Discussion in 'Pro Match Results and Discussion' started by Agassifan, Jan 29, 2012.
Nole : 5/7 = 71%
Fed : 16/23 = 70%
Rafa : 10/15 = 67%
Juan Martin Del Potro = 1/1 = 100%
Safin - 2/3 - 67%
Safin had 2/4 so 50%. Same for Lleyton Hewitt.
Ferrero 1/3 33%..
Quite amazing that we only have 7 current ATP players who have a singles slam.
This clearly shows that JMDP is the GOAT
JMDP is indeed the goat
those stats mean nothing before one ends his career...
Nah, Safin would have been 4/4 under normal circumstances; He should have beaten Johansson but choked and was a corpse at the AO 2004 final. Should have won both.
Murray 0/3 - 0%.
Not bad, however, Fed was 100% from his first 7 finals.
Good point. I think it all goes down hill after that. Especially as you get older and the new young brigade take over.
what a stupid stat this is..
Nole made Nadal mentally weaker than Federer. That's too funny. He is breaking one Nadal myth after another. I guess now he can go after Nadal's 5 set winning %.
Sorry to break it to you but Federer was GOATing around at 2004 AO and had match point in 2005 as well.
Yes, he is equal with Andres Gomez who also has a 100% slam final success rate.
Kuerten was 3/3 at the French
Sorry to break it to you, but Federer wasn't #1 at that time. Safin managed to beat Roddick (who was ranked #1) and Agassi (top 5) both in 5 sets. Safin managed to make two sets competetive running on an empty tank. I'd go with Safin if he was fully fit. AO 2005 SF, damn, that was a match. TBH with you if Safin and Federer both played well the match would come down to a few points. But yeah if Safin hadn't have had such a tough draw it would have been an epic match for sure.
The stats are wrong. Those are slam final numbers. Actual stats (as compared to the GOAT in this category):
Bjorn Borg 11/27 = 41%
Rafael Nadal 10/31 = 32%
Roger Federer 16/51 = 31%
Novak Djokovic: 5/29 = 17%
Safinhad another 5 setter before Agassi and Roddick. He got pass Roddick.....Agassi should have won in 3. Safin was looking tired even then.
The Sampras conversion rate is 14/18. 77.78%, and 7/7 at Wimbledon - 100%.
He is already doing that.
I loved how he made everyone believe that Nadal won the fourth set on his willpower. It was Nole going after his 5 set stat. That coming back after being a break down in fifth was a nice touch.
Shows you how daft stats are eh Bobby Jr.
Hardly surprising, he missed virtually 2003 and his first tournament is a slam. The guy did brilliantly to make the finals.
Safin was a great player but didn't beat Federer too many times, he needed to really bring out his insane level to do it, so I wouldn't say he should have won in 2004, but yeah could have made it tighter. The other time he lost in the final I think he was out partying or something the night before? What a shame, but also gotta love Marat for his personality.
It could have gone either way if Safin wasn't a corpse. By the way, there are many players like Djokovic and Murray who have lost against a decrepid passive Roddick in slams. Safin was able to beat a prime Roddick who was #1 after having nearly a full year off. Think of that. Safin wasn't clubbing the night before, but let's just say his attitude and off-court life costed Safin. He choked the final but definately a brilliant career for someone who had so many problems.
They're not WRONG, they're just different stats than the ones you posted.
You posted Slam wins vs Slams played. They posted Slam wins in Slam FINALS played.
Well, the Gomez example is one of daftness. A match comparison with a sample size of over 250 points is far more indicative of something depending on how/what you're interpreting it - which can be the death or life of a line of debate.
Yeah I remembered that Safin hadn't played much towards the end of 2003, lost a lot of matches and was amazing he was even in the final in 2004.
Read the thread title: "Slam winning percentages for the Big 3", not "Slam final winning percentages for the Big 3"
It may seem like a small difference, but when it turns the outcome on its head it's obviously not.
And when I first saw the threat title, before reading the posts, I thought it meant winning percentage of matches played in slams.
Corpse ..really ???:shock:
Have you ever watched the match?
Roger had also 10/31 after 2007 AO ... so roger consistency after 2003 wimbledon caught up child prodigy nadal!!
Easiest way is to jump off a cliff. Drink something first if you lack the guts for it.
1. Pete Sampras 77.78 14–4
2. Novak Djokovic 71.43 5–2
3. Roger Federer 69.57 16–7
4. Björn Borg 68.75 11–5
5. Rafael Nadal 66.67 10–5
6. John McEnroe 63.64 7–4
7. Mats Wilander 63.64 7–4
8. Boris Becker 60.00 6–4
9. Stefan Edberg 54.55 6–5
10. Jimmy Connors 53.33 8–7
10. Andre Agassi 53.33 8–7
Anybody who thinks this is a relevant stat where a higher percentage is better is nuts.
Which is better?
20/1 = 95% (20 slam titles, 1 runner-up)
20/8 = 71% (20 slam titles, 8 runner-up)
Clearly the second has the better statistics.
Yeah. This is pretty gross misuse of statistics to make a point.
Statistics aren't wrong. People who use them incorrectly are.
Holy crap Nadal has only been to 3 fewer slam finals than Sampras????? Wow Sampras was a lot worse than I thought.
All bow down to Nole, don't worry he won't wear any stupid jackets or pick anything.
yaa..he will only rip-off his shirt after the match stupidly
The stat isn't stupid. interpretations are.
5/15 >>>>> 5/5
LOL, best of all!!
Just after the FO last year, Nadal was dominating this stat. Amazing what a few months can do, now he is actually below Federer. I didn't really think that would be possible, with his high rate of success in big matches....then Djokovic stood up from the ashes.
Amazing how few current players have even played in a slam final, let alone won one. What a horrible era to be in if you are not one of the top 4 guys lol.
Yep, just 7 winners and 7 others who have been runner up only, if I've counted correctly. That's mostly down to Federer and Nadal of course - 38 final spots between them out of the last 75 finals - wow!
Murray would be always
N=No. of slam finals
N will vary but final outcome will be always fixed.its constant.
He only said GOATing, not being No.1.
Fed would stand at 15-3 if he failed to make a single French Open final in his career. Turns out if he sucked on clay like Sampras, he'd actually be a better player.
if nadal had a day's rest at wimbledon and if novak and roddick hadn't choked on set points and break points, poor fed'd never have his praise for beating sampras' slam total.
Separate names with a comma.