The roll of honor of the "real" ATP Finals champions

[ChrisRF]

In tennis a tournament win only feels right if you are undefeated. And I think that’s why Djokovic fought so hard against Medvedev. This was his fourth undefeated title, only one behind Federer and Lendl now. That said, I’m quite sure he will get another one, so this thread isn't intended to "downvote" him. On the contrary, he showed that a real champion wants to stay undefeated at all costs and he should have earned everyone's respect with his attitude.

Here I have the number of undefeated title runs for all those players who (officially) won the ATP Finals since 1970.

5
Roger Federer (6)
Ivan Lendl* (5)
* 2 of Lendl’s titles were in knockout format, so obviously the winner was undefeated. Also in one more title his last RR match wasn’t played.

4
Novak Djokovic (6)

3
John McEnroe* (3)
* 2 of McEnroe’s titles were in knockout format (same as for Lendl)

2
Ilie Nastase (4)

1
Björn Borg (2)
Lleyton Hewitt (2)
Andy Murray (1)
Michael Stich (1)
Daniil Medvedev (1)
Grigor Dimitrov (1)
Guillermo Vilas (1)

0
Pete Sampras (5)
Boris Becker (3)
Alexander Zverev (2)
Alex Corretja (1)
Andre Agassi (1)
David Nalbandian (1)
Gustavo Kuerten (1)
Jimmy Connors (1)
Nikolay Davydenko (1)
Stan Smith (1)
Stefan Edberg (1)
Stefanos Tsitsipas (1)

 

[Kralingen]

I dare you to tell Sampras he has 0 'real' ATP Finals titles. Double dare you.

 

[NoleFam]

Thread should have said "undefeated ATP Finals champions". Every last one of them were real. Lol

 

[TheAssassin]

Zero undefeated YEC runs. Nadal has something in common with PETE. Stunning!

 

[The Guru]

I think undefeated definitely makes it more special. Wouldn't feel quite the same if Meddy had gotten the win.

 

[ChrisRF]

I dare you to tell Sampras he has 0 'real' ATP Finals titles. Double dare you.

Yeah, it was really strange, especially in combination with Becker. Imagine, they had FIVE (!) Round Robin matches against each other, and ALWAYS the LOSER went on to win tournament (1991, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996). Maybe one of the strangest facts in tennis history.

Surprisingly Sampras only came out of RR undefeated twice in 11 tries (that's really weak for a player of his caliber), and in both years he lost in the knockout stage.

 

[ChrisRF]

Thread should have said "undefeated ATP Finals champions". Every last one of them were real. Lol

That's why I used quotation marks, to not make it FULLY serious. But still, for me it SOMEHOW feels that way.

 

[NoleFam]

That's why I used quotation marks, to not make it FULLY serious. But still, for me it SOMEHOW feels that way.

Well we can't say Sampras has no real ATP Finals titles...lol

 

[Mainad]

Amazing to think that Sampras had no unbeaten runs in ANY of his 5 title wins!!!

Does that mean he was a bit careless or that it was harder to have an unbeaten run in his day??

 

[ChrisRF]

Amazing to think that Sampras had no unbeaten runs in ANY of his 5 title wins!!!

Does that mean he was a bit careless or that it was harder to have an unbeaten run in his day??

Well, apart from Wimbledon Sampras was never dominant in a Big 3 sense. He could always have his day where his serve was slightly off, and then a loss could come surprisingly easily. Even your guy Andy matches some of Sampras' peak yearly win percentages quite well.

Yes, he was great. But (again outside Wimbledon of course) you could never fully trust him to win 5 matches in a row, sometimes especially against lower opposition.

In the years he ended as #1 he had losses at the WTF to guys like Michael Chang, Wayne Ferreira, Carlos Moya and Alex Corretja (added to the more acceptable losses to Becker and Stich in Germany). Then at his last WTF he was absolutely clobbered by Hewitt, including a bagel. The end of the S&V era was about to arrive. However, he still had a great revenge win against US Open winner Safin in the same tournament.

 

[DSH]

Yeah, it was really strange, especially in combination with Becker. Imagine, they had FIVE (!) Round Robin matches against each other, and ALWAYS the LOSER went on to win tournament (1991, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996). Maybe one of the strangest facts in tennis history.

Surprisingly Sampras only came out of RR undefeated twice in 11 tries (that's really weak for a player of his caliber), and in both years he lost in the knockout stage.

The guy suffered from thalassemia minor, don't expect him to play every match at maximum intensity.
And Sampras didn't have the supplements and magic potions that there are now.

 

[ChrisRF]

The guy suffered from thalassemia minor, don't expect him to play every match at maximum intensity.
And Sampras didn't have the supplements and magic potions that there are now.

But to give him credit, despite that illness he had a very good record in 5-set-matches, clearly better than Federer. He certainly was a fighter. He just had it harder to find a Plan B if his main tool, his serve, wasn't at 100 %. And, unlike Federer and Djokovic (but a bit like Nadal) he generally needed his favourite conditions to really be confident and dominant.

 

[Hitman]

Thread should have said "undefeated ATP Finals champions". Every last one of them were real. Lol

Yes....this thread title is incorrect regarding the subject content.

 

[helterskelter]

Yeah, it was really strange, especially in combination with Becker. Imagine, they had FIVE (!) Round Robin matches against each other, and ALWAYS the LOSER went on to win tournament (1991, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996). Maybe one of the strangest facts in tennis history.

Surprisingly Sampras only came out of RR undefeated twice in 11 tries (that's really weak for a player of his caliber), and in both years he lost in the knockout stage.

Moreover, on only two of the five occasions (1994 and 1996) was the round-robin reversed in the final. In 1991, 1992, and 1995, the round-robin winner lost in the semis to someone who then lost in the final to the round-robin loser. It'd be one thing if the two of them just kept splitting matches, but that little factoid makes it all the stranger, to me at least.