Roger Federer Ties Ivan Lendl For Second Place In Open Era ATP Wins

by Tom Gainey | June 9th, 2016, 11:15 am

Roger Federer tied Ivan Lendl for second place on the ATP’s all-time match win leaders. Earlier, Federer survived a tough battle from 18-year-old American Taylor Fritz 64, 57, 64 in his opening round at Stuttgart.

The match was Federer’s first since a third round loss to Dominic Thiem at Rome. Federer withdrew from the French Open with a back injury.

“It wasn’t easy,” said Federer. “I thought Fritz had some good moments there. He gained control of the baseline, he had a little bit of an upper-hand at times. He served well and I was a little bit cautious, unsure of how to move and questioning my defence. These are the things I will need to iron out.

“I can take a lot of confidence out of this match. I need to improve a few things, but I served big and I was able to handle three sets over two days, and find some energy at the end of the match. I know I have an extra gear. My next goal is to stretch leads – once I get a lead, I need to know that I can protect it then take the next step.”

Federer will now try to break the tie tomorrow against German veteran Florian Mayer.

1) Jimmy Connors (USA) 1,256
2=) Ivan Lendl (CZE/USA) 1,071
2=) Roger Federer (SUI) 1,071
4) Guillermo Vilas (ARG) 929
5) John McEnroe (USA) 877

You Might Like:
Murray, Lendl Split Up Again
Longest Winning Streaks in Men’s Tennis – Open Era
Ivan Lendl Apparently Declined Coaching Grigor Dimitrov
Ivan Lendl Says He Wants To Ruin Novak Djokovic’s Chances At A Calendar Year Grand Slam
Andy Murray Is Back With Ivan Lendl

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

22 Comments for Roger Federer Ties Ivan Lendl For Second Place In Open Era ATP Wins

Daniel Says:

He should cross 1100 this season, but getting close to 1200 will be a hard time

chrisford1 Says:

Congrats to Federer. Testimony to his longevity, ability, and consistency. Avoidance of long periods off Tour due to injury.
A caution about “shooting for Connors, since age is just a number”, (or similar blather)
Connors went on too long, says he erred badly trying to play as long as he did, has knee surgeries, back surgeries, bone grafts, and 3 hip replacements to show for it.
Of the other guys still active, Rafa has 796, Djokovic 730, David Ferrer 679, and Andy Murray 580.
It seems possible that Djokovic might be able to get past MacEnroe and possibly Vilas, but not make it to where Federer, Connors, and Lendl stand as Top 3.
Don’t see any of the other guys now playing getting up there. Djokovic will pass Rafa unless Rafa has a physical amd mental renaissance. Rafa is 8th now, and even if Djokovic passes him, can pass a few inactive players on the list to be solid Top 10 in most wins.

(And this is Open Era Stats. Laver and Rosewall have more wins than Connors, but they lived in a different time. Play 2-3 matches a day, wipe up on the other amateurs. Head to another town to play where the gamblers wanted them. Along the way find time to throw a leg of mutton on the fire for dinner while consuming mashies, bangers, cooked dried peas, and mass qualities of beer while the mutton roasted, Djokovic would faint if he had to eat the shit they ate in 1950s, 60s Australia. (Though the diet is not that bad from my perspective).

Willow Says:

Well done Mr Federer on an amazing achievement, a thread about another player, yet some posters feel the need to steer the conversation back around to their favorite ….

chrisford1 Says:

You mean Laver, Rosewall, Rafa, Djokovic, and David Ferrer to put Roger’s feat in perspective.

Context, dear, context. It is critical in sports and other achievements to give perspective.
And it is well worth remembering in a different time, Laver, Roache, Newcombe, and Rosewall did things the modern tennis players will not duplicate.
Laver actually leads the win list.

It’s all bigger than just Federer. If it was only Federer, there would be no records to set, no one to compare his feats to, no conversation if his record will be significant andt last or be eclipsed soon (no, Feds place on the win list will stay #2 for decades, IMO.

Willow Says:

Yeah but somehow theres always a sly dig dressed up as a compliment in there somewhere, and you couldnt sound more condescending if you tried ….

Dave Says:

Unless Djokovic retires early, he will pass Lendl as well. He actually got to 700 wins at a younger age than Federer. Not by much, but he still did it. He will get to 800 faster than Federer did as well. I actually am maybe in the minority in thinking this, but I believe Federer will break Connors record in the end. I actually do. I have always felt this way and until proven otherwise, I will continue to feel this way. Federer can win matches so much easier than most people, even at his current age. He can play the same opponent at times as Novak and still make it look easier than Novak does at times. I’m not saying he is better than Novak. But his game is so smooth and slick and he rushes opponents better than anyone. He can put matches to bed with ease when he is firing on all cylinders still at 34 almost 35.

James Says:

These stats really don’t matter. Eventually, its all about singles slams won.

17. 14. both are final numbers.

12 and counting. Lets see how far that goes. With so many great slam winning young players right now, its anybody’s guess!!

BBB Says:

James I don’t agree. For some, the total number of majors is the only number that counts. But it’s not a universal truth that total number of majors is the only thing that matters.

BBB Says:

I also don’t think it’s out of the question for Federer to eke out one more major.

Dave Says:


I totally agree. If Djokovic gets upset in Any major other than the French Open, Federer is the next in line to win, yes even over Murray. Federer has owned Murray since his racquet change. 5 in a row. In order for Djokovic to break the all-time majors record, it’s just as much about stopping Federer from adding another major as it is about winning majors. Especially when they are playing head to head for a major. Because it’s a 2 major swing. If Federer had won the U.S. Open it would have been 18 to 9 instead of 17 to 10. 9 major verses 7 major separation.

Jun Says:

This is what Roger said:
“Grand Slams aren’t everything. Unfortunately they’ve become sort of everything. But for me, they’re not.”

skeezer Says:

Its the only number that counts? Yeah, mostly. It is the ultimate benchmark and the players put on the highest chair of royalty. You start there and then go down, not the other way around. Put it another wAy, if you hold plenty of Slams, you probably have many other records as well.
Case study: Roger Federer.

James Says:

I am not saying it SHOULD be the only number that matters. I am saying it IS the only number that matters.

Sampras is 14. Nobody talks about much else. Laver is 11, with 4 in one year. That’s it, never hear anything else about him.

chrisford1 Says:

The noise machine and lazy writers that otherwise would be forced to discuss Olympic medals, World Championships, Davis Cup, Borg retiring early after dominating clay and grass, Pete’s serve and volley game nearly unbeatable for years – happily latch on to Slamcount,
American football, basketball, real football fans have long moved past “Superbowl Ring Count”, “World Cup finals won”, and “NBA career points”. Too simplistic. Too limited.
Tennis will move on, too.

James Says:

And then when you look past just the number of slams you realize how Nadal’s record is so much superior to Sampras’s, even though both have 14 slams. About Sampras’s 24-13 record at the French open with just one semi (not even one final). Or how his 2002 US Open was won by not facing ANY top 5 player.

But that is not palatable, is it??

I am all for comprehensive analysis mate. But data creates problems for many posters here!

Dave Says:

I agree Chrisford1. There are way to many other factors to think about. The 4 slams in a row that Novak just accomplished will of course be taken into account. If he wins 5 or 6 in a row, it will only hold more weight. Weeks at Number 1. Masters 1000’s. Year End Number 1. WTF’s. IF Nole passes Roger in weeks at Number 1. And passes Pete’s Record for Year end number 1’s as well as beating Rogers 6 WTF’s. He already owns the masters 1000’s record and will smash his own record by a long shot. Even if he ended up with 1 or 2 less majors than Roger, many people would still put him ahead. He would have a lot of the big records at that point. These of course still need to be accomplished. But if they were to be accomplished, many would have him at number 1. If he were to win calendar slam this year, there would be no discussion for most people. The debate would be over.

Michael Says:

Yet another milestone for Roger in his illustrious career.

The match was tough against an unknown and Roger needs time to settle and get into his groove ahead of Wimbledon. Once, he finds his feet on Grass, there is no stopping Roger unless he runs against a wall named Novak Djokovic.

Daniel Says:

1072 today, just beat Meyer in two tiebreaks, saving a few set points down 5-6 second set.

Love how slices work on grass, such a different game than clay.
Next Thiem which will be his real test, still fine tuning his game, missing a few FH, but overall his grass game is all there.

jatin Says:

Loved the match. Fed played two great tie breaks. Some wonderful half volleys and forehands. So nice to see him back, it felt like eternity.
Should be an exciting match against thiem. But with the way he is playing, i think he will be through.

elina Says:

Some here must think that Margaret Court is GOAT better than Serena and Graf lol.

Van Persie Says:

Tbh Roger-Novak matches were my favorites, but they started to be battles lately…and the UO final from last year really pissed me off. Novak was booed also during the final ceremony. The media also went crazy since Wimbledon 2014, in a fascist way.

Baa Says:

The media got so angry and numb.
You can see the stunned, resigned Fed fan faces in the crowd.
These confused people didn’t pay attention to anything except slams!

If slams are the only great things then we can assume
that Roddick is only slightly behind murray.
What a joke.

“We want 155 mph serves and fed winning over injured opponents”

Their protective Fedal bubble, with fake classic match
after fake classic match, is not here after
the disastrous “declining Fed years”!

Top story: Monfils v Auger-Aliassime Headlines Day 1 Laver Cup; Shelton v Fils