McEnroeisanartist
Hall of Fame
Just noticed that Becker was a combined 31-7 against Wilander and Edberg in non-Grand Slam matches, but 1-6 against them in Grand Slam matches.
Just noticed that Becker was a combined 31-7 against Wilander and Edberg in non-Grand Slam matches, but 1-6 against them in Grand Slam matches.
Just noticed that Becker was a combined 31-7 against Wilander and Edberg in non-Grand Slam matches, but 1-6 against them in Grand Slam matches.
This is yet another example of numbers not telling the entire story. A little more context:
- When you talk about big matches in the '80s you simply can't ignore those at Davis Cup, especially between these Europeans who took their DC duties very seriously. Here Becker was utterly dominant, winning all of their encounters (think 5 in total) even on clay in the '88 finals against Edberg and particularly in next year's finals (on carpet) where he demolished both Wilander and Edberg and almost single-handedly handed Germany her 2nd DC trophy. (In fact I'd say even Pete or Fed would have to be at the absolute top of his game to have a good chance against Becker of the '89 finals.)
- Much of Becker's seemingly poor records at the majors can be attributed to just plain bad luck. For example 2 of his 3 losses to Mats came at RG where the Swede was the obvious favorite. And this was also when Becker began having his off-court problems with booze and drugs--if we're to believe Becker (and I do take him at his word here as he wasn't necessarily trying to make an excuse) he took a little too many sleeping pills the night before his '90 final against Edberg, which explains why he had such a slow start in this match.
So it's not really Becker "choking" against his rivals that explains his major H2Hs. On the contrary his records against the top 10 and his fellow No. 1 contemporaries, as can be seen from the OP's first collective H2H, are truly impressive, on par with the likes of Borg, Lendl, Pete, Fed and Rafa.
I'd elaborate on this a little further, but then another dissertation would be necessary. Maybe next time.
Yeah, you can't ignore Davis Cup. Becker was 25-10 vs. Edberg. Edberg was 3-1 vs. Becker in Slams, and also won the Masters (today's YEC) final over him, so 4-1 in the biggest events. Two of Becker's 4 Slam/Master's losses were in 5 sets. But, add Becker's Davis Cup wins, and it's either 4-3 Edberg in the most important/biggest events or they're tied 4-4 (not sure if Becker beat Edberg twice or three times in DC). Not sure I'd say any of Becker's losses were unlucky though.
And, as pointed out, the two Wilander Slam matchups were on clay, so no surprise.
What surprises me most is the small number of times that Becker played Edberg or Wilander in Slams. They were, for the most part, contemporaries, part of the same generation. Wilander kind of went away prematurely and was a little older, but still, only two Slam matches? And, Becker and Edberg overlapped for 10 years 1985-1994, so only 4 Slam matches surprises me. There was more parity, and only 16 seeds for a good stretch of that time (so better chance of one of them getting upset early), so I'm not expecting 10 or more Slam matches, but it seems like they should have played at least 6 or 7.
That's odd. You saying Becker more apt to choke in big matches?
^^ Edberg has most GS finals -- 11 to 10 compared to Becker, I Believe, 6 wins for both. Don't know about Wilander but I believe it's less than Edberg in terms of finals reached. Edberg also has more quarterfinals than Becker, but the same no. of SFs. I believe Becker was ousted before his seeding more often than Edberg, if memory serves. Edge to Edberg for me, due to greater ranking consistancy and more consistant GS record. When Edberg and Becker were both at their best, Edberg was better against the field, even if perhaps he wasn't against Becker himself. Wilander died out too early but was superior in 1988 and very strong prior to that as well.
I saw an inteview with Wilander and he was asked when he lost motivation. He answered, the day after I became no. 1. Intersting.
Other things of interst:
Becker may have beaten Wilander and Edberg in their individual DC matches, but both Edberg and Wilander have more DC titles. Not irrelevant, since DC is a team event.
Edberg won 3 clay court titles, Becker none. Wilander won many, of course including 3 FOs, and he won the AO on grass, his weakest Surface. So both Edberg and Wilander were better than Becker on their respective weakest surface. Edberg also edges Becker in 5-set matches 2-1, in addition to the 3-1 GS and 1-0 YEC finals.
Wilander never won the YEC but I believe he reached the final in 1987.
If doubles merit Counts and are weighted the same as singles, then Edberg wins easily.
Edberg has far superior GS record to Becker, I believe. Same number of titles, but more finals, semi finals and quarter finals (on greater variety of surfaces). Also superior GS head to head.
Edberg, he not very much care about non-GS tournaments.
the becker/wilander/edberg debate is really interesting and a very tough nut to crack. i respect any opinion about the trio, beause there are very good reasons for any of them.
1) wilander
- has 7 major titles under his belt
- has the most dominant year 1988
- never lost a set vs becker in a gsmatch, and oftentimes beat edberg in gsmatches
- i think he has a wimby title in doubles
- has major titles on every surface
- best brain of the 3
2) edberg
- most weeks at no1
- no1 singles and doubles
- reached finals in every gs
- most stylish player of the 3
3) becker
- most titles
- pos h2h vs edberg & wilander
- most masters/yec/wtf titles and finals as the next category
- most gs finals (not sure)
- beat edberg and wilander in all dcmatches and edberg/jarryd (world no1) in both dc doubles
- best in longevity (1985 wimby - 1996 ao)
- most powerful of the 3
as a fan i give becker a slight egde over wilander and edberg, but i dont mind anybody thinking differently. and when i think about the trio now becker's carreer still seems to be somewhat unfinished, because ha had everything to play a role in the goat-discussion. whereas wilander and edberg fulfilled expectations.
overall it shows how interesting tennis was in 80s and 90s with very different kinds of players/styles/surfaces. that created a mix which was very unique.
today rather boring when you watch a rgmatch nadal vs berdych with the same result as a wimbymatch nadal vs berdych.
^^ Edberg has most GS finals -- 11 to 10 compared to Becker, I Believe, 6 wins for both. Don't know about Wilander but I believe it's less than Edberg in terms of finals reached.
Wilander is certainly the best of terms of his tennis mentality, and his overall strategic game. His game required a lot of intense mental focus, due to the fact that he didn't have a cruise game to fall back on. I have a feeling that Wilander, if he wanted something badly enough, would get it. Often struggled with motivation in smaller tournaments and the daily grind of the tour.
Becker has the best cruise game, a big powerful, naturally talented game, which he could raise to ridiculous heights at his best. I also think that Becker would seek inspiration from the occasion, and if he found it, would be an extremely hard nut to crack.
Edberg's game depended a lot on his movement, speed and timing of his volleys. Edberg needed these things to be clicking well if he was to play well, and he usually did it very consistently. He is the most consistent of the three.
Wilander = Brain
Becker = Power
Edberg = Movement
That is flawed reasoning. Back in 80s, early 90s, Masters 1000 equivalents not as important as today.
Edberg, non slam tournaments just way to pay bills. He much different player at majors.
Of course you would, it suit your argument.I'd argue that Edberg also took the Masters, WCT finals and the Davis Cup seriously.
Of course you would, it suit your argument.
In those days, Masters and WCT were just normal tournaments with big cheques. Edberg was all about slams. That, best way to judge.
Of course you would, it suit your argument.
In those days, Masters and WCT were just normal tournaments with big cheques. Edberg was all about slams. That, best way to judge.
Difference being, I am correct.
Of course you would, it suit your argument.
In those days, Masters and WCT were just normal tournaments with big cheques. Edberg was all about slams. That, best way to judge.
Of course you would, it suit your argument.
In those days, Masters and WCT were just normal tournaments with big cheques. Edberg was all about slams. That, best way to judge.
When Edberg lost in Chile in 85 to Hans Gildemeister playing for Sweden in Davis Cup he was crying after he lost the match. So not only Slams were important for Edberg;-)
Yes He was 53 or something on the Atp Tour Rankings and Edberg 13 I beleive.6-3 2-6 6-4-7-5.It was the first singles match for Edberg in Davis Cup. Hans beat Vilas, Clerc and was a Davis Cup hero playing for Chile.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtAMNgCNfYo
Enjoy Kiki the above from YouTube.
Yes He was 53 or something on the Atp Tour Rankings and Edberg 13 I beleive.6-3 2-6 6-4-7-5.It was the first singles match for Edberg in Davis Cup. Hans beat Vilas, Clerc and was a Davis Cup hero playing for Chile.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtAMNgCNfYo
Enjoy Kiki the above from YouTube.
What a lot of people don't include was Beckers vastly superior record indoor to both of them. Indoor tennis was a big part of tennis in the 1980's and 1990's.
...
So it seems very clear having Becker ahead of those other two.