[Federer-Fan]

Win-Loss record against the top 10 at Grand Slams
1. Nadal - 35-15 (0,700)
2. Federer - 53-28 (0,654)
3. Djokovic - 36-24 (0,600)
4. Murray - 16-22 (0,421)
5. Tsonga - 12-18 (0,400)
6. Wawrinka - 12-19 (0,387)
7. Nishikori - 6-10 (0,375)
8. Monfils - 7-12 (0,368)
9. Cilic - 7-16 (0,304)
10. Youzhny - 7-17 (0,292)
11. Ferrer - 8-22 (0,267)
12. Berdych - 8-24 (0,250)
13. Hewitt - 10-30 (0,250)
14. del Potro - 5-16 (0,238)
15. Gasquet - 5-19 (0,208)
16. Robredo - 5-20 (0,200)
17. Haas - 4-19 (0,174)
18. Simon - 3-15 (0,167)
19. Verdasco - 3-15 (0,167)
20. Raonic - 1-7 (0,125)


I was inspired by AnnaK_4ever's thread, but I decided to focus on active players only. :yeah:

 

[Chris Kuerten]

Tsonga at #5 with almost the same ratio as Murray, amazing player and most definitely the fifth best player of this generation :worship:

 

[Federer-Fan]

Tsonga at #5 with almost the same ratio as Murray, amazing player and most definitely the fifth best player of this generation :worship:

I wish I could goodrep you. :yeah:

 

[Why So Serious?]

Djoker has the highest active win ratio over top 10 players in GS with 0.837. That's insane.

 

[acacacacademy]

Nadal at RG. Dominant numbers.

The only problem for Tsonga's claim to be the fifth best is Wawrinka's decision to start peaking late in his career. He is unfortunate to be playing in this era; it's made worse by his injuries and tough draws. He could surely have won at least 2 or 3 Wimbledons if he didn't end up playing in-form Djokovic or Murray during all of his deep runs there (at least two of those were tight losses, too).

 

[Federer-Fan]

Nadal at RG. Dominant numbers.

The only problem for Tsonga's claim to be the fifth best is Wawrinka's decision to start peaking late in his career. He is unfortunate to be playing in this era; it's made worse by his injuries and tough draws. He could surely have won at least 2 or 3 Wimbledons if he didn't end up playing in-form Djokovic or Murray during all of his deep runs there (at least two of those were tight losses, too).

Now that Wawrinka won a 2nd Slam, I can't claim Tsonga is better. However, it's pretty clear he's the best active Slamless player I think.

 

[Jam]

Nice thread. 2 things stand out, that Tsonga has been a good but unlucky slam player and that Raonic having a career high ranking of #4 is an absolute joke.

 

[Murray Mint]

Jo has been unfortunate in his career in a number of regards, whether it's timing, injuries, or, more recently, becoming the unluckiest player on tour!

 

[Litotes]

For historic comparison, Sampras did 30 in 52 tournaments (3 AO, 1 RG, 10 W, 16 USO) for a 0,577 ratio.

 

[RuRo]

Nice thread. 2 things stand out, that Tsonga has been a good but unlucky slam player and that Raonic having a career high ranking of #4 is an absolute joke.

Raonic's one top 10 win? #10 ranked Youhzny in the 3rd round of the Australian Open 2011.

 

[Jam]

Raonic's one top 10 win? #10 ranked Youhzny in the 3rd round of the Australian Open 2011.

 

[zjtennis]

"Best Slam players" based on percentage or number of wins? Anyway, nice to see that even if Tsonga isn't active everytime, he's still managing many Top 10 wins, but is still has come short. It's funny how Ferrer and Berdych were kinda alike -- 4-1-2-1 combinations but on different Slams (AO>Wimbledon>RG=USO for Berdych [only Top 10 win in USO was that fateful QF against Fed? ], RG>USO>AO=Wimbledon [only Top 10 win in AO was against Nadal who was finding his "Nadal Slam"! ]) and are both consistent but usually falters at the ends. Anyway could you also add the win/loss record on their overall Slam wins to see their percentage overall?

 

[Sapeod]

Damn. I had no idea Jo had such a good statistics in this regard. The poor guy has been incredibly unlucky.

 

[Federer-Fan]

"Best Slam players" based on percentage or number of wins? Anyway, nice to see that even if Tsonga isn't active everytime, he's still managing many Top 10 wins, but is still has come short. It's funny how Ferrer and Berdych were kinda alike -- 4-1-2-1 combinations but on different Slams (AO>Wimbledon>RG=USO for Berdych [only Top 10 win in USO was that fateful QF against Fed? ], RG>USO>AO=Wimbledon [only Top 10 win in AO was against Nadal who was finding his "Nadal Slam"! ]) and are both consistent but usually falters at the ends. Anyway could you also add the win/loss record on their overall Slam wins to see their percentage overall?

Best Slam players based on their overall Slam W-L record that you can find here : http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=654673&highlight=

 

[Mark Lenders]

Interesting that of Berdych's 8 top 10 wins, 6 are over top 4 ranked players, 5 over top 3. The other two are AO 2011 vs #9 Verdasco and AO 2012 vs #10 Almagro. He never beat a player ranked 5-8 at a Slam.

 

[Federer-Fan]

Interesting that of Berdych's 8 top 10 wins, 6 are over top 4 ranked players, 5 over top 3. The other two are AO 2011 vs #9 Verdasco and AO 2012 vs #10 Almagro. He never beat a player ranked 5-8 at a Slam.

Yeah he has as much top 10 wins as Ferrer at Slams, but his wins are clearly more impressive. Maybe the fact he never beat a player ranked between #5 and #8 can be explained by the fact that, in his prime years, Berdych has often been ranked between #5 and #8, which means he can't face a 5-8 seed until SFs. :yeah:

 

[InfoKenway]

Interesting that of Berdych's 8 top 10 wins, 6 are over top 4 ranked players, 5 over top 3. The other two are AO 2011 vs #9 Verdasco and AO 2012 vs #10 Almagro. He never beat a player ranked 5-8 at a Slam.

That's understandable, because he is always 5-8 seed at Slams and he faces 1-4 seed in QF and SF (except AO 14).

 

[zjtennis]

Interesting that of Berdych's 8 top 10 wins, 6 are over top 4 ranked players, 5 over top 3. The other two are AO 2011 vs #9 Verdasco and AO 2012 vs #10 Almagro. He never beat a player ranked 5-8 at a Slam.

Odd stat. :lol: Does it mean Stan's 8th seed powers actually means something? :lol: Any idea why he struggles on them? 5 wins are against the Big Four; who is the other one?

That's understandable, because he is always 5-8 seed at Slams and he faces 1-4 seed in QF and SF (except AO 14).

Yeah, probably makes the most sense with this. He's constantly in the 5 to 8 range, so in order to face a seed #5-8 the other QF has to beat their Top 4 seed (although how frequently does he meet the #9 and #10 players in Slams anyway? ).

 

[Federer-Fan]

Odd stat. :lol: Does it mean Stan's 8th seed powers actually means something? :lol: Any idea why he struggles on them? 5 wins are against the Big Four; who is the other one?

Ferrer at AO 2014. :lol:

 

[Mark Lenders]

Yeah, you guys are right. Off the top of my head, Berdych only faced a 5-8 seed twice at Slams, 5-set loss to Soderling at RG 2010 SF and very tight 4-set loss to Wawrinka at AO 2014.