Most wins over ATGs - Federer had none of the best 24 seasons

urban

Legend
I don't know, what the op means with "ATG", but his stats seem obsolete. From what i know, in 1969 Laver had 52 wins over fellow top tenners, who all won more than 10 titles and were major winners or finalists.
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
1986-89 Becker was

12-6 vs Edberg
7-3 vs Lendl
6-0 vs McEnroe
5-0 vs Connors
3-1 vs Wilander
3-0 vs Agassi

total 36-10 o_O These are GOAT level numbers.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
1986-89 Becker was

B. Becker, born on Nov 67

12-6 vs Edberg, born in 66
7-3 vs Lendl, born in 1960
6-0 vs McEnroe, born in 1959, I assume we are not talking Patrick here
5-0 vs Connors, born in 1952
3-1 vs Wilander, born in 1964

In the above group everyone is either older than Becker or same gen.
quite easy going

and probably no surprise in the result with Connors, Mcenroe and Lendl.

3-0 vs Agassi, born in 1970

this is an interesting way of @Lew II slicing data.
if you check the H2H, then you will see that 1986 - 1989 is 3:0 for Becker
but starting with 1990, the H2H is 10:1 for Andre.
sure, age is just a number and 1:10 is GOAT number.
 

zipplock

Hall of Fame
Most wins over ATGs (10+ Slam finalists) in a season:

1) 1984 McEnroe 17
2) 1985 Lendl 16
3) 1970 Laver / 2015 Djokovic 15
5) 1987 Lendl 13
6) 1979 Borg 12 / 1989 Becker 12 / 1990 Edberg 12
9) 2011 Djokovic 12
10) 1971 Laver / 1986 Becker 11 / 1995 Agassi 11 / 2008 Nadal 11
14) 1969 Laver 10
15) 1970 Rosewall 9 / 1989 Edberg 9 / 1994 Sampras 9 / 2007 Nadal 9
19) 1980 Borg / 1987 Edberg / 1988 Becker / 1989 Lendl / 1991 Courier / 1995 Sampras / 2012 Djokovic / 2014 Djokovic 8

Federer's best season (7 wins in 2010) is at #27 place (EDITED) , tied with other seasons.
Confirmed: Fed is a hack and his 20 slams are a fluke :)
 
D

Deleted member 21996

Guest
yes, but what about Most wins over Reebok/Tecnifibre gear combo ATGs in the Mardi Gras/Erntedankfest interim between 1977 and 2028? what are the numbers so far? can we make a call with the data we already have? GOAT material imho...
 

Antonio Puente

Hall of Fame
It's subjective. To me he is.

A 10 slam final threshold - just keep saying it over and over. It doesn't matter what it is, if you say anything over and over, with a segment of the population it will take hold.

- Better at 3 of 4 slams.
- Big 5 tournaments
- Berrettini
- Hugo Chavez, the Viet Cong, the governor of Georgia and the CIA are conspiring to outlaw Christmas and steal kids' Christmas candy.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
A 10 slam final threshold - just keep saying it over and over. It doesn't matter what it is, if you say anything over and over, with a segment of the population it will take hold.

- Better at 3 of 4 slams.
- Big 5 tournaments
- Berrettini
- Hugo Chavez, the Viet Cong, the governor of Georgia and the CIA are conspiring to outlaw Christmas and steal kids' Christmas candy.

wait, he isn't talking about winning 10 GS
he is talking reaching the final.
next will be participating in 10 GS
 
D

Deleted member 21996

Guest
It's subjective. To me he is.

Finals won vs players better than Roddick/Hewitt:

2004-09 Federer 7
2011-16 Djokovic 34

Do you prefer if I put it this way? 8-B

not just that. he is also a ATG because he was the first and the last to lose the SW19 in white fred perry clobber while facing a swiss player.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
this is an interesting way of @Lew II slicing data.
if you check the H2H, then you will see that 1986 - 1989 is 3:0 for Becker
but starting with 1990, the H2H is 10:1 for Andre.
sure, age is just a number and 1:10 is GOAT number.

@Lew II
Lewie, Lewie, Lewie
do you have anything to answer? or your silence is your way to acknowledge that you got destroyed yet once again?
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
Op is master of manipulating stats to suit his agenda. If Murray is ATG why not Hewitt, Wawrinka, Safin aren't ? If you count them Fed' number will shoot up.
Murray is better than them in every stat, except Slam titles compared to Wawrinka, who was not a big player in 2004-07 anyway.

Federer's opponents in his domination years were not great however you put it, sorry. You have to manipulate stats to make them look good, not the other way around.
 
Murray is better than them in every stat, except Slam titles compared to Wawrinka, who was not a big player in 2004-07 anyway.

Federer's opponents in his domination years were not great however you put it, sorry. You have to manipulate stats to make them look good, not the other way around.

No one is manipulating their stats, whereas you are constantly manipulating the stats for the Djoke era.

768325bdcbde46cd682ce2205e03f5c6.gif


smiley_emoticons_santagrin.gif
 
Last edited:

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
No one I manipulating their stats, whereas you are constantly manipulating the stats for the Djoke era.

768325bdcbde46cd682ce2205e03f5c6.gif


smiley_emoticons_santagrin.gif
Show me the stats that prove Hewitt and Safin are on par with Murray.

Oh, and if I don't like what you will write, I won't call it manipulating stats, because I can have a civil discussion. :whistle:
 
Show me the stats that prove Hewitt and Safin are on par with Murray.

Oh, and if I don't like what you will write, I won't call it manipulating stats, because I can have a civil discussion. :whistle:

I don't have to show you anything, because I am quite confident to know what and how they played. You have no clue (as you yourself admitted), so you need to resort to "stats". What you will call it is irrelevant: it has been proven countless times already.

You need to start having a clue, because you can spent the next 30 years doing what you do, and you will have less knowledge than someone who has watched two months of tennis flat. A free advice, if you don't want to look at 30 something years of nothing doing.

giphy.gif


:cool:
 

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
Murray is better than them in every stat, except Slam titles compared to Wawrinka, who was not a big player in 2004-07 anyway.

Federer's opponents in his domination years were not great however you put it, sorry. You have to manipulate stats to make them look good, not the other way around.

OK - let's take a poll. We will see how many would consider Murray as ATG player. Agreed ?
 

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
I don't have to show you anything, because I am quite confident to know what and how they played. You have no clue (as you yourself admitted), so you need to resort to "stats". What you will call it is irrelevant: it has been proven countless times already.

You need to start having a clue, because you can spent the next 30 years doing what you do, and you will have less knowledge than someone who has watched two months of tennis flat. A free advice, if you don't want to look at 30 something years of nothing doing.

giphy.gif


:cool:

Well said. :)
 

Bamoos

Semi-Pro
Murray is better than them in every stat, except Slam titles compared to Wawrinka, who was not a big player in 2004-07 anyway.

Federer's opponents in his domination years were not great however you put it, sorry. You have to manipulate stats to make them look good, not the other way around.
Djokovic opponents were not great since 2015.
 
Last edited:

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
@Lew II
Lewie, Lewie, Lewie
do you have anything to answer? or your silence is your way to acknowledge that you got destroyed yet once again?

thank you very much @Lew II for confirming, by avoiding my question, that this thread is rubbish and all your "arguments" boil down to some cherry picked and randomly selected "stats".
and of course age is just a number.
 
Top