Hilarious tennis stats that are alarmingly true

DSH said:
Hurkacz has won Miami but Nadal has not.
Medvedev has won Rome but Federer has not.
Massu won Olympic gold but Djokovic has not.
8-B
Click to expand...

Some journeyman or random top player winning OG is not a new thing in tennis, in fact it happens in 80% of cases in tennis. 1988 one was won by Mecir, next one in 1992 by Rosset (like who the f*uck is that even?? LOL), 2000 one was won by Kafelnikov and the next one in 2004 by Massu and finally Zverev, who has only reached one slam final in his entire career yet won in 2021 (the one, that was supposed to be 2020)...if you boil it down to ATG vs. Non-ATG logic, then it includes Murray too as a "random" player, who won 2012 and 2016 editions and it only leaves Agassi winning it in 1996 and Nadal in 2008 as the only two ATG players to ever do it! LOL Better luck next time!...btw this is the list of ATG caliber players, who missed it, but realistically had chances to do it - Lendl, Wilander, Becker, Edberg (Lendl and Wilander could realistically do it in 1988, while Edberg and Becker in 1992 on top of that!), Sampras (could potentially do it in ANY of the three editions from 1992 till 2000) and finally Federer and Djokovic (Federer was skipping some, but realistically only had chances in 2004 and 2012), Novak played all of them, that he could have played, but never managed to do it (but let's not jump to conclusions yet...2024 is about to happen, we'll see!)...
 
Last edited:
Djokodalerer31 said:
Some journeyman or random top player winning OG is not a new thing in tennis, in fact it happens in 80% of cases in tennis. 1988 one was won by Mecir, next one in 1992 by Rosset (like who the f*uck is that even?? LOL), 2000 one was won by Kafelnikov and the next one in 2004 by Massu and finally Zverev, who has only reached one slam final in his entire career yet won in 2021 (the one, that was supposed to be 2020)...if you boil it down to ATG vs. Non-ATG logic, then it includes Murray too as a "random" player, who won 2012 and 2016 editions and it only leaves Agassi winning it in 1996 and Nadal in 2008 as the only two ATG players to ever do it! LOL Better luck next time!...
Click to expand...

Lol....so Murray to you is "some journeyman random player" who has somehow devalued the event by winning it and....gasp horrors......winning it twice!!! :p
 
Mainad said:
Lol....so Murray to you is "some journeyman random player" who has somehow devalued the event by winning it and....gasp horrors......winning it twice!!! :p
Click to expand...

That's why i specfically added - "if we boil it down to ATG vs. non-ATG" logic, Murray doesn't make the cut as an ATG caliber player (even if his career resume outside of grand slams suggests otherwise), because he doesn't have enough slam titles to make the cut...i wasn't calling Murray a journeman or a random top player either, but you gotta have at least 6 slams in your possession to even start being considered!...
 
Djokodalerer31 said:
That's why i specfically added - "if we boil it down to ATG vs. non-ATG" logic, Murray doesn't make the cut as an ATG caliber player (even if his career resume outside of grand slams suggests otherwise), because he doesn't have enough slam titles to make the cut...i wasn't calling Murray a journeman or a random top player either, but you gotta have at least 6 slams in your possession to even start being considered!...
Click to expand...

Well, that's 1 theory but only a theory. :cool:

The trouble with this "6 Slams or you're out" business is that it links the likes of Becker and Edberg with the likes of the Big 3 or Sampras or Borg who won (or almost won) at least twice as many Slams and in some cases 3 times as many. It's just arbitrary. If 6, why not 5, if 5 why not 4 etc. etc.

That's why I prefer whole career evaluation rather than just an insistence on the Slam count and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
 
weakera said:
Hubert Hurkacz has won more Masters 1000 titles than Thiem, Del Potro, Wawrinka, Ferrer, Berdych...
Click to expand...
Ferriera so has more master title than these, Thomas Johansson won same number of major as Delpo and more than Ferrer, Berdych, Soderling.
It is all about luck of draw
 
Mainad said:
Well, that's 1 theory but only a theory. :cool:

The trouble with this "6 Slams or you're out" business is that it links the likes of Becker and Edberg with the likes of the Big 3 or Sampras or Borg who won (or almost won) at least twice as many Slams and in some cases 3 times as many. It's just arbitrary. If 6, why not 5, if 5 why not 4 etc. etc.

That's why I prefer whole career evaluation rather than just an insistence on the Slam count and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Click to expand...

There is more involved than just pure slam count that link all of them at 6 slams or more! Each one of them won at least one grand slam in 5 different seasons, that is half a dozen of a decade! Each of them were much more competitive against each other and were capapable of beating one another in high stake situations than Murray ever did against big-3 (for Murray it basically only happened 4 times in his career 2 times against Djokovic in slam final, once against him in YEC final in 2016 to seal #1 ranking and once against Federer in 2012 olympic final to seal gold...every other time he played against them in some sort of high stake circumstance he spectacularly choked...) and last but not least each of them either defended their slam title at least once and on top of that everyone one of them except for Edberg (who is the 2nd weakest link in the ATG chain anyway after Wilander) managed to pull off a multi slam winning season at least once in their respective career!...It's not just mere 6 titles, that makes them ATGs, it's all those things too!
 
Djokodalerer31 said:
There is more involved than just pure slam count that link all of them at 6 slams or more! Each one of them won at least one grand slam in 5 different seasons, that is half a dozen of a decade! Each of them were much more competitive against each other and were capapable of beating one another in high stake situations than Murray ever did against big-3 (for Murray it basically only happened 4 times in his career 2 times against Djokovic in slam final, once against him in YEC final in 2016 to seal #1 ranking and once against Federer in 2012 olympic final to seal gold...every other time he played against them in some sort of high stake circumstance he spectacularly choked...) and last but not least each of them either defended their slam title at least once and on top of that everyone one of them except for Edberg (who is the 2nd weakest link in the ATG chain anyway after Wilander) managed to pull off a multi slam winning season at least once in their respective career!...It's not just mere 6 titles, that makes them ATGs, it's all those things too!
Click to expand...

You're conveniently forgetting Masters tournaments which are counted as big titles too. Murray beat 1 or other of the Big 3 on 8 occasions in a Masters final and several times more in semis. Not wanting to include them is just as arbitrary as insisting on the Slam count to the exclusion of anything else. No player outside the Big 3 themselves has as good a record against them as Murray.
 
Mainad said:
Well, that's 1 theory but only a theory. :cool:

The trouble with this "6 Slams or you're out" business is that it links the likes of Becker and Edberg with the likes of the Big 3 or Sampras or Borg who won (or almost won) at least twice as many Slams and in some cases 3 times as many. It's just arbitrary. If 6, why not 5, if 5 why not 4 etc. etc.

That's why I prefer whole career evaluation rather than just an insistence on the Slam count and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Click to expand...
Murray's bad luck with injury didn't help him but in years like 09-11 and 15-16 he could have made a number his slam losses closer to make the ATG claim even stronger in years were he was healthy and pretty well.

I think you could actually call Murray a ATG anyway considering all he did regardless though.
 
Chris Woodruff won more Canadian Open titles than Sampras, Connors, Edberg, Courier, Hewitt, Kafelnikov, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Cilic, Thiem and Korda combined. I deliberately named players that both won hard court majors and entered the tournament at least 5 times, as IMO it was unfair to also add Wilander (who hardly ever entered the tournament during his career) or Alcaraz (who has only entered it twice so far) to that list.

Ljubicic lost 6 matches that he had match points in during the 2002 season, including 4 matches that he had multiple match points in. In back to back tournaments at start of the season, he had 7 match points vs. Rios at Sydney, and 2 match points vs. Ferreira at the Australian Open, but lost both of those matches. Against Ferreira, he was leading 6-4 6-4 5-1, and hadn't faced a single break point at that stage.

On the subject of Ljubicic, the fact he spent such a decent amount of time as a top 5, top 10 and top 20 ranked player and had numerous other very notable achievements, but failed to win more matches than he lost in grand slams during his career (he had an even 48-48 W/L record there), was notable.

Robredo's combined 0-7 record on clay against Roddick, Rusedski, Isner and Karlovic. During his first ever match as a top 10 player, he lost to a 32 year old Rusedski in Rome.
 
Last edited:
An obvious one: Stan having a better slam H2H against Djokovic after 2011 than both Fedal (and this without any matches in 2017/first half of 2018).
 
Mainad said:
Becker is the only ATG never to win a title on clay.
Click to expand...
This is often forgotten when comparing him to Edberg. The consensus that Becker is superior focuses way too much on head-to-head (even though Edberg arguably won the majority of their important matches) while forgetting that Becker has this major career flaw. Not being able to win a single tournament on one of the sport's main surfaces should be more penalising than it seems to be.
 
Djokodalerer31 said:
Edberg (who is the 2nd weakest link in the ATG chain anyway after Wilander)
Click to expand...
Cool it with the Swedish disrespect. Wilander won 7 Slams, that alone doesn't make him the weakest. And I find it much more degrading to never have won a single clay court tournament (not even a measly 250), like Becker, than to never have had a multiple Slam season (a comparatively farfetched and specific statistic).
 
ScentOfDefeat said:
This is often forgotten when comparing him to Edberg. The consensus that Becker is superior focuses way too much on head-to-head (even though Edberg arguably won the majority of their important matches) while forgetting that Becker has this major career flaw. Not being able to win a single tournament on one of the sport's main surfaces should be more penalising than it seems to be.
Click to expand...
It is not such a big deal if you consider that he reached three FO SFs and four M1000. He could have easily grabbed some Mickey Mouse CC tournaments just for the sake of it. No issues with having Edberg ahead on clay due to his FO final and his Hamburg win, but it is pretty close. None of them was a world-beater on clay.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
It is not such a big deal if you consider that he reached three FO SFs and four M1000. He could have easily grabbed some Mickey Mouse CC tournaments just for the sake of it. No issues with having Edberg ahead on clay due to his FO final and his Hamburg win, but it is pretty close. None of them was a world-beater on clay.
Click to expand...
Well, could have or should have, but the fact is he didn't, and the difference between actually winning and not winning a tournament is - sadly, in many cases - the fundamental difference in sports. Had Federer not won that RG title his status would diminish considerably compared to his main rivals: without a career Grand Slam he would be no more than an inflated Sampras. That speaks to the importance of that one clay Slam. But if we compare Edberg to Becker on clay, it's not that close, he's not clinging to a single win on clay, he won 3 titles (Gstaad, Hamburg and Madrid against Bruguera in the final) and made other finals (including a major final) on that surface. To be fair, I think Edberg and Becker are practically tied in terms of achievements (in singles), but I will always hold the former's greater versatility against the latter's head-to-head lead when people try to convince me Becker is the overall better player. And while, in my view, they're tied in singles, Edberg is still a better player overall if we take his doubles career into account.
 
ScentOfDefeat said:
Well, could have or should have, but the fact is he didn't, and the difference between actually winning and not winning a tournament is - sadly, in many cases - the fundamental difference in sports. Had Federer not won that RG title his status would diminish considerably compared to his main rivals: without a career Grand Slam he would be no more than an inflated Sampras. That speaks to the importance of that one clay Slam. But if we compare Edberg to Becker on clay, it's not that close, he's not clinging to a single win on clay, he won 3 titles (Gstaad, Hamburg and Madrid against Bruguera in the final) and made other finals (including a major final) on that surface. To be fair, I think Edberg and Becker are practically tied in terms of achievements (in singles), but I will always hold the former's greater versatility against the latter's head-to-head lead when people try to convince me Becker is the overall better player. And while, in my view, they're tied in singles, Edberg is still a better player overall if we take his doubles career into account.
Click to expand...
Well it is not that Edberg was a giant on clay. One had a final the other one had three semis at the FO, don’t see such a significant difference here. Sure he won a couple of tournaments, but I wouldn’t say it is a big factor in the comparison between the two.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
It is not such a big deal if you consider that he reached three FO SFs and four M1000. He could have easily grabbed some Mickey Mouse CC tournaments just for the sake of it.
Click to expand...
It's interesting though that he exactly tried this when he was already officially retired from Slams. Remember after Wimbledon 1997 he actually said goodbye and 2 years later it was just a one-time comeback.

In 1998 he only played a few small events, but that included quite some clay tournaments like Gstaad for example. So he definitely recognized his lack of a clay title as a flaw himself. As if he was fine with being done with Slam success, but this one elusive thing was worth it to still play tennis. He reached one more final, and yet it wasn't to be.

Generally I agree with you though. If he would have played let's say in Munich every year of his career, he most certainly would have got a title.
 
Gizo said:
Kuerten entering the Australian Open 8 times, never reaching the 4th round, only once reaching the 3rd round and losing more matches than he won there (7 wins and 8 losses). His disastrous record in Melbourne relative to his ability on hard courts, was largely attributable to the fact that he liked to party and unwind during the off-season, and wasn't exactly in a rush to return to any serious form of training.
Click to expand...
One of Greg Rusedski's best career wins was beating world number 1 Gustavo Kuerten in the second round of the 2001 Australian Open 4-6, 6-4, 6-3, 2-6, 9-7. Kuerten's one appearance in an Australian Open third round, i.e. in 2004, was also past his prime.
 
Fabresque said:
Nadal fans:

Step 1: Make a factually incorrect statement
Step 2: Get called out on lying
Step 3: Change subject by saying RafaGOAT, Epic, or making some sort of slight at Djokovic.

Like clockwork for this lot.
Click to expand...
Step 4. @octobrina10 shows up to deny all this, proving that there are people who are still obsessed about cheating readers.
 
Fabresque said:
Step 4: Ignore context because that’s not real.
Click to expand...
Step 5, act like Nadal didn't chokeslam your boy 8 times on Chatrier 8-B

E653D1F2396317E8177F416AA3BE20BF4B73297B
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Otacon
The stats of the week
Replies
17
Views
1K
Otacon
Otacon
Pheasant
Serving and return stats of various slam winners since 1991
Replies
7
Views
320
Wurm
Wurm
H
POST Federer-Nadal STATS
2
Replies
84
Views
4K
travlerajm
travlerajm
falstaff78
Cumulative stats - Nadal [2], Federer [3], Wawrinka [24] - RG 2019 QF
Replies
4
Views
676
oldmanfan
oldmanfan
La Grande
35 facts that prove Roger Federer is the greatest tennis player ever
Replies
16
Views
1K
Deleted member 733170
D
Back
Top