Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count - MensTennisForums.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-27-2006, 09:17 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 582
                     
Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

Grand Slam Wins/Runner Ups/Total # of Finals/Singles Titles:

Tier I
Sampras - 14/4/18/64
Laver - 11/6/17/39(some estimates put count at around 100)
Borg - 11/5/16/61
Emerson - 12/3/15/25

Tier II
Rosewall - 8/4/12/na
Federer - 8/1/9/40
Agassi - 8/7/15/60
Connors - 8/7/15/101
Lendl - 8/11/19/94
McEnroe - 7/4/11/77
Wilander - 7/4/11/33
Edberg - 6/5/11/42
Becker 6/4/10/49

To add a more statistical perspective to the greatest of all time debate. Interesting insights: Federer wins nearly 90% of his grand slam finals. W/ a couple more gs wins, he'll be in tier I
Laver won two career grand slams
Borg won french opens and wimbledons back to back
Agassi won slams on 4 different surfaces, 17 masters series shields
Connors won most singles titles of any other GOAT player
McEnroe was just as prolific in grandslam doubles titles
lordmanji is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-27-2006, 09:46 PM
Registered User
 
R.Federer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,821
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

You should standardize in some way-- either by years / tournaments played, e.g. Slams won relative to Slams played (I think Borg wins handily in that case).
R.Federer is offline  
post #3 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-27-2006, 10:20 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 276
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

Wilander has won on all surfaces too.
mecir72 is offline  
 
post #4 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-28-2006, 03:11 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 582
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

wilander didnt win wimbledon.
and it matters ultimately how many titles they won, not how long it took.
lordmanji is offline  
post #5 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-28-2006, 03:13 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 399
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordmanji
wilander didnt win wimbledon.
and it matters ultimately how many titles they won, not how long it took.
The Australian Open was played on grass until 1988 when it switched to Rebound Ace afterwards, hence mecir72 is correct in saying that Wilander titles on all surfaces.

Can you tell me how it feels to be hated?
Can you tell me how it feels to be loved?
Can you tell me how it feels to be respected?
Or is the answer none of the above

PAW 2006 W Kitzbühel, RU Madrid

PAW results for 2005
W Vienna
SF Roland Garros
QF Palermo, Stuttgart, Bastad
Plastic Bertrand is offline  
post #6 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-28-2006, 03:19 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 249
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

Something to keep in mind--after Laver won his first Grand Slam he turned pro and was barred from playing the Slams for 8 years while he was in his prime (the Slams were amateur events in those days). One year after Open tennis came about he won his second Grand Slam. One can only imagine how many Slams Laver would have won had he been allowed to play them. Also Emerson won most of his Slams while the best players of his day (Laver, Hoad, Rosewall, Gonzalez, etc.) were playing pro tennis and not allowed to play the Slams--thus I would not categorize him as tier 1.
JW10S is offline  
post #7 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-28-2006, 03:33 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 582
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

its interesting to note how history favors winners over runnerups. lendl appeared in 19gs finals but at only 8gs, he can only be considered 2nd tier. had he won w/ the same percentage as sampras, he'd be considered one of the greatest. also, had connors and agassi won their gs finals, they would be up there as well. conversely, if federer had 50% ratio like some of the others, he'd not be so specially regarded.

jw: i believe you're right about emerson. he should at most be at the bottom of tier 2.

about wilander: yes, wilander won on all four surfaces. but i should have stated clearly that i meant four grandslams on different surfaces. wilander's achievement is lesser imo for that reason tho it should be noted he won 3 gs in the same year.
lordmanji is offline  
post #8 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-28-2006, 04:23 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 158
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

Technically, aren't there just 3 Grand Slam surfaces? Agassi only won on 3 different surfaces, not 4. Unless you are saying there's hardcourt type 1 and hardcourt type 2. If that's the case, then we really have about 100 different court surfaces on the tour.
senorgato is offline  
post #9 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-28-2006, 04:26 AM
Banned!
 
prima donna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,319
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

Wilander was overrated.
prima donna is offline  
post #10 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-28-2006, 07:41 AM
Registered User
 
DrJules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 10,597
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

Quote:
Originally Posted by JW10S
Something to keep in mind--after Laver won his first Grand Slam he turned pro and was barred from playing the Slams for 8 years while he was in his prime (the Slams were amateur events in those days). One year after Open tennis came about he won his second Grand Slam. One can only imagine how many Slams Laver would have won had he been allowed to play them. Also Emerson won most of his Slams while the best players of his day (Laver, Hoad, Rosewall, Gonzalez, etc.) were playing pro tennis and not allowed to play the Slams--thus I would not categorize him as tier 1.
Overall mostly true.

Actually 5 years from 1963-1967 inclusive. In the middle of career between grand slams.

Laver almost certainly would have won 15 or more grand slams, probably less up to 1962 (Laver benefited from absence of professionals) but would have won numerous titles during 63-67. Emerson won 10 of his 12 titles from 63-67 having lost in 3 grand slam finals in 62 to Laver; Emerson won none in the professional era of tennis.

The current greatness league of active players in order of achievements to date (a factual comparison rather than fan biased assessment):

Federer 18 GS, 6 Year End Masters, 24 Master Series.
Nadal 14 GS, 28 Master Series, 1 Olympic Gold.
Djokovic 12 GS, 5 Year End Masters, 30 Master Series.


DrJules is offline  
post #11 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-28-2006, 09:12 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 693
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordmanji
Laver won two career grand slams

Please, friends, if you make such lists, learn at first some basics, terminology, etc...
Boris Franz Ecker is offline  
post #12 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-28-2006, 09:34 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Age: 32
Posts: 4,144
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

There are awful mistakes in the first post. I wonder why anyone noticed it before

An example for you all:
Connors won 109 tournaments
Adler is offline  
post #13 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-28-2006, 04:07 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 375
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

Pretty good list, though I think Newcombe won 7 GS titles as well, including 3 Wimbledons. All his big titles were won on grass courts as far as I know. It's hard to compare the eras. Emerson would be tier 2 for me as well. Sometimes I feel the older time players from the 40's, 50's and 60's get overlooked. Rosewall must have been some player as well to win titles in the 50's and then compete and win big titles twenty years later in the Open era. He was reaching the Wimbledon and US Open finals in his 40th year.
Dancing Hero is offline  
post #14 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-29-2006, 02:53 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 498
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

How many titles did Connors win? The ATP site says 105, the International Tennis Hall of Fame site says 109. As regards to 'Non grand slam' titles, we don't seem to have an accurate source as how many titles players won before the open era. I agree with the first post that there are two tiers are greatness. For me the players who have 10 or more grand slams are in the top tier, and the players who have won 6-9 grand slams are in the second tier.
I don't think the number of grand slam finals reached is that important. For me only titles actually count. You either win a grand slam or you don't IMHO. First is first, second is nowhere.
Dr Jules is right that Laver benefitted in 1961-62 by players like Rosewall and Pancho Gonzales being banned from grand slams. I certainly put Laver above Borg and Emerson, but probably not Sampras.
All_Slam_Andre is offline  
post #15 of 17 (permalink) Old 08-29-2006, 03:10 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 498
                     
Re: Greatest of All Time Grand Slam Final, Runnerup, Single Count

Yes it is an interesting case with Wilander. He won the Australian Open twice on grass, but he never went past the quarter-finals at Wimbledon. I suppose this raises the question, what is more important, the surface or the location. Along with Agassi, he is the only player to have won grand slams on 4 different surfaces.
I personally don't think that doubles tennis is that important. For me it is just a sideshow and only singles matter.
All_Slam_Andre 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