Nole's defeat in slam finals

[Moxie]

So, Now Roger has matched Nole's record of losing eight GS finals. :cover

At least he went out only to other members of Big Three; to Rafa six times and to Nole twice.

9 times...One time to del potro as well.

Thanks. Forgot JMDP (as he is out of action for a long time). Roger has taken over Novak. It looks like only Lendl has lost more times in finals. With two more losses Roger can tie Lendl for the record.:cover

But that's a short-sighted way of looking at Roger's record. He's 17-9 in finals. That's 26 finals. I don't know how many other players have made that many finals, if any, but I can guarantee they have a worse winning percentage, if so. If we go back to the OP, Novak has just slipped above .500.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

9 times...One time to del potro as well.

Thanks. Forgot JMDP (as he is out of action for a long time). Roger has taken over Novak. It looks like only Lendl has lost more times in finals. With two more losses Roger can tie Lendl for the record.:cover

But that's a short-sighted way of looking at Roger's record. He's 17-9 in finals. That's 26 finals. I don't know how many other players have made that many finals, if any, but I can guarantee they have a worse winning percentage, if so. If we go back to the OP, Novak has just slipped above .500.

You seriously bothered to reply to that.

 

[Moxie]

Thanks. Forgot JMDP (as he is out of action for a long time). Roger has taken over Novak. It looks like only Lendl has lost more times in finals. With two more losses Roger can tie Lendl for the record.:cover

But that's a short-sighted way of looking at Roger's record. He's 17-9 in finals. That's 26 finals. I don't know how many other players have made that many finals, if any, but I can guarantee they have a worse winning percentage, if so. If we go back to the OP, Novak has just slipped above .500.

You seriously bothered to reply to that.

Well, you seriously bothered to post about it twice. I was afraid that you were looking at the negative. I was trying to cheer you up! :hug

 

[Kirijax]

You have to be good enough to get to the final to lose it, so I don't really consider a sub-.500 mark or barely above it such a bad thing. The fact that these guys have been in so many finals may put the others in a bad light, but I would like to think it's just a testimony to how good the Big Three really are.

Top 10 Grand Slam Finals
No. 1 Roger Federer 26 (17-9)
No. 2 Rafael Nadal 20 (14-6)
No. 3 Ivan Lendl 19 (8-11)
No. 4 Pete Sampras 18 (14-4)
No. 5 Rod Laver 17 (11-6)
No. 5 Novak Djokovic 17 (9-8)
No. 7 Ken Rosewall 16 (8-8)
No. 7 Bjorn Borg 16 (11-5)
No. 9 Bill Tilden 15 (10-5)
No. 9 Roy Emerson 15 (12-3)
No. 9 Jimmy Connors 15 (8-7)
No. 9 Andre Agassi 15 (8-7)

 

[brokenshoelace]

Novak's record in slam finals isn't "bad" per se, I mean he still won 9 majors. But it's really not good. I don't hold him to your average player's standards though, so that's part of my assessment. However, I realize who he had to play in many of these finals, so it's hardly disastrous. After all, you reach so many finals, you're going to lose many because ostensibly, the other guy who reached the final is pretty damn good as well. Until the recent Wawrinka final (in which Stan was sensational), Djokovic had only lost to Federer, Nadal and Murray in major finals. So yeah, you play in the era of the "big 4," you'll lose to them in the finals occasionally. And I suppose losing in the finals is often a harsh stat because very few bat an eye if you lose in the semis (like, very few people are going to look at your records in the QF or SF), which in a way makes it seem like losing earlier is better.

That said, Novak has reached 17 finals. You'd expect a player of his caliber to be at least 11-6 or something like that. So yeah, I wouldn't say his record in finals is good.