Ljubicic has more consecutive weeks in the top 100 than any other player. [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Ljubicic has more consecutive weeks in the top 100 than any other player.

n8
03-24-2010, 11:59 AM
As Ljubicic is the man of the moment, I thought I would share an interesting stat; Ljubicic has been in the top 100 since Oct 4th 1999, a longer active streak (544 weeks) than any other player. Federer places second as his streak started a week later. Here's the top 10:


ATP Rank Player (country) Consecutive weeks in the top 100
13 Ivan Ljubicic (CRO) 544 wks
1 Roger Federer (SUI) 543 wks
15 Mikhail Youzhny (RUS) 475 wks
8 Andy Roddick (USA) 466 wks
22 Tommy Robredo (ESP) 464 wks
6 Nikolay Davydenko (RUS)440 wks
11 Fernando Gonzalez (CHI)423 wks
34 Feliciano Lopez (ESP) 400 wks
17 David Ferrer (ESP) 398 wks
4 Rafael Nadal (ESP) 359 wks

For the full top 100, see here (http://statracket.net/?view=stats/weeks.php) and choose '100' from the drop down menu. Until August last year, Moya held the active record (streak ended at 723 weeks :sad:).

Kolya
03-24-2010, 12:25 PM
Interesting.

How about all time?

RIboy
03-24-2010, 01:47 PM
Legenda :yeah:

samanosuke
03-24-2010, 02:02 PM
Great stats

ApproachShot
03-24-2010, 02:28 PM
StatRacket, do you know the equivalent figures for Connors and Santoro?

Mateya
03-24-2010, 02:34 PM
Very interesting :spit: If I had to guess I would never pick Ljubo.

A small surprise on that list is Youzhny and LaLo too.
Others are quite expected, well known and respected names for a decade or so. :cool:
But Moya's record seems untouchable at the moment. :eek:

EDIT: I see PHM is no.15 on the list, right after all the big names.
Go Paulo, let's make it 400 weeks :rocker2:

fabolous
03-24-2010, 03:26 PM
StatRacket, do you know the equivalent figures for Connors and Santoro?
just looked it up at the ATP website, santoro's streak goes from beginning of 1997 to beginning of 2010, so 13 years for him.

connors has to be the alltime leader. his streak went from the beginning of the rankings 1973 to 1990, which makes 17 years (too lazy to count the exact number of weeks). and keep in mind that he would have even more time if there was a ranking system before 1973.

TennisOnWood
03-24-2010, 03:36 PM
Great thread m8.. as always from you

Certinfy
03-24-2010, 05:36 PM
Berdych at 318 weeks :eek: Never would have thought that!

*bunny*
03-24-2010, 05:54 PM
Ljubicic's and Federer's records are definitely great, but your list includes only the ongoing streaks, and IMHO it seems a bit misleading, and it's unfair to active players who have had longer streaks in the past.
For example, Hewitt was in top 100 from Feb. 1, 1999, to Feb. 1, 2009, and JCF from June 14 1999 to Feb. 1, 2009---before both of them briefly dropped out of top 100 due to injury layoffs in 2008; that is, 521 weeks for Hewitt and 504 weeks for Ferrero.

And, Moya was in top 100 from Sept. 25, 1995, till July 27, 2009---that's nearly 14 years! (= about 700 weeks!) So IMHO, he should be on top of the table for active players.

TennisOnWood
03-24-2010, 06:06 PM
Maybe we can see some alltime list.. this is really interesting statistic

electronicmusic
03-24-2010, 06:08 PM
Maybe we can see some alltime list.. this is really interesting statistic

Would love to see that as well.

marcRD
03-24-2010, 06:14 PM
Rosewall must have been in the top 100 all the time between 52 and 77, which would be something like 1300 weeks

sammy01
03-24-2010, 06:16 PM
nice stat shocked at youzhny being so high up the list. he doesn't seem that old to me, but i guess he broke through young.

marcRD
03-24-2010, 06:21 PM
Connors entered the top 100 1971, top 10 72 and left the top 10 only 1988 and top 100 1990...

Then he came back to top 100 1991 and was there until 1993 when he was 41 years old...

Connors was awesome (and I definetly am not a fan), his longevity doesnt make sense to me as he was such a grinder. At 39 he was still taking 20 year old Chang to 5 sets in red clay, going to USOPEN semifinal, taking sets from the nr1 ranked Edberg...

I cant belive he beat Edberg 6-2, 6-3, 6-1 in USOPEN 89 at 37 years old and took Agassi to 5 sets (including a bagel) in QF....

Take a look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WShBaHxLmpk&feature=related

If MTF would be around back then it would be called the muggiest of eras.

Anyway it is through these crossings between eras we have evidence that a Borg (or Laver, Rosewall, Mcenroe) would still be a force in today's tennis, if Connors who was kind of dominated by Borg at their peaks could give young Agassi a 5 set battle at 37 years old and Agassi could go on to give Federer a good match at 35 years old, surely Borg and Mcenroe would be able to be the great players they were in this era aswell.

Haelfix
03-24-2010, 06:57 PM
You run into trouble with that logic pretty rapidly, as it is a slippery slope. You can trace a line from Federer all the way back to players in the early 1900s, where people could barely hit 80mph serves and moved like stick figures. Truth is, they'd get double bageled if they played any guy in the ATP 500 today.

I don't think Federer or Nadal would double or triple bagel Borg, Lendl, McEnroe or Connors but then I don't think the result would be in much dispute either assuming the latter played the same way they did. You'd be looking at 6-3 6-2 6-3 matches or something like that, nearly every time.

Whether its serve speed, return reflexes, grip and motion changes, amount of speed and topspin imparted to the ball, or even athletic ability in general, there has been improvement in ATP tennis pretty much consistently throughout the years.

marcRD
03-24-2010, 07:19 PM
You run into trouble with that logic pretty rapidly, as it is a slippery slope. You can trace a line from Federer all the way back to players in the early 1900s, where people could barely hit 80mph serves and moved like stick figures. Truth is, they'd get double bageled if they played any guy in the ATP 500 today.

I don't think Federer or Nadal would double or triple bagel Borg, Lendl, McEnroe or Connors but then I don't think the result would be in much dispute either assuming the latter played the same way they did. You'd be looking at 6-3 6-2 6-3 matches or something like that, nearly every time.

Whether its serve speed, return reflexes, grip and motion changes, amount of speed and topspin imparted to the ball, or even athletic ability in general, there has been improvement in ATP tennis pretty much consistently throughout the years.

If you go too far with the chain the logic certanly breaks down, but we have simply Connors and Agassi at the center spanning over 30 years, Connors competed toe to toe with top players like Agassi when he was almost 40 years old and in the late 70s was dominated by Borg and Mcenroe, Agassi himself competed at his mid 30s toe to toe with young guns in the 2000s like Federer, Nadal, Safin and Hewitt. Equipment changed and tennis evolved, with physios and the team getting bigger around tennis players and if Borg and Mcenroe had all that they would be top players today.

Fact still remains that when Connors and Agassi/Chang faced each other in both 5 set marathons 1989 and 1991 it was the 70s era (Borg, Mcenroe and Connors) with all their experience and also their old legs facing the 90s era (Agassi, Chang, Sampras..) without the experience but with young legs and the future ahead. What conclusion could be made? None except that Connors could still compete with the young guns when he was almost 40 years old, tennis had not taken a quantum leap since the 70s, it was very much the same competitive sport Connors had played for all his long career.

I dont like to hear old guys talking about how their eras were the greatest without having any idea how it is to be on a tennis court with modern raquets facing Nadal or Federer. Kramer is one of those guys that would write about every top player he ever played in the 40s/50s as the greatest tennis players of all time and even write down guys from the 60s like Laver and Rosewall as second tier.

However Connors really played young Borg and young Agassi, so he knows what it is like to play against both these guys and I would love to hear how they compare against each other when standing on the other side of the net against them.

JediFed
03-25-2010, 12:27 AM
Ivan and Fed are both at about 600 weeks (as after 52 they would still be in the top 100).

Still would need another 2 years to match Moya's 14 years.

Certinfy
03-25-2010, 12:31 AM
Ljubicic is the real GOAT!