Win% on the worst surface for ATGs

Sunny014

Legend
Connors - 77.4% on Clay
Rod Laver - 75.2% on Clay
Ivan Lendl - 75% on Grass
Borg - 74.1% on HCs
Federer - 72.5% on Carpets
Mcenroe - 71% on Clay
Djokovic - 69.2% on Carpets
Edberg - 68% on Clay
Becker - 66% on Clay
Agassi - 64.3% on Carpets
Sampras - 62.5% on Clay
Wilander - 57% on Carpets

Nadal - 25% on Carpets
 

Sunny014

Legend
How many times has Nadal played on carpets?

DateTournamentSurfaceRoundW/LMatchScoreStats
25-10-2004BaselCarpetR32LRainer Schuettler (6) d. Rafael Nadal6-3 6-4 Stats
04-10-2004LyonCarpetR32LJulien Benneteau (Q) d. Rafael Nadal6-3 6-0 Stats
09-02-2004MilanCarpetR16LMario Ancic d. Rafael Nadal (6)7-5 6-2 Stats
09-02-2004MilanCarpetR32WRafael Nadal (6) d. Ivo Karlovic7-5 6-7(5) 6-1 Stats
06-02-2004Davis Cup WGCarpetR16WRafael Nadal d. Radek Stepanek7-6(2) 7-6(4) 6-3
06-02-2004Davis Cup WGCarpetR16LJiri Novak d. Rafael Nadal7-6(2) 6-3 7-6(3)
20-10-2003BaselCarpetR32LFeliciano Lopez d. Rafael Nadal3-6 6-3 7-6(4) Stats
06-10-2003LyonCarpetR32LDominik Hrbaty d. Rafael Nadal6-3 7-5 Sta
 

Sunny014

Legend
ATP should announce immediately that from the 2022 season onwards they are making a huge change to the rules in Tennis.
2022 onwards Poly shall be banned, all players will have to play with wooden racquets only and Carpets need to be brought back as a surface and the Aus Open should be played on it.
Tennis would become very interesting.
 

Sudacafan

Bionic Poster
Connors - 77.4% on Clay
Rod Laver - 75.2% on Clay
Ivan Lendl - 75% on Grass
Borg - 74.1% on HCs
Federer - 72.5% on Carpets
Mcenroe - 71% on Clay
Djokovic - 69.2% on Carpets
Edberg - 68% on Clay
Becker - 66% on Clay
Agassi - 64.3% on Carpets
Sampras - 62.5% on Clay
Wilander - 57% on Carpets

Nadal - 25% on Carpets
Small sample size for matches on carpet is misleading.
 
Last edited:

Nate7-5

Professional
Carpet was discontinued as a surface in 2009

Make of that what you will
"It's one of the unique aspects of life on the ATP Challenger Tour. Twice a year, a once-extinct surface comes to life. In 2008, carpet courts made their last appearance on the ATP Tour, but the indoor synthetic material is still alive on the Challenger circuit. Every October, Germany hosts a pair of tournaments on the surface in the cities of Ismaning and Eckental!"
 

Sunny014

Legend
I love playing on carpet but this is some pretty hilarious desperation

Federer and Djokovic right from 98 and 2004 respectively (their 1st years on the tour) avged 60% or more on Carpets

Nadal avged 25% and Nadal is the same guy who has a win% in the 60s indoors.... Do you think Nadal would be great on carpets ?
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
DateTournamentSurfaceRoundW/LMatchScoreStats
25-10-2004BaselCarpetR32LRainer Schuettler (6) d. Rafael Nadal6-3 6-4 Stats
04-10-2004LyonCarpetR32LJulien Benneteau (Q) d. Rafael Nadal6-3 6-0 Stats
09-02-2004MilanCarpetR16LMario Ancic d. Rafael Nadal (6)7-5 6-2 Stats
09-02-2004MilanCarpetR32WRafael Nadal (6) d. Ivo Karlovic7-5 6-7(5) 6-1 Stats
06-02-2004Davis Cup WGCarpetR16WRafael Nadal d. Radek Stepanek7-6(2) 7-6(4) 6-3
06-02-2004Davis Cup WGCarpetR16LJiri Novak d. Rafael Nadal7-6(2) 6-3 7-6(3)
20-10-2003BaselCarpetR32LFeliciano Lopez d. Rafael Nadal3-6 6-3 7-6(4) Stats
06-10-2003LyonCarpetR32LDominik Hrbaty d. Rafael Nadal6-3 7-5 Sta
Lol so when he was like 16!
 

RelentlessAttack

Hall of Fame
Federer and Djokovic right from 98 and 2004 respectively (their 1st years on the tour) avged 60% or more on Carpets

Nadal avged 25% and Nadal is the same guy who has a win% in the 60s indoors.... Do you think Nadal would be great on carpets ?
I think saying teenage Nadal was bad on carpets is one of the most irrelevant and obvious points you could make
 

zvelf

Hall of Fame
Connors - 77.4% on Clay
Rod Laver - 75.2% on Clay
Ivan Lendl - 75% on Grass
Borg - 74.1% on HCs
Federer - 72.5% on Carpets
Mcenroe - 71% on Clay
Djokovic - 69.2% on Carpets
Edberg - 68% on Clay
Becker - 66% on Clay
Agassi - 64.3% on Carpets
Sampras - 62.5% on Clay
Wilander - 57% on Carpets

Nadal - 25% on Carpets
The more interesting point here is how many ATGs had clay as their weakest surface, but most strikingly Pete is on the bottom of the list on clay, even worse than fellow S&Vs Becker and Edberg.
 

Turing

Rookie
It's a shame we missed out on prime Fed on carpet. Surely would have put on clinics had there been more carpet tourneys around. That and if he stayed healthy in 2004 and 2005 during the indoor season. As it stands, Basel 2006 and an injured YEC 2005 are all we have.
 

NAS

Hall of Fame
Rafa and Novak didn't play many matches to draw any conclusion.
Rafa stopped playing before he entered top 30 and same with Novak, he was hardly a top player when he played those 13 matches
 

Sunny014

Legend
I think saying teenage Nadal was bad on carpets is one of the most irrelevant and obvious points you could make
You are either good or bad right from early years, you don't avg 25% and then magically jump to 80%, it never happens, in Nadal's case he has struggled indoors throughout his life and his % on carpets is no surprise if those matches were indoors he would struggle, like I told you, Novak and Fed were already 60% starting from their first year and they did improve slowly as they played more matches, if they played a lot they would have improved it to 80+ ... no doubt about it...... Nadal's 25% would have reached a max of 60%
 

Sunny014

Legend
The more interesting point here is how many ATGs had clay as their weakest surface, but most strikingly Pete is on the bottom of the list on clay, even worse than fellow S&Vs Becker and Edberg.
Pete's struggles were very real, he is marketed as a guy who suffered due to diverse courts but then his position in clay is worse than all the ATGs, that raises serious question marks on how good he would be in this modern era where even courts that are supposed to be fast as high bouncing.

Pete might struggle a lot vs the Big 3 I feel, even if he smokes the rest of the tour it will be very tough to go past the Big 3.
 

RelentlessAttack

Hall of Fame
You are either good or bad right from early years, you don't avg 25% and then magically jump to 80%, it never happens, in Nadal's case he has struggled indoors throughout his life and his % on carpets is no surprise if those matches were indoors he would struggle, like I told you, Novak and Fed were already 60% starting from their first year and they did improve slowly as they played more matches, if they played a lot they would have improved it to 80+ ... no doubt about it...... Nadal's 25% would have reached a max of 60%
lmao I’m about as broken up about his carpet record as I am about his record with wooden racquets
 
For me it s absurd to include carpet to Nadal and Djokovic because Nadal has only 5 tournament entries and 8 matches and Djokovic just 4 tournament entries and 13 matches it s too few data for both./especially for Novak who i think would have become great carpet player/.So better compare it with Nadal grass results and Novak clay.
 

ibbi

Legend
Honestly, counting carpet as any of those three guys weakest surfaces considering how little they played on it is comical :-D I mean especially Federer and Djokovic, for whom there is no way it would have been their weakest surface if it had continued to be used. It more than likely would have been Nadal's worst, but considering he never played on it after 2004 that seems kind of ridiculous to compare also.
 

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
Agreed; I'd toss carpet for the Big 3. The sample size is far too low. Anybody can have a bad stretch over 10-15 matches. I'd increase the requirement to at least 50 matches on the surface to include it. But I like the concept of looking at winning pct for each surface.

With that being said, Djokovic right now is above .800 on all 3 surfaces that he's played on regularly. Now granted, those numbers will drop as he ages. But that's very impressive nonetheless.

Per Ultimate Tennis Statistics:

Djoker:
623-116, .843 on hard courts
102-18, .850 on grass
244-59, .805 on clay

Nadal:
489-139, .779 on hard courts
71-20, .780 on grass
464-43, .915 on clay

Federer:
776-156, .833 on hard courts
192-29, .869 on grass
226-71, .761 on clay

Sampras:
426-103, .805 on hard courts
101-20, .835 on grass
90-54, .625 on clay
145-45, .763 on carpet

Lendl:
390-83, .825 on hard courts
81-27, .750 on grass
329-77, .810 on clay
269-55, .830 on carpet
 

R. Schweikart

Professional
Weak champ who vultured GOLDEN SLAM when Navratilova aunty was in her early 30s and Evert Grandma was in her mid 30s and then was pwned by Seles for 3 years, cried at AO and then Gunter the Madman helped her win 11 more slams....
The great Steffi won her Golden Slam :)love:) when Navratilova, the ultimate late bloomer, was just 31 years old.
Serena Williams was 31 years old when she won her 16th of 23 slams.
And is there anyone out there who would claim that Serena was a better athlete than Martina?? :-D

Seles was 2-3 win/loss against a slumping Steffi in 1991-93. Was twice really routed. Wheres her wins both were nail-biters.
Seles to this day owns two remarkable all-time records:
- Worst H2H ever of a #1 player against any opponent.
- Worst slam final loss ever of a #1 player (2-6 1-6 in Wimbledon 92).
:-D:-D
 

Sunny014

Legend
The great Steffi won her Golden Slam :)love:) when Navratilova, the ultimate late bloomer, was just 31 years old.
Serena Williams was 31 years old when she won her 16th of 23 slams.
And is there anyone out there who would claim that Serena was a better athlete than Martina?? :-D

Seles was 2-3 win/loss against a slumping Steffi in 1991-93. Was twice really routed. Wheres her wins both were nail-biters.
Seles to this day owns two remarkable all-time records:
- Worst H2H ever of a #1 player against any opponent.
- Worst slam final loss ever of a #1 player (2-6 1-6 in Wimbledon 92).
:-D:-D
You fool, 31 in Navratilova's time was like 36-37+ today, you cannot compare longevity of the players in the late 80s to those 30 years later.
 

R. Schweikart

Professional
You fool, 31 in Navratilova's time was like 36-37+ today, you cannot compare longevity of the players in the late 80s to those 30 years later.
That is nonsense.
The greats of the 70s and 80s were still great well into their 30s:
- Margaret Court won her last slam at 31.
- Billie Jean King also won her last slam at 31 (and beat Navratilova 6-2 6-1 on grass at age 35 and 6-1 6-3 on carpet at age 36)
- Virginia Wade won her last slam at 32.
- Chris Evert won her last slam at 31 (and made her last slam final at 33).

Martina Navratilova, the latest "late bloomer" ever
- won her first slam at 21
- won her third slam at 25
- lost her #1 rank to teenage Steffi Graf at 30
- won her last slam at 33
- made her last slam final at 37.

No woman player has ever won a slam at 36-37+ - neither back in the day nor in present years.
You are talking nonsense again, as so often. Sad!
 

urban

Legend
I looked up Ultimate Tennis Statistics and found some interesting stats on Rod Laver for open era alone. They have only numbers for open era since 1968, when Laver turned 30 in August. Laver still is the best open era player, leading all players including Big 3, regarding the overall percentage of tournament wins against tournaments entered, Following UTS he stand at 33.96% (72 wins out of 212 entries). That 34 % of open tournaments won (not pro, not amateur tournaments) is pretty good for the last phase of his career. I don't know the stats of the modern players, but following UTS they are less.. On hard courts Laver is also the leading man with a 40. 83% for 26 wins out of 64 entries, and in hard court finals Laver is a staggering 83. 87% for a 26-5 record in hc finals. So much for the myth, that he could only play on grass. UTS also give Laver 212 weeks at Nr.. 1 in open era alone, which puts him in the range of Nadal, who played his whole career in open era. That are pretty good and impressive stats for old Rocket in the last portion of his career.
 

zvelf

Hall of Fame
I looked up Ultimate Tennis Statistics and found some interesting stats on Rod Laver for open era alone. They have only numbers for open era since 1968, when Laver turned 30 in August. Laver still is the best open era player, leading all players including Big 3, regarding the overall percentage of tournament wins against tournaments entered, Following UTS he stand at 33.96% (72 wins out of 212 entries). That 34 % of open tournaments won (not pro, not amateur tournaments) is pretty good for the last phase of his career. I don't know the stats of the modern players, but following UTS they are less.. On hard courts Laver is also the leading man with a 40. 83% for 26 wins out of 64 entries, and in hard court finals Laver is a staggering 83. 87% for a 26-5 record in hc finals. So much for the myth, that he could only play on grass. UTS also give Laver 212 weeks at Nr.. 1 in open era alone, which puts him in the range of Nadal, who played his whole career in open era. That are pretty good and impressive stats for old Rocket in the last portion of his career.
On pure numbers, Laver looks great there, but the tour in Laver's time, while the very best players were great, the rest of the field wasn't nearly as competitive as the field in modern-day tennis, which is to say there were fewer early-round upsets. Also, many tournament draws back then were smaller than they are today, which made it easier to win them. So it's not a strict 1:1 comparison.
 
Top