Big 3 - Slam wins against younger ATG's

[Gazelle]

Since nobody cares about players beating up on the likes of Baghdatis, Goffin or Nishikori...

This is were it's really at! Beating ATG's who are younger than you. Since nobody cares about beating ATG's who are older (think Agassi)...

I limited it to slam wins, since nobody cares about non-slam tournaments...


Now I wasn't sure if I had to include Murray, given that TTW is a bit divided about his ATG status. So I have both stats including and excluding him.

Federer

wins vs Nadal: 4
wins vs Djokovic: 6
wins vs Murray: 4
Total wins excluding Murray: 10
Total wins including Murray: 14

Nadal

wins vs Djokovic: 9
wins vs Murray: 7
Total wins excluding Murray: 9
Total wins including Murray: 16

Djokovic

Total wins excluding Murray (since he's older than Djokovic) : 0

Now this doesn't have to be a negative thing. Given that Djokovic is the youngest, he will have more opportunities than Fedal to beat the NextGen ATG's when they arrive. So he can still catch-up to Fedal.



These are just the unbiased stats. I leave the interpretations to the knowledgeable tennis connoisseurs of TTW.

 

[mike danny]

I understand that it's a troll thread, but Djokovic has not been a younger ATG for Nadal.

 

[Third Serve]

I understand that it's a troll thread, but Djokovic has not been a younger ATG for Nadal.

They're essentially the same generation, yeah.

 

[mike danny]

They're essentially the same generation, yeah.

They're the same generation. Djokovic just peaked after Nadal had already won 9 slams.

 

[Gazelle]

I understand that it's a troll thread, but Djokovic has not been a younger ATG for Nadal.

They're essentially the same generation, yeah.

They are, but I wanted to stay objective. Generations aren't clearly defined in tennis. Some would say Fed is same generation as them too.

My stats are unbiased and objective, following the Lewesian statistical methods.

 

[mike danny]

They are, but I wanted to stay objective. Generations aren't clearly defined in tennis.

Funnily enough, Nadal won his 2nd slam when Federer had 7. Djokovic won his 2nd slam when Nadal already had 9.

 

[Lew II]

So? Why not "ATGs whose name begins with A" ?

Federer among others proved age is meaningless.

First matches against Big4 (age 22-27) --> 15-23
Last matches against Big4 (age 33-37) --> 15-11

 

[Gazelle]

Funnily enough, Nadal won his 2nd slam when Federer had 7. Djokovic won his 2nd slam when Nadal already had 9.

Interesting choice. I love it. You learn quickly from TTW.

 

[Gazelle]

So? Why not "ATGs whose name begins with A" ?

Federer among others proved age is meaningless.

First matches against Big4 (age 22-27) --> 15-23
Last matches against Big4 (age 33-37) --> 15-11

Funny.

 

[mike danny]

Interesting choice. I love it. You learn quickly from TTW.

You can easily make stuff up on this forum to prove a point so why not?

Point being of course that it took longer for Djoker to win his second slam than it took Nadal.

 

[TheAssassin]

Only fair in a way since he had the toughest time breaking through I'd say. Federer's peers got plagued with injuries in their primes while Sampras was already out, and the clay field took a turn for the worse as well around the time of Nadal's emergence. Not taking anything away from them, it's been a long time since they had to prove themselves to anyone, what I am saying is Djokovic had to break an unprecedented duopoly just to put himself on a map of tennis greats, and then after that had to remain exceptionally consistent for years before the NextGen phenomenon to become comparable to those two. He's earned his wins as much as anyone else.

 

[AceSalvo]

Djokovic just peaked after Nadal had already won 9 slams.

Next Gen stuff right there.

 

[maratha_warrior]

I guess @Lew II will make many threads in response to this thread .
be ready

 

[maratha_warrior]

Funnily enough, Nadal won his 2nd slam when Federer had 7. Djokovic won his 2nd slam when Nadal already had 9.

wow , Djoker entered his peak after Nadal was already an ATG .
Just realised this right now , after reading your comment .

 

[The Guru]

We don't know if he does or not. We would've said in 07 beating Djokovic at AO was not beating an ATG. Djoker has beaten Shapo/Med/Zverev other young dudes in slams. We'll see.

 

[mike danny]

We don't know if he does or not. We would've said in 07 beating Djokovic at AO was not beating an ATG. Djoker has beaten Shapo/Med/Zverev other young dudes in slams. We'll see.

But Djoker kept having a great season in 2007, greater than any Next Gen season. He did show ATG quality at 20.

None of the Next Gen have done so yet.

 

[NoleFam]

Total Slam wins against ATG players (big 3 + Sampras and Agassi)

Nadal - 20
Djokovic - 17
Federer - 14

 

[The Guru]

But Djoker kept having a great season in 2007, greater than any Next Gen season. He did show ATG quality at 20.

None of the Next Gen have done so yet.

I know but you get the point. Djokovic 07 is comparable to Med 19 for example. Djokovic clearly better but I don't think we can say for sure Djokovic has not beaten a younger ATG in a slam.

 

[metsman]

We don't know if he does or not. We would've said in 07 beating Djokovic at AO was not beating an ATG. Djoker has beaten Shapo/Med/Zverev other young dudes in slams. We'll see.

beating 07 Djokovic at AO is still irrelevant in the grand scheme of things even after all he accomplished because he played like a rookie there. Same with those guys (who played like mugs, worse than rookie) so who cares how many, if any, slams they win in the future.

 

[DjokoGOAT]

Djokovic has beaten big 4 in 16/17 slams won.

 

[The Guru]

beating 07 Djokovic at AO is still irrelevant in the grand scheme of things even after all he accomplished because he played like a rookie there. Same with those guys (who played like mugs, worse than rookie) so who cares how many, if any, slams they win in the future.

I know but he included that all the same. So technically we can't say whether he's beaten any younger ATGs yet. I'm using the OPs criteria.

 

[Lew II]

Total Slam wins against ATG players (big 3 + Sampras and Agassi)

Nadal - 20
Djokovic - 17
Federer - 14

Agassi doesn't belong to the same group.

 

[NatF]

Agassi doesn't belong to the same group.

Agassi has 6 HC slams, more than Nadal on grass/hard and more than Djokovic/Fed on clay but sure

 

[Lew II]

Agassi has 6 HC slams, more than Nadal on grass/hard and more than Djokovic/Fed on clay but sure

Agassi is not one of the GOATs like the other four.

 

[NatF]

Agassi is not one of the GOATs like the other four.

So beating Sampras on clay is more impressive than beating Agassi on HC?

 

[Lew II]

So beating Sampras on clay is more impressive than beating Agassi on HC?

The post made by NoleFam didn't talk about surfaces.

 

[Lew II]

The post made by NoleFam didn't talk about surfaces.

@NatF

I guess Nole has the best distribution of wins over ATGs/GOATs across surfaces anyway, since he beat Big3 at the AO 6 times, at the RG 2 times, at Wimbledon 5 times, at the UO 4 times.

 

[NatF]

The post made by NoleFam didn't talk about surfaces.

Well you frequently include Murray in your ATG list of compiled stats so complaining about the inclusion of Agassi now is a bit weird?

@NatF

I guess Nole has the best distribution of wins over ATGs/GOATs across surfaces anyway, since he beat Big3 at the AO 6 times, at the RG 2 times, at Wimbledon 5 times, at the UO 4 times.

My issue isn't the end numbers but whether you're showing intellectual honesty or not.

 

[Lew II]

Well you frequently include Murray in your ATG list of compiled stats so complaining about the inclusion of Agassi now is a bit weird?



My issue isn't the end numbers but whether you're showing intellectual honesty or not.

If we wanna go by surface it's something like this:

hard: Djokovic/Federer/Sampras (GOAT level) > Agassi/Nadal (ATGs) > Murray
clay: Nadal (GOAT level) > Djokovic/Federer (ATGs) > Agassi/Murray > Sampras
grass: Djokovic/Federer/Sampras (GOAT level) > Murray/Nadal (ATGs) > Agassi

 

[NatF]

If we wanna go by surface it's something like this:

hard: Djokovic/Federer/Sampras (GOAT level) > Agassi/Nadal ATGs > Murray
clay: Nadal (GOAT level) > Djokovic/Federer (ATGs) > Agassi/Murray
grass: Djokovic/Federer/Sampras (GOAT level) > Murray/Nadal (ATGs) > Agassi

Don't have any big complaints with this. Not sure Djok/Fed are ATG's on clay - likewise Murray and Nadal on grass.

Would definitely put something between Fed/Sampras on grass and Djokovic but whatever

 

[NoleFam]

Agassi doesn't belong to the same group.

He belongs to the group that consists of ATGs.