PDA

View Full Version : Could Federer get to 8 US Open or 8 Wimbledon wins?


timnz
03-26-2009, 04:59 PM
The record for Wimbledon for Mens single wins is 7 (held by 2 players), similarly it is 7 for the US open (held by 3 players). Federer currently has 5 wimbledon wins and 5 US Open wins.

Question 1/: Is it possible that Federer could get into the position by the end of his career of winning the most US Opens or the most Wimbledon's of anyone in history ie 8 or more of either. He may not get both records but would he get either?

Question 2/: Regardless of your answer to question 1 - of the two tournaments which one is Federer likely to clock up the most wins - the US Open or Wimbledon?

My pick is that he could get one of these records. I believe that his better surface is the US Open (it is faster these days than Wimbledon - the latter having slowed down considerably), but he would strike more competition at the US Open (more players being able to play on hard court than grass). So it is hard to pick.

I think he could get to 8 Wimbledon's.

grafselesfan
03-26-2009, 06:37 PM
8 Wimbledons I doubt. Nadal is already arguably superior and favored over him in the upcoming years there. U.S Open has a higher # of true opponents but this is still more possible than 8 Wimbledons. Atleast here we cant definitively say anyone is over him even though he has a variety of dangerous threats. Nadal? Hasnt made the final there yet, his worst surface of fast and low bouncing hard court. Djokovic? a threat on his best form, but not actually favored over Federer anywhere even if he gets back in form. Murray? a great record vs Fed on hard courts but hasnt proven himself able to beat Federer in a slam or able to win a grand slam yet. The only slam he proved himself was the U.S Open and even there he was beaten comprehensively by Federer.

All that being said I think even 8 U.S Opens would be very tough. Still more possible than 8 Wimbledons. Either would elevate his current all time status somewhat though IMO if he pulled either off, especialy if some success vs Nadal was involved. I didnt even mention the obvious factor of Federer being 27 already, 28, 29, and 30 at the next 3 U.S Opens (older in any future ones), about to turn those ages at the next 3 Wimbledons, and that his play and confidence has arguably been in decline for awhile at a surprisingly young age.

egn
03-26-2009, 06:53 PM
I don't see him getting 8 of either. 7 is more likely. However I would have to pick the US Open. For years people praised him for grass court but I feel the US Open has always been his best slam where he puts out his most dominating performances in the big matches. Fed could get to I feel 7 US Opens as long as he does not give up..I even see him winning 6 in a row this year if he really tries hard. Only because Murray is prone to upset, he can beat Djokovic and I think Nadal might get bounced in qf or sf if he faces a guy like Tsogna, Djokovic, Simon or someone who thrives on a fast surface and can go on a hot streak..Roddick etc. It is unlikely Nadal though gets bounced but usually end of year he is flamed out. Federer if he can keep in form for the next 5-6 years can rack up 3 more US Opens but the question is can he keep it up for 5 more years?

8 Wimbys..less likely not because of Nadal but I think there are a lot more grass court threats rising up that will come into play. Though if Fed wins Wimby this year then I change that but we will see.

joshburger
03-26-2009, 07:06 PM
nope

(10 chars)

grafselesfan
03-26-2009, 07:08 PM
8 Wimbys..less likely not because of Nadal but I think there are a lot more grass court threats rising up that will come into play. Though if Fed wins Wimby this year then I change that but we will see.

This is the part of your statement I dont get. I think it will be harder at Wimbledon but only because of Nadal. I dont see these grass court threats rising you refer to. The newbies and most current quality players are hard court lovers. I certainly hope you are not referring to people like Gasquet who Federer would probably beat each time out when he is 35 and playing with a sprained ankle.

CEvertFan
03-26-2009, 10:31 PM
First off this thread should be in the current players section.

Secondly I don't think Federer will win 8 of either major if he keeps playing like he has been, especially the way he's been playing against Nadal and Murray. He'll have to step it up again if he wants to even break the Sampras record, because time is beginning to run out for him.

grafselesfan
03-26-2009, 10:32 PM
First off this thread should be in the current players section.

Secondly I don't think Federer will win 8 of either major if he keeps playing like he has been, especially the way he's been playing against Nadal and Murray. He'll have to step it up again if he wants to even break the Sampras record, because time is beginning to run out for him.

If Roger doesnt change some things he might never win another major. I am not saying I think this will happen, but it isnt entirely impossible, as unfathomable as that once would have been.

kimbahpnam
03-26-2009, 10:39 PM
Well, if he were to do it consecutively starting now, he would be 29 and a half by the time he has the chance to go for Wimbly or the USO. Each year is going to get harder for him to win either. I think his chances diminish significantly if he doesn't either in the next consecutive years starting this year.

flying24
04-24-2009, 03:01 PM
8 U.S Opens is unlikely but possible
8 Wimbledons will never happen. Nadal owns Wimbledon for the forseeable future I believe.

hoodjem
04-24-2009, 04:47 PM
Is Fed is former player now? Did I miss his retirement?

At the rate he is going these days, he will win zero more slams.

GameSampras
04-24-2009, 05:39 PM
I could see Fed getting a few more USO's. But I think that may be the only slam he can manage at this point.

Of course Murray will be right there and we may even see a rematch of the final last year. This time Murray with the first slam final gitters out of the way

oneleggedcardinal
04-24-2009, 07:13 PM
8 U.S Opens is unlikely but possible
8 Wimbledons will never happen. Nadal owns Wimbledon for the forseeable future I believe.

I respectfully disagree, sir. I'm not saying Federer will resume his domination at Wimbledon, but I am saying that there are other players who can beat Nadal there...this year and in the foreseeable future, mind you.

crazylevity
04-24-2009, 09:24 PM
Weren't the 7 Wimbledons originally by William Renshaw in the challenge era, until Sampras came along and tied it?

Are the 7 US Opens also from the challenge era as well?

(For the uninitiated, once upon a time in grand slams, the defending champion only had to play the final when defending his title.)

vtmike
04-24-2009, 09:30 PM
8 U.S Opens is unlikely but possible
8 Wimbledons will never happen. Nadal owns Wimbledon for the forseeable future I believe.

Are you freakin serious!?! He won 9-7 in the fifth set ... A few points here and there and Fed could've won that match! And after that close match you come out & say Nadal owns wimbledon?

120mphBodyServe
04-24-2009, 09:34 PM
Nadal's win at Wimbledon will be proven to be a fluke, or not.. All depending if he can actually defend the title.
For me Federer is still no1 on grass & hard courts..
It's just his health issues holding him back...

flying24
04-24-2009, 09:39 PM
Are you freakin serious!?! He won 9-7 in the fifth set ... A few points here and there and Fed could've won that match! And after that close match you come out & say Nadal owns wimbledon?

I can tell by your avatar that you are a Federer fan. I am afraid you are just going to have to accept reality for your boy at this point. Federer is only getting worse at this point while Nadal is only getting better. If Federer couldnt do it last year he is hugely unlikely to ever do it in the future. Federer has 5 Wimbledons which is an amazing accomplishment deserving of huge praise regardless of the slowed grass and relatively limited competition he achieved this against. It will have to be enough.

His best chances of slams at this point are the Australian Open and U.S Open. He cant beat Nadal ever again at the French Open or Wimbledon IMO. I am not even a Nadal fan, but that is just how it is.

timnz
04-24-2009, 10:18 PM
Weren't the 7 Wimbledons originally by William Renshaw in the challenge era, until Sampras came along and tied it?

Are the 7 US Opens also from the challenge era as well?

(For the uninitiated, once upon a time in grand slams, the defending champion only had to play the final when defending his title.)

Actually it was only Wimbledon that had the challenge round not the US Championships, I believe.

3 Men won 7 US Opens

Richard Sears in 1881, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1885, 1886, 1887

Bill Larned in 1901, 1902, 1907, 1908, 1909, 1910, 1911

Bill Tilden in 1920, 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, 1925, 1929

Be nice to see Federer win 8 to set the all time record.

Sampras and Connors and Federer hold the open era record of 5 US Open's each.

Joseph L. Barrow
04-24-2009, 10:42 PM
Federer is already on a substantial decline right now, and would have to win three more years of either one of these Slams to get to eight. In all likelihood, Federer is going to continue getting worse while the younger generation continues to get better. Three years from now, I doubt Federer will still be in serious contention for Grand Slam titles.

I am virtually positive that he will not win any Slam three consecutive seasons again, and that he will be out of serious contention for those titles by the time he's substantially on the darker side of 30. In short, eight of either of these tournaments looks very implausible to me. I think Federer has a strong chance to pass the 14 Grand Slam title record, but I would practically be willing to bet my entire bank account he'll never dominate the game again.

380pistol
04-24-2009, 10:45 PM
I can tell by your avatar that you are a Federer fan. I am afraid you are just going to have to accept reality for your boy at this point. Federer is only getting worse at this point while Nadal is only getting better. If Federer couldnt do it last year he is hugely unlikely to ever do it in the future. Federer has 5 Wimbledons which is an amazing accomplishment deserving of huge praise regardless of the slowed grass and relatively limited competition he achieved this against. It will have to be enough.

His best chances of slams at this point are the Australian Open and U.S Open. He cant beat Nadal ever again at the French Open or Wimbledon IMO. I am not even a Nadal fan, but that is just how it is.

Federer beating Nadal at the French Open is very unlikely, but at Wimbledon I thinkk he still as a shot. Right now I'd favour Nadal, but it's not like Roger has no chance. He has to stop being stubborn, and tweak a couple of things, but he definitely has a shot.

flying24
04-24-2009, 10:58 PM
Federer beating Nadal at the French Open is very unlikely, but at Wimbledon I thinkk he still as a shot. Right now I'd favour Nadal, but it's not like Roger has no chance. He has to stop being stubborn, and tweak a couple of things, but he definitely has a shot.

If he changes his approach to the game and finally hires a legit coach, he has a shot of beating Nadal at Wimbledon again. He is a stubborn mule though so I highly doubt he will. If he doesnt change his approach in general and how he plays Nadal, he might not even be able to beat Nadal ever again and have to hope to avoid Nadal to have a shot of a hard court slam even.

luckyguy
04-24-2009, 11:36 PM
wimbledon no, a lot of threats from the young guns..

US open, maybe..but not this year..maybe some other time when there is no more pressure and when he is very much not expected to win it..

gj011
04-25-2009, 12:12 AM
No. 10 characters.

LanceStern
04-25-2009, 12:48 AM
No one has threatened Federer at Wimbledon except Nadal. No-one even CLOSE except Roddick in 2004.

How are people saying there are young guns catching him?

And to say Nadal owns Wimbledon is frustrating, because Federer can still beat him on grass. 2 points here and there, Fed actually HOLDING when he was up 4-2 in the first...

He doesn't even have to change up his play, because it's enough to beat Nadal on grass. He just has to keep up his intensity.

thalivest
04-25-2009, 12:51 AM
No one has threatened Federer at Wimbledon except Nadal. No-one even CLOSE except Roddick in 2004.

How are people saying there are young guns catching him?

And to say Nadal owns Wimbledon is frustrating, because Federer can still beat him on grass. 2 points here and there, Fed actually HOLDING when he was up 4-2 in the first...

He doesn't even have to change up his play, because it's enough to beat Nadal on grass. He just has to keep up his intensity.

Murray, Djokovic, and Nadal can ALL beat him on hard courts; Djokovic I am sure could beat him on clay now (yeah he hasnt but if last year didnt confirm it watching Monte Carlo should have if you have decent set of eyes), and Nadal is arguably favored over him now on grass. That is already more than enough to say "young guns are catching him". What I said already gives him a big challenge to win slams in the future. What do you require, 20 younger guys who can beat him in a grand slam event? If it came to that Federer would quit.

P_Agony
04-25-2009, 05:24 AM
I could see Fed getting a few more USO's. But I think that may be the only slam he can manage at this point.

Of course Murray will be right there and we may even see a rematch of the final last year. This time Murray with the first slam final gitters out of the way

Djokovic's semi final against Fed in 2008 were free of first slam final gittets. By that point he reached 2 slam finals, won one, and has already beaten Fed in a HC slam. Yet he got demolished by Fed (depite playing some of his best tennis ever).

Fed in slams is not the Fed from the MS tournys where he losses to Murray on a regular basis. It's best of 5, and Fed always steps it up when it matters.

maximo
04-25-2009, 05:27 AM
Fed in slams is not the Fed from the MS tournys where he losses to Murray on a regular basis. It's best of 5, and Fed always steps it up when it matters.

Murray is more fit than Federer, so i disagree. Murray would win if they meet at the US open this year.

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-25-2009, 05:42 AM
Murray is more fit than Federer, so i disagree. Murray would win if they meet at the US open this year. Thats why Murray falls apart in 5 setters/Grand Slams.

maximo
04-25-2009, 05:44 AM
Thats why Murray falls apart in 5 setters/Grand Slams.

That's why he beat Nadal at the US Open. :roll:

All-rounder
04-25-2009, 05:47 AM
Murray is more fit than Federer, so i disagree. Murray would win if they meet at the US open this year.
This is what everybody was saying at AO and looked how that turned out

All-rounder
04-25-2009, 05:48 AM
If he changes his approach to the game and finally hires a legit coach, he has a shot of beating Nadal at Wimbledon again. He is a stubborn mule though so I highly doubt he will. If he doesnt change his approach in general and how he plays Nadal, he might not even be able to beat Nadal ever again and have to hope to avoid Nadal to have a shot of a hard court slam even.
If federer won't change up his game on hardcourts or clay then why would he do that on grass which is his favourite surface

maximo
04-25-2009, 05:49 AM
This is what everybody was saying at AO and looked how that turned out

He played the QF's with a virus, what do expect?

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-25-2009, 05:49 AM
That's why he beat Nadal at the US Open. :roll: An extremely tired Nadal as *******s would say. Also is it why Fed wasted him in that final?

maximo
04-25-2009, 05:50 AM
An extremely tired Nadal as *******s would say. Also is it why Fed wasted him in that final?

Enough with the BS please...

All-rounder
04-25-2009, 05:51 AM
He played the QF's with a virus, what do expect?
No that was after the AO during dubai he had a virus and he was knocked out during the 4th round not QF

vtmike
04-25-2009, 07:05 AM
The record for Wimbledon for Mens single wins is 7 (held by 2 players), similarly it is 7 for the US open (held by 3 players). Federer currently has 5 wimbledon wins and 5 US Open wins.

Question 1/: Is it possible that Federer could get into the position by the end of his career of winning the most US Opens or the most Wimbledon's of anyone in history ie 8 or more of either. He may not get both records but would he get either?

Question 2/: Regardless of your answer to question 1 - of the two tournaments which one is Federer likely to clock up the most wins - the US Open or Wimbledon?

My pick is that he could get one of these records. I believe that his better surface is the US Open (it is faster these days than Wimbledon - the latter having slowed down considerably), but he would strike more competition at the US Open (more players being able to play on hard court than grass). So it is hard to pick.

I think he could get to 8 Wimbledon's.

I think there is a chance for 8 US opens & 7 Wimbledons...Will it happen? Only time will tell...

icedevil0289
04-25-2009, 07:08 AM
Can he? Maybe
Will he? Probably not

helloworld
04-25-2009, 07:12 AM
Who on earth started this ******** thread? 8 USO and 8 Wimbledon? Are you still living in the dream world where Roger is an unbeatable tennis god? Forget about 8 USO or 8 Wimbledon. Federer will win no more grand slam title from now on, period. .

vtmike
04-25-2009, 07:15 AM
Who on earth started this ******** thread? 8 USO and 8 Wimbledon? Are you still living in the dream world where Roger is an unbeatable tennis god? Forget about 8 USO or 8 Wimbledon. Federer will win no more grand slam title from now on, period. .

I am going to save this ignorant post to come back and rub it in your face!

icedevil0289
04-25-2009, 07:18 AM
I am going to save this ignorant post to come back and rub it in your face!

Or he could be right and federer will not win anymore slams. The way he has been playing, I could see that happening. Time will tell.

All-rounder
04-25-2009, 07:20 AM
Who on earth started this ******** thread? 8 USO and 8 Wimbledon? Are you still living in the dream world where Roger is an unbeatable tennis god? Forget about 8 USO or 8 Wimbledon. Federer will win no more grand slam title from now on, period. .
Thats fine its your opinion I DON'T respect it I just want to see the look on your face when nadal turns 27

Serendipitous
04-25-2009, 07:30 AM
3 more grand slams?


I doubt it.


If he wants to win any more grand slams, this is his last year.

Docalex007
04-25-2009, 08:01 AM
Is Fed is former player now? Did I miss his retirement?

At the rate he is going these days, he will win zero more slams.

What rate is that man? He's won at least one slam per year since 2003. That's six years of winning at least one slam. So you saying "at the rate he's going these days" makes one draw the conclusion that he'll win a few more, not that he will all of a sudden stop after six years of constant slam wins.

veroniquem
04-25-2009, 09:47 AM
He's at 5 right now. How is he gonna get 3 more of any slam? You people are crazy. By the way, noone has ever won any slam 8 times. The maximum so far has been 6 at AO (Roy Emerson), 6 at RG (Bjorn Borg), 7 at Wimbledon (Pete Sampras and William Renshaw), 7 at USO (Bill Tilden, Richard Sears, William Larned).

veroniquem
04-25-2009, 09:52 AM
What rate is that man? He's won at least one slam per year since 2003. That's six years of winning at least one slam. So you saying "at the rate he's going these days" makes one draw the conclusion that he'll win a few more, not that he will all of a sudden stop after six years of constant slam wins.
It's not "all of a sudden". Already last year he won just 1 slam. You really think he's gonna do better this year? You sincerely believe he's playing much better than last year? You're living on wishful thinking man.

Bud
04-25-2009, 09:58 AM
The record for Wimbledon for Mens single wins is 7 (held by 2 players), similarly it is 7 for the US open (held by 3 players). Federer currently has 5 wimbledon wins and 5 US Open wins.

Question 1/: Is it possible that Federer could get into the position by the end of his career of winning the most US Opens or the most Wimbledon's of anyone in history ie 8 or more of either. He may not get both records but would he get either?

Question 2/: Regardless of your answer to question 1 - of the two tournaments which one is Federer likely to clock up the most wins - the US Open or Wimbledon?

My pick is that he could get one of these records. I believe that his better surface is the US Open (it is faster these days than Wimbledon - the latter having slowed down considerably), but he would strike more competition at the US Open (more players being able to play on hard court than grass). So it is hard to pick.

I think he could get to 8 Wimbledon's.

No and no :)

Fed is done...

http://toonrefugee.com/toonblog/wp-content/uploads/cooked-cardinal.jpg

Cyan
04-25-2009, 04:55 PM
Nope..............................

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-25-2009, 06:37 PM
8 probably not, 7 is more likely.

scraps234
04-25-2009, 08:17 PM
i think he might get 8 but im pretty sure he will atleast get 7 or im hopeing...

VivalaVida
04-25-2009, 08:27 PM
Roger winning 6 more slams? I dont see it at all.

CANADIAN763
04-25-2009, 08:28 PM
3 more grand slams?


I doubt it.


If he wants to win any more grand slams, this is his last year.

Three more at the same tournament. I highly doubt that but it would be awesome!

zacinnc78
04-26-2009, 10:12 AM
what sux about it is fed still has the skills to beat anybody , he just plays so high risk nowadays ,its like hes saving himself for injury so we can have many more years of a mediocre fed....i wish hed go all out again but really,what motivation does he have anymore?hes now married and expecting a kid,and has made the most money in tennis history......its still doable but its gonna be totally up to him,not us selfish fans:) (myself included)

vtmike
04-26-2009, 08:07 PM
No and no :)

Fed is done...

http://toonrefugee.com/toonblog/wp-content/uploads/cooked-cardinal.jpg

That is pretty tasteless! & not funny!

chief wiggum
04-26-2009, 08:18 PM
Could he? Yes. Will he? No way.

Carlo Giovanni Colussi
04-27-2009, 03:25 AM
Actually it was only Wimbledon that had the challenge round not the US Championships, I believe.


Hello timnz,
of course there was no CR in the US amateur champs the first year in 1881 but it was used as soon as around 1883 (in 1884 sure) and until last Larned's win in 1911 the CR was the championship round. It was decided to suppress the CR in 1912 : Larned who didn't want to play through the champs, defaulted (however it seemed that Larned had played his last match 8 months before, suffering from rheumatism, against Rodney W. Heath in the 1911 Davis Cup ... challenge round).

Leublu tennis
04-27-2009, 03:30 AM
First off this thread should be in the current players section.

Secondly I don't think Federer will win 8 of either major if he keeps playing like he has been, especially the way he's been playing against Nadal and Murray. He'll have to step it up again if he wants to even break the Sampras record, because time is beginning to run out for him.

Chris, where have you been for two years? General Pro Player Discussion = current player section. Former Pro Player Talk is, as its titled, former players.

timnz
04-27-2009, 03:33 AM
Hello timnz,
of course there was no CR in the US amateur champs the first year in 1881 but it was used as soon as around 1883 (in 1884 sure) and until last Larned's win in 1911 the CR was the championship round. It was decided to suppress the CR in 1912 : Larned who didn't want to play through the champs, defaulted (however it seemed that Larned had played his last match 8 months before, suffering from rheumatism, against Rodney W. Heath in the 1911 Davis Cup ... challenge round).

Carlo - that's great! Thanks for the information. :).

It clears up a few things. Hence, Tilden's effort at getting 7 US Championships was a greater accomplishment (than the other two 7 time winners), because he won all of his Championships without the benefit of a challenge round.

Leublu tennis
04-27-2009, 03:34 AM
Weren't the 7 Wimbledons originally by William Renshaw in the challenge era, until Sampras came along and tied it?

Are the 7 US Opens also from the challenge era as well?

(For the uninitiated, once upon a time in grand slams, the defending champion only had to play the final when defending his title.)Hey, thanks. I did not know that. When did this practice end?

Carlo Giovanni Colussi
04-27-2009, 03:36 AM
He's at 5 right now. How is he gonna get 3 more of any slam? You people are crazy. By the way, noone has ever won any slam 8 times. The maximum so far has been 6 at AO (Roy Emerson), 6 at RG (Bjorn Borg), 7 at Wimbledon (Pete Sampras and William Renshaw), 7 at USO (Bill Tilden, Richard Sears, William Larned).

Sometimes pro majors before the open era are considered as pro slam tournaments. In this case,
Rosewall has won 10 French championships :

1 amateur in 1953 (but it is true that were missing 2 great amateur claycourters, Trabert and Larsen and above all all the best pro players as Segura, Kramer, Sedgman, Gonzales, Pails, Kovacs, Riggs, Budge, McGregor, ...)
8 pro including 7 in a row in 1958 then 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966 (where he beat Hoad twice in the finals, Gonzales in 1961, Gimeno in 1962 and Rod Laver 4 times consecutively from 1963 to 1966) where all the very best entered.
1 open in 1968 (once again he defeated Laver).

6 of these were played at Roland Garros on clay, the slowest surface ever used in tennis (1953, 1958, 1960 to 1962).
4 on indoor wood at the Pierre de Coubertin stadium, the fatest surface ever used in tennis (1963 to 1967).

Therefore Rosewall has won as many French chps at Roland Garros as Borg and besides he also won 4 other French Chps at Coubertin. And except in 1953 when many good players were missing because of stupid politics separating the pros from the amateurs,
in 9 occasions Rosewall won the French Chps from the very best players.

Leublu tennis
04-27-2009, 03:40 AM
He played the QF's with a virus, what do expect?Wasn't that just a "touch of mono" or something like that. And didn't come from Federer and not some unimpeachable source? I don't know. I keep hearing this playing with a virus bit and find it hard to believe. Do you have any sites on this business? Would be interested in reading them.

Leublu tennis
04-27-2009, 03:42 AM
Who on earth started this ******** thread? 8 USO and 8 Wimbledon? Are you still living in the dream world where Roger is an unbeatable tennis god? Forget about 8 USO or 8 Wimbledon. Federer will win no more grand slam title from now on, period. .
Come on. He might win one. Lets see what happens at Wimby.

COPEY
04-27-2009, 04:17 AM
I don't think it's likely Federer will win 8 of either major, however, I do think he'll supplant Pete's grand slam record. Course, it's possible he won't - either argument has merit in my opinion. As one poster already mentioned in another thread, no one thought McEnroe would go slamless for the duration of his career after that incredible run he had in '84 (82-3).

I think this year will tell the tale where Federer is concerned. If he goes slamless, mentally will he have the intestinal fortitude to hang in there and at least try to tie Pete's record? Who's to say, but it should be interesting to see how it plays out.