stats sub after all.

'Toxicity' is forbidden. Just kidding, we don't care.

just like how Russian players don't have their flags shown due to Russia invading Ukraine, U.S. players should have the same done to them honestly

Intro/Caveats

With Sinner's dismantling of Zverev in Madrid, the field has never looked bleaker for anyone not named Sinner or Alcaraz. The last time two players dominated the rest of the tour like this was the Fedal era, before the rise of Djokovic and Murray as legitimate threats. This got me wondering: Had Djokovic never broken through, how many majors would Fedal have wound up winning? And what might that alternate universe tell us about the future of Sincaraz if a new challenger doesn't come along?

A caveat. I'm going to assume Djokovic did constrain Fedal's slam count. Silly to say otherwise. More reasonably, you could claim that Djokovic's brilliance spurred Federer and Nadal to play longer, get better, and ultimately win more majors in their 30s than they'd otherwise have done.

But I don't think this holds: Fedal might have spurred Djokovic to become greater than he would've been otherwise, but the reverse isn't true. I don't think Fed stuck around into his mid-30s because he wanted to prove he could beat Djokovic; I don't think Rafa needed Djokovic to push him to win a gazillion French Opens. I don't think either of them believed they had a realistic chance of "catching him", so to speak, once he'd matured; however deep they dug, Novak had more, and they knew it. Not to say they expected him to beat their slam counts, but from 2015 onward at least, they knew he'd be top dog more often than he wasn't.

Given this, I am going to add titles to Fedal's total in my alternate universe. (And as a bonus, to Murray's.) So: Federer starts at 20, Nadal at 22, Murray at 3, etc. We go through the seasons chronologically, but for simplicity's sake, I add to the count retroactively, with 20/20 hindsight.

Another caveat. You could also claim that Djokovic acted as a gatekeeper for some of his career and thereby boosted Fedal's slam count, i.e., the "Ferrer effect": that in at least some of their title runs, Fedal benefited from Djokovic's elimination of a lower-ranked player who might have beaten them. This seems probable in theory, but having gone through the draws of all the majors held from 2005-07, it just isn't the case (the closest is Novak's defeat of Hewitt at Wimbledon 2007, but do we really think the version of Hewitt that lost to Novak in straights would have beaten Rafa?). Once Djokovic matured, he lost to Fedal so rarely at majors that it's hard to make the case he ever eased their path to victory. Special cases will be treated in passing, as reaches/hypotheticals.

The most important objection, as I see it, is that you can't assume Fedal would have beaten whoever turned up in Djokovic's place, and that's what my little "study"/thought experiment is going to test. In every match Fedal lost to Nole at a major, who would have taken his place in an alternate universe, and what was that player's chance of beating the GOATs that weren't quite?

2008 Australian Open: Federer d. Tsonga?

Right away an intriguing one. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga was unseeded, ranked 38th in the world, heading into the AO. He beat a 9th-seeded Murray (!!) in the first round and, as often happens when a high seed loses early, got to move through a 9th seed's draw. But it was a monster run: he beat GG Lopez, Gasquet (8th seed!), and Youzhny (14th!) before crushing Nadal in the semis. (Nadal's form wasn't great, but he had breezed through the draw.) Tsonga was playing unreal tennis and wasn't overawed by the occasion (beat Nadal in front of 15,000 people, took the first set off Djokovic in the final).

Had Federer not lost in the semis, it would have been his first meeting with the Frenchman. When they did meet later that year in Madrid (back when it was played on indoor hard), Federer won handily, then lost their next match at Montreal 2009. On the whole, their h2h is 12-6 in favor of Fed, and I'm going to give him this one, even though he was struggling with mononucleosis at the time. He was good enough to beat Berdych and Blake in straights after coming through a tough five-setter against Janko Tipsarevic, so I say he finds a way to win against a red-hot Tsonga. RF +1 = 21

2011 Australian Open: Federer d. Murray?

Another toughie. The h2h was 8-6 in favor of Murray. The case for Fed: he had never lost to the Scot over five sets, brushed him aside in 2010's AO final, and won their previous meeting (at the O2 Arena a couple months earlier) in straights. But Murray had won their last two meetings on outdoor hard, Montreal and Shanghai, during an underwhelming summer (by his standards) for the Swiss.

Crazily, Fed and Muzz wouldn't meet at all in 2011; so dominant were Novak and Rafa as top seeds that Nos. 3+4 never faced each other! This makes it hard to gauge where their rivalry would have been at in that season. What tips it for me is that Federer was playing poorly, especially against pushers/defenders: he nearly lost to Simon in R64, dropped a set to Robredo in R16, and (ofc) lost to Djokovic in straights. Basically a coin-flip, but (surprise!) I think Murray had him covered. AM +1 = 4

2011 Wimbledon: Nadal d. Tsonga?

The Frenchman again. Tsonga came back from 0-2 sets down against Federer and won an epic tiebreak (11-9) in the fourth set against Djokovic; remove the Serb, and he has a puncher's chance against Nadal in the final. What's more, he actually beat Nadal on grass in the final of Queen's Club just three weeks earlier! Bo5 is a different beast, however, and Nadal was defending champ at Wimby. He'd lose to another big hitter in Lukas Rosol the next year, but Nadal on fresh, early-rounds grass is a different prospect to Nadal on late-round, sun-scorched grass where the baselines have been pounded to dust.

Does Tsonga run out of gas? Does the 5-2 h2h (at the time; ultimately 10-4) in favor of Nadal outweigh the recency and surface-dependency of the Queen's result? Tsonga arguably played Novak tougher than Nadal did, but Novak was in Rafa's head at the time. I am giving this to the Spaniard out of respect for his finals pedigree (just one loss in a major final to a non-Big 3, and with a bum knee). But it's so, so close. RN +1 = 23

2011 US Open: Nadal d. Federer?

Frankly, this is an easy one. Minus Novak, a Fedal title is assured; we never got a NY match between them, but given the high bounce and Fed's (pre-RF 97) backhand situation, we go RN +1 = 24

2012 Australian Open: Nadal d. Murray?

Was the Scot ready? Given that it took Djokovic six hours to subdue the Bull (after five v. Murray!), I'm inclined to think not. RN +1 = 25

2012 US Open: del Potro d. Murray?

A possible Murray minus. Delpo was rampant till the Djoker stopped him in his tracks. But the 7-3 h2h overall tips this the Scot's way. History holds serve. 0 = 0

2013 Australian Open: Murray d. Ferrer?

It was the honey badger's best year on tour, but Djokovic smoked him in the semi, dropping just five games, before outlasting Murray in the final. Remove the Serb, and Murray has his second alternate-universe AO! You could make the long-shot case that Wawrinka, who lost to Djokovic in the R16 in one of the great five-setters, was playing well enough to go the distance. But that's a lot of speculative tennis to imagine, and the Swiss No. 2 hadn't hired Magnus Norman yet. AM +1 = 5

2013 Wimbledon: del Potro d. Murray?

No. I yield to none in my reverence for the Tower of Tandil, but against that Murray, on that court? No way. 0 = 0

2014 Wimbledon: Federer d. Cilic?

Remove his loss to Djokovic in the quarters, and the 6'6" Croat comes through the semi against Dimitrov, making his first major final two months (and one Atlantic) ahead of schedule. The big-serving, hard-hitting game that would win Cilic the 2014 US Open was in evidence at SW19, hinting at the September to come. But Federer had reeled off two fairly comfortable wins against the even bigger-serving Kyrgios and Raonic, and nearly beat the Djoker, too. Allez! RF +1 = 22

2015 Australian Open: Murray d. Wawrinka?

Brutal. Whatever I choose, someone's being hard done by. The h2h is 13-10 Murray, and 9-4 on hard, but Wawrinka has some big hard-court wins against the Scot: before the 2013 US Open, where Murray was defending champion, there was the 2010 US Open, when Wawrinka was yet to become the late-career monster and 3x major champ. But here it would've been the Swiss defending his title, something neither man managed to do in our universe. I'd say that pattern holds -- judging by their progress through the draw, Stan wasn't quite at Murray's level in Melbourne that year. Parallel Muzz picks up a third AO. AM +1 = 6

2015 Wimbledon: Federer d. Cilic?

Rinse and repeat. Federer was better than the previous year; Cilic, who'd blow Gasquet to kingdom come without Djokovic to once again knock him out in the QF, was worse. RF +1 = 23

2015 US Open: Federer d. Cilic?

Open and shut. Fed was untouchable all summer. Until the Djoker touched him with a burning finger and the Maestro's wings fell to ash. RF +1 = 24

2016 Australian Open: Federer d. Murray?

Let no one say I'm being too generous with Andy Murray in this counterfactual. After beating the Swiss in Melbourne in 2013, when the older man was struggling with a season-spoiler of a back problem, Andy Murray never beat Roger Federer again. Fed had him figured out, and would have come into this match (having sailed past the ghost of Djokovic, who, in our world, outclassed him 3-1 in the SF) on a five-match win streak v. Muzz. RF +1 = 25

2016 French Open: Murray d. Thiem?

This one is a doozy. Personally, I don't think Thiem was ready to win a major title, and Murray had just beaten defending champ Wawrinka 3 sets to 1 in the semis. In our world, Djokovic destroyed Thiem a round earlier, then barely squeaked level at 1-1 against Murray after three hours of lung-busting clay-court tennis, upon which the Scot was truly dusted. This was peak Murray in his best season, when he achieved one of the highest Elo ratings of all time against perhaps the strongest ATP field ever assembled. I will not apologize. AM +1 = 7

2016 US Open: Wawrinka d. Gael Monfils?

Believe it or not, it's what you've got if you remove Djokovic. 0 = 0

2018 Wimbledon: Nadal d. Anderson?

Rafole produced the best fully-indoors match at SW19 ... ever ... in a barn-burner of a semi. If Nadal wins that, does a tall, kick-serving South African get his nerves in check and deny Rafa the big one? Nope. RN +1 = 26

2018 US Open: del Potro d. Nishikori?

The Argentine was 6-2 against Special K, the best pure ball-striker between Agassi and Sinner. But Delpo on Ashe is different gravy. JMDP +1 = 2

2019 Australian Open: Nadal d. Pouille?

Note how much worse the projected opponents are getting. Yes, Lucas Pouille, who beat Nadal at the US Open in 2015, would have met him in an AO final if a wormhole had swallowed the Serbinator and funneled him to another dimension (possibly ours). Fool me once. In reality, this was the most one-sided Rafole final (in favor of Nole) until Rafa returned the favor in Paris. RN +1 = 27

2019 Wimbledon: Federer d. Bautista Agut?

The flat-hitting Spanish counterpuncher was sneaky-good on grass. But Fed was not-so-sneaky-great. Another flat-hitter, David Goffin, has a case for finals contention, having lost to Djokovic in the QF, but the Maestro would've rolled him up and then smoked him. RF +1 = 26

2020 Australian Open: Thiem d. Federer?

The Austrian beat Nadal and Zverev on his way to the final, where he took Djokovic to five. Federer lost to Djokovic in straights in their semi, and the Austrian had his number by this point. DT +1 = 2

2021 Australian Open: Medvedev d. Karatsev?

Remember Karatsev? He made it to the semis. Djokovic ate him. Zverev, who took a set off Djokovic in the previous round, would probably have found a way to lose to the qualifier, who'd blasted Diego Schwartzman, FAA, and Dimitrov to smithereens. But Medvedev would've sucked him into a vortex of meaninglessness. Karatsev leads the h2h 2-1, but both wins were on clay. DM +1 = 2

2021 French Open: Nadal d. Tsitsipas?

I don't care if Nadal was running on fumes and held together with duct tape. He doesn't lose to Stef Tsitsipas's one-hander on Court Philippe Chatrier. RN +1 = 28

2022 Wimbledon: Kyrgios d. Sinner?

And that brings us basically up to the present.

Yes, the Italian, our current World No. 1, was barely out of the egg and yet up 2-0 sets against the (modern) GOAT before losing his grip on the grass and the match. Had he come through that QF, or against whoever would replace Novak (the next-best player in the section was Miomir Kecmanovic...), he would've played Cam Norrie, who was a top player at the time but matches up poorly against Sinner's whirling groundies. Kyrgios, though, was in career-best form, serving out of a tree, and far more seasoned than the 20-year-old Sinner.

Neither Federer nor Nadal would win another major.

Takeaways

So what's the de-Nolefied Fedal slam count? It goes from 42 ... to 54. By my rough calculations, then, Djokovic denied Federer and Nadal six major titles each, meaning the gap between them stays exactly the same: +2 Nadal. Neither can claim to have had their legacies marred disproportionately by the rise of The Third Man. The GOAT, our GOAT, is a just GOAT, of evenhanded justice.

You know who can? Andy Murray. I might be overreaching by giving him a major title over a year-and-a-half ahead of schedule (AO 2011, d. Federer), but even without that, his slam count doubles if you take out Djokovic. Which makes sense: they were born mere days apart, played very similar games, and rose to threaten the duopoly right around the same time, with Murray mostly lagging just behind. Unlike Fedal, Murray's prime was fully contiguous with that of Djokovic; he didn't have the luxury of stockpiling majors before Novak turned world-eater. In an alternate universe, he wins seven, in an era dominated by Federer and Nadal! That's one less than Andre Agassi. Call me crazy, but this makes Murray a better player than Agassi. And I do rate him higher. So does Jeff Sackmann.

Another thing to note is how certain players have incredible purple patches but end up with nothing to show for them. Until Nick Kyrgios, the VERY LAST counterfactual in my list, no new major winners emerged from this process. Correct: I'm claiming that even without Djokovic, all the no-slam also-rans of the 2010s would be (most likely) still on 0. Thiem and Delpo would've added one each. But Ferrer, Berdych, Nishikori, Soderling, Raonic ... no such luck.

Yet they came close. Tsonga could so easily have won a major -- or two. In a different era, Cilic could've won four. When we look back on the Big 4 days, the possibility of these players having such success seems remote. But if you actually look at the draws, they were often a set or two away from history. Yet, over and over again, someone got in the way. The same guys got in the way. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic ... and Murray.

Wawrinka, who's one of my favorite players, broke through in a three-year period when Fedal's grip had loosened and Murray-Djokovic were running the show. What separates him from the almost-greats isn't so much a matter of intangible mental strength or unparalleled offensive capability (in my view) but ... timing. His surge was well-timed. A year or two earlier or later, and he'd have a different, lower, place in the pantheon.

As for Sincaraz .... Look, if you've made it this far, thanks for nerding out with me. I love this stuff. But slam counts are not actually important. They're good for deep dumb dives like this one. What such an analysis says to me is: If things could so easily have been different, is the way they actually turned out really that meaningful? What matters is the tennis itself -- the experience of watching, competing, hoping, dreading, dreaming. As a player or a fan. And numbers -- the real numbers -- don't necessarily tell the whole story.

And I say that as a numbers guy.

In this series of posts I'm gonna attempt to rank the top 3 tennis players of every year since the year 2000 - starting with the 2000s in this post. I did a similar project with football players in another subreddit, which started some great discussions and also helped me refine my rankings.

The rankings are based on things like stats, year-end rankings/points, titles and H2H matchups. I tried leaning towards the players who I thought were actually playing the best that year - not necessarily who had the best season - but ultimately it's a combination of the two. If that makes sense.

Durability has also been a factor. If a player has played too few matches in a season, they will not be considered, no matter how good they were.

Before we get into the rankings, I want to mention that I'm far from an expert on tennis. I know a lot more about football, but I love tennis and wanted to do something similar to my last project, and found it a lot easier to rank players in an individual sport compared to a team sport.

These rankings are also subjective of course, and the purpose of this is to hopefully start an interesting discussion, and I would love to have my mind changed on some of them if possible.

If you're interested, you can find the posts about the football player rankings here.

Here are the rankings from 2000-2009:

2000

1. Pete Sampras

2. Marat Safin

3. Gustavo Kuerten

This is pretty much a 50/50 for me between Sampras and Safin, but Sampras' more impressive grand slam season gives him the edge for me. Could easily be convinced to put Safin #1 though.

2001

1. Lleyton Hewitt

2. Gustavo Kuerten

3. Andre Agassi

I have Hewitt #1 this year, just as he was also the year-end no. 1 after playing 98 games and winning both the US Open and the ATP Finals.

2002

1. Lleyton Hewitt

2. Andre Agassi

3. Marat Safin

One of the last great Agassi years, but Hewitt takes the #1 for me again after finishing as year-end no. 1, winning Wimbledon and the ATP Finals, and winning 2 out of 3 matches against Agassi.

2003

1. Roger Federer

2. Andy Roddick

3. Juan Carlos Ferrero

The first great Federer year. Roddick finished ahead of him in the year-end rankings, but Federer wins in basically every other aspect.

2004

1. Roger Federer

2. Lleyton Hewitt

3. Andy Roddick

This is when Federer truly became Federer. He won 3/4 grand slams, the ATP Finals, 3 Masters titles and had a 92,5% winning percentage. The easiest #1 yet.

2005

1. Roger Federer

2. Rafael Nadal

3. Andy Roddick

Federer is still dominating, but this is when Nadal starts to become a worthy competitor. Federer had a 24-2 record in the slams this year though, so he's still the clear #1.

2006

1. Roger Federer

2. Rafael Nadal

3. James Blake

Federer wins 3/4 grand slams again (27-1 record), and also wins 4 Masters and the ATP Finals. Another easy #1 for him.

2007

1. Roger Federer

2. Rafael Nadal

3. Novak Djokovic

Once again Federer wins 3/4 grand slams (26-1 record) + the ATP finals, and takes the #1 spot again. This is the year Djokovic really announces himself though, and he comes in at #3 after winning 2 Masters titles and getting knocked out of every slam by either Federer or Nadal.

2008

1. Rafael Nadal

2. Roger Federer

3. Novak Djokovic

In 2008 Nadal finally dethrones Federer as the best player in the world, and he does so after having the highest winning percentage (88,2%), winning 2 grand slams (24-2 record), 3 Masters titles, and the gold medal at the Olympics. Also won against Federer in one of the best matches ever in the Wimbledon final. The more interesting discussion is who takes the #2 spot, but Federer was better than Djokovic in the Majors and won 2 out of 3 H2H matches, so he gets the edge for me.

2009

1. Roger Federer

2. Rafael Nadal

3. Novak Djokovic

Federer reclaims the #1 spot in 2009 after winning 2 grand slams (26-2 record), 2 Masters titles, and finishing as year-end no. 1. I think there's a really good argument for Andy Murray to get the #3 spot over Djokovic though. They were pretty even and had the same grand slam record (15-4), but Murray had the highest winning percentage of anyone that year (85,7%) and won the only match they played against each other that year. Djokovic though, finished above him in the year-end rankings and also did slightly better against Federer and Nadal than Murray did. I've gone with Djokovic for now, but could easily be convinced otherwise.

I am a recreational player with ntrp of around 4.5, I’ve been playing with pro staff and head extreme microgel the last 15 years. I wanna upgrade now and I want a racket that will help me get better. I am wondering between Head Speed MP 2022 and Pure Aero 100 2023. Which one would you recommend? Unfortunately there are no demos here so can’t try them.

Please discuss who is the women's tennis GOAT. Try and prove your point with some stats/data, this is a stats sub after all.

'Toxicity' is forbidden. Just kidding, we don't care.

As of May 2, 2026

Alcaraz (22 yrs old) - 7 Grandslams, 8 Masters

Sinner (24 yrs old) - 4 Grandslams, 8 Masters (about to be 9 if he wins Madrid now)

Do you guys think Sinner and/or Alcaraz can reach at least 15+ GS and 15+ Masters title? Or more intriguingly, how about 20+ each? To compete with the all time greats.

Unless, there is a 3rd player who rises, it will be an era of Sinner VS Alcaraz always.

----

For Comparison:

Federer (44 yrs old, retired)- 20 Grandslams, 28 Masters

Nadal (40 yrs old, retired) - 22 Grandslams, 36 Masters

Djokovic (39 yrs old, active) - 24 Grandslams, 40 Masters

So ive been using this 10 year old dunlop racket my dad used to have and I can say that it’s been holding me back a bit. I want to spend around £100 so around $140ish.
My cousin who works at a tennis store recommended me the head speed team tennis racket (2022) as a beginner one. Its around £109.99 cousin can get it down to around 80 with discount. String upgrade around 20 but not completely well known with the strings and stuff.
Are there any rackets you would go for similar price or a bit more? Any recommendations?