Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time] - MensTennisForums.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 05:14 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Age: 76
Posts: 2,672
                     
Post Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Having too much time on my hands, I came to think of an old fav of mine who was a "slayer", a player who managed to beat top guys more often than he perhaps should according to his ranking. I'm thinking of Magnus Larsson, who culd beat just about anyone on a good day. (A less flattering word for a player like him would be "underachiever"...)

I collected some stats (on www.tenniscorner.net) about his records against contemporary players who have at some time during their career been ranked #1. In Magnus case, the players and his H2H against them were the following:

Agassi 1-3
Becker 2-4
Courier 2-2
Edberg 2-2
Federer 1-1
Ferrero 1-0
Hewitt 0-1
Kafelnikov 3-4
Lendl 0-1
Moya 0-1
Muster 4-3
Rafter 0-2
Rios 3-4
Safin 1-1
Sampras 4-7
Wilander 1-0

and summing up:

ML - (all contemporary #1:s) 25-36, that is a winning % of 41.

This seems to be a good record for someone who has had 10 as his highest ranking, and never won a tournie for six years. Then again, maybe we should have expected more of Larsson than reaching only 1 major SF.

I did the same with some other players to compare (yup, having nothing important to do for the moment...), a couple of them known as underachievers:

Philippoussis - #1 25-49, 34% W
Chang - #1 62-98, 39% W
Enqvist - #1 43-57, 43% W
Henman - #1 36-56, 39% W
T. Johansson - #1 23-40, 37% W
Gilbert - #1 24-70, 26% W

It's kind of fun to see that my guess about ol' Magnus was right, he really could challenge the top just as good as some better known guys.

Feel free to add other players' stats!


I don't like hypocrites, but even worse are the ones who think it's OK to be an asshole as long as you are not hypocritical.
oz_boz is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 05:21 PM
Registered User
 
mitalidas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,048
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

I would like to see this for Hewitt
I'm sure his stats are veryimpressive from when he was #1

Goes without saying, I think Fed's would be even better (but I know his, so don't really need someone to compile it)
mitalidas is offline  
post #3 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 05:32 PM
Senior Member
 
DanEd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 1,786
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mitalidas
I would like to see this for Hewitt
I'm sure his stats are veryimpressive from when he was #1

Goes without saying, I think Fed's would be even better (but I know his, so don't really need someone to compile it)
for hewitt:

Sampras: 5-4
Agassi: 4-4
Ferrero: 5-3
Safin: 5-6
Kuerten:3-1
Moya:6-5
Federer: 7-9
Kafelnikov:7-1
Rafter:3-1
Rios:3-2
Roddick:5-1
Becker:0-1
total: 53:38 (58.2%)

Last edited by DanEd; 05-12-2005 at 07:01 PM.
DanEd is offline  
post #4 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 06:04 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Age: 76
Posts: 2,672
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mitalidas
I would like to see this for Hewitt
I'm sure his stats are veryimpressive from when he was #1

Goes without saying, I think Fed's would be even better (but I know his, so don't really need someone to compile it)
The stats are more telling for players who have retired or at least a career of say 7-8 years behind them.Hewitt will probably face Federer-Safin-Roddick-Ferrero + future #1:s later in his career.


I don't like hypocrites, but even worse are the ones who think it's OK to be an asshole as long as you are not hypocritical.
oz_boz is offline  
post #5 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 06:17 PM
Registered User
 
mitalidas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,048
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanEd
for hewitt:

Sampras: 5-4
Agassi: 4-4
Ferrero: 5-3
Safin: 5-6
Kuerten:3-1
Moya:6-5
Federer: 9-7
Kafelnikov:7-1
Rafter:3-1
Rios:3-2
Roddick:5-1
Becker:0-1
total: 55:36 (61.5%)
these are extremely impressive
there are so few players that are better or equal in H2H with sampras and agassi (Fed is one of course)
mitalidas is offline  
post #6 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 06:42 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Age: 76
Posts: 2,672
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Giants of the Open Era:

Sampras - other #1:s 115-57, 68% W
Borg 33-21, 61% W
Lendl 102-73, 58% W
Agassi 95-79, 55% W



I don't like hypocrites, but even worse are the ones who think it's OK to be an asshole as long as you are not hypocritical.

Last edited by oz_boz; 05-12-2005 at 06:45 PM.
oz_boz is offline  
post #7 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 06:46 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 299
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

I think this stat should be based on matches against #1 players AFTER they have ascended to #1 ranking.
shaoyu is offline  
post #8 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 06:49 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,402
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanEd
for hewitt:

Sampras: 5-4
Agassi: 4-4
Ferrero: 5-3
Safin: 5-6
Kuerten:3-1
Moya:6-5
Federer: 9-7
Kafelnikov:7-1
Rafter:3-1
Rios:3-2
Roddick:5-1
Becker:0-1
total: 55:36 (61.5%)
I think that should be Federer: 7-9
Not that it makes a lot of difference, mind
jtipson is offline  
post #9 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 07:00 PM
Senior Member
 
DanEd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posts: 1,786
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtipson
I think that should be Federer: 7-9
Not that it makes a lot of difference, mind
yep sorry
DanEd is offline  
post #10 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 07:02 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Age: 76
Posts: 2,672
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Quote:
Originally Posted by shaoyu
I think this stat should be based on matches against #1 players AFTER they have ascended to #1 ranking.
Good point there. But:

1) It will be much harder to collect data (it is already a tedious task). But perhaps you can provide us with some?
2) Every decent (say best ranking <20) player with a career of say 5-10 years will meet maybe 15 different #1:s on a number of occasions (some in the beginning of their career, some at their peak, some on their way down). In the long run, these stats are KIND OF comparable.
3) I still believe that a player's win% calculated in this way tells us something about that player's A game. If you have a good A game, you will win more meetings against the best of the best; if not, you can beat lower ranked players but stand no chance against the cream.


I don't like hypocrites, but even worse are the ones who think it's OK to be an asshole as long as you are not hypocritical.
oz_boz is offline  
post #11 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 07:11 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Age: 76
Posts: 2,672
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Quote:
Originally Posted by oz_boz
I still believe that a player's win% calculated in this way tells us something about that player's A game. If you have a good A game, you will win more meetings against the best of the best; if not, you can beat lower ranked players but stand no chance against the cream.
To this I want to add that Enqvist's and Gilbert's percentages are particularly telling - both reached a career-high #4 ranking...


I don't like hypocrites, but even worse are the ones who think it's OK to be an asshole as long as you are not hypocritical.
oz_boz is offline  
post #12 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 07:40 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 299
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Quote:
Originally Posted by oz_boz
Good point there. But:

1) It will be much harder to collect data (it is already a tedious task). But perhaps you can provide us with some?
2) Every decent (say best ranking <20) player with a career of say 5-10 years will meet maybe 15 different #1:s on a number of occasions (some in the beginning of their career, some at their peak, some on their way down). In the long run, these stats are KIND OF comparable.
3) I still believe that a player's win% calculated in this way tells us something about that player's A game. If you have a good A game, you will win more meetings against the best of the best; if not, you can beat lower ranked players but stand no chance against the cream.
Your second point is very well said. I agree with you now this may be the better way to do it. I'd save myself from trying to figure it out match by match
shaoyu is offline  
post #13 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 07:52 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 488
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Can you tell me the stats for Edberg, T. Martin and Rafter?
Maxpowers is offline  
post #14 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 10:00 PM
Registered User
 
SwissMister1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Virginia
Age: 17
Posts: 4,786
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Jerome Haehnel is 100%. I actually can't think of too many other guys who can say that, even guys who came completely out of nowhere to beat a #1 usually wound up playing some other #1 and losing.

______________________________

~♠ Gasquetaires ♠~

un pour tous, tous pour un
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾

PAW #1 5/22/06
Predict-the-SCORE US Open Champion

Last edited by SwissMister1; 05-12-2005 at 10:04 PM.
SwissMister1 is offline  
post #15 of 26 (permalink) Old 05-12-2005, 10:03 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 812
                     
Re: Interesting (?) stat: [any player] vs. [every #1 of his time]

Federer:

Agassi 7-3
Ferrero 5-3
Hewitt 9-7
Kafelnikov 2-4
Kuerten 1-2
Moya 5-0
Rafter 0-3
Rios 2-0
Roddick 8-1
Safin 6-2
Sampras 1-0

46-25 (65%)

Prediction for the rest of the decade:
Federer winner: Usopen 05, 06, 07, 09 Aopen:06, 07, 10 Roland GArros:06, 08 Wimbledon:05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10 (Roddick always runner up)
Safin winner: Aopen 08 Gasquet winner: USopen 08, Aopen 09, RG: 10
Nadal winner: RG 07 Monfils winner: USopen 10
Guga winner: RG 2010
Roddick and Hewitt together winner of: 3 sidney, 4 Adelaide, 3 washington, 3 san jose, 3 indianapolis, 2 houston, 2 memphis, 5 queens and one master series title (where Safin, Agassi, Federer and Nadal happens to all be injured).
makro120 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome