Who won the Edberg-Becker rivalry?

[StringGuruMRT]

On the court Becker for sure. Off court... Unfortunately, Edberg in straights!

 

[StringGuruMRT]

Nobody cares about a QF match in Basel in 1995 after they were both has-beens.

Becker was far from a has-been in 1995. He won the Aus Open in 96

 

[California]

I was a big fan of Edberg and voted « too close to call ».
To be fair I would like to mention that I watched a lot of tennis at that time and it seemed to me that at his best, Becker was a bit stronger Edberg and I didn’t like that.
However there are several factors to consider, well discussed in this thread and that’s why I maintain « too close to call ».

The other factor in Becker’s H2H advantage is one surface, indoor carpet. 13 to 4 for Becker on that particular surface, would’ve been nice to see them play more on clay or outdoor hardcourts. A US Open meeting would’ve been great to see. 1994 on Edberg was done at the top of the game, Becker also won 4 times from 94 to 96. So there is more to the story of the 25 to 10 number.

Both great players and fun to watch, shame we didn’t get to see them play more at big events from 87 to 93. I don’t think they ever played each other at the US Open or Aussie Open.

 

[Shaolin]

Edberg wins rivalry 6-0, 6-0

Stefan still in great shape, playing at a high level and a successful businessmen.

Boris looks like he's 78, bankrupt and heading to prison.

 

[BillKid]

Edberg wins rivalry 6-0, 6-0

Stefan still in great shape, playing at a high level and a successful businessmen.

Boris looks like he's 78, bankrupt and heading to prison.

I can’t like your message but it’s sadly true.

 

[ScentOfDefeat]

Ah yes, the age-old question.
Overall, Becker undeniably, but Edberg won the most important matches between them.
In the sport of tennis as a whole it's perhaps the opposite: Becker won the most in the most prestigious category (singles), but Edberg mastered the game overall (number 1 in singles and doubles). These are additional factors in the rivalry, it's not just about H2H.

To this day Edberg remains my favourite player of all time.

 

[Aslan T]

This is a good post. Hopefully not too toxic for Becker fans.

 

[Thetouch]

The 1990 Wimbledon final is key. It set things in motion that led to Edberg, not Becker, being the one to finally oust Lendl from the no.1 spot in the rankings, a position he had held more or less permanently since 1985. And for the next 85 weeks Edberg held Becker at bay for 72, leading to that Becker only accumulated a measly 13 weeks at the top and never ending a year as the no. 1 player. When Edberg was finally ousted it wasn't by Becker but by Courier. In the list of no.1 players per year, Edberg appears twice, Becker zero times. It's not just about counting matches won or lost -- what matches you win and consequences of them matters more. Nobody cares about a QF match in Basel in 1995 after they were both has-beens. Losing the 1990 Wimbledon final had a major detrimental effect on Becker's overall standing in the sport. That year, 1990, (and 1991), was his chance to be the best, his one chance, as it turned out. He was never close again. Instead Edberg took the top spot and was the best in the sport. And this is why Edberg won the rivalry.

In hindsight Becker should have won their RG semis in 1989 because he would have most likely beaten Chang and become a CGS winner. It's ironic how Becker lost both matches in RG and WB in 5 sets coming back from 0:2 in sets when he was a break up in the 5th as well. Becker blew 2 more slam victories at least. But it also proves Edberg's mental strength as he pulled quite a lot of those matches in the very last minute.

 

[I get cramps]

Are other tennis forums like this place: a battle? It’s horrible

I suspect it’s the same people on all of them.

I was a member for years of the allaboutjazz forum a very long time ago until unexpectedly that forum crashed and they could not recover any of the written material.

Jazz fans tend to be contentious. It was common to read on allaboutjazz assertions along the lines of, "Free Jazz is a manifestation of teenage angst." However, quite a few of the diatribes were sharp and witty. I can't say the same about this place. Occasionally, here you read things of a tone and volume befitting the din of a giant's sperm running or a colossus's testicles clacking in his ******* (name of an undiscovered mythological giant). Fortunately, there is a lot of holy indignation around here.

Needless to say, I include myself in all of the above groups as well as thirteen others.

 

[Aslan T]

Sir, this is a Wendy's

 

[ScentOfDefeat]

Who had the greater career, who is higher on the GOAT list is a different conversation than who won the rivalry. IMO (and it's just my opinion; everyone has their own), Edberg and Becker are closer when talking GOAT standing than they are on the rivalry front. From my perspective, the "rivalry" only encompasses the matches between them, not all the stuff outside their matches. I made my case above for why I think Becker clearly "wins" the rivalry.

It depends whether you take rivalry to be just H2H between two players or a career comparison.
The same word can be used for both, and the confusion between them has created some miscommunication in this thread.
But if people explain what they mean by rivalry - like you and I did, though our definitions differ - it certainly becomes more helpful.

 

[joe sch]

Yes rivalry to be just H2H between two players or a career comparison
GOATness is usually slam count and both have 6, I believe, but as stated by others Edberg won the slams when Becker was the opponent.
Also as @Shaolin points out, perhaps the life rivalry is the most important ?
IMO Edberg

 

[AgassiSuperSlam11]

Edberg has too much of a deficit in the overall bo3 and bo5 count to give him the edge. I think the OP may have considered the Edberg-Lendl rivalry as a closer rivalry to debate. Edberg won the h2h 14-13, lead 6-5 bo5, but was 3-4 in Finals. Edberg was also 5-4 in Slams which may give him the overall slight edge.

 

[adil1972]

is agassi the only tennis player who played challenger circuit after winning a grand slam

 

[King_olaf_the_hairy]

is agassi the only tennis player who played challenger circuit after winning a grand slam

Stan Wawrinka definitely has.[Source]
Andy Murray too.[Source]

Edit: I wondered if it had been done before Agassi. Per this article, Jimmy Connors (then world #4) played a challenger in Washington in April 1974, three months after winning his first slam. He received a R1 bye, won his next match, then gave a walkover to world #29 Vijay Amritraj. Slightly peculiar. I'm wondering if the Washington event was part of Bill Riordan's US Indoor Circuit, hence why he and at least one other top 30 player entered? Michael Chang also did it in 2002/2003 as his career wound down, although it seems to have been as a kind of lap-of-honour to American fans rather than being forced on him by declining rankings. And Sergi Bruguera is also cited as having played 15 challengers from 1998 to 2002 after struggling with a shoulder injury.

 

[Ballmachine87]

Well Edberg certainly won post career, that is for sure.

 

[Dane_is_Finnish_OJ]

Stan Wawrinka definitely has.[Source]
Andy Murray too.[Source]

Edit: I wondered if it had been done before Agassi. Per this article, Jimmy Connors (then world #4) played a challenger in Washington in April 1974, three months after winning his first slam. He received a R1 bye, won his next match, then gave a walkover to world #29 Vijay Amritraj. Slightly peculiar. I'm wondering if the Washington event was part of Bill Riordan's US Indoor Circuit, hence why he and at least one other top 30 player entered? Michael Chang also did it in 2002/2003 as his career wound down, although it seems to have been as a kind of lap-of-honour to American fans rather than being forced on him by declining rankings. And Sergi Bruguera is also cited as having played 15 challengers from 1998 to 2002 after struggling with a shoulder injury.

Didn't Thiem do it too this year?

 

[travlerajm]

Didn't Thiem do it too this year?

Does it count as competing in Challengers if he wasn’t competitive enough to win any matches?

 

[Fedinkum]

Edberg is way ahead in life.

This is from a die hard Becker fan back in the hay days...

 

[thrust]

Weird H2H.

Becker was just a bad match up for Edberg, I think mostly mentally, sonething like Navdal VS Federer till 17 when Roger turned it around. Still, Stefan has 2 YE at #1, Boris has-0. Stefan had 72 weeks at #1, Boris- 12, therefore IMO, Stefan had the slightly better career

 

[Weekendhacker]

People forget that Edberg also had a pretty successful doubles career (which included 2 Australian and 1 US open in doubles).

 

[bluetrain4]

At one point the H2H was a more respectable 17-10 in favor of Becker. That's still an big gap over a player of Edberg's caliber, but not gaudy. Becker won the last 8 matches to get to that gaudy 25-10 overall record.

 

[bluetrain4]

The record could have been 26-9 . One of Edberg's victories was in the Paris Indoor when Becker retired at 3-3 in the first set. Not that Edberg never beat Becker indoors (e.g. the 1989 Masters final), but I still would have bet on Becker had he been healthy. Without that Paris victory, Becker would have won the last 11 matches in the rivalry. After 1990 Wimbledon, Becker led 15-9 - again, significant, but not gaudy.

50 percent of Edberg's 10 wins were 3 Slam matches (including 2 finals), a Masters/YEC final and a regular Masters/Super 9 final (Cincy) - making a lot of a dismal overall record.