A surprising statistic

According to the ATP website, career prize money of Nadal and Djokovic is:

Nadal: $71,379,236
Djokovic: $72,403,908

So, despite having won 7 more slams and 7 more Masters titles, Rafa's career earnings are less than Djokovic's.

Rafa is well ahead in endorsements over his career (in 2014, Forbes estimate his endorsements as $30m compared to Djokovic's $21m), but the prize money statistic really surprised me.

I'm actually a little confused as to how it is possible. Rafa's number of title wins are not that far behind those of the post-2011 Djokovic 2.0, and he won loads more prior to 2011.

Odd.

Djokovic has played more tournaments the last few years and prize money always goes up. He has participated more and when he participates he usually gets very deep in the draw. By the way Novak having 2/3s of Nadal's endorsements, kind of belies the claim that he is unpopular considering the fact that Nadal has one of the biggest followings in the history of the game.

Inflation I guess. Djoko's wins are more recent.
I hope Djoko doesn't get too popular or he will lose the appeal of being unpopular.

So Djoko won 8 titles this year, 61 wins/8 loses = $14,250,527

Fed won t titles, 72 wins /11 loses = $9,343,988

$5M difference, Fed is at $86,166,538, and if Fed quit today, Djoko would pass him in 2 years, with this rhythm.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Inflation I guess. Djoko's wins are more recent.
I hope Djoko doesn't get too popular or he will lose the appeal of being unpopular.

JHM - so then is Djoko the most popular unpopular player then ?! Praps we could, somewhat controversially perhaps, choose the most ugly handsome player (Stepanek?) or the oldest young player (Nishi? Cilic?)

that is an amazing stat, really hard to believe that djokovic has won more prizemoney than nadal. Regardless of Nadal being injured from time to time, its amazing on Novaks part to have caught up with him. They both go deep in pretty much every tournament. You could almost argue that Novak goes deeper across all surfaces.

Nadal is so dominant on clay but Novak also reaches a lot of semis and finals. On hard courts which make up a lot of the tennis calendar, that is Novaks best surface and he nearly always wins or is semi finalist at the very least.

On grass, Novak has been really consistent every year whereas Nadal has struggled in the past few years. Indoors and Novak is once again very dominant. Still very surprised by that stat though, NOvak has earned double what Murray has in prizemoney too !!!

It is a great stat slasher as it shows how consistently the guy performs and how durable he has been over the last few years. Of course inflation is a factor for example Connors won't be high on the career money list. But it still shows how he has been the most consistent performer of the players in his generation showing up and doing well week after week across all surfaces.

Yes he's earned a lot of money. I suppose that must compensate to some degree the fact that he's only won one slam each year for the past three years and was nearly overtaken in the rankings by a 33 year old who is at least a step slower than he was in his prime.

greengoblin wrote:Yes he's earned a lot of money. I suppose that must compensate to some degree the fact that he's only won one slam each year for the past three years and was nearly overtaken in the rankings  by a 33 year old who is at least a step slower than he was in his prime.

Ah, the "nearly overtaken in the rankings" chestnut.

Federer never got within 1300 pts.

greengoblin wrote:Yes he's earned a lot of money. I suppose that must compensate to some degree the fact that he's only won one slam each year for the past three years and was nearly overtaken in the rankings  by a 33 year old who is at least a step slower than he was in his prime.

Greengoblin,

I am in charge of kicking Djoko in the nuts, thats my job here, and I do it nicely, as all Djoko fans are my friends here too.

So please don't take over my duties, thx

Jahu wrote:Greengoblin,

I am in charge of kicking Djoko in the nuts, thats my job here, and I do it nicely, as all Djoko fans are my friends here too.

So please don't take over my duties, thx

It wasn't a bad effort by greengoblin. If he'd ditched the disprovable stat and gone with an insult about Djoko's ears, he may have come close to your lofty standards.

You should keep an eye on that one. I think the student wishes to become the master!

LF, has ordered to be gentle with new guys here, so patience

would definately not have guessed that, would have put Djoko 20-30% below, but yeah increases in recent years have perhaps been beyond inflation

another factor is possibly that Rafa has won a higher % of tournaments in Europe due to clay I believe the prize money in Europe tends to be lower than US and maybe Asia as well for tournaments of an equivalent level - an IW/Miami double outscores a Rome/Monte double

When these players get to the pinacle of their profession and they have earned such vast sums in  prize money sponsorships personal appearances and the like.. I somehow dont think that the money is in the forefront of their minds.. its all about winning majors, prestige, not to mention the adulation of their fans.
Records, G.O.A.T and rankings are the order of the day methinks.

Greengoblin you forgot to mention that the 33 yr old is weighed down by a couple of doubles teams in tow and to make matters worse seems to have a wife who could easily pass for a fishmonger at a sea side market.

Jahu wrote:LF, has ordered to be gentle with new guys here, so patience

Thanks, Jahu.

coolpixel wrote:...and to make matters worse seems to have a wife who could  easily pass for a fishmonger at a sea side market.

She has already been thrown to the wolves on v2, CP.

Keep thinking of the Don Henley song, Kick them....

greengoblin wrote:Yes he's earned a lot of money. I suppose that must compensate to some degree the fact that he's only won one slam each year for the past three years and was nearly overtaken in the rankings  by a 33 year old who is at least a step slower than he was in his prime.

Yes he has only one a slam every year, what a dismal record. He wasn't nearly overtaken in the rankings at all, he pulled out of a master's event and went unbeaten to run the table. So you call finish on top of Federer with one less Master's event played by nearly 2000 being nearly overtaken. Federer would have needed a near miracle at the end of the season to overtake Djokovic.

HM Murdoch wrote:According to the ATP website, career prize money of Nadal and Djokovic is:

Nadal: $71,379,236
Djokovic: $72,403,908

They are the tax free figures. If you factor in that Djokovic lives in a tax free haven and Nadal pays heavy Spanish taxes on his earnings then Djokovic has probably taken home double the amount Nadal has. (well roughly double )

True, except that Nadal has made triple more money on endorsements then Djokos Joke Sponsors, so he has way more cash then Djoko.

Sergio Tacchini gave up on Djoko as they had no money to pay him, and he has lost quite some time to find rich sponsors.

But for tournament Prize earning, Djoko is left with more compared to Nadal.

socal1976 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:Yes he's earned a lot of money. I suppose that must compensate to some degree the fact that he's only won one slam each year for the past three years and was nearly overtaken in the rankings  by a 33 year old who is at least a step slower than he was in his prime.

Yes he has only one a slam every year, what a dismal record. He wasn't nearly overtaken in the rankings at all, he pulled out of a master's event and went unbeaten to run the table. So you call finish on top of Federer with one less Master's event played by nearly 2000 being nearly overtaken. Federer would have needed a near miracle at the end of the season to overtake Djokovic.

Obviously, I mean one slam is not fantastic in the context of 'all time great players' which you keep talking of him as. He won that slam this year against a 33 year way past his prime Federer. His other main rival is a player who is injured half the year. This era is the weakest we have seen for some time.

greengoblin wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:Yes he's earned a lot of money. I suppose that must compensate to some degree the fact that he's only won one slam each year for the past three years and was nearly overtaken in the rankings  by a 33 year old who is at least a step slower than he was in his prime.

Yes he has only one a slam every year, what a dismal record. He wasn't nearly overtaken in the rankings at all, he pulled out of a master's event and went unbeaten to run the table. So you call finish on top of Federer with one less Master's event played by nearly 2000 being nearly overtaken. Federer would have needed a near miracle at the end of the season to overtake Djokovic.

Obviously, I mean one slam is not fantastic in the context of 'all time great players' which you keep talking of him as. He won that slam this year against a 33 year way past his prime Federer. His other main rival is a player who is injured half the year. This era is the weakest we have seen for some time.

I leave you to respond to that socal      

@GG.. there are a few at the same slam count as Djokovic (9 in OE with 7 slams) is at, and he is still playing with a theoretical chance to overtake others, correct?

green goblin wrote:This era is the weakest we have seen for some time.

Era debates always fail, because they have no common yardstick to measure across a time axis.

laverfan wrote:@GG.. there are a few at the same slam count as Djokovic (9 in OE with 7 slams) is at, and he is still playing with a theoretical chance to overtake others, correct?

I couldn't have put it better

greengoblin wrote:Obviously, I mean one slam is not fantastic in the context of 'all time great players' which you keep talking of him as.

Rafael Nadal - 7 out of 10 slam winning years were one slam years.
Andre Agassi - 6 out of 7
Stefan Edberg - 6 out of 6
Ivan Lendl - 4 out of 6
Boris Becker - 4 out of 5
Mats Wilander - 4 out of 5
Jimmy Connors - 3 out of 5
John McEnroe - 3 out of 5


Seems like a lot of great players built their records mainly on one slam years.

^ Yes and Rafa also has 3 years of winning more than 1 slam

Here is Djokovic with three slams in a year -

2011 (10) US Open  (Outdoor/Hard) , ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Canada  (Outdoor/Hard) , Wimbledon  (Outdoor/Grass) , ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Rome  (Outdoor/Clay) , ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Madrid  (Outdoor/Clay) , Belgrade  (Outdoor/Clay) , ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Miami  (Outdoor/Hard) , ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Indian Wells  (Outdoor/Hard) , Dubai  (Outdoor/Hard) , Australian Open  (Outdoor/Hard)

Who will reach 100 million first: Fed, Novak or Rafa?

Djoko in prize money will pass 100M first i think.

Thought Fed seems to have passed 500M in total on endorsments, at average of 40-45M a year.

If Rafa is being surpassed by both Fed and Novak then perhaps thats why he has taken up poker.. after all its a hard life when you have only earned 71,000 million in prize money He will be getting the begging bowl out if he doesn't have a good 2015

I have another surprising stat This year Ivan Dodig surpassed Bjorn Borg in career prize money.

hawkeye wrote:I have another surprising stat This year Ivan Dodig surpassed Bjorn Borg in career prize money.

Inflation is not surprising HE

What is surprising is that when J.Mc beat Borg in the Wimbers final in 1981 he picked up the princely sum of 21,000 GB POUNDS   now the prize money for the winner is 1,760. million GB pounds... and I havent checked out the other GS's

That was little money then, here is some calculation by a website:

If you want to compare the value of a £21,000.00 Income or Wealth , in 1981 there are three choices. In 2013 the relative:

historic standard of living value of that income or wealth is £70,230.00
economic status value of that income or wealth is £116,200.00
economic power value of that income or wealth is £129,800.00

But life was cheaper and less costs I guess for player, and not like now with 10 people traveling with the Top 4 players.

That wasn't the point I was trying to prove Jahu.. I was making comparisons with Dodig now having earned more money that Borg.. is it not surprising ? I wasn't talking about comparative wealth. Between then and now I am awake I can assure you

Why is it surprising? Look at Djoko for 3 years, 50M!!

Dodid would bagel Borg these days

Lots of money these days in Tennis, but last year was a article somwhere, saying that only like top 20 are making money in tennis.

Also Nadal by 2013 i think, his father has said that he paid over 40M euro in taxes in Spain.

Now thats an amazing patriot, not like some big ears Monaco boy.

Jahu wrote:Also Nadal by 2013 i think, his father has said that he paid over 40M euro in taxes in Spain.

Now thats an amazing patriot, not like some big ears Monaco boy.

As you are no doubt aware by now I lived for 14 yrs in Spain.. if it stands still long enough they will tax anything.
Crippling taxes there..but Rafa will never leave his home As for your comment on Borg... dream on sunshine !!!

Still crying about Spain are we?

Canada is good, stop acting like you are living on Income Support, or are you?

Dodig would beat Borg on HC any day

Jahu wrote:Still crying about Spain are we?

Canada is good, stop acting like you are living on Income Support, or are you?  

Dodig would beat Borg on HC any day

Why are you combing your hair and not looking me in the eyes?

Because there is nothing to say erhem!!!

Thats just you being jealous of me in Europe.

And whats with 3 !!! ? Threatening me with Maple syrup?

Sorry to interrupt...

I have some more interesting stats

According to the ATP site this is what Djokovic won in his last three WTF's

2012 - $1,760,000
2013 - $1,923,000
2012 - $2,075,000  

ie $5,758,000 in total

This is what Federer won for his first 5 Wimbledon titles

2003 - $956,802
2004 - $1,107,817
2005 - $1,152,900
2006 - $1,190,725
2007 - $1,399,175

ie $5,807,419

This is what Nadal won for his first 5 RG titles

2005 - $1,103,960
2006 - $1,196,700
2007 - $1,343,550
2008 - $1,000,000
2010 - $1,120,000

ie $5,764,210 in total. So Djokovic won roughly the same in 3 WTF's as Federer won in 5 Wimbledons or Nadal won in 5 RG. (I'm not sure why the prize money for RG decreases in 2008?)

Also this is what Nadal won in his previous 3 RG wins

2012 - $1,250,000
2013 - $1,500,000
2014 - $1,650,000

Notably Djokovic has won roughly half a million more for winning the WTF than Nadal has won for winning RG in the same year. This year Djokovic won over $2,000,000 for nine sets of tennis.

Good research, HE.

That goes some distance to explaining it.

Interesting, I thought the lowest slam had to be above the highest masters for money. If anyone has ever seen all the prize money per tournament in a single chart (without clicking all over the place on the ATP website) it would be worth a look.

Maybe they put the RG prize money down in 2008 because Rafa had such an easy opponent in the final?

Henman Bill wrote:Maybe they put the RG prize money down in 2008 because Rafa had such an easy opponent in the final?

Ouch !!! Im glad I didn't say that