Discussions about All Time Greats

[Federberg]

Since I couldn't find a logical home for this, I decided to create a catch-all thread for whenever we want to discuss about the great ones, playing or retired.

I thought this was very interesting... kudos to Novak for his position in this list. While I don't discount Borg I don't think he ended up playing enough, so he gets a bump up for not having to deal with the losses others experienced when they were on the downward curve of their careers. I find it fascinating that Novak has played substantially more top 10 guys than Rafa has. How is that possible?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/perf...op10/all/?sortByField=WinLoss&ascending=False

 

[El Dude]

The only thing that comes to mind--and I haven't done the research to verify if this is correlation or causation--is that a larger percentage of Rafa's matches (40%) have been on clay than Novak (25%). It may be that clay tournies include a lower percentage of top 10 players than hards and/or grass.

Also of note on that list is the big jump between #7 (Sampras) and #8 (McEnroe): from .636 to .568.

Also, notice Jimmy Connors way down at .497.

Finally, compare Becker at .651 vs. Edberg at .457...that seems to give some weight to Boris in the "Great Becker vs. Edberg Debate."

 

[Federberg]

The only thing that comes to mind--and I haven't done the research to verify if this is correlation or causation--is that a larger percentage of Rafa's matches (40%) have been on clay than Novak (25%). It may be that clay tournies include a lower percentage of top 10 players than hards and/or grass.

Also of note on that list is the big jump between #7 (Sampras) and #8 (McEnroe): from .636 to .568.

Also, notice Jimmy Connors way down at .497.

Finally, compare Becker at .651 vs. Edberg at .457...that seems to give some weight to Boris in the "Great Becker vs. Edberg Debate."

Lol! I knew someone would spot the Becker thing. I guess that’s why a lot of folks give him the edge. I would still argue that more finals - including the fact it’s in all the slams - and more weeks at number 1 more than counter that. But I’m an unabashed Edberg fan

 

[El Dude]

Lol! I knew someone would spot the Becker thing. I guess that’s why a lot of folks give him the edge. I would still argue that more finals - including the fact it’s in all the slams - and more weeks at number 1 more than counter that. But I’m an unabashed Edberg fan

I liked Edberg more as well, and think it is very very close, but if pushed would give Boris a tiny edge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Federberg]

^That's fair enough. It could go either way. To me, it's the usual balance between H2H type scenarios and how one performs against the field. My views on that are well documented

 

[Federberg]

Re: your observation about the drop off Sampras to Mac. Yes I noticed that as well. I also noticed that despite the huge number of matches some of the older guys played they had surprisingly few encounters against their closest rivals. To my mind it makes me think the whole concept of weak eras needs to be revisited or perhaps it illustrates the fact that in some eras the competition was flatter than it is now. Or perhaps this has something to seedings at majors now? 32 vs 16

 

[Horsa]

Since I couldn't find a logical home for this, I decided to create a catch-all thread for whenever we want to discuss about the great ones, playing or retired.

I thought this was very interesting... kudos to Novak for his position in this list. While I don't discount Borg I don't think he ended up playing enough, so he gets a bump up for not having to deal with the losses others experienced when they were on the downward curve of their careers. I find it fascinating that Novak has played substantially more top 10 guys than Rafa has. How is that possible?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/perf...op10/all/?sortByField=WinLoss&ascending=False

I think that's a very good idea as it means we can go all nostalgic & talk about all the old favourites. Maybe a good thing to discuss would be who our all-time favourite player/players were & why with no more than 3 allowed of each gender to stop things getting too long. I know the comment about things getting too long is a bit rich coming from me though.

 

[El Dude]

Re: your observation about the drop off Sampras to Mac. Yes I noticed that as well. I also noticed that despite the huge number of matches some of the older guys played they had surprisingly few encounters against their closest rivals. To my mind it makes me think the whole concept of weak eras needs to be revisited or perhaps it illustrates the fact that in some eras the competition was flatter than it is now. Or perhaps this has something to seedings at majors now? 32 vs 16

I don't know. I would also fold in court type homogeneity as a possible factor.

I also have wondered if there's no such thing as weak vs. strong eras, just different ways in which the talent is pooled. Sometimes it is very "top-heavy," sometimes more dispersed. I mean, I do think there are stronger and weaker eras, maybe just not as much as we might think.

 

[Federberg]

Yup. It needs more thought. Clearly the guys in the older era were getting taken out before they could face top 10 guys. You're right about surfaces. Definitely has something to do with it. There was grass, clay and carpet that were all fairly specialised