Djokovic won by far the most finals over ATGs in the Open Era

Double digit finals won against ATGs (10+ Slam finalists) in the Open Era


2) Lendl 29 (8 vs McEnroe, 6 vs Becker, 6 vs Wilander, 4 vs Edberg, 2 vs Connors, 2 vs Borg, 1 vs Sampras)
3) Becker 27 (14 vs Edberg, 7 vs Lendl, 3 vs Wilander, 1 vs Sampras, 1 vs Connors, 1 vs McEnroe)
6) Federer 23 (10 vs Nadal, 6 vs Djokovic, 5 vs Murray, 2 vs Agassi)
10) Borg 16 (8 vs Connors, 4 vs McEnroe, 4 vs Lendl)
11) Edberg 15 (5 vs Becker, 3 vs Lendl, 3 vs Wilander, 1 vs Agassi, 1 vs McEnroe, 1 vs Connors, 1 vs Sampras)

Thanks to Lew now we've proof:

Lendl, Becker underrated; Borg, Federer, Edberg overrated
 
Pushing MÙRRAY to ATG level is very dangerous example of fan favouring one player .
3 Slam are 3 only. Yes Murray played in the most difficult era with 3 ATG stopping but to become ATG you have to beat ATG .
 
Pushing MÙRRAY to ATG level is very dangerous example of fan favouring one player .
3 Slam are 3 only. Yes Murray played in the most difficult era with 3 ATG stopping but to become ATG you have to beat ATG .
I think in other eras he wins 3 to 5 slams. No more. So it is what it is at this pt.

I don't like the arbitrary atg count though. Murray is much closer to Becker than Becker is to djokovic. What atg.
 
I think in other eras he wins 3 to 5 slams. No more. So it is what it is at this pt.

I don't like the arbitrary atg count though. Murray is much closer to Becker than Becker is to djokovic. What atg.
No disrespect to Sir Murray but 3 is way too less to be in discussion of ATG LIST.
We have to give credit to Murray to win 3 slam and reaching #1 ranking which seemed to be big3 monopoly but to elevate murray to ATG is like bending the rule.
 
Back
Top