Weird Anomaly or Telling Stat?

[El Dude]

In one of my various statistical inquiries I noticed that very few multi-Slam winners win their first Slam at the US Open. In fact, of the 18 players with 4+ Slams in the Open Era, only two players their first at the US Open - John McEnroe in 1979 and Pete Sampras in 1990.

The rest of the Slams are pretty evenly distributed: Australian Open (6), French Open (6), Wimbledon (4). By the way, I am including Laver, Rosewall, and Newcombe, even though their first Slams were during the amateur era.

So what do you think? Is this just random, or maybe it has something to do with the fact that the US Open is the last of the year? Or could it be that it is actually harder to win than the others, at least at first?

 

[Kieran]

McEnroe?

 

[El Dude]

Yeah, I added him in a few minutes after posting. Still, only Mac and Pistol.

 

[Kirijax]

Not sure how much stock I'd put in that. The French is the only one the clay courters are going to win, so that would be their first anyways. And the Australian was skipped quite a few of the top guys during '68-'82 so that number is screwed too.

 

[shawnbm]

I'll chime and say it is the hardest to win. It comes at the end of an arduous summer hard court season and within two months of the tour ending for the year. It is hard court, so top baselines can still play their game and compete and the same could be said (until maybe the last seven years or so in light of string changes) of the attacking serve and volleyers. In other words, a player would have to beat all types playing on a fairly "leveling" surface--either style could win on the day. So, I think it only fitting that this major is the least often first major victory amongst the better players of the Open Era. Okay, have at it!

 

[Fiero425]

People have traditionally felt that the French Open was the tough major to get; esp. during the grass court eras! Americans were at sea on the surface from win of Trabert to '89's Chang victory! Many top US #1's never even played a final, much less won the title; including Sampras and Connors! Top players were vulnerable against anyone on the dirt with weather affecting tactics and effectiveness! It can be an inferno; hot, humid with light/fast conditions and the next cold, dreary, with heavy conditions! It's why Borg and Nadal will be highly regarded decades from now due to their lock on the tournament during their early and prime years! IMO, it's the USO that's the toughy with weather just as severe, rough crowds, and a play schedule that's finally making sense giving a day off after the semis! As good as Martina was, she only won 4 between the grass, clay, and HC she had to endure during her tenure! Evonne Goolagong played several finals on grass and clay at Forest Hills, but never got to hold the Cup! I don't need to go down the horrible luck with Borg's futility trying to take the title; even when on clay! The Aussie or Wimbledon titles are a lot more attainable; except tell that to Lendl! :cover: :ras:

 

[the AntiPusher]

McEnroe and Sampras were complete players at their first USO. McEnroe and Sampras were the best serve and volley players that consistently took advantage of their brilliant first and second serves with very potent first volleys.

 

[Front242]

Here's another interesting set of stats. Just for fun Of course it doesn't take a lot into account, eg. no major competition right now with Federer and Nadal aging and not anywhere near what they once were and the rest either inconsistent or just plain not good enough to beat Djokovic. Either way, interesting reading.

http://www.eurosport.com/tennis/why-novak-djokovic-may-never-rival-roger-federer-s-all-time-grand-slam-record_sto4819057/story.shtml

 

[El Dude]

Here's another interesting set of stats. Just for fun Of course it doesn't take a lot into account, eg. no major competition right now with Federer and Nadal aging and not anywhere near what they once were and the rest either inconsistent or just plain not good enough to beat Djokovic. Either way, interesting reading.

http://www.eurosport.com/tennis/why-novak-djokovic-may-never-rival-roger-federer-s-all-time-grand-slam-record_sto4819057/story.shtml

I'm rather unimpressed with that article because it doesn't taken into account the current context of the game. Roger won 15 through Novak's age and only two after, but he had to contend with Rafa, Novak, and Andy. Who does Novak have to contend with going forward? Who are the best players of the next generation?

According to my five-year generation system, here are the top 5 players of each of the last few generations:

1979-83: Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, Ferrero
1984-88: Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, del Potro (or maybe Berdych/Tsonga)
1989-93: Nishikori, Raonic, Dimitrov, Thiem, Sock
1994-98: Kyrgios, Coric, Zverev, Chung, Kokkinakis

So compare the generation of players younger than Roger's to the generation younger than Novak. It isn't even close. At best, the best players of the 89-93 group are about as good as the 4th to 8th best players of the 84-88 generation...and they're not even at that point yet. The field is wide open right now and looks to be for at least another year or two.

But that's just it: Novak may not age like Roger is. Novak won't get better than he is now, and will probably start sliding a bit over the next couple years, with steeper decline sometime after. So his window is really 2016-18, imo, for tallying up the Slams. After that, all bets are off. In 2019 he'll be 31-32 and we just don't know what the scene will be like - maybe (hopefully) we'll have seen the emergence of the next group of stars.

 

[Fiero425]

All we can do is let the future unfold to become the new history when it comes to the play and results of upcoming stars! We're always hopeful, but I'm still waiting for the new crop to even stay "on court" more than a couple months! We all know about the grind of travel, competition, etc., but these players are "doing it to themselves!" The sport tried to protect children from coming "on board" a little early; Austin, Jaeger, Basset, and so many others who "broke down!" But greedy "fame HO's" can't be made to see reason and petition to get their brats on the circuit ASAP; "those endorsement deals won't happen practicing and waiting our turn!"

It's not that the players are brittle or injury prone as much as them pushing the limits when the tour tried to slow things down with the weight of balls, racket restrictions, courts homogenized, and the like! Reminds me of players like Arias and Krickstein who's whole game revolved around their forehands; why be surprised they wound up with arm problems? If you don't have a balanced attack "you" lose one way or the other; either deficient play or body betraying them! I have little sympathy for any of them since money is so out of whack! There isn't a need for "money grabs" like the IPTL in the off season! Don't whine about the long season and being tired when something like that is being supported by the biggest stars! Nole made over $20 M and told them "forget it!" Federer will shorten his schedule since match against Nole not possible! If the rest of the tour plays, more power to them, but for Roger, Serena, and several other "old timers" to whine about being tired or hurt, I'm going to laugh in their faces! :ras: :cover