Proof that Fed is far more versatile than Rafa and Djoker

[Phoenix1983]

Looking at the results of the true greats of the Open Era (those who have won 6+ slams), we can see how versatile players were, by how much they depended on a particular slam to boost their total. Obviously, those players who only really excelled at a certain venue would rack up a high percentage of their slams at that place, whereas the more balanced champions would gain reasonable percentages elsewhere.

Here are the greats, ranked from most to least versatile:

Name...............................% of slams won at best slam

Stefan Edberg...................33 (2/6 at AO, USO and W)
Ivan Lendl........................38 (3/8 at FO and USO)
Roger Federer...................41 (7/17 at W)
Mats Wilander...................43 (3/7 at AO and FO)
Pete Sampras....................50 (7/14 at W)
Andre Agassi.....................50 (4/8 at AO)
Boris Becker......................50 (3/6 at W)
Bjorn Borg..........................55 (6/11 at FO)
John McEnroe......................57 (4/7 at USO)
Jimmy Connors....................63 (5/8 at USO)
Rafael Nadal........................67 (8/12 at FO)
Novak Djokovic....................67 (4/6 at AO)

A few points to note:

1. On average, it seems that the greats win around 50% of their slams at their favourite venue.

2. Nadal and Djokovic are the Open Era greats who depend most for their success at a particular slam.

3. Federer has the 3rd most balanced resume - and, if we consider that Edberg never won the FO, and Lendl never won W, we could claim that Federer has a more balanced resume than either of them as well, since he won on all surfaces.

4. The list underestimates certain people, particularly Jimmy Connors, who despite winning 5/8 slams at the USO, did win on three different surfaces there (clay, hard, grass). McEnroe and Borg's versatility is also underrated, as they hardly played the AO, so had little chance to win there (but may well have done).

 

[6-3 6-0]

Please! We don't need a thread for something we already know
I know you're doing this to counter the threads that a few RNadal fans make on a daily basis (One got deleted yesterday LOL), but that's only because they like to troll

Those few fanboys are just insecure of their boy's legacy that they work all day and night to bring other players down (especially RFederer).

 

[Jeffrey573639]

That's pretty interesting stat so well done OP, although I do agree with FSK that we don't need any thread to know how versatile Fed is

 

[6-3 6-0]

That's pretty interesting stat so well done OP, although I do agree with FSK that we don't need any thread to know how versatile Fed is

FSK? :shock:
I am no multi account which is why I am unbanned till now. If you wish to report me as a multi account of some previous user, then please feel free to do so

 

[wangs78]

You should run the same analysis but based on GS finals, not titles. Fed would be uber balanced in that case

 

[tudwell]

Federer is tied for the Open Era record at three of the four slams. No other modern player has that kind of versatility.

 

[Antonio Puente]

You should run the same analysis but based on GS finals, not titles. Fed would be uber balanced in that case

No, it's better not to bring the 8 losses to Nadal into the discussion. Then, you're back to the start. A thread like this is trying to make you forget of such things.

 

[Phoenix1983]

No, it's better not to bring the 8 losses to Nadal into the discussion. Then, you're back to the start. A thread like this is trying to make you forget of such things.

Actually, the thread is showing that, take away any of the slams, and Fed would still have a great career.

Take away the FO for Nadal, or the AO for Djokovic, and they are in trouble.

 

[FrontHeadlock]

This does not address the correlative effects of being great on hardcourts (AO and USO) or being great on fast courts (W and USO).

 

[RoddickAce]

FSK? :shock:
I am no multi account which is why I am unbanned till now. If you wish to report me as a multi account of some previous user, then please feel free to do so

I think that poster is referring you to as Federer Slam King in jest since people suspect 6-1, 6-3, 6-0 to be Nadal Slam King, and you are countering him/her.

But there actually was a Federer Slam King poster that got banned LOL

 

[Moose Malloy]

Stefan Edberg...................33 (2/6 at AO, USO and W)
Ivan Lendl........................38 (3/8 at FO and USO)
Roger Federer...................41 (7/17 at W)
Mats Wilander...................43 (3/7 at AO and FO)
Pete Sampras....................50 (7/14 at W)
Andre Agassi.....................50 (4/8 at AO)
Boris Becker......................50 (3/6 at W)
Bjorn Borg..........................55 (6/11 at FO)
John McEnroe......................57 (4/7 at USO)
Jimmy Connors....................63 (5/8 at USO)
Rafael Nadal........................67 (8/12 at FO)
Novak Djokovic....................67 (4/6 at AO)

so if Nadal had only 2 French Opens, along with 2 Wimbledons, 1 USO, & 1 Australian, he would be more versatile according to your stats.

 

[tudwell]

This does not address the correlative effects of being great on hardcourts (AO and USO) or being great on fast courts (W and USO).

By surface:
Wilander - 3 clay, 2 hard court, 2 grass (43% on strongest surface)
Becker - 3 grass, 3 hard court , 0 clay(50%)
Connors - 4 grass, 3 hard court, 1 clay (50%)
Sampras - 7 grass, 7 hard court, 0 clay (50%)
Federer - 9 hard court, 7 grass, 1 clay (53%)
Borg - 6 clay, 5 grass, 0 hard court (55%)
McEnroe - 4 hard court, 3 grass, 0 caly (57%)
Lendl - 5 hard court, 3 clay, 0 grass (63%)
Nadal - 8 clay, 2 grass, 2 hard court (67%)
Edberg - 4 grass, 2 hard court, 0 clay (67%)
Agassi - 6 hard court, 1 grass, 1 clay (75%)
Djokovic - 5 hard court, 1 grass, 0 clay (83%)

By court speed:
Borg - 6 slow court, 5 fast court (55% on best court speed)
Wilander - 4 slow court, 3 fast court (57%)
Agassi - 5 slow court, 3 fast court (63%)
Lendl - 5 slow court, 3 fast court (63%)
Djokovic - 4 slow court, 2 fast court (67%)
Becker - 4 fast court, 2 slow court (67%)
Federer - 12 fast court, 5 slow court (71%)
Nadal - 9 slow court, 3 fast court (75%)
Sampras - 12 fast court, 2 slow court (85%)
Connors - 7 fast court, 1 slow court (88%)
Edberg - 6 fast court, 0 slow court (100%)
McEnroe - 7 fast court, 0 slow court (100%)

 

[forzamilan90]

What's this? A thread that actually makes sense and is not made by a troll? Hallelujah!! This fine forum shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes and return to normalcy...ahem, project XVII at this US Open!

 

[FEDERERNADAL13]

What's this? A thread that actually makes sense and is not made by a troll? Hallelujah!! This fine forum shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes and return to normalcy...ahem, project XVII at this US Open!

You mean Project XVIII

But I agree with the rest!

Fed vs Grigor USO final!!! The winner: Tennis!

 

[1477aces]

By surface:
Wilander - 3 clay, 2 hard court, 2 grass (43% on strongest surface)
Becker - 3 grass, 3 hard court , 0 clay(50%)
Connors - 4 grass, 3 hard court, 1 clay (50%)
Sampras - 7 grass, 7 hard court, 0 clay (50%)
Federer - 9 hard court, 7 grass, 1 clay (53%)
Borg - 6 clay, 5 grass, 0 hard court (55%)
McEnroe - 4 hard court, 3 grass, 0 caly (57%)
Lendl - 5 hard court, 3 clay, 0 grass (63%)
Nadal - 8 clay, 2 grass, 2 hard court (67%)
Edberg - 4 grass, 2 hard court, 0 clay (67%)
Agassi - 6 hard court, 1 grass, 1 clay (75%)
Djokovic - 5 hard court, 1 grass, 0 clay (83%)

By court speed:
Borg - 6 slow court, 5 fast court (55% on best court speed)
Wilander - 4 slow court, 3 fast court (57%)
Agassi - 5 slow court, 3 fast court (63%)
Lendl - 5 slow court, 3 fast court (63%)
Djokovic - 4 slow court, 2 fast court (67%)
Becker - 4 fast court, 2 slow court (67%)
Federer - 12 fast court, 5 slow court (71%)
Nadal - 9 slow court, 3 fast court (75%)
Sampras - 12 fast court, 2 slow court (85%)
Connors - 7 fast court, 1 slow court (88%)
Edberg - 6 fast court, 0 slow court (100%)
McEnroe - 7 fast court, 0 slow court (100%)

can't just go by surface. Nowadays there are 2 slams on HC, so its expected that you win most of your slams or at least half on hard court. Federer: 7 slams per grass
4.5 per hardcourt
1 slam per clay court
5.5 slams if you disregard grass
nadal: 1 slam per hard court 2 slams per grass major. 8 slams per clay court major. Get rid of clay courts: 3 slams.

 

[veroniquem]

Rafa is the only player who 's won slams on 3 different surfaces the same year and only 1 of 2 to have won more than 1 slam on every surface. He's shown great versatility during his career (except maybe indoor). He also has the career slam which only he, Agassi and Fed have on clay, hard and grass.

 

[tudwell]

can't just go by surface. Nowadays there are 2 slams on HC, so its expected that you win most of your slams or at least half on hard court. Federer: 7 slams per grass
4.5 per hardcourt
1 slam per clay court
5.5 slams if you disregard grass
nadal: 1 slam per hard court 2 slams per grass major. 8 slams per clay court major. Get rid of clay courts: 3 slams.

I don't really understand what you're saying here, but I agree the surface list doesn't say much. Federer's at 53% below Sampras, for example, yet has won on all three surfaces.

What I find interesting about the second list is that's split almost exactly into slow-court players at the top and fast-court players at the bottom. It looks like players who excel on slow courts tend to be more diverse (by the very simplistic binary measure of fast vs. slow courts) than fast court players.

 

[Phoenix1983]

so if Nadal had only 2 French Opens, along with 2 Wimbledons, 1 USO, & 1 Australian, he would be more versatile according to your stats.

Yes, because he would have achieved roughly comparable success on all surfaces. At the moment his clay dominance skews all stats regarding him.

 

[tudwell]

so if Nadal had only 2 French Opens, along with 2 Wimbledons, 1 USO, & 1 Australian, he would be more versatile according to your stats.

Yeah, I agree. That's a simplistic way of looking at it. But there's no doubt there have been players with more diverse records than Nadal. Federer holding Open Era records at three of the four slams, for instance. Or Borg dominating two different slam surfaces when they were still worlds apart (although admittedly he never succeeded on hard courts like Nadal did). Or Lendl dominating clay, hard courts, and carpet. Or Laver, obviously.

 

[Russeljones]

so if Nadal had only 2 French Opens, along with 2 Wimbledons, 1 USO, & 1 Australian, he would be more versatile according to your stats.

According to common sense. According to the stats he is weaker on other surfaces, hence the use of the word 'balance'.

 

[Zildite]

Well would you rather be versatile or successful. Almost everyone on that list has more slams than Edberg (6 is the minimum used, sure).

 

[Phoenix1983]

Well would you rather be versatile or successful. Almost everyone on that list has more slams than Edberg (6 is the minimum used, sure).

Edberg, despite his (relatively) low ranking on the GOAT list compared to Nadal, still managed to do something Nadal has not: win three different slams on multiple occasions.

I'm not denying Nadal's greatness with these stats, just showing that he has, unlike most other greats, only dominated one surface. It's because he dominated that surface to an unprecedented degree that his numbers are so high. The same could end up being true of Djokovic if he keeps on racking up AO titles but nothing else.

 

[Moose Malloy]

Edberg, despite his (relatively) low ranking on the GOAT list compared to Nadal, still managed to do something Nadal has not: win three different slams on multiple occasions.

Edberg won slams on only 2 surfaces, Nadal won on 3.

These are the only players to win slams on 3 surfaces:
Connors
Wilander
Agassi
Federer
Nadal

These are the only players to make the finals of all 4 slams(open era) at least twice:

Federer
Nadal
Lendl
Agassi
Rosewall

I think Nadal is a bit more versatile than you think. He came very close to being the only Open Era player to win every major twice(lost US & AO finals to Djokovic)

 

[Magnetite]

I found Fed's versatility to be showcased best on the blue clay at madrid.

He really adjusted his game to meet the demands of a slippery new surface.

His footwork was sublime, and he adjusted his strategy to wrong his opponents more often than on other surfaces.

And the fact that he has excelled at every slam (5 FO finals too).

 

[FrontHeadlock]

And the fact that he has excelled at every slam (5 FO finals too).

To me, the fact that Fed has played in 5 FO finals really makes his case as the best and most versatile.

 

[Phoenix1983]

To me, the fact that Fed has played in 5 FO finals really makes his case as the best and most versatile.

Yes, only Nadal and Borg have played in more FO finals than Fed. :shock:

 

[6-3 6-0]

Just for my knowledge, how many clay tournament finals has he made? Thanks!