Federer first ever to win 90 matches in a single season? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer first ever to win 90 matches in a single season?

The Magic Hand
11-16-2006, 02:38 PM
Does anyone know if that's actually the case and who's second, third ... in this statistic?

Fredi

oz_boz
11-16-2006, 02:40 PM
Lendl was the last one to do it, so it's been a while. But I don't know the figures. NYCtennisfan, Voo de Mar, Sjengster...?

jazar
11-16-2006, 02:42 PM
i think guillermo vilas might have done it as well

Caerula Sanguis
11-16-2006, 02:43 PM
didn't Lendl won like 107 matches ?

NYCtennisfan
11-16-2006, 02:43 PM
Nope. Lendl has done it multiple times (80-82--100+ wins twice), Connors did it twice, Vilas did it, and JMac did it once.

However, Connors is the only one to have ever won 90+ matches and lost i the single digits when he went 90-9 in 1976. Fed is now the second person.

NYCtennisfan
11-16-2006, 02:44 PM
Lendl

1980: 109-29
1981: 97-14
1982: 106- 10

NYCtennisfan
11-16-2006, 02:44 PM
Jmac

1979: 97-13

NYCtennisfan
11-16-2006, 02:45 PM
Connors

1973: 90-15
1974: 89-6 (almost :))
1976: 90-9

NYCtennisfan
11-16-2006, 02:46 PM
Vilas:

1977: 133-14

NYCtennisfan
11-16-2006, 02:47 PM
Borg

1974: 87-19
1975: 87-16

Close but not quite.

MisterQ
11-16-2006, 02:47 PM
Lendl

1980: 109-29
1981: 97-14
1982: 106- 10

Amazing that Lendl didn't win a major in those years with that many wins!

The Magic Hand
11-16-2006, 02:47 PM
Ok, thx. Damn those guys played a lot of matches. :)

Fredi

R.Federer
11-16-2006, 02:49 PM
Another incredible stat.... I'm losing count of his streaks!

NYCtennisfan
11-16-2006, 02:49 PM
Amazing that Lendl didn't win a major in those years with that many wins!

Indeed. He couldn't beat Jmac, Connors, Borg in the big matches.

In fact, when he went on his 18 finals in a row streak, it was between the USO and Roland Garros. Amazing that he could play so much, but a lot of it was when he wasn't playing JMAC or Connors.

deliveryman
11-16-2006, 03:09 PM
I think a more interesting stat would be, who won 90+ matches with the LEAST amount of tournaments played.

hammett
11-16-2006, 03:14 PM
Vilas:

1977: 133-14

:eek: Did you see that CmonAussie?:cool:

:wavey:

nobama
11-16-2006, 03:20 PM
I think a more interesting stat would be, who won 90+ matches with the LEAST amount of tournaments played.Yes I'd be curious to know how many tournaments Lendl, Connors, Vilas and Mac played to get those 90+ match wins.

ChinoRios4Ever
11-16-2006, 03:56 PM
roger is out of this world :eek:

patrickc
11-16-2006, 04:14 PM
i just recently joined and i thought this thread was an interesting one to make my first post:
events played (excluding davis cup)
lendl 1980: 34 played for 109 wins
1981: 22 played for 97 wins
1982: 23 played for 106 wins
jmac 1979: 22 played for 97 wins
connors 1973: 24 played for 90 wins
1976: 21 played for 90 wins
vilas 1977: 31 played for 133 wins
federer 2006: 17 played for 90 wins

The Magic Hand
11-16-2006, 04:18 PM
Yes I'd be curious to know how many tournaments Lendl, Connors, Vilas and Mac played to get those 90+ match wins.

Another good list would be the number of players someone lost to in a single season while winning more than 50 (or whatever number) matches. I'm pretty sure Federer would be pretty high up there as well with only two players (or three if he doesn't win the TMC).

Fredi

jazar
11-16-2006, 07:26 PM
Vilas:

1977: 133-14

that really is quite an incredible statistic. but then when you think about it i guess most matches were on clay and he was a claycourt master

MisterQ
11-16-2006, 08:36 PM
i just recently joined and i thought this thread was an interesting one to make my first post:
events played (excluding davis cup)
lendl 1980: 34 played for 109 wins
1981: 22 played for 97 wins
1982: 23 played for 106 wins
jmac 1979: 22 played for 97 wins
connors 1973: 24 played for 90 wins
1976: 21 played for 90 wins
vilas 1977: 31 played for 133 wins
federer 2006: 17 played for 90 wins


:wavey: Thanks for those stats.

It's worth considering the sizes of the tournaments played as well. Connors played some tournaments with only 16 in the draw. It doesn't make a huge difference in the numbers, but there's a slight effect when we're talking about the number of matches that are there for the taking in a given number of tournaments.

nobama
11-16-2006, 10:23 PM
Didn't Lendl (and others) play some tournaments where they only had to win three matches to win the tournament?

CmonAussie
11-16-2006, 11:04 PM
:eek: Did you see that CmonAussie?:cool:

:wavey:
:wavey:
Hey hammett mate:cool:
..........>>>>>>>>>>> Yes sure~~ no need to remind me that 1977 belonged to Vilas;) .. The people that need reminding are Jimmy Connors [illegitimate #1 for 77] the gutless ATP & the biased ITF [they chose Borg in 77 as their player of the year:eek: ]...

Without a doubt Vilas was the clear #1 in 1977 ~ there should be some kind of belated award to recognise that fact!!;)

nobama
11-16-2006, 11:11 PM
Connor's 160 consecutive weeks at #1, what years did that represent? And how were the rankings determined back then?

Fedex
11-16-2006, 11:14 PM
I believe the record for wins in a single season was Laver who won 134 matches in 1962, with just 15 losses. :eek: :eek:
So Federer is still a long way from that record, but nonetheless, he has had a historic season by many standards. :)

PamV
11-16-2006, 11:24 PM
Players with at least 80 match wins over the
past 25 years:
2006 Roger Federer 90-5
2005 Roger Federer 81-4
2001 Lleyton Hewitt 80-18
1996 Yevgeny Kafelnikov 80-25
1995 Thomas Muster 86-18
1993 Pete Sampras 85-16
1985 Ivan Lendl 84-7
1984 John McEnroe 82-3
1983 Mats Wilander 82-11
1982 Ivan Lendl 106-9

It would be intersting to compare the value of the matches in these tallys. In other words how many of the matches were Majors and Masters Series level?

Fedex
11-16-2006, 11:33 PM
Its too bad Roger doesn't play 30 tournements like Davydenko does. He'd win about 150 matches if he did that. :lol: :rolls:

Merton
11-17-2006, 01:25 AM
Connor's 160 consecutive weeks at #1, what years did that represent? And how were the rankings determined back then?

The rankings back then were decided differently, Lend's record of consecutive weeks as #1 is more relevant in my opinion. For example, Borg in 1978 won RG and Wimbledon but still Connors held the top rank because they counted results from 2 years and not just a year.

Didn't Lendl (and others) play some tournaments where they only had to win three matches to win the tournament?

That is true, but also the game is physically different today, a win takes more than it did in the late 70s. 90 wins today is an incredible record, given that this is only the second year that Roger plays 95 matches after 2003, he is very unlikely to repeat this.