[Federer-Fan]

Grand Slam
1. Rafael Nadal - 0.875 (196-28)
2. Roger Federer - 0.858 (291-48)
3. Novak Djokovic - 0.855 (200-34)
4. Andy Murray - 0.806 (150-36)
5. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga - 0.752 (91-30)
6. David Ferrer - 0.719 (128-50)
7. Stanislas Wawrinka - 0.710 (98-40)
8. Juan Martin del Potro - 0.708 (63-26)
9. Marin Cilic - 0.707 (70-29)
10. Tomas Berdych - 0.704 (114-48)
11. Lleyton Hewitt - 0.702 (146-62)
12. Milos Raonic - 0.695 (41-18)
13. Gael Monfils - 0.676 (73-35)
14. Tommy Robredo - 0.656 (103-54)
15. Kei Nishikori - 0.662 (45-23)
16. Richard Gasquet - 0.661 (84-43)
17. Tommy Haas - 0.652 (105-56)
18. Fernando Verdasco - 0.647 (90-49)
19. Gilles Simon - 0.637 (65-37)
20. Mikhail Youzhny - 0.629 (95-56)

Masters 1000
1. Rafael Nadal - 0.831 (294-60)
2. Novak Djokovic - 0.816 (249-56)
3. Roger Federer - 0.773 (321-94)
4. Andy Murray - 0.712 (168-68)
5. Juan Martin del Potro - 0.652 (73-39)
6. Lleyton Hewitt - 0.637 (128-73)
7. Tomas Berdych - 0.636 (161-92)
8. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga - 0.627 (94-56)
9. David Ferrer - 0.625 (168-101)
10. Kei Nishikori - 0.613 (49-31)
11. Milos Raonic - 0.608 (59-38)
12. Stanislas Wawrinka - 0.596 (112-76)
13. Grigor Dimitrov - 0.595 (44-30)
14. Tommy Haas - 0.582 (142-102)
15. Tommy Robredo - 0.577 (131-96)
16. Richard Gasquet - 0.575 (100-74)
17. John Isner - 0.573 (71-53)
18. Robin Söderling - 0.571 (72-54)
19. Gilles Simon - 0.558 (96-76)
20. Gael Monfils - 0.540 (67-57)

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/performance-zone/win-loss-index/career/grandslam/all/
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/performance-zone/win-loss-index/career/1000/all/

 

[Logos]

Nadal - the most efficient player of all time?

I did not know Nole is tied at 6th for all time grand slam titles. It is a remarkable achievement already and he still has a chance to surpass many players on that list until he retires. :worship:

 

[AnnaK_4ever]

YEC:

Federer - 0.814 (48-11) :worship: :worship:
Djokovic - 0.719 (23-9)
Nadal - 0.542 (13-11) :spit:

 

[Federer-Fan]

YEC:

Federer - 0.814 (48-11) :worship: :worship:
Djokovic - 0.719 (23-9)
Nadal - 0.542 (13-11) :spit:

Federer's record is ridiculous since you only face top 8 players at this event. :lol:
Crazy to think Djokovic's record was 9-9 until 2012 btw...

 

[Jomp1]

What stands out to me there is Tsonga's grand slam record. Crazy good for a player who's basically never predicted to win, and some of the guys behind him have won slams obviously.

 

[doubletrollt]

What stands out to me there is Tsonga's grand slam record. Crazy good for a player who's basically never predicted to win, and some of the guys behind him have won slams obviously.

Stronga 1F + 5 SF, Ferrer the same.
Stanimal 2GS + 2 SF, all in the last 22 month since USO'13, but would've been even better though if not had always been placed in Djokovic half/quarter at AO/USO since 2012, losing four times.

 

[Federer-Fan]

What stands out to me there is Tsonga's grand slam record. Crazy good for a player who's basically never predicted to win, and some of the guys behind him have won slams obviously.

Yes, Tsonga is a great Grand Slam player, arguably one of the best Slamless players of all-time and probably the best among active ones. Aside from his US Open 2012 loss to Klizan, I can't remember him having a single very bad loss in a Slam actually (closest cases are probably Dolgopolov at AO 2011 and Nishikori at AO 2012 but they were both playing very good tennis - top 20 level most definitely). Hopefully he can win a Slam one day anyway, I still have some hope. :yeah:

 

[Litotes]

Nadal - the most efficient player of all time?

I did not know Nole is tied at 6th for all time grand slam titles. It is a remarkable achievement already and he still has a chance to surpass many players on that list until he retires. :worship:

He isn't.

1 Federer 17
2 Nadal & Sampras 14
4 Emerson 12
5 Laver & Borg 11
7 Tilden 10
8 Djokovic, Agassi, Connors, Lendl, Rosewall, Perry 8

 

[duarte_a]

Nadal - the most efficient player of all time?

I did not know Nole is tied at 6th for all time grand slam titles. It is a remarkable achievement already and he still has a chance to surpass many players on that list until he retires. :worship:

Give Dull a couple more years and the winning percentages will go down hard.

 

[mistercrabs]

He isn't.

1 Federer 17
2 Nadal & Sampras 14
4 Emerson 12
5 Laver & Borg 11
7 Tilden 10
8 Djokovic, Agassi, Connors, Lendl, Rosewall, Perry 8

It's pointless including pre-open era slams.

 

[Burrow]

It's pointless including pre-open era slams.

Litotes was replying to a guy who said "all-time", not open era.

 

[Firstservingman]

These kind of stats aren't very helpful.

The only reason why Nadal is #1 is because he skips tournaments like one of my high school friends skipped detention.

He literally doesn't show up unless he's in good form, whereas Federer hasn't skipped a slam since like 1999 or something, at least.

So can we re-do these stats except put Nadal's absences in as 1R losses?
Even that's being generous, at least 1R losers show up and probably win some games.

 

[thrust]

It's pointless including pre-open era slams.

Then Emerson would have 0 slams, Laver-5, Rosewall-4. According to the tennis establishment, the pro tour did not exist, and they made sure that it got as little publicity in the US as possible. This, despite the fact that the best players in the world were competing on the pro tour. The tennis establishment was a group of narrow minded elitist snobs.

 

[Federer-Fan]

These kind of stats aren't very helpful.

The only reason why Nadal is #1 is because he skips tournaments like one of my high school friends skipped detention.

He literally doesn't show up unless he's in good form, whereas Federer hasn't skipped a slam since like 1999 or something, at least.

So can we re-do these stats except put Nadal's absences in as 1R losses?
Even that's being generous, at least 1R losers show up and probably win some games.

That's also due to Nadal peaking very early. He didn't have many 1st or 2nd round losses before winning his first Slam and becoming a top player.

 

[Logos]

He isn't.

1 Federer 17
2 Nadal & Sampras 14
4 Emerson 12
5 Laver & Borg 11
7 Tilden 10
8 Djokovic, Agassi, Connors, Lendl, Rosewall, Perry 8

Not on ATP's website though. But even in that list, tied at 8 is pretty high up and possible for Novak to surpass many legends . I think I agree with the comment that it's pointless to count pre-Open era slams. Tennis was a lot different back then - equipment, rules, necessary physical preparation, speed, power...it's just not the same sport.

 

[Litotes]

Not on ATP's website though. But even in that list, tied at 8 is pretty high up and possible for Novak to surpass many legends . I think I agree with the comment that it's pointless to count pre-Open era slams. Tennis was a lot different back then - equipment, rules, necessary physical preparation, speed, power...it's just not the same sport.

You're right, on ATPs website several players are not credited with the slams we know they won. My list is accurate, though. There is no possible doubt about that. I guess the ATP will correct in time. It's just the update throwing spanners in their works.

As for only open era:

1 Federer 17
2 Nadal & Sampras 14
4 Borg 11
5 Lendl, Connors, Agassi, Djokovic 8

 

[The Triumvirate]

Nadal - the most efficient player of all time?

I did not know Nole is tied at 6th for all time grand slam titles.

You must not know much about tennis history. That list doesn't count amateur era slams nor pro era slams, and players from the 70s and 80s in the Open Era frequently played only 3 slams a year.

With all these things in mind it's not much of an accomplishment for Djokovic.

 

[TigerTim]

Emersons 12 "slams" are a disgrace to tennis history.

In fact the whole x won x slams is a poor comparison tool for viewing players in the present day and comparing them to the past

 

[RFed]

Nadals record will only go down from now, when he starts losing early, unless he retires early to preserve his stats.

 

[Federer-Fan]

Nadals record will only go down from now, when he starts losing early, unless he retires early to preserve his stats.

I didn't check but I suppose Nadal's record is considerably declining since one year or so.