justinb386
Banned
You seem to be someone who values good logic from others, yet you aren't holding yourself to the standards of using good logic when you make statements like this and many others regarding who should be player of the decade.
First, let's define player of the decade. Player of the decade is defined as the person that has demonstrated the greatest level of skill over a specified time frame, in this case the beginning of 2010 to the end of 2019. So essentially you are taking into consideration skill and consistency. You seem to want to define it as "who has won the most world titles from 2010 to 2019" which aside from being an overly simplistic view, it is just a completely different question than what is being asked and the so the answer to each of those two questions can obviously be different since they are two different questions. To arrive at the correct answer to a question, you must first make sure you are actually answering the question that is being asked of you instead of another question that is not being asked. The question is who has demonstrated the most skill over the 2010 to 2019 (or until now since the decade isn't over) time period.
You are also putting way too much weight on the title of events, and the location in the world in which they were played. They are both all but completely immaterial. What matters is the strength and depth of the fields, not what the tournaments were called or what words were or were not in the titles of those events, nor what country they were played in. The strength and depth of the fields is all that matters.
I think you can also argue that everything else being the same (or everything else being unknown, either one), that the player who finished second in an event two years in a row has shown both more skill and more consistency than the guy who won it once.
When you consider the strength and depth of the fields, and someone's results within those fields (and not just only their first place finishes but their other high finishes as well, although the first place finishes are obviously weighted higher), and then consider how they did in those fields over a period of time, 2010 until now since we haven't hit 2019 yet, I just don't see how you can really argue for anyone having a better resume than SVB for the question being asked, which is who has consistently demonstrated the most skill over the as of now incomplete decade in question. And when you look at the resume for his whole career, I don't see how you can logically argue against SVB being in the discussion as one of the greatest of all time.
Great post.