Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed. - MensTennisForums.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:10 PM Thread Starter
Banned!
 
prima donna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,319
                     
Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

The argument's been made that players like Pete Sampras, Roger Federer or perhaps even John McEnroe, the greatest the sport has ever seen lack versatility, simply because they couldn't play on clay. Well, what does that say for the Roland Garros Champions that have outclassed them in that department, by not only managing to skip tournaments and absolutely bomb out, in not only 1 tournament, but 3 others and 2 of those being on different surfaces. The anemic play of clay courters has not only haunted them in the villages of England, but this goes all the way to New York and even in some cases, Australia. If one is incapable of winning on rebound ace, then what tournament will they ever win ? Do we need to serve underhanded to make the game a tad simplier ? Rafael Nadal accumulated the best return percentage on tour this year, even if the majority of those results came on clay, a surface that makes it much easier to return. I'm not going to even bother listing at his stats for the tournaments played on a fast surface, but I can assure you they come nowhere close to those on dirt.

Fact of the matter is, clay courters have skipped Wimbledon and failed at 2 other slams aside from that, with the exception of a rare few, Roland Garros has been their only title.

Roland Garros is notorious for providing "average" champions.
Even more notorious for it's lack of real star power, even more amazing the people that don't win it.

Andres Gomez has won Roland Garros, yet John McEnroe, Pete Sampras, Roger Federer and a cluster of others have yet to capture the title.
Something wrong with this picture?

Wimbledon, on the other hand, is notorious for creating Champions that have enjoyed success throughout the world and on each surface, showcasing their variety and talent on the Rebound Ace of Australia, Clay of Paris and the speedy courts in New York City.

Wimbledon Champs:
AO's: 12 - 7 different players won, as opposed to the domination of mainly a 3 RG champions.
FO's: 1 (Zero, aside from Agassi)
U.S Open's:22 - 9 different players.

Roland Garros
AO's: 12 ( Thank Andre, Wilander and Lendl)
Wimbledon's:1 (Zero, aside from Agassi)
U.S Open's: 4 - 2 players, Wilander and Lendl

We have to stop and ask ourselves, is it the reality that clay is one big equalizer and not so much having to do with skill, but repetition and not actual tennis, just, which player will blink first.



These figures outline the last

20 Year's of Competition between Roland Garros Champion
vs
24 Year's of Competition between Wimbledon Champions

Since a large portion of the records were amassed for Wimbledon Champions (14) in fact, (which nearly matches the pitiful amount of titles that have been captured off clay, in total, by each of the Roland Garros champions), I've decided to even the score by adding other Champions (2, Connors and McEnroe) into the equation.

12 Wimbledon Champions
vs
15 Roland Garros Champions


What exactly is being measured?
The amount of Slams won outside of Roland Garros and Wimbledon.

The total amassed by Roland Garros Champions:
17
Most of that coming solely from Lendl, Wilander and Agassi

The total amassed by Wimbledon Champions:
35


In conclusion, the problem doesn't seem like it has as much to do with the lack of versatility of those that have failed at the Roland Garros, but merely is an issue of quite the contrary. The lack of versatility that Roland Garros Champions have shown us. Also, one more challenge:

Look at this list of Roland Garros Champs and Compare the list of Wimbledon Champs.

Which is more likely to be known by the general public ?

Roland Garros:
1985 Mats Wilander Ivan Lendl 3-6 6-4 6-2 6-2
1986 Ivan Lendl Mikael Pernfors 6-3 6-2 6-4
1987 Ivan Lendl Mats Wilander 7-5 6-2 3-6 7-6
1988 Mats Wilander Henri Leconte 7-5 6-2 6-1
1989 Michael Chang Stefan Edberg 6-1 3-6 4-6 6-4 6-2
1990 Andrés Gómez Andre Agassi 6-3 2-6 6-4 6-4
1991 Jim Courier Andre Agassi 3-6 6-4 2-6 6-1 6-4
1992 Jim Courier Petr Korda 7-5 6-2 6-1
1993 Sergi Bruguera Jim Courier 6-4 2-6 6-2 3-6 6-3
1994 Sergi Bruguera Alberto Berasategui 6-3 7-5 2-6 6-1
1995 Thomas Muster Michael Chang 7-5 6-2 6-4
1996 Yevgeny Kafelnikov Michael Stich 7-6 7-5 7-6
1997 Gustavo Kuerten Sergi Bruguera 6-3 6-4 6-2
1998 Carlos Moya Alex Corretja 6-3 7-5 6-3
1999 Andre Agassi Andrei Medvedev 1-6 2-6 6-4 6-3 6-4
2000 Gustavo Kuerten Magnus Norman 6-2 6-3 2-6 7-6(6)
2001 Gustavo Kuerten Alex Corretja 6-7(3) 7-5 6-2 6-0
2002 Albert Costa Juan Carlos Ferrero 6-1 6-0 4-6 6-3
2003 Juan Carlos Ferrero Martin Verkerk 6-1 6-3 6-2
2004 Gastón Gaudio Guillermo Coria 0-6 3-6 6-4 6-1 8-6
2005 Rafael Nadal Mariano Puerta 6-7(6) 6-3 6-1 7-5

Wimbledon:
1981 John McEnroe Björn Borg 4-6 7-6(1) 7-6(4) 6-4
1982 Jimmy Connors John McEnroe 3-6 6-3 6-7(2) 7-6(5) 6-4
1983 John McEnroe Chris Lewis 6-2 6-2 6-2
1984 John McEnroe Jimmy Connors 6-1 6-1 6-2
1985 Boris Becker Kevin Curren 6-3 6-7(4) 7-6(3) 6-4
1986 Boris Becker Ivan Lendl 6-4 6-3 7-5
1987 Pat Cash Ivan Lendl 7-6(5) 6-2 7-5
1988 Stefan Edberg Boris Becker 4-6 7-6(2) 6-4 6-2
1989 Boris Becker Stefan Edberg 6-0 7-6(1) 6-4
1990 Stefan Edberg Boris Becker 6-2 6-2 3-6 3-6 6-4
1991 Michael Stich Boris Becker 6-4 7-6(4) 6-4
1992 Andre Agassi Goran Ivanisevic 6-7(8) 6-4 6-4 1-6 6-4
1993 Pete Sampras Jim Courier 7-6(3) 7-6(6) 3-6 6-3
1994 Pete Sampras Goran Ivanisevic 7-6(2) 7-6(5) 6-0
1995 Pete Sampras Boris Becker 6-7 6-2 6-4 6-2
1996 Richard Krajicek MaliVai Washington 6-3 6-4 6-3
1997 Pete Sampras Cédric Pioline 6-4 6-2 6-4
1998 Pete Sampras Goran Ivanisevic 6-7(2) 7-6(9) 6-4 3-6 6-2
1999 Pete Sampras Andre Agassi 6-3 6-4 7-5
2000 Pete Sampras Patrick Rafter 6-7(10) 7-6(5) 6-4 6-2
2001 Goran Ivanisevic Patrick Rafter 6-3 3-6 6-3 2-6 9-7
2002 Lleyton Hewitt David Nalbandian 6-1 6-3 6-2
2003 Roger Federer Mark Philippoussis 7-6(5) 6-2 7-6(3)
2004 Roger Federer Andy Roddick 4-6 7-5 7-6(3) 6-4
2005 Roger Federer Andy Roddick 6-2 7-6(2) 6-4

Last edited by prima donna; 12-13-2005 at 09:03 PM.
prima donna is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:18 PM
Registered User
 
Peoples's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,294
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Excellent post. Wimbledon and US Open have very few 'random' winners. But clay has a big part in tennis and those Wimbledon champions who are capable of winning Roland Garros are special (like Agassi).

fernandogonzález
Peoples is offline  
post #3 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:23 PM
Not a Registered User
 
El Legenda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: US of A
Posts: 30,181
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by prima donna

Wimbledon:
1982 Jimmy Connors John McEnroe 3-6 6-3 6-7(2) 7-6(5) 6-4
1983 John McEnroe Chris Lewis 6-2 6-2 6-2
1984 John McEnroe Jimmy Connors 6-1 6-1 6-2
1985 Boris Becker Kevin Curren 6-3 6-7(4) 7-6(3) 6-4
1986 Boris Becker Ivan Lendl 6-4 6-3 7-5
1987 Pat Cash Ivan Lendl 7-6(5) 6-2 7-5
1988 Stefan Edberg Boris Becker 4-6 7-6(2) 6-4 6-2
1989 Boris Becker Stefan Edberg 6-0 7-6(1) 6-4
1990 Stefan Edberg Boris Becker 6-2 6-2 3-6 3-6 6-4
1991 Michael Stich Boris Becker 6-4 7-6(4) 6-4
1992 Andre Agassi Goran Ivanisevic 6-7(8) 6-4 6-4 1-6 6-4
1993 Pete Sampras Jim Courier 7-6(3) 7-6(6) 3-6 6-3
1994 Pete Sampras Goran Ivanisevic 7-6(2) 7-6(5) 6-0
1995 Pete Sampras Boris Becker 6-7 6-2 6-4 6-2
1996 Richard Krajicek MaliVai Washington 6-3 6-4 6-3
1997 Pete Sampras Cédric Pioline 6-4 6-2 6-4
1998 Pete Sampras Goran Ivanisevic 6-7(2) 7-6(9) 6-4 3-6 6-2
1999 Pete Sampras Andre Agassi 6-3 6-4 7-5
2000 Pete Sampras Patrick Rafter 6-7(10) 7-6(5) 6-4 6-2
2001 Goran Ivanisevic Patrick Rafter 6-3 3-6 6-3 2-6 9-7
2002 Lleyton Hewitt David Nalbandian 6-1 6-3 6-2
2003 Roger Federer Mark Philippoussis 7-6(5) 6-2 7-6(3)
2004 Roger Federer Andy Roddick 4-6 7-5 7-6(3) 6-4
2005 Roger Federer Andy Roddick 6-2 7-6(2) 6-4
1981 John McEnroe Björn Borg 4-6 7-6(1) 7-6(4) 6-4
1981 is not after 2005, i think 2006 comes after 2005. :retard:
El Legenda is offline  
post #4 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:23 PM
Registered User
 
DrJules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 10,594
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Rather convienent that your period excludes Bjorn Borg; 6 x French Open and 5 x Wimbledon. Also 3 x Decoturf runner-up at US open.

You of course miss the point.

How few have won Wimbledon and French Open shows that the people who have done both are incredible players. The total difference in skills required for each surface is why many people consider Bjorn Borg the greatest player of all time.
DrJules is offline  
post #5 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:24 PM Thread Starter
Banned!
 
prima donna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,319
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones
1981 is not after 2005, i think 2006 comes after 2005. :retard:
Talk about trivial and minor details.

Bravo, once again, you win the award for missing the big picture.
prima donna is offline  
post #6 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:27 PM Thread Starter
Banned!
 
prima donna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,319
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJules
Rather convienent that your period excludes Bjorn Borg; 6 x French Open and 5 x Wimbledon. Also 3 x Decoturf runner-up at US open.

You of course miss the point.

How few have won Wimbledon and French Open shows that the people who have done both are incredible players. The total difference in skills required for each surface is why many people consider Bjorn Borg the greatest player of all time.
Bjorn Borg never won the Australian Open or U.S Open.

He dominated in England and both Paris. It'd really an equal trade-off and what would be the point of including him ? He'd just mangle the statistics, the same way that a Sampras would, only reason I've included Pete is simply because he's being downplayed by critics due to his lack of success on clay, okay, well put Pete's numbers up against the entire Roland Garros Champions.

Scary thought, right ?

Borg is actually everything that I'm against here ...

He won Roland Garros.
Only could win Wimbledon.
Won Wimbledon
Only could win Roland Garros.

Hello, what about Australia and New York ? He succeeded on 2 different surfaces. The argument to be made for Borg is equally fair and beneficial for both sides of the card. Irrelevant.
prima donna is offline  
post #7 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:32 PM
Registered User
 
DrJules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 10,594
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Borg only played Australia once because during his playing time few top players went to the AO. Look at the list of winners in the late 70's; all players regularly on the losing side when playing Borg.

NO player has consistenly managed to dominate on clay, grass and Decoturf on regular basis. NO player has been that good. Maybe Roger????

Last edited by DrJules; 12-13-2005 at 08:39 PM.
DrJules is offline  
post #8 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:33 PM
Registered User
 
musefanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: In Monaco harbour waiting for next week's GP with a drunken Kimi
Age: 26
Posts: 8,267
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Brilliant post thanks for all that trivia, it was great to read and i do agree with you!

Kimi Raikkonen 2007 F1 World Champion

15 wins- 14 poles- 456 points

Murray HenmanNieminen Ferrero Federer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mara_M View Post
oh then i come to share the bed
musefanatic is offline  
post #9 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:35 PM Thread Starter
Banned!
 
prima donna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,319
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJules
Borg only played Australia once because during his playing time few top players went to the AO. Look at the list of winners in the late 70's.

NO player has consistenly managed to dominate on clay, grass and Decoturf on regular basis. NO player has been that good. Maybe Roger????
Dominance isn't what should be measured in this instance.

It is variety.

Even in the AO, more Wimbledon champions have succeeded than Roland Garros champions.

There is a same amount of titles, but a higher number of players that won Wimby have succeeded in Australia.
prima donna is offline  
post #10 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:40 PM
Registered User
 
Haute's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Age: 30
Posts: 12,969
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

It's definitely true on the men's side, but not the women's. Far more women in the Open Era have been successful at winning Roland Garros and another Slam than the men have been; and just off the top of my head right now: Jennifer Capriati, Serena Williams, and Justine Henin-Hardenne. What does that say when the women's game has more versatility than the men's?

What would Anderson say?
Haute is offline  
post #11 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:42 PM
Registered User
 
DrJules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 10,594
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Agassi fans will like this post. It shows his unique achievement in this period.
DrJules is offline  
post #12 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:44 PM Thread Starter
Banned!
 
prima donna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,319
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol Apollo
It's definitely true on the men's side, but not the women's. Far more women in the Open Era have been successful at winning Roland Garros and another Slam than the men have been; and just off the top of my head right now: Jennifer Capriati, Serena Williams, and Justine Henin-Hardenne. What does that say when the women's game has more versatility than the men's?
That's one way of looking at it, then again, how many true "clay court specialists" are there on the Women's Side ?

1). Aranxta Sanchez-Vicario - Retired.
2). Conchita Martinez - Winding down near the end of her career.
3). Amelie Mauresmo - Mental weakness.
4). Justine Henin-Hardenne - Really the only player very strong on clay.
5). Kim Clijsters - Probably aside from Justine, the only specialist on clay.

There are a variety of others, how could I forget my favorite
Anastasia Myskina, but fact of the matter is that aside from Hardenne, Clijsters, Myskina and even Schynder there is a lack of players that can play on it really properly.

The Women's Game is dominated by power right now, which isn't a recipe for success on clay; however, Serena has accomplished something rare and that definitely deserves to be acknowledged. The only player of the last 20 years I can think of that would beat Serena on Clay is Aranxta Sanchez-Vicario.
prima donna is offline  
post #13 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:47 PM Thread Starter
Banned!
 
prima donna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,319
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJules
Agassi fans will like this post. It shows his unique achievement in this period.
Agassi is a legend of the game, that is precisely why I refuse to touch on any issues concerning his technique or sportsmanship, he can do whatever he wants within reason. The only other player still living that shares such an accomplishment (Career Grand Slam) is Rod Laver, so he is in good company.
prima donna is offline  
post #14 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:51 PM
Registered User
 
Haute's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Age: 30
Posts: 12,969
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Interesting to bring up Conchita though as a clay court specialist; she never won Roland Garros but got to the Finals, and instead wins Wimbledon against Navratilova. That'd be like Coria winning Wimbledon against Fed, which would never happen.

What would Anderson say?
Haute is offline  
post #15 of 215 (permalink) Old 12-13-2005, 08:52 PM
Registered User
 
DrJules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 10,594
                     
Re: Wimbledon vs Roland Garros Champions - the bitter and ugly truth. Exposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by prima donna
Agassi is a legend of the game, that is precisely why I refuse to touch on any issues concerning his technique or sportsmanship, he can do whatever he wants within reason. The only other player still living that shares such an accomplishment (Career Grand Slam) is Rod Laver, so he is in good company.
Rod Laver of course did not have Rebound Ace or Decoturf although he proved his brilliance on hard courts on the professional tour.

Considering his versatility, all 4 grand slams + all 4 surfaces, I am amazed Agassi does not rate higher in all time greatest lists. He is in a group of 1.
DrJules 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