Open era rankings by titles won per surface

[True Fanerer]

The original (non-edited) methodology in your first post was correct. It followed Olympic Standard tie rules, as I've pointed out. Bowing to pressure from the Federer Mafia to change it so Nadal drops a few places in some categories is frankly pathetic. And spineless.

It's not "more accurate". It's just more suitable to Federistas, and shows how easily statistics can be manipulated. A tie formula used by the Olympics isn't good enough now, if Federer fans don't like the results.

No wonder this place is called Federer Warehouse.

Now that OP has fixed up a new rankings list for each surface and your Olympic medal crap has been proven wrong, let me make it simple. OP list shows:
Federer - 1, 1, & 26th ranked
Nadal - 1, 14, & 20th ranked

26+1+1=28, 28÷3= 9.dadadada
1+14+20=35, 35÷3= 11.dadadada

Adv. Federer

 

[tennisaddict]

Errr...There have been situations where there has been a tie for first place at the Olympics. Two athletes get a Gold Medal. The next placed finisher is considered 2nd, and awarded the Silver Medal. And whomever came 4th gets a bronze medal (so officially considered 3rd). They don't skip over Silver and award the 3rd place finisher a Bronze Medal. The guy who comes after the tie is considered 2nd place.

But whatever methodology works to keep Nadal from looking too good works just as well I guess. LOL!

Comprehend that, compadre. Sorry to burst your bubble.

LMAO..Rankings are completely different.

I will give you two examples. First, take ATP tennis rankings...2 players on same points, the next player in points is 2 ranks down.

In a classroom, if there are 20 kids to take a test and 19 kids get 100% and the last kid gets 98% that kid is ranked 20 and not 2.

This is the reason I keep telling VB is always intelligence challenged.

 

[Druss]

Whatever happened to carpet? Shame it’s been eradicated :/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Spencer Gore]

Federer's inability to conquer clay-eventually having to run away from even playing on it, one of the founding surfaces -is a severe black mark against his claim to all-time greatness.

 

[True Fanerer]

Federer's inability to conquer clay-eventually having to run away from even playing on it, one of the founding surfaces -is a severe black mark against his claim to all-time greatness.

 

[pame]

Federer's inability to conquer clay-eventually having to run away from even playing on it, one of the founding surfaces -is a severe black mark against his claim to all-time greatness.

Spencer Gore,unsurprisingly, singing the song the cow dead 'pon

 

[merlinpinpin]

Read my post about the Olympics again. I stand by their methodology. 4 guys tie for 1st place, they all win Gold, and the 5th place guy wins silver, so would be 2nd. You rarely get a situation with that many ties because things can be measured to 10ths of a second or millimetres, but that's how it would play out.

If it's a good enough tie methodology for the Olympics, one would hope it's good enough for the devoted fanbase of Roger Federer on TT Warehouse.

So that's not a comprehension issue, it's just that you actually just *can't* risk saying anything true because you're afraid you'll get thrown out of the higher echelons of VB, right?

pame has of course debunked your latest claim, and here is another example: https://www.olympic.org/news/an-olympic-first-as-maze-and-gisin-share-downhill-gold

Alpine skying downhill - women (2014). Guess which medal got Gut, who came in just 1/10th of a second behind Maze and Gisin, tied for first place?

 

[Wander]

Nadal will be in the top 10 Open era for Hard, Clay and Grass titles won. Probably the same for Djokovic.

Err, no he won't. Nadal needs to win 3 titles on grass to make the top 10 and he hasn't won a title on grass since 2010. How is he going to win 3 more in his 30s? I presume you meant top 20.

Edit: Oh, I forgot he won Stuttgart in 2015, but I still don't expect him to win multiple grass titles in the future.

 

[KG1965]

As I had said before, the ATP website is full of errors, and I'm not going to manually fix the data myself. Can you explain why the ATP website decided to list the Challenger tournament and the World Team tournament in the following pages that I scraped the data from?

• http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/scores/results-archive?year=1976
  
• http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/scores/results-archive?year=1985

I can't know why ATP site has committed the two errors.
What is certain is that:
- the final between Nastase and Connors to Nottingham stopped on 1-1 of the third set and never finished;
- World Team Cup was a team tournament (like Davis Cup) and USA won the final on Czechoslovakia: Lendl beats McEnroe, Connors beat Mecir, and Flach / Seguso won the decisive double ... 2-1.

 

[aditya123]

According to slams Fed is the goat, no doubt about it. According to Spencer's logic of uniformly dominating the 3 surfaces then am afraid to say that Goat is yet to be born: It all depends on how you look though

 

[MichaelNadal]

This makes interesting reading. Nadal, often criticised as a surface specialist, is in the top 10 Open era for Clay Titles and Grass titles won. And only 2 titles away from being in the top 10 for Hardcourt wins.

Djokovic is in the top 10 for Hardcourt and top 10 for Grass.He's 3 titles from getting in the top 10 for Clay.

Federer is in the top 10 for Hardcourt and top 10 for Grass. He's 6 titles away from making it in the top 10 for Clay.

Djokovic and Nadal are almost mirror images of each other. Extremely dominant on one surface (Hard for Djoker, Clay for Nadal), very strong on each others favorite surface, and dead even on grass as top 10 open era grass courters.

Federer is dominant on Hard and Grass, but will never get in the top 10 for clay (unless he decides to spend a season or two in South America to vulture some clay court titles).

Nadal is pretty much guaranteed to end up top 10 in all 3 relevant surfaces (Carpet is an obsolete surface for top guys today). Djokovic should end up there as well (though his form and Nadal's clay dominance, and Thiem's increasing danger on clay may make it harder than it seems). And Federer will only be top 10 for Hard and Grass.

There is an argument that Nadal is the most well rounded by surface, then Djokovic (who is as much a "specialist" as Nadal, just not quite as succesful), then Federer.

Slaydal does it again.

 

[merlinpinpin]

Slaydal does it again.

Fake news tactics in full flight again. Have one outlet spout nonsense, then ask others to validate it so that it now appears as truth.

In the real world, "Slaydal" will end up in the top 10 for clay only. Surprise, surprise...

 

[Deleted member 77403]

LOL at the recent posts.

 

[hann7]

This makes interesting reading. Nadal, often criticised as a surface specialist, is in the top 10 Open era for Clay Titles and Grass titles won. And only 2 titles away from being in the top 10 for Hardcourt wins.

Djokovic is in the top 10 for Hardcourt and top 10 for Grass.He's 3 titles from getting in the top 10 for Clay.

Federer is in the top 10 for Hardcourt and top 10 for Grass. He's 6 titles away from making it in the top 10 for Clay.

Djokovic and Nadal are almost mirror images of each other. Extremely dominant on one surface (Hard for Djoker, Clay for Nadal), very strong on each others favorite surface, and dead even on grass as top 10 open era grass courters.

Federer is dominant on Hard and Grass, but will never get in the top 10 for clay (unless he decides to spend a season or two in South America to vulture some clay court titles).

Nadal is pretty much guaranteed to end up top 10 in all 3 relevant surfaces (Carpet is an obsolete surface for top guys today). Djokovic should end up there as well (though his form and Nadal's clay dominance, and Thiem's increasing danger on clay may make it harder than it seems). And Federer will only be top 10 for Hard and Grass.

There is an argument that Nadal is the most well rounded by surface, then Djokovic (who is as much a "specialist" as Nadal, just not quite as succesful), then Federer.

Have you not just answered your own question? Federer and Djokovic are surface specialists they are not clay maestros. They are just so versatile that their DOMINANCE, particularly in federers case extends to multiple surfaces in a way Nadal simply isn’t and never will. Im pretty sure Nadal will finish his career without ever defending a non clay court title which is just awful when you think about it. Federer owning Wimbledon and US open 5 consecutive years in a row AT THE SAME TIME is a good example of completely dominating and owning two slams and surfaces not just being good or OK at other surfaces like Nadal is with a win here and there. And being great at the WTF and AO and YE no 1 at the same time as that US/WIMB record so its actually more than just owning two surfaces at the same time. Nadal can only dream of that. But they are surface specialists - grass for Federer. So you’ve answered you’re own question you’ve said Federer isn’t even top 10 on clay yet he has been nadals competition. Nadal has had no one on clay as competition. Clay court specialist don’t exist apart from Nadal. Theim is the only one you could name. Nadal has capitalised on vulturing the one surface and slam with the least prestige, competition and money. Theres nothing wrong with Nadal being a one surface guy. He has had his moments outside too so he isn’t completely one surface only but he HAS NEVER DEFENDED anything off clay. EVER.


So you’ve answered your own question really, Nadal has had no competition on clay and faced guys like Federer. He’s vultured his little weak era from the scraps people fight for on clay. Theim has popped up as the only clay court specialist Nadal will ever face but he’s too young now so not Nadals problem. Also looking at at the data it looks like fed is the only guy ever to have 10 titles per surface?? Is that right? Cos if it is that is pretty amazing and considering he is no 2 all time of titles won and his total is comprised of most slams of all time, most Wimbledon’s, most US opens, 2nd most AO of all time etc.


Federer isn’t a slouch on clay or any surface but he isn’t GOAT competition for Nadal in clay who has only had weak competition on clay. Infact fed is by a country mile the most consistent player on all surfaces. He’s got the most titles per surface combo than anyone. Novak has his NGS too which is unique and Nadal hasn’t got either. Nadal has never defended anything off clay ever so hasn’t even come close to the concept of even being consistent let alone dominant. You could actually say Federer has been dominant on clay as he got to every single final pretty much for four years so he was easily second best clay courter. he just wasn’t the most dominant and couldn’t break Nadal who fair enough has a stranglehold on the dirt. And until Nadal manages to actually win something indoors as I don’t think he even has anything indoors he will never be an all surface player in the way Federer and Djokovic are


Also looking at the data. Nadal is only slightly ahead on clay and not dominant in anything else just good. Fed is firstly number 2 of all titles all time has a shot to get to no 1 and is clearly number 1 on two different surfaces not just a little ahead on clay like Nadal is. Also Hewitt and Roddick are top 10 on hard court of all time on this list. I thought Nadal lovers like to bang on about how weak those guys were as competition?? Fed isn’t even top 10 on clay on this list and he is basically the best competition Nadal has had. Nadal has been a Weak clay competition champion this data is showing then you’re saying??

 

[hann7]

Don't matter. If Fed were in the top 10 for clay and there were several players above him in a tied position, I wouldn't hold that against him. It's not his problem. Being in the top 10 is what matters, even if there are a bunch of ties that mean more than 10 players are in it.

I'd simply give Fed credit for being in the top 10. Which unfortunately, I'll never be able to do.

I thought it was slams that matter? Nadal would only be top 10 at RG nowhere else

If you’re saying slams aren’t everything then that’s fine but that means In terms of clay titles he may be no1 but barely according to that list. Federer is dominant number 1 on HC and grass. Wonder what he would be indoors despite far less tournaments these days. He might still be no 1??

 

[hann7]

There is an argument that Nadal is the most well rounded by surface, then Djokovic (who is as much a "specialist" as Nadal, just not quite as succesful), then Federer.

Nadal has never dominated anything bar clay. But forget domination he hasn't even reached the level of consistency as he has never defended ANYTHING ever off clay. Off clay he has a big win here and there and a lot of weak wins and countless losses to nobodies.

Djokovic and fed have dominated multiple surfaces/conditions at the same time. Both have defended tournaments on every single surface. Djokivic won 4 in a row. They are definitely not limited to one surface.

As for the other point I’m not sure what you mean. Nadal has also never beaten Djokovic at the AO and only has one title. He is in the exact same scenario as fed is in for the FO expect its worse for Nadal as had loads of people he could have beaten instead of AO GOAT/ATG Djokovic unlike Fed who had to constantly face the one player that he had a matchup problem against. Nadal could have beaten a grandad this year, a never before slam finalisit wawrinka etc. Also there are many tournaments that Nadal hasn’t beaten people on. Nadal hasn’t even beat ferrer on a hard court slam. Nadal has only beaten mueller once on grass. Nadal has had a big win in non clay tournaments here or there but he has never been dominant anywhere bar clay. There is absolutely no way to spin this as well. He has never defended a non clay tournament. He hasn’t even reached the level of consistent let alone dominant. He’s a million miles away from dominant. Federer on the other hand has repeatedly dominated multiple surfaces and at the SAME TIME. 5 US and 5 WIMB consecutively is far more impressive then la decima. Fed had a complete stranglehold at 2 slams for 5 years. But not just that he had a stranglehold on no1 and was exceptional at AO and WTF and even RG for this entire period. Nadal is a million miles a away from that. He isn’t even in the same universe of achieving that.

 

[hoodjem]

This makes interesting reading. Nadal, often criticised as a surface specialist, is in the top 10 Open era for Clay Titles and Grass titles won. And only 2 titles away from being in the top 10 for Hardcourt wins.

As of 2023, Nadal is now at 25 hard-court titles.

 

[aldeayeah]

For anyone interested in more updated data:

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Titles

Most Titles at Ultimate Tennis Statistics

ultimatetennisstatistics.com

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Clay Titles

Most Clay Titles at Ultimate Tennis Statistics

ultimatetennisstatistics.com

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Hard Titles

Most Hard Titles at Ultimate Tennis Statistics

ultimatetennisstatistics.com

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Grass Titles

Most Grass Titles at Ultimate Tennis Statistics

ultimatetennisstatistics.com

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Carpet Titles

Most Carpet Titles at Ultimate Tennis Statistics

ultimatetennisstatistics.com

 

[nolefam_2024]

For anyone interested in more updated data:

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Titles

Most Titles at Ultimate Tennis Statistics

ultimatetennisstatistics.com

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Clay Titles

Most Clay Titles at Ultimate Tennis Statistics

ultimatetennisstatistics.com

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Hard Titles

Most Hard Titles at Ultimate Tennis Statistics

ultimatetennisstatistics.com

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Grass Titles

Most Grass Titles at Ultimate Tennis Statistics

ultimatetennisstatistics.com

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Carpet Titles

Most Carpet Titles at Ultimate Tennis Statistics

ultimatetennisstatistics.com

Novak is in top 10 in all existing surfaces. Going to be top on hard courts very soon ( pandemic stopped him).