The most incredible statistic in men's tennis?

Shaolin

Talk Tennis Guru
Ok. I will try to give this one a try. Note. these ones really have to stand out, IMHO. For example, as cool as Fed's record of winning 5 straight slam titles at 2 different events is, it doesn't stand out. Borg had 4 x 5 and 5 x 5. And the surfaces that Borg did this on were far more polarized. And the 4 x 5 streak at the FO didn't end with a loss. He simply ended on a 4 title winning streak. And as much as I love Mac's 82-3 record for winning percentage that still stands, Federer came within 1 set of tying it during his very last match of the 2005 season. Also, Connors 93-4, .959 in 1974 barely trails Mac's 82-3, .965 in 1984. This one is out.

Here are some that stand out; but in no particular order of greatness

Laver's 3 CYGS: Amateur CYGS, Pro Slam(1967), and his Open Era Grand Slam. Nice work, Rod
Djoker's 428 weeks at #1. Next best is 310 by Fed, followed by 286 by Sampras
Fed's 237 consecutive weeks at #1. The next best is 160 by Connors, followed by 157 by Lendl.
Fed's 65 straight wins on grass courts. Next best is 41 by Borg, followed by 34 by Djoker.
Mac's 65 straight wins on carpet. The next best is 51 by Lendl, followed by 30(Lendl and Connors)
Nadal's 81 straight wins on clay. The next best is 53 by Vilas, followed by 48 by Borg
Fed's 24 straight finals wins. The next best is 19 by laver.
Fed's 24 straight wins vs top-10. The next best is 17 by Federer and Djoker
Djoker's 72 big titles. The next best is 59 by Nadal, followed by 54 by Federer.
Lendl's 7 consecutive wins vs world #1. The next best is 5 by both Djoker and Nadal
Fed's 23 straight slam semis. Next best is 14 by Djoker, followed by 10 by Lendl
Djoker's 10 finals reached at 3 different slam events. Only Nadal and Federer have reached 10 finals at a slam event. And they only did it at 1 event.
Nadal's 14 titles at a slam event. The next best is 10 by Djoker, followed by 8 by Federer.
Borg's 3 consecutive channel slams. Nobody else did 2 straight.
Djoker's 2 career boxed sets of masters events. Nobody else has done it once.
Connors 659 consecutive week staying in the top-5. The next best is 558 by Lendl, followed by 548 by Federer
Nadal's 912 consecutive weeks in in the top-10. The next best is 788 by Connors, followed by 734 by Federer
Ken Rosewall's #2 ranking on his 41st birthday. I don't have a list of others here. But this is bonkers.
Nadal's 50 consecutive sets won on clay. The next best is 35 by Coria, followed by 34 by Nastase
Federer's 36 consecutie sets won on grass. The next best is 30 by Federer, followed by 29 by Federer

Great list.
 

The Guru

Legend
Nadal RG record is probably the most untouchable significant record in sports. There are minor records like Dimaggio hit streak and Ripken and Favre's games streaks are probably harder to beat but not at all records of the same magnitude. Only Gretzky's PTS record gives it a run for its money imo.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Nadal RG record is probably the most untouchable significant record in sports. There are minor records like Dimaggio hit streak and Ripken and Favre's games streaks are probably harder to beat but not at all records of the same magnitude. Only Gretzky's PTS record gives it a run for its money imo.
How does Gretzky do in today's era?
 

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
Nadal RG record is probably the most untouchable significant record in sports. There are minor records like Dimaggio hit streak and Ripken and Favre's games streaks are probably harder to beat but not at all records of the same magnitude. Only Gretzky's PTS record gives it a run for its money imo.
Even the records that Chamberlain achieved in the NBA are at the highest possible coefficient.

The 100 points in a game are the least, even more impossible to think of beating are the 50.4 points average in a single regular season, or the 55 rebounds in a game, the average and total career rebounds, the 292 points over 4 consecutive games (for an average of 73 points) culminating with the 100 point game.

In summary, Nadal's record of RGs won is certainly one of the most unapproachable, but I'm not sure it is the most unapproachable in the entire sporting landscape.
For example, even the records Messi and Ronaldo achieved in the Spanish championship, I don't know if they can ever be beaten.
50 goals in a single championship like Messi did if I'm not mistaken in the 2011/12 La Liga are science fiction (and CR7 did not win that top scorer ranking despite scoring 45) in a context where even if a player exceeds 30 it is considered a "miracle".
 

anarosevoli

Semi-Pro
1. 14 RGs
2. 13 consecutive slam finals (Graf)
3. Reaching at least the semifinal in the first 34 slams she participated in (Evert)
4. Being one of the most famous tennis players without winning anything (KK)
(ignore 2 and 3, just realized it's only about men's tennis)
 

thrust

Legend
Even the records that Chamberlain achieved in the NBA are at the highest possible coefficient.

The 100 points in a game are the least, even more impossible to think of beating are the 50.4 points average in a single regular season, or the 55 rebounds in a game, the average and total career rebounds, the 292 points over 4 consecutive games (for an average of 73 points) culminating with the 100 point game.

In summary, Nadal's record of RGs won is certainly one of the most unapproachable, but I'm not sure it is the most unapproachable in the entire sporting landscape.
For example, even the records Messi and Ronaldo achieved in the Spanish championship, I don't know if they can ever be beaten.
50 goals in a single championship like Messi did if I'm not mistaken in the 2011/12 La Liga are science fiction (and CR7 did not win that top scorer ranking despite scoring 45) in a context where even if a player exceeds 30 it is considered a "miracle".
As great as the football players were, they were on a team sport, Nadal and other great players are on the court alone. Winning the FO as often and as dominate as Nadal did, is definitely one of the very greatest accomplishments in tennis and all sports. I doubt if Rafa's record at RG will ever be broken.
 

The Guru

Legend
How does Gretzky do in today's era?
No idea not a hockey guy but I know that his career average in assists per season in a 20 year career is higher than the highest season anyone has posted since he retired. That's pretty ****ing nuts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS

RS

Bionic Poster
No idea not a hockey guy but I know that his career average in assists per season in a 20 year career is higher than the highest season anyone has posted since he retired. That's pretty ****ing nuts.
Sorry assumed you are hockey guy :p
 

The Guru

Legend
Even the records that Chamberlain achieved in the NBA are at the highest possible coefficient.

The 100 points in a game are the least, even more impossible to think of beating are the 50.4 points average in a single regular season, or the 55 rebounds in a game, the average and total career rebounds, the 292 points over 4 consecutive games (for an average of 73 points) culminating with the 100 point game.

In summary, Nadal's record of RGs won is certainly one of the most unapproachable, but I'm not sure it is the most unapproachable in the entire sporting landscape.
For example, even the records Messi and Ronaldo achieved in the Spanish championship, I don't know if they can ever be beaten.
50 goals in a single championship like Messi did if I'm not mistaken in the 2011/12 La Liga are science fiction (and CR7 did not win that top scorer ranking despite scoring 45) in a context where even if a player exceeds 30 it is considered a "miracle".
There's a lot of reasons the Wilt records don't impress me as much that we can get into if you're interested and no it's not the ignorant he was facing plumbers nonsense.

Can't speak on soccer it's not my sport but goals in a season is not a record of the same magnitude at least in my opinion. Like no one is ever going to even sniff 1/10th of Cy Young's complete game record there's a 0% chance it will even be remotely threatened at any point in history but like that's just not nearly as important of a record.
 

The Guru

Legend
Sorry assumed you are hockey guy :p
Haha no worries man. The sports I follow closely enough that I feel I can speak on intelligently are football, basketball, baseball, MMA, and tennis. I casually follow and generally have an idea about what goes in hockey, F1, and golf but my opinions are not worth taking seriously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
There's a lot of reasons the Wilt records don't impress me as much that we can get into if you're interested and no it's not the ignorant he was facing plumbers nonsense.

Can't speak on soccer it's not my sport but goals in a season is not a record of the same magnitude at least in my opinion. Like no one is ever going to even sniff 1/10th of Cy Young's complete game record there's a 0% chance it will even be remotely threatened at any point in history but like that's just not nearly as important of a record.
And one of the reasons is that due to the much more anarchic game of the time there were many more possessions per game.

However, in this case we were no longer talking about the origin of the thread, i.e. the most impressive statistics, but we had digressed into the most unapproachable ones.

So, like it or not, the records obtained by Chamberlain are among the most unapproachable in the sporting scene regardless of the cause.
 

GoatNo1

Hall of Fame
Of course Djokovic has many incredible records, but the fact it took Djokovic until he was 37 because the Olympics happens every four years, means it was a more difficult mountain for him to climb, it was the highest peak, the tougher achievement. No one has shown complete mastery of the sport in mens and womens except him.
if you think like this, fed is 3 titles short to completing tennis: MC, rome and OG.
rafa is also 3 titles short to do the same: WTF, miami and paris.

BUT

fed is 2 titles short of completing CGM and 5 to completing DCGM.
rafa is 2 titles short of completing CGM and 6 titles short to do it twice.

nole is one title short to do it trice!
 

RS

Bionic Poster
I want to get into MMA. I just can't seem to get invested in any combat sport like boxing though.

I was looking forward to the talks of Jones fighting Aspinall and Ngannou at heavyweight but seems that's died down now.
 

The Guru

Legend
I want to get into MMA. I just can't seem to get invested in any combat sport like boxing though.

I was looking forward to the talks of Jones fighting Aspinall and Ngannou at heavyweight but seems that's died down now.
Jones doesn't want to take this risk of getting beaten. Can't blame him honestly even though it really sucks for the fans. I think he'd fight Francis if Dana would let him but Aspinall he just won't take.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS

Hitman

Bionic Poster
if you think like this, fed is 3 titles short to completing tennis: MC, rome and OG.
rafa is also 3 titles short to do the same: WTF, miami and paris.

BUT

fed is 2 titles short of completing CGM and 5 to completing DCGM.
rafa is 2 titles short of completing CGM and 6 titles short to do it twice.

nole is one title short to do it trice!
He is indeed.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Jones doesn't want to take this risk of getting beaten. Can't blame him honestly even though it really sucks for the fans. I think he'd fight Francis if Dana would let him but Aspinall he just won't take.
Yeah tbf it's not Jones natural weight class and he is getting older now.
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
You're so ignorant lol.
You insulting me doesn't make you right, and speaks bad of your temper and manners (imagine insulting someone simply because you disagree with his views over a tennis discussion). The US Open and the AO are only played on hard nowadays and over the last 3 decades and a half. Whether they have been played in other surfaces some years in the past, doesn't make my argument wrong: RG and W are more relevant due to surface's specificity.
 
Last edited:

Sport

G.O.A.T.
Easier said than done, but…
Don’t feed the troll. Sport is, how shall I say this…
“A very objective and honest poster”

You’re absolutely right though, the US open historically has been the most prestigious after Wimbledon.
Username checks out. Thanks for insulting me, though.

Now whatever comment I say that leans slightly, I repeat, slightly in another direction from the narrative of certain users, it's considered trollistic in nature.

Saying Alcaraz is better than Federer is trolling. Saying RG is more prestigious than the USO due to its current (and over the last 3 decades and a half) surface's specifity, it's just a perfectly valid opinion. Whether you can't handle the fact that other users have different perspectives on tennis topics than yours is another issue. Now, go ahead, and insult me again proving my point.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
You insulting me doesn't make you right, and speaks bad of your temper and manners (imagine insulting someone simply because you disagree with his views over a tennis discussion). The US Open and the AO are only played on hard nowadays and over the last 3 decades and a half. Whether they have been played in other surfaces some years in the past, doesn't make my argument wrong: RG and W are more relevant due to surface's specificity.
I stated a fact 8-B You have 0 idea about tennis history. The USO was clearly the second most prestigious slam in the 70's to 90's. The best players in the world prioritised Wimbledon and the USO in that order, for the most part.

This revisionist take of yours is based only on your feelings because you're a Nadal fanboy (y)
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
I stated a fact 8-B You have 0 idea about tennis history. The USO was clearly the second most prestigious slam in the 70's to 90's. The best players in the world prioritised Wimbledon and the USO in that order, for the most part.

This revisionist take of yours is based only on your feelings because you're a Nadal fanboy (y)
I dissagree with your views = fanboy.

That's the pinnacle of fanaticism, which is paradoxical, considering you accuse others of being the same thing you profess without realizing it.

suppressed-emotions-young-man-looking-at-a-screaming-reflection-of-himself-in-a-mirror-2K2ADB0.jpg



P. S.: why are you suddenly reducing the significance of the USO to the 1970s to 1990s, instead of including all of its history, including the present century?

Also, I disagree with the notion that the USO was bigger than RG in the 1970s and 1980s. Borg was the man in tennis during those days, and his success at RG was much more talked about than any other player's success at the USO.
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
I'm done with this discussion with @NatF. He's unable to maintain a civil tennis discussion without employing ad hominem derogative attacks such as "ignorant", "fanboy", etc.

I refure to keep going a conversation with disrespectful people.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Haha no worries man. The sports I follow closely enough that I feel I can speak on intelligently are football, basketball, baseball, MMA, and tennis. I casually follow and generally have an idea about what goes in hockey, F1, and golf but my opinions are not worth taking seriously.
I think it was baseball I was thinking of. Got confusing because in the cross sports threads they have all be talked about lol.
 

The Guru

Legend
I stated a fact 8-B You have 0 idea about tennis history. The USO was clearly the second most prestigious slam in the 70's to 90's. The best players in the world prioritised Wimbledon and the USO in that order, for the most part.

This revisionist take of yours is based only on your feelings because you're a Nadal fanboy (y)
In fairness a lot of that had to do with almost all the greatest players in the game being American which means they both were worst on clay and loved and prioritized the USO
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
In fairness a lot of that had to do with almost all the greatest players in the game being American which means they both were worst on clay and loved and prioritized the USO
Some of it but not all of it, that doesn't mean it's not valid either. Maybe we should make a poll in the former pro section and see what some of the old timers think...
 

The Guru

Legend
Some of it but not all of it, that doesn't mean it's not valid either. Maybe we should make a poll in the former pro section and see what some of the old timers think...
You can't deny that the fact that the biggest stars in the game mostly sucked on clay and were Americans and loved the USO had a huge effect on the USOs prestige. Now that we suck at tennis people in America don't really care and the lack of American star power has dropped it from clear number 2 to imo number 4. And I say that as someone who currently lives in NYC.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
You can't deny that the fact that the biggest stars in the game mostly sucked on clay and were Americans and loved the USO had a huge effect on the USOs prestige. Now that we suck at tennis people in America don't really care and the lack of American star power has dropped it from clear number 2 to imo number 4. And I say that as someone who currently lives in NYC.
Who's denying anything? Of course that impacted the prestige but that doesn't mean it's invalid to say it was more prestigious.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
You can't deny that the fact that the biggest stars in the game mostly sucked on clay and were Americans and loved the USO had a huge effect on the USOs prestige. Now that we suck at tennis people in America don't really care and the lack of American star power has dropped it from clear number 2 to imo number 4. And I say that as someone who currently lives in NYC.
Average BH's and rallying/movement of a number of US players :whistle:
 

The Guru

Legend
Who's denying anything? Of course that impacted the prestige but that doesn't mean it's invalid to say it was more prestigious.
Sure I'm just trying to point out that USO's prestige was mostly circumstantial unlike say Wimbledon's. If we had a bunch of Euro/French stars who loved clay it might've been 2nd in the 70s-90s.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer record of 22 consecutive semifinal appearances at the GS is one of the greatest feat among all sports

His streak belongs in the same feat with these legends.....
• Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak in 1941 for the New York Yankees. Pete Rose's 44 games is second on the all-time list.
• Edwin Moses' 107 consecutive victories in 400-meter intermediate hurdles finals. The American went 9 years, 9 months and 9 days without a loss before falling to Danny Harris in 1987.
• Cael Sanderson's 159-0 wrestling career at Iowa State. He remains the only undefeated wrestler in college history, winning three NCAA titles at 184 pounds and one at 197.
• The Edmonton Oilers' Wayne Gretzky's streak of scoring at least a goal or an assist in 51 straight games in 1983-84.
• Orel Hershiser's run of 59 consecutive scoreless innings in 1988 for the Los Angeles Dodgers.
• Russia's Greco-Roman super heavyweight wrestler Alexander Karelin went 13 years without losing a match -- a full decade without surrendering a point -- before losing to Rulon Gardner at the Sydney Olympics.

"It's just ridiculous," Lendl added. "There is no other way to say it. You can't explain it to people, it's just absurd."

"It says," Lendl mused, "how much better he is than anybody else."

"It's pretty safe to say,"
said ESPN analyst Darren Cahill, "it's one record that will never be broken."

“I don’t think you can ever get your game to perfection, you know. Only if you’re Federer,”
Djokovic said.
 

FedForGOAT

Professional
Nadal RG record is probably the most untouchable significant record in sports. There are minor records like Dimaggio hit streak and Ripken and Favre's games streaks are probably harder to beat but not at all records of the same magnitude. Only Gretzky's PTS record gives it a run for its money imo.
Respectfully, I really cannot agree with this take.

Michael Phelps, 8 Gold medals at the Beijing Olympics? Total Olympic medals?

Usain Bolt 100m 200m 4x100m x3 ? Absolutely nuts.

Don Bradman’s Career Test average of 99.94?

Kohei Uchimura’s 7 straight AA titles in gymnastics?

Alexander Karelin’s 13 unbeaten years in wrestling?

Bill Russel’s 11 NBA championships?

Some of these are older, pre “modern” era.
But some are modern, and some like Bolt’s record, I’d consider more “major” than Nadal’s record, as impressive as it is.

Just my $0.02.
 

The Guru

Legend
Respectfully, I really cannot agree with this take.

Michael Phelps, 8 Gold medals at the Beijing Olympics? Total Olympic medals?

Usain Bolt 100m 200m 4x100m x3 ? Absolutely nuts.

Don Bradman’s Career Test average of 99.94?

Kohei Uchimura’s 7 straight AA titles in gymnastics?

Alexander Karelin’s 13 unbeaten years in wrestling?

Bill Russel’s 11 NBA championships?

Some of these are older, pre “modern” era.
But some are modern, and some like Bolt’s record, I’d consider more “major” than Nadal’s record, as impressive as it is.

Just my $0.02.
All reasonable takes. The Phelps thing to me is slightly less impressive because no other sports offer that opportunity to win so many medals so even though it has to do with his greatness it's really more about the sport he competes in. Bolt, for example, never failed to get a gold every time he competed but he only got 9 chances.

I will also admit that I rate sports that have higher participation rates and dollars invested as more impressive to achieve things in and for that reason some of these are relatively less insane obviously everything here is an otherworldly accomplishment.

Russell is my pick for the GOAT but it is worth noting that he played in a league with 8 teams making his championships about 4x as likely given the amount of competitors assuming parity. 11 championships in an 8 team league is not necessarily more impressive than 6 in a 22/27 team league or 4 in a 30 team league.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
All reasonable takes. The Phelps thing to me is slightly less impressive because no other sports offer that opportunity to win so many medals so even though it has to do with his greatness it's really more about the sport he competes in. Bolt, for example, never failed to get a gold every time he competed but he only got 9 chances.

I will also admit that I rate sports that have higher participation rates and dollars invested as more impressive to achieve things in and for that reason some of these are relatively less insane obviously everything here is an otherworldly accomplishment.

Russell is my pick for the GOAT but it is worth noting that he played in a league with 8 teams making his championships about 4x as likely given the amount of competitors assuming parity. 11 championships in an 8 team league is not necessarily more impressive than 6 in a 22/27 team league or 4 in a 30 team league.
What does Lebron need to do for you to put him over Russell?
 

FedForGOAT

Professional
All reasonable takes. The Phelps thing to me is slightly less impressive because no other sports offer that opportunity to win so many medals so even though it has to do with his greatness it's really more about the sport he competes in. Bolt, for example, never failed to get a gold every time he competed but he only got 9 chances.

I will also admit that I rate sports that have higher participation rates and dollars invested as more impressive to achieve things in and for that reason some of these are relatively less insane obviously everything here is an otherworldly accomplishment.

Russell is my pick for the GOAT but it is worth noting that he played in a league with 8 teams making his championships about 4x as likely given the amount of competitors assuming parity. 11 championships in an 8 team league is not necessarily more impressive than 6 in a 22/27 team league or 4 in a 30 team league.
Very reasonable points!

About Phelps, I absolutely agree. The discussions that just mention his medal count compared to other athletes are pretty nonsensical.

However, even in swimming, no one has really come close to what he’s done. Partly because it’s so exhausting trying to swim all those races in such a short period of time (Phelps himself might’ve raced backstroke if it weren’t so onerous to do so many races). Ledecky is closest, but still not close, and I do tend to rate the women’s competition as somewhat weaker, even in swimming (I could be wrong). This is why I rate his accomplishments very highly.

And I absolutely agree about participation and dollars. I also rate these sports more highly, due to intrinsically higher competition. That’s why Bolt would be very high on my GOAT list (even though I believe they all take copious PEDs in track). Because almost every child runs, and if you’re fast enough to compete, most do.

Nice discussion :). But I don’t want to digress too much from the thread topic
 

thrust

Legend
I stated a fact 8-B You have 0 idea about tennis history. The USO was clearly the second most prestigious slam in the 70's to 90's. The best players in the world prioritised Wimbledon and the USO in that order, for the most part.

This revisionist take of yours is based only on your feelings because you're a Nadal fanboy (y)
The best players also competed at the FO in the 70 and 90's.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
- The Connors-Lendl retaliation, first 5 matches 5-0 Connors, last 17 matches 17-0 Lendl
Connors won his first 8 matches against Lendl, played from 1979-1981, and won all 17 sets played.

I think the McEnroe vs. Lendl rivalry had crazier swings of momentum, i.e. first 2 matches to McEnroe, 7 matches in a row to Lendl losing only 1 set, 8 of the next 9 matches to McEnroe, then Lendl shockingly wins the 1984 French Open final from 2 sets down, 4 of the next 6 matches to McEnroe (meaning 12 of 16 matches to McEnroe from 2-7 down to 14-11 in front), then 10 of the next 11 matches to Lendl to finish 21-15 to Lendl.
 

Incognito

Legend
if you think like this, fed is 3 titles short to completing tennis: MC, rome and OG.
rafa is also 3 titles short to do the same: WTF, miami and paris.

BUT

fed is 2 titles short of completing CGM and 5 to completing DCGM.
rafa is 2 titles short of completing CGM and 6 titles short to do it twice.

nole is one title short to do it trice!

Don’t forget tennis records has a lot to do with luck as well.

You really think Zverev and Tsitsipas are better players on clay than Federer? How many times have they won Monte Carlo and Rome?
 

Neptune

Hall of Fame
Don’t forget tennis records has a lot to do with luck as well.

You really think Zverev and Tsitsipas are better players on clay than Federer? How many times have they won Monte Carlo and Rome?

Yeah, luck and outside help are clear for everyone to see. Stop trying to mislead with selective small piece of information.

Career​
vs Top5​
T5 Weight​
vs Top10​
T10 Weight​
vs T11+​
T11+ Weight​
vs All​
Lendl
163 (94-69) 57.67%
12.44%
257 (165-92) 64.20%
19.62%
1053 (903-150) 85.75%
80.38%
1310 (1068-242) 81.53%
Fed​
179 (104-75) 58.10%​
11.73%​
347 (224-123) 64.55%​
22.74%​
1179 (1027-152) 87.11%​
77.26%​
1526 (1251-275) 81.98%​
Career Finals​
vs Top5​
T5 Weight​
vs Top10​
T10 Weight​
vs T11+​
T11+ Weight​
vs All​
Lendl
71 (35-36) 49.30%
48.97%
89 (47-42) 52.81%
61.38%
56 (46-10) 82.14%
38.62%
145 (93-52) 64.14%
Fed​
61 (30-31) 49.18%​
39.10%​
98 (58-40) 59.18%​
62.82%​
58 (45-13) 77.59%​
37.18%​
156 (103-53) 66.03%​
Peak​
vs Top5​
T5 Weight​
vs Top10​
T10 Weight​
vs T11+​
T11+ Weight​
vs All​
Lendl 84-89
74 (52-22) 70.27%
15.81%
116 (83-33) 71.55%
24.79%
352 (333-19) 94.60%
75.21%
468 (416-52) 88.89%
Fed 04-09​
67 (44-23) 65.67%​
13.59%​
121 (91-30) 75.21%​
24.54%​
372 (351-21) 94.35%​
75.46%​
493 (442-51) 89.66%​
Peak Finals​
vs Top5​
T5 Weight​
vs Top10​
T10 Weight​
vs T11+​
T11+ Weight​
vs All​
Lendl 84-89
37 (20-17) 54.05%
56.92%
45 (24-21) 53.33%
69.23%
20 (19-1) 95.00%
30.77%
65 (43-22) 66.15%
Fed 04-09​
30 (17-13) 56.67%​
45.45%​
44 (30-14) 68.18%​
66.67%​
22 (20-2) 90.91%​
33.33%​
66 (50-16) 75.76%​
 

Incognito

Legend
Yeah, luck and outside help are clear for everyone to see. Stop trying to mislead with selective small piece of information.

Career​
vs Top5​
T5 Weight​
vs Top10​
T10 Weight​
vs T11+​
T11+ Weight​
vs All​
Lendl
163 (94-69) 57.67%
12.44%
257 (165-92) 64.20%
19.62%
1053 (903-150) 85.75%
80.38%
1310 (1068-242) 81.53%
Fed​
179 (104-75) 58.10%​
11.73%​
347 (224-123) 64.55%​
22.74%​
1179 (1027-152) 87.11%​
77.26%​
1526 (1251-275) 81.98%​
Career Finals​
vs Top5​
T5 Weight​
vs Top10​
T10 Weight​
vs T11+​
T11+ Weight​
vs All​
Lendl
71 (35-36) 49.30%
48.97%
89 (47-42) 52.81%
61.38%
56 (46-10) 82.14%
38.62%
145 (93-52) 64.14%
Fed​
61 (30-31) 49.18%​
39.10%​
98 (58-40) 59.18%​
62.82%​
58 (45-13) 77.59%​
37.18%​
156 (103-53) 66.03%​
Peak​
vs Top5​
T5 Weight​
vs Top10​
T10 Weight​
vs T11+​
T11+ Weight​
vs All​
Lendl 84-89
74 (52-22) 70.27%
15.81%
116 (83-33) 71.55%
24.79%
352 (333-19) 94.60%
75.21%
468 (416-52) 88.89%
Fed 04-09​
67 (44-23) 65.67%​
13.59%​
121 (91-30) 75.21%​
24.54%​
372 (351-21) 94.35%​
75.46%​
493 (442-51) 89.66%​
Peak Finals​
vs Top5​
T5 Weight​
vs Top10​
T10 Weight​
vs T11+​
T11+ Weight​
vs All​
Lendl 84-89
37 (20-17) 54.05%
56.92%
45 (24-21) 53.33%
69.23%
20 (19-1) 95.00%
30.77%
65 (43-22) 66.15%
Fed 04-09​
30 (17-13) 56.67%​
45.45%​
44 (30-14) 68.18%​
66.67%​
22 (20-2) 90.91%​
33.33%​
66 (50-16) 75.76%​
What has Lendl got to do with the price of tea in china?

I was asking, you really think Zverev and Tsitsipas are better players than Federer on Monte Carlo and Rome because they’ve won it multiple times, something Federer never could?
 

GoatNo1

Hall of Fame
Don’t forget tennis records has a lot to do with luck as well.

You really think Zverev and Tsitsipas are better players on clay than Federer? How many times have they won Monte Carlo and Rome?
That nole is one title short to complete TCGM and both fed and rafa 2 titles short to just one has nothing with luck to do. They played in the same era most of the time.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Don’t forget tennis records has a lot to do with luck as well.

You really think Zverev and Tsitsipas are better players on clay than Federer? How many times have they won Monte Carlo and Rome?
Of course luck always exist. Records/stats has a lot to do with the strength and depth of competition.

Federer had much, much stronger competition than Zverev and Tsitsipas
 

Incognito

Legend
That nole is one title short to complete TCGM and both fed and rafa 2 titles short to just one has nothing with luck to do. They played in the same era most of the time.

Im of the opinion that if big 3 were all born in the same year, tennis records would look totally different today.

How many Monte Carlo and Rome titles would Zverev and Tsitsipas win if they were facing a 20-23 year old Nadal like Federer did?
 

ibbi

G.O.A.T.
I'll throw out an amazing one that is somehow still criminally unappreciated. A baselining island in a 20 year (well, almost) sea of champions...

83: McEnroe
84: McEnroe
85: Becker
86: Becker
87: Cash
88: Edberg
89: Becker
90: Edberg
91: Stich
92: Agassi️:cool:
93: Sampras
94: Sampras
95: Sampras:
96: Krajicek
97: Sampras
98: Sampras
99: Sampras
00: Sampras
01: Ivanisevic
 
Top