Ivan Lendl's Career v Roger Feder's Career (NON GS Consistency Only, please)

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by lendlmac, Nov 13, 2012.

  1. lendlmac

    lendlmac Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Location:
    san diego, ca
    Good Stuuf! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Lendl_career_statistics

    Take away Roger's GS wins..for the sake of this post...I'd take Ivan Lendl's career any day, all day over Roger Feder's career, week end and week out..for sheer consitency and dominace. No? :) all with inferior equipment, faster surfaces on every surface, and playingmore tournaments than any other, except for Jimmy Connors, and maybe a few others... LOL

    Just saying, at 31, lendl had 89 tournametn wins, to Roger's 77 wins at 31....so Roger, CAN be another Jimmy Connors, in longevity.... Lendl's severe back and disc problems did him in and out in 1994...

    These are Tournament WINS ASIDE from his 94 ATP Tournament Wins... LOL

    Other singles titles - Draw at least 8 players (37)Year Date Tournament Surface Final opponent Final result Winners prize

    IVAN LENDL WINS vs Opponents....aside from the 94 ATP Wins

    1980 Sept 10-14 São Paulo - Brazil Invitational Cup Clay
    Gene Mayer 6–3, 7–5

    1980 Feb 25-27 Genoa - Bitti Bergamo Memorial Carpet
    Johan Kriek 6–2, 6–2

    1981 Aug 26-30 White Plains - AMF Head Cup [1]
    Hard Ilie Năstase W/O $50,000

    1981 Nov 23-29 Milan - Master Brooklyn Chewing Gum
    [2] Carpet John McEnroe 6–4, 2–6, 6–4 $85,000

    1982 Feb 4–7 Toronto - Molson Light Challenge
    [3] Carpet John McEnroe 7–5, 3–6, 7–6, 7–5

    1982 Oct 19-24 Melbourne - Mazda Super Challenge
    [4] Carpet Vitas Gerulaitis 6–2, 6–2, 7–5 $100,000

    1982 Nov 30-Dec 5 Antwerp - European Champions' Championship
    [5] Carpet John McEnroe 3–6, 7–6, 6–3, 6–3

    1983 Jan 10-16 Rosemont - Lite Challenge of Champions
    [6] Carpet Jimmy Connors 4–6, 6–4, 7–5, 6–4 $100,000

    1984 Jan 30-Feb 5 Toronto - Molson Light Challenge
    [7] Carpet Yannick Noah 6–0, 6–2, 6–4 $100,000

    1984 Aug 20-26 Jericho - Hamlet Challenge Cup
    [8] Hard Andrés Gómez 6–2, 6–4

    1984 Nov 12-18 Antwerp - European Champions' Championship
    [9] Carpet Anders Järryd 6–2, 6–1, 6–2 $200,000

    1985 Aug 19-25 Jericho - Executone Hamlet Challenge Cup
    [10] Hard Jimmy Connors 6–1, 6–3

    1985 Oct 28-Nov 3 Antwerp - European Champions' Championship
    [11] Carpet John McEnroe 1–6, 7–6, 6–2, 6–2 $200,000*

    1986 Jan 6-12 Atlanta - AT&T Challenge of Champions
    [12] Carpet Jimmy Connors 6–2, 6–3 $150,000

    1986 Apr 28-May 4 Ede - Audi Championship Clay Stefan Edberg 7–6, 6–3

    1986 Aug 19-24 Jericho - Norstar Bank Hamlet Challenge Cup
    [13] Hard John McEnroe 6–2, 6–4

    1987 May 7–10 Ede - Audi Championship Clay Paolo Canè 7–6, 6–3

    1987 Jul 22-26 Stowe - Head Classic[14] Hard Jimmy Arias 6–3, 6–3

    1987 Oct 27-Nov 1 Antwerp - European Community Championship
    [15] Carpet Miloslav Mečíř 5–7, 6–1, 6–4, 6–3 $250,000

    1988 Jan 7-10 Gold Coast - Sanctuary Cove Classic Hard
    Wally Masur 6–7, 7–6, 6–4

    1988 April 28-May 1 Atlanta - AT&T Challenge of Champions
    [16] Clay (Har-Tru) Stefan Edberg 2–6, 6–1, 6–3 $150,000

    1989 Dec 28-Jan 1 Newcastle - N.S.W. Invitational Hard
    Carl-Uwe Steeb 6–3, 7–6

    1989 Feb 6-12 Chicago - Volvo Tennis Carpet Brad Gilbert 6–2, 7–6

    1989 Aug 21-27 Jericho - Norstar Bank Hamlet Challenge Cup
    [17] Hard Mikael Pernfors 4–6, 6–2, 6–4

    1989 Oct 2–7 Stuttgart - Eurocard Classic[18] Carpet
    Miloslav Mečíř 6–3, 4–6, 4–6, 6–1, 6–4

    1989 Oct 19-22 Essen - Germany Invitational Carpet
    Miloslav Mečíř 6–4, 6–2

    1989 Oct 23-29 Antwerp - European Community Championship
    [19] Carpet Miloslav Mečíř 6–2, 6–2, 1–6, 6–4 $250,000

    1990 Jun 4-10 Beckenham - Kent Grass Court Championships Grass
    Darren Cahill 6–3, 7–5

    1990 Aug 20-26 Forest Hills, New York - WCT Tournament of Champions Hard Aaron Krickstein 6–4, 6–7, 6–3 $100,000

    1990 Oct 17-21 Hong Kong - Marlboro Championships
    [20] Carpet Michael Chang 1–6, 6–2, 6–1, 6–2 $200,000

    1991 Jan 2–6 Salamander Bay - Roche Racquet Classic Hard
    Carl-Uwe Steeb 6–4, 6–2

    1991 Jun 3–9 Beckenham - Kent Grass Court Championships Grass
    Pat Cash 3–6, 7–6, 7–6

    1991 Oct 16-20 Hong Kong - Marlboro Championships[21] Carpet
    David Wheaton 6–3, 7–5, 6–1 $200,000

    1992 Jul 27-Aug 2 Boston - U.S. Pro Championships Hard
    Richey Reneberg 6–3, 6–3

    1992 Oct 19-25 Hong Kong - Marlboro Championships Carpet
    Michael Chang 6–3, 4–6, 6–4, 6–4 $200,000

    1993 Jul 13-18 Boston - U.S. Pro Championships Hard
    Todd Martin 5–7, 6–3, 7–6

    1994 Jul 12-17 Boston - U.S. Pro Championships Hard
    Malivai Washington 7–5, 7–6

    1981 Nov 4–5 Calcutta - Indian Classic Cup Hard
    John Alexander 6–4, 6–2

    1981 Nov 7–8 Jakarta - Indonesian Grand Prix Tennis Hard
    Wojciech Fibak 6–1, 7–6, 9–7

    1984 February San Juan - Governors Cup (Porto Rico) - 4-men exhibition ? Gene Mayer 6–3, 6–2 $80,000

    1984 Apr 7–8 Tokyo - Suntory Cup
    [22] Carpet John McEnroe 6–4, 3–6, 6–2 $110,000

    1985 Apr 20-21 Tokyo - Suntory Cup
    [23] Carpet John McEnroe 6–4, 6–2 $110,000

    1985 Oct 8–9 East Rutherford - The Members Only Meadowlands Tennis Challenge[24] Hard John McEnroe 7–5, 6–4

    1985 Nov 21-23 Canberra - Rio International Challenge Carpet
    Tim Mayotte 6–4, 6–4

    1987 May 5–6 Barcelona - Royal Polo Club
    [25] Clay John McEnroe 6–2, 3–6, 6–2

    1987 Nov 25-29 West Palm Beach - The Stakes Matches
    [26] Hard Pat Cash 11–21, 21–18, 21–7, 22–20 $583,200

    1988 Jul 21-24 Monterrey - Hartmarx Racquet Club Apparel Tennis Classic Hard Kevin Curren 6–4, 7–6

    1989 May 27–28 Marseille - Charity Matches Invitational
    [27] Clay Andre Agassi 6–3, 6–3

    1989 Oct 24-25 Bologna - All Stars Tennis Classic Carpet John McEnroe 6–4, 7–5

    1990 Nov 10-11 Rome - Big Four Tennis Carpet Stefan Edberg 5–7, 7–6, 7–6

    1990 Nov 12 Milan - Muratti Shoot Out Tie-Break Carpet
    Jonas Svensson 7–5, 5–7, 7–4

    1990 Dec 3–5 Bolzano - Ebel Tennis Trophy Carpet
    Goran Ivanišević 6–2, 7–6

    1990 Dec 8–9 Zürich - Swiss Invitational Tennis Cup Carpet
    Pete Sampras 3–6, 7–6, 6–4


    Now compare with Roger Feder's Career, (NON GS Wins)..... Pretty dominant? No? now you see Roger has a long ways to go... just saying... yes 17 GS is better than Lendl's 8...No question about it. NONE! Today's tennis fans and players have NO comprehension how difficult and FUN tennis was in the 80's PRE-Sampras era... just saying, using Today's players, with advanced technology, SLOWER courts all around...the players of the 80's era, had more challenges, tougher draws and faster surfaces, and smaller racquets to achieve more than most players are achieving still today... What Lendl did in the 80's is utter DOMINANCNE..not only did he win 94 ATP Tirels, but look at all the OTHER TITLES he WON outside of the ATP...is mindboggling....

    Jimmy Connors has more overall wins....utter dominance. Connors and Lendl were FREAKS!!
    Also Connors as he got older and slower got larger and larger racquets to stay in the game to compete with the younger players...so he played longer....

    Discuss. :) Is Roger Feder GOAT, most likey, yes...does Roger have more GS than ANYONE? Absolutely. But is he as consistent as Jimmy Connors or Ivan Lendl were, year end and year out? Utter domiance? ? Nope. Not even close.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2012
    #1
  2. zam88

    zam88 Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,341
    eh, roger made more money, i'll take his career.

    in fact, roger probably will make more money even after he's retired just on endorsements in the same way MJ still makes decent coin on endorsements even though he hasn't made a bucket in over a decade.
     
    #2
  3. lendlmac

    lendlmac Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Location:
    san diego, ca
    I agree with the money...when Lendl retired he was atop with over $24 million I believe which was huge back then... Roger is the KING of all MEDIA, and TENNIS now...but if Roger is to play as long as Connors....for fun, he can win an average of 3-5 tournaments a year, easily....
     
    #3
  4. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    But why would you take away Federer's Slams? That's like taking away one of Usain Bolt's legs and asking him to race against me.
     
    #4
  5. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,506
    If you want to make a non-slam comparison you need to include the fact that, in the 80s, there were far more tournaments on offer to play than nowdays. In the US for example there were 35+ ATP equivalent level tournaments in the US late 70s/early 80s. In 2013 there will be only 13.

    Lendl, like Connors and others, racked up tons of titles at tournaments which, by today's standard, would be the equivalent of Federer or Djokovic rushing around the calendar playing 250 level or lower tournaments like Zagreb, Sao Paulo, Houston, Belgrade, Umag, Auckland etc. Those guys often played close to 30 tournaments a year in the late 70s and early 80s, compared to more like 17 nowdays.

    As an example, Lendl in 1982... won 15 titles out of 25 tournaments played (60% win rate). Exclude the two majors he played (he missed the Aussie Open and Wimbledon) and the average draw size of these tournaments was less than 36 players (35.82) - giving him a 5 match average draw (excluding first round byes which he had 3 of).

    Federer by contrast in 2006 played 18 tournaments for 12 titles (67% win rate). Exclude the four majors and and his average draw size was 46 (46.2) - i.e. he had to win an extra match per tournament on average to win each title (excluding first round byes of which he had 4) - and, the level of the tournaments was also higher on average too. Over the course of a year that's 12 more matches that Federer had to play... 10% more basically to be rewarded with 3 fewer titles than Lendl. His titles were harder to win - by some margin - and he had fewer of them available to play as well.

    Now, I chose 1982 because it was was nowhere near Lendl's peak but chose 2006 for Federer because it was. But looking at crude numbers and excluding majors you'd be forgiven for thinking Lendl had a better year - but you're not really comparing apples with apples. Not even close.

    Let's not let nostalgia blur the fact that guys in the early 80s were able to rack up ****loads of titles in comparatively easy circumstances.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2012
    #5
  6. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    12,522
    Location:
    Australia
    We're in a stronger era.
     
    #6
  7. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,373
    If you take away their slam titles, Fed has 237 consecutive weeks at #1, the only player to reach 300+ weeks at #1. Won 6 WTF.

    But it's pointless to remove the most important title(slams) and only compare smaller titles. Because you are stripping away many of Roger's records(eg most consecutive win on grass and hardcourt, 24 straigt win in the final...).

    BTW, remove slam titles, Agassi > Sampras.
     
    #7
  8. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,373
    Yes, Federer had a stronger field.
     
    #8
  9. mattennis

    mattennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,259
    It is impossible to compare Connors era, or Lendl era with Agassi-Sampras era (let alone current era).

    Everything was so different back then.

    That is why in my honest opinion it doesn't make sense to say that Sampras was "better"/"greater" than Lendl or Connors, or that Federer is "better"/"greater" than Lendl or Connors, or that "great player from such era" is/was "better"/"greater" than "great player from such another era".

    It is impossible to know.
     
    #9
  10. lendlmac

    lendlmac Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Location:
    san diego, ca
    don't get all your feathers ruffled..... for the sake of THIS topic only..

    You REMOVE Federer's 17 GS titles, leaving him 60 Titles at age 31
    You REMOVE Lendl's 8 GS titles, leaving him 81 Titles at age 31


    Now, add all the remaining Tourinament Title wins....Roger's is still ongoing...but by age 31, Lendl won nearly 40+ more tournaments by age 31 then Roger has.....(non GS wins)...

    that is plain scary-freaking solid, consistent and DOMINANT.

    Lendl dominated the 80's era, more than Roger dominated the 2002-2012 era... just saying...

    Anyone would trade for Rogers overall career... but remove the GS titles from BOTH players, and EVERYONE would take Lendl's career now over Roger Federer's career...no questions asked.... better opponents, faster surfaces, harer draws, better players.....

    just saying.... Roger is #1...Lendl was not and wishes he had Federe's career... we all get that. This OP only talks about removing the GS titles from BOTH players, and Lendl is the MORE dominat player of HIS era...then Roger could ever dream of on a week end and week out basis in consistency and sheer DOMINANCE...just the fact. No one feared Federer like they feared Lendl.... they both were feared...but Lendl frightened people and scared them... LOL
     
    #10
  11. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,553
    What Bobby Jr. said sums this up perfectly....
     
    #11
  12. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    LOL, Lendl never even won the biggest prize of all : Wimbledon. He racked up titles beating midgets in obscure tournaments. Sure he was dominant but about half as dominant as Federer was. Again, why would you disregard Grand Slams? It makes zero sense to disregard THE most important titles in the sport. But again, you don't seem like a very sensible fella so I can't say I'm surprised.
     
    #12
  13. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,553
    but you understand that back then they played more tournaments per year, calendar was different, hence why they had the opportunity to rack up so many titles. Fed doesn't have that luxury.
     
    #13
  14. Federer20042006

    Federer20042006 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,173
    So what's the ratio of non-GS tournaments entered vs. won between the two?

    Mustard? :)
     
    #14
  15. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,422
    Possibly, but to say it in such a matter-of-fact way is a bit much. Lendl had Conners, Mac, Borg (for a bit), Wilander, Becker, Edberg, Vilas, Cash, Mecir, Gerulaitis. An aging Lendl also had many wins over the new generation of Agassi, Sampras, Martin, Chang, and Courier. That's an incredibly strong field, about as tough as it gets. It's at least pretty close.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2012
    #15
  16. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,422
    This argument is a tad pointless. Lendl won a lot of smaller titles, and in the big events Federer blows him out of the water. Grand slam performance is a main indicator of dominance -- and Federer has him beat.
     
    #16
  17. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    This thread, BAHAHAHAHA, take away the important stuff, and then I'd rather have Lendl, great theory. I'd definitely much rather win East Rutherford than Wimbledon, BAHAHAHA.
     
    #17
  18. Gizo

    Gizo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,699
    Lendl's record and title collection at many of the biggest non-slam events available to him, across the full range of surfaces, was very impressive:

    Masters (5) – 1981, 1982, 1985, 1986 and 1987
    WCT Finals (2) – 1982 and 1985
    Canada (6) – 1980, 1981, 1983, 1987, 1988 and 1989
    Philadelphia (2) – 1986 and 1991
    Boca West/Miami (2) – 1986 and 1989
    Forest Hills (4) – 1982, 1985, 1989 and 1990
    Queen’s (2) – 1989 and 1990
    Stockholm (1) – 1989
    Cincinnati (1) – 1982
    Las Vegas (1) – 1981
    Wembley (3) – 1984, 1985 and 1987
    Rome (2) – 1986 and 1988
    Hamburg (2) – 1987 and 1989
    Monte-Carlo (2) – 1985 and 1988
    Barcelona (2) – 1980 and 1981
    Sydney Indoor (3) – 1985, 1987 and 1989
    Tokyo Indoor (3) – 1985, 1985 and 1990
    Milan (3) – 1983, 1986 and 1990
    Indianapolis (1) – 1985
    San Francisco (1) - 1983
    Basel (2) – 1980 and 1981
    Madrid (1) – 1980

    Looking at quality over quantity, I've always rated Lendl's 94 official titles as more impressive Connor's total of 109. That's because Lendl had at least two good quality title wins on every type of surface, outdoor hard, indoor hard, indoor carpet, red clay, green clay and grass, while Connors didn't win any titles on red clay. Also Lendl's total was more well rounded, with a better collection of titles across the bigger tournaments in both Europe and North America, while Connors's title collection is heavily US dominated (he won about 70% of his official titles in his home country).

    Lendl's achievement of winning 3 titles in 3 consecutive weeks on 3 different surfaces in March/April 1985 was very impressive; Fort Myers on hard courts, Monte-Carlo on red clay and then the WCT Finals in Dallas on carpet.
     
    #18
  19. Candide

    Candide Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    987
    Location:
    Yabba, the greatest little place on Earth
    Connors could play and win into his late 30s because the game was less explosive, physical and dare I say professional then. Federer is doing a great job to be in the top group at 31 but by 33 I would think he'll drop off the pace. It's just too physically demanding now. By the way look at the old footage of Laver waddling around with a decent pot belly at the end of his career and still knocking off big wins. Just would not happen now.
     
    #19
  20. lendlmac

    lendlmac Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Location:
    san diego, ca
    Sorry to burst your bubble... Aside from 94 ATP titles which Federer may ever come close to, let alone pass... Lendl won nearly 40+ more titles than that beating top 10 to top 5 players routinely..even in the smaller tournaments....

    You fail to understand... When you put these two players careers Outside of Grand Slams....forget the GS even existed.....now the body of work the level of players and the sheer dominance in mens tennis goes to Ivan Lendl....

    Lendl s not chasing Federer folks....fact is there still many Ivan Lendl records Roger Federer can never achieve still nor come close to....yet. Lendls career is written....Its done....Federer is chasing history.......but hes still casing connors and ivan lendl....
     
    #20
  21. ledwix

    ledwix Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,130
    Ferrer was pretty dominant in 2012.
     
    #21
  22. lendlmac

    lendlmac Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Location:
    san diego, ca
    Thans Gizo!

    No one is saying lendl is better than roger....but if Grand Slams did NOT exist....now put both their careers next to each other.....Lendl would have kicked rogers a s s upband down the courts...

    Also Roger Federer has NEVER ever played the fast courts of the 80's and never will. All the tennis tournaments back in the 80s played waaay far much faster than any current player has even tried....AO was faster...W was faster...FO was faster and USO was faster....and the racquets were far inferior and smaller than todays tech....

    So simply remove GS from the equation.....Pretend they didnt exist....Lendls career blows Federers career into the weeds... fact. Just saying...
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2012
    #22
  23. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,709
    Location:
    Weak era
    You're kinda taking away Fed's biggest strength :)

    But yes Lendl does get underrated, he was a pretty dominant player in possibly the strongest tennis era ever, also playing style wise I think those players are very similar (possibly more so than any other tennis greats in comparison).

    BTW. Fed agrees that he's not better than Lendl:


    Q. I think the World Tour Finals equals a Grand Slam as a major title event. Now you have 16 Grand Slam titles and six World Tour Final titles. How much satisfaction do you have holding both records?
    ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, of course I'm extremely happy and extremely proud. I still don't feel like I'm better than Pete Sampras, or Lendl for that matter. I still believe they are one of the all‑time greats to play the game. I'm just happy to be compared to them.
    I'm actually happy that they are mentioned while I'm doing this because they have done amazing things in our sport. Sometimes legends do get forgotten rather quickly, which is unfortunate.
    So for me to hear we are talking about Pete, Ivan, other players, I think is great for the sport and great for them. I mean, that I hold both records, sure, I'm very happy about it, I'm proud, because I know the effort that has gone into it. It's longevity, it's something you can't just do over a short period of time.
    I used to be famous for not being consistent. I think this one proves to me that I was able, and proves to maybe many people, that if I can be, then many other people can be successful for a long period of time, as well, because I thought that was a very difficult thing to achieve.



    Yes but Fed's career has been mostly about slams, he scheduled himself around them, always trying to peak at the right time etc. That has been his focus his whole career, maybe influenced by Sampras being his idol.

    Actually, I get the impression that FO was slower in the 90s and 80s.
     
    #23
  24. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    If Slams didn't exist Federer would have played(and would be playing) all the Masters 1000/500/250 tournaments around and won most of them. You're incredibly dense and deluded with the argument you're making.
     
    #24
  25. Gizo

    Gizo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,699
    Obviously Lendl is clearly not in the same tier of greatness as Federer.

    I agree that he has been underrated though. Many people just look at his total of 8 grand slam titles and ignore his other achievements (the same goes for guys like Borg, Connors and Mac), when they all played in eras when the grand slam title count was meaningless.

    It's a shame that these guys didn't have a crystal ball to predict the future, and didn't know during their primes that after they retired, people would be judging their careers and 'greatness' just based on their number of slam titles. Maybe in the 90s Sampras then would have been chasing someone else's record instead of Emerson's.

    Non-slam tour events, invitational tournaments and exhos were all way more important back then. The gulf in importance between the slams and best non-slam events was significantly smaller in the 70s and 80s than it has been in the 90s and 00s, when the 'only slams matter' mentality became more common.

    Also the tour was so incredibly disorganised back then. I mean a huge tournament on carpet (the WCT finals in Dallas) so soon before RG on red clay, the Australian Open held so soon before the Masters in New York.

    Comparing Federer/Nadal to Sampras/Agassi is easy because all of those guys have played in eras when slam counting has actually mattered, and all 4 slams have been equally important. Comparing any of those guys to Borg, Lendl, Connors etc is far more difficult, because the tour set-up and players' priorities were so different in those previous eras.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2012
    #25
  26. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,506
    Lendlmac has a hilarious and conveniently selective way of looking at things - discounting all that doesn't support his/her pre-decided point of view. These all-encompassing views are anything but and the argument for Lendl being a greater player than Federer outside of majors is flawed up the wazzoo.

    My previous post on the number of tournaments that were played by guys like Lendl is a prime example of shining a spotlight on the fallacy that Lendl had it tough - he had it easier than Thomas Muster did in the 90s when he'd spend most of his year avoiding the hard court tour to play clay tournaments in backwater locations than hardly any other top players considered.
     
    #26
  27. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,709
    Location:
    Weak era
    #27
  28. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,422
    But why remove the grand slams? The four majors are the most valued tennis tournaments by far. Whats the point of removing them?
     
    #28
  29. Monsieur_DeLarge

    Monsieur_DeLarge Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    Messages:
    492
    I totally agree. In fact, if you discount grand slams... AND tour events... AND non-sanctioned events... AND exhibitions, and only measure their careers by counting Czechoslovakian Tennis Association-supervised tournaments during the 1970s, then Lendl absolutely dominates Federer.


    Regards,
    MDL
     
    #29
  30. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    Lendl would kill to get just 1 Wimbledon from Federer. :lol:
     
    #30
  31. THUNDERVOLLEY

    THUNDERVOLLEY G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    10,774
    That's funny.
     
    #31
  32. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,373
    I agree with Gizo that Lendl is very underrated. He's not Federer, but he should be ranked #1 in the 2nd tier great. Connors, Agassi, Mac doesn't doesn't hold tennis records like Lendl, who also was more consistent...multiple years with a 90+ winning percentage.
     
    #32
  33. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,373
    We're talking about the ATP not the WTA.
     
    #33
  34. PrimeChoice

    PrimeChoice New User

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    80
    Location:
    Callisto
    Well, you know what they say. "Going to McDonalds for a salad is like going to a prostitute for a hug."
     
    #34
  35. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    No, according to this guy, East Rutherford is where it's at, who cares about that little UK tourney.
     
    #35
  36. PCXL-Fan

    PCXL-Fan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    2,872
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    Who is amazed at Federer's Basel Open wins? Nobody.
     
    #36
  37. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,124
    Location:
    New York

    And Sampras would kill him for his 1 RG title! Obviously, not many players have won all 4 slams. But one has to admit that the obsession with slams is relatively recent. Even in the 90s, Agassi skipped AO for several years and some players skipped Wimbledon regularly. It didn't seem like such a big deal at the time. The "counting slams" frenzy started with the Fed era.
    Anyway, in the case of Lendl, it's true he was desperate to get a W title. But if we're talking about total # of slams won, I don't think it seemed as important at the time as it does now.
     
    #37
  38. THUNDERVOLLEY

    THUNDERVOLLEY G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    10,774
    You are off on another rant.

    TheFifthSet's post on page one illustrates just how grand Lendl's competition was throughout his career. This generation does not come close, and the idea of anyone trying to sell that is comedy at best.
     
    #38
  39. Gizo

    Gizo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,699
    Well for Federer to win his home city title 5 times in 6 years is a noteworthy achievement. Federer finally winning the title at Basel for the first time in 2006, was one of the proudest moments of his career, just like him losing his 5 set final against Henman in 2001 (a year after losing the 2000 final to Enqvist) was one of toughest.

    When Lendl won his first title at Basel in 1980, he beat a peak Borg in 5 sets in the final which was no mean feat. For many years Borg was considered to be unbeatable in 5 set matches, having won 13 in a row until the 1980 US Open final against McEnroe. But still there were numerous much bigger indoor tournaments around during Lendl's time, nearly all of he which he won at some point during his career.
     
    #39
  40. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,124
    Location:
    New York
    By the way, Fed won Basel 3 times as a 250 and twice as a 500. It makes a difference imo as it's not the same level of competition.
     
    #40
  41. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,373
    That's just an opinion, not a fact.

    Lendl himself said the players today are WAY better than him than his peers. I take his words over Fed detractor like you.
     
    #41
  42. Gizo

    Gizo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,699
    Not really. Under the 2000-2008 ranking system Basel was an International Series Gold tournament. Those tournaments were effectively the precursor to the 500 events, which were introduced from 2009 when the new ranking system was implemented. Tournament ranking points were pretty much doubled across the board from 2009.

    International series gold tournaments awarding 250 points to the winner from 2000-2008 (apart from Dubai and Barcelona which awarded 300), then all doubled that to 500 points from 2009 provided they weren't demoted in status.

    So when Federer won his Basel titles from 2006-2008, the tournament had effectively the same status/tier as it did from 2009 onwards.
     
    #42
  43. big ted

    big ted Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,869
    it was easier to win smaller tournaments back in lendls era esp in the early 80s since the top players werent required to play in all the "masters series" tournaments. the top players played each other alot less then they do now throughout the year.
     
    #43
  44. Federer20042006

    Federer20042006 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,173
    Besides which, the way Srichaphan played in the 2006 Basel semifinal was as well as anybody could ever play from a shot making standpoint in an indoors match. He was unbelievable...Roger Federer is the only guy playing in the past 10 years who would have beaten him in that match.

    THAT'S what competition is. Not some top 5 player showing up and half-assing it.
     
    #44
  45. Goosehead

    Goosehead Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,597
    Location:
    A bloke in Brighton, England.
    ..flawed up the wazoo :p:)
     
    #45
  46. joeri888

    joeri888 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    13,120
    Rosol's career vs Sampras career?


    Now let's take away all slams, masters, rankings, and only look at second rounds at wimbledon while being outside the top 99.

    I think Rosol's career eclipses Sampras's:confused:
     
    #46
  47. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,506
    The difference in field comment also then highlights that many dozens of Lendl's titles won in conditions/fields which often wouldn't even compare to a 250 tournament of today.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2012
    #47
  48. lendlmac

    lendlmac Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Location:
    san diego, ca
    There is no flaw....your logic is flawed. So, I agree, FEDERER BLOWS Lendl's career into the weeds.. He is the BEST EVER...right? :) I got it!!!!

    The topic was suppose there WERE NO GRAND SLAMS, period.

    Now look at the Head-to Head- in Career Stats, winning percentages, titles, DOMINANCE, Faster courts, smaller racquets, inferior technology, and Lendl thrashes Federer's career in a landslide...

    To Bring Federer into the 80's would not work, because in the 80's NO ONE, NO ONE, not even the BEST forehand in the game as Lendl or Agassi, swings the racquet head speed like Federer does in today's game... that "Style" did not exist back inthe 80's due to racquet technology...Roger's game is alien to the 80's men's game... it is "alien"... LOL In the 80's Roger could not even "hang" playing fast courts 24/7.... he's neve even played the same fast courts as the men's field ever from the 80's era... the 2000-2012 era tennis courts are SLOOOOW comared to the game inthe 80's.... LOL

    When Federer "upgraded" to the NEWEST racquet technology using 90" inches and the new strings...you see Federer's forehand swing speed ultra fast... that was never going to happen inthe 80's era....So Federer would NOT play the same today, back in the 80's....

    So, OUTSIDE the Gand Slams...which is EASY TO DIGEST, Which tenis player, Lendl or Federer, DOMINATED their ERA more.... the answer is easily IVAN LENDL.

    ROGER - When opponents face up to Federer, they are all in "in awe of him, mesmerized by his gracefulness on the court, his effortless shot making, and opponetns RELISH the thouht of playing against Federer, as they are in aweo of him...and rightly so..

    LENDL - However, ask ANYONE in the game... NO ONE, I MEAN NO ONE EVER WANTED TO FACE IVAN LENDL...they ALL FEARED HIM to death... game over... that was how much he instilled fear inot he men's fiedl back then.

    Do you think, right now, any player in toda's game, sa, "Oh, no I fear Djokovic? LOL Oh, no here comes Del Potro...? LOL or, wait, I got Roger Federer in the 1st round? "How cool is that!" No one ever feard Roger, Djoker, Nadal, Del POtro... players RELISHED playng them...they lost, but they never feard them...never...

    With Lendl, it was ", Oh #@%^!"! This can't be happeing to me...please don't let me play Lendl, please. LOL

    But if you TAKE AWAY, REMOVE the GRAND SLAMS, from tennis altogether... you see the DOMINANCE of IVAN LENDL next to say JIMMY CONNORS in the men's game....where NO ONE could beat them and live to tell about it.. LOL

    just saying... Roger is better than Lendl ever was... period. Now remove the GS from the equation, and Lendl overwhelms Roger's career in a landslide.... :)
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2012
    #48
  49. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,506
    Um.. Federer effectively uses a frame which was available in it's first incarnation in 1983. Since then the changes to it amount to about 2% difference - barely a small change in head size and a paint job, that's it. He also uses strings in the mains which were available since even earlier. Since he did so well in his early career prior to poly strings I'd say he of all current players would adapt to the 80s pretty well.

    Tell this story again so it makes more sense.
     
    #49
  50. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,124
    Location:
    New York

    No it wasn't. It was a simple WS. The gold one was Vienna.
     
    #50

Share This Page