PDA

View Full Version : Grand Slam Statistics of Grand Slam Greats


akv89
12-12-2007, 09:10 PM
Boredom got the better of me and I decided to look some statistics up about 15 of the best tennis players since 1970 regarding their performance in grand slams. I assure you that there are errors in the numbers but they are pretty close to actual values, so they can be useful for some analysis.
I have looked at how many grand slam matches the following players have won after every set of four slams they have played, i.e. matches won in 1st 4 slams, matches won in first 8 slams etc.
Players looked at:
Jimmy Connors
Bjorn Borg
John Mcenroe
Ivan Lendl
Mats Wilander
Boris Becker
Stefan Edberg
Jim Courier
Pete Sampras
Andre Agassi
Gustavo Kuerten
Lleyton Hewitt
Andy Roddick
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal

After 1st 4 slams (Player-Wins)

1. Boris Becker-13
1. Mats Wilander-13
3. Bjorn Borg-12
4. John Mcenroe-9
5. Andy Roddick-8
5. Gustavo Kuerten-8
7. Jim Courier-6
7. Rafael Nadal-6
9. Roger Federer-5
10. Ivan Lendl-4
11. Jimmy Connors-2
12. Stefan Edberg-2
13. Pete Sampras-1
13. Andre Agassi-1
13. Lleyton Hewitt-1

After 1st 8 slams

1. Borg-29
2. Wilander-27
3. Mcenroe-26
4. Becker-26
5. Nadal-19
6. Agassi-18
7. Roddick-15
8. Sampras-14
9. Courier-13
9. Federer-13
9. Lendl-13
12. Kuerten-12
13. Edberg-11
14. Connors-10
15. Hewitt-8

After 1st 12 slams

1. Mcenroe-50
2. Borg-49
3. Wilander-43
4. Nadal-40
4. Agassi-40
6. Becker-39
7. Connors-34
8. Courier-33
9. Roddick-32
10. Lendl-25
11. Sampras-24
11. Edberg-24
13. Federer-23
14. Kuerten-22
15. Hewitt-18

After 1st 16 slams

1. Borg-72
1. Mcenroe-72
3. Wilander-60
4. Nadal-56* has played only 15 Grand Slams
4. Agassi-56
6. Connors-54
7. Courier-53
8. Becker-52
9. Roddick-47
10. Lendl-46
11. Sampras-44
12. Edberg-38
13. Kuerten-35
14. Hewitt-32
15. Federer-29

After 1st 20 slams

1. Borg-99
2. Mcenroe-92
3. Connors-79
4. Wilander-75
4. Courier-75
6. Becker-74
7. Lendl-69
7. Sampras-69
9. Agassi-64
10. Roddick-59
11. Edberg-56
12. Hewitt-50
13. Federer-48
14. Kuerten-47

After 1st 24 slams

1. Borg-123
2. Mcenroe-115
3. Connors-103
4. Wilander-94
5. Becker-89
6. Courier-87
6. Lendl-87
6. Agassi-87
9. Sampras-82
10. Edberg-76
11. Federer-71
12. Roddick-70
13. Kuerten-59
13. Hewitt-59

After 1st 28 slams

1. Borg-142*retired after 28 slams
2. Mcenroe-124
3. Connors-120
4. Wilander-119
5. Lendl-111
6. Becker-109
7. Sampras-103
8. Courier-100
9. Agassi-99
10. Federer-98
11. Edberg-91
12. Roddick-83*only played 28 slams
13. Hewitt-79
14. Kuerten-65

After 1st 32 slams

1. Connors-141
2. Lendl-135
3. Mcenroe-133
4. Wilander-129
5. Federer-125
6. Sampras-123
7. Becker-118
8. Courier-111
9. Agassi-110
10. Edberg-107
11. Hewitt-93
12. Kuerten-70*only played 31 slams

After 1st 36 slams

1. Connors-162
2. Lendl-155
3. Mcenroe-146
4. Federer-138*only played 34 slams
4. Sampras-138
4. Wilander-138
7. Becker-132
8. Edberg-127
9. Agassi-124
10. Courier-112
11. Hewitt-106

After 1st 40 slams

1. Connors-183
2. Lendl-178
3. Sampras-158
4. Mcenroe-154
5. Edberg-148
6. Agassi-145
7. Wilander-143
8. Becker-140
9. Courier-118
10. Hewitt-110*only played 37 slams

After 1st 44 slams

1. Lendl-197
2. Connors-195
3. Sampras-176
4. Mcenroe-165
5. Agassi-162
6. Edberg-159
7. Becker-154
8. Wilander-147
9. Courier-118*retired after 42 slams

After 1st 48 slams

1. Connors-212
2. Lendl-209
3. Sampras-189
4. Agassi-176
5. Mcenroe-168*retired after 45 slams
6. Edberg-166
7. Becker-161*retired after 47 slams
8. Wilander-148*retired after 45 slams

After 1st 52 slams

1. Connors-222
2. Lendl-216
3. Sampras-200*retired after 52 slams
4. Agassi-196
5. Edberg-175

After 1st 56 slams

1. Connors-229
2. Lendl-220
3. Agassi-210
4. Edberg-180*retired after 54 slams

After 1st 60 slams

1. Connors-230*retired after 58 slams
2. Agassi-222
3. Lendl-221*retired after 57 slams

After 1st 64 slams

1. Agassi-224*retired after 61 slams

protourOS
12-13-2007, 08:16 AM
after 60 slams (15 yrs) the only guys left wining matches at the highest level are the 2 best returners in the history of the game and maybe the fittest ever guy of his era...

akv89
12-13-2007, 11:01 AM
Here are some interesting notes I have made from these lists

1. Players who played in the 70's and early 80's tended to start off much better than players in the 90's. I think this is because many of them skipped 1 or 2 grand slams every year. As a result, they would have reached their peak after fewer grand slams than modern players who play all the grand slams every year. However, this also means that the players who skipped grand slams would have played in fewer number of grand slams in their career, thus having fewer match wins at the end of their career. The biggest exception to this rule is Jimmy Connors who won the most number of grand slam matches.

2. Roger Federer only won 29 matches in his first 16 grand slams. That's less than 2 matches won per slam tournament, which means he lost in the 1st round most of the time. This is the worst start after 16 grand slams. But he now has the best years in his peak.

3. Borg was ridiculous. Although he retired after only having played 28 slams, he had already won 142 matches. To put this into context, the next fastest man to get to or pass 142 matches was Connors, who had to play in 33 slams. Although Federer now has 3 more slam titles than Borg, he still only has 138 match wins under his belt.

4. Edberg and Wilander had dramatically different careers although their career stats look similar. Wilander had one of the best starts in tennis history, having won 60 grand slam matches after only 16 grand slams. At that time, Edberg had only won 38. However, after 1988, Wilander started dropping off but Edberg kept winning like normal and had won more by the end of his career.

MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
12-13-2007, 11:22 AM
How many more days until the season start? :confused:


Interesting stats, I am really impressed by the blazing start by Nadal though...

AndrewD
12-13-2007, 01:17 PM
3. Borg was ridiculous. Although he retired after only having played 28 slams, he had already won 142 matches. To put this into context, the next fastest man to get to or pass 142 matches was Connors, who had to play in 33 slams. Although Federer now has 3 more slam titles than Borg, he still only has 138 match wins under his belt.

It's interesting to compare Borg to another player who achieved great success at a young age - Ken Rosewall. After 15 majors (all he played before he turned pro and was banned), Rosewall had won 86 matches. When the ban was lifted he played a further 21 majors and won 98 matches. That's a total of 36 majors played, 184 matches won.

alexbalboa
07-21-2010, 10:52 AM
The above statistics are great. It may be of value to put these into a spreadsheet and look closely at the number of matches won between the blocks of 4 grand slams. Also, it may be of interest of the number of games won and lost to see how dominant each of these players were. A closer look at Borg's match win may reveal how truly ridiculous his 142 match wins compare against other players that reached 142 match wins (regardless of number of grand slams needed to reach 142 match wins). Just a thought

SusanDK
07-22-2010, 12:01 AM
4. Edberg and Wilander had dramatically different careers although their career stats look similar. Wilander had one of the best starts in tennis history, having won 60 grand slam matches after only 16 grand slams. At that time, Edberg had only won 38. However, after 1988, Wilander started dropping off but Edberg kept winning like normal and had won more by the end of his career.

I always knew Edberg was a late bloomer in slams, and often disappointed in his early year results based on his talent and potential. What I did not realize is that he played more slams than everyone except Connors, Agassi and Lendl. It always seemed as if he retired a little too early.

Perry the Platypus
07-22-2010, 01:42 PM
I am not a Roddick freak, but I think you have to admit that the numbers here show a caliber of player who is undeserving of much of the grief he receives on these boards.

He may only have one slam (albeit making 5 finals), but he is a hall of fame worthy player.

hoodjem
07-22-2010, 05:08 PM
Boredom got the better of me and I decided to look some statistics up about 15 of the best tennis players since 1970 regarding their performance in grand slams. I assure you that there are errors in the numbers but they are pretty close to actual values, so they can be useful for some analysis.
I have looked at how many grand slam matches the following players have won after every set of four slams they have played, i.e. matches won in 1st 4 slams, matches won in first 8 slams etc.
Players looked at:
Jimmy Connors
Bjorn Borg
John Mcenroe
Ivan Lendl
Mats Wilander
Boris Becker
Stefan Edberg
Jim Courier
Pete Sampras
Andre Agassi
Gustavo Kuerten
Lleyton Hewitt
Andy Roddick
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal

After 1st 4 slams (Player-Wins)

1. Boris Becker-13
1. Mats Wilander-13
3. Bjorn Borg-12
4. John Mcenroe-9
5. Andy Roddick-8
5. Gustavo Kuerten-8
7. Jim Courier-6
7. Rafael Nadal-6
9. Roger Federer-5
10. Ivan Lendl-4
11. Jimmy Connors-2
12. Stefan Edberg-2
13. Pete Sampras-1
13. Andre Agassi-1
13. Lleyton Hewitt-1

After 1st 8 slams

1. Borg-29
2. Wilander-27
3. Mcenroe-26
4. Becker-26
5. Nadal-19
6. Agassi-18
7. Roddick-15
8. Sampras-14
9. Courier-13
9. Federer-13
9. Lendl-13
12. Kuerten-12
13. Edberg-11
14. Connors-10
15. Hewitt-8

After 1st 12 slams

1. Mcenroe-50
2. Borg-49
3. Wilander-43
4. Nadal-40
4. Agassi-40
6. Becker-39
7. Connors-34
8. Courier-33
9. Roddick-32
10. Lendl-25
11. Sampras-24
11. Edberg-24
13. Federer-23
14. Kuerten-22
15. Hewitt-18

After 1st 16 slams

1. Borg-72
1. Mcenroe-72
3. Wilander-60
4. Nadal-56* has played only 15 Grand Slams
4. Agassi-56
6. Connors-54
7. Courier-53
8. Becker-52
9. Roddick-47
10. Lendl-46
11. Sampras-44
12. Edberg-38
13. Kuerten-35
14. Hewitt-32
15. Federer-29

After 1st 20 slams

1. Borg-99
2. Mcenroe-92
3. Connors-79
4. Wilander-75
4. Courier-75
6. Becker-74
7. Lendl-69
7. Sampras-69
9. Agassi-64
10. Roddick-59
11. Edberg-56
12. Hewitt-50
13. Federer-48
14. Kuerten-47

After 1st 24 slams

1. Borg-123
2. Mcenroe-115
3. Connors-103
4. Wilander-94
5. Becker-89
6. Courier-87
6. Lendl-87
6. Agassi-87
9. Sampras-82
10. Edberg-76
11. Federer-71
12. Roddick-70
13. Kuerten-59
13. Hewitt-59

After 1st 28 slams

1. Borg-142*retired after 28 slams
2. Mcenroe-124
3. Connors-120
4. Wilander-119
5. Lendl-111
6. Becker-109
7. Sampras-103
8. Courier-100
9. Agassi-99
10. Federer-98
11. Edberg-91
12. Roddick-83*only played 28 slams
13. Hewitt-79
14. Kuerten-65

After 1st 32 slams

1. Connors-141
2. Lendl-135
3. Mcenroe-133
4. Wilander-129
5. Federer-125
6. Sampras-123
7. Becker-118
8. Courier-111
9. Agassi-110
10. Edberg-107
11. Hewitt-93
12. Kuerten-70*only played 31 slams

After 1st 36 slams

1. Connors-162
2. Lendl-155
3. Mcenroe-146
4. Federer-138*only played 34 slams
4. Sampras-138
4. Wilander-138
7. Becker-132
8. Edberg-127
9. Agassi-124
10. Courier-112
11. Hewitt-106

After 1st 40 slams

1. Connors-183
2. Lendl-178
3. Sampras-158
4. Mcenroe-154
5. Edberg-148
6. Agassi-145
7. Wilander-143
8. Becker-140
9. Courier-118
10. Hewitt-110*only played 37 slams

After 1st 44 slams

1. Lendl-197
2. Connors-195
3. Sampras-176
4. Mcenroe-165
5. Agassi-162
6. Edberg-159
7. Becker-154
8. Wilander-147
9. Courier-118*retired after 42 slams

After 1st 48 slams

1. Connors-212
2. Lendl-209
3. Sampras-189
4. Agassi-176
5. Mcenroe-168*retired after 45 slams
6. Edberg-166
7. Becker-161*retired after 47 slams
8. Wilander-148*retired after 45 slams

After 1st 52 slams

1. Connors-222
2. Lendl-216
3. Sampras-200*retired after 52 slams
4. Agassi-196
5. Edberg-175

After 1st 56 slams

1. Connors-229
2. Lendl-220
3. Agassi-210
4. Edberg-180*retired after 54 slams

After 1st 60 slams

1. Connors-230*retired after 58 slams
2. Agassi-222
3. Lendl-221*retired after 57 slams

After 1st 64 slams

1. Agassi-224*retired after 61 slamsInteresting that on none of these lists, does Fed come out as no. 1. I would have thought he rated higher.