Number of Matches Played - The End of Winning Slams

masterclass

Masters Champion
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
652
Reactions
246
Points
43
All Players with at least 3 major wins after 1973

tw0fgGR.png


-stats derived from tennisabstract data

Discuss...

Updated with new image Jan 30, 2017.

Respectfully,
masterclass
 

Fiero425

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
11,482
Reactions
2,564
Points
113
Location
Chicago, IL
Website
fiero4251.blogspot.com
This might be as high as Nole goes; can't see him playing into his doddering years of 35+ like Connors, Agassi, & Federer til now! He might surprise with a hot, late run, but he's definitely fallen off since winning the FO! It was such a weight off of him, he's almost feeling like he's done as much as he can do! I keep saying he hasn't been at the height of his powers since annihilating Rafa at Qatar event! I'm hoping he can pull it back together, but he's not showing me much in months; even with USO finale and Masters' wins in Madrid & Toronto! :rolleyes: :nono :angel: :cover :p

- - - http://fiero4251.blogspot.com/2016/08/fan-page-novak-nole-djokovic.html - - -
 

GameSetAndMath

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
21,141
Reactions
3,398
Points
113
I read a new interview by Nole in which he says his "desire" has decreased (in case you are wondering he was talking about winning tennis tourneys :laydownlaughing)
 

lacatch

Pro Tour Player
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
307
Reactions
0
Points
1
GameSetAndMath said:
I read a new interview by Nole in which he says his "desire" has decreased (in case you are wondering he was talking about winning tennis tourneys :laydownlaughing)

Not to split hairs, but he stated that he desire "had" declined after winning the French, but he was now recharged and was very much looking forward to the rest of the season. I would NOT count him out by any means.
 

masterclass

Masters Champion
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
652
Reactions
246
Points
43
Dear readers,

Thanks for your responses and discussion.

It's interesting to look at the Penultimate leaders.

Connors, Lendl, Sampras at 984, 908, 869, are all higher than Federer's 850, but then their last major came about 60, 90, 110 matches later respectively. Federer got his last major win close to 200 matches later, mostly due to Nadal and Djokovic dominating RG 2010- RG 2012.

I believe that one of Federer's greatest accomplishments was winning 2012 Wimbledon in match #1045, defeating Murray and Djokovic, and regaining the World #1 ranking when his strong next generation competitors, Djokovic and Nadal were in their prime peak years.

Much like Connors, he has demonstrated his strength over multiple generations:

1. He and his generation rose at the end of the Sampras/Agassi generation at age 19-21, helping to push them out.
2. He dominated at #1 over his own generation from Feb 2004 - Aug 2008, age 22-27.
3. He solidly competed with the Nadal/Djokovic generation from then on, never worse then #3, and even topped them at age 31, reaching #1, and was still #2-#3 in 2014-2015, at age 33-34.
4. The following generation, Nishikori/Raonic leading the way, has posed few problems until this injury ridden year when he lost to Raonic in the SF at Wimbledon.
5. The #NEXT generation, has shown some promise here and there, but is still unproven.

Federer looks like he has won his last major, but I won't rule him out till he retires.

Nadal looks like he has won his last or penultimate major, but ditto about ruling him out.
He has now played 976 matches. His last was at 834 matches, a 142 match difference.

Djokovic has played 894 matches. Ironically, his recent domination has added a lot of mileage. He certainly is within the range where players win their penultimate major, but his advantage is that there are no strong rising youngsters that have even won a major. However, the main challengers to him come from his generation, Murray, Del Potro, Cilic, and Wawrinka all with from 100-400 fewer matches in their bag. I see 2 maybe 3 majors more for Novak based on the historical match wins.

But who knows? Things can change fast in tennis.

Respectfully,
masterclass
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,130
Reactions
5,779
Points
113
Good overview, masterclass--not much to quibble with.

I see Novak (and Andy and Stan) as having a window before two factors coalesce: Father Time catches up, and "Gen Next" comes more fully into its own. A bit on both:

First, Father Time. Very few Slams are won after the 30th birthday, and both Novak and Andy have only one more Slam chance before they turn 30. Of the 195 Slams played in the Open Era, 21 were won by 30+ year olds, so 10.7%. Of those 21 Slams, eight were won by Ken Rosewall and Rod Laver (four each) in a very different era; add in Andres Gimeno's 1972 French Open title at age 35, and all of a sudden we have only 12 Slam titles by 30+ year olds in the last 178 Slams, or 6.7%.

It really changes with the time. Between Andre Agassi's last Slam in 2003 at age 32 and Roger's last (so far) in 2012 at age 30, the oldest Slam winner was 28 years old (Roger in 2010). Between Andres Gomez in 1990 and Petr Korda in 1998, it was the same--only one 28 year old: Boris Becker in 1996. But this could be because greats travel in packs, or cohorts, and the age of Slam winners has at least as much to do with how old the current greats are as it does with changes in the game.

We are in an unusual era because the dominant generation is in its late 20s to early 30s, while the generation that is in it's mid-20s and should be dominant is a particularly weak one. There's a real gap in talent with no Slam winners in birth years 1989 and later, although Thiem (93) and Pouille (94) could shrink that window if they take further steps forward. And of course Kei (89) and Milos (90) are still very much in their primes.

Anyhow, as you and others (including myself) have stated, Father Time's impact on Novak (and Andy) is lessened by this. In other words, their declines will be softened by weak competition in the generation that should be holding the reins of the tour.

OK, now for Gen Next. The only player under age 24 that seems vaguely ready to challenge at a Slam, and then probably only at the French Open, is Dominic Thiem, who just turned 23 years old. Maybe he'll take a step further next year and be a serious challenger, but he still needs to prove that he's a step above the other second tier players, and he hasn't yet done that. I'm not sure I quite see it from Lucas Pouille (22) yet, but he could challenge for a spot in the top 10 next year. Nick Kyrgios (21) is also close, but has mental issues. I don't see any other players in that "ripe" range of 21-24ish that are ready to challenge.

Looking a bit younger and we have 19-year olds Alex Zverev, Borna Coric and Josh Donaldson. Of the three, Zverev is the only one that looks like a future Slam winner. Coric looks like the type of guy that will max out in the lower half of the top 20, and Donaldson maybe not even that (although his recent play has been promising).

A bit younger and we have 18-year olds Taylor Fritz, Frances Tiafoe, Stefan Kozlov, Duck Hee Lee, and Andrey Rublev. Fritz is the most promising and had a good rise earlier this year, but has stagnated--but at least held his ground--for six months or so. He could take another big step forward next year, but probably not to Slam contention; I see him as about a year behind Alex Zverev, so for next year the top 20 might be a good goal, with 2018 being possible Slam contention. The others are further behind.

And then we have 17-year olds Denis Shapovalov, Casper Ruud, and 16-year old Felix Auger Aliassime. These guys are several years away but worth keeping an eye on.

So looking at Gen Next as a whole, they will continue to get better and better but I don't see a real "swell" until 2019-20. Maybe Thiem, Pouille, Kyrgios and possibly Zverev challenge next year, and maybe Fritz joins them in 2018, but it isn't until 2019 or so that I see these guys really starting to reach for that baton.

So that gives a nice window of 2017-18 that Novak, Andy, and Stan have a relatively open field. There will be challengers: Cilic is still dangerous, maybe Kei or Milos or even Grigor catches fire for an entire tournament, and perhaps Rafa or Roger drink from the fountain of youth. But come 2019 or so, a whole new generation of talent will be coming more fully into it's own and, coupled with the fact that Andy and Novak turn 32 in 2019, and Stan 34, the window will narrow considerably.
 

masterclass

Masters Champion
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
652
Reactions
246
Points
43
Wonderful post, El Dude.

My own preference for the most dangerous player in the window you speak of is a healthy Juan Martin del Potro.

He's shown us even in the few months that he has come back this year he is capable of beating all of the best players playing and that was with an impaired two handed backhand, though perhaps that may have worked to his advantage a bit with some opponents who don't love his more wicked slice these days. I imagine between now and next season, he'll get the 2 hander working as well as before. There were signs of it's return in his most recent matches where his passing shot was needed.

I don't worry about his age. 28 years old, but he has only played 474 matches. In comparison, Novak Djokovic had played 429 matches before the 2011 season. Delpo has far fewer matches played than any of the top proven players.

His problem has been staying healthy. IF he can manage that, I expect a big 2017-2018 from him.
In a way, his comeback this year has demonstrated yet again the state of the tour.

Respectfully,
masterclass
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,130
Reactions
5,779
Points
113
I really hope you are right, masterclass, as Delpo is a likable guy and has had terrible luck. I think the best case scenario is that he does something like Stan had done for the last three years. That said, I worry about his penchant for wrist problems and wonder how he'll do with the grind of a full schedule. But I agree, he is a great dark horse.
 

herios

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
8,984
Reactions
1,659
Points
113
In the context of slams, I would not include in the discussion the Next Generation players, until they prove that can make at least a QF in a such event. Those would therefore be only: Thiem, Kyrgios and Pouille.
 

masterclass

Masters Champion
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
652
Reactions
246
Points
43
I have updated Post #1 with a new image of the matches played stats based on the Australian Open results.

I can only say that Roger Federer is in uncharted territory. To win a major with his mileage in the modern portion of the Open Era is... incredible. One has to congratulate him for his success and longevity and dedication in playing and enjoying the sport.

Respectfully,
masterclass
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
16,965
Reactions
7,229
Points
113
Just a tiny correction, maybe, but according to the atp website, federer has played 1332 matches...
 

masterclass

Masters Champion
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
652
Reactions
246
Points
43
Kieran said:
Just a tiny correction, maybe, but according to the atp website, federer has played 1332 matches...

I'm using tennisabstract and only including ATP Tour Level. (includes Davis Cup and Olympics, ATP and Slams, but not challengers, futures, etc)

So I would have to know what they are counting...

Regardless, it is an amazing number of matches.

Respectfully,
masterclass
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
16,965
Reactions
7,229
Points
113
masterclass said:
Kieran said:
Just a tiny correction, maybe, but according to the atp website, federer has played 1332 matches...

I'm using tennisabstract and only including ATP Tour Level. (includes Davis Cup and Olympics, ATP and Slams, but not challengers, futures, etc)

So I would have to know what they are counting...

Regardless, it is an amazing number of matches.

Respectfully,
masterclass

It's a helluva lot of miles...
 

mightyjeditribble

Pro Tour Champion
Joined
Nov 17, 2016
Messages
487
Reactions
51
Points
28
Of course, Connors played the most matches of anyone, 1535 (1256-279). But I think many of these were played at smaller tournaments. This also goes to show just how long Connors kept playing after last winning a GS.

Fed is on 1332 (1087-245; I'm using the official ATP site for both). I know we're getting off-topic, but how likely is Roger to break any of these records?

Matches played: Fed 1332 - Connors 1535 (differential: 203 matches)
Match wins: Fed 1087 - Connors 1256 (differential: 169 matches)
Titles won: Fed 89 - Connors 109 (differential: 20 titles)

Now, these are not likely to motivate Roger or his fans very much. Tbh, I never thought they could even be in reach for Roger. It is still not clear that they are, but that we can even talk about it is somewhat amazing.

Fed's 2015 season had a 63-11 Win-Loss record, and 6 titles. Fed's aborted 2016 season had a 21-7 record, and no titles. Now, it's unlikely that Fed can string together many more seasons like 2015 - and most likely will play less. On the other hand, I don't think he'll have another season like 2016 (if he gets another serious injury, my guess is that he is more likely to retire).

My conclusion: Should Fed stay healthy and play well for four more years, he'll likely pass the matches played and won records in due course. If he plays "only" 2-3 more years, they will remain out of reach.

I don't believe the titles record is in reach - Fed is unlikely to play lots of small tournaments at the expense of not competing in the big ones, so Jimmy can keep this record for sure. :)
 

mrzz

Hater
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
6,171
Reactions
2,993
Points
113
All those records seem very fair away, tbh. He would need two stellar seasons to get close to that and be able to reach them in his fading years. The match wins is the less hard one, but even so a long shot.
 

mightyjeditribble

Pro Tour Champion
Joined
Nov 17, 2016
Messages
487
Reactions
51
Points
28
mrzz said:
All those records seem very fair away, tbh. He would need two stellar seasons to get close to that and be able to reach them in his fading years. The match wins is the less hard one, but even so a long shot.

True. Connors played well into his 40s, and reached the US Open semis at 39.

The fact that we can discuss the possibility is remarkable within itself. I never used to think he would possibly overtake Lendl, and he has done that already (in match wins and matches played; not yet in titles, where he is 5 behind).

:clap