Various Topics on Tennis

....

Here one more try :

Slam win - 6 pts (finals- 2), S9 and Masters - 3 (finals-1 )

Nineties (1990-99)

1 Sampras 131
2 Ag***i 79
3 Courier 47
3 Becker 47
5 Edberg 42
6 Muster 32
7 Chang 30
8 Bruguera 23
9 Stich 20
9 Rafter 20
11 Rios 19
12 Ivanisevic 17
13 Kafelnikov 17
14 Medvedev 15
15 Korda 13
15 Moya 13
15 Krajicek 13
15 Kuerten 13
19 Corretja 11
20 Lendl 10

2000-2004 (so far)

1 Ag***i 40
2 Federer 33
3 Kuerten 28
4 Hewitt 27
5 Safin 27
6 Sampras 20
7 Ferrero 18
7 Rod**** 18
9 Coria 11
10 Moya 8
11 Rafter 6
11 Ivanisevic 6
11 A.Costa 6
11 T.Johansson 6
11 Henman 6
11 Gaudio 6

Together (1990-2004)

1 Sampras 151
2 Ag***i 119
3 Courier 47
3 Becker 47
5 Edberg 42
6 Kuerten 41
7 Federer 33
8 Muster 32
9 Chang 30
10 Safin 28
11 Hewitt 27
12 Rafter 26
13 Ivanisevic 23
13 Bruguera 23
15 Moya 21
16 Kafelnikov 20
17 Stich 20
18 Rios 19
19 Ferrero 18
19 Rod**** 18
21 Corretja 16
22 Medvedev 15
23 Korda 13
23 Krajicek 13
25 Enqvist 12
26 Coria 11
26 A.Costa 11
28 Lendl 10
29 T.Johansson 9
29 Pioline 9
29 Forget 9
29 Chesnokov 9
33 Philippoussis 8
34 Ferreira 7
35 Henman 6
35 Gaudio 6
35 Gomez 6
35 Rusedski 6
39 Norman 5
39 Grosjean 5
39 T.Martin 5

..b

nice, but 1 flaw: you equate all slams..no way a wimbledon = any other
slam..no way a courier legacy = a becker/edberg legacy.

bob

"Yury" <buzun@swbet.youknowwhattoinsert> wrote in message
news:cdpavr$lbg$1@hyppo.gu.net...
> Here one more try :

> 1 Sampras 151
> 2 Ag***i 119
> 3 Courier 47
> 3 Becker 47
> 5 Edberg 42
> 6 Kuerten 41
> 7 Federer 33
> 8 Muster 32
> 9 Chang 30
> 10 Safin 28

..ka.. ....

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:13:33 +0300, "Yury"
<buzun@swbet.youknowwhattoinsert> wrote:

>Here one more try :

Not you too...

....

"bob" <rstein6@nospam.cfl.rr.com> ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ × ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ:
news:%uWLc.55702$IX4.7147773@twister.tampabay.rr.c om...
> nice, but 1 flaw: you equate all slams..no way a wimbledon = any other
> slam..no way a courier legacy = a becker/edberg legacy.

Becker and Edberg have just their 1990+ achievements included.

As for Wimbledon>any other slam... leave it to Whisper. Emotionally ?
Perhaps. Achievement-wise ? No way.

Regards, Yury

....

"Yury" <buzun@swbet.youknowwhattoinsert> ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ × ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ
ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ: news:cdpavr$lbg$1@hyppo.gu.net...
> Here one more try :
>
> Slam win - 6 pts (finals- 2), S9 and Masters - 3 (finals-1 )
>

Best year :

Sampras'94 - 24 points
Sampras'95 - 22
Sampras'97 - 21
Edberg'90 - 20
Ag***i'95 - 18
Ag***i'99 - 18
Federer'04 - 18 and counting (!!)
Sampras'93 - 16
Courier'92 - 16
Courier'93 - 16
Courier'91 - 15
Muster'95 - 15
Kuerten'00 - 14
Hewitt'02 - 14
Ag***i'94 -13
Safin'00 - 13
Kuerten'01 -13
Becker'91 - 12
Rafter'98 -12
Ag***i'01-12
Rod****'03 -12

..ephe..

> As for Wimbledon>any other slam... leave it to Whisper. Emotionally ?
> Perhaps. Achievement-wise ? No way.

I don't understand why you fail to see that if an event is more emotionally
valuable, that will surely make it more of an achievement to win it...?


--
the mainstreaming of deviance must
come to an end.

-Senator Robert Dole

.. ..

you're better than this, Yury.

....

> I don't understand why you fail to see that if an event is more
emotionally
> valuable, that will surely make it more of an achievement to win it...?

Because it's hard to measure. I fail to see why USO is more emotionally
valuable than AO, let alone FO, which is THE tournament for many players.

IMO, this emotional factor works at Wimbledon only, butWimbledon is
otherwise is heavily degraded by ancient surface - gr***.

Look, match on gr*** between skilled players can be unforgettable - but
because of "gr*** season" one month long we have TWO skilled gr*** players
now - and not much more in Pete's time.

Regards, Yury

..isp..

Yury wrote:

>>I don't understand why you fail to see that if an event is more
>
> emotionally
>
>>valuable, that will surely make it more of an achievement to win it...?
>
>
> Because it's hard to measure. I fail to see why USO is more emotionally
> valuable than AO, let alone FO, which is THE tournament for many players.


If it really is 'THE' tennis tournament, any ideas why it was cancelled
on Aus TV (didn't even show the finals) & no one complained....?

..isp..

Yury wrote:

>>I don't understand why you fail to see that if an event is more
>
> emotionally
>
>>valuable, that will surely make it more of an achievement to win it...?
>
>
> Because it's hard to measure.



You mean 'hard to swallow' that Sampras won it 7 times lol.... ; )