I'm always struck by the fact that, unusually for a Swedish great, Wilander could never make any impression at Wimbledon (never even made a semi-final) whilst Edberg made the final of all 4 Slams. This is why Edberg always made a greater impression with me.
For what it's worth, Wilander did win a Wimbledon men's doubles title in 1986 with his childhood friend Joakim Nystrom. I saw an interview where he said that particular title was one of his happiest and most satisfying because he got to share it with his best friend, and it was at a place where he otherwise had so many difficult losses. Mats made the Wimbledon quarterfinals in singles 3 times, losing to Pat Cash (who beat him 3 different years at Wimbledon), Miloslav Mecir, and John McEnroe at that stage. It wasn't like Wilander couldn't play on grass, as those results and his two Australian Open titles on that surface (events where he beat the likes of McEnroe, Lendl, Edberg, and Curran to win) attest.
The fact that he won 2 Slams on grass makes his failure at Wimbledon all the more puzzling (and no, explanations about the different type of grass there won't cut it).
Actually it will. Mats himself said in several interviews that he couldn't adapt to this faster grass, so I guess he knows more than anybody else what he's talking of . This, plus the fact that he lost several times against true grass specialists, as underlined previously in this very topic, his Wimbledon record ain't that bad (but of course not the best either).
Excuses excuses, Mat!
You can take this argument many ways....7 slams Wilander 6 Edberg. Wilander wins.
Wilander has at least 2 titles on all surfaces. Edberg 0.You can take this argument many ways....
Wilander 7 slams Edberg 6
Weeks at number 1. Edberg 72 to Wilander 20
Doubles Slams. Edberg 3 Wilander 2
Tour Finals. Edberg 1 Wilander 0
Singles winning percentage. Edberg 74.8% Wilander 72%
Edberg has 3 career titles on clay... not majors, which I think you are getting at...Wilander has at least 2 titles on all surfaces. Edberg 0.
That's a major achievement (pun not intended). Edge Wilander.
It's practically dead even with these 2.
Wilander's 1988 was pretty amazing, though.Barely anyone remembers Wilander anymore, while Edberg is a tennis legend, so... Stefan.
Edberg really had a great chance to move the argument strongly in his favor with the 1991 AO title - but he had to retire in the final with a torn stomach muscle. I think he would have won it if healthy. But, that's all speculation, and a player can't get credit for what he didn't actually achieve.
The torn abdominal muscle was 1990
The other thing that makes me lean toward is after 1988 he basically gave up so his stats are affected by that
It's a bit like Borg vs Connors, where one player leads in the biggest metrics but behind in pretty much everything else, although the margins in each specific category were much wider for each player compared to Wilander v Edberg. It's a tough one.
I'd go with Wilander, barely. Because of the surface distribution, in that elite group of multi-Slam winners on every surface (just him and Nadal)
Ahah good one. You're kidding right?Barely anyone remembers Wilander anymore
while Edberg is a tennis legend, so... Stefan.