The 10s: GOATs per slam.

[UnderratedSlam]

Another decade is over (despite some people's claims that 2020 is also in this decade), and we have fairly clear-cut GOATs per slam.

Or, rather, GO10SPS. Greatest of 10s per slam.

2010-2019 Dominators:

AO --- Novak --- 6 titles - 0 finales

FO --- Rafa --- 8 titles - 0 finales

W --- Novak --- 5 titles - 1 finale

USO --- Rafa --- 4 titles - 1 finale

That's 28/40 slams for the 86/87 generation GOAT duo. They've won almost 3/4 of all the slams. Almost certainly a record.

While we're at it, diversity of champs per slam (very low this decade):

AO --- 6 Novak, 3 RF, 1 Stan = 3 champs

FO --- 8 Rafa, 1 Novak, 1 Stan = 3 champs

W --- 5 Novak, 2 RF, 2 His Highness Sir Lord Murray, 1 Rafa = 4 champs (only slam won by all Big 3, also all Big 4)

USO --- 4 Rafa, 3 Novak, 1 Stan, 1 Cilic, 1 His Highness Sir Lord Murray = 5 champs

Notice a trend? The later the season, the less predictable the slam champ, and the more different slam champs there are. Not by a wide margin of course, but still... Beggars can't be choosers.

Rarely has there been a decade with such a uniform domination, at AO, and especially FO. In fact, for FO, never. For AO probably never also.

A decade of dominion and record-breaking, even more so than the last one.

Interestingly, USO has manifested/established itself as the least predictable hence least dominated slam. 2014 USO is the only slam finale with no Big 4 players. Which is why most TTWers predict that a NextGen breakthrough will come at this slam. It certainly almost happened in 2019: right, Rafa fans?

5-set finales:

AO --- 3
FO --- 0
W --- 2
USO --- 2

Opinions?

 

[Fridge]

I don't even get what this is

 

[dropshotlikeitshot]

Funny that Stan managed to win 3 different slams while Fed and Murray only won at 2 different slams

 

[Yugram]

So much for the so called GOAT to win 5 Slams in a decade. Nadal's won 5 in the last 3 years lol.

 

[Third Serve]

So much for the so called GOAT to win 5 Slams in a decade. Nadal's won 5 in the last 3 years lol.

It’s a bit easier to do so when your prime overlaps between two decades. This was obviously not the case for Federer or Djokovic.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

I don't even get what this is

It's the Versailles Treaty.

 

[Towny]

Well this further evidences the weakness of LostGen. Total inability to break through the Big 3 dominance. Wawrinka and Murray managed it 3 times each; there's no excuse. And the clock is ticking for NextGen too. Hopefully we'll see something (maybe from Med) next year, but this decade is a write-off.

Nadal and Djokovic have just been supremely consistent and dominant all decade. Nadal won 13 slams this decade and was still only the second best player. Compare that the second best player of the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s won 5, 7, 5 and 6 slams respectively (I actually think Mac was 2nd best in the 80s with 6, but Wilander got 2nd highest total with 7).

I think injuries and fatigue of the Big 3 have played a significant part in why the USO has been won by more people. I agree that it is the most likely slam to yield a new champion

 

[Nadal_Django]

Funny that Stan managed to win 3 different slams while Fed and Murray only won at 2 different slams

Federer is basically a Wawrinka level of player at Slams during the 10s.

 

[Frank Bannister]

So much for the so called GOAT to win 5 Slams in a decade. Nadal's won 5 in the last 3 years lol.

It could be because Fed is 5 years older.

Just a thought..

 

[Yugram]

It could be because Fed is 5 years older.

Just a thought..

Federer is old since 2005, no?

 

[Frank Bannister]

Federer is old since 2005, no?

The last year Nadal won an indoor title, no?

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Federer is old since 2005, no?

Don't be so rude...

It's 2008.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

The last year Nadal won an indoor title, no?

Rafa sucks at indoors, compared to other surfaces.

You've just discovered Uranium.

 

[Third Serve]

The last year Nadal won an indoor title, no?

nadal peak in 2005 confirmed

 

[Yugram]

nadal peak in 2005 confirmed

18 Slams post peak

GOAT

 

[Third Serve]

^^ Actually, the above isn't so far off. It's not his best season, obviously, but it's underrated. He won a Slam, four Masters (including one on outdoor hard and one on indoor hard; the other two were competed against the reigning king of clay), and compiled a win percentage of nearly 90%.

 

[Yugram]

The last year Nadal won an indoor title, no?

There’s like 2 relevant indoor titles all year lol. And the last time Federer won one of them was 2011.

 

[Frank Bannister]

There’s like 2 relevant indoor titles all year lol. And the last time Federer won one of them was 2011.

He won the Big One just last year.

 

[SaintPetros]

The last year Nadal won an indoor title, no?

By beating Fed on the way most likely, no?

 

[SaintPetros]

He won the Big One just last year.

The Laver Cup?

 

[Frank Bannister]

By beating Fed on the way most likely, no?

The great Robby Ginepri actually.

 

[Nadal_Django]

There’s like 2 relevant indoor titles all year lol. And the last time Federer won one of them was 2011.

Yep. The Indoors Goat right there.

 

[Backspin1183]

He won the Big One just last year.

Welcome, "New User".

 

[Frank Bannister]

Welcome, "New User".

 

[Frank Bannister]

Fedr.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

The great Robby Ginepri actually.

He must be great... coz Fed's amazing Strong Era generation...

 

[King No1e]

No one has or will ever dominate 2 Slams as Djokovic and Nadal have done at AO and RG, respectively. At their height, those 2 Slams were out of question (until they were suddenly were, when Djokovic lost to Wawrinka and Nadal loses to Djokovic)

 

[SaintPetros]

The great Robby Ginepri actually.

Shucks, I must have gotten 2013 and 2005 mixed up.

 

[SaintPetros]

He must be great... coz Fed's amazing Strong Era generation...

Fraudster's generation is strong...except when its not.

 

[steelcity32]

The last year Nadal won an indoor title, no?

lmfao you've got nothing

 

[Lleytonstation]

He must be great... coz Fed's amazing Strong Era generation...

Your too modest. This generation is not as bad as you think. We have had Anderson (2 finals), Thiem (2 finals), and Med Bear. I know I know, you dismiss Thiem as just a one slam contender, but give him time, he is only 26...

 

[guitarra]

It’s all great for the BIG3 fans especially Nadal and Djokovic but now tennis desperately needs fresh blood and new champions.

 

[Lew II]

New #1 per decade:

1980s - 3
1990s - 10
2000s - 7
2010s - 2

 

[Yugram]

Yep. The Indoors Goat right there.

Natics: "Rojeer prefers when it’s fast! ATP ruins him by slowing down the courts!"

Federer: Loses to Tsitsipas and Rublev on fast courts

 

[DSH]

No one has or will ever dominate 2 Slams as Djokovic and Nadal have done at AO and RG, respectively. At their height, those 2 Slams were out of question (until they were suddenly were, when Djokovic lost to Wawrinka and Nadal loses to Djokovic)

There has never been such an overwhelming domain as that exercised by Nadal in RG in the decade that ends. 8 titles of 10. Stratospheric!
Djokovic, although extraordinary, had already been achieved by Sampras and Federer in Wimbledon in the 90s and at the beginning of this century, respectively.
They won 6 Wimbledon titles in their respective decade, something that recently managed to emulate the Serbian in Australia.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

It's the Versailles Treaty.

The seeds of slam (hyper) inflation.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

New #1 per decade:

1980s - 3
1990s - 10
2000s - 7
2010s - 2

ATP 90s like WTA 10s.

WTA 90s like ATP 10s.

Topsy-turvy world.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

The seeds of slam (hyper) inflation.

RF fans didn't seem to mind this hyperinflation when their icon benefited from it...

Well, it's time others benefit from it too. Which puts his records into a little bit of a perspective, no?

 

[Phoenix1983]

While we're at it, diversity of champs per slam (very low this decade):

AO --- 6 Novak, 3 RF, 1 Stan = 3 champs

FO --- 8 Rafa, 1 Novak, 1 Stan = 3 champs

Rarely has there been a decade with such a uniform domination, at AO, and especially FO. In fact, for FO, never. For AO probably never also.

AO was the same in the 1960s actually (6 Emerson, 3 Laver, 1 Bowrey).

It's almost certain there has never been a decade in the men's game with only 6 slam champs though (Novak Djokovic 15, Nadal 13, Federer 5, Murray 3, Wawrinka 3, Cilic 1).

 

[UnderratedSlam]

AO was the same in the 1960s actually (6 Emerson, 3 Laver, 1 Bowrey).

It's almost certain there has never been a decade in the men's game with only 6 slam champs though (Novak Djokovic 15, Nadal 13, Federer 5, Murray 3, Wawrinka 3, Cilic 1).

Which begs the million dollar question everyone has been asking: is it because the 80s generation is so awesome or because the younglings are so pathetic?

I believe the answer involves both. Such an extreme situation cannot have a simplistic answer - as much as a simple answer would please fanbases...

 

[Frank Bannister]

lmfao you've got nothing

How bout them Steelers, son?

 

[clout]

Damn that’s 28/40 slams for Djokodal duo (almost dead even too), 31/40 slams for the 86/87 duo, and 35/40 for the 85-88 gen. The only other five were won by the godly grandfather, Rogi Fedr. This ain’t the GOAT gen for no reason.

It’s a shame Delpo couldn’t join in this decade, darn stupid injuries

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Damn that’s 31/40 slams for the 86/87 duo and 35/40 for the 85-88 gen. The only other five were won by the godly grandfather, Rogi Fedr. This ain’t the GOAT gen for no reason.

It’s a shame Delpo couldn’t join in this decade, darn stupid injuries

28/40 for 86/87 duo, 31/40 for 86/87 trio i.e. with His Royal Highness Lord Sir Baron Murray.

Yes, Delpo should have been part of the domination, at least in a "small" Murray, Stan way...

 

[kevaninho]

No one has or will ever dominate 2 Slams as Djokovic and Nadal have done at AO and RG, respectively. At their height, those 2 Slams were out of question (until they were suddenly were, when Djokovic lost to Wawrinka and Nadal loses to Djokovic)

Im pretty sure Federer was more dominant at Wimbledon than Djokovic was at the AO.

Also comparing Djokovic's AO resume to Nadals FO resume is a bit silly. Nadal has almost double the titles in respective slam.
12/15 and 7/15 aren't even close. One is domination, the other isn't.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Im pretty sure Federer was more dominant at Wimbledon than Djokovic was at the AO.

Also comparing Djokovic's AO resume to Nadals FO resume is a bit silly. Nadal has almost double the titles in respective slam.
12/15 and 7/15 aren't even close. One is domination, the other isn't.

Except that one is 6 years younger and could win several more...

 

[kevaninho]

Except that one is 6 years younger and could win several more...

Well if Djokovic can go on a run of 7 finals in a row at the AO I will give him his due.
Federer won 6 out of 7 and lost a final the other time. That is as dominant as you can get.
Whats Djokovic's AO best run? 3 wins in a row?
Theres a major difference there IMO, and im not a fan of either player.

 

[clout]

Except that one is 6 years younger and could win several more...

Federer was more dominant at both Wimbledon and the US Open than Djokovic was at any major tbh.

 

[clout]

28/40 for 86/87 duo, 31/40 for 86/87 trio i.e. with His Royal Highness Lord Sir Baron Murray.

Yes, Delpo should have been part of the domination, at least in a "small" Murray, Stan way...

I was referring to 86/87 being two years hence being a duo. So essentially I’m counting everyone born in those two years, sorry if I was unclear haha

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Well if Djokovic can go on a run of 7 finals in a row at the AO I will give him his due.
Federer won 6 out of 7 and lost a final the other time. That is as dominant as you can get.
Whats Djokovic's AO best run? 3 wins in a row?
Theres a major difference there IMO, and im not a fan of either player.

You are talking about concentrated dominance...

To me it's utterly irrelevant whether 5 slam titles are won in a row or with regular gaps. Both are impressive for different reasons.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Federer was more dominant at both Wimbledon and the US Open than Djokovic was at any major tbh.

So RF's 5 USO > Novak's 6 AO...?

You sure this isn't fan bias talking...?

We must all learn to appreciate and respect Novak, all those who don't haven't yet understood the game of tennis...