Top 10 Winningest Tennis Player of All Time

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
According to this article, the following tennis legends are the top 10 winningest tennis player of all time in ascending order.


10. Bjorn Borg
The Swedish-born Borg won a total of eleven Grand Slam singles titles between 1974 and 1981. During this run, he collected five consecutive Wimbledon titles as well as a total of six French Open championships. Borg is one of four players to win both Wimbledon and the French Open in the same year and became the only player to accomplish this feat three years in a row. He was the first player to win more than ten major titles in the Open Era.

Borg’s record-setting winning percentage on all surfaces was 82.74% for an overall record of 609 wins to 127 losses. He holds a 92.73% mark at Wimbledon, also a record. Overall, Borg won 41% of the Grand Slam events that he entered in his short pro career, which saw him become the first single season million-dollar prize money winner in 1979.

9. Rod Laver
Laver won a record 200 singles titles in his career. The Australian also won 22 singles titles in 1962, a single season record for a male player. Laver won at least ten singles titles per season from 1964 to 1970, also an all-time record.

Laver won nineteen major titles; eleven Grand Slams and eight Pro Slams. He is the third player to win each of the major tournaments twice in his career.

8. Roy Emerson
Emerson is the most successful amateur player in tennis history. Winning 12 amateur Grand Slam singles titles, the Australian is also the only male to complete an amateur career Grand Slam in both singles and doubles. In total, Emerson claimed sixteen doubles titles, totaling a record 28 overall major titles.

7. Rafael Nadal
Nadal is the current number two player in the world. The Spaniard has ruled on clay courts, winning the French Open a record nine times. Nadal has won fourteen Grand Slams, equaling Pete Sampras for second on the all-time list for male players.

After winning the 2014 French Open, Nadal secured the distinction of becoming the first player to win at least one Grand Slam for ten straight years. In 2010, he became the youngest player ever to complete the career Grand Slam. He also joined Mats Wilander as the only players to win at least two Grand Slams on three different surfaces: hard court, grass, and clay.

6. Pete Sampras
Sampras won fourteen Grand Slam singles titles in his career, becoming the first player to surpass Roy Emerson’s record of twelve titles. The American won the last professional tournament he entered, the U.S. Open, in 2002. He currently shares the singles title record at Wimbledon with Roger Federer, claiming seven open championships. Sampras’s five U.S. Open wins is tied for first place with Federer and Jimmy Connors.

5. Serena Williams
The younger of the Williams sisters, Serena has accrued the most success over the course of her career. The only female player to earn over $60 million in prize money, Williams is one of the most dominant female players of all time. Winning the most combined singles, doubles, and mixed doubles titles ever, she has reserved her place as one of the all-time, all-around greats.

Williams’ 18 major singles titles are fourth all time and second most during the Open Era. In tandem with her sister, Venus, the pair has combined for thirteen major doubles titles. Williams has also claimed two major mixed doubles championships. Her total of 33 major championships ranks Williams seventh on all-time list for overall major championships.

4. Chris Evert
Evert reached 34 Grand Slam finals, the most by any player in tennis history. The 18-time Grand Slam title winner never lost in the first or second round of any major tournament she entered as a professional. In singles, Evert advanced to the semifinals or better in 52 of 56 Grand Slams she entered. Evert’s seven French Open championships remains the mark to beat in women’s tennis. She also shares a record six U.S. Open wins with Serena Williams.

A career winning percentage of 89.96% ranks Evert as the most successful player in the Open Era. Her 94.55% winning percentage on clay courts is the best in the history of women’s tennis. In total, Evert claimed 15 singles and 29 doubles wins.

3. Martina Navratilova
Navratilova was a dynamic player, holding the record for most singles titles (167) and most doubles titles (177) in the Open Era. The Czech won 18 Grand Slam singles titles, 31 major doubles titles, and 10 major mixed doubles titles. Navratilova claimed the Wimbledon crown a record nine times, including six consecutive championships at one point.

Navratilova posted a record of 1982 wins to 86 losses when playing as the number one seed in a tournament. For five straight years, she won 96.8% of her matches from 1982 through 1986. This included an 86-1 season record in 1983, the best single season win/loss mark in history. Both sterling marks in a career that saw Navratilova hold the world number one ranking for five years in a row and a total of 332 weeks.

2. Steffi Graf
Graf not only owns the record for major wins in tennis history with 22 victories, but the German is also the only player to win each Grand Slam at least four times. Another first on her resume is the Calendar Year Golden Slam. In 1988, Graf won all four major championships and the Olympic gold medal.

Graf was ranked as the world’s best women’s player by the Women’s Tennis Association for a record 377 weeks. She advanced to thirteen straight Grand Slam finals, starting with the 1987 French Open and ending with the 1990 French Open. During that time, she won five straight majors, beginning with the 1988 Australian Open and ending with the 1989 Australian Open. Her 197 singles titles ranks third behind Navratilova and Evert on the all-time women’s list.

1. Roger Federer
Name virtually any major record and chances are Roger Federer owns at least a piece of it. Seven-time Wimbledon champion, five-time U.S. Open winner, and four-time Australian Open victor, the Swiss player has put his name on the title record at all three of these major tournaments. The 17-time Grand Slam winner, also a men’s record, is the greatest tennis player of all time.

World number one for 302 weeks, Federer’s career is a picture of dominance. Reaching the final of every Grand Slam event at least five times, including nine appearances in the Wimbledon final, he is the best big time player in the sport’s history. Federer has appeared in 25 Grand Slam finals, which has included a streak of ten straight finals appearances and 18 out of 19 from the 2005 Wimbledon final until the 2010 Australian Open. In Grand Slams, Federer has won 279 matches, a men’s record, and has won 60 or more times at all four tournaments.

Federer is the first player to exceed $50 million in prize money. On top of that, Federer is the only player to hit the $80 million mark in career earnings.
 
All these lists mixing male and female players are silly, ridiculous and make no sense.

Anyway, Djokovic will indeed be on this list like this, by the time his career is over.

Also Graf should not be on the list due to huge asterisk she has on her career achievements which should never be overooked or forgotten.

Also Nadal is too high on the list.
 
I'm glad the link to the original article was provided. I didn't read it, I just checked the byline. Now I finally know what TMF's real life identity is:
Travis Boyer
Author's Bio
Since earning his Bachelor's degree in English, Travis has been freelance writing for numerous publications, the latest being right here at TheRichest.com. :)
 
Last edited:
What does "winningest" even mean?
Lol even spell checker does not recognize this "word".

A credible article indeed. :roll:
 
All these lists mixing male and female players are silly, ridiculous and make no sense.

Anyway, Djokovic will indeed be on this list like this, by the time his career is over.

Also Graf should not be on the list due to huge asterisk she has on her career achievements which should never be overooked or forgotten.

Also Nadal is too high on the list.

Considering Bjorn Borg clocks in at #10, Novak has some work to do!

I actually think he will make it, btw.
 
I am pretty sure google is accessible on Apple-computers as well, so I will still send my complaints to you ;-)

It is their spellchecker who does not recognize the word. As an ESL speaker I need to rely on them about things like this.

Anyway "winningest" does sound clumsy and is not proper commonly used word indeed.

The more literate and credible writer would probably say "most accomplished" or something like that.

So I do believe Apple more than some online "Webster" dictionary.

Again. All (unwarranted in this case I must say) complaints should to be sent to the Apple Inc:

https://www.apple.com/contact/
 
It is their spellchecker who does not recognize the word. As an ESL speaker I need to rely on them about things like this.

Anyway "winningest" does sound clumsy and is not proper commonly used word indeed.

The more literate and credible writer would probably say "most accomplished" or something like that.

So I do believe Apple more than some online "Webster" dictionary.

Again. All (unwarranted in this case I must say) complaints should to be sent to the Apple Inc:

https://www.apple.com/contact/

It's in the Oxford Dictionary as well (among others), and Webster is one of the most credible dictionaries; Apple on the other hand is not.

From the entry in the Grammarist: "Yet despite the existence of grammatically unquestionable alternatives (most winning, best), winningest is deeply entrenched in sports commentary and is not going away any time soon. Those who dislike it might as well get used to it.

Google News searches show winningest has been common since the 1940s,1 and there are scattered examples from earlier. The word has always been confined mainly to American and Canadian publications.2"

You can blame Apple all you want, but before sardonically complaining about the credibility of a journalist based on grammar, one would be smart to do some more research than relying on often mistaken spellcheckers ;-)
 
This idiot says Federer is the greatest player of all time. All credibility is lost, just another article by another crazy Fed fan...
 
It's in the Oxford Dictionary as well (among others), and Webster is one of the most credible dictionaries; Apple on the other hand is not.

From the entry in the Grammarist: "Yet despite the existence of grammatically unquestionable alternatives (most winning, best), winningest is deeply entrenched in sports commentary and is not going away any time soon. Those who dislike it might as well get used to it.

Google News searches show winningest has been common since the 1940s,1 and there are scattered examples from earlier. The word has always been confined mainly to American and Canadian publications.2"

You can blame Apple all you want, but before sardonically complaining about the credibility of a journalist based on grammar, one would be smart to do some more research than relying on often mistaken spellcheckers ;-)

You can twist it any way you want it, but any experienced professional journalist, with a proper degree and a bit more literate, would not use such clumsy title for his article.

If the word is commonly used, any spellchecker would recognize it.

So my complaints towards the credibility of the author are quite warranted, unlike your complaints about Apple's spellchecker.
 
You can twist it any way you want it, but any experienced professional journalist, with a proper degree and a bit more literate, would not use such clumsy title for his article.

If the word is commonly used, any spellchecker would recognize it.

So my complaints towards the credibility of the author are quite warranted, unlike your complaints about Apple's spellchecker.

I quote again: "… winningest is deeply entrenched in sports commentary and is not going away any time soon. Those who dislike it might as well get used to it.

Google News searches show winningest has been common since the 1940s,1 and there are scattered examples from earlier. The word has always been confined mainly to American and Canadian publications.2".

Keep rowing, boy, keep rowing. I think you're revealing more about your own credibility ;-)
 
I quote again: "… winningest is deeply entrenched in sports commentary and is not going away any time soon. Those who dislike it might as well get used to it.

Google News searches show winningest has been common since the 1940s,1 and there are scattered examples from earlier. The word has always been confined mainly to American and Canadian publications.2".

Keep rowing, boy, keep rowing. I think you're revealing more about your own credibility ;-)

Quote what? LOL.

You can try to insult me all you want, but you very well know that my objections to author's credibility and usage of a word unrecognized by spellcheckers are right and correct.

I am an ESL speaker an any attempt to insult me when it comes to English is silly, does not meant anything to me and just speaks about you. I would like to see you arguing about subtleties like this one in some other language that is not your native.
 
Last edited:
You can twist it any way you want it, but any experienced professional journalist, with a proper degree and a bit more literate, would not use such clumsy title for his article.

If the word is commonly used, any spellchecker would recognize it.

So my complaints towards the credibility of the author are quite warranted, unlike your complaints about Apple's spellchecker.

You are not seeing the forest for the trees. Who cares about the grammatical correctness of a commonly used word? If you want to attack this guy's credibility, let his (lack of) bio speak for you:

Travis Boyer
Author's Bio
Since earning his Bachelor's degree in English, Travis has been freelance writing for numerous publications, the latest being right here at TheRichest.com.

It's silly to get worked up over an article published on an obscure website for rich people, written by a recent college grad with no claim to sports expertise. It could easily have been written by someone on this board!
 
Good list. But if the author mixes Male and woman, and even putting emerson in that list, I wonder where Margaret Court is. She is more successfull than any female tennis player.
 
Last edited:
You are not seeing the forest for the trees. Who cares about the grammatical correctness of a commonly used word? If you want to attack this guy's credibility, let his (lack of) bio speak for you:

Travis Boyer
Author's Bio
Since earning his Bachelor's degree in English, Travis has been freelance writing for numerous publications, the latest being right here at TheRichest.com.

It's silly to get worked up over an article published on an obscure website for rich people, written by a recent college grad with no claim to sports expertise. It could easily have been written by someone on this board!

Well said. But the silly clumsy title using uncommon questionable words is just another confirmation of all that.
 
Quote what? LOL.
The Grammarist. Their entry on the word disproved you.

You can try to insult me all you want, but you very well know that my objections to author's credibility and usage of a word unrecognized by spellcheckers are right and correct.

I'm not insulting you, simply pointing out that you have been disproven, and that you continuing being wrong is ridiculous. You've been disproven, so saying that you are correct over and over won't make it so.

I am an ESL speaker an any attempt to insult me when it comes to English is silly, does not meant anything to me and just speaks about you. I would like to see you arguing about subtleties like this one in some other language that is not your native.

Again, not insulting, simply correcting ludicrous claims. And, ha, english is not my native language, so you have already gotten what you wished to see.
 
Good list. But if the author mixes Male and woman, I wonder where Margaret Court is. She is more successfull than any female tennis player.

Are you high? It's a terrible article.

LOL Borg less dominant than Emerson?

LOL this guy probably wasn't even alive when Borg was dominating, let alone when Emerson was playing...
 
Good list. But if the author mixes Male and woman, and even putting Emerson in that list, I wonder where Margaret Court is. She is more successfull than any female tennis player.

So true. And if you're going to be silly and mix genders, no way can you place Federer over Graf unless a) you value men's over women's (fair enough, but don't put them in the same list then), or b) you are a Fed fanboy.
 
Well said. But the silly clumsy title using uncommon questionable words is just another confirmation of all that.

But there is a word ''winningest''. Don't know why you keep questioning the credibility when you just realized that winningest is a word.
 
So true. And if you're going to be silly and mix genders, no way can you place Federer over Graf unless a) you value men's over women's (fair enough, but don't put them in the same list then), or b) you are a Fed fanboy.

Of course he's a Fed fanboy, he referred to Roger as the goat. Only Fed fanboys do that.

Every other rational and sane tennis fan knows it's impossible to say who is the goat.
 
Are you high? It's a terrible article.

LOL Borg less dominant than Emerson?

LOL this guy probably wasn't even alive when Borg was dominating, let alone when Emerson was playing...

I think he looked mostly at amount of GS titles.
 
Good list. But if the author mixes Male and woman, and even putting emerson in that list, I wonder where Margaret Court is. She is more successfull than any female tennis player.

Regardless of whether it's Male and woman or Man and female, Margaret Court would definitely be in the mix.
 
The Grammarist. Their entry on the word disproved you.



I'm not insulting you, simply pointing out that you have been disproven, and that you continuing being wrong is ridiculous. You've been disproven, so saying that you are correct over and over won't make it so.



Again, not insulting, simply correcting ludicrous claims. And, ha, english is not my native language, so you have already gotten what you wished to see.

You have not disproved me, nor was I was wrong here at all. Everything I said was correct.

Anyway, keep bragging and throwing unproven claims and insults. Just speaks about you.
 
Last edited:
But there is a word ''winningest''. Don't know why you keep questioning the credibility when you just realized that winningest is a word.

"Winningest" is obscure and not a proper commonly used word.
Spellchecker would recognize it if it is.

Usage of that word in a clumsy way in the title, among other things, proves authors incompetence.

All there is to say here.
 
"Winningest" is obscure and not a proper commonly used word.
Spellchecker would recognize it if it is.

Usage of that word in a clumsy way in the title, among other things, proves authors incompetence.

All there is to say here.

How do you know its not a commonly used word?

Using spellchecker to ''prove'' if its not used much or not isn't enough.

Cut the crap will you. You were just prooven that it is indeed a word and that you can use it for whatever you want and how much you want.
 
Last edited:
Of course he's a Fed fanboy, he referred to Roger as the goat. Only Fed fanboys do that.

Every other rational and sane tennis fan knows it's impossible to say who is the goat.

I don't believe in goats either, but I can at least see how Fed fans can make their case for him as man goat or all time goat (with presumption that it's harder to achieve slams in men's), but if you're just going to lump the men and women together equally based on stats, no way is he over Graf.

I actually kind of believe TMF could be the author because it follows his pattern: places Serena below Evert and Navratilova (not saying that isn't a valid opinion, but how many threads has he started to this effect since Serena won 18?), excludes Court, and makes Fed the GOAT.*

It scares me that I have spent enough time on here to make this kind of accusation - when I was new I thought people like that needed to get a life. I was right :)

*edit: TMF, if you really are the author, then I'm sorry for teasing and sincerely congratulate you for getting your article published!
 
Last edited:
Federer is the most accomplished player of all times. No one have the records he has.

I can't see why he wouldn't be called the greatest of all times.

I guess Mcenroe, Wilander, and all former pros etc are clueless aswell as they talk about GOATS.
 
Last edited:
Quote what? LOL.

You can try to insult me all you want, but you very well know that my objections to author's credibility and usage of a word unrecognized by spellcheckers are right and correct.

I am an ESL speaker an any attempt to insult me when it comes to English is silly, does not meant anything to me and just speaks about you. I would like to see you arguing about subtleties like this one in some other language that is not your native.

I can recall the Montreal Canadiens being described as "the winningest pro sports franchise of all time" decades ago, so it's a word that's been in use long before now.
 
How do you know its not a commonly used word?

Using spellchecker to ''prove'' if its not used much or not isn't enough.

Cut the crap will you. You were just prooven that it is indeed a word and that you can use it for whatever you want and how much you want.

It is good enough for this purpose. Also words need to be used in proper fashion, especially by journalists.

So no "crap" from me. Not at all. Just justified objections about author's credibility.

Also no need to use insults and bad language. Thanks.
 
It is good enough for this purpose. Also words need to be used in proper fashion, especially by journalists.

So no "crap" from me. Not at all. Just justified objections about author's credibility.

Also no need to use insults and bad language. Thanks.

Both the Grammarist and several esteemed dictionaries support the fact that the word was used in a proper way. Whatever shortcomings you have in your knowledge of the english language doesn't affect the credibility of the article. English speaking journalists can't and won't change the way they write simply because you don't use a dictionary :lol:
 
Both the Grammarist and several esteemed dictionaries support the fact that the word was used in a proper way. Whatever shortcomings you have in your knowledge of the english language doesn't affect the credibility of the article. English speaking journalists can't and won't change the way they write simply because you don't use a dictionary :lol:
I would also point out that the only credential the author has is that he was an English major. This would imply that he knows jack **** about the English language, compared to someone who has admitted that they are not proficient. Just sayin'.....maybe time to give it a rest.
 
Why is everywon sow sencitive about spelling and grammar ? Eye just don't get it. Four sum peeple English is knot there first language.

Buy the weigh English is a silly language in any case as demonstrated above and in this sentense.
 
Why is everywon sow sencitive about spelling and grammar ? Eye just don't get it. Four sum peeple English is knot there first language.

Buy the weigh English is a silly language in any case as demonstrated above and in this sentense.

Exactly. Its really irrelevant to nag about some misspelling and gramar issues.

For me english is my third language. I don't expect it to be perfect either. As long as people understand eachother, it should be fine.
 
Never heard about "winningest" either. I thought the OP just made it up as a joke. I'd almost go as far as saying it shouldn't be a word based on how stupid it looks and sounds.
 
Never heard about "winningest" either. I thought the OP just made it up as a joke. I'd almost go as far as saying it shouldn't be a word based on how stupid it looks and sounds.

Yes, I agree. I have heard this word before (and many similar others) but it sounds ridiculous.
 
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/winningest

How about checking a dictionary? -est is a suffix to be added at the end of adjectives, and winning can be used as an adjective, as in this case.
Winningest is an Americanism related to sports. It would never be used in formal writing - more like online/magazine-type discussions and probably only about topics like sports where colloquialisms/informal phrases are common. Otherwise, it sounds like a lazy way to say "most likely to win."

If "est" can be added to the end of adjectives then why not "ish" > winningish.? :p
 
This idiot says Federer is the greatest player of all time. All credibility is lost, just another article by another crazy Fed fan...

So then I'm sure you know of some mysterious players who have a better claim?
 
Both the Grammarist and several esteemed dictionaries support the fact that the word was used in a proper way. Whatever shortcomings you have in your knowledge of the english language doesn't affect the credibility of the article. English speaking journalists can't and won't change the way they write simply because you don't use a dictionary :lol:

Bold part is not true at all. You keep repeating this, but you have shown nothing whatsoever to back this empty claim. The rest are just insults and empty drivel, not worthy of a response.

Anyway to repeat. The title and usage of the "winningest" word is improper enough to question author's credibility. You are free to disagree, but that is just your opinion, which is not worth much here. I would take Apple's spellchecker over your trolling any day.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top