Splitting Indoors

[Waspsting]

I am curious about the indoor versus outdoor distinction, which is often referenced to explain seemingly unusual observations e.g. "Jones didn't do well because it was indoors, he doesn't like indoors/the indoor courts are quick and low bouncing etc."

The ideal I start with is that its should make negligible difference as long as the court plays the same

Which means hard courts. Shouldn't make much difference

So I looked into the records for a selected few greats. The source for all figures is the ATP site - which I know isn't too great for accuracy

They have win/loss records for "hard", "indoor" and "carpet".

Assuming "indoor" = "carpet" + "indoor hard" (i.e. there are no indoor grass or clay), "indoor" - "carpet" = Indoor Hard record and "Hard" - Indoor Hard = Outdoor Hard record

The findings -

Player...... Hard Court (All)..... Indoor Hard ....... Outdoor Hard ...... Difference & Direction
Connors.... 547-114 @ 82.8%..... 131-30 @ 81.4%..... 416-84 @ 83.2%..... 1.8% Outdoor

Borg........ 121-38 @ 76.1%...... 40-15 @ 72.7%...... 81-23 @ 77.9%..... 5.2% Outdoor

McEnroe... 299-73 @ 80.4%...... 82-14 @ 85.4%...... 217-59 @ 78.6%..... 6.8% Indoor

Lendl...... 395-86 @ 82.1%...... 76-17 @ 81.7%...... 319-69 @ 82.2%..... 0.5% Outdoor

Wilander... 193-77 @ 71.5%..... 44-20 @ 68.8%...... 149-57 @ 72.3%..... 3.5% Outdoor

Edberg...... 400-110 @ 78.4%.... 93-35 @ 72.7%...... 307-75 @ 80.4%..... 7.7% Outdoor

Becker...... 254-72 @ 77.9%..... 74-19 @ 80.0%..... 180-53 @ 77.3%.... 2.7% Indoor

Agassi...... 612-163 @ 79.0%..... 112-37 @ 75.1%.... 500-126 @ 79.9%... 4.8% Outdoor

Sampras.... 451-111 @ 80.2%..... 93-24 @ 79.5%.... 358-87 @ 80.4%... 0.9% Outdoor

Federer.... 708-143 @ 83.2%..... 226-50 @ 81.9%.... 482-93 @ 83.8%... 1.9% Outdoor

Nadal..... 421-126 @ 77.0%.... 75-30 @ 71.4%.... 346-96 @ 78.3%... 6.9% Outdoor

Djokovic.... 508-95 @ 84.2%..... 125-33 @ 79.1%.... 383-62 @ 86.1%... 7.0% Outdoor

Murray...... 431-116 @ 78.9%.... 127-34 @ 78.9%.... 307-82 @ 78.9%.... Equal

---

Points of interest -

- Given Zero Sum Game, it appears the Greats tend to prosper more outdoor than indoor. Only John McEnroe and Boris Becker are Indoor > Outdoor... everybody else is Outdoor > Indoor. (Andy Murray is uniquely perfectly even)

- Taking a difference of 4% to be significant....6 players show significant differences - Borg, McEnroe, Edberg, Agassi, Nadal and Djokovic

- Curiously, two of the biggest differences are for two of the more similar players - McEnroe (6.8% Indoors) and Edberg (7.7% Outdoor)

- McEnroe, far and away the leader on indoor hard courts

- Connors and Lendl fairly comfortably leading the retired pack outdoor though behind the still active Djokovic (far and away in front), and in the same ball park as Federer


- The two narrowest differences are Ivan Lendl (0.5%), which I would have expected, and Pete Sampras (0.9%)

- The Connors-Borg-McEnroe 'cluster'... Connors outstripping both outdoor (particularly impressive, given how long he played), Borg right up there with Mac outdoor (indoors is what puts Mac well beyond) and Borg's relatively weak indoor record (particularly noteworthy given his outstanding record on carpet... figures for which I'll post up as well)

- Edberg's outstanding outdoor figure... right there with Sampras and above McEnroe and Agassi - surprised me

Anything else strike you?

(I'll post up tables for comparison with carpet and indoor hard soon)

 

[Waspsting]

Indoor Record

Player... Carpet ... Hard... Difference & Direction

Connors 416-84 @ 82.2%... 131-30 @ 81.4%... 0.8% Carpet

Borg... 176-37 @ 82.6%... 40-15 @ 72.7% ... 9.9% Carpet

McEnroe... 337-58 @ 85.3% ... 82-14 @ 85.4% ... 0.1% Hard

Lendl... 265-53 @ 83.3% ... 76-17 @ 81.7% ... 1.6% Carpet

Wilander... 65-50 @ 56.5% ... 44-20 @ 68.8% ... 12.3% Hard

Edberg... 164-69 @ 70.4%... 93-35 @ 72.7% ... 2.3% Hard

Becker... 223-56 @ 80.0%... 74-19 @ 80.0% ... Equal

Agassi... 56-36 @ 60.9%... 112-37 @ 75.1% ... 14.2% Hard

Sampras ... 120-37 @ 76.4% ... 93-24 @ 79.6% ... 3.2% Hard


Some huge differences emerging - Borg, Wilander and Agassi... very little difference for most others

- Interestingly, McEnroe and Becker - the only two guys who have better indoor than outdoor hard court records - both have near identical figures for carpet vs indoor hard

- Borg is distinctly odd. One would think his game was more suited to hard courts than carpet... but he's feasted on carpet relative to hard
Borg's record can be depicted as Carpet >> Outdoor Hard >> Indoor Hard

- Lendl and Connors... hardly any difference across the three conditions

- Edberg seems to have a clear problem indoors... his outdoor hard leaves both indoor hard and carpet record in the dust (I would have expected him to prosper more on carpet than hard if anything)

- Sampras... not much difference. He's another I would have expected carpet > hard for

Putting the two tables together and summing up

Hard (all) vs Carpet

for Hard > Carpet - Wilander, Edberg and Agassi are prominent (note how different the three players in question are of style - the clever rallyer, the serve-volleyer and the power baseliner). Also Sampras to a lesser degree

for Carpet > Hard - Borg and McEnroe are prominent (again, note the difference of styles at play). For McEnroe, it seems to be a case of indoor > outdoor while for Borg the result is mostly a product of relatively poor indoor hard.

Hard = Carpet just about, Connors and Lendl


Indoor Hard closer to....

A) Carpet.... Significantly for McEnroe and Edberg.

B) Outdoor Hard.... Very strongly for Wilander and Agassi, strongly for Borg and significantly for Sampras


Loose, general conclusion -

- the surface (carpet vs hard) is a bigger factor than the dichotomous condition (indoor vs outdoor)

- the top players generally have better records on hard courts than carpet (a fair amount of variance in this)

 

[Moose Malloy]

It's important to remember that the tour has been structured very differently over the years. I believe 30% of all events on tour in the late 70s early 80s were Indoors. Outdoor hardcourts really didn't become common until the Miami/Indian wells swing which didn't exist before 1985/1986. Before the Australian Open moved back to Jan, pretty much all of Jan to March was just indoor events, in addition to the many fall indoor events.

Mac's prime coincided with this type of schedule. 8 of his 13 titles in 1984 were Indoors, that sort of schedule was sort of impossible for many of the other players listed, since so many of those events didn't exist anymore by the 90s, and outdoor hard became a much bigger part of the schedule. So I'm not surprised by your numbers for him.

It's such an unimportant part of the schedule these days, I don't see how relevant indoors results are for the big 4 frankly.

Also there have been great variance in surface speeds for indoor and even carpet over the years. commentators and players did comment on the differences. krosero found articles about 1980 Stockholm where it was called a 'slow carpet' and some players called it as slow as clay. I have many matches from the Masters in the early 80s where it was called slow or medium by commentators and players. Check out the Lendl-Borg YEC final, has longer rallies than any match you'll see today, and it was carpet. And my net stats on many Mac matches show he served and volleyed less Indoors than he did on grass(at least pre 1984 when he became probably the most agressive player of all time). Becker also served and volleyed less Indoors than he did on grass.

And the surface speed of the YEC also greatly varied in the 90s as well. I remember how slow everyone was calling it in 2000 when Guga won it. Commentators said more grit was added to the court.

One other thing - some posters have discovered incorrect surface listings for old events, like them listing an event as hardcourt when it was clay(or vice versa, can't remember). And I believe someone discovered an indoor clay event in the 70s, which of course the ATP just lists as clay. Also many Davis Cup ties have been played on Indoor Clay, not sure if the ATP website makes that distinction.

Not sure you should draw any conclusions about Borg on hardcourt since the guy hardly played on it.

Agassi played in an era where one could be a hardcourt specialist, so not surprised by your numbers. Also he wasn't exactly committed to playing a full schedule many years so he didn't exactly go all out Indoors his entire career. I recall more than a few tanks on that surface for him.

 

[dominikk1985]

indoors was a much bigger difference than now. in These days it is basically the same as outdoor hardcourt but when they still played on carpet it was really playing fast and low.

 

[timnz]

It's important to remember that the tour has been structured very differently over the years. I believe 30% of all events on tour in the late 70s early 80s were Indoors. Outdoor hardcourts really didn't become common until the Miami/Indian wells swing which didn't exist before 1985/1986. Before the Australian Open moved back to Jan, pretty much all of Jan to March was just indoor events, in addition to the many fall indoor events.

Mac's prime coincided with this type of schedule. 8 of his 13 titles in 1984 were Indoors, that sort of schedule was sort of impossible for many of the other players listed, since so many of those events didn't exist anymore by the 90s, and outdoor hard became a much bigger part of the schedule. So I'm not surprised by your numbers for him.

It's such an unimportant part of the schedule these days, I don't see how relevant indoors results are for the big 4 frankly.

Also there have been great variance in surface speeds for indoor and even carpet over the years. commentators and players did comment on the differences. krosero found articles about 1980 Stockholm where it was called a 'slow carpet' and some players called it as slow as clay. I have many matches from the Masters in the early 80s where it was called slow or medium by commentators and players. Check out the Lendl-Borg YEC final, has longer rallies than any match you'll see today, and it was carpet. And my net stats on many Mac matches show he served and volleyed less Indoors than he did on grass(at least pre 1984 when he became probably the most agressive player of all time). Becker also served and volleyed less Indoors than he did on grass.

And the surface speed of the YEC also greatly varied in the 90s as well. I remember how slow everyone was calling it in 2000 when Guga won it. Commentators said more grit was added to the court.

One other thing - some posters have discovered incorrect surface listings for old events, like them listing an event as hardcourt when it was clay(or vice versa, can't remember). And I believe someone discovered an indoor clay event in the 70s, which of course the ATP just lists as clay. Also many Davis Cup ties have been played on Indoor Clay, not sure if the ATP website makes that distinction.

Not sure you should draw any conclusions about Borg on hardcourt since the guy hardly played on it.

Agassi played in an era where one could be a hardcourt specialist, so not surprised by your numbers. Also he wasn't exactly committed to playing a full schedule many years so he didn't exactly go all out Indoors his entire career. I recall more than a few tanks on that surface for him.

YEC 2000 was on an indoor hard surface (not carpet). Hard can be such a variety of speeds.

 

[KG1965]

I am curious about the indoor versus outdoor distinction, which is often referenced to explain seemingly unusual observations e.g. "Jones didn't do well because it was indoors, he doesn't like indoors/the indoor courts are quick and low bouncing etc."

The ideal I start with is that its should make negligible difference as long as the court plays the same

Which means hard courts. Shouldn't make much difference

So I looked into the records for a selected few greats. The source for all figures is the ATP site - which I know isn't too great for accuracy

They have win/loss records for "hard", "indoor" and "carpet".

Assuming "indoor" = "carpet" + "indoor hard" (i.e. there are no indoor grass or clay), "indoor" - "carpet" = Indoor Hard record and "Hard" - Indoor Hard = Outdoor Hard record

The findings -

Player...... Hard Court (All)..... Indoor Hard ....... Outdoor Hard ...... Difference & Direction
Connors.... 547-114 @ 82.8%..... 131-30 @ 81.4%..... 416-84 @ 83.2%..... 1.8% Outdoor

Borg........ 121-38 @ 76.1%...... 40-15 @ 72.7%...... 81-23 @ 77.9%..... 5.2% Outdoor

McEnroe... 299-73 @ 80.4%...... 82-14 @ 85.4%...... 217-59 @ 78.6%..... 6.8% Indoor

Lendl...... 395-86 @ 82.1%...... 76-17 @ 81.7%...... 319-69 @ 82.2%..... 0.5% Outdoor

Wilander... 193-77 @ 71.5%..... 44-20 @ 68.8%...... 149-57 @ 72.3%..... 3.5% Outdoor

Edberg...... 400-110 @ 78.4%.... 93-35 @ 72.7%...... 307-75 @ 80.4%..... 7.7% Outdoor

Becker...... 254-72 @ 77.9%..... 74-19 @ 80.0%..... 180-53 @ 77.3%.... 2.7% Indoor

Agassi...... 612-163 @ 79.0%..... 112-37 @ 75.1%.... 500-126 @ 79.9%... 4.8% Outdoor

Sampras.... 451-111 @ 80.2%..... 93-24 @ 79.5%.... 358-87 @ 80.4%... 0.9% Outdoor

Federer.... 708-143 @ 83.2%..... 226-50 @ 81.9%.... 482-93 @ 83.8%... 1.9% Outdoor

Nadal..... 421-126 @ 77.0%.... 75-30 @ 71.4%.... 346-96 @ 78.3%... 6.9% Outdoor

Djokovic.... 508-95 @ 84.2%..... 125-33 @ 79.1%.... 383-62 @ 86.1%... 7.0% Outdoor

Murray...... 431-116 @ 78.9%.... 127-34 @ 78.9%.... 307-82 @ 78.9%.... Equal

---

Points of interest -

- Given Zero Sum Game, it appears the Greats tend to prosper more outdoor than indoor. Only John McEnroe and Boris Becker are Indoor > Outdoor... everybody else is Outdoor > Indoor. (Andy Murray is uniquely perfectly even)

- Taking a difference of 4% to be significant....6 players show significant differences - Borg, McEnroe, Edberg, Agassi, Nadal and Djokovic

- Curiously, two of the biggest differences are for two of the more similar players - McEnroe (6.8% Indoors) and Edberg (7.7% Outdoor)

- McEnroe, far and away the leader on indoor hard courts

- Connors and Lendl fairly comfortably leading the retired pack outdoor though behind the still active Djokovic (far and away in front), and in the same ball park as Federer


- The two narrowest differences are Ivan Lendl (0.5%), which I would have expected, and Pete Sampras (0.9%)

- The Connors-Borg-McEnroe 'cluster'... Connors outstripping both outdoor (particularly impressive, given how long he played), Borg right up there with Mac outdoor (indoors is what puts Mac well beyond) and Borg's relatively weak indoor record (particularly noteworthy given his outstanding record on carpet... figures for which I'll post up as well)

- Edberg's outstanding outdoor figure... right there with Sampras and above McEnroe and Agassi - surprised me

Anything else strike you?

(I'll post up tables for comparison with carpet and indoor hard soon)

The break point is 78% .
> 78% the result seems to be a great result.
< 76% there are obvious problems.
It follows that some have had some difficulties:
- EDBERG, AGASSI & BORG Indoor hard
- WILANDER Hard

Even the difference of efficiency indoor/open of Becker, Mac, Djoker, Nadal leaves perplexed.

We need to do a lot more research, maybe.

 

[KG1965]

Indoor Record

Player... Carpet ... Hard... Difference & Direction

Connors 416-84 @ 82.2%... 131-30 @ 81.4%... 0.8% Carpet

Borg... 176-37 @ 82.6%... 40-15 @ 72.7% ... 9.9% Carpet

McEnroe... 337-58 @ 85.3% ... 82-14 @ 85.4% ... 0.1% Hard

Lendl... 265-53 @ 83.3% ... 76-17 @ 81.7% ... 1.6% Carpet

Wilander... 65-50 @ 56.5% ... 44-20 @ 68.8% ... 12.3% Hard

Edberg... 164-69 @ 70.4%... 93-35 @ 72.7% ... 2.3% Hard

Becker... 223-56 @ 80.0%... 74-19 @ 80.0% ... Equal

Agassi... 56-36 @ 60.9%... 112-37 @ 75.1% ... 14.2% Hard

Sampras ... 120-37 @ 76.4% ... 93-24 @ 79.6% ... 3.2% Hard


Some huge differences emerging - Borg, Wilander and Agassi... very little difference for most others

- Interestingly, McEnroe and Becker - the only two guys who have better indoor than outdoor hard court records - both have near identical figures for carpet vs indoor hard

- Borg is distinctly odd. One would think his game was more suited to hard courts than carpet... but he's feasted on carpet relative to hard
Borg's record can be depicted as Carpet >> Outdoor Hard >> Indoor Hard

- Lendl and Connors... hardly any difference across the three conditions

- Edberg seems to have a clear problem indoors... his outdoor hard leaves both indoor hard and carpet record in the dust (I would have expected him to prosper more on carpet than hard if anything)

- Sampras... not much difference. He's another I would have expected carpet > hard for

Putting the two tables together and summing up

Hard (all) vs Carpet

for Hard > Carpet - Wilander, Edberg and Agassi are prominent (note how different the three players in question are of style - the clever rallyer, the serve-volleyer and the power baseliner). Also Sampras to a lesser degree

for Carpet > Hard - Borg and McEnroe are prominent (again, note the difference of styles at play). For McEnroe, it seems to be a case of indoor > outdoor while for Borg the result is mostly a product of relatively poor indoor hard.

Hard = Carpet just about, Connors and Lendl


Indoor Hard closer to....

A) Carpet.... Significantly for McEnroe and Edberg.

B) Outdoor Hard.... Very strongly for Wilander and Agassi, strongly for Borg and significantly for Sampras


Loose, general conclusion -

- the surface (carpet vs hard) is a bigger factor than the dichotomous condition (indoor vs outdoor)

- the top players generally have better records on hard courts than carpet (a fair amount of variance in this)

AGASSI & WILANDER disastrous.
Edberg mmmmm.

 

[KG1965]

I am curious about the indoor versus outdoor distinction, which is often referenced to explain seemingly unusual observations e.g. "Jones didn't do well because it was indoors, he doesn't like indoors/the indoor courts are quick and low bouncing etc."

The ideal I start with is that its should make negligible difference as long as the court plays the same

Which means hard courts. Shouldn't make much difference

So I looked into the records for a selected few greats. The source for all figures is the ATP site - which I know isn't too great for accuracy

They have win/loss records for "hard", "indoor" and "carpet".

Assuming "indoor" = "carpet" + "indoor hard" (i.e. there are no indoor grass or clay), "indoor" - "carpet" = Indoor Hard record and "Hard" - Indoor Hard = Outdoor Hard record

The findings -

Player...... Hard Court (All)..... Indoor Hard ....... Outdoor Hard ...... Difference & Direction
Connors.... 547-114 @ 82.8%..... 131-30 @ 81.4%..... 416-84 @ 83.2%..... 1.8% Outdoor

Borg........ 121-38 @ 76.1%...... 40-15 @ 72.7%...... 81-23 @ 77.9%..... 5.2% Outdoor

McEnroe... 299-73 @ 80.4%...... 82-14 @ 85.4%...... 217-59 @ 78.6%..... 6.8% Indoor

Lendl...... 395-86 @ 82.1%...... 76-17 @ 81.7%...... 319-69 @ 82.2%..... 0.5% Outdoor

Wilander... 193-77 @ 71.5%..... 44-20 @ 68.8%...... 149-57 @ 72.3%..... 3.5% Outdoor

Edberg...... 400-110 @ 78.4%.... 93-35 @ 72.7%...... 307-75 @ 80.4%..... 7.7% Outdoor

Becker...... 254-72 @ 77.9%..... 74-19 @ 80.0%..... 180-53 @ 77.3%.... 2.7% Indoor

Agassi...... 612-163 @ 79.0%..... 112-37 @ 75.1%.... 500-126 @ 79.9%... 4.8% Outdoor

Sampras.... 451-111 @ 80.2%..... 93-24 @ 79.5%.... 358-87 @ 80.4%... 0.9% Outdoor

Federer.... 708-143 @ 83.2%..... 226-50 @ 81.9%.... 482-93 @ 83.8%... 1.9% Outdoor

Nadal..... 421-126 @ 77.0%.... 75-30 @ 71.4%.... 346-96 @ 78.3%... 6.9% Outdoor

Djokovic.... 508-95 @ 84.2%..... 125-33 @ 79.1%.... 383-62 @ 86.1%... 7.0% Outdoor

Murray...... 431-116 @ 78.9%.... 127-34 @ 78.9%.... 307-82 @ 78.9%.... Equal

---

Points of interest -

- Given Zero Sum Game, it appears the Greats tend to prosper more outdoor than indoor. Only John McEnroe and Boris Becker are Indoor > Outdoor... everybody else is Outdoor > Indoor. (Andy Murray is uniquely perfectly even)

- Taking a difference of 4% to be significant....6 players show significant differences - Borg, McEnroe, Edberg, Agassi, Nadal and Djokovic

- Curiously, two of the biggest differences are for two of the more similar players - McEnroe (6.8% Indoors) and Edberg (7.7% Outdoor)

- McEnroe, far and away the leader on indoor hard courts

- Connors and Lendl fairly comfortably leading the retired pack outdoor though behind the still active Djokovic (far and away in front), and in the same ball park as Federer


- The two narrowest differences are Ivan Lendl (0.5%), which I would have expected, and Pete Sampras (0.9%)

- The Connors-Borg-McEnroe 'cluster'... Connors outstripping both outdoor (particularly impressive, given how long he played), Borg right up there with Mac outdoor (indoors is what puts Mac well beyond) and Borg's relatively weak indoor record (particularly noteworthy given his outstanding record on carpet... figures for which I'll post up as well)

- Edberg's outstanding outdoor figure... right there with Sampras and above McEnroe and Agassi - surprised me

Anything else strike you?

(I'll post up tables for comparison with carpet and indoor hard soon)

We try to break up into three periods:
1974-1985 Big 4 (Connors, Borg, Mac, Lendl),
1986-1999 Big 5 (Wilander, Becker, Edberg, Sampras, Agassi),
2000-2017 Big 4.

The last period is relatively simple:
Fedr & Djoker are hardcourt superstars, the data is unmistakable.
We could better analyze the 33 Djokovic defeats in indoor courts... but the record of the serbian is really excellent, especially because he was the player who most of all in Open Era played not light tournaments.
Murray is good, much better than Nadal who has played little and has a poor record in indoor courts (75-30 @ 71.4%).
IMHO Rafa's problem are the lights. Fantasy hypothesis, I admit it.

From 1974 to 1999, the situation is more complex.

 

[KG1965]

1974-1985
The data of Lendl and Connors are congruent. They are definitely benefiting from some easy victories (1972-1975 Jimbo / Riordan circuit and 1982-83 Ivan / WCT) but the two are also the ones who have won more non-ATP titles, practically the almost whole indoor.
Mac Indoor > Mac Open, surely. Mac is the Open Era GOAT indoor and only 7th - 8th? I do not know ... Open.
Mac is among the three greatest indoor champions alltime (with Pancho & Rodney) , while it is 12 ° - 18 ° Open all time.

Borg is more problematic because he has had an ascending career where he became the best on red clay in 1974, on grass in 1976, probably on har tru in 1977 and in indoor or hc perhaps in 1978, surely only in 1979. So he lost many matches from 1973 to 1978.

 

[KG1965]

DJOKOVIC

I found inexplicable that Djoker's very good indoor performance compared to the almost unbeatable outdoor hard performance because in recent years Nole was unbeatable even in indoor.
The explanation lies in the fact that at the beginning of his career he often lost in indoor tournaments, for example

2006
Paris v Mathieau
Madrid v Gonzalez
Vienna v Wawrinka
Rotterdam v Stepanek
Zagreb v Ljubicic

2007
v Nadal, Gasquet and Ferrer to ATP Finals
Paris v Santoro
Madrid v Nalbandian
Rotterdam v Youzhny
Madrid v Youzhny

 

[KG1965]

BORG's indoor statistic is bad because the early years were very young and while he was already very big on red clay and afterwards to Wimbledon in indoor court he lost so much:

1974
US Pro Indoor (Philadelphia) v Roche
WCT Bologna v Franchitti
WCT Barcelona v Ashe
WCT Tokyo v Laver
WCT Denver v Gerken
WCT Houston v Laver
WCT Dallas (Finals) v Newcombe
Stockholm v Okker
Masters GP v Newcombe & Vilas

1975
US Pro Indoor v Lutz
WCT Barcelona v Ashe
WCT Rotterdan v Okker
WCT Munich v Ashe
WCT Johanneburg v Mottram
WCT Stockholm v Svensson
WCT Dallas (Finals) v Ashe
Stockholm v Connors
Masters GP v Vilas & Nastase

1976
WCT Atlanta v Borowiak
US Pro Indoor v Connors
WCT Challenge Cup v Ashe & Nastase
WCT Memphis v Smith
WCT Johannesburg v Moore
WCT Stockholm v Panatta
Stockholm v Gottfried

1977
US Pro Indoor v Moore
Little Rock v Sandy Mayer
Washington v Borowiak
Oviedo v Stewart
Masters GP v Connors

.. after that he will lose a few times, obviously.

 

[KG1965]

McENROE has strabiliand results in indoor courts. Less in outdoor courts. The motif IMHO is simple, in its best years he mainly plays indoor tournaments, but instead gets into its worst stage, John participates in a large number of outdoor events losing so many times.
The circuit in the late 80's was very hard outdoor, there are still indoor events but not as many as in the 70s and early 80s, the years of JohnnyMac.

 

[Waspsting]

@KG1965 - I think your explanation for McEnroe is spot on

For Borg... I'm not so sure. Most of the early losses you mentioned I think were on carpet, not hard courts?

His carpet record is a superb 82.6%, (pulled up I believe by extreme dominance from 1978 onward) but indoor hard is a much more modest 72.7%

That is strange - but explainable by small sample size (55 matches), especially if much of that was played when he hadn't quite hit his stride

Despite the (relatively) small sample size of Borg on hardcourts overall, I find his record on it peculiar

First of all, close to 50 tournaments though relatively small is hardly negligible... if he'd excelled over that period, not taking it too seriously because it's a small number would be seen as a silly comment

Second, I would expect a guy who had at least short bursts of utter dominance on clay, grass and carpet (and in 2/3 of those, more than that) to have at least struck a short golden run on hard courts

As far as I know, he never did?

3/4 US Open finals from1978-1981 is an excellent achievement. Given his record on other surfaces and general temperment, I still would have expected him to do better on hardcourts outside the Slam in those years

Maybe @chrisb , who once discussed the technical aspects of Borg's volleying patterns by surfacewith me, might have some insight on Borg's showings on hardcourts - indoor and outdoor - and carpet

 

[KG1965]

For Borg... I'm not so sure. Most of the early losses you mentioned I think were on carpet, not hard courts?

His carpet record is a superb 82.6%, (pulled up I believe by extreme dominance from 1978 onward) but indoor hard is a much more modest 72.7%

That is strange - but explainable by small sample size (55 matches), especially if much of that was played when he hadn't quite hit his stride

Despite the (relatively) small sample size of Borg on hardcourts overall, I find his record on it peculiar

First of all, close to 50 tournaments though relatively small is hardly negligible... if he'd excelled over that period, not taking it too seriously because it's a small number would be seen as a silly comment

The Borg hard indoor data on ATP I think is doubtful. I remember that the indoor tournament surfaces were very varied (linoleum, supreme court, etc.) but on the media I did not remember there was only division between the carpet and the hard. There were two or three tournaments playing on hard indoor ATP (Stockholm, Basel, Oviedo) then ATP also considers Wembley for example in 1977 but it is not possible because it was carpet.
IMHO the only indoor data is real while hard / carpet subdivision I have the doubt that it is not.

The hard indoor data does little, the overall percentage of Borg is good despite the fact that the early years suffered a lot. (268 v 52 ... 80,60%).

 

[KG1965]

Second, I would expect a guy who had at least short bursts of utter dominance on clay, grass and carpet (and in 2/3 of those, more than that) to have at least struck a short golden run on hard courts

As far as I know, he never did?

3/4 US Open finals from1978-1981 is an excellent achievement. Given his record on other surfaces and general temperment, I still would have expected him to do better on hardcourts outside the Slam in those years

You know well.

The record on hardcourt is not bad but Bjorn has never won tournaments only since 1978 (4 to be exact: T.of ch. 78, Canada 79, Alan King L.Vegas 79 & 80).

Keep in mind though that in the '70s there were few tournaments on hc outdoor (lots of indoor carpet but few on hc outdoor).
They were big tournaments but they were few.
At the beginning of the 70s there were Las Vegas, Los Angeles and Johannesburg
Then came Tucson, replaced by what is now held in Indian Wells (played in Palm Springs, Rancho Mirage and La Quinta before arriving in Indian Wells but the area is that .. desert).
Towards the end of the decade, when the US Open moved to Flushing Meadows, Cincinnati and Canada turned the camps into hardcourt.

Borg did not always participate, however he could not win those tournaments until the late 70s.

In fact, he managed to establish himself in those 4 tournaments I mentioned above.

 

[KG1965]

AGASSI had some indoor problems.
I do not know, I followed little that period, but the ATP site with the results can help us.
After I look at each other.

1989
19 w - 5 loss = 79% OUTDOOR HARD
1 w - 1 loss = 50% INDOOR HARD
8 w - 9 loss = 47% INDOOR CARPET

28 w - 15 loss = 65%


1992
17 w - 6 loss = 74% OUTDOOR HARD
2 w - 2 loss = 50% INDOOR HARD
1 w - 3 loss = 25% INDOOR CARPET

20 w - 11= 65%

I took two years of the first period from which it seems clear that in 1999 Andre did not play at a high level indoor tournaments while in 2002 it is not significant because he played few indoor tournaments.

1996
30 w - 5 loss = 86% OUTDOOR HARD
4 w - 4 loss = 50% INDOOR HARD
2 w - 2 loss = 50% INDOOR CARPET

36 w - 11= 77%

 

[KG1965]

WILANDER's hard outdoor and indoor (hard & carpet) career is an .... enigma.

He has a first part of his career where he often loses, then he wins some big titles like Cincinnati, then in 1988 he wins everything that can be won, then he sinks.
Also in this case the ATP site can help us.

The impression that I always had is that Mats tended to distract himself, he was not always the concentration monster that we met in slam tournaments.

 

[KG1965]

WILANDER's hard outdoor and indoor (hard & carpet) career is an .... enigma.

He has a first part of his career where he often loses, then he wins some big titles like Cincinnati, then in 1988 he wins everything that can be won, then he sinks.
Also in this case the ATP site can help us.

The impression that I always had is that Mats tended to distract himself, he was not always the concentration monster that we met in slam tournaments.

Wilander 1990
Mats plays strangely little on red clay (2 w - 3 l). On hard (indoor and ourdoor) and carpet goes bad: 20-11, but 5 of these victories are in the last tournament of the year, a poor Master250 in Itaparica.

Wilander 1989
Mats still bad in 1989 (12 w - 9 l), the year following 1988 where he played as Laver 1969!
I do not remember what happened unfortunately.

But it does not affect Mats's very bad average.
These are the pre 1988 years to have a greater impact.

 

[KG1965]

Edberg...... 400-110 @ 78.4%.... 93-35 @ 72.7%...... 307-75 @ 80.4%..... 7.7% Outdoor

Becker...... 254-72 @ 77.9%..... 74-19 @ 80.0%..... 180-53 @ 77.3%.... 2.7% Indoor

In fact it seems indecipherable.

Edberg... 164-69 @ 70.4%... 93-35 @ 72.7% ... 2.3% Hard

Becker... 223-56 @ 80.0%... 74-19 @ 80.0% ... Equal

Equal

Boris is consistent, Stefan seems in trouble in indoor courts. I did not have this memory.

 

[KG1965]

I would like to get more details of the indoor rivalry between the two champions.

 

[KG1965]

BECKER-EDBERG RIVALRY HARD OUTDOOR & INDOOR (CARPET & HARD)

BECKER 1985
HARD OUTDOOR 80% (12-3)
INDOOR HARD 0-0
INDOOR CARPET 68% (21-10)
72% (33-13)

BECKER 1986
HARD OUTDOOR 83% (19-4)
INDOOR HARD 10-0 (100%)
INDOOR CARPET 82% (18-4)
85% (47-8)

EDBERG 1985
HARD OUTDOOR 74% (17-6)
INDOOR HARD 8-1 (89%)
INDOOR CARPET 70% (21-9)
74% (46-16)

EDBERG 1986
HARD OUTDOOR 81% (22-5)
INDOOR HARD 10-0 (100%)
INDOOR CARPET 62% (16-10)
76% (48-15)

 

[KG1965]

BECKER 1987
HARD OUTDOOR 79% (19-5)
INDOOR HARD 75% (3-1)
INDOOR CARPET 76% (13-4)
78% (35-10)

EDBERG 1987
HARD OUTDOOR 86% (32-5)
INDOOR HARD 100% (5-0)
INDOOR CARPET 90% (19-2)
89% (56-7)

Taking the period 1985-87 as a reference, this is the situation:

HARD OUTDOOR
Becker 81% (50-12)
Edberg 82% (71-16)

INDOOR HARD
Becker 93% (13-1)
Edberg 96% (23-1)

INDOOR CARPET
Becker 74% (52-18)
Edberg 73% (56-21)

HARD OURDOOR + INDOOR (CARPET & HARD)
Becker 79% (115-31)
Edberg 80% (150-38)

As you can see the difference is ... the programming: Edberg plays 188 tournaments v 146 !!

 

[Waspsting]

KG,

regarding Wilander... his carpet stuff is the biggest mystery of all. He's just before my time - and frankly, I don't know how to make sense of him

Maybe see him as a genuine ATG clay courter, who over-performed on hard courts and to a lesser degree, grass?... As opposed to a genuine ATG multi-surface player like Lendl... in that case, we'd look to praise him for his hard (and grass) exploits, rather than critique his poor carpet (and indoor hard) record. I don't know

Regarding Agassi... Wikipedia has significantly different data from the ATP site.

On carpet, I got 56-36 @ 60.9% (4 titles) from ATP site, while Wikipedia has 81-44 @ 64.8% (6 titles). (I know 3 of the titles - the YEC in 1990 and two Paris titles)

So first problem - inaccurate data, not much we can do about that (well, there is, but I'm not looking to put that much time and energy into this right now)

Either way, Agassi's a bit down from what I'd have expected

Given his indoor hard is significantly down from outdoor hard as well, the simple explanation for him would be the safe chestnut..."he didn't like indoor conditions" (I dislike explanations like this), but for Agassi, one of the loosest headed characters on this list it might be satisfactory

Having watched him in detail, I maintain that Agassi was a danger man on carpet (or anywhere else for that matter) and no one would be surprised if he won a big tournament or beat the top players on the surface (unlike say, Sampras on clay... it was as surprise when he did do well on it)... these are the subtleties I'm aware I'm missing and can't know intuitively for the players I didn't follow in real time

Regarding Becker & Edberg... Edberg seems to be a clear "he didn't like indoor" case too (outdoor hard 80.4%, indoor hard 72.7%, carpet 70.4%). This is the easiest explanation for Edberg

The only obvious "he really liked indoor" case is McEnroe (indoor Hard 85.4%, carpet 85.3%, outdoor hard 78.6%)... I find it funny that the two most relentless net rushers earmark the extremes of doing better in one condition than the other

Becker is more mildly "he really liked indoor" (80% carpet, 80% indoor hard, 77.9% outdoor hard) ... intuitively, I'd say his numbers are suggestive but not conclusive (Mac and Edberg's are much clearer)

In fact it seems indecipherable.

Equal

Haha

I'll give you a couple others to mull over

Andy Murray - dead even across indoor and outdoor hard courts

Player...... Hard Court (All)..... Indoor Hard ....... Outdoor Hard ...... Difference & Direction
Murray...... 431-116 @ 78.9%.... 127-34 @ 78.9%.... 307-82 @ 78.9%.... Equal

and a small curiosity... Djokovic and Nadal's records shifting in virtually the exact same proportion from outdoor to indoor

Player...... Hard Court (All)..... Indoor Hard ....... Outdoor Hard ...... Difference & Direction
Nadal..... 421-126 @ 77.0%.... 75-30 @ 71.4%.... 346-96 @ 78.3%... 6.9% Outdoor

Djokovic.... 508-95 @ 84.2%..... 125-33 @ 79.1%.... 383-62 @ 86.1%... 7.0% Outdoor

I'd say the near equality across all listed conditions for Connors and Lendl are as interesting as some of the differences we've been looking at

Doubly so when one sees that Connors' grass figures (83.3%) and Lendl's clay figures (81.1%) are also right up there around each's figures for carpet, indoor hard and outdoor hard... what wonderful consistency across surfaces and conditions - especially given the huge number of matches both played

 

[KG1965]

regarding Wilander... his carpet stuff is the biggest mystery of all. He's just before my time - and frankly, I don't know how to make sense of him

Maybe see him as a genuine ATG clay courter, who over-performed on hard courts and to a lesser degree, grass?... As opposed to a genuine ATG multi-surface player like Lendl... in that case, we'd look to praise him for his hard (and grass) exploits, rather than critique his poor carpet (and indoor hard) record. I don't know

Yes, I think when he was at the top of form and concentration he could be at level 1, a dangerous opponent for everyone, but he was not always at the top of form and concentration so he lost several matches especially in on carpet tournaments ... where maybe was less concentrated (on the carpet there were also many important no-ATP tournaments where Wialnder had a very bad record).
Maybe he was not one of those players "always in the ball" from January to December, he had to (or wanted) occasionally take a break. We took breaks especially in indoor tournaments.

 

[KG1965]

Regarding Agassi... Wikipedia has significantly different data from the ATP site.

On carpet, I got 56-36 @ 60.9% (4 titles) from ATP site, while Wikipedia has 81-44 @ 64.8% (6 titles). (I know 3 of the titles - the YEC in 1990 and two Paris titles)

So first problem - inaccurate data, not much we can do about that (well, there is, but I'm not looking to put that much time and energy into this right now)

Either way, Agassi's a bit down from what I'd have expected

Given his indoor hard is significantly down from outdoor hard as well, the simple explanation for him would be the safe chestnut..."he didn't like indoor conditions" (I dislike explanations like this), but for Agassi, one of the loosest headed characters on this list it might be satisfactory

Having watched him in detail, I maintain that Agassi was a danger man on carpet (or anywhere else for that matter) and no one would be surprised if he won a big tournament or beat the top players on the surface (unlike say, Sampras on clay... it was as surprise when he did do well on it)... these are the subtleties I'm aware I'm missing and can't know intuitively for the players I didn't follow in real time

Even San Francisco was played on the carpet, Vienna and Ostrava I don't know.
But the point is that Andre in indoor had a worse record than outdoor even in the three years that I took into consideration in the previous post.

IMHO with Agassi two conditions occur that together lead to its record is not excelled:
1) Agassi did not have an innate predisposition to indoor conditions (like Nadal);
2) Agassi played few indoor tournaments (line Nadal) .. in a period where ATP started to organize less indoor tournaments than in the past.
Perhaps Agassi needed to play so many tournaments to get into the condition, and he was struggling after 3 ourdoor tournaments to insert an indoor in his schedule and then again participate in 3 outdoor tournaments (maybe on clay).

 

[KG1965]

I'll give you a couple others to mull over

Andy Murray - dead even across indoor and outdoor hard courts

and a small curiosity... Djokovic and Nadal's records shifting in virtually the exact same proportion from outdoor to indoor

What I think is that:
Nadal has big problems indoors and it is understood by the fact that he participates in few tournaments (half of Djokovic & Murray).
I can not determine if
- plays much worse than in outdoor and therefore the opponents are very close to his performance (even the supporting players) or
- the opponents have big problems in the outdoor (sun, temperature, wind, weather) and he does not suffer.

The fact is that Nadal refuses to challenge his opponents in indoor (75 matches in a career is ... nothing).

Murray is continuous at the highest levels.
His data is close to Becker.

 

[KG1965]

I'd say the near equality across all listed conditions for Connors and Lendl are as interesting as some of the differences we've been looking at

Doubly so when one sees that Connors' grass figures (83.3%) and Lendl's clay figures (81.1%) are also right up there around each's figures for carpet, indoor hard and outdoor hard... what wonderful consistency across surfaces and conditions - especially given the huge number of matches both played

I am not surprised by the consistency of the two bad guys, I am surprised (this yes) that with a different trend the two eventually have similar data.

I think that the prime Connors has a higher average (also complicit the Riordan's period 1972-75) that has dropped considerably since 1985, while Lendl has always maintained a high level throughout his career, his parable is less dizzying.

 

[KG1965]

Regarding Becker & Edberg... Edberg seems to be a clear "he didn't like indoor" case too (outdoor hard 80.4%, indoor hard 72.7%, carpet 70.4%). This is the easiest explanation for Edberg

The only obvious "he really liked indoor" case is McEnroe (indoor Hard 85.4%, carpet 85.3%, outdoor hard 78.6%)... I find it funny that the two most relentless net rushers earmark the extremes of doing better in one condition than the other

Becker is more mildly "he really liked indoor" (80% carpet, 80% indoor hard, 77.9% outdoor hard) ... intuitively, I'd say his numbers are suggestive but not conclusive (Mac and Edberg's are much clearer)

In this case I would like to investigate better because the result of the first years is identical between the two, unlike the overall result.
After 1987, evidently something happened.

 

[KG1965]

Regarding Becker & Edberg... Edberg seems to be a clear "he didn't like indoor" case too (outdoor hard 80.4%, indoor hard 72.7%, carpet 70.4%). This is the easiest explanation for Edberg

The only obvious "he really liked indoor" case is McEnroe (indoor Hard 85.4%, carpet 85.3%, outdoor hard 78.6%)... I find it funny that the two most relentless net rushers earmark the extremes of doing better in one condition than the other

Becker is more mildly "he really liked indoor" (80% carpet, 80% indoor hard, 77.9% outdoor hard) ... intuitively, I'd say his numbers are suggestive but not conclusive (Mac and Edberg's are much clearer)

Share with Boris/Stefan rivalry...
equal situation:

81% - 82% HARD OUTDOOR (good result for both)
93% - 96% INDOOR HARD (great result for both)
74% - 73% INDOOR CARPET (not good result for both)
79% - 80% HARD OURDOOR + INDOOR (CARPET & HARD)

 

[KG1965]

In the years 1988-89 something important happens, while Edberg continues on good levels, Becker plays a science-fiction 1989 and in both years is formidable in the indoor carpet courts (42-4!!!)

BECKER 1988
HARD OUTDOOR 86% (12-2)
INDOOR HARD 50% (5-5)
INDOOR CARPET 91% (20-2)
80% (37-9)

EDBERG 1988
HARD OUTDOOR 76% (22-7)
INDOOR HARD 75% (6-2)
INDOOR CARPET 80% (16-4)
77% (44-13)

BECKER 1989
HARD OUTDOOR 83% (15-3)
INDOOR HARD 100% (5-0)
INDOOR CARPET 92% (22-2)
89% (42-5)

EDBERG 1989
HARD OUTDOOR 83% (25-5)
INDOOR HARD 80% (8-2)
INDOOR CARPET 71% (10-4)
80% (43-11)

 

[KG1965]

After the stratospheric yield of Becker in the two-year period 1988-89, especially in "indoor territory", this is the situation.

BECKER 1985-1989
HARD OUTDOOR 82% (77-17)
INDOOR HARD 79% (23-6)
INDOOR CARPET 81% (94-22)
81% (194-45)

EDBERG 1985-1989
HARD OUTDOOR 81% (118-28)
INDOOR HARD 88% (37-5)
INDOOR CARPET 74% (82-29)
79% (237-62)

Then....

 

[KG1965]

Regarding Becker & Edberg... Edberg seems to be a clear "he didn't like indoor" case too (outdoor hard 80.4%, indoor hard 72.7%, carpet 70.4%). This is the easiest explanation for Edberg

The only obvious "he really liked indoor" case is McEnroe (indoor Hard 85.4%, carpet 85.3%, outdoor hard 78.6%)... I find it funny that the two most relentless net rushers earmark the extremes of doing better in one condition than the other

Becker is more mildly "he really liked indoor" (80% carpet, 80% indoor hard, 77.9% outdoor hard) ... intuitively, I'd say his numbers are suggestive but not conclusive (Mac and Edberg's are much clearer)

1985-1989
HARD OUTDOOR 82% - 81% They are equivalent.
INDOOR HARD 79% - 88% In indoor hard Edberg > Becker but the two all in all play few matches.
INDOOR CARPET 81% - 74% In the indoor carpet the two are equivalent with bad numbers until 1987 then Boris takes over clearly.
Edberg loses too many matches (29!!!)

81% - 79%

 

[WYK]

The lights are what messes with me indoors.

 

[KG1965]

The lights are what messes with me indoors.

A sure point. Thanks.