Number of Big Titles won with Best of 5 Finals

Razer

Razer

G.O.A.T.
Number of Big Titles won with Best of 5 Finals

01. Federer - 31
02. Nadal - 28
03. Sampras - 27
04. Djokovic - 25
05. Lendl - 22
06. Borg - 20
07. Becker - 20
08. Mcenroe - 19
09. Laver - 18
10. Agassi - 17
11. Connors - 14
12. Wilander - 11
13. Nastase - 10
14. Muster - 9
15. Rosewall - 9
16. Edberg - 8
17. Courier - 8
18. Newcombe - 8
19. Kuerten - 7
20. Safin - 6
21. Ashe - 7
22. Vilas - 6
23. Murray - 5

Too bad Djokovic seems to have lost all his ATP Finals titles in this list due to them being BO3.
 
Razer said:
Number of Big Titles won with Best of 5 Finals

01. Federer - 31
02. Nadal - 28
03. Sampras - 27
04. Djokovic - 25
05. Lendl - 22
06. Borg - 20
07. Becker - 20
08. Mcenroe - 19
09. Laver - 18
10. Agassi - 17
11. Connors - 14
12. Wilander - 11
13. Nastase - 10
14. Muster - 9
15. Rosewall - 9
16. Edberg - 8
17. Courier - 8
18. Newcombe - 8
19. Kuerten - 7
20. Safin - 6
21. Ashe - 7
22. Vilas - 6
23. Murray - 5

Too bad Djokovic seems to have lost all his ATP Finals titles in this list due to them being BO3.
Click to expand...
WTF order
1. Sampras
2. Federer
3. Djokovic
 
the only relevant thing that really counts is the numbers of big titles, best of 5 or best of 3 is irrelevant.

big-title-kings-chart-updated-from-atp-v0-ynxdtry4uc1c1.jpg


20231223122536-98.128.181.208.JPG


it is also interesting that the leading tennis association still ranks OG below the masters!
 
Last edited:
GoatNo1 said:
the only relevant thing that really counts is the numbers of big titles, best of 5 or best of 3 is irrelevant.

big-title-kings-chart-updated-from-atp-v0-ynxdtry4uc1c1.jpg


20231223122536-98.128.181.208.JPG


it is also interesting that the leading tennis association still ranks OG below the masters!
Click to expand...

Not it is not irrelevant, maybe for kids like you it is irrelevant, but actual fans of the game like best of 5 sets and that is what separates the best players from the lesser ones. Djokovic would have won most of those titles if they were best of 5, but at the same time you cannot say things like bo5 or b3 does not matter.
 
Razer said:
Not it is not irrelevant, maybe for kids like you it is irrelevant, but actual fans of the game like best of 5 sets and that is what separates the best players from the lesser ones. Djokovic would have won most of those titles if they were best of 5, but at the same time you cannot say things like bo5 or b3 does not matter.
Click to expand...
it has absolutely nothing to do with whether the game is played in the best of 5 or best of 3 format for the credibility of the champion! how can it be nole's mistake that he didn't win in the best of 5 sets if it is played in the best of 3 format? what's next, fewer titles on the carpet or wooden surface? blue clay? mixed grass-clay? nonsense. everyone can win only those tournaments that exist and in the format in which they are played! and bigger format favor the better player and it would be better for nole so change of the format was a handicap for him.
 
GoatNo1 said:
it has absolutely nothing to do with whether the game is played in the best of 5 or best of 3 format for the credibility of the champion! how can it be nole's mistake that he didn't win in the best of 5 sets if it is played in the best of 3 format? what's next, fewer titles on the carpet or wooden surface? blue clay? mixed grass-clay? nonsense. everyone can win only those tournaments that exist and in the format in which they are played! and bigger format favor the better player and it would be better for nole so change of the format was a handicap for him.
Click to expand...

Yeah not his fault but that still doesn't mean BO3 is comparable to BO5.

It is also true that WTF titles won in the 90s have more value than those won in 2010s.
 
Razer said:
Yeah not his fault but that still doesn't mean BO3 is comparable to BO5.

It is also true that WTF titles won in the 90s have more value than those won in 2010s.
Click to expand...
you can value in any way you want but that will not change the fact that nole is the grandest at the grand slams, the champion of the YECs and the master of the masters!
 
GoatNo1 said:
you can value in any way you want but that will not change the fact that nole is the grandest at the grand slams, the champion of the YECs and the master of the masters!
Click to expand...

Who cares if Nole in grandest at grand slams and champion of YEC ???
Maybe you do, I don't .... tennis does not revolve around Nole for me.
 
Razer said:
No, I am not Serbia so I dont care for him like you do. I am not even from the western countries. I don't give a sh1t for Nole. I am a tennis fan only, not a fanatic of any player.
Click to expand...
i did not mean in a positive way, but you seems to care a lot anyway
 
GoatNo1 said:
i did not mean in a positive way, but you seems to care a lot anyway
Click to expand...

No I don't. It is your insecurity which makes you feel that people are out here to target your Nole. Get over your inferiority complex and also focus on something in life other than Nole, his tennis achievements are his own, not yours, you have no reason to be proud of him. This nationalistic pride which you might feel over his records is hollow IMO. In an individual sport everyone is playing for their own glory, not for country's.
 
nachiket nolefam said:
Pathetic attempt

Why don't we take new polls brother
Click to expand...

Attempt at what ? I am highlighting that lots of classic 5 set matches were missed by Tennis as mentioned by @BauerAlmeida above. Thats why Nole's and even Fedal's counts are lower. Lot of exciting 3 set matches we've had in last 15-20 years should have been 5 setters. This recent Alcaraz-Nole match at Cinci should also have gone 5 sets but could Nole have won that? Maybe he would have, or maybe not, who knows ? The suspense and doubt will always be there @nachiket nolefam
 
Last edited:
Perhaps the lack of BO5 Masters events are one of the reasons why Nextgens are not winning slams. How is BO3 a proper warm-up to BO5?
 
Razer said:
Number of Big Titles won with Best of 5 Finals

01. Federer - 31
02. Nadal - 28
03. Sampras - 27
04. Djokovic - 25
05. Lendl - 22
06. Borg - 20
07. Becker - 20
08. Mcenroe - 19
09. Laver - 18
10. Agassi - 17
11. Connors - 14
12. Wilander - 11
13. Nastase - 10
14. Muster - 9
15. Rosewall - 9
16. Edberg - 8
17. Courier - 8
18. Newcombe - 8
19. Kuerten - 7
20. Safin - 6
21. Ashe - 7
22. Vilas - 6
23. Murray - 5

Too bad Djokovic seems to have lost all his ATP Finals titles in this list due to them being BO3.
Click to expand...

You can't blame Djokovic or other players for change in format of masters final. It's impossible to win if there's no BO5 final. Let's be fair
 
NeutralFan said:
You can't blame Djokovic or other players for change in format of masters final. It's impossible to win if there's no BO5 final. Let's be fair
Click to expand...

Agreed, not the mistake of Djokovic or others, infact Novak would benefit if matches went 5 instead of wrapped up in 3.
 
NeutralFan said:
Not sure since he was majoring in minors till 2015(except 2011)
Click to expand...

Well Djokovic's percent will definitely go up if more matches are BO5, but Nadal might go up even more, thats the only difference. Except Lendl & Connors all ATGs have a significant jump in win% in BO5, so it is not possible that Djokovic's could go lower. Yes lost a lot of BO5 matches before Becker took over as his Guru but even until 2013 end Djoker had like 83% win record in BO5, he did suffer some losses at slams but I cannot imagine them at masters where he is playing BO3s till final and then he would only benefit with a 5 setter. Also the Djokovic we know was a beast from 2014 that he has 92% win record in BO5, so he would benefit more after that too until 2019 or so, it is only 2020 onwards that he could no longer play a full tour like he did before it, so his % would only go up, I am sure of it.
 
Razer said:
Well Djokovic's percent will definitely go up if more matches are BO5, but Nadal might go up even more, thats the only difference. Except Lendl & Connors all ATGs have a significant jump in win% in BO5, so it is not possible that Djokovic's could go lower. Yes lost a lot of BO5 matches before Boom Boom Becker took over as his Guru but even until 2013 end Djoker had like 83% win record in BO5, he did suffer some losses at slams but I cannot imagine them at masters where he is playing BO3s till final and then he would only benefit with a 5 setter. Also the Djokovic we know was a beast from 2014 that he has 92% win record in BO5, so he would benefit more after that too until 2019 or so, it is only 2020 onwards that he could no longer play a full tour like he did before it, so his % would only go up, I am sure of it.
Click to expand...

I was merely pointing out the fact that after 2011 Novak was ruling BO3 masters but not bo 5 finals ( even accused of majoring in minor ) it changed after 2014 and more in later years for whatever reason I don't wanna discuss.
 
Razer said:
Yeah not his fault but that still doesn't mean BO3 is comparable to BO5.

It is also true that WTF titles won in the 90s have more value than those won in 2010s.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't. Let's value the titles more by making it BO7.

Actually, making slams BO3 would make Federer a winner in several famous matches, everything else being equal of course. He would've eliminated Djokovic at SF's of 2010-11 USO. There was Kevin Anderson in 2018 WB. Several other times he won the first 2 sets, and lost the next 3.
 
SonnyT said:
No, it isn't. Let's value the titles more by making it BO7.

Actually, making slams BO3 would make Federer a winner in several famous matches, everything else being equal of course. He would've eliminated Djokovic at SF's of 2010-11 USO. There was Kevin Anderson in 2018 WB. Several other times he won the first 2 sets, and lost the next 3.
Click to expand...

Federer has come back from 0-2 in BO5s a total of 10 times (out of 46 times)
Djokovic has come back from 0-2 in BO5s a total of 8 times (out of 27 times)
Nadal has come back from 0-2 in BO5s a total of 4 times (out of 38 times)

Roger converts 90% of his won matches in straights when he is 2-0 up in BO5
Nadal converts 89% of his won matches in straights when he is up 2-0 in BO5
Djokovic converts 87% of his won matches in straights when he is 2-0 up in BO5

Number of matches they lost from 2-0 up

Federer - 5
Nadal - 3
Djokovic - 2

So Roger has advantage is not taking to the 4th set when he wins matches after 2-0 up relatively more than Nadal or Djoko.

It is pretty even when we consider that Federer 5-6 years older than Djokodal, also there is no advantage if slams are BO7, from round 1 if you make them then nobody will make the last match, quality will suffer. Men cannot play 7 sets for 7 rounds and ladies cannot play 5 sets for 7 rounds, thats why formats exist as they are.
 
Last edited:
Razer said:
Federer has come back from 0-2 in BO5s a total of 10 times (out of 46 times)
Djokovic has come back from 0-2 in BO5s a total of 8 times (out of 27 times)
Nadal has come back from 0-2 in BO5s a total of 4 times (out of 38 times)

Roger converts 90% of his won matches in straights when he is 2-0 up in BO5
Nadal converts 89% of his won matches in straights when he is up 2-0 in BO5
Djokovic converts 87% of his won matches in straights when he is 2-0 up in BO5

Number of matches they lost from 2-0 up

Federer - 5
Nadal - 3
Djokovic - 2

So Roger has advantage is not taking to the 4th set when he wins matches after 2-0 up relatively more than Nadal or Djoko.

It is pretty even when we consider that Federer 5-6 years older than Djokodal, also there is no advantage if slams are BO7, from round 1 if you make them then nobody will make the last match, quality will suffer. Men cannot play 7 sets for 7 rounds and ladies cannot play 5 sets for 7 rounds, thats why formats exist as they are.
Click to expand...
Age has nothing to do with it! In any case, Nadal & Djokovic have to play while Federer is sitting on his sofa.
 
SonnyT said:
No, it isn't. Let's value the titles more by making it BO7.

Actually, making slams BO3 would make Federer a winner in several famous matches, everything else being equal of course. He would've eliminated Djokovic at SF's of 2010-11 USO. There was Kevin Anderson in 2018 WB. Several other times he won the first 2 sets, and lost the next 3.
Click to expand...
But in that case, Federer would not have a career Grand Slam, because in his only winning RG he turned the matches from 0:2 deficit to sets (against Haas) and 1:2 to sets (against del Potro).
 
Enceladus said:
But in that case, Federer would not have a career Grand Slam, because in his only winning RG he turned the matches from 0:2 deficit to sets (against Haas) and 1:2 to sets (against del Potro).
Click to expand...
It's bs talking about bo3 when Nole leads all the categories. Slams never stopped being bo5 and Nole already is 4 ahead of fed there and the gap will continue.

What Nole has done in ATP finals and masters is better than what fed did. No ifs.
 
SonnyT said:
No, it isn't. Let's value the titles more by making it BO7.
Click to expand...
BO7, it was meant as a joke! Could you imagine '11 UO or '12 AO as BO7? We could've 2 players in coma!

The most exhausting matches have been Nadal vs Djokovic. Do you remember the most exhausting match involving Federer or someone else?
 
Europa1 said:
Perhaps the lack of BO5 Masters events are one of the reasons why Nextgens are not winning slams. How is BO3 a proper warm-up to BO5?
Click to expand...
Bingo!
But that didn't stop Alcaraz and, to a lesser extent, Sinner, from winning best-of-five-set tournaments and delivering the final blow to the players born in the 90s.
:cool:
 
Razer said:
I like this list because Safin is above Murray as he always should have been, that and there is good amount of difference between Murray and Becker too as per their level.
Click to expand...
What should have Murray done? Travel back in time to play more bo5 finals?

Murray is the 4th best player of a 24 years period from 2000 to 2023. He Is one of the greatest of his era, which is all that matters.

And Djokovic Is the greatest of his era despite he won a few less bo5 finals than Federer, because he leads them in all other stats.
 
junkieballer said:
What should have Murray done? Travel back in time to play more bo5 finals?

Murray is the 4th best player of a 24 years period from 2000 to 2023. He Is one of the greatest of his era, which is all that matters.

And Djokovic Is the greatest of his era despite he won a few less bo5 finals than Federer, because he leads them in all other stats.
Click to expand...

Murray is not the unanimous 4th best player from 00-23 for me.

Hewitt, Safin all have their own arguments.... Murray's peak on grass is below Roddick's, his peak on HCs is below Safin's, his peak on clay is below Soderling, Coria etc, so you cannot be a 4th in my book based on accumulated stats, I give more importance to great performance, this is not a stats accumulating contest
 
junkieballer said:
What should have Murray done? Travel back in time to play more bo5 finals?

Murray is the 4th best player of a 24 years period from 2000 to 2023. He Is one of the greatest of his era, which is all that matters.

And Djokovic Is the greatest of his era despite he won a few less bo5 finals than Federer, because he leads them in all other stats.
Click to expand...
it is BS stats. not the same chances for all players.
 
Razer said:
Murray is not the unanimous 4th best player from 00-23 for me.

Hewitt, Safin all have their own arguments.... Murray's peak on grass is below Roddick's, his peak on HCs is below Safin's, his peak on clay is below Soderling, Coria etc, so you cannot be a 4th in my book based on accumulated stats, I give more importance to great performance, this is not a stats accumulating contest
Click to expand...
Hewitt has double the amounts of weeks at No.1 than Murray, double the amount of YECs and double the amount of YE1. Unanimous stretches it tbh.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
Hewitt has double the amounts of weeks at No.1 than Murray, double the amount of YECs and double the amount of YE1. Unanimous stretches it tbh.
Click to expand...

True, it is not unanimous with Murray.

Hewitt (youngest number 1 in his time and for 2 decades he was that) and Murray both have arguments to be 4th and by pure ability it was Safin (he too was youngest world number 1 of his era) who could play close to Big 3 than anyone else. It is between these 3 and depends on what we value in the end.
 
Razer said:
Murray is not the unanimous 4th best player from 00-23 for me.

Hewitt, Safin all have their own arguments.... Murray's peak on grass is below Roddick's, his peak on HCs is below Safin's, his peak on clay is below Soderling, Coria etc, so you cannot be a 4th in my book based on accumulated stats, I give more importance to great performance, this is not a stats accumulating contest
Click to expand...
of course muzza is the best and the 4th greatest in 00-23 period and it is not even close call! and he did it in the best and strongest era ever! his peak was worth 12560 points + OG (not gain any points in 2016)! it is worth 12965 current points + OG!

raz is now on 13550 points (without OG) for compare! roddick (4535 in 03), hewitt (4485 and 4365 in 02-01), safin (4120 in 00) was probable never close to those points (converted to todays or 2016 system, their numbers would be around 8000 points without OG)!
 
Last edited:
GoatNo1 said:
of course muzza is the best and the 4th greatest in 00-23 period and it is not even close call! and he did it in the best and strongest era ever! his peak was worth 12560 points + OG (not gain any points in 2016)! it is worth 12965 current points + OG!

raz is now on 13550 points (without OG) for compare! roddick, hewitt, safin was probable never close to those points (converted to todays or 2016 system)!
Click to expand...

Nobody cares about these useless points.
Murray remains a Hewitt level player with less weeks at 1 and more year end titles, just 1 extra slam which is no big deal.
 
Razer said:
Nobody cares about these useless points.
Murray remains a Hewitt level player with less weeks at 1 and more year end titles, just 1 extra slam which is no big deal.
Click to expand...
one less YE#1 (1-2) and WTF (1-2) and 39 less weeks (41-80)
(*218 points)

but
1 more slam (3-2)
7 more slam finals (11-4)
2 more OG (2-0)
12 more masters (14-2)
14 more big titles (20-6)
16 more overall titles (46-30)
(*420 points)

pretty big deal (202 points)!!!

*
slam, YE#1 and 50 weeks = 100 points
slam F = 15 points
WTF, OG = 40 points
masters = 20 points
MM = 5 points

you see

i am very consistent and go always with the same stat and values does not matter players i compare. while you are driving your own agenda and change whole the time "important criteria" and its value! you are charry picking stats driving your own agenda.

when you compare rafa and nole it is only slams that matter and they are very close but when you compare muzza nd hewitt so WTF, YE#1 ans weeks at #1 have much more importance than slam difference! what about YE#1, weeks at #1 and WTF when you compare nole and rafa, or nole and fed????
 
Last edited:
Razer said:
Murray is not the unanimous 4th best player from 00-23 for me.

Hewitt, Safin all have their own arguments.... Murray's peak on grass is below Roddick's, his peak on HCs is below Safin's, his peak on clay is below Soderling, Coria etc, so you cannot be a 4th in my book based on accumulated stats, I give more importance to great performance, this is not a stats accumulating contest
Click to expand...
Murray is much better than those players.

Weeks in the top5:

Murray 429
Roddick 208
Hewitt 184
Safin 141
Coria 75
Soderling 49
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
Hewitt has double the amounts of weeks at No.1 than Murray, double the amount of YECs and double the amount of YE1. Unanimous stretches it tbh.
Click to expand...
Murray has many more Slam titles, Slam finals, slam semifinals, Slam quarterfinals, Slam R16, big titles, big finals, big semifinals, big quarterfinals, big r16...

Hewitt leads Murray in a couple of stats, Murray leads Hewitt in a thousand stats.

In the Wikipedia page of records Murray is mentioned 51 times, Hewitt 8 times:

Open Era tennis records – Men's singles - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

money_ball
Open era rankings by titles won per surface
2 3
Replies
118
Views
11K
nolefam_2024
N
JennyS
Number of different players who have won each Slam during the Open era
Replies
5
Views
1K
T10s747
T10s747
duaneeo
Big-3's Top-5 Five-Year Spans
2
Replies
76
Views
4K
TearTheRoofOff
TearTheRoofOff
Lew II
Positive h2h at 10/5+ matches
Replies
48
Views
3K
Deleted member 763691
D
Lew II
Different GOAT rankings combined
Replies
16
Views
1K
Tennis_Hands
T
Back
Top