Lets take a look at career rankings against the top 10, what does it tell us?

First topic message reminder :

Winning percentage this year and career against players ranked in the top 10.
1. Bjorn Borg .000 - 0-0 .705 - 67-28
2. Roger Federer .615 - 3-7 .660 - 138-71
3. Rafael Nadal .692 - 12-6 .656 - 84-44
4. Boris Becker .000 - 0-0 .651 - 121-65
5. Ivan Lendl .000 - 0-0 .643 - 119-66
6. Pete Sampras .000 - 0-0 .636 - 124-71
7. John McEnroe .000 - 0-0 .570 - 85-64
8. Andy Murray .500 - 2-5 .550 - 44-36
9. Andre Agassi .000 - 0-0 .548 - 109-90
10. Arthur Ashe .000 - 0-0 .540 - 27-23
11. Gustavo Kuerten .000 - 0-0 .514 - 38-36
12. Novak Djokovic .720 - 14-1 .510 - 53-51
13. Jimmy Connors .000 - 0-0 .503 - 84-83
14. Mats Wilander .000 - 0-0 .500 - 54-54
15. Marat Safin .000 - 0-0 .495 - 49-50
16. Lleyton Hewitt .000 - 0-2 .492 - 60-62
17. Michael Stich .000 - 0-0 .470 - 39-44
18. Roscoe Tanner .000 - 0-0 .463 - 31-36
19. Stefan Edberg .000 - 0-0 .460 - 97-114
20. Ilie Nastase .000 - 0-0 .453 - 34-41
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Reliability-Zone/Reliability-Versus-Top-10-Career-List.aspx


Interesting when measuring the current big 4's record against top 10 players against the record's of past champions and we see that the big 4 stacks up remarkably well. I think what this list shows is that clearly winning against top 10 competition is not easy when players like Edberg are at a 46 percent winning percentage. Good to see the clearly superior Boris, at #4 on the list. Bjorg the ethereal one is at the top of the list. The big 4 of today; Fed, Nadal, murray, and Djoko come in respectively at #2, 3, 8, and 13. Andy Murray very impressive with a career win percentage that puts him ahead of agassi. ALTHOUGH CURRENT PLAYERS IN THEIR PRIME YEARS LIKE RAFA, DJOKO, AND ANDY ARE GOING TO HAVE MORE INFLATED NUMBERS, afterall like Fed they will start losing more of these matches against top 10 guys in years to come. Djokovic however is the fastest mover on the charts. He has WON AN INCREDIBLE 14 OF 15 matches against top 10 guys this year to date. He is streaking up the charts and may be able to get into the top 5 or 10 on this list with the way he is playing. Andy's strong numbers indicate what many of us have been saying. Andy has seperated himself from the rest of the tour, but there is still some distance between him and the big 3.

Even in 2009, Fed was a shadow of the grasscourt player he was from 04-06.

His main problem on grass has been his poor return game, and that has been in decline since 2007. He managed one break of serve against Roddick in the longest men's W final ever. He won that year because of his serve.

The only time in 2009 when fed looked like the old fed was in Cincinatti; other than that 2009 was a continuation of the decline, except of course he set his standards at such a high level that despite declining he was still better than the rest of the tour.

I do think that he played slightly better than in the first half of 2008 but I would attribute his poorer performance in the first half of 2008 to his mono problems.

Otherwise it has been a slow but steady decline since mid 2007.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Oh right emancipator so Federer in decline reached four slam finals in 2009? Do me a favour.

It's not that hard to understand.

Despite declining Fed was still better than the rest of the tour bar an injured Nadal, and thus reached four slam finals.

Hardly surprising considering he had reached 13 of the previous 14 slam finals.

A slow but steady decline does not mean he should go from reaching 13 out of 14 slam finals to reaching 0 out of 4!

Fair enough that is your opinion.

However, players thriving today could still boast success against Federer since before your claimed decline came for him.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Fair enough that is your opinion.

However, players thriving today could still boast success against Federer since before your claimed decline came for him.

Yes I agree.

federer having declined does not mean he is still not a viable contender.

He can still play awesome tennis (WTF last yr, FO 11) and a win over him is still a huge scalp.

I still feel he may have another slam in him but that depends on a few things I reckon.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well the fact that Murray and Djokovic never made slam finals can be explained in various ways as Murray did have a virus that affected him in the Australian Open in 2009 and he went out in the 4th Round and was not allow to travel because of it and the US Open saw him hampered with a wrist injury. Djokovic retired injured from his QF at the Australian Open against Roddick so wasn't their best years for varying reasons. Del Potro though, who you mention, could still be a big player in the future.

If we are doing the Murray virus route and Djokovic breathing issues against Roddick @ AO 2009, then Federer's Mono is a 'valid' reference point in 2008. He played a 10-8 fifth set against Tipsarevic @AO 2008, a portent of things to come against Novak and a 6-1,6-3,6-0 beating @FO 2008.

Oh BTW, look who is in the AO 2008 QFs, Blake (much-maligned), Nieminen, Ferrer, Youzhny.

Federer is the only one beating Djokovic in 2011 in the FO SF, but SoCal would say it is Fognini who is responsible .

CaledonianCraig wrote:Federer's record against the top ten players in 2010 (only counting up until Fed's decline by the way):-

PLD 106 W 75 L 31 Success Rate = 70.75%

His record against players in the top ten in 2005:-

PLD 126 W 99 L 27 Success Rate = 78.57%

Proof that he fared better with players at the top echelons in 2005 than that of today.

Yes laverfan forgot that but I'd certainly say that his decline became apparent after (what for him was a flop) at Wimbledon 2010.

This seems incorrect, can you please provide a source for this information?

From Federer's own web site...

2005 W/L - 81-4 - http://www.rogerfederer.com/en/tennis/results/year/2005.html and http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Roger-Federer.aspx?t=pa&y=2005&m=s&e=0#

(Loses - Safin @AO, Gasquet @MC, Nadal @FO, Nalbandian @TMC)


2010 W/L - 65-13 - http://www.rogerfederer.com/en/tennis/results/year/2010.html and http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Roger-Federer.aspx?t=pa&y=2010&m=s&e=0#

(Loses - Davydenko @Doha, Baghdatis @IW, Berdych @Miami, Gulbis @Rome, Montanes @Estoril, Nadal @Madrid, Soderling @FO, Hewitt @Halle, Berdych @W, Murray @Canada, Djokovic @USO, Murray @Shanghai, Monfils @Paris). Also notice, quite a few 'old timers' from 2005 in that list - Berdych, Baghdatis, Montanes, Hewitt.


Two very different schedules in 2005 vs. 2010. ;-)

CaledonianCraig wrote:Oh right emancipator so Federer in decline reached four slam finals in 2009? Do me a favour.

Yeah, he really is that good.

This is what everyone is trying to tell you, but you're so tied to the hop[e that it was peak Federer who kicked Andys butt that you can't see it.

Honestly, I like Murray but against peak Federer he doesn't get anything. Off clay people had to have a gigantic game to trouble him back then.

It will be incorrect as it only goes as far as summer 2010 where I cut off at the point when I'd say Federer's decline set in. The results are from his matches in his career against the top ten (of present day) and top ten of 2005.

bogbrush wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Oh right emancipator so Federer in decline reached four slam finals in 2009? Do me a favour.

Yeah, he really is that good.

This is what everyone is trying to tell you, but you're so tied to the hop[e that it was peak Federer who kicked Andys butt that you can't see it.

Honestly, I like Murray but against peak Federer he doesn't get anything. Off clay people had to have a gigantic game to trouble him back then.

It is fine to judge Federer at his peak but was Murray at his peak?. Besides we do not know until Andy Murray retires when he will have reached his peak. Perhaps already, perhaps that time is still to come. Time will tell.

CaledonianCraig wrote:It will be incorrect as it only goes as far as summer 2010 where I cut off at the point when I'd say Federer's decline set in. The results are from his matches in his career against the top ten (of present day) and top ten of 2005.

So these are cumulative numbers starting from when he turned pro to 2010 Summer. Can you post similar numbers for the other Top 3 and it would provide a comparable yardstick? Are these from the ATP Fedex Reliability Index, if so, I can take a look myself.

Edit: Should you look at this instead? http://www.atpworldtour.com/Reliability-Zone/Reliability-Versus-Top-10-Current-List.aspx

Yes that is right from pro to summer 2010. They are from head-to-heads between the players on the ATP site. If you wish I'll compile similar stats for the other top three.

Fed is 30

Rafa is (what) 25 ?

Djoko and Murray are both 24 !

Feds *decline* set in when he became the Father of Twins and
let himself *go* for a while - as the Tele tubby stomach
supports !

Well GOOD LUCK ROGER is all I can say ! Have a wonderful life
(but NOT) the James Stuart kind .

CaledonianCraig wrote:Yes that is right from pro to summer 2010. They are from head-to-heads between the players on the ATP site. If you wish I'll compile similar stats for the other top three.

... only if you have the inclination and time...

Their records against current top ten is as follows:-

Novak Djokovic PLD 102 W 62 L 40 Success Rate = 60.78%

Rafael Nadal PLD 131 W 97 L 34 Success Rate = 74.04%

Roger Federer PLD 106 W 75 L 31 Success Rate = 70.75%

Andy Murray PLD 70 W 31 L 39 Success Rate = 44.88%

So Federer has a better record than Djokovic and Murray in 2010 and better than Nadal's current in his peak @2005.

What conclusion do you want to draw from this for the current 'era'? ..

Edit: and his 'L 31' is the lowest of the current Top 4.

No that is a career record against the current top ten players (not just this year's results).

CaledonianCraig wrote:No that is a career record against the current top ten players (not just this year's results).

Yes. When I said 2010, I meant up to 2010, it is cumulative over the career.

Some confusion though as the other players results include those up to the present day whilst Fed's goes up to summer 2010 when by my opinion his decline set in. Hope that clears things up.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Some confusion though as the other players results include those up to the present day whilst Fed's goes up to summer 2010 when by my opinion his decline set in. Hope that clears things up.

Can you include Federer's to the present' to provide validity for comparison purposes?

CaledonianCraig wrote:Some confusion though as the other players results include those up to the present day whilst Fed's goes up to summer 2010 when by my opinion his decline set in. Hope that clears things up.

Feds decline set in early 2008. Results make it obvious. No amount of repetition otherwise can change that.

Okay this includes Federer's record up to the current day:-

Novak Djokovic PLD 102 W 62 L 40 Success Rate = 60.78%

Rafael Nadal PLD 131 W 97 L 34 Success Rate = 74.04%

Roger Federer PLD 126 W 84 L 42 Success Rate = 66.66%

Andy Murray PLD 70 W 31 L 39 Success Rate = 44.88%

PS Bogbrush this is for laverfan.

This is what I expected. Despite a five-year differential and a decline, he is above Djokovic and Murray.

Thanks Craig.

laverfan wrote:This is what I expected. Despite a five-year differential and a decline, he is above Djokovic and Murray.

Thanks Craig.

I don't think that is any great surprise though remembering that he is often seen as a candidate for GOAT by many and no disgrace to Djokovic or Murray.

Fed may have started his decline in 2008 or whenever but he still has the capacity to come up with the old fed for a match or a tournament. The fed of WTF 10 and AO 10 when he crushed murray was as imperious and maybe even a more complete player than Fed of 05. I have never seen Fed play better ever than he did in that first AO final with Murray. So when did the consistency of his play decline well that would be at the start of 08. But he has had days even recently where he has been just as good since then. He played ridiculous in that AO final with Murray, so I actually agree with Caledonian. Federer had matches and tourney's where he played just as well as he ever has after 08.

Again that is all open to opinion. In my opinion there has been a decline since summer 2010. His consistency isn't as it was when he was at his peak. Others will say his decline set in earlier and that is their opinion.

He's a DADDY CC - with all that entails,

Sleepless nights, nappy changes, hormonal Mum ( )

First off with all this business about Fed's decline, Fed's decline has been rather small. The man is only just turned 30. Agassi was able to have a spell at #1 at the age of 33 years. Agassi finished ranked #6 in the world at the age of 35. If fed has degraded so much from his mid 20s on maybe that is a reflection partially to the improvement in the competition level he has had to face as much as it is a reflection of the loss of his prowess. The days of Ljubi, Blake, fat Dave, and Marat the "guy who left the model's hotel room at 7 am the day before the match" would easily succumb to Federer in grandslams is over. As I have been saying when the Nadal, Djoko generation hit Fed started to have to fight for it, at first he best them as well but couldn't fight them off forever.

As you get older no player can hold off the next generation forever - that's what being in decline results in.
Nearly everyone attributes Agassi's longevity to his extended periods where he was effectively out of the game. In his case it wasn't the years, it was the low mileage.
Being 30 is old for a tennis player. How many players play better at 29/30 than they did at 24/25? And how many of those were at the very top for extended periods of time?

Someone posted a while back there Fed and Nadal were not the same era, they were half an era apart. To a great extent that's true. Fed and Djoko are probably 3/4 of a era apart. We rarely got to see Fed vs Rafa at their peak - maybe 2 or 3 matches. We never will see Fed vs Djoko at their peak.

Definetly, disagree with that Julius. Of course every number 1 loses his crown often in a short period of time. What Fed did to hold off the young bucks as long as he was able to is really amazing, I don't think frankly that playing earlier in your career against somewhat weaker accomplishment is in anyway a blemish on Fed. Fed would most likely be the greatest player of any generation. However, Julius any objective analyst would agree, that when Nadal came the competition level rose and then when the rest of that class ie Djoko and Murray came up in 07 the bar rose again, and has kept on going up. Roger isn't that old, at the AO 2010 he was still 28 and he played lights out. This year at FO up till the final he played tremendously. There is a fall off no question, but people fail to take into account the better competition as well. Fed's greatest rivals have all been younger than him, it took time for those guys especially Djoko and murray to develop.

Any tennis player in their time can only beat who is put in front of them and I would say winning a slam is the ultimate challenge in tennis. Whatever you want to say about eras (whatever is your preference) Federer's achievements stand up favourably as does Nadal's and Agassi's etc etc. Djokovic is already a multiple slam winner and could and think will add to his haul and still has time on his side.

30 is that old.
See http://www.tennis28.com/slams/agerecords_winners.html

How many players have won more than 1 slam after turning 29 in the last 35 years - Agassi (5) and Connors (3).
Only 5 players have won more than 1 slam after turning 27 in the last 35 years - Sampras (3), Lendl (4), Federer (4), Agassi (5) and Connors (3).

Julius, Federer is in decline there is no question. But his lack of results are for two reasons both the competition has gotten better and he has gotten a little bit worse.

This year maybe. Up to this year, was Djoko any better than 2008?

And would you say Sampras' later results were worse because the competitiion got worse, but he got even worse?