PDA

View Full Version : Federer Honors Connors


breakfast_of_champions
02-25-2007, 07:33 AM
actually connors has 2 alltime records federer wont catch. 109 tourny wins, and 800+ career wins.



Connors has one tennis record I won't beat, says Federer



Roger Federer has paid tribute to Jimmy Connors, whose record of 160 consecutive weeks as world number one he will overtake on Monday, by saying that the American has one record he will never surpass.

Connors amassed a total of 109 career titles while Federer has won 46.

"Well of course he still has the record for the most titles which I don't think will be ever be eclipsed," said Federer, who will attempt to regain the Dubai Open title from Rafael Nadal during the next six days.

"He is one of the all time great players. He played for such a long time which allowed him to get so many titles, but to stay fit through all this time with his intensity is quite remarkable.

"The players today who are intense - (Lleyton) Hewitt and Nadal, imagine them playing till they are 40 years old - it's almost not possible to imagine.

"But Jimmy did that and came to all the matches with a great attitude and broke great records, like the one I'm just breaking now and obviously the record number of titles, and he was very close to the all-time record number (of weeks as world number one) as well.

"So he's one of the all time greats."

The man who overtook Connors' record of the total number of weeks as number one was Pete Sampras, with whom Federer has often been compared, and who was number one for 286 weeks altegether.

Federer did not rule out the possibility of aiming for that one day, but preferred to focus on this week, his shorter term goals and the significance of his new record.

"This is definitely going to stay for quite some time: I'll definitely keep it for three years," Federer pointed out.

"It's a nice record to have and it's very hard to beat. It's not something you do overnight. It's a long hard-working process.

"Even if I lose it eventually I still think I will always be very high up in the record books and that is very nice to see.

"I've known I am going to break it ever since I beat Andy Roddick in the Masters Cup - Jimmy Connors being there - so it's actually quite ironic. So I've been looking forward to this day. It's about to come so I'll be excited."

Federer reckons his game has improved a lot during the last 161 weeks.

"I remember it was still a little bit up in the air you know," he said referring to the way he was on February 2, 2004, the day when he reached the pinnacle.

"I knew I could play well on any given day, but on my off days I would be very vulnerable. Basically my game was okay but just not as consistent as I was hoping for, which I have been able to improve.

"Fitness-wise as well I knew I had a little problem here and there, but I was always hoping not to go five sets whereas now I don't mind it.

"So I have really come a long way and I am happy with my improvements since becoming number one in the world."

Federer reckons improvements in his fitness have been the key to his consistency and that to a significant extent he achieved it by building three one-month training breaks into his schedule.

One is during Christmas, one after Wimbledon, and one after the Australian Open, which ends with his match Monday against Kristian Pless, the world number 86 from Denmark.

He was also prepared to enjoy his comfortable-looking first round in contrast to the difficult one Nadal has landed with Marcos Baghdatis, the world number 17.

"Yeah, he probably has the toughest," agreed Federer.

"It's actually fun him (Nadal) drawing Baghdatis. It's like when I drew Marat (Safin) in the first round a few years ago. It's kind of fun for a first round."

Viper
02-25-2007, 09:20 AM
Thanks for posting that. It was very interesting.


"The players today who are intense - (Lleyton) Hewitt and Nadal, imagine them playing till they are 40 years old - it's almost not possible to imagine."



I've tryed that. It's not pretty at all. A 40 year old Rafa in his capris yelling "VAMOS!!"

lorenza
02-25-2007, 09:27 AM
"It's actually fun him (Nadal) drawing Baghdatis. It's like when I drew Marat (Safin) in the first round a few years ago. It's kind of fun for a first round."

haha, yeah, i'm sure nadal is jumping for joy at having gotten marcos for his first round match :p

breakfast_of_champions
02-25-2007, 11:11 AM
federer is just too classy. wouldn't be surprised if he did pass 109 titles.

power_play21
02-25-2007, 11:18 AM
federer is just too classy. wouldn't be surprised if he did pass 109 titles.

at 10 titles a year, it'll take him another 6 years, i say doable, but hard.

scineram
02-25-2007, 11:25 AM
I say not doable. Could pass Mac though, finishing with about 80 titles and 800 match wins.

Mick
02-25-2007, 12:28 PM
I say not doable. Could pass Mac though, finishing with about 80 titles and 800 match wins.

yeah the problem i see is that to reach 109 career titles, Connors continued to play when other players were beating him (meaning he was no longer a top ranked player). Will Federer continue to play when other players are beating him ? that is the question.

BeckerFan
02-25-2007, 12:42 PM
Players were also less protective about their schedules in Connors's time, and they entered many more tournaments. If Federer were serious about breaking this record, he should be winning 15+ titles a year now ... these are, after all, his prime years. Of course, Federer knows that if you play more matches, you are going to start losing more matches too. He seems more like Sampras, in that he would rather play fewer smaller tournaments and structure his calendar around the Grand Slam events. Unlike Sampras, though, Federer DOES at least give his all at these smaller tournaments.

To be fair, Connors's record isn't necessarily 'true' ... at least not in an all-time sense. Connors holds the Open Era record. Though the records before that are complicated, it is clear that Tilden, Rosewall and Laver won more than 120 titles each.

tennishead93
02-25-2007, 01:12 PM
If federer passes Connors he will have to play as many touranments as Daveydenko every year for the rest of his career.

omniexist
02-25-2007, 01:17 PM
I doubt Federer is all that concerned about Connor's record. Fed is like Lendl-Grand Slam wins are all that matter in the end.

illkhiboy
02-25-2007, 01:31 PM
It should be mentioned that Connors played a bunch of tournaments where he had to play 3 or 4 matches per tournament. Federer has to play a minimum of five per event. This basically means that it's hard for him to play in as many tournaments as Connors would. Not to mention tennis is a far far more physically challenging game now compared to the late 70's when Connors dominated.

BeckerFan
02-25-2007, 01:37 PM
Lendl played (and won) a sh*tload of tournaments in the early 1980s, omniexist.

In fact, his number of titles is second only to Connors's in the Open Era.

killer
02-25-2007, 01:51 PM
Good point, BeckerFan...if i'm not mistaken, Lendl's got 94 titles. I think what Omni was trying to say is that for Lendl and many others, ultimately the titles that people remember are the Grand Slams. Until you get into the 'ridiculous' range of titles (where the numbers mean more than the names of the tourneys), the other tournaments (outside the GS's) aren't remembered that clearly.
I like Federer's perspective: he knows that breaking Connors' title record is an insurmountable task, and as such he ensures that he can continue to play as many tournaments as he wants in a year while maintaining his physical health. The training breaks he takes made waves when people began noticing them a couple of years back; it seemed unheard of for top-tier players to just take 3 months off throughout the year. But we've all been witness to the success of this scheudling. I simply hope that we can all continue to enjoy Federer (and his game!) for years and years to come. cheers.

breakfast_of_champions
02-25-2007, 08:22 PM
It should be mentioned that Connors played a bunch of tournaments where he had to play 3 or 4 matches per tournament. Federer has to play a minimum of five per event. This basically means that it's hard for him to play in as many tournaments as Connors would. Not to mention tennis is a far far more physically challenging game now compared to the late 70's when Connors dominated.

really? vilas had 120 wins in 77, connors 99 wins in 74. they played more tournaments because they played for less money.

breakfast_of_champions
02-25-2007, 08:24 PM
I doubt Federer is all that concerned about Connor's record. Fed is like Lendl-Grand Slam wins are all that matter in the end.

ya, u can tell that by how often federer loses in the tournaments other than the slams. never.

caulcano
02-26-2007, 01:45 AM
Players were also less protective about their schedules in Connors's time, and they entered many more tournaments. If Federer were serious about breaking this record, he should be winning 15+ titles a year now ... these are, after all, his prime years.

True. He needs to enter more of the mickey-mouse tournaments to achieve the 15+ titles a year he needs to break his record.

Besides which would you go for? Having the most titles ever or getting as many GS as possible?

federerfanatic
02-26-2007, 02:08 AM
Connors is a great champion and so is Federer. It is understandable Connors would not pay kudos to Federer since nobody likes their records beaten, plus he is coaching one of Fed's big rivals now so it would be uncomfortable. However good that Federer payed kudos to Connors.

federerfanatic
02-26-2007, 02:11 AM
actually connors has 2 alltime records federer wont catch. 109 tourny wins, and 800+ career wins.

You dont know that. If he plays into his mid 30s he definitely can beat both. Of course he wont be dominating into his 30s like he does now but that does not mean he wont be winning lots of matches, some smaller tournaments, and the odd slams.

Andres
02-26-2007, 02:34 AM
really? vilas had 120 wins in 77, connors 99 wins in 74. they played more tournaments because they played for less money.
145 wins in 1977 :) (ATP win-loss record was 128-14), but je actually played OTHER tourneys, which added 17 more matches to his credit ;)

vive le beau jeu !
02-26-2007, 02:37 AM
Jimmy McBorg played 427 matches in 1969.

justineheninhoogenbandfan
02-26-2007, 01:35 PM
I could see Fedster passing 109 titles. Here is an example of how that could happen:

2007: 10-12 titles
2008: 10-12 titles
2009: 10-12 titles
2010: 8-10 titles
2011: 7-9 titles
2012: 6-8 titles
2013: 4-6 titles
2014: 3-5 titles

Overall: 58-74 titles

He started this year 64 from the record. So I think it is very challenging but quite realistic for him.

Eviscerator
02-26-2007, 10:16 PM
Reading about Federer's humility kind of reminds me of Rios and the Williams sisters.:mrgreen:

breakfast_of_champions
02-26-2007, 10:30 PM
yes, its nice to federer has a sense of history about tennis.

caulcano
02-27-2007, 01:15 AM
I could see Fedster passing 109 titles. Here is an example of how that could happen:

2007: 10-12 titles
2008: 10-12 titles
2009: 10-12 titles
2010: 8-10 titles
2011: 7-9 titles
2012: 6-8 titles
2013: 4-6 titles
2014: 3-5 titles

Overall: 58-74 titles

He started this year 64 from the record. So I think it is very challenging but quite realistic for him.

I don't see and I don't think he'll go for it. Even FED himself admits he probably won't break that record ... much as I would like him to.

breakfast_of_champions
02-27-2007, 08:31 AM
federer is probably hinting he doesnt plan on playing well into his 30's.

lambielspins
02-27-2007, 08:38 AM
Well Federer had an interview awhile back saying he would retire in 2012, then had another interview that said he has had second thoughts and might play longer. Alot of it would probably depend how he was doing. I agree with an earlier poster that it probably isnt his makeup to keep playing when he is no longer a regular in the top 3 anyway, while Connors played on for multiple years outside of the top 5, even eventually outside the top 10.

breakfast_of_champions
02-27-2007, 08:44 AM
federer's goals are probably:


a grand slam

a french

most weeks and yearend #1's

most slams


the rest would just be gravy.