Rolling 30 match win% vs. top 10 - for ATGs

falstaff78

Hall of Fame
Sharing these charts for no particular reason other than I made them. (To settle a debate off-forum.)

The first chart shows, for Fed, Nadal & Djokovic, their rolling 30 match win percentage vs. top-10 players. The x-axis measures years since first match vs. a top 10 player - Federer in 1998, Djokovic 2005 & Nadal 2003.

Two things are clear from this chart.

1. Federer had a 3.5 yr stretch where he was above 80%. Djokovic has managed this for the last 2 years. Nadal just about broke through 80% in 2013.

2. Federer's peak ended ages ago.




The next chart shows the same lines but for Murray, alongside all 4 guys with 6-7 majors in the open era. (Becker 6, Edberg 6, McEnroe 7, Wilander 7). You can see Murray holds up well against Edberg & Wilander, but not so much against Becker and McEnroe.



Enjoy. Discuss.
 
Last edited:

TripleATeam

Legend
Tennis is highly competitive sport, if someone is able to beat the very best players in the world and win a Slam .. he is in some kind of peak form.
His peak, not peak of the sport. I agree that Fed's peak ended years ago. Fed is still in fighting shape, but his prime also ended quite some time ago.

It's just that Fed is so good that on a good day long after his prime, it is still enough to win a slam.
 
Last edited:

Boom-Boom

Hall of Fame
I am sharing these charts for no particular reason other than I made them. (To settle a debate about Federer's peak, with some off-forum friends.)

The first chart shows, for Fed, Nadal & Djokovic, their rolling 30 match win percentage vs. top 10 players. The x-axis measures years since first match vs. a top 10 player - Federer in 1998, Djokovic 2005 & Nadal 2003.

Two things are clear from this chart.

1. Federer had a 3.5 yr stretch where he was above 80%. That is, he always had >24 wins in his previous 30 matches vs. top 10 players. Djokovic has managed this for the last 2 years. Nadal just about broke through 80% in 2013.

2. Federer's peak ended ages ago. (Can't believe this still needs to be clarified.)




The next chart shows the same lines but for Murray, alongside all 4 guys with 6-7 majors in the open era. (Becker 6, Edberg 6, McEnroe 7, Wilander 7). You can see Murray holds up well against Edberg & Wilander, but not so much against Becker and McEnroe.



Enjoy. Discuss.
good stuff

shows how well Becker did against top 10 (think he has the fourth overall % win against top 10 behind Borg/Djoko/Fedr) ..and how he was much better than Edberg
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
Becker was obviously the biggest victim of a strong era, only 12 weeks at #1.
Or he was not as dedicated to tennis as others. Becker was known for being a bit of a playboy in his prime. He obviously made the decision that obsessiveness about tennis was not in the cards for him after he became #1.
 
Becker was obviously the biggest victim of a strong era, only 12 weeks at #1.
Some say that OBEray is a weak mug of a No.1 because he lost in his first major as the #1 to unhearlded M.Zverev in thr fourth round. However, Becker got pasted in his first and only major as the #1 (1991 USO) by Paul Haarhuis in the third round, 6-3 6-4 6-2. So maybe BBecker, for all his accolades, wasn't really consistently good enough day in, day out to spend more time as #1, hmm?
 
Top