Top 20 Under 20: Where are they now?

Just over five years ago, I made my first of a series of posts called "Top 20 Under 20" where I rated the 20 most promising teenagers on the ATP. Now seems like a good time to reflect on these rankings and see what I got right and what I got wrong.

I will comment on the 20 players in the original order that I ranked them on July 17, 2014.

1. Nick Kyrgios - I put Kyrgios at No. 1 since this ranking came out shortly after he had defeated No. 1 Rafael Nadal to reach the Wimbledon quarterfinals. At the time, he was the only teenager in the top 100. Since then Kyrgios has only reached one other grand slam quarterfinal and he has failed to do so in the last 16 majors that he has played in. There are now eight players ranked ahead of Kyrgios that are younger than him. He has had flashes of brilliance over the last five years, but his career has been a disappointment with his tantrums being the most defining aspect of his career so far.

2. Alexander Zverev - Zverev is now ranked sixth in the world and is the second-highest ranked player of anyone that was a teenager five years ago. He has won 11 titles in his career, including a very impressive four elite titles. He has been in a bit of a slump in 2019, but he still has the most impressive list of career accomplishments of anyone on this list at this.

3. Borna Coric - The Croat just reached a career-high ranking of 12 last week, which gives him the fifth-best ranking of any player that was a teenager five years ago. He has two titles to his name and a very impressive 12 wins against top-10 players. Coric has had a steady growth throughout his career without any single big breakthrough moment.

4. Andrey Rublev - Throughout the series, I was more optimistic about Rublev than most other people, so I felt somewhat vindicated by his win over Roger Federer last week. Still, he has only won one title and has a career-high ranking of 31. Injuries have been an issue, so there is still plenty of reason to believe that he will be a top-10 player in the future.

5. Christian Garin - This looked like a massive whiff for a long time, but Garin is finally starting to make a name for himself on tour. He has won two titles this year and has a career-high ranking of No. 32 in the world after breaking into the top 100 for the first time late last year. At this point, he looks like he'll never be more than a clay specialist with 28 of his 34 career wins coming on dirt, but he can make a decent career for himself that way.

6. Jared Donaldson - Just a year after getting into the top-50 in tennis, Donaldson had a right knee injury that has kept him away from tennis for over five months now as his ranking has slipped to No. 713 in the world. He has 47 career wins and is still only 22 years old. It will be a long road back for him, but his career isn't necessarily over.

7. Frances Tiafoe - Unlike five years ago, we now know the right way to spell Frances. Earlier this year, he was ranked No. 29 in the world, but has since dropped back down to No. 52. Last year, he won his only career title to date in Delray Beach and he also reached the final in Estoril. He has struggled at the majors, but has proven to be a tough draw in a best-of-3 match. Tiafoe was a little overrated at No. 7 on this list, but not by much.

8. Thanasi Kokkinakis - Most people had Kokkinakis in their top 3 or 5 this time five years ago, so I felt like I was being bold putting him as low as No. 8. Yet I still overrated him. Kokkinakis has not reached the top 50 in the rankings yet and is currently outside the top 200. Injuries have been the main reason that he hasn't lived up to potential. Kokkinakis has finally been healthy over the last month, so maybe now he can start to make a comeback.

9. Nikola Milojevic - This is another one that looked like a big bust until recently. Don't get me wrong, the former junior No. 1 is still a long way away from living up to expectations, but there have been some positive signs over the last year that he will eventually be a regular on the tour-level. He won his second career Challenger title this month and is back in the top 150.

10. Stefan Kozlov - The American has been a bust so far, but is also only 21-years old, so it's way too soon to give up on Kozlov. Still, it has been two and a half years since he reached his career-high ranking of 119 and he is now outside the top 500 despite having played in 14 events this year. All 14 events have been played in North America, which is great for saving on travel expenses, but a nightmare for trying to get ranking points.

11. Hyeon Chung - We finally get to the first underrated player on this list. While Chung has had a massive slump in 2019, he did get into the top 20 in the world last year. He has 81 career tour-level wins and there is no reason to think he won't be back in the top 20 again in the future.

12. Noah Rubin - My American bias was showing on this one. I never listed Rubin this high again on my list, although his career trajectory hasn't been that bad. He still hasn't cracked the top 100 and is currently No. 195, but he did qualify for Wimbledon this year.

13. Kyle Edmund - The Brit was definitely underrated on this list. He is the tenth-highest ranked player of anyone who was a teenager five years ago. He has been ranked as high as No. 14 in the world and has one title to his name. He has 22 grand slam wins, which is near the most of anyone on this list.

14. Gianluigi Quinzi - This was another bust. Quinzi had an impressive junior career, but it never turned into much on the professional level. He is ranked lower now than he was five years ago and he peaked at No. 142.

15. Roman Safiullin - The Russian's career so far has been totally derailed by injuries. 2019 will be his first full season as a professional and he is near breaking into the top 200 for the first time. Lots of young Russians are having success right now, and it would be great to see Safiullin join them. He's still only 22 years old.

16. Yunseong Chung - Despite having not played a single tour-level match at this point in his career, he is ranked No. 259 in the world. So far, Chung has been a bust.

17. Elias Ymer - Ymer is still trying to get into the top 100. He came very close last year and could do it this year. At 23 years old, I would have expected him to be farther along by now. I'm more optimistic about his younger brother at this point.

18. Laslo Djere - The Serb has finally started to deliver on all the hype this year. He got as high as No. 27 in the world in June after reaching the third round of Roland Garros where he nearly took out Kei Nishikori. His success has been limited to clay courts, but if you told me five years ago that he had a better career than Garin, I would have been very surprised.

19. Johan Tatlot - I had nearly forgotten about Tatlot. He still hasn't reached the top 200 yet and hasn't played a single tour-level match, so he's definitely a bust so far.

20. Nicolas Jarry - The Chilean peaked at No. 8 in his junior career, so most people didn't have high expectations for Jarry as a professional, so I'm going to give myself some credit on this one. He is currently ranked No. 69 with a career-high ranking of No. 38. He also won his first career title this year in Bastad.

Players missing: Lorenzo Sonego, Cameron Norrie, Yoshihito Nishioka, Matteo Berrettini, Karen Khachanov, Daniil Medvedev, Andrey Bublik, Hubert Hurkacz, Ugo Humbert, Reilly Opelka, Taylor Fritz, Stefanos Tsitsipas, Casper Ruud, Denis Shapovalov, Alex De Minaur, Miomir Kecmanovic, Felix Auger-Alliasime.

Of those players that were missing, the following were listed on later editions of the top 20 under 20 series: Nishioka, Khachanov, Bublik, Opelka, Fritz, Tsitsipas, Ruud, Shapovalov, De Minaur, Kecmanovic, Auger-Alliasime.

Daniil Medvedev is currently the highest ranked player that was a teenager five years ago. He was never listed in my top 20, which either shows how bad my lists were or how he came out of nowhere. His junior ranking peaked at No. 13 and he didn't reach the top 100 until he was 20. He did receive consideration for my list, but he never made the cut. He has definitely proven me wrong!

In three years, nothing has changed

One of my favorite series on this blog was comparing the top tennis countries in the world. It's been nearly three years since I posted an update on this series, and that was when France finally surpassed Spain as the top tennis country in the world. With only a couple young Spanish players on the rise, that seemed like a permanent switch, but right now, the standings are right back where they were three years ago.

The top three countries are now Spain, Serbia, France and United States in that order, identical to exactly three years ago.

Here are the full standings based on the combined ranking points of every player in the top 140:
1. Spain - 17,693
2. Serbia - 16,956
3. France - 13,385
4. United States - 10,712
5. Italy - 9860
6. Switzerland - 9592
7. Argentina - 8580
8. Germany - 8527
9. Russia - 7396
10. Australia - 7043
11. Japan - 6070
12. Canada - 5446
13. Austria - 5413
14. Croatia - 4810
15. Greece - 3455
16. Great Britain - 3320
17. South Africa - 2682
18. Chile - 2182
19. Georgia - 2020
20. Kazakhstan - 1866
21. Belgium - 1815
22. Poland - 1660
23. Slovakia - 1495
24. Hungary - 1323
25. Moldova - 1132
26. Portugal - 1045
27. Uruguay - 1013
28. Korea - 994
29. Sweden - 980
30. Norway - 951
31. Bulgaria - 802
32. Belarus - 799
33. Lithuania - 765
34. Romania - 622
35. Bolivia - 618
36. Slovenia - 605
37. India - 600
38. Tunisia - 544
39. Brazil - 532
40. Czech Republic - 530
41. Bosnia & Herzegovina - 530
42. Netherlands - 446
43. Latvia - 442
44. Chinese Taipei - 405
45. Uzbekistan - 392

A few notes on this list...

-45 different countries rated in the top 140 is the most that I have ever recorded.
-The highest ranked No. 2 from any country is from Russia
-The highest ranked No. 3 is from Argentina
-The most well-represented country is France with 13 players in the top 140
-Greece, Chile and Georgia are all in the top 20 after having not been ranked at all for many years.
-Great Britain and Czech Republic have made massive dives in the rankings
-The first rankings I ever did in 2012 included Ukraine, Colombia, Cyprus, Finland, Luxembourg, Estonia and Israel. None of those countries are represented in the top 140 anymore.

Djokovic Reaches Milestone In Cincinnati

I don’t want to waste your time, so I’ll get right to the point. With his win today, Novak Djokovic became the third-most successful player in the history of the Cincinnati Masters Series tournament, making him the first player in tennis history to rank in the top three at all nine masters series tournaments.

This is based on the same metric that I have used in previous posts, which is total ranking points earned. The formula is adjusted to the current ranking formula so that a quarterfinal appearance in Monte Carlo is worth 180 points regardless of whether it happened in 1994 or 2019.

In his career, Djokovic has now earned 4,605 points in Cincinnati, surpassing Michael Chang at 4,570 points. In the history of Cincinnati, which is Djokovic’s second worst tournament, he now only trails Roger Federer and Pete Sampras.

Federer is in the top three at eight of the nine tournaments, missing only Monte Carlo, where he ranks fourth behind Rafael Nadal, Thomas Muster and Djokovic. Rafael Nadal is among the top three at five of the tournaments, cracking the top-3 players in Canada last week with his title. He is also among the top three at Indian Wells, Monte Carlo, Madrid and Rome.

Djokovic is the most successful player at three of the Masters 1000s, which is tied for most with Nadal. Federer is the top player at two of the Masters Series events and Andre Agassi is the best player in the history of Miami.

Here is a breakdown of where Djokovic ranks at all 14 elite events.

First (3): Canada, Shanghai, Paris

Second (6): Australian Open, Indian Wells, Miami, Monte Carlo, Rome, Year-End Finals

Third (3): Madrid, Wimbledon, Cincinnati

Fourth (2): Roland Garros, US Open

The same breakdown for Federer

First (5): Australian Open, Indian Wells, Wimbledon, Cincinnati, Year-End Finals

Second (3): Madrid, Rome, US Open

Third (4): Miami, Roland Garros, Shanghai, Paris

Fourth (2): Monte Carlo, Canada

And for Nadal

First (4): Monte Carlo, Madrid, Rome, Roland Garros

Second (1): Canada

Third (1): Indian Wells

Fourth (1): Shanghai

Fifth or lower (7): Australian Open, Miami, Wimbledon, Cincinnati, US Open, Paris, Year-End Finals

Looking at the GOAT debate from this perspective might make someone wonder why Nadal is even in the conversation. There are six elite tournaments in which Nadal isn’t even among the five best players in the history of that tournament. Meanwhile, Djokovic and Federer are inside the top four in all 14 tournaments. Djokovic will likely finish his career inside the top three in all 14 tournaments.

No single metric can resolve the GOAT debate, but based on this metric, Djokovic is well on his way to finishing his career as the GOAT.

Career Masters Performances

Four years ago, I began measuring how many ranking points players have earned in their career at the nine Masters Series 1000 events. I am now reposting it with updated stats to see how players have progressed, since it has been over two years since I updated the original post.

I found the sum total of ranking points earned by all of the top players since 1990 at each of the Masters Series events that they played in. The totals were based on the current ranking system: W-1000, RU-600, SF-360, QF-180, R16-90, R32-45, R64-20, and all first round losses were worth 10 points unless it entrance was based on a wildcard.

Keep in mind that players who started their peak years before 1990 could be drastically underrated in categories that have to do with totals, and could be very overrated in categories that have to do with averages.

Career Masters Ranking Points Earned:
1. Rafael Nadal 54,950
2. Novak Djokovic 52,565
3. Roger Federer 52,485
4. Andy Murray 28,230
5. Andre Agassi 27,745
6. Pete Sampras 24,420
7. Tomas Berdych 16,655
8. David Ferrer 16,560
9. Andy Roddick 15,755
10. Michael Chang 15,405
11. Thomas Muster 12,810
12. Stefan Edberg 12,695
13. Boris Becker 12,671
14. Jim Courier 12,600
15. Gustavo Kuerten 12,150
16. Lleyton Hewitt 11,865
17. Carlos Moya 11,570
18. Stan Wawrinka 11,375
19. Marcelo Rios 11,370
20. Goran Ivanisevic 11,360

Average Ranking Points Earned per Tournament: 
1. Rafael Nadal 473.7
2. Novak Djokovic 473.6
3. Roger Federer 391.68
4. Andre Agassi 298.3
5. Pete Sampras 294.2
6. Andy Murray 291
7. Stefan Edberg 275
8. Boris Becker 248
9. Thomas Muster 241
10. Andy Roddick 212
11. Kei Nishikori 203.5
12. Marcelo Rios 199
13. Milos Raonic 182.9
14. Gustavo Kuerten 181
15. Michael Chang 181
16. Jim Courier 177
17. Lleyton Hewitt 160
18. Patrick Rafter 159
19. Yevgeny Kafelnikov 145.3
20. Sergi Bruguera 142.4

Nadal has finally surpassed Djokovic in average points, and holds a very slim margin. It's amazing how close these two players are after such long and different careers. Nadal is certainly the best player in Masters Series history as of right now, but that could change even before the end of the 2019 season.

Most Points Earned at One Tournament:
1. Rafael Nadal 12,590 (Monte Carlo)
2. Rafael Nadal 10,750 (Rome)
3. Roger Federer 8780 (Indian Wells)
4. Rafael Nadal 8565 (Monte Carlo)
5. Andre Agassi 8220 (Miami)
6. Roger Federer 8100 (Cincinnati)
7. Novak Djokovic 7900 (Rome)
8. Novak Djokovic 6830 (Miami)
9. Novak Djokovic 6745 (Indian Wells)
10. Roger Federer 6355 (Miami)

There is one more way of looking at the numbers presented in this form. The first two categories dealt with totals and averages. Averages are good for looking at how good a player is in the tournaments that they played. Total is good for looking at the longevity of that success in tournaments.

This final list looks at a combination of the two. It takes the total amount of points won and subtracted from that is the number of Masters Series tournaments played multiplied by 171, which was the average amount of points won per tournament of the players that were researched. That means that an average score on this list would be zero for the 46 players that were researched.

Career Points Earned Adjusted
1. Rafael Nadal 35,114
2. Novak Djokovic 33,584
3. Roger Federer 29,571
4. Andre Agassi 11,842
5. Andy Murray 11,643
6. Pete Sampras 10,227
7. Stefan Edberg 4829
8. Boris Becker 3950
9. Thomas Muster 3747
10. Andy Roddick 3101
11. Marcelo Rios 1623
12. Kei Nishikori 1397
13. Michael Chang 870
14. Gustavo Kuerten 693
15. Milos Raonic 581

Race To 311 Weeks

Roger Federer has been the No. 1 singles player in the ATP for a record 310 weeks in his career, setting that record by winning Wimbledon in 2012. In the seven years since then, that record has gone unchallenged. However, Novak Djokovic is currently getting himself in position to challenge Federer's record.

Djokovic has now been the No. 1 player in the world for 261 weeks, which is the fifth most in tennis history. He is now just 50 weeks away from breaking Federer's record, meaning he needs to stay No. 1 in the world until July 6, 2020. That is also the date of Manic Monday for the 134th edition of Wimbledon. Therefore, if Djokovic stays ranked No. 1 in the world from now until the start of the next Wimbledon, he will break Federer's record.

Every year, the ATP tracks the Race to London rankings to measure only the ranking points that will count toward qualification for the year-end finals. However, Djokovic is racing toward a different tournament in London, so below is the total number of ranking points accumulated by each player toward being the No. 1 player in the world on July 6, 2020.

Race To Wimbledon Rankings (As of Sept. 6, 2019)
1. Daniil Medvedev - 3190
2. Novak Djokovic - 2540
3. Rafael Nadal - 2260
4. Roger Federer - 1650
5. David Goffin - 1150
6. Roberto Bautista Agut - 1135
7. Matteo Berrettini - 910
8. Diego Schwartzman - 835
9. Andrey Rublev - 770
9. Grigor Dimitrov - 770
11. Gael Monfils - 740
12. Nikoloz Basilashvili - 735
13. Nick Kyrgios - 680
14. Guido Pella - 595
15. Alex De Minaur - 575
16. Alexander Zverev - 560
16. Richard Gasquet - 560
18. Dominic Theim - 540
19. Albert Ramos Vinolas - 539
20. Benoit Paire - 520
20. John Isner - 520
22. Karen Khachanov - 515
23. Stan Wawrinka - 495
24. Hubert Hurkacz - 470
24. Kei Nishikori - 470
26. Sam Querrey - 435
27. Pablo Carreno Busta - 427
28. Fabio Fognini - 415
28. Marin Cilic - 415
30. Taylor Fritz - 375
31. Dusan Lajovic - 370
32. Pablo Andujar - 335
33. Joao Sousa - 335
34. Dominik Koepfer - 325
34. Tennys Sandgren - 325
34. Lucas Pouille - 325
37. Yoshihito Nishioka - 321
38. Juan Ignacio Londero - 315
38. Jan-Lennard Struff - 315
38. Miomir Kecmanovic - 315
41. Ugo Humbert - 300
42. Daniel Evans - 295
43. Denis Shapovalov - 280
43. Steve Johnson - 280
45. Milos Raonic - 270
45. Alexander Bublik - 270
45. Nicolas Jarry - 270
48. Yuichi Sugita - 266

Being No. 1 at Wimbledon next year only matters if Djokovic remains No. 1 up until then. Rafael Nadal has the best chance to surpass Djokovic before Wimbledon next year and his best chance to do so could be at the Australian Open. Since the Austalian Open, Djokovic has earned 5,175 points, while Nadal has earned 6,745 points. That means that Nadal's best chance to catch Djokovic will be between Paris-Bercy and the Australian Open.

GOAT Résumés

Among tennis fans, there are those who love the GOAT debate and there are those who hate the GOAT debate. I am unashamedly a part of the first group.

Sport is about two teams or individuals competing against each other two see which one is better. At a tournament, the purpose is to find out which team or individual is greatest. In an individual sport like tennis, the question "who is the greatest ever?" is the ultimate question. To not even ask the question would be to miss the whole point of the sport.

Some people say that it cannot be determined who the GOAT is. In response, I would ask who is better between Novak Djokovic and Raul Ramirez? Everyone says that Djokovic is better. At this point, they have conceded that it is possible to compare two players from different generations. That doesn't mean that all will agree on who the GOAT is or will agree on an objective manner to make the determination, but it is clear that a GOAT does exist. Therefore, it is meaningful to try to determine and debate who that GOAT is.

There is one other point that I want to make in this preamble. All tennis generations must be treated as equal. The sport has changed so much over the last 50 years in the Open Era. The way to win in tennis has changed significantly. However, the definition of success has never changed. Winning is success and success is winning. That has never changed. If we define a tennis generation as 10 years, then in every generation, there have been 40 grand slams won, 90 masters or WCT titles won, 10 year-end championships won, 522 weeks at No. 1, and 10 year-end No. 1's. These measuring sticks of success remain the same throughout all generations of tennis players, so they are the key ingredients for a GOAT resume.

Thus concludes my introduction. Here is the resume for each of the GOAT candidates:

Rod Laver

Resume: The case for Laver is an interesting one because of when his career was played. He was an amateur for seven years, then he was banned from 21 majors for having turned pro before the Open Era began in 1968. Players from before 1968 are usually not taken into consideration in the GOAT debate, so how we understand Rod Laver's accomplishments before 1968 is still an open question. How impressive was it for him to win the Grand Slam in 1962 as an amateur? After turning pro, he became the only player in the Open Era to win the Calendar Grand Slam in 1969. He finished his career in the Open Era with five grand slams. He is like the Babe Ruth of tennis in his legendary status. Like Babe Ruth's 60 home runs in a season, Rod Laver's record of four-consecutive grand slam titles won was a record that stood for several decades. It has become the ultimate achievement that every other GOAT candidate has attempted to repeat.

Drawbacks: If you only consider what Laver did in the Open Era, he certainly isn't the GOAT. His highest computer ranking was No. 3 and he only won five majors. If not for what he did before the Open Era, he wouldn't even get consideration. To argue for Laver as the GOAT requires treating his amateur achievements as equally valid as his Open Era achievements.

Jimmy Connors

Resume: Most people don't give Connors much thought, but he certainly deserves consideration. At the time that he retired, he was considered by some to be the GOAT, since he held several records and was arguably the best player of his era (1974-83). During that decade, he was the No. 1 player in the world for over half of the weeks and had the second-most majors won of any player in the Open Era at the time. To this day, he holds the records for matches won and titles won. If greatness is about winning matches, then Connors is the greatest. His longevity in his career should be admired as well.

Drawbacks: Connors' case for being the GOAT is a lot less compelling when you consider that during the peak of his career, there was another player who won three more majors than he did. Also, outside of his peak 10 years, there was a lot of mediocrity. While Connors won a lot of matches, he also lost a lot of matches. He simply played a lot of matches. In the majors, he consistently made it to the final rounds of majors, but at one point he had an eight-match losing streak at major semifinals.

Bjorn Borg

Resume: When looking at achievements per tournament played, nobody is close to Bjorn Borg. The clearest example is average ranking points (based on current rankings formula) earned per grand slam tournament played, Borg is far ahead of everybody else at 1,148. That means that reaching the final of a grand slam was just an average performance for Borg during his career. Nobody else is within 200 points of Borg in that category. He won 11 grand slams, which was the record at the time, and was the No. 1 player in the world for 108 out of the 121 weeks that made up the prime of his career.

Drawbacks: There are a lot of "what if..." questions that could be asked about Borg. He was still young when he retired at 25 years old. Had he kept playing, he surely would won more titles, but likely dropped off in the degree to which he dominated the sport. To make a real case for Borg to be considered the GOAT, you have to assume he could have continued dominating. However, possible dominance isn't the same as real dominance, so his case for the designation as the GOAT takes a serious hit.

John McEnroe

Resume: McEnroe is a popular choice among casual tennis fans or sports pundits who only pay attention occasionally. While Borg was dominating tennis, McEnroe managed to win half of his matches against Borg, taking 7 of 14 contests. He also won all of his last three matches against Borg, which is considered by some to be the reason that Borg retired so easily. To end the career of another GOAT candidate certainly merits some consideration. McEnroe finished with seven grand slam titles and 170 weeks at No. 1. In 1984, he won both Wimbledon and the US Open in what was one of the greatest single seasons in tennis history. Usually when talking about the GOAT, fans are referring to singles success, but if you take McEnroe's doubles success into consideration, his case becomes more interesting. He won nine grand slams in doubles and reached the top ranking in the world. Most other GOAT candidates didn't even play doubles regularly.

Drawbacks: Inconsistency and a short period of dominance both hurt McEnroe. His peak lasted only six years and it had a big dip in the middle of it. If you compared the best six years of all the GOAT candidates, McEnroe still wouldn't lead in many statistical categories. He is remembered because of his on-court antics and he has remained in the public eye since retiring, but there are better players to remember from tennis' past.

Pete Sampras

Resume: At the time he retired, most tennis pundits considered Sampras to be the GOAT. He had the most grand slams won, the most weeks at No. 1 in the world and the most wins against top-10 opponents. Sampras had no rivals, because he dominated all of his opponents. His most serious rival was Andre Agassi, who he beat 20 times in 34 matches. Unlike any other GOAT candidate, he was clearly the best player of his generation, dominating the sport from 1993 to 2000. During those eight years, he was the year-end No. 1 for nearly 70 percent of the weeks and he was the year-end No. 1 six years in a row.

Drawbacks: Clay creates the biggest hole in Sampras' resume. He always struggled at Roland Garros and never won the title. Where Sampras' resume is strong, Roger Federer's resume is even stronger. Anyone who tries to argue that Sampras is the GOAT will be met by an even better argument for Federer being the GOAT on the exact same grounds. There are few things that Sampras has accomplished that haven't also been done by Federer. Those in the Sampras camp will have to focus on how Sampras dominated all of his rivals and finished as the year-end No. 1 six years in a row. That kind of dominance is unmatched.

Roger Federer

Resume: I have been among those who have considered Federer the GOAT for a long time, and my mind hasn't been changed yet. The case for Federer is simple. He has won the most grand slams, he has the most weeks at No. 1, he has the most wins against top-10 opponents and he has become the second player ever to win 100 career titles. Federer is one of only five players in the Open Era to achieve the Career Grand Slam and he has earned more ranking points at grand slam events than any other player in tennis history.

Drawbacks: The charge that Federer played in a weak era is addressed in my introduction to this post. Still, there is something to be said for the fact that he played high-ranked players with a shockingly low frequency for the first half of his career. In the second half of his career, he has been outdone by both Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal. Both of the other GOAT candidates from Federer's era have positive head-to-head records against him. There is an argument to be made that Federer didn't have any serious competition for the first half of his career and he was only the third-best player during the second half of his career.

Rafael Nadal

Resume: It is an understatement to say that no tennis player has ever dominated a single tournament the way Nadal has dominated Roland Garros. Nadal has won 11 of his 17 majors at Roland Garros and only lost two matches in his career on the Parisian clay. Most people consider Federer to be the GOAT, but Nadal leads the head-to-head series against Federer, 23-15. He has won 17 majors, which is the second-most in tennis history, and he has also won an Olympic gold medal. Nadal doesn't hold many records, but he is second or third in nearly every statistical category, while he does lead in most career Masters Series titles won. 

Drawbacks: Nadal has a losing record against Djokovic, who has beaten Nadal at all four majors. Also, he only has won six majors outside of Roland Garros. No other GOAT candidate has such a lop-sided distribution of grand slam titles. Nadal has been the world No. 1 for 196 weeks, which ranks sixth. Because his dominance has been limited to clay, he hasn't spent as much time atop the rankings as other GOAT candidates and he his longest stint as No. 1 only lasted 56 weeks.

Novak Djokovic

Resume: Of the three active GOAT candidates, Djokovic is the one who still could add a lot to his resume. He is the current world No. 1 and has won each other last three majors, which seems to indicate that he could still win a few more, even at 32 years old. Like his idol Pete Sampras, Djokovic has a positive head-to-head record against all of his rivals. During his peak years (2011 to present) he has clearly been the best player in the world, holding the No. 1 ranking for 253 weeks and counting, which is well over half of the time. He has finished five seasons as the No. 1 player in the world and is on pace to tie Sampras' record of six at the end of this season. Djokovic has won 15 majors (3rd most) and 201 matches against top-10 opponents (2nd most). He is also only the second player to win four-consecutive majors, joining Rod Laver. Unlike Rafael Nadal, Djokovic's dominance is not limited to one surface. He has won all nine Masters Series titles, all grand slam events and the year-end championships. And unlike Roger Federer, Djokovic has had to face higher-ranked players with great frequency. In every metric that considers opponents' ranking, the Serb comes out on top. Simply put, Djokovic has won against the very best on all surfaces and conditions. Nobody else can say that.

Drawbacks: While Djokovic has winning records against both Nadal and Federer, his two contemporaries have both won more major titles. The fact that three players in Djokovic's era managed to win more than 14 majors could suggest that winning many majors is perhaps not as difficult as it used to be. Federer has 57 more weeks at No. 1, six more grand slam titles and 17 more wins against top-10 players, so Djokovic still has his work cut out for him.

Career Grand Slam Results

Almost four years ago, I began tracking total ranking points earned at grand slams by all of the top players in the Open Era. I used the current ranking system for all generations, so that there was no advantage given to the current generation.

It has been a long time since I have updated the numbers, and with the GOAT debate being rekindled, now is as good of a time as any to write about this. I do want to be clear about the role I believe that these numbers should play in the GOAT debate. Anyone who says that "whoever has the most majors is the GOAT" is being too simplistic. Although major titles are the ultimate prize in tennis, there is still plenty to play for besides that: Masters 1000 events, year-end championships, ranking, etc.

Non-major events should also have a place in the GOAT debate. In terms of measuring a players success at majors, it isn't enough to simply count titles, because that treats losing in the first round as the same as losing in the final. More in depth analysis is definitely needed to measure how dominant a player truly is at the majors. Not surprisingly though, players with many grand slam titles will be near the top of all of these lists. So without further preamble, here is what the numbers show.

Career Total Ranking Points Earned At Majors
1. Roger Federer - 69,235
2. Novak Djokovic - 55,105
3. Rafael Nadal - 54,215
4. Jimmy Connors - 40,480
5. Pete Sampras - 40,385
6. Ivan Lendl - 39,890
7. Andre Agassi - 37,675
8. Bjorn Borg - 31,015
9. John McEnroe - 28,760
10. Stefan Edberg - 28,490
11. Andy Murray - 27,970
12. Boris Becker - 26,490
13. Mats Wilander - 25,025
14. Guillermo Vilas - 20,630
15. John Newcombe - 18,210
16. Ken Rosewall - 17,715
17. Jim Courier - 17,620
18. Stan Wawrinka - 16,660
19. Arthur Ashe - 16,295
20. Lleyton Hewitt - 15,975

Average Ranking Points Earned Per Major
1. Bjorn Borg - 1148
2. Rafael Nadal - 951
3. Novak Djokovic - 950
4. Roger Federer - 8999
5. Rod Laver - 851
6. Ken Rosewall - 805
7. Pete Sampras - 721
8. Jimmy Connors - 710
9. John Newcombe - 700
10. Ivan Lendl - 699
11. John McEnroe - 639
12. Andre Agassi - 617
13. Andy Murray - 582
14. Boris Becker - 575
15. Mats Wilander - 568
16. Stefan Edberg - 547
17. Arthur Ashe - 479
18. Jim Courier - 429
19. Guillermo Vilas - 421
20. Jan Kodes - 344

Most Points Earned At One Major
1. Rafael Nadal (Roland Garros) - 24,630
2. Roger Federer (Wimbledon) - 23,035
3. Roger Federer (Australian Open) - 19,050
4. Jimmy Connors (US Open) - 18,720
5. Roger Federer (US Open) - 16,270
6. Novak Djokovic (Australian Open) - 15,505
7. Pete Sampras (Wimbledon) - 15,370
8. Pete Sampras (US Open) - 15,230
9. Novak Djokovic (US Open) - 14,340
10. Ivan Lendl (US Open) - 14,080

Most Points Earned At Player's Weakest Major
1. Roger Federer (Roland Garros) - 10,880
2. Novak Djokovic (Roland Garros) - 10,775
3. Rafael Nadal (Wimbledon) - 9,635
4. Andre Agassi (Wimbledon) - 6,640
5. Ivan Lendl (Wimbledon) - 6,605
6. Andy Murray (Roland Garros) - 5,080
7. Ken Rosewall (Roland Garros) -3,200
7. Jimmy Connors (Australian Open) - 3,200
9. Stefan Edberg (Roland Garros) - 2,930
10. Boris Becker (Roland Garros) - 2,890

Another category that I came up with four years ago is what I call "adjusted ranking points." Roger Federer has played 14 more majors than anyone else on these lists, so it's no surprise that he has the most total points. Bjorn Borg played 48 majors less than Federer, so it's also no surprise that Borg has the best average. So I wanted to come up with a stat that neither rewarded a player for retiring early nor for continuing to play way passed their prime (like Hewitt and Connors).

I measured 43 of the top players in tennis history and the average ranking points earned per major for the entire group is currently at 453. Back when I created this stat, the average was at 475, so I left my formula as it was to keep it consistent. The small change won't matter much. The formula is simply total ranking points minus 475 times number of majors played. That means that every time a player failed to reach at least the semifinals, they lost points so that getting upset early in a tournament actually hurts a player. I personally consider this to be the single most definitive measure of grand slam success. I think the fact that the list matches pretty well with fans' intuitions is a strong indicator of its accuracy in representing the success of players.

Career Points Earned At Majors (Adjusted)
1. Roger Federer - 32,660
2. Novak Djokovic - 27,665
3. Rafael Nadal - 27,140
4. Bjorn Borg - 18,190
5. Pete Sampras - 13,785
6. Jimmy Connors - 13,405
7. Ivan Lendl - 12,815
8. Andre Agassi - 8,700
9. John McEnroe - 7,385
10. Ken Rosewall - 7,265
11. John Newcombe - 5,860
12. Rod Laver - 5,650
13. Andy Murray - 5,170
14. Boris Becker - 4,640
15. Mats Wilander - 4,125
16. Stefan Edberg - 3,790
17. Arthur Ashe - 145