4 of our modern GOAT candidates slam records stat analysis per Rd

[BTURNER]

I put a lot of amount of work on this, only to find I had no where to post it for a month - where many people who cared about such things might read it. Drove me crazy.
We are looking at Evert, Navratilova, Graf and Serena in depth to see which Rds were strong, and which were not, when they tended to peak and when they tended struggle. Its fascinating in my view.

No statistic in this post includes any match outside of the singles Australian, French, Wimbledon, or US championship results. Results have been rounded up like this ( LOL frankly don't know how to label it) 32.58% becomes 32.6% and 47.76% becomes 47.8%) LOL, If someone can tell me how to word what I have done so that a math teacher is happy, I will edit. We can all be thankful for online percentage calculators, or none of this would be reliable!

Court entered 47 majors between 1959-1975 (17 years s) and won 24 with an 90% win/loss match ratio. That means she won 51.1 % of those 47 and reached the finals 61.7% of the time with a finals conversion rate of 83 %. Court reached the semifinals 76.6% of the time she entered a slam with a SF conversion rate of 86.6% and the QFs 91.5% with a QF conversion rate of 83.7%

Court's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Court lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 6.4% of the time she played one, with no 1st Rd losses, 2 2nd Rd losses and 1 Rd 3 losses .

Evert entered 56 majors between 1971-1989 (19 years) and won 18 with an 89% win/loss match ratio. That means she won 32.1 % of those 56 and reached the finals 60.7% of the time with a finals conversion rate of 52.9 %. Evert reached the semifinals 92.9% of the time she entered a slam with a SF conversion rate of 65.4% and the QFs 96.4% with a QF conversion rate of 96.2%

Chris's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Evert lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 3.6% of the time she played one, with no 1st Rd losses, no 2nd Rd losses and 2 Rd 3 losses( Jordan and Sanchez) .

Navratilova entered 67 majors between 1973-2004 (30 yr span w/ 8 yr sabbatical 1995-2003 included. She played in 23 separate yrs ) and won 18 with an 86% win/loss match ratio. That means she won 26.9 % of those 67 and reached the finals 47.8% of the time with a finals conversion rate of 56.3 %. Martina reached the semifinals 65.7% of the time she entered a slam with a SF conversion rate of 72.7% and the QFs 79.1% with a QF conversion rate of 83.0%

Navratilova's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Martina lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 13.4% of the time she played one, with 5 1st Rd losses, 2 2nd Rd losses and 2 Rd 3 losses.

Steffi entered the main draw in 54 slams between 1983-1999 (17 years) and won 22 with a 90% win/loss match ratio . She won 40.7% of the major championships she entered and reached the finals of 30 slams, or 55.6% of the slams she entered. Finals conversion rate is 73% . 66% of the time she was a semifinalist. Her semifinal conversion rate is 81.1%. 74.1% of the time Steffi reached the QFs with a QF conversion rate of 88.1%

Steffi's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Graf lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 13% of the time she played one, with 3 1st Rd losses, 1 2nd Rd losses and 3 Rd 3 losses .

Serena entered 81 majors between 1998-2022 (25 years) and won 23 with an 87% win/loss match ratio. That means she won 28.4 % of those 81 and reached the finals 32 times or 40.7% of the time for a finals conversion rate of 71.9%. Serena reached the semifinals 49.4% of the time she entered a slam with a semifinal conversion rate of 82.5% . She reached the QFs 66.7% of the time with a 74.1% QF conversion rate.

Serena's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Serena lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 21% of the time she played one, with 2 1st Rd losses, 3 2nd Rd losses and 11 Rd 3 losses

Slam Career win/loss % 1.Tie Court & Graf 90% 3. Evert 89% 4. Serena 87% 5. Martina 86%
% of majors champ won 1. Court 51.1% 2 .Graf 40.7% 3. Evert 32.1% 4. Martina 29.9% 5. Serena 28.4%
% of majors reached final 1.Court 61.7% 2. Evert 60.7% 3. Graf 55.6% 4. Martina 47.8% 5. Serena 40%
Slam finals conversion 1.Court 83% 2.Graf 73.1% 3.Serena 71.9% 4. Martina 56.3% 5. Evert 52.9%
% of major reached SF's 1. Evert 92.9% 2.Court 83% 3. Graf 66% 4. Martina 65.7% 5. Serena 49.4%
Semifinals conversion 1.Court 86.6% 2.Serena 82.5% 3. Graf 81.1% 4. Martina 72.7% 5. Evert 65.4%
% of major Reached QF's 1. Evert 96.4% 2. Court 91.5% 3. Martina 79.1% 4. Graf 74.1% 5. Serena 66.7%
QFinals conversion rate 1. Evert 96.2 2. Graf 88.1% 3. Court 83.7% 4. Martina 83% 5.Serena 74.1%
*Here a low number is a better number
* % of slam losses - Rds1-3 1.Evert 3.6% 2. Court 6.4% 3. Graf 13% 4. Martina 13.4% 5. Serena 21%

 

[BTURNER]

Some thoughts so far. You can really see how deciding to extend your career to get that one more slam, one more wimbledon, really impacts more inconsistent players. Martina got her ninth wimbledon over Garrison with a heavy cost and her decision to play in 2004 really hurt these numbers. It did not help that she took her sweet time maturing, and had a slump in 80-81. Serena deciding to play on several years to get her 24th push her down, and you can see that pregnancy took its toll and injuries took their toll. Maybe she tended to come back before she was really ready to mentally and physically compete at the top level. She is arguably the most inconsistent of the 4. But the woman knew how to win a final!

Evert is interesting. she amassed such volume in those QF, SF numbers, and of course she reached more finals than anyone in the sport, but she crashes at semifinal and final conversions. I think this is where surface affects her. Evert began playing when 3 of four majors were grass, and that slowed her progress at reaching US Open finals. She loses 4 straight semis to the likes of Court, Goolagong, King and Kerry Reid. And then all those losses to Martina at Wimbledon at up. In addition Evert spent so many years ranked 2 or 3 in the world ( which is better than 4-9! as some of these women dropped) but she rarely managed to beat the best grass-courter in the world at a slam. Evert reached her seeding despite the lawn, but did not exceed it often enough.

What astonishes about Graf, is how good these numbers ended up despite joining the tour at 13 yrs old and playing all four events at those early years. I made the executive decision not to include those two qualifying round losses at Wimbledon and US Open 1983 when she was 13 year old. She was not in the main draw, so she cannot win or lose in the main draw. She reached only one semifinal in her first 3 years on the tour, and was able to make up so much ground with phenomenal number from 1986 forward, that there is no real detriment left.

One more point on my chart above than needs explanation.
% of major Quarterfinls won 1. Evert 96.4% 2. Martina 79.1% 3. Graf 74.1% 4. Serena 66.7%
QFinals conversion rate 1. Evert 96.2 2. Graf 88.1% 3. Martina 83% 4.Serena 74.1%
* % of slam losses rds1-3 1.Evert 3.6% 2. Graf 13% 3. Martina 13.4% 4. Serena 21%

Notice how Graf inexplicably drops low between % of slam losses rd's 1-3, and % of majors where she reached the QF's. Thats because Graf's troublesome rd was the 4th rd which I did not document at all " I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now" now looms larger than I anticipated when I did all this!. Graf lost 5 times in that 4th rd which you are not seeing reflected elsewhere outside the slam win/ loss ratio. I decided it was neither a late rd, or early round that explained much, but with Graf its a significant round. Once she gets past that round, her winning ways return. In retrospect, I probably should have labeled and documented on 4th round results,

 

[BTURNER]

I added Margaret's stats to the OP. More often than not, she's pushes all our faves downward. Graf and Court both tie with their career w/l ratio stat at 90% with Evert right behind at 89% but the span between the best and worst here is only 4 percentage points! Now Martina does not excel in any category at all at this highest of echelons. She is ranking #4 virtually everywhere, doing a little better at reaching the QF's and dead last in career w/l ratio. Serena is doubtless the most inconsistent. There is no pattern at all except that we know when she reaches the semis and finals, she tends to win them. Its the polar opposite of Evert who soars at consistency round after round and falters when it comes time to win those last two rounds.

Personally considering all the factors, I'd rather have Graf's stats and career at majors than anyone. She played in an era with maximum participation at the top ten level at all slams, with great variety of surfaces available, and still marries excellent consistency and excellent conversion rates in the last two rounds.

 

[jrepac]

Great stats. Evert was probably the most consistent female player ever to step on the court.

 

[BTURNER]

Unfortunately for her, Evert was playing a series of all time great grass-courters, and in fields full of top ten serve/volleyers in an era where either 2 or 3 of the slams each year were played on grass! 27 of her 56 majors ( 48%) were played on somebody's lawn! Here are her losses. ( the losses have her opponent's seeding range )
King x 3 ( #1-3), Goolagong x 4 (# 1-4), Melville-Reid x1( '72 #9) Court x 1 ('73 #1), Wade x 1 ('77 #3), Navratilova x 9 ( #1-2), Jordan ('83 unseeded), Mandlikova x 1 ('86 #3), Graf x 1('89 #1).

Only once in 27 entries, did Evert lose to someone either outside the top ten seeding, or fail to reach the semis ( Jordan was a true upset by any definition). Only once did Evert lose to a player seeded outside the top four, but within the top ten (Melville Reid). Evert still ended up with 141 wins out of 163 matches played on Grasscourt slams. She won 86.5% of these matches, but this dynamic killed her conversion stats!

By the way, Evert beat aging King x 4 on grass in a slam, Goolagong x 2, Reid x 2, Court x1, Wade x1, Navratilova x 3, Jordan x1, Mandlikova x 3 but she only played Graf in her final Wimbledon.

 

[WCT]

That Evert 92.9% figure for reaching the semis is staggering. And that is for her entire career, not just her peak. Wow.

 

[BTURNER]

That Evert 92.9% figure for reaching the semis is staggering. And that is for her entire career, not just her peak. Wow.

Evert's first upset was in her 35th slam in 1983 at 28 yrs old. Her second ( if defined as losing in the QF's or earlier ) was in her 50th major in the Open of 1987 four years later. I will never understand it.

 

[Grafil Injection]

Great stats! What happens to Steffi's numbers if you exclude 1983 and 1984 when she was just 14 and 15 years old (in fact only 13 & 14 at the AO&FO)? I noticed that Court, Evert and Martina all started at GSs at 17 years old, and Steffi's attendance in 83/84 was really just a fun training opportunity for her as she was not yet physically developed, but too good for the juniors.

 

[BTURNER]

. I don't. I also don't take Martina's 'comeback' in 2004 on a lark, away because Evert, and Graf did not decide to try a comeback years after they retired. Decisions were made by Graf and her Dad to play those matches, The matches were played on the pro tour, and in the main draw of the slams and a record of Steffi's career began. I did however preclude her matches in the qualifying tournament, consistent with the WTA records.

Your facts may be wrong . Evert was 15 when she started to play tour events, and 16 when she played her first US Open ( she would turn 17 in December) and Martina was about 6 months away from turning 17 in October, when she played her first French in June. Graf's decision to play tour matches that young certainly was a decision with some consequences to these stats, but so were other decisions by other greats.

If I were to make a logical 'cutoff' it would have to be at 18 years of age for everyone ( age of majority ), but then Tracy Austin would not get credit for one of her two slams and I could not credit Graf for her first slam which was finished about a month before her 18th birthday either. It also occurs to me that the age of majority - for the purposes of deciding travel and playing decisions independent of parental veto - may not be 18 all across the globe

 

[Grafil Injection]

. I don't. I also don't take Martina's 'comeback' in 2004 on a lark, away because Evert, and Graf did not decide to try a comeback years after they retired. Decisions were made by Graf and her Dad to play those matches, The matches were played on the pro tour, and in the main draw of the slams and a record of Steffi's career began. I did however preclude her matches in the qualifying tournament, consistent with the WTA records.

Your facts may be wrong . Evert was 15 when she started to play tour events, and 16 when she played her first US Open ( she would turn 17 in December) and Martina was about 6 months away from turning 17 in October, when she played her first French in June. Graf's decision to play tour matches that young certainly was a decision with some consequences to these stats, but so were other decisions by other greats. If I were to make a 'cutoff' it would have to be at 18 years of age for everyone ( age of majority), but then Tracy Austin would not get credit for one of her two slams and I could not credit Graf for her first slamf which was finished about a month before her 18th birthday either

Sure, I was in fact being generous to Evert and Martina by not saying exclude Steffi in 1985 too, when she was 15-16.

 

[BTURNER]

Sure, I was in fact being generous to Evert and Martina by not saying exclude Steffi in 1985 too, when she was 15-16.

You may have been being generous, but statistics aren't supposed to be! I would continue to add other players to this (I have already done the stats on Goolagong) but my title is wrong! Its says 4 modern GOAT, not for them + King, Venus, Seles, Henin..... I think this is fascinating stuff.

 

[WCT]

Evert's first upset was in her 35th slam in 1983 at 28 yrs old. Her second ( if defined as losing in the QF's or earlier ) was in her 50th major in the Open of 1987 four years later. I will never understand it.

Just as mind boggling stats. When Jordan beat her at Wimbledon that early, I was like, is this for real? Because it just NEVER happened.

 

[BTURNER]

Just as mind boggling stats. When Jordan beat her at Wimbledon that early, I was like, is this for real? Because it just NEVER happened.

I remember Virginia Wade saying that at the time nobody ever really gave much thought or attention to this streak, until it was broken, and they started to look back for a precedent in Chris' Career. None!

 

[big ted]

the lower ranked players werent as good back in the day so that probly should be taken into account..
martina and chris could usually get thru the first week half asleep lol..

 

[BTURNER]

the lower ranked players werent as good back in the day so that probly should be taken into account..
martina and chris could usually get thru the first week half asleep lol..

As was pointed about above. Evert's stat is not about her prime years when she could be half asleep. Its about literally every single major she played from 16-34 years old. Reversing this , only 7% of the time did she fail to make the semifinals.
To compare. Those same 'lower ranked' players ended both Martina and Graf before the semis about 34% of the time they entered a slam, and about 23% of the time it was Margaret that was the victim. Goolagong lost before the semis 43% of the times she entered a slam. Austin entered 17 majors in her career and only reached the semis 5 times total! As for King, its just embarrassing to even post hers. All this compared to 7% for Chris. Can you think of any player who reached the #1 ranking in the 1970's or 1980's for even a day, that may reflect your view better than the list that I just presented because I think its a complete list. Your idea of 'lack of depth'in the era protecting these top women through their careers, is not showing in my data.

They all needed to wake up!!