Seasons with most wins over top-10s

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 757377
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
Seasons with most wins over top-10s:


1)
2015 Djokovic 31






2)
1984 McEnroe 24
2012 Djokovic 24
2013 Djokovic 24
2013 Nadal 24



6)
1985 Lendl 21
2011 Djokovic 21
2016 Djokovic 21


9)
1980 Borg 19
2006 Federer 19
2014 Djokovic 19


Discuss.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tumblr_nd8yw7JTLW1qjnvkbo1_500.gif
 
I have few data for Borg, I checked only 1980. Tell me if he went up 19 wins in a season.
 
Lew said:
Seasons with most wins over top-10s:


1)
2015 Djokovic 31






2)
1984 McEnroe 24
2012 Djokovic 24
2013 Djokovic 24
2013 Nadal 24



3)
1985 Lendl 21
2011 Djokovic 21
2016 Djokovic 21


4)
1980 Borg 19
2006 Federer 19
2014 Djokovic 19


Discuss.
Click to expand...

This is impressive. Can you do wins vs losses and do rankings based on the difference.
 
Mandatory masters, adding byes and no BO5 finals helps this stat. This is basically an era geared towards forcing consistency and meetings between the top players.

Not to mention the slow plod of the next gen and dire lost gen.

Djokovic's numbers are definitely impressive but check out the top 10 wins in slams and you'll see he's mostly level with Federer who missed several masters each season from 04-06 - which lowers his overall meetings.
 
Last edited:
Lew said:
Seasons with most wins over top-10s:


1)
2015 Djokovic 31






2)
1984 McEnroe 24
2012 Djokovic 24
2013 Djokovic 24
2013 Nadal 24



6)
1985 Lendl 21
2011 Djokovic 21
2016 Djokovic 21


9)
1980 Borg 19
2006 Federer 19
2014 Djokovic 19


Discuss.
Click to expand...
DjokoGoat
 
CYGS said:
It means not all slams are equal. Some had it tougher while others not so much.
Click to expand...

Top 10 wins in slams won.

Federer 2003: 1
Federer 2004: 4
Federer 2005: 4
Federer 2006: 4
Federer 2007: 7
Federer 2008: 2
Federer 2009: 3
Federer 2010: 3
Federer 2012: 2
Federer 2017: 6
Federer 2018: 1

Total: 37
Per slam: 1.85

Djokovic 2008: 2
Djokovic 2011: 6
Djokovic 2012: 3
Djokovic 2013: 3
Djokovic 2014: 1
Djokovic 2015: 7
Djokovic 2016: 5
Djokovic 2018: 3

Total: 30
Per Slam: 2.14

Not a huge difference, Djokovic faced a third of a top 10 player more per slam and like always this does't say anything about how anyone actually played on the day.
 
Does this tell us that the depth of the field is so crappy that noone outside top10 can challenge the top players, OR that the top10 is so good that they always go deep?

Players outside top10 going deep could actually be a sign of a field with depth;)
 
Last edited:
I more or less knew most of Djokovic and Nadal's numbers so the one I'm most impressed with McEnroe 1984. What a GOAT season that was and considering he missed a Slam makes it even more impressive.
 
NatF said:
Top 10 wins in slams won.

Federer 2003: 1
Federer 2004: 4
Federer 2005: 4
Federer 2006: 4
Federer 2007: 7
Federer 2008: 2
Federer 2009: 3
Federer 2010: 3
Federer 2012: 2
Federer 2017: 6
Federer 2018: 1

Total: 37
Per slam: 1.85

Djokovic 2008: 2
Djokovic 2011: 6
Djokovic 2012: 3
Djokovic 2013: 3
Djokovic 2014: 1
Djokovic 2015: 7
Djokovic 2016: 5
Djokovic 2018: 3

Total: 30
Per Slam: 2.14

Not a huge difference, Djokovic faced a third of a top 10 player more per slam and like always this does't say anything about how anyone actually played on the day.
Click to expand...


wins over top-3 in slams won:

federer 8
djokovic 14

Per Slam:

federer 0.4
djokovic 1

:D
 
NatF said:
Mandatory masters, adding byes and no BO5 finals helps this stat. This is basically an era geared towards forcing consistency and meetings between the top players.

Not to mention the slow plod of the next gen and dire lost gen.

Djokovic's numbers are definitely impressive but check out the top 10 wins in slams and you'll see he's mostly level with Federer who missed several masters each season from 04-06 - which lowers his overall meetings.
Click to expand...

Actually the reason why Djokovic's numbers are so impressive is because he is the one who chases the least after smaller tournaments. He only goes for the big fish so to speak. Bigger tournaments = more chance to run into top players. He has only played 28 500 tournaments and 31 250s in his career. Compared to Nadal at 42 500 level tournaments, 48 250s and Federer at 45 500s and 75 250s, he is far behind them in this stat but on par to have a significant lead in top 10 wins by the end of his career. It's not because his era is more Masters driven. It's because he only cares about Masters level and up.

Top 10 wins overall
Federer - 214-111 - 65.8% - 1424 matches
Djokovic - 188-89 - 67.9% - 996 matches
Nadal - 162-85 - 65.6% - 1107 matches
 
NoleFam said:
Actually the reason why Djokovic's numbers are so impressive is because he is the one who chases the least after smaller tournaments. He only goes for the big fish so to speak. Bigger tournaments = more chance to run into top players. He has only played 28 500 tournaments and 31 250s in his career. Compared to Nadal at 42 500 level tournaments, 48 250s and Federer at 45 500s and 75 250s, he is far behind them in this stat and on par to have a significant lead in top 10 wins by the end of his career. It's not because his era is more Masters driven. It's because he only cares about Masters level and up.

Top 10 wins overall
Federer - 214-111 - 65.8% - 1424 matches
Djokovic - 188-89 - 67.9% - 996 matches
Nadal - 162-85 - 65.6% - 1107 matches
Click to expand...
Tell about RAFA, why does he have less top 10 wins than Fed and Djoko?
 
NoleFam said:
Actually the reason why Djokovic's numbers are so impressive is because he is the one who chases the least after smaller tournaments. He only goes for the big fish so to speak. Bigger tournaments = more chance to run into top players. He has only played 28 500 tournaments and 31 250s in his career. Compared to Nadal at 42 500 level tournaments, 48 250s and Federer at 45 500s and 75 250s, he is far behind them in this stat and on par to have a significant lead in top 10 wins by the end of his career. It's not because his era is more Masters driven. It's because he only cares about Masters level and up.

Top 10 wins overall
Federer - 214-111 - 65.8% - 1424 matches
Djokovic - 188-89 - 67.9% - 996 matches
Nadal - 162-85 - 65.6% - 1107 matches
Click to expand...

Non of what you said contradicts what I said though.

Lew said:
wins over top-3 in slams won:

federer 8
djokovic 14

Per Slam:

federer 0.4
djokovic 1

:D
Click to expand...

Always moving the goalposts?

Arbitrary to pick top 3 as the top 3 are not always playing the best tennis. Likewise with the top 10.
 
CYGS said:
It means not all slams are equal. Some had it tougher while others not so much.
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree. Nole had to beat 6 years old past his prime Fed who had no baseline weapons, and his pigeon Murray who rolled over in any slam match after 2013 following surgery.

At least Fed faced contemporaries who were his generation rivals.
 
NatF said:
Non of what you said contradicts what I said though.
Click to expand...

It actually does. Federer skipped 7 Masters tournaments alone in 2004 and 2005 yet played 10 500 and 250 level tournaments. This is why his count is lower in those years compared to Djokovic's. Djokovic would never play so many smaller tournaments no matter what type of era it was.
 
Since beating 20-30 top10 per season it has become normal, let's see the records in 2017 and 2018:

2017
federer 14

2018
nadal 10
 
NoleFam said:
It actually does. Federer skipped 7 Masters tournaments alone in 2004 and 2005 yet played 10 500 and 250 level tournaments. This is why his count is lower in those years compared to Djokovic's. Djokovic would never play so many smaller tournaments no matter what type of era it was.
Click to expand...
Yeah but he skipped both Paris masters in 04-05 due to injury and also Madrid in 05 for the same reason. Having Basel in close proximity to those events doesn’t help either.

Also if masters were BO3, he would’ve played and been favourite for Hamburg in 2006.
 
The much more homogenized surfaces today allow the top 10 to go much deeper in tournaments these days. The higher number of top-10 opponents has increased due to the increase in racket technology and the slowing down of the surfaces. I.e, far fewer upsets happen nowadays. In the past, a bomb-server could upset a better player much more easily than today.

If tennis made all of the surfaces clay, then the top 10 clay players would make the quarterfinals nearly every time. The slower the surface, the less chance that a lesser player on that surface has to beat the better player. It is that simple.

Let's look at how many top 10 players Murray has faced vs guys heavyweights like Lendl and McEnroe
matches vs top 10 players:
Lendl: 186
Murray 183
McEnroe 146

Murray played his 183rd opponent in the top 10 at the 2017 FO. He had just turned 30. He would have dusted Lendl in matches played against top 10, had he not gotten injured.

Lendl is a guy that has spent 270 weeks at #1 while winning 90+ career titles. It was his era that caused him to play top-10 players far less frequently than Murray.

The opportunities to play against players in the top 10 are far higher today, thanks to the era. This era allows the better players to go deeper in tournaments.
 
Last edited:
KINGROGER said:
Yeah but he skipped both Paris masters in 04-05 due to injury and also Madrid in 05 for the same reason. Having Basel in close proximity to those events doesn’t help either.

Also if masters were BO3, he would’ve played and been favourite for Hamburg in 2006.
Click to expand...
Also the points difference between M1000s and slams were less so players didn’t mind playing more smaller tourneys.
 
KINGROGER said:
Yeah but he skipped both Paris masters in 04-05 due to injury and also Madrid in 05 for the same reason. Having Basel in close proximity to those events doesn’t help either.

Also if masters were BO3, he would’ve played and been favourite for Hamburg in 2006.
Click to expand...

Yes he was injured and tired by the end of both seasons in both of those years, but he probably should have saved himself for the bigger events. In years like 2007-2009, 2011 etc, he played less of them and somewhat changed his schedule.
 
I think, in 1969, Laver had 40 wins over top ten out 108 wins overall. I relied on the top ten for 1969 by Lance Tingay/ Bud Collins. If one picks the top ten in the reconstruction of 1969 by Slasher, or the top ten chosen by Tennis Base, it could be even better.
 
NoleFam said:
It actually does. Federer skipped 7 Masters tournaments alone in 2004 and 2005 yet played 22 500 and 250 level tournaments. This is why his count is lower in those years compared to Djokovic's. Djokovic would never play that many smaller tournaments no matter what type of era it was.
Click to expand...

Federer was injured at the of 2004 and 2005 as well though remember.

In 2004 he played 5 events (not including Olympics at lower than Masters level), Rottadam, Dubai, Halle Gstard and Bangkok. Rottadam and Dubai generally had good fields and there's a good break between the AO and IW. I don't think Halle needs much explanation? Weaker field than Queen's of course but Federer has his reasons for being loyal to Halle, it's normal to play a grass warm-up. Gstaad I would say was unnecessary but it's in his home country, he basically didn't play it again until what 2013 after this? Then there's Bangkok which actually had a good field including Roddick and Safin.

In 2005 he played 5 events lower than Masters level again. Instead of Kyong he played Doha, he again played Rottadam, Dubai, Halle and Bangkok. He beat some good players in the first 4 events as well, Ljubicic was a definite top 10 player that year if not at the time.

And again my point was that there was a different attitude to masters in that era, they took a significant amount more effort to win in some cases and had only been mandatory for a short while. Most of those smaller events Federer played had good fields and weren't near masters events.
 
Lew said:
Since beating 20-30 top10 per season it has become normal, let's see the records in 2017 and 2018:

2017
federer 14

2018
nadal 10
Click to expand...
6 out of the 14 was AO/W. He won AO17 beating 4 top10 players. Anyway - you can only beat who Is in front of you. If the top10 players is knocked out by lower ranked players, then the lower ranked players is better that tournament. Doesnt matter which rank they have If they can't go deep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lew II
Ridicolous stat that may be never repeated
2
Replies
52
Views
3K
guitarra
guitarra
Lew II
Most wins over top5/10/20 in a season
2 3 4
Replies
169
Views
9K
SonnyT
S
Lew II
Most wins over top ranked players in a season
2
Replies
94
Views
4K
Lew II
Lew II
M
Do Djokovic and Nadal Share Record For Most Top 10 Wins in a Season?
Replies
1
Views
876
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
MichelaDe
Seasons with 20+ wins over top10s: Djokovic more than Federer, Nadal, Sampras and Borg combined
Replies
35
Views
2K
TearTheRoofOff
TearTheRoofOff
Back
Top